Surfaces, Benches and Clothing: Before and After

Who this page is for, and what it answers

Removing contamination from a surface begins before it occurs: with a polished covering and a gloss paint. That is advice in clause 1 of article 7 of the instructions in decision 3 of 2007. Then come four measures after it occurs, the first of them damping the surface. Clothing has its own article: article 8, with four clauses. The Arabic wording itself is carried verbatim in the section below; we do not reproduce the law's wording in English.

Nine terms are needed on this page. A bench is the working surface in a laboratory. A gloss paint is a coating with a smooth surface. Our reading: a smooth surface takes up less liquid, so removal from it is easier, and it does not stop the take-up altogether. Damping is the wetting of a surface before it is cleaned. The half life is the period in which the activity of a material falls to half. Radioactive decay is a spontaneous change in the material's nuclei by which its activity falls. Radioactive waste is material whose use has ended while activity remains in it. A warning sign is a visible mark that gives notice of contamination still present. Its place is a surface not yet finished with, or one whose reading has not come down. Wiping on this page means cleaning the surface, not a radiation measurement. And the licence holder is the party holding the licence to deal with radioactive material.

The page is for the radiation protection officer. It is for whoever fits out a new laboratory and chooses its surfaces and paint. And it is for whoever prepares a washing procedure for work clothing in a facility.

Where this sits in the text: articles 7 and 8 of the instructions attached to the decision, not of its two enacting articles. The first has two clauses and the second has four.

The most important caution: clause 1 of article 7 is advice in form and not an obligation. Clause 2, by contrast, sets out four measures of differing form: the fourth in the form of an obligation, the stripping agent in the second as a permission, and the clause's own opening in neither. We do not level them.

The trigger for treating clothing as waste is not the same form of words as for tools. Article 8 speaks of items from which the contamination is difficult to remove. The article on tools speaks of a level of contamination that has not fallen to the permitted limits. The two triggers differ, and we do not read one by the other.

There is no measurement figure in either article. They name no unit of radioactive activity and no area of surface over which a rate is worked out. Numbers from one place are not imported into another.

What articles 7 and 8 provide, in our words

The opening of clause 1 of article 7 gives the purpose of the advice: so that contamination may be easier to remove from surfaces and walls, the following is advised. The two recommendations are these: covering floor and bench surfaces with polished plastic sheeting, and painting the walls with a gloss paint after smoothing them well.

The opening of clause 2 states what is followed for the removal: for decontamination, the measures below are followed. The measures are four, in the order the text gives them.

The first measure is damping: the contaminated surfaces are damped so as to limit the risk of the contamination spreading through airborne contaminated dust. That purpose is stated in the measure itself; it is not an inference of ours.

The second measure concerns painted areas: soap and water are used to decontaminate painted areas, and where the contamination is fixed and stubborn, paint stripping agents may be used. So soap and water are named for painted areas, and the stripping agent is named as a permission where the contamination is fixed and stubborn. The text defines neither fixed nor stubborn. Our reading: fixed is what does not transfer on contact, and stubborn is what soap and water will not lift. Where that distinction operates for the limits is clause 1 of article 1, which has its own published page.

The third measure ties the solution to the type of surface: the various chemical solutions are used to decontaminate surfaces according to the material of the surface, as by using sulphuric acid on steel surfaces. The stated qualifier is according to the material of the surface, and the naming of the acid is an example rather than an order to use it. We state no concentration and no method of use.

The fourth measure is marking with signs: suitable warning signs must be placed on surfaces whose level of contamination has not fallen to the permitted limits, or which are still being cleaned and worked on. So the marking covers two cases: what has not fallen, and what is still under cleaning and work.

Article 8 has four clauses. The first concerns washing machines: washing machines are provided for washing clothing and similar materials in areas where contamination by radioactive material is possible. The second concerns short lived contaminants: clothing and similar items contaminated with short lived radioactive elements are placed in plastic bags, closed tightly, and kept in designated places until the danger passes by radioactive decay.

Our reading of the second clause: its purpose is the passing of the danger by decay and not the eliminating of the activity. The third is the waste trigger: clothing and similar items from which the contamination is difficult to remove are treated as radioactive waste, and the instructions on treating radioactive waste apply to them. The fourth is classification to make removal easier: for that purpose, clothing and fabric materials are classified according to the degree, nature and kind of the contamination. So three descriptors are stated, and the text names neither the number of classes nor their names.

What falls outside these two articles

Neither article gives a numerical limit. Marking under article 7 turns on the two cases set out in the fourth measure, and the article does not set the values of the permitted limits. They sit in clause 1 of article 1 and in other tables of the instructions, which have their own published pages.

Neither deals with handling the waste once classified. That belongs to the instructions on treating radioactive waste, which are a separate instrument. We name them as a reference, and we neither quote them nor describe their content.

Neither deals in detail with contamination of tools and vessels. That has its own article, with its own page in this same batch.

Neither deals with what is done for a contaminated person. That is another article of the instructions, with its own published page. These articles govern things and not people.

What we have read of these two articles is free of any sanction and of any transition period. We build nothing on what we have not seen in words.

Before and after contamination in the two articles

The table below gathers the clauses of the two articles in the order the text gives them. Read it when you build your plan, and skip it on a first reading.

The middle column summarises each clause in our words, and the fuller rendering of it sits in the transcription section above. The last column gives its place in the text, with its form or a note on it. The order in the table is the text's order. The table carries no measurement figure and no limit, because neither article contains one.

A case of a painted bench and work clothing, and four steps

Suppose a painted bench on which a dry radioactive powder has fallen, and a worker whose overall has caught some of it. The first measure in article 7 is damping the contaminated surfaces. That the damping comes before the wiping is our own technical reading. Then soap and water for the painted area. The overall, meanwhile, falls under article 8: a washing machine in an area where contamination is possible, or a sealed bag if the contaminant is short lived. Had the worker wiped the powder dry, he would have spread it into the air. That is our technical explanation, while the purpose itself is stated in the text.

Step one: put the damping of the contaminated surface first in your procedure; it is the first of the four measures and its purpose is stated above. Two readings of ours: the stated purpose turns on dry dust that can fly up; and damping liquid contamination spreads it over a wider area. The text ties the measure to no state of the contaminant, and judging that is the protection officer's work.

Step two: require in your procedure that the solution be chosen according to the material of the surface. That qualifier is stated in the third measure. One surface is not judged by another.

Step three: require in your procedure that warning signs be placed on what is not finished. The fourth measure requires them on what has not fallen to the limits and on what is still being cleaned and worked on.

Step four: classify the clothing in your procedure. Clause 4 of article 8 provides for classification to make removal easier, and article 8 carries no obligation word. The protection officer classifies, records and separates: this is what we train for, not what we do for you.

Questions people ask

Notes on transcription and reading

Articles 7 and 8 are sound in transcription: they contain no symbol and no figure whose reading is in doubt. We have taken from them everything we needed. Another article of these instructions has a place we withheld, and it is declared on its own page.

Clause 3 of article 8 speaks of the instructions on treating waste, while the article on tools speaks of the instructions on managing waste. We render each name as it stands. Whether the two names point to one instrument is a point the text does not settle, and we have not raised it with the competent authority.

Our reading of clause 2 of article 8. It speaks of radioactive elements with a short half life. It sets no period for that shortness. Classifying a material as short lived or not therefore turns on the material itself and on the licence holder's reading. We have not raised the question with the competent authority.

What the institute offers, its limits, and the reference

This page is about contamination of surfaces, benches and clothing. The institute trains people to order the removal measures and to classify clothing and document it.

ALDuha Institute for Training and Environmental Consulting works in training and consulting. Its training is licensed. It does not run a laboratory analysis service for smears. It does not calibrate radiation survey instruments. It does not test equipment or certify it as safe. It does not carry out decontamination in a laboratory or on a site.

The institute does not provide first aid, treatment or medical assessment. We train people to read the text and to write down what happened.

Decontamination is the work of the licence holder and his radiation protection officer. Where outside expertise is needed, it is arranged through specialist partners. We train people to read, measure and document. We do not do the work in place of the licence holder.

Neither our training nor our consulting gives any undertaking that a licence will be issued. There is no undertaking about how long an approval will take. That decision belongs to the competent authority alone.

Reference: decision 3 of 2007 of the chairman of the Supreme Council for the Environment and Natural Reserves, on radioactive decontamination instructions, issued on the recommendation of the radiation protection committee. Location: articles 7 and 8 of the attached instructions. The decision rests on decree law 31 of 2002, and on the executive regulation issued by decision 4 of 2003. The decision's own preamble points in particular to article 17 of the first and article 97 of the second. We name the two enabling instruments and carry the preamble's reference to them, and we do not quote their text.

A note on the names of authorities: the decision was issued by the Supreme Council for the Environment and Natural Reserves. The authority addressed today is the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change, which houses the Radiation Protection Department. The name has changed; the duty remains.

This page is an introductory explanation of a published text, and is not a legal opinion. It does not replace reading the decision itself. It does not replace checking with the competent authority.