RADIATION & RISK
Bulletin of the National Radiation and Epidemiological Registry
since 1992
About the Journal : 2019 : vol. 28, No. 1 : Assessment of radiation risks from spent nuclear fuel depending on composition of radionuclides and radiation dose distribution in organs

Assessment of radiation risks from spent nuclear fuel depending on composition of radionuclides and radiation dose distribution in organs

«Radiation and Risk», 2019, vol. 28, No. 1, pp.26-36

DOI: 10.21870/0131-3878-2019-28-1-26-36

Authors

Menyajlo A.N.1,2 – Lead. Researcher, C. Sc., Biol.
Lovachev S.S.1,2 – Research Assistant.
Chekin S.Yu.1,2 – Head of Lab. Contacts: 4 Korolev str., Obninsk, Kaluga region, Russia, 249036. Tel.: (484) 399-30-79; e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .
Ivanov V.K.1,2,4 – Deputy Director, Chairman of RSCRP, Corresponding Member of RAS

1 A. Tsyb MRRC, Obninsk.
2 Medinfo LLC, Obninsk.

Abstract

The article presents the method for assessing radiation risks from spent nuclear fuel depending on the radionuclides composition and radiation doses distribution in organs. The method can be used for optimizing management of spent fuel in view of lowering the fuel storage period in which the risk from spent nuclear fuel will equal that from natural uranium before its dumping. Coefficients of radiation-associated lifetime attributable risks of developing cancer (LAR×106/mSv) for men were calcu-lated. Risks of developing cancer of different sites as a result of internal irradiation by radionuclides in BREST-300 (300 MWe) and WWER-1000 spent nuclear fuel were assessed. Table of risk coefficients was drawn up. Dynamics of changing relative radiation risks (in relation to the natural uranium) for different tumor sites as a result of exposure to radionuclides of BREST-300 and WWER-1000 spent nuclear fuel was calculated. Practical conclusion resulted from the study is as follows: for dumping spent nuclear fuel, when health risks from nuclear fuel equal risks from natural uranium. Plutonium isotopes should be separated from the fuel. The time of radiological equivalence, when above mentioned risks equal, may depend on uncertainties in calculating LARs, however to determine the time special simulated mathematical models should be developed.

Key words
Radiation risk, internal radiation, equivalent dose, committed effective dose, malignant neoplasms, population, spent nuclear fuel, radioactive waste, BREST-300, WWER-1000, natural uranium, radiological equivalence.

References

1. Ivanov V.K., Chekin S.Yu., Menyajlo A.N., Maksioutov М.А., Tumanov K.A., Kashcheeva P.V., Lovachev S.S., Adamov E.O., Lopatkin A.V. Application of the radiation equivalence principle to estimation of levels of radiological protection of the population: risk-oriented approach. Radiatsiya i risk – Radiation and Risk, 2018, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 9-23. (In Russian).

2. Ivanov V.K., Chekin S.Yu., Menyajlo A.N., Maksioutov М.А., Tumanov K.A., Kashcheeva P.V., Lovachev S.S., Adamov E.O., Lopatkin A.V. “Radiotoxicity” of some radionuclides of the spent nuclear fuel from BREST and WWER reactors in different storage time periods, evaluated with ICRP models. Radiatsiya i risk – Radiation and Risk, 2018, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 8-27. (In Russian).

3. ICRP, 2007. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Ann. ICRP 37 (2-4).

4. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR). Sources and effects of ionizing radiation. UNSCEAR 2006 Report. Vol. I, Annex A: Epidemiological studies of radiation and cancer. New York, United Nation, 2008.

5. Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2014 (morbidity and mortality). Eds.: A.D. Kaprin, V.V. Starinskiy, G.V. Petrova. Moscow, Р. Hertsen MORI, 2016. 250 p. (In Russian).

6. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans, Vol. 75. Ionizing radiation, Part 1: X- and γ-radiation and neutrons. Lyon, IARC, 2000. 402 p.

7. Eckerman K.F., Leggett R.W., Nelson C.B., Puskin J.S., Richardson A.C.B. Federal Guidance Report 13. Cancer Risk Coefficients for Environmental Exposure to Radionuclides. EPA 402-C-99-001. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Office of radiation and indoor air United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC 20460, 1999.

8. Ivanov V.K., Chekin S.Yu., Menyajlo A.N., Maksioutov М.А., Tumanov K.A., Kashcheeva P.V., Lovachev S.S., Adamov E.O., Lopatkin A.V. Radiation and radiological equalities between natural uranium and radioactive waste in innovative two-component nuclear energy system. Radiatsiya i risk – Radiation and Risk, 2019, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 5-25. (In Russian).

9. ICRP Database of Dose Coefficients: Workers and Members of the Public; Ver. 3.0, official website. Available at: http://www.icrp.org/page.asp?id=145 (Accessed 12.01.2019).

10. Preston D.L., Ron E., Tokuoka S., Funamoto S., Nishi N., Soda M., Mabuchi K., Kodama K. Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors: 1958-1998. Radiat. Res., 2007, vol. 168, no. 1, pp. 1-64.

11. Preston D.L., Kusumi S., Tomonaga M., Izumi S., Ron E., Kuramoto A., Kamada N., Dohy H., Matsuo T., Nonaka H., Thompson D.E., Soda M., Mabuchi K. Cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors. Part III: Leukemia, lymphoma and multiple myeloma, 1950-1987. Radiat. Res., 1994, vol. 137, pp. 68-97.

12. Ivanov V.K., Tsyb A.F., Panfilov A.P., Agapov A.M. Optimization of radiation protection: ”dose matrix”. Moscow, Meditsina, 2006. 304 p. (In Russian).

13. Ivanov V.K., Korelo A.M., Panfilov A.P., Raikov S.V. ARMIR: the system for optimization of radiological protection of the staff. Moscow, Pero, 2014. 302 p. (In Russian).

Full-text article (in Russian)