[ RadSafe ] two shells Tritium production in a nuke plant

[Scott Davidson]

My 2 cents worth.  The issue is not new with tritium.  What is new is that
everybody looked but missed calculating the dose from the pathway of
tritium to the environment.  Because this was missed when tritium was found
it was not expected and no one knew whether it was a big deal or not.
 Also, this pathway was not included in the plant's ODCM which I think
stands for off site dose calculation manual.

All routine release pathways are accounted for in the ODCM or so we
thought.  In the 1970s there was a leak from condensate tanks to the
environment at Indian Point.  This resulted in a Bulletin which carried the
equivalent of law for the plants to look for a sneak pathway to the
environment.  NRC inspectors looked at the pathways too and that ended
that.  So this tritium issue is just an unanalyzed pathway for plants
currently operating.

Remember this if your source term or expected release is 10 curies or 1000
you will have the same performance requirements (LLD) in your RETS which is
the radiological environmental technical specifications.  This uncertainty
is probably about the same order of magnitude error in the geohydrological
modeling.  So if the proponent of the new plant uses a worst case
combination of these you just have to meet the environmental dose
performance objectives in 10 CFR 50 Appendix I.  These have the gaseous and
liquid pathways which should be able to capture and model intakes from the
tritium in the aquifer or groundwater providing drinking water, irrigation,
etc.

For an order of magnitude SWAG, I would look at John Till's Radiological
Assessment book which is a NUREG.  It may be helpful to eventually writing
the scope of work for the contractor that can help you with this.

Scott


On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 9:09 PM, Emil <kerrembaev at yahoo.com> wrote:

> nrc has two shells.
> 1. 'busy work' regulatory agency. busy part are regulations, inspections,
> enforcements etc.
> 2. public opinion monitoring eyes and ears, teeter-totter, wait and see.
>
> licensees are dealing with "busy work" agency, that knows that tritium is
> not dangerous nuclide.
> but they don't decide nothing (double negative), they are as said just do
> 'busy work'.
>
> decisions are made in the second shell.
> where tritium's danger depends on:
> a) geographic location.
> b) time of the year.
>
> obvious disconnect between two shells.
>
> In the other words, tritium is the least dangerous from radiological point
> of view.
> However, tritium has caused the most damage by its high mobility and some
> surveillance elusiveness, the second to strontium.
>
> Contrary to nrc, doe is much better...just kidding, something is always
> needs to be left for later.
>
> Have a nice and safe day to everyone.
>
> Emil Murat.
>
> --- On Thu, 4/18/13, Jerry Cohen <jjcohen at prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>
> From: Jerry Cohen <jjcohen at prodigy.net>
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Tritium production in a nuke plant
> To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) MailingList" <
> radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> Date: Thursday, April 18, 2013, 8:12 PM
>
>
> OK, so ask NRC. Maybe they will tell you why H3 is dangerous---Then you can
> share this information with the rest of us.   Jerry
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rahim Ghanooni" <rahim.ghanooni at gmail.com>
> To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List"
> <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 3:57 PM
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Tritium production in a nuke plant
>
>
> > Jerry :
> >
> > I agree with you but I have to answer the higher authority, means NRC.
> >
> > Rahim
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Jerry Cohen <jjcohen at prodigy.net>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Just curious as to why you believe tritium production is of any
> >> importance. From a public health standpoint, tritium is of little or no
> >> consequence.
> >> Jerry Cohen
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rahim Ghanooni" <
> >> rahim.ghanooni at gmail.com>
> >> To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
> >> List"
> >> <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> >> Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 12:44 PM
> >> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Tritium production in a nuke plant
> >>
> >>
> >>  I am looking for a equation/method/documentation/**publication to
> >>> calculate
> >>> the Tritium production in a typical nuke plant.
> >>>
> >>> Feel free to contact me directly.
> >>>
> >>> Thnx
> >>> Rahim
> >>> ______________________________**_________________
> >>> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> >>>
> >>> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
> >>> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/**
> >>> radsaferules.html <http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html>
> >>>
> >>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> >>> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
> >>>
> >>
> >> ______________________________**_________________
> >> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> >>
> >> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
> >> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/**
> >> radsaferules.html <http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html>
> >>
> >> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> >> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> >
> > Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
> > the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> > http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
> >
> > For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> > visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>