Re: HIGH-TECH SECURITY TOOLS GET A SECOND LOOK

["Jerry Cohen" <jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET>]

----- Original Message -----

From: Jacobus, John (OD/ORS) <jacobusj@ors.od.nih.gov>

To: Jerry Cohen <jjcohen@prodigy.net>; Franz Schoenhofer

<franz.schoenhofer@CHELLO.AT>; RadSafe <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 7:28 AM

Subject: RE: HIGH-TECH SECURITY TOOLS GET A SECOND LOOK





John, Fritz, et,al,

    I would prefer the "radiation", but then I am a hormesis fan. It appears

from responses to date that somewhere around 100 mrem/y might qualify as a

"no concern" or de minimis level. I agree that such a dose level would be

reasonable for the purpose.. If implemented in regulations, it would mean

that ALARA would not apply for doses below 100 mrem/y. However, I doubt that

the LNT/ALARA police would buy it.

            Jerry



Jerry,

I should have added that the NCRP 116 proposes an annual public dose limit

of 100 mrem (1 mSv) per year is for continuous.  For infrequent exposure,

like x-ray scanners, it is 5 mSv.  For the skin, again for the scanners

under consideration, the limit is 50 mSv per year.



My feeling will come down to strip-searching all passengers, or asking them

to be scanned by the machine.  Which would you take?  I also believe that

the term "radiation" will be lost in the discussions with the security

staff, as it has been in dealing nuclear medicine technicians.



-- John

John Jacobus, MS

Certified Health Physicist

3050 Traymore Lane

Bowie, MD  20715-2024







************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.