[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: planned special exposures?
Trisha,
From my information no licensee has executed the PSE. There are many
reasons for this:
1. Any licensee who implements a PSE will be scrutinized in detail by
the NRC as to why no other individual or individuals could have
performed the work that required the PSE.
2. The only realistic licensee who would even potentially use this
rule are the nuclear utilities and potentially a radiographer.
3. These groups have reduced the annual exposures for their workers to
levels that are generally below 2 rem/yr/individual.
4. The higher exposed workers, those transients that are specialized
are also reducing their exposure. Their employers are also promoting a
cost/manrem above some agreed upon threshold.
5. ALARA within the nuclear utilities works, even when ALARA was not
specifically required by the former 10 CFR 20. Jobs are better
planned, executed and feedback is used to further improve dose to be
received the next time the job is conducted.
6. More remote monitoring is conducted and robotics are on the rise.
So, the PSE is a loophole that has not been used, at least within the
commercial nuclear utilities.
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
HomePage: http://www.lookup.com/homepages/54398/home.html
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: planned special exposures?
Author: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu at Internet-Mail
Date: 11/16/95 4:15 PM
>>has anyone needed and used a planned special exposure?
If so, for what reason, and what was the dose? We are betting that using PSE's
has not been necessary, considering the criteria for having one - i.e.,
"unusual" incidents where someone was likely to exceed annual limits.<<