RE: Paduca Pu

["Potter, Charles" <capotte@sandia.gov>]

I believe that the point I am making is that if the requirements of the time
are followed, that should be good enough.  How can we look into the future
and know what future sciences will tell us and what future requirements will
be, so that we can cover ourselves from the 20/20 hindsight that will tell
us what we do today is immoral or illegal?  I am not claiming to be a
"victim."  I am only saying that it is blatantly unfair to say that
something that was legal and moral at the time should not be judged by
today's laws or morality. 


C. A. Gus Potter
Sandia National Laboratories
Albuquerque, New Mexico
(505) 844-2750
capotte@sandia.gov


-----Original Message-----
From: William V Lipton [mailto:liptonw@dteenergy.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 1999 8:33 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Re: Paduca Pu


This was the 1970's.  The AEC-ERDA-DOE Manuals were in place.  We had the
dose
limits and monitoring requirements.  If the facility management had a
culture
which condoned not following established requirements, that was wrong, it
always
has been, and it always will be. Quibbling about the exact dose is equally
futile.

I fail to understand why hp's are so eager to play the role of victim.  We
should acknowledge and correct our mistakes, and go on.  This dialogue is
taking
on the tones that I might try with traffic police if I were caught running a
red
light.  "There wasn't any accident, so I don't deserve a ticket."  I doubt
that
this would work, and neither will your arguments work with the public.

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