wheel afl tee als 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 normally accepted. Exceptions to this limit in specific cases should he allowable only if it can be cemonstrated 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 papulation should be considerably lower than the upper limit permit- e) . ted for individuals. Medical radiation exposure can and should be reduced considerably by limiting its use to clinically indicated procedures utilizing eficient exposure techniques and optimal operation of radiation equipment. Consideration should be given to the fol- -”- lowing: Ore ee pene eee 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. Sonal aaa 3) Appropriate training and certification of involved personne!. Gonad shielding (especially shielding the testis) is strongly recommended as a simple and highly efficient way to reduce the Genetically Significant Dose. Guidance for the nuclear power industry should be established on the basis of costbenefit analysis, particularly taking into account the total biological and environmental risks of che .arious options available and the cost-effectiveness of reducing these risks. The quantifying of the “as low as practicable’ concept and consideration I0131b1 of the net effect on the welfare of society should be encouraged. g) In addition to normal operating conditions in the nuclear power industry. carefu! consideration should be given to the probabilities and estimated effects of uncontrolled releases. Jt has been estimated that acatastrophic accident leading to melting of the core of a large nuclear reactor could result in mortality comparable tathat of a severe natural disaster. Hence extraordinary efforts to minimize this risk are clearly called for. h Occupationa] and emergency exposure limits have not been specifically considered but should be based on those sec- . tions of the report relating to somatic risk to the individual. i In regard to possible efiects of radiation on the environment, it is felt that if the guidelines and standards are accepted as — made non-medical exposure for individu- —_ ) There should be an upper hmit of man- adequate for man then it is highly unlike- ly 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 radioactivityto 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 svstems to a position of contact with man; (5) what is their effect on the environment itself; (6) how can this infor- mation be used as an early warning sys- tem to prevent potential problems from developing? }) Every effort should be made to assure ac- curate estimates and predictions of radiation equivalent dosages fromall existing and pjanned sources. This requires use of present knowledge on transport in the environment, on metabolism, and on relative biological) efficiencies of radiation as well as further research on manyaspects.