EPA-520/7-76-004
         RADIATION
PROTECTION ACTIVITIES
              1975
             THERMAL EFFECTS
         THE UNITED STATES
   ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
     OFFICE OF RADIATION PROGRAMS

-------
              RADIATION PROTECTION - 1975
ANNUAL EPA  REVIEW OF RADIATION PROTECTION ACTIVITIES
           U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
               OFFICE OF RADIATION PROGRAMS
                  WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460
                        JUNE 1976

-------
                         TABLE  OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF FIGURES

FOREWORD

CHAPTER  1 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY  	   1

CHAPTER  2 - LEGISLATION AND STANDARDS ACTIVITIES  	   7

   INTRODUCTION	   7

   LEGISLATION  	-	   7

      Energy Reorganization Act  of 1974	   7
      Licensing of Major Nuclear Facilities -
       Early Site Review	   8
      Extension and Modification  of the
       Price-Anderson  Act  	   8
      Joint Committee on Atomic  Energy (JCAE)   	   9

        Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor
          Program	   9
        Nuclear  Power Reactor  Safety	  10
        Radioactive Waste Management	„  11

   STATE  REGULATIONS	  11

   INITIATIVES AFFECTING NUCLEAR ENERGY   	  12

      Non-Government  Standards/Guides	  12

        NCRP	  12

   HEALTH PHYSICS SOCIETY  	  14

      Criteria for Testing Personnel
       Dosimetry Performance	  14
      Criteria for Film Badge Performance  	  14
      'n-Plant  Plutonium Monitoring for
       Personnel Protection	  14
      Standards for the Unrestricted Release
       of  Radioactivity  Contaminated Equipment
       and Facilities   	  15
                                     in

-------
  .AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS INSTITUTE (ANSI)  	  15

   NRC JUDICIAL  REVIEW	  16

     Cases Decided During 1975	  16
     Cases Argued and Awaiting Decision	  18
     Other Pending Cases	  18

CHAPTER 3 - NUCLEAR ENERGY   	  21

   INTRODUCTION	  21

   INDUSTRY STATUS	  22

   MEETING STANDARDS FOR NORMAL RELEASES  	  22

     NRC's New Rule on Effluent Control .	  22
     EPA's Proposed Uranium Fuel  Cycle Standard   	  25

   ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS	  .  28

   FLOATING NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS	  28

   HIGH TEMPERATURE  GAS-COOLED REACTOR (HTGR)  	  29

   LIGHT WATER  BREEDER REACTOR  (LWBR)	  29

   NRC'S ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING	  30

     Interagency Program  	  30

   RADIATION STUDIES AT NUCLEAR FACILITIES	  31

     Haddam Neck Plant	  31
     Oyster Creek	  31
     Quad Cities Nuclear Power Plant	  31
     Cooper Nuclear  Station	32
     Monticello  Nuclear Generating Plant Dose Model
       Validation Study	32
     G.E. Fuel  Fabrication Plant	 . .	32
     Harbor Study at Puget Sound	32
     Browns Ferry Nuclear  Power Plant  	33

   PLANT SAFETY	,	33

     Review of the Reactor Safety Study	  33
     Risk Assessment Methodology	  34
     Risks from Other Sources	  35
                                    IV

-------
   WASTE MANAGEMENT  	  35

      Nuclear Waste Disposal   	  35
      Nuclear Regulatory Commission Actions   	  35
      Status of  Low-Level Waste Disposal	  37
      Spent  Fuel Storage	  40
      Barnwell  Fuel Receiving  and  Storage Station  	  40
      High-Level Waste Management Plans	  41
      Low-Level Radioactive Waste   	  42
      Ocean Dumping  	  43

        Domestic Activities	  43
        International  Activities	  44

      High-Level Waste  	  45

   UNITED STATES NUCLEAR NAVY	  46

CHAPTER  4 - MEDICAL, OCCUPATIONAL AND CONSUMER
  PRODUCT RADIATION  	  49
   MEDICAL X-RAYS
      The Medical  Radiation Problem  	,   49
      Issues of Medical Radiation Use   	   52

   FEDERAL GUIDANCE   	   53

      EPA Federal  Guidance  	   53
      FDA Federal  Guidance	   55

         Model Regulations for States	   55
         Guidelines on  Radiation in Pregnancy	   55
         Mammography Recommendations   	   56
         Voluntary  Guidance on Gonad Shielding   	   57
         Recommendations for Qualifications of
          Medical  Radiation Technologists	   58
         Quality Assurance Recommendations   	   58

      FDA Educational Programs	   60

         Radiological  Health Sciences Learning
          Laboratory   	   60
         Dental Training Packages	   60
         Radiologic Technologist Training Packages	61
         Systematized  Continuing Education   	   61
         Radiation  Protection Syllabus	   61
         Training Seminars	   62

-------
  SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES	  62

     Nationwide Evaluation of X-Ray Trends (NEXT)	  62
     Front-End Analysis	  63

  APPRAISAL OF INCIDENCE OF BIOLOGICAL INJURY
    AND  EFFECTS  	  63

     Additional Accomplishments	  66

  SCREENING OF ELECTRON MICROSCOPES FOR X-RAY LEAKAGE	  67

  X-RAY  MACHINE DONATIONS  	  67

  GENERAL AMENDMENTS PROPOSED FOR DIAGNOSTIC
    X-RAY STANDARD	  68

  COMPLIANCE ACTIONS	  69

     General	  69
     Television Receivers	  69
     Medical and Dental X-Ray Equipment   	  70
     Cabinet and Airport X-Ray Units  	  70

  MISCELLANEOUS  ACTIONS	  70

  ISSUES OF OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE	  71

     Progress in  Radition Protection  	  72

  OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES  -  1974	"'.  73

     Exposures of Uranium Miners  - 1974  	  77

CHAPTER  5  - NATURALLY-OCCURING RADIOACTIVITY	  80

  INTRODUCTION	  80

  URANIUM MINE AND MILL TAILINGS	  82

     Active  Uranium  Mills	  82
     NRC Activities in Uranium Milling	  84

  ENVIRONMENTAL  ANALYSIS OF THE URANIUM FUEL CYCLE	  85

     Ambrosia Lake  Study	  85
     Grants Mineral  Belt Study	  85
                                   VI

-------
  INACTIVE URANIUM  MILL TAILINGS SITES  	  85

     Phase II Study at Salt Lake  City	  87
     Gamma Radiation  Surveys	  87
     Potential Radiological  Impact	  87
     Radon Exhalation	  87
     Navajo  Nation Studies  	  88

  TRACK-ETCH  BADGE DOSIMETRY STUDIES	  88

  NON-NUCLEAR  ENERGY SOURCES	  88

     Geothermal	  88
     Coal	  89
     Natural  Gas  	  90

  MINERAL EXTRACTION  INDUSTRY  	  90

     Phosphate  Mining  and Milling  	>.	  90

  RADIOACTIVITY IN WATER	  94

     Drinking Water Regulations .	,  . .  94
     Radon in  Potable  Water  	  95
     Water Quality Criteria	  95
     Water Permit Program  	  95
     U.S.-Canada  Great Lakes Water Quality
       Agreement	  96

  CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS	  96

CHAPTER 6 - OTHER NUCLEAR  ENERGY ACTIVITIES	101

  INTRODUCTION	101

  ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT	102

     Dose Assessment Program	102
     Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring
       System  (ERAMS)	'	102
     Radiological Quality of the Environment  	103
     Improvement in Surveillance  Programs  	103
     Dose Modeling	108

  QUALITY ASSURANCE	108

  EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANNING ACTIVITIES	110

     EPA Manual  of Protective Action Guides and
       Protective Actions for  Nuclear Incidents	113
                                    VII

-------
  SPACE APPLICATIONS
     Launch of SNAP Systems .............................. 114
     Environmental Impact Statements for
       Space Vehicles  ................................... 114

  NUCLEAR WEAPONS TESTING  ......................  . ..... H4

  ENVIRONMENTAL  IMPACT STATEMENTS (EIS)  ................. .  . 117

     Plutonium Powered Cardiac  Pacemakers  ...................... 117
     Licensing Exemption for Spark-Gap Irradiatiators
       Containing Cobalt-60   ............  . ................... 117
     Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor ............. ...... °. .......  .118
     Expansion of U.S. Uranium  Enrichment Capacity  ................. 118
     Underground Nuclear Testing Program
       (Supplement to WASH-1526)   ......................... .  . 118
     Nuclear  Power Export Activities  ........................... 119
     Waste Management Operations at the  Hanford
       Reservation (WASH-1538)  ..... . ....................... 119
     Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor (LMFBR)   ................... 120

CHAPTER 7 - NONIONIZING  RADIATION  ...............  ......... 123

  INTRODUCTION

  FEDERAL PROGRAMS IN  NONIONIZING  ELECTROMAGNETIC
    RADIATION (RADIOWAVES)   ........... ..... .......  . ..... 123

     Environmental Protection Agency  ......... .  ................ 125

        Environmental Nonionizing Measurements  ..... ............... 125
        Ambient Environment Studies  .  .....  ........ ............ 128
        Specific Source Studies  .............................. 128

     High Voltage Transmission Lines  .......................... 129
     Biological Effects Research   ........................... . . 130
     Bureau of Radiological  Health ......... . ................... 132

        Microwave Ovens  ...  ..............  . ....... . ....... 132
        Microwave Exposure  Levels from Marine  Radar
          Evaluated  ...... ......  ........ .  ................ 133
        Radiofrequency and Microwav^ Products
          and Devices ....... . ........ .... ........ .  ...... 133
        Light Products and Devices  ......... ............  ...... 135
        Visible and Ultraviolet Radiation Products  .... ............... 135
        Ultrasound Products  and Devices  . .........  . . ............ 136

  STATE AND RELATED  ACTIVITIES  .  . ........................ 136

  MEETINGS AND PROGRAM RELATED ACTIVITIES ......  .... ....... 137
                                    VIII

-------
CHAPTER 8 - INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES OF INTEREST
  TO THE  U.S	142

  INTRODUCTION	142

  INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY (IAEA)	142

  NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY (NEA) OF THE ORGANIZATION
    FOR ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT (OECD)  	145

  INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION  ON RADIOLOGICAL
    PROTECTION (ICRP)	 145

  THE  UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM (UNEP)  	146

  AGREEMENT BETWEEN  CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES ON
    GREAT  LAKES WATER QUALITY	146

  CENTER FOR STANDARDIZATION OF PROTECTION AGAINST
    NONIONIZING RADIATION 	146

  INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION  ON RADIATION UNITS AND
    MEASUREMENTS (ICRU)	147

APPENDIX A	149

APPENDIX B	154

APPENDIX C		162

LIST OF ACRONYMS	168
                                 IX

-------
                                UST OF TABLES
Table 3.1


Table 3.2


Table 4.1

Table 4.2


Table 4.3


Table 4.4


Table 4.5

Table 4.6


Table 4.7

Table 4.8

Table 5.1


Table 5.2

Table 5.3


Table 5.4


Table 5.5


Table 6.1

Table 6.2

Table 6.3
Proposed May 1975 Standards for Normal Operations of the Uranium
Fuel Cycle

Characteristics of Radioactive Wastes Buried at the Maxey Flats and
West Valley Burial Facilities

Trends in Radiographic Diagnostics

List of Nationwide  Evaluation  of X-Ray Trend Survey Radiographic
Views and Mean Exposures at Skin Entrance

Number of  Incidents and Number of Persons Reported Exposed to
Various Types of Radiation Sources Covered Licensees 1974

Distribution  of Annual Whole Body Exposures for Covered Licensees
1974

Exposures of Transient Workers

Summary of Annual Whole Body  Exposures for Covered Covered
Licensees 1968-1974

Radon Daughter Concentrations, 1975

Distribution of Individual Radon Daughter Exposure -1975

Status of Active Uranium Mill Sites in the United States as of December
1975

Mill Sites Included in Phase I Study

Radium-226,  Uranium and Thorium  Concentrations  in in  Florida
Phosphate Mine Products and Wastes

Radium-226, Uranium and  Thorium Concentrations  in Wet Process
Phosphoric Acid Plant Products and Byproducts

Maximum Contaminant Levels for Radioactivity in Community Water
Systems

Summary of Dose Data from All Sources

No. of Participating Laboratories in Cross Check Analysis-1975

Protective Action Guides for Whole  Body and Thyroid Exposure to
Airborne Radioactive Materials
Table 6.4
Nuclear Detonations During 1975

-------
Figure 3.1



Figure 3.2



Figure 3.3



Figure 7.1



Figure 7.2



Figure 7.3
Figure 1



Figure 2



Figure 3



Figure 4



Figure 5
     LIST  OF  REPORT  FIGURES






Trend in U.S. Reactor Orders



Presently Scheduled Growth of Installed Nuclear Capacity in the U.S.



Nuclear Fuel Cycle



Nonionizing Radiation: Effects-Standards



Electromagnetic Radiation Analysis Van



Interior of Electromagnetic Radiation Analysis Van






   LIST OF  APPENDIX C FIGURES






Summary Diagram of Major Federal Radiation Protection Functions



EPA-ORP



ERDA



DHEW-FDA-BRH



NRC
                                        XI

-------
FOREWORD
     An EPA presentation, "Radiation Protection Activities - 1974 (a prototype for subsequent
annual reports)," was published in September 1975. This report was developed with limited input
and coordination from other Federal and State agencies. The first annual report was developed by
EPA to provide a summary of major events, issues, and progress in radiation protection in the
United States, as well as a discussion of the underlying issues and problems accompanying them.

     The EPA, under its Federal Guidance authorities, is responsible for advising the President on
all matters pertaining to radiation  and, through this mechanism, to  provide guidance to other
Federal agencies on radiation protection matters.

     This report presents  highlights of significant radiation protection activities of all Federal
agencies which were completed in 1975, or in which noteworthy progress was made during that
period, and those events  affecting members of the public. State or local activities are also
presented where the effects of those events may be more far-reaching. The report will be made
available to Congress, key administrative officials,  Federal  agencies, States and the public.
Federal agencies with radiation protection activities and responsibilities for protecting the public
health have contributed summary material for inclusion in the report. Even though each agency
prepares an annual report on its activities, there is no single source that sets forth the overall
efforts of the Federal government in radiation protection.

     At the Federal level significant strides have been made in reducing unnecessary radiation
exposure through the  efforts of the responsible agencies. These efforts have resulted  in 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. This report  provides information  on the significant  activities  leading  to  the
establishment of the necessary controls for protection of public health and the environment. Such
controls are developed through due process, including public participation. Particularly significant
are the discussions of several major problems in the development of nuclear energy in the public
forum through the National Environmental Policy Act process in the form of the Environmental
Impact Statements (EIS's). Equally as important are  radiation protection activities in other areas
such as medical, occupational and consumer product radiation, where actions have been taken to
minimize unnecessary radiation exposure. In the context of radiation protection, ancillary activities
are included in this report in order to present a comprehensive overview of the events that took
place in 1975 that could have an effect on public health, either directly or indirectly. Because of
the restraints in developing this type of report, it is not possible to include detailed information on a
particular activity.

     Reports of routine or continuing radiation protection operations may be found in publications
of the sponsoring Federal agencies, as can more detailed information about activities reported in
this document. Appendix B lists some of these reports.

     Office of Radiation Programs technical reports are distributed to State and local radiological
health offices, Office of Radiation Programs 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.
                                          XII

-------
     I encourage readers of these reports to inform the Office of Radiation Programs of any
omissions or errors. Your additional comments or requests for further information are also
solicited.
                                  W.  D.  Rowe, Ph.D.
                             Deputy Assistant Administrator
                                for Radiation Programs
                                          XIII

-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY-CHAPTER 1
     Nuclear reactors now produce about 8.3 percent of the Nation's electrical power. By the end
of 1975 there were in the U.S. nuclear power industry 56 plants with operating licenses, 69 plants
with construction permits, 90  plants on order, and 21 plants firmly planned for a total of 236
commitments. These figures reflect the existing importance of nuclear power to the United States.
This, coupled  with expectation of increasing reliance  on nuclear energy in  the future, has
accounted for  much concern over radiation hazards and consequent protection activities. This
concern  has been  expressed  by  both  public and private sectors alike. Private concern has
manifested itself in part as citizen participation in hearings on nuclear energy environmental
impact statements and criteria and standards development.  At the Federal  level, concern for
radiation control has taken  the form of continuing research and  monitoring efforts in order to
establish a data base upon which subsequent revision and promulgation of standards might be
based.

     In addition to its activities aimed at potential radiation hazards from nuclear power plants, the
Federal Government has initiated radiation protection programs aimed at many other potentialally
hazardous radiation sources. Increased  mining, processing, and transport  of  radioactive
materials, expanded medical  applications  of diathermy,  lasers, x-rays, and radionuclides for
therapeutic and diagnostic  purposes, x-rays, radionuclides, and  lasers for testing and quality
control in industry, and increased use of radio and microwave transmitters, televisions, radar, and
radios have all prompted Federal activity in regard to radiation protection.

     The following are highlights of Federal radiation protection activities identified for 1975:

     •  The. Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA)  and the  Nuclear
        Regulatory Commission  (NRC)  became effective January  19,  1975. They  were
        established by Executive Order 11834, signed by the President on January 15, 1975, in
        fulfillment  of  the  passage by  Congress  of  Public   Law  94-438, "The Energy
        Reorganization Act of 1974."

     •  In May, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission forwarded  to the Congress a legislative
        proposal to improve  the  licensing  process for major  nuclear facilities,  which was
        introduced as S. 1717 and H.R. 7002.

     •  The President, on December 31, 1975, signed a bill to extend and modify the  Price-
        Anderson Act. The modification involved a provision for replacing the Government
        indemnity designed to protect nuclear power plant licensees in the unlikely event of a
        nuclear catastrophe with  a retrospective premium insurance system over a period of
        years as more power reactors become licensed. Price-Anderson coverage would also be
        extended to cover offshore nuclear power plants and shipments of nuclear material
        between NRC licensees via routes wholly or partially outside U.S. territorial limits.

     •  During the 94th Congress, First Session, the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy (JCAE)
        held public hearings directly related to radiation  protection problem areas. On March 19,
        1975,  a subcommittee under the chairmanship  of  Representative Mike McCormack

-------
   reviewed the Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor (LMFBR) and related activities of ERDA.
   Throughout June and July, testimony was heard from Government agencies, industry,
   and private citizens on both sides of the issue relevant to the need for the Breeder
   program.

•  On February 5, 1975, the JCAE held a hearing on the NRC action of January 30, 1975
   requiring the operators of 23 boiling water reactors to perform prompt safety inspections
   of certain piping in their plants.

•  On October 29, 1975, the NRC transmitted to the JCAE the final report of the Reactor
   Safety Study, referred to as the Rasmussen Report.

•  On November 19,  1975, the JCAE held a public hearing on the policies, plans, and
   programs of the Executive Branch to provide for  the  safe storage and  disposal of
   radioactive wastes produced in the commercial nuclear fuel cycle.

•  Section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act authorizes the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to
   enter into agreements with States whereby they assume regulatory authority over certain
   radioactive materials. At the end ,of 1975, there were 25 Agreement States exercising
   regulatory jurisdiction over a total of approximately 10,500 nuclear material licenses.

«  On  January 23, 1976, the  U.S. Nuclear Regulatory  Commission  published in  its
   "Information Report on State Legislation" a summary of laws affecting nuclear power
   plants which were enacted by the States during the 1975 legislative session.

•  During 1975 the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP)
   published four reports; Report No. 43 entitled "Review of the Current State of Radiation
   Protection  Philosophy," Report  No. 44 entitled "Krypton-85  in the  Atmosphere  -
   Accumulation, Biological Significance, and Control Technology," Report No. 45 entitled
   "Natural Background Radiation in the United States," and Report No. 46 entitled "Alpha-
   Emitting Particles in Lungs."

•  During 1975 the Health Physics Society, in conjunction with its Standards Committee,
   assumed the  responsibility of the  Secretariat for  the American National Standards
   Institute (ANSI) of its Main Committee N-13 "Radiation Protection." Under this program
   there are  15  scientific groups  actively  involved  in  the  development of standards.
   Approximately 610 nuclear standards are in various stages of development or are in the
   publication process by ANSI.

•  On April 30, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) arinounced-a significant new
   regulation, effective on June 4, 1975, which  provided definitive numerical guidance to
   NRC licensees on how to comply with the previously enunciated requirement that levels
   of radioactive material  in effluents from light-water-coofed power reactors and resultant
   doses to the public be kept "as low as reasonably achievable."

•  The EPA published in the Federal Register on May 29,1975, a notice of rulemaking for
   the Uranium Fuel Cycle designed to provide environmental and public health protection.
   These standards would limit quantities of long-lived radioactive materials in the general
   environment  attributable  to  planned releases from operations contributing to the
   generation of electric power through the uranium fuel cycle.

-------
•   During 1975 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRG) issued for comment 13 draft
    environmental impact statements (EIS's) and 16 final EIS's on conventional nuclear
    power plants. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reviewed and commented on
    each of the draft statements.

•   Offshore Power Systems, inc. applied in 1973 to the Atomic Energy Commission for a
    license to manufacture eight floating nuclear power plants. The final EIS (Part 1) was
    issued in October  1975. This part pertained to the environmental aspects of the
    manufacturing  facility at Blount Island,  near Jacksonville, Florida.  A second part,
    pertaining to the generic aspects of siting and operation of floating nuclear power plants
    on the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts, was issued in December 1975.

•   A draft EIS for the Light Water Breeder Reactor (LWBR) was issued for comment by
    ERDA on August 8,1975. The statement addressed LWBR technology development and
    specifically the demonstration program at the Shippingport reactor.

•   In 1975, the NRC issued a revision to its Regulatory Guide on  environmental radiation
    surveillance. The revised guide "Programs for Monitoring Radioactivity in the Environs of
    Nuclear  Power Plants," provides the latest guidance on acceptable programs  for
    monitoring radioactivity around nuclear power plants.

•   The Office of Radiation Programs (ORP) of the EPA conducts field studies at operating
    nuclear facilities as a part of its dose assessment program. In 1975 report preparations
    were undertaken for completed studies at; the  Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant at
    Toms River, New Jersey, the Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station at Cordova, Illinois, the
    Cooper Nuclear Station in Brownville, Nebraska, the Monticello  Nuclear Generating
    Plant, the G.E. Fuel Fabrication Plant north of Wilmington, North Carolina, and Puget
    Sound Naval Shipyard in Bremerton, Washington. A study at the Browns Ferry Nuclear
    Power Plant in northern Alabama was initiated in July 1975.

•   EPA's Office of Radiation Programs has initiated a dose assessment program. Part of the
    environmental  radiation data gathered in this  program is acquired  from  EPA's
    Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System (ERAMS). A quarterly summary of
    raw data from ERAMS is reported in Environmental Radiation Data.

•   ORP has initiated a project for evaluating the radiological quality of the environment
    annually as a part of the dose assessment program. Preparation of the first annual
    Radiological Quality of the Environment report was undertaken in 1975.

•   An effort is underway by the EPA Monitoring Systems Research and Development
    Division's Quality Assurance Branch in Las Vegas to prepare  standard  reference
    materials which contain in vivo pollutants.  Reference materials in preparation  during
    1975 include Uranium-235/-238 series, Thorium ore, Uranium mill tailings and Radium-
    bearing soil.

•   The responsibilities of certain Federal Agencies with regard  to radiological incident
    emergency response planning for fixed facilities and transportation, including provisions
    for planning  assistance to State and local  governments, were defined in  a Federal
    Register notice initially issued in  1973 and revised in December 1975 by the Federal
    Preparedness Agency in the General Services Administration.

-------
 •  The EPA has prepared a Manual of Protective Action Guides and Protective Actions for
    Nuclear Incidents. During 1975, EPA continued to study the relative benefits of shelter
    and evacuation as protective actions and the cost-risk-benefit of protective actions for
    exposure from deposited radioactive material.

 •  In November, the NRC revised its requirements for fuel cycle reporting. Semi-annual
    reports  are  to be required for effluents  from uranium mills, uranium hexaflouride
    production facilities, and users of plutonium or enriched uranium for fuel  fabrication,
    processing, or scrap recovery.

 •  Activities to meet the problems of radioactive waste disposal accelerated during 1975.
    ERDA has de-emphasized earlier plans to develop an interim retrievable surface storage
    facility and is concentrating on methods for long-term waste  disposal. In November
    1972, the United States signed the International Ocean Dumping Convention which was
    ratified in April 1974. The Convention thereby became a treaty to be entered into force in
    October 1975. In 1975, ERDA issued a report on the storage problems associated with
    spent fuel elements. ERDA also restarted a program leading to the construction of a pilot
    disposal facility in bedded salt in southeast New Mexico.

 •  EPA has funded efforts by State licensing agencies to perform annual inventories of
    quantities of waste materials received at the commercial burial sites. Efforts are currently
    underway to obtain the 1974 and 1975 inventory results.

 •  The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was charged with the responsibility to
    develop specific recommendations regarding ocean dumping of all radioactive wastes
    pursuant to the International Ocean Dumping Treaty (ratified in August 1975).

 •  The Administrator of the EPA approved a program request on July 5, 1974 to form an
    Interagency Working Group on Medical Radiation. During 1975, a subcommittee of this
    group, Subcommittee on Prescription of Exposure to X-Rays (SPEX), drafted a report on
    prescription  diagnostic x-ray  studies. The recommendations in this report, when
    endorsed by the Working Group, will be used by EPA as a basis to develop Federal
    Guidance for diagnostic radiology.

 •  In the 15 December 1975 issue of the Federal Register, the FDA announced plans to
    develop guidelines concerning exposure of women of childbearing age  to ionizing
    radiation from medical diagnostic procedures.

 •  A revised "Suggested State Regulations for Control  of Radiation," has been published
    and distributed to State radiation control  agencies.  A notice of availability of the
    Regulations was published in the Federal RegisterVol 40, Number 136 dated July 15,
    1975.

•  The FDA has proposed a group of 11 general amendments to the Federal Performance
    Standard for  Diagnostic X-Ray Systems and their Major Components. The Notice of
    Proposed Rulemaking was published in the Federal Register-on June 11,1975.

•   The Food and Drug Administration  has  proposed a guideline for the use of gonad
    shielding during medical diagnostic x-ray procedures. The  proposal appeared in  the
    Federal Register, September 16,1975.

-------
•   During  1975,  the  Food and  Drug Administration, in  cooperation with the American
    College of Radiology and the West Virginia State Department of Health, field tested a
    diagnostic radiology quality assurance program for  future  implementation by  State
    radiation control personnel.

•   DENT is  a program developed by FDA for use by State and  local  radiation control
    agencies in encouraging dentists to standardize dental x-ray machine  exposures within
    established ranges  that  produce high quality x-ray films with acceptable patient
    exposures. During 1975, full-scale DENT programs were underway in 16 States, local
    subdivisions, and Federal agencies.

•   Manufacturers are  required by  21  CFR 1002.20  to report accidental radiation
    occurrences to the BRH.  Six incidents were reported by manufacturers to the FDA's
    Bureau of Radiological Health  during calendar year  1975 and were investigated to
    determine their causes. Nine incidents involving radiation exposure were reported to the
    Radiation Incidents Registry, BRH, from a variety of sources.

•   The first  extensive study  to determine the impact of the uranium mining and milling
    industry on ground water quality was completed by EPA in August 1975 in the Grants
    Mineral Belt area of New Mexico.

•   The Office of  Radiation Programs Las Vegas Facility of the EPA conducted a sampling
    and analysis program for radioactivity in geothermal fluids in 1975.

•   In  1975,  the EPA-ORP  involved itself  in  a variety of research,  monitoring, and
    surveillance activities aimed at solving the problems associated  with phosphate mining
    and milling. As part of  its efforts, the EPA has established an interim guideline for new
    construction on land reclaimed from phosphate mining activities.

•   During the past year, EPA has reviewed data concerning present levels of both natural
    and artificial radioactivity  in drinking water supplies.  Based  on these data, proposed
    interim regulations for radioactivity in drinking water were published for comment  in the
    Federal Registeron August 14,1975.

•   On June 17,1975, EPA awarded Harvard University School of Public Health a contract to
    study radiation exposure due to building materials.

•   Using the Mobile Radiofrequency Measurements System, the EPA measured environ-
    mental levels of nonionizing radiation in Boston, Massachusetts (October 1975) and
    Atlanta, Georgia (December 1975).

•   In 1975, 69 production or  pre-production microwave ovens were laboratory tested and
    found to be in  compliance with the Federal Performance Standard for Microwave Ovens.
    Compliance actions were taken against five manufacturers of microwave ovens.

•   BRH has proposed an amended performance standard for the requirements for interlock
    concealment  and  prevention of object insertion into  microwave ovens.  The proposal
    appeared in the Federal Registeron June 26,1975.

•   The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has completed the general plan for a
    comprehensive set of safety codes and guides for nuclear power plants.

-------
Launches of two identical spacecraft, Viking A and Viking B, were made during 1975.
Each of these spacecraft contained 20,000 curies of plutonium in a Space Nuclear
Power System (SNAP).

During 1975, NRC published 4 draft EIS's and 2 final EIS's on non-conventional nuclear
projects while ERDA issued 5 draft EIS's and 4 final EIS's. These EIS's concerned the
following projects:  Plutonium Powered  Cardiac Pacemakers, the  Barnwell  Fuel
Receiving and Storage Station, a Generic Site Evaluation on Off-Shore Power Systems
Floating Nuclear Power Plants (FNPP), Licensing Exemption for Spark-Gap Irradiators
Containing  Cobalt-60,  A High  Temperature  Gas-Cooled Reactor  (HTGR), FNPP
Manufacturing Facilities, The Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor, Expansion of U.S. Uranium
Enrichment Capacity, FY 1976 Supplement to Underground Nuclear Testing, The Light
Water Breeder Reactor (LWBR)  Demonstration Project, and The U.S. Nuclear Export
Program. Also, the AEC issued a proposed Final Statement on the Liquid Metal Fast
Breeder Reactor Program in December 1974, and the Final Statement in December
1975.
                                6

-------
LEGISLATION AND STANDARDS ACTIVITIES - CHAPTER 2
INTRODUCTION

     During 1975 significant activities have taken place at the Federal level by the adoption of
new legislation and by Congressional hearings on critical problems relating to radiation safety and
protection of public health.  States and non-Government groups have been active in publishing
radiation protection standards. At the  same  time  there continues  to  be increased public
participation in the development of radiation controls at both the Federal and State levels through
participation in various meetings and public hearings.

LEGISLATION

     Energy Reorganization Act of 1974

     On January 15,1975, the President signed Executive Order 11834, which brought into being
the Energy Research and  Development Administration (ERDA)  and the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) to be effective on January  19, 1975. The action was in fulfillment of the
passage by Congress of Public Law 94-438 "Energy Reorganization  Act of 1974," which the
President signed on October 11,1974. An interagency Energy Resource Council  has also been
established in the Executive Office of the President to insure coordination among the Federal
agencies that have responsibilities for development and implementations of energy policy.

     The ERDA brings  together in a single agency the major Federal energy research and
development programs,  and bears the responsibility for leading the national effort to develop the
needed technology to assure that the United States will have ample and  secure supplies of
energy. It consolidates major R & D functions previously handled by the United  States Atomic
Energy Commission, Department of the Interior, National Science Foundation and Environmental
Protection  Agency.  ERDA  also will continue the basic research, materials production and
weapons programs of the AEC.

     The NRC carries out the licensing and regulatory functions formerly assigned to the AEC,
and as a primary activity devotes its attention to assuring the safety as well as the reliability of
commercial nuclear electrical power. It has been anticipated that the creation of NRC should end
the concern that some have expressed about the past when one agency, the AEC, was assigned
the responsibility for both the technological development and the regulation of civilian nuclear
power.

-------
     Licensing of Major Nuclear Facilities- Early Site Review

     In  May, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission forwarded to the Congress a  legislative
proposal to improve the licensing process for major nuclear facilities, which was introduced as 5.
1717 and H.R. 7002. In hearings conducted in June by the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, the
Commission strongly supported the proposed licensing reform legislation as a measure that could
lead to reduction of the time now required to bring a nuclear power plant on line from eight or more
years to about six years.

     The basic concepts of early site approvals and standard plant designs are at the heart of the
proposed legislation. The Commission noted  it would provide a more efficient framework for siting
and licensing without impairing the quality or thoroughness of the NRC's safety, anti-trust or
environmental reviews, or depriving the Commission or the public of the benefits of full public
participation in the process. It would make a major contribution to attainment of more efficient,
effective regulation which is essential if nuclear power is to be a viable option in meeting the
country's need for electric energy.

     Main features of the proposed legislation are:

     (1)     Provision for approvals of sites for nuclear plants independent of construction permit
applications. Site permit1  applications could be filed by interested States as well  as by utilities
proposing to construct plants. An inventory of approved sites could be developed. There would be
a complete environmental review and opportunity for formal hearing before issuance of any site
permit.

     (2)     Encouragement of standardization of  nuclear plants by providing for  combined
construction permits and operating licenses, by encouraging early  public participation in the
resolution of plant design questions, and by avoiding duplicate hearings.

     (3)     Enhancement of public participation by  providing for hearings on site suitability and
design questions at early points in time when they can be most effective, and by providing for
certain assistance to hearing participants.

     Extension and Modification of the Price-Anderson Act

     The Price-Anderson Act was enacted in 1957, and extended and amended in  1965, and
1966. The Act was designed to protect th© public by providing for the payment of claims in the
unlikely event of a catastrophic nuclear incident. Among other things, the Act provides funds for
public liability in the event of a nuclear incident up to a total amount of $560 million. This amount is
provided for by requiring nuclear power plant licensees to maintain financial protection through
insurance or other means in the full  amount available from private insurance (currently $125
million) and by providing for government indemnity for the remainder of the $560  million. Other
features  included in the Act by the amendments of  1966 are no-fault liability and provisions for
accelerated payment of claims immediately upon occurrence of a nuclear incident.

     Thb question of whether to extend the Price-Anderson Act received extensive consideration
during the 93rd Congress. After comprehensive hearings, the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy
reported out a bill, H.R. 15323, which was passed by the Congress with amendments and sent to
the President on October 1,1974. The President vetoed the measure on October 12,1974, citing
his approval of the substantive sections of the bill and basing his veto on "the clear constitutional

-------
infirmity of a provision in the bill which allowed the Congress to prevent it from becoming effective
by passing a concurrent resolution within a specified time."

    On June 9,1975, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission submitted to the Joint Committee the
report on the subject of sabotage and the theft of nuclear materials which had been requested by
the Conference Committee on H.R. 15323.

    On July 10, 1975, the Federal Energy Administration forwarded to the Congress proposed
legislation which was introduced as H.R. 8631 and S. 2568. These bills were identical to the bill
which was passed by the 93rd Congress with two exceptions: first, the provision which caused the
President to veto the bill was omitted; and second, the measure called for a 10-year rather than a
5-year extension of the Act.

    The major change to existing law which would be made by the bills is a provision for replacing
the Government indemnity with a retrospective premium insurance system over a period of years
as more power reactors become licensed. This system would also allow an increase in the limit on
liability above $560 million after Government indemnity has been phased out. This is expected to
occur no later than 1985. Price-Anderson coverage would also be extended to offshore nuclear
power plants and  to shipments of nuclear material between NRC licensees via routes wholly or
partially outside U.S. territorial limits.

    The bills were referred to the Joint Committee and hearings were held on September 23 and
24, 1975, to  consider that measure and the question of whether the Price-Anderson system
should be extended to cover sabotage and the theft of nuclear materials. At those hearings, the
Committee heard testimony from the nuclear power and insurance industries, the electric utilities,
the Executive Branch, and a number of other organizations interested in this subject.

     On December 16,1975, the Senate considered and adopted three amendments to S. 2568.
By a vote of 76-18, the Senate then voted to pass H.R. 8631 with the Senate amendments, dn
December 17,1975, the House agreed to the Senate amendments to H.R. 8631. The President
signed the bill on December 31,1975 (Public Law 94-197).

     In its report on the bill to amend and extend the Price-Anderson Act, the Joint Committee
requested that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission review the need for extending  the Price-
Anderson system  to include plutonium processing facilities. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
advised the Committee on December 3,1975, that once H.R. 8631 has been signed into law, the
NRC  will  publish  a  "Notice of Intended Rule  Making" as  the first step in implementing the
legislation. This notice will solicit the views of the public and interested groups on the question of
extending Price-Anderson coverage to plutonium processing facilities and to the transportation of
nuclear material to and from those facilities. Based upon those views, NRC will then decide
whether Price-Anderson coverage should be extended.

    Joint Committee on Atomic Energy (JCAE)

     During the 94th .Congress, First Session, the JCAE held public hearings directly related to
radiation protection problem areas.

         Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor Program

    On March 19,1975, Senator John O. Pastore, Chairman of the Joint Committee  on Atomic
Energy, established a Subcommittee under the chairmanship of Representative Mike McCormack

-------
 to review the Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor (LMFBR) Program and related activities of the
 Energy Research and Development Administration. The purpose of this review was to examine
 the various concerns that have been expressed and questions that have been raised within the
 Congress and outside by members of the public with respect to several fundamental issues sucn
 as the need and timing of the breeder program, the cost and potential benefits to be realized from
 it, and the attendant risks associated with the ultimate widespread commercial use of this type or
 energy production and conversion technology.

     During the spring and summer,  the Subcommittee held a series of public briefings and
 hearings on the history of the nuclear power program, the nuclear  fuel cycle, reactor types and
 characteristics, the enrichment process, present status of the  civilian nuclear power  plant
 program and the role of utilities in the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project

     Throughout  June and July, during a series of seven public  hearings,  the Subcommittee
 received oral testimony from representatives of  government agencies,  private industry, public
 groups and individuals presenting information  on both sides of the issue relevant to the need for
 the  breeder  program. These included energy trends, alternate  energy sources, safety and
 environmental considerations, safeguards, role of converter and  breeder reactors, and  cost-
 benefit analyses.

     The Subcommittee has  prepared a report  stating  its views,  conclusions   and
 recommendations with regard to the need and timing of the breeder. It is planned that this report
 will be published early in 1976.

         Nuclear Power Reactor Safety

     The Joint Committee continued to devote major attention to the subject of nuclear power
 reactor safety over this past year. This was done  in recognition of the fact that nuclear activities
 must be carried out in a manner which fully protects the health and safety of the public and which
 minimizes the impact of these activities on the environment.  The health and safety record in the
 nuclear programs has been excellent, and there have been no commercial radiation accidents in
 this country which have in any meaningful way jeopardized the public or the environment

     As part of its continuing attention to matters of safety significance, the Joint Committee held
 a hearing February 5,1975, on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) action of January 30,
 1975, requiring the operators of 23 boiling water reactors to perform prompt safety inspections of
 certain piping in their plants. The purposes of this hearing were to determine th§ full extent of the
 situation requiring reactor shutdowns, its impact on the nuclear power program, and to Sing this
 matter fully and openly to the attention of the public. The precautionary shutdown action was
 taken by NRC after the  discovery of  pipe defects in several operating boiling water reactors.
 Testimony was received at the hearing from NRC and the Union of Concerned Scientists. The
 hearing clearly brought out the fact that the piping problems presented no hazard  to the public,
 and that there had been no releases of radioactivity associated with the defects in the affected
 operating plants. During the inspections ordered by NRC, no additional cracks were found in the
 pipes of 22 of the plants; one plant reported  that it had found one additional smaf! crack in its
 piping. All pipes in which cracks were identified  have been replaced.

     The Joint Committee also held a hearing September 16, 1975, on the circumstances and
implications, particularly from the standpoint of nuclear safety, of a fire which occurred on March
22, 1975, at the Tennessee Valley Authority's Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant. The purpose of this
hearing, as in the previous case, was to examine the causes and impact of the event in question,


                                          10

-------
and to bring this safety-related matter to the attention of the public. Testimony was received from
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, The Tennessee Valley Authority and the State of Alabama.

     The record of this hearing showed, contrary to numerous reports in the media, that the fire
did not constitute a "near disaster" and that sufficient backup systems were available at all times
to provide necessary cooling of the nuclear reactor cores. There was no unusual  release of
radioactivity  to the environment, and no hazard  was presented to the public. Although the
hearings demonstrated that improvements are  needed  in  design practices  and operating
procedures to minimize the possibility and consequences of such fires in the future, the incident
showed that nuclear power plants indeed have a large margin of safety built into them.

     On  October 30, 1975, the Nuclear  Regulatory Commission transmitted to the Joint
Committee the final report of the Reactor Safety  Study, which is generally referred to as the
Rasmussen  Report. The  study,  which was conducted over a three-year period, undoubtedly
represents the most  comprehensive risk assessment of nuclear plants ever made. The Joint
Committee has strongly encouraged and supported this effort to quantify the risks associated with
nuclear power, to put these risks into overall perspective, and to communicate these matters to
the public in terms the layman can understand.

        Radioactive Waste Management

     On November 19,1975,  the Joint Committee held a public hearing on the policies, plans and
programs of the Executive Branch to provide for the safe storage and  disposal of radioactive
wastes produced in the commercial nuclear fuel cycle. This hearing was a part of the Committee's
continuing efforts to stimulate the development of a comprehensive waste disposal program.
Among these efforts was the Committee's  directive in its report on the bill authorizing ERDA
appropriations for fiscal year  1976 that ERDA prepare a comprehensive and detailed analysis of
the options for storage and disposal of commercially generated radioactive wastes.

     During the hearing, the Committee received testimony from ERDA on its research, develop-
ment and demonstration activities on waste processing, storage and disposal. Testimony was
also presented by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the  Environmental Protection Agency
on the standards and regulations being developed to assure the safe handling and disposal of
radioactive wastes. The hearing served to show  that there are no basic technical problems
standing in  the way of demonstrating an acceptable program for the disposal  of radioactive
wastes. The Committee will continue to devote major attention to this subject. The record of this
hearing was published in 1975.

STATE REGULATIONS

     "Suggested State Regulations for Control of Radiation" have been prepared and distributed
to State radiation control agencies for their use.  The current regulations revise, update and
expand the  1970 edition,  and were prepared  by the FDA's Bureau of Radiological  Health, the
former USAEC and  the  Conference  of Radiation Control  Program  Directors. The revised
suggested regulations, often referred to as "model State regulations," reflect changes in National
Council on  Radiation Protection and Measurement guidelines,  new amendments  to  AEC
regulations, and electronic product radiation safety performance standards issued by the Bureau.
They are intended primarily as guidance for State radiological health programs developing or
amending their radiation control regulations (See Chapter 4).
                                          11

-------
     In the report "Report of State and Local Radiological Health Programs - Fiscal year, 1974,"
which was published by the Bureau of Radiological Health, is included the following legislative
information:

     Since 1951, a total of 47 States and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico have enacted
     specific laws for the regulation of ionizing radiation. Some of these laws are restricted to
     certain occupations or are amendments to existing statutes. In Iowa, Rhode Island, West
     Virginia,  and the District of  Columbia, the responsibility for  some  aspects of radiation
     protection is assumed under general public health laws. The technical details of regulatory
     control are generally not included in these enabling acts; rather this authority is delegated to
     State agencies.

     The Nuclear Regulatory Commission  has entered into  agreement  with 25 States for
     regulating specific material previously under Atomic Energy Commission control. The State
     of New Mexico signed an agreement with the Atomic Energy Commission in May 1974.

     As of June 30, 1974,  16 States had  approved legislation for the regulation of nonionizing
     electromagnetic  radiation, and four States have  approved specific legislation for the
     registration of laser devices.  Nine States and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico have
     approved specific laws which establish minimum standards for the education, training, and
     experience of certain user groups that apply ionizing radiation to human beings for diagnostic
     or therapeutic purposes.

     Section 274 of the  Atomic Energy Act authorizes the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to
enter into agreements with  States whereby they assume regulatory authority over radioisotopes,
source materials, and special nuclear materials in quantities not sufficient to form a critical mass
(a mass capable of supporting a self-sustaining chain reaction).

     At the end of 1975, there were 25 Agreement States exercising regulatory jurisdiction over a
total of approximately 10,500 nuclear material licenses, in addition to about 8,500 such licenses
administered  directly  by NRC. The Agreement  States were: Alabama,  Arizona,  Arkansas,
California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi,
Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York,  North Carolina, North Dakota,
Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Washington.

     During the year,  active negotiations were underway with Illinois, Michigan and New Jersey
preparatory to entering into  regulatory agreements.

     On January 23,1976, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission published in its "Information
Report on State Legislation" a summary of laws  affecting nuclear power plants which were
enacted  by the States during the  1975 legislative session. Appendix A shows pertinent laws
excerpted from this report and a compilation of initiatives affecting nuclear energy.

INITIATIVES AFFECTING NUCLEAR ENERGY

     Non-Government Standards/Guides

         NCRP

     During 1975 the National Council on  Radiation Protection and  Measurements (NCRP)
published four reports:

-------
        NCRPReport No. 43, "Review of the Current State of Radiation Protection Philosophy."
The  report is a position  statement of the NCRP  on issues that emerged as a result of the
publication of  reports by the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic
Radiation and the  National Academy  of Sciences - National  Research Council's  Advisory
Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation. The NCRP indicated that  although
those two reports essentially reached the same numerical results for  radiation levels  at which
observations are available, there have been differences in philosophy and divergent conclusions
regarding the estimation of the risk associated with low-ievel, low-dose rate radiation, for which
little or no data are available. Further, the Council believes that perhaps more importantly, widely
varying interpretations of the significance and meaning of those  reports and conclusions have
been formulated.

     The NCRP undertook an extensive analysis of the published materials and the underlying
background. On the basis of this review and recent developments relating to radiation standards
for the public, particularly in regard to extrapolated estimates of cancer risk at low doses and low-
dose rates, the Council took the position that no change is required, at the time of publication of
Report No. 43, inlne,conclusions and dose limits set out in NCRP Report No.  39 which was issued
in 1971.

         NCRP Report  No.  44,  "Krypton-85  in  the  Atmosphere-Accumulation, Biological
Significance, and Control Technology." Krypton-85  is released to the atmosphere through
nuclear weapons tests and the generation of nuclear electrical power. With the partial cessation
of atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons 85Kr in the atmosphere results primarily  from the
reprocessing gf nuclear fuel, very little being released from the actual  operation of the nuclear
^pwer pfafjts themselves. The report estimates the future global concentrations of 85Kr in the
atmosphere resulting from projected future levels of nuclear power use, the absorbed  doses to
jfrmn resulting from these concentrations, and possible techniques which may prove practicable
for the future control of krypton-85.

         NCRP Report No. 45, "Natural Background Radiation in the United States" is concerned
with the assessment of the radiation dose to the population from natural background exposures.
The report presents the measurements and calculations of dose equivalent  rates for the tissues
and organs of interest to all natural sources, such as cosmic radiation, internal and external
radionuclides.

         NCRP Report No. 46,  "Alpha-Emitting Particles in  Lungs." Release of particulate
plutonium and transplutonium alpha-emitting elements from nuclear facilities  poses questions
concerning body distribution of dose and the resultant biological effects. The NCRP developed a
statement on  the  question of whether  the current  practice of  averaging  over the lungs the
absorbed dose from particulate alpha-emitting radionuclides is a defensible procedure in the
practice of radiation protection, and whether exposure limits derived on this basis are more or less
conservative than those that might result from a precise consideration of the spatial distribution of
the dose.

     The main conclusions from the report are that (1) The substantial body of experimental data
available at the present time indicates that particulate plutonium in the lung  is no greater hazard
than the  same amount of plutonium more uniformly distributed throughout the lung; and (2) The
current NCRP practice of averaging over the lung the absorbed dose from particulate alpha-
emitting radionuclides is a defensible procedure when employed in conjunction with appropriate
dose limits.
                                           13

-------
HEALTH PHYSICS SOCIETY

    During 1975  the  Health Physics Society in conjunction  with its Standards  Committee,
assumed the responsibility of the Secretariat for the American National Standards Insitute of its
Main Committee N-13 "Radiation Protection." The Secretariat formerly had been with the Atomic
Industrial Forum.

    At the present time under this program there are 15 scientific groups actively involved in the
development of standards. The following are examples of standards already developed or that
are in the process of development.

    Criteria for Testing Personnel DosSmetry Performance

    At  the April  1975 meeting of the  National Conference  on Radiation  Control Program
Dosimetry Task Force II (Hyannis, Massachusetts), the Health Physics Society was requested to
establish a committee to develop a standard on  "Criteria for Testing  Personnel Dosimetry
Performance." Basic data accrued through a  Bureau of Radiological Health supported program
will provide the basis for the technical specifications in the standard.

    This important area of work owes its beginning to the interest of the Conference of State
Radiation Control Program Directors where at their 1973 annual meeting, they cited the need to
establish a national qualrty assurance program for personnel dosimetry. They recommended, as
noted in one of their task  group reports that, "a Federal  agency be designated to direct a
continuing performance testing  program for suppliers of personnel monitoring dosimeters." A
decision was made to have the National Bureau of Standards act as an impartial agency to
provide technical direction to the program. The Bureau of Radiological Health in conjunction with
the Nuclear Regulatory  Commission, the  Environmental Protection Agency,  and  the  Energy
Research and Development Administration supported the resolution.

    The HPSSC Committee is  currently developing a first draft which will then  be processed
through ANSI, Main Committee N-13.

    Criteria For Film Badge Performance

    This standard provides film  badge performance criteria for several categories of radiation
following exposure under specified conditions. The standard considers the performance of film
dosimetry under the most reproducible conditions. As far as possible, uncertainties introduced by
scatter radiation, unspecified radiation sources, and  nohuniform irradiations are eliminated from
the procedures.

    This standard is currently  published  and may be obtained from the American National
Standards Institute.

    In-PIant Plutonium Monitoring For Personnel Protection

    This standard and its appendix define  performance parameters for radiation protection
instrumentation essential to in-plant  plutonium monitoring.  Performance criteria  are  limited to
instruments capable of measuring:

     (1) photon radiation within the energy range 0.010 to 1.25 MeV,
                                         14

-------
     (2) neutron radiations within the energy range from thermal to 10 MeV, and

     (3) alpha radiation within the emitted energy range of 4.5 to 7.5 MeV.

The standard does not define specifications for personnel dosimetry, effluent monitoring systems
or instruments needed in bioassay programs. A final letter ballot action is nearing completion.

     Standards for the Unrestricted Release  of Radioactivity Contaminated Equipment
     and Facilities

     The standard  provides  criteria  for  the  control of  materials,  equipment and facilities
contaminated with radioactivity proposed to  be released for uncontrolled use.  Permissible
contamination limits are specified including methods for assessing the levels of contamination.
The  following areas will be a matter of separate consideration and beyond the scope of this
standard:

     1. control of radioactive contamination that is dispersed through material,,

     2. materials made radioactive by neutron irradiation,

     3. contaminated soils, and

     4. contaminated clothing and evaluation of contamination on persons.

     The standard has just completed a successful letter ballot action and will be processed
through the ANSI Board of Standards Review.

AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS INSTITUTE (ANSI)

     Approximately 610 nuclear standards are in various stages of development or are in the
publication process by the  ANSI. Approximately 20% of this total is directed primarily toward
radiation protection standards. The ANSI Main  Committee, N-13, is the  principal committee
involved  in the  development  of  general  radiation protection  standards.  However,  other
committees such as N-43 also develop radiation standards but specifically within the scope of
their charters.

     The following are three examples of ANSI standards activities in cooperation with the Health
Physics Society:

     "Performance,  Testing and Procedural Specifications for Thermoluminescent  Dosimetry
(Environmental Applications)." The standard has been published.

     "Control of Radioactive Surface Contamination on Materials, Equipment and Facilities to be
Released for Uncontrolled Use." The standard is in the process of publication.

     "Personnel Monitoring with Thermoluminescent Dosimeters." The standard is in final draft.
                                          15

-------
 NRC JUDICIAL REVIEW (1)

     Federal court actions involving the Nuclear Regulatory Commission during 1975 include nine
 cases decided, four cases argued and awaiting decision, and two cases pending.

     Cases Decided During 1975

     Carolina  Environmental Study Group v. AEC, et a/., 510 F.2d 796 (D.C.  Cir.  1975). On
 January 21,1975, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed a final order of
 the AEC (now  NRC) granting Duke Power Co. a construction license to build two nuclear reactors.
 Petitioners had contended that the Commission failed to comply with the National Environmental
 Policy Act because it inadequately considered Class 9 accidents and alternative_sources of power
 in the impact of due process becasue of the AEC's dual role in promotion and^uation of nuclear
 power.  The Court approved the Commission's treatment of Class 9 accidents as hypothetical
 occurrences whose probability was extremely remote.

     The Conservation Society of Vermont, eta/,  v. AEC. On April 17,1975, a three-judge district
 court dismissed a complaint which challenged the constitutionality of the Atomic Energy Act on
 the ground that it vested both developmental and regulatory functions in the AEC. The action was
 dismissed because the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 had rendered the issues moot.

     Ralph Nader, eta/, v. NRC, eta/. On May 30, 1975, the Court of Appeals for the District of
 Columbia Circuit affirmed the Commission's denial of a petition seeking a shutdown or derating of
 20 nuclear power plants previously licensed for operation. The Court agreed with the Commission
 that a determination of compliance with the Acceptance Criteria is equivalent to a determination of
 compliance with  Criterion 35. It pointed out that the  former  were detailed specifications
 implementing the more general Criterion 35.

     Porter County Chapter of the Izaak Walton League of America. Inc., eta/, v. AEC, eta/. On
 April 21, 1975, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit set aside the NRC
 construction permit for the nuclear power reactor  proposed for the Bailly site on Lake Mighigan in
 Northern Indiana. The Court denied the Government's petition for rehearing or rehearing in bane.
 In so ordering, the original three-judge panel observed "We find nothing in the  Atomic Energy
 Reorganization Act of 1974 which would prevent NIPSCO from applying for another license or
 would prevent NRC from considering such new application."

     On June 16,1975, NRC requested that the Solicitor General authorize the filing of a petition
 for a writ of certiorari in the Supreme Court. The Solicitor General filed a memorandum supporting
 the suggestion of Northern Indiana Public Service co. that the case be summarily reversed. On
 November  11,1975, the Supreme  Court  reversed the judgment of the Seventh Circuit and
 remanded the case for consideration of questions which that court had not decided. The Supreme
 Court held that the Seventh Circuit had erroneously rejected the NRC's interpretation of its own
 power plant siting regulations.

     The State of New York v. NRC, eta/. (S.D.N.Y., 75 Civ. 2121). The State of New York claimed
that several Federal agencies, including NRC,  had violated the National Environmental Policy Act
by transporting and allowing the transport of special nuclear material, particularly plutonium, by air
without  having first prepared an Environmental Impact  Statement. The agencies agreed to
prepare an impact statement and re-examine pertinent regulations. The State of New York sought
a preliminary injunction suspending air transport of the material pending completion of the impact
statement and  associated rulemaking procedures. The petition was denied, the Court noting that
                                         16

-------
air shipment was inherently a better protection from theft than surface transport and that, with the
safety record of such shipments in the past, the State's contention that irremediable harm could
ensue without immediate suspension was not convincing.

     On August 9,1975, Congress enacted Public Law 94-79, prohibiting the licensing by NRC of
any air shipments of nuclear material except that contained in certain medical devices designed
for individual human use. The restriction will remain in force until NRC has certified to the Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy that a safe container has been developed.

     Environmental Coalition on Nuclear  Power,  et al.  v. NRC, et al.  (3rd  Cir., 75-1421).
Petitioners sought review of  an Order issuing construction permits  for  Limerick Generating
Station, Units 1 and 2, of the Philadelphia Electric Co. They contended that the Commission's
review concerning cooling water for  the  facility was not in  accordance with the  National
Environmental Policy Act. In its brief, the Commission contended that its environmental review
was complete and that Limerick was economically and environmentally sound when operated on
the basis of natural river flow. As the Commission further stated, alternative methods of operation
which would increase the plant's economic efficiency will not be authorized until and unless they
too can be shown to comply  with NEPA. On November  12, 1975, two days after it heard oral
argument, the court issued an order denying the petition of review.

     York Committee fora Safe Environment, eta/, v. NRC(D.C.C\r., 74-1923). On December 9,
1975, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, rejecting numerous other
objections raised by the petitioners to the grant of an operating license for the Peach Bottom
Atomic Power Station, Unit 2, remanded the case to the Commission for an individualized analysis
of the costs and benefits of reducing routine radioiodine releases in accordance  with  the
Commission's "as low as reasonably achievable" regulations. The Court rejected the petitioners'
contentions that the licensee's emergency  plans did  not comply with the Commission's
regulations and that the Commission had violated the National Environmental Policy Act by giving
inadequate consideration to the transportation of spent fuel and to the cumulative effects of the
operation of existing and planned reactors in the vicinity of Peach Bottom.

     Citizens for Safe Power,  Inc., eta/, v. NRC, eta/. (D.D. Cir., 74-1186). Contending  that the
Atomic Energy Act requires, beyond compliance with safety regulations implementing the Act, a
consideration of "residual" risks, petitioners sought review of  an  order granting an operating
license for the Maine Yankee facility. The Commission responded that the Act does not require
such additional consideration because the  regulations themselves embrace a consideration of
such risks. Moreover, such residual risks were expressly considered in review under the National
Environmental Policy Act. On December 24, 1975, the Court issued its opinion  holding  that the
Commission's action complied with the Atomic Energy Act and was an adequate assessment, in
the context of NEPA review, of the residual risk.

     Hudson River Fisherman's Assoc., Inc.,  et al.  v. NRC (23 Cir. No. 75-4212). Petitioners
challenged the Appeal Board's Order interpreting—and approving as interpreted—a stipulation
which  they executed  jointly with the other parties to NRC's adjudicatory hearing concerning
issuance of an operating  license for  Unit  3 of the Indian Point Nuclear Generating  Station.
Following the Commission's December 2,  1975 Order approving the stipulation and vacating
portions of the Appeal Board's decision, the court dismissed the suit on December 10,1975.
                                          17

-------
     Cases Argued and Awaiting Decision

     North Anna Environmental Coalition v. NRC, eta/. (D.C. Cir., 75-1312). Petitioners seek
review of  a  Commission determination  allowing Virginia Electric and Power Co. to  continue
construction of four reactors at the North Anna site. After a hearing, the Commission determined
that a geological fault on which the reactors were sited was not a "capable fault" and therefore
posed no danger to the public health and  safety. The court heard oral argument on November 20,
1975.

     Lloyd Harbor Study Group v. NRC, eta/. (D.C. Cir., 73-2266). Petitioners seek review of an
order granting a construction permit for  the Shoreham nuclear facility. At issue in the case is
whether nuclear fuel cycle effects attributable to this particular plant—which are identical to those
from all other reactors and which were the subject of an ongoing generic rulernaking proceeding-
had to be considered in the environmental impact statement. Another issue, identical to the
question decided in Carolina Environmental Study Group, is whether the National Environmental
Policy Act requires a detailed analysis of the consequences of Class 9 accidents. The case has
been briefed and argued and awaits action by the Court.

     Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., eta/, v. NRC, eta/. (D.C. Cir.  Nos. 74-1385 and
74-1586). These  two cases were  consolidated for oral argument. In number 74-1586, the
petitioners challenged the Commission's issuance of a rule prescribing the manner of accounting,
in individual  licensing cases, for the environmental consequences of the uranium fuel cycle
activities attributable  to the particular plant. In number 74-1385, petitioners challenged the
Commission's issuance of the Vermont Yankee operating license. Relying on NEPA, they attack
the Commission's treatment of environmental  effects of  fuel cycle activities attributable to
Vermont Yankee Operation.

     Aeschliman, et al. v. NRC, et  al. (D.C. Cir. 73-1776)  and Saginaw Valley Nuclear Study
Group, eta/,  v. NRC, eta/. (D.C. Cir. 73-1867). Petitioners in these  companion cases seek review
of Commission orders granting construction permits for. Units 1 and 2 of the Midland  facility in
Michigan. At issue is the Commission's decision to evaluate emergency core cooling systems and
impacts of the nuclear fuel cycle by generic rulernaking rather than in separate adjudications. By
order of the Court the cases were held in abeyance pending determination of the related fuel cycle
issues in the  above-mentioned cases brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council.

     Other Pending Cases

     City of Cleveland,  Ohio v. NRC (D.C. Cir. No. 75-2115). The, City of Cleveland filed, on
Nobember 17, 1975, a petition to review a decision of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal
Board in a consolidated proceeding involving the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station (Unit 1) and
the Perry Nuclear Power Plant (Unites 1  and 2). The Appeal Board held that appointment of a
Special Master, with the parties' agreement, to decide certain discovery matters did not violate an
NRC prohibition against redelegation of the Licensing Board's authority. The Appeal Board also
pointed out that the parties had agreed to be bound by the Special Master's discovery rulings.

     Carolina Environmental Study  Group v. NRC, et al. (U.S.D.C.W.D.N.C., No.  C-C-73-139).
This  suit challenges the granting of a construction permit to Duke Power Company for the
McGuire facility in North Carolina. The issues it had in common with the suit of the same name in
the Court  of Appeals for the  D.C.  Circuit have  been dismissed. The remaining  issue is the
constitutionality of the limitation of liability in the Price-Anderson  Act. Memoranda on the issue
                                          18

-------
have been filed; argument was heard on December 18, 1975. The Court ordered that a further
hearing be held.

    Though the NRC is not a party to it, special mention is merited of the Supreme Court's grant
of certiorari in the case of Train v. Colorado Public Interest Research Group, by which the  Court
has accepted the Government's petition for review of an appellate court decision. The  issue
before the Court is whether nuclear waste material, regulated and controlled  through licenses
issued by the NRC, is a "pollutant" within the meaning of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
which required the Environmental Protection Agency to establish regulations and controls over
pollutants by administering a detailed permit program. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth
Circuit, reversing the district court decision, answered this question in the affirmative. The EPA
has appealed this decision to the Supreme Court, which heard oral argument from the parties on
December 9,1975.
                                          19

-------
                                REFERENCE
1.   U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "Annual Report 1975," pursuant to the requirements
    of Section 307 (C) of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974.
                                     20

-------
NUCLEAR ENERGY - CHAPTER 3
INTRODUCTION

     The nuclear power industry, producing electricity to meet over 8 percent of the U.S. demand,
is the most visible and controversial of the sources of radiation covered in this report. There are
four specific problems which are facing the nuclear power  industry. First  is the problem of
management and handling of  radioactive  waste" such  that  they can  be concentrated,
encapsulated, and stored in a manner that will assure full protection of the public both now and in
the future. Because of the important role envisioned for nuclear power, a coordinated Federal
program is being developed to resolve this problem.  Second, there is the complex problem
involving the levels of risk individuals are willing to assume for the benefits..of low cost power.
Even though considerable effort has been devoted to  Reactor Safety both at the Federal and
State levels, much work remains to be done to resolve the problem. Third, although planned
releases from nuclear power plants  are  low, the buildup of long-lived  radionuclides in the
environment is of continuing concern. With respect to this problem, EPA's proposed Uranium Fuel
Cycle Standard establishes limits on the  annual exposure of any member of the public and
contains provisions to limit the releases of long-lived radionuclides to prevent any unwarranted
buildup of themjn the environment.  Fourth, as new  technologies are developed which use
separable fission rnaterial such as plutonium, the problem of safeguards needs to be addressed in
the psIbftQ forum and resolved.

     Radioactive emissions from  nuclear power plants can be reduced  to any desired level by
appropriate controls. There is an  active debate over what is the "desired" level, in view of the
mounting costs of increasing control. As an alternative  it is possible to locate and design plants
such that the radioactive emissions will provide a minimal impact on the environment by  locating
the plant away from such sensitive areas as population centers. The preparation and- review of
Environmental Impact Statements promote application  of emission reduction systems to assure
protection of the public and the environment.

     In  1975, there were significant radiation protection activities which are likely to affect the
public and the environment in relation to radiation; 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.
                                          21

-------
INDUSTRY STATUS (1)

     By the end of 1975, there were in the U.S. nuclear power industry:

          56 plants with operating licenses, representing 38,655 MWe

          69 plants with construction permits, representing 70,773 MWe

          90 plants on order, representing 100,200 MWe

          21 plants firmly planned, representing 26,160 MWe

          236 total commitments, representing 236,729 MWe

     Nuclear reactors now produce about 8.3 percent of the electric power used in the U.S. In
1975, the industry saw cancellations and deferrals of new construction for two dozen plants.
Figure 3.1, charting annual orders, clearly shows a rising trend in plant orders that weakened in
1974, and plummeted to only five orders in 1975. Due in part to art abrupt halt in the historic growth
of electric power usage, and a feeble resumption of demand in 1975, nuclear growth is also
plagued by the tight capital  market utilities  must tap to meet  the high initial cost and long1
construction cycle for a modern nuclear plant. Nevertheless, as presently scheduled, the U.S.
capacity for electric power will rise a factor of 5 by 1986, as shown.in Figure 3.2.

MEETING STANDARDS FOR NORMAL RELEASES

     Planned releases of radioactive wastes from nuclear reactors are to the atmosphere and the
water body cooling the plant condensers. Gaseous wastes are filtered, retained to permit some
decay of  short-lived products,  and discharged to the  atmosphere.  Aqueous wastes  are
discharged to the natural water body or cooling pond.

     NRC's  New Rule on  Effluent Control (1)

     On April 30, the NRC announced a significant new regulation, effective on June 4, 1975,
which provided definitive numerical guidance to NRC licensees on how to comply with the
previously enunciated requirement that levels of radioactive material in effluents from light-water-
cooled power reactors and  resultant doses to the  public be kept "as  low as  reasonably
achievable".

     The new rule,  "Numerical Guides for Design Objectives and Limiting Conditions for
Operation to Meet the Criterion 'As Low as Reasonably Achievable' for Radioactive Material in
Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Effluents," (Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50) concluded
a rulemaking proceeding lasting more than three years  which  involved an evidentiary public
hearing, an environmental statement, more than 4,000 pages of prepared testimony and exhibits.

     The new regulation involves both design objectives and a cost-benefit analysis requirement
to determine the point at which the costs of further reductions of emissions of radioactive material
are not justified.
                                         22

-------
                                           Figure 3.1
ro
CO
4U

35
30
•o
«
•
"O
0 25
CD
Q.
o 20
.0
E
1 15



10



5

^S Basic
X Trend
/
• / \
/ \
9 •
/ I
\

* \ Recent
— j * Trend
/ I
1 1
• 1
A K
• / I
/ I
/ I
/ »
/ 1
/ 1
/ 1
/ *
1 1 1 1 1 ! 1 ! 1 1
66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75
Years
      U.S. REACTOR ORDERS EACH YEAR. WHILE THE TREND LINE WOULD INDICATE ABOUT THREE DOZEN

      ORDERS/YEAR MIGHT NOW BE EXPECTED, 1975 ORDERS WERE DOWN TO 5.

-------
                                               Figure 3.2
            200,000
            150,000
ro
      1
111


S


I
a
O)
0

5



1
            100,000
             50,000
                          I
                           I
                  75     76     77     78     79     80     81     82      83      84     85

                                                        Year



          PRESENTLY SCHEDULED GROWTH OF INSTALLED NUCLEAR CAPACITY IN THE U.S.
                                                                                          86

-------
    The design objectives are to:

    (1)    Restrict the amount of radioactive material released in liquid effluents from any light-
           water-cooled power reactor to levels that would keep the annual doses to any
           individual in an unrestricted area to not more than three millirems for the total body
           and not more than 10 millirems for any single organ;
    (2)    Restrict the amount of radioactive material in gaseous effluents from any light-water-
           cooled power reactor to keep annual doses to any individual in an unrestricted area
           tanot more than five millirems to the total body and not more than 15 millirems to the
           skin; and
    (3)    Restrict the amount of radioactive iodine and other radioactive material in gaseous!
           effluents  from  any light-water-cooled power reactor to keep annual dose to anyl
           organ of any individual in an unrestricted area to no more than 15 millirems.

    In  its  decisiotf Ihe  NRC adopted a landmark technique—a quantitative approach—for
assessing the cost-benefit of achieving further reductions in emissions of radioactive material.
This approach seeks, for  the first time, to express both the costs and benefits of a reduction in
radiation exposure levels in comparable units  in order  to achieve an  objective cost-benefit
balance. Contributions to the record in the rulemaking proceeding comparing the costs of further
measures to  the  benefits of any reduction achieved ranged from $10 to $980 for total-body
exposure to a standard unit of radiation dose  equivalent, the "man-rem."  (The man-rem is a
measure of co\te&ifai& dose equivalent for large groups of people—for example, 100 people, each
receM&g;Q.01 rem; or 1,000 people each receiving 0.001 rem.)

    Irl September 1975, the Commission amended the regulation to provide  an optional method
for certain reactors to  come in compliance with the guidelines.  Under this option, applicants filing
for construction permits on or after January 2,1971, and before June 4,1976, may comply with
the "as low as reasonably achievable" regulation without making the newly required cost-benefit1
analysis, provided their radioactive waste systems and equipment meet the guides on design!
objectives that were proposed by the regulatory staff of the AEC in February 1974.

    EPA'S Proposed Uranium Fuel Cycle Standard (2)

    The EPA published in the Federal Register or\ May 29,1975, a notice of rulemaking for the
Uranium Fuel Cycle designed to provide  environmental and public health protection. These
standards would limit quantities of long-lived radioactive materials in the general environment
attributable to planned releases from operations contributing to the generation of electric power
through the uranium fuel cycle. 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 transportation, that are involved in the processing, fissioning, and reprocessing
of uranium for these reactors. The standards will cover the process from the time uranium ore
leaves the mines through the reprocessing of uranium after burnup in reactors and its eventual
recycling back into the fuel supply. This will (a)  assure protection of the public 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 reasonably achievable"
concept. Effective consideration of "as low as  reasonably achievable"  involves judgments ofi
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 3.1.
                                          25

-------
     Standards in categories of Section A of Table 3.1  are designed to address doses due tOj
short-lived fission produced materials and  naturally occurring materials, while those in Section_B
specifically address 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,  including  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 temporary1
operation in the presence of unusual operating conditions to assure the orderly delivery of power.
                                          26

-------
                                     Table 3.1
             Proposed May  1975  Standards for  Normal Operations
                            of the  Uranium  Fuel Cycle
A.   Individual Dose Limits

     1.  Whole  body

     2.  Thyroid

     3.  Other organs*


B.   Limits for  Long-Lived  Radionuclides

     1.  Krypton-85

     2.  lodine-129

     3.  Transuranics**


C.   Variances
25 millirems/year

75 millirems/year

25 millirems/year
50,000 curies/gigawatt-year

5 miliicuries/gigawatt-year

0.5  millicuries/gigawatt-year
     At the  discretion of the regulatory agency  (licensor)  for
 temporary  and unusual operating circumstances to insure orderly
 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.
                                         27

-------
 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS

     According to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, a Federal action which can
 conceivably affect the environment must be preceded by the issuance of a draft environmental
 impact statement for comment. Comments received must be reviewed and the action modified
 where necessary to protect the environment before a final environmental impact statement (EIS)
 can be issued and the action carried out.

     Such an action is the issuance of a permit by NRC to construct or a license to operate a
 nuclear power plant. During 1975, NRC issued for comment 13 draft EIS's and 16 final EIS's on
 conventional light-water cooled nuclear power plants. Also, TVA issued one draft and one final
 EIS on a conventional nuclear power plant. EPA reviewed and commented on each of these draft
 statements.

     The principal issues identified by EPA in all the reviews related to:

          risks of severe nuclear accidents,

          ultimate disposal of nuclear waste,

          impacts of the associated fuel cycle, notably dose commitments, and

         ' impacts of necessary transportation of nuclear materials.

 Each of these concerns is broad and not confined to one or several  EIS's. As such, it requires
 resolution on a broad basis.  Problems which were specific to projects  related to reliance on
 environmental dilution to reduce doses, rather  than  in-plant effluent  control;  thyroid dose
 problems where a site was in a dairy  region, radiation source terms; doses due  to the use of
 sewage waste water contaminated with active iodine; source terms for shipment of low-level solid
 radwaste; and the disposal of demineralizer resin-filter sludges via settling ponds with subsequent
 shallow-land burial at municipal sites.

     During 1975, NRC also published a draft EIS on a generic site evaluation on off-shore power
 system floating nuclear power plants. The novelty of this concept suggests that it is worthwhile to
 discuss in detail.

 FLOATING NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS

     A number of Government agencies and organizations have statutory responsibility and
 regulatory authority over activities taking place in the ocean. In recognition of this multi-agency
 involvement in the licensing of floating nuclear power plants, an Interagency Regulatory Steering *
 Committee was formed to minimize duplicative efforts,  clarify policy and provide an efficient
 regulatory process for industry and the public.  Departments and  agencies  of the Federal
 Government represented on the Committee are: Coast Guard, Corps of  Engineers, Council on
 Environmental Quality (observer), Department of the Interior, Environmental Protection Agency,
 Federal Aviation Administration,  Federal  Energy Administration  (observer), Federal  Power
 Commission, National  Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission. The NRC representative serves as chairman of the Committee, which has existed
since 1973.
                                         28

-------
     For each of the major phases in the licensing process for a floating nuclear power plant,
agencies represented  on the  Committee have identified the key  points at which  a required
regulatory or coordination function must be undertaken by one or more of them. The principal
phases are: construction of the manufacturing facility; manufacture of the floating nuclear power
plants; construction of offshore and onshore facilities at the proposed site of the floating nuclear
plant to the operating site and its installation in the breakwater; operation of the nuclear power
plant.

     Offshore Power Systems, Inc.  applied in 1973  to the Atomic Energy Commission for a
license to manufacture eight floating nuclear power plants. NRC is issuing the Environmental
Statement for the application in three parts. The first was issued as a draft in July 1974 and
pertained  to the environmental aspects of the manufacturing facility at Blount Island,  near
Jacksonville, Florida. There was little radiological concern with the statement since the only
potential source of exposure would be through radiographic inspection procedures. The final EIS
(first part) was issued in October 1975.

     The second part of the statement, issued in December 1975, pertains to the generic aspects
of siting and operation of floating nuclear power plants on the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. Part three
will supplement the generic evaluation by considering the liquid pathways in detail for radiological
releases under both normal and potential accident conditions. Part three is expected to be issued
in 1976.

     The first application to NRC for a license to site and operate floating nuclear power plants
was presented by Public Service Electric and Gas Company of New Jersey. The station, Atlantic
Generating Station (AGS), is proposed for a site 2.8 miles off the  southeastern coast of New
Jersey. Current plans are for operation of unit 1  in 1985 and unit 2 in 1987. An environmental
statement for AGS was issued April 1976.

HIGH TEMPERATURE GAS-COOLED REACTOR (HTGR)

     NRC published its final EIS for the construction of the Fulton Generating Station, Units 1 and
2 in April 1975. The principal comments raised by EPA on the draft statement emphasized the
importance of (1) obtaining HTGR operating data at Fort St. Vrain for use in assessing impacts of
the large HTGR, (2) developing "as low as reasonably achievable"  guidance for HTGR effluent
discharges, and (3) developing additional information to more accurately define HTGR,risks and
consequences from reactor operation and from  operation of the  HTGR fuel cycle. The final
statement was responsive to the EPA comments; however, the details on plans and schedules for
obtaining additional operating data and for conducting a risk assessment of the.HTGR were not
provided.

     Fulton Station, and all other previously proposed commercial-sized HTGR  (800-1100 MWe
class) have been cancelled by the utilities involved. The future development of the HTGR will
largely depend on successful operation at Fort St. Vrain, the medium-sized prototype plant, and
economics of the HTGR versus the available alternatives.

LIGHT WATER BREEDER REACTOR (LWBR)

     A draft EIS for the light water breeder reactor (ERDA-1541) was issued  for comment on
August 8, 1975. The statement covered the LWBR technology development  program and, in
particular, the demonstration program at the Shippingport reactor, at which an LWBR core will be
installed  and operated  for three years. The  statement addressed both the impacts  of a
                                         29

-------
 hypothesized commercial LWBR industry and those of the Shippingport plant. The  general
 approach taken was to evaluate the incremental impacts of the LWBR over those which might
 occur if the nation continued with only its light-water reactors (LWR) currently being utilized.

     This program will demonstrate the feasibility of converting existing LWR's, which use low-
 enriched uranium dioxide as fuel, to use of a thorium oxide-uranium oxide fuel. In the LWBR, the
 thorium-232 is converted to uranium-233 which can then be  used in a conventional LWR.
 Eventually, A LWBR will produce sufficient U-233 to supply its own reload fuel.

     In its comments, EPA found no significant technical issues relative to Shippingport but did
 conclude that there were sufficient uncertainties with the technology, economics and natural
 resource utilization that a re-evaluation of the viability of commercial LWBR application would be
 prudent after the technology is further developed.

 NRC'S ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING (1)

     In 1975, the NRC issued a revision to its Regulatory'Guide  on environmental radiation
 surveillance. The revised guide "Programs for Monitoring Radioactivity in the Environs of Nuclear
 Power Plants"  (Regulatory Guide 4.1, Rev. 1), provides the latest guidance on  acceptable
 programs for monitoring radioactivity around nuclear power plants. Such programs are essential
 for providing additional sssurance that the  public' health and safety arid the environment are
 adequately protected; they also provide NRC with data by which to determine if the plants are
 operating within the conditions of their licenses.

     Each nuclear facility licensee is required to monitor major and potentially significant paths for
 release of gaseous and liquid  radioactive effluents during normal  operation.  NRC inspectors
 check the licensee's radiological monitoring and waste systems to assure they are  built as
 designed and operated to keep releases within regulatory limits. If a regulatory limit is exceeded,
 the licensee must so inform the NRC and take appropriate action.

     Each power plant licensee also is required to monitor major pathways in the environment.
 During NRC inspections, random samples of monitoring records, procedures, and reports are
 examined and confirmatory measurements are made to assess the accuracy and consistency of
 licensee measurements of radioactivity in effluent and environmental samples. The confirmatory
 measurements are then further compared with NRC reference data developed in laboratory
 measurements.

     Interagency Program

     NRC enlisted the cooperation of the National Bureau of Standards, the Energy Research
 and  Development Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, and State  health and
 environmental agencies in  1975 to provide corroborative evidence of the environmental and
 effluent radioactivity measurements submitted by licensees. An example of such cooperation is a
 system which  permits  continuous  tracking of the accuracy of radioactivity measurements,
 established by agreement between the National Bureau of Standards and the Health Services
 Laboratory (HSL) of the ERDA Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. HSL functions as the NRC
 reference laboratory in such matters, and NRC inspectors regularly compare licensee effluent
 measurements with those made by HSL on identical effluent samples.

     State agencies also assist in long-term, repetitive sampling to evaluate licensees' overall
environmental programs. At the end of FY 1975, the 18 States participating in this program were
                                         30

-------
Alabama,  Arkansas,  California,  Colorado,  Connecticut,  Florida,  Illinois, Maine,  Maryland,
Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, South Carolina, Vermont, Virginia and
Wisconsin. Under written contract, NRC provides these States with funds, technical support and
training to assist in improving their analytical capabilities.

     Another tool for the evaluation of a licensee's analytical capability is EPA cooperation with
NRC under a  1975  agreement  in  the  use of  its Environmental Radioactivity  Laboratory
Intercomparison Studies Program at the Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Las
Vegas, Nevada.

RADIATION STUDIES AT NUCLEAR FACILITIES

     The Office of Radiation Programs conducts field studies on a case by case basis at operating
nuclear facilities as a part of its dose  assessment program to  (a)  develop measurement
techniques, (b) validate dose computational models, (c) characterize effluents, and (d) determine
the ability of technology for control of nuclear wastes to meet design technical specifications.

     Haddam Neck Plant

     At the Haddam Neck Plant at Haddam Neck, Connecticut, a joint EPA,  NRC, and State field
study was conducted to obtain data for use in validating a dose model for estimating the external,
whole body, cloud gamma dose to exposed populations.  The study was  intended to provide
information 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 exposing
population groups, (e) magnitude  of radiation exposure in the environment, (f) applicability  of
various monitoring and measuring techniques, and  (g) the ability of technology for control  of
nuclear wastes  to meet technical design specifications. The report for this study has been
published as "Radiological Surveillance Study at the Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Station"(3).

     Oyster Creek

     The Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant at Toms River, New Jersey, was studied by a joint
EPA/NRC field study team. The data were  gathered 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 effluent  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
routing conditions of station operation, and (d) determine the ability of the technology for control
of nuclear wastes to meet technical design specifications. Report draft prepared to be published
in 1976.

     Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station

     A joint EPA/NRC study was conducted in the vicinity of the Quad Cities  Nuclear Power
Station, Cordova, Illinois, during June through October  1974. The purpose of the study was to
continue a previous study of the iodine-131 air to milk pathway at a BWR nuclear power station
begun in 1973. Measurements included (a)  release rates of iodine-131 by chemical species 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
                                          31

-------
 two locations. 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 in
 preparation for publication in 1976.

     Cooper Nuclear Station

     A joint EPA/ERDA/NRC field study to evaluate "N skyshine  dose was conducted at the
 Cooper Nuclear Station in  BrownviHe, Nebraska. The sources of the 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 boundaries. The doses at such
 locations are from skyshine (large angle air 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. A report of this study has been published as ""N Skyshine Survey
 of a 2400 MW(t) Nuclear Power Plant" (4).

     Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Dose Model Validation Study

     A joint EPA/NRC field study was conducted at the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant to
 obtain data for use in validating a dose model 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 building characteristics.

     Participants  in the study  included the EPA;  Minnesota Department of Health; Northern
 States Power Company; and the NRC. A draft report has been prepared and reviewed and will be
 published in 1976.

     G.E. Fuel Fabrication Plant

     A field study was initiated in early  1974 at the G.E. Fuel Fabrication Plant north of Wilmington,
 North Carolina. The  plant was chosen as being representative of the  larger fuel fabrication
 facilities. The purpose of the study was to characterize the stack effluents and to acquire data
 from environmental surveillance at a facility on types of radionuclides discharged and significant
 environmental exposure pathways. These data will be used to validate dose models (and source
 terms) for use in future estimates of individual and population doses from normal operation of the
 plant. A draft report is now in preparation.

     Harbor Study at Puget Sound

     In cooperation with the U.S. Naval Ship  Systems Command, the Office of Radiation
 Programs conducted a radiological survey at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in  Bremerton,
 Washington. The purpose of this study and other previous studies of ports servicing nuclear
 powered ships was to locate, identify, and measure any radionuclides in the port or its environs
 due to nuclear ship activity. The data would then be analyzed to assess any hazard to the general
 population in the  vicinity of the port. The  field  study conducted in November 1974 and  the
subsequent laboratory analysis of samples and data showed no significant levels of radioactivity
due to  nuclear powered ships. A draft of the study report has been prepared for review and
publication is planned for 1976.
                                          32

-------
     Browns Ferry Nuclear Power Plant

     A joint study at the Browns Ferry Nuclear Power Plant in northern Alabama was initiated in
July  1975.  Participants included the Alabama Division of Radiological Health,  the Alabama
Environmental Health Administration Laboratory, the Tennessee Valley Authority, and EPA.

     The objective of the study is to design and evaluate an ambient radiation monitoring program
for the vicinity of the plant. Radiation exposures due to airborne releases from the plant will be
predicted using  mathematical  models  for comparison  with  measured  values. Pressurized
ionization chambers (PIC's) and thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's) were placed at locations
chosen by the participants in July 1975. However, the plant has been shut down since then and
only background data have been gathered. The plant is expected to resume operation in early
1976 at which time measurements  under normal operating conditions will begin. Special field
measurements will also be made to assess radiation contributions from sources such at nitrogen-
16 and gamma emitters jn waste tanks.

PM^NT SAFETY

     Review of the Reactor Safety Study

     Because the occurrence of a severe nuclear power reactor power reactor accident could
cause the death and injury of persons and long-term contamination of the environment, EPA has
always considered the risk of such  accidents to be part of its environmental concerns. EPA's
activities in  this  area are related either to preparedness for accidents or  to assessment  of
accidents. Those activities related to the assessment of risks are either in review of individual
nuclear facility environmental impact statements (EIS) or in geneiic studies and reviews.

     One of EPA's principal efforts in generic reviews is its review of the report of the Reactor
Safety Study (5). This report, titled "Reactor Safety Study, An Assessment of Accident Risks in
U.S. Commercial Nuclear power Plants," WASH-1400 (NUREG-75/014), presents quantitative
risk  estimates produced  by the study group under the direction of Professor Norman  C.
Rasmussen of MIT, after  whom it is sometimes called the "Rasmussen Study." The effort was
initially sponsored by the  U.S. Atomic Energy Commission and, after January 1975, by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The Reactor Safety Study report, WASH-1400, was accorded
an intensive review by EPA because it is the first really significant effort to quantify the risks of
nuclear power and because, due to its depth of analysis and the large amount of specialized
manpower involved, it is likely to remain the principal reference on the subject for some time. The
draft version of WASH-1400 was issued in August 1974, and EPA issued comments on it dated
November 27,1974 to the AEC and August 15,1975 to the NRC. These comments, together with
the report of EPA's contractor,  Intermountain Technologies, Inc., have been issued as an EPA
report (6). The principal points of EPA's review are:

     (1)     Greater emphasis should have accompanied the risk comparisons to disclaim any
judgement on the acceptability of the risks.

     (2)     The general methodologies and rationale developed in the study to determine risk
levels appear to provide a meaningful basis for obtaining useful assessments of accident risks of
nuclear power plants; the methodology should be refined further and given wider application.
Among the suggested future applications are off-shore power plants, HTGR's and LMFBR's.
                                         33

-------
     (3)     In general, the results are not sensitive to changes in the analysis of any particular
accident event sequence because there are such a great number contributing to the overall
results.

     (4)     Some of the consequence  modeling assumptions with regard to evacuations and
health effects tend to cause underestimates of the health effects. These could affect the overall
risk estimates.

     (5)     Specific areas that could be significant and needed better support for the results
presented were the BWR transient-without-scram accidents, and the failure pressure for the PWR
containment.

     (6)     Editorial problems, inconsistencies, errors, omissions, and incomplete explanations
were evident in many parts of draft WASH-1400.

     (7)     The application of the results from the Surry 1 PWR to the overall PWR population
may involve greater uncertainties than the draft WASH-1400 suggests.

     (8)     The core meltdown and containment response analyses were found to contain many
oversimplifying assumptions deserving more justification.

     (9)   • Several areas were found which appear to be improperly or incompletely considered
but for which  insufficent  information is  available to determine quantitatively their risk impact.
These areas include human reliability, common mode failure quantification, some aspects of
design adequacy, and techniques for calculating the results of small pipe breaks in PWR's.

     It should be noted that EPA neither accepted nor rejected draft WASH-1400's numerical
values of risk, but called for modification and information additions to certain aspects of the report.
EPA pointed out that the report presents only the risk from severe accidents at some nuclear
power plants,  and that the overall risk from nuclear power includes contributions from normal
operations of  power plants, from the rest of the fuel  cycle and from  sabotage and terrorist
activities.

     The final version of WASH-1400 (7) was issued to Congress  on October 30,1975, in time to
be taken into consideration in hearings on the Price-Anderson extension. It is being reviewed by
EPA and Intermountain Technologies, Inc., with regard to revisions from the draft which possibly
affect EPA's earlier findings. Because the section on calculation  of accident Consequences has
been completely revised in the final vision, it is receiving particular attention. This review is to be
concluded in the spring of 1976.

     Risk Assessment Methodology

     As society develops a capability to estimate risks in quantitative  terms, certain related
problems acquire more importance. One of these is understanding the degree of acceptance of
different  types of risks by the  public and the reasons for acceptance  of different risk levels.
Another problem is that of establishing criteria to be used by regulatory agencies as bases for their
regulatory activities, taking into proper consideration the risks associated with the industries being
regulated. A risk assessment methodology adequate to handle these problems must incorporate
more than accident consequences and probabilities.
                                          34

-------
     Risks from Other Sources

     In order to treat the risk from nuclear power properly, so that it may be considered in the
 regulation of the industry, it is necessary to know not only the risk in quantitative terms, but also
 the associated benefits, how the public regards the risks, how they compare to other risks, and
 what the alternatives are, including their associated risks. To provide some of the background
 information, EPA has sponsored research resulting in two  reports. One of these, titled "The
 Consequences and Frequency of Selected Man-Originated Accident Events," (8) is a listing and
 classification of accidents in the United States in the period 1953-1973, causing ten or more
 fatalities, or thirty or more injuries, or three million dollars  or more in property damage. The
 second, titled "Risk Assessment of Storage and Transport of Liquefied  Natural Gas and LP-
 Gas,"(9) shows that this non-nuclear technology also has a potential for unlikely accidents with
 severe consequences. These reports provide information on risks in our society which is relevant
 to the understanding of risk and its acceptability.

 WASTE MANAGEMENT

     Nuclear Waste Disposal

     Activities to meet the problems of radioactive waste disposal accelerated during 1975. As
 reported in last year's review,  ERDA deferred earlier plans to develop an interim retrievable
 surface storage facility and is concentrating on methods for long term waste disposal. Planning
 and evaluating waste management has not been confined to ERDA, and recently interagency
 cooperation has been formalized for some activities in this subject. Meanwhile, the inventory of
 radioactive waste continues to grow and has become a subject  of increasing concern. The
 operation of a nuclear reactor generates wastes in the quantities typified by the fuel cycle shown
 in Figure 3.3. At present, the cycle is open, and so the fuel expended in a reactor is stored to await
 reprocessing.

     The underlying objective of waste management is to contain radioactive materials until they
 have decayed to a level where they present negligible biological hazards. This containment has
 been achieved, with varying degrees  of success, by burial, storage in remote areas, or ocean
 dumping in sealed containers.  Presently, radioactive wastes from weapons production are in
 interim storage in tanks, some of which leak, and wastes from nuclear power plants are stored at
 the plant.

     Nuclear Regulatory Commission Actions

     The Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 assigned NRC the responsibility to license the safe
 storage and/or disposal of high-level radioactive  wastes from the commercial reprocessing
 industry, whether stored at the reprocessor's facilities or at a Federal repository. To meet this, as
 well as other nuclear waste' responsibilities conferred by the Atomic Energy  Act, the NRC
 established a  Waste Management  Branch  in the  Office  of Nuclear  Material Safety and
"Safeguards. This Branch is responsible for the necessary safety analyses and licensing activities
 as well  as for the  development  of a comprehensive  waste management  policy  for the
 Commission.

     During the year, NRC undertook preparation of a broad program plan for nuclear waste
 regulation and management concerning all types of wastes ranging from tailings at uranium mills
 to the decontamination of nuclear facilities upon decommissioning at the end of their useful lives.
 Scope  of the program will include standards development, backup research, and the licensing
                                           35

-------
                                                                     Figure 3.3
CO
0>
                            Full core consists of
                            about 135 tons of nu-
                            clear fuel elements
                            (containing about %
                            tons of uranium)
           600 Ib.  of
           plutonium
30 tons of
  iraniurn
            r—__—*|    uranium^
9  tons of  solid metal
scrap from fuel cladding
(handled separately  be-
cause there is some plu-
tonium  contamination,
but less need for shield-
ing or heat dissipation).
                                      COMMERCIAL
                                     REPROCESSING
                                         PLANT
                                                     NUCLEAR POWER
                                                          PLANT
                                                                                                ELECTRICAL  ENERGY
                                                                                                FORACOMMUNITYOF
                                                                                                ABOUT 750,000 PEOPLE
                                                                                a
                                                                                                      45 tons of "spent"
                                                                                                      nuclear fuel, (one-
                                                                                                      third of the plant's
                                                                                                      fuel load, with its
                                                                                                      weight essentially
                                                                                                      unchanged)
                                                                          10,000 gallons  of high-
                                                                          level liquid waste, includ-
                                                                          ing solvents added. (May
                                                                          be stored in this form for
                                                                          up  to 5 years.) Contains
                                                                          about 3 Ib. of plutonium,
                                                                          2200  Ib.  of fission  pro-
                                                                          ducts,  and 300  Ib. of
                                                                          uranium.
                                                                                        5 tons of stable, solidified high-
                                                                                        level  waste  to  be shipped  to
                                                                                        Federal Repository.
                          THE FUEL CYCLE ASSOCIATED WITH 1 YEAR'S OPERATION OF A TYPICAL 1000 ELECTRICAL-MEGAWATT
                          NUCLEAR POWER PLANT.

-------
 actions required to protect public health and safety in all aspects of the handling, treatment,
 shipping, storage and disposal of nuclear wastes.

      Under current NRC regulations, high-level  liquid radioactive wastes resulting from fuel
 reprocessing operations must be solidified within five years of generation and shipped to ERDA
 within another five years for storage or disposal.  NRC is charged by law with making licensing
 decisions on all  storage and disposal facilities. The NRC is developing detailed standards and
 performance criteria for high-level waste disposal to help guide ERDA's waste management
 research and development program, while providing flexibility to include any additional options
 that may be developed as the program progresses.

      Status of Low-Level Waste Disposal

      At present, low-level waste disposal is the only form of waste disposal actively being
 accomplished. The general method of such disposal in this country and abroad has been burial in
 shallow trenches.  There are six commercial shallow  land burial facilities in the U.S. They are
 located at  Barnwell, South Carolina;  Beatty,  Nevada; Maxey  Flats,  Kentucky; Richland,
 Washington;  Sheffield,  Illinois;  and  West Valley,  New York. Similar  burial  facilities were
 established at five Federally-operated sites located at Idaho National Engineering Laboratory,
 Idaho; Hanford Facility, Washington; Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, New Mexico; Oak Ridge
 National Laboratory, Tennessee; and Savannah River Plant, South Carolina. At each of these
 sites a monitoring program is carried out to detect migration of the buried radioactive materials so
 that corrective action can be taken if necessary to protect public health and safety.

      What are these low-level wastes? It has been estimated (10) that 70 percent by volume of
 these wastes are paper, and that the density of the total waste would be about 10 Ibs/ft*. As well
 as paper, cleanup materials and absorbed liquids, packing, broken glassware, plastics, protective
 clothing, radioactive carcasses of experimental animals, and contaminated equipment  are
 buried.(11) Depending upon the source and type, the wastes are shipped to the sites in 55-gallon
 steel drums or wooden or cardboard boxes for burial.

      EPA has recently inspected two of the commercial burial sites. Both Maxey Flats and West
 Valley have not performed as expected. Migration of radioactivity from the burial trench has been
 detected at both these sites and at the Federally-operated site at Oak Ridge. The EPA studies
 indicate that the following sequence occurs:

      •  the wastes were  buried in  large trenches  and covered  with earthen  caps

      •  rain  soaked through  the caps, filled the  trenches,  and  soaked the wastes

      •  the water leached the wastes

      •  the leachate,   containing radioactivity,  overflowed the tranch  or seeped
         through the ground.

 A  summary of activity  at these  sites  is given  in Table 3.2

     Clearly, the level of precipitation affects the suitability of a waste disposal site. Other things
being equal, arid sites are best. The "other things," however, are complex to evaluate, including
soil porosity, hydrology, and seismic risk. With these uncertainties, surveillance is essential at any
burial site.
                                            37

-------
     At West Valley, tritium and strontium 90 were found in the leachate. The water has been
diverted to a holding lagoon, where it is being treated. As at Maxey Flats, only traces are involved,
but Nuclear Fuel Services closed the burial site in the spring of 1975 and is studying ways to
control seepage. Low-level radioactive wastes generated in the eastern U.S. now are buried only
at the Kentucky, Illinois and South Carolina sites.
                                         38

-------
                                  TABLE  3.2
        CHARACTERISTICS OF RADIOACTIVE  WASTES BURIED AT THE
          MAXEY  FLATS AND WEST VALLEY BURIAL FACILITIES
                               Maxey  Flats                  West Valley'/
                          (Burial began 1973)          (Burial began 1964)

Volume                         104,000                     64,000
    (cubic meters)

By-Product Material             1,638,000                   386,000
    (curies)*/

Special Nuclear Material          349,000                     52,000V
    (grams)V

Source Material                 158,000                   986,000
    (pounds)*/

Solidified  Liquid Wastes        2,250,000                      -0-
'/  Burial operations were halted in  1975.

21  Includes radioisotopes produced in  reactors, special
    nuclear material (plutonium and enriched uranium), source
    material (uranium and thorium) are  defined in 10  CFR 20.

31  Further burial of plutonium-239 was prohibited in  1974.
                                      39

-------
     Spent Fuel Storage

     There are, at present, no commercial plants operating in the U.S. to reprocess spent nuclear
fuel. As a result,  there is no high-level waste being generated for disposal. This material is still
locked into the fuel elements taken from nuclear reactors and awaiting reprocessing. The storage
of spent fuel elements is beginning to become a problem. In 1975, ERDA issued a report(12) on
the situation. With the assumption that present storage capacity on-site at the power plants will be
augmented by expansion of Nuclear Fuel Services' storage basin at West Valley, New York, by
the end of 1976 four reactors  will require  additional storage beyond  this to accommodate
scheduled fuel discharges. Assuming no further increase in storage, the report finds 82 reactors
will be short by 1985.

     Because of the continuing building up on spent fuel in storage pools, owners of the three fuel
reprocessing plants (none operating, except for storage) - located in New York, Illinois and South
Carolina - have applied to NRC for licenses either to expand storage facilities already in operation
or,  in one case, to operate the storage basin at the site before completion of the entire plant. In
addition, during 1975, four utilities applied to NRC for approval of storage capacity increases at
their individual nuclear power plants - Point Beach in Wisconsin,  Indian Point Unit 2 in New York,
La Crosse in Wisconsin, and Maine Yankee.

     In September, NRC announced that  it would prepare  a generic  environmental impact
statement on storage of spent fuel from light-water reactors, and would continue to act on storage
license applications while the statement is being prepared.

     Storage of spent fuel is regarded as an interim solution. On a long-term basis, spent fuel must
either be reprocessed to recover the valuable uranium and plutonium for recycling in new reactor
fuel, or managed as radioactive waste.

     Crowding schemes involve  redesign of the spent fuel storage pool so it will accommodate
more fueJ elements, still function to remove the heat generated, and not risk startup of a chain
reaction. Neutrons may be absorbed by installing steel cells around the fuel elements; other ways
of averting chain reaction are soluble poisons and redesign of pool configuration.

     Barnwell Fuel Receiving and Storage Station

     The NRC DEIS for the Barnwell Fuel Receiving and Storage Station (BFRSS) was issued
during May 1975. The purpose of the DEIS was to allow Barnwell to receive and store spent fuel
from  nuclear power reactors. The need to find additional storage capacity for spent fuel was
determined to be serious during  1975. Projections were made that the situation was becoming
critical and the potential for shutting down power reactors was discussed as a real possibility.
Licensing the Barnwell plant to receive and store spent fuel would help in alleviating the problem.

     EPA concluded that more information was-needed to reach a decision on the environmental
impact of BFRSS. In particular, no information was presented as to whether or not alpha waste will
be generated nor what quantities might be generated.  In this  regard it was also not clear as to
whether the proposed shallow land storage area could be found acceptable for storage of alpha
contaminated waste.  With regard to liquid discharges, no information was presented to support
the recommended license condition that would limit liquid waste discharge concentrations to 15%
of the RCG's listed in 10 CFR 20.
                                          40

-------
     EPA also found that the facility can be operated in compliance with applicable Federally
approved State water quality standards and the requirements of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act of 1972, as amended. However, under the requirements of the Safe Drinking Water
Act, the facility may be subject to a well injection permit for the seepage from the Carolina Bays
and from Beacon Pond.

     High-level Waste Management Plans

     Eventually,  of  course, the spent fuel must be reprocessed to recover uranium-235 and
Plutonium. The fission products must then be concentrated as high-level waste and disposed of.
Plans for the preparation of this high-level waste and its eventual disposal are in the formative
stage.

     Currently, no reprocessing plants are operating  in the United States. The Nuclear Fuel
Services reprocessing plant at West Valley, New York, operated until late 1971 when it shut down
for modifications and expansion.  It is scheduled  to  resume  in 1983. The  General Electric
Company,  Midwest Fuel  Recovery Plant in Morris, Illinois, has indefinitely postponed its 1974
schedule startup because of technical problems. The Allied-General Nuclear Services plant near
Barnwell, South Carolina, is scheduled to begin operations in 1977-1978.

     The form in which the high-level waste is produced will have a bearing on the case of
disposal. Storage as a liquid, in a liquid waste storage tank, has been proposed by Nuclear Fuel
Services and Allied-General Nuclear Services. However,  Federal Regulations require that the
liquid be transformed to a solid form within 5 years after reprocessing.

     A waste management system being studied involves vitrification of the high-level radioactive
wastes. Nuclear Fuel Services has started with the French St. Gobain technique for dispersing the
wastes uniformly through a glass matrix, but is currently working on a new process  which
produces a glass block about 10 ft. high and 14 to 15 in. in diameter, weighing under  a ton.
Encased in stainless steel, the block can be shipped in standard fuel shipping casks.

     In Great Britain similar plans for high-level waste vitrification  are underway. The British
Nuclear Fuels Ltd. originally planned to start construction in July of a pilot plant at Windscale to
vitrify wastes, which are accumulating at a rate under 150  cubic meters a year. But controversy
over who should pay for development of the process has delayed the construction.

     A key problem is the disposal of the  high-level wastes once they are stabilized. ERDA is
studying  the  concept of a geological disposal pilot plant.  Ultimately, a  permanent geologic
disposal facility, a storage facility for intermediate-lived gaseous wastes, and a disposal facility for
long-lived gaseous wastes will also be needed. In 1975, ERDA restarted a program leading to the
construction of a pilot disposal facility for transuranic wastes in bedded salt in southeast New
Mexico. Programs on solidification and packaging of high-level waste are concurrent, and sealed
canisters of waste for disposal will be used to study the disposal capabilities of bedded salt in this
pilot facility.

     Facilities for intermediate level and long-lived gaseous wastes are still in the conceptual
stage. Decisions to construct these facilities may not be made until 1982 for the former and 1984
for the latter. In previous reprocessing activity, the long-lived gaseous wastes were released to
the atmosphere. Both EPA and NRC are considering regulations for these gases (tritium, krypton-
85, iodine-129, and carbon-14 as carbon dioxide are the  principal ones). The  regulations may
prevent their release, hence there is need for technology to stabilize the gases for storage.
                                          41

-------
     Low-Level Radioactive Waste

     An unavoidable product of nuclear power generation, low-level radioactive waste results
from the almost-complete removal of radioactive isotopes, by ion exchange resins, evaporators,
etc., from the planned environmental releases due to normal plant operation. Under present
Federal and State regulations, these wastes can be disposed of  in shallow land burial grounds,
operated under an NRC or State license. Since the wastes can contain appreciable quantities of
very long-lived radionuclides, precautions must be  elaborate and even so, the acceptability of
burial is questionable. Several studies are being conducted by EPA, either in-house or by contract
to investigate various facets of this problem, and are^discussed below:

     (1)    The New York  State Energy Research and Development Authority and EPA are
presently engaged in a contract to conduct an investigation of the  radioisotopic makeup of typical
LWR generated ion exchange resins or sludges and evaporator concentrate wastes at two to four
typical existing PWR and BWR reactors. The wastes will be analyzed for both short and long-lived
alpha, beta, and gamma ray emitting radionuclides.

     (2)    A study is being conducted by the Office of Radiation Programs, to examine radio-
active  wastes received at commerical burial  sites which are generated  by light water power
reactors (LWR) and supporting fuel cycle facilities.

     Using operating experience data, this study attempts to:

     Identify the types, source, and amounts of this material from the LWR fuel cycle.

     Compare the quantities shipped from the LWR fuel cycle to burial site receipts in order to
     determine the magnitude of the LWR fuel cycle contribution.

     Develop a realistic basis for projections of the growth of this material as a functipn of LWR
     generating capacity growth.

     The nature of low-level solid wastes generated at each fuel cycle facility type and the method
of disposal is being determined. Those facilities which ship wastes to commercial burial sites are
identified. Estimates are made to related annual quantities of waste shipped to facility throughput
of uranium. A composite or model fuel cycle is used to identify solid waste quantities generated in
support of an annual fuel requirement for a 1000 MWe LWR. The model fuel cycle and annual fuel
requirement concepts, as developed and used in studies by the former AEC and by EPA, form a
convenient basis for comparing environmental quantities from different fuel cycles and as a basis
for projecting future quantities.

     The report will follow the general practice of using a 1000 MWe LWR operating at 80 percent
load factor producing 7x10° kwhr of electricity at the bus bar. The fuel cycle throughputs will be
expressed in metric tons (MT) of uranium for  the composite fuel cycle and will be scaled on a
reactor operating at 32 percent thermal efficiency.

     (3)    EPA has funded efforts by State licensing agencies to perform annual inventories of
quantities of waste materials received at the commercial burial sites. Results have been published
for 1962 through 1973 and efforts are currently underway to obtain the 1974 and 1975 inventory
results. Waste volume projections are of interest in examining future burial capacity needs as a
function of nuclear industry  growth. Previous  projections of low-level solid wastes have either
                                          42

-------
been based on projections of burial site receipts or on computations of quantities of waste radio-
nuclides produced in reactors per unit of electricity generated.

    An attempt has  been made to gather operating experience data from other fuel cycle
facilities and to update summaries of reactor operating experience to include information from
1974. Summaries of radwaste shipments from operating reactors for 1974 were obtained from
semiannual operating reports to the NRC prepared by the utilities, supplemented, in some cases,
by direct queries to the utilities. Direct queries were made to operators of other fuel cycle facilities
and various NRC and State officials concerning radwaste practices at these facilities.

    The main emphasis in this report will be on volumes of waste material shipped to commercial
burial sites. For present purposes, the use of this criterion avoids the problem of resolving the
various definitions of what is meant by low-level radioactive waste. The intent herein is to include
all materials from the fuel cycle, including reactors, which are disposed of at the commercial sites.

     (4)     During 1975, EPA's Office of Radiation Programs contracted for a study of the build-
up and decay of actinide and daughter acitivifies in HTGR fuels and waste. Quantities of  actinides
in spent fuel, high  activity waste and recovered  U-233 are presented over five time periods for
HTGR core loads, recycle of mixed U-233 and U-235, and recycle of LWR discharge plutonium in
an HTGR. The information generated in this contract report for the HTGR fuel cycle is of similar
format to that previously generated in a contract report(13) for LWR and LMFBR fuel cycles.

     EPA has received the final contract report "Significant Actinide and Daughter Activities from
the HTGR Fuel Cycle"(14). The results of this report will be used in the development of technical
information for use by the Office of Radiation Programs in its standard setting activities  and in its
reviews of environmental impact statements for facilities in the HTGR fuel cycle. EPA is currently
preparing the report for publication with duplication and distribution of the report expected for
early 1976.

     Ocean Dumping

        Domestic A ctivities

     (1) Permit Program - With the passage of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries
Act of 1972 (PL92-532) EPA was  given a statutory responsibility to administer a permit program
controlling ocean dumping of all pollutants including radioactive materials not expressly prohibited
from  disposal under the Act; prohibited materials include high-level radioactive wastes and
radiological warfare agents. The Office  of Radiation  Programs developed a general  policy  of
containment for any radioactive wastes which might be considered for future disposal in order to
prevent any dispersion and dilution in the oceans.(15,16)

     To date one application has been received and reviewed (U.S. Air Force, 1975). This special
permit application was returned to the USAF with a request for additional information which has
not been received.  Two informal requests have been reviewed although specific permits were not
submitted by the requesters— one from the U.S. Navy for low-level reactor wastes, the other from
the Defense Nuclear Agency  concerning the radioactive debris on Enewetak  Atoll. No permits
have  been issued  by EPA for ocean disposal  of radioactive  wastes because of the lack  of
adequate information on the potential fate of the packaged radioactive materials in the ocean.
                                          43

-------
     (2) Field Studies - The Office of Radiation Programs (ORP) has initiated field studies of past-
used U.S. low-level  ocean dumpsites. Two sites received the majority of the wastes dumped
between 1946-1970:

     East Coast - approximately 120 miles east of the Maryland-Delaware coast at a depth of
2800 meters.

     West Coast - forty miles west of San Francisco, California near the Farallon Islands; consists
of two sub-sites at 900 and 1800 meters.

     ORP has conducted submersible operations at all three depths listed  above and found
packaged radioactive wastes. Extensive photographic documentation was made and sediment
samples were taken very  close to the  containers to determine such factors as hydrostatic
pressure effects, benthic species abundance, and types of radionuclides released. An Operations
Report has been prepared on the 1974 Farallon Islands 900-meter site and technical reports of
the three depth surveys will be issued.

     A paper has recently  been issued (18) summarizing some of the results of the sediment
radioanalyses, current-meter measurements, commercial fish species observed, and condition of
the waste packages at the dumpsite depths of 900 meters and 2800 meters  in the Pacific and
Atlantic respectively. Plutonium-239,240 contamination was detected in surface sediments forty
miles west of San Fransicso at the 900 meter depth in concentrations ranging from 2-25 times
higher than the maximum expected concentration that could have resulted from weapons testing
fallout. Plutonium-238 was also measureable.

     In  the 2800 meter  Atlantic  dumpsite,  cesium-137  was  measured  in  sediments  at
concentrations ranging from 3-70 times higher than the maximum expected fallout concentration.
Most of this contamination was associated with radioactive waste containers that were visibly
breached by corrosion or hydrostatic pressure effects.

        International Activities

     In November 1972, the United States signed the International Ocean Dumping Convention,
and this was ratified in April 1974.  The convention thereby became  a treaty,  to be intered into
force in October 1975. Under the Ocean Dumping Act of 1974 (P.L. 92-532), EPA is responsible
for regulations and criteria to meet this treaty. Criteria, published in the Federal Register (October
15,1973) include a policy of placing wastes to be dumped in containers such that the waste will
decay to environmentally innocuous levels within the lifetime of the container and its inert matrix.

     Since  1973 ORP has been the U.S. representative to the  International Atomic Energy
Agency's (IAEA) panel  of  experts on ocean dumping of radioactive  wastes. The IAEA  was
charged with the responsibility to develop specific recommendations regarding  ocean dumping of
ail radioactive wastes pursuant to  the International Ocean  Dumping Treaty (ratified in August
1979).

     Most recently ORP participated in an IAEA meeting in Vienna, Austria in February 1975, to
review the ocean dumping dispersion model used to develop the IAEA recommendations (17).
EPA-ORP was instrumental  in bringing about stronger environmental safeguards in the dispersion
model and is working towards the incorporation of these safeguards into the basic IAEA
recommendations on ocean dumping.
                                         44

-------
     High-Level Waste

     One of the major environmental concerns associated with the projected increase in nuclear
power generation is the handling and disposal of high-level radioactive waste. Periodically, a
portion of the nuclear reactor's core must be  removed for reprocessing of fuel elements to
remove the accumulated radioactive fission products and recover the remaining fuel for reuse.
The  fission product waste is the most significant of the fuel reprocessing plant  residuals and
includes radioisotopes  having  very  long half-lives. This high-level waste must  eventually be
placed in long term storage repositories which prevent entry into the environment for up to tens of
thousands of years.

     There have been several studies (18,19,20) of radioactive waste management alternatives
which  describe most of the  disposal concepts which have  been  proposed and  discuss
advantages and disadvantages of each. The concepts studies may be divided into the following
categories:

     1.  Disposal in terrestrial locations

        a.  In geologic settings  on land
        b.  In the seabed
        c.  In ice sheets

     2.  Disposal in space

     3.  Elimination by transmutation

     Assessment methodology, that is both independent and flexible, is being conducted by EPA
for the evaluation of the various long term waste disposal methods and management options.
State and Federal regulatory and R&D agencies must be in a position to evaluate proposals for
waste management activities in the course of carrying out their assigned functions (i.e., to protect
public health and safety, to protect resources, and to insure adequate financial compensation for
any  long term risk involved). EPA's  current project in this area  is to assess and evaluate the
national high-level  radioactive waste management program, so that the long term adequacy of
provisions for burial is assured and that total cost of radioactive waste handling and disposal is
minimized. Full implementation of the results of this study will aid EPA and others in evaluating
waste management programs to insure adequate financial compensation for any short term as
well as long term risks involved.

     A radioactive Waste Management Systems Model is being developed under an EPA contract
to assist in performing this assessment. The fuel reprocessing plant, its high-level radioactive
waste (residuals)  discharges, transport and disposal of these wastes in a region, and the
environment, comprise the Radioactive Waste Management Systems Model. There are four
parallel paths in the model contributing to charges assessed against the residuals. Each path
represents a phase in the management sequence and includes a release or fault tree model, an
environmental model and an economic model which calculates damage costs. The first phase is
residuals treatment taking place at the reprocessing plant, since the treatment is performed on-
site.  Following treatment, the next phase is transport to the repository. The repository operations
phase involves receipt of shipments, any preparations or assembly required, and Jhe placement
into  the underground storage zone. The duration extends only  until the  receipt of shipments
ceases and operations terminate. The long term storage phase applies to wastes after placement
underground in one of the several concepts for a long term storage repository.
                                          45

-------
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR NAVY

    As of March 1975, there were 105 nuclear submarines and seven surface ships in the U.S.
Navy with authorization for a total of 148 nuclear active U.S. warships. There are also 6 land-
based prototype reactors in operation. The naval program is the single largest reactor program in
the country (21).

    Available figures for 1974 showed that the total volume of water discharged by the U.S. Navy
in restricted waters from 111 ships, 9 shipyards, 11 tenders and 2 submarine bases was less than
10,000 gallons. This water contained less than 0.002 curies of radioactivity excluding tritium. 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 NRC (or by a State
under agreement with the NRC) in compliance with the Department of Transportation (DOT) and
NRC. In 1974 this amounted to 62,000 cubic feet and about 387 curies of radioactive material.
This solid waste becomes numbered  among  items destined for ultimate disposal; thus, it
contributes to  the  waste  management  problem.  The  Navy  concluded  in  their  annual
environmental  report that  radioactivity associated  with  their  nuclear program has  had no
significant or discernible effect on the quality of the environment.
                                        46

-------
                                    References


1. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "Annual Report 1975" Pursuant to the Requirements of
    Section 307 (c) of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974. pgs. 43-46.

2.   U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency, Draft  Environmental  Statement,  "Environmental
    Radiation Protection Requirements for Normal Operations of Activities in the Uranium Fuel
    Cycle," For a Proposed Rulemaking Action (May 1975)

3.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Radiological surveillance study at the Haddam Neck
    PWR nuclear power station, EPA-520/3-74-007. Office of Radiation Programs, Washington,
    D.C. (December 1974).

4.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "N skyshine survey at a 2400 MW(t) nuclear power
    plant, EPA-520/5-75-018. Office of Radiation Programs,  Washington, D.C.  (December
    1975).

5.   U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Reactor Safety Study, An Assessment of Accident Risks in
    U.S. Comercial Nuclear Power Plants, WASH-1400,  U.S. Atomic Energy Commission,
    Washington, D.C. 20545 (draft August 1974).

6.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Reactor Safety Study (WASH-1400): A Review ol the
    Draft Report, EPA-520/3-75-012, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
    20460, (August 1975).

7.   U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Reactor Safety Study, An Assessment of Accident
    Risks in U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants, WASH-1400 (NURG-75/014), U.S. Nuclear
    Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, (October 1975).

8.   CONSAD Research Corporation,  The Consequences and Frequency of Selected Man-
    Originated Accident Events, EPA-520/3-75-016, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
    Washington, D.C. 20460, (August 30,1974).

9.   J.A. Simmons, SAI Services, Risk Assessment of Storage and Transport of Liquefied Natural
    Gas and LP-Gas, EPA-520/3-75-015, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
    D.C. 20460, (November 25,1974).

10. Morton, R.J., "Land Burial of Solid Radioactive Wastes:, Study of Commercial Operations
    and Facilities," U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, WASH-l'l43 (1968).
                                        47

-------
11.  Meyer, G.L., "Recent Experience with the Land  Burial of Solid  Low-Level Radioactive
    Wastes," U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency,  presented to the IAEA Symposium on
    Management of Radioactive Wastes, March 1976.

12.  "LWR  Spent Fuel Disposition Capabilities,  1975-1984," U.S.   Energy Research  and
    Development Administration, March 1975.

13.  Heeb, C.R. and E.T. Merrill, Significant Actinide Activities in the LWR and LMFBR Nuclear
    Fuel Cycles, U.S.EPA Contract Report, EPA-520/3-75-006, October 1974.

14.  Simmons, G.L and M.L Gritzner, Significant Actinide and Daughter Activities from the HTGR
    Fuel Cycle, September  5, 1975, being prepared for publication as  a U.S.EPA Contract
    Report.

15.  Federal Register, October 15,  1973. Title 40, Chapter 1,  Subchapter H;  Ocean Dumping
    Final Regulations and Criteria.

16.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. A Survey of  the Farallon  Islands 500-Fathom
    Radioactive Waste Disposal Site (Operations Report), Technical Note ORP-75-1, December
    1975.

17.  Dyer,  R.S., "Environmental Surveys of Two Deepsea Radioactive Waste Disposal Sites
    Using  Submersibles,"  U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency; presented  at the  joint
    IAEA/NEA Symposium on the Management of Radioactive Wastes from the Nuclear Fuel
    Cucle, IAEA, Vienna (1976) in press.

18.  High Level Radioactive Waste Management Alternatives, WASH-1297, USAEC,  May 1974.

19.  High Level Radioactive  Waste Management Alternatives, BNWL-1900, 4 volumes,  May
    1974.

20.  Alternatives for Managing Wastes from Reactors and Post-Fission  Operations in the LWR
    Fuel Cycle, ERDA-76-43,5 volumes, May 1976.

21.  Rickover, Admiral H.G., "Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, 1975, Hearing Before the Joint
    Committee on  Atomic  Energy," 94th Congress  of the United  States, First Session,
    Testimony given March 5,1975.
                                        48

-------
MEDICAL, OCCUPATIONAL AND CONSUMER PRODUCT RADIATION-
CHAPTER 4
MEDICAL X-RAYS

    The Medical Radiation Problem

    There has been marked increase in the number of diagnostic x-ray examinations performed
in the United States over the last decade with estimated annual increases ranging from 1 to 4
percent (1). Two notable surveys of diagnostic radiology practice were the x-ray Exposure Studies
of 1964 and 1970 conducted by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in cooperation with the
National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). Recently, FDA has released an interim report which
shows some of the changes in diagnostic radiology practices which occurred from 1964 through
1970(2).

    Some of the more dramatic indications taken from this report were as shown below and
summarized in Table 4.1:

    (1)    There was a 20 percent increase in the number of persons receiving one or more x-
           ray procedures from 108 million in 1964 to 130 million in 1970 while the population
           increased only 7 percent during the same period.

    (2)    There was a 22 percent increase in the number of x-ray examinations performed
           from 173 million in 1964 to 212 million in 1970.

    (3)    There was a 30 percent increase in the number of films exposed from 506 million in
           1964 to 661 million in 1970.

    (4)    The average number of films per radiographic examination increased from 2.2 in
           1964 to 2.4 in 1970.

    (5)    The percentage of thoracic examinations performed with two or more x-ray films
           increased from 31 percent in 1964 to 47 percent in 1970. This was attributed to the
           inclusion of lateral views for routine chest examinations.

    (6)    The mean ratio of beam area to film area for radiographs declined approximately 30
           percent.
                                       49

-------
TABLE 4.1 TRENDS IN RADIOGRAPHIC DIAGNOSTICS

PERSONS X-RAYED   1964       108  MILLION
                      1970       130  MILLION

X-RAY EXAM I NATIONS 1964       173  MILLION
                      1970       212  MILLION

FILMS EXPOSED      1964       506  MILLION
                      1970       661  MILLION
     The increased use of x-ray examinations can be explained in some measure by the increase
in the U.S. population, as well as by improvements in the availability of medical care for older and
poorer segments of  society (Medicare and Medicaid programs). Most recently, the trends for
patient exposure from specific radiographic examinations have been examined by the Nationwide
Evaluation of X-Ray Trends (NEXT) a survey program which is supported by the Conference of
Radiation Program Control Directors and the Food and Drug Administration. The NEXT program is
an on-going program and its annual reports provide the most recent survey data for the measured
exposures for selected radiographic views. The objectives of the NEXT surveys  are to establish
trends in effectiveness of radiological health programs and to identify the optimum components of
an x-ray installation survey.  NEXT reports on "All States" representative surveys are produced
semi-annually for twelve selected radiographic views. The radiographic views  currently being
surveyed and the mean exposures for the views taken from the last two annual reports are listed
in Table 4.2. This table indicates that the  only change in mean ESE, which is statistically
significant at the 95% confidence level is a decrease for the thoracic spine examination.

     A clearer perspective  of the extent of  medical and dental uses of x-rays for diagnostic
purposes is evidenced by the fact that over 90 percent of current man-made exposure is due to
such x-ray examination and further that over 50 percent of the United States population receives a
radiographic examination annually. It should be noted that this  in itself does  not necessarily
establish that medical exposure is excessive,  because medical uses constitute a purposeful
application of radiation on humans as contrasted with those uses in which radiation exposure is an
unwanted by-product (as in nuclear reactor operations).

    The attendant benefits from  the use of x-rays for  medical or dental  diagnosis are well
recognized. However, there  are reasons to believe that a significant proportion of the exposure
received from these uses is unnecessary.
                                        50

-------
                           TABLE 4.2

               LIST OF  NATIONWIDE EVALUATION OF
       X-RAY TREND SURVEY RADIOGRAPHIC VIEWS  AND MEAN
               EXPOSURES AT SKIN ENTRANCE (ESE)*
Projection
Chest (P/A)
Skull (Lat)
Abdomen (A/P)
Retrograde
Pyelogram (A/P)
Thoracic Spine
(A/P)
Cervical Spine
(A/P)
Lumbo- Sacral
Spine (A/P)
Pull Spine (A/P)
Feet (D/P)
Dental Bi tewing
(Post)
Dental
Per iap leal
Dental Cephalometric
(Lat)
Time
(7/1/73
Mean ESE
22
317
582
682
961
329
943
231
214
628
656
28
Period 4
to 6/30/74)
Standard Error
2
123
43
163
91
220
193
35
150
101
135
6
Time
(7/1/74
Mean ESE
21
273
671
726
594
239
757
281
209
469
610
42
Period 8
to 6/30/75)
Standard Error
2
43
67
73
110
18
68
42
60
71
126
15
"Weighted according to facility workloads.
                               51

-------
     The implications are clear; it is well recognized that any amount of exposure to ionizing
 radiation places incremental risks of either a somatic or genetic nature on the person so exposed.
 It is paramount then to  establish whether current radiologic practices are performed  at the
 maximum benefit to the patient while delivering the minimum exposure risk. To this end, there are
 a number of medical and  scientific groups which  generally agree that there is  unproductive
 radiation exposure from medical x-ray uses that could, and should, be reduced.

     Issues of Medical Radiation Use

     The extent of usage of radiographic procedure as a routine part of diagnostic medicine has
 been noted and numerous warnings or cautions against unnecessary  radiologic examinations
 have been issued. Patient exposures which are ten times higher than that needed to provide the
 required diagnostic information may occur in present da"y medical practice (3). In 1959 and again
 in 1966, the National Advisory Committee recommended to the Surgeon General  of the  Public
 Health  Service  that programs were advised  to  prevent the overuse  of  diagnostic x-ray
 examinations. More recently the  Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation  (BEIR) Committee
 recommended that all examinations should be clinically justified and performed utilizing the most
 efficient and optimal techniques  to obtain the required clinical  information.  Specifically the
 judgment of the BEIR Committee was that a significant reduction in patient exposure, "without
 loss of benefit" to the patient and  "at relatively low cost  could be accomplished". Likewise,
 Committee 3 of the International Council on Radiation  Protection  (ICRP) has concluded that,
 "there is a need to ensure that the advantages of diagnostic radiology are obtained with the
 minimum risk to the individual and to future generations.

     The BEIR Committee concluded that as much as 30 percent of the patient exposure is due to
 use of less than optimal techniques and that nearly 10 percent of all exposure can be attributed to
 retake examinations. The BEIR Committee recommended, "Medical radiation exposure can and
 should be reduced  considerably by limiting its  use to clinically indicated procedures utilizing
 efficient exposure techniques and optimal operation of radiation equipment. Consideration should
 be given to the following:

     1)      Restriction of the use of radiation for public health survey purposes, unless there is a
            reasonable probability of significant detection of disease.

     2)      Inspection and licensing of radiation and ancillary equipment.

     3)      Appropriate  training and certification  of involved personnel.  Gonad shielding
            (especially shielding the testes) is strongly  recommended  as a simple and  highly
            efficient way to reduce the Genetically Significant Dose."

     The BEIR Committee also stated, "that experts estimate that it appears reasonable that as
much as a 50 percent reduction in the genetically significant dose (GSD) from medical radiology
might be possible through improved technical and educational methods." A BRH study indicates
that in 1970 the genetically significant dose was approximately 20 millirems per member of the
U.S. population.  Using the  BEIR risk estimate translates this into 543 serious-health effects
(genetically related) produced in 1970 to the U.S. population. It appears that half of these, or 272
serious-health effects, are produced annually due to poor radiological practice.
                                          52

-------
FEDERAL GUIDANCE

     The responsibility for controlling medical and occupational exposure to radiation generating
equipment and radioactive materials is divided between the Federal and State governments.
Within the Federal government, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of
Health,  Education, and Welfare (DHEW), the Department  of Labor (DOL), and  the  Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) are responsible for protecting the public against the deleterious
effects of ionizing radiation. The DHEW, pursuant to authority under the  Radiation Control for
Health and  Safety Act  (PL 90-602),  has the major Federal responsibility for  establishing
equipment performance standards for electronic products which emit radiation.

     The responsibility of providing 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  (42 USC 2021h)  to advise the President  on  radiation  matters directly  or indirectly
affecting health,  including  guidance for all  Federal agencies in the  formulation  of radiation
standards. Other  Federal  agencies and  the fifty State governments have complementary
responsibilities to establish  radiation  protection regulations. The Public Health Service  is
authorized under the Public Health Service Act to conduct studies and carry out educational and
training activities  for protection of the public health. The DHEW has interpreted their broad
authority to  provide a basis for developing and recommending voluntary guidelines for use  of
medical radiation.

     At present, the  responsibility to control exposure due to diagnostic x-ray examinations is
divided between the Federal and the State governments. Within the Federal Government, the
Bureau of Radiological Health  in the Department of Health, Education and Welfare  has the
responsibility of administrating the Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act. The  Secretary of
Health, Education and Welfare is required by the act to submit an annual report to the President
for transmittal to the Congress. Under the Public Health Service Act, the Secretary of DHEW (with
authority delegated to the Bureau of Radiological Health)  has the responsibility to  enact those
regulations and recommendations which will ensure that the use of all electronically produced
electromagnetic and sonic  radiation (including x radiation) for medical  diagnosis and treatment
will cause patient  exposures that are al low as reasonably achievable without sacrificing  medical
benefit. The Environmental Protection Agency under the authority of Reorganization Plan 3  of
1970 is mandated to advise the President on radiation matters affecting public health. However,
no  Federal laws,  regulations, or guidance presently exist to ensure that  the use  of x-rays for
medical diagnostic purposes will bestow patient exposures that are as low as might reasonably be
achievable.

     EPA Federal Guidance

     The basic strategy of the EPA program to reduce public x-rays dosage is: 1) to carry out  its
Federal Guidance responsibility to assure that thei»enefits to patients from the use of medical x-
rays are derived at minimum risk in Federal health care programs and Federal facilities by giving
appropriate  guidance to  affected  agencies, and 2) by way of example and publication of the
results of such efforts to influence the private sector to give similar protection to the  general
public. No individual will be deprived of obtaining the necessary benefits of diagnostic radiology
nor will any physician be inhibited from providing basic health care, but  guidance will be  given to
eliminate unnecessary exposure.
                                          53

-------
     EPA efforts will focus on  decisions to prescribe  x-rays and  improving  techniques of
 optimizing exposure when x-rays are taken. Attempts in the first area will be made to preclude
 circumstances  such  as routine  examinations given before a doctor is seen,  retakes when
 adequate x-rays exist in files or as result of poor technique, and unnecessary confirmation of
 diagnosis that is or can be made from non-radiological tests. A program has been undertaken to
 set a Federal example, an approach that is expected to  be successful in reducing dose in all
 sectors. The goal of the guidance is to assure that the benefits to patients from the use of medical
 x-rays are derived at minimum risk in Federal health care facilities by giving appropriate guidance
 to the implementing agencies. To accomplish this, the Administrator, on July 5,1974, formed an
 Interagency Working Group on Medical Radiation to develop guidance. This working group is
 made up of representatives from the military services and the Veterans Administration. (DHEW
 declined to  participate in this effort.) Two subcommittees have examined potential dose
 reductions by improving prescription (Subcommittee on Prescription of Exposure to X-rays) and
 technic (Subcommittee on Technic of Exposure Prevention). The  recommendations of these
 subcommittees and the full working group provide the basis for specific guidance to be developed
 by EPA for promulgation as Federal Guidance.

     During 1975, Subcommittee on Prescription  of X-Rays (SPEX) drafted a report on  the
 ordering of diagnostic x-ray  studies. The recommendations of this committee concerning  the
 prescription aspects of diagnostic studies are currently under review by the Interagency Working
 Group and such recommendations when endorsed by the Working Group will be used by EPA as a
 basis to develop Guidance for diagnostic radiology. The SPEX report makes recommendations
 for prescription of x-rays in Federal health care facilities in the following broad categories:

     1.  Restriction of  privileges  to order general  medical and dental x-ray examinations and
 general fluoroscopic  examinations to those possessing medical and dental  degrees who are
 eligible  for licensure in the U.S.  or properly  trained  personnel under their direct supervision;
 special  fluoroscopy procedures and invasive studies could only be prescribed by those with
 sufficient training in specialities to interpret the results of such studies.

     2.  Elimination  of routine  examinations, unless  clinical  indications  exist,  for  such
 circumstances as hospital admission chest x-rays, chest x-rays screening for tuberculosis, routine
 full mouth and bitewing dental radiographs, and mamography screening in asymptomatic women
 under age 35.

     3.  Involvement of diagnosticians, especially radiologists, in medical decisions requiring the
 prescription of diagnostic x-ray examinations  by establishment of written policies on  who can
 perform examinations, the number of views for standard examinations, and the need to keep the
 number of standard examinations to a minimum because such generalization  tends to increase
 exposure for a given examination.

     4.  Requiring  all  fluoroscopic  equipment for  fixed Federal  facilities  to  have  image
 intensification; fluoroscopy  in non-radiology specialties should be done with units with electronic
 image-holding features when practicable.

     The Subcommittee on Technic Exposure Prevention (STEP)  is currently developing  its
recommendations in x-ray technique. It is hoped that by the summer of 1976 their report will be
completed. If such be the case, then it is  expected that Federal Guidance for diagnostic
radiographic procedures could be developed and instituted by early fall of 1976.
                                          54

-------
     FDA Guidance

     As previously noted, FDA's Bureau of Radiological Health establishes recommendations on
optimum practices in medical radiology and conducts educational programs for medical radiation
users under the authority of the Public Health Service Act, as amended by PL 90-602, under Title
III, Part F, Subpart 3, Section 356. Under this authority BRH provides in-depth analysis, testing,
validation, environmental, economic and clinical assessment and evaluation of its regulations and
recommendations. BRH also provides implementation  of its recommendations at Federal, State,
professional and  consumer levels in order to maximize their dose optimization impact. It has
specific programs aimed at educating physicians and  allied health users in the appropriate
radiological health  practices pertinent to their professions, including the  ordering of x-ray
examinations, their conduct and the interpretation of their results. The status of these guidelines
are summarized below.

         Model Regulations  for States

     A revised "Suggested State Regulations for Control of Radiation," has been published and
distributed to State radiation control agencies for their use. The revision, essentially an update
and expansion of the 1970 edition by the same name, was prepared by the Bureau of Radiological
Health, the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), and the Conference of Radiation Control Program
Directors. The revised suggested regulations, often referred to as "model State regulations,"
reflect changes in National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement guidelines, new
amendments to AEC regulations, and electronic product radiation safety performance standards
issued by the Bureau. They are intended primarily as  guidance for State radiological health
programs developing or amending their radiation control regulations. This is especially important
because certain Federal laws, including the Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act, and
Atomic Energy Act, require State regulations to be compatible with, identical to, or as effective as
Federal regulations.

     The  current "Suggested State Regulations"  covers three  new  areas: analytical x-ray
equipment, particle accelerators, and notices,  instructions, and reports to workers. The latter is
related to Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements. With the new subjects
there is a total of ten parts to the model regulations. The others are general provisions,  registration
of radiation machine  facilities and services, licensing of  radioactive materials, standards for
protection against radiation, radiation safety requirements of industrial radiographic operations, x-
rays in the healing arts, and use of sealed radioactive sources in the healing arts.

     This model  regulation was  developed  so  that the ,States could  promulgate statutes
compatible with each other and with  the Federal government. Fifty States, the District  of
Columbia, and Commonwealth of Puerto Rico now have laws for regulation of ionizing radiation. A
notice of availability of the regulations was published in  the Federal Register^rol. 40, Number 136,
dated July 15,1975.

         Guidelines on Radiation in Pregnancy

     The Bureau of Radiological Health has announced plans to develop guidelines  concerning
exposure of women of childbearing age to ionizing radiation from medical diagnostic procedures.
The announcement appeared in the December 15 Federal Register.

     Exposure of the developing human embryo or fetus to ionizing radiation may result in certain
deleterious effects, including an increased  risk of childhood leukemia. The proposed guidelines
                                          55

-------
will aim at reducing such risks by recommending procedures for radiological examinations of
potentially pregnant women that will minimize unnecessary exposure of the fetus.

    As presently conceived, the guidelines will provide recommendations to clinicians regarding
exposure of possibly pregnant women to ionizing radiation from both x-ray examinations and
nuclear medicine procedures. The Bureau  presently is studying certain diagnostic x-ray and
nuclear medicine practices to determine what actions may be taken to minimize fetal exposure.

        Mammography Recommendations

    The American College of Radiology (ACR) expert panel  on mammography made four
recommendations which were adopted, with slight  modification, by the Medical Radiation
Advisory Committee of BRH. The recommendations were made  during a special session of the
Advisory  Committee convened to consider  public health  implications associated with the
increased use of mammography in the U.S. and to provide guidance as to the BRH's role in this
area. These recommendations are as follows:

     1.  Mammography—x-ray examination of the breast—should  not be used routinely in
        "asymptomatic women"  under the age of 35 to detect breast cancer. Asymptomatic
        women are defined as  those "without complaint,  without  history, without physical
        findings, and without  a strong family history of breast cancer." The recommendation
        against routine mammography examinations under the  age of 35 is based on the low
        incidence of breast cancer in this age group and the decreased  effectiveness of the
        procedure in detecting early cancer in the breast of the younger woman. This is because
        the breast tissue is firmer and more fibrous which may obscure early signs of breast
        tumors. The significance of the recommendation lies in recent reports that breast cancer
        screening centers are being set up for young women, for example, on college campuses.

    The panel did not take  a stand on the use of this screening procedure for women over 35.
Rather, the panel stated "the issue  of efficacy on routine  mammogram examinations  in
asymptomatic women in the 35-50 age group is still in question and additional studies should be
devoted to this area."

    This work is underway in a large-scale breast cancer screening program sponsored by the
American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute. The project, begun in 1973, will
involve the examination of 270,000 women, none of whom have evidence of breast cancer, in 27
detection centers across the U.S. The aim of the project is to learn if current detection methods,
such as physical examination, x-ray film mammography, and thermography, can spot cancer
before the woman becomes aware of a breast lump.

    2.  The Bureau support the expansion of activities of the regional physics centers of the
       National Cancer Institute and the American Association of Physicists in Medicine, as well
       as State radiological health agencies, to make available on a national  basis uniform
       dosimetry methodology for mammographic examinations. The physics centers, of which
       there  are six across the country, provide dosimetry and  calibration support services for
       the 27-center breast cancer detection study. The language of the recommendation as it
       now stands reflects an amendment offered by the Advisory Committee to include State
       agencies.

    3.  The Medical Radiation Advisory Committee appoint a liaison member to  the American
       College of Radiology's Committee on Mammography and Diseases of the Breast.


                                        56

-------
     4.  The Medical Radiation Advisory Committee appoint a subcommittee on mammography,
        to include  liaison  members from the ACR  Committee on Mammography and  the
        American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

     The Medical Radiation Advisory Committee forwarded the recommendations to BRH for its
consideration. The Bureau Task Force on Mammography will develop an action plan based on the
recommendations.  This plan may include a guideline  on the use of mammography for breast
cancer detection.

         Voluntary Guidance on Gonad Shielding

     The Food and Drug Administration has proposed a guideline for the use of gonad shielding
during medical  diagnostic  x-ray procedures. The proposal appeared in the Federal Register,
September 16,1975, and final publication is anticipated by June 30,1976.

     The recommendation is the first in a series of guidelines on medical radiation use being
prepared by the BRH, and will be the first to be published in a new subpart of Title 21 of the Code
of Federal Regulations set aside for voluntary guidelines and  recommendations  concerning
electronic product radiation. The guidelines will be implemented, through educational programs
and cooperative activities with professional organizations.

     Gonad shielding is accomplished by placing lead or lead-impregnated material between the
x-ray source  and the reproductive organs of the patient. Three types of specific area gonad
shields, which cover an area slightly larger that the region of the gonads, are now  in use: shadow
shielding; flat, contact shielding; and shaped, contact shielding for male patients.

     The proposal  recommends that such shielding be provided when: (1) the  gonads will lie
within the primary x-ray field, or within close proximity (about 5 centimeters), despite proper beam
limitation; (2) the clinical objectives of the examination  will not  be compromised; and  (3)  the
patient has a reasonable reproductive potential.

     Clinical techniques for testicular shielding are better established at present than those for
ovarian shielding. Examples of examinations during which testicular shielding is recommended
are those of  the pelvis, hip, and upper femur. Depending on the size of the patient and  the
examination technique and equipment employed, male gonad shielding also may be warranted
during other pelvic area x-ray procedures. Each facility, according to the proposed guideline,
should evaluate its procedures, techniques, and equipment and compile a list of examinations for
which testicular shielding should be routinely considered.

     With regard to ovarian shielding, the guideline notes that its use is sometimes impractical
because the exact location of the ovaries is difficult to estimate and the shield may obscure areas
of diagnostic interest. Although the ovaries may be shielded during selected views in some
examinations, little practical guidance is presently available on implementing the proposed criteria
for females. The BRH is continuing to support efforts to develop such guidance. It is hoped that
comments submitted in response to the proposed guideline will provide additional information on
the appropriate use of ovarian shielding.
                                          57

-------
        Recommendations for Qualifications of Medical Radiation Technologists

     The FDA's Bureau of Radiological Health is forming a national committee of State and
professional organization representatives to formulate Recommendations for Qualifications of
Medical Radiation Technologists. Presently, there are a  number of both governmental and
professional organizations setting standards and qualifications for individuals working in the
professions of diagnostic x-ray and nuclear medicine technology. Such standards are overlapping
and, in some aspects, contradictory and incompatible. This Committee will produce a single set of
recommendations in the areas  of education,  training, field-entry mechanisms and continued
competence, which will be published in the Federal Register.

        Quality Assurance Recommendations

     The Quality Assurance program of the FDA's Bureau of Radiological  Health is a major new
approach to assuring that the maximum diagnostic benefits commensurate with minimum patient
risk and cost are obtained from the use of diagnostic x-rays. The goal of this effort is to encourage
the implementation of quality assurance programs in all diagnostic x-ray facilities. Such a facility
program would include all actions taken to ensure that  equipment,  once manufactured and
installed according to regulations, and operators, once trained, continue to produce consistently
high quality radiographs at minimum cost and patient exposure. This involves:

     (1)    Quality Control monitoring techniques used in routine physical testing of the x-ray
           system to identify the need for corrective or preventive maintenance, and

     (2)    Quality Administration management actions to guarantee that  the needed corrective
           measures are taken.

     As a result of preliminary studies, conducted during 1975, FDA has determined that the
issuance of Quality Assurance  recommendations through the  Federal  Register is the  most
promising  way to stimulate establishment of Quality Assurance  Programs in diagnostic x-ray
facilities. Work  on the recommendations began in 1975 and will be advanced  with  a major
program effort in 1976.

     Other 1975 FDA program actions supporting the development of recommendations fell into
two areas:

a.    Provision of guidance to facilities wishing to implement quality assurance programs. Several
     program actions are in progress in this area.

        The Food and Drug Administration has initiated a program, in cooperation with the Public
        Health  Service Hospital in Baltimore,  to assess the results  of a facility-based quality
        assurance program, carried  out  by  hospita> staff members,  to assure consistent
        radiographic quality. The first phase of this program, completed in November of 1975,
        involved the  collection  of base-line  data  on parameters  such as repeated x-ray
        examinations, radiographic film quality, and patient exposure. During the second phase
        various quality assurance procedures are being introduced into the hospital's radiology
        department  and their impact in terms of reducing exposure  while maintaining  or
        improving film quality is being evaluated. The final product will be  the development of a
        recommended quality assurance protocol for use in any hospital desiring to establish a
        facility-based program. It is expected this protocol will be implemented in other Federal
        hospital facilities.
                                         58

-------
    ii   Other FDA program activities to provide quality assurance guidance to diagnostic x-ray
        facilities are also under way. A seminar series has been sponsored to collect information
        on active quality assurance programs. A Quality Assurance Catalog is being developed
        as a reference guide to available equipment, techniques, and training in the area. Quality
        assurance  manuals  are being written  to provide  detailed guidance  on  particular
        components of the x-ray system.

b.   Development of programs enabling the State radiation control agencies to assist facilities in
    dealing with specific quality  assurance problems. Three  program  actions have  been
    launched in the area.

    i   The Dental  Exposure Normalization Technique (DENT) program was the initial FDA
        quality assurance program effort.  DENT was developed by FDA for use by State and
        local radiation control agencies in encouraging dentists to standardize dental x-ray
        machine exposures within established ranges that produce high quality x-ray films with
        acceptable patient exposures. It is primarily an educational effort amined at the dental
        radiology personnel rather than  a survey to check for compliance of the x-ray machine
        with Federal and State regulations.

        During 1975, full-scale DENT programs were under way in 16 States, local subdivisions,
        and Federal agencies. These programs are  expected to reach  30,600 dental x-ray
        machines. In addition, pilot DENT programs in five more States were expected to reach
        1700 machines. In the following year it is projected that eight additional States will initiate
        programs reaching  17,000 more machines.  These  efforts represent  a substantial
        expansion of pre-1975 efforts which tested  2360 machines in six  States.  Exposure
        reductions per dental bitewing radiograph of over 30 percent have  been achieved in
        States which have completed the first round of the program.

     ii   The FDA, in cooperation with  the radiation control agencies of the District of Columbia
        and of Pennsylvania, is developing a mammography quality assurance program. This is
        an  educational  program aimed at facilities doing  mammography  and designed  to
        minimize patient exposure from  x-rays of the breast while improving image quality. The
        methodology is based on  that of  the successful DENT program. Groundwork for the
        program involves identifying the facilities doing mammography and the number of units
        at each  facility. The local medical and radiological societies  have given  valuable
        cooperation in this program.  In later stages, thermoluminescent dosimetry cards are
        used to identify facilities which appear to be giving unnecessarily high exposures. These
        facilities are visited by State radiation control personpel who advise the facility personnel
        on what quality assurance actions should be implemented to reduce the exposure. It is
        expected  that the  pilot  test of  this program  will  screen mammography  radiation
        exposures in 22 facilities  in the District of Columbia and  in 250 to 400 facilities in
        Pennsylvania.

   iii    During 1975, the Food and Drug Administration, in cooperation with the  American
        College of Radiology and the  West Virginia State Department of Health, field tested a
        diagnostic radiology  quality assurance  program for future  implementation  by State
        radiation control personnel. The first phase involved visits to a broad spectrum of x-ray
        facilities, ranging from doctors' offices to a large hospital, by combined teams of Federal
        and State personnel. The purposes of this  phase were  to test quality assurance
        instruments  and procedures in  clinical facilities, to assist facilities through identifying
        equipment maintenance and use problems, and to determine the practicality of a State
                                          59

-------
        radiation  health program performing  a quality assurance consultation service for
        radiological facilities in addition  to  their  traditional regulatory duties.  At each  site,
        numerous measurements were made of the physical parameters associated with the x-
        ray system. Each facility was given a report on the survey results and any potential
        problems detected. During the second phase, efforts are being made to correlate the
        results of physical measurements with evaluations by radiologists of the quality of films
        supplied by the facility. The  goal is to identify equipment problems requiring special
        attention. In addition, the survey forms and procedures are being revised in preparation
        for expanded use in other States.

     FDA Educational Programs

     In addition to establishing guidelines for good practices in medical radiology, the  Bureau of
 Radiological Health, FDA, develops and implements educational programs in radiation protection
 for both health professionals and consumers, as specified in Section 356  of the Public Health
 Service Act, as  amended by PL 90-602. The present status of a few of  these  programs are
 summarized below.

        Radiological Health Sciences Learning Laboratory

     More than 300,000 physicians currently practice in the United States. Most of them either
 use diagnostic radiology themselves or rely heavily on its benefits. They are directly responsible
 for ordering  the examination of the patient,  overseeing  the conduct  of the  examination,
 interpreting the results, and applying this interpretation to the health care of the patient. Through
 an FDA contract, the University of California at San Francisco has developed a comprehensive
 educational system which  teaches all these elements of x-ray usage, and emphasizes the
 radiation protection aspects, to medical students, residents  and practising physicians of x-ray
 using specialties. This system, called the Radiological Health Sciences Learning  Laboratory, is
 directed at the three phases of the radiologic examination: selection of the patient; conduct of the
 examination; and interpretation of the results. All medical students, as future selectors of patients
 for radiographic  examinations, should  be trained in the elements of patient selection;  these are
 presented in a series-of lectures in the  Learning Laboratory. Students who will be  radiology
 residents, and other future physicians who plan to supervise the use of radiographic equipment,
 should be acquainted  with  technical aspects of  the  actual performance  of  radiological
 examinations.  This material is covered  in a  series of lectures  and  laboratory experiments
 designed to be used with a special training x-ray machine and mannequins. All physicians who will
 be involved in interpretation of radiographic examinations and the use of this information in patient
 diagnosis and treatment need training in the interpretation of radiographs. The learning file, which
 is a major part of the Learning Laboratory, provides simulated clinical experience with 1200
 documented radiographic cases in self-teaching format, reproduced on full size x-ray film.  The
 system is  now being made available at cost to medical schools through the  American College of
 Radiology under agreement with FDA; thus far, more than 30 institutions have purchased it, and
 orders have been placed for over 40 more. It is anticipated that within 3 to 5 years, essentially all
 medical schools and  radiology residency programs will be utilizing the Learning Laboratory
 system.

        Dental Training Packages

    The  radiation exposure to patients  from dental x-ray examinations  could  be drastically
reduced by adherence to such straightforward radiation protection principles as the use of fast
films, proper beam-limiting cones, and standardized darRroom procedures. The FDA is currently


                                           60

-------
conducting several training  efforts directed at teaching these principles to dental auxiliaries,
dental students,  dentists, and individuals  involved in the education of  dentists and  dental
auxiliaries.

     An instructional program has been developed which presents an 8-hour curriculum for dental
auxiliaries in the safe operation of x-ray equipment, protection of the patient, beam limitation, and
other radiation protection principles. The package includes "home-study" material which the
auxiliary can study on his own time without the aid of a professional. The package was originally
developed for the Maryland State Dental Association  and is currently being used on a review
basis. Subject to this review and completion of necessary revision, the package will be made
available for sale and distribution on a nationwide basis. In addition, the FDA plans to publish the
"home-study" material as a separate document.

     The importance of dental darkroom practices in reducing unnecessary radiation exposure in
dentistry has long been recognized. Through the development, distribution,  and sale of a Slide-
Tape Lecture Series on Dental Darkroom Procedures, the FDA is actively  working to improve
darkroom practices. This program is a multi-media, self-contained series  of  three 20-minute
slide/tape presentations on dental darkroom requirements, processing procedures, and film
processing failures with related corrective measures. This package provides dental educators
with material which can be used in  schools for dental auxiliaries, in dental  schools, and in
continuing education programs for licensed practitioners.

        Radiologic Technologist Training Packages

     The  FDA produces a  series of multi-media packaged  training programs  for  radiologic
technologists. The series is entitled: Radiation Protection During MedicalX-Ray Examinations and
is distributed through the National Audiovisual Center of the General Services Administration. The
program is designed  in modular form to allow continual  addition of parts  as  new information
becomes available and as new FDA programs are developed. Approximately one-half of the 1200
radiologic technology education programs  have already purchased one or more parts  of the
series. The material is also available on a loan basis from regional and State radiological  health
offices.

        Systematized Continuing Education

     In  1975, the  FDA pilot tested, through contract with the American Society of Radiologic
Technologists, a self-assessment program of continuing education  for practicing diagnostic
radiologic technologists. The program consists of approximately 300 questions covering 10 basic
subject matter categories. It also includes identification  of available educational materials related
to each of the categories. Plans are being formulated to make the material available to diagnostic
x-ray equipment operators on a nationwide  basis and  to  design the program  for continued
updating and expansion.

        Radiation Protection Syllabus

     In 1975, the FDA, in cooperation with  the American Society of Radiologic Technologists,
developed a  radiation protection syllabus based on behavioral objectives. This syllabus will be
included in a new major revision of the Curriculum  and Teacher's Syllabus for Schools of
Radiologic Technology*** be completed by ASRT in 1976. This document is the basic educational
guide for all radiologic technology schools approved by the American Medical Association Council
on Medical Education.
                                           61

-------
        Training Seminars

     In order to upgrade the competence of State and local radiation control personnel to carry
out their radiation protection responsibilities, FDA's Bureau of Radiological Health helps States
and regions conduct seminars and workshops in various aspects of radiological health. Some of
the seminars are aimed at teaching new personnel the basic principles of radiation science and
protection; others concentrate  on the skills and  techniques necessary for surveying and
evaluating medical x-ray equipment in hospitals and offices; still others deal with the inspection of
consumer products such as microwave ovens.

     This  program has been active for over a decade,  and has  been largely responsible for
establishing and maintaining the pool of manpower trained in radiation protection  among the
State and local radiation control agencies.  However, because of increased emphasis in recent
years on educating users of medical radiation, as well as staff and budget restrictions,  the number
of these seminars presented by FDA has been  sharply curtailed. Nonetheless, during 1975
approximately 300 individuals were trained through approximately 15 seminars. In the future, the
emphasis of this  training program will be placed on the production of audio-visual materials,
primarily video tapes, for use in State sponsored training.

SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

     Several monitoring programs in the medical radiation area are conducted by the Bureau of
Radiological Health, FDA. These serve to  assess population exposure and  trends in  medical
radiation usage, assist in measuring the effectiveness of Federal and State radiation control
activities, and provide a basis for effective planning of radiation protection and quality assurance
action programs. The status of several of these surveillance projects are described below.

     Nationwide Evaluation of X-Ray Trends (NEXT)

     The NEXT Task Force, a Federal-State partnership, was established by the Conference of
State Radiation Control Program Directors and the Bureau of  Radiological Health in 1971. Its
charge is to design a system to  provide States with a  means for setting program priorities and
measuring the impact of programs in reducing diagnostic x-ray exposure.

     With both financial and technical support from the FDA, the Task Force has developed a
system for measuring the effectiveness of State and Federal regulatory agency activities directed
at reducing patient radiation exposure during diagnostic radiography. The resulting system, which
is called the Organ Dose Index System, was successfully pilot-tested during the spring of  1972.
The system is now being used by the three military services, U.S. Coast Guard, Bureau of Prisons,
U.S. Public Health Service, Indian Health Service, and 38 States.

     The system,  designed to serve as an adjunct  to the State or agency's x-ray  installation
inspection program, is based on  measurements of patient exposure  and x-ray dose to the
reproductive organs received by a "standard patient" during the radiographic procedures most
frequently performed  at  each x-ray  facility. Data  are  collected using  standardized survey
procedures, forms, and test equipment developed by the Task Force.

    The data outputs from the system permit users to compare mean values for reproductive
organ dose, exposure at skin entrance, beam size, and  other parameters for radiographic exams
performed by practitioners in their State or agency with those for all other users of  the system
before and after the implementation of programs developed in response to PL 90-602.


                                          62

-------
     During 1975, the NEXT Task Force has unanimously moved to increase the accuracy of
NEXT data by adding more computer checks to evaluate the incorporation of questionable data
with the system and by requiring the use of calibrated survey instruments.

     According to Task Force plans, five additional checks will be included in the NEXT computer
system as a means of improving data accuracy. The checks will verify that:

     Exposure readings are no higher than the range of the survey instrument used to make the
     measurements,

     The repeat exposure performed during a survey does not vary by more than 10 percent from
     the original exposure,

     The three half-value layer exposure measurements recorded during the survey decrease as
     filtration is added,

     The added  filtration for half-value  layer determinations was chosen according to NEXT
     survey instructions, and

     The calculated half-value layer is within pre-established limits.

     Regarding instrument calibration, the Task Force set September 1,1975 as the target date
after which  only calibrated instruments would be used  for NEXT surveys.  In  addition, the
recommendation was adopted that instruments be calibrated annually by the BRH.

     Front-End Analysis

     The FDA has contracted to pilot test a survey methodology in  Virginia, Maryland and the
District of Columbia as a  preliminary to a National study in Fy-77. The study will attempt to define
the predominant influences (e.g., education, work environment, attitude, regulations, knowledge,
etc.) on x-ray equipment  operator practices. The information obtained through direct interview of
equipment operators will be used by FDA and disseminated to other agencies and the radiology
professions  as a basis for  more  informed  planning regarding  radiation safety and quality
assurance programs directed at the radiology community.

APPRAISAL OF INCIDENCE OF BIOLOGICAL INJURY AND EFFECTS

     Manufacturers are required by 21 CFR 1002.20 to report  accidental radiation occurrences to
the Bureau of Radiological Health, FDA. All accidental occurrences from electronic products that
are known to the manufacturer, and which arise from the manufacturing, testing, or use of any
product introduced or intended to be introduced into commerce, must be reported. Six incidents
were reported by manufacturers to the Bureau during calendar year 1975 as a result of the
requirements of 21 CFR 1002.20 and were investigated to determine their causes. Nine incidents
involving radiation exposure  were reported to the Radiation Incidents Registry,  BRH, from a
variety of sources.

     Approximately 209 claims of eye and skin injury to 232 persons, associated with the use of
an ultraviolet dental device,  were reported  during 1975.  A  corrective  action program was
completed by the Bureau to  ameliorate the  problems associated with  the ultraviolet device.
Twelve incidents, involving high intensity mercury vapor lamps used  for lighting  purposes,
reportedly resulted in eye and skin injuries to 50 persons. The industry is planning to adopt a
                                          63

-------
voluntary standard for high-intensity mercury vapor lamps to control the problem, to be developed
by the American National Standards Institute. The BRH  is conducting a parallel approach to
develop a regulatory standard if the voluntary approach is unsuccessful. See Table 4.3 for
summary data on numbers of persons involved in various types of radiation exposure incidents.

     Regulations issued under the Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act (21 CFR, Chapter
I, Subchapter J) require that manufacturers of certain electronic products submit reports and keep
records related to the electronic product radiation safety, including the applicable radiation testing
and quality control programs that the manufacturers conduct. Initial reports and reports of model
changes  are required from manufacturers of certain classes  of products. Manufacturers of
microwave ovens, television receivers,  cold-cathode tubes, medical x-ray units, baggage x-ray
units, sunlamps, lasers, and certain other products are also required to establish and maintain
records including quality control and testing records.

     During  1975, 1,040 initial reports,  model change reports, annual  reports, and exemption
requests  were received. Also about 1,600 supplements to such reports and requests  for
exemption were submitted. Fifteen hundred reports and supplements thereto were reviewed and
evaluated. Over 5,400 pieces of incoming correspondence (including  reports and exemption
requests) were received and acted upon.

     Approximately 530 letters were sent to  known or assumed manufacturers of electronic
products  advising them of their  reporting obligations and requesting appropriate  reports.
Approximately 180 followup actions, in  the form of letters or telephone calls, were taken with
various manufacturers to obtain required reports, supplements,  or other regulatory information
and data.
                                         64

-------
                              TABLE 4.3
NUMBER OF INCIDENTS AND NUMBER OF PERSONS REPORTED EXPOSED
             TO VARIOUS TYPES OF  RADIATION  SOURCES
              RADIATION INCIDENTS REGISTRY, 1970-1975
   Sources

   Ionizing

      Industrial x-ray
        units
      X-ray units in
        universities &
        laboratories
      Medical & dental
        x-ray units
      Gamma
      Television

   Nonionizing

      Ultraviolet
      Microwave
      Laser
      High frequency
        radiowaves
      Infrared

   Ionizing and
      Nonionizing

   Ultrasound

      TOTAL
Number
   of
incidents
Number    Number
  of         of
.persons    Incidents
                          80
    3

    4
   3

  11
  226
    1
    2
 286
   1
   2
  237
  304
 41

 65
  6
  1
310
 51
 21

  1
  1
  5

  3

596
          Number
            of
          persons
                         88
 51

125
 14
  1
390
 53
 23

  1
  1
                                       5

                                       5

                                     769
                                   65

-------
     Additional Accomplishments

     Test Stand for X-Ray Equipment Compliance Testing- A patent recently has been assigned
for a test stand designed by BRH personnel for use in evaluating the performance characteristics
of diagnostic x-ray systems. The device has several unique features that simplify the testing of x--
ray equipment for compliance  with the Federal performance standard. Although developed
primarily for compliance testing, it also has been approved by the Task Force on the Nationwide
Evaluation of X-Ray Trends (NEXT) for use in collecting survey data.

     X-Ray Exposure and Time Monitor - A single portable instrument capable of measuring both
radiation exposure and exposure time from a typical diagnostic x-ray machine is the first of its kind
to become commercially available.

     The FDA initially conceived the design of the instrument, and developed a feasibility model,
as a means for making field measurements of timer accuracy and exposure to verify equipment
compliance with  the  Federal performance standard for diagnostic x-ray systems. The  FDA
awarded a contract in 1974 to refine and package the instrument for production.

     The new instrument uses an air-equivalent ionization chamber in conjunction with a charge
digitizer and digital-processing unit to measure  exposure, exposure rate, pulse exposure, and
pulse width. Principal advantages of the instrument are:  improved accuracy and reliability over
existing devices used for making x-ray exposure measurements in the field; convenience, in that it
replaces two instruments with one; and ease of use.

     Long-Term Effects of Prenatal and Postnatal Ionizing Radiation  Exposure in  the Beagle
(Collaborative  Radiological Health  Laboratory)  -  The  Collaborative  Radiological Health
Laboratory project, under contract with FDA, is a study of the long-term effects of prenatal and
early postnatal ionizing radiation exposure in the beagle. The effects in the beagle of a single
exposure of low levels of radiation are being investigated in terms of long-term effects. This study
will contribute significantly to the determination of the hazards associated with human prenatal
and early postnatal exposure to ionizing radiation. The  project has made  approximately 100
original contributions to the published scientific literature.

     Comparative Thyroid  Tumor Induction in Rats from lodine-131  and X-lrradiation - The
objective of this study is to evaluate the risk and the relative radiosensitivity of thyroid carcinoma
from internally administered lodine-131 and x-irradiations in the  dose range of 75 to 1,000 rads.
Also, a possible radiogenic synergistic effect between the  thyroid and the pituitary with x radiation
will be investigated.

     Findings  in a recent epidemiologic study  revealed that a  significant  number  of thyroid
carcinoma  was incurred  by patients  treated with x-irradiation of  the scalp for tinea capitis
(ringworm of the scalp) at prepubertal ages. The predominant latent period  was from 10 to 20
years, and the dose to the thyroid was estimated to be about 6.5 rads. Doses received by patients
from 1-131, currently used in nuclear medicine for thyroid function and diagnostic procedures,
ranged from approximately ten to several hundred rads. Studies in the past, involving humans and
animals,  suggested that  the thyroid gland  is not very  radiosensitive  and  that thyroid radio-
sensitivity to x-irradiation is approximately ten times greater than  that from internally administered
1-131. It should be noted that previous studies employed high radiation doses to the thyroid. As a
result, the thyroid glands were partially ablated, which might account for the low incidence of
observed latent thyroid tumor.
                                          66

-------
     Evaluation of Dose from Uranium in Dental Porcelain - The FDA is  studying the use of
•uranium in dental  porcelain with respect to potential doses due to alpha and beta emissions.
 Preliminary results of the study were  reported in November at the American Public Health
 Association Annual Conference.

     Concern over the potential radiation hazard from uranium in artificial teeth arose from earlier
 studies in England and Switzerland which indicated the dose from such sources exceeded the
 maximum permissible dose for the general public recommended by the International Commission
 on Radiation Protection (ICRP). Although it is believed that the uranium concentrations being
 used by U.S. manufacturers are considerably lower that those found in the British and Swiss
 studies, very little  data are presently available. The Bureau of Medical Devices and Diagnostic
 Products asked BRH to develop this information for use as a basis in evaluating the need for
 Federal guidelines on the concentration of uranium in dental porcelain.

     The presence  of uranium  in artificial teeth is considered essential  because  no other
. substance has been found to yield as broad an imitation of the fluorescence found in natural teeth
 under all lighting conditions. The fluorescent effect is particularly noticeable when the lighting
 contains a substantial ultraviolet component. Porcelain without uranium often emits green, yellow,
 or no fluorescence. Since a large percentage of crowns and dentures are prescribed primarily for
 cosmetic reasons, manufacturers of dental prosthetics routinely incorporate uranium in their
 products.

     Some 18 sets of artificial  teeth  and 23 powders submitted by  domestic and foreign
 manufacturers are being analyzed by the BRH for alpha and beta emissions as well as for uranium
 concentration.  Preliminary results indicate the annual dose from these materials may be higher
 than the ICRP recommended levels of 3.0 rems per year for the skin and 1.5 rems per year for
 other organs. However, it has not yet been determined whether a significant amount of this dose is
 delivered to the sensitive basal layer of the oral tissue.

     Complete results of the study will be published in 1976 as a BRH  report.

 SCREENING OF ELECTRON MICROSCOPES FOR X-RAY LEAKAGE

     In an effort to determine whether operators of electron microscopes are, in fact, subjected to
 unnecessary exposure, EPA, with the cooperation of the health physics staff on the campus of the
 National Institutes of Health and the Veterans Administration  Hospital in Washington, D.C.,
 surveyed 45 electron microscopes which operated in the energy range of 50 to 125J
-------
    In letters to the three charitable organizations, the FDA urged that donations of used x-ray
equipment be refused because sale of the units to uninformed purchasers could result in serious
radiation injury. The new Federal standard for diagnostic x-ray machines is likely to reduce the
resale value of used equipment and, as a result, it may be disposed of through  donations. In
response, the Commissioner of The Salvation Army stated: "We have tried in the past to refuse
donations  of medical or dental x-ray machines,  unless they are secured specifically for our
hospital mission overseas. In that case, we have them examined... before accepting or shipping
them. So far as acceptance of such donations in our institutions in the United States, we will alert
the necessary departments and ask their cooperation." In a similar vane, Commander in Chief of
The Volunteers of America, reported that all program centers have been instructed that should
such equipment  be picked up inadvertently,  "it is to be  made  inoperable immediately and
disposed of."

GENERAL AMENDMENTS PROPOSED FOR DIAGNOSTIC X-RAY STANDARD

    The Food and Drug Administration has proposed a group of 11 general amendments to the
Federal performance standard for diagnostic x-ray systems and their major components. The
notice of proposed rulemaking was published in the Federal Register on June 11,1975.

    The proposed amendments include revisions of the list of major components to which the
standard applies; addition of alternate certification and labeling procedures for products marketed
as a combination of two or more major components; strengthening of the requirements for fluoro-
scopic x-ray field limitation and high-level controls;  and revision of the wording of several
definitions, performance requirements, and methods for determining compliance.

    Specifically, the proposed amendments would:

    Revise the list of major components so the standard applies to spot-film devices and image
    intensifiers rather than fluoroscopic imaging assemblies. This revision would allow the list of
    components to correspond more closely to current manufacturing and marketing practices,
    and facilitate product certification and identification by the manufacturer and enforcement of
    the standard by the Bureau.

    Add cephalometric devices to the list of major components regulated by the standard. These
    devices are  used in dentistry for radiographic visualization of the patient's head. They were
    not addressed in the original standard and are being added because they must be selected
    and installed correctly for the x-ray  system to meet the requirements regarding x-ray field
    limitation and alignment.

    Revise the definition of "leakage technique factors" to state that the maximum rated peak
    tube potential is such a factor. This proposed revision is intended to clarify the definition and
    is consistent with previously issued interpretations.

    Ttevise  the  definition of the  "visible  area" of an  image  receptor to assure  correct
    interpretation of the requirements concerning alignment of the fluoroscopic x-ray field and
    image intensifier. Again, the proposed revision is intended solely for clarity and is consistent
    with previous interpretations.

    Revise the  definition of "x-ray  control" by adding timers,  phototimers, and automatic
    brightness stabilizers as examples. This  revision will make,it clear that  these items are
                                         68

-------
    considered to be controls and must be certified separately if they are not integral parts of
    other components.

COMPLIANCE ACTIONS

    General

    The compliance and defect investigations of FDA consist of authorized inspections and
reviews of record keeping, plant inspections authorized for cause, and plant inspections arranged
with manufacturers on a voluntary basis. Compliance with applicable standards are determined by
inhouse laboratory analyses of products, as well as reviews of reports and quality control data
required of the manufacturer to be submitted to FDA.

    A total of six Compliance Programs and four Program Circulars were issued in calendar year
1975. These Programs provide guidance for field and headquarters personnel in conducting
compliance activities in the following areas:  Field and Laboratory Testing of  Microwave Ovens,
Inspection  of Microwave Oven Dealer/Distributor  Records, Imported  Electronic Products,
Laboratory Testing of Television Receivers, Laboratory Testing of Cold-Cathode Gas Discharge
Tubes, and Field Activities Involving Diagnostic and Cabinet X-Ray Equipment.

    During 1975, there were 424 petitions approved for the importation of electronic products
that were not in compliance with applicable Federal performance standards at the time they were
offered for import. Of these, 299 were exemption requests for products imported for purposes of
research, investigations, studies, demonstrations, or training. All these products have been or are
to be exported or destroyed. The remaining 125 were applications to bring the electronic products
into compliance with applicable  Federal  performance standards  prior to introduction  into
commerce. These have been or will be brought into compliance or they will  be exported or
destroyed.

    Eighty-two compliance actions, affecting more than 507,000 radiation-producing products,
were in progress during the 1975 calendar year. Of these, 41 compliance actions were initiated
during this time and involve 51,000 products.

    These compliance actions involved television receivers, microwave ovens, medical x-ray
units,  dental  x-ray units,  cabinet x-ray units, including those  used for inspection of carry-on
baggage at airports, oscilloscopes, industrial x-ray machines, and ultraviolet dental appliances.

    Twelve compliance actions in progress, 7 of which were initiated during the year, were the
result of inadequate quality control programs or failure to submit a required report. It is prohibited
for products concerned to be introduced into commerce until the program disapproval has been
rescinded.

    Television Receivers

    There have been 164 television receivers laboratory tested in accordance with the Federal
Performance  Standard for Television Receivers. Compliance action cases  were initiated with
seven manufacturers of television receivers.

    During February 1975, two manufacturers reported that several models of their television
receivers were in noncompliance with the Federal standard and would be corrected. During the
remainder of the year, two other manufacturers were found to have introduced noncompliant
                                          69

-------
receivers into production. More than 17,000 receivers are involved in these four compliance
actions and carry a potential radiation hazard of 2 to 4 times the maximum limits allowed by the
Federal standard for radiation emission. The  three other compliance  actions taken involved
television monitors, projectors, and oscilloscopes.

     Medical and Dental X-Ray Equipment

     There have been 14 major components of x-ray systems and 11  complete x-ray systems
laboratory tested in accordance with the Federal Performance Standard for Diagnostic X-Ray
Systems and  their Major Components.  Compliance action  cases  were  initiated with 24
manufacturers of diagnostic x-ray equipment. Fifteen quality control and testing programs were
disapproved pending further information or requiring a change in the program. Eleven of these
disapprovals have been rescinded after receipt and review of additional submissions.

     Cabinet and Airport X-Ray Units

     Four quality control and testing programs were disapproved. One disaproval was rescinded
after receipt and review of additional information. Compliance actions were taken against the
remaining manufacturers.

MISCELLANEOUS ACTIONS

     Quality Assurance- During 1975, the Food and Drug Administration, in cooperation with the
American College of Radiology and the West Virginia State Department of Health, field tested a
diagnostic radiology quality assurance program for future implementation  by  State radiation
control personnel. The first phase involved visits to a broad spectrum of x-ray facilities, ranging
from doctors' offices to a large hospital, by combined teams of Federal and State personnel. The
purposes of this phase were to test quality assurance instruments and procedures in clinical
facilities, to assist facilities through identifying equipment maintenance and use problems, and to
determine the  practicality of a State radiation health program performing a quality assurance
consultation service for radiological facilities in addition to their traditional regulatory duties.

     The Food and  Drug Administration has initiated a program, in cooperation with the Public
Health Service Hospital in Baltimore, to assess the results of a facility-based quality assurance
program, carried out by hospital staff members, to assure consistent radiographic quality. The
expected result of the program is to identify practical quality assurance procedures that could be
recommended for x-ray facilities, including those of the Federal Government.

     The FDA in cooperation with the radiation control agencies of the District of Columbia and of
Pennsylvania is developing a mammography quality assurance program. This is an educational
program aimed at facilities doing mammography and designed to minimize patient exposure from
x-rays  of the breast while improving image quality. The methodology  is based on that of the
successful DENT program. Groundwork for the program involves identifying the facilities doing
mammography and  the number of units  at each  facility. The local medical and radiological
societies have given valuable cooperation in this program. It is expected that the pilot test of this
program will screen mammography radiation exposures in 22 facilities in the District of Columbia
and in 250 to 400 facilities in Pennsylvania.

     DENT- DENT  is a program developed by FDA for use by State and local radiation control
agencies in encouraging  dentists  to standardize dental x-ray  machine exposures  within
established ranges that produce high quality x-ray films with acceptable patient exposures. It is
                                          70

-------
primarily an educational effort aimed at the dental radiology personnel rather than a survey to
check for compliance of the x-ray machine with Federal and State regulations.

     During 1975, full-scale DENT programs were under way in 16 States, local subdivisions, and
Federal agencies. These programs are expected to reach 30,600 dental x-ray machines. In
addition, pilot DENT programs in five more States were expected to reach 1700 machines. In the
following year it is projected that eight additional States will initiate programs reaching 17,000
more machines. These efforts represent a substantial expansion of pre-1975 efforts which tested
2360 machines in six States.

ISSUES OF OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE

     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 Federal
agencies in the preparation of standards and regulations for their respective areas of authority.

     During the sixteen years since this guidance was established, there has been an increase in
the  number of persons occupationally exposed; changes have been made in methods of
calculating doses  and their effects;  new national requirements have  been promulgated on
increasing uses of sources;  new occupations have been created and have exposed sensitive
population groups; and new and relevant scientific information on the risk of exposure to  low-
levels of radiation has been acquired.

     Because of  the  increased number of  persons  being exposed to  ionizing  radiation  and
increased information on the risks of radiation exposure, the Environmental Protection Agency
has  undertaken a program  to reconsider all factors relevant to updated Federal guides for
occupational  exposure. As part of the program, EPA established an Interagency Committee on
Occupational Exposures to  Ionizing Radiation in  September 1974 to advise EPA in developing
guides sufficient to protect the radiation worker from undue risk.

     During the first half of 1975, the occupational exposure program's task groups investigated
problems associated with the major issues of occupational exposures. Dose-to-risk conversion
factors were  calculated to facilitate evaluation of the effects of being exposed to radiation; a
survey of government agency exposure records  was performed to assess the current level of
occupational  exposures; and the  risks associated with various radiation and  non-radiation
occupations were appraised and compared. The results of these tasks  were presented at the
Interagency Committee meeting in early August 1975.

     Four major issues of occupational exposures identified by the Interagency Committee are as
follows:

     1.  Determination of the Radiation Protection Guide (RPG)

     EPA reported that selecting the RPG on the basis of a cost-benefit analysis was not feasible
because there were too many uncertainties in assessing  the costs and benefits of radiation
protection in the nuclear industry. From the information that was available, EPA believes that
comparative risk would be the most reasonable basis for establishing the RPG.

     In the comparative risk approach, a method  is devised to evaluate the risk associated with
being exposed to  radiation. This method is  used to determine the'risk  that would result from.
                                          71

-------
proposed RPG  levels which are  then studied and compared with the risks involved in non-
radiation occupations. A result of this analysis was that a radiation worker exposed at 5 rems/year
faces a risk between those found in the average and high accidental death risk industries. The
examination of radiation risks is continuing and is expected to be able to provide basic data for
determining the RPG.

     2.  Misuse of the accumulated exposure rule of 5 (N-18)

     Under current regulations (10 CFR 20) cumulative exposure of radiation workers is limited to
a number of rems dependent on  the age of the worker. The formula allows 5 (N-18) rems of
cumulative exposure. It was pointed out by EPA that under current Federal guidance, a radiation
worker could conceivably be exposed to 12 rems in a single year (3 rems/quarter) if a sufficient
"exposure bank account" had accumulated using the 5 (N-18) rule.

     3.  Assurance that exposures are ALRA

     The Committee restated the basic premise that since exposure to any level of radiation
carries a risk of injury, all exposures should be kept as low as is reasonably achievable. It was
further stated that the updated Federal guides should contain a mechanism  to assure that
exposures below the RPG will  indeed be as  low as reasonably achievable. An example was
presented in which administrative surveillance and monitoring requirements were increased with
increasing radiation exposure.

     4.  Provision for exceeding the RPG

     The Committee acknowledged that the RPG could be exceeded in accident situations and
that even some planned activities warrant exposure above the limit. The aid of the Committee was
requested in developing suitable provisions for such exposures.

     EPA also requested the Committee members to submit their personal opinions on these
issues as well as formal comments on behalf of their respective agencies. Other areas to be
addressed by the Occupational Exposures program include organ doses, extremity exposure
guides and special groups (e.g., fertile women).

     Progress in Radiation Protection

     The details of the resolution of these issues will be contained in a technical document
supporting the updated Federal guidance which will be available in  1976. Also contained in this
document will be the results of a recently developed methodology which enhances comparative
risk analyses  that involve radiation related occupations. The model will be used to refine the
evaluation of risk from various radiation levels, and enable a more meaningful comparison with
risj
-------
general area of radiation protection were made by the  NRC, ERDA, AIF, utilities, architect-
engineer firms, nuclear reactor system vendors and labor unions. The transcript of the meeting is
available and represents one of the most comprehensive reviews of radiation protection.

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES-1974

     In past years the United States Atomic Energy Commission has published exposure data on
both its licensees and contractor personnel. With the division, in January 1975, of the AEC into
two agencies, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Energy Research and Development
Administration, each of the agencies assumed responsibility for collecting occupational radiation
exposure information relating to its own activities.

     In November 1975, the NRC issued the "Seventh Annual Occupational Radiation Exposure
Report, 1975" (NUREG-75/108) and "Occupational Radiation Exposure of Light-Water Cooled
Power Reactors,  1969-1974" NUREG-75/032,  in June 1975. The bulk of  the  information
contained therein was obtained from annual and termination reports submitted by certain types of
NRC licensees (i.e., operating nuclear power reactors; industrial radiographers, fuel processors,
fabricators, and reprocessors; commercial processors and distributors of specified quantities of
byproduct material).

     During 1974 some 421  licensees reported monitoring a total of approximately 85,000
individuals. Table 4.4 shows the distribution of the  annual whole body  exposures of these
individuals for each of the covered categories of licensees. Of special interest are the exposures
of "transient workers" (i.e., individuals who began and terminated two or more employments with
different employers within the same calendar quarter). As can be seen from Table 4.5, the number
of these workers has been increasing over the years; however, for the last three years the average
individual quarterly exposure has been decreasing. Table 4.6 presents summary data of annual
whole body exposures for covered licensees.
                                          73

-------
                                                                     TABLE 4.4
                                                      Distribution of Annual Whole Body Exposures
                                                                 for Covered Licensees
                                                                         1974
  Covered                 	Exposure  Ranges  (Rems)_
Categories
  of NRC       Total No.   Less Than  Less Than  0.10   0.25   0.50  0.75
  OT IIKI*       IUIQI uu.   L.G:>:>  inaii  i-e:>3  iiian  u.tu   u.t~»   u. j\j  v./j
Licensees      Monitored  Measurable     0.10    0.25   0.50   0.75  1.00    1-2    2-3    3-4    4-5   ^±^iLI^.^±  9-10   10_-1_1   11-12   >12

Power
Reactors        62,044      40,140       9,471   3,317   2,230   1,238    929   2,522  1,378   471    226     86    30    6    0     0       0       00

Industrial
Radiography      8,792       3,849       1,740    939    635    424    323     547    209    74     22     17     5    2    3     0       1       20

Fuel Processing
&  Fabrication   10,921       6,304       1,801    959    772    316    146     275    126    83     60     23    12   16   12    16       0      00

Manufacturing &
Distribution     3.340       1,513          748    504    144   	8£    69   ., 125	5£   46     17   _2i   _7   _]_   _2    _0       p_      0.   0


     TOTALS     85,097      51,806       13,760   5,719   3,781   2,062  1,467 3,469  1,772   674    325    147    54   25   17    IS       1      20

-------
                                                        TABLE 4.5


                                                    TRANSIENT WORKERS

                                                       1969 - 1974
en
Number of Individuals
Terminating Employment
with Two or More Employers
During One Calendar
Quarter

Total Number of
Man-Rems Accumulated

Average Individual
Quarterly Exposure (Rem)
                                              1969
                                              5.39
                                              0.67
                                          1970     1971     1972     1973     1974     TOTALS
                                                           28
            14
66
154
313
 0.45     0.20     0.88     0.83
                 0.51
583
12.62     2.85    58.23   127.40    160.70    367.19
                   0.63

-------
                TABLE 4.6
SUMMARY OF ANNUAL WHOLE BODY EXPOSURES
         FOR COVERED LICENSEES
               1968 - 1974
Percent of No. of Annual

Year
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
Total No.
Monitored
36,836
31,176
36,164
36,311
44,690
67 , 862
85 , 097
Exposures
2 Rems
97.2%
96.5%
96.1%
95.3%
95.7%
95.0%
96.4%
Exposi
12 R
3
7
0
1
8
1
0
                  76

-------
    Exposures of Uranium Miners-1974

    The Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration of the Department of the Interior is
responsible for  the inspection and enforcement of its radiation protection regulations as they
apply to workers in underground uranium mines. During 1974, for which data are available,
radiation measurements were made in  70  underground uranium  mines and 64 underground
nonuranium mines and inspectors made 586 determinations of radon daughter concentrations.
Average underground concentrations of radon daughters, as measured by inspectors, dropped by
22 percent in 1974 from the previous year. Only 0.6 percent of the uranium mine workers were
reported to have received exposures of more that 4 Working Level Months (WLM) for the year.
The highest exposure was 5.3 WLM. The average underground radon daughter concentrations,
as measured by inspectors for 1975, are shown in Table 4.7. The distribution of individual radon
daughter exposure, as reported by the mining companies in 1975, is shown in Table 4.8.
                                           77

-------
TABLE 4.7
1975 RADON DAUGHTER CONCENTRATIONS
(Federal Uranium Mine Inspections)

No. of No. and % of Samples
Samples Average Maximum Within Designated Range
1028 0.71 25
WL WL
0.0-0.3
WL
493
48%
0.3-0.6
WL
272
26.5%
0.6-1
WL
123
12%

1-2
WL
74
7.2%

>2
WL
66
6.4%
TABLE 4.8
1975 EMPLOYEE EXPOSURE
(as per Operator's Records)
No. of No. and % of Employees
Employees Average Maximum Exposed to .Designated Range


3344 1.07 5.15
WLM WLM
0-1
WLM
1889
56.5%
1-2
WLM
787
23.5%
2-3 .
WLM
416
12.4%
3-4
WLM
205
6.1%
>4
WLM
47
1.4%
78

-------
                                 REFERENCES
1.   Population Exposure toX-Rays U.S. 1970, DHEW Publication no. (FDA) 73-8047, November
    1973.

2.   Pre-release report: X-Ray Exposure Study (XES) Revised Estimates of 1964 and 1970
    Genetically Significant Dose, BRH, February 1975.

3.   K.Z. Morgan, Testimony before Senate Committee on Commerce on Public Law 90-602.
    March 8-12,1973, Congress Rec. Serial No. 93-24 (1973), Pgs. 25-48.
                                        79

-------
NATURALLY-OCCURRING RADIOACTIVITY - CHAPTER 5
 INTRODUCTION

     Naturally-occurring radionuclides have always made a significant contribution to man's
 external radiation exposure, and they will continue to do so in the future. |n many areas of the
 United States, the magnitude 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.

     The existence of natural radiation sources is not the result of man's activities. Exposure to
 external natural radiation 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. Internal  exposure to natural  radiation sources is due to inhalation and
 ingestion of foods, liquids, and air containing  naturally-occurring radionuclides. The intensity of
 natural radiation sources can be enhanced by some technological activity by man that is not
 expressly designed to produce radiation (1). That is, exposure from natural radioactivity can be
 increased and concentrated by man's industrial and other activities. Examples of this type of
 natural radiation sources are uranium mill tailings, radioactivity in construction materials, uranium
 in fertilizers, and cosmic radiation exposure due to air travel (1). Consequently man increases his
 exposure from these sources of natural radiation by means of his technology and his lifestyle.

     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 increasing 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, rare earth, and several other mining industries, as well as newer, less developed
 industries such as shale oil recovery and geothermal power production.

     When the naturall\fcoccurring radioactive materials are confined deep in 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  paniculate radioactive materials are released to the air,  becoming available for
 possible human inhalation and lowering the overall air quality. Second, the radioactive materials in
 the ores or the associated by-products  can  enter ground and surface waters by  effluent
 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 contamination of
 the food chain, which may result in man's ingestion of radioactive materials.

     Substantial  environmental and public health problems associated with natural radioactivity
are emerging which require for their solutions effective regulatory roles in Federal agencies and in
the States. The major problem areas have been identified for successfully addressing the issues.
Many of these areas are the subject of extensive Environmental Protection Agency activity. Other
areas will  require intense involvement in  the near future* In  general, these areas  call for
                                          80

-------
nuhHr ESS8! f fessment and the development of adequate control measures to minimize any
public health risk from naturally-occurring radioactivity.
                                         81

-------
 URANIUM MINE AND MILL TAILINGS

     Active Uranium Mills

     Large scale milling of uranium ore began in the United States in the late 1 y40's. The average
 time of operation of a uranium mill has been 12 to 15 years. As of December 1975, fifteen mills
 were operating in the United States (Table 5.1) With nominal capacities ranging\from 150 to 7,000
 tons of ore per day. These mills are characteristically located in arid, isolated regions of the west.
 Areas with significant high  grade ore reserves are: Wyoming, 55 million tons; New Mexico, 50
 million tons; Texas, 11 million tons;  Colorado-Utah, 6 million tons; all other areas combined, 7
 million tons. 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 (2).

     A uranium mill extracts uranium from ore. The product  is a semi-refined uranium compound
 called "yellowcake" which is the feed material for the production of uranium hexafluoride. Eighty
 percent of yellowcake is currently produced by a process that uses sulfuric acid to leach the
 uranium out of the ore; the remainder is produced by a sodium carbonate, alkali leach process.

     The radioactivity in uranium ores depends primarily on the amount of uranium in the 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 percent 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^). Almost all of the radioactive decay products of the uranium ore end up in the
 tailings, mostly in the tailings solids, but with small percentages in solution. Large amounts of solid
 waste  tailings remain following the  removal of the uranium from  the ore. A typical  mill  may
 generate 1,800 metric tons per day of tailings solids slurried in 2,500 metric tons of waste milling
 solutions. Over the lifetime of the mill, 100 to.200 acres may permanently be committed to store
 this material. Included  in the tailings are 97 percent of the radioactive decay products of the
 uranium and about 4 percent of the original uranium.

     These "tailings piles"  will have a radiological  impact  on the environment through the air
 pathway by continuous discharge of  radon-222 gas (a daughter of radium-226), through gamma
 rays given off by radium-226,  radon-222 and daughters as they undergo radioactive decay, and
 finally through air and water pathways if radium-226 and thorium-230 are blown off the pile by wind
 or are leached from the pile due to water erosion.

     New mills in the Rocky Mountains area are using impoundment technology in an attempt to
 approach  zero liquid discharge levels. Utilizing a  clay-core retention darn, two  methods for
 seepage collection and return are being considered. When an impermeable geological formation
 underlies the retention system, seepage can be collected in a catch basin located at the-foot of
the dam and then pumped back into the retention pond. Wells may also be drilled downstream of
the retention system into the subsurface formation where seepage can be collected and pumped
back into the retention system. Impoundment of solids is being accomplished in older mills merely
by construction of a dike with natural  materials and filling the diked area with slurried tailings. The
diking procedure,  which is less costly initially, creates an above-ground pile of tailings which is
difficult and costly to stabilize. While  the mill is operating, this type of pile is also subject to wind
and water erosion; therefore, new mills are not likely to be built using this  type of solid waste
control.
                                          82

-------
                      TABLE 5.1 STATUS OF ACTIVE URANIUM MILL SITES IN THE UNITED STATES AS  OF  DECEMBER 1975
CD
CO

State
*Colorado

*New Mexico


South Dakota
* Texas

Utah

*Washington
Wyoming








Location
Canon City
Uravan
Ambrosia Lake
Blue Water
Grants
Edgemont
Falls City
Ray Point''0)
La Sal
Moab
Ford
Gas Hills
Gas Hills
Gas Hills
Jeffrey City
Powder River Basin
River ton (°'
Shirley Basin
Shirley Basin

Year
Mill
Nominal
Mill
Capacity
(Tons Ore
Tons of Size of
Tailings Tailings
(In Pile
Name and/or Owner Started per Day) thousands) (Acres)
Cotter Corporation
Union Carbide Corp.
Kerr-McGee Nuclear
Anaconda Company
United Nuclear-Homestake Partners
TVA (Mine-Development, Inc./
Conoco & Pioneer Nuclear, Inc.
1958
1950
1958
1953
1958
1956
1971
Exxon, U.S.A. (Susquehanna-Western)1970
Rio Algom Corporation
Atlas Corporation
Dawn Mining Company
Federal American Partners
Utah International, Inc.
Union Carbide Corporation
Western Nuclear, Inc.
Highland Mill, Exxon, U.S.A.
Susquehanna-Wes tern
Petrotomics Company'1 '
Utah International, Inc.
1972
1956
1957
1959
1956
1960
1957
1972
1958
1962
1971
150-450
0-1300 (a)
3600-7000
3000
1650-3500
250- 500
220-1750
200- 800
500
800-1500
0- 400
500- 950
750-1200
1000
400-1200
2000
500
525-1500
1200
1,100
7,000
25,400)eJ
15,300(e'
18,700(bKe)
2,000
2,600
490
739
7,800
1,900
4,000
5,500(-e;
4,000
3,000
2,200
900
4,500)Includes  1,200,000  tons  from salvaged Homestake-New Mexico Partners Mill  that was located on  the  present
            active  site.
          (°)Although  the site license  is still active,  there  is no present milling activity.
          (d)Mill will reopen  January 1, 1978  and handle about 1,600 tons per day.
          ^e'Estimated.
          * Agreement States which have responsibility for licensing the mills.   All  others are licensed by NRG.

-------
     Uranium mill tailings piles are long half-life, low-level radioactive wastes. As such, they will
 require perpetual care. This will include occasional inspection and maintenance to insure integrity
 of the stabilizing cover, fencing, and of the warning signs around  the pile. The maintenance
 associated with perpetual care of a stabilized dike system would probably be higher than that for
 the depression fill system, since there is a tendancy toward collapse  of side slopes and possible
 inadequate drainage of precipitation from the pile.

     In the milling operation, hazardous airborne gaseous and particulate 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 crushing 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 (3).

     Other sources of gas and dust which can be controlled are the open pit mine haul roads and
 the ore storage and blending pits. In some instances, the liquid content of the ore as mined may be
 sufficiently high to eliminate most dust formation in the ore storage and blending  area; based on
 the information available, this problem appears potentially significant and it may be controlled in
 principle through sprinkling and by use of wind breaks. Dust generation on ore haul roads can also
 be controlled by sprinkling.

     NRC Activities in Uranium Milling

     In May 1975, the General Accounting Office (GAO) recommended that the Chairman of the
 NRC "(1) assess the capability and willingness of public health authorities or other State agencies
 to assume responsibility for and to adequately carry out programs for  the long-term monitoring of
 tailings piles and for correcting any problems in tailings' stabilization and control programs, and (2)
 determine whether additional Federal authority is needed to improve such programs."

     In August, NRC reported to the Committees on Government Operations of the U.S. House of
 Representatives and  the Senate the actions  taken and  planned to implement the  GAO
 recommendations.

     NRC has direct regulatory jurisdiction over uranium mills in the States of Utah, Wyoming and
 South  Dakota, currently numbering 10 active facilities. Under the "Agreement State" program
 whereby qualified States assume part of NRC's regulatory authority,  eight other  active mills are
 regulated, including  the control of tailings, by the States of Colorado, New  Mexico, Texas and
 Washington.

     For a mill licensed by the NRC,  an environmental monitoring program must be  carried out,
 and the licensee must establish a program to prevent releases of tailings material and to restrict
 use of the area. NRC will also require a guarantee such as a surety bond to assure that the
 commitments will be fulfilled, and is discussing arrangements for the affected States to hold such
 surety bonds posted by the licensee.

     In 1975, NRC received a petition requesting action to (a) prepare a generic environmental
statement on uranium mill tailings, (b) cease all licensing actions connected with generating
tailings until results of the environmental review are available, and (c) require mill  owners to post
performance  bonds  to assure that tailings will be stabilized prior to abandonment. The petition
                                          84

-------
was published ofr comment and NRC will review these comments and take appropriate action in
1976.

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS OF THE URANIUM FUEL CYCLE

     An environmental analysis related  to  uranium milling  was included  in supplementary
information prepared by EPA for the hearings on the proposed standard (40 CFR 190) for the
uranium fuel cycle (2,3).

     Ambrosia Lake Study

     In November 1975, a study was conducted by EPA to determine the ambient radiological air
quality in the Ambrosia Lake area of New Mexico, a region of active uranium ore mining and milling
operations. Three operating mills, one inactive mill, associated tailings ponds, and approximately
20 active mines contribute radon and radon progeny as well as airborne paniculate material to the
ambient air quality. During episodes of limited atmospheric dispersion, radon levels build up in the
basin. Airborne particulate levels will give information on the radioJogical hazard associated with
windblown tailings from active tailings ponds. The study should provide data on outdoor radon
levels, indoor radon progeny concentrations and outdoor particulate concentrations for active
mines and mills. A report on this study will be published by EPA in 1976.

     Grants Mineral Belt Study

     The first extensive study to determine the impact of the uranium mining and milling industry
on ground water quality was completed by EPA in August 1975 in the Grants Mineral Belt area of
New Mexico.  The study had these objectives: 1) to assess the impact of waste discharges on
ground water, 2) to evaluate the adequacy of company water quality monitoring networks,  self-
monitoring data, analytical procedures, and reporting requirements, and 3) to develop priorities for
subsequent monitoring and  other followup  studies. Study findings revealed that excessive
seepage of effluents from tailings ponds, unlined channels and, in one case, an injection well,
resulted in elevated levels of radioactivity in natural ground water bodies. No adverse impacts on
municipal water supplies were evident although three industrial potable supplies exceeded levels
for radium in drinking water (4).

INACTIVE URANIUM MILL TAILINGS  SITES

     During the past 27 years there have been about 40 uranium ore processing rails that have
produced uranium for sale to the Government and private industry. Twenty-four of these mills in
eight western States have shut down leaving the accumulated radioactive residues or tailings.
Two of these sites are currently under active NRC licenses and one site is maintained by the
Federal Government. The remaining twenty-one inactive mills have tailings totaling 25 million tons
with individual piles varying from 90,000 tons to 3 million tons (Table 5.2) (5).

     Following hearings conducted  in Washington, D.C.,  on March 12, 1974,  by the Sub-
committee on Raw Materials of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy (JCAE), the Environmental
Protection Agency and the Atomic Energy Commission (now the Energy Research and Develop-
ment Administration) agreed to conduct a joint comprehensive study of inactive uranium mill
tailings piles  in the Western United States. The study, a two-phase undertaking, would be
conducted by ERDA and EPA and the concerned States. During the  period April-October 1974,
EPA, ERDA, and State representatives conducted a Phase I study of the 21 inactive pile sites to
define the extent of the problem and to recommend possibTe solutions. The Phase I  findings
                                         85

-------
TABLE 5.2
MILL SITES INCLUDED IN PHASE I STUDY

Arizona
Monument
Tuba City
Colorado
Durango
Grand Junction
Gunnison
Maybell
Naturita
New Rifle
Old Rifle
Slick Rock (NC)
Slick Rock (UCC)
Idaho
Lowman
New Mexico
Ambrosia Lak
Shiprock
Oregon
Lakeview
Texas
Falls City
Ray Point
Utah
Green River
Mexican Hat
Salt Lake City
Wyoming
Converse County
Totals
Years

1955 -
1956 -

1943 -
1951 -
1958 -
1957 -
1939 -
1958 -
1924 -
1931 -
1957 -

1955 -

1958 -
1954 -

1958 -

1961 -
1970 -

1958 -
1957 -
1951 -

1962 -

Operated

1967
1966

1963
1970
1962
1964
1963
1972
1958
1943
1961

1960

1963
1968

1960

1973
1973

1961
1965
1968

1965

Tons of Tailings

1,200,000
800,000

1,555,000
1,900,000
540,000
2,600,000
704,000
2,700,000
350,000
37,000
350,000

90,000

2,600,000
1,500,000

130,000

2,500,000
490,000

123,000
2,200,000
1,700,000

187,000
25,256,000
86

-------
formed the basis for the initiation of Phase II  for 21 mill sites plus Riverton, Wyoming (NRC
licensed facility), which would include evaluation of the problems and examination of alternative
solutions, the preparation of cost estimates and detailed plans and specifications for alternative
remedial action measures. Funds from the EPA energy fund were transferred to ERDA, which in
turn entered into a contract with an architect-engineering company to begin Phase II. ERDA, the
lead agency in these program efforts, has received additional funds from Congress to continue
the study. Any remedial action that may result from the study will require legislation and additional
funds.

     Phase II Study at Salt Lake City

     As a result of a previous study in 1974, EPA recommended remedial action on the tailings
piles at the inactive vitro uranium mill site in Salt Lake City, Utah (6). During 1975, the Phase II
engineering study at this site was initiated.  A  final report is being  prepared by the architect-
engineer contractor to ERDA to present costs of alternative remedial actions and will be sent to
the JCAE and the State of Utah for their consideration as to which action should be  taken.

     Gamma Radiation Surveys

     Gamma surveys to determine the extent of tailings spread by wind and water erosion were
conducted by EPA for the Phase II program at 20 inactive mill sites in 1974 and the results of these
surveys have been published. (7).

     Potential Radiological Impact

     As part of a program to determine which measures to use to control radioactivity from tailings
piles at inactive uranium mill sites,  EPA has prepared estimates of the  potential  radiological
impact from the inactive uranium mill tailings piles. The gamma radiation field and the radon-222
release rates from inactive uranium mill tailings  sites were estimated on the basis of the radium-
226 concentration in a "typical" pile. Potential exposures to airborne particulate uranium, thorium-
230, and radium-226 are estimated from field measurements. Although there are uncertainties in
these estimates,  the indicated  conclusions are that the  radon releases,  which  are difficult to
control, are the hazard of greatest significance, that the radioactive particulate releases may
sometimes be significant also, that ground and surface water supplies may become contaminated
and thorough measurements are needed for assessment of individual  piles (8).

     Radon Exhalation

     As a followup to the theoretical analysis  of radon  releases  from inactive  tilings piles, a
program has been initiated to develop a model  to determine radon-222 source t  ms in order to
present a predictive capability for ambient air concentrations in a five-mile radius of tailings piles.
Parameters, such as  radium-226 concentration profiles,  bulk  density, porosity and  moisture
content will be studied. A description and verification of the measurement method for radon
exhalation has been reported by EPA (9).

     Navajo Nation Studies

     Since  1968 the Federal Government has provided technical  assistance and advice to the
Navajo Nation on matters dealing with mill tailings  piles on the Navajo reservation. In January
1975 a project was begun to decontaminate the Shiprock, New Mexico.-inactive uranium mill site
                                          87

-------
and its local environs. EPA has provided technical assistance in this effort to prevent immediate
redistribution of the uranium mill tailings in the environment.

     EPA assisted in a survey in 1975 of residences and structures in the Cane Valley area of
Monument Valley, Arizona, to identify those structures using uranium mill tailings and ore in their
construction and to assess the resulting radiation exposures. A review of the data indicated that
no remedial action need be initiated at this time. More data on this potential problem will be
collected when the Phase II study by ERDA is conducted in 1976.

     Another  EPA monitoring survey was completed at Mexican Hat, Utah, where former mill
structures were being used for a heavy equipment operator's school. A review of present and past
data indicated that the Site should not be used as a living or working area.because of radioactive
contamination. An interim remedial  action program was suggested by EPA until the Phase II
program by ERDA is completed.

TRACK-ETCH BADGE DOSIMETRY STUDIES

     Studies  of natural radioactivity in the environment have created a  requirement for an
economical, convenient,  noise free,  and accurate method  of  determining radon  daughter
exposure levels  in structures. In order to provide such a dosimetric method, EPA funded a
contract to develop the measurement technique  using the Track Etch  principle. As part of a
cooperative project with the State of Colorado, the Track Etch Badge was field tested at selected
locations in Grand Junction, Colorado. Results of the Tract Etch Badges are being compared with
results of the thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) air samplers operated at the same locations
because TLD's currently represent the standard measuring technique.

The  study has been completed and a draft of the final report was submitted to EPA by the
contractor in late 1975. EPA plans to prepare a summary after receipt of the final report from the
contractor.

NON-NUCLEAR ENERGY SOURCES

     Geothermal

     A potential source of  energy for production of electricity, space heating, or industrial steam
supplies is geothermal energy. Such energy, stored in reservoirs of hot water or steam in the
earth's crust, is not expected to be a significant contributor to our overall energy needs. In fact, a
recent EPA contract indicates that less than one percent of U.S. energy demand can be satisfied
by geothermal sources (12). Furthermore, these will be highly localized uses in  areas of
geothermal activity, mostly in the southwest. Radioactivity as a potential environmental pollutant
from geothermal sources is a secondary impact, primary impacts being from  hydrogen sulfide,
ammonia and methane in air, dissolved solids in water, and solid waste.

     The Office of Radiation Programs Las Vegas Facility  (ORP-LVF) of EPA conducted a
sampling and analysis program for  radioactivity in geothermal fluids in 1975. Nearly  140 hot
springs and wells were sampled in the States of Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada,
New Mexico, Oregon and Utah. Analyses were performed for radon, radium, uranium, and thorium
at EPA's Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory (EMSL) in Las Vegas and the Mound
Laboratory (operated by Monsanto  Research Corporation for the U.S.  Energy Research and
Development Administration (ERDA)) in Miamisburg, Ohio.
                                         88

-------
     The purpose of this program is to characterize the radiochemical species in representative
geothermal water sources, in order to determine the radiological impacts of anticipated activities
with these sources. Such anticipated activities include use of geothermal sources for energy
production via an electrical generating plant or by direct use of geothermal fluids or steam for
residential space heating or industrial  heat sources. While such activities with geothermal
reservoirs do not specifically create additional radioactivity, as in a nuclear power plant, natural
radioactivity in the form of members of  the uranium and thorium natural decay series may be
redistributed  to  the biosphere  during utilization of geothermal fluids. In  order to determine
potential radiological  consequences,  the source activities must be known. A review of the
literature  regarding this subject yields  little,  if any, analytical results that would aid such a
charcterization. Therefore, EPA initiated  a program in 1974 to sample and analyze a number of
these sources across a wide geographic area. The sampling and sample analyses have been
completed; however,  statistical correlation of the radioactivity to other factors, such as gross
chemical, geographic or geologic parameters, has not been accomplished. It is hoped that the
results of this program will provide the bases for future radiological impact studies connected with
proposed practical utilizations of the energy available from these geothermal resources.

     Preliminary results of the analyses of samples are reported in EPA Technical Note ORP/LV-
75-8A, "Radioactivity Associated with Geothermal Waters in the Western United States." This
report describes sample locations, sampling techniques, and the results of laboratory analyses.
Data indicate Rn concentrations as high as 14,000 pCi/l and Ra concentration up to 1,500 pCi/l.

     Coal

     The radioactivity of coal used for power generation has received continued attention from
research and regulatory groups. This interest is a result of recent coal-use trends which show an
increasing dependence of electric utilities on low-sulfur western coals, some of which tend to
have higher uranium concentrations than other coals. The radionuclide of concern in the burning
of coal is radium-226. The concentration of radium in coal varies with the ash content and other
factors, generally averaging approximately 1 pCi/g, although specific beds may contain much
higher concentration  (13).  Generally,  coal  contains  higher  uranium  concentration  in  the
bituminous and lignite deposits than in anthracite. A coal-fired power plant can discharge amounts
of such long-lived biologically significant radionuclides comparable in amount to those released
from nuclear plants of similar size (14). In a well-run plant, a small fraction of the total radioactivity
contained in the coal is released into the atmosphere in the form of fly ash. The remaining ash is
handled in a variety of ways, some of which may involve opportunities for public exposures (15).

     The United States Geological Survey has made extensive surveys of the trace composition
of coals, lignites and other carbonaceous materials throughout the midwestern and western parts
of the country. These surveys have found uranium concentrations ranging as high as 0.1 percent
in some  mineralized lignite beds of North and South Dakota (16). For unmineralized deposits,
concentrations were similar to those found in other coal types.

     Using source term, data from such surveys,  the  Energy  Research and  Development
Administration through its Oak Ridge Laboratory is presently performing computer modeling of
potential population dose (at the fence-line) from coal-burning power plants. In this analysis,
discharge and deposition data from the Allen  Steam Plant study (17) are being  used in the
calculations.

     The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recognized the importance of assessing
the radiological impact of the use of uraniferous coals on the environment and public health. As a
                                           89

-------
first step in developing a program in this area, EPA has compiled a bibliography and literature
survey for the assessment of the radiological impact of fossil fuel use. This literature survey is
divided into three subject categories: radioactivity in coal, radioactivity in oil, and radioactivity in
natural gas. Using this survey as a measure of current information on the subject, EPA through its
Las Vegas Laboratory is planning to expand the current project to encompass field surveys and
laboratory testing of various coal types, particularly western coals. The  radiation  exposure
contribution due to the discharge of Rn-222 and Po-210 will receive special attention, through the
use of computer modeling.

     Natural Gas

     Radon-222 permeates porous geological formations and is collected along with methane in
production wells for natural gas. An earlier assessment of potential health effects from radon in
natural gas (18) indicated that much of this radon is separated along with heavy hydrocarbons
during routine processing.  These heavy  hydrocarbons are bottled  under pressure for sale  as
liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). Therefore, further assessment was made of the potential health
effects resulting from radon in LPG which is used in home appliances (19). This study indicated
that the aggregate dose to the  U.S. population would result in less than one health effect (lung
cancer) a year. However, individual  exposures could result in doses to the tracheobronchial
epithelium of more than 200 mrem/y.  Further  evaluation  will be required to  determine the
significance of such potential individual exposures.

MINERAL EXTRACTION INDUSTRY

     Phosphate Mining and Miiling

     Numerous industries mine and process raw  materials which occur in strata containing
significant concentrations of uranium, thorium,  and their daughter products. These include
industries that are well established, currently mining and processing millions of tons of ore per
year, such as the phosphate industry, as well as newly developed industries, such as geothermal
power and oil shale.

     While the naturally occurring radioactive materials are confined to depths of the earth, they
cause little impact on man or  the environment. This is  because the surface  environment is
shielded from the radioactive materials by many feet of dirt and rock. However, the extraction of
large quantities of the ores, their chemical separation, processing into commercial products, and
distribution of the  products  result in situations where the  radioactive components expose
individuals and large populations.

     The phosphate mining and manufacturing industry is representative of the general problem
of redistribution within the environment of radioactive materials originating from beneath the
earth's surface. In central Florida alone, there is approximately 30 million tons of phosphate rock
processed per year (about 80%  of the U.S. phosphate production). Field studies have shown that
significant concentrations of uranium and thorium exist in various phosphate mine products and
wastes.  Table  5.3 presents  the  results  of  analytical  determinations  conducted by the
Environmental Protection Agency's  Eastern Environmental  Radiation Facility for radium-226,
uranium, and thorium concentrations in such products and wastes in Florida.

    As the data show, the marketable rock and slimes contain more radium-226, uranium and
thorium than do the sand tailings. This is because the radioactivity is directly associated with the
                                          90

-------
                          TABLE 5.3
 RADIUM - 226, URANIUM AND THORIUM CONCENTRATIONS IN FLORIDA
           PHOSPHATE MINE PRODUCTS AND WASTES (20)
MATERIAL
MARKETABLE
ROCK
SLIMES
SAND
TAILINGS
RADIUM - 226
(pCi/GRAM)
42
45
7.5
URANIUM (pCi/GRAM)
234
41
42
5.2
235
1.9
2.6
0.38
238
41
44
5.3
THORIUM (pCi/GRAM)
227
2.0
2.3

228
.0.61
1.2

230
42.3
48

232
0.44
1.4

                          TABLE 5.4
       RADIUM - 226, URANIUM AND THORIUM IN WET PROCESS
        PHOSPHORIC ACID PLANT PRODUCTS AND BYPRODUCTS
MATERIAL
GYPSUM
NORMAL SUPER-
PHOSPHATE ,
DIAMMONIUM
PHOSPHATE (DAP)
TRIPLE SUPER-
PHOSPHATE (TSP)
MONOAMMONIUM
PHOSPHATE (MAP)
SODIUM
FLOUROSILICATE
ANIMAL FEED
PHOSPHORIC ACID
RADIUM - 226
(pCi/gm)
33
25
5.6
21
5.0
0.28
5.5
840 pCi/I
URANIUM (pCi/pn)
234
6.2

63
58
55



235
0.32

3.0
2.8
2.9



238
6.0

63
58
55



THORIUM (pCi/gm)
227
0.97

1.6
1.2


<

228
1.4

0.8
0.9




230
13

65
48




232
0.27

0.4
1.3




* PLANTS USING FLORIDA PHOSPHATE ROCK
                         91

-------
phosphate compound  structure, and the marketable  ore  and slimes contain  most of the
phosphate.

     With 1973 production of 5.62 million tons of P205  as phosphoric acid, 20 million tons of
marketable rock went to the production of phospTTorRTacid by the wet process method. This
process results in the discharge of radium in liquid effluents, and significant radium and thorium
concentrations in wet process phosphoric acid plant products and by-products. Data concerning
these products gathered from several facilities using Florida phosphate rock are given in Table
5.4.

     Phosphate manufacture results in the accumulation of massive gypsum piles (30-100 feet in
height), the maintenance of large cooling ponds (about 500 acres), and the sale of fertilizer and
other products all containing radioactive materials. The thermal milling process for the production
of elemental phosphorus results in discharges of radioactive air effluents. However, most Of the
radioactivity originally in the ore is confined in the by-product calcium silicate slag. In addition,
reclamation of mining areas results in creating land areas which contain substantially elevated soil
radium concentration over normal soil. These lands are extensively  used for residential and
agricultural purposes (21).

     The  Environmental Protection Agency  is  actively pursuing programs in each  of these
potential problem areas. As far as radiation  exposure in structures built on reclaimed  land is
concerned, EPA has joined the State of Florida in implementing a radiological survey of represen-
tative homes built on such land. Preliminary findings of this survey,  published by the Agency in
September 1975, suggest that "structures built on reclaimed land have radon daughter levels
significantly greater than structures not built on reclaimed land" (22). Further radiological analysis
will continue with TLD air pumps and track-etch film until a full year's exposure is available for
study. Because of the concerns voiced by the public in the affected areas, EPA has established an
interim guideline for new construction on reclaimed land. After  a review of available data, the
Agency made these recommendations to the State of Florida (23):

        External  Gamma
        Radiation  Level                        Recommendations

     Equal or greater than              Construction should be delayed
        0.01 mR/hr                    pending study or acceptable
                                       control technology  should be
                                       instituted to preclude  indoor
                                       radon daughter problems.

     Less than .01  mR/hr              Construction may be initiated.


     In order to assist further the State and  local government in controlling this problem, the
Office of Radiation  Programs (ORP)  has compiled a listing of recommended radon control
measures to  be  employed  in  new  home   construction  on  phosphate lands.  These
recommendations include such control techniques as polymeric sealants, improved ventilation
and columnar house supports. The selected  control techniques used for each case  depends
primarily upon an external gamma radiation survey of the site.
                                          92

-------
     tn addition to  performing  radiation studies of structures, EPA has  sampled fruits  and
vegetables grown on reclaimed land. As the citrus industry is one of the major land users in this
region, a number of composite citrus samples have been collected for analysis.

     Phosphate mining and milling effluents, both liquid  and gaseous, are of major concern to
EPA, State and local  health officials because of  their potentially high radium-226  content.
Because of the potential for such releases, the Office of Radiation Programs has recommended
for inclusion in the Final Radioactivity Effluent Guidance for Phosphate Chemicals and  Fertilizer
Manufacturing,  the following standards  for radium-226 in liquid  effluent  released to  the
environment: a daily maximum limitation of 9 pCi/liter total radium-226 and a monthly average
limitation of 4 pCi/liter total radium-246 (24). Field and laboratory studies conducted by EPA have
shown that with the "double-liming" treatment over 94 percent of the radium-226 is precipitated
out of the effluent streams. These standards are based on the use of such treatment processes
which are effective, but not unreasonable in cost to the industry. In order to  monitor effluent
seepage into nearby aquifers, EPA in conjunction with  the State of Florida has sampled  and
analyzed numerous wells for radium-226. As for gaseous effluents, ORP-Las Vegas has been
involved in stack sampling at phosphate milling plants in Idaho and EERF-Montgomery has been
collecting data concerning radon emanation rates from gypsum piles.

     Due  to the size  of the phosphate  industry  and the number of employees involved,
occupational radiation exposure is an area which is being given a high priority for study at this time.
Data on occupational radiation exposure levels associated with various job categories have been
obtained.  The goal of  this  occupational program is to  identify those jobs with  high  radiation
exposure levels and determine what control action is necessary.

     EPA has been actively assessing several major phosphate products and by-products for
potential radiation exposure to the public.  By-products are of particular interest to the Agency
because the vast amount produced and the radium-226 concentration inherent in most of them
increase the likelihood of such exposure.  By-product gypsum wallboard, for example,  although
not being manufactured in this country at this time, is also being similarly assessed at both EERF,
Montgomery, and under contract with the Harvard University School of  Public Health.  The
contract  work  at Harvard  encompasses  a wide  range  of construction materials, including
wallboard.

     Uranium recovery from  phosphoric acid is an innovative technique which is just being
commercialized on a wide scale at the present. This process, which utilizes solvent extraction of
the uranium from the phosphoric acid process stream, holds great promise not only.as a source of
uranium, but also as a control measure for reducing the amount of uranium being released into the
environment through fertilizers,  and other phosphate products and wastes. EPA is presently
assessing the radiological impact of this new industry on the environment and public health.

     Although the phpsphate mining and milling industry was first selected for concentrated effort
by the Office of Radiation Programs, other mineral extraction industries also have a potential for
contributing to occupational and public radiation exposure. One such industry is the mining of
humates,  a carbonaceous  material  used  as a soil amendment  which  has  shown  above
background concentrations of uranium. At the request of the Bureau of Land Management, EPA
has assisted in the radiological impact assessment of the commercial sale of this material. EPA
advised that the use of humate material with less than 30 ppm natural uranium in equilibrium with
its daughters as proposed by the industry should not pose a significant adverse environmental
and  public health problem (25). Other ores such as copper, titanium and beryllium, depending
upon mine  location, have  shown uranium concentrations  high enough to be  commercially
                                          93

-------
extractable. At several copper mines in the southwest, in fact, such operations have been initiated
as a result of an increase in the price of uranium. EPA is currently drafting development plans for
these ores and has collected uranium concentration data through an outside contractor.

RADIOACTIVITY IN WATER

    Drinking Water Regulations

    Under the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, the Environmental Protection Agency is charged
with setting limits for contaminants in drinking water. The Office of Radiation Programs has been
involved in developing that portion of the Regulations which pertains to maximum contaminant
levels for radioactivity. These regulations apply to public  water systems having at least 15 service
connections, or regularly serving at least 25 residents, on a year-round basis. Source waters for
public systems may be divided into two broad categories: The first is ground water for which the
most common radioactive constituent is naturally occuring radium-226.  The  second, surface
water, is most often contaminated by artificially produced radionuclides - principally as a result of
the atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons but also due to discharges from commercial nuclear
facilities.

    During the past year, EPA has reviewed data concerning present levels of both natural and
artificial radioactivity in drinking water supplies. In addition, contracts studying the engineering and
economic aspects of radium removal have been completed and monitoring techniques for both
natural and artificial radionuclides have been evaluated.

    Based on these data, proposed interim regulations for radioactivity in drinking water were
published for comment in the Federal'Register-on August 14,1975. Table 5.5 shows the maximum
contaminant levels for radioactivity in Community Water Systems. During the comment period,
following  publication,  a public  hearing was held in Washington (September 10,  1975)  and
numerous written comments from the States, Federal agencies, municipalities, and the general
public were received. A number of changes have been made in the proposed regulations in
response to these comments and the revised regulations are now being reviewed prior to their
promulgation in final form.


                                   TABLE 5.5
      MAXIMUM  CONTAMINANT  LEVELS FOR  RADIOACTIVITY
                    IN  COMMUNITY  WATER  SYSTEMS

A.  Of radium-226,  radium-228, and gross                     Picocuries
    alpha particle radioactivity                                  per liter

    (1) Combined radium-226 and radium-228                        5

    (2) Gross alpha particle activity
         (including Ra-226)                                         15

B.  Of beta  particle and photon radioactivity
    from man-made  radionuclides

    (a) The average annual concentration of beta particle and  photon
        radioactivity from man-made radionuclides in drinking water
                                        94

-------
         shall  not produce  an annual dose equivalent to the total
         body  or any internal organ  greater than  4 millirems.


     EPA believes that these regulations will aid in achieving the national goal of safe drinking
water.
     Radon in Potable Water

     ORP has recently begun evaluating the potential health significance of radon-222 which
diffuses from potable ground water supplies used in family dwellings and commercial buildings.
Present data indicate that one-third to one-half of all U.S. ground water supplies have radon-222
concentrations greater than  500 pCi/1. When  this water is used  in a home, especially with
increased temperature and agitation, much of the radon could diffuse into the air. For a typical
home using water with 500 pCi/1 of radon, the average air concentration could exceed 0.1 pCi/1.
Continuous exposure at this concentration could  result in an individual dose as high as 500 mrem
to the tracheobronchial epithelium from inhalation of radon daughter products. The significance of
such exposures to the U.S. population and relative  control costs are the subject of the ongoing
study. The results of this study should be available during 1976.

     Water Quality Criteria

     The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972  require the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency to publish criteria for water quality. These criteria are far
reaching in that the effects considered must pertain not only to humans but, also, to the total biota.
In addition, the esthetic and recreational aspects of pollutants in water, including ground water,
must be considered. The determination of water quality criteria is, therefore, a complex task which
requires consideration of the interrelationships existing within the total aquatic ecosystem.

     For radioactive substances, several criteria  have  been selected. These are basically for the
protection of human health  but also recognize that criteria stringent enough to protect human
health should adequately protect the balance of the aquatic cycle.

     Criteria for drinking  water are  the same as the  Maximum Contaminant Levels proposed
under Regulations called  for by the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974.                   Criteria
to be considered in allowing the use of waters containing radioactivity for other purposes, such as
the support of aquatic life, irrigation, and the watering of livestock, were guided by the principal
that both individual and population doses should be considered. The Environmental Protection
Agency recognizes that the wide range of the bioaccumulation factors for organisms in the food
web precludes specification  of generally applicable  levels  for radioactivity in water and has,
instead, proposed criteria based on dose for elements in the food chain ingested by man.

     Water Permit Program

     No application of the Permit Program to discharges of man-made radioactivity has been
made following the Administrator's decision not to designate as pollutants  materials already
regulated under the Atomic Energy Act. This decision has been contested by the Colorado Public
Interest Research Group, Inc. and is now being considered by the U.S. Supreme Court following
oral arguments held in December 1975. Discharges consisting of naturally occuring or accelerator
produced  radioisotopes are  regulated under the Permit Program. For these materials both the
                                           95

-------
 Environmental Protection Agency and the several States have issued discharge permits for liquid
 wastes.

     U.S.-Canada Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement

     The importance of the Great Lakes to both the United States and Canada has been
 recognized formally since signing of the Treaty of 1909 between the two countries. The original
 Treaty was reinforced,  in 1972, by a subsequent Agreement, between the United States and
 Canada, to "restore and enhance water quality" in the Lakes. One of the general water quality
 objectives was thajt "radioactivity should be kept at the lowest practical levels and in any event
 should be controlled to the extent necessary to prevent harmful effects on health." One provision
 of the Agreement also required development of a more specific radioactivity objective.

     As a consequence of the Agreement, an  Advisory Committee, with members from both
 nations, was formed to consider a refined radioactivity objective for the Great Lakes. Co-chairmen
 were Dr. W. Mills from the Office of Radiation Programs  of the United States Environmental
 Protection Agency and Dr. A.  Booth from the  Canadian  Department of National  Health and
 Welfare. A major portion of the staff work required by the Advisory Committee was carried out by
 the Criteria and Standards Division in the  Office of Radiation Programs. In September 1975, a
 revised radioactivity objective  was agreed upon by the  Advisory Committee, consisting of
 members representing Nation,  Provincial, and State governments,  and forwarded to their
 respective Governments for further consideration.

     This refined objective recommends that the level of radioactivity in Great Lakes water shall
 be such as to result in a dose equivalent to reference man  of less than one millirem based on a
 standard annual intake. In addition, any  release of  radioactive materials shall be as low as
 reasonably achievable and is to be controlled by specified Action  Levels. These Action Levels
 basically define the lake water radioactivity levels  at which a  particular source shall  be
 investigated to insure that discharges are as low as reasonably achievable and a level at which
 corrective action shall be taken by the responsible national regulatory body.

     The refined radioactivity objective, when ratified by both governments, will materially assist in
 preserving one of the major natural resources of both countries.

 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, contain higher concentrations of uranium, thorium and their decay products (1). A notable
 example of increased radiation levels resulting from construction materials is buildings built on or
 adjacent to uranium mill tailings in Grand Junction, Colorado. Over 5000 buildings surveyed in the
 western United States have tailings incorporated in either the fill, grading, or concrete. Because
 the radon daughter activity levels in many of  these buildings exceeded the Surgeon General's
 guide for such levels, a remedial program is presently underway to reduce the  radon daughter
 levels in these structures. In Florida, Idaho and a few other states a similar situation exists with the
 use of phosphate slag material in concrete  blocks and pavement. As part of the ongoing program
 in Florida, a determination is being made as to the extent of the problem and whether restriction
will be necessary on the use of phosphate related materials for construction purposes.

     In manufacturing 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,
                                          96

-------
each phosphoric acid plant has a large store of gypsum typically between 50 to 300 acres about
50 to 100 feet high. Outside of the United States, where normal gypsum supplies are less
abundant, a number of countries such as Germany and Japan, utilize by-product gypsum in
wallboard construction. Preliminary data indicates that the by-product gypsum contains 20 to 43
pCi/gram of radium-226. In order to assess the potential radiation exposure to individuals living in
structures constructed of such wallboard, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will make
dose measurements utilizing a test structure constructed with by-product wallboard which at this
time is being shipped from Japan.  In  conjunction with  these  lab  analyses, the  Eastern
Environmental Radiation Facility in Montgomery, Alabama, is developing a model for calculating
internal doses due to radon emanation from by-product wallboard.

     On June 27,1975, EPA awarded the Harvard University School of Public Health, a contract
to study radiation exposure due to building materials. It is expected that the final report will include
a  definitive report on the demographic variation for effective exposures of the population to
natural radioactivity in building materials. Also  included will be an estimate of  factors which
influence exposure and a methodology to describe population exposures due to the uranium,
thorium,  decay chain and potassium-40 which will include internal exposure due to radon and its
daughters (26). The final report for this contract is being drafted.
                                            97

-------
                                   REFERENCES


1.    Gesell, T. and H. Prichard, "The Technologically Enhanced Natural Radiation Environment,"
     Health Physics, April 1975.

2.    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Radiation Protection for Nuclear
     Power Operations,  Proposed Standards 40 CFR 190. Supplementary Information. Office of
     Radiation Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460 (January
     1976).

3.    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Analysis of the Uranium Fuel Cycle,
     Part I—Fuel Supply, EPA-520/9-73-003B, Washington, D.C. 1973.

4.    Kaufmann, R.F., G.G. Eadie, and C.R. Russell. Summary of Ground Water Quality Impacts of
     Uranium Mining and Milling in the Grants Mineral Belt, New Mexico, ORP/LV-75-4. U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation  Programs, Las Vegas Facility, P.O.
     Box 15027, Las Vegas, Nevada 89114 (August 1975).

5.    Summary Report. Phase I Study of Inactive Uranium Mifl Sites and Tailings Piles (October
     1974).

6.    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Surveys of Uranium Mill Tailings Pile
     and Surrounding Areas, Salt  Lake City,  Utah, EPA-520/6-74-006. Office of  Radiation
     Programs, Las Vegas Facility, Nevada (August 1974).

7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Gamma Radiation Surveys at Inactive Uranium Mill
     Sites, ORP/LV-75-5. Office of Radiation Programs, Las Vegas Facility, Las Vegas, Nevada
     89114 (August 1975).

8.    Swift, J.J., J.M. Hardin, and  H.W. Galley. Potential Radiological Impact of Airborne Releases
     and Direct Gamma  Radiation to Individuals Living Near Inactive Uranium Mill Tailings Piles.
     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  Office of Radiation Programs, Environmental
     Analysis Division, Washington, D.C. 20460 (January 1976).

9.    Bernhart, D.E., F.B.  Johns, and R.F. Kaufmann. Radon Exhalation fromtlranium Mill Tailings
     Piles, Description and Verification of the  Measurement  Method, ORP/LV-75-7(A). U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation  Programs, Las Vegas Facility, P.O.
     Box 15027, Las Vegas, Nevada 89114 (November 1975).
                                         98

-------
10.  Hans, J.M.,Jr., and R.L Douglas. Radiation Survey of Dwellings in Cane Valley, Arizona and
    Utah, for Use of Uranium Mill Tailings, ORP/LV-75-2. U.S. Environmental  Protection
    Agency,  Office of Radiation Programs, Las Vegas Facility, P.O.  Box 15027, Las Vegas,
    Nevada 89114 (August 1975).

11.  Summary Report - Grand Junction Track Etch Demonstration Program. D.B. Lovett, General
    Electric Nuclear Energy Division, (December 1975).

12.  "Control of Environmental Impacts From Advanced Energy Sources," EPA-600/2-74-002,
    Environmental Protection Agency, March 1974.

13.  Gipsh, A.A. and G.G. Kapaturin, 1970, Izv. vyssh. ucheb. Zaved. 10,195.

    Jaworowski, A., J. Bilkiewica, L. Kownacka and S. Wlodek, 1972, Artificial Sources of Natural
    Radionuclides in the Environment, Natural Radiation Environment II, Proceedings of the
    Second International
        Symposium on Natural Radiation Environment, Houston, TX, August 1972.

14.  Eisenbud, M. and H.G. Retrow, 1964, Science, New York, 144,288.

15.  Martin, J.E., 1974, Comparative population radiation dose commitments of nuclear and fossil
    fuel elctric power cycles, in Proceedings 8th Midyear Topical Symposium of the  Health
    Physics Society, CONF-741018, pp 317-326, NTIS, U.S. Department of Interior Open-File
    Report.

16.  Swanson, V.E., C. Huffman, Jr., and J.C. Hamilton,  Composition and trace-element content
    of  coal,  Northern Great Plains Area, Northern  Great Plains Resource Program, Mineral
    Resources Work Group Report, February  1974,  U.S. Department of Interior Open-File
    Report.

17.  Trace element measurements at the coal-fired Allen steam plant, Progress Report: June
    1971-January 1973, February 1973-July 1973, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission,  Oak Ridge
    National Laboratory, ORNL-NSF-EP-43,62.

18. Johnson, R.H., Jr., D.E. Bernhardt, N.S. Nelson, and H.W. Galley, Jr. Assessment of potential
    radiological health effects from radon in natural gas, EPA-520/1-73-004. (November 1973).
                                         99

-------
19.  Gesell, T.F., R.H. Johnson, Jr., and D.E. Bernhardt. Assessment of potential radiological
     health effects from radon in liquefied petroleum gas, EPA-520/1-75-002. Office of Radiation
     Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. (In press)

20.  Guimond, R.J.  and ST. Windham, Radioactivity Distribution in Phosphate Products, By-
     products, Effluents, and Wastes, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation
     Programs, ORP/CSD-75-3, August 1975.

21.  Problem Resolution Plan, Population Exposure from Concentrations of Radioactive Material
     in  Non-Nuclear Industry  Processes,  Effluents Residuals and Products, Category  I:
     Phosphate Mining, Milling and Fertilizer Manufacturing.

22.  Preliminary  Findings Radon Daughter  Levels in Structures Constructed on Reclaimed
     Florida Phosphate  Land,  U.S. Environmental  Protection  Agency, Office of Radiation
     Programs, ORP/CSD-75-4, September 1975.

23.  Interim Recommendations for Gamma Exposure Levels at New Structures Sites on Florida
     Phosphate  Lands  (Draft), U.S. Environmental  Protection  Agency, Office of Radiation
     Programs.

24.  Radioactivity Considerations for Effluent Guidelines for the  Phosphate Mining Industry,
     Memo from William A.  Mills,  Director, Criteria and Standards Division,  Office of Radiation
     Programs, to Allen  Cywin,  Director,  Effluent Guidelines  Division,  U.S.  Environmental
     Protection Agency, December 8,1975.

25.  Letter to R. Keith Miller, District Manager, U.S. Department of Interior, from William A. Mills,
     Director, Criteria and Standards Division, Office of Radiation  Programs,  U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency, December 16,1975.

26.  Study of  Radiation Exposures Due  to Building Materials, EPA/68-01-3292,  Contract
     schedule, Article II (Statement of Work), June 27,1975.
                                         100

-------
OTHER NUCLEAR ENERGY ACTIVITIES - CHAPTER 6
INTRODUCTION

    While many of the Federal Government's radiation protection activities focus on the nuclear
fuel cycle per se, there are also many Federal radiation protection efforts associated with non-fuel
cycle activities. Monitoring and surveillance of a wide range of nuclear radiation sources account
for a major  portion of these Federal program activities. Included also are quality assurance
programs aimed at improving the accuracy in radiation measurements by Federal and State
agencies and by industry.

    Emergency response  planning for radiological  incidents is a problem  that  involves
cooperative efforts of Federal and State agencies. Because of public concern over the potential
consequences and environmental impact, increased efforts in this area were initiated in 1975.

    A wide  variety of non-conventional nuclear projects have come under Federal supervision
and control.  Significant 1975 activities in this area centered around plutonium powered cardiac
pacemakers, spark cap irradiators containing cobalt-60, fusion reactor experiments, and uranium
enrichment.

    This chapter discusses the 1975 radiation protection events concerned with non-nuclear fuel
cycle activities.
                                         101

-------
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

     Dose Assessment Program

     EPA's Office  of Radiation Programs (ORP) has initiated a  National dose  assessment
program (1) to determine the status of environmental radiation data, to analyze these data in
terms of individual and population doses, and to provide guidance for improving radiation data. In
addition, this program will provide information to guide the direction of ORP by the analysis of
radiation trends, identification  of radiation problems,  and support for establishing  radiation
protection guidance. The general approach in this program is to make maximum use of available
data reported by  others and  updated by EPA. Additional data are  acquired  from  EPA's
Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System (ERAMS), source related field studies, and
dose computational  models. The gathering  of  such  a total  data  base for radiation  dose
assessment in the United States in unique to EPA.

     Environmental Radiation  Ambient Monitoring System (ERAMS)

     ERAMS  is a  program  for continuing surveillance of  radioactivity  levels throughout the
continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, and U.S. territories. Through this system, over 7,000
individual analyses are performed annually on samples of air, airborne particulates, deposition,
surface and drinking water, milk, and human bones. These samples are collected by State and
local health agencies and analyzed at ORP's Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility (EERF) at
Montgomery,  Alabama. The present ERAMS  emphasis is  towards identifying  trends in the
accumulation  of long-lived radionuclides in the environment. Therefore, specific analyses are
made for uranium-234, uranium-238, plutonium-238, plutonium-239, carbon-14, tritium, strontium-
90, and krypton-85. Measurements are  also made for gross alpha and beta  activity, and the
gamma emitters, iodine-131,  cesium-137, barium-140, and potassium-40.

     Data from ERAMS were previously published in Radiation Data and Reports, however, the
Office of Radiation Programs terminated this publication with the December 1974  issue. Since
then a quarterly summary of raw data from the National Environmental Radiation  Ambient
Monitoring System  network (which includes a limited amount of surveillance data from States) is
reported in Environmental  Radiation  Data*  These compendiums consist  mainly of  data
tabulations without interpretation or discussion. These tabulations will be summarized annually
and reported in ORP's report on  the Radiological Quality of the Environment. An in-depth analysis
of ERAMS is being carried out to determine annual averages, to identify trends, to  characterize
the statistical  distributions of data sets, to estimate individual and population doses, and to
evaluate error terms for each of these determinations.

     Beginning with data from samples collected in July 1975, all ERAMS data will be reported
according to a new protocol. The most significant change is that specific radionuclide  analyses
will be reported as the counting results indicate, whether the number is negative, zero, or positive.
Ambient concentrations of nuclides are frequently at or near zero. When the actual concentration
of a nuclide is zero, the counting results should statistically show a distribution of negative and
positive numbers near zero. Previously ERAMS data were not reported numerically when the
results were less than a specified reporting level. The new reporting protocol allows all data to be
evaluated statistically without an arbitrary cutoff of small or negative numbers. This  will facilitate
estimates of bias in the nuclide analysis and will  allow better evaluations of distributions and
trends in environmental data.
                                         102

-------
•Environmental Radiation Data is available from: Environmental  Protection Agency,  Eastern
Environmental Radiation  Facility, P.O. Box 3009,  Montgomery, Alabama 36109. Each quarterly
summary must be requested separately as a mailing list is not being prepared.

    Radiological Quality of the Environment

    ORP has initiated a project for evaluating annually the radiological quality of the environment
as a part of the dose assessment program. The first prototype report f6r this project is intended to
summarize individual and  population dose data for two source categories of radiation, ionizing and
nonionizing.  The primary  effort for the first report was to identify source categories of ionizing
radiation. Sources in  the ionizing category have been grouped  under ambient environment,
technologically enhanced natural radiation, fallout, uranium fuel cycle, Federal facilities, medical,
occupational, and other  miscellaneous sources.  The nonionizing radiation  category is mainly
concerned with environmental sources.

     Literature searches have been conducted for each of those sources and the data organized
to provide the following  information: 1) general information about each source category and
availability of data, 2) data base description, 3) status of data base analyses, 4) summary of dose
data for each source, 5) comparison of reported  dose data with estimates from previous
publications, 6) discussion and conclusions.

     The first annual Radiological Quality of the  Environment report will be available from the
Office of Radiation Programs about June 1976 (2).

     However, Table 6.1  summarizes the individual and population doses in  the U.S. from each
category of radiation source discussed in the report. The information is divided according to the
primary mode of exposure: external—which results in a radiation dose to the whole body,  or
internal—when radioactive materials are inhaled, ingested or occasionally absorbed through the
skin and often result in a radiation dose to particular organs of the body.

     It should be noted that although population doses from the different source categories, in
general, can be added together to gain a perspective of overall impact, it does not  necessarily
follow that individual doses can be added together because an individual in one population group
generally does not receive the radiation dose common to another population group.'  For this
reason, the data in this table show total population doses in the various source categories.

     The dose of approximately  10 million person-rem per year from ambient ionizing radiation
greatly exceeds each of the other categories of radiation sources. The second largest category of
population dose is from the use of  radiopharmaceuticals for  medical radiation purposes,
estimated at 3 million person-rem per year; the next largest dose category is from technologically
enhanced natural radiation, contributing approximately 3 million person-rem per year and also
contributing  to the largest individual dose.

     Improvement in Surveillance Programs

     Part of ORP's dose assessment program  is oriented towards improving the quality  of
surveillance  data. A facility data analysis project was developed for this purpose. This project will
evaluate the rationale  for surveillance programs, as well as details in program planning and
design, sampling methodology, radioassay techniques, quality assurance,  and data handling,
reporting, and interpretation. Early phases of the project have dealt with criteria for summarizing
and using ambient data, development of data analysis techniques, dose conversion'criteria, and


                                          103

-------
TABLE 6.1 RADIOLOGICAL QUALITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Summary of Dose Data from All Sources

SOURCE



Ambient Ionizing Radiation
Cosmic radiation
Ionizing component
Neutron component
Worldwide radioactivity
Tritium
Carbon-14
Krypton-85
Terrestrial radiation
Potassium-40
Tritium
Carbon-14
Rubidium-87
Polonium-210
Radon-222
Technologically Enhanced Natural
Radiation
Ore mining and milling
Uranium mill tailings
Phosphate minining and processing
Thorium mining and milling
Radon in potable water supplies
Radon in natural gas
Radon in liquified petroleum gas
Radon in mines
Radon daughter exposure in
natural caves
Radon and geothermal energy production
Radioactivity in construction material
EXTERNAL INTERNAL

Individual
dose
(nrem/y)
_
40.9-45
28-35.3
0.33-6.8

-
_
4xlO~4
30-95
17
-
-
-
a!3
b25

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

-
-
—

Population
dose
(person-rem/y)
9.7xlOJ?
9.7x10^
9.2x10;?
4.9x10

-
_
80
-
_
-
-
-
_
-

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

-
-
—

Individual
dose
(mrem/y)
—
-
_
-

0.04
1.0

18-25
16-19
4x10 3
1.0
0.6
2-3
3.0

-
-
C140-14000
-
-
a
54
0.9-4.0
-

-
-
—

Population
dose
(person-rem/y)
_
—
-
-

9.2*103
_
-
-
_
-
-
-
_
-
6
2.73x10
-
d2. 5-70000
-
-
6
2.73x10
30000
-

_
-
—

-------
o
en
TABLE 6.1 RADIOLOGICAL QUALITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Summary of Dose Data from All Sources (Continued)
SOURCE



Fallout
Uranium Fuel Cycle
Mining and milling
Fuel enrichment
Fuel fabrication
Power reactors BWR
PWR
Research reactors
Transportation -
Nuclear power industry
Radioisotopes
Reprocessing and spent fuel storage
Radioactive waste disposal
Federal Facilities
ERDA

Department of Defense
Accelerators
Radiopharmaceuticals-production and
Disposal
EXTERNAL

Individual
dose
(mrem/y)
f 2

~
h0.17

m54 max
m 1 max
-

-
-
PS. 8
~

m!3-320

0.01
m0.04-4
0.2


Population
dose
(person-rem/y)
-
2 01 A
_
14

"1552
n 155
-

0 100
0 170
P 23
~
1.96
n8xlO-7
-1.96
—
0.42-65
q0.083

INTERNAL

Individual
dose
(mrem/y)
-

84.5xlO~2
14. 3-8.0
k2xlO~3

-
-

-
-
-
—

-

-
-
_


Population
dose
(person-rem/y)
-

2.5
Jl4
k 3

-
-

_
-
-
—

_

-
-
.


-------
                                 TABLE  6.1 RADIOLOGICAL QUALITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT

                                             Summary of Dose Data from All Sources  (Continued)
           SOURCE
                                                        EXTERNAL
                                                                                               INTERNAL
                                           Individual
                                              dose
                                             (mrem/y)
                      Population
                         dose
                    (person—rem/y)
             Individual
                dose
              (mrem/y)
  Population
     dose
(person-rem/y)
Medical Radiation
   X radiation
   Radiopharmaceutlcals
r20
                                                             S3.3xl06
Occupational and Industrial Radiation
   BUR
   PWR
   All occupations
C1230
C1080
U0.80
Consumer Products
   TV
   Timepieces
V0.025-0.043
6100

6100
Nonionizing Electromagnetic Radiation
   Broadcast towers and airport radars
   All sources
                                                   Individual Exposure
                                                         (uW/cm2)
              10
             0.1-1

-------
                     TABLE 6.1 RADIOLOGICAL QUALITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT
KEY

a Uranium-238 series
b Thorium-232 series
c Lung dose
d Lung- r em/ y
e Trachea-bronchial dose
f 50 year dose commitment divided by 50
g Average individual lung dose within 80 km
h Maximum potential exposure
i Maximum potential exposure to lung
j Cumulative exposure within 40 mile radius
k Average individual lung dose within 80 km
m Fence line boundary dose
n Within a radius of 80 km
o Estimated for the year 1973
p For NFS
q Based upon data from 5 institutions
r Millirads/y
s Estimated 1980 dose
t Average occupational exposure/y
u Average exposure for all occupations & 3.7 radiation workers/1000 persons in United States
v 5 cm from TV set; units of mR/h
- - No dose data available

-------
the development of a manual on sampling methodology. Information from these initial phases will
be used to evaluate surveillance programs at several commercial and Federal nuclear facilities.
These reviews will aid in developing criteria for the evaluation of surveillance programs and later
will lead to an updating of EPA's Environmental Radiation Surveillance Gu/de(3).

     Dose Modeling

     ORP has an ongoing program to develop exposure pathway models for estimating individual
and population doses from facility effluents. The  emphasis is on long-term population dose
commitment and health risks. One of the primary exposure pathways for nuclear power plants is
from gaseous effluents. ORP has developed a model called AIREM (4) to evaluate the air pathway
by  estimating doses from inhalation and external radiation. Other dose models have been
developed for radionuclide releases to  rivers and  for the airborne dispersion, deposition, and
resuspension of plutonium particles. A  model has  also been developed for ground level area
sources of radon and particulates from  tailings  piles in the  uranium  and phosphate industries.
Reports on each of these models are in preparation and should be available during 1976.

QUALITY ASSURANCE

     Since EPA's emphasis in its dose assessment program is on maximizing the use of radiation
surveillance data reported by others, there is much concern for validation of  such data. To aid
laboratories in maintaining the accuracy and precision of their analyses, EPA operates a Radiation
Quality Assurance Program through the Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory in Las
Vegas. The two major activities of this  program are the distribution of radionuclide reference
standards (5) and environmental media containing known amounts of one or more radionuclides
(6). This program is available to all Federal, State, local, and private laboratories. During 1975, the
Nuclear Regulatory  Commission (NRC) expressed an interest in having their  licensees and
contractor  laboratories  participate  in  EPA's  Quality Assurance Program.  An  Interagency
Agreement between EPA and NRC is now being written to formalize this participation.

     An increasing number of elements discharged into the environment are being scrutinized for
possible environmental effects. These include heavy elements as well as certain radionuclides.
Since a large  number of the samples to be analyzed consist of plant or animal tissue, an effort is
underway by the EPA's Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory (EMSL) in Las Vegas
to prepare standard reference materials which contain in vivo pollutants. This material resembles
the samples to be analyzed more closely than does material to which the pollutants are physically
added. Mercury, lead, arsenic, and cadmium have been chosen as candidates for incorporation
into plant materials.

     New reference materials are being made  available.  In final  preparation are the uranium-
2357-238 series, thorium ore, uranium mill tailings, and radium-bearing soil. These are needed for
calibration, standardization,  yield determination,  and quality control acitvities in radiation
monitoring  laboratories.  These reference materials  will aid in  EPA's operational monitoring
programs in acquiring accurate and legally defensible ambient and source environmental quality
data.  The  reference materials are  presently undergoing final  checks  for homogeneity and
accuracy of analyses and will be available  in early 1976 upon request to all Federal, State,
Regional, and private laboratories engaged in monitoring and enforcement activities.

     Mancos shale obtained from Grand  Junction, Colorado, has been processed and blended to
ensure homogeneity. This soil is presently being characterized for radium and other probable
radionuclides  by the National Bureau of Standards and should also be available in early 1976.
                                         108

-------
    The methodology required for preparing representative samples containing known amounts
of Plutonium and americium has been developed. Samples will be prepared according to this
methodology and distributed to other laboratories for use as a yardstick by which the accuracy of
their radiochemical analyses can be evaluated.

    To assist laboratories  involved in environmental radiation measurements to develop and
maintain a control program, extensive laboratory intercomparison studies involving environmental
media (milk, water, air, food, soil, and gases) and a variety of radionuclides with activities at or near
environmental levels are being  made. The types of cross-check analyses and the number of
participating laboratories are shown in Table 6.2.

              TABLE 6.2   NO.  OF PARTICIPATING LABORATORIES
                       IN CROSS CHECK ANALYSIS -  1975


Type of Cross-check                    October     November   December
Gamma  in water                              65           —          67

Tritium  in water                               67           	          72

Milk                                          _           61          —

Gross  alpha and gross  beta  in water          —           58          —

Radium-226 in water                          —           27               —

Air Filter                                      _           _          52

Diet                                          —           —          23

Tritium  in urine                                —           —          14
     The laboratories participating in the programs include 2 international, 13 Federal, 43 State,
13 university, and 46 nuclear facilities and contractor laboratories.

     To meet the needs of environmental monitoring laboratories, new studies are periodically
introduced into the program. Currently, in response to requests from participants, an air sample
containing krypton-85 is being prepared for use both as a reference sample, and for use in the
cross-check program.  Although krypton-85, a noble gas, has a much  lower radiotoxicity than
many other radioisotopes, the multi-curie  amounts being released to the environment make it a
pollutant of concern to the EPA. Preparation of the krypton-85 samples, which will be available for
distribution early in 1976, required the design, construction, and testing of a complex gas system.
This system mixes known amounts of krypton-85  and air and transfers accurately measured
aliquots of the gas mixture into small refillable metal cylinders. The system also separates krypton
from air for analysis by either liquid scintillation counting of krypton-85, or for the measurement of
stable krypton and krypton-85 by a gas chromatograph-radiation detection system.

     EPA prepares and distributes calibrated low-level radioactive solutions to Federal, State, and
private  laboratories involved  in  environmental radiation monitoring and  surveillance.  These
solutions are utilized  for  both the calibration of counting instruments  and chemical yield


                                         109

-------
determinations.  Since the laboratories  using these samples must have confidence in their
accuracy, EPA has instituted intercomparison studies with the National  Bureau of Standards
(NBS)  and with  the  Energy Research and  Development Administration's  Health  Services
Laboratory.

    The results of the studies conducted with the NBS during 1974 and 1975 are described in
detail in the Environmental Monitoring Series publication entitled, "Radiation Quality Assurance
Intercomparison Studies" (EPA-600/4-75-014, October 1975).

    Environmental measurements are made daily by many different Federal, State, local, and
private agencies. The data from these measurements are used for a wide variety of purposes
including assessment of health effects, the establishment of standards and guides, and for
enforcement activities. It is therefore imperative that the precision and accuracy of the data be
assured in order that  policy decisions concerning environmental quality be based on valid and
comparable data.

    As an integral part of its overall quality assurance effort, the EMSL prepares and distributes a
variety of calibrated low-level radioactive samples for use in the laboratories of Federal, State,
local and private agencies. The major objective of this program is to encourage the development
of intralaboratory and  interlaboratory  quality  control  procedures  and  thus  ensure  that
environmental  radiation data  are valid.  Providing  accurately  calibrated  samples assists
laboratories in calibrating new  instruments, implementing and maintaining routine instrument
calibration programs,  evaluating analytical  procedures,  and developing and  revising data
processing programs.

EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANNING ACTIVITIES

    The responsibilities  of certain Federal agencies  with  regard  to  radiological  incident
emergency response planning  for fixed facilities and transportation,  including provisions for
planning assistance to State and local goverments, were defined  in a Federal Register Notice
initially issued in 1973  and revised in December 1975 by the Federal Preparedness Agency in the
General Services Administration.(7)

    As the "lead agency" in the  Federal interagency program spearheading this effort, the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission during 1975 actively assisted State and  local governments in
developing and improving such emergency response plans. Other Federal agencies engaged in
this program are the Environmental Protection Agency,-the Defense Civil Preparedness Agency,
the Energy  Research  and Development Administration, the Federal  Disaster Assistance
Administration, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare. Responsibilities are assigned by the Federal Preparedness Agency of the General
Services Administration.

    During the year,  NRC formally reviewed 25 State radiological emergency response plans,
following up in each case with specific guidance for improvement. A "Field Training Cadre,"  made
up of representatives from  NRC and other Federal agencies, visited 17 States to provide  direct
assistance. Similar "cadres" evaluated actual field tests of emergency plans in six States.

    In the area of training, the  "Federal  Interagency  Course in Radiological Emergency
Response Planning" was established by NRC and other Federal agencies at the Defense Civil
Preparedness Agency Staff College in Battle Creek7 Michigan. Approximately 125 State and local
                                         110

-------
government emergency planning personnel have attended the course through fiscal year 1976
and beyond.

     NRC and other Federal  agencies are developing  a  second  course in "Radiological
Emergency Response Operations" to be offered to State and local government personnel during


     EPA responsibilities include the establishment of Protective Action Guides (PAG) and the
recommendation  of appropriate  protective actions to ameliorate the consequences of  a
radiological  incident. A protective action is an action or measure taken to avoid or reduce the
exposure to radiation from  inadvertent release of radioactive  materials. The term Protective
Action Guide is defined as the projected absorbed dose to individuals in the general population
that warrants  protective  action following a contaminating  event(8,9). The projected absorbed
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 incident with subsequent releases of radioactive 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  contaminated property or
equipment. These pathways are being investigated to determine appropriate PAG's(8,9,10).

     The protective measures considered  appropriate for  achieving  the  objectives of the
Protective Action Guides include evacuation, sheltering, prophylaxis, respiratory protection, and
controlled  access. Evacuation  is effective for protection  against  any radiation exposure.
Sheltering 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 for some
individuals.  Finally, controlled access to  affected areas  is  effective in preventing additional
members of the public from being significantly exposed.

     EPA has developed recommended Protective Action  Guides for emergency response for
whole body external exposure to airborne radioactive materials (Table 6.3). These guidelines
represent numberical 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 iodine, the thyroid dose due to inhaling radioiodine 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 also listed in Table 6.3.

     Within  the framework of  these  guides, it is assumed that: (a) the PAG's apply to acute
exposure from a gaseous cloud released to the atmosphere  from a light water nuclear reactor
accident, and (b) the PAG's apply only to the taking of initial protective actions within the first 2 to 4
days after an  accident;  decisions as to later protective actions or  cessation of actions under
specific situations are left to the responsible officials.
                                          111

-------
                                   TABLE  6.3
               PROTECTIVE ACTION GUIDES FOR  WHOLE  BODY
    AND  THYROID EXPOSURE TO AIRBORNE  RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS
   Population at Risk          Projected Whole Body             Projected Thyroid
                               Gamma Dose (rem)                Dose (rem)
Nonessential personnel              1  to 5(a)                         5-2b


Emergency  workers                   25                            125


Lifesaving activities                   75                            (b)
    (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.

    (b)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.
                                      112

-------
    EPA Manual of Protective Action Guides and Protective Actions For Nuclear Incidents
    (11)

    This Manual has been prepared  to provide practical 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 provides 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.
Recommendations on the application  of  Protective Action Guides and protective actions are
being developed separately for various categories, such as (a) exposure to airborne radioactive
materials, (b) exposure from foodstuffs or water, (c) exposure from material deposited on property
or equipment, and (d) transportation incidents.

    The manual has been issued to help State and local officials develop adequate emergency
response plans and to ensure that prompt responses will be made—even though the  probability
of an incident requiring such actions is extremely low.

    The EPA manual calls for responsible State and local agencies to secure agreements with
nuclear power  facility operators to promptly notify them if an accident occurs which  could
potentially expose the population to radiation levels above those specified by EPA. These action
levels  are above those normally experienced, but below those  which would rapidly cause
detrimental effects in individuals.

     Following notification by the nuclear facility operator, the first protective actions, such as
possible evacuation and/or instructions to  the public to take cover in the nearest buildings and
stay indoors, would be implemented by State and local officials. At the same time, survey teams
would be dispatched by State or local officials to make radiation measurements that could be
used to evaluate the need for changing the  size or location of the area needing protective action.
Emergency  teams would  also be dispatched to implement protective actions and  to restrict
access to the affected area.

     After the potential exposure to elevated levels of airborne radioactivity  has ended and the
need for protective actions relative to this exposure have ended, continued controls on the use of
food and water might be necessary, and some surfaces, such as streets, buildings, and  cars might
require decontamination.

     During  1975, EPA continued to study the relative benefits of shelter  and evacuation as
protective actions, and the cost-risk-benefit of protective actions for exposure, from  deposited
radioactive material. Two appendices to the manual were drafted and started through  the review
process. One of them provides guidance for offsite emergency radiation measurement systems,
and the other provides the technical basis  for dose projection techniques that were used in the
manual.

     In a related activity the Interagency Task Force on Offsite Emergency  Instrumentation for
Nuclear Incidents at  Fixed Facilities produced a draft report on measurement systems for an
airborne plume.

     EPA also participated in  the Interagency Task Force on Training and Exercises and, as a
result,  assisted in developing training programs for  State and local response planning  and
participated  in conducting these training programs. As a part of this function, EPA has taken the
lead in developing a training course for State Radiological Emergency Response coordinators.
                                          113

-------
 SPACE APPLICATIONS

     Launch of SNAP Systems

     Launches of two identical spacecraft, Viking A and Viking B, were made during 1975. Each of
 these spacecraft contained 20,000 curies of  plutonium in  a Space Nuclear Auxiliary Power
 System (SNAP). The first launch was August 21 and the second September 9. These space
 vehicles are to make soft landings on the surface of Mars in midsummer 1976.

     In order to assess any release of radioactive material, a monitoring program is conducted by
 five mobile teams with instrumentation in the immediate launch area. The program is directed from
 the launch control center by a  senior Environmental Protection Agency officer.  EPA's Eastern
 Environmental Radiation  Facility routinely provides support to the National Aeronautics and
 Space Administration and the  Department of Defense  during the  launch of vehicles carrying
 SNAP units. In the event of a near-pad abort, with a land or water impact, EPA will support, with
 information  and consultation,  the control and  management  of  radiological  threats to the
 environment. EPA also serves as a liaison between the launch agency and State and local health
 agencies.

     Environmental Impact Statements for Space Vehicles

     During 1975, the Air Force prepared a draft and a final environmental statement on the
 Lincoln Experimental Satellites 8 and 9 (LES 8 and LES 9). To be launched into terrestrial orbits,
 these twin satellites will be powered by thermoelectric generators containing a total of over
 300,000 curies of plutonium, a larger quantity than the total present atmospheric inventory from all
 testing of nuclear weapons. A  potential radiation exposure and health effects from plutonium
 releases would exist if the launch were to abort, or the satellite to fail to reach orbit. It is essential
 to make this potential a minimum by appropriate design.

     Evaluation of nuclear safety was carried out by an Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Panel
 composed of representatives from ERDA, NASA, and DOD. The safely review resulted in a Safety
 Evaluation report by the INSRP in July 1975. A final  environmental  statement,  with review
 comments by EPA and others, was published in December 1975.

     Unlike  plutonium-239, plutonium-238  is not sufficiently fissionable to support a chain
 reaction, but is an alpha particle emitter and therefore a radiation and  heat source. A rugged,
 multiple-jacketed design was used to prevent dispersion of this fueTin the event of a crash. The
 fuel, as plutonium dioxide, was pressed into 250 gram solid'spheres, covered with iridium impact
 shells, and further covered with 0.46 in. thick graphite impact shells. Each source contains 24 of
•these assemblies in a graphite cylinder with iridium cladding. Structural integrity is provided by the
 iridium components, while impact energy is taken  up by the graphite components and additional
 crush-up material in the cylinder.

     The LES 8 and 9 were successfully launched together and placed in orbit in March 1976, to
 remain there indefinitely.

 NUCLEAR WEAPONS TESTING

     The major issue concerning nuclear weapons testing is the continued atmospheric testing by
 countries not signatory to the Threshold Test Ban  Treaty. On July 3,1974, the United States and
 Soviet Union signed The Treaty on the Limitation  of Underground Nuclear Weapons Tests. This
                                         114

-------
Treaty states in part that "Each party undertakes to prohibit, to prevent, and not to carry out any
underground nuclear weapons tests having a yield exceeding 150 kilotons at any place under its
jurisdiction or control,  beginning  March 31, 1975. Those nuclear detonations detected and
reported during 1975 are included in Table 6.4.
                                            115

-------
                                TABLE 6.4
Date (1975)


20 February

28 February

 7 March

11 March

 5 April

24 April

27 April

30 April

14 May

 3 June

 3 June

 7 June

19 June

26 June

 6 August

23 August

 6 September

24 October

26 October

28 October

28 October

20 November

26 November

20 December

25 December
 NUCLEAR DETONATIONS  DURING 1975
                                      Yield Range
Country      Test Area/NAME             (kilotons
 USSR

  US

  US

 USSR

  US

  US

 USSR

  US

  US

  US

  US

 USSR

  US

  US

 USSR

 USSR

  US

  US

China

  US

 USSR

  US

  US

  US


 USSR
Semipalatinsk

Nevada/Topgallant

Nevada/CABRILLO

Semipalat insk

Nevada/DINING CAR

Nevada/EDAM

Semipalatinsk

Nevada/OBAR

Nevada/TYBO

Nevada/STILTON

Nevada/MIZZEN

Semipalatinsk

Nevada/MAST

Nevada/CAMEMBERT

Semipalatinsk

Novaya Zemlya

Nevada/MARSH

Nevada/HUSKY PUP

Lop'Nor

Nevada/KASSERI

Semipalatinsk

Nevada/INLET

Nevada/LEYDEN

Nevada/CHIBERTA


Semipalatinsk

     116
  20-200

  20-200

  20-200

  20-200

  Less than 20

  20-200

  20-200

  20-200

  200 KT  to 1 MT

  20-200

  20-200

  20-200

  200 KT to 1 MT

  200 KT to 1 MT

  20-200

  Multi-megaton

  Less than 20

  Less than 20

Less than 20(underground.

  200-1000

  20-200

  200-1000

  Less than 20

  20-200


  20-200

-------
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS (EIS)

    Plutonium Powered Cardiac Pacemakers

    The draft generic DEIS on the wide-scale use of plutonium powered cardiac pacemakers
was issued by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) in January 1975. Prior to this action the
AEG had issued licenses for the manufacture of plutonium powered pacemakers, but only oh a
limited basis,  in order to establish safety and reliability data. The purpose of the DEIS was to
analyze  the data and other factors by considering radiation safety, benefits resulting from tr*
comparatively long half-life of plutonium "batteries," alternative types of pacemakers, and risks to
the public and the environment to enable a decision to be made whether to issue licenses for
larger scale production.

    The EPA comments were issued the following month and. in general, found the  DEIS
comprehensive and acceptable. However, it was  felt that there should have been a deeper
discussion on alternative, non-nuclear pacemakers and comment was made on the lack of any
discussion dealing with a security system to safeguard the plutonium. The AEC was urged to
include such a discussion in the DEIS. Also, the AEC's cost-benefit analysis was questioned as to
its validity, and some suggestions were made to improve it.

    Licensing  Exemption for Spark-Gap Irradlators Containing
    Cobalt-60  (NUREG-75/086)

    In October 1975, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued a DEIS concerning
a proposed amendment to NRC regulations to exempt from requirements for a license the receipt,
possession, use, transfer, export,  ownership, or acquisition of spark-gap  irradiators that contain
cobalt-60 (Co-60) for use in spark-ignited fuel-oil burners. Each  irradiator would have a quantity
limit of 1 microcurie of Co-60. As the draft statement indicates, the NRC staff concluded that the
exemption of such  irradiators may be: "(a) appropriately conditioned to protect environmental
values; and (b) acceptable for consideration by the Commission as a proposed amendment to 10
CFR Part 30 under the Commission's rules of practice regarding rule making petitions and the
provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act related to rule making."

    EPA stated that the draft statement does not adequately support the conclusion reached by
the NRC staff since it does not adequately address the potential environmental impact of the
proposed exemption or sufficiently explore alternatives. Also, the cost-benefit analysis presented
in the statement was determined to be inadequate and it was recommended that this section be
redone to more realistically address  and document the benefits and costs to society and the
environment that could result from the proposed exemption. Other EPA comments discussed the
need to include operating experience information on the irradiators, reexamine the scope of the
proposed exemption and  expand the radiological impact analysis to include  estimates of
population dose and a more thorough discussion of potential accident situations.

    Moreover, EPA commented that the draft statement does not provide  the required strong
technical documentation which demonstrates that a significant benefit would  be derived from the
use of the irradiators and that a non-radiological alternative could not be utilized to achieve the
same  result. However,  based  on the limited information presented, EPA concluded that the.
minimal  benefit of the proposed exemption does not appear to justify the radiation dose to the
installers and disposal personnel and potential dose to other members of  the general public from
lost or misplaced Co-60 irradiators.
                                         117

-------
    Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor

    The TFTR Facilities DEIS was issued in February 1975, in support of the Energy Research
and Development Administration's proposal for legislative authorization and appropriations for
the TFTR project. The TFTR, to be built at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, will be the
first United States fusion reactor designed to achieve break even conditions where the fusion
energy produced will equal the energy supplied to heat the plasma. As such it will provide
important plasma physics and engineering information for subsequent design of an experimental
Fusion Power Reactor utilizing the Tokamak magnetic confinement system. Plans call for initial
operation in 1980 with five years of experimental operation.

    The draft statement, as support for legislation, drew largely from conceptual designs.
Therefore,  some of the information  necessary to arrive at  a,conclusive evaluation  of
environmental impacts was not available. For that reason,  EPA requested that provisions be
made to ensure that the tentative  conclusions  reached in the  statement are reviewed as the
design is refined and that any significant results be published prior to facility operation. In the final
statement on July 1975, ERDA agreed to such a review procedure.

    Expansion of U.S. Uranium Enrichment Capacity (ERDA-1543)

    This DEIS was prepared in support of ERDA's administrative actions related to expansion of
the U.S. uranium enrichment capacity and the President's message and legislative proposal sent
to Congress on June 26,1975.

    The DEIS assesses the foreseeable environmental, social, economic, and technological
costs  and benefits of this expansion along with available alternatives to such expansion. The
current production capacity for enriching uranium for commercial nuclear power plants is fully
committed to existing and planned domestic and foreign reactors.

    The postulated expansion required to support nuclear power growth through the year 2000 is
eleven enrichment plants, each of which  is equivalent  in capacity to  an existing U.S. uranium
enrichment plant.

    In EPA's review of the DEIS an attempt was made not only to assess the adequacy of the
statement as presented  but also to apply some philosophy for priority setting for overall nuclear
fuel cycle needs. EPA believes that this is necessary in the case of such broad expansion of the
uranium enrichment part of the nuclear fuel cycle as proposed by ERDA.

    The following principal conclusions were reached during the review: (1) a nuclear enrichment
program can be conducted with an acceptable environmental impact, (2) reassessment of nuclear
fuel cycle priorities  is necessary to facilitate a  smooth domestic program, (3) definition and
classification of  enrichment wastes and of associated waste management practices should be
improved, and (4) enrichment plant dose assessment must be done on a site dependent basis
using local meteorology.

    Underground Nuclear Testing Program (Supplement to WASH-1526)

    The ERDA Draft Supplement to the April 1973 Final Environmental Statement, Underground
Nuclear Testing Program  (WASH-1526) reassessed the environmental aspects of the under-
ground nuclear testing program at the Nevada Test Site for fiscal year 1976 and the transitional
period to assure that further major testing activities would have minimal adverse environmental
                                         118

-------
impacts. The statement addressed those environmental consequences at the outset or at each
stage of the testing program to serve as a base for evaluating the environmental impact of future
actions in relation to the existing environment at the Nevada Test Site and surrounding area. In its
review, EPA attempted to  determine  whether the information  provided  was complete and
adequate to support the conclusions reached.  In addition, EPA evaluated the current ERDA
radiation monitoring program to determine if contamination is presently reaching the environment
(and if so, in what quantities) and if the ERDA monitoring program has the capability to predict the
present and future impact of underground nuclear testing on the environment.

     EPA  recognized that  this program  has  been conducted in  the past  without  major
environmental  proglems, and believes that its continuation during fiscal  year 1976 and the
transitional period can likewise be carried out safely.

     The final  FY 1976 Supplement EIS was issued in  September 1975 and  is currently
undergoing Federal agency review.

     Nuclear Power Export Activities

     On August 1,1975, ERDA issued the  DEIS for the Nuclear Power Export Activities (ERDA-
1542) for comment. The intent of the statement was to support the Nation's program of exporting
nuclear power technology and to provide a basis for informed judgments on the nature, scope and
direction of the U.S. nuclear export activities. The statement addressed activities associated with
the export of commercial nuclear steam supply systems and related components, and of source
and special nuclear material  for commercial use in foreign power reactors. It covered the impacts
on the U.S. and the high seas from possible diversion, theft or sabotage abroad of U.S. supplied
materials or facilities.

     In its comments, EPA concluded that  the environmental impacts had not been adequately
evaluated. The major concerns related to (1) failure to consider the impacts of reprocessing cpent
reactor fuel, (2) failure to consider impacts of radioactive gaseous discharges from the reactor or
reprocessing plants, and (3) failure to assess the impacts of waste disposal resulting from fuel
reprocessing plants.  The evaluation of the world-wide population dose commitments from the
impact of the release  of radioactivity at mines and mills, reprocessing plants and the reactors was
considered inadequate. Another significant concern was the lack of consideration of alternatives
available for controlling the  safeguards aspects, including denial  of export approval unless the
recipient was a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

     Waste  Management Operations at the Hanford  Reservation
     (WASH-1538)

     The DEIS which was issued in September 1974 by the AEC was reviewed  and comments
transmitted by EPA in January 1975. In its review, EPA attempted to determine whether the
information provided was complete and adequate to support the conclusion reached in the draft
statement. In addition, EPA tried to evaluate whether the current monitoring program is adequate
to determine if contamination is presently reaching the environment (and if so, in what quantities),
and if the monitoring  program has the capability to predict the present and  future impact of the
wastes on the environment.

     It is EPA's opinion that the hydrogeologic information presently available is not sufficient to
permit a comprehensive envaluation to be made of the*potential for environmental damage
represented by the presently stored waste, either on a short- or long-term basis.  To remedy this
                                         119

-------
situation, EPA recommended that an independent comprehensive re-evaluation be made of the
hydrogeology of the Hanford site.

    EPA's principal  conclusions relative to the adequacy of the Hanford Reservation waste
management operations were that there was a need for more hydrogeological information; a need
to eventually eliminate reliance on soils to remove radioactivity from liquid wastes discharged to
the ground; and a need to place more emphasis on determining an acceptable ultimate disposal
form and method for the high-level wastes.

    In December 1975, ERDA issued a final environmental statement on the Hanford waste
management operations. The FEIS is currently undergoing Federal agency review.

    Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor (LMFBR)

    The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) issued a Proposed Final EIS (PFEIS) on the LMFBR
(WASH-1535) for comment in December 1974, and ERDA came into existence in January 1975.
The PFEIS was thus  technically an AEC document, and as such was not adopted as an ERDA
statement until ERDA completed its review of it. In December 1975, ERDA issued its FEIS on the
LMFBR as an attachment to the AEC's PFEIS, and generally adopted the PFEIS as its own PFEIS.
The purposes of this EIS were to continue the LMFBR research and development (R&D) program
and to support the eventual commercialization of the LMFBR. However, as a consequence of the
review of the PFEIS by EPA, ERDA and other parties, the Administrator of ERDA concluded in the
FEIS that there were several areas of information which were not sufficiently  well developed to
enable prediction of impacts of commercialization. However, a commitment was made to fully re-
evaluate the environmental impacts  of LMFBR commercial deployment prior to commencement
of construction of the first commercial plant. He further indicated that R&D, underway or planned,
was expected to provide answers to important unresolved questions prior to the re-evaluation.

    The major areas of concern relative to the LMFBR are (1) safety, (2) plutonium safeguards,
(3) waste disposal, (4) transportation, and (5) the economic and resource justification for the
LMFBR. The first four items are not unique to the LMFBR, but the problems are intensified by the
LMFBR design. Each of these areas is expected to have vastly greater information available,
much of which is dependent on a successful R&D program, before the re-evaluation is conducted.

    In its comments  on the PFEIS, EPA concluded that the environmental impacts of the LMFBR
had been assessed about as well as is possible, given the state of the available  information. Thus,
in view of the unknowns associated with reactor safety, plutonium safeguards, waste disposal,
and transportation safety, it is not possible to accurately predict the enviornmental impacts of a
commercial LMFBR industry. EPA did not, however, identify any unresolveable problems which
would preclude LMFBR commercialization. Further, for a limited  number of demonstration facilities,
EPA concluded that an adequate level of -safety could be provided through conservative design
and siting criteria.

    EPA further indicated that a decision to commercialize the LMFBR should be made after
thorough evaluation of information generated in the ongoing and planned R&D. Similarly, the
cost/benefit analyses should be re-evaluated in the future when more accurate and up-to-date
data are available.

    The commitments made by ERDA in their FEIS substantially resolved the concerns EPA had
expressed  about proceeding with the LMFBR program. In particular, the commitment to re-
evaluate the environmental impacts and to  publish a new  environmental statement  prior to
                                        120

-------
conduction of the first commercial  LMFBR was a firm, positive step  which  will facilitate
necessary consideration of the environmental impacts in the decision making process.
                                        121

-------
                                   REFERENCES
1.   Rowe, W.D., F.L. Galpin, and H.T. Peterson, Jr. EPA's environmental radiation assessment
    program. Nuclear Safety, Vol. 16, No. 6 (November 1975).

2.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Radiological Quality of the Environment, Office of
    Radiation Programs, EPA-520/1-76-010 (in press).

3.   U.S.  Environmental Protection  Agency. Environmental Radiation Surveillance Guide,
    ORP/SID 72-2. Office of Radiation Programs, Washington, D.C. (June 1972).

4.   Martin, J.A., C.B. Nelson, and P.A. Cuny. AIREM Program Manuat. a computer code for
    calculating doses, population doses and ground depositions due to atmospheric emissions
    of radionuclides, EPA-520/1-74-004. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation
    Programs, Washington, D.C. (May 1974).

5.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Radioactivity standards distribution program-1975,
    EPA-680/4-75-002a. Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C. (April 1975).

6.   U.S.  Environmental   Protection  Agency,   Environmental   radioactivity  laboratory
    intercomparison  studies program-1975, EPA-680/4-75-002b. Office  of Research  and
    Development, Washington, D.C. (May 1975).

7.   General  Services Administration, Federal  Preparedness Agency, "Radiological  Incident
    Emergency Response Planning-Fixed Facilities and Transportation," Federal Register, Vol.
    40, number 248 (December 24,1975).

8.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Approaches to Population Protection in the Case of
    Nuclear Accidents, Office of Radiation Programs, (draft November 1974).

9.   U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency, Emergency Response Protective Action Guides
    Airborne Releases from Fixed Nuclear Facilities,  Office  of  Radiation Programs, (draft
    January 1975).

10.  U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency, The Comparative Risk Perspective for Setting
    Protective Action Guides, Office of Radiation Programs, (draft January 1975),

11.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  Manual of Protective Action Guides and Protective
    Actions for Nuclear Incidents, Office of Radiation Programs document EPA-520/1-75-001.
                                        122

-------
NONIONIZING RADIATION - CHAPTER 7
INTRODUCTION

    Electromagnetic  radiation  at  frequencies below  101§ Hertz (Hz)  is commonly  called
nonionizing radiation. As the term implies, "nonionizing" radiation does not produce ionization
when it is absorbed. For practical purposes, the nonionizing part of the electromagnetic spectrum
includes the ultraviolet, visible, infrared, radiogrequency, and extremely low frequency regions
including power distribution frequencies at 50  and 60 Hz.  Sources of interest include lasers,
radars, radio and television broadcast stations,  industrial heating equipment, microwave ovens,
line of sight communciations including satellites, mobile communications systems, navigational
aids, medical diathermy devices and others.

    Because of the increase in the number and power of sdurces in the radiofrequency range
since 1940, recent interest has focused on the effects produced by electromagnetic radiation at
frequencies below 300 GHz (300 x 10' Hz) or equivalently with photon energies less than 1.24 x
10"3 electron volts. In this frequency range effects are associated with power density as follows:
(a) exposures above 10 mW/cm2 (high level) where thermal effects predominate, (b) exposures
below 1  mW/cm2 where thermal effects are improbable, and (c) exposures between 1 and 10
mW/cm2 where the mechanism, thermal or nonthermal, is not established. (Figure 7.1)

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other Federal departments and agencies
such as Health Education and Welfare, (HEW), Department  of Defense (DOD), the National
Bureau of Standards (NBS), and Department of Labor have program activities concerned with
various forms of radiation consistent with their  individual missions and  responsibilities. Federal
Government activities to assess the effects of radiowaves (0-3000GHz) are coordinated  by the
Office of Telecommunications Policy. Some States and non-Governmental organizations also
have programs or activities in nonionizing radiation. This chapter summarizes the programs and
activities of several agencies.

FEDERAL  PROGRAMS   IN   NONIONIZING   ELECTROMAGNETIC   RADIATION
(RADIOWAVES)

    Federal  Government  activities  concerned with  biological  effects  of  nonionizing
electromagnetic radiation  in the radiowave range (0-3000GHz) as are associated with tele-
communications, are oyerviewed and coordinated by the Office of Telecommunications Policy
(OTP) in the Executive Office of the President.

    The purpose  of this  cooperative multiagency program which  involves environmental
measurements, testing, and research, is to assess the biological effects of these radiations and to
develop a sound scientific basis for ensuring the compatibility of society's use of the spectrum
with the health and well being of man and his environment.

    This program is comprised of individually funded activities by Federal agencies with various
responsibilities related to their basic missions. These include EPA, HEW, DOD, NBS, etc.

    OTP's statutory responsibility for spectrum management involves the review, management,
and assignment of  frequencies for  Government use;  the Office also advises the President on
                                        123

-------
3MINUTES)|


       IC_ATARACTOGENIC THRESHOLD IN RlABBITS I

       IPARTIAL^ODY DIATHERMY TREATlvrENTS I

       I WARTmTSENS^TION[THRESHOLD^IN HUMANS I
              |(3GHZ/ 1 SECOND)|
       i WEAK AVERSIVE REACTION IN RATS '


       I WARMTH SENSATION THRESHOjLDTN HUMANS I
                      4SECONDSf[
          AVOIDANCE BEHAVIOR IN RATS I
                                            I DOM I NATE I
                                                  I AREA OF UNCER-i
                                              ITAINITY FOR TRANSIENT I
                                               [BEHAVIORAL CHANGES I
                                          INONTHERMAL EFFECTSI
                                          I PREDOMINATE I
I
       h.  EVOJ
-------
national telecommunications policy. In this regard, DTP is concerned with any possible adverse
"side effects" which might be associated with the use of the spectrum.

     The Electromagnetic Radiation Management  Advisory Council (ERMAC), established in
1968,  assists DTP,  providing advice and recommendations on possible  side  effects  of
electromagnetic radiations associated with the use of communication/electronics. Following a
two year review of biological effects and Government activities, the ERMAC recommended a
coordinated Federal  program  of  nonionizing  radiation  effects research  and environmental
measurement (1).  In early 1972  the  current  program was coordinated  by  OTP  within the
Government for implementation.

     An  interagency  "Side Effects"  Working Group was  established  within the Technical
Subcommittee of the Inderdepartment Radio Advisory Committee.  The principal function of this
group is to provide for coordination of research and measurements programs. It also provides a
forum for the exchange of information for agencies with ongoing research and other concerned
agencies. About 20 different Government agencies are represented.

     During  1975,  OTP/ERMAC  hosted   workshop/seminars  on   "Measurements  of
Environmental Levels of Nonionizing Electromagnetic Radiation" (2) and on "Genetic, Hereditary,
Growth and/or Developmental  Effects of  Nonionizing Electromagnetic Radiation" (3). The Side
Effects Working Group met bimonthly throughout the year. Its activities include developing
information on ongoing research programs and examining problems and related issues of mutual
interest.

     Each year OTP issues an annual  report on the Federal Government's program to assess
biological effects of nonionizing electromagnetic radiation (4,5). These annual reports summarize
research efforts, give short descriptions  of participating agencies programs and associated
publications, and cover related  issues and problems. The fourth annual report covering calendar
year 1975 is being prepared and will be available in the spring of 1976.

     Environmental Protection Agency

     The nonionizing radiation activities  in the Environmental  Protection Agency are divided
between two offices, the  Office  of Radiation  Programs and the Office of Research and
Development. Standards development,   environmental  measurements,  and environmental
evaluation  are conducted by the Office of Radiation Programs. Biological effects research is
conducted by the Health Effects Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC, a part of the
Office of Research and Development. Environmental exposure data are collected, evaluated, and
compared  to known  effects and research results to assess needs for criteria, guidelines, or
standards to control exposure.

         Environmental Nonionizing Measurements

     The environmental nonionizing radiation  program includes measurement of the general
ambient environment and calculation, measurement, and evaluation of specific types of sources.
The calibration and  field testing of a  mobile  radiofrequency measurements system  were
completed in 1975.  Data on  ambient environmental levels in urban areas were  collected.
Evaluations were also made of several problems related to specific sources or source types.
                                         125

-------
        Ambient Environment Studies

    Using the mobile radiofrequency measurements system environmental levels of nonlonlzlng
radiation in Boston, MA (October 1975) and Atlanta, GA (December 1975) were measured. Tht
data are being studied and population exposure is being computed on the basis of a population
locator code (6). Figure 7.2 shows the van used in making electromagnetic radiation analyse*.
The interior of this van appears in Figure 7.3.

    The measurements system uses a spectrum analyzer interfaced to a minicomputer for data
acquisition and is  housed within a 27-foot van equipped with its own electrical power supply.
Special antenna systems allow isotropic field intensity measurements in selected bands between
0.5 MHz and 10 GHz. Data are collected for the standard AM broadcast band, the VHF-TV and FM
bands, the 150 and 450 MHz land mobile bands and the UHF-TV band. Emphasis has been given
to accurate system calibration. The antennas have been calibrated relative to NBS standard
dipoles in a low background radiofrequency area (Green Bank, WV in June 1975). At the facilities
of the Institute for Telecommunications Sciences in Boulder, CO (August 1975), radiation patterns
have been determined for the antennas mounted on the  van. The calibration and correction
factors are stored in the computer and computer programs have been developed for different data
collection modes which include peak signal strength retention and signal averaging (7,0).

        Specific Source Studies

    In February 1975, EPA was asked to assist a local health department evaluate the radio-
frequency susceptibility of an  electronic, digital  readout, thermometer commonly used in
hospitals. Through field tests and measurements it was determined that the thermometer was
susceptible to radiofrequency interference at frequencies in the FM band (88-108 MHz). The
interference  resulted  in erroneously  high temperature readings.  Interference was  readily
demonstrated at electric field strength levels of 1.5 Volts/meter (V/m). Maximum measured field
strengths in the hospital from two nearby FM stations were 1.55 V/m (vertical polarization) at
105.1  MHz and 0.813 V/m (horizontal polarization) at 90.9 MHz. This interference problem was
brought to the attention of the thermometer manufacturer and the Bureau of Medical Devices and
Diagnostic Products  in the  Food and  Drug Administration. As a  result of this study  the
manufacturer changed the  design  of  the thermometer and  replaced  the  susceptible
thermometers in the hospital. •

    In June 1975, at the request of the State of Hawaii, EPA evaluated the environmental impact
of broadcast radiation levels on the island of Oahu. This request stemmed from the denial of a
rezoning application to allow construction of a residential-commercial high-rise building within 50
feet of an existing  FM-TV broadcast antenna tower. The fields in the vicinity of other broadcast
towers were then  questioned and the  Hawaiian State Senate issued a resolution directing the
Hawaiian State Health Department to study the problem and make a report to the State Senate.
Based on source parameters, source location, and conservative propagation models calculations
were made of the environmental radiofrequency levels from broadcast stations. The source
distributions, parameters, and calculation^ models have been described (9). These conservative
calculations indicated that there were no exposures exceeding 10 mW/cm*. which is the OSHA
standard for occupational exposure (10).

    In September 1975, an analytical study was started on broadcast radiation levels at Mi
Wilson, CA. Based on the results of the analytical study, a field study to  measure the levels of
broadcast radiation was conducted during November 1975, in cooperation with the County of Los
Angeles Department  of Health Services. In  close proximity on  Mr.  Wilson are a number of
                                         126

-------

-------
128

-------
broadcast antenna towers on which are mounted the antennas for 27 FM and TV stations which
serve the Los Angeles metropolitan area. Of particular interest were the environmental levels in
the vicinity of the Mt. Wilson Post Office which also serves as the residence of the Postmaster.
The  Post Office is located within several  hundred  feet of a number of the antenna towers.
Calculations using the  usual conservative  assumptions indicated that ground level  exposure
values would be in the range from  1 to 44 mW/cm2. The maximum measured value found in the
vicinity of the Post Office in the field  study was 4.8  mW/cm2 at a single location. More typical
values fell in the range from 0.2 to 2  mW/cm2 outside the Post Office building and 0.06 to 0.6
mW/cm2 inside. A detailed description of the field study is being prepared (11). During the field
study, measurements were obtained of the fields which exist on an FM antenna tower and to
which station or maintenance personnel might be exposed when working on the tower. Levels
well in excess of the OSHA standard (10) were found.

     A summary (12) of earlier work on radiation levels from specific sources and measurements
of the  general  ambient radiofrequency environment was presented to the  Electromagnetic
Radiation Management Advisory Council (ERMAC)  in April 1975. The ERMAC is an advisory
group to the Office of Telecommunications Policy on possible "side effects" associated with the
use of the spectrum; references to earlier work performed by EPA are listed in the annual reports
of the Office of Telecommunications Policy (13,14).

     High Voltage Transmission Lines

     Private citizens, public interest groups, and State agencies have expressed concern about
the potential adverse effects that may be associated with the transmission  of electric power at
extra-high voltages (EHV), i.e., voltages at or above 345 kilovolts (kV).

     In part, because of these concerns, the Environmental Protection Agency published a notice
in the  Federal  Register in  March  1975, requesting  data  and information  on the health and
environmental effects of EHV power transmission (15). Over 50 replies totaling over 6,000 pages
were received from  the following groups: electric utility or organization, 14; Federal agency, 8;
citizen or citizens' group, 6; State agencies, 5; consulting firms, 4; equipment manufacturer, 4; city
or county planning agency, 3; university, 3; railroad, pipeline, and professional society,  1 each. A
preliminary analysis  of the submitted information and of information from other sources has not
identified any acute  detrimental health or environmental effects (16). Further work to determine
any  potential subtle problems and to determine if areas of concern have been adequately
investigated will be carried out under contract.

     Representatives of EPA  have participated in a number of meetings and working groups
which are investigating EHV problems. In  April  1975, as part  of an Electric Power  Research
Institute (EPRI)  sponsored contract, the Illinois Institute of Technology Research Institute (IITRI)
hosted a workshop  on 60 Hz electric field effects on life  forms. A summary of the workshop
activities and a critical review of  effects literature has been published (17) together with  an
annotated effects bibliography (18). In October 1975,  IITRI hosted another workshop sponsored
by the Energy  Research and  Development Administration  on electromagnetic coupling and
corona effects. A report is to be published in the near future.

     EPA is participating in the deliberations  of the "Task  Force on the  Technical  Basis  for
Selection of Interference Limits from Electric Power Lines and Stations," which is part of the
Radio  Noise and  Corona Subcommittee of the   IEEE Power  Engineering  Society. EPA
representatives participated in the IEEE sponsored field day at Project UHV  in Pittsfield, MA.
Experience was gained in calibrating and using electric and magnetic field measuring equipment.
                                          129

-------
The  program participants  also  obtained data on electric shock perception  and annoyance
thresholds. EPA is participating in an Interagency Advisory Committee on Electric Field Effects
from High Voltage Lines, which is chaired by ERDA. The committee's objective is to coordinate all
Federally sponsored research efforts relating to the environmental effects of electric fields from
high voltage transmission lines.

     Biological Effects Research

     The nonionizing radiation biological effects program has broadened and taken new direction
in  1975.  A wide range of biological  experiments is being conducted  with rapidly improving
dosimetry. New equipment both for locating likely frequencies of interaction and for laboratory
exposure systems is being developed and put into use. The  results of recent work have been
published (22-38) and current work is summarized below.

     A major objective in  the dosimetry work is to report all exposures  in terms of energy
absorption  or rate of  energy absorption by the biological  system. Methodology has been
developed  to measure and analyze cooling  curves for in vitro systems  from which energy
absorption rates are calculated. Twin well calorimeters are being constructed so that whole body
absorbed dosage can be measured for small animals up to the size of large rats. In addition, the
use of transmission line exposure geometries allows absorbed  power to  be  calculated from
measured values of forward,reflected and transmitted ppwer.

     Other dosimetry work is also in progress. Computer software has been developed so that
thermographic camera  pictures of dose distribution  in animals may be analyzed quantitatively.
Field  perturbations caused by  neighboring animals in a multi-animal exposure have been
investigated and various configurations of animal placement have been tried in order to minimize
such scattering. An X-band field probe has been constructed using a Schottky diode detector and
microwave transparent semiconductor leads. This probe is being used to measure field intensities
in  the X-band exposure chamber from  1 W/cm2 to 10 mW/cm2 (average power, pulsed)  for
frequencies between 8.5 and 9.6 GHz. Mathematical modeling in order to estimate exposure and
dose is continuing.

     Several biochemical and cellular level investigations have  been pursued. The binding of
pseudosubstrates to the enzyme ribonuclease while undergoing irradiation has been investigated
using the crossed-beam apparatus for simultaneous irradiation and observation. No differences
between  samples irradiated at 1.7 and 2.45 GHz to exposure rates of 40 W/kg and unirradiated
samples  were found.  Mitochondrial suspensions were exposed in I system* that continually
circulates the sample through a coaxial airline and an oxygen 'electrode cell. Exposures were at
2.45,3.0 and 3.4 GHz (41 W/kg) while the mitochondria were biochemically active and respiration
was measured as the sample flowed from the airline. No differences in  respiration or oxidative
phosphorylation  were  found between irradiated  and control mitochondria. Swept frequency
measurements between 2.0 and 4.0 GHz (at about 2 W/kg) were also made using this system.
Again no differences were found.

     The effects of nonionizing radiation on immune defense systems is under investigation. The
phagocytic activity of  guinea  pig  neutrophils during irradiation at  2.45  GHz was  assayed
biochemically. No change in phagocytosis was noted. In a related study, the phagocytic activity of
rat peritoneal macrophages  during irradiation at 2.45 GHz is being investigated. Preliminary
results again  indicate no change. Both experiments were inspired by  the report of Mayers and
Habeshaw (Int. J. Bad. Biol. 24: 449-461,  1973) indicating a change in phagocytic activity of
irradiated macrophages.
                                          130

-------
     Mouse splenic lymphocytes have been irradiated in vitro at 2.45 GHz and their capacity to
undergo  DMA synthesis after stimulation with several  mitogens has been measured.  No
differences in the response of irradiated and control lymphocytes was found. Live mice are being
irradiated at 2.45 GHz. Peripheral blood and splenic lymphocytes from these animals are being
assayed for their ability to undergo blast transformation and for DNA synthesis in the presence
and absence of specific mitogens. This work is in progress. Mice are also being immunized before
exposure to 2.45 GHz CW and 9.0 GHz pulsed radiation and subsequently checked for antibody
titer. This work is also in progress.

     Genetic effects work is being largely conducted extramurally with exposures made in EPA
facilities.  The results of the completed study on Drosophila were presented at an OTP/ERMAC
seminar. Saccharomyces cerevisiaeand Salmonella typhimurium have been irradiated at 8.5-9.6
GHz (pulsed) and are being examined for alteration in mutation rate and secondary cellular effect.
Chinese hamsters are  being irradiated  at 2.45 GHz  and 9.0 GHz  pulsed between 5 and 45
mW/cm2.  Peripheral  blood lymphocytes are being cultured and examined for chromosome
aberrations. So far none  have been  found,  but secondary studies indicate that irradiated
lymphocytes undergo blast transformation but  then do  not divide even after stimulation with a
mitogen.  Such a  result, if confirmed, would indicate a serious decrease in the ability  of the
lymphocyte system to respond to antigenic stresses. Work is continuing to elucidate this effect.

     Teratological studies  are being conducted on mice and rats. In the major study  so far
pregnant female mice were irradiated 100 min. daily at 14 and 28 mW/cm2 in a 2.45 GHz free field
exposure. Eighteen days after breeding the fetuses were examined. The weights of animals in the
higher dose  group were  significantly  lower  than the weights of the control  animals.  A
nonsignificant incidence in encephaloceles was noted  in both exposed groups. However, the
incidence was significant when the data from both exposed groups was combined and compared
to controls. Adult male rats irradiated at 2.45 GHz periodically for 4 weeks at 28 mW/cm2 showed
a 50% loss in capacity to impregnate when breeding was conducted immediately after the final
irradiation. Work is continuing in this area.

     Behavior of rats after exposure to microwave radiation is being  studied. In one study, male
rats  were irradiated 4 hours  daily from  birth to 21 days at 9 Ghz (pulsed) in fields of 3 to 10
mW/cm2 average power. The rats were tested for signs of changes in growth, reflex development,
activity and development of operant behavior. No significant difference from controls was found.
In a  second study, male rats were exposed to 2.45 GHz at 10 mW/cm2, 15 hours/day, 3 times
weekly for 3 or 6 months. Measurement of a previously acquired operant performance was made
over the course of the exposures. No difference from controls attributable to microwave exposure
was  found. These same rats were then exposed to 12.5 to 20 mW/cm2 for 15 hours at a time.
Preliminary data indicate lower rates of operant behavior for exposures at 12.5 mW/cm2 and
above.

     New instrumentation has been developed for exposure of samples in vitroand small animals.
These are essentially coaxial transmission lines of rectangular cross section (known as Crawford
cells). Exposures in a small Crawford cell can be made at frequencies between 500 and 1100
MHz. Amplitude modulation of the RF source for this cell is available  using a pin diode and a low
frequency function generator. One instrument is being tested and will be used in cellular genetic
and  membrane studies. A large Crawford cell which propagates 100-450 MHz has been
constructed for use in experiments including irradiation of rats or mice, investigation of absorption
characteristics of small animals, and other experiments involving amplitude modulated fields. A
temperature control system has been developed for  use with the  Crawford  cells. It regulates
temperature to  0.1 ° C from 15° to 45° C.
                                         131

-------
     Other instrumentation is being developed for measuring absorption frequencies of in vitro
biological  samples.  A double line microwave spectrometer will compare directly the  power
absorption of an unknown sample against a reference. Frequency will be scanned from 250-4000
MHz. The development  of a time domain reflectometer (TDR) is continuing. It will allow the
determination of the complex dielectric constant of biological materials for a frequency range up
to 9 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 instruments and the completion and operation of a new  high
performance microwave  power density calibration facility in the Division of Electronic Products.
The facility has the capability to make accurate microwave measurements at many frequencies.
Studies are made of electronic products emitting in radiofrequency, VHP, UHF and microwave
regions of the electromagnetic spectrum and devices for their control in support of enforcement,
standards development, and product testing.

        Microwave Ovens

     In 1975,69 production or pre-production microwave ovens have been laboratory tested and
found to be in compliance  with  the  Federal Performance Standard  for  Microwave Ovens.
Compliance actions were taken against five manufacturers of microwave ovens.

     During May 1975, the FDA's Bureau of Radiological Health notified a manufacturer of
microwave ovens that more than  18,000 ovens were found to be a potential radiation hazard,
since they were capable  of emitting up to 10 times the maximum limits allowable by the Federal
standard for radiation emission.

     A total  of 1,814  certified microwave ovens were inspected by field personnel and an
additional  482 uncertified ovens were  inspected. Field personnel reviewed the records of  405
dealer or distributors of microwave ovens, in order to determine that these records were sufficient
to permit the tracing of specific ovens to specific purchasers.

     BRH  has proposed  an amended performance standard for the requirements for interlock
concealment and prevention of object insertion into microwave ovens. The proposal appeared In
the Federal Registers June 26,1975.

     The proposal requires  that  concealed  interlocks must meet the commonly  accepted
definition of concealment—that is, the interlock must be hidden from view. The amendment would
allow ovens  to have, as an alternative to a concealed interlock, an  interlock that cannot be
actuated when access to it is possible. In addition, the requirement concerning insertion of objects
into the oven would be changed to provide a better definition of "object" and to prohibit insertion
of these objects into the cavity, waveguide, and other oven spaces that contain microwave
energy.

     The present standard requires that the concealed interlock not be operable by any part of the
human body or by a rod 3 millimeters in diameter and 10 centimeters in useful length. Some oven
manufacturers in the past have met the nonoperability conditions of this requirement even though
the interlock was not "concealed" but was visible to the user and could be defeated  by common
household objects. The proposed amendment would solve this problem by clarifying that the
                                         132

-------
nonoperability tests are not to be equated with the concept of concealment, but are additional
requirements that must be met. It also would delete the diameter specification for the rod to allow
the test object to simulate items commonly found in homes, and would require that any visible
interlock actuator or device which prevents actuation of an interlock not be removable without
disassembly of the door. The proposed requirements would apply to ovens manufactured on or
after 1 year from the date on which the amendment is published as a final rule.

     According to the preamble in the Federal Register, the proposal to amend the standard at
this time should not be interpreted as indicating that ovens presently available are unsafe. Most
manufacturers have, in  the past, correctly "interpreted the intent of  the standard  and have
manufactured  microwave  ovens that would fully meet  the requirements  of the  proposed
amendment or, when misunderstandings have occurred, have voluntarily corrected the designs to
comply with the intent of the standard.

        Microwave Exposure Levels from Marine Radar Evaluated

     BRH has conducted a study of the range and magnitude of microwave radiation exposure
associated with marine radar units used on small pleasure boats. The project included a survey of
33 marine radar units in actual use, a compilation of information concerning 43 different marine
radar models, laboratory measurements in the Division's anechoic chamber, and a comparison of
calculated emission levels with experimentally measured values.

     According to a recently published report on the study, personnel exposure to microwave
ernissions from the radar units probably will not exceed 1 mW/cm2 average power density under
normal operating  conditions.  However,  significantly  increased  emission  levels  might  be
encountered if a unit is operated with the antenna rotation stopped. The report recommends that
exposure under such conditions be avoided.

     Another finding was that instantaneous peak microwave emissions in the region surrounding
the antenna might be quite high. Although any possible biological hazards associated with these
emission levels are uncertain at  present, the possibility of interference phenomena in  critical
devices, such as cardiac pacemakers, seems to warrant caution. Therefore, the report suggests
that care be exercised to limit the unnecessary use of  marine radar in  areas of high population
density—for example, when docked in harbors.

     The U.S. Coast Guard has agreed to a program of cooperation  with BRH on the safety
aspects of marine radar.

        RadiofrequencyandMicrowave Products and Devices

     Microwave Diathermy Survey - A limited microwave diathermy field survey conducted by
BRH found that: (a) although diathermy users are aware  of possible harmful effects from
microwave exposure, their understanding is limited, and (b)  equipment manufacturers  do  not
supply users with sufficient information on the radiation emission pattern from the diathermy
applicator, so that some treatments may expose a larger body area than  prescribed. The survey
was part of a fact-gatheringlfiission to determine the need for a Federal performance standard for
microwave diathermy equipment. It focused primarily  on equipment use, but also considered
treatment techniques and machine performance characteristics.

     The need for a microwave diathermy equipment standard was brought to the attention of the
Technical Electronic Products Radiation Safety Standards Committee (TEPRSSC) by BRH during
                                          133

-------
the committee's meeting in September 1974. Microwave diathermy is a procedure in which heat is
induced in the tissues beneath the skin by microwaves. Because excessive microwave radiation
may be harmful, precautions should be taken to assure safe equipment performance.

     Information and comments on the following topics are specifically invited by BRH:

     (a)    The types of radiation safety performance requirements which would be appropriate
           for microwave diathermy equipment; for example, emission level  requirements,
           interlocks, indication of output power, means of beam limitation or definition, and so
           forth.

     (b)    Appropriate emission levels from the entire unit, including the applicator, and the
           methods and conditions of measurement.

     (c)    Appropriate radiation safety warning labels and user and service instructions.

     (d)    The possible environmental impact of this action, including factors such as radiation
           exposure reduction and economic consequences in  relation to expected benefits
           (cost-benefit relationship).

     RF and Microwave Energy Deposition in Humans - BRH's Division of Electronic Products is
developing new mathematical techniques and computer programs for predicting the geometrical
distributions of dissipated radiofrequency and microwave energy within complex systems such as
the human body. This project is aimed at providing accurate estimates of energy deposited in
humans exposed to emissions from such devices as microwave, diathermy, short-wave, and radar
equipment.

     When nonionizing electromagnetic radiation interacts with biological systems, the potential
for harm results from the  electromagnetic fields induced within the irradiated tissues. In some
instances, these fields or  the subsequent tissue heating may be determined experimentally by
using implantable probes in living tissue or infrared sensors  in phantom (biologically simulated)
material. These techniques, how«v«r, have many practical drawbacks.

     In an alternate approach, DEP  is mathematically simulating  the interaction of an electro-
magnetic field with a region of  space having electrical properties and  geometric structure
representative  of  a living  organism. Computer-assisted  calculations  1£en  determine  the
distribution of  energy  throughout  the region. This  mathematical problem, although quite
formidable, has been solved for simple geometries such as spheres, planes, and infinite cylinders.
Recently, the energy distribution within a multilayered spherical model of a human head exposed
to microwave radiation has been calculated.

     The next step in the project will be development of the more complex mathematical models
needed to predict the energy distribution in irregularly shaped areas of the body.

     Occupational Exposure to Radar - BRH is assessing the association of microwave radiation
(radar) with  the health of naval, personnel by relating  occupational differences  in levels of
exposure to subsequent  mortality in the veteran period, hospitalized  illness  at  the time of
occupational exposure, and  later disability. The study is being done under contract with the
National  Research Council by means of search, linkage,  and analysis of the records of a
sufficiently large maximally exposed group and a comparable minimally or nonexposed group of
Korean War veterans.
                                          134

-------
        Light Products and Devices

    Testing of Laser Eyewear - The U.S. Air Force School of Aerospace Medicine is to test some
20 types of commercially available protective eyewear used by persons working with lasers to
evaluate their long-term effectiveness and reliability. The work, an extension of ongoing testing of
laser eyewear procured  by the Defense Department, is being carried out under an interagency
agreement between BRH and the Air Force.

    BRH teamed up with the Air  Force testing program to supplement its efforts in evaluating
laser eyewear. A limited  investigation in BRH laboratories has found that some types of eyewear
fail after several seconds of exposure to laser beams of about one watt—a level at which users
(might) expect protection. The Bureau initiated the tests based on reports that the lenses of some
eye protection devices  deteriorate due to environmental  conditions and others  fail to meet
designed optical densities—a measure of the fraction of radiation transmitted through the lens.

    Protective eyewear, including goggles, glasses, and face guards, is used  in certain industrial,
medical, and research applications to safeguard operators or bystanders from high levels of laser
radiation which could cause serious eye damage. Although there have been no reports of human
injury resulting from lens failure, the possibility of accidental eye injury exists.

    BRH will use data obtained under the agreement to determine methods by which eyewear
can be uniformly tested by manufacturers for protection effectiveness and labeled with essential
user information. For the most part, eyewear being produced today lacks any indication on the
product or container as to the upper exposure limit for which protection is guaranteed and lacks
wavelength information to indicate its correct application.

    According to the agreement, the School of Aerospace Medicine will perform optical and
physical quality tests for  each type  eyewear. Optical tests are designed to evaluate optical
distortion and spectral transmission characteristics of the lens material. The physical quality tests
are to include (1) determination of the optical density under laser illumination, (2) exposure of lens
and frame materials to increasing amounts of laser radiation until irreversible damage occurs, for
example, the material melts or explodes, (3) evaluation of bleaching effects in the lens, (4) checks
on impact resistance, and (5) determination of the long-term stability of the eyewear.

         Visible and Ultraviolet Radiation Products

    During  July 1974, a manufacturer of an ultraviolet dental appliance was notified that two
defects relating to safety of  use existed in the product. Corrections were being made to these
products. However, FDA became aware of 31 unreported but alleged injuries resulting from use of
the product.  Investigations and review of the manufacturer's records revealed an additional defect
and more alleged injuries. The manufacturer was notified in May 1975 and requested to correct all
three  defects.  The  alleged  injuries are being  reviewed to  determine if there  is  medical
substantiation for irradiation injuries.

    At the request of BRH, a task group of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) is
developing a voluntary  standard  that will specify safety features to minimize the  ultraviolet
radiation hazards associated with  the use of damaged mercury vapor discharge lamps. BRH is
supporting the ANSI effort at the suggestion of the Technical Electronic Product Radiation Safety
Standards Committee (TEPRSSC) that it cooperate with industry to develop a voluntary, industry-
wide standard  for these lamps.  Realizing it could take a long while to develop a voluntary
standard,  TEPRSSC also advised BRH to proceed with a parallel effort to develop a regulatory
                                          135

-------
standard that could be issued if it appeared that an effective voluntary standard would not be
forthcoming within a reasonable period of time.

     Laser  Calorimeter System - The initial  phase of an  intercomparison of BRH's  laser
calorimeter with the National  Bureau of Standards  (NBS) system has demonstrated that the
BRH's calibration system is in agreement with the NBS standard calorimeter at the power levels
used. The NBS system is the primary national  standard against which the validity of all optical
radiation measurements are checked. The system is used to calibrate laser survey instruments
that  will  be needed  for making low-level,  continuous-wave  radiation  measurements in the
laboratory and the field.

        Ultrasound Products and Devices

     Visualization  and Measurement of Ultrasonic Beams  - A  state-of-the-art system for
visualizing and measuring certain output characteristics of ultrasound diagnostic devices is now
operational  in BRH's acoustics laboratory. Specifically,  the ultrasonic system, known  as
ultrasonovision, can map out the distribution of an ultrasonic beam and measure its intensity. The
division plans to use the system to (a) analyze beam patterns from various ultrasonic transducers,
(b) evaluate transducer performance, and (c) check the total ultrasonic device as an integral unit.

     Diagnostic Ultrasound Equipment Survey - BRH, in cooperation with the District of Columbia
Bureau of Radiological Health, conducted  a field survey of diagnostic ultrasound equipment in
1975.

     As a result of this study, BRH found that the output from some newer pulse echo units to be,
in some cases, less  than a milliwatt.  It was also found  that the  sensitivity of measurement
equipment  will have  to be lower than previously anticipated. This indicates that satisfactory
imaging can be obtained with current diagnostic equipment at relatively low power levels.

     Feasibility Study of Possible Adverse Effects of Diagnostic Levels of Ultrasound on the Fetus
- A feasibility study was initiated in 1975 to determine whether a full-scale study of the possible
delayed  effects of ultrasound on  the fetus can be made,  using the records of obstetric
examinations of 1967-69 as the starting point. Its purpose is to assess the adequacy of the
original  hospital records,  success in tracing children, and the feasibility of including medical
examinations. Reported biological effects of ultrasound at high levels in experimental animals
include  chromosomal anomalies, birth defects, cataracts,, tissue  necrosis, hemorrhage, skin
burns, and leg paralysis. At the levels used  for diagnosis  in humans, such serious manifestations
have not been observed. Nevertheless, studies in humans are needed to confirm the absence of
adverse effects.

STATE AND RELATED ACTIVITIES

     Texas is developing regulations for the control of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation
(39). The November  1, 1975 draft is subject to further  change and to approval  by the Texas
Radiation Advisory Board before adoption. The regulations would impose control measures on
microwave  ovens and  on sources  where accessible  fields  exceed  the exposure   limits
promulgated by the American National Standards Institute (40). In addition microwave ovens used
in commercial food vending services and sources which  produce accessible radiation levels ten
times the ANSI exposure limits must be registered. Sources licensed by the FCC and installations
of the departments and agencies of the Government of the United States are exempt from the
regulations.
                                         136

-------
    The New York Public Service Commission is holding common hearings on two proposed 765
kV overhead electric transmission lines (41). Such issues as oxidant production, audible noise,
induced electric shock currents, and cardiac pacemaker performance will be addressed during
the hearings, expected to last through spring or summer of 1976.

MEETINGS AND PROGRAM RELATED ACTIVITIES

    There is an increasing interest in combining thermal therapy with either chemotherapy or
ionizing radiation therapy for the treatment of tumors. A workshop sponsored by the American
Association for the Advancement of Science and the National Cancer Institute was held in April
where the combination of heat and chemotherapy was discussed (19) and two papers were given
at the International Microwave Symposium on the combination of heat and ionizing radiation
therapy (20). The two principal meetings where significant work on the biological effects of
nonionizing radiation were presented were the Microwave Power Symposium (20) and the United
States National Committee of the International Union of Radio Science Annual Meeting (21).

     The American National Standards C95 Committee on Radiofrequency Radiation Hazards
held its 1975 meeting in conjunction with the USNC/URSI Meeting. There are seven active
subcommittees.  Subcommittee  (IV),  "Safety Levels  and/or Tolerances with Respect  to
Personnel," is reorganizing so that it can address several issues prior to reissuing an exposure
standard in 1979. There are now five working groups: 1. low level effects, 2. high frequency safety
standards, 3. peak power safety standards, 4. population versus occupational exposure, and 5.
literature review. The National Council on Radiation Protection's Scientific Committee SC-39 on
Nonionizing Radiation is currently working on three reports: "Quantities and Units," "General
Measurements," and "Biological Effects."

     Under the US-USSR Health Agreement, joint and complimentary  studies of nonionizing
central nervous system and behavioral effects are planned. The exchange program is managed
by the National  Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and includes participation by the
Bureau of Radiological Health and the Environmental Protection Agency.
                                         137

-------
                                   REFERENCES
1.   Electromagnetic Radiation Management Advisory Council (1971), "Program for control of
    electromagnetic pollution of the  environment: the assessment of biological hazards of
    nonionizing electromagnetic radiation," Office of Telecommunications Policy, Washington,
    D.C.

2.   Ibid (1975), "Summary of ERMAC work session on measurement of environmental levels of
    nonionizing electromagnetic radiation, "Office of Telecommunications Policy, Washington,
    D.C.

3.   Ibid  (1975),  "Workshop on genetic,  hereditary, growth and/or developmental effects of
    nonionizing electromagnetic radiation," Office of Telecommunications Policy, Washington,
    D.C.

4.   Office of Telecommunications  Policy (1974), "Second report on program for control of
    electromagnetic pollution of the  environment: the assessment of biological hazards of
    nonionizing electromagnetic radiation, Washington, D.C.

5.   Ibid  (1975), "Third  report on  program for  control of electromagnetic poHution  of  the
    environment: the assessment of biological hazards of nonionizing electromagnetic radiation,
    Washington, D.C.

6.   Athey, T.W., R.A. Tell, and  D.E. Janes (1974), "The use  of  an automated population
    exposure calculations," in Population Exposures, Proceedings of the Eighth Midyear Topical
    Symposium of the Health Physics Society, PP. 30-36, USAEC Technical information Center
    (CONF-741018), Oak Ridge, TN.

7.   Tell, R.A., N.N. Hankin, and D.E.  Janes (1974), "An automated measurement system for
    determining environmental radiofrequency field intensities," in Program and Abstracts, 1974
    Annual Meeting, United States National Committee, International Union of Radio Science, p.
    28, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C. (text available from authors).

8.   Tell, R.A., N.N.  Hankin, J.C. Nelson, TW.W Athey,  and D.E. Janes (^76), "An automated
    measurement system for determining environmental radiofrequency field intensities, II," to
    be published in Proceedings of the NBS 75th Anniversary Symposium, Measurements for
    the Safe Use of Radiation, National Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, MD.

9.   Tell, R.A.  (1975), "An analysis of broadcast radiation levels in Hawaii," Technical Note
    ORP/EAD  75-1, Office  of  Radiation  Programs,  Environmental  Protection Agency,
    Washington, D.C. 10. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration
    (1974), "Nonionizing radiation," Title 29 Code of Federal Regulations, 1910.97.

11.  Tell, R.A. and P.J. O'Brien (1976), "An investigation of broadcast radiation intensities at Mt.
    Wilson, California" (in preparation), Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
                                         138

-------
12.  Janes, D.E., N.N. Hankin, T.W. Athey, and R.A. Tell (1975), "EPA Nonionizing Radiation
    Measurements Program," in Summary of Electromagnetic Radiation Management Advisory
    Council (ERMAC) Work Session on Measurement of Environmental Levels of Nonionizing
    EM Radiation, Office of Telecommunications Policy, Washington, D.C.

13.  Office of Telecommunications Policy (1974), "Second Report on 'Program for control of
    electromagnetic pollution of the environment: the assessment of biological  hazards of
    nonionizing electromagnetic radiation," Washington, D.C.

14.  Ibid (1975), "Third Report on 'Program for control of  electromagnetic  pollution of the
    environment:  the assessment  of  biological hazards  of  nonionizing  electromagnetic
    radiation," Washington, D.C.

15.  Strelow, R. (1975), "Extremely high voltage transmission lines, health and environmental
    effects," FederalRegister40(53): 12312.

16. Janes, D.E. (1975), "Electric effects of extra-high voltage and ultra-high voltage transmission
    lines," Westinghouse International School for Environmental Management, Colorado State
    University.

17.  Bridges, J.E. (1975), "Biological effects of high voltage electric fields: state-of-the-art review
    and program plan," Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA.

18.  Bridges, J.E. (1975), "Bibliography on biological effects of electric fields," Electric Power
    Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA.

19. Atkinson, R.E. (Chairman)  (1975),  "Microwaves as an adjunct to cancer  treatment,"
    Workshop sponsored by American Association for the Advancement of Science and the
    National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Health, Bethesda, MD.

20. Microwave Power Sumposium (1975), University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
    (Program) International Microwave Power Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

21. U.S. National Committee International Union  of Radio Science (1975), Abstracts, National
    Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C.

22. Weil, C.M., "Absorption characteristics of multi-layered  sphere models exposed to UHF-
    microwave radiation," IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. BME-222:468-477 (1975).

23. Weil, C.M., "Absorption of microwaves in medicine," Presentation at Annual Meeting of NC
    Section IEEE, Winston-Salem, NC, Nov. 1975.

24.  Allis, J.W., C.M.  Weil, and  D.E.  Janes, "A crossed-beam apparatus for simultaneous
    spectrophotometric  observation  and microwave exposure  of  biochemical  samples,"
    Presentation at IEEE AP/S URSI Symposium, Urbana, IL, June 1975; Rev. Sci.  Instrum. 46.
    1344-49(1975).

25.  Allis, J.W., "Irradiation of bovine serum albumin with a crossed-beam exposure-detection
    system," Ann. N.Y. Academy Sci. 247.312-322 (1975).
                                         139

-------
26.  Blackman, C.F., S.G. Benane, C.M. Weil, and J.S. AN, "Effects  of nonionizing  electro-
    magnetic  radiation on single-cell biologic systems," Ann.  N.Y. Acad. Sci. 247: 352-366
    (1975).

27.  Elder,        J.A. and J.S. Ali, "The effects of microwaves (2450 MHz) on isolated rat liver
    mitochondria," Ann, N.Y. Acad. Sci. 247.251-262 (1975).

28.  Ward, T.R., J.W. Allis, and J.E. Elder, "Measure of enzymatic activity coincident with 2450
    MHz microwave exposure," Presentation at IEEE AP/S URSI Symposium, Urbana, IL, June
    1975; J. Microwave Power—: 315-320 (1975).

29.  Allis, J.W. and M.L. Fromme, "Pseudosubstrate binding to ribonuclease during exposure to
    microwave radiation at 1.70 and 2.45 GHz," Presentation at Annual Meeting of USNC/URSI,
    Boulder, CO, October 1975.

30.  Blackman, C.F., M.C. Surles,  and S.G. Benane, "The effect of microwave exposure on
    bacteria," Ibid.

31.  Elder, J.A., J.S. Ali, and M.D. Long, "Respiratory activity of mitochondria exposed in a coaxial
    airline to 2000-4000 MHz microwave radiation," Ibid.

32. Smialowixz, R.J. "The effect of microwaves (2450 MHz) on lymphocyte blast transformation in
    vitro," Ibid.

33.  Elder, J.A., "Biological effects of nonionizing radiation," Presentation at the Second Joint
    U.S./U.S.S.R. Symposium on  the Comprehensive Analysis of the Environment, Honolulu,
    Hawaii, October 1975.

34.  Ali, J.S., "A versatile temperature controlled exposure chamber for microwave bioeffects
    research," IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. BME-22.76-77 (1975).

35.  Chen,  T.F., "Heat absorption via electromagnetic fields  in drosophila melanogaster,"
    Doctoral dissertation, Univ. of Oklahoma, 1975.

36.  Braver,      G. (Univ.  of  Oklahoma), "Effects of electromagnetic fields  of genetic
    phenomena," Presentation to OTP/ERMAC Side Effects Working Group, Washington, D.C.,
    August 1975.

37.  Berman, E., "Teratological effects of nonionizing electromagnetic radiation," Ibid.

38  Elder, J.A. and AT. Huang, "Cytogenetic and immunological studies of microwave irradiated
    animals," Ibid.

39.  Anon.  (1975), "Texas regulations  for  the control of radio-frequency electromagnetic
    radiation," (Draft, November 1,1975), Texas Department of Health Resources, Austin, TX.

40. American National Standards Institute (1974), "Safety level of electromagnetic radiation with
    respect of personnel, (ANSI C95.1-1974),  Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,
    New York, NY.
                                         140

-------
41. Rosenbaum, W.B. and R.E. Lee (1975), "Licensing of 765,000 volt ac power transmission
     lines in New York State: part a - present status," The Rochester Committee for  Scientific
     Information Bulletin 186A, Rochester, NY 14627.
                                          141

-------
INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES OF INTEREST TO THE U.S. - CHAPTER 8
INTRODUCTION

    From an international viewpoint there continues to be increased and extensive programs in
nuclear safety and safeguards, waste management and control, and environmental research. In
the area of nonionizing radiation, increased emphasis is being placed on gathering population
exposure data, establishing internationally acceptable nominclature and stimulating research on
the biological effects of nonionizing radiation. The continuing use of regional study groups, and
the conduct of training courses and international symposia assists many countries in developing
their nuclear power programs and providing the required environmental protection.

INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY (IAEA)

    In July 1975, the IAEA published its "Annual Report, 1 July 1974-30 June 1975," which
provides information  on the activities in radiation protection. The importance and scope of the
work on nuclear safety and environmental protection continues to grow and to be concentrated
increasingly on practical problems arising from the use of nuclear power. During the period under
review, the IAEA has completed the general plan for a comprehensive set of safety codes and
guides for nuclear power plants. The initial plan calls  for five codes  of practice and 12 safety
guides. It has also continued to give high priority to the problems of storing and disposing of
radioactive wastes and has formulated provisional definitions and recommendations regarding
the disposal of such wastes at sea.

    Three symposia were held on topical questions of nuclear safety;  the IAEA began work on a
research project regarding risk acceptance. The number of regional  study groups and training
courses and safety and siting missions has continued to increase to meet the needs of Member
States introducing or expanding their nuclear power programs.

    The IAEA continues to carry out extensive programs in nuclear safety, radiological safety
waste management, research and environmental protection studies. During the calendar year it
sponsored numerous regional meetings and symposia and has sent health and Safety missions to
countries seeking advice on particular problem areas. In  1975 the  IAEA held two important
symposia in the Unites States: (1) "International Symposium on Biological Effects of Low Level
Radiation Pertinent to Protection of Man and his Environment," Chicago, Illinois, 3-7 November
1975, cosponsored by the  World Health Organization; and (2) "International Symposium on
Transuranium Nuclides in the Environment," San Francisco, California,  17-21  November 1975,
cosponsored by the U.S. ERDA.

    The IAEA also has a very active program of Safeguards in Peaceful Nuclear Activities. On 30
June 1975,43 safeguards agreements with non-nuclear-weapon States party to Non Proliferation
Treaty (NPT) were in force; 22 of these agreements were with States that have significant nuclear
activities. Furthermore, safeguards were also being applied under then project agreements and
either unilateral submission agreements. All  of  the latter 38 agreements provide for the
application of safeguards under the Agency's Safeguards System.
                                        142

-------
    In particular, during the period covered by the Annual Report the Board approved:

    (a)     In connection with NPT, safeguards agreements with Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Gabon,
           Japan, Sudan, Sweden and Tonga:

    (b)     In connection with both NPT and the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in
           Latin American (Tlatelolco Treaty), safeguards agreements with El Salvador and
           Honduras;

    (c)     A Safeguards Transfer Agreement between the IAEA, Israel and the United States of
           America:

    (d)     An agreement with Argentina for the application of safeguards to the Embalse Power
           Reactor Facility; and

    (e)     Two agreements with Spain and Switzerland respectively for the  application of
           safeguards to nuclear material.

    The IAEA has continued to standardize procedures for applying safeguards, particularly
under NPT. It is reviewing existing Subsidiary Arrangements and "Facility Attachments" in the
light of experience and applying this experience in connection with newly concluded agreements.
Work has also started on standardizing the implementation of safeguards outside  the framework
of NPT.

    A list of nuclear installations under IAEA safeguards or containing material safeguarded
under arrangements approved by the Board is shown in the following breakdown on 30 June 1975
as compared to 30 June 1974:


Facilities

                                   NPT                         Non-NPT

                       20 June 1974  30  June  1975   30 June 1974   30 June  1975

Nuclear Power
  Stations                12             17              24               30

Other Reactors            45             55              65               60

Conversion Plants,
  Fabrication Plants,
  and Fuel Reprocess-
  ing Plants                7              9              19               20

Other Separate
  Accountability
  Areas                   28             86              88             109
                                        143

-------
    The IAEA's records showed the following quantities of nuclear material to be under its
safeguards:

                                 1969    1970     1971    1972       1973     1974

Plutonium (kg)                   824     770    1,726    2,900    4,730    6,300

Enriched uranium

    (a)  Total  element (tons)       -     243       522    1,178    1,865    2,305,

    (b)  Fissile content  (tons)   4.6     6.1     11.2     26.0     43.0     53.0'

Source material (tons)        1,070  1,146   1,200     2,145    3,370    3,910|

    During the year 1 July 1974-30 June 1975, the IAEA carried out 502 inspections in 37 nation*
(190 in connection with NPT), compared with 434 inspections (147 in connection with NPT) in 40
nations during the preceding year. Of the 502 inspections,  178 were made of power plants, 97 of
bulk fuel fabrication plants and 227 of other facilities including research reactors.

    NRC participated with the Department of State, Arms Control and Disarmament Agency and
ERDA in (1) continuing efforts to develop a U.S.-IAEA safeguards in the U.S., (2) preparation of a
Presidential report to Congress outlining  ways  of strengthening  IAEA safeguards through
allocation of funds made available under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1974, and (3) a meeting
with the Safeguards Policy Committee of the Atomic Industrial Forum to discuss the draft U.S.-
IAEA Agreement and its anticipated impact on U.S. industry.

    Under an anticipated U.S.-IAEA agreement, the international agency would implement IAEA
safeguards controls at certain U.S. Nuclear facilities. Affected plants would be mainly commercial
operations, defense-related facilities are exempt. The U.S. has volunteered to  apply IAEA
safeguards control to domestic operations to demonstrate willingness to accept the same
controls that nonnuclear-weapons countries are obliged to accept under the Treaty  on the Non-
Proliferation of  Nuclear  Weapons. The purpose of the IAEA  safeguards program is  timely
detection of the diversion of significant quantities of nuclear material or facilities from peaceful
uses to weapons use, and deterrence of such diversion by the risk of early detection. The U.S.-
IAEA Safeguards Agreement is expected to be approved in 1976. NRC will be the primary contact
with IAEA for licensed activities.

    During the  year, NRC contributed substantial support to the IAEA's intensified  program  for
the collation and preparation of internationally acceptable codes and guides on the siting, safety,
and reliability of nuclear power plants. In addition, NRC furnished IAES with a large number of U.S.
nuclear safety documents to be used as models and examples for international safety codes and
guides.

    NRC experts participated in other IAEA activities, including efforts to strengthen international
safeguards procedures and update recommendations to member countries on the protection of
nuclear facilities and materials from terrorist attacks.

    In 1975,  NRC also  supported IAEA training activities,  especially those directed towards
training technical and administrative manpower in developing countries which are planning or
constructing their first nuclear  power plants. In April and  May 1975, NRC hosted  and do-
sponsored with IAEA a three-week course on the principles and techniques of regulating nuclear
                                         144

-------
power for public health, safety, and environmental protection. Thirty-one foreign nuclear safety
officials attended the course. NRG also prepared the regulatory/safety aspects of a syllabus for a
15-week course on nuclear-power-project planning and implementation to be held at ERDA's
Argonne National Laboratory twice during 1976.

N!£LEAR  ENERGY AGENCY  (NEA) OF THE  ORGANIZATION  FOR ECONOMIC
COOPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT (OECD)

    The NEA acts as a service institution to the member nations for meeting the technical and
technological requirements for nuclear power "development within those countries. It provides
activity reports on a quarterly basis; the most recent one available at this time is the "Third Activity
Report, 1974," published in 1975.

    NEA, on its own behalf, or in cooperation with the IAEA, WHO and FAO has held several
symposia and meetings in the radiation protection area. For example, NEA convened a "Seminar
on the Application of the Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological
Protection," in Paris, France, 5-7 March 1975.

    The NEA has had a very active program in the waste management field, and has for several
years been responsible for the international  surveillance and control of a series of solid  low-
activity waste disposal operations at sea. During 1974 some 2,300 tons of waste incorporated in
concrete or bitumen, and  contained in some 4,000 metal drums  was disposed of  in the
northeastern Atlantic Ocean.  These wastes  came from nuclear energy establishments in the
Netherlands, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, and had a total activity of approximately 416
curies of alpha, 6,000 curies of beta-gamma, and 95,000 curies of low-energy beta in the form of
tritium-contaminated wastes, most of which had been accumulated over several years. The ocean
depth in the dumping area is some 4.5 km. A similar disposal operation was  conducted in June
1975  in the same ocean  site with  containerized wastes from Belgium,  The Netherlands,
Switzerland and the United Kingdom. In this operation approximately 4,450 tons were disposed of
and consisted of about 766 curies of alpha activity, 27,680 curies of  beta-gamma, and 29,690
curies of tritium contaminated waste.

INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION (ICRP)

     In 1975 the ICRP published ICRP Publication 23, "Report of the Task Group on Reference
Man." This report is the  culmination  of effort started in 1973  by ICRP Committee II  when it
requested the  Commission to establish Task  Groups for the  revision and extension of the
standard man concept.

     Estimates of dose equivalent resulting from human exposure to radionuclides that may enter
the body  depend upon many characteristics  which must be  indicated clearly if the ICRP
recommendations on dose commitment, body burden, and MPC's are to be applied correctly. For
this reason the Commission's recommendations relating to dose equivalent  from internally
deposited emitters have been specified in terms of a "Reference Man" whose characteristics, so
far as relevant to the Commission's recommendations, are carefully specified. Also because of
the increased emphasis on exposure of the population, it was desirable that the specifications of
the previous "Standard Man" be reviewed and revised to take account of present needs for
evaluation of exposure to radiation.
                                        145

-------
    ICRP Report 23 "Reference Man" fulfills the charter given to the Task Group and will be as
useful in meeting the needs of the health physicist now as was the "Standard Man" of 15 years
ago.

THE UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM (UNEP)

    The UNEP continues its interests in supporting standards  development, monitoring and
assessment of potential environmental radiation hazards, and waste management. The Fund of
UNEP has provided support for; ocean monitoring by the IAEA Marine Radioactivity Laboratory in
Monaco; for various  training  programs;  for  updating radiation protection  standards and
recommendations by the  International  Commission  on Radiological  Protection; and  an
International Atomic Energy Agency program to study nuclear waste management problems. In
addition, UNEP is supporting the WHO in developing health criteria for assessment of ultra-violet
radiation exposure; and criteria documents for selected  radionuclides,  in cooperation with
UNSCEAR, IAEA and WHO.

AGREEMENT BETWEEN CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES ON GREAT LAKES
WATER QUALITY

    During 1975 a team of technical  experts representing National,  State and  Provincial
governments of  Canada and the  U.S. completed a report entitled "Refined Radioactivity
Objective for the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement." U.S. participation came from EPA, NRC
and the States of Pennsylvania, New York and Minnesota.

    The report represents the joint recommendations of the U.S. and Canadian advisory groups
on a radioactivity objective to preserve the quality of the Great Lakes. The objective is in terms of a
dose equivalent to ICRP Reference Man from a standard annual intake of the Great Lakes water.
The recommended  objective for the general water quality in the Great Lakes is that level of
radioactivity which results in a whole body dose equivalent not exceeding one millirem. Release of
radioactive materials shall be as low as reasonably achievable and controlled by specific actions
at defined levels.

CENTER FOR  STANDARDIZATION  OF  PROTECTION  AGAINST  NONIONIZ1NQ
RADIATION

    The United States Public Health Service, Bureau of Radiological Health has been designated
as the World Health Organization (WHO) Collaborating Center for Standardization of Protection
Against  Nonionizing Radiation, and, concurrently, the Bureau  Director has been  appointed
Principal Investigator and  Head of  the Center. The Center will  assist WHO in  (1) estimating
present  levels  and  trends of human exposure from nonionizing radiation, (2) promoting  the
establishment  of instrument calibration and  reference   services  in various countries,  (3)
establishing internationally acceptable  nomenclature, definition  of terms and quantities, and
dosimetry methods, (4) training public health personnel, (5) alerting health officials to the need for
establishing nonionizing radiation control programs, and (6) stimulating international research on
biological effects and development of measuring instrumentation.

    An  information exchange program established between the Bureau of Radiological Health,
FDA and the Canadian Department of National  Health and Welfare's Health Protection Branch
provides a mechanism for the communication of information of mutual interest between the  two
health agencies which have major responsibility for controlling  radiation emission and human
                                        146

-------
exposure from electronic products in the United States and Canada. The thrust of the program is
to share knowledge and experience in the conduct of national compliance programs.

     Since there  is  no  international  commission  or  body  to  provide  guidance  and
recommendations in the nonionizing  radiation protection area, the International Radiation
Protection Association  (IRPA)  has decided that as part of its  activities it will serve as the
international organization to stimulate research and exchange of scientific information in this field;
and  also sponsor or cosponsor seminars and symposia concerning all radiation  protection
aspects of nonionizing radiation.

     In view of the lack of internationally accepted criteria on nonionizing radiation protection and
of wide discrepancies of criteria adopted in various countries and  by various schools of thought,
the Executive Council of IRPA agreed to establish a Study Group. Its task is to prepare documents
on criteria, standards and measurements for  protection against nonionizing radiation and to
prepare drafts of rules and procedures  for a possible future  international organization  or
commission to provide the necessary guidance on this subject. The Group is composed of experts
from France, Poland, Denmark, USA, and the USSR, and it has met several times this past year. A
report is in preparation  by the Working Group and the IRPA Executive Council will discuss the
report and present recommendations on the subject at the next IRPA International Congress in
Paris, France, April 1977.

INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON  RADIATION UNITS AND MEASUREMENTS
(ICRU)

     At its meeting in 1973, the ICRU discussed the  important proposal that the special radiation
units — curie, rad,  rem, and roentgen — be abolished. After careful study, the Commission
formulated the following statement on this topic.

                                Special Radiation Units

     For a number of years, the ICRU has recommended the use of the International System (IS)
of Units although it has continued to recognize and to  use the special radiation units - rad,
roentgen, curie and  rem. Recently, the International Committee on Weights and Measures has
listed the curie, rad and roentgen as temporary units.

     One may infer  that this committee visualizes the eventual replacement of these units  by
those of the international system. Of course,  if this replacement takes place, there will be no
modification of the  current definitions of the  now associated radiation quantities - activity,
absorbed dose, and exposure.

     Realizing that such a replacement might produce confusion or even possible mistakes in
radiation therapy, the Secretary of the ICRU prepared a document on the problem and published it
in pertinent professional journals. This document requested opinions and arguments for and
against the abandonment of the special radiation units. Comments are still being received. The
ICRU will formulate a recommendation on this matter at its July 1974 meeting. For the time being,
new ICRU Reports will state numerical values of quantities in both IS and special units.

     At its  1974 meeting, the Commission recognized that the  adoption of the international
system of units (IS) and the potential loss of the special radiation units raises severe problems.
However, for a number of years the ICRU  has recommendecLthe use of the IS although it has
continued to recognize the special radiation units. The problem was discussed  in detail by the
                                         147

-------
Commission.  To  facilitate  the possible  introduction  of the  IS to  radiology,  a  set  of
recommendations was agreed upon. Before dissemination of these recommendations, it was
found necessary  to  refer some specific questions for  consideration by the Consultative
Committee on Units (CCU) of the International Committee of Weights and Measures at its meeting
in September 1974.

     During the 1975 meeting, the Commission received a report on the action taken by the
General Conference  of  Weights and  Measures to provide special  names  for two  of the
International System (IS) units for quantities of importance in radiation work — the gray, as the
special name for the unit of absorbed dose, and the becquerel, as a special name of the unit for
activity. Related to this action was Commission approval of the proposal that the gray be available
for use as a special for the units of the quantities, absorbed dose, absorbed dose index, kerma,
and  specific energy.  Related also  to the action of the  General Conference of Weights and
Measures was the Commission's decision to undertake an examination of what should be done
about a name for the units  of dose equivalent and dose equivalent index. The Commission
assigned preliminary work on this task to the Committee  on Fundamental Quantities and Units.
Also related to the availability of the new names for the special units of the quantities absorbed
dose and activity was the Commission's decision that, in ICRU Reports to be produced in.the
future, the new names for these two units would be employed, but that the values of the quantities
in terms of the previously used specially named units would be set out parenthetically at the same
time.

     Thus the IS unit  the joule per  kilogram, when used  for ionizing radiation (absorbed dose,
kerma, specific energy imparted, etc.)  is given the name "gray" with the symbol Gy; 1 Gy —
tOOrad = 1 Jkg-. The SI unit the reciprocal second (one per second) for activity is given the name
"becquerel," symbol Bq; 1 Bq = 1s-1 = 2.703x10-11 Ci.

     The ICRU now recommends that the special units the rad, the roentgen and the curie be
gradually abandoned over a period of not less than about 10 years and replaced by the IS units the
gray (Gy), the coulomb per kilogram (C kg-1) and the becquerel (Bq), respectively. It is desirable
that preparatory steps be taken as soon as possible by various national and international bodies in
order to facilitate a smooth, safe and efficient transition.
                                        148

-------
                                   APPENDIX  A
   STATE LEGISLATION AND INITIATIVES AFFECTING  NUCLEAR ENERGY
Radiation Control

Arkansas H-659. Establishes within Department of Health a statewide radiation control financial
responsibility program. (Approved 3/12/75)

Illinois H-994. Amends current Radiation Protection Act to redefine "specific license" to include
"radioactive," rather than "by-product, source or special nuclear" materials. (Approved 9/11 /75)

Nevada A-761. Designates Division of Health as State radiation control agency; responsibilities
include licensing of radioactive materials. (Approved 5/11 /75)

New York S-6506. Amends general business law to prohibit possession or use of radioactive
material withouta license from the State's industrial commissioner. (Approved 8/9/75)

New  York A-7896.  Delegates State licensing authority of radioactive material to cities with
population of 1 million or more. (Approved 8/9/75)

North Carolina. A broad revision of North Carolina's Radiation Protection Act. Creates Radiation
Protection Commission. Authorizes environmental monitoring and surveillance  programs around
N-plants. (Ratified 6/23/75)

Oregon S-55. Empowers Health Division, Department of Human Resources, to take emergency
action to protect the public against radiation. (Approved 6/3/75)

 Virginia H-1694. Department of Health, as the State radiation  control agency,  to  develop
programs to deal with radiation emergencies. (Approved 3/22/75)


Power Plant Inspections

Colorado HB-1138.  Expands powers of State radiation control agency to permit inspections of
Federal installations without prior permission of appropriate Federal agency. (Approved 7/14/75)


Nuclear Studies

Connecticut  H-7661. Creates  Nuclear  Power  Evaluation  Council  to study  and  make
recommendations by 2/15/76  concerning  the extent  to which Connecticut  can regulate,
supervise or monitor N-plants. (Approved 7/1 /75)


Massachusetts H-5999. Directs a joint special committee to study nuclear power and its health
and safety effects. (Adopted 6/10/75)
                                         149

-------
Montana S-374.  Department of Natural Resources to study methods and effects of solution
extraction of uranium, and propose appropriate legislation. (Approved 4/8/75)

Rhode Island S-180. Economic Development Corporation to study location and development of
N-plants in Rhode Island. (Adopted 4/3/75)
Creation of Energy Agencies

Connecticut  H-8554.  Abolishes  Energy  Agency  and  consolidates planning  and  policy
responsibilities into Department of Planning and Energy Policy. (Approved 6/30/75)

Florida SB-123. Florida Environmental Reorganization Act of 1975. (see "Nuclear Power Plant
Siting") (Approved 5/22/75)

Kansas S-13. Creates Kansas Energy Office, including an Energy Advisory Council. (Approved
4/18/75)

New YorkA-8620. Originally intended to prohibit the construction of nuclear facilities, the bill, as
enacted, served only to reconstitute the Atomic and Space Development Authority (ASDA) into an
ERDA. (Approved 8/9/75)

North Carolina S-943. Creates Energy Policy Council, to serve as central energy policy planning
body. (Ratified 6/26/75)

Oregon S-483. Creates Department of Energy and Energy Facility Siting Council. (See "Nuclear
Power Plant Siting") (Approved 7/2/75)
Joint Agreements

Florida H-1329. Authorize publicly-and privately-owned electric utilities to jointly plan, finance,
acquire, construct, own,  manage,  operate and utilize joint  electric power supply projects.
(Approved 6/25/75)

Nebraska L-104 andL-62. Permits public power districts to enter into joint agreements concerning
electric generation or transmission facilities. (Approved 3/7/75)

North Carolina H-266. Authorizes municipalities to own and operate jointly electric generation and
transmission facilities. (Ratified 5/1 /75)

Utah H-111. Permits cities and regulated electric utilities to participate jointly in the development
of power facilities. (Approved 3/17/75)
Referendum

Massachusetts H-6530. Provides that the following issue: "Shall a second nuclear power station
be constructed within the town of Plymouth?" be placed on the next official ballot at the town
meeting of Plymouth. Results are not binding. (Approved 8/28/75)
                                         150

-------
Legislative Control Over Nuclear Plants


         H'127' Requires Ie9'slative approval  for construction of  nuclear plants. (Approved
Licensing of Guards

Florida SB-245. Requires Department of State to license private guards. (Affects guards at N-
plants) (Approved 6/27/75)
 Transportation

 Hawaii S-322. Relates to exterior markings on vehicles used to transport radioactive materials.
 (Approved 6/27/75)
Nuclear Power Plant Siting

Florida S-123. Creates Department of Environmental Regulation; transfers duties of Department
of Pollution Control to DER, except for certain powers, relating to power plant siting, which are
vested in the Governor and Cabinet. (Approved 5/22/75)

Minnesota S-1196. After 9/15/75, no large energy facility can be sited or constructed without a
certificate of need. (Approved 5/17/75)

Montana H-581. A power or energy conversion facility may not be constructed without a certificate
of environmental compatibility and public need. (Approved 4/21 /75)

North Dakota S-2050. Requires site compatibility certificate for construction of a power plant.
(Approved 4/9/75)

Oregon AJR-31. Abolishes Nuclear and Thermal Energy Council  and transfers its functions to
Energy Facility Siting Council. (Approved 7/2/75)

Wisconsin AB-463. Comprehensive siting bill, with siting authority vested in the Public Service
Commission. (Approved 9/24/75)

Wyoming  H-125. Industrial Siting Council permit required for construction of  power plant.
(Approved 3/8/75)
Disposal of Nuclear Wastes

Nevada AJR-15. Urges ERDA to choose  Nevada Test Site for disposal of nuclear wastes.
(Adopted 5/16/75)

Oregon S-163. Authorizes Department of Environmental Quality to establish and operate site(s)
for disposal of environmentally hazardous wastes. (Approved 6/30/75)
                                         151

-------
Miscellaneous

North Carolina S-420. Establishes policy to govern expansion of electric utility facilities. (Ratified
6/24/75)

Oregon H-2629. Permits holder of a nuclear plant construction  permit to prepay local taxes.
(Approved 7/2/75)
     Antlnuclear Initiatives

     During the year various organizations within the States have called for moratoria on the
construction and operation of nuclear power plants. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
has compiled a listing of such activities and the status of the initiatives within the States is listed
below (as of February 1976).
 State

Arizona


Arkansas


California
Colorado



Idaho

Iowa



Kansas

Maine
                 Status of Initiative

- Initiative drive launched 12/19/75—55,220 signatures
  required by 7/9/76.   (For  Nov. ballot)

- Targeted  by Critical Mass '75 for  an initiative,  but
  no evidence of activity to launch  a  drive.

- Has qualified for June 8 ballot   Secured  397,556
  signatures (85,000 more than required).   Legislative
  committee hearings held  by Assemblyman Charles Warren
  and Senator Alfred Alquist.

- Second initiative,  to  render above measure  null and
  void, being circulated to collect 312,404  signatures
  by 3/17/76. (For Nov. ballot)

- Drive launched 11/3/74—63,040  signatures required by
  4/3/76.  Over 50,000 collected  as of 1/15/76.
  (For Nov.  ballot)

- Signature drive expected  to begin soon.

- Iowa does not allow initiatives; however,  plans are
  being made  for recall elections against State officials
  who support nuclear power.

- (Same as  Iowa)

- Drive launched Sept. 1975 for  some 45,000 signatures;
  reported to be well on the  way.   Petition  to be pre-
  sented  to  Legislature  in Jan. 1977;  if rejected, it
  will  become  a ballot issue in  Nov. 1977.
                                         152

-------
Massachusetts
Michigan


Mississippi

Montana


Nebraska

Nevada



North  Dakota


Ohio
Oklahoma


Oregon
South Dakota


Utah

Washington
- Failed to collect 56,000 valid signatures,  but  will
  present  those  that were obtained  to the  Legislature
  in attempt to influence  legislation.   Next  opportunity
  for ballot - fall 1978.

- Michigan PIRC  expects  to start  campaign  about  March to
  collect  212,000 signatures.   (For  Nov.  ballot)

- Rumored that  signature  collecting  will start soon.

- Drive launched 10/1/75—16,000  signatures required
  by July.  (For Nov. ballot)

- People's Lobby active but no evidefice of drive.

- If California initiative succeeds,  similar  drive
  possible  in Nevada.   Environmentalists  opposing  nuclear
  waste storage.

- Drive launched in January—10,000 signatures  required
  by 8/8/76.   (For Nov.  ballot)

- Initiative  petition for constitutional  amendment to
  require  legislative approval for construction of
  nuclear  plants submitted to  State  attorney general
  in January for approval of wording.   Approx. 307,000
  signatures required.  (For Nov.  ballot)

- Drive to start  March 1  for 65,000 signatures by 6/1/76.
  (For  Nov. ballot)

- Has  qualified for November 2 ballot   More than
  46,235  signatures obtained;  however,  public seems
  confused, e.g., a recent poll showed  53% favor
  initiative,  54% oppose  nuclear  moratorium,  72%
  oppose  nuclear power  ban,  and  66%  approve of Trojan
  nuclear  plant.

- Second  initiative being  considered - to prohibit
  operation of Trojan.

- Petition  being  withdrawn in favor  of moratorium
  legislation.

- Signature collecting to  start soon.

- Petition  filed  with Secretary of State  February 3.
  Would  require 118,000 signatures.  (For  Nov. ballot)
                                          153

-------
                                  APPENDIX B
          LIST  OF  RADIATION PROTECTION PUBLICATIONS  - 1975
EPA PUBLICATIONS

    EPA TECHNICAL REPORTS

EPA-520/1-75-001
EPA-520/3-75-003

EPA-520/3-75-006

EPA-520/7-75-007

EPA-520/6-75-010

EPA-520/4-75-011

EPA-520/3-75-012

EPA-520/6-75-013


EPA-520/7-75-014

EPA-520/3-75-015


EPA-520/3-75-016


EPA-520/5-75-018

EPA-520/3-75-019


EPA-520/4-75-020

EPA-520/3-75-021


680/1-75-001


680/4-75-001

680/4-75-002a
Manual of Protective Action Guides & Protective Actions for Nuclear
Incidents

Environmental Analysis of a Generic Fuer Reprocessing Facility

Significant Actinides in the LWR & LMFBR Nuclear Fuel Cycles

National Radiation Protection Program Strategy

Gamma Radiation Surveys and Inactive Uranium Mill Sites

Radionuclide Transport in the Great Lakes

Reactor Safety (WASH-1400): A Review of the Draft Report

Ground Water Quality Impacts of Uranium Mining & Milling in the Grants
Mineral Belt

EPA Review of Radiation Protection Activities-1974

Risk Assessment of Storage & Transportation of Liquified Natural Gas &
LP-Gas

The Consequence  & Frequency of Selected Man-Originated Accident
Events

16N Skyshine Survey at a #2400 MW(+) power plant

Radionuclide production, transport, and release from normal operation
of liquid-metal-cooled Fast Breeder Reactors

Nuclear Medicine Environmental Discharge Measurement

Preliminary data on the occurrence of trans-uranium nuclides in the
environment at the radioactive waste burial site, Maxey Flats, Kentucky

1FA082 Synergistic Effect of Polonium-210 and Cigarette Smoke in
Rats

IHA325 Handbook of Radiochemical Analytical Methods.

IHA327 Radioactivity Standards Distribution Program-1975
                                       154

-------
680/4-75-002b
680/4-75-005
1HA327 Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory   Inter-Comparison
Studies Program-1975

1HA327 Tentative Reference Method for the Measurement of Gross
Alpha and Gross Beta Radioactivities in Environmental Waters
    EPA TECHNICAL NOTES
EPA 906/9-002


ORP/CSD-75-3


ORP/CSD-75-4


ORP/EAD-75-1

ORP/LV-75-1


ORP/LV-75-2


ORP/LV-75-4


ORP/LV-75-5

ORP/LV-75-6


ORP/LV-75-7(A)
Water Quality Impacts of Uranium Mining and Milling Activities in the
Grants Mineral Belt, New Mexico

Radioactivity distribution in phosphate products, by-products, effluents,
and wastes August 1975

Preliminary findings radon daughter levels in structures constructed on
reclaimed Florida phosphate land September 1975

"An Analysis of Broadcast Radiation Levels in Hawaii August 1975

Radioactivity  in Construction  Materials—A Literature  Review and
Bibliography

Radiation Survey of Dwellings in Cane Valley, Arizona and Utah, for Use
of Uranium Mill Tailings

Summary of Ground-Water  Quality Impacts of Uranium Mining and
Milling in the Grants Mineral Belt, New Mexico

Gamma Radiation Surveys at Inactive Uranium Mill Sites

Individual and Population Doses for 1972 Discharges from the Ginna
Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Number One

Radon Exhalation  from Uranium Mill Tailings Piles—Description and
Verification of the Measurement Method
     EPA AUTHORED REPORTS

J.S.  AH: A Versatile Temperature Controlled Exposure Chamber for Microwave Bioeffects
     Research. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. BME-2276-77 (1975).

J.W.  Allis, C.M.  Weil,  and  D.E.  Janes:  A  Crossed-Beam Apparatus for Simultaneous
     Spectrophotometric Observation and' Microwave Exposure of Biochemical Samples. Rev.
     Sci. Instrument. 46.1344-1349 (1975).

C.F.  Blackman, S.G. Benane, and J.S. AN: Effects of Nonionizing Electromagnetic Radiation on
     Single-Cell Biologic Systems. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 247.352-366 (1975).

S.J. Bursian, D.F. Cahill, J.W. Laskey, and L.N. Parker: Some Aspects of Brain Neurochemistry
     After Intrauterine Exposure to Tritium. Int. J. Rad. Biol. 27.455-461 (1975).
                                        155

-------
D.F. Cahill, J.F. Wright, J.H. Godbold, J.M. Ward, J.W. Laskey. and E.A. Tompkins: Neoplastic and
    Life-Span Effects of Chronic Exposure to Tritium I. Effects on Adult Rats Exposed During
    Pregnancy. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 55: 371-374 (1975).

D.F. Cahill, J.F. Wright, J.H. Godbold, J.M. Ward, J.W. Laskey, and E.A. Tompkins: Neoplastic and
    Life-Span Effects of Chronic Exposure to Tritium II. Rats Exposed in Utero. J. Natl. Cancer
    Inst. 551165-1169(1975).

J.A. Elder and J.S.  Allis:  The  Effects of Microwaves  (2450  MHz)  on Isolated  Rat Liver
    Mitochondria. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 247.251-262 (1975).

D.E. Janes, N.N. Handin, T.W. Athey, and R.A. Tell, "EPA Nonionizing Radiation Measurements
    Program,"  in  Summary of  Electrogagnetic  Radiation Management Advisory  Council
    (ERMAC) Work Session and Measurement of Environmental  Levels of Nonionizing EM
    Radiation Office of Telecommunications Policy, Washington, D.C. (February 1975).

D.E. Janes: "Electric Effects of Extra-High Voltage  and Ultrahigh Voltage Transmission Lines,"
    Westinghouse International  School for  Environmental Management,  Colorado State
    University, July 1975.

W.P. Kirk, P.W. Parrish and D.A. Morken: In Vivo Solubility of "Kr in Guinea Pig Tissues. Health
    Phys. ££249-261 (1975).

W.P. Kirk and D.A. Morken: In Vivo Kinetic Behavior and Whole Body Partition Coefficients for "Kr
    in Guinea Pigs. Health Phys. 29.263-273 (1975).

W.P. Kirk, B.F. Rehnberg, and D.A. Morken: Acute Lethality in Guinea Pigs Following Respiratory
    Expousre to MKr. Health Phys. 29.275-284 (1975).

W.P. Kirk: Behavior of "Kr in Animals. In Noble Gases, A.A. Moghissi and R.E. Stanley, Eds.,
    Messenger Graphics, Phoenix (1975).

R.A. Tell and D.E. Janes: "Broadcast Radiation: A  Second Look," presented at the 1975 U.S.
    National Committee of the International Radio Science Union  (URSI)  Meeting,  20-23
    October 1975, Boulder, CO. (To be published in the conference proceedings.)

T.R. Ward, J.W. Allis,  and J.A. Elder: Measure of Enzymatic Activity Coincident with 2450 MHz
    Microwave Exposure. J. Microwave Power 10.315-320 (1975).

C.M. Weil:  Absorption  Characteristics of  Multi-Layered  Sphere Models Exposed to UHF-
    Microwave Radiation. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. BME-22.468-477 (t975).

    EPA PUBLIC HEARINGS

        Plutonium

           Vol I       Dec  10-11,   1974     April 1975
           Vol II      Jan 10,  1975         July 1975
           Vol III      Additional  Materials
                      Received              1975
                                        156

-------
    t»:VIRONMENTAL RADIATION DATA

       EPA, EERF, Montgomery, Alabama

Report 1         June 1975 (January, February and March Data)

Report 2         September 1975 (April, May, and June Data)

Report 3         January 1976 (July, August and September Data)

Report 4         April 1976 (October, November and December Data)
BRH PUBLICATIONS

    BRH TECHNICAL REPORTS
FDA 75-8007



FDA 75-8020



FDA 75-8021


FDA 75-8022


FDA 75-8023

FDA 75-8024

FDA 75-8025


FDA 75-8026


FDA 75-8027

FDA 75-8028



FDA 75-8029

FDA 75-8031
A  Standard  Technique for Estimating Patient  Exposure  from  Photo-
fluorographic X-Ray Machines  (GPO 017-015-00086-9, $0.70) (PB 244
738/AS,mfonly).

Automation and Scheduling and File  Room  Functions of  a Diagnostic
Radiology  Department,  Volume I (GPO 017-015-00082-6, $2.35) (PB 241
975/AS,mfonly).

Automation and Scheduling and File  Room  Functions of  a Diagnostic
Radiology Department, Volume II (NTIS PB 242 508/AS, $13.00).

The  Survey  of   Medical  Radium  Installations  in  Wisconsin  (GPO-
017-015-00088-5, $0.85) (PB 245 682/AS, mf only).

Progress in Radiation Protection 1974.

Gonad Shielding in Diagnostic Radiology (GPO 017-015-00087-7, $0.50).

Index to  Selected Acoustic and Related  References  (PB  239-805/AS,
$11.25).

Preliminary Evaluation of Commercially Available Laser Protective Eyewear
(PB 241 903/AS, $3.75).

Radiological Health Training Resources 1975.

Precise Microwave Power Density Calibration Method  Using the Power
Equation Techniques March 1975 (GPO 017-015-00084-2, $0.85) (PB 242
883/AS,mfonly).

BRH Regulatory Guidelines For Diagnostic X-Ray Systems.

Measurements of the Radiation Emissions of the Nuva-Lite Dental Appliance
(GPO 017-012-00228-5, $1.05) (PB 242 8827AS, mf only).
                                       157

-------
FDA 75-8032     Changes in Radiofrequency E-Field Strengths Within a Hospital During a 16-
                Month Period (GPO-017-012-00229-3, $1.05) (PB 244 737/ASm mf only).

FDA 75-8033     Legislative History of Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act of 1968
                (GPO 017-015-00089-3, Volumes I and 2, $24.00).

FDA 76-8001     Public   Health   Implications   of   Radioluminous   Materials   (GPO
                017-015-00090-7, $1.10).

FDA 75-8002     Assembler's Guide to Diagnostic X-Ray Equipment.

FDA 76-8003     Nationwide Evaluation of X-Ray Trends.

FDA 76-8004     Measurement of Power Density from Marine Radar (in preparation).

FDA 76-8005     Radiation Safety Handbook for Ionizing & Nonionizing Radiation.

FDA 76-8006     Directory of Personnel Responsible for Radiological Health Programs.

FDA 76-8007     Electronics in the Home.

FDA 76-8008     XRays...HowSafe?

FDA 76-8009     Federal/State Radiation Control Legislation 1974.

FDA 76-8010     CSU-PHS Collaborative Radiological Health Laboratory Annual Report 1974.

FDA 76-8011     Nashville Dental Project: An Educational Approach for Voluntary Improvement
                of Radiographic Practice.

FDA 76-8013     A Comparison of Instrument Performance in Measuring X-Ray Tube Current
                and mAs.

FDA 76-8014     Suggested Optimum Survey Procedures for Diagnostic X-Ray Equipment.

FDA 76-8015     A System for Estimation of Mean Active Bone Marrow Dose.

FDA 76-8016     A Study of Retakes in Radiology Departments of Two Large Hospitals.

FDA 76-8017     Report of State and Local  Radiological Health Programs, Fiscal Year 1974.

FDA 76-8020     Medical  X-Hay Photo-Optical Systems Evaluation.

FDA 76-8021     A Review of Biological Effects and Potential Risks Associated with Ultraviolet
                Radiation as Used in Dentistry.

FDA 76-8022     The Use of lodine-125 for  Interstitial Implants.

    BRH ANNUAL REPORTS

1975  Annual  Report   Administration of the Radiation Cootrol for
                                        158

-------
    Health and Safety   Act of 1968    Public Law 90-602
    April 1,  1976.

Seventh Annual National Conference on Radiation Control
ERDA PUBLICATIONS

    ERDA TECHNICAL REPORTS

ERDA0010      Interagency Radiological Assistance Plan.

ERDA0017      Emergency Handling of Radiation  Accident Cases. Physicians.  Previously
                WASH 1321

ERDA0018      Emergency Handling of Radiation Accident Cases. Nurses. Previously WASH
                1322

ERDA0019      Emergency Handling of Radiation Accident Cases. Hospital Administrators.
                Previously WASH 1323

ERDA0020      Emergenty Handling  of  Radiation Accident  Cases.  Ambulance-Rescue
                Squads. Previously WASH 1324

ERDA0021      Emergency Handling of Radiation Accident Cases. Police. Previously WASH
                1325

ERDA0022      Emergency Handling of Radiation Accident Cases. Sheriffs. Previously WASH
                1326

ERDA0027      Emergency Handling of Radiation Accident Cases. Firemen. Published as
                ERDA 76-23

ERDA0034      Radiological Resurvey of Food, Soil, Air and Groundwater at Bikini Atoll 1972.

ERDA0039      The  1974 Review of the Research Program of the Division of  Controlled
                Thermonuclear Research.

ERDA0044      Peaceful Nuclear Explosions

ERDA0056      Status of Safety Technology for Radiological Consequence Assessment of
                Postulated Accidents in Liquid Metal  Fast Breeder Reactors.

EFHDA0060      Energy Research and  Development Administration Radiological Assistance
                Plan.

ERDA0092      Proceedings of the Third Environmental Protection Conference, Chicago, III.
                September 23-26,1975 CONF-750967 2 Vols.
                                       159

-------
NRC PUBLICATIONS

NUREG-75/001  "Summary of Radioactivity Released in Effluents from Nuclear Power
                Plants  During 1973."  Office  of Operations Evaluations.  Jan.  1975.

NUREG-75/021  "Detailed Measurement of ml in Air, Vegetation and Milk  Around Three
                Operating  Reactor Sites."  Office of Inspection  and Enforcement.
                Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Energy Research  and Development Administration
                and the Environmental Protection  Agency.   Mar. 1975.

NUREG-75/032  "Occupational Radiation Exposure at Light-Water-Cooled  Power Reactors,
                1969-1974."  Office  of Nuclear Reactor Regulation  (Technical Review).
                June 1975.

NUREG-75/038  "Environmental  Survey of Transportation of Radioactive Materials to
                and from  Nuclear Power  Plants."   (Supp.  1 to  WASH 1238)   Office of
Standards Development  (Engineering Standards).  Apr. 1975.

NUREG-75/064  "Doses from  Radioactive  Actinides Released in  Liquid Effluents from
                Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactors."  Office of  Nuclear
Reactor Regulation (Technical Review).  June  1975.

NUREG-75/068  "Proceedings of the  1975 Federal-State Conference, Proceedings on
                Power  Plant Siting."   Office  of  International and State Programs.
July  1975.

NUREG-75/090  "Report to Congress on Abnormal Occurrences:  January  - June 1975."
                Office  of Management Information and  Program  Control.   Oct. 1975.

NUREG-75/108  "Seventh Annual  Occupational Radiation Exposure Report  for  Certain
                NRC Licensees - 1974."  Office  of Nuclear Reactor Regulation  (Technical
Review).   Oct. 1975.

NUREG-75/111  (Reprint of WASH 1293).  "Guide and  Checklist for Development and Evaluation
                of State and  Local Government Radiological Emergency  Response Plans in
Support of Fixed Nuclear Facilities."   Office of International and  State Programs.  Oct.  1975.

     NRC  REGULATORY GUIDES

Regulatory  Guide 4.1        (Revision 1)  "Programs for Monitoring  Radioactivity in the
                           Environs  of Nuclear Power  Plants."

Regulatory  Guide 7.3        "Procedures for Picking Up and Receiving Packages  of
                           Radioactive Materials."

Regulatory  Guide 7.4        "Leakage Tests on  Packages for Shipment of  Radioactive
                           Materials."

Regulatory  Guide 7.5        "Administrative Guide  for Obtaining Exemptions from  Certain
                           NRC Requirements Over Radioactive Material Shipments."

Regulatory  Guide 8.8        (Revision 1)  "Information  Relevant  to Maintaining  Occupational
                           Radiation  Exposures As  Low As Is  Reasonably Achievable."
                                        160

-------
Regulatory Guide 8.13        "Instruction Concerning Prenatal Radiation Exposure."

Regulatory Guide 8.13        (Revision   1)   "Instruction  Concerning   Prenatal  Radiation
                            Exposure."

NUCLEAR SCIENCE ABSTRACTS

Ballou, J.E. and G.E. Dagel, "Long Term Effects of Inhaled Pu (NO3)4 and Fs (NO3)3 in Rats."

Cheng, C.H., K.Y. Liu, C.T. Yung and P.S. Weng, "Implementation of a Nationwide Program on
    Health and Safety of Medical X-Rays."

Dean, P.M., R.V. Griffith and A.L. Anderson, "Design Criteria for Phantoms for Calibration  of
    External Detectors for the In-Vivo Assay of Plutonium."

Failla, L "Radiation Protection Concepts: Proposal for a New Criterion."

Gamertsfeler, C.C., "Other Considerations in Establishing Standards."

Hendee,  W.R. and  E.L  Chaney, "Diagnostic  X-Ray  Survey Procedures for  Fluoroscopic
    Installations."

Jeiter, W., "Radiation Protection in Medicine." (In German)

Lingjaerde, R., "Ionizing Radiation: Present Valves Too Strict." (In Norwegian)

Linsley, G.S., "Radioactive Relics."

Lovins, A.B. and W.C. Patterson, "Plutonium Particles: Some Like Them Hot."

Mummery, P.W., "Health and Safety and the Nuclear Industry."

Norwood, W.D., "Health Protection of Radiation Workers."

Odor, D.L., "Health Physicist and Nuclear Power Plant."

Park,  J.F., R.L Buschbom, D.L Catt, O.K. Craig, G.E. Dagle, P.L Hackett, G.J.  Powers, H.A.
    Ragan, C.R. Watson, "Dose Effect Studies with Inhaled 238PuO2 in Beagles."

Ryer, F.H., "New Health and Safety Act as it Relates to Occupational Radiation Exposure."
                                          161

-------
                                  APPENDIX C


    Federal agency organizational charts depicting only those respective components which
engage in radiation protection activities are as follows:

    Figure 1     Summary Diagram of Major Federal Radiation Protection Functions

    Figure 2     EPA

    Figure 3     ERDA

    Figure 4     DHEW-FDA-BRH

    Figure 5     NRC
                                       162

-------
                                                                                         SUMMARY DIAGRAM OF MAJOR FEDERAL RADIATION PROTECTION FUNCTION*
                                                           EHVIHnwCHTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                                                      Advil* the  President on r*dlatlon Batter*
                                                      Includinli nuidance for ill Frdaral ae,**clM
                                                      IB the formulation of radiation •ttndard*
                                                      and proirvM of cooperation with State*.
0>
CO
H
1. .(Bui
1. Canal
• t nu
UCLEAR •EGULATMY COM
ore*, byproduct, and
tr tranavlaalon line*
dor B*neratln| plan
HI SSI OP
•ad production
tp*clal nuclear
•ct of ht|h
that originate
«t
•••«!••• •
urnor or inuio.
""•"'^•" "'-'- "

J" "
EHERCT t£SEAtC«
•jfrtf and
CKDA owned
2. Engage* In
bloaedlcal.
Mur». -»d
4 DEVELOPMENT ADM I Ml STRATI OK
for the radiation health and
and operated and EUU-coo-
rated facllltlea.
phyelcal, and safety reeearch
utlll>attM tecbnologla..
                                                                       DCPABTrCKT OP HEALTH,  EDUCATION, t VELFAU
1.  Regulate radlwdw wterlall In food
   and druga, **4 the HH of radtopkar-
OCPA
Regulate lor
•me* are re|
RTrOTT Or TtAKPCKTATlOB
aaf. tra*
r. and by
ulated by
•rrt.il.
the U.S
port.
• (p*>
Poml
highway
atal lal
al S«r*
P-
ce).
1.  Generally applicable envl rnnaenlal atandarda.
1.  Hater quality criteria;  effluent llaltatloM;
   dln-har»e pcralti; dl«char«r* of haiardoM
   •ub.t*ncc«.
).  SollJ luatv dlxpuul Huldelloe*; lutlonal
   haiardnu* H.ntn dKpoaal  *ll*>m plan.
4.  HatiiKval prlakarv-vtnJ wrondar* drlaalBi tuter
   rexuldtfofi*; undvriroiotd lajertlm cMlrol
   rnul«tl(m«; tmnftr^f protection of drinking
   water.

   atandardi; emliilim ntandard* for hatardovm
   air  pnlluunt*; rmrTHvncj  cnntrnl of air
   pollution; rpvlrv and publliih rnavnl* on
   cnvlconaB-nt.il Inatact nf  pro««Bed letl"l*t Ion,
   •Jj-.r Pe4eral action*, out •ropotrd re«ula-

                                                                                                                                 arrh. I
                                                                                                                                            tltatlnaa , •tudlel.  publlr
                                                                                                                             ncrpt (a) rmulitlon nf radial I™ from c

                                                                                                                             hrallnK jrta.  and  (r) occuaatlmMl espoau
                                                                                                                             I.) radial Ion.
                                                                                                                                        11 HI,-.;  prnvfdr
                                                                                                                                      coa^llancr:  report
                                                                                                                                                         nc* for FiKlrr.il
                                                                                                                              oa rcdrr.i
                                                                                                                           I.  laaw pcraltH fur di^>in* of radioactive
                                                                                                                                                                              \
                                                                                                                                                                                  %. H.-1 in-  priKJurl .-pri I f lr.it l»n and  Libeling-
                                                                                                                                                                                  h. AJ-lnlttrr  Fcdf-r.il M.».irdou> Subnianm
                                                                                                                                                                                     A.-1.
Entabllah orcapatIooaI ufety a«d health pro(r*«
pro«al|t.-ite •tandardi; rafnrccanvt: reacarck;
tralnlwt; o«««r«tln> pn>iirn*H with State*: (*"i
.ippllcable to MitrrlalB controlled »r *•* hKlei
                                                                                                                                                                                                 \
FKDtJtAL ATl^Clrs WITH TUir&DICTlOB
IK SPKCIAL IXPFXTIU
uf .Ml Fi-drral .iRi-nry n->-onvad^l I.XIB «r
-tlfortlne the quality of the feaua
F>J>UtAI. COHMJNI CAT ICMS CTMIISSI
vurcri iwd In . oonuilc-Jt lonn (Offlr
TricconautliatloaB Policy ret)ol«ttfB |
•ourcec).
V
HI
•Icrowave
F (.f

rTOOUJ. rawvm
R*Rula(c- hi Kb vnltaK*-
(IlkUrd t» vurh llnr
and r— *--d .tor..Re ).
                                                                                                                                            FIGURE   1

-------
                                                   EPA ADMINISTRATOR
                                               ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
                                                      FOR AIR AND
                                                   WASTE MANAGEMENT
                                             OFFICE OF RADIATION PROGRAMS

                                            DEPUTY ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
                                                FOR RADIATION PROGRAMS
 CRITERIA & STANDARDS
      DIVISION
                                                                                            PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
                                                                                                  OFFICE
  ENVIRONMENTAL
STANDARDS BRANCH
 FEDERAL GUIDANCE
     BRANCH
BIOEFFECTS ANALYSIS
     BRANCH
  ECONOMICS AND
    STATISTICAL
EVALUATION BRANCH
TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT
       DIVISION
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
        DIVISION
     ENERGY SYSTEMS
     ANALYSIS BRANCH
    SURVEILLANCE
       BRANCH
    RADIATION SOURCE
    ANALYSIS BRANCH
     PROTECTIVE
      ACTION
      BRANCH
                           ELECTROMAGNETIC
                          RADIATION ANALYSIS
                               BRANCH
EASTERN ENVIRONMENTAL
  RADIATION FACILITY
OFFICE OF RADIATION
PROGRAMS - LAS VEGAS
   TECHNICAL SERVICES
         BRANCH
   FIELD STUDIES
      BRANCH
       MONITORING
       ANALYTICAL
     SUPPORT BRANCH
    EVALUATION
      BRANCH
                               ENVIRONMENTAL
                               STUDIES BRANCH
                                                    FIGURE 2
                                                      RADIOCHEMISTRY &
                                                     NUCLEAR ENGINEERING
                                                           BRANCH

-------
                                                             ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
0>
Ol
                                                                                  ADMINISTRATOR
             ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
               FOR NUCLEAR ENERGY
                                                ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
                                              FOR ENVIRONMENT AND SAFETY
DIVISION OF
NAVAL
REACTORS
       PITTSBURGH
       NAVAL
       REACTORS
       OFFICE
        SCHENECTADY
        NAVAL
        REACTORS
        OFFICE
DIVISION OF
NUCLEAR
FUEL CYCLE
AND PRODUCTION
                   DIVISION OF
                   ENVIRONMENTAL
                   CONTROL
                   TECHNOLOGY
                   GRAND
                   JUNCTION
                   OFFICE
                                                                     ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
                                                                    FOR SOLAR, GEOTHERMAL AND
                                                                     ADVANCED ENERGY SYSTEMS
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
 FOR NATIONAL SECURITY
       DIVISION OF
       REACTOR
       DEVELOPMENT
       AND
       DEMONSTRATION
                   DIVISION OF
                   NUCLEAR
                   RESEARCH
                   AND
                   APPLICATIONS

-------
                                            DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFARE
                                                      ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR HEALTH
                                                       FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
                                                               COMMISSIONER
                                                            DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
8
                                                      BUREAU OF RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH
                                                           OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR
                                             OFFICE OF
                                             MEDICAL AFFAIRS
                   DIVISION OF
                   COMPLIANCE
DIVISION OF
BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
                                     OFFICE OF THE
                                     ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR
                                     FOR ADMINISTRATION
DIVISION OF
ELECTRONIC
PRODUCTS
DIVISION OF
RADIOACTIVE
MATERIALS AND
NUCLEAR MEDICINE
DIVISION OF
TRAINING
AND MEDICAL
APPLICATIONS
                                                                   FIGURE 4

-------
                                                NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
                                                          THE COMMISSION
                                                            5 MEMBERS
                                                      EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR
                                                            OPERATIONS
CD
              OFFICE OF
         STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIALS
  SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS
 OFFICE OF NUCLEAR
REACTOR REGULATION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION
 AND ENFORCEMENT
DIVISION OF
ENGINEERING
STANDARDS







DIVISION OF
SITING, HEALTH
AND
SAFEGUARDS
STANDARDS
                                                                                      LT1
DIVISION OF
FUEL CYCLE
AND MATERI-
ALS SAFETY






DIVISION OF
OPERATING
REACTORS







DIVISION OF
SITE SAFETY
AND ENVIRON-
MENTAL
ANALYSIS





DIVISION OF
PROJECT
MANAGE-
MENT






DIVISION OF
SYSTEMS
SAFETY







DIVISION OF
MATERIALS
INSPECTION
PROGRAMS

DIVISION OF
REACTOR
INSPECTION
PROGRAMS

DIVISION OF
FIELD
OPERATIONS



-------
                             LIST OF ACRONYMS






ACGIH    American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists



AEC      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, DHEW



CFR      Code of Federal Regulations



CIA       Central Intelligence Agency



COM M    Department of Commerce



CW       Continuous Wave



DAP      Diammonium Phosphate



DCPA     Defense Civil Preparedness Agency



DHEW    Department of Health, Education and Welfare



DNA      Defense Nuclear Agency, DOD



DOD      Department of Defense



DOL      Department of Labor



DOT      Department of Transportation



EAD      Environmental Analysis Division, ORP



ECAC     Electromagnetic Compatibility Analysis Center, DOD



EHF      Extremely High Frequency, 30-300 GHz



EIS       Environmental Impact Statement



ELF       Extremely Low Frequency, 3-3000 Hz



EM       Electromagnetic
                                      168

-------
EMR       Electromagnetic Radiation



EMSL      Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, DHEW



EPA       Environmental Protection Agency



ERAS      Electromagnetic Raidation 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



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



ICRP       International Commission on Radiation Protection



IRAC       Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee



ITS       Institute of Telecommunication Science, COMM




kV        Kilovolt (1,000 volts)






                                       169

-------
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 hHz)




mrem      Millirems



mW        Milliwatt, 1/1,000 watt




MW        Microwave




NASA      National Aeronautics and Space Administration




NBS       National Bureau of Standards, COMM




NOT       Nondestructive Testing




NEPA      National Environmental Protection Act




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




ORD       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






                                       170

-------
TLD



TSP



UHF



USDA



USEPA



USIA



VA



VHF



VLF



WHO
Radio Frequency



Super High Frequency, 3-30 GHz (3,000-30,000 MHz)



Thermoluminescent Dosimeter



Triple Superphosphate



Ultra High Frequency, 300-3,000 MHz



U.S. Department of Agriculture



U.S. Environmental Protection



U.S. Information Agency



Veterans Administration



Very High Frequency, 30-300 MHz



Very Low Frequency, 3-30 kHz



World Health Organization, United Nations
                              171
                                                   U S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 1975—  213-310/153

-------