An “as low as is reasonably achievable” (ALARA) assessment of occupational radiation exposures requires that a cost-benefit analysis be performed to determine which exposures should be incrementally reduced. Such an analysis not only takes into account the potential benefits of societal health cost savings that may result from lower exposures, but also involves an understanding of the potential beneficial or detrimental effects that changes in plant availability and manpower requirements can have on personnel exposures and on plant operating and capital costs. Although the parameters necessary to perform a cost-benefit analysis for defining ALARA exposure levels for radiation workers have not yet been completely quantified, many research programs are currently under way to develop the requisite theoretical framework and data bases to fully characterize nuclear power plant design features and operating procedures for application in ALARA evaluations of occupational radiation exposures. For example, a recent investigation has shown that limitations to worker productivity and possibly plant availability due to external radiation exposures may occur only if a worker reaches his administrative dose limit. Hence, unless a worker reaches his administrative dose limit, a utility does not incur extra operating expenses (personnel requirements or extentions of outages) because of external radiation exposures, which can significantly affect the magnitude of the benefit-to-cost ratio.