Re: more radiobiology

["Wesley M. Dunn" <WDUNN@brc1.tdh.texas.gov>]

> Date: Thu, 16 Mar 95 12:28:13 -0600
> From: melissa@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu (M. Woo)
> Subject: more radiobiology
>
> Firstly, one expects that tomorrow's regulators of radiation standards will
> be comprised of today's health physicists.  (I shudder to think what would
> happen if this weren't the case!

Well, this isn't entirely the case now.  Not every regulator has
significant prior education, training or experience in Health Physics
before joining their regulatory Agency.  Some have radiation work
experience, but rarely were they practicing HPs.  There are
exceptions (at least in my totally unbiased opinion), but the pay and
the work environment just isn't there (unless you really enjoy
reviewing paperwork) to excite many good HPs.

Many years ago, the NRC determined that they couldn't hire in
experienced HPs to fill every position.  So they determined to hire
"trainable" individuals, and run them through a set of training
courses, combined with On-The-Job (OJT) training.  They also made
these training courses available to the Agreement States, so the
States followed a similar policy.

One might question how this policy creates trained HPs.  The
regulatory workplace just is not set up to provide the breadth
and depth of experience necessary to make good decisions based
on Health Physics criterion.  Regulatory criterion, yes.  HP, no.

I understand the NRC has just determined that, in a short while, they
will now charge the states for "actual" costs for these training
courses previously supplied under NRC's budget.  States don't have
the money to send personnel to these courses.  This does not
make an encouraging sign for the State programs.

> agency right now, but that just isn't nice.)  In order to make informed
> decisions on standards in radiation safety/protection, one would hope that
> those in a position to make such decisions would have some the ability to
> discern the validity of the scientific evidence presented in support of new
> legislation.  If we were all automatons, blindly following regulations
> without thought to the science underlying radiation protection practices,
> one wonders why a body of "professionals" should have to exist in the
> field.

Yep.  Review the history of regulations and let me know your answer...


Disclaimer:  Everything that is not a fact is an opinion or an
observation, and is summarily disclaimed.