|
When I worked
at Mare Island, a situation like that would happen occasionally in one of the
facilities. If the interior air sample of radon progeny reached 3 times
the outside air, we had to exit the building. This may have been motivated
by a concern that "real" airborne contamination might be masked, rather than
from the actual exposure.
Dave
Neil
Well, here is hat eater.......an employer that
requires a person to work in a building that enhances naturally occurring
radon emanations is required to account for the internal exposure,
right?
H. Dean Chaney, CHP
URS Corp. Sacramento, CA
(916) 679-2086
"In science there is only physics; everything else is stamp
collecting."
--Ernest Rutherford
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 9:20
PM
Subject: Re: Dosimeters and Airport
Security
In a message dated 01/09/2003 9:17:09 PM Pacific Standard
Time, magna1@jps.net writes:
Therefore, an employer that requires an employee to travel,
say by jet aircraft at high altitudes, is supposed to account for the high
altitude exposure (not natural background, per se, but maybe enhanced by
the high altitude of the flight) and the additional exposure from
penetrating x-rays at the airport....really?
I think,
and I'm not speaking for any agency, that the high altitude exposure would
be considered part of the "natural background," but that the x-rays at the
airport would not, although, if anyone actually gets a measurable exposure
from the x-ray machines at the airports while passing through security, even
a dozen times a month, I'll eat my hat.
Fortunately, no matter what
the case, I do not own any hats.
Barbara
|