Fwd: RADSAFE digest 2760

["Michael C. Baker" <mcbaker@lanl.gov>]

I disagree.  The nuclear navy has kept its operations and mistakes out of 
the press so that they have never had to convince the public one way or 
another.  I have worked both in and out of the naval nuclear program and 
find little differences in the seriousness with which people in each 
approach their jobs.  The big difference is that the Navy is 
self-regulated.  When they make a mistake an incident report is circulated 
for the education of other operators.  In the commercial business the 
incident report is issued with a press release from both the utility and 
the NRC.  Of course its issued with assurances, that although they felt a 
press release was necessary, it's really not that serious.  That type of 
system gives just the opposite impression.

The Navy has no profit motive either and to be honest could not run a 
commercially competitive plant without a lot of changes.  But this is not 
their mission so I would not expect or want them to operate like a 
commercial power plant.

I don't mean to imply that the commercial nukes should be self regulated, 
only that you are comparing two extremely different operations.  The Navy 
is not "in this business" as you state.

Mike

P.S.  I would also rephrase your comment about zero tolerance for 
error.  My experience with the Navy was that it was zero tolerance for 
error without improvement or corrections.  I saw many errors made, but they 
were followed by clear and immediate corrective actions to decrease the 
odds of the same or similar mistakes from happening again.  After those 
actions were complete those operators were back on watch.  Zero tolerance 
for error implies an operator cannot make an error without losing his 
job.  This isn't true and if it was would drastically decrease 
self-reported mistakes and omissions.



>From: William V Lipton <liptonw@dteenergy.com>
>
>The one success story in this business, the Nuclear Navy, got that way by 
>convincing the
>public that they take every photon and every mrem seriously, and that they 
>have zero
>tolerance for error.
>
>The opinions expressed are strictly mine.
>It's not about dose, it's about trust.
>
>Bill Lipton
>liptonw@dteenergy.com

______________________________________________

Michael C. Baker
Environmental Technology Group (E-ET)
Environmental Science & Waste Technology Division
Los Alamos National Laboratory
Mail Stop J594, Los Alamos, NM 87545

mcbaker@lanl.gov

(505) 667-7334 (phone)
(505) 665-8346 (fax)
(505) 996-3519 (pager)
______________________________________________

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html