Search

On April 8, 1966, 4,808 barrels—208.2 L each—were buried at Savannah River nuclear cemetery in Aiken, South Carolina. They contained about 1,100 tons of radioactive contaminated soil and vegetation from Palomares, a village on the South Coast of Spain. Earlier that year, about 9 kg of plutonium had been scattered over Palomares due to a U.S. Air Force accident involving four nuclear bombs. In this paper I reconstruct the diplomatic negotiations between the US and Spain to establish the clean‐up criteria for Palomares by focusing on the contaminated earth. This work provides an interpretation of the construction of radiological thresholds (for burial and health protection) through nuclear diplomacy and highlights the importance of public visibility in this process. The Palomares earth was considered nuclear or not nuclear depending on different factors, not only its radioactivity readings. In this paper I disentangle these factors and show to what extent materiality, diplomacy, and public visibility are intertwined in the construction of nuclearity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To discover the extent of training in radiological protection (RP) of Spanish urologists who perform endourological procedures, and to analyse the use of on ionising radiation control and protection measures., Material and Methods: A survey conducted through the Plataforma de Investigación de Estudios Multicéntricos (PIEM) (Multicentre Study Research Platform) on the 1,894 associates of the Spanish Association of Urology, between April and October 2015. The questionnaire comprised 21 questions on endourological activity undertaken, RP training, and the use of protective measures, and personal dosimetry. Seventeen percent responded, and 238 surveys were eventually validated for study., Results: Sixty-three percent of the respondents had received no type of RP training, 25% had first level accreditation, and only 12% second level. Fifty-seven percent, 27%, and 2% of the urologists used flap, wrist and crystalline dosimetry respectively. Use of radiation protection measures was insufficient. Fifty-three percent of the urologists at greatest risk of exposure had had no training in RP, 30% did not use flap dosimetry, and 40% used neither an apron or thyroid collar during the endourological procedures., Conclusions: RP training, dosis monitoring, and the use of ionising radiation protective measures are insufficient, even by practitioners most exposed to radiation. It is essential that these serious shortcomings in RP are corrected, at the level of the individual, in urology departments, scientific societies, and the health authorities., (Copyright © 2018 AEU. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)