Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi ET Audio File
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
MALE PARTICIPANT: Are we (inaudible) to give recommendations to the Ambassador. Because we got into this at the beginning, like (inaudible) advising the Ambassador.
MIKE CASE: Yes.
MALE PARTICIPANT: So, (inaudible) only go out to 50 miles.
FEMALE PARTICIPANT: But the request we had yesterday at 6:54 a.m., which we’re still waiting on, has to go out past Tokyo, go out at least 150-200 miles.
MIKE CASE: Okay.
FEMALE PARTICIPANT: Well, we should be able to get that information –
MALE PARTICIPANT: At least the first estimate. [...]
MALE PARTICIPANT: I have Tom Roberts here with me, and I guess we’re hearing that Admiral Donald wanted to talk to the Chairman to get some clarification.
MALE PARTICIPANT: Right. And so, are you plugged into that, to advise on whether it makes sense radiologically to –
MALE PARTICIPANT: Yes. No, I think it’s more than radiological issues –
MALE PARTICIPANT: Uh-hum.
MALE PARTICIPANT: — that the Ambassador has under consideration right now. You know, our position is that it is
MALE PARTICIPANT: Right. This is –
MALE PARTICIPANT: (Inaudible) –
MALE PARTICIPANT: This is not some we’ve calculated or we’ve recommended. We’re responding to the Ambassador’s request at this point.
MALE PARTICIPANT: Okay. Let me ask the question, isn’t there an ALARA consideration here at some level? We calculate that if, in fact, the asumptions [sic] made relative to your 50-mile PEG calculation come to pass, that you would get like 1 to rem total effective dose equivalent out to 150 to miles. And wouldn’t it make sense, if we’re talking now voluntary departure, wouldn’t it make sense to recommend voluntary departure in the name of avoiding that level of population dose?
MALE PARTICIPANT: Do you want my personal opinion?
MALE PARTICIPANT: Sure.
MALE PARTICIPANT: Right.
MALE PARTICIPANT: That’s my own personal view. And radiation is just one factor.
MALE PARTICIPANT: Right. So, but what we are charged with advising on radiation or you are charged with advising –
MALE PARTICIPANT: And that’s in our protective action to up to 50 miles.
MALE PARTICIPANT: Right, but why are we being so rigid in terms of doing the right thing? The right thing is an ALARA thing here, in addition to strict interpretation of PEG.
MALE PARTICIPANT: If you went to a (inaudible, possible “law”) –
MALE PARTICIPANT: Yes.
MALE PARTICIPANT: — I suppose, I suppose you could get there.
MALE PARTICIPANT: Yes, so the question is, how much should the law play into –
FEMALE PARTICIPANT: Yes.
MALE PARTICIPANT: And the scope of that, as you understood it from him, was –
MALE PARTICIPANT: Right. Now, if we were asked to advise strictly on radiological grounds, you would or would not take into consideration ALARA?
MALE PARTICIPANT: Yes, I would, but I keep coming back to I think that, if you’re out beyond the 50-mile zone, there are other factors –
MALE PARTICIPANT: That take in –
MALE PARTICIPANT: — that bear on this decision..
MALE PARTICIPANT: Okay.
VONNA ORDAZ: And other countries have recognized that as well in releases.
MALE PARTICIPANT: In the press releases — thanks. Vonna Ordaz is here with me, and she is saying in the press releases other countries are acknowledging that the radioactive dose is just one of many considerations.
VONNA ORDAZ: Structural (inaudible) –
MALE PARTICIPANT: Right.
VONNA ORDAZ: — transportation, communications, and other –
MALE PARTICIPANT: Right, yes.
Published: March 6th, 2012 at 8:43 pm ET