Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “dosimetry, internal”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

203 records · Page 12
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

2025 Review and Revision of Federal Guidance Report 15

Federal Guidance Report No. 15 (FGR 15), External Exposure to Radionuclides in Air, Water and Soil, published in 2019 and referred to below as FGR 2019, provides age-specific effective dose rate coefficients for reference persons externally exposed to each of 1252 radionuclides homogenously distributed in environmental media. Soon after completion of FGR 2019, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) published a similar report (ICRP Publication 144, 2020) addressing the same radionuclides and many of the external exposure scenarios addressed in FGR 2019. In 2023 Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) published a review of dose coefficients in FGR 2019, concluding that “The external effective dose from beta radiation is not appropriately accounted for in FGR 15 for both low- and high-energy beta emitters in air, in soil, and on soil surfaces.” That conclusion was based largely on comparisons of dose coefficients in FGR 2019 with values in ICRP Publication 144 but also on consideration of some unexpected patterns of equivalent dose rate coefficients across tissues and of effective dose rate coefficients across different soil depths, for a selected set of low-energy beta emitters. In response to the ANL report, the Center for Radiation Protection Knowledge (CRPK) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) performed an extensive reexamination of the methods and published values of FGR 2019. CRPK found that coding errors had resulted in inaccurate estimates, primarily overestimates, in many of the dose coefficients tabulated in FGR 2019 but that many of the differences between results in FGR 2019 and ICRP Publication 144 could be traced to differences in methodology. CRPK has corrected all errors in FGR 2019 associated with the coding errors and has taken the opportunity to improve a major portion of the remaining dose coefficients in FGR 2019, primarily through additional Monte Carlo calculations resulting in improved statistics for tissue equivalent dose rate coefficients for exposure to monoenergetic sources. This has eliminated the need for extrapolation of results from high and medium energies to low energies, as was done in FGR 2019. In addition, inconsistencies in the methodology identified in the review, such as computational representation of the adult female, were eliminated. The revised effective dose rate coefficients are consistent with values in ICRP Publication 144 except for differences in values clearly arising from differences in methodology; and differences in values for a relatively small set of very low-energy radionuclides with highly uncertain dose coefficients regardless of methodology.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Groundwater and Intruder Radionuclide Screening

Solid Waste Management (SWM) operates the E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility (ELLWF) where low level on-site and off-site solid waste streams are buried. The facility has been in operation since late 1994 and is currently projected to remain in operation until 2065. This facility can accommodate a broad range of waste forms resulting from the six different types of disposal unit options (i.e., varying degrees of engineered barriers → trenches to concrete vaults). This facility is currently operating under a Performance Assessment (PA) issued back in 2008, along with several subsequent supporting Special Analyses (SA). The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) developed the prior PAs and SAs and has been tasked to update the facility’s PA. For operating the E-Area facility, a Waste Inventory Tracking System (e.g., WITS) is actively employed by waste generators where every radionuclide entering the facility (to be buried in one of its many disposal units1) must be either directly or indirectly accounted for. Since there is a large number of radionuclides in existence (>3,000), the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP-107) has provided guidance on the subset of radionuclides requiring further assessment in landfills such as the E-Area LLWF. The ICRP-107 publication provides critical radiological information on 1,252 radionuclides of 97 elements. This database is the critical starting point for developing a consistent inventory limit system. The explicit measurement and tracking of all 1,252 ICRP-107 radionuclides can be reduced when process knowledge, burial history, and radiological aspects are factored into conservative groundwater and intruder screening processes. Across the DOE complex these screening processes have been historically performed using the methodology suggested by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) as presented in their original report (NCRP 1984) and then refined in a later report (NCRP 1996). In the recommended screening models employed within this report the traditional NCRP models are updated to better handle progeny and better reflect the known characteristics of E-Area. This improved screening process is referred to as the “NCRP-like” method. Various upgrades to the traditional NCRP methodology have been used by others (e.g., NRC funded effort by Kennedy and Strenge 1992). The more detailed models by Kennedy and Strenge (1992) were considered in this effort and are compared to the results from the more traditional NCRP-like models. The groundwater and inadvertent intruder screening analyses presented in this report start with this 1,252 radionuclide list and reduces it down to more manageable lists that are applicable to the various disposal unit types contained within E-Area. In order to reduce this starting list, some level of exposure risk must be considered acceptable. Historically, a dose (or concentration level) has been compared with a screening criterion set to 1% of a performance measure (e.g., a betagamma dose not to exceed the 4 mrem/yr beta-gamma performance measure x 0.01 = 0.04 mrem/yr). Thus, if a radionuclide produced a bounding or screening-level dose (or concentrations) less than the screening criterion, it could be safely removed from further consideration. Several tiers of screening and bounding level analyses have been considered in this report.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Groundwater and Intruder Radionuclide Screening

Solid Waste Management (SWM) operates the E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility (ELLWF) where low level on-site and off-site solid waste streams are buried. The facility has been in operation since late 1994 and is currently projected to remain in operation until 2065. This facility can accommodate a broad range of waste forms resulting from the six different types of disposal unit options (i.e., varying degrees of engineered barriers → trenches to concrete vaults). This facility is currently operating under a Performance Assessment (PA) issued back in 2008, along with several subsequent supporting Special Analyses (SA). The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) developed the prior PAs and SAs and has been tasked to update the facility’s PA. For operating the E-Area facility, a Waste Inventory Tracking System (e.g., WITS) is actively employed by waste generators where every radionuclide entering the facility (to be buried in one of its many disposal units) must be either directly or indirectly accounted for. Since there is a large number of radionuclides in existence (>3,000), the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP-107) has provided guidance on the subset of radionuclides requiring further assessment in landfills such as the E-Area LLWF. The ICRP-107 publication provides critical radiological information on 1,252 radionuclides of 97 elements. This database is the critical starting point for developing a consistent inventory limit system. The explicit measurement and tracking of all radionuclides are not necessary when process knowledge, burial history, and radiological aspects are factored into conservative groundwater and intruder screening processes. Across the DOE complex these screening processes have been historically performed using the methodology suggested by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) as presented in their original report (NCRP 1984) and then refined in a later report (NCRP 1996). In the recommended screening models employed within this report the traditional NCRP models are updated to better handle progeny and better reflect the known characteristics of E-Area. This improved screening process is referred to as the “NCRP-like” method. Various upgrades to the traditional NCRP methodology have been used by others (e.g., NRC funded effort by Kennedy and Strenge 1992). The more detailed models by Kennedy and Strenge (1992) were considered in this effort and are compared to the results from the more traditional NCRP-like models. The groundwater and inadvertent intruder screening analyses presented in this report start with this 1,252 radionuclide list and reduces it down to more manageable lists that are applicable to the various disposal unit types contained within E-Area. In order to reduce this starting list, some level of exposure risk must be considered acceptable. Historically, a dose (or concentration level) has been compared with a screening criterion set to 1% of a performance measure (e.g., a beta-gamma dose not to exceed the 4 mrem/yr beta-gamma performance measure x 0.01 = 0.04 mrem/yr). Thus, if a radionuclide produced a bounding or screening-level dose (or concentrations) less than the screening criterion, it could be safely removed from further consideration. Several tiers of screening and bounding level analyses have been considered in this report.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2025

In vitro toxicity assessment of uranium particulates on different human lung epithelial cell models

Inhalation of uranium aerosols produced via human activities such as mining can pose a threat to human respiratory systems. Uranium oxide particulates emit short-range alpha particles that elicit DNA and direct damage, beyond associated physiochemical heavy-metal toxicity, to internal epithelial tissues. The availability of reliable in vitro models to study radiation exposure can greatly enhance our ability to understand and combat the biological impacts of exposure. However, the toxicological effects of alpha emissions and/or the oxidation states of uranium particulates vary across different human lung epithelial cell models and have not been systematically compared. We have endeavored to address this limitation by comparing impacts in three different human lung cell models: primary human bronchial and tracheal epithelial cells, primary human small airway epithelial cells, and human adenocarcinoma alveolar basal epithelial cells. Other studies have mainly investigated the toxicity of depleted uranium. Here, we compared the exposure of uranium oxide particulates (U 3 O 8 and UO 3 ) of different enrichment states on the chosen cell systems. Each cell model was exposed to 0.1, 1, 10, 50, 100, and 500 µg/mL of depleted U 3 O 8 , highly-enriched U 3 O 8 , and natural UO 3 particulates for 24 hours in submerged monolayer cultures. We compared viability and superoxide dismutase activity results across cell lines and uranium enrichment/ oxidative states. The results showed that 1) the oxide state of the particulates affected cell viability, implying that uranium’s different oxidation states contribute to different toxicological responses, and 2) each cell model reacts differently when exposed to uranium oxides, which may provide insights into the mechanistic processes associated with the exposure of radiological particulates on different biological systems. For instance, increased uranium enrichment corresponds to increased toxicity for the primary cells, but not for the immortalized cells. Our study shows that a holistic approach that incorporates similarities between model systems and types of radionuclides is required to truly develop empirical solutions for radiation exposure.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Economic Model for Estimation of GDP Losses in the MACCS Offsite Consequence Analysis Code

The MACCS (MELCOR Accident Consequence Code System) code is the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) tool used to perform probabilistic health and economic consequence assessments for atmospheric releases of radionuclides. It is also used by international organizations, both reactor owners and regulators. It is intended and most commonly used for hypothetical accidents that could potentially occur in the future rather than to evaluate past accidents or to provide emergency response during an ongoing accident. It is designed to support probabilistic risk and consequence analyses and is used by the NRC, U.S. nuclear licensees, the Department of Energy, and international vendors, licensees, and regulators. This report describes the modeling framework, implementation, verification, and benchmarking of a GDP-based model for economic losses that has recently been developed as an alternative to the original cost-based economic loss model in MACCS. The GDP-based model has its roots in a code developed by Sandia National Laboratories for the Department of Homeland Security to estimate short-term losses from natural and manmade accidents, called the Regional Economic Accounting analysis tool (REAcct). This model was adapted and modified for MACCS and is now called the Regional Disruption Economic Impact Model (RDEIM). It is based on input-output theory, which is widely used in economic modeling. It accounts for direct losses to a disrupted region affected by an accident, indirect losses to the national economy due to disruption of the supply chain, and induced losses from reduced spending by displaced workers. RDEIM differs from REAcct in its treatment and estimation of indirect loss multipliers, elimination of double counting associated with inter-industry trade in the affected area, and that it is designed to be used to estimate impacts for extended periods that can occur from a major nuclear reactor accident, such as the one that occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi site in Japan. Most input-output models do not account for economic adaptation and recovery, and in this regard RDEIM differs from its parent, REAcct, because it allows for a user-definable national recovery period. Implementation of a recovery period was one of several recommendations made by an independent peer review panel to ensure that RDEIM is state-of-practice. For this and several other reasons, RDEIM differs from REAcct. Both the original and the RDEIM economic loss models account for costs from evacuation and relocation, decontamination, depreciation, and condemnation. Where the original model accounts for an expected rate of return, based on the value of property, that is lost during interdiction, the RDEIM model instead accounts for losses of GDP based on the industrial sectors located within a county. The original model includes costs for disposal of crops and milk that the RDEIM model currently does not, but these costs tend to contribute insignificantly to the overall losses. This document discusses three verification exercises to demonstrate that the RDEIM model is implemented correctly in MACCS. It also describes a benchmark study at five nuclear power plants chosen to represent the spectrum of U.S. commercial sites. The benchmarks provide perspective on the expected differences between the RDEIM and the original cost-based economic loss models. The RDEIM model is shown to consistently predict larger losses than the original model, probably in part because it accounts for national losses by including indirect and induced losses; whereas, the original model only accounts for regional losses. Nonetheless, the RDEIM model predicts losses that are remarkably consistent with the original cost-based model, differing by 16% at most for the five sites combined with three source terms considered in this benchmark.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗