23.04.2013 Views

Management of Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste - U.S. ...

Management of Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste - U.S. ...

Management of Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste - U.S. ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Draft p. 3.1.192<br />

Issue<br />

121<br />

DOSE CALCULATIONS<br />

The most severe accident postulated for predisposal operations is a transport accident<br />

involving HLW. Maximum-individual 70-yr dose is 7 rem. This is significantly lower than<br />

normally seen for this accident. Nor does it seem reasonable in relation to the spent fuel<br />

transport accident discussed on pp. 3.1.178-179. (154)<br />

Response<br />

The dose to the maximum individual from a severe transportation accident involving HLW<br />

is 37 rem. This typographical error was corrected for the final Statement.<br />

Draft Appendix D<br />

Issue<br />

While the calculation models employed may be adequate, in light <strong>of</strong> the uncertainties<br />

inherent in the input data, they are not state-<strong>of</strong>-the-art, as claimed. For example, the<br />

calculation <strong>of</strong> the 5-cm gamma dose as the total body dose for air immersion could be<br />

improved by the use <strong>of</strong> an existing code employing the TGLD model. It does not explicitly<br />

treat the daughter products formed after inhalation as do more complete codes. (113-EPA)<br />

Response<br />

Use <strong>of</strong> programs giving specific organ doses from external radiation do not give sig-<br />

nificantly different results than the 5-cm estimate to warrant their use (see NCRP-45<br />

pp. 108 and 109, NCRP 1975 in reference list). The DACRIN code dose considers daughter<br />

product radiations formed in organs <strong>of</strong> interest. Daughters produced in transit to the<br />

organs are not considered, but for the majority <strong>of</strong> cases this omission is not significant.<br />

To avoid unnecessary argument, the expression "state-<strong>of</strong>-the-art" in reference to the<br />

codes used has been dropped.<br />

Draft Appendices D and F<br />

Issue<br />

Although the sections on radiological models indicate that all pathways were con-<br />

sidered, the contribution <strong>of</strong> various pathways to the total dose is not given in the docu-<br />

ment. Additional information on the radiological analysis for scenarios (e.g., source<br />

terms, concentrations <strong>of</strong> nuclides for different locations, solubility classifications <strong>of</strong><br />

particulates, etc.) would help document the major conclusions concerning radiological<br />

impacts. (208-NRC)

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!