RE: Respiratory protection and source security

["Dunn, Wes" <WDunn@intiso.com>]

If the person has physical trouble transporting materials, then there
should be (1) a second person; and/or (2) a cart.  This is irrespective
of whether doors are locked and the NRC's policy.   This is not to say I
don't have problems with NRC's concept of security not being tied to a
rational hazard.  It is just your example isn't a fair match.  

Wes

Wesley M. Dunn, CHP, Director, Environmental Health & Safety
International Isotopes, Inc.
3100 Jim Christal Road
Denton, Texas  76207
Wdunn@intiso.com <mailto:Wdunn@intiso.com>
Corporate Website:  http://www.intiso.com
940-484-9492; 940-484-0877 (fax)


	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Skierkowski, Paul [SMTP:pskierkowski@ou.edu]
	Sent:	Monday, August 03, 1998 1:32 PM
	To:	Multiple recipients of list
	Subject:	Respiratory protection and source security

	Today I received Draft Reg Guide DG-8022 "Acceptable programs
for
	respiratory protection"

	does anyone see any relationship between this philosophy, and
one of not
	locking doors, and requiring other obstacles  which cause
barriers to
	safe travel between laboratories, especially when carrying
materials
	etc, in light of the potential for "theft" of licensed materials
in the
	laboratory?

	Paul Skierkowski
	Univ. of Oklahoma
	
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html