US dataswitch to UK
Nuclear Technicians
following nuclear equipment operational policies and procedures that ensure environmental safety, providing initial response to abnormal events or to alarms from radiation monitoring equipment and determining intensities and types of radiation in work areas. If that's your week, this page is about your job.
The honest answer
AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: following nuclear equipment operational policies and procedures that ensure environmental safety is work software can't reach.
What shifts is calculating safe radiation exposure times for personnel using plant contamination readings and prescribed safe levels of radiation. This page scores what today's tools actually do, not headlines.
Your week, as this page understands it
Assist nuclear physicists, nuclear engineers, or other scientists in laboratory, power generation, or electricity production activities. May operate, maintain, or provide quality control for nuclear testing and research equipment. May monitor radiation. The job title says “nuclear technicians”. The real job is the part underneath: following nuclear equipment operational policies and procedures that ensure environmental safety. That is the thing someone has to be right about.
The exposed part of this job is specific, and we won’t pretend it is coming back. But nuclear technicians is not one task. It is 34 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is following nuclear equipment operational policies and procedures that ensure environmental safety, and the ledger below shows exactly why.
Where the work sits, by task weight
- shifting to AI
- 11%
- changing shape
- 12%
- staying human
- 77%
These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.
Whole-job exposure score 20 out of 100 (16–26 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, across 34 scored tasks. The number is the support for the sentence above it, not a headline about anyone’s future.
How we know this
What is measured: Every published task statement for nuclear technicians is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.
How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.
Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-05. Read the full method.
Your job, task by task
These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.
- 4 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
- Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.
Shifting to AI
4 tasksTasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.
Calculating safe radiation exposure times for personnel using plant contamination readings and prescribed safe levels of radiation
This is reading one thing and writing another: safe radiation exposure times in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Calculate safe radiation exposure times for personnel using plant contamination readings and prescribed safe levels of radiation.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Safe exposure times come from contamination readings and published limits through set formulas, which software calculates reliably.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Preparing reports describing contamination tests
This is reading one thing and writing another: reports describing contamination tests in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Prepare reports describing contamination tests, material or equipment decontaminated, or methods used in decontamination processes.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (62–70 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Writing up what was tested, what was decontaminated and how is standard report writing.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Entering data into computers to record characteristics of nuclear events or to locate coordinates of particles
This is reading one thing and writing another: data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Enter data into computers to record characteristics of nuclear events or to locate coordinates of particles.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Entering event characteristics and particle coordinates into a computer is routine data work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Calculating equipment operating factors, such as radiation times, dosages, temperatures, gamma intensities or pressures
This is reading one thing and writing another: equipment operating factors in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Calculate equipment operating factors, such as radiation times, dosages, temperatures, gamma intensities, or pressures, using standard formulas and conversion tables.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Working out exposure times and doses from readings uses standard formulas and published tables, which software applies reliably.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Changing shape
4 tasksTasks where the machine takes the producing and a person keeps the checking, the deciding, or the answering-for-it. For most jobs this is the biggest group, and it is where "transformation, not termination" is literally visible.
Informing supervisors when individual exposures or area radiation levels approach maximum permissible limits
The software now makes the first pass at supervisors, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Inform supervisors when individual exposures or area radiation levels approach maximum permissible limits.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Comparing exposure readings against limits and flagging them is straightforward monitoring that software does continuously.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Monitoring personnel to determine the amounts and intensities of radiation exposure
The software now makes the first pass at personnel, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Monitor personnel to determine the amounts and intensities of radiation exposure.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 42 out of 100 (35–49 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Tracking each worker’s dose readings is record and data work that software handles well, under qualified oversight.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Determining or recommending radioactive decontamination procedures
The software now makes the first pass at radioactive decontamination procedures, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Determine or recommend radioactive decontamination procedures, according to the size and nature of equipment and the degree of contamination.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Recommending decontamination steps for a described piece of equipment follows documented practice software can set out.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Staying human
26 tasksTasks that stay with a person, because they happen in the physical world, because the rules need someone accountable, or because the value is that a specific person does them.
Following nuclear equipment operational policies and procedures that ensure environmental safety
This work happens in the physical world: nuclear equipment operational policies, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Follow nuclear equipment operational policies and procedures that ensure environmental safety.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 5 out of 100 (0–12 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Nuclear operating procedures are written down, but following them is physical work under a legal duty holder.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Conducting surveillance testing to determine safety of nuclear equipment
This work happens in the physical world: surveillance, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Conduct surveillance testing to determine safety of nuclear equipment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 5 out of 100 (1–9 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Surveillance testing on nuclear equipment is regulated hands-on work at the plant.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Testing plant equipment to ensure it is operating properly
This work happens in the physical world: plant equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Test plant equipment to ensure it is operating properly.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (3–11 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Testing plant equipment means putting hands and instruments on the machinery.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Show the other 24 tasks
Determining or recommending radioactive decontamination procedures
changing shapeThe software now makes the first pass at radioactive decontamination procedures, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Determine or recommend radioactive decontamination procedures, according to the size and nature of equipment and the degree of contamination.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Recommending decontamination steps for a described piece of equipment follows documented practice software can set out.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Communicating with accelerator maintenance personnel to ensure readiness of support systems
staying humanThe ratings behind this row put accelerator maintenance personnel well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Communicate with accelerator maintenance personnel to ensure readiness of support systems, such as vacuum, water cooling, or radio frequency power sources.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 37 out of 100 (30–44 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Checking with maintenance staff that cooling, vacuum and power systems are ready is mostly communication and record checking.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Monitoring instruments, gauges or recording devices under direction of nuclear experimenters
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: instruments, gauges or recording devices under direction, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · SupplementalSource: “Monitor instruments, gauges, or recording devices under direction of nuclear experimenters.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 25 out of 100 (18–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Reading instruments and recording what they show is routine data work, though the instruments sit in the facility.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Monitoring nuclear reactor equipment performance to identify operational inefficiencies
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: nuclear reactor equipment performance, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Monitor nuclear reactor equipment performance to identify operational inefficiencies, hazards, or needs for maintenance or repair.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 22 out of 100 (15–29 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Watching reactor equipment data for signs of trouble is largely screen work software supports, though qualified staff must judge it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Identifying and implementing appropriate decontamination procedures
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: appropriate decontamination procedures, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Identify and implement appropriate decontamination procedures, based on equipment and the size, nature, and type of contamination.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 22 out of 100 (15–29 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Choosing the right decontamination method is documented judgment; carrying it out means handling contaminated equipment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Instructing personnel in radiation safety procedures and demonstrating use of protective clothing and equipment
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: personnel, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Instruct personnel in radiation safety procedures and demonstrate use of protective clothing and equipment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (11–25 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Training material can be prepared automatically, but showing people how to wear protective gear happens face to face.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Briefing workers on radiation levels in work areas
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: workers, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Brief workers on radiation levels in work areas.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 15 out of 100 (8–22 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Briefing a work team about radiation levels happens face to face, from a qualified adviser.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Analyzing samples, such as air or water samples, for contaminants or other elements
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: samples, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Analyze samples, such as air or water samples, for contaminants or other elements.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 13 out of 100 (6–20 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Analyzing samples for contaminants involves laboratory handling, though interpreting the numbers is well-documented work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Providing initial response to abnormal events or to alarms from radiation monitoring equipment
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: initial response, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Provide initial response to abnormal events or to alarms from radiation monitoring equipment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (2–10 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Responding first to an alarm or abnormal event means getting to the spot and acting.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Determining intensities and types of radiation in work areas
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: intensities, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Determine intensities and types of radiation in work areas, equipment, or materials, using radiation detectors or other instruments.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (2–10 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Identifying the type and strength of radiation present means being there with detection instruments.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Modifying devise or maintaining nuclear equipment used in operations
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: devise, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Modify, devise, or maintain nuclear equipment used in operations.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (2–10 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Changing or maintaining nuclear equipment is hands-on work under strict oversight.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Measuring the intensity and identifying the types of radiation in work areas
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: the intensity, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Measure the intensity and identify the types of radiation in work areas, equipment, or materials, using radiation detectors or other instruments.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (2–10 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Measuring radiation in a work area means carrying a detector through it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Following policies and procedures for radiation workers to ensure personnel safety
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: policies, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Follow policies and procedures for radiation workers to ensure personnel safety.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 4 out of 100 (0–11 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Following safety rules is something a person does while working in a radiation area.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Warning maintenance workers of radiation hazards and directing workers to vacate hazardous areas
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: maintenance workers of radiation hazards, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Warn maintenance workers of radiation hazards and direct workers to vacate hazardous areas.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 4 out of 100 (0–8 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Warning workers about radiation and clearing them from an area happens in person, right where the hazard is.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Collecting samples of air, water, gases or solids to determine radioactivity levels of contamination
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: samples of air, water, gases or solids, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Collect samples of air, water, gases, or solids to determine radioactivity levels of contamination.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Collecting air, water, gas or solid samples is physical work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Setting up equipment that automatically detects area radiation deviations and test detection equipment to ensure its accuracy
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Set up equipment that automatically detects area radiation deviations and test detection equipment to ensure its accuracy.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–7 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Setting up and checking area radiation monitors means working on the instruments themselves.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Decontaminating objects by cleaning with soap or solvents or by abrading with wire brushes
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: objects, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Decontaminate objects by cleaning with soap or solvents or by abrading with wire brushes, buffing wheels, or sandblasting machines.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Cleaning and abrading contaminated objects is entirely hands-on.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Calibrating and maintaining chemical instrumentation sensing elements and sampling system equipment
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: chemical instrumentation sensing elements, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Calibrate and maintain chemical instrumentation sensing elements and sampling system equipment, using calibration instruments and hand tools.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Calibrating sensing elements and sampling equipment with hand tools is hands-on work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Placing radioactive waste, such as sweepings or broken sample bottles, into containers for shipping or disposal
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: radioactive waste, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Place radioactive waste, such as sweepings or broken sample bottles, into containers for shipping or disposal.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Placing radioactive waste into containers is hands-on work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Applying safety tags to equipment needing maintenance
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: safety tags, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Apply safety tags to equipment needing maintenance.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Hanging a safety tag on equipment is a physical act at the machine.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Performing testing, maintenance, repair or upgrading of accelerator systems
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: maintenance, repair or upgrading of accelerator systems, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Perform testing, maintenance, repair, or upgrading of accelerator systems.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Testing, repairing and upgrading accelerator hardware is hands-on work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Decontaminating objects by cleaning them using soap or solvents or by abrading
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: objects, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Decontaminate objects by cleaning them using soap or solvents or by abrading using brushes, buffing machines, or sandblasting machines.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Scrubbing and abrading contaminated objects clean is entirely hands-on.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Collecting air, water
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: air, water, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · SupplementalSource: “Collect air, water, gas or solid samples for testing to determine radioactivity levels or to ensure appropriate radioactive containment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Taking air, water, gas and solid samples means physically collecting them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Setting up equipment that automatically detects area radiation deviations and test detection equipment to ensure its accuracy
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance not publishedO*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Set up equipment that automatically detects area radiation deviations and test detection equipment to ensure its accuracy.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–7 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Setting up and checking area radiation monitors means working on the instruments themselves.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
What this job pays, and how many people do it
- Median pay
- $110,240a year, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.bls-oews, 2025 · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
How we know this
Source: bls-oews
Reference period: May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
Rounding: Shown as published.
- People doing this job
- 6,470in the US, 2025.bls-oews · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
What is deliberately not here: a forecast of how many of these jobs exist in ten years. Where an official projection exists for a market we publish it with its vintage; where it does not, we leave the space empty rather than borrow the other country’s number.
Why this is shifting
The reason is boringly specific. Most of what is shifting here is reading one thing and writing another: safe radiation exposure times in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: calculating safe radiation exposure times for personnel using plant contamination readings and prescribed safe levels of radiation and preparing reports describing contamination tests. What it cannot do is be answerable: nuclear equipment operational policies need a named person the rules will accept, and software cannot be that person. Which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.
Your move
Over a pint: what I’d tell you if you were my friend
Start with what does not change: following nuclear equipment operational policies and procedures that ensure environmental safety is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.
So, given all that: 11% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 12% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 77% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 34 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.
So the thing worth your attention is not the job going away. It is the layer around it. Calculating safe radiation exposure times for personnel using plant contamination readings and prescribed safe levels of radiation is the part turning into software, and being the person who understands that layer is worth money.
This week: one thing
Ask the one question. Find whoever is bringing new software into your workplace (the manager, the office, whoever runs the system) and ask them what it is meant to do to safe radiation exposure times, and what it is not meant to touch. Ten minutes, this week, before anyone decides it for you.
- What you end up holding
- a straight answer about what is actually being rolled out, and when
- How long it takes
- ten minutes
If there’s nobody obvious to ask, or you’d rather not ask your manager: Put the same question to your union rep, your shift lead or the person who has been there longest, in person, over a break. Same ten minutes, same answer, and you will usually get a straighter one. Write down what they say. The note is the artifact, and it tells you whether nuclear equipment operational policies are in scope or not. Nothing to log into, no license needed.
Over the next 90 days
Get inside the tool rollout rather than waiting for it. Over the next ninety days, ask to be in the group that tests, checks or signs off whatever new system arrives near informing supervisors when individual exposures or area radiation levels approach maximum permissible limits. It is usually an unglamorous seat that nobody fights for, and it is the one that decides how the software is used on your job rather than to it.
Over the next 12 months
On this evidence I would not retrain out of this job, and I will say that plainly rather than hedge it. The task list here is dominated by work that stays with a person. What I would do with a year is get formally recognised for the layer around it (the systems, the compliance, the planning), so you are the one who understands the software instead of the one it is done to. Before you pay for anything, use CareerOneStop - Find local training. It is free, it is the Labor Department's own service, and it is listed below with the rest of the free routes.
The roads out of here, and why I am not sending you down them
I looked at the obvious moves out of this job, and here is what I found.
I checked the 12 nearest US occupations to nuclear technicians (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was nuclear power reactor operators: only about 8% of its durable work is work you already do. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 20/100 here, with only 11% of the task list in the top band, and “follow nuclear equipment operational policies and procedures that ensure environmental safety” is not work that hands over cleanly. None of them beats deepening what you already have.
How that was checked: this job was compared against all 830 US occupations in this release on their official task statements, and the 12 nearest were examined one by one. A move that turns on an industry, an employer or a qualification rather than on the work itself will not show up in a check like that. And this release carries no licence register, so anything you are weighing needs that looked up separately.
3 moves I checked and rejected
These are the obvious-looking jumps. They are here with their reasons rather than quietly dropped, because the ones that fail are worth knowing about. It is one less thing to turn over at night.
Nuclear Power Reactor Operators
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already follow policies and procedures for radiation workers to ensure personnel safety, and their equivalent is to operate nuclear power reactors in accordance with policies and procedures to protect workers…. Across both published task lists that is about 8% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 8% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Nuclear Engineers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already conduct surveillance testing to determine safety of nuclear equipment, and their equivalent is to conduct tests of nuclear fuel behavior and cycles or performance of nuclear machinery…. Across both published task lists that is about 5% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 5% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Medical Dosimetrists
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already monitor personnel to determine the amounts and intensities of radiation exposure, and their equivalent is to measure the amount of radioactivity in patients or equipment, using radiation monitoring devices. Across both published task lists that is about 4% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 4% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
What I’d stop worrying about
A friend tells you what not to spend fear on. This is that list.
The headline number you read somewhere
The big “X% of jobs” figures are about the whole economy, not about you. The number that describes your job is on this page: 11% of its task weight, across 34 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
The headlines about your trade disappearing
They are usually about the technology, not the timetable. Changes to work like following nuclear equipment operational policies and procedures that ensure environmental safety arrive through rules, insurance and money, slowly and visibly. This page tracks the task evidence and will move when it moves.
Retraining out of a job that is holding up
On this evidence I would not spend money leaving. Spend it on the layer around the job instead: the tools, the paperwork, the planning. That is where the change actually is.
The “obvious” next job everyone suggests
I checked the obvious moves and most of them did not survive. The reasons are printed with the routes above, including the pay and the gate. A move that fails on the numbers is worth knowing about so you can stop turning it over at night.
You are reading the United States figures
The United Kingdom splits this work across more than one official group, of which Quality assurance technicians is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.
Switch to the United Kingdom page →partial match
The other groups this work is counted across:
In UK official statistics this job is counted as Quality assurance technicians, Science, engineering and production technicians n.e.c., Inspectors of standards and regulations and Chemical scientists. Pay is shown separately for each of those groups (medians cannot be averaged together), while the task list and the scores on this page are for this group only.
Your route through this
Where to go next, and what it costs
Free, and complete
The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Find local training
Search what's running near you, from the Labor Department's own database, before anyone sells you a course.
Free to search; individual programs vary, and some are funded
Anywhere in the US:
An American Job Center will sit down with you for free. Find yours by ZIP code.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Licensed occupations finder
Check what your state actually requires before you pay for anything.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
Free
No Space for this job, but one for what is happening to it
Nothing Collab365 runs is built for nuclear technicians, and we are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.
There is one that is not about a job title at all. The AI Authority is about being the person who directs these tools at work rather than the person they get compared to. That is worth saying here, because 11% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.
7 days free, no card needed. Explore up to 2 Spaces before you choose a plan: you pick a plan later, not now.
The AI Authority is a general community about working with AI, not a course for nuclear technicians. You do not need it to act on anything here: the moves above cost nothing and stand on their own. The data on this page is the same either way.
Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for nuclear technicians launches. Nothing else.
That did not look like an email address, so nothing was saved. Have another go below.
We could not save that. The fault is ours, not yours, and your address was not stored. Please try again later.
No deadline on any of this. The page will still be here, and the data is refreshed on a published schedule rather than when someone wants a headline.
Questions people ask about this job
- Will AI replace Nuclear Technicians?
- Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 34 official task statements scored for Nuclear Technicians (United States, SOC 19-4051), 11% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 20 out of 100 (range 16–26, band: low). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.
- Which tasks in “Nuclear Technicians” can AI already do?
- The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Calculate safe radiation exposure times for personnel using plant contamination readings and prescribed safe levels of radiation” (75/100, high); “Enter data into computers to record characteristics of nuclear events or to locate coordinates of particles” (75/100, high); “Calculate equipment operating factors, such as radiation times, dosages, temperatures, gamma intensities, or pressures, using standard formulas and conversio…” (75/100, high). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
- Which tasks in “Nuclear Technicians” stay human?
- About 77% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Set up equipment that automatically detects area radiation deviations and test detection equipment to ensure its accuracy” (0/100, minimal); “Collect air, water, gas or solid samples for testing to determine radioactivity levels or to ensure appropriate radioactive containment” (0/100, minimal); “Decontaminate objects by cleaning them using soap or solvents or by abrading using brushes, buffing machines, or sandblasting machines” (0/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.
- What should someone working in “Nuclear Technicians” do about AI?
- Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 11% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 77% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.
- How is the AI exposure score for Nuclear Technicians calculated?
- Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 34 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.
Where these numbers come from
Worth knowing about these figures
- The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
- 4 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
- Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.
- Task statements
- onet-dbProcessing: catalogue-bridge → onet-im-rt-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
- Task weights
- onet-db (im-rt-with-imputed)
- Scores
- Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
- Pay and employment
- bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))
Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.
The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.
The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.
Using these figures?
Cite this
Everything on this site is published under CC BY 4.0. Quote it, chart it, sell something built on it. Just say where it came from, and cite the dated release rather than the site, so the figure you quote stays checkable.
Plain text
Collab365 (2026). Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1 (methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0). https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1. Licensed CC BY 4.0. Built with O*NET data (USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0); ONS data (Open Government Licence v3.0); GAISI task framework (arXiv:2507.22748, MIT); BLS data (public domain).
BibTeX
@misc{collab365futureproof2026q41,
title = {Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1},
author = {{Collab365}},
year = {2026},
url = {https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1},
note = {Release 2026-q4.1, methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0, CC BY 4.0}
}Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published . Releases never change after publication; when the figures move, a new dated release is published beside this one and this one stays exactly where it is.