[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: RADSAFE digest 6
----Is there a simple way to reply to individual messages in this digest?
On Tue, 22 Aug 1995 radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu wrote:
> Contents:
> Re: Repair & DDREF (loesch@viper.eh.doe.gov (Robert M. Loesch))
> ?Linear Assumption (HWADE@aol.com)
> Re: Oracle (Gary Masters <gmasters@csn.net>)
> RE: NRC requirements on retention of film ("William G. Nabor" <wgnabor@uci.edu>)
> Re: ?Linear Assumption ("Will Atkinson (B364 X4370)" <will.atkinson@aea.orgn.uk>)
> Elastomeric Coatings for Contamination Control (U) ("J. Wes Mouser" <wes.mouser@srs.gov>)
> Portable alpha spectroscopy ("RICHARD W. EDWARDS" <SHEA132@KGV2.bems.boeing.com>)
> Forwarded request ("John E. Aperans" <JAPERANS@wsmr-emh81.army.mil>)
> ?Bioassay ("K.L.Classic" <rvetter@mayo.edu>)
> Re: Portable alpha spectroscopy (Gary Masters <gmasters@csn.net>)
> Seeking Employment (Greg Sackett <gsackett@blkbox.COM>)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 07:35:10 +0600
> From: loesch@viper.eh.doe.gov (Robert M. Loesch)
> Subject: Re: Repair & DDREF
>
> On Mon, 21 Aug 95 15:53:34, Paul Frame wrote in reply:
>
> > ... Of course, if you are a fan of
> >hormesis, you can argue that the repair mechanisms for some reason
> >are normally operating at a suboptimal rate and that radiation
> >stimulates repair. This might then be imagined to reduce the total
> >amount of unrepaired DNA damage, damage brought about by radiation
> >and everything else.
> >
>
> I'm not an expert in this area, but I believe that there have been some
> animal experiments when a substantial dose, say 4 Sv, was delievered and
> the effects compared with another idential group receiving the same
> dose except that the dose was divided with a pre-sensitizing dose of about
> 50 mSv followed within 12-24 hours by the remaining dose. I seem to
> remember that the first group displayed a statistically significant increased
> response to the same overall dose as the second group.
>
> Bob Loesch
>
> Robert M. Loesch
> DOELAP Administrator
> U.S. Department of Energy
> Germantown, MD 20874
> (301) 903-4443
> ********************************************************
> Random number generation is too important a task
> to be left to chance!
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 08:53:17 -0400
> From: HWADE@aol.com
> Subject: ?Linear Assumption
>
> The statement below recently appeared in criticism of Cohen, who has shown
> that the association between radon concentration and cancer is negative
>
> 'The ecologic fallacy is "An error in interpreting associations between
> ecologic indices. It is committed by mistakenly assuming that, because the
> majority of a group has a characteristic, the characteristic is related to a
> health state common in the group" (Slome C, Brogan DR, Eyres SJ, Lednar W.
> Basic Epidemiological Methods and Biostatistics - A Workbook. Boston: Jones
> and Bartless, 1986, Chapter 9 & p. 306). The problem with the ecological
> study design is that it doesn't have individual doses linked to individual
> people.'
>
> If one believes that data subject to the "ecologic fallacy" should be
> disregarded, shouldn't the Hiroshima and Nagasaki data, that some say
> support the Linear Assumption and ALARA, also be disregarded? Aren't these
> data also subject to the "ecologic fallacy?"
>
> In fact, it appears that the Linear Assumption and ALARA are inherent victims
> of the "ecologic fallacy."
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 07:18:31 -0600
> From: Gary Masters <gmasters@csn.net>
> Subject: Re: Oracle
>
> >
> >We recently did the find a database search. Halliburton NUS is marketing a
>
> >scaled down version of their power plant package for smaller users. They
> >call it RDMS, and it is the only Oracle package I could find. The modules
> >you probably need will run around $30K. You can find an ad in the latest
> >HP Journal.
> >
> >John J. Zummo, RSO
> >Genentech, Inc.
> >
>
> We also recently went through the selection process to let a contract for
> an Oracle application to track things radiological. We settled on the Canberra
> HIS-20 package. It is modular so you should be able to pick and choose. We're
> getting the whole thing so I can't comment on module prices.
>
>
> *********************************************************************
> * Gary Masters, ALARA Program Coordinator, RFETS gmasters@csn.net *
> * Get Totally Warped - Use a Mac as a Unix terminal! *
> *********************************************************************
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 95 06:57:09 CST
> From: "William G. Nabor" <wgnabor@uci.edu>
> Subject: RE: NRC requirements on retention of film
>
> 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.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 95 15:31:01 +0100
> From: "Will Atkinson (B364 X4370)" <will.atkinson@aea.orgn.uk>
> Subject: Re: ?Linear Assumption
>
> HWADE writes:
>
> >If one believes that data subject to the "ecologic fallacy" should be
> >disregarded, shouldn't the Hiroshima and Nagasaki data, that some say
> >support the Linear Assumption and ALARA, also be disregarded? Aren't these
> >data also subject to the "ecologic fallacy?"
>
> No. The Bomb Survivor data compares individual reconstructed doses
> with individual health outcomes. It would be an ecological study if,
> for example, it had compared the mortality rates of people within 1
> mile of the epicentre with people 1-2 miles away, 3-5 miles away etc,
> and assumed that any differences were caused by radiation dose.
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Will Atkinson Internet: will.atkinson@aeat.co.uk
> Health Effects
> AEA Technology, 364 Harwell, Didcot Phone: +44 1235 434370
> Oxfordshire, OX11 0RA, U.K. FAX: +44 1235 432134
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 10:31:00 -0400 (EDT)
> From: "J. Wes Mouser" <wes.mouser@srs.gov>
> Subject: Elastomeric Coatings for Contamination Control (U)
>
> Greetings, RadSafers!
>
> I was wondering if any of you had experience using a product known as
> Polyshield SS-100 (tm), made by Specialty Products, Inc. The technical
> info. I have on it states that it is "a state of the art, high performance
> sprayed plural component polyurea elastomer. This system is based on
> amine-terminated polyether resins, amine chain extenders and isocyanates.
> It provides a flexible extremely tough monolithic membrance with excellent
> water and chemical resistance."
>
> Our Engineering group is obviously going to perform a technical evaluation
> as to the use of this elastomer, but in addition to this evaluation, I
> wanted to seek out personal experience. The specific application would be
> to coat concrete surfaces that have become contaminated with Pu-239
> dissolved in acid (nitric, sulfamic, others). The acid tends to leach out
> of the concrete and attack sealant paint, causing it to flake off. It is
> hoped that the Polyshield SS-100 will correct this problem.
>
> The tech. info. indicates that this material will probably work well in our
> application, but there is no reference in the tech. info. with regards to
> use on radioactive contaminated surfaces. Have any of you used, or seen
> this stuff used?
>
> Wester
> wes.mouser@srs.gov
> Decon & Containment Engineer
> I don't speak for DOE, WSRC, or your neighbor.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 09:47:26 -0700 (PDT)
> From: "RICHARD W. EDWARDS" <SHEA132@KGV2.bems.boeing.com>
> Subject: Portable alpha spectroscopy
>
> We periodically need to identify unknown alpha emitters which are not readily
> removeable from surfaces. Typically, this occurs when trying to identify the
> isotope found on a circuit board which may have been subjected to a number of
> processes involving different alpha emitting isotopes (i.e., neutron or
> fission product irradiation from Cf-252 sources, dusting with air from
> anti-static air nozzles containing Po-210, etc.). Alpha emission levels from
> the surface of these components range between 0.3 and 35 per cm2 per minute.
>
> The only portable instrument we have seen that would give us this capability
> is the new SAIC AP-2 alpha analyzer. Does anyone have any experience with this
> or any other device that would permit alpha spectroscopy on fairly large
> objects? (Disassembly of other people's hardware isn't always an option.) Or
> can anyone suggest an alternate means for accomplishing this?We are concern ed
> about reliability, ease of use, ability to calibrate, and general usefulness
> of whatever instrument we get.
>
> Thanks,
> Richard W. Edwards, Analyst The Boeing Company
> Phone: (206) 393-1999 P.O. Box 3707, M/S 6Y-38
> Fax: (206) 393-3060 Seattle, WA 98124-2207
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: 22 Aug 95 15:03:00 MST
> From: "John E. Aperans" <JAPERANS@wsmr-emh81.army.mil>
> Subject: Forwarded request
>
> Greetings, RadSafers:
>
> This was sent to me directly. I am redirecting it throughout the
> RADSAFE net in hopes that these individuals may have a broader
> range of experience from which to draw inspiration.
>
> ***** EXTRACTED MESSAGE *****
>
> Return-Path: <bscott@extro.ucc.su.oz.au>
> (snip)
> From: bscott@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (bscott)
> Subject: radiation, health and safety
> (snip again)
> We are a group of students from Sydney University,
> currently reasearching an assingment on radiation for physics.
> We would appreciate any information that you may have
> regarding your occupation and radiation. Any information concerning the
> machine(s)\device(s), it's uses, levels of emission, safety precautions
> taken and any other relavent information, will be very useful in our research.
> Thankyou for your time and effort,
>
> Belinda Scott
> Susan Murray
> Diane Tee
> Chris Than
> Jackie Wright
> ***** END OF EXTRACTED MESSAGE *****
>
> Thanx in advance for any help you can provide
> to these studei (isn't that the plural of
> student?)
> John E. Aperans
> japerans@wsmr-emh81.army.mil
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 16:20:27 -0500 (CDT)
> From: "K.L.Classic" <rvetter@mayo.edu>
> Subject: ?Bioassay
>
> To: IN14994 --POST
>
> From: K.L.Classic
> Subject: ?Bioassay
>
> We would be very interested in the criteria medical or educational
> institutions use to determine when a bioassay is required for those who work
> with gamma emitting radionuclides, whether urinalysis or whole-body counting
> is the method of choice, and the frequency of positive results.
>
> At our institution, anyone who works with more than 10 mCi of ANY gamma
> emitting radionuclide in one calendar quarter must have a whole body count.
> For routine bioassay we rarely have a positive result.
>
> Respond here or privately to:
>
> classic.kelly @mayo.edu
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 16:15:47 -0600
> From: Gary Masters <gmasters@csn.net>
> Subject: Re: Portable alpha spectroscopy
>
> We have been using the AP-2 to identify isotopes on air samples with good
> results. I'm not sure how well it would work with an irregular surface such
> as a PC board.
>
> What do you mean when you say "(Disassembly of other people's hardware isn't
> always an option.)"? An AP-2 won't detect contained isotopes.
>
> *********************************************************************
> * Gary Masters, ALARA Program Coordinator, RFETS gmasters@csn.net *
> * Get Totally Warped - Use a Mac as a Unix terminal! *
> *********************************************************************
>
> > We periodically need to identify unknown alpha emitters which are not readily
> > removeable from surfaces. Typically, this occurs when trying to identify the
> > isotope found on a circuit board which may have been subjected to a number of
> > processes involving different alpha emitting isotopes (i.e., neutron or
> > fission product irradiation from Cf-252 sources, dusting with air from
> > anti-static air nozzles containing Po-210, etc.). Alpha emission levels from
> > the surface of these components range between 0.3 and 35 per cm2 per minute.
> >
> > The only portable instrument we have seen that would give us this capability
> > is the new SAIC AP-2 alpha analyzer. Does anyone have any experience with this
> > or any other device that would permit alpha spectroscopy on fairly large
> > objects? (Disassembly of other people's hardware isn't always an option.) Or
> > can anyone suggest an alternate means for accomplishing this?We are concern ed
> > about reliability, ease of use, ability to calibrate, and general usefulness
> > of whatever instrument we get.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Richard W. Edwards, Analyst The Boeing Company
> > Phone: (206) 393-1999 P.O. Box 3707, M/S 6Y-38
> > Fax: (206) 393-3060 Seattle, WA 98124-2207
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 95 21:03:13 -0500
> From: Greg Sackett <gsackett@blkbox.COM>
> Subject: Seeking Employment
>
>
> Greetings fellow radsafers!
>
> I have recently aquired my M.S. in Health Physics from
> Texas A&M University and am currently seeking an entry
> level position in the field.
>
> I would greatly appreciate any aid that you could give me in this
> matter. I will gladly answer any questions you may have and
> will be more than happy to supply a resume.
>
> I would like to thank all the people who have previously
> tried to help me in this matter. Their efforts are not forgotten
> and much appreciated.
>
> Regards,
>
> Greg Sackett
> ********************************************
> Greg Sackett
> Texas A&M University, Class of '93, '95
> Aspiring Health Physicist, Mountain Biker,
> and Guitar Player.
> (Better at some than others)
>
> email: gsackett@blkbox.com
> ********************************************
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> End of Digest
> ************************