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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

What is involved in radiation protection at accelerator facilities?

Radiation protection for accelerator facilities involves a range of actions to operate the facility within safe boundaries (often called an accelerator safety envelope) and it starts from the very early stage of facility development. Each facility will establish fundamental safety principles, requirements, and measures to control the radiation exposure to people and the release of radioactive material to the environment.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Reevaluation of Radiation-Protection Standards for Workers and the Public Based on Current Scientific Evidence

President Trump’s recent executive orders to “Usher in a Nuclear Renaissance,” coupled with the global pledge to triple nuclear energy capacity by 2050, underscore nuclear energy’s importance to national security and economic prosperity. This renewed interest has prompted efforts to spur nuclear-energy deployment, including assessing factors impeding it. One issue that has previously been identified as adding to the cost of nuclear energy is excessively conservative requirements, including those related to radiation protection. This technical review, therefore, examines current radiation-protection standards that were established decades ago when more limited data were available and nuclear-energy expansion was not a national priority. The review focuses on scientific evidence regarding the health effects of ionizing radiation at annual doses of 10,000 mrem or less. The review evaluates epidemiological studies, radiobiological research, and positions of relevant professional organizations to assess whether such doses result in discernable or observable increases in negative health outcomes. The review also surveys the literature related to economic and practical implications of current radiation-protection standards and practices. Based on this assessment, we propose maintaining an annual occupational whole-body dose limit of 5,000 mrem/yr and eliminating all “as low as reasonably achievable” requirements and limits below this threshold. This change could potentially reduce radiation-protection costs by millions of dollars annually for each reactor, as well as decrease the overall costs and correct misconceptions about the risks associated with all nuclear technologies. The evidence further supports future consideration of a 10,000 mrem/yr limit that would maintain appropriate safety margins while further reducing protection costs. Similarly, given the data and that the average annual radiation dose per person in the U.S. is 620 mrem, we believe the public dose limits of 100 mrem/yr are unnecessarily restrictive; increasing to 500 mrem/yr would maintain substantial safety margins—a factor of 10 below the occupational limit—while reducing regulatory burdens and associated bureaucracy. While we acknowledge ongoing scientific debate and encourage continued research on the health effects of ionizing radiation, our review indicates current frameworks are overly conservative. These overly stringent limits not only impose unnecessary economic burdens without corresponding health benefits but also divert safety focus and resources from more important considerations. Although this study was motivated by nuclear-power considerations, reforms to radiation-protection requirements have significant positive implications for other areas, such as nuclear medical applications, environmental remediation, nuclear-waste management and disposal, and industrial applications of nuclear technologies.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2019

EM Program Expectations on Implementation of DOE O 458: Radiation Protection of Public/Environment - 19553

DOE Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and Environment, was issued in 2011. DOE sites were given 18 months to implement. The revised Order promulgates requirements for property clearance actions and independent verification. DOE Order 458.1 allows for preapproved authorized limits for the clearance of property. However, when property with the potential to contain residual radioactive material does not meet preapproved authorized limits, an authorized limits package must be developed. The Order contains a range of requirements for demonstrating with reasonable assurance that dose constraints are met for any actual or likely future use of the property to be released. EM has developed a draft guidance document that provides the elements of an authorized limits package. These elements are used to review all authorized limits packages that are submitted to EM. Expected elements include property description and process knowledge documentation, current and likely future use, the conceptual site model, dose modeling methodologies, specific authorized limits, dose- or concentration-based constraints, collective dose estimate to the potentially exposed population, stakeholder communications, description of the As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) analysis, implementation plan, evaluation of difficult to assess surfaces, and independent verification plan. The draft guidance document also provides further explanation of the desired elements of an independent verification (IV) plan. An IV plan should describe the planning phase, implementation phase, assessment phase, and decision phase of an activity. The planning phase includes scope and cost, concurrent with cleanup contractor procurement, and review and approval of site radiological survey clearance program and IV program plans. The implementation phase assures sufficient collection of data and adjustment can be made as necessary. During the assessment phase, data and reports are reviewed, and coordination between the clean-up contractor and IV personnel occurs. A decision of whether or not the clearance actions need to be altered occurs during the decision phase. IV certification that the clearance action is complete also occurs during the decision phase. Issuance of the final guidance document is meant to improve the consultation process and minimize iterative interactions with EM. Standardizing and formalizing property clearance and IV actions also helps assure that cleanup actions are transparent and sustainable for future scrutiny. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

A bespoke health risk assessment methodology for the radiation protection of astronauts

An alternative approach that is particularly suitable for the radiation health risk assessment (HRA) of astronauts is presented. The quantity, Radiation Attributed Decrease of Survival (RADS), representing the cumulative decrease in the unknown survival curve at a certain attained age, due to the radiation exposure at an earlier age, forms the basis for this alternative approach. Results are provided for all solid cancer plus leukemia incidence RADS from estimated doses from theoretical radiation exposures accumulated during long-term missions to the Moon or Mars. For example, it is shown that a 1000-day Mars exploration mission with a hypothetical mission effective dose of 1.07 Sv at typical astronaut ages around 40 years old, will result in the probability of surviving free of all types of solid cancer and leukemia until retirement age (65 years) being reduced by 4.2% (95% CI 3.2; 5.3) for males and 5.8% (95% CI 4.8; 7.0) for females. RADS dose–responses are given, for the outcomes for incidence of all solid cancer, leukemia, lung and female breast cancer. Results showing how RADS varies with age at exposure, attained age and other factors are also presented. The advantages of this alternative approach, over currently applied methodologies for the long-term radiation protection of astronauts after mission exposures, are presented with example calculations applicable to European astronaut occupational HRA. Some tentative suggestions for new types of occupational risk limits for space missions are given while acknowledging that the setting of astronaut radiation-related risk limits will ultimately be decided by the Space Agencies. Suggestions are provided for further work which builds on and extends this new HRA approach, e.g., by eventually including non-cancer effects and detailed space dosimetry.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Evolution of radiation protection for medical workers

Within a few months of discovery, X-rays were being used worldwide for diagnosis and within a year or two for therapy. It quickly became clear that while there were significant benefits, there were significant associated hazards, not only for the patients, but also for the operators of the equipment. Simple radiation protection measures were implemented within a decade or two and radiation protection for physicians and other operators has continued to evolve over the last century driven by cycles of widening uses, new technologies, realization of previously unidentified effects, development of recommendations and regulations, along with the rise of related societies and professional organizations. Today, the continue acceleration of medical radiation uses in diagnostic imaging and in therapeutic modalities not imagined at the turn of this century, such as positron emission tomography, calls for constant vigilance and flexibility to provide adequate protection for the growing numbers of medical radiation workers.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2024

National Council on Radiation Protection (NCRP) 2024 annual meeting: advanced and small modular nuclear power reactors

On 25–26 March 2023, the U.S. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) held its 2024 annual meeting in Bethesda, Maryland, USA. The NCRP dates from 1929, and this meeting celebrated the 60th anniversary of receiving a U.S. Congressional Charter. For this annual meeting the NCRP felt it was essential to provide a briefing about advanced and small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs). The Journal of Radiological Protection is delighted to publish the following synopsis of material presented at the U.S. NCRP meeting. This synopsis is divided into five sections. The first section provides an overview of the whole meeting together with summaries of two context setting overview papers. The following four sessions of this synopsis are specific to advanced and small modular nuclear power reactors. The meeting also included keynote presentations by three of NCRP annual award recipients. The meeting topical areas were Technology Overview and Critical Issues. The individual papers laid the groundwork to understanding reactor technologies, terminology, and the fundamental concepts and processes for electrical generation. The perspectives of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and states, through the Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors were provided. The papers included a discussion of diverse topics including potential emergency preparedness considerations, radiological survey requirements, an evaluation of the future of nuclear power, the economics of reactors (both large and small), and the critical issues identified by the recent National Academies of Sciences’ study on advanced reactors. Here, the summary papers were developed to briefly document the major points and concepts presented during the oral papers presented at the 2024 NCRP Annual Meeting. The meeting heralded the dawn of a new era for commercial nuclear power.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Radiation Protection [Slides]

Health Physics is a profession dedicated to the protection of human health and the environment from the dangers of radiation and radioactivity WHILE providing for its beneficial use.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2019

Los Alamos Radiation Protection Internal Dosimetry (Bioassay) Pamphlet

A radionuclide intake happens when a radioactive material enters the body through inhalation or ingestion or through a wound. Because the radiation produced by some materials (such as plutonium, americium, uranium, and tritium) cannot leave the body, we look for the materials themselves in urine samples.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2020

The Industry's Long-term, Yet Near-term, Issues: The Need for Radiation Protection Professionals - 20266

Since the discovery of X-rays and radioactivity, the civil use of nuclear technology has thrived for more than a half-century and has matured to be safer and more efficient. A balance between radiological and non-radiological knowledge and experience has been gained and retained through the years. Nevertheless, a slowly developing gap has emerged during the past few decades. National and international data show a declining trend in the existence of health physics programs and associated enrollment and training, which directly impact the pipeline of radiation professionals (i.e., educators, technicians, researchers, and regulators). This decline can be attributed to many factors including the lack of scientific inquisitiveness, declining funding, and the perception that existing protocols are sufficiently protective. Decommissioning and dismantling nuclear facilities is a complex and multi-phased process that generates large quantities of various levels of radioactive waste. With multiple facilities reaching their end of operational life, and others being shut down for economic reasons, the current pipeline for radiation protection experts cannot meet the future's need. Consequently, international organizations have proposed a variety of programs to transfer knowledge of radiation protection principles and practice. While many change-oriented efforts to counteract this trend aim to promote mobility, this is just a partial solution to the actual issue: long-term availability. This paper suggests multidisciplinary collaborations with modern technologies as a path forward to educate young professionals on the diversity of radiation-related applications to retain expert knowledge and foster innovation. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

Radiation Protective Coveralls for Fermilab’s SPOT Robot

Fermilab’s Accelerator Division recently purchased a SPOT robot from Boston Dynamics to be used to automatically measure the residual radiation in the beamline tunnels. Fermilab will work with the College of DuPage Fashion Studies Department to design and develop a prototype Tyvek-garments (coveralls and booties) that can be easily used and replicated by the Fermilab operators to shield the SPOT robot from collecting radioactive dust while deployed.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
DOE OSTI2019

Determining Beta Radiation Protection Factors for Eye Shields

The purpose of this experiment was to determine the efficacy of INL eye shields in attenuating beta radiation and was performed in response to changes in international and national standards and guidelines. Two methods were used to determine the protection factor for each eye shield: A Fixed Evaluation and a Dosimetry Evaluation. Both evaluations showed the PAPR hood as the least protective eye shield and the respirator face mask as having the highest protection factor. Seven of the eye shields challenge the INL protection factor criteria of 3 and will require further testing. Though the two methods varied widely, the results were consistent.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Dosimetry and cancer risk estimations for different radiation protection solutions at decommissioning a contaminated nuclear power plant site

Contaminated sediments originating from dredging activities in a nuclear power plant site were placed in a pond, which has to be taken into consideration during the future decommissioning process. The sediments have to be handled to free release the site. The radionuclides Co-60 and Cs-137 were identified and the activity concentrations (Bq/kg) were quantified in the range of 10–6000 and 5–50 Bq kg -1 , respectively. The absorbed dose rate to individuals of various ages and sex present at the site of the dry pond area was estimated. The radiological impact in terms of lifetime attributable risk (LAR) and effective dose were calculated. For a 30-year-old male exposed during one year without any action regarding the sediments in the dried out pond, the LAR was predicted to be 0.0027, which recalculated to effective dose corresponds to 7.6 mSv year -1 . The calculations show that countermeasures will be needed for the contaminated site.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗