Re: Acceptable P-32 monitoring methods

["Jean-Francois, Stephane" <stephane_jeanfrancois@merck.com>]

I agree with Sue. P-32 is so easy to detect with a pancake, why not
using it as much as possible (after each experiment is a good practice).
To evaluate precisely free contamination, I would tend toward the swipe
(if I have time to spare)


Stephane Jean-Francois Phys, Eng.
RSO
Merck. Frosst Canada
stephane_jeanfrancois@merck.com
 ----------
From: Sue M. Dupre
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Re: Acceptable P-32 monitoring methods
Date:  May 23, 1997 08:24

We had an accident here back in the 80s in which a minute
jet of P-32 shot out of a unexpectedly pressurized bottle and
contaminated much of the clothing of  a researcher.  The researcher
did not realize he had been contaminated and did not immediately
survey himself.  By the time the contamination was discovered six hours
later, he had accumulated enough of a skin dose to exceed NRC dose
limits.  I don't think this kind of incident would be readily
detected with wipes, and I have a hard time imagining that we would
approve the use of P-32 in a lab that did not have G-M survey meters
on hand.

Regards,
Sue M. Dupre, Health Physicist

Office of Occupational Health and Safety
Chemical Sciences Building/Forrestal Campus
Princeton University
Princeton, NJ  08544-0710

E-mail: dupre@princeton.edu
Phone:  (609) 258-6252
Fax:    (609) 258-1804

Visit the OHS Web site at http://www.princeton.edu/~ehs