have a formal agreement assuring interchange of information and

services.

Within the State health department close liaison between the occupational and radiological health section and many other sections is, of course, necessary because of the radiological health problems related to water pollution control; radioactive fallout surveillance; food, milk and drug controls; recommended limited use of X-raying in tuberculosis case finding programs; civil defense participation; and precautions against emergencies involving radiation and radioactive materials.

SUMMARY

There are at this time approximately 400 uranium mines supporting a $60 million source materials industry within the State of Colorado. The Public Health Service and the State of Colorado Department of Public Health have been studying the health hazards in this industry. A group of about 3,200 men has been assembled and is being followed to determine their health experience. The record of this group, together with the environmental data, will eventually enable us to assess the hazard associated with exposure to ionizing radiation.

Sufficient time has not elapsed to determine categorically whether or not the health experience of our study group is different from other industry workers; however, the data that are available are disturbing. Our group originally contained about 50 men who had at least 1 year of uranium mining experience prior to 1942. That does not mean that these men worked continuously. However, they worked spasmodically since 1942. Sixteen of these have died in the last 3 years, four from lung cancer. These numbers are too small to permit firm conclusions to be drawn, but they may be indicative of the future developments.

Our environmental data show that the newer mines, working large ore bodies, are reasonably successful in controlling the atmospheric concentrations to radon and its daughters. In the older mines, the workers are still exposed to high levels of these elements. Our 1957 environmental samples showed that in Colorado 50 percent of the active areas exceeded five times the working level for radon daughters. In Arizona, 50 percent of the active areas exceeded four times the working level. These levels may be compared with the concentrations reported to exist in the European mines which probably ranged from 20 to 180 times the working level in the active parts of the mines. In those mines from 50 to 75 percent of the workers contracted lung cancer, after 7 to 27 years of exposure.

Or coverage of the mines is incomplete, but it appears that about 1,500 men are working in roughly 300 uncontrolled, or poorly controlled mines. These mines are primarily in Colorado and Arizona, though all States have some problem areas. It is discouraging to observe that our environmental samples do not show any marked improvement in these mines in the last 2 years.

It is our opinion that although at this time the statistics are inconclusive, there is strong evidence that there should be more effective controls of the airborne radioactive contaminants in uranium mines. If the present situation continues, there is a real possibility that a

number of men will be unnecessarily endangered. Correction measures should be taken immediately.

As a result of joint studies by the State and Federal agencies interested in the health and safety of uranium miners there are definite indications that additional action should be taken to adequately protect the health of individuals engaged in this occupation from radiation hazards.

I would like to add also that our activities are not limited to uranium mining. We do have a registration act. We have an emer gency program for accidents regarding radioactive materials. We do inspection of isotopes. Our program is very similar to that outlined by the gentleman from Texas.

Chairman ANDERSON. Do you happen to know whether the law in Wyoming requires the monthly checks of radon in the mines? Wyoming is developing some new mines and some new mills. Since you are familiar with the general area, do you happen to know that?

Mr. JACOE. To my knowledge, Wyoming does not require that. At last report Wyoming had only two or three underground uranium mines. Most of them are open pit mines, and therefore they do not have a problem as yet.

Chairman ANDERSON. The biggest mine in our area is possibly open pit. We have some other types, too.

You mentioned this 4- to 6-month interval for inspection. Do you think that is adequate? If there were funds available would you like to do it more frequently?

Mr. JACOE. Yes. That is a minimum. Actually it would be designed to determine ventilation conditions during warm weather, during transition periods and during very cold weather. Development in these days is very fast and areas are opened up so that the ventilation equipment in use does become inadequate very rapidly.

Chairman ANDERSON. I thought this was a fine presentation. I appreciate Colorado giving us information on it because you have a lot of experience with it.

Mr. Toll has a question.

Mr. TOLL. Mr. Aspinall had to leave to go to the floor of the House, but he asked me to ask these questions for his information.

Do you think that Colorado has sufficient statutory and regulatory authority to protect those working in the mines and mills of uranium operations?

Mr. JACOE. I personally don't feel that we do. The tolerance exists in the Colorado Bureau of Mines law. It does not say "shall not exceed." It says, "should not exceed." Therefore, there is some doubt whether it is enforceable.

Mr. TOLL. How does Colorado police or inspect the mines? Could you indicate how frequently most mines are inspected?

Mr. JACOE. The mines are inspected quite frequently. Once or twice a year at least for safety hazards by the Colorado Bureau of Mines. That does not mean that evaluations are made for radioactive materials.

There are some mines that we have not gone into at all. We have not been able to cover them all since that work is technical and is not done by mine inspectors.

Mr. TOLL. What has Colorado done through its State board of health to secure the necessary personnel in order to make satisfactory number of inspections?

Mr. JACOE. We have added two men to our staff within the last 9 months in addition to the request for funds from the legislature, which was granted for this 1-year emergency program that I outlined in this discussion here: These two men for a 3-month period and one man for a full year period will do nothing but mine survey work in uranium mines only. The results, or the findings, of those three men will determine the request for funds at the next meeting of the legislature, so that we will know in which direction we are heading.

(At this point, Congressman Aspinall returned to the hearing room.) Mr. TOLL. Mr. Aspinall and I visited one mine in Colorado last fall where the ventilation equipment had broken down and was not operating. Do you have any penalties that you can impòse upon a mine operator who operates mines under conditions that are not designed for safe operation?

Mr. JACOE. Not in the health department. Penalties do exist in the mining law of the Colorado Bureau of Mines.

Chairman ANDERSON. I am sure your department does a reasonable job of checking as quickly as you can and trying to make sure that the operators have their plants in operating shape.

Mr. JACOE. Yes. Of course, the coverage is inadequate. We realize that. There are a great number of mines, and very few people to cover them.

Chairman ANDERSON. You had a great many mines that were just gopher holes and mined out pretty quickly.

Mr. JACOE. That is correct.

Chairman ANDERSON. It is difficult to keep track of all of them. Mr. ASPINALL. May I make this observation, Mr. Chairman? According to your statement, Mr. Jacoe, there are 400 uranium mines in Colorado. Of course some of them are very small mines. Colorado does not have the personnel either in the bureau of mines safety work or in the public health safety work to make very much of an inspection annually.

Mr. JACOE. That is correct. A very quick cursory inspection is made by the bureau of mines' inspectors. As you understand, travel is very difficult in those areas. The area in which most of the mines lie in the Colorado Plateau area, 75 percent being in that area, there are two inspectors of the Colorado Bureau of Mines assigned to that are, and one of them is a recent addition. There was just one man formerly in that area.

Chairman ANDERSON. Thank you very much.

Dr. Visscher, we will be happy to hear from you.

Dr. VISSCHER. Mr. Anderson, I am very happy to be able to contribute something to this hearing in connection with problems of State and Federal cooperation and regulation of ionizing radiation sources. The State of Minnesota has adopted a slightly different point of view from that of other States with regard to at least one aspect of this problem. The State of Minnesota has not been involved in any active regulation of ionizing radiation sources until very recently. As a

matter of fact, under statutory authority the Minnesota State Board of Health has adopted on December 4, 1958, a group of regulations on ionizing radiation, a copy of which I have supplied to the committee. (The document referred to follows:)

MINNESOTA STATE BOARD OF HEALTH REGULATIONS ON IONIZING RADIATION

Reg. 1150. Declaration of purpose and scope

Whereas, ionizing radiation can be instrumental in the improvement of health, welfare, and productivity of the public if properly utilized, and may impair the health of the people and the industrial and agricultural potentials of the State if improperly utilized, and the Board of Health has the statutory authority and duty to adopt, alter, and enforce regulations for the preservation of the public health and thereby to control sources of ionizing radiation, and the handling, storage, transportation, use, and disposal of radioactive isotopes and fissionable materials within this State, and to observe their effect upon human health, it is hereby declared to be the purpose of the Board of Health in these regulations to secure information concerning the nature and extent of the employment of radiation-emitting equipment and radioactive materials within this State, and to control or prevent dangers to health from ionizing radiation without limiting or interfering with the constructive uses of radiation. Nothing in these regulations is to be construed to limit the kind and amount of radiation that may be intentionally applied to a person for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes by or under the direction of a licensed practitioner of the healing arts.

As used in these regulations, the following terms shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them:

"Radiation" means ionizing radiation regardless of whether or not the qualifying adjective is used with the term. The definition therefore includes gamma rays and X-rays, 'alpha and beta particles, protons, and other nuclear particles, but does not include sound or radio waves, or visible, infrared or ultraviolet light.

"Person" means any person, association, corporation, or legal entity, and includes agencies of the State and of the subdivisions of the State.

"Appropriate limit" or "appropriate limits" mean the maximum permissible dose or doses of radiation that, in the light of present knowledge, may be administered to the whole body or a given part of the body of a human being with the reasonable expectation that such administration will not cause any appreciable bodily injury to that person at any time during his lifetime. The quantitative amounts of the "appropriate limits" or maximum permissible doses are presumed to be the quantitative standards established for maximum permissible doses as set forth in the recommendations of the National Committee on Radiation Protection and Measurements and published in the handbooks of the National Bureau of Standards, specifically, Handbook 52, "Maximum Permissible Amounts of Radioisotopes in the Human Body and Maximum Permissible Concentrations in Air and Water," U.S. Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, March 1953, and Handbook 59, "Permissible Dose from External Sources of Ionizing Radiation," U.S. Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, September 24, 1954, with Addendum dated April 15, 1958.

"Radioactive material" is any material or materials, solid, liquid, or gas, that emit radiation spontaneously.

"Radiation machine" means any machine, mechanism, electronic arrangement, or device that emits radiation when energy is applied to it or when the associated control instruments or devices are operated.

"Radiation source" means any radiation machine or machines and/or radioactive material or materials as defined in these regulations.

"Radiation hazard" means any condition that might result in the exposure of persons to radiation in excess of the appropriate limit or limits.

Reg. 1152. Radiation symbol and labeling

a. Each radiation sign or label shall bear the standard symbol specified in these regulations and appropriate printed warning such as CAUTION-RADIATION, in capital block letters. The standard symbol for designating any radiation hazard shall be a circle with three propellerlike blades arranged around it as illustrated:

60°

60°

The boundaries of the three blades of the propellerlike symbol shall be confined within a 60° sector of the circle delineated by their outer edges, and said blades shall be symmetrically distributed 60° apart. The radius (R) of the central circle of the symbol shall be the standard for its other dimensions as follows: overall radius of symbol=5R; shortest distance from circumference of central circle to inner edge of nearest blade=R/2. The standard color specification shall be a background of yellow with lettering and distictive symbol in purple (magenta). The symbol and lettering shall be as large as practical, consistent with the size of the equipment or material upon which they appear.

b. The use of the specified radiation symbol for any other purpose than designating or referring to a radiation hazard is expressly prohibited.