What I believe that Al is saying is that the operation would always be
substandard if the NRC regulated the DOE. NRC could simply fine the
contractor - and rob Peter to Pay Paul. If the DOE disagrees and does
not pay up - no work gets done (except for a lot of political
posturing). Even if you fine the DOE direct- how do you enforce it,
what is the model? It just sounds like a screwy way of "fixing" things
- a federal government entity regulating another federal government
entity (Jenga anyone?).
We should analyze the real problem (e.g., too many government agencies
regulating the exact same thing) and look to a model that works for
fixing that problem. I bet that simply shuffling one government agency
under another will increase the problems. A lot of things have to be
fixed before that happens.
Robert A. Jones Robert_A_Jones@rl.gov
Health Physicist phone: (509)376-8528
PFP Radiological Control fax: (509)373-4274
Hanford, WA Hanford Pager: 85-6559
-----Original Message-----
From: LIPTONW@dteenergy.com [SMTP:LIPTONW@dteenergy.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 1998 1:24 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Re: DOE regulation
This is precisely the reason why NRC (or other external)
regulation is
needed
for DOE contractors. DOE should NOT have the option of allowing
a
substandard
operation to continue because it doesn't want to spend the money
to fix it.
The opinions expressed are strictly mine.
It's not about dose, it's about trust.
Bill Lipton
liptonw@dteenergy.com
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html