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

RE: transportation event



That depends.  Would you consider a failure rate of less than 1% to be

adequate?



The opinions expressed are mine all mine...

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

Daren Perrero

perrero@iema.state.il.us





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

From: William V Lipton [mailto:liptonw@DTEENERGY.COM]

Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 8:36 AM

To: John Jacobus

Cc: Doug Aitken; Luke.I.McCormick@nwd02.usace.army.mil;

radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Subject: Re: transportation event





Has this event "... proven they are adequate?"



The opinions expressed are strictly mine.

It's not about dose, it's about trust.

Curies forever.



Bill Lipton

liptonw@dteenergy.com



John Jacobus wrote:



> Well, I guess that after 30 years, ammo boxes have

> proven they are adequate.

>

> --- William V Lipton <liptonw@dteenergy.com> wrote:

> > This arrangement is generally known as "scab

> > shielding," i.e. shielding which is  not an integral

> > part of the packaging.  I

> > generally avoid it, for two primary reasons:  (1) It

> > often compromises package integrity.  2.  The

> > shielding may fail within the

> > package, resulting in a dose rate increase.  With

> > many radionuclides, the dose rate, not the quantity

> > is the limiting condition

> > for an RQ shipment.

> >

> > I remember a training class where a class exercise

> > involved determining the maximum quantity of solid

> > Co-60 that could be shipped

> > LQ.  The activity limit is 10.8 mCi.  With all of my

> > usual diplomatic skills, I challenged the instructor

> > to find a "strong tight"

> > package for that quantity of Co-60 which would meet

> > the 0.5 mR/hr dose rate limit.  (The unshielded dose

> > rate from a Co-60 point

> > source of 10.8 mCi is ~150 mR/hr at 1 foot.)

> >

> > In a situation such as this, there's a great

> > temptation to add shielding to the package to

> > achieve dose rate compliance.  I would

> > generally avoid this.  Possible solutions:  use a

> > bigger package, with the material securely centered

> > in the package; use a

> > shielded package; or ship as NOS, rather than RQ.  I

> > suspect that an ammo box is not an adequate package

> > for material in a lead

> > pig, especially if it were dropped on a top corner.

> >

> > . . .

>

> =====

> +++++++++++++++++++

> "Eternal vigilance by the people is the price of liberty and . . . you

must pay the price if you wish to secure the blessing."

> Andrew Jackson

>

> -- John

> John Jacobus, MS

> Certified Health Physicist

> e-mail:  crispy_bird@yahoo.com

>

> __________________________________

> Do you Yahoo!?

> Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard

> http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree





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

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/

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

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/