Nuclear Engineering and Technology

  • 제54권2호
  • /
  • Pages.493-500
  • /
  • 2022
  • /
  • 1738-5733(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-358X(eISSN)
한국원자력학회 (Korean Nuclear Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Derivation of site-specific derived concentration guideline levels at Korea Research Reactor-1&2 sites

  • Kim, Geun-Ho (KRR Decommissioning Team, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute) ;
  • Do, Tae Gwan (Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Kwon, Jae (Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Ryu, Gangwoo (Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Kim, Kwang Pyo (Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyung Hee University)
  • 투고 : 2021.03.18
  • 심사 : 2021.09.16
  • 발행 : 2022.02.25
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

The objective of this study was to derive derived concentration guideline levels (DCGLs) reflecting the site-specific characteristics of KRR-1&2. A total of 7 nuclides (H-3, C-14, Co-60, Sr-90, Cs-137, Eu-152, and Eu-154) were selected for DCGLs derivation. Radiation dose at the sites was evaluated with RESRAD-ONSITE program. The dose contribution due to direct external exposure was the highest during the entire evaluation period. Ingestion had the second effect. The DCGLs of Co-60 was derived to be 0.051 Bq/g, and DCGLs of Cs-137 was 0.193 Bq/g. The DCGLs of H-3 showed the highest value of 129 Bq/g. The ratio of DCGLs derived by applying site-specific values and default values ranged from 0.27 to 19.6. For six nuclides excluding H-3, KRR-1&2 sites and the overseas NPP sites showed similar DCGLs. H-3 showed large differences in DCGLs from this study and overseas NPPs. The large difference resulted from input parameter values applied to the sites. In conclusion, it is critical to apply site-specific parameter values reflecting the site characteristics to derive DCGLs for decommissioned site clearance. The result of this study can be used as a reference for nuclide selection and DCGLs derivation reflecting the site characteristics when decommissioning nuclear facilities, including nuclear power plants in Korea.

키워드

과제정보

This work was supported by the Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT) of the Republic of Korea under the nuclear R&D Project.

참고문헌

  1. Kaeri, A Study on the Identification of the National Research and Development Needs for Nuclear Decontamination and Decommissioning in Korea, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 2000. KAERI/CR-94/2000.
  2. Iaea, Release of Site from Regulatory Control on Termination of Practices, International Atomic Energy Agency, 2006. No. WS-G-5.1.
  3. Nssc Notice, Criteria for Reuse of Site and Buildings after Completion of Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities, Nuclear Safety and Security Commission, 2016, 2016-33.
  4. K.W. Lee, S.B. Hong, J.H. Park, U.S. Chung, Final status of the decommissioning of research reactors in Korea, J. Nucl. Sci. Technol. 47 (12) (2010) 1227-1232. https://doi.org/10.3327/jnst.47.1227
  5. S.B. Hong, D.S. Hwang, B.K. Seo, J.K. Moon, Practical application of the MARSSIM process to the site release of a Uranium Conversion Plant following decommissioning, Ann. Nucl. Energy 65 (2014) 241-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2013.11.018
  6. H. Seo, W. Sohn, Scenario options to calculation of Derived Concentration Guideline Levels for a multi-unit decommissioning site, Ann. Nucl. Energy 133 (2019) 347-358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2019.05.036
  7. H. Seo, W. Sohn, Calculation of preliminary site-specific DCGLs for nuclear power plant decommissioning using hybrid scenarios, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 51 (2019) 1098-1108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2019.01.018
  8. J. Byon, S. Park, S. Ahn, Derivation of preliminary derived concentration guideline levels for surface soil at Kori Unit 1 by RESRAD probabilistic analysis, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 50 (2018) 1289-1297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2018.07.018
  9. S. Cho, Y. Kim, D. Park, C. Park, A study on DCGL determination and the classification of contaminated areas for preliminary decommission planning of KEPCO-NF nuclear fuel fabrication facility, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 51 (8) (2019) 1951-1956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2019.06.012
  10. S. Kamboj, C. Yu, R. Johnson, Development of DCGLs by using both probabilistic and deterministic analyses in RESRAD (Onsite) and RESRAD-OFFSITE codes, Health Phys. 104 (2) (2013) S68-S75. https://doi.org/10.1097/HP.0b013e318286cb20
  11. S.D. Rima, Development of dose-based release limits for unrestricted release of a radiochemistry laboratory, Health Phys. 84 (2) (2013) S37-S40. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004032-200302001-00013
  12. B.J. Lee, S.Y. Chang, S.K. Park, W.S. Jung, K.J. Jung, Evaluation of residual radiation and radioactivity level of TRIGA Mark-II,III research reactor facilities for safe decommissioning, J. Korean Asso. Radiat. Prot. 24 (2) (1999) 109-120.
  13. S.B. Hong, J.S. Nam, Y.S. Choi, B.K. Seo, J.K. Moon, Application of in situ measurement for site remediation and final status survey of decommissioning KRR site, J. Radiat. Prot. Res. 41 (2) (2016) 173-178. https://doi.org/10.14407/jrpr.2016.41.2.173
  14. S.B. Hong, B.K. Seo, D.K. Cho, G.H. Jeong, J.K. Moon, A Study on the inventory estimation for the activated bioshield concrete of KRR-2, J. Radiat. Prot. 37 (4) (2012) 202-207. https://doi.org/10.14407/jrp.2012.37.4.202
  15. S.B. Hong, M. Kang, K. Lee, U. Chung, Development of scaling factors for the activated concrete of the KRR-2, Appl. Radiat. Isot. 67 (2009) 1530-1533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2009.02.056
  16. M.J. Kang, S.B. Hong, U.S. Chung, J.H. Park, A correlation of the 60Co and beta-emitting radionuclides in the activated concrete of KRR-2, J. Nucl. Sci. Technol. 45 (5) (2008) 658-661. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223131.2008.10875941
  17. H. Kim, S. Kim, B. Seo, K. Lee, J. Park, The preliminary 3D dynamic simulation on the RSR dismantling process of the KRR-1&2, Ann. Nucl. Energy 30 (2003) 1487-1494. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-4549(03)00085-9
  18. S. Kim, H. Park, C. Jung, K. Lee, Quantitative comparison and analysis of decommissioning scenarios using the analytic hierarchy process method and digital mock-up system, J. Energy Eng. 16 (3) (2007) 93-102.
  19. H. Park, S. Kim, K. Lee, C. Jung, J. Park, S. Jin, The application of visualization and simulation in a dismantling process, J. Nucl. Sci. Technol. 44 (4) (2007) 649-656. https://doi.org/10.3327/jnst.44.649
  20. U.S.NRC, Consolidated Decommissioning Guidance; Characterization, Survey, and Determination of Radiological Criteria, vol. 2, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2006, p. 1. NUREG-1757.
  21. U.S.NRC, Rancho Seco License Termination Plan Revision 1, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2008.
  22. U.S.NRC, Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2000. NUREG-1575 rev. 1.
  23. KINS, Development of Regulatory Requirements for Clearance of Radioactive Waste, Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety, 2002. KINS/RR-144.
  24. KINS, Supplementation and V&V of Integrated Dose Assessment Code Package, Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety, 2014. KINS/HR-1357.
  25. Y. Lim, H. Kim, J. Son, K. Park, K. Kang, K. Kim, C. Jeong, Key parameters analysis of important radionuclides in dose evaluation model of decommissioning site, Proceedings of the Korean Radioactive Waste Society Spring (2004). Suwon, Korea, June 24-25, 2004.
  26. ANL, Examination of Technetium-99 Dose Assessment Modeling with RESRAD (Onsite) and RESRAD-OFFSITE, Argonne National Laboratory, 2011. ANL/EVS/TM/11-2.
  27. U.S.NRC, Development of Probabilistic RESRAD 6.0 and RESRAD-BUILD 3.0 Computer Codes, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2000. NUREG/CR6697.
  28. ANL, User's Manual for RESRAD Version 6, Argonne National Laboratory, 2001. ANL/EAD-4.
  29. G. Hampel, F. Scheller, W. Bernnat, G. pfister, U. Klaux, E. Gerhards, Calculation of the Activity Inventory for the TRIGA Reactor at the Medical University of Hannover (HMM) in Preparation for Dismantling the Facility, Waste Management, 2002.
  30. E. Ionescu, D. Gurau, D. Stanga, O.G. Duliu, Decommissioning of the VVR-S research reactor radiological characterization of the reactor block, Rom. Rep. Phys. 64 (No. 2) (2012) 387-398.
  31. A. Raty, P. Kotiluoto, FIR 1 TRIGA Activity Inventories for Decommissioning Planning, PREDEC, 2016.
  32. A. Anl, Compilation of Radionuclide Transfer Factors for the Plant, Meat, Milk, and Aquatic Food Pathways and the Suggested Default Values for the RESRAD Code, Argonne National Laboratory, 1993. ANL/EAIS/TM-4103.
  33. IRSN, Radionuclide Fact Sheet Carbon-14 and the Environment, Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, 2010.
  34. C.E. Murphy Jr., The Transport, Dispersion, and Cycling of Tritium in the Environment (U), Westinghouse Savannah River Company, 1990. WSRC-RP-90-462.
  35. D.K. Gupta, C. Walther, Behaviour of Strontium in Plants and the Environment, Springer, 2018.
  36. U.S.NRC, Haddam Neck Plant License Termination Plan Revision 4, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2006. CY-06-144.
  37. U.S.NRC, Yankee Nuclear Plant Station License Termination Plan Revision 1, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2004. BYR 2004-133.