131 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3563510)
1. The safety goals of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Okrent D
Science; 1987 Apr; 236(4799):296-300. PubMed ID: 3563510
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Safety of DOE reactors questioned.
Marshall E
Science; 1987 Nov; 238(4828):741. PubMed ID: 3672120
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Review of health physics research administered by U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Moeller DW
Health Phys; 1978 Sep; 35(3):447-56. PubMed ID: 748242
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Nuclear reactor safety: a new dilemma for the AEC.
Gillette R
Science; 1971 Jul; 173(3992):126-30. PubMed ID: 5581905
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Medical use of byproduct material; policy statement, revision. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Final policy statement; revision.
Fed Regist; 2000 Aug; 65(150):47654-60. PubMed ID: 11067710
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Nuclear power after Chernobyl.
Ahearne JF
Science; 1987 May; 236(4802):673-9. PubMed ID: 3576192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Safety systems in nuclear power plants with pressurized water reactors and demonstration of their function in technical scale experiments. II].
Hennies HH
Naturwissenschaften; 1987 Nov; 74(11):520-7. PubMed ID: 3431585
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Abnormal occurrences for second quarter CY 1991; dissemination of information--Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Fed Regist; 1991 Oct; 56(200):51919-21. PubMed ID: 10115357
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Nuclear safety: United States opts for caution.
Beardsley T
Nature; 1986 Dec 18-31; 324(6098):607. PubMed ID: 3796725
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Nuclear safety: NRC investigates Seabrook.
Collins E
Nature; 1986 Nov 20-26; 324(6094):203. PubMed ID: 3785390
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Nuclear power and public health.
Wolff AH
Am J Public Health; 1972 Aug; 62(8):1042-3. PubMed ID: 5046439
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Low-dose radiation: latest data renew questions of 'safe' level.
Marwick C
JAMA; 1990 Aug; 264(5):553-4, 557. PubMed ID: 2366287
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Regulatory experience in applying a radiological environmental protection framework for existing and planned nuclear facilities.
Mihok S; Thompson P
Ann ICRP; 2012; 41(3-4):256-62. PubMed ID: 23089024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Radiological health effects models for nuclear power plant accident consequence analysis.
Evans JS; Moeller DW
Health Phys; 1989 Apr; 56(4):397-413. PubMed ID: 2925380
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards.
Moeller DW
Health Phys; 1975 Mar; 28(3):177-87. PubMed ID: 1112717
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Probabilistic reliability analysis, quantitative safety goals, and nuclear licensing in the United Kingdom.
Cannell W
Risk Anal; 1987 Sep; 7(3):311-9. PubMed ID: 3685540
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Nuclear safety: damaged fuel ignites a new debate in AEC.
Gillette R
Science; 1972 Jul; 177(4046):330-1. PubMed ID: 5035481
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Nuclear plant workers: fearless and forgotten?
Denton DR
Occup Health Saf; 1982 Jul; 51(7):16-22. PubMed ID: 7121949
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Government nuclear accident planning--do doctors have confidence in it?
Morrison L
Med War; 1989; 5(4):173-4. PubMed ID: 2622416
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Yugoslavia: doubts on nuclear safety.
Rich V
Occup Health (Lond); 1981 Aug; 33(8):427-9. PubMed ID: 6912963
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
