Use of Radioactive Materials in Commercial Applications Has Increased

Categorizing Radioactive Sources by Risk
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) categorization system used by NRC places radioactive materials into five categories based on risk to human health. Category 1 materials have the highest potential to immediately harm human health, leading to the death or permanent injury of individuals who are exposed. Most commercial applications fall into Categories 1 - 3. The report says the current categorization system fails to provide an adequate level of protection to society because it does not take into account the long-term health risks of radiation exposure — or the severe societal and economic impacts of these materials’ use in a dirty bomb — but instead focuses only on the immediate consequences of exposure. Only Category 1 and Category 2 materials are currently subject to enhanced security measures and tracked by the NRC.

IAEA and NRC should reframe categorization to reflect the potential health, economic, and social impacts of these materials and to describe their overall risk more holistically. The NRC should also start tracking Category 3 sources to increase accountability and better enable informed security decisions, says the report.

Adopting Alternatives

To facilitate adoption of alternative technologies, the report recommends:

·  The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) should prioritize funding for research and development projects that aim to develop alternatives where there are currently no acceptable nonradioisotopic technologies.

·  NNSA should engage with federal partners such as the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the Food and Drug Administration to support equivalency studies for researchers who are considering replacing their cesium or cobalt research irradiators with alternative technologies.

·  NNSA should engage with other offices within the U.S. Department of Energy, NSF, and professional societies to support equivalency studies for oil and gas well logging and industrial radiography service providers that are considering replacing their radioactive sources and adopting an alternative technology.

·  The National Institute of Standards and Technology should engage immediately with the research community as well as federal, industry, and international partners to initiate research on alternatives to cesium chloride for calibration applications, to prepare for the possible future elimination of its use.

The report also contains a detailed table outlining the committee’s findings about available alternatives, replacement challenges, adoption trends, and promising areas of research and development for each radioactive source.

Replacement in Low- and Middle-Income Countries
The report says efforts by the U.S. government and other national and international organizations to reduce high-activity radioactive sources in low- and middle-income countries should be driven by the local resources, infrastructure, and needs. Efforts to replace radiation cancer therapies in low- and middle-income countries has sometimes had unintended negative effects on patient care, for example, if replacements require training for medical professionals that is unavailable or resources like electricity that are not always reliable. In situations in which local resources and infrastructure cannot support alternatives, the report says, efforts should instead focus on enhancing security and assisting with infrastructure building.

“This assistance could represent a major contribution to international efforts and specifically provide benefits to low- and middle-income nations,” added Kroc.