evaluating biological risk. Appropriate member agencies of the Federal Radia tion Council are sponsoring and encouraging research in these areas. Recommendations. In view of the findings summarized above the following recommendations are made: It is recommended that: 1. There should not be any man-made radiation exposure without the expectation of benefit resulting from such exposure. Activities resulting in man-made radiation exposure should be authorized for useful applications provided rec ommendations set forth herein are followed. It is recommended that: This 2. The term "Radiation Protection Guide" be adopted for Federal use. term is defined as the radiation does which should not be exceeded without care ful consideration of the reasons for doing so; every effort should be made to encourage the maintenance of radiation doses as far below this guide as prac ticable. It is recommended that: 3. The following Radiation Protection Guides be adopted for normal peace time operations: The following points are made in relation to the Radiation Protection Guides herein provided: (1) For the individual in the population, the basic Guide for annual whole body dose is 0.5 rem. This Guide applies when the individual whole body doses are known. As an operational technique, where the individual whole body doses are not known, a suitable sample of the exposed population should be developed whose protection guide for annual whole body dose will be 0.17 rem per capita per year. It is emphasized that this is an operational technique which should be modified to meet special situations. (2) Considerations of population genetics impose a per capita dose limitation for the gonads of 5 rems in 30 years. The operational mechanism described above for the annual individual whole body dose of 0.5 rem is likely in the imme diate future to assure that the gonadal exposure Guide (5 rem in 30 years) is not exceeded. (3) These Guides do not differ substantially from certain other recommendations such as those made by the National Committee on Radiation Protection and Measurements, the National Academy of Sciences, and the International Commis sion on Radiological Protection. (4) The term "maximum permissible dose" is used by the National Committee on Radiation Protection (NCRP) and the International Commission on Radio logical Protection (ICRP). However, this term is often misunderstood. The words "maximum" and "permissible" both have unfortunate connotations not intended by either the NCRP or the ICRP. (5) There can be no single permissible or acceptable level of exposure without regard to the reason for permitting the exposure. It should be general practice to reduce exposure to radiation, and positive effort should be carried out to fulfill the sense of these recommendations. It is basic that exposure to radiation should result from a real determination of its necessity. (6) There can be different Radiation Protection Guides with different numer ical values, depending upon the circumstances. The Guides herein recommended are appropriate for normal peacetime operations. (7) These Guides are not intended to apply to radiation exposure resulting from natural background or the purposeful exposure of patients by practitioners of the healing arts. (8) It is recognized that our present scientific knowledge does not provide a firm foundation within a factor of two or three for selection of any particular numerical value in preference to another value. It should be recognized that the Radiation Protection Guides recommended in this paper are well below the level where biological damage has been observed in humans. It is recommended that: 4. Current protection guides used by the agencies be continued on an interim basis for organ doses to the population. Recommendations are not made concerning the Radiation Protection Guides for individual organ doses to the population, other than the gonads. Unfortunately, the complexities of establishing guides applicable to radiation exposure of all body organs preclude the Council from making recommendations concerning them at this time. However, current protection guides used by the agencies appear appropriate on an interim basis. It is recommended that: 5. The term “Radioactivity Concentration Guide” be adopted for Federal use. This term is defined as the concentration of radioactivity in the environment which is determined to result in whole body or organ doses equal to the Radiation Protection Guide. Within this definition, Radioactivity Concentration Guides can be determined after the Radiation Protection Guides are decided upon. Any given Radioactivity Concentration Guide is applicable only for the circumstances under which the use of its corresponding Radiation Protection Guide is appropriate. It is recommended that: 6. The Federal agencies, as an interim measure, use radioactivity concentration guides which are consistent with the recommended Radiation Protection Guides. Where no Radiation Protection Guides are provided, Federal agencies continue present practices. No specific numerical recommendations for Radioactivity Concentration Guides are provided at this time. However, concentration guides now used by the agencies appear appropriate on an interim basis. Where appropriate radioactivity concentration guides are not available, and where Radiation Protection Guides for specific organs are provided herein, the latter Guides can be used by the Federal agencies as a starting point for the derivation of radioactivity concentration guides applicable to their particular problems. The Federal Radiation Council has also initiated action directed toward the development of additional Guides for radiation protection. It is recommended that: 7. The Federal agencies apply these Radiation Protection Guides with judgment and discretion, to assure that reasonable probability is achieved in the attainment of the desired gval of protecting man from the undesirable effects of radiation. The Guides may be exceeded only after the Federal agency having jurisdiction over the matte- has carefully considered the reason for doing so in light of the recommendation, in this paper. The Radiation Protection Guides provide a general framework for the radiation protection requirements. It is expected that each Federal agency, by virtue of its immediate knowledge of its operating problems, will use these Guides as a basis upon which to develop detailed standards tailored to meet its particular requirements. The Council will follow the activities of the Federal agencies in this area and promote the necessary coordination to achieve an effective Federal program. If the foregoing recommendations are approved by you for the guidance of Federal agencies in the conduct of their radiation protection activities, it is further recommended that this memorandum be published in the FEDERAL REGISTER. ARTHUR S. FLEMMING, Chairman, Federal Radiation Council. The recommendations numbered "1" through "7" contained in the above memorandum are approved for the guidance of Federal agencies, and the memorandum shall be published in the FEDERAL REGISTER. DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER. MAY 13, 1960. [F.R. Doc. 60-4539; filed, May 17, 1960; 8:51 a.m.] 58454-60- -9 ATTACHMENT 1 STAFF MEMBERS OF FEDERAL AGENCIES CONSULTED BY FEDERAL RADIATION COUNCIL STAFF ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION Dr. Forrest Western, Office of Health and Safety. Dr. Clifford Beck, Hazards Evaluation Branch. Mr. Lester R. Rodgers, Division of Licensing and Regulation. Lt. Col C. M. Barnes, Division of Reactor Development. PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE Dr. Francis J. Weber, Division of Radiological Health. Mr. Ralph Graber, Division of Engineering Services. Mr. Harold B. Robinson, Division of Engineering Services. Mr. Robert Porter, Division of Engineering Services. Mr. Richard S. Green, Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control. Dr. Duncan Holaday, Division of Special Health Services. Dr. Abraham Goldin, Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center. Dr. Donald Rushing, Division of Special Health Services. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION Dr. Edwin P. Laug, Division of Pharmacology, Bureau of Biological and Physical Sciences. Mr. Shelbey Grey, Bureau of Program Planning and Appraisal. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Mr. Richard A. Schwarz, Assistant to Under Secretary of Labor. NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS Dr. Lauriston S. Taylor. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Dr. Frank Todd, Agricultural Research Service. Dr. Robert F. Reitemeier, Soil and Water Conservation Research Division Dr. Ronald G. Menzel, Soil and Water Conservation Research Division. U.S. COAST GUARD Capt. C. P. Murphy, Merchant Marine Safety Office. Capt. D. T. Adams, Merchant Marine Safety Office. Capt. J. J. Hutson, Port Security and Law Enforcement. Comdr. L. F. Sudnik, Chief of Legislative Section, Legal Division. Comdr. George Steinman, Merchant Marine Safety Office (Technical). Lt. Comdr. Mark Mitchell, Port Security and Law Enforcement. Lt. J. A. Flynn, Port Security and Law Enforcement. DEFENSE ATOMIC SUPPLY AGENCY, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Capt. J. A. O'Donoghue. ATTACHMENT 2 CONSULTANTS FROM OUTSIDE THE GOVERNMENT TO FEDERAL RADIATION COUNCIL STAFF Dr. Claude W. Sill, National Reactor Testing Site. Dr. Morris F. Milligan, Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory. Mr. Herbert M. Parker, General Electric, Hanford Works. Dr. G. Fialla, Columbia University. Dr. C. B. Braestrup, Columbia University. Dr. William Russell, Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Dr. K. Z. Morgan, Union Carbide Nuclear Co.-Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Dr. Walter Snyder, Union Carbide Nuclear Co.-Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Dr. James Sterner, Eastman Kodak. Dr. Victor Bond, Brookhaven National Laboratory. Dr. Shields Warren, New England Deaconess Hospital. Mr. R. G. McAlister, American Standards Association and Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. Dr. James Neel, University of Michigan. Dr. William B. Looney, Johns Hopkins University. Dr. Philip Sartwell, Johns Hopkins University. Dr. Henry Blair, University of Rochester. Dr. Edward B. Lewis, California Institute of Technology. Dr. Hermann J. Muller, Indiana University. Dr. L. D. Marinelli, Argonne National Laboratory. Dr. Austin Brues, Argonne National Laboratory. Dr. R. J. Hasterlik, Argonne Cancer Research Hospital. Dr. Richard Chamberlain, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. William Moloney, Boston City Hospital. Dr. Robley Evans, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dr. Robert Dudley, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (Thereupon at 12:15 p.m., a recess was taken until 2 p.m., the same day.) AFTERNOON SESSION Representative HOLIFIELD. The committee will be in order. The first witness this afternoon will be Dr. Charles R. Williams, assistant vice president of Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. Dr. Williams, will you please come forward? STATEMENT OF CHARLES R. WILLIAMS,1 PH. D., ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO., BOSTON, MASS. Dr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Holifield, I would like to express my appreciation to your committee for the privilege of being here and to add my expression of appreciation also to the committee for delving into this 1 Assistant vice president, director of industrial hygiene services, Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., 175 Berkeley Street, Boston, Mass., and associate professor of applied industrial hygiene, Harvard School of Public Health, 55 Shattuck Street, Boston, Mass. Consultant, health division, Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, University of California, Los Alamos, N. Mex.; member, teaching staff, Colby College course in industrial audiology. Born: Schenectady, N.Y., 1908. Education: Schenectady public schools; Union College, Schenectady, N.Y., A.B., 1929; Harvard University, A.M., 1930, Ph. D., 1934. Member: Sigma Xi, national honorary scientific society; Delta Omega, national honorary public health society; American Industrial Hygiene Association (past president); Acoustical Society of America; Atomic Industrial Forum; Health Physics Society (chairman, legal committee; advisory board for journal (Health Physics)). Committees: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (U.S. Atomic Energy Commission); Advisory Committee to the Surgeon General on Occupational Health (U.S. Public Health Service); Inspection Committee-Mutual Atomic Energy Reinsurance Pool (chairman); Subcommittee on Atmospheric and Industrial Hygiene National Research Council; American Standards Association: Nuclear Standards Board, Z-37-Allowable Concentra very complicated problem. I certainly hope you come up with some answers to the perplexing questions facing all of us. I have a prepared statement which is in the hands of the committee. I should like to request the privilege of deviating from time to time in minor sorts of ways. Detailed material on various phases of radiation hazards relative to the activities of many official agencies and other groups concerned with radiation safety has been presented to the committee in several hearings. In discussing radiation standards I am assuming that we are covering only those codes, standards, and regulations which are applicable to health and safety as distinguished from many other kinds of standards in the nuclear energy field. For purposes of discussing the relationships between those groups which are concerned with the protection of the health and safety of industrial workers as well as the general public it would be helpful, first, to attempt to divide them into groups relating to their basic function and activities. This is not a simple thing to do because many of these organizations have expanded their activities from simple beginnings to attempts to cover the entire field. DEVELOPMENT OF BASIC DATA AND STANDARDS Both the NCRP and the ICRP originally assumed the responsibility of providing basic information on which subsequent regulations were based. Within the last 7 to 8 years, however, NCRP has expanded its activities far beyond this to development of specific standards, dealing not only with maximum permissible doses but also having broadened its interest to include such matters as legislation. The American Standards Association, on the other hand, has long been involved in broad standardization work and has done little at the basic level, such as NCRP has done. I would like to remind many of those in the room who are probably already familiar with it that on April 15, 1946, the American Standards Association published a code entitled "Safety Code for Industrial Use of X-Rays." This is probably the first radiation code we had in the country. Here again the work was based on earlier work by the National Committee on Radiation Protection and utilized the maximum permissible dose available at that time. There are significant differences between the methods of operation of the NCRP and the American Standards Association--the two most important groups in radiation standards work. The works of the NCRP is done in committee as it is with the ASA, but once the com mittee has been able to find agreement, the material is published, largely in the form of handbooks of the National Bureau of Standards As you know well, these handbooks do not carry any weight of law, but are intended to guide individuals who are working in the field. tions of Toxic Dusts and Gases, Z-54-Industrial Use of X-ray and Radium, Z-62-Unl form Industrial Standards. U.S. delegate to organization meeting of International Organization for Standardiz tion--Technical Committee 85 "Standardization for Nuclear Energy"-Geneva, Switzer land, 1957. Present activities: Prevention of occupational disease from toxic materials; control of radiation expostures from all sources; prevention of loss of hearing from noise; evaluation and control of possible exposures to microwaves. Publications: Approximately 50 publications in the occupational health field. |