The health risks of decommissioning nuclear facilities

Our plain-English summary of The health risks of decommissioning nuclear facilities, by M. Dodic-Fikfak, R. Clapp, D. Kriebel (New Solutions, 1999).

The study

• Authors: M. Dodic-Fikfak, R. Clapp, D. Kriebel
• Journal: New Solutions
• Published: 1999;9(2):153-61
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

Abstract

The health risks facing workers involved in decommissioning nuclear facilities are a critical concern as the nuclear weapons complex and nuclear power plants begin to be dismantled. In addition to risks from exposure to radioactive materials, there are risks from other common industrial materials like crystalline silica dust and asbestos. We discuss these issues in the context of recent research on the risk of low-level ionizing radiation, the classification of crystalline silica as a carcinogen, and early experience with decommissioning nuclear facilities in the United States. Health and safety advocates will need to be vigilant to prevent worker exposure.

In plain English

This article was a literature review, not a new study. The authors reviewed published research on cancer among nuclear industry workers to judge the risks facing workers who decommission nuclear weapons facilities and power plants. Across the studies reviewed, they reported that the most consistent findings were elevated risks of leukemia and multiple myeloma. They described an earlier pooled analysis of eight studies in which workers with cumulative doses of 10 mSv or more had an 80 percent excess relative risk of leukemia compared with workers below 10 mSv. They also described a combined analysis of workers in the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada, which found a statistically significant trend with dose for leukemia (except chronic lymphocytic leukemia) and multiple myeloma. The authors noted that crystalline silica had been classified by IARC as a Group 1 carcinogen. Asbestos was mentioned only briefly, as an exposure likely during dismantling. The article gave no asbestos data. The authors concluded that the same vigilance used during plant operations would be needed to prevent exposures during decommissioning.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Literature review of epidemiologic studies of nuclear industry workers, with commentary on decommissioning
• Who was studied: Published studies of nuclear power and nuclear research laboratory workers in the United States, Canada and Great Britain. Table 1 lists eight studies covering roughly 1943 to 1985. The review's subject is workers who decommission nuclear facilities.
• Exposure: Mainly low-level ionizing radiation. The authors also mentioned crystalline silica from breaking concrete, and asbestos, metal fumes, beryllium, other heavy metals, oils and chemicals. No asbestos fiber types or doses were given.
• Main results:
  • Across the nuclear worker studies reviewed, the most consistent findings were elevated risk of leukemia and multiple myeloma. Brain and lung cancer were elevated in some studies.
  • In a previously published pooled analysis of eight studies, workers with cumulative doses of 10 mSv or more were compared with workers below 10 mSv. For leukemia, both the excess crude relative risk and the excess pooled relative risk were 80 percent. For lymph and blood cancers combined, the excess pooled relative risk was 100 percent.
  • In that same pooled analysis, the relative risk for leukemia was 2.2 for the 10-50 mSv dose category and 1.7 for the more than 50 mSv category, compared with doses below 10 mSv.
  • A previously published combined analysis of workers in the US, UK and Canada included 15,825 deaths from all causes and 3,976 cancer deaths. It found a statistically significant trend with dose for leukemia (except chronic lymphocytic leukemia) and multiple myeloma.
  • At the Yankee Rowe plant's Main Coolant System Decontamination Project, the projected worker dose was eight person-rem, but the actual dose was 12.7 person-rem.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that the vigilance used to prevent worker exposures during operations would be needed during decommissioning. They also said that risks from non-radiation carcinogenic hazards in decommissioning work are substantial.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The authors stated that the low-dose radiation studies reviewed, with relatively small sample sizes, had low statistical power to detect effects.
  • The authors stated that the healthy-worker effect may cause harmful effects of radiation in these studies to be underestimated.
  • The authors stated that most of the reviewed studies had data only on external radiation exposure, not on internal emitters.

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Crystalline.

Related studies

• Reducing environmental risk associated with laboratory decommissioning and property transfer — R. Dufault, E. Abelquist, et al. (2000)
• Using GIS to Estimate Population at Risk Because of Residence Proximity to Asbestos Processing Facilities in Colombia — B. Lysaniuk, M.F. Cely-García, et al. (2021)
• Health Effects of Occupational and Environmental Exposures to Nuclear Power Plants: A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression — R.T. Lin, H. Boonhat, et al. (2024)
• Yield of Low-Dose Computerized Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer in High-Risk Workers: The Case of 7189 US Nuclear Weapons Workers — S.B. Markowitz, A. Manowitz, et al. (2018)
• Malignant pleural mesothelioma risk among nuclear workers: a review — C. Metz-Flamant, I. Guseva Canu, et al. (2011)
• Risk and significance of chest radiograph and pulmonary function abnormalities in an elderly cohort of former nuclear weapons workers — M.A. Mikulski, P.G. Hartley, et al. (2011)

Browse more research in New Solutions, or return to medical research.