RE: 15 or 25 mrem per year?

["Vernig, Peter G." <Peter.Vernig@MED.VA.GOV>]

ER then things have changed a bunch.  I attended a local chapter meeting on

a clean up project [I think it was part of the Rocky Flats clean up but

maybe not.]  Anyway the contractor assumed that if they documented meeting

the EPA's 15 mrem that would be acceptable to the NRC.  I hope nobody is

surprised that they were wrong and had to do a whole separate report

documenting that they had met the 25 mrem figure for the NRC.

 

Of course things change and this was say 3 to 5 years ago.

 



Any opinions expressed in this message are mine alone and do not necessarily

represent those of the Eastern Colorado VA Health Care System, The

Department of Veterans Affairs, or the United States Government.



Peter G. Vernig 

Radiation Safety Officer, VA Medical Center 1055 Clermont St. Denver, CO

80220, ATTN:  RSO MS 115; peter.vernig@med.va.gov; personal

peter_vernig@hotmail.com; 303.399.8020 ext. 2447, FAX: 303.393-5026 [Off on

weekends] Alternate fax 303-377-5686 [Service 24/7]



"...whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is

pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable, if anything is found to be

excellent or praiseworthy, let your mind dwell on these things."

Paul of Tarsus



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

From: Raymond A Hoover [mailto:ray2hoover@YAHOO.COM]

Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 3:29 PM

To: jjcohen; Redmond, Randy (RXQ); radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Subject: Re: 15 or 25 mrem per year?





Considering all the uncertainties in the calculations, it should not make a

bit of difference.  Of course the folks at the EPA would then insist that

conservative is better.

 

Actually, I think on at least one occasion EPA has agreed to 25 mrem. On

October 10, 2002, NRC News No 02-120 was released in which the NRC announced

that that the NRC and EPA had reached an agreement in which the EPA agreed

to defer exercise of authority under CERCLA Act for the majority of NRC

facilities to be decomissioned.  This I have taken to mean that they are not

going to argue with the NRC.  The copy of the MOU I have doesn't get

specific on doses, so presumably the NRC number is the controlling one.

However, there is a table of permissible contamination levels for

radionuclides in soil.  How the numbers were devied is not stated.