[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: external dose evaluation
There is a caveat to all this and that is that the particular licensee has
to make this methodology a part of the license obviously before any over
exposure and not back peddle after the fact trying to obscure an inability
to follow their procedures or the regulations. The approval to use these
weighting factors is not automatic either.
The particular 10CFR20 reference to this is found in the definitions under
weighting factor. Footnote 2 of the given table reads:
For the purpose of weighting the external whole body dose (for adding it to
the internal dose), a single weighting factor, w_T = 1.0, has been
specified. The use of other weighting factors for external exposure will be
approved on a case-by-case basis until such time as specific guidance is
issued.
This little note may or may have not made into any particular Agreement
States regulations. Just because you want it doesn't mean you are going to
get it. Convincing the regulatory bodies that this method applies in your
situation will probably involve some local studies on your part using
multi-badging to demonstrate that the assumptions used in the methodology
applies in your situation. The bottom line is that the licensee has to know
quite a bit about the radiation fields their folks will be working in to
convince regulators that the methodology applies.
Another thing to keep in mind is that using these weighting factors does
not absolve you of ALARA responsibilities and they should not be used to
"push the limits" so to speak.
DJWhitfill
Opinions expressed are mine and do not reflect official policies or
positions of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment.
"Sandy Perle"
<sandyfl@EARTHLINK.NET> To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu
Sent by: cc:
owner-radsafe@list.vand Subject: Re: external dose evaluation
erbilt.edu
10/02/01 01:23 PM
Please respond to
"Sandy Perle"
Bill,
I currently am providing the ANSI N13.41-1997 effective dose weighting
calculation in one SE
state (not under NRC jurisdiction). This method does result in a higher
dose than most of the other
dose weighting methodologies.
The NRC has been considering the use of dose weighting, even sponsored the
EPRI Meeting
back in 1997. Unfortunately they have not moved on it. Hopefully now they
will allow use of the
various methodologies, as you outlined. I can currently provide the Webster
(99%), Niklasson (1
client) and the N13.41 (1 client).
Dose evaluations will obviously change for the better.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy Perle Tel:(714) 545-0100 / (800) 548-5100
Director, Technical Extension 2306
ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Service Fax:(714) 668-3149
ICN Pharmaceuticals, Inc. E-Mail: sandyfl@earthlink.neI
ICN Plaza, 3300 Hyland Avenue E-Mail: sperle@icnpharm.com
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Personal Website: http://sandyfl.nukeworker.net
ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com
************************************************************************
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.
************************************************************************
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.