Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “RADIATION PROTECTION”

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 397 records · Page 22

Shielding Analyses for SNS Accelerator Power Upgrade

The Proton Power Upgrade (PPU) project [1] at Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) is aiming at increasing the neutron beam intensities at the First Target Station (FTS) and advancing accelerator capability to additionally power a future Second Target Station (STS) [2]. PPU will involve upgrading the SNS accelerator complex to double the currently available proton beam power from 1.4 to 2.8 MW, by increasing the proton beam energy from 1 GeV to 1.3 GeV and by increasing the proton beam current.PPU will enable new science capabilities enhancing the experiment throughput of the 19 existing FTS instruments, which are heavily oversubscribed. STS will include 22 additional neutron scattering instruments. Numerous neutronics analyses are performed to support PPU evaluating the FTS systems for higher beam power and for system upgrades. Part of the PPU scope is an extension of the Ring to Target Beam Transport (RTBT) line, a stub out of the accelerator tunnel for the future Ring to STS Transport (RTST) line[3]. As the RTST tunnel will not be built within the PPU project, the stub will be shielded by a plug, which is planned to be made from regular concrete.In order to provide radiation protection safety, analyses are required to design adequate plug thickness for the stub. The thickness of the stub is driven by the criterion that the area downstream of the plug is “unrestricted access area”, demanding the dose rate downstream the stub be below 0.25 mrem/h at 30 cm from the surface at normal operation and below 20 Rem/hr for accident cases. Additionally, analyses verifying the amount of soil for shielding the accelerator tunnel to the above stated requirements are performed.

Popova, Irina I.↗

FRIB Beam Power Ramp-up: Status and Plans

After project completion on scope, on cost, and ahead of schedule, the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams began operations for scientific users in May of 2022. The ramp-up to a beam power of 400 kW is planned over a six-year period; 1 kW was delivered for initial user runs from in 2022, and 5 kW was delivered as of February 2023. Test runs with 10 kW 36Ar and 48Ca beams were conducted in July 2023. Upgrade plans include doubling the primary-beam energy to 400 MeV/nucleon for enhanced discovery potential (¿FRIB 400¿). This talk reports on the strategic plans towards high power operations emphasizing challenges and resolutions in beam-interception devices and targetry systems, radiation protection and controls, and legacy system renovation and integration.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗

2018 Annual Site Environmental Report

Los Alamos National Laboratory’s (the Laboratory’s) annual site environmental reports are prepared annually by the Laboratory’s environmental organizations, as required by U.S. Department of Energy Order 231.1B, Administrative Change 1, Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting, and Order 458.1, Administrative Change 3, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment. The following chapters in this report discuss our success in complying with environmental laws, regulations, and orders (Chapter 2, Compliance Summary); how we manage the Laboratory’s environmental performance (Chapter 3, Environmental Programs); how we monitor for air emissions of radioactive materials and climate conditions (Chapter 4, Air Quality); how we monitor for effects of Laboratory operations on groundwater quality (Chapter 5, Groundwater Monitoring); how we monitor the movement of chemicals and radionuclides by storm water runoff and the levels of chemicals and radionuclides in deposited sediment (Chapter 6, Watershed Quality); how we monitor for the presence, levels, and effects of chemicals and radionuclides in plants, animals, soil, and vegetation (Chapter 7, Ecosystem Health); and finally, what radionuclide dose or risk from chemical exposure members of the public may experience as a result of Laboratory operations (Chapter 8, Public Dose and Risk Assessment). This report follows plain language guidelines, as required for federal agencies by the Plain Language Act of 2010. More information about plain language can be found at http://www.plainlanguage.gov/index.cfm. You will notice we have substantially reduced the use of acronyms and abbreviations and are using active voice and personal pronouns. We hope you find this report useful. If you have suggestions for improving this report, additional questions, or want a copy of this report, please contact us at envoutreach@lanl.gov, or call the Communications Office at 505-665-7000. This report, its supplemental tables, and the 2018 Annual Site Environmental Report Summary are available at http://www.lanl.gov/environment/environmental-report.php. Note: This document has been revised since it was initially published on September 23, 2019. The revisions included corrections to figure and table references, changes in heading levels, adding blank pages where appropriate, and changes of an editorial nature.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Environmental Monitoring Plan

The purpose of environmental monitoring is to promote the early identification of, and response to, potential adverse environmental impacts associated with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) operations. Environmental monitoring supports the Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS), International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14001 Environmental Management Systems standard, and U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment. Specifically, environmental monitoring enables LLNL to detect, characterize, and respond to releases from LLNL activities; assess impacts; estimate dispersal patterns in the environment; characterize the pathways of exposure to members of the public; characterize the exposures and doses to individuals and to the population; and to evaluate the potential impacts to the biota in the vicinity of LLNL. Environmental monitoring is also a major component of compliance demonstration for permits and other regulatory requirements.

Environmental sciences↗

Tonopah Test Range Air Monitoring: CY2018 Meteorological, Radiological, and Wind Transported Particulate Observations

In 1963, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) (formerly the Atomic Energy Commission [AEC]), implemented Operation Roller Coaster on the Tonopah Test Range (TTR) and an adjacent area of the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR) (formerly the Nellis Air Force Range). This operation resulted in radionuclide-contaminated soils at the Double Tracks site and Clean Slate I, II, and III sites. This report documents observations made during ongoing monitoring of radiological, meteorological, and dust conditions at stations installed adjacent to the Clean Slate sites and at the TTR Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) Range Operations Center (ROC). The primary objective of the monitoring effort is to support the DOE Environmental Management Nevada Program (EM NV) in the safe remediation of the environmental legacy of nuclear device development and testing by determining if wind blowing across the Clean Slate sites is transporting particles of radionuclide-contaminated soil beyond the physical and administrative boundaries of the sites, and to provide information for designing long-term monitoring of the sites. The monitoring program in 2018 included five stations. Station 400, located within TTR Area 3 and near the ROC, monitors conditions near the local workforce center. Stations 401 and 403 are located on the northern and southeastern perimeter fence lines, respectively, of the Clean Slate III site. Stations 404 and 405 are along the northern and eastern boundary fence, respectively, at Clean Slate II. The stations are generally downwind of the contaminated areas during either northwesterly or southerly winds, which are the predominant wind directions. The stations—which are similar in design to the Community Environmental Monitoring Program (CEMP) stations operating at locations surrounding the Nevada National Security Site and TTR—include meteorological instruments and continuous-flow, low-volume air samplers. Three pressurized ionization chambers for measuring gamma energy are in use at Stations 400, 401, and 403. Saltation sensors and saltation traps are deployed at the stations adjacent to the Clean Slate sites. Detailed meteorological data are recorded on data loggers, with periodic uploads via a satellite system to the Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC) at Desert Research Institute (DRI), to monitor instrument and site conditions. Air filter samples are collected every two weeks and the deposits in the saltation traps are collected when a sufficient sample mass for analysis has accumulated (generally a six- to eight-month interval). Monitoring at TTR in calendar year (CY) 2018 provided surveillance of both ambient conditions, and ground disturbance associated with remediation activities at Clean Slate II and III. The first half of CY2018 data from Stations 404 and 405 at Clean Slate II were collected during remediation activities at that site, and data collected during the final third of the year at Stations 401 and 403 at Clean Slate III coincided with remediation work at the site. Ambient conditions prevailed at Station 400 throughout the year. Dust transport by suspension and saltation is strongly dependent on wind speed. Concentrations of PM 10 (particulate matter of aerodynamic diameter ≤10 micrometers [μm], a size fraction of small particles that are suspended in the air and can be easily inhaled) remain low until winds exceed approximately 32 kilometers per hour (km/hr) (20 miles per hour [mph]). Saltation particle counts also increase above the same general threshold wind speed. Wind speeds in excess of 32 km/hr (20 mph) occur less than three percent of the time at the sites. Ground disturbing remediation activities were carried out at Clean Slate II from October 31, 2017, until July 26, 2018. Station 404 is located closest to the remediation area and is downwind of the area when winds are from the south. By late November, analysis of dust from the air sampler at Station 404 registered increases in plutonium-239+240 ( 239+240 Pu) concentrations. Peak plutonium concentrations, accompanied by elevated gross alpha concentrations and the detection of americium-241 ( 241 Am) by gamma spectroscopy, occurred between March and May 2018. During spring and early summer of 2018, elevated radionuclide concentrations were also measured in dust collected from the air sampler at Station 405, which is more than twice the distance from the remediation activity as Station 404. A minor but sustained increase in gross alpha concentration of suspended dust collected at Stations 400, 401, and 403 was also observed starting in May 2018 and continuing into August. Stations 401 and 403 are approximately 4.8 to 6.4 km (three to four miles) from Clean Slate II and Station 400 is approximately 13 km (eight miles) from that site. The radionuclide content of material that saltated into the passive Big Spring Number Eight (BSNE) traps during the Clean Slate II remediation period increased in both the traps facing toward and away from the fenced contamination area at Station 404, with the largest increases in concentration (almost five times the previous 239+240 Pu concentration) observed in the traps facing the fenced area. The radionuclide concentration in material in the trap facing away from the fence more than doubled from that measured in 2017. A similar increase was observed for the saltation trap facing away from the fenced area at Station 405, although no increase was observed for material captured in the trap facing the fenced area. Particles ranging in size from 50 to 500 µm generally move by saltation processes and are not expected to significantly contribute to dose for someone breathing in the standard respiratory zone for adult humans (1.5 to 1.7 m [4.9 to 5.6 ft] above ground level) because they are too large to be entrained in the air as suspended dust. Remediation activities at Clean Slate III began on September 5, 2018, and continued until a brief hiatus started on December 20, 2018. Although Station 401 is much closer to the remediation area than Station 403, the first increase in gross alpha and 239+240 Pu concentrations was noted in dust from filters collected at Station 403 in early November 2018. The highest radionuclide concentrations of 2018 at the Clean Slate III stations were recorded in air samples taken from Stations 401 and 403 in late December 2018 and these concentrations were comparable between the two station locations. Gamma rate data measured by the PICs was slightly higher than the annual average at Stations 401 and 403 after remediation activities began, but no single measurement was outside of the range observed in 2018 prior to remediation activities. No increase in radionuclide concentration was observed for the Clean Slate III remediation time period on air filters collected from the other stations. Radiological monitoring at Station 400—which is located at the ROC, and therefore the closest regularly staffed work location to the Clean Slate sites—recorded a higher mean gross alpha activity from dust collected on air sampler filters than in previous years. The individual biweekly air filters yielded measurements of gross alpha that were at or below the mean plus one standard deviation measured in CY2017, except for the period from April 25, 2018, through September 12, 2018. Nonetheless, gamma spectroscopy of all air filters from Station 400 identified only naturally occurring radionuclides, with no detection of americium-241 ( 241 Am) (which is used as an indicator of plutonium-241[ 241 Pu]). Alpha spectroscopy of selected air filters collected at Station 400 did not detect plutonium-238 ( 238 Pu) or 239+240 Pu above the analytical detection limit. Gross beta and gamma exposure rate data were comparable to data from regional CEMP stations. No saltation traps are deployed at Station 400. Considering the ambient monitoring periods during CY2018, the monitoring stations adjacent to the Clean Slate sites recorded above-background 238 Pu and 239+240 Pu concentrations (SNL, 1998; Turner et al., 2003) in samples collected by passive saltation traps and on selected air filters. These observations were consistent with previous years and indicated that radionuclide movement occurred under ambient conditions by processes of both saltation and suspension. The presence of radionuclides in all saltation traps, both upwind and downwind of the fenced contamination areas, was consistent with previous radiological survey results (EG&G, 1979) that show lower concentration radiologically contaminated material dispersed outside the fenced area. Although 239+240 Pu concentrations in the air filter samples were sometimes orders of magnitude higher than background, the concentrations were below risk-based action levels defined for an industrial area worker scenario (U.S. DOE, 2014). The interception of airborne dust with above-background radionuclide concentrations demonstrates that dispersal processes are continuing. Strong winds are the driver for both suspension and saltation of dust and soil. The recorded wind speed and PM10 during remediation activities at Clean Slate II and III identified discrete wind events lasting approximately five to eight hours each, which accounted for the greatest PM 10 concentrations at the monitoring stations. These events captured the effect of winds from the northwest and from the south. The observed differences in dust loading and radionuclide concentrations for the monitoring stations when they were either upwind or downwind of the contamination area identify the remediation area as a source of plutonium contaminated dust. The increase in concentration of radionuclides in airborne dust during the remediation activities, compared with measurements under previous ambient conditions (mean 239+240 Pu concentrations during remediation activities are approximately nine to 40 times higher compared to pre-remediation concentrations, depending on monitoring station), highlights the impact of land disturbance on wind-borne contaminant transport from the Clean Slate test areas. The meteorological and particulate matter monitoring indicated that conditions for wind-borne contaminant movement exist at the Clean Slate sites, and that transport of radionuclide-contaminated soil by both suspension and saltation occurred under ambient conditions and accelerated when the sites were disturbed. The 239+240 Pu alpha spectroscopy results indicated that airborne concentrations during remediation activities ranged from 2 × 10-16 to 380 × 10-16 µCi/ml. These results can be compared to the derived air concentration limit for 239 Pu of 6 × 10-11 µCi/ml for occupational workers contained in Code of Federal Regulations 10 CFR 835, Occupational Radiation Protection. Even though the air sampling results document an increase in concentration during remediation activities, the observed concentrations are less than 0.06 percent of the occupational limit. The Corrective Action Unit (CAU) closure strategy uses a risk-based approach, whereby acceptable contaminant concentrations are determined as a function of anticipated human exposure.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Criticality Accident Response

The document outlines procedures and priorities for Radiation Protection personnel response should a nuclear criticality accident occur.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

Big Data Health Physics

This project, in completion of the Illinois Institute of Technology’s Professional Masters of Health Physics program, represents a two part independent study wherein (1) a Statistical Analysis is performed on a new data process implemented at a Los Alamos National Laboratory facility and (2) a Project Management Plan is designed for the successful implementation of this new radiation protection management process.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

Proposed guidance for preparing and reviewing a molten salt non-power production or utilization facility application

Development of non-power molten salt reactors (MSRs) are under consideration to further establish an MSR experience base, support the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.43(e), and provide any additional analyses needed for development of a full-scale MSR. Guidance provided in this report is based on MSRs operating with liquid fuel (i.e., fuel dissolved within a molten salt). These reactors, unless owned by the DOE or DOD, will require licensing by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff. Standard review plan (SRP) guidance for large light water reactors (LWRs) is available in NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants; Light Water Reactor (LWR) Edition. However, NRC staff observed that NUREG-0800 is very cumbersome to apply to non-power reactors “because of the great differences in complexity and hazards between non-power reactors and nuclear power plants.” Therefore, a program to develop performance-based guidance applicable to non-power reactors was initiated. In 1996, NUREG-1537, Parts 1 and 2, Guidelines for Preparing and Reviewing Applications for the Licensing of Non-Power Reactors, was published. Part 1, the format and content guide, suggests a uniform format for presenting information in non-power reactor applications that is acceptable to the NRC staff, but conformance with the format and content is not required. Part 2, the SRP, ensures the quality and uniformity of the staff review of an application. Unfortunately, the application guidelines and SRP do not provide adequate guidance for all advanced non-LWR technologies and applications. This discrepancy eventually led to the 2012 development of interim staff guidance (ISG) for NUREG-1537, which includes criteria for describing and reviewing aqueous homogeneous reactors (AHRs). Specifically, NUREG-1537 ISG, 2012 expanded the original document to address three areas: 1. updated criteria for heterogeneous non-power reactors, 2. criteria for licensing AHRs, and 3. criteria for licensing a Part 50-licensed isotope production facility. In 2015, the US Department of Energy (DOE) opted to build on the AHR NUREG-1537 ISG experience by performing a gap analysis of the guidance that would be used to license a non-power MSR. MSRs represent one of the advanced non-LWR technologies selected by DOE for development through a multiyear cost share award with Southern Company Services. Under this Advanced Reactor Concepts 2015 (DOE Advanced Reactor Concepts [ARC] 15) award program, the DOE tasked Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) to evaluate the guidance changes that the NRC may need to consider when licensing an MSR non-power reactor. ORNL staff, with support from Boston Government Services, LLC, focused on five system-related chapters in NUREG-1537 that were considered most relevant to inform the effort that would be required for a non-power MSR applicant. ORNL documented this review in a technical report, ORNL/TM-2018/834, Proposed Guidance for Preparing and Reviewing Molten Salt Non-Power Reactor License Applications (NUREG-1537). The report was subsequently shared with industry and the NRC. The 2018 review was limited in scope, focusing on key system chapters based on the expected significance of each chapter relative to expected differences in addressing advanced non-LWR technologies, specifically non-power MSRs, compared with heterogeneously fueled non-power reactors. In the ORNL report, proposed generic adaptations were suggested for the following NUREG-1537 chapters: Chapter 4, “Reactor Description”; Chapter 5, “Reactor Coolant Systems”; Chapter 6, “Engineered Safety Features”; Chapter 9, “Auxiliary Systems”; Chapter 11, “Radiation Protection Program and Waste Management” The inclusion of Chapter 11 in the previous review effort was intended to provide guidance for categorizing the waste-handling process for an MSR operating with homogenous fuel. The introductions from Parts 1 and 2 of the 2012 NUREG-1537 ISG provide guidance for the application and review of production facilities. After a period of operation, non-power MSRs with homogenous fuel will include gaseous and soluble fission products. The gaseous fission products will be collected and held for decay in an off-gas system. There might also be an initiative to polish or filter the soluble fission products in the fuel salt by some mechanical or chemical means. The treatment and handling of fission products in the non-power MSR fuel salt and the description of this process in the safety analysis report (SAR) must be very precise to avoid the waste treatment facility being construed as a co-located special nuclear material (SNM) fuel cycle facility (see Section 2.3 of this report). Subsequent to the release of ORNL/TM-2018/834, NRC staff expressed a desire to continue the regulatory gap analysis that was begun in that report. This would provide additional clarity and information addressed in certain sections of the original report, while also providing new guidance on certain topics not addressed in the original report. This revision would benefit the NRC staff reviewing applications involving non-power MSR designs and would help developers understand how the NRC staff might approach the review of such applications. The focus of this report is to provide infrastructure support to the NRC staff for the regulatory review of non-power MSRs.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

The Relationship Between Dose Rate and Decay Heat for Spent Nuclear Fuel Casks

Decay heat and dose rate are two important limits used for determining the allowable contents of spent fuel (SNF) in dry storage systems and transportation packages. While the decay heat limit is used to maintain fuel cladding integrity and ensure retrievability, dose rates are used to demonstrate compliance with regulatory requirements on radiation protection. Because both dose rate and decay heat result from decay of radioisotopes in SNF, this study is an attempt to examine the relationship between dose rate and decay heat for a given cask design. Dose rates were evaluated for 198 cask configurations, that include various SNF system designs (e.g., storage, transfer, transport), SNF characteristics (e.g., fuel types, burnup, cooling time), and loading maps (e.g., uniform loading, zone loading), while a constant decay heat was maintained. The decay heat was calculated using US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Regulatory Guide (RG) 3.54, Revision 2, and verified using ORIGEN sequence within SCALE code system. The ORIGEN outputs were used as source terms in the dose analysis using 198 different configurations. A computer script was developed to calculate the cooling time necessary to achieve a given decay heat for a given enrichment, assembly average burnup, assembly mass, and in-core history using a rootfinder algorithm. Initially the computer script was developed to provide cooling time and burnup calculations directly to the analysis of dose rates and decay heats, so a comparison between Used Nuclear Fuel-Storage Transportation and Disposal Analysis Resource Data System (UNF-ST&DARDS) results and RG3.54 data was made; results are included in the appendix to this document. However, an iterative approach was used to compute cooling time, and its accuracy did not depend on the results of the RG3.54r2 algorithm, although the algorithm was still used. The results of the evaluation presented herein clearly demonstrate that a given decay heat does not correspond to a unique dose rate for a variety of cask and package designs. There is no clear pattern to develop a correlation between decay heat and the source terms. Depending on burnup, enrichment, cask type, and loading pattern, dose rates varied for the exact same decay heat—in some cases by 400% for a given cask. For cases in which decay heat was held constant through selection of the appropriate cooling time, dose rates would decrease with increasing burnup, and in other cases, dose rates would increase. The large variation in dose rates for a constant decay heat indicates that casks loaded based on decay heat—that is allowing any burnup, cooling time, and enrichment combinations that yield the qualified decay heat limit(s) —cannot ensure that an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation or a spent fuel transportation package will meet the regulatory limits set forth by the respective regulations, i.e., 10 CFR 72 or 10 CFR 71.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Annual Site Environmental Report (2019)

Los Alamos National Laboratory’s (the Laboratory’s) annual site environmental reports are prepared by the Laboratory’s environmental organizations, as required by U.S. Department of Energy Order 231.1B, Administrative Change 1, Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting, and Order 458.1, Administrative Change 3, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment. The following chapters in this report discuss our success in complying with environmental laws, regulations, and orders (Chapter 2, Compliance Summary); how we manage the Laboratory’s environmental performance (Chapter 3, Environmental Programs); how we monitor for air emissions of radioactive materials and climate conditions (Chapter 4, Air Quality); how we monitor for effects of Laboratory operations on groundwater quality (Chapter 5, Groundwater Protection); how we monitor the movement of chemicals and radionuclides by storm water runoff and the levels of chemicals and radionuclides in deposited sediment (Chapter 6, Watershed Quality); how we monitor for the presence, levels, and effects of chemicals and radionuclides in plants, animals, and soil (Chapter 7, Ecosystem Health); and finally, what radionuclide dose or risk from chemical exposure members of the public may experience as a result of Laboratory operations (Chapter 8, Public Dose and Risk Assessment).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) 2019 Summary

In order to maintain human and environmental health, Los Alamos National Laboratory follows state and federal environmental regulations, including compliance with permits, limits, and inspections. These regulations are in place to maintain radiation protection, waste management, and air and water quality.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

U.S. Efforts in Support of Examinations at Fukushima Daiichi- November 2020 Meeting Notes with Updated Information Requests

Much is still not known about the end-state of core materials in each unit that was operating on March 11, 2011 at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station (Daiichi). Information obtained from Daiichi is required to inform Decontamination and Decommissioning (D&D) activities, improving the ability of the Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings, Incorporated (TEPCO Holdings) to characterize potential hazards and to ensure the safety of workers involved with cleanup activities. This information also has important implications for the safety and operation of U.S. commercial nuclear power plants. This document summarizes results from the Fiscal Year 2021 (FY2021) U.S. effort to review Daiichi information and extract insights to enhance the safety of existing and future nuclear power plant designs. This U.S. effort, which was initiated in 2014 by the Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE), is completed by a group of experts in reactor safety and plant operations that identify examination needs and evaluate recent Daiichi examination data to address these needs. Since its inception, annual reports were issued that document significant safety insights being obtained in areas of special emphasis: system and component performance, radionuclide surveys and sampling, debris end-state location, combustible gas effects, and plant operations and maintenance. In addition to reducing uncertainties related to severe accident modeling progression, these insights have and continue to be used to update guidance for severe accident prevention, mitigation, and emergency planning. Reduced uncertainties in modeling the events at Daiichi improve the realism of reactor safety evaluations that inform future D&D activities. A key aspect of prior U.S. efforts, the updated list of information requests, is included in this FY2021 report to ensure that they are transmitted to organizations within Japan. This report also continues to emphasize how information obtained from the affected reactors at Daiichi has been and will continue to be used to update severe accident management strategies and reduce uncertainties in systems analysis code models. In addition, recommendations are included that would expand the use of this information to provide insights regarding maintenance, radiation protection, design, and siting activities for existing and new reactors.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

2021 Consequence Management Hotline Drill After Action Report

In March 2021, a functional area drill was held at the Remote Sensing Laboratory–Nellis that focused on using CBRNResponder and the Digital Field Monitoring (DFM) tablets for sample hotline operations and the new paper Sample Control Forms (SCFs) for sample collection. Participants included staff trained and billeted as sample control specialists and Consequence Management Response Team (CMRT) field monitoring personnel. Teams were able to successfully gather and transfer samples to the sample control hotline staff through the manual process, though there were several noted areas for improvement. In July and October 2021, two additional functional area drills were held at Sandia National Laboratories that focused on field sample collection and custody transfer at the sample control hotline for the Consequence Management (CM) Radiological Assistance Program (RAP) program. The overarching goal of the drills was to evaluate the current CM process for sample collection, sample drop off, and sample control using the CBRNResponder mobile and web-based applications. The July 2021 drill had an additional focus to have a subset of samples analyzed by the local analytical laboratory, Radiation Protection Sample Diagnostics (RPSD) laboratory, to evaluate the Laboratory Access portal on CBRNResponder. All three drills were able to accomplish their objectives however, there were several issues noted (Observations: 25 Urgent, 29 Important, and 22 Improvement Opportunities). The observations were prioritized according to their impact on the mission as well as categorized to align with the programmatic functional area required to address the issue. This report provides additional detail on each observation for skillset/program leads and software developers to consider for future improvement or mandatory efforts.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

Preconceptual Design of Irradiated Fuel Salt Management System

The National Reactor Innovation Center was established by the U.S. Department of Energy to accelerate the demonstration and deployment of advanced nuclear reactors. To meet this mission, the National Reactor Innovation Center has developed the Laboratory for Operations and Testing in the U.S. (LOTUS) to support the first fast-spectrum molten salt reactor demonstration. The goal of this research is to understand the system requirements that may be applied to a molten salt reactor experiment in the LOTUS test bed and to perform systems analyses and preconceptual development of a storage container for the management of the irradiated molten salt fuel. This study proposes a set of irradiated fuel salt management processes for the molten salt reactor, from defueling to storage or disposal. For that, the historic Molten Salt Reactor Experiment (MSRE) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory has served as a crucial source of data for a mock application. This paper proposes a potential geometry for storing irradiated fuel salt based on MSRE data and the Monte Carlo N-Particle radiation transport code. The geometry was analyzed for criticality safety under abnormal situations, such as water ingress and interaction between containers. Based on the determined configuration of the storage system, the decay heat produced from the irradiated fuel salts was calculated to provide a reasonable time scale of the dormancy period. Using the same geometry assumed above, the neutron and gamma dose rates from the irradiated fuel salt at the end of the dormancy period were estimated, which will be useful for understanding the handling and radiation protection requirements for handling the irradiated fuel salt. Lastly, a reactor in the LOTUS test bed could use chloride-based fuel as opposed to the fluoride-based fuel used in MSRE. Thus, a literature study provided data to understand the similarities and differences between the characteristics of fluoride- and chloride-based salts in terms of salt chemistry, material characteristics, postirradiation behavior, neutronics, thermal hydraulics, and heat removal. This study, together with the proposed irradiated fuel salt management processes, preliminary criticality calculations, decay heat, and dose rate estimates, provides a strong basis for future investigation into the management of irradiated fuel salts generated during molten salt reactor technology demonstrations.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

Los Alamos National Laboratory 2021 Annual Site Environmental Report

Los Alamos National Laboratory’s (LANL’s or the Laboratory’s) annual site environmental reports are prepared each year by the Laboratory’s environmental organizations as required by U.S. Department of Energy Order 231.1B, Administrative Change 1, Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting, and Order 458.1, Administrative Change 4, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Summary of Analytical Services for the Hanford Site Radionuclide NESHAP Program

This document serves as a summary of the analytical requirements used to demonstrate compliance on the Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site to 40 CFR 61, “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants,” (NESHAP) Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities,” and WAC 246-247, “Radiation Protection – Air Emissions.” This document is a reference summarizing information from multiple existing requirement source documents and does not create, supersede, replace or over-ride any existing contractual, DOE, federal, state, permit or license requirement. The requirement source documents govern where any differences may exist.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Dataset Repository for Investigating Suicide Risk Using Social and Environmental Determinants of Health

Suicide is frequently modeled as a function of genetics and environment, where the latter refers to factors other than direct biological consequences, such as air quality, financial level, social connectivity, transportation and food access, and homelessness status. According to the World Health Organization, clean air, a stable climate, adequate water, sanitation and hygiene, safe chemical use, radiation protection, healthy and safe workplaces, sound agricultural practices, health-supportive cities and built environments, and a preserved natural environment are all prerequisites for good health. Understanding the relationships between these determinants and mental health outcomes requires standardized data that can be included in healthcare programs and health outcome models. There is a wealth of publicly available data on social and environmental factors provided by various US organizations that can benefit the design of health care systems and public health interventions, as well as improve our comprehension of factors that impact health. Such information would not only help improve the understanding of individual and community risk but also identify new risk factors that have not previously been therapeutically targeted, especially in terms of their impact on mental health. However, curating and standardizing such datasets is challenging because they are often recorded at numerous geographical and temporal resolutions and with varying spatial and temporal granularities. To address this challenge, we launched an endeavor in conjunction with the Veterans Health Administration to collect publicly available socioeconomic and environmental determinants of health statistics in the US. In this manuscript, we describe a social and environmental determinants of health (SEDH) datasets repository, data curation documentation, and a pipeline framework for data generation; This effort started in 2020, when we began constructing a scalable pipeline to automate the download, extraction, preparation, analysis, and production of datasets. These datasets have been made available to the VHA and may be shared upon agreement with collaborating organizations.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

Los Alamos National Laboratory 2022 Annual Site Environmental Report (Rev. 2)

Los Alamos National Laboratory (Laboratory) annual site environmental reports are prepared each year by the Laboratory’s environmental organizations as required by U.S. Department of Energy Order 231.1B, Administrative Change 1, Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting, and Order 458.1, Administrative Change 4, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment. The chapters in this report discuss our compliance with environmental laws, regulations, and orders (Chapter 2, Compliance Summary); how we manage the Laboratory’s environmental performance and assure the quality of data from analysis of environmental samples (Chapter 3, Environmental Programs and Analytical Data Quality); how we monitor for air emissions of radioactive materials and for weather conditions (Chapter 4, Air Quality); how we monitor for effects of Laboratory operations on groundwater quality (Chapter 5, Groundwater Protection); how we monitor the levels of chemicals and radionuclides in storm water runoff and sediment (Chapter 6, Watershed Quality); how we monitor for the levels and effects of chemicals and radionuclides in plants, animals, soil, and vegetation (Chapter 7, Ecosystem Health); and finally, what radioactive dose or risk from chemical exposure that members of the public could experience as a result of Laboratory operations (Chapter 8, Public Dose and Risk Assessment).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗