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