Interview with Claire Palmiter

Page 2

- Origin and development of Federal Radiation Council Help to states - Minnesota, Utah - Establishment of standards - Role of Departments of Labor, Commerce, Interior - Secretary Wirtz and his decisions - Choice of subjects - the differing format of the FRC v s other - Staff of BEIR committee due to FRC - Minnesota and Utah incidents Minnesota did not take final action Utah did - it seems - Radiation Protection Guides not mean use Protective Action Guides instead for fa lout situations - Numbers needed only for the important radionuclides The FRC files go to EPA and get buried Re/Stimulation of research by fallout problems Risk estimates in FRC report f 3 On making the computed numbers too real People contributing to the various reports The BEAR reports - and NAS input to FRC Re/Reports on uranium miners

Page 3

- Re/Vic Archer - where will the PHS data be or where will they go to? May get lost The miner group in Colorado plateau needs further follow up, but - Problems of evaluating the epidemiologic data The different groups - The Stewart-Simpson report (not very helpful discussion of it) - Why has radon been such a difficult problem? Politics and dosimetry problems A section about someone being concerned about Archer's data but not possible to identify - Re/AECls role in the miner problem Legal counsel to AEC Aquatic biology program - Re/What radionuclides were thought to be in the Columbia River? - Pile effluent experiment a milestone - Broader through aquatic studies - A diversion to Alaskan (Amckitka) work Eating caribou steaks in Alaska doubled his cesium body content

Page 4

Samples back to Hanford Short food chain - Naming people to be mentioned - First radioecology - Hanford, Windscale, Oak Ridge - IAEA and its relation to internal emitter work Main contributions in education and helping developing countries plus seminars and symposia - Incorporation of ICRP 26 into IAEA standards - not completed - End of tape

Page 5

Interview held in San Diego STANNARD : We might begin by your giving what you might cz lla thumb nz il sketch of the Federal Radiation Council ' s organization,rz is on d ' etre, contributions End Ghat you felt i - as different about its approach against the other agencies (or the other groups,they were not agencies)and how well you thought it worked. P&?lITER: Well, ifI can go back into the history of the Council, it was established originally by Presidential Executive Order 010831, August14, 1959. Then the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy discussed tne met ter in1959also. Law 86-373 on SE?t. 23,1959. The purpose of the Council was str ted Tne Council was made si atu rory by Public t o be that it would a6vise the president with resp ecr to radiation. Patters directly or in dire cr lya ffe c ring health including guidznce for all fe der z lz gen cie s in the for nul ation of radiations tendard s and in the est z j ll sha ent and execution of progra-s of cooperation with states. ?;OX that was the basic charge. Going bock t o xhy the Council vas for ned.Inthe early ani ages cie s,for ex==?le like the Health Education and Kel fare Deparzaent, which insisted that fallout from our weapons testing was affecting the heal rh of the peopie in the country. On the other hand we had the agencies such zs the Aior.ic Energy Commission of Defense for se cnr it pre t sons hz ving to test and the Department

Page 6

weapons i n the atmosphere. I think our public was ina quandary on biological effects of radiation. One agency sayLng it was dangerous,another agency saying it was safe.Therefore, the CouncLl caa e to ger her on the result or as a result Of a meeting bet ve ex the Bureau of Budget, the White House, AEC, HEW, and DOD. I t WES t o be a forum v here the agencies could talk internally. The ese cut ive branch could develop a policy and announce this policy - to the public.This way I think the FRC did serve as a good mechanism of carrying out this responsibility. Was it for political reasons that they hac? tosay, "Well, our advice, of course, is only applicable to federal agencies. " 1 .policy to the federal agerrcies and tt the sme tia e assist the Tnere ' s no question about that. st zte s. ~ o rex=-s,ie, r e h2d the pro ble a of c oct ari nation of rheat in the st ste of E innes ota.Secret try Free am of Agriculture case on tothe Couricil rh en this WES going on. Pad I believe tha: r-e I think cer lso helped the situation in the st zte of Utah from the 1oca if zl lou z conti ti or,. We titi zany discussions vith the>. Tne Edu cari on and Kel fare on the subject of fallout in Utah. the eight rz ports that the Council pc: out proved a ver:I valuable source of info Dz ci on for the people as well 2s providing guidance for there gul tr or ; program of the federal agencies. held E conference through the Secretary of Health

Page 7

STANNARD: I would certainly agree with that.It could have been presented a s " This is the consensus o f the experts i n the that, as faras implementation goes, i t was for the federal But they were very careful toput in the caveat establishment. And " i f the general population and industry wants t o follow suit,fine,but you don ' t have to. " I suppose that was just t o make its iq le because actually there weren ' tvery many people using or c once ned with large radiation sources who weren ' tin one way or another federal. PLYITER: Well, thein2us try was coining along quite L-ell. Ve had many types of ac rivi ries associated with radio ect ive = rerid. Tnere was a need for standards, and I think there was a need for a definite federal policy governing the regulations a n d the various regulators in the federal government. I believe that we found out then, andI think i t ' s still trU2,that the este blis nme at of these standards isz't apc rely scientific matter.Ge have t o brLxc, is socisl and w e heve to bri z g In public.points of view.I this:; one ?tint thzr. is vo rih noting is the c vhsn the Council r-as z c tl ve,it rss a directive of the Bureau of Budget, nou the office of MEnagenent 2z-k Budget, thzrz3e Cocncil's activities would no: be c ace public uzzil after the preside at had signed off. Tnen it wes released through the federal register and in the imp le3ent ation of the policy and the various regulator ? ; activities of the federal agencies. sure that tnis type of activity could not work properly. It woull have t o be discuss ec through public forurrss; then the president t nd his

Page 8

in ned i ate advisors vould establish federal policy.Ichid Khe Council L-ith ics small staff VES something that was a policy point because redid not gather a huge bureaucracy. We used consult an rs frorr the various federal agencies. The agencies paid their szl aries.But the Council itself d it not establish a very lz r ge staff.In this way v e could call on eny particular scientist or exTert in a federal agency and an X EC contractor o r at a university that we wished t o have on a particular subject. That subject would be completed,and w e would go on to another activity r-hich vould require a different type of expert.k qd this nod us operand i,I think,proved very valuable. STANNARD: I think it was gret t.Do you have any kind of alist of the nee tings of these various groups or consult vlt s plus,s2y, a possible reccrd of what was said? PALYITER : I have the zi nute so fell the Council meet iz gs,all the corking group n ~ e tir rg s ,z listing of consultants from the Sz rion zl But this is in t ne filing cz binet zz hone..I could excerpt so ce cf STANNARD: Iwas,I think,primarily wanting to know for this history chat su jj ect s were considered important enough t o have discussions by knoving who participated and if anything got deci6e.d that cas really new and different, how i t helped push s one thing over the line.I couldn ' t possibly go through all of it.But this is in,

Page 9

one of those areas where people may have said things,in ansver t o .questions or for other reasons,that were very pertinent that h even ' t seen the light of day in any other way. PLYITER : Kell, I think in the treatment of strontium in our report 4'3,for ex arn ple,Ican ' t recall many that thought this way. originally,but one of the first was Dr. Forrest Western who felt that there wasn ' t any need to have a higher RPG, Radiation Protection Guide, for strontium than would give the mpd dose at that time. So we took a third of that value. As I recall he had a great leal to do vith reaching that decision that was passed on t o Council 2nd STANNARD: I was going to ask about that one - third value because it seemed to me that it was about that time that the population - individual number turned up.It was a tenth of the occupational. Then there was this factor of 3that came in for the average of the population. Now that was Forrest Western ' sidea ? es high 2s the =.p.d. in this p2r:icular activity. And I think it L-2s Because we know nov there wasn ' t 21ly need t o go And still have a viable industry. Was itthe FRC that first enunciated the idea that for any 2 policy-=kixg operation that produced this. It hi ak theN CiV and the

Page 10

ICRP h a d even enumerated such philosophies. However, I don't recall a specific date vherr they put these into effect.I could guess o r estimate. But as far as the federal bureaucracy goes, i t was the first time that we had an official position out of the executive branch. STANNARD : Was there somebody there - Labor o r other people there t h a t presumably could have helped on the benefit side o f the equation. PALMITER: I think we were proposing a philosophy that would have ab2lance between benefits 2nd risks. But i n actual day-to-day living, we were actually more concerned about the risks than the benefits. And I think it ' s still a problem to identify and enumerate a benefit aga hst the risks of radiation exposure. You c2n 60 i t .in general terms, butit ' s still an art 2nd not a science. STANNARD: What kind of complications did they see ? In addition t o the health oriented people that were involved,there was Labor,and didn ' tthe Department of Commerce get involved, too ? The Departments of Interior, Department o f Commerce, represent E rives from the Kac ion zl Bureau of Stan Cards, such people as Dr. Lauri t son Taylor, Dr. Harold Wycoff. Whenever we needed a certain ex per rise,ve could call on these people. Department of Counerce. experts vhom 'I considered exp errs from the various federal e gen cie s on o u r vorking group. I'd forgotten about h'BS being pa it of the Well, what I'm trying to get at is the - contributions

Page 11

that Labor and Interior and those others were supposed t o make. I may hzve had the wrong i dez that the): were tn ere partly because they were representing the people chat were being asked to take the the Interior Oept. included the Bureau o f Mines. You had people from the Bureau o f Mines, but they were still really on the risk side ? Not very rcuch for benefit side our of some of those agencies. Is that right ? PLYITER : Yes, yes. PAElZTEII: Well, at the time we were involved in the uranium mining exposure study for example. Secretary Wirtz had the responsibility under the Walsh-Eiealy Act to provide pro tec rion to the uaderground recall thE z durlng the he z ring that came out Secretary Wirtz hzd develc?ed his om u or king level which vas tech ~ icell yi nz c cure te. This t.-2s VET c lez rly eau a cls ted by one Dr. Robley Evans. working level is something you rig ' n t want c o rePezber i n one of the The Wirtz working level. Was that the 4? (working levels per year) That was 0.3 WL, the way i t was actually stated. [This was the usually been propounding for the high side rather than the low PPLYITLR: Ee L-ZS jus : na king sure that the join c - cor air tze tic

Page 12

ad the audience understood the implications of what the Wirtt working level really meant. STPUTXRD: Oh, he wasn ' t advocating it. STAWXRD : I can hear him doing that,yes indeed. Well, let me ask another kind of a general question. The FRC reports use a very different approach than the older NCR P and ICRP reports in that they took up specific subjects for each report. three elements together and discussed the problems o f them andin many res - pec ts gave a great deal more information about how they got there than was kind'of a calculation or tv o kinds, one for bone seekers and one strontium number was what it was, for example. You didn ' tget very much help i n terms of why theI Whereas t h e FRC spent major emphasis on a single subject. My question i s how did that come about, who ' s idea was it,or did it just happen? pro dect s. Ve cere involved in proposing I could say four CT five particular subjects to work on for the next year or the nest the Council would m2ke the decisfon along vith the President ' s Science Tnese activities could be proposed tothe Counci1,znd input fror the Fn ire House en6 :he President ' s Science Advisor and from the

Page 13

agencies.If i: appeared that ur anl ur mining vas i! problerr., radon and its daughter products vas a problem then the Council decided well, "We would study that," and propose a report, prepare a report anda the pro b len vith the Alaskan Eskimos, whether we should move the villages. We developed particular guidance for those. (None o f the villagers had t o he moved.) STA-ARD: Which report is that …