This report is prepared by the National Research Council (NRC) Committee on an Assessment of CDC Radiation Studies. It reviews the draft report, Task 4. Environmental Pathways–Models and Validation, submitted in 1993 by the Radiation Assessment Corporation (RAC) to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The RAC's report describes the methods RAC plans to apply in a dose reconstruction project at the Feed Materials Production Center (FMPC) at Fernald, Ohio. The facility, which is northwest of Cincinnati, operated from 1951 to 1989. During that time, there were discharges of uranium compounds and small amounts of other radionuclides to the atmosphere and to groundwater and surface water. The goal of Task 4 of the project is to develop a method that can be used to translate the release estimates into actual concentrations of radioactive materials in the environment surrounding the facility and to predict the radiation exposures to human populations living in these environments.

Contents

• COMMITTEE ON AN ASSESSMENT OF CDC RADIATION STUDIES
• BOARD ON RADIATION EFFECTS RESEARCH
• COMMISSION ON LIFE SCIENCES
• [The National Academies]
• PREFACE
• EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• I. INTRODUCTION
  • A. FERNALD NUCLEAR FACILITY
  • B. METHODS USED IN THE RADIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTS CORPORATION REPORT
  • C. COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES
• II. STATUS OF SOURCE TERM
  • A. CHEMICAL FORM OF RELEASED MATERIAL
  • B. PARTICLE SIZES
  • C. DISPERSION MODELING
  • D. VALIDATION AND UNCERTAINTY
  • E. RADON
• III. EXPOSURE PATHWAYS AND DOSE ASSESSMENT
  • A. MEASUREMENTS AND METEOROLOGIC DATA
  • B. EXPOSURE PATHWAYS
  • C. DOSE ASSESSMENTS
• IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
• APPENDIX SPECIFIC COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT REPORT
• LITERATURE CITED

This project was prepared under grant 200-91-0951 between the National Academy of Sciences and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the governing board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance.

This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of the members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.