Document text
Machine-read from the scan, so expect some errors. Lines that couldn’t be read are left out.
Page 1
'I.'oltlt.r reg^ Thrngd-~g~scomment on lack of clarity as tothe meaning of the term %r/hr,f'l this is quite true until one dissects the paper into its component parts,, I believe the statements would be much more comprehensible ifthe paper were more specific in its leading paragraphs. paragraph 1 should state that the following paragraphs, through paragraph 10, refer t o gamma radiation, paragraphs on contamination refer tothe summation of beta and gama radiation, t o be obseamed as specified. I n paragraph 12, the statements "In all cases ,.,will be used as a guide" are cumpletely out of context and result in confusion of thought. They should be relegated t o paragraph 13. Paragraph 11 could say that the following 2, While on t h e subject of these statements, Dunning's comment ( 3 ) is applicable. The phrase %ci.thout regard t o radiological hazard1* should be eliminated, If the rest of t h e statements are placed in paragraph 13, it becomes obvious that the command decision is t o be based on the tactical levels which are given i n paragraph 13. 3 . Skin contamination values on page 1-1-3 might call special attention Specialt o contamination of t h e eyes and gonads as on page 5 of Handbook 48. mention should be made that it is not profitable to abrade the skin or e pilate the scalp i n an attempt t o remove stabborn contamination somewhat in excess of 1 mrep/hr or about 1000 counts per minute of b e t a plus gamma, Fortunately, it is unlikely that, even rain-out of fission products will produce skin contmi nation which will not yield to ordinary washing with a surgical brush or which will not sweat off i n a day or two, 4. Dunning's comment ( 2 ) refers t o t h e alpha level given i n paragraph 12-c-1 (page 1-1-3) as unnecessarily stringent. The approximate AEC values qEoted here are intended for good housekeeping purposes, for enclosed laboratories and for lifetime exposures. W e have discussed this at some length and believe there is danger insetting a level s o low that it cannot be metin practice and is therefore disregarded entirely. be relaxed on shipboard by a factor of 2-5 for enclosed areas (cabins, etc.) and by a factor of 10 or more for open surfaces where ventilation is good. This level might very well 6.Inthe lkmits prescribed a t the top o€ page 1-1-5, the value of 5 x 10-3pc/cc f o r beta-gamma emitters means the value as calculated t o (H days from the presently observed value, probably could not be met, This set of criteria might be written: This needs t o be more specifically The values for a i r are intended Limits as stated
Page 2
Beta-Gamma Ibitter Alpha Emitters h ted to H3 days) Particles less than 5 p diameter lo4 p / c c It can be shown tha.t the above limits of d pha activity for bomb products in the air, as given in the table, are reasonably consistent with the limiting difficult to measure in the field. specify a limit of contamination i n terms of beta-gamma activity only. Alpha activity in the air, however, is For both safety and convenience, one may 7. Paragraph 1 3 4 , page I-I-5. W e are not agreed t h a t there is no necessity for use of masks, Criteria should be established for use o r non-use,