SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
This report presents the environmental dose assessment methods and the estimated potential doses to the public from 2024 Savannah River Site (SRS) air and liquid radioactive releases. Also documented are potential doses from special-case exposure scenarios, such as the consumption of wildlife or goat milk.
Using the Langley Research Center galactic cosmic-ray transport computer code and the Computerized Anatomical Man model, initial estimates of interplanetary exposure of astronauts to galactic cosmic rays, during periods of solar minimum activity, are made for a realistic human geometry shielded by various thicknesses of spacecraft aluminum shielding. Conventional dose assessment in terms of total absorbed dose and dose equivalent is made for the skin, ocular lens, and bone marrow. Included in the analyses are separate evaluations of the contributions from the incident primary ions, from subsequent-generation fragmentation products, and from target fragments. In all cases considered, the equivalent sphere approximation yielded conservative overestimates for the actual organ exposures.
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), one of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science’s 10 national laboratories, provides innovative science and technology development in the areas of energy and the environment, fundamental and computational science, and national security. There are three DOE offices within the Richland area. Two are responsible for the Hanford Site, whereas the Pacific Northwest Site Office oversees PNNL. PNNL prepares an Annual Site Environmental Report to meet the requirements of DOE Order 231.1B, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting, and DOE Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment, thus assuring that the public is informed of any PNNL-Richland campus or PNNL-Sequim campus event that could adversely affect the health and safety of the public, site staff, or the environment. The report provides a synopsis of ongoing environmental management performance and compliance activities for operations that occur at the PNNL-Richland campus in Richland, Washington, and at the PNNL-Sequim campus near Sequim, Washington. It describes the location of and background for each facility; addresses compliance with applicable DOE, federal, state, and local regulations, and site-specific permits; documents environmental monitoring efforts and their status; presents potential radiation doses to staff and the public in the surrounding areas; and describes DOE-required data quality assurance methods used for data verification. The ASER report describes Compliance with Federal, State, and Local Laws and Regulations in 2023, Environmental Sustainability, Environmental monitoring and dose assessment, Natural and Cultural Resource Management, and Quality Assurance activities that took place during Calendar Year 2023.
This data package summarizes the exposure assumptions, equations, and methods used to calculate radionuclide-specific unit dose factors and the radiological doses for both groundwater and atmospheric pathways as a part of the revised Hanford Site Composite Analysis. An All-Pathways Representative Person exposure scenario is considered to evaluate exposure via both groundwater and atmospheric transport pathways. The radiological dose assessments for both groundwater and atmospheric pathways are included in the performance assessments for various Waste Management Areas at the Hanford Site. This data package calculates exposure route-specific and total unit dose factors for composite-analysis-specific radionuclides of concern based on the exposure assumptions used in the composite analysis and performance assessments. This data package presents the results and comparison of the radionuclide-specific unit dose factors based on the exposure assumptions used in the revised composite analysis and various performance assessments.
Analytical tools and models have been developed as a starting point for directly assessing dose in the Annular Core Research Reactor Facility (ACRRF) due to reactor operation. Key results include peak dose along the Central Cavity (CC) centerline (beamline) at the cavity level, dose throughout the High-Bay (HB), and dose on the facility roof for partially-shielded reactor operation where the 4” insert is removed from the CC Shield Plug (SP). Model results in the beamline are benchmarked against measured doses from passive dosimetry evaluations. Personnel total (neutron and gamma) dose in the ACRRF HB is calculated using Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP). Various CC and SP configurations are analyzed, including unshielded (no SP) and partially shielded (SP installed but 4” insert removed). Novel application of Variance Reduction (VR) techniques, namely the Surface Source Write (SSW) and Surface Source Read (SSR) capabilities in MCNP, enable impressive resolution (in a Monte Carlo modeling sense) of dose throughout much the facility. The VR techniques reduce stochastic error for challenging tallies, with more advanced techniques explored in the companion to this report (Part B) [1]. Supplementary studies (including a verification analysis) and pedagogic evaluations in Part B involve neutron spectra, angular distributions, and the dose impact of facility characteristics. With the SP 4” insert removed and the Lead-Boron (44”) Bucket (LB–44) in the reactor cavity, Total Effective Dose (TED) within the CC beamline is ≈140 rem per 300 MJ of reactor yield (or 3900 rem per hour at 100% Steady-State (SS) power). With no SP (unshielded) and a Free-Field (FF) cavity, TED within the beamline is ≈610 rem per 300 MJ (or 17000 rem per hour at 100% SS power). Due to the predicted collimation of radiation by the reactor pool (and partial SP, if present), beamline dose is much greater than the scattered radiation field surrounding the cavity and reactor tank. Comparisons are made to beamline dosimetry measurements to validate the model. Model predictions agree reasonably well (⪅10%) with measured quantities of neutron fluence, gamma fluence, and spectral metrics. Away from the beamline, comparisons made to previous dose measurements in the HB agreement within an order of magnitude.
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.
The Performance Assessment (PA) for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste (RHLLW) Disposal Facility at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) was completed in 2018 (DOE-ID 2018) using dose coefficients from U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Standard DOE-STD-1196-2011 (DOE 2011). Internal and external dosimetry was updated in 2021 and a new technical standard was published in 2022 (DOE-STD-1196-2022) (DOE 2022). This technical memorandum provides a comparison of the ingestion dose coefficients between those published in DOE (2011) and those published in DOE (2022). The dose coefficients in DOE (2022) were then used to calculate the all-pathways dose for the groundwater pathway and the results between the doses published in the 2018 PA and those calculated using the updated dose coefficients in DOE (2022) were compared. Several other issues in the 2018 RHLLW Disposal Facility PA were also addressed.
Historically, microbiological spaceflight requirements have been established in a subjective manner based upon expert opinion of both environmental and clinical monitoring results and the incidence of disease. The limited amount of data, especially from long-duration missions, has created very conservative requirements based primarily on the concentration of microorganisms. Periodic reevaluations of new data from later missions have allowed some relaxation of these stringent requirements. However, the requirements remain very conservative and subjective in nature, and the risk of crew illness due to infectious microorganisms is not well defined. The use of modeling techniques for microbial risk has been applied in the food and potable water industries and has exceptional potential for spaceflight applications. From a productivity standpoint, this type of modeling can (1) decrease unnecessary costs and resource usage and (2) prevent inadequate or inappropriate data for health assessment. In addition, a quantitative model has several advantages for risk management and communication. By identifying the variable components of the model and the knowledge associated with each component, this type of modeling can: (1) Systematically identify and close knowledge gaps, (2) Systematically identify acceptable and unacceptable risks, (3) Improve communication with stakeholders as to the reasons for resource use, and (4) Facilitate external scientific approval of the NASA requirements. The modeling of microbial risk involves the evaluation of several key factors including hazard identification, crew exposure assessment, dose-response assessment, and risk characterization. Many of these factors are similar to conditions found on Earth; however, the spaceflight environment is very specialized as the inhabitants live in a small, semi-closed environment that is often dependent on regenerative life support systems. To further complicate modeling efforts, microbial dose-response characteristics may be affected by a potentially dysfunctional crew immune system during a mission. In addition, microbial virulence has been shown to change under certain conditions during spaceflight, further complicating dose-response characterization. An initial study of the applicability of microbial risk assessment techniques was performed using Crew Health Care System (CHeCS) operational data from the International Space Station potable water systems. The risk of infection from potable water was selected as the flight systems and microbial ecology are well defined. This initial study confirmed the feasibility of using microbial risk assessment modeling for spaceflight systems. While no immediate threat was detected, the study identified several medically significant microorganisms that could pose a health risk if uncontrolled. The study also identified several specific knowledge gaps in making a risk assessment and noted that filling these knowledge gaps is essential as the risk estimates may change by orders of magnitude depending on the answers. The current phase of the microbial risk assessment studies focuses on the dose-response relationship of specific infectious agents, focusing on Salmonella enterica Typhimurium, Pseudomonas spp., and Escherichia coli, as their evaluation will provide a better baseline for determining the overall hazard characterization. The organisms were chosen as they either have been isolated on spacecraft or have an identified route of infection during a mission. The characterization will utilize dose-response models selected either from the peer-reviewed literature and/or by using statistical approaches. Development of these modeling and risk assessment techniques will help to optimize flight requirements and to protect the safety, health, and performance of the crew.
This report describes the emissions of airborne radionuclides from operations at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) for calendar year 2022 and the resulting off-site dose from these emissions. This document fulfills the requirements established by the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants in 40 CFR 61, Subpart H – Emissions of Radionuclides other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities, commonly referred to as the Radionuclide NESHAP or Rad-NESHAP. Compliance with this regulation and preparation of this document is the responsibility of LANL’s Rad NESHAP compliance program, which is part of the Environmental Protection and Compliance (EPC) Division. The information in this report is required under the Clean Air Act and is being submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Headquarters and EPA Region 6. The highest effective dose equivalent (EDE) to an off-site member of the public was calculated using procedures specified by the EPA and described in this report. LANL’s EDE was 0.45 for 2022. The annual limit is 10 millirem per year, established by the EPA in 40 CFR 61 Subpart H. All measured air emissions are modeled to a single location, known as the Maximally Exposed Individual (MEI). During calendar year 2022, LANL continuously monitored radionuclide emissions at 27 “major” release points, or stacks. The Laboratory estimates emissions from an additional 34 “minor” release points using radionuclide usage source terms in lieu of stack monitoring. Also, LANL uses an EPA approved network of air samplers around the Laboratory perimeter to monitor ambient airborne levels of radionuclides. To provide data for dispersion modeling and dose assessment, LANL maintains and operates several meteorological monitoring towers. From these various systems, a comprehensive evaluation is conducted to calculate the MEI dose for the Laboratory. The MEI can be any member of the public at any off-site location where there is a residence, school, business, or office. In 2022, this MEI location was a business at 95 Entrada Drive, located in the eastern end of Los Alamos town site. The primary contributors to the off-site dose at this location are the ambient air data at that location combined with radioactive gas emissions from the LANSCE facility and the collected potential emissions from unmonitored (minor) sources. Overall, the MEI dose in 2022 is similar to that which has been observed in recent years, and it remains well below the EPA’s 10 millirem per year limit. Doses reported to the EPA for the past 10 years are shown in Table E1.
This report describes the emissions of airborne radionuclides from operations at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) for calendar year 2023 and the resulting off-site dose from these emissions. This document fulfills the requirements established by the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants in 40 CFR 61, Subpart H – Emissions of Radionuclides other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities, commonly referred to as the Radionuclide NESHAP or Rad-NESHAP. Compliance with this regulation and preparation of this document is the responsibility of LANL’s Rad NESHAP compliance program, which is part of the Environmental Protection and Compliance (EPC) Division. The information in this report is required under the Clean Air Act and is being submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Headquarters and EPA Region 6. The highest effective dose equivalent (EDE) to an off-site member of the public was calculated using procedures specified by the EPA and described in this report. LANL’s EDE was 0.43 for 2023. The annual limit is 10 millirem per year, established by the EPA in 40 CFR 61 Subpart H. All measured air emissions are modeled to a single location, known as the Maximally Exposed Individual (MEI). During calendar year 2023, LANL continuously monitored radionuclide emissions at 28 “major” release points, or stacks. The Laboratory estimates emissions from an additional 59 “minor” release points using radionuclide usage source terms in lieu of stack monitoring. Also, LANL uses an EPA approved network of air samplers around the Laboratory perimeter to monitor ambient airborne levels of radionuclides. To provide data for dispersion modeling and dose assessment, LANL maintains and operates several meteorological monitoring towers. From these various systems, a comprehensive evaluation is conducted to calculate the MEI dose for the Laboratory. The MEI can be any member of the public at any off-site location where there is a residence, school, business, or office. In 2023, this MEI location was a business at 129 New Mexico State Road 4 (NM-4), located in the northern end of White Rock. The primary contributors to the off-site dose at this location are the ambient air data at that location combined with the collected potential emissions from unmonitored (minor) sources. Overall, the MEI dose in 2023 is similar to that which has been observed in recent years, and it remains well below the EPA’s 10 millirem per year limit. Doses reported to the EPA for the past 10 years are shown in Table E1.
To investigate the impact of reduced injected doses on the quantitative and qualitative assessment of the amyloid PET tracers [ 18 F]flutemetamol and [ 18 F]florbetaben. Cognitively impaired and unimpaired individuals (N = 250, 36% Aβ-positive) were included and injected with [ 18 F]flutemetamol (N = 175) or [ 18 F]florbetaben (N = 75). PET scans were acquired in list-mode (90–110 min post-injection) and reduced-dose images were simulated to generate images of 75, 50, 25, 12.5 and 5% of the original injected dose. Images were reconstructed using vendor-provided reconstruction tools and visually assessed for Aβ-pathology. SUVRs were calculated for a global cortical and three smaller regions using a cerebellar cortex reference tissue, and Centiloid was computed. Absolute and percentage differences in SUVR and CL were calculated between dose levels, and the ability to discriminate between Aβ- and Aβ + scans was evaluated using ROC analyses. Finally, intra-reader agreement between the reduced dose and 100% images was evaluated. At 5% injected dose, change in SUVR was 3.72% and 3.12%, with absolute change in Centiloid 3.35CL and 4.62CL, for [ 18 F]flutemetamol and [ 18 F]florbetaben, respectively. At 12.5% injected dose, percentage change in SUVR and absolute change in Centiloid were < 1.5%. AUCs for discriminating Aβ- from Aβ + scans were high (AUC ≥ 0.94) across dose levels, and visual assessment showed intra-reader agreement of > 80% for both tracers. This proof-of-concept study showed that for both [ 18 F]flutemetamol and [ 18 F]florbetaben, adequate quantitative and qualitative assessments can be obtained at 12.5% of the original injected dose. However, decisions to reduce the injected dose should be made considering the specific clinical or research circumstances.
The Radiological Safety Analysis Computer (RSAC) Program Version 7.4 (RSAC-7) is the newest version of the RSAC legacy code. RSAC-7 calculates the consequences of a release of radionuclides to the atmosphere. Users generates a fission product inventory from either reactor operating history or a nuclear criticality event. RSAC-7 models the effects of high-efficiency particulate air filters or other cleanup systems and calculates the decay and ingrowth during transport through processes, facilities, and the environment. Doses are calculated for inhalation, air immersion, ground surface, ingestion, and cloud gamma pathways. RSAC-7 is used as a tool to evaluate accident conditions in emergency response scenarios, radiological sabotage events, and safety basis accident consequences. This users’ manual contains the mathematical models and operating instructions for RSAC-7. Instructions, screens, and examples are provided to guide the user through the functions provided by RSAC-7. This program is designed for users who are familiar with radiological dose assessment methods.
Radioactive Air Emissions Management evaluates radiological impacts of LANL operations on members of the public, identifies and quantifies releases, and assesses impacts. It is not directly affiliated with cleanup operations or programmatic work and has independent oversight. The focus areas in Environmental Compliance Programs are stack emissions measurements, ambient air measurements, minor source operations evaluations, data management and quality assurance, collaboration with Meteorology program, and collaboration with Dose Assessment program (EPC-ES).
The Spent Fuel and Waste Science and Technology Campaign of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy, Office of Spent Fuel and Waste Disposition is conducting research and development on geologic disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level nuclear waste. This work includes the Geologic Disposal Safety Assessment (GDSA) program which is charged with development of generic deep geologic repository concepts and system performance assessment models. One part of the GDSA framework is the development of a biosphere model capable of assessing doses to potential receptors exposed to radionuclides released from geologic disposal sites. As part of the GDSA framework, a biosphere model compatible with the PFLOTRAN massively parallel subsurface flow and reactive transport code is under development. The PFLOTRAN model provides the radionuclide source term for the biosphere model. The GDSA Biosphere model then assesses the potential movement of radionuclides through the surface biosphere and the subsequent exposure to a human receptor living in the biosphere. The biosphere model includes pathways originating from the groundwater as well as pathways originating from surface water bodies that have a water exchange with a contaminated groundwater body. The pathways for human exposure include consumption of drinking water, irrigated crops, meat animals, aquatic vegetation, and animals, etc.; external exposure from irrigated ground surfaces, surface water bodies, recreational activities, etc.; and inadvertent exposures such as ingestion of contaminated soils or shower water, etc. The GDSA Biosphere model was designed to be flexible and generic in order to accommodate a variety of different sites and climate states. This presentation will present the on the purpose, design, and development progress of the GDSA Biosphere Model.
The Radiochemical Processing Laboratory (RPL) tritium continuous air monitor (CAM) is used for near real-time detection of tritium gas (i.e., elemental tritium [HT] and tritiated water vapor [HTO]) in the stack exhaust. The CAM interfaces with software developed by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL)—called the “PNNL OS3700 Tritium Monitoring Software”—that provides near real-time estimates of tritium gas air concentrations and integrated daily activities that are calculated from measured CAM counts. The OS3700 software implements alarm setpoints to alert the facility of larger tritium gas releases that if allowed to persist, could begin to challenge permitted emission and established dose constraints. This report performs a detailed review of historical and current tritium alarm setpoints used at RPL, including discussion of the technical basis used in their development, analysis of alarm frequencies using measured historical data, and performs a detailed dose assessment using more realistic release scenarios and meteorology. Based on the results, the tritium air concentration and integrated daily tritium activity alarm setpoints will remain 2.0 × 10 -5 µCi/ml and 25 Ci/day, respectively. These setpoints achieve the right operational balance in identifying larger releases from planned tritium work at RPL, without being overly conservative so as to cause nuisance alarming. Furthermore, implied doses associated with these setpoints are well below defined and regulatory limits.
The Radiochemical Processing Laboratory (RPL) alpha-beta continuous air monitor (CAM) is used for real-time detection of “artificial” alpha-beta particulates from the stack exhaust. The CAM interfaces with software developed by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory—called the “PNNL OS3300 Alpha-Beta Monitoring Software”—that provides real-time estimates of alpha-beta air concentrations and integrated activities that are calculated from measured CAM counts. The OS3300 software has alarm setpoints that can be used to provide an early indication of larger releases, that if allowed to persist, could approach defined dose limits. This report performs a detailed review of historical and current alarm setpoints used at RPL, including discussion of the technical basis used in their development, analysis of alarm frequencies using measured historical data, and performs a detailed dose assessment using more realistic release scenarios, meteorology, and adjustment factors used in estimating released stack activity. Based on the results, the alpha and beta air concentration alarm setpoints will remain 1.77 × 10 -8 µCi/ml and 3.47 × 10 -8 µCi/ml, respectively; and the alpha and beta integrated activity alarm setpoints will remain 70.22 µCi and 137.63 µCi, respectively. These setpoints achieve the right operational balance in identifying larger releases from planned radiological work at RPL, without being overly conservative so as to cause nuisance alarming. Furthermore, implied doses associated with these setpoints are below defined and regulatory limits.
The purpose of this study was to compare the projected dose using different plume models, evaluating a short duration release of tritium to the 16 compliance sectors and 4 additional points of interest using local meteorology. This report is written as guidance to the decision makers when reviewing this specific Gaussian plume model intended for radiological dose assessment and regulatory compliance, called CAP88 1 , as compared to a more-complex model designed for emergency response. The emergency response model, NARAC 2 , can be used to supplement the CAP88 compliance model evaluations, since NARAC is intended for use in situations where releases are shorter in duration and have increased complexity in terrain and meteorology.
The purposes of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2021 are to record Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s (LLNL’s) compliance with environmental standards and requirements, describe LLNL’s environmental protection and remediation programs, and present the results of environmental monitoring at the two LLNL sites—the Livermore Site and Site 300. The report is prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) by LLNL’s Environmental Functional Area. Submittal of the report satisfies requirements under DOE Order 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting,” and DOE Order 458.1, “Radiation Protection of the Public and Environment.” The report is distributed electronically and is available at https://saer.llnl.gov/, the website for the LLNL annual environmental report. Previous LLNL annual environmental reports beginning with 1994 are also on the website. Some references in the electronic report text are underlined, which indicates that they are clickable links. Clicking on one of these links will open the related document, data workbook, or website. Sampling location maps throughout this report were created using ArcGIS® software by Esri. The report begins with an executive summary, which provides the purpose of the report and an overview of LLNL’s compliance and monitoring results. The first three chapters provide background information: Chapter 1 is an overview of the location, meteorology, and hydrogeology of the two LLNL sites; Chapter 2 is a summary of LLNL’s compliance with environmental regulations; and Chapter 3 is a description of LLNL’s environmental programs with an emphasis on the Environmental Management System including pollution prevention. The majority of the report covers LLNL’s environmental monitoring programs and monitoring data for 2021: effluent and ambient air monitoring and dose assessment (Chapter 4); waters, including wastewater, storm water runoff, surface water, rain, and groundwater (Chapter 5); and terrestrial, including soil, sediment, vegetation, foodstuff, ambient radiation, and special status wildlife and plants (Chapter 6). The remaining two chapters discuss LLNL’s groundwater remediation program (Chapter 7), and quality assurance for the environmental monitoring programs (Chapter 8). Complete monitoring data, which are summarized in the body of the report, are provided in Appendix A. The report uses Système International units, consistent with the federal Metric Conversion Act of 1975 and Executive Order 12770, “Metric Usage in Federal Government Programs” (1991). For ease of comparison to environmental reports issued prior to 1991, dose values and many radiological measurements are given in both metric and U.S. customary units. A conversion table is provided in the glossary. The report is the responsibility of LLNL’s Environmental Functional Area. Monitoring data were obtained through the combined efforts of the Environmental Functional Area; Environmental Restoration Department; Physical and Life Sciences Environmental Monitoring Radiological Laboratory; and the Radiation Protection Functional Area.