Rank: Guest
|
Posted By garyh
Is there a reason why the ionising radiation regulations 1999 require a dose as low as is reasonably achievable (ALARA) whereas under COSHH exposure to eg Carcinogens has to be ALARP (where p= practicable).
Is this just semantics or is there a difference?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Bob Youel
Having extensive experience re nuclear I note that; COSHH is easier to manage than industrial radiation hence the differing standards at this time as its almost impossible to work to a 'practicable' standard re radiation exposure in the 'real' world in some situations
In some of the older reactors the controls were ???! to say the least - some old designs make installing temp shield walling without getting high doses impossible and some of the permanent installiations were not shielded at all
Thankfully the industry has changed and the 'old' ways of working are controlled better that they were
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Kevin Drew
Gary,
First of all, the IRRs1999 and its ACoP make no mention of the term ALARA or the phrase "as low as reasonably achievable". There are, as you might expect, multiple references to the term "as low as reasonably practicable".
My understanding is that the two terms are essentially the same and it is just semantics. Generally, ALARA is followed by some words to the effect that social and econmonic factors are taken into account which is what makes them the same.
If I'm wrong I'm sure somebody will say so.
Regards
Kevin Drew
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.