Re: Re[4]: MONITORING UNIVERSITY HEALTH

[lambert@HAL.HAHNEMANN.EDU]

On Wed, 1 May 1996 LASKV@ccmail.ceco.com wrote:
> Legal action has been implemented for personnel who took less than 100
> mrem of exposure - lifetime.  I know of several lawsuits that were on this 
> level although I don't have the data available.  

Getting back to the original reason for this thread:  How are monitoring 
badges "cheap insurance" if litigation occurs with doses of 100 mrem 
lifetime and 2 mrem lifetime (from another post)?  Neither of these 
doses are measurable with standard radiation monitoring devices (assuming 
with the former that the lifetime dose was over the course of a 
lifetime).  The uncertainty of the measurement is significantly greater 
than these doses.

In all these discussions I have yet to see anyone address the original
question, which was about whether monitoring should occur for radiology
technologist who based on historical monitoring results do not receive
radiation exposure.  So, I'll take a stab at it.  It is harder to take a
badge away from someone than to not give it in the first place.  We have
given groups of individuals monitors for short terms (e.g., 3 - 6 months)
to demonstrate that they are not exposed.  In these cases they know from
the start that the monitoring is a temporary "experiment" to demonstrate
whether there is a need. So there may be some adverse reactions from the
staff that you stop monitoring, such as labor grievances, ...  Further,
you should consider, along with your Risk Manager, the level of
discretionary monitoring that your institution feels comfortable with. 

BTW, our "policy" on monitoring is that we issue monitoring to 
individuals who work with types and quantities of sources of radiation 
that are likely to receive a measurable dose.  

Kent Lambert
LAMBERT@hal.hahnemann.edu

All opinions are well reasoned and insightful.
Needless to say they are not the opinion of my
employer. - Paraphrased from Michael Feldman.