[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Study Raises Projection For 'Dirty Bomb' Toll
Dear John,
If you, working in the area, ask a question like this: "do all sources pose
the same risk?"
how do you think the question the general public could ask?
Enforcement is applied according with the degree of violation and the danger
that source could pose to people and environment.
About your remark: "As noted only 5 sources in the last 14 years have posed
a significant risk to the public"
I remind the words of Hans Blix, IAEA General Director at the time of the
Goiania Accident -- "De fact that accidents are uncommon should not give
grounds for complacency. No radiological accident is acceptable, and one
that threatens widespread contamination is bound to alarm a public that not
yet come to terms with radioactivity".
Jose Julio Rozental
joseroze@netvision.net.il
Israel
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Jacobus" <crispy_bird@yahoo.com>
To: "Tom" <tom@xrfcorp.com>; "Jose Julio Rozental"
<joseroze@netvision.net.il>
Cc: "Stewart Faber" <radproject@optonline.net>; "Stewart Farber"
<farbersa@optonline.net>; "Hart, Tim P GS (RASO)" <harttp@RASO.NAVY.MIL>;
"Radsafe" <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2004 9:12 PM
Subject: Re: Study Raises Projection For 'Dirty Bomb' Toll
> I think one should also ask the question "do all
> sources pose the same risk?" There are, according to
> Commissioner Dicus, about 200 sources reported lost
> every year. Last year we lost a 100 microcurie Co-60
> marker source used in nuclear medicine. Should
> security of this item be as rigorous (translates to
> money) as a radiography source? As noted only 5
> sources in the last 14 years have posed a significant
> risk to the public.
>
> I agree that some groups need to have better control,
> but all things are not equal.
>
> --- Tom <tom@xrfcorp.com> wrote:
> > I have to agree with Jose. According to EPA there
> > are thousands of
> > orphan sources right here in the good old USA. I
> > would venture to say
> > that that number of sources missing says something
> > about controls in the
> > USA needing to be improved.
> >
> > Tom Hazlett
> >
> > joseroze@netvision.net.il wrote:
> >
> > >Please, consider:
> > >a) poor control in Brazil
> > >b) poor control by user
> > >
> > >In the First case we can consider general context,
> > and this is not
> > correct.
> > >
> > >Poor control by user you can find anywhere in many
> > developed countries,
> > >including USA
> > >
> > >AN OVERVIEW OF MANAGING THE U.S. RADIATION
> > PROTECTION PROGRAM CONCERNING
> > >GENERALLY-LICENSED SOURCES AND DEVICES
> > >Commissioner Greta Joy Dicus, U.S. Nuclear
> > Regulatory Commission
> > >Washington, D.C. 20555
> > >Keynote Presentation at the
> > >10th Annual International Radiation Protection
> > Association Conference
> > >May 15, 2000
> > >Hiroshima, Japan
> > >
> > >...............
> > >"U.S. operational experience with radioactive
> > materials includes few
> > >accidents with generally-licensed devices, and
> > only five have resulted in
> > >potential radiation overexposures to the general
> > public since 1989.
> > The U.S.
> > >metal recycling industry has been particularly
> > affected by losses and
> > thefts
> > >of radioactive sources, some of which were
> > generally-licensed and have
> > >subsequently become mixed with metal scrap
> > destined for recycling."
> > >
> > >"For a smelting event involving a large radiation
> > source (believed to
> > not be
> > >a generally licensed device) one U.S. steel mills
> > incurred an average cost
> > >of approximately US$ ten million, while yet in
> > another case the cost
> > >approached US$ 23 million."
> > >
> > >"Lost, stolen, and abandoned generally-licensed
> > sources or devices
> > appearing
> > >in recycled metals constitute a worldwide problem.
> > Thirty other smelting
> > >events have been reported in at least eighteen
> > other countries (1). Others
> > >may have occurred but have not come to our
> > attention or cannot be
> > >confirmed."
> > >
> >
> >
> >----------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >USA PERSPECTIVES
> > >SAFETY & SECURITY OF RADIOACTIVE SOURCES
> > >BY GRETA JOY DICUS
> > >IAEA BULLETIN, 41/3/1999
> > >
> > >
> > >............................
> > >"Each year, the NRC receives about 200 reports of
> > lost, stolen or
> > abandoned
> > >radioactive sources and devices. It is important
> > to note that such reports
> > >are received only when licensees recall that they
> > have a source, know that
> > >it is lost or stolen, know that there is a
> > requirement to report the
> > loss or
> > >theft, and make that report."
> > >"In some cases, the loss of control of radioactive
> > sources resulted in
> > >radiation overexposures of unsuspecting members of
> > the public. For
> > example,
> > >in 1979, an unshielded 1 GBq (28 Ci) iridium-192
> > industrial radiography
> > >source was accidentally left at a temporary job
> > site in California. A
> > >worker, not knowing what itwas, picked it up and
> > placed it into a back
> > >pocket of his trousers. The dose to his buttock
> > exceeded 200 Sv(20,000
> > rem).
> > >
> > >In 1992, a 0.14 GBq (3.7 Ci) iridium-192
> > brachytherapy source was
> > accidently
> > >disconnected from the cable attaching it to a
> > remote afterloader while it
> > >was emplaced in a patient. The source eventually
> > became dislodged from the
> > >patient together with surgical dressings. The
> > discarded dressings
> > containing
> > >the source were sent to a disposal facility which
> > routinely conducted
> > >radiation surveillance of incoming waste.
> > Radiation from the source was
> > >detected and it was thus discovered the patient
> > died from complications
> > >resulting from the overdose and 90 members of the
> > public were accidentally
> > >exposed to the source.
> > >
> > >In 1996, industrial radiography devices were
> > stolen....."
> > >
> > >
> > >The above examples doesn't mean poor control by
> > Regulatory Authority.
> > >So, I can't agree with your expression: "poor
> > control in Brazil"
> > >
> > >Jose Julio Rozental
> > >joseroze@netvision.net.il
> > >Israel
> > >
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Stewart Faber" <radproject@optonline.net>
> > >To: "Stewart Farber" <farbersa@optonline.net>;
> > "Hart, Tim P GS (RASO)"
> > ><harttp@RASO.NAVY.MIL>; "Radsafe"
> > <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>; "Jose
> > Julio
> > >Rozental" <joseroze@netvision.net.il>
> > >Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 7:41 PM
> > >Subject: Re: Study Raises Projection For 'Dirty
> > Bomb' Toll
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>1/15/04 9:47:36 AM, Jose Julio Rozental
> > <joseroze@netvision.net.il>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>[EXCERPT INCLUDED FROM MY ORIGINAL POST:]
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>The fact that the Goaiana incident was not a
> > group of "workers"
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >servicing a
> > >
> > >
> > >>>>teletherapy unit, but a group of
> > thieves/scavangers who were ripping
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >apart
> > >
> > >
> > >>>>an abandoned teletherapy unit due to poor
> > controls in Brazil of unused
> > >>>>medical equipment [at the time] alone should be
> > corrected by the W.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >Post, along
> > >
> > >
> > >>>>with the clear errors in the number of people
> > seriously injured.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>[COMMENT BY JOSE ROZENTAL]:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>About the topic "poor control", I don't agree,
> > this is not correct. I
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >was
> > >
> > >
> >
> === message truncated ===
>
>
> =====
> +++++++++++++++++++
> "I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form
of tyranny over the mind of man."
> Thomas Jefferson
>
> -- John
> John Jacobus, MS
> Certified Health Physicist
> e-mail: crispy_bird@yahoo.com
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
>
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To
unsubscribe, send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the
text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail,
with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at
http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/