Re: NCRP/NRC recommendations on dose limits for hot particles-Reply

[PAUL PRICHARD <PRICHP@GWSMTP.NU.COM>]

I believe that your assessment is incorrect.  Six out of 15,000 is a bad
average.  But consider first that half of the overexposures occurred in the
early days as hot particles were beginning to become recognized as a hazard. 
Secondly, the incidence rate is much lower when you consider that the
opportunities for exposure would best be characterized by person-hours worked
in the radiological environment vs number of TLDs processed.  If 500 Boeing
767s have been built and 2 have crashed, that's a bad record.  But when you
consider the number of miles travelled or number of flights made, you get a
different picture.
_____________________________

Just an analog guy in a digital world.

Paul Prichard
prichp@gwsmtp.nu.com
(800) 269-9994 x3235
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html