[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: RE: Patient Excreta



<<One of the reasons for this requirement is that releases in their excreta
may 
be detected in our environmental samples.  

Not to mention the tripping the sewer system off line when the sewer monitor
detects it.

Charles MIgliore RRPT

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	LIPTONW@dteenergy.com [SMTP:LIPTONW@dteenergy.com]
> Sent:	Wednesday, March 17, 1999 6:53 AM
> To:	Multiple recipients of list
> Subject:	Re: RE: Patient Excreta
> 
> At Fermi 2, employees who receive nuclear medicine uptakes must report
> this.
>  
> One of the reasons for this requirement is that releases in their excreta
> may 
> be detected in our environmental samples.  For example, the "reporting
> level" 
> for I-131 in a water sample is 2 pCi/l (2 E-6 uCi/ml).  An employee who
> has 
> recently been released after a therapeutic I-131 treatment is likely to 
> excrete approximately 10 mCi during his day on site.  Using the reference
> man 
> data, a man excretes 1400 ml of urine per day (A woman excretes 1000
> ml/day
> - 
> draw your own conclusions!), so the concentration would be 1 E4 uCi/1.4 E3
> ml 
> = 7 uCi/ml in the urine - higher for a woman.  Assuming a dilution factor
> of
> 1 
> E4 (approximately 100 in the sewaage system and 100 in the environment),
> the 
> expected concentration in the sample would be 7 E-4 uC/ml, which is 
> approximately 300 times the reporting level!  If this concentration were
> due 
> to plant operation, it would indicate a significant deterioration of plant
> 
> conditions, so, when this turns up, it's important that we know why. 
>  
> The opinions expressed are strictly mine. 
> It's not about dose, it's about trust. 
>  
> Bill Lipton 
> liptonw@dteenergy.com 
>  
>  
> You wrote: 
>  
> >When in Graduate School, one my colleague's research was to  
> >study the release and effect of radioactive material into the sewer  
> >system in Dade County Florida (Greater Miami area), which  
> >included around 10 large medical facilities. The results were that  
> >there was very little dilution, with the release staying in a bolus (not
> 
> >as expected), the facility could be identified by the "fingerprint" and  
> >time of arrival at the sampling station. The dose from the release, if  
> >I remember correctly (and this was quite some time ago) was not  
> >insignificant. It was quite measurable. 
>  
> >Sandy Perle 
> >E-Mail: sandyfl@earthlink.net  
> >Personal Website: http://www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/1205 
> 
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html