Re: Holding kids thread... addendum

[sandy_perle@email.fpl.com]

     The rule defines Public Dose as follows:
     
     "Public dose means the dose received by a member of the public from 
     exposure to radiation and/or radioactive material released by a 
     licensee, or to any other source of radiation under the control of the 
     licensee. It does not include occupational dose or doses received from 
     natural background radiation as a patient from medical practices, or 
     from voluntary participation in medical research programs."
     
     
     1. A family member who is likely to receive an exposure that exceeds   
        the public dose limit of 100 mrem requires to be monitored.
     
     2. The patient exposure is excluded from regulatory control.
     
     3. If the family member is to exceed the 100 mrem exposure, they, by   
        definition require training regarding the hazards involved with the 
        exposure.
     
     Hope this helps provide a background on the rule change. This change 
     was first proposed in May 1991, and it involved the definition of 
     controlled and restricted areas. They eventually let those definitions 
     stand. The reason it was raised was due to some power plants requiring 
     all workers to be trained as long as they entered the Plant Protected 
     Area, even though they received NO radiation exposure.
     
     
        
     Sandy Perle
     Supervisor Health Physics
     Florida Power and Light Company
     Nuclear Division
     
     (407) 694-4219 Office
     (407) 694-3706 Fax
     
     sandy_perle@email.fpl.com

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Holding kids thread...
Author:  radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu at Internet-Mail
Date:    10/3/95 9:43 AM


This is just to let everyone know that the NRC published new
regulatory definitions of occupational and public dose to
exclude medical exposure.  60 FR 36038-36043, July 13, 1995.  As
I understand the new rule, only persons employed in a radiation
area or radioactive materials area are considered occupationally
exposed, not an occasional visitor ot that area.  So putting a
monitoring device on a "family member who is asked to assist in
positioning a patient" is probably not appropriate.

Also, a "wrong patient" rule was published on September 20,
1995 ..60 FR 48623.  I think the idea a a family member
receiving radiation exposure incidentally from a patient might
be in there.



--
Jean Gresick-Schugsta
RSO/Imaging Physicist
York Hospital
1001 S. George Street
York,  PA  17405
PHONE:   (717) 851-5166
FAX:     (717) 741-8196
Internet:  rd_jgresick@yorkhospital.edu