Re: Business airflights = occupational exposure?

[Kerembaev@cs.com]

Greetings,

I from my point of view it is not an occupational exposure, because an 
"occupational exposure" is a regulatory term. Technically, it is an exposure 
from any licensed source of radiation. 
But in the reality.
It is what exposure "radiation" workers are receiving when they are working 
minus what they would get if they were not a "radiation" workers.
So if someone flu plane because of the fact that you were a "radiation" 
worker then it would be considered as an occupational. But I can not imagine 
how could someone argue that in the court. If only a some "researcher" would 
contaminate the airplane and HP will have to survey it............ in the 
flight

So I am not surprized that licensee do not allowed to take personal 
dosimeters on the flights. Can you imagine how much additional unnessary 
DOCUMENTED work an HP would have to do to explain to a regulator that 
exposure was not from a licensed source of radiation.
But It doesn't make sense, from the radiological health point of view.
If there is "evidence" that everything above of 5 rem is definetely harmful 
than a regulator has to assure that person will not get anything above 5 rem, 
included not just flight exposures but many other exposures.
So it is the case when "scientists" come up with recomendations, having in 
mind one thing, and a regulatory body, having a different set of mind, 
implementing these recomendations in law.
Also, It is one of those things: "everybody knows, nobody want to speak out", 
like if we do not talk about it than it doesn't exist. Something like little 
kids are doing when they are scary.

It is not that I am criticizing anybody particular. I don't think that there 
is an easy 
way out.

1. Practically,
  If to consider flight exposures as occupational exposures than many of us 
won't be able to work and to fly in the same time at all, considering almost 
ALL ALARA limits.

I am not talking about the picture when with every birth, a child is getting 
with a birth certificate also a personal ..... "TLD".  It would be probably a 
dream picture of dosimetry 
industry CEOs. ;-) 

2. Seriousely, 
  I see to use this "phenomena" as one of examples which can help public to 
accept radiation as a part of our life. Because, I think, that a general 
public is trying to control the radiophobia by trying to control "known as a 
harmful" sources of radiation.

So this is my view and I stick with it.


I am agree, Lets talk about that more............ 


Emil.
kerembaev@cs.com

Why are poeple having three different languages, writting, spoken and 
thinking?
Why can't they write what they say and speak what they think?

"Unknown Author"


In a message dated 1/28/00 5:04:56 Pacific Standard Time, 
bcradsafers@hotmail.com writes:

<< Radsafers,
 
 I want to hear your points of view: A businessman/woman who does a lot of 
 air travel (due to his/her work) gets more of cosmic radiation than others. 
 Should this be classified as occupational exposure or not? Are there any 
 clear analogies?
  >>
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html