Re: Asking for opinions - follow-up

["Ron L. Kathren" <rkathren@tricity.wsu.edu>]

Sandy --

Or any agrument from me with you, Sandy.  You make many valid points
including reiteration of the importance of control badges in adequate
numbers.  As I have said to you privately a number of times, you are in my
view a major reason why RadSafe is such a valuable tool for the practicing
HP.   Keep up the good work.

Ron


-----Original Message-----
From: Sandy Perle <sandyfl@earthlink.net>
To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Date: Friday, September 10, 1999 5:50 PM
Subject: Re: Asking for opinions - follow-up


>Ron Kathren said a lot of things. I can't really argue with any of the
>points. I suppose my statement regarding CHP was a bit
>"overstated". What I should have emphasized in a more understood
>manner was that there was no need to do any of the assessments
>performed, including the calculations etc. As Ron said, they could
>have performed area surveys when there were materials located
>outside of the dosimetry storage area, along with TLDs for times
>when there were no surveys being performed. The ultimate solution
>is to always have Control TLDs in appropriate numbers available.
>That should be SOP.
>
>So Ron,, no arguments from me regarding your many valid points.
>
>------------------------
>Sandy Perle
>E-Mail: sandyfl@earthlink.net
>Personal Website: http://www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/1205
>
>************************************************************************
>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