Working Levels

[Wes Van Pelt <vanpeltw@idt.net>]

Hi Radsafers,
I almost always agree with Dr. Cohen. But not this time.
I too understand working levels and even working level months.
But how bizarre we must seem to the scientific world speaking in these
specialized arcane terms.
Especially odd and confounding is "working level months per year"!
As a concept, the WL makes sense to an industrial hygienist or HP. But as a
unit of measure, it stinks.
Regards,
Wes
--
Wesley R. Van Pelt, Ph.D., CIH, CHP            KF2LG
President, Van Pelt Associates
Radiation Safety and Environmental Radioactivity
mailto:vanpeltw@idt.net    http://idt.net/~vanpeltw/

Bernard L Cohen wrote:

>         Can I request one concession from the SI unit advocates? How
> about letting us keep the working level (WL) and working level month (WLM)
> units for radon progeny. They have a very clear significance, while the SI
> equivalents, 2.08 x 10E-5 J/m**3 and 3.5 x 10E-3 Jh/m**3 mean nothing to
> me
>
> Bernard L. Cohen
> Physics Dept.
> University of Pittsburgh
> Pittsburgh, PA 15260
> Tel: (412)624-9245
> Fax: (412)624-9163
> e-mail: blc+@pitt.edu
>
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html

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