[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Guard's Uniforms

I had no idea my remark about buying new uniforms for the guards would 
generate so much discussion.  Let me add, however that not only the 
regulatory, but also the political reality is that we cannot afford to release 
people with detectable levels of contamination, and that, in many situations, 
the levels of radon daughters are high enough to mask contamination levels of 
concern.  The political reason is that contamination is associated with or can 
result in uptake.   
 
This goes to the heart of another ALARA hangover - the myth that internal dose 
and external dose are the same.  Get real.  External dose is a piece of paper 
in your file.  An internal body burden is something you take home to your 
family; and to your next job.  Regardless of how much effort has gone into the 
internal dosimetry models, their still just guesswork, especially considering 
the wide variation among individuals - useful for planning or after the fact 
assessment; but they should NEVER be used for a planned internal exposure. 
 
The opinions expressed are strictly mine. 
Here's to a risk free world and other fantasies. 
 
Bill Lipton 
liptonw@detroitedison.com 





Keith Welch said:
<snip>
> Jim Muckerheide said:
> 
> >Interesting "solution" :-) "Rad protection" strikes again. Don't we begin to
> >feel a little ludicrous? 
> 
> I don't see it as ludicrous.  It just turns out to be one of the facts of
> life at a nuc plant.  You've got real sensitive detectors that thousands of
> bodies go through on an ongoing basis.  False alarms due to "nuisance"
> nuclides can be a real time/money wasting aggravation.  Taking this into
> account for large groups who are "issued" clothing makes sense to me.  The
> only unhappy part of the story is that some money was "wasted" on the
> original set of uniforms.

> However, if Bill's experience was similar to what happened at my site, it
> came about due to the gradual (or in some cases sudden) increase in the
> monitoring capability, such that levels of activity previously undetected
> started becoming a problem, so there was no way to predict that the clothing
> would be an issue and plan ahead on it.  Now that I think back, we may have
> actually replaced the guard's uniforms at my site also - one issue was that
> the cotton ones were more comfortable - as well as being "radon-busters".

Sorry for the confusion. The "ludicrous" part isn't buying new uniforms. The
ludicrous part is buying and using detectors that operate at levels that cost
a lot to achieve and $millions in paying the 1000s of persons in the
organization going thru the detectors, even without "false alarms". This is
totally unrelated to any reasonable standard of risk (and that doesn't mean
dose levels of risk to the individual, but a reasonable level of "risk" to
just knowing that there's contamination). 

HP and radiological engineering won't be taken seriously in the new
competitive enterprize until it can contribute to rational cost-effectiveness
standards. Other professionals must set standards with "tradeoffs", from
chemical to civil to aeronautical engineering. Some other "professions"
maximize costs, but not many and they are not seen as valued contributors to
the enterprize. Their practioners don't get to management except in
organizations that can stick the bill to the taxpayer or ratepayer. Look
around, unfettered bureaucracy maximizing its own feather-bedding approach to
life is on the way out, in utilities, and even in gov't thru "privatization"
and related initiatives. 

I still see commitment to rad monitoring at levels that can be affected by
simple capture of radon daughters on clothing as "ludicrous". :-) 

> Keith Welch

Thanks, Keith.

Regards, Jim Muckerheide
jmuckerheide@delphi.com
Radiation, Science, and Health, Inc.