Transcript North American Technical Center Public Radiation Safety Research

North American Technical Center
Public Radiation Safety Research
Program REMP Study
Jason T. Harris, M.S.
Purdue University/NATC
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
Outline






Introduction
Public Dose Study
Effluents
REMP
Conclusions
Acknowledgements
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
Introduction

NATC Research Activities




Liquid and gaseous effluents
BNL Collected and tabulated US NPP effluent data
prior to 1994
1996 NATC asked to take over task (as independent
scientific organization for UNSCEAR)
Since 1998, NATC has collected and performed research
on effluent data from NRC and licensees (support of
UNSCEAR, EPRI, NEI, ANI, licensees and universities)
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
Introduction

NATC NPP Environmental and Public Health Work


In 2000, NATC program became known as the Public
Radiation Safety Program
Goals include:







development and maintenance of database for use by NPPs,
regulatory bodies and scientific analysis
Expanded trend analysis, benchmarking and discussion of
effluent data
Standardized entry form development for licensee use
Establishment of effluent website for general use
Establishment of an effluent expert group
Modeling and “hot issue” analysis
Now extended to rad waste and environmental monitoring
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
Introduction

Data Compilation and
Purpose

Ongoing Research


Evaluate significance, if any,
of NPP effluent/rad waste
releases in terms of trends,
dose commitments and
benchmarking (emphasis on
sister plant comparisons)
Analysis of data from 1994present
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
Public Dose Study

Preliminary Research Statement

Perform a comprehensive public dose analysis of all nuclear
power plant emissions (liquid, gaseous, and solid) over the last
10 years (1995-2004) using US NRC and UNSCEAR
methodologies.

Components:







“Closed-loop” analysis of NPP radioactive analyses
Trend analysis of effluents for the future, comparisons for future reactors,
and siting
Sister-plant comparisons, effects of electricity generation and radwaste
systems.
Effects of failed fuel, power up-rates, license extensions
REMP pathway assessments
Correlated results
Creation of new models
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
Public Dose Study

Purpose of Research





Protection of public health and safety
Litigation protection, environmental pathway validity, trending,
projected impact (license renewals, new NPP construction,
power-uprates), public perception
Compliance with National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
as amended and National Cancer Institute (1991 cancer study,
JAMA - 3/21/91)
10 year study of all data for U.S. NRC, NSF (National Science
Foundation), NPP utilities and UNSCEAR
ICRP 2005 Draft Recommendations (protection of nonhuman species)
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
Public Dose Study

Data Collection

Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports (10 year period)


Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports (10 year period)


Reports collected for period of 1994-present (2005 in progress)
Pre-operations environmental reports (Final Environmental Statements)


All data collected for period of 1994-present (2005 in progress)
In Progress
Data Analysis (completion goal: winter 2006/2007)

Effluent and solid waste activities, electrical generation, collective dose


REMP data (pathways, doses, meteorological conditions)



All data analyzed for period of 1993-present
In progress
Statistics
Modeling (projected impact)
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
NATC U.S. Effluent Database

Developed to satisfy needs of U.S. and
international organizations




Format – U.S. NRC Reg. Guide 1.21 reports
and UNSCEAR
Raw and un-normalized values (Ci and
GBq) for individual units and sites
(operating and shutdown)
Normalized values (activity vs. net electrical
energy, not the best)
Collective effective dose calculated
(UNSCEAR)
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
Publications
SOURCES AND
EFFECTS OF IONIZING
RADIATION
United Nations Scientific
Committee on the Effects
of Atomic Radiation
UNSCEAR 2000 Report to
the General Assembly,
with scientific annexes
Volume I: SOURCES
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
Publications
Liquid and Gaseous
Activity Released from
Pressurized Water
Reactors: International
Data (1980-2004)
CEPN
December 2005
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
Effluent Release Trends


Important to evaluate release trends,
especially as nuclear power generation
steadily increases in the U.S. through
relicensing, power uprates, and
possible new construction
Trends evaluated for un-normalized
and normalized data (better reflect
particular operating conditions and no
skewed values, but public doesn’t care)
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
Effluent Impacts

Although effluent releases are well below regulatory limits (1%) it is
important to continually monitor and scrutinize your effluent
release program




Effluent releases have a direct financial impact on nuclear liability insurance
premiums via the ERF program. There is also an indirect financial
impact. Performance information also plays an important part in the
development of insurance risk profiles that support loss control strategies at
each nuclear power plant facility.
As technology improves, MDAs will decrease and what may not have been
there in the past, may now appear
Increased environmental findings at several operating and decommissioned
plants
Public perception and confidence (Reputation!)
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
website.lineone.net/ ~jean.cheesman/Arooster2.jpg
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
Gaseous Tritium Trends
Total Gaseous Tritium Released
Total Raw Release (Ci)
1.E+04
P WR
1.E+03
B WR
1.E+02
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Years
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
2001
2002
2003
2004
Liquid Tritium Trends
Total Liquid Tritium Released
Total Raw Release (Ci)
1.E+05
PWR
1.E+04
1.E+03
BWR
1.E+02
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Years
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
2001
2002
2003
2004
Dose Determination


Dose determination performed to evaluate the
human effects of effluents
Currently NATC uses UNSCEAR effluent dose
assessment model (for average trends)


Uses “representative” environmental conditions and
population density
Collective effective dose per unit of electrical energy
generated (normalized release divided by calculated
collective doses per unit release – from dose pathway
models)
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
Gaseous Tritium CED
Total Gaseous Tritium Collective Effective Dose
CED (man mSv/GW a)
1.E+0 3
PW R
1.E+0 2
BWR
1.E+0 1
19 9 4
19 9 5
19 9 6
19 9 7
19 9 8
19 9 9
2000
Years
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
2001
2002
2003
2004
Liquid Tritium CED
Total Liquid Tritium Collective Effective Dose
CED (man mSv/GW a)
1.E+0 3
1.E+0 2
PW R
BWR
1.E+0 1
1.E+0 0
19 9 4
19 9 5
19 9 6
19 9 7
19 9 8
19 9 9
2000
Years
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
2001
2002
2003
2004
REMP Study

Purpose






Validate effluent releases
Evaluate correlations (plant
type, radwaste systems, etc.)
Track program changes
Evaluate pathway significance
Calculate general collective
dose
10 years (1995-2004)
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
REMP Study

Components


Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports
Summary Data

Analysis Type and # of measurements




Direct radiation, air iodine/particulates, fish and inverts, milk,
sediments, vegetation (broadleaf), water (drinking, surface, ground,
well)
Indicator location - mean, low and high
Control location mean, low and high
# of non-routine values
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
REMP Study

Analysis

Statistics







Regression analysis, ANOVA, ANCOVA
SAS
Significance (if any) by plant type (PWR/BWR), sister
plant, age, electrical generation, etc.
Comparison with effluents
“Overall” plant release balance (effluents/solid waste)
Public dose analysis
New model development (EPRI?)
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
REMP Study

Conclusions




Next year’s workshop – complete results
Even over last 10 years, drastic cutback of REMP
programs
Need greater emphasis on ground and well water
monitoring (most non-routine results)
Very difficult to quantify/compare REMP w/ RETS

Natural background, lld’s, etc.
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
Acknowledgements

David W. Miller, Ph.D.



University of Illinois/NATC/AEP, Cook Nuclear Plant
US NRC PDR Staff
US NPP RETS-REMP staff
Funding provided by NATC, NPP utilities, EPRI and
DoE OCRWM Fellowship Program
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006
Questions?
Thank You!
[email protected], [email protected]
16th Annual RETS-REMP Workshop
Mashantucket, CT
June 26-28, 2006