Selected Agencies Generally Used Advice from Scientific Advisory Bodies to Develop and Apply Radiation-Protection Requirements and Guidance

EPA, NRC, DOE, and FDA have generally used the advice of scientific  advisory bodies to develop and apply radiation protection requirements  and guidance for workers and the public for the four radiation settings in  our review. This advice includes the use of the “linear no-threshold  model,” which assumes that the risk of cancer increases with every  incremental increase in radiation exposure. Agencies’ Radiation Protection Requirements and Guidance Vary Depending on the Four Settings Reviewed in Which Exposure Can Occur

The limits and guidance the four agencies have developed and applied  vary depending on the settings in which exposure can occur, as  described below. This result is in part because the scientific advisory  bodies on which the agencies relied have developed recommendations  specific to the four settings we reviewed: (1) operation and  decommissioning of nuclear plants; (2) cleanup of sites with radiological  contamination; (3) use of medical imaging equipment that produces  radiation; and (4) accidental or terrorism-related exposure to radiation. Officials at the plant told us  that they have been able to keep exposures below the plant’s own limit by  continuously seeking opportunities to reduce unnecessary worker  exposure to radiation, such as using robots to perform maintenance work  in radiation areas. Seven Federal Agencies Obligated about $210 Million for Fiscal Years 2012 to 2016 for Research on Low-Dose Radiation’s Health Effects, but Annual Funding Decreased

From fiscal year 2012 through fiscal year 2016, seven federal agencies  obligated $209.6 million for research on the health effects of low-dose  radiation. These estimates,  according to EPA, can be used by federal and state agencies to  develop and implement radiation protection regulations and  standards. Agencies Collaborated on Individual Projects on Radiation’s Health Effects but Not on Overall Research Priorities

The seven agencies that funded research on health effects of low-dose  radiation for fiscal years 2012 through 2016 collaborated on particular  research projects through the use of several mechanisms, including the  following:
Joint funding of individual research projects: For example, as  previously mentioned, DOE’s Office of Science, EPA, NASA, and  NRC jointly funded the Million Person Study, and CDC and DOE’s  Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security helped fund the  International Nuclear Workers Study. Until recently, DOE’s Low Dose Radiation Research Program provided a  stable source of funding for such research and according to DOE’s  website, DOE took a leading role in advocating for greater communication  and coordination between the fields of radiation biology and  epidemiology. DOE’s reduced role  has created a void in federal efforts to maintain a collaborative  mechanism for low-dose radiation research, and no other agency has  stepped forward to fill this void. DOE is well positioned to lead an effort to ensure that federal agencies  have a mechanism for interagency collaboration to address overall  research priorities related to low-dose radiation health effects because of  the agency’s past experience as a leader in this area of research. Conclusions

DOE and other federal agencies have invested millions of dollars in low- dose radiation research, and this research has led to a better  understanding of the health effects of radiation exposure, thereby helping  federal agencies develop and implement radiation protection  requirements and guidance for workers and the public. Given the reduction in funding for low-dose radiation research,  federal agencies can benefit from greater collaboration on addressing  their research priorities in this area. DOE,  consistent with its past experience as a leader in this area of research  and its research responsibility under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,  could assist agencies in developing an interagency collaborative  mechanism for the future. Table 2 shows  examples of federal agencies’ dose limits, guidance levels, and other  radiation protection measures.
Why GAO Did This Study

According to EPA, exposure to low doses of radiation does not cause immediate health effects but may increase a person's cancer risk. Federal agencies fund research on cancer risk, but uncertainties remain about risk assessments that federal agencies use to develop radiation protection regulations and guidance.
GAO was asked to examine federal agencies' radiation protection requirements and guidance and related research. This report (1) describes how selected federal agencies have developed and applied radiation protection requirements and guidance and (2) examines the extent to which federal agencies have funded and collaborated on research on low-dose radiation's health effects for fiscal years 2012 to 2016.
GAO selected four federal agencies, based on their development of requirements or guidance for settings in which radiation exposure to workers and the public can occur. GAO reviewed agency documentation and interviewed agency officials on the development of the requirements and guidance. GAO also collected and examined federal-funding data for low-dose radiation research from seven agencies that fund this research.

What GAO Found

The Department of Energy (DOE), Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Food and Drug Administration generally used the advice of scientific advisory bodies to develop and apply radiation protection requirements and guidance for workers and the public in the radiation exposure settings that GAO reviewed. These settings were: (1) the operation and decommissioning of nuclear power plants; (2) the cleanup of sites with radiological contamination; (3) the use of medical equipment that produces radiation; and (4) accidental or terrorism-related exposure to radiation. Specifically, the agencies relied on the advice of three scientific advisory bodies that supported the use of a model that assumes the risk of cancer increases with every incremental radiation exposure. Accordingly, the agencies have set regulatory dose limits and issued guidance to confine exposure to levels that reduce the risk of cancer, while recognizing that scientific uncertainties occur in estimating cancer risks from low-dose radiation. For example, NRC requires nuclear power plants to consider measures for limiting workers' exposure below NRC's regulatory dose limit, such as by using robots for maintenance work in radiation areas.
GAO identified seven federal agencies that funded research on low-dose radiation's health effects. In fiscal years 2012 to 2016, DOE, NRC, EPA, and four other federal agencies obligated about $210 million for such research (see table). Although the agencies have collaborated on individual projects on radiation's health effects, they have not established a collaborative mechanism to set research priorities. GAO's previous work has shown that federal agencies can use such mechanisms to implement interagency collaboration to develop and coordinate sound science policies. In the past, DOE took a leading role in this area because DOE provided stable funding and advocated for greater coordination on research on low-dose radiation's health effects. However, since fiscal year 2012, DOE has phased out funding for one of its main research programs in this area. This has created a void in coordination efforts among federal agencies, and no other agency has stepped forward to fill this void. Because of DOE's prior experience as a leader in this area of research and its research responsibility under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, it could play an important role in helping federal agencies establish a coordinating mechanism for low-dose radiation research.
Dollars are in millions and have not been adjusted for inflation
Source: GAO analysis of agency data. | GAO-17-546

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends DOE lead development of a mechanism for interagency collaboration on research on low-dose radiation's health effects. DOE disagreed, stating that agencies set their own research priorities. GAO continues to believe that DOE is in the best position to lead such an effort, as discussed in the report.