[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Potential Overexposure



Oops!

William V Lipton wrote:

> The attached, NRC "Preliminary Notification" regarding a potential
> overexposure brings to mind a previous string on the ANI requirement for
> secondary dosimetry.  With 20/20 hindsight (Is there any other kind?),
> secondary dosimetry would have obviated this situation.  If this is a
> real overexposure, an alarming dosimeter would probably have warned the
> worker of the hi rad fields in time to prevent it.  If this is some
> artifact, then the secondary dosimetry would give the licensee a more
> credible basis for writing it off.
>
> The opinions expressed are strictly mine.
> It's not about dose, it's about trust.
>
> Bill Lipton
> liptonw@dteenergy.com
>
> PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION OF EVENT OR UNUSUAL OCCURRENCE PNO-I-00-015
>
> This preliminary notification constitutes EARLY notice of events of
> POSSIBLE safety or public interest significance. The
> information is as initially received without verification or evaluation,
> and is basically all that is known by Region I staff in King of
> Prussia, Pennsylvania on this date.
>
>  Facility
>                                                        Licensee
> Emergency Classification
>  Yale University
>                                                        Notification of
> Unusual Event
>  Yale University
>                                                        Alert
>  135 College Street
>                                                        Site Area
> Emergency
>  New Haven, Connecticut
>                                                        General Emergency
>
>  Dockets: 03000582 License No: 06-00183-03
>                                                     X
>                                                        Not Applicable
>
> Subject: Potential Personnel Overexposure
>
> A technician in the University's Environmental Services group was
> performing an inventory of waste/sources in a lead-lined
> "cave" (source storage vault) over the course of three or four days,
> when the technician noticed on the last day that a vial
> containing approximately 1 millicurie of Na-22 (accelerator produced)
> was on its side, partially outside of its shield. The
> individual expressed concern about his exposure, therefore, the
> university requested an expedited processing of the individual's
> film badge on June 14, 2000. The University received the badge report on
> June 15, 2000, which indicated an exposure of
> 6930 millirem to the whole body. University radiation safety staff
> interviewed the individual immediately and performed a dose
> reconstruction where they calculated a maximum dose of 150 millirem to
> the whole body. University radiation safety staff also
> performed bioassay measurements of the technician and all co-workers,
> with negative results. The film badges of the
> technician's co-workers were sent in for expedited processing. The
> University's investigation has noted that the individual
> typically receives monthly doses no greater than 10 mrem and the
> individual had inadvertently taken the dosimetry badge to
> Texas in May, where it may have been left in the sun. The University
> asked their dosimetry processor to review possible
> environmental effects on the film and was notified on June 19, 2000 by
> the processor that the exposure was not due to heat or
> light.
>
> Region I and NMSS contacted the Assistant RSO at the University on June
> 16, 2000 and were informed that: 1) radiation
> work by all other employees in the individual's department has stopped
> until their badge results are received; and 2) the
> potentially exposed individual may have worked with byproduct material
> during the exposure period, as well as with
> accelerator-produced material. The licensee's investigation has not
> determined the source of exposure so far. The State of
> Connecticut was notified. Region I plans to conduct an immediate
> inspection in conjunction with the State of Connecticut.
>
> This information is current as of 4:00 p.m. on June 19, 2000.
>
> Region I is prepared to respond to inquiries by the media.
>
>  Contact:
>                    Mohamed Shanbaky
>                                                               Penny
> Lanzisera
>                    (610)337-5209
>
> (610)337-5169
>
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html

--
Jon C. Couillard
Fermi 1 Radiological Engineer
Couillardj@dteenergy.com
Voice: 734-586-4348
Fax:    734-586-1776


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