EPA-520/7-75-014
THE UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF RADIATION PROGRAMS
EPA REVIEW OF RADIATION
PROTECTION ACTIVIT IES - 19 74
A PROTOTYPE FOR SUBSEQUENT ANNUAL REPORTS
33
V
LLJ
-------
ANNUAL REPORT
EPA REVIEW OF RADIATION PROTECTION ACTIVITIES
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Washington, D.C.
SEPTEMBER 1975
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
FORWARD
CHAPTER 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
CHAPTER 2 NUCLEAR ENERGY 6
INTRODUCTION 6
MAJOR RADIATION PROTECTION ACTIVITIES 9
Standard Setting Activities 10
Nuclear Fuel Cycle 10
Plutonium 12
"As Low As Practicable" 13
Environmental Impact Statements 14
Management of Commercial High-Level and
Transuranium-Contaminated Radioactive
Waste (WASH-1539) 15
Generic Environmental Statement Mixed
Oxide Fuels (GESMO) (WASH-1327) 17
Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor
(LMFBR) (WASH-1535) 18
Waste Management Operations at the
Hanford Reservation (WASH-1538) 20
Enewetak EIS 20
Fuel Reprocessing 21
Radioactive Waste Management Field Study
Efforts 21
-------
Nuclear Facility Accident Problems 22
Rasmussen Study (WASH-1400) 22
Study Findings 23
Response to the Study 23
Emergency Response Planning
Activities 24
Federal Interagency Agreement 24
Protective Action Guides 25
EPA Manual of Protective Action
Guides and Protective Actions
for Nuclear Incidents 27
Price Anderson Act (1957) 27
Safeguards 29
National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System 30
Advanced Reactor Concepts 31
Nuclear Energy Centers 31
Offshore Floating Nuclear Power Plants .. 31
Light Water Breeder Reactors 32
Other Reactor Concepts 32
Molten Salt Breeder Reactor 32
Fusion 32
Other Nuclear Applications 33
Nuclear Weapons Testing 33
Peaceful Applications of Nuclear
Explosives 34
United States Nuclear Navy 36
Commercial Nuclear Powered Shipping 37
Radiation Monitoring 37
EPA's Environmental Radiation Ambient
Monitoring System 37
State Radiological Monitoring 40
Nuclear Facility Licensing Monitoring ... 41
-------
EPA Field Studies at Nuclear Facilities 41
Connecticut Yankee 41
Oyster Creek 42
Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station 42
Cooper Nuclear Power Station 42
Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant -
Dose Model Validation Study 43
G. E. Fuel Fabrication Plant 43
Field Study at Ocean Dumping Sites 43
Legislation 44
Research for Radiological Protection 44
Environmental Protection Agency 44
Atomic Energy Commission 45
International Organizations and
Activities 46
Information Exchange Arrangements 46
Visits of Foreign Nationals 47
Notifications of Important Events 47
International Atomic Energy Agency 47
OUTLOOK FOR THE FUTURE 48
REFERENCES 50
CHAPTER 3 54
INTRODUCTION 54
MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION PROTECTION
ACTIVITIES 59
Uranium Mine and Mill Tailings 59
Inactive Uranium Mill Tailings Sites .... 61
Navajo Nation Study 61
NRC Stabilization Guidelines 62
Track Etch Badge Dosimetry Studies 62
Radioactivity from Non-Nuclear Industrial
Processes, Effluents, Residuals, and
Products 63
-------
Page
Radioactivity in Non-Nuclear Energy
Sources , 64
Radon in Natural Gas ; 64
Radon in Geothermal Sources 65
Uranium and Daughters in Western Coal .. 65
Radium and Drinking Water/Standards 66
Radioactivity in Construction Materials , 67
OUTLOOK FOR THE FUTURE 68
REFERENCES 70
CHAPTER 4 MEDICAL AND OCCUPATIONAL 72
INTRODUCTION 72
MEDICAL 72
The Medical Radiation Problem 72
Issues of Medical Radiation Use 74
Progress in Medical Radiation Protection .... 75
OCCUPATIONAL 78
The Issues of Occupational Exposure 78
Progress in Occupational Radiation
Protection 78
The OSHA Role in Radiation Health
Protection 78
REFERENCES 80
-------
CHAPTER 5 NONIONIZING RADIATION 81
INTRODUCTION 81
Growth in Nonionizing Radiation 85
Nonionizing Radiation Concerns 89
MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION PROTECTION
ACTIVITIES 90
Federal Agencies 90
Office of Telecommunication Policy 94
Electromagnetic Radiation Management
Advisory Council 94
Environmental Protection Agency 95
U.S. Air Force 96
U.S. Army 97
U.S. Navy 97
Bureau of Radiological Health 98
National Institute of Environmental
Health Science 98
National Institute of Occupational
Safety and Health 98
National Bureau of Standards 99
National Science Foundation 99
Central Intelligence Agency 99
Veterans Administration 99
Federal Communications Commission 100
Standards 100
Federal/State Legislation 101
Court Action 102
Field Study 102
High Voltage Transmission Lines Data
Request 102
International 102
US/USSR Exchange 102
BRH/WHO 103
-------
Paee
OUTLOOK FOR THE FUTURE 103
REFERENCES 106
LIST OF ACRONYMS Ill
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table
2-1 The Proposed Standards for Normal Operations
of the Uranium Fuel Cycle 11
2-2 Protective Action Guides for Whole Body
Exposure to Airborne Radioactive Materials 26
2-3 Protective Action Guides for Thyroid Dose
Due to Inhalation from a Passing Plume 28
2-4 Nuclear Detonations During 1974 35
2-5 EPA's Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitor-
ing System (ERAMS) 38
5-1 Electromagnetic Bioeffects: Areas of Investi-
gation 84
5-2 Electromagnetic Bioeffects Programs - FY 1974 92
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
2-1 Nuclear Power Reactors in the United States 7
2-2 Nuclear Power Plant Sales (1972-5) 48
3-1 Variation of Cosmic Radiation with Latitude
(Millikan, 1936) 56
3-2 Cosmic Ray Dose Equivalent Rate Variation
With Altitude (O'Brien and Mclaughlin, 1970) 57
5-1 Increase in Radio and TV Broadcast Stations in
the United States 86
5-2 Some Selected Microwave Exposure Standards 87
5-3 Cumulative Distribution of Emitters in the
United States Capable of Producing a Power
Density Equal to or Greater than (a)
10 mW/cm2 and (b) 0.01 mW/cm , as a
Function of Distance 88
5-4 Governmental Parties Interested in Nonionizing
Radiation 91
5-5 Frequency Distribution of Electromagnetic Bio-
effects Research Programs By Agency - FY 74 93
-------
FOREWORD
The Environmental Protection Agency was established in 1970 by
Executive Order under the Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970. One of
the authorities transferred under that Plan was that of the Federal
Radiation Council which was set up to advise the President on all
matters pertaining to radiation and,' through this mechanism, to pro-
vide guidance to and overview of other Federal agencies on radiation
protection matters. While the Council as such no longer exists, the
functions now vested in the Administrator of EPA are ongoing functions
actively being pursued by the Office of Radiation Programs. This re-
port provides an EPA review of significant radiation protection and
industrial activities through December 31, 1975, as well as the under-
lying issues and problems accompanying them. As an initial effort in
this respect, it represents EPA's point of view in terms of priorities,
knowledge, and philosophies.
This report was developed over a short period of time with only
limited input from and coordination with other Federal and State agen-
cies that have radiation protection responsibilities. Even with this
limitation, the report should be of assistance to other agencies and
the public, and provide a basis of evaluation for evolving future re-
ports.
EPA plans to involve other Federal agencies early in the process
of developing future reports of this type. We believe this report can
serve as a basis for structuring an outline of a broader report; we ex-
pect to give the other involved agencies an opportunity to comment on
an adequate balance in the material presented and to incorporate inputs
from many other agencies that have radiation protection related respon-
sibilities and concerns. In this context, it is acknowledged that there
are probably many other equally critical issues and problems that are
not covered in this first effort that relate to important programs in
the Department of the Interior, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Depart-
ment of Labor, Department of Defense, Energy Research and Development
Administration, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and the
fifty states. We hope that, during the review of the present report,
these agencies will consider the nature of their future contributions.
EPA sees this expanded annual repprt as a basis for presenting the cur-
rent progress in radiation protection programs.
-------
The Energy Reorganization Act of 1954 (PL 93-438), approved Octo-
ber 11, 1974, abolished the Atomic Energy Commission and established
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRG) and the Energy Research and
Development Administration (ERDA) effective January 19, 1975. AEC's
responsibilities will be continued as part of NRC and ERDA activities.
In this report, the names of NRC and ERDA are occasionally used in for-
wardlooking contexts; elsewhere, we use the name of AEC.
Office of Radiation Programs technical reports are distributed to
State and local radiological health offices, Office of Radiation Pro-
grams technical and advisory committees, universities, laboratories,
schools, the press, and other interested groups and individuals. These
reports are also included in the collection of the Library of Congress
and the National Technical Information Service. For the reasons stated
above, this report has received limited distribution.
I encourage readers of these reports to inform the Office of
Radiation Programs of any omissions or errors. Your additional com-
ments or requests for further information are also solicited. Future
reports will correct the deficiencies noted in preparation of this
issue.
W. D. Rowe, Ph.D.
Deputy Assistant Administrator
for Radiation Programs
-------
CHAPTER 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The increase in radiation sources in scope and quantity, and the
potential increase in radiation dose received by the population from
such sources, has resulted in increased efforts in radiation protect-
ion activities to reduce unnecessary exposure. At the Federal level
significant strides toward control of radiation hazards have been made,
including the promulgation of certain standards, criteria, and guides.
Improved control technologies in many areas make it feasible to reduce
emissions at a reasonable cost to levels below current standards and
guides. Many new technologies and applications using radiation are be-
ing developed that will require additional standards and controls.
Fifty-three commercial nuclear power plants have been licensed in
the United States since 1957, and there have been corresponding in-
creases in mining, processing, and transport of radioactive materials.
The medical field has expanded applications of diathermy, lasers, X-rays,
and radionuclides for therapeutic and diagnostic purposes. Industrially,
X-rays, radionuclides, and lasers have been used increasingly for test-
ing and quality control. With broad availability of relatively inexpen-
sive amateur radio transmitters (citizens band included), the prolifera-
tion of microwave transmitters, radio and TV stations, and radar, and
the use of powerful satellite communication facilities, there has recent-
ly been an increasing superposition of nonionizing radiation energy pat-
terns in the environment. As fossil fuels and geothermal resources are
brought up from beneath the earth's surface, radioactive decay products
of radon and thoron are added to the background ionizing radiation in
the environment. The natural radiation level is also increased by
radioactivity in some construction materials, in phosphate fertilizers,
and in uranium mill tailings sometimes improperly used for land and road
fill. A large source of ionizing radiation is from natural radiation
made up of cosmic rays and terrestrial radiation and fallout debris
from nuclear device testing. The magnitude of this source varies sub-
stantially from one part of the nation to another and exposures from
these sources are generally unavoidable.
The primary focus of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's)
radiation strategy is to implement a program leading to the establish-
ment of necessary radiation controls for the protection of public health
and the environment. These controls would include standards, guidelines,
-------
and criteria developed through due process including public participa-
tion. Much of this program is carried out by agencies other than EPA
who have direct regulatory authority for different sources of radiation
exposure. During 1974, EPA, other Federal agencies, States, and other
organizations were involved in a variety of major actions affecting the
radiation environment. Particularly significant was the discussion of
several major problems in the development of nuclear energy in the pub-
lic forum through the National Environmental Policy Act process in the
form of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS's).
The significant events identified during this reporting period
were as follows:
• EPA published on May 10, 1974, an advanced notice of
rulemaking for a proposed Standard on Environmental
Protection for Nuclear Power Operations to assure pro-
tection of the public against radiation doses result-
ing from uranium fuel cycle operations and to limit
the long-term impact on current and future populations
of long-lived radioactive materials that accumulate as
a result of the production of electrical energy via
this fuel cycle.
• A draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (WASH-1538)
was published by the AEG in September 1974 on the Waste
Management Operations at the Hanford Reservation, Rich-
land, Washington.
• An Environmental Impact Statement (WASH-1529) was pub-
lished by the AEC in September 1974, which discussed its
program for the long-term management of commercial high-
level and transuranium contaminated waste.
• The AEC published a Draft EIS on Mixed Oxide Fuels (WASH-
1327) and a proposed Final EIS on liquid metal fast breed-
er reactors (WASH-1535) in August 1974 and January 1975,
respectively.
• In August 1974 under the independent direction of Profes-
sor Norman C. Rasmussen of the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, the AEC published a draft Reactor Safety Study
(WASH-1400), which provided an assessment of accident risks
from U.S. commercial light water nuclear power plants.
• During 1974, for emergency response planning, the EPA de-
veloped proposed protection action guides (PAG's) which
provide exposure levels for initiation of protective actions
-------
to avoid exposure to radiation from an inadvertent
release of gaseous effluents from a nuclear power
plant.
• Under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of
1974, as amended, permits must be issued by the
EPA for the discharge of pollutants into navigable
waters. In the case of the Colorado Public Interest
Research Group versus Russell Train as Administrator
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the
United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit over-
turned the lower courts decision and ruled that EPA
is responsible, instead of AEG, for issuing water
permits for discharge of radioactive waste from nu-
clear power plants. The EPA's Office of Radiation
Programs is not taking any action to develop efflu-
ent guidelines pending review of the ruling by the
Supreme Court in the fall of 1975.
• The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 gave the EPA
authority to set standards for radium in drinking
water. Interim primary drinking water regulations
on proposed maximum contaminant levels for radio-
activity are under development. In determining
the impact of the proposed standards, the EPA has
a program to evaluate cost/effective methods to
remove radium from drinking water.
• The AEC issued a regulatory guide for the stabiliza-
tion of uranium and thorium milling waste retention
systems.
• Beginning with the phosphate industry, EPA initiated
a program to assess the radiological impact of indus-
tries using materials containing naturally occurring
radioactivity.
• During 1974, EPA made a study and found that the use
of natural gas containing radon-222, under average ex-
posure conditions, does not contribute significantly
to an increased background radiation exposure in the
U.S. population.
• Radiation monitoring in the vicinity of nuclear facili-
ties increased during 1974. By the end of 1974 there
were 19 states participating in a monitoring program
-------
under contract with the Atomic Energy Commission.
The program essentially covers all operating nu-
clear power reactors.
Joint field studies by the EPA/AEC/States were com-
pleted, or were in the process of being conducted,
at nuclear facilities during 1974 to improve measure-
ment techniques and validate dose computation models,
as well as to evaluate control technology for manage-
ment of nuclear wastes.
EPA completed an intensive program of evaluating
types of high power sources of environmental non-
ionizing radiation. A unique mobile electronic
surveillance van has been designed, procured, and
equipped by EPA to make measurements of ambient
levels of nonionizing radiation in the environment.
Data from these measurement programs will serve as
a substantial basis for determining the need for
setting an environmental standard in this area.
The Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, updated its "Nonionizing
Radiation Exposure Standard" and issued it on
July 1, 1974, in the Federal Register (29 CFR
191097).
The use of X-rays in the medical and industrial
fields is an area of focus for reduction of un-
necessary radiation exposure. August 1, 1974, was
the effective date for new dental and medical X-ray
equipment to meet performance standards developed
by the Bureau of Radiological Health, Department
of Health, Education and Welfare.*
The Bureau of Radiological Health, FDA, DHEW, reis-
sued in the Federal Register (39 FR 32094) a revised
laser performance standard on September 4, 1974.
Their continuing efforts to protect the public from
leakage from microwave ovens led to setting August 6,
1974 as the effective date when all microwave ovens
*Performance standards for cabinet X-ray systems are effective as of
April 10, 1975, except for carry-on baggage types which went into ef-
fect April 25, 1974.
-------
must be inoperable if one or both of the independ-
ently operating safety interlocks fail to function.
The Environmental Protection Agency initiated a care-
ful review of exposures caused by medical procedures
in 1974. In order to obtain expert assistance by
qualified professionals an Interagency Working Group
was formed and all Federal agencies which oversee a
health care program which involves radiologic proce-
dures were invited to participated.
EPA evaluated the exposure commitment of the public
(as passenger) due to shipment of radioisotopes on
commercial carriers and recommended to Federal agen-
cies charged with the regulation of the transporta-
tion of radioactive materials that of dose rate to
any passenger should not exceed 0.5 mrem/hour.
EPA initiated a study by contract, with the University
of Texas, School of Public Health, to further deter-
mine the dose to the general public due to the release
of medical radioisotopes into sewage systems.
A review and updating of occupational exposure guides
was initiated in September of 1974. EPA formed an In-
teragency Committee on Occupational Exposures to Ion-
izing Radiation and the advice of this committee will
provide the basis for updated exposure guides.
-------
CHAPTER 2
NUCLEAR ENERGY
INTRODUCTION
The first major application of nuclear energy was in the use of
fission and fusion devices for weaponry. Testing of these devices in
the atmosphere has been a major contributor to ambient radiation lev-
els, but since the cessation of above-ground testing by the United
States and the USSR under the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, these levels
have been diminishing substantially. The 1974 above-ground tests by
the Republic of China and by the French in the South Pacific have made
additional contributions to this radioactive burden. Underground test-
ing of devices has continued in the United States and the USSR, as well
as an initial atmospheric device detonated by India. The major inter-
national issue was pressure for limitation on underground testing of
nuclear weapons, as evidenced by the SALT talks. Another major inter-
national issue is proliferation of nuclear capabilities as a result of
export of "peaceful" nuclear power, e.g., India.
Other commercial nuclear activity in this country and the USSR is
primarily centered around ship propulsion. These reactors have been
shown to be relatively clean and operated with little environmental
contamination. The application of propulsion systems to commercial
ships has been less than successful primarily because of economics.
In 1974, public reaction to the problems in Japanese ship design raised
major concern in that country.
In terms of peaceful uses of nuclear energy, sampling of gases from
Plowshare operations such as Rulison and Rio Blanco continued. The fu-
ture of the Plowshare program is uncertain at this time.
The major commercial efforts in nuclear energy in the United States
and throughout the world involve the generation of electricity by large
nuclear power plants. Figure 2-1 gives the location of the 53 licensed
to operate reactors in the United States as of December 31, 1974. Also
included are the nuclear generating capacities, both present [36 giga-
watts and projected (16)]. At the present time the nuclear capacity of
the 53 commercial power plants accounts for 7 percent of the country's
-------
NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS IN THE UNITED STATES
V**
NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT CAPACITY
. Operable kilOwatts
53 licensed by AEC to operate 35,870,400
2 others authorized to operate (AEC-owned) 940,000
A Being Built
63 construction permits 63,283,700
10 limited work authorizations 10,556,000
• Planned
93 reactors ordered 105,129,900
14 reactors not ordered* 16,940,000
235 232,720,000
Since these units have not been ordered and site information is incomplete,
there are no further references to them in this document.
Because of space limitations, symbols do not reflect precise locations. See
reverse side for site information.
OK
TX
PUERTO RICO
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission
December 31, 1974
Figure 2-1
-------
entire electric generation. Projections indicate that by 2000 this per-
centage may amount to over 50 percent of all electric power in the United
States (26). Whether these figures are achieved will depend on the tech-
nological development and capacity of alternate power sources to supply
a portion of the needed electrical generating capacity.
Utility interest in uranium as a power generation source continues
to be stimulated by the compelling advantages of low fuel costs and low
fuel shipping costs (because of the energy potential per unit of uran-
ium, which far exceeds that of comparable units of coal and petroleum
products), freedom from air pollution control problems, and the ready
availability of nuclear fuel in a period marked by declining supplies
of other combustibles. Nuclear fission power is clearly freeing con-
siderable amounts of fossil fuel for other uses, and these savings will
rise dramatically with its continued growth. It has been estimated that
if the current United States nuclear capacity did not exist today, and
all generators had to be fired with fossil fuels, over 250 million bar-
rels of oil per year would be required in addition to current require-
ments.
Three generic issues evolved in the nuclear energy controversy dur-
ing 1974: (a) Should we have nuclear power at all? (b) How safe should
it be made?, and (c) What form of nuclear power should be allowed? Nu-
clear power plants are currently in operation for generation of electri-
city both in this country and abroad and there have been tremendous in-
vestments in capital and labor. Since there is a current need for ener-
gy independence, the first question cannot be debated at this time (1).
However, the rate of future expansion is certainly a question that can
and must be addressed since the decision on whether to pursue nuclear
energy commercially predates NEPA and therefore expansion has never
been addressed in the public forum. With respect to future nuclear
energy, the question of how safe (in terms of planned and accidental
releases) nuclear power can be made and how much should be spent to
achieve such goals, is paramount. Finally, the form of nuclear power
involves technology and economic questions of light-water reactors with
uranium fuel, plutonium enriched fuels, high temperature gas reactors
and breeders, as well as fusion. These are all part of the analysis
which must be taken into account and weighed against other methods of
producing energy.
The specific issues which are facing nuclear power at this time
represent several unsolved problems. The first is long-term waste dis-
posal. There is urgent need to develop an ultimate disposal method for
both commercial and government high-level and low-level nuclear wastes.
The generation of large amounts of high-level radioactive material and
fission products require that they be disposed of by some method to as-
sure long-term containment. Second, the possibility of very large, but
-------
highly improbable, accidents at nuclear power plants is a primary
issue, and considerable effort has been addressed to it in terms of
(a) quantification of risk from nuclear power plants through the
Rasmussen Study, (b) insight into developing methods for accepting
levels of risk for society, and finally, (c) the need for develop-
ment of emergency response plans should such accidents occur. Third,
as new technologies are developed which use separable fission mater-
ials such as plutonium, the problems of safeguards once again need
to be addressed in the public forum and resolved. Fourth, although
planned releases from nuclear power plants are indeed low, the build-
up of long-lived nuclides in the environment has become of increasing
concern. Fortunately, this buildup can generally be controlled once
the problems have been identified. Effluent and general environmental
standards are effective means of addressing this type of problem.
In 1974, there were significant radiation protection activities
which are likely to affect the public and the environment in relation
to radiations, their sources, and measures for their control. For
this year, the primary focus has been on nuclear power and its control,
and, to a more limited extent, on other parts of the nuclear fuel cycle,
i.e., the stages of radioactive material handling from the mining to the
ultimate disposal of such material. These activities are described in
this chapter.
MAJOR RADIATION PROTECTION ACTIVITIES
During 1974 there were numerous nuclear related activities, most
of which followed from past events. New concerns have also developed
concomitantly with the nuclear industry growth and increased public
awareness. Such activities involve to varying degrees Federal and
State agencies, public interest groups, and knowledgeable individuals.
The following discussions provide an insight into the major events,
critical issues, and imminent plans for dealing with these various
problems.
-------
STANDARD SETTING ACTIVITIES
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
The sequence of radioactive material passing through several nu-
clear facilities during production and utilization of nuclear fuel for
a light water reactor, which is the predominant reactor type in use to-
day, typifies the nuclear fuel cycle. The sequence includes the mining
and milling of uranium, conversion of ore concentrate to uranium hexa-
fluoride (UF^), enrichment in the isotope uranium-235 (U-235), conver-
sion of enriched to fuel material, UC>2, fabrication of fuel elements,
nuclear power generation, reprocessing of spent fuels, and ultimate
disposal of radioactive waste. (36)
In recognition of the problems of population exposure from the
uranium fuel cycle, EPA published in the Federal Register on May 10,
1974 (37), an advance notice of rulemaking designed to provide en-
vironmental and public health protection (37). Then in December 1974,
EPA issued a draft environmental statement for proposed rulemaking
action (for interagency review only) on the uranium fuel cycle stand-
ards . These standards would limit radiation doses to the general pub-
lic and would also limit quantities of long-lived radioactive materials
in the general environment attributable to planned releases from opera-
tions contributing to the generation of electric power through the
uranium fuel cycle. (33) These proposed standards will limit radiation
exposure from planned releases outside the boundaries of nuclear power
light water reactors and outside of all facilities, including trans-
portation, that ai._ involved in the processing, fissioning, and repro-
cessing of uranium for these reactors. The standards will cover the
process from the time uranium ore leaves the mines through the repro-
cessing of uranium after burnup in reactors and its eventual recycling
back into the fuel supply. This will (a) assure protection of the pub-
lic against radiation doses resulting from fuel cycle operations, and
(b) limit the long-term impact on current and future population of
long-lived radioactive materials that accumulate as a result of the
production of electrical energy. The guideline for this standard is
the "as low as practicable" concept. Effective consideration of "as
low as practicable" involves judgments of trade-off between public
health considerations, cost of effluent control, and overall benefit.
The proposed standards for individual doses and for limits on total
quantities of long-lived radionuclides are presented in Table 2-1.
Standards in categories of Section A of Table 2-1 are designed to
address doses due to short-lived fission produced materials and natural-
ly occurring materials, while those in Section B specifically address
10
-------
Table 2-1 The Proposed Standards for
Normal Operations of the Uranium Fuel Cycle
A. Individual Dose Limits
1. Whole body 25 millirems/year
2. Thyroid 75 millirems/year
3. Other organs* 25 millirems/year
B. Limits for Long-Lived Radionuclides
1. Krypton-85 50,000 curies/gigawatt-year
2. Iodine-129 5 millicuries/gigawatt-year
3. Transuranics** 0.5 millicuries/gigawatt-year
C. Variances
At the discretion of the regulatory agency (licensor) for
temporary and unusual operating circumstances to insure or-
derly delivery of electrical power.
D. Effective Dates
1. Two years, except
2. 1983 for krypton-85 and iodine-129
*any human organ except the dermis, epidermis, or cornea
**limited to alpha-emitters with half-lives greater than one year
11
-------
long-lived radioactive materials. The standards for environmental
burdens of specific long-lived radionuclides are expressed in terms
of the quantity of electricity produced, in order to assure the public
that the risk associated with any long-term environmental burden is
incurred only in return for a beneficial product: electrical power.
The standard permits these radionuclides to be released up to the
specified level at any time or location and at any rate that will
not exceed the individual dose limitations. The standards proposed
apply to all operations except mining within the fuel cycle, includ-
ing milling, conversion, enrichment, fuel fabrication, operation of
light-water-cooled reactors, fuel reprocessing, and transportation
of radioactive materials in connection with any of these operations.
A variance is proposed to permit temporary operation in the presence
of unusual operating conditions to assure the orderly delivery of
power.*
PLUTONIUM
EPA has been evaluating the environmental impact of contamination
by transuranium elements, and considering whether new guidelines or
standards are needed to protect the public. These nuclides include
long-lived, toxic materials which could constitute an irreversible
commitment to the environment and a health hazard to the population.
Produced in nuclear reactors, these isotopes include plutonium, which
is valuable as weapons material, as fuel, and as a power source for
space and medical applications. Small releases of these isotopes have
taken place, and on the basis of projection of present experience more
are anticipated in the future as ways of using these materials are in-
creased. (12) Among the problems of plutonium which are being consid-
ered are those dealing with its environmental transport and pathways
to man, especially the possible health effects resulting from inhala-
tion of particulate matter (28).
On February 14, 1974, the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
petitioned the Atomic Energy Commission (AEG) and the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency (EPA) requesting a reduction in the existing radiation
protection standards applicable to the internal exposure of man from
hot particles (particulates—plutonium and alpha-emitting actinides).
Although the retention of these particulates in the lung tissues may
not cause whole organ damage, it may cause rather intense damage local-
ized at the spot of retention. A report on "Radiation Standards for
*EPA published in the Federal Register on May 29, 1975 a notice of pro-
posed rulemaking for the Uranium Fuel Cycle for review and comment.
12
-------
Hot Particles" by A. R. Tamplin and T. B. Cochran was used as justifi-
cation for this petition. (15) The views expressed in the petition
will be considered in the rulemaking process along with other expressed
comments.
Since the release of long-lived radionuclides represents an irre-
versible, long-term environmental commitment, realistic control is only
practicable at the point of release. In dealing with this situation
the EPA has prepared a report evaluating the cumulative impact of re-
leases of plutonium and other long-lived radionuclides (38). They
published a "Notice of Intent to Review the Need for Establishing New
Rules for Plutonium and Transuranium Elements," and then held public
hearings in Washington, D. C., on December 10-11, 1974, and in Denver,
Colorado, on January 10, 1975, to permit public input to the standards
development program and to solicit technical information and viewpoints.
A technical "Statement of the Problem" and several analysis papers have
been prepared to define the scope of the problem.
The comprehensive work program that has been initiated includes
analysis of related research, engineering and operating programs, and
studies on actinides. The program plans include development of (a)
damage function-health effects model, (b) regulation based on "con-
trolled containment" philosophy, and (c) guidelines for cleanup and
restoration of contaminated areas. Future activities include develop-
ment of general guidelines for plutonium in the environment and, if
needed, actinide standards for plutonium recycle activities and for
plutonium fuel cycle liquid metal fast breeder reactors (LMFBR's)-
Close liaison on this activity has been established with a number of
other governmental agencies, especially ERDA and NRC through the es-
tablishment of an interagency task force.
"AS LOW AS PRACTICABLE"
On June 7, 1971, the Atomic Energy Commission announced proposed
numerical guidelines for design and limiting conditions for operation
of light-water-cooled nuclear power reactors (LWR) to keep radioactive
material in effluents released to unrestricted areas "as low as practi-
cable." (24) A final environmental statement (WASH-1258) concerning
this matter was then required and published during July 1973. For the
final guidelines, the AEC has announced that if the design objective and
operating limits established in Appendix I should prove to be incompat-
ible with any generally applicable environmental protection standard
established by EPA, the objectives and limits will be modified as neces-
sary.
13
-------
The "as low as practicable" concept as used in Appendix I, 10 CFR
Part 50 (24) means that radioactive material in effluents released from
LWR facilities to unrestricted areas must be kept as low as practicably
achievable taking into account the state of technology and the economics
of improvement in relation to benefits to the public health and safety
and to the utilization of atomic energy in the public interest. (22)
The design objective guides expressed as quantities and concentra-
tions of radioactive material in effluents (liquid or gaseous) are suf-
ficiently conservative to provide reasonable assurance that, for most
locations having environmental characteristics likely to be considered
acceptable by the AEC for a nuclear power reactor site, resultant in-
creases in radiation dose to individual members of the public living
at the site boundary will generally be less than 5 millirem per year.
(22) Higher quantities and concentrations than those suggested in the
design guides may be deemed to meet the requirement for keeping levels
of radioactivity in effluents as low as practicable if the applicant
provides reasonable assurance that the proposed higher quantities and/
or concentrations will not result in annual doses to any organ of an
individual in excess of 5 millirem from liquid or gaseous effluents.*
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, implemented
by Executive Order 11514 and the Council of Environmental Quality's
(CEQ's) Guidelines of August 1, 1973 (38 FR 20550), requires that all
agencies of the Federal Government prepare detailed environmental im-
pact statements on proposals for legislation and other major Federal
actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
NEPA requires that agencies include in the decision-making process ap-
propriate and careful consideration of all environmental effects of
proposed actions, explain potential environmental effects of proposed
*0n May 5, 1975, the NRC published a notice in the Federal Register
(Appendix 1, 10 CFR 50) of the design objective guides for discharges
of radioactive materials to the environment from individual reactors
to be effective July 1, 1975. These new guides are: Liquid Effluent-
3 mrem whole body; 10 mrem any organ; Gaseous Effluent-5 mrem whole
body; 15 mrem per reactor annual dose limit to skin; Radioactive Iodine
and Particulates-15 mrem per year dose to any organ, including thyroid,
from all pathways.
14
-------
actions and their alternatives for public understanding, avoid or
minimize adverse effects of proposed actions, and restore or enhance
environmental quality as much as possible. The EPA in reviewing en-
vironmental impact statements follows the directive of the NEPA and
the requirements of section 309 of the Clean Air Act of 1970.
Four major environmental impact statements (EIS) were issued by
the AEG during 1974. The issues were (a) waste disposal (WASH-1539)
(19), (b) the use of recycled plutonium mixed oxide fuels (GESMO) in
light-water-cooled reactors (WASH-1327) (21), (c) the development of
the liquid metal fast breeder reactor (LMFBR) (WASH-1535) (25), and
(d) waste management operations at the Hanford Reservation, Richland,
Washington, (WASH-1538) (20). Additional EIS's submitted to EPA for
review and comment included light water reactors, a fuel reprocessing
plant, uranium mills, and other related facilities.
MANAGEMENT OF COMMERCIAL HIGH-LEVEL AND TRANSURANIUM-CONTAMINATED
RADIOACTIVE WASTE (WASH-1539)
The AEC draft environmental impact statement (EIS) WASH-1539 was
published (19) during September 1974. The basic purpose of the draft
statement was to assess the environmental consequences of developing
an engineered surface storage facility for retrievable commercial high-
level wastes (RSSF)* of evaluating geologic formations and sites for
the purpose of developing a geologic pilot plant for the permanent dis-
posal of these wastes; and of providing retrievable storage for commer-
cial transuranium-contaminated waste pending availability of permanent
disposal. This EIS included statements on such points as environmental
impact and unavoidable adverse environmental effects, alternatives in
sites and disposal techniques, resource commitments, and a cost-benefit
analysis. The desirability of Federal ownership and control of commer-
cially generated high-level transuranium-contaminated waste was dis-
cussed. It was concluded that the best solution for the development
and operation of a permanent disposal system was to require Federal
control, even though no specific permanent system was identified.
*Plans for development of an interim retrievable surface storage facil-
ity (RSSF) have since been terminated by the Energy Research and Develop-
ment Administration (ERDA). Efforts are now being redirected toward
long term waste disposal methodology.
15
-------
Interim above ground storage was identified by EPA as a secondary
concern, compared to the ultimate waste disposal question. The AEC
Retrievable Surface Storage Facility (RSSF) proposed in WASH 1539 (19)
was not the only form of interim storage or "insurance" that should
have been evaluated. Other options, such as long term storage of spent
fuel at the reactors or in other facilities with no reprocessing, should
have been considered, as well as extended storage of the solidified high
level waste at the reprocessing facility where it was generated. EPA
believed it necessary to consider all such alternatives because t^ie
scope of the waste management problem may be significantly amplified
in the future if the proposal to use recycled plutonium fuel in LWR's
and if the program for developing the fast breeder reactor fuel cycle
are pursued.
AEC's primary emphasis in the EIS was placed on the development of
a retrievable surface storage facility (RSSF). EPA concluded that an
environmentally suitable facility could probably be designed and sited.
Several EIS reviewers made the point, however, that the draft statement
did not contain sufficient information to support any specific site or
storage technique.
Most reviewers felt that the primary concern of any waste manage-
ment program should be the development of an acceptable ultimate dis-
posal technique. In general, it was felt that unless it can be demon-
strated that at least one acceptable method for ultimate disposal, eith-
er retrievable or inretrievable, can be developed in the reasonable near
future, nuclear energy programs will be in serious jeopardy as a viable
energy option. Further, because of the existing AEC weapon production
waste, the U.S. already has been committed to a sizeable ultimate dis-
posal program, and there is no going back. The primary concern here
is not which specific ultimate disposal method should be followed, but
rather, assurance that at least one method does exist that is satisfac-
tory from an environmental standpoint. Once this is accomplished, trade-
offs between methods and timing of implementation can be made.
While it is recognized that the generation of power by nuclear means
offers certain benefits from the environmental viewpoint, the question
of how to manage properly the hazardous waste produced during such power
generation remains one of the major unresolved problems. EPA is espec-
ially concerned with the long-term nature of the potential environmental
hazards presented by these wastes. Complicating this problem is the fact
that physical and administrative controls for this waste will have to be
exercised over the millenia of the future. With the recent policy re-
direction, (placing priority on the ultimate waste disposal problem in-
stead of the RSSF and other forms of interim disposal) it appears that a
comprehensive review of the total waste management program will be forth-
coming in the near future. EPA believes there is reasonable cause for
hope that an acceptable solution will emerge.
16
-------
GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT MIXED OXIDE FUELS (GESMO) WASH-1327
In August 1974, the AEC published a four volume draft Generic
Environmental Statement on Mixed Oxides (GESMO) Fuels for use in light
water reactors (LWR) (21). The principal issues addressed by the AEC
staff were (a) the acceptability of the environmental impacts of plu-
tonium recycling in light water reactors based on cost-benefit-risk
analysis, (b) the safety of using mixed oxide fuels in a LWR, and (c)
the achievement of adequate levels of protection for facilities and
special nuclear materials.
The use of recycled plutonium in reactors will require licensing
by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), even in LWRs already li-
censed for full power operation with uranium fuel. Comments from the
reviews of NRC environmental impact statements for the fabrication
and the use of mixed plutonium and uranium oxide fuels in LWRs will
provide information necessary to make a decision on the possible need
to amend the proposed EPA Uranium Fuel Cycle Standard to control en-
vironmental releases from plutonium recycle facilities.
EPA stated that the GESMO EIS lacked sufficient information con-
cerning the behavior of plutonium in the environment to allow an in-
dependent dependable decision to be made on the acceptability of the
potential environmental impact.
Moreover, EPA's preliminary findings (4) were that the implement-
ation of plutonium recycle on an industry-wide basis appeared to be
marginally acceptable from a cost-benefit balance. The analysis in-
dicated that the timeliness of the program implementation did not ap-
pear to be critical. With the application of revised cost-benefit
analysis the timeliness might be even less critical, and the cost/
benefit balance even more marginal. It also appeared that the program
could result in some environmental advantages. Within this perspective,
the principal conclusions reached on the plutonium recycle program were
that (a) before a full scale mixed oxide program is implemented, a com-
mitment should be made to an acceptable safeguards program, including
the completion of the necessary selection of a procedure, its develop-
ment, and the securing of regulatory or legislative approvals for its
implementation, including funding mechanisms; and (b) before actual
full-scale mixed oxide fabrication and fueling of light water reactors
is commenced, the safeguards program should be implemented, the ultimate
waste disposal concerns about transuranic wastes should be resolved, and
an accident analysis of specific plutonium recycle reactor designs
should be completed for each proposed application.
17
-------
LIQUID METAL FAST BREEDER REACTOR (LMFBR) WASH-1535
The Atomic Energy Commission prepared a draft environmental im-
pact statement (March 14, 1974) (25) designated as WASH-1535, stating
that commercial utilization of the liquid metal fast breeder reactor
(LMFBR) is a promising method for meeting a substantial portion of
the Nation's future energy needs, and the projected total impact on
the environment is low and therefore acceptable. For economic reas-
ons, the development of the LMFBR should proceed expeditiously in
order to achieve early commercial introduction. The Environmental
Protection Agency was not able to verify independently the timeliness
of the recommendation for early commercial development or to assess
fully the cost-environmental risk issues of the LMFBR program or other
alternatives. The following are summaries of the areas in which EPA
recommended additional studies to verify acceptability of the con-
cept (18) .
• AEC planning for the safeguards program rested on
the assumption that whatever measures are deemed
necessary can and will be provided within the con-
straints of program economics. Information in the
draft statement did not clarify sufficiently the
constraints that may be imposed by limitations on
the cost or resources.
• The final statement should indicate the degree of
confidence that can be attached to the projected
risks regarding health effects associated with
plutonium, so that this factor can be considered
in evaluating the potential impact on public health.
Most current evaluations of potential health effects
from inhaled plutonium particulates are based on a
uniform distribution of radiation dose to the lung.
However, a concern about the adequacy of such an
approach has been expressed by the International
Commission on Radiation Protection, EPA, and by
others.
• The final statement should indicate what counter
measures are being considered by the Commission, in
case further health effects research indicates that
non-uniform distribution of radiation dose from
transuranium elements leads to significantly great-
er estimates of health effects for humans than those
presented in the draft statement.
18
-------
• Because the draft statement was not sufficiently
quantitative in the area of reactor safety, EPA
was unable to form an opinion on the adequacy of
the approaches to be taken in many important areas.
• The final statement should provide a meaningful
comparison of LMFBR risks relative to those from
light water reactors, or else it should indicate
plans to quantify accident risks.
In comments on the cost/benefit analysis methodology of the pro-
posed Final Impact Statement, EPA questioned the use of a low discount
rate and certain empirical assumptions such as capital cost estimates.
Sufficient uncertainties exist in the projected demand for electrical
energy to make premature a full commitment to commercialization of the
LMFBR with a highly fixed time schedule. If additional time were avail-
able, it would provide ERDA with an opportunity to re-evaluate the de-
velopment program to provide a better environmental protection. The
AEC's assumption with respect to energy demand and other significant
factors, as well as its conclusion regarding the timing of LMFBR com-
mercialization, should be critically reviewed throughout the develop-
ment program. These reviews may indicate that the date of commercial-
ization necessary from an economic perspective may not be as presently
calculated nor as critical as ERDA assumed.
Under current procedures of the National Environmental Policy Act,
the present review process may constitute the only comprehensive analy-
sis that will be made on the LMFBR as a national program. Future re-
views may well be on a plant-by-plant basis, as is now done with light
water reactor plants and associated facilities. The current LMFBR pro-
gram could potentially have far-reaching economic and social implications,
including large-scale commitment of national resources and possible ad-
verse environmental impacts. Therefore, it is essential that the en-
vironmental statement provide sufficient information to enable informed
conclusions to be reached regarding the desirability of this national
program in relation to alternative programs for accomplishing the same
objective.
A public meeting was held August 13, 1974, between the Atomic Ener-
gy Commission and the Environmental Protection Agency on the Liquid Metal
Fast Breeder Reactor Environmental Impact Statement (41). This meeting
was called by mutual agreement between EPA and AEC in order to keep the
public fully informed of the discussions that have taken place between
the staffs of these two agencies on problems associated with the LMFBR.
These discussions have provided the public with an opportunity to comment
meaningfully on this project. The subject areas which were discussed
were plutonium toxicity, transportation of radioactive materials, radio-
active waste disposal, reactor plant safety, and cost benefit analysis.
19
-------
The Atomic Energy Commission has since prepared a proposed final
environmental impact statement document which addresses the questions
raised above on the draft environmental impact statement, and this has
been submitted for federal agency review.
WASTE MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS AT THE HANFOKD RESERVATION (WASH-1538)
The purpose of this environmental statement, released during Sep-
tember 1974, was to reassess the environmental impact of the Hanford
Reservation Waste Management Operations in order to assure that further
major changes in the operational programs would have minimum adverse
environmental consequences (20). In addition, an attempt was made to
account for those environmental consequences that may not have been
fully evaluated at the outset or at each stage of the waste management
program. This statement is the evaluation of a long-existing program
and consequently the results are presented as of a particular date,
December 31, 1972. Preliminary data for 1973 were included where avail-
able.
In summary, the report anticipates that the quantities of radio-
active materials released to the environment from future Hanford oper-
ations will be less than the 1972 quantities. This is a result of
modifications and construction of new facilities for effluent control
and curtailment of production activities. The primary anticipated
benefit of the Hanford Waste Management Operations Program is the con-
tinued isolation of significant quantities of radioactive and other
waste materials from man's environment. At the end of the year (1974)
this environmental impact statement was under review by the federal
agencies concerned. (31) <
ENEWETAK EIS (16)
Enewetak Atoll in the Marshall Islands served as the primary site
of U.S. nuclear weapons testing in the Pacific from 1948 through 1958.
In 1972, the U.S. announced it was prepared to release Enewetak to the
Trust Territory Government with the expectation that a radiological
cleanup and rehabilitation program would be necessary to render the
atoll suitable for human rehabilitation. The Enewetak people currently
reside on Ujelang Atoll which is more than three times smaller in land
area than Enewetak. During late 1972 and for most of 1973, the AEC
sponsored an extensive radiological survey to assess the conditon of
Enewetak. The results, published in March 1974, form the basis for
specific recommendations for cleanup and rehabitation, which are to be
20
-------
conducted by the Department of Defense and the Department of the
Interior, respectively. An important step in the AEC's deliberations
on its recommendations was a series of presentations in September
involving the Enewetak people. These presentations were made in con-
junction with the issuance by the Defense Nuclear Agency of the draft
environmental impact statement for the Cleanup, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement of the Enewetak Atoll—Marshall Islands. EPA's primary
comment was directed to assuring that waste disposal methods for plu-
tonium would be adequate to assure isolation of the material from the
biosphere.
FUEL REPROCESSING
Experience to date with spent fuel reprocessing plants shows that
there are environmental problems associated with the discharge of ra-
dioactive materials that need to be resolved by proper plant design
and operation. There has not been a private irradiated fuel reprocess-
ing capacity since early 1972, when Nuclear Fuel Service, Incorporated
closed down its West Valley, New York facility for major changes. Com-
mercial operation is not scheduled to be restarted there until 1978.
Allied-General Nuclear Service's Barnwell (South Carolina) Nuclear Fuel
Plant plans to be the first, with commercial operation due late in 1978.
As a result of detailed study of design and preoperational testing,
General Electric Company announced on July 8, 1974 that the start of
operation of the Midwest Fuel Recovery Plant at Morris, Illinois, is
indefinite. The plant has been expected to be placed in operation dur-
ing 1974. In these circumstances, several industry actions were taken
to increase storage capacity for spent fuel removed from power reactors
and destined for reprocessing (16). The need for reprocessing spent
fuel is being questioned from an economic standpoint.
RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT FIELD STUDY EFFORTS
During 1974 several ORP funded field study efforts were continued
or initiated which address the problems attendant to the disposal of
"low-level" radioactive wastes in State-licensed burial grounds. One
of the primary influences which led ORP to devote professional and finan-
cial resources to this area was the Radioactive Waste Management Task
Force of the National Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors.
It is through this Task Force that representatives of the States, which
either presently have such a waste disposal facility or may have one in
the future, can identify individual and mutual problems and seek help
from the federal government. Several past ORP in-house, contract and
field efforts have had their "birth" in just this way.
21
-------
Due to the natural processes involved in considering the potential
environmental impact of these burial activities, most of the field stu-
dies take over a year to complete their experimental phase. One such
study (to investigate the waste retention capability and hydrogeological
characteristics of the state-licensed burial ground in New York) has com-
pleted its data collection and preliminary analysis, interpretation, and
report preparation efforts. A final published report should be available
before the end of 1975.
A similar field study to investigate the state-licensed site in
Kentucky was initiated in 1974. To augment the technical capabilities
of the state, OKP, through an interagency agreement, has obtained the
services of the U.S. Geological Survey to provide expert assistance in
characterizing the hydrologic and geologic characteristics of the site
and its surroundings. A unique feature of the operations at this site
is the use of an evaporator to routinely treat leachate, generated by
the interaction of groundwater and the wastes. A special portion of
the overall study in Kentucky is being focussed on this aspect of the
burial site operation. It is being conducted by ORP's Radiochemistry
and Nuclear Engineering Facility located in Cincinnati, Ohio. A re-
port on this effort should be available by the end of 1975.
Additional field study efforts are being finalized with state agen-
cies in New York to provide more detailed evaluations of conditions at
that site. These efforts are expected to start in the fall of 1975 and
result in technical reports in about 18 months. The studies are designed
to continue collection of data for several years. Updated reports and
evaluations will be prepared and published periodically during that per-
iod.
NUCLEAR FACILITY ACCIDENT PROBLEMS
RASMUSSEN STUDY (WASH-1400)
The Rasmussen Study (29) was a reactor safety study performed under
the independent direction of Professor Norman C. Rasmussen of MIT and
sponsored by the AEC. A draft was published in August 1974. The pur-
pose was to estimate the public risks that could result from potential
accidents in commercial nuclear power plants of the type now in use
(such as pressurized water and boiling water reactors). The risks had
to be estimated, rather than measured, because to date there have been
no nuclear commercial power reactor accidents which have led to major
release of radioactivity or injury to any member of the public. The
methods used to develop these estimates are based on those developed by
22
-------
the Department of Defense and the National Aeronautics and Space Admin-
istration in the last ten years. The estimated risks were then com-
pared to risks to which the public is already exposed from other causes.
Study Findings. The basic conclusion of this study is that the
risks to the public from potential accidents in nuclear power plants
are very small. This is based on several study conclusions: (a) the
consequences of potential reactor accidents are no larger, and in many
cases, are much smaller than those of non-nuclear accidents; (b) the
likelihood of reactor accidents is much smaller than many non-nuclear
accidents having similar consequences; (c) the greatest risk is the re-
lease of radioactive fission products, such as iodine, xenon, and stron-
tium from the reactor core. A large quantity of such fission products
might be released through an accident which causes the reactor core to
melt. The report indicates that it would take such an accident, com-
bined with other unfavorable and unlikely circumstances, to produce
measurable health effects. It was calculated that for each year of
reactor operation, there is 1 chance in about 170,000 that such a cbm-
bination of events would occur.
According to the study, while a reactor accident might cause imme-
diate death or injury to persons in the reactor's proximity, the chances
of consequences to personal health of large numbers of people are ex-
tremely small. Also a serious nuclear accident would cause no physical
damage to property beyond the plant site other than contamination with
radioactive material. However, the principal concern should be that of
environmental monitoring in the accident vicinity to insure that the
amount of radioactivity ingested remains small. Such monitoring should
be continued for one to two months following an accident until radioac-
tive iodine, the nuclide of greatest concern, has decayed to an insig-
nificant level. The study indicates that little monitoring would be
required after this time period, and that the production of thyroid
nodules is the only anticipated long term health effect which would
occur at rates significantly higher than normal.
Response to the Study. There has been a large response to the Ras-
mussen Study, both by government agencies and private groups. Some of
the major EPA comments on the draft Rasmussen Report are summarized here
in the following paragraphs.
The study is innovative in both its concept and methodology, and
provides a forward step in risk assessment of nuclear power generators.
The general methodologies and rationale developed in the study to de-
termine risk levels appear to provide a meaningful basis for obtaining
useful assessments of accident risks of nuclear power plants, but it is
possible that several sources of potential accidents were underestimated
or overlooked.
23
-------
Appendix VI (environmental consequences) was found by EPA to be
incomplete in a number of respects. For example, if the recommenda-
tions of the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) Report
(8) are followed, in certain cases the consequences estimated in the
study may be low by factors of 2 and 5. In addition, the evacuation
model assumed for the consequences calculation in the reference case
also appears somewhat overly optimistic. Based on the information
presented in the study, this could increase consequences by at most
a factor of 2 to 4 (i.e., no evacuation). The combination of these
factors, therefore, indicate that the draft WASH-1400 may have sig-
nificantly underestimated the consequences associated with the "high"
release accident sequences.
Although the study indicates that no absolute judgment on nuclear
power plant acceptability was intended, the comparative risk approach
highlighted in the summary may well imply an acceptability judgment to
the average reader. The Rasmussen Study has estimated probabilities
of various kinds of nuclear risks. However, the problem remains to de-
termine the levels of such risk acceptable to society which was not
included, nor should it have been, in the original study. Thus, the
quantification of risk determined by the study and implications of
their acceptability should be clearly differentiated to eliminate any
potential confusion.
The second phase of EPA's review includes an in depth review of
selected aspects of the study with technical assistance being provided
through a contract. This second phase is expected to be concluded in
the fall of 1975 when a report is to be released detailing all of EPA
comments.
EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANNING ACTIVITIES
Federal Interagenoy Agreement. The responsibilities of certain
Federal agencies in connection with nuclear incident planning for fixed
facilities, including provision of planning assistance to state and
local government, were initially defined in an Interagency Agreement
signed in 1973. The Office of Emergency Preparedness, Atomic Energy
Commission, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Health,
Education and Welfare, and Defense Civil Preparedness Agency are sig-
natories to the agreement (2). Since then, a revised draft (43) of
the interagency agreement is being circulated for comment. This has
been dictated by the dissolution of AEC and formation of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Energy Research and Development
Administration (ERDA); and also by the need to clarify responsibilities
among Federal agencies in connection with nuclear incident emergency
24
-------
planning at the Federal level for fixed nuclear facilities and trans-
portation incidents; and for providing assistance to State and local
governments for emergency planning related to such incidents.
Protective Action Guides. A protective action is an action or
measure taken to avoid the exposure to radiation from inadvertent re-
lease of radioactive materials. The term Protective Action Guide (PAG)
is defined as the projected absorbed dose to individuals in the general
population that warrants protective action following a contaminating
event (31, 35). The projected dose is the dose that would be received
by individuals in the population group from the contaminating event if
no protective action were taken. If the projected dose exceeds the PAG,
protective action is indicated. The nature of the protective action,
under any specific circumstance, may vary depending on the nature of
competing risks. The preferred protective action may not be called for
in all circumstances. In some cases, a variety of protective actions
may be indicated.
In the event of a nuclear accident with subsequent releases of ra-
dioactive material, there will be a hazard from airborne material and
from contamination of foodstuffs and property. The three most critical
pathways of exposure then would be (a) direct exposure from cloud or
plume passage, (b) exposure from foodstuffs, and (c) exposure from con-
taminated property or equipment. These pathways and others are being
investigated to determine appropriate PAGs. (31, 35, 32)
The protective measures considered appropriate for achieving the
objectives of the Protective Action Guides include evacuation, shelter-
ing, prophylaxis, respiratory protection, and controlled access. Evac-
uation is effective for protection against any radiation exposure. Shel-
tering is considered, but it is probably ineffective against continuous
gaseous releases after about two hours in the absence of shelters with
ventilation control. Prophylaxis may be necessary to provide blocking
of the thyroid; however, because of some potential side effects, this
may not be advisable. If appropriate, apparatus can be provided for
respiratory protection which can be effective. Finally, controlled ac-
cess to affected areas is effective in preventing additional members of
the public from being significantly exposed.
EPA has developed recommended Protective Action Guides for emergen-
cy response for whole body external exposure to airborne radioactive
materials and are summarized in Table 2-2. These guidelines represent
numerical values as to when, under the conditions most likely to occur,
intervention is recommended to avoid radiation exposure that would
otherwise result from the incident. Due to the ability of the thyroid
to concentrate iodines, the thyroid dose due to inhaling radioiodine
25
-------
Table 2-2 Protective Action Guides for Whole Body
Exposure to Airborne Radioactive Materials
Projected Whole Body
Population at Risk Gamma Dose (rem)
(a)
Nonessential personnel 1 to 5
Emergency workers 25
Lifesaving activities 75
(a)
When ranges are shown, the lowest value should be used if
there are no major local constraints in providing protection
at that level, especially to sensitive populations. Local
constraints may make lower values impractical to use, but in
no case should the higher value be exceeded in determining
the need for protective action.
26
-------
may be hundreds of times greater than the corresponding whole body
external dose. The Protective Action Guide recommended by EPA for
thyroid dose due to inhalation is shown in Table 2-3.
Within the framework of these guides, it is assumed that: (a)
the PAGs apply to acute exposure from a gaseous cloud released to the
atmosphere from a nuclear reactor accident; (b) the PAGs will not be
applied to large communities (e.g., over 200,000 population) for which
reasonable estimates cannot be made of evacuation times, evacuation
distances, or the health risks related to massive movement of people;
(c) the PAGs apply only to the taking of initial protective actions
within the first 2 to 4 days after an accident, leaving decisions as
to later protective actions or cessation of actions under specific
situations to the responsible officials; and (d) insufficient infor-
mation about the source term and probable duration of exposure preclude
quantification of shelter as an effective protection action.
EPA Manual of Protective Action Guides and Protective Actions for
Nuclear Incidents (24). This manual has been prepared to provide prac-
tical guidance to State, local, and other officials on criteria to use
in planning for radiological emergencies that could present a hazard
to the public. It is organized to provide a perspective for protective
actions and guidance for planning and implementation of protective
actions to protect the public in the event of a nuclear incident. This
is followed by chapters dealing with Protective Action Guides for spe-
cific exposure pathways and time periods. The application of Protective
Actions Guides and Protective Actions is being developed separately for
various categories, such as (a) exposure from foodstuffs or water, (b)
exposure from material deposited on property or equipment, (c) exposure
to airborne radioactive materials, (d) foodstuffs and water contamination,
(3) contaminated property or equipment, and (f) transportation incidents.
EPA has sent the draft PAGs and Manual for Protective Actions for
Nuclear Incidents to other agencies, industry, and States for their use
and comments.
PRICE ANDERSON ACT (1957)
The primary purpose of the Price-Anderson Act was to provide the
public and the nuclear industry indemnification protection in the event
of a major accident at a nuclear facility which caused public conse-
quences, including personal injury and property damage. The "federal
insurance" was necessary since there was no actuarial base on which to
establish insurance needs or premiums. Since Price-Anderson establishes,
in essence, "no fault" protection, an individual may recover damages
27
-------
Table 2-3 Protective Action Guides for Thyroid Dose
Due to Inhalation from a Passing Plume
Projected Thyroid Dose
Population at Risk (rem)
Nonessential personnel 5-25
Emergency workers 125
Lifesaving activities (a)
(a)
No specific upper limit is given for thyroid exposure
since in the extreme case complete thyroid loss might
be an acceptable penalty for a life saved. However,
this should not be necessary if respirators and/or
thyroid protection for rescue personnel are available
as a result of adequate planning.
28
-------
without having to resort to the tort system of determining liability
for damages in the State courts. The law was enacted in 1957 and re-
newed in 1965. Until August 1, 1977, the protection provided by the
present law is 560 million dollars—95 million by industry and 465
million by the government. In May 1974, the Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy (JCAE) held hearings on the proposed legislation submitted by
the AEC to modify and extend the provisions of the Price-Anderson Act.
The bill (H. R. 15323) would extend the Act for five years with gradual
phase out of government support.
President Ford vetoed an extension of the Act in October 1974
based on a technicality which he believed made the bill unconstitu-
tional. This technicality was a part of an amendment, which would
allow Congress to eliminate the provisions of the Act by resolution
passed within 30 days after submission of a Joint Committee Report
on the Reactor Safety Study (Rasmussen Report). In the President's
view, he was, thus, expected to give his approval prior to Congress-
ional approval, contrary to the procedures established by the Con-
stitution.
SAFEGUARDS (16)
In its reviews of AEC Environmental Statements concerning pluto-
nium utilization, EPA has commented that a commitment should be made
to an acceptable safeguards program prior to initiation of a pluto-
nium recycle program; and that such a safeguards program should be
implemented prior to actual full scale mixed oxide fuel fabrication
and fueling of light water reactors. In addition, the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) has suggested a number of steps it con-
siders necessary to bring the safeguards proposals in the AEC generic
environmental statement on mixed-oxide fuels (GESMO) into conformance
with the National Environmental Policy Act.
In turn NRC provisional views indicated that its decision on wheth-
er to license wide-scale use of plutonium recycle fuel in light water
reactors might not be forthcoming until mid-1978. This would permit de-
velopment of draft and final environmental statements on alternative
safeguards programs, including cost/benefit analyses, prior to approval
of wide-scale use of such fuel. Many pro and con comments have been
received by NRC and it appears that the procedures to be used in reach-
ing a final decision on wide-scale plutonium recycle will be developed
by NRC in 1975. The NRC provisional views were responsive to many con-
cerns expressed, including those of EPA and CEQ.
29
-------
NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
Under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) of 1974,
as amended, discharges of pollutants to navigable waters require a
water permit to be issued by EPA. In a suit filed in the United
States District Court in February 1974 for the District of Colorado
by the Colorado Public Interest Research Group, Incorporated (plain-
tiffs) versus Russell Train, Administrator, Environmental Protection
Agency, defendant, the plaintiff raised the legal issue that all
radioactive effluents are subject to the regulations pursuant to the
1972 amendment to the FWPCA. The District Court ruled in favor of
EPA. Subsequently, on appeal of the lower court decision, the United
States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit on December 9, 1974 reversed
the decision.
This case—known as the Ft. St. Vrain Nuclear Power Plant de-
cision—has led EPA to a series of measures designed to develop a
basis by which to comply with the decision, pending outcome of the
appeal to the Supreme Court. For this purpose ORP will develop water
effluent guidelines as required to comply with the court decision in
support of the water permit program. This requires EPA to (a) issue
permits in a timely manner, (b) ensure permit conditions reflect qual-
ity technical considerations, and (c) minimize duplication of Federal
regulatory restrictions. Priorities for meeting these objectives have
been established as a function of the magnitude of the impact, poten-
tial for delaying national energy requirements, availability of tech-
nical data, and the status of pending permit applications. Because of
the court decision, first priority will be given to nuclear power re-
actors. Priorities for other facilities have been established and
plans are being developed to implement the program for such facilities
depending on resource allocation. This program also has the respon-
sibility for monitoring and for assuring overall compliance. In
addition, EPA may be required to list some radioactive materials as
toxic substances under Section 307 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act FWPCA) and designate such materials as hazardous under
Section 311.
*In April 1975 the Solicitor General, on behalf of the Environmental
Protection Agency and its Administrator, submitted a petition to the
Supreme Court of the United States for a writ of certiorari to review
the judgments of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Cir-
cuit and subsequently the Supreme Court in June 1975 agreed to review
these decisions.
30
-------
ADVANCED REACTOR CONCEPTS
In addition to light water reactors and high temperature gas
reactors there are several other reactor concepts that are being
pursued. The concepts of nuclear energy centers (15) and offshore
floating nuclear power plants are being investigated (16), as well
as the use of Light Water Breeder reactors, gas cooled breeder re-
actors, molten salt breeder reactors, and fusion.
NUCLEAR ENERGY CENTERS (44)
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is studying the nuclear energy
center concept and is surveying and evaluating potential sites, as
mandated by Section 207 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974. The
survey is to be conducted in cooperation with other interested Federal,
State, and local agencies. The views of interested persons including
electric utilities, citizens groups, and others shall be solicited and
considered [207(a)]. The survey shall include an evaluation of the
environmental impact likely to result from construction and operation
of such nuclear energy centers. The energy centers will include 10 to
40 reactors and associated fuel fabrication, fuel processing, and other
facilities located within an area of 20 to 75 square miles. A report
of the results is due to Congress and CEQ not later than one year from
enactment, which would make it due October 1975.
OFFSHORE FLOATING NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS
This concept continues to be developed by Offshore Power Systems
(16). This Westinghouse enterprise, formed in August of 1972 to design
and manufacture offshore nuclear plants, has announced plans to build
a completely new shipyard facility at Jacksonville, Florida. Floating
nuclear plants would be constructed in the manufacturing facility on an
assembly-line basis. An offshore floating nuclear power plant is basic-
ally a nuclear plant of standardized design constructed on a floating
platform foundation in a shipyard type manufacturing facility. The
completed plant would then be towed to a site possibly several miles
from shore, and permanently moored inside a protective breakwater. An
underwater cable would transmit the electric power from the plant to a
shore distribution station. This plant concept avoids several problems
of land based plants, but raises new questions of environmental safety
and security. EPA is participating in the regulatory aspects of off-
shore floating nuclear power plants.
31
-------
LIGHT WATER BREEDER REACTORS
The light water breeder reactor program is designed to confirm
the capability of breeding in a pressurized water reactor through the
in-plant testing of a breeder reactor core. The core is being de-
signed and developed by Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory at Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, under the naval reactors program of the AEC. Successful
operation of the breeding core would show that it is feasible to in-
stall breeder cores in existing and future pressurized water reactor
plants and would confirm the technology of breeding in a light water
reactor using thorium. The core design employs a thorium-uranium-233
fuel system within a seed blanket core configuration to achieve breed-
ing. Thorium is plentiful and easily available. By using it as the
nuclear fuel material, light water breeder reactors, if successful,
could substantially extend the nations energy resources.
Preparation of an environmental impact statement on the light
water breeder reactor program is underway. Suggestions have been re-
ceived regarding the content of the statement. The AEC has announced
that a public hearing will be held following issuance of the draft en-
vironmental impact statement. The final statement will be issued be-
fore a decision is made to start operation of the Shippingport light
water breeder reactor core.
OTHER REACTOR CONCEPTS
Molten Salt Breeder Reactor. The AEC has a limited basic tech-
nology program for the development of the Molten Salt Breeder Reactor.
The molten salt breeder concept is a high-temperature, thermal-neutron
breeder that would operate on the thorium-uranium-233 fuel cycle. The
molten fuel salt consists of uranium and thorium fluorides dissolved
in fluorides of beryllium and lithium. Continuous fuel processing is
a basic feature of the system.
Work is continuing in the major areas of materials development,
continuous fuel processing, and tritium (hydrogen-3) control. Oak Ridge
Laboratory is responsible for a major portion of this research and in-
dustry is involved as required.
Fusion. All present nuclear power plant reactors use a fission
process which entails the splitting of atoms (e.g., uranium or pluto-
nium). An alternate source would be fusion power, which is achieved
by harnessing the energy released by the merging of the nuclei of light-
weight elements. A number of fusion reactions are known. However, the
32
-------
reaction of the hydrogen isotopes deuterium (hydrogen-2) and tritium
(hydrogen-3) is regarded as the most likely basis for the first com-
mercial fusion power plants. The isotope deuterium is in essentially
unlimited supply in the world's rivers and oceans. The processes by
which it may be extracted are well known. Tritium is not found na-
turally and must be created by a breeding process (neutron absorption
in lithium). The fertile resource, lithium—the lightest known metal—
is also available in large supply. Hence, availability of the basic
fuel is not a matter of concern.
The AEC supports two programs (16) intended to employ the nuclear
fusion process for civilian electrical power production. The con-
trolled thermonuclear research program involves the use of magnetic
fields to confine the reacting fuel. The laser fusion research pro-
gram emphasizes the use of high-energy, short-pulsed lasers focussed
on a suitable thermonuclear target. In the United States, KMS Indus-
tries, Incorporated independently sponsors a laser fusion program (14).
There are a few other private research groups (Lawrence Livermore Lab-
oratory, Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, and Sandia Laboratories)
working on such programs; these are government sponsored.
Besides realizing substantial progress during recent years, creat-
ors of current concepts for fusion power plants foresee low environmental
impact. Fusion power plants will not have many of the potential environ-
mental problems associated with nuclear fission reactors. Long-lived
fission products will not be produced in a fusion power reactor and de-
signs will reduce the generation of significant quantities of neutron
activation products. However, they will be produced in the structural
components in large quantities. These parts will have to be periodic-
ally replaced due to the high energy neutron flux effects. Nuclear run-
away is not possible and reactor meltdowns can be avoided because of the
low latent heat content in the fuel, containment wall, and shielding.
OTHER NUCLEAR APPLICATIONS
NUCLEAR WEAPONS TESTING
The major issue concerning nuclear weapons testing is the continued
atmospheric testing by countries not signatory to the Test Ban Treaty,
as well as the underground testing by any party. On July 3, 1974, the
United States and the Soviet Union signed a treaty on the limitation of
underground nuclear tests. If ratified by Congress, beginning March 31,
1976, each country will be restricted to conducting tests having a yield
of less than 150 kilotons.
33
-------
The United States and the Soviet Union have not conducted atmos-
pheric tests since 1962, but a small portion of the remaining radio-
active materials which had been introduced into the stratosphere from
pre-1963, large-scale, high-yield tests is still deposited annually,
and the measured low levels in the environment have become constant.
The French and Chinese have continued to conduct atmospheric tests
and have added small but measurable quantities of fallout in the con-
tinental United States. Underground testing programs were continued
on the part of the United States and the USSR, while one was initiated
by India in a 1974 detonation.
The detonations of nuclear devices have been used for both mili-
tary and peaceful purposes. Those nuclear detonations detected and re-
ported during 1974 (16, 42) are included in Table 2-4.
PEACEFUL APPLICATIONS OF NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVES
A number of possible uses of nuclear explosives have been suggest-
ed for industrial applications. These include excavation, natural gas
stimulation, recovery of oil from oil shale, mineral recovery, under-
ground storage, and waste and water management. Experimental programs
in some of these areas have progressed to some extent, but in general
the programs are in a hold status at the present time due to problems
of economic feasibility, impact on the environment, and potential risk
to consumers.
In the use of nuclear explosives for peaceful purposes, there is
a question as to whether the environmental impact and risk of the nu-
clear program would be balanced by any benefits gained. Alternate (non-
nuclear) methods of increasing the production of certain natural re-
sources appear feasible. Another issue is the question of the levels
of radioactivity in products produced through nuclear methods and con-
sideration of the risk-benefit for consumers of these products.
The initial peaceful underground experiments, Projects Gasbuggy
(El Paso Natural Gas Company, New Mexico, 1967) and Rulison (Austral
Oil Company, Colorado, 1969), which were technologically successful,
were followed by the Project Rio Blanco gas stimulation experiment
with three simultaneous detonations on May 17, 1973, in western Colo-
rado. The three 30 kiloton nuclear explosives created a fracture sys-
tem and three chimneys of broken rock which act as large underground
gas collectors from which the natural gas can be produced. Unfortunate-
ly, the top two fracture patterns did not connect well enough to permit
gas to flow from all three chimneys into the initial reentry well, thus
requiring a second reentry well into the bottom chimney. This was com-
pleted in October 1974, and gas production from this zone is being
34
-------
Table 2-4 Nuclear Detonations During 1974
Date (1974)
30 January
27 February
15 May
17 May
30 May
17 June
19 June
10 July
14 August
14 August
29 August
30 August
26 September
16 October
2 November
Country
USSR
US
USSR
India
USSR
China
UK-US*
US
US
USSR
USSR
US
US
USSR
USSR
Test Area/NAME
Semipalatinsk
Nevada/LATIR
Semipalatinsk
Rajaschar desert
Semipalatinsk
Lop Nor
Nevada /MING BLADE
Nevada/ESCABOSA
Nevada /PUYE
Tazovskiy Peninsula
Novaya Zemlya
Nevada/PORTMANTEAU
Nevada/ STANYAN
S emip a la t ins k
Novaya Zemlya
Yield Range
(kilotons)
20-200
20-200
20-200
20
20-200
20-1000
20-200
20-200
20
20-200
1000-3000
20-200
20-200
20-200
3000-4000
*Test Conducted with AEC laboratory assistance.
35
-------
evaluated. The flow tests and pressure build-up measurements are de-
signed to determine the technical success of Project Rio Blanco, and
to provide data for a determination of the economic viability of gas
stimulation using nuclear explosives.
Future Plowshare experiments in the state of Colorado will require
a permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health as required by
Section 25-8-20, of the Colorado Department of Health, Water Quality
Act, effective July 1, 1973, which establishes a permit system for
nuclear, toxic, and radioactive wastes. Under this section it shall
be unlawful for any person to discharge, deposit, generate, or dispose
of any radioactive, toxic or other hazardous waste underground in liquid,
solid, or explosive form unless the commission, upon application of the
person desiring to undertake such activity and after investigation and
hearing, shall have first found beyond a reasonable doubt that there
will be no pollution resulting therefrom or that this pollution if any
will be limited to waters in a specified limited area from which there
is no risk or significant migration and that the proposed activity is
justified by public need.
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR NAVY
Presently there are 106 nuclear submarines and five surface ships
in the U.S. Navy with authorization for a total of 130 nuclear submar-
ines and 12 surface ships, or approximately one-third of the active U.S.
warships. These ships are being constructed at the rate of 2 or 3 per
year. By 1978, the year the current SALT treaty expires, the Russians
will have reached their limit of 62 modern nuclear ballistic submarines.
No figures are available for the remainder of their nuclear fleet; how-
ever, construction is taking place at the rate of 10 per year. (10)
Available figures for 1973 showed that the total volume of water
discharged by the U.S. Navy in restricted waters from 107 ships, 9 ship-
yards, 11 tenders and 2 shore bases was less than 25,000 gallons. This
water contained less than 0.002 curies of radioactivity excluding trit-
ium. The total tritium released into harbors within 12 miles was less
than one curie. The solid wastes are packaged in approved containers
and shipped to burial sites licensed by the USAEC (or by a State under
agreement with the USAEC) in compliance with the Department of Transpor-
tation (DOT) and USAEC. In 1973 this amounted to 59,000 cubic feet and
about 222 curies of radioactive material. (30) This solid waste becomes
numbered among items destined for ultimate disposal; thus, it contributes
to the waste management problem.
36
-------
COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWERED SHIPPING
The application of nuclear power to commercial ships has been less
than successful, primarily for financial reasons. These reactors have
been shown to be relatively clean and operated with little environmental
contamination; however, in Japan, during 1974, a major problem in the
design of the reactor in a commercial Japanese nuclear ship caused great
concern (shielding against neutrons).
RADIATION MONITORING
EPA'S ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION AMBIENT MONITORING SYSTEM
Continuing surveillance of radioactivity levels is maintained through
EPA's Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System (ERAMS). This
system was formed in July 1973 from the consolidation and re-direction
of separate monitoring networks formerly operated by the U.S. Public
Health Service prior to EPA's formation. These previous monitoring net-
works were primarily operated for measurements of fallout levels. They
were then modified by changing collection and analysis frequencies, sam-
pling locations; and by increasing the number of analyses for specific
radionuclides. The emphasis of the current system is toward identifying
trends in the accumulation of long-lived radionuclides in the environment,
with specific analyses being made for uranium-234 and uranium-238, pluto-
nium-238 and plutonium-239, carbon-14, tritium, strontium-90, and krypton-
85. (45)
Table 2-5 provides a summary of the current status and historical
perspective of ERAMS. The system requires over 7,000 individual analy-
ses annually on samples of air, airborne particulates, deposition, sur-
face and drinking water, milk, and bone from approximately 150 locations
throughout the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, and U.S. ter-
ritories. Samples are collected by State and local health agencies and
forwarded to ORP's Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility (EERF) in
Montgomery, Alabama for analysis. From 1960 until December 1974, the
ERAMS results were published in Radiation Data and Reports and its pre-
decessor, Radiological Health Data and Reports (1966-1971), and Radio-
logical Health Data (1960-1965). This publication was terminated due
to budgetary constraints in 1974.*
*ERAMS data is presently available from: Environmental Protection Agen-
cy, Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility, P.O. Box 3009, Montgomery,
Alabama 36109.
37
-------
Current Status
Component Name
AIR MONITORING PROGRAM
Gross Radioactivity and Deposition
Component
Deposition
Plutonium and Uranium in
CO
oo Air Component
Krypton-85 in Air Component
WATER ANALYSIS AND SAMPLING
Surface Water Component
Drinking Water Component
Number of
Sampling
Sites
20 active
(c)
54 standby
20 active
54 standby
20
12
PROGRAM
55
76
20
Sampling
Frequency
semi-
weekly
as rain
occurs
semi-
weekly
semi-
annually
quarterly
quarterly
quarterly
Analyses
Performed
(a)
gross 3
gamma-scan
gross 3
gamma-scan*
tritium
Pu-238, -239
U-234, U-238
Pu-238, -239
U-234, U-238
krypton- 85
tritium
gamma-scan
tritium
gross a
gross 3
gamma-scan
radium-226
strontium-90
Pu-238, -239
U-234, U-238
Latest
Frequency of Previous Initially Descrip.
Analysis Network Established in RD&R
Semi-weekly R adiation Alert 1956 Dec. 74
Network
daily as rain 1956 Dec. 74
occurs
daily as rain
occurs
monthly comp. 1967 Aug. 74
March-May 1974
comp.
quarterly ' ' Plutonium in Air- 1965 Nov. 74
quarterly borne Particulates
semi- No network but 1973 Nov. 74
annually individual measure-
ments from 1962
quarterly Tritium Surveillance 1964 Aug. 74
annually(d) System
quarterly^ 1970 Aug. 74
annually • ,
annually | '
annually , ;
IQf
annually
annually |
annually J. None
annually
Table 2-5 EPA's Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System (ERAMS)
-------
Current Status
OJ
VO
Component Name
WATER ANALYSIS AND SAMPLING
Interstate Carrier System
MILK ANALYSIS PROGRAM
Pasteurized Milk Component
Special Milk Analysis Component
HUMAN ORGAN PROGRAM
Bone Analysis Component
Number of
Sampling
Sites
Sampling
Frequency
Analyses
Performed
Frequency of
Analysis
Previous Initially
Network Established
Latest
Descrip.
inRD&R
PROGRAM (Continued)
658
2/19/year
65
9
varies
triannually
monthly
monthly
annually
gross a
gross 0
strontium-90
radium-226
gamma
spectrometry
strontium-89,90
tritium
carbon-14
stable calcium
strontium-90
triannually
triannually
triannually
triannually
monthly
annually
annually
annually
annually
Interstate Carrier 1960
Drinking Water
Project
Pasteurized Milk 1960
Network
Carbon-14 in Milk 1965
Human Bone 1961
Network
Dec. 74
Dec. 74
Nov. 73
Jan. 73
LEGEND:
* If deposition exceeds gross beta of 15 nCi/m
(a)
Field estimate and subsequent laboratory determination
If gross beta greater than 10 pCi/m
(o)
(d)
(e).
(f)
Activated if contaminating event occurs (e. g. , atmospheric nuclear test in the
Northern Hemisphere).
Composite sample analyzed
'if gross alpha level exceeds 3 pCi/1
If gross beta level exceeds 10 pCi/1
-------
Because of the nationwide coverage and consistent sampling and
analysis methods, the ERAMS data has been extensively used for com-
parison with data from the vicinity of nuclear facilities. The ERAMS
is intended to provide long-term trend data for major airsheds, water-
sheds, and milk producing regions and, therefore, complements, rather
than duplicates, localized programs around specific nuclear facilities
conducted by State agencies and facility operators. The ERAMS is a dy-
namic system in that improvements are being made as the need for addi-
tional information arises. Currently, plans are being made to insti-
tute analysis for iodine-129 in milk and the feasibility of creating a
national program to determine plutonium levels in soil samples is be-
ing investigated.
STATE RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING
Many states operate environmental surveillance programs to obtain
data on levels of radiation in the environment from operations of nu-
clear facilities. This data is used to meet the needs of the States
for assuring protection to the public health of their citizens.
The AEC continued to improve its methods of evaluating licensees'
programs for controlling radioactive effluents and monitoring radioac-
tivity in the environment. As part of this effort an independent meas-
urements program was established through collaborative agreements with
several States for their support in measuring radioactivity in effluents
and plant environs. At the end of 1974, there were 19 states partici-
pating in this program covering essentially all the operating nuclear
power reactors. They included Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado,
Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota,
Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Vermont,
Virginia, and Wisconsin.
In January 1974, the state of Colorado and the Atomic Energy Com-
mission entered into a memorandum of understanding (a new step in inter-
governmental relations) to permit the state of Colorado formal access
and participation in the on-going program of monitoring and analysis of
liquid effluents discharged from the Commission's Rocky Flats Plant neat
Golden, Colorado. Underlying this arrangement is the fact that such ef-
fluents are presently discharged into waters of the State of Colorado.
In entering into this memorandum of understanding, the State of Colorado
and the AEC recognize their common objective of maintaining the radio-
logical constituents of these effluents at the lowest practicable level,
and they encourage the establishment of a cooperative program to observe
these levels as an aid to providing better control of such effluents
through available means. The parties further recognize that this
40
-------
memorandum of understanding does not create an entirely new arrangement
where none before existed, but is a formalization and expansion of a
working relationship between them which has been in effect for a num-
ber of years.
NUCLEAR FACILITY LICENSING MONITORING
Nuclear facilities licensed by the Atomic Energy Commission con-
duct environmental surveillance to determine the levels of radioactivity
in critical environment pathways. Such surveillance involves, but is
not limited to, collection and analysis of samples of air, water, milk,
vegetation, and soil. The results of review of monitoring data indicate
that radioactivity releases to the environment from licensed nuclear
facilities have generally been low in comparison with the limits set
in AEC regulations. In the case of nuclear power reactors in addition
to environmental surveillance, the licensee reports semi-annually the
quantities of specific radionuclides in the liquid gaseous effluents.
This data is available for use by the licensee and other Federal and
State agencies to estimate the population dose within 50 miles of the
facility.
EPA FIELD STUDIES AT NUCLEAR FACILITIES
The Office of Radiation Programs conducts field studies at operat-
ing nuclear facilities to (a) develop measurement techniques, (b) vali-
date dose computational models, (c) characterize effluents, (d) deter-
mine the ability of technology for control of nuclear wastes to meet
design technical specifications, and (e) study waste disposal sites to
determine the effectiveness of burial techniques to contain the waste
materials.
CONNECTICUT YANKEE
At Connecticut Yankee's Haddam Neck Generating Station a joint EPA,
AEC, and State field study was conducted to obtain data for use in vali-
dating a dose model for estimating the external, whole body cloud gamma
dose to exposed populations. The study was intended to provide inform-
ation on the (a) identity and amount of radionuclides in effluents, (b)
influence of station operation on radionuclide discharges, (c) degree
of dispersion or concentration of radionuclides in the environment,
(d) relative importance of specific radionuclides and vectors in ex-
posing population groups, (e) magnitude of radiation exposure in the
41
-------
environment, (f) applicability of various monitoring and measuring
techniques, and (g) determine the ability of technology for control
of nuclear wastes to meet technical design specifications.
OYSTER CREEK
The Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant at Toms River, New Jersey,
was studied by a joint EPA/AEC field study team. The data were gath-
ered for validation of a dose model that estimates the external, whole
body cloud gamma dose to exposed populations. The study objectives
were to (a) gain information on individual radionuclides in the efflu-
ent as a basis for developing recommended radiological surveillance
programs, (b) evaluate programs associated with measuring discharged
radionuclides and interpreting results in terms of radiation exposure,
(c) observe the movement of critical radionuclides from the plant
through the environment under routine conditions of station operation,
and (d) determine the ability of the technology for control of nuclear
wastes to meet technical design specifications.
QUAD CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATION
A joint EPA/AEC study was conducted in the vicinity at the Quad
Cities Nuclear Power Station during June through October 1974. The
purpose of the study was to continue the previous study of the lodine-
131 air to milk pathway at a BWR nuclear power station begun in 1973.
Measurements included (a) release rates of Iodine-131 by chemical spe-
cies at the main chimney and vent, (b) air concentrations of Iodine-131
by species at four locations, (c) Iodine-131 concentrations in grass at
five locations, and (e) Iodine-131 concentrations in milk at two loca-
tions. Measurement sensitivities were critical to this study and as
such there were a limited number of samples with activities below the
detection limit. A report of this study is presently in preparation.
COOPER NUCLEAR POWER STATION
A joint EPA/ERDA/NRC field study was conducted at the Cooper Nu-
clear Power Station in Brownville, Nebraska. A source of Nitrogen-16
dose at the reactor site is from moisture separators and turbines, which
are both typically located on the same floor and shielded along a line
of sight from ground-level location. The purpose of this study was to
obtain Nitrogen-16 dose data at locations outside of the building bound-
aries. The doses at such locations are from skyshine (large angle air
42
-------
scatter) rather than directly from the Nitrogen-16 source itself as had
been the case in previous studies. The data were needed to provide a
check on the complex models that are used to predict such doses as a
technical input into the proposed Uranium Fuel Cycle Standard.
MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT - DOSE MODEL VALIDATION STUDY (16)
A joint EPA/AEC field study was conducted at the Monticello Nu-
clear Generating Plant to obtain data for use in validating a dose mod-
el for estimating the external, whole body cloud gamma dose to exposed
populations. The model—after validation—will be useful in estimating
dose to the population at other boiling water reactors with similar site
and construction characteristics.
Participants in the study included the Eastern Environmental Ra-
diation Facility; the Meteorological Division, Research Triangle Park;
representatives from the Field Operations Division—Operations Analysis
Branch; Minnesota Department of Health; Northern States Power Company;
and the AEG. A report is expected to be published by mid-1975.
G.E. FUEL FABRICATION PLANT
A field study was initiated in early 1974 at the G.E. Fuel Fabri-
cation Plant north of Wilmington, North Carolina (16) . The plant was
chosen as being typical of the larger fuel fabrication facilities. The
purpose of the study was to characterize the stack effluents and to ac-
quire data from environmental surveillance at a facility on types of
radionuclides discharged and significant environmental exposure path-
ways. This data will be used to validate dose models (and source terms)
for use in future estimates of individual and population doses from nor-
mal operation of the plant.
FIELD STUDY AT OCEAN DUMPING SITES
EPA has a specific regulatory requirement to control oceanic dis-
posal of radioactive wastes under P.L. 92-532, the Marine Protection,
Research and Sanctuaries Act. In order to fulfill these responsibili-
ties, the Office of Radiation Programs is conducting oceanographic in-
vestigations in two former radioactive waste dumpsites, one located off
the east coast, the other off the west coast, to learn the long-term
fate of the containerized radioactive wastes. From this will be de-
veloped more detailed regulations and criteria governing any possible
requests for permits for specific dumping operations.
43
-------
LEGISLATION
One aspect of the licensing procedure which has gained special
emphasis is that of power plant siting. This has become an increas-
ingly important subject for state legislation over the past several
years. When the Southern Interstate Nuclear Board (SINE) first pub-
lished "Power Plant Siting in the United States, 1972—A State Sum-
mary," only about five states had officially enacted siting laws.
As of September 8, 1974*, eighteen states have passed such legisla-
tion and a significant number of jurisdictions will act during their
1975 legislative sessions.
Another aspect of legislative action deals with nuclear energy.
In 1974 a total of 11 Federal bills dealing with nuclear energy were
defeated with no bills being passed. Five of these bills were intro-
duced in 1973. (6) At the state level, 42 bills dealing with nuclear
energy were acted upon. These bills were either introduced or carried
over from 1973. A total of 7 bills were passed by 6 states. The com-
parative figures for state legislation on nuclear energy in 1973 show
10 bills approved from a total of 44 bills acted upon (7) .
RESEARCH FOR RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
The Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Research and De-
velopment pursues a scientific research effort in support of the needs
defined by ORP. The purpose of these investigations is to eliminate
many of the uncertainties associated with health effects and environ-
mental processes that currently affect environmental radiation protec-
tion. In addition, the policy studies are directed toward evaluating
technical radiation control alternatives and overall program alterna-
tives. It is anticipated that results of these studies will direct the
Agency's future radiation program thrusts and also point out specific
areas where legislation is needed.
The scientific research program, while conducting both non-ionizing
and ionizing radiation studies, will have its thrust in two major areas.
The first is health effects research, which will be primarily directed
*This compilation was done by the Southern Interstate Nuclear Board and
is current as of September 8, 1974.
44
-------
toward the establishment of definitive knowledge in the area of non-
thermal health effects and toward the investigation of specific health
effects questions regarding key radionuclides, such as plutonium and
actinides. The second is ecological processes and environmental trans-
port. Work in this area is necessary to reduce the uncertainties in
migration patterns, resuspension factors, and other general pathway
parameters. With these uncertainties reduced, more definitive action
can be taken with respect to these materials.
This research is carried out at NERC—Research Triangle Park, at
NERC—Las Vegas, and by contract.
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
AEC is the major research agency dealing with the problems of nu-
clear energy and radiation protection. Under the Reorganization Plan
of 1974, which established the Energy Research and Development Admini-
stration (ERDA) this role has been taken over and expanded to include
other facets of energy development. The primary objective of AEC's
(ERDA's) research program in the radiation area is to ascertain the
quantitative and qualitative health and environmental effects from any
step in the nuclear fuel cycle. This includes steps from resource re-
covery to waste management operations. AEC's (ERDA's) program also in-
cludes continuation of important, high priority work in support of nu-
clear energy technology development. The AEC (NRC's) Office of Nuclear
Regulatory Research conducts research relevant to the needs of NRC.
The Office develops plans and policy options which are subject to Com-
mission review and actions relevant to the research necessary for the
performance of the licensing functions in both reactor and fuel cycle
radiological safety areas. The research programs are conducted through
contracts with national laboratories and other groups. The NRC research
program sponsors the Rasmussen Study (WASH-1400) the principal program
investigating the probability of accidents and their consequences in
light-water reactors. Included are research efforts investigating the
Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor (LMFBR), High Temperature Gas Cooled
Reactor (HTGR), and programs on safeguards, facility safety, waste man-
agement, radioactive materials, transportation, and environmental effects
of nuclear power. EPA maintains close liaison with the research being
carried out, in order to be cognizant of ERDA's and NRC's efforts and to
avoid duplications.
45
-------
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND ACTIVITIES (16)
The AEG has had a consistent policy of sharing nuclear safety in-
formation with other countries. Today, as more nuclear facilities are
being built in foreign countries, two international objectives are be-
coming more important to the U.S. regulatory organization. First, the
U.S. needs to benefit from the nuclear experience being accumulated
elsewhere. We must, for example, be made aware promptly of the tech-
nical and political implications of nuclear reactor problems experi-
enced in other countries. Second, it is important that the benefits
of increasing safety research being conducted especially by nations
with advanced programs, be available to help assure the safe use of
energy worldwide.
International activities to meet these objectives include formal
arrangements for the reciprocal exchange of information and cooperation
in standards work, visits by and assignments of foreign regulatory em-
ployees to the AEG regulatory organization, reciprocal notification
of important regulatory decisions, and foreign visits by the U.S. regu-
latory staff.
INFORMATION EXCHANGE ARRANGEMENTS
While almost all documentary material on the U.S. regulatory program
is available to the public, some countries require that any information
the government regulatory authority gains in its official duties remain
the property of the owner of the licensed facility, and it is unlawful
for their governments to release such information without a formal inter-
national agreement. Even with routine disclosure of U.S. regulatory in-
formation, foreign authorities still frequently need assistance on tech-
nical matters and prompt advice concerning important events in the U.S.
In order to formalize reciprocal exchanges of regulatory information
to assure that the U.S. receives news of important foreign developments,
the AEC has negotiated bilateral exchange arrangements with the countries
that have significant programs for the construction and operation of light
water reactors. During 1974, such agreements were signed with the nuclear
regulatory agencies of Japan, France, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland.
They provide for systematic reciprocal exchanges of data on operating
experience and other technical information related to the safety and en-
vironmental impact of nuclear power plants. They also lay the groundwork
for cooperation in the development of nuclear safety standards.
46
-------
Negotiations on additional information exchange agreements are be-
ing held with other countries. By the end of 1975, the AEC hopes to
have such agreements in effect with all the countries that have major
nuclear power programs.
VISITS OF FOREIGN NATIONALS
In mid-1974 the AEC began a small scale program of assigning a limit-
ed number of foreign regulatory employees from countries just starting nu-
clear power programs to work for one to two years within the AEC regula-
tory organization. In this carefully controlled program, AEC expects 8
to 10 foreign experts to work with the U.S. staff, gaining knowledge and
experience which will assist in the future organization of their nation-
al regulatory programs. To date, two such foreign experts (from Australia
and Denmark) are working in the Licensing Directorate. Several additional
assignments of this type are under consideration.
The regulatory staff also received directly and through the IAEA an
increasing number of foreign visitors, 223 in 1974. The staff also receiv-
ed requests for information about the U.S. policy of licensing and regula-
tion, and about decisions on specific technical or procedural matters. This
task will continue to grow as more reactors are built overseas and more gov-
ernments start programs of nuclear energy regulation.
NOTIFICATIONS OF IMPORTANT EVENTS
The AEC has begun a practice of prompt notification to interested for-
eign governments of each important AEC decision affecting the construction
or operation of nuclear power plants in the U.S. Seventeen such notifica-
tions were dispatched to 16 countries and two international organizations
in 1974, usually within hours of the public announcements. This openness
with other countries has resulted in additional information being sent to
the U.S. in exchange.
INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY
The AEC continued its support of the International Atomic Energy Agen-
cy's program in the field of nuclear safety and issued a resolution support-
ing the Agency's expanded program to develop internationally acceptable
safety codes and guides. The U.S. is prepared to make important contribu-
tions, including expert services without cost, to the International Atomic
47
-------
Energy Agency (IAEA) to help accomplish the objectives of this pro-
gram. The development of a set of standards for commercial light water
reactors, which would permit the IAEA to give advice and assistance to
developing nuclear states on a uniform and consistent basis, is expect-
ed to take several years. Because of the U.S. leadership position in
nuclear standards, the U.S. regulatory organization is expected to pro-
vide various participants through the duration of this program.
OUTLOOK FOR THE FUTURE
The historic growth rate for nuclear power changes during 1974.
This was partly due to a decrease in a demand for electric power as
generated by an economic recession, and by pleas for conservation.
Another major factor is the inflationary process which has placed many
utilities at a disadvantage in regard to raising new capital. The
time delay for getting an EIS approved is also a factor. By the end
of September 1974, electric utilities had deferred construction of 70
previously ordered reactors, and had cancelled plans for nine nuclear
units previously ordered. It is evident, then, that the potential
nuclear power generation capacity will not meet earlier projected
levels.
It appears that the decline in orders (and construction) for nu-
clear power plants will continue into 1975. On the basis of informa-
tion available it appears that only 9 or 10 firm orders will be placed
in that year. The bar chart below, Figure 2-2, gives the story.
09 40
£ 35
H 30
* 25
o 20
M 15
1 10
3 5
z o
rH
nj
C
O
•H
•1— J
0.
0
+
ro
H
n)
a
O
•H
4-1
a
0
ON
4
H
o> C
4-3
Vf 4-J
D.
o
rH
C^
'72
'73
'74
'75
Figure 2-2 Nuclear Power Plant Sales (1972-5)
48
-------
The major factors presently affecting plant availability were
scheduled shutdowns for refueling and maintenance operations, un-
scheduled outages for replacement or repair of malfunctioning valves
and switches, replacing turbine generators, and correction of prob-
lems with steam generators. In addition, plant shutdowns of various
lengths of time were caused by failure of electric motors, pipe leaks,
failures in electronic circuitry and monitoring equipment, excessive
vibrations, failure of hydraulic shock and sway arresters, and per-
sonnel or procedural errors. Most of these factors will continue to
affect plant operations in the future.
At present there are no spent fuel reprocessing plants operating
in the United States. It does not appear that there will be an oper-
ating plant until about 1978. Delays in start-up at reprocessing
plants, and the possibility that future capacities of facilities will
not keep pace with demand, imply that a shortage in spent fuel storage
capacity could develop. Therefore, concentrated effort is needed to
solve the future transportation and ultimate storage problems for the
vast amounts of radioactive wastes that are being generated.
An acceptable model for evaluating the impact and determining the
suitability of long term waste disposal methods will have to be adopted.
Delays in adoption of a disposal model will extend the time for adoption
of at least one ultimate disposal method. It is anticipated that even-
tually several long term disposal methods will be acceptable.
The problem of reactor safety will be a continuing focal point.
The Rasmussen report has and will continue to receive a great deal of
attention. Various Federal Agencies and environmental organizations
have attacked various aspects of this study. Although it will be im-
possible to satisfy all people with regard to the safety aspects of
nuclear power, there appear to be certain areas of research in this
study that deserve further investigations. Such reactor safety re-
search should also consider the new types of reactors being considered.
The entire nuclear fuel cycle will be under scrutiny for some time
to come to determine the potential for accidents and acceptable levels
of risk. Consideration will be given to accidents affecting the popu-
lation at large and the environment, and to accidents and working condi-
tions which affect plant personnel.
49
-------
REFERENCES
1. Federal Energy Administration, Project Independence, A Summary,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Stock Number 4118-00028, Novem-
ber, 1974 (There are also 10 volumes in the main report).
2. General Services Administration, "Responsibilities of Federal Agen-
cies for Fixed Nuclear Facilities Incident Planning," Federal Regis-
ter, Volume 38, Number 16, January 24, 1973.
3. International Commission on Radiation Protection, "Implications of
Commission Recommendations That Doses Be Kept As Low As Readily
Achievable," ICRP Publication Number 22, April 1973.
4. Letter to Dr. S.H. Smily from the Environmental Protection Agency
dated November 21, 1974.
5. Meyer, G.L., "Maxey Flats Radioactive Waste Burial Site," Personal
Letter dated February 19, 1975.
6. Miller, L.A., Federal/State Radiation Control Legislation 1974, DREW
Publication (FDA) March 1975.
7. Miller, L.A., Federal/State Radiation Control Legislation 1973, DHEW
Publication (FDA) 74-8023, March 1974.
8. National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council, The Effects
on Populations of Exposures to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, Re-
port of the Advisory Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing
Radiation (BEIR Report), NAS/NRC report, November 1972.
9. "Nuclear Electricity Generation," Nucleonics Week, January 24, 1974.
10. Rickover, Admiral H. G., "Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, 1974,
Hearing before the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy," 93rd Congress
of the United States, Second Session, Testimony given February 25,
1975.
11. Rowe, W.D., Ph.D., "Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor Policy Approach,"
Letter to Roger Strelow, March 21, 1975.
12. Rowe, W.D., Ph.D., "Waste Disposal: The Ultimate Question," Presented
at the Waste Management '75 Symposium, Tucson, Arizona, March 24, 1975,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs re-
port.
50
-------
13. Schneider, K.J., and Platt, A.M., Editors, Advanced Waste Management
Studies, High-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Alternatives, U.S. AEC
Report BNWL-1900, Battelle, Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Richland,
Washington, 4 Volumes, May 1974.
14. Siegel, Keeve M., "Laser Fusion Program: Statement before the Sub-
committee on Legislation of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy on
March 13, 1975.
15. Tamplin, A.R., and Cochran, T.B., Radiation Standards for Hot Particles,
National Resources Defense Council Report, February 1974.
16. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1974 Annual Report to Congress, 94th
Congress, 1st Session, Senate Document Number 94-2, January 17, 1975.
17. U.S. EPA, Draft Environmental Statement Comments:
Management of Commercial High-Level and Transuranium-Contaminated
Radioactive Waste (WASH-1539) AEC document D-AEC-A-00107-00 November
1974.
18. U.S. EPA, Draft Environmental Statements Comments:
Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor Program, AEC document D-AEC-A00106-00,
August 1974.
19. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Draft Environmental Statement: Manage-
ment of Commercial High-Level and Transuranium-Contaminated Radioactive
Waste, AEC report WASH-1539, September 1974.
20. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Draft Environmental Statement: Waste
Management Operations Hanford Reservation, Richland, Washington, AEC
report WASH-1538, 3 Volumes, September 1974.
21. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Draft Generic Environmental Statement on
the Use of Mixed Oxide Fuels in Light Water Reactors, AEC report Wash
1327, August 1974.
22. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Final Environmental Statement Concerning
Proposed Rule Making Action; Numerical Guide for Design Objectives and
Limiting Conditions for Operation to Meet the Criterion "As Low As Prac-
ticable" for Radioactive Material in Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power
Reactor Effluents, Volume 1, The Statement, AEC publication Wash-1258,
July 1973.
23. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, High-Level Radioactive Waste Management
Alternatives, AEC report WASH-1297, May 1974.
51
-------
24. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, "Licensing of Production and Utiliza-
tion Facilities: Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Powered Reactors,"
(Proposal), Code of Federal Regulations Title 10, Part 50, Appendix
I, proposed in Federal Register Volume 36 FR 11113, June 9, 1971.
25. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Draft Environmental Statement: Liquid
Metal Fast Breeder Reactor Program, AEC report WASH 1535 (4 Volumes)
March 1974.
26. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, The Nuclear Industry 1974, AEC report
WASH 1174-74.
27. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Nuclear Power Reactors in the United
States, AEC Release, December 31, 1974.
28. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Plutonium and Other Transuranium Ele-
ments: Sources, Environmental Distribution and Biomedical Effects,
AEC report WASH-1359 on Testimony before an Environmental Protection
Agency hearing board, December 10-11, 1974.
29. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Reactor Safety Study, An Assessment
of Accident Risks in the U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants, AEC
report WASH-1400 (Draft), August 1974.
30. U.S. Department of the Navy, Environmental Monitoring and Disposal
of Radioactive Waste from U.S. Nuclear Powered Ships and Their Sup-
port Facilities, Naval Sea Systems Command, USN report NT-74-1, Wash-
ington, D.C., April 1974.
31. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Approaches to Population Pro-
tection in the Case of Nuclear Accidents, Office of Radiation Pro-
grams, Draft, November 1974.
32. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, The Comparative Risk Perspective
for Setting Protective Action Guides, Office of Radiation Programs,
Draft, January 1975.
33. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Draft Environmental Statement
a Proposed Rulemaking Action Concerning Environmental Radiation Pro-
tection Requirements for Normal Operation of Activities in the Uran-
Fuel Cycle, Office of Radiation Programs, December 1974.
34. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Draft Manual of Protective Action
Guides and Protective Action for Nuclear Incidents, Office of Radiation
Programs document EPA-520/1-75-001.
52
-------
35. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Emergency Response Protective
Action Guides Airborne Releases from Fixed Nuclear Facilities, Of-
fice of Radiation Programs, January 1975.
36. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Analysis of the
Uranium Fuel Cycle, Parts I, II and III, Office of Radiation Programs
publication EPA-520/9-73-003 (B, C, D), October 1973.
37. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Environmental and Public
Health Protection from Radioactive Effluents: Guidelines," Fed-
eral Register, Volume 39, Number 92, May 10, 1974.
38. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Radiation Dose
Commitment; An Application to the Nuclear Power Industry, ORP Pub-
lication EPA-520/4-73-002, June 1974.
39. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Radiation Protection
Program Strategy, Office of Radiation Programs document EPA-520/7-
75-007, (In Press) May 1975.
40. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Notice of Intent to Review
the Need for Establishing New Rules for Plutonium and Transuranium
Elements," Federal Register, 20 FR 24098, September 23, 1974.
41. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Public Meeting Between Atomic
Energy Commission and Environmental Protection Agency on Liquid Metal
Fast Breeder Reactor, Environmental Impact Statement (WASH-1535), EPA
report, August 13, 1974.
42. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Radiation Data and Reports,
Volume 15, Numbers 1-12, 1974.
43. U.S. General Services Administration, "Nuclear Incident Emergency
Planning—Fixed Facilities and Transportation: Notice of Interagency
Responsibilities," Draft prepared by the Office of Preparedness,
March 17, 1975.
44. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Nuclear Energy Center Site Survey,
Office of Special Studies report NUREG-75/018, March 13, 1975.
45. Nuclear Safety Volume 16, Number 6, EPA Environmental Assessment
Program.
53
-------
CHAPTER 3
NATURALLY-OCCURRING RADIOACTIVITY
INTRODUCTION
The largest source of ionizing radiation exposure to the world's
population is radiation from the natural environment. Man has been
continuously exposed to natural radiation sources for thousands of
years. This exposure is not uniform for all individuals, but varies
with such factors as altitude, geological features, and man's living
habits. For example, cosmic radiation intensity increases threefold
from sea level to 10,000 feet, and by 10 to 20 percent from 0 degrees
to 50 degrees geomagnetic latitude (6).
The existence of natural radiation sources is not the direct re-
sult of man's activities. Exposure to external natural radiation sources
occurs through cosmic radiation and radioactive elements originating in
the earth's crust. An additional increment of external exposure, which
accounts for a small percent of the total, is due to the presence of the
radioactive decay products of radon and thoron in the atmosphere. Inter-
nal exposure to natural radiation sources is due to inhalation and inges-
tion of foods, liquids, and air containing naturally occurring radionu-
clides. The intensity of natural radiation sources can be enhanced by
some technological activity by man that is not expressly designed to
produce radiation (3). That is, exposure from natural radioactivity
can be increased and concentrated by man's industrial and other activi-
ties. Examples of this type of natural radiation sources are uranium
mill tailings, radioactivity in construction materials, uranium in fer-
tilizers, and cosmic radiation exposure due to air travel (3). Conse-
quently man increases his exposure from these sources of natural radia-
tion by means of his technology and his lifestyle.
Naturally occurring radionuclides have always made a significant
contribution to man's external radiation exposure, and they will contin-
ue to do so in the future. In many areas of the United States, the mag-
nitude of terrestrial radiation exposure is relatively uniform. However,
significant variations from the average exist in some regions due to high
concentrations of uranium, thorium, and their decay products in soil,
54
-------
building materials, and other media. Potassium-40 and the radioactive
decay chains of uranium-238 and thorium-232 are radionuclides which
contribute most significantly to man's exposure. Many additional ra-
dioactive nuclides do exist but due to their half lives, energies, and
low abundance they have an insignificant dose equivalent to man.
In a given location, the exposure to terrestrial radiation is pri-
marily determined by the soil concentration of natural radionuclides (6).
Exposure from terrestrial sources of radiation is generally considered
unavoidable; however, it may be partially controlled by appropriate land
use in particularly radioactive areas and in areas where man has altered
the environment.
Another major component of natural radiation exposure to the pop-
ulation is cosmic radiation. Cosmic radiation is composed primarily of
galactic radiation and a varying component of solar radiation. With the
exception of short-term variations in cosmic ray intensity, there is no
evidence to indicate the occurrence of significant changes in the inten-
sity of cosmic radiation since the most recent magnetic field reversal
some 700,000 years ago.
Various factors contribute to cosmic radiation variations and ex-
plain the rather large differences in the reported measurements. Time
variations of cosmic radiation have been observed and are generally
thought to be attributable to the solar influence on the interplanetary
magnetic field. These variations occur in regular cycles and result in
variations in cosmic ray intensity of approximately 10 percent.
Another factor which influences cosmic radiation variations is
latitude. This effect is a result of the earth's geomagnetic field
which tends to eliminate low energy cosmic particles. However, the
overall influence of latitude on cosmic radiation exposure within the
United States can be considered small. Other factors which influence
cosmic radiation exposure are altitude and barometric pressure. For
purposes of long term estimating, the variations are not significant.
Variations of cosmic radiation with latitude and altitude are shown
in Figures 3-1 and 3-2.
Even the most recent measurements of cosmic radiation differ by
large percentages. These differences have been explained by instru-
mentation construction, calibration techniques, and radon daughters in
the atmosphere.
In addition to terrestrial and cosmic external radiation sources,
radiation exposure can result from ingestion and inhalation of natural
radionuclides. The major contributor by inhalation is radon and its
55
-------
LINES OF EQUAL COSMIC-RAY INTENSITY
AT SEA LEVEL ( RELATIVE VALUES )
60
30
30 60 90
Figure 3-1 Variation of Cosmic Radiation with Latitude (Millikan, 1936)
-------
103
10'
oe
3C
s
£ 10'
a.
til
UJ
\~
ae
l-
UJ
| 10'
o»
UJ
UJ
o
a
10~*
10-'
-
4
V
^
•
•
•
•
.•
/ /
7^
'!
:l
!> •
t!
•
«
/,
^. • TOTAL
/ ..••"" ^~- — "PROTONS
r .•* -.^*"
* .* .^*^
/ •' "'
/ / xx ^^- NEUTRONS
M * * .^^^
' £ > -^^
/ / ' X
ll//
«• / '
• * *
/ -x ''/
//'^ — \
.* / AX^ ^^x.
/ ^ ^\
^y \
• /7 X
// /'' '^^.. ^MUONS
'/ ' \
// •' •.
/ / ^PIONS
•
/ GEOMAGNETIC LATITUDE = 55°
i i 1 i 1 1 1 1 1
4 6
ALTITUDE 10" FEET
10
Figure 3-2 Cosmic Ray Dose Equivalent Rate
Variation With Altitude (O'Brien and HcLaughlin, 1970)
57
-------
daughter products, and by ingestion mostly potassium-40. Other sig-
nificant internal emitters are radium-226, radium-228, and their
daughter products. The primary sources of lung dose exposure to the
general population is radon, thoron, and their decay products.
Although the quantity and intensity of natural radiation sources
has remained constant in recent times,, man's living habits have changed
in ways that influence exposure. Substantial populations have migrated
from coastal to inland areas, thus increasing their elevation and expos-
ure to cosmic radiation. Also, society has tended to move from an out-
door rural life to an indoor life in urban centers. Thus, man's expos-
ure in some instances has been increased because of the natural radio-
activity in some building materials. On the other hand, some buildings
reduce exposure to the outdoor terrestrial sources and therefore, de-
pending upon the construction materials, a building may either reduce
or increase exposure.
As man seeks to improve his standard of living and demands greater
use of available natural mineral resources, the earth's protective crust
is broken and the naturally occurring radioactive ores are processed in-
creasing potential exposure to the population. Many industries mine and
process raw materials which are found in strata containing significant
concentrations of uranium, thorium, and their daughter products. This
includes well established industries such as the phosphate industry,
rare earth, and several other mining industries, as well as newer, less
developed industries such as oil shale and geothermal power.
When the naturally occurring radioactive materials are confined to
depths of the earth, they have little impact on man or the environment
due to the shielding effect of the ground cover. However, when ore is
mined, separated, processed into commercial products, and distributed,
individuals and large populations can be subjected to exposure from the
radioactive components.
These radioactive materials can affect man and the environment in
four basic ways. First, gaseous and particulate radioactive materials
are released to the air, becoming available for possible human inhala-
tion and lowering the overall air quality. Second, the radioactive ma-
terials in the ores or the associated by-products can enter ground and
surface waters by effluents discharges, land runoff, and leaching from
waste piles. A third effect is caused by the close contact of workers
with the radioactive material. The fourth potential impact is contami-
nation of the food chain, which may result in man's ingestion of radio-
active materials.
From the standpoint of man's exposure, only potassium-40, and the
radioactive decay chains of uranium-238 and thorium-232 are significant.
58
-------
Potassium-40 occurs as one of three potassium isotopes. The two most
abundant isotopes, potassium-39 (93.1 percent) and potassium-41 (6.9
percent), are stable. The third isotope, potassium-40 (0.0118 percent)
decays with a half life of a billion years. As potassium-40 decays,
gamma rays are emitted creating a source of exposure to man.
Uranium-238 and thorium-232 decay through a series of radionuclides
to radon-222 and radon-220 respectively. Because of the shorter half
life of radon-220, there is less opportunity for diffusion from the
ground, and thus airborne concentrations of radon-222 are generally two
orders of magnitude greater than those of radon-220.
Substantial environmental and public health problems associated
with natural radioactivity are emerging which require for their solu-
tions effective regulatory roles in Federal agencies and in the States.
The major problem areas have been identified for successfully address-
ing the issues. Many of these areas have been the subject of extensive
Environmental Protection Agency activity over the past year. Other
areas will require intense involvement in the near future. In general,
these areas call for environmental assessment and the development of
adequate control measures to minimize any public health risk from na-
turally-occurring radioactivity.
MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION PROTECTION ACTIVITIES
URANIUM MINE AND MILL TAILINGS
Large scale milling of uranium ore began in the United States in
the late 1940's. The average time of operation of a uranium mill has
been 12 to 15 years. There are currently more than 20 inactive mills.
Each location where a mill is operating or has operated has an accumu-
lation of waste products or tailings. As of 1970, there were more than
80 million metric tons of tailings occupying more than 2,100 acres of
land. In recent years, there has been a sharp increase in the use of
light-water-cooled nuclear reactors to generate electricity. There has
been a parallel growth in the uranium fuel industry that provides the
enriched uranium fuel for these operations.
The radioactivity in uranium ores depends primarily on the amount
of uranium in the ore. Processes such as leaching by groundwater and
59
-------
diffusion of radon gas can also affect the amount of radioactivity in
the uranium ore. The principal decay chain in the radioactive decay
process for uranium ore is that beginning with uranium-238 and ending
with lead-206. Most of the ores currently being mined are 0.1 percent
or more uranium oxide. Generally, the ores are stockpiled near the
mills and blended to provide a uniform feed of approximately 0.2 per-
cent uranium oxide. During milling, 20 to 80 percent of the radon gas
in the ore and small fractions of the other radionuclides are released
to the environment. (13) Almost all the radioactive decay products of
the uranium ore end up in the tailings, mostly in the tailings solids,
but with small percentages in solution.
After the uranium is extracted from the ore, more than 99 percent
of the ore material becomes the mill wastes or tailings. Included in
these tailings are 97 percent of the radioactive decay products of the
uranium and about 4 percent of the original uranium. (13) The tailing
piles release radioactive material to the air as radon gas, as airborne
particulates, and waterborne radionuclides leached out by precipitation,
surface runoff, and the wastes solutions. Sufficient radioactivity is
in the tailings to create a field of gamma radiation in the immediate
vicinity of the tailings. Because of the presence in the tailings of
thorium-230, which by its decay maintains the radium inventory, the ra-
dioactivity in the tailings will remain almost constant for thousands
of years. While mills are in operation, most of the tailings are either
saturated with water or under water in tailings ponds. The water inhib-
its the radon gas from escaping. When the milling operation is discon-
tinued, the sands will partially dry. If the slimes have been segregat-
ed and not mixed with the sands, they may retain moisture longer.
In the milling operation, hazardous airborne gaseous and particu-
late wastes are generated from a number of different sources. These are
mainly gaseous and particulate effluents from the ore crushing area, the
fine ore bins, and the yellowcake packaging and drying area. Current
practice involves the use of wet dust control systems for the ore crush-
ing area and fine ore storage bins and wet scrubbers with bag filters
for the yellowcake packaging and drying areas. The scrubber efficiency
for the ore crushing area is about 95 percent, and for the yellowcake
packaging and drying areas it is 99 percent. (13)
Other sources of gas and dust which can be controlled are open pit
mine haul roads and the ore storage and blending piles. Dust generation
on the ore haul road can be controlled by sprinkling.
Stabilization of a tailings pile involves grading the tailings area
to lessen side slopes, establishing drainage diversion, and covering with
a suitable type of material to prevent erosion and wind blowing of the
material.
60
-------
INACTIVE URANIUM MILL TAILINGS SITES
Hearings were held by the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy to
obtain information needed to define the problem with respect to in-
active uranium mill tailings piles, and to establish procedures within
the Federal Government for a remedial action program. Following these
hearings in May 1974, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Atom-
ic Energy Commission (now the Energy Research and Development Adminis-
tration) conducted a Phase I study of 21 inactive tailings pile sites
to define the extent of the problem and to recommend possible solutions.
The summary of the findings and conditions at the time of Phase I has
been submitted to the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, other Federal
agencies, and to the states involved. These findings formed the basis
for the initiation of a Phase II effort. (7) This is an engineering
assessment to develop cost estimates for a remedial action program to
reduce the environmental impact.
Since neither the Environmental Protection Agency nor the Energy
Research and Development Administration has the in-house capability to
carry out the detailed work needed for a Phase II study, ERDA entered
into a contract with an architect-engineering company to perform most
of the specific services required. Funds have been made available from
the EPA energy fund and then passed through the ERDA to initiate Phase
II studies. A portion of these funds will be allocated for research on
pile stabilization. The Phase II work is proposed to start at Salt Lake
City; the remaining sites will be evaluated within a time frame of ap-
proximately two years.
ERDA is the lead Federal agency in these program efforts and will
thus have the responsibility to seek the necessary funds from Congress
to perform a Phase III study, which will be the implementation of the
remedial actions that were determined in Phase II.
NAVAJO NATION STUDY
As a result of various formal and informal requests from both the
Navajo Nation and the Indian Health Service, the Environmental Protect-
ion Agency and, earlier, the Public Health Service have provided techni-
cal assistance and advice to the Nation since about 1968 on matters deal-
ing with mill tailings piles on the Navajo Reservation. During 1974,
gamma surveys were conducted at four sites (Monument Valley, Tuba City,
Mexican Hat, and Shiprock) on the Navajo Reservation. At the same time,
a few air, soil, tailings and gamma logging were used to establish the
depth of tailings contamination. Recommendations for remedial action
61
-------
for decontamination were officially provided to the Navajos by the EPA
Office of Radiation Programs after preliminary discussion and review of
the recommendations by an interagency group at Shiprock, New Mexico, in
July 1974. Such recommendations were requested by the Indian Health
Service and the Chairman of the Navajo Nation prior to the Environmental
Protection Agency/Atomic Energy Commission commitments to the Joint Com-
mittee on Atomic Energy to conduct Phase I/II studies at inactive uran-
ium mill sites.
NRC STABILIZATION GUIDELINES
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Agreement States are
responsible for the licensing of new uranium mills. As a condition to
the licensing of a new mill, pile stabilization will be required before
decommissioning the mill.
In 1974, the Atomic Energy Commission issued a new guide in its
Regulatory Guide Series. The new guide, Regulatory Guide 3.23, is en-
titled, "Stabilization of Uranium—Thorium Milling Waste Retention Sys-
tems." The guide describes the principal stabilization, maintenance,
and long-term control criteria acceptable to the Regulatory staff that
should be considered in the construction and use of tailings retention
systems at uranium and thorium mills containing radioactive materials.
This guide endorses the requirements and criteria included in American
National Standards Institute N313-1974, "Stabilization in Uranium—
Thorium Milling Waste Retention Systems."
TRACK ETCH BADGE DOSIMETRY STUDIES
Studies of natural radioactivity in the environment have created a
requirement for an economical, convenient, noise free, and accurate meth-
od of determining radon daughter exposure levels in structures. In order
to provide such a dosimetric method, the EPA has funded a contract to de-
velop the measurement technique using the Track Etch principle. As part
of a cooperative project with the state of Colorado, the Track Etch Badge
is being field tested at selected locations in Grand Junction, Colorado.
Results of the Track Etch Badges are being compared with results of the
thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) air samplers operated at the same loca-
tions. Since there is a long history of operation for this measurement
technique, it was selected for use in the field study to determine if the
new Track Etch Dosimeter should be made available for field use.
62
-------
RADIOACTIVITY FROM NON-NUCLEAR INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES,
EFFLUENTS, RESIDUALS, AND PRODUCTS
Numerous industries process raw materials which occur in strata
containing significant quantities of radioactive materials. While bur-
ied in the ground, the radioactivity is of little consequence to man
because of the shielding effect of the overburden. However, when the
raw ores are mixed and processed into products such as fertilizers and
building materials, the radioactive components are subject to distribu-
tion wherever the product is used. Further, individual workers are sub-
ject to direct exposure by close proximity to radioactive materials dur-
ing ore extraction, separation, and processing.
In the United States there are now approximately 42 million tons
of marketable phosphate rock produced annually. About 88 percent of
this comes from the southern states of Florida, North Carolina, and
Tennessee, while the remainder comes from the western states of Idaho,
Montana, Utah, and Wyoming. In 1972, the rock was used for fertilizers
(about 24 million tons), elemental phosphorus (about 5.1 million tons),
and feed supplement and other uses (about 289 thousand tons). The re-
mainder (about 14.3 million tons) was exported.
The Environmental Protection Agency has a program to assess the
radiological impact of industries using materials containing naturally
occurring radioactivity. To begin the program, EPA has started with the
phosphate industry. The objective is to assess the radiological impact
from effluents, wastes, products, and by-products of the phosphate indus-
try and, where necessary, to develop cost-effective controls.
Samples have been obtained from several wet process plants, thermal
plants, and mines in Florida, North Carolina, Alabama, and Idaho. EPA
has sampled raw ores, marketable ores, phosphoric acid, triple superphos-
phate (TSP), diammonium phosphate (DAP), monoammonium phosphate (MAP), nor-
mal super phosphate and by-products, slag, ferrophos, and gypsum. In ad-
dition, investigations have included effluent treatment systems, ambient
air concentrations, and reclaimed land concentrations.
In Florida, where large tracts of land have been strip-mined for
phosphate rock, the industry is currently involved in extensive land re-
clamation projects. So far, reclaimed land is used for cattle grazing,
municipal structures, and residential buildings. Over the ensuing years,
EPA anticipates that much use will be made of this land for habitable
structures. Consequently, EPA is investigating the concentrations of
uranium, radium, and daughter products to determine if there is any po-
tential hazard to occupants of structures erected on these sites. It is
anticipated that if a hazard exists it will be caused by buildup of
radon-222 within these structures. At this stage the data is preliminary
and further study is needed before the assessment is completed.
63
-------
Uranium concentrations have been found in copper veins during
routine mining operations. By-products of uranium have appeared in
residues of copper smelting operations. Uranium and thorium have also
been associated with the mining of vanadium, fluorspar, lead, titanium,
and the rare earths. The concentrations of the uranium and thorium
varies depending on the location of the mine. The impacts and the po-
tential health effects from these mining operations will be considered
in the future.
RADIOACTIVITY IN NON-NUCLEAR ENERGY SOURCES
To meet urgent energy demands, many nations are initiating ventures
in alternative energy strategies. Some of these energy resources have
natural radioactivity associated with them. Radon has been found in
geothermal power sources, natural gas, and liquefied petroleum gas.
Quantities of uranium have been found in Western coal. With possible
increased development of the Western coal because of its low sulfur
content, the radioactivity contained in the coal may become a signifi-
cant source of exposure. This could be as a solid waste problem in the
fly ash or as an air pollution problem if the effluent control equipment
does not adequately remove all radionuclides.
RADON IN NATURAL GAS
In late 1973, the Environmental Protection Agency published a re-
port entitled, "Assessment of Potential Radiological Health Effects from
Radon in Natural Gas." This report summarized the findings of the En-
vironmental Protection Agency concerning the estimation of health effects
from the release of radon in dwellings through use of natural gas in un-
vented cooking ranges or space heaters. In 1974, EPA initiated a similar
study to assess the radiological health effects from radon in liquefied
petroleum gas (LPG).
EPA concluded that the use of natural gas containing radon-222
for average exposure conditions does not contribute significantly to
lung cancer deaths in the United States. For average exposure conditions,
the radon from natural gas produced insignificant indoor radon concentra-
tions. No available information was found to evaluate local conditions
where individuals may receive exposure from radon daughters much higher
than the average. (12)
64
-------
RADON IN GEOTHERMAL SOURCES
To meet urgent energy demands, many nations are initiating ven-
tures in geothermal technology. The Department of Interior has iden-
tified 44 known geothermal resource areas in the United States. (De-
partment of the Interior's Final Environmental Impact Statement for
Geothermal Leasing Program—1973). While the needed environmental and
health impact data is scarce or non-existent at this time, (1) some
concentrations of radon have been found with particular geothermal
energy sources.
The Office of Radiation Program Las Vegas Facility (ORP-LVF) of
the Environmental Protection Agency is now conducting a sampling program
in thermal springs, pools, lakes, and rivers (geothermal sources). Ra-
dium in water, radon in water and steam, and radium and thorium in sedi-
ments are all being measured. This work includes gathering data on back-
ground information on the geology and chemistry of geothermal areas.
URANIUM AND DAUGHTERS IN WESTERN COAL
The concentration of radium in coal varies with the ash content and
other factors. A coal-fired power plant can discharge amounts of long-
lived biologically significant radioactivity. In a well-run plant, less
than 1 percent of the total radioactivity contained in the coal is dis-
charged into the atmosphere in the form of fly ash. The remaining ash
is handled in a wide variety of ways, some of which may involve opportu-
nities for population exposures (16).
Some types of rocks are far more favorable hosts for uranium than
others. Thus, the physical properties of peat, lignite, and sub-bitu-
minous coal are rather different in their capacities for concentrating
uranium in those important fuel materials, (9) and are found with rather
different concentrations of this radioactive contaminant.
The United States Geological Survey has made extensive investiga-
tions of the occurrence and distribution of uranium in coal and related
carbonaceous materials throughout large areas in the western United
States. By the use of portable geiger and scintillation counters, hun-
dreds of outcrops of coal have been tested for radioactivity, and samples
have been collected for chemical and spectrographic analyses. The uran-
ium content of the coal in these deposits ranged from 0.005 to 0.02
percent. Much of the uranium was found to be disseminated in the carbo-
naceous material.
65
-------
Uranium has also been found in the groundwaters adjacent to the
western coal. In general, it was found that the greater the alkalinity
of the groundwaters, the more uranium the waters contain.
RADIUM AND DRINKING WATER/STANDARDS
In general, groundwaters contain more natural radioactivity than
surface waters (3). Water treatment procedures instituted for non-
radiological reasons may also remove some radionuclides. A dosage can
be received from ingestion of radon rich water, or by inhalation of the
radon which readily emanates from open water or water undergoing aera-
tion. Household use of water entailing heating, agitation, and aeration
could constitute a potential hazard from airborne radon and its daughter
products.
Unlike limits for other chemical constituents in drinking water,
radiological approval limits cannot be based on an assumed harmless lev-
el of radiation dose. Rather, controls for both individual and popula-
tion exposures should be based on the prudent assumption that there is
no threshold dose for ionizing radiation and that any health effects
would be proportional to the dose delivered by the ingested activity.
EPA has a current program to evaluate cost-effective methods for
removing radium from drinking water. This work includes both cost and
engineering analyses. Involved in the same program are two state agen-
cies, Iowa Department of Environmental Quality, and the Illinois Envir-
onmental Protection Agency.
The contract with the Iowa Department of Environmental Quality pro-
vides for studies at up to 10 drinking water supplies. Sample collection
and analysis are complete at all nine systems. Cost data have been col-
lected and are being analyzed. The contractor has submitted preliminary
data on all supplies. From these data, preliminary decontamination fac-
tors for each process have been calculated. The final report from this
contractor is due in October 1975. A similar contract with the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency provides for studies at five to eight
drinking water supplies. Radium analysis is being performed at the Ar-
gonne National Laboratory.
Under the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, EPA has the authority
to set standards for radioactivity levels in drinking water. The Office
of Radiation Programs has been involved with developing that portion of
the Drinking Water Standards that applies to radioactivity. A national in-
terim primary drinking water regulation on proposed maximum contaminant
66
-------
levels for radioactivity is under development. EPA believes that the
establishment of such levels as proposed will protect health to the
extent feasible and aid achievement of national goals of safe drinking
water.*
RADIOACTIVITY IN CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS
Construction materials may account for a significant exposure to
the U.S. population from naturally occurring radioactivity. It has
long been known that some building materials, such as granite, are
naturally more radioactive than others. (3) Recently, particular em-
phasis has been given to the use of uranium mill tailings as construc-
tion fill. Concentrations of radioactivity have also been associated
with the use of the waste product gypsum for plaster board. The re-
moval of these materials from the ground for subsequent use in dwellings
constitutes an example of natural radioactivity increased by man. Other
building materials being evaluated for possible radioactivity included
uranium ore leach residues in Sweden (Bergstrom and Wahlbug, 1968), cer-
amic bond fly ash, and foamed blast furnace slag (Roka, 1966).
Efforts are now underway (a) to increase our understanding of the
degree of exposure associated with these materials, (b) to evaluate
available methods to identify high exposures from construction materials,
and (c) to control their application. Inter-governmental coordination
is required of all agencies involved in the selection and quality of con-
struction materials used in the United States.
In making phosphoric acid by the wet process, a large quantity of
gypsum (calcium sulfate) is produced. To date, there has been a very
limited market for this gypsum. Consequently, each phosphoric acid
plant has a large store of gypsum typically between 50 to 300 acres
about 50 to 100 feet high. In Europe, and particularly in Japan, by-
product gypsum is being used to make wallboard. Preliminary data in-
dicates that the by-product gypsum contains 20 to 43 pCi/gram of radium-
226. The Bureau of Mines has a small pilot project designed to deter-
mine if the by-product gypsum could be successfully manufactured into
high quality wallboard. EPA has obtained samples of the processed gyp-
sum from the Bureau to determine the concentrations of radioactive ma-
terials in the final product. From this data, EPA is modelling struc-
tures to determine the dose to residents. The purpose is to evaluate
this use as soon as possible, because increasing mining costs for reg-
ular gypsum makes it appear that recovery of the by-product gypsum for
*EPA published the interim primary drinking water regulation in the
Federal Register dated August 14, 1975.
67
-------
wallboard may be economically desirable in the near future. Other
potential manufacturing uses of this gypsum in the production of am-
monium sulfate fertilizer, sulfuric acid, and Portland cement are being
studied throughout the world.
In the production of elemental phosphorus, a major by-product is
slag. Preliminary data indicates that slag contains about 50 to 60
pCi/gram of radium-226. Uranium content would be expected to be simi-
lar in values. It appears that the slag is now being widely used for
highway material, concrete, aggregate, and crushed stone. EPA is con-
tinuing to investigate slag concentrations in order to draw conclusions
regarding the acceptability of slag for various uses.
Surveys conducted to evaluate the hazards associated with the use
of uranium mill tailings for construction purposes have not been fully
reported in the literature. Detailed reports have been issued to indi-
vidual states where tailings material were used for construction pur-
poses. These state reports include the results of a mobile gamma-
scanning survey and the results of portable instrument radiation sur-
veys completed inside and outside of selected dwellings. In 1974 Dun-
can and Eadie presented data on the evaluation of the indoor working
level values and also on some indoor gamma radiation survey results for
structures built immediately adjacent to a uranium mill tailings pile
located in Salt Lake City, Utah.
OUTLOOK FOR THE FUTURE
As man seeks to improve his standard of living and demands greater
use of available natural resources, he is no longer shielded from natural
radioactivity contained in the earth. The result is increased potential
exposure to population groups. As the use of these natural resources in-
creases, there arises a need to consider the risks to the population ver-
sus the benefits derived from using such resources. There are both imme-
diate and long term needs to research, evaluate, and provide control meas-
ures for natural radiation. The following areas typify needed research
efforts:
• Develop radiation control and regulations for uranium
mill sites and uranium tailings and wastes burial sites.
68
-------
Identify cost/effective techniques for pile stabilization.
Determine needs for additional controls for the phosphate
industry and formulate allowable levels of discharge from
phosphate fertilizer plants.
Examine construction materials and radioactivity and de-
termine the need for new building controls.
Assess exposure due to radon and daughters from geothermal
sources.
Evaluate environmental impact from radioactivity in coal-
fired power plants and coal gasification.
Continue assessment of radon in natural gas, LNG, and
LPG.
Develop accurate, cost/effective, and reliable instrument-
ation to measure natural radioactivity and establish an
effective quality assurance program.
Finalize standards for drinking water and evaluate radium
removal techniques.
Evaluate radioactivity associated with vanadium, fluorspar,
copper, lead, titanium, and rare earth mining operations.
69
-------
REFERENCES
1. Axtmann, Robert. "Environmental Impact of Geothermal Power Plant,"
Science, March 7, 1975.
2. Congress of the United States, Hearings Before the Joint Committee
on Atomic Energy, February 5 and 6, 1974.
3. Gesell, Thomas and Prichard, Howard. "The Technologically Enhanced
Natural Radiation Environment," Health Physics, April 1975.
4. Liverman, James L. Statement Before the Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy, February 27, 1975.
5. National Academy of Sciences. The Effects on Populations o-f Expos-
ure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, Washington, D.C., 1972.
6. Oakley, Donald. Natural Radiation Exposure in the United States.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1972.
7. Summary Report Phase I Study of Inactive Uranium Mill Sites and
Tailings Piles, October, 1974.
8. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Sixth Annual
National Conference on Radiation Control. April 28 - May 2, 1974.
9. U.S. Department of the Interior. Uranium in Coal in the Western
United States, Geological Survey, Washington, D.C., 1959.
10. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Radiation Dose
Commitment: An Application to the Nuclear Power Industry. EPA-520/
4-73-002, Washington, D.C., 1974.
11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Assessment of Potential Radio-
logical Health Effects from Radon in Liquefied Petroleum Gas, Wash-
ington, D.C., (Draft), 1975.
12. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Assessment of Potential Radio-
logical Health Effects from Radon in Natural Gas. EPA-520/I-73-004,
Washington, D.C., 1973.
13. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Analysis of the
Uranium Fuel Cycle, Part I - Fuel Supply, EPA-520/9-73-003-B, Wash-
ington, D.C., 1973.
70
-------
14. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency- Radiation Data and Reports.
Volume 15, Number 1, Washington, D.C., January 1974.
15. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National Radiation Protection
Program Strategy and Plan, 1972.
16. Martin, James E., "A Comparative Population Radiation Dose Commit-
ment of Nuclear and Fossil Fuel Electric Power Cycles," Proceedings
of the 8th Annual Topical Symposium on Population Dose, Health
Physics Society (Knoxville, Tennessee) 24 October 1974.
71
-------
CHAPTER 4
MEDICAL AND OCCUPATIONAL
INTRODUCTION
The responsibility for controlling medical and occupational ex-
posure to radiation generating equipment and radioactive materials is
divided between the Federal and the State governments. Within the Fed-
eral government, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare (DREW), the Department of Labor
(DDL), and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) are responsible for
protecting the public against the deleterious effects of ionizing radia-
tion.
The responsibility establishing general Federal radiation guidance
applicable to all Federal agencies now resides in the Environmental
Protection Agency. This authority, which was previously vested in the
Federal Radiation Council by the Atomic Energy Act (PL 83-274h), was
transferred to the EPA by Reorganization Plan Number 3 of 1970. As a
consequence, the EPA administrator is now charged by law 42 USC 2021h
to advise the President on radiation matters directly or indirectly af-
fecting health, including guidance for all Federal agencies in formulat-
ing radiation standards. Federal agencies and the fifty State govern-
ments have complementary responsibilities to establish regulations to
control the use of radiation.
MEDICAL
THE MEDICAL RADIATION PROBLEM
Ionizing radiation represents a valuable diagnostic and therapeutic
tool in medicine, and its use has expanded substantially since its intro-
duction for such purposes about the turn of the century. Indeed, the ex-
posure of the general public to X-ray sources in medicine and dentistry
72
-------
is the largest manmade contributor to radiation exposure of the U.S.
population. Medical and dental X-ray equipment currently account for
over 90 percent of all manmade human exposures to ionizing radiation.
In 1970 alone, 129 million people (or 63 percent of the population),
received 210 million medical diagnostic X-ray examinations. In the
process, an estimated 8 million pregnant women were subjected to X-ray
procedures. Other population segments - such as the elderly - were
also subjected to a high number of examinations per capita.
The diagnostic and therapeutic uses of radiopharmaceuticals are
another source of ionizing radiation in medical practice. In 1970,
6-8 million individuals were administered such radiopharmaceuticals.
Other sources of radiation exposure derive from the use of microwaves,
ultrasonics, lasers, and diathermy equipment for diagnostic and thera-
peutic purposes.
The attendant benefits from the use of radiation for medical and
dental diagnosis and therapy are well recognized and are not at issue.
However, the risks associated with undergoing efficacious radiation
procedures needed for proper medical care must always be offset by the
benefits derived.
X-ray radiation protection became an important concern in the first
decades of this century when it was found that radiologists and their
assistants had a higher mortality rate, a higher rate of cancer induct-
ion, and a shorter life span than other physicians. It was the demon-
strated deleterious effects of large acute exposures to radiologists
and their assistants which provide the stimulus for the first radiation
protection guides. The effects of exposure on the equipment operators
were, therefore, of more concern than the effects of excessive and un-
necessary exposure to patients, as little concern was given to protecting
the patient.
While the safety of the personnel performing the X-ray procedures
is important, EPA is concerned also with potential unnecessary or exces-
sive exposure to the patient, particularly as it relates to both the in-
creased number of films per procedure and the higher exposure per film
noted in recent years. A Nationwide Evaluation of X-ray Trends (NEXT),
a program conducted jointly by the Food and Drug Administration/Bureau
of Radiological Health (FDA/BRH) and the States, found many kinds of
unnecessary exposures. Of special concern are those X-ray procedures
which are particularly dose intensive, include in the primary beam cer-
tain body organs such as the genitals, or suggest less than optimal exam
techniques.
In addition to the patient and medical personnel exposed while treat-
ing and diagnosing disease, the general population may be exposed to ra-
dioisotopes which have been discharged to the environment. This may take
73
-------
place through sewer systems and associated waste treatment facilities.
A cooperative BRH/EPA study on sewage radioisotope contamination in
the Cincinnati area was completed and findings reported in 1974 (4).
This exposure results from the current lack of regulations controlling
the handling, storage, or disposal of the excreta of patients who have
been administered radiopharmaceuticals. To minimize such contamination
of the environment, special precautions are particularly needed in faci-
lities using large amounts of radioactive materials.
ISSUES OF MEDICAL RADIATION USE
The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic
Radiation in 1972 (1) stated: "The awareness of the radiological staff
of the importance of the protection of the patient is probably the
greatest factor in the control of population exposure." Moreover, a
significant portion of present consumer-patient exposures can be avoided,
without a decrease in benefits, by improvements in training, equipment,
techniques, and procedures in administering radiation to patients, and
particularly by the application of X-rays in diagnostic procedures.
A report of the National Academy of Sciences - National Research
Council Advisory Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Ra-
diation (BEIR Committee) (2) dealt with the scientific basis for. the
establishment of radiation protection standards and reviewed and re-
evaluated existing scientific knowledge concerning radiation exposure
of human populations. This report states that "the aim is not only to
reduce the radiation exposure to the individuals, but also to have pro-
cedures carried out with maximum efficiency so that there can be a con-
tinuing increase in medical benefits accompanied by a minimum radiation
exposure." In this regard, the Committee concluded "...that it appears
reasonable that as much as 50 percent reduction in the genetically sig-
nificant dose from medical radiology might be possible through improved
technical and educational methods."
Therefore, from a radiation protection viewpoint, the major issues
in medical radiation deal with strategies to achieve three main object-
ives.
The first objectives is to ensure that all equipment in use is of
the best quality and complies with applicable performance standards. In-
spection procedures and an effective maintenance program must be institu-
ted with follow-through and follow-up to ensure that the standards are
continuously met. In addition, even the best quality equipment should be
used only in conjunction with shielding equipment to protect non-examin-
ated parts of the patient's body and the whole of the operator's body.
74
-------
The second objective is to eliminate clinically unnecessary exams.
Although physicians are not in complete accord as to which specific ex-
ams are unnecessary, it is generally thought that those which could be
eliminated are exams that provide few benefits compared to their asso-
ciated risks. These include: routine radiographic screening type exams,
used in annual physical exams; pre- and post-employment physicals, includ-
ing chest screening or lower back exams; public health screening; and
pelvic screening exams to estimate the likelihood of difficult childbirth.
The third objective is to utilize optimal techniques to assure that
the radiation dose for exposure is as low as readily achievable while
maintaining desirable image quality. This requires use of appropriate
technique variables such as speed of the film and screens, processing
time, KVp, and mAs. Use of less than optimal technique variables may
cause a ten fold increase in patient exposure as compared to the expos-
ure incurred using optimal technique variables in a similar exam. Also,
the training of equipment operators is important to good technique.
Training standards, operator qualification standards, and licensing re-
quirements need consideration in achieving this objective.
PROGRESS IN MEDICAL RADIATION PROTECTION
During 1974, several significant events occurred in the field of
medical radiation protection regulation and control. They represent
an encouraging trend for human and environmental protection. At the
Federal level, programs of both the Environmental Protection Agency and
the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare were directed toward
reduction of population exposure from medical radiation.
The Environmental Protection Agency took steps to include medical
radiation within Federal radiation protection guides. An Interagency
Working Group was formed to assist EPA in initiating a Federal effort
to reduce unnecessary radiation exposures from the use of X-rays in the
practice of medicine. This Interagency Working Group was established in
August 1974 and will develop as a cooperative Federal effort the Federal
guidance for medical use of radiation in Federal health care programs.
In June 1974 hearings before the Senate Committee on Commerce found
that air shipments of radionuclides are a source of needless exposure to
passengers, up to rates in the vicinity of 25 mrem/hour. The NRC fur-
nished data on the effectiveness of increased shielding, and EPA studies
indicated that more adequate shielding is technically and economically
achievable. Consequently, EPA has recommended to those Federal agencies*
*The Department of Transportation/Federal Aviation Administration, the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the Food and Drug Administration/
Bureau of Radiological Health.
75
-------
charged with the regulation of the transportation of radioactive mater-
ials that the dose rate to any passenger not exceed 0.5 mrem/hour.
A consequence of increased use of medical radioisotopes is increased
discharges of these materials to the environment principally via munici-
pal sewage facilities. In 1974, EPA initiated studies to determine the
nature and extent of this problem by a contract with the University of
Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health, Houston,
Texas.
The FDA's Bureau of Radiological Health continued programs designed
to control radiation exposure from electronic products under authority
contained in the Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act of 1968 as
follows:
• Performance standards for diagnostic medical and dental
X-ray equipment were promulgated with an effective date
of August 1, 1974.
• An agreement was reached with the U.S. Customs Office
for an interagency program to assure that all imported
electronic products comply with applicable performance
standards issued under the Radiation Control for Health
and Safety Act.
• Performance standards for cabinet X-ray systems become
effective April 10, 1975 except carry-on baggage sys-
tems which were effective April 25, 1974.
• A performance standard was promulgated to prevent human
access to radiation from lasers.
• An amendment was made to the microwave standard.
• A draft performance standard was proposed for ultrasound
equipment.
• An amendment was proposed to the Radiation Control for
Health and Safety Act to add sun lamps and certain med-
ical ultraviolet lamps.
The U.S. Senate passed Senate S. 2994 Title 7 as part of the Com-
prehensive Health Planning Act of 1974 requiring DHEW to establish stand-
ards to license radiologic technologists. This section was removed when
the bill went to the Joint Conference. Since the Senate has passed the
bill, it is reasonable to anticipate eventual enactment of the legisla-
tion and its implementation by Federal programs.
76
-------
At the State level, the National Conference of Radiation Control
Program Directors (3) adopted a resolution in May 1974 urging the
Congress and State legislatures to adopt "such legislation as is pre-
sently before them to assure the continuation or implementation of pro-
grams for licensure of operators of medical diagnostic X-ray equipment."
The resolution urged the Congress and the Food and Drug Administration
"to adopt a policy supporting such legislation" and urged further that
the "Food and Drug Administration actively assist states in drafting
state legislation and organizing an effective implementation of present
and future operators licensing legislation."
Beginning with New York in 1964, a number of states have initiated
programs requiring licensure of radiologic technologists. Three states -
California, New Jersey, and New York - and Puerto Rico have mandatory
programs, while three other states - Hawaii, Kentucky, and Vermont are
in the process of implementing licensure statues. Some thirteen state
legislatures are presently considering licensure proposals. Of note,
the State of California's licensure law requires anyone who takes or
supervises the taking of X-rays, including licensed practitioners, to
attest to minimum qualifications.
It is anticipated that the licensure of technologists would result
in a reduction of the amount of radiation exposure caused by the use of
sub-optimal X-ray techniques. The premise is that a technologist who
has demonstrated technical competence would commit fewer errors in op-
timizing the exam technique factors.
An entirely different method to reduce patient exposure has been
adopted by the State of Illinois. Effective January 1, 1975, the Illi-
nois Division of Radiological Health has established regulations which
limit the amount of radiation exposure for selected routine radiographs.
It is expected that the regulatory activities of 1974 will cause a
decrease in the exposure per patient. However, the collective exposure
of the general population is expected to increase in the future because
of population growth and the extension of medical and dental care to a
larger proportion of the population through Medicare and other health
insurance programs. Increased use of diagnostic radiological procedures
in medical practice suggests the need to limit individual exposures to as
low a level as reasonably achievable.
77
-------
OCCUPATIONAL
THE ISSUES OF OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE
Employees in industries involving radiation are exposed to radia-
tion by handling radioactive materials or entering areas which have ra-
diation levels or are contaminated by radioactive material. Current
guidance on occupational exposure is contained in the former Federal
Radiation Council's Memorandum for the President, "Radiation Protection
Guidance for Federal Agencies," approved and signed by the President
on May 13, 1960. These guides are used by all Federal agencies in their
activities. During the fifteen years since this guidance was established,
there has been an increase in the number of persons occupationally ex-
posed (800,000 in 1970); changes have been made in methods of calculat-
ing doses and their effects; new national requirements have been prom-
ulgated on increasing uses of sources, new Occupations have been creat-
ed and have exposed sensitive population groups; and new and relevant
scientific information on risks of low-levels of radiation and exposure
patterns by occupation has been acquired.
PROGRESS IN OCCUPATIONAL RADIATION PROTECTION
Because of the increased number of persons being exposed to ioniz-
ing radiation and increased information on the risks of radiation expos-
ure, the Environmental Protection Agency has undertaken a program to
reconsider all factors relevant to updated Federal guides for occupa-
tional exposure. As part of the program, EPA established an Interageney,
Committee on Occupational Exposures to Ionizing Radiation in September
1974 to advise EPA in developing guides sufficient to protect the radia-
tion worker from undue risk. A program for routinely compiling national
statistics on annual occupational exposure is under study. A contract
to develop a program to compile statistical data on annual occupational
exposure to ionizing radiation within the United States is expected to
be awarded in 1975.
THE OSHA ROLE IN RADIATION HEALTH PROTECTION
With the growing increase in the use of industrial radiation tech-
niques has come a serious concern for workers who, in the course of nor-
mal work activity, may come near potentially-dangerous sources of ioniz-
ing or non-ionizing radiation. The Occupational Safety and Health Act of
78
-------
1970 demonstrates a concern with such techniques. This legislation
created the Occupational Safety and Health Administration of the De-
partment of Labor, with the power to promulgate safety standards and
to make on-site inspections. Congress gave enforcement authority to
the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). The admin-
istration includes a system of fines and citations costly enough to
ensure compliance with the law.
The law provides OSHA with jurisdiction over all employers engaged
in interstate commerce. Recent judicial interpretation of the consti-
tution's interstate commerce clause assures that virtually all employ-
ers are legally bound by the act. There is, however, an exception
which applies to radiation. Section 4(b)(l) excludes employees who
are under the authority of Federal and State agencies acting under Sec-
tion 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. However, even these licen-
sees are subject to OSHA inspection and citation if they have X-ray
equipment or accelerators. Statistically, then, about 57 percent of
all people who are exposed to radiation in their work environment are
directly under OSHA1s aegis.
Whether or not a work facility will be inspected depends essen-
tially on one or more of three factors. First, OSHA gives priority
to an investigation involving a catastrophe or fatality. Second, under
an arrangement which guarantees the anonymity of the complaint, a worker
may complain to the Secretary of Labor if he feels his workplace is not
safe or healthful. Third, inspections are made on a random selection,
unannounced basis. The decision to make a random inspection is made at
the OSHA area level (in effect, at the local level).
Thus far, the number of actual radiation inspections has been com-
paratively small compared to the total number of inspections made by
OSHA's Compliance Safety and Health Officers. However, we can antici-
pate that - as part of the random selection and inspection program -
radiation inspections will become a more significant part of the OSHA
function.
OSHA closely follows the standards developed by the former AEC
for occupational exposure. New standards based on more recent research
are being considered and studied, but have not yet been promulgated.
79
-------
REFERENCES
1. Ionizing Radiation Levels: Levels and Effects, Volume I and II,
United Nations Scientific Committee on Effects of Atomic Radia-
tions, New York, 1972.
2. National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council, The Effects
on Population of Exposures to Low Level of Ionizing Radiation, Re-
port of the Advisory Committee on the Biological Effects of Ioniz-
ing Radiation, (BEIR Report) NAS/NRC report, November 1972.
3. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Sixth Annual
National Conference on Radiation Control, April 20 - May 2, 1974.
4. Sodd, V. J., Felton, R. J., and Saenger, E. L., 1974 An Investiga-
tion of the Disposal of Radiopharmaceuticals in the Cincinnati
Sewer System. First World Congress of Nuclear Medicine, Tokyo,
Japan, October 1974.
80
-------
CHAPTER 5
NONIONIZING RADIATION
INTRODUCTION
Nonionizing radiation is defined as radiation occurring in that ,
portion of the electromagnetic spectrum from 0 hertz (Hz) through 10
Hz; these are the frequency ranges used in such commonplace functions
as household current (60 Hz in the U.S.), high voltage electrical pow-
er lines, radio communications, TV broadcasts, microwaves (including
radar, microwave ovens, point-to-point microwave transmission towers,
satellite communications and medical diathermy devices), and infrared,
visible, and ultraviolet light (including sunlight, lasers, sunlamps,
and high intensity lamps). Basically, nonionizing radiation is con-
cerned with that portion of the electromagnetic spectrum where ener-
gies are below the atomic ionization potential for molecules of bio-
logical importance; thus, the energy transfer is primarily through
atomic vibrations and rotations. Those nonionizing'devices primarily
associated with medical and industrial areas have been discussed in
Chapter 4.
Nonionizing radiation has become a national concern because of the
rapid increase in its use for industrial, communication, and consumer
applications, and because of its potential harm to public health. It
is a major concern especially with low level exposure, because (a) the
environmental levels are unknown, (b) the number of sources is rapidly
increasing, and (c) the controversy over low level radiation effects is
heightened by the difference in human exposure standards, especially
between the United States (7, 8) and the Soviet Union (1).
In order to establish a more uniform approach to the discussion of
mechanisms underlying biological effects, microwave intensities are di-
vided into three approximate ranges: (a) the range above 10 mW/cm^ (high
level) in which distinct thermal effects predominate; (b) the range below
1 mW/cm (low level) in which thermal effects are improbable; and (c) an
intermediate range in which weak but noticeable thermal effects occur,
as well as direct field effects and other effects of a microscopic or
macroscopic nature, the details of which have not yet been clarified (47).
81
-------
The limits of these ranges have not yet been determined. They may
differ for various species and may also depend on a variety of parameters,
such as modulation and frequency.
The effects from exposure to high levels of nonionizing radiation
(such as those produced by some radar and satellite communication facili-
ties or other high intensity sources) have been referred to frequently as
"thermal" effects. Low level effects have been referred to as "nonthermal"
effects. The term "nonthermal" effects is imprecise and will be avoided as
much as possible.
A variety of health effects have been observed from exposure to non-
ionizing radiation. The thermal effects result from temperature increases
in tissue caused by the radiation (electromagnetic energy) absorbed and
converted into heat energy. Nonionizing radiation has beneficial applica-
tions in diathermy, microwave cooking, and industrial heating processes,
but, improperly used, there can be harmful side effects which include heat
stress (e.g., heat prostration), burns, cataracts of the eyes, and testic-
ular degeneration. (32)
Documentation (14) exists concerning microwave hearing i.e., the per-
ception of audible noises produced by interaction of the body with high
power sources such as radar. The microwave hearing mechanism is only par-
tially understood, and no adverse biological effects are yet determined.
At levels of exposure in the range of 0.01 milliwatts per square centi-
meter there is some evidence of nervous system and behavioral effects (1,
23). These effects may be due to localized heating or other molecular dis-
orderings. This evidence has come from certain European countries, some
(1, 23) of which have adopted standards for microwave exposure which set
occupational levels at one-thousandth of the current standard used in
the United States. The nervous system and behavioral effects have not
yet been verified in this country, although several research programs
have been initiated, both within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
and outside, to determine the existence and significance of such effects.
Besides the categories of biological effects which are related to the
various power density levels, the other major category of effects from non-
ionizing radiation is electrical interference. This includes critical com-
munications systems, electronic control systems, life support systems (such
as heart pacemakers), or inadvertent triggering of detonations (blasting).
Some anti-lock or anti-skid brakes, as well as some fuel-injection (elec-
tronic) systems have been known to fail because of electrical interference.
Whether the environmental nonionizing radiation problem is limited to
the relatively high levels of exposure in the vicinity of individual high
power sources, or whether it is related to the superposition or overlapping
of radiation from many sources, it appears that large populations are ex-
posed to significant ambient levels of nonionizing radiation.
82
-------
The EPA radiation program is providing the first information avail-
able on the scope of ambient levels of nonionizing radiation and on the
magnitude of potential effects on the exposed populations. This program
addresses (27) the need for information and action on (a) the adverse
thermal effects on biological systems that occur at levels greater than
10 milliwatts per square centimeter power density for radio frequency
and microwave radiation, (b) the adverse effects on biological systems
that have been reported to occur at level orders of magnitude below the
above power density, and (c) the environmental levels of nonionizing ra-
diation that can significantly interfere with the operation of critical
electrical systems.
It is important to understand the difference between effects from
sources which are pulsed (such as radar) and effects from continuous
wave (CW) radiation (such as radio, TV, and microwave ovens). In the
CW radiation category the effects of various modulations must also be
addressed. Areas of interest for electromagnetic-biological effects
are categorized in Table 5-1 (30).
In the nonionizing frequency range of radiation from light there
are potential problems such as eye damage and skin burns. This is par-
ticularly true of the intense light from laser systems, where a potential,
however, small, exists for irradiation of the general population. Lasers
are not generally used in applications which affect the environment, but
are usually restricted in accessability and confined in use to limited
areas such as scientific, industrial or military applications. Potential
hazards exist primarily because of unawareness or carelessness, with the
most significant possibilities for hazardous exposure occurring in educa-
tional institutions, medical facilities, and in surveying and ranging ap-
plications.
There is a growing concern (11) with possible health and environ-
mental effects from extremely high voltage power transmission (greater
than 700 kilovolts) because, with the increased demand for electrical
generation capacity in the U.S., transmission on 765 kV lines is current-
ly being planned, with future development of 1.2 million volt transmis-
sion lines probable. The effects from these high voltages at 60 Hz are
those due to (a) electromagnetically and electrostatically induced volt-
ages and currents, (b) electric discharge, and (c) ozone production.
Good data needs to be made generally available on the relevant para-
meters of line height, phase configuration, line voltage^ etc. so that
reported effects can be evaluated.
83
-------
Table 5-1 Electromagnetic Bioeffects: Areas of Investigation
• Genetic/Hereditary/Developmental; chromosomal, mitotic, reproduc-
tion/fertility, embryology, and pre- and postnatal development, etc.,
• Nervous System; CNS, sensory, neurochemical-neuroendocrine, and
single cell - membrane phenomena,
• Behavioral/Psychological
• Gross Physical Condition/General Health '
• Epidemiology (pro- and retrospective)
• Clinical Examinations
• Mechanisms of EM Interaction (with molecules, tissues, body systems,
etc.): micro- and macro-
• Other Areas
A. Ocular
B. Cardiovascular
C. Metabolism/endocrinology/biochemical
D. Thermal/thermoregulatory/lethality
E. Cytological/historical, morphological
F. Other Effects: blood GI, respiratory, motor, physical, endur-
ance, stress, biological clocks/rhythms, disease, etc...
• Instrumentation/Techniques/Calibration: bioresearch (EM measurement,
special biomedical instrumentation, exposure and calibration facili-
ties), and field measurements (equipment, methodology, etc.)
• Absorption/Dose; analytical/mathematic/theoretical, and experiment-
al (animal, phantom, model)
• Environmental and Safety Studies; environmental surveys, population
studies, hazard assessment/safety standards
• Special Features, such as: multiple frequencies, RF with other
stressors and environmental factors (e.g., drugs, ionizing radiation,
disease, etc.), RF heating vs. other heat sources, chronic vs. short
term effects studies, compare difference due to sex, age, and other
biological factors, literature studies, and therapy.
*0ffice of Telecommunications Policy, Ref. 30.
84
-------
With only minimal health and environmental information available
on the direct effects of high intensity 60 Hz field (and this only for
animal systems), there is a need to collate what is known before design-
ing an extensive research program. Information is needed on electrical
shock from voltages and currents induced in objects in the vicinity of
the line. We need to know which effects are considered painful, annoy-
ing, or just distasteful.
GROWTH IN NONIONIZING RADIATION
Since 1945, when environmental nonionizing radiation levels were
very low, the potential threat to persons and equipment from nonioniz-
ing sources has risen dramatically. Radiofrequency and microwave sources
alone are estimated to be increasing at 15 percent annually (27). The
applications with the highest growth rate include commercial broadcast,
microwave ovens (1,200,000 estimated in service at the end of 1974, a
600,000 increase over 1973; 1975 increase estimated at 700,000 to
800,000) (5), landmobile communications (459,000 in 1972), small boats
and private and commercial plane electronic systems, radars (military
and private) and microwave diathermy.
Until recently the growth of radio and TV stations in the United
States has been phenomenal, as is seen in Figure 5-1 (21). As of Febru-
ary 1975, there are 7,928 radio stations (4,436 AM, 2,657 FM commercial,
and 735 FM educational).* In addition 6,000,000 transmitting devices
had been authorized by the FCC (27) exclusive of Federal Government sys-
tems with over 120,000 assigned frequencies (28). It is evident that
there are numerous artificial sources of nonionizing radiation influenc-
ing the human environment in the United States.
Besides the growth in source numbers and types, the output power
density has steadily increased until there are now 86 sites capable of
producing a power density of 10 milliwatts per square centimeter at a
distance of approximately one mile from the source, while 2,368 sources
are capable of producing a power density of 10 microwatts per square
centimeter (0.01 mW/cm^) at the same distance. (35) These two power den-
sities represent the probable extremes of the range of acceptable power
densities for environmental standards. Notable high powered sources are
satellite communications facilities, airport radar, broadcast TV (UHF),
industrial processing applications, and military electronic applications.
*FCC licensing information office, telephone conversation.
85
-------
8000
1200 -
1100 -
- 7000
100 -
1945
Figure 5-1 Increase in Radio and TV Broadcast Stations
in the United States (21)
86
-------
What is the hazardous level of radiation? Two very different
points of view as to hazardous levels are presented in Figure 5-2 (40).
1000
100
CM
I 10
I -1
5- -01
.001
ANSI, OSHA(IOMHz-IOOGHz)
U.S. Army-Air Force (300 MHz-300 GHz)
(Practical Limit - 55 mW/cm2)
ACGIH(100MHz-100GHz)
USSR Occupational (300 MHz-300 GHz)
USSR Non-occupational (300 MHz-300 GHz)
'—i i i
juuL
I—I I 1111
10
Time of Exposure (min.)
100
1000
Figure 5-2 Some Selected Microwave Exposure Standards (40)
87
-------
U.S. standards, e.g., the OSHA standard (7, 8), the American Na-
tional Standards Institute (ANSI) consensus standard (2), the U.S. Army
and U.S. Air Force Standards (42), and the standard used by the Ameri-
can Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) (41), per-
mit continuous exposure to power densities of 10 mW/cm^ for a period of
one hour or more. The difference between the exposures permitted under
U.S. and Russian standards is 3 to 4 orders of magnitude (1,000 to
10,000 times). The U.S. standards for nonionizing electromagnetic ra-
diation are based on the premise that biological effects are due to the
heat generated when the radiation is absorbed; the Russian standards as-
sume that biological effects occur at much lower power densities and are
not due to heating alone (1). Poland has standards (22) that are less
restrictive than those of the USSR, but more so than those of the U.S.,
while Czechoslovakia has standards (20) which fall in between the Polish
and Russian standards.
The potential magnitude of the nonionizing radiation problem in our
environment is illustrated by Figure 5-3 (35). Figure 5-3a shows the tot-
al number of sources within the U.S. which are capable of producing an ex-
posure power density of 10 mW/cm2 (U.S. Standard) as a function of distance
from the source. Reducing the density levels to the levels of the Russian
Standard, Figure 5-3b, more than doubles the number of stations which ex-
ceed the U.S. standard and increases the perceived dimensions of the prob-
lem many fold.
.000
.000
100
10
5|097 (a) 10mW/cm2
2,366
i * •»
569
84
(5
|
1
317 10 31 7 100 317 t.OOO 3.170 IO.OOQ 3I.7OO
DISTANCE (meters)
to
cc
UJ
1- (0.000
K
UJ
U. 1,000
cr
UJ
| K>0
2
10
55.4" .8.106
,b,0.01mw/cm2
I6.F74
5.09,9
2,366
i e«j
565
317 10 317 100 317 1,000 3.170 KJ.OOO 31.700
DISTANCE (meters)
Figure 5-3 Cumulative Distribution of Emitters in the United States
Capable of Producing a Power Density Equal to or Greater
than (a) 10 mW/cm2 and (b) 0.01 mW/cm2, as a
Function of Distance. (35)
88
-------
NONIONIZING RADIATION CONCERNS
Concern over the level and effects of nonionizing radiation has not
yet caused any one agency to consider nonionizing radiation as a priority
issue across the board. At present the responsibilities for nonionizing
radiation research and control are diffused among several agencies. The
Department of Health, Education and Welfare (DHEW) is responsible for
equipment performance standards, the Department of Labor (DOL) for occu-
pational health and safety, the Environmental Protection Agency for en-
vironmental aspects, and user agencies for control over their activities.
The Office of Telecommunications (OTP) is attempting to coordinate re-
search, but acts only in an advisory capacity.
The environmental and health risks from nonionizing radiation need
to be resolved at all frequencies, both for the biological effects and in-
terference with electronic equipment. In the power density range of below
10 mW/cm^, it is necessary (a) to determine guidelines for the exposure of
the general population where neither the mobility nor the environment of
the exposed group is under the control of the operators of the source, and
where some segments of the population may be more sensitive to heat stress
than those exposed occupationally; and (b) to determine and verify by meas-
urement the sources which can produce significant thermal levels in order
to define necessary controls.
Research at power density levels above 10 mW/cm^ would be applied only
to frequencies greater than 10 MHz and would be needed primarily as it re-
lates to man for levels below 10 mW/cm^.
The problems related to lower levels of nonionizing radiation (1 mW/
cm^ and less) are more complex and subtle than those at higher power den-
sity levels, and the complexity increases as the level decreases. At a
level of 1 mW/cm^, environmental measurements are directed toward specific
areas of very high source density, while at 0.01 mW/cm^ the emphasis shifts
to the development and verification of predictive models. Most of the cur-
rent research is directed toward direct health effects in the 1 to 10 mW/
cm^ range. Research requirements pertinent to a 1 mW/cm^ guideline might
be met by extensions of some on-going research programs. Levels of 0.1
through 0.01 mW/cm^ require extensive new efforts with emphasis on deter-
mining basic mechanisms of interaction, behavioral and neurophysical ef-
fects, and on epidemiological studies. With a decrease in the radiation
density level of interest, the length of time necessary to determine the
effects increases, even to the extent of a generation or more.
Interference effects are of concern especially in the low level ra-
diation density category and need further investigation because of the broad
89
-------
range of devices affected. Interference affects the reliability and
usefullness of life support equipment such as cardiac pacemakers, hos-
pital telemetering equipment, hospital-used electronic thermometers,
critical communications such as aircraft guidance and communications,
and other devices ranging from electrocardiographs to home televisions
receivers.
The effects from extremely high voltage electrical power (greater
than 700 kV) transmission lines include electrical shock, ozone produc-
tion, electrical discharge, and induction effects into nearby objects
like metal fences paralleling the power lines (11). The biological ef-
fects from the electric fields of high voltage transmission lines would
be comparable to any associated with the Navy's controversial project
Sanguine (16, 17, 24).
MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION PROTECTION ACTIVITIES
FEDERAL AGENCIES
The problems associated with nonionizing radiation are of interest
to a number of governmental agencies, each having its own scope and level
of effort. Figure 5-4 presents the governmental groups interested in some
aspect of the problem, whether in the coordinating of programs, monitoring
of sources, measuring of radiation levels, researching the effects on the
environment, maintaining the safety and health of man, or developing stand-
ards. About 90 percent of the research in nonionizing radiation environ-
mental health effects is conducted by the Department of Defense (DOD), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Department of Health, Educa-
tion and Welfare (DREW).
At the beginning of calendar year 1974, there were 114 projects con-
cerned with electromagnetic biological effects. These are listed by agency
in Table 5-2 (30). Figure 5-5 gives a summary of the frequency distribution
of electromagnetic biological effects programs for fiscal year (FY) 1974 (30).
Laser and other light radiation have not been included in the summaries. Dur-
ing the calendar year 1974, several projects were modified, consolidated, or
dropped and approximately 21 new projects were initiated. The result was
that for the beginning of FY 75 there were 106 projects planned with a fund-
ing of about $7.5 million (FY 74 funding $7 million, FY 73 funding $6 million)
(31)
90
-------
TECHNICAL COORDINATION:
Office of Telecommunications Policy
(OTP)
• Electromagnetic Radiation Management Ad-
visory Council (ERMAC)
• Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee
(IHAC)
• Side Effects Working Group
NONIONIZING RADIATION PROGRAMS:
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
• Office of Radiation Programs (ORP)
• Office of Research and Development
Programs (ORD) National Environ-
mental Research Center - Research
Triangle Park (NERC-RTP)
Env ironmental
Standards for Nonionizing
Radiation
Federal Agencies
Department of Health, Education and
Welfare (DHEW)
• Bureau of Radiological Health (BRH)
• National Institutes of Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH)
• National Institutes of Environmental
Health Sciences (NIEHS)
Performance Standards
for Nonionizing Radiation Sources
Department of Labor
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA)
Occupational Safety
and Health Act Standards
Industry
Federal Agencies
Department of Defense (DOD)
Air Force
Army
Navy
Defense Nuclear Agency (DNA)
Electromagnetic Compatibility
Analysis Center (ECAC)
Other Federal Agencies
Department of Commerce (COMM)
• National Bureau of Stand-
ards (NBS)
• Institute of Telecommuni-
cations Sciences (ITS)
National Science Foundation (NSF)
Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
Federal Communications Commission
(FCC)
National Aeronautics and Space Admin-
istration (NASA)
Veterans Administration (VA)
Energy Research and Development Ad-
ministration (ERDA)
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
United States Information Agency
(USIA)
States
• High Voltage Transmission Lines
• LASERS
• Microwave Sources
Figure 5-4
Governmental Parties Interested in Nonionizing Radiation
91
-------
VXD
hO
Agency Projects
DOD
Army 1-7
0-fi
Navy 1-13
0=26
Air Force 1-3
0-7
0=1
HEW
BRII 1-15
0-8
0-1
0-2
EPA 1-- 1 1
0-1
NSF 0=3
TOTALS 114 *•
1=59
0=55
PROGRAM AREAS*
1234 5 6 7 SA 8B 8C 8D 8E 8F 9 10 11 12
Behav/ Gross Clin Met/End T/T Cyt/Hist Envir/ Special
G/H/D NS Psych Cond Epidem Exam Mech Eye C-V Blochem Reg. Morph Other Jnst Absorp Safety Feature
3,3 2,2 1,1 — 1,1 1,1 3,3 2,1 3,3 3,3 2,2 2,2 1,0 2,0 4,2
(1J) (U)
5,2 10,8 12,8 5,5 3,3 5,5 4,2 1,1 12,11 1,1 1,0 7,7 3,3 3,2 1,1 4,4
(1J) (U) (2J) (2J) (1J)
3,3 1.1 — 1,1 3,3 2,2 2,2 1,1 5,3 4,2 3,3 1,1
1.1
8,4 3,3 2.1 — 1,1 3,3 3,2 4,3 1,1 3,2 3,2 3,2 2,2 3 2
(1J) (1J) (U) (U) (2J) (2J) (U)
3.2 2,2 1,1 — 1,0 --- 4,4 4,4 1,1 2,2 3,3 3,3 1,1
(5T) (IT) (IT)
2,1 1,1 1,1 1,1 1,1
1,0
1,0
— - — - 1|0
1,1
24 21 17 7 3 4 18 8 2 24 7 9 13 20 15 13 14
I = number of projects conducted within tho agency
0 = number of projects conducted by outside contracts, grants, or another agency
T = indicates a project funded by transfer dollars from ;mother agency (5T) indicates 5 transfer fund projects
J = indicates a project jointly funded with another agency
* abbreviations are defined in Table 5-1
** totals are adjusted to account for ioint and transfer funding In-Government = 67 non-Government = 47
Table 5-2 Electromagnetic Bioeffects Programs - FY 1974
(From Figure 4, Ref. 30)
-------
AM
VHF VHF UHF
TV FM TV TV
U)
AGENCY
^PROJECTS
ARMY 15
NAVY-39
AIR
FORCE-10
ONA-2
BRH-23
NIEHS-5
NIOSH-3
EPA-12
NBS-8
NSF 3
FCC-1
FAA-1
VA-2
ELF
0-3kHz
1 '
(13)
1Hz
VLF
3-30kHz
i i inn i
IF
30-3HkHz
1 1 Mill 1
MF
300-3000kHz
1 1 1 Mil 1
(2)
HF
3-30MHZ
1 ' '
EMP
(2) 1
VHF
30-300MHZ
I I 1 1 II 1
(2)
Frequency Scale [ |_ j i i 1 1 ill 1 1 1 1 1 Mil i I 1 I 1 1 in I i i i | nil i i i i 1 1 III I
UHF
3003000MHz
i Mini i
(2) —
(4)-
(Z) (11)
(15)-
.
-
(2)-
(4t- (41 —
(4)-
(2)-
SHF
3-30GHZ
i i HIM i
-
-
-
.
^••^^^^B
(3)
"
-
-14)
-
(2)
- (2)
EHF
30300GHZ
i nun i
-_
OTHER
3003000CH2
EMP, Vigw, Etc.
Various,
Radar,
MW Rad. lit
EMP
Various,
Radar
EMP
1 1 1 1 III 1 I I i i nil i i 1 1 1 Mil 1 1 1 I 1 III!
1kHz 10kHz 100kHz 1MHz 10MHz 100MHz IGHz f 10GHz 100GHz lOOOGHz
Notes: Number in bracket indicates the number of projects in a frequency range. 2450MHz
A single project may deal with more than one frequency (or range). (Microwave ovens)
Figure 5-5 Frequency Distribution of Electromagnetic Bioeffects Research Programs By Agency - FY 74
(From Figure 5, Ref. 30)
-------
A majority of the projects for both FY 74 and FY 75 dealt with
microwave radiation, although a cluster of research projects dealt
with the effects of the frequency range 45 to 75 Hz. Even though
this latter work is directed primarily toward the Navy's Project San-
guine, it is expected to provide important information relating to ex-
tremely high voltage power transmission.
Because of the diversity of works among agencies, a summary of ef-
forts is presented for the calendar year 1974 by agency. *
OFFICE OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS POLICY
The Office of Telecommunications Policy (OTP) continued to empha-
size the study of radiation exposures at relatively low power density
levels over extended periods of time, as well as the study of the effects
of different electromagnetic conditions. OTP also emphasizes the need to
determine the clinical significance associated with any observed effects
and the need to develop a sound scientific basis for remedial and/or con-
trol measures as warranted. Annually OTP publishes a report on programs
for control of electromagnetic pollution of the environment, with empha-
sis on the biological hazards (29, 30, 31).
ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COUNCIL
The Electromagnetic Radiation Management Advisory Council (ERMAC) is
an advisory group for OTP. The Council is composed of multidisciplinary
scientists, with interested Federal agencies also providing designated
observers. Some liaison and coordination is made possible among Federal
agencies through ERMAC activities.
In an effort to bring forth available information on nonionizing ra-
diation, the Office of Telecommunications Policy (OTP) held a workshop/
seminar (10) with the Electromagnetic Radiation Management Advisory Coun-
cil on October 31, and November 1, 1974. They invited specialists and in-
vestigators to review the present state of knowledge, progress, and re-
search pertaining to possible nervous system and behavioral effects of non-
ionizing radiation (a principal area of investigation in the overall multi-
agency program to assess biological effects of these radiations). A second
session (9) on measurement of environmental levels of nonionizing electro-
magnetic radiation was held in February 1975. Because of the relevance of
radiation from lasers, ERMAC intends to include this area of nonionizing
radiation in future considerations.
*Information on several of the agencies was provided by the Office of Tele-
Communications Policy from reports submitted to OTP from these agencies (31)
94
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
The Environmental Protection Agency nonionizing radiation program
(12) is divided between two offices. Regulatory actions and environ-
mental measurements and evaluation are conducted by the Office of Radia-
tion Programs in the Office of Air and Waste Management. Biological ef-
fects research is conducted by the Experimental Biology Laboratory Divi-
sion in the Office of Research and Development.
During calendar year 1974 activities in the environmental measure-
ments and evaluation area included the development of a mobile capability
to measure general ambient environmental levels and to measure and analyze
several specific types of sources. A semiautomated system (37) for meas-
uring environmental levels is now scheduled to be operational early in
1975. The principal components of the system are a spectrum analyzer
(20 Hz - 18 GHz), a minicomputer system to control the spectrum analyzer
and to acquire and reduce data, and several antenna systems that are sen-
sitive to the principal polarizations of signals in their respective fre-
quency bands. The entire system is housed in a mobile van.
Land space for a facility to support the mobile monitoring capability
and other program related activities is provided by the Army at the Forest
Glen Annex of the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research through an Inter-
agency Agreement. Interagency Agreements have also been established with
the Electromagnetic Compatibility Analysis Center for source distribution
data and with the Institute for Telecommunications Science (ITS) for anten-
na calibration.
A limited number of field or analytical studies have been completed
on such specific sources as radar, satellite communication systems, and UHF
broadcast stations. A computer program has been adapted from ITS to calcu-
late the population in the U.S. about any point defined by its latitude and
longitude. The program has been used to calculate population exposure from
AM radio stations. A capability to calculate and measure electric field
profiles in the vicinity of high voltage transmission lines has been esta-
blished. The computer program for calculating electric field strength,
adapted from one provided by the Bonneville Power Administration, has been
verified against field measurements on a single 500 kV transmission line.
Biological effects research progressed during 1974 on a number of
fronts. A crossed-beam apparatus for simultaneous microwave irradiation
and spectrophotometric analysis was significantly improved to allow con-
tinuous monitoring of reflected power. In this system, exposure of a mod-
el protein to 1.7 and 2.45 GHz radiation had no detectable effects on the
structural integrity of the molecule. Similar experiments on the binding
constants of ribonuclease were nearing completion. The activities of mito-
chondrial and microsomal preparations exposed to 2.45 GHz radiation in this
95
-------
apparatus showed no differences from control levels. A flow-through sys-
tem was also developed which permits the rapid measurement of mitochondrial
respiratory activity immediately following exposure over a frequency of 1.7-
3.0 GHz. Research capabilities have also been extended by the completion of
an X-band (8.5 to 9.6 GHz) microwave exposure facility which operates under
controlled environmental conditions.
Development of methodology to determine the complex dielectric con-
stant for biological materials over a frequency range up to 9 GHz using
Time-Domain-Refleetometer exposure techniques and Fast Fourier Transform
Analysis was in progress. The interaction between multilayered spherical
models and UHF/Microwave plane waves was used to examine the energy depo-
sition in spheres with radii of 3.3, 6, and 10 cm over the frequency spec-
trum 400-4000 MHz. Work was initiated on the whole body absorption prop-
erties of animals using swept frequencies over a range of 200-525 MHz.
The methods and measurements needed for determining absorbed dose rates
for in vitro samples under a variety of conditions, including far field
exposures, were under development.
U.S. AIR FORCE
The Air Force has several program study areas. One studied internal
fields in man and experimental animals in order to estimate the effects of
electromagnetic radiation in man. Assymetrical power distributions, even
at wavelengths much longer than the axis of man, were found to exist.
In studies of the brain areas of rats exposed to high and low impe-
dence high frequency (HF) band fields, a strong thermal response and de-
creased concentrations of ATP and acetylcholine were detected. Analysis
showed an uptake of zinc and alterations of magnesium content of the mid-
brain.
A study on zebra fish subjected to short pulse (one microsecond) and
field strengths up to 7.5 kV/cm showed little effect on developing systems,
other than those that can be explained by thermal effects.
The usual indicators of pathology were negative when mice were exposed
for 240 days at two field levels to very low frequency (VLF) radiation.
Efforts are directed toward determining if there are effects from high VLF
field strengths on humans.
96
-------
U.S. ARMY
During 1974, a major effort to determine microwave effects on beha-
vior and lethality was continued and extended. Emphasis was placed on
the orientation of the body relative to the electric (E) and magnetic
(H) fields. In the lethality studies on rats and mice it was found that
when the long axis of the rodent was oriented parallel to the E vector,
increased lethality resulted.
Development efforts produced new microwave transparent probes which
are superior to previous probes for use in experimental animals.
Ocular effects studies on rabbits have been completed at microwave
frequencies for exposure levels of 50 to 300 mW/cm2. The finding was
that cataracts develop only at high exposure levels. Meanwhile, in an-
other effort, data are being analyzed for 5, 10, and 25 mW/cm2 power den-
sities of microwave radiation on mammalian serum protein to determine the
effects.
U.S. NAVY
The U.S. Navy has many projects to study nonionizing radiation. The
efforts in this program are to determine safe exposure power levels and
tolerance times for personnel, as well as to define the nature of possi-
ble biological effects of such exposure from communications transmitters,
radars, and other military electronic equipment.
In one study, the extremely low frequency (ELF) electric and magnetic
field exposures over several weeks duration on man and other representative
organisms are being investigated in support of Project Sanguine. A related
but separate effort shows no significant changes in temperature rhythms des-
pite thorough studies with animals exposed for as long as three months to
45 to 75 Hz fields. However, another study indicates behavior may be af-
fected within the EEC range (1-32 Hz) if the fields are in resonance with
the dominant EEC frequency that accompanies the behavior. This relation-
ship is seen to a slight degree through the behavioral response of monkeys
in low frequency, low voltage, unmodulated electric fields within broad
frequency-voltage thresholds.
The Navy has substantially changed the original design of the sub-
marine under water communications system, Project Sanguine (17, 24), and
announced in early 1975 that the project is now named "Seafarer" (16).
97
-------
Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) effects are being evaluated. These
are the very short duration, high peak power voltage pulses experien-
ced as a result of a nuclear detonation. In another area neuroendocrine
studies are being conducted on rats and dogs at RF and MW frequencies.
In another study behavioral dysfunctions in adult male rats were asso-
ciated with mild to severe body heating as a result of behavioral tests
of general activity at 2.450 GHz.
BUREAU OF RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH
The Bureau of Radiological Health (BRH) of DHEW conducted several
programs to help determine future performance criteria. The effort dealt
with the calibration at 2450 MHz of microwave radiation measurement in-
struments and the completion and operation of a new high performance
microwave power density calibration facility in the Division of Electro-
nic Products. The facility has the capability to make accurate micro-
wave measurements at many frequencies (43). In addition to calibration
improvements, the development of more precise techniques for microwave
measurement moved forward. In the biological area the concepts of cri-
tical tissue, delayed effects, cumulative damage, and embryonic and fetal
sensitivity formed the basis for experimental design and for selection of
biological end points.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCE
The National Institute of Environmental Health Science (NIEHS) of
DHEW concentrated on studies of effects on cell systems, embryo develop-
ment, and neural response to microwave radiation at 2450 MHz. In another
program, 2450 MHz radiation at 10 mW/cm^ was studied to determine neural
function effects.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH
The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of
DHEW shares responsibility for developing the scientific data, research in-
formation, and recommendations for the Nonionizing Radiation Exposure Stand-
ard (29 CFR 1910.97). This standard was updated July 1, 1974, by the De-
partment of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. This
standard covers occupational electromagnetic radiation in the frequency
range 10 MHz to 100 GHz.
98
-------
A radiofrequency (RF) program was set up to determine potential bio-
logical effects from RF radiation on industrial workers at the Industrial-
Scientific-Medical (ISM) band frequencies of 13.56, 27.12, and 40.48 MHz.
The program will identify health and safety problems experienced as a re-
sult of this RF radiation exposure. Another study was initiated as a
joint Air Force - NIOSH project: research to determine the effects of
RF radiation on lymphocyte division response in primates and in cell cul-
tures over a range of 10 to 100 MHz at selected locations in man.
NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS
The National Bureau of Standards (NBS) of the Department of Commerce
was called upon by other agencies to develop instrumentation. This in-
cluded development of energy density meters with isotropic probes with
a broad frequency response for the Navy, Air Force, and NIOSH, special
electric field measurement and magnetic field measurement instruments
for NIOSH, exposure chambers for biological studies, and the equipment
and theory to measure and calculate antenna patterns. Another project
required improvement to existing energy density meters for use around
airports and aircraft for the FAA. A near field synthesizer was developed
for the Air Force.
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
The National Science Foundation (NSF) awarded a number of grants for
studies of the interaction of electromagnetic energy and biological mater-
ials through its Control and Automation Protram.
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) identifies, reviews, and trans-
lates current foreign literature, making this literature available to agen-
cies working on the biological effects from nonionizing radiation.
VETERANS ADMINISTRATION
The Veterans Administration (VA) has investigated chronic microwave ex-
posure and its ocular and behavioral effects. The VA has also measured rela-
tively large perturbations in field strengths due to the presence of objects
99
-------
in an electromagnetic field during data acquisition on absorption and
field distribution. The VA is concerned with dosimetry and instrumenta-
tion to permit more accurate measurements.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
The Federal Communications Commission controls civilian and amateur
broadcast sources, but the health effects of high powered sources are not
directly considered in frequency allocation or in the siting of transmit-
ters.
STANDARDS
The Department of Health, Education and Welfare (DHEW) is obligated
by PL 90-602—known as the "Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act
of 1968"—to develop and promulgate performance standards for consumer
products as was done for microwave ovens. Others are presently being
prepared for lasers, laser systems, and laser-containing products. The
purpose of DHEW standards is to ensure that products will be manufactured
to meet the appropriate performance requirements and minimize the possi-
bility of radiation injury.
On September 4, 1974, the Food and Drug Administration of DHEW is-
sued proposed laser performance standards (39FR32094) (44) for a second
time, after receiving and reviewing numerous comments on the proposed
standard issued December 10, 1973 (38FR34084). The aim of this standard
is to control the electromagnetic radiation emission intensity in the
wavelength range 250 through 13000 manometers (infrared, visible, and
ultraviolet light ranges). Four classes of emission power are defined.
As of August 6, 1974, all microwave ovens must become inoperable if
one or both of the independently operating safety interlocks fail to func-
tion (43). This is an improvement of the FDA requirement that microwave
ovens manufactured after October 6, 1971, be equipped with at least two
safety interlocks. The Bureau of Radiological Health of FDA is still in-
vestigating methods of defeating the interlock devices by use of common
household items in order to specify further interlock design standards or
guidelines.
The Department of Labor, through PL 91-596—the "Occupational Health
and Safety Act of 1968"—may adopt any national consensus standard for oc-
cupational exposures, such as a standard adopted and promulgated by the
100
-------
American National Standards Institute (ANSI). For example, any laser
standard adopted by the Department of Labor for PL 91-596 would apply
to all lasers used by workers in industry. The military services use
similar guidelines to control occupational exposure.
On December 2, 1974, the American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) reissued its standards (2), "Safety Level of Electromagnetic
Radiation with Respect to Personnel" (ANSI C95.1-1974).
FEDERAL/STATE LEGISLATION
At the present time, there is no legislative authority for the
specific control of nonionizing electromagnetic radiation pollution of
the environment. However, as a pollutant, nonionizing radiation comes
under the broad authority of EPA to protect the environment. In Reor-
ganization Plan Number 3 of 1970, EPA is directed to "...by itself and
together with other agencies, monitor the condition of the environment—
biological as well as physical" and "...in concert with the States—to
set and enforce standards for air and water quality and for individual
pollutants." (27)
The Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, PL 93-438 of October 11,
1974 created the Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA).
One of its missions will be to carry on research with regards to environ-
mental and biological impacts and to study effects of various electric
transmission and generation systems.
Executive Order 11807 (September 28, 1974) made the Occupational
Safety Standards applicable to federal employees, requiring protection
to be "at least as effective" as OSHA standards. The new regulations
became effective November 1, 1974.
A recent agreement (43) between the Food and Drug Administration and
the U.S. Customs Service outlines an interagency program on electronic im-
port control to assure that all imported electronic products comply with
applicable performance standards issued under the Radiation Control for
Health and Safety Act (PL 90-602).
During 1974 no new legislation was passed by the 50 states with re-
gards to nonionizing radiation. New Jersey has a microwave oven bill
(A.833) which will be carried over to the 1975 session. Three other
bills, all associated with microwave ovens, failed to pass (Wisconsin
S.49o', New York S.9313, and Pennsylvania S.1902) (25).
101
-------
COURT ACTION
Two court cases, one in Michigan involving Detroit Edison Company
(Case Number 18146) and another in New York State involving Niagara-
Mohawk Power Corporation, took place during 1974 in an effort to stop
construction of 765 kV electrical power transmission lines. Some issues
involved were shock hazard, ozone production and field effects.
FIELD STUDY
A Calverton, New York, potato farmer has charged Grumman Aerospace
Corporation's Calverton facility with producing cataracts in his eyes.
while he worked in his fields, via microwave radiation from the radar
at the adjacent Grumman airfield. During the week of August 25, 1974,
an EPA team from ORP monitored the radiation and found it to be well
within the OSHA standard (29 CFR 1910.97-1974). (6, 13, 34)
HIGH VOLTAGE TRANSMISSION LINES DATA REQUEST
A high voltage electrical power transmission line radiation program
commenced in ORP during 1974. Initial investigation led to the recogni-
tion of a need for data and information on the health and environmental
effects associated with the operation of extremely high voltage (EHV)
lines (700 kV or greater). Of particular interest are the magnitudes
of the electric and magnetic fields and their impact on health and the
environment. Data are also desired on phenomena which accompany electric
discharge such as oxidant production, audible noise, and interference
with electronic devices.
INTERNATIONAL
US/USSR EXCHANGE (43)
During May, 1974, a group of five U.S. representatives made a tech-
nical exchange visit to Soviet laboratories. The information exchange
was a step towards implementation of an agreement between the two coun-
tries for scientific collaboration in the area of microwave biological
effects. The collaborative work would be part of a larger program to
study physical factors in the environment that affect human health.
102
-------
During a December visit to the USSR, Dr. Rail, Director of the National
Institute of Environmental Health Science, presented a proposed U.S.
work plan and course of action for developing a cooperative microwave
program in anticipation that a formal plan can be adopted during a re-
turn visit by Soviet scientists in early 1975.
BRH/WHO
The Bureau of Radiological Health (BRH) has been designated as the
World Health Organization (WHO) Collaborating Centre for Standardization
of Protection Against Nonionizing Radiation. The designation is for a
three-year period (43).
OUTLOOK FOR THE FUTURE
Nonionizing radiation sources have substantially increased over the
last several years, including sources such as microwave ovens, formerly
not commercially available in significant numbers. By the end of 1974,
however, it was estimated that the annual sales of microwave ovens for
the home reached 600,000. The proliferation of broadcast radio and TV
stations, microwave transmitters, radars, lasers, microwave ovens, high
voltage electric power transmission lines, two-way remote communications,
and other nonionizing radiation sources has produced the highest sustained
level of nonionizing radiation exposure to the general population in his-
tory. Cheaper microwave sources are becoming available which will increase
the use of frequencies above 10 GHz for communications. High power micro-
wave systems have been proposed for use in agriculture as a substitute for
herbicides and for pesticides. Industrial and medical applications of
heat treatment processes also increased. Radars are being installed on
some small boats used for recreation and the number continues to increase
as prices are reduced. Solar energy converted to microwave frequencies
for transmission from satellites to large antennas on the earth's surface
has been proposed as a significant electrical energy source for the year
2000. Control in the rate of growth of radio or TV stations during the
past year has been due to the limitation of frequency spectrum availabil-
ity; many areas of our nation cannot accomodate more stations.
103
-------
During the past decade, nonionizing radiation standards have been
introduced which protect persons from microwave sources on the occupa-
tional level (7, 8) and which specify performance standards for micro-
wave ovens (43) and lasers (44). This appears to be just the beginning.
There are numerous areas for which research is not sufficiently advanced
to justify-specifying power density levels. As we learn in which fre-
quency ranges and at which power density levels biological interference
effects become significant, we can expect investigations and research to
produce a justification for the promulgation of standards which regulate
nonionizing radiation and exposure on the environmental, occupational,
and health and safety levels.
Publicity regarding the effects of nonionizing radiation has been
increasing. In spite of the fact that some of the publicity has come
from misinformed sources, there has been enough accurate information to
make people generally aware that there is a potential problem of some
magnitude. The increase in public awareness is borne out by the increased
number of inquiries about nonionizing radiation made to agencies such as
the EPA and DREW. Agency public information offices have been created or
expanded due to the demands of the public for more available information.
Also, environmentally concerned groups have proliferated in recent years.
During recent years court actions have increased with regards to
nonionizing radiation concerning alleged microwave oven and radar injur-
ies and by citizens opposed to high voltage transmission lines construct-
ion.
Because the present ambient environmental levels of nonionizing
radiation and its rate and pattern of growth are uncertain, a complete
mapping of the nonionizing radiation levels in the United States needs
to be carried out, at least in regions with probable high density. This
effort has been established through the efforts of the Electromagnetic
Radiation Analysis Branch within EPA's Office of Radiation Programs,
using a mobile and automated measurement system for determining environ-
mental radiofrequency field intensities on an absolute scale.
A determination is required as to whether there are low level ef-
fects. The answer to this question should become evident during the
subsequent stages of investigation and should help in structuring a
more complete research program.
Another need is the determination of criteria which can be used to
specify acceptable nonionizing radiation environmental levels. Efforts
have been underway to gain insight into the thermal stresses created by
high levels of radiation power densities, and some low power density
levels studies are underway. The effects of interference on life support
systems have been investigated, especially with regards to cardiac pace-
makers. In order to make a determination of the criteria for acceptable
104
-------
environmental levels, further research must be completed, probably over
a long term, in order to provide a proper determination of effects from
low power density levels.
Most nonionizing radiation experiments will undoubtedly be conducted
at the frequencies associated with radio broadcast bands and higher fre-
quencies, but it has been seen that information is also needed on the
health and environmental effects from extremely high voltage (EHV) trans-
mission lines, i.e., those operating at voltages above 700 kilovolts at
60 Hz.
At an ERMAC Seminar (10) some specific areas were identified where
research emphasis should be placed: separation of electric (E) and mag-
netic (H) fields; comparative studies of effects of different modulations
and waveforms, e.g., continuous wave (CW) radiation vs. pulses, and ef-
fects from multiple frequency exposures; parallel efforts to investigate
mechanisms involved in any effects observed; more work at the biophysical,
membrane, and neurochemical levels; and dosimetry, field measurements, and
energy distributions to permit determination of fields, scattering within
subjects, and extrapolation from one animal to another and to man. Stud-
ies of chronic exposures with durations of several months to a year also
require more attention.
International cooperation will be beneficial in bringing forth, at
an early date, reasonable nonionizing radiation standards that can be en-
forced by the respective nations. Efforts in this realm began during
1974 with U.S. scientists visiting the USSR, and a reciprocal visit early
in 1975 by Soviet scientists to the U.S.
105
-------
REFERENCES
1. Academy of Medical Science. Safety Standards and Regulations for
Handling Sources of High, Ultrahigh and Superhigh Frequency Elec-
tromagnetic Fields, AMN (Academy of Medical Sciences), USSR, Rus-
sian, No. 848-70, March 30, 1970, 3-34.
2. American National Standards Institute. Safety Level of Electro-
magnetic Radiation with Respect to Personnel. Rep. ANSI-C 95.1,
1974.
3. Anderson, F.A., Ph.D. Biological Bases for and Other Aspects of a
Performance Standard for Laser Products, U.S. Department of Health,
Education and Welfare, DHEW Publication No. (FDA) 75-8004, July,
1974.
4. Athey, T.W., Tell, R.A., and Janes, D.E. The Use of an Automated
Population Data Base in Population Exposure Calculations. Reprint-
ed by: U.S. EPA, Office of Radiation Programs, from Population Ex-
posures, Proceedings of the Eighth Midyear Topical Symposium of the
Health Physics Society, October 1974, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Office of Radiation Programs.
5. Britain, R.G., Director, Division of Compliance, Bureau of Radio-
logical Health, letter to David E. Janes Office of Radiation Pro-
grams, Environmental Protection Agency, 24 July 1974.
6. Butler, W., "Feds Find Some Radiation But It's Within Standard."
New York Daily News, August 28, 1974.
7- Department of Labor. Occupational Safety and Health Administration,
Federal Register, Volume 36, Number 105, May 29, 1971, Section 1910.97
Nonionizing Radiation. Effective August 27, 1971.
8. Department of Labor. Occupational Safety and Health Administration,
Code of Federal Regulations, Title 29 - Labor, Part 1910.97, Nonion-
izing Radiation, Revised as of July 1, 1974.
9. Electromagnetic Radiation Management Advisory Council, Summary of the
ERMAC Work Session on Measurement of Environmental Levels of Nonioniz-
ing Electromagnetic Radiation, April 1975.
10. Electromagnetic Radiation Management Advisory Council, Summary of the
ERMAC Work Session on Nervous System and Behavioral Effects of Nonion-
izing Electromagnetic Radiations of October 31 and November 1, 1974,
and January 1975.
106
-------
11. Environmental Protection Agency. Extremely High Voltage Trans-
mission Lines: Request for Submission of Data. Federal Register,
Volume 40, Number 53, FR12312, March 18, 1975.
12. EPA 1974 Nonionizing Radiation Program, Input to Office of Tele-
communication Policy 1974 Report, EPA Office of Radiation Programs
1975.
13. Erbar, 0., "Grumman Has Radiation Test," Long Island Press, August
27, 1974.
14. Foster, K.R., and Finch, E.D., "Microwave Hearing: Evidence for
Thermoacoustic Auditory Stimulation by Pulsed Microwaves," Science
Volume 185, July 19, 1974, 256-258.
15. Frey, J., Ph.D., The Growth of Microwave Systems and Applications,
In Proceedings of a Session on Environmental Exposure to Nonioniz-
ing Radiation, in Proceedings of a Session on Environmental Expos-
ure to Nonionizing Radiation, Annual Meeting of the American Public
Health Association, Atlantic City, New Jersey, November 14, 1972,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Publication EPA/ORP 73-2.
16. Getler, M., "Sanguine1 Sub Network Pending 10 Years - Huge Navy Ra-
dio Revised," The Washington Post, July 18, 1974.
17. Guidry, V.A., Jr., "Sanguine Successor Is Moving," Washington Star
News, March 5, 1975.
18. Hankin, N.N., An Evaluation of Selected Satellite Communications
Systems as Sources of Environmental Microwave Radiation, U.S. En-
vironmental Protection Agency EPA 520/2-74-008, December 1974.
19. Hankin, N.N., and Janes, D.E., Nonionizing Radiation Measurement
Capabilities of State and Federal Agencies, U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, EPA 520/2-73-001, August 1973.
20. Hankin, N.N., Tell, R.A., Janes, D.E., Assessing the Potential for
Exposure to Hazardous Levels of Microwave Radiation from High Power
Sources, Presented at the 19 Annual Meeting of the Health Physics
Society, Houston, Texas, July 7-11, 1974, U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, Office of Radiation Programs.
21. Healer, H.J., Federal Program on Biological Effects of Electromag-
netic Energy, in Proceedings of a Session on Environmental Exposure
to Nonionizing Radiation, Annual Meeting of the American Public
Health Association, Atlantic City, New Jersey, November 14, 1972,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Publication EPA/ORP 73-2.
107
-------
22. Journal of Statutes, Polish People's Republic, No. 21, 1972.
23. Marha, K., Maximum Admissible Values of HF and UHF Electromagnetic
Radiation at Work Places in Czechoslovakia, Symposium Proceedings:
Biological Effects and Health Implications of Microwave Radiation.
DHEW Publication BRH/DBE 70-2, 1970.
24. McClintock, M. and Scott, A., "Sanguine," Environment, Volume 16,
Number 6, July/August, 1974.
25. Miller, L.A., Federal/State Radiation Control Legislation 1973,
U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, DHEW Publication
(FDA) 74-8023, March 1974.
26. Morrison, M., "Laser, The Powerful Little Light that Performs Like
Magic," FDA Consumer, DHEW Publication No. (FDA) 73-8040, February
1973.
27. National Radiation Protection Program Strategy, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs, Document EPA-520/
7-75-007, May 1975.
28. Office of Telecommunications Policy, Report on "A Summary of the
Federal Government's Use of the Radio Frequency Spectrum," July
1973.
29. Office of Telecommunications Policy, Report on "Program for Control
of Electromagnetic Pollution of the Environment: The Assessment of
Biological Hazards of Nonionizing Electromagnetic Radiation," March
1973.
30. Office of Telecommunications Policy, Second Report of "Program for
Control of Electromagnetic Pollution of the Environment: The.Assess-
ment of Biological Hazards of Nonionizing Electromagnetic Radiation,"
May 1974.
31. Office of Telecommunications Policy, Third Report on "Program for
Control of Electromagnetic Pollution of the Environment: Assessment
of Biological Hazards of Nonionizing Electromagnetic Radiation,"
April 1975.
32. Rowe, W.D., Janes, D.E., and Tell, R.A., An Assessment of Adverse
Health Effects of Telecommunications Technology, Telecommunications
Conference, Atlanta, Georgia, November 26, 1973, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs, January 1975,
108
-------
33. Ruggera, R.S., and Swicord, M.L., Electromagnetic Compatibility,
Electromagnetic Interference and Susceptibility as Related to Med-
ical Devices, in Proceedings of a Session on Environmental Expos-
ure to Nonionizing Radiation Annual Meeting of the American Public
Health Association, Atlantic City, New Jersey, November 14, 1972,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Publication EPA/ORP 73-2.
34. Snider, Jane, "Health Team OK's Radar at Grumman Unit," Long Island
Newsday, August 29, 1974.
35. Tell, R.A., Environmental Nonionizing Radiation Exposure: A Pre-
liminary Analysis of the Problem and Continuing Work Within EPA, in
Proceedings of a Session on Environmental Exposure to Nonionizing
Radiation, Annual Meeting of the American Public Health Association,
Atlantic City, New Jersey, November 14, 1972, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Publication EPA/ORP 73-2.
36. Tell, R.A., Reference Data for Radiofrequency Emission Hazard Anal-
ysis, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ORP/SID 72-3, June 1972.
37. Tell, R.A., Hankin, N.N., Janes, D.E., and Nelson, J.C., An Auto-
mated Measurement System for Determining Environmental Radiofrequen-
cy Field Intensities, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1974.
38. Tell, R,A,, Nelson, J.C., and Hankin, N.N., HF Spectral Activity in
the Washington, D.C. Area, Reprinted by: U.S. EPA, Office of Radia-
tion Programs, from Radiation Data and Reports, Volume 15, Number 9,
September 1974.
39. Tell, R.A., and Nelson, J.C., Microwave Hazard Measurements Near
Various Aircraft Radars, Reprinted by: U.S. EPA Office of Radiation
Programs, from Radiation Data and Reports, Volume 15, Number 4, April
1974.
40. Tell, R.A., and Nelson, J.C., RF Pulse Spectral Measurements in the
Vicinity of Several Air Traffic Control Radars, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA 520/1-74-005, May 1974.
41. Threshold Limit Values of Physical Agents with Intended Changes Adopt-
ed by ACGIH for 1971, American Conference of Governmental Industrial
Hygienists Publication, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1971.
42. U.S. Departments of the Army and the Air Force. Control of Hazards
to Health from Microwave Radiation, Rep. TB MED 270/AFM 161-7, Decem-
ber 1965.
109
-------
43. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. BRH Bulletin,
Volume VII, Nos. 1-24, Bureau of Radiological Health, Rockville,
Maryland, 1974.
44. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Laser Products,
Proposed Performance Standard, Federal Register, Vol. 39, Number
172, Part II, FR32091, September 4, 1974.
45. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Resources and
Staffing (of the Bureau of Radiological Health,) February 15, 1975.
46. Van Pelt, W.F., Payne, W.R., and Peterson, R.W., A Review of Select-
ed Bioeffects Thresholds for Various Spectral Ranges of Light, U.S.
Department of Health, Education and Welfare, DHEW Publication No.
(FDA) 74-8010, June 1973.
47. Waldeskog, B., et al, Symposium Secretariat and Editorial Board,
Biological Effects and Health Hazards of Microwave Radiation:
Proceedings of an International Symposium (Warsaw, Poland) 15-18
October 1973, Polish Medical Publishers, Warsaw, 1974.
110
-------
LIST OF ACRONYMS
ACGIH American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists
AEG Atomic Energy Commission
AM Amplitude Modulation
ANSI American National Standards Institute
ASNT American Society for Nondestructive Testing
BEIR Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation
BRH Bureau of Radiological Health, DREW
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CIA Central Intelligence Agency
COMM Department of Commerce
CW Continuous Wave
DAP Diammonium Phosphate
DCPA Defense Civil Preparedness Agency
DREW Department of Health, Education and Welfare
DNA Defense Nuclear Agency, DOD
DOD Department of Defense
DOL Department of Labor
DOT Department of Transportation
ECAC Electromagnetic Compatibility Analysis Center, DOD
EHF Extremely High Frequency, 30-300 GHz
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
111
-------
ELF Extremely Low Frequency, 3-3000 Hz
EM Electromagnetic
EMR Electromagnetic Radiation
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ERAB Electromagnetic Radiation Analysis Branch, ORP
ERAC Electromagnetic Compatibility Analysis Center, DOD
ERAMS Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System
ERDA Energy Research and Development Administration
ERMAC Electromagnetic Radiation Management Advisory Council
FAA Federal Aviation Agency
FCC Federal Communications Commission
FDA Food and Drug Administration
FDA/BRH Food and Drug Administration/Bureau of Radiological Health
FM Frequency Modulation
FOD Field Operations Division, ORP
FPC Federal Power Commission
FR Federal Register
FWPCA Federal Water Pollution Control Act (of 1974)
GESMO Generic Environmental Statement on Mixed Oxide Fuels
GHz Gigahertz, 1,000,000,000 Hz (1,000 MHz)
GSA General Services Administration
HF High Frequency, 3-30 MHz
Hz Hertz
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency
112
-------
ICRP International Commission on Radiation Protection
IRAC Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee
ITS Institute of Telecommunication Science, COMM
kV Kilovolt (1,000 volts)
LF Low Frequency, 30-300 kHz
LMFBR Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor
LWR Light Water Reactor (or Light-Water-Cooled Reactor)
MAP Monoammonium Phosphate
MF Medium Frequency, 300-3,000 kHz
MHz Megahertz, 1,000,000 Hz (1,000 kHz)
mrem Millirems
mW Milliwatt, 1/1,000 watt
MW Microwave
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NBS National Bureau of Standards, COMM
NDT Nondestructive Testing
NEPA National Environmental Protection Act
NERC National Environmental Research Center, EPA
NEXT Nationwide Evaluation of X-Ray Trends
NIEHS National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, DHEW
NIOSH National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health
NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission
NRDC National Resource Defense Council
NSF National Science Foundation
113
-------
OP Office of Preparedness, GSA
OKD Office of Research and Development, EPA
ORP Office of Radiation Programs, EPA
ORP-LVF Office of Radiation Programs-Las Vegas Facility
OSHA Occupation Safety and Health Administration, DOL
OTP Office of Telecommunications Policy,
pCi Pico Curies
PAG Protective Action Guides
RF Radio Frequency
RSSF Retrievable Surface Storage Facility
SHF Super High Frequency, 3-30 GHz (3,000-30,000 MHz)
TLD Thermoluminescent Dosimeter
TSP Triple Superphosphate
UHF Ultra High Frequency, 300-3,000 MHz
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
USIA U.S. Information Agency
VA Veterans Administration
VHF Very High Frequency, 30-300 MHz
VLF Very Low Frequency, 3-30 kHz
WHO World Health Organization, United Nations
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1975—210—810:51
114
------- |