RE: One last comment on Irradiation -Reply

[Lonny Eckert <LLE@nrc.gov>]

Patricia,

<May I remind you of the internationally
recommended basic principles of  radiation
protection.  In particular the justification of a
practice, briefly:

<"A practice that entails or that could entail
exposure to radiation should  only be adopted if
it yields sufficient benefit to exposed individuals
or to  society to outweigh the radiation detriment
it causes or could cause".
IAEA - SS n. 115,  1994>

This seems to me to be an endorsement of an
ALARA philosophy.

<This principle shall be taken into account by
the national regulatory bodies  to authorize a
practice  that entails or that could entail
exposure to  radiation.>

<In other words, although food irradiation has a
lot of known advantages,  RADIATION SAFETY 
has to be considered always. The practice
should be  adopted if it is suitable and there is
no other "non-radioactive" option  available.>

The phrase: "The practice should be  adopted if
it is suitable and there is no
other "non-radioactive" option  available." 
connotates to me an ALAP or 'as low as
possible' radiation protection philosophy

I know that some European countries mandate
ALAP radiation protection practice.  In many
countries ALARA is to be practiced with a key
emphasis on the words PRACTICALLY
ACHIEVABLE.  This does not mean that
radiation should not be used as a tool if another
"non-radioactive" tool is available.

I am a little confused.  I thought that IAEA
embraced am ALARA philosphy, not an ALAP
philosophy.  Patricia or anyone else, could you
clear this up?


Lonny Eckert
LLE@NRC.GOV
Standard Disclaimers