Resolution of comments from stakeholder submissions on Document Title: Guide for Radiation Protection in Existing Exposure Situations (RPS G-2) Consultation period: 15 December 2016 10 March 2017 – Please note: Text of the Guide has been edited in the final review, including the revision of Annex A. Comments by Reviewers Resolution Accepted, Para/Line Reason for modification/ not # Submitter Comment Reason Accepted but modified Not accepted No. accepted as follows 1 Jeff Carter I put to you (ARPANSA), that through Comment not Comment not adopted. this invitation to the public, you are adopted attempting a smoke-screen Not relevant to of the regarding the 'worst danger' which is proposed Guide which is ionising not addressed in the above radiation. publication. The worst danger I believe, alongside the view of many others who have researched the subject of EMF exposure… 2 Rick O’Brien Lines These lines refer to situations on Comment not Comment not adopted. – 25-27 which a decision (i.e. that they do adopted not meet current radiation The meaning is consistent with protection standards) has already GSR Part 3 and ICRP 103. been made. Such situations, according to lines 20-22, may not be existing exposure situations. There is a potential inconsistency here. 3 Scope The cross-reference above” is Accepted Comment accepted. – “(a) Lines 30-32 incorrect Corrected
Resolution of comments from stakeholder submissions on Document Title: Guide for Radiation Protection in Existing Exposure Situations (RPS G-2) Consultation period: 15 December 2016 – 10 March 2017 Please note: Text of the Guide has been edited in the final review, including the revision of Annex A. Comments by Reviewers Resolution # Submitter Para/Line No. Comment Reason Accepted Accepted, but modified as follows Not accepted Reason for modification/ not accepted 1 Jeff Carter I put to you (ARPANSA), that through this invitation to the public, you are attempting a smoke-screen regarding the 'worst danger' which is not addressed in the above publication. The worst danger I believe, alongside the view of many others who have researched the subject of EMF exposure… Comment not adopted Comment not adopted. Not relevant to of the proposed Guide which is ionising radiation. 2 Rick O’Brien – Lines 25-27 These lines refer to situations on which a decision (i.e. that they do not meet current radiation protection standards) has already been made. Such situations, according to lines 20-22, may not be existing exposure situations. There is a potential inconsistency here. Comment not adopted Comment not adopted. The meaning is consistent with GSR Part 3 and ICRP 103. 3 Scope – Lines 30-32 The cross-reference “(a) above” is incorrect Accepted Comment accepted. Corrected