RE: Instrumentation for Emergencies -Reply

[BRZGV@CCMAIL.CECO.COM (Glen Vickers)]

I understand completely.  I ship all the time at my utility and the number of
those packages is negligible when compared to the standard <200 mrem/hr
packages.  Just saying that risk from your LSA packages in non-NRC packages is
negligible when compared to the immediate threat to life from fire or trauma.

Have a super day,
Glen Vickers

-----Original Message-----
From:     "Alan R. Marchand" <radarm@accessnv.com> at INTERNET
Sent:     Friday, August 07, 1998 9:36 PM
To:     Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu> at INTERNET
Subject:     RE: Instrumentation for Emergencies -Reply

49 CFR 173.441 (b) (1)  Closed transport vehicle under exclusive use transport
can have a package max. reading of 10 mSv/h (1000 mrem/h).

Alan R. Marchand
radarm@accessnv.com

At 03:50 PM 8/7/98 -0500, you wrote:
>1.  Do not let radiological concerns in any way increase the risk of serious
>injury or death.  Physical inuries are certain, risk of death from cancer is
>comparably insignificant.
>
>2.  An ion chamber such which would enable open and closed windows would be
the
>best single instrument.  A GM frisker would only needed for insignificant
>amounts of radioactivity (i.e. clean-up after first response).
>
>3.  The most probable event in which materials would be released would be a
LSA
>package (~200mrem/hr), not a cask.  LSA packages are held to standards that
are
>not comparable to a cask shipment.
>
>5 minute time limit is up...  good luck!
>
>Sincerely,
>Glen Vickers

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html <<
File: RFC822.TXT >>

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html