0

Full Content is available to subscribers

Subscribe/Learn More  >

Validation of Dose Calculation Codes for Clearance

[+] Author Affiliations
Shankar Menon

Menon Consulting, Cherry Hill, NJ

Bo Wirendal

Studsvik RadWaste

Jan Bjerler

Studsvik Stensand, Varobacka, Sweden

Lucien Teunckens

Belgoprocess, Dessel, Belgium

Paper No. ICEM2003-4667, pp. 89-96; 8 pages
doi:10.1115/ICEM2003-4667
From:
  • ASME 2003 9th International Conference on Radioactive Waste Management and Environmental Remediation
  • 9th ASME International Conference on Radioactive Waste Management and Environmental Remediation: Volumes 1, 2, and 3
  • Oxford, England, September 21–25, 2003
  • Conference Sponsors: Nuclear Engineering Division and Environmental Engineering Division
  • ISBN: 0-7918-3732-7 | eISBN: 0-7918-3731-9
  • Copyright © 2003 by ASME

abstract

All proposals for clearance from regulatory control of very low level radioactive material are based on predicted scenarios for subsequent utilisation of the released materials. The calculation models used in these scenarios tend to utilise conservative data regarding exposure times and dose uptake as well as other assumptions as a safeguard against uncertainties. Another aspects is common to all these calculation models and codes: none of them has ever been validated by comparison with the actual real life practice of recycling. An international project has recently been concluded where two calculation codes used for this purpose (the RESRAD-RECYCLE and CERISE codes) were used to calculate the dose uptake by workers, during the segmentation and melting of a contaminated fuel rack at Studsvik RadWaste, Sweden. These calculated doses were compared with electronic dosimeter measurements on workers participating in the various operations. The measurements showed that segmenting was the work operation that gave the highest dose, almost 65% of the total dose incurred, while melting itself accounted for only about 13%. The project was a co-operation between the Swedish Radiation Protection Institute, Studsvik (Sweden), the US Department of Energy, Argonne National Laboratory (USA), the Institute de Radioprotection et Securité Nucléaire (France) and Belgoprocess (Belgium). The comparison of the calculation results indicated that, even with a carefully controlled reflection of reality with respect to geometry and exposure time and with a “best judgment” choice of densities for each operation, the calculation programmes have tended to overestimate the dose uptake by a factor 4 to 7, i.e. about an order of magnitude. An obvious explanation is the fact that the workers are not static, they move about constantly, changing the geometry, thus not taking the assumed doses. There are also some other practical aspects difficult to reflect exactly in the calculations. It should be noted that the Swedish Radiation Protection Institute were not completely of the same opinion as the project team, pointing out that the codes also underestimated doses for certain operations. We feel, however, that this is irrelevant, as only the maximum estimated doses for any operation in the process are used for the determination of clearance levels. It seems reasonable to state that the use of ‘enveloping’ scenarios, which necessarily cover a wide range of scenarios range of scenarios in connection with the calculation of clearance levels, would tend to accentuate this tendency of overestimation of dose uptake in most individual cases of recycling by melting. Taking into account the sensitivity of the modelling and the practical aspects listed above, the estimated doses can be, say, one or even more orders of magnitude higher than those actually taken. A side aspect of the execution of the Validation Project — specifically the background measurements — was the revelation of radioactivity in unexpected places: the paint used for the painting of moulds at Åkers (3–5 Bq/g), the slag binding product (twice background radiation), the stamp mass, insulation and new asphalt at the Studsvik furnace (all at three to four times background). This serves to illustrate the undetected omnipresence of radioactivity in the human habitat at dose rate levels considerably higher (up to 400% over background) than the levels (ca 1% over background) at which the currently proposed clearance criteria are based on. Finally, it is important to note that the degree of overestimation (a factor of 4 −7), as recorded in the validation project, is generally regarded as ‘acceptable’ by dose modellers. The results will most probably not lead to any revision or refinement of these codes. For the nuclear decommissioner and the other producers of large volumes of only slightly radioactively contaminated material, the clearance levels resulting from such a degree of conservatism can lead to huge amounts of material unnecessarily being condemned to burial as radioactive waste. Considering that most such producers transfer their costs to the public, it is society at large that will foot the bill for this exercise in conservatism.

Copyright © 2003 by ASME

Figures

Tables

Interactive Graphics

Video

Country-Specific Mortality and Growth Failure in Infancy and Yound Children and Association With Material Stature

Use interactive graphics and maps to view and sort country-specific infant and early dhildhood mortality and growth failure data and their association with maternal

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In