UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTfCTION AGENCY
                             WASHINGTON, 0,C. 20460

EPA-SAB-RAC-COM-92-002                                January 9, 1992

Honorable William K. Reilly
Administrator                   •                                  omceoF
U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency                          THE ADMINISTRATOR
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington,  D,C.  20460

Subject.-  Commentary on Residual Radioactivity

Dear Mr. Reilly:

      Upon the recommendation of its Radiation Advisory Committee, the Science
Advisory Board urges the Agency to develop Federal radiation protection guidance
specifically for removal or remediation actions for radioactive substances at various
locations, including Superfund sites and Federal facilities.  No radiation guidance
directed  to allowable residual radioactivity contamination at such sites currently
exists.  This  recommendation is directed toward residual radioactivity resulting
from human  activities, not naturally occurring distributions of radionuclides.

      The present guidelines available for assessing cancer risk focus  mainly on
chemical contamination at Superfund sites.  These use risk-based goals frequently
augmented by reference to Applicable Relevant and Appropriate Requirements
(ARARs), which are  specific numerical guidelines derived  from regulatory limits
used elsewhere. For radioactive substances ARARs either do not exist or were
developed for purposes  distinctly different from those contemplated for residual
radioactivity.. For example,  the Agency commonly selects a radionuclide standard
for finished drinking water  to use as an ARAB for leachate or contaminated
groundwater at such sites;  this practice imposes an unnecessarily high restriction
in areas  wherein such water is not being  used for human consumption.

      Both the Department of Energy and the Superfund program must deal with
radioactive contaminants at more than a hundred sites of various types.  The
number is likely to increase, perhaps substantially, as federal site evaluations
proceed,  and as radioactivity sources not previously considered gain public
attention.  Examples of this latter category  are accumulation of naturally occurring
radioactive materials in wastes from oil drilling and pipeline activities and in
municipal water treatment residues.  The Congress has recognized this potential
problem  by directing the Agency to address this issue in a recent appropriation
bill. The Agency previously issued an Advance Notice of  Proposed Rule-Making
for residual radioactivity in  1986 (51  FR 22264) but the Agency has made little
progress in finalizing this notice.
                                                                     PrmltdOn &ic\c.

-------
      States and Federal agencies do not now have specific criteria for residual
radioactivity to follow in assessing sites, or for designing and implementing
remedial actions.  This lack of clearly defined and consistent requirements leads to
considerable variation in approach from site to site and, at times, selection of
costly clean-up procedures that may not be justifiable from a cost/risk point of
view.

      The technical issues that should  be considered in developing guidance
should include at least the following:

      1.  the types and forms of radioactive substances at sites;

      2,  a consistent protocol for exposure assessment and risk estimation that
recognizes both spatial and temporal factors and the attendant uncertainties
associated with human exposures to radiological contaminants at or from these
sites;

      3,  the digree to which other contaminants and biota may enhance or
inhibit the on-site and off-site migration of radionuclides; and

      4.  consideration of technical approaches for implementation of guidelines
through managing radionuclide contaminants, and the effectiveness, costs, and
cost/risk balancing for selected remedial actions.

      Such guidance could include residual contamination levels for individual
radionuclides that should not be exceeded, or perhaps set forth decision-making
processes  for establishing such levels.  Current Suparfund guidance suggests that
any lifetime risk in excess of one in ten thousand is an obligatory (de maximus)
basis for consideration of the feasibility of removal or remediation action. • Once an
action has begun, the  risk goal may be  as low as one  in a million, which may
represent  a de minimis level for which  no further action is indicated.  However,
the radiation exposures that would produce such risks are far below variations in
the natural background level.  Measurement of the corresponding nuclide
concentrations is difficult and the reliable estimation of the net effects independent
of natural background is difficult if not impossible to verify. The Agency thus
must establish whether the de  maximus and dejtninimis values used for Superfund
actions  for chemicals are justified for radionuclides as well, and if it is determined
that these levels are not justified, such  values and ARARs for radionuclides must
be established.

-------
      The Board will continue to follow the Environmental Protection Agency's
progress on residual radioactivity. We shall be happy to elaborate on the need for
Federal guidance at your convenience. We look forward to hearing your thoughts
on an approach to  this important issue.
                             Sincerely,
                              Raymond C. Loehr, Chair
                              Executive Committee
                              Science Advisory Board
                              Oddvar F. Nygaard, Chair
                              Radiation Advisory Committee
Enclosure;   Committee roster

-------
               U.S.  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                     SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD
                   RADIATION ADVISORY  COMMITTEE

                              ROSTER

CHAIRMAN

Dr. Oddvar F. Nygaard
     Division of Biochemical Oncology
     Department of Radiology
     University Hospitals of Cleveland
     2058 Abington Road
     Cleveland, Ohio  44106

MEMBERS

Dr. Kelly H. Clifton
     Department of Human Oncology and Radiology
     University of Wisconsin Clinical Cancer Center
     K4/330, Clinical Science Center
     600 Highland Avenue
     Madison, Wisconsin 53792

Dr. James E. Martin
     Assistant Professor of Radiological Health
     University of Michigan
     School of Public Health
     Ann Arbor, Michigan  48109

Dr. Genevieve M. Matanoski  .
     Professor of Epidemiology
     The Johns Hoplcins University
     School of Hygiene and Public Health
     Department of Epidemiology
     524 North Broadway, Room 280
     Baltimore, Maryland  21205

Dr. H. Robert Meyer
     C.N.S.I.
     750 East Park 'Drive
     Suite 200.
     Harrisburg, Pennsylvania  17111
Dr. Richard G. Sextro
     Building Ventilation and
       Indoor Air Quality Program
     Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
     Building 90, Room 3058
     Berkeley, California  94720

-------