RE: EPDs for personnel monitoring and surveys

["Dunn, Wes" <WDunn@intiso.com>]

There are a few key assumptions in Matt's discussion.  Many State
regulators fought (and lost) the NRC on the requirement for alarming
ratemeters in that they are likely to cause more accidents than they
prevent.  The key element to ANY radiography safety program is proper
use of the portable survey instrument.  The overriding root cause in
almost every radiography accident is failure to use the survey meter
properly.  Any item (such as an alarming ratemeter) that can provide
"peace of mind" tends to decrease use of survey meters.  After all, it
is going to protect you no matter how stupid you are - unless you forget
you aren't wearing it.  

Basically, it becomes another case of too many safety systems that start
canceling each other out.

Wes

Wesley M. Dunn, CHP, Director, Environmental Health & Safety
International Isotopes, Inc.
3100 Jim Christal Road
Denton, Texas  76207
Wdunn@intiso.com <mailto:Wdunn@intiso.com>
Corporate Website:  http://www.intiso.com
940-484-9492; 940-484-0877 (fax)


	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Williamson, Matthew [SMTP:Matthew.Williamson@nypa.gov]
	Sent:	Thursday, January 21, 1999 6:11 PM
	To:	Multiple recipients of list
	Subject:	RE: EPDs for personnel monitoring and surveys


	With the rash of events lately, I don't know how they could
begin to
	back off on requirements.

	The alarming rate meters should eliminate accidental exposures,
as Mike
	said, provided they are worn; and the dose received can be
quantified
	with the TLD or Film also provided they are worn; and the
surveys will
	verify the source is retracted provided there are batteries in
the
	survey meter.

	Matt Williamson
	Indian Point Unit 3
	Williamson.m@nypa.gov <mailto:Williamson.m@nypa.gov> 
	914-736-8416

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