Pennie
TR
of
3.
Judging from past experience at the Nevada Test Site,
4t would not be operationally feasible to limit exposures to 10
roentgens in 30 years.
The situation becomes one of facing the
problem frankly and in the interests of the National Defense
defining the degree of risk, as the Commission has done in the
past.
It would appear that a reasonable figure would Ile somewhat
between the 10 and 50 roentgens per 30 years,
The acceptable
value of exposure within this range is dependent upon one's
philosophy with respect to the imperativeness
of the nuclear
testing program since even the highest value (50 roentgens in
30 years) would not be considered a dangerous exposure in terms
of the individual's health nor of major consequence genetically.
(Fifty roentgens might double the mutation rate, but this would
be for a relatively small number of persons in terms of the
general population,)
Based on such reasoning we are recommending
that the operational guide be arbitrarily established at 10
roentgens in a period of 10 years with the first of the successive
ten year periods starting in the spring of 1951.
first nuclear tests in Nevada.)
(The date of the
This criterion should not be con-
strued as a maximum limit beyond which serious effects might be
expected, but rather it should be thought of as an operational
guide.
4,
The operational feasibility of 10 roentgens in 10 years
may be estimated by noting that during the five years of testing
at Nevada Test Site the highest total accumulated: exposure to any
community has been about four and one-half roentgens {about 15
people living at a motor court received about seven to eight
roentgens).
This might suggest a degree of ease in meeting the
criteria that does not in fact exist.
The relatively low exposures
are the result of the most exacting plans and procedures for
~ 4 -
Appendix "A"