Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “environmental dosimetry”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI1995

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 36, No. 1, January-June 1995]

Nuclear Safety is a journal that covers significant issues in the field of nuclear safety. Its primary scope is safety in the design, construction, operation, and decommissioning of nuclear power reactors worldwide and the research and analysis activities that promote this goal, but it also encompasses the safety aspects of the entire nuclear fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing and handling, and nuclear waste disposal, the handling of fissionable materials and radioisotopes, and the environmental effects of all these activities. Table of Contents for this issue follows. THE CHORNOBYL ACCIDENT: 1 The Chornobyl Accident Revisited, Part II: The State of the Nuclear Fuel Located Within the Chornobyl Sarcophagus, A A. Borovoi and A. R. Sich; GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 33 Nuclear Power Safety in Central and Eastern Europe, R. Wilson; 46 Safety of Nuclear Power Reactors in the Former Eastern European Countries, S. Chakraborty; 53 Technical Note: On the Definition of Common-Cause Failures, H. Paula; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 58 Modeling and Analysis of Core-Debris Recriticality During Hypothetical Severe Accidents in the Advanced Neutron Source Reactor, S.-H. Kim, V. Georgevich, D. B. Simpson, C. O. Slater, and R. P. Taleyarkhan; 68 Ignitability of Hydrogen/Oxygen/Diluent Mixtures in the Presence of Hot Surfaces, R. K. Kumar and G. W. Koroll; 94 Coupled RELAP5 and CONTAIN Accident Analysis Using PVM, K. A. Smith, A. J. Baratta, and G. E. Robinson; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 109 Application of Fuzzy Logic in Nuclear Reactor Control Part I: An Assessment of State-of-the-Art, A. S. Heger, N. K. Alang-Rashid, and M. Jamshidi; DESIGN FEATURES: 122 Twenty-Third DOE/NRC Nuclear Air-Cleaning and Treatment Conference, R. R. Bellamy, J. J. Hayes, and M. W. First; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 135 Atmospheric Dispersion and the Radiological Consequences of Normal Airborne Effluents from a Nuclear Power Plant, D. Fang, C. Z. Sun, and L. Yang; 142 Calculation of Distribution Coefficients for Radionuclides in Soils and Sediments, I. Puigdomenech and U. Bergstrom: OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 155 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher; U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION INFORMATION AND ANALYSES: 158 Operating Experience Feedback Report—Reliability of Safety-Related Steam Turbine-Driven Standby Pumps Used in U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants, J. R. Boardman; 166 Turbine Building Hazards, H. L Ornstein; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 169 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 175 Proposed Rule Changes as of Dec. 31,1994; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 32 Harvard School of Public Health In-Place Filter Testing Workshop; 134 International Conference on Advances in the Operational Safety of Nuclear Power Plants; 193 30th Tennessee Industries Week; 193 DOE Technical Standards Program 1995 Workshop; 194 Multiphase Flow Experiments and Instrumentation; 180 The Authors; 185 Indexes to Nuclear Safety, Volumes 34 and 35.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI1996

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 37, No. 1, January-March 1996]

Nuclear Safety is a journal that covers significant issues in the field of nuclear safety. Its primary scope is safety in the design, construction, operation, and decommissioning of nuclear power reactors worldwide and the research and analysis activities that promote this goal, but it also encompasses the safety aspects of the entire nuclear fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing and handling, and nuclear waste disposal, the handling of fissionable materials and radioisotopes, and the environmental effects of all these activities. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 1 A Decision Support System for Maintenance Management of a Boiling-Water Reactor Power Plant, J. H. Shen, A. Ray, and S. Levine; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 12 On Prediction of the Ignition Potential of Uranium Metal and Hydride, M. Epstein, W. Luangdilok, M. G. Plys, and H. K. Fauske; 26 An Overview of the Primary Parameters and Methods for Determining Condensation Heat Transfer to Containment Structures, J. Green and K. Almenas; DESIGN FEATURES: 49 Modem Tornado Design of Nuclear and Other Potentially Hazardous Facilities, J. D. Stevenson and Y. Zaho; U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION INFORMATION AND ANALYSES: 73 1994 Accident Sequence Precursor Program Results, R. J. Belles, J. W. Cletcher, D. A. Coplnger, B. W. Dolan, J. W. Minarick, and P. D. O'Reilly; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 93 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AlChE) Spring 1997 National Meeting; 94 European Safety and Reliability Association International Conference on Safety and Reliability ESREL ’97; 95 Criticality Safety Challenges in the Next Decade; 96 21st International Symposium on the Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management; 84 The Authors; 88 Letter to the Editor; 90 Indexes to Nuclear Safety, Volume 36.

05 NUCLEAR FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Radon-222 Charcoal Canister Steady State Model Calibrations Performed in a Highly Controlled Environmental Chamber and a Natural Indoor Environment

Charcoal canisters are a common method of 222 Rn screening. The calibrations of different batches of activated charcoal used in different canister designs are typically performed in large volume controlled environmental chambers with known and controlled radon concentration, temperature, and humidity. Radon screening could be facilitated in locations without ready access to environmental chambers if canisters could be accurately calibrated and undergo quality control in less controlled environments. This study compares charcoal canister calibrations from a highly controlled radon chamber with calibrations from a basement storage area experiencing temporally varying radon. In addition, the impacts of exposure time and spectral region of interest selection on calibration accuracy are investigated by comparing calibrations calculated using three different choices. Approximately 30 mo after calibrations were completed, groups of canisters were exposed for different durations of time to investigate measurement accuracy and calibration validity over an extended time. A digital simulation of charcoal canister kinetics was also performed to establish limits on how stable radon must be in a space for equilibrium-based calibration to be performed there. Overall, the accuracy of measurements using calibrations from each space differed by less than 10% after 2 d exposure time, showing that carefully controlled conditions are not necessary for the accurate calibration of charcoal canisters. Furthermore, measurement accuracy differed by less than 2% for different spectral region selections. Accuracy improved slightly with canister exposure duration. Simulations suggest that radon instability is most tolerable near the beginning of canister calibration exposures, but this merits further experimental study.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Conversion of Site-Specific Meteorological Data for use in CAP-88 PC

CAP-88 PC is a commonly used radiological atmospheric dispersion model. This US EPA-approved model is used to demonstrate compliance with atmospheric emission regulations for radionuclides. While the model includes a large library of meteorological data for use across the United States, there are applications when users may wish to use onsite meteorological data as an input to the CAP-88 PC model. Here, in this work, we present a work-around process for preparing and converting onsite data for use in CAP-88 PC. However, the use of local data should provide a more realistic estimate of doses to members of the public in the immediate vicinity of a facility, although the regulatory agency having jurisdiction may not accept the use of local data for compliance. Additionally, the historical meteorological records from 20+ years ago (at a site many kilometers away) might not be representative of current local weather patterns, highlighting another benefit of using local meteorological data.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Hanford Site Disposition Baseline for Composite Analysis

An updated version of the Hanford Site Disposition Baseline (HSDB) was prepared to document the evolution of conditions for 637 waste sites within Central Plateau of the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Hanford Site. The HSDB provides information that will be used to evaluate post-closure radiological dose in the updated composite analysis (CA).

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

Overview of PFAS at LANL [Slides]

This presentation addresses these questions. What are the potential uses and sources of PFAS at LANL? What are the emerging issues? What are federal and state agencies doing regarding PFAS? Where are we monitoring PFAS at LANL? What are the preliminary findings of PFAS monitoring? What do the data suggest? Where do we go from here?

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

NESHAPs CY19 Report: Radionuclide Air Emission Report for 2019

Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC operates facilities at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in which radionuclides are handled and stored. These facilities are subject to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) in Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 40, Part 61, Subpart H, which regulates radionuclide emissions to air from Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. Specifically, NESHAPs limits the emission of radionuclides to the ambient air to levels resulting in an annual effective dose equivalent of 10 mrem (100 μSv) to any member of the public. Using measured and calculated emissions, and building-specific and common parameters, LLNL personnel applied the EPA-approved computer code, CAP88-PC, Version 4.0.1.17, to calculate the dose to the maximally exposed individual member of the public for the Livermore Site and Site 300. In 2019, LLNL maintained its compliance with 40 CFR 61, Subpart H. All radioactive air emissions resulted in calculated doses far below the annual 10 mrem (100 μSv) sitewide standard. The annual doses to the site-wide maximally exposed individual member of the public at the Livermore Site and Site 300 from planned and unplanned operations in 2019 are: Livermore Site: 4.3 x 10⁻³ mrem (4.3 x 10⁻² μSv); Site 300: 9.5 x 10⁻⁸ mrem (9.5 x 10⁻⁷ μSv).

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

Updated External Exposure Dose Coefficients

In 2018, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) updated and expanded the Federal Guidance Report (FGR) No. 12 to No. 15; tabulating age-specific external exposure effective dose rate coefficients for 1,252 radionuclides in the air, water, and soil (EPA 2018). However, the EPA discovered errors in the tables of dose coefficients for soil which led to the report being retracted for correction. This led to the adoption of “a uniform method of data-smoothing and extrapolation of monoenergetic organ doses at low energies across all exposure pathways; the originally-published dose coefficients utilized different methods for each media type” (EPA 2019). This resulted in all the external exposure dose coefficients being updated and FGR 15 being republished in August 2019 with corrected tables.

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 OSTI2020

FRMAC Assessment Manual Volume 1 (Overview and Methods)

The Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center (FRMAC) Assessment Manual is the tool used to organize and guide activities of the FRMAC Assessment Division. The mission of the FRMAC Assessment Division in a radiological emergency is to interpret radiological data and predict worker and public doses. This information is used by Decision Makers to recommend protective actions in accordance with Protection Action Guides (PAGs) issued by government agencies. This manual integrates many health physics tools and techniques used to make these assessments.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

A comprehensive final summary of the MCNP calculations performed concerning the UW 137 Cs release event

This document combines and supersedes earlier reports (e.g. LA-UR-19-32358 and LA-UR-20- 22216) that discussed MCNP-calculated conversion factors (count rate per unit activity per unit area) for collimated 2”x2” NaI detectors (Ludlum model 44-10 and Thermo model SPA3) in contact with various surfaces of interest to the University of Washington 137 Cs release event. These surfaces include: Exterior surface of round and rectangular ducts, Exterior surface of outdoor brick work, Exterior surface of cast iron pipes, Exterior surface of an O 2 filter assembly For each surface, the calculated conversion factors allowed inferences on 137 Cs activity on interior surfaces based on exterior contact measurements of the 662 keV photopeak count rate. The MCNP calculations included the effect of attached collimators (i.e. either a Pb/Sb-based Ludlum or a W-based “Rees” model) on detector response. As a consequence, the conversion factors only apply to the appropriate collimated 2”x2” NaI detector operated in pulse height analysis (PHA) mode. Other assumptions affecting the calculations and valid application of the conversion factors will be outlined below.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

NTS-SS-SNL-NMSITE-2017-0004 "Contamination Monitor Left in Service After Inadequate Calibration" Causes Not Fully Addressed (Causal Analysis Report)

On June 5th, 2020 Sandia National Laboratories signed and recommended for closure the evidence package for the Noncompliance Tracking System NTS—SS-SNL-NMSITE-2017-0004, Contamination Monitor Left in Service After Inadequate Calibration. On July 16th, 2020 the Sandia Field Office sent a follow-up question list to the Radiation Protection Instrumentation Program Lead to clarify some points while reviewing the evidence package. The follow-up questions readily identified deficiencies with all three calibrations of the iPCM12 systems. On July 30th, 2020 Radiation Protection hosted a meeting to better understand the exact nature of the concerns, determine if the iPCM12 machines were out of calibration and therefore would have to be taken out of service. One result of this meeting was to determine if SNL could withdraw the evidence package. SNL transmitted a letter on August 26th, 2020 recalling the evidence package and committed to performing a thorough causal analysis and invoke the required issues management processes to ensure that corrective actions are sustained.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

2019 ASER Supplemental Tables Chapters 7 and 8

This pdf contains the data tables that will be posted on the LANL external website as a supplement to the Los Alamos National Laboratory 2019 Annual Site Environmental Report for Chapters 7 and 8.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Argonne National Laboratory Site Environmental Report (CY2020)

This report discusses the status and the accomplishments of the environmental protection program at Argonne National Laboratory for calendar year 2020. The status of Argonne environmental protection activities with respect to compliance with the various laws and regulations is discussed, along with environmental management, sustainability efforts, environmental corrective actions, and habitat restoration. To evaluate the effects of Argonne operations on the environment, samples of environmental media collected on the site, at the site boundary, and off the Argonne site were analyzed and compared with applicable guidelines and standards. A variety of radionuclides were measured in air, surface water, groundwater, and bottom sediment samples. In addition, chemical constituents in surface water, groundwater, and wastewater were analyzed. External penetrating radiation doses were measured, and the potential for radiation exposure to off site population groups was estimated. Results are interpreted with respect to the origin of the radioactive and chemical substances (i.e., natural, Argonne, and other) and are compared with applicable standards intended to protect human health and the environment. A U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) dose calculation methodology, based on International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) recommendations and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) CAP 88 Version 4.1 computer code, was used in preparing this report.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2021

ASER Annual Site Environmental Report 2020

Los Alamos National Laboratory’s (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. 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 and Analytical Data Quality); 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, 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).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Update to the Finite Cloud Dose Correction Factors in MACCS

In WASH - 1400, external exposure from the finite radioactive cloud (cloudshine) is calculated by assuming that the cloud is semi-infinite, the concentration of radioactive material is uniform, and by using a correction factor to account for these approximations. This correction factor is originally based upon formulations by Healy and depends on the effective size of the plume and the distance from the plume center to the receptor. The range of the finite cloud dose correction factor table from WASH - 1400 developed using Healy formulations can be exceeded in certain situations. When the range of the table is exceeded, no extrapolation is performed; rather interpolation at the edge of the table is performed per WASH - 1400. The tabulated values of these finite cloud dose correction factors from WASH - 1400 and the interpolation at the edge of the table have been used in MACCS since its creation. An expanded table of finite cloud dose correction factors is one way to reduce the need of using interpolation at the edge of the table. The generation of an expanded finite cloud dose correction factor table for future use in MACCS is documented in this report.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗