DRAFT.
LounertonnitinadLaboratory |
Jonmsey 24, 1808
Mr... Tordiay. NeGraw
EP 842: 1
u.
5,
Dept, ‘of Energy
Washington, DC 20545
Dear ‘Mr. Cannon:
The Department of Eheruy hes conducted the review of the proposed
guidance for transuranium elements in the environment by a technical committee
at promised in aur letter of November 15, 1983.
The following comments and
recommendations arese from this review..
In our letter of July 8, 1981, we indicated that we had no object ions*to
the basic dose equivalent limits proposed as guidance.
There were also many
addi tidaal comments on the draft guidance as then proposed iacludiag a
reference to the nearly 360 pages of technical comments provided cartier.
In
our. current review, we felt that there have been many developmentssince this
letter was written whitch! caused us ta change our position on these. numerical
values: in the guideace.
These include the recent developments in risk based
contral of exposure by the ICRP aad, more recently, the proposed risk system
of tte NCR,
The obsolescence of the detailed guidance now proposed by the
EPA: 13 an faportant facter.
This guidance was developed in accord with a
request from the Stete of Colorado to provide guidance for control of the
Rocky Flats contamination.
This s{tuation now seems to be under control and
other existing sites of contamination with transuranium elements appear to
present little or no problems.
Thus, the primary use of the guidance appears
to be future weapons accidents or accidents in launching a nuclear power
Ae Equal Oppettuntitg Emnpterer/Opersted by University of Caifornia
~
/