DOCSLIB.ORG

Regulatory Guide 8.23 Revision 1 Radiation Safety Surveys At

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Regulatory Guide 8.23 Revision 1 Radiation Safety Surveys At Revision 1 Jaonia1y 11 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGULATORY GUIDE OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT REGULATORY GUIDE 8.23 RADIATION SAFETY SURVEYS AT MEDICAL INSTITUTION A. INTRODUCTION Surveyst are a necessary supplement to personnel monitoring, which measures individual radiation exposures Paragraph 20.201(b) of 10 CFR Part 20, "Standards for by the use of devices worn by the workers (Refs. 4, 6, 12, Protection Against Radiation," requires that each licensee 14. and 16. make or cause to be made such surveys as may be necessary for that licensee to comply with the regulations in Part 20. C. REGULATORY POSITION As used in Part 20. the term "'survey" means an evaluation of the radiation hazards incident to the production, use. Methods and procedures in this guide are acceptable to release, disposal, or presence of. radioactive mate'rials or the NR( staff for establishing survey programs in accord other sources of radiation under a specific set of conditions. ance with the as low as is reasonably achievable (ALARA) This guide identifies the types and frequencies of surveys philosophy. Generally, medical institutions licensed by thc that are acceptable to the NRC staff for use in medical. NRC should have a health physics staff available for consul institutions licensed by the NRC to use radioactive materials ration to design a survey program appropriate to the for purposes of diagnosis, therapy, or human research institution's use of radioactive material. Nothing in this involving the administration of radioactive materials or guide should be construed to preclude or discourage radiation to patients or the use of radioactive the materials for design of survey programs containing provisions *patient services. other than those in this guide, when such programs are accepted by the NRC licensing staff as providing ALARA exposure conditions for a particular institution. B. DISCUSSION 1. Types of Surveys Surveys are considered to be part of a comprehensive 1.1 General Description protection program established by the licensee consistent with the philosophy and principles of Regulatory Guide 8.10, Surveys performed in compliance with §20.201 "Operating Philosophy for Maintaining Occupational of 10 CFR Part 20 should include those necessary Radiation Exposures As Low As Is Reasonably Achievable." to evaluate external exposure to personnel, surface contamination (Ref. 1). Principles, methods, and instrumentation for levels, and concentrations of airborne radioactive materials carrying out radiation and contamination surveys were in the facility and in effluents from the facility. developed early in the atomic energy program and have been discussed in reports of the National Council on Environmental monitoring is beyond the scope of Radiation Protection and Measurement (Refs. 2-9), the this guide. However, the radiation safety program should International Atomic Energy Agency (Refs. 10-14), and the include surveys or records that indicate control International Commission on Radiological Protection of the quantities of radioactive material released in air and water (Refs. 15-17). Other publications (Refs. 17- 34) contain addi to unrestricted areas as required by Part tional information for use in establishing 20. In miny radiation survey medical institutions, surveys of effluents programs and selecting methods and or calculations to equipment for their ensure that permissible concentration implementation. limitsare not exceeded are included as a regular part of the health physics survey t The word "survey," often used synonymously with "survefl lance," "monitoring," or "area monitoring," is used connote the jpes•oa in this guide to 0 inspection of vsulouS locations in a facility using radioactive "Lines indicate substantive changes from the February 1979 ver materials, with or without accompanying measure sion that was issued for public ments, to determine the effectiveness of measures to protect against comment. exposure to radiation. USNRC REGULATORY GUIDES Comments should be sent to the U.S. Secretary of the Commission, Regulatory Guides are Issued to describe and make Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, available to the Attention: Docketing and D.C. 20555, public methods acceptable to the NRC staff of implementing Service Branch. specific parts of the Commission's regulations, to delineate niques tech The guides are Issued in the following used by the staff in evaluating specific problems or postu tan broad divisions: lated accidents or to provide guidance to applicants. Guides Regulatory 1. Power Reactors are noi substitutes for regulations, and compliance with 6. Products them Is not required. Methods and solutions 2. Research and Test Reactors 7. Transportation different from those set 3. Fuels and Materials out in the guides will be acceptable if they provide a basis Facilities 8. Occupational Health findings for the 4. Environmental and Siting requisite to the issuance or continuance of a Permit or 9. Antitrust and Financial Review license by the Commission. 5. Materials and Plant Protection 10. General Copies of issued guides Comments and suggestions for improvements in these may be purchased at the current Government guides are Printing Office price. encouraged at all times, and guides will be revised, as appropriate, A subscription service for future guides in spe to accommodate comments and to reflect new cific divisions is available through the Government Printing Office. experience. information or Information on the subscription This guide was revised as a result of substantive com service and current GPO prices may ments received from the pu 'ic be obtained by writing the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory and additional staff review. Washington, Commission, D.C- 20555. Attention: Publications Sales Manager. program. Often these calculations may he made by estimat Surveys are not acceptable for routine compliance with ing the amotints of radioactive material washed down the personnel monitoring requirements of §20.202. How designated sinks and dividing them by the quantities ever, in the event of accidental loss of personnel dosimetry of sewage released from the hospital, as indicated on the data. e.g., as a result of losing the dosimeter or chemical or hospital's water or sewage bills. This procedure normally physical damage to the dosimeter, the best alternative suffices to show compliance with the effluent limits of means of estimating the exposure may be to use survey dllat Part 20. Amounts of radioactive material released in air in conjunction with appropriate occupancy factors. In such within hospitals or exhausted to the outside from hospitals case, the estimate, including the survey data used. should bh are generally small, but these amounts may sometimes be documented and retained indefinitely (see para 2 4 estimated by calculational techniques if not by air-monitoring graph 0. 01(c)(2)tii)). Survey results should be reviewed procedures.' Appendix A to this guide describes surveys to carefully by the Radiation Safety Officer to identify be made of radioactive xenon-I 33 releases. potentially hazardous situations and unfavorable trends. Radiation protection programs should include the types 1.3 Measurements of Radioactive Material Concentrations of surveys discussed below. In Air 1.2 Surveys of External Radiation Exposure Levels It may ofterr be sufficient in medical institutions to show by calculation, together with monitoring of ventilation Areas to he surveyed should include any locations where rates, that air concentrations are well below levels that individuals may be exposed to -radiation intensities that would require routine air sampling. However. concentrations might cause the occupational radiation dose to exceed of radioactive material in air should be measured at tre-, 10 percent of the limits of paragraph 20.101(a) in any qucncics described in Section ('.2 and specified in Table 1 calendar quarter or where an individual is working with any for areas where operations could at any time expose workers radiation source that could produce radiation levels greater to 10 percent or more of the concentration values given in than 1.0 mR/h at 1 meter. These areas typically include Table 1. Column I. of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 20. shipping and receiving areas: radionuclide laboratories Special requirements for such monitoring may also be made in nuclear medicine; diagnostic areas in nuclear medicine; a condition of the license. intracavilary .source preparation areas in radiation therapy; patients' rooms where treatments are given with intracavi Air samples obtained in accordance with §20.103 tary. interstitial, or radiopharmaceutical therapy sources; should be representative of the air in the workers' breathing operating rooms, control (console) areas for teletherapy zones. In cases where breathing zone sampling is not accom equipment rooms; waste packaging and disposal areas; plished, air samples taken outside the breathing zone .radiation instrument calibration areas; and any other areas closer to the source, where the concentration of radioactive where persons might be exposed (e.g., areas occupied by material can be or is expected to be equal to or greater than technologists, nursing staff, visitors. patients. or any other the concentration in the breathing zone. are acceptable. persons who may be exposed to radioactive materials When measuring the quantity of radioactive 'material handled by others). deposited on an air sample filter. corrections should he made for absorption of alpha or beta particles
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nuclear Threat
    MANAGEMENT OF RADIOLOGIC CASUALTIES Nuclear Threat . Formerly .Soviet Union .Nuclear fallout . Now .NBC threat against civilians .Accidental exposure of workers and public Images: CIA, FBI Accidental Exposure in Brazil . Cesium-137 source found by scavengers in 1987 . Source broken open, contents shared . 112,800 surveyed for contamination . 120 externally contaminated only . 129 internally & externally contaminated . 20 required hospital treatment . 14 developed bone marrow depression . 8 treated with Granulocyte Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factors (GM-CSF) . 4 died acute phase, hemorrhage, infection . 1 died in 1994 from liver failure Images: CIA Medical Staff Exposure Medical staff received doses: . Maximum 500 millirem (5 millisieverts) .Natural background radiation dose ~ 200 millirems annually . Average 20 millirem (0.2 millisieverts) .Equivalent to one chest X-ray Juarez, Mexico Incident . 400 curies of cobalt-60 in stainless steel therapy device sold for scrap . Ended up in recycled steel rebar . Wrong turn into Los Alamos lab . I0 people significantly exposed . 1 construction worker died .bone cancer . 109 houses demolished in Mexico Images: CIA US Experience 1944-1999 . 243 radiation accidents leading to “serious” classification . 790 people received significant exposure resulting in 30 fatalities .Incidents included: . 137 industrial . 80 medical . 11 criticality Image: DOE The Basics of Radiation Radiation is energy that comes from a source and travels through matter or space Radioactivity is the spontaneous emission of radiation: . Either directly from unstable atomic nuclei, or . As a consequence of a nuclear reaction, or . Machine – produced (X-ray) Image: NOAA Contamination . Defined as internal or external deposition of radioactive particles . Irradiation continues until source removed by washing, flushing or radioactive decay .
    [Show full text]
  • Radiation Survey Meters in Hospitals: Technology, Challenges, and a New Approach
    White paper Radiation survey meters in hospitals: technology, challenges, and a new approach This white paper introduces a new radiation sur- essary environmental radiation in hospitals. To vey meter for the hospital segment: the RaySafe lower the risks of unwanted radiation-induced 452. First, the need for survey meters in hospi- effects, the goal is to minimize the exposure to tal environments is described. This is followed unnecessary radiation, both for patients and staff. by an introduction to common survey meter To be able to take the correct measures, it is es- technologies to illustrate their possibilities and sential to know the properties of the radiation in delimitations. Next, some difficulties with survey terms of energy range, dose rate, type of radia- meter measurements in hospitals are identified tion, and more. This is where radiation survey and discussed. Finally, the technology inside the meters are needed. RaySafe 452 is presented to summarize how the instrument addresses the identified issues. Figure 1 illustrates some measurement scenarios and demonstrate the wide range of measurement 1. Why radiation survey meters are need- needs in hospitals. Table 1 gives an overview of ed in hospitals the main areas of application of survey meters in hospitals, with quantities, units, and typical Ionizing radiation is not visible to the human eye. energy ranges of the radiation. It does not smell or make a noise, and you cannot feel it. In the complex and busy environment of a hospital, how can you ensure that patients and staff are not exposed to more ionizing radiation than necessary? Ionizing radiation is utilized for different purposes in medical procedures, with the three main areas being diagnostic imaging, nuclear medicine, and radiotherapy.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiation Risk in Perspective
    PS010-1 RADIATION RISK IN PERSPECTIVE POSITION STATEMENT OF THE HEALTH HEALTH PHYSICS SOCIETY* PHYSICS SOCIETY Adopted: January 1996 Revised: August 2004 Contact: Richard J. Burk, Jr. Executive Secretary Health Physics Society Telephone: 703-790-1745 Fax: 703-790-2672 Email: [email protected] http://www.hps.org In accordance with current knowledge of radiation health risks, the Health Physics Society recommends against quantitative estimation of health risks below an individual dose of 5 rem1 in one year or a lifetime dose of 10 rem above that received from natural sources. Doses from natural background radiation in the United States average about 0.3 rem per year. A dose of 5 rem will be accumulated in the first 17 years of life and about 25 rem in a lifetime of 80 years. Estimation of health risk associated with radiation doses that are of similar magnitude as those received from natural sources should be strictly qualitative and encompass a range of hypothetical health outcomes, including the possibility of no adverse health effects at such low levels. There is substantial and convincing scientific evidence for health risks following high-dose exposures. However, below 5–10 rem (which includes occupational and environmental exposures), risks of health effects are either too small to be observed or are nonexistent. In part because of the insurmountable intrinsic and methodological difficulties in determining if the health effects that are demonstrated at high radiation doses are also present at low doses, current radiation protection standards and practices are based on the premise that any radiation dose, no matter how small, may result in detrimental health effects, such as cancer and hereditary genetic damage.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B: Recommended Procedures
    Recommended Procedures Appendix B Appendix B: Recommended Procedures Appendix B provides recommended procedures for tasks frequently performed in the laboratory. These procedures outline acceptable methods for meeting radiation safety requirements. The procedures are generic in nature, allowing for the diversity of research facilities, on campus. Contamination Survey Procedures Surveys are performed to monitor for the presence of contamination. Minimum survey frequencies are specified on the radiation permit. The surveys should be sufficiently extensive to allow confidence that there is no contamination. Common places to check for contamination are: bench tops, tools and equipment, floors, telephones, floors, door handles and drawer pulls, and computer keyboards. Types of Contamination Removable contamination can be readily transferred from one surface to another. Removable contamination may present an internal and external hazard because it can be picked up on the skin and ingested. Fixed contamination cannot be readily removed and generally does not present a significant hazard unless the material comes loose or is present large enough amounts to be an external hazard. Types of Surveys There are two types of survey methods used: 1) a direct (or meter) survey, and 2) a wipe (or smear) survey. Direct surveys, using a Geiger-Mueller (GM) detector or scintillation probe, can identify gross contamination (total contamination consisting of both fixed and removable contamination) but will detect only certain isotopes. Wipe surveys, using “wipes” such as cotton swabs or filter papers counted on a liquid scintillation counter or gamma counter can identify removable contamination only but will detect most isotopes used at the U of I. Wipe surveys are the most versatile and sensitive method of detecting low-level removable contamination in the laboratory.
    [Show full text]
  • Occupational Radiation Protection Record-Keeping and Reporting Guide
    DOE G 441.1-11 (formerly G-10 CFR 835/H1) 05-20-99 OCCUPATIONAL RADIATION PROTECTION RECORD-KEEPING AND REPORTING GUIDE for use with Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) DOE G 441.1-11 i 05-20-99 CONTENTS CONTENTS PAGE 1. PURPOSE AND APPLICABILITY ........................................................ 1 2. DEFINITIONS ........................................................................ 2 3. DISCUSSION ........................................................................ 3 4. IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE ......................................................... 4 4.1 RECORDS TO BE GENERATED AND MAINTAINED ................................ 4 4.1.1 Individual Monitoring and Dose Records ........................................ 4 4.1.2 Monitoring and Workplace Records ............................................ 8 4.1.3 Administrative Records .................................................... 11 4.2 REPORTS ................................................................... 15 4.2.1 Reports to Individuals ...................................................... 16 4.2.2 Reports of Planned Special Exposures ......................................... 17 4.3 PRIVACY ACT CONSIDERATIONS .............................................. 17 4.3.1 Informing Individuals ...................................................... 17 4.3.2 Identifying Individuals ..................................................... 17
    [Show full text]
  • The International Commission on Radiological Protection: Historical Overview
    Topical report The International Commission on Radiological Protection: Historical overview The ICRP is revising its basic recommendations by Dr H. Smith Within a few weeks of Roentgen's discovery of gamma rays; 1.5 roentgen per working week for radia- X-rays, the potential of the technique for diagnosing tion, affecting only superficial tissues; and 0.03 roentgen fractures became apparent, but acute adverse effects per working week for neutrons. (such as hair loss, erythema, and dermatitis) made hospital personnel aware of the need to avoid over- Recommendations in the 1950s exposure. Similar undesirable acute effects were By then, it was accepted that the roentgen was reported shortly after the discovery of radium and its inappropriate as a measure of exposure. In 1953, the medical applications. Notwithstanding these observa- ICRU recommended that limits of exposure should be tions, protection of staff exposed to X-rays and gamma based on consideration of the energy absorbed in tissues rays from radium was poorly co-ordinated. and introduced the rad (radiation absorbed dose) as a The British X-ray and Radium Protection Committee unit of absorbed dose (that is, energy imparted by radia- and the American Roentgen Ray Society proposed tion to a unit mass of tissue). In 1954, the ICRP general radiation protection recommendations in the introduced the rem (roentgen equivalent man) as a unit early 1920s. In 1925, at the First International Congress of absorbed dose weighted for the way different types of of Radiology, the need for quantifying exposure was radiation distribute energy in tissue (called the dose recognized. As a result, in 1928 the roentgen was equivalent in 1966).
    [Show full text]
  • Rapport Du Groupe De Travail N° 9 Du European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS) – Coordinated Network for Radiation Dosimetry (CONRAD – Contrat CE Fp6-12684)»
    - Rapport CEA-R-6220 - CEA Saclay Direction de la Recherche Technologique Laboratoire d’Intégration des Systèmes et des Technologies Département des Technologies du Capteur et du Signal Laboratoire National Henri Becquerel RADIATION PROTECTION DOSIMETRY IN MEDECINE REPORT OF THE WORKING GROUP N° 9 OF THE EUROPEAN RADIATION DOSIMETRY GROUP (EURADOS) COORDINATED NETWORK FOR RADIATION DOSIMETRY (CONRAD – CONTRACT EC N° FP6-12684) - Juin 2009 - RAPPORT CEA-R-6220 – «Dosimétrie pour la radioprotection en milieu médical – Rapport du groupe de travail n° 9 du European Radiation Dosimetry group (EURADOS) – Coordinated Network for Radiation Dosimetry (CONRAD – contrat CE fp6-12684)» Résumé - Ce rapport présente les résultats obtenus dans le cadre des travaux du WP7 (dosimétrie en radioprotection du personnel médical) de l’action coordonnée CONRAD (Coordinated Network for Radiation Dosimetry) subventionné par la 6ème FP de la communauté européenne. Ce projet a été coordonné par EURADOS (European RadiationPortection group). EURADOS est une organisation fondée en 1981 pour promouvoir la compréhension scientifique et le développement des techniques de la dosimétrie des rayonnements ionisant dans les domaines de la radioprotection, de la radiobiologie, de la thérapie radiologique et du diagnostic médical ; cela en encourageant la collaboration entre les laboratoires européens. Le WP7 de CONRAD coordonne et favorise la recherche européenne pour l'évaluation des expositions professionnelles du personnel sur les lieux de travail de radiologie thérapeutique et diagnostique. La recherche est organisée en sous-groupes couvrant trois domaines spécifiques : 1. Dosimétrie d'extrémité en radiologie interventionnelle et médecine nucléaire : ce sous- groupe coordonne des investigations dans les domaines spécifiques des hôpitaux et des études de répartition des doses dans différentes parties des mains, des bras, des jambes et des pieds ; 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis and Radiation Protection* by J.U
    Cost-Benefit Analysis and Radiation Protection* by J.U. Ahmed and H.T. Daw Cost-benefit analysis is a tool to find the best way of allocating resources. The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), in its publication No. 26, recommends this method in justifying radiation exposure practices and in keeping exposures as low as is reasonably achievable, economic and social considerations being taken into account 1. BASIC PHILOSOPHY A proposed practice involving radiation exposure can be justified by considering its benefits and its costs The aim is to ensure a net benefit. This can be expressed as: B = V-(P + X +Y) where: B is the net benefit; V is the gross benefit; P is the basic production cost, excluding protection; X is the cost of achieving the selected level of protection; and Y is the cost assigned to the detriment involved in the practice. If B is negative, the practice cannot be justified. The practice becomes increasingly justifiable at increasing positive values of B However, some of the benefits and detriments are intangible or subjective and not easily quantified. While P and X costs can be readily expressed in monetary terms, V may contain components difficult to quantify. The quantification of Y is the most problematic and probably the most controversial issue. Thus value judgements have to be introduced into the cost-benefit analysis. Such judgements should reflect the interests of society and therefore require the participation of competent authorities and governmental bodies as well as representative views of various sectors of the public. Once a practice has been justified by a cost-benefit analysis, the radiation exposure of individuals and populations resulting from that practice should be kept as low as reasonably achievable, economic and social factors being taken into account (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiation Glossary
    Radiation Glossary Activity The rate of disintegration (transformation) or decay of radioactive material. The units of activity are Curie (Ci) and the Becquerel (Bq). Agreement State Any state with which the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has entered into an effective agreement under subsection 274b. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. Under the agreement, the state regulates the use of by-product, source, and small quantities of special nuclear material within said state. Airborne Radioactive Material Radioactive material dispersed in the air in the form of dusts, fumes, particulates, mists, vapors, or gases. ALARA Acronym for "As Low As Reasonably Achievable". Making every reasonable effort to maintain exposures to ionizing radiation as far below the dose limits as practical, consistent with the purpose for which the licensed activity is undertaken. It takes into account the state of technology, the economics of improvements in relation to state of technology, the economics of improvements in relation to benefits to the public health and safety, societal and socioeconomic considerations, and in relation to utilization of radioactive materials and licensed materials in the public interest. Alpha Particle A positively charged particle ejected spontaneously from the nuclei of some radioactive elements. It is identical to a helium nucleus, with a mass number of 4 and a charge of +2. Annual Limit on Intake (ALI) Annual intake of a given radionuclide by "Reference Man" which would result in either a committed effective dose equivalent of 5 rems or a committed dose equivalent of 50 rems to an organ or tissue. Attenuation The process by which radiation is reduced in intensity when passing through some material.
    [Show full text]
  • Ionization Chamber Type Survey Instruments
    Chapter 5: Instrumentation Objectives: • Summarize the advantages and disadvantages of the different types of devices used to monitor individuals for radiation exposure. • Describe the principal advantages and disadvantages of air ionization chamber type survey instruments. • Describe the principal advantages and disadvantages of Geiger-Müller (GM) type survey instruments. SAT Chapter 5 - Instrumentation 2 Objectives: • Describe the important characteristics of any radiation monitoring instrument and why these characteristics are important for obtaining accurate results. • Select the appropriate survey instrument for a task, and be able to ensure its proper operation and be able to interpret the results obtained. SAT Chapter 5 - Instrumentation 3 Overview: • Humans cannot detect ionizing radiation with any of our senses. But, we need to know: – Is ionizing radiation present? – Are we receiving dose from ionizing radiation? – How much dose have we received (mrem)? – Is there contamination present? • We use instruments which respond to ionizing radiation. The type of instrument needed depends on the type and levels of radiation that are present. • Radiation detectors respond to ionizations or excitations created by radiation interaction with the detector media. Detectors can either be gas-filled or solid materials. SAT Chapter 5 - Instrumentation 4 Instrumentation Gas-filled instruments for detecting ionizing radiation utilize the concept that radiation interaction with atoms can cause ionizations. The ions are collected and measured. This is used to provide information on the presence of radioactive material (contamination) or the dose rate in an area. Hi + Volt - Ionizing Radiation (MEDIUM) SAT Chapter 5 - Instrumentation 5 IONIZATION CURVE 1015 I II III IV V VI 1012 Proportional 109 Continuous Geiger- Discharge Müller 106 α # of Ion Pairs Collected Pairs Ion of # 103 β 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Applied Voltage, V SAT Chapter 5 - Instrumentation 6 Ionization Chamber Ionization chambers measure the ionization of air.
    [Show full text]
  • International Basic Safety Standards for Protection Against Ionizing Radiation and for the Safety of Radiation Sources Safety5 Serie11
    CATEGORIES IN THE IAEA SAFETY SERIES A hierarchical categorization scheme beenhas introduced, according whichto publicationsthe IAEAthe in Safety Series groupedare follows:as Safety Fundamentals (silver cover) Basic objectives, concepts and principles to ensure safety. Safety Standards (red cover) Basic requirements which mus e satisfieb t o ensurdt e safet r particulafo y r activitie r applicatioso n areas. Safety Guides (green cover) Recommendations, on the basis of international experience, relating to the fulfilmen f basio t c requirements. Safety Practices (blue cover) Practical example detailed san d method applicatioe s useth whice b r dn fo hca n of Safety Standards or Safety Guides. Safety Fundamentals and Safety Standards are issued with the approval of the IAEA Board of Governors; Safety Guides and Safety Practices are issued under the authorit Directoe th f yo r Genera IAEAe th f o l. Ther othee ear r IAEA publications which also contain information importano t safety, in particular in the Proceedings Series (papers presented at symposia and conferences) Technicae th , l Reports Series (emphasi technologican so l aspectsd an ) the IAEA-TECDOC Series (information usually in preliminary form). CORRIGENDA to International Basic Safety Standards for Protection against Ionizing Radiation and for the Safety of Radiation Sources Safety5 Serie11 . sNo p. 48 In para 14(b. II . ) replace "focal spot position" with "focal spot size", p. 88 followine footnotn I th d Tablo pareno t ad ea I gtw e I- t nuclide progend san y (firs sixth)d an t : Sr-80 Rb-80 Ag-108m Ag-108 p. 91 In para.
    [Show full text]
  • Thermo Micro Rem / Micro Sievert Tissue Equivalent Survey Meters
    A D V A N C E D T E C H N O L O G Y F O R A S A F E R W O R L D Micro Rem/Sievert Tissue Equivalent Survey Meter The Micro Rem and Micro Sievert models are lightweight, portable survey meters for applications where accurate dose rate measurements of low radiation levels are required. Accurate down to background levels, the Micro Rem and Micro Sievert read absorbed dose rate directly so no conversion from mR/h is required. APPLICATIONS The tissue-equivalent scintillator used in the Micro Rem and Micro Sievert gives them a nearly flat, rem energy response. This rem response is based • Routine low/medium level gamma dose rate on the deep dose equivalent index for 1 cm (0.39”) depth, uniparallel surveys directional beam as calculated on the ICRU standard sphere. • Confirming radiation boundaries • Monitoring items for unrestricted release These instruments give tissue equivalent photon response for x-ray and • X-ray surveys, using the expanded low gamma radiation from environmental levels of 0-20 μrem/h (o-0.2 μ Sv/h) energy range option full scale up to normal survey levels of 200 mrem/h (2 mSv/h) full scale. Rugged construction and quality components make the Micro Rem and Options Micro Sievert durable, and they are easy to service. Internal components You can “customize” your instrument with practical are laid out on modular circuit boards. Span, HV and calibration pots (one options to match the requirements of your survey for each range) are clearly marked.
    [Show full text]