RE: Removable Contamination Surveys

["Perrero, Daren" <Perrero@IDNS.STATE.IL.US>]

Your extension of logic seems reasonable for propagating the values.  In

Illinois (as in most agreement states) our requirements are more likely to

be guidelines and are handled on a case by case basis depending on the

facility's past and future projected uses, along with the nuclides and

surfaced involved particularly if an unrestricted release is being

requested.  On the other hand if its for determining an action level for

corrective steps for areas where RAM will continue to be used then we may be

headed in another direction.  Above all the, IMHO, the question should be

asked, what is the reason for performing the monitoring?  Do you really need

a 'quantitative answer where a qualitative answer will suffice? (go/no go

vs. strict compliance issue)

 

As far as the 'standard area' is concerned, I'm sure there's a history

there,  (like the now infamous 8 inch "S" that allot of us were trained to

perform.) however, I'm afraid I don't have the background to get your answer

for you.

 

The thoughts expressed are mine, mine, all mine! 

I'm with the government, I'm here to help........ 

Daren Perrero, Health Physicist 

perrero@idns.state.il.us 



-----Original Message-----

From: Jenkins, Peter [mailto:PJenkins@ahs.llumc.edu]

Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 1:51 PM

To: 'radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu'

Subject: Removable Contamination Surveys







Can anyone give me some insight (and possible source documents) into the

reasons for the 100cm^2 standard (or suggestion?) used for removable

contamination surveys?  Why is it 100cm^2 and not 1,000cm^2, or something

smaller or larger?  Is there anything wrong with increasing the swiped area

to increasing the likelihood of detection?  



Specifically, assume a removable contamination limit is set at 200

dpm/100cm^2 for a laboratory and a researcher wishes to use a survey meter

to count the swipes.  According to the manufacturer's formula and values

(for efficiency of the radionuclide, etc), the meter has an MDA of 400 dpm.

Is there anything wrong with performing the survey over 200 cm^2 so that the

detection limit would meet the removable contamination limit?



Thanks, 



Pete Jenkins 













































Confidentiality Note: The preceding e-mail message (including any

attachments) contains information that may be confidential, protected by

applicable legal privileges, or constitute non-public information.  It is

intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s).  If you are not

an intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender by replying

to this message and then delete it from your system.  Use, dissemination,

distribution or reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is not

authorized and may be unlawful.



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

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 can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/