2
4
c) There should be an upper limit of manmade non-medical exposure for individuals in the general population such that
the risk of serious injury from somatic
effects in such individuals is very small
relative to risks that are normallyaccepted. Exceptions to this limit in specific cas-
es should be allowable only if it can be
demonstrated that meeting it would cause
individuals to be exposed to other risks
greater than those from the radiation
avoided.
d) There should be an upper limit of manmade non-medical! exposure for the general population. The average exposure permitted for the population should be considerably lower than the upper limit permitted for individuals.
,
e) Medica] radiation exposure can and
should be reduced considerably bylimiting
its use to clinically indicated procedures
utilizing efficient exposure techniques and
optima] operation of radiation equipment.
Consideration should be given to the following:
1) Restriction of the use of radiation for
public health survey purposes, unless
there is a reasonable probability of
significant detection of disease.
2) Inspection and licensing of radiation
and ancillary equipment.
3) Appropriate training and certification
of involved personnel. Gonad shielding
(especially shielding the testis) is
strongly recommended as a simple and
highly efficient way to reduce the Ge
netically Significant Dose.
—
f Guidance for the nuclear power industry
should be established on the basis of cost-
benefit analysis, particularly taking into
account the total biological and environ-
mental] risks of the . urious options available and the cost-effectiveness of reducing
these risks. The quantifying of the “as low
as practicable’ concept and consideration
of the net effect on the welfare of society
should be encouraged.
g) In addition to normal operating conditions
in the nuclear power industry, careful
consideration should be given to the prob-
abilities and estimated effects of uncontrolled releases. It has been estimated that
a catastrophic accident leading to melting
of the core of a large nuclear reactor could
result in mortality comparable to that of a
severe natural disaster. Hence extraordi-
nary efforts to minimize this risk are
clearlycalled for.
h) Occupational and emergency exposure
limits have not been specifically considered but should be based on those sections of the report relating to somatic
risk to the individual.
i) In regard to possible effects of radiation
on the environment,it is felt that if the
guidelines and standards are accepted as
adequate for man thenit is highly unlikely that populations of other living organisms would be perceptibly harmed. Nevertheless, ecological studies should be improved and strengthened and programs
put in force to answer the following questions about release of radioactivity to the
environment: (1) how much, where, and
what type of radioactivity is released; (2)
how are these materials moved through
the environment; (3) where are they concentrated in natural systems; (4) how long
might it take for them to move through
these systems to a position of contact
with man; (5) what is their effect on the
environmentitself; (6) how can this information be used as an early warning system to prevent potential problems from
developing?
j) Every effort should be made to assure ac-
curate estimates and predictions of radiation equivalent dosages from a}] existing
and planned sources. This requires use of
present knowledge on transport in the environment, on metabolism, and on relative
biological efficiencies of radiation as wel]
as further research on manyaspects.
DOE ARCHIVES