Re[4]: Urgent Request for Medical Isotope

[Charles Potter <capotte@sandia.gov>]

     Why must we always push for our facility and say how useless the other 
     is?  We're already experimenting with Mo production here so I guess 
     the "significant modifications" are completed.  We also have a waste 
     facility here.  Get your facts straight.
     
     I, unlike some of my DOE colleagues, would support multiple medical 
     radionuclide generation sites, rather than having the lone site at 
     their facility.
     
     Gus Potter
     Sandia National Laboratories
     (505) 844-2750
     CAPOTTE@sandia.gov


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Re[2]: Urgent Request for Medical Isotope
Author:  lee_david_w@lanl.gov at hubsmtp
Date:    11/24/96 2:39 PM


I certainly would like to endorse your efforts to have DOE come to its 
senses re production of the medical radioisotopes that you have noted in 
your e-mail and draft letter.  As the former Director of the Omega West 
Reactor at Los Alamos, I share in your concern for their irresponsible 
behavior over the last term of the Secretary of Energy to support the 
medical radioisotope production role that they currently have.  Because they 
are the only department in the US that is equipped to produce isotopes with 
reactors such as FFTF, they have a social and moral responsibility to do so 
until an orderly transition can be made to commercialize this role.
     
I will add only one comment that should be considered mine and mine alone 
with respect to WHY DOE may be moving forward in their current path.  As you 
recall, Sec. O'Leary hired Terry Lash, a well-known anti-nuclear activist 
and intervenor to run what is now the Office of Nuclear Energy and Space for 
the sake of providing a "balanced view" on new nuclear research.  Since his 
appointment, the HTGR effort has been shut down, the Omega West reactor was 
shut down for non-technical reasons, the ACRR has been selected to produce 
Mo-99 (something that they have been set up to fail at because of reasons 
such the lack of a radioactive refuse site at SNLA and a lack of processing 
facilities), and now FFTF is being threatened to be shut down.  Therefore I 
can only help but conclude that Mr. Lash has been extremely successful in 
carrying out his own personal agenda and that he will be able to claim
success under the guise of "managing the future of nuclear research" at the DOE.
     
Sincerely,
Antonio (Tony) Andrade, PhD
Los Alamos National Laboratory
     
     
     
At 01:11 PM 22-11-96 -0600, you wrote:
>     MIPP is the Medical Isotope Production Project 
>
>     DOE made the decision to produce medical isotopes (Mo-99) in NM rather 
>     than at any of the other sites that were considered, which included:
>     target irradiation at ORNL's Oak Ridge Research Reactor with target
>     fabrication and isotope separations at their Radioisotope Development 
>     Lab; and irradiation at INEL's Power Burst Facility with target
>     fabrication and isotope separations at the Test Area North. 
>
>     DOE identified the Annular Core Research Reactor at SNL/NM and the 
>     Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Facility at LANL as the preferred 
>     facilities for the production of Mo-99.
>
>     Ernest Antonio
>     Research Scientist
>     Pacific Northwest National Lab. 
>     ej_antonio@pnl.gov
>
>
>______________________________ Reply Separator 
_________________________________
>Subject: Re: Urgent Request for Medical Isotope 
>Author:  JMUCKERHEIDE@delphi.com at -SMTPlink 
>Date:    11/22/96 10:11 AM
>
>
>Please explain.
>
>> MIPP is not dead.
>>
>> DOE decided to go to New Mexico rather than Idaho. 
>>
>> Bill Pitchford
>> Radiation Protection Facility
>> Arizona State University
>> Tempe, Arizona 85287-3501
>
>Thanks.
>
>Regards, Jim Muckerheide
>jmuckerheide@delphi.com
>
>
David W. Lee
Radiation Protection Policy
& Programs Analysis Group (ESH-12)
Los Alamos National Laboratory
PO Box 1663, MS K483
Los Alamos, NM  87545
Ph:  (505) 667-8085
FAX: (505) 667-9726