Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Radiological Control”

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.

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2018

Executive Summary: Prototype Design, Analysis, and Results for a Liquid Radiological Waste Control Room

Under the United States Department of Energy Light Water Sustainability Program (LWRS), Idaho National Laboratory (INL) is collaborating with Palo Verde Generating Station (PVGS) to support human factors engineering efforts in the modernization of PVNGS’ radiological waste system (LRS) control room. The studies proposed and/or conducted by INL are designed to address the inconsistency between different human factors standards, guidance, and conventions. Guidance such as NUREG-0700 leave much of the information open to interpretation. INL will identify whether maintaining a design that is consistent with population stereotypes actually enhances performance, or whether there are alternative designs that yield performance that is better than the designs that maintain those stereotypes. The overall design concept for the LRS workstation includes system overview displays for the Evaporator system and the Boric Acid Concentrator system. A third display contains overview information for the rest of the LRS. The forth display contains alarm information. Each display will be presented on one of four monitors in the control room. The system overview displays contain embedded controls for valves and pumps, mini-trends, and micro-trends. The mini-trends present data for the controllers and contain alarm set point information as well as trending. All other relevant system parameters are shown on micro-trends. The semi-dull screen approach utilized present dynamic data in green, active components are white (gray when closed or off). The product stream flow paths are indicated by different colors. Alarm states are presented in saturated red and selected components are indicated by bright blue. In addition to the micro task study described below, the INL researchers also conducted an evaluation of the semi-dull screen approach as well as an ergonomic evaluation of the suggested upgrades in the local control room. A detailed report of all INL’s activities related to the modernization of the LRS conducted between October 2016 and September 2017 are found in these two reports; • INL-EXT-17-43226, Prototype Design, Analysis, and Results for a Liquid Radiological Waste Control Room, and • INL-EXT-17-43250, Evaluation of Control Room Interface Designs to Support Modernization in Nuclear Power Plants.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2012

Investigation into Cause of Cs-137 Source Leakage

During the morning of September 28, 2011 a pig containing a sealed source used for source checking detectors, tipped over in the Collider-Accelerator Department (C-AD) Radiological Control van. Several hours later, the Radiological Control Technician (RCT) detected low levels of radioactivity on his shoes, and the floor mat of the vehicle, as well as a personal vehicle owned by a facilities and operations (F&O) tradesman who took the RCT to lunch at the BNL cafeteria. Areas that were checked for contamination included offices, work station, RCTs themselves, the tradesman and the cafeteria. Several areas of contamination were detected in the parking lot, the floor of the source storage building, and also detectors where the source had been used that day. All areas were secured or decontaminated. The initial results reported in the afternoon of 9/28 were preliminary, and the final determination on its report ability was deferred until more information could be obtained after additional smear results were performed.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
DOE OSTI2012

Volume Changes After Stereotactic LINAC Radiotherapy in Vestibular Schwannoma: Control Rate and Growth Patterns

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the control rate of vestibular schwannomas (VS) after treatment with linear accelerator (LINAC)-based stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or radiotherapy (SRT) by using a validated volumetric measuring tool. Volume-based studies on prognosis after LINAC-based SRS or SRT for VS are reported scarcely. In addition, growth patterns and risk factors predicting treatment failure were analyzed. Materials and Methods: Retrospectively, 37 VS patients treated with LINAC based SRS or SRT were analyzed. Baseline and follow-up magnetic resonance imaging scans were analyzed with volume measurements on contrast enhanced T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Absence of intervention after radiotherapy was defined as 'no additional intervention group, ' absence of radiological growth was defined as 'radiological control group. ' Significant growth was defined as a volume change of 19.7% or more, as calculated in a previous study. Results: The cumulative 4-year probability of no additional intervention was 96.4% {+-} 0.03; the 4-year radiological control probability was 85.4% {+-} 0.1). The median follow-up was 40 months. Overall, shrinkage was seen in 65%, stable VS in 22%, and growth in 13%. In 54% of all patients, transient swelling was observed. No prognostic factors were found regarding VS growth. Previous treatment and SRS were associated with transient swelling significantly. Conclusions: Good control rates are reported for LINAC based SRS or SRT in VS, in which the lower rate of radiological growth control is attributed to the use of the more sensitive volume measurements. Transient swelling after radiosurgery is a common phenomenon and should not be mistaken for treatment failure. Previous treatment and SRS were significantly associated with transient swelling.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2022

RCT Training and Qualification

The RCT training program prepares Radiological Control Technicians to support the advancement of the laboratory’s mission objectives while ensuring the health and safety of the workforce and public from radiological hazards, utilizing a multi-disciplinary, hands-on approach. Currently located at the MESA complex within the University of New Mexico – Los Alamos Campus, the RP Training department has established an immersive training environment that simulates realistic work conditions in which RCTs may develop the fundamental knowledge and skills required to control radiological work across the Laboratory

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2010

CH Packaging Operations Manual (Rev. 10.1)

This document provides the user with instructions for assembling a payload. All the steps in Subsections 1.2, Preparing 55-Gallon Drum Payload Assembly; 1.3, Preparing "Short" 85-Gallon Drum Payload Assembly (TRUPACT-II and HalfPACT); 1.4, Preparing "Tall" 85-Gallon Drum Payload Assembly (HalfPACT only); 1.5, Preparing 100-Gallon Drum Payload Assembly; 1.6, Preparing Shielded Container Payload Assembly; 1.7, Preparing SWB Payload Assembly; and 1.8, Preparing TDOP Payload Assembly, must be completed, but may be performed in any order as long as radiological control steps are not bypassed. Transport trailer operations, package loading and unloading from transport trailers, hoisting and rigging activities such as ACGLF operations, equipment checkout and shutdown, and component inspection activities must be performed, but may be performed in any order and in parallel with other activities as long as radiological control steps are not bypassed. Steps involving OCA/ICV lid removal/installation and payload removal/loading may be performed in parallel if there are multiple operators working on the same packaging. Steps involving removal/installation of OCV/ICV upper and lower main O-rings must be performed in sequence, except as noted.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2017

RCT: Module 2.04, Dosimetry, Course 8769

This course will introduce the types of instruments used to measure external and internal radiation to people. Dosimetry is the quantitative assessment of radiation received by the human body. Several types of dosimeters are used worldwide. This information is valuable to all radiological control personnel because dosimeters are the only direct method to measure and document personnel radiation exposure and ensure regulatory compliance with applicable limits. This course will cover dosimetry terms, Department of Energy (DOE) limits, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) administrative guidelines, thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs), LANL dosimetry, and bioassay assessment methods. This course will prepare the student with the skills necessary for radiological control technician (RCT) qualification by passing quizzes, tests, and the RCT Comprehensive Phase 1, Unit 2 Examination (TEST 27566) and providing in-thefield skills.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2017

RCT: Module 2.03, Counting Errors and Statistics, Course 8768

Radiological sample analysis involves the observation of a random process that may or may not occur and an estimation of the amount of radioactive material present based on that observation. Across the country, radiological control personnel are using the activity measurements to make decisions that may affect the health and safety of workers at those facilities and their surrounding environments. This course will present an overview of measurement processes, a statistical evaluation of both measurements and equipment performance, and some actions to take to minimize the sources of error in count room operations. This course will prepare the student with the skills necessary for radiological control technician (RCT) qualification by passing quizzes, tests, and the RCT Comprehensive Phase 1, Unit 2 Examination (TEST 27566) and by providing in the field skills.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2023

Tritium Safety: Self-Study Course 11952

Course Overview: Tritium is a radioactive isotope of hydrogen which has characteristics that require workers understand what should be done to work safely and responsibly around it. Tritium is used for defense applications, experimental purposes for general research, and is a byproduct of some of the work that is done at LANL. Practical guidance offered in this training will inform safe handling to minimize negative impacts on personnel, the workspace, and the surrounding environment. This course, Tritium Safety Self-Study (Course 11952), provides information on the physical, chemical, and radioactive properties of tritium; sources of tritium; uses of tritium; biological effects of tritium; radiological control methods for tritium; monitoring methods of tritium; tritium waste minimization and handling; and alarms and proper response to abnormal conditions in a tritium facility. Course Objectives: When you have completed this course, you will be able to: Identify the physical, chemical, and radioactive properties of tritium; Identify the sources of tritium; Identify the uses of tritium; Identify the modes of tritium exposure; Identify the biological effects of tritium; Identify the radiological control methods of tritium; Identify methods used to monitor for tritium; Identify tritium waste minimization and handling techniques; Identify proper response to abnormal conditions in tritium facilities.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2012

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2011

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) is a premier research laboratory that is part of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). As a national security laboratory, LLNL is responsible for ensuring that the nation’s nuclear weapons remain safe, secure, and reliable. The Laboratory also meets other pressing national security needs, including countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and strengthening homeland security, and conducting major research in atmospheric, earth, and energy sciences; bioscience and biotechnology; and engineering, basic science, and advanced technology. The Laboratory is managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), and serves as a scientific resource to the U.S. government and a partner to industry and academia. LLNL operations have the potential to release a variety of constituents into the environment via atmospheric, surface water, and groundwater pathways. Some of the constituents, such as particles from diesel engines, are common at many types of facilities while others, such as radionuclides, are unique to research facilities like LLNL. All releases are highly regulated and carefully monitored. LLNL strives to maintain a safe, secure and efficient operational environment for its employees and neighboring communities. Experts in environment, safety and health (ES&H) support all Laboratory activities. LLNL’s radiological control program ensures that radiological exposures and releases are reduced to as low as reasonably achievable to protect the health and safety of its employees, contractors, the public, and the environment. LLNL is committed to enhancing its environmental stewardship and managing the impacts its operations may have on the environment through a formal Environmental Management System. The Laboratory encourages the public to participate in matters related to the Laboratory’s environmental impact on the community by soliciting citizens’ input on matters of significant public interest and through various communications. The Laboratory also provides public access to information on its ES&H activities. LLNL consists of two sites—an urban site in Livermore, California, referred to as the “Livermore site,” which occupies 1.3 square miles; and a rural Experimental Test Site, referred to as “Site 300,” near Tracy, California, which occupies 10.9 square miles. In 2011 the Laboratory had a staff of approximately 6800.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2013

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2012

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) is a premier research laboratory that is part of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). As a national security laboratory, LLNL is responsible for ensuring that the nation’s nuclear weapons remain safe, secure, and reliable. The Laboratory also meets other pressing national security needs, including countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and strengthening homeland security, and conducting major research in atmospheric, earth, and energy sciences; bioscience and biotechnology; and engineering, basic science, and advanced technology. The Laboratory is managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), and serves as a scientific resource to the U.S. government and a partner to industry and academia. LLNL operations have the potential to release a variety of constituents into the environment via atmospheric, surface water, and groundwater pathways. Some of the constituents, such as particles from diesel engines, are common at many types of facilities while others, such as radionuclides, are unique to research facilities like LLNL. All releases are highly regulated and carefully monitored. LLNL strives to maintain a safe, secure and efficient operational environment for its employees and neighboring communities. Experts in environment, safety and health (ES&H) support all Laboratory activities. LLNL’s radiological control program ensures that radiological exposures and releases are reduced to as low as reasonably achievable to protect the health and safety of its employees, contractors, the public, and the environment. LLNL is committed to enhancing its environmental stewardship and managing the impacts its operations may have on the environment through a formal Environmental Management System. The Laboratory encourages the public to participate in matters related to the Laboratory’s environmental impact on the community by soliciting citizens’ input on matters of significant public interest and through various communications. The Laboratory also provides public access to information on its ES&H activities. LLNL consists of two sites—an urban site in Livermore, California, referred to as the “Livermore Site,” which occupies 1.3 square miles; and a rural Experimental Test Site, referred to as “Site 300,” near Tracy, California, which occupies 10.9 square miles. In 2012 the Laboratory had a staff of approximately 7000.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2013

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) is a premier research laboratory that is part of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). As a national security laboratory, LLNL is responsible for ensuring that the nation’s nuclear weapons remain safe, secure, and reliable. The Laboratory also meets other pressing national security needs, including countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and strengthening homeland security, and conducting major research in atmospheric, earth, and energy sciences; bioscience and biotechnology; and engineering, basic science, and advanced technology. The Laboratory is managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), and serves as a scientific resource to the U.S. government and a partner to industry and academia. LLNL operations have the potential to release a variety of constituents into the environment via atmospheric, surface water, and groundwater pathways. Some of the constituents, such as particles from diesel engines, are common at many types of facilities while others, such as radionuclides, are unique to research facilities like LLNL. All releases are highly regulated and carefully monitored. LLNL strives to maintain a safe, secure and efficient operational environment for its employees and neighboring communities. Experts in environment, safety and health (ES&H) support all Laboratory activities. LLNL’s radiological control program ensures that radiological exposures and releases are reduced to as low as reasonably achievable to protect the health and safety of its employees, contractors, the public, and the environment. LLNL is committed to enhancing its environmental stewardship and managing the impacts its operations may have on the environment through a formal Environmental Management System. The Laboratory encourages the public to participate in matters related to the Laboratory’s environmental impact on the community by soliciting citizens’ input on matters of significant public interest and through various communications. The Laboratory also provides public access to information on its ES&H activities. LLNL consists of two sites—an urban site in Livermore, California, referred to as the “Livermore Site,” which occupies 1.3 square miles; and a rural Experimental Test Site, referred to as “Site 300,” near Tracy, California, which occupies 10.9 square miles. In 2013 the Laboratory had a staff of approximately 6,300.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2017

RCT: Module 2.08, Radiological Source Control, Course 8774

radioactive source is material used for its emitted radiation. Sources are sealed or unsealed and are classified as accountable or exempt. Radioactive sources are used for response checks, functional checks, and the calibration of instruments and monitors to traceable standards. To ensure the safety and welfare of all personnel, it is important to maintain control of radioactive sources to minimize the potential for the spread of contamination, unnecessary exposure to personnel, loss or theft, and improper disposal. This course will prepare the student with the skills necessary for RCT qualification by passing quizzes, tests, and the RCT Comprehensive Phase 1, Unit 2 Examination (TEST 27566) and will provide in-the-field skills.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2017

Remote Monitoring System Design Requirements for Accountable Nuclear Materials at the Nevada National Security Site

The Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) worked with other sites within the Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration weapons complex to develop design requirements for a Remote Monitoring System. System objectives included: Continuous monitoring of packaging (containers) within a Facility's buildings to meet Material Control and Accountability (MC&A) inventory requirements. Remotely access and receive monitoring data for tamper detection/alarm, tracking information, environmental conditions, equipment metadata (serial number, date of manufacture, etc.), and assessment video feeds. All data processing, storage/retrieval, and communications will be protected in a manner commensurate with its trust level and classification. Remotely collected and processed data will be securely stored, backed up, and archived. Current and historical data will accessible within and outside of a Building (location). Automated creation of reports and data visualization. Design features to facilitate the potential future integration with the Facility's physical security alarm and display system. The requirements may be used to develop an integrated conceptual design or may be used in a modular fashion to inform separate designs. The guiding principles in developing the system objectives include: For MC&A needs, remotely perform the physical inventory and evidence collection of tamper for Security Category I and II packaged material within a facility and be capable of satisfying guidelines establish by DOE M 470.4-6, “Nuclear Material Control and Accountability.” For personnel safety needs: Meet/satisfy Nuclear Explosive Safety requirements. Minimize the exposure of personnel to radiation to be as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) in accordance with NSTec Radiological Controls Manual. For DOE nuclear materials, Building environment shall be controlled to meet requirements for packaged nuclear materials specified in weapons laboratory literature.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2018

Modeling Analysis of Actual and Potential Atmospheric Dispersion of Plutonium-239 from the Hanford Site Plutonium Finishing Plant

This report presents the results of two studies conducted to assess actual and potential plutonium-239 environmental contamination during demolition of the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) at the Hanford Site near Richland, Washington. The assessments described herein were conducted by the National Atmospheric Release Advisory Center (NARAC) at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The overall objective of NARAC’s work is to help determine if contamination levels that warrant controls will extend beyond the established radiological control boundaries around the Hanford Site PFP in the course of further decontamination and demolition activities.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2019

Radiological Survey and Release Report for 9204-04 Buildings (9404-16, 9409-20, 9409-21 basin, 9811-04, 9811-05 foundation, and 9983-78)

This report is to document that sufficient surveys have been conducted to demonstrate that the debris from these buildings can be released from radiological controls for disposal at the ORR Landfills. This report covers the radiological surveys conducted in accordance with RE-KRK-18-M-017.01 (November 2018), Radiological Survey and Release Plan For 9204-04 Buildings (9404-16, 9409-20, and 9811-04), RE-KRK-18-M-017.02 (December 2018), Radiological Survey and Release Plan For 9204-04 Buildings (9404-16, 9409-20, 9409-21 basin, 9811-04, 9983-78), and RE-KRK-18-M-017.03 (January 2019), Radiological Survey and Release Plan For 9204-04 Buildings (9404-16, 9409-20, 9409-21 basin, 9811-04, 9811-05 foundation, 9983-78).

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

Mercury Speciation of Hanford 241-AP-107 Tank Waste Samples - 20384

The concentration of key mercury species in the Hanford tank waste has not been previously measured. Based on process knowledge, an estimated inventory of 2,100 kg of mercury is assumed and was distributed in varied amounts across 149 single-shell tanks (SSTs) and 28 double-shell tanks (DSTs). Limited analyses of individual SSTs and DSTs for total mercury were all below detection, yielding upper limits in concentration estimates based solely on instrument detection limits, resulting in an uncertain mercury inventory for Hanford tanks. Accurate and reliable chemical speciation and quantification is desired to anticipate, predict, and abate the mass movements of various mercury species through the Hanford waste processing flowsheet. Highly sensitive separation and quantification methods for total, elemental, and monomethyl mercury species, in tank waste, have been developed at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory's (PNNL) Radiochemical Processing Laboratory (RPL). A non-radiological environmental method to quantify mercury species has been adapted for application to Hanford tank 241-AP-107 raw supernatant feed, filtered feed, and cesium-decontaminated samples. These samples represent feed inventory and pretreatment process effluents prior to immobilization by vitrification. This method separates and preconcentrates total, elemental, and monomethyl mercury onto selective solid substrates with little-to-no radioactive background. The solid samples can then be released from strict radiological control, allowing for analytical work to be conducted in low-level radiological facilities. Separation of mercury species was demonstrated at PNNL's RPL in Richland, Washington before transport and analytical quantification using cold vapor atomic fluorescence spectrometry (CVAFS) at PNNL's Marine Science Laboratory (MSL) in Sequim, Washington. Additional studies were conducted to assess the stability of monomethyl mercury in distilled matrices and preconcentrated onto the Carbotrap{sup R} solid substrate to assess sample degradation over time during transport. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS1969

Medical examinations for radiation workers

The NASA radiological protection policy allows an employee to be assigned work in a radiologically controlled area only if all of the following conditions are met: (1) The area must be radiologically safe for the intended operations; (2) the employee must be medically fit; (3) the employee must be properly trained; (4) appropriate radiation protection procedures must be prepared; (5) appropriate dosimetric, survey, surveillance and reporting procedures must be implemented; and (6) adequate controls and records must be established.

Alexander, R. E.↗