a BT APSP ORK Nts abe RADIATION STANDARDS, INCLUDING FALLOUT 319 The recommendations of the National Committee on Radiation Protection and Measurements and the International Commission on Radiological Protection continue to be the bases of radiation protection standards and regulations in this country. Radiation protection standards have been, and appear to be, keeping pace with the growing needs of the atomic energy industry. Expausion of NCRP considerations to cover emergency situations on the one hand, and more amplification of the broad aspects of group and population exposures on the other are favorable trends. The introduction of the range concept by the Federal Radiation Council is regarded by many as a start in getting away from the rigidity of specific control numbers. The industrial exposure situation continues to be characterized by good compliance with current radiation protection standards for long-term radiation control. The serious accident experience does not show any unfavorabie trends, and while there is room for improvement, the accident experience of the atomic energy industry compares very favorably with other elements of industrial safety. Some minor difficulties principally associated with implementation of standards or codification of the basic principles of good practice into regulations have appeared and very likely will continue to appear. Some problems of jurisdiction and reciprocity will be difficult to avoid in the course of the transfer of regulatory responsibilities from the Atomic Energy Commission to individual States. Not peculiar to industry’s role, but nevertheless having substantial effect on the industrial climate, is an apparent lack of public understanding in depth of nuclear energy and its associated hazards. It appears that considerable effort will have to be expended before the potential hazards associated with sources of ionizing radiation can be viewed in perspective by the layman. Comprehensive hearings such as these and others conducted in the past by the Joint Committee are major factors in increasing public understanding of this complex subject of radiation protection in the atomic energy field. APPENDIX SoME Facets oF INDUSTRIAL ExXPosuRES EXPERIENCE TABLE I.-—Exposures of contractor personnel to penetrating radiation, summarized for 1959 and 1960 1959 (13) Range of annual total exposure in rems Number of workers 0 tO Lee eee ee ee ee 1 to 6.022228 ee eee § to 10.002 eee 10 to 15.220 ween eye een 71, 630 3, 912 66 2 Total... --.2-2--2- 0 awe wena een eens 75, 611 Above 15___.. 2202222222 1960 (7) Percent of total number of workers 94,73 5,17 . 09 <, OF 1 <, 01 j-..0-- wena eee Number of workers 77, 522 , 41 2 3 82,197 Percent of total number of workers 94, 5. . <. 31 63 05 O01 <.01 |... Tanne II.—U.S. criticality accident experience (12) Year Number of criticality accidents Number of | fatalities | Year 1945.22 3 1 1946-222 1 l 1947.2 fee 1948.22 ep eee 1949_ 22 ] j---------- Lee 1950_.--- 2) eee lee ee eee 1951_2 2-2. 2 j--- 2+ ween eee 1955_ 2.222 -- eee 1956. _..----.-----.--1957.22 eae 1958-2 - aoanane 1959. le 1960_. 2-2-2 1961_ 22. eee ene eee 1953.22 fel 1954-2222 ne Total__..- 0. 1952... 2-2 eu. Ps 1962 through April. ___ | Number of criticality accidents Numberof fatalities 1 feleeeee ia 1 [eee eee 2 1 1 jee. e eee eee 1 jelee--------e2 3 | [-.---.-------- 22 are 6 SERREeae abet aBNAe eh tehkage Bi TERN