Re[2]: X-ray Scanning For Theft Detection

[Steven.Rima@DOEGJPO.COM (Steven Rima)]

     Franz et al,
     
     I don't know what Austria's regulations are, but I don't believe that 
     they really strictly prohibit ANY personnel exposure other than 
     medical. What about airline crews? People that manufacture smoke 
     detectors? People working in industries where sources are used for 
     gauging thickness of products or tank levels? People calibrating 
     survey instruments? People working in sterilization facilities? 
     etc...... Are all of these occupations that might expose a person to 
     ionizing radiation really illegal in Austria?
     
     No, there is no specific regulation in the U.S. prohibiting any 
     exposure to ionzing radiation other than for medical purposes, and I 
     sure hope no such law is ever proposed, let alone adopted. There are 
     many, many beneficial uses of ionizing radiation, other than medical, 
     that may expose personnel to radiation, and I don't believe that any 
     country should ban them outright.
     
     As for whether diamond miners should be x rayed, I'll leave that 
     debate to others...
     
     Steven D. Rima, CHP
     Manager, Health Physics and Industrial Hygiene
     MACTEC-ERS, LLC
     steven.rima@doegjpo.com


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: X-ray Scanning For Theft Detection
Author:  Christian Schoenhofer <schoenho@via.at> at Internet
Date:    9/30/97 8:31 AM


Schoenhofer
Habichergasse 31/7
A-1160 Wien
AUSTRIA
Tel./Fax: +43-1-4955308
Mobiltel.: +43-664-3380333
e-mail: schoenho@via.at
     
----------
> Von: Douglas.Minnema@dp.doe.gov
> An: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu> 
> Betreff: X-ray Scanning For Theft Detection
> Datum: Montag, 29. September 1997 15:28 
> 
> ------ =_0_MIME_Boundary_6636.342fb5cf.im7cfi60.dpmail.dp.doe.gov 
> 
>     
>     With regards to this subject, the reference is somewhat dated, 
>     but:
>     
>     "The [ICRP] Commission has been asked for its views on an 
>     international proposal to use radiography as part of a system for 
>     the security-screening of airline passengers. ...................the 
>     Commission believes that the proposal, if performed under the 
>     conditions already specified, could be justified in the light of 
>     the benefits that might be expected."  HPS Journal, Vol. 21, p. 
>     616, 1971.
>     
A consideration of the ICRP from the year 1971 (or before) cannot be 
regarded as a justification of such a practice in the year 1997. In the 
year 1971 it was even possible to erect nuclear power plants and to get 
them onto the grid. Times have changed considerably since then. Nobody 
would any more use x-ray machines to look whether the shoes fit, though 
this was done not so long time ago.
     
>     This reference indicates that the Commission had already 
>     considered anti-crime activities, but it gives no reference.  
>     Somebody may be able to point us towards it, or an update of 
>     either of these statements.
>     
I would be very interested to know whether such considerations have been 
made later.
     
     
>     The only question that I would still have is whether the 
>     Commission's decisions depend upon who the receptor is - a member 
>     of the public, or an employee.  One could argue that for an 
>     employee, the irradiation is a condition of employment, and 
>     therefore is elective, similar to other radiological workers.
     
No, this is an unacceptable argument. I find it hard to believe that there 
exists no legislation in the USA which forbids deliberate exposure of 
persons to ionizing radiation. In Austria any exposure other than for 
medical purposes is forbidden. The medical purpose must also guarantee a 
benefit for the patient. 
     
The comparison to radiological workers is not justified, because radiation 
workers must not be subjected deliberately to a radiation exposure. The 
limit of exposure is not intended that careless work is accepted and that 
radiation workers  may  receive any doses as long as their sum  does not 
exceed the limits. Their doses have to be kept as low as reasonably 
achievable  a n d  must not exceed the limits. What about the ALARA 
principle? 
     
 Franz