Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “INL”

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 19 records

Total Effective Dose from Radiologic Emissions from INL Facilities for Calculation of Population Dose for the INL 2024 Annual Site Environmental Report

Total effective radiation dose from airborne releases was calculated using air dispersion modeling performed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Idaho Falls Office using their HYSPLIT computer model (Stein et al. 2015; Draxler et al. 2013), and the Dose Multi-Media (DOSEMM) dose assessment model (Rood 2019) . The objective of these calculations was to provide a grid of total effective dose across a model domain that encompasses a 50-mile (80-km) radius from any Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Site source. In addition to INL Site sources, releases from the Radiological and Environmental Sciences Laboratory (RESL) (IF-683) and IF-603 located at the INL Research Center (IRC) within the Idaho Falls city limits were also included. Due to tracking limitations, radionuclides released from IF-611 and IF-603 are modeled as released from IF-603. The dose results will be combined with GIS software to compute a total population dose for the calendar year (CY) 2024 and will be reported in the INL Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER). This report does not cover the population dose calculation and only documents generation of the gridded dose file.

42 - ENGINEERING↗

INL CRMO XRF Special Report No. 3: INL CRMO XRF Calibration Methods for the Analysis of Ceramics and Brick

This report details the analytical methods used by the Idaho National Laboratory Cultural Resource Management Office to characterize ceramic and brick artifacts using X-ray fluorescence spectrometry. More specifically, this report provides details on instrumentation, analysis times, and matrix-specific calibration protocols for ceramic materials. Calibration curves were developed to adjust raw instrumental output for 13 elements using a suite of reference standards made from historic brick borrowed from the Yale Peabody Museum. Calibration curves were validated by plotting predicted values against published reference values for the calibration set as well as a certified soil reference standard (SRM 2711a).

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

INL Site ARG-US Implementation – FY22 Activities and FY23 Plans

The Packaging Certification and Life Cycle Management program at Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) developed a suite of monitoring systems collectively referred to here as ARG-US. ARG-US provides necessary data for nuclear facility and system operation and maintenance, and has been previously demonstrated in hot cells, radioactive material (RAM) storage areas, and RAM shipment trucks. It has also been installed directly on RAM storage and shipment containers. ARG-US offers some unique advantages over other commercially available systems by using wireless data connections, battery power supplies, and customizable monitoring methods. Idaho National Laboratory (INL) has been tasked with investigating applications for ARG-US at INL site facilities, which are operated by several different contractors. The initial investigation scope centered on CPP-603 Irradiated Fuel Storage Facility in relation to the upcoming Department of Energy (DOE) Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Packaging Demonstration. The investigation has been led by the Used Fuel Management Department in INL’s Nuclear Science and Technology (NS&T) directorate. This investigation is expected to recommend INL site processes or facilities in which to implement ARG-US systems. INL has engaged local site technical and oversight representatives, security, nuclear safeguards, and program management personnel to identify good candidates for ARG-US test implementations. INL has identified the following high-level goals for any INL site implementation of ARG-US: provide unique testing environments, prompt development of new monitoring methods/techniques for the ARG-US suite, and acquire useful monitoring for the user facility. As a result, INL suggests three program areas for further investigation: CPP-603 Fuel Handling Cave (FHC), legacy mixed waste storage systems at Idaho Nuclear Technology & Engineering Center (INTEC) known as the “Tank Farm,” and periodic and emergency environmental monitoring. This progress report relates activities undertaken in this investigation, describes the preliminary areas of interest for limited scope ARG-US testing or implementation, and relays expected actions for completing the task scope. This report offers an opportunity to the program sponsor, technical leads at ANL, and INL site representatives to give feedback on the initial assessment and make recommendations on the forthcoming activities.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Updated Application of Frequency of Detection Methods for the INL Site Ambient Air Monitoring Network

This report presents a quantitative assessment of the current INL Site air monitoring network using frequency of detection (FD) methods. The first assessment of the INL network was performed in 2015 and made recommendations for improving the network. As a result of changes made in response to the recommendations and the addition of new source locations, the network was modified and reassessed in 2017. Since 2017, administration of the air sampling program has been consolidated under one contractor, which resulted in additional changes to the network (sampler numbers and locations) and changes in radionuclide detection levels. As a result of these changes and others, an updated assessment of the INL Site ambient air monitoring network was performed. The same two exposure scenarios used in previous assessments were used for this assessment: a resident scenario and a shepherd/rancher scenario. The resident was assumed to be continuously present at their residence/business/farm operation outside the INL Site boundary while the shepherd/rancher was assumed to be present 24-hours at the nearest INL grazing allotment boundary in each of the 22.5-degree sectors along the sector centerline from each source. Updates to both the resident and shepherd/rancher receptor locations were included. Other changes include updates to flow rates for stack sources, expansion of the list of important radionuclides based on the most recent National Emission Standards for Hazardous Pollutants (NESHAPs) analysis, and updated dose coefficients. The assessment was conducted to determine whether the current INL monitoring network is capable of detecting releases of important radionuclides from INL Site sources that have the potential to exceed a conservative dose threshold for the two exposure scenarios. The assessment revealed that for the resident scenario, the current network meets the desired performance objective (FD = 95%) for all radionuclides and sources except for Cl-36 from the TRA-770 stack (94.4%). For the shepherd/rancher scenario, the FD performance objective is met for all radionuclides and sources except tritium from MFC-774 and TAN 679 (91% for both). An investigation of reported emissions for the past three years revealed that Cl 36 is not emitted from TRA-770, and routine tritium emissions from MFC-774 and TAN-679 are very small and the sources are likely incapable of emitting enough tritium to cause a release that should be detectable by the monitoring network. This assessment is based on a conservative dose threshold. This coupled with fact that the FD for Cl 36 is only slightly less than the performance objective and Cl-36 is not emitted from TRA-770, modifying the network (i.e. adding another sampler, increasing sampler flow rate, moving samplers) to meet the 95% performance objective for this radionuclide/source/receptor scenario is not warranted. Similarly, because tritium emissions from MFC-774 and TAN-679 are very small and these two sources are likely incapable of causing a dose due to tritium release that should be detectable by the network, modifications to increase tritium detection for these sources is also unwarranted at this time. However, if it is required to meet the performance objective for tritium for all sources and receptor scenarios, additional analysis determined the FD could be raised from 91% to > 99% for both sources by adding two tritium samplers to the network.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

INL High-Performance and Sustainable Building Strategy

High-performance buildings are reliable, cost effective, and sustainable structures that minimize energy and water use, reduce solid waste and pollutant emissions, and limit the depletion of natural resources. High-performance buildings also provide a thermally and visually comfortable working environment that increases productivity for building occupants. As Idaho National Laboratory (INL) is the nation’s premier nuclear energy research laboratory, the physical infrastructure requires continual updating and repurposing to help accomplish that mission. INL’s infrastructure must incorporate high-performance sustainable design features to be fiscally responsible and reflect an image of innovation to the public and prospective employees. INL is a large consumer of energy with annual energy costs exceeding $16M. This High-Performance and Sustainable Building Strategy will help engineering and construction project teams design sustainable facilities, reduce life cycle operating costs, and support the INL net-zero plan while providing INL employees with a safe and healthy working environment. With these goals in mind, the recommendations described in this document are intended to form INL’s foundation for sustainable and high-performance building standards. This strategy incorporates the latest federal and Department of Energy (DOE) orders and directives, including DOE Order 436.1A, “Departmental Sustainability,” the DOE Sustainability Plan (SP), the INL Site Sustainability Plan (SSP), and Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). This document identifies the requirements of the “Guiding Principles for Sustainable Federal Buildings” (Guiding Principles) and briefly highlights the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Gold certification. LEED Gold certification can be used to meet many of the requirements of the Guiding Principles.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

INL and Environmental Justice

INL and Environmental Justice PPT presentation. INL’s objectives are to create a lab wide culture that supports environmental justice efforts. INL will create programs and projects that exemplify the lab’s commitment to environmental and energy justice, in the following focus areas: • Integrate environmental justice into INL’s program planning to create opportunities to positively impact underserved and under resourced communities • Create internal awareness programs • Create external awareness programs • Highlight flagship projects that demonstrate INL’s environmental justice efforts

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Briefing Human Reliability Analysis Tasks in the KINS-INL Project

Under the SPP with Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety (KINS) (SPP No. 24SP91), INL research team has a plan to visit KINS on December 3, 2024 and have a project meeting with KINS in-person. INL researchers will give this presentation about what we have done on Task 2 under the contract as below. Task 2: Support KINS in the treatment of human actions. INL efforts consist of: Provide technical expertise on recovery analysis based on INL’s methods or recent research Provide technical expertise on dependency analysis based on INL’s methods or recent research Provide technical expertise on analyzing the effects of HSI degradation on operator actions

99 - GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Assessment of Potential Dose and Environmental Impacts from Proposed Testing at the INL Radiological Response Training Range

This assessment uses screening-level models to calculate potential environmental impacts from proposed tests at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Radiological Response Training Range (RRTR) site. Proposed tests could be conducted using 11 different radioactive material types that include K2O, LaBr3, KBr, Cu, Zr, F, Ga, Ga2O3, NaNO2, Ga-68, and Tc-99m. The tests could potentially release radioactive material to the atmosphere and radionuclides and other contaminants to the soil, which could leach into the unsaturated zone and migrate to the aquifer. Atmospheric transport of radionuclides to potential human receptors and time-integrated air concentrations were calculated with a Gaussian plume model and three years of hourly meteorological data. Potential surface-soil impacts were calculated with the computer program mixing-cell model (MCM). Groundwater impacts were calculated with the computer programs MCM and GWSCREEN. Radiological doses from potential atmospheric releases were calculated for public receptors off the INL Site and for workers at nearby INL facilities. Results were compared to regulatory dose limits. Maximum potential groundwater concentrations were estimated in the aquifer below the NSTR site and compared to drinking water standards or risk-based screening levels for resident tap water. Soil concentrations were calculated and compared to risk-based screening levels for workers and potential future residents. All impacts were estimated assuming 12 tests are conducted annually using all 11 material types for a period of 15 years. This document provides the resources to enable a subject matter expert in the field of environmental assessments to replicate the modeling and calculations. The methodology and parameters are presented in the text. All electronic files, including computer-code input, output, executable files, batch files, scripts, and spreadsheet files are contained in a zip file that can be accessed by selecting “Additional Information” (select Native File) in the INL Electronic Document Management System (EDMS). It is highly unlikely the test scenarios evaluated in this ECAR will adversely impact human health based on comparisons of calculated dose and concentration against regulatory standards and risk-based screening levels. Conservative estimates of dose to workers and the public from atmospheric transport of possible radionuclide releases are far below federal radiation protection standards. Conservative estimates of potential contaminant concentrations in groundwater are less than federal drinking water standards or screening levels. Predicted radionuclide concentrations in surface soils are below risk-based screening levels, except for Ge-68 (material Ga-68) for the worker. The Ge-68 soil concentration can be made less than the worker PRG, if the number of annual tests using Ga-68 is reduced from 12 to 6. However, the sum of ratios still exceeds one because of the high K-40 ratio. If the EF of the worker (number of days the worker is in the contaminated testing area) is reduced from 225 days/yr (default value for full time worker) to 112 days/yr, the Ge-68 ratio is less than one and the sum of ratios is less than one. Actual radiation doses and groundwater and surface-soil concentrations are likely to be much less than those calculated because of the conservative assumptions and parameters employed in the modeling. For example, atmospheric-transport calculations assume the entire inventory of each material type is readily released to the atmosphere and no plume deposition, depletion, or radioactive decay occurs during transport. The calculations also assume the same meteorological conditions (e.g., wind velocity, wind direction, stability class) that produce the maximum 95th percentile concentration (i.e., concentration representing the 95th percentile of a distribution of concentrations derived from 3 years of hourly meteorological data) at each receptor location are the same for all 12 tests during the year, and each receptor is assumed to be present during all 12 tests. The surface-soil assessment assumes the entire inventory of each test is deposited in the top 5 cm of soil. No atmospheric dispersal is assumed, and the radionuclides are subject only to leaching and radioactive decay. The groundwater-pathway modeling is conservative in that it is one-dimensional in the unsaturated zone (no lateral spreading/dilution) and assumes the entire inventory of contaminants infiltrates into the ground at the same location for every test. This is especially conservative for particulate radionuclides because they would have to dissolve or corrode first and some would be dispersed into the atmosphere. The groundwater receptor is also assumed to consume water directly from a hypothetical well positioned in the location of maximum concentration. In addition, conservative degradation rates were used, and volatilization was not considered for the nonradioactive chemical

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Assessment of Potential Dose and Environmental Impacts from Proposed Testing at the INL National Security Test Range

This assessment uses screening-level models to calculate potential environmental impacts from proposed tests at two locations at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) National Security Test Range (NSTR) site. Proposed tests could be conducted using 11 different radioactive material types that include K 2 O, LaBr 3 , KBr, Cu, Zr, F, Ga, Ga 2 O 3 , NaNO 2 , Ga-68, and Tc-99m. The tests could potentially release radioactive material to the atmosphere and radionuclides and other contaminants to the soil, which could leach into the unsaturated zone and migrate to the aquifer. Atmospheric transport of radionuclides to potential human receptors and time-integrated air concentrations were calculated with a Gaussian plume model and three years of hourly meteorological data. Potential surface-soil impacts were calculated with the computer program mixing-cell model (MCM). Groundwater impacts were calculated with the computer programs MCM and GWSCREEN. Radiological doses from potential atmospheric releases were calculated for public receptors off the INL Site and for workers at nearby INL facilities. Results were compared to regulatory dose limits. Maximum potential groundwater concentrations were estimated in the aquifer below the NSTR site and compared to drinking water standards or risk-based screening levels for resident tap water. Soil concentrations were calculated and compared to risk-based screening levels for workers and potential future residents. All impacts were estimated based on the assumption that 12 tests are conducted annually using all 11 material types for 15 years. This document provides the resources to enable a subject matter expert in the field of environmental assessments to replicate the modeling and calculations. The methodology and parameters are presented in the text. All electronic files, including computer-code input, output, executable files, batch files, scripts, and spreadsheet files, are contained in a zip file that can be accessed by selecting “Additional Information” (select Native File) in the INL Electronic Document Management System (EDMS). It is highly unlikely the test scenarios evaluated in this ECAR will adversely impact human health based on comparisons of calculated dose and concentration against regulatory standards and risk-based screening levels. Conservative estimates of dose to workers and the public from atmospheric transport of possible radionuclide releases are far below federal radiation protection standards. Conservative estimates of potential contaminant concentrations in groundwater are less than federal drinking water standards or screening levels. Predicted radionuclide concentrations in surface soils are below risk-based screening levels, except for Ge-68 (material Ga-68) for the worker. The Ge-68 soil concentration can be made less than the worker PRG, if the number of annual tests using Ga-68 is reduced from 12 to 6. However, the sum of ratios still exceeds one because of the high K-40 ratio. If the EF of the worker (number of days the worker is in the contaminated testing area) is reduced from 225 days/yr (default value for full time worker) to 112 days/yr, the Ge-68 ratio is less than one and the sum of ratios is less than one. Actual radiation doses and groundwater and surface-soil concentrations are likely to be much less than those calculated because of the conservative assumptions and parameters employed in the modeling. For example, atmospheric-transport calculations assume the entire inventory of each material type is readily released to the atmosphere and no plume deposition, depletion, or radioactive decay occurs during transport. The calculations also assume the same meteorological conditions (e.g., wind velocity, wind direction, stability class) that produce the maximum 95th percentile concentration (i.e., concentration representing the 95th percentile of a distribution of concentrations derived from 3 years of hourly meteorological data) at each receptor location are the same for all 12 tests during the year, and each receptor is assumed to be present during all 12 tests. The surface-soil assessment assumes the entire inventory of each test is deposited in the top 5 cm of soil. No atmospheric dispersal is assumed, and the radionuclides are subject only to leaching and radioactive decay. The groundwater-pathway modeling is conservative in that it is one-dimensional in the unsaturated zone (no lateral spreading/dilution) and assumes the entire inventory of contaminants infiltrates into the ground at the same location for every test. This is especially conservative for particulate radionuclides because they would have to dissolve or corrode first and some would be dispersed into the atmosphere. The groundwater receptor is also assumed to consume water directly from a hypothetical well positioned in the location of maximum concentration. In addition, conservative degradation rates were used, and volatilization was not considered for the nonradradioactive chemicals modeled. And finally, the calculations assume all 12 tests will be performed at the same place at both locations, and all 11 radioactive material types will be used for each test. This is conservative because it is anticipated that no more than two material types will be used per test.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Assessment of Potential Dose and Environmental Impacts from Proposed Testing at the INL Radiological Response Training Range

This assessment uses screening level models to calculate potential environmental impacts from proposed tests at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Radiological Response Training Range (RRTR) site. Proposed tests could be conducted using 11 different radioactive material types that include K 2 O, LaBr 3 , KBr, Cu, Zr, F, Ga, Ga 2 O 3 , NaNO 2 , Ga-68, and Tc-99m. The tests could potentially release radioactive material to the atmosphere and radionuclides and other contaminants to the soil, which could leach into the unsaturated zone and migrate to the aquifer. Atmospheric transport of radionuclides to potential human receptors and time-integrated air concentrations were calculated with a Gaussian plume model and three years of hourly meteorological data. Potential surface-soil impacts were calculated with the computer program Mixing-Cell Model (MCM). Groundwater impacts were calculated with the computer programs MCM and GWSCREEN. Radiological doses from potential atmospheric releases were calculated for public receptors off the INL Site and for workers at nearby INL facilities. Results were compared to regulatory dose limits. Maximum potential groundwater concentrations were estimated in the aquifer below the NSTR site and compared to drinking water standards or risk-based screening levels for resident tap water. Soil concentrations were calculated and compared to risk-based screening levels for workers and potential future residents. All impacts were estimated based on the assumption that 12 tests are conducted annually using all 11 material types for a period of 15 years. This document provides the resources to enable a subject matter expert in the field of environmental assessments to replicate the modeling and calculations. The methodology and parameters are presented in the text. All electronic files, including computer code input, output, executable files, batch files, scripts, and spreadsheet files are contained in a zip file that can be accessed by selecting “Additional Information” (select Native File) in the INL Electronic Document Management System (EDMS).

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Assessment of Potential Dose and Environmental Impacts from Proposed Testing at the INL National Security Test Range

This assessment uses screening level models to calculate potential environmental impacts from proposed tests at two locations at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) National Security Test Range (NSTR) site. Proposed tests could be conducted using 11 different radioactive material types that include K 2 O, LaBr 3 , KBr, Cu, Zr, F, Ga, Ga 2 O 3 , NaNO 2 , Ga-68, and Tc-99m. The tests could potentially release radioactive material to the atmosphere and radionuclides and other contaminants to the soil, which could leach into the unsaturated zone and migrate to the aquifer. Atmospheric transport of radionuclides to potential human receptors and time-integrated air concentrations were calculated with a Gaussian plume model and three years of hourly meteorological data. Potential surface soil impacts were calculated with the computer program Mixing-Cell Model (MCM). Groundwater impacts were calculated with the computer programs MCM and GWSCREEN. Radiological doses from potential atmospheric releases were calculated for public receptors off the INL Site and for workers at nearby INL facilities. Results were compared to regulatory dose limits. Maximum potential groundwater concentrations were estimated in the aquifer below the NSTR site and compared to drinking water standards or risk-based screening levels for resident tap water. Soil concentrations were calculated and compared to risk-based screening levels for workers and potential future residents. All impacts were estimated based on the assumption that 12 tests are conducted annually using all 11 material types for 15 years. This document provides the resources to enable a subject matter expert in the field of environmental assessments to replicate the modeling and calculations. The methodology and parameters are presented in the text. All electronic files, including computer code input, output, executable files, batch files, scripts, and spreadsheet files, are contained in a zip file that can be accessed by selecting “Additional Information” (select Native File) in the INL Electronic Document Management System (EDMS).

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Pu-238 Production Progress at INL From December 2022 to December 2023

Idaho National Laboratory (INL) has an ongoing effort to produce Pu-238 for NASA deep space missions. Recent work at INL has consisted of irradiation of Pu 238 production targets in the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR), generating more than an estimated 400 grams of Pu-238 heat source material between March and October 2023. Additionally, INL began qualifying Pu-238 production targets with a higher loading of Np-237 to further increase the production of Pu-238 production in later years. INL has also updated the analysis as a result of operational changes at ATR. One instance was updating the analysis to enable a single Pu-238 production target to be run in ATR’s South Flux Trap (SFT), rather than the previous seven production targets, to make use of a spare target from a discontinued design. Higher lobe powers in ATR were also analyzed due to potential changes in planned lobe powers.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

Update of Receptor Locations for INL National Emissions Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) Assessments

This report documents the selection of updated public receptor locations for use in conducting regulatory assessments of radioactive air emissions for Idaho National Laboratory (INL) facilities. The basis for this receptor location analysis is found in 40 CFR 61 Subpart H, “National Emissions Standards for Emissions of Radionuclide Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities,” where the requirements for identifying National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) receptor locations are outlined. Receptor locations (residences, schools, businesses, or farm operations) were identified using high-resolution satellite imagery. This assessment identified 31 unique receptor locations for all INL Site facilities, and 30 receptor locations for INL in-town facilities that have the potential to emit radioactive materials. Identification of receptors for each in-town facility is new to this report.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

2022 INL Site Report

Visualization is key to the work we do at Idaho National Laboratory (INL). We support research computing, nuclear science, and educational outreach using both traditional and emerging visualization tools and technologies. In this presentation, we will introduce and summarize INL and its mission, describe some of the visualization resources INL provides, and present example applications from recent years.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

INL Contributions to Draft HTTF Benchmark Specifications

The High-Temperature Test Facility (HTTF) is an integral effects thermal hydraulics test facility at Oregon State University designed as a 1/4 length scale model of the Modular High-Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor 350 MW core (mHTGR-350). In the spring and summer of 2019, several experiments were conducted at HTTF providing a valuable source of gas-cooled reactor thermal hydraulics data. Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Oregon State University, Argonne National Laboratory, and Canadian Nuclear Laboratories have partnered to use this experimental data to develop a gas-cooled reactor thermal hydraulics benchmark led by INL under the auspices of the Advanced Reactor Technologies (ART) program. This report provides some context on the benchmark, HTTF, and previous Reactor Excursions and Leak Analysis Program (RELAP)5-3D modeling of HTTF. It also provides a draft of the benchmark specifications for the Depressurized Conduction Cooldown problem, which is the INL-led benchmark problem.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

2025 INL Site Report

Visualization is key to the work we do at Idaho National Laboratory (INL). We support research computing, nuclear science, and educational outreach using both traditional and emerging visualization tools and technologies. In this presentation, we will introduce and summarize INL and its mission, describe some of the visualization resources INL provides, and present example applications from recent years.

Visualization↗

2024 INL Site Report

Visualization is key to the work we do at Idaho National Laboratory (INL). We support research computing, nuclear science, and educational outreach using both traditional and emerging visualization tools and technologies. In this presentation, we will introduce and summarize INL and its mission, describe some of the visualization resources INL provides, and present example applications from recent years.

97 - MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Cross-Code Verification of Neutronics Analysis Tools at INL Applied for 238 Pu Production in the Advanced Test Reactor

Here, analyses are completed for experiments prior to experiment irradiation in the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) at Idaho National Laboratory (INL). Various codes are used to qualify all experiments planned for insertion in the reactor, thereby ensuring that all safety and programmatic requirements are satisfied preirradiation. Among the common experiment analysis tools at INL are MCNP5 coupled to ORIGEN2 (MOPY) and MC21. MOPY uses MCNP5 for transport calculations along with calculations for fluxes and select reaction rates, and then ORIGEN2 handles the step-by-step and postirradiation depletion. MC21 handles all in-reactor transport and step-by-step, during-irradiation, depletion calculations, and then ORIGEN (SCALE 6.2.3) is used for decay and dose calculations postirradiation. The MOPY results, along with those obtained via two variations of the MC21 model, were compared in terms of 238 Pu production in the ATR’s H10 position. For the MOPY model, the MC21 model utilizing the HELIOS-based fission product (FP) library, and the MC21 model utilizing the expanded 1300 FP library, the during-cycle irradiation in-core heating results were sufficiently equivalent; however, the MOPY model and the MC21 model with the HELIOS library showed some differences relating to the respective FP libraries. Ultimately, the MC21 model with a 1300 FP library produced the most consistent results throughout the cycle, whereas the MC21 model that utilized the (smaller) HELIOS library was able to handle during-irradiation analysis but lacked certain short-lived FPs that significantly contributed to the total decay heat at shutdown. MOPY, on the other hand, was found to overpredict fission gas production, as a result of limitations in the ORIGEN2 code.

ATR↗