[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Appropriateness of RADSAFE Posting of Y90 Spill
Radsafers,
I have received some criticism of my RADSAFE
posting regarding the Y90 spill.
I would like to state my purpose/motivation
for the posting and welcome any comments
for my actions.
First, I must explain that the regulatory environment
in Canada is somewhat less 'prescriptive' than that
in the US.
Our regulations are somewhat general and open to
interpretation. This has certain advantages and
disadvantages over a strict prescriptive appraoch.
For example :
Section 24 states
"Every person operating a nuclear facility ....
shall.....
...take all reasonable precautions in relation to the nuclear facility
or the prescribed substance to protect persons and property from
injury or damage ;"
Now. so far this clause has not been interpreted by a judge for us
so at times, people like myself are asked to interpret this clause and
others like it.
While I (and I guess my employer) consider myself competent to carry
out such interpretations, I do not consider myself infallible by
any means.
With regard to the Y90 spill, I have my own strong opinion
on this matter, which I have not stated so as not to influence the
requested responses. However, others have stated quite different
opinions on this incident and this brings me to RADSAFE.
By posting the message on RADSAFE I wanted to tap the immense,
combined knowledge and experience available in this forum to see
if perhaps my opinions might be out of line with other radiation
safety professionals.
If you respond publicly to this, I respectfully ask that you
aim your comments at the use of RADSAFE, not to a discussion of
the incident itself. Discussions of the incident should be
directed to me personally.
Jim Presley
Senior Health Physicist
Atomic Energy Control Board
presley.j@atomcon.gc.ca