144

TH SHORTER-TERM BIOLOGICAL HAZARDS OF A FALLOUT FIELD

made not from the point of view of a biologist

or physicist, but someone who has been exposed
to Army operational requirements concepts, and
thinking over the past few years in the field of
radiological defensein general.

My feeling is that many of the practical
problems of radiological defense of which beta
is one can be resolved most successfully by a

‘joint attack on the problem by research people
and the operational people with the research

people providing the basic information, Where
the operational people provide their capabilities

and limitations, which serve in many cases as a
framework in which part of the research and
development effort at least should be directed
to provide solutions to these very simple

problems. ‘This is no more apparentthanin the
ease of beta hazard. I think if we assume for
the momentthatas a result of the studies that

Col. Brennan recommended as to the beta

hazard, let us assume that they proceed to the
point where they indicate that in a fair number
of tactical or practical situations in the field,

there will be a beta hazard relative to the

gamma hazard.

The very real operational problem then comes
to the fore is, do you have to assess this hazard

in the field, and if you do, how do you go about
doing it? There are two schools of thought on

this particular problem. One says that you
have to have beta detection capability or

measuring capabilityin the field, and the other
school says the way to approach this thing is to

do some research and development based on
simplified geometry situations, and by means
of gamma measurements plus factors based on

field geometry, you can come up with a fairly
decent estimate of whatthe beta hazard will be
in these various situations.
The question as to which approach should

be taken appears to be dictated at the present
momentby operational limitations, rather than
technical limitations, If you can assume for
the moment that you do have radiological
equipment which can give you information by
means of a beta window reading, or what have
you,itstill brings up the point of how manyof
these instruments will be required to give you a

DISCUSSION ON TOPIC IV

meaningful reading. The Army can only support so manyof these instruments, and so many
different types to do a given survey job.
At the present time their conceptis that two

gamma measuring instruments per company

limitations must be thrown into the picture

fairly early in the gameso it indicates the di-

rection in which the research and development
effort might be more profitably directed.

Col. Brennan. Thank you.

That was very

will give them an indication of the contours in
the company area. T wonder how many in-

illuminating.

ability to do the same thing in view of the fact

as we used to think. The answers to the problems that Mr. Lindwarm poses certainly T don’t
know. J suspect from an efficiency point of

struments it would take of a beta detecting
that you have such markedvariations.

In the

beta hazard part of this thing, there is so much
variation of the beta dose within a given area,
if you are going to get a meaningful survey, it

Certainly no one can say in view

of the Marshallese and the other data are available that there is no such thing as a betahazard

seems to me you would have to take an awful
lot of instrumentation to do it. If you were

view, the Army and the Armed Forces and the
Civil Defense people should emphasize prophylexis with regard to beta rays. The Marshallese tend to maximize this information for

of beta hazard, the point contact which results
from personnel contamination, again the question comes if you take a simple company with

a hot climate where theyperspire and so forth.
One can look at this and realize the undesirability and seriousness of it, and perhaps take

going to use beta detection for the other type

250 men distributed in a forward area, how do

you go about monitoring every individual,
finding out whether he is contaminated, and
to whatlevel?
There are other practical limitations, and

that is the availability of personnel to do the

monitoring. The present concept in the Army
is that monitoring will be taught as part of the
basic soldierly skill. It will be taught to enlisted men in basic training. It is not simple
now-a-days to get enlisted men to do ordinary
simple gamma measuring in the field.

The

question of getting meaningful beta readings I
think is recognized even among people who

know what they are doing as a quite difficult
thing. Just how to interpret an instrument
reading with the window closed and open takes
quite a bit of interpreting.
Then thelast consideration as far as the prac-

tical limitation is concernedis that we know that
the instrument can do rugged work. We know
even in the hands of technical people these
windows have « habit of being punctured. If

you distribute these types of instruments to
personnel in the field, you stand a very good

chance of
capability
mentation
I think

winding up with no beta detection
but without any gamma instruas well.
certain operational capabilities and

us by wearing few clothing, living out of doors,

care of it by enforcing simple measures, keep

your sleeves down, your helmet on, don’t go
in contaminated areas, and so forth.
The point contact can largely he avoided for

atleast military personnel by simplybattlefield
hygiene measures.

The external beta com-

ponent, whether this has to be allowed for or

routinely measured or measured once in a

while, I think it is impossible to say at the
present time without more experimental data,
and a good deal more developmentof doctrine
and philosophy.

I think the beta problem is

going to be with us militarily and civilianwise
for quite some time.
:
There are many, many industrial hazard
situations in which the beta hazard has likewise

been sort of shoved in the background, and not
solved, because it was heard to approach.

There are many instances in which you have

insoluble particles in the air, many industrial
hazards that are regarded as gaseous and
liquid, which are really not. If the truth were

known theyare particulate and give the point
contact for a beta hazardif theyare inhaled.
Does anyone have any further comment?
Mr. Greene (FCDA). For some time we

havefelt that there was a need for making beta

Measurements, especially for certain types of

civil defense operations.

The most. obvious

145

that I can think of would be reseue workers

who are working in debris and who would have

their faces and hands close to the sources of
radiation, It would certainly be important
for them to know whether they are working in

an area that actually has the contamination
in the debris where they are working or whether

the main source of radiation is from the outside,
From that standpoint we have felt that

there is a requirement for the measurement—and I use the term rather loosely—of beta
radiation and we have incorporated that into
our specifications. We actually have an instrument that is now beginning to come off the

production line which measures beta.

The

problem of fragility is certainly a serious one.
We therefore have not attempted to hava a

beta window as thin as the 7 milligrams per

square centimeter that one might ideally want.
What we have doneis used a thicker window,
and from work in Nevada, and work with Dr.
Failla, we believe we can get a portion of the
betaradiation whichis relatively constant with
time and from that portion with calibration
curve get someideaof the total beta radiation

dose.

Mr. Linpwarm. This fight has been going
on for so many years that it is funny. I
question the requirement why you have to
knowyou are operating in a contaminated area.
You have a gamma reading to tell you that.
You mean if voufind beta, you will take gloves
off or if there is none, you will take them off.
Mr. Greene. You are working with the
You ought to know more
Chemieal Corps.
about it than anybody else. I was talking
aboutyourface and hands. Tf youare working
in rubble, you are close to the debris and your

face is close to it.
Mr. Linpwarm.

I doubt that there would

be any requirement at any time if you are
doing emergency rescue work to go in with a
gas mask for the simple purpose of protecting
your face. As soon as you got out you would
wash your hands andface.
Col. Brennan. Is the gas mask to protect:

from inhalation?
Mr. Greene.

I was thinking of a mask to

Select target paragraph3