RMI Nuclear Justice Documents

-

@

4102

ENE Pe dete

FEDERAL RASiATION Cbetta:

RADIATION PROTECTION CUIDANCE
FOR FEDERAL AGENCIES

SEED

ALU BEY Owe

-

mendations for the ruidance of Federal
e@ccncies in the conduct of their radiation protection activities.
It is the statutory responsibility of the
Council) to “* * * advise the President
with respect to radiation matters, di-

Scientific findings concerning the bio-

or

indirectly

affecting

health,

with States’ °°”

Fundamentally, setting basic rediation

protection standards involves passing
judgement on the extent ef the possible

health hazerd society is willing to accept
in order to reaucze the known benefits
of radiation.
I: involves inevitubly a
balancing Letween total health protection, which might require forezoing any
activilies insreesing exposure to rediation, and th< vizorous promotion of the
use of radiction and atomic energy in
order to schieve opiimum benefits.
The Federal Radiation Council hes
reviewed availcLie knowledec on radiation effects and consulted with scientists
vithin

and

outsice the

Government.

Each member has also examined the
Guidance recornmended in this memoranduwm in lish: of his statutory responsi-

bilities, Althonch the guidance dses not
cover all phases of radiation protection,
such as internal emitters, we find that
the guidance which we recommend that
you provide fer the use of Federal asen-

cies gives appropriate consideration to
the requiremcnis of health protection
and the beneficial uses of radsation and
atomic energy. Our furtherfindings and
recommendations follow.

Discussion. The fundamental problem
§n establishing radistion protection
euides is to allow as much of the Leneficial uses of jonizing radiation as pose
sible while assuring that man is not
exposed to unduc hazard. To ect a true
insight into the scope of the problem

and the impact of the decisions involved,
a review of the benefits and the hazards
ds necessary.
Itis imporfant in eonsidering both the
benefits and hasards of radistion to ap-

precinte that man has existed throush-

out his history in a bath of natural

radiation. This backsround radiation,
whieh varics over the carth. provides a
partial basis for understanding the effects Of radiation on man and serves as

an indicator of the ranees of rachation
exposures Wilhin which the human popue
Yation has develoned and increased.
The bencfiis of tonizing radiation.

Radiation properly cantralied is a boon
fo inankind. Mo has been of inestimable
“value in the diacnosis and treatment of
discascs,
It ¢an provide suurces of

ee

amount of dose, it then become: pc-::.

to rclate very low dote to an uss:
blolorical effect even thouth it ts no:
tectuble. It is penerally acres thes

trace liquid flow, and for other purposes,

many diverse ficlds now rank radiation

ewe

9. Ifone assumes a diroet ness 3:
tion between biviouical eZect anc -

yet had available. In Industry, & ts used
as a tool to measure thickness, quantity
or qualily, to discover hiddcn flaws, to

Pursuant to Uxccutive Order 10631 and
Public Law 86-373, the Fedcral Radiation Council has made a study of the
hazards and usc of radiation We herewith transmit our first report to you

including guidance for all Federal acenejes in the formulation of radiation
standards and in the establishment and
execution of protrams of cocperation

we

enerry ereater than anv the world has

So manyresearch uscs for ioniziny radia-

rectly

—~

2

fAemorandsm for the President

eoncerning our findings and our rccom-

ee

2awses

tion have been found that scientists in

effect that may actually occur wit
excced the amount predicted by th.

assumption.
Basic biological assumptions. T-are insufficien. data to provice a H-:
basis for evaluating radiation efcc-- :
oll types end Jevils of irradiation T7.-:

With the microscope in value as a working tool.

The hazards of tonizing radiation.
Ionizing radiation involves health haz-

ards just as do manyother useful tools.

ds particular uncertainty with respec: :
the biolorical efects at very lew
c:

logical effects of radiaticn of most imMediate interest to the establishment of
radiation protection standares are the
following:
1, Acute doses of rediation may profuse immediate or delayed effects, or
th.
2. AS acute whole body doses increase
above approximately 25 reins (units of

and low-dose rates. It is not prous::
therefore to essurme that there is a
of radiation expusure below which
is absolute certainty that no effect inoccur. This considcration, in ecai:.:
to the adoption of the conservative ::

pcthesis of a linear relation bstweer.: .

logical effect and the amount of c:Getermines our basic approach to :!

radiation dose), immediately observable
effects increase in severity with dose,

formulation of radiation protec..<
guides.
The lack of adecauate scientific ints
mation makes it urgent that edci:
research be underteken and new co
Geveloped to provide a firmer basis :

beginning
from
barely
detectable
changcs, to biological signs clearly indicating damage, to death at levels of a
few hundred rems.
3. Delaycd efiects produced either by
acute irradiation or ty chronic irradia-. evaluating biolezical risk. Apprors::
tion are similar in kind, but the ability of miember agencies ef the Federa} Rac.
the body to repair radiation damage is tion Council are sponsoring and enctcu
usually more effective in the case of aging research in these areas.
chronic than acute irradiation.
Recommendacions. In view cf t!
4. The delayed effects from radiation find.ngs summarized above the follow:
are in general indistinguishable from reccmmendations are made:
familiar pathological conditions usually .
It is recommended that:
present in the population.
1. There should not be any maz-mrs
5. Delcyed effects include genetic radiation exposure without the expect
effects (effects transmitted to succeeding tion of benefit resulting from such :
generations), increased incidence of posure, Activities resulting in man-m~
tumors, lifespan shortening, and growth
rediation exposure should be authorir
and development chances.
6. The child, the infant, end the un- for useful applications provided in 1.
born infant appear to be more sensitive ommendations sct forth herein «
followed.
to radbation than the adult.
It is recommendedthat:
7. The various organs of the body differ
2. The term “RadiationPretes:
in their sensitiviiy to radiation, _
8. Although ionizing radiation can ine Guice” be adopted for Federal use. 1.
duce genctic and somatic effects (effects term is
defined_as_the_ radiation c¢:
on the individual during his lifetime which should not be exceeded with:
other than genctic effects), the evidence
at the present time is insufficient to justify precise conclusions on the nature of

careful considcration of the reas
doing so; every effort should be misc:
encourage the maintenance of revs.

the dose-ciTeci relationship at low doscs
and dcse rates. Moreover, the evidence

doses as far below this guide.
practicable,
Zi is recommended that:
3. The following Radiation Proie:::
Guides be adopted for normal peaceiii

is insuiiicient to prove either the hypoth-

esis of a “damage threshold” (a point
below which no damage occurs) or the
hypothesis of “no threshold" in man at

lowdoses.

operations:

Type of e.posure
Radiation warker:
4a) Whete bol, head and trmk, active blood formfag organs, ganas, of betas of ©) G,
(hb) Ekin of whole body aed tnyroid..

Condition

Dose (reas)

Accumulated dose... 8 timesfhe numberof yeses b:
AD WOCKS.. .ecenences

ote!

(ce) Hands and forvarms, beet and ankiee,....... ae.
(A) Wane 2... ec cerenecccewcctennceccenwesecnce
@) Other organs.

yenr

O 1 inicrorram of radium- moet
pslrownical equivalent,

13 weeks. ....-.-..200-f &
Population:
Ga) Favten db Veral
Vear..
(b) Average. phecreteencscccee weweeccnsecceencce wees W SCMcceweeee edeeces & (Wenads),

05 (whale hedy),

The followins points nre made in relabon fo the Radiation ProtecWon
Guides herein provided:

CD For the individual in the por.

tion, the basic Guide for annual wh

body dose ts 0.5 rem.

This Guide :

DOE ARCHIVES*