Potential radiological risk for the population during implementation of the Rosatom Proryv project. Part 2. Radiation detriment assessment

«Radiation and Risk», 2020, vol. 29, No. 4, pp.48-68

DOI: 10.21870/0131-3878-2020-29-4-48-68

Authors

Ivanov V.K. – Deputy Director of A. Tsyb MRRC, Chief Radioecologist of Project PRORYV, Chairman of RSCRP, Corresponding Member of RAS, D. Sc., Tech.
Chekin S.Yu. – Head of Lab. Contacts: 4 Korolyov str., Obninsk, Kaluga region, Russia, 249035. Tel.: (484) 399-30-79; e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .
Menyajlo A.N. – Senior Researcher, C. Sc., Biol.
Lovachev S.S. – Research Assistant
Seleva N.G. – Engineer, C. Sc., Biol. A. Tsyb MRRC, Medinfo.
Solomatin V.M. – Head of Dep. of the Chief Radioecologist, Project PRORYV, C. Sc., Biol.
Adamov E.O. – Research Advisor, Project PRORYV, D. Sc., Tech., Prof.
Lemekhov V.V. – Chief Constructor, Project PRORYV. JSC PRORYV.
Bakin R.I. – Head of Lab.
Ilichev E.A. – Research Assistant
Kiselev A.A. – Head of Dep., C. Sc., Tech. IBRAE RAN.
Proukhin A.V. – Chief Specialist. N. Dollezhal PERDI.

1 A. Tsyb MRRC, Obninsk
2 Medinfo LLC, Obninsk
3 Joint Stock Company PRORYV, Moscow
4 Nuclear Safety Institute of the RAS, Moscow
5 N. Dollezhal Power Engineering Research and Design Institute, Moscow

Abstract

Nuclear power is effective and safe source of electricity. Meanwhile, uranium reserves in the earth's crust will run out in 100 years with the development of traditional nuclear reactors. The Rosatom “Proryv” project implementation will allow multiplying fuel sources for the new generation nuclear power through the closing fuel cycle. Radiation safety of the new nuclear powers should be based on the state of the art Russian national and international regulations, as well as on predicted radiation doses, estimates of potential radiation risks and radiation detriment of the public. Developed methods for computational analysis of possible doses of estimates of radiation risks and population-based detriment, associated with atmospheric fallouts of radioactive substances from the BREST-OD-300 reactor, corresponds to the currently recognized approaches to evaluating safety of nuclear energy facilities. Developed method for radiation detriment estimating is in accordance with ICRP recommendations. It allows making assessment of radiation-associated health effects for Russian population with account of patients’ quality of life provided by the current health care system. The analysis of possible radiation doses and potential radia-tion risks shows that the upper 95% confidence bound of radiation detriment for the critical group of population in the town of Seversk (girls of 5 years of age) even in the event of beyond design basis accident at the reactor equals 1.16*10-5 year-1, and does not exceed the radiation risk limit of 5*10-5 year-1, established by Russian national radiation safety regulations NRB-99/2009 for the population during normal op-eration of ionizing radiation sources. In the event of an accidental situation on the Brest-OD-300 reactor, the average estimates of radiation risks for the population living within the 30-km zone around the JSC “Siberian Chemical Combine” will generally remain in the range of negligible risk and will not exceed the level of 10-6 year-1.

Key words
modeling meteorological fields, effective dose, equivalent dose, ICRP, lifetime attributable risk, risk of radiation-induced cancer, years of life lost, lethality fraction, radiation detriment, radiation safety regulations.

References

1. Assessment of radiation doses to the public in the vicinity of a nuclear facility, 15.3.2019 (YVL C.4). Available at: https://www.stuklex.fi/en/ohje/YVLC-4 (Accessed 07.09.2020).

2. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.145. Atmospheric dispersion models for potential accident consequence assessments at nuclear power plants. Rev. 1. Washington, DC, 1982. 15 p.

3. Raskob W., Trybushnyi D., Ievdin I., Zheleznyak M. JRODOS: Platform for improved long term countermeasures modelling and management. Radioptotection, 2011, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. S731-S736.

4. Rossi J., Ilvoinen M. Dose estimates at long distances from severe accidents. Research report VTT-R-00589-16. VTT, 2016. 41 p.

5. Dispersion of radioactive material in air and water and consideration of population distribution in site evaluation for nuclear power plant. IAEA Safety standards series No. NS-G-3.2. Safety Guide. Vienna, IAEA, 2002. 32 p.

6. Ross K., Phillips J., Gauntt R.O. MELCOR best practices as applied in the State-of-the-Art Reactor Consequence Analyses (SOARCA) project (NUREG/CR-7008). Albuquerque, New Mexico, Sandia National Laboratories, 2014.

7. NCEP Office Note 442. The GFS atmospheric model. Camp Springs, Maryland: Global Climate and Weather Modeling Branch, EMC, 2003.

8. Walter H., Gering F., Arnold K., Gerich B., Heinrich G., Welte U. RODOS-based simulation of potential accident scenarios for emergency response management in the vicinity of nuclear power plants. Salzgitter, 2016. Available at: https://doris.bfs.de/jspui/bitstream/urn:nbn:de:0221-2016091214084/3/BfS-SCHR-60-16.pdf (Accessed 07.09.2019).

9. Skamarock W.C., Klemp J.B., Dudhia J., Gill D.O., Barker D.M., Duda M.G., Huang X.-Y., Wang W., Powers J.G. A description of the advanced research WRF Version 3 (No. NCAR/TN-475+STR). Boulder, Colorado, USA, 2008. DOI: 10.5065/D68S4MVH.

10. Dzama D., Semenov V., Sorokovikova O. The code ROM for assessment of radiation situation on a regional scale during atmosphere radioactivity releases. Fast reactors and related fuel cycles: next generation nuclear systems for sustainable development FR17. Proceedings of an International Conference, Yekaterinburg, Russian Federation, 26-29 June 2017. Available at: https://www.iaea.org/publications/13414/fast-reactors-and-related-fuel-cycles-next-generation-nuclear-systems-for-sustainable-development-fr17 (Accessed 07.09.2020).

11. Arutunyan R.V., Bakin R.I., Kiselev A.A., Krasnoperov S.N., Shvedov A.M., Shikin A.V., Shinkarev S.M. Availability of constants data for estimating radiation doses to the general population. Review. Radiatsiya i risk – Radiation and Risk, 2018, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 91-103. (In Russian).

12. Arutunyan R.V., Bakin R.I., Kiselev A.A., Krasnoperov S.N., Shvedov A.M., Shikin A.V., Shinkarev S.M. The use of dose coefficients in the software engineering platform for estimation and prediction of radiation situation following radiation emergency. Radiatsiya i risk – Radiation and Risk, 2019, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 92-102. (In Russian).

13. Bakin R.I., Kiselev A.A., Shvedov A.M., Shikin A.V. Computational errors in the calculation of long radioactive decay chains. Atomnaya energiya – Atomic Energy, 2017, vol. 123, no. 6, pp. 334-338.

14. 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 07.09.2020).

15. ICRP, 2007. The 2007 International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Ann. ICRP, 2007, vol. 37, no. 2-4, pp. 1-332.

16. New generation nuclear power: radiological viability and environmental benefits. Eds.: V.K. Ivanov, E.O. Adamov. Mocsow, Pero, 2019. 379 p. (In Russian).

17. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR). Effects of ionizing radiation. Vol. 1. UNSCEAR 2006 Report to the General Assembly, Scientific annexes A and B. New York, United Nations, 2008.

18. Menyajlo A.N., Lovachev S.S., Chekin S.Yu., Ivanov V.K. Assessment of radiation risks from spent nuclear fuel depending on composition of radionuclides and radiation dose distribution in organs. Radiatsiya i risk – Radiation and Risk, 2019, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 26-36. (In Russian).

19. Ivanov V.K., Chekin S.Yu., Menyajlo A.N., Maksioutov М.А., Tumanov K.A., Kashcheeva P.V., Lovachev S.S., Spirin E.V., Solomatin V.M. Spent nuclear fuel management: new approaches to evaluating radiotoxicity of long-livedhigh-level nuclear wastes of fast reactors. Radiatsiya i risk – Radiation and Risk, 2019, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 8-24. (In Russian).

20. Radiation Safety Standards (RSS-99/2009). Sanitary-epidemiological rules and standards. Moscow, Federal Center of Hygiene and Epidemiology of Rospotrebnadzor, 2009. 100 p. (In Russian).

Full-text article (in Russian)