it E
Ce
The rechendations of the National Council on Radiation Peutection
,
and Measurement set forth in I, and the recomendations of the International
Comaission on Radiological Protection set forth in Ili, are explicit in
”.
offering na guidance.
II is a discussion of the hot particle problem taken from ine
It is not. intended to give dispositive
report cf an ICRP Task Group.
official guidance.
_
The discussion is useful commentary, but inconclusive.
The very conditional statement made in the first and second sentence of II
(41) is not generally convincing.
,
a
ade
to the previously cited method of risk estimation
i th regard
é
described in the first sentence of 4.6.5, that section continues with the
following supportive references:
Protection Agency in recent reports on the potential
health consocuenres of the nuclear feel cycle. @9
um apurcacu leaus
to EStimaces cor pevabble to ihose
# Gavankxar® following Thompson et al/ based on
Tinea ry noethresho.d oxtrasolation GF observations
1
,
"This epproacn has been used by tne Environaental
.
ch
Pe
we
:
a
on beagle dogs aduinistered
23970, aerosols."
As to the first, consensus in error may provide amiable agreement amongst
federal agencies, but seams hardly a desirable basis for decisions involving
the public heal“h and safetys
The observations on bexgle dogs are discussed
“h
urther on 4.G-117 and deserves Separate consideration.
It requires pathological optimism to find reassurance in the
results of the now completed Hanford beagle experiment.
Dogs were given
initial aerosol burdens of approximately 1-10 microcuries of pu".
By
nine years post-exposure the lung cancer response was virtually satureted
and multicentric origing ware noted in some dogs.
Those receiving larger
lung burdens greater than 10 microcuries died of pulmonary insufficiens
Within 4-1/2 years.
Twenly-one dogs survived for more than 4-1/2 years,
.
.
Ton TR monLaPrae yy oe ape
ra
Voy
‘
booty istssai.
te iat
A
FR Blgeee
AS
we
us
ag
8SHrs
eta
“9?ye
: eb
te
Fag