Re: Badging Workers

[Ed Wilds <EHSADM3@UConnVM.UConn.Edu>]

On Fri, 16 Sep 94 13:13:36 -0500 Kristin Erickson said:
>Hi, Radsafers:
>
>This is to provide yet another reason for badging workers who are known to
>be less than 10% of limits, and where it is therefore not required for
>health or compliance.  We have discussed this many times; and when the
>revised 10 CFR 20 went into effect, we were asked, "Why badge anyone when
>not required?"
>
>Answers are
>1.      Provides a service to workers
>2.      Provides data for historical record
>3.      Helps maintain consciousness of what they work with
>4.      Biggest and most useful reason:  The new general public limit, 100
>mrem per year is difficult or costly to demonstrate without badge data for
>workers handling rad. materials.  We were asked about ancillary personnel,
>how we assure compliance with general public limit.  We wrote into our
>license that by demonstrating <10% (ALARA) compliance for rad workers
>through badge data, that the ancillary personnel and public at large were
>in compliance by corrolary.  We were able to write that into our license,
>and have just passed NRC inspection muster for general public compliance
>using this rationale and our rad. worker exposure data.

Kristin:
   We just lost this ability to use badge data to justify expected exposure
to the public.  We are being asked to show, through calculated dose estimates
in each lab, that the dose rates are below 2mrem/hr.  We were told that having
a dose <10% does not demonstrate a dose rate below 2 mrem/hr.  Any ideas on
how we can get this written back into our license like it was for the previous
10 years?

   It must be nice to be outside Region I.

Ed Wilds
Radiation Safety Manager
The University of Connecticut