[ RadSafe ] NRC Reports Lowest Average Occupational Dose EverforNPPs in 2004

[bobcherry]

When I was assigned as Army RSO to the Army Safety Office, I cautioned the
Director of Army Safety, who was a brigadier general and helicopter pilot,
about trumpeting the then-declining Army aviation accident rate to the Army
Chief of Staff too much. I thought that the statistics were fluctuations
around an average and that it was likely the rates would go back up a little
bit the next year (which they did). Of course, by that time we had a new
Directory of Army Safety.

So if the NPP occupational doses go up next year, which is probably an even
bet, what will the media say? 

[I don't mean to belittle the achievement. It is certainly good news. But
before we get too excited about it, let's see what happens next year.]

Bob C

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf
Of Thomas Potter
Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 12:47 PM
To: vargo at physicist.net; 'RADSAFE'
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] NRC Reports Lowest Average Occupational Dose
EverforNPPs in 2004

This is an admirable accomplishment, but I think Bruce Boger's
interpretation overstates the importance of radiation protection programs
and slights the importance of improvements in maintenance and operations on
dose reduction.  Improvements in radiation protection programs are
important.  But I believe that it is not coincidental that exposures have
fallen substantially while operational reliability has increased
substantially.  Effectiveness of radiation protection programs is greatly
improved when plants are running right, and no radiation protection program
can, by itself, make a plant run right.

Thomas E. Potter 

-----Original Message-----
From: George J. Vargo [mailto:vargo at physicist.net] 
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 10:53 PM
To: RADSAFE
Subject: [ RadSafe ] NRC Reports Lowest Average Occupational Dose Ever
forNPPs in 2004

This appeared on NRC's web site yesterday.  This is a great a accomplishment
for the power reactor community.  It's also noteworthy that in 2003-2004,
100 of the 104 operating NPPs in the US had a capacity factor of over 80%.
Good planning, good operations, good maintenance, and good health physics
all go hand-in-hand.  A job well done!

George J. Vargo, Ph.D., CHP
Senior Scientist
MJW Corporation
http://www.mjwcorp.com
610-925-3377
610-925-5545 (fax)
vargo at physicist.net


NRC NEWS
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION		
Office of Public Affairs	Telephone: 301/415-8200	
Washington, DC 20555-0001	E-mail: opa at nrc.gov	
www.nrc.gov </> 		

No. 05-097 June 30, 2005 
NRC REPORTS LOWEST AVERAGE OCCUPATIONAL DOSE EVER
FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANT WORKERS IN 2004

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's latest compilation of nuclear power
plant worker doses at U.S. reactors shows the average annual collective dose
per plant is 100 person-rem, the lowest ever and half of the dose recorded
10 years ago. 

To determine a plant's collective dose, individual doses are added up and
the result is expressed in person-rem. The average American receives a dose
of about 360 millirem every year from all radioactive sources; the average
nuclear plant worker in recent years received about an additional 160
millirem each year on the job. NRC regulations allow workers at nuclear
power plants to safely receive a job-related dose of up to 5,000 millirem
each year.

"This report shows nuclear power plant operators have very effective plans
and procedures in place to reduce workers' exposure while ensuring the
necessary work is done to NRC requirements," said Bruce Boger, Director of
the Division of Inspection Program Management in the NRC's Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.

The nation's 69 pressurized-water reactors had an average annual collective
dose of 71 person-rem, down 22 percent from 2003 and the lowest ever for
PWRs. The 35 boiling-water reactors had an average annual collective dose of
156 person-rem, the second-lowest ever.

The full report is available on the NRC's Web-based document database,
ADAMS, by entering ML051530296 in the search function at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html
</reading-rm/adams/web-based.html> .






_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the radsafe mailing list radsafe at radlab.nl

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/