MODARIA II Preliminary Plans for Working Group 1 Assessment and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

SLIDE 1

IAEA

International Atomic Energy Agency

MODARIA II Preliminary Plans for

Working Group 1 Assessment and Decision Making of Existing Exposure Situations for NORM and Nuclear Legacy Sites

Ming Zhu, Ph.D., PE, PMP

U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management MODARIA II 1st Technical Meeting Vienna, Austria 4 November, 2016

SLIDE 2

IAEA

Participants

• Talal Almahayni

Belgium

• Amanda Anderson

U.S.A.

• Rodolfo Avila

Sweden

• Karine Beaugelin‐Seiller France
• Werdi Putra Daeng Beta

Indonesia

• Nick Beresford

U.K.

• Geert Biermrns

Belgium

• Weiya Cheng

China

• David Copplestone

U.K.

• Eduardo Figueira da Silva

Brazil

• Stacey Fernandes

Canada

• Dan Galeriu

Romania

• Violeta Hansen

Denmark

• Diederik Jacques

Belgium

• Mathew Johansen

Australia

• Daria Koliabina

Ukraine

• Branko Kontic

Slovenia

• Matthew Kozak

U.S.A.

• Nana‐Owesua Kwamena

Canada

• Yunxuan Liao

China

• Anca Melintescu

Romania

• Stephane Pepin

Belgium

• Adrian Punt

U.K.

• Borut Smodis

Slovenia

• Valentin Terziev

Bulgaria

• Leena Torpo

Finland

• Russell Walke

U.K.

• Jeff Whicker

U.S.A.

• Mike Wood

U.K.

• Tamara Yankovich

IAEA

• Charley Yu

U.S.A.

• Ming Zhu

U.S.A.

SLIDE 3

IAEA

Proposed Objectives of this Working Group

• To further develop radionuclide transport and exposure

models, as well as radiological impact assessment approaches, to support decision making for the remediation of NORM and legacy sites.

• To conduct model comparisons using monitoring data,

where available.

• To further develop methodologies and toolsets for

conducting decision analyses that aid in decision making.

SLIDE 4

IAEA

Problem Definition

• Existing exposure scenarios of NORM and legacy waste sites

SLIDE 5

IAEA

• Develop improved methodologies for

radiological impact assessments

• Improve assessment models
• Conduct model–model and model–data

comparisons

• Apply methodologies to existing sites and

facilities

• Train end users (regulators, operators, other

stakeholders) on use of NORMALYSA, RESRAD, and other codes

Proposed Tasks – Risk Assessment

SLIDE 6

IAEA

• Develop improved methodologies for radiological impact assessments
• FEP screening (Expand the FEP List for NORM/legacy sites?)
• Improve assessment models
• Source terms
• NORMALYSA, RESRAD, others
• Conduct model–model and model–data comparisons
• NORMALYSA, RESRAD, PRG, ERICA, others
• Model‐data comparison for selected sites
• Apply methodologies to existing sites and facilities
• 4‐5 selected sites
• Visualization of spatial radionuclide distributions at the Andreeva Bay SNF

temporary storage facility in Russia

• To be confirmed
• Train end users (regulators, operators, other stakeholders) on use of codes

when they attend MODARIA meetings or through TC

• NORMALYSA, RESRAD, and others

Proposed Tasks – Risk Assessment

SLIDE 7

IAEA

Processing of phosphate ore for the production of dicalciumphosphate (contamination with Radium)

Tessenderlo Site, Belgium

SLIDE 8

IAEA

Legacy site with tailings and contaminated buildings

C A A D B B E

Pridneprovsky Uranium Legacy Site, Ukraine

SLIDE 9

IAEA

Material Disposal Area B ‐ Los Alamos National Laboratory, USA

• Operated from

~1943‐1948

• Unknown

amount of Pu‐ 239 waste in shallow burial pits

• Goal‐ remediate

and release property to public

SLIDE 10

IAEA

Pocos de Caldas U mining and processing facility, Brazil

Flooded Mine Pit at former U Mine Waste rock piles at former U Mine

SLIDE 11

IAEA

Proposed Tasks – Decision Analyses

• Develop lists of “prevailing circumstances” and site

specific situations

• Develop methodologies and toolsets for formalized

decision analysis

SLIDE 12

IAEA

Proposed Tasks – Decision Analyses

• Document decision making process for lessons learned
• MDA‐B land transfer after completion of cleanup at the LANL site, USA
• Closure of mine Zirovski vrh, Slovenia
• Beaverlodge, Canada
• Chernobyl site, Ukraine?
• Develop lists of “prevailing circumstances” and site specific situations
• Review non‐nuclear (mining, chemical, oil/gas, construction) best practices
• List contributing factors that cannot be modelled easily, but need to be considered

in decision making

• Develop methodologies and toolsets for formalized decision analysis
• Consider application of the DA methodologies to case studies
• Define end‐state and optimize monitoring program using high‐performance

computing codes

• Develop structured decision making framework with participation of interested

parties

SLIDE 13

IAEA

Collaborations/Leveraging

• Internal cooperation within the MODARIA II project

➢ WG 2: Collaboration on remedy selections; Attend each WG’s

IMs; joint meeting at next TM

➢ WG 5: Members to join the team in running the biota models ➢ WG 6: Near surface systems; FEPs list

• Internal within the IAEA

➢ IAEA TC Chernobyl Remediation Group ➢ ICRP Committee 5

• External

➢ ASCM & CBP Projects ➢ P&RA CoP

SLIDE 14

IAEA

Proposed Interim Meeting

26‐30 June, 2017 FANC & SCK‐CEN Brussels, Belgium