Download or read book A Comparison of Radiological Risk Assessment Methods for Environmental Restoration written by and published by . This book was released on 1993 with total page 10 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: Evaluation of risks to human health from exposure to ionizing radiation at radioactively contaminated sites is an integral part of the decision-making process for determining the need for remediation and selecting remedial actions that may be required. At sites regulated under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), a target risk range of 10−4 to 10−6 incremental cancer incidence over a lifetime is specified by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as generally acceptable, based on the reasonable maximum exposure to any individual under current and future land use scenarios. Two primary methods currently being used in conducting radiological risk assessments at CERCLA sites are compared in this analysis. Under the first method, the radiation dose equivalent (i.e., Sv or rem) to the receptors of interest over the appropriate period of exposure is estimated and multiplied by a risk factor (cancer risk/Sv). Alternatively, incremental cancer risk can be estimated by combining the EPA's cancer slope factors (previously termed potency factors) for radionuclides with estimates of radionuclide intake by ingestion and inhalation, as well as radionuclide concentrations in soil that contribute to external dose. The comparison of the two methods has demonstrated that resulting estimates of lifetime incremental cancer risk under these different methods may differ significantly, even when all other exposure assumptions are held constant, with the magnitude of the discrepancy depending upon the dominant radionuclides and exposure pathways for the site. The basis for these discrepancies, the advantages and disadvantages of each method, and the significance of the discrepant results for environmental restoration decisions are presented.