Re: Uranyl Acetate

[FRAMEP@ORAU.GOV]

Message authorized by:
/S=ischneid@gandalf.rutgers.edu/O=ORAUSMTP/PRMD=ESNET/ADMD= /C=US/ at X400PO




On July 19 Ira Schneider wrote:

>Today, an electron microscopist discovered that uranyl acetate
>contains depleted uranium even though it is labeled as rad
>limited quantity.  Of course we had no idea he has been
>working with it since 1965 not bothering to wear gloves or
>working in a hood.  He now wants to know the classic
>question of was he exposed to radiation?

>I am interested in finding out how other institutions regulate this
>substance with respect to personnel monitoring.  How would one go
>about reconstructing  a dose?  Any good literature out there that I
>could get my hands on.  Any comments would be appreciated.

The researcher is in an awkward spot. He's trying to stain very small
grids by floating them on drops of uranyl acetate and has gone to a
great deal of trouble to get this far. If he drops the grid during
handling he could very well lose the sample - wearing gloves
greatly increases the chance of this happening. If the drop
of uranyl acetate drys out during the staining, his sample
is probably compromised - operating in a fume hood, while possible,
makes this more likely. Overall, the uranyl acetate hazard pales when
compared to that from the volatile fixatives and plastics he's using.
Also, he probably gets a greater exposure from whatever x-rays the
electron microscope emits. In the old days at Brookhaven, health
physics used to do weekly(?) smear surveys but no personnel
monitoring.  A urine sample might be analyzed to demonstrate that his
uranium levels are in the baseline range.

      Good luck!

          Paul Frame
          Oak Ridge Assoc. Univ.