DOCSLIB.ORG

Ontario Uranium Miners Cohort Study Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ontario Uranium Miners Cohort Study Report Ontario Uranium Miners Cohort Study Report Prepared for: The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission February 2015 Prepared by: The Occupational Cancer Research Centre, Cancer Care Ontario 1 Ontario Uranium Miners Cohort Study Feb. 2015 ACKNOWLEGEMENTS This update of the Ontario Uranium Miners Cohort was conducted by the Occupational Cancer Research Centre (OCRC) with funding from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. This report was prepared by Garthika Navaranjan, Colin Berriault, and Paul A. Demers from the OCRC and Minh Do, currently with the Public Health Agency of Canada and Paul Villeneuve from Carleton University. Loraine Marrett and John McLaughlin played key roles in the development of this cohort and the initiation of this project. Thanks are due to the staff of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission for their scientific comments and suggestions on the report. Special thanks are due to Robert Semenciw of the Public Health Agency of Canada who assisted with Canadian mortality and cancer incidence rates and to Douglas Chambers for his valuable insights and suggestions. Ontario Uranium Miners Cohort Study Feb. 2015 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................... i 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Canadian Uranium Mining History ............................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Uranium Mine Exposures and Health Effects ............................................................................................ 4 1.3 Ontario Radon Exposure Regulation .......................................................................................................... 7 2. URANIUM MINING COHORT STUDIES OVERVIEW ........................................................................................... 9 2.1 International Studies ................................................................................................................................ 16 2.2 Canadian Studies ...................................................................................................................................... 16 2.3 Ontario Studies ........................................................................................................................................ 16 3. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES................................................................................................................................... 18 4. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................................. 21 Radon exposure assessment .......................................................................................................................... 24 Record Linkage and Mortality Ascertainment ............................................................................................... 25 4.1 Statistical Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 25 4.1.1 External Cohort Comparison ................................................................................................................. 25 4.1.2 Internal Cohort Analyses ....................................................................................................................... 27 4.1.3 Lung Cancer Morphology ...................................................................................................................... 30 4.1.4 Modern Miners ..................................................................................................................................... 31 5. RESULTS .......................................................................................................................................................... 32 5.1 External comparisons of mortality and cancer incidence ............................................................................ 38 5.2 Internal Analyses ...................................................................................................................................... 54 5.2.1 Radon exposure and lung cancer mortality ...................................................................................... 54 5.2.2 Attained Age ..................................................................................................................................... 56 5.2.3 Exposure rate .................................................................................................................................... 58 5.2.4 Time since first exposure .................................................................................................................. 59 5.2.5 Time since last exposure ................................................................................................................... 60 5.2.6 Age at first exposure ......................................................................................................................... 61 5.2.7 Inverse dose-rate .............................................................................................................................. 62 5.3 Radon exposure and lung cancer incidence ............................................................................................ 63 5.3.1 Attained Age ..................................................................................................................................... 66 5.3.2 Exposure rate .................................................................................................................................... 66 5.3.3 Time since first exposure .................................................................................................................. 67 5.3.4 Time since last exposure ................................................................................................................... 68 Ontario Uranium Miners Cohort Study Feb. 2015 5.3.5 Age at first exposure ......................................................................................................................... 69 5.4 Radon exposure and lung cancer morphology ........................................................................................ 70 5.5 Examination of risks among modern miners ........................................................................................... 75 5.6 Exploratory analyses of RDP exposure and cancer incidence and mortality for cancers other than lung .. 76 5.7 Exploratory analyses of RDP exposure and non-cancer mortality ............................................................... 78 5.8 Sensitivity Analysis Assessing Different Sources of Exposure Data ......................................................... 78 6. DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................................................... 82 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................................... 94 APPENDIX A: Exploratory Analyses of Potential Health Risks Associated with Gamma Radiation Exposure among Ontario Uranium Miners ..................................................................................................... 101 APPENDIX B: Sources of Exposure Uncertainty ............................................................................................... 115 Appendix C: Canadian Uranium Mine and Refinery Locations circa 2009....................................................... 123 Ontario Uranium Miners Cohort Study Feb. 2015 List of Tables Table 1: International Cohorts of Uranium Miners.............................................................................................. 9 Table 2: Overview of Previous Ontario Uranium Miner Cohort Studies............................................................ 16 Table 3: Basic characteristics of cohort members ............................................................................................. 34 Table 4: Exposure characteristics of cohort members by sex and mining region ............................................. 35 Table 5: Mortality for various non-cancer causes of death and 95% CIs, males (1954–2007) ......................... 38 Table 6: Cancer mortality, incidence and 95% CIs, male Ontario uranium miners ........................................... 39 Table 7: Overall mortality, incidence and 95% CIs, female Ontario uranium miners ........................................ 41 Table 8: Mortality for non-cancer causes of death and 95% CIs, males with gold mining experience ............ 42 Table 9: Cancer mortality, incidence and 95% CIs, males with gold mining experience ................................... 43 Table 10: Mortality for non-cancer causes of death and 95% CIs, males without gold mining experience ..... 44 Table 11: Cancer mortality, incidence and 95% CIs, males without gold mining experience ........................... 45 Table 12: Mortality for non-cancer causes of death and 95% CIs, males with only Elliot Lake experience ...... 47 Table 13: Cancer mortality, incidence and 95% CIs, males with only Elliot Lake experience............................ 48 Table 14: Mortality for non-cancer causes of death and 95% CIs, males
Load more

Recommended publications
  • + 2020 Annual Information Form
    Denison Mines Corp. 2020 Annual Information Form March 26, 2021 ABOUT THIS ANNUAL INFORMATION FORM This annual information form (“AIF”) is dated March 26, Table of Contents 2021. Unless stated otherwise, all of the information in this AIF is stated as at December 31, 2020. About this AIF .................................... 1 About Denison ................................... 6 This AIF has been prepared in accordance with Canadian Developments over the Last Three securities laws and contains information regarding Years ................................................. 8 Denison’s history, business, mineral reserves and The Uranium Industry ........................ 17 resources, the regulatory environment in which Denison Mineral Resources and Reserves 24 does business, the risks that Denison faces and other Mineral Properties ............................. 27 important information for Shareholders. Athabasca Exploration: Sampling, Analysis and Data Verification ........... 102 This AIF incorporates by reference: Denison Operations ........................... 107 Manager of UPC ................................ 111 Denison’s management discussion and analysis (“MD&A”) for the year ended December 31, 2020, Denison Closed Mines Group ........... 112 Environmental, Health, Safety and Denison’s audited consolidated financial Sustainability Matters ........................ 112 statements for the year ended December 31, 2020, Government Regulation .................... 114 Risk Factors ...................................... 120 both of which
    [Show full text]
  • CMD 18-M48.9A File/Dossier : 6.02.04 Date
    CMD 18-M48.9A File/dossier : 6.02.04 Date : 2018-12-03 Edocs pdf : 5725730 Revised written submission from Mémoire révisé de Northwatch Northwatch In the Matter of À l’égard de Regulatory Oversight Report for Uranium Rapport de surveillance réglementaire des Mines, Mills, Historic and Decommissioned mines et usines de concentration d’uranium et Sites in Canada: 2017 des sites historiques et déclassés au Canada : 2017 Commission Meeting Réunion de la Commission December 12, 2018 Le 12 décembre 2018 Revised version with changes made on pages 5 and 6 November 20, 2018 Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission 280 Slater Street, P.O. Box 1046, Station B Ottawa, ON K1P 5S9 Ref. CMD 18-M48 Dear President Velshi and Commission Members: Re. Regulatory Oversight Report for Uranium Mines, Mills, Historic and Decommissioned Sites in Canada: 2017 On 29 June 2018 the Secretariat for the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission provided notice that the Commission would hold a public meeting in December 2018 during which CNSC staff will present its Regulatory Oversight Report for Uranium Mines, Mills, Historic and Decommissioned Sites in Canada: 2017. The notice further indicated that the Report would be available after October 12, 2018, online or by request to the Secretariat, and that members of the public who have an interest or expertise on this matter are invited to comment, in writing, on the Report by November 13 2017. Northwatch provides these comments further to that Notice. Northwatch appreciates the extension of the deadline for submission of our comments by one week in response to delays in finalizing the contribution agreement which had to be in place prior to our technical experts beginning their review.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Report on the Serpent River Project, Elliot Lake District, Ontario Prepared for International Montoro Resources Inc
    TECHNICAL REPORT ON THE SERPENT RIVER PROJECT, ELLIOT LAKE DISTRICT, ONTARIO PREPARED FOR INTERNATIONAL MONTORO RESOURCES INC. NI 43-101 Report Authors: Lawrence B. Cochrane, Ph.D., P.Eng. William E. Roscoe, Ph.D., P.Eng. March 20, 2007 RPA SCOTT WILSON ROSCOE POSTLE ASSOCIATES INC. www.rpacan.com SCOTT WILSON RPA www.scottwilson.com TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1 SUMMARY.................................................................................................................. 1-1 Executive Summary .................................................................................................... 1-1 Technical Summary .................................................................................................... 1-6 2 INTRODUCTION AND TERMS OF REFERENCE .................................................. 2-1 3 RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS ........................................................................... 3-1 4 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION........................................................ 4-1 5 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY........................................................................................................... 5-1 6 HISTORY ..................................................................................................................... 6-1 7 GEOLOGICAL SETTING ........................................................................................... 7-1 Regional Geology.......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Denison Mines Corp
    Denison Mines Corp. 2019 Annual Information Form March 13, 2020 ABOUT THIS ANNUAL INFORMATION FORM This annual information form (“AIF”) is dated March 13, Table of Contents 2020. Unless stated otherwise, all of the information in About this AIF .................................... 1 this AIF is stated as at December 31, 2019. About Denison ................................... 5 Developments over the Last Three This AIF has been prepared in accordance with Canadian Years ................................................. 7 The Uranium Industry ........................ 15 securities laws and contains information regarding Denison’s history, business, mineral reserves and Mineral Resources and Reserves 22 resources, the regulatory environment in which Denison Mineral Properties ............................. 26 does business, the risks that Denison faces and other Athabasca Exploration: Sampling, important information for Shareholders. Analysis and Data Verification ........... 88 Denison Operations ........................... 94 This AIF incorporates by reference: Manager of UPC ................................ 99 Denison Closed Mines Group ........... 99 Denison’s management discussion and analysis (“MD&A”) for the year ended December 31, 2019, Environmental, Health and Safety Matters .............................................. 100 which is available under the Company’s profile on Government Regulation .................... 102 SEDAR (www.sedar.com) and on EDGAR Risk Factors ...................................... 107 (www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml)
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Life Cycle Analysis of Base Load Electricity in Ontario
    [Type text] Canadian Energy Research Institute Comparative Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Base Load Electricity Generation in Ontario Seyed Jazayeri Paul Kralovic Afshin Honarvar Abbas Naini Jon Rozhon Rami Shabaneh Thorn Walden Prepared for the Canadian Nuclear Association October 2008 Relevant • Independent • Objective COMPARATIVE LIFE CYLE ASESSMENT (LCA) OF BASE LOAD ELECTRICITY GENERATION IN ONTARIO ii Canadian Energy Research Institute v TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES..........................................................................................................IX LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................XI ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..............................................................................................XIII EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................. XV ES1.1 Background .........................................................................................................xv ES1.2 Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................xv ES1.3 Methodology........................................................................................................xv ES1.4 The Process LCA ................................................................................................. xvi ES2 Power Generation in Canada ................................................................................ xvi ES3
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear France Abroad History, Status and Prospects of French Nuclear Activities in Foreign Countries
    Mycle Schneider Consulting Independent Analysis on Energy and Nuclear Policy 45, allée des deux cèdres Tél: 01 69 83 23 79 91210 Draveil (Paris) Fax: 01 69 40 98 75 France e-mail: [email protected] Nuclear France Abroad History, Status and Prospects of French Nuclear Activities in Foreign Countries Mycle Schneider International Consultant on Energy and Nuclear Policy Paris, May 2009 This research was carried out with the support of The Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada (www.cigionline.org) V5 About the Author Mycle Schneider works as independent international energy nuclear policy consultant. Between 1983 and April 2003 Mycle Schneider was executive director of the energy information service WISE-Paris. Since 2000 he has been an advisor to the German Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Reactor Safety. Since 2004 he has also been in charge of the Environment and Energy Strategies Lecture of the International Master of Science for Project Management for Environmental and Energy Engineering at the French Ecole des Mines in Nantes, France. In 2007 he was appointed as a member of the International Panel on Fissile Materials (IPFM), based at Princeton University, USA (www.fissilematerials.org). In 2006-2007 Mycle Schneider was part of a consultants’ consortium that assessed nuclear decommissioning and waste management funding issues on behalf of the European Commission. In 2005 he was appointed as nuclear security specialist to advise the UK Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM). Mycle Schneider has given evidence and held briefings at Parliaments in Australia, Belgium, France, Germany, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland, UK and at the European Parliament.
    [Show full text]
  • Ucalgary 2016 Madhavan Dayal.Pdf
    University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository Graduate Studies The Vault: Electronic Theses and Dissertations 2016 How to Overcome the Challenges in In-situ Decommissioning of the Above Ground Tailings Management Facility? Madhavan, Dayal Madhavan, D. (2016). How to Overcome the Challenges in In-situ Decommissioning of the Above Ground Tailings Management Facility? (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. doi:10.11575/PRISM/26396 http://hdl.handle.net/11023/3115 master thesis University of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission. Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY How to Overcome the Challenges in In-situ Decommissioning of the Above Ground Tailings Management Facility? By Dayal Madhavan A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ENGINEERING GRADUATE PROGRAM IN CIVIL ENGINEERING CALGARY, ALBERTA July, 2016 © Dayal Madhavan 2016 Abstract This thesis focused on the challenges related to the in-situ decommissioning of the above ground tailings management facility (AGTMF) at Cameco’s Key Lake Uranium Milling and Mining Operations. The uranium tailings stored in the AGTMF from 1983 to 1998 could adversely affect the regional biota and public health as the tailings. Significant uncertainties also exist in regards to the ultimate long-term storage of uranium mine tailings as the timescales involved are relatively long (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Uranium Deposits of Ontario- Their Distribution and Classification
    Ontario Geological Survey Miscellaneous Paper 86 The Uranium Deposits of Ontario- Their Distribution and Classification By James A. Robertson 1981 lanWPope Ministry of !^st£ Natural ...__ W.T. Foster Deputy Minister Ontario ®OMNR-OGS 1981 ISSN 0704-2752 Printed in Canada ISBN 0-7743-602627 Publications of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and price list are available through the Ministry of Natural Resources, Public Service Centre Room 1640, Whitney Block, Queen's Park, Toronto, Ontario, M7A 1W3 (personal shopping and mail orders). and reports only from the Ontario Government Bookstore, Main Floor 880 Bay St., Toronto for per- sonal shopping. Out-of-Town customers write to Ministry of Government Services, Publica- tions Services Section, 5th Floor, 880 Bay St., Toronto. Ontario. M7A 1N8. Telephone 965-6015. Toll free long distance 1 •800-268-7540, in Area Code 807 dial 0-Zenith 67200. Orders for publications should be accompanied by cheque or money order payable to the Treasurer of Ontario. Every possible effort is made to ensure the accuracy of the information con- tained in this report, but the Ministry of Natural Resources does not assume any liability for errors that may occur. Source references are included in the report and users may wish to verify critical information. Parts of this publication may be quoted if credit is given. It is recommended that reference to this report be made in the following form: Robertson, James A. 1981: The Uranium Deposits ol Ontario-Their Distribution and Classifica- tion; Ontario Geological
    [Show full text]
  • Investors' Guide to Mining in Canada
    INVESTORS’ GUIDE TO MINING IN CANADA Mining English (Dec 2012 - new address)_Layout 1 07/12/2012 1:22 PM Page i At Davies, we focus on the matters that are the most important to our clients, in Canada and around the world. The more complex the challenge, the better. Our strength is our people, who blend proven experience, deep legal expertise and business sensibility to generate the outcomes you need. We measure our achievements by one simple standard: Your success. TORONTO MONTRÉAL NEW YORK DAVIES WARD PHILLIPS & VINEBERG LLP DAVIES WARD PHILLIPS & VINEBERG LLP DAVIES WARD PHILLIPS & VINEBERG LLP 155 WELLINGTON STREET WEST 1501 MCGILL COLLEGE AVENUE, 26TH FLOOR 900 THIRD AVENUE, 24TH FLOOR TORONTO ON CANADA M5V 3J7 MONTRÉAL QC CANADA H3A 3N9 NEW YORK NY U.S.A. 10022 TELEPHONE: 416.863.0900 TELEPHONE: 514.841.6400 TELEPHONE: 212.588.5500 FAX: 416.863.0871 FAX: 514.841.6499 FAX: 212.308.0132 Mining English (Dec 2012 - new address)_Layout 1 07/12/2012 1:22 PM Page iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 Mining in Canada The Canadian Legal System This Guide ACQUIRING CANADIAN MINING INTERESTS 5 Due Diligence Types of Acquisitions Other Considerations Relating to Mining Acquisitions OPTIONS AND JOINT VENTURES 11 Options to Acquire Mining Interests Joint Venture Arrangements TABLE 1 Comparison of Different Forms of Joint Ventures CONTENTS EXPLORATION AND MINING RIGHTS 17 Protection of Mining Rights Acquiring Mining Rights in Canada Mining Leases Surface Rights Taxes and Royalties Restrictions on Foreign Ownership The Exportation of Metals
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 19 Storage and Disposal of Irradiated Fuel Prepared by Mukesh Tayal and Milan Gacesa – Independent Consultants
    1 CHAPTER 19 Storage and Disposal of Irradiated Fuel prepared by Mukesh Tayal and Milan Gacesa – Independent Consultants Summary Nuclear wastes, in particular irradiated nuclear fuel, must be handled, stored, and placed into permanent disposal facilities safely to prevent harm to people and the environment. Radioactive wastes can be grouped into four classes: (i) low-level radioactive waste, (ii) intermediate-level radioactive waste, (iii) high-level radioactive waste such as irradiated nuclear fuel, and (iv) uranium mine and mill waste. Storage and disposal of irradiated fuel in Canada follows a three-step process: storage in water-cooled pools, storage in air-cooled storage cylinders, and final disposal. The two stages of storage (the first two steps above) are fully proven and have been in practical operation for some time. The associated technical challenges that must be addressed and the engineered solutions are discussed in this chapter. Several configurations for final disposal have been shown to be technically feasible. Public acceptance and implementation remain to be achieved; ongoing work aimed at achieving these goals is discussed. Nature’s “reactors” that existed billions of years ago are examined for useful analogies that can be applied to engineered disposal facilities. ©UNENE, all rights reserved. For educational use only, no assumed liability. Storage and Disposal of Irradiated Fuel – December 2015 2 The Essential CANDU Table of Contents 1 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • TITLE: Cameco Corporation: Uranium Mining and Aboriginal Development in Saskatchewan[1]
    This case was written by Saleem H. Ali for the purpose of entering the 2000 Aboriginal Management Case Writing Competition. TITLE: Cameco Corporation: Uranium Mining and Aboriginal Development in Saskatchewan[1] The Setting The topic of Bernard Michel's speech was general in nature, yet quite specific in substance: "Corporate Citizenship and the Saskatchewan Uranium Industry." He had been invited by the Uranium Institute in London, UK to share his company's experiences in negotiating agreements with Native communities in Northern Saskatchewan. As the President and Chief Executive Officer of Cameco, the world's largest uranium mining company, his speech was much anticipated by the audience. The Uranium mines of Saskatchewan are an interesting laboratory for the study of corporate community relations......The community relations programme's first action was to listen through public hearings to the communities' expressed concerns.......Today 80% of Saskatchewan's residents, compared with 65% in 1990, support continued uranium mining. This reflects the industry's community relations initiative. Cameco's shares also trade at 3.5 times their 1991 issue price. Only a small segment of anti-nuclear activists takes a negative view. Relationships with local communities, like uranium ore, are a valuable resource needing competent development.[2] Originally from France, and a graduate of the Ecole Polytechnique in Paris, Michel, had spent the past two decades in Canada working for various mining interests. Having served as Senior Vice President, Executive Vice President and President for a subsidiary of the French nuclear conglomerate Cogema, Amok Ltd, Michel had eminent credentials to join Cameco in 1988.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Activities in Uranium Mining and Milling
    Nuclear Development Environmental Activities in Uranium Mining and Milling A Joint NEA/IAEAReport NUCLEAR•ENERGY•AGENCY OECD, 1999. Software: 1987-1996, Acrobat is a trademark of ADOBE. All rights reserved. OECD grants you the right to use one copy of this Program for your personal use only. Unauthorised reproduction, lending, hiring, transmission or distribution of any data or software is prohibited. You must treat the Program and associated materials and any elements thereof like any other copyrighted material. All requests should be made to: Head of Publications Service, OECD Publications Service, 2, rue AndrÂe-Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, France. ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVITIES IN URANIUM MINING AND MILLING A JOINT REPORT BY THE OECD NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY AND THE INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT Pursuant to Article 1 of the Convention signed in Paris on 14th December 1960, and which came into force on 30th September 1961, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shall promote policies designed: ± to achieve the highest sustainable economic growth and employment and a rising standard of living in Member countries, while maintaining ®nancial stability, and thus to contribute to the development of the world economy; ± to contribute to sound economic expansion in Member as well as non-member countries in the process of economic development; and ± to contribute to the expansion of world trade on a multilateral, non-discriminatory basis in accordance with international obligations. The original Member countries of the OECD are Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States.
    [Show full text]