r‘w‘" "1 '3" r}: . ‘ ’ WERAGENCY ‘ TASK FORCE ON THE HEALTH EFFECTS or IONIZING RADIATION—3 I/{EPORT OF THE WORK GROUP / ON SCIENCE .wc- ‘ v DOCUMEI‘JTS DEE3-“aRT?-..":EE‘H P ham [‘5. ‘ UNIVERSE? C.‘ CL.‘«.1E:"CI'?:!Z‘A 0.3. DEPoslTORY JUN 27.1979 7 JUNE 1979 Q Printed and distributed by the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare WashingtOnl D. C. l KA/QB/ BACKGROUND 5:;21 MS"! {0 PW}? 3336?: §E P ’ V" C’ FUBL puma, In May, 1978, the White House directed the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare to "coordinate the formulation of a program" covering (1) research on the health effects of radiation exposure, (2) public "information on radiation, (3) care and benefits for persons adversely affected by radiation exposure, and (4) steps to reduce adverse radiation exposure. To carry out the Presidential directive an Interagency Task Force on the Health Effects of Ionizing Radiation was established comprised of the Departments of Defense, Energy, and Labor, the Veterans Administration, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Health, Education and Welfare as chair. The Task Force completed seven reports over the course of its work: 0 Final Report of the Task Force which reviews the Work Group Reports of the agencies' staffs and recommends a future program. 115203 Science Work Group Report which describes the health effects associated with radiation exposure, includes an inventory of federally supported radiation research, with particular emphasis on human studies, and recommends areas for future research. Privacy Work Group Report which recommends administrative and legislative changes to permit easier access by health researchers to records while, at the same time, protecting personal privacy. Care and Benefits Work Group Report which examines existing systems for providing care and benefits to persons who may have been injured by radiation exposure and recommends additional guidelines for handling radiation- related claims. Exposure Reduction Work Group Report which reviews present efforts to reduce exposure to radiation and recommends a range of additional measures for consideration. _ ii _ 0 Public Information Work Group Report which outlines public information programs for the general population and particular groups exposed to radiation. 0 Task Force Report on Institutional Arrangements which describes current institutional arrange- ments among Federal agencies concerned with the use, study, and control of ionizing radiation and recommends changes to improve coordination, effectiveness, and responsive- ness among them. Drafts of these seven reports were made available for public comment and were distributed to scientists of varying viewpoints, public interest and environmental groups, representatives of the nuclear power industry and the medical professions, labor unions, veterans' organizations, and State agencies. These groups were asked to submit their views formally and informally, orally and in writing, throughout the Task Force proceedings. The public comments received were considered in the preparation of the final Report of the Task Force and the final Work Group Reports. The - iii - written public comments have been summarized and com- piled in a separate volume. The Work Group Reports contain the proposed recommen- dations of the Work Group members, and the Task Force Report contains the proposed recommendations of the Task Force members. The final recommendations of the agencies will be contained in a report to the White House. -iv- THE WHITE HOUSE WASH'NGTON May 9, 1978 MEEEORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE THE SECRETARY OF HEALTH, EDUCATION u” AND WELFARE THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY THE ADMINISTRATOR OF VETERANS AFFAIRS ?7Z: FROM: STUART EIZBNSTAT 37 0.2. ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI SUBJECT: _ radiation Exposure Inquiry o The President has approved the development of a coordinated response to the growing agency and Congressional concern about the effects of radiation exposure on participants in nuclear tests and workers in nuclear-related projects. ” The Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare should coordinate the formulation of a program including the following: 1. A study or series of studies which would determine the effects of radiation exposure on participants in nuclear tests, including members of the armed forces and civilian 'personnel, workers at nuclear facilities and projects, and other persons as indicated- 2. A public information program to inform persons who might have been affected and the general public about the steps being taken and the CODdI t of the studies. 3. A plan for ensuring that persons adversely affected by radiation exposure receive the care and benefits to which they may be or should be entitled. 4. Recommendations on steps which can be taken to reduce the incidence of adverse radiation exposure of this type in the future. We are aware that the Department of Defense has initiated' a study and that the Center for Disease Control has under- taken at least two investigations. Our intent is that these efforts become a coordinated Administration approach to the problem. A proposed plan of action should be prepared for review by June 1, 1978. The staff of the National Security Council, the Domestic Policy Staff and the Office of Science and Technology Policy within the Executive Office are available to assist the interagency group. INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE ON THE HEALTH EFFECTS OF IONIZING RADIATION CHAIRMAN: F. Peter Libassi Department of Health, Education & Welfare F. Peter Libassi General Counsel Room 722-A, Humphrey Bldg. 200 Independence Ave SW Washington, DC 20201 Dr. Donald S. Fredrickson Director, National Institutes of Health Room 124, Bldg. #1 9000 Rockville Pike Bethesda, Maryland 20014 Dr. William H. Foege Director, Center for Disease Control Room 2104, Building #1 1600 Clifton Road NE Atlanta, GA 30333 Dr. Arthur Upton Director, National Cancer Institute Rm II-A—52, Bldg. #31 9000 Rockville Pike Bethesda, Maryland 20014 Dr. Donald Kennedy Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration Room 14—88, Parklawn Bldg. '5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, Maryland 20857 - vii - Linda Donaldson, Project Manager Office of Legal Counsel, OGC Room 706-E, Humphrey Bldg. 200 Independence Ave SW Washington, DC 20201 Dr. Gilbert W. Beebe Clinical Epidemiology Branch National Cancer Institute Room A521, Landow Bldg. 7010 Woodmont Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 21609 Dr. Clark Heath Director, Chronic Diseases Division, Bureau of Epidemiology, CDC Room 5112, Building #1 1600 Clifton Road NE Atlanta, GA 30333 Dr. Charles Land Statistician, Health Environmental Epidemiology Branch National Cancer Institute Room 3C07, Landow Building 7910 Woodmont Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 20014 John C. Villforth, Director, Bureau of Radiological Health, FDA Twinbrook Research Laboratories 5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, Maryland 20857 Department of Defense Vice Admiral Robert Monroe Director, Defense Nuclear Agency 6801 Telegraph Road Alexandria, Virginia Department of Energy Ruth Clusen Assistant Secretary for Environment Room 4228 20 Massachusetts Ave NW Washington, DC 20545 Department of Labor Robert Copeland Director, Office of Health and Disability ASPER Room So. 2121 200 Constitution Ave NW Washington, DC 20210 Environmental Protection Agency David Hawkins Assistant Administrator For Air & Waste Management Rm 937, W. Tower, Waterside Mall 401 M Street SW Washington, DC 20460 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Robert B. Minogue Director, Office of Standards Development Room 120 5650 Nicholson Lane Washington, DC 20555 - viii Dr. James Liverman Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment Room 4228 20 Massachusetts Ave NW Washington, DC 20545 William Mills Director, Criteria & Standards Division (ANR-460) Office of Radiation Programs 401 M Street SW Washington, DC 20460 Karl R. Goller Director, Division of Siting, Health & Safety Standards Office of Standards Development 5650 Nicholson Lane Washington, DC 20555 veterans Administration Dr. Lawrence B. Hobson Deputy Assistant Chief Medical Director for Research & Development Room 644-E, Veterans Administration 810 Vermont Avenue NW Washington, DC 20420 Staff Kathleen Blackburn, Attorney Office of the General Counsel, HEW Room 672, Parklawn Bldg. 5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, Md. 20857 Mary Pendergast, Attorney Office of the General Counsel, HEW Room 7ll-E, Humphrey Bldg. 200 Independence Ave SW Washington, DC 20201 June Zeitlin, Special Assistant to the General Counsel, HEW Room 722-A, Humphrey Bldg. 200 Independence Ave SW Washington, DC 20201 K.S. Reagan, Attorney Office of the General Counsel, HEW Room 7ll—E, Humphrey Bldg. 200 Independence Ave SW Washington, DC 20201 INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE ON THE HEALTH EFFECTS OF IONIZING RADIATION Task Force Work Groups Science -— Privacy -— Public Information -- Care & Benefits -- Exposure Reduction -- Dr. Clark Health (Chair) Center for Disease Control, HEW Room 512A, Building #1 1600 Clifton Road NE Atlanta, GA 30333 Steven J. Cole (Chair) Office of the General Counsel, HEW Room 706-E, Humphrey Bldg. 200 Independence Ave SW Washington, DC 20201 Nancy Low (Chair) Office of Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs, HEW Room 63l-F, Humphrey Bldg. 200 Independence Ave SW Washington, DC 20201 Donald Gonya (Chair) Deputy Assistant General Counsel Room 601 Altmeyer Bldg. 6401 Security Boulevard Baltimore, Maryland 21235 Kathleen Blackburn (Co-Chair) Office of the General Counsel, HEW Room 672, Parklawn Bldg. 5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, Maryland 20857 Mary Pendergast Office of the General Counsel, HEW Room 711—E, Humphrey Bldg. 200 Independence Ave SW Washington, DC 20201 Dennis Tolsma (Co—Chair) Center for Disease Control, HEW Room 2035, Building #1 1600 Clifton Road NE Atlanta, GA 30333 ‘Xi- I. II. III. SCIENCE Table of Contents IntrOdUCtion o.oa.ooooooI.Ono-00.000000000000000. Review of Current Knowledge A. B. Hmn Stlflies no.noIInna-ootoooloooolooooooo 1. Acute Somatic Effects Developmental Effects Genetic Effects Late Somatic Effects a. AtomBombRadiation.............. b. MedicalRadiation................ c. Occupational Radiation d. Background Radiation e. Contamination of the Envirommnt OOOOIOIOOOOOOCOCOIOIOI Estimates of Radiogenic Cancer Risks O0.0..0.DIOOOOIOIQIOOIOOOO0...... a. Current Risk Estimates b. Risk Estimates at Low-dose Levels I.O...DDOOIOIIIIIIIDIOOIOI. Experimental Studies Current Research . A. B. C. Hmn StUdieS noII.acocooooooo-oooooo-oonooo Experimental Studies Pathway StUdieS .0...OOOOOOIIIOIIIOIOOODUOIO - xiii - Page 10 l3 l7 19 20 20 20 22 26 27 30 31 33 Page IV. Conclusions and Recommendations ................. 33 A. Data Collection and Record Systems ......... 36 B. Low~dose Effects ........................... 37 C. High and Low-dose Rates .................... 41 D. Radionuclides .............................. 41 E. Genetic Effects ............................ 42 F. Interaction with Other Factors ............. 43 V. Summary .......................................... 44 VI. References cocoon-OlooocoooolooOOOOIOOODQOOOOOOSII 46 Appendices 1. Science Wbrk Group .......................... 55 2. Background Information on Ionizing Radiation .00....00....00....0000000000000000 57 3. Quantitative Estimates of Radiogenic CancerRiSk .0...I.-..ICOIOOOOOOIUIOCOOOOOOI. 60 4. Estimation of Risk frcnlLow-dose Exposures to Ionizing Radiation ............. 63 5. Current Federally Supported Studies Concerning Human Health Effects of Ionizing Radiation OOIUOIOOOOOOCOIIOOOIOOIIII 77 6. Current Federally Supported Experimental Studies Concerning Biologic Effects of Ionizing Radiation ....................... 88 7. Current Federally Supported Studies Concerning Environmental Distribution and Pathways of Radioactive Materials ....... 117 8. Data Record Systems ......................... 126 - xiv — I. INTRODUCTION Much of our present uncertainty about the biologic effects of ionizing radiation centers on effects at low- dose levels._:/ One indication of this uncertainty is the current controversy surrounding several recent epidemiologic analyses which suggest that low—dose radi— ation exposure may be more effective in causing cancer than had previously been predicted. Populations studied in these recent analyses have included radiation workers at nuclear facilities (1), including nuclear shipyards (2), and persons receiving medical diagnostic x-rays (3, 4), situtations in which exposure levels are known to be in the low range. Also of concern have been recent studies involving persons present at atmospheric nuclear bomb tests (5) or exposed to fallout from such testing (6). Exposure levels in these latter 2 settings, while possibly low, as yet are somewhat uncertain. The implications of these various sets of data, if confirmed, may be far-reaching with respect to occupa- tional standards and medical practices. Their interpre- tation at present, therefore, is a matter of considerable scientific and public concern. In response to this con- cern, the White House in May, 1978, requested that the Secretary of HEW coordinate formulating an interagency program to assess current knowledge regarding the health effects of ionizing radiation, and to address concerns about care and benefits available to exposed persons, public health education, and measures to reduce dose levels. In response to this executive request, the Interagency Task Force on Ionizing Radiation was formed. Although the White House memorandum expressed particular concern about radiation exposures of nuclear workers and bomb test participants, the Task Force recognized that such particular exposures could not be fully eval- uated without reviewing the entire scope of human exposures to ionizing radiation and its potential for biologic effects. :/ The term "low-dose", unless indicated otherwise, refers in this report to whole-body dose levels below individual occupational dose standards and in most cases to doses lower than 1 rem per year. The Task Force proceeded to organize its work around a series of tasks, the first two of which concerned 1) review and evaluation of current knowledge regarding the biologic effects of ionizing radiation and 2) develop- ment of recommendations for future research directions. These two tasks have been the responsibility of the Task Force's Science Work Group. In carrying out its assignment, the Work Group met on several occasions during the summer and early autumn of 1978 and has produced the present document. A listing of Work Group members is given in Appendix 1. The intent of this report is not to provide a fully detailed assessment of all knowledge regarding radiation biology, but to summarize current information with parti— cular emphasis on human low-dose exposures. In this process, human epidemiologic studies have been reviewed in substantially greater detail than experimental and laboratory research. Data contained in this report have been developed from publicly available sources, and primarily from material published in the scientific literature. The general subject of ionizing radiation and its biologic effects has been studied extensively over many years. Several recent comprehensive reviews exist, particularly the 1972 report of the National Academy of Science's Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (the BEIR 1972 report) (7), and the 1977 report of the United Nations' Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (the UNSCEAR report) (8). Frequent reference has been made to material contained in these two reports in the process of developing the present review. Very recently, the NAS-BEIR Committee released a new report (9). The Science Work Group has chosen not to cite this report extensively, partly because its general conclusions and risk estimates appear not to differ substantially from those of earlier reports, and partly because the Group did not receive the report in time to re- view its contents in detail. The following Work Group report is organized in three sections. First, current knowledge regarding the biologic effects of ionizing radiation is reviewed with emphasis on human epidemiologic studies and on recent observations in low-dose exposure situations. Second, the report reviews the scope of current research being supported from federal sources, with regard both to human studies and to experimental and environmental work. Finally, it develops specific recommendations concerning future research approaches in major areas where scientific questions remain. Readers of this report should be aware from the outset that substantial methodologic difficulties surround interpretation of scientific data concerning human radia- tion effects, particularly at low-dose levels. These difficulties are not unique to radiation studies but apply to virtually every epidemiologic study of any human environmental exposure. Man cannot be exposed deliberately to radiation on an experimental basis except when some personal medical benefit may be involved. Direct knowledge, therefore, concerning effects of radiation on human health is essentially limited to medical and epidemiologic studies of populations exposed non—experimentally to radiation. Evaluation of such studies requires recognition of their non-experimental nature and hence their limitations in terms of imperfect records and incomplete control over competing exposure variables (chemical carcinogens, for instance). Size of study population is also a highly critical factor, particularly for low-dose studies. It should not be considered unusual, therefore, if firm con- clusions regarding low-dose effects cannot be established from current data or even from data potentially available in the relatively near future. This, of course, need not discourage future studies of health effects at low-doses. Studies of populations exposed to low—dose radiation can at least help to define upper limits for radiation exposure safety. In addition, they may be useful in exploring potential interactions between radiation, other environmental exposures and host susceptibility factors, provided suitable data are available for followup of exposed persons and for reasonably precise estimates of exposure levels. Ultimately, agreement of results among multiple studies and their general biologic plausibility will determine the extent to which observations become accepted as scientific fact. II. REVIEW OF CURRENT KNOWLEDGE A. Human Studies The human health effects of ionizing radiation may be classified as l) acute somatic effects, 2) late soma- tic effects, 3) developmental or teratogenic effects, and 4) genetic effects. Somatic effects refer to health changes in the person exposed, while genetic effects are expressed in the descendants of exposed persons. Developmental or teratogenic effects result from exposure received by the embryo or fetus in utero. Attention in this report will focus primarily on late somatic effects (largely cancer). As general background, Appendix 2 provides a simplified description of the physical nature of ionizing radiation and its capacity to damage tissue molecules, with definitions of units commonly used to measure levels of radiation exposure. 1. Acute Somatic Effects Acute effects involve various forms of radi- ation sickness occurring within a few days or weeks after exposure (10). Such illness usually develops after single whole body doses of about 100 rem or more. Single doses in excess of about 500 rem (and in the absence of medical treatment) are generally fatal. Because of biologic repair mechanisms, however, rela- tively high cumulative doses (100 rem or more) received in small amounts over a period of time often produce no acute clinical symptoms. As early as 1906 it was known that different types of mammalian cells had different sensitivities to radia- tion. In general, the most radiosensitive cells 1) divide rapidly, 2) undergo many cell divisions, and 3) are primitive or non-specialized. Although exceptions exist, these criteria are helpful in predicting the relative sensitivity of cells to radiation. Bone marrow cells, the precursors of circulating blood cells, divide rapidly and are highly radiosensitive. Since acute marrow effects involve decreased blood cell pro— duction, impaired blood clotting, and reduced resist- ance to infection, persons acutely ill after exposure to high radiation doses often suffer from anemia, hemorrhage, and infection. The cells lining the stomach and intestinal tract are sensitive to acute radiation damage at single whole-body doses of 100 to 200 rem. Brain tissue, in contrast, is relatively resistant to radiation. Skin burns occur at high single dose levels (BOO-1,000 rem), while cataracts can result from somewhat lower single doses. A prominent effect of ionizing radiation at the cellular level is chromosomal damage. Most commonly studied is persistent chromosome breakage in peripheral blood lymphocytes (white blood cells). Increased fre- quencies of lymphocyte chromosome breakage have been observed in many different settings (11), including Japanese atom bomb survivors (12), plutonium workers (13), and nuclear shipyard workers (14). At present, the human health significance of such breakage is not known, whether in terms of later risk of cancer or in terms of birth defects and genetic abnormalities in offspring of persons with radiation-induced chromosomal damage. 2. Developmental Effects Exposure to ionizing radiation at different stages of embryonic and fetal development, and perhaps during childhood, can lead to various kinds of develop— mental abnormalities (BEIR 1972, pp. 77-82 and UNSCEAR 1977, para. 29-39). Animal experiments suggest that increased embryonic mortality and various malformations, including defects of skeleton and central nervous system, can in rare instances result from doses as low as 5 rem in early pregnancy. Human data have linked doses over 50 rem with small head size (microcephaly), central nervous system defects, skeletal abnormalities, reduced stature, and mental retardation. Other human surveys following doses on the order of 1—10 rem, however, have been negative or inconclusive. Such information comes from studies of pregnant women receiving therapeutic irradiation and from studies of children exposed in utero to atom bomb radiation in Japan. The Japanese data also suggest a relationship between post-natal irradiation and subsequent retarded childhood physical development. The relation of childhood cancer to prena- tal irradiation is discussed under late somatic effects. Observations in the United States correlating infant mortality rates with radiation from atmospheric nuclear testing and from nuclear power plants have not been substantiated and appear to have been founded on in— complete data (BEIR 1972, pp. 178-179). 3. Genetic Effects Experimental studies in short-lived animal species demonstrate clearly that ionizing radiation produces gene mutations which can result in heritable abnormalities in later generations (BEIR 1972, pp. 41—72, and UNSCEAR 1977, para. 40-51). Although similar genetic changes may also be induced in humans, none has yet been demonstrated, perhaps because the effect is too small to see with the data resources available or with present methods of observation. Direct human information is therefore limited. Studies of Japanese children conceived after their parents were exposed to atom bomb radiation have shown no observable increase in genetic defects (UNSCEAR 1977, annex H, para. 38, 39). Although certain other data have suggested that Down syndrome (mongolism), the result of a chromosomal defect, may be increased by parental irradiation before conception, not all studies are in agreement (UNSCEAR 1977, annex H, para. 33). Based on extensive observations in mice, the 1972 BEIR report (p. 59) estimated that spontaneous human mutation rates may be increased between 0.5 and 5.0 percent per rem of gonadal dose, a mutation doubling dose of 20 to 200 rem. :_/ The 1977 UNSCEAR report provides similar estimates (annex H, para. 56). While such risk values are difficult to translate into actual health effects, the 1972 BEIR report (p. 57) has estimated that a cumulative dose of 5 rem per generation (the current allowable population limit of 0.17 rem per year times 30 years) might be expected in the United States to produce between 60 and 1,000 genetically determined illnesses of various sorts per million live births. This would represent a 0.1 - 1.6 percent increase over the expected incidence of 60,000 cases. The same exposure level, continued for several generations, might lead to an equilibrium level of 300 to 7,500 cases per million live births per generation (0.5 - 12.5 percent increase). :/ A doubling dose is that dose which doubles the frequency of any given effect. 4. Late Somatic Effects , At doses below 500 rem, the late somatic effects of ionizing radiation consist almost entirely of cancer. Although non-specific life-shortening, or "accelerated aging", has been reported in mice, and possibly is present in patterns of mortality among radiologists (15), most human studies indicate that radiation-induced life-shortening is largely due to increased cancer mortality (BEIR 1972, pp. 174—177) (16). One study has also recently suggested that other chronic diseases such as heart disease may result from radiation exposure (17). At present this suggestion lacks support from other sources. Cancer appears to be the only observable late radiation effect among Japanese bomb survivors (16) and among radium dial painters (18). Human evidence for radiogenic cancer comes from epidemiologic studies conducted among 1) persons exposed to atom bomb radiation and fallout, 2) persons exposed to therapeutic or diagnostic radiation, and 3) persons exposed occupationally to radiation. Table 1 summarizes the types of cancer linked to radiation by studies in these three categories. Linkage in some instances is stronger than in others. Triple asterisks (***) in Table 1 indicate strong associations, usually confirmed repeatedly in multiple studies and often with evidence that cancer risk increases with radiation dose. Double asterisks (**) indicate associations that appear meaning— ful but are less striking. Single asterisks (*) indicate suggestive associations, usually from quite recent work in single sets of data, not confirmed by other studies and often based on small numbers or questionable study design. Interpretation of such epidemiologic data requires an understanding both of carcinogenesis and of limitations involved in epidemiologic research. Studies of carcino— genesis, whether radiogenic or due to other causes, show that cancers usually occur long after the initiating event (long latency), and that the relationship between cancer incidence and dose of carcinogen is affected by 1) characteristics of the carcinogen (potency, dose rate, dose fractionation), 2) host factors (age at exposure, sex, health status), and 3) presence of competing environmental factors. In general, probability of cancer increases with dose of carcinogen. In the presence of Mbwbm H. OVZOMWm szxmo HO vaHWHHOZ HZ wWwHHOng wOMGB>HHOZm+ 1i >wo§ 6038 Hmmwmnwos ZmQHomH Hmmwmdwou onocmmw~osmw Hmmwmnwos . . Q _ \I _ \I 4 ) i 6 i 6 \I .V, 9 b 1 2 l \I 3 8 \I 4 5 m \I Y _ Y11 I 3 .0 4 .) I O 5 d A. d A. \l \I 5 I 4 ( Y 1 5 b \I ) ( n 2 n ( 9 4 3 7 s I \I a 6 l r s 9 l O (x O , 2 3 t (x 3 u 9 2 r \I Y r r Ix e 2 r m11 2 s n. ox) c I t I s st m3 4 9.8 a _ 8 h 6 e on (\ t.t 5,) s m i_8 5.5 e Y .1 Yr\ I\ c I r x l s t k t s n Y u V“; a3 h P t\) h n7 _ 17( t o_& r as 5 ea ga 91 l( e( co in t) t a( x c a s on r r t? nr nd 6 r c Fe 3 s c i .15 i &( w6 eo 1e .1 i. ia De be es ar dt a ) 0 t3 dr 9 _ sv 1d rc sx sr s s 10 Cd en r d1 r s e 0 ms r3 ei an ?1 o( 0( na na Pr 1 9a t 13 e 05 mt 1 ur a6 nv ha et 1 1 9e Ge io ai rf o 01 t n. un 0 ie e( ar 51 1r Y5 Y5 is is tu eh an r r. u QM ii i nn 1 Pu rs ca ki ki ni ni 11 no 11 o YI a da d ai c a as aI up nt nt ed ed uf i( n( h h( n i( a9 a rm u mum on J M N A A B B M T E T T I D R R U N omban , hmcwoawm »** * »** ** »* »»: * *** w *** * HSKHOHQ 3:. .5: t: .13» mmamwm Uummmd *** » *»* **» ficsn **» **» ,h} i»» » mono .a *1.» as.» mnoamns »» ** Mmovsmaam ** . ** memmmH »* b<3vfioam Awsow. I . ‘ BcHn. BKmHoawv ** . ** » :w : WHWHHH, it». * *5. cnmnam » omnBrookhaven National Laboratory experimental animals Chronic irradiation and S. Zamenhof 50 DOE brain development U. of California-L05 Angeles Radiosensitivity of oocytes R. Dobson 146 DOE and other mammalian cells Lawrence Livermore Laboratory during development Biomagnetic effects D. Mahlum 0 DOE Pacific Northwest Laboratory; Biological incorporation of Z. Jaworowski 13 EPA tritium Central Laboratory for Radio- logical Protection, Warsaw, Poland Neoplastic and life-span effects W. Johnson 130 EPA of louhlevel exposure to HTO St. Augustine's College, Raleigh, ' during pregnancy. North Carolina Multiparameter study of rats y W. Kirk 35 EPA pre-and post-natally exposed to Kr-85 Maintenance of rats and guinea W. Kirk 40 EPA pigs exposed to Kr—85 for observation No. 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 - 102 - Appendix-6: continued Title of Study Principal Investigator Federal Support Supporting and Institution FY 1978 ($1,000) Agencies Thyroid tumor indication by W. Lee 52, ' HEW/FDA 1—131 and x-irradiation in FDA/BRH ' the rat Biological effects of in—utero R. Rugh 79 HEW/FDA X—ray exposure FDA/BRH - Automated cytogenetic radia- N. Wald 29 HEW/FDA tion health monitoring -U. of Pittsburgh Studies of chromosomal J. Liniecki 25 HEW/FDA aberrations after gamma Medical Academy of Lodz, Poland irradiation Erythroid effects of radi- J. Cong 41 HEW/FDA 7 ation in the 10R range State Univ. of New York, Buffalo Transfer mechanisms in H. Box 35 HEW/FDA irradiated biologic systems New York State Department of Health Long-term effects in beagles 5. Benjamin 1154 HEW/FDA from whole body exposure to Colorado State University ionizing radiation Repair of radiation-induced K. Smith 96 HEW/NIH lesions in DNA (bacteria) Stanford University Biological aspects of carcino— H. Kaplan 147 HEW/NIH genesis by radiation (mice) Stanford University Effects of x-rays on normal and L. Tolmach 153 HEW/NIH malignant cells (mice, hamsters, Washington University Hela cells) DNA repair and recovery in the R. Humphrey 172 HEW/NIH mammalian cell CYCIE University of Texas System Cancer Center Nndifirarinn nf radiatinn +n- n Hahn 1Ln HFw/NTH - 103 - Appendix 6. continued No. Title of Study Principal Investigator Federal Support Supporting and Institution FY 1978 ($1,000) Agencies 172 Relation of Epstein-Barr virus W. Henle 176 HEW/NIH to human malignancies Children's Hospital of Philadelphia 173 Molecular basis of radiation K. Smith 91 HEW/NIH lethality (bacteria) Stanford University 174 Repair of DNA in human lympho- B. Blumberg 36 HEW/NIH cytes Institute for Cancer Research 175 Low-dose capillary damage A. Conger 16‘ HEW/NIH revealed by microangiography Temple University 176 Cellular responses to irradia- w. Dewey 202 HEW/NIH tion (hamsters) Colorado State University 177 Tissue effects of radiation J. Laughlin 231 HEW/NIH Sloan Kettering Institute 178 Bone mineralization measurement W. Shapiro 26 HEW/NIH (human) Sloan Kettering Institute 179 Production of oncogenic N- G. Brown 26 HEW/NIH oxides by ionizing radiation Sloan Kettering Institute 180 Biological effects of radiation E. Hahn 103 HEW/NIH (rats, rabbits, humans) Sloan Kettering Institute 181 RBE of helium ion beam in J. Kim 26 HEW/NIH human kidney cells Sloan Kettering Institute 182 Repair of radiation damage J. Lett 92 HEW/NIH to cellular DNA (hamsters) Colorado State University - 104 - Appendix 6. continued No., Title of Study Principal Investigator Federal Support Supporting and Institution FY 1978 ($1,000) Agencies 183 Oncogenic transformation in H. Clark 26 HEW/NIH poikilothermic vertebrate_ Wistar Institute of Anatomy cells or viruses and Biology 184 Proliferation and differ- S. Hellman 114 HEW/NIH entiation of stem cells Harvard University (mice) 185 Radiation pathology studies P. Rubin 178 HEW/NIH (hamsters, human) University of Rochester 1867 Radiobiology of normal H. Withers 92 HEW/NIH tissues (mice, rats) 187 Core basic research E. Fowler . 71 HEW/NIH (human, mice. rats) University of Rochester 188 Nucleic acid function in D. Goldthvait 72 HEW/NIH relation to cancer Case western Reserve University (micro-organisms, animals) 189 Cellular infiltrate identi- E. Van Scott 22 HEW/NIH ' fication Temple University 190 Effects of radiation on sta- J. Little 147 HEW/NIH tionary cells (mammals,’ Harvard University human) 191 Cell kinetics in irradiated A. Goldfeder 65 HEW/NIH tumors of different growth New York University (mice) v ‘ 192 Effect of ionizing and other D. Wallach 58 HER/NIH irradiation on cellular membrane Tufts-Nev England Medical Center - 105 - Appendix 6. continued No. Title of Study Principal Investigator Federal Support Supporting ' and Institution FY 1978 ($1,000) Agencies ' 193 DNA repair and its relation- E. Friedberg 47 HEW/NIH ship to carcinogenesis Stanford University (human, phages, bacteria) 194 Suppression of malignancy 0. Miller 79 HEW/NIH in cell hybrids (mice, ' Columbia University rats, primates) 195 Dynamics of nucleic acid C. O'Konski 47 HEW/NIH macro-molecules and University of California Berkeley complexes 196 Genetically controlled H. Schneiderman 53 HEW/NIH malignant neoplasms University of California Irvine (Drosophila) 197 Radiation response of J. Belli 91 HEW/NIH mammalian cells Harvard University ‘(hamsters) 198 Antineoplastic effect of w. Bloomer ‘ 91 HEW/NIH nuclides Harvard University 199 Complement dependent and inde- F. Orsini 3? HEW/NI“ pendent cellular cytotoxicity Roswell Park Memorial Institute 200 Protein turnover in normal and M. Pine - HEW/NI“ tumor tissue (mice) Roswell Park Memorial Institute 32 201 Potential carcinogenic and ’ D. Mewissen *-' I : 152 - HEW/NIH genetic effects of tritium University of Chicago 202 Effects of intracavitary M. Sullivan 55 HEW/NIH‘ irradiation with CF-252 Pacific Northwest Laboratories No. 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 Title of Study - l()6 - Appendix 6, continued Principal Investigator Federal Support Supporting and Institution FY 1978 ($1,000) 7 Agencies Effects of fast neutrons on A. M03 42 HEW/NIH cultered mammalian cells University of Arkansas Inhibition of two-stage B. Vanduuren 14 HEW/NIH carcinogenesis (mice) New York University Experimental oncology (hamsters, M. Kuschner _ 14 HEW/NIH mice, rats) New York University Ekperimental radiation skin R. Albert . 28 HEW/NIH carcinogenesis (rats, mice) New York University Vascularity and reoxygenation C. Song 47 “EV/NIH in x-irradiated tumors (rats) University of Minnesota Colony—forming cells in bone E. Hays . 50 HEN/NIH marrow (human, mice) University of California. Los Angeles Mechanisms of immunity in W. Murphy 84 HEW/NIH leukemia (mice) University of Michigan Modification of x—ray response J. Biaglow 112 HEW/NIH of anoxic—hypoxic cells (ham- Case Western Reserve University ' ster) Radiation injury in subpopula- R. Anderson 40 HEW/NIH fiions of lymphocytes (mice) University of New Mexico - 107 - Appendix 6. continued No. Title of Study Principal Investigator' Federal Support Supporting and Institution FY 1978 ($1,000) > Agencies 212 Radiation in vitro: mammary K. Clifton 127 HEW/NIH cell survival and Neoplasia -University of Wisconsin (rats) 213 Radiation repair of normal E. Gillette . 89 HEW/NI“ mammalian tissues (dogs) Colorado State University 214 Superoxide dismutase (bacteria) 1. Fridovich 55 HEW/NI“ ' Duke University 215 Immune surveillance in radiation R. Anderson 44 HEW/NIH carcinogenesis (mice) University of New Mexico 216 Tritium damaged mammalian cells H. Burki 50 HEN/NIH in vitro (mice, hamsters) University of California Berkeley 217 Neutron activation analysis 0. Ferguson 33 HEN/NIH Howard University 218 Radiation nephritis in a z. Klingler 62 HEW/NIH nonhuman primate (macaca) University of New Mexico 219 Enzymes and reaction for repair T. Brent 57 HEW/NIH of DNA in human cells St. Jude Children's Research Hospital ‘ 220 Pathogenesis of liver cancer—- J. Van Lancker 49 HEW/NIH the role of repair (ducks. University of California rats) Los Angeles 221 Cell mediated post irradiation K. Goh '96 HEW/NIH immunologic defects University of Rochester No. 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 - 1108 - Appendix 6, continued I__r - _\ J. Fischer Title of Study Principal Investigator Federal Support Supporting and Institution FY 1978 ($1,000) Agencies Regulatory mechanisms of J. Cerny I 101 HEW/NIH neoplasia (mice) Harvard University ' Neoplasia and differentiation T. Crocker 7o HEW/NIH in tracheal epithelium (rodents) University of California Irvine Role of oxidant injury in radia— A. Sagone 56 HEN/NIH tion damage of lymphocytes Ohio State University Pretherapeutic use of acceler- C. Tobias 933 HEW/NIH ated heavy ions (rats) University of California Berkeley Experimental radiotherapy J. Brown 78 HEW/NIH (mice) Sanford University Cell irradiations with mole— H. Rossi 119 HEW/NIH cularions (hamsters) Columbia University Tumor cell kinetics following J. Clemont 6 HEW/NIH fractionated irradiation University of Minnesota (mice) Dose fractionation effects on F. Knan 46 HEW/NIH guinea pig skin University of Minnesota '. Effects of x-irradiation on A. Sbarra 65 HEN/NIH phagocytic response (human St. Margaret's Hospital for Women and non-human) Residual postnatal injury from G. Christensen 44 HEN/NIH prenatal x—irradiation University of Washington Radiation—induced modification N. Oleinick . 91 HEW/NIH protein synthesis (human, Case Western Reserve University Tetralymena) Suppressor cell induction by . Z. Ovary 42 HEW/NIH reticUlumvceil’sarcomarfmice)rrr—New York University Cellular and tissue radiology 77 HEW/NI" - 109 - Appendix 6, continued meas uremen I: National Council on Radiation Protection -No. Title of Study Principal Investigator Federal Support Supporting and Institution FY 1978 ($1,000) Agencies 235 Pediatric oncology—-bone changes S. Mcintosh 7] HEW/NIH in successfully treated Yale University leukemic children 236 Radiation induced alterations J. Roti Roti 116 HEW/NIH of chromosomal proteins University of Utah (mammals) 237 Effects of radiation on human G. Kantor 31 HEW/NIH cells in vitro Wright State University 238 Cancer biology and carcino— E. Santiago—Delpin 61 HEW/NIH genesis (mice, human, dogs) University of Puerto Rico Med Science 239 Radiation effects on estab- J. Vaage 50 HEW/NIH lished tumor immunity (mice) Tufts University 240 Tumor cell antigen changes H. Ioachim 39 HEW/NIH (rodents) Lenox Hill Hospital 241 cardiotoxicity in cancer M. Goodman 47 HEW/NIH treatment-~a molecular study University of Southern California (rats) 242 Heat and radiation on neo— E. Hahn _ 101 HEW/NIH plasms--optimal fractionation Sloan Kettering Institute for Cancer Research 243 Response of a rat rhabdomy— 5. Curtis 152 HEW/NIH sarcoma to heavy ions University of California Berkeley ,244 Tumor and normal tissue re- E. Gillette 76 HEW/NIH sponse to heat and radiation Colorado State University (mice, hamsters, dogs) 245 Radiation protection and w. Ney 48 HEW/NIH No. 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253- 254 255 256 - 110 - Appendix 6, continued Title of_Study Principal Investigator Federal Support Supporting and Institution FY 1978 ($1,000) Agencies Dose and time factors in J. Bedford 70 HEW/NIH cellular radiosensitivity Colorado State University Radiation effects——DNA template L. Gorelic 23 HEW/NIH inactivation and repair Wayne State University (bacteria) ' Late effects of fast neutrons E. Bradley 243 HEW/NIH on dog cord, brain, lung George Washington University Ionizing radiation and oxygen H. Weiss 80 HEW/NIH tension in cells Sloan Kettering Institute Mechanisms of carcinogenesis J. Bertram 48 HEN/NIH in cell culture Roswell Park Memorial Institute Radiosensitization by specific R. Johnson 29 HEW/NIH DNA repair control (bacteria) Medical University of South Carolina Radiation induced defects in E. Gerner 29 HEW/NIH cell kinetics (hamsters, University of Arizona tissue culture) Effects of radiation and hyper- E. Hills 19 HEW/NIH thermia of tumor lysosomes University of London Enzymology of radiation induced J. Osborne 63 HEW/NIH intestinal carcinoma (rats) University of Iowa Molecular basis of radiosensi- N. Dewey 91 HEW/NIH tization by hyperthermia Colorado State University (mammals)? DNA repair during initiation of J. Yager 46 HEW/NIH hepatocarcinogenesis (rats) Dartmouth College No. 257 258 259 260 261 262 k 263 266 267 - ll]. - Appendix 5..continuedl Supporting Title of Study Principal Investigator Federal Support . and Institution FY 1978 ($1,000) Agenc1es Role of herpesviruses in 1 H. Isom 14 HEN/NIH oncogenesis Pennsylvania State University” Fast time processes in cancer E. Epp 102 HEN/NIH radiobiology (HeLa cells, Massachusetts General Hospital bacteria, bacteriophage) Radiation response of cells D. Crdina 53 HEN/NIH separated from tumors ' University of Texas Repair of x—irradiated DNA in D. Goldthwait 49 HEW/NIH normal and cancer cells ! Case Western Reserve University (mammals, E. coli) Ultraviolet and ionizing H. Griggs 16 HEN/NIH radiation damage (hamsters, John Brown University frogs) Effects of neutrons on taste K. Mossman 51 HEW/NIH and saliva in humans Georgetown University Reaction of carcinogens and W. Taylor , 64 HEW/NIH cell extracts with RD-DNA Pennsylvania State University (bacteria, human) Hyperthermia and radiation-— W. Nagle 74 HEN/NIH x-ray vs fast neutrons University of Arkansas Cell cycle related DNA repair R. Humphrey 57 HEW/NIH mechanisms (hamsters) University of Texas DES-induced transplacental H. Vorherr 48 HEW/NIH carcinogenesis (rats) University of New Mexico Hyperthermia as a differential F. Gibbs 90 HEW/NIH radiosensitizer in vivo University of Utah Radiation enhancement in J. Allen I 89 HEW/NIH nervous system tumor models ‘ Ohio State University No. 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 - I112 - Appendix 6,continued protein crosslinks (micro- organisms) Clemson University Title of Study Principal Investigator Federal Support Supporting and Institution ‘ FY 1978 ($1,000) Agencies Combined modalities—~cell tumor R. Kallman 143 HEW/NIH and tissue effects Stanford University Induced circadian phase E. Burns 24 HEN/NIH differences in tumor and host University of Arkansas Immunomicrospheres for cell A. Rembaum 70 HEN/NIH membrane receptors (mice, human) California Institute of Technolbgy Radiation and drug studies in N. Griem 56 HEN/NIH growing and resting hair (mice) University of Chicago Mutation and hybridization of R. Slesinski 43 HEW/NIH human lymphoblast cells (mouse. Carnegie-Mellon University guinea pig. rabbit) Mutagenesis, malignant trans- C. Ueidelberger 49 HEW/NIH formation and DNA repair University of Southern California (mouse embryo fibroblasts) Action of carcinogens with V. Maher _ 93 HEW/NIH DNA—-repair of lesions (slime Michigan State University molds, bacteria, rats) Modification of x—ray-induced 8. Wallace 88 HEW/NIH damages in phage T4 New York Medical College 'Transcapillary exchange in M. Pollay‘ 69 HEN/NIH experimental brain tumors ' University of Oklahoma (rabbits, rats) ’ Biological effects of DNA— L. Larcom 21 HEW/NIH No. 279 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 - 113 - Appendix 5,continued Title of Study Principal Investigator Federal Support Supporting and Institution FY 1978 ($1,000) Agencies Mutagenesis and repair of C. Walker 70 HEW/NIH DNA (S. typhimurium, E. Coli) Massachusetts Institute of Technology Brain tumor therapy--radiation, K. Wheeler 38 HEW/NIH drugs and DNA repair University of Rochester Total body irradiation in J. Earle 60 HEN/NIH advanced lymphoma (mice) Mayo Foundation Herpesvirus gene expression P. Spear 64 HEW/NIH in transformed cells (mice, University of Chicago hamsters) Early gene transcription in S. Zimmer 47 HEW/NIH adenovirus-Z infected cells University of Kentucky Interaction of drugs, radiation R. Neichselbaum 98 HEN/NIH and hormones Harvard University Studies on interactions of J. Ohlsen 84 HEN/NIH drugs and x-rays in vivo University of Utah Repair and mutagenesis of DNA I. Tessman 60 HEW/NIH (bacterial systems) Purdue University Neurospora DNA repair A. Schroeder 52 HEW/NIH Washington State University Cytoskeleton and cell traus- B. Brinkley 105 HEW/NIH formation to malignancy (rats, Baylor College of Medecine human, hamsters, mice) " Radiation and chemical in vitro A. Kennedy 194 HEW/NIH malignant transformation Harvard University No. 290 291 296 297 298 299 300 - 1114 - Appendix 6, continued Title of Study Principal Investigator Federal Support Supporting and Institution FY 1978 ($1,000) Agencies The mechanism of radiation— E. Brewer 88 HEW/NIH induced mitotic delay Case Western Reserve University DNA repair--human E. coli B. Sutherland 83 HEW/NIH photo—reactivating enzymes Brookhaven National Laboratory Immunologic regulation of R. Lynch 73 HEW/NIH myeloma cell growth (mice, Washington University sheep, rabbits) Radiation induced mutagenesis K. Evans 104 HEW/NIH and carcinogenesis Case Western Reserve University Tolerance of bone marrow R. Click 64 HEW/NIH grafts (mice) University of Minnesota Antioxidant reversed cyto— J. Chan 42 HEW/NIH toxicity and carcinogenesis Texas Southern University (human. mammals) Selective radioimmunotherapy D. Goldenberg 83 HEW/NIH of colon cancer (hamsters) University of Kentucky Immunogenetic analysis of Rous R. McBride 159 HEW/NIH sarcoma development (chickens) Baylor College of Medicine Auto-regulation of immune re— 6. Mayers 45 HEW/NIH sponse by anti-idiotype Roswell Park Memorial Institute Fidelity of DNA replication in L. Loeb 64 HEW/NIH human lymphocytes .University of Washington Factors influencing experimental J. Little ‘54 HEW/NIH respiratory carcinogenesis (mammals, nonhuman) Harvard University No. 301 305 306 307 308 309 310 -'115 — Appendix 6, continued Title of Study Principal Investigator Federal Support Supporting and Institution FY 1978 ($1.000) AgenCIBS Hormones and neutron radiation J. Broerse 69 HEN/NIH for mammary gland carcinogenesis Netherlands Central Organization (animals) Cellular recovery mechanisms. P. Howard—Flanders 24 HEN/NIH DNA repair and radiation Yale University sensitization Influence of irradiation on A. Segaloff 180 HEN/NIH carcinogenesis Ochsner Medical Foundation Repair mechanism in carcino— R. Setlow 86 HEN/NIH genesis Brookhaven National Laboratory In vivo radiation-activation E. Chan 446 HER/NIH of endogenous sarcoma virus Argonne National Laboratory genome Influence of low dose irradi— C. Shallabarger 559 HEN/NIH ation on mammary gland carcin- Brookhaven National Laboratory ogenesis in estrogenized rats Influence of carcinogens on A. Frensdorff 113 HEN/NIH viral gene expression Tel Aviv University, Israel Radioiodine hazard as a S. Book 57 NRC function of radiation University of California Davis quality and age at exposure Biodosimetry as a predictor of H. Shifrime 135 NRC late effects University of California Davis Radiation exposure for inhaled J- Heuhinney 395* 836' airborne radioactive pollutants Inhalation Toxicology Research Institution No. 311 312 313 314 315 316 - 116 - Appendix 6, continued Federal_Support ' Title of Study Principal Investigator Supporting : and Institution "FY 1978 ($1,000) Agencies UF6002F2 in experimental - P. Morrow ~ 81 NRC animals University of Rochester ' ' Early effects of inhaled R. Filipy - 300 NRC radionuclides 'Pacific Northwest Laboratories Acute morbidity and mortality 'F. Hahn . 250 NRC estimates for different ‘ Lovelace Foundation ‘ nuclear accidents ' Post—irradiation repair of A. Moss ; 29 VA DNA by mammalian cells VA Hospital, Little Rock, Arkansas Effect of fast neutrons on A. Moss 32 VA cultured cells - VA Hospital, Little Rock, Arkansas R. Donati . 47. VA U l a..- Radiation injury and wound healing VA Hospital, St. Louis, Missouri Not 3:- 10 11‘ 'Current federally supported studies concerning environmental - 117 - Appendix 7 distribution and pathways of radioactive materials 3' Title of Study Transuranic elements in natural waters Plutonium behavior in the Miami River watershed Pu cycling of wind scale ' wastes Transuranic marine studies Radionuclides in coastal environment Marshall Islands Ecological investigation of radioactive materials in waste disposal canyons Pu, Am, Cm in terrestrial and aquatic environments Physical and chemical charac- terization of Pu in existing contaminated soils Environmental behavior of,¢ U and Th Radionuclide sources in coastal zones Inventory of transuranics in the Clinch River Principal Investigator and Institution Wahlgren . Argonne National Laboratory Wahlgren Argonne National Laboratory Hicks Argonne National Laboratory V. Noshkin .Lawrence Livermore Laboratory V. Noshkin Lawrence Livermore Laboratory V. Noshkin Lawrence Livermore Laboratory T. Hakonson Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory b; Reichle Oak Ridge National Laboratory T. Tamura _ Oak Ridge National LabOratory E. Bondietti Oak Ridge National Laboratory Cutshall Oak Ridge National Laboratory D. Ewmn» Oak Ridge National Laboratory Federal Support FY 1978 ($1,000) ‘ 115 390 40 55 250 350 273 ' 400 105‘ 100 100 140_ Supporting Agencies DOE nos not nor non DOE DOE DOE DOE DOE DOE DOE No. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 - 118 - Appendix 7, continued release tEst program Health Services Laboratory Title of Study Principal Investigator_' Federal Support :Supporting and Institution FY 1978 ($1,000) Agencies Fallout rates and mechanisms - J. YOung ,_ 100 DOE ' Pacific Northwest Laboratory Particle resuspension and ,G. Sehmel . 230 DOE translocation Pacific Northwest Laboratory Suspended particle inter-I D. Cataldo 320 DOE , actions and uptake in Pacific Northwest Laboratory terrestrial systems Environmental behavior Wildung 152 DOE and effects of Te—99 and Pacific Northwest Laboratory I—129 Ecological distribution and E. Emery 295 DOE fate of radionuclides Pacific Northwest Laboratory In situ pollutant measurements 'N. Wogman 54 DOE ‘ Pacific Northwest Laboratory Transuranic weathering in~ Schreckhise 130. DOE plants ., ._ Pacific Northwest Laboratory Analogs for transuranic w. Weimer . 75 DOE environmental chemistry Pacific Northwest Laboratory Quantitative aspects of .R. Gilbert 82 DOE Pu field studies Pacific Northwest Laboratory North Pacific disposal of D. Anderson 300 ‘ DOE high level radiation wastes Sandia Corporatidn ~ Controlled environmental J. Alvarez 20 _DOE No. 24" 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 - :119 - Appendix 7, continued. RadioactiVity in the biosphere " Environmental Measurements Laboratory Title of Study Principal Investigator Federal Support' Supporting and Institution FY 1978 ($1,000) Agencies ‘INEL radioecology program ' D. Markham 1go I DOE‘ ‘ Health Services Laboratory Circulation and chemistry Smith” 50 DOE of the Eniwetok Atoll -_University of Hawaii Lagoon ' Nevada applied ecology group - Potter» 80 DOE ' transport of transuranic ‘ Nevada Operations Office elements Pollutants and soils H. Nishita ~ 130 DOE University of California at Los Angeles Air transport of contaminants T. Crawford 300 DOE E.I. Du Pont de Nemours and Co., Inc. Ocean transport of D. Hayes 140 DOE contaminants E.I. Du Pont de Nemours and Co., Inc,‘ Cycling of long-lived J. Corey 290 DOE radionuclides E.I, Du Pont de Nemours and Co., Inc; Radioecology of transuranic H. Smith. _ 422 -DOE elements - University of Georgia at Athens V _Cycling of radioisotopes H. Smith _ ‘ 110 DOE ' University of Georgia at Athens E. Hardy 1.91. DOB No. 34 35 36 37 38 39_- 60 41 43 - 120 — Appendix 7. continued- natural water_systems Yale University Title of Study Principal Investigator' I . Federal Support Supporting 'and Institution ' - > FY 1978 ($1;000) Agencies Analysis of samples of E. Hardy . v ; .5 . DOE surface ocean water Environmental Measurements. - ‘ Laboratory ‘ Study of dynamic features T. Folsom "25 DOE controlling coastal University of California environment ' - Marine Geochemistry Research E. Goldberg 75 DOE University of California Radioecology of some natural F. Whisker _. 84 DOE organisms and systems Colorado State Foodcfiains of transuranium J. Miettin ‘ 75 . DOE elements in the subarctic University of Helsinki Emission and alpha—trace G. Friedman 23 DOB study of biochemistry ofv Rensselaer Poly plutonium ' - 'Ceochemistry of uranium and, w. Sackett' _’ 80 DOB thorirm series nuclides and Texas A&H University of plutonium . Radioelement studies in V. Bowen 575 DOE the oceans Woods Hole - Plutonium and americium V. Bowen ' 93 _ DOE concentrations along Woods Hole ‘ fresh-water lakes ' The fate of nuclides in K. Turekia as DOE No. 44 45 46 47 48 49 SD 51 53 - 121 - Appendix 7: continued Title of Study Principal Investigator Federal Support Supporting 5and Institution FY 1978 j§1,000) Agencies Investigation of the unusual J. Gamble 20 ' DOE behavior of cesium2137 University of Florida erosion - ‘ Redistribution of radioactive J. McHenry 27 DOE - fallout in watersheds University of Agriculture Studies on the concentrations C. Jenning 36. DOB of iron—55 in South Pacific 'Oregon Collect Ocean ' Proposal to investigate the J. Sheppard 39 DOE transport of actinide—bearing Washington State soils Plutonium and cesium radio- H. Simpson 65 DOE nuclides in the Hudson Columbia University River estuary ‘ Radioecology studies Beasley. 130 DOE Oregon State University Precipitation scavenging W. Slinn 54 DOE studies Oregon State University Radon transport processes M. Wilkening 56 DOB in near surface and New Mexico Institute ' and underground environments ~ Great Lakes pollutant Franzen- 173 DOE transport processes Argonne National Laboratory Air pollution dry deposition 6. Sehmel ' 110 DOE Pacific Northwest Laboratory- No. 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 - 122 e Appendix 7, continued Radioactivity in surface air Environmental Measurements Laboratory Title of Study Principal Investigator Federal Support 'Supporting and Institution FY 1978 ($1,000) Agencies The hydrogeochemistry of Buddemeier 65 DOE Eniwetok ' University of Hawaii Documentation of natural ’6. Welford 83 I DOE activity levels in the Environmental Measurements biosphere Laboratory Carbon-14 assays in the J. Gray 70 DOE stratosphere Argonne National Laboratory Marshall Island radio- W. Robison 765 ‘ DOE ecology Lawrence Livermore Laboratory Mid-Pacific marine lab Reese 205 DOE ' University of Hawaii Logistical support R. Bastian 103 DOE Reynolds Electrical and Engineering Co. Research aircraft program‘ T. Crawford I 60 DOB E.I. Du Pont de Nemours and Co., Inc. Study of atmospheric T. Crawford 245 DOE releases E.I. Du Pont de Nemours and Co., Inc. The earths surface, radio- E. Hardy 165 DOE activity and other studies Environmental Measurements ' . Laboratory E. Hardy 135 DOE -123- t . 'Appendix 7, continued No. Title of Study . 'Principal investigator Federal Support . Supporting ___ ' and Institution . FY 1978 ($1,000) Agencies 64 Radioactivity in stratospheric E. Hardy - . ‘ 165. ‘ - DOE air ’ . . Environmental Measurements ' ‘ ~ ‘ Laboratory 65 Project ash can_ i A. Gerlach 367 DOE ’ U.S. Air Force‘ . 66 Airlift support of a i 72 ‘ DOE- project ash can U.S. Air Force 67 Project airstream A. Calio , 550 DOE . .National Aeronautics 68 Air pathways To be named ' 1,100 EPA 69 Atmospheric modelling and To be named ’ h 500 EPA calculation of dose in alpha radiation effects 70 Emissions and pathways of To be named 400 EPA radioactive effluents from ' mines, coal-burning power stations, etc. 71 Pathways for emissions from To be named . 100 EPA nuclear accelerators ' 72 Pathways for emissions from To be named 100 EPA manufacture of radionuclides 73 Pathways and distribution . I To be named 43 EPA of'plutonium in the environ— " _ ment U , ,7, Studies of radon in water '. 'To be named 20 EPA ‘41 L~ No. 75 76 77 78 79 80 8] 82 .—124 -, Appendix 7, continued Title of Study Principal Investigator . Federal Support Supporting and Institution FY'1978 ($11000) Agencies Waste radionuclide transport E. Fowler . 240 V NRC in soils Los Alamos Scientific Lab Transuranium element transport A; Wallace 191 NRC in agricultural systems University of California Laboratory of Nuclear Medicine Uranium mill tailing: health P. Gustafson 269 NRC and environmental impacts Argonne National Lab Characterization and L. Schwendiman 200 . NRC environmental significance Pacific Northwest Lab_ of gases and particles in uranium mine exhaust venti-~ lation air Radon and aerosol release R. Perkins 75 NRC from open pit uranium mining Pacific Northwest Lab Sediment and radionuclide Y. Onishi 154 NRC transport in rivers - field 'Pacific Northwest Lab sampling program in Catta- raugus and Buttermilk Creeks, N.Y. near West Valley Burial site Sediment and radionuclide Y. Onishi so NRC transport in rivers - Pacific Northwest Lab computer run Mathematical simulation of 'Y. Onishi * NRC sfidiment and contaminant transport in surface waters (oceans, estuaries, lakes and rivers) *105 in FY 1977 and 150 in FY 1979 Pacific Northwest Lab No. 83 8/0 85 86 87 88 - 125 - iAppendix 7, continued wastes and containers (physical, chemical ' stability of solidified low level'hastes) 7 Brookhaven National Lab Title of Study Principal Investigator Federal Support Supporting and Institution FY 1978 ($1,000) Agencies Distribution coefficients W. Schell ' 190 NRC of radionuclides in University of Washington aquatic environment . Environmental behavior of V. Bowen 7 40 NRC transuranics discharged to Woods Hole Oceanographic marine environments (Atlantic Institution Ocean) from nuclear power stations (Maine Yankee and Millstone 1 & 2) Monitoring of radioiodine C. Distenfeld 93 NRC releases from loss-of— Brookhaven National Lab containment accidents — emergency instrumentation Environmental behavior of J. Keller 100 NRC radioiodine, tritium and Idaho National Engineering Lab ' carbon-14 releases from ' ‘ nuclear stations (quad . cities) Evaluation of isotope A._Weiss ‘ 375 NRC migration - water chemistry ‘Brookhaven National Lab of commercially operated - low level disposal sites ‘(cooperative effort with USCS) Properties of radioactive - R. Neilsen ~ 400 NRC - 126 - APPENDIX 8 Data Records Systems The importance of records systems for assessing the impact of ionizing radiation on human health is stressed both in this Work Group report and in the Work Group reports concerned with Privacy, Care and Benefits, and Exposure Reduction. Record systems with information on the nature and levels of exposure to radiation can serve as basic data resources for three different purposes: (1) conducting epidemiologic research, (2) determining possible causes of illness for worker's compensation, and (3) monitoring the effectiveness of regulation and exposure control measures. This Appendix reviews the utility of uniform record systems and possible centralization of records for each of these purposes in turn, focusing on the advantages provided, potential problems, and the issues that must be decided if record systems are changed. The Work Group believes that further study should be made of the feasibility of improving existing record systems for these purposes. A. Research Standardization of data on exposure of workers to ionizing radiation would assist epidemiologic research by permitting comparative analysis of health effects in populations located at different facilities and by making it possible to pool comparable data sets so that studies requiring large sample sizes can be effectively performed. The same categories of infor- mation should be obtained and recorded with methods as similar as possible to assure comparability. The information must be maintained for a period sufficient to permit the tracing of delayed health effects. Researchers' access to this information must be assured. Several issues will have to be resolved before a uniform system can be established. An important preliminary question will be what information should —127- be placed in the record system. Information con- cerning the nature and amount of radiation to which a worker is exposed would of course be included. Identifying demographic information will also be necessary to enable follow-up of individual workers and to establish the characteristics of the worker population. Ideally, exposures to other sources of radiation such as medical x-rays, to other workplace carcinogens like asbestos and benzene, and to other environmental factors like cigarette smoke should also be recorded, but questions of feasibility and cost may prevent their inclusion. Records could include a description of health status, although it may be preferable to rely primarily on medical records and linkages to them for health status information. Feasibility studies concerning registry development will need to select among these many items and somehow define the extent to which each may be included. Such studies will also have to consider how information on pre-employment exposures, often of critical importance for epidemiologic studies in particular, can be included in the record system. A second issue of importance will be which workers to include in the system. This Appendix is primarily directed at record systems for nuclear industry workers, including employees of DoE contractors and NRC licensees. Should record systems prove feasible for this group of workers, extension of record systems to other population segments might later be considered. Having thus selected a target population, one must next consider what levels of exposure within that group will require registration. Shall records be kept on all persons assigned a personal dosimeter device, including plant visitors and persons who only rarely work in exposure areas, or will registration be limited to certain work categories involving regular potential for exposure? In developing a registry system, definition of particular exposure categories will be a necessary step. The extent to which records maintained in a registry system should be centralized under some form of government ownership or sponsorship may not be easy to resolve. Such centralization could involve all data in the registry or just particular pieces of data. Whether centralization is complete or partial, however, - 128 - the process of developing and maintaining a central registry will be sufficiently difficult and costly that its feasibility should be carefully considered in terms of the ultimate purposes and usefulness of central registration. Arguing against extensive centralization is the fact that the makeup of different worker groups is likely to vary greatly, thus reducing the usefulness of central data pooling for research. Epidemiologic studies, even of large groupings of nuclear workers, may be as easy to perform by obtaining records directly from industry sources as from a central data file, as long as record information is standardized and readily available to researchers. Here the difficulty is often not so much locating particular worker exposure records as tracing the ultimate health outcome of exposed and non-exposed workers. Rather than relying on new systems of data collection for such record linkage, one might well emphasize greater utilization of existing data registries like the Social Security System, which may already contain sufficient information to enable effective record linkage. Another argument against centralization is that possession of comprehensive personal information may impose on the agency holding it a legal or moral obligation to notify individuals in the registry when- ever research results indicate that they may be at risk. Such a procedure would be costly and would divert resources from the central, scientific purpose of the registry. Although workers should certainly be informed about the hazards in their workplaces, in part through dissemination of research results, other effective methods of notification should be explored. , Arguments favoring some form of central registration for research purposes focus on the need to maintain cumulative records on workers who move from one industrial location to another and to provide access to past records from companies which have gone out of business. Some form of limited central registry seems essential to account for worker transfers and to main- tain record archives for defunct companies. Another argument supporting centralization is that researchers - 129 - can thus be assured access to the information they require. It might also be easier to protect worker privacy in a centralized system. If record systems are standardized but not centralized, measures must be taken to provide both access to researchers and privacy for workers. Access to persons other than researchers or the workers themselves must be limited, however, to ensure that personal information gathered for research purposes is not used against individuals in employment or other decisions. Only with such assurance can the full participation of workers in the registry be expected. The possibility of computerization in a uniform language and form should be explored. Computerization has advantages other than efficient storage, since access can be provided to only the information required for a specific purpose. Thus, privacy protections can be introduced. Other methods to protect worker privacy, such as use of numerical identifiers with separate and protected storage of names, should also be examined. B. Compensation The usefulness of a standardized record system or central repository for dose information that can be used in worker's compensation cases is less certain. Such a system was proposed in the mid 1960's by the Atomic Energy Commission and hearings on the measure (H.R. 16920 and S. 3722) were held by the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. Ultimately the proposal, which involved central registration of cumulative radiation exposure records for all radiation workers, was rejected. Since worker's compensation involves state rather than federal programs, the AEC proposal was predicated on approval and participation by individual states. The plan called (1) for individual company licensees or contractors to obtain identifying worker information and exposure records, (2) for individual states to monitor the collection and quality of data, and (3) for the federal government to serve as the ultimate central data repository. The plan's main weakness involved the fact that, while federal financial support would have encouraged state participation, it could not ensure it in the face of concerns about possible federal intrusion into state programs for worker's compensation. - 130 - Other questions were also raised. First, the need for central registration of exposure records seemed marginal since unavailability of such records had prevented adjudi- cation of claims in relatively few instances. While the 1966 AEC proposal was based on accurate predictions of increasing numbers of workers in nuclear power plants, it appeared not to have examined actual numerical trends in compensation claims. Second, it was argued that such records in any case are not adequate for establishing causeeeffect relationships in particular instances of ill- ness. While dosimeter readings can provide a reasonably accurate measure of overall work-place radiation exposure, even with complete dosimetry one can never say absolutely that any particular illness was caused by radiation, except in certain high exposure situations. Third, it was pointed out that dosimetry readings do not necessarily correlate with particular organ doses and hence are not always relevant in assessing organ-specific radiation effects. For example, in a case of leukemia one is primarily concerned with bone marrow dose, and although there may be good statistical correlation between dosimeter readings and bone marrow doses when a large number of readings are viewed as a group, the individual correlations can be poor. Support for a data registry for worker's compensation programs might be greater now. Interest in the adequacy of state worker's compensation programs has expanded following publication of the Report of the National Commission on State Workmen's Compensation Laws. Many states have reformed their programs to improve their handling of occupational disease claims and legislation has been proposed to establish minimum federal standards for worker's compensation. Direct federal regulation of workplace conditions, including requirements for record- keeping, is also more common today than formerly. However, many of the objections raised in 1966 remain valid today. In particular, it is still true that indivi- dual dose information is insufficient to establish a direct cause and effect relationship between exposure and a parti— cular case of disease. On the other hand, dose information is deemed relevant in worker's compensation claims adjudi- cation and it would be helpful to individual claimants to have a source of cumulative dose information. - 131 - Establishment of a standardized record system or a centralized registry should not be predicated entirely on its use in compensation cases. But if a system is established for research purposes, its potential use for worker's compensation should be considered when the system is structured, so that records can later be accessible to workers with compensation claims. A centralized registry containing cumulative dose information would be of greatest use for claims pur- poses. C. Monitoring Another purpose which might be served by a standar- dized record system is enforcement of regulations limiting exposure to workplace hazards. This purpose requires neither maintenance of records for a long period nor use of personalized information, since the enforcement agency is primarily concerned with keeping exposures low to all workers now and in the future. One group of workers whose exposure might best be monitored through a centralized data system is tran- sient workers, who move from plant to plant over the course of a year. Existing record requirements appear generally adequate at present to monitor the exposures of other workers, particularly since enforcement agencies lack the resources to review compliance on a daily basis. However, standardization or centrali- zation may lead to improvement in enforcement efforts. This possibility should be explored when the measures proposed in this Appendix are considered in detail. D. Summary From this brief review of issues involved in developing record systems related to radiation exposure, it is plain that extensive feasibility analyses will be needed before any particular system can be established. The need for some system directed particularly at exposed worker populations is clear, however. Efforts to improve existing record systems or to deVelop new systems should therefore be undertaken without delay. Whatever system ultimately develops will probably have to involve a certain degree of centralization on a national scale. - 132 - What particular information is recorded, in what form, and for which worker groups, must be carefully scrutinized. In this process, every opportunity should be used to incorporate existing data sources, particularly Social Security records, into whatever registry system is developed. One must also bear in mind the implications of such a system as a model for environmental exposures other than radiation. In this context, development of a radiation—specific record system should interdigitate with current efforts in other quarters (NIOSH) to develop similar national systems for a wide range of potential workplace hazards. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. EDUCATION. AND WELFARE POSTAGE AND FEES PAID WASHINGTON. o.c. 20201 u.s. DEPARTMENT or H.E.W. HEW 391 OFFICIAL BUSINESS PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300