EPA-520/1-76-010
RADIOLOGICAL QUALITY OF
THE ENVIRONMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Radiation Programs
-------
RADIOLOGICAL QUALITY OF
THE ENVIRONMENT
\
MAY 1976
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Radiation Programs
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
Contributors
The following individuals contributed to the writing of this
document.
Earl A. Ashton, Jr.
Jon A. Broadway
Mary Anne Culliton
Philip A. Cuny
David L. Duncan
Kurt L. Feldmann
David E. Janes
Raymond H. Johnson, Jr,
J, David Lutz
Thomas Reavey
Charles Robbins
Ellery D. Savage
Aeknowledgements
I would like to express my appreciation to all the Headquarters,
Regional and State personnel and the personnel from other Federal
agencies who assisted us in gathering the data used in this report
and review of the drafts of the report. Their assistance was
invaluable to the production of the report in the time allowed.
I would also like to express my appreciation to Marianne Bender
for her understanding and patience with my many requests for changes
in the text of the report and for her perseverance in its production.
Graditude is also expressed to Mazie Young and all the others who
assisted with the typing of the tables and references.
Kurt L. Feldmann, editor
-------
Preface
The Office of Radiation Programs (ORP) of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has a primary responsibility to establish
radiation protection guidance and to interpret existing guides- for
Federal agencies. This responsibility was transferred to the Admin-
istrator of EPA from the Federal Radiation Council which was abolished
by Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970. One of ORP's mandates in carrying
out this responsibility is to monitor and assess the impact on public
health and the environment of radiation from-all sources in the United
States, both ionizing and nonionizing. Therefore, ORP has initiated a
radiological dose assessment program to determine the status of radi-
ation data nationwide, 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 other Federal agencies, States and nuclear facilities.
This report is part of ORP's dose assessment program for evaluating
the radiological quality of the environment. As a prototype effort,
this first report is intended only to summarize information available in
the open literature. Special emphasis was placed on acquiring recent
dose data. For some source categories, dose information was available
for calendar year 1975, for others the most recent data goes back to the
early 1970's. It is not intended in this initial effort to calculate or
extrapolate from existing data to supply missing dose information.
Instead, the concern was for the availability of data and what the
existing data provides for individual and population dose information.
However, gaps in data coverage and areas of inadequate data coverage are
identified when found.
The gathering of data on the radiological quality of the environ-
ment will be done annually hereafter. Future reports in this series
will be able to analyze the data in greater depth with special emphasis
on trend analyses. Also as the dose data become better defined more
extrapolations to potential 'health effects will be considered.
-------
The first issue of this report also includes a summary of data from
EPA's Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System (ERAMS) for FY
1975. These data are included here to make the information more readily
available, since there is no longer a separate publication for such
data. A glossary of terms used in this report is also included.
Since this is a prototype effort, it is realized that the reported
data are probably not all inclusive. If the reader knows of other
information on radiation source categories that has not been included or
which has not been given adequate coverage, we would appreciate having
this information brought to our attention for future reports.
VI. D. Rowe, Ph.D.
Deputy Assistant Administrator
for Radiation Programs
-------
Contents
Page
Preface i
Chapter 1 - Introduction 1
Summary 4
Conclusions- 10
Chapter 2 - Ambient Ionizing Radiation 11
Cosmic Radiation 11
Worldwide Radioactivity 18
Terrestrial Radiation 25
Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring
System (ERAMS) - - 35
Chapter 3 - Technologically Enhanced Natural Radiation 43
Ore Mining and Milling 44
Uranium Mill Tailings 45
Phosphate Mining and Processing 49
Thorium Mining and Milling 53
Radon in Potable Water Supplies 53
Radon in Natural Gas 54
Radon in Liquefied Petroleum Gas 54
Radon Daughter Exposures in Natural Caves 55
Radon and Geothermal Energy Production 55
Radon Mines 56
Radioactivity in Construction Material 57
Summary 58
-------
Page
Chapter 4 - Fallout - - 63
Health and Safety Laboratory Fallout Program 63
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects
. of Atomic Radiation 78
Summary 82
Chapter 5 - Uranium Fuel Cycle 85
Uranium Mining and Milling 85
Fuel Enrichment 93
Fuel Fabrication Plants 96
Power Reactors 97
Research Reactors 103
Transportation 104
Reprocessing Operations and Spent Fuel Storage 112
Radioactive Waste Disposal 115
Chapter 6 - Federal Facilities 125
Chapter 7 - Accelerators 133
Chapter 8 - Radiopharmaceutlcals 139
Chapter 9 - Medical Radiation 141
Chapter 10 - Occupational and Industrial Radiation 149
Chapter 11 - Consumer Products 169
Chapter 12 - Health Effects of Ionizing Radiation Exposure- 173
Chapter 13 - Nonionizing Electromagnetic Radiation 181
Glossary - - 197
Appendix - Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring
System (ERAMS), FY 1975 203
1v
-------
List of Tables
Page
Table 1-1. Summary of dose data from all sources 6
Table 2-1. Doses from cosmic radiation 14
Table 2-2. Estimated annual cosmic-ray whole-body doses 17
Table 2-3. Cosmic-ray produced radioactive nuclides 19
Table 2-4. Estimated annual whole-body dose to the United
States population from worldwide tritium 21
Table 2-5. Estimated annual doses to the United States
population from worldwide distribution of 85Kr 23
Table 2-6. Estimated annual doses to U.S. population from
worldwide distribution of selected isotopes 23
Table 2-7. Nonseries primordial radionuclides 26
Table 2-8. Estimated average annual internal radiation doses
per person from natural radioactivity in the
United States- - 28
Table 2-9. Uranium (radium) series 30
Table 2-10. Thorium series 31
Table 2-11. Actinium series 32
Table 2-12. Estimated annual external gamma whole-body doses
from natural terrestrial radioactivity 36
Table 3-1. Phase I inactive uranium mill site reports 50
Table 3-2. Radiation dose rates for selected inactive
uranium mill tailings piles 51
Table 3-3. Typical 222Rn concentrations in ground water
supplies at selected areas in the United States 59
Table 4-1. Annual and cumulative worldwide 90Sr deposition 68
Table 4-2. Strontium-90 in the diet during 1973 - 70
-------
Page
Table 4-3. Fallout 239Pu data - New York 74
Table 4-4. Fallout 239,21*0pu in food, New York, 1972- 76
Table 4-5. Fallout 239,21+0pu dietary intake, New York, 1972-- 77
Table 4-6. Dose commitments from nuclear tests carried out
before 1971 81
Table 4-7. Total annual whole-body doses from global
fallout 83
Table 5-1.
Table 5-2.
Table 5-3.
Table 5-4.
Table 5-5.
Table 5-6.
Table 5-7.
Significant uranium areas of the United States
U^ nvanTiim mi 1 1 c ac r\f lamiavw 1 1 Q7/L__ ________
Radiation doses to individuals due to inhalation
in tho vi PT ni t\/ n~F a mnrlol mi 1 1 ________ __________
Collective dose to the general population in the
Estimated doses from fuel fabrication facility
Calculated and predicted doses from noble gas
Summary projection of annual national population
87
90
94
95
98
101
radiation dose from routine transportation of
materials in the nuclear power industry 106
Table 5-8. Projected estimates of annual population dose
from transportation 107
Table 5-9. Estimated average annual release of radioactivity- 109
Table 6-1. Boundary and 80-km doses around ERDA facilities,
1973 127
Table 7-1. Estimated dose due to LBL operations 136
Table 7-2. Estimated population doses from selected
accelerators for 1973 138
Table 9-1. Estimated mean gonadal dose per examination from
radiographic examinations by type of examination
and by sex, United States, 1964 and 1970 143
VI
-------
Page
Table 9-2. Estimated radiographic examination rates by
type of examination and sex, United States,
1964 and 1970 144
Table 10-1. Radiation protection guides 150
Table 10-2. Total annual whole-body dose by reporting group
and occupation-1969 to 1970 152
Table 10-3. Percentage of workers in recorded dose ranges in
licensed installations, United States, 1968 153
Table 10-4. Total risk from various radionuclides per Ci
processed 155
Table 10-5. Average occupational -exposure to tritium according
toMoghissi, et al 155
\
Table 10-6. Summary of in-plant occupational exposures 156
Table 10-7. Average employee dose 157
Table 10-8. Breakdown of in-plant exposures 159
Table 10-9. Summary of annual whole body exposures, 1973 162
Table 10-10. Distribution of annual whole body exposures for
covered licensees, 1974 162
Table 10-11. Annual whole body exposures, 1968-1974 163
Table 10-12. Summary of annual exposures at nuclear power
facilities, 1974 164
Table 10-13. Summary of overexposures to external sources
reported to NRC by licensees, 1971-1974 165
Table 10-14. Plutonium systemic body burden estimates for
selected Manhattan project plutonium workers at
three different times 166
Table 10-15. Whole body occupational population exposures, 1973- 167
Table 11-1. Luminous timepieces distributed in United States- 171
Table 11-2. Evaluation of population dose in United States
to radioluminous timepieces 171
Glossary. Table of international numerical multiple and
submultiple prefixes 202
vii
-------
List of Figures
Page
Figure 2-1. Estimated world inventory of tritium in the
atmosphere and in surface waters ------------------ 20
Figure 2-2. Estimated 85Kr concentration in the Northern
Hemisphere from nuclear electric power production- 22
Figure 2-3. Measured krypton-85 concentrations in the
atmosphere over a 13-year period ------------------ 24
Figure 2-4. Radioactivity concentration versus time ......... 37
Figure 2-5. Radioactivity concentration versus time ....... ---- 38
Figure 4-1. Monthly 90Sr deposition ---- ....................... 69
Figure 4-2. Cumulative 90Sr deposition ............ ---- ...... 69
Figure 4-3. Strontium-90 intake in New York City and San
Francisco --------------------------------- -------- 71
Figure 4-4. 90Sr adult vertebrae-observations and bone model
predictions ----------- ---------------------------- 73
Figure 4-5. Inhalation intake and burden in man of fallout
..... ----- .......... ----- ........ - ........ - 75
Figure 5-1. Geological resource regions of the United States 86
Figure 5-2. Active uranium ore processing mills --------------- 89
Figure 5-3. Uranium ore processing rates ---------------------- 91
Figure 5-4. Uranium concentrate production (includes
production from millfeed other than ore) ---------- 91
Figure 5-5. Grade of uranium ore processed -------------------- 92
Figure 5-6. Recovery from ore processed ----------------------- 92
Figure 5-7. Annual average whole body population dose from
transportation accidents in the nuclear power
industry^- ----------------------------------------- 110
vm
-------
Figure 9-1. Estimated mean annual genetically significant
dose contribution from radiographic examinations
by type of examination, United States, 1970
Figure 13-1. Cumulative distribution of emitters in the
United States capable of producing an average
power density equal to or greater than 0.01 mW/
as a function of distance
cm2,
Figure 13-2. Cumulative distribution of emitters in the
United States capable of producing an average
power density equal to or greater than 0.1 mW/
as a function of distance
cm2,
Figure 13-3. Cumulative distribution of emitters in the
United States capable of producing an average
power density equal to or greater than 1.0 mW/
cm2, as a function of distance-
Figure 13-4. Cumulative distribution of emitters in the
United States capable of producing an average
power density equal to or greater than 10 mW/
Page
145
187
188
189
cm
2, as a function of distance-
190
ix
-------
Chapter 1 - Introduction, Summary, and Conclusions
Background
Numerous studies have been conducted in the past by EPA and other
agencies to evaluate the impact of individual radiation sources. However,
this report represents the first systematic effort to annually evaluate
the impact from all sources of radiation, both ionizing and nonionizing.
Such an evaluation requires the assembling of a broad data base on
radiation exposures, a responsibility unique to EPA. This effort in
determining the quality of the radiological environment is one part of
ORP's overall Dose Assessment Program.
Objective
This report is intended to fulfill ORP's responsibility for deter-
mining individual and total United States population doses from all
source categories of radiation. In addition, this information will
provide guidance for direction of programs in ORP by analysis of radi-
ation trends, identification of radiation problems, and support for
establishing standards.
Approach
The primary effort in this first prototype report has been to
identify source categories of radiation. The identified sources have
been considered in two general categories; (1) ionizing radiation, and
(2) nonionizing radiation. In the ionizing radiation category, sources
were further grouped under the headings of ambient environmental radi-
ation, technologically enhanced natural radiation, fallout, uranium fuel
cycle, federal facilities, medical, occupation, and other miscellaneous
sources. The nonionizing radiation category is mainly concerned with
environmental sources.
-------
Literature searches have been conducted for each of these sources
and the available data have been organized to provide the following
information:
1. General information about each source category and the avail-
ability of data.
2. Data base description (includes who reports data to whom,
under what authority, and what data are being reported).
3. Status of data base analyses (to indicate what has been done
with the data).
4. A summary of dose data for each source category.
5. Comparison of actual dose data reported with estimates from
previous publications.
6. Discussion, evaluation of the adequacy of the data base and
needed improvements, and conclusions.
Data aGquisit-ion
The most cost-effective way for EPA to acquire the necessary data
for assessing the radiological quality of the environment is to maximize
the use of available data reported by other Federal agencies, States,
and nuclear facilities. Thus, EPA does not intend to repeat measurements
for acquiring data where other sources may be adequate. It is recognized
that the data from other programs may have been prepared for purposes
other than ORP's present interest in dose assessment. However, to
determine the need for acquiring additional data by ORP, the first step
(represented by this report) is to review the available data and eval-
uate its adequacy. The identification of gaps in the data indicates
areas of concern for future dose assessments. At the same time, source
categories may be defined for which additional data collection is not
warranted with respect to the small dose contribution from that source.
Special effort was made in this report to acquire real data sup-
ported by direct measurements. Such data are in contrast to estimates
made by extrapolation with numerous assumptions involved. Most dose
information falls in the latter category due to the difficulty or cost
of direct measurements. Therefore, most of the data available represent
the product of several calculations involving an understanding of the
radiation source, and the behavior of that source with regard to inter-
action with the environment and man.
-------
Data validation
Although it is cost effective for ORP to maximize the use of data
provided by other agencies, there must also be concern for the quality
of that data. Consequently, ORP supports several data validation activ-
ities on a continuing basis. First of all, ORP encourages radiation
laboratories to participate in a national quality assurance program.
EPA operates such a program for radiation measurements at its Environ-
mental Monitoring and Support Laboratory in Las Vegas, Nevada. This
laboratory provides standard radionuclide sources, standard reference
materials, and cross-check media for intercomparison measurements with
any laboratory desiring to participate.
In addition, EPA conducts special field studies at nuclear facil-
ities or other radiation sources in cooperation with State and other
Federal agencies. Thse studies are designed to characterize radiation
sources and environmental effects as well as to validate calculated
doses and dose models. The use of such models for calculation of doses
represents the third activity for data validation. These models are
used to check on environmental effects predicted by models or to check
the validity of direct measurments.
Scope
This report is intended to include data as current as possible.
When the report was initiated, the most currently available data for
some source categories were for calendar year 1973. However, as the
report developed it became apparent that a number of new source cate-
gories were unknown in 1973 and consequently, the most recent data for
these sources are for 1975. For other categories, the only available
data are for the early 1970's. Because of the time spread of available
data, it was decided to compile the latest data available for each
source, regardless of the year for which they were determined. There-
fore, this report and those of future years will represent a compilation
of the latest data available at the time of preparation.
Future efforts
The radiological quality of the environment will be determined on
an annual basis. Future reports will update this first effort and place
more emphasis on treatment or analysis-of available data and trend
evaluations. An analysis of environmental concentrations of radio-
nuclides may also be considered in subsequent reports in addition to "
dose information.
-------
Sources of information
The information for this report was primarily obtained from published
reports such as professional society journals, symposium proceedings,
and other technical reports. The EPA regional offices were instrumental
in obtaining reports of State monitoring activities. Operating and
environmental surveillance reports from nuclear power reactors were
obtained from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Data for Energy
Research and Development Administration (ERDA) facilities were taken
from the contractors' annual environmental surveillance reports. Medical
x-ray and consumer product information was taken from reports of the
Bureau of Radiological Health, DHEW.
Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System (ERAMS) data
In addition to the radiation data provided by other agencies, EPA
has its own program for ambient monitoring data. This program is
conducted at the Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility (EERF) in
Montgomery, Alabama. Analyses are conducted on samples from national
networks for air, milk, and water. The data from these analyses are
issued quarterly in an internal environmental radiation data report. It
is intended at present to summarize data from these quarterly reports on
an annual basis. The ERAMS data for FY 1975, in the appendix of this
report, represent the first of these annual summaries and as such also
represent a prototype effort. It was decided to include the detailed
summary in this report to make the data readily available to those
interested in the radiological quality of the environment. It is not
planned at this time to publish the annual summaries of ERAMS data
elsewhere. However, a comprehensive analysis of past ERAMS data is
being carried out.
A brief review of earlier ERAMS data is given in chapter 2 to
complete that section on ambient ionizing radiation.
Summary
The purpose of this report is to summarize the individual and
population doses in the United States resulting from each category of
radiation source and to assess these data. When the literature on radi-
ation sources was searched for information, it became readily apparent
that an immense amount of data had been published during the past 15
years. It was therefore considered necessary, first to organize the
sources into the 25 categories described in this report, and secondly,
to summarize the details in a manner whereby the data would reveal
meaning and perspective. In doing so, it was also necessary to assume
that all' the data extracted from the literature were valid.
-------
The individual and population dose data resulting from the various
categories of radiation sources discussed in this report are summarized
in table 1-1. The information in this table is divided according to
whether the primary mode of exposure is external or internal. Exposure
to direct radiation from radionuclides in the ground, water, buildings,
and air around us, or from radiation-producing machines, such as x-ray
equipment and nuclear accelerators is considered external exposure.
Exposures of this type usually result in a radiation dose to the whole
body of the person exposed. In contrast, internal exposures occur when
radioactive materials are inhaled, ingested, or occasionally absorbed
through the skin. Internal exposures often result in a radiation dose
to particular organs of the body, such as the lung, gastrointestinal
tract, or bones.
It is evident from this table that there are radiation sources for
which data are either incomplete or not available. Consequently, the
discussion and comments in this report are based upon the data which
were available at the time of writing during 1975. Also, it is worth-
while noting 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 gener-
ally does not receive the radiation dose common to another population
group. For this reason, the data in table 1-1 only show total popu-
lation doses in the various source categories.
It is apparent from this table that the dose of approximately 10
million person-rem per year from ambient ionizing radiation greatly
exceeds each of the other categories of radiation sources. Within this
category of ambient radiation, the ionizing component of cosmic radi-
ation and radon-222, polonium-210 and potassium-40 in terrestrial radi-
ation make the greatest contributions to this dose.
The second largest category of population dose for which we have
data is from the use of radiopharmaceuticals for medical radiation
purposes, which is estimated to contribute approximately 3 million
person-rem per year to the population dose. The third largest category
of dose is estimated to be from technologically enhanced natural radi-
ation purposes which also contributes approximately 3 million person-rem
per year to the population dose. Finally, it is of interest to note
that all the doses from all the other source categories for which data
are available are less than 0.1 percent of the total population dose.
It is important to note that the population dose values mentioned
here are based upon the data available to us at this time. It is quite
possible that these values and thus, the relative contributions of
population dose from the source categories considered, could change in
the future as more information on this subject becomes available.
-------
Table 1-1
Summary of dose data from all Sources
cr>
External
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
Individual
dose
(mrem/y)
^
40.9-45
28-35.3
0.33-6.8
_
4xlO~4
30-95
17
-
a!3
b25
Population
dose
(person-rem/y)
9.7xl06
9.7xl06
9.2xl06
4.9x105
mm
80
_
_
_
Internal
Individual
dose
(mrem/y)
_
-
0.04
1.0
18-25
16-19
4xlO~3
1.0
0.6
2-3
3.0
Population
dose
(person-rem/y)
_
_
_
-
9.2xl03
B
_
_
_
_
_
_
Technologically enhanced natural radiation
Ore mining and milling
Uranium mill tailings
Phosphate mining 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
C140-14000
654
0.9-4.0
2.73x10°
d2.5-70000
2.73xl06
30000
-------
Table 1-1 cbnt. Summary of dose data from all Sources
External Internal
Source
Fallout
Uranium fuel cycle
{lining 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
E,RDA
Department of Defense
Accelerators
Radiopharmaceuticals-production and disposal
Medical radiation
X radiation
Radiopharmaceuticals
Occupational and industrial radiation
BWR
PWR
All occupations
Individual
dose
(mrem/y)
f,2
h0.17
_
m54 max
m
-------
Table 1-1 cont. Summary of dose data from all sources
External
Internal
Source
Individual
dose
(mrem/y)
Population
dose
(person-rem/y)
Individual
dose
(mrem/y)
Population
dose
(person-rem/y)
Consumer products
TV
Timepieces
V0.025-0.043
^6100
^6100
oo
Nonionizing electromagnetic radiation
Broadcast towers and airport radars
All sources
Individual exposure
(yW/cm2)
10
0.1-1
a Uranium-238 series
b Thorium-232 series
c Lung dose
d Lung-rem/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 (genetically significant dose)
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
-------
For individuals, the largest dose is derived from technologically
enhanced natural radiation which results in 140 to 14,000 mrem per year
to the tracheobronchial surface tissue of the lung as a result of inhal-
ation of radon daughter products from uranium mill tailings.
The second largest individual dose is received by individuals
through their occupations, approximately 1200 millirem of whole body
dose per year. This is the dose normally received by maintenance
personnel working around a boiling water nuclear power reactor. The
third largest individual dose, approximately 320 millirem per year,
would be received by an individual at the boundary of a federal facil-
ity. The next largest dose, about 120 millirem per year, is an average
value due to ambient ionizing radiation. The individual doses from all
other sources were less than half the dose due to ambient ionizing
radiation.
As has been mentioned above, the relative contributions from each
of the source categories are subject to revision as may be required by
new data.
Evaluation of the data base
It is apparent from table 1-1 that most of the results on indi-
vidual and population doses are based upon calculations which lead to
estimated data. It is customary to prefer measured data to calculated
data because of the assumption that they are more accurate and reliable.
However, frequently, in order to arrive at certain dose information, it
is sometimes impractical or impossible to perform any dose measurements.
Consequently, under these circumstances, the only possible or cost-
effective way of determining the dose to an individual or a population
is through dose model computation. This type of calculation generally
involves experience and judgment to arrive at order of magnitude esti-
mates which are considered to be satisfactory for dose assessment. For
example, it is virtually impossible to measure the dose to an individual
from the potassium-40 in the human body. However, data on the potas-
sium-40 concentration in the body, energies and types of radiations,
half-life of the radionuclide and mass of the body are available and can
be used to compute the dose. Such doses may be considered to be reli-
able and conservative estimates with the understanding, that in all
probability, the values for the actual doses are appreciably smaller
than the estimated values.
In determining individual doses, It is important to appreciate the
fact that these doses are for specific categories which are additive -
only if it is reasonable to expect that the same individuals would be
exposed to the sources in these categories. For example, in general,
the individual dose from uranium mining and milling should not be added
to other source categories in the uranium fuel cycle because different
individuals are involved in these exposures.
-------
Finally, after searching the-literature for individual and popu-
lation dose values and studying the manner in which many of these values
were determined, it becomes evident that frequently, the number of
significant figures representing the data cannot be justified. For this
reason, the data in table 1-1 are considered valid to about 2 signif-
icant figures in spite of the fact that more figures are given in the
literature and used in this report.
It is also evident from table 1-1 that many gaps appear in the
data. This is apparently due to the fact that some of the information
published is oriented toward individual dose, and other data are expressed
in terms of concentrations of isotopes in various environmental media.
For example, data concerned with phosphate mining and processing oper-
ations report that occupational personnel in the industry are exposed to
uranium decay chain products which are present in ore with a concen-
tration of 4 to 10 picocuries per gram. It is not possible to obtain an
estimate of population dose from these data without considerable supple-
mentary knowledge. For this reason, no dose data are available for this
category. It is hoped that these data will be filled in future reports.
In addition to this brief evaluation of the data base, each chapter
in the report contains a more detailed evaluation of the data base
pertinent to that chapter.
Conclusions
1. On the basis of the population dose data acquired in this
report, the three major source categories of radiation dose to the
United States population are Ambient Ionizing Radiation, the Application
of Radiopharmaceuticals in Medicine, and Technologically Enhanced
Natural Radiation. The reason for these relatively high dose values is
due to the large populations that are exposed to the sources in these
categories.
2. On an individual basis, the largest sources of dose are from
Technologically Enhanced Natural Radiation, Occupational and Industrial
Operations and Federal Facilities. The factor that keeps the population
doses low in Occupational and Industrial Operations and Federal Facil-
ities is the relatively small number of people exposed to the sources in
these categories. The source responsible for high individual doses in
the category of Technologically Enhanced Natural Radiation is uranium
mill tailings that .had been used in the construction of residences. It
is quite conceivable that if dose from other sources in this category
were available, additional high individual doses would be observed.
3. There are many gaps in the dose data of this report. For
example, it'is generally accepted that the use of x rays in medicine
contributes to a large and significant population dose. However, the
magnitude ,of this population dose has still not been determined. For
this reason, the resulting observations and comments are necessarily
restricted to this data base. It also indicates a need to greatly
improve the data base.
10
-------
Chapter 2 - Ambient Ipnizing Radiation
The ionizing radiation dose received from the natural, ambient
environment is considered to be composed of three parts: 1. cosmic
radiation, 2. worldwide radioactivity, and 3. terrestrial radiation.
Cosmio Radiation
Man's usual environment, the surface of the earth, is continually
being bombarded by cosmic radiation. This racliation by definition
originates in intersteller space or in the cosmos. However, from time
to time the "cosmic" component of our natural radiation exposure is
increased by injections of high-energy radiation from our own sun.
The majority of the work reported, by necessity, has been the
characterization of cosmic radiation and the measurement of the flux and
flux spectra. This work in the United States has been carried out
directly by federal agencies, such as the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission,
the U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Department of Commerce (National Bureau
of Standards); by laboratories such as the Health and Safety Laboratory,
Argonne National Laboratory, Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Hoiifield
National Laboratory (Oak Ridge); and by universities such as the Uni-
versity of California (Lawrence Livermore Laboratory and Lawrence
Berkeley Laboratory), the California Institute of Technology, and other
groups such as the National Academy of Sciences.
The research findings have been reported in all forms. Special
committee reports, annual reports, project reports, symposium proceed-
ings, and journals. A partial list of journals include Science, Journal
of Geographical Research, Physics Review, International Physics Review,
Nuclear Instrumentation & Methods, Review of Modern Physics, Journal of
Applied Physics, Nucleonics, and Health Physics.
The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic
Radiation (UNSCEAR) reports of the twentieth, twenty-first, and twenty-
second sessions contained in the 1966 and 1969 publications were used to
produce the 1972 report. These reports provide excellent literature
reviews and state-of-the-art references.
11
-------
Reports of the dose equivalence (pE) in the literature vary. Even
recent dose rate measurements differed, as shown by Oakley (2.1), from
30 to 40 percent and by 30 percent in UNSCEAR (1972) (2.2). Also, much
of the literature data is presented without any dose equivalence or
quality factor (QF) information and one must infer that a certain QF was
used. In some instances, the value after a QF is applied, seems to be
reported consistently as mrad instead of mrem.
Variables measured
Actual measurements of the incident radiation intensities have been
made for about 40 years; but research work has shown that the present
intensities have not changed appreciably for the last 40,000 years, and
probably this time is much longer (2.3). In fact, the levels may have
remained fairly constant for 108 years with maximum increases of 10
percent occurring during the reversal of the earth's magnetic field;
the most recent field reversal occurring 700,000 years ago (2.1).
There are two components to cosmic radiation, the ionizing component and
the neutron component. There are also four variables which affect
these two components that have been described. These are variation in
time, latitude, barometric pressure, and altitude.
Time
Changes with time over long and short periods have been observed
and reported. There is what appears to be a fluctuation of a few
percent change over an 11-year period which is in phase with sun spot
activity and a large 7-fold increase for a few hours has been noted
(2.3)', but in general, the integration of the exposure at the earth's
surface over a year's period makes the total contribution of such large
events small.
Latitude
The latitude effect was the first variable to be described and the
overall effect causes about a 2 percent variation throughout the contig-
uous United States latitudes. The latitude variation observed in the
neutron flux is about 15 percent for the United States, but neutrons are
a small component of cosmic radiation.
Barometric pressure
The overall variation in barometric pressure has no effect on the
long-term estimation of cosmic radiation, but the barometric pressure
may vary by 3 percent from day to day. Thus, the barometric pressure
variance can represent a source of error in comparing the different
values for cosmic radiation that appear in the literature.
12
-------
Altitude
Because there are many uncertainties in the various measurements
made to date, the only variable previously considered by Oakley (2.1)
was the altitude. The other variables tended to be obscured by the
differences between measurement techniques.
Most of the cosmic radiations upon striking the earth's upper
atmosphere produce secondary radiations. Actually, very few of the
primary radiations penetrate as deep as the earth's surface; thus, the
secondary radiations are the major source of man's exposure, and flux
intensities increase with increasing distance from the earth's surface.
Neutron component
The poorest knowledge is about the neutron component since the
neutron component is more sensitive to time, latitude, and altitude. At
sea level, the flux density is small and difficult to measure. The 1972
UNSCEAR report utilized a fluence to dose conversion factor of 4.95 yrad/h
for a flux density of 1 neutron/cm2/s. This was based on averaging the
dose rates to a depth of 15 cm for a slab.of tissue; 30 cm thick; the
maximum dose rate below 1 cm occurs at 1 cm and is 5.25 yrad/h (2.2).
Oakley, for his work, chose the UNSCEAR (1966) 0.7 mrad/y with a
quality factor of 8 (QF=8) or 5.6 mrem/y (2.1). The later UNSCEAR
(1972) report adopts 0.35 mrad with a QF=6 or 2.1 mrem/y as the average
tissue absorbed dose rate at sea level, 40° latitude; but the report
cautions that the variations must be borne in mind and that no account
is taken of attenuation or buildup due to surrounding structures.
Shielding of 50 g/cm2 can provide a 30 percent reduction in the exposure
at sea level (2.4). Also, a recent National Council on Radiation
Protection_(NCRP) committee report indicates that a QF of 5 should be
applied to the neutron component (2.5). The values reported are summar-
ized in table 2-1.
Ionizing component
The ionizing component does not vary greatly at sea level but
differences between measurements exist. Oakley (2.1) used the average
values reported at sea level in the United States (post-1956) and
obtained a value of 2.44 ion pairs (I) per cm3 per second (s) which was
equivalent to 4.0 yrem/h or 35.3 mrem/y. The UNSCEAR (1966) value was
29 mrem/y (2.6). The UNSCEAR (1972) report indicated that the work of
one researcher appeared inconsistent and adopted a value of 2.14 I/cm3/s
at normal temperature and pressure (NTP). Assuming that each ion pair
in air is equivalent to 33.7 eV, the dose in air/I/cm3/s would be 1.50
yrad/h; thus, the air dose rate adopted was 28 mrad/y or 3.2 yrad/h
(2.2). If the radiation is very penetrating, the absorbed dose index
13
-------
Table 2-1. Doses from cosmic radiation
Component and reference
Dose
(mrad/y)
Oose equivalent
(mrem/y)
Quality factor
used
Neutron dose at sea level
UNSCEAR (1966) (2.6)
Upton et al. (2.1)
Watt (2.1)
O'Brien & Mclaughlin (2.1)
Hajnal et al. (2.1)
Oakley (2.1)
[40° Lat.] UNSCEAR (1972) (2.2)
[Equatorial] UNSCEAR (1972) (2.2)
NCRP
0.7
0.38
0.7
0.35
0.20
5.6
3.0
6.8
0.33
3.3
5.6
2.1
1.2
8
8
8
6
6
5
Ionizing component exposure
Oakley
UNSCEAR (1966)
UNSCEAR (1972) (penetrating)
UNSCEAR (1972) (muons)
35.3
29
28
28
35.3(2.44 I/cm3/s)
29
28(2.14 I/cm3/s)
31
1
1
1.1
Combined
Oakley (sea level)
Klement et al. (August
- United States)
40.9
45
I = ion pair
-------
rate is unity; but for other cases, 75 percent of the exposure is due to
cosmic ray muons, the factor should be 1.1 or 3.5 yrad/h which would be
31 mrad/y. These reported values are also summarized in table 2-1.
Exposure above the earth's surface
New data are constantly being added and compared with previous
literature reports. The origin of the primary cosmic rays has still jiot
been determined. Most of the observed radiation is believed to orig-
inate in our galaxy and two distinguishing terms have been adopted:
galactic cosmic rays and solar cosmic rays.
Man's activities such as space travel and the development of super-
sonic transports (SST) have increased the interest in the calculation of
exposures at locations other than the surface of the earth. For instance,
the neutron component contributions to exposure at sea level is small,
but it rapidly increases with altitude and reaches a maximum between 10
and 20 km.
The evaluations of exposure related to high altitude SST travel
have indicated that the passenger-rem received will be less than in a
conventional jet. Since, although the exposure at the higher altitude
is greater, the SST will fly at greater speeds and the trip will take
less time in the SST. Thus, an Atlantic crossing by SST is shown to be
2 mrad, while 2.6 mrad has been stated for present day jets (2.3).
However, the increased exposure at the higher altitudes may be reflected
in the crew exposures. The present jet crew exposure for flying 600
hours is 0.5 rem/y. With SST travel, this would increase to 1 rem/y.
Compared to the galactic cosmic radiation, radiation of solar
origin does not contribute significantly to the average dose rate; but
during an intense solar flare, dose rates may increase several orders of
magnitude (2.7). However, giant flares only last about 10 hours and
only occur a few times during each 11-year cycle; thus, if SST aircraft
were equipped with radiation detection devices that would alarm when a
prescribed action level was reached, the pilot could decrease this
altitude until a safe level was reached.
The QF used at the higher altitudes may need to be different.
Schaefer, who estimated the 1 rem/y exposure at about 20 km (65,000
feet), used a QF of 8 for the neutron component. His work and others
have been reviewed by O'Brien and Mclaughlin, who concluded that one can
estimate the annual dose-equivalents to passengers and crew; and that
they expected to see, "the development of cosmic-ray ionization profiles
with altitude for several latitudes, as well as dose and dose-equivalent
rate curves" (2.8).
15
-------
During space travel, persons are exposed to primary cosmic ray
particles, the radiation from solar flares, and the intense radiation in
the two Van Allen radiation belts. The maximum dose rate inside a 0.7
g/cm2 shield was reported by Savun et al. to be 22 rad/h (inner belt)
and 5.4 rad/h in the outer belt (2.9).
Combined oosmio radiation
The combined cosmic radiation exposure at sea level as presented by
Oakley is 4.6 yrem/h or 40.9 mrem/.y (2.1). The combined cosmic exposure
at sea level, 40° latitude, and NTP as shown by UNSCEAR (1972) is 30.1
mrem/y (2.2). These differences as shown in table 2-1 result primarily
because of the use of a different QF.
Other differences such as latitude (Florida to Alaska varies from
30 to 45 mrem/y) and altitude (sea level to 8,000 feet varies from 40 to
200 mrem/y) have been used to produce an average exposure for each
county or similar political unit in the United States. This information
from Klement, et al. is shown in table 2-2 (2.10). These authors also
present estimates of the annual man-rem (person-rem) for years 1960-
2000, and for 1970, the value given is 9.2 million person-rem based on
United States population of 205 million people (2.10). This is also
based on the average of 45 mrem/person in the United States as shown in
table 2-2.
The annual passenger-kilometers flown should be approaching 1012
(excluding China) since 4.6 x 1011 passenger-kilometers were flown in
1970 (2.2). Assuming a speed of 600 km/h, the total is 109 passenger-
hours each year. The collective dose for subsonic flights for 1970 was
reported to be 250,000 person-rads which corresponds to a worldwide
population dose of 0.1 mrad/y/person (2.2). This population exposure
compared to the surface exposure is insignificant, however, as previ-
ously shown, the cosmic exposure received by certain individuals could
be 10 to 20 times the average surface exposure.
Swrmary
The data concerning ambient ionizing radiation indicate values
which represent the best conservative estimates for the whole body dose
resulting from cosmic ionizing radiation and its neutron component at
sea level. These values are dependent upon latitude, longitude, and
altitude above the surface of the earth and can result in increases by a
factor of 10 or 20 as the altitude increases above sea level. This is
readily seen in table 2-2 where the annual cosmic radiation dose in
Florida at sea level is 30 mrem/y and in Colorado, about 1 mile above
sea level, where the annual dose is 120 mrem/y.
16
-------
Table 2-2.
Estimated annual cosmic-ray whole-body doses (2.10)
(mrem/person)
Average Annual
Political Unit Dose
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
40
45
60
40
40
120
40
40
35
40
30
85
45
45
50
50
45
35
50
40
40
50
55
40
45
90
75
85
45
Political Unit
Average Annual
Dose
New Jersey 40
New Mexico 105
New York 45
North Carolina 45
North Dakota 60
Ohio 50
Oklahoma 50
Oregon 50
Pennsylvania 45
Rhode Island 40
South Carolina 40
South Dakota 70
Tennessee 45
Texas 45
Utah 115
Vermont 50
Virginia 45
Washington 50
West Virginia 50
Wisconsin 50
Wyoming 130
Canal Zone 30
Guam 35
Puerto Rico 30
Samoa 30
Virgin Islands 30
District of Columbia 40
Total United States
45
17
-------
" Worldwide Radioactivity
Worldwide radioactivity consists of both naturally occurring and
manmade radioactivity. The cosmic ray neutrons cause capture reactions
in the atmosphere and in the earth's soil and water cover. The nuclides
produced in the earth's cover are discussed in the section dealing with
terrestrial radiation. The radionuclides produced in the atmosphere are
shown in table 2-3. Although table 2-3 summarizes 14 radionuclides,
only two of these nuclides are considered to cause any significant
exposure: carbon-14 and, to a lesser extent, tritium. Man's surface
activities also affect the llfC and 3H concentrations in the atmosphere
as well as adding krypton-85. In addition, radon-222 is a component of
worldwide radioactivity; but it will be discussed with terrestrial
radiation since its precursors are part of the decay chain of the primor-
dial radionuclide uranium-238.
Tritium is produced in the atmosphere by the interaction of high-
energy cosmic rays with atmospheric nitrogen and oxygen and it occurs
naturally in the earth's surface waters. About 90 percent of natural
tritium is found in the hydrosphere, 10 percent in the stratosphere and
0.1 in the troposphere. The amount of tritium produced has been measured
as 0.20 ± 0.05 tritons/cm2/s, which corresponds to an annual production
rate of 1.6 MCi/y and to a steady state inventory of 28 megacuries in
the biosphere (2.2).
The inventory of tritium has been increased, however, by nuclear
explosions, the contributions from the nuclear power industry and the
use of tritium in private industry. Before the advent of nuclear energy,
environmental levels of tritium were in equilibrium with the rates of
cosmic ray production and decay; but tritium levels are now expected to
slowly increase because of the release of this nuclide by power reactors
and the reprocessing of spent fuel. Jacobs has estimated that, by the
year 2000, a worldwide inventory of waste tritium will be 96 MCi. The
tritium would mix throughout the hydrosphere, with the oceans and seas
representing the largest reservoirs (2.11).
Figure 2-1 shows the estimated world inventory of tritium in the
atmosphere and in surface waters. The dose from worldwide tritium
depends on the tritium content in food and water which are dependent on
the worldwide inventory. Klement et al. estimated the annual whole
body dose to the United States population for the period 1960-2000
(table 2-4) (2.10).
Carbon-14
Carbon, one of the elements essential to all forms of life, is
involved in most biological and geochemical processes. The radioisotope
14C is produced in the upper atmosphere by interaction of cosmic ray
neutrons with nitrogen. Thus 14C is present in atmospheric carbon
18
-------
Table 2-3 Cosmic ray produced radioactive nuclides
Calculated
atmospheric
production
rate
Radionuclide (atoms/cm^-s)
3H
7Be
1?Be
C
?ANa
24N
28wa
2^A1
31Si
32,Si
\J
vf
P
J J ri
b
38s
mci
36C1
JO
Cl
39C1
^Ar
8lKr
0.
8.
4.
2.
8.
3.
1.
1.
4.
1.
8.
6.
1.
4.
2.
1.
2.
1.
5.
1.
20
IxlO'2
5xlO-2
5
6xlO~5
OxlO"5
7xlO~4
4xlO~4
4xlO~4
6x10",
/,
lxlO~4
8xlO~4
4xlO~3
9xlO~5
OxlO"4
lxlO~3
OxlO~3
4xlO~3
6xlO~3
5xlO~7
Half-life
12.3 y
53 d
2.5xl06 y
5,730 y
2.6 y
15.0 h
21.2 h
7.4x10^
2.6 h;
700 y
14.3 d
25 d
87 d
2.9 h
32.0 min
3.1xl05y
37.3 min
55.5 min
270 y
2.1x10^
Maximum
energy
of beta
radiation
(keV)
18
Electron
555
156
545
1,389
460
1,170
1,480
210
1,710
248
167
1,100
2,480
714
4,910
1,910
565
Electron
capture
(3+)
capture
dioxide, in the terrestrial biosphere, and in the bicarbonates dissolved
in the ocean. UNSCEAR estimates the average dose through the whole body
to be 1.02 mrad/y, with the highest dose delivered to fat (2.2).
The natural production rate for 14C is not well known. If the
assumed production rate is 2 atoms/s/cm2, 0.03 MCi/y would be formed
providing a steady state inventory of 280 MCi (2.2). The decay rate was
estimated to be 1.81 atoms/s/cm2; and, although this is less than the
production rate, the values are actually considered to be in good agree-
ment because of the uncertainties involved (2.2). It has been estimated
that nuclear tests have added 6.2 MCi or 5 percent of the steady state
amount of llfC to the atmosphere (2.2).
19
-------
10,000
ro
o
nfa^inium_rota/_if_:_ WO MCi
^Z*^^
Weapon Produced
(6 - 10 MCi/MT)
Total of all ranges
Naturally Produced
(range of probable values)
Reactor Produced
(0.70-0.85 load factor)
1960 1965
199O 1995 2OOO
Figure 2-1. Estimated world inventory of tritium in the atmosphere and in surface waters (2.10)
-------
The combustion of ltfC-free fuel is betieved to have caused a
decrease in the atmospheric llfC specific activity. The specific activity
determined from nineteenth century wood was 6.13 ± 0.03 pCi/g carbon but
theoretical reductions (in the absence of nuclear tests) of -3.2 percent
in 1950, -5.9 percent in 1969, and -23 percent in 2000 have been calcu-
lated (2.2).
Table 2-4. Estimated annual whole-body dose to the United States population
from worldwide tritium (2,10).
Dose to U. S.
Dose population
Year (mrem/person) * (person-rem/y)
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
0.02
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.03
3,100
9,200
7,100
6,700
8,400
Krypton-85
Krypton is produced artificially by nuclear explosions and by
nuclear electric power production. The world inventory from nuclear
explosions is calculated to be about 3 MCi (2.2). It was estimated in
1972 that reactors were producing greater than 10 MCi/y. The krypton
air concentrations in 1960, 1965, and 1970 were about 5, 10, and 15
pCi/m3, respectively. Klement et al. calculated annual doses from air
concentrations (table 2-5). The estimated krypton-85 concentration in
the northern hemisphere from nuclear power production is shown in figure
2-2. Figure 2-3 presents krypton-85 concentrations in the atmosphere as
measured by the Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System.
21
-------
100O-
ro
ro
CO
u
a
C
0
-*-
CO
l_
+
c
0)
u
c
o
U
0)
(0
0)
(0
100 -
196O
1970
198O
Year
1990
2000
Figure 2-2. Estimated 85Kr concentration in the Northern Hemisphere from
nuclear electric power production (2.10)
-------
Table 2-5. Estimated annual doses to the United States population
from worldwide distribution of 85Kr (2.10)
Dose
Whole-body Skin
Year (mrem/person) (person-rem) (mrem/person)
1960 0.0001 20 0.005
1970 0.0004 80 0.02
1980 0.003 700 0.1
1990 0.01 4,000 0.6
2000 0.04 12,000 * 1.6
Lung
(mrem/person)
0.0002
0.0006
0.005
0.02
0.06
Table 2-6. .Estimated annual doses to U.S. population from worldwide
distribution of selected isotopes
Radionuclide External
whole
body
3H
"c
Individual dose
(mrem/y)
Internal
whole
body Skin
0.04
l.O(fat)
Population dose
(person-rem/y)
External Internal
whole whole
Lung body body
9200
^m
85
Kr
0.004
0.02
0.006
80
23
-------
i i i i
62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74
Figure 2-3. Measured krypton-85 concentrations
in the atmosphere over a 13-year period (2.12)
Summary
Worldwide radioactivity is primarily concerned with the radio-
nuclides, 3H, lkC, and 85K which are produced naturally by cosmic-
ray interactions and artificially in nuclear detonations and in the
operation of nuclear power facilities. Table 2-6 summarizes the indiv-
idual and population doses resulting from exposure to these isotopes.
The supplementary data indicate that the concentration of 85Kr in
the atmosphere will probably increase by a factor of approximately 100
times present levels during the next 25 years if the current schedule
for nuclear power production is maintained. It is estimated that this
increase in 85Kr concentration will result in an increase of whole body
dose by a factor of 100 and in population dose by a factor of 150. The
.annual doses from 3H and 1J+C are considered to be reasonably steady
compared to the dose from 85Kr.
24
-------
Terrestrial Radiation
The naturally radioactive nuclides in man's environment produce
exposure by both direct external gamma irradiation and by internal
irradiation after entering the body via ingestion and inhalation. Food
and water are the main exposure pathways and inhalation is of secondary
importance, except for uranium daughters which are discussed later.
The description of the occurrences in the literature and the type
of organizations performing the research are the same as described
previously for cosmic radiation. Most of the previously mentioned
journals such as Journal of Geophysical Research and Health Physics,
contain articles and others such as Science, Nature, and the American
Industrial Hygiene Association could be added. Reports of the U.S.
Geological Survey probably provide the largest single source of area
soil composition. Actually, the initial interest in the natural radio-
activity in soils was not to determine the human exposure but to determine
and locate possible mineral deposits by using ratios of nuclide abundance.
The development of age dating techniques was also an early use of natural
radioactivity.
The naturally occurring radionuclides may be classified into two
groups. The nuclides that are continually being formed by the inter-
actions of cosmic ray particles and matter, and those nuclides which
have been present since the formation of the earth, the primordial
radioactive nuclides.
Cosmic ray interactions
The presence of cosmic ray neutrons does cause capture reactions in
the earth's soil cover, but the exposure from these nuclides is insig-
nificant (2.1). The three nuclides which would probably be the major
contributors are beryl!ium-7, sodium-22 and sodium-24.
Primordial nuclides
The primordial nuclides can be divided into two groups: those
which decay directly to a stable nuclide and those that belong to one of
three naturally occurring radioactive series. UNSCEAR (2.13) and Lowder
and Solon (2.14) presented data for about 24 radionuclides which exist
or were hypothesized to exist. However, most have long half-lives and
low abundances; thus, only potassium-40, and the decay chains of uranium-
238 and thorium-232 are believed to cause any significant exposure.
Rubidium-87 has also been mentioned since its abundance (table 2-7) is
much greater than the other nonseries primordial radionuclides.
25
-------
Table 2-7. Nonseries primordial radionuclides (2.2)
ro
en
Radionuclide
40K
50y
87Rb
115In
138U
i"Sm
i76Lu
Abundance in the
lithosphere (ppm)
3
0.2
75
0.1
0.01
1
0.01
Half -life
(years)
1.3 x 109
6. x 1015
4.8 x 1010
.6 x 101*
1.1 x 1011
1.1 x 1011
2.2 x 1010
Alpha or EamaY
(MeV) max
3 1.314(89)
3 ? (30)
3 0.274(100)
3 0.480(100)
3 0.210(30)
a 2.230(100)
3 0.430(100)
Gamma
(MeV)
1.460(11)
0.783(30),
'.
0.810(30),
0.088(15),
1.550(70)
1.426(70)
0.202(85),
0.306(95)
aFigures in parentheses indicate yield per disintegration.
-------
The concentration of the primordial nuclides in the soil will be
determined by the associated source rock and the subsequent stage of the
soil formation process. Igneous rocks generally have more radioactivity
than sedimentary rocks and the metamorphic rocks will exhibit concen-
trations typical for the rock from which they were derived. However,
certain sedimentary rocks, shales and phosphate-bearing rocks are highly
radioactive (2.5).
Igneous and metamorphic rocks comprise about 90 percent of the
earth's crust; but the sedimentary rocks tend to accumulate at the top
of the crust, thus, about 75 percent of the earth's surface is covered
by sedimentary rocks. In the contiguous United States, the sedimentary
rocks, shale, sandstone, or limestone (in a ratio of 3:1:1, respectively),
cover 85 percent of the surface (2.1).
The actual environmental exposure produced will depend on the type
of rock, the leaching action of water, the porosity of the overburden,
the amount of soil or organic material formed on the surface, and the
absorption and precipitation of surface deposited radionuclides. Thus,
in boggy soils where leaching and humus buildup occur rapidly, the
radioactivity concentration is low. It is higher in forests and would
be highest, about equal to the corresponding soil-forming rocks, in arid
climate soils (2.4,2.5).
Internal
The principal internal emitters considered are shown in table 2-8.
These radionuclides are present in our environment and enter the body
with our food and water. Inhalation is of secondary importance except
for radon daughters and the immediate areas surrounding some industrial
sites such as uranium mills or uranium mill tailings piles.
Potassiwn-40
The main naturally occurring source of internal radiation exposure
has been stated to be ^°K. It enters the body primarily in food stuffs
and its concentration varies considerably in different body organs.
Whole body counting studies indicate persons under 20 years of age
contain 15 percent less potassium than persons over 20 (2.2). The
reasons for this are not immediately evident and are probably due to a
combination of things since the potassium concentrations in different
tissues are given as: muscle, brain, and blood cells, 0.3 percent;
blood serum, 0.01 percent; and fat, none. Thus, the average potassium
content of the body will depend on body build, and obese persons have a
lower g K/kg body weight ratio than lean persons (2.2). Females have
more fatty tissue than males and, therefore, exhibit lower g K/kg body
weight ratios (2..1). Three isotopes of,potassium occur; two isotopes,
39K (93.1 percent) and 41K (6.9 percent), are stable. Despite the low
abundance of **°K (0.0118 percent), its activity in soil averages an
order of magnitude greater than 238U or 232Th (2.1).
27
-------
Table 2-8. Estimated average annual internal radiation doses per person from natural radioactivity
in the United States
ro
oo
Dose to
Radionuclide whole M*
(2.1)* (2.2) (2.10)
mrem mrad mrem
H°K 16 19** 17
3H 0.004
14C 1.0
87Rb 0.6 0.6
21°Po 2 3.0
220Rn
222Rn 3.0
226Ra
228Ra
238U
Total 1.8 21 25
Dose to
endosteal cells
(2.2)
mrad
6
0.001
0.8
0.4
4.0
0.04
1.6
1.9
0.8
16
(2.10)
mrem
8
0.004
1.6
0.4
21
3.0
6.1
7
47
Dose to
bone marrow
(2.1) (2.2)
mrem mrad
16 15
0.001
0.7
0.6
2 0.3
0.05
0.08
0.1
0.1
0.06
18 17
(2.10)
mrem
15
0.004
1.6
0.6
3.0
3.0
0.3
0.3
24
Dose to
gonads
(2.1) (2.2)
mrem mrad
16*** 19'
0.001
0.7
0.3
2 0.6
0.003
0.07
0.02
0.03
0.03
18 21
*Reference number
**17 mrad/y from beta and 2 mrad/y from gamma
***Average: 19 mrem/y, male and 13 mrem/y, female.
-------
Rubidium-87
The isotopic abundance of 87Ru is 27.8 percent and is about 17 ppm
in the whole body tissues of bone and gonads. The average gonadal dose
is calculated to be 0.3 mrad/y and 0.4 mrad/y to the small tissue inclu-
sions within the bone. Assuming that the 87Ru concentrations in bone
marrow is the same as averaged for the whole body, the dose to the bone
marrow would be 0.6 mrad/y (2.2).
Uranium and thorium series
There are three natural series or decay chains. Two start with
radioisotopes of uranium, 238U and 235U. The third series starts with
232Th. These series are shown in tables 2-9 to 2-11. Uranium and
thorium are distributed throughout the earth's crust in approximately
the same activity concentration. The activity ratio, 235U/238U, in
nature is less than 0.05, and the radon isotope in the 235U chain (219Rn)
has a very short half life, resulting in Atmospheric activities of its
decay products which are about 2,000 times less than those of 222Rn;
thus, the 235U chain is not considered to cause any significant environ-
mental exposure.
Uranium-238
The uranium-238 chain can be divided into four parts: 1. The long-
lived isotopes, 238U, which are considered to be in equilibrium in
nature, 2. 226Ra, since its concentrations in the environment and man
are not necessarily related to its uranium parents, 3. 222Rn and its
short-lived daughters (through 21tfPo), and 4. the long-lived radon
daughters, 210Pb, 210Bi, and 210Po. One gram of natural uranium contains
0.33 yCi 238U and 0.015 yCi 235U (2.2).
Man's uranium uptake in his daily diet has been shown to be 1 ug/d
(2.2). The uranium in the soil enters plants and then goes directly
into man and herbivorous animals and also into man from herbivorous
animals. Water can also provide a source of uranium, and values of
0.024 to 200 yg/£ in fresh water are reported (2.2). Uranium, as well
as thorium and radium, can be present in air, but normally in very small
quantities. Thus, inhalation is not considered to be a source of normal
exposure except for radon and its daughters. The exposures calculated
for uranium are shown in table 2-8.
Thorium-232
Thorium enters man in the same manner as uranium, and experiments
performed with plants showed that thorium was readily absorbed by plant
roots; however, no intake values appear in the literature (2.2). It
also appears that although thorium is readily absorbed, the concen-
tration in the plant's shoots is negligible compared to radium.
29
-------
Table 2-9. Uranium (radium) series (2.15)
Isotope
Uranium-238
Thorium-234
Protactinium-234
Uranium-234
Thorium-230
Radium-226
Radon-222
Polonium-218
Lead-214
Bismuth-214
Polonium-214
Lead-210
Bismuth-210
Polom'um-210
Lead-206
Symbol
238y
234Tn
23Upa
23^
230Th
226Ra
222Rn
218p0
21"pb
214Bi
2H*Po
210Pb
210Bi
210p0
206pb
Half-life
4.5xl09 y
24.1 d
1.18 min.
2. 50x1 0s y
8.0x10^ y
1622 y "
3.82 d
3.05 min.
26.8 min.
19.7 min.
160xlO"6 s
19,4 y
5.0 d
138.4 d
Stable
Radiation
a
3
Y
3
Y
a
Y
a
a
Y
a
a
6
Y
3
Y
a
3
Y
3
a
Energy3 (MeV)
4.18(77), 4.13(23)
0.19(65), 0.10(35)
0.09(15), 0.06(7), 0.03(7)
2.31(93), 1.45(6), 0.55(1)
1.01(2), 0.77(1), 0.04(3)
4.77(72), 4.72(28)
0.05(28)
4.68(76), 4.62(24)
4.78(94), 4.59(6)
0.19(4)
5.48(100)
6.00(100)
1.03(6), 0.66(40), 0.46
(50), 0.40(4)
0.35(44), 0.29(24), 0.24
(11), 0.05(2)
3.18(15), 2.56(4), 1.79(8),
1.33(33), 1.03(22),
0.74(20)
2.43(2), 2.20(6), 2.12(1),
1.85(3), 1.76(19),
1.73(2), 1.51(3),
1.42(4), 1.38(7),
1.28(2), 1.24(7),
1.16(2), 1.12(20),
0.94(5), 0.81(2),
0.77(7), 0.61(45)
7.68(100)
0.06(17), 0.02(83)
0.05(4)
1.16(100)
5.30(100)
lumbers in parentheses indicate percent abundance.
30
-------
Table 2-10. Thorium series(2.15)
Isotope
thorium- 2 32
Radium-228
Actinium-228
Thorium-228
Radium-224
Radon-220
Polonium-216
Lead-212
Bismuth-212
Polonium-212b
Thallium-208c
Lead-208
Symbol
232Th
228Ra
228Ac
228Th
22"Ra
220Rn
216Po
212pb
212Bi
212p0
208T1
208pb
Half-life
1.41xl010 y
6.7 y
6.13 h
1.91 y
3.64 d
54.5 s
0.158 s
10.64 h
60.5 min.
O.SOxlO"6 s
3.1 min.
Stable
Radiation
a
Y
3
3
Y
a
\
Y
a
Y
a
a
8
Y
a
8
Y
a
B
Y
Energy3 (MeV)
4.01(76), 3.95(24)
0.06(24)
0.05(100)
2.18(10), 1.85(9), 1.72(7),
1.13(53), 0.64(8), 0.45(13)
1.64(13), 1.59(12), 1.10, 1.04,
0.97(18), 0.91(25), 0.46(3),
0.41(2), 0.34(11), 0.23,
0.18(3), 0.13(6), 0.11, 0.10,
0.08
5.42(72), 5.34(28)
0.08(2)
5.68(95), 5.45(5)
0.24(5)
6.28(99+)
6.78(100)
0.58(14), 0.34(80), 0.16(6)
0.30(5), 0.24(82), 0.18(1),
0.12(2)
6.09(10), 6.04(25)
2.25(56), 1.52(4), 0.74(1),
0.63(2)
0.04(1), with a 2.20(2), 1.81(1),
1.61(3), 1.34(2), 1.04(2),
0.83(8), 0.73(10), with 3
8.78(100)
2.37(2), 1.79(47), 1.52, 1.25
2.62(100), 0.86(14), 0.76(2),
0.58(83), 0.51(25), 0.28(9),
0.25(2)
aNumbers in parentheses indicate percent abundance.
Divide given percentage yields by 1.5 to obtain yield in terms of thorium-232.
cDivide given percentage yields by 3 to obtain yield in terms of thorium-232.
31
-------
Table 2-11. Actinium series (2.16)
Isotope
Uranium-235
Thorium-231
Protactinium-231
Actinium-227
Thorium-227
Radiurn-223
Radon-219
Polonium-215
Lead-211
Bismuth-211
Thallium-207
Lead-207
Symbol
235u
231Th
23ipa
227Ac
227Th
223Ra
219Rn
215p0
211pb
211Bi
207T1
207pb
Half -life
7.1xl08 y
25.5 h
3. 25x1 0s* y
21.6 y
,
18.2 d
11.43 d
4.0 s
1.78xlO"3 s
36.1 min.
2.15 min.
4.79 min.
Stable
Radiation
a
Y
0
Y
a
Y
a
B
Y
a
Y
a
Y
a
Y
a
e
Y
a
Y
6
Y
Energy3 (MeV)
4.40(57), 4.37(18), 4.
0.18(54), 0.14(11), 0.
0.14(45), 0.30(40),
0.22(15)
0.08(10), 0.03(2)
5.01(24), 5.02(23),
4.95(22)
0.29(6), 0.03(6)
4.95(1.2), 4.86(0.18)
0.043(99+)
0.070(0.08)
5.98(24), 6.04(23),
5.76(21)
0.24(15), 0.31(8),
0.050(8)
5.71(54), 5.61(26), 5.
0.27(10), 0.15(10), 0.
6.82(81), 6.55(11), 6.
0.27(9), 0.40(5)
7.38(100)
1.39(88), 0.56(9),
0.29(1.4)
0.83(3.4), 0.40(3.4),
0.43(1.8)
6.62(84), 6.28(16)
0.35(14)
1.44(99.8)
0.90 (0.16)
58(8)
20(5)
75(9)
33(6)
42(8)
3Numbers in parentheses indicate percent abundance.
32
-------
Radium
Radium isotopes are present in ali soils and will be found in
varying equilibrium with its parents. Since uranium and thorium are
usually present in about the same activity concentrations, the isotopes
of radium, 226Ra and 228Ra, from 238U and 232Th, respectively, will also
be present in similar activity concentrations. However, the normal
226Ra concentration may be increased by the addir'on of phosphate ferti-
lizers.
The average daily uptake of 226Ra in normal background areas is
stated to be 1 pCi/g of calcium.
Radon
Radium-226 decays by alpha emission to its daughter, 222Rn, an
inert gas having a half-life of 3.8 days. Similarly, radon-220 is the
daughter of 221fRa in the thorium-232 decay chain (table 2-10). These
gaseous isotopes can then diffuse from the soil into the atmosphere.
The atmospheric concentration of these gases and their daughter products
depends on many geological and meteorological factors. Because the
daughter products of radon and thoron are electrically charged when
formed, they tend to attach themselves to the dust particles normally
present in the atmosphere, thus becoming the only significant natural
radionuclides leading to widespread exposure through inhalation.
Radon can also reach man through water, and the ingestion of 1 yd*
of 222Rn dissolved in water has been indicated to cause a 20 mrad exposure
to the stomach (2.6). Another source could be milk, but values should
be lower (in Sweden, 222Rn concentrations in milk are 40 times less than
in water) (2.2).
Long-lived radon-222 daughters
The average concentration of 210Pb for a location will depend on
the 222Rn surface exhalation rate at that point and the global pattern
of air circulation. The average 210Pb to 210Po ratio will be 10 in the
northern middle latitudes. The concentrations would be 15 and 1.5
Ci/m3, respectively (2.2). However, ratio values of less than unity can
be found in industrial areas. This has been attributed to the release
of 210Po during the combustion of coal. The standard man inhales 20 m3
of air per day; thus, for the "normal" areas, 0.3 pCi 210Pb and 0.03
pCi 210Po would be inhaled.
Cigarette smoking causes an additional uptake of lead-210 and
polonium-210 as both are present in tobacco; 210Po is more abundant
because it is highly volatile. One pack of cigarettes per day causes a
daily intake of 0.3-0.8 pCi 21(>Pb and 0.4 to 1.4 pCi 210Po (2.2). If a
lung to blood transfer coefficient of 0/3 is used, 0.2 and 0.3 pCi/d
would be the resultant uptake.
33
-------
The daily intake from.the western diet of milk, bread, meat, and
vegetables is 1-10 pCi/d 210Pb with a 210Pb/210Po ratio of about one.
Persons whose diet consists primarily of fish or meat ingest higher than
average concentrations of 210Po. The largest ingestions found occur in
the Lapps and Eskimos because of the lichen - reindeer (caribou) - Lapp
(Eskimo) food chain. The average intake reported for the Lapp's is an
order of magnitude higher than the northern middle latitudes due to the
diet of reindeer.
The radiation dose to the body's tissues caused by the long-lived
daughters is primarily due to the energetic alpha particles of 210Po.
At equilibrium, the beta contribution from 210Pb and 210Bi is 7.5 percent
that of the 210Po alpha energy, thus, it is generally neglected.
The whole body exposure attributed to all of the internal emitters
is 18-21 mrem/y; the difference between the literature values appears to
be the use of an average of male and female 40K exposures (2.1:) or the
male exposure only (2.2). In "norma.V1 areas (designation used by UNSCEAR),
the other internal emitters (not including tf°K) provide about 2 mrem/y.
However, exposures from individual emitters such as 226Ra and 210Po as
discussed can vary by an order of magnitude. The gonadal exposure shown
for 210Po in table 2-8 is 0.6 mrad/y which is for normal areas in the
northern temperate latitudes. The exposure given for the artic regions
is 7.2 mrad/y (2.2). The exposure (table 2-8) for 226Ra is 0.02 mrad/y
which is for normal areas; but for areas such as Kerala, India, the
gonadal exposure stated is 0.2 mrad/y.
External radiation
The naturally radioactive nuclides contribute significantly to
man's external exposure. The radiation that causes the largest increment
of exposure is generally gamma-ray radiation, but alpha and beta particle
radiations also occur. For example, at one meter above the ground,
gamma and cosmic rays produce 7 ion pairs/cm3/s (I) in air, and beta
radiation produces 13 I (2.1). Normally, the beta radiation would
produce no rem dose to the bone marrow or the gonads; but it is felt
that in special situations, such as houses with dirt floors, significant
individual exposures could occur.
In the United States, 90 percent of the population receives an
annual dose ranging from 30-95 mrem. The average was 55 mrem/y with
^OK, the 238U series, and the 232Th series contributing 17, 13, and 25
mrem, respectively (2.17). The radon daughters in air generally do not
contribute much to this dose, only 0.1-0.5 urem/h (2.1). Measurements
for many locations have been collected and averages by state obtained to
estimate the exposure to the population of the United States. This
method produced an average exposure for the United States of 60 mrem/y/
person and the various state averages are shown in table 2-12 (2.10).
Other measurements and methods have presented averages of 77 mrem/y
(2.18) and 43.7 mrem/y (2.1).
34
-------
Table 2-12. Estimated annual external gamma whole-body
doses from natural terrestrial radioactivity (2.10)
(mrem/person)
Average Annual
Political Unit Dose
Al abama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
70
60*
60*
75
50
105
60
60*
60*
60*
60*
60*
65
55
60
60*
60*
40
75
55
75
60*
70
65
60*
60*
55
40
65
Political Unit
Average Annual
Doses
New Jersey 60
New Mexico 70
New York 65
North Carolina 75
North Dakota 60*
Ohio 65
Oklahoma 60
Oregon 60*
Pennsylvania 55
Rhode Island 65
South Carolina 70
South Dakota 115
Tennessee 70
Texas 30
Utah 40
Vermont 45
Virginia 55
Washington 60*
West Virginia 60*
Wisconsin 55
Wyoming 90
Canal Zone 60*
Guam 60*
Puerto Rico 60*
Samoa 60*
Virgin Islands 60*
District of Columbia 55
Others 60*
Total United States
60
*Assumed to be
United States
equal to the
average.
35
-------
Summary
Terrestrial radiation comes from radioactive materials in the crust
of the earth. These materials contribute to man's exposure by direct
radiation and by indirect radiation through ingestion and inhalation.
The estimated annual, average, individual, internal radiation dose from
selected natural isotopes in the United States is given in table 2-9.
These data show that the terrestrial radionuclides responsible for the
most significant exposures are lf°K, 238U chain products, 232Th chain
products, and 87Rb. The whole body exposure attributed to all internal
radioactive nuclides is estimated to be 18-21 mrem/y.
In the United States, most of the population receive annual external
terrestrial radiation doses ranging from 30-95 mrem/y depending upon
location with an average of 55 mrem/y. tt°K, 238U chain products and
232Th chain products contributed 17, 13 and 25 mrem/y, respectively, to
the terrestrial dose.
Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System (EMMS)
The ERAMS is a surveillance program of EPA's Office of Radiation
Programs for measuring levels of radioactivity in air, air particulates
deposition, surface and drinking water, and milk in the United States
and territories. The samples are collected by Federal, State, or local
governments and analyzed at the Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility
in Montgomery, Ala. Sources of radiation and population centers were
considered in determining the locations of the sampling sites. The main
emphasis for ERAMS is towards identifying trends in the accumulation of
long-lived radionuclides in the environment, such as plutonium-238, -239,
uranium-234, -235, -238, krypton-85, hydrogen-3 (tritium), cesium-137,
and strontium-90.
Trends
A tabulation of all raw data from each sampling network is reported
quarterly in Environmental Radiation Data by the Eastern Environmental
Radiation Facility. A summary of the FY 75 data appears in the appendix
of this report. Figures 2-4 and 2-5 depict the trends of radioactivity
concentration versus time for each network. An examination of the
graphs reveals a yearly cycle of concentrations of radioactivity which
are attributable to fallout. This is explained by the atmospheric
mixing between the troposphere and stratosphere in the spring of each
year. The submicron radioactive particles from the stratosphere are
thus pulled down into the troposphere where settling and washout bring
these particles to the earth's surface as fallout.
36
-------
Gross beta in airborne
particulates
«*>
o
CL
73 74
75
Gross beta in
deposition
73 74
75
in airborne
particulates
80
CO
^60
o
o
o.
15
13
in Air
69 71 73 75
70
72 74
in precipitation
1.
£ -5
in drinking water
67 69 71
1.
3H in surface water
70 72 74 70 72 74
Figure 2-4. Radioactivity concentration versus time
14C in milk
650
£1550
5450
Q.
3501-
65 68. 71 74
-------
137Cs in milk
160.
1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974
9°Sr in miMk
30
10
1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974
Figure 2-5. Radioactivity concentration versus time
38
-------
Radioactivity in air
In the ERAMS Air Program, airborne participates are collected
continuously at 21 sampling stations. An additional 51 sampling stations
have been placed on standby. The filters at the sampling stations are
changed one or two times per week, and the gross beta radioactivity
concentration is measured on each filter in the laboratory. The monthly
averages for all analyses are shown in figure 2-4 from July 1973 when
the laboratory analyses were reinitiated. The data show a yearly cycle
with highest concentrations occurring in the spring and the lowest
concentrations in the fall.
The airborne particulates from the 21 air sampling sites are analyzed
for uranium-234, -235, and -238. The uranium-234 and -238 concentrations
show an increase from 1973 to a peak concentration in mid-1974, and then
a decrease extending into 1975. The uranium-235 concentrations show a
general downward trend for the short period of time that results are
available.
\
Plutonium-238 and -239 analyses are currently performed on the air
particulates from the 21 air sampling sites. However, plutonium-238
and -239 measurements have been conducted since 1967 on samples from
selected air particulate sampling stations. The results since 1967 are
plotted for both radionuclides and generally show a yearly cycle with
the peak concentrations in the spring and the minimum concentrations in
the fall.
Krypton-85 concentrations have been measured in air samples collected
at 12 locations since 1970. The results for 1970 thru 1974 show very
little trend, but in comparison with other measurements made in the
1960's, the general trend is upward.
Radioactivity in precipitation
Gross beta radioactivity measurements are also performed on precip-
itation samples collected at the 21 air sampling sites. The graph shows
the fallout in mid-1973 from a nuclear detonation by the Peoples Republic
of China and a spring rise in 1974.
Tritium concentration is measured on a monthly precipitation
composite at the same locations as the 21 air sampling sites. The data
since 1967 show the yearly cycle of higher concentrations in the summer
and lower concentrations in the winter.
Radioactivity in water
Tritium is measured in drinking-water at 77 sampling sites which
are at either major population centers or selected nuclear facility
environs. The data since 1970 show about the same average concentra-
tions.
39
-------
Tritium is also monitored in surface waters which are downstream
from nuclear facilities. The data since 1970 show about the same or
slightly declining concentrations.
Radioactivity in milk
The ERAMS milk program consists of 65 sampling stations. Samples
from 9 stations were selected for carbon-14 analysis. The results since
1965 show a maximum average concentration in 1967, declining concentra-
tions to a low in 1971, and a general increase since then. There is no
readily apparent explanation for the rise and fall of these concentrations,
Figure 2-5 depicts the cesium-137 and strontium-90 concentrations
in milk from 1960. Both graphs reflect the fallout from atmospheric
detonations in the early 1960's and a decline to present levels...
40
-------
References
(2.1) OAKLEY, D. T. Natural radiation exposure in the United States,
ORP/SID 72-1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
D.C. (June 1972).
(2.2) UNITED NATIONS SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON THE EFFECTS OF ATOMIC
RADIATION. Report of the United Nations Scientific Committee
on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. Twenty-seventh Session,
Supplement No. 25 (A/8725). United Nations, New York, N. Y.
(1972).
(2.3) KORFF, S, A. Production of neutrons by cosmic radiation. The
Natural Radiation Environment, Symposium Proceedings, Houston,
Texas, April 10-13, 1963, pp. 427-440. The University of Chicago
Press, Chicago, Illinois (1964)
(2.4) NATIONAL COUNCIL ON RADIATION PROTECTION AND MEASUREMENTS. Report
of Scientific Committee 35, Environmental Radiation Measurements.
J. E. McLaughlin, Chairman (1974)
(2.5) NATIONAL COUNCIL ON RADIATION PROTECTION AND MEASUREMENTS. Report
of Scientific Committee 43. Natural Background Radiation in the
United States, J. H. Harley, Chairman (1974)
(2.6) UNITED NATIONS SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON THE EFFECTS OF ATOMIC
RADIATION. Twenty-first Session, Supplement No. 14 (A/6314).
United Nations, New York, N. Y. (1966).
(2.7) INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION. Task Group
on the biological effects of high-energy radiation, radiobiological
aspects of the supersonic transport. Health Physics 12: 209-226
(1966).
(2.8) O'BRIEN, K. and J. E. MCLAUGHLIN. Calculation of dose and dose-
equivalent rates to man in the atmosphere from galactic cosmic-
rays, HASL-228, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Health and Safety
Laboratory, New York, N. Y. (May 1970).
(2.9) SAVUN, 0. I., I. N. SENCHURO, P. I. SHAVRIN et al. Distribution
of radiation dose in the radiation belts of the earth in the year
of maximum solar activity. Kosm.Issled 11:119-123, No. 1 (1973).
(2.10) KLEMENT, A. W., JR., C. P. MILLER, R. P. MINX, and B. SHLEIEN.
Estimates of ionizing radiation doses in the United States: 1960-
2000, ORP/CSD 72-1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Radiation Programs, Washington, D.C. (August 1972).
41
-------
(2.11) EISENBUD, MERRIL. Environmental Radioactivity, Second Edition.
Academic Press, New York (1973).
(2.12) ROWE, W. D., F. L. GALPIN, and H. T. PETERSON, JR. EPA's
environmental radiation assessment program. Nuclear Safety,
Vol. 16, No. 6, pp 667-682 (November-December 1975).
(2.13) UNITED NATIONS SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON THE EFFECTS OF ATOMIC
RADIATION. Supplement No. 16 (A/5216). United Nations, New
York, N. Y. (1962)
(2.14) LOWDER, W. M. and L. R. SOLON. Background radiation, a literature
search, USAEC Document NYO-4712 (1956).
(2.15) ADAMS, 0. A. S. and W. M. LOWDER. The natural radiation environ-
ment. The Univers-ity of Chicago Press, Chicago, 111. (1964).
(2.16) Radiological Health Handbook (Revised Edition), U.S. Department
of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. (January 1970).
(2.1?) BECK, H. L. Environmental gamma radiation from deposited fission
products, 1960-1964. Health Phys. 12:313-322 (1966).
(2.18) LEVIN, S. G., R. K. STOMS, E. KUERZE, and W. HUSKISSON. Summary
of natural environmental gamma radiation using a calibrated
portable scintillation counter. Radio!. Health Data Rep. 9:679-695
(November 1968).
42
-------
Chapter 3 - Technologically Enhanced Natural Radiation
This section deals with exposures received in the ambient envir-
onment from materials containing naturally radioactive nuclides. To
distinguish the exposure from these materials (which can be controlled)
from the exposure received from the natural terrestrial and cosmic
radiation sources (generally uncontrollable exposure), the term tech-
nologically enhanced natural radioactivity or. TENR has been suggested by
Gesell and Prichard (3.1).
As stated, this exposure comes from the natural radionuclides; but
results from some activity or technology undertaken by man, such as
mining or development of wells. Thus, the nuclide is either brought to
the surface of the earth where exposures can occur, the surface of the
earth which previously provided attenuation or acted as a diffusion
barrier is removed, or persons go into the earth in natural caves and
manmade excavations. Since some form of technology is involved, the
resulting exposure can be controlled; and if the envisioned control
measures are cost effective, then it would follow that the exposures
should be controlled.
The creation of the TENR classification has been suggested so that
agencies with responsibility for issuing guidance for radiation expos-
ures and setting exposure standards can differentiate between natural
(background) exposure and the occurrences which were previously referred
to as natural radiation anomalies. For instance, if one obtains a gamma
radiation measurement of 100 yR/h in Grand Junction, Colo., the extra-
polated yearly exposure of 876 mrem/y is not due to background exposure,
as it might be in parts .of India or Brazil; but the excess gamma (788
mrem/y, assuming 10 yR/h background) is due to TENR (in all likelihood,
uranium mill tailings). It is suggested that the development of a TENR
category would perhaps do away with the present inconsistent attitude
that allows concern for exposure to manmade sources of radiation (radio-
isotopes and reactors) and ignores the equivalent levels of exposure if
they are from a material that was not designed to produce radiation,
such as fertilizer. TENR would not be limited to the surface of the
earth but would also include such exposures as the exposure received
from the cosmic radiation that will be present during supersonic air
43
-------
travel. This too is technologically enhanced natural radioactivity.
The sources of TENR which are presently being considered are discussed
below, and it is estimated that many technologies may be causing unknown
significant exposures.
Ore Mining and Milling
Naturally radioactive nuclides are present in various ores that are
not mined for a naturally radioactive element such as uranium. The
concentration of the natural radioactive elements will vary even in the
same type of ore in different geographic areas. Thus, finding certain
concentrations of radium in association with an ore does not necessarily
mean that the same typ.e of ore may present a possible health hazard in
another geographic location. For instance, the wastes from a fluorspar
operation near Golden, Colo., produce gamma radiation levels of about 1
mR/h, and the waste pile is controlled by the State's Division of Occu-
pational and Radiological Health; however, fluorspar ore near Beatty,
Nev., produces radiation instrument measurements typical of background
levels.
The evaluation of possible radiological health hazards associated
with ore and waste products is really just beginning. The fact that the
radiation was present in various ores has been known; but by law, unless
the ore contained uranium or thorium in concentrations that equal or
exceed 0.05 percent (separately or combined), the possession, processing,
and disposal of the ore is not licensed or controlled.
Proof that the removal of uranium from uranium ore with less than
0.05 percent remaining in the waste tailings did not render the tailings
harmless so that they could be used for construction material, was
finally accepted in about 1970.
The EPA and its predecessor programs in the USPHS have been involved
with the AEC, the ERDA, and the States in evaluating the possible health
effects from uranium mill tailings. The EPA in cooperation with State
Health Departments is now in the process of evaluating the products,
byproducts, and use of waste associated with the phosphate industry
(3. 2,3.3).
Other attempts at evaluating other mineral industries have also
been started; but the evaluation of the radiation and use of products,
byproducts and wastes in these industries will be long and tedious with
the current and proposed levels of funding.
44
-------
Uranium Mill Tailings
The wastes from uranium mills will be discussed in this section and
uranium mining and milling will be discussed in a later section dealing
with the uranium fuel cycle. These wastes, uranium mill tailings, have
been the subject of various investigative research projects since the
1950's, when potable and agricultural water supplies in Farmington,
N.M., were determined to have high radium concentrations. The source of
this radium was eventually traced to the uranium mill at Durango, Colo.,
which was located on the Animas River, a tributary of the San Juan
River. The wastes from uranium mills, at that time, were usually
discharged into a river. This practice was ended, and storage lagoons
or tailings ponds came into use. These ponds did not require a new
technology since raffinate and pregnant liquor ponds (for mills with
dual uranium/vanadium circuits) were already in use.
Little or no sealing or bottom-of-pond preparation was done, since
in theory, the fines contained in the tailings slurry were expected to
fill in the pores or void spaces in the soil and prevent seepage. In
addition, most of the tailings ponds are designed with catchment basins
downgradient from the dike or dam where the seepage (that comes to the
surface) is collected and pumped back to the pond system. However, the
latest reports indicate that seepage is not prevented by "fines-sealing,"
and in some of the largest mill waste retention systems, about 30 percent
of the ponded liquids seep out of the pond and into the surface or
ground water (3.4-3.6). At the large mills, 30 percent of the mill
effluent can be significant, on the order of 674 million liters per
year. It is estimated that this has contributed 1.1 curies of radium to
the ground water in the vicinity (3.7).
The ore feed to the mills has been estimated to average 0.25
percent U308. Usually, the radioactive nuclides of the 23^U decay chain
are in equilibrium. Thus, the uranium daughters will all have the same
activity. This activity may be calculated by multiplying 290 times each
0.1 percent UaOe. Thus, 290 x 2.5 = 725 picocuries per gram of tailings
(pCi/g). Almost all of the radium and thorium daughters contained in
the ore feed eventually are discharged to the waste system. Thus, the
uranium mill tailings will contain about 725 pCi/g of radium-226 and
thorium-230.
Uranium mill tailings piles are currently categorized as active or
inactive depending on the site activity, with the following subclassi-
fications:
1. Active (in use). These piles are located at an active uranium
mill site and are receiving wastes.
2. Active (not in use). These piles are located at an active site
but have been filled and are no longer receiving wastes.
45
-------
3. Active (other use). The site is in use but not for milling. No
longer receiving wastes.
4. Inactive (standby). These sites exist at mills that are not
processing ore. The owner has put the mill in "moth-balls" but plans to
reopen.
5. Inactive (controlled). Mill buildings may have been dismantled,
but the owner is still responsible for the tailings piles under author-
ities held by a State agency.
6. Inactive (abandoned). No mill owner responsibility (either the
land has been sold or returned to the original land owner).
The radioactivity contained in these piles will, if not controlled,
migrate to and contaminate the environment through air and water,path-
ways. The magnitude of the possible population exposures, in general,
can be estimated for the various classifications depending on the
presence or absence of ponded liquid on the surface of the particular
tailings pile. As viewed at present, the pathways involved that can
result in radiation exposure to the general public from uranium mill
tailings are:
1. Whole body gamma irradiation directly from the pile itself or
from the deposition of windborne material.
2. Deposition of radionuclides in the body or in an organ of the
body because of the ingestion of water or food that has been contam-
inated by material from the milling operation.
3. Deposition of radionuclides in the body or in an organ of the
body because of inhalation, primarily alpha irradiation of the pulmonary
region. Deposition in other areas of the body can also occur after
inhalation if the material is cleared from the pulmonary region.
If the surface of a tailings pile is covered with liquid, the
tailings material cannot be removed by the wind, and the water will slow
up the radon being exhaled from the solids below; however, the water may
seep out the bottom or the sides of the tailings pond and the radium can
enter the environment, or as the water seeps through the underlying
tailings solids, additional radium can be dissolved by leaching.
EPA believes that the radiation dose to the pulmonary region of the
lung is the critical pathway, but population exposure by the three modes
previously mentioned may be prevented by either one or a combination of
two different control actions: one, controlling and stabilizing the
tailings pile which will also protect the surrounding environment; and
two, providing land exclusion areas between the tailings piles and the
general population. The second method, although preventing exposure to
man, does not protect the immediate environment.
46
-------
As soon as a tailings pond no longer has liquid being added to it,
the tailings begin to dry due to evaporation and seepage. Eventually,
the surface will dry, allowing the wind to pick up the particulate
material. For this mode, thorium-230 is believed to be the critical
nuclide, exceeding the radiation concentration guide in some cases;
however, radium-226, polonium-210, and lead-210 are also usually present.
During the constant radioactive decay occurring in all of the three
natural chains discussed in terrestrial radiation, an element, which is
an inert or noble gas, named radon is formed. The isotopes are 219Rn
called, historically, actinon from the uranium-235 chain; 220Rn called
thoron from the thorium-232 chain, and 222Rn called radon from the
uranium-238 chain.
Uranium-235 is normally present in very small quantities and the
half-life of actinon (219Rn) is 4.0 seconds; thus, there will never be
much 219Rn exhaled from tailings material. Similarly, thoron (220Rn)
also has a short half-life (55 seconds), and thoron would not diffuse
very far in tailings material. The subsequent daughters after radon are
particulates, thus; upon formation, they will be trapped in the tailings
matrix. Because of the low abundance and very short half-lives, these
two radon isotopes are not usually considered to contribute to the
health effects calculated for uranium mining and uranium mill tailings.
However, if one was associated with a material that contained larger
concentrations of thorium-232, such as thorium mining or a manufacturing
process that utilized thorium, then there might be a hazard created by
the thoron daughters.
Radon-222, the radioactive radon isotope from the uranium-238 decay
chain, has a relatively long half-life (3.8 days). The elasticity
length in the tailings material will be about 1.5 meters, or 1.5 meters
of soil will reduce the radon exhalation by about two-thirds (1/e).
Originally, the concern regarding radon was exposure to uranium
miners. The radon-222 itself produces only about 5 percent of the
radiation exposure (alpha energy) that contributes to the biological
hazard. The main hazard comes from the radon daughters, specifically,
the short half-life radon daughters. These daughters are 218Po, 21tfPb,
214Bi, and 214Po. Since more than one nuclide is involved, a total
energy unit was developed which precluded having to determine the concen-
tration of each nuclide. This unit, the working level (WL), was also
designed to be a safe occupational level of exposure. Thus, at the time
of development, a uranium miner could work in an atmosphere containing
one WL and the exposure received would be acceptable. (This "safe"
level has now been reduced by a factor of 3).
One WL is defined as any mixture of short half-life radon daughters
in a liter of air which will ultimately produce 1.3 x 105 MeV of alpha
energy. Also, 100 pC.i of 222Rn per liter of air in equilibrium with its
short half-life daughters will produce 1.3 x 105 MeV of alpha energy or
1 WL of exposure. Further, if a miner worked 8 hours per day, 5 days
per week for a month (actually based on 170 hours of exposure) in a 1 WL
47
-------
atmosphere, then he would receive -a one working level month exposure
(WLM). This same exposure for one year would be 12 WLM which was orig-
inally a "safe" yearly occupational exposure.
The biological hazard data collected to date is from the uranium
miner population. However, with the discovery that uranium mill tailings
were being used for construction material and knowing that the tailings
had a substantial radium concentration, health officials suspected that
elevated WL exposures would be present in the homes built with or over
tailings because the radon could diffuse through the material used in
the structure. Once the radon reaches the inside of a habitable structure,
the radon daughters that are formed can lead to elevated exposures of
the occupants.
In 1966, it was discovered that uranium mill tailings were being
used as backfill for new home construction in Colorado. It was subse-
quently determined that tailings had been supplied for this purpose
since about 1953.
In August 1970, the Public Health Service provided guidance to the
State of Colorado concerning gamma radiation and radon daughter exposures.
Referred to as the Surgeon General's Guidance, the document provided for
an upper level, above which remedial or corrective action was suggested;
a lower level, below which no action was believed necessary; and an
intermediate region where the decision for action was based on further
evaluation of the specific location. The working level guidance values
were 0.05 WL and 0.01 WL, and the gamma radiation values were 0.1 mR/h
and 0.05 mR/h, upper and lower guides, respectively.
Two computer data bases were developed. Both of these systems are
still in use, and printouts are furnished to the users by the EPA routinely
and also upon request. The active gamma data base is now operated for
the State of Colorado by a Grand Junction ERDA contractor.
'The initial surveys were performed by a mobile gamma survey vehicle
which belonged to the AEC, and the necessary adaptations for this use
were developed by Lucius Pitkin, Inc., (LPI), the prime contractor for
the AEC in the Grand Junction Operations Office. By August 1972, surveys
of about 90 communities in 10 Western States (Arizona, Colorado, Idaho,
New Mexico, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming)
were completed by LPI for the AEC. Any anomalies in the natural gamma
radiation levels discovered by the contractor were followed up by an EPA
field survey team. A report for each community and a State summary of
the community surveys were then furnished to the appropriate State
agencies.
Studies of the radon exhaled from uranium mill tailings sites were
initiated in 1967. The PHS, AEC, and the Colorado and Utah State Health
Departments cooperated in a joint project in four communities, Grand
Junction and Durango, Colo., and Monticello and Salt Lake City, Utah.
48
-------
The results of this study indicated that, beyond the distance of 0.5
mile from the tailings pile, the ambient radon level could not be statis-
tically distinguished from the community's background 222Rn level (3.8).
Environmental surveys were also provided for tailings piles at Tuba
City, Ariz.; Mexican Hat, Utah; and Monument Valley, Ariz. (3.9-3.12).
All of these surveys indicated that the sites should not be used without
stabilization of the tailings piles, and that the surface of the pile
should not be used or developed.
In 1973, Congress indicated that comprehensive studies should be
made of all of the uranium mill tailings piles under an overall plan
rather than surveying each pile separately. The above recommendation
was accepted, and a joint AEC/EPA Phase I-Phase II project was started.
During April 1974, a report was prepared for the Climax Site in
Grand Junction, Colo. This report was used as the format for the other
site reports. This was followed by visits to each site by a team
consisting of an AEC representative, EPA representatives from the Office
of Radiation Programs in Las Vegas and the EPA region concerned, a
representative of the concerned State's radiological health program, and
when possible a representative of the milling company. Surveys at all
of the sites were completed in May, and the Phase I reports were submitted
to the Congress in October 1974 (3.12). The sites included in these
reports are shown in table 3-1.
The purpose of the Phase II planned work at the inactive tailings
pile sites is to determine the costs of various types of remedial action
for a particular site. This work will be performed by an architect-
engineering firm performed under contract to ERDA. The first Phase II
study was started in mid-1975 at the Vitro site in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Predicted doses
Recent studies by EPA have estimated the radiation doses to an
individual and the population from radioactivity in a uranium tailings
pile (3.13). Table 3-2 presents the results of this study for six
inactive uranium mill tailings piles.
Phosphate Mining and Processing
One of the first steps in processing ore is roasting or calcining.
During this process, laboratory analysis indicated, about 85 percent of
the polonium volatilized. A field effort was started to determine the
actual discharge levels and determine the effectiveness of certain
control technologies.- The results of this effort have been reported by
EPA (3.2). Initial field studies were performed in the southeast United
States, primarily Florida since, as reported, 91 percent of the phosphate
rock mined comes from Florida. Tennessee produces 3 percent, and the
49
-------
Table 3-1. Phase I inactive uranium mill site reports (3.12)
State
Location
Present owner*
or
former mill owner**
Size of tailings pile
(tons)
Arizona
Colorado
Idaho
Monument Valley
Tuba City
Durango
Grand Junction
Gunnison
Maybe!1
Naturita
Rifle (old)
Rifle (new)
Slickrock (UCC)
Slickrock (NC)
Lowman t
New Mexico Ambrosia Lake
Shiprock
Oregon
Texas
Lakeview
Falls City
Ray Point
Utah
Wyomi ng
Green River
Mexican Hat
Salt Lake City
Converse County
The Navajo Nation*
Foote Mineral Company**
The Navajo Nation*
El Paso Natural Gas**
Foote Mineral Company*
American Metals, ClimaK Div.**
Gunnison Mining Co.**
Union Carbide Corporation*
Foote Mineral Company*
Union Carbide Corporation*
Union Carbide Corporation*
Union Carbide Corporation*
Union Carbide Corporation*
Porter Brothers*
Phillips 66*
United Nuclear**
The Navajo Nation*
Foote Mineral Company**
Atlantic Richfield Company*
Susquehanna Western**
Exxon, USA*
Union Carbide Corporation***
The Navajo Nation*
A Z Minerals**
Vitro Corp. of America**
Phelps Dodge Company*
1,100,000
800,000
1,555,000
1,900,000
540,000
2,600,000
680,000
350,000
2,700,000
350,000
37,000
90,000
2,600,000
1,500,000
130,000
2,500,000
490,000
123,000
2,200,000
1,666,000
187,000
***Property owned by Union Carbide but currently leased to the U.S. Air Force.
tNo chemical processing was involved at this site. Heavy minerals in the
dredge concentrate from placer deposits were upgraded by physical methods.
50
-------
Table 3-2. Radiation dose rates for selected inactive uranium mill
tailings piles (3.13)
Lung dose to bronchial Aggregate lung dose
T .,. epithelium of rate to the population
Iai!ings critically exposed within 80 km
P1le individual (organ-rem/y)
(mrem/y)
Salt Lake City, 14,000 70,000
Utah
Grand Junction, 8,100 14,000
Colorado
Mexican Hat, 1,200 660
Utah
Monument Valley, 140 2.5
Arizona
Tuba City, 2,100 470
Arizona
Shiprock, 900 840
New Mexico
remainder comes from the States of Idaho, Missouri, Montana, Utah, and
Wyoming. Phosphate deposits also occur in North and South Carolina and
Georgia. The development of the deposits in North Carolina is now
underway; however, no development is known to be underway in the other
two States.
Plants which process the phosphate rock are located throughout the
United States; most produce fertilizer. There are three general types
of processes, and some plants may only perform one, while others may
produce all of the products. If the marketable ore is combined with
sulfuric acid (H2S04), phosphoric acid (HaPOj and gypsum result. This
product is called normal superphosphate. By separation, phosphoric acid
is obtained, and the gypsum is sent to a waste "gyp" pile. The "phos
acid" can then be combined with marketable ore to produce triple super-
phosphate fertilizer, or combined with ammonia to produce diammonium
phosphate fertilizer. Other plants combine the marketable ore with coke
and silica and, in an electric furnace, produce phosphorus, ferrophos
metal (FEP), and slag.
51
-------
All of these products contain varying quantities of natural radio-
activity, and the laboratory analyses of the overburden, ore, products
and byproducts is continuing at EPA facilities in Las Vegas, Nev. and
Montgomery, Ala.
The fact that uranium, thorium and radium occurred in phosphate
rock throughout the world has been known for several years, but the
information was primarily obtained for geological identification purposes.
However, with the realization that radon from uranium mill tailings can
cause significant exposures to the general public, these other sources
have come under scrutiny by health physicists.
In the United States, thorium and uranium concentrations in phosphate
rock range from 2 to 19 ppm (0.4 to 4 pCi/g) and 8-399 ppm (5.4 to
267 pCi/g), respectively (3.14). The highest and lowest concentrations
were reported in South Carolina and Tennessee, respectively. In general,
higher concentrations are associated with marine deposits. It has also
been shown that, as with other ore such as uranium, the uranium or
thorium and their daughter products exist in secular equilibrium, i.e.
members of the same series will be present in equal activities. The
mining and processing of the phosphate ores redistributes these naturally
radioactive nuclides among the various products, byproducts, and wastes.
Thus, the materials are dispersed throughout the environment.
At present, the wastes (slag, and overburden) are being evaluated
to determine their radioactive contribution to the environment. Recom-
mendations against the use of slag in building materials have been
provided by the EPA to the State of Idaho. Many foreign countries use
waste gypsum for the manufacture of wall board, and this use is being
studied. Although, no waste gypsum is presently known to be used in the
manufacture of wall board in the United States, samples of this product
are being imported from other countries for laboratory analyses.
Much of the land mined, for phosphate has been reclaimed by replacing
the overburden removed to reach the phosphate ore. Habitable structures
built on this reclaimed land are now being evaluated in Florida. To
date, measurements have been made in about 125 structures, two-thirds of
which were believed to have been built on reclaimed phosphate land (3.3).
In general, the data from this study coupled with existing infor-
mation indicates that radium-226 concentrations in soil beneath struc-
tures significantly affects the radon daughter levels within the struc-
tures. The data collected suggests that structures built on reclaimed
land have radon daughter levels significantly greater than structures
not built on reclaimed land.
52
-------
Thorium Mining and Milling
The commercial production of thorium in the United States has
usually been from monazite sands but a list of facilities has not been
compiled nor made available to EPA; thus, thorium mining and milling
operations have not yet received extensive study. One, now inactive,
operation in Salmon, Idaho, was surveyed during the 1971 EPA mobile and
field team gamma evaluations. No use of the waste material from this
operation was discovered.
Radon in Potable Water Supplies
Various reported concentrations of radon-222 from analysis of
potable water exist in the literature; however, a comprehensive liter-
ature search has not been performed in order to determine if the data
are comparable or where'the different analyses have been performed.
Data have been presented by Dr. Thomas Gesell (3.15) and prelim-
inary calculations have been performed by the Office of Radiation Programs
(3.16). Dr. Gesell's data showed the following:
1. Approximately 10-15 percent of all United States drinking water
supplies and 1/3 to 1/2 of all ground water supplies have radon concen-
trations greater than 500 pCi/£.
2. Measured radon-222 concentrations in ground water supplies:
State 222Rn (pCi/l)
Maine 53,700 (Avg. of 226 samples)
New Hampshire 2,500 - 1,130,000 (Avg. 101,000 pCi/£
for 26 samples)
Washington, North Dakota
Montana, Idaho 19-5,600
Utah 400-1,800
Texas 20-27,000
Houston, Tex. 500-2,000 (Ground water = 75 percent
of supply)
In the past, exposures from radon-222 in drinking water have been
considered because of the ingestion pathway; and to prevent ingestion,
aeration has been suggested. However, EPA believes that the radon-222
concentrations in water could cause significant radiation exposures to
people; but that this exposure would be due to the short-lived decay
products of radon (the radon daughters), and the pathway would be
inhalation.
53
-------
To examine this hypothesis the -following assumptions previously
determined by EPA were used: (3.17,3.18).
1. House size = 227 m3 (8,000 ft3)
2. Bathroom size = 6 m3 (200 ft3) (51 x 5' x 8')
3. Ventilation rate = 1 complete change each hour
4. Radon to radon daughter equilibrium in house = 50 percent
5. Continuous exposure to a radon concentration of 1 pCi/£
produces 4 rem/y and 1 working level month (WLM) per year ~16 rem/y.
If the potable water being used in a dwelling contains 500 pCi/£,
the resultant 222Rn air concentration could be 0.15 pCi/£. The contin-
uous exposure to this concentration could produce 500 mrem/y to the
lung. These are only estimates and are not presently substantiated.
Further efforts are being made to evaluate this potential exposure
source.
Radon in Natural Gas
Natural gas as a source of radon and cause of subsequent population
exposures to consumers has been evaluated by the EPA (3.19). The EPA
paper reviews data collected by many authors including Bunce, Barton,
Paul and Gesell (3.20-3. 24).
Radon in the geological strata in which the gas wells are located
diffuses with the natural gas into the wells, and various modes of
storage and distribution were considered. These included well head
concentration, well production rate, pipeline sources (gas from one area
mixing with another area), transmission time, and storage time.
Doses to the bronchial epithelium were calculated assuming that the
radon concentration in the gas was 20 pCi/£, that 0.765 m3 of gas was
used in a kitchen range, in a 226.6 m3 house with one air change per
hour. The average air concentration was calculated to be 0.0028 pCi/£
and the tracheobronchial dose from unvented stoves and spaceheaters was
calculated to be 15 and 54 mrem/y, respectively. The total for the
United States was calculated to 2.73 million person-rems per year.
Radon in Liquified Petroleum Gas
Most of the natural gas from well production fields is not distri-
buted directly to consumers. It is first processed to remove impurities
and the heavier more valuable hydrocarbons. Methane is the principal
54
-------
constituent of the natural gas. The components ethane, propane and
other heavy hydrocarbons are bottled under pressure as liquified petro-
leum gas (LPG) with propane as the major constituent. This process may
remove up to 50 percent of the radon in the natural gas, decreasing an
individual's exposure; but overall, there would be no effect on the
population exposure.
The exposures estimated in the EPA report, Assessment of Potential
Radiological Health Effects from Radon in Liquified Petroleum Gas (3.18),
for unvented kitchen ranges and space heaters were 0.9 and 4.0 mrem/y,
respectively; 20,000 and 10,000 person-rems/y, respectively or about
30,000 person-rems/y would result.
Radon Daughter Exposures in Natural Caves
Radon and radon daughter measurements have been made in some of the
large natural caves located in the United States such as Carlsbad Caverns
(3.25*3.26).
These caves are usually characterized by relatively uniform interior
temperatures during the year. Thus at times, unfortunately, usually
during the winter, there will be an interchange of interior air with
outside air, and the radon concentrations in the cave will be diluted
with outside air. During the summer though, the outside temperature
will probably be higher than inside and very little air exchange should
occur. Thus, during the summer when visitor use would be expected to be
the greatest, the working.level (WL) exposure is also estimated to be
the highest. However, use of elevator shafts, etc., could cause dif-
ferent effects, and the effect of barometric pressure changes has not
been studied.
During the 3- or 4-hour underground visit, an individual's exposure
will probably not be large; but a significant population person-rem per
year may result because it is believed that an excess of one million
persons visit some of the large caves operated by the U.S. National Park
Service each year.
If studies show control methods should be instituted, ventilation
would be envisioned as a corrective measure; however, in this case it is
suspected that the control measure could eventually destroy the cave
features and cave ecology that persons came to view. More work needs to
be done on this source of possible radiation exposure.
Radon and Geothermal Energy Production
Energy from geothermal sources has been produced for several years
at the Palisades Plant operated by Pacific Gas and Electric (PG & E) in
55
-------
Northern California. PG & E and the Union Oil Company of California
have contracted with the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LL.L) to determine
the radon and radon daughters present in the production and waste streams
of a geothermal electric power generator. Radon-222 concentrations in
the thousands of pCi/£ have been mentioned in the waste streams, but the
data have not been released to EPA.
It is suspected that elevated exposures to radon and its daughters
would occur at the plant and in the surrounding vicinity. Other envir-
onmental pollutants such as noise and toxic gases (hydrogen sulfide)
are also associated with this industry.
Investigations of natural thermal areas and hot springs have
recently been conducted by the EPA and others. As with the radon in
potable water supply investigations, there has been no correlation
between the radium and radon concentrations observed in the samples.
Areas investigated to date are in the States of Arizona, California,
Colorado, Idaho, Oregon, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah.
Radon Mines
Numerous previous metal mine facilities in the Western United
States have been utilized as "treatment" centers, at one time, adver-
tising cures for gout, arthritis and various other physical complaints.
Today, these facilities by law cannot advertise various cures and depend
on testimonials from their clientel and word of mouth.
Surveys were carried out by the EPA in several facilities in Boulder,
Mont. During the usual "treatment" procedure, visitors descend into the
mine and spend varying amounts of time sitting on benches or playing
cards while inhaling the "curative" radon vapors. Some mines are
supposedly "salted" with ore to ensure "helpful" radon levels.
The actual number of persons availing themselves of these facil-
ities has not been tabulated, but the numbers would represent a small
percentage of the entire population; thus, this source is not thought to
produce a significant population dose.
Individual exposures are also limited because the visits to the
mine are short (about 3 hours). Reportedly, most of the users come for
a week's cure and, thus, would spend only 12-15 hours per year in the
facility. However, workers at the facility such as receptionists and
guides can receive significant exposure during their 40-hour week. In
some cases, the working level month (WLM) exposures exceed the current
uranium miner exposure standard of 4 WLM/y (3.27).
56
-------
Radioactivity in Construction Material
A literature search and discussion of reports of radioactivity in
construction material has been prepared by the EPA's Office of Radiation
Programs (3.28). The report contains a bibliography of pertinent refer-
ences that describe the exposure of the population to levels of the
naturally occurring radionuclides present in construction materials.
EPA's bibliography on radioactivity in construction materials
contains, to a large extent, articles from the early 1950's to the
present, since few surveys were reported in the literature prior to
1950. A brief description of important topics dealt with in each
article has been provided with the reference source for those articles
which have been reviewed.
The summary and conclusions from EPA's report follow:
"Surveys to determine the radioactive content of specific building
materials used in the United States have not been reported in the liter-
ature. The external dose to the United States population from exposure
to natural radioactive materials (exclusive of uranium mill tailings)
contained in United States building materials has not been evaluated,
and the possibly significant external exposure from the use of byproduct
gypsum and fly-ash materials should be evaluated. The effects of various
contruction materials on the attenuation of cosmic and terrestrial
radiation have been evaluated in a limited number of surveys in the
urban area of Boston, Mass., New York City, N.Y., and Livermore, Calif.
The measurement of radon and radon daughter product concentrations has
only been reported for a few dwellings and several multi-story office
buildings in Boston and in several State-owned buildings in North
Carolina. This literature search has found a lack of meaningful data
for use in evaluating the U.S. population exposure from building mater-
ials.
"Conclusions
"1. The article by Hamilton (1971) is the only significant report
of data on the radioactivity content of specific building materials.
"2. Radioactivity in building materials used in the United States
has received very little attention. Except for the studies to find
construction materials of very low background, there are no reports of
radiological surveys of any United States building materials which are
used by the general population for construction purposes. Also, there
are no reports of United States studies on the possible use of byproduct
gypsum and fly-ash products for construction materials.
57
-------
"3. The reports by Solon, et al., (1960); Yeates, et al., (1970 and
1972); and Lindeken, et al., (1971 and 1973) provide the only data on
radiation measurements made inside United States buildings.
"4. The reports by Yeates, et al., (1970 and 1972) and Aldrich and
Conners (1974) are the only reported data of radon daughter product
concentration measurements made inside United States buildings (exclu-
sive of measurements made to study uranium mill tailings material usage),
"5. The documentation of the evaluation of radiological hazards
associated with the use of uranium mill tailings materials for con-
struction purposes in the United States has not been reported in the
open literature [except for the report by Duncan and Eadie (1974)]."
Summary
Technologically enhanced natural radiation is radioactive material
which occurs naturally as an ore below the surface of the earth, but in
the process of exploitation, is transferred to the surface, thus affec-
ting the radiation environment. This occurs in mining where subsurface
radioactive ores are brought to the surface of the earth, thus not only
affecting workers in the industry but potentially increasing the exposure
of populations to these materials. One of the most important of these
exposures is from uranium mill tailings piles, the individual and popu-
lation exposures of which are listed in table 3-2.
Phosphate mining and processing
Thorium concentrations in phosphate rock range from 4 to 10.4 pCi/g
and uranium concentrations ranged from 5.4 to 267 pCi/g. The highest
concentrations were reported in Tennessee. Much of the land mined for
phospFiate is reclaimed and is being used for home construction. These
homes are exposed to radon daughter levels significantly higher than
homes not built on reclaimed land.
Radon in potable water supplier
Approximately 10-15 percent of all U.S. drinking water supplies and
1/3 to 1/5 of all ground water supplies have radon concentrations greater
than 500 pCi/£. Table 3-3 lists typical 222Rn concentrations in ground
water supplies at selected areas in the United Statas.
58
-------
Radon in natural gas
Burning natural gas with a 222Rn concentration of 20 ,pCi/£ gives
an average 222Rn air concentration of 0.0028 pCi/£ and the tracheo-
bronchial dose from this concentration could reach a maximum of 54
mrem/y. The total person-rems from this source is estimated to be 2.73
million person-rem/y.
Table 3-3. Typical 222Rn concentrations in ground water supplies
at selected areas in the United States
State 222Rn (pCi/£)
Maine 53,700
N.H. * 2500-1,130,000
Wash., N.Dak., Mont., Idaho 19-5,600
Utah 400-1,800
Tex. 20-27,800
Houston, Tex. 500-2000
Radon in liquified petroleum gas
It has been estimated that unvented kitchen ranges and space
heaters operating on liquified petroleum gas would result in a popu-
lation exposure of about 30,000 person-rem/y for the United States.
Radon daughter exposures in natural oaves
Although individual exposures are not large, nevertheless, due to
the large population that visits natural caves, a significantly large
population exposure could result.
59
-------
References
(3.1) GESELL, T. F. and H. M. PRICHARD. The technologically enhanced
natural radiation environment. Health Physics, Vol. 28, No. 4,
pp. 361-366 (April 1975).
(3.2) GUIMOND, R. T. and S. T. WINDHAM. Radioactivity distribution in
phosphate products, by-products, and wastes. Technical Note:
ORP/CSD-75-3. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Radiation Programs, Washington, D.C. (September 1975).
(3.3) Preliminary findings: radon daughters levels in structures
constructed on reclaimed Florida phosphate land. Technical Note:
ORP/CSD-75-4. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Radiation Programs, Washington, D.C. (September 1975).
(3.4) Water quality impacts of.uranium mining and milling activities in
the Grants mineral belt, New Mexico (EPA 906/9-75-002). U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region VI, Dallas, Texas
(September 1975).
(3.5) Final environmental statement related to the operation of Shirley
Basin Uranium Mill, Utah International, Inc. (Docket No. 40-6622).
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Directorate of Licensing, pp. IV-3
through IV-5 (December 1974).
(3.6) Final environmental statement related to the operation of the
Highland Uranium Mill by the Exxon Company, U.S.A. (Docket No.
40-8102). U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Directorate of Licensing,
p. 33 (March 1973).
(3.7) KAUFMAN, 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. Submitted for publication in Ground
Water (the technical journal of the National Waterwell Association),
(3.8) Evaluation of radon-222 near uranium mill tailings piles, U.S.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, U.S. Public Health
Service, DER/69-1 (March 1969).
(3.9) SNELLING, R. N. and S. D. SHEARER, JR. Environmental survey of
uranium mill tailings pile, Tuba City, Arizona. Radiol. Health
- Data Rep, 10:475-487 (November 1969).
(3.10) SNELLING, R. N. Environmental survey of uranium mill tailings pile
Monument Valley, Ariz., Radiol. Health Data Rep, 11:511-517
(October 1970).
60
-------
(3.11) SMELLING, R. N. Environmental survey of uranium mill tailings
pile, Mexican Hat, Utah, Radio!. Health Data Rep, 12:17-28
(January 1971).
(3.12) Phase I reports on conditions of inactive uranium mill sites
and tailings in the Western United States. U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission, Grand Junction, Colorado (1974).
(3.13) HARDIN, J. M., J. J. SWIFT, and H. W. CALLEY. Draft-Guidance for
the evaluation of remedial measures at inactive uranium mill
tailings sites, Appendix. Office of Radiation Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460 (May 1975).
(3.14) MENZEL, R. G. Uranium, radium, and thorium content in phosphate
rocks and their possible radiation hazard, J. Agr. Food Chem.,
Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 231-234 (1968).
(3.15) Personal communication. Dr. Thomas F. Gesell, University of
Texas at Houston, School of Public Health.
*
(3.16) DUNCAN, D. L. Indoor radon daughter levels resulting from
radon-222 in potable water (Draft Report). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs, Washington, D.C.
(October 1975).
(3.17) JOHNSON, R. H. JR., J. M. HARDIN, and N. S. NELSON. Dose
conversion factor for radon-222 and daughter products (Draft
Report). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation
Programs, Washington, D.C.
(3.18) GESELL, T. F., R. H. JOHNSON, JR., and D. E. BERNHARDT. Assessment
of-potential radiological health effects from radon in liquified
petroleum gas (EPA-520/1-75-002), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Radiation Programs, Washington, D.C. (August 1975).
(3.19) JOHNSON, R. Hi JR., D. E. BERNHARDT, N. S. NELSON, and H. W.
CALLEY, JR. Assessment of potential radiological health effects
from radon in natural gas, EPA-520/1-73-004, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. (November 1973).
(3.20) BUNCE, L. A. and F. W. SATTLER. Radon-222 in natural gas. Radio!.
Health Data Rep, 7:441-444 (August 1966).
(3.21) BARTON, C. J. Radon in air, natural gas, and houses, ORNL Central
Files 71-5-48 (May 29, 1971).
(3.22) BARTON, C. J., R. E. MOORE, and P. S. ROHWER. Contribution of
radon in natural gas to the natural radioactivity dose in homes.
ORNL-TM-4154 (April 1973).
61
-------
(3.23) PAUL, H., G. B. GOTT, G. E. MANAGER, J. W. MYTTQN, and A. Y.
SAKAKURA. Radon and helium in natural gas. 19th International
Geological Congress, Algiers, Sec. 9, Part 9 (1952).
(3.24) GESELL, T. F. Radiological health implications of radon in
natural gas and natural gas products - an interim report.
Institute of Environmental Health, the University of Texas Health
Sciences Center at Houston (April 17, 1973).
(3.25) CLEMENTS, S. E. and M. H. WILKENING, J. Geophys. Res., Vol. 79,
5025.
(3.26) BECKMAN, R. T., D. D. RAPP, and L. A. RATHBUN. Radiation survey
of Carlsbad Caverns National Park, U.S. Department of the Interior,
Mining, Enforcement, and Safety Administration, Denver, Colorado.
(3.2?) DUNCAN, D. L. Memorandum to P. B. Smith, EPA Region VIII, Denver,
Colorado.
(3.28) EADIE, G. G. Radioactivity in construction materials: a
literature review and bibliography. Technical Note ORP/LV-75-13,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs,
Las Vegas, Nevada (April 1975).
62
-------
Chapter 4 - Fallout
This section presents the status of the collection and reporting of
fallout data and doses to man from fallout for the year 1973. In those
cases where there may be no data specific to the year 1973, data for
doses for the latest year before 1973 are presented.
Information presented in this section of the report has been limited
to those sources of information that are the most complete and up to
date (re the year 1973). These sources are the Health and Safety Labor-
atory (HASL) fallout program reports and the United Nations Scientific
Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) report. The
former provides an extensive source of fallout information in the form
of raw data and interpretive comments. The latter provides the most
comprehensive source of information on doses resulting from fallout.
Other sources of information on fallout monitoring and various
reports on doses do exist; (see the ERAMS summary in this document)
however, the inclusion of a discussion of each would be a laborious task
which would provide little more information on fallout and doses than is
contained in the sources selected for this report.
Health and Safety Laboratory Fallout Program
Every 3 months, the Health and Safety Laboratory (HASL) issues a
report summarizing current information obtained at HASL pertaining to
fallout.
To present a more complete picture of the current fallout situation
and to provide a medium for a rapid publication of radionuclide and
trace element data, the quarterly reports often contain information from
other laboratories and programs, some of which are not part of the
general AEC or ERDA program. To assist in developing, as rapidly as-
possible, provisional interpretations of the data, special interpretive
reports and notes are included from time to time.
63
-------
The reports are usually divided into four main parts which are:
1. interpretive reports and notes,
2. HASL fallout program data,
3. data from sources other than HASL, and
4. recent publications related to radionuclide studies.
An appendix to each quarterly report is also published. This
appendix contains the results of the analyses of all samples taken under
the HASL Fallout Monitoring Program.
Of the four main parts of the HASL reports only the second is fixed
in regard to subject matter discussed. The other parts contain subject
matter on various subjects as it becomes available. The second part,
HASL Fallout Program Data, is. comprised of information and data con-
cerning the following fallout program subjects:
1) 90Sr and 89Sr fallout at world ground sites,
2) radionuclides and lead in surface air,
3) Project Airstream,
4) High Altitude Balloon Sampling Program,
5) 90Sr in milk and tap water,
6) 90Sr in diet (Tri-Cities), and
7) 90Sr in human bone.
The 90Sr and 89Sr in monthly deposition at world ground sites
activity consists of the collection of precipitation and dry fallout
over monthly periods at stations in the United States and overseas. The
samples are analyzed for 90Sr and prior to 1971 for 89Sr whenever pos-
sible. At present there are 35 monthly monitoring sites in the United
States and 90 sites in other countries.
In late 1958 and 1959, the monthly fallout samples were analyzed
for 90Sr and 89Sr. The 89Sr measurements were discontinued in 1960 at
most sites, resumed in September 1961 and discontinued again in 1971.
Between May 1960 and September 1961, the monthly samples were combined
on a 2-month basis because 90Sr levels had dropped considerably. In
September 1961, analysis of individual monthly collections were resumed.
The res.ults of all analyses are published quarterly. All ratios of
89Sr to 90Sr have been extrapolated to the midpoint of the sampling month,
64
-------
Calculated values of the concentration of 90Sr in precipitation are
given in units of picocuries of 90Sr per liter. The total precipitation
in centimeters and the 90Sr deposition in millicuries per square kilo-
meter for data available in a calendar year are listed. The groups or
organizations responsible for the sampling are identified. Monthly 90Sr
depositions for New York City since 1954 are shown in graphical form to
reflect trends since 1954.
The HASL has been collecting surface air particulate samples at
stations in the Western Hemisphere since January 1963. The sample
filters are analyzed for a number of fission and activation product
radionuclides as well as stable lead. The study is a direct outgrowth
of a program initiated by the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) in
1957 and continued through 1962. The primary objective is to study the
spatial and temporal distribution of nuclear weapons debris and lead in
the surface air. The present network of sampling stations extends from
76° north to 90° south latitude.
Samples are analyzed for concentrations of gamma-emitting radio-
nuclides 7Be, 95Zr, 137Cs and lt+l+Ce. Radiochemical analyses are conducted
to determine concentrations of 51+Mn, 90Sr, 109Cd, 1Ift*Ce, 238Pu and 239Pu.
In samples collected after some French and Chinese atmospheric weapons
tests, additional short-lived nuclides were analyzed, such as 89Sr,
95Zr, and lklCe. As the levels of any of the radionuclides drop to
below practical detection limits they are eliminated from the radio-
chemical program. The results of all analyses (concentrations) are
averaged for each month for each station from 1963 through 1973 by HASL.
Project Airstream is HASL's study of radioactivity in the lower
stratosphere. An RB-57F aircraft serves as the sampling platform.
Airstream missions are usually scheduled for the months of January,
April, July and October of each year. The first Airstream mission was
flown in August 1967- Because of .budgeting and other compelling consid-
erations Project Airstream as presently structured will be discontinued
after the April 1974 mission.
The route followed by the sampling aircraft extends from 75° N to
31° S latitude (Alaska to southern tip of South America). Air filter
samples are collected along the flight track. A gamma analysis of the
samples is made as well as detailed radiochemical analysis which includes
some of the following nuclides; 89Sr, 90Sr, 210Pb, 210Po, 238Pu, and
239,2«fOpu> Results of the analyses are reported in HASL's "Fallout
Program Quarterly Summary Report."
Under the HASL Fallout Program, HASL operates a High Altitude
Balloon Sampling Program. Upper atmospheric nuclear debris are collected
by balloon-borne filtering devices. The program has been in operation
since 1957. Balloon flights are made at three or more altitudes from
21 km up to a maximum of 42 km from approximately 6 locations.
65
-------
The sampling filters from the. balloon-borne samplers are analyzed
for gamma activity as well as radiochemically for long-lived weapons-
related radionuclides. These nuclides include 89Sr, 90Sr, 238pUj an(j
239Pu. Starting in fiscal year 1973, some samples were also analyzed
for 210Pb, and 210Po to compliment Project Airstream studies. The
results of the sample analyses are published quarterly in HASL's "Fallout
Program Quarterly Summary Report."
HASL has analyzed New York City milk and tap water on a monthly
basis since 1954 to determine both tabularly and graphically and published
quarterly. The graphical presentation describes the trends in levels
since 1954.
HASL performs quarterly estimates of the annual dietary intake of
90Sr of New York City and San Francisco residents. These estimates are
based on the analyses of food purchased at these cities every 3 months
since 1960. Available data are published in HASL's quarterly summaries.
An evaluation of the 1973 data-was presented in HASL's Fallout Program
Quarterly Summary Report for July 1, 1974.
HASL analyzes specimens of human vertebrae from New York City and
San Francisco to determine 90Sr concentrations. Human vertebrae specimens
are also received, through the World Health Organization, from countries
where western world-type diets are not typical. Analyses are published
quarterly. Strontium-90 data for samples received in 1973 were reported
in HASL's Fallout Program Quarterly Summary Report for April 1, 1974.
Interpretation of HASL fallout program data
Periodically, HASL publishes interpretive reports and notes con-
cerning the data obtained from the fallout program. Generally, the
reports and notes show the results of the last year's data and compare
it to data from previous years. Occasionally, doses to man may be
calculated. The following reports and evaluations were published by
HASL for each of the indicated fallout program areas.
90Sr> and 8<*Sr deposition at world ground sites
Each year since 1958 an estimate of the annual worldwide deposition
and the cumulative deposit of 90Sr, based upon data of the HASL sampling
network, has been made. All of the primarily monthly precipitation and
radiochemical data are listed and updated quarterly in the appendix to
each HASL Fallout Quarterly Summary Report. Additionally, a summary of
these results, averaged over a 10-degree latitude band was published for
1973 (4.1).
66
-------
To determine worldwide deposition, HASL assumes that within the 10
degree latitude band, that HASL sampling sites, on the average, are
representative of fallout in that area. Hence, multiplying the average
monthly 90Sr deposition (mCi/km2) by the area of the latitude band (km2)
gives the total deposition in that band. For poleward areas beyond 80° N
and 70° S, values of deposition are obtained by extrapolating a smoothly
decreasing 90Sr deposition to zero at the poles. Summing all the derived
deposition in each latitude band yields the total worldwide deposition.
The total deposition of 90Sr fallout on the earth's surface in 1973 was
found to be 63 kCi. This is the lowest value since the program began in
1958. The seasonal and latitudinal variations in fallout have remained
as before (4.1).
Table 4-1 and figures 4-1 and 4-2 show the annual cumulative world-
wide 90Sr deposition, monthly 90Sr deposition and cumulative 90Sr depo-
sition since 1958. From these tables and figures, it is evident that
the total 90Sr burden is decreasing as radioactive decay exceeds fallout.
Strontium-90 in diet
Estimates of intake via the total diet in New York City and San
Francisco have been made since 1960 based upon concentrations found in
quarterly food samples. The dietary intakes of 90Sr have decreased from
maximum levels attained in 1963-64, but the decline has become more
gradual in recent years due to the continuing small amounts of 90Sr
deposition and the little changing cumulative deposit in the soil. The
annual intake in New York City in 1973 was 9.7 pCi/day which is a 9
percent decrease from 1972. The 1973 estimate of intake for San Fran-
cisco was 3.2 pCi/day compared to 3.6 pCi/day in 1972. Lower intakes
occurred in San Francisco due to the fact that less deposition occurs in
the San Francisco food-producing region (4.2).
Table 4-2 shows 90Sr concentrations found in the diet for some 19
food products in San Francisco and New York City. Figure 4-3 shows the
trend in 90Sr concentration in these cities since 1960. The rapid
decline in 90Sr intake's after 1963-1964 became more gradual after 1966-
67 as the uptake from the little changing cumulative deposit of 90Sr on
soil became the dominant factor contributing to 90Sr concentrations in
food (4.2).
Resumption of atmospheric testing by the French and Chinese in
1966, resulting in a relatively constant low fallout rate of 90Sr, has
been a factor in maintaining the dietary intakes of 90Sr at about constant
levels since 1968.
67
-------
Table 4-1. Annual-cumulative worldwide 90Sr deposition (4.1)
oo
Year
Pre-1958
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
Annual
Northern
Hemisphere
.630
1.052
.262
.351
1.444
2.622
1.656
.774
.328
.169
.195
.147
.206
.188
.086
deposition jMCi)
Southern
Hemisphere
.255
.185
.168
.174
.264
.308
.422
.357
.207
.110
.102
.141
.128
.150
.096
Cumulative deposit (MCi)
Total
.885
1.237
.430
.525
1.708
2.930
2.078
1.131
.535
.279
.297
.288
.344
.338
.182
Northern
Hemisphere
1.7
2.28
3.26
3.44
3.70
5.04
7.51
8.96
9.50
9.59
9.52
9.48
9.40
9.37
9.33
9.18
Southern
Hemisphere
.6
.84
1.00
1.14
1.29
1.51
1.78
2.16
2.46
2.60
2.65
2.68
2.76
2.82
2.90
2.92
Total
2.3
3.12
4.26
4.58
4.99
6.55
9.29
11.12
11.96
12.19
12.17
12.16
12.16
12.19
12.23
12.10
-------
Figure 4-1. Monthly 90Sr deposition (4.1)
12
11
10
9
8
World
Northern Hemisphere
Southern Hemisphere
I I I
I I I I I
'58 '59 '60 '61 '62 '63 '64 '65 '66 '67 '68 '69 '70 '71 '72
YEAR
Figure 4-2. Cumulative 90Sr deposition (4.1)
69
-------
Table 4-2. Strontium-90 in the diet during 1973 (4.2)
New York City
Diet category
Dairy products
Fresh vegetables
Canned vegetables
Root vegetables
Potatoes
Dry beans
Fresh fruit
Canned fruit
Fruit juices
Bakery products
Flour
Whole grain products
Macaroni
Rice
Meat
Poultry
Eggs
Fresh fish
Shellfish
kg/y
200
48
22
10
38
3
59
11
28
44
34
11
3
3
79
20
15
8
1
g Ca
y
216.0
18.7
4.4
3.8
3.8
2.1
9.4
0.6
2.5
53.7
6.5
10.3
0.6
1.1
12.6
6.0
8.7
7.6
1.6
% of
yearly
intake pCi 90Sr
of Ca kg
5.5
58
13.1
8.7
7.1
5.5
16.7
9
11.0
1.2
3.0
3
4.2
5.5
8.5
3.8
1.7
20
0.6
0.7
1.5
0.7
1.2
% of
yearly
pCi 90Sr intake
y of 90Sr
1090
31
627
192
71
209
50
32
649
13
85
21
185
186
93
11
5
14
46
14
22
5
1
San Francisco
pCi 90Sr
kg
1.2
2.7
4.3
3.1
2.7
14.7
2.3
1.1
1.5
2.6
2.8
5.6
2.8
1.4
0.2
0.4
0.8
0.3
0.6
pCi 9°Sr
y
246
129
95
31
104
44
137
12
43
113
96
62
8
4
19
8
13
3
1
% of
yearly
intake
of 90Sr
21
35
16
24
10
Yearly intake
Daily intake
370.0 g
3554 pCi
9.6 pCi/g Ca
9.7 pCi/day
1168 pCi
3.2 pCi/g Ca
3.2 pCi/day
-------
10.0
Gralnx/*'
Products/'\
../ Vegetables
f>0 61 62 63. 64 65 66 67 6B 69 70 71 72 73 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69
Figure 4-3. Strontium-90 intake in New York City and San Francisco (4.2)
-------
Strontium-90 in Tuonan bone
Based upon their analysis of human vertebrae specimens, HASL (4.1)
has reported determinations of 90Sr concentrations obtained during 1973
and the trend in concentrations since 1954. Additionally, results of
90Sr concentration in diets are compared to vertebrae concentrations to
determine correlations between 90Sr intake and bone concentrations.
During 1973, 229 specimens of human vertebrae were analyzed,
including 43 from children and 54 from adults in New York City and 63
from children and 69 from adults obtained in San Francisco.
Figure 4-4 shows 90Sr in adult vertebrae since 1953 for New York
and San Francisco. The decrease since 1965 is consistent with lower
levels of 90Sr fallout deposition. The solid lines in figure 4-4 indicate
predictions made by HASL using modeling techniques (4.3).
Fallout 239Pw dose to man
Based upon air concentrations (measured and inferred) of 239Pu in
New York City, inhalation intake by man, and the ICRP Task Group lung
model, Bennet (4.4) has estimated 239Pu dose to man through the year
1972. It was assumed in performing model calculations that fallout
239Pu was attached to 0.4 urn aerosol particles and that the inhalation
rate was 20 m3/d or 7300 m3/y. Table 4-3 shows the yearly computed
burdens in man for the period 1952-1972. Figure 4-5 shows the yearly
239Pu intake and the cumulative burdens from 1952 through 1985. The
cumulative intake through 1972 was 42.1 pCi.
The doses due to the cumulative intake of 42.1 pCi through 1972
were computed to be 15, 500, 4, and 7 mrem for the lung, lymph, liver,
and bone, respectively. If one assumes that the average air concen-
tration will be 0.01 fCi/m3 in 1973 and that no further intake occurs
beyond 1973, the cumulative doses through the year 2000 are 16, 950, 17,
and 34 mrem for the lung, lymph, liver, and bone, respectively.
Comparison of the computed organ burdens against results of
analyses of autopsy tissue by HASL shows that reasonable estimates of
organ burdens from 239Pu inhalation can be obtained from air concen-
trations and the ICRP Task Group model.
Fallout 239 240Pw in the diet
Although inhalation intake of 239Pu adequately accounts for organ
burden, HASL investigated (4.5) the occurrence of plutonium in the diet
because of the long half-life involved and the persistence of plutonium
in the environment.
72
-------
GO
90Sr IN ADULT VERTEBRAE
NEW YORK
SAN FRANCISCO
53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70
71 72 73
Figure 4-4. 90Sr in adult vertebrae - observations (points with standard deviations)
and bone model predictions (solid lines) (4.3)
-------
Table 4-3. Fallout 239Pu Data - New York (4.4)
Year
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
Deposition
(mCi/km2)
.07
.09
.12
.12
.16
.23
.04
.06
.32
.62
.41
.14
.05
.04
.04
.06
.03
.03
.02
Cumulative
deposit
(mCi/km2)
.07
.16
.28
.40
.56
.78
.82
.89
1.21
1.83
2.24
2.38
2.43
2.47
2.51
2.57
2.60
2.63
2.65
Surface air
(fCi/m3)
.14
.18
.23
.23
.32
.45
.081
.13
.63
1.68
.91
.33
.12
.051
.080
.063
.065
.060
.031
Inhalation
intake (pCi)
1.03
1.34
1.66
1.66
2.31
3.25
.59
.91
4.61
12.23
6.65
2.39
.90
.37
.58
.46
.47
.44
.22
Lung
.15
.29
.43
.51
.66
.89
.63
.52
1.01
2.46
2.48
1.86
1.25
.81
.58
.42
.32
.26
.19
Computed
Lymph
.01
.03
.07
.11
.16
.21
.26
.27
.31
.46
.65
.78
.81
.78
.72
.65
.59
.54
.48
burden
Liver
.00
.01
.02
.04
.07
.10
.14
.17
.21
.29
.39
.49
.58
.66
.73
.78
.83
.86
.89
in man
Bone
.00
.01
.02
.04
.07
.10
.14
.18
.22
.30
.40
.51
.61
.69
.77
.83
.88
.92
.95
(PCi)
Total body
.17
.35
.54
.70
.95
1.31
1.16
1.14
1.75
3.50
3.93
3.63
3.25
2.95
2.79
2.68
2.62
2.58
2.51
-------
Computed >urd»r»»
.Total tody
Figure 4-5. Inhalation intake and burden in man of fallout 239Pu (4.4)
Foods purchased during 1972 in New York for the 90Sr in diet program,
were analyzed for 239,240pu content. Results are shown in table 4-4.
Dietary estimates of plutonium intake were made by HASL and are presented
in table 4-5. The estimated annual intake of 239,2ifOpu during 1972 was
estimated to be 1.5 pCi. Thirty percent of the plutonium was attributed
to grain products, 20 percent to vegetables, fruit and meat and less
than 4 percent to milk and dairy products. Comparison with earlier data
to determine changes in amounts of plutonium intake is not easily made
due to the scarcity of data; however, from what data are available, it
appears that decreases have occurred for the most part.
In addition to the dietary samples, 100 tap water samples of New
York City drinking water were analyzed. Based upon the analysis and the
assumption that the average man drinks'1.4 liters/day, tap water would
add 0.1 pCi to the individual's estimated annual intake of plutonium.-
Based upon an uptake 3 x 10"5 to 10"6 for the gastrointestinal
tract, the 1.5 pCi intake during 1972 would contribute at most 5 x 10~5
pCi to the body burden or about 1000 times Tess than the contribution
from inhalation intake.
75
-------
Table 4-4. Fallout 239,240Pu in foodj New York - 1972 (4.5)
Sample
Shellfish
Bakery products
Whole grain products
Fresh fruit
Dry beans
Fresh vegetables
Root vegetables
Poultry
Flour
Meat
Fresh fish
Rice
Potatoes
Eggs
Macaroni
Canned vegetables
Milk
Fruit juice
Canned fruit
Weight (kg)
4.7
5.3
4.5
16.9
2.8
12.6
14.1
15.0
20.8
10.5
8.6
14.1
9.4
10.9
14.9
10.2
16.8
17.5
27.7
ash (g)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
80
100
100
100
100
120
100
100
Concentration
dpm/sample pCi/kg (fresh weight)
.12 ±
.10 ±
.06 ±
.19 ±
.03 ±
.12 ±
.11 ±
.11 ±
.13 ±
.06 ±
.03 ±
.05 ±
.03 ±
.03 ±
.04 ±
.02 ±
<.01
£.01
<.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
.01
.02
.02
.03
.01
.02
.02
.01
.01 (peeled
potatoes)
.01
.01
.01
.011
.0085
.0060
.0051
.0048
.0043
.0035
.0033
.0028
.0026
.0016
.0016
.0014
.0012
.0012
.0009
<.0003
<.0003
<.0002
-------
Table 4-5. Fallout 239,2i+0Pu dietary intake, New York-1972 (4.5)
Item
Bakery products
Fresh fruit
Fresh vegetables
Meat
Flour
Whole grain products
Poultry
Milk
Potatoes
Root vegetables
Canned vegetables
Eggs
Dry beans
Fresh fish
Shell fish
Fruit juice
Rice
Macaroni
Canned fruit
Consumption
(kg/y)
44
59
48
79
34
11
20
200
38
10
22
15
3
8
1
28
3
3
11
Concentration
(pCi/kg)
.0085
.0051
.0043
.0026
.0028
.0060
.0033
<.0003
.0014
.0035
.0009
.0012
.0048
.0016
.011
<.0003
.0016
.0012
<.0002
Intake
(pCi/y)
.37
.30
.21
.20
.095
.066
.066
<.06
.053
.035
.019
.019
.014
.013
.011
<.007
.005
.004
<.002
TOTAL 1.5 pCi/y
77
-------
United Nations Scientific Committee
on the Effect's of Atomic Radiation
Perhaps the best source of dose information derived from many
different sources of fallout data, including the HASL data, has been
provided by the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of
Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR). The sixth substantive report of UNSCEAR
reviews radiation received from all sources to which man is exposed.
Fallout dose information presented by UNSCEAR in the 6th report is
currently being updated and should be published in 1977. Although the
most recent published report does not contain dose data up to and
including the year 1973, it does contain in one single reference the
most complete and recent dose information available with some few
exceptions such as the HASL plutonium doses discussed previously.
Presented below is the dose information contained in the latest UNSCEAR
report.
Tritium doses
Based upon an estimated 1900 megacuries of tritium released by
nuclear weapons tests up to 1963 (4.6) (most of which was in the Northern
Hemisphere), the UNSCEAR estimates the dose commitments to be 4 and 1
millirads for the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, respectively (4.6).
Carbon-14
The total estimated 14C inventory from weapons tests has been
estimated to be 6.2 megacuries compared to a natural inventory of 280
megacuries. UNSCEAR estimates dose commitments of 140 millirads and 170
millirads to soft tissue and endosteal cells, respectively. Because of
the long half life of 1IfC, most of the dose commitment occurs over
thousands of years; the part of the commitment that will occur up to the
year 2000 is estimated to be 12 millirads to the gonads and 14 millirads
to the cells lining bone surfaces (4.6).
Iron-55
The total production of 55Fe from tests since 1961-1962 is esti-
mated to be about 50 megacuries. Activity estimates based upon moni-
toring in North and South America dropped from about 500 fCi/m3 to a few
femtocuries per cubic meter by 1970. Body burdens calculated from
different places about the world range from 20-30 nanocuries in 1966 to
1-10 nanocuries in 1969. Assuming a maximum body burden of about 30
nanocuries in the temperate latitudes, dose estimates are 1 millirad to
-------
the gonads and bone-lining cells and 0.6 millirads to the bone marrow.
For the Southern Hemisphere, doses are estimated to be about 1/4 that of
the temperate latitudes (4.6).
Krypton-85
The atmospheric inventory of 85Kr produced by nuclear weapons tests
has been estimated to be about 3 megacuries. 85Kr is a beta emitter,
however, it also produces a gamma photon in 0.4 percent of the disinte-
grations. By external irradiation, beta rays deliver a dose to the skin
and to subcutaneous tissues, while gamma radiation is responsible for
whole body and gonad doses. Internal radiation also occurs from inhalation.
The dose to the gonads from external radiation is estimated to be 17
nrad/y per pCi/m3. The dose commitment to the gonads is estimated to be
about 0.2 microrad (4.6).
Radiostrontium
Based upon 90Sr deposition measurements taken worldwide and calcu-
lations of uptake by man in diet, the UNSCEAR estimates that the dose
commitment from 90Sr from all tests up"to 1970 are (4.6):
Northern Hemisphere Southern Hemisphere
Temperate Temperate
latitudes Average latitudes Average
(mrad) (mrad) (mrad) (mrad)
Bone marrow 62 45 17 11
Endosteal cells 85 61 23 15
Iodine-131
Iodine-131 fallout deposition patterns are unpredictable throughout
the world; hence, the estimation of worldwide doses is not possible
unless extensive data on deposition and milk production and consumption
throughout the world are known. Because of the limitation of data,
UNSCEAR has only provided estimates of 131I doses at some local areas
throughout the world, but did not include the United States.
Cesium-137
UNSCEAR estimates that the average integrated deposits of 137Cs in
the northern and southern temperate latitudes are 128 and 35 nCi/m2,
79
-------
respectively. The corresponding dose commitments from diet for these
deposits are 26 and 7 millirads. If the dose commitments are calculated
on a population-weighted basis over the whole of each hemisphere, the
commitments are 19 and 4 millirads for the Northern and Southern Hemis-
pheres, respectively (4.6).
External dose commitments from 137Cs ground deposition have been
estimated for the period 1950-1970 to be 134 and 32 millirads for the
Northern and Southern Hemispheres, respectively (4.6).
Plutonium
Based upon estimates of the total integrated level of fallout
Plutonium since the beginning of weapons tests to 1970, the UNSCEAR
estimates that the integrated doses over 50 years to be 2, 400, 0.8, and
0.2 millirads to the pulmonary region, the lymph nodes, the liver, and
the bone, respectively (4.6).
Short-lived f-ission products
UNSCEAR, using 90Sr deposition data up to 1967 at Abingdon, United
Kingdom, has computed an estimate of the Northern Hemisphere, population-
weighted, dose commitment of 144 millirads. Based upon estimates of
fallout of 90Sr for 1968-1969, a dose commitment of 4 millirads for
1968-1969 is estimated. Thus, the total population-weighted dose commitment
for short-lived fission products for 1961-1969 is estimated as 148
millrads for all deposition in the Northern Hemisphere, and the dose
commitment for the northern temperate latitudes is estimated as 203
millirads (4.6).
Based upon 90Sr deposition from 1961-1969 in the Southern Hemis-
phere to the dose commitment from short-lived products is estimated by
UNSCEAR to be 40 millirads. In the southern temperate regions, it is
estimated to be 60 millirads (4.6).
Summary - UNSCEAR results
Table 4-6 summarizes UNSCEAR estimates of dose commitments from
weapons tests conducted prior to 1971. Table 4-6 also presents estimates
given in the UNSCEAR 1969 report for tests conducted prior to 1968.
Although no major series of tests were conducted during the period 1968-
1970, there are significant differences between the estimates made for
internal dose commitments from 90Sr to bone-lining cells and for external
dose commitments to all tissues. These changes are mostly due to the
availability of improved information (4.6). As a result, the ratios of
external to internal estimated dose commitments for all tissues are
higher for 1972 than 1969.
80
-------
Table 4-6. Dose commitments from nuclear tests carried out before 1971. (The dose commitments from nuclear
tests carried out before 1968, taken from the 1969 report, are indicated between parentheses) (4.6)
Dose commitments (mrad)
for the north temperate zone
Source of radiation Gonads
Bone-lining
cells
Bone
marrow
Dose commitments (mrad)
for the south temperate zone
Dose commitments (mrad)
to the world population
Gonads
Bone-lining
cells
Bone
marrow
Gonads
Bone-lining
cells
Bone
marrow
External
Short-lived
65 (36)
59 (36)
2x10-^
65 (36)
59 (36)
65 (36) 19 (8) 19 (8)
59 (36) 16 (8) 16 (8)
2x10-^ 2x10-** 2xlO-I+
19 (8) 44
16 (8) 40
4 2x10^
44
40
44
40
2x10"^
Internal
55Fe
90Sr
137Cs
239pu(a)
Total
(b)
4
12 (13)
1
26 (21)
4
15 (16)
1
85 (130)
26 (21)
0.2
4
12 (13)
0.6
62 (64)
26 (21)
1
12 (13)
0.3
7 (4)
1
15 (16)
0.3 >
23 (28)
7 (4)
0.05
1
12 (13)
0.2
17 (14)
7 (4)
4
12
0.7
18
170 (110) 260 (240) 230 (170) 55 (33) 81 (64)
72 (47) 120
4
15
0.7
57
18
0.1
180
4
12
0.4
42
18
160
^a'The dose commitment to bone-lining cells for the north temperate zone has been taken to be equal to the
integrated dose over 50 years to bone. A reduction by a factor of four has been assumed for the south temperate
zone. Because of insufficient data, the dose commitments to gonads and to bone marrow have not been estimated.
(b)
Totals have been rounded off to two significant figures.
-------
Because of the higher dose commitments for external radiation and
lower dose commitments from 90Sr, the relative importance of 90Sr has
decreased and 137Cs appears to be the main contributor to total dose
commitment (4.6).
Predicted doses
A prediction of doses from atmospheric nuclear tests was made in a
study published in 1972 (4.7). A summary of these doses is presented in
table 4-7.
Summary
UNSCEAR provides population-weighted dose estimates on .a world-wide
basis usually reported by temperate zone in each hemisphere. The disad-
vantage to this reporting procedure is that this information is not
specific to the United States. However, in a way, the data indicate
that the annual cumulative worldwide deposition reached a maximum around
1965, and it has been decreasing ever since as radio-active decay exceeds
fallout. Table 4-6 of this chapter summarizes the estimates of dose
commitment from the significant fission products of fallout resulting
from tests conducted prior to 1971. Although the data are reported on a
global basis, they indicate that most of the dose is committed to the
population in the Northern Hemisphere and that 137Cs appears to be the
most significant contributor to this dose commitment. An estimation of
the doses to the U.S. population from fallout was presented in table 4-7.
These estimations indicate that the per capita dose will increase
slightly during the 1970 to 2000 time period.
82
-------
Table 4-7. Total annual whole-body doses
from global fallout (4.7)
Year
1963
1965
1969
1980
1990
2000
U.S.
population
(millions)
190
194
204
237
277
321
Per capita
dose
(mrem)
13
6.9
4.0
4.4
4.6
4.9
Dose for
U.S. population
(106 person-rem)
2.4
1.3
0.82
1.1
1.3
1.6
83
-------
References
(4.1) VOCHOK, H. L. and LAWRENCE TOONKE. Worldwide deposition of
90Sr through 1973. US Atomic Energy Commission Report HASL-286,
pp 1-17, 1-35 (October 1974).
(4.2) BENNETT, B. G. Strontium-90 in the diet - results through 1973
US Atomic Energy Commission Report HASL-284, pp 1-34, 1-48
(July 1, 1974).
(4.3) BENNETT, B. 6. Strontium-90 in human bone - 1973 results for
New York City and San Francisco. US Atomic Energy Commission
Report HASL-286, pp 1-53, 1-70 (October 1, 1974).
(4.4) BENNETT, B. G. Fallout 239Pu dose to man. US Atomic Energy
Commission Report HASL-278, pp 1-41, 1-63 (January 1, 1974).
(4.5) BENNETT, B.-G. Fallout 239,240Pu in diet. us Atomic Energy
Commission Report HASL-286, pp 1-36, 1-52 (October 1, 1974).
(4.6) UNITED NATIONS SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON THE EFFECTS OF ATOMIC
RADIATION. Ionizing Radiation Levels and Effects Volume 1:
Levels, United Nations, New York (1972).
(4.7) KLEMENT, A. W. JR., C. P. MILLER, R. P. MINX, and B. SHLEIEN.
Estimates of ionizing radiation doses in the United States:
1960-2000, ORP/CSD 72-1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Radiation Programs, Washington, D.C. (August 1972).
84-
-------
Chapter 5 - Uranium Fuel Cycle
Uranium Mining and Milling
Uranium has been milled in the United States since the late 1940's.
Ores containing uranium have actually been mined since around 1900 in
the Slickrock, Colo., area.
Mining locations in the United States
\
Uranium ore producing mines have been operated in the States of
Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New
Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, and
Wyoming. From 1948 to 1974, 270,100 tons of U308 have been produced
from 116,962,000 tons of ore in the United States, and 65 percent have
come from the States of New Mexico and Wyoming, 42 and 23 percent,
respectively (5.1). The Colorado plateau area shown in figure 5-1,
accounting for 72 percent of the U308 (produced and known $8 reserves),
includes the four corners area of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and
Utah. The Wyoming Basins account for 18 percent, and all others, 10
percent of_these reserves. The significant uranium areas of the United
States are"listed in table 5-1.
The number of acres held by the uranium industry for exploration
and mining peaked in -1969 and on January 1, 1970, 27,279,000 acres were
held. As of January 1, 1974, 18,774,000 acres were held. Forty-six
percent of this land was in the State of Wyoming (8,598,000 acres)
followed by New Mexico (17 percent), Utah (15 percent), and Colorado
(7 percent). The remaining 10 States ranged from Arizona with 754,000
acres (4 percent) to Oregon with 31,000 acres (0.2 percent) (5.1).
85
-------
Figure 5-1. Geological resource regions of the United States (S.I)
Types of mining
Two types of mining are practiced in the United States, strip or
pit mining and underground mining. Strip mining produces the largest
amount of waste because of stripping the overburden from above the ore
horizon. For instance, in Wyoming during 1974, 2,666,000 tons of
uranium ore were mined. The wastes produced were 103,531,000 tons of
overburden, 515,000 tons of waste rock, and 2,984,000 tons of mill
tailings. Colorado mined 1,216,000 tons of ore and produced 1,210,000
tons of tailings (5.2). All of Colorado's production was from under-
ground mines while almost all of Wyoming's production comes from strip
mines; thus, strip mining produces vast quantities of waste.
86
-------
Table 5-1. Significant uranium areas of the United States (5.1)
State
Alaska
Arizona
California
Colorado
Idaho
Montana
Nevada
New Mexico
North Dakota
Oregon
South Dakota
Texas
Area
Prince of Wales Island
Cameron
Grand Canyon
Globe
Monument Valley
Tuba City
West Central
East Central
Southeast
Front Range
Gunnison
Marshall Pass
Maybel 1
Rifle
Uravan Mineral Belt
Lowman
South Central Border
Austin
North Central
Grants Mineral Belt
Laguna
Shiprock
Bel field
Lakeview
Cave Hills
Edgemont
Slim Buttes
Falls City
Ray Point
U308 production
> 500 tons
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
and reserves
< 500 tons
> 10 tons
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
87
-------
Table 5-1. Significant uranium areas of the United States cont.
U308 production and reserves
State Area
> 500 tons < 500 tons
> 10 tons
Utah Canyon Lands X
Green River X
Inter River (Moab) X
Lisbon Valley X
Marysvale X
Mexican Hat X
San Rafael X
Thompson . X
White Canyon X
Washington Spokane (Ford) X
North of Spokane X
Wyoming Black Hills X
Crooks Cap X
Gas Hills X
Powder River Basin X
Shirley Basin X
Active uranium mills
The uranium mills that were in operation in the United States as of
January 1, 1974, are shown in figure 5-2 and listed in table 5-2. Ninety-
one percent of the stated nominal milling capacity was centered in the
States of New Mexico (50 percent), Wyoming (28 percent), Colorado (7
percent), and Utah (6 percent). The remaining 9 percent was in the
States of Texas (7 percent) and Washington (2 percent). Figures 5-3 to
5-6 show the trends that have been developing in the uranium mining and
milling industry since 1965.
Strip mining probably produces more problems for the environment
than underground mining. While underground mining does not produce as
great a volume of waste, it produces greater hazards for the miners.
Rock falls and equipment accidents are constantly present but another
hazard is the exposure to the radon daughters produced from radon.
-------
oo
vo
I
r-r
'4 (
--p
'- J
;
/
/
;
/
i-..
\
/
^
>\ i
f
r~i
*fo*
r-*»v
I
\s-
\
\
\
\
\
^
\ f
x
^
/
J
i
rV
/nv
L't
14
ILLS
I--.. ^
\ . Dawn Mining Co. '-\
2. Union Carbide Corp. \
fyo. -\
3 . Utah Internali onal. Inc.
Gas rii I Is, «yo.
4. Federal-American Partners
S . festern Nuc tear. Inc.
6. Petrotomics Company
7. Utah Internalipnal, Inc.
Sh i rley B»sin. ffyo.
8. Ex««n Company
9. Rio Alftm Corp.
10. Union Carbide Corp. Uravan. Colo.
11 . Atlas Corp.
12. Cotter Corp.
13. Herr-icSee Nuclear Corp.
14. The Anaconda Co.
IS. United Nuclear-Homestake Partners
16. Conoco-Pioneer
\
1
-"1 "\
r -N,
i i
- J . j
r i - r
i | !
i ^-vv^^.|
i i
i i
r"' I \
y i \
\ I K
^ ) /
S j~"
w~r
y
X-r T1
/ i \
- ^ i \
/ ! 5
v L~, ' c '
EXPLANATION
Uranium mill, act ive
Figure 5-2. Active uranium ore processing mills (5.1)
-------
Table 5-2. U.S. uranium mills as of January 1, 1974 (5.1)
Company
Location
Nominal
capacity
(tons ore
per day)
Anaconda Company
Atlas Corporation
Conoco & Pioneer Nuclear, Inc.
Cotter Corporation
Dawn Mining Company
Federal-American Partners
Exxon Company
Kerr-McGee Nuclear Corporation
Rio Algom Corporation
Union Carbide Corporation
Union Carbide Corporation
United Nuclear-Homestake Ptns.
U'tah International, Inc.
Utah International, Inc.
Western Nuclear, Inc.
Bluewater, New Mexico
Moab, Utah
Falls City, Texas
Canon City, Colorado
Ford, Washington
Gas Hills, Wyoming
Powder River Basin, Wyoming
Ambrosia Lake, New Mexico
La Sal, Utah
Uravan, Colorado
Natrona County, Wyoming
Grants, New Mexico
Gas Hills, Wyoming
Shirley Basin, Wyoming
Jeffrey City, Wyoming
3,000
1,000
1,750
450
400
950
2,000
7,000
700
1,300
1,000
3,500
1,200
1,200
1,200
Total 26,650
90
-------
22.000
20.000
18.000
16.000
14.000
12.000
10.000
1965 1966 1967 - 1988 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974
CALENDAR YEAR
Figure 5-3. Uranium ore processing rates (5.1)
16,000
15.000
*Z 14.000
13 000
12.000
v, 11 . 000
10.000
1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 t974
CALENDAR YEAR
Figure ,5-4. Uranium concentrate production (5.1)
(includes production from mi 11 feed other than ore)
91
-------
24
.2*
= .22
.21
_ .20
.19
.18
IMS 1966 1167 1966
1M9 1970
CALENDAR YEAR
1971 1972 1973 1974
Figure 5-5. Grade of uranium ore processed (5.1)
u> 96
1965 1966 1967 1946 1969 1170 1971 1972 1973 1974
CALENDAR YEAR
Figure 5-6. Recovery from ore processed (5.1)
92
-------
Dose data
Although the doses to individuals or populations in the vicinity of
uranium mills has been nonexistent, doses have been predicted for a
model uranium mill (5.3). The dose estimates from routine effluents of
a model mill to individuals in the vicinity of the mill through the air
pathway are given in table 5-3. The estimated doses to the population
in the vicinity of the mill are given in table 5-4.
Fuel Enrichment
There are three government-owned gaseous diffusion plants operated
in the United States. These plants are located at Oak Ridge, Tenn.,
Paducah, Ky., and Portsmouth, Ohio. The gaseous diffusion technology is
used to enrich uranium-235 content from about 0.7 percent to 2 to 4
percent for use in light water reactors and up to about 90 percent
enrichment for use in high temperature gas-cooled reactors.
The contractors who operate these plants conduct environmental
monitoring about their plants to determine the impact of their opera-
tions upon the environment and man. The results of the monitoring
activities are published yearly. The 1973 results which are summarized
below were published in references 5.4-5.6.
Oak Ridge
There are three major facilities at Oak Ridge. They are the Oak
Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), the Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant,
and the Y-12 plant. Radioactive waste and effluents are generated at
these facilities. The monitoring data available for the the Oak Ridge
Facility as reported in reference 5.4 does not differentiate environ-
mental concentrations and doses from these facilities; hence, only the
total environmental impact for Oak Ridge is available. Thus, any contri-
bution by the gaseous diffusion plant would be less than or, at the
worst, equal to the total contribution of radioactivity to the envir-
onment and man by the whole Oak Ridge Facility.
Doses at Oak Ridge, based upon contributions for all activities at
Oak Ridge, were estimated to be:
a. Maximum potential dose to an Oak Ridge resident was 0.17
mrem/y to the whole body and 4.8 mrem/y to the lung.
b. Average exposure to an Oak Ridge resident was estimated to
be 0.1 mrem/y.
c. The cumulative whole body dose to the general population
within a 4t)-mile radius of Oak Ridge which resulted from
plant effluents was about 14 person-rem in 1973.
93
-------
vo
Table 5-3. Radiation doses to individuals due to inhalation
in the vicinity of a model mill (5.3)
Radionuclide
Uranium-234
and 238
Thorium-230
Radium- 2 26
Total
Source
term
(mCi/y)
180
15
10
205
Critical
organ
Lung
Lung
Lung
Dose equivalent
Individual at plant
boundary
(mrem/y)
170
15
15
200
to critical organ
Average individual
within 80 km
(mrem/y)
3.9 x 10-2
3.4 x 10'3
2.2 x lO"3
4.5 x 10-2
-------
Table 5-4. Collective dose to the general population in the
vicinity of a model mill (5.S)
Source Crit'cal Collective critical
Radionuclide term Pathway rtv,,;a^ organ dose
(person-rem/y)
Uranium-234
and 238 180
Thorium-230 15
Radium-226 10
Air Lung
Air Lung
Air Lung
Total
2.2
0.2
0.1
2.5
aReleases to water pathways assumed equal to zero, and doses from
radon-222 are not included.
Paduoah gaseous diffusion plant
An extensive monitoring program is routinely conducted about the
Paducah plant from which environmental concentrations are determined and
doses are calculated. The dose estimates for 1973 are summarized below.
a. Maximum "fence post dose". Based upon measured alpha
activity in ambient air, the maximum fence post dose was
estimated to be about 36 mrem/y to the lung. Calculations
of the lung dose based upon uranium effluents and prevailing
meteorological conditions at the location of the maximum
measured activity yield a dose of less than 3 mrem/y.
b. The potential lung dose to a family living nearest to the
plant was estimated to be about 15 mrem/y based upon contin-
uous occupancy or about 8 mrem/y for a resident who is away
from the home about 8 hours per day.
95
-------
c. The potential lung dose to a member of the nearest community
was estimated to be about 5 mrem/y assuming continuous
residence.
Portsmouth gaseous diffusion plant
At the Portsmouth gaseous diffusion plant, the ambient atmosphere
and all effluent streams are sampled and analyzed regularly. Based upon
these analyses, the maximum annual radioactivity dose (lung burden) was
calculated for various points along the plant perimeter and for Pike-
town, the nearest population center (calculations were based upon
Pasquill dispersion coefficients for stability class "D"). The maximum
lung dose at the plant boundary was calculated to be 6 mrem/y. The
maximum dose at Piketown was estimated to be 0.53 mrem/y.
Predicted doses
In a generic study of the uranium fuel cycle (5.7), dose estimates
based upon an assumed "model" facility for a gaseous diffusion plant
were made. These estimates were made considering the bone as the crit-
ical organ and were quite small being about 3 x 10~4 mrem/y per facility-
year of operation for individuals within 80 km of the facility due to
inhalation and about 0.07 mrem/y per facility-year to bone from drinking
water.
Summary
Despite the source or method of calculating doses from enrichment
facilities it is concluded that, based upon available data, the doses
are small.
Fuel Fabrication Plants
There is relatively little data available in the literature con-
cerning the release of radioactivity from fuel fabrication plants and
the resulting exposures and doses to the general population.
A single study (5.7) by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
was made in 1973 to analyze and project what effects the total uranium
fuel cycle may have upon the public health. Because of the lack of
specific detailed data, the analysis was performed using model plants
which typified those in existence for the various functions in the
fuel cycle such as milling, conversion, enrichment, and fabrication.
This study presents the best estimates of dose available which result
from fuel fabrication activity.
96
-------
Based upon an assumed release of 0.005 Ci/y of uranium, the maximum
dose to an individual at the plant boundary from the inhalation pathway
would be 10 mrem/y per facility-year to the lung, and 0.002 mrem/y per
facility-year to an individual within 80 km of the model facility.
Corresponding individual doses from the water pathway (drinking water)
were 0.6 and 0.06 mrem/y per facility-year to the bone for an individual
at the plant boundary and an average individual within 300 km of the
plant, respectively. The corresponding doses to soft tissue from
drinking water are 0.06 and 0.006 mrem/y per facility-year. The aggre-
gate population doses for the general population within 80 km of a model
facility were estimated to be 3 person-rem/y per facility-year to the
lung via the air pathway, 34 person-rem/y per facility-year to the bone
from the water pathway, and 3 person-rem/y per facility-year to soft
tissue from the water pathway.
Summary
For the 10 fuel fabrication plants in the United States, very
little data concerning effluents, environmental monitoring, and popu-
lation dose and exposure exist within the literature. Because of the
scarcity of data, only very rough estimates of dose from these facili-
ties can be made. Unless more specific data is developed concerning
fuel fabrication facilities, no specific information concerning their
impact upon the environment can be developed.
The estimated plant boundary, average individual and aggregate
population doses expected from the operation of a fuel fabrication
facility are shown in table 5-5.
Fewer Reactors
In 1973 there were 40 civilian nuclear power reactors operating in
18 States in the United States. Radiation from these reactors reaches
the environment either as direct radiation from the reactor, which may
be of significance only near the reactor boundary, or through discharges
of low level, radioactive, gaseous and liquid wastes from reactor oper-
ations.
Monitoring of the reactor environment is performed in order to
determine the impact of nuclear power reactors on the environment.
Description of data base
By the enactment of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) [Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)
in 1973] is required to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for
each nuclear power-plant. These statements contain data on baseline
97
-------
Table 5-5. Estimated doses from fuel fabrication facility operations
n Inhalation Drinking water Drinking water
uose Lung Bone Soft tissue
Maximum dose to individual
at plant boundary 10 0.6 0.06
(mrem/y)
Average individual dose a0.002 b0.06 b0.006
(mrem/y)
sgate popi
(person-rem/y)
Aggregate population dose . a3 a34 a3
aWithin 80 km of facility
bWithin 300 km of facility
levels of radioactivity in the environment and predicted radiation doses
to the public from normal plant operations. After an operating license
is granted, the licensee is required, under Title 10, Part 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (S.8), to file an operating report semi-
annually (5.9). An environmental monitoring report may be filed as part
of the licensee's operating report or as a separate report. These
reports are available to the public at NRC public document rooms.
Collection of data for the reports is often carried out by a
contracting firm specializing in environmental radiation surveys. The
information required in environmental monitoring reports varies somewhat
according to the technical specifications in the license for each
nuclear reactor. However, the data generally include gross alpha, gross
beta, and gamma-emitting radionuclide, 90Sr, 89Sr, and 3H concentrations
in samples of air, air particulates, surface water, ground water, drinking
water, sediment, milk, and other food products which are locally available.
External dose measurements are usually made using thermoluminescent dosi-
meters at various locations around the reactor.
98
-------
Individual States have environmental surveillance programs around
nuclear power reactors, usually carried out by a division of the State
Board of Health or Environmental Protection Agency. The State programs
vary in monitoring capabilities; States having several nuclear facil-
ities have extensive programs. A report summarizing State environmental
radioactivity surveillance programs contains information on sample
media, sites, collection and analysis frequency, and types of analysis
performed for each state (5.20). A directory published by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (5.11) has a section giving a
brief description of the environmental monitoring program for each State
and includes the name of the person to contact for more information.
As a help to firms or agencies conducting surveillance programs,
the EPA Office of Radiation Programs has published a guide (5.12)
recommending specific methods for a minimurm level of environmental
radiation surveillance. The Atomic Industrial Forum, in a two volume
book compiled by Battelle Laboratories (5.13), provides a broader base
for types of monitoring methods, including ecological as well as radio-
logical monitoring methods.
The reports, mentioned above, prepared by the operators of nuclear
power plants and by the appropriate State agencies, are the only routine
source of primary environmental radiation data. However, in 1973 some
special field studies were carried out by government agencies, such as
the EPA, the AEC, and individual States.
A joint field study by EPA and AEC (5.14) was conducted during 1973
to measure iodine-131 in environmental samples of air, rainfall, vege-
tation, and milk collected around the Dresden, Monticello, and Oyster
Creek nuclear power plants. Data from the field study was compared with
levels of radioactivity in samples that were predicted by mathematical
models in order to determine their validity.
A comprehensive radiological surveillance study at the Haddam Neck
nuclear power station (5,15) by EPA measured radionuclide concentrations
in the environment and external radiation doses around the pressurized
water reactor (PWR) facility. This study follows similar studies at the
Dresden boiling water reactor (BWR) (5.16), and Yankee-Rowe PWR (5.17).
Another study by EPA at the Shippingport Atomic Power Station (5.18)
measured iodine-131 and strontium-90 concentrations in milk and soil
samples, and ambient radiation levels using thermoluminescent dosimeters.
Dose data
Some power reactor operators report dose information at or outside
the site boundary in their semiannual reports to NRC. However, most of
these reports lack dose information. Dose measurements at Haddam Neck
during 1971 (5.15) resulted in an estimation that an adult at the nearest
residence received 0.5 mrem/y from airborne effluents. The maximum
potential dose from eating fish caught in the vicinity of the reactor
99
-------
was estimated to be 0.1.3 mrem/y - whole body and 0.25 mrem/y to the
bone. The dose at ground level 0.6 km from the vent was estimated to be
0.2 mrem/y.
Population dose from exposure to operating BWR's for 1973 was
calculated by EPA using a computer code and based on gaseous reactor
effluent data reported to the AEC (5.19). This resulted in an estimation
of a total population dose of 1550 person-rem to populations within 80 km
(50 miles) of BWR's.
The New York State Department of Health in a report by J. M.
Matuszek, et al. (5.20) measured gaseous effluents from one BWR, two
PWR's and one high temperature gas-cooled reactor (HT6R). From these
data, they estimated doses at 1 km from a theoretical 2500 MW(t) reactor
for each reactor type:
Dose (mrad/y)
3H i^C 37Ar
BWR 4 x 10"3 6 x 10"2 4 x 10"3
PWR 2 x 10"3 >4 x 10"1 1 x 10"2
HTGR 1.2 x 102 <1 1.4 x 102
Other reports, while not presenting data for 1973, discuss dose
commitment to populations from discharge of carbon-14 and krypton-85
(5.21) and from the nuclear power industry in the United States
(5. 22, 5.23).
As mentioned previously, environmental impact statements (EIS)
compiled by the NRC contain estimates of predicted radiation doses to
the public from normal operation of nuclear power reactors. These
estimates are summarized in a report by the Office of Radiation Programs
of EPA (5.24). Table 5-6 lists the calculated maximum doses at the site
boundary based on discharges of gaseous effluents for the years 1972 and
1973 and the maximum whole body doses as estimated in the EIS's. The
large differences between the predicted dose values and the dose values
calculated from actual discharge information may be due to differences
in the assumptions used in the calculations. It may be seen in compar-
ing these doses that the calculated doses for BWR's are generally higher
than the predicted doses given in the environmental impact statements.
The reason for these differences is still being investigated.
Observations
In comparing environmental monitoring data from nuclear power plant
licensee's reports to NRC, it is apparent that a more uniform method of
acquiring and reporting the data would be desirable. Environmental dose
100
-------
Table 5-6. Calculated and predicted doses from noble gas releases at
operating plants (1972-73) (5.24)
Facility
(Site)
PWR's
Yankee Rowe
Indian Point 1 & 2
San Onofre 1
Haddam Neck
R. E. Ginna
Point Beach 1 & 2
H. B. Robinson
Palisades
Surry, 1 & 2
Turkey Point 3 & 4
Maine Yankee
Oconee 1
Zion 1
Fort Calhoun
BWR's
Dresden 1
Big Rock Point
Humbolt Bay
LaCrosse
Oyster Creek
Start up
8/60
8/62,5/73
6/67
7/67
11/69
11/70,5/72
9/70
5/71
7/72,3/73
10/72,6/73
10/72
4/73
6/73
8/73
10/59
9/62
2/63
7/67
5/69
Net site
capacity
[GW(e)] -
0.18
1.14
0.43
0.58
0.47
0.99
0.70
0.70
1.58
1.39
0.79
0.88
1.05
0.46
0.20
0.08
0.07
0.05
0.64
Annual output Fence dose Predicted exposure
(% of capacity) (mrem/y) (Wholt body)
1972
40
16
74
85
57
70
72
32
6
-
7
-
65
57
62
60
78
1973 1972 1973 (mrem/y)
68 <1 <1 N.A.
24 <1 <1 a2
60 <1 <1 <1
46 <1 <1 <1
87 <1 <1 <1
67 <1 <1 1
82 <1 <1 <1
41 <1 <1 <1
65 <1 <1 <1
62 - <1 <1
58 <1 <1 <1
47 - <1 al
22 - <1 bl
42 - <1 <1
33 13 12 C<1
68 55 N.A.
77 67 54 N.A.
46 <1 3 N.A.
64 37 35 <1
-------
Table 5-6. Calculated and predicted doses from gas releases at
operating plants (1972-73) (5.24) continued
Facility
(Site)
BWR's continued
Nine Mile Point
Dresden 2 & 3
Millstone 1
Monti cello
Quad Cities 1 & 2
Vermont Yankee
P'ilgrim 1
Start up
9/69
1/70,1/71
10/70
12/70
10/71,4/72
3/72
6/72
Net site
capacity
CGW(e)]
0.63
1.62
0.65
0.55
1.60
0.51
0.66
Annual output
(% of capacity)
1972
59
57
55
75
28
10
15
1973
68
64
34
68
73
44
71
Fence dose Predicted exposure
<"""*> (Whole'body)
1972
11
2
8
30
1
3
1
1973 (mrem/y)
21 *<1
6 <1
1 <1
33 1
7 4
16 <1
3 <1
Predicted values are for three units.
Predicted values are for two units.
°The dose of 22 mrem/y in table 5.3 of the EIS for unit one will be reduced by a factor of 100 by a
scheduled augment committed by the applicant (see page 11-40 of the EIS).
Includes the contribution from Fitzpatrick. The site gamma dose assumes 100 hours in a boat at point
of nearest approach per year. The figures shown are after scheduled 1975 augment of unit one gaseous
effluent control.
60ne BWR and two PWR units.
One BWR and one PWR units.
N.A. - Not available.
-------
information is not routinely reported. The NRC publishes, annually, a
summary of releases of radioactive material to the environment from
nuclear power reactors (5.25). If this information included a summary
of the releases of individual radionuclides, it would be very helpful in
calculating doses to the public.
Summary
Power reactors contribute to environmental radioactivity either as
direct radiation from the reactor which is generally significant within
the reactor boundary or through discharges of radioactive gaseous and
liquid wastes resulting from reactor operations. The total population
dose from the gaseous effluents of BWR's for 1973 has been estimated to
be 1550 person-rem within a radius of 80 kilometers from the plant. The
population dose from PWR's would be expected to be significantly lower,
possibly by a factor of 10-50, because of the large reduction in the
release of radioactive gaseous effluents.
Research Reactors
In 1973, there were 68 research and test reactors of all types
exclusive of those owned by the Energy Research and Development Agency
(see chapter 6 for discussion of ERDA facilities). Of these, 1 was a
irradiation test reactor; 3 were high power research and test reactors;
13 were general research reactors, and 51 were classified as university
research and testing reactors (5. 26). The rated power output of the
reactors ranged from near 0 to 50,000 kW(t).
Research reactors are regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commis-
sion C5.&-), and the licensees are required to submit annual environ-
mental monitoring reports. These reports are usually included in the
reactor operating report and amount to a short paragraph stating the
general condition of. the environmental monitoring program. The reports
are available to the public at the NRC public document room in the
regional office nearest the reactor. The most detailed description of
the monitoring program for a research reactor can be found in its Final
Safety Analysis Report which is filed with the NRC. Typical surveil-
lance programs include gross beta measurements of water and air samples,
and direct gamma dose measurements using thermoluminescent dosimeters.
In addition to the surveillance performed by the licensees, the
States in which the reactors are situated maintain environmental moni-
toring programs in the vicinity of each site (5.1035.ll). Because of
the diversity of types and the variation of power output of these
reactors, the surveillance that the States perform at the sites varies
widely.
There is little or no published information on dose to the public
or special surveillance studies carried out by government agencies.
103
-------
Transportation
Authority
The two agencies having overlapping regulatory authority for the
transportation of radioactive materials are the Department of Trans-
portation (DOT) and the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), now called the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
DOT has the authority to regulate the transportation of explosives
and other dangerous materials including radioactive materials under the
Transportation of Explosives Act (18 USC 831-835), the Dangerous Cargo
Act (RS 4472 - as amended, 46 USC 170), and title VI and 902(h) of the
Federal Aviation Act of 1958 (49 USC 1421-1430 and 1472(h)) (5.27).
This responsibility extends to all modes of transport in interstate or
foreign commerce (railroad, air, road, water) and by all means of
transport except postal .shipments. Postal shipments are under the
jurisdiction of the U.S. Postal Service. Shipments not in interstate or
foreign commerce are subject to control by a State agency in most cases
(5. 28).
The AEC under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, is author-
ized to license and regulate the receipt, possession, use, and transfer
of byproduct, source, and special nuclear material. A license is
required from the AEC for the possession and use of such materials
except for certain small quantities and specific products for which the
possession and use are exempted. Many States have entered into formal
agreements with the AEC whereby the regulatory authority over byproduct,
source and less-than-critical quantities of special nuclear material has
been transferred to the States from AEC. Most of the States have adopted
uniform regulations pertaining to intrastate transportation of radi-
oactive materials which require the shipper to conform to the packaging,
labeling, and marking requirements of the DOT to the same extent as if
the transportation were subject to the rules and regulations of that
agency.
A Memorandum of Understanding, defining the roles of DOT and AEC in
the regulation of transportation of radioactive materials, was signed on
March 22, 1973 (5.27). This Memorandum states that DOT will adopt
regulations imposing standards developed by AEC and DOT on shippers and
carriers subject to DOT jurisdiction and will adopt a requirement for
AEC approval of packages for shipment of fissile material and Type B and
large quantities of material by people not subject to 10 CFR Part 71 or
AEC-Manual requirements but subject to DOT jurisdiction. Each agency
will conduct an inspection and enforcement program within its juris-
diction to assure compliance with regulations. DOT requires notifi-
cation and reporting of accidents, incidents, or suspected leakage
involving radioactive material packages if such occurs or is discovered
while in transit. AEC requires notification and reporting of accidents,
incidents or suspected leakage occurring prior to delivery to a carrier
for transport or after delivery to a receiver- DOT and AEC agreed in
104
-------
the Memorandum to make available to each other summaries of inspection
records, investigations of serious accidents, and other matters relating
to safety. The Memorandum of Understanding did not affect the statutory
exemption of shipments of radioactive materials made by or under the
direction or supervision of the AEC or Department of Defense (DOD) in
accordance with the provisions of 18 USC 832(c).
On January 3, 1975, the Transportation Safety Act of 1974 (PL 93-
633), was enacted to regulate commerce by improving the protections
afforded the public against risks connected with the transportation of
hazardous materials, and for other purposes (5.29).
Transportation of radioactive materials in the nuclear power industry
Holmes and Narver, Inc., under a contract with EPA, estimated that
the total annual population dose expected in the United States from
routine transportation of radioactive materials for the nuclear power
industry is a very small fraction of the total annual population doses
expected from other sources, such as natural cosmic radiation from outer
space, natural radiation from radioactive isotopes in the earth's crust,
global fallout from weapons tests, diagnostic x-ray machines, use of
radiopharmaceuticals, operating nuclear power plants, and miscellaneous
sources including TV sets, microwave ovens, transmission lines, etc.
The total annual population dose from transportation of radioactive
materials in the country varies from about 140 person-rem/y in 1975 to
about 15,000 person-rem/y in 2020 (5.30).
The report states further that the greatest radiation dose from
routine transportation of nuclear facility-related materials is projected
to come from transportation of low level waste from reactors to commercial
burial grounds. Because of the large number of shipments and the long
shipping distances involved, the annual population dose is projected to
vary from about 100 person-rems/y in 1975 to about 8,000 person-rems/y
in 2020. These doses are about 4 or 5 times as large as the corre-
sponding doses from spent fuel shipments even though the low level waste
shipments are assumed to be only one-fourth as radioactive as spent fuel
shipments.
Table 5-7 gives a summary projection of annual national population
radiation dose from routine transportation of materials in the nuclear
power industry. Table 5-8 presents projected estimates of annual popu-
lation dose from transportation.
In another study for EPA, Holmes and Narver, Inc., made a quanti-
tative assessment of the accident risks associated with the transpor-
tation of radioactive materials in the nuclear power industry for the
period 1975-2020 (5.31). The radioactive materials considered in the
report were spent fuel, plutonium, high-level radioactive solid waste,
and fission product gasjes. The consequences of accidents evaluated were
radioactivity released and population doses. Methods of transportation
105
-------
Table 5-7. Summary projection of annual national population
radiation dose from routine transportation of materials in the
nuclear power industry (5.30)
Year
1980
2000
2020
Parameter
Amount transported
Expected shipments
Shipping distance (km)
Shipping unit*
(10° shipment-km)
Population density
(people/km^)
Population dose
(pe rson- rems)
Amount transported
Expected shipments
Shipping distance (km)
Shipping units
(lot shipment-km)
Population density
(people /km*)
Population dose
(person- rems)
Amount transported
Expected shipments
Shipping distance (km)
Shipping units
(10° shipment -km)
Population .density
(people/km^)
Population dose
(person- rems)
Material
Spent fuel
2.400MT
l.OBO
8.470
0.47
29.7
74
17.600MT
7.800
4,350
1.90
37.0
490
3S.200MT
IS, 610
«,S70
4.26
46.3
1,400
Recycled
plutonlum
40 MX
310
3.990
0.03
29.7
9
680 MT
5. 100
3,990
0.86
37.0
210
3.060MT
23,270
3,990
4.88
46.3
1,300
Radioactive solid waste
High level
-
18,870
29.7
550m3
350
18.870
0.76
37.0
280
2, 200m3
1,400
18,870
2.76
46.3
1,200
Intermediate
levelb
18,870
29.7
970m3
310
18,870
0.69
37.0
260
5, 950m3
2,000
18,870
5.43
46.3
2,300
Low level*
31,000m3
14, 600
7,900
7.74
29.7
290
260, 000m3
115,000
5,000
43.97
37.0
2,300
736, 000m3
249, 000
5,400
119.72
46.3
8,600
Totald
16,000
8.74
29.7
370
1 30, 000
48. 18
37.0
3,500
290, 000
137.05
46.3
15,000
aSum of average distances in the six Federal Power Commission Regions,
Includes only waste transported from chemical processing plants to
the Federal Waste Repository.
Includes both waste transported frOm chemical processing plants to
commercial burial grounds and waste transported from reactors to
commercial burial grounds.
dNumbers may not add exactly because of rounding.
106
-------
Table 5-8. Projected estimates of annual population dose from transportation (5.SO)
Estimated annual population dose in United States9
Source (106 person-rem/y)
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Transportation of:
Spent fuel 7.4 x 10~5 2.4 x lO'4 4.9 x lO'4
Recycled plutonium 9.0 x 10~6 1.4 x 10~5 2.1 x 1Q'1*
High level waste 7.8 x 10~5 2.8 x 10-4
Intermediate level waste ,-- 7.9 x 10~5 2.6 x lO'4
Low level waste -- 2.9 x 10-4 9.1 x 10-4 2.3 x 10~3
Total - -- 3.7 x 10-4 1.1 x 10~3 3.6 x 10'3
_ . .,
aAnnual whole body dose to the entire population within the continental United States.
-------
considered were truck, rail, and^barge. The study determined that the
public health risks from the release of radioactivity from transpor-
tation accidents in the industry is relatively small because of the low
probability of accidents, the small fraction of the accidents resulting
in the release of radioactivity, and because the majority of releases
are relatively small fractions of the radioactive contents. Neverthe-
less, the amount of radioactivity accidentally released is sufficient to
raise issues of public concern. The report also states there are very
little statistical data on which to assess the risk of release of radio-
activity from the shipment package as a result of an accident during
transportation. Within the United States over the past 25 years, there
have been about 300 reported accidents in transportation involving
packages of all kinds of radioactive material. About 30 percent of
those accidents involved release of radioactive material from medical
and industrial radiochemicals. The report states that none of these
accidents resulted in perceptible injury or death attributed to the
radiation aspects and that there have been no releases from nuclear
power shipments. Holmes- and Narver estimate that nuclear power trans-
portation activity will exceed one million miles in 1980 and 10 million
miles after 2000.
Using current statistics, Holmes and Narver estimated there will be
1.3 accidents per million vehicle miles in 2020, with total accident
frequency less than one per year in 1975, then increasing to one per
month after 2000, and reaching almost two per month in 2020.
Up until about year 2005, spent fuel transportation will dominate.
Plutonium transportation increases dramatically after 1995 and exceeds
spent fuel transportation after 2005. Shipment of radioactive waste
does not exceed 10 percent of the total until after 2000; shipments of
radioactive gases comprise less than 2 percent of the transportation
activity.
Holmes and Narver estimated the amount of radioactivity released
from the transportation activity in the nuclear power industry from 1975
to 2020 based on transportation data, estimates of the fraction of
radioactivity released during an accident, and the fractions of accident?
of given severity associated with damages of given severity. These
results were averaged by transportation mode, accident severity, release
probability, and package damage severity. The estimated average annual
releases of radioactivity are summarized in table 5-9, with the largest
average release of radioactivity occurring from spent fuel. The average
annual whole body population dose associated with transportation acci-
dents is shown in figure 5-7 for the period 1975-2020.
In WASH-1238, "Environmental Survey of Transportation of Radio-
active Materials to and from Nuclear Power Plants," AEC analyzed the
potential impact on the environment of transporting fuel and low level
solid radioactive wastes for single light-water-cooled nuclear power
plants. AEC determined that, under normal conditions of transport, the
radiation dose to the individual receiving the highest exposure is
108
-------
Table 5-9. Estimated average annual release of radioactivity (5.31)
o
VO
Average annual release
Year
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
t
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
Spent fuel
85Kr
0.55
1.4
2.9
5.7
8.8
10
12
13
13
13
!3!j Fission
product
7.4 x
2.0 x
3.7 x
4.4 x
2.7 x
8.9 x
1.7 x
2.2 x
2.7 x
3.1 x
io-6
io-5
io-5
10-*
lO-3
IO-3
IO-2
lO-2
ID'2
IO-2
0
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
5
6
.16
.46
.93
.4
.2
.4
.4
.5
.9
.3
(Ci)
Plutonium
3.5 x
9.5 x
2.1 x
2.9 x
4.4 x
7.6 x
1.1 x
1.4 x
1.6 x
1.7 x
io-1*
TO-**
ID'3
lO-3
lO-3
TO'3
ID'2
ID'2
ID'2
ID'2
High-level
radioactive
solid waste
6.. 5 x
1.7 x
3.7 x
6.7 x
8.6 x
0.12
0.16
0.19
lO-3
lO-2
ID'2
lO-2
lO-2
Noble
gas
0.
0.
1.
3.
5.
7.
10
11
27
76
8
8
9
6
-------
10-
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
Figure 5-7. Annual average whole body population dose from transportation
accidents in the nuclear power industry (5,31)
110
-------
unlikely to be more than 500 mrem/y and the average radiation dose to
those individuals in the highest exposed group is about 100 mrem/y
(5.32). The cumulative radiation dose to all transport workers is about
4 person-rem per reactor-year, to other persons about 3 person-rem per
reactor-year distributed among approximately 600,000 people (5.33,5.34).
AEC felt this generic analysis would serve to implement section 102(2)(c)
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA),
under which applicants for an AEC license to operate light-water nuclear
power plants must evaluate the environmental impact of transportation of
nuclear fuel and low level solid radioactive wastes to and from the
plant. WASH-1238 served as the primary data base for the AEC amendment
to 10 CFR 51 which permits the reactor licensing applicants in their
environmental reports and AEC in their environmental impact statements
to state that the adverse impact resulting from the transportation of
spent fuel and packaged wastes from reactors falls within the values
contained in the regulations (5.34).
The Environmental Protection Agency has agreed that the values in
the transportation impact table in 10 CFR 51 are reasonable for the
routine impact of normal transportation; however, the Agency feels that
the impact resulting from transportation accidents or incidents is not
clearly defined (5.3535. 36). The DOT and AEC philosophy regarding
transportation safety is that safety is provided through the use of
special shipping containers. EPA feels that the relationship between
packaging test requirements and the survival of such packages under
various accident conditions has not been established. There are current
efforts by both EPA and the Energy Research and Development Administra-
tion (ERDA) (and/or NRC) to more fully assess the radiological impact of
transportation accidents.
Transportation of radio-isotopes
Currently, the vast majority of radioactive shipments are small or
intermediate quantities (called type A quantity) of material in rela-
tively small packages. The Office of Hazardous Materials, DOT, reported
in 1972 that shipments of radioactive materials amounted to approxi-
mately 800,000 packages per year in the United States (5.28). Most of
these packages involve radioisotopes which are intended for medical
diagnostic or therapeutic applications, and because of the short "half-
life" of many such materials, these shipments are often shipped by the
fastest route possible, which is air transportation. EPA, which is
responsible for radiation directly or indirectly affecting health,
including guidance to Federal Agencies in the formulation of radiation
standards, has made recommendations of actions that could be taken to
reduce passenger exposure to shipments of radioactive materials on
passenger aircraft. These recommendations resulted from AEC investi-
gations of exposure levels on passenger aircraft carrying radioactive
materials. The radiopharmaceutical source, known as a molybdenum-
technetium (Mo-Tc) generator, currently is the radioactive material
shipped by air which poses the greatest threat of exposure to aircraft
111
-------
travelers. Studies sponsored by the AEC at two airports in 1973 observed
a maximum radiation level at seat height of 20 mR/h on one flight
carrying radioactive material. Most flights had no discernible radi-
ation exposure to passengers. The exception was due to noncompliance
with DOT regulations. The AEC estimated the average dose to aircraft
passengers who travel frequently to be about 20 mR/y although, under
unlikely circumstances, the dose to an individual could be as high as
160 to 170 mR/y. The EPA, AEC, and a special study group of the Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy have suggested methods for reducing air
passenger exposure to Mo-Tc, including increasing package shielding from
25 Ibs. to about 58 Ibs., using surface (truck) transport on short
hauls, modifying shipping schedules of the generators, and substituting
99mTc for Mo-Tc generators (-5.37).
Summary
The transportation of radioactive materials is concerned with the
transfer of byproduct, source and special nuclear materials. It has
been estimated that the population dose in the United States due to
routine transportation of radioactive materials concerned with the
nuclear power industry is a very small fraction of the total annual
population doses from all other sources. The annual population dose is
expected to increase as the nuclear power industry expands during the
next generation and will vary from 100 person-rem/y in 1975 to 8000
person-rem/y in 2020, with the largest percentage of population dose
resulting from the transportation of low-level waste from the reactors
to burial grounds.
Most of the small packages of radioactive material are shipped by
air and are intended for medical diagnostic, therapeutic or scientific
purposes. The half lives of these materials are generally short. For
this reason, there generally is no discernible radiation exposure to
passengers, although under unusual circumstances the individual dose
rate could reach as high as 170 mrem/y.
Reprocessing Operations and Spent Fuel Storage
Spent fuel from nuclear power plants is reprocessed in order to
recover isotopes of plutonium and uranium. The separation of these
useful radionuclides from the spent fuel results in large quantities of
radioactive waste products. Therefore, the waste management program is
of great importance at a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant and the con-
trolled discharge of low level wastes from the plant to the environment
is very carefully monitored.
Since 1972, there have been no operating commercial reprocessing
plants in the United States. The Nuclear Fuel Services plant in West
Valley, N.Y., operated from 1966 to December 1971, but was shut down to
expand its reprocessing capability to 750 tons of fuel per year.
112
-------
There are three commercial fuel reprocessing plants operated for
the U.S. government. In addition to the Nuclear Fuel Services plant in
West Valley, N.Y., a reprocessing plant is under construction at Barn-
well, S.C., but it is not expected to begin operation before 1978. The
future of the Midwest Recovery Plant near Morris, 111., which has been
under construction, is uncertain. In 1973, it was operating under an
AEC license as a spent fuel storage facility.
Spent fuel is stored in special storage pools at power plants for
varying periods of time before being shipped to a reprocessing plant.
As a consequence of there being no commercial reprocessing plant in
operation since 1972, some fuel is stored at facilities at Morris, 111.,
and at NFS, West Valley, N.Y. The facility at Barnwell, S.C., is in
the process of obtaining a license for spent fuel storage.
Description of the data base
Characterization of the gaseous and liquid effluents from nuclear
fuel reprocessing plants shows the important radioactive components to
be 85Kr, 129I, 3H, 106Ru, 90Sr, 134Cs, 137Cs, uranium and plutonium
(5.38,5.39). General treatment of the assessment of the effects of
nuclear fuel reprocessing plants on the environment is included in some
reports (5.40-5.42).
Environmental monitoring reports are filed semiannually with the
NRC (5.8) by the operators of reprocessing plants as a requirement for
their operation. These reports are available to the public at NRC
public document rooms. Where spent fuel is stored at nuclear power
plants or reprocessing plants, the waste management procedures are
combined in one program and, therefore, separate environmental moni-
toring reports are not required. The data that are required in the
reports to NRC are included in the technical specifications of the
operating license for the facility. At the NFS plant in West Valley,
N.Y., the quarterly reports for 1971 and 1972 contain information on
131I concentration in three milk samples and gross alpha and beta concen-
trations in samples collected at perimeter monitoring stations.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation maintains a
surveillance program at the NFS site and publishes an annual report
which includes the data collected (5.103 5.11, 5.43). A summary of environ-
mental surveillance through 1972 at NFS is included in a report by
Terpilak and Jorgensen (5.43). The Division of Radiological Health of
the South Carolina State Board of Health has a preoperational surveil-
lance program (5.10,5.11,5.44) at the Barnwell site.
Besides the sources of environmental monitoring data cited above,
special studies have been carried out at the NFS site during its period
of operation. Iodine-129 found in samples of milk, animals, and other
environmental samples is the subject of several reports (5.45-5.48).
Measurements of environmental levels of radioactivity due to gaseous
113
-------
(s.39,5.49) and liquid.(5.38) effluents were made in field studies by
the EPA, Office of Radiation.Programs. Aerial measurements of radio-
activity were made periodically by the AEC (5.50). Other surveys of
environmental radiation from NFS have been conducted by New York State
(5.51-5.53).
Dose data
Dose data are generally lacking in environmental monitoring reports
filed with the NRC by fuel reprocessing plant licensees. However, several
studies made by government agencies have reported dose information based
on plant effluent data and on field measurements.
A report by the Office of Radiation Programs, EPA, which develops
the concept of environmental dose commitment to populations, projects
doses over a 50-year period from 1970 to 2020 from normal operations of
the nuclear power industry 'in the United States including fuel repro-
cessing plants (5. 22). Magno, et al. (5.21) estimates that population
dose from 14C may be significant. Russell and Galpin (5. 54) in a review
of offsite doses from fuel reprocessing plants indicate that radioactive
iodine and krypton-85 are the most important gaseous effluent components
in terms of dose to the public.
The Office of Radiation Programs of EPA in a report (5.55) esti-
mating ionizing radiation doses in the United States from the year 1960
to 2000, includes dose data from reprocessing plants. The report calcu-
lates the average annual dose (whole body) accrued to the population
within 100 kilometers of a fuel reprocessing plant, processing LWR fuel
to be 0.17 mrem/person/y, and 6.3 mrem/person/y at a distance of 3,000
meters. Shleien (5.56) calculated whole-body doses using the individual
dose commitment concept, i.e., the dose delivered (in mrem) to a critical
organ during a 50-year period from a particular intake. The individual
dose commitment was based on field measurements of environmental activ-
ity at the NFS plant site during 1968. For the "maximum individual,"
the whole-body dose commitment from ingestion of cesium-137 and cesium-
134 (mostly from deer meat) was estimated to be 257 mrem. For the
"typical individual," the whole-body dose commitment from cesium-137 was
1.7 mrem, and this was attributed mainly to the dose from fallout.
Another study by Martin (5.57), using effluent and environmental surveil-
lance data from the NFS site for 1971, found the most significant radio-
nuclides contributing to dose were tritium, krypton-85, strontium-90,
cesium-137, and cesium-134. The average annual (for 1971) whole-body
dose to individuals in the maximum exposure group was calculated to be
5.8 mrem and the whole body population dose was 23 person-rem. An in-
depth survey of the intake of fish and venison caught in the vicinity of
NFS in 1971 by Magno, et al. (5. 55; resulted in the calculated maximum,
whole body, individual dose from fishing to be 1.4 mrem and from ingestion
of venison (in 1970) to be 14 mrem. These figures are considerably
smaller than the doses estimated by Shleien for 1968 (5.56).
114
-------
The Environmental Impact Statement for the Barnwell reprocessing
plant under construction predicts the maximum, whole-body dose from
normal plant operations to be 4 mrem/y (5.59).
Summary
There has been no commercial fuel reprocessing plant in operation
in the United States since December 1971. The Nuclear Fuel Services
plant operated from 1966 to 1971, and so the data reviewed in this
report are for this plant during its period of operation.
Spent fuel is stored in special pools at individual nuclear power
plants and at storage areas at NFS and Morris, 111.
Dose estimates are generally not included in reports by spent fuel
storage and reprocessing licensees. However, State and U.S. government
agencies have collected data and reported dose information in several
studies.
Reprocessing operations and spent-fuel storage is concerned with
conducting a safe waste management program with a view of recovering
selected isotopes and controlling the discharge of low-level wastes to
the environment. It has been estimated that the average annual whole
body dose to an individual within 100 kilometers of a fuel reprocessing
plant is 0.17 mrem/y and 6.3 mrem/y at a distance of 3000 meters. It
appears that the most significant radionuclides contributing to this
dose are 3H, 85Kr, 90Sr, 134Cs, and 137Cs.
Radioactive Waste Disposal
High level wastes are presently stored in retrievable form in
storage areas on installations operated by contractors for ERDA. Low
level radioactive wastes are also buried at these facilities. The
population exposures from these waste disposal operations are included
in the discussion of ERDA facilities in Chapter 6.
The disposal of low-level radioactive wastes at commercially-
operated burial sites began in 1962 at Beatty, Nev. Since that time,
the industry has expanded to include three private companies operating
six sites. The other five sites are located in Maxey Flats, Ky.;
Sheffield, 111.; Barnwell, S.C.; West Valley, N.Y.; and Richland, Wash.
The three companies operating these facilities are Nuclear Engineering
Company (Washington, Nevada, Illinois, and Kentucky); Chem Nuclear
Systems, Incorporated (South Carolina); and Nuclear Fuel Services (New
York) (5.60).
These burial facilities consist of trenches in which the waste
materials are stacked and then covered by earth and compacted by earth-
115
-------
moving equipment. The filled trenches are then capped with a mound of
earth to reduce infiltration from precipitation. In the wetter, eastern
United States, precipitation presents operational problems. At two
sites which have burial media with relatively low permeability, oper-
ational experience indicates that it is difficult to keep water from
getting into the trenches. Compaction during backfilling, capping with
mounds of earth, the placement of sumps in the trenches, and dewatering
by pumping are methods now being used to deal with this problem. Because
of equipment movement or waste shrinkage, the earthen caps sometimes
subside and allow infiltration of water into the trenches. At some
sites, growth of vegetation is encouraged to prevent erosion, while at
other sites, the cap is kept barren to avoid radionuclide reconcentration
by long-rooted plants.
Data base description
Most information on the quantities and types of radioactive mater-
ials in commercial burial sites is available from NRC (5.61,5.62). The
EPA Office of Radiation Programs also contracted with each of the six
States to obtain inventories of by-product, source, and special nuclear
materials buried through 1973 (5.60). In addition, the quantities of
liquid waste received at the burial facilities for solidification and
burial were also tabulated. Some surveillance data are also presented
in State reports on environmental radiation (5.63).
Data base analysis
An evaluation of the available data by ORP resulted in the follow-
ing observations regarding quantities of waste in burial sites (5.60).
In 1973, approximately 1.75 million cubic feet of waste containing
approximately 300,000 curies of by-product material, approximately
150,000 grams of special nuclear material, and approximately 245,000
pounds of source material were buried at the commercial disposal facil-
ities. The quantity and activity of these wastes are expected to increase
exponentially along with the growth of nuclear power, and in the year
2000, it is estimated that as much as 80 - 100 million cubic feet of
waste containing some 19 million curies of by-product material, some 7
million grams of special nuclear material, and some 11 million pounds of
source material will be buried annually (These estimates are based on
present rates of burial).
Surveillance information
Radioactive contamination has been detected migrating from the
disposal site to the environment at the Maxey Flats and West Valley
facilities. Specific radionuclides, detected in leachates in the
trenches and free to migrate to the offsite environment, included: 3H,
22Na, 5£*Mn, 55Fe, 57Co, 60Co, 63Ni, 65Zn, 9°Sr, 106Ru, 125Sb, 125I,
137Cs> 226Ra> 228ACj 229Thj 232Thj 23^ 235U§ 236U>
116
-------
238Pu, 239Pu, 2"°Pu and 2/tlAm. Little is known at this time about the
physical and chemical characteristics of the wastes or of the radio-
active contaminants being leached from them. A striking similarity has
been noticed, however, between the leachates at Maxey Flats and West
Valley and the leachates found at sanitary landfills. Both appear to
have a high dissolved solids content (~500,000 ppm) and significant
amounts of organic and inorganic acids.
Population doses
There is no information on potential doses to individuals or the
general population from low-level waste burial practices. However, two
of the commercial burial sites, the West Valley and Maxey Flats disposal
facilities, have failed to perform as planned. Authorization to operate
the burial facilities was based on analyses of the site hydrology,
meteorology, etc., which, it was believed, demonstrated that the buried
radioactive wastes would not migrate from the site. That is, they would
be retained on the site for hundreds of years. In 10 years or less,
radioactivity has been detected offsite.
Studies supported by the Office of Radiation Programs (EPA) at
these two sites show similar patterns of burial and causes for the
migration of pollution. Summarized simply: (1) the wastes are buried
in large trenches and covered with earthen caps; (2) precipitation
infiltrates through the caps, fills the trenches, and soaks the wastes;
(3) the water in the trenches forms a leachate and leaches radioactive
material from the wastes; and (4) the leachate and radioactive material
contained therein migrate from the trenches to the uncontrolled envir-
onment (5.64).
State regulatory authorities have evaluated present levels of
contamination and have stated that the activity detected in the environ-
ment does not create a public health hazard, but that it does demon-
strate the need to determine the possible extent of migration of radio-
active material and to assess the long-range significance of its migration.
Conclusions and reooTtimendat-ions
There is no current indication of significant environmental levels
of radionuclides from low-level waste burial sites. The goal in the
design of land burial facilities is zero release. However, in the more
humid Eastern United States, present disposal practices are not meeting
this goal at the two burial facilities which the Office of Radiation
Programs has investigated. Some contamination of local ground and
surface waters is presently occurring; the significance of which is
being investigated.
117
-------
References
(5.1) Statistical data of the uranium industry (GJO-100 (75)), U.S.
Energy Research and Development Administration, Grand Junction
Office, Grand Junction, Colorado (January 1, 1975).
(5.2) A study of waste generation, treatment, and disposal in the
metals mining industry, Volume I and II. Midwest Research
Institute, Kansas City, Missouri, Draft Report for EPA Contract
No. 68-01-2665 (May 1975).
(5.3) U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. Environmental radiation
protection for nuclear power operations, proposed standards
(40 CFR 190), supplementary information. Office of Radiation
Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
20460 (January 5, 1976).
(5.4) Environmental monitoring report, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission,
Oak Ridge Facilities, calendar year 1973. UCC-ND-280. Office of
Safety and Environmental Protection, P.O. Box Y, Oak Ridge, Tenn.
37830 (May 2, 1974).
(5.5) Environmental monitoring report, Atomic Energy Commission, Paducah
Gaseous diffusion Plant, calendar year 1973, UCC-ND-279, Office of
Safety and Environmental Protection, P.O. Box Y, Oak Ridge, Tenn.
37830 (April 30, 1974).
(5.6) KALMON, B. and F. A. KOEHLER. Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant
environmental monitoring report, 1973, GAT-781. Goodyear Atomic
Corporation, P.O. Box 628, Piketon, Ohio 45661 (May 3, 1974).
(5.7) Environmental analysis of the uranium fuel cycle, part 1 - fuel
supply, EPA-520/9-73-003-B, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Radiation Programs (October 1973).
(5.8) U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION. Code of Federal Regulations, Part
50, 10 CFR, Licensing of production and utilization facilities.
Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. 20402.
(5.9) U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION. Measuring and reporting of radio-
activity in theenvirons of nuclear power plants, Regulatory
Guide 4.1. Director of Regulatory Standards, USAEC, Washington,
D.C. 20545.
(5.10) CULLITON, M. A. State environmental radioactivity surveillance
programs, 1972. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Radiat.
Data Rep. 14:145-173 (March 1973).
118
-------
(5.11) Directory of EPA, State, and local environmental quality moni-
toring and assessment activities, Section V. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460. (December 1974).
(5.12) Environmental radioactivity surveillance guide. U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs. ORP/SID
72-2 (June 1972).
(5.13) Environmental impact monitoring of nuclear power plants. Source
Book of Monitoring Methods. 2 Vols. Prepared by Battelle
Pacific NW Labs, Columbus Labs, for Atomic Industrial Forum,
Inc. AIF/NESP-004.
(5.14) WEISS, B. H., P. G. VOILLEQUE, 0. KELLER, B. KAHN, H. KRIEGER,
A. MARTIN, and C. PHILLIPS. Detailed measurement of 131I in
air, vegetation, and milk around three operating reactor sites.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555
(March 1975). NUREG-75/021.
(5.IS) KAHN, B., R. BLANCHARD, W. BRINK, H. 'KRIEGER, H. KOLDE, W. AVERETT,
S. GOLD, A. MARTIN, and G. GELS. Radiological surveillance study
at the Haddam Neck PWR nuclear power station. EPA-520/3-74-007.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460,
pp. 63-117 (December 1974).
(5.16) KAHN, B., et al. Radiological surveillance studies at a boiling
water nuclear power reactor. U.S. Public Health Service.
BRH/DER 70-1 (1970) (Now available from EPA, Washington, D.C.
20460).
(5.1?) KAHN, B., et al. Radiological surveillance studies at a pres-
surized water nuclear power reactor. RD 71-1. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460 (1971).
(5.18) Assessment of environmental radioactivity in the vicinity of
Shippingport atomic power station, EPA-520/5-73-005. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs,
Washington, D.C. 20460 (November 1973).
(5.19) MARTIN, J. A., C. NELSON, and H. PETERSON, OR. Trends in popu-
lation radiation exposure from operating BWR gaseous effluents,
in Symposium on Population Exposures, Proceedings of the Eighth
Midyear Topical Symposium of the Health Physics Society, Knox-
vilie, Tenn. October 21-24, 1974. USAEC Report CONF-741018
(October 1974).
(5.20) MATUSZEK, J. M., C. PAPERIELLO, C. KUNZ, J. HUTCHINSON, and
J. DALY. Permanent gas measurements as part of an environmental
surveillance program. Report by N.Y. State Dept. of Health pub-
lished in Symposium on Environmental Surveillance Around Nuclear
Installations, International Atomic Energy. Agency, IAEA/SM-180/38,
Vol. I, pp. 225-233 (November 1973).
119
-------
(5.21) MAGNO, P. J., C. NELSON, and W. ELLETT. A consideration of the
significance of carbon-14 discharges from the nuclear power
industry, in Proceedings of the 13th AEC Air Cleaning Conference.
USAEC Report CONF-740807.
(5,22) Environmental radiation dose commitment: an application to the
nuclear power industry. EPA-520/4-73-002. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs, Washington, D.C.
20460 (revised June 1974).
(5.23) Environmental analysis of the uranium fuel cycle, part II - nuclear
power reactors. EPA-520/9-73-003-C. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs (November 1973).
(5.24) Draft, Environmental statement for a proposed rulemaking action
concerning environmental radiation protection requirements for
normal operations of activities in the uranium fuel cycle. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs,
Washington, D.C. 20460, pp. 50-59 (May 1975).
(5.25) U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, OFFICE OF OPERATIONS EVALUATION.
Summary of radioactivity released in effluents from nuclear power
plants during 1973. NUREG-75/001, OOE-OS-003.
(5.26) U.S. ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION. Nuclear
reactors built, being built or planned in the United States.
TID-8200-R32.
(5.2?) Transportation of radioactive materials, Memorandum of Understanding.
Department of Transportation and Atomic Energy Commission.
Federal Register, Vol. 38, No. 62. (Monday, April 2, 1973).
(5.28) DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. Transportation of radioactive
materials. OHM Newsletter, Office of Hazardous Materials, Vol.
II, No. 8 (February 1972).
(5.29) Public Law 93-633, 93rd Congress. HR 15223. Transportation
Safety Act of 1974 (January 3, 1975).
(5. 30) BALDONADO, 0. C. and C. V. HODGE. Evaluation of routine exposure
from the shipment of radioactive material for the nuclear power
industry. Prepared for EPA under Contract No. 69-01-2101.
Nuclear & Systems Sciences Group, Holmes & Narver, Inc.
(September 1974).
(5.31) HODGE, C. V. and A. A. JARRETT. Transportation accident risks in
the nuclear power industry, 1975-2020. Prepared for EPA under
Contract No. 68-01-0555. Nuclear & Systems Sciences Group,
Holmes & Narver, Inc. (November 1974).
120
-------
(5.32) U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION. Environmental survey of trans-
portation of radioactive materials to and from nuclear power
plants, WASH-1238. Atomic Energy Commission, Directorate of
Regulatory Standards, Washington, D.C. 20545 (December 1972).
(5.33) Proposed Rulemaking. Amendment to 10 CFR 50, environmental
effects of transportation of fuel and waste from nuclear power
plants. Federal Register. (February 5, 1973).
(5.34) Amendment to 10 CFR 51, licensing and regulatory policy and
procedures for environmental protection. Federal Register, Vol.
40, No. 3 (January 6, 1975).
(5.35) U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. Impact from transportation
of radioactive materials to and from light water reactors.
Technology Assessment Division, Office of Radiation Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460
(June 1973).
(5.36) U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. Testimony of Dr. W. D.
Rowe before the Atomic Safety Licensing Board in the Matter of
Amendment of 10 CFR Pt 50, Docket RM 504 (April 2, 1973).
(5.37) U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. Considerations for control
of radiation exposures to personnel from shipments of radio-
active materials on passenger aircraft. Office of Radiation
Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
20460 (December 1974).
(5.38) MAGNO, P., T. REAVEY, and J. APIDIANAKIS. Liquid waste effluents
from a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant, BRH/NERHL 70-2. Avail-
able from Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation
Programs, Washington, D.C. 20460 (November 1970).
(5.39) COCHRAN, J. A., D. SMITH, P. MAGNO, and B. SHLEIEN. An investi-
gation of airborne radioactive effluent from an operating
nuclear fuel reprocessing plant, BRH/NERHL 70-3. Available
from Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs,
Washington, D.C. 20460 (July 1970).
(5.40) Environmental analysis of the uranium fuel cycle, part III.
Nuclear fuel reprocessing, EPA-520/9-73-003-D. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs, Washington, D.C.
20460 (October 1973).
(5.41) U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION. Environmental survey of the
uranium fuel cycle. WASH-1248 pp. F-15-F-20 (1974).
(5.42) KULLEN, B.-J., L. TREVORROW, and M. STEINDLER. Tritium and
noble gas fission products in the nuclear fuel cycle II: fuel
reprocessing plants, ANL-8135. Argonne National Laboratory
(March 1975).
121
-------
(5.43) TERPILAK, M. S'. and B. JORGENSEN. Environmental radiation effects
of nuclear facilities in New York State. Radiat. Data Rep.
15:375-400 (July 1974).
(5.44) S.C. STATE BOARD OF HEALTH, DIVISION OF RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH.
Radiation Surveillance Data. Report No. 73-A (June 1973).
(5.45) MATUSZEK, J. M., J. DALY, S. GOODYEAR, C. PAPERIELLO, and J. GABAY.
Environmental levels of 129I. Symposium on Environmental Surveil-
lance Around Nuclear Installations. International Atomic Energy
IAEA/SM-180/39, Vol. II, pp. 3-20 (November 1973).
(5.46) DALY, J. C., S. GOODYEAR, C. PAPERIELLO, and J. MATUSZEK.
Iodine-131 levels in milk and water near a nuclear fuel repro-
cessing plant. Health Physics, Vol. 26, pp. 333-342 (April 1974).
(5.4?) MAGNO, P. J., T. REAVEY, and J. APIDIANAKIS. Iodine-129 in the
environment around a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant. ORP/SID-
72-5. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation
Programs, Washington, D.C. 20460 (October 1972).
(5.48) KELLEHER, W. J. and E. MICHAEL. Iodine-129 in milk. Health
Physics 25:328 (September 1973).
(5.49) COCHRAN, J. A., W. GRIFFIN, JR. and E. TROIANELLO. Observation
of airborne tritium waste discharge from a nuclear fuel repro-
cessing plant, EPA/ORP-73-1. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460 (February 1973).
(5. 50) BARASCH, G. E. and R. BEERS. Aerial radiological measuring
surveys of the Nuclear Fuel Services plant, West Valley, New
York. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. ARMS-68.6.9.
(5.51) DALY, J. C., A. MANCHESTER, J. GABAY, and N. SAX. Tritiated
moisture in the atmosphere surrounding a nuclear fuel repro-
cessing plant. Radiol. Health Data Rep. (July 1968).
(5.52) SAX, N..I., P. LEMON, A. BENTON, and J. GABAY. Radioecological
surveillance of the waterways around a nuclear fuels reprocessing
plant. Radiol. Health Data Rep. 10:289-296 (July 1969).
(5.53) KELLEHER, W. J. Environmental surveillance around a nuclear
fuel reprocessing installation, 1965-1967. Radiol. Health Data
Rep. 10:239-339 (August 1969).
(5.54) RUSSELL, J. L. and F. GALPIN. A review of measured and estimated
offsite doses at fuel reprocessing plants in Management of
Radioactive Wastes from Fuel Reprocessing. Proceedings of an
OECD/NEA-IAEA Symposium in Paris, France, November 27-December 1,
1972, OECD, Paris, pp. 99-127 (March 1973).
122
-------
(5.55) KLEMENT, A. W. JR., C. MILLER, R. MINX, and B. SHLEIEN. Estimates
of ionizing radiation doses in the United States 1960-2000,
ORP/CSD 72-1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Radiation Programs, Washington, D.C. 20460 (August 1972).
(5.56) SHLEIEN, B. An estimate of radiation doses received by indi-
viduals living in the vicinity of a nuclear fuel reprocessing
plant in 1968, BRH/NERHL 70-1. Available from Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs, Washington,
D.C. 20460 (May 1970)
(5.57) MARTIN, J. A. JR. Calculation of doses in 1971 due to radio-
nuclides emitted by Nuclear Fuel Services fuel reprocessing plant.
Radiat. Data Rep. 14:59-76 (February 1973).
(5.58) MAGNO, P. J., R. KRAMKOWSKI, T. REAVEY and R. WOZNIAK. Studies of
ingestion dose pathways from the Nuclear Fuel Services fuel
reprocessing plant, EPA-520/3-74-001. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs, Washington,
D.C. 20460 (December 1974).
(5.59) Draft environmental statement for a proposed rulemaking action
concerning environmental radiation protection requirements for
normal operations of activities in the uranium fuel cycle.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs,
Washington, D.C. 20460, pgs. 50 & 59 (May 1975).
(5.60) O'CONNELL, M. F. and W. F. HOLCOMB. A summary of low-level
radioactive wastes buried at commercial sites between 1962-
1973, with projections to the year 2000, Radiat. Data Rep.
15:759-767. (December 1974).
(5.61) MORTON, R. Land burial of solid radioactive wastes: study of
commercial operations and facilities, WASH-1143. U.S. Atomic
Energy Commission, Washington, D.C., 20545 (March 1969).
(5.62) U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION. Report of releases of radio-
activity in effluents and solid waste from nuclear power plants
for 1972, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Directorate of
Regulatory Operations, Washington, D.C. 20545 (August 1973).
(5.63) NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION, Annual
report of environmental radiation in New York State - 1973. New
York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, N.Y.
(5.64) MEYER, G. L. Recent experience with the land burial of solid
low-level radioactive wastes. Office of Radiation Programs,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460.
Presented at the International Atomic Energy Agency Symposium
on Management of Radioactive Wastes from the Nuclear Fuel Cycle,
Vienna, Austria (March 22-26, 1976).
123
-------
Chapter 6 - Federal Facilities
There are two groups of federal facilities that handle radioactive
materials and publish reports of their monitoring activities. These
groups are those facilities that are operated for the Energy Research
and Development Administration and the Navy's nuclear fleet and their
support facilities.
ERDA facilities
\
There are 28 facilities that report their environmental surveil-
lance results to the Energy Research and Development Administration
(ERDA) (6.1-6.28). The operators of these facilities are contractors
for ERDA and operate facilities that have a potential for environmental
impact or may release a significant quantity of radioactive or nonradio-
active wastes. In accordance with the ERDA Manual Chapter 0513, these
contractors prepare annual reports containing data on levels of radio-
active and nonradioactive pollutants in the environs of each site and an
interpretation of the sampling results in relation to the appropriate
standards for environmental protection. These reports may also include
estimates of offsite exposures and summaries of effluent releases that
may be necessary to aid in calculations of any offsite exposures (6.29).
Many of the monitoring reports submitted to ERDA by their contractors
contained an assessment of the radiation exposure of the public which
could have resulted from site operations during the past calendar year.
Each of these assessments provided an estimate of (a) the "fencepost"
dose at the location of the site boundary where the maximum exposure
rate exists, (b) the dose to an individual and population group in those
locations where the highest dose rate occurs, and/or (c) the 80-kilometer
(50-mile) person-rem whole body dose. The latter dose is the dose
received by the population within an 80-kilometer radius of the facility.
The annual reports were investigated for two types of doses. The
first is the boundary dose or the dose to an individual at the perimeter
of the secure area of the contractor facility. Twenty-three of the 31
sites (several of the facilities consist of more than one site) reported
125
-------
boundary doses; these doses ranged from a low of 13 yrem/y at the
National Accelerator Laboratory to a high of 320 mrem/y at the Argonne
National Laboratory.
In addition to reporting the boundary doses due to the activities
of a facility, many facilities also reported a background dose that they
measured as part of their monitoring program. These background doses,
which are a measure of the ambient radioactivity in the environment
around these contractor facilities, ranged from 54 mrem at the Knolls
Atomic Power Laboratory's Kesselring Site to 200 mrem/y at the Rocky
Flats Plant.
The second dose estimate that some of the contractor facilities
reported is the dose to the population within 80 kilometers (50 miles)
of the site. The majority of the facilities reporting an 80-kilometer
population dose reported these doses in the units of person-rem. Some
of these facilities, however, reported their doses in units of yrem/y.
Brookhaven National Laboratory, the Feed Materials Production Center,
and the Paducah plant reported doses for radii smaller than 80 kilo-
meters. For those facilities that did report comparable person-rem
doses, the doses ranged from 8 x 10"7 person-rem at the Pantex Plant to
196 person-rem at the Savannah River Plant.
The dose to an individual or population group at those locations
where the highest dose rate occurs was presented by very few facilities
and, consequently, was not tabulated. In many cases, this dose corre-
sponded to the dose at the site boundary and, in all instances, was
equal to or less than the dose at the site boundary. Consequently, only
the doses at the site boundary and the 80-kilometer doses are tabulated
in table 6-1.
Department of Defense
Of the facilities using radioactive materials in the Department of
Defense, one that issues a report on its environmental program is the
nuclear Navy.
At the end of 1973, the U.S. Navy had 103 nuclear-powered submarines
and 4 nuclear-powered surface ships in operation (6.30). Nine ship-
yards, 11 tenders, and two submarine bases are involved in the construction,
maintenance, overhaul, and refueling of these nuclear propulsion plants.
The Navy monitoring and radioactivity control program begins with
tight surveillance and control of radioactive releases and waste disposal.
The radiation monitoring program consists of analyzing harbor water and
sediment samples for radioactivity associated with nuclear propulsion
plants, monitoring of radiation around the perimeter of support facilities,
and monitoring of effluents. The primary radionuclides of concern are
cobalt-60 and tritium. The total radioactivity, less tritium, discharged
to all ports and harbors from these facilities was less than 2 millicuries
126
-------
Table 6-1. Boundary and 80-km doses around EROA contractor facilities, 1973 (6.1-6.28)
Facility
Name and Location
Ames Lab.
Ames, Iowa
Argonne National Lab.
Argonne , f 1 1 .
Atomics International
Canoga Park, Calif.
Battelle Columbus Lab.
Columbus, Ohio
Bettis Lab.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Brookhaven National Lab.
Upton, N. Y.
Elk River Reactor0
Elk River, Minn.
Feed Materials Production
Center, Fernald, Ohio
Han ford Site
Richland, Wash.
Knolls Atomic Power Lab.
Knolls Site
Niskayuna, N. Y.
Kesselring Site
West Milton, N. Y.
Windsor Site
Windsor, Conn.
Lawrence Berkeley Lab.
Berkeley, Calif.
Background
Doses (mrem/y)
(a)
100
(a)
140
(a)
85
(a)
(a)
-80
125
54
(a)
80-100
Boundary Dose to
Individual in Population
Due to Facility (mrem/y)
<5
320
(a)
2.9 x 10"6
2.4
15.5
(a)
9.2
(a)
<2
<.l
<.l
30
Population Dose within
80 km Radius around Facility
(person-rem/y)
11.6
94.9
(a)
2.7 x 10'6
.21
.1
(a)
(a) *
40
(a)
(a)
(a)
<60
Population within
80 km of Site
590,500
7.76 x 106
(a)
6.23 x 105
3.1 x 106
b31 ,700
(a)
(a)
2.5 x 105
(a)
(a)
(a)
(a,
Dose within 80 km
Radius of Site
(urem/y)
(a)
12
(a)
(a)
(a)
(a)
(a)
d2,000
(a)
(a)
(a)
30
(a)
ro
-------
Table 6-1. Boundary and 80-km doses around ERDA contractor facilities, 1973 continued
Facility
Name and Location
Lawrence Liver-more Lab.
Livermore, Calif.
Livermore Site
Site 300
Los Alamos Scientific Lab.
Los Alamos, N. Mex.
Mound Lab.
Miamisburg, Ohio
National Accelerator Lab.
Batavia, 111.
National Reactor Testing Sta.
Idaho Falls, Idaho
Nevada. Test Site
Mercury, Nev.
Oak Ridge Facilities
Oak Ridge, Tenn.
Paducah Gaseous Diffusion
Plant
Paducah, Ky.
Pantex Plant
Amarillo, Tex.
Pinellas Plant
St. Petersburg, Fla.
Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion
Plant
Plketon. Ohio
Background
Doses (mrem/y)
71
80
153
140
105
188
123
100
125
(a)
120
119
Boundary Dose to
Individual in Population
Due to Facility (mrem/y)
.3 mrem from T
(a)
(a)
1 .1 -Whole Bgdy-T
9.9-Bone-Z38Pu
.ll-Kidney-2TOpo
.013
«*.298
(a)
130
36 to lung
.04 from
depleted U
1 x 10-5 from T
.06 from T gas
and tritium
oxide
6
Population Dose within
80 km Radius around Facility
(person-rem/y)
3.9 from 41Ar
(a)
0.4 from T
51
<1
.53
(a)
14
(a)
8 x 10~7 from
depleted U
1 x 10~8 from T
2.44
(a)
Population within
80 km of Site
4.6 x 106
(a)
19,000
2.8 x 106
(a)
6.95 x 104
(a)
7.2 x 105
(a)
2.31 x 105
1.52 x 106
> 500 ,000
Dose within 80 km
Radius of Site
(prem/y)
.85
(a)
e 2000
(a)
(a)
(a)
(a)
100
f 5000
(a)
1.6
(a)
ro
oo
-------
Table 6-1. Boundary and 80-km doses around ERDA contractor facilities, 1973 continued
Facility
Name and Location
Project Rio Blanco
Rio Blanco County, Colo.
Rocky Flats Plant
Golden, Colo.
Sandia Lab.
Albuquerque, N. Mex.
Savannah River Plant
Aiken, S. C.
Shippingport Atomic
Power Sta.
Shippinqport, Pa.
Stanford Linear Acceler-
ator Center
Stanford, Calif.
Background
Doses (mrem/y)
146
-200
(a)
60-70 mR/y
(a)
82
Boundary Dose to
Individual in Population
Due to Facility (mrem/y)
(a)
(a)
0.014
1.27
<.08
3.9
Population Dose within
80 km Radius around Facility
(person-rem/y)
(a)
(a)
(a)
196
(a)
*
(a)
Population within
80 km of Site
(a)
(a)
(a)
4.65 x 10s
9 18, 000
(a)
Dose with 80 km
Radius of Site
(tirem/y)
(a)
(a)
(a)
(a)
<2 ,000
(a)
ro
aNot reported.
bAssumed population within 10 km radius.
cThe Elk River Reactor was shut down in 1968 and was being dismantled in 1973.
^Population at 4 km from site.
eNot considered statistically significant.
Dose at 3.2 km from plant.
Population within 8 km radius.
-------
in 1973. The total tritium released to all ports and harbors was less
than one curie in 1973. Based on the radioactivity released, the maximum
radiation dose to any member of the general public in 1973 was less than
10 microrems.
Summary
Radiation exposure resulting from the operation of federal facil-
ities is assessed by evaluating (a) the fencepost dose at the site
boundary location where the maximum exposure rate exists, (b) the dose
to an individual and population group in locations where the higher dose
rates occur and (c) the whole body dose received by the population
within a radius of 80 kilometers of the facility. The data have been
compiled for 1973 and are presented in table 6-1. There are 28 federal
facilities conducting nuclear operations. Based on the facilities
reporting, individual and population doses showed the following ranges:
Individual dose Population dose
at fence post boundary within 80 km radius
13 - 320 mrem/y 8 x 10"7 - 196 person-rem/y
References
(6.1) VOSS, M. D. Summary of environmental radioactivity, January 1,
1973-December 31, 1973, IS-3313. Ames Laboratory, USAEC, Iowa
State University, Ames, Iowa 50010 (May 1974).
(6.2) SEDLET, J., N. W. GOLCHERT and T. L. DUFFY. Environmental
monitoring at Argonne National Laboratory, annual report for
1973, ANL-8078. Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 South Cass
Avenue, Argonne, 111. 60439 (March 1974).
(6.3) MOORE, J. D. Environmental and radioactive effluent moni-
toring annual report, 1973. Atomics International Division,
Rockwell International Corporation, Canoga Park, Calif.
(6.4) Environmental report for calendar year 1973 on radiological and
non-radiological parameters. Health Physics Services, Battelle-
Columbus Laboratories, 505 King Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43201
(April 18, 1974).
(6.5) Effluent and environmental monitoring report for calendar year
1973, WAPD-RS(EA)-140. Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory,
Pittsburgh, Pa. (May 1974).
(6.6) HULL, A. P. and J. A. ASH. 1973 environmental monitoring report,
BNL 18625. Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, N.Y. 11973
(March 1974).
130
-------
(6.7) Survey of environmental radioactivity, COO-651-90. Minnesota
Department of Health and United Power Association, Elk River,
Minnesota (April 1974).
(6.8) Feed Materials Production Center environmental monitoring annual
report for 1973, NLCO-1109 special. Health and Safety Division,
National Lead Company of Ohio, P.O. Box 39158, Cincinnati,
Ohio 45239 (April 1, 1974).
(6.9) NEES, W. L. and J. P. CORLEY. Environmental surveillance at
Hanford for CY-1973, BNWL-1811. Battelle-Pacific Northwest
Laboratories, Richland, Wash. 99352 (April 1974).
(6.10) Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory annual environmental monitoring
report, Calendar year 1973, KAPL-M-7370. General Electric
Company, Schenectady, N.Y. (April 1974).
(6.11) WALLACE, R. Annual environmental monitoring report for calendar
year 1973. UCID-3651, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley,
Calif. 94720 (March 26, 1974).
\
(6.12) SILVER, W. J., C. L. LINDENKEN, J. W. MEADOWS, W. H. HUTCHIN
and D. R. MCINTYRE. Environmental levels of radioactivity in
the vicinity of the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory 1973 annual
report, UCRL-51547. Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, University
of California, Livermore, Calif. 94550 (March 4, 1974).
(6.IS) SCHIAGER, K. J. and K. E. APT. Environmental surveillance at
Los Alamos during 1973, LA-5586. Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
of the University of California, Los Alamos, N.M. 87544 (May 1974)
(6.14) CARFAGNO, D. G. and W. H. WESTENDORF. Annual environmental moni-
toring report: calendar year 1973, MLM-2142. Mound Laboratory,
Miamisburg, Ohio 45342 (April 25, 1974).
(6.15) BAKER, S. I. Environmental monitoring report for calendar year
1973. National Accelerator Laboratory, P.O. Box 500, Batavia,
111. 60510 (March 15, 1974).
(6.16) 1973 National Reactor Testing Station environmental monitoring
program report. Environmental Sciences Branch, Health Services
Laboratory, Idaho Operations Office, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission,
550 Second Street, Idaho Falls, Idaho 83401 (April 1974).
(6.1?) Environmental monitoring report for the Nevada Test Site and
other test areas used for underground nuclear detonations,
January through December 1973, NERC-LV-539-31. Monitoring Oper-
ations Laboratory, National Environmental Research Center, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas, Nev. (May 1974).
(6.18) 'Environmental -monitoring report, United States Atomic Energy
Commission, Oak Ridge Facilities, calendar year 1973, UCC-ND-280.
Office of Safety and Environmental Protection, P.O. Box Y,
Oak Ridge, Tenn. 37830 (May 2, 1974).
131
-------
(6.19) Environmental monitoring report, United States Atomic Energy
Commission, Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, calendar year 1973,
UCC-ND-279. Office of Safety and Environmental Protection, P.O.
Box Y, Oak Ridge, Tenn. 37830 (April 30, 1974).
(6. 20) ALEXANDER, R. E. Environmental monitoring report for Pantex Plant
covering 1973. Mason & Hanger-Silas Mason Company, Inc., Pantex
Plant, P.O. Box 647, Amarillo, Texas 79177.
(6.21) Environmental monitoring report, 1973. Pinellas Plant, P.O. Box
11508, St. Petersburg, Fla. 33733 (April 1, 1974).
(6. 22) KALMON, B. and F. A. KOEHLER. Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant
environmental monitoring report, 1973, GAT-781 . Goodyear Atomic
Corporation, P.O. Box 628, Piketon, Ohio 45661 (May 3, 1974).
(6. 23) Project Rio Blanco, environmental monitoring summary report,
initial production testing, November 14-20, 1973. Nevada Oper-
ations Office, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.
(6.24) WERKEME, G. J., Group Leader. Annual environmental monitoring
report, Rocky Flats Plant, January through December 1973, RFP-
ENV-73. Dow Chemical U.S.A., Rocky Flats Division, P.O. Box 888,
Golden, Colo. 80401.
(6. 25) BREWER, L. W. Environmental monitoring report for Sandia Labor-
atories for 1973, SLA-74-0'167. Environmental Health Department
3310, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, N. Mex. 87115 (April 1 974).
(6.26) Environmental monitoring in the vicinity of the Savannah River
Plant, annual report for 1973, DPSPU 74-30-1. Health Physics
Section, E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company, Savannah River Plant,
Aiken, South Carolina.
(6.27) Annual effluent data and environmental monitoring report, January-
December 1973. Duquesne Light Company, Shippingport Atomic Power
Station, Shippingport, Pa.
(6. 28) BUSICK, D. D. and E. HOLT. Annual environmental monitoring report,
January-December 1973, SLAC-170. Stanford Linear Accelerator Center,
Stanford University, Stanford, Calif. 94305 (March 1974).
(6. 29) U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION. Environmental monitoring at
major U.S. Atomic Energy Commission contractor sites, calendar
year 1973, WASH-1259 Division of Operational Safety, U.S. Atomic
Energy Commission, Washington, D.C. 20545. (June 1973).
(6'SO) tinnn M>HE;- G' L\ Si°BLf ' and J' D' EAGLES' Environmental moni-
toring and disposal of radioactive wastes from U.S. naval nuclear
powered ships and their support facilities, Report NT-74-1. Naval
20360 f A HI nd' Department of the Navy» Washington, D.C.
132
-------
Chapter 7 - Accelerators
The purpose of this section is to present information concerning
accelerator-induced radioactivity in the environment and resulting doses
to man. The availability of data encountered during the review of
literature for this report concerning these aspects of accelerator
operations limits this section to those facilities reported upon by the
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (7.1-7.4).
These facilities are the National Accelerator Laboratory, the
Brookhaven National Laboratory, the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, and
the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center. Doses and exposure information
obtained from reference 7.1 for these facilities are summarized below.
National Accelerator Laboratory
The National Accelerator Laboratory (NAL) facility is a proton
synchrotron with a design energy of 200 GeV; however, it has been
routinely operated at 300 GeV and at 400 GeV during a few weeks in 1973.
Radioactivity is produced from the interaction of accelerator protons
with matter. The induced radioactivity is mostly contained in insoluble
shields and in beam dumps. The remainder penetrates the shielding,
escapes as airborne radioactivity, or results in radioactivation of the
soil. NAL conducts an extensive monitoring program to monitor pene-
trating radiation, airborne radioactivity and waterborne radioactivity.
The results of the programs are presented below.
133
-------
Penetrating radiation
During the year, monitoring was conducted at numerous locations
around the accelerator on an around-the-clock basis. At a location
where beam losses were typical of the Main Ring, there were 15 days when
radiation levels were greater than 50 percent above background. Assuming
that losses of the same magnitude occurred everywhere else about the
Main Ring, a site boundary dose of 0.013 mrem for 1973 was calculated.
At one source around the Main Ring radioactivity greater than background
was detected for 160 days. The site boundary dose from that source was
estimated to be less than 1/10 of 1 percent of the 1973 AEC criterion of
0.17 rem (maximum).
Additionally measurements were taken to determine if penetrating
radiation existed near the site boundary along the straight line exten-
sion of the beam lines. No activity above background was detected.
Airborne radioactivity
Radioactivation of air may occur in the vicinity of some beam dumps
and target boxes during operations of the accelerator. Monitoring
measurements were made at the exhaust fan in the Neutrino Area Train
Spur Stack. The highest concentration observed was 15 yCi/m3. Using a
Gaussian Plume diffusion model, typical wind conditions, and a release
rate of 15 yCi/m3, the site boundary concentration was estimated to be
approximately 5 x 10~6 yCi/m3. The predominant activity was due to 11C.
This concentration equates to a 0.03 mrem/year at the site boundary.
Similarly, the total exposure to the general population was estimated to
be less than 1 person-rem per year.
Waterborne radioactivity
During accelerator.operation, some radioactivation of soils may
occur. The radionuclides thusly induced may be leached into ground
water and possibly become a mechanism for the transport of radionuclides
into surface runoff waters and aquifers. Results of the NAL monitoring
program indicate that a total of about 146 mCi of 7Be was released at an
average concentration of 2.5 x ID'4 yCi/m£ and about 4.4 mCi of tritium
was released at an average concentration of 17 pd"/£ during 1973. The
7Be was released into soil at a depth of 6 feet. Due to its affinity
for soil and short half life, it should not present any environmental
problems when released from the soil. The tritium produced has a 12-
year half life and hence its buildup in ponds on site and possible
releases caused by losses from closed-loop cooling systems will require
careful monitoring in future years.
134
-------
In summary, the total exposure to the general population about NAL
was less than 1 person-rem in 1973 and the exposure resulted primarily
from nC released via the airborne pathway.
Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL)
The major scientific facilities operated at BNL during 1973 were a
High Flux Beam Reactor (HFBR), a Medical Research Reactor, the Alter-
nating Gradient Synchrotron (AGS), the 200 MeV Proton Linac in the
Brookhaven Linac Isotopes Facility (BLIF), and the Tandem Van de Graaff,
60-inch Cyclotron, Research Van de Graaff, Vertical Accelerator and
Chemistry Van de Graaff for medium energy physics investigations and
isotopes production.
Most of the airborne radioactive effluents at BNL originate from
the HFBR, the BLIF and the Research Van de Graaff. The first two faci-
lities produce a significant amount of the Laboratory's liquid effluents.
The contribution of the accelerators at BNL to the overall site
dose to the population is not readily available from available reference
material; however, the doses due to exposure from tritium can be esti-
mated to be less than 0.05 person-rems to the population of 31,700
persons within 10 km of BNL. The exposure from accelerator "skyshine"
at the closest BNL site boundary was estimated to be 1.2 millirems,
mainly attributed to the neutron component of the scattered radiation
from the AGS. The skyshine dose to an assumed population of 100 persons/km2
within 3.5 km of BNL was calculated to be about 0.42 person-rems in
1973, compared to an estimated background dose of about 290 person-rems.
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
The Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL) is located contiguous to
fairly densely populated areas, a situation which is unique among high
energy accelerator laboratories. Accelerators currently operating at
LBL are an 88-inch and 184-inch cyclotrons, the Bevatron, the Super
Hilac, and the Electron Ring Accelerator.
An extensive program to monitor the radioactivity from accelerators
and estimate doses has been carried out at LBL for a considerable period
of time. The doses estimated since 1963 through 1972 are presented in
table 7-1. The method of calculation of those doses is the same in all
cases. The variations in dose are expected and are due to variations in
accelerator operations over the years.
In 1973 the dose was estimated at a maximum to be less than 64.6
person-rem with a minimum expected dose of about 28 person-rem.
135
-------
Table 7-1. Estimated dose due to LBL operations
Dose
Year (person-rem)
1963 288
1964 217
1965 110
1966 142
1967 153
1968 185
1969 277
1970 176
1971 273
1972 103
The population considered in the above esti-
mates were from the surrounding cities of Berkeley,
Oakland and Albany, California.
136
-------
The dose calculated for the years in table 7-1 do not include radi-
ation decreases due to shielding of a large fraction of the area included
in the estimates by the hills of the area. Other factors that might
reduce the magnitude of the dose estimates result from the inclusion of
better estimates of population density and occupancy factors for close-
in areas. Additionally, the estimate of neutron flux density may decrease
faster with distance than assumed in the study. In view of the methods
of dose estimation, it can probably be safely assumed that the calculated
doses are relatively conservative.
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC)
SLAC is a large research laboratory devoted to theoretical and
experimental research in high energy physics and to the development of
new techniques in high energy accelerator particles. The accelerator
produces beams of electrons with energies up to 22 GeV and positrons
with energies up to 12 GeV.
A surveillance program about the site is 'conducted to determine'
contributions to environmental radiation and population doses due to
accelerator operations.
Because airborne radioactivity is not released until the completion
of a waiting period after accelerator operations, the only radioisotope
routinely released is argon-41. In addition to ulAr which results in a
small contribution to environmental radioactivity and dose, fast neutrons
characterized by "skyshine" are measured, and their contribution assessed.
From airborne pathway monitoring, the dose estimated at the SLAC
was ^0.05 mrem for 1973, and the dose due to penetrating radiation was
about 3.9 mrem.
Investigation of activity in water and vegetation indicated that no
dose would result from exposure to these potential sources.
Summary
Accelerator radioactivity is concerned with penetrating radiation
(skyshine), airborne radioactivity resulting from reactivation of air to
HC, and waterborne activity resulting from 3H. The skyshine component
is the most significant contribution to population dose. Table 7-2
summarizes the population dose from this source. No radioactivity was
observed in water and vegetation, consequently, no dose can be attributed
to these pathways.
137
-------
References
(7.1) BAKER, S.I. Environmental monitoring report for calendar
year 1973. National Accelerator Laboratory, P.O. Box 500,
Batavia, 111. 60510 (March 15, 1974).
(7.2) HULL, A.P. and O.A. ASH. 1973 environmental monitoring
report, BNL 18625, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton,
N.Y. 11973 (March 1974).
(7.3) WALLACE, R. Annual environmental monitoring report for
calendar year 1973, UCID - 3651, Lawrence Berkeley Labo-
ratory, Berkeley, Calif. 94720 (March 26, 1974).
(7.4) BUSICK, D.D. and E. HOLT. Annual environmental monitoring
report, January-December 1973, SLAC - 170, Stanford Linear
Accelerator Center, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif.
94305 (March 1974).
Table 7-2. Estimated population doses for 1973
from selected accelerators
Population dose
Facility (person-rem/y)
National Accelerator Laboratory < 1
Brookhaven National Laboratory 0.42
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory 28-65
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center 3.9
138
-------
Chapter 8 - Radiopharmaceuticals
Discussed elsewhere in this report are the doses to man resulting
from the use of radiopharmaceuticals in medical therapy. The uses of
radiopharmaceuticals in therapy result in the major doses to man;
however, additional doses to man result from the manufacture of radio-
pharmaceuticals and from the discharge of radiopharmaceuticals to the
environment from patient and medical facilities.
A search of available literature unfortunately has not revealed any
references concerning the release of radiopharmaceuticals to the environment
during manufacturing processes, thus the effect of manufacture of these
materials cannot be determined.
A study (8.1) which was concerned with the release to the environment
via the nuclear medicine pathway was conducted in 1975. The study
reviewed previous studies in this area and made estimates of whole body
population doses in Houston, Tex., from five medical institutions. The
calculated whole body doses due to the releases of 133Xe was 0.083
person-rem, and the corresponding skin dose was 0.2 person-rem.
In order to estimate the total contribution to population doses
from the discharges of radiopharmaceuticals, each medical facility would
require evaluation because of the unique ways each might contribute to
environmental contamination. Thus, it is concluded that little inference
can be made at this time about the dose and contamination that results
from the discharge from radiopharmaceuticals from patients and medical
facilities.
Reference
(8.1) GESELL, T. F., H. M. PRICHARD, E. M. DAVIS, 0. L. PIRTLE, and
W. DIPIETRO. Nuclear Medicine Environmental Discharge Measurement,
Final Report, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
School of Public Health (June 1975).
139
-------
Chapter 9 - Medical Radiation
The responsibility for controlling medical exposure to radiation 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 adminis-
trating the Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act (Public Law 90-
602). 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 (9.1).
A model State Radiation Control Act containing suggested model
regulations for control of radiation was published by the Council of
State Governments with the cooperation and assistance of interested
Federal Agencies (9.2). This publication assisted the States in making
regulations compatible with each other and with the Federal Government.
Fifty states, the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico now have laws for the regulation of ionizing radiation (9.3).
The use of radiation by the medical profession is recognized as the
largest manmade component of radiation dose to the United States popu-
lation. This includes medical diagnostic radiology, clinical nuclear
medicine, radiation therapy and occupational exposure of medical and
paramedical personnel. However, the main contributor of the total dose
from medical exposures is diagnostic x radiation, the contribution from
dental radiation, radiopharmaceuticals, and radiation therapy being far
lower. Medical diagnostic radiology accounts for at least 90 percent of
the total manmade radiation dose to which the U.S. population is exposed.
This is at least 35 percent of the total radiation dose from all sources
(including natural radioactivity) (9.4,9.5).
The Bureau of Radiological Health (BRH) in cooperation with the
National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) conducted an X-ray Exposure
Study (XES) in 1964 (9.6) and another in 1970 (9.7). A dose model was
developed for use in calculating the gonad dose from the XES data, and a
141
-------
report presently being prepared will illustrate changes in gonad and
genetically significant dose from diagnostic x-ray procedures between
1964 and 1970.
In an interim report released last year by BRH (9.8) t selected
highlights are presented to show some of the changes in medical x-ray
use patterns between 1964 and 1970 (tables 9-1 and 9-2 and figure 9-1).
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.
2) There was a 22 percent increase in the number of x-ray
examinations performed from 174 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 number of thoracic examinations performed with two
or more x-ray films increased from 31 percent in 1964 to
47 percent in 1970. This was largely due 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.
7) The estimated mean skin exposure per film for posterior-
anterior (PA) and anterior-posterior views of the abdomen
increased from 480 mR in 1964 to 620 mR in 1970.
8) There was no significant change in the estimated mean
exposure per film for radiographic PA chest examination.
It was approximately 28 mR in 1964 and 27 mR in 1970.
9) There was a 20 percent decrease in the mean skin exposure
per dental film from 1140 mR in 1964 to 910 mR in 1970.
This decrease is indicative of a greater use of faster
films.
The GSD was estimated to be 20 ± 8 mrad at the 95 percent confi-
lence level in 1970, compared with 17 ± 12 mrad in 1964 which does not
:onstitute a statistically significant change (9.8).
142
-------
Table 9-1. Estimated mean gonadal dose per examination from radiographic examinations
by type of examination and by sex, United States, 1964 and 1970 (9.8)
.p.
CO
Dose (mrad)
Type of examination
Skull
Cervical spine
Chest
Radiographic
Photof 1 uorographi c
Thoracic spine
Shoulder
Upper gastrointestinal
series
Barium enema
Cholecystography or
cholangiogram
Intravenous or retrograde
pyelogram
Abdomen, KUB, flat plate
Lumbar spine
Pelvis
Hip
Upper extremities
Lower extremities
Other abdominal exams
All others
1964
Mean
*»
-
1
-
46
-
22
119
-
535
63
108
443
718
-
38
296
1
Male
S.E.
-
-
55
-
11
47
-
172
21
39
101
244
-
11
178
1
Female
Mean
-
5
5
17
-
122
470
71
437
248
507
119
196
1
-
213
4
S.E.
-
1
1
8
-
19
48
15 '
43
41
66
20
31
1
-
43
2
Male
Mean
-
-
2
3
-
1
175
-
207
97
218
364
600
-
15
857
*
1970
S.E.
_
-
-
2
3
-
1
70
-
66
42
98
76
135
-
7
332
Female
Mean
-
1
3
11
-
171
903
78
588
221
721
210
124
-
-
524
6
S.E.
-
-
-
2
-
15
111
17
47
25
50
34
15
-
-
84
4
= less than 0.5
S.E. = standard error
-------
Table 9-2. Estimated radiographic examination rates by type of examination and sex, United States,
1964 and 1970 (9.8)
Estimated rate per 1000 persons
Type of examination
1964
Male
Skull
Cervical spine
Chest
Radiographic
Photof 1 uorographi c
Thoracic spine
Shoulder
Upper gastrointestinal
series
Barium enema
Cholecystography or
cholangiogram
Intravenous or retrograde
pyelogram
Abdomen, KUB, flat plate
Lumbar spine
Pelvis
Hip
Upper extremities
Lower extremities
Other abdominal exams
All other
Rate
17
11
181
84
8
8
31
14
12
20 ^
22
22
12
5
49
70
8
23
S.E.
6
3
20
13
5
5
19
6
6
7
7
7
6
4
11
13
3
8
Female
Rate
15
16
167
89
6
8
29
18
18
15
10
21
11
7
34
40
10
15
S.E.
6
6
18
13
4
46
8
7
7
6
5
7
6
5
9
10
5
6
1970
Male
Rate
25
17
253
45
7
10
34
16
16
20
17
31
8
4
57
64
6
27
S.E.
4
4
13
6
2
3
5
4
4
4
4
5
3
2
6
7
4
8
Female
Rate
17
15
234
58
8
10
34
19
24
19
17
24
13
10
41
57
12
22
,S.E.
3
3
12
6
2
3
5
4
4
4
3
4
3
3
5
6
5
7
S.E. = standard error
-------
1970 GSD = 20 millirads
Radiographic
Examinations
not listed
Barium
Enema
Other Abdominal
Exams
Intravenous or
Retrograde
Pyelogram
Abdomen, KUB,
Flat Plate
Lumbar
Spi ne
Figure 9-1. Estimated mean annual genetically significant dose contribution
from radiographic examinations by type of examination, United States,
1970 ' (9.8)
145
-------
Radiopharmaceuticals are used in the diagnosis and, in some cases,
the treatment of disease. Their use has increased fivefold from 1960 to
1970, and it has been estimated that an increase of sevenfold may be
experienced from 1970 to 1980. If this trend continues, and there are
no technical changes, it is estimated that the whole-body dose to the
United States population in 1980 from the use of radiopharmaceuticals
will be 3.3 million person-rem (9.5).
The Bureau of Radiological Health has released information on a
pilot study that compares current nuclear medicine data obtained from
six hospitals with survey data collected from the same institutions in
previous years (9.9). Although these data cannot be considered to be
representative of nuclear medicine practice in all U.S. hospitals, the
study notes that several significant trends are apparent (9.10).
1) There has been an increase in nuclear medicine procedures
of more than 17 percent per year over the past 3 years.
V
2) There has been a decrease in the use of iodine-131 but
the use of technetium-99m has increased from 7 percent
in 1966 to 82 percent in the current study.
3) The proportion of patients under the age of 30 on which
nuclear medicine procedures are performed is 21 percent.
The contribution of nuclear medicine to the total medical radiation
exposure to the population may be greater than previously estimated if
the trends indicated in the pilot study are a reflection of the practice
of nuclear medicine throughout the United States.
X rays were used by dermatologists for the treatment of skin
lesions from 1930 to 1960. Since that time, there has been a great
reduction in their use for this purpose and in the kilovoltage and beam
penetration when used. However, there is not much dose information
available on the treatment of nonmalignant diseases with radiation.
In the treatment of cancer, tumor cells are given destructive
radiation doses and the exposure to healthy cells in the adjacent area
is not considered an undesirable side effect. It has been estimated
that radiation therapy used in the treatment of cancer contributes an
additional 5 mrem to the genetically significant dose annually (9.4).
Swntnzpy
Medical radiation is concerned with the doses from diagnostic x radi-
ation, therapeutic x radiation, dental radiation and radiopharmaceuticals.
The main contributor to this total dose is from diagnostic x rays. The
doses from the other applications are significantly lower. The gene-
tically significant dose from the use of diagnostic x rays in the United
States in 1970 was 20 millirads. The anticipated whole body population
dose from the use of radiopharmaceuticals will be 3.3 x 106 person-rem
in 1980.
146
-------
References
(9.1) The annual report on the administration of the radiation control
for health and safety act of 1968 (Public Law 90-602), covering
1970. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. (1971).
(9.2) PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE. An evaluation of the compatibility and
uniformity of State regulations for the control of radiation,
PHS/BRH/ORO 70-7, Washington, D.C. (1975).
(9.3) PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE. Report of State and local radiological
health programs, FDA-76-8017, Washington, D.C. (1975).
(9.4) U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. Estimates of ionizing
radiation doses in the United States, 1960-2000, ORP/CSD 72-1,
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs,
Washington, D.C. 20460 (August 1972).
(9.5) NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES - NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL. The
effects on populations of exposure to low levels of ionizing
radiation. Report of the Advisory Committee on the Biological
Effects of Ionizing Radiation. NAS/NRC, Washington, D.C. 20006
(November 1972).
(9.6) PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE. Population dose from x rays, U.S. 1964,
PHS Publication No. 2001, Washington, D.C. (1969).
(9.7) PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE. Population exposure to x rays, U.S. 1970,
FDA 73-8047, Washington, D.C. (1973).
(9.8) PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE. Pre-release report: x ray exposure study,
revised estimates of 1964 and 1970 genetically significant dose,
FDA/Bureau of Radiological Health, Rockville, Md. 20852 (1975).
(9.9) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH EDUCATION AND WELFARE, BUREAU OF RADIO-
LOGICAL HEALTH, BRH Bulletin, Vol. IX, No. 19, Bureau of Radio-
logical Health, Rockville, Md. 20852 (October 6, 1975).
(9.10) MCINTYRE, A. Personal communication. Division of Radioactive
Materials and Nuclear Medicine, Bureau of Radiological Health,
Rockville, Md. (1975).
147
-------
Chapter 10 - Occupational and Industrial Radiation
There is surprisingly little data published in the scientific
literature on the contributions of occupational exposure to the popu-
lation dose from ionizing radiation. However, there is a large quantity
of data available in various dosimetry programs throughout the United
States (10.1,10.2). In general, personnel monitoring programs are
designed to check that exposures of radiation workers do not exceed some
specified level. In addition, it is usual to ignore doses below a
minimum detectable level or below the "investigation level" set for
monitoring purposes.
The Federal Radiation Council in May 1960 recommended Radiation
Protection Guides for the use by Federal agencies in their radiation
protection activities (10.3). These guides (table 10-1) are being
reviewed by the Environmental Protection Agency, and it is anticipated
that EPA recommended updated guidance will be formally submitted to the
President for approval sometime in 1977.
Close adherence to the FRC Guides and the recommendations of such
bodies as the International Commission on Radiological Protection, the
International Labour Organization, the World Health Organization, and
the International Atomic Energy Agency insures that most workers receive
very low exposures and that very few workers exceed the recommended
permissible doses. The maximum permissible annual dose to the whole
body is about 50 times that received from natural radiation sources.
In 1970, the average dose rate from occupational sources was
reported as 0.8 mrem/y (10.4).
149
-------
Table 10-1. Radiation protection guides (10.3)
Type of exposure
Condition
Dose (rem)
01
o
Radiation worker:
(a) Whole body, head and trunk, active
blood forming organs, gonads, or lens
of eye
(b) Skin of whole body and thyroid
(c) Hands and forearms, feet and ankles
(d) Bone
(e) Other organs
Population:
(a) Individual
(b) Average
{Accumulated dose
(13 weeks
/Year
\13 weeks
| Year
113 weeks
Body burden
Year
13 weeks
Year
30 year
5 times the number of
years beyond age 18.
3.
30.
10.
75.
25.
0.1 microgram of radium-226
or its biological equivalent.
15.
5.
0.5 (whole body).
5 (gonads).
-------
One of the problems encountered in dealing with occupational
radiation is in defining "radiation worker." It can mean all of the
staff in certain establishments, or in other work places, only those
personnel whose exposures might exceed three-tenths of the annual dose
limit. In 1966, the ICRP introduced the concept of a single category of
occupational exposure, the radiation exposure received by any worker in
the course of his work. The UN Scientific Committee reported that a
representative figure for most developed countries is 1-2 workers per
thousand population, with the U.S. 1970 figure being somewhat higher.
The UN data for the United States reports 1.33/thousand workers engaged
in medical work, 0.87 in dental, 1.55 in research and education, with a
total of 3.7/thousand (10.2). There are no data reported in categories
termed atomic energy and industrial, and it is not clear whether the
medical category includes diagnosis, therapy, chiropractic, or veter-
inary. Klement et al. reported 3.76 radiation workers in the United
States by "using reported numbers of workers and judicious estimates in
non-reported areas" (10.1). The categories of workers and total annual
occupational whole body doses (1969-1970) are reported in table 10-2.
There is no requirement for uniformity in collecting and reporting
occupational exposures. There are considerable variations in the
terminology used by reporting agencies. For example, results of personnel
monitoring data are reported as.exposures (R), absorbed doses (rad) or
dose equivalents (rem). The dose equivalent is used frequently because
this is the term used by the International Commission on Radiological
Protection (ICRP) to express the maximum permissible doses for occupa-
tional exposure.
With external monitoring, there is generally little data available
about the actual doses received by the various tissues; workers gener-
ally wear one dosimeterdoses to those parts distant from the moni-
toring device will generally be lower. The value reported is assumed to
be the value of the device. "For various reasons, therefore, it is
probable that the direct use of data about individual doses from personnel
monitoring programmes will tend to overestimate population doses for the
various tissues of interest, but, at the low levels currently involved,
this is not considered to be a serious problem." (10.2).
Data on licensed installations in the United States in 1968 reported
in a UN report indicate that in general the great majority of exposures
reported through a film badge monitoring of a sample of workers using
radioactive materials are in the lower dose ranges. However, the data
indicate a large percentage of waste disposal workers with exposures in
high dose ranges, and this was also true to a lesser extent of indus-
trial radiographers (table 10-3) (10.2).
Accidents and overexposures are rare in most types of radiation
work today. However, there are some exceptionsmost reported injuries
occur in industrial radiography and users of x-ray crystallographic
machines. There is a problem in reducing the inhalation exposures of
miners (particularly in underground uranium mining). This form of
radiation exposure at sufficiently high levels has been shown to be
associated with an increased incidence of lung cancer.
151
-------
Table 10-2. Total annual whole-body dose by reporting group and occupation - 1969 to 1970 (10.1)
01
ro
Activity
Healing arts
Medical x ray
Dental x ray
Radionuclides
Veterinary x- ray
Medical radium
Industrial practice
Radionuclides
Radiography
Reactors
Waste disposal
Fuel processing
Packaging & transport
Radar
Special weapons
Academic
Not specified
Major processing
Air
Force
736
(405)
(264)
(53)
(14)
394
(229)
(165)
100
96
65
164
State
Army Navy Licensee
366 477 3,403
269 10,402 1,784
(1,490)
(294)
73
766
499
226
37
AEC
Licensee AEC PHS
5,260 65
2,891
(2,139)
(752)
497
96
2,177
22
903
1,024 20,361
495
Non- Nonreporting Licensee
federal State AEC
104,136
(62,253)
(21,403)
(20,480)
819 5,022
-------
CJl
oo
.Table 10-3. Percentage of workers in recorded dose ranges in licensed installations3
(United States, 1968) (10.2)
Dose range
. (rad/y)
0 - 0.5
0.5 - 1
1 - 5
>5
Academi c
96.5
2.1
1.4
0
Medical3
87.9
7.1
4.7
0.2
Major
processor
88.0
4.0
6.8
1.2
Industry
general
91.7
3.4
4.7
0.2
Industry
radiography
75.0
10.5
14.0
0.5
Waste
disposal
46.2
6.6
33.8
13.3
Fuel
processing
and
reprocessing
86.1
5.4
7.4
0.1
Power
and
research
reactors
95.7
2.4
1.7
0.2
All
others
94. a
3.4
1.8
0.2
3The data in this table apply to facilities licensed under the United States Atomic Energy Act, and do not
include those workers exposed to machine-produced radiation exclusively.
-------
There has been some difficulty in the luminizing industry in pre-
venting excessive uptake of tritium by the workers. Tritium and, to
some extent, promethium have replaced radium as the light activator in
phosphors. In general, the occupational exposure to radium is higher
than to tritium (and radium offers no advantage as compared to tritium).
The occupational exposure to promethium-147 cannot be measured with any
degree of accuracyno data are available and none can be expected to be
available because of the extreme difficulties in measuring the body
burden of the workers. The chemical properties of radium and promethium
are similar. Table 10-4 summarizes risks from processing 1 curie of
radium, promethium-147 and tritium. Table 10-5 contains average occu-
pational exposure to tritium as measured by Moghissi et al. and Krejci
(10. 5).
Data on occupational exposure records from 13 U.S. operating nuclear
power plants for the period 1970-72 supports the view that maintenance
activities account for the major portion of in-plant exposure (10.6).
Tables 10-6 and 10-7 present total employee exposure data in person-rem.
These tables are given an average person-rem/person-year based on the
number of people employed at the plant either as utility staff or as
contractors. For all the plants listed in table 10-7, the average
exposure for workers is 1.16 rem/year. The PWR exposures average 1.08
rem per year; for the BWR's, the average exposure is 1.23 rem per year.
Data categorized by job function are shown in table 10-8.
A program for the reporting of certain occupational radiation
exposure information on monitored individuals to a central repository
was approved by the AEC in 1968 and arrangements were made for the
establishment of a central, computerized repository at the Union Carbide
Computing Technology Center, Oak Ridge, Tenn. Information was required
from four categories of AEC licensees (operating nuclear power facil-
ities; industrial radiographers; fuel processors, fabricators and repro-
cessors; commercial processors and distributors of specified quantities
of byproduct materials) and from AEC contractors exempt from licensing.
Certain information obtai.ned from personnel overexposure reports submitted
by all licensees and contractors would also be maintained in the repository.
As of December 31, 1973, these 6 types of reports had provided exposure
information on a total of approximately 150,000 monitored persons (summar-
ized and published in WASH-1350-R1 through R6) (10.7).
With the division of the AEC into the two agencies, the Energy
Research and Development Administration (ERDA) and the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC), in January 1975, each of the agencies
assumed responsibility for collecting occupational radiation exposure
information relating to its own activities.
154
-------
Table 10-4. Total risk from various radionuclides
per Ci processed (10.5)
Occupation
Risk per Ci processed (person-mrem)
Radium Tritium Promethium-147
Dial Painting
Bone
Whole body
Lung
200,000
600,000
125,000
Assembly
Whole body 69,000
\
Storage
Whole body Unknown
Environmental (user's dose from wristwatches)
Whole body (65-70)106
NA
9.1
NA
4.5*
12*
30
Unknown
5*
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
5000
*Estimated values with limited usefulness
Table 10-5. Average occupational exposure to tritium
according to Moghissi, et al. do.5)
Location of
plants
U.S.A.
Switzerland
Switzerland
Switzerland
Switzerland
Switzerland
Switzerland
Switzerland
Average
activity
in paint
(mCi/g)
150
150
227
102
164
262
354
453
Processed
tritium
( Ci/person-yr)
104.3
193.4
64.9
140.8
222.2
67.6
79.6
65.3
Average
urine
activity
(uCi/1)
20.4
2.57
3.43
7.64
13.1
4.86
9.57
14.2
Risk
(person-
mrem/Ci)
19.1
1.3
5.3
5.4
5.9
7.2
12.0
21.7
Reference
Moghissi et al.
Krejci
Krejci
Krejci
Krejci
Krejci
Krejci
Krejci
Average
9.1
155
-------
Table 10-6. Summary of In-plant occupational exposures 110. 6)
Plant Year
Glnna 1970
1971
1972
H.B. Robinson 1971
1972
Conn. 1969
Yankee 1970
1971
1972
San Onofre 196*9
1970
1971
1972
Point Beach 1971
1972
Indian 1969
Point 1970
1971
1972
Yankee 1969
Rowe 1970
1972
Mine Mile 1970
Point 1971
1972
Montlcello 1971
1972
Quad Cities 1972
Millstone 1971
1972
Humboldt 1969
Bay 1970
1971
1972
PllKrlm 1972
Big Rock 1969
1970
1971
1972
Oyster 1970
Creek 1971
1972
Dresden 1969
1970
1971
1972
normal Operations
Surveillance
and
inspection Maintenance
(pexaon-rem) (person-tea)
93.97 113.62
69.69 248.17
61.01 493.84
7 3
42 36
23.295 7.14
16.03 28.68
24.59 19.20
89.88 53.86
15.7 4.5
40.4 11.6
10.92 11.53
19.63 11.55
50.11 38.68
50.610 19.445
93.160 37.705
91.480 23.410
63.810 19.865
10.74 4.13
59.5 31.5
57.0 21.0
50.5 18
Total
peraon-rem/
peraon-rem Mtf(e)-h
207.59 8.971x10-5
317.86 1.107x10-"
554.85 2.157x10-"
10 3. 892xlO-6
78 1.101x10-5
178.8 4.603x10'=
184.8 4.968x10-5
173.0 3.932x10-5
155.6 3.445x10-5
41.76 1.518x10-=
49.45 1.426x10-5
30.435 8.832x10-6
44.71 2.331x10-5
43.79 1.444x10-5
143.74 4.433x10-5
20.2 1.378x10-=
52.0 1.399x10-5
22.45
31.18 8.321xlO-»
88.79 2.685x10-5
70.055 1.803x10-"
130.865 3.033x10-"
114.890 3.313x10""
83.675 2.216x10-"
14.87 1.672x10-=
91.0 2.389x10-"
79.0 2.333x10-"
68.5 1.796x10-"
Shutdown operations
Special
maintenance
Routine Special Shutdown ' and
refueling refueling maintenance inspection
(person-rem) (person-rem) (person-rem) (person-rem)
82.06 7.00 23.35
115.31 14.19 347.82
354
139
343.0 200.9
213.9 19.2
144.2 99.0
20.17 113.25
39.21 102.52
5.5
8.1
33.49
17.49
74.23 92.80 339.95
.73
15 10 84
13.5 6.5 54.5
23.5 9.0 74.0
Total
person-rem/
person-rem MH(e)-h
112.41 3.914x10-5
477.32 1.856x10-"
354 1. 378x10-"
139 1.963x10-5
543.9 1.462x10-"
232.1 5.276x10-5
243.2 5.385xlO-5
Total
133.45 4.400x10-5
141.73
5.5 3.752x10-6
8.1 2.179xlO-6
17.49 4.668x10-6
506.98 1.533x10-"
98.820 2.543x10-"
83.630 1.938x10-"
178.060 5.134x10-"
172.220
.73 8.210x10-'
109 2.862x10-"
74.5 2.200x10-"
106.5 2.792x10-"
Plant total
person-rem person-rem/ person-rem/
MW(e)-h MH(e)-h
207.59 8.971x10-5
430.27 1.498x10-" 1.89
1.032.17 4.013x10-"
1.670.03
364.0 1.417X10-11
217.0 3.064x10-5 .72
581.0
176.8 4.603x10-'
738.7 1.986x10-"
405.1 9.208x10-5 -89
398.8 8.830x10-5
1.719.4
41.76 1.518x10-=
155.48 4.860x10-5
49.45 1.426x10-5 .36
256.94 8.665X10-5
503.63
30.435 8.832x10-"
578.864 1.748x10-" .79
609.3
235.55 1.304x10-*
1,342.38 3.525X10-3
662.00 4.906x10-" 5.46
742.05 5.953x10-"
2.981.98
235.604 1.944x10-"
255.248 1.994x10-"
90.3 5.941xlO-5 1.57
255.25 3.699x10-"
83674
8902 Average 1.29
44.71 2.331x10-5
177.24 5.844x10-5 .35
285.47 8.805x10-5
507.42
25.7 1.753x10-5
60.1 1.617x10-5 .145
85.8
55.94 1.354x10-= .119
48.67 1.299x10-5
595.77 1.801x10-" .80
168.875 4.348x10-"
214.495 4.972x10""
292.950 8.447x10-" 5.28
253.895 6.776x10-"
930.215
15.60 1.754x10-= .153
117.60 2.788x10-"
200.0 5.251x10-"
143.5 4.238x10-" 3.66
175.0 4.588x10-"
636.1
63.38 1.764x10-5
240.50 6.054xlO-s 0.64
582.34 1.293x10-"
886.22
286.4 3.280x10-"
143.2 5.341x10-5
715.2 1.540x10-" 0.92
728. 7.500x10-5
1.872.8
Total 5,633 Average 0.856
01
-------
Table 10-7. Average employee dose (10.6)
Plant
Year
Total plant doses
(person-rem)
Number of personnel Dose Average
at plant (person-rem/person/y) (person-rem/person/plant-y)
Ginna
H. B. Robinson
Conn. Yankee
San Onofre
Nine Mile Point
Monticello
70
71
72
71
72
69
70
71
72
69
70
71
72
70
71
72
71
72
207.59
430.27
1032.17
364.0
217.0
176.8
738.7
405.1
398.8
41.76
155.48
49.45
256.94
44.71
177.24
285.47
25.7
60.1
170
340
667
283
245
98
601
265
267
123
251
121
326
821
1006
392
63
102
1.868
1.266
1.547
1.286 |
.886 ;
1.804
1.229
1.110
1.087
.340
.619
.409
. .788
.054
.176
.728
.408
.589
.
>
'
1
f
*
[
'
)
f
Quad Cities
Millstone
Humboldt
72
71
72
69
70
71
72
55.94
48.67
595.77
168.875
214.495
292.950
253.895
173
244
232
115
115
140
129
1.558
1.086
1.308
,323
.199
.568
.468
.865
.093
.538
.319
.499
.323
1.383
1.849
1.968
-------
Table 10-7. Average employee dose (contd)
Total plant doses
Number of personnel Dose Average
en
oo
Plant
Pilgrim
Point Beach
Oyster Creek
Dresden
Big Rock
Indian Point
Yankee Rowe
Year
72
71
72
70
71
72
69
70
71
72
69
70
71
72
69
70
71
72
69
70
71
72
(person-rem)
15.60
30.435
578.864
63.38
240.50
582.34
286.4
143.2
715.2
728.
117.60
200.0
143.5
175.0
235.55
1342.38
662.00
742.05
235.6
255.2
90.3
255.2
at plant
57
79
365
95
249
339
S182
a202
a
225
a239
a223
a262
Q
a272
a336
a519
S1864
a
a!280
a!497
b509
s698
501
b769
(person-rem/person/y) (person-rem/person/plant-y)
.274 .274
i.-JS }
.667 }
.966 > 1.117
1.718 J
1.574
.709
3.179
3.046
2.127
Average for workers = 1 . 16 rem
.527
.763
.528
.521
c o c
JO J
-J \J*J
.454
.720
.517
.496
.463
.366
.180
.332
C/. -7
J*\ /
.335
Number of personnel with >100 mrem/month.
Total personnel involved at the plant. May include some with <100 mrem/quarter.
-------
Table 10-8.
Breakdown of in-plant exposures (10.6)
(person-rem)
Facility
Year
Contractors
Health physics
Maintenance**
Total for
permanent
plant personnel
fc
Dresden
Humboldt
Nijie Mile Point
t
Monticello
Quad Cities
Oyster Creek
San Onofre
1969
1970
1971
1972
1969
1970
1971
1972
1970
1971
1972
1971
1972
1972
1970
1971
1972
1969
1970
1971
1972
70.7
15.3
399.3
360.
12.455
37.030
64.935
57.565
16.84
63.32
27.90
1.7
1.2
33.49
11.2
92.2
167.67
4.81
58.72
2.63
116.81
22.6
14.5
48.3
42.7
11.519
11.685
16.750
15.715
2.74
10.22
13 . 08
Not given
Not given
Not given
5.82
11.35
28.18
4.24
8.33
4.75
12.09
62.841
71.635
80.010
73.450
28.68
32.09
156.38
4.5
11. 6
46
26.85
81.03
229.06
25.07
75.63
32.33
103.18
215.7
127.9
315.9
368.
156.42
177.465
228.015
196.33
27.87
131.71
257.57
24
58.9
22.45
52.18
148.30
414.67
36.95
96.76
46.82
140.13
-------
Table 10-8 (Contd)
Facility
Ginna
Yankee Rowe
H.B. Robinson
Conn. Yankee
Point Beach
Average
Year
1970
1971
1972
1969
1970
1971
1972
1971
1972
1969
1970
1971
1972
1971
1972
Contractors
15.30
108.43
'278.36
74.74
91.75
18.71
142.14
351.
137
34.8
201.6*
96.4*
47.0*
0
480.717
102.6
Health physics
Not given
Not given
38.24
Not given
Not given
Not given
Not given
Not given
Not given
15
37
31
28
5.86
14.103
18.2
Maintenance**
113.62
248.17
493.84
64 . 034
67 . 088
24.960
46.300
3
36
33
27.5
92.8
79.8
7.14
35.976
82.3
Total for
permanent
plant personnel
192.29
321.84
753.81
160.864
163.498
71.59
113.11
364.
217.
142.0
326.2*
309.7*
252.8*
30.735
98.147
214.5
*Does not include special operations of which there were 200.9 person-rem in 1970, 19.2 person-rem in 1971,
and 79.0 person-rem in 1972.
**Maintenance includes the normal maintenance performed during operation in addition to that performed during
refueling.
-------
For calendar year 1973, annual statistical exposure data was reported
on 221,979 monitored individuals (AEC offices, contractors, and licensees).
Of this total, 212,044 (95.5 percent) received annual whole body external
exposures of less than 1 rem; 362 or 0.2 percent exceeded 5 rems (table 10-9)
(10.8). Table 10-10 indicates the distribution of whole body exposures
in 1974 by 85,097 monitored individuals for 4 categories of NRC licensees
(10.7).
In 1974, 10 CFR 20.407 was amended to require covered licensees to
submit an annual statistical summary of exposure and data rather than
identification and exposure data for individuals whose annual exposure
exceeded applicable quarterly limits. The new reporting system was
adopted to give a much better indication of the actual distribution of
whole body exposures. Table 10-11 gives a comparative analysis of AEC
contractor and licensee annual exposure experience for 1968-1974
(10.7,10.8).
A brief summary of annual exposures at nuclear power facilities for
a 6-year period is given in table 10-12. There have been no reported
annual whole body exposures exceeding 12 rems during the 6 years.
"Occupational Radiation Exposure at Light'Water Cooled Power Reactors
1969-1974," NUREG-75/032, contains a more detailed analysis of this
information.
Section 20.405 of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, requires
all licensees to report personnel exposures in excess of applicable
limits to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (formerly AEC). During
the 4-year period 1971-1974, a total of 288 reports of personnel over-
exposures to external radiation were received. About 35 percent of this
number occurred during industrial radiography operations; about 28
percent occurred during testing, maintenance, and/or repair activities
at licensed nuclear power facilities; about 13 percent occurred during
the processing and production of byproduct material. Of the remaining
24 percent, some 11 percent occurred at medical facilities and about 13
percent occurred at research, educational and other facilities (table
10-13) (10.9).
The overexposures ranged from a 1.26 rem whole body exposure to a
30,000 rem extremity exposure. Only 48 (17 percent) of the total number
of overexposures to external radiation exceeded the applicable annual
limits and were required to be reported to the Commission within 72
hours (10 CFR 20.403). During the period of 1971-1973, there were six
comparable exposures reported by AEC contractors (10.9).
The Atomic Energy Commission also operates a U.S. Transuranium
Registry (USTR) which collects information from AEC contractors and
licensees regarding employees potentially exposed to transuranium
elements. Participation in this registry, which was established in
1968, is completely voluntary on an individual basis and includes
release of medical and health physics data. Permission is also obtained
on a voluntary basis for post mortem analyses of tissues of interest.
161
-------
Table 10-9. Summary of annual whole body exposures, 1973 (10,8)
Name
AEC offices
Contractors
Licensees
Total
Total
Number of exposures recorded (rent)
monitored Q_,
1,686
a!52,431
67,862
221,979
1,680
149,523
60,841
212,044
1-2
3
1,947
3,600
5,550
2-3
3
726
2,050
2,779
3-4
0
172
654
826
4-5
0
60
358
418
5-6
0
2
177
179
6-7
0
1
95
96
7-8
0
0
49
49
8-9
0
0
25
25
9-10
0
0
9
9
10+
0
0
4
4
Includes some 62,000 visitors,
CD
IN)
Table 10-10. Distribution of annual whole body exposures
for covered licensees, 1974 (10. 7)
Covered
Exposure Ranges (Rems)
Categories
of NRC Total No.
Licensees Monitored
Power
Reactors
Industrial
Radiography
Fuel Processing
& Fabrication
Manufacturing &
Distribution
TOTALS
62,044
3,792
10,921
3.340
85,097
Less Than
Measurable
40,140
3,849
6,304
1.513
51 ,806
Less Than 0.10
0.10 0.25
9,471
1,740
1,801
748
13,760
3,317
939
959
504
5,719
0.25
0.50
2,230
635
772
144
3,781
0.50
0.75
1,238
424
316
84
2,062
0.75
1.00
929
323
146
69
1,467
1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5
2,522 1,378 471 226
547 209 74 22
275 126 83 60
125 59 46 17
3,469 1,772 674 325
5-6 6-7
86 30
17 5
23 12
21 7
147 54
7-8 8-9
6 0
2 3
16 12
1 2
25 17
9-10 10-11 11-12 >12
0 0
0 1
16 0
0 0
16 1
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
n
-------
Table 10-11. Annual whole body exposures, 1968-1974 (.10.7,10.8)
Calendar
year
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
AEC
Total
monitored
106,958
102,918
96,661
94,319
87,845
90,311
contractor
Percent of
exposures
< 2 rems
98.4
98.4
98.4
98.7
98.7
98.9
employees
Number & (percent)
of exposures
over 5 rems
8
6
8
13
10
3
(0.007)
(0.006)
(0.008)
(0.014)
(0.011)
(0.003)
Total
monitored
36,836
31,176
36,164
36,311
44,690
67,862
85,097
Covered licensee
Percent of
exposures
< 2 rems
97.2
96.5
96.1
95.3
95.7
95.0
96.4
personnel
Number & (percent)
of exposures
over 5 rems
178 (0.5)
151 (0.5)
226 (0.6)
238 (0.7)
230 (0.5)
359 (0.5)
-------
Table 10-12. Summary of annual exposures at nuclear
power facilities, 1974 (10.7)
Year Number of operating Total number Percent of exposures
facilities monitored <2 rems
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
14
20
23
30
41
53
6,332
12,042
14,516
21,288
44,795
62,044
66.6
83.6
90.1
94.3
94.0
96.5
The principal criterion used by USTR to determine inclusion of an indiv-
idual in the Registry is that the employer provide a routine surveil-
lance program because of a reasonable likelihood that exposure could
occur. Most of the USTR activities have been confined to Hanford, Los
Alamos, and Rocky Flats (10.10).
Most of the data on occupational exposure to plutonium comes from
medical followup data on military personnel who worked with plutonium in
1944-45 at Los Alamos. Hempelmann et al. reported that "to date, none
of the medical findings in the group can be attributed definitely to
internally deposited plutonium" (10.11). The selected cases shown in
table 10-14 represent systemic plutonium burdens ranging from 0.13 to
0.42 Ci, which correspond to annual bone doses of approximately 2 to 6
rad (10.10).
Occupational and industrial radiation is concerned with the exposure
of individuals to a radiation environment during their occupations. The
occupations considered are medicine, radiography, nuclear reactors,
waste disposal, feed processing, packaging and transport, radar and
special weapons. There are approximately 3.76 radiation workers per
1,000 people in the United States, and in 1970 the average annual indi-
vidual occupational dose was 0.8 mrem/y.
The data indicate that the largest occupational exposures generally
are received by waste disposal workers and, to a lesser extent, by
industrial radiographers.
164
-------
Table 10-13. Summary of overexposures to external sources reported to NRG by licensees,
1971-1974 (10.9)
Licensed activity reporting overexposures
Calendar
year
1971
1972
1973
1974
Total
Part of
body
whole body
skin
extremity
whole body
skin
extremity
t
whole body
skin
extremity
whole body
skin
extremity
whole body
skin
extremity
Total number of
overexposures
45
2
13
47
1
12
58
2
5
95
1
7
245
6
37
Industrial
radiography
22 (49%)
5 (38%)
18 (38%)
4
23 (40%)
1 (20%)
29 (31%)
92 (38%)
10 (27%)
Power
reactor
2 (4%)
16 (34%)
19 (33%)
43 (44%)
80 (33%)
Manufacturing
and distribution Medical
5 (11%) 13 (29%)
5 (38%)
3 (6%)
6 (50%)
3 (5%) 9 (15%)
2 (40%)
8 (8%) 8 (8%)
6 (86%) 1 (14%)
19 (8%) 30 (12%)
19 (51%) 1
Other
3 (7%)
2 (100%)
3 (24%)
10 (21%)
1 (100%)
2 (17%)
A (7%)
2 (100%)
2 (40%)
7 (7%)
1 (100%)
24 (10%)
6 (100%)
7 (19%)
-------
Table 10-14. Plutonium systemic body burden estimates for
selected Manhattan project plutonium workers at three
different times? (10,10)
239-240pu (nci)
1953
30-60
80
80
80
60
60
40
1962
10
130
140
140
70
80
90
1972
210
420
260
180
140
150
130
CASE CODE
1
3
4
5
6
7
17
"PERSONS WITH MORE THAN 120 nCi 239-240pu SYSTEMIC
BURDEN IN 1972.
The highest occupational personnel exposures from U.S. operating
nuclear power plants for the period 1970-72 have resulted from in-plant
maintenance activities. The average individual occupational exposure
from PWR's was 1.08 rem/y and from BWR's, it was 1.23 rem/y with a total
average of 1.16 rem/y. Table 10-15 provides a statistical breakdown of
the whole body occupational population exposures that have occurred in
nuclear facilities in 1973, the last year for which comparative data are
available.
166
-------
Table 10-15. Whole body occupational population
exposures, 1973
Total Percent Exposures greater
Group personnel exposures than 5 rems
monitored < 2 rems Number Percent
AEC contractor
employees
AEC license
personnel
90,311
67,862
98.9
95.0
3 O.UUJ
359 0.5
References
(10.1) KLEMENT, A. W., C. R. MILLER, R. P. MINX, and B. SHLEIEN.
Estimates of ionizing radiation doses in the United States, 1960-
2000. EPA, Office of Radiation Programs, Division of Criteria
and Standards, Washington, D^C. "20460 (August 1972).
(10.2) UNITED NATIONS SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON THE EFFECTS OF ATOMIC
RADIATION. Report to the General Assembly. Ionizing Radiation:
Levels and Effects. Volume IrLevels. United Nations, New York
(1972).
(10.3) FEDERAL RADIATION COUNCIL. Radiation protection guidance for
federal agencies. Federal Register. (May 18, 1960).
(10.4) ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF IONIZING RADIATION
The effects on populations of exposures to low levels of ionizing
radiation. Division of Medical Sciences, National Academy of
Sciences, National Research Council, Washington, D.C. 20006
(November 1972).
(10.5) MOGHISSI, A. A. and M. W. CARTER. Public health implications of
radioluminous materials, FDA 76-8001. DHEW, PHS, FDA, Bureau of
Radiological Health, Rockville, Md 20852 (July 1975).
(10.6) U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION. Additional testimony of Mr. Morton I.
Goldman on behalf of the Consolidated Utility Group, Part I Rule-
making Hearing on Effluents from Light Water Cooled Nuclear Power
Reactors (November 9, 1973).
(10.7) U.S. NUCL£AR REGULATORY COMMISSION. Seventh annual occupational
radiation exposure report, 1974, NUREG-75/.108. U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commissioft, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation,
Division of Technical Review, Washington, D.C. (November 1975).
167
-------
(10.8) U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION. Sixth annual report of the opera-
tion of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission's centralized ionizing
radiation exposure records and reports system. Prepared by
Assistant Director for Workmen's Compensation, Division of Opera-
tional Safety, Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D.C.
(September 1974).
(10.9) Personal communication to Floyd L. Gal pin, Director, Environmental
Analysis Division, Office of Radiation Programs, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., from W. G. McDonald, Director,
Office of Management Information & Program Control, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. (February 17, 1976).
(10.10) ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. Proceedings of public hearing:
Plutonium and the other transuranium elements, Vol. 1, December 10-
11, 1974. Criteria and Standards Division, Office of Radiation
Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460.
(10.11) HEMPELMANN, L. H., W. H. LANGHAM and others. Manhattan project
Plutonium workers: a twenty-seven year follow-up study of selected
cases. Health Physics, Vol. 25, pp.461-479 (November 1973).
168
-------
Chapter 11 - Consumer Products
Television sets
The Bureau of Radiological Health (BRH) in the Department of Health,
Education and Welfare has the responsibility for administrating, the
Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act. One of the purposes of
this act is to protect the U.S. population from unnecessary exposure to
radiation from electronic products.
High-voltage rectifier, shunt regulator tubes and the picture tube
are the sources of x rays in color television sets. Today the trend is
toward solid state circuitry which means that the picture tube will be
the only x-ray emitter remaining in television sets within a few years.
In 1968, BRH conducted a survey of color television sets in the
Metropolitan Washington, D.C. area. The average rate of emission of
ionizing radiation 5 cm from the front face of the sets was found to be
0.043 mR/h (11.1).
If it is assumed that the viewing habits of the population in the
survey is typical of the entire U.S. population, that the population
exposed will be close to 100 percent in 1980, and that the trend continues
in reduction of emission rate from television sets (11.2), a reduction
of average emission rate to 0.025 mR/h at 5 cm by 1980 is predicted
(11.3). However, according to UNSCEAR," under conditions of normal
operation and proper servicing, the x-ray emission from recently-built
colour television receivers is negligible" (11.4).
Timepieces containing radioactive material
In recent years, the use of radium in the dial painting industry
for the illumination of timepieces has been replaced by tritium and, to
169
-------
a lesser extent, promethium-147. The sales of radium-activated watches
were estimated to be about 3 million in 1968 in contrast to only a few
sales of these watches in the past three years. However, radium continues
to be used in clocks (table 11-1).
This trend is reflected in a report published by the Bureau of
Radiological Health in July 1975 in which the estimates of population
dose for 1973 were 3600 person-rem from 24 million tritium-activated
timepieces versus 2500 person-rem from 8.4 million radium-activated
timepieces (table 11-2). There was no reliable data on promethium-
activated timepieces. These estimates were derived from the average
activities per timepiece5 mCi of tritium for 24 million timepieces and
0.5 yCi of radium for 8.4 million timepieces (11.5). If radium had been
used in all of the timepieces, the dose would have been significantly
higher. Therefore, with the decrease in the use of radium and the
increase in the use of tritium and promethium, the population dose from
timepieces should decrease in the future.
Summary
The radiation dose from consumer products is concerned with the
doses from television sets and timepieces containing radioactivity. It
has been estimated that the average dose rate 5 cm from a color tele-
vision screen was 0.043 mR/h in 1968 and will be 0.025 mR/h in 1980.
The dose rate from a recently-built color set is negligible. It has
also been estimated that the population dose from timepieces is 3,600
person-rem/y for timepieces with tritium-activated dials and 2,500
person-rem/y for timepieces with radium-activated dials.
There are known to exist a number of other consumer products which
have been identified as potential radiation risks. One of the histor-
ically oldest of these is dinnerware contaminated with natural radio-
active materials. Of more recent publicity have been false teeth and
eyeglasses. Quantitative information on radioactivity in these items
and subsequent exposure levels have been difficult to document. However,
efforts will be continued to find such information for inclusion in
subsequent editions of this report.
170
-------
Table 11-1. Luminous timepieces distributed in United States (11.5)
Wristwatches
a) Tritium activated
Made in U.S.
Imported
b) Promethium activated
Made in U.S.
Imported
c) Radium-226 activated
Clocks
a) Tritium activated
Made in U.S.
Imported
b) Promethium- 147 activated
Made in U.S.
Imported
c) Radium-226 activated
1971
2,710,000
5,670,000
Negligible
620,000
Negligible
18,000
500,000
Negligible
1,470,000
2,800,000
1972
2,330,000
6,540,000
Negligible
770,000
Negligible
10,000
190,000
Negligible
970,000
2,800,000
1973
1,800,000
3,60"0,000
Negligible
900,000
Negligible
20,000
240,000
Negligible
1,370,000
2,800,000
Table 11-2. Evaluation of population dose in the United States
to radioluminous timepieces (11.5)
Number of timepieces
Average activity of timepiece
Total activity
Population dose (person-rem/year)
Tritium
24 x 106
5 mCi
120 kCi
3600
Promethium-147
6 x 106
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Radium
8.4 x 106
0.5 yCi
4.2 Ci.
2500
171
-------
References
(11.1) PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE, NATIONAL CENTER FOR RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH.
A survey of x-radiation from color television sets in the
Washington, D.C. Metropolitan area. TSB No. 3. Available
from Bureau of Radiological Health, Rockville, Md. 20852
(March 1968).
(11.2) ELECTRONIC INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION. Evaluation of television
contribution to the annual genetically significant radiation
dose of the population. Radiol. Health Data Rep. 12:363-369
(July 1971).
(11.3) U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. Estimates of ionizing
radiation doses in the United States, 1960-2000, ORP/CSD 72-1,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation
Programs, Washington, D.C. 20460 (August 1972).
(11.4) UNITED NATIONS. Report of the United Nations Scientific
Committee on the effects of Atomic Radiation. Vol. 1, New
York (1972).
(11.5) PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE. Public health implications of radio-
luminous materials, FDA 76-8001. Bureau of Radiological Health,
Rockville, Md. 20852 (July 1975).
172
-------
Chapter 12 - Health Effects of Ionizing Radiation Exposure
In order to appropriately place the reported ionizing radiation
exposures in this report in the proper perspective, some relatedness to
potential health effects is desirable. To allow some interpretation in
this respect, this section will present a generic evaluation of the
various health effect risk factors that can be applied.
No attempt has been made to translate individual exposure values to
health effects for several reasons. First, it is recognized that the
degree of uncertainty with the doses is not consistent. Although it is
intended to report doses based on actual data whenever possible, many of
the values still represent estimates with potentially large variability.
A second constraint on applying effects conversion factors to the exposure
data is the lack of definitive information relative to the population
parameters, especially where exposures are reported for specific facil-
ities. This is important as there are differences in sensitivity; for
example, children are more radiosensitive than adults. Therefore, while
one might apply such risk conversion factors to large population groups
where some generalizations as to population parameters are applicable,
it is increasingly invalid to apply such generalizations as the popu-
lation under consideration becomes smaller and more specific. Besides
these two prime reasons, others, such as the lack of specific risk
conversion factors for many organs and the lack of information on the
exact pathway of exposure in many cases, have led to the decision to
handle health effects in this general manner, at least for this first
report.
In carrying out its activities of environmental radiation assessment
and standards setting, it was necessary, in spite of the uncertainties,
for EPA to establish a policy for the general way in which it would
relate radiation dose and effects. Such a policy was devised and issued
on March 3, 1975, and is included here in its entirety.
173
-------
"EPA Policy Statement on
Relationship Between Radiation Dose and Effect
"The actions taken by the Environmental Protection Agency to protect
public health and the environment require that the impacts of contam-
inants in the environment or released into the environment be prudently
examined. When these contaminants are radioactive materials and ion-
izing radiation, the most important impacts are those ultimately affecting
human health. Therefore, the Agency believes that the public interest
is best served by the Agency providing its best scientific estimates of
such impacts in terms.of potential ill health.
"To provide such estimates, it is necessary that judgments be made
which relate the presence of ionizing radiation or radioactive materials
in the environment, i.e., potential exposure, to the intake of radio-
active materials in the body, to the absorption of energy from the
ionizing radiation of different qualities, and finally to the potential
effects on human health. In many situations, the levels of ionizing
radiation or radioactive materials in the environment may be measured
directly, but the determination of resultant radiation doses to humans
and their susceptible tissues is generally derived from pathway and
metabolic models and calculations of energy absorbed. It is also
necessary to formulate the relationships between radiation dose and
effects; relationships derived primarily from human epidemiological
studies but also reflective of extensive research utilizing animals
and other biological systems.
"Although much is known about radiation dose-effect relationships
at high levels of dose, a great deal of uncertainty exists when high
level dose-effect relationships are extrapolated to lower levels of
dose, particularly when given at low dose rates. These uncertainties in
the relationships between dose received and effect produced are recog-
nized to relate, among many factors, to differences in quality and type
of radiation, total dose, dose distribution, dose rate, and radiosen-
'sitivity, including repair mechanisms, sex, variations in age, organ,
and state of health. These factors involve complex mechanisms of inter-
action among biological, chemical, and physical systems, the study of
which is part of the continuing endeavor to acquire new scientific
knowledge.
"Because of these many uncertainties, it is necessary to rely upon
the considered judgments of experts on the biological effects of ion-
izing radiation. These findings are'well-documented in publications by
the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radi-
ation (UNSCEAR), the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), the Inter-
national Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), and the National
Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), and have been
used by the Agency in formulating a policy on relationship between
radiation dose and effect.
174
-------
"It is the present policy of the Environmental Protection Agency to
assume a linear, nonthreshold relationship between the magnitude of the
radiation dose received at environmental levels of exposure and ill
health produced as a means to estimate the potential health impact of
actions it takes in developing radiation protection as expressed in
criteria, guides, or standards. This policy is adopted in conformity
with the generally accepted assumption that there is some potential ill
health attributable to any exposure to ionizing radiation and that the
magnitude of this potential ill health is directly proportional to the
magnitude of the dose received.
"In adopting this general policy, the Agency recognizes the inherent
uncertainties that exist in estimating health impact at the low levels
of exposure and exposure rates expected to be present in the environment
due to human activities, and that at these levels, the actual health
impact will not be distinguishable from natural occurrences of ill
health, either statistically or in the forms of ill health present.
Also, at these very low levels, meaningful epidemiological studies to
prove or disprove this relationship are difficult, if not practically
impossible, to conduct. However, whenever new information is forth-
coming, this policy will be reviewed and updated as necessary.
"It is to be emphasized that this policy has been established for
the purpose of estimating the potential human health impact of Agency
actions regarding radiation protection, and that such estimates do not
necessarily constitute identifiable health consequences. Further, the
Agency implementation of this policy to estimate potential human health
effects presupposes the premise that, for the same dose, potential
radiation effects in other constituents of the biosphere will be no
greater. It is generally accepted that such constituents are no more
radiosensitive than humans. The Agency believes the policy to be a
prudent one.
"In estimating potential health effects, it is important to recognize
that the exposures to be usually experienced by the public will be
annual doses that are small fractions of natural background radiation to
at most a few times this level. Within the United States, the natural
background radiation dose equivalent varies geographically between 40 to
300 mrem per year. Over such a relatively small range of dose, any
deviations from dose-effect linearity would not be expected to signif-
icantly affect actions taken by the Agency, unless a dose-effect thresh-
old exists.
"While the utilization of a linear, nonthreshold relationship is
useful as a generally applicable policy for assessment of radiation
effects, it is also EPA's policy in specific situations to utilize the
best available detailed scientific knowledge in estimating health impact
when such Information is available for specific types of radiation,
conditions of exposure, and recipients of the exposure. In such situations,
estimates may or may not be based on the assumptions of linearity and a
175
-------
nonthreshold dose. In any case, the assumptions will be stated expli-
citly in any EPA radiation protection actions.
"The linear hypothesis by itself precludes the development of
acceptable levels of risk based solely on health considerations. There-
fore, in establishing radiation protection positions, the Agency will
weigh not only the health impact, but also social, economic, and other
considerations associated with the activities addressed."
Within the context of this overall policy statement, EPA uses
primarily the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences
Committee on Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) (12.1) as
expressed in their November 1972 report to arrive at dose to health risk
conversion factors. Besides the concept of linearity expressed in the
policy statement, it is further assumed that health effects that have
been observed at dose rates much greater than those represented in this
report are indicative of radiation effects at lower dose rates. Any
difference in biological recovery from precarcinogenic radiation damage
due to low dose rates is neglected in the BEIR health risk estimates.
On the other hand, in some cases, the BEIR risk estimates are based on
relatively large doses where cell killing may have influenced the proba-
bility of delayed effects being observed and hence, underestimate the
effects at low doses. The dose-risk conversion factors that EPA has
adopted from the BEIR report are neither upper nor lower estimates of
risk, but those that are considered "best .estimates."
One must caution against interpreting the product of dose and risk
conversion factor as a prediction of actual number of effects to be
sought out in the real world. The dose conversion factors (from concen-
tration to dose) and the risk conversion factors (dose to effects) are
really representative of a range of values.
For instance, the BEIR Committee has made a determination, based on
their evaluation of the increase of the ambient cancer mortality per
rem, that ranges from 100 to 450 deaths per million persons per rem
during a 30-year followup period. Even though the following discussion
will indicate average values that EPA has chosen to use for various dose
to health effect conversions, it can be seen that they are likely to be
revised as new information becomes available.
Dose-risk Conversion Factors
1. Total body dose-risk
The BEIR Report calculates the excess cancer mortality risk (in-
cluding leukemia mortality) from whole body radiation by two quite
176
-------
different models. The absolute risk model1 predicts about 100 cancer
deaths per 106 person-rem while the relative risk model2 predicts
between 160 and 450. An average cancer mortality of 300 annually per
106 person-rem would seem to be an appropriate mean for the relative
risk model. The average of the absolute and relative risk models is
200, which is close to the estimates of cancer mortality risk listed as
"most likely" by the committee. Cancer mortality is not a measure of
the total cancer risk, which the committee states is about twice that of
the yearly mortality.
Estimated cancer risk from total body irradiation
Cancer mortality = 200 deaths per year for 106 person-rem annual
exposure. Total cancers = 400 cancers per year for 1 person-rem annual
exposure to the total body.
2. Gonadal dose-risk
The range of the risk estimates for genetic effects set forth in
the BEIR report is so large that such risks are better considered on a
relative basis for different exposure situations than in terms of absolute
numbers. The range of uncertainty for the "doubling dose" (the dose
required to double the natural mutation rate) is 10-fold (from 20 to 200
rad); and because of the additional uncertainties in (1) the fraction of
presently observed genetic effects due to background radiation, and (2)
the fraction of deleterious mutations eliminated per generation, the
overall uncertainty is about a factor of 25. The total number of indiv-
iduals showing genetic effects such as cbngential anomalies, consti-
tutional and degenerative diseases, etc., is estimated at somewhere
between 1,800 and 45,000 per generation per rad of continuous exposure
at equilibrium; i-e., 60-1,500 per year if a 30-year generation time is
assumed. This equilibrium level of effect will not be reached until
after many generations of exposure; the risk to the first generation
postexposure is about a factor of 5 less.
The authors of the BEIR report reject the notion of "genetic death"
as a measure of radiation risk. Their risk analysis is in terms of
early and delayed effects observed post partum and not early abortion,
risk estimates are based on the reported number of excess
cancer deaths per rad that had been observed in exposed population
groups* e.g., Hiroshima, Nagasaki, etc.
2Relative risk estimates are based on the percentage increase per
rem in the ambient cancer mortality.
177
-------
still births or reduced fecundity. Because of the seriousness of some
of the genetic effects considered here, e.g., mongolism, the emotional
and financial stress would be somewhat similar to death impact. Indeed,
10 percent of the effects described are those which lead directly to
infant or childhood mortality (fetal mortality is excluded). For some
purposes, this class of genetic effects are considered on the same basis
as mortality.
Estimated serious genetic risk from continuous gonadal irradiation
Total risk = 200 effects per year for 106 person-rem annual exposure.
3. Lung dose-risk
Due to the insufficient data for the younger age groups, estimates
of lung cancer mortality in the BEIR report are only for that fraction
of the population of age 10 or more. For the risk estimate made below,
it is assumed that the fractional abundance for lung tumors is the same
for those irradiated at less than 10 years of age as it is for those
over 10. On an absolute risk basis, lung cancer mortality in a popu-
lation would be about 18 deaths per annum per 106 persons irradiated
continuously at a dose rate of 1 rem per year. This is a minimum value.
The BEIR report states that the absolute risk estimates may be too low
because observation times for exposed persons are still relatively short
compared to the long latency period for lung cancer. Furthermore, lung
cancer risks calculated on the basis of the geometric mean of the relative
risk is 3.4 times larger than the estimated absolute risk. Therefore,
an average of mean relative and absolute risk estimates is given in the
following dose-risk estimate.
Estimated lung cancer risk from continuous lung irradiation
Excess lung cancer mortality = 40 deaths per year for 106 person-
rem annual exposure.
4. Skin dose-risk
Epidemiological evidence of any real risk from such insults at the
dose levels considered here is nonexistent. This is not to say that the
linear dose-effect assumption does not hold for skin cancer but rather
that the BEIR Committee found from the extensive evidence they examined
that the "numerical estimates of risk at low dose levels would not seem
to be warranted."
178
-------
5. Thyroid dose-risk
Iodine is concentrated in the human thyroid. Therefore, the insult
from radioiodines is important only for the thyroid. The dose to other
organs is over an order of magnitude less. Two health effects follow
high level exposures of thyroid tissue to ionizing radiation: benign
neoplasms and thyroid cancer. Though the former is a more common radi-
ation effect, only the risk from cancer is considered here.
While children are particularly sensitive to radiation damage to
their thyroid glands, thyroid cancer is not usually a deadly disease for
persons in younger age groups but mortality approaches 25 percent in
persons well past middle age. It is not presently known if the radiation-
induced cancers which are more frequent for persons irradiated early in
life will follow the same patterns of late mortality.
The BEIR report provides risk estimates only for morbidity (not
mortality) and only for persons under 9 years of age, i.e., 1.6-9.3
cancers per 106 person-rem years. From the Hiroshima data and other
studies it would appear that, for persons over 20 years old, the radi-
ation-induced thyroid cancer incidence is lower, but not zero as assumed
before recent followup data became available.
Since information in the BEIR report is not sufficient in itself to
estimate the cancer incidence from continuous exposure, tentative risk
estimates for this study are also based on information in other refer-
ences (12.2-12.5) as well as the mean of the BEIR Committee's various
estimates of incidence per rem. Infants and fetuses are, of course, the
most sensitive group. By weighting the age group sensitivity and using
population percentages for the age groups, a population age-weighted
value was obtained.
Estimated thyroid cancer risk
Thyroid cancer risk = excess thyroid cancers per 106 rems to the
thyroid.
It is unlikely that the mortality from thyroid cancer would be more
than 10-25 percent of its rate of incidence. As for other radiation
effects, a true measure of the risk from thyroid cancers could be life
shortening, but insufficient mortality data prevents such an approach.
References
(12.1) NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES - NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL.
The effects on populations of exposure to low levels of
ionizing radiation, Report of the Advisory Committee on
the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR), U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. (1972).
179
-------
(12.2) INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE ON RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION. The evalu-
ation of risks from radiation, ICRP publication no. 8, Pergamon
Press, New York 11101 (1966).
(12.3) UNITED NATIONS SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON THE EFFECTS OF ATOMIC
RADIATION. "Ionizing Radiation: Levels and Effects," Vol. II,
United Nations Publication E.72.IX.18, New York (1972).
(12.4) U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. Environmental Radiation
Protection for Nuclear Power Operations, Proposed Standards
[40 CFR 190], Supplementary Information. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460 (October 1976).
(12.5) U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. Environmental Analysis
of the Uranium Fuel Cycle, Part III - Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing,
EPA-520/9-73-003-D, Office of Radiation Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460 (October 1973).
180
-------
Chapter 13 - Nonionizing Electromagnetic Radiation
As its name implies, nonionizing electromagnetic radiation does not
produce ionized particles when it is absorbed by the material of interest.
Absorbed energy is converted to electronic excitation and to molecular
vibration and rotation. The ionization potentials of the principal
components of living tissue (water, and atomic oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen,
and carbon) are between 11 and 15 electron volts (eV). Michaelson (13.1)
considers 12 eV to be the lower limit for ionization in biological systems,
while noting that some weak hydrogen bonds in macromolecules may have lower
ionization potentials. As a point of reference, an ultraviolet wavelength
of 180 nanometers corresponds to an energy t»f about 7 eV. Thus, for prac-
tical purposes, the nonionizing part of the electromagnetic spectrum
includes the ultraviolet, visible, infrared, radiofrequency and lower
frequency regions including power distribution frequencies at 50 and 60 Hz.
Because of the increase in the number and power of sources in the
radiofrequency range since 1940, recent interest has focused on nonion-
izing electromagnetic radiation at frequencies below 300 GHz or photon
energies less than 1.24 x 10~3 eV. The voluntary American National
Standards Institute (ANSI) (IS.2) exposure standard and the OSHA (13.3)
occupational exposure standard cover the frequency range from 10 MHz to
100 GHz; the Bureau of Radiological Health (BRH) (13.4) microwave oven
performance standard and the proposed BRH (13.5) diathermy performance
standard are for frequencies from 890 MHz to 6 GHz and 890 MHz to 22.25
GHz, respectively. Though there may be limited exposure problems
associated with the use of lasers and some noncoherent light sources, at
the present time we are not aware of manmade sources of nonionizing
electromagnetic radiation operating above 300 GHz which would produce
significant environmental levels. Therefore, this discussion is restricted
to frequencies below 300 GHz.
181
-------
Description of data base
There are two types of data base which are pertinent to analyzing
environmental levels of nonionizing electromagnetic radiation at frequen-
cies below 300 GHz. The first of these consists of computer files of
source location and characteristics that permit the calculation of expected
exposure levels if an appropriate model is available. This type of
analysis has proved more successful in analyzing levels from individual
sources than in predicting levels from the superposition of fields from
many sources. The second type of data base consists of reports on
studies of specific sources and the ambient environment. Until recently,
only limited data have been gathered on the general ambient environment.
Sources of data
The Office of Telecommunications Policy (OTP) assigns operating
frequencies to government users of the electromagnetic spectrum and the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) assigns frequencies to non-
government users. The most extensive inventory of sources of nonion-
izing radiation in the United States is maintained at the Electromag-
netic Compatibility Analysis Center (ECAC), Department of Defense,
Annapolis, Md. The ECAC Environmental File contains records of government
and nongovernment communications-electronics equipment. Information in
the records includes the operational characteristics of the equipment,
its location, and administrative information, such as who is operating
it. There are four subfiles of the Environmental File. These are the
E-file, the Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC) File, the
FCC file, and the American Telephone and Telegraph Company (AT&T) file.
The subfiles are described in the following paragraphs.
E-file
The E-file is primarily composed of deployed military equipment
records. The major sources of data for this file are the FAA, the
Department of Defense, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
and the U.S. Coast Guard. ECAC personnel review the incoming data,
resolve discrepancies, and perform maintenance of the file daily. The
utility of this file is dependent on the currency and accuracy of the
information supplied by the various agencies.
IMC file
IRAC is an advisory committee consisting of government agency
representatives to the Office of Telecommunications Policy. The IRAC
file is maintained for the Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee
by the Office of Telecommunications, Department of Commerce. The file
includes frequency authorizations of all U.S. government agencies and is
the only authoritative record of the total U.S. government use of the
radiospectrum, including the equipment used.
182
-------
AT&T file
\
AT&T file information is obtained directly from the American Tele-
phone and Telegraph Company and represents their common carrier micro-
wave equipments. The file contains data on locations, frequency, lati-
tude, longitude, power fixed antenna bearing, and antenna gain for each
transmitter. The data are maintained by AT&T and supplied to ECAC
semiannually.
FCC file
ECAC gets data for the FCC file from the National Technical Infor-
mation Service on a semiannual basis. The data supplied represent all
FCC-licensed entries except in the Amateur Bands, Citizens Band, Air-
craft and Ship Services. Equipment information in this file is limited.
The source information in the ECAC data base is supplemented or
complimented by source listings from the FCC for specific broadcast
services such as FM radio or VHF television. Other complimentary sources
of information include the Broadcasting Yearbooks published by Broadcasting
Publications, Washington, D.C. and the Television Factbook published by
Television Digest, Inc., Washington, D.C.
There are a large number of low power devices which are not included
in the source inventories cited above; at least 459,000 land mobile
records are not included. It is estimated that about 2,000,000 microwave
ovens will be in service by the end of 1975 (13.6). In addition, there
are large but undetermined numbers of noncommunications, industrial, and
medical sources such as industrial dryers and medical diathermy units.
These low power or high power contained sources are not expected to make
a large contribution to ambient environmental levels, especially at
distances far from the source. Control of exposure to radiation from
these sources is currently accomplished by limiting power (FCC), through
product performance standards (BRH), and occupational exposure standards
(OSHA).
Specific source environments
In February 1975, the Electromagnetic Radiation Management Advisory
Council (ERMAC), an advisory group to OTP in the area of "side effects"
from use of the spectrum hosted a Work Session on "Measurement of Envir-
onmental Levels of Nonionizing Electromagnetic Radiation." Some of the
information in this and the following section is condensed from the Work
Session summary report (13.7). A large amount of data has been gathered
on the radiation levels produced by specific sources. The FCC is con-
ducting a limited study of fields encountered in the immediate environs
of radar and television facilities. The National Bureau of Standards is
surveying emissions from Federal Aviation Administration systems including
183
-------
localizer arrays, air traffic control radars, and weather radars in
aircraft. The National Institutes of Occupational Safety and Health is
conducting measurements of both E and H fields in the industrial, scien-
tific, and medical (ISM) bands between 13 and 40 MHz as part of its
industrial safety and research effort and in support of OSHA.
In the Department of Defense, measurements programs are carried out
by the Air Force, Army, and Navy. The responsibility for monitoring
radiofrequency radiation emissions from Air Force systems is shared by
the Air Force Communications Service, Air Force Radiological Health
Laboratory, base level support groups, and for some special problems,
the USAF School of Aerospace Medicine. All operational Air Force emitters
are periodically surveyed to maintain appropriate exclusion or controlled
areas for personnel safety and to minimize risks from interaction with
electro-explosive devices and fuels. Recent surveys have been conducted
to establish "low- and high-risk" exclusion radii for cardiac pacemaker
interference.
The responsibility for monitoring Army systems rests with the Laser
Microwave Division, U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency. Compre-
hensive surveys at all Army installations and activities are conducted
every 3 years. This effort is currently averaging over 100 reports per
year, representing 25-35 installations. In addition, all radiofrequency
devices in the Army's research, development, testing and evaluation
cycle are evaluated.
The Navy has a measurement program which is part of the Shipboard
Electromagnetic Compatibility Improvement Program. Class evaluations
are being performed to reveal the electromagnetic status of naval vessels.
Several analytical models have been developed to predict fields on ships
and the results compared to measurements. Measurements have also been
made at Navy shore activities.
The Environmental Protection Agency is conducting studies to determine
the need for setting standards for exposure to environmental nonionizing
radiation. EPA has measured the radiation levels from a number of
specific source types! These include satellite communication systems,
acquisition and tracking radars, air traffic control radars, weather
radars, and UHF-television transmitters. An analytical model for pre-
dicting levels from sources using parabolic antennas has been developed
and compared to other methods and measured data. Electric field profiles
for 345-, 500-, and 765-kV overhead power transmission lines have been
determined.
Ambient environmental levels
For the purposes of this discussion, we will broadly define the
general ambient electromagnetic environment to be the electromagnetic
field in the frequency band from 0 to 300 GHz. It results from the
superposition of the field from all sources contributing to the field at
184
-------
the point of interest. In practice this means all sources which produce
fields greater than the noise level of the detection system will con-
tribute to the measured level. The actual level may be high or low
depending on the distribution of contributing sources, but in most
cases, should be relatively low when compared to levels in the main beam
of powerful sources. Actual measurements will, for the most part, cover
more restricted frequency ranges than that considered in the definition.
Two types of instruments are used, those which preserve frequency infor-
mation and those which integrate across a band of frequencies. Only a
limited amount of data is available on general ambient environments. A
great deal of data has been collected in so-called noise studies such as
that of Toler (13.8). However, these studies ignore intentional signals
and, while they are useful in determining signal amplitude requirements
for communication and serve as an indicator of the increase in the use
of the electromagnetic spectrum, they are not useful in estimating total
exposure.
In 1969, White Electromagnetics and the Public Health Service
measured peak power densities in the Washington, D.C. area (13.9^13.10).
Radiation levels were monitored over the frequency range from 20 Hz to
10 GHz at 10 sites within a 25-mile radius-of the city. The highest
levels measured (approximately 10 yW/cm2) originated primarily from AM
broadcast towers and airport radar installations. The accuracy of the
measurements was estimated to be within 15 decibels (dB) in the first
paper and at ± 10 dB in the second (dB is a logarithmic unit of power
and 10 dB corresponds to one order of magnitude, i.e., a factor of 10).
A similar study over a more restricted frequency range was conducted in
Las Vegas in 1970 by Envall, Peterson, and Stewart (13.11). The maximum
observed power density over the frequency range from 54 to 220 MHz was
0.8 yW/cm2. Ruggera (13.12) studied the changes in electric field
strengths within a hospital before and after the installation of a new
transmitting tower 3,200 feet from the hospital. Measurements were made
in the frequency range from 54 MHz to 656 MHz and the maximum total rms
field strength was about 2 V/m which corresponds to a far-field power
density of about 1 yW/cm2- A preliminary analysis of the results of a
recent study of environmental levels in Boston, Mass., for the frequency
range from 54 to 890 MHz indicates that ambient levels were less than
2 yW/cm2, and for most sites were in the range from 0.1 to 0.5 yW/cm2
(13.13). Whether the range of values reported in these studies is
typical of urban environments remains to be determined.
Status of data base analysis
Several analyses have been made of the source data and specific
source environments. However, the data base for ambient environmental
levels is still too small to permit analyses.
Analysis of source data
A partial inventory of microwave towers, broadcasting transmitters,
and fixed radars based on the ECAC data base was jointly published by
185
-------
the Department of Defense and the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare (13.14). The data base has also been used to establish the
distribution of transmitters within a 50-mile radius of Washington, D.C.
(13.15), the number and location of continuous wave sources with effective
radiated powers above 1 megawatt and the number and location of pulsed
sources with effective radiated peak powers greater than 1 gigawatt
(13.16)* and the number of sources capable of producing 0.01, 0.1, 1,
and 10 mW/cm2 at various distances from the source (13.17). These studies
give inventories of source capabilities but overestimates the potential
for exposure since the main beam of many of these sources is not accessible
to people.
Source distributions for a number of other cities have been provided
to the Environmental Protection Agency as an aid to selecting sites for
making environmental measurements. These distributions were provided as
computer printouts and not as published reports.
In 1971, there were 223 continuous wave emitters with an average
effective radiated power (ERP) of one megawatt or greater and 375 pulsed
emitters with a peak ERP of 10 gigawatts or greater. A one megawatt ERP
source can produce a power density of 1 mW/cm2 at a distance of 0.05
mile and 1 uW/cm2 at about 2 miles from the source. Figures 13-1 through
13-4 show the number of sources capable of producing 0.01, 0.1, 1, and
10 mW/cm2 at various intervals from the source. The upper and lower
limits of the range correspond to the occupational exposure standards in
the United States and U.S.S.R., respectively (13.17). The analysis is
based on 56,000 transmitters within the United States having an average
ERP greater than 10 watts. The source inventory includes deployed
military equipment, frequency authorizations of all U.S. Government
agencies, common carrier microwave equipment, and all FCC-licensed
equipment except that in the Amateur Bands, Citizens Band, Aircraft and
Ships Services and 459,000 land mobile records. From the figures, it
can be seen that there are 2,366, 5,099, 16,174, and 30,102 sources
which are capable of producing 10, 1, 0.1, 0.01 mW/cm2, respectively, at
distances between 32 and 100 meters in the main lobe of the radiated
beam.
Source distribution data such as that available from ECAC has the
potential for use in model studies for predicting environmental levels.
However, extensive modeling studies should await the development and
application of measuring systems that can be used to verify the validity
of the models.
Analysis of specific sowcae environments
Techniques and instrumentation are available for the analysis of
the fields from most high power sources. Methods for calculating power
densities have been given by Mumford (13.19) and Tell (13.20). Analysis
186
-------
30,102
o:
LU
l-
16,174
10,000 I
LU
1,000 I
5 QC.
" UJ
CD
100
10
3.17
10
31.7
100
317 1,000 3,170 10,000 31,700
DISTANCE (meters)
Figure 13-1. Cumulative distribution of emitters in the United States
capable of producing an average power density equal to or greater
than 0.01 mW/cm2, as a function of distance (13.17313.18)
-------
10
3.17
16,174
31.7
100
317 1,000 3,170 10,000 31,700
DISTANCE (meters)
Fl9rnL,i?lS Curmjlative distribution of emitters in the United States
than 0 i°Lr°2UC1ng a" avera9e P°wer density equal to or greater
than 0.1 mW/cm2, as a function of distance (13.17,13 18)
-------
00
IO
CO
[]] 10,000
h-
K
LU
U.
o
o:
LU
OQ
1,000 I
100 I
10
45,513
3.17
16,153
5,099
2,366
1,654
565
84
15
10
31.7
100
317 1,000 3,170 IQOOO 31.700
DISTANCE (meters)
Figure 13-3. Cumulative distribution of emitters in the United States
capable of producing an average power density equal to or greater
than 1.0 mW/cm2, as a function of distance (13.17,23.18)
-------
21,379
v£>
O
IO,OOO
o:
LU
h-
I-
1,000.,
LU
U.
O
o:
LU
QQ
100'....
317 1,000 3,170 10,000 31,700
DISTANCE (meters)
Figure 13-4. Cumulative distribution of emitters in the United States
capable of producing an average power density equal to or greater
than 10 mW/cm2, as a function of distance (13.17,13.18)
-------
of broadcast radiation sources have been given by Tell (13.21)3 Tell
and Nelson (15.22), and Tell and Janes (13.23). Satellite communications
earth terminals have been analyzed by Hankin (13.24). Air traffic
control radars radiation levels have been measured by Tell and Nelson
(13.25) and airborne radars by Tell and Nelson (13.26) and Tell, Hankin,
and Janes (13.27). The overall impact of high power sources based upon
measurements and theoretical analyses has been discussed by Hankin, et
al. (13.28jl3.29). The highest power sources are satellite communcations
stations and large radars. Both of these source classes use very
directive antennas to achieve extremely high effective radiated powers.
Thus, the probability of being illuminated at any given time by the
primary beam of one of these sources is quite small. Many of these
sources are remotely located and almost all are surrounded by an exclusion
area which further limits the probability of exposure. Site surveys are
done for many sources to delineate operational procedures which will
prevent the inadvertent exposure of occupied areas. Some sources are
mechanically or electrically equipped to limit the pointing directions
of antennas or to reduce or shut off-power when occupied areas are
scanned. The rotational feature of many radars further reduces the
exposure levels. Nevertheless, a careful examination of the siting and
operation of high powered sources is required to assure they are installed
and operated safely. When factors such as number of sources, number of
persons potentially exposed, and general operating characteristics and
procedures are considered, broadcast transmitters are the most environ-
mentally significant category.
Analysis of ambient environments
As reviewed above, only minimal data are available on the general
ambient environment. Very preliminary data in the 55 MHz to 1 GHz
frequency range indicate that significant portions of the population are
exposed in the 0.1 to 1 yW/cm2 range. Whether this is typical of urban
exposures remains to be determined from studies now underway. Ambient
levels in urban areas are now being measured by EPA with a specially
instrumented van. The system has been described by Tell et al.
(13.30,13.31). The results of these measurements are to be combined
with population data to obtain estimates of population exposure.
Doses from the data base (population exposure estimates)
Because of the complexity of the transmitter environment, the
directional properties of antennas, and their operational character-
istics, it is difficult to develop any model predictions of exposure
fields. Furthermore, the absorption of energy is dependent on frequency,
polarization, wave form of the incident wave, and the dielectric constant,
size, and shape (radius of curvature) of the irradiated object, so that
dose is even more difficult to calculate than exposure. In the area of
nonionizing radiation exposure-rate (W/m2) and dose-rate (W/kg) are
probably more meaningful terms than the terms exposure and dose from the
ionizing radiation field since they are more closely related to thermo-
regulation.
191
-------
An attempt to calculate population exposure-rate to fields in the
AM broadcast band (0.54-1.6 MHz) has been made by Athey, Tell, and Janes
(13.32). Using a simple propagation model and 1970 census data they
calculated the number of people in the Baltimore-Washington area exposed
to field strengths over 0.5, 1, and 2 volts/meter. These calculations
were later extended to the entire United States (13.33). The results of
the calculation indicate that about 0.2 percent (about 440,000 people)
of the U.S. population might be exposed to fields greater than 2 volts/
meter (1 yW/cm2), but exposures greater than 10 volts/meter (26 yW/cm2)
are minimal in this frequency range. Similar calculations for UHF-TV
(470-890 MHz) indicate that perhaps 1 percent (about 2 million) of the
U.S. population might be exposed to fields greater than 2 V/m in this
frequency range (13.32). Preliminary measurements of environmental data
for a single metropolitan area suggests that these estimates may be of
the right order of magnitude.
Conclusions and recommendations
Research is now underway in this country and elsewhere to determine
and assess any possible biological effect of long-term exposure to low
levels of nonionizing radiation and to examine the validity of the
present occupational exposure standard of 10 mW/cm2. Also of concern
are the effects of high peak power, low average power, pulsed radiation
and the questions of the need for and how to develop standards for the
frequency range below 10 MHz where there is currently no exposure standard.
Four types of overlapping exposure can be distinguished: (1) exposure
in the general environment to intentional signals from the broadcast
services, radars, leakage radiation, and other sources, (2) occupational
exposures, (3) exposure to leakage radiation from consumer devices such
as microwave ovens, and (4) intentional medical exposures. Occupational
-exposure is subject to control by OSHA. Intentional medical exposure is
given at the discretion of a physician. It has been suggested that
medical devices conform to the same performance standard for leakage as
is now required for microwave ovens by the Food and Drug Administration.
There is no direct control of environmental exposures. Indirect controls
of environmental exposures are the limitation put on effective radiated
power by the FCC, their requirement for posting areas about domestic
satellite stations where levels exceed 10 yW/cm2, and the operational
procedures employed in using both government and nongovernment sources.
Also, any telecommunications system planned for purchase by the govern-
ment, as a condition for spectrum approval, is reviewed by IRAC-OTP to
assess among other factors whether levels in excess of 10 yW/cm2 will
occur and whether operational measures have been provided to insure that
people are not exposed above this level.
Two types of environmental exposure can be distinguished. One is
the relatively high radiation level from high power sources such as some
radars and satellite communications stations where the power density in
the useful beam can exceed that thought to be safe for human occupancy
even outside the boundary of the facility. The problems associated with
192
-------
such sources are recognized and instrumentation and techniques for
analyzing exposure from them are available. The other type of environ-
mental exposure arises from the superposition of the fields from many
sources at different frequencies. This exposure may be high or low
depending on the location and types of sources contributing to the
exposure and includes the specific source problem as a special case.
Very little data are available for interpretation at the present time.
The required data will become available within the next 18 to 24 months
as EPA carries out its ambient level monitoring program in a number of
urban areas thoughout the country. Nonionizing environmental radiation
data are needed to interpret the results of current biological effects
research and establish the predominant frequencies in the environment so
that future research for the validation of standards can be appropriately
directed.
Summary
In this report, nonionizing electromagnetic radiation is concerned
with the radiation intensity in the electromagnetic field resulting from
equipment operating in the frequency range up to 300 GHz. This includes
equipment generating ultraviolet light, visible light, infrared radiation,
radiofrequency and power distribution. Four categories of exposures can
be distinguished. These are (1) exposure to signals from broadcasting,
radar and power transmission, (2) occupational exposures, (3) exposure
to leakage radiation from consumer devices such as microwave ovens, and
(4) medical diathermy exposure.
The highest power sources are satellite communication stations and
large radio transmitters which generally are located in remote areas
and are surrounded by an exclusion area which limits the probability of
personnel exposure. The rotational aspect of radar equipment further
reduces the chances of prolonged exposure. After consideration of such
data as operating characteristics and population density, it appears
that broadcast transmitters are the most environmentally significant
equipment and that a major portion of the population is exposed to
intensities of 0.1 to 1 yW/cm2 from this source and 440,000 people in
the U.S. population (0.2 percent) are exposed to intensities greater
than 1 yW/cm2-
193
-------
References
(13.1) MICHAELSON, S. M. Human exposure to nonionizing radiant energy-
potential hazards and safety standards, Proc IEEE, 60:389-421
(1972).
(13.2) AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS INSTITUTE. Safety level of electro-
magnetic radiation with respect to personnel, Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New York, N.Y- (1974).
(IS.3) OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION. Nonionizing
radiation, Title 29 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1910.97
(1974).
(13.4) BUREAU OF RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH. Regulations for the adminis-
tration and enforcement of the radiation control for health
and safety act of 1968, USDHEW Rep. (FDA) 73-8015 (1972).
(13.5) Bureau of Radiological Health. Draft performance standard for
microwave diathermy products, USDHEW, Rockville, Md. (1975).
(13.6) BRITAIN, R. G. Director, Division of Compliance, Bureau of
Radiological Health, FDA. (private communication) (1974).
(13.7) OFFICE OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS POLICY. Summary of the ERMAC
work session on measurement of environmental levels of non-
ionizing radiation, DTP, Washington, D.C. (1975).
(13.8) TOLER, J. C. Electromagnetic environments in urban areas,
Session Proceedings: Environmental Exposure to Nonionizing
Radiation, EPA/ORP 73-2, pp. 19-45, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460 (May 1973).
(13.9) SMITH, S. W. and D. G. BROWN. Radiofrequency and microwave radi-
ation levels resulting from man-made sources in the Washington,
D.C. area, USDHEW Rep. (FDA) 72-8015, BRH, DEP 72-5 (1971).
(13.10) SMITH, S. W. and D. G. BROWN. Nonionizing radiation levels in
the Washington, D.C. area, IEEE Trans. EMC-15, 2-6 (1973).
(13.11) ENVALL, K. R., R. W. PETERSON, and H. F. STEWART. Measurement
of electromagnetic radiation levels from selected transmitters
operating between 54 and 220 MHz in the Las Vegas, Nevada, area,
USDHEW Rep. (FDA) 72-8012, BRH, DEP 72-4 (1971).
(13.12) RUGGERA, P. S. Changes in radiofrequency E-field strengths
within a hospital during a 16-month period, USDHEW Rep. (FDA)
75-8032 (1975).
(13.13) ATHEY, T. W. Unpublished data (1975).
194
-------
(IS.14) DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE and DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, and
WELFARE. A partial inventory of microwave towers, broadcasting
transmitters, and fixed radar by states and regions, USDHEW Rep.
BRH, DEP 70-15 (1970).
(13.15) FIENI, D. 0. Metropolitan radiation hazards, DOD Rep. ESD-TR-
72-006, Electromagnetic Compatibility Analysis Center, Annapolis,
Md. (1972).
(13.16) FIENI, D. 0. Metropolitan radiation hazards II, DOD Rep. ECAC-
PR-72-034, Electromagnetic Compatibility Analysis Center,
Annapolis, Md. (1972).
(13.17) PARKER, D. E. Metropolitan radiation hazards III, DOD Rep.
ECAC-PR-73-005, Electromagnetic Compatibility Analysis Center,
Annapolis, Md. (1973).
(13.18) TELL, R. A. Environmental nonionizing radiation exposure: a
preliminary analysis of the problem and continuing work within
EPA. Session Proceedings: Environmental Exposure to Nonionizing
Radiation, EPA/ORP 73-2, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C. 20460 (May 1973).
(13.19) MUMFORD, W. W. Some technical aspects of microwave radiation
hazards, Proc. I.R.E.. 49:427-477 (1961).
(13.20) TELL, R. A. Reference data for radiofrequency emission hazard
analysis, USEPA Rep. EPA/ORP, SID 72-3 (1972).
(13.21) TELL, R. A. Broadcast radiation: How safe is safe? IEEE Spectrum
9:43-51 (1972).
(13.22) TELL, R. A. and J. C. NELSON. Calculated field intensities
near a high power UHF broadcast installation, Radiat. Data Rep.
15:4014410 (July 1974).
(13.23) TELL, R. A. and D. E. JANES. Broadcast radiation - a second
look, U.S. National Committee of the International Radio Science
Union Annual Meeting, Boulder, Colo. (1975).
(13.24) HANKIN, N. N. An evaluation of selected satellite communication
systems as sources of environmental microwave radiation, USEPA
Rep. EPA-520/2-74-008. Office of Radiation Programs, EPA,
Washington, D.C. 20460 (1974).
(13.25) TELL, R. A. and J. C. NELSON. RF pulse spectral measurements
in the vicinity of several ATC radars, USEPA Rep. EPA-520/1-74-
005 (1974).
(13.26) TELL, R. A. and J. C. NELSON. Microwave hazard measurements near
various airborne radars, Radiat. Data Rep. 15:161-179 (April 1974).
(13.2?) TELL, R. A., N. N. HANKIN, and D. E. JANES. Aircraft radar
measurements in the near field, Proceedings of the Health Physics
Society Ninth Midyear Topical Symposium (in press) (1976).
195
-------
(13.28) HANKIN, N. N., R. A. TELL, and D. E. JANES. Assessing the
potential for exposure to hazardous levels of microwave radiation
from high power sources, (abstract) Health Physics 27:633 (1974).
(13.29) HANKIN, N. N., R. A. TELL, T. W. ATHEY, and D. E. JANES. High
power radiofrequency and microwave sources: A study of relative
environmental significance, Proceedings of the Health Society
Ninth Midyear Topical Symposium (in press) (1976).
(13.30) TELL, R. A., N. N. HANKIN, D. E. JANES, and J. C. NELSON. An
automated measurement system for determining environmental radio-
frequency field intensities, presented at U.S. National Committee
for International Radio Science Union Annual Meeting, Boulder,
Colo. (1974).
(13.31) TELL, R. A., N. N. HANKIN, J.C. NELSON, T. W. ATHEY, and D. E.
JANES. An automated measurement system for determining environ-
mental radiofrequency field intensities, presented at the NBS
75th Anniversary Symposium, Measurements for the Safe Use of
Radiation (1976).
(13.32) ATHEY, T. W., R. A. TELL, and D. E. JANES. The use of an automated
population data base in population exposure calculations, in
Proceedin of the Health Physics Society Eighth Midyear Topical
Symposium, pp. 24-36, USAEC Technical Information Center (CONF-
741018), Oak Ridge, Tenn. (1974).
(13.33) ATHEY, T. W. Calculated population exposure to AM broadcast radi-
ation, in Summary of the ERMAC Work Session on Measurement of
Environmental Levels of Nonionizing Radiation, p. 3, Office of
Telecommunications Policy, Washington, D.C. (1975).
196
-------
Glossary
Absorbed dose - The energy imparted to matter by ionizing radiation per
unit mass of irradiated material at the place of interest. The unit
of absorbed dose is the rad. One rad equals 100 ergs per gram
(See rad).
Accelerator - A device for increasing the velocity and energy of charged
elementary particles, for example, electrons or protons, through
application of electrical and/or magnetienforces.
AEC - U.S. Atomic Energy Commission - In 1975, the Atomic Energy
Commission was divided into two new agencies. The regulatory portion
became the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the reactor development
portion became part of the Energy Research and Development Adminis-
tration.
Body burden - The amount of radioactive material present in the body
of a man or an animal.
Boiling water reactor (BWR) - A reactor in which water, used as both
coolant and moderator, is allowed to boil in the core. The resulting
steam can be used directly to drive a turbine.
By-product material - Any radioactive material (except source material
or fissionable material) obtained during the production or use of
source material or fissionable material. It includes fission
products and many other radioisotopes produced in nuclear reactors.
Cosmic radiation - Radiation of many sorts but mostly atomic nuclei
(protons) with very high energies, originating outside the earth's
atmosphere. Cosmic radiation is part of the natural background
radiation. Some cosmic rays are more energetic than any manmade
forms of radiation.
Curie (Ci) - The special unit of activity. One curie equals 3.7 x 1010
nuclear transformations per second.
Daughter. - A nuclide formed by the radioactive decay of another nuclide,
which in this context is called the parent.
197
-------
Diathermy - The generation of heat in tissues for medical or surgical
purposes by electric currents.
Dose - A general form denoting the quantity of radiation or energy
absorbed. For special purposes it must be appropriately qualified.
If unqualified, it refers to absorbed dose.
Dose equivalent (DE) - A quantity used in radiation protection. It
expresses all radiations on a common scale for calculating the
effective absorbed dose. It is defined as the product of the absorbed
dose in rads and certain modifying factors (The unit of dose equi-
valent is the rem).
Dose rate - Absorbed dose delivered per unit time.
$8.00 reserves - Ore that can be mined and produced at $8.00 a pound.
Electron volt (eV) r A unit of energy equivalent to the energy gained by
an electron in passing through a potential difference of one volt.
Larger multiple units of the electron volt are frequently used: KeV
for thousand or kilo electron volts: MeV for million or mega electron
volts (1 eV = 1.6 x 10~12 erg).
Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA) - In 1975, the
Atomic Energy Commission was divided into two new agencies. The
regulatory portion became the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the
reactor development portion became part of the Energy Research and
Development Administration.
Exposure - A measure of the ionization produced in air by x or gamma
radiation. It is the sum of the electrical charges on all ions of
one sign produced in air when all electrons liberated by photons in
a volume element of air are completely stopped in air, divided by the
mass of the air in the volume element. The special unit of exposure
is the roentgen.
External radiation - Radiation from a source outside the body - the
radiation must penetrate the skin.
Flux (neutron) - A term used to express the intensity of neutron radi-
ation. The number of neutrons passing through a unit area in unit
time. For neutrons of given energy, the product of neutron density
with speed.
Frequency - Number of cycles, revolutions, or vibrations completed in
a unit of time (See hertz).
Genetically significant dose (GSD) - The gonadal dose which, if received
by every member of the population, would be expected to produce the
same total genetic effect on the population as the sum of the indiv-
idual doses that are actually received. It is not a forecast of
predictable adverse effects on any individual person or his/her
unborn children.
198
-------
Gonad - A gamete-producing organ in animals; testis or ovary.
Half-life - Time required for a radioactive substance to lose 50 percent
of its activity by decay. Each radionuclide has a unique half-life.
Hertz - Unit of frequency equal to one cycle per second.
High temperature gas-cooled reactor (HT6R) - A reactor in which the
temperature is great enough to permit generation of mechanical power
at good efficiency using gas as the coolant.
Internal radiation - Radiation from a source within the body (as a
result of deposition of radionuclides in body tissues).
lonization - The process by which a neutral atom or molecule acquires a
positive or negative charge.
Isotopes - Nuclides having the same number of protons in their nuclei,
and hence the same atomic number, but differing in the number of
neutrons, and therefore, in the mass number. Almost identical
chemical properties exist between isotopes of a particular element.
The term should not be used as a synonym for nuclide.
Linear accelerators - A device for accelerating charged particles. It
employs alternate electrodes and gaps arranged in a straight line,
so proportioned that when potentials are varied in the proper
amplitude and frequency, particles passing through the waveguide
receive successive increments of energy.
Man-rems - The product of the average individual dose in a population
times the number of individuals in the population. Syn: person-
rems.
Maximum permissible dose equivalent (MPD) - The greatest dose equivalent
that a person or specified part thereof shall be allowed to receive
in a given period of time.
Mi 11 feed - The ore and other material introduced into the milling
process.
Millirem (mrem) - A submultiple of the rem, equal to one-thousandth of a
rem (See rem).
Muon - An elementary particle classed as a lepton, with 207 times the
mass of an electron. It may have a single positive or negative
charge.
NRC - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission: In 1975, the Atomic Energy
Commission was divided into two new agencies. The regulatory portion
became the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the reactor development
portion became part of the Energy Research and Development Adminis-
tration.
199
-------
Nuclide - A species of atom characterized by the constitution of its
nucleus. The nuclear constitution is specified by the number of
protons (Z), number of neutrons (N) and energy content; or alterna-
tively, by the atomic number (Z), mass number A = (N + Z), and atomic
mass. To be regarded as a distinct nuclide, the atom must be capable
of existing for a measurable time. Thus, nuclear isomers are separate
nuclides, whereas promptly decaying excited nuclear states and
unstable intermediates in nuclear reactions are not so considered.
Permissible dose - The dose of radiation which may be received by an
individual within a specified period with expectation of no signif-
icantly harmful result.
Person-rems - The product of the average individual dose in a population
times the number of individuals in the population. Syn: man-rems.
Polarization - In electromagnetic waves, refers to the direction of the
electric field vector.
Population dose - The sum of radiation doses of individuals and is
expressed in units of person-rem (e.g. if 1,000 people each received
a radiation dose of 1 rem, their population dose would be 1,000
person-rem).
Power density - The intensity of electromagnetic radiation power per
unit area expressed as watts/cm2.
Pressurized water reactor (PWR) - A power reactor in which heat is
transferred from the core to a heat exchanger by water kept under
high pressure to achieve high temperature without boiling in the
primary system. Steam is generated in a secondary circuit. Many
reactors producing electric power are pressurized water reactors.
Quality factor (QF) - The linear-energy-transfer-dependent factor by
which absorbed doses are multiplied to obtain (for radiation
protection purposes) a quantity that expresses-on a common scale for
all ionizing radiations-the effectiveness of the absorbed dose.
Rad (Acronyn for radiation absorbed dose) - The basic unit of absorbed
dose of ionizing radiation. A dose of one rad equals the absorption
of 100 ergs of radiation energy per gram of absorbing material (See
absorbed dose).
Radioactive decay - Disintegration of the nucleus of an unstable nuclide
by spontaneous emission of charged particles and/or photons.
Rem - A special unit of dose equivalent. The dose equivalent in rems is
numerically equal to the absorbed dose in rads multiplied by the
quality factor, the distribution factor and any other necessary
modifying factors.
200
-------
Roentgen (R) - The special unit of exposure. One roentgen equals 2.58 x
lO'4 coulomb per kilogram of air (See exposure).
Skin dose (Radiology) - Absorbed dose at center of irradiation field on
skin. It is the sum of the dose in air and scatter from body parts.
Skyshine - Radiation emitted through the roof of the shield (or unshielded
roof) that scatters back to ground level due to its deviation by the
atmosphere.
Source material - In atomic energy law, any material except special
nuclear material, which contains 0.05 percent or more of uranium,
thorium, or any combination of the two.
Special nuclear material - Jn atomic energy law, this term refers to
plutonium-239, uranium-233, uranium containing more than the natural
abundance of uranium-235, or any material artificially enriched in
any of these substances.
4
Technologically enhanced natural radioactivity (TENR) - Naturally radio-
active nuclides whose relationship to the location of persons has
been altered through man's activities such as by the activities of
mining, tunneling, development of underground caverns, development of
wells, and travel in space or at high altitudes.
Terrestrial radiation - Radiation emitted by naturally occuring radio-
nuclides such as potassium-40; the natural decay chains uranium-238,
uranium-235, or thorium-232; or from cosmic-ray induced radionuclides
in the soil.
Type A and Type B quantities - Legally established maximum amounts of
radioactive materials which can be contained in Type A and Type B
packages, respectively. Precise definitions are listed in 49 CFR
173.389(1), however, basically the radionuclides are divided into
seven groups according to their radiotoxicity and relative potential
hazard in transportation. Each of these groups then has a maximum
amount assigned depending on the type of package to be used to ship
it.
Type A packaging - Containers designed to maintain their integrity,
i.e., not allow any radioactive material to be released and to keep
the shielding properties intact, under normal transportation condi-
tions. The test conditions which must be met are defined in 49 CFR
173.398b and include heat, cold, reduced air pressure, vibration,
water spray endurance, free drop, penetration, and compression
standards.
Type B packaging - Containers designed to meet the standards established
for hypothetical transportation accident conditions, as well as
meeting the Type A packaging standards, without reducing the effect-
iveness of the shielding or allowing releases in excess of those
201
-------
enumerated in 49 CFR 173.398c(l). The standards to be met by Type B
packages, in addition to the Type A standards, are defined in 49 CFR
173.398c(2) and include puncture, thermal, water immersion, and
higher free drop tests.
UNSCEAR - United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic
Radiation.
Volt (V) - The unit of electromotive force (1 volt = 1 watt/1 ampere).
Whole body dose - The radiation dose to the entire body.
International numerical multiple and submultiple prefixes
Multiples
and
submultiples
Prefixes
Symbols
10"
lO1*
1012
109
106
103
102
101
lo-1
lO'2
ID'3
10'6
ID'9
io-12
lO'1*
lo-1*
exa
peta
tera
giga
mega
kilo
hecto
deka
deci
centi
milli
micro
nano
pi co
femto
atto
E
P
T
G
M
k
h
da
d
c
m
y
n
P
f
a
202
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION
AMBIENT MONITORING SYSTEM (ERAMS)
The ambient monitoring system known as ER»MS was
established in 1973 by the U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency's Office of Radiation Programs (ORP). The ERAMS
is comprised of nationwide sampling stations which provide
air, water and milk samples from which environmental
radiation levels are derived.
These sampling locations are selected to provide the
best possible combination of radiation source monitoring
(such as surface water downstream from a nuclear power
reactor) and wide population coveragei
The radiation analyses performed on these samples
include general trend indicators, such as gross alpha and
gross beta levels, as well as specific analyses for uranium
fuel cycle related radionuclides. The latter category
includes but is not limited to uranium, plutonium, iodine,
and krypton, which are released into the environment from
stationary sources such as nuclear power reactors, fuel
reprocessing plants and the like.
The data procured from the ERAMS is analyzed to pro-
vide environmental surveillance information pertaining to
environmental radiation levels and concomitant population
exposure. Fluctuations and trends in environmental
radiation levels are determined also.
203
-------
SECTION I. Air Program
Airborne Particulates and Precipitation
Airborne particulates are collected continuously on
filters at 21 field stations. These filters are changed
one or two times a week and measured for gross beta activity
with a G-M survey meter at five hours after collection to
allow most of the radon daughters to decay. Another
measurement is made at 29 hours when most of the thoron
daughter products will have decayed. All field estimates
are reported to appropriate EPA officials by mail or tele-
phone depending on the activity levels found. For purposes
of summarization, the field estimates are not given in the
tables which follow.
The filters are then sent to EERF for more sensitive
analyses in a low background beta counter. Gamma scans are
performed on all filters showing laboratory gross beta
activity greater than 1 pCi/m3.
Precipitation samples,are also collected at the same
21 field stations. These samples are sent to EERF for gross
beta activity measurements and gamma scans when the gross
beta activity is greater than 10 pCi/1. Tritium measure-
ments are performed on monthly composites from each station.
Plutonium-238, -239, and uranium-234, -235 and -238 analyses
are performed annually on precipitation samples collected
during the spring quarter. Results of these analyses for
FY75 are presented in Table A-l.
Table A-2 presents the gross beta activities for airborne
particulates for FY75. A compilation of daily measurements
is available from the Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility,
Montgomery, Alabama 36109.
The monthly analyses for tritium in precipitation samples
at the selected stations are shown in Table A-3.
204
-------
Table A-l
Plutonium and Uranium Analyses
of
Selected Precipitation Composite Samples
March 1975 - May 1975
Location
AL:Montgomery
CAtBerkeley
Los Angeles
CO:Denver
ID:Idaho Falls
XL:Chicago
ND:Bismarck
NM:Santa Fe
NVtLas Vegas
NY:Buffalo
Plutonium
(pCi/1)
238Pu
239Pu
238Pu
239Pu
238Pu
239Pu
238Pu
239Pu
238Pu
239Pu
TI
238Pu
239Pu
TI
238Pu
239PU
238Pu
239Pu
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
o.
0.
0.
004
008
005
017
016
033
036
111
009
005
024
004
Oil
0
±
0
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
0
±
±
±
±
±
.004
^
.005
.004
.006
.008
.012
.016
.029
.005
.004
.008
.004
.006
234U
235U
238U
234U
235U
238U
234U
235U
238U
234U
235U
238U
234U
235U
238D
234U
235U
238U
234U
235U
238U
234D
235U
238D
Uranium
(pCi/1)
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
013
004
006
008
002
009
014
001
008
067
008
041
042
Oil
041
012
007
091
009
057
005
003
004
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
0
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
.006
.003
.004
.005
.003
.005
.007
.002
.005
.018
.005
.014
.013
.006
.013
.006
.004
.020
.005
.015
.003
.003
.003
205
-------
Location
New York
OH:Columbus
OK:Oklahoma City
OR:Portland
PA:Harrisburg
Pittsburgh
SC:Anderson
Columbia
TN:Knoxville
VA:Lynchburg
NETWORK
AVERAGES
Table A-l (Continued)
Plutoniuitt
(pCi/1)
TI
TI
TI
238Pu 0
239Pu 0.007 ± .005
238Pu 0.002 ± .003
239Pu 0.010 ± .006
238Pu 0
239Pu 0.019 ± .010
238Pu 0.004 ± .004
239Pu 0.010 ± .005
238PU 0.001 ± .002
239Pu 0.008 ± .005
TI
238Pu 0
239Pu 0.006 ± .004
238Pu .005
239Pu .020
Uranium
(PCi/1)
234U 0.027 ± .010
235U 0.004 ± .004
238U 0.007 ± .005
234O 0.013 ± .006
235U 0.002 ± .002
238U 0.004 ± .003
234U 0.016 ± .009
235U 0.002 ± .003
2380 0.016 ± .009
234U 0.013 ± .006
235U 0.002 ± .002
238U 0.010 ± .005
234U 0.011 ± .006
2350 0.001 i .002
238U 0.008 ± .005
2340 0.022 ± .008
2350 0.005 i .004
2380 0.008 ± .005
2340 .025
2350 .004
2380 .016
TI - Temporarily Inoperable,
206
-------
Table A-2
Gross Beta Radioactivity in Air Filters
(pCi/m3)
July 1974 - June 1975
EERF LAB MEASUREMENTS
No. of
Location Samples Max Avg
ALxMontgomery 112 .58 .081
CA:Berkeley 103 .30 .054
Los Angeles 106 1.00 .094
CO:Denver 108 .32 .115
FL:Miami 125 .55 .070
10:Idaho Falls 104' .27 .084
IL:Chicago 3 .20 .180
ND:Bismarck 103 .23 .067
NM:Santa Fe 16 .55 .083
NV:Las Vegas 106 .28 .098
NY:Buffalo 103 .23 .080
New York 28 1.31 .118
OH:Columbus 62 .59 .099
OK:Oklahoma City 94 .25 .092
OR:Portland 96 .15 .049
PArHarrisburg 126 1.04 .072
Pittsburgh 58 .17 .061
SC:Anderson 24 .16 .078
Columbia 108 .31 .090
VA:Lynchburg 104 .30 .075
NETWORK SUMMARY 1689 1.31 .087
Note: Knoxville, Tenn. station temporarily inoperable.
207
-------
Table A-3
Tritium Concentration in Precipitation
(nCi/1)
July 1974 - June 1975
Location
AL: Montgomery
CA: Berkeley
Los Angeles
CO: Denver
FL : Miami
ID: Idaho Palls
IL: Chicago
ND: Bismarck
NM: Santa Fe
NV:Las Vegas
NY:Buffalo
New York
OH : Columbus
OK -.Oklahoma City
OR: Portland
PAtHarrisburg
Pittsburgh
SC: Anderson
Columbia
TN:Knoxville
VA:Lynchburg
NETWORK SUMMARY
No. of
Samples
12
8
6
11
0
7
0
12
0
5
12
2
0
0
12
10
5
9
12
1
10
134
Max
.5
.15
.3
.5
.5
.4
.3
.5
.3
.3
.5
.3
.4
.8
.0
.2
.8
Avg
.092
.019
.055
.30
.30
.25
.10
.241
.15
.072
.21
.18
.189
.369
.0
.065
.18
208
-------
Krypton-85 in Air
Krypton-85 is a long-lived noble gas with a half life
of 10.8 years. It is released into the atmosphere by
nuclear reactor operations, fuel reprocessing, and nuclear
detonations. Krypton-85 also occurs naturally in minor
quantities primarily from the neutron capture of stable
krypton-84 as well as spontaneous fission and neutron-
induced fission of uranium. Monitoring of krypton-85 in
the atmosphere is being conducted to identify and estab-
lish baseline levels and long-term trends.
Dry compressed air samples are purchased from commer-
cial air suppliers semiannually and shipped to the EERF
where the krypton-85 is cryogenically separated and counted
in a liquid scintiallation system.
Krypton-85 analysis began in January 1973 with sample
collections and analyses being.performed for 12 sampling
locations. These locations were selected to provide
atmospheric coverage of the United States with considera-
tions being given to the proximity to fuel reprocessing
plants, nuclear reactors, and wide geographic coverage.
Results of analyses for krypton-85 in air for the period
July 1974 to December 1974 are shown in Table A-4.
209
-------
Table A-4
Krypton-85 in Air
(pCi/ras at STP)
July 1974 - December 1974
Location Krypton-85 Cone,
AL:Montgomery 18.2
CA:Oakland NS
PL:Tampa NS
XL:Chicago NS
MA:Boston NS
MI:Detroit 16.7
NC:Greensboro 17.1
NJ:Camden NS
NY:Buffalo 15.8
Utica 16.8
OK:Oklahoma City NS
OR:Portland 17.1
NETWORK AVERAGE 17.0
NS, no sample.
210
-------
Plutonium and Uranium in Airborne Partieulatee
Plutonium and uranium analyses are performed on
quarterly composite samples of the air filters collected
from the 21 continuously operating Airborne Particulate
and Precipitation sampling sites. Plutonium-238, -239,
uranium-234, -235, and -238 are determined by alpha
spectroscopy following chemical treatment of the samples,
The volume of the air sampled ranges between 25,000 and
40,000 m1 for each quarterly composite sample analyzed.
The plutonium and uranium in airborne particulates
data for FY75 are shown in Tables A-5 through A-9.
211
-------
Table A-5
238 Plutonium in Airborne Particulates
(aCi/m3)
July 1974 - June 1975
Location
AL:Montgomery
CA:Berkeley
Los Angeles
CO:Denver
PL:Miami
ID:Idaho Falls
ND:Bismarck
NM:Santa Fe
NV:Las Vegas
NY:Buffalo
New York City
OH:Columbus
OK:Oklahoma City
OR:Portland
PA:Harrisburg
Pittsburgh
SC:Anderson
Columbia
VA:Lynchburg
NETWORK SUMMARY
No. Of
Samples
4
4
4
4
2
4
4
1
4
4
2
4
2
4
4
4
2
4
4
65
Max
6.0
3.2
8.9
4.4
3.4
5.7
4.3
1.8
11.2
6.3
8.6
14.1
3.6
4.8
3.6
6.4
12.0
4.3
3.3
14.1
Avg
4.20
2.20
6.48
3.33
2.55
4.18
2.85
1.80
6.43
98
60
03
3.55
3.10
1.73
4.55
6.75
3.60
1.95
4.10
3,
7,
7,
Note: Chicago, 111. and Knoxville, Tenn. stations were
temporarily inoperable.
212
-------
Table A-6
239 PlutonilM in Airborne Particulates
(aCi/m»)
July 1974 - June 1975
No. of
Location Samples Max Avg
AL:Montgomery 4 34.4 23.1
CA:Berkeley 4 21.3 16.3
Los Angeles 4 33.4 27.6
CO:Denver 4 57.8 37.5
FL:Miami 2 29.8 26.7
ID:Idaho Falls 4 41.1 29.7
ND:Bismarck 4 28.8 21.0
NM:Santa Fe 1 19.9 19.9
NV:Las Vegas '4 46.6 32.1
NY:Buffalo 4 39.4 28.9
New York City 2 46.2 31.2
OH:Columbus 4 54.8 34.2
OK:Oklahoma City 2 50.1 43.3
OR:Portland 4 22.3 17.8
PA:Harrisburg 4 27.1 19.6
Pittsburgh 4 38.1 23.1
SC:Anderson 2 34.1 23.2
Columbia 4 42.8 25.1
VA:Lynchburg 4 35.8 24.0
NETWORK SUMMARY 65 57.8 26.5
Mote: Chicago, 111. and Knoxville, Tenn; stations were
temporarily inoperable.
213
-------
Table A-7
234 Uranium in Airborne Particulates
(aCi/m»)
July 1974 - June 1975
Location
AL t Montgomery
CA:Berkeley
Los Angeles
CO:Denver
FL:Miami
ID:Idaho Falls
ND:Bismarck
NM:Santa Fe
NV:Las Vegas
NY:Buffalo
New York City
OH:Columbus
OK:Oklahoma City
OR: Portland
PA:Harrisburg
Pittsburgh
SC:Anderson
Columbia
VA:Lynchburg
NETWORK SUMMARY
No. of
Samples
Max
4
4
4
4
2
4
4
1
4
4
2
4
2
4
4
4
2
4
4
29.0
12.2
71.6
92.2
22.8
56.2
65.4
41.6
197.
222.
73.8
119.
41.8
31.0
40.5
116.
31.8
57.2
1290.
Avg
26.1
10.2
43.7
82.0
21.1
43.8
54.8
41.6
163.
135.
56.9
94.0
41.7
24.2
35.3
95.5
28.5
47.3
516.
65 1290.
82.1
Note: Chicago, 111. and Knoxville, Tenn. stations were
temporarily inoperable.
214
-------
Table A-8
235 Uranium in Airborne Particulates
(aCi/ra8)
July 1974 - June 1975
Location
AL:Montgomery
CA:Berkeley
Los Angeles
CO:Denver
PL:Miami
ID:Idaho Falls
ND:Bismarck
NM:Santa Fe
NV:Las Vegas
NY:Buffalo
New York City
OH:Columbus
OK:Oklahoma City
OR:Portland
PA:Harrisburg
Pittsburgh
SO:Anderson
Columbia
VA:Lynchburg
NETWORK SUMMARY
No. Of
Samples Max
4
4
4
4
2
4
4*
1
4
4
2
4
2
4
4
4
2
4
4
2.5
1.0
13.5
6.1
1.9
3.9
4.1
2.5
8.1
13.2
4.1
9.0
2.6
2.4
3.2
8.9
1.9
3.6
54.3
65
54.3
Avg
1.70
.65
5.03
4.95
1.45
2.75
3.60
2.50
6.73
8.38
3.15
5.20
2.60
1.68
2.60
6.10
1.75
2.53
21.9
4.49
Note: Chicago, 111. and Knoxville, Tenn. stations were
temporarily inoperable.
215
-------
Table A-9
238 Uranium in Airborne Particulates
(aCi/m»)
July 1974 - June 1975
Location
AL:Montgomery
CA:Berkeley
Los Angeles
CO:Denver
FL:Miami
ID:Idaho Falls
ND:Bismarck
NM:Santa Fe
NV:Las Vegas
NY:Buffalo
New York City
OH:Columbus
OK:Oklahoma City
OR:Portland
PA:Harrisburg
Pittsburgh
SC:Anderson
Columbia
VA:Lynchburg
NETWORK SUMMARY
No. of
Samples Max
4
4
4
4
2
4
4
1
4
4
2
4
2
4
4
4
2
4
4
65
26.1
11.5
76.0
95.3
21.6
55.8
62.2
40.8
110.
232.
78.4
127.
44.0
34.6
42.4
112.
29.9
57.0
46.5
232.
Avg
24.2
8.75
42.1
83.7
20.8
44.0
52.0
40.8
92.4
139.
59.1
90.8
40.9
23.5
33.3
94
27
46
36.8
52.7
Note: Chicago, 111. and Knoxville, Tenn. stations were
temporarily inoperable.
216
-------
ERAMS
SECTION II. Water Program
Surface Water
Surface water monitoring consists of 55 quarterly
surface water samples taken downstream from nuclear
facilities or at a background station. The location of
the sampling sites was based on all nuclear facilities
that were operating, being constructed, or planned through
1976. Tritium analyses are performed quarterly. Gamma
scans performed annually showed no detectable activity
other than *0K.
The tritium concentrations for the surface water
samples for FY75 are given in Table A-10.
Drinking Water
Drinking water monitoring consists of 77 quarterly
drinking water samples taken from major population centers
and selected nuclear facility environs.
The analyses performed for the drinking water are
currently being evaluated with respect to the Safe Drinking
Water Act of 1974 and will be expanded to meet requirements
of that legislation. Those analyses which may be added
include strontium-89, radium-226, cesium-134 and cesium-137.
The results of tritium in drinking water analyses for
FY75 are shown in Table A-ll.
Analyses for gross alpha beta, strontium-90 and
radium-226 are shown in Table A-12.
Results of analyses for plutonium and uranium in
selected drinking water samples for FY75 are shown in
Table A-13.
21?
-------
Table A-10
Surface Water
Tritium Concentration
(nCi/1)
July 1974 - June 1975
Location
AL:Decatur
Gordon
AR:Little Rock
CA:Clay Station
Diablo Canyon
Eureka
San Onofre
COtGreeley
CT:East Haddam
Waterford
FL:Crystal River
Ft. Pierce
Homestead
GA:Baxley
IA:Cedar Rapids
ID:Buhl
IL:Moline
Morris
Zion
LA:New Orleans
MA: Plymouth
Rowe
MD:Conowingo
Lusby
MEtWiscasset
MI:Bridgman
Charlevoix
Monroe
South Haven
MN:Monticello
Red Wing
No. of
Samples
Max
4
4
4
4
4
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
.4
.8
.2
.2
.0
5.
.2
.7
1.6
.3
.2
.1
1.7
.1
.5
.4
.5
.3
.3
.2
.3
.3
.3
.3
.4
.5
.3
.4
.4
.5
.4
Avg
.3
.3
.1
.1
.0
5.
.1
.6
.5
.2
.1
.0
.9.
.1
.3
.4
!3
.2
.2
.1
.2
.2
.2
.2
.3
.3
.3
.3
.3
.4
.4
218
-------
Table A-10 CContinued)
No. of Max Avg
Location Samples
NC:Charlotte 4 .4 .3
Southport 4 .2 .1
NE:Rulo 4 .6 .5
NJrBayside 3 .2 .1
Oyster Creek 4 .2 .2
NV:Boulder City 4 .5 .5
NYrOssining 4 .4 .2
Oswego 4 .4 .4
Poughkeepsie 4 .3 .2
OH:Toledo NS
OR:Westport 3 .2 .1
SC:Allendale 4 5.9 3.7
Hartsville 4 3.3 2.1
TN:Daisy 4 .5 .4
Kingston 4 2.6 1.0
TX:E1 Paso 4 .3 .2
VA:Mineral 4 .3 .3
Newport News 3 .3 .2
VT:Vernon 4 .2 .2
WA:Northport 4 .5 .4
Richland 4 .6 .5
WI:Two Creeks 4 1.0 .5
Victory 4 .3 .3
WVrWheeling 4 .3 .2
NETWORK SUMMARY 207 5.9 .47
NS, no sample.
219
-------
Table A-ll
Drinking Water
Tritium Concentration
(nCi/1)
July 1974 - June 1975
Location
AK:Anchorage
Fairbanks
AL:Dothan
Montgomery
Muscle Shoals
ARsLittle Rock
CA: Berkeley
Los Angeles
CO i Denver
Platteville
CT:Hartford
CZ:Ancon
DC:Washington
DE t Wilmington
PL:Miami
Tampa
GA:Baxley
Savannah
HI:Honolulu
IA:Cedar Rapids
ID:Boise
Idaho Falls
IL:Morris
Chicago
KS:Topeka
LAsNew Orleans
MA:Lawrence
Rowe
MD:Baltimore
Conowingo
ME:Augusta
MI:Detroit
Grand Rapids
MN:Minneapo1 i s
Red Wing
No. of Samples Max
Avg
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
.6
.5
.0
.2
.3
.2
.2
-1
.6
.9
.2
.1
.3
.3
.1
.1
.1
3.0
.0
.5
.2
.6
.1
.3
.3
.3
.2
.4
.5
.3
.2
.4
.3
.5
.1
5
,4
0
1
,3
,1
.1
.0
.4
.7
.1
.1
.2
.2
.1
.1
.1
.6
.0
.3
.2
.5
.0
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
.3
.3
.1
.3
.3
.5
.0
220
-------
Table A-ll (Continued)
Location No. of Samples Max Avg
MO:Jefferson City 4 .2 .1
MS:Jackson 4 .2 .1
MT:Helena 4 .4 .4
NC:Charlotte 4 .3 .3
Wilmington 4 .3 .2
ND:Bismarck 4 .7 .5
NE:Lincoln 4 .2 .1
NH:Concord 4 .3 .2
NJ:Trenton 4 .4 .2
Waretown 4 .1 .0
NM:Santa Fe 3 .5 .3
NV:Las Vegas 4 .7 .6
NYrAlbany 4 .3 .2
New York - 2 .3 .2
Buffalo '4 .5 .4
Syracuse 4 .8 .6
OH:Cincinnati 4 .2 .2
East Liverpool 4 .4 .3
Painesville 4 .5 .4
Toledo 1 .3 .3
OK:Oklahoma City 2 .2 .1
OR:Portland 4 .3 .1
PA:Columbia 4 .7 .3
Harrisburg 4 .3 .2
Pittsburgh 4 .3 .3
PR:San Juan 4 .1 .0
RI:Providence 4 .2 . i
SC:Anderson 4 .4 .3
Columbia 4 .4 [3
Hartsville 4 .2 , i
Seneca 4 .3 .3
TN:Chattanooga 4 .4 "3
Knoxville 4 .3 2
TX:Austin 4 .1 \i
VA:Doswell 4 .2 "]_
Lynchburg 4 .2 '2
Norfolk 4 .2 '2
WA:Richland 4 .6 '5
Seattle 4 .4 [2
WI:Genoa 3 .0 * Q
Madison 4 .3 *±
NETWORK SUMMARY 292 3.0 .25
221
-------
Table A-12
Drinking vfater
Gross Alpha, Beta Concentration
April - June 1^75
Annual Analysis
Indicated Activity in pCi/1
Total Gross Beta Gross Alpha
Date Solids Date Date
Location
AK : Anchorage
PO
ro
Fairbanks
AL : Dothan
Montgomery
Muscle Shoals
AR: Little Rock
CA: Berkeley
Collected
4/14/75
4/08/75
4/04/75
4/04/75
4/03/75
4/03/75
4/02/75
mg/1
94.0
78.0
82.0
62.6
60.0
36.0
46.0
Dtd. (a) (b)
(e)
4/24/75
1.3 ± 0.9
4/28/75
1.4 ± 0.9
4/28/75
1.3 ± 0.9
4/22/75
2.6 ± 1.0
4/22/75
1.7 ± 0.9
4/24/75
1.4 ± 0.9
4/28/75
Ctd. (a) (
(e)
4/25/75
(e)
4/28/75
(e)
4/28/75
(e)
4/22/75
(e)
4/22/75
(e)
4/25/75
(e)
4/28/75
9o
Sr
Specific
Gamma
Activity
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
-------
Table A-12 (Continued)
ro
ro
CO
Location
Los Angeles
CO:Denver
Platteville
CT:Hartford
CZ:Ancon
DC:Washington
DE:WiIming ton
FL:Miami
Tampa
GA:Baxley
Savannah
HI:Honolulu
Total Gross Beta
Date Solids Date
Collected mg/1 Dtd. (a)(b)
Gross Alpha
Date
Ctd. (a)(c)
4/01/75
4/03/75
4/03/75
4/02/75
4/21/75
4/09/75
4/02/75
4/01/75
4/15/75
4/01/75
4/01/75
4/14/75
108.0
58.6
880.0
36.0
72.0
98.0
27.0
216.8
310.0
186.6
64.0
244.0
3.7 ± 1.1
4/25/75
1.1 ± 1.0
4/28/75
3.0 ± 1.0
5/09/75
1.6 ± 0.9
4/22/75
(e)
5/12/75
2.3 ± 0.9
6/04/75
2.1 ± 1.0
4/24/75
1.8 ± 1.1
4/22/75
2.2 ± 1.1
4/25/75
5.6 ± 1.4
4/22/75
1.6 ± 0.2
4/22/75
2.3 ± 1.0
4/25/75
(e)
4/28/75
(e)
4/28/75
(e)
5/09/75
(e)
4/22/75
(e)
5/09/75
*
(e)
6/04/75
(e)
4/24/75
(e)
4/22/75
(e)
4/25/75
5.5 ± 1.8
4/22/75
(e)
4/22/75
(e)
4/25/75
Specific
Gamma
«°Sr 22«Ra Activity
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
«
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
3.1 ± .1 (d)
(d)
(d)
-------
Table A-12 (Continued)
ro
ro
.£»
Location
IA:Cedar Rapids
ID:Boise
Idaho Falls
IL:Morris
Chicago
KS:Topeka
LA:New Orleans
MA:Lawrence
Rowe
MD:Baltimore
Conowingo
Total Gross Beta
Date Solids Date
Collected mg/1 Dtd. (a)(b)
Gross Alpha
Date
Ctd. (a)(c)
4/02/75
4/02/75
4/04/75
4/02/75
4/01/75
4/01/75
5/09/75
4/01/75
5/14/75
4/02/75
4/01/75
167.4
46.0
120.0
378.0
734.0
418.0
100.0
92.0
104.0
90.0
154.0
2.6 ± 1.1
4/25/75
(e)
4/25/75
2.3 ± 1.0
4/28/75
29.4 ± 2.6
4/28/75
1.1 ± 0.9
4/22/75
4.4 ± 1.3
4/24/75
1.9 ± 0.9
5/15/75
1.4 ± 1.0
4/25/75
1.8 ± 0.9
6/04/75
2.0 ± 1.6
4/24/75
1.6 ± 0.9
4/25/75
(e)
4/25/75
(e)
4/25/75
(e)
4/25/75
16.4 ± 3
4/28/75
(e)
4/22/75
(e)
4/25/75
(e)
5/15/75
(e)
4/25/75
(e)
6/04/75
(e)
4/25/75
(e)
4/24/75
Specific
Gamma
90 Sr 226 Ra Activity
(d)
(d)
(d)
(e) 7.4 ± .1 755+159
04/23/75
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
-------
Table A-12 (Continued)
ro
ro
01
Location
ME:Augusta
MI:Detroit
Grand Rapids
MN:Minneapolis
Red Wing
MO:Jefferson City
MS:Jackson
MT:Helena
NC:Charlotte
Wilmington
ND:Bismarck
Total Gross Beta
Date Solids Date
Collected mg/1 Dtd. (a)(b)
Gross Alpha
Date
Ctd. (a)(c)
90
Sr
226
4/02/75
4/07/75
4/01/75
4/04/75
4/04/75
4/04/75
4/02/75
4/08/75
4/02/75
6/05/75
4/04/75
10.0
146.0
188.0
122.0
64.4.0
640.0
66.0
48.6
46.6
48.0
310.0
1.5 ± 1.0
4/25/75
2.7 ± 1.1
4/25/75
2.4 ± 1.1
4/22/75
2.4 ± 1.0
4/28/75
18.7 ± 2.2
4/28/75
7.9 ± 1.7
5/21/75
1.7 ± 1.0
4/22/75
1.4 ± 1.1
4/28/75
1.1 ± 0.9
4/25/75
2.3 ± 0.9
6/25/75
2.8 ± 1.1
4/28/75
(e)
4/24/75
(e)
4/24/75
(e)
4/22/75
(e)
4/25/75
(e)
4/25/75
*
(e)
5/20/75
(e)
4/22/75
(e)
4/28/75
(e)
4/25/75
(e)
6/25/75
(e)
4/28/75
(e)
Specific
Gamma
Ra Activity
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
-------
Table A-12 (Continued)
Total Gross Beta
Date Solids Date
Gross Alpha
Date
Specific
Gamma
ro
ro
Location
NE:Lincoln
NH:Concord
NJ:Trenton
Waretown
NM:Santa Fe
NV:Las Vegas
NY:Albany
Buffalo
New York
Syracuse
OH:Cincinnati
Collected
4/10/75
4/01/75
4/30/75
4/10/75
4/01/75
4/01/75
4/02/75
4/01/75
(f)
5/30/75
4/01/75
mg/1
312.0
282.0
134.0
64.0
78.0
798.0
66.8
70.0
68.0
194.0
Dtd. (a) (b)
10.2 ± 1.6
4/25/75
1.2 ± 1.1
5/09/75
4.5 ± 1.1
5/15/75
3.5 ± 1.1
4/25/75
2.2 ± 0.9
4/25/75
11.5 ± 2.1
4/28/75
1.7 ± 0.9
4/22/75
2.8 ± 1.0
4/24/75
1.8 ± 0.9
6/24/75
2.7 ± 1.2
4/22/75
Ctd. (a) (c)
3.7 ± 1.7
4/25/75
(e)
5/09/75
(e) '
5/15/75
(e)
4/25/75
(e)
4/24/75
(e)
4/28/75
(e)
4/22/75
(e)
4/25/75
(e)
6/24/75
(e)
4/22/75
90 sr 226Ra Activit
(e) 0.3 ± .02 (d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
1.7 ±0.8 (d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
-------
Table A-12 (Continued)
Location
Columbus
East Liverpool
Painesville
Toledo
OK: Oklahoma
ro OR: Portland
ro
PA: Columbia
Harrisburg
Pittsburgh
PR: San Juan
RI : Providence
Total Gross Beta
Date Solids Date
Collected mg/1 Dtd. (a)(b)
(g)
Gross Alpha
Date
Ctd. (a)(c)
Specific
Gamma
9 ° Sr 2 2 6 Ra Activitv
4/22/75
4/01/75
5/05/75
(f)
4/02/75
4/01/75
4/01/75
4/22/75
4/11/75
4/04/75
266.0
134.0
682.0
26.0
138.2
34.0
174.8
164.0
79.0
3.3 ± 1.1
5/09/75
2.9 ± 1.1
4/25/75
3.2 ± 1.2
5/21/75
(e)
4/28/75
1.7 ± 1.0
4/25/75
1.2 ± 0.9
4/25/75
2.3 ± 1.1
5/09/75
3.1 ± 1.1
4/28/75
2.7 ± 1.0
4/25/75
(e)
5/09/75
(e)
4/25/75
(e)
5/20/75
,(e)
4/28/75
(e)
4/25/75
(e)
4/24/75
(e)
5/09/75
(e)
4/25/75
(e)
4/25/75
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
-------
Table A-12 (Continued)
ro
ro
GO
Location
SC:Anderson
Columbia
Hartsville
Seneca
TN:Chattanooga
Knoxville
TX:Austin
VA:Doswell
Lynchburg
Norfolk
WAtRichland
Tv>tal Gross Beta
Date Solids Date
Collected mg/1 Dtd. (a)(b)
Gross Alpha
Date
Ctd. (a)(c)
4/09/75
4/03/75
4/03/75
4/09/75
4/01/75
4/01/75
4/02/75
4/03/75
4/01/75
4/01/75
4/08/75
76.0
52.0
21.0
26.0
74.0
106.0
180.0
158.0
40.0
86.0
96.0
2.2 ± 0.9
5/15/75
1.1 ± 0.7
5/15/75
(e)
5/15/75
(e)
5/15/75
2.1 ± 0.9
4/22/75
2.9 ± 1.0
4/22/75
3.1 ± 1.2
4/25/75
3.6 ± 1.2
4/28/75
1.5 ± 0.9
4/25/75
2.9 ± 1.0
4/22/75
1.3 ± 0.9
4/25/75
(e)
5/15/75
(e)
.5/15/75
(e)
5/15/75
(e)
5/15/75
(e)
4/22/75
(e)
4/22/75
(e)
4/25/75
(e)
4/28/75
(e)
4/24/75
(e)
4/22/75
(e)
4/25/75
Specific
Ganuna
90 Sr 226Ra Activity
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
-------
Table A-12 (Continued)
Location
Total Gross Beta
Date Solids Date
Collected mg/1 Dtd. (a)(b)
Gross Alpha
Date
Ctd. (a)(c)
« e
Sr
228
Specific
Gamma
Ra Activity
ro
PO
Seattle
WI:Genoa
Madison
Network Average
4/01/75 40.0
4/03/75 196.0
4/01/75 414.0
(e)
4/28/75
2.3 ± 1.1
4/28/75
3.0 ± 1.2
4/24/75
2.95
(e)
4/28/75
(e)
4/28/75
(e)
4/25/75
0.34
(d)
(d)
(d)
(a) The error expressed is the 2-sigma counting error.
(b) The minimum detectable limit of gross alpha is 2.0 pCi/1.
(c) The minimum detectable limit of gross beta is 1.0 pCi/1.
(d), Indicates specific gamma activity not detectable.
(e) Indicates activity not detectable.
(f) No sample.
(g) Newly established sampling sites. Data will appear in future issues,
-------
Table A-13
Plutonium and Uranium Analyses
of
Selected Drinking Water Samples
July 1974 - June 1975
Location
AL:Montgomery
CA:Berkeley
Los Angeles
CO:Denver
ID:Idaho Falls
IL:Chicago
ND:Bismarck
NM:Santa Fe
NV:Las Vegas
NY:Buffalo
Plutonium
(pCi/1)
238Pu .0081.005
239Pu .0221.009
238Pu 0
239Pu .0041.004
238Pu .0011.002
239Pu .0061.005
238Pu .0031.003
239PU .0121.008
238Pu 0
239PU .0051.004
238Pu 0
239Pu .0011.002
238PU .0031.003
239Pu .0091.006
238PU 0
239Pu .0091.007
238PU .0061.007
239PU .0231.014
238Pu .0011.002
239Pu .0031.003
230
Uranium
(pCi/1)
234U .0391.012
235U .0021.003
238U .0361.011
234U .0131.006
235U 0
238U .0081.004
234U 1.9910.24
235U .0861.018
238U 1.7210.21
234U .1601.027
235U .0051.004
238U .1091.021
234U .8001.112
235U .0301.010
238U .4361.065
234U .0801.018
235U .0041.004
238U .0721.017
234U .2531.038
235U .0111.006
238U .1491.027
234U 2.491.320
235U .0601.015
238U .8531.119
234U 2.491.320
235U .1381.028
238U 1.571.220
234U .0801.016
235U .0061.004
238U .0741.027
-------
Table A-13 (Continued)
Location
New York City
OH:Cincinnati
OK:Oklahoma City
OR:Portland
PA:Harrisburg
Pittsburgh
SC:Anderson
Columbia
TN:Knoxville
VA:Lynchburg
NETWORK
AVERAGES
Plutonium
(pCi/1)
238PU .0031.003
239PU .0094.006
238Pu .0051.004
239Pu .009±.006
238Pu .0041.004
239Pu .009±.006
238Pu 0 ,
239Pu .005±.004
Uranium
(PCi/1)
234U .0101.005
235U .0014.002
238U .005±.004
234U .0061.004
235U .001±.002
238U .0071.004
234U .025±.009
235U .0014.002
2380 .0144.006
234U .0094.005
235U .0014.002
238U .0044.003
238PU
239Pu
238PU
239Pu
238Pu
239Pu
238Pu
239PU
238Pu
239Pu
238Pu
239PU
238Pu
239Pu
0
.0034.
0
0
.0014.
.0064.
0
.0044.
.0064.
.0084.
0
.0044.
.002
.008
003
002
004
003
005
005
003
2340
2350
2380
2340
2350
2380
2340
2350
2380
2340
2350
2380
2340
2350
2380
2340
2350
2380
2340
2350
2380
*
0064
0034
0054
0254
0014
0164
0094
0014
0084
0144
0014
0104
0784
0074
0594
0104
0014
0114
429
018
258
*
*
»
004
003
003
009
002
007
005
002
004
006
002
005
016
004
013
005
002
006
231
-------
SECTION III. Milk Program
Pasteurised Milk
Pasteurized milk monitoring consists of 65 nationwide
sampling sites which contribute monthly pasteurized milk
samples. These samples are analyzed for iodine-131,
barium-140, cesium-137, and potassium. All 65 samples are
analyzed annually for strontium-89 and strontium-90. The
annual average value for strontium-89 was .3 aftd for
strontium-90 the annual average value was 4.2.
The values from the pasteurized milk samples for the
period PY75 are shown in Tables A-14 through A-17.
The results of .analyses of regional composite samples
for strontium-89 are shown in Table A-18. Table A-19 shows
the results of analyses of regional composite samples for
strontium-90.
232
-------
Table A-14
131 I in Pasteurized Milk
(pCi/1)
July 1974 - June 1975
Station
AK:Palmer
AL:Montgomery
AR:Littie Rock
AZ:Phoenix
CAtLos Angeles
San Francisco
Sacramento
CO:Denver
CT:Hartford
CZ:Cristobal
DC:Washington
DE:Wilmington
FL:Tampa
GA:Atlanta
HI:Honolulu
IA:Des Moines
ID:Idaho Falls
IL:Chicago
IN:Indianapolis
KS:Wichita
KY:Louisville
LA:New Orleans
MA:Boston
MD t Baltimore
ME:Portland
MI:Detroit
Grand Rapids
MN:Minneapolis
MO:Kansas City
St. Louis
MS:Jackson
MT:Helena
NC:Charlotte
ND:Minot
NE:Omaha
NH:Manchester
No. of
Samples
2
12
12
12
12
12
9
12
12
12
12
11
11
9
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
11
12
12
9
12
12
11
12
Max
0
3
4
0
2
9
4
4
3
9
3
6
5
7
2
4
3
3
5
4
5
3
3
5
8
5
4
8
3
8
4
2
5
4
2
2
Avg
.0
.7
.8
.0
.3
1.2
1.0
.5
.8
1.8
.7
1.6
.8
1.1
.4
1.0
.5
.8
.9
.8
.9
.7
.5
1.0
1.3
.8
.3
1.2
.7
1.4
.7
.2
.7
.8
.5
.3
233
-------
Table A-14 (Continued)
Station
NJ:Trenton
NM:Albuquerque
NVtLas Vegas
NY:Buffalo
New York
Syracuse
OH:Cincinnati
OH:Cleveland
OK:Oklahoma City
OR:Portland
PA:Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
PR:San Juan
RI:Providence
SC:Charleston
SD:Rapid City
TN:Chattanooga
Knoxville
Memphis
TX:Austin
Dallas
UT:Salt Lake City
VA:Norfolk
VT:Burlington
WA:Seattle
Spokane
WI:Milwaukee
WV:Charleston
WY:Laramie
NETWORK SUMMARY
No. of
Samples
10
12
11
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
11
12
12
12
12
11
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12,
752
Max
2
4
4
5
2
4
3
5
4
4
3
7
3
4
2
2
3
4
7
3
5
5
2
8
4
4
6
4
2
Avg
.8
1.2
.5
.8
.5
.8
.3
1.6
1.1
1.2
.8
1.1
.7
.4
.5
.5
.4
.8
.6
.5
.8
1.3
.5
1.3
.8
.7
1.1
1.2
.6
.8
234
-------
Table A-15
*
140 Ba in Pasteurized Milk
(pCi/1)
July 1974 - June 1975
Station
AK:Palmer
AL:Montgomery
AR:Littie Rock
AZ:Phoenix
CAtLos Angeles
San Francisco
Sacramento
CO:Denver
CT:Hartford
CZ:Cristobal
DC:Washington
DE:Wilmington
PL:Tampa
GA:Atlanta
HI:Honolulu
IA:Des Moines
ID:Idaho Falls
IL:Chicago
IN:Indianapolis
KS:Wichita
KY:Louisville
LA:New Orleans
MA:Boston
MD:Baltimore
ME:Portland
MI:Detroit
MI:Grand Rapids
MN Minneapolis
MO:Kansas City
St. Louis
MS:Jackson
MT:Helena
NCrCharlotte
ND:Minot
NE:Omaha
NH:Manchester
No. of
Samples
2
12
12
12
12
12
*9
12
12
12
12
11
11
9
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
11
12
12
9
12
12
11
12
Max
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
6
0
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
4
2
3
4
3
1
3
3
1
Avg
.0
.0
.0
.1
.0
.0
.4
.0
.0
.5
.0
.0
.1
.0
.0
.3
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.1
.0
.0
.0
.1
.0
.5
.4
.4
.3
.3
.1
.3
.3
.1
235
-------
Table A-15 (Continued)
No. of
Station Samples Max Avg
NJtTrenton 10 0 .0
NM:Albuquerque 12 0 .0
NV:Las Vegas 11 0 .0
NY:Buffalo 12 9 .8
New York 12 3 .3
Syracuse 12 0 .0
OHtCincinnati 12 9 .8
Cleveland 12 0 .0
OK:Oklahoma City 12 5 .7
OR: Portland 12 9 1.1
PA:Philadelphia 12 1 .1
Pittsburgh 12 0 .0
PR:San Juan 12 1 .1
RI:Providence 12 1 .1
SC:Charleston 12 1 .1
SD:Rapid City 11 9 .9
TN:Chattanooga 12 5 .4
Knoxville 12 0 .0
Memphis 12 2 .2
TX:Austin 12 2 .2
Dallas 11 1 .1
UT:Salt Lake City 12 0 .0
VA:Norfolk 12 0 .0
VT:Burlington 12 0 .0
WA:Seattle 12 1 .3
Spokane 12 2 .3
HI:Milwaukee 12 1 .1
WV:Charleston 12 0 .0
WY:Laramie 12 0 .0
NETWORK SUMMARY 752 9 .2
236
-------
Table A-16
137 Cs in Pasteurized Milk
(pCi/1)
July 1974 - June 1975
Station
AK:Palmer
AL:Montgomery
AR:Littie Rock
AZ:Phoenix
CAtLos Angeles
San Francisco
Sacramento
CO:Denver
CTiHartford
CZ:Cristobal
DC:Washington
DE:Wilmington
FL:Tampa
GA:Atlanta
HI:Honolulu
IA:Des Moines
ID:Idaho Falls
IL:Chicago
IN:Indianapolis
KS:Wichita
KY:Louisville
LA:New Orleans
MA:Boston
MD:Baltimore
ME:Portland
MI:Detroit
Grand Rapids
MN:Minneapolis
MO:Kansas City
St. Louis
MS:Jackson
MT:Helena
NC:Charlotte
ND:Minot
NE:Omaha
NH:Manchester
No. of
Samples
2
12
12
12
12
12
9
12
12
12
12
11
11
9
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
11
12
12
9
12
12
11
12
Max
19
17
17
10
8
9
13
13
15
8
18
13
32
18
9
15
10
15
13
12
11
18
18
13
31
16
17
17
18
14
13
15
13
12
11
20
Avg
12.0
10.3
10.3
4.7
4.9
4.7
6.2
6.1
10.3
5.2
8.6
8.2
27.8
13.8
6.3
10.0
6.0
10.0
9.6
8.3
7.3
11.9
11.9
8.9
17.1
10.1
11.6
12.1
9.3
9.0
9.4
8.8
9.4
8.6
8.8
13.5
237
-------
Table A-16 (Continued)
No. of
Station Samples Max Avg
NJ:Trenton 10 15 9.3
NM:Albuquerque 12 10 5.4
NV:Las Vegas 11 14 5.4
NY:Buffalo 12 15 9.6
New York 12 13 9.8
Syracuse 12 18 10.3
OH Cincinnati 12 11 8.8
Cleveland 12 23 10.2
OK:Oklahoma City 12 15 8.3
Portland 12 12 6.6
PA Philadelphia 12 11 7.9
Pittsburgh 12 16 9.7
PR:San Juan 12 12 7.1
RI:Providence 12 19 12.4
SCCharleston 12 19 12.7
SD:Rapid City 11 20 10.1
TN:Chattanooga 12 11 9.1
Knoxville 12 13 7.8
Memphis 12 13 8.0
TX: Austin 12 9 5.9
Dallas 11 13 7.7
UT:Salt Lake City 12 18 7.6
VA:Norfolk 12 11 6.6
VT:Burlington 12 13 8.9
WA:Seattie 12 19 9.9
Spokane 12 18 10.5
WI: Milwaukee 12 15 9.9
WV:Charleston 12 12 8.1
WY:Laramie 12 9 3.8
NETWORK SUMMARY 752 32 9.1
238
-------
Table A-17
Potassium in Pasteurized Milk
(g/1)
July 1974 - June 1975
Station
AK:Palmer
AL:Montgomery
AR:Little Rock
AZ:Phoenix
CA:Los Angeles
San Francisco
Sacramento
CO:Denver
CT:Hartford
CZ:Cristobal
DC:Washington
DE:Wilmington
PL:Tampa
GA:Atlanta
HI:Honolulu
IA:Des Moines
ID:Idaho Falls
IL:Chicago
IN:Indianapolis
KS:Wichita
KY:Louisville
LA:New Orleans
MA:Boston
MD:Baltimore
ME:Portland
MI:Detroit
Grand Rapids
MN:Minneapolis
MO:Kansas City
St. Louis
MS:Jackson
MT:Helena
NC:Charlotte
ND:Minot
NE:Omaha
NH:Manchester
No. of
Samples
Max
2
12
12
12
12
12
9 ,
12
12
12
12
11
11
9
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
11
12
12
9
12
12
11
12
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.7
Avg
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1'.5
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.5
239
-------
Table A-17 (Continued)
No. of
Station Samples Max Avg
NJiTrenton 10 1.6 1.5
NM:Albuquerque 12 1.5 1.4
NV:Las Vegas 11 1.5 1.5
NY-.Buffalo 12 1.6 1.5
New York 12 1.6 1.5
Syracuse 12 1.6 1.5
OH:Cincinnati 12 1.6 1.5
Cleveland 12 1.6 1.5
OK:Oklahoma City 12 1.5 1.4
OR:Portland 12 1.6 1.5
PA:Philadelphia 12 1.5 1.5
Pittsburgh 12 1.5 1.4
PR:San Juan 12 1.5 1.5
RI:Providence 12 1.6 1.5
SC:Charleston 12 1.6 1.5
SDtRapid City 11 1.6 1.5
TN:Chattanooga 12 1.6 1.4
Knoxville 12 1.5 1.5
Memphis 12 1.5 1.4
TX:Austin 12 1.6 1.5
Dallas 11 1.6 1.5
DT:Salt Lake City 12 1.7 1.5
VA:Norfolk 12 1.5 1.4
VT:Burlington 12 1.5 1.5
WA:Seattle 12 1.6 1.5
Spokane 12 1.5 1.4
WI: Milwaukee 12 1.6 1.5
WVrCharleston 12 1.6 1.5
WY:Laramie 12 1.6 1.4
NETWORK SUMMARY 752 1.7 1.5
240
-------
Table A-18
Strontium 89 In Pasteurized Milk
(pCi/1)
Regional Composite Samples
July 1974 - June 1975
No. of
Region Samples Max Avg
I 3 1.0 .3
II 3 1.0 .3
III 3 3.0 1.
IV 3 0.0 0.
V .3 '4.0 1.3
VI 3 4.0 1.3
VII 3 1.0 .3
VIII 3 0.0 0.
IX 3 1.0 .7
X 3 1.0 .3
NETWORK SUMMARY 30 4.0 .55
241
-------
Table A-19
Strontium 90 in Pasteurized Milk
(pCi/1)
Regional Composite Samples
July 1974 - June 1975
Region
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
NETWORK SUMMARY
No. Of
Samples
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
30
Max
5.7
4.2
4.8
5.3
4.5
4.3
4.2
4.6
1.6
3.2
5.7
Avg
5.3
3.6
4.7
4.8
4.2
3.6
3.4
3.5
1.0
3.0
3.7
242
-------
SECTION V. PAHO - Air and Milk Programs
An agreement was made in 1962 with the Pan American Health
Organization (PAHO) to develop a collaborative program for
furnishing assistance to health authorities in the Americas
for developing programs of radiological health. The agreement
provided limited quantities of essential equipment on a loan
basis to PAHO needed to establish surveillance programs, and
also provided the requisite laboratory services for analysis
of air, milk, water, and other samples. Technical advice was
givep. on research designs for radiological health programs.
The PAHO programs are included organizationally as an
ancillary function of the ERAMS.
Air analyses at the present time are 12 weekly samples.
Results of the PAHO air analyses for FY75 are shown in
Table A-20.
Pan American milk samples are analyzed for potassium,
strontium-89, strontium-90, iodine-131, cesium-137, and
barium-140. The results for strontium-89 are shown in
Table A-21. These values may have been affected by the
detonation by the Peoples Republic of China on June 17,
1974. The results for the strontium-90 analyses are shown
in Table A-22 and potassium results are shown in Table A-23.
The results for iodine-131, barium-140, and cesium-137 showed
no detectable concentrations for this period.
243
-------
Table A-20
Gross Beta Radioactivity in Pan American Surface Air
(pCi/m3)
July 1974 - June 1975
No. of
Location Samples Max Avg
CHILE:Santiago 312 5.05 .238
COLOMBIA:Bogota 199 5.82 .044
ECUADORiCuenca 145 18.1 .673
Guayaquil 201 3.32 .336
Quito 47 9.78 .422
PERU:Lima 65 2.58 .484
VENEZUELA:Caracas 47 .26 .042
GUYANA:Georgetown 11 .04 .010
BOLIVIA:La Paz 17 .02 .008
NETWORK SUMMARY 1044 18.1 .251
244
-------
Table A-21
Strontium-89 in Pan American Milk
(pCi/1)
July 1974 - June 1975
No. of
Location Samples Max Avg
Chile:Santiago 9 20 3.8
Colombia:Bogota 4 22 9.
Ecuador:Guayaquil 9 57 12.8
Venezuela:Caracas 12 6 1.
NETWORK SUMMARY' 34 57 6.7
v
Note: In these averages, the ND's have been averaged as zero.
245
-------
Table A-22
Strontium 90 in Pan American Milk
(pCi/1)
July 1974 - June 1975
No. of
Location Samples Max Avg
Chile:Santiago 9 2.8 .82
Colombia:Bogota 4 1.9 .83
Ecuador:Guayaquil 9 4.0 1.59
Venezuela:Caracas 12 4.0 1.86
NETWORK SUMMARY 34 4.0 1.28
Note: In these averages, the ND's have been averaged as zero,
246
-------
Table A-23
Potassium in Pan American Milk
(g/D
July 1974 - June 1975
No. of
Location Samples Max Avg
Chile:Santiago 9 1.59 1.45
Colombia:Bogota 4 1.37 1.30
Ecuador:Guayaquil 9 1.48 1.31
Venezuela:Caracas 12 1.52 1.26
NETWORK SUMMARY 34 1.59 1.33
247
------- |