Re: Safety Questioned at Nuclear Plant -Reply -Reply

["Robert Gunter" <rjgunter@icnpharm.com>]

Is this really "accepting the public" or pandering to a regulator?  It
seems to me that minimizing the dose to the public to a level that really
cannot be measured, and is far from anything that is harmful is really
enforcing the view that this stuff is dangerous at any level.  We tell
people that they get 300 mrem (3mSv for you international types) naturally
(not background), but millions will be heroically spent to protect them
from getting 43 (.43).?!

I'm not trying to pick on anyone.  I think this applies to us all.

Rob

Sorry about the long address below, but I'm using Lotus Notes.  Nuff said.

Robert J. Gunter

Sr. Technical Specialist

ICN Biomedicals, Inc.

Dosimetry Division

ICN Plaza

3300 Hyland Avenue

Costa Mesa, CA  92626

Tel: (714) 545-0100

Tel: (800) 548-5100 Ext. 2414

Fax: (714) 668-3149

Email: rjgunter@icnpharm.com





"CLAUDE A. FLORY" <FLORYCA@GWSMTP.NU.COM> on 06/03/98 03:55:56 AM

Please respond to radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu

To:   Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
cc:    (bcc: Robert Gunter/HQ/ICN)
Subject:  Re: Safety Questioned at Nuclear Plant -Reply -Reply




The technology has already accepted the public.  In the mid-70's Appendix I
of
10CFR50 was added to limit radiological effluent doses to the public from
power
reactors to 3 mRem/yr organ dose and 10 mRem/yr whole body dose from liquid
releases and to 10 mrad/yr gamma dose and 20 mrad/yr beta dose for gaseous
releases.  To accomplish these very public friendly doses Millstone Unit 1
spent considerable money to construct additional gas processing facilities.
Gasesous releases were reduced greater than a factor of 500.  Today public
doses from releases from all three Millstone units, combined, are less than
10%
of the Appendix I limits.  What are the annual doses for releases from coal
powered plants?  Nuclear power technology is adequately protecting the
public.


>>> <GACMail98@aol.com> 06/02/98 11:02pm >>>
<<The public is afraid of what they don't understand. . . .But how does the
industry correct that perception without providing at least some technical
background, and will the public pay attention if it is given?>>

<< The real question is .. will nuclear survive until the public does
accept
the technology. I am not optimistic. >>

Perhaps, the real question is. . .will nuclear survive until the technology
accepts the public.

Glenn