Re: Hot Spot Exemption

[Gary Masters <gmasters@csn.net>]

Linda,

The purpose of "Hot Spot" posting is to alert workers to the elevated
dose rate with respect to the general area dose rate. If you have a bunker
full of warheads you shouldn't have a bunker full of Hot Spots, you should
have an elevated general area dose rate (i.e. High Radiation Area). If,
on the other hand, you have a single warhead in a radiation area you
then have a Hot Spot.

I would not pursue an Article 113 exemption in this case.

Gary Masters
ALARA Program Coordinator
Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site
gmasters@csn.net

> 
> Radsafers:
>    At the DOE Pantex Plant, our mission is to disassemble/assemble
> nuclear warheads.
>    According to the DOE Radiological Control Manual Article 234, hot
> spots shall be posted for localized sources that are 5 times general
> area dose rate and greater than 0.1 rem/hr.  The localized source in
> a nominal warhead is a "hot spot" per the DOE definition.  However,
> isn't the intent and spirit of the Order of "hot spots" applicable to
> crud/buildup in piping, process equipment, etc.. places where it is
> not "designed or engineered" to be.  Our warhead sources are designed
> and engineered to meet or exceed "hot spot" dose rates.  Therefore,
> the question is:  Would not our warhead sources be candidates for an
> exemption to the "hot spot" regulation?
> 
> Linda Vickers
> Health Physicist
> Pantex Plant 
> 
>