recovery plan could be devised. “be In recognition of the mtuallyexclusive aspects of a fixed MPE ser tne entire operationand the greater amount of work to be acc<mplished ir sontamtinated areas, it was obvious that some form of relaxation of rigid cos: Limits was necessary. arparent. Several sethods of relaxation of the MPE were There was the possibility of assigningthe MPE of 3.95 to calendar quactsrs and thus take advantage “of the fact that Operation CASTLE extended cve> Swo such quarters, giving a total of 7.8r for the first six months of ~SSh. Some U. S. laboratories and industries now use this system. ‘Tre orimary AEC objection to such @ generalized solution lies in the fact tnat, sheteas on a field teat, dosage limits mst be flexible enough to all’w linits se% without regard to the rate cf acquisition, such is not the case in iabora- teres. In the latter case, control features are set up on & week- by-week, yeamby-year basis to limit exposures to 0.3r per week, and to remove from cedlation work those personnel exposed in excess of a maximum averaged pro- gtassively on the basis of 0.3r per week. Similarly, a flat MPE of, for example, 7.8F for the operation was objectionable to the AEC for similar reasons and because of a general lack of long-term raciation effects informa +ien on year-by-year acquisition of dosages at even the currently acceptable rate cf 0.3r per week. The most promising averme of relaxation appeared to be some sort ef watver provision to be exercised by the Task Force Commander in exceptional casea where the technical import and the medical aspects of proposed work could be evaluated before the fact in conjunction with the necessity for completion of specific missions. Provision for waiver of the MPB was built into the CASTLE plan (Tab A and Tab B) with the concurrence cf the Surgeons Goneral of the three Services and the Director, Division of Blolegy_and Mcdicine, AEC, The waiver provision was used to an aprrciable 19 |