Re[2]: 60 Minutes story on SRL

[Rodney Bauman <rodney_bauman@wssrap-host.wssrap.com>]

Due to variations in site contractual agreements and the continual evolution of
DOE orders/regulations, the exact regulations applicable to this situation are
most likely different than current 10CFR835 requirements.

Currently, 10CFR835 allows such an individual to return to work only if the
"lifetime limit" exposure occurred under an emergency exposure situation and all
the provisions of 10CFR835.1301 are met.  One obvious provision is consent from
the affected employee.

Rodney Bauman, CHP, RRPT
rodney_bauman@wssrap-host.wssrap.com

____________________Reply Separator____________________
Subject:    Re: 60 Minutes story on Savannah River Laboratory 
Author: <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Date:       01/24/2000 10:49 AM

The only quantification stated was that the one individual received a 
"lifetime" limit based on his internal uptake of plutonium. Then the 
story said that the individual was put back to work in the plutonium 
cell. This doesn't make sense. If the individual received a lifetime 
burden, I expect that he wouldn't be out back to work. Under NRC 
regulations, an individual who receives an internal dose, the 50 year 
committed dose is assumed to take place in the year it was received. 
After the year passes, the individual is once again, permitted to 
receive radiation exposure as an occupational worker. How is this 
treated by DOE?


************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html