.
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