RE: xray scanning machines

[Dave Derenzo <dave@UIC.EDU>]

If I recall correctly this discussion is about monitoring of personnel who 

operate package or baggage inspection units.  To me there are three issues. 

The first is whether an area monitor is representative of the doses 

received by the employees.  Employees move around a lot and are frequently 

very close to the inspection units while in operation.  One could argue 

that an area monitor in a fixed location does not represent the exposure of 

the typical worker or the maximally exposed individual.    (Analogy - 

Breathing zone monitoring vs. fixed location air sampling).  The second 

issue is perception of risk.  Employees are probably more comfortable with 

dosimeters than without.  Giving them a badge conveys the message that the 

employer cares about their safety.  It also projects the same attitude to 

the public, who watch these people do their jobs at airports.  The third 

issue is liability.  I would much rather go to court with badge results for 

the individual and their coworkers that say "minimal" than to have none at 

all or to only have the results of a few area monitors.  As health 

physicists we know that there is very little exposure associated with these 

units, but employees, lawyers, judges, and juries may not believe this to 

be true in a courtroom situation.  If you save an employer from just one 

lawsuit, the badge program more than earned its keep.



Dave Derenzo, RSO

University of Illinois at Chicago



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

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.