In the late 1980s, the National Cancer Institute initiated an investigation of cancer risks in populations near 52 commercial nuclear power plants and 10 Department of Energy nuclear facilities (including research and nuclear weapons production facilities and one reprocessing plant) in the United States. The results of the NCI investigation were used a primary resource for communicating with the public about the cancer risks near the nuclear facilities. However, this study is now over 20 years old. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission requested that the National Academy of Sciences provide an updated assessment of cancer risks in populations near USNRC-licensed nuclear facilities that utilize or process uranium for the production of electricity. Analysis of Cancer Risks in Populations near Nuclear Facilities: Phase 1 focuses on identifying scientifically sound approaches for carrying out an assessment of cancer risks associated with living near a nuclear facility, judgments about the strengths and weaknesses of various statistical power, ability to assess potential confounding factors, possible biases, and required effort. The results from this Phase 1 study will be used to inform the design of cancer risk assessment, which will be carried out in Phase 2. This report is beneficial for the general public, communities near nuclear facilities, stakeholders, healthcare providers, policy makers, state and local officials, community leaders, and the media.

This book is the seventh in a series of titles from the National Research Council that addresses the effects of exposure to low dose LET (Linear Energy Transfer) ionizing radiation and human health. Updating information previously presented in the 1990 publication, Health Effects of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR V, this book draws upon new data in both epidemiologic and experimental research. Ionizing radiation arises from both natural and man-made sources and at very high doses can produce damaging effects in human tissue that can be evident within days after exposure. However, it is the low-dose exposures that are the focus of this book. So-called “late” effects, such as cancer, are produced many years after the initial exposure. This book is among the first of its kind to include detailed risk estimates for cancer incidence in addition to cancer mortality. BEIR VII offers a full review of the available biological, biophysical, and epidemiological literature since the last BEIR report on the subject and develops the most up-to-date and comprehensive risk estimates for cancer and other health effects from exposure to low-level ionizing radiation.

Though overall cancer incidence and mortality have continued to decline in recent years, cancer continues to devastate the lives of far too many Americans. In 2009 alone, 1.5 million American men, women, and children were diagnosed with cancer, and 562,000 died from the disease. There is a growing body of evidence linking environmental exposures to cancer. The Pres. Cancer Panel dedicated its 2008¿2009 activities to examining the impact of environmental factors on cancer risk. The Panel considered industrial, occupational, and agricultural exposures as well as exposures related to medical practice, military activities, modern lifestyles, and natural sources. This report presents the Panel¿s recommend. to mitigate or eliminate these barriers. Illus.

Analysis of Cancer Risks in Populations near Nuclear Facilities is a pilot study requested by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) to assess the risk of cancer near nuclear facilities in the United States. This effort is being carried out in two phases. The Phase 1 study recommended two study designs appropriate for assessing cancer risks near nuclear facilities. It also recommended a pilot study of seven nuclear facilities to assess the technical feasibility of the recommended study designs. The Phase 2 study is the assessment of cancer risks. The pilot, which is part of the Phase 2 study, is being carried out in two steps: pilot planning and pilot execution. The pilot planning (current step) aims to plan for the pilot study. The pilot execution (next step) aims to carry out the pilot study and evaluate the technical feasibility of implementing the two study designs recommended in the Phase 1 study. If implementation of the study designs is feasible, the methods developed and tested in the pilot study could be used to conduct a nationwide study. Analysis of Cancer Risks in Populations Near Nuclear Facilities: Phase 2 Pilot Planning provides advice to the National Academy of Sciences in performing a number of tasks related to the planning for a pilot epidemiological study, such as identifying the processes for selecting qualified individuals and/or organizations to perform epidemiological and dosimetric tasks and initiating effluent release and meteorological data collection in preparation for estimating doses to the people who live near the pilot nuclear facilities. This report brief report serves as a public record of the committee's advice to the National Academy of Sciences on general methodological considerations involved in carrying out the pilot study.

In the United States there are several thousand devices containing high-activity radiation sources licensed for use in areas ranging from medical uses such as cancer therapy to safety uses such as testing of structures and industrial equipment. Those radiation sources are licensed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and state agencies. Concerns have been raised about the safety and security of the radiation sources, particularly amid fears that they could be used to create dirty bombs, or radiological dispersal device (RDD). In response to a request from Congress, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission asked the National Research Council to conduct a study to review the uses of high-risk radiation sources and the feasibility of replacing them with lower risk alternatives. The study concludes that the U.S. government should consider factors such as potential economic consequences of misuse of the radiation sources into its assessments of risk. Although the committee found that replacements of most sources are possible, it is not economically feasible in some cases. The committee recommends that the U.S. government take steps to in the near term to replace radioactive cesium chloride radiation sources, a potential "dirty bomb" ingredient used in some medical and research equipment, with lower-risk alternatives. The committee further recommends that longer term efforts be undertaken to replace other sources. The book presents a number of options for making those replacements.

This report assesses the levels and effects of exposure to ionizing radiation. Scientific findings underpin radiation risk evaluation and international protection standards. This report comprises a report with two underpinning scientific annexes. The first annex recapitulates and clarifies the philosophy of science as well as the scientific knowledge for attributing observed health effects in individuals and populations to radiation exposure, and distinguishes between that and inferring risk to individuals and populations from an exposure. The second annex reviews the latest thinking and approaches to quantifying the uncertainties in assessments of risk from radiation exposure, and illustrates these approaches with application to examples that are highly pertinent to radiation protection.