MODARIA II Working Group 1 (Assessment and Decision Making) Summary - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
modaria ii working group 1 assessment and decision making
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

MODARIA II Working Group 1 (Assessment and Decision Making) Summary - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Nov 03, 2022 135 likes •446 views

MODARIA II Working Group 1 (Assessment and Decision Making) Summary of Work & Recommendations Ming Zhu, Ph.D., PE, PMP U.S. Department of Energy 4 th MODARIA II Technical Meeting Vienna, Austria 24 October 2019 IAEA International Atomic Energy

slide-1
SLIDE 1

IAEA

International Atomic Energy Agency

MODARIA II Working Group 1 (Assessment and Decision Making) Summary of Work & Recommendations

Ming Zhu, Ph.D., PE, PMP

U.S. Department of Energy 4th MODARIA II Technical Meeting Vienna, Austria 24 October 2019

slide-2
SLIDE 2

IAEA

MODARIA II Working Group 1

WG 1: Assessment and Decision Making

  • f Existing Exposure Situations

for NORM & Nuclear Legacy Sites

  • Focus on risk‐informed decision analysis

with stakeholder engagement:

 Approaches  Toolsets

  • Demonstration through Case Studies of

representative NORM and legacy sites

  • Technical exchange and Leveraging to

maximize impact on mission work

  • Training to raise the standard for practice

and gain acceptance of desired outcomes

WG1 IAEA Scientific Secretary: WG1 Group Leader: Tamara Yankovich Ming Zhu (US DOE) T.Yankovich@iaea.org Ming.Zhu@em.doe.gov

Status and Remaining Work

  • Framework developed for risk‐informed decision

analysis with stakeholder engagement

  • Modeling analysis is near completion for Case

Studies

  • Key chapters of the WG1 report are prepared to

document methodologies and Case Studies

  • Collaborative efforts and Training ongoing
  • Work planned to complete the WG1 report in 2020
  • Ideas collected for follow‐up programme to

MODARIA II

slide-3
SLIDE 3

IAEA

Summary of WG1 Activities

3

  • First MODARIA II Technical Meeting (TM), 31 October‐4 November 2016;

Second TM, 30 October to 3 November 2017; Third TM, 22 to 25 October 2018; Fourth TM, 21‐24 October 2019, Vienna, Austria.

  • First WG1 Interim Meeting, 26‐30 June, 2017, SCK‐CEN, Brussels, Belgium,

including field trip to the Tessenderlo Chemie (TCH) phosphate processing Site.

  • Second WG1 Interim Meeting, 7 to 11 May 2018, Jozef Stefan Institut, Ljubljana,

Slovenia, including visit to Žirovski vrh (RŽV) Uranium Mine & Mill Tailings Site.

  • Third WG1 Interim Meeting, 20‐24 May 2019, Oslo, Norway with sponsorship

from Norwegian Radiation & Nuclear Security Commission (DSA).

  • Two sites (TCH & Zapadnoe) were selected for Case Studies in 2016; A 3rd site

(Brazil); was added in 2017 and a 4th site (China) was added in 2018.

  • Three additional sites (LANL MDA‐B, Beaverlodge, and RŽV) were selected as

examples for sharing good practices and lessons learned.

  • Modeling and analyses are either complete or under way for the Case Studies.
  • A number of publications/presentations. A WG1 Report is under development.
slide-4
SLIDE 4

IAEA

Example Sites: Good Practices and Lessons Learned

4

Material Disposal Area B, Los Alamos National Laboratory, USA Beaverlodge Mine/Mill Site, Canada Ziroviski vrh Uranium Mine & Mill Tailings Site, Slovenia

slide-5
SLIDE 5

IAEA

Material Disposal Area B, Los Alamos National Laboratory, USA

5

Site layout

Distribution of Pu concentrations from samples

A clean-up area at LANL MDA B

slide-6
SLIDE 6

IAEA

Beaverlodge Mine/Mill Site Closure

6

Beaverlodge Mine/Mill in 1983 2012 Remediation Options Workshop Modeling Non-Human Biota Management Framework

slide-7
SLIDE 7

IAEA

Ziroviski vrh Uranium Mine & Mill Tailings Site, Slovenia

7

Site location Jazbec uranium mine Boršt mill tailings site Dose rate from measurements

slide-8
SLIDE 8

IAEA

The MODARIA II WG1 Framework

8

  • Risk‐informed Decision Making with Participation of

Interested Parties

  • MODARIA I WG1 Report describes the decision analysis

process

  • Three broad phases to decision analysis
  • Throughout all three phases and iterations through them,

modelling and analysis provides a framework to organize and articulate discussions between decision makers, analysts, the technical remediation team and interested parties

  • The processes of modelling and analysis typically separate

the issues into two distinct categories: Science & Values

  • MODARIA I WG1 Report discusses Multi‐Criteria Decision

Analysis (MCDA)

  • MODARIA II WG1 focuses on the Bayesian decision

analysis

slide-9
SLIDE 9

IAEA

The MODARIA II WG1 Framework

9

  • Key aspects of the decision analysis process:

 Roles and responsibilities of parties  Ways of engagement with interested parties (from MODARIA I)  Value systems  Decision

  • Evaluating Options – Modelling
  • Decision Making, Exploring and Analysing Decision

Process

  • Post-Decision Monitoring and Evaluation
  • Demonstration of the decision analysis approach
slide-10
SLIDE 10

IAEA

Sites Selected for Case Studies

10

Tessenderlo Phosphate Processing Site Belgium Zapadnoe Uranium Tailings Site Ukraine Former NORM Facility in São Paulo Brazil

Grote Laak Winterbeek

Yunnan NORM Site, China

slide-11
SLIDE 11

IAEA

Tessenderlo (TCH) Phosphate Processing Site, Belgium

11 Site locations: The facilities (orange); sludge basin (dark blue); waste water buffer basin (light blue); landfill (green); out of operation (dashed); discharge points to the rivers (yellow)

Sludge pond at the Kepkensberg site Ra-226 contamination in the Winterbeek River

TCH Phosphate Processing Facility Grote Laak Winterbeek

slide-12
SLIDE 12

IAEA

Zapadnoe Uranium Tailings Site, Ukraine

12 Location of Zapadnoe tailings Distribution of Rn-222 flux (mBq/m2/s) from the surface of Zapadnoe tailings in September 2009

Konoplyanka Dnieper

slide-13
SLIDE 13

IAEA

Former Tin Processing Facility, Brazil

13

Site layout Storage facility

slide-14
SLIDE 14

IAEA

Yunnan NORM Site Case Study, China

Coal mining and surrounding farmland Tailing and paddy field

14

slide-15
SLIDE 15

IAEA

Collaboration with the LeTrench Project

  • The LeTrench Project Team shared their draft report; final

report expected in the first half of 2019.

  • WG1 and LeTrench participants would jointly prepare a

section in the WG1 Report to summarize lessons learned and explore opportunities for using risk‐informed decision‐making approach in management of legacy trenches with limited data.

Australia UK Canada

15

slide-16
SLIDE 16

IAEA

Structure of WG1 Case Study Chapters

16

  • Site and decision context
  • Site description summary (key aspects – details,

data, parameterization for an Appendix)

  • Need for decision analysis
  • Decision analysis process summary (where

information available)

  • Role of assessment calculations
  • Role of calculations in original decision analysis
  • Role of additional assessment calculations for this

case study

  • Aims of the comparison process
  • Assessment approach (link to IAEA ISAM

methodology; incl. scenarios considered; key pathways and receptors; approach to dealing with uncertainties; sensitivity analyses; etc

  • RESRAD/NORMALYSA/GOLDSIM/AMBER
  • Key similarities and differences
  • Assessment outcomes
  • RESRAD/NORMALYSA/GOLDSIM/AMBER
  • Key similarities and differences
  • Potential implications of the outcomes for

decision processes (not necessarily the site decision which is already made, but whatever

  • bservations we feel able to make!)
  • Lessons learned for decision analyses
  • Summary of strengths and weaknesses of

approaches for consideration in future analyses

slide-17
SLIDE 17

IAEA

Accomplishments @ MODARIA II TM4

17

  • Reviewed status of modeling and analyses of the Case Studies:

 Zapadnoe with GOLDSIM – Paul Black (USA)  TCH with AMBER – Alan Paulley (UK)  TCH with GOLDSIM – Paul Black (USA)  Brazil – Eduardo F. da Silva (Brazil)  Žirovski vrh Case Study with GiST, Paul Black (USA) and Branko Kontic (Slovenia)  Linkage between Risk Assessment and Decisions, Branko Kontic and Tine B (Slovenia)

  • Updating the WG1 Report:

 Chapter 1, Introduction  Chapter 2, Examples of Current Practices  Chapter 4, Additional Considerations  Chapter 6, Tessenderlo Case Study  Chapter 7, Zapadnoe Case Study  Appendices A & B (including details for the Tessenderlo and Zapadnoe Case Studies)

  • Planned steps to complete the WG1 Report in 2020
  • (Plenary) Training Session on NORMALYSA Tool, D. Koliabina, Wednesday

AM

  • Made recommendations for Follow‐up Programme to MODARIA II
slide-18
SLIDE 18

IAEA

Representative Publications & Presentations

18

  • ZHU, M., Introduction of MODARIA II Working Group 1, Presented to the U.S. Department of Energy ERAD (Environmental Radiological

Assistance Directory), Aug. 16, 2017.

  • YANKOVICH, T., AND M. ZHU, Overview of IAEA MODARIA II Working Group 1, Presented to the P&RA CoP 2017 Technical

Exchange Meeting, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA, October 19, 2017.

  • BLACK, P., Stakeholder Engaged, Risk-Informed Decision Making Framework, Presented to the P&RA CoP 2017 Technical Exchange

Meeting, Albuquerque, NM, October 19, 2017.

  • WAINWRIGHT, H.W., Define End‐State and Optimize Monitoring Program Using High‐Performance Computing, Presented to the P&RA

CoP 2017 Technical Exchange Meeting, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA, October 19, 2017.

  • WHICKER, J., Modeling of Resuspension: Prediction and Validation of Radioactive Dust Emissions from Contaminated Areas,

Presented to the P&RA CoP 2017 Technical Exchange Meeting, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA, October 19, 2017

  • PUNT, A., M. ZHU, T. YANKOVICH, AND K. BAINES, An IAEA MODARI II Working Group 1 Proposed Study to Better Define End

States for NORM and Nuclear Legacy Waste Site, Presented to the International Workshop hosted by the NPRA, Lillehammer, Norway, 21-23 Nov. 2017.

  • T., ALMAHAYNI & N. VANHOUDT, Does leaching of naturally occurring radionuclides from roadway pavements stabilised with coal fly

ash have negative impacts on groundwater quality and human health? Journal of Hazardous Materials, 349 (2018) 128–134, 2018.

  • BLACK, P., Stakeholder Engaged Structured Decision Making to Reduce Costs while Protecting Human Health, Presented at WM2018

Conference, Phoenix, Arizona, USA, March 18-22, 2018.

  • WAINWRIGHT, H.W., Sustainable Remediation Processes - Global Insights or Applications, Presented at WM2018 Conference,

Phoenix, Arizona, USA, March 18-22, 2018.

  • ZHU, M., MODARIA II Working Group 1 Interim Report for period from October 2016 to October 2018, Presented to the IAEA LeTrench

Project, Vienna, Austria, October 2018.

  • PEPIN, S., G. Biermans, B. Dehandschutter, S. Radulovic, Chemical and radiological risk-assessment methodology for soil

contamination in Belgium: A comparison, 2018.

  • ZHU, M. and T. YANKOVICH, Status Update on IAEA MODARIA II Working Group 1 (Assessment and Decision Making) – 19391,

WM2019 Conference, Phoenix, Arizona, USA, March 3-7, 2019.

  • BLACK, P. K. Catlett, S. Van Sickle, R. Perona, & C. Schaupp, A Comparison of GoldSim, RESRAD-Onsite, and NORMALYSA

Modeling Tools at Radioactive Waste Sites – 19480, WM2019 Conference, Phoenix, Arizona, USA, March 3-7, 2019.

  • WHICKER, J. et al., Validation Tests of Resuspension Models for a 3 Finite and Infinite Site, Health Physics 117(4):1 · April 2019.
  • ZHU, M. and T. YANKOVICH, IAEA MODARIA II Working Group 1 (Assessment and Decision Making) Activities and Opportunities,

Presented to the IAEA Consultancy Meeting to establish the Terms of Reference for the new ENVIRONET Decision Making on Environmental Remediation Project, Vienna, Austria, 27-29 May 2019.

slide-19
SLIDE 19

IAEA

Training

19

Training Session on RESRAD‐Offsite by Charley Yu (USA), MODARIA II TM2, 1 Nov. 2017 Training Session on Demonstration of use of Guided Interactive Statistical Decision Tools (GiSdT) for stakeholder‐engaged structured decision‐making by Paul Black and Kelly Black (USA), MODARIA II TM2, 3

  • Nov. 2017

Training Session on NORMALYSA Tool for safety Assessment and Uranium Residues Management by D. Koliabina (Ukraine), MODARIA II TM3, 24 Oct. 2018 Training Session Tool for safety Assessment and Uranium Residues Management by D. Koliabina (Ukraine), MODARIA II TM4, 23 Oct. 2019

slide-20
SLIDE 20

IAEA

MODARIA II WG1 Outcomes, Lessons Learned & Challenges

20

  • A framework has been developed for risk‐informed decision analysis with

stakeholder engagement

  • Several case studies are being used to demonstrate the applicability of this

approach; additional work is needed to improve model‐data comparisons and demonstrate their role in decision analysis

  • Various IAEA (ENVIRONET ‐ DERES, CIDER, RICOMET), NEA (EGLM), EU

(TERRITORIES, CONFIDENCE), and other international programs have common interests in this area

  • We may be approaching the critical mass to enable change to affect risk‐

informed decisions

  • A key challenge is to identify sites to demonstrate the applicability of the

proposed approach to improve future regulatory compliance processes

  • We recommend continuation of this effort in a follow‐up programme to

MODARIA II

  • Opportunities exist for collaboration/leveraging with other programs
slide-21
SLIDE 21

IAEA

Potential Topics for Follow‐up Programme to MODARIA II

21

  • Demonstration of the framework for risk-informed decision analysis with stakeholder

engagement for selected sites to improve future regulatory compliance process

1. Legacy sites/NORM sites 2. planned release scenario/post accident scenario

  • Optimization of decommissioning and remediation given improvement in regulations

allowing adaptive management (e.g., End State for UK Lead and Learn Site and Sellafield LLW; worker/public safety; ecosystem impact)

  • Decision making to account for different attributes of both chemical & physical

hazards and radiological risks (i.e., integration & optimization)

  • Engineering practicability (e.g., construction quality assurance & slope stability)
  • Adaptive management with feedback from performance monitoring during and after

implementation of remediation (including knowledge management)

  • Decision analysis for engineered systems with temporal uncertainty (timing for

action; long-term temporal scale) (with WG6?)

  • Incorporation of improved/next-generation numerical models for e.g., coupled

geochemical-mechanical processes into risk-informed decision analysis toolsets.

slide-22
SLIDE 22

IAEA

Plans for Completing the WG1 Report

22

  • Follow up with WG4 Kd subgroup on discussion of the Kd databases

and the use of the Kd approach by November 2019

  • Complete Chapters 2 (Current Practice Examples) by December

2019.

  • Complete Chapter 4 (Kd, End State) by December 2019.
  • Complete Chapter 5 (Codes) by December 2019.
  • Complete the modeling and analyses for the Brazil and China Case

Studies by March 2020.

  • Complete Chapters 6‐9 (Case Studies) and associated Appendices by

March 2020.

  • Finalize Chapter 1 (Introduction) by March 2020.
  • Submit the complete draft to IAEA by end of May 2020.
slide-23
SLIDE 23

IAEA

1ST MODARIA II Technical Meeting __ October 2016, Vienna, Austria

slide-24
SLIDE 24

IAEA

24

1st WG1 Interim Meeting, 7‐11 May 2018, Brussels, Belgium

slide-25
SLIDE 25

IAEA

2nd MODARIA II Technical Meeting 30 Oct. ‐ 3 Nov. 2017, Vienna, Austria

slide-26
SLIDE 26

IAEA

26

2nd WG1 Interim Meeting, 7‐11 May 2018, Ljubljana, Slovenia

slide-27
SLIDE 27

IAEA

3rd MODARIA II Technical Meeting 22‐25 October 2018, Vienna, Austria

slide-28
SLIDE 28

IAEA

28

3rd WG1 Interim Meeting, 20‐24 May 2019, Oslo, Norway

slide-29
SLIDE 29

IAEA

29

4th MODARIA II Technical Meeting 21‐24 October 2019, Vienna, Austria