LNT meeting July 26 2016 ------------------------ 6:33P: ------ August 8th is the next big teleconference. The hope tonight is that we will settle on a budget. What we want to know is are we going to be planning for 150 attendees or should we back it down to 100 people instead. At 150 people, we are anticipated that only half of those people will be staying at the red lion, therefore we are only expecting that 75 people will be staying there. Even so, they have an 80% rule, so if only 60 people stay there we are still okay. The general consensus is that if we can't get up to 60 people that we may be in a different sort of trouble. It sounds like bob and jerry are okay with the contractual obligations with red lion but, their main concern is with whether or not the technical planning committee is okay with an expected outcome of 150 people. Wanda is thinking that even without corporate backing and even without reimbursing people for attending, she is thinking that with enough lead time we will likely still be able to get the requisite number of people. 6:40P: ------ DOE interest of up to 25 was heard but, considering that their budgets aren't finalized at this point there is no guarantee. Wayne, is planning to call Andy Wallow the third about funding. Jerry and bob are thinking that we can probably manage 150 people, Wanda is thinking that we are probably going to get 1/2 of 400. 6:44P: ------ On to publications. Wayne has had several discussions with the HPS journal. The $70/page charge is "etched in granite". It sounds like this price originates from the publishing company, and there is no wiggle room at all. It sounds like we are ready to send in the package. There are two publication plans and they are very similar. In reality they are incredibly similar. The only difference between the journal and the other publication will be the inclusion of proceedings and others that could not have been done before the meeting has happened. The timing according to the ANS manual is what we are going to have to follow. At this point it is imperative that we get a technical program handled. We need to get the extended abstracts (250 words) put together. These extended abstracts are going to be what we put on those DVDs. The $7000 cost would be for a 100 page publication. Wayne things we may need to get a "sugar-daddy" to pay for this. Should we decide to go beyond this and do full papers, we may need to increase the size of the publication to over 250 pages. While we will need to look over the abstracts, their are not exactly peer-reviewed. 6:50P ----- Wayne thinks that it might be best if we limit the paper publication to including the extended abstracts (and something else I didn't catch...). It may be a possibility that we could put the full text of the papers onto a CD/DVD and have HPS distribute it along with the publication... Though there appears to be a number of questions regarding copyright on the issue. Wanda put forth the possibility of having each of the people who produce and make a paper be okay with free electronic distribution of the papers to other people. It sounds we are expecting that there will be 40 abstracts (~80 pages) that could be put into the publication. Alan is thinking that if somebody goes to the trouble of putting together a full article, they may want to get the entire thing published. However, should people decide to take those articles to an actual journal, we would lose the ability to redistribute that paper. The final ~20 pages of the publication will be reserved for "the product" of the meeting. 6:55P ----- Alan suggested that a writer, Rod Adams, would be an excellent candidate to take the technical information and to be able to summarize it in a way that is more accessible to the layperson. However, this issue needs to be discussed with the technical committee (darryl, ron, etc..) however, that is something that needs to be discussed with those guys. Alan is thinking that Rod Adams would be willing to do this work at no cost. Wayne said, assuming we go ahead with a special edition of the HPS magazine, it will be given away for free to all the HPS members. However, there may be some sort of complications regarding how non-HPS members, are able to get ahold of a copy. These special publications would be available electronically to HPS members, but not to people who aren't. One question is how does this affect ANS members. It sounds like we are going to contact the publisher to see if we can create a special link to make this publication to ANS members as well. 7:00P ----- Alan mentioned that Wayne sent an email to an ANS guy but that he hasn't yet heard a response from him. The only thing we are missing is contact with the ANS president (of western washington?) . It sounds like we are ready to send it in, once we get the cover letter. Wayn did talk to the ANS president, and they are not willing to modify their agreement to accept any liability. They are willing to provide free advertising however, if they do so, there is an expectation that they will see their logo plastered everywhere (Jerry suggests that "we will weasel it, somehow"). Alan has brought up Calibrisi, who is apparently a very good speaker and is very much an advocate. He is not on the program yet. Ludvig feels that if we are successful that the LNT is not what we should be using, then the question is, well, what should be using instead. He is suggesting that we have another meeting with six people or so from all sides of the issue for 2-3 days, to hammer out a plan of what should be used instead. He is planning to try and have this meeting either this spring of fall (next year (before the Official Topical Meeting)). The plan is to have one of those Ingall's creek type meetings for these people so that they can hammer out the plans. 7:07P: ------ It was pointed out by Mike that the issue is not that the linear par is killing us, the issue is how a small quantity of dose to 100K people is the same as one large quantity to a single person. (Essentially, the current method is suggesting that 9 pregnant women can gestate a single baby in a single month). This is really where the astronomical cost is coming from. Wanda points out that when we first started, we were saying that if not LNT, then what? What darryl suggests is to try and adjust that lower limit up to reasonable levels is a better place to start. Wanda is suggesting that while changing the LNT thing altogether would be great, she is thinking that it may be too big of a change that it may compromise our capability to produce any sort of meaningful change (namely, being able to raise that lower dose limit). Wayne is suggesting that there is probably current science good enough to prove that the current standards are not correct, however, who are the people that we need to prove this to, its ICRP and the like that need to change their tune otherwise we won't be able to make any changes. Almost all people in attendance are in agreement that having a pre-meeting is a great idea, however, this issue of the what, who, and how to communicate with the people that can result in changing the fundamental issue. Wanda says that at the end of this we have to come up with a document that we can present to these bodies to hopefully cause them to reconsider their current position that will then trickle-down to fix the more local regulations. 7:15P: ------ There is a consideration that we need more representation of the people who are in the regulation. Otherwise, we would just be a bunch of scientists sitting around discussing something. Ludvig has named a few people but he hasn't come up with an epidemiologist. Alan suggested John Boice would be a good candidate but, that he has a vested interest that would complicate matters. 7:20P: ------ Coming back to Steve's point, it doesn't make sense that collective does is being used however, who would be appropriate to suggest... We all agree that we encourage Ludvig to pursue the pre-meeting. It sounds like there is a discussion of where this meeting should take place. Apparently, Ludvig owns a house in the Alps. Wayne suggests that the most conservative regulatory committee is the EPA. Jerry is suggesting that the EPA continually tightens their standards to maintain their viability. As the story goes, the EPA improved the numbers of certain nuclides in drinking water but, there is a huge quantity of backlash resulting from this. 7:25P: ------ Back to the issue on branding, Anna has been saying that it isn't that bad. Jerry read thought the ANS standards, we can use pictures, we can use colors however, there are some very specific details on how the ANS logo must be used. We have to pay a bit of attention to our layout and sizing. We have to be careful to make sure that we use the correct colors for the ANS logo. But yeah, we can have the ANS logo, the topical logo, and the HPS logo all coexist on the same page. Wanda held up a piece of paper and asked if it was okay. Alan suggests that it probably hasn't been looked at yet and that there may need to be some asking. Alan is waiting on feedback from Anna on this matter. Anna has been talking to Paula about this. Jerry is suggesting that we should use the letterhead like Wanda has until we find out otherwise... Wayne reminded people that a paper was about to be circulated though all of the NRC tonight unless he is told otherwise. Alan wants Wayne to see if he can get them to hold off from sending out that (paper/announcement/whatever) until after they get a chance to get Paula to have a look at it and hopefully keep us on the good side of the law. 7:30P ------ * 25K from DOE * 700 from HPS (I might not have got this correctly...) * Doug Bernem 40k would not be a problem. Alan says, once we get the approval, he wants to try to do something with Terrapower. Its possible that we might be able to get Bill Gates to be a banquet speaker. If we can do that it's likely that the event will totally sell out. Wayne is suggesting that sponsorship for smaller things like, lunches, coffee breaks and whatnot could probably be obtained from local consulting firms and companies. However we have a lot of time until that is needed. 7:34P: ------ The IAEA, we have a draft letter printed up. Wanda glanced at it but, had a little problem with the tone. Jerry thought about it but decided to leave it alone. Who can be responsible for contacting EPRI and INPO (it sounds like we have a guy for that). CHEMICO AREVA, what about people overseas? What organizations could we contact. Wayne suggests that there are international equivalents to HPS could give us some ideas. If would could get sponsorships from some of these important organizations, Alan, feels like it could make our story sound better. Alan is planning to meet with Wanda tomorrow to rewrite one of the paragraphs of that draft letter. Wayne is suggesting that by circulating these letters to the international HPS groups, may not get us sponsorships but, may give the topical visibility to people who might not see it otherwise. 7:40P: ------ It sounds like the plan is to have two lists, or two sets of expectations, one list of people who might send us money, and one list which we hope might send people to attend. Can we call these people sponsors, a co-sponsorship, in cooperation with, in association with.... etc. Apparently Jerry has had some level of discussion on this topic and it seems like it may need to be handled on a case by case basis, basically however a sponsor wants us to credit them. Wanda wants to know if we are planning to contact China or Russia? These countries are very big in this market and so it should be of interest to them. Another good country to contact would be somebody in India. If we are going to be leaning on Bill Gates, we could possibly see if he would mind sharing his contacts in Russia and China. Alan wants to know whether or not we want to invite the people (like Tom Cockren, or Bob Alfreds, Rob Alvarez (nope, he has no credentials)). Apparently we cant argue with somebody like Marjani, Steve Wing (was suggested by Jerry). Wanda says that if they want to come, let them pay. Don't even bother sending them an invitation. Jerry things that we probably should send them an invitation... but, Wanda disagrees with him saying that facts don't matter to people like them 7:50P: ------ Tours, it sounds like we could potentially include a pub-crawl if they are interested (sarcasm?). We have wineries in the lineup and also, there is a LIGO facility out here that could possibly be toured. And there is still a possibility that something could be done with the B-reactor. A lot of rules are being relaxed nowadays to allow tours to go and see the B-reactor. Apparently it's becoming more and more easy to get foreign nationals in there. Regarding the website, it sounds like we are doing pretty good. After the dust has settled and money is made, we might consider cutting a check for Virginia cause it sounds like collectively, she has helped out considerably. It sounds like the pub crawl should be referred to as (attitude-adjustment session). 7:55P: ------ In regards to the upcoming Waste Management Conference in Phoenix ??? March 2017. It sounds like it would be good to get somebody to talk about risk in the Fukushima session. Do we know anybody who is planning a paper on something like that. Cause this number of 1600 people dying from evacuation 12 thousand from the tsunami but, no deaths in particular from radiation. 8:00P: ------ Alan says at this point we really should try and get preliminary approval. He is also thinking that we should probably not have a meeting next month since many people may be out on vacation. Wanda's concern is that we are only meeting once a month at this point, and if we get into a habit of meeting even less than once a month, we may loose some momentum on this project. It was pointed out by Jerry that there are 790 days left until the next meeting. It sounds like August 23rd may be the date of the next meeting. At this point it is tentative, depending on whether or not the technical planning committee available. We want to know what the technical planning committee is telling people they are inviting regarding full papers and whatnot.