Re: In-flight radiation -Reply -Reply

[Mutty Sharfi <SHARMM@doe-md.gov>]

Sandy,

I agree that this is not and should not be an issue.  My response was
only for informational purposes.  Attempting to track flight crews and
passengers would be crazy.  Also another issue is who would be the
regulating organization?  It is not a DOE or NRC issue, the EPA? The more
interesting thing to me was that airlines emphasize to passengers that
exposure in the second trimester is the worst time for exposure but they
require their employees to work through the second trimester.

****************************************************************************************
The opinions expressed above are mine alone and my not represent the
opinions of my employer of the DOE.
****************************************************************************************

Mutty Sharfi
Internal Dosimetry
Mound Site 
BWXT of Ohio
sharmm@doe-md.gov 

>>> "Sandy Perle" <sandyfl@earthlink.net> 11/16/99 02:06pm >>>
The issue could be larger than just addressing flight crews. Before I 
proceed, let me say that I don't think there is an issue to contend 
with at all. While there is dose to the crew and passengers, there is 
still no credible data suggesting that there is a problem, or 
consequences. Having said that, let me take this issue one step 
further, to the passengers.

The dose to flight crews is not extensive. Currently they are not 
deemed to be occupationally exposed workers. There is a move to make 
this definition change. If there is a change, they will exceed the 
10% rule requiring monitoring. In my opinion, that is a big mistake, 
due to the message it will send the public, for one.

Now let's address the flying public. If the crew is considered 
occupationally exposed, then it seems to me that the passengers are 
now being exposed due to the airlines activities. Seems that the next 
step is to ensure that no passenger ever exceeds 0.1 rem (1 mSv) from 
those activities. I am not recommending this, but given time, I 
believe that this will become an issue, needlessly as I believe it to 
be.

The only way to reduce exposure is time, distance and shielding. I 
don't see any viable new techniques that is going to accomplish this. 
Again, why do we really care? The data suggests that this is not an 
issue.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sander C. Perle					Tel:(714) 545-0100 /
(800) 548-5100   				    	
Director, Technical				Extension 2306
				     	
ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Division		Fax:(714) 668-3149 	            
      		    
ICN Biomedicals, Inc.				E-Mail: sandyfl@earthlink.net
				                           
ICN Plaza, 3300 Hyland Avenue  		E-Mail: sperle@icnpharm.com
         	          
Costa Mesa, CA 92626

Personal Website:  http://www.geocities.com/scperle
ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com

************************************************************************
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