RE: 86Rb bigger issue -Reply

[Todd Jackson <TJJ@nrc.gov>]

Following up on this thread:
Rhonda wrote in part
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps I should have worded my question to make this more clear, but
it was also nice to hear confirmation of our consultant's advice.  I do apologize if this was
inappropriate -- I will be very hesitant before asking any more questions, to be sure.

Once again, many thanks to those who provided advice and the benefit of their experiences
with 86Rb.

Rhonda O'Keefe rhonda_okeefe@cambneuro.com
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

I don't think Rhonda should be discouraged from posing her question, and perhaps a bit more
background would be appropriate.  However, I also think the "bigger issue" question of what
depth and breadth of advice/recommendations is appropriate in this context is valid.  What are
the implications if someone is overexposed based on bad advice, or misuse of good advice? 
And who is responsible?
Both questions are legit for radsafe, although the broader question is tougher to answer.  In
my opinion the RSO is ultimately responsible to elevate the issue to management if
necessary, within the licensed company.  If the researcher doesn't follow the
recommendations of the RSO in such a case there is another significant problem to solve.

Todd Jackson
NRC Region I
tjj@nrc.gov
My opinions only, not reviewed by anybody else, etc...