Comparative assessment of standards development for radiation and other hazardous exposures

A fundamental question in development of standards for allowable exposure is, {open_quotes}What levels of safety are the standards intended to achieve?{close_quotes} This question has clearly not received the attention it deserves. A comparative assessment of standards for radiation and other physical and chemical hazards indicates that differing concerns may have motivated their developmental process. In most cases, the organization formulating the standards stated their objective in general terms such as, {open_quotes}to ensure safety,{close_quotes} {open_quotes}to protect worker`s health,{close_quotes} {open_quotes}to cause no undue stress,{close_quotes} {open_quotes}to avoid adverse health effects,{close_quotes} or to {open_quotes}maintain exposure levels as low as reasonably achievable.{close_quotes} It was generally recognized that absolute safety was unachievable, and therefore, some {open_quotes}reasonable{close_quotes} level of safety would need to be determined. The problem is made even more complex with the understanding that there can be a wide range in individual sensitivity to various harmful agents.