EPA-520/4-77-00^
RADIATION
PROTECTION ACTIVITIES
1976
THE UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF RADIATION PROGRAMS
-------
RADIATION PROTECTION ACTIVITIES
1976
An Annual Report Prepared By
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Radiation Programs
Washington, D.C. 20460
August 1977
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
we**0" WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
To Readers of Radiation 'Protection Activities;
Since 1974 EPA has published this report to consolidate information
about radiation protection activities, which take place in several
dozen Federal agencies and cover a spectrum from nuclear power to medical
x rays. We hope the report will be useful to those who want an under-
standing of the full sweep of Federal activities; as in previous years,
it will be made available to Congress, key administrative officials, States
and the public.
We have established a generic outline to be used every year, so
readers may more easily compare activities from one report to the next.
Under each source of radiation exposure, substantive areas (such as wastes
under nuclear power) arc divided into kinds of action — guidance, environ-
mental impact statements, education, enforcement, research. Selected
activities, which will vary from year to year, are then discussed briefly
under each category.
Rather than presenting an exhaustive examination of each item, we have
identified the responsible agency so that people who want more detailed
information will know where to find it. Among the most useful sources
are the annual reports of other agencies; while none of them catalogs the
overall Federal effort like this report, they do provide more detailed data
on their own activities. Another good source for further information is the
expanded publications list for 1976, Appendix B. It should be noted that
this document serves as EPA's own annual report as well as being a compre-
hensive overview of other Federal agencies, so EPA's activities are
necessarily presented in more detail than others'.
Most radiation protection activities are day-by-day procedures which
receive little public attention. In 1-976, however, several related issues
became controversial and were widely discussed:
—the implications for public health and safety of nuclear power
development, especially as the industry continued to be plagued by various
difficulties;
—the question of proliferation of nuclear weapons, addressed by
President Ford in his October 28 statement that reprocessing and recycling
of plutonium should halt unless the associated risks can be overcome;
—the suitability of mammography as a standard diagnostic procedure
for older women'with' no breast cancer symptoms.
-------
In addition to the public debate on these issues, there were significant
developments in the courts. The Supreme Court ruled that EPA could not
regulate radioactive effluents from nuclear power plants licensed by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The issue of waste disposal was highlighted
in a Court of Appeals ruling that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission must
explain and document more fully the consideration given to the possible
impacts in its reactor licensing process.
In the Executive Branch, many new standards and guidelines were in
the works at EPA, including transuranic elements, x-ray guidance for
Federal health facilities, and radioactivity in drinking water. Among
many other activities, the Bureau of Radiological Health established
rules for gonadal shielding during diagnostic x rays; also, at its
initiative, the first civil penalty was collected under the Radiation
Control for Health and Safety Act of 1968. The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission worked on several Environmental Impact Statements of great
importance, including those on wastes and on uranium mills. As the body
of the report shows, Federal activities relating to radiation protection
included almost every Department in one way or another, and 1976 was a
very busy year.
Although we have attempted to be accurate and reasonably complete
in preparing this report, no doubt there are errors and omissions. We
would appreciate your drawing them to our attention, as well as sending
us your comments and requests for assistance Misinformation.
D. Rowe, Ph.D.
Deputy Assistant Administrator
for Radiation Programs
-------
CONDENSED TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. Introduction 1
II. Naturally-Occurring Radioactive Materials 7
III. Medical Radiation Exposure 25
IV. Nuclear Power 43
V. Other Nuclear Sources 84
VI. Protection from Nonionizing Radiation 90
VII. Occupational Exposure 110
VIII. Comprehensive Executive Activities 127
APPENDICES
A. Summary of Laws Enacted by States During 1976
B. List of Radiation Protection Publications - 1976
C. Non-Government Standards Setting Bodies
D. Charts of Organization
E. Acronyms and Abbreviations Glossary
CHARTS, TABLES AND FIGURES
2.1 Status of Active Uranium Mill Sites in the U.S.
as of December 1976 11
2.2 Mill Sites Included in Phase II Study 14
2.3 Radium-226, Uranium and Thorium Concentrations in
Florida Phosphate Mine Products and Wastes 17
2.4 Radium-226, Uranium and Thorium in Wet Process Phosphoric
Acid Plant Products and By-products 17
2.5 Major Effluent Pathways for Uranium in Copper Mining
and Milling 20
3.1 Trends in Radiographic Diagnostics 25
4.1 U.S. Reactor Orders Each Year 42
4.2 Proposed May 1975 Standards for Normal Operations of the
Uranium Fuel Cycle 53
4.3 The Fuel Cycle Associated with One Year's Operation of a
Typical 1000 Electrical-Megawatt Nuclear Power Plant 55
4.4 Protective Action Guides for Whole Body and Thyroid
Exposure to Airborne Radioactive Materials 77
5.1 Announced U.S. Nuclear Detonations 85
6.1 Nonionizing Radiation 91
6.2 Electromagnetic Radiation Analysis Van 96
6.3 Integral Power Density Distribution 97
6.4 Fraction of Population Exposed as a Function of Power
Density 98
6.5 Tall Building Exposure Situation 99
6.6 Frequency Assignment Distributions: Number vs. Distance
for a Minimum on-Axis Power Density 101
6.7 Frequency Assignment Distribution Number vs. Distance for
a Specified Range of on-Axis Power Density 102
6.8 Frequency Assignment Distributions: Number vs. Minimum
on-Axis Power Density at a Specified Distance 103
7.1 Summary of Annual Whole Body Exposures for Covered NRC
Licensees 1968-1975 114
-------
7.2 Distribution of Annual Whole* Body Exposures Reported by
Covered Licensees 115
7.3 NRC Transient Workers 1969-1975 114
7.4 Whole Body Exposure History of ERDA and ERDA Contractor
Employees . 119
7.5 Length of Employment for Workers Terminating Employment
with ERDA or ERDA Contractors 120
7.6 Radon Daughter Concentrations, 1976 121
7.7 1976 Uranium Mine Exposure 121
7.8 Number of Incidents and Number of Persons Reported
Accidentally Exposed to Various Types of Radiation Sources,
Radiation Incidents Registry, 1970-76 : . . .124
8.1 Summary of Dose Data from All Sources 132
8.2 Environmental Radioactivity Intercomparison Program,
1976 137
-------
OUTLINE
Page
INTRODUCTION 1
1. Congressional Activities 1
2. Executive Branch 2
a. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
b. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
c. Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA)
d. Bureau of Radiological Health (BRH)
e. Multi-Agency Responsibilities
Occupational Exposure
Nuclear Export Licensing Policy
Radioactive Materials Transportation
Consumer Products
Emergency Response Planning
3. Federal/State Jurisdiction 5
NATURALLY-OCCURING RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS 7
1. Introduction and Summary 7
2. Major Congressional and Judicial Activities 9
3. Executive Activities by Source of Radiation 10
a. Uranium Mining and Milling Tailings 10
•Guidance/Environmental Impact Statements
Generic Environmental Statement
Sherwood Uranium Project, Spokane Indian Reservation
•Studies
NRC Task Force
EPA/ORP Study of In-situ Mining
Ambrosia Lake Study
EPA/ORP Report on Environmental Impact
b. Inactive Uranium Mill Tailings Sites 13
•Studies
Joint Engineering Assessment
Navajo Nation Studies
c. Non-Nuclear Energy Sources 15
Bibliography on Radioactivity of Fossil Fuels
•Coal
Assessment of Radiological Impact of Western Coal
•Liquefied Petroleum Gas
•Geothermal Energy
d. Mineral Extraction Industry 16
•Phosphate Mining and Milling
Occupational Impact
EPA/ORP Studies
Egyptian Phosphate Industry Study
Radiological Aspects of Fertilizer Utilization
•Copper Industry
e. Water 19
Guidance
Radioactivity in Drinking Water
•Studies
Radium Removal Process
Radon in Potable Water
f. Construction Materials 21
•Studies
-------
g. Other Sources 22
Carlsbad Caverns Recommendations
III. MEDICAL RADIATION EXPOSURE 25
1. Introduction and Summary 25
2. Major Congressional and Judicial Activities 28
3. Executive Activities Pertaining to Public Exposure 29
a. Comprehensive Activities 29
•Guidance
Exemption Procedures for Government Used Products
•Education and Quality Assurance
Training Resources Center
•Studies
Long Term Radiation Effects
Oxford Study of Childhood Cancers
Polish Radiation Bioeffects Studies
Uranium in Dental Porcelain
b. Conventional Diagnostic X-Ray Systems 30
•Guidance 30
Quality Assurance Recommendations
Gonad Shielding
Exposure During Pregnancy
Mammography Recommendations
Memorandum of Understanding
X-Rays in Federal Health Care Facilities
•Education and Quality Assurance 32
Quality Assurance Catalog
BRH Training Program Evaluation
Radiological Health Sciences Learning Laboratory
Quality Assurance Seminars
Radiologic Technologist Training Packages
Radiographic Film Processing Conference
Self Assessment for Technologists
Dental Exposure Normalization Technique
Breast Exposure: National Trends
Film on Safe Use of Analytical X-Rays
Surveillance Manual
Consumer Information Programs
•Compliance 34
Automated System for Survey Instruments
State Contracts for Diagnostic X-Ray Equipment
Corrective Action Programs
•Studies 36
National Evaluation of X-Ray Trends
Bone Marrow Dose to Adults
Organ Doses in Diagnostic Radiology
Mammographic Screening
X-Ray Operator Job Performance
Skull X-Ray Selection Criteria
c. Computered Tomographic Systems 37
•Guidance
•Compliance
-------
•Studies
Panoramic Dental Units
d. Nuclear Medicine 37
•Education and Quality Assurance
Manual on Quality Assurance for Scintillation Cameras
Course on Instructional Techniques for Radiation Protection
Radiopharmaceutical Dosimetry Symposium
Quality Assurance Workshops in Nuclear Medicine
•Compliance
Hospital Patients Overexposed
•Studies
Short Lived Radionuclides
Nuclear Medicine Information Systems
Childhood Exposure to lodine-131
Scintillation Camera Image Quality
e. Cabinet X-Ray Systems -. 39
•Guidance
•Compliance
f. Ultrasound 40
•Guidance
•Studies
IV. NUCLEAR POWER 43
1. Introduction and Summary
a. Industry Status
b. Presidential Statement
c. Summary
2. Major Congressional and Judicial Activities 47
a. Congressional 47
Reactor Safety Study Review
Exports and Proliferation
Breeder Reactor Restrictions
Radioactive Wastes
Insurance and Indemnity
Low Level Radiation
b. Judicial 49
EPA/NRC Jurisdiction
Transportation
Reprocessing and Waste Disposal
Export Program and NEPA
Radioiodine Reduction
Mixed Oxide Fuels
Price-Anderson Constitutionality
3. Executive Activities Pertaining to Public Exposure 52
a. Comprehensive Activities 52
•Guidance 52
Report on Controlling Planned Releases
-------
EPA/ORP's Standards for the Uranium Fuel Cycle
EPA/ORP's Environmental Analysis of Carbon-14
Types of NRC Standards
NRC Environmental Guides
NRC Review of Environmental Specifications
NRC Effluent Guidelines
NRC Regulations on Mixed Oxide Fuels
NRC Regulations on Reporting Noncompliance
International Safeguards
•Study Review 57
•Environmental Impact Statements .58
Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor
Floating Nuclear Power Plants
Mixed Oxide Fuel
Nuclear Power Export Activities
Expansion of Uranium Enrichment Capacity
Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant Expansion
Brookhaven National Laboratory
•Enforcement 60
Inspection Types
Action Taken
Confirmation of Monitoring Measurements
Standard Review Plans
•Studies 62
NRC's Risk Assessment Studies
Cost/Benefit of Reducing Exposures
Doses Associated with Power Generation
EPA/ORP Radiation Studies at Nuclear Facilities
b. Waste 63
•Administration 63
•Guidance 63
High Level Waste Criteria
West Valley Wastes
Decommissioning Criteria
•Environmental Impact Statements 65
Reprocessing and Waste Management
Waste Management Operations at the Hanford Reservation
Commercially Generated Radwaste
Waste Management Operations At Idaho National Laboratory
ERDA Waste Conferences
Barnwell Fuel Receiving and Storage Station
High Performance Fuel Laboratory at Richland, Washington
•Enforcement and Licensing 67
Licensing ERDA Facilities
NRC Oversight of Waste Disposal
•Studies 68
EPA/ORP Research on Burial Sites
NRC Site Reassessment
GAO Report
Status Report
c. Spent Fuel 70
•Environmental Impact Statement
-------
•Licensing and Enforcement
d. Transportation 70
•Guidance
Irradiated Fuel Packaging
Plutonium Packaging
•Environmental Impact Statements
Air Transport of Nuclear Materials
•Studies
Monitoring
Survey of Radioactive Material Shipments
Large Shipping Cask Safety
Transport in Urban Areas
e. Accident Prevention 72
•Guidance
Qualification Testing of Components
Fire Protection
•Enforcement
Abnormal Occurrences
Deficiencies in Containment
•Studies
Review of Plutonium Facilities
Health and Environmental Research
Facility Safety Studies
Water Reactor Safety Tests
Fuel Behavior 1
Metallurgy and Metals
Site Safety Research
Operational Safety
NRC's Advanced Reactor Program
f. Emergency Response Planning 75
•Guidance
Basic Documents
EPA/ORP Protective Action Guides
NRC Handbook
Task Force on Offsite Emergency Instrumentation
International Activities
•Studies
EPA/ORP Contracts
•Education
Training Programs
•State/Federal Programs
GAO Report
Shift to Regions
NRC/EPA Task Force
V. OTHER NUCLEAR SOURCES 84
1. Nuclear Weapons Testing 84
People's Republic of China Nuclear Detonations
2. U.S. Nuclear Navy 86
3. Radioisotope Applications 86
4. Consumer Products 87
-------
•Guidance
•Environmental Impact Statements
•Radiation Incidents Registry
•Licenses
5. Nuclear Powered Pacemakers 87
VI. PROTECTION FROM NONIONIZING RADIATION 90
1. Introduction and Summary 90
2. Major Congressional and Judicial Activities 93
3. Executive Activities Pertaining to Public Exposure 94
a. Comprehensive 94
Measurements at Moscow Embassy
Interagency Programs on Biological Effects
b. Radiofrequency and Microwave 94
•Guidance 94
•Compliance 94
•EPA Studies 95
Urban Area Environmental Measurements
Population Exposure to Radiofrequency
Measurements of Radiofrequency Levels in Buildings
Radiofrequency and Microwave Source Distribution Analysis
Microwave Oven Electric Field Intensity Measurements
Portable Traffic Radar Systems
Fetal Exposure in Rats
Length of Gestation
Animal Studies on Behavioral Effects
Hearing Effects
Epidemiological Study of Alabama Children
In Vitro Studies
•BRH Studies 105
Marine Radar Exposure
Theoretical Dosimetry Studies
Miniature Microwave Field Probe
c. High Voltage Transmission Lines 105
d. Lasers and Laser Products 105
•Guidance
•Compliance
•Studies
e. Light Products and Devices 106
•Guidance
Mercury Vapor Lamps
•Studies
Light Research Programs Symposium
Light Source Measurement
Ultraviolet Hazard Monitor
Guide Number for Ultraviolet Radiation
Environmental Factors and Ultraviolet Injury
Monitoring Ultraviolet Radiation
VII. OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE 110
1. Introduction and Summary 110
-------
2. Environmental Protection Agency
3. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 113
•Guidance
Personnel Monitoring Reports
Petition on "Hot Particles"
Respiratory Protection
High-Intensity Radiation
Dosimetry Requirements for Criticality Accidents
Monitoring of Radiographers
•Environmental Impact Statement
Personnel Dosimeters Containing Natural Thorium
•Studies
Exposure of Airport Workers
Exposure of Flight Attendants
4. Energy Research and Development Administration 118
•Studies
Lifetime Health and Mortality Studies
Uranium Miners
Health Effects of Radium and Thorium
Inhaled Radioactive Gases and Dusts
5. Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration ..121
6. Occupational Safety and Health Administration 122
7. National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health 122
8. Bureau of Radiological Health 123
VIII. COMPREHENSIVE EXECUTIVE ACTIVITIES 127
1. Guidance 127
Transuranium Contamination
Radioactivity in Food
Ocean Dumping
Quality Assurance Requirements
Proposed Guides for NARM
Transportation Regulations
Radioactivity in the Great Lakes
2. Studies 128
EPA/ORP's Research Committee
Plutonium Air Inhalation Dose (PAID)
Ocean Disposal Studies
Dose Assessment Program
Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System
Radiological Quality of the Environment
Facility Data Analysis Project
Dose Modeling
Radon Daughter Detection
Lifetime Somatic Risk Model
Effects of Low Level Radiation
ERDA Studies on Bioeffects
3. Quality Assurance 136
-------
INTRODUCTION
Americans get most of their exposure to radia-
tion from naturally-occurring sources like cosmic
rays. Although we can affect it by where we
choose to live, whether we travel by air, or how
we decide to vacation, a certain amount of expo-
sure is inescapable for each individual.
The purpose of radiation protection is to limit:
— the dose to individuals which is added to
the relatively unavoidable amount,
— the total population dose, which sums all
individual doses, and
— the environmental dose commitment, or
the sum of all doses to individuals over the time
period that a radioactive material is available for
interaction with people.
Setting Federal policy about how much and
what kind of protection the public should have
from any one particular source of radiation is
certainly complex, since risks and benefits are
often uncertain. In terms of exposure to individu-
als, the major source which almost everyone
agrees could be cut down safely and substantially
is diagnostic x-ray procedures. The possible re-
duction in individual or even total population
exposure by controlling most other sources — the
nuclear fuel cycle, consumer products containing
naturally-occurring radioactive materials, naval
reactors, and so on — is comparatively small
because doses are small. However, by the crite-
rion of environmental dose commitment, the'nu-
clear fuel cycle and some mining and fossil fuel
sources are important because they can produce
radioactive materials which, if discharged, persist
in the environment for hundreds of years and
longer, exposing large population groups. Like-
wise, such operations produce waste materials
that could result in varying degrees of hazard to
different population groups for very long time
periods, depending on the amount of control or
isolation involved.
In addition to setting policy on controlling such
sources, radiation protection involves many spe-
cific implementing activities, including less famil-
iar problems like regulating the occupational
environment of fire' alarm makers and
transportation of fertilizer. This report is designed
to survey in some detail the activities of several
Federal agencies involved in radiation protection
— such as controlling medical x-ray exposures,
managing nuclear power plant effluents, protect-
ing workers exposed to radiation, and monitoring
fallout. In addition, some of the less obvious
activities are referred to, to give readers a sense of
the scope of Federal involvement. This introduc-
tion will focus on how the jurisdictional pie is
sliced in Congress, among Federal agencies, and
between Federal and State authorities.
• Congressional Activities
Although this Report deals almost exclusively
with 1976 activities, it cannot ignore the drastic
change Congress made early in 1977 in the way it
will deal with nuclear energy legislation. The
House Democratic Caucus voted on January 4,
1977 to strip the Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy of legislative powers, and subsequently
both Houses divided its former jurisdiction
among other Committees.
The Joint Committee was virtually unique in its
importance in steering nuclear power policy.
Chartered in the Atomic Energy Act itself — not
merely in the House and Senate rules — the Joint
Committee was the only permanent one with
continuing authority to report legislation. Rather
than weaving through the cumbersome legislative
process in the usual way, the Committee would
introduce its legislation in identical form in both
Houses; on the relatively rare occasions when
other Members amended its bills on the floor, the
Committee would serve as its own conference
committee to resolve differences between the
House and Senate versions.
The Joint Committee served a useful purpose in
the early days of development of nuclear energy.
However, the recognition that nuclear energy is
only one part of a balanced energy program,
together with changing Congressional structures
for energy, made the Committee outmoded. Af-
ter its legislative powers were formally split up,
nuclear power legislation began to be considered
in the same way as bills for other energy alterna-
tives: from different standpoints affected by
-------
many kinds of interests, instead of by one spe-
cially chartered Committee where all the Con-
gressional expertise was centralized. The new
lineup in the House is as follows:
— military nuclear concerns: Committee on
Armed Services
— general regulation of the nuclear indus-
try: Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs
— nuclear export questions: Committee on
International Relations
— research and development: Committee
on Science and Technology
— facilities regulation and oversight: Com-
mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.
On the Senate side, reform proposals made the
following changes:
— national security aspects of atomic en-
ergy: Committee on Armed Services
— nonmilitary environmental regulation and
control of atomic energy: Committee on Envi-
ronment and Public Works
— international aspects, including nuclear
transfer policy: Committee on Foreign Relations
— organization and management of U.S. nu-
clear export policy: Committee on Governmen-
tal Affairs
— energy policy: Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources.
Radiation protection activities other than those
pertaining to nuclear power are covered in two
ways: by the Committees with jurisdiction over
substantive areas like health or the environment,
and by the Appropriations Subcommittees for
each agency involved. Enumerating the responsi-
bilities of each substantive Committee would not
be helpful to people seeking pertinent hearings,
since virtually every Committee has some possi-
ble angle on radiation protection: transporta-
tion, consumer products, occupational safety,
small business, executive branch jurisdiction, and
so on. Much depends on whether Members of a
particular Committee are interested in radiation
protection; if they are, they can find good reasons
for exploring it.
• Executive Branch
Nearly everything the Federal government
does in radiation protection is accomplished by
the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of
Radiation Programs (EPA/ORP), the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC), FDA's Bureau of
Radiological Health (BRH) and Bureau of Drugs,
the Energy Research and Development Adminis-
tration (ERDA), or the National Cancer Institute.
The remaining activities and responsibilities are
scattered among many agencies, including the
National Bureau of Standards, the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, the Office of
Telecommunications Policy, and the Central In-
telligence Agency. While the discussion which
follows is by no means complete, it does show
the division of jurisdiction among four of the
major agencies involved, and the way a number
of multi-agency functions are handled.
Originally, nearly all authority pertinent to ra-
diation protection was or is derived from the
Atomic Energy Act and the Public Health Service
Act. These basic statutes have been amended
many times over and supplemented by Executive
Orders; additional relevant laws have been
passed, such as the Medical Device Amendments
and the Consumer Product Safety Act.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
When EPA was formed in 1970 (by Reorgani-
zation Plan No. 3), its new jurisdiction included
that of:
— the Federal Radiation Council, a Presiden-
tially appointed, Cabinet level group formed "to
advise the President with respect to radiation
matters, directly or indirectly affecting health,
including guidance to Federal agencies in the
formulation of radiation standards..." (73 Stat
690).
— radiation protection activities of the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
covered under the Public Health Service Act,
except "insofar as the functions...pertain to (A)
regulation of radiation from consumer products,
including electronic product radiation, (B) radia-
-------
tion as used in the healing arts, (C) occupational
exposures to radiation, and (D) research, techni-
cal assistance, and training related to clauses (A),
(B), and (C)" (Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970,
Section 2). Other functions under this Act involve
research and investigation, national health sur-
veys and studies, and Federal/State cooperation
in public health.
— ,the Division of Radiation Protection Stan-
dards in the Atomic Energy Commission, "to the
extent that such functions of the Commission
consist of establishing generally applicable envi-
ronmental standards for the protection of the
general environment from radioactive material.
As used herein, standards mean limits on radia-
tion exposure or levels, or concentrations or
quantities of radioactive material, in the general
environment outside the boundaries of locations
under the control of persons possessing or using
radioactive material" (Ibid.).
Since 1970, EPA's radiation protection author-
ity has been extensively supplemented. The ma-
jor area of jurisdictional conflict resulting from
the additional legislation has been implementa^
tion of water quality effluent limitations under the
Water Quality Control Act of 1972. The Supreme
Court found on June 1, 1976 that EPA is not
required to regulate radioactive effluents in dis-
charge permits for nuclear power plants (see
below for a fuller discussion). Before that deci-
sion, in January 1976 a new and updated Memo-
randum of Understanding became effective be-
tween EPA and NRC on the preparation and
evaluation of environmental impact statements.
For all activities covered under the Water Quality
Act of 1972:
1. NRC serves as the "lead agency" for prep-
aration of environmental statements.
2. NRC and EPA work together to identify
environmental information needed to evaluate
the impact on water quality and biota.
3. EPA evaluates such impacts as far as possi-
ble in advance of the issuance of NRC's Final
Environmental Impact Statement.
4. EPA endeavors to issue, where appropri-
ate, a complete Section 402 permit under the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) as far as possible in advance of the NRC
licensing action (construction permit, operating
license, or early site approval).
5. EPA and NRC consider the feasibility of
holding combined or concurrent hearings on
EPA's proposed Section 402 permits and NRC's
proposed licensing actions.
The range of other additional legislation is
extremely broad, since almost all of the major
bills affecting EPA can include radiation protec-
tion in one way or another. Below are some of the
most important:
— Toxic Substances Control Act, regulating
all aspects of hazardous chemical substances and
mixtures, including premarket review.
— Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act, identifying and listing hazardous wastes, ap-
plying standards to their generators and transport-
ers, issuing permits for treatment, storage or
disposal.
— Solid Waste Disposal Act, publishing
guidelines for solid waste systems, consulting
with agencies which issue disposal licenses or
permits.
— Safe Drinking Water Act, promulgating
drinking water regulations, acting on an emer-
gency basis to protect public health under certain
conditions.
— Clean Air Act, publishing a list of air pollu-
tants and issuing air quality criteria and standards
for each pollutant listed, publishing categories of
stationary sources and regulating them, publish-
ing hazardous air pollutants and prescribing
emission standards.
— Marine Protection, Research and Sanctu-
aries Act, allowing permits to be issued for ocean
dumping of radioactive substances under certain
conditions.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
Broadly speaking, the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion was split into its promotional (ERDA) and
regulatory (NRC) parts by the Energy Reorganiza-
tion Act of 1974 (88 Stat 1233, PL 93-438). NRC
-------
became responsible for the "licensing and regula-
tory functions" relating to commercial nuclear
facilities, and to some facilities of the promotional
arm (ERDA). Therefore, NRC must implement
radiation protection standards, both by defining
specific requirements in the licenses of individual
plants and by enforcing them.
The other major area of NRC responsibility is
the regulation of:
— "source material," meaning uranium or
thorium, or ores of a certain concentration of
either or both;
— "by-product material," meaning any ra-
dioactive material (except below) yielded in, or
made radioactive by, producing or using special
nuclear material;
— "special nuclear material," meaning plu-
tonium, uranium-233, uranium enriched in the
isotope 233 or 235, any material enriched by the
foregoing, and any other material designated by
the NRC. As will be seen below, much of the
regulating of these materials is actually carried out
by the States rather than by the NRC itself.
Energy Research and
Development Administration (ERDA)
As the agency designated to take over the
AEC's promotional functions, ERDA is responsi-
ble for the great bulk of research on the biomedi-
cal, environmental, physical and safety aspects of
nuclear and other kinds of energy. While other
agencies have a few projects in health effects of
radiation, ERDA's program is extensive and com-
prehensive. It is also responsible for radiation
health and safety and environmental protection
at ERDA owned facilities.
Bureau of Radiological Health (BRH)
The Food and Drug Administration's BRH has
many general public health responsibilities asso-
ciated with radiation protection. It conducts an
electronic product radiation control program, in-
cluding the development and administration of
performance standards. As the agency primarily
responsible for radiation used in the healing arts,
the Bureau develops criteria, recommendations,
and standards relative to radiation use and expo-
sure, as well as developing improved techniques,
procedures and users' qualifications for reducing
unnecessary exposure. BRH also provides advice
to the Bureau of Foods and the Bureau of Drugs
on the control of radioactive materials and radia-
tion in food and drugs. Other functions include
research, technical assistance and training in oc-
cupational radiation exposure; research on health
effects of radiation exposure; and participation in
the development of model codes and recom-
mendations.
Multi-Agency Responsibilities
Occupational Exposure
The Occupational Safety and Health Adminis-
tration (OSHA) covers workers who are exposed
to radiation and not already protected by another
agency. All Federal agencies are required to meet
OSHA standards for their own employees, and to
ensure that contractor employees are similarly
protected. As part of its inheritance from the
Federal Radiation Council, EPA is responsible for
general Federal guides for occupational expo-
sure, while BRH traditionally has covered health
workers. For uranium, phosphate and other min-
ers, the Mining Enforcement and Safety Adminis-
tration (MESA) in the Department of the Interior
sets health and safety standards within EPA guid-
ance, which include regulation of exposure to
radon and radon daughters.
Nuclear Export Licensing Policy
While NRC has responsibility for final deci-
sions about licensing export of nuclear materials
and equipment, a 1976 Executive Order (E.O.
11902, February 2, 1976) defines procedures for
involving other agencies. They apply to specific
export license applications, general licenses for
export, and proposed exemptions from the re-
quirement for a license. To produce an executive
branch position on the effect on the common
defense and security, the Secretary of State is to
-------
consult with the Secretaries of Defense and Com-
merce,-the ERDA Administrator, and the Director
of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency.
Radioactive Materials Transportation
NRC, the Department of Transportation (DoT),
the U.S. Postal Service, and the States all have a
part in regulating the safety of commercial ship-
ments of nuclear material. NRC regulations apply
to its licensees and generally specify procedures
and standards for packages and shipments. DoT
regulates certain types of packaging, labeling and
conditions of carriage. Since DoT and NRC juris-
dictions overlap, the agencies operate under a
Memorandum of Understanding in order to pro-
vide consistent, comprehensive and effective reg-
ulation without duplication. The Postal Service
regulates shipments of nuclear materials by mail,
and the States have regulatory authority over
intrastate transport of nuclear materials.
Consumer Products
Jurisdiction over consumer products contain-
ing radioactive material is incomplete and ex-
tremely complex. Five different Acts may be used
to regulate risks associated with products: the
Occupational Safety and Health Act (by OSHA),
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (by NRC or
Agreement States, discussed below), the Clean
Air Act (by EPA), or the Radiation Control for
Health and Safety Act (by BRH).
If none of these can adequately reduce or
eliminate the risk -- and if the radioactive sub-
stance involved is not regulated by NRC — the
Consumer Product Safety Commission may act. It
can require appropriate branding and labelling of
products containing radioactive substances, as
long as it determines that the material is suffi-
ciently hazardous to warrant control.
Emergency Response Planning
The Federal effort to develop and improve
emergency response planning for radiological in-
cidents includes provisions for assistance to State
and local governments in making plans for fixed
facilities and transportation. Led by the NRC,
agencies involved include EPA, ERDA, DoT,
HEW, the- Defense Civil Preparedness Agency,
and the Federal Disaster Assistance Administra-
tion. Responsibilities among them are assigned by
the Federal Preparedness Agency of the General
Services Administration; the current division was
published in the Federal Register on December
24,1975.
• Federal/State Jurisdiction
While the States may not regulate, control or
restrict any NRC activities, they can and generally
do regulate x-ray facilities and use, as well as
radioactive materials not controlled by NRC.
Forty-eight States and Puerto Rico have their own
enabling acts for radiation protection, and 21
have specific statutes to control nonionizing radi-
ation. In addition, although Federal radiation con-
trol authorities dominate the field and generally
preempt States, many statutes include provisions
permitting Federal authority to be delegated to
States through individual agreements. Two of the
most important laws with such provisions are the
Atomic Energy Act and the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act (FWPCA).
The Atomic Energy Act (as amended by Sec-
tion 274) authorizes NRC to relinquish to a Staje
its regulatory authority over by-product, source
and special nuclear materials not sufficient to
form a critical mass. As of the end of fiscal year
1976, there were 25 Agreement States exercising
regulatory jurisdiction over approximately
10,700 "agreement material" licenses, as com-
pared to about 8,500 such licenses administered
directly by the NRC. As required by the Act, NRC
conducts an annual formal review of State pro-
grams to assure continuing compatibility. NRC
also provides training courses; exchanges current
information on regulations, licensing, inspection
and enforcement; and consults with State
officials.
Similarly, EPA has agreements with 27 "per-
mitting States" under FWPCA. They were con-
tacted in March 1976 by the National Governors'
-------
Conference to promote early cooperation with
NRC in licensing nuclear power plants and rela-
ted facilities. Suggesting that States might enter
into agreements modeled after the principles of
the NRC/EPA Memorandum of Understanding
(discussed below), the Conference stimulated fa-
vorable response from nine States.
To help make State programs compatible and
to some degree uniform, the Council of State
Governments published Suggested State Regula-
tions for the Control of Radiation in cooperation
with Federal agencies. Those responsible for
helping with periodic revision and updating are
NRC, BRH, EPA, and particularly the Conference
of Radiation Control Program Directors.
-------
NATURALLY-OCCURRING RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS
1. Introduction and Summary
Most Americans are exposed to about the
same magnitude of radioactivity from naturally-
occurring sources, including cosmic rays, materi-
als originating beneath the earth's crust, and a
small amount from radioactive gases in the air.
However, there are significant variations in expo-
sure because of high concentrations of uranium,
thoron and their decay products in soil; also,
cosmic radiation varies considerably with land
elevation and altitude above sea level. Exposure
may also differ in accordance with individual
lifestyles — because of more air travel, for
instance.
One of the most important naturally-occurring
sources of exposure is mined and processed ores
originating in strata containing significant con-
centrations of uranium, thorium and their daugh-
ter products. As long as they are confined deep in
the earth, the ores have little impact on people
because of the shielding effect of the ground
cover. However, when they are mined, sepa-
rated, processed into consumer products and
distributed, potential exposure to the population
is increased. While people of course do not cause
the natural radioactivity in the ores, they can
increase and concentrate it by technological
processes. Some of the industries where this takes
place are phosphate, rare earth and several other
mining concerns, as well as newer and less devel-
oped processes such as geothermal power
production.
Radioactfve substances can affect people and
their environment through four basic pathways:
— as gases and particulates which are re-
leased to the air, becoming available for possible
human inhalation and lowering the overall air
quality.
— as materials in ores or the associated by-
products which may enter ground and surface
waters by effluent discharges, land runoff, and
leaching from waste piles.
— from close contact between workers and
radioactive materials throughout mining and
processing.
— from radioactive materials that have en-
tered the food chain.
Because naturally-occurring radioactive ma-
terials have the potential for exposing large por-
tions of the population, Federal agencies are
extensively involved in identifying and assessing
the public health and environmental problems
associated with its _various sources. Substantial
problems have emerged, and analyses of new
technologies are only beginning.
Summary
Congress enacted two major laws affecting
naturally-occurring sources of radiation expo-
sure: the Toxic Substances Control Act and the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (sum-
marized below). There was no significant court
action.
Arranged by source of radiation, highlights of
executive branch activities follow:
— Uranium mining and milling: NRC began
preparing a Generic Environmental Statement on
uranium milling operations, and continued to
review license applications on a case by case
basis. Several related Environmental Statements
were considered, and EPA's Office of Radiation
Programs (EPA/ORP) and NRC conducted rele-
vant studies.
— Inactive uranium mill tailings sites: An
engineering assessment of 23 inactive piles was
continued by ERDA as part of a joint study with
EPA.
— Non-nuclear energy sources: EPA/ORP
continued compiling an annotated bibliography
on radioactivity in fossil fuels. Assessments and
surveys of coal as a source of radioactive emis-
sions proceeded with particular emphasis on
coal-fired power plants using Western coal. Stud-
ies were completed on radiological effects from
radon in Liquefied Petroleum Gas and from geo-
thermal energy.
-------
8
— - Mineral extraction industry: EPA/ORP
continued to provide assistance to Florida in
surveying the phosphate industry problem, and
started to look at the radiological impact of
(1) uranium recovery from phosphoric acid, and
(2) fertilizer utilization. Also, a preliminary as-
sessment of the copper industry was launched.
— Water: New Drinking Water Regulations
were promulgated by EPA/ORP in July, and stud-
ies on radium removal began, along with evalua-
tion of the potential health significance of radon
in potable water.
— Construction materials: EPA/ORP began
looking at the exposure levels in laboratory struc-
tures built with by-product gypsum, and spon-
sored a Harvard study of the effects of building
materials on population dose equivalents.
— Other sources: EPA/ORP recommended
that the National Park Service use the
occupational exposure standard for uranium
miners as guidance for its employees at caves
such as Carlsbad Caverns.
-------
2. Major Congressional and Judicial Activities
In 1976, Congress passed two major pieces of
legislation applying to exposure from naturally-
occurring radioactive materials, the Toxic Sub-
stances Control Act and the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act.
Toxic substances legislation has been
considered for several sessions, but previously
the House and Senate versions differed too
greatly to compromise. Finally, on October 12,
1976, the Act was signed into law (PL 94-469),
specifically excluding "any source material,
special nuclear material, or by-product material
(as such terms are defined in the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954 and regulations issued under such
Act)" [Section 3 (2)B(iv)].
However, the Toxic Substances Control Act
does apply to naturally-occurring radioactive
substances. If the Administrator of EPA "finds
that there is a reasonable basis to conclude that
(they)...present or will present an unreasonable
risk of injury to health or the environment" [Sec.
6(a)], then he or she is to improve requirements to
protect against the risk. Specifically, some of the
rules which may be promulgated are:
— prohibiting or limiting the manufacture,
processing or distribution of the substance;
— requiring that it be clearly marked with
warnings and instructions;
— requiring that manufacturers and
processors keep certain records.
The Act also has provisions for protection against
imminent hazards, reporting of information,
exports, preemption, citizens' civil actions, and
administration.
The other important measure related to
naturally-occurring materials is the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (PL
89-272). Signed into law on October 21, 1976,
the Act amends the 1965 Solid Waste Disposal
Act, which had already been strengthened
somewhat by the 1970 Resource Recovery Act.
Applicable provisions require the Administrator
to define and identify hazardous wastes and issue
regulations setting safety standards. The Act
covers recordkeeping, storage, labeling, reporting
and disposal; in addition, it authorizes some
inspection, establishes civil penalties, and defines
a relationship with the States.
There was no significant court action in this
area in 1976.
-------
10
3. Executive Activities by Source of Radiation
• Uranium Mining and Milling Tailings
The uranium in the ore extracted by mining is
separated and concentrated in milling operations,
which result in the accumulation of large quanti-
ties of waste product material called tailings.
Composed primarily of ore residues, they contain
almost all of the radioactivity that was originally
present in the ore. Tailings are a waste manage-
ment problem because of the large quantities
involved, and because of the long half-life of the
radionuclides.
As an indication of quantity, a typical mill may
generate 1,800 metric tons per day of tailings
solids slurried in 2,500 metric tons of waste
milling solutions. Over the lifetime of the mill,
100 to 200 acres may be permanently committed
to store this material. The tailings piles will have a
radiological impact on the environment (1)
through the air pathway by continuous discharge
of radon-222 gas (a daughter of radium-226), (2)
through gamma rays given off by radium-226,
radon-222 and daughters as they undergo radio-
active decay, and (3) finally through air and water
pathways, if radioactive particulates are blown
off the pile by wind or radionuclides are leached
from the pile due to water seepage.
Solids are being stored at mills by constructing
a dike and filling the diked area with slurried
tailings. Some of the older mills and all new mills
use a clay-core retention dam and various kinds
of seepage return systems to control seepage
from the tailings ponds. However, in addition to
creating a pile which is difficult and costly to
stabilize, the dikes are subject to the possibility of
structural failures such as the one at the United
Nuclear Homestake Partners Mill in New Mexico
in 1976.
Uranium mill tailings piles contain long half-life
radioactive wastes, and therefore require long-
term care. This should include fencing, posting,
monitoring, inspection and continual mainte-
nance to assure integrity of the stabilizing cover.
As of December 1976, 16 uranium mills were
in operation, all located in Western States. (See
Table 2.1.) Eight of these mills are regulated by
NRC, and eight are licensed under the Agreement
States program. The various active mill sites al-
ready contain over 100 million tons of tailings.
There are also a number of new mills presently
under construction or in the planning stage. It is
estimated that, by the year 2000, between 68 and
228 uranium mills may be in operation and 1 to
1.5 billion tons of uranium mill tailings will have
been generated, covering an area from 30 to 70
square miles.
In non-Agreement States, NRC evaluates ura-
nium milling operations and the conditions of mill
tailings piles. This activity includes reviews of
uranium mill licenses to evaluate the adequacy of
the supporting information in the license files;
on-site visits to determine the adequacy of ura-
nium mill inspections; observation of the condi-
tion of stabilized and unstabilized mill tailings
piles; and reviews of the licensees' environmental
surveillance programs.
After an operating license is terminated, the
owner of the land on which the tailings are stored
is subject to the following NRC restrictions:
1. The holder of the land will not permit the
release of tailings materials to the surrounding
area.
2. Subdivision of the covered surface will be
prohibited, including private roads, trails, or
rights-of-way.
3. No structures that could be inhabited by
people or animals may be built on the covered
surface.1
Guidance/Environmental
Impact Statements
Generic Environmental Statement
In March 1975 NRC received a petition for
rulemaking from the Natural Resources Defense
-------
TABLE 2.1 STATUS OF ACTIVE URANIUM MILL SITES IN THE UNITED STATES AS OF DECEMBER 1976
(16 active — 2 active standby)
Year
State
*Colorado
*New Mexico-
•
South Dakota
*Texas
Utah
*Washington
Wyoming
'
Location
Canon City
Uravan
Ambrosia Lake
Blue Water
Grants
Moquino
(e)
Edgemont
Falls City
La Sal
Moab
Ford
Gas Hills
Gas Hills
Gas Hills
Jeffrey City
Powder River Basin
Shirley Basin
Shirley Basin
Name and/or Owner
Cotter Corporation
Union Carbide Corp.
Kerr-McGee Nuclear
Anaconda Company
United Nuclear-Homestake Partners
Sohio
TVA (Mine-Development, Inc.)
Conoco 6 Pioneer Nuclear, Inc.
Rio Algom Corporation
Atlas Corporation
Dawn Mining Company
Federal American Partners
Utah International, Inc.
Union Carbide Corporation
Western Nuclear, Inc.
Highland Mill, Exxon, U.S.A.
Petrotomics Company
Utah International, Inc.
Mill
Started
1958( }
195JT '
1958
1953
1958
1976
1956
1971
1972
1956
1957
1959
1956
1960
1957
1972
1962
1971
Nominal
Mill
Capacity
(Tons Ore
per Day)
150-450
0-1300
3600-7000
3000
1650-3500
250- 500
220-1750
500
800-1500
0- 400
500- 950
750-1200
1000
400-1200
2000
525-1500
1200
Tons of
Tailings
(In
millions )
1.1
7 .0,,*
25 .4
15>3(d b)
18.7 '
2.000
2.600
.74
7.8
1.9
4.0, ,
5.5
4.0
3.0
2.2
4.5
1.8
Reported
Size of
Tailings
Pile
( Acres )
35
8°(c)
200,,
( r* )
25°c
150 m
(t >
82
200
45
120
100
100
135
61
60
250
50
250
U)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)r
Ore processed at the Vanadium facility for the Manhattan project in 1943.
Estimated.
Estimated from topographic map of site.
Includes 1,200,000 tons from salvaged Homestake-New Mexico Partners Mill that was located on the present active site.
Although the site license is still active, there is no present milling activity.
Designated impoundment area.
Mill will reopen January 1, 1978, and handle about 1,600 tons per day.
*Agreement States which have responsibility for licensing the mills. All others are licensed by NRG.
-------
12
Council (NRDC). The petitioners requested that
the Commission issue regulations requiring ura-
nium mill operators to post performance bonds
that would cover the cost of stabilizing and ulti-
mately disposing of uranium mill tailings. They
also asked the Commission to prepare a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement on the NRC's
uranium milling regulatory program, including
that part administered by the Agreement States.
The NRDC further petitioned that no licenses be
issued or renewed while the Statement was being
prepared, so licensees could not escape any new
regulations promulgated as a result.
On June 3, 1976, the Commission announced
its intention to prepare a Generic Environmental
Impact Statement (GEIS) on uranium milling oper-
ations. The purposes of the GEIS will be:
1. to assess the local, regional and national
environmental impacts of uranium milling on
both a short and long term basis;
2. to provide a basis for deciding whether
additional regulatory requirements are needed for
uranium mills, with emphasis on the waste
management of mill tailings;
3. to support any rulemaking and/or
modification of statutory authorities which may
be determined to be necessary; and
4. to provide an opportunity for public partici-
pation in decisions concerning any proposed
changes in NRC regulations or regulatory
authority.
During preparation of the GEIS, which has
begun, the NRC will review applications for new
or renewed licenses for uranium milling on a case
by case basis; also, it will continue to assure that
adequate financial security arrangements are
made for the reclamation and stabilization of mill
tailings. Any licensing actions may later be re-
vised in accordance with the conclusions of the
final GEIS and related rulemaking.
The decisions to prepare a Generic Environ-
mental Impact Statement and to continue proc-
essing related applications in the interim, subject
to specified criteria, were a partial response to the
NRDC petition. Decisions on other aspects of the
petition - such as regulations covering financial
responsibility for waste management over the
long term - had not been reached at year-end.
The Commission intends to publish proposed
rules for public comment no later than the final
GEIS. (Such rules will be developed from the
information derived from the preparation of the
Statement and from an assessment of
alternatives.)
Sherwood Uranium Project,
Spokane Indian Reservation
Description: The Sherwood Uranium Project2
involves construction and operation of a Western
Electric facility which would mine and process
about 7,950,000 tons of ore. The project site is
leased from the Spokane Indian Tribe, which
would get at least 50% of the available jobs.
Among the possible environmental impacts dis-
cussed are the effects on ground water of treated
liquid effluents, the need for revegetation, air-
borne radiological effluents, and release rates
from the tailings pond.
EPA/ORP Response and Status: EPA/ORP's
comments on the Draft Statement expressed con-
cern about the management of overburden and
tailings material, and requested that alternatives
to the mill tailings retention system be presented
in the Final Statement. One possibility suggested
was re-emplacement of the tailings in the mine
pit. In considering alternatives, EPA/ORP said
that some additional studies might have to be
made of local hydrology and groundwater
characteristics.
Studies
NRC Task Force
NRC's research program to provide data for
the GEIS and associated rulemaking will mainly
involve: (T) an assessment of the public health
and environmental impact of uranium milling
operations with emphasis on mill tailings, and
(2) identification and development of alternative
strategies for mill tailings waste management,
including assessment of their practicality and
costs.
-------
13
The NRC has asked a 13-member task force to
develop information from which acceptable me-
thods for handling and storing tailings can be
devised. It will examine current procedures for
handling tailings and for choosing waste storage
sites, and will identify areas where further re-
search is needed to form the basis for regulatory
requirements. Members of the task force repre-
sent several scientific disciplines and a number of
private and governmental institutions including
EPA. The report is being prepared by Argonne
National Laboratory.3
EPA/ORP Study of In-situ Mining
EPA/ORP began investigating the radiological
aspects of in-situ mining of uranium, an experi-
mental technique being assessed in ore bodies of
limited size and uranium concentration. It is
hoped that the process would eventually produce
saleable yellowcake onsite, as opposed to the
highly impure product which now has to be
processed at a conventional mill.
EPA/ORP Report on
Environmental Impact
EPA/ORP released an April report, "Potential
Radiological Impact of Airborne Releases and
Direct Gamma Radiation to Individuals Living
Near Inactive Uranium Mill Tailings Piles."5
Identifying radon-222 and its daughter products
as the most significant hazard to people living
near the piles, the report described EPA/ORP's
methods of assessing potential hazards and possi-
ble pathways. It was found that people living near
the 23 inactive piles (averaging 35 acres) could be
exposed when:
— radon-222 escapes from the surface of
the pile and is carried to nearby dwellings by the
wind;
— the wind lifts particles containing radionu-
clides from the surface, and they are inhaled;
— radionuclides in the pile emit gamma
radiations.
Ambrosia Lake Study
EPA/ORP released in June the results of a
November 1975 study to determine the ambient
radiological air quality in a region of active ura-
nium ore mining and milling operations.4 In the
Ambrosia Lake area of New Mexico, there are
three operating mills, one inactive mill, asso-
ciated tailings ponds, and approximately 20 ac-
tive underground mines contributing radon and
radon progeny (as well as airborne particulate
material) to the atmosphere. The EPA/ORP re-
port presents measurements of ambient outdoor
radon concentrations and indoor working level
determinations for ten locations throughout the
area. Further efforts will be made in 1977 t6
define the origins of excess radon levels more
clearly as part of a joint Federal/State study in the
Grants Mineral Belt area.
• Inactive Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
During the past 28 years there have been more
than 40 ore upgraders and mills that have
produced uranium for sale to the government and
private industry. Twenty-four of these mills in
nine Western States.have been closed, leaving
the accumulated radioactive residues or tailings.
Four of the sites are currently under active NRC
or Agreement State licenses, and one site is main-
tained by the Federal Government. Twenty-three
inactive mills (excluding the Federal site in Monti-
cello, Utah) have tailings totaling 28 million tons
with individual piles varying from 90,000 tons to
2.7 million tons (Table 2.2).6
Studies
Joint Engineering Assessment
ERDA continued its engineering assessment of
23 inactive uranium mill tailings piles as listed in
Table 2.2, in the second phase of a joint compre-
hensive study with EPA. It includes evaluation of
-------
14
TABLE 2.2
MILL SITES INCLUDED IN PHASE II STUDY
Years Operated Tons of Tailings
Arizona
Monument 1955 - 1967 1,100,000
Tuba City 1956 - 1966 800,000
Colorado
Durango 1943 - 1963 1,555,000
Grand Junction 1951 - 1970 1,900,000
Gunnison 1958 - 1962 540,000
Maybell 1957 - 1964 2,600,000
Naturita 1939 - 1963 704,000
New Rifle 1958 - 19*72 2,700,000-
Old Rifle 1924 - 1958 350,000
Slick Rock (NC) 1931 - 1943 37,000
Slick Rock (UCC) 1957 - 1961 350,000
Idaho
Lowman 1955 - 1960 90,000
New Mexico
Ambrosia Lake 1958 - 1963 2,600,000
Shiprock 1954 - 1968 1,500,000
Oregon
Lakeview 1958 - 1960 130,000
South Dakota
Edgemont 1956 - 1974 2,000,000
Texas
Falls City 1961 - 1973 2,500,000
Ray Point 1970 - 1973 490,000
Utah
Green River 1958 - 1961 123,000
Mexican Hat 1957 - 1965 2,200,000
Salt Lake City 1951 - 1968 1,700,000
Wyoming
Converse County 1962 - 1965 187,000
Riverton 1958 - 1963 900,000
TOTALS 28,056,000
-------
15
the problems and examination of the alternative
solutions, the preparation of cost estimates, and
detailed plans and specifications for alternative
action measures. Any remedial action that may
result from the study will require legislation and
additional funds. A report on the site in Salt Lake
City, Utah, was published in April 19767
Navajo Nation Studies
Since 1968, EPA/ORP has provided technical
assistance and advice to the Navajo Nation on
matters dealing with uranium mill tailings piles on
their reservation. During 1976 EPA/ORP contin-
ued to provide technical assistance in
decontaminating the Shiprock, New Mexico, in-
active uranium mill site. Reports of assessments of
several sites will be available in 1977.
• Non-Nuclear Energy Sources
Bibliography on Radioactivity
of Fossil Fuels
To identify literature relevant to assessing ra-
dioactivity of fossil fuels, EPA/ORP is compiling
an annotated bibliography8 in four major subject
areas: coal, oil, natural gas and shale oil. A fifth
section deals with fossil fuels in general, focusing
on performing radiological assessments of fuel
utilization. Some of the findings to date include:
— Coah Western coal having significant
uranium content appears to occur only on a
localized basis in low-grade coal deposits, most
of which are not now being considered for active
mining. Concerns about the possible radiological
impact have arisen in part because coal mining in
the West has steadily increased over the past few
decades to its 1971 level of over 30% of total
U.S. production. Coal originating in deposits with
significantly elevated concentrations of uranium
can affect the environment through airborne dis-
charges, solid waste materials and ash utilization.
— Other fossil fuels: Literature compiled in
non-coal areas is scarce, and the little there is
provides limited data. No potentially hazardous
levels for the general population were identified
from these sources, although maximum concen-
trations of radon-222 in natural gas may be high
for some individual users.
Coal
Radioactivity in coal used for power genera-
tion has received more attention since utilities
have increased their use of Western coals, some
of which contain more uranium than Eastern
ones. The concentration of radium-226, one of
the critical radionuclides, varies with ash content
and many other factors; it generally averages
about one pCi/g, although specific coal beds may
contain a much higher concentration.9
Extensive surveys by the U.S. Geological Sur-
vey have shown that concentrations of uranium
range as high as .1 percent in some mineralized
lignite beds of North and South Dakota.10 For
unmineralized deposits, concentrations were
similar to those found in Eastern coal types. In
general, bituminous and lignite deposits contain
more uranium than anthracite.
A well run coal-fired power plant releases a
small fraction of the coal's total radioactivity in
the form of fly ash, with some of the remaining
ash handled in ways that could expose the pub-
lic.11 NRC has sponsored a generic study to
collect available data and assess the public health
and safety impacts of the coal fuel cycle.
Assessment of Radiological
Impact of Western Coal
EPA/ORP cosponsored with ERDA and the
Federal Energy Administration a study to deter-
mine whether there is a potential environmental
problem due to radioactive emissions from coal-
fired power plants using Western coal. The re-
sults, currently under final review, indicate that it
does contribute quantities of various radionu-
clides to the environment. While no immediate
population hazard has been found, a number of
potential impacts have been identified. Further
assessment appears to be called for to determine
-------
16
exposure levels due to lead-210 deposition, polo-
nium emissions, and coal ash utilization.
Liquefied Petroleum Gas
EPA/ORP conducted an assessment of poten-
tial radiological health effects from the radon in
Liquefied Petroleum Gas." It was estimated that
doses from unvented kitchen ranges and space
heaters are low — about .9 and 4.0 mrem/year
respectively to the bronchial epithelium — and
that they would result in less than one lung cancer
a year for the total U.S. population at risk. As
control costs would be over $50 million,
EPA/ORP concluded that they would not be cost
effective on a population basis. Special cases of
high individual exposure were still under study at
the end of the year.
Geothermal Energy
EPA/ORP began sampling geothermal waters
in the West in 1974 to characterize their radio-
chemical species and assess the possible radio-
logical impact. The use of geothermal sources for
generating electricity, or for providing direct
space heating or industrial heat sources, does not
create additional radioactivity, as does nuclear
power. Rather, such activities concentrate and
redistribute naturally-occurring radioactivity
through the biosphere.
In 1976, preliminary results of EPA/ORP's
analyses were reported in "Radioactivity Asso-
ciated with Geothermal Waters in the Western
U.S."13 The report describes sample locations
and techniques, and the results of the sample
analysis. Data indicate radon concentrations as
high as 14,000 pCi/liter and radium concentra-
tion up to 1,500 pG/liter.
• Mineral Extraction Industry
Phosphate Mining & Milling
As long as naturally-occurring radioactive ma-
terials remain in the depths of the earth, they
have little effect on people and the surface envi-
ronment because of many feet of soil and rock.
However, numerous industries mine, bring to the
surface, and process raw materials containing
significant concentrations of uranium, thorium
and their daughter products.
The phosphate mining and manufacturing in-
dustry provides an example the problems that
can result from redistribution of radioactive ma-
terial in the surface environment. In central Flor-
ida alone, about 37 million tons of phosphate
rock are processed each year (about 80% of U.S.
production). The radiological impact is consider-
able, as shown in Table 2.3. It presents the results
of EPA/ORP's analytic determinations of
radium-226, uranium, and thorium concentra-
tions in Florida's phosphate products and wastes.
One set of environmental and health impacts
results from the production of phosphoric acid
from marketable rock. The usual wet process
method — used in 1974 to produce about five
million tons of acid from 20 million tons of rock
— involves the discharge of radium in liquid
effluents, as well as significant concentrations of
radium and thorium in products and by-products.
(See Table 2.4 for details.)
Other problems stem from the fact that phos-
phate manufacture involves the accumulation of
massive gypsum piles (30-100 feet in height) and
the maintenance of large cooling ponds of waste
(often about 500 acres). The production of ele-
mental phosphorus results in radioactive air efflu-
ents from the thermal milling process, although
most of the radioactivity originally in the
phosphate ore can be found in the by-product
slag.
Occupational Impact
Based on normal worker occupancy and radia-
tion levels measured in Florida facilities, it has
been estimated that direct gamma dose equiva-
lents for workers in phosphoric acid or elemental
phosphorus plants range from 30 to 300 mrem
per year. The annual dose equivalent rate to the
lung has been estimated to be as high as five
rem/year for these workers. The major occupa-
-------
17
TABLE 2.3
RADIUM - 226, URANIUM AND THORIUM CONCENTRATIONS IN FLORIDA
PHOSPHATE MINE PRODUCTS AND WASTES (20)
MATERIAL
MARKETABLE
ROCK
SLIMES
SAND
TAILINGS
RADIUM - 226
(pCi/GRAM)
42
45
7.5
URANIUM (pCi/GRAM)
234
41
42
5.2
235
1.9
2.6
0.38
238
41
44
5.3
THORIUM (pCi/GRAM)
227
2.0
2.3
228
0.61
1.2
230
42.3
48
42
232
0.44
1.4
89
TABLE 2.4
RADIUM - 226, URANIUM AND THORIUM IN WET PROCESS
PHOSPHORIC ACID PLANT PRODUCTS AND BYPRODUCTS
MATERIAL
GYPSUM
NORMAL SUPER-
PHOSPHATE ,
DIAMMONIUM
PHOSPHATE (DAP)
TRIPLE SUPER-
PHOSPHATE (TSP)
MONOAMMONIUM
PHOSPHATE (MAP)
SODIUM
FLOUROSILICATE
ANIMAL FEED
PHOSPHORIC ACID
RADIUM - 226"
(pCi/gm)
33
21
5.6
21
5.0
0.28
5.5 '
<1
URANIUM (pCi/gm)
234
6.2
63
58
55
235
0.32
3.0
2.8
2.9
238
6.0
20
63
58
55
N.D.
-
25
THORIUM (pCi/gm)
227
0.97
1.6
1.2
•
228
1.4
0.8
0.9
230
13
18
65
48
50
N.D.
28
232
0.27
0.6
0.4
1.3
1.7
N.D.
3.1
* PLANTS USING FLORIDA PHOSPHATE ROCK
-------
18
tional hazards are in areas of high dust concentra-
tions and in or around the phosphoric reactor
vessel and its associated equipment. EPA/ORP
sees a need for more prudent "good housekeep-
ing" measures, particularly with respect to dust
levels, but does not believe that Florida workers
are being exposed at levels greater than the radia-
tion protection guides for the general population
(500 mrem/year).
EPA/ORP Studies
Another cause for concern is that reclaimed
mining areas — where the soils contain substan-
tially more radium than normal soil — are used
extensively for residential and agricultural pur-
poses. EPA/ORP worked to address these
concerns in 1976 by continuing its assistance to
the Sjate of Florida in implementing a radiological
survey of representative homes built on
reclaimed land. Data collection was continued
until a full year's exposure was available for
study. Pending that data and formulation of final
recommendations, EPA/ORP made these sugges-
tions to Florida in 1975:
External Gamma Recommendation
Radiation Level
= or greater
than 0.01 mR/hr
Construction should
be delayed pending
study or acceptable
control technology
should be instituted
to preclude indoor
radon daughter
problems.
Less than 0.01 Construction may be
mR/hr. initiated.
In addition, EPA/ORP began sampling fruits
(particularly citrus) and vegetables grown on re-
claimed land, and data will be evaluated in 1977.
EPA/ORP initiated a contract to assess the
radiological impact of uranium recovery from
phosphoric acid, an innpvative technique which
is now being commercialized. It uses solvent
extraction of uranium from the phosphoric acid
process stream; it holds great promise not only as
a source of uranium, but also as a measure to
reduce the amount of uranium released to the
environment through fertilizers and other phos-
phate products and wastes.
Although the phosphate mining and milling
industry was the first selected for concentrated
effort by EPA/ORP, other mineral extraction in-
dustries also have a potential for contributing to
occupational and public radiation exposure. Ores
such as copper, titanium and beryllium, depend-
ing upon mine location, have shown uranium
concentrations high enough to be commercially
extractable, especially as the price of uranium
rises.
Egyptian Phosphate Industry Study
EPA/ORP decided to support, under the Spe-
cial Foreign Currency Program, an evaluation by
the University of Alexandria, Egypt of the phos-
phate mining and manufacturing industry. It will
cover the industry's radiological impact,
particularly with respect to underground
phosphate mining and airborne emissions from
manufacturing facilities. It is hoped that evalua-
tion of the Egyptian industry will contribute to an
understanding of the radiological impact of its
American counterpart.
Egypt was chosen for the project because:
— the literature indicates that the concentra-
tions of uranium and radium in Egyptian phos-
phate samples are about 120 ppm and 40 pCi per
gram, respectively, which are similar to U.S. ore.
— the industry is expanding greatly in the
next few years. Plans for a new phosphoric acid
plant have been completed and construction will
begin soon; facilities are also being built to in-
crease the phosphate concentration of the mar-
ketable ores.
— large numbers of people will be exposed
to elevated levels of radioactivity. More than
10,000 workers are involved, including miners
who work in mines with only natural ventilation,
where radon decay products may build up.
Moreover, a number of phosphate facilities are
located near towns and cities where dust and
-------
19
other atmospheric emissions may result in expo-
sure to many nearby residents.
Radiological Aspects of
Fertilizer Utilization
About 80 percent of the phosphate rock mined
and consumed in the U.S. is used for the manu-
facture of fertilizers, which contain concen-
trations of different radionuclides varying with
production processes. EPA/ORP completed a
study of the overall potential health impact of
fertilizer use due to increased radioactivity in
crops. After measuring the amounts of
radium-226, thorium and uranium in samples of
various fertilizers, doses were calculated on the
basis of uptake information in the literature.
Copper Industry
During 1976, EPA/ORP performed a prelimi-
nary assessment of the copper industry to identify
and delineate the magnitude of radiological im-
pacts of mining and milling of uraniferous copper
ore. Although a comprehensive survey of radio-
activity has not yet been done, limited data is
available from the U.S. Geological Survey, the
Bureau of Mines and EPA/ORP
As Figure 2.5 details, four areas of potential
occupational and/or public radiation exposure
have been identified. An effort was made to
collect radiological data, when available, for each
of these effluent pathways. Although gamma ana-
lyses of the ore bodies themselves show only
approximate background radiation levels, ele-
vated levels of uranium and decay products are
evident in sampling of ore, copper leachate
solutions and mine runoff water.
Radon measurements conducted by the
Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration
(MESA) in underground copper mines have also
been significantly above background levels, ex-
ceeding 0.33 working levels (see glossary). For
mine pumpout water, average radium-226 con-
centrations ranging from 1.5 to 27.3 pCi/1 were
measured for operating mines in Michigan, Mon-
tana, and Arizona.
Other than a potential occupational exposure
impact, the study concludes that there is no
evidence at present that the copper industry con-
stitutes a radiological public health hazard. Fur-
ther field work is recommended, however, to
quantify concentrations of uranium in mining and
milling effluents more accurately, and to charac-
terize occupational exposures in the industry.
• Water
Guidance
Radioactivity in Drinking Water
On July 9, 1976, EPA promulgated National
Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations14 ra-
dioactive contaminants. The Regulation restricts
the levels of natural and man-made radionuclides
in community water systems, effective June 24,
1977. This regulation was in addition to previous
Interim Regulations15 on microbiological, chemi-
cal and physical contaminants.
For alpha contaminants, the Regulations pro-
vide that initial compliance sampling will begin
within two years of the effective date, and will be
completed within an additional year. Thereafter,
monitoring shall be conducted not less than once
every four years. Cross alpha particle activity
measurements are used as a screen to determine
the need for specific radium isotopic analyses. If
the gross alpha particle activity exceeds a certain
level (five picocuries per liter), analysis for
radium-226 is required, and for radium-228 if the
radium-226 activity exceeds three picocuries per
liter.
Systems serving more than 100,000 persons
from surface water supplies, and any other sys-
tems designated by the State, are required to
analyze for gross beta activity and for tritium and
strontium-90, within two years of the effective
date, and at four year intervals thereafter. If the
gross beta activity exceeds 50 picocuries per liter,
-------
MAJOR EFFLUENT PATHWAYS FOR URANIUM IN COPPER MINING AND MILLING
ro
o
COPPER
PRIMARY ORE
MILLING
PROCESS
UNDERGROUND
MINING
t
RADON GAS
EMANATION
PUMPOUT
WATER
OPENPIT
MINING
OVERBURDEN
AND
WASTE DUMPS
TAILINGS
-------
21
the major constituents must be determined for
calculation of organ and total body doses. Analy-
sis for iodine-131 may be required by the State if
the supply is contaminated by effluents from
nuclear facilities. Environmental surveillance data
from nuclear facility monitoring programs may be
accepted by the State in lieu of direct monitoring
of the water supply.
All measurements must be made by
laboratories approved by the enforcing authority.
Generally, States will have primary enforcement
responsibility unless they do not request or
achieve it, in which case it would rest with EPA.
The principal radiological laboratory for each
analysis in a State would be certified by a regional
EPA team, supplemented by the Quality Assur-
ance Branch of EPA's Environmental Monitoring
and Support Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Studies
Radium Removal Process
Numerous well-water supplies for public water
systems contain naturally-occurring radium-226.
Methods for removing radium from drinking
water must be identified so that treatment plants
may meet the limit set in the EPA drinking water
regulations. Studies were performed by State
agencies at 14 cities in Iowa and Illinois to deter-
mine the radium removal efficiency of four water
treatment processes.16 Populations served by the
water treatment plants ranged from 235 to
24,000, and the radium-226 concentration in the
raw water varied from three to 49 pCi/liter.
Results showed radium removal efficiencies from
•11 to 95 percent.
Radon in Potable Water
EPA/ORP began evaluating the potential
health significance of radon-222's diffusing from
potable water supplies inside structures. Present
data indicate that one-third to one-half of all
ground water supplies could have radon-222
concentrations greater than 500 picocuries (pCi)
per liter. When this water-is used in a home,
especially with increased temperature and agita-
tion, much of the radon could diffuse into the air.
Various literature articles were reviewed for
relevant information. Initial considerations indic-
ate that if water containing 10,000 pCi/liter
radon-222 is used in a dwelling, an air
concentration of one pCi/liter could occur. This
might cause a bronchial epithelium exposure of
80 millirems/week (four rem/year), and an inges-
tion exposure of 25 mrem/week to the walls of
the stomach. If water containing 500 pCi/liter
radon is used across the U.S., it is estimated that
20 fatal lung cancers per year could result from
inhalation of radon daughters for each million
people exposed. EPA/ORP is continuing the eval-
uation of this source of exposure.
• Construction Materials
Elevated radiation levels from building material
were discovered in Grand Junction, Colorado,
where some structures are built on or adjacent to
uranium mill tailings. The tailings were incorpo-
rated in either the fill, building material, or con-
crete. Because the radon daughter activity levels
in many of the structures exceed the Surgeon
General's guide, ERDA and the State of Colorado
are conducting a remedial action program to
reduce them.
Phosphate by-products interest EPA/ORP
greatly, not only because of the sheer quantity
involved — 50 to 300 acres of gypsum piled 50
to 100 feet high at an average plant — but also
because of their radium-226 concentrations.
Questions have been raised concerning the use of
phosphate slag material in concrete blocks and
pavement in Florida, Ohio, Idaho and a few other
States. By-product gypsum is of special concern;
it is commonly used in the manufacture of wall-
board in other countries, although it has not been
used commercially in the U.S. primarily because
of abundant natural supply. Insulation is another
potential difficulty.
-------
22
Studies
To assess the exposure levels in structures built
with by-product gypsum, EPA/ORP began a
project using Japanese materials in a test struc-
ture, and started developing a model for calcula-
tion of internal doses due to radon emanation.
Also, under contract to EPA/ORP, Harvard
University conducted a study of the effects of
building materials on population dose equiva-
lents. The initial purposes.were:
— to search all published information on the
subject,
— to develop a detailed model for-estimating
the dose equivalent rate to the inhabitants of
buildings, and
— to estimate the dose equivalent to the U.S.
population from building materials. A secondary
part of the effort was to analyze ways to minimize
such exposure, including cost/benefit analyses to
identify which approaches should be studied
further.
The study concluded that naturally-occurring
radionuclides in building materials are a source of
external and internal radiation exposure to virtu-
ally the entire U.S. population. The dose equiva-
lent rate in a given situation is a complex function
of the geometric distribution of radionuclides
within a building, the air exchange rate, and the
time utilization factor for each room. A comput-
erized model, written in Fortran IV, has been
developed for calculating dose equivalent rates,
both for external and internal sources, to occu-
pants in a building for a variety of assumed
conditions.
the Carlsbad Caverns, following a radiation moni-
toring survey which showed radon daughter con-
centrations of up to 0.25 working levels (see
glossary). EPA/ORP made interim
recommendations17 based on existing "Federal
Guidance for the Protection of Underground Ura-
nium Miners"18 which recommends against cu-
mulative exposures to employees in excess of
four working level months in any calendar year.
EPA/ORP decided that the guidance provided for
employees is sufficient to protect all who visit the
Caverns, and recommended continued sampling.
Public comment was invited on applying this
recommendation to other caves and caverns.
• Other Sources
Carlsbad Caverns Recommendation
The National Park Service asked EPA/ORP for
guidance on the appropriate exposure limits for
park personnel, concessionaires, and visitors to
-------
23
REFERENCES
1. "Draft Environmental Statement related to the Rocky Mountain Energy Company's Bear Creek
Project (Converse County, Wyoming)." U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, U.S. Department of
the Interior Geological Survey, and U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service: Docket No.
40-8452, pp. 3-38 (January 1977).
2. "Environmental Assessment Report, Sherwood Uranium Project, Spokane Indian Reservation."
Dames and Moore (January 1976).
3. Further information will be available in 1977.
4. Eadie, G.G.; Kaufmann, R.F.; Markley, DJ.;andR. Williams. "Report of Ambient Outdoor Radon
and Indoor Radon Progeny Concentrations during November 1975 at Selected Locations in the
Grants Mineral Belt, New Mexico." EPA: ORP/LV 76-4 (June 1976).
5. "Potential Radiological Impact of Airborne Releases and Direct Gamma Radiation to Individuals
Living Near Inactive Uranium Mill Tailings Piles." EPA: 520/1-76-001 (April 1976).
6. Phase I Study of Inactive Mill Sites and Tailings Piles. Atomic Energy Commission (October 1974).
7. Ford, Bacon, & Davis Utah, Inc. Phase II—Title I Engineering Assessment of Inactive Uranium Mill
Tailings, Vitro Site, Salt Lake City, Utah. ERDA: Contract No. E(05-1 )-1658 (April 30,1976).
8. A Bibliography and Literature Review for the Radiological Impact Assessment of Fossil Fuels. EPA:
ORP/CSD 77-3 (Available in late 1977).
9. Jaworowski, A.; Bilkiewica, J.; Kownacka, L.; and. S. Wlodek. "Artificial Sources of Natural Ra-
dionuclides in the Environment, Natural Radiation Environment II." In Proceedings of the Second
International Symposium on Natural Radiation Envfronment(August 1972).
10. Swanson, V.E.; Huffman, C, Jr.;andJ.C. Hamilton. "Composition and Trace-Element Content of
Coal, Northern Great Plains Area," U.S. Department of Interior Open-File Report (February 1974).
11. Martin, J.E., "Comparative Population Radiation Dose Commitments of Nuclear and Fossil Fuel
Electric Power Cycles." In Proceedings, 8th Midyear Topical Symposium of the Health Physics
Society. U.S. Department of Interior Open-File Report: CONF-741018, pp. 317-326 (1976>.
12. Gesell, T.R.; Johnson, R.H., Jr.; and D.E. Bernhardt. "Assessment of Potential Radiological Popu-
lation Health Effects from Radon in Liquified Petroleum Gas." EPA: EPA 520/1-75-002 (February
1977).
13. O'Connell, M.F. and R.F. Kaufmann. "Radioactivity Associated with Geothermal Waters in the
Western United States: Basic Data." EPA: ORP/LV-75-8A (March 1976).
14. "Part 141 — Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations, Promulgation of Regulations on Radionu-
clides." EPA: 41 F.R. 28402 (July 9,1976).
15. Part 141 — National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations. EPA: 40 F.R. 59566 (December
24,1975).
-------
24
16. "Determination of Radium Removal Efficiencies in Iowa Water Supply Treatment Processes." EPA:
ORP/TAD 76-1 (1976). "Determination of Radium Removal Efficiencies in Illinois Water Supply
Treatment Processes for Small and Large Populations." EPA: ORP/TAD 76-2 (1976). "Determina-
tion of Radium Removal Efficiency in Water Treatment Processes." EPA: ORP/TAD 76-5 (1976).
17. "Interim Recommendations on Exposure Limits — Carlsbad Caverns." EPA: 41 F.R. 22409 (June 3,
1976).
18. "Underground Mining of Uranium Ore, Radiation Protection Guidance for Federal Agencies."
EPA: 36 F.R. 9480 (May 25,1971).
Below are publication numbers for relevant items cited in Appendix B.
EPA Technical Reports:
520/1-76-001
520/5-76-014
520/4-76-018
EPA Authored Reports: See Fitzgerald, Guimond, and Kaufmann.
EPA Technical Notes:
ORP/LV 75-8A
ORP/LV 76-4
ORP/LV 76-7
ORP/LV 76-9
ORP/TAD 76-1
ORP/TAD 76-2
ORP/TAD 76-5
-------
25
MEDICAL RADIATION EXPOSURE
1. Introduction and Summary
Medical exposure to ionizing radiation can and
should be significantly cut without reducing qual-
ity of care, according to experts in the scientific
community. As matters stand, over half of the
U.S. population receives at least one radiographic
examination annually, and medical exposures ac-
count for at least 90 percent of the total man-
made dose to individuals.1
These trends have probably continued since
1970, especially the increase in film usage.
In 1971 the National Conference of Radiation
Control Program Directors initiated the Nation-
wide Evaluation of X-Ray Trends (NEXT) to assess
patient exposure from specific routine radio-
graphic examinations. Analysis of data from this
program indicates that the weighted mean expo-
sure for nine of the 12 radiographic projections
surveyed increased between 1973 and 1975.3
TABLE 3.1 TRENDS IN RADIOGRAPHIC DIAGNOSTICS
PERSONS X-RAYED
1964 108 MILLION
1970 130 MILLION
X-RAY EXAMINATIONS 1964
1970
173 MILLION
212 MILLION
FILMS EXPOSED
1964
1970
The problem of unnecessary risks associated
with medical exposure is compounded by the
marked increase in the number of diagnostic
examinations performed over the last decade,
estimated to range from one to four percent per
capita annually. Some significant changes were
revealed in surveys of diagnostic x-ray exposures
in1964and1970:2
— 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. The population increased only
seven percent during this period.
— There was a 22 percent increase in the
number of x-ray examinations performed, from
174 million in 1964 to 212 million in 1970.
— There was a 30 percent increase in the
number of films exposed, from 506 million in
1964 to 661 million in 1970.
— The average number of films per radio-
graphic examination increased .from 2.2 in 1964
to 2.4 in 1970.
506 MILLION
661 MILLION
Among the scientific bodies who have re-
viewed diagnostic exposure issues is the Biologi-
cal Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) Committee
of the National Academy of Sciences. In its 1972
report/ the Committee concluded that as much
as 30 percent of patient exposure istdue to the use
of less than optimal techniques, and that nearly
ten percent of all exposure can be attributed to
retake examinations. The Committee further ex-
pressed the view that "medical radiation expo-
sure can and should be reduced considerably by
limiting its use to clinically indicated procedures
utilizing efficient exposure techniques and opti-
mal operation of radiation equipment.
Consideration should be given to the following:
1. Restriction of the use of radiation for public
health survey purposes, unless there is a
reasonable probability of significant detec-
tion of disease.
2. Inspection and licensing of radiation and
ancillary equipment.
-------
26
3. Appropriate training and certification of
involved personnel. Gonad shielding (es-
pecially shielding the testes) is strongly
recommended as a simple and highly effi-
cient way to reduce the Genetically Signifi-
cant Dose."
The Report also stated "that experts estimate
that it appears reasonable that as much as a 50
percent reduction in the genetically significant
dose (GSD) from medical radiology might be
possible through improved technical and educa-
tional methods."5 A study* by FDA's Bureau of
Radiological Health (BRH) indicates that in 1970
the genetically significant dose was approxi-
mately 20 millirems per American; using the
BEIR risk estimate, this could cause up to 543
serious health effects (genetically related). It ap-
pears that half of these, or 272, would be due to
poor radiological practice.
Summary
This chapter describes efforts by a number of
Federal agencies to address the issue of unneces-
sary exposure in both x-ray procedures and nu-
clear medicine treatments. A few highlights of
each section follow:
• Major Congressional and
Judicial Activity
While no new bills were passed in 1976, the
first civil penalty was levied for failure to .comply
with regulations issued under the Radiation Con-
trol Act of 1968. The Sheppard X-Ray Company
of Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania, signed a consent
decree to pay a $2,000 fine.
• Comprehensive Executive Activities
BRH proposed regulations establishing proce-
dures to exempt products for Government use
from performance standards (promulgated under
the Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act).
Research was conducted on long-term radiation
effects and childhood cancers.
• Conventional
Diagnostic X-Ray Systems
Plans were announced to develop recommen-
dations for quality assurance programs in diag-
nostic x-ray facilities.
A final voluntary recommendation endorsed
the concept of appropriate use of specific area
gonad shielding during diagnostic x-ray exams.
BRH published a technical overview of clinical
methods of avoiding medical x-ray exposure of
the human embryo and fetus, as an intermediate
step in formulating a voluntary recommendation.
The BRH Medical Radiation Advisory Commit-
tee suggested a more restrictive policy on the use
of mammography in screening. BRH is consulting
with other health agencies and professional
groups to develop a joint statement or guideline.
EPA and HEW (parent agency of BRH) negoti-
ated a Memorandum of Understanding concern-
ing guidance to Federal agencies on radiation
protection in the healing arts.
An Interagency Working Group formed by
EPA issued its final report on reducing unneces-
sary radiation exposure from x-rays in Federal
health care facilities. From their recommenda-
tions, EPA published proposed Radiation Protec-
tion Guidance in that area.
Many educational programs were undertaken,
including expansion of the services of the Radio-
logical Health Sciences Learning Laboratory and
extension of a series of training packages for
radiologic technologists.
Quality assurance activities included the Den-
tal Exposure Normalization Technique (DENT)
and Breast Exposures: National Trends (BENT)
programs. BRH is cooperating with the Confer-
ence of Radiation Control Program Directors in
developing a quality assurance surveillance
manual.
In the research area, the Nationwide Evalua-
tion of X-Ray Trends (NEXT) continued, and stud-
ies were made of the bone marrow dose to adults
-------
27
from diagnostic radiography, organ doses, mam-
mography risks and benefits, x-ray operator job
performance, and skull x-ray selection criteria.
Corrective action programs covered both
medical and dental x-ray units, and included
assessment of quality control and testing
programs.
BRH contracted with 18 States for compliance
inspections of medical x-ray equipment as part of
the Bureau's enforcement program under the
Federal performance standard for x-ray
equipment.
One accident is discussed, in which about 400
patients taking cobalt-60 teletherapy treatment
received doses over the prescribed amounts.
The Task Force on Short-Lived Radionuclides
for Medical Use reviewed preliminary reports on
modifying radioiodine policies, and on the conse-
quences of several alternatives. Another Task
Force, on the public health impact of nuclear
medicine practice, began reviewing existing data
sources and evaluating their potential contribu-
tion to developing reliable estimates on practices
and trends.
• Computered Tomographic Systems
BRH is considering modifying its safety perfor-
mance standards to provide specifically for tomo-
graphic systems; in the meantime, however, it
has notified manufacturers that they must heed
present regulations or apply for an authorized
deviation from them. Compliance action was
taken in several cases.
Research on panoramic dental units showed
substantial variation in internal exposures to pa-
tients, although all were low.
• Nuclear Medicine
BRH developed several new educational
tools: a manual on quality assurance for scintilla-
tion cameras, and a course on instructional tech-
niques for radiation protection.
The latest concepts of internal dosimetry were
discussed at a BRH sponsored symposium, and a
contract was awarded to develop quality assur-
ance workshops.
1976 studies in the field included one on
childhood exposure to iodine-131 and another
on scintillation camera image quality.
• Cabinet X-Ray Systems
BRH prepared a document describing routine
compliance testing for cabinet systems, and es-
tablished automatic data processing systems to
maintain a current list of the locations of units and
to analyze results of field tests.
• Ultrasound
New proposed safety performance standards
for ultrasonic therapy and surgery equipment
were issued by BRH in June. A panel of scientists
and technical experts was convened to review
BRH's research efforts on ultrasound bioeffects
and measurements.
-------
28
2. Major Congressional and Judicial Activities
Congressional activity was confined to consid-
eration of the Senate version of the Health Profes-
sionals Educational Assistance Act of 1976,
which would have provided for the training and
licensing of radiologic technicians. (A new Title
XVI would have been added to the Radiation
Control for Health and Safety Act to this effect.)
However, the Conference Committee adopted
the House version of the Act instead, and it had
no similar provision.
judicial activity included the first civil penalty
levied for failure to comply with regulations is-
sued under the Radiation Control Act of 1968.
The Sheppard X-Ray Company of Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, signed a consent decree to pay a
$2,000 fine for failure to certify and report the
assembly of certified components into diagnostic
x-ray systems, as required by the Federal diagnos-
tic x-ray equipment performance standard. Un-
der the enforcement provisions of the Act, United
States District Courts are authorized to restrain
violations of promulgated regulations and to pun-
ish violators through the imposition of civil penal-
ties of up to $1,000 for each infraction. Following
a pretrial hearing, Sheppard decided to sign the
consent decree rather than contest the case in
court, and agreed to comply with the regulations
in future.
-------
29
3. Executive Activities Pertaining to Public Exposure
• Comprehensive Activities
Guidance
Exemption Procedures for
Government Used Products
After consulting with other agencies on its
1975 version, BRH issued a revised proposal7 to
establish procedures for exempting products for
Government use from performance standards
promulgated under the Radiation Control for
Health and Safety Act.
The original version8 stipulated that the
product manufacturer would be required: (1) to
apply for the exemption, and (2) to demonstrate
both the need for it and the extent to which the
product could meet the criteria set forth in the
applicable standards. The major changes in the
reissued proposal permit either the manufacturer
or the procuring agency to apply for the exemp-
tion, and provide guidance for communication
between the agency and the Bureau whenever
the need for an exemption* is anticipated. In
addition:
— administrative procedures are prescribed
for exemption of products intended for Govern-
ment use only, for purposes of research, investi-
gation, study, demonstration, or training; or for
national security reasons; and
— the Bureau's Director may impose terms
or conditions on an exemption that may include
specifications related to manufacture, use, con-
trol, or disposition of exempted products.
Education and Quality Assurance
Training Resources Center
BRH's Training Resources Center distributed
its updated "Radiological Health Training Re-
sources"'extensively in 1976, filled 582 requests
for fascicles, manuals, or books; and loaned 160
slides or overhead projects, 143 movies, and 778
videotapes. Videotapes are now being used to
train BRH Regional Representatives, State per-
sonnel and users of x-ray equipment, with sub-
jects ranging from the Bureau's mammography
quality assurance program to bioeffects of ioniz-
ing radiation and cardiovascular nuclear
medicine.
Studies
Long Term Radiation Effects
Under contract to BRH, the Collaborative Ra-
diological Health Laboratory of Colorado State
University continued a study of the lifetime haz-
ards associated with prenatal and early postnatal
ionizing radiation exposure in the beagle. An ad
hoc group of experts met in March 1976 to
review the status of the project, which has al-
ready made about 100 contributions to the pub-
lished scientific literature.
Oxford Study of Childhood Cancers
BRH continued its sponsorship of analyses of
the Oxford Survey of Childhood Cancers, which
is an epidemiologic investigation of children in
Great Britain who died of leukemia or other
childhood cancers. The study began in 1953 with
children who died under ten years of age, and has
since been expanded to include children under
15 years of age in order to encompass the long
latent periods of cancer. The survey includes over
10,000 children who died of cancer and a com-
parable group of surviving children, and now
focuses primarily on prenatal x-ray exposure.
Polish Radiation Bioeffects Studies
Under the Special Foreign Currency Program,
three Polish radiation bioeffects studies were ap-
proved on:
-------
30
— effects of gamma irradiation on
lymphocytes,
— structure and photochemistry of nucleic
acid analogues, and
— biological properties of melanins.
Uranium in Dental Porcelain
A BRH study found that the radiation doses
due to the uranium used in dental porcelain
appear to present no significant hazard to denture
wearers or to exposed workers. Uranium is
added to dental prostheses because no other
substance has been found to equal its imitation of
the fluorescence of natural teeth under'all lights.
• Conventional
Diagnostic X-Ray Systems
Guidance
Quality Assurance Recommendations
BRH announced plans to develop recommen-
dations for quality assurance programs in diag-
nostic x-ray facilities. The Bureau's experience
with quality assurance activities, which dates
back to the early 1970's, and its consultations
with others, have indicated that voluntary facility-
based programs are the most promising way to
assure consistent nationwide production of high-
quality diagnostic radiographs at minimum cost
and patient exposure. The aim is to provide
health practitioners (and others responsible for
the operation of diagnostic x-ray facilities) with
recommendations concerning the establishment
and implementation of voluntary quality assur-
ance programs.
In soliciting comments in its May 7, 1976
Federal Register announcement, BRH specifically
asked for information oh personal experience of
facility-based programs and on their costs and
benefits.10
Gonad Shielding
A final FDA voluntary recommendation" en-
dorsed the concept of appropriate use of specific
area gonad shielding during diagnostic x-ray ex-
ams. It advised shielding when: (1) gonads lie
within the primary x-ray field or within close
proximity, (2) clinical objectives will not be com-
promised, and (3) the patient has a reasonable
reproductive potential. To be implemented
through educational programs and cooperative
activities of professional organizations, the gonad
shielding guidance is the first to be published in a
new Subpart C of Title 21 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, "Radiation Protection
Recommendations."
Exposure During Pregnancy
As an intermediate step in formulating a volun-
tary recommendation on medical radiation expo-
sure during pregnancy, the Bureau published
"Clinical Methods of Avoiding Medical X-Ray
Exposure of the Human Embryo and Fetus: A
Technical Overview."12 It analyzed the benefits
and limitations of current recommendations for
women of childbearing age and suggested a pos-
sible alternative approach to clinical management
of potentially pregnant women. Following assess-
ment of comments on the report and if such
recommendation is still warranted, a proposed
recommendation will be published in the Federal
Kegisterior public review.
Mammography Recommendations
BRH is working with other health agencies and
with professional groups to develop a joint policy
statement or guideline on mammography screen-
ing. The BRH Medical Radiation Advisory Com-
mittee suggested the following to the Bureau for
guideline consideration:
— "Women of all ages should receive an-
nual physical examinations of the breast
and be taught breast self-examination. For
asymptomatic women the first, or base-
line, mammographic examination should
-------
31
be performed between the ages of 35 and
40.
"A second mammographic examination
should be performed in three to five years
unless indications of increased natural
breast cancer risk for an individual warrant
more frequent examinations.
"Subsequent mammographic examina-
tion of women who remain asymptomatic
should depend upon reevaluation of the
patient's personal risk status, the current
understanding about the efficacy of mam-
mography, and evaluation of radiation
risks.
"After age 50, annual or other regular
interval mammographic examinations
should be performed."
Memorandum of Understanding
EPA and HEW negotiated a Memorandum of
Understanding concerning guidance to Federal
agencies on radiation protection in the healing
arts." Some main features of the definition of the
agencies' responsibilities are:
— EPA will identify areas of potential radia-
tion exposure reduction, in consultation with
other agencies.
— EPA will consult HEW on the need for
Federal guidance, and on timing, specificity, and
adequacy of existing criteria.
— HEW may develop and promulgate a rec-
ommendation and transmit it to EPA for review as
proposed Federal guidance.
— The agencies will consult on the appropri-
ate division between broad and specific phases of
issuing guidance, when it is appropriate to follow
broad EPA proposals with specific implementing
guidance by HEW.
— When EPA develops guidance, HEW will
provide available input, and EPA will address
HEW's comments in the public record along with
others'.
— EPA will conduct review of proposed Fed-
eral guidance developed by itself or HEW.
— EPA will provide appropriate followup
and coordination to assure implementation.
X-Rays in Federal
Health Care Facilities
An Interagency Working Group formed by
EPA in 1974 issued its final report in October on
radiation protection guidance for diagnostic
x-rays in Federal health care facilities. Two Group
Subcommittees submitted background reports:
— The Subcommittee on Technic of Expo-
sure Prevention developed recommendations on
quality assurance, radiographic technic, operator
qualifications and exposure guides for selected
standard examinations.
— The Subcommittee on Prescription of Ex-
posure to X-Rays emphasized the qualifications
of people who order examinations, elimination of
unproductive screening programs and appropri-
ate clinical procedures.
— Appropriate technic should be used to
maintain exposures as low as reasonably achieva-
ble without loss of requisite diagnostic informa-
tion; Entrance Skin Exposure Guides should be
established for this purpose and measures should
be undertaken to evaluate and, where practica-
ble, reduce exposures which exceed such
established guides.
From the recommendations of the Working
Group's final report, EPA's Office of Radiation
Programs (EPA/ORP) developed proposed Radi-
ation Protection Guidance for Diagnostic X-Rays
in Federal health care facilities.14 Highlights of
the proposal follow:
— Prescription of an x-ray study should be
for the purpose of obtaining diagnostic informa-
tion, be based on clinical evaluation, state the
diagnostic objective, and detail relevant medical
history.
— Routine or screening examinations with
no prior clinical examination should not be per-
formed, except for identifiable groups on the
-------
32
basis of careful consideration of diagnostic yield,
radiation risk, and economic and social factors.
— Prescription of x-ray examinations of
women who could be or are pregnant should
assure that medical consideration has been given
to possible fetal exposure, and appropriate pro-
tective measures should be applied.
— The number, sequence, and types of stan-
dard views for an examination should be clini-
cally oriented and kept to a minimum.
— X-Ray equipment used in Federal pro-
grams should meet the Federal performance stan-
dards sooner than required where practicable, or,
in the interim, Part F of the "Suggested State
Regulations."
— X-Ray facilities should have quality assur-
ance programs designed to produce radiographs
that satisfy diagnostic requirements with minimal
patient exposure.
— X-Ray equipment should be operated by
individuals with demonstrated proficiency in
producing diagnostic quality radiographs with the
minimum of exposure required.
— Proper collimation should be used to re-
strict the x-ray beam as much as practicable to
the clinical area of interest and within the dimen-
sions of the image receptor; shielding should be
used to limit the exposure of the fetus and gonads
even further.
BRH Training Program Evaluation
BRH evaluated its training program in 1976,
and found that by 1980 about 50,000 users of
diagnostic x-ray equipment will have benefited
from BRH's voluntary recommendations and
training materials.
Radiological Health Sciences
Learning Laboratory
The Laboratory continued to educate medical
students and others in the major segments of
diagnostic radiology — including patient selec-
tion for x-ray examinations, conduct of the exam-
ination, and interpretation of results, with empha-
sis on reducing unnecessary patient and operator
exposure. Since the Learning Laboratory was first
made available in 1973, 44 of the 115 medical
and osteopathic schools in the U.S. have adopted
it, and an additional 22 requests will be filled by
January 1978.
Quality Assurance Seminars
BRH conducted a series of nine quality assur-
ance seminars with personnel from existing
facility-based programs. After the proceedings
were printed, they were distributed to several
hundred requesters.
Education and Quality Assurance
Quality Assurance Catalog
BRH began collecting information on materials
and resources suitable for its forthcoming Diag-
nostiQ Radiology Quality Assurance Catalog. In-
tended as a source book, the Catalog will be
directed at those who want to establish or expand
programs in their own diagnostic radiology
facilities.
Radiologic Technologist
Training Packages
The series of radiologic technologist training
packages on radiation protection developed by
BRH was expanded to include packages on the
biological effects of x-rays and on the use of
gonad shielding in diagnostic radiology. The se-
ries, "Radiation Protection During Medical X-Ray
Examination,"15 consists of self-contained training
packages to teach radiologic technologists how
to avoid unnecessary radiation exposure during
diagnostic x-ray examinations. Aimed at motivat-
ing technologists to use safer practices, the first
addition explains known biological risks asso-
ciated with x-ray exposure; the second discusses
-------
33
the importance of shielding reproductive organs
and shows how to do it.
In addition to BRH's present training functions,
the General Accounting Office (GAO) recom-
mended in a 1976 report16 that the Bureau "work
more vigorously with States and nonprofit private
organizations to establish a uniform national op-
erator credentialing program" to help insure the
competency of x-ray machine operators. Current
BRH policy is that credentialing of allied health
personnel is an issue to be resolved at the State
level. Striking the proper balance between the
very valid manpower considerations on the part
of HEW and the suggestion of the GAO for
improved program effectiveness will require ex-
tensive evaluation and planning.
Radiographic Film
Processing Conference
BRH contracted with the American College of
Radiology (ACR) to coordinate a conference on
radiographic film processing. ACR will convene a
group of nationally recognized experts to review
the significance and extent of less than optimal
processing, which may result in films of poor
diagnostic quality, and to discuss the importance
of quality assurance in this area.
Prior to the conference, the ACR will perform a
literature search to develop bibliographies on the
relationship between film processing, image qual-
ity and patient exposure, and on the establish-
ment and maintenance of optimal processing
procedures. This information will be used to pre-
pare a handout that describes the state of the art,
defines the major problems to be addressed at the
conference, and lists specific questions that must
be answered. The proceedings will be prepared
by the ACR for publication as a Bureau report.
Self Assessment for Technologists
A BRH contract awarded to the American
Society of Radiologic Technologists proceeded
toward full implementation of a self assessment
program for 6,000 technologists per year. After
helping individuals determine their areas of weak-
ness in professional skills, the learning system
directs them to appropriate educational
materials.
Dental Exposure
Normalization Technique (DENT)
During 1976, full scale DENT programs were
underway in 16 States, municipalities and Federal
agencies, reaching 34,000 dental x-ray machines
in addition to the 35,000 covered by pilot pro-
grams in nine other States. DENT is a program
developed by BRH to e'ncourage dentists to stan-
dardize dental x-ray machine exposures within
established ranges that produce high quality x-ray
films with acceptable patient exposures. It is pri-
marily an educational effort, rather than the usual
survey to check for compliance with State
regulations.
Breast Exposure:
National Trends (BENT)
BRH is collaborating with the National Cancer
Institute to make a mammography quality assur-
ance program known as BENT available to all
States during the next two years. A pilot test has
already been completed in the District of Colum-
bia, and four States are testing it now. Thermolu-
minescent dosimeter (TLD) cards are mailed to all
participating facilities, who expose them accord-
ing to their usual practices and provide informa-
tion on their image receptor and processing. After
assessing the data, BRH identifies facilities that
appear to be using excessive exposure. They are
then visited by trained personnel from the State
health department who survey the facility and
suggest improvements in technique.
Film on Safe Use of Analytical X-Rays
A 16-mm color film, "The Double-Edged
Sword," was produced by a contractor in a joint
project between BRH and the National Bureau of
Standards. The theme of the film is that x-rays
have many useful applications in analytical labo-
-------
34
ratories, but the serious injuries that result from
accidental exposure to their intense beams make
them a "double-edged sword." The presenta-
tion aims to convey a sense of urgency and to
motivate the viewer to make better use of de-
tailed guidelines.
Surveillance Manual
The Task Force on Quality Assurance — a
group of Federal and State representatives re-
cently established by the Conference of Radiation
Control Program Directors — is planning to de-
velop a quality assurance surveillance manual for
publication by the Conference. As a first step
toward developing the manual, BRH representa-
tives will review existing Federal quality assur-
ance programs.
The specific charges of the Task Force are to:
(1) define the areas of diagnostic x-ray use in
which quality assurance is needed and describe
the basic factors in all quality assurance pro-
grams, (2) examine current diagnostic x-ray pro-
grams in Federal agencies and serve as the focal
point for State input into these programs, and
(3) report to the Conference on quality assurance
programs and techniques that can be used by
State radiation control programs.
Consumer Information Programs
BRH prepared messages and other material
advising women of specific steps to reduce the
risk of x-ray exposure to unborn children. The
director's presentations to consumer groups in-
cluded one on risks versus benefits in diagnostic
radiology at the University of Georgia, and one
on protection at a meeting of 150 organized by
the Region III Consumer Affairs Officer.
Compliance
Automated System
for Survey Instruments
BRH is installing an automated system for cali-
brating and maintaining records of x-ray survey
instruments, to replace a manual process which
had become inadequate. The facility is being
automated gradually, with extensive tests made
at each stage to verify the performance of the
system. Eventually, the computer will handle
most of the routine "button pushing" while the
operator monitors the quality of the work. The
possibility of multiple, simultaneous calibrations
has been designed into the system along with the
capability for automatically positioning sequential
instruments in the x-ray beam. These functions
will greatly reduce the calibration time and en-
able large numbers of instruments to be moni-
tored easily and quickly.
State Contracts for
Diagnostic X-Ray Equipment
The radiation control agencies of ten States
and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico were
added to the seven State agencies already partici-
pating in the Bureau's x-ray compliance testing
program. New contracts with Arkansas, Califor-
nia, Hawaii, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Missis-
sippi, North Dakota, Puerto Rico, South Carolina,
Texas, and Wisconsin call for State agencies to
inspect and gather test data on 2,000 certified
diagnostic x-ray systems to aid the Bureau in
determining compliance with the Federal x-ray
equipment performance standard.
These contracts represent an expansion of the
Bureau's efforts to provide State programs with
funds in order to obtain additional technical assis-
tance in the enforcement of the diagnostic x-ray
standard. Colorado, Florida, Minnesota, New Jer-
sey, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and the District of
Columbia currently are carrying out diagnostic
x-ray system inspection and testing programs
under previous Bureau contracts.
-------
35
Under the terms of the contracts, each agency
will survey a specified number of diagnostic x-ray
systems that contain newly certified components
according to test procedures designated by the
Bureau. Test data will be submitted to the Bureau
and will serve as the basis for compliance action
when warranted.
Corrective Action Programs
Thirty-three compliance action cases were ini-
tiated with manufacturers of diagnostic x-ray
equipment. Eleven instances of noncompliance
were reported by manufacturers; ten were noted
during reviews of initial reports; seven were dis-
covered during field testing; two were found
during a plant visit; and three were discovered
during laboratory testing. Eight major compo-
nents of x-ray systems and six complete x-ray
systems have been laboratory tested in accor-
dance with the Federal Performance Standard for
Diagnostic X-Ray Systems and Their Major Com-
ponents. Three quality control and testing
programs were disapproved pending further
information or a change in the program. Two of
these disapprovals were rescinded after receipt
and review of additional submissions.
Sample programs for medical equipment
included:
— Picker Corporation: to repair 388 auto-
matic brightness stabilizers used in-fluoroscopic
x-ray systems by changing a wire from one termi-
nal to another to prevent the x-ray tube from
producing x-rays when the primary protective
barrier is not in a position to intercept the entire
useful beam.
— General Electric Medical Systems: to
modify 358 single-phase x-ray generators used in
medical diagnostic radiographic equipment, by
instructing field service personnel to visit each
user facility and apply a label that pre-indicates
tube current for spot film exposures.
— Pedicraft, Inc.: to provide users of 68
cephalometric devices with the proper labels,
user information, assembler information, and an
adjustable cephalometric cone. Each user will
make the corrections and fill 'out an assembler's
report, which will be submitted to the manufac-
turer as proof that the modifications have been
made. Items of noncompliance included lack of a
quality control program; no records of radiation
safety test procedures or the distribution of units
introduced into commerce; inadequate labeling;
no provision of specified information to assem-
blers; no provision of a maintenance schedule to
users; and no means to limit the field of the x-ray
beam within the dimensions of the image recep-
tor, or to align the center of the x-ray field with
the center of the image receptor to within two
percent of the source-to-image distance.
Sample programs for dental equipment follow:
— General Electric Company: to notify
owners of 1065 GH 1000 (conventional) and 909
GE Panelipse (panoramic) units of noncomplying
features and to repair them. On both models, the
actual variation in maximum tube voltage ex-
ceeds the accuracy limits specified by the manu-
facturer. The Panelipse also has other
deficiencies.
— Ritter Company: to send users and deal-
ers of 1,577 Ritter x-ray systems used for intraoral
dental radiography (models Meteor II R1, R2, and
R4, and Explorer II P3) a packet containing: labels
for the collimator, tube housing assembly, and
timer selector assembly; a statement of maximum
line current for the lowest rated line voltage; and
a recommendation that timer settings of one and
two pulses not be used.
— Belmont Equipment Corporation: to in-
struct dealers to obtain the addresses of purchas-
ers of 551 dental x-ray machines, modify the
units so positive means are provided to assure
that at least minimum filtration'is in the useful
beam, and supply purchasers with the required
labels and user information.
— Weber Dental Manufacturing Company:
to provide each user of 90 dental x-ray machines
with an addendum to the user manual containing
a consistent statement on rated line voltage, a
statement of maximum line current for lowest
rated line voltage, a statement of measurement
bases for technique factors, and consistent as-
semblers' instructions for certain calibration.
-------
36
Studies
Nationwide Evaluation of
X-Ray Trends (NEXT)
Fourth year data was collected in NEXT, a joint
Federal/State program supported by BRH. NEXT
measures the exposure received from standard
x-ray examinations at different facilities, provid-
ing the States with information to set program
priorities and evaluate protection progress, and
the FDA with a tool for monitoring x-ray trends.
In all, 43 State and local radiation control pro-
grams and seven Federal agencies were partici-
pating in NEXT at the end of 1976. Analysis of the
data collected in 15,000 surveys of U.S. medical
and dental radiographic installations indicates:
— in many cases high patient exposure cor-
relates with above average normalized machine
output; and
— there is a wide variation in radiologic
practices and patient exposure, suggesting a need
for quality assurance efforts by health physicists.
In addition to the regular program, a one year
pilot study began in 13 States to determine the
usefulness of optional survey procedures gather-
ing information on films, screens, and processing
techniques.
Bone Marrow Dose to Adults
A BRH report17 estimated that the per capita
mean active bone marrow dose to U.S. adults
from diagnostic radiology procedures in 1970
was 103 millkads, compared to 83 in 1964.
Providing explanations of its dose determinations
and the relationship between age and pef capita
dose, the report compares results of Public
Health Service studies in 1970 and 1964 to
similar studies performed in other countries.
Organ Doses -in Diagnostic Radiology
To help evaluate the effectiveness of efforts to
reduce organ doses in x-ray examination, FDA
developed a system for estimating organ doses as
a function of the physical parameters used during
diagnostic procedures. The estimates are derived
from a Monte Carlo computer technique that
statistically simulates and records the deposition
of x-ray photons in an anthropomorphic
phantom.
Mammographic Screening
BRH proceeded with its evaluation of risks and
benefits of routine mammographic screening of
asymptomatic women for breast cancer. New
data is being incorporated to reflect recent
radiological practice and technological progress
in mammography.
Work began on a BRH contract study to deter-
mine the combinations of x-ray spectra and im-
age receptor characteristics that will enable radi-
ologists to detect breast microcalcifications —
small calcium deposits that may be indications of
breast cancer — with minimum radiation dose to
the patient. The project is designed to augment
the findings of a previous study of the optimum
x-ray spectra for visualizing tumor bodies by
mammography.
X-Ray Operator Job Performance
BRH accepted the final report of a pilot study
titled "An Analysis of Factors Which Affect the
Performance of Medical X-Ray Equipment Oper-
ators." In addition to collecting information on
operators, their workplaces and practices, the
study made cross comparisons to determine
which background and environmental factors
tended to have the strongest influence on certain
practices.
Skull X-Ray Selection Criteria
Two Seattle, Washington, hospitals began a
study to determine whether physician use of
specified selection criteria for ordering skull
x-rays in trauma cases reduces the number of
unnecessary exposures. One hospital uses such
criteria while the other does not.
-------
37
• Computered Tomography Systems
Guidance
BRH is considering amending radiation safety
performance standards for diagnostic x-ray
equipment to recognize special characteristics of
tomographic systems used for pantomography or
those which use reconstruction techniques to
produce an image. Because the present standards
were developed before tomographic systems
were envisioned, they include requirements
which may be inappropriate for the new equip-
ment. Some of the changes being considered are:
— a clearer definition of x-ray field limitation
and alignment requirements, and
— permissible means for the newer systems
to resume and complete interrupted exposures,
rather than automatically resetting the timer to
zero or its initial setting as in conventional
systems.
BRH met and consulted with industry repre-
sentatives on these and other possible amend-
ments, and invited public comment.18
Compliance
BRH notified CT manufacturers that, while the
Bureau was considering modification of its exist-
ing standards to provide specifically
for such units, they should heed present regula-
tions or apply for an authorized deviation from
them. In November, corrective plans were ap-
proved for 267 EMI Medical units which failed to
comply with the diagnostic x-ray equipment stan-
dard. Purchasers will be notified of the noncom-
pliance by certified mail, and the source collima-
tion systems on each unit will be replaced with
redesigned collimators. EMI service personnel
will perform the modifications at user facilities
during routine preventive maintenance visits.
Corrections were required on 550 General
Electric diagnostic x-ray machines. They will con-
sist of indicating the tomographic exposure time
on the control of the Telegem-90 table system,
specifying the tomographic exposure time accu-
racy in the operating manual for the Telegem-90
system, and disabling the "record test" function
on all machines that use the Fluoricon-300 IV
image intensifier. Each customer will sign a certifi-
cation form, to be returned to GE, verifying that
corrections were performed.
Studies
Panoramic Dental Units
While stray radiation was found to be uni-
formly low, three of the most commonly used
panoramic dental units resulted in substantially
different internal exposures to patients, according
to a BRH supported study.19
• Nuclear Medicine
Education and Quality Assurance
Manual on Quality Assurance
for Scintillation Cameras
BRH published a new "Workshop Manual for
Quality Control of Scintillation Cameras in Nu-
clear Medicine."20 It gives special consideration
to instrument components which influence image
quality, materials and methods for ascertaining
changes in performance, and common malfunc-
tions. It is designed to encourage users of scintilla-
tion cameras to adopt quality control procedures
to maintain adequate instrument performance
levels.
Course on Instructional Techniques
for Radiation Protection
The Bureau offered "Instructional Techniques:
Radiation Protection in Nuclear Medicine,"21 its
first course on the types of training aids, devices
and techniques available for teaching radiation
protection to nuclear medicine technologists.
Specific topics addressed are biological effects,
principles of radiation protection, communicating
-------
38
radiation protection to the patient, and perfor-
mance evaluation.
Radiopharmaceutical
Dosimetry Symposium
BRH cosponsored a Radiopharmaceutical Do-
simetry Symposium where latest concepts of in-
ternal dosimetry were discussed. As a sequel to a
1969 symposium whose proceedings have been
a standard reference, a transcript will be pub-
lished to make findings available to nuclear medi-
cine practitioners and clinical investigators.
Quality Assurance Workshops
in Nuclear Medicine
To promote training of nuclear medicine tech-
nologists in radiation safety practices, BRH
awarded a contract to develop two new quality
assurance workshops:
— Quality Assurance of Handling and Assay
of Radioactive Mater/a/s w\\\ cover radiopharma-
ceutical quality control testing, generators of ra-
dionuclides, xenon handling systems and their
operation, and basic radiation safety policies and
procedures recommended for hospital and labo-
ratory use, with emphasis on Federal and State
requirements.
— Quality Assurance of Rectilinear Scanners
will provide instruction on scanner evaluation
and operation, characteristics and quality control
of films, daily quality assurance practices, and
choice of phantoms.
Compliance
Hospital Patients Overexposed
In April 1976, the NRC was informed by the
Riverside Methodist (Hospital in Columbus, Ohio,
that about 400 of their patients had received
radiation treatment doses that ranged from ten
percent to 40 percent in excess^of the prescribed
amounts, with an average overdose of about 19
percent. The persons affected were primarily pa-
tients^ taking radiation treatment for cancer, al-
though for some radiation was prescribed as
preventive therapy following other medical pro-
cedures, and, for some others, as a moderator of
the intensity of the condition.
A radiologist's concern about the response of
patients to the treatment led to a calibration
check on the teletherapy unit in January 1976,
when it was revealed that the actual doses ex-
ceeded those prescribed. The unit was correctly
calibrated at once, and treatment schedules of
patients still taking radiation therapy were ad-
justed, wherever possible, to avoid exceeding the
overall total dose intended for each. All patients
and physicians involved were informed by the
hospital of the situation. With regard to patients
who had died since the time of treatment, re-
views were undertaken. The coroner for Franklin
County, Ohio, stated that, of 30 cases reviewed,
autopsies showed that radiation exposure was a
contributor to death in two instances. The cause
of the excessive doses to the patients was human
error.
While the NRC licenses the medical use of
nuclear materials, the amount of radiation pre-
scribed in the diagnosis and treatment of a patient
is exempt from its regulatory control. Under noti-
fication, the NRC instituted an investigation and
engaged a medical consultant to review the coro-
ner's findings and advise on medical aspects of
the incident. In July 1976, the NRC issued an
order modifying the hospital's licenses specifi-
cally to require periodic calibration of the teleth-
erapy unit by a qualified expert, in accord with
accepted professional procedures. The order also
required that management control systems be
improved to ensure that public health and safety
are protected.
In August 1976, NRC sent a bulletin to all
licensees using teletherapy units, directing them
to perform comparison tests between their units'
actual measured output and the calculated output
and, if variances between the two were found, to
perform a full calibration of the instrument. NRC
also initiated a program to verify independently
that the difference between measured and calcu-
lated output in the licensees' units was acceptably
small. NRC is studying ways to prevent recur-
-------
39
rence of this kind of event with the teletherapy
unit involved or the approximately 500 other
units licensed by NRC through regulation. Besides
these, there are about 600 teletherapy units oper-
ated under licenses administered by 25 States in
the NRC "Agreement States" program. NRC has
urged the State authorities to strengthen their
licensing programs along the same lines, and
State personnel have participated in a three-day
training course in teletherapy unit calibration un-
der NRC sponsorship.
Studies
Short Lived Radionuclides
The Bureau's Task Force on Short Lived Ra-
dionuclides for Medical Use reviewed prelimi-
nary reports on: (1) decreasing the administered
dose of iodine-131 for diagnostic purposes,
(2) reducing the number of iodine-131 studies
performed, (3) the risks versus benefits of shifting
from iodine-131 to iodine-123, including the
economic and environmental impact, and (4) the
application of short-lived radionuclides in other
nuclear medicine procedures.
In addition to these areas, the Task Force
recommended that the reports cover the role of
technetium-99m in thyroid imaging, and define
the research efforts required to substantiate the
need for short-lived radionuclides. The group also
drafted a report in June suggesting measures to
reduce patient dose.
Nuclear Medicine Information Systems
The Task Force on the Public Health Impact of
Nuclear Medicine Practice started reviewing ex-
isting data sources and evaluating their potential
contribution to developing reliable estimates on
current practices and trends in nuclear medicine.
It is a group of Federal and State representatives
established by the Conference of Radiation
Control Program Directors. Ultimately, the Task
Force hopes to develop a data system usable for
estimating specific parameters related to the pub-
lic health impact of the clinical practice of nuclear
medicine. The Task Force includes members
from both EPA and BRH.
Childhood Exposure to Iodine-131
BRH and NRC began collaborating on a fol-
lowup study of people who received diagnostic
doses of iodine-131 during childhood. The pri-
mary aim is to determine if the clinical proce-
dures used for the investigation of endocrine
disorders during childhood are associated with
adverse health effects later in life — particularly
benign and malignant thyroid tumors. If they are
associated, the nature of the relationship between
them will be investigated. Ultimately, the five-
year effort will involve identification and fol-
lowup of 19,500 persons — 6,500 subjects ex-
posed to iodine-131 between 1948 and 1967;
6,500 sibling controls; and 6,500 clinical
controls.
Scintillation Camera Image Quality
To assess the effectiveness of quality assurance
for scintillation camera images, a grant was
awarded to investigate parameters affecting qual-
ity, and to provide quantitative data on the clini-
cal problems associated with the use of cameras
with graded degrees of maladjustment.
• Cabinet X-Ray Systems
Guidance
"BRH Routine Compliance Testing for Cabinet
X-Ray Systems"22 was prepared by the Division of
Compliance to explain the test procedures to be
used to screen systems for evidence of noncom-
pliance with the Federal performance standard. It
describes the general procedures for testing items
common to all cabinet x-ray systems, as well as a
number of specific procedures applicable to par-
ticular cabinet x-ray models, such as systems
used to inspect carry-on baggage in airports.
-------
40
Compliance
Automatic data processing systems were es-
tablished at BRH to maintain a current list of the
locations of cabinet x-ray units, and to analyze
the results of field tests. (Most tests are made to
comply with a Federal Aviation Administration
requirement that airport x-ray units be surveyed
semiannually.) Overall, 52 systems were in-
volved in corrective actions on four
noncompliances/defects. Two quality assurance
and testing program disapprovals were continued
from 1975; eight new programs were disap-
proved, although five of these were rescinded
after additional information was submitted.
Ultrasound
Guidance
BRH issued a proposed safety performance
standard for ultrasonic therapy and surgery
equipment in the June 14 Federal Register (41
F.R. 23973). While two voluntary industry stan-
dards are now in effect, many units produced do
not meet them. The new mandatory standard
would require that equipment be capable of de-
livering a prescribed amount of ultrasonic energy
to the patient, and that sufficient information on
beam characteristics be supplied to allow medi-
cal personnel to make informed judgments. Ac-
cording to the proposal, the standard would ap-
ply to all ultrasonic therapy and surgery products
except those designed for use in dentistry or for
surgical removal of cataracts. It would not cover
diagnostic equipment.
genetic effects, sterility in the male, and safety
considerations.
BRH research in the area includes:
— a contract to develop a portable instru-
ment for measuring and visually displaying the
output characteristics of diagnostic and therapeu-
tic ultrasound devices.
— a hospital survey to determine the fre-
quency of use and selected parameters of use of
(1) phototherapy for neonatal jaundice and
(2) ultrasound for the diagnosis of obstetric con-
ditions. The data were collected in 1976 and
analysis is underway.
— a feasibility study to determine whether a
full scale study of possible delayed effects of
ultrasound on the fetus can be made using obstet-
rical examination records from 1967-69 as the
starting point.
In addition, the Bureau of Radiological Health
and the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medi-
cine (AIUM) cooperated in a survey to evaluate
the performance and use of diagnostic ultrasound
equipment in approximately 50 medical facilities.
BRH's aim was to obtain information bearing on
the need for a possible Federal radiation safety
performance standard. The AIUM is particularly
interested in assessing the effectiveness of a spe-
cial 100-millimeter test object it has designed for
checking the imaging ability of the equipment.
Studies
BRH convened a panel of scientists and techni-
cal experts to review the Bureau's research efforts
on ultrasound bioeffects and measurements, and
to exchange information on the latest develop-
ments. As well as recommending additional areas
of study; the panel discussed epidemiological
studies, somatic effects, interrelationships of ul-
trasonic delivery, regimes, embryological effects,
-------
41
REFERENCES
1. The Effects on Populations of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR Report). National
Academy of Sciences - National Research Council (November 1972), p. 50.
2. "Population Exposure to X-Rays." BRH: FDA 73-8047 (November 1973).
3. "Nationwide Evaluation of X-Ray Trends." BRH: FDA 76-8052 (1976).
4. BEIR Report.
5. BEIR Report, p. 55.
6. "Gonad Doses and Genetically Significant Dose from Diagnostic Radiology: U.S. 1964 and 1970."
BRH: FDA 76-8034(1976). GPO 017-015-00100-8, $1.30.
7. "Performance Standards for Electronic Products, Exemptions from Performance Standards for
Products Intended for U.S. Government Use." BRH: 41 F.R. 43412 (October 1, 1976). .
8. "Performance Standards for Electronic Products, Exemptions from Performance Standards for
Products Intended for U.S. Government Use." BRH: 40 F.R. 44846 (September 30,1975).
9. "Radiological Health Training Resources 1977." HEW/PHS/FDA/BRH: HEW Publication
(FDA) 77-8023 (May 1977).
0. "Quality Assurance Program for Diagnostic X-Ray Facilities, Advance Notice of Intent to Propose
Recommendations." BRH: 41 F.R. 18863 (May 7,1976).
11. "Specific Area Gonad Shielding." BRH: 41 F.R. 30327 (July 23,1976).
12. "Clinical Methods of Avoiding Medical X-Ray Exposure to the Human Embryo and Fetus: A
Technical Overview." 10 BRH BulletinNo. 21 (November 22,1976).
13. "Radiation Protection in the Healing Arts; Guidance to Federal Agencies, Memorandum of
Understanding with Department of Health, Education, and Welfare." EPA: 42 F.R. 5123
(January 27,1977).
14. "Diagnostic X-Rays, Radiation Protection Guidance; Invitation for Comment." EPA: 42 F.R. 4884
(January 26,1977).
15. "Radiation Protection During Medical X-Ray Examinations - Part 4 and Part 5." BRH:
FDA 76-8048-9(1976).
16. "Radiation Exposure from Diagnostic X-Rays Could be Reduced." General Accounting Office:
HRD-77-22 (November 24,1976).
17. "A System for Estimation of Mean Active Bone Marrow Dose." BRH: FDA 76-8015 (1975).
GPO 017-015-00092-3, $1.15.
-------
42
18. "Diagnostic X-Ray Equipment Performance Standard: Tomographic Systems, Advance Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking." BRH:41 F.R. 43180 (September 30,1975).
19. Comparison of Radiation Exposures from Panoramic Dental X-Ray Units. BRH: FDA 77-8009
(1977).
20. "Workshop Manual for Quality Control of Scintillation Cameras in Nuclear Medicine."
HEW/PHS/FDA/BRH:HEW Publication (FDA) 76-8039 (May 1976).
21. "Instructional Techniques: Radiation Protection in Nuclear Medicine." 10 BRH Bulletin No. 1
(January 12,1976).
22. "BRH Routine Compliance Testing for Cabinet X-Ray Systems." BRH: FDA 76-8028(1976).
Below are publication numbers for relevant items cited in Appendix B. Since most BRH Technical
Reports will be helpful, they are not listed-separately below; see the full information in the Appendix.
EPA Technical Reports: 520/4-76-012, 520/4-76-019
EPA Authored Reports: See Martin
ERDA Publications: ERDA-76/135
-------
Figure 4.1
40
35
30
1
0
0 25
g
CD
Q.
o 20
0
.a
E
Z 15
10
5
^^ Basic
X Trend
- V*
_ X
•x
• / \
/ \
m A
f V
/ i
t \ Recent
— f * Trend
/ 1
/ I
' ' / \
/ t
/ 1
« 1
0 •
/ *^%%
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
>
66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76
Years
U.S. REACTOR ORDERS EACH YEAR. WHILE THE TREND LINE WOULD INDICATE ABOUT THREE
DOZEN ORDERS/YEAR MIGHT NOW BE EXPECTED, 1976 ORDERS WERE DOWN TO 3.
-------
43
NUCLEAR POWER
1. Introduction and Summary
Nuclear power is by far the most controversial
source of man-made radiation. While it accounts
for only a small percent of the average Ameri-
can's exposure, nearly all scientists agree that any
dose of radiation from any source involves some
risk. The long term environmental burden must
be considered as well as the risks to individuals,
since many radioactive substances have half-lives
of hundreds or thousands of years.
The basic controversy is how much risk people
are willing to assume — for themselves, the
world environment, and future populations - to
gain the benefits of nuclear power. There is wide-
spread and violent disagreement about nearly all
the factors in the risk/benefit equation: what the
effects of low level radiation are, how much
nuclear power will cost relative to the alternatives
in ten years, what the danger of an accident is, if
and how wastes can be contained for milennia,
and so on almost ad'infin/turn.
Emissions from nuclear power plants can be
reduced to virtually any level with appropriate
controls — but the costs of each increment of
reduction must be weighed against preventing
risks whose significance is still in debate. The
above considerations alone would make policy
decisions complex and difficult; a further compli-
cation is the threat of nuclear proliferation, partic-
ularly when combined with the possibility of
terrorist diversion of nuclear materials.
This chapter deals only with the radiation pro-
tection aspect of these issues, including limited
material on preventing accidents whose after-
math would require protection activities.
Industry Status
As background to that discussion, the status of
the nuclear power industry in 1976 is described
partially by Figure 4.1, showing that, for the
second straight year, orders for new reactors
were dramatically below the*expected numbers.
Only three new orders were made in 1976, while
about three dozen a year might be expected
according to the trend line.
Another way to look at the industry status is
that there were 237 nuclear power units either in
operation, being built or planned, which repre-
sent a total capacity of 237,000 net megawatts
electric (MWe). Of these 237 units (as of
September 30, 1976), 202 had entered the NRC
licensing process, as follows:
— 62 licensed to operate, with a total capac-
ity of 45,000 MWe;
— 72 with construction permits, represent-
ing 76,000 MWe capacity;
— 68 under review for construction permits,
representing 75,000 MWe capacity.
Initial construction work was proceeding on 21 of
those under limited work authorizations; of the
remaining 35 units, 16 had been ordered and 19
publicly announced.1
Presidential Statement
The most important nuclear policy event of
1976 was President Ford's October 28
statement2 announcing decisions that: (1) the
reprocessing and recycling of plutonium should
not proceed unless there is sound reason to
conclude that the world community can over-
come effectively the associated risks of prolifera-
tion of nuclear explosives capability, (2) the
avoidance of proliferation must take precedence
over economic interests, and (3) the U.S. and
other nations should increase their use of nuclear
power for peaceful purposes even if reprocessing
and recycle of plutonium are not found
acceptable.
The President also announced specific guide-
lines for action concerning the framework of
controls for U.S. nuclear export activities. These
guidelines included applying new criteria in judg-
-------
44
ing whether to enter into new or expanded agree-
ments for peaceful nuclear cooperation, and di-
recting the Secretary of State to:
— enter into negotiations to conform existing
agreements between the United States and coo-
perating nations with established international
guidelines and the new U.S. criteria;
— intensify discussions with nuclear suppli-
ers aimed at expanding common guidelines for
cooperative agreements; and
— work closely with the NRC to ensure ap-
propriate emphasis on nonproliferation concerns
in the nuclear export licensing process.
All nations were asked to join with the United
States in exercising maximum restraint in the
transfer of reprocessing and enrichment technol-
ogy and facilities, by avoiding these sensitive
exports or commitments for at least three years.
The statement also called for the development of
means to establish international restraints over
the accumulation of plutonium.
In addition, the President directed that ERDA:
— identify research and development efforts
needed to define a reprocessing and recycle
evaluation program, consistent with the U.S. goal
of building an effective system of international
controls to prevent proliferation of nuclear explo-
sives capability;
— investigate the feasibility of recovering en-
ergy value from used nuclear fuel without sepa-
rating plutonium;
— speed up the program to demonstrate all
components of waste management technology
by 1978; and
«
— demonstrate the operation of a complete
repository for nuclear wastes by 1985. (The
waste repository plans will be submitted to NRC
for licensing.)
NRC is in the process of deciding whether and
to what extent it will license the-use of recycle
plutonium in mixed oxide fuel. The decision will
be based partly on consideration of ERDA's work
as mandated above, along with NRC's Generic
Final Environmental Statement on health and en-
vironmental issues and a forthcoming Statement
on safeguards. Another source of input will be the
public hearings held on both Statements and
related questions.
Summary
Congress explored many issues in the nuclear
power field in 1976, although few bills actually
became law. Among the significant hearings dis-
cussed in full below are:
— Reactor Safety Study review. The Ras-
mussen Study's methodology and conclusions
were reviewed by executive agencies and inde-
pendent witnesses.
— Exports and proliferation. Despite much
activity, the only provision actually passed in this
area was an amendment to the military aid bill
prohibiting economic assistance to countries who
bought or transferred reprocessing equipment or
materials without establishing international safe-
guards for them.
— Breeder reactor restrictions: Several at-
tempts to restrict development of the breeder
reactor failed in both Houses — including one
which would have made utilities responsible for a
certain percentage of cost overruns above two
billion dollars.
— Radioactive wastes: Hearings ranged
from low level waste disposal, general waste
management, and radiological contamination of
the ocean to the process ERDA used in conduct-
ing negotiations on a possible storage site.
— Insurance and indemnity. Congress
passed a new version of the Price-Anderson Act,
which provides a system to pay public liability
claims in case of a nuclear incident involving
personal injury and property damage.
— Low level radiation: A Congressional
Seminar was held to air varying scientific opinion
about the biological effects of low level radiation.
The judiciary addressed a number of cases
related to nuclear power in 1976. One of the
most important established that EPA has no regu-
-------
45
latory jurisdiction over radioactive waste materi-
als discharged into water from NRC licensed
facilities. New York is trying to ban air transporta-
tion of special nuclear materials; an appeal was
pending at the end of 1976. The most dramatic
decisions were two from the U.S. Court of Ap-
peals, which resulted in a temporary suspension
of licensing by NRC. The Court held that the rule
governing NRC's consideration of the environ-
mental impact of reprocessing and waste disposal
in its reactor licensing process must be more fully
explained and documented.
Other cases touched on such issues as the
export program and the National Environmental
Policy Act, radioiodine reduction, mixed oxide
fuels, and the constitutionality of the Price-
Anderson Act.
The section on executive agencies includes
discussion of comprehensive activities which
cover the entire fuel cycle, as well as activities
related to specific issues. Below are brief descrip-
tions of a few of the most significant.
• Comprehensive
EPA's Office of Radiation Programs
(EPA/ORP) issued new radiation protection stan-
dards for planned releases from nuclear power
facilities in the entire uranium fuel cycle, from
mills to fuel reprocessing establishments.
NRC followed its 1975 guidelines for levels of
radioactive material in reactor effluents by issuing
many regulatory guides and technical reports for
• public comment.
EPA/ORP reviewed the Rasmussen Reactor
Safety Study, concluding, among other things,
that health effects after an accident were not
addressed fully, and that the assumptions for
evacuation as a protective action were deficient.
NRC released the health, safety, and environ-
mental part of its Finai Generic Environmental
Statement on the use of recycle plutonium in
mixed oxide fuel in light-water-cooled reactors.
EPA/ORP's review of the Statement contended
that the technology necessary to close the fuel
cycle has not been finally established, and, until it
is, the economic basis for plutonium recycle
would be speculative.
Along with three other agencies, ERDA issued
a Final Environmental Statement on U.S. Nuclear
Export Activities, to assess the Atoms for Peace
program (designed to spread nuclear power to
other countries) from its inception in 1954
through the year 2000. EPA and ERDA agreed
that a later, separate assessment of the impacts of
returning exported U.S. fuel would be made, if
reprocessing becomes part of U.S. policy.
• Waste
NRC temporarily suspended licensing as a re-
sult of two U.S. Court of Appeals decisions. They
relate to the manner and degree to which NRC
considers the environmental impact of reprocess-
ing and waste disposal in its reactor licensing
process.
NRC published its Supplement 1 to
WASH-1248, "Environmental Survey of the Re-
processing and Waste Management Portions of
the Light-Water Reactor Fuel Cycle."
EPA/ORP's view is that the report does not meet
the stated purpose of clarifying and elaborating
on the environmental impacts associated with the
defined portions of the cycle.
• Spent Fuel
NRC prepared a Draft Generic Environmental
Impact Statement on its evaluation of handling,
shipping and storing spent light water reactor fuel
during the next ten years. It will be published in
1977.
• Transportation
NRC completed a Draft Generic Environmen-
tal Impact Statement to assess transportation of
radioactive materials, including the costs and
benefits of alternative modes. EPA/ORP rated the
Draft "environmentally unsatisfactory" because
-------
46
it considered doses to individual passengers
excessive.
• Accident Prevention
NRC published "Recommendations Related to
Browns Ferry Fire," concluding that most existing
facilities needed improvements in fire prevention
and control. Detailed fire protection guidelines
for nuclear power plants followed in June.
Extensive water reactor and advanced reactor
safety research was conducted, including four
tests at the Loss of Fluid Test Facility (LOFT).
NRC evaluated the potential problems in a
General Electric containment design, and con-
cluded that the systems would perform their
function without interfering with other emer-
gency systems. Licensees employing the GE sys-
tem were required to change operations to in-
crease the safety margin.
• Emergency Response Planning
EPA/ORP conducted an extensive program,
including preparation of a "Manual of Protective
Action Guides and Protective Actions for Nuclear
Incidents," and participation in interagency and
international activities.
The General Accounting Office released a re-
port titled "Stronger Federal Assistance to States
Needed for Radiation Emergency Response
Planning."
-------
47
2. Major Congressional and Judicial Activities
• Congressional
In addition to its standard yearly authorization
and appropriation hearings for each agency, Con-
gress examined many different angles of the nu-
clear power issue, from perspectives ranging
from the most enthusiastic to the most skeptical.
Some of the hearings related to radiation protec-
tion are discussed below; while there are a great
many — even more than those related here —
very few bills reached enactment.
Reactor Safety Study Review
The House Interior Subcommittee on Energy
and the Environment examined on June 11,
1976, the conclusions and methodology of the
Reactor Safety 5ft/£//conducted by Dr. Norman
Rasmussen's group.3 In addition to touching on
the implications of the Browns Ferry fire, wit-
nesses considered the usefulness of the Study in
determining limitations on liability under the
Price-Anderson Act (see below under Insurance
and Indemnity). Among those testifying were Dr.
Rasmussen, NRC, ERDA, independent scientists,
and an industry representative. *
Exports and Proliferation
An amendment to the military aid bill was the
only important piece of legislation actually en-
afcted to slow nuclear proliferation in 1976. The
House/Senate Conference Committee adopted a
Senate provision prohibiting economic assistance
to countries who bought or transferred reprocess-
ing equipment or materials without establishing
international safeguards for them. While the
Committee agreed, it added the qualification that
the President could make exceptions if he certif-
ied that the country would not make nuclear
weapons itself or help others to, and if a prohib-
ition would have a serious adverse effect on U.S.
interests. (Congress could reverse the President
by a joint resolution within 30 days of his submit-
ting such certification.)
Although no other legislation was enacted,
Congress sperit much time and energy investigat-
ing and debating the export and proliferation
issue. Two bills were the focus of attention:
The Export Administration Act would have
provided tighter safeguards and improved con-
trols on proliferation. A House amendment
would have, among other things, (1) given the
U.S. veto power over fuel used in U.S. supplied
reactors and (2) requested other governments
covered by Internatwnal Atomic Energy
Agency safeguards to report on levels of pluto-
nium, U-233, and highly enriched uranium.
Although both Houses passed a bill, no Con-
ference Committee was appointed to resolve
their differences.
The Export Reorganization Act would have
set down procedures to be followed in licens-
ing exports. All authority would have been
concentrated in the NRC, which would have
had to consider the other country's safeguards
in making its decision. Also, the Arms Control
and Disarmament Agency would have been
required 'to submit a "Nuclear Proliferation
Assessment Statement." This bill was re-
placed with a drastically different substitute
after agencies protested; it in turn was suc-
ceeded by a compromise bill which was
passed out of Committee but not the House.
Key elements of the second version were:
requiring assurances that certain international
safeguards be applied to all U.S. exports; pro-
hibiting peaceful explosions; banning repro-
cessing, without U.S. approval, of any U.S. fuel
or fuel from U.S. reactors; and requiring ade-
quate physical security.
Extensive hearings were held in a number of
Committees considering these two measures, and
it seems likely that the next Congress will pass a
bill based in part on the voluminous legislative
history already compiled.
The Senate did adopt a less sweeping measure,
which died in the last hours of the 94th Congress,
to require Congressional review of new export
-------
48
license requests from countries who have not
ratified the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. It
would have applied specifically to Brazil, India,
Israel, Portugal, Spain and South Africa.
Breeder Reactor Restrictions
Several attempts to restrict development of the
breeder reactor failed in both Houses in 1976:
— an amendment to make utilities building
the Clinch River breeder reactor responsible for a
certain percentage of cost overruns above two
billion dollars. The project was originally esti-
mated at $699 million in 1972, and was raised to
$1.95 billion by 1976.
— an amendment to force Federal officials to
make a firm safety determination on the Clinch
River plant before building it. Instead, a proposal
asking for "reasonable assurance" was adopted
in the House.
Radioactive Wastes
Congress heard testimony on many aspects of
radioactive waste disposal in 1976, ranging from
general policy questions about how much ocean
and land dumping should be permitted and under
what conditions, to specific consideration of a
particular possible site in Michigan. No laws were
enacted as the result of the hearings.
In February the House Government Opera-
tions Committee's Subcommittee on Conserva-
tion, Energy and Natural Resources began hear-
ings on low level radioactive waste disposal.4 In
addition to EPA/ORP's testimony, the Subcom-
mittee heard U.S. Geological Survey recommen-
dations for improved site selection criteria and for
more research. Other witnesses included the in-
dustry, State radiological health officials, and the
NRC, which described its responsibilities and
programs. As a result of the hearings, the Sub-
committee published H. Rpt. 94-1320 on June
30, titled Report on Low Level Nuclear Waste
Disposal.5
The now defunct Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy held hearings May 10-12 on radioactive
waste management, in its Subcommittee on
ERDA, Environment and Safety.6 The most im-
portant new policy to emerge in the hearings was
ERDA's decision to involve the public more ex-
tensively in the development of environmental
impact statements. Also discussed were the agen-
cy's research progress, developing technical op-
tions, and new programs. NRC explained its
planning and regulatory program activities, and
contamination problems at sites already in use.
Other witnesses were from EPA/ORP, the Na-
tional Academy of Sciences, and the U.S. Geo-
logical Survey.
To deal with the issue of radiological contami-
nation of the oceans, the Subcommittee on En-
ergy and Environment of the House Interior Com-
mittee devoted two days Guly 26-7, 1976) to
oversight hearings on past and ongoing dumping
practices.7 In particular, the hearings addressed
the possibility of contamination of the marine
environment. EPA, which issues permits for
ocean dumping, detailed the technical program
on which the permits are based. Although past
policy has been to dilute and disperse radioactive
wastes, EPA's current practice requires that any
materials contemplated for disposal be contained
and isolated from the marine environment. The
Subcommittee also heard testimony from the
Department of State on international aspects of
the problem, from ERDA on research status, and
from NRC on the licensing process and its conclu-
sions on possible impacts.
At a September 17, 1976, hearing of the Sub-
committee on Conservation, Energy, and Natural
Resources (House Government Operations
Committee), EPA/ORP presented the results of
continuing surveys of deepsea radioactive dis-
posal sites." The Agency stressed that it sees no
health hazard to people or the marine environ-
ment from dumping practices in the past. Another
issue discussed was EPA/ORP's role in assisting
the NRC in implementing a court decision
requiring them to study further the effects
of waste disposal on the environment. In addition
to providing generally applicable environmental
standards for disposal of high level wastes,
-------
49
EPA/ORP said it was ready to assist NRC if the
Commission requested help.
In March 1977, the Subcommittee on Energy
and Environment (House Interior Committee)
published a report titled Proposed Nuclear Waste
Storage in Michigan, based on hearings held on
July 6,1976.9 The subject was the lack of partici-
pation of citizens and their representatives in
negotiations on a possible storage site, conducted
by ERDA, Union Carbide, and the Michigan De-
partment of Natural Resources. Testimony was
heard from ERDA, EPA, public interest groups,
and State and local officials, focussing largely on
the division of responsibilities among them and
on the ERDA proposal to conduct test drilling for
geological data relevant to site determination.
Insurance and Indemnity
The Price-Anderson Act originally provided a
system of private insurance and government in-
demnity totaling $560 million to pay public liabil-
ity claims in the unlikely event of a nuclear
incident involving personal injury and property
damage. The Joint Committee on Atomic Energy
held hearings on March 3 to consider whether
the financial risk to the insured utilities should be
increased.10
On December 31, 1975, the Price-Anderson
Act was modified and extended until August 1,
1987, with the passage of Public Law 94-197.
Among other things, this legislation provides for
the phasing out of government indemnity by
1985. Utility industry licensees would collec-
tively share in the financial risk of a nuclear
incident through payment of a retrospective pre-
mium to the nuclear insurance pools. In Septem-
ber 1976, the Commission published a proposed
rule to set the premium at $5 million per reactor.11
If a nuclear incident results in damages exceed-
ing the current $125 million primary insurance
layer, each licensee of a large power reactor
would be called upon to pay a prorated share of
the damages in excess of the primary layer, up to
the maximum of $5 million per reactor. The
present $560 million limit on liability for a single
nuclear incident would be retained until the com-
bined primary and retrospective insurance layers
reach $560 million. After that point, the com-
bined liability coverage would rise with the in-
creases in the primary and retrospective
insurance layers. No ultimate dollar limit on
liability would be set.
Low Level Radiation
The Congressional Research Service prepared
for the Subcommittee on Energy and Environ-
ment (House Interior Cpmmittee) "Proceedings
of a Congressional Seminar on Low-Level Ioniz-
ing Radiation."12 The Seminar, cosponsored by
the Environmental Study Conference and the En-
vironmental Policy Institute, brought together sci-
entists with a broad range of opinions about the
effects of low level radiation, and Federal agency
people with similarly diverse views. (It was held
on May 4, 1976, and the Committee print was
released in November.)
• Judicial
While there was little legislative activity result-
ing in statutes in 1976, there were a number of
interesting and productive court cases. One, for
example, addressed jurisdictional confusion be-
tween EPA and NRC, and another brought NRC
licensing to a temporary halt. In addition, there
were many challenges to individual power plants.
Also important were conflicts over New York
City's right to ban transportation of radioactive
materials in its borders, and the State's corre-
sponding request that air transport of special
nuclear materials be halted.
EPA/NRC Jurisdiction
The Supreme Court ruled on June 1, 1976 that
radioactive waste materials subject to NRC regu-
lation are not "pollutants" under the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (Train v. Colorado
Public Interest Research Group, Inc., 48 L.Ed.2d
434).13 Therefore, EPA has no authority to regu-
late discharges of such wastes under the Act. Suit
-------
50
was originally brought under a provision autho-
rizing citizen suits against the EPA Administrator
for failure to perform a nondiscretionary duty.
The Colorado Public Interest Research Group
unsuccessfully contended that radioactive waste
materials discharged from NRC licensed facilities
were "pollutants," and thus subject to regulation
by EPA and by individual States under EPA's
permit program. The Court held that EPA had
correctly disclaimed any authority under the Act
to regulate the discharges.
Transportation
State of New York v. NRC (2nd Circ. Nos.
75-6115, 76-6022 and 76-6081). Three deci-
sions issued by the District Court for the Southern
District of New York during 1976 were appealed
by the State of New York to the Court of Appeals
for the Second Circuit. The central issue is
whether the State can ban air transport of pluto-
nium and enriched uranium.
United States of America v. City of New York
(S.D.N.Y. No. 76-273). The State's request for a
preliminary injunction against enforcement of a
City Health Code provision on transportation of
nuclear materials was denied on January 30,
1976. The Court found that no irreparable injury
would occur, ending a decision on the merits of
the case.
NRC is also involved in an attempt by several
railroads to require the use of special trains for
certain radioactive materials. In a matter before
the Interstate Commerce Commission, the NRC
contended that, insofar as the proceedings in-
volve safety issues, they should be addressed to
the NRC and/or the Department of
Transportation.
Reprocessing and Waste Disposal
Two decisions handed down on July 21,1976,
by the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit resulted in a tempo-
rary suspension of licensing by>IRC. The two
cases — Natural Resources Defense Council,
Inc., v. NRC (D.C. Cir. Nos. 74-1385 and
74-1586) — related to the manner and degree to
which the NRC considers the environmental im-
pact of reprocessing and waste disposal in its
reactor licensing process. The Court held that the
rule( governing such consideration (10 CFR
51.20(e)) must be more fully explained and docu-
mented than it was under then current practice.
In August 1976, the Commission directed that a
new and thorough staff analysis be undertaken of
the environmental impact of fuel reprocessing
and waste management associated with individ-
ual nuclear power plant licensing, to provide the
explanation and documentation required.
Pending completion of the staff analysis, the
Commission suspended issuance of new full-
power operating licenses, construction permits
and limited work authorizations. However, some
types of licensing action — such as fuel loading,
limited power testing, and construction permit
amendments — were not affected.by the deci-
sion. On October 8, the Court of Appeals stayed
its mandate of July 21 and indicated that the
Commission could continue licensing activities
on the condition that it "shall make any licenses
granted between July 21, 1976, and such time as
the mandate has issued subject to the outcome of
the proceeding herein."
On October 13, NRC announced a proposed
interim rule — based on a newly completed staff
analysis — dealing with environmental impacts
of fuel reprocessing and waste management in
licensing nuclear power plants. The interim rule
was to be used for licensing only during the
period required for completion of a public hear-
ing process and publication of a final rule. The
staff analysis concluded that environmental im-
pacts of fuel reprocessing and waste management
as they relate to individual nuclear plants con-
tinue to be small, even when impacts which were
not completely accounted for in the past were
considered. On November 5,1976, the Commis-
sion announced that it was resuming licensing of
nuclear power plants under the conditions set
forth by the Court of Appeals on October 8. It did
so on the basis of the breadth and quality of the
new analysis of reprocessing and waste impacts,
and its belief that there would be no substantial
error in the staff's conclusion. (On March 14,
-------
51
1977, NRC published the final interim rule at 42
F.R. 13883-7.)
Related court cases deal with energy conserva-
tion issues, incremental impact of the uranium
fuel cycle, and ERDA's alleged failure to comply
with the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA).
Export Program and NEPA
Sierra Club v. NRC (D.D.C No. 1867-73).
Four environmental groups charged the NRC
(originally the Atomic Energy Commission) and its
Commissioners, and other Federal entities and
their officials, with a series of alleged failures to
comply with NEPA. Specifically, plaintiffs con-
tended that the defendants have a "nuclear
power export program" and that each of them
must prepare an impact statement on the pro-
gram as a whole and on each individual action
taken in furtherance of the program. ERDA issued
a final programmatic Environmental Impact State-
ment regarding the nuclear export program in
March 1976. The suit was pending at year-end.
Radioiodine Reduction
York Committee for a Safe Environment v.
NRC, 527 F.2d 812 (D.C. Or. 1976). The Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
remanded this case to NRC for an individualized
analysis of the cost and benefits of reducing
routine radioiodine releases at Peach Bottom
Atomic Power Station, Unit 2. Noting that the
.current level of emissions is low, the Court found
that the public interest did not require suspension
of the operating license. On January 26, the
Commission ordered a Licensing Board to super-
vise the cost/benefit analysis.
which set forth procedures for hearings on the
Generic Environmental Statement on Mixed Ox-
ide Fuel (GESMO). The notice also outlined
agency standards for licensing activities related to
the use of mixed oxide fuel prior to a decision on
wide-scale use of plutonium recycle. On May 26,
1976, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
issued its decision, upholding in full both the
GESMO hearing procedures and associated indi-
vidual licensing procedures. However, interim
licensing, except that for "experimental and feasi-
bility purposes," was forbidden. This prohibition
covers all separations, conversion, fuel fabrica-
tion, imports and loacling of mixed oxide fuel in
reactors unless it can be shown that the action is
not related to commercial plutonium recycle.
Current uses of mixed-oxide fuel remain unaf-
fected. Allied General Nuclear Services has
sought Supreme Court review of the Second
Circuit's decision.
Price-Anderson Constitutionality
Carolina Environmental Study Croup v. NRC
(W.D.N.C. No. 73-139). In September 1976, a
hearing was held in the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of North Carolina, Charlotte
Division, in a lawsuit in which the constitutional-
ity of the Price-Anderson Act's limitation on lia-
bility provisions is being challenged. As of the end
of the year, preliminary legal issues of standing
and ripeness had not been resolved.
Mixed Oxide Fuels
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., v.
NRC(2± Cir. Nos. 75-4276 and 75-4278). In a
consolidated case, New Yo/k State and citizen
groups sought review of the Commission's notice
-------
52
3. Executive Activities Pertaining to Public Exposure
• Comprehensive Activities
Guidance
Report on Controlling
Planned Releases
In 1976 an expert international advisory group
— including representatives from ERDA, NRC
and EPA/ORP —prepared a final draft report
setting forth principles for establishing limits for
the release of radioactive material into the envi-
ronment.14 When finalized, the report will pro-
vide the basis for a unified international approach
to controlling planned releases from nuclear fuel
cycles. That approach will be consistent with
current U.S. practice, as exemplified by new
EPA/ORP standards for the uranium fuel cycle
and NRC regulations for light-water-cooled reac-
tors. Scheduled for completion in 1977, the re-
port will be followed by consideration of specific
numerical recommendations.
EPA/ORP's Standards for
the Uranium Fuel Cycle
EPA/ORP published new final radiation pro-
tection standards for planned releases from the
uranium fuel cycle on January 13, 1977.1S Most
steps involved in producing nuclear power are
covered by the new standards, which apply to
uranium mills, chemical conversion plants, iso-
topic enrichment facilities, fuel fabrication opera-
tions, nuclear power plants, and fuel reprocessing
facilities.
The new standards are lower roughly by a
factor of 20 than previous Federal Radiation
Guides, which allowed 500 millirems maximum
annual dose to the whole body and most organs,
and 1,500 millirems to the thyroid, from all
sources except medical activities and natural
background radiation. New figures are shown in
Table 4.2. These standards have the force of law,
which the guides did not until they were trans-
lated by the regulatory agency into each license's
specifications.
Unlike previous guides, the new limits consider
the long term potential buildup of radiation in the
environment, rather than annual exposure alone.
They require that releases of krypton-85, not now
controlled by industry, be reduced by a factor of
ten by 1983. This requirement has worldwide
implications, because krypton is distributed
evenly throughout the world's atmosphere within
about a year after its release. By the year 2000
only an estimated 30 percent of the world's
krypton will be produced by the United States,
but it is hoped that other countries will follow suit
in limiting releases.
The standards also require, by 1983, a signifi-
cant improvement in the control of iodine-129,
which has a half-life of 17 million years. The
required processes for retaining krypton-85 and
iodine-129 are now in advanced stages of dem-
onstration and should be available by 1983. The
transuranic elements governed by these stan-
dards can be controlled using presently available
processes.
NRC will implement the new standards by
issuing detailed technical specifications and regu-
lations for radioactive effluents from each of the
specific facilities involved in the fuel cycle, as part
of its normal licensing process. In this connection,
EPA/ORP has concluded that the guidance is-
sued in 1976 by NRC for control of effluents from
individual light-water-cooled reactors will pro-
vide appropriate implementation of the standards
at most existing reactor sites.
The EPA/ORP standards recognize the need
not only to limit the public health and environ-
mental impact of planned releases, but also to
avoid unnecessary and precipitous disruptions in
the orderly supply of electric power. For this
reason,- the regulations contain a variance proce-
dure which may be used, on a temporary basis, if
the NRC determines that its use will not pose a
significant threat to public health.
-------
53
TABLE 4.2
Proposed May 1975 Standards for Normal Operations
of the Uranium Fuel Cycle
A. Individual Dose Limits
1. Whole body
2. Thyroid
3. Other organs*
25 millirems/year
75 millirems/year
25 millirems/year
B. Limits for Long-Lived Radionuclides
1. Krypton-85
2. lodine-129
3. Transuranics**
50,000 curies/gigawatt-year
5 millicuries/gigawatt-year
0.5 millicuries/gigawatt-year
C. Variances
At the discretion of the regulatory agency (licensor) for
temporary and unusual •operating circumstances to insure orderly
delivery of electrical power.
D. Effective Dates
1. Two years, except
2. 1983 for krypton-85 and iodine-129.
*any human organ except the dermis, epidermis, or cornea.
''limited to alpha-emitters with half-lives greater than one year.
-------
54
The NRC staff reviewed EPA/ORP's proposed
environmental radiation standards for the ura-
nium fuel cycle and light-water-cooled nuclear
power reactors, and testified at EPA/ORP's pub-
lic hearings on the subject in March 1976. NRC
staff comments and subsequent discussions with
EPA/ORP staff resulted in revisions in the pro-
posed standards that would achieve the same
level of environmental protection without unnec-
essary regulatory burdens on the NRC, which
must implement the standards.
EPA/ORP's Environmental
Analysis of Carbon-14
EPA/ORP prepared in several ways to propose
standards for carbon-14 (C-14) discharges from
the nuclear power industry. These particularly
concern the Agency both because C-14 is very
long-lived and because it becomes part of the
carbon cycle, moving from the atmosphere and
water to chemical structures of all life forms and
back again. In the technical support documents
for EPA/ORP's uranium fuel cycle standard, the
Agency pointed out that "the potential for a long
term impact on health due to carbon-14 released
from fuel cycle operations was not recognized
until the Agency considered fenvironmental dose
commitments from the industry in the course of
developing these standards; thus, consideration
of methods for limiting its release to the general
environment is only now beginning." Specifi-
cally, in 1976:
— EPA/ORP continued to study C-14
sources and control systems for light water reac-
tor facilities;
— public health considerations were dis-
cussed in a technical note published in July;16
— Science Applications, Inc. worked on a
contract report to EPA which assesses C-14 con-
trol technology and costs for the light water
reactor fuel cycle. After the final report is re-
viewed, it is expected to be published in 1977;
the major conclusion is that caustic scrubbing is
the best way to remove C-14 from waste gas
streams and to leave it in a form compatible with
permanent disposal conditions.
Types of NRC Standards
NRC standards are of two types: (a) regula-
tions established by the Commission and pub-
lished in Title 10, Chapter I, of the Code of
Federal Regulations, which set forth requirements
that must be met and (b) regulatory guides, de-
veloped to describe and make available to the
public methods acceptable to the NRC staff for
implementing specific parts of the Commission's
regulations. In some cases, guides also delineate
techniques used by the staff to evaluate specific
problems or postulated accidents. In other cases,
they provide guidance to applicants concerning
information needed by the staff in its review of
applications for permits and licenses. Many NRC
guides refer to consensus standards (also called
"national standards") which are developed by
recognized national professional standards orga-
nizations, often with NRC participation.
NRC Environmental Guides
Regulatory Guide 4.11, "Terrestrial Environ-
mental Studies for Nuclear Power Stations," was
issued for comment in July 1976. This Guide
provides information to applicants for NRC licen-
ses on the types of ecological and land use
surveys and environmental monitoring studies
that should be considered (1) for evaluating the
terrestrial environmental impact of proposed.
power plants, (2) for preparation of the construc-
tion permit application, and (3) during
construction.
Regulatory Guide 4.13, "Performance, Testing
and Procedural Specifications for Thermolu-
minescence Dosimetry: Environmental Applica-
tions," was issued for comment in November
1976. Thermoluminescence dosimetry (TLD) is
widely used to measure levels of x and gamma
radiation in the environs of NRC-licensed facili-
ties. The American National Standards Institute
has published a standard (ANSI-N545-1975) that
specifies minimum acceptable performance of
TLDs used for environmental measurements; out-
lines methods to test for compliance; and pro-
vides procedures for calibration, field application,
and reporting. Regulatory Guide 4.13 endorses
-------
TABLE 4.3
Full core consists of
about 135 tons of nu-
clear fuel elements
(containing about 96
tons of uranium)
ELECTRICAL ENERGY
FORACOMMUNITYOF
ABOUT 750,000 PEOPLE
600 Ib. of
Plutonium
cn
9 tons of solid metal
scrap from fuel cladding
(handled separately be-
cause there is some plu-
tonium contamination,
but less need for shield-
ing or heat dissipation).
NUCLEAR POWER
PLANT
COMMERCIAL
REPROCESSING
PLANT
45 tons of "spent"
nuclear fuel, (one-
third of the plant's
fuel load, with its
weight
10,000 gallons of high-
level liquid waste, includ-
ing solvents added. (May
be stored In this form for
up to 5 years.) Contains
about 3 Ib. of plutonium,
2200 Ib. of fission pro-
ducts, and 300 Ib. of
uranium.
5 tons of stable, solidified high-
level waste to be shipped to
Federal Repository.
THE FUEL CYCLE ASSOCIATED WITH 1 YEAR'S OPERATION OF ATYPICAL 1000 ELECTRICAL-MEGAWATT
NUCLEAR POWER PLANT.
Ul
-------
56
the ANSI standard, subject to a number'of provi-
sions and qualifications.
NRC Review of
Environmental Specifications
All nuclear power plant operating licenses that
have been issued since January 1972 contain
detailed environmental technical specifications
which establish operating limitations and proce-
dures and require monitoring programs to verify
the anticipated environmental impacts of the
plants. Considerable time, effort, and money are
being spent by utilities to accumulate the required
monitoring data. Therefore, NRC began review-
ing in 1976 the degree to which environmental
technical specifications adequately address real
ecological problems, and how much confor-
mance with them is actually determined by
monitoring.
The major objectives of this review program
are: (1) to evaluate preconstruction environ-
mental studies; (2) to examine data collection,
data analysis, and reporting format for opera-
tional monitoring; (3) to determine whether mon-
itoring data validate thermal and ecological im-
pact predictions made in the final environmental
statement; and (4) to identify possible
environmental impacts common to several
power plants with similar hydrological and eco-
logical profiles. The review will also assist in the
development of ecosystem models that could be
used by the NRC, as well as by applicants and
licensees, in impact analysis.
NRC Effluent Guidelines
On April 30,1975, NRC announced guidelines
for levels of radioactive material in effluents from
light-water-cooled nuclear power reactors to
meet the criterion "as low as is reasonably
achievable."
A major effort was made during the year:
— to improve the models used by the staff
for estimating effluent levels, environmental dis-
persion, and dose calculations;
— to employ more realistic assumptions; and
— to develop guidance for licensees on im-
plementing the cost-benefit analysis requirements
contained in Section II D of the new regulation
(Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50).
This effort culminated in the issuance for pub-
lic comment of many regulatory guides and tech-
nical reports.17"23 They present calculation
models and values of parameters acceptable to
the NRC staff for calculating the average ex-
pected releases of radioactive material in liquid
and gaseous effluents from normal operation, the
dispersion of effluents in the atmosphere and
different bodies of water and the associated radi-
ation doses to man, and for performing the
cost-benefit analysis required by Appendix I. A
number of licenses have been required to add
contol systems and radwaste equipment to meet
the individual dose design objectives in the
regulation.
NRC Regulations on
Mixed Oxide Fuels
NRC prepared and issued for public comment
proposed regulations covering the health, safety,
and environmental aspects of possible wide-scale
use of mixed oxides of plutonium and uranium to
fuel nuclear power reactors.24 The proposed
regulations would (1) extend existing criteria for
emergency core cooling systems to light water
reactors fueled with mixed oxide fuel; (2) autho-
rize amendments to licenses for the use of the
composition of mixed oxide fuel covered in the
"Generic Environmental Statement on Use of
Mixed Oxide Fuel in Light Water Reactors"
(GESMO), without the preparation of additional
environmental statements; (3) modify regulations
covering environmental effects of the nuclear fuel
cycle to include the effects of mixed oxide fuel
cycle activities; (4) permit the Commission to
impose additional standards for the use of the
-------
57
composition of mixed oxide fuel not covered in
GESMO.
NRC Regulations on
Reporting Noncompliance
The Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 in-
cludes a section which requires certain individu-
als to report to NRC either a defect that could
create a substantial safety hazard, or a failure to
comply with a rule relating to such hazards.
To implement that section, the Commission
published in March 1975 proposed amendments
to its regulations.25 They are intended to provide
NRC with a new source of information to antici-
pate problems. A director or other responsible
officer of a licensed (and many suppliers) would
be subject to a civil penalty for failure to disclose
relevant information.
Since this proposed new part was published,
over 140 letters of comment have been received.
The Commission at year-end was considering a
summary of public comments received, alterna-
tive proposals for modifying the proposed Part
21, and information on existing Federal statutes
and regulations that are similar to the proposed
rule.
International Safeguards
NRC participated in developing and approving
an agreement between the U.S. and the Interna-
tional Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which im-
plements the U.S. offer to accept IAEA safeguards
on nuclear activities (except for those which bear
directly on national security). Concurrently, the
safeguards are being applied in non-nuclear
weapon States under the Nonproliferation Treaty.
The U.S. first offered to take this step in 1976
during negotiations on the NPT, with the inten-
tion of making an agreement with the IAEA on
safeguards procedures when they were being
broadly applied in other industrial countries. The
purpose of the offer was to demonstrate that the
safeguards do not involve undue economic bur-
dens or risk disclosure of proprietary information,
thus assuring other countries that agreeing to the
treaty would not place them at a commercial
disadvantage.
Study Review
EPA/ORP conducted an intensive review of
Reactor Safety Study, An Assessment of Accident
Risks in U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants
(WASH-1400, NUREG-75/014), by Prof. Nor-
man Rasmussen's study group.26 Because it was
the first really significant attempt to quantify the
risks of nuclear power and because it is the
principal reference on the subject, EPA/ORP
made the Study one of its main efforts in generic
reviews.
The resulting comments of EPA/ORP and its
contractor, Intermountain Technologies, Inc.,
were published in a report.27 Highlights follow:
1. EPA/ORP considers the Safety Study a ma-
jor step forward in understanding and estimating
the risks from nuclear power plants. EPA/ORP
supports the Study, its concept, and the need for
continuing the effort to arrive eventually at a
reasonable consensus of risk associated with
reactors.
2. The Study failed to address fully the health
effects expected after an accident and to consider
adequately a technical basis which includes a
broad range of perspectives for estimating the
incidence of the associated bioeffects. It appears
that if late somatic health effects were adjusted in
accordance with EPA/ORP's assessment of the
numerical health risks, the estimates would in-
crease. The potential change in the estimated
early fatalities and injuries could not be deter-
mined by EPA/ORP from the information
provided.
3. The Study appeared to have two deficien-
cies in the assumptions for evacuation as a pro-
tective action. The first involves the use of a
constant 25 mile evacuation sector for all core
melt accidents. This is at variance with present
and planned practice and in some cases overesti-
mates and in other cases underestimates the risk.
The second set of deficient assumptions involves
-------
58
the amount of time that persons would be ex-
posed prior to and during evacuation and the
evacuation speeds.
4. The Study has improperly or incompletely
evaluated parameters used in determining certain
accident event sequences and probabilities. The
assessment of potential BWR reactor protection
system failures was found to be the most signifi-
cant case.
5. The Study report did not have an adequate
description of the analysis of the consequences of
the release of radioactive materials to the
environment.
Subsequent meetings between the Reactor
Safety Study staff and EPA/ORP staff resulted in
agreement that (1) the EPA/ORP position on
calculation of late somatic health effects would
result in a factor of four increase in such calcu-
lated effects, (2) the Study's modeJ for evacua-
tions was adequate for the Study's purposes, and
(3) the assessment of potential BWR reactor pro-
tection system failures was the only case-specific
parameter whose reevaluation appeared to have
the potential to change the overall risk estimates
significantly.
Environmental Impact Statements
While many agencies — often several dozen
— comment on Environmental Impact State-
ments, EPA has primary responsibility. Therefore,
and because of space limitations, only EPA/ORP
responses are summarized here.
Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor
^Description: The proposed Clinch River facil-
ity near Oak Ridge, Tennessee is to be a 975
megawatt (thermal) demonstration project that
includes a liquid metal fast breeder reactor
(LMFBR), fueled with a mixture of plutonium and
uranium oxides. The Environmental Report pre-
pared by ERDA for Clinch River was reviewed
and a Draft Environmental Statement was issued
for public comment by the NRC on February 12,
1976.28 Numerous comments were received
and considered in preparation of the Final Envi-
ronmental Statement, which was issued in De-
cember 1976.
ERDA conducted the environmental assess-
ment of the LMFBR program and issued its Final
Environmental Statement on December 31,
1975. In response to contentions filed by interve-
nors, the need for an independent staff review of
the ERDA program statement was considered by
the Commission and rejected in August 1976.
EPA/ORP Response and Status: The ERDA
Final Environmental Statement fully reflected
EPA/ORP's 1975 comments and responded sat-
isfactorily to them.
Floating Nuclear Power Plants
Description-. An NRC staff Draft Environmen-
tal Statement was published in December 1975
covering the generic issues pertaining to the pro-
posed siting of floating nuclear plants in the
coastal regions of the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf
of Mexico.29 The floating nuclear plant was con-
ceived by the electric power industry some years
ago as an alternative to land siting; its potential
advantages include freedom from earthquake
motions, an abundance of cooling water, and a
relative isolation from populated areas.
EPA/ORP Response and Status: EPA/ORP
rated the NRC Statement inadequate, and
presented its criticisms in testimony before the
House Subcommittee on Energy and the Environ-
ment on July 27, 1976.30 Deficiencies cited
were: (1) inadequate treatment of inshore siting
options, (2) inadequate treatment of siting crite-
ria, (3) lack of discussion of long term and cumu-
lative impacts of a projected industry, and (4) lack
of justification of eight plants for the first incre-
ment of production.
When the Final Environmental Statement was
issued by NRC on October 1, 1976, EPA/ORP
found it unresponsive to the comments and so
informed the NRC and Council on Environmental
-------
59
Quality. Resolution of EPA/ORP's concerns is
now underway.
Mixed Oxide Fuel
Description: In August 1976, NRC released
NUREG-0002, titled "Final Generic Environmen-
tal Statement on the Use of Recycle Plutonium in
Mixed Oxide Fuel in Light Water Cooled Reactors
— Health, Safety and Environment," or
GESMO-1.31 The final Statement, which consists
of five volumes and contains a total of 1700
pages, includes the NRC staff responses to the
comments received on the 1974 Draft Environ-
mental Impact Statement.
The principal staff findings based on health,
safety and environmental — but not
safeguards — considerations, were as follows:
— The safety of reactors and fuel cycle facili-
ties would not be affected signficantly by recycle
of fissile materials.
— Adverse nonradiological environmental
impacts resulting from recycle of fissile materials
from spent fuel would actually be slightly less
than those from a fuel cycle that does not reclaim
residual fuel values.
— Plutonium recycle would extend uranium
resources and reduce enrichment requirements,
but would introduce the need for reprocessing
and fabrication of plutonium-containing fuels.
— While there are uncertainties, wide-scale
recycle would be likely to have economic advan-
tages compared to a fuel cycle that does not
reclaim residual fuel values.
— Differences in health effects attributable
to alternative fuel cycles would be too slight to
provide a significant basis for selection among the
alternatives.
— No waste management considerations
were identified that would bar recycle of recov-
ered uranium and plutonium.
EPA/ORP Response and Status: EPA/ORP's
review concentrated on technical aspects of the
Statement, particularly the comparison of im-
pacts of mixed oxide fuel versus conventional
enriched uranium fuel. Among other points, the
Agency contended that the technology necessary
to close the fuel cycle has not been finally estab-
lished, and, until it is, the economic basis for
plutonium recycle would be speculative. Recom-
mendations included a demonstration or pilot
project subject to thorough consideration of the
safeguards issues.
Nuclear Power Export Activities
Description: In April 1976 ERDA — with the
collaboration and endorsement of the Depart-
ment of State, the NRC, and the Export-Import
Bank — prepared a Final Environmental State-
ment on U.S. Nuclear Export Activities
(ERDA 1542).32 The Statement's purpose was to
assess a wide range of costs and benefits of the
Atoms for Peace program to spread nuclear
power to other countries, from its inception in
1954 through the year 2000. The Statement con-
sidered alternatives to current policies, from
complete termination of exports to continuation
of existing policy with upgraded technology to
minimize environmental impacts.
EPA/ORP Response and Status: EPA/ORP
recommended that, since return of exported U.S.
fuel for reprocessing was an alternative
considered in the Draft Statement, the final
version should address the environmental im-
pacts that could result. While this was not done in
the Final Statement, ERDA later agreed that a
separate assessment would be made if reprocess-
ing becomes part of U.S. policy.
Expansion of Uranium
Enrichment Capacity
Description: ERDA's Final Environmental
Statement33 considers the general question of ex-
panding U.S. uranium enrichment capacity, a
move ERDA considers necessary to maintain the
option of constructing and operating additional
-------
60
nuclear reactors. In addition to discussing the low
level environmental releases of radiation and is-
sues like water consumption, the Statement cov-
ers economic and social costs.
EPA/ORP Response and Status: In addition to
addressing the adequacy of the Statement as
presented, EPA/ORP attempted to apply a per-
spective of priority setting for overall nuclear fuel
cycle needs. Among its more important conclu-
sions were:
— a nuclear enrichment program can be
conducted with an acceptable environmental
impact.
— reassessment of nuclear fuel cycle priori-
ties is necessary to facilitate a smooth domestic
program.
— definition and classification of enrichment
wastes and of associated waste management
practices should be improved.
— enrichment plant dose assessment must
be done on a site-dependent basis using local
meteorology.
Portsmouth Gaseous
Diffusion Plant Expansion
Description: ERDA prepared a Draft Environ-
mental Statement in November 1976 to assess
the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant Expan-
sion.34 To accommodate U.S. needs for nuclear
fuel as well as those of foreign customers, ERDA
concluded that an additional plant would be
required to ensure an adequate supply after
1985, and chose the Portsmouth site. While the
Statement was being reviewed by EPA/ORP, the
importance of the proposed action was enhanced
as the new Administration put increasing empha-
sis on expanding enrichment capacity to achieve
nonproliferation goals.
EPA/ORP Response and Status: EPA/ORP
questioned whether possible alternatives had
been given adequate consideration, and sug-
gested that an expansion facility could be built at
a later date if actually needed, using energy- and
water-saving centrifuge technology rather than
diffusion. Also, the Agency contended that analy-
sis of the regional impact was insufficient. Since
EPA/ORP's comments were submitted, ERDA
has proposed an open season for enrichment
contracts, indicated that some additional lead
time is available, and that the eventual expanded
facility will probably use centrifuge technology.
Brookhaven National Laboratory
Description: ERDA's Draft Environmental
Statement35 addresses the principal pathways
from Brookhaven: releases of waste to the atmo-
sphere and a nearby river, and direct exposure
both from the facilities themselves and from
transportation of waste materials. Operations
thus far have had no perceptible impact on the
offsite environment.
EPA/ORP Response and Status:
concluded in its review that:
EPA/ORP
— the present operation and planned expan-
sion at Brookhaven can be accomplished with an
acceptable environmental impact.
— the Final Statement should qualify the ra-
diological impact of shipping spent reactor fuel in
relation to the actual shipping situation, instead of
using a generic approach.
— the recharge basins, loss of sewage input,
and leaching from the land fill represent potential
means of groundwater contamination. The
Agency asked for some additional information,
and rated the Draft "insufficient information" and
the action proposed as "lack of objections."
Enforcement
Inspection Types
Planned NRC inspections are based on a de-
fined program expressed in detailed inspection
procedures, and are accomplished at prescribed
intervals by NRC regional inspectors. Their princi-
-------
61
pal objective is to provide reasonable assurance
that licensed activities are conducted safely and
in compliance with NRC requirements. This ob-
jective is met through selective examination of
systems and functions, both administrative and
physical, that have an impact on the safety and
protection provided by each licensee.
Reactive NRC inspections respond to particu-
lar conditions or events which may affect the
public's health and safety. Information on such
conditions or events comes to NRC through noti-
fication by an applicant, licensee, contractor or
supplier, or as a result of allegations by a member
of the public. Each licensee is required to report
any abnormal condition or event to the Commis-
sion, thus providing for continuous NRC monitor-
ing of licensee operations. Compliance with these
reporting requirements is examined during the
planned on-site NRC inspections.
Action Taken
Several threshold levels of NRC action are
provided to allow flexibility in the enforcement
action response to reports of noncompliance:
— Written "notices of violation" are pro-
vided for a spectrum of matters where severity
and punitive considerations are below the thresh-
old of orders and civil penalties.
— Civil monetary penalties are provided as
an incentive for licensees to assure .compliance
on a continuing basis. They are considered for
licensees with chronic, deliberate, or repetitive
items of noncompliance, generally where a "no-
tice of violation" has not been effective. Civil
penalties may also be imposed for certain first of a
kind violations.
— Orders to "cease and desist" operations,
or for modification, suspension, or revocation of
licenses are used to deal rapidly and conclusively
with licensees who do not respond to civil penal-
ties or to deal with violations that constitute a
significant threat to public health and safety or to
the common defense and security.
During the period July 1, 1975 through Sep-
tember 30, 1976 a total of 15 civil monetary
penalties were imposed upon licensees by NRC
in order to enforce compliance with NRC rules
and regulations.
Confirmation of
Monitoring Measurements
NRC for several years has enlisted the cooper-
ation of the National Bureau of Standards, the
Energy Research and Development Administra-
tion, and State health and environmental agen-
cies to provide corroborative evidence of the
environmental and effluent radioactivity mea-
surements submitted by licensees. This system
provides some specific evidence for the evalua-
tion of the capability of licensees to perform
radioactivity measurements. The Health Services
Laboratory (HSU of the ERDA Idaho National
Engineering Laboratory functions as the NRC re-
ference laboratory in such matters, and NRC
inspectors regularly compare licensee effluent
measurements with those made by HSL on identi-
cal effluent samples.
The State agencies assist in long-term, repeti-
tive sampling to evaluate licensees' overall envi-
ronmental programs. At the end of 1976, the 19
States participating in this program were Ala-
bama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecti-
cut, Florida, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan,
Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Vermont, Virginia,
and Wisconsin. For most States this arrangement
is under written contract, with NRC providing
these States with funds, technical support and
training to assist in improving their analytical
capabilities.
Standard Review Plans
NRC's Standard Review Plans for safety re-
views were completed during 1975 and fully
implemented during 1976. The Plans describe
the process by which the NRC staff determines
that a proposed design provides adequate protec-
tion of the public health and safety. The primary
purposes of the Plans are to improve the quality
and uniformity of staff reviews, to stabilize the
-------
62
safety review process, and to present a
well-defined base from which to evaluate pro-
posed changes in the scope and requirements of
reviews. Another important goal is to assure that
only essential requirements are imposed on li-
cense applications.
Studies
NRC's Risk Assessment Studies
NRC is exploring ways in which the probabili-
ties and risk assessment techniques developed in
the Reactor Safety Study (WASH-1400) can be
implemented in the regulatory process and ap-
plied to help resolve both specific and generic
technical issues. Also, a computer code has been
developed for detailed analysis of nuclear power
plant reliability data. The code may be used to
calculate the sensitivity of system unavailability to
variations in test-related characteristics and to
design changes.
Several studies were concluded to provide
information needed in risk assessment and licens-
ing. These included: (1) one phase of a study to
formulate a methodology, based on WASH-1400
techniques, to examine the risk to the public of
reprocessing of nuclear fuels; (2) analysis of the
effect of engineered safety features on the risk of
hypothetical Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor
accidents; and (3) an analysis of data on fires at
nuclear power plants to be used in the develop-
ment of a risk assessment.
Cost/Benefit of Reducing Exposures
NRC and EPA/ORP began to cooperate on
defining the health benefits Of reducing radiation
exposures of the general population from nuclear
facility effluents, soliciting public and industry
input. The results will be used by NRC to improve
the bases for conducting the cost-benefit analysis
required by its regulations establishing as low as
reasonably achievable population doses.
Doses Associated with
Power Generation
To compare the internal radiation doses asso-
ciated with nuclear power to those from conven-
tional systems, the National Institute of Environ-
mental Health Sciences sponsored a study at
New York University. It will evaluate effects of
radionuclides on a local population and on the
global community.
EPA/ORP Radiation Studies
at Nuclear Facilities
EPA/ORP continued its special field studies at
selected typical nuclear facilities. In addition to
helping develop measurement techniques and
validate dose computational models, the studies
are useful in characterizing effluents and deter-
mining whether technology to control nuclear
wastes can meet design specifications. Some of
the studies completed or in progress in 1976
were:
— Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant.
EPA/ORP published a report of a study3* con-
ducted jointly with NRC. Data were gathered to
validate a dose model that estimates the external,
whole body, cloud gamma dose to exposed pop-
ulations. In addition, the field study team evalu-
ated programs to measure discharged radionu-
clides and interpret results in terms of radiation
exposure, and examined the movement of
radionuclides through the environment under
routine conditions.
— Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station: A
draft report was prepared during 1976 of a con-
tinuing joint EPA/NRC study of the iodine-131 to
milk pathway at a boiling water reactor. Measure-
ments included release rates and concentrations
of iodine-131 in air, grass and milk.
— Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant.
EPA/ORP, the Minnesota Department of Health,
Northern States Power Company and NRC col-
laborated on collecting data to validate a dose
model. Results were published in 1976.17
— C.E Fuel Fabrication Plant. EPA/ORP
completed a study to characterize the stack efflu-
-------
63
ents of a larger fuel fabrication facility, and to
learn about types of radionuclides discharged and
about significant environmental exposure path-
ways. As stated in a draft report to be published in
1977, these data will be used to validate dose
models for use in future estimates of individual
and population doses.
— Puget Sound Naval Shipyard. EPA/ORP
published the results of its study of the Shipyard,
designed to locate, identify and measure any
radionuclides in the port or its environment due
to nuclear ship activity, and then to analyze any
hazard resulting from them.38 Researchers could
find no significant levels due to nuclear powered
ships.
— Browns Ferry Nuclear Power Plant. De-
sign and evaluation of an ambient radiation moni-
toring program was the major objective of a joint
study begun by EPA/ORP, the Alabama Division
of Radiological Health, the Tennessee Valley Au-
thority and others. Only background data was
gathered before the plant was shut down tempo-
rarily, but the study will resume in 1977.
Waste
Administration
An Interagency Task Force on Commercial
Nuclear Wastes was formed and chaired by the
Office of Management and Budget with partici-
pants from the Council on Environmental Quality,
EPA/ORP, ERDA, the U.S. Geological Survey,
and NRC. The Task Force worked on the
following:
— identifying the respective roles of ERDA,
EPA/ORP, and NRC in the area of nuclear waste
management,
— determining the current timetable for the
agencies' waste management reports, decisions,
and research and development results,
— working with the agencies to secure the
clarification of their roles and timetable changes
needed to assure adequate scheduling of these
reports, decisions, and research and develop-
ment results, and
— identifying alternative actions that might
be taken to clarify roles of the agencies, if any
clarification is needed.
The Task Force did not reconsider program
matters such as the adequacy of safety analyses,
the validity of technologies involved in all aspects
of the waste management issue, or the accept-
ability of environmental criteria.
Guidance
In January 1976, the NRC set up a task force to
define goals against which nuclear waste
management programs could be evaluated. The
task force began by interviewing a wide range of
individuals from industry, conservation groups,
and agencies involved in waste management. The
interviews pointed up the complexity of the is-
sues, which span social, political, institutional,
and ethical problems.
The task force identified several time horizons
pertinent to dealing with nuclear wastes: the
coming decade, the next few centuries, and the
next few hundred millenia. NRC's statement of
goals and objectives will address each of these.
Ensuring long term safety was universally cited as
the most important requirement, yet judgments
about what would be adequate varied widely—
understandably so, because of the extended time
periods involved.
The recommendations of the task force were
conveyed to the Commission early in 1977, fol-
lowing an oral report at the Conference on Public
Policy Issues in Nuclear Waste Management at
Chicago in October. After considering the policy
issues and priorities that should be assigned to the
various goals, the Commission will request public
comments on recommended goals and will es-
tablish policy based on the report and the com-
ments received.
High Level Waste Criteria
Development work supporting the formulation
of performance criteria for solid matrices for high
-------
BARRIERS TO THE ENVIRONMENT
SOLID
WASTE
FORM
ENGINEERED
CONFINEMENT
GEOLOGICAL FORMATIONS
CALCINE GLASS
TENS TO HUNDREDS YEARS
MILLIONS TO BILLIONS YEARS
-------
65
level wastes was completed by Lawrence Liver-
more Laboratories and the University of Arizona
under contracts with NRC. Based on this work,
preparation of a proposed regulation was
initiated.
Preliminary identification and scheduling of
the standards required for the regulation of all
categories of licensed wastes is nearing comple-
tion. Similar efforts directed toward scheduling
the development of licensing methodologies and
predictive models are underway. Regulations
governing the performance of high level waste
solids, setting forth waste classifications for regu-
latory purposes, and setting forth site suitability
criteria for high level waste repositories are
scheduled to be proposed for public comment in
1977 and 1978. The addition of a new part to the
Commission's regulations specifically for waste
management facilities and operations is also be-
ing considered.
West Valley Wastes
A policy statement issued by the former
Atomic Energy Commission in 1971 (Appendix F
to 10 CFR Part 50 of NRC regulations) provided
that high level radioactive liquid wastes produced
at reprocessing plants must be (1) converted to
an approved solid form within five years, and
(2) shipped to a Federal repository within 10
years after separation of the fission products from
the irradiated fuel. The rule provided that its
application to existing wastes (produced by the
Nuclear Fuel Services plant at West Valley, N.Y.,
the only spent fuel reprocessing plant to be li-
censed for operation) would be the subject of a
further rulemaking proceeding.
The NRC staff published in April 1976 a report
concerning disposition of the liquid high level
waste currently being stored at the closed-down
facility at West Valley.39 The waste includes
600,000 gallons of neutralized (non-acid) high
level waste and 12,000 gallons of acid from high
level waste, both by-products of spent reactor
fuel reprocessing from 1966 to 1972. The report,
"Alternative Processes for Managing Existing
Commercial High-Level Radioactive Wastes"
(NUREG-0043), discusses the nature of the
wastes and reviews the available technology that
may be applicable.
Decommissioning Criteria
In the waste management area, technical stud-
ies were underway at the Battelle-Pacific North-
west Laboratory to develop decontamination and
decommissioning criteria for light water reactors
and for fuel cycle facilities, with initial reports
scheduled for completion in early 1977. These
will assist in developing decommissioning regula-
tions and regulatory guides.
Environmental Impact Statements
Reprocessing and Waste Management
Description: Supplement 1 to WASH-1248,
"Environmental Survey of the Reprocessing and
Waste Management Portions of the LWR Fuel
Cycle" (NUREG-0116) was published by the
NRC in October 1976."° It was a result of the July
21 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C.
Circuit, remanding the reprocessing and waste
management portions of the fuel cycle rule (see
above). The Supplement considers two fuel cy-
cles: uranium-only recycle, and the no recycle
case. It presents a full discussion of spent fuel
reprocessing and waste management impacts,
and is based on a thorough survey of the available
data. In general, the Supplement indicates that
the available data are adequate for a quantitative
assessment of impacts from normal operations of
all parts of the reprocessing and waste manage-
ment system. Accidents were analyzed for most
components of the complete system, but the
basis for these analyses in the literature were
varied, and all accident sequences could not be
analyzed. Even when impacts not completely
accounted for previously were considered, the
NRC report found that environmental impacts of
fuel reprocessing and waste management at indi-
vidual nuclear plants continue to be small.
EPA/ORP Response and Status: EPA/ORP
concluded that the report did not meet the stated
-------
66
purpose of clarifying and elaborating on the envi-
ronmental impacts associated with the manage-
ment of nuclear fuels and wastes. More substan-
tive information and data were needed to support
the impact assessments presented, and EPA/ORP
questioned a number of the assumptions, ap-
proaches, analyses and references used by NRC.
Concern also focused on the use of a relative
hazard index, failure to recognize problems of
milling and mining, and presentation of environ-
mental impact from radiological releases and
problems associated with low level wastes.
Waste Management Operations
at the Hanford Reservation
Description: The Final Environmental
Statement41 ERDA issued in December 1975 cov-
ered current waste management operations at
Hanford and the program to convert stored and
newly generated high level waste from a liquid to
a salt cake form. Alternatives include additional
treatment of waste streams, calcining the wastes,
or holding them in liquid form.
EPA/ORP Response and Status: EPA/ORP
found that the Final Statement was responsive to
the concerns it expressed with regard to the Draft
Statement, and that there is adequate emphasis
on improved waste management practices and
ultimate disposal.
Commercially Generated Radwaste
Description: A Federal Register notice of Oc-
tober 1, 197642 included an outline for a pro-
posed Generic Environmental Impact Statement
for the management of commercially generated
radwaste.
EPA/ORP Response and Status: EPA/ORP
responded that the outline provided insufficient
coverage to such areas as risk benefit consider-
ation, alternatives, a detailed assessment of po-
tential accidents, and whether all wastes from
both fuel cycle and non-fuel cycle operations
would be covered.
Waste Management Operations
at Idaho National Laboratory
Description: ERDA's October 1976 Draft
Statement43 assesses the impact of continuing
waste management operations at the Idaho Na-
tional Engineering Laboratory. Currently, high
tevel waste is calcinated into solids and stored in
steel bins in underground concrete vaults, where
it will remain until a terminal storage method is
developed. The Statement concludes that the
total body dose to people resulting from the
Idaho operations is small compared to natural
background.
EPA/ORP Response and Status: EPA/ORP
felt that the hydrogeologic information available
could be improved to perform a more compre-
hensive evaluation of the potential for environ-
mental damage caused by stored waste. Also
emphasized were the importance of (1)
eliminating reliance on soils to remove
radioactivity from liquid wastes discharged to the
ground, and (2) placing more emphasis on
determining an. acceptable disposal form and
method for high level wastes.
ERDA Waste Conferences
ERDA sponsored two meetings on radwastes,
in part to incorporate public comment and views
in the drafting of its Environmental Impact State-
ment on commercial waste management. The
first, billed as an international technological semi-
nar on waste handling, was attended by over 600
people from twelve nations, while the second
focused on environmental and societal ramifica-
tions. (The latter was cosponsored by NRC, EPA,
the National Science Foundation and the Council
on Environmental Quality.)
Barnwell Fuel Receiving
and Storage Station
Description: Construction of Allied General
Nuclear Services' separation plant at Barnwell,
S.C., is virtually completed; however, work on
the projected plutonium conversion and waste
-------
67
solidification facilities at Barnwell has not yet
begun. The hearing on the application to license
the operation was continuing at the end of 1976,
but was limited to safety and environmental
issues.
The NRC's Final Environmental Impact State-
ment, which was introduced into the hearing
record, has been supplemented by a Draft State-
ment dealing with impacts from the full range of
activities expected to be conducted at Barnwell
and vicinity as well as with krypton-85, tritium
and carbon-14 gas removal and collection tech-
nology.44 Comments on the Draft Supplement
were received but a Final Supplement had not
been issued by year-end. A second Supplement,
dealing with the final cost benefit analysis and
with safeguards, is planned when a licensing basis
is established, that is, after the Commission's
decision on recycle and reprocessing.
EPA/OKP Response and Status-. In its review,
EPA/ORP classified the project as "environmen-
tal reservations," finding an inadequate response
to comments on the Draft Statement regarding
effluent limits for discharging radioactive waste
liquid. It had been EPA/ORP's understanding
throughout the lengthy licensing process for the
Barnwell facility that no radioactive waste dis-
charges to the receiving waters were planned.
The issues requiring clarification include: (1)
whether or not there are planned liquid releases
for the facility, (2) bases for any liquid waste
concentration limits that may be applied to
planned discharges, and (3) specific bases for
any liquid waste concentration limits including
15% of applicable regulation concentrations that
have been or will be applied for abnormal
occurrences.
High Performance Fuel Laboratory
at Rich/and, Washington
Description: The Draft Statement45 addresses
potential impacts of the construction and opera-
tion of the High Performance Fuel Laboratory, a
pilot scale facility used by ERDA to support the
fuels development effort in the breeder reactor
program. Some of the subjects touched on are
effluent and environmental monitoring and meas-
uring, waste handling systems, site security, re-
gional hydrology and alternative sites.
EPA/ORP Response and Status: EPA/ORP
noted that the ERDA Statement did not demon-
strate that waste water discharges would not
signifcantly affect the water supply. In general,
the Statement failed to present a clear picture of
the waste water disposal system and the water
supply system for the facility; it appears that
sanitary wastes would be discharged to the
ground after being processed at a sewage treat-
ment plant.
Enforcement and Licensing
Licensing ERDA Facilities
While ERDA has the task of developing and
demonstrating technologies for storage and dis-
posal of high level nuclear wastes, the Energy
Reorganization Act of 1974 assigns NRC the
responsibility to license and regulate the facilities
to be employed for the safe storage and/or dis-
posal of these wastes.
The NRC is actively preparing for the licensing
of these ERDA facilities. Factors being considered
in the development of licensing procedures in-
clude assuring the protection of the health and
safety of the public, the timely development of
the facilities, and obtaining public participation to
the fullest extent possible. With these factors in
mind, the preparation of a licensing procedure
which will provide for effective NRC regulation is
well underway.
The NRC licensing procedures will provide for
an independent assessment of proposed ERDA
waste management facilities. A study under NRC
direction has been initiated at Sandia Laboratories
to develop the procedures, methods, and guide-
lines which will be used for assessing the risks and
evaluating the acceptability of proposed geologic
storage facilities. The evaluation of performance
will be in terms of meeting NRC goals and objec-
tives for waste management in areas including
-------
68
safety, environmental, technical, societal, eco-
nomic, and public involvement factors.
NRC Oversight of Waste Disposal
During the year the NRC established a task
force to reassess the roles of Federal and State
governments in the regulation and operation of
commercial low level radioactive waste burial
grounds. This was done to meet a commitment to
the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy and to
respond to recommendations of the House Com-
mittee on Government Operations. The task
force visited the various burial sites. It also held
meetings with management representatives in the
respective States to discuss each State's experi-
ence and obtain its views. A report containing the
task force's findings and recommendations was in
preparation at year-end.
Studies
EPA/ORP Research on Burial Sites
EPA/ORP is working to determine the impact
of ground disposal of radioactive wastes on a
practical, field-oriented basis by conducting stud-
ies at operating commercial burial facilities. Thus
far, studies have been conducted, in close co-
operation with the States of New York and Ken-
tucky and the U.S. Geological Survey, at the
Maxey Flats, Kentucky and West Valley, New
York burial sites. At Maxey Flats, preliminary
environmental pathways and evaporation studies
have already been completed, and preliminary
hydrogeological and radiological studies are in
process; at West Valley, EPA/ORP has finished a
preliminary radioactivity migration study and is
now in the second year of a four-year detailed
environmental pathways study. In 1977 the
Agency hopes to extend the studies to include
other burial sites.
In addition, EPA/ORP is conducting or spon-
soring several smaller studies aimed at specific
segments of the land burial problem, such as
determining what wastes are buried in the burial
grounds; factors which affect the retention of
radionuclides by soil; potential improvements in
site engineering, operations and water manage-
ment; and development of criteria for selection of
a burial site..
Specifics on sample programs follow:
— Characterization of reactor-generated low
level radwastes: EPA/ORP continued to fund a
study investigating the radionuclide makeup of
light water reactor radioactive wastes presently
being consigned to shallow land burial. Chemical
analyses were made of spent ion exchange resins,
evaporator concentrates, and filter sludges for
specific radionuclides. Waste samples from four
reactors were analyzed to determine gross alpha,
beta and gamma activities. A report will be issued
in 1977.
— Environmental survey of packaging for so-
lidified low level radwastes: EPA/ORP sup-
ported a study to analyze packaging methods and
techniques for solidified low level radwaste, sim-
ulating environmental conditions present in shal-
low land burial and deep ocean disposal.
Considerations will include physical, chemical
and radioactive properties which affect the
durability of the packages, and practices currently
followed both in the U.S. and in other countries.
— Inventory and projections of low level
radwastes for burial at commercial facilities:
EPA/ORP is preparing a report of the inventory
(through June 1976) of low level radioactive-
wastes buried at the six commercial facilities.
These data update a 1974 report and were com-
piled through arrangements with various State
regulatory agencies. A projection or prediction of
future waste volumes for comparison with exist-
ing capacity will be included.
NRC Site Reassessment
The reassessment of existing sites involves in-
terrelated activities by NRC, the States, and other
Federal agencies—including some parts of the
NRC staff review of the Federal/State programs;
Agreement State and NRC licensing and inspec-
tion programs; work of the NRC in-house task
force on criteria; a State bonding task force re-
port; U.S. Geological Survey and EPA/ORP data
-------
69
base site studies; and interagency task force
efforts.
As part of the Commission's ongoing program
to reexamine the bases for the management of
radioactive wastes, and in response to Congres-
sional concerns, the NRC undertook a study of
Federal/State programs for the regulation and
operation of the commercial low level burial
facilities. The NRC staff study was a concentrated
effort to assess the overall programs for these sites
and to identify needed corrective actions.
During July and August, 1976, NRC staff met
with representatives from the States of Illinois,
Kentucky, Nevada, New York, South Carolina,
and Washington. (A commercial disposal facility
is located in each of these States.) The purpose
of the meetings was to discuss the States' experi-
ence and views concerning the regulation and
operation of commercial low level radioactive
waste burial facilities. The views expressed at
these meetings were incorporated into the ongo-
ing staff study. The NRC staff also visited five of
the six existing commercial sites during this time.
GA O Report
In June 1974, the U.S. General Accounting
Office (GAO) initiated a review of nuclear waste
burial grounds. In January 1976, the GAO issued
its report to Congress, entitled "Improvements
Needed in the Land Disposal of Radioactive
Wastes—A Problem of Centuries."4* The report
dealt with both commercial and ERDA operated
burial activities. The GAO made several recom-
mendations to the NRC concerning the need for
comprehensive studies of waste disposal sites,
development of site selection criteria, improve-
ments in monitoring programs and development
of long term care requirements.
The most broad ranging GAO recommenda-
tion was for studies of existing commercial and
ERDA sites to evaluate their ability to retain radio-
active waste. Then, on the basis of those studies,
site selection criteria would be developed for
determining the long term suitability of existing
disposal sites and for selecting future sites. Full
implementation of all the recommendations will
involve a number of Federal agencies and State
groups who have overlapping charges and ongo-
ing studies.
An informal interagency working group to deal
specifically with shallow land burial and with the
implementation of the GAO recommendations
has been established following an NRC initiative.
The group consists of representatives of NRC,
ERDA, EPA/ORP and USGS, plus a representa-
tive of the National Conference of Radiation
Control Program Directors to provide input from
the States. The group has agreed to define areas
of responsibilities, to coordinate the timing of
programs, and to see that the GAO recommenda-
tions are fully implemented, while minimizing
duplication of effort.
Status Report
The Federal Energy Administration compiled a
Status Report on Management of Commercial
Radioactive Nuclear Wastes, released May 10,
1976. It reported on what it described as a
comprehensive government waste program plan,
including:
— extensive environmental assessments and
impact statements, prior to decisions on repro-
cessing, recycle, waste forms, storage modes and
packing criteria;
— selection of specific technologies for
waste solidification and of waste terminal storage
sites;
— completion of environmental, safety and
related regulatory standards, criteria and reviews
to assure acceptable radioactive waste manage-
ment practices;
— an interagency task force to coordinate
these activities among the responsible Federal
agencies.
-------
70
• Spent Fuel
Environmental Impact Statements
NRC evaluated the environmental impact of
handling, shipping and storing spent fuel during
the ten years or so when interim storage will be
required regardless of any fuel cycle decisions. A
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
covering this evaluation will be published in Au-
gust 1977, and the Final Statement and any possi-
ble rulemaking or other guidance on spent stor-
age are anticipated later.
Licensing and Enforcement
Since no reprocessing of spent fuel from light
water reactors is taking place pending NRC's
resolution of the issues regarding recycle, disposi-
tion of trie growing inventory of spent fuel has
become a problem for an increasing number of
utilities. Typical storage capacity at a reactor is
about one and one-half core loads, or six years of
accumulated spent fuel. Nuclear utilities have
been contacting NRC regarding storage capacity
at their nuclear power plants in increasing num-
bers. Thirteen applications, letters of intent and
other indications of interest in increasing storage
capacity were received during calendar year
1975, and an additional 17 during calendar year
1976. By December 31, 1976, the NRC had
approved 18 requests.
Guidance
• Transportation
Irradiated Fuel Packaging
Spent (irradiated) nuclear fuel is transported off
site in shipping casks specially designed to con-
tain the radioactive fuel assembly materials dur-
ing normal and postulated design accident trans-
portation conditions. Two regulatory guides
which outline the NRC staff recommendations for
design loading conditions and design criteria for
the shipping casks were under development in
fiscal year 1976.
Plutonium Packaging
Public Law 94-79 requires the NRC to prohibit
its licensees from transporting plutonium by air
until it has certified to the Joint Committee on
Atomic Energy of the Congress "that a safe con-
tainer has been developed and tested which will
not rupture under crash and blast testing equiva-
lent to the crash and explosion of a high-flying
aircraft." Except for plutonium contained in a
medical device designed for individual human
application (like a cardiac pacemaker), the re-
striction applies to all air transport of plutonium.
Qualification criteria are being developed to
assure that packages will almost certainly remain
intact in aircraft accidents occurring during take-
offs, landing, or ground operations. These types
of accidents not only represent the majority of all
aircraft accidents, but also are the kind most likely
to occur in an urban area. The criteria will also
afford a high degree of protection against acci-
dents which occur in other phases of flight, in-
cluding accidents of extreme severity such as
mid-air collisions, high-speed crashes and fires. A
two phase program to develop and test a high
integrity package that meets the qualification
criteria is in progress.
The qualification criteria, the package design,
the test results and the supporting documentation
are to be reviewed by the Advisory Committee
on Reactor Safeguards and the Assembly of Engi-
neering of the National Academy of Sciences,
prior to NRC's certifying the design to the Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy. In the fall of 1976,
the ACRS endorsed the criteria devloped by the
NRC staff as being properly responsive to Public
Law 94-79. Both the review by the Assembly of
Engineering and the certification procedures are
expected to be completed in 1977.
Environmental Impact Statements
Air Transport of Nuclear Materials
Description: From its inception in January
1975, the NRC has reviewed the existing regula-
tions and procedures for transportation of radio-
-------
71
active materials. As part of its review, the Com-
mission initiated in June 1975 a public rulemaking
proceeding regarding the air transport of all nu-
clear materials, including plutonium and enriched
uranium.
With the technical assistance of Sandia Labora-
tories, a Draft Generic Environmental Impact
Statement was prepared to assess the impacts
associated with the transportation of radioactive
materials, including relative costs and benefits of
alternative modes.47 Information derived from re-
search into the accident-resistant properties of
plutonium shipping packages, and data collected
from the NRC's 1975 Radioactive Material Ship-
ments Survey, were used in preparing the State-
ment. About 30 letters of comment were re-
ceived and analyzed, and'changes to the State-
ment will be made, as appropriate, before the
Final Environmental Impact Statement is issued in
1977.
EPA/ORP Response and Status: EPA/ORP
rated the Statement "environmentally unsatisfac-
tory" because doses to individual passengers on
aircraft were considered excessive. NRC indica-
ted, without discussion, maximum and average
individual dose rates as 340 mrem/year and 60
mrem/year, respectively. In its 1974 recommen-
dations to the Federal Aviation Administration,
EPA/ORP had recommended a seat level dose
rate of 0.5 rnrem/hour — which in the worst
assumed case resulted in 42-mrem/year — and
demonstrated a cost effective method to reach
this level. It appeared that, in discarding the
approach EPA/ORP recommended, NRC was
not following the "as low as reasonably achieva-
ble" philosophy. The other major criticism of the
Statement was that its accident analysis model
was apparently based on incomplete test data.
Studies
Monitoring
During 1976, NRC initiated a long term
State/Federal collaborative program to assess the
current practices in the transpprtation of radioac-
tive material under existing regulations. Under
this program a State contracts with NRC to en-
gage in a two year cooperative effort for the
surveillance of radioactive materials in transport.
The surveillance is conducted at designated loca-
tions in order to obtain information on the condi-
tion of packages, handling practices, and other
pertinent data. An ancillary benefit to the States is
the enhancement of their expertise in dealing
with radioactive material shipments.
Survey of
Radioactive Material Shipments
To determine the total number and types of
packages of radioactive material being trans-
ported annually in the U.S., the NRC conducted a
survey among some 2,300 NRC and Agreement
State licensees and E.RDA contractors. A detailed
report of this survey (BNWL-1972) was issued in
April 1976 by Battelle-Pacific Northwest Labora-
tories, and a summary report (NUREG-0073) was
made available by NRC in May 1976."" Based on
the survey data, the estimated total number of
packages of radioactive material transported
each year in the United States is about 2.5 mil-
lion. About one-third of these packages contain
such small quantities of radioactive materials that
they are exempt from packaging and labeling
requirements. The data from the survey were
used in other studies to estimate radiation expo-
sures from normal transport of radioactive ma-
terial, and to calculate the risk to people and the
environment from transportation accidents in-
volving such packages.
Large Shipping Cask Safety
The development and verification of analytical
procedures is necessary to predict with greater
confidence the margins of safety which exist in
the design of large, complex, and costly shipping
containers'such as spent fuel shipping casks. For
these packages, physical testing of each individ-
ual design, ultimately involving their damage or
destruction, is not necessary or justified. NRC,
therefore, has ongoing research efforts to estab-
lish analytical methods for evaluating the struc-
tural and thermal performance, and shielding and
-------
72
sub-criticality features of these casks and their
critical components. Identification of the physical
tests required to verify the capability of the ana-
lytical model procedures has been initiated.
Transport in Urban Areas
The NRC has undertaken a study of the special
features of radioactive material transport—under
both normal and accident conditions-in large
densely populated areas. It will result in a Generic
Environmental Impact Statement on the transport
of radionuclides in urban environs. The study will
evaluate the effects, including radiological safety,
of characteristics peculiar to large cities, such as
high population density, local meteorology, and
numerous tall buildings. Sandia Laboratories, the
NRC contractor for this study, has begun model
formulation and preliminary data gathering. The
study will take about two years to complete.
To help in developing an assessment model,
the contractor formed a Task Group composed of
members from Federal, State and local agencies
as well as industrial, academic and environmental
public interest groups. The group met twice in
1976 and has scheduled its first draft assessment
for July 1977.
• Accident Prevention
Guidance
Qualification Testing of Components
Reports from NRC inspectors in the field have
indicated that some active
components—particularly pumps and
valves—have not functioned when called on in
tests or during operation. The staff has encour-
aged the American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) to initiate development of standards to
provide greater assurance that components will
operate when needed. As part of this effort, ANSI
published a standard on functional specifications
for nuclear valves, with the major focus on quali-
fication testing.
Fire Protection
As a result of a fire in electrical cable trays in
the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant in Alabama, the
NRC initiated a program to evaluate the need for
improving fire protection in nuclear power plants.
As part of this continuing evaluation, the NRC, in
February 1976, published a report by a special
review group, "Recommendations Related to
Browns Ferry Fire" (NUREG-0050).49 This report
recommends that improvements in fire preven-
tion and control should be made in most existing
facilities, and that consideration should be given
to increasing their ability to withstand large fires
without the loss of important functions. ,fn May
1976, the NRC's Office of Nuclear Reactor Regu-
lation issued specififc recommendations for fire
protection programs and included them in the
acceptance criteria of the licensing review for
nuclear power plants.
Detailed guidelines for nuclear power plants
were issued in June 1976,m describing how to
implement NRC's requirement that the probabil-
ity and effects of fire be minimized, and how to
design fire safety features into nuclear power
plants.
The NRC is reevaluating fire protection pro-
grams at all nuclear power stations.
Enforcement
Abnormal Occurrences
Under Section 208 of the Energy Reorganiza-
tion Act of 1974, NRC is required to "...submit to
the Congress each quarter a report listing for that
period any abnormal occurrences at or asso-
ciated with any facility which is licensed or other-
wise regulated pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954, as amended, or pursuant to this Act. For
the purposes of this section, an abnormal occur-
rence is an unscheduled incident or event which
the Commission determines is significant from the
standpoint of public health or safety...."
NRC has developed two major interim criteria,
according to which abnormal occurrences are:
-------
73
(1) events involving an actual loss of the protec-
tion provided for the health or safety of the
public; and (2) events involving major reduction
in the degree of protection provided.
Only one of the events occurring at an NRC
licensed facility from July 1975 through June
1976 had any direct impact on or consequence
to public health and safety. (This was the expo-
sure of certain hospital patients to amounts of
radiation in excess of those prescribed, at River-
side Methodist Hospital in Columbus, Ohio.) Of
some 2,200 Licensee Event Reports received dur-
ing this time, a total of three events at operating
nuclear power plants were considered to have
sufficient safety significance to be abnormal oc-
currences. For operating fuel cycle facilities other
than reactor plants, there was one abnormal
occurrence, and for other materials
licensees-hospitals, radiographers, waste dis-
posal contractors, etc.—there were six abnormal
occurrences.
research to confirm the adequacy of existing
safety margins.
Studies
Review of Plutonium Facilities
The NRC staff undertook this year the task of
examining and evaluating plutonium fuel fabrica-
tion facilities to determine the effects of natural
phenomena such as tornadoes and floods upon
the public health and safety. The decision to
review all facilities at one time was made to
promote the highest degree of uniformity. The
NRC staff, including expert consultants, is review-
ing the selected facilities on a site-specific basis
and will provide a safety assessment for each.
These assessments will provide a basis for deter-
mining the extent of any changes necessary to
protect each facility from the effects of natural
phenomena.
Deficiencies in Containment
Late in January of 1976, the NRC received the
results of tests conducted by the General Electric
Co. pertaining to boiling water reactors with the
"Mark I" containment design. Potential problems
with the design first came to light in April 1975,
during safety reviews of the advanced Mark III
containment by the reactor vendor.
Since the potential problem was identified, the
NRC has: requested the additional information
which led to the tests conducted by the vendor
and owners' groups; closely reviewed the test
results as they were developed; and required all
appropriate licensees to increase the safety mar-
gin by altering their mode of operation.
All of the utilities involved, as well as the
vendor, have undertaken continuing efforts to
obtain the data needed to confirm design ade-
quacy ~ or to plan further actions to provide the
safety margins intended in their original designs.
NRC is following their long term programs to
achieve this result and is conducting independent
Health and Environmental Research
NRC research to improve environmental mea-
surement and monitoring technology is directed
to continued refinement in the control of effluents
from nuclear plants. While there is a great wealth
of knowledge gained from past years of nuclear
safety research, there is a continuing need to
study important issues directed to current appli-
cations of nuclear energy. Some of the areas
bein0 investigated by NRC and ERDA are the
potential health effects in large populations from
long term exposure to low levels of radiation; the
potential for interactions between radioactive
and chemical effluents from the nuclear industry
and environmental systems; the possible effects
of nuclear plant effluents in the presence of other
industrial pollutants in the environment; and the
methodology for predicting and assessing poten-
tial environmental impacts.
Facility Safety Studies
During 1976, NRC started an extensive pro-
gram to confirm and refine the effluent release
-------
74
models used by the licensing staff in their review
of nuctear power plants. Measurements were
carried out in two operating reactors which char-
acterized the sources and concentrations of ra-
dioactive materials throughout the entire reactor
plant. This in-plant measurement program will be
extended to other operating reactors to provide a
comprehensive review of actual radioactivity
sources and releases under a variety of operating
conditions.
In view of the growing need to provide for
storage of spent reactor fuel, additional nuclear
criticality studies have been undertaken to assure
that spent fuel storage system designs will con-
tinue to provide adequate margins of safety.
Water Reactor Safety Tests
NRC conducted some water reactor safety
tests at ERDA's Loss of Fluid Test Facility (LOFT),
a 55 megawatt thermal pressurized water test
reactor. The facility is designed to accommodate
study of nuclear, thermal-hydraulic, and struc-
tural phenomena occurring during a postulated
loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA).
The major objective of the LOFT test program
is to provide data to evaluate and improve the
analytical methods now used to predict the
LOCA response of a large pressurized water reac-
tor. Thus, LOFT has been designed to perform a
number of experiments and provide measure-
ments of system response. These measurements
are compared with pretest predictions to check
the capability of computer codes. The first non-
nuclear test in LOFT was run on March 4, 1976,
and the facility performed well. Computer code
predictions compared well with LOFT data. Re-
peatability of the LOFT results was excellent,
indicating that the plant and the data acquisition
system perform in a consistent manner to assure
the reliability of the data.
Fuel Behavior
designed into the structural and operational fea-
tures of the plants. One such barrier is the clad-
ding around the nuclear fuel pellets. An important
goal of NRC's reactor safety research is to im-
prove the understanding of the response of fuel
element pellets and cladding to a postulated nu-
clear accident. The research programs in this area
involve laboratory studies and in-pile tests, i.e.,
experiments conducted in an operating nuclear
reactor. These activities provide data for the de-
velopment of analytical computer codes, which
in turn are verified by comparing predictions with
results of additional experiments.
Metallurgy and Metals
NRC-sponsored metallurgy and materials re-
search is related to the integrity of the primary
system pressure boundaries (vessels, components
and piping) in light water reactors. These
heavy-walled vessels, components and pipes
must remain intact at all times, since failure could
lead to a loss of coolant accident. The ability of
the steel vessel, components and piping to retain
integrity throughout operating and accident con-
ditions is governed by (1) the material properties
and the response of the steel to the reactor
environment, and (2) the size and orientation of
any flaws that may exist in the vessel, compo-
nents or piping.
Site Safety Research
Potential effects on nuclear facilities of earth-
quakes, tornadoes, floods, and other natural phe-
nomena are considered by NRC in the licensing
process. Research in safety related aspects of
siting focuses on the characteristics and distribu-
tion of severe natural phenomena in the U.S., and
upon the engineering methods which are used to
mitigate the effects. The information developed is
used by the NRC in the evaluation of sites during
the licensing process and to provide bases for
improving siting guides and criteria.
The escape of radioactivity from nuclear
power plants is prevented in part by barriers
-------
75
Operational Safety
NRC has expanded its research into reactor
operational safety matters — specifically, fire
protection and qualification testing evaluation.
The programs were initiated to evaluate the cur-
rently utilized standards and guides in these
areas.
During fiscal year 1976, a fire protection re-
search plan was written based on the general
recommendations of NUREG-0050, "Recom-
mendations Related to Browns Ferry Fire" and
reflecting the specific needs of NRC user offices.
Resulting research includes confirming the effec-
tiveness of cable tray separation criteria, which
prevent the spread of a fire between electrical
cables of redundant safety systems.
The qualification testing evaluation research
was started in fiscal year 1976, combining sepa-
rate research programs already underway by
NRC; it covers questions of aging and the evalua-
tion of synergistic effects of combined radiation
and steam environment testing.
NRC's Advanced Reactor Program
Two types of advanced reactors — the liquid
metal.cooled fast breeder reactor (LMFBR), and
the high-temperature gas-cooled reactor
(HTGR) - are the focus of this program. It aims at
providing confirmatory data to assist in the licens-
ing process on a schedule commensurate with
ERDA's program for LMFBR commercialization.
The gas-cooled program centers on generic issues
of HTGR safety, pending the outcome of
ERDA-industry development efforts.
Some of NRC's 1976 research on the LMFBR
will help in reviewing ERDA's Clinch River
Breeder Reactor, in the areas of severe accident
analyses and radiological source assessments.
The program is divided into several areas,
including:
Analysis Computer codes and mathematical
models are created to predict how a plant would
behave under a wide variety of extreme condi-
tions. This effort, when properly verified by ex-
periment, avoids the need for a repetitious series
of costly and destructive tests. It is the backbone
of the safety research effort.
Safety Test Facility Studies: The need for new
facilities to conduct special reactor safety tests is
studied to determine the facility specifications.
These are transmitted to the ERDA for incorpora-
tion into their construction plans. Studies als.o
consider special equipment needs and the details
of the safety tests.
Material Interactions: In the course of an
accident, materials such as fuel or cladding can
be overheated and, when they come into contact
with sodium or concrete, interact to produce
vapors and new chemical compounds. The ex-
panding vapors are a potential cause of damage.
This program provides confirmatory data to as-
sess that potential.
• Emergency Response Planning
Guidance
Basic Documents
The basic documents for the guidance of State
and local governments in the development of
their radiological emergency response plans are
EPA's "Manual of Protective Action Guides and
Protective Actions for Nuclear Incidents"
(EPA 520/1-75-001) and NRC's "Guide and
Checklist for Development and Evaluation of
State and Local Government Radiological EmerT
gency Response Plans in Support of Fixed Nu-
clear Facilities" (NUREG-75/111).S1
EPA's Manual has been prepared to provide
practical guidance to State, local, and other offi-
cials on criteria to use in planning for radiological
emergencies that could present a hazard to the
public. It provides a perspective for protective
actions and guidance for planning and implemen-
tation of protective actions to protect the public
in the event of a nuclear incident. The Manual
calls for agreements that nuclear power facility
operators will notify government representatives
-------
76
promptly of any significant accident. In that un-
likely event, State and local officials would
simultaneously:
— take the first protection actions, such as
evacuation and/or instructions to the public to
take cover and stay indoors,
— dispatch survey teams to make radiation
measurements to help evaluate the size or loca-
tion of the area requiring action,
— send emergency teams to restrict access
to the affected areas.
One appendix to the Manual, which provides
technical bases used for calculating projected
doses from airborne releases, was drafted and
circulated for review by States, industry, and
Federal agencies during 1976. It will be issued in
final form for incorporation into the Manual in
1977, along with another appendix, "Planner's
Evaluation Guide," which was drafted under
contract.
A study of the criteria in the "Guide and
Checklist" was undertaken in early 1976 by eight
Federal agencies. The views of the Conference of
Radiation Control Program Directors, the Na-
tional Association of State Directors for Disaster
Preparedness, and the U.S. (local) Civil Defense
Council were solicited. A principal result of the
study will be a rating of the items in the "Guide
and Checklist" according to whether they are
considered essential or merely desirable. The
goal of this effort is to help identify those emer-
gency response plans which meet minimum
criteria.
EPA/ORP Protective Action Guides
To ameliorate the consequences of a radiologi-
cal incident EPA/ORP continued to develop Pro-
tective Action Guides (PAGs) and recommend
appropriate protective actions to avoid or reduce
exposure. Protective action must be taken when
the projected absorbed dose to the population
exceeds the PAG established. Different actions
may be appropriate under various circumstances,
depending on the nature of competing risks.
In the event of a nuclear incident, there may be
a hazard to the population from airborne material
and from contaminated food and property. In
providing assistance, three accident phases are
considered with separate PAGs for each:
1. emergency phase, when quick decisions
and actions would be required to protect the
public from whole body exposure and inhalation
exposure,
2. intermediate phase, when whole body ex-
posure would result mostly from deposited ma-
terial and ingestion of contaminated food and
water, and
3. long term or recovery phase, where low
level direct radiation and contaminated food
would be the critical exposure pathways.
Emergency Phase. EPA/ORP established a
range of one to five rem projected whole body
dose and five to 25 rem projected thyroid dose as
PAGs, and began developing Guides for the
lungs. In the lower end of the PAG range, easy
and inexpensive protective action should be
taken, while, in the higher end, PAGs require
judgment in application under actual accident
conditions. (These Guides were originally .issued
as EPA/ORP guidance only, but are being pre-
pared for submission to the President and pro-
mulgation on an agency wide basis).
Once it has been determined that the
projected dose in the emergency phase exceeds
the applicable PAG, various actions can be taken,
including evacuation, sheltering and controlled
access to affected areas. Also, prophylaxis may
be necessary to block the thyroid from radio-
iodine exposure, and the Food and Drug Admin-
istration is studying the appropriate dosage form
for the device and its availability. Recommenda-
tions will be made in FY 78. Respiratory devices,
including makeshift types, are also being consid-
ered to provide protection in emergencies.
Intermediate phase. PAGs were under devel-
opment in 1976 and will be drafted in 1977.
Various categories for the intermediate phase
-------
77
TABLE 4.4
PROTECTIVE ACTION GUIDES FOR WHOLE BODY
AND THYROID EXPOSURE TO AIRBORNE RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS
Population, at Risk Projected Whole Body Projected Thyroid
Gamma Dose (rem) Dose (rem)
Nonessential personnel 1 to 5(a) 5-25
Emergency workers 25 125
Lifesaving activities 75 (b)
(a)When ranges are shown, the lowest value should be used if there
are no major local constraints in providing protection at that level,
especially to sensitive populations. Local constraints may make lower
values impractical to use, but in no case should the higher value be
exceeded in determining the need for protective action.
(b)No specific upper limit is given for thyroid exposure since, in
the extreme case, complete thyroid loss might be an acceptable penalty
for a life saved. However, this should not be necessary if respirators
and/or thyroid protection for rescue personnel are available as a result
of adequate planning.
-------
78
could include a preventive PAG for use when
actions causing minimal social and economic
impact would be justified, and emergency PACs
for situations when actions having high impact
are justified because of projected health hazards.
Long term or recovery phase. PAGs were also
being formulated for this phase; they will be
based on cost/risk analyses resulting from studies
currently underway.
NRC Handbook
In support of the interagency field effort in
radiological emergency response planning assis-
tance, the NRC Office of State Programs pub-
lished in June a document entitled '/Radiological
Emergency Response Planning-Handbook for
Federal Assistance to State and Local Govern-
ments," NUREG-0093/1.52 This document sets
forth guidelines for the activities of the eight
Federal agencies involved.
Task Force on Offsite
Emergency Instrumentation
The Federal Interagency Task Force on Offsite
Emergency Instrumentation Systems, formed in
1974, continued in 1976 to provide guidance to
State and local emergency response planning
officials on offsite radiation detection systems and
associated instrumentation. One project the Task
Force is responsible for evaluating is directed at
the development of a portable, field operated
monitor which can measure elemental and or-
ganic forms of radioiodine in the presence of
noble gases. The purported advantages of this
system, due for completion sometime in FY 77,
are the relatively short sampling time and low
expense.
Also, early in 1976 the Task Force completed
and submitted to the Federal Interagency Central
Coordinating Committee a draft interim report,
"Guidance on Offsite Emergency Radiation Mea-
surement Systems, Phase I —Airborne Releases"
which incorporated comments by the involved
Federal agencies and the Conference of Radiation
Control Program Directors. The final draft is ex-
pected to be ready for comment in 1977.
International Activities
During 1976 EPA and NRC participated in an
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) effort
to develop international guidance on plans for
response to major radiological accidents. This
effort is continuing, and a draft report from IAEA
should be available in 1978.
Studies
EPA/ORP Contracts
An EPA/ORP contract was completed during
1976 which evaluated the benefits of shelter and
compared the relative benefits of shelter and
evacuation. A contract on the study of the cost-
effectiveness of control methodologies (protect-
ive actions) for exposure from contaminated
property and equipment will be finalized in
FY 78.
Education
Training Programs
The Federal agencies responsible for emer-
gency response planning have identified a num-
ber of areas where training is needed for State and
local government personnel. They have devel-
oped, or are currently developing, formal training
courses for each of several areas.
A one-week course in radiological emergency
response planning has been conducted 11 times
since its inception in March of 1975. As of the
end of fiscal year 1976, approximately 360 State
and local government emergency planning per-
sonnel from 48 States have attended. Pilot
courses in radiological monitoring and radiologi-
cal emergency medical response, developed and
conducted by ERDA contractors, were formally
evaluated by a working group composed of Fed-
eral, State and local government emergency pre-
-------
79
paredness personnel. These evaluations were
used in developing revised curricula. Because of
limited Federal funding for these courses for State
and local government personnel, only a modest
start was made in offering them in 1976.
State/Federal Programs
GAO Report
In March the General Accounting Office
(GAO) audited NRC's activities in emergency
response planning and issued a report, "Stronger
Federal Assistance to States Needed for Radiation
Emergency Response Planning." It made two
specific recommendations to NRC in its "lead
agency" role.53 The first was that NRC report
periodically to the Congress on the status of
Federal efforts to help the States in their planning,
setting out: (1) State actions to improve their
plans; (2) the relationships and commitments of
the various Federal agencies involved; (3) any
recommendations for legislation which would
enable NRC to increase its help to States in
preparing adequate plans. NRC indicated that it
would comply with the recommendation by in-
cluding, in future annual reports to the Congress,
a more comprehensive section on the status of
the effort to assist States in their planning.
The second GAO recommendation to NRC
was that the Office of State Programs have repre-
sentatives at the NRC regional offices to provide
better liaison with State and local governments.
NRC indicated its intent to comply with this
recommendation as funding allowed. A study on
increased regionalization of NRC activities, in-
cluding assistance to State and local governments
in emergency response planning, was near com-
pletion at year-end.
In addition to making specific recommenda-
tions, the GAO report presented several conclu-
sions. One was that State plans for dealing with
radiation emergencies need improvement, not-
withstanding NRC's progress in support of this
effort. The report also concluded that "the suc-
cess of Federal efforts to improve State radiation
emergency plans now depends substantially on
how committed the States are to developing
adequate plans."
Shift to Regions
During 1976 the responsibility for assisting
States in the development of their radiological
emergency response plans was shifted from
Washington headquarters to the regions. Each
responsible Federal agency appointed a member
to each of ten regional committees, all of whom
are providing technical support in developing
State emergency plans and evaluating emergency
exercises. In addition, a headquarters committee
was formed to offer general coordination, policy
guidance, and technical assistance to the regions
when necessary. Committee activities in 1976
included:
— providing eight States with assistance in
developing plans,
— initiating of twelve State plans, with up-
dating action planned as new information be-
comes available, and
— critiquing six simulated tests of State
plans.
NRC/EPA Task Force
An NRC/EPA Task Force on Emergency Plan-
ning was appointed in 1976 to determine the
types of radiological accidents that States and
local governments should plan for and develop
preparedness plans to support. Among the con-
cerns to be addressed is the apparent disparity
between the NRC "Guide and Checklist" recom-
mendations and the Reactor Safety Study's esti-
mate of the risks of extremely severe accidents.
-------
80
REFERENCES
1. These and other NRC data are extracted from the forthcoming (as of June 1977) NRC annual report
for FY 1976.
2. "Nuclear Policy." Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents 7^:1624 ff. (November 1,
1976).
3. Reactor Safety Study. House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on Energy and
the Environment (June 11,1976).
4. Low Level Radioactive Waste Disposal. House Government Operations Committee, Subcommittee
on Conservation, .Energy and Natural Resources (2/23, 3/12,4/6/76).
5. Report on Low Level Nuclear Waste Disposal. House Government Operations Committee, Subcom-
mittee on Conservation, Energy and Natural Resources: H. Rpt. 94-1320 (June 30,1976).
6. Radioactive Waste Management. Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, Subcommittee on ERDA,
Environment and Safety (May 10-12,1976).
7. Radiological Contamination of the Oceans. House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, Subcom-
mittee on Energy and the Environment (July 26-27,1976).
8. Radioactive Waste Disposal Problems. House Government Operations Committee, Subcommittee
on Conservation, Energy and Natural Resources (September 17,1976).
9. Nuclear Waste Disposal in Michigan. House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, Subcommittee
on Energy and the Environment (July 6,1976).
10. To Consider Whether Financial Risk to Utilities Under the Price Anderson System Should be
Increased. Joint Committee on Atomic Energy (March 3,1976).
11. "Financial Protection Requirements and Indemnity Agreements, Implementation of the Price-
Anderson Act." NRG41 F.R. 40511 (September 20,1976).
12. Proceedings of A Congressional Seminar on Low-Level Ionizing Radiation. House Committee on
Interior and Insular Affairs, Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment (November 1976).
13. Russell Train v. Colorado Public Interest Croup, Inc. 48 L.Ed.2d 434 (June 1,1976).
14. "Draft Report of the Advisory Group to Consider Principles for Establishing Limits for the Release of
Radioactive Material into the Environment." International Atomic Energy Agency (May 17-21,
1976) Unpublished.
15. "Part 190 - Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Nuclear Power Operations." EPA:
42 F.R. 2858 (January 13,1977).
16. "Public Health Considerations of Carbon-14 Discharges from the Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear
Power Reactor Industry." EPA: ORP/TAD 76-3 (1976).
-------
81
17. "Calculation of Releases of Radioactive Material in Gaseous and Liquid Effluents from Boiling Water
Reactors (BWR-GALE Code)." NRC: NUREG-0016 (April 1976).
18. "Calculation of Releases of Radioactive Materials in Gaseous and Liquid Effluents from Pressurized
Water Reactors (PWR-GALE Code)." NRC: NUREG-0017 (April 1976).
19. "Estimating Aquatic Dispersion of Effluents from Accidental and Routine Reactor Releases for the
Purpose of Implementing Appendix I." NRC: Regulatory Guide 1.113 (May 1976).
20. "Calculations of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of
Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I." NRC: Regulatory Guide 1.109 (March
1976).
21. "Cost-Benefit Analysis for Radwaste Systems for Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactors."
NRC: Regulatory Guide 1.110 (March 1976).
22. "Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion of Gaseous Effluents in Routine
Releases from Light-Water-Cooled Reactors." NRC: Regulatory Guide 1.111 (March 1976).
23 "Calculation of Releases of Radioactive Materials in Gaseous and Liquid Effluents from Light-Water-
Cooled Reactors." NRC: Regulatory Guide 1.112 (April 1976).
24. "Use of Mixed Uranium-Plutonium Oxide Fuels in Light-Water Nuclear Power Reactors." NRC: 41
F.R. 40506 (September 20,1976).
25. "Reports to the Commission Concerning Defects and Noncompliance." NRC: 40 F.R. 8832 (March
3,1975).
26. "Reactor Safety Study, An Assessment of Accident Risks in U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power
Plants." NRC: WASH-1400, NUREG-75/014 (October 1975).
27. Reactor Safety Study (WASH-1400): A Review of the Final Report, EPA-520/3-76-009 (June 1976).
28. "Draft Environmental Statement for Construction of the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant." NRC:
NUREG-0024 (February 1976).
29. "Draft Environmental Statement Related to the Proposed Manufacture of Floating Nuclear Power
Plants: Part II, A Generic Environmental Statement Considering the Siting and Operation of Floating
Nuclear Power Plants." NRC: NUREG-75/113 (November 1975).
30. Statement of Dr. William D. Rowe, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Radiation Programs, EPA,
before the Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,
House of Representatives (July 27,1976).
31. "Final Generic Environmental Statement on the Use of Recycle Plutonium in Mixed Oxide Fuel in
Light-Water-Cooled Reactors — Health, Safety and Environment." NRC: GESMO-1, NUREG-0002
(August 1976).
32. "Final Environmental Statement, U.S. Nuclear Power Export Activities." ERDA: ERDA-1542 (April
1976).
-------
82
33. "Final Environmental Statement, Expansion of U.S. Uranium Enrichment Capacity." ERDA:
ERDA-1543 (April 1976).
34. "Draft Environmental Statement, Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant Expansion." ERDA:
ERDA-1549 (October 1976).
35. "Draft Environmental Statement, Brookhaven National Laboratory." ERDA: ERDA-1540 (No-
vember 1975).
36. Blanchard, R.L., et at., "Radiological Surveillance Studies at the Oyster Creek BWR Nuclear
Generating Station." EPA-520/5-76-003 (June 1976).
37. Partridge, J.E., et a/., "Air Pathway Exposure Model Validation Study at the Monticello Nuclear
Generating Plant." EPA-520/5-76-015 (September 1976).
38. Callis, R., Windham, S., and C. Phillips, "Radiological Survey of Puget Sound Naval Shipyard,
Bremerton, Washington, and Environs." EPA-520/5-77-001 (January 1977).
39. West Valley Wastes: "Alternative Processes for Managing Existing Commercial High-level Radioac-
tive Wastes." NRC: NUREG-0043 (April 1976).
40. "Environmental Survey of the Reprocessing and Waste Management Portions of the LWR Fuel
Cycle." NRC: Supplement 1 to WASH-1248, NUREG-0116 (October 1976).
41. "Final Environmental Statement, Waste Management Operations, Hanford Reservation." ERDA:
ERDA-1538 (December 1975).
42. "Management of Commercially-Generated Radioactive Wastes, Preparation of Environmental
Impact Statement." ERDA: 41 F.R. 43446 (October 1,1976).
43. "Draft Environmental Statement, Waste Management Operations, Idaho National Engineering
Laboratory." ERDA: ERDA-1536 (July 1976).
44. "Final Environmental Statement, Barnwell Fuel Receiving and Storage Station." NRC: NUREG-008
(January 1976).
45. "Draft Environmental Statement, High Performance Fuel Laboratory at Richland, Washington."
ERDA: ERDA-1550-D (September 1976).
46. "Improvements Needed in the Land Disposal of Radioactive Wastes — A Problem of Centuries,"
General Accounting Office (January 1976).
47. "Draft Environmental Statement on the Transportation of Radioactive Material by Air and Other
Modes." NRC: NUREG-0034 (March 1976).
48. "Transport of Radioactive Material in the U.S.: A Detailed Summary of 'Survey of Radioactive
Material Shipments in the U.S.'" NRC: NUREG-0073 (May 1976).
49. "Recommendations Related to Browns Ferry Fire." NRC: NUREG-0050 (February 1976).
50. "Fire Protection Guidelines for Nuclear Power Plants." NRC: Regulatory Guide 1.120 (June 1976).
-------
83
51. "Guide and Checklist for Development and Evaluation of State and Local Government Radiological
Emergency Response Plans in Support of Fixed Nuclear Facilities." NRC: NUREG-75/111
52. "Radiological Emergency Response Planning — Handbook for Federal Assistance to State and Local
Governments." NRC: NUREG-0093/1 (June 1976).
53. "Stronger Federal Assistance to States Needed for Radiation Emergency Response Planning."
General Accounting Office (March 1976).
Below are publication numbers for relevant items cited in Appendix B. Most ERDA and NRC publications
will be helpful, so they are not listed separately below; see the full information in the Appendix.
EPA Technical Reports:
520/3-75-021
520/3-75-023
520/5-76-003
520/5-76-005
520/3-76-009
520/3-76-011
520/5-76-015
520/4-76-016B
520/4-76-017
520/5-76-020
EPA Authored Reports: See Brinck, Blanchard, Gruhlke, Holcomb, Meyer, Phillips, Richardson,
Rowe, and Russell.
EPA Technical Notes:
ORP/CSD 76-1
ORP/CSD 76-2
ORP/EAD 76-3
ORP/EAD 76-3
ORP/EAD 76-4
ORP/LV 76-1
ORP/LV 76-2
ORP/LV 76-3
ORP/LV 76-5
ORP/LV 76-9
ORP/TAD 76-3
ORP/RAD 76-4
-------
84
OTHER NUCLEAR SOURCES
• Nuclear Weapons Testing
The Treaty on the Limitation of Underground
Nuclear Weapon Tests, commonly known as the
Threshold Test Ban Treaty, and its companion
Treaty on Underground Nuclear Explosions for
Peaceful Purposes have been signed and intro-
duced to the U.S. Senate for ratification. These
treaties limit individual underground nuclear tests
to 150 KT. In the interim., pending their entry into
force, the United States has announced its inten-
tion to abide by the yield limits of the treaties.
However, the capability to conduct larger nu-
clear tests at the Nevada Test Site-(NTS) remains
unchanged.
Since the 1963 Limited Test Ban Treaty, ERDA
and its predecessor (the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion) have conducted underground nuclear tests
to support (1) national laboratories' development
of weapons in response to Department of De-
fense requirements, and, in previous years, (2)
ERDA's development of explosives for peaceful
applications.
Each test is reviewed in advance by a Contain-
ment Evaluation Panel of experts drawn from the
Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, the Depart-
ment of Defense, the U.S. Geological Survey, the
Sandia Laboratories, and the Lawrence Livermore
Laboratory. The Panel considers many factors
which could contribute to atmospheric dis-
charges, such as device yield, hydrology, closure
methods, and drilling and construction histories.
During the test itself and on the day before the
test, a Test Controller's Advisory Panel is con-
vened to advise on possible effects. Mobile moni-
tors are sent to areas downwind of the detonation
to monitor possible releases, and aerial surveil-
lance is conducted above the site itself to track
any radioactive clouds.
Announced U.S. nuclear detonations during
1976 are shown in Table 5.1.
People's Republic of China
Nuclear Detonations
On September 26, 1976, the People's Repub-
lic of China detonated a nuclear device with an
estimated yield of 20,000-200,000 tons of TNT
equivalent, at the Lop Nor test site in southwest
China. A second atmospheric detonation fol-
lowed on November 17, with a yield of about
four million tons of TNT equivalent. Since the
tests were above ground, large amounts of radio-
active materials were swept through the atmo-
sphere. They crossed the U.S. several days after
each test.
Before the contaminated air mass from the first
detonation reached the U.S., EPA's Office of
Radiation Programs (EPA/ORP) activated 46 ad-
ditional standby air particulate and precipitation
sampling stations, as well as increasing sampling
frequencies for the 21 air sampling stations nor-
mally operated. They are part of the Environmen-
tal Radiation Ambient Monitoring System
(ERAMS). The air particulate samples were used
to estimate the potential inhalation dose to the
U.S. population, and precipitation samples were
collected to indicate rainout of radioactive ma-
terials. Since the most critical exposure pathway
for the movement of iodine-131 and
strontium-89 in fallout contamination was from
pasture grass to ingestion by cows, particular
emphasis was placed on sampling pasteurized
milk. Iodine is of special concern because it
concentrates in human thyroids.
EPA/ORP's special monitoring of the concen-
trations of radioactivity in air particulates, precipi-
tation, and milk continued until the concentra-
tions returned to normal in early November. The
EPA/ORP program included the collection of
293 pasteurized milk samples, 1124 air particu-
late samples, and 39 precipitation samples. As a
result, over 1600 radiation measurements were
made at EPA's Eastern Environmental Radiation
Facility in Montgomery, Alabama. Following the
November 17 detonation, the standby portion of
the ERAMS air particulate and precipitation net-
work was again activated and special milk sam-
-------
85
Table 5.1
Announced United States Nuclear Detonations
Purpose
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Effects
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Effects
Weapons Related
Joint US-DK
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Weapons Related
Event Name
Tybo
Stilton
Mizzen
Mast
Camembert
Marsh
Husky Pup
Dod Event
Kasseri
Inlet
Leyden
Chiberta
Muenster
Keelson
Esrom
Fontina
Cheshire
Estuary
Colby
Pool
Strait
Mighty Epic
Dod Event
Billet
Banon
Chevre
Redmud
Asiago
Rudder
Date (CGT)
5/14/75
673/75
6/3/75
6/19/75
6/26/75
9/6/75
10/24/75
10/28/75
11/20/75
11/26/75
12/20/75
1/3/76
2/4/76
2/4/76
2/12/76
2/14/76
3/9/76
3/14/76
3/17/76
3/17/76
5/12/76
7/27/76
8/26/76
11/23/76
12/8/76
12/21/76
12/28/76
Yield Range
200 to lOOOkt
20 to 200kt
20 to 200kt
200 to lOOOkt
200 to lOOOkt
Less than 20kt
Less than 20kt
200 to lOOOkt
200 to lOOOkt
Less than 20kt
20 to 200kt
200 to lOOOkt
20 to 200kt
20 to 200kt
200 to lOOOkt
200 to SOOkt
200 to SOOkt
500 to lOOOkt
200 to SOOkt
200 to SOOkt
Less than 20kt
20 to ISOkt
20 to ISOkt
Less than 20kt
Less than 20kt
Less than 20kt
20 to ISOkt
-------
86
pies were collected, until it was apparent that no
fallout from this detonation could be detected.
From the ERAMS data collected from Septem-
ber to December, EPA/ORP concluded that po-
tential health effects from fallout caused by the
Chinese tests are minimal. Air paniculate data
indicated that most measurements were within
the range of normal background fluctuations, and
that no significant increase in population expo-
sures could be estimated for the inhalation path-
way. (Data are available on request; see Appen-
dix on 1976 publications.)
Most of the milk data indicated normal back-
ground or slightly elevated levels of radiation,
although some samples in the eastern U.S. did
have higher levels. Potential effects from
iodine-131 in milk were estimated, using the
highest reported level in each State as the repre-
sentative value for all milk produced in that State;
results indicated that a maximum of 4.3 potential
excess thyroid cancers could occur as a result of
the September test. It will not be possible to
identify any of these excess cases over the next
45 years when they are expected, because
380,000 cases are anticipated in the U.S. as the
normal incidence from other causes. Health ef-
fects were also estimated for strontium-89 from
milk ingestion. This isotope concentrates in hu-
man bones and may lead to an estimated 0.005
to 0.02 excess leukemia deaths in the U.S.
Because the estimates for both iodine and
strontium exposures are based on conservative
assumptions, they overstate the probable true
impact of the Chinese tests. Thus, the detona-
tions' fallout contamination of milk should not
result in significant health effects for the U.S.
population. The public was kept informed of
EPA/ORP's monitoring and sampling activities
during the fall by frequent press releases. A com-
prehensive report detailing EPA/ORP's evalua-
tion of fallout from the Chinese tests will be
published in 1977.
Because seven different Federal agencies were
involved in assessing the impact of the tests, a
formalized Memorandum of Understanding is
being prepared to delineate the responsibilities of
each and their interaction. EPA will coordinate
the draft, which is being put together by FDA,
ERDA, NRC, the National Oceanic and Atmo-
spheric Administration, the Federal Aviation
Agency, and the Air Force.
• United States Nuclear Navy
At of the end of 1975, the Navy was operating
106 nuclear submarines and seven* nuclear-
powered surface ships. Support facilities involved
in construction, maintenance, overhaul and re-
fueling of these vessels include nine shipyards,
twelve tenders, and two submarine bases.
Within 12 miles of shore, less than 0.002
curies of long-lived gamma radioactivity were
released annually by the nuclear Navy for the
five-year period ending with 1975. (This figure
includes all nuclear-powered ships and the ports
they visited, as well as supporting facilities.)
Most tritium released was beyond 12 miles from
shore, a total of less than 200 curies. Not includ-
ing tritium, the radioactivity released at sea was
about 0.4 curies in 1975. Solid radioactive wastes
from the Navy are packaged and shipped to
licensed burial sites in compliance with NRC and
Department of Transportation standards. In
1975, about 58,000 cubic feet and about 63
curies were disposed of.
The Navy concluded in their annual environ-
mental report that radioactivity associated with
their nuclear program has had no significant or
discernible effect on the quality of the envir-
onment.1
• Radioisotope Applications
Radioactive materials are widely used for med-
ical diagnosis and treatment, basic and applied
1-esearch, teaching, consumer products, and in-
dustrial applications. These activities are con-
ducted under approximately 19,000 nuclear ma-
terial licenses, over half of which are adminis-
tered by 25 States under regulatory agreements
with the NRC. The 8,600 licenses administered
directly by NRC include approximately 2,800 for
-------
87
medical use, 700 issued to academic institutions
for teaching and research, and over 4,000 for
industrial applications. The NRC processes
6,000-8,000 new applications and license
amendments and renewals annually. Each appli-
cation is given a thorough review to assure that
the proposed use of radioactive materials will not
endanger the public health and safety.
Among the 1976 licenses is one authorizing
testing of a new system for detecting and giving
an in-flight indication of incipient helicopter rotor
failure. Using a small amount of radioactive ma-
terial sealed in a metal capsule, the new system
will signal the loss of rotor blade internal pressure
in smaller helicopters. There is no in-flight warn-
ing system now, so lower than optimum speeds
must be used to reduce the probability of failure
without warning. The new system will be less
costly than electromechanical, in-flight systems
presently used on larger helicopters.
• Consumer Products
Guidance
NRC drafted a Regulatory Guide directed to
petitioners for exemptions from NRC require-
ments for products containing radionuclides. The
Guide, issued in June 1976,2 is designed to assist
in preparation of a required environmental report
to support the petition. NRC evaluates the report
and information from other sources, as well as
preparing an environmental impact statement,
prior to its final decision on whether an exemp-
tion will be allowed.
Environmental Impact Statements
In October 1975, the NRC issued its first Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for a consumer
product. It concerned a proposed rule to exempt
spark-gap irradiators containing cobalt-60 for use
in spark-ignited fuel orl burners. Placement of the
irradiator near the spark gap eliminates the spark
delay that is considered to be a contributory
factor in some explosions in oil burning equip-
ment. The Final Environmental Statement was
being prepared at the end of fiscal year 1976.
Radiation Incidents Registry
FDA's Bureau of Radiological Health (BRH)
continued to maintain its Radiation Incidents Re-
gistry, which tabulates the biological effects on
humans which are reported to be associated with
electronic product radiation. 1976 figures are
presented in Table 5.2. The Registry has been
useful in a number of ways: helping to determine
the size and extent of the problem, how and why
certain injuries occur, and the effectiveness of
radiation control measures. Most important, Re-
gistry case reports can identify groups to follow in
epidemiological surveys.
However, the Registry cannot provide esti-
mates or statistical projections of future injury
trends, nor can it be used to estimate trends, since
reporting is voluntary and is known to vary from
year to year.
Licenses
NRC has issued several licenses authorizing
the use of small amounts of the radioactive gas
tritium sealed in glass tubes to illuminate watches.
These self luminous light sources are used in
conjunction with a liquid crystal display (LCD) in
watches with a digital display. The most common
digital watch uses light-emitting diodes (LED) and
an electric power cell; self-luminous lights and
LCD make the cell unnecessary. In addition, the
watch can be read at any time without the need
to operate a switch as is necessary with
battery-powered LEDs.
• Nuclear Powered Pacemakers
NRC published the "Final Generic Environ-
mental Statement on the Routine Use of
Plutonium-Powered Cardiac Pacemakers,"
NUREG-0060, in July 1976.3 The Commission
found that, based on a balancing of the benefits
and risks involved, plutonium-powered pace-
-------
88
makers can be licensed for routine use. Previ-
ously, NRC had licensed them only on a limited,
investigational basis.
The Statement concludes that the pacemakers
have sufficient longevity to eliminate the need for
surgical replacement operations which are re-
quired by pacemakers powered by chemical bat-
teries. Also, plutonium-powered units can pro-
vide long term maintenance free pacing to pa-
tients for whom rechargeable pacemakers are
either physically or psychologically unaccepta-
ble. Plutonium batteries'can accommodate new
or additional pacemaker functions that require
high power drains without shortening their lives
significantly.
EPA/ORP Response and Status: ' EPA/ORP
commented on the lack of lung dose equivalents
in the Statement and their potential importance,
but expressed no other objections.
-------
89
REFERENCES
I. Miles, M.E.; Sjoblom, G.L.; and J.D. Eagles. "Environmental Monitoring and Disposal of Radioac-
tive Wastes from U.S. Naval Nuclear-Powered Ships and Their Support Facilities." Naval Systems
Command, Department of the Navy: Report NT-76-1 (August 1976).
2. "Preparation of an Environmental Report to Support a Rule Making Petition Seeking an Exemption
for a Radionuclide-Containing Product." NRC: Regulatory Guide 6.7 (Rev. 1)(June 1976).
3. "Final Generic Environmental Statement on the Routine Use of Plutonium-Powered Cardiac
Pacemakers." NRC: NUREG-0060(July 1976).
-------
90
PROTECTION FROM NONIONIZING RADIATION
1. Introduction and Summary
Although environmental levels of nonionizing
radiation were negligible before the 1930's, virtu-
ally every American is now exposed. Sources
have proliferated in number as well as power; in
the ranges of primary interest, the radiofrequency
(10 MHz to 300 MHz) and microwave
(300 MHz to 300 GHz) frequencies, the envi-
ronmentally significant sources include:
— radio and television broadcast stations
— radars
— satellite communications system earth
terminals
— point to point microwave communica-
tions
— mobile communications systems
— microwave ovens
— industrial heating equipment.
Other nonionizing radiation sources are lasers
that produce radiation ranging in frequency from
the ultraviolet through the far infrared and over-
head extra-high voltage power lines.
Quantum energies associated with microwave
radiation at its extreme of 300 GHz are about
8000 times less than is needed to destroy cells by
ionization; however, radiofrequency and micro-
wave radiation do get absorbed by tissue and do
interact with biological systems. The electromag-
netic energy is transformed into increased kinetic
energy of the absorbing molecules, and results in
tissue heating. The process of absorption and
distribution in irradiated tissue depends on the
radiation wavelength and its relationship to the
physical shape, size and distribution of a non-
uniform system of tissues, the electrical charac-
teristics of tissue at specific frequencies, and the
intensity of the radiation.1"2 A complex tissue
structure such as the human body absorbs energy
differently in specific parts, so that localized heat-
ing or nonuniform absorption may result.
Two kinds of effects on humans due to expo-
sure to radiofrequency and microwave frequency
radiation are usually discussed: thermal effects
from high-level exposures, and possible low-level
or "nonthermal" effects.
Thermal effects, resulting from irradiation with
power densities above
10,000 microwatts/square centimeter (abbrev-
iated as //W/cm2, and equivalent to ten
milliwatts/cm2 or mW/cm2), involve tissue heat-
ing with the possibility of thermal damage. They
may include increased body temperature and
resulting heat stress, cataract formation/ cardio-
vascular effects, testicular effects, and brainwave
pattern changes.3
Low-level effects are a subject of controversy.
Effects of exposure to 1,OOOMW/cm2 (one
mW/cm2) or less have not been well docu-
mented; in fact, all U.S. scientists do not even
agree that they exist. Some Russian and Czech
scientists believe that they occur, but not as a
result of increased tissue temperature (hence
"nonthermal" effects). Their views are based on
animal research and statistical studies of workers'
exposure histories and medical records. Consid-
ered to be mainly central nervous system effects,
symptoms attributed to low-level exposure in-
clude headache, weariness, dizziness, irritability,
emotional instability, partial loss of memory, loss
of appetite, cardiovascular effects, electroen-
cephalogram changes, blood chemistry changes,
changes in respiration, and possible genetic
effects.4
While American scientists are skeptical of be-
havioral data and the conclusions of the Eastern
European experts, there has been little research
conducted in the U.S. involving long term expo-
sures to low-level microwave and radiofrequency
radiation intensities, even in animal experimenta-
tion. Some U.S. scientists believe that the effects
observed, if real, could result from non-uniform
energy distributions and very small localized tem-
perature changes in the body, where the structure
of certain molecular systems may be changed in
some minor, reversible way.
-------
TABLE 6.1
NONIONIZING RADIATION
s
EC
111
h-
I-
Z
111
o
UJ
or
0
in
a:
UJ
n
£
X
830
150
100
60
25
13.0
10.0
6.0
1.0
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.02
0.01
0.001
EFFECTS
PAIN THRESHOLD IN HUMANS
(3GHZ>3 MINUTES)
CATARACTOGENICTHRESHOLD IN RABBITS
PARTIAL BODY DIATHERMY TREATMENTS
WARMTH SENSATION THRESHOLD IN HUMANS
(3GHZ/ 1 SECOND)
r- WEAK AVERSIVE REACTION IN RATS
WARMTH SENSATION THRESHOLD IN HUMANS
(10GHZ/ 4 SECONDS)
THERMAL EFFECTS
DOMINATE
i.
AREA OF UNCER-
TAINITY FOR TRANSIENT
BEHAVIORAL CHANGES
NONTHERMAL EFFECTS ~r
PREDOMINATE
AVOIDANCE BEHAVIOR IN RATS
- EVOKED AUDITORY RESPONSE THRESHOLD IN HUMANS
- EVOKED AUDITORY RESPONSE THRESHOLD IN CATS
STANDARDS
OSHASTANDARD FOR
OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE
FDA STANDARD FOR
- MICROWAVE OVEN
LEAKAGE
USSR STANDARD FOR OCCU-
PATIONAL EXPOSURE (20 MIN. LIMIT)
USSR STANDARD FOR OCCU-
PATIONAL EXPOSURE (2 HR. LIMIT)
USSR STANDARD FOR OCCU-
(UNLIMITED DURATIONS)
USSR STANDARD FOR NON-OCCU-
PATIONAL EXPOSURE
-------
92
The exposure limits in protective standards
differ widely among various countries. In Eastern
Europe, they are geared to protect against "non-
thermal effects" of long term exposure to low
intensity radiation. On the other hand, in the U.S.
and most Western European countries, standards
were designed with high level exposures and
possible thermal effects in mind. Below are sum-
marized both occupational and environmental
exposure limits for the USSR, Czechoslovakia,
Poland and the U.S. in simplified form.
The occupational exposure standards of the
world generally fall into three groups on the basis
of their exposure limits. The most conservative
group includes the USSR and Czechoslovakia,
with limits in the range of tens of /uW/cm2. In the
middle group are the standards of Poland, Swe-
den, the Bell Telephone Company, and the N.V.
Phillips Company (Netherlands), with limits in the
range of hundreds of /uW/cm2 up to about
1000 yuW/cm2. The U.S. and most of Western
Europe have standards in the most permissive
group.
In the U.S. the principal occupational standard
is the American National Standards Institute's
(ANSI), which was reaffirmed with minor
changes in 1974. The Defense Department has
had a similar standard since about 1953; the Air
Force recently adopted a value of 50 mW/cm2,
or 50,000 W/cm2, for frequencies between
one kHz and ten MHz, where previously there
had been no standards. In 1971 the Occupational
NONIONIZING'RADIATION
Safety and Health Administration adopted the
1966 version of the ANSI standard as a national
consensus standard.5 It recommends allowable
limits of 10,000 A»W/cm2 for periods of
0.1 hours or more for frequencies from ten MHz
to 100 GHz, with more intense exposures being
allowed for shorter time periods. According to a
December 31, 1975 decision, the OSHA stan-
dard is considered to be advisory rather than
mandatory. In contrast, the USSR occupational
exposures allowed for the 300 MHz-300 GHz
frequency range cannot exceed 10 //W/cm2 for
the duration of a working day, although greater
exposures are allowed for short periods of time.
There are no general public health or environ-
mental standards for microwaves in the U.S.
(Other countries have typically set such levels
about a factor of ten more restrictive than their
occupational standards.) However, the U.S.
does have a microwave oven performance stan-
dard, which limits the permissible microwave
radiation leakage from the device itself, rather
than the maximum level to which an individual
might be exposed. The limit for new ovens is
1000 /uW/cm2, measured at any point five cen-
timeters from the surface of the oven. Ovens in
service may degrade to levels no greater than
5000 /uW/cm2 at the same distance. Although
not directly comparable to the exposure stan-
dard, the microwave oven limits should probably
be considered with the most restrictive group.
STANDARDS (SIMPLIFIED)
^
Occupational Exposure (jnW/cm )
USSR Czech. Poland US ANSI
(advisory)
Above 300 MHz
30 - 300 MHz
10 25 200
6 25 106
Environmental Exposure
USSR Czech. Poland
Above 300 MHz
30 - 300 MHz
1
1
2.5
.25
10
13
10,000
10,000
Tn2)
U.S.
(none)
(none)
-------
Summary
93
Although there were no major Congressional
or judicial activities pertaining to nonionizing ra-
diation in 1976, the Executive branch covered
many sources and addressed them in diverse
ways. While only EPA's Office of Radiation Pro-
grams (EPA/ORP) and FDA's Bureau of Radiolog-
ical Health (BR.H) activities are discussed in detail
here, some other agencies — especially the De-
partment of Defense, NASA and ERDA — are
also involved in research efforts. Comprehensive
activities1 included measurements of intentional
microwave radiation at the Moscow U.S. Em-
bassy, and interagency programs on the biologi-
cal effects of radiofrequency and microwaves. In
specific areas:
— BRH began the process of generating a
draft performance standard for microwave dia-
thermy applicators, and several major compli-
ance actions were taken. EPA studies relating to
microwaves and radiofrequency included urban
area environmental measurements, measure-
merits of RF levels in buildings, source distribution
analysis for both RF and microwaves, and popu-
lation exposure studies, as well as work on bio-
logical effects. BRH studies included here are on
marine radar exposure, theoretical dosimetry,
and a miniature microwave field probe.
— EPA/ORP prepared to let a contract to
evaluate and summarize 6,000 pages of com-
ments in response to its request for information
on health and environmental effects of extra-high
voltage power transmission lines.
— The Federal laser performance standard
went into effect on August 2, 1976, preceded by
two BRH documents explaining the standard to
manufacturers. Compliance actions were under-
taken when it became effective. In addition, BRH
sponsored a public meeting to consolidate infor-
mation on laser bioeffects and consider possible
implications for Federal policy.
— After reissuing its warning against the haz-
ards of broken mercury vapor discharge lamps,
BRH issued a proposal recommending radiation
safety performance criteria for them. Various re-
search was conducted on light products and
devices generally, such as light source measure-
ments and development of a guide number for
ultraviolet radiation.
2. Major Congressional and Judicial Activities
There were no major Congressional or judicial
activities in this area in 1976. People concerned
about nonionizing radiation may be interested in
appropriations hearings for EPA and BRH, which
are the main agencies dealing with it.
-------
94
3. Executive Activities Pertaining to Public Exposure
• Comprehensive
Measurements at Moscow Embassy
Much press coverage was given to the inten-
tional microwave radiation of the U.S. Embassy in
Moscow by the Soviet Union. The maximum
intensity there was reported to be 18 microwatts
per square centimeter. Although there was much
conjecture and speculation in the press on the
subject, no health effects, were linked to micro-
wave exposure at the Embassy. EPA confirmed
this information with the State Department at a
1976 meeting on the matter.
Interagency Programs on Biological
Effects of Radiofrequency
Microwaves
The Office of Telecommunications Policy
(OTP) coordinates and oversees research and
other Federal activities concerning bioeffects
from the RF range generated by telecommunica-
tions. To assess bioeffects and develop a sound
scientific basis for Federal action, OTP tracks
individually funded activities by such agencies as
EPA, HEW, the Department of Defense, and the
National Bureau of Standards. OTP's statutory
responsibility for spectrum management involves
the review, management, and assignment of fre-
quencies for Government use; the Office also
advises the President on national telecommunica-
tions policy, and therefore is concerned with any
possible adverse side effects which might be
associated with the use of the spectrum.
Each year OTP issues a report on the Federal
Government's program to assess biological ef-
fects of nonionizing electromagnetic radiation,8
which covers environmental measurements, test-
ing and research. These annual reports summa-
rize research efforts, give short descriptions of
participating agencies' programs and associated
publications, and discuss related issues and prob-
lems. (The fifth annual report covering calendar
year 1976 is being prepared and will be available
in 1977.)
An Interagency "Side Effects" Working Group
was established within the Technical Subcommit-
tee of the Interdepartment Radio Advisory Com-
mittee. It helps to coordinate research and mea-
surements programs as well as providing a useful
forum for the exchange of information by 20 or
so agencies that are represented.
• Radiofrequency and Microwave
Guidance
BRH met with researchers and clinical users to
explore the clinical implications of a draft perfor-
mance standard for microwave diathermy
applicators.
Compliance
General Electric agreed to make repairs to
assure that 36,000 home cooking ovens manu-
factured since November 1973 are in compliance
with Federal standards. BRH found that the com-
pany's quality control and testing program was
inadequate to assure that emissions criteria would
be met.
In 1976, one compliance action was taken
after the manufacturer itself reported noncompli-
ance. Other BRH activities included:
— laboratory testing of 85 production or
preproduction ovens, all found to be in
compliance;
— inspection of 2,605 certified and 551 un-
certified ovens;
— review and processing of survey forms for
441 certified and 164 uncertified ovens tested by
the Air Force;
— review of records of 23 dealers or distrib-
utors to see whether they were sufficient to per-
mit tracing of specific ovens to specific
purchasers.
-------
95
EPA Studies
Urban Environmental Measurements
As part of its program to determine the need
for standards to control environmental nonioniz-
ing radiation exposure, EPA/ORP began measur-
ing urban area environmental radiofrequency
(RF) and microwave radiation levels in Boston
and Atlanta in 1975. The study continued in 1976
with the completion of measurements in Miami,
Philadelphia, New York, Chicago, and Washing-
ton, D.C.
Using a mobile computer controlled instru-
mentation system installed in a van equipped
with electrical power generators (Figure 6.2), the
measurements are made in the broadcast
radiation frequency bands which are principally
responsible for urban area exposure levels.
Although data analysis through the end of 1976
included only the 72 sites located in Boston,
Atlanta, Miami and Philadelphia,9 measurements
have been made at a total of about 200 locations
for all of the cities included in the study to date.
The combined results of the measurements of
radiofrequency and microwave power densities
for the 72 sites analyzed are presented in Figure
6.3. (The percentage of sites at which power
densities exist with values equal to or less than a
given total power density in the frequency range
from 54 to 900 MHz is plotted as a function of
log power density.)
The FM band contributes the most to environ-
mental RF exposure between 54 and 900 MHz:
each of the three TV bands contributes about
equally, the land mobile band element is almost
negligible, and less active bands are even less
significant. The maximum power density at any of
the 72 sites summed over all bands was
2.5 /iW/cm2. Four sites, or about six percent, fell
in thetrange of one to 2.5 /jW/cm2, so that some
of the population is potentially exposed to values
in excess of one /aW/cm2, with a median expo-
sure value of about 0.03 /*W/cm2. The maximum
value measured to date at any of the 200 sites in
any of the seven dties is about ten
Population Exposure to Radiofrequency
EPA/ORP estimated the population exposed
to various radiofrequency levels for some of the
urban areas studied. The total power density from
all sources was determined at each of the discrete
points where population is considered to be con-
centrated, and the number exposed at different
levels was summed. Figure 6.4 shows the frac-
tion of the population in metropolitan areas of
Boston, Atlanta, Miami, and Philadelphia (total
population = 8.3 million) estimated to be ex-
posed to various levels of power densities. The
median power density (based on population ex-
posure) is 0.014 /iW/cm2. Less than one percent
of the population is exposed to values greater
than one /nW/cm2. (This estimate does not take
into account exposure due to AM broadcast
sources, daily movements of the population
within an area, exposures at heights other than six
meters above ground, attenuation effects of
buildings, or times when sources are not
transmitting.)
Measurements of Radiofrequency
Levels in Buildings
To supplement data collected near ground
level, EPA/ORP measured radiation levels on the
upper floors of several buildings near broadcast
transmitters in three cities. An example of a tall
building located near a transmitter is shown in
Figure 6.5. The office building on the left is a
number of stories taller than the building on the
right, which has a powerful FM radio transmitter
mounted on its roof. Therefore, the upper floors
of the building on the left are being exposed to the
main beam of the FM transmitter. In such mea-
surements, power density levels were shown to
be greater than those commonly found near
ground level.
The maximum total power densities measured
on the upper floors of selected buildings in New
York, Miami, and Chicago were 32 /*W/cm2,
97 /uW/cm2, and 66 /zW/cm2 respectively, and
consisted primarily of radiation from FM radio
and UHF-TV transmitters.
-------
96
I
Figure 6.2
Electromagnetic Radiation Analysis Van
-------
97
80
t/J
LLJ
t/>
O
h-
z ..
uj 40
U
•* 30—
LU
Q_
1 »• '
J« •
. i • •
LAND * ,* • •
MOBILE ' /.**•"
\ il1 -; '•'
\ i •' *
\ 41
\ . ' t • f
t
' i *
LOW / ;* ;
I VHF-TV / y^
\ 1 ' ' '
\S / :\
r / t :• •• \
~ / f\ t / \ ~
t .** ..*" TOTAL
* . * .•
• •
/ .' ^
A •
• •
1 'It
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
LOG S; S= POWER DENSITY in /xW/cm2
Integral Power Density Distribution
Figure 6.3
-------
98
FRACTION OF POPULATION EXPOSED AS A FUNCTION OF POWER DENSITY
c
o
4~>
fO
3
Q.
0
Q.
O
O
+J
O
-------
99
Tall Building Exposure Situation
Figure 6.5
-------
100
Radiofrequency and Microwave
Source Distribution Analysis
EPA performed an analytic study10 to obtain
statistics on the distribution of RF and microwave
sources, to evaluate their value for determining
the impact of Federal guidance or standards, and
to see whether existing data source bases can be
used to obtain this type of information. Another
objective is to identify and specify sources which
can produce certain environmental levels of no-
nionizing radiation at various distances from a
source antenna.
The study was performed by EPA/ORP with
the assistance of the Electromagnetic Compatibil-
ity Analysis Center (ECAC). The ECAC data base
is a computerized file with frequency assignments
and pertinent characteristics for almost all U.S.
sources of RF and microwave radiation (except
for equipment operating in the amateur bands,
citizen bands, land mobile bands, and aircraft
and commercial maritime bands). ECAC pro-
vided the data base, computer software, data
processing and sorting, and graphic results, while
EPA defined the task, source selection criteria,
calculational models, format for presentation of
results, and is evaluating the results of the study.
The source categories included in the study are
satellite communications earth terminals
(SATCOMS), radars, and all continuous wave
(CW) communications systems except broadcast
transmitters, which are included in a separate
study. As sources from the data base were se-
lected on the basis of certain frequency assign-
ments, on-axis time average power densities
were calculated at a number of specified dis-
tances using EPA/ORP's analytical models. The
results are organized for each system category
and displayed as a series of histograms for each
category.
Examples of the histograms illustrate the kinds
of results obtained in the study. Figure 6.6 shows
the number of frequency assignments for all sys-
tems which can produce an on-axis time aver-
aged power density of at ler.st ten W/m2
(1000 //W/cm2) at the indicated distances from
the antennas. Figure 6.7 shows the number of
frequency assignments in all categories which
can produce power densities in the range of 1.0
to 10.0 W/m2 (100 to 1000 ^W/cm2).
Figure 6.8 shows the number of frequency as-
signments at a distance of 500 meters which
have the capability to produce power densities
equal to at least the values shown.
Frequency distributions in the initial study are
now being corrected, and an attempt will be
made to reduce the results to system distribu-
tions. After system errors are identified and modi-
fications made, a second generation study will be
performed.
Microwave Oven Electric
Field Intensity Measurements
In February 1976, in conjunction with the
environmental nonionizing radiation measure-
ments being performed in Miami, EPA/ORP mea-
sured electric field intensities associated with mi-
crowave oven operation at a location outside a
large condominium complex in Ft. Lauderdale,
Florida." Microwave ovens are installed in the
kitchens of all of the condominium apartments.
The ovens were manufactured to operate at a
frequency which is nominally 915 MHz. The
highest field intensity measured was 8.9 mV/m
(2.1X10"5 AiW/cm2) and centered at 920 MHz, at
a distance of approximately 500 feet from the
complex and at a height of about 20 feet above
ground. During the measurements, no more than
three ovens were observed operating simultane-
ously, although it might be expected that more
ovens could be. Frequency shifts, superimposing
parts of the characteristic spectra of simultane-
ously operating ovens, could obscure the identifi-
cation of other ovens operating at the same time.
Portable Traffic Radar Systems
In March 1976, a study of typical portable
traffic radar systems, used by police to determine
the speed of vehicles, was completed.12 The
study was initiated by a request for information
by the Amalgamated Transit Union, which was
concerned about members' exposure. An analy-
sis was performed to determine radiation charac-
teristics of four different commercially available
-------
101
DATA TYPE*
COMPOSITE
FREQ. RANGE'
FREQ. >_ 100 MHz
HISTOGRAM TYPE'
POWER DENS. >. 10,
W/.2
3500-
uj 2500-
o
* BOO
o
S
| 900-
2:
a
1254
1 T t
1 1 T r ¥ v
100
900
25000
DISTANCE IN METERS
Frequency Assignment Distributions: Number vs. Distance
for a Minimum on-Axis Power Density
Figure 6.6
-------
102
1411
DATA TYPEi
COMPOSITE
FREO. RANGE'
FREQ. >. 100 Mlz
HISTOGRAM TYPE*
POWER DENS.
1.-10. W/«2
WOO-
•
ooo-
.
^
600-
j.
a
w
7
° 6
90
572
T T
too
900
DISTANCE IN METERS
Frequency Assignment Distribution Number vs.
Distance for a Specified Range of On-Axis
Power Density
Figure 6.7
-------
103
200-
DATA TYPE" «,
c
COMPOSITE z
u 3000
FREO. RANGE' 1
FREQ. > 100 MHz § ,^
"• ^ WOO-
&
HISTOGRAM TYPE' ^
DIST. > 500 • y
~ a soo
4
>90 4
3S7
3
MS
.
i
12
Tr
.001 JOt .t 1 K>
POWER DENSITY
100
Frequency Assignment Distributions: Number vs. Minimum
On-Axis Power Density at a Specified Distance
Figure 6.8
-------
104
traffic radar systems, and to predict on- and
off-axis power densities at various distances from
the radiation sources. It appears that use of traffic
radars cannot result in significant exposures to
persons in vehicles being checked by police
radar.
Fetal Exposure in Rats
EPA/ORP conducted two long-term studies of
rats exposed to different levels of radiation —
2450 MHz and 425 MHz. Preliminary results
indicate that there may be an effect on the im-
mune system; the Specific Absorption Rates
(SARs) were measured in both studies.
The EPA/ORP Health Effects Research Labora-
tory developed the capacity for measuring aver-
age SARs for available exposure systems. Two
pairs of twin well calimeters were constructed to
measure whole body absorption on animals up to
the size of adult rats." In addition, two dosime-
try studies were conducted: one applied the
method of measuring heating and cooling curves
to determine the SAR for in vitro samples;14 the
other described a simple method for measuring
whole body absorption for small lab animals
using common equipment.15
Length of Gestation
EPA/ORP is investigating the effects of chronic
irradiation of mice at 2450 MHz on the length of
gestation, since a pilot study indicated a signifi-
cant lengthening of the duration of pregnancy.
Also, a large number of mouse litters have been
examined for teratological changes after daily
irradiation in utero at 2450 MHz. Three expo-
sure levels (3500; 14,000 and 28,000 i^W/cm2)
were used, and a total of seven encephaloceles
(hernias of the brain) were found in approxi-
mately 300 litters (3000 animals); no such anom-
alies were found in a similar number of controls.
The normal incidence of this anomaly is three in
10,000. The significance of the results is being
.evaluated.
Animal Studies on Behavioral Effects
Several EPA/ORP behavioral studies are in
progress for both acute and chronic irradiation of
rats or squirrel monkeys. Subjects being investi-
gated include changes in social behavior, in
stress-related biochemical substances, EEC pa-
rameters, and performance after operant condi-
tioning. Results from one such 1976 study show
that rats irradiated (15,000 and 20,OOOi/^W/cm2,
2450 MHz) for 15 hours display at least a 40%
decrease in task performance whereas one hour
exposures show no decrease.16 Lower powers
did not produce statistically significant decreases
in behavior after 15 hours of exposure, but the
trend towards lowered performance was seen at
power densities as low as five mW/cm2.
A chronic study of behavioral effects is being
performed at Stanford Research Institute. Preg-
nant squirrel monkeys are being exposed
throughout gestation to 2450 MHz radiation,
three hours per day, five days per week. Infants
will be exposed on the same schedule to 12
months after birth. (Exposure levels are 100;
1000 and 10,000 yuW/cm2.) In addition to be-
havioral responses, biochemical and immunolog-
ical parameters are being investigated. The expo-
sures are currently in progress, but some
unexpected results have been obtained; in the
higher exposure level groups, there have been
deaths of infants and mothers. Autopsies are
being conducted to discover the cause.
Hearing Effects
The first phase of EPA/ORD's work to investi-
gate the effect of microwaves on hearing using
post stimulus time histograms from the auditory
nerve has been completed. Evidence shows that
transduction of the pulsed microwaves can be
mechanical, through stimulation of hair cells or
through direct stimulation of the auditory
nerve.17 This important work has not been con-
tinued because of the unavailability of funds.
-------
105
Epidemiological Study
of Alabama Children
The epidemiological study of congenital anom-
alies in children born at Ft. Rucker, Alabama, has
been completed and the final report has been
issued.18 The investigators concluded that the
available evidence did not support the thesis that
there was a significantly higher than normal rate
of anomalies. However, they also concluded that
the measuring device, examination of birth
records, was so insensitive that a very high anom-
aly rate would be necessary to measure a signifi-
cant difference.
In Vitro Studies
EPA's in vitro work in progress is concentrating
on the study of amplitude modulated microwave
radiation on the normal processes of enzyme
systems, bacterial and mammalian cells, and
brain tissue. The development of a microwave
spectrometer capable of identifying wavelengths
of energy absorption for in vitro systems has
encountered technical difficulty. The dual line
instrument has been found to be technically un-
feasible, and work is now concentrating on a
single line instrument with data storage capability.
BRH Studies
Marine Radar Exposure
Following a study of microwave radiation ex-
posure associated with marine radar units on
small pleasure boats,19 BRH concluded that peo-
ple will probably not be exposed to more than
1000 AiW/cm2 average power density under nor-
mal operating conditions. However, significantly
increased levels might result if antenna rotation is
stopped.
Theoretical Dosimetry Studies
BRH developed a computer program to pre-
dict the absorbed power density at any point
inside a body exposed' to microwave radiation.
Several calculations of the internal distribution of
absorbed power have been made with a five-
layered spherical model of the head and a triple-
layered, irregularly shaped model of the human
thigh.
Miniature Microwave Field Probe
A miniature probe, capable of measuring mi-
crowave fields in air or in simulated biological
tissue phantoms, was developed by BRH. A fiber
optics telemetry system was made, in micromini-
ature form, to allow the probe to be used without
a metallic signal cable which could diminish
accuracy.
• High Voltage Transmission Lines
Private citizens, public interest groups, and
State agencies have expressed concern about the
potential adverse effects of electric power at
extra-high voltages (EHV), i.e., voltages at or
above 345 kilovolts. Because of these concerns,
EPA published a notice in the Federal Register in
1975, requesting data and information on health
and environmental effects of EHV power trans-
mission.20 Over 50 replies totaling over 6000
pages were received,21 and in 1976, a request for
proposals to evaluate and summarize the infor-
mation received was prepared and made public.
The proposals received in response have been
evaluated in preparation for the award of a con-
tract. Contractual arrangements will be made in
1977, and the desired evaluation and summary
should be available by the end of the year.
An Interagency Advisory Committee on Elec-
tric Field Effects from High Voltage Lines has
been established to coordinate Federally spon-
sored efforts relating to the environmental effects
of electric fields from high voltage transmission
lines. The Committee is chaired by ERDA.
• Lasers and Laser Products
Guidance
Before BRH's laser performance standard went
into effect on August 2, 1976,22 two documents
were published to help manufacturers comply
with it:
-------
106
— "Laser Products — Federal Requirements
for Manufacturers"23 describes the major provi-
sions, and explains the actions required of manu-
facturers and the consequences of
noncompliance.
— "Guide for Submission of Information on
Lasers and Products Containing Lasers"24 is spe-
cifically directed at the reports the standard
requires.
Compliance
BRH expanded its program to enforce the
Federal laser product performance standard. In
addition to developing and distributing laser field
test kits, the Division of Compliance notified
three manufacturers of noncompliance after the
standard became effective.
To help manufacturers comply, BRH notified
them of the availability of a laser power transfer
meter. It will be maintained and calibrated by the
National Bureau of Standards, and made avail-
able to industry for checking out their testing and
quality control measurements for products sub-
ject to the laser standard.
Studies
Recent laser bioeffects data were reviewed at a
BRH sponsored public meeting, to consider their
implications for the Federal performance stan-
dards. Of special interest were data relevant to
hazards of radiation in the red, blue and ultravio-
let portions of the electromagnetic spectrum.
• Light Products and Devices
Guidance
Mercury Vapor Lamps
Following a reissuance in June of its warning
against the hazards of broken mercury vapor
discharge lamps, BRH issued a proposal in Octo-
ber 197625 recommending radiation safety per-
formance criteria for them. All high intensity
mercury vapor lamps used for general illumina-
tion would shut off within two minutes after their
outer envelope is broken. (Normally the envelope
prevents intense ultraviolet radiation from escap-
ing from the inner bulb.) The Bureau has taken a
dual approach to the hazard, cooperating with
the American National Standards Institute to pre-
pare a voluntary industry standard while develop-
ing concepts for a mandatory standard in case the
other fails to materialize.
Studies
Light Research Programs Symposium
BRH reported on its light research activities at
a symposium on Biological Effects and Measure-
ment of Light Sources, which brought together all
Bureau personnel, contractors and grantees
working in the area. They exchanged information
on their research and reviewed the status of
ongoing projects.
Light Source Measurement
BRH awarded a contract to characterize and
measure levels of radiation emission from various
illumination sources, including high intensity gas
discharge lamps, quartz halogen lamps, xenon
flash lamps and strobe lights.
Ultraviolet Hazard Monitor
BRH sought proposals for ultraviolet radiation
hazard monitors, including' development, con-
struction, testing and calibration. These are
needed for evaluation of potentially harmful em-
issions from light emitting products, including
sunlamps, laser pump sources, germicidal lamps,
and high pressure gas discharge lamps used for
general illumination.
-------
107
Guide Number for Ultraviolet Radiation
BRH developed a "Maximum Illumination
Guide" representing the maximum illumination
level for which a particular type of light source
may be used without exceeding a specified ultra-
violet exposure limit. The Guide is useful for
comparing the relative desirability of various light
sources, responding to concern about potential
hazards of ultraviolet radiation exposure.
Environmental Factors and
Ultraviolet Injury
The Veterans Administration continued to
evaluate the role of environmental factors on
ultraviolet light injury. Some of the factors being
examined are heat, wind; and humidity; it has
already been found that these have an adverse
effect on acute injury.
Monitoring Ultraviolet Radiation
Under contract to the Department of Trans-
portation's System Development and Technology
Office, Temple University was assigned to design
and construct monitoring devices to measure
ultraviolet light.
-------
108
REFERENCES
1. Gandhi, O.P. and K. Sedigh, "Biological Phantom Materials for Simulating Man at Different
Frequencies." Presented at the USNC/URS11976 Annual Meeting, Amherst, MA (October 10-15,
1976).
2. Wallace, J.E. and A.W. Guy, "Experimental Heating Patterns in Bi-Layered Biological Tissue
Circular Aperture Sources." Presented at the USNC/URSI 1976 Annual Meeting, Amherst, MA
(October 10-15,1976).
3. Cleary, Stephen F., "Uncertainties in the Evaluation of the Biological Effects of Microwave and
Radiofrequency Radiation." Health Physics 25:387-404 (October 1973).
»
4. Pressman,. A.S., "Electromagnetic Fields* and Life." Plenum Press, New York (1970).
5. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Code of Federal Regulations,
Title 29-Labor Part 1910.97, Nonionizing Radiation (Revised July 1,1974).
6. "Occupational Safety Standards, Electromagnetic Fields of Radiofrequency, General Safety Require-
ments," COST 12.1.006-76, State Committee on Standards of the Council of Ministers of the USSR,
Moscow (January 22,1976).
7. Gordon, Z.V., "Biological Effects of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields." Available as JPRS
63321 from NTIS, Springfield, Va. (1973).
8. Janes, D.E.; Athey, T.W.; Tell, R.A.; and N.N. Hankin, "Radiofrequency Radiation Levels in
Urban Areas." Office of Radiation Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, presented at
the USNC/URSI Meeting, Amherst, MA (October 1976).
9. Hankin, N.N., "Radiofrequency and Microwave Source Distribution Analysis," presented during
the EPA Nonionizing Radiation Program Review for the Electromagnetic Radiation Management
Advisory Council, Office of Telecommunications Policy (February 1977).
10. "Fifth Report on Program for Control of Electromagnetic Pollution of the Environment: The
Assessment of Biological Hazards of Nonionizing Electromagnetic Radiation;" Office of Telecom-
munications Policy (1976).
11. Measurement of Power Density from Marine Radar, BRH: FDA 76-8004 (1976).
12. Tell, R.A., "Field Strength Measurements of Microwave Oven Leakage at 915 MHz." EPA:
ORP/EAD-76-7 (December 1976).
13. Kinn, J.B., "Whole Body Dosimetry of Small Animals: The Effect of Weight and Exposure Geome-
try." Presented at the Annual Meeting of USNC/URSI, Amherst, MA (October 1976); submitted for
publication in Radio Science.
14. Allis, J.W.; Blackman, C.F.; Fromme, M.L.;andS.G. Benane, "Measurement of Microwave Radia-
tion Absorbed by Biological Systems. I. Analysis of Heating and Cooling Data." Presented at the
Annual Meeting of USNC/URSI, Amherst, MA (October 1976); submitted for publication in Radio
Science.
-------
109
15. Blackman, C.F. and J.A. Black, "Measurement of Microwave Radiation Absorbed by Biological
Systems. II. Analysis by Dewar Calorimetry." Presented at the Annual Meeting of USNC/URSI,
Amherst, MA (October 1976); submitted for publication in Radio Science.
16. Gage, M.I., "Effects of Single Exposures to 2450 MHz Microwave Irradiation on Rat Behavior."
Presented at the Annual Meeting of USNC/URSI, Amherst, MA (October 1976); submitted for
publication in Radio Science.
17. Wilson, B.; Joines, W.T.; and J.A. Casseday, "Microwave Evoked Membrane Responses in the
Auditory Systems of Cats." Presented at the Annual Meeting of USNC/URSI, Amherst, MA
(October 1976); submitted for publication in Radio Science.
18. Burdeshaw, J.A. and S. Schaffer, "Factors Associated with the Incidence of Congenital Anomalies:
A Localized Investigation." EPA: Contract No. 68-02-0791 (March 31,1976).
19. "Extremely High Voltage Transmission Lines, Health and Environmental Effects." EPA: 40 F.R.
12312(1975).
20. Janes, D.E., "Background Information on Extra-High-Voltage Overhead Electric Transmission
Lines." EPA (April 1976).
21. Hankin, N.N., "Radiation Charcteristics of Traffic Radar Systems." EPA:ORP/EAD-76-1
(March 1976).
22. "Laser Products, Performance Standards." BRH/FDA/HEW: 40 F.R. 148, Title 21, Chapter I,
Subchapter J (Docket No. 75N-0103) Part 1040 — Performance Standards for Light-Emitting
Products (July 31,1975).
23. Laser Products — Federal Requirements for Manufacturers. BRH:FDA 76-8040 (1976). GPO
017-015-00101-6, $.35.
24. "Guide for Submission of Information on Lasers and Products Containing Lasers Pursuant to 21 CFR
1002.10 and 1002.12." BRH/FDA/PHS/HEW (Approved OMB No. 57 R 00068) (July 1976).
25. "Radiation Safety Criteria for Mercury Vapor Lamps, Proposed Recommendations and Notice of
Intent to Develop Performance Standards." BRH:41 F.R. 44421 (Octobers, 1976).
Below are publication numbers for relevant items cited in Appendix B.
EPA Technical Report: 520/2-76-008
EPA Authored Reports: See Allis, Berman, Blackman, Eider, Gage Huang, Janes, McRee, Tell,
and Weil.
EPA Technical Notes: BRH Technical Publications: FDA 76_8040
ORP/EAD 76-1 FDA 76_8029 ™ ***
ORP/EAD76-2 76-8036
-------
110
OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE
• Introduction
People who are exposed to radiation on the
job add a certain amount to the dose generally
received — whether they are physicians, x-ray
technicians, nuclear power plant operators, ura-
nium miners, or fire alarm makers. Because such
workers are usually subject to higher doses than
the general population, it is important to know
how many are exposed to how much radiation,
and what effects it has on them, if any. Data
collected on occupationally exposed people can
be useful in assessing potential effects on the
general public.
An initial problem is defining who a radiation
worker is. As the partial list below shows, sources
of occupational exposure to ionizing radiation are
by no means confined to medical and nuclear
fuel cycle activities. Industrial exposures include
not only obvious sources like thickness gauges
and radiographic equipment, but also incidental
sources like klystron tubes and radar tube testing
operations.
Since there is so much room for dispute about
who a radiation worker is, the rlumber of workers
exposed is uncertain. The Special Studies Group
estimated in a 1972 EPA report that there were
772,000 such employees in 1969-70, Busing re-
ported numbers of workers [from the Atomic
Energy Commission, other agencies, and medical
and dental sources] and judicious estimates in
nonreported ones [such as nonreporting Agree-
ment States and AEC licensees]."1 The total
man-rem from occupational exposure was calcu-
lated at 164,000, with a mean annual dose of 210
mrem/ worker.
Information about exposure is needed not only
to insure compliance with applicable regulations
but also to provide a data base for studies of
health effects. Since cancer is the main known
effect of ionizing radiation exposure, and since it
may arise from any of many sources, continuing
epidemiological studies of workers are especially
informative.
According to EPA's Office of Radiation Pro-
grams' (EPA/ORP) May 1976 Radiological Qual-
ity of the Environment, "there is no requirement
for uniformity in collecting and reporting occupa-
tional exposures. There are considerable varia-
tions 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)."2 The Federal Government maintains two
registries which cover occupational exposure in-
formation, ERDA's Transuranium Registry and
BRH's Radiation Incidents Registry. Both are
voluntary.
Occupational exposure to nonionizing radia-
tion is also surprisingly widespread. Lasers, for
example, are used in the construction industry as
reference lines — and in drilling, communica-
tions, holography, and surgery. (They are ex-
tremely hazardous to the worker's eye because of
the intense concentration of light on the retina.)
Microwaves, which are widely used in medical
diathermy and other fields as well as in ovens,
can affect eyes, and may have a health impact at
low levels over a long period of time. For those
who work out of doors, sunlight is a major source
of ultraviolet light which may cause cancer, and
certainly has irritating and damaging effects on
the eye.
Federal responsibilities and selected activities
related to radiation exposure are discussed be-
low, categorized by agency. The information
presented is far from exhaustive, but we hope
that it will provide a sense of the diversity of
occupational exposure and of the activities of
Federal agencies which regulate it.
-------
111
Workers Who May Be
Exposed to Ionizing Radiation
Aircraft workers
Atomic energy plant workers
Biologists
Cathode ray tube makers
Ceramic workers
Chemists
Dental assistants
Dentists
Dermatologists
Drug makers
Drug sterilizers
Electron microscope makers
Electron microscopists
Electrostatic eliminator operators
Embalmers
Fire alarm makers
Food preservers
Food sterilizers
Gas mantle makers
Glass makers
High voltage television repairmen
High voltage vacuum tube makers
High voltage vacuum tube users
Industrial fluoroscope operators
Industrial radiographers
Inspectors using, and workers in
proximity to, sealed gamma ray
sources (cesium-137, cobalt-60
and iridium-192)
Klystron tube operators
Laboratory technicians
Liquid level gauge operators
Luminous dial painters
Machinists, fabricated metal product
Military personnel
Nurses
Oil well loggers
Ore assayers
Pathologists
Petroleum refinery workers
Physicians
Physicists
Pipeline oil flow testers
Pipeline weld radiographers
Plasma torch operators
Plastic technicians
Printing press workers
Prospectors
Radar tube makers
Radiologists
Radium laboratory workers
Radium refinery workers
Research workers
Roentgenologists
Roentgen tube makers
Shoe fitters
Television tube makers
Thickness gauge operators
Thorium-aluminum alloy
workers
Thorium-magnesium alloy
workers
Thorium ore producers
Tile glazers
Uranium dye workers
Uranium mill workers
Uranium miners
Veterinarians
X-Ray aides
X-Ray diffraction apparatus
operators
X-Ray technicians*
*From Occupational Diseases: A Guide to Their Recognition, PHS Public Notice 1097, p.270-271
iReprinted June 1966).
-------
112
Summary
EPA/ORP
— worked on updating the Federal guides for
limiting occupational exposure to ionizing radia-
tion, with the help of an Interagency Committee.
— responded to a petition for special stan-
dards for "hot particles."
NRC
— collected extensive annual radiation ex-
posure records from its licensees.
— resolved areas of duplicative regulation
with the Labor Department.
— asked all licensees to submit a voluntary
report of 1975 personnel monitoring data, to help
determine the value of the information submitted
now and whether more should be collected.
— responded to a petition for special stan-
dards for "hot particles."
— promulgated new rules on respiratory
protection, high intensity radiation, dosimetry re-
quirements for criticality accidents, and monitor-
ing for radiographers.
— issued an environmental impact statement
on personnel neutron dosimeters.
— conducted or funded studies on exposure
of airport workers and flight attendants.
ERDA
— published its annual report of occupa-
tional exposure.
— conducted lifetime health and mortality
studies, as well as investigating bioeffects on
uranium miners, radium workers, and inhaled
radioactive gases and dust.
MESA
— increased its standards compliance and
monitoring activities, in part by conducting blitz
inspections lasting two or three weeks.
— made progress toward promulgating new
sampling, recordkeeping and ventilation stan-
dards.
— conducted research in radiation pro-
tection.
OSHA
— continued to cover radiation protection as
one of many criteria during its inspections.
NIOSH
— sponsored studies of current trends in sur-
vivorship of radiologists, and of safe ocular levels
for near-infrared exposures.
BRH
— continued analysis of data from the Radia-
tion Registry of Physicians.
— discussed with other agencies implemen-
tation of a testing program for personnel
dosimeters.
— maintained the Radiation Incidents
Registry.
• Environmental Protection Agency
EPA/ORP worked on updating the Federal
guides for limiting occupational exposure to ion-
izing radiation. The former Federal Radiation
Council's 1960 "Radiation Protection Guidance
for Federal Agencies"3 is the basic document
used by agencies in preparing standards and
regulations for their respective areas of authority.
In the seventeen years since the Guidance was
issued, the number of workers exposed to ioniz-
ing radiation has increased and more information
has been developed about the potential risks.
EPA/ORP set up an Interagency Committee on
Occupational Exposures to Ionizing Radiation in
September 1974, to advise the Agency in devel-
oping new guides sufficient to protect radiation
workers from undue risk. Four major issues asso-
ciated with occupational exposure have been
identified by the Committee:
— Determination of the basic Radiation Pro-
tection Guides (RPC's)
Selecting the RPG's on the basis of a cost
benefit analysis appears not to be feasible be-
cause there are so many uncertainties in assesss-
-------
113
ing all uses of radiation sources in the country.
Instead, EPA/ORP is examining a comparative
risk approach, combined with consideration of
other relevant factors.
In this approach, the risk associated with
being exposed to radiation is compared with the
risk involved in non-radiation occupations. An
EPA/ORP analysis4 found that a radiation worker
exposed at five rems per year faces a risk no
greater than that of a worker in an industry with
an average risk of accidental death. The analysis
continued in 1976, including use of a detailed
model to refine the evaluation of risk to different
age groups.
— Use of the accumulated exposure rule
Under current Guidance, cumulative ex-
posure of radiation workers is limited to a number
of rems dependent on the age (N) of the worker.
The formula allows 5(N-18) rems of cumulative
exposure and up to three rems per quarter; thus, a
radiation worker could be exposed to 12 rems in
a single year (at three rems/quarter) if a sufficient
"exposure bank account" had accumulated using
the 5(N-18) rule. This rule is being reexamined,
since it is not uniformly applied and may not be
necessary.
— Assurance that exposures are as low as
practicable (ALAP)
EPA/ORP is examining potential mecha-
nisms to assure that exposures below the RPG's
will indeed be as low as practicable, such as
requiring more administrative surveillance or
monitoring when radiation exposure is increased.
— Provisions for exceeding the RPC's and
other special situations
The RPG's may have to-be exceeded in
some' planned activities. Other special situations
also require consideration, such as those of fertile
women, transient workers, minors, and students.
EPA worked toward proposed resolution of
these and other issues, which will be discussed in
a technical document supporting proposed up-
dated Federal guidance. Draft^revised guidance,
prepared during 1976, will be reviewed by the
Interagency Committee in 1977 and finalized for
public comment.
To back up its guidance efforts and to assess
current exposure levels, EPA/ORP began devel-
oping a program to compile statistical data on
annual occupational exposure to ionizing radia-
tion. A contract was awarded in 1976 to investi-
gate ways to assemble national data, and final
results are expected during 1977.
EPA's response to a petition for special stan-
dards for "hot particles" is discussed below.
• Nuclear Regulatory Commission
For the calendar years 1968 through 1975,
NRC collected 417,000 annual radiation expo-
sure records ("whole-body" exposures) from its
various licensees. About 95 percent of these
record an annual exposure of less than two rems
per person, and 22 recorded more than 12 rems.
Only one such exposure was reported in each of
the last three years of the period. More than half
of the 79,000 exposures reported in 1975 were
too small to be detected by personnel radiation
monitoring devices, and more than 99 percent of
the total were less than five rems. The average
exposure for 1975 was 0.36 rem per person.5
(1975 is the most recent year for which data are
available, see Tables 7.1,2,3 for details.)
The Occupational Safety and Health Adminis-
tration accepts NRC's certification that Agree-
ment State radiation control programs are ade-
quate to protect the public and radiation workers.
OSHA does not assert its own regulatory author-
ity over agreement material activities in Agree-
ment States under the Occupational Safety and
Health Act. During 1976, it was noted that there
were areas of duplicative regulation for licensees
possessing both Agreement and non-Agreement
sources in relation to occupational safety and
health programs. NRC and Labor Department
staffs resolved these issues cooperatively and
notified the Agreement States of the results.
-------
114
Year
Table 7.1
SUMMARY OF ANNUAL WHOLE BODY EXPOSURES
FOR COVERED NRG LICENSEES
1968 - 1975
Total Number
Monitored
Percent of
Exposures <2 Rems
Number of Annual
Exposures >12 Rems
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
36,836
. 31,176
36,164
36,311
44,690
67,862
85,097
78,713
97.2%
96.5%
96.1%
95.3%
95.7%
95.0%
96.4%
94.8%
3
7
0
1
8
1
1
1
Number of Workers
Terminating employ-
ment with Two or
More Employers in
One Quarter
Total Number of
Man-r ems
Table 7.3
NRC TRANSIENT WORKERS
1969 - 1975
1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 Totals
8
28
14
66
154 313 530
1113
5.4 12.6 2.9 58.2 127.4 160.7 330.8 698.0
Average Indivi-
dual Quarterly
Exposure
0.67 0.45 0.20 0.88 0.83 0.51 0.62
0.63
-------
TABLE 7.2
DISTRIBUTION OF ANNUAL WHOLE BODY EXPOSURES
REPORTED BY COVERED LICENSEES-1975
Covered
Categories
of NRC
Licensees
Power
Reactors
Industrial
Radiography
Fuel Processing'
& Fabrication
Manufacturing
& Distribution
Totals
Exposure Ranges (Rems)
Total No.
Monitored
54763
9178
11405
3367
78713
Less than
Measurable
26729
4485
5910
1508
38632
Meas'ble
<0.10
10606
1811
1968
644
15029
0.10
0.25
4081
813
1102
532
6528
0.25
0.50
2948
614
1021
214
4797
0.50
0.75
1778
346
433
88
2645
0.75
1.00
1384
263
241
67
1955
1-2
3982
538
381
140
5041
2-3
1873
171
153
65
2262
3-4
692
64
77
43
876
4-5
424
35
40
39
538
5-6
169
21
30
11
231
6-7
60
8
11
12
91
7-8
24
1
9
3
37
8-9
12
3
14
0
29
9-10
0
1
15
1
17
10-11
1
2
0
0
3
11-12
0
1
0
0
1
>-12
0
1
0
0
1
-------
116
Guidance
Personnel Monitoring Reports
Since 1969, four categories of licensees have
been required to report annually the results of
their personnel monitoring for radiation expo-
sures (nuclear reactors, industrial radiographers,
nuclear fuel processors and reprocessors, and
certain manufacturers or processors of large
quantities of by-product material). These are be-
lieved to include licensees whose operations
have the greatest potential for significant occupa-
tional radiation exposures.
On May 30, 1975, the NRC published a pro-
posed amendment' to its regulation that would
require all licensees to file an annual statistical
summary report. The data gathered would be
used to identify situations for further study. This
would enable the NRC to develop guidance on
keeping occupational radiation exposures "as
low as is reasonably achievable." The NRC
believes the information it would receive from all
licensees is needed for evaluating the risk of
exposure associated with related activities.
However, a number of comments received on
the proposed rulemaking questioned the value of
the data requested and mentioned the burden of
reporting by licensees. Consequently, the NRC
asked all licensees to submit a voluntary,, one-
time report of their personnel monitoring data for
1975. These reports will provide NRC with better
basis for assessing the value of the data. In addi-
tion, they will determine whether or not the
licensees who are currently required to report
actually conduct operations having the greatest
potential for significant radiation exposure. The
NRC will evaluate the reports before deciding on
a requirement for reporting from all licensees.
Petition on "Hot Particles"
On April 12, 1976, the NRC published in the
Federal Registef a comprehensive analysis of
what have been called "hot particles" of pluto-
nium. Small particles of an alpha-emitting radion-
uclide such as plutonium, when deposited in the
lung, can cause extremely large radiation doses to
the tissue cells immediately surrounding the parti-
cles. Despite the large doses, however, experi-
ments with animals have indicated that cancer is
not likely to develop unless large volumes of
tissue are irradiated, as would be the case with
uniformly distributed radioactive material in the
lung. In addition, clinical studies have established
that workers exposed to airborne plutonium par-
ticles immediately following World War II have
not developed lung cancer. The NRC analysis
concluded that radionuclides in the form of parti-
cles are not more hazardous, and may be less
hazardous, than the same quantity of radionu-
clides distributed uniformly in the lung.
The analysis was performed as the result of a
petition from the Natural Resources Defense
Council, which asked NRC to establish special
standards for plutonium and other alpha emitters
in "hot particle" form. The standards were to be a
factor of 115,000 lower than present standards
for these radionuclides in insoluble form. The
Commission denied the petition. EPA was also
asked to respond, and also denied the petition
following a National Academy of Sciences review
of the scientific basis. In October, EPA published
the full text of the Academy Committee's report,
"Health Effects of Alpha-Emitting Particles in the
Respiratory Tract."8 It concluded "that the evi-
dence does not support the NRDC petition," and
that "if there is a hot particle risk, it is small by
comparison with the lung cancer risk attributable
to the generalized alpha radiation." EPA pub-
lished a denial of the NRDC petition on January 6,
1977(42F.R. 1288).
The question raised by the petition was also
reviewed by the National Council of Radiation
Protection and Measurements (NCRP). The
Council published "Alpha-Emitting Particles in
Lungs" which concluded that "paniculate
plutonium in the lung is no greater hazard than
the same amount of plutonium more uniformly
distributed throughout the lung."9
-------
Respiratory Protection
The NRC adopted a rule change10 in August
1976 that:
— eliminates separate licensing actions for
approval of respirator use,
— relaxes the requirements for reporting
overexposures to radioactive materials taken into
the body, by replacing the former weekly report-
ing limits with quarterly limits consistent with
basic radiation protection standards, and
— establishes requirements for precaution-
ary procedures, including a weekly basis for ex-
posure control and the use of engineering
controls, to limit exposures to airborne
radioactive materials.
The rule is expected to improve safety require-
ments and result in significant savings by eliminat-
ing unnecessary reports from licensees. A
regulatory guide11 and a supplemental manual of
technical support information" were published in
October 1976 to provide licensees with the nec-
essary guidance on practices for respiratory pro-
tection that are acceptable to the NRC.
High-Intensity Radiation
In May 1976, the NRC published a proposed
rule change13 to upgrade requirements for protec-
tion against radiation from high-intensity sources,
such as those used in some irradiators, that could
be immediately lethal to people who might acci-
dentally be exposed to them.
The proposed rule would require automatically
functioning entry controls and warning devices,
as well as procedural controls, to reduce the
likelihood of exposures. Potentially affected li-
censees were provided with information on costs
and need for the additional controls.
Dosimetry Requirements for
Criticality Accidents
In July 1976, the NRC issued a rule change" to
enable rapid screening of personnel who might
have been exposed to radiation during a critical-
ity (nuclear chain reaction) -accident. It requires
117
people who work near fissionable materials that
could form a critical mass to wear a device (such
as an indium strip) to identify exposed workers
quickly should an accident occur. Use of a do-
simeter to measure the neutron dose is not
required, on the basis of an analysis which
indicated that neutron dosimetry would cost
more than the value of the dose information for
attending physicians.
Monitoring of Radiographers
An amendment to NRC regulations on person-
nel monitoring,15 placed in effect in May 1976,
permits radiographers to use thermoluminescent
dosimeters as substitutes for film badges to record
cumulative individual exposure to radiation. The
amendment requires daily exposure records ob-
tained with dosimeters that are readable without
the use of accessory equipment.
Environmental Impact Statement
Personnel Neutron Dosimeters
Containing Natural Thorium
Description: NRC's Office of Standards Devel-
opment issued a Draft Statement in June 197616
on a manufacturer's request for exemption from
licensing requirements for personnel dosimeters
containing natural thorium. Thorium is an essen-
tial ingredient for producing fission fragments to
be recorded as tracks in an adjacent plastic foil
from which the neutron exposures can be esti-
mated. The Final Statement was published in
January 1977 as NUREG-0137, "Final Environ-
mental Statement Concerning Exemption from
Licensing Requirements for Personnel Neutron
Dosimeters that Contain Natural Thorium."
EPA/ORP Response and Status: EPA/ORP
rated the Draft Statement lack of
objections/insufficient information. In addition to
requesting further analysis regarding the maxi-
mum exposed individual in airplanes (one leg of
the distribution network), EPA/ORP questioned
the effect of the thorium dosimeter on other
dosimeters.
-------
118
Studies
Exposure of Airport Workers
An NRC contractor's report issued in February
197617 gave the results of surveys of exposures to
cargo handlers at six U.S. airports. The informa-
tion gathered included descriptions of handling
and arrangement of packages, dose distribution
around groups of packages, and estimated doses
received by workers.
As its major conclusion, the study showed that
no monitored worker received a dose equivalent
greater than nine mrem in a single shift:
12 received more than five mrem, and 39 more
than three mrem. A combined total of 102 shifts,
125 workers, and more than 15 00'packages were
covered. No evidence was found to suggest that
the public received any exposure of significance
relative to natural background dose levels.
Exposure of Flight Attendants
NRC and two flight attendants' unions spon-
sored jointly a study which concluded that there
is little increase in the radiation exposure of flight
attendants due to radioactive shipments. Data
was gathered by dosimeters worn by about 100
attendants, and it was found that the average
annual dose equivalent from shipments was
11 mrem. About 100 to 150 mrern per year is
the dose from cosmic radiation.
• Energy Research and
Development Administration
ERDA is responsible for the occupational
safety and health both of its own Federal employ-
ees and of those who work for its contractors.
Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act,
Federal employees must be protected by a pro-
gram comparable to the Act's, and contractor
employees are covered by the agency's ongoing
program. To carry out ERDA's responsibilities, a
management directive system has been
developed.
An annual report of radiation exposures for
ERDA and ERDA contractor employees is pub-
lished each year, covering the previous calendar
year. As an outgrowth of the old Atomic Energy
Commission's program to retain certain records
in a central repository, the annual report was
issued by ERDA for the first time in 1974.18
Among the information presented in 1976 is a
whole body exposure history, the distribution of
exposures by facility type, and summaries of
internal exposures.19
Studies
Lifetime Health and Mortality Studies
ERDA accumulated data on about 37,000
Hanford project employees, covering medical
and occupational exposure, medical examina-
tions and mortality data. The Hanford Environ-
mental Health Foundation was granted funds to
analyze the data to assess the effect of exposure
on mortality rate and causes of death. Also, the
National Cancer Institute undertook a study to
determine whether 33,500 employees at the
Hanford facility were harmed by their exposure
to permissible levels of radiation, using the dis-
ability claim rate as the criterion of health.
Uranium Miners
ERDA sponsored a study to find whether ura-
nium miners can reverse the cytological progres-
sion to malignancy, once it has started, by
stopping mining or cigarette smoking or both. To
identify which specific uranium mine air
contaminants are responsible for development of
respiratory tract pathology, the Batelle Memorial
Institute conducted experiments with beagles and
rodents. Also, the exposure of miners to radon
with lead-210 was evaluated at New York
University.
Health Effects of Radium and Thorium
Radium cases were traced by the Argonne
National Laboratory from lists of workers with
-------
119
Table 7.4
WHOLE-BODY EXPOSURE HISTORY OF ERDA AND ERDA CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEES
(Percent of employees with dose
Year
1964
1965
1966**
1967**
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974***
1975
equivalent
1 rem (number)
4
5
5
•6
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
.85
.07
.35
.11
.43
.17
.63
.90
.78
.16
.26
.36
(6254)
(6854)
(7387)
(6622)
(4780)
(4293)
(4476)
(3675)
(3383)
(2906)
(2549)
(2974)
greater than)
2 rem (number)
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
.07
.99
.98
.23
.83
.69
.84
.37
.40
.05
.13
.28
(2671)
(2696)
(2738)
(2415)
(1981)
(1739)
(1778)
(1295)
(1253)
( 962)
( 882)
(1128)
Total
Man rem*
13411
14818
15454
13715
9877
8707
9137
5395
6170
5623
4935
5813
Total
Monitored
128965
135214
137939
108386
107986
102918
96661
94315
89460
91977
78232
88425
*Individuals with dose equivalent of less than one rem have been excluded.
In 1975, this represented approximately 50 percent of the total man rem.
Therefore, these data reflect only the trend in high ranges of dose equivalents
rather than the total collective dose equivalent.
**Data for 1966 and 1967 differ from previous reports due to the discovery of
*an error in the radiation exposure records of one major contractor.
***These data differ slightly from that reported in ERDA-76/119 because of the
late reporting of exposures for 227 individuals.
-------
ro
o
Table 7.5
Length of Employment for Workers Terminating
Employment with ERDA or ERDA Contractors
Calendar
Year
1-89
Days
90-180
Days
180-365
Days
1-2
Years
2-4
Years
4-6
Years
>6
Years
Total Number
Total Cum. Dose
Equivalent (Rem)
Avg. Cum. Dose
Equivalent (Rem)
1975
2016
519.40
.26
700
192.37
.27
677
.43
743
509
329
.54
.62
1.46
1612
292.68 399.57 316.58 480.18 4171.88
2.59
-------
121
luminous paints and other radiation sources. Epi-
demiological analyses planned include correlat-
ing morbidity and mortality in relation to the body
burden of radium. Also, ERDA funded collection
of technical data on radium-burdened persons for
whom late effects are being evaluated. Along
with conclusions about the risks of different can-
cers, the study indicates that significant chromo-
some effects appear in persons in the high risk
range.
The Argonne National Laboratory's Center for
Human Radiobiology continued its studies of the
health of former thorium workers, searching out
mortality records for age, sex, time, and cause-
specific mortality. The results will be compared to
the expected figures for the general population,
and figures for job classification subgroups will be
analyzed and compared.
Inhaled Radioactive Gases and Dusts
ERDA sponsored a University of Rochester
study of the effects of radon or its decay
products. It is designed to determine whether
they, through the emission of alpha particle radia-
tion, could be the stimulus to produce the lesions
which develop into bronchial cancer, or whether
other carcinogenic agents must be present.
• Mining Enforcement and
Safety Administration (MESA)
1976, in regulating both uranium and other mines
where radiation could be a problem.20 Forty-
nine notices and 14 orders were issued, as op-
posed to 22 and 16 respectively in 1975. A total
of 2,251 radiation (radon daughter) samples were
collected during 378 inspections at 296 under-
ground mines: 191 inspections in 142 uranium
mines, and 187 in 154 others. (In 1975, 1398
samples were taken during 253 inspections at
147 mines.)
Table 7.6 summarizes Federal sampling results
for 1976. The data for nonuranium mines seem
high because of one large phosphate mine, where
a problem was discovered and certain sections
were permanently abandoned. Aside from that
case, average radon daughter concentrations
were 0.14 working level (WL;see glossary) and
the maximum was 3.02 WL.
Both Federal sampling results and company
records show a slight decrease in 1976 radon
daughter concentrations — from 0.71 WL to
0.58 WL and from 1.07 working level months
(WLM) to 0.99 WLM. However, the percentage
distribution of sample results and exposures is
relatively unchanged. See Table 7.7 for mining
company data.
The discrepancy between Federal inspection
results and company records of worker exposure
continued to be marked in 1976: 4.64 average
exposure compared to 0.99. MESA therefore
expanded its special radiation audit program,
MESA's radiation standards compliance and
monitoring activities increased dramatically in
Table 7.6 - Radon daughter concentrations, 1976
Type of mine
Uranium mines
Nonuranium mines
Total
number
of
samples
1,180
1,071
Average
concen-
tra-
tions
0.58 WL
0.22 WL
Maximum
concen-
tra-
tions
22.5 WL
5.4 WL
Number of samples in designated
range
0.0-0.3
WL
628
837
0.3-0.6
WL
217
91
0.6-1.0
WL
189
86
1.0-2.0
WL
87
54
*.o
WL
59
3
Table 7.7 - 1976 uranium mine exposure
Total
employment
4,306
Average
exposure
0.99 WLM
Miners having exposure in indicated
intervals, percent
0-1 WLM
60.4
1-2 WLM
22.0
2-3 WLM
11.4
3-4 WLM
6.0
>4 WLM-
0.1
-------
122
sending teams to visit four underground uranium
mines employing more than 600 miners. Blitz
inspections lasting two to three weeks indicated
three related problems:
— because radiation levels were far more
variable than operators assumed, sampling was
not frequent enough;
— as operators did not average their sam-
pling data properly, high radiation levels were
seldom reflected in employee exposure records;
and
— since ventilation was not adequately
planned or maintained, adjusting it in one area
almost invariably caused a problem in another.
As a result of the special radiation audits, some
operators have modified their recordkeeping pro-
cedures and sampling strategies to account prop-
erly for time spent by miners in high concentra-
tions. When such conditions were found during
the audits, orders withdrawing the workers from
the area were issued until the radon daughter
concentrations were reduced to acceptable lev-
els. (This was usually done by State mine inspec-
tors, since most of the audits were conducted in
States where MESA delegates its authority.)
New sampling, recordkeeping and ventilation
standards were provided*1 in 1975, and during
1976 the process of public comment brought
them closer to promulgation. When finalized,
they will help assure that mine workers are not
overexposed.
MESA also conducted research in the radiation
protection area in 1976. For example, personal
dosimeters for alpha radiation which are suitable
for the mining environment are in the advanced
stage of field testing, and radon gas control tech-
nology is being developed.
• Occupational Safety and
Health Administration
Simply put, the Department of Labor's Occu-
pational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) has jurisdiction over workers who are
exposed to radiation but not covered by other
agencies. OSHA* inspects workplaces (where
there is even one employee) for compliance with
dozens of standards — of which radiation is only
one. Therefore, there are no definite figures on
the number of workplaces or workers that OSHA
is responsible for, in terms of radiation protection
alone.
The breadth of situations involved is enor-
mous, from electron microscope workers to pipe-
fitters. Although the Occupational Safety and
Health Act covers Federal contractors as a matter
of form, in practice the agencies contracting with
them are responsible for enforcement. Federal
employees, while not covered under the Act, are
to be protected by a comparable agency plan.
• National Institute of
Occupational Safety and Health
NIOSH, which conducts research and makes
recommendations to OSHA regarding standards,
had two 1976 projects with particular bearing on
radiation protection: a Johns Hopkins University
study of current trends in survivorship of radiolo-
gists, and a Duke University study of safe ocular
levels for near-infrared occupational exposures.
The study of radiologists is designed to deter-
mine whether they are still subject to a greater
risk of cancer than other doctors, despite the
decreased dose of radiation to which they have
been exposed in recent years. In addition, the
research will attempt to identify dose levels of
radiation and other toxic agents to which various
medical specialty groups are exposed, and to
relate these data to cause-specific mortality.
At Duke University, researchers plan to deter-
mine non-hazardous power levels and the mech-
anism of formation of cataracts following chronic
occupational exposures to radiation in the near
infrared. Among other procedures, lenses will be
analyzed by sensitive tests to detect any early or
precataract changes following exposure.
-------
123
• Bureau of Radiological Health
Although the primary responsibility for occu-
pational health and safety enforcement lies with
other agencies (particularly OSHA), FDA's Bu-
reau of Radiological Health (BRH) conducted
numerous pertinent programs in 1976, as for
example:
— Analysis of the Radiation Registry of Phys-
icians data proceeded, but BRH terminated its
support for collection of further data. The Regis-
try is a long term followup study of radiologists
and pathologists and their families, to investigate
bioeffects of prolonged occupational exposure to
low levels of ionizing radiation.
— BRH, NRC, and ERDA held a public meet-
ing to discuss the implementation of a testing
program for personnel dosimeters. If the program
can be successfully implemented, the NRC plans
to amend its regulations to require its licensees to
use dosimeter services that have been tested and
found to meet certain accuracy requirements.
ERDA is interested in extending the program to its
contractors, while BRH intends to encourage use
of the program by those who provide dosimeter
services to users not regulated by the NRC.
BRH also maintains the voluntary Radiation
Incidents Registry, which includes occupational
data. 1970-1976 data are presented in Table 7.8.
Other BRH programs relevant to occupational
aspects of radiation protection are discussed in
the chapter on Medical Radiation Exposure.
-------
124
Table 7.8
Number of Incidents and Number of Persons Reported Accidentally Exposed to
Various Types of Radiation Sources, Radiation Incidents Registry, 1970-1976.
1976
Sources
Number
of
incidents
Number
of
persons
Cumulative
1970-1976
Number
of
incidents
Number
of
persons
Ionizing
Industrial x-ray units
Medical and Dental x-ray units
X-ray units in universities
and laboratories
Gamma
Television
2
15
4
21
82
79
44
6
1
92
146
55
14
1
Nonionizing
Ultraviolet
Microwave
Laser
High Frequency Radiowaves
Infrared
Ionizing and Monionizing
Ultrasound
Unknown
TOTAL
8 73
1 2
- -
1 1
_
: :
30 105
318*
52
21
11
2
5
3
2
626
463*
65
23
11
2
5
5
2
884
* This includes approximately 209 claims involving 232 persons allegedly
injured from a defective ultraviolet dental device.
-------
125
REFERENCES
1. Estimates of Ionizing Radiation Doses in the U.S., 1960-2000. EPA: ORP/CSD 72-1 (1972),
page 147.
2. Radiological Quality of the Environment. EPA; EPA-520/1-76-010 (1976), page 151.
3. "Radiation Protection Guidance for Federal Agencies," Federal Radiation Council (May 13, 1960).
4. Unpublished EPA analysis.
5. Brooks, Barbara, "Eighth Annual Occupational Radiation Exposure Report 1975," NUREG-0119
(October 1976).
6. "Personnel Monitoring Reports." NRC40 F.R. 23478-79 (May 30,19Z5).
7. "PRM 20-5, NRDC Denial of Petition for Rule-Making." NRC: 41 F.R. 15371-80 (April 12,
1976).
8. Health Effects of Alpha-Emitting Particles in the Respiratory Tract. National Academy of Sciences
(1976).
9. Alpha Emitting Particles in Lungs. National Council on Radiation Protection: NCRP Report No. 46
(August 15,1975).
10. "Exposure of Individuals to Concentrations of Radioactive Materials in Air in Restricted Areas."
NRC: 41 F.R. 52300 (November 29,1976).
11. "Acceptable Programs for Respiratory Protection." NRC: Regulatory Guide 8.15 (October 1976).
12. Caplin, J.L.; Held, B.J.; and R.J. Catlin, Manual of Respiratory Protection Against Airborne
Radioactive Materials. NRC: NUREG-0041 (September 1976).
13. "Standards for Protection Against Radiation, Caution Signs, Labels, Signals and Controls." NRC:
41 F.R. 18320 (May 3,1976).
14. "Criticality Accident Protection Requirements." NRC: 41 F.R. 31521 (July 29,1976).
15. "Personnel Monitoring of Radiographers." NRC: 41 F.R. 18645 (May 6,1976).
16*. "Draft Environmental Statement on Proposed Rulemaking Exemption from Licensing Requirements
for Personnel Neutron Dosimeters that Contain Natural Thorium." NRC: NUREG-0074 (June
1976).
17. Shapiro, Jacob, "Exposure of Airport Workers to Radiation from Shipments of Radioactive Materi-
als." Prepared for U.S. NRC under Contract No. DR-75-1505 by Harvard University. NRC:
NUREG-0154 (January 1977).
18. Seventh Annual Report of Radiation Exposures forAEC & AEC Contractor Employees, 1974. ERDA:
ERDA 76/119(1976).
-------
126
19. Eighth Annual Report of Radiation Exposures for ERDA and ERDA Contractor Employees, 1975.
ERDA:ERDA 77-29.
20. Administration of the Federal Metal and Nonmetallic Mine Safety Act (PL 89-577), 1975. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration and Bureau of Mines.
21. "New and Revised Health and Safety Standards, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking." MESA,
40 F.R. 44272 (September 25,1975).
Below are publication numbers for relevant items cited in Appendix B.
EPA Technical Reports: 520/4-76-013
ERDA Publications:. ERDA 76-45-7, ERDA 76/119
NRC Publications: NUREG-0041, NUREG-0074, NUREG-0019
NRC Regulatory Guides: 4.13, 8.14, 8.15
BRH Technical Publications: FDA 77-8007
-------
127
COMPREHENSIVE EXECUTIVE ACTIVITIES
This Chapter covers activities which cross the
boundaries established in the others; such as
regulations on ocean dumping of many kinds of
radioactive waste, and research on low level
radiation effects.
Guidance
Transuranium Contamination
EPA's Office of Radiation Programs
(EPA/ORP) continued work on its assessment of
the hazard to people from existing transuranium
element contamination, with a view to proposing
recommendations in 1977 for protecting ex-
posed individuals and the environment. Pluto-
nium and other transuranium elements have en-
tered the environment from several sources:
fallout from aboveground nuclear weapons tests
(primarily during 1945-63), accidents involving
military and related operations, and local releases
from nuclear facilities. In developing possible
recommendations, EPA/ORP has had valuable
assistance from an Interagency Working Group
with representatives from ERDA, NRC, NASA,
and the Departments of Defense, State, Com-
merce and Interior. After being approved,
EPA/ORP's recommendations will be issued as
Federal Guidance. It will be implemented by the
agencies with regulatory and administrative re-
sponsibilities for the production, utilization and
control of transuranium elements.
Radioactivity in Food
FDA's Bureau of Radiological Health (BRH)
distributed for review a draft guideline on re-
sponse planning for incidents involving radioac-
tive contamination of human foods and animal
feeds. It is intended for use by Federal, State, and
local agencies in planning protective counter-
measures to institute, if food supplies become
contaminated as a result of radiological incidents
at nuclear facilities, transportation accidents, or
fallout. The proposed recommendations would
be Protective Action Guides, defined as the
projected dose equivalent to individuals in the
general population that warrants protective
action.
Ocean Dumping
During 1976 EPA/ORP finalized a proposed
revision of regulations on ocean dumping of
wastes to include a basic isolation and contain-
ment philosophy for radioactive wastes.1 High
level radioactive wastes are prohibited from dis-
posal. To prevent other radioactive wastes from
being directly dispersed or diluted in ocean
waters, they must be packaged so that:
— the wastes will radiodecay to environ-
mentally innocuous materials within the life ex-
pectancy of the containers, and
— the wastes would produce only short-
term localized adverse effects if the containers
should rupture, and
— containers are dumped where they will
cause no threat to navigation, fishing, shorelines
or beaches.
Quality Assurance Requirements
EPA/ORP started writing quality assurance re-
quirements for approved laboratories in 1976.
The present draft generally requires use of ap-
proved procedures, following certain mandatory
requirements in laboratory practice, establish-
ment and operation of an internal quality control
system, and satisfactory results on an annual
performance evaluation.
Mandatory practice requirements include:
— Provision of a separate counting room
with adequate temperature control, regulated
power, and grounding,
— sample preparation equipment,
— appropriate counting instrumentation in-
cluding specific types,
-------
128
— sample preservation,
— participation in a quality control program
including:
a. Semiannual participation in EPA/ORP
intercomparisons.
b. Annual participation in an EPA/ORP
unknown performance study.
c. Calibration procedures and records.
d. Routine internal quality control of du-
plicates, performance standards, and
blanks.
Recommended but not mandatory guidelines
cover personnel qualifications, laboratory space
and utilities, glassware cleaning, quality of reag-
ents and of water, handling and storage of radio-
active standards and wastes, and data reporting
and retention.
Proposed Guides for NARM
The National Conference of Radiation Control
Program Directors appointed a Task Force which
wrote and distributed draft guides on naturally-
occurring or accelerator produced material
(NARM). These materials are not covered by the
Atomic Energy Act, and a mechanism is needed
for Federal/State control of their manufacture
and distribution. Among the provisions of the
proposed guides are comprehensive classifica-
tion and evaluation of NARM sources and
products by radiation control agencies. Evalua-
tion could be done in three ways: (1) by a State
alone, (2) with BRH assistance, or (3) by BRH at
the State's request.
Transportation Regulations
The Department of Transportation consoli-
dated its regulations for air, water, rail and high-
way transportation of hazardous materials into a
single volume, Title 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations. At the same time, some changes
were made relating to radioactive substances
specifically; for example, more information is to
be included on the shipping paper description,
and the standard radiation symbol will be used
for vehicle placards.
The Federal Railroads Administration re-
viewed regulations and handling criteria for trans-
porting radioactive materials by train, and con-
cluded that no changes were required.
Radioactivity in the Great Lakes
An Interagency Working Group, chaired by
EPA and including NRC and State members,
completed development of "Refined Radioactiv-
ity Objectives for the Great Lakes," as provided
for in the 1972 U.S.-Canadian Agreement on the
Great Lakes. These objectives were discussed
with a Canadian counterpart group; a mutually
satisfactory draft was agreed to and forwarded to
the U.S. State Department and Canadian Depart-
ment of External Affairs for further intergovern-
mental consideration.
Studies
EPA/ORP's Research Committee
Following an Office of Management and
Budget decision that ERDA, not EPA/ORP, has
primary responsibility for ionizing radiation
research, EPA/ORP created a formal Research-
Committee with two primary functions:
1. On research pertaining to ionizing radiation,
to act as a mediator between (a) agencies with
research responsibilities, and (b) the needs iden-
tified by EPA/ORP. Ultimately, the research is
used to set radiation standards, assist in making
technological decisions, or understand the prob-
lems associated with movement and analysis of
radionuclidesm the environment.
2. On research pertaining to nonionizing ra-
diation, to perform a parallel mediating function,
but within EPA/ORP itself as well as between it
and other agencies.
The Committee is responsible for identifying
EPA/ORP's top priority research and operational
-------
129
needs, and matching those to actual or potential
activities in other agencies.
Plutonium Air Inhalation Dose (PAID)
To determine the dose and dose rates due to
intake of the transuranic (class Y) elements and
their decay products, EPA/ORP developed a
computer code titled PAID, Plutonium Air Inhala-
tion Dose, It is the first code which can determine
the dose from parent-daughter chains accurately,
including an assessment of the time dependent
dose rates and doses from an acute or chronic,
inhaled or ingested radionuclide. The code also
provides for including the dose due to transfer of
radioactivity to body organs from ingested ma-
terials. Recent modifications allow study of class
W radionuclides as well as class Y.
' Among the unique features of the PAID code
are:
— explicit calculation of the dose rates and
doses due to both parent and daughter products,
— inclusion of the dose to the tracheobron-
chial region due to the clearance of material
deposited in the pulmonary region,
— calculation of the dose from material per-
manently retained in the lymph nodes, and
— separate calculation and printout of the
percentage of the total dose to a reference organ
due to absorption from the gastrointestinal tract
for both parent and daughter.
Ocean Disposal Studies
Since 1974, the EPA Office of Radiation Pro-
grams has conducted a series of environmental
assessment surveys at three of the four primary
radioactive waste disposal sites used by the U.S.
between 1946 and 1970. They are located in the
Pacific Ocean west of San Francisco and in the
Atlantic Ocean east of the Maryland-Delaware
coast. Although ocean dumping of radioactive
wastes by the United States was discontinued in
1970, it is being reconsidered because of recent
problems with existing land burial sites and a
national policy to reevaluate all radioactive waste
management alternatives. EPA has the regulatory
authority for the ocean disposal option under the
Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act
of 1972 (PL 92-532).
Two basic conclusions have emerged from
1974 and 1975 studies, as background for the
1976 activities:
— Techniques formerly used to package the
radioactive wastes for ocean disposal were, in
general, not adequate to insure that the wastes
would remain isolated from the surrounding envi-
ronment until they had radiodecayed to innocu-
ous levels.
In the two Pacific dumpsites, plutonium-238
and plutonium-239, 240 were found in the sedi-
ment at concentrations well above the maximum
expected from weapons testing fallout alone.
Similar findings were made in the 2800m Atlantic
dumpsite for cesium-137. Based upon the data
collected up to 1977, the concentrations of ra-
dionuclides detected in the sediments at both the
Atlantic and Pacific sites do not yet represent a
risk either to people or the marine environment.
— If ocean disposal of low-level radioactive
wastes were to recommence in the future, the
technology exists to survey or monitor a deep
ocean site precisely to detect the possible release
and movement of selected radionuclides and to
recover waste packages disposed at depths up to
2800m.
During July-August 1976, the EPA/ORP's
Technology Assessment Division conducted the
first comprehensive bottom survey of a disused
U.S. radioactive waste dumpsite using the deep
submersible ALVIN. A program was successfully
completed consisting of sediment coring at pre-
cisely located positions both throughout the 100
square mile dumpsite area and relative to specific
radioactive waste containers. The cores are being
analysed to determine: (a) the extent and direc-
tion of radionuclide contamination of the
sediments, particularly for cesium-137, (b) the
biological infauna populations within the site, and
(c) the sediment retention characteristics at the
site. In addition, initial results of bottom current
-------
130
measurements indicate the presence of a measur-
able current with a velocity of sufficient magni-
tude to transport radioactive materials in solution
and adsorbed to sediments. Longer term mea-
surements must be taken to corroborate these
findings.
Of particular significance during the 1976 sur-
vey was the recovery of an 80 gallon radioactive
waste container from a depth of 2800m (9300
feet). Dumped approximately fifteen years ago,
the recovered package — which is a container
filled with concrete surrounding a smaller con-
tainer for the waste itself — appears to have
withstood the rigors of its immersion surprisingly
well. There appears to be limited surface corro-
sion and the concrete matrix seems to have
cured, becoming more durable although still
permeable.
Significant progress has been made in the envi-
ronmental assessment survey programs at both
the east and west coast dumpsites. The cumula-
tive results of individual dumpsite surveys will
provide the major part of the technical basis for
determining the feasibility of ocean disposal of
various categories of low-level radioactive wastes
in an environmentally acceptable manner. This
survey information will also be used in the prepa-
ration of a generic Environmental Impact State-
ment relative to any proposed revisions of the
ocean dumping regulations and criteria regarding
disposal of such low-level radioactive wastes.
Dose Assessment Program
Since 1975, EPA/ORP has been conducting a
nationwide dose assessment program to analyze
trends, identify problems and provide support for
establishing (and evaluating the implementation
of) environmental radiation standards and guides.
Major objectives of the program are to:
— determine the status of U.S. environmen-
tal radiation data,
— analyze the available data in terms of
individual and population doses,
— develop guidance for improving the col-
lection, interpretation and reporting of the data,
and
— provide information to guide EPA/ORP.
The general approach of the program is to
maximize the use of extensive effluent and envi-
ronmental monitoring data reported by other
State and Federal agencies, including ERDA and
NRC, and individual nuclear facilities. These data
will be complemented as needed by data ac-
quired from EPA/ORP's Environmental Radiation
Ambient Monitoring System (ERAMS), radiation
source-related field studies, and dose computa-
tional modeling. Only EPA/ORP gathers such a
comprehensive data base for radiation dose
assessment.
Environmental Radiation Ambient
Monitoring System (ERAMS)
ERAMS is an EPA/ORP program for continuing
surveillance of radioactivity levels throughout the
U.S. and its territories. Over 7,000 individual
analyses are performed annually on samples of
air, airborne particulates, deposition, surface and
drinking water, and milk. After samples are col-
lected by State and local health agencies, they are
analyzed at EPA/ORP's Eastern Environmental
Radiation Facility (EERF) at Montgomery, Ala-
bama. The present ERAMS emphasis is towards
identifying trends in the accumulation of
long-lived radionuclides in the environment.
Therefore, specific analyses are made for
uranium-234, uranium-238, plutonium-239,
carbon-14, tritium, strontium-90, and
krypton-85. Measurements are also made for
gross alpha and beta activity, and the gamma
emitters iodine-131, cesium-137, barium-140,
and potassium-40.
A quarterly summary of raw ERAMS data
(which includes a limited amount of surveillance
data from States) is reported in Environmental
Radiation Data.2 These quarterlies consist
mainly of data tabulations without interpretation
or discussion, and are reviewed annually in
EPA/ORP's report on the Radiological Quality of
the Environment. An in-depth analysis of ERAMS
-------
131
is being carried out to determine annual averages,
to identify trends, to characterize the statistical
distributions of data sets, to estimate individual
and population doses, and to evaluate error terms
for each of these determinations.
Radiological Quality of the Environment
As part of EPA's dose assessment program, the
Office of Radiation Programs initiated an annual
evaluation of the radiological quality of the envi-
ronment. The first report, in 1976, summarized
individual and population dose data for both
ionizing and nonionizing radiation, with primary
emphasis on identifying source categories of ion-
izing radiation.3 Sources in that category include
ambient environment, technologically enhanced
natural radiation, fallout, uranium fuel cycle, Fed-
eral facilities, medical, occupational, and others.
The nonionizing radiation category is mainly con-
cerned with environmental sources.
Literature searches have been conducted for
each of those sources, with data organized to
provide: general information about each source
category and availability of data, data base de-
scription, status of data base analyses, summary
of dose data for each source, comparison of
reported dose data with estimates from previous
publications, and discussion and conclusions.
Table 8.1 summarizes the individual and popu-
lation doses in the U.S. from each category of
radiation source discussed in the report. The
information is divided according to the primary
mode of exposure: external—which results in a
radiation dose to the whole body, or internal—
when radioactive materials are inhaled, ingested,
or occasionally absorbed through the skin, often
resulting in a radiation dose to particular organs of
the b'ody.
Population doses from the different source
categories can generally be added together to
gain a perspective on overall impact. However,
doses to individuals vary greatly, so it can be
misleading to total individual doses. For this rea-
son, the data show totals only for population
doses, not individual doses, in the various source
categories.
Facility Data Analysis Project
One object of EPA/ORP's dose assessment
program is improving the quality of surveillance
data. For this purpose, a facility data analysis
project was developed to evaluate the rationale
for surveillance programs and to examine their
components. Early phases of the project have
dealt with criteria for summarizing and using
ambient data, development of data analysis tech-
niques, dose conversion criteria, and the devel-
opment of a manual orrsampling methodology.
Information from these initial phases will be
used to evaluate surveillance programs at several
commercial and Federal nuclear facilities. These
reviews will aid in developing criteria for the
evaluation of surveillance programs and later will
lead to an updating of EPA/ORP's Environmental
Radiation Surveillance Guide.4
Dose Modeling
EPA/ORP continued its ongoing program to
develop exposure pathway models for estimating
individual and population doses from facility ef-
fluents. The emphasis is on long-term population
dose commitment and health risks. Two new
models were developed in 1976:
— RVDROS,5 a computer code to calculate
population doses from radioactive liquid efflu-
ents, and an application to nuclear power reac-
tors on the Mississippi River Basin; and
— AREAC,6 or Area Source Radiological
Emission Analysis Code, to calculate doses from
ground level area sources of radon and particu-
lates from tailings piles in the uranium and phos-
phate industries.
-------
Table 8.1
CO
ro
Summary of dose data from all sources, United States (2)
External
Internal
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
Uranium 238 series
Thorium 232 series
Technologically enhanced natural radiation
Ore mining and milling
Ui'anium mill tailings
Phosphate mining and processing
Thorium mining and milling
Radon in potable water supplies
Radon in natural gas
Radon in liquified petroluem gas
Radon in mines
Radon daughter exposure in natural caves
Radon and geothermal energy production
Radioactivity in construction material
Airplane travel
Jet (cosmic), per trip over Atlantic
SST (cosmic, per trip over Atlantic
Individual
dose
(mrem/y)
41-45
28-35
0.33-7
.035
30-95
17
13
25
Population Individual Population
dose dose dose
(person-rem/y) (mrem/y) (person-rem/y)
9.7x10°
9.2xl06
4.9xl05
0.04 9.2xlOc
.1
18-25
16
4x10 3
1
0.6
2-3
2.73x10°
100,000
a!40-14000 2.5-70000
C54
1-4
14,400
2.73x10'
30000
2.6
2.0
-------
Table 8.1
Summary of dose data from all sources, United States (2)
External
Source
Fallout
Uranium fuel cycle
Mining and milling
Fuel enrichment
Fuel fabrication
Power reactors BWR
PWR
Research reactors
Transportation - Nuclear power
Industry
Radioisotopes
Reprocessing and spent fuel
storage
Radioactive waste disposal
Federal Facilities
ERDA
Department of Defense
Accelerators
Radiopharmaceuticals
Medical radiation
X radiation
Cardiac pacemakers
Occupational and industrial radiation
BWR
PWR
All occupations
Internal
Individual
dose
(mrem/y)
f<0.1
3 76max
3 4 max
n6
. 1-358
<0.01
Jo. 04-4
L1230
r!080
S0.80
Population
dose
Individual
dose
(person-rem/y) (mrem/y)
2014
!564
k21
m 100-9600
n23
t480
<1-180
0.4-65
64.5xlO~2
§0.3
n!4-257
<5000
Population
dose
(person-rem/y)
2.5
10.64
L0.66
13. 3x10
u>
u>
-------
CO
Table 8.1
Summary of dose data from all sources, United States (2)
External
Sourcs
Consumer Products
Timepieces
Smoke detectors
Artificial teeth
TV
Internal
Individual
dose
(mrem/y)
Population Individual
dose dose
(person-rem/y) (mrem/y)
Population
dose
(person-rem/y)
U0.007
0.025-0.043
0.001
140-1390
Individual exposure
OiW/cm2)
Nonionizing electromagnetic radiation
Broadcast towers and airport radars
All sources
a Lung dose
b Lung-rem/y
c Trachea-bronchial dose
d 50-year dose commitment divided by 50
e Average individual lung dose within 80 km
f Maximum potential exposure per facility
g Maximum potential exposure
h Cumulative exposure per facility within 80 km radius
i Estimated bone dose within 80 km
j Fence line boundary dose
k Within a radius of 80 km
m Estimated for the year 1973
n For NFS Reprocessing Plant, West Valley, N.Y.
10
0.1-1
o Based upon data from 5 institutions
p Millirads/y (genetically significant dose)
q Estimated 1980 dose
r Average occupational exposure/y
s Average exposure for all occupations 6
3.7 radiation workers/1000 persons in
United States
t 1965 data
u Estimated
- = No dose data available
* Maximum individual dose to skin surface
** from digital watches
ftftft from time pieces containing tritium
or radium activated dials
O5cm from TV set; units of mR/h
-------
135
Radon Daughter Detection
EPA/ORP entered into an Interagency Agree-
ment with the Argonne National Laboratory (an
ERDA contractor) to design, develop, and fabri-
cate four systems to detect and evaluate environ-
mental radon daughter levels. They will
accurately and rapidly measure the WL and
radon daughter concentrations in air, with sensi-
tivity in a range of .001 to 10 WL. The method of
measurement will make no assumptions about
the radon daughter equilibrium; only constancy
of concentrations during the time of sampling
(three minutes) will be assumed.
Lifetime Somatic Risk Model
EPA/ORP has developed a model to assess the
'lifetime somatic effects of radiation exposure as
one of a number of competing risks, using a
lifetable approach. The model incorporates an-
nual radiation risks into a lifetable framework,
and can be used to measure the number of
radiation-induced cancer deaths in a population,
the reduction in life expectancy caused by radia-
tion exposure, and the average years of life lost to
affected individuals.
Effects of Low Level Radiation
ERDA sponsored the bulk of research on this
subject, including a project at the Oak Ridge
National Laboratory to provide more data on the
late effects of low dose rate gamma rays given
during the prenatal period. It is hoped that this
work (on mice) will help to resolve the scientific
controversy over the leukemogenic and carcino-
genic effects of low level radiation during fetal
life.
On a related subject, the National Cancer
Institute funded a Columbia University investiga-
tion of various biological effects of low level
radiation within the framework of biophysical
theory. Some of the effects under scrutiny include
carcinogenesis, cell transformation, chromosome
aberrations and genetic impairment.
The National Institute of Dental Research be-
gan an animal study of possible synergistic effects
between repeated low doses of known or sus-
pected chemical carcinogens and of radiation.
Designed to improve understanding of the effects
on the human mouth, the study should clarify
some of the mechanisms involved in the interac-
tion between dual exposures.
ERDA Studies on Bioeffects
ERDA is the major Federal sponsor of research
on the biological effects of ionizing radiation, and
was involved in projects covering an extremely
broad range of related subjects. Below are a few
examples, designed to show the variety of the
effort rather than represent it fully:
— ERDA continued annual assessment of the
243 Marshallese accidentally exposed to radio-
active fallout in 1954. Late effects observed in-
clude thyroid abnormalities in 30 of 86 of the
most exposed people.
— ERDA kept up U.S. sponsorship of studies
of the Japanese atomic bomb victims. Because
cancer has been found to be the major delayed
effect of their exposure, it has been the main
focus of investigation. Studies to detect, explore
and characterize changes in risk rates have
shown considerable variation over time.
— Funded by ERDA, the University of Utah
School of Medicine began compiling a computer-
readable, master file of all the data systematically
collected on experimental dogs in studies of the
toxicity of radionuclides. New data will probably
be generated for another fifteen to seventeen
years.
— Animal studies were conducted in 1976 at
the University of Chicago (with ERDA funds) to
identify and measure the harmful effects of radia-
tion during prenatal, postnatal and adult life.
Among the factors examined were the age at
which sensitivity is greatest, and ways of alleviat-
ing or preventing radiation damage.
-------
136
— To improve estimates, of risk to human
populations exposed to various types and rates of
radiation, ERDA funded a project to study late
somatic effects in mammals with a life expec-
tancy between that of lab rodents and people.
Experiments with swine and cattle were com-
pleted, but burros are still being studied.
— ERDA funded a study by the Argonne
National Laboratory to provide basic data for
evaluating the hazard to people from exposure to
radionuclides deposited within the body.
Dose-response information has been collected in
relation to differences in both radiation character-
istics and species irradiated.
Quality Assurance
Because EPA/ORP's dose assessment program
relies heavily on surveillance data reported by
other agencies and groups, their validity must be
confirmed. EPA/ORP therefore operates a Radia-
tion Quality Assurance Program through its Envi-
ronmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory in
Las Vegas. The two major activities of the pro-
gram are the distribution of calibrated radionu-
clide solutions, and laboratory intercomparisons
for the analysis of radionuclides in environmental
media. This program is available to all Federal,
State, local, and private laboratories.
In 1976, EPA and NRC entered into an Intera-
gency Agreement which provides formally for the
participation of NRC licensees and their contrac-
tor laboratories in the EPA/ORP intercomparison
programs. Eventually, NRC will require that all
licensees participate in such a quality assurance
program.
In 1976, there was considerable interest in the
measurement of naturally-occurring radioactive
nuclides in various media. To help validate the
data from different analyses, the Quality Assur-
ance Branch has added a number of items to its
list of calibrated materials, including members of
the uranium-235 and -238 series, thorium ore,
uranium mill tailings and radium-containing soil.
ERDA's Health Services Laboratory in Idaho Falls
assisted in the calibration of these materials. Man-
cos shale from Grand Junction, Colorado, has
also been characterized for content of
radium-226 and radium-228 by the National Bu-
reau of Standards. All these materials are now
available for use by Federal, State, local, and
private laboratories for their monitoring and en-
forcement activities. They are suitable for instru-
ment calibration and standardization, for
measurement of chemical yields, and for labora-
tory internal quality control uses.
Extensive laboratory intercomparison studies
involving various environmental media and a
number of radionuclides were conducted to help
environmental radiation laboratories improve
their measurements. Radionuclide concentra-
tions in these studies are generally at or some-
what above current ambient radionuclide
concentrations. The kinds of these intercompari-
son analyses, their frequency, and the number of
laboratories participating are presented in Table
8.2.
Because krypton-85 caused increasing con-
cern in 1976, it has been added to the analyses
available. It is one of the few fission products
released to the environment in fuel reprocessing,
and, since it is a noble gas, krypton-85 remains in
the atmosphere and has become distributed
worldwide, in small but measureable
concentrations.
Two reports were issued in 1976 describing
activities of the Quality Assurance Program:
Radioactivity Standards Distribution Program, FY
1977? and The Status and Quality of Radiation
Measurements in Water*
-------
737
Table 8.2
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY INTERCOM?ARISON PROGRAM - 1976
Type of cross-check Number per year Laboratories participating
Gamma* in water 6 78
Tritium in water 6 81
Nuclides** in milk 6 67
Gross alpha and gross
beta in water 6 74
Radium-226 in water 4 38
Nuclides*** on air filters 4 64
Nuclides** in diet 4 25
Tritium in urine 4 15
Krypton-85 in air 3 17
*60Co, 106Ru, 13t*Cs, 137Cs, 51Cr, 65Zn
**89Sr, 9°Sr, 131I, l*^ 137Cs> and 40K
***Gross alpha, gross beta, 90Sr, 137Cs
-------
138
REFERENCES
1. "Ocean Dumping, Proposed Revision of Regulations and Criteria." EPA: 41 F.R. 26644 (June 28,
1976).
2. Environmental Radiation Data is available from: Environmental Protection Agency, Eastern Envi-
ronmental Radiation Facility, P.O. Box 3009, Montgomery, Alabama 36109. Each quarterly
summary must be requested separately as a mailing list is not being prepared.
3. Radiological Quality of the Environment. EPA: EPA-520/1-76-010 (1976).
4. "Environmental Radiation Surveillance Guide." EPA: ORP/SID 72-2 (1972).
5. Martin, J.A., jr.; Robbins, C; Nelson, C.B.; Cousins, R.D., Jr.; and M.A. Culliton. A Computer
Code (RVRDOS) to Calculate Population Doses from Radioactive Liquid Effluents and an Application
to Nuclear Power Reactors on the Mississippi River Basin. E PA: ORP/ EAD-76-4 (October 1976).
6. Martin, J.A.; Nelson, C.B.; and P.A. Cuny. AIREM Program Manual: A Computer Code for
Calculating Doses, Population Doses and Ground Depositions Due to Atmospheric Emissions of
Radionuclides. EPA: EPA-520/1-74-004. (May 1974).
7. Ziegler, L.H. Radioactivity Standards Distribution Program, FY 1977. EPA: EPA-600/4-76-053
(October 1976).
8. Jarvis, A.N.; Smiecinski, R.F.; and D.C. Easterly. The Status and Quality of Radiation Measure-
ments of Water. EPA: EPA-600/4-76-017 (April 1976).
Below are publication numbers for relevant items cited in Appendix B.
EPA Technical Reports: 600/4-75-008
EPA Authored Reports: See Duncan
BRH Technical Publications: FDA 77-8008
-------
APPENDIX A
SUMMARY OF LAWS ENACTED BY STATES DURING 1976
The following is a summary of laws relating to the nuclear regulatory program which were enacted by the
States during the 1976 legislative session, compiled by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
RADIATION CONTROL
GEORGIA HB-1907. Abolishes the Radiation Control Council and designates the Department of Human
Resources as the State radiation control agency. (Signed by Governor 4/7/76)
IOWA HB-1281. Creates an Interagency Coordinating Council on Radiation Safety to develop a State
radiation safety program plan. (Signed by Governor 5/13/7.6)
KENTUCKY HB-499. An amendatory act expanding the functions of the Department of Energy to include
development of a process for regulating the siting of energy facilities, and directing the
Department of Human Resources to 1) monitor radioactive waste material sites, and 2)
"provide for the licensing of the possession or use of any radiation source and the
transportation, handling, and disposal of radioactive waste." (Signed by Governor
3/30/76)
MARYLAND HB-1634. Transfers to the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene the radiation control
responsibilities formerly vested in the Board of Health. (Signed by Governor 5/17/76)
MISSISSIPPI SB-2229. Establishes a State-wide radiation protection program and designates the State Board
of Health as the agency to administer it. (Signed by Governor 5/25/76)
RHODE ISLAND HB-7459. Designates the Department of Health as the State radiation control agency.
Creates a State Radiation Advisory Commission as a separate division of the agency.
(Signed by Governor 5/28/76)
TENNESSEEHB-1473. Authorizes the Commissioner of Public Health to require certain classes of licensees
who use, store or handle radioactive materials to post a performance bond and to
contribute to a perpetual care trust fund. (Signed by Governor 3/12/76)
VIRGINIA HB-488. Provides for the posting of bond by certain licensees handling radioactive materials and
the creation of a Radioactive Material Perpetual Care Trust Fund into which licensees
would make payments on an annual basis. (Signed by Governor 4/10/76)
NUCLEAR STUDIES
CALIFORNIA AB-2820. No new nuclear power plant shall be permitted land use in California until the State
Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission makes a finding that the
Federal Government "has identified and approved, and there exists a technology for the
construction and operation of, nuclear reprocessing plants." (Signed by Governor
6/3/76)
-------
CALIFORNIA AB-2821. No new nuclear power plant shall be permitted land use in California until the State
Energy Commission completes a study of the necessity for and effectiveness and
economic feasibility of undergrounding and berm containment of nuclear reactors.
(Signed by Governor 6/3/76)
CALIFORNIA AB-2822. No new nuclear power plant shall be permitted land use in California until the State
Energy Commission certifies that the Federal Government has approved and there exists
a demonstrated technology or means for the disposal of high-level nuclear waste.
(Signed by Governor 6/3/76)
IDAHO SCR-132. Authorizes the Legislative Council to appoint a committee to undertake a study of energy
development in Idaho. (Adopted 3/18/76)
KENTUCKY HR-)'00. Directs the Legislative Research Commission to study the effects of radioactive waste
disposal in Kentucky and publish its findings by October 1,1977. (Adopted 3/30/76)
LOUISIANA SCR-18. Directs the Division of Radiation Control to study the facts and circumstances
surrounding the construction and use of nuclear reactors within and in proximity of
Louisiana and report its findings by 1 /18/77. (Signed by Governor 7/30/76)
LOUISIANA SCR-56. Authorizes a Joint Legislative Committee to undertake an indepth study of the
feasibility and ramifications of underground salt dome storage of wastes and to report its
findings by 3/18/77. (Adopted 7/26/76)
MASSACHUSETTS HB-3161. Extends through 1976 the existence of a special committee of the General
Court which was established in 1974 to study the health and safety effects of nuclear
power. (Adopted 2/3/76)
PENNSYLVANIA SCR-238. Directs the Joint State Government Commission to study the entire issue of
energy facility siting and report its findings, along with draft legislation, to the General
Assembly by 5/1/77. (Adopted 6/29/76)
TENNESSEE SJR-162. Directs the legislative Joint Task Force on Energy to continue its study on the use,
production and conservation of energy. (Adopted 3/28/76)
ENERGY AGENCIES
CONNECTICUT HB-5825, HB-5897, HB-5898. Amendatory laws expanding the activities and hearing
requirements of the Power Facilities Evaluation Council. (Signed by Governor 6/4/76)
GEORGIA HB-1698. Establishes, within the Office of Planning and Budget, the Georgia Office of Energy
Resources, which will absorb the functions of the former State Energy Office. (Signed by
Governor 4/9/76)
IOWA HB-1371. Extends the life of the Energy Policy Council to June 30, 1979. (Sighed by Governor
6/20/76)
NEW YORK SB-9715A. Creates a State Energy Office to administer all energy programs of the Federal
Government, other than those conducted by NYSERDA. Abolishes the Atomic Energy
-------
Council and transfers its functions to the new Energy Office. (Signed by Governor
7/26/76)
NEW YORK SB-10719. Creates within the State Energy Office an Energy Advisory Council. (Signed by
Governor 7/26/76)
PENNSYLVANIA SB-1219. Establishes within the PUC a Bureau of Conservation, Economics and Energy
Planning to conduct energy-related studies and research. (Signed by Governor 7/9/76)
WASHINGTON SB-3172. Creates a State Energy Office to serve as the official State energy responsible for
coordination of energy-related activities. Redesignates the Thermal Power Plant Site
Evaluation Council as the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council. (Signed by Governor
3/19/76)
JOINT AGREEMENTS
ARIZONA HB-2340. Authorizes districts to enter into joint agreements for the purpose of acquiring or
assuring a supply of energy resources including "uranium and nuclear materials."
(Signed by Governor 6/7/76)
COLORADOSB-61. Authorizes Colorado municipalities to contract with municipalities of adjoining States
to form power authorities. (Signed by Governor 5/7/76)
VIRGINIA SB-166. Authorizes political subdivisions to join together in the creation of an electric authority
for the purposes of providing for energy needs. (Signed by Governor 4/12 / 76)
WASHINGTON SB-3129. Permits rural electric cooperatives to participate in the development of nuclear
and other power facilities. (Signed by Governor 3/4/76)
SITING
CALIFORNIA AB-2820,2821,2822. Imposes restrictions on siting. (See Nuclear Studies)
FLORIDA SB-659. The Department of Environmental Regulation is responsible for electric power plant site
certifications. Certification by the board, consisting of the Governor and cabinet,
constitutes the sole license of the State. (Signed by Governor 6/8/76)
GEORGIA SR-123. Creates a Power Plant Siting Study Committee to "develop proposed legislation to
streamline the laws and regulations applicable to power plant siting in this State."
(Adopted 1/21/76)
IOWA HB-1470. A single certificate from the Iowa State Commerce Commission is required for the siting
and construction of electric power facilities. (Signed by Governor 5/20/76)
KANSAS SB-60. Requires a permit from the State Corporation Commission prior to commencing site
preparation and construction of, or addition to, an electric generating facility. (Signed by
Governor 3/31/76)
-------
KENTUCKYSR-28. Memorializes the Congress and President to consider very carefully the total impact of
nuclear power plant construction on the Ohio River. (Adopted 2/20/76)
KENTUCKY HB-499. The Department of Energy is to develop a process for regulating the siting of energy
facilities. (Signed by Governor 3/30/76)
TRANSPORTATION
CONNECTICUT HB-5908. Prohibits the transport of radioactive materials into or through the State without
a certificate of transport from the Commissioner of Transportation. (Signed by Governor
6/1/76)
ILLINOIS HB-1815. State Department of Transportation is to develop a legislative program regulating the
transportation of hazardous materials through the State. (Signed by Governor 8/26/76)
IOWA HB-736. Requires that the police be notified when an accident occurs involving the transportation of
hazardous materials. (Signed by Governor 2/20/76)
MARYLAND HJR-23. State Departments of Transportation, Health and Mental Hygiene and Natural
Resources are to .formulate recommendations for consolidating into one agency the
authority to regulate and supervise the transporting of hazardous materials through
Maryland. (Signed by Governor 5/4/76)
NEW YORK AB-7761B. Grants Department of Transportation authority to regulate the transportation of
radioactive materials. (Signed by Governor 7/21 /76)
DISPOSAL OF NUCLEAR WASTES
*
CALIFORNIA AB-2822. Energy Commission must certify that there exists a demonstrated technology or
means for the disposal of nuclear wastes. (See Nuclear Studies)
HA WAIISR-68. Expresses concern over the disposal of radioactive wastes in the Pacific Ocean 600 miles
north of Hawaii. Requests the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to halt any plans
for undersea disposal until their safety is "proven beyond any shadow of doubt."
(Adopted 4/5/76)
KENTUCKY HB-838. Levies an excise tax of ten cents per pound to be paid by the processor, on all
radioactive waste material delivered to Kentucky for processing, packaging, storage,
disposal, or burial. (Signed by Governor 3/30/76)
NEW JERSEY SB-1493. Regulates the disposal of hazardous wastes by prohibiting any solid waste facility
within two miles of a river flood hazard area or a major aquifer. (Signed by Governor
10/7/76)
-------
LEGEND
AB — Assembly Bill
HB — House Bill
SB — Senate Bill
HR — House Resolution
HJR — House Joint Resolution
SR — Senate Resolution
HCR — House Concurrent Resolution
SCR — Senate Concurrent Resolution
SJR — Senate Joint Resolution
-------
APPENDIX B
List of Radiation Protection Publications - 1976
EPA PUBLICATIONS
EPA Technical Reports
520/3-75-021 Preliminary Data On The Occurrence of Trans-Uranium Nuclides In The
Environment At The Radioactive Waste Burial Site, Maxey Flats, Kentucky
520/3-75-023 Transportation Accident Risks In The Nuclear Power Industry 1975-2000
520/1-76-001 Potential Radiological Impact of Airborne Releases And Direct Gamma Radiation To
Individuals Living Near Inactive Uranium Mill Tailings Piles
520/4-76-002 Recommendations On Guidance For Diagnostic X-Ray Studies In Federal Health
Care Facilities
520/5-76-003 Radiological Surveillance Studies At The Oyster Creek BWR Nuclear Generating
Station
520/7-76-004 Radiation Protection Activities - 1975
520/5-76-005 Radionuclide Accumulation In A Reactor Cooling Lake
520/7-76-007 ORP Program Statement
520/2-76-008 An Examination Of Electric Fields'Llnder EHV Overhead Power Transmission Lines
520/3-76-009 Reactor Safety Study (WASH-1400): A Review Of The Final Report
520/1-76-010 Radiological Quality Of The Environment
520/3-76-011 Significant Actinide And Daughter Activities From The HTGR Fuel Cycle
520/4-76-012 Recommendations On Guidance For Technic To Reduce Unnecessary Exposure
From X-Ray Studies In Federal Health Care Facilities
520/4-76-013 Health Effects Of Alpha-Emitting Particles In The Respiratory Tract
520/5-76-014 Radiation Dose Estimates To Phosphate Industry Personnel
520/5-76-015 Air Pathway Exposure Model Validation Study At The Monticello Nuclear Generating
Plant
-------
520/4-76-016A Environmental Radiation Protection Requirements For Normal Operations Of
Activities In The Uranium Fuel Cycle, Volume I
520/4-76-016B Environmental Radiation Protection Requirements For Normal Operations Of
Activities In The Uranium Fuel Cycle, Volume II
520/4-76-017 Environmental Analysis Of The Uranium Fuel Cycle
520/4-76-018 A Preliminary Evaluation Of The Control Of Indoor Radon Daughter Levels In New
Structures
520/4-76-019 Federal Guidance Report No. 9: Radiation Protection Guidance For Diagnostic
X-Rays
520/5-76/020 Radiological Measurement At The Maxey Flats Radioactive Waste Burial Site - 1974
to 1975
600/4-76-027 Radioactive Prediction Model for Nuclear Tests
600/4-76-035 Factors Affecting the Use of CaF2:Mn Thermoluminescent Dosimeters for Low-Level
Environmental Radiation Monitoring
EPA Authored Reports
Allis, J.W.; Blackman, C.F.; Fromme, M.L.; and S.G. Benane. Measurement of microwave radiation
absorbed by biological systems: I. Analysis of heating and cooling data. Accepted for
publication in the Proceedings of the 1976 Annual Meeting of the United States National
Committee, International Union of Radio Science, Amherst, Mass. (October 11-16, 1976).
Berman, E. Teratologic and mutagenic studies on mice and rats exposed to microwave radiation of
2.45 GHz CW radiation at 3.5, 7, or 14 mW/cm2 and of 9 GHz pulsed radiation having a
duty cycle of 0.001 at 3 or 10 mW/cm2 mean power density. Office of Telecommuni-
cations Policy, Fourth Report on Programs for Control of Electromagnetic Pollution of the
Environment: The Assessment of Biological Hazards of Nonionizing Electromagnetic
Radiation (June 1976), pages D8-9.
Blackman, C.F., and J.A. Black. Measurement of microwave radiation absorbed by biological systems.
II. Analysis by Dewar-flask calorimetry. Accepted for publication in Proceedings (see Allis
above).
Blanchard, R.L. Data Interpretation. Southeastern Workshop on the Utilization and Interpretation of
Environmental Radiation Data, Orlando, Florida (March 1-3, 1976).
Brinck, W.L.; Gross, K.C.; Blanchard, R.L.; and B. Kahn. National Radiation Measurements for
Environmental Surveillance at Nuclear Power Stations. Tenth Midyear Topical Symposium of
the Health Physics Society, Saratoga Springs, N.Y. (October 11-13, 1976).
-------
Blanchard, R.L. Potential Environmental Impacts Associated with the Disposal of Low-Level Waste.
Seminar on Solid Radioactive Waste Storage in the U.S., sponsored by the Health Physics
Society Bluegrass Chapter, Mammoth Cave National Park (September 17-18, 1976).
Cahill, D.F., et al. Biological assessment of continuous exposure to tritium and lead in the rat.
Proceedings of the IAEA International Symposium on Biological Effects of Low Level
Radiation Pertinent to Protection of Man and His Environment, Chicago (1976).
Duncan, D.L.; Gesell, T.F.; and R.H. Johnson. Rn-222 in Potable Water. Tenth Midyear Topical
Symposium of the Health Physics Society, Saratoga Springs, New York (October 11-13,
1976).
Dyer, R.S. Environmental Surveys of Two Deepsea Radioactive Waste Sites Using Submersibles. IAEA
Symposium on the Management of Radioactive Wastes from the Nuclear Fuel Cycle,
Vienna (March 22-26, 1976).
Elder, J.A. Cytogenetic and immunological studies of microwave irradiated animals and cells in vitro.
Office of Telecommunications Policy, Fourth Report on Program for Control of
Electromagnetic Pollution of the Environment: The Assessment of Biological Hazards of
Nonionizing Electromagnetic Radiation (June 1976), pages D25-27.
Fitzgerald, J.E. Radioactivity in the Copper Ore Mining and Dressing Industry. Tenth Midyear Topical
Symposium of the Health Physics Society, Saratoga Springs, New York (October 11-13,
1976).
Fitzgerald, J.E., and R.J. Guimond. A Preliminary Evaluation of the Control of Indoor Radon Daughter
Levels in New Structures Due to Emanation Through the Foundation. Tenth Midyear Topical
Symposium of the Health Physics Society, Saratoga Springs, New York (October. 11-13,
1976).
Gage, M.I. Effects of single exposures to 2450 MHz microwave irradiation on rat behavior. In
Proceedings (see Allis above).
Gruhlke, J.M. Pressurized Water Reactor Effluent Discharge Trends in the United States. American
Nuclear Society Annual Meeting, Toronto, Canada (June 14-18, 1976).
Guimond, R.J. The Radiological Impact of the Phosphate Industry - A Federal Perspective. 8th Annual
National Conference on Radiation Control, Springfield, Illinois (May 2-7, 1976).
Guimond, R.J. Radiation and the Phosphate Industry-An Overview. Tenth Midyear Topical
Symposium of the Health Physics Society, Saratoga Springs, New York (October 11-13,
1976).
Guimond, R.J. The Radiological Implications of Increased Coal Utilization. Tenth Midyear Topical
Symposium of the Health Physics Society, Saratoga Springs, New York (October 11-13,
1976).
Holcomb, W.F. International Disposal Techniques for Other-Than-High-Level Solid Radioactive
Wastes. Pollution Engineering £29-32 (1976).
-------
Huang, AT.; Engle, M.E.; and J.A. Elder. Lymphocyte transformation induced by microwave
radiation. Accepted for publication in the Proceedings (see Allis above).
Janes, D.E. "EPA's Nonionizing Radiation Program," presented at Electronic Industries Association
Engineering Department Executive Committee Meeting, Washington, D.C. (March 23,
1967).
Janes, D.E. "Environmental Levels of Nonionizing Radiation: Models and Measurements," Washington
Regional Electromagnetic Bioeffects Seminar, Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute,
National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, Md. (May 4, 1976).
Janes, D.E. "EPA Environmental Electromagnetic Radiation Measurements Program," presented at
Association of Federal Communications Consulting Engineers Meeting, Washington, D.C.
(May 20, 1976).
Janes, D.E. "Background Information on Extra-High-Voltage Overhead Electric Transmission Lines,"
EPA, Silver Spring, Md. 20910 (April 1976).
Janes, D.E.; Tell, R.A.; Athey, T.W.; and N.N. Hankin. Radiofrequency Radiation Levels in Urban
Area. Accepted for publication in Proceedings (see Allis above).
Kaufmann, R.F.; Gregory, G.E.; and C.R. Russell. Effects of Uranium Mining and Milling on Ground
Water in the Grants Mineral Belt, New Mexico. Ground Water 74:296-308 (1976).
Kinn, J.B. Whole body dosimetry of small animals: The effect of weight and exposure geometry.
Accepted for publication in the Proceedings (see Allis above).
Kirk, W.P.; Ostby, J.S.; Rehnberg, B.F.; and J.F. Wright. Effects of inhalation exposure to Kr-85 on
the cellular components of peripheral blood. Abstract in Radiation Research 67:623-624
(1976). Presented at Twenty-fourth Annual Meeting of the Radiation Research Society, San
Francisco, Cal. (June 27-July 2, 1976).
Laskey, J.W. and S.J. Bursian. Some effects of chronic tritium exposure during selected ages in the
rat. Radiation Research 67:314-323 (1976).
Martin, J.E. Federal Guidance on Medical X Rays. 8th Annual National Conference on Radiation
Control, Springfield, Illinois (May 2-7, 1976).
McRee, D.I., et al. Effects of nonionizing radiation on the central nervous system, behavior and
blood. A progress report. Presented at the Second US/USSR Environmental Health
Symposium, Florida (December 6-12, 1976). To be submitted to Environmental Health
Perspectives.
Meyer, L.G. Recent Experience with the Land Burial of Solid Low-Level Radioactive Wastes.
Presented at IAEA Symposium on Management of Radioactive Wastes from the Nuclear
Fuel Cycle, Vienna (March 22-26, 1976).
Phillips, J.W.; Gual, G.A.; and Mary K. Barrick. Determination of Design Bases Noble Gas Source
Term and Release Trends from BWR's in the United States. American Nuclear Society
Meeting, Toronto, Canada (June 14-18, 1976).
-------
Rehnberg, B.F.; Kirk, W.P.; Ostby, J.S.; and J.F. Wright. Effects of acute exposure to Kr-85 in beta-
infinite cloud geometry: Results of median-lethality studies in guinea pigs, rats, and Chinese
hamsters. Abstract in Radiation Reserach 67:627 (1976). Presented at Twenty-fourth Annual
Meeting of the Radiation Research Society, San Francisco, Cal. (June 27-July 2, 1976).
Richardson, A.C.B. EPA's Role in the Control of Airborne Effluents from Fuel Cycle Plants. Presented
at American Nuclear Society and the American Institute of Chemical Engineering Meeting,
Idaho (August 5-6, 1976).
Rowe, W.D. Report on Federal Radiation Protection Activities. 8th Annual National Conference on
Radiation Control, Springfield, Illinois (May 2-7, 1976).
Rowe, W.D. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Views on Transportation of Radioactive
Materials. American Nuclear Society Annual Meeting, Toronto, Canada (June 14-18, 1976).
Rowe, W.D. EPA's Functions in Radioactive Waste Management. International Symposium on the
Management of Wastes from the LWR Fuel Cycle, Denver, Colorado (July 11-16, 1976).
Russell, John L. Potential Environmental Advantages from Partitioning of Radioactive Waste. Presented
at "NRC Technical Workshop on Waste Partitioning as an Alternative in the Management
of Radioactive Waste," Seattle, Washington (June 6-8, 1976).
Smialowicz, R.J. Chronic microwave irradiation and its effects on lymphocyte function: A preliminary
study. Presentation to the Electromagnetic Radiation Management Advisory Council
(ERMAQ, Washington, D.C. (December 15, 1976).
Tell, R.A. and D.E. Janes. Broadcast Radiation: A Second Look. Presented at the 1975 Annual
Meeting of the United States National Committee, International Union of Radio Science,
Boulder, Colorado (October 20-23, 1975).
Tell, R.A.; Hankin, N.N.; Nelson, J.C.; Athey, T.W.; and D.E. Janes. An Automated Measurement
System for Determining Environmental Radiofrequency Field Intensities: II, Measurement for
the Safe Use of Radiation, ed., S.P Fivosinsky, National Bureau of Standards Special
Publication 456, pp. 203-213, Washington, D.C.
Weil, C.M. Use of mathematical models in nonionizing radiation. Proceedings of the Conference on
Environmental Modeling and Simulation, Cincinnati, Ohio, pp. 186-190 (April 19-22,
1976).
EPA Technical Notes
ORP/CSD 76-1 A Statistical Analysis Of The Projected Performance Of Multi-Unit Reactor Sites
ORP/CSD 76-2 Estimate of the Cancer Risk Due to Nuclear-Electric Power Generation
ORP/EAD 76-1 Radiation Characteristics Of Traffic Radar Systems
ORP/EAD 76-2 A Measurement Of RF Field Intensities In The Vicinity Of An FM Broadcast Station
Antenna
-------
ORP/EAD 76-3 Radioactive Isotopic Characterization of the Environment Near Wiscasset, Maine
Using Pre and Post-Operational Surveys in the Vicinity of the Maine Yankee
Nuclear Reactor
ORP/EAD 76-4 A Computer Code (RVRDOS) to Calculate Population Doses from Radioactive
Liquid Effluents and an Application to Nuclear Power Reactors on the Mississippi
River Basin
ORP/EAD 76-6 Area Source Radiological Emission Analysis Code (AREAC)
ORP/LV 75-8A Radioactivity Associated with Geothermal Waters in the Western United States-
Basic Data
ORP/LV 76-1 Radiation Survey in Beatty, Nevada, And Surrounding Area
ORP/LV 76-2 Parameters For Estimating The Uptake Of Transuranic Elements By Terrestrial Plants
ORP/LV 76-3 Review Of State Licenses For Disposal Of Low-Level Radioactive Waste By Shallow
Land Burial
*
ORP/LV 76-4 Report Of Ambient Outdoor Radon And Indoor Radon Progeny Concentrations
During November 1975 At Selected Locations In The Grants Mineral Belt, New
Mexico
ORP/LV 76-5 Evaluation Of Sample Collection And Analysis Techniques For Environmental
Plutonium
ORP/LV 76-7 Environmental And Safety Aspects Of Alternative Nuclear Power Technologies
Fusion Power Systems
ORP/LV 76-9 Sampling and Data Reporting Considerations for Airborne Paniculate Radioactivity
ORP/TAD 76-1 Determination Of Radium Removal Efficiencies In Iowa Water Supply Treatment
Processes
ORP/TAD 76-2 Determination Of Radium Removal Efficiencies In Illinois Water Supply Treatment
Processes For Small And Large Populations
ORP/TAD 76-3 Public Health Considerations Of Carbon-14 Discharges From The Light-Water-
Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Industry
ORP/TAD 76-4 Available Methods Of Solidification For Low-Level Radioactive Wastes In The
United States
ORP/TAD 76-5 Determination Of Radium Removal Efficiency In Water Treatment Processess
-------
Environmental Radiation Data
EPA, Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility
Montgomery, Alabama 36109
Report 5 July 1976 (January, February and March Data)
Report 6 October 1976 (April, May and June Data)
Report 7 January 1977 (July, August and September Data)
Report 8 April 1977 (October, November and December Data)
BRH TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS
FDA 76-8024 BRH Publications Index (PB 251 240/AS, $9.00)
FDA 76-8025 The Clinical Testing of Male Gonad Shields (PB 250 753/AS, $4.00)
FDA 76-8026 Seventh Annual .National Conference on Radiation Control - Assuring Protection
(GPO 017-015-00097-4, $4.40) (PB 251 344/AS, mf only)
FDA 76-8027 The Use of Electron Linear Accelerators in Medical Radiation Therapy: Physical
Characteristics (GPO 017-015-00098-2, $1.75) (PB 253 605/AS, $5.50)
FDA 76-8028 BRH Routine Compliance Testing for Cabinet X-Ray Systems (PB 253 916/AS,
$4.50)
FDA 76-8029 Tabulated Values of Accessible Emission Limits for Laser Products (PB 254 254/AS,
$4.50)
FDA 76-8030 Organ Doses in Diagnostic Radiology (GPO 017-015-00102-4, $1.95)
(PB 255 363/AS, mf only)
FDA 76-8031 Handbook of Selected Organ Doses for Projections Common in Diagnostic Radiology
(GPO 017-015-00109-1, $0.75) (PB 257 482/AS, mf only)
FDA 76-8033 Applications of Iodine in Nuclear Medicine - Proceedings of a Conference
(GPO 017-015-00091-1, $2.10) (PB 254 223/AS, mf only)
FDA 76-8034 Gonad Doses and Genetically Significant Dose from Diagnostic Radiology: U.S., 1964
and 1970 (GPO 017-015-00100-8, $1.30) (PB 254 173/AS, mf only)
FDA 76-8035 Regulations for the Administration and Enforcement of the Radiation Control for
Health and Safety Act of 1968 (GPO 017-012-00233-1, $0.90)
FDA 76-8036 Quality Control Practices for Compliance with the Federal Laser Product Performance
Standard. (PB 254 249/AS, $4.00) ,
-------
8
FDA 76-8037 National Conference on Measurements of Laser Emissions for Regulatory Purposes
FDA 76-8039 Workshop Manual for Quality Control of Scintillation Cameras in Nuclear Medicine
(GPO 017-015-00104-1, $1.55) (PB 255 362/AS, mf only)
FDA 76-8040 Laser Products—Federal Requirements for Manufacturers (GPO 017-015-00101-6,
$0.35)
FDA 76-8042 Dental Exposure Normalization Technique "DENT" Instruction Manual
(PB 256 678/AS, $4.50)
FDA 76-8043 Photographic Quality Assurance in Diagnostic Radiology, Nuclear Medicine, and
Radiation Therapy (GPO 017-015-00107-5, $1.75) (PB 255 973/AS, mf only)
FDA 76-8044 Radiopharmaceutical Dosimetry Symposium (GPO 017-015-00108-3, $6.20)
(PB 257 572/AS, mf only)
FDA 76-8045 A Pilot Study of Nuclear Medicine Through the Medically Oriented Date System
(GPO 017-015-00106-7, $0.75) (PB 256 029/AS, mf only)
FDA 76-8046 Quality Control for Scintillation Cameras (GPO 017-015-00105-9, $1.15)
(PB 255 892/AS, mf only)
FDA 76-8048 Radiation Protection During Medical X-Ray Examinations - Part 4, Biological Effects
of X Rays (National Audiovisual Center (GSA), Washington, D.C. 20409, $48.00)
FDA 76-8049 Radiation Protection During Medical X-Ray Examinations - Part 5, Gonad Shielding in
Diagnostic Radiology (National Audiovisual Center (GSA), Washington, D.C. 20409,
$39.00)
FDA 76-8051 Directory of Personnel Responsible for Radiological Health Programs
FDA 76-8052 Nationwide Evaluation of X-Ray Trends (GPO 017-015-00110-5, $0.35)
FDA 76-8054 Specific Area Gonad Shielding - Recommendation for Use on Patients During
Diagnostic X-Ray Procedures (GPO 017-015-00111-3, $0.45) (PB 258 039/AS,
mf only)
FDA 76-8055 Diagnostic Ultrasound: A Review of Clinical Applications and the State of the Art of
Commerical and Experimental Systems (GPO 017-015-00112-1, $1.45)
(PB 258 237/AS, mf only)
FDA 76-8056 CSU-FDA Collaborative Radiological Health Laboratory Annual Report 1975
(PB 257 937/AS, $6.75, $3.00 mf)
FDA 76-8058 Quadrennial Report of the Division of Biological Effects (PB 258 436/AS $6.75)
FDA 76-8061 Uranium in.Dental Porcelain (GPO 017-015-00113-0, $1.00)
FDA 77-8001 BRH Routine Compliance Testing for Diagnostic X-Ray Systems
-------
FDA 77-8002 Symposium on Biological Effects and Measurement of Light Sources
(GPO 017-015-000114-8, $3.30)
FDA 77-8003 First Image Recepter Conference: Film/Screen Combinations
(GPO 017-015-000115-6, $2.50)
FDA 77-8004 Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation: An Overview
t
FDA 77-8005 Report of State and Local Radiological Health Programs, Fiscal Year 1975
(PB 259 947/AS, $4.50)
FDA 77-8006 Nationwide Evaluation of X-Ray Trends: Organ Dose Index System-Instruction
Manual
FDA 77-8007 Radiation Safety Handbook for Ionizing & Nonionizing Radiation
(GPO 017-015-00116-4, $1.70) (PB 262 109/AS, mf'only)
FDA 77-8008 Imports - Radiation-Producing Electronic Products
FDA 77-8009 Comparison of Radiation Exposures from Panoramic Dental X-Ray Units
FDA 77-8010 Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Waves - Selected Papers of the USNC/URSI
Annual Meeting - Volume 1
FDA 77-8011 Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Waves - Selected Papers of the USNC/URSI
Annual Meeting - Volume 2
1976 Annual Report Administration of the Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act of 1968 Public
Law 90-602 April 1, 1977
ERDA PUBLICATIONS
ERDA Technical Reports
ERDA-76-29 ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND THE ERDA FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH
CENTERS: A RECOMMENDED COMPLEMENTARY PROGRAM. (Interim Report.)
Oct. 1975 NTIS $7.50 AES/Div. of Biomedical & Environmental Research (Prepared
by Greenfield, Attaway & Tyler, Inc.)
ERDA-76-43 ALTERNATIVES FOR MANAGING WASTES FROM REACTORS AND POST-FISSION
OPERATIONS IN THE LWR FUEL CYCLE. Vol. 1 - Summary $7.50; Vol. 2 -
Alternatives for Waste Treatment $12.75; Vol. 3 - Alternatives for Interim Storage
and Transportation $9.00; Vol. 4 - Alternatives for Waste Isolation and Disposal
$8.00; Vol. 5 - Appendices $9.25; May 1976 NTIS, H. Soule, 353-3253 ANE/Div.
of Nuclear Fuel Cycle & Production
ERDA-76-45-1 OCCUPANCY USE READINESS MANUAL: SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS. (SSDC-1)
Apr. 1976 NTIS $4.00 R. Eicher, 353-5601
-------
10
ERDA-76-45-2
ERDA-76-45-7
ERDA-76-70
ERDA-76-73
ERDA-76-83
ERDA-76-89
ERDA-76-101
ERDA-76-104
ERDA-76-107
ERDA-76-111
ERDA-76-119
ERDA-76-121
ERDA-76-122
ERDA-76-134
HUMAN FACTORS IN DESIGN. (SSDC-2) Feb. 1976 NTIS $6.00
ERDA GUIDE TO THE CLASSIFICATION OF OCCUPATIONAL INJURIES AND
ILLNESSES. (SSDC-7) Oct. 1976 NTIS $4.00
SURVEY OF SUPRESSION OF SODIUM FIRES IN LIQUID METAL FAST BREEDER
REACTORS. June 1976 NTIS $3.50 A. Weintraub, 353-5610 AES/Div. of Safety,
Standards, and Compliance (Prepared by Factory Mutual Research Corp., Norwood,
Mass.)
ERDA FIELD ORGANIZATION: CAPSULE SUMMARIES OF PLANTS AND
LABORATORIES, FY 1975. Aug. 1976 NTIS $4.00 V. Garber, 376-9132 A/A for
Field Operations
PROGRAMS OF THE MATERIALS & RADIATION EFFECTS BRANCH, DIVISION OF
MAGNETIC FUSION ENERGY. June 1976 NTIS $5.50 E. Dalder, 353-4964
ASGA/Div. of Magnetic Fusion Energy
LIVING WITH RADIATION: The Problems of the Nuclear Age for the Layman. July
1976 NTIS $4.50 K. Hoag, 353-5602 AES/Div. of Safety, Standards, and
Compliance (Prepared by Francis L. Bannigan)
RADIATION PROTECTION ENROLLMENTS AND DEGREES, 1975. (5th ed.)
Enrollments, Fall 1975. Degrees Granted, July 1965-June 1975. Sep. 1976 NTIS
$4.50 L. Barker, 376-9180 AIR/Office of University Programs (Prepared by the
Manpower Development Div., ORAU)
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AT MAJOR U.S. ENERGY RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION CONTRACTOR SITES. CALENDAR YEAR
1975. (2 vols.) Aug. 1976 NTIS $18.75 each D. Elle, 353-5622 AES/Div. of Safety,
Standards, and Compliance
ADVANCED NUCLEAR REACTORS: AN INTRODUCTION. May 1976 NTIS $4.00
S. Wells, 353-5407 ANE/Div. of Reactor Development & Demonstration
EMPLOYMENT IN NUCLEAR ENERGY ACTIVITIES, 1975: A Highlights Report. Oct.
1976 GPO $0.65 L. Barker, 376-9180 AIR/Office of University Programs
SEVENTH ANNUAL REPORT OF RADIATION EXPOSURES FOR AEC AND AEC-
CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEES - 1974. Oct. 1976 NTIS $4.00 K. Baker, 353-5615
AES/Div. of Safety, Standards, and Compliance
BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF REPROCESSING AND RECYCLING LIGHT WATER
REACTOR FUEL. Dec. 1976 NTIS $4.00 J. Thereault, 353-4265 ANE/Div. of
Nuclear Fuel Cycle & Production
MASTER PLAN - DIVISION OF SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY. Sept. 1976 NTIS
$6.00 J. Hennessey, 353-5697 ANS/Div. of Safeguards & Security
WORKSHOP ON ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH FOR TRANSURANIC ELEMENTS.
Proceedings of the Workshop, Nov. 12-14, 1975. Battelle Seattle Research Center,
-------
11
ERDA-76-135
ERDA-76-162
Seattle, Washington. Nov. 1976 NTIS $4.50 W. Forster, 353-5323 AES/Div. of
Biomedical & Environmental Research
NUCLEAR MEDICINE RESEARCH: AN EVALUATION OF THE ERDA PROGRAM.
Aug. 1976 NTIS $4.00 W. Weyzen, 353-5355 AES/Div. of Biomedical &
Environmental Research
THE MANAGEMENT AND STORAGE OF COMMERCIAL POWER REACTOR
WASTES. A Summary Based on the ERDA Technical Alternatives Document (ERDA-
76-43). Dec. 1976 F. Tooper, 353-5458 ANE/Div. of Wastes Mgmt, Production, &
Reprocessing
NRC PUBLICATIONS
NUREG-0002.
NUREG-0015.
NUREG-0016.
NUREG-0017.
NUREG-0025.
NUREG-0026.
NUREG-0027.
NUREG-0028.
Final Generic Environmental Statement on the Use of Mixed Oxide Fuel in Light
Water Cooled Reactors - Health, Safety and Environment. Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards. Aug. 1976 1,761 pp. NTIS (Springfield, Va. 22161)
$47.00 for set
Security Agency Study: Report to the Congress on the Need for, and the Feasibility
of, Establishing a Security Agency within the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards. Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. Aug. 1976 156 pp.
NTIS $6.75
Calculations of Releases of Radioactive Materials in Gaseous and Liquid Effluents for
Boiling Water Reactors (BWR-TALE Code). Office of Standards Development (Siting,
Health and Safeguards Standards). April 1976 140 pp. NTIS $6.00
Calculations of Releases of Radioactive Materials in Gaseous and Liquid Effluents for
Pressurized Water Reactors (PWR-GALE Code). Office of Standards Development
(Siting, Health and Safeguards Standards). April 1976 148 pp. NTIS $6.00
Monthly Inspection Summary Report. Office of Management Information and
Program Control. Monthly NTIS $35/y
Evaluation of Soil Liquefaction Potential for Level Ground During Earthquakes - A
Summary Report. Prepared for USNRC Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
(Safeguards, Fuel Cycle and Environmental Research) by Shannon & Wilson, Inc.,
and Agbabian Associates. Contract AT(04-3)-954. Aug. 1976 128 pp. NTIS $6.00
Determination of Soil Liquefaction Characteristics by Large-Scale Laboratory Tests.
Prepared for USNRC Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (Safeguards, Fuel Cycle
and Environmental Research) by Shannon & Wilson, Inc., and Agbabian Associates.
Contract AT(04-3)-954. Aug. 1976 172 pp. NTIS $6.75
In Situ Impulse Test - An Experimental and Analytical Evaluation of Data
Interpretation Procedures. Prepared for USNRC Office of Nuclear Regulatory
Research (Safeguards, Fuel Cycle and Environmental Research) by Shannon &
-------
12
Wilson, Inc., and Agbabian Associates. Contract AT(04-3)-954. Aug. 1976 292 pp.
NTIS $9.25
NUREG-0029, Vol. 1. Geotechnical and Strong Motion Earthquake Data from U.S. Accelerograph
Stations: Ferndale, Cholame and El Centre, California. Prepared for USNRG Office
of Nuclear Regulatory Research (Safeguards, Fuel Cycle and Environmental
Research) by Shannon & Wilson, Inc., and Agbabian Associates. Contract AT(04-3)-
954. Aug. 1976 340 pp. NTIS $10.00
NUREG-0030.
NUREG-0034.
NUREG-0041.
NUREG-0043.
NUREG-0050.
Construction Status of Nuclear Power Plants. (Yellow Book) Office of Management
Information and Program Control. Monthly NTIS $100/y. $10/copy
(Docket PR-71, 73) Draft Environmental Statement on the Transportation of
Radioactive Material by Air and Other Modes. Office of Standards Development
(Engineering Standards). March 1976 384 pp
Manual of Respiratory Protection Against Airborne Radioactive Materials.
Caplin, J.L.; -Held, B.J.; and R.J. Catlin. Office of Standards Development (Siting;
Health and Safeguards Standards). Sept. 1976 152 pp. NTIS $6.75
Alternative Processes for Managing Existing Commercial High-level Radioactive
Wastes. Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (Fuel Cycle and Material
Safety). April 1976 184 pp. NTIS $7.50
Recommendation Related to Browns Ferry Fire. Hanauer, S.H., et a/., Special
Review Group. Feb. 1976 86 pp. NTIS $5.00
NUREG-0054 (Supp. 1 to NUREG-75/100). (Docket SIN 50-437) Supplement 1 to the Safety
Evaluation Report for the Qffshore Systems Floating Nuclear Plants. Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation (Project Management). March 1976 47 pp. NTIS $4.00
NUREG-0056, Vol. 1. (Docket SIN 50-437) Final Environmental Statement on Floating Nuclear
Power Plant, Vol. 1. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (Site Safety and
Environmental Analysis). Sept. 1976 708 pp. NTIS $16.25
NUREG-0060. Final Generic Environmental Statement on the Routine Use of Plutonium Powered
Cardiac Pace Makers. Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (Fuel Cycle
and Material Safety). July 1976 284 pp. NTIS $9.25
NUREG-0061 (Supp. 1). (Docket 50-259/50-260) Supplement 1 to the Safety Evaluation Report for
Operations of Browns Ferry, Units 1 and 2, Following the March 22, 1975 Fire.
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (Operating Reactors). July 1976 88 pp. NTIS
$5.00
NUREG-0069.
NUREG-0073.
Potential Releases of Cesium from Irradiated Fuel in a Transportation Accident.
Office of Standards Development (Engineering Standards). July 1976 24 pp. NTIS
$3.50
Transport of Radioactive Material in the U.S.: A Detailed Summary of "Survey of
Radioactive Material Shipment in the United States," BNWL-1972. Office of
Standards Development (Engineering Standards). May 1976 20 pp. Avail, at NRC
-------
13
NUREG-0074. (Docket PRM 40-19) Draft Environmental Statement on Proposed Rule-Making
Exemption from Licensing Requirements for Personnel Neutron Dosimeters that
Contain Natural Thorium. Office of Standards Development (Engineering Standards).
June 1976 72 pp. Avail, at NRC
NUREG-0077. Radioactive Material Released from Nuclear Power Plants: 1974. Office of
Management Information and Program Control. June 1976 120 pp. NTIS $5.50
NUREG-0090-1. Report to Congress on Abnormal Occurrences: July - September 1975. Office of
Information Management and Program Control. March 1976 20 pp. NTIS $3.50
NUREG-0090-2. Report to Congress on Abnormal Occurrences: October - December 1975. Office
of Information Management and Program Control. March 1976 16 pp. NTIS $3.50
NUREG-0090-3. Report to Congress on Abnormal Occurrences: January - March 1976. Office of
Management Information and Program Control. July 1976" 24 pp. NTIS $3.50
NUREG-0090-4. Report to Congress on Abnormal Occurrences: April - June 1976. Office of
Management Information and Program Control. Oct. 1976 16 pp. NTIS $3.50
NUREG-0093-1. Radiological Emergency Response Planning Handbook of Federal Assistance to State
and Local Governments. Office of State Programs. June 1976 80 pp. NTIS $5.00
NUREG-0099. Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Stations. (Regulatory Guide
4.2, Rev. 2). Office of Standards Development. July 1976 100 pp. NTIS $5.00
NUREG-0109. Occupational Radiation Exposure at Light Water Cooled Reactors - 1969-1975.
Murphy, T.D., et al. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (Site Safety and
Environmental Analysis). Aug. 1976 24 pp. NTIS $3.50
NUREG-0116. (Supp. I to WASH-1248). Environmental Survey of the Reprocessing and Waste
Management Portions of the LWR Fuel Cycle. Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards (Fuel Cycle and Material Safety). Oct. 1976 304 pp. NTIS $9.75
NUREG-0119. Eighth Annual Occupational Radiation Exposure Report for 1975. Office of
Management Information and Program Control. Oct. 1976 32 pp. NTIS $4.00
NRC Regulatory Guides
1.64 (Rev. 2) Quality Assurance Requirements for the Design of Nuclear Power Plants, July 1976
1.98 Assumptions Used for Evaluating the Potential Radiological Consequences of a Radioactive
Offgas System Failure in a Boiling Water Reactor, March 1976
1.102 (Rev. 1) Flood Protection for Nuclear Power Plants, September 1976
1.109 Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the
Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix 1, March 1976
-------
14
1.110 Cost-Benefit Analysis for Radwaste Systems for Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power
Reactors, March 1976
1.111 Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion of Gaseous Effluents in
Routine Releases from Light-Water-Cooled Reactors^ March 1976
1.112 Calculations of Releases of Radioactive Material in Gaseous and Liquid Effluents from Light-
Water-Cooled Power Reactors, May 1976
1.113 Estimating Aquatic Dispersion of Effluents from Accidental and Routine Reactor Releases for
the Purpose of Implementing Appendix 1, May 1976
1.120 Fire Protection Guidelines for Nuclear Power Plants, June 1976
3.38 General Fire Protection Guide for Fuel Reprocessing Plants, June 1976
4.13 Performance, Testing and Procedural Specifications for Thermoluminescence Dosimetry:
Environmental Applications, November 1976
5.57 Shipping and Receiving Control of Special Nuclear Material, July 1976
6.7 (Rev. 1) Preparation of an Environmental Report to Support a Rule Making Petition Seeking
an Exemption for a Radionuclide-Cohtaining Product, June 1976
8.14 Personnel Neutron Dosimeters, June 1976
8.15 Acceptable Programs for Respiratory Protection, October 1976
-------
15
WHERE TO WRITE FOR INFORMATION
Publications with a GPO number may be ordered from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402; those with an NTIS number may be ordered
from the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. 22161. Some, as noted, are available
in microfilm or microfiche (mf). Publications with neither a GPO nor an NTIS number may be ordered
directly from the agencies which publish them, at the addresses below:
Bureau of Radiological Health
BRH Technical Information
5600 Fishers Lane
Rockville, Maryland 20857
Energy Research and Development Administration
Office of Public Affairs
ERDA
Room 7110
20 Mass. Ave., NW
Washington, D.C. 20545
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Radiation Programs
(AW-460)
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Document Control
Washington, D.C. 20555
-------
APPENDIX C
NON-GOVERNMENT STANDARDS SETTING BODIES
American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
ANSI acts as a clearinghouse to coordinate standards development in the private sector by about 20
pertinent professional and technical societies. The actual drafting of standards is done by experts sitting on
society sponsored panels. Since 1975, the responsibility of the ANSI Secretariat for the Main Committee on
Radiation Protection has been assumed by the Health Physics Society (see below).
There are presently twelve ANSI Standards in force. These include standards for administrative practices
in radiation monitoring, specification of standards source terms for nuclear power plants for environmental
dose design calculations, guides for radiation protection in uranium mines, air sampling criteria, and
performance specifications for instrumentation. Copies of these Standards are available from the Anerican
National Standards Institute, 1430 Broadway, New York, New York 10018.
In addition, about twenty other standards are in various stages of development. These include standards
on performance specifications for thermoluminescent dosimeters, monitoring of occupational exposure,
several standards in the field of environmental contamination, and others dealing with contamination of
equipment and facilities. A series of standards is also underway dealing with environmental radiation
surveillance. Finally, a number of standards on internal dosimetry techniques are being prepared with
respect to occupational exposures to activation and fission products, tritium, uranium, and plutonium. For
further information, see M.E. Wrenn's paper "The U.S. National Voluntary Concensus Nuclear Standards
Program in Radiation Protection (ANSI N-13)," presented at the International Radiation Protection
Association, Paris, April 24-30,1977.
National Council on Radiation Protection & Measurements (NCRP)
Four new reports were published during 1976:
Tritium Measurement Techniques (Report No. 47): provided information on methods for measuring
tritium in a variety of media, and on selecting procedures best suited to particular problems and situations;
describes the most important measurement methods and their advantages and disadvantages; includes an
extensive bibliography.
Radiation Protection for Medical and Allied Health Personnel (Report No. 48): discusses biological
considerations, the x-ray department, radioactive nuclides, laboratories, the morgue, disposal of radioac-
tive waste, all directed at individuals who use radiation in healing arts. Also includes appendices on special
topics such as maximum permissible doses and dose limits, radiation detecting devices, and caution signs.
Structural Shielding Design and Evaluation for Medical Use ofX-Rays and Gamma Rays of Energies Up to
10 MeV(Report No. 49): discusses factors to consider in selection of appropriate shielding materials and
in calculation of barrier thickness,.superceding the 1970 recommendations; explicitly gives specific values
of the parameters used in the formulation of tables.
Environmental Radiation Measurement (Report No. 50): presents sampling and sample analysis for
radioactivity, information on properties of widely distributed radionuclides and typical radiation fields in
-------
the environment; treats methods for measurement, including evaluation of available and developing
methods; identifies areas where present knowledge is limited.
Health Physics Society
Major Standards Committee activities on formulating new standards in 1976 were as follows:
— Performance Testing and Procedural Specifications for Thermoluminescense Dosimetry: Environ-
mental Applications (ANSI N-545) — final version published.
— American National Standard for Personnel Neutron Dosimeters (Neutron Energies Less than
20 MeV) — published.
— Criteria for Testing Personnel Dosimetry Performance — now being prepared for a letter ballot.
— Radiation Instrumentation Test and Calibration (ANSI N-323) — currently in final processing.
— Internal Dosimetry Techniques for Uranium — in preparation for ANSI N-13 letter ballot.
— Internal Dosimetry Techniques for Fission and Activation Products (ANSI N-343) — now being
balloted.
— Criteria for Maintaining Exposures As Low As Practicable — first draft in preparation.
— Control of Radioactive Surface Contamination on Materials Equipment and Facilities to be Released
for Uncontrolled Use — approved by ANSI N-13 and transmitted to the ANSI Board of Standards
Review for final processing.
— Standards for the Unconditional Release of Real Property (ANSI N-547) — committee being
constituted.
The Standards Committee established an Internationa! Division, which began focussing on the pending
Gatt Standards Code. Among other things, the draft Code requires that no technical barriers to trade be
created by mandatory central government standards, test methods, and certification procedures (covering
industrial and agricultural products, and packaging and labeling regulations relating to products). The Code
also calls for notification and consultation in developing standards and equal treatment of domestic and
foreign products with respect to standards adopted.
International Commission on Radiological Units & Measurements
At its 1976 annual meeting, the Commission decided to publish the following reports:
— An International Neutron Dosimetry Intercomparison
— Assessment of Absorbed Dose in Clinical Use of Radionuclides
— Basic Aspects of High Energy Particle Interactions and Radiation Dosimetry.
-------
Progress was reviewed in a wide variety of fields, including the average energy required to produce an ion
pair, dose specifications for reporting, dosimetry of pulsed radiation, fundamental quantities and units,
photographic dosimetry in external beam therapy, and radiobiological dosimetry. In addition to approving
development of a new report emphasizing clinical aspects of electron beam dosimetry, the Commission
approved a report committee to work on low level in wVocounting in humans.
The Commission and the International Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP) collaborated in
discussing specific names for the International System (SI) units of the quantities of absorbed dose and
activity.
Others
Other private organizations which have set standards bearing on radiation protection in 1976 are the
American Nuclear Society, the American Society for Testing and Materials, the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, the American Institute of
Chemical Engineers, the Institute of Nuclear Materials Management, the National Fire Protection Associa-
tion, and Underwriters Laboratories.
-------
APPENDIX D
Charts of Organization
Figure 1 Summary Diagram of Major Federal Radiation Protection Functions
Figure 2 Environmental Protection Agency
Figure 3 Energy Research and Development Administration
Figure 4- Bureau of Radiological Health
Figure 5 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
-------
SUMMARY DIAGRAM OF MAJOR FEDERAL RADIATION PROTECTION FUNCTIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACEHCY
Advlae the President on radiation matters
Including guidance for all Federal agencies
In the formulation of radiation standards
and programs of cooperation with Stataa.
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACENCT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. EDUCATION, t UCLFAU
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COHH1SSION
1. Regulate possession, use. and production
of aaurc*, byproduct, and apaclal nuclear
Htarlal.
2. Consider environmental Impact of high
voltage transmission lima that originate
at nuclear generating planta.
DEPAjrmarr or IHTERIOR
Regulate exposure of uranluai mln
radon end radon daughters In «ln
ere to
as.
ENERGY RESEARCH t DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
Responsible for the radiation health and
safety and environmental protection at
ERDA owned and operated and ERM-con-
trector operated facilities.
Engage* In end supports environmental,
blomedlcal, physical, and aafaty research
related to the development of energy
sources and utilisation technologies.
1. Regulate radioactive materials In food
and drugs, and tha use of radlophar-
•aeeutlcala.
2. Performance standards for radiation
emissions from electronic product!;
research, technical assistance, and
training related to regulation of radia-
tion fro* consumer products-
3. Research, Investigations, studies,
public Information, technical assistance
to Ktntcs, surveys, end training related
to radiation as used In the heeling arts
snd occupational exposures to radiation,
DEFARTHENT OF TRAMSPORTATION
Regulate for safe transportation of radioactive
•sterlals by ell sndea of transport, highway,
rail, or water, and by all Man* (postal shlp-
•ent* are regulated by the U.S. Postal Service).
, Generally applicable environmental standards.
, Water quality criteria; effluent limitations;
discharge permits; discharges of haiardous
substances.
. Solid waste disposal guidelines; national
hainrdous wastes dlxposal sites plan.
. National primary and secondary drinking water
regulations; underground Injection control
regulations; emergency protection of drinking
water.
. Air quality criteria; new source performance
standards; emission standards for hasardous
nlr pollutant*; emergency control of air
pollution; review and publish coeewnts on
environmental Impact of proposed legislation,
major Federal actions, and proposed regula-
tions.
. Research, Investigations, studies, public
Information, grnnts and contracts, technical
assistance to States, surveys, training, and
emergency assistance for any radiation area
except (a) regulation of radiation from con-
sumer products, (b
healing arts,
to radiation.
, With rospect to en Ironmrntel polluti
adiation aa used In the
c) occupational exposures
Federal fncilltiei
tanct; review comp
State ll.ilson; met"
Issue regulations
facility compliant
on federal ngenry
B. Issur permits for
materials Into oc<
lance
technical
provide Fedr
ala-
ate Fi-der.il-Stale conflicts;
nd guidelines for Federal
report to the President
ilvmentatlnn.
limping of radioactive
iat*r s.
\
1. Conduct research, tttudiea, Investigation
on ft.ifcty of consumer products; test con-
Kissvr product*.
1. PriMHilR.itc consumer product s.ifety
ttL.ind.irdn.
). OccUro ,i lonmimor prndurt n b.mnc-d
h.i*.irdmm product.
*. T.iki- vmirt net Ion agnlmil .in Immlnvntly
K.itnnlnun consumer product.
S. Rc-qulrc product" <-crtlflc.it Inn and Libeling
fi. Administer Federal llncnrdous Substances
Act.
\
FKDKRAI. AGENCIES UIT1I JURISDICTION
OR SPECIAL EXPERTISE
CnaM-nt on fnvlronawhtil
of all Federal .iRency rvi
reports on proposals f»r
other B-ijor Fedrral .ictla
.irtcctlnn the quality of
en v Iron-cm.
(•p.iot st.itCMcnts
oewndAtlons or
legislation and
na significantly
the huaan
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Eatnb
proBu
train
..PP1I
Regul
lih occup.i
g.ito stand
Able to an
tory Coes.1
anal nafety a
d>; enforceme
Ive pragmas
rials control
Ion).
nd health program;
nt; research;
with States; (not
led by the Nuclear
FEDLRA1. COftnmiCATIOHS COMtlSSION
Rcgulnte civilian r.idlofreqiioncy and Blcrowava
nourcrs um-d In ruMunlcatInna (Office of
TclecOHBHinlcatlona Policy regulates governacnt
sources).
FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
Regulate high voltage transmUnlon 11
(limited to aurh lines from hydroclcr
and pumped atornge generating pl.intu)
trlr
FIGURE 1
-------
EPA ADMINISTRATOR
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
FOR AIR AND
WASTE MANAGEMENT
OFFICE OF RADIATION PROGRAMS
DEPUTY ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
FOR RADIATION PROGRAMS
CRITERIA & STANDARDS
DIVISION
ENVIRONMENTAL
STANDARDS BRANCH
FEDERAL GUIDANCE
BRANCH
BIOEFFECTS ANALYSIS
BRANCH
ECONOMICS AND
STATISTICAL
EVALUATION BRANCH
TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT
DIVISION
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
OFFICE
ENVI RONMENTAL ANALYSIS
DIVISION
ENERGY SYSTEMS
ANALYSIS BRANCH
SURVEILLANCE
BRANCH
RADIATION SOURCE
ANALYSIS BRANCH
PROTECTIVE
ACTION
BRANCH
ELECTROMAGNETIC
RADIATION ANALYSIS
BRANCH
EASTERN ENVIRONMENTAL
RADIATION FACILITY
OFFICE OF RADIATION
PROGRAMS - LAS VEGAS
TECHNICAL SERVICES
BRANCH
FIELD STUDIES
BRANCH
MONITORING
ANALYTICAL
SUPPORT BRANCH
EVALUATION
BRANCH
ENVIRONMENTAL
STUDIES BRANCH
FIGURE 2
RADIOCHEMISTRY &
NUCLEAR ENGINEERING
BRANCH
-------
ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATOR
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
FOR NUCLEAR ENERGV
DIVISION OF
NAVAL
REACTORS
PITTSBURGH
NAVAL
REACTORS
OFFICE
SCHENECTADY
NAVAL
REACTORS
OFFICE
DIVISION OF
REACTOR
DEVELOPMENT
AND
DEMONST RATIO'
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
FOR ENVIRONMENT AND SAFETY
DIVISION OF
NUCLEAR
FUEL CYCLE
AND PRODUCTION
DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY
DIVISION OF
BIOMEDICAL AND
ENVIRONMENTAL
RESEARCH-
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
FOR SOLAR, GEOTHERMAL AND
ADVANCED ENERGY SYSTEMS
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
FOR NATIONAL SECURITY
FIGURE 3
-------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFARE
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR HEALTH
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
COMMISSIONER
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BUREAU OF RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR
OFFICE OF
MEDICAL AFFAIRS
OFFICE OF THE
ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR
FOR ADMINISTRATION
DIVISION OF
COMPLIANCE
DIVISION OF
BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
DIVISION OF
ELECTRONIC
PRODUCTS
DIVISION OF
RADIOACTIVE
MATERIALS AND
NUCLEAR MEDICINE
DIVISION OF
TRAINING
AND MEDICAL
APPLICATIONS
FIGURE 4
-------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
THE COMMISSION
5 MEMBERS
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR
OPERATIONS
t
OFFICE OF
STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT
•
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIALS
SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR
REACTOR REGULATION
1
II II II
DIVISION OF
ENGINEERING
STANDARDS
DIVISION OF
SITING, HEALTH
AND
SAFEGUARDS
STANDARDS
DIVISION OF
SAFEGUARDS
DIVISION OF
FUEL CYCLE
AND MATERI-
ALS SAFETY
DIVISION OF DIVISION OF
OPERATING SITE SAFETY
REACTORS AND ENVIRON-
MENTAL
ANALYSIS
DIVISION OF
PROJECT
MANAGE- !
WENT
OFFICE OF INSPECTION
AND ENFORCEMENT
L 1
DIVISION OF
SYSTEMS
SAFETY
DIVISION OF
MATERIALS
INSPECTION
PROGRAMS
1 1
DIVISION OF DIVISION OF
REACTOR FIELD
INSPECTION OPERATIONS
PROGRAMS
-------
APPENDIX E
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS GLOSSARY
AEC Atomic Energy Commission
ANSI American National Standards Institute
BEIR Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation
BRH Bureau of Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration
CT Computered Tomographic
DoD Department of Defense
Dol Department of I nterior
DoT Department of Transportation
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EPA/ORP Environmental Protection Agency/Office of Radiation Programs
ERAMS Environmental Radiological Ambient Monitoring System
ERDA Energy Research and Development Administration
FDA Food and Drug Administration
FNP Floating Nuclear Plant
F.R. Federal Register
FWPCA Federal Water Pollution Control Act
CAO General Accounting Office, U.S. Congress
GEIS Generic Environmental Impact Statement
GHz Gigahertz, a unit of frequency (1,000 MHz)
GSD Genetically Significant Dose
H EW Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
-------
HTGR High Temperature Gas Reactor
Hz Hertz, basic unit of frequency
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency
ICRP International Commission on Radiation Protection
LMFBR • Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor
LOCA Loss of Coolant Accident
LOFT Loss of Fluid Test
LWR Light Water Reactor
MESA Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration, Department of Interior
MHz Megahertz, a unit of frequency (1,000,000 hertz)
Microcuries A unit of activity, abbreviated /*Ci (one-millionth of a curie)
Mrem Millirem, a special unit of dose equivalent (1/1,000 rem)
mW Milliwatt, a unit of power (1/1,000 watt)
NARM Naturally-Occurring or Accelerator Produced Material
NAS National Academy of Sciences
NASA National Aeronautics and Space-Administration
NBS National Bureau of Standards
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NIOSH National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health
NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission
NRDC Natural Resources Defense Council
ORP Office of Radiation Programs, Environmental Protection Agency
OSH A Occupational Safety and Health Administration
OTP Office of Telecommunications Policy
PAG Protective Action Guide
pCi Picocurie, a unit of activity (one millionth of a microcurie)
• U.S. GCVLIMll N'T PRINTING OFFICE i 1977 0-720-117/2027
-------
ppm Pa its Per Thousa nd
Rad A unit of absorbed dose
Rem A special unit of dose equivalent
RF Radiofrequency
TLD Thermoluminescent Dosimeter
USCS U.S. Geological Survey
WL(M) Working Level (Month), a unit of concentration based on one liter of air (one WL is any
combination of short-lived decay products of radon that will result in emission of a certain
amount of alpha ray energy)
------- |