SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
Radiological control procedures for transportation, handling, and storage of SNAP 27 thermoelectric generator in radiological emergencies
This report documents the findings of an assessment of the Turbo FRMAC© software’s ability to implement International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) guidance for calculating operational intervention levels (OIL) for nuclear and radiological emergencies. This assessment is a continuation of previous work that considered IAEA OIL1 and OIL2 for evacuation and relocation protective actions. The IAEA OIL and U.S. Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center (FRMAC) derived response and intervention level methodologies were compared for ingestion and skin and thyroid monitoring pathways. This comparison revealed significant differences in IAEA versus FRMAC handling of these pathways, which precluded an assessment of Turbo FRMAC’s ability to implement the IAEA approach.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Objectives: 1) List the revised initial response and supplemental actions while responding to a major injury inside of a radiological area; 2) List the initial response and supplemental actions while responding to a minor injury inside of a radiological area; 3) List the initial response and supplemental actions for responding to a Continuous Air Monitoring (CAM) alarm; 4) List the initial response and supplemental actions for responding to a radioactive spill; 5) List the initial response and supplemental actions of responding to an Area Radiation Monitor (ARM) alarm; 6) List the initial response and supplemental actions of an Electronic Personal Dosimeter (EPD) dose and dose rate alarm; 7) List the initial response and supplemental actions of responding to a Stationary Contamination Monitor (SCM) alarm; 8) Identify the methods to perform personnel decontamination.
This is a presentation that will be given at the International Conference on the Development of Preparedness for National and International Emergency Response (EPR2021), 11–15 October 2021, in Vienna, Austria.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
During a radiological emergency, swift determination of the extent and intensity of the radiological materials that have been released to the environment are important for decision makers to correctly assess the hazards and recommend protective actions. In a radiological emergency, natural background counts need to be subtracted from the total activity for the actual amount of activity present to be assessed. This study provides documented survey results of the soils in and around the INL using instrumentation utilized by field monitoring teams that support the INL. Over three hundred alpha background counts were taken. The average alpha background count rate on portable instruments in use by field monitoring teams is 5 counts per minute and the decision level for activity that should be considered as having activity greater than background is 10 counts per minute. It was also shown that rain or snow can increase the background and its effects are difficult to quantify.
Presentation summarizing DOE Consequence Management assets available to support state, local, territorial, and tribal partners during a radiological emergency. This presentation will be given at various state engagements, including training and outreach for ingestion pathway exercises, national and regional CM exercises, and trainings for radiological emergency preparedness events as requested.
Studies indicate that early identification of persons involved in and receiving high doses of radiation in accidents is key to providing life-saving medical treatment. Although the risk of criticality accidents is low the potential impact to workers is significant. For facilities that employ large numbers of workers a key element in the response to a radiological emergency is identifying personnel that received significant, and potentially harmful, doses. Also important is having the ability to screen large numbers of workers to identify persons that did not receive significant exposure so as to reduce the impact on emergency response efforts. At the Y-12 National Security Complex the focus on criticality accident response is the rapid triage of personnel in order to identify persons exposed to large radiation doses and to prioritize those persons receiving the highest exposures. Once identified personnel are transported to local medical facilities including the Radiation Emergency Assistance Center/Training Site (REAC/TS) for medical evaluation and treatment. The Y-12 external dosimetry program utilizes a number of techniques to identify and prioritize workers and these methods were evaluated at a criticality dosimetry intercomparison exercise. Finally, the methods used were shown to perform as intended and other sites may consider incorporating these methods into their accident dosimetry response procedures.
The objective of this presentation is to familiarize participants with the different types of radiation detection systems and their practical applications for radiological emergency response. The specific goals are for participants to: (1) Understand the Three Step Process for Radiological Response of (i) Search and/or Survey, (ii) Radioisotope Identification, and (iii) Source Recovery, (2) Recognize the types of radiation detection equipment and their applications, and (3) View examples of common radiation detection instrumentation with operational videos.
At a fundamental level, nuclear facility safety is built upon the concept of defense-in-depth (DID), which entails multiple, independent layers of protection for public health and safety. Within the DID structure, emergency preparedness (EP) is the last layer of defense and provides reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a radiological emergency. Over several decades, the EP regulatory framework has evolved in response to lessons learned from actual events, experience with maintaining and testing EP capabilities, and advances in a wide range of technologies. Furthering this evolution, recent developments in risk-informed performance-based (RIPB) design and licensing approaches provide an opportunity to leverage insights regarding the attributes of the specific facility and site to inform EP.
The objective of this presentation is for participants to understand the process for interdicting and adjudicating radiation alarms and review operational scenarios for radiological emergency response best practices. The specific goal is for participants to: (1) Become familiar with the Primary and Secondary Inspection process for alarm interdiction, investigation, and adjudication, (2) Gain knowledge of common operational scenarios where alarm interdiction, investigation and adjudication are conducted as best practices, and (3) Review several scenarios that could be encountered as part of the Nuclear Security measures for an MPE.
In the mid-1970s, American civil defense authorities became increasingly concerned with the potential threat of fission reactor accidents. Research from the Defense Civil Preparedness Agency began to be aimed not just at the ever-present threat of nuclear warfare, but also peacetime emergencies as part of a "dual use" philosophy. The Brookhaven National Laboratory received funding to create a prototype radioiodine air sampling system, with multiple publications detailing the creation of the air sampler itself and a special CD V-700 survey meter that accompanied it. In late March 1979, the system found its first operational employment at the reactor accident at Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania. Despite successful use and further study, the BNL Air Sampler was not widely fielded by the federal government. However, lessons learned from its employment and development may be applicable to contemporary radiological emergency response.
The IAEA’s model testing programmes have included a series of Working Groups concerned with modelling radioactive contamination in urban environments. These have included the Urban Working Group of Validation of Environmental Model Predictions (1988–1994), the Urban Remediation Working Group of Environmental Modelling for Radiation Safety (EMRAS) (2003–2007), the Urban Areas Working Group of EMRAS II (2009–2011), the Urban Environments Working Group of (Modelling and Data for Radiological Impact Assessments) MODARIA I (2013–2015), and most recently, the Urban Exposures Working Group of MODARIA II (2016–2019). The overarching objective of these Working Groups has been to test and improve the capabilities of computer models used to assess radioactive contamination in urban environments, including dispersion and deposition processes, short-term and long-term redistribution of contaminants following deposition events, and the effectiveness of various countermeasures and other protective actions, including remedial actions, in reducing contamination levels, human exposures, and doses to humans. This paper describes the exercises conducted during the MODARIA I and MODARIA II programmes. These exercises have included short-range and mid-range atmospheric dispersion exercises based on data from field tests or tracer studies, hypothetical urban dispersion exercises, and an exercise based on data collected after the Fukushima Daiichi accident. We report improvement of model capabilities will lead to improvements in assessing various contamination scenarios (real or hypothetical), and in turn, to improved decision-making and communication with the public following a nuclear or radiological emergency.
In late 2004, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) initiated a project to analyze the relative efficacy of alternative protective action strategies in reducing consequences to the public from a spectrum of nuclear power plant core melt accidents. The study is documented in NUREG/CR-6953, “Review of NUREG-0654, Supplement 3, ‘Criteria for Protective Action Recommendations for Severe Accidents,’” Volumes 1, 2, and 3. The Protective Action Recommendations (PAR) study provided a technical basis for enhancing the protective action guidance contained in Supplement 3, “Guidance for Protective Action Strategies,” to NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1, “Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants, ” dated November 2011. In the time since, a number of important changes and additions have been made to the MACCS code suite, the nuclear accident consequence analysis code used to perform the study. The purpose of this analysis is to determine whether the MACCS results used in the PAR study would be different given recent changes to the MACCS code suite and input parameter guidance. Updated parameters that were analyzed include cohorts, keyhole evacuation, shielding and exposure parameters, compass sector resolution, and a range of source terms from rapidly progressing accidents. Results indicate that using updated modeling assumptions and capabilities may lead to a decrease in predicted health consequences for those within the emergency planning zone compared to the original PAR study.
To be presented April 5 at the National Radiological Emergency Preparedness Conference: https://www.nationalrep.org/ - an annual conference of federal, state, utility and other stakeholders who plan and prepare for nuclear power plant emergencies. Co-author/presenter is Brennen Brunner (New Hampshire Dept of Public Health).
Radiological emergencies that result in the dispersion of radioactive materials to the environment require the deployment of field monitoring teams to determine the quantity and location of the dispersed radioactive material. This information is utilized by the emergency operations center to aid in determining the appropriate protective action recommendations. The background alpha emission rates from normal environmental surfaces of soil, concrete and asphalt as measured by portable instrumentation used by field monitoring teams are not well documented. Idaho National Laboratory conducted a study of the alpha radiation background levels of the environmental surfaces in eastern Idaho to determine the normal background rates. Results for normal dry surfaces and those wetted by precipitation were measured and reported.
Accurate measurement of exposure rate from gamma-ray spectral data remains a critical challenge during radiological emergency response operations. Conventional methods rely on pre-defined static conversion factors derived from fixed geometries and isotopic compositions, which often fail to capture real-world environmental variability. This study presents a generalized approach as a "next-step" for converting gamma-ray spectral data into exposure rate using polynomial response models. The method introduces a flexible weighting scheme based on the in-situ detector response to distributed sources, enabling a pathway towards improved correspondence between measured spectra and "ground-truth" exposure rates. Experimental data from sodium iodide NaI(Tl) detectors were used to validate the approach as, at least equivalent to the current count-to-exposure method employed in emergency response CONOPS. Results show that the polynomial weighting model is sufficiently equal to the count-to-exposure method and may help improve accuracy given its adaptability to real-world conditions.