RE: NRC requirements on retention of film

["William G. Nabor" <wgnabor@uci.edu>]

Quite a few!  It may be possible to demonstrate that the badge was not being
worn when the  exposure occurred (a clear, sharp image is unlikely on a
moving body, for example).  If the subject disputes the reading, either
denying that an exposure occurred, or claiming an overexposure not reported,
then the film can be re-read.  Spot contamination as from a splash of
radioactive liquid may be obvious from the pattern, again being determined
after the subject disputes the reading.  Finally, it is better to have hard
evidence in a court of law than a simple report.  A third party, for
example, can be appointed by the court to examine the evidence again.

     Keep that film!

Bill Nabor
UCI
WGNABOR@UCI.EDU


In Message Mon, 21 Aug 95 10:26:31 -0500,
  "Gray, Joel" <joel_gray@msgw.mayo.edu> writes:

>Why do you think it is important to keep processed film?  What purpose does it
>serve after the densities have been read?
>
>
>     Joel
>
>  Joel E. Gray, Ph.D.
>  Dept. of Diagnostic Radiology
>  Mayo Clinic
>  Rochester, MN 55905
>
>  Phone:   507-284-7374
>  Fax:     507-284-8996
>  e-mail:  gray.joel@mayo.edu 
>
>
>_______________________________________________________________________________
>From: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu on Mon, Aug 21, 1995 10:01 AM
>Subject: NRC requirements on retention of film
>To: Multiple recipients of list
>
>
>We at DOE are involved in discussions with National Archives on the
>recommended
>retention times for processed film (not the recorded results from).  Would 
>appreciate hearing from NRC licensees about any specifics incorporated into
>licenses or technical specifications.  All I could find in Part 20 was in
>20.2106(f) which requires maintaining records of individual monitoring
>results until the Commission terminates the license requiring the record.
>However, it doesn't specifically reference processed file.