[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: ANNUAL DOSE, DOSERATE and the MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL





The term limit should only be used for a criterion that must not be 

exceeded.

Many countries adopt the derived limit: A limit on a measurable quantity 

set, on the basis of a model, such that compliance with the derived limit 

may be assumed to ensure compliance with a primary limit.



The ICRP limit of 1mSv is the total dose which should arise from all 

man-made sources of radiation exposure (excluding medical procedures).

Dose limits for skin and lens of the eye are 50 mSv and 15 mSv per year, 

respectively.



If you are interested I can send by e-mail a resume in power point of the 

ICRP 60, interesting to explain the System.



Jose Julio Rozental

jrozental@hotmail.com

Madrid, until 2-10-2002









>From: Quintino De Notariis <qdenotariis@novacon.it>

>Reply-To: Quintino De Notariis <qdenotariis@novacon.it>

>To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

>Subject: ANNUAL DOSE, DOSERATE and the MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL

>Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 15:34:13 +0200

>

>If the ANNUAL dose limit for the public is an EFFECTIVE DOSE (ED) of 1

>mSv/year, why some radsafers seem to take for granted that this IMPLIES a

>DOSERATE limit of 0,114 microSv/h (1000 microSv/year x 8760 hours/year) ?

>

>So if, for example, in an X-ray facility we MEASURE 0,200 microSv/h above

>the background in correspondence of a door on an alley with a very limited

>or no time occupancy by members of the public (say, ONLY 1 hour/year),

>should we conclude that that facility is out of low, no matter that the

>total ED in a year would be ONLY 0,200 x 1 = 0,200 microSv ?

>

>Regulations give an ANNUAL dose limit NOT a DOSERATE limit.

>

>Somewere I've read that requiring the limit of 0,114 microSv/h INSTEAD of 1

>mSv/year is the consequence of the hypothesis of the "MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL"

>(that's to say, a person who stays behind that door 24 hours a day for 365

>days = 8760 hours/year).

>Isn't this hypothesis absurd? Shouln't we consider the EXPECTED TIME

>OCCUPANCY? Or are we about to apply the LNT even to dead matter?

>

>Another related question :

>I don't think that one could MEASURE EFFECTIVE DOSE with an instrument,

>because of the definition of ED through the tissue weighting factor WT :

>                             ED = … WTxHT

>where HT is the equivalent dose to tissue or organ T.

>ONLY in the circumstance of UNIFORM irradiation of the body we can say that

>ED and H values coincide :

>                             ED = H

>where H is the equivalent dose to the body uniformly irradiated (… WT = 1).

>If PARTS of the body are striked by radiation we have

>                             ED < HT

>So, if we read 0,200 microSv/h Equivalent Dose above the background at the

>level of the lungs (WT=0,12), even in the hypothesis of the maximum

>individual we don't exceed 0,114 Effective Dose, because

>                 0,200 x 0,12 = 0,024 microSv/h.

>In conclusion, we shouldn't take it for granted that a doserate > 0,114

>microSv/h above the background could mean that we have exceeded the annual

>limit of 1 mSv/year, because we should consider not only the EXPECTED TIME

>OCCUPANCY by the members of the public IN A YEAR but also the GEOMETRY of

>the irradiation (uniformity or non uniformity).

>

>Please, radsafers, help me to clarify and correct me if there is something

>that I miss.

>

>Quintino De Notariis

>Health Physicist

>

>

>************************************************************************

>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/









_________________________________________________________________

Charle con sus amigos online usando MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com



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

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/