[ RadSafe ] Radon Daughters on People

[Alston, Chris]

Rick



If the radon daughters are truly the progeny of "radon" (Rn-222) and not thoron (Rn-220), which is usually the case, they will all go away very quickly, i.e., about four (4) hours.  Thoron daughters are much more persistent, there actually is some in-growth, in the early phase.



cheers

cja





-----Original Message-----
From: Hansen, Richard [mailto:HansenRG at nv.doe.gov]
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 12:27 PM
To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
Subject: [ RadSafe ] Radon Daughters on People [was "Salsman warning"]



Roy,



The incident you mention of the nuclear power plant worker coming to

work contaminated with radon daughter products is briefly described on

the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection web site:



The Saga of the Bureau of Radiation Protection

...Another seminal event for the Bureau occurred on December 19, 1984.

Notification was received from the chief raddie at Limerick that a

worker was coming to work contaminated. The contamination was detected

by a portal monitor. The contamination was natural. The utility had the

worker's home checked, and found extremely high concentrations of radon

there. The Limerick chief raddie reasoned correctly that the problem was

not a utility problem, but rather a state problem. The radon story began

with that phone call.

In the early months of the radon project, attention was confined to the

Boyertown area. A field office was established in Gilbertsville. By the

end of 1985, the project included the entire Reading Prong and adjacent

areas. By late 1986, the program began to go statewide.

http://www.dep.state.pa.us/brp/BRP_Info/BRP_History.htm



I have a question for radsafe:



What are some methods to use in the field to determine if low levels of

radiation detected on a person or clothing is due to radon daughters

rather than radioactive contamination from other sources?



Two situations come to mind. First, during a law enforcement

investigation of possible illegal use of radioactive material, the

persons involved (including the officers) may be checked for radioactive

contamination using handheld survey meters.

A second situation would be emergency response personnel checking fellow

responders and members of the public for contamination at the scene of a

potential incident involving radioactive material.



Depending on the organization, the personnel may have access to survey

meters with GM pancake detector probes and NaI gamma detector probes

(such as 1-in. diameter by 1-inch long NaI detectors). Hand-held

NaI-based radionuclide identification instruments (or RIIDs) may be

available. Some organizations also have alpha-beta scintillator

contamination probes, but most probably will not.



Examples of this type of situation include training exercises where

radiation levels exceeded twice background levels on some of the Tyvek

suits worn by responders (especially during winter with low humidity).

Another possible example is workers initially thought to be contaminated

from a leaking sealed radioactive source because radiation (actually

from radon daughters) was detected coming from workers' hands, clothes,

and chairs.



Rick Hansen

Senior Scientist

Counter Terrorism Operations Support Program

National Security Technologies, LLC, for the U.S. Dept of Energy

hansenrg at nv.doe.gov

www.ctosnnsa.org





Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 14:36:43 -0700 (PDT)

From: ROY HERREN <royherren2005 at yahoo.com>

Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Salsman warning

To: Doug Huffman <doug.huffman at wildblue.net>,

     radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu



<snip> James concern brings to mind a rather infamous incident from the

1970's at a Nuclear facility in Pennsylvania. If I remember the near

Urban myth like details of the story correctly, it seems that at the end

of a work shift a worker was found to be contaminated. After much

unsuccessful research over several day as to the work related cause of

the contamination,a survey was taken of the workerupon immediate arrival

at the work site from his home at the beginning of his shift before he

started work. The worker was found to be contaminated from a source

other than work... What was that source of contamination? Was it coal

fly ash? No, it was from naturally occurring Radon gas daughter

products. It seems that the worker had weather proofed his home so well

that naturally occurring Radon gas that was released from the soil under

his house had built up in the house to a much greater extent that would

otherwise naturally occur.

...

Roy Herren








CONFIDENTIAL: The information contained in this communication,
including its attachments may contain confidential information and
is intended only for the individual (s) or entity (ies) to whom it
is addressed . The information contained in this communication may
also be protected by legal privilege , federal law or other
applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient of this
communication , you are hereby notified that any distribution,
dissemination or duplication of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please
immediately delete and destroy all copies of this message and
please immediately notify us of the error by separate communication
. Thank you.