ML20129J295
| ML20129J295 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/10/1976 |
| From: | Hironori Peterson NRC OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT |
| To: | Mattson R NRC OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20129J281 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-85-309 NUDOCS 8507220443 | |
| Download: ML20129J295 (2) | |
Text
r -
~ s
, [*%
y 3, / *g UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMisslON g f, ,
g WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 Nov 1 0 :36 R. J. Mattson, Director, Division of Siting, Health & Safeguards Standards, SD Thru:
Jacob s, Kastner, Chief, Environmental Standards Branch, SHSS, SD $j
'/. 'I. C.' Roberts, Assistent Director for Site and Health Standards, SHSS, SD MERITS OF ADDITIONAL STUDIES BY THE flATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIEf!CES ON RADIATION INJURY Recently, several studies have cast doubt on the validity of the health risk cstimates darived by the NAS Advisory Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (SEIR) in their 1972 report. These studies range from showing that the BEIR estimates were too conservative in disregarding departures from a linear dose-effect relationship at low dose (i.e. WASH-1400 Task Group) to those indicating that the original BEIR estimates underestimate the risk (Mancuso, Stewart, and Kneale).
The original BEIR report was largely devoted to a review of human exposure data. Although the NCRP Scientific Cem.nittee SC-40, en the Biological Aspects of Radiation Protection Criteria is currently reviewing the question of dose-effect relationships at low doses, I believe that there still would be merit in having the NAS perform a three-phase review of this issue because of its importance to the setting of radiation standards for the protection of public henith and safety. The three phases that I envision for this review, which could be funded jointly by HRC (RES), EPA, ERDA, and BRH, would be:
- 1. reexamine the BEIR 1972 estimates in light of human data developed subsequent to information reviewed in the 1972 report,
- 2. review the existing data on mammalian radicbiological studies (including animal data) and relate these experimental findings to models of dose-effects relationships developed by Rossi, Baum, and others and summarize the knowledge about:
(a) The mechanisms of radiation injury; (b) potentiation, co-carcinogensis or other synergistic effects with other environmental factors such as pre-existing disease, or other toxic substances in the environment, (c) the apparent dose-rate dependence for health effects due to high-LET and low-LET radiation, specifically the RBE for neutrons and Alpha particles; (d) the. agreement or contradiction of experimental evidence and the predictions of various dose-effect models.
$ 72 g 3 850524 ALVAREZ85-309 PDR
R. J. Mattson
. 2 5
- 3. Recomendations on the assunptions or codels of dose-effect relation-ships that should be used in setting standards for:
(a) occupationally-exposedindividuals, (b) individuals in the general population including the fetus, women of child-bearing age, children, and adults; and (c) large segments of the general population; and recoranendations for where future radiobiological or epidemiological studies would be likely to produce data of value.
w.i.aTNALSW#fggs
.. .yy r. t . g b
H. Peterson Environmental Standards Branch Office of Standards Development DISTRIBUTION:
50 RDG -
SD. ALPHA ESB RDG
, ESB Subject Minogue Smith ~
Mattson Roberts Kastner Peterson l&
s& b.
(whl-7 P
e c.c= *-
eut. J
. ESplSHS:SD ---- -. - ---
soaa...* HPeterson/phpg
.11/5/76 _ _ . , _ , _
oaie > . . . .
Fcana AEC.318 (Rev. 9-53) AEC4 0240 W u. e.eovsanusar rasavene orrecss sen.sae see L<