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.
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) 1 & 2 for nuclear and radiological emergencies. The IAEA OIL and U.S. Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center (FRMAC) Derived Response Level methodology and implementation in respective tools were compared, as demonstrated through benchmarking activities for a nuclear power plant source term and potential radionuclides of concern for radiological dispersal devices. This comparison revealed some shortcomings in Turbo FRMACs ability to perform IAEA OIL calculations and resulted in recommended software modifications to be considered for future development.
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.
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Abstract not provided.
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.
The Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center (FRMAC) Assessment Manual is the tool used to organize and guide activities of the FRMAC Assessment Division. The mission of the FRMAC Assessment Division in a radiological emergency is to interpret radiological data and predict worker and public doses. This information is used by Decision Makers to recommend protective actions in accordance with Protection Action Guides (PAGs) issued by government agencies. This manual integrates many health physics tools and techniques used to make these assessments.
An interlaboratory effort has developed a probabilistic framework to characterize uncertainty in data products that are developed by the US Department of Energy Consequence Management Program in support of the Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the probability distributions of input variables and the statistical methods used to propagate and quantify the overall uncertainty of the derived response levels that are used as contours on data products due to the uncertainty in input parameters. Uncertainty analysis results are also presented for several study scenarios. This paper includes an example data product to illustrate the potential real-world implications of incorporating uncertainty analysis results into data products that inform protective action decisions. Data product contours that indicate areas where public protection actions may be warranted can be customized to an acceptable level of uncertainty. Finally, the investigators seek feedback from decision makers and the radiological emergency response community to determine how uncertainty information can be used to support the protective action decision-making process and how it can be presented on data products.
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.
Presentation discusses use of data in radiological emergency response and different methods (applied statistics, spectral clustering, spectral anomaly detection, etc.) that could be used in conjunction with machine learning to optimize response to real-world radiological events.
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.