ML20199B556
| ML20199B556 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07003061 |
| Issue date: | 12/22/1997 |
| From: | Mike T IMAGING & SENSING TECHNOLOGY CORP. |
| To: | Brown K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20199B525 | List: |
| References | |
| CAL-1-97-25, NUDOCS 9801280317 | |
| Download: ML20199B556 (3) | |
Text
_...
y i
6 IMAGING & SENSlNG TECHNOLOG
300 westingnouse orcie HOrteheads, NY 14845 d
(607) 796-4400 F AX (607) 796-4579 I
December 22,1997 Keith D.Brova U.S. Nuclear 2agulatory r'waminn Region 1 475 AllandalaRoad King dPmasia,PA 19406 1415 re: Imaging and m% Technology Corporation GST)
C%ActionIAtter i
CALNo.1-97 025
Dear Mr. Bmwn:
As reqsed by the C% Action letter dated September 26,1997, enclosed are the evab=tinna dair aminainna, showing compliance with 10CFR20.1101(d) and hammys, shmving dose to each warber, to satisfy Itans 2 & 3 dthe acCm letter. The evab=tinna were perfonned by Dnmas MoOiff, a Certi6ed Heshh ToyQ who:n IST retains as a consultant.
Dis me=niasian ocepletes all actions required by the rdermoed Confinnatory Action Letter.
Please advise ifyou require c f4 further at tais time.
Very trulyyours,
./ W Thomas M. Mike Radiatinn Safety Of5cer e: L.Binetti. Executive Vice P.A IST CB\\GN W DBU f;5s\\GO
,,u mme c
DEC 2 31997
3069 North Triphammer Road Lansing, NY 14882 (607) S33-7064 December 20,1997 Imaging and Sensing Technology 300 Westinghouse Circle Horseheads, NY 14845 Attn: aomas M. Mike
Dear Mr. Mike:
Per your request, I determined dose estimates for the bioassay results that you provided to me. The results are listed on the attached calculation summary. Indrc+als are identified by their initials. The intake of each radionuclide was calculated nom the bioassay results, the time lapse between exposure and urine collection and the intake retention function for the radionuclide according to " Interpretation of Bioassay Measurements, NUREG/CR-4884. Doses were calculated as the ratio of the calculated intake of the nuclide to the ALI of the nuclide times 5,000 mrem. Additional assumptions used in the calculations are listed as notes to the calculation summary.
All estimated doses were considerably less than one mrem. All urine analysis results were less than or seemed close to the detection limit of the analysis procedure. This may be the reason that the reported ratios of U234, U235 and U238 are not the same ratios expected from the composition of the uranium metal. The results confirm no significant intake occurred.
To assist you in performing a quick assessment of future bioassay results, I suggest compe.ng them to the activity that will result in a dose of approximately 100 mrem. The relatic. ship between activity in the urine and dose changes dramatically as the time betwe m the day of exposure and the day of urine collection changes. If the time difference is either 1 or 4 days, the folicwing reference values can be used.
1 day - 5,700 pCi total activity of U234, U235 and U238 in the entire urine sample 4 days - 490 pCi total activity of U234, U235 and U238 in the entire urine semple You also requested a dose assessment for an air sample that found an activity concentratior, of 1.6E-12 uCl/mi during a 5 hour5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> sampling period. The simplest assessment approach is to compare this to the Derived Air Concentration or DAC listed in
. RP 30. An exposure to a concentration of airbome radioactive material equal to one DAC for 2000 hours0.0231 days <br />0.556 hours <br />0.00331 weeks <br />7.61e-4 months <br /> will result in a committed effective dose equivalent equal to 5,000 mrem.
The measured concentration of 1.6 E-12 uCl/mi is equal to 5.9E-02 Sq/m3. The DAC for uranlum as a class D aerosolis 2.0E+01 Bq/m3. The air concentration reported is 3.0E-03 DAC. If an individual were exposed to this concentration for 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />, the resulting dose would be 0.04 mrem.
If you have any additional questions, let me know and i'll be happy to try to answer them.
Thank you, i
i i
Sincerely, Thomas McGiff mi971220.ltr
Conversion of Urine Bioassay Results to Committed Effective Dose Equivalent verker dstes ti date d De:la T
- sics
!?;clide (pC !!) (oC:)
IR.C Fr 24h
!make intake inhalat:en ALI Doss (.wern) exixEu a sarr:pis (days) volums ur:ns efst. ate estimats(Bq)
Class D '1238 (0
(Q (BQ)
J
~
k ca 3.6E44 3/13/97 1
0 962 U234 0.11 0.106 1.87E 01 5 66E-01 209E42 500E44 2.E43 U235 0.03 0.029 1.87E41 154E41 571E03 500E44 6.c44 U238 0 04 0.038 1.87E-01 2 06E-01 7.61E43 500E44 8 E-04 total 0.173 3E43 sd 3.5E+04 2/2/96
- 4 1 034 3 SE+04 U234 01 0.103 182E-02 5 68E+00 210E-01 500E44 2E-02 3 SE+04 U235 0.1 0.103 1.82E-02 5 68E+00 2.10E41 5 00E+04 2.E-02 U238 0.1 0.103 1.82E-02 5.68E400 2.10E41 500E44 2.E42 tota!
0.310 6E42 sd 3.5E+04 3/8/97 4
0 895 U234 0.14 0.125 1.82E42 688E40 2.55E41 500E+04 3.E-02 3.5E+04 l
3.5E+04 U235 0.06 0.054 1.82E-02 2.95E+00 109E-01 500E44 1.E42 U238.
0.1 0.090 1.82E-02 4.92E+00 1.82E-01 500E44 2E42 total 0.269 5.E42 Notes:
When exposure takes pl ace over several days, dose is calculated as if all exposure takes place on the first drf.
Intakes of radioactive matenal calculated according to
- Interpretation of Bioassay Measurements, NUREG/CR-4884.
Doses were calculated as the ratio of the calculated intake of the nudide to the ALI of the nuclide times 5,000 mere.
ALI amounts taken from " Annals of the ICRP ICRP Publication 30, Part 1. Limits for Intakes of Radionucirdes by Workers".
Exposure was assumed to be inhalation of uranium as a class O aerosol cf 1 micrometer AMAD.
When analysis results are given as *less than* values, dose is calculated on the value gven.
Worker:
CA Chades Amrine SD Shidey Daughesty
,