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

Re: RADSAFE digest 200



Dear Jerry,
We charge researchers for radioactive waste disposal.  The costs are 
based on the disposal cost to us and any costs we incur in getting the 
waste ready prior to its ultimate disposal.  These would be such costs as 
empty drums, absorbent, labor, vehicle rental, supplies etc.  I would be 
willing to send you a copy of our "Waste Disposal Cost Breakdown" if you 
wish.  It runs about 10 pages.  Let me know, and provide an address.

Brian Pankow 
U of Washington

On Wed, 25 May 1994 radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu wrote:

> Contents:
> Instrument Checks (Keith <WELCH@CEBAF.GOV>)
> Re[2]: Moisture Density Guage (forrere@ccmail.orst.edu)
> Re: Special Session - Computer Applications Roundtale (tdc@ehssun.lbl.gov (Ted M. de Castro))
> Re: Moisture Density Guage (ehsnet!hps (HPS))
> Special Session - Computer Applications Roundtale (ehsnet!hps (HPS))
> Re: Instrument Checks (Mary Beth Taormina - Radiation Safety/OEHS <MTAORMINA@Gems.VCU.EDU>)
> Radioactive Waste Disposal; direct charge ("RAD CAPT JERRY A. THOMAS" <THOMAS@usuhs.usuhs.mil>)
> Re: Radioactive Waste Disposal; direct charge (Joshua.W.Hamilton@Dartmouth.EDU (Joshua W. Hamilton))
> Re: Special Session - Computer Applicati (JMUCKERHEIDE@delphi.com)
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 16:54:33 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Keith <WELCH@CEBAF.GOV>
> Subject: Instrument Checks
> 
> I'm taking a mini-survey.  Any response to the following questions is greatly
> appreciated.  The subject is response checks on portable survey (dose rate)
> meters.
> 
> 1.  How often do you response check survey meters?
> 2.  Brief description of the check. (how many ranges are checked, etc)
> 3.  Do you make a distinction between a "source check" and a "resonse check"?
> 4.  Do you think your program meets ANSI N323 reqmts. (or do you even try to)
> 
> Thanks to all in advance for your input.
> 
> Keith Welch, CEBAF
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Tue, 24 May 94 14:42:11 PST
> From: forrere@ccmail.orst.edu
> Subject: Re[2]: Moisture Density Guage
> 
> 
>           I wondered the same thing about the "passenger compartment"
>           rule.  We have several departments that could end up using a
>           van, blazer, or suburban to get to their work site.  I asked
>           one of our state regulators who indicated that in these type
>           of vehicles, so long as the unit was securely strapped down,
>           and as far back as possible, transporting a gage was
>           allowable.  That, however, is in Oregon.  I would give your
>           local regulator a call for their interpretation.
> 
>           Gene Forrer
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 16:17:33
> From: tdc@ehssun.lbl.gov (Ted M. de Castro)
> Subject: Re: Special Session - Computer Applications Roundtale
> 
> Computer applications special session sounds fine to me!!
> 
> All proposed time equally acceptable.
> 
> Ted de Castro
> LBL
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Tue, 24 May 94 18:13:37 cdt
> From: ehsnet!hps (HPS)
> Subject: Re: Moisture Density Guage
> 
> Reply-to: Wes.Dunn@p2.f13.n233.z1.fidonet.org (Wes Dunn)
> Fido-To: ninni jacob
> 
> In a message of <24 May 94  14:29:05>, Ninni Jacob writes:
> 
>  >I just have one question regarding transportation.  it says 
>  >"not in passenger department"
>  >What does that mean?
> 
> I believe the wording should be "not in the passenger compartment" 
> (i.e., in a car trunk or bed of a truck -- locked, braced and secured,
> of course).
> 
> Wes
> 
> --- msged 1.99S ZTC
> --- eecp 1.45 LM2 
> 
>  * Origin: Health Physics Liberation Front  (1:233/13.2)
> --  
> HPS - via FidoNet node 1:233/13    (ehsnet.fidonet.org)
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Tue, 24 May 94 18:18:45 cdt
> From: ehsnet!hps (HPS)
> Subject: Special Session - Computer Applications Roundtale
> 
> Reply-to: Wes.Dunn@p2.f13.n233.z1.fidonet.org (Wes Dunn)
> Fido-To: jeffrey leavey
> 
>  >
>  >AT THE HPS ANNUAL MEETING - SPECIAL SESSION and ROUND TABLE
>  >-----------------------------------------------------------
>  >        >>  COMPUTER APPLICATIONS  <<
>  >            ---------------------
>  >
>  > Hector Mandel, UIUC  and  Jeff Leavey, IBM   Co-Chairs
>  >
>  >Wed 6/29 from 3:00 to 5:00 PM     OR
>  >Wed 6/29 from 7:00 to 9:00 PM     OR
>  >What date/time would be better (I'll try and get the
>  >majority's choice, but no guarantees).
>  >
> 
> ANSI N43.4 writing group is 3-5, so that's out for me.
> 7-9pm is also out for me unless you are planning on a more convivial 
> atmosphere than a typical meeting room (and HM would agree *snicker*)
> 
> --- msged 1.99S ZTC
> --- eecp 1.45 LM2 
> 
>  * Origin: Health Physics Liberation Front  (1:233/13.2)
> --  
> HPS - via FidoNet node 1:233/13    (ehsnet.fidonet.org)
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 07:00:23 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Mary Beth Taormina - Radiation Safety/OEHS <MTAORMINA@Gems.VCU.EDU>
> Subject: Re: Instrument Checks
> 
> We check the operation with a dedicated check source each time the
> survey meter is used.  "Operational" and full battery checks are
> performed monthly.
> 
> Mary Beth Taormina
> Radiation Safety Manager/OEHS
> Virginia Commonwealth University
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: 25 May 94 12:42:00 EST
> From: "RAD CAPT JERRY A. THOMAS" <THOMAS@usuhs.usuhs.mil>
> Subject: Radioactive Waste Disposal; direct charge
> 
> 
> 	During a recent meeting of our faculty senate, we had a discussion
> of direct costs and radioactive waste disposal.  Do any of your institutions
> have researchers that have NIH or other grants in which the direct cost of
> radioactive waste disposal is listed.  This would be much like animal costs
> and other "line item" costs normally included in grants.
> 
> 	A second question.  Do you charge your researchers for radioactive
> waste disposal.  If so, how do you calculate the costs?  Are they based on
> a per pound cost, per millicurie, or flat rate.
> 
> 	In the past a similar question was disucced on this forum.  But, the
> issue of getting granting agencies to defray the cost of disposal was not
> discussed.
> 
> 	I will be glad to provide the membership with a summary of the responsesI receive.  Please send your responses to me at:
> 
> 	THOMAS@USUHS.USUHS.MIL
> 	Phone:  301-295-3246
> 	Fax:    301-295-3893
> 
> 	Thanks in advance for your reply.
> 
> 	JERRY THOMAS
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: 25 May 94 14:08:21 EDT
> From: Joshua.W.Hamilton@Dartmouth.EDU (Joshua W. Hamilton)
> Subject: Re: Radioactive Waste Disposal; direct charge
> 
> 
> Regarding: direct costs and radioactive waste disposal
> 
>      Yes, our investigators our encouraged to list radioactive and
> biohazardous waste disposal as a direct cost (under Other Expenses) on their
> NIH and other grants, since there are certain direct costs that are passed on
> directly to the investigator for disposal of waste.  We charge individual
> labs on a volume basis for disposal of scintillation vials, bags of dry
> waste, carcasses, etc., so these are direct costs in addition to the indirect
> costs of the Radiation Safety Program itself which might be considered
> overhead.  Unfortunately, these requested funds are being increasingly
> reduced by NIH as part of its overall trimming of grant budgets to stretch
> their diminishing dollars.  This means that the investigator is once again
> caught in the middle.  The Federal and State governments mandate certain
> regulations, and the institution must implement them but then passes the
> costs along to the investigator.  However, the investigator has an
> increasingly difficult time getting either the institution or the funding
> agencies to pay for these mandates, even though they must be done to carry
> out the research in accordance with the law.  This has become a growing
> problem for research institutions and their investigators not only for
> radiation safety but also in the chemical hygeine, occupational sfaety and
> animal welfare arenas.
> 
> Josh Hamilton
> Dartmouth
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 14:39:04 -0400 (EDT)
> From: JMUCKERHEIDE@delphi.com
> Subject: Re: Special Session - Computer Applicati
> 
> Hector, Jeff:
> 
> Are you also interested in input here? especially from users who won't make
> the meeting?
> 
> Software search: Does anyone know where to find any old software that makes
> simple graphs with old ascii plotting output? (that can print, not just
> display to screen)
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jim M
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> End of Digest
> ************************
>