Overexposed radiographers

["Robert Gunter" <rgunter@SEC-TN.COM>]

Maybe the frequency of dosimetry issue should be raised.  Sandy would agree

with that!



Rob



Robert J. Gunter, CHP

Operations Support Manager

Safety and Ecology Corporation

East Tennessee Technology Park

Bldg 1020, Rm 18

Mail Stop 7404

Oak Ridge, TN

Ph:  (865) 241-9748

Pg:  (865) 873-0078

E:  rgunter@sec-tn.com



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

From: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

[mailto:owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu]On Behalf Of Sandy Perle

Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 10:58 PM

To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Subject: Re: Response to Mr. Stroud RE: CO Pocket Dos. Req.





> the overwhelming majority of the

> responses do not support your position.



there is a real exposure that

exceeds a regulatory limit, where it could have been prevented, secondary

dosimetry should be a requirement. I don't see the requirement as

punishment,

rather I see the need as being prudent. Considering that radiographers are

notorious for radiation dose issues and incidents, how can anyone question

the

need for secondary dosimetry? Yes, the power reactors require additional

dosimetry, and ANI requires it. This is not bad. This is a good thing.

------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

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.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/