. abo ‘ . . + : aa Cae Hoo ay wot be ote 4 eg a * n, . oe a. te. . oo ie te ce be 5‘ we acid PRBcei ed ae BO2 tad tele othe ebiy tot seal’, wa evervsbidce inseshe hebDAA abe“de Li tha lad cates eweStab Teves ae sepame* egret ll enna TE OE, Aten di a Gol oil sethehe UYelaHNLanpe let Bote! Je RD Eed i on Ca “ ee be ere + Somcdahon, Dub MES met cerun whether ooo *opotractian ¢ Feaposure reported w ovoitiowed Incidence was higher on rete the usual dose-rity effects seen of the soft-tissue sucker, polenmunm£31). Because of the PG eutdes af eeveriiepg bade burdens moexmosod individeats Thy SOU 9 aaoa lo) otposure was ecdopied that could be related to the radi¢dvusiy oF the mene vir. The unit agiced upon is the * Working Level 7 OWL), defued 235 anv combination of snort-lived daughters of radon (radiuen A,B. Co and C’r in one tier of air, which results in emission (not necessirtly asoradoan) ef 1.310° MeV of potential aipha enérgy in their decuv to radium D. integral exnosure units are the “ Working Leve' Monts” (WLM) and the Working Lever Year” (WLY) and cumulative values of these (CWLAL CWLY). With certain assumotions regarding daughter-product ratios and percentage of Iree ions. | WiLMis eauivalent to about 7 rads (52) but with & larze factor of vertance. ec. - 3 rads. Wile convenignat to measure. these units have manyproblems. Radiation dose is not proportional to WL, WLM, or WLY, but depends upon the ratio of activities (concentrations) of the several daughter nuclides present and their clearance from the lung. Morken siates (33). the factor may be as large as 9.6 between mistures with only Ra-A and those with equal concentrations of Ra. RaB, and F.aC. In a similar calculation, Pasternack (54) calculates a factor of 5 variation in the relationsnip of lung dose to WL (or WLM), depending uponthe concentrations of RaA, RaB, and RaCpresent. It is only when there has been total decay of activity in the lungs, ie., at the site of deposition, that the ratio o* dose rate to working level is unity. Add the fact that dose to broachiclar ep‘thelium may be as much as a factor of 10 higher than average jung dose, and the WL is seen as a rather fluid measure of dose. Yet the short life of the daughters and tier moverrent out of the lung make retrospective analysis of lune dose aysch hioggent lt er FangRE Rg ET gtty oon ruta’ population demonstrating the Soars of miners who work under“of pulmonary carcinoma oceurs in tons, this is one of the most important me wre currently working and exposure .wat? tapic. But it is also a much more bis and sclenufic compiexities— fo DA OMaa AE DSU yw pe ee teddy tee pec aiedls doy dea pally a piumciil wl dike elivets a my osery can occur at lower dose-rates pot eet of dase-rate with high Hnear seuss at Mays offer several plausible Sat but aot unknewn, effect of cried cells. tess subsequent killing 2 vcimttilus io cell division, etc, But it toto os thes ohenonicnon is clearly Gai atl, SOUS. from excreiiaa raizs, deposition of 7!°Pb or 7!°Po almost as tricky. Therefore, A “aoa Central Europe (Erz Mountains) os agen ana that there was a high incidence rate. That it was due in part at ‘aducis) in the mines is a much wi anaiy zed population is the Loited States. Several recent dl.i catings before the Joint Comoe 8 ane documentation (48-30), wots bivi: have now deen reasonabiy eee ier rite Mi a adh imeaurable unit fe aie has continued to hold sway. ppd 37 ry> Federal Radiation Councn issued guidance for che cortral of racistion hazard: in uranium mining (£5), Because of the urgency of the subject, a NAS-NRL Advisory Committee prepared a further report analvzine sctenuic nindinas of pertinence (52). This repor: conctuded that a causal assoemtion exists betuecen lung cancer incidence in the mines and exposure to i000 cumulative WLM (CWL‘f) or more, that there is a statistically significant increase in lung cancer risk for miners receiving between 100-400 CWLM, and that radiation exposure from recon daughter praducts contributed substantially to this treresce Mie inere.ses in :cwer WLMgroups were not statistically signifcant but may become so with time as more individuals enter the croup under sp au. As a sin@rabz.des. abe nuraber of lung cancer cases among the uranium miners in Pag pe| (76S ts about @ imes that of nenniters, Thy Presto os: itn Service cre tm reexamined ali of ther esidence and unedsi! me te ee Hai Exposure to radon gas seeping ty the uranium ere to radon, end this vast. Rad (7!8poy, RaB (2/4 Pp). Kab (''Bo. and Rak (*' Po}. “ens frequently attached to vector acrors that entered earher. Inas ing sinsipel offenders rathe ‘rae mey exert ther full rade “ooo Arsreciabte fosr in cote Sek oN Ag Les ure OT Sats Irmo: te i. Sines the blero reais ~the ona wuchdes. and all kur racon Fes aa poateBe 1 te so ‘ 1 coe ogy COPY (Sui, Jabs Aas Cooreéinate.! wita. ard followed Ov, an te eat nom M4 Resa Groun” convenec ia aaumine tle: be eb De la aR ek une Couuis regardicg the contro! of mine atraospeo daly Lieu tichudes the severa: cogiizant Federal agencies and the SOTTEE EPPRTTTT “a 1 . . : 3 io “ 1 . . pig Mebeed ER ee a rt ne dee AT ie ete TENCE Gay OF RADTONETOP TIES iw . . ae foe Pr peeeh wtx pers Pe PCE Pee ae Be . my poSpeeeg ck once fomaagemrt " Tg terye ae© non : tape aaeerdeey ee Bepial Moe PemaEanPeedi siejessgi! : 1B i pemmerey 5‘a 8 ' | r wd. “ad ‘ ' wi , . 4 \ Foeo.tt f 1 t : 7 sepa . j : CAC . cere vos 4 Soe Be A et i RE ay ee wt you oo 1, fo pete. “te. . BG a . . ve a Rap sap ke ptetga ou Bary pt ey Oy fda ocendei Meponie NTE oyg, aENoe “ f ane PE peg 24} . ce ety me te eb 43 “wa ot wh A ee LR ESE, : beh ry eer ect ’ . . . 4 ae a4 ‘ o aw a . do See ee an Prk ange! opted Sra be