Re: tritium exit signs - not

[Gary Isenhower <garyi@BCM.TMC.EDU>]

I know nothing about tritium - I mean, Really Nothing. :)

However, the effective doses cited seem pretty inconsequential.  I would

be interested in seeing how this "risk" compares to, say, living with

someone who smokes.  In the case of the state facility, I would imagine

that patients are in a lot more danger from their peers than from the

exit signs.



On the other hand, the greatest risk from this mess is most likely to

whoever was responsible, i.e., fatal lawsuit due to irrational public

perception.



My personal opinion only.

    _______________________________________________



        Gary Isenhower

        713-798-8353

        garyi@bcm.tmc.edu





Gerald Nicholls wrote:

> 

> This is in response to JPAndrews request for "numbers" regarding the two tritium exit sign incidents I described in a recent posting.

> 

> Incident 1 - The sign was found at a demolition site by a 17 yr old male who took the sign to his basement bedroom and disassembled it, contaminating his bedroom and portions of the first floor of his home (most notably the kitchen).   The sign contained approximately 12 Ci of tritium at the time it was disassembled.  Urine bioassay estimated a total effective dose of approximately 100 mRem to the young man.  The dose almost certainly would have been lower if the bedroom had been on an upper floor with better ventilation.

> 

> Incident 2 - A 14 year old male client at a state operated residential facility for severely emotionally disturbed children removed a sign from a wall and threw it down breaking it.  The client was restrained by an attendant.  The incident took place in a dormitory that housed 13 teen-aged clients.  It took place in a second floor hall but was not immediately reported and contamination was spread to a common room on the first floor.  Tritum contamination up to 14K dpm/100 cm squared was found.  Urine bioassay found detectable tritium in 18 clients, workers and response personnel.  The highest dose (to the client who broke the sign) was estimated to be 16 mRem.  Some 47 drums of waste were generated and, when they arrived in South Carolina for disposal, exhibited surface contamination levels from 18 to 240 Kdpm/100 cm squared.  The sign contained approximately 15 Ci of tritium when it was broken.  Also, two other signs of similar activity were found to be missing and unaccoun!

!

!

!

!

te!

> d for at the facility.

> 

> Given the facts that both of these incidents involved contamination of living areas, and that they involved children, we believe we acted appropriately.  I would be interested, however, in comments from Radsafers who have dealt with similar incidents or who other views regarding our responses.

> 

> Gerald P. Nicholls

> NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection

> 609-633-7964

> gnicholl@dep.state.nj.us

> 

> ************************************************************************

> You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

> send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

> radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.



-- 

    _______________________________________________



	Gary Isenhower

	713-798-8353

	garyi@bcm.tmc.edu

************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.