Re[2]: Radiation Records Being Investigated -Reply

[Scott Siebert <SIEBSR@doe-md.gov>]

Vincent King posted:

>     Actually, in the version of the House Bill forwarded by Bob Cherry 
>     on 3/10/00, the eligibility requirement is stated: 
>     
>        "...was or should have been monitored through use of dosimetry   
>        badges for exposure of the employee's body to radiation at the   
>        facility..."

Now we're focusing on who had a badge (most other messages have
mentioned this as the determination of eligibility), but this goes MUCH
farther than that.  Look at the quote "...was or SHOULD HAVE BEEN
monitored..."

How in the name of God do you define who should have been
monitored?  If you want to be technical, many times people were
monitored when they didn't need to be from a technical standpoint.  Does
this mean that they shouldn't have been monitored?  Once agin, we
strive to be better safe than sorry and it just bites us in the butt.  The
way I read this is that if you claim to have worked at a DOE site, you will
probably qualify, since often times employment records are not complete,
especially when it comes to subcontractors and visitors.

As taxpayers, we better be contacting our reps and making our positions
known.

Scott Siebert
Internal Dosimetry
BWOXT Mound

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html