[ RadSafe ] State regulatory authority -was: body dose - witholding data

[Clayton J Bradt]

Phil, you raise an interesting point. Do you have a citation as to where 
exactly in the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) it prohibits State regulation of 
uranium mines? (Are you thining of Sec. 274 c. (1)?)  As an Agreement 
State, Colorado does not regulate radioactive materials pursuant to the 
AEA, but rather pursuant to the states' inherent police powers. What AEA 
does is allow NRC to relinquish its regulatory authority within state 
jurisdiction. 

Clayton J. Bradt
Principal Radiophysicist
NYS Dept. of Health
Biggs Laboratory, Room D486A
Empire State Plaza
Albany, NY 12201-0509

518-474-1993
****************************************
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 16:13:28 +0000
From: "Egidi, Phil" <Phil.Egidi at dphe.state.co.us>
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] body dose - witholding data
To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
                 List"           <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Message-ID:
 <4A2CC5F4817F144A88DF20FD14C5327204C7EE9A at dphevs14.dphe.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

It was not just DOE, secrecy of course went all the way back to War II and 
the MED.  The AEC was formed in 1946, and they downplayed concerns by the 
States and their own safety people as early as 1949 that there were 
significant issues in uranium mines and mills.  AEC would only allow the 
State and Public Health Service to collect radon samples in mines if they 
did not discuss the results with the miners.(1)  It was verified by 1951 
that radon progeny were responsible for large doses to the lungs (i.e., 
John Harley), yet it was not until 1967 that rules were passed for 
underground uranium miners.  AEC morphed into NRC, ERDA, and DOE later. It 
is not known how many lives could have been saved if basic ventilation 
measures were put in place sooner.  AEC claimed it lacked authority over 
the mines, and left it for the states to handle, and they of course did 
not have the expertise or resources to take that on.  The story goes on 
and on and there is no time to go further here...

BTW, those regulations for underground uranium miners are still on the 
MSHA books at 30 CFR 57.5005 - .5047. - ICRP 2-based limits that have 
separate limits for inhalation (4 WLM/y ~= 5 rem), separate (i.e. 
additional) limit for gamma (5 rem), only required to make ANNUAL 
measurements for gamma, only badge workers if > 2 mR/h, no summation of 
doses, and of course, no ALARA.  There is no requirement to monitor for 
long-lived progeny (Pb-210 and Po-210) in ore dust, they may be ingesting 
and there is no requirement for tracking.  These regs, IMHO, do not 
provide equal protection to the miners as other radiation workers get 
today under NRC, DOE, or State regulations based on ICRP 26/30 or 60 or 
103 paradigms.  Guidance (ANSI N13.8) cited in the regulations for making 
WL measurements, etc. has not been updated since 1973.  HPS does have a 
group working on updating that guidance.  IAEA has updated guidance, as 
does Australia and others.

As a state regulator in a materials program, we have no authority over 
uranium mining.  The Atomic Energy Act is clear that the authority under 
the Act "starts after removal from its place in nature."  There is some 
sporadic underground uranium mining in the last few years, but it is 
expected to increase at least a little since the price of uranium is going 
up and the need for fuel is increasing based on world demand.

(1) Mogren, Eric.  "Warm Sands, Uranium Mill Tailings Policy in the Atomic 
West".  University of New Mexico Press. 2002



IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential or sensitive information which is, or may be, legally privileged or otherwise protected by law from further disclosure. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, please do not distribute, copy or use it or any attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.