I-160
-Sinee Ihave mentioned maximum permissible lune burdens, you
Twould lilies lo comraent 9
>
are aware that there is official guidance.
The maximum permissible iuny burden is established by cquilivrating the
exposure from the depozited radioactive acrosol with that ofan accent
‘ne International Commission on Radiological
uniform dose cf x-rays.
Protection indicates this may be greatly in error, and specifically states
x
.
me
.
in its publica.tion 9, "In the meantime there is no clear evidence to show
.
whether, with a given mean absorbed dose, the biological risk
associated
with a non-homogeneous distribution is greater or less than the risk re.
.
.
-
°
1966).
ify
(ICRP,
They are effectively saying that there is no guidance as to th
ce)
.
sulting from a more diffuse distribution of that dose in the lung.”
risk”
sar nencthormoygenccous expofture in the ling, hence the maximum permissivle
lang
burden igs rnaeaningless
for plutonium particles, as are the raaximum
Qo
°o
permissible air concentrations which derive from it.
So there is a hot particle problem with plutonium in the lung, and
the hot particle problem is not understood, and there ig nu guidance as to
ti.c risk.
I don't think there is any controversy about that.
to you from Dr. K. “%
Let me quote
»
.
-
Morgan's testimony in January ofthis year before
‘
the
Joint Committee on Atoraic Energy, U.S. Congress (Morgan, K.Z.,
1960).
Dr. KZ. Morgan is one of the United States! two members
to the
rnin Committee of the Internatio:nal Cornmission on R adiologiical Proteclien:
he has been a member of the committec longer than anyone:
and he
is diceclor of Healih Physics Division af Oak Ridge Nationaal Laboratory.
.
.
Lasote:
~
a
.
“.
.
eas
:
:
Vhere
are
rangy
Utiegs
aboub radiation
exposure we do net
Wes,
.
woe
me
“ Wo
.,
spy
.
nes. was,
we
a
tne,
°
costspee
7 +.
°fsa
ve vee
et
ws
:
.
ij
:
6340
Big, >
“
2.
pores
wo,
lay
‘ Shoe
—-
over one ed,