A couple of points: 1) If we're going to compare plants we have to be careful to say "equal to or greater than 100 ccpm", because a lot of PCEs are reported as 100 ccpm, and they should be counted as well. 2) The 100 ccpm level is basically a sort of lower detection level, a level that all plants should be able to detect. Levels 2 and 3 relate to fractions of the skin dose limit. So there are different bases here. If we have risk based levels based on skin dose, why not also have levels for facial contamination based on potential reportable internal dose? 3) Again, if we're using this to compare contamination control programs, is 100 ccpm on the bottom of a shoe really the equivalent of 100 ccpm on the face, in terms of the quality of contamination control? I still think that defining Level 1 as equal to 1000 ccpm on shoes, 500 ccpm on external clothing, 200 ccpm on skin, and 100 ccpm on the face (for example) would make more sense. I know this is a radical idea.
Tom VanderMey, CHP Principal Radiological Engineer DTE Energy, Fermi 2 734-586-1539 [email protected] wrote: ----- To: <[email protected]> From: <[email protected]> Sent by: [email protected] Date: 10/19/2010 04:12PM Subject: RE: Powernet: PCE Question As a member of the committee that worked on the document - The intent of a level one PCE was to document and evaluate the radioactive material control program. As as result a PCE would be any contamination greater than 100 dpm (>100 ccpm) on the outside of the item such as clothing, shoes etc. Which if this is a measure of your program - it does not make any sense to count the activity on the inside of the garment. The purpose of the inside count was to evaluate the potential skin dose as a result - of which there are various methods to do this. Willie Harris, CHP Corporate Radiation Protection Manager Exelon Nuclear 200 Exelon Way Kennett Square, PA 19438 Contact Info: (C) 484-885-0578 (W) 610-765-5350 Email: [email protected] From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2010 11:48 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Powernet: PCE Question Friends, Do you look for >100 ncpm on the inside of clothing before classifying a clothing PCE as Level 1? Been recommended to me that EPRI guidance (excerpted below) is interpreted as suggesting that approach at some benchmark plants. The determination of the EPRI PCE level classification should be based on a frisker reading of the skin or the highest reading on clothing. For skin contaminations, a frisker reading should be the maximum reading with the frisker held approximately ½ inch away from the affected skin. For clothing, the frisker reading should be on the inside of the clothing with the detector faced away from the skin. EPRI “Guidelines for Industry Response to Personnel Contaminations Rev 1” thank you, Mark Lewis Health Physics Division Manager San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (D1N) Work: (949) 368-1140 [email protected] ************************************************** This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon Corporation family of Companies. This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. Thank You. **************************************************
