Re: Exposure to Phograhic Film in Airport X-ray Scanners

[Brian Rees <brees@lanl.gov>]

I have measured the exposure from one x-ray (scanner) machine and found 140
micro rem (integrated).  - Just one data (datum?) point, but I understand
that this was reasonable based on discussions with others.  Looks like the
security staff person was better informed than I would expect. 

Brian Rees
brees@lanl.gov 




At 03:14 PM 6/22/00 -0500, you wrote:
>Recently a message was posted on a list server devoted to photography
>stating that a photographer preparing to board a plane was told by a
>security staff member that his film would receive more exposure to
>radiation during his transcontinental flight than it did from passing it
>through the x-ray scanner.  A debate ensued as to whether or not the
>statement made by the security staff member was correct.  The
>photographic list server must be a very popular one since the debate
>prompted calls to my office.
>
>Does anyone have any actual measurements of or references to the
>exposure to objects sent through x-ray scanners at airports?  
>
>An interesting aspect of the debate is that some well-traveled
>photographers advocated keeping a role of fast ISO 800 or higher film to
>show the security staff as they apparently are allowed to hand search
>parcels containing high speed films rather than requiring that they be
>passes through the scanner.
>
>Thanks.
>
>Gerald Nicholls
>gnicholl@dep.state.nj.us
>609-633-7964
>************************************************************************
>The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
>information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html

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