Reference, Questions and Help > MARSSIM
So is it a Marssim or Marsame survey?
Marlin:
--- Quote from: Wojo on May 18, 2012, 09:19 ---I can’t wait to see everybody’s heads explode when the NRC finally shitcans Reg Guide 1.86 and switches over to a risk-based release criteria for materials based upon an all pathway TEDE of 1 mrem/yr to an average member of the critical group. It’s coming people, quicker that some would think.
[Dalek] [Dalek] [Dalek]
--- End quote ---
How would that work for transportation releasing railcars etc., I think 1.86 is safe in non facility release criteria.
[2cents] just my opinion I have no other basis for it.
Wojo:
--- Quote from: Marlin on May 18, 2012, 10:38 ---How would that work for transportation releasing railcars etc., I think 1.86 is safe in non facility release criteria.
--- End quote ---
Technically, you would use the MARSAME guidance to derive a material specific release criteria based upon the material disposition, post use scenarios, who makes up the AMCG, etc. Realistically, what is probably going to happen is that licensees will model a bunch of conservative release criterion based on their frequent waste streams and apply them via a SOP. So let's speculate that your rail cars are carrying excavated soils and the disposition is disposal, you would model that, derive a conservative pathway scenario, come up with a volumetric criteria for the soils and a surface criteria for the cars and then apply them across the board. You would then come up with a SOP for surveys that would demonstrate compliance using the statistical survey designs presented in MARSAME.
Marlin:
--- Quote from: Wojo on May 18, 2012, 11:31 ---Technically, you would use the MARSAME guidance to derive a material specific release criteria based upon the material disposition, post use scenarios, who makes up the AMCG, etc. Realistically, what is probably going to happen is that licensees will model a bunch of conservative release criterion based on their frequent waste streams and apply them via a SOP. So let's speculate that your rail cars are carrying excavated soils and the disposition is disposal, you would model that, derive a conservative pathway scenario, come up with a volumetric criteria for the soils and a surface criteria for the cars and then apply them across the board. You would then come up with a SOP for surveys that would demonstrate compliance using the statistical survey designs presented in MARSAME.
--- End quote ---
You may be right but that responsibility can be carried by a very small business with limited resources. Known isotopes and a frisker would be much cheaper. I have found myself on a hard money contract where the project manager did not realize we where responsible for the clearance of leased cars introducing the cost of HP manpower. Not much of an issue for $500K plus contracts but it starts to make a dent in lower end hard money contracts.
I know!!! Where is the job security for all of our MARSSIM experts??? [devious]
Wojo:
--- Quote from: Marlin on May 18, 2012, 01:13 --- I know!!! Where is the job security for all of our MARSSIM experts???
--- End quote ---
Cha-Ching Baby ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
GLW:
--- Quote from: Marlin on May 18, 2012, 10:38 ---How would that work for transportation releasing railcars etc., I think 1.86 is safe in non facility release criteria.
[2cents] just my opinion I have no other basis for it.
--- End quote ---
1.86 (circa 1974) soldiers on in the face of ANSI 13.12 (circa 1999) and the 1 mrem/yr dose standard because audible clicks mean so much more to the discerning public than a SOP for surveys that demonstrate compliance using the statistical survey designs presented in a MARSAME dose based TBD's,...
especially when 12,000 clicks of isotope A is ok, but 3,000 clicks of isotope B are not,....
commercially;
those working under general licenses or otherwise will go with 49CFR and agreement state regs to send 'em,...
specific licensees will have larger staffs to implement all that fun stuff previously described,...
it'll open a lot of jobs that nobody is going to believe are needed,...
especially when statistically released stuff starts setting off the monitors at smelters, salvage yards and waste recyclers, et al and the pat answer comes back along the lines of being regulatory compliant and approved procedures,...
Yucca Mountain was regulatory compliant with approved procedures,...
the cops can pick up the dose from your stress test as you drive along in your car these days,...
folks already have it in their heads that medical dose is good dose and power plant dose is bad dose,...
statistically based free release and lead balloons,... yeah, I'm seeing the analogy,....
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version