ML20058J551
| ML20058J551 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/19/1990 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Ponomarevstepn UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS |
| References | |
| JCCCNRS-WG-7, NUDOCS 9012020109 | |
| Download: ML20058J551 (44) | |
Text
_
'o UNITED STATES
~,,
[ '
w.
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION r.
r wAswiwotow.o. c. nosse
~
,h January 19, 1990 Dr. Niblai N. Ponomarev-Stepnoy First 00puty Director Kurr,natov Institute of Atomic Energy i
Kut chatov Square No.tcow, 123182 U.S,$.R.
U.S. Correspon'lence No. 90-1.
Dear Dr. Pononirev-Stepnoy:
Pursuant to section^7;trof the Protocol of the Second Meittiag of the,1CCpRS, I am enclosing in th!s letter the US proposals that have bten 1evelo>ed for working groups 7.1 (Dr. t. f.trael and Dr. Avdyushin) and 7.2 (Act demnian
.. Ilyin).
Please note that we are still adjusting some of these proposa'it, but we wanted to get these to you in draft fonn as soon as possible. One adyJstment that we are considering is the consolidation of proposals 7.2 C 1-3 inti, one proposal 7.2 C 1.
We will send you any updated proposals under separate tover. We recognize that not all of the work outlined in our proposals can be initiated in 1990, but we did want to provide a broad basis for your colleagues' initial consideraiton.
We apprr' s the proposals that you provided when we met on January 5th.
These t sen translated and_ given to our working group 7 leaders.
In our brief i.
..d we have been able to identify several proposals that are complementary to ours. We note, however, that Dr. Avdyushin's Institute af Applied Geophysics has not yet provided any specific proposals. Naturally we are anxiously awaiting any proposals that he might develop and all proposa h from Academician L. Ilyin in reference to working group 7.2.
We understand from recent telephone conversations between Dr. $homa ter and Dr. Sukhoruchkin that Academician 11 yin is preparing such proposals.
Would you please see that these working groups receive our proposals. Upon receipt of all USSR submissions, we will develop a specific selection of activities, including goals, scope,-responsible project leaders, and schedules, plus estimated needs for Host Country cost coverages of meetings and visits.
For example, this would solidify the expected number of persons and days of visits for 1990. We look forward to completing the comment and final selection process by March 30, 1990, as specified in the Second Protocol.
hkhh R
1
Dr. Ponomarev Stepnoy
-2 M' ** *'
Lastly, I am also providing you with a folder which explains the contracting process at the NRC.
Sincerely, eY/ _
/
Ja es M. Ta or E cutive Director for Operations
Enclosures:
As stated l
l l
l-L l
L l
7.1 A RESEARCH ON ATMOSPHERIC DISPERSION MODELING Objective:
Improve our respective nuclear emergency response capabilities by conducting joint US USSR research on (1) the development of an automated methodology for integrating radiological measurements with atmospheric dispersion model predictions to enhance our ability to acquire more accurate real time assessments of the source term and dose distributions, and (2) the development of improved atmospheric dispersion models that are capable of more realistically sim'. dating dispersion on various spatial scales that range from local to continental.
Discussion: We propose to (1) continue our collaboration with Dr. Sergey Pitovranov of the Institute of System Studies (Moscow) and begin collaboration with scientists from the Institute of Experimental Meteorology (Obninsk) and the Institute of Applied Geophysics (Moscow) to develop and evaluate various hybrid nonlinear regre,sion schemes that can be used to optimize the agreement between rneasurements and model predictions, and to begin the work of restructuring the MATHEW/ADPIC models with multiple loops for efficient utilization during an emergency, and (2) initiate the work of performing model sensitivity studies using the Chernobyl data base. This will be performed in conjunction with our planned studies with the IAEA/ CEC /WMO sponsored ATMAS project designed to evaluate atmospheric dispersion models using the European data base. This work will utilize the model development, evaluation, and applic.4tions expertise at LLNL, the model-evaluation experience at ORNL, and the theoretical and numerical modeling expertise resident at the Soviet technical institutes as well as their extensive knowledge of the Chernobyl event.
Mechanism: Initially we expect to formulate detailed plans via fax or mail with follow up exchange visits beginning with several Soviet scientists visiting LLNL during April 1990 and followed by US scientists visiting the Institutes in Moscow and Obninsk during September 1990. These meetings will focus on the details of our modeling approaches, the results of our initial model simulations of the Chernobyl event on the European scale, and definition of modelimprovement areas.
Leaders: Gudiksen (LLNL), Dickerson (LLNL), and Hoffman (ORNL) for the US.
Suggested USSR leaders are Pitovranov, Petrov, and Borzilov.
Schedule: Planning efforts would start immediately after agreement. USSR scientists visit the LLNL in April 1990; US scientists visit Institutes in Moscow and Obninsk in September 1990.
Other: USSR man days hosted in US estimated to be 75. US man-days hosted in USSR estimated to be 60. Additional exchanges would be planned for FY 1991.
l
7.1 B WIND DRIVEN RESUSPENSION OF TOXIC AEROSOLS Ob}ective: Develop a definitive model for the resuspension of toxic aerosols.
Discussion: One of the important issues in a variety of situations is the resuspension of radionuclide contaminated aerosols. A general problem relates to the magnitude of the resuspension process at very early tirses following the deposition of radioactive materials in the environment. Considera11e controversy exists, and this is mainly due to the paucity of experimental data tiat have been taken at these early times.
During and immediately following the Chen obyl accident, measurements were made of airborne activity. These data would be of most value in validating present US models of resuspension. Similar measurements were also made in Europe and are hopefully available from the investigators.
Mechanism: A joint study of the resuspension process is proposed. The study would include a visit of USSR scientists to the US to discuss presently used models and the data upon which they are based. This would be followed by a visit to the USSR and the aquisition of data from the Chernobyl experience to test present models and to develop modified models, if appropriate. A goal would be the publication of a joint paper on this subject.
Leaders: The proposed US participants are Anspaugh (LLNL) and Shinn (LLNL). The suggested USSR participants are Garger and Borr.ilov.
Schedule: Workshop to be held in the US in July 1990. Visit of US scientists to the USSR in September 1990.
Other: USSR man days hosted in the US estimated to be 14. US man-days hosted in the USSR estimated to be 14.
7.a C EXTERNAL EXPOSURE AND DOSE FROM DEPOSITED PADIONUCLIDES Objective: A collaborative US USS.R cffort is proposed to improve and validate our methods of forecasting doses and dose commitments from external exposure.
Discussion:
Under many possible accident conditions, the most important contribution to dose during the first year and to the dose commitment will be from external exposure resulting from the decay of deposited radionuclides. Scientists from the US anc' the USSR have developed methods of forecasting such doses based upon initial measurements of external ex?osure rate or of radionuclide deposition, the relative mixture of radionuclides in the source term, theoretical gamma ray transport calculat!ons, assumed rates of radionuclide vertical and horizontal migration, and assumed building shielding and occupancy factors. While the methods used are i
similar, they are not identical.
Further, the assumptions concerning rates of radionuclide horizontal (particularly in urban environments) and vertical migration and concerning building shielding and occupancy factors are not well validated. Data taken following the Chernobyl accident should be of great value in testing the above assumptions. Other data taken in Europe and available through the IAEA, the CEC, and the UNSCEAR would also be of value.
Mechanism: This work could consist of a visit of USSR scientists to the US during the second quarter of FY 1990; the primary goal would be detailed discussions of the methods used to forecast external doses, the formulation of improved methods, and the detailed specification of data needed to validate the methods. This would be followed by a visit of US scientists to the USSR during the fourth quarter of FY 1990 to consider the data and to perform the validation studies. A proposed goal is the publication of a joint paper on the subject.
Leaders: The suggested US participants are Beck (EML), Anspaugh (LLNL), and Bouville (NCI). Possible USSR participants are Likhtarev, Balonov, Knizhnikov, Barkhudarov, and Pavlovsky.
Schedule: Workshop in the US in May 1990; workshop in the USSR in September 1990.
Other: USSR man days hosted in the US estimated to be 50; US man days hosted in the USSR estimated to be 40. Additional exchanges may be required in FY 1991.
7.1 0 i..
LNTERNAL DOSE FROM DIRECT CONTAMLNATION OF TERRESTRIAL FOOD SOURCES Objective: A collaborative US USSR effort is proposed to improve and validate our mehods of forecasting doses and dose commitments from the direct contamination of sood sources.
Discussion: At early times following an accident, the direct contamination of pasture and food stuffs, particularly leafy vegetation and grain, can be of great importance.
This situation has been modeled extensively by scientists in the US, the USSR, and many other countries.
However, models currently employed to predict the deposition, retention and transport of radionuclides in terrestrial environments employ concepts and data bases that are more than a decade old. The extent to which these models have been tested with independent data sets is limited. The data gathered in the USSR (and elsewhere throughout the Northern Hemisphere) offer a unique opportunity to test model predictions of wet and dry deposition, agricultural food chain bloaccumulation, and short and long term retention, redistribution, and resuspension of radionuclides from a variety of natural and artificial surfaces. Models to be tested include those used for analyses of accidental and prolonged releases by the USNRC and the USEPA, and models employed by the USDOE to reconstruct historic doses received from operation of the Nevada Test Site and the Hanford Plant. The Chernobyl data permit model testing over a wide range of locations, ecosystems and climatic regimes. The general applicability of the results of these analyses will be evaluated for application to future accidents and other types of contaminant releases.
Recommendations will be made to improve model structure, to derive more realistic generic and site specific parameter values, and to eliminate unwarranted conservatisms in the model predictions. Information on the transport of 137Cs and 1311 in Europe, Asia, and North America is already available through international activities initiated by the IAEA's Validation of Assessment Models Program (VAMP) and the International Biospheric Model Validation Study (BIOMOVS). Support for both US and USSR involvement with these activities would enable comparisons to be made as a function of distance from the Chernobyl site.
Mechanism: Extensive planning and coordination would be necessary to priorm this complex study. Much of this planning could be carried out by corresponc ence during the next few months. Part of this process would involve the exchange of models (at least of the modeling concepts) and the specification of what consistent data sets would be needed to perform the comparisons. During the third quarter of FY 1990, US scientists could visit the USSR to examine and select data sets with their Soviet colleagues and to make detailed plans for the model validation exercise. At least two additional meetings during FY 1991 would be required to complete the validation exercise, including the formulation of new models,if necessary.
Schedule: Planning would start immediately after project approval. US scientists would meet with their USSR colleagues in the USSR in July 1990.
Additional meetings would be planned for FY 1991.
l
7.1 D Leaders: Suggested US partidpants are Hoffman (ORNL), Whicker (Colorado State University), Peterson (NRC), and Bouville (NCI). Possible USSR participants are Vetrov, Borzilov, Stukin, and Knizhnikov.
Other: US man days hosted in the UC3R estimated at 60. Additional exchanges, particularly, of the USSR scientists to the US, would be planned for FY 1991.
7.1 E i..
LONGoTERM INTERNAL DOSE FROM THE CONTAMINATION OF AGRICULTURAL SOIL Objective: Perform experiments and validation studies to improve our ability to predict rapidly and accurately the long term intemal dose from the contamination of agricultural soll.
This objective would include the consideration of remedial measures to block contamination of food grown on contaminated soll.
Discussion: Despite the large number of radionuclides released from the Chemobyl reactor, most of the long term internal dose commitment will be from 137Cs; a similar situation might well result from any future reactor accident. The long term behavior of cesium in agricultural food chains is subject to great variability due to edaphic factors and agricultural practices. Because this process is affected by many parameters, the possibility exists for effective remedial measures to greatly reduce the uptake of 137Cs by food crops. Such manipulations of 137Cs uptake have been carried out successfully in the USSR in the Chernobyl region and by the US in the Marshall Islands. A }oint study is proposed that would substantially improve the ability of models to predict the long term behavior of 137Cs in a variety of agricultural environments and the effects of remedial measures. The first activity is to conduct a joint investigation on the rate of transfer of 137Cs among some major food chains (ground plants farm animals) on 5 to 7 plots with different ground plant characteristics in the zone of evacuation (30 km zone), as well as in nearby regions (Chernobyl region). This study would also include the effects of remedial actions to prevent the uptake of 137Cs. The objeelve is the comparison of major metludological relationships in the rate of migration of radionuclides within food thains and collection of data for models of transport of radionuclides in fields of ;gricultural production, in addition to the study of the specifies of migration el 137Cs in agricultural food chains.
Such data sets can also be compared to previously contaminated field plots and forest stands at ORNL and to the data on uptake into crops grown in the Marshall Islands, both under r.atural conditions and under the effects of remedial measures. The second part of the proposed }oint study is to test and/or develop models of the transfer of radionuclides in agricultural food chains (on the basis of models used in the USSR and the US). The objective would be the comparison of principles of radionuclide transport and of models of transfer for radionuclides in agricultural food chains used in the USSR and the US and improvement of these models.
Mechanism: In order to undertake these experiments in the USSR, US scientists should visit the experimental sites and plan the experiments with their Soviet colleagues during the first or second quarter of FY 1990. While the experiments are underway, USSR scientists could v! sit the US to pursue the model validation issues with their US counterparts and to examine the ORNL plots and to. receive information on the ORNL and Marshall Islands studies. Following the completion of the f,trst year's experimental studies, two joint meetings would be required to synthmize the data and to complete the model development and validation activities.
e v-
?----
7.1 E Schedule: This study must begin as soon as possible in order to take advantage of the next growing season in the USSR. The initial step would be a planning meeting in the USSR in April 1990. Another workshop would be hosted in the US in July 1990 to examine US sites, exchange data, and plan validation studies. Additional work would be required in FY 1991.
leaders: Proposed US participanM are Whicker (Colorado State University), Robison (LLNL), Hoffman (ORNL), and Romney (UCLA). Suggested USSR participants are Alexakhin and Vetrov.
Other: US man days hosted in the USSR are e'timated to be 80. USSR man days hosted in the US are estimated to be 60. Additional exchanges would take place in FY 1991.
7.1 F LONG TERM DOSE FROM THE CONTAMINATION OF AQUATIC FOOD CHAINS Perform experiments and validation studies to improve our ability to Objective:
predict rapidly and accurately the long term internal dose from the contamination of aquatic food chains.
Discussion: A proposal was received from Kryshev and Ryabov during the visit of the US Working Group 7.1 to the USSR. This is reproduced here. " Keeping in mind the considerable expertise related to the study of contamination of water reservoirs within the zone of Chernobyl, we propose to conduct }oint experiments on migration of radionuclides and influence of radiation on aquatic ecosystems in the following sites: 1) Cooling pond of the Chernobyl reactor, 2) River Pripyat, and 3) Kiev's Reservoir. On these sites, we would conduct the following studies: 1) Inventory and composition of water, plants and animals; 2) Estimated dose from internal and external exposure of hydroblent; 3) Monitoring of fish, plankton, and benthic communities according to radiological, biochemical, cytogenetical and other parameters; 4) Analysis of trophic connections among communities of water mammals; and 5) Analysis of the biological effects among major types of water plants and animals; survey of indicators of fish population. On the basis of data obtained from experiments and monitoring surveys, work will be conducted to verify models of migration of radionuclides in aquatic ecosystems and of effects ofionizing radiation on ecological and physiological parameters. The methodology is developed in view of using the obtained data for prognosis purposes of effects of accidents on the contamination of a,uatic ecosystems. The rate of stability of functional aquatic ecosystems during accidental radioactive contamination is planned. The obtained models will also be used to determine the migration of radionuclides in food chains and the doses of radiation on humans following possible at:Idents of nuclear reactors."
This proposal includes the important elements of the examination of the relationships among the concentrations of radionuclides in members of aquatic ecosystems, and the derivation and/or validation of models of the transport of radionuclides through aquatic ecosystems to man. This program will coordinate with the Hydrology Modeling Task on the role of sorption and availability of radionuclides from sediments.
The initial step in implementing this proposal should be a visit to this Mechanism:
site to develop definitive programmatic needs for the study. Following the initial l
visit, a definitive program plan and detailed budget for FY 1991 will be developed.
The proposed US participants are Templeton (PNL) and Blaylock (ORNL).
Leaders:
The suggested UGSR participants are Kryshev and Ryabov.
7.1 F Schedule: Planning meeting in the USSR in May 1990. Additional meeting would be planned for FY 1991.
Other: US man-days hosted in the USSR estimated to be 40. Additional exchanges would take place in FY 1991.
1 b
7,1 G
]
HYDROLOGICAL MODELING Ob}ective: Develop and validate improved models of the hydrological transport of 4
radionuclides.
Discussion: long term migration in surface water is controlled for contaminants (e.g.,
radionuclides, heavy metals, pesticides, and other toxic chemicals) not only by the water movement, but also by sediment contaminant interactions, such as l
contaminant sorption / desorption with sediment, transport, deposition and migration of sediment-soaked contaminants. There is considerable experience in the US on this problem and scientists have developed four sediment-contaminant models, a one-dimensional model (TODAM) applicable to rivers and estuaries, a two dimensional model (longitudinal and vertical) called SERATRA for rivers and river-run reservoirs, and the three-dimensional model FLESCOT for estuaries, coastal waters, and oceans. The US has also worked on coupling a compartment model (similar to the USSR WATOX 1) for sediment contaminant transport to a geochemical model (MINTEQ) to improve model prediction for the use of waste discharge allocation by j
the regulatory agencies and states. In addition, the Contaminant Migration and Risk l
Assessment (CMRA) methodology has been developed to couple a surface water model with a statistical risk-assessment computer program.
With these experiences, the US could cooperate with USSR researchers on their efforts with WATOX-1 and WATOX 2 (similar to the US FETRA model) in the following ways:
1 1.
Examine the computer codes themselves (WATOX 2 as well as WATOX-1), to incorporate improvements in the models.
Cooperatively develop a one-dimensional model for rivers and estuaries based 2.
on the TODAM model.
3.
Cooperatively develop a three dimensional model based on FLESCOT, which simulates flow, turbulence, water temperature, salinity, sediment, dissolved contaminant, sediment-sorbed contaminants, both in water bodies and rivers / sea bottoms.
4.
Cooperatively develop a multimedia model (or models) to couple migration of I
contaminants in surface water, groundwater, land surface (supplying contaminants to recehing rivers / reservoirs, groundwater and resuspension to air), and air. This is very important for the Chernobyl case, because a large amount of radionuclides on the land surfsce may be washed away from the land surface to recching rivers / reservoirs through run-off and soll erosion.
l l
l
7.1 G 5.
Cooperatively develop a statistical model (based on the CMRA methodology) to statistically couple the surface water-contaminant model results with 4
chemical toxicity to aquatic biota to estimate the aquatic impact of the contamination.
6.
Cooperatively work on model applications to the Chernobyl accident (Kiev Reservoir and others).
7.
Cooperatively design necessary field data collection / analysis and related laboratory experiments.
8.
Cooperatively develop an expert system to run complex codes (such as 1
WATOX 2 types of codes), so non-experts can run them with proper selection of parameters, grids, etc.
9.
Cooperatively develop post processing graphics capabilities, r. specially animation of computer-prediction results of three-dimensional modeling.
Mechanism: The first step in implementing this task should be a trip early in FY 1990 by. the US scientists to the Chernobyl site and Kiev to develop definitive needs.
Following the initial visit, a detailed program plan, schedule, and budget for FY 1991 would be developed.
t.
Leaders: The proposed US participant'is Onishi (PNL).
The suggested USSR participants are Morozov and Zweleznyak.
Other: US man days hosted in the USSR estimated to be 30. Additional exchanges would be planned for FY 1991.
i 1
t
'l
7.1 H CROSS CALIBRATION OF AIRBORNE MEASUREMENTS Objective: Exchange information on systems of airborne measurements of deposited radioactivity and of concentration in air. Perform cross calibrations of the US and USSR systems.
Discussion: At early times following an accident, airborne measurements provide critical information on the levels of deposited radioactivity and of external gamma-exposure rate. Both the US and the USSR have developed considerable expertise in this ares and it is recognized that both countries employ analogous airborne instrumentation systems, share similar concerns regarding calibration and are currently pursuing development of closely related new systems of instrumentation.
The intent of the proposed cooperation is to improve methods and instrumentation systems. The methods to be considered include airborne measurement of radioactive deposition and of airborne radioactivity. The scope of these measurements would include the immediate vicinity of the Chernobyl accident and extend as far downwind as detectable; additional measurements at some site in the US should also be considered.
Mechanism: It is proposed that scientists from each country become more famnkr with their counterparts, airborne measurement techniques, capabilities and problems.
It is therefore proposed that reciprocal visits be arranged for 1990. Each visit should provide opportunity for the host to display and demonstrate systems of instrumentation, as well as to present technical descriptions of systems, procedures and applications. The systems to be displayed and demonstrated should include all elements related to airborne measurements.
These include instruments for the measurement, processing and recording of the dose and energy spectrum of gamma radiation and instruments for air sampling and sample analysis. Each visit should also provide an opportunity for the guest to observe a survey conducted by the host. It is proposed that a survey be jointly conducted of a selected region of the Chernobyl area and one within the US. This opportunity is proposed in order to cross calibrate airborne systems of instrumentation. Ground truth measurements should also be conducted during this same time frame.
Leaders: The proposed US participants are Clark (EG&G) and Beck (EML). The suggested USSR participant is Vakulovsky.
Schedule: Reciprocal visits to be arranged during FY 1990.
Other: USSR man-days hosted in the US estimated to be 120. US man-days hosted in the USSR estimated to be 120.
se
7.1 I CROSS-CALIBRATION OF THE ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLES Objective: To cross calibrate systems for the measurement of radionuclides in a variety of environmental samples and to cross calibrate systems of field spectrometry.
Discussion: In order to carry out the many joint studies proposed, an initial very important step is to ensure that the two countries are using comparable measurement methods and/or that the measurement methods yield comparable results.
Mech.ni:m: Cross calibration of the measurement of the radionuclide content of various environmental samples is proposed. This would be done by the exchange of a variety of environmental samples, including any international standards available and the comparison of results. An interchange of visits to various laboratories would also be useful. As field spectrometry has been found to be a ureful tool following accidental situations, cross calibration of this technique is also proposed.
Leaders: The proposed US leader is Beck (EML) Suggested USSR participants are not yet identified.
Schedule: Arrange for the exchange of appropriate samples during Spring 1990.
Report on results during Summer 1990 and arrange for an interchange of visits during this time.
Other: USSR man-days hosted in the US estimated to be 80. US man days hosted ir.
the USSR estimated to be 30.
l 1
7.2 A
Title:
Reconstruction of Age Specific Organ and Tissue Doses Objective:
To define the state of the art it estimation of absorbed dose and dosr. rate to organs and tissues of interest from external radiation fields as w311 as the intake of isotopes of iodine and cesium.
Initial emphasis will o'e placed on dosimetric needs of current or planned health studies and plans for advancing dosimetric methods. A workshop for comparison of current dosimetric methods and review of joint research efforts will be held in FY91. Training visits for young Soviet specialists would also be arrangid in U.S.
laboratories during 1990.
Discussion:
Organ and tissue doses are needed in risk assessment and risk management tasks stemming from the Chernobyl accident.
Further insight into the dose response relationships in. humans depends, in part, on the likelihood that meaningful estimates of radiation dose can be derived for use in health studies. Of particular concern are exposures of the unborn and of young children.
Cooperative efforts in radiation dosimetry and training will enhance Soviet efforts for resolving current issues, while broadening access to unique data and experience that have the potential to resolve issues in the safety of nuclear installations of world wide importance.
Mechanism:
It is proposed that a workshop be held on dosimetric methods for dose reconstruction.
This workshop should document the state of the art, with l
particular emphasis on exposures of the unborn and young children. A planning L
session should be held in July-August 1990 to outline the workshop and i
identify speakers / participants in the critical areas and prepare for a cooperative research program. A workshop of about 20 people will be held in April 1991.
Proceedings of the workshop would be published as an ORNL Report.
Two to four USSR young specialists in dosimetry will be hosted in U.S.
laboratories for a total of twelve person weeks.
Participants:
Proposed U.S. Participants include K.F. Eckerman, H. Beck, A. Bouville, L.
Anspaugh. Suggested U.S.S.R. participants include I.A. Likhtarev, Knizhnikov, Barkhudarov, and O. Pavlovsky.
K.F. Eckerman and I.A. Likhtarev will coordinate planning of U.S. and U.S.S.R. participation and the technical content of the workshop and draining exchange.
l Schedule:
.Drs. Eckerman and Likhtarev will begin their planning efforts in April 1990.
'sechnical topics, potential U.S. and U.S.S.R. speakers, host training l
laboratories and training participants will be identified and their participation sought. The location and dates of the Workshop will be set by August 1990.
The workshop will be held in April 1991. The Workshop will be recorded and a proceeding published as an ORNL Report by October 1991.
I
7.2 B
Title:
Thermoluminescence (TL) Analysis of Ceramic Building Materials Exposed to G a u Raatation from the Chernobyl Accident.
Objective:
Measurements of cumulative radiation dose resulting from the Chernobyl accident would be made by applying TL techniques to bricks and porcelain plumbing fixtures from structures within 30 km of the Chernobyl site.
The 1
project would involve the collaboration of a TL laboratory in the Soviet Union soon to perform such measurements and a laboratory in the U.S. which has applied the techniques to radiation exposed sites in the past.
Samples would also be made available to other laboratories in Europe and Japan which have expressed a desire to collaborate on such measurements.
Discussion:
Thermoluminescence (TL) measurements of bricks and tiles have led to the success 1ul reconstruction of external gama ray doses at dose levels of biological significance at Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Maruyama et al., 1987) and in regions of the United States exposed to fallout radiation from early atmospheric testing (Haskell, et al., 1988). The Hiroshima measurements have l
been compared with and tested against dosimetric models developed specifically l
for the evaluation of doses in those cities, and together with the U.S.
l fallout measurements have been checked through intercomparisons and blind studies with laboratories in the U.S., U.K. and Japan.
The success of these studies suggests the use of cnmmonly available ceramic materials for accident dosimetry near the Chernobyl site.
Traditional methods for radiation field determination in accident situations typically require prior placement of dosimeters, measurement of the levels of radiation fields using scintillation counters, measurement of nuclide deposition etc., in addition to extensive computer modeling. Difficulties associated with reconstruction of radiation fields increase dramatically with t
time following an accident as decay, cleanup and normal weathering processes occur. Analytical techniques for measuring doses received by environmental items which were present and exposed during the time of the accident provide information on actual accumulated dose to the sample resulting from the l
accident exposure as well as cumulative dose from other natural sources.
These measurements are unaffected by weathering or cleanup'* divities.
In l
addition, measurements made to bricks on the outside of a ouilding can be l
compared against measurements made to porcelain fixturer inside the structure l
to determine shielding factors associated with the prior radiation field.
Dr. Galina H*utt, Senior Research Scientist of the Department of Geology at the Estonian Academy of Sciences has been contracted by the Soviet Government to perform measurements of a similar nature on bricks near the accident site.
Dr. HUtt has requested that the TL Laboratory at the-University of Utah perform replicate measurements on the samples to be taken.
7.2 B Mechanism:
-The project would involve exchange of scientists between the Soviet Union and the U.S. for purposes of sharing technical expertise.
Replicate analyses by the U.S. laboratory would be performed to coincide with analyses currently supported on the Soviet. side.
Participants:
Dr. Galina H0tt, Senior Research Scientist, Institute of Geology, Estonian Academy of Sciences, Estonia pst 7, Tallinn 200101 ESSR, USSR.
and-Dr. Edwin Haskell, Director, TL Laboratory, Radiobiology Division, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah 84112, U.S.A.
Schedule:
Project duration 12 months Sample selection and collection May 1990 Sample analysis June 1990 to May 1992 Visit by Dr. H0tt to Utah July 1990 Visit by Dr. Haskell to Tallinn Sept 1990
7.2 Cl
Title:
Multiple End Point Biodosimetry on Chernobyl Accident Victims Objective:
-Implement the development of a multi-institutional program to measure any different biological effects that occur to individual humans as the result of exposure to ionizing radiation.
The objectives of phase I are:
1.
Establish a set of US USSR collaborative projects to perform many new bio assays on each exposed individual.
2.
Continue the pre existing collaborative project on a glycophorin based somatic mutation assay.
Discussion:
Two benefits are envisioned from this project. One would be to confirm the accuracy, precision, persistence, and utility of the glycophorin based assay for lifetime accumulated biodosimetry.
By September 1991, we would expect to have completed a study on the glycophorin assay, with analysis on blood samples from 75 exposed individuals and 40 matched controls.
The results of the glycophorin assay will be compared with the conventional cytogenetic
- analysis that was performed in 1985/1987 er.d is being repeated in Kiev during 1990 1991.
Implementation of other end points is intended to obtain similar information for several new methods as biological indicators of radiation
- exposure, in the long term, multi-endpoint analysis should be the technique for biodosimetry.
Each assay has particular merits that complement other assays (such as different biological functions measured, different expression times, different persistence of effects, or different tissues tested) so that a multi end point analysis would show very precise and complete descriptians of individual exposure.
It is envisioned that during the time period of phase I, a written protocol will be submitted that details which new assays should be performed, the schedule for implementing their performance, the s'pport required to perform each new assay, and the collaborators involved.
Mechanism:
The glycophorin based assay is an ongoing three way collaboration between Lawrence.Livermore National Laboratory, US; Ir.stitute of Biophysics, Ministry of Health, Moscow, USSR; and All Union S:lentific Center for Radiation Medicine, Kiev, USSR.
The expansion to new bio-assays will be planned by an advisory committee that will be organized in FY 1990 and meet for a workshop in FY 1991.
It should include experts in the field of biodosimetry, biochemical epidemiology, and radiation biology both from the US and USSR.
- ~
t
)
7.2 Cl
Participants:
The ongoing glycophorin study is led by Ronald H. Jensen, Ph.D.
Section Leader, Cytochemistry, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Professor Pavel Pleshanov Ministry of Health, Moscow Professor Oles A. Pyatak, Deputy Director All-Union Scientific Center of Radiation Medicine, Kiev The advisory planning committe<< should include these three individuals plus others from each country who are experts in different types of biodosimetric measurements (e.g., from the l SA, Dr. Niel Wald, U. of Pittsburg, Dr. Richard Albertini, U. of 'Iermont, Dr. Joe Gray, LLNL, and/or Dr. L. G. Littlefield).
Schedule:
Glycophorin samples are to be analyzed at the rate of 10 samples per month.-
At present, about 25 samples have already been analyzed.
To date, communication between the two countries has been difficult and shipment of samples from the USSR has been unreliable.
This must be improved if the rate of analysis is to be achieved.
The planning committee should be appointed and advised of their responsibility by August 1990, should hold a workshop in October or November 1990, and should submit a finished document by March 1991. The workshop should be 2-3 days on the East coast of the USA with 4 US committee members and 4 Soviet courter) arts.
Following the meeting, some additional visits to cytogenetic re.earci centers could be arranged to enhance information exchange and future research collaboration. Methods for beginning the recommended new assays
'(collaboration agreements and-organization decisions) would be completed before the end of FY 1991.
l' 1'
l-
~
4 7.2 C2
Title:
Biodosimetry for Chernobyl Victims Using " Chromosome Painting" Dr. Tore Straume, Lawrence Livemore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550 Objective:
We propose to measure chromosome translocation frequencies in selected persons exposed to radiation from Chernobyl using a rapid and accurate translocation detection method (" chromosome painting") recently developed at Livermore.
From the measured translocation frequencies, and from standard dose response curves also obtained as part of this proposal for the dose rates and radiation types relevant to Chernobyl, we will reconstruct the doses received by these persons.
Discussion:
We have recently developed an assay for the purpose of rapid detection of chromosome translocations in human cells (doses less than 10 rad of low LET radiation are possible). This assay involves the application of fluorescence in situ hybridization technology (FISH) and chromosome specific DNA probes to selectively " paint" entire human chromosomes. As translocations are stable with time post exposure, they would be expected to be reliable for use in-biological dosimetry of Chernobyl victims, even several years after the accident.
FISH results in essentially uniform sainting along the entire L
lengths of the targeted chromosomes with a brigit fluorescent green yellow color.
With subsequent counter staining, all other chromosomes not specifically labeled are made to fluoresce red. The final result is metaphase spreads having selected chromosomes fluorescing bright green yellow and the other chromosomes fluorescing red. Translocation of material between red and l
green yellow chromosomes is very easy to detect using fluorescence microscopy and lends itself to automated detection. We have previously described the
- chromosome painting" method in recent publications, including studies of irradiated persons (1-5).
Mechanism:
During the first 12 months, we expect to (1) organize a planning meeting in the USSR to discuss project strategy, scientific needs, and develop an outline and timetable, and (2) generate in vitro dose-response curves for
. translocations relevant to Chernobyl radiation type and dose rates received, to serve as the basis for future biodosimetry of Chernobyl accident victims
- using chromosome painting relevant to Chernobyl radiation type and dose rates received.
Participants:
Dr. Tore Straume, Section Leader, Analysis and Assessment, Environmental l
Sciences Division, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P.O. Box 5507, Livermore, CA 94550, USA. The Soviet counterpart should have good familiarity with cytogenetics and radiation biological dosimetry. Detailed knowledge of molecular biology and fluorescence hybridization is not required. The chromosome painting methodology is relatively simple. We can provide the i
necessary training.
1 7.2 CP Schedule:.
Planning meeting:~ 2 3 months Complete standard dose response curves:
12-18 months Begin biodosimetry of Chernobyl victims:
18 months Begin possible technology transfer to USSR:
18 months Meetings:-
Timing:
Initial overview meeting (3 days; May-June 1990)
Place:
USSR, City'(?)l meeting to discuss the methodology and develop a People:
Small informa outline and timetable for the project.
It would be useful if the USSR scientist (s) to be involved in this project were identified well before the
- meeting,
' Timing:
Planning meeting for biodosimetry of Chernobyl victims (3 days); Oct-Nov 1990).
Place:
Livermore, USA People: Attendance should be limited to the principal USSR scientist for this project and at most one colleague or assistant. The meeting should be kept L
small and informal involving only the scientists directly involved in this project. An additional period of tine could be scheduled following the
- meeting for methodology. training. Dr. R. Jensen of LLNL to attend for L
possible intercomparisons with glycophorin mutation assay.
i s
I 1
Nr 1
l-
.j
}
- l
7.2 C3
Title:
Automated Chromosome Analysis of Chernobyl Population Subsets with Difh ring Radiation Exposures Objectives:
1.
To produce a database of cytogenetic dosimetry results in individuals with a variety of radiation exposure routes, doses *.nd dose rates, s
2.
To determine the differences in biologic effec;1veness of the various radiation exposure variables using the cytogenetic endpoint.
3.
To aid in diagnosis and clinical monitoring of blood dyscrasia patients arising from these populations, and to augment our limited understanding of the relationship between induced aberrations and blood dyscrasias.
4.
To s'upplement cytogenetic data collection for persons in the ongoing and future expanded studies of biological indicators of radiation exposure (e.g.,
glycophorin somatic mutation assays).
Discussion:
The purpose of these studies is to maximize the radiation cytogenetic and biodosimetric information to be obtained from a unique human source, the population subsets in the Chernobyl area that were irradiateo acutely and/or chronically, externally and/or internally, at high and/or low doses and dose rates. These subsets include Chernobyl nuclear power plant workers; other persons working at the plant during and after accident; and population groups that lived or are living in Chernobyl accident-contaminated areas.
Their exposures _ differ markedly from the instantaneous, external, high dose exposures of the Japanese A bomb survivors, and those of most other worker and patient populations. Analysis of these data should provide a better understanding of the differing biological effects of the above mentioned variables, and of the relationship between chromosome aberrations and blood dyscrasias. The comparisons of cytogenetic findings with other biological radiation indicators should also aid in the development of optimal understanding and improved prediction models concerning late radiation effects.
Mechanism:
a.
Training of Soviet personnel in our cycologic methods.
b.' Funding for purchase of the present automated chromosome aberration scoring and karyotype analysis system or an' improved one in the US, and subsequent placement of another such system in Kiev, c.
A semiannual meeting of-participants at alternating locations between Pittsburgh and Kiev.
Products in 12 months from initiation should be:
1.
a developing database with relatively high numbers of metaphase cells scored automatically, and 2.
a file of cytogenetically defined blood dyscrasia patients.
Participants:
1.
Maria Andreevna Pilinskaya, M.D., All-Union Scientific Center for Radiation Medicine, Kiev.
2.
Niel Wald, M.D., University of Pittsburgh
7.2 C3 Schedule:
a.
Test existing Kiev slides in Pittsburgh:
1st-3rd months.
b.
Training for any necessary modification in cytologic methods in Pittsburgh:
3rd 4th month, c.
Meeting to review progress and problems in methodology and analysis:
every 6 months, d.
Transfer of data and results from Pittsburgh to Kiev monthly, beginning in the 5th month.
e.
Interim report:
12th month.
- f. Complete initial phase:
24th month l
l
d 7.2 D
^
Title:
Leukemia Follow up Study: Chernobyl Accident Objective:
Development of a protocol (study plan) for a systematic epidemiologic and etiologic study of the post-Chernobyl experience with leukemia.
Discussion:
Leukemia is the first carcinogenic effect to appear following exposure to ionizing radiation. Within five years a good study could reliably define, for the first time, its early time response characteristics, Ultimately the post-Chernobyl experience might clarify the dose-rate characteristics of the leukemogenic response as well.
In addition, given a sufficient number of high dose cases, the study should offer an opportunity to learn whether radiation-induced leukemia has unusual biologic features in comparison with leukemia of other etiologies.
The public health significance of the study of leukemia would be manifold:
(1) early insight into the probable significance of the total cancer response to the irradiation from the accident; (2) indication of the level of risk for leukemia and, indirectly, for solid tumors also; and (3) estimation of the total burden of radiogenic leukemia (and of all cancer) in the exposed population. Within 12 months of the acceptance of a definitive protocol it should be possible to have the necessary inter agency agreements and operational procedures drafted and a start made on:
(1) the definition of the study population; (2) the ascertainment of leukemia cases; (3) the establishment of procedures for diagnostic review; (4)the establishment of communication channels and file procedures; (5) the collection of demographic information on the population selected for study; and (6) the establishment of a central file, hard-copy and computer, to serve the purposes of the study.
Mechanism:
Workshop in the US with prior visits to US centers of relevant work.
Participants:
Experts-in hematology and pathology whose special interests include immuno hematology, histochemistry, cytogenetics, and the morphologic flassification of leukemia, and in epidemiology and survey statistics. Gil Beebe of NCI would be the coordinator for the U.S. side.
Schedule:
It might take 6-12 month:; after the workshop to develop a definitive protocol-to which the various cooper & ting agencies in the USSR would agree, since access to the medical and mortality experience of the subjects may have to be arranged.
The necessary steps in tr.o study process can be enumerated but the factors. influencing their progress w'll hhve to be identified by the Soviet participants.
1
7.2 D Budget elements:
a.) Timing:
Perha)s five days for a workshop to be held in June or later, the length of time ;)eing based on the necessity for bi lingual interpretation.
b.)
Lochtion:
At NIH or DOE in Washington.
c.)
People:
For a workshop of 12 people, logistic support for 6 US participants for 5 days, plus 30 man-days for the Soviet participants and 10 man-days for two interpreters.
In advance of the workshop, provision for 40 man days of travel to visit selected US centers of excellence in leukemia investigation on the part of primarily English-speaking Soviet participants.
l N.
7.2 E
Title:
Development of methods and technologies for epidemiologic studies of populations exposed to ionizing radiation.
Objective:
The proposed objective is to design a comprehensive and integrated data base structure and identify existing or needed support technologies for follow up studies of the population (or subsets of it) exposed to radiation as a result of the Chernobyl reactor accident in order to address questions of mutual scientific interest concerning the health effects of the exposure.
Discussion:
This work is necessary to ensure that epidemiologic, dosimetric, clinical, and ecologic data for individuals in the exposed population (s) are collected and managed so as to ensure their accuracy, completeness, and validity and their availability in a format that enables planned statistical analyses to be conducted.
By the end of one year, it is expected that structured analysis of the data collection operations and design of the data base structure will have been completed. This will provide for the development of a scientifically valid data base that will enable (1) jury treatment regimens and identify monitoring of the health of exposed individuals to evaluate radiation in onset of any untoward effects, and (2) expansion by direct measurement of the body of scientific knowledge of the magnitude of the risks to health of exposure to low levels of radiation.
Thus far, there are only limited data for evaluation of these end points.
The construction of an integrated l
epidemiological 1y valid data base for the Chernobyl population will expand the basis for such evaluations and is an essential first step in conducting any epidemiologic study.
Mechanisms:
The project objective will be met by extended (1-2 months) exchange visits followed by joint work sessions involving scientists from institutions in the US conducting follow up studies of large populations (particularly irradiated populations) and Soviet institutions involved in the collection and management of data for the Chernobyl population.
Participants:
1 The task requires scientists and technologists with knowledge, skills, and experience-in roster (registry) construction, data base design, development and management, quality controls, records linkage, vital status and cause of death determination, health survey design, long term medical follow up, and I
radiation dosimetry as well as in study design and analysis of-epidemiologic dita. Dr. A. Prisyazhnyuk, Professor N. Omelyanets, and Dr. B. Ledoschuk are among the Soviet scientists with interest in the project area. Dr. Shirley Fry of ORAU would be the coordinator for the U.S. side.
1 Schedule:
-Exchange informational visits of scientists to US and USSR during the first six months
-Organize joint work sessions during months 7-12 to complete drafts of data base structure, documentation, data collection / survey instruments
-Plan for development of needed supporting software for data base system during months 13-18 m
i.
4 7.2 E
- Budget Elements:
)
-Exchange visits: Up to 6 members from each country would spend 12 months in
)
counterpart country. ORAU could host 2 3 scientists / technologists for 1-7 months-each. Other U.S. host laboratories might include NIH, Center for Disease Control, PNL, etc.
-Work sessions: Two to three meetings involving 6 members from each country for 5 day session / meeting i
s
.h f
I i
l..
2 w
7.2 F
Title:
Workshop on Detection of Thyroid Dysfunction Objective:
1.
To discuss the applicability of the most sophisticated procedures for detection of thyroid dysfunction among those exposed to fallout from Chernobyl, and 2.
consider plans for joint efforts in the future.
Discussion:
Should be based in part on reprints, preprints and abstracts exchanged in advance of the workshop. Review the information available by age-group k
exposed, the radioisotopes involved, dosimetry, urinary measurements, dietary intake, thyroid uptake and size, and results to date. Also, review the use of potassium iodide, and acute or delayed reactions to it, and the registry of children with high thyroid doses.
Review the findings from other exposures of the thyroid to ionizing radiation, including the fallout in 1954 on the Marshall Islands, I-131 studies in Scandinavia, high background radiation in
?
China, and fallout in Nevada from weapons tests in the 1950s.
Compare results L
with those in Chernobyl and consider differences in relation to exposure variables, host susceptibility and study procedures.
Plan population groups to be studied in the future, and methods for detecting hypothyroidism, taking into account the latent period, e.g. by what schedule and by what means should thyroid nodules and cancer be sought? Use of ultrasound and aspiration cytology of nodules.
Mechanism: Workshop
Participants:
Thyroidologists from both countries, especially those with a knowledge of radiation effects, dosimetry, and/or epidemiology.
For the US, five or more of the following would be selected:
W.H. Adams, Brookhaven National Laboratory; David V. Becker, Cornell; A. Bertrand Brill, U. of Massachusetts; Michael M. Kaplan, Michigan; Jacob Robbins, NIH; Arthur S. Schneider, Chicago Medical School; Roy E. Shore, NYU; and Lester Van Middlesworth, U. of Tennessee.
Robert W. Miller of NCI would be the coordinator for the US side.
Schedule:
Make plans for the workshop in early 1990. Consider sending two Soviet specialists, one on dosimetry and the other a clinician, to formulate a preliminary agenda in Bethesda. The workshop should be held as early in p
1990 as possible.
Budget elements:
a) Duration: Three days b) - Place:
In Bethesda or Kiev c) Person-days:
15 40 for each side for 3 days at the workshop without translation or 5 days with translation, plus time for visits to key
=
laboratories within the host country.
I
~.
7.2 G
Title:
- Child Health Survey: Chernobyl Accident Objective:
Development of a protocol (study plan) for a comprehensive survey of the health of children affected by the Chernobyl accident Discussion:
Children are more sensitive to the effects of irradiation than other age groups and may suffer effects other than those for which special, target-oriented, surveys are already being designed, e.g., of leukemia and thyroid disease.. Any untoward effects on children would have considerable public health-as well as scientific significance. -The effect of irradiation on growth and development is readily acknowledged but far from precisely understood or measured. The proposed study would be expected to make a major contribution to knowledge of the desendence of growth and development on radiation dose. There is concern t1at exposure at higher dose levels may have made children more susceptible to infection and also that there may be effects l
that have.not yet been identified in the world literature.
It is important, therefore', that-there be develo>ed a reliable index of the health of the L
exposed children over time, periaps continued through late adolescence, l
and that it be investigated in relation to radiation dose. The psycho. logical h
'and psychosocial effects of the stress associated with evacuation and l-relocation may also deserve careful study, either in the proposed child health survey or in a special survey designed for the purpose.
In 12 months it is expected that a definitive study protocol could be agreed to but in that i
g
' time it might not'be possible to complete all the necessary cooperative arrangements within the USSR for record linkage, observational procedures, and data collection.
It is important that a child health survey be organized
~ soon so:that. any early effects on very young children not be missed.
- Initially any observational data already collected would be studied for the value they might have in planning and carrying out the proposed survey.
Within five years there should at least be a good reading on the effect of l
1rradiation on growth and development.
Mechanism:-
I Workshop in the US, possibly in Washington, with prior visits to centers of relevant work'in the US.
L
Participants:
h
-The breadth of the subject may require as many as 6 or'7 experts from each l
country, depeading on how many individuals with expertise in more than one relevant area can be recruited for the workshop The obvious areas of 1
expertise include pediatrics, endocrinology, infectious-diseases, H
epidemiology; survey statistics, growth-and-development, and clinical
. laboratory science.
Gil Beebe of NCI would be the initial coordinator for the j
U.S. side.
' Schedule:
'The, proposal is to hold a workshop designed to produce a research protocol, not to conduct a study.
It remains to be seen whether participation in the L
worksho' will lead to active US participation in the conduct of the study.
j The wor (shop would be planned for the sumer or fall of 1990.
It might well
)
7.2 G
-take up to 12 months after the workshop for a definitive protocol to be developed since a variety of Soviet institutions and agencies presui.: ably would have to be involved. The US side is quite poorly informed about Soviet resources for such a study and about the extent of the cooperative arrangements that would be necessary in the USSR.
Budget elements:
a.) Timing:
Five days for a workshop to be held in July or later; its duration being controlled by the necessity for bi lingual interpretation.
b.
Place:
NIH or DOE headquarters in Washington c.
People:
6 or 7 from each country, plus 2 interpreters to share the bu den of interpretation. This would require logistic support for 6-7 US scientists, for the same number of Soviet scientists, and for 2 interpreters.
Provision would also be made for perhaps 40 man days of pre workshop visits to US centers by primarily English-speaking Soviet participants.
l l
l l.
l l
7.2 H
Title:
Development of optimal early prognostic indicators in the Acute l
Radiation Syndrome by reanalysis of Chernobyl high exposure patients clinical and laboratory data Objective:
a.
To review clinical and laboratory data of Chernobyl Acute Radiation i
Syndrome patients, b.
To determine which of these data correlate best with clinical course, 3
complications and final outcome, l
Discussion:
The Chernobyl Acute Radiation Syndrome patients represent the largest l~
single group of humans exposed at the same time and under circumstances in which relatively uniform, consistent observations and sophisticated clinical care were feasible.
Earlier triage schemes have been based on severely circumstantially limited Japanese A bomb medical data, cancer patient data post-radiation therapy and a small number of occupational radiation accidents usually involving 1 to 3 patients.
The Chernobyl patients present an opportunity to test the previously promulgated procedures (e.g., those of Dunham,Cronkite, Wald and Thoma, Guskova, Baranov and others) for triage, diagnosis and prognosis. An assessment of the effectiveness of the therapeutic measures used should form a second phase of this project.
The purpose of this study.is-to review the medical and dosimetric records on the Acute Radiation Syndrome patients from the Chernobyl accident to determine the optimal early clinical and laboratory indicators of prognosis as related to the actual clinical occurrences and outcomes of the individual patients.
The hope is that an improved set of early diagnostic procedures can be developed to optimize the clinical triage, diagnosis and management of any future radiation injury patients.
Mechanism:
- a. _ Preliminary planning meeting in USSR to view location and nature of clinical records of Moscow and-Kiev hospitals and other institutions where patients were treated and evaluated subsequently; and to determine best method for record collection and processing, b.
Midterm me d ng in US to collaborate in evaluation-of database and design of statistical ' analysis procedures.
c.
Final meeting to review-and discuss results.
Products in 12 months from initiation should be:
1.
Copies of the clinical records of all pertinent patients (approximately 120, based.on Prof.11 yin's Kiev presentation of 27 September 1989).
- 2. - A database consisting of all relevant clinical and laboratory findings in_each patient.
3.
Statistical analyses of the database to identify the best correlates for determining diagnosis and prognosis.
~.
7.2 H
Participants:
a.
US: Niel Wald, M.D., Radiation Medicine specialist; Carol Redmond, Ph.D.,
Biostatistician and Chairman, Dept of Biostatistics, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, b.
USSR:
Radiation Medicine specialists in Moscow (e.g., Drs. L.A. Ilyin, A.K. Guskova, or A.E. Baranov) and Kiev (e.g., Drs. V. Buzonov, V. Bebeshko).
Biostatistician (e.g., 7)
Schedule:
a.
Planning meeting -- 1st month b.
Record microfilming - 2nd month c.
Data extraction -- 3rd 4th month d.
Database development -- 5th 6th month e.
Midterm meeting -- 6th month f.
Statistical analyses -- 7th llth month g.
Final report preparation and final meeting -- 12th month l
t l
l l
7.2 I
Title:
Model Validation for Non Stochastic Health Effects Dbjective:
Determination of thresholds and dose rate and gestation age dependent a.
risk coefficients for the various possible adverse effects on embryo / fetus, b.
Determination of the threshold values correlated to dose and dose rate for early (non stochastic) effects, Development of better early diagnostic procedures to determine promptly c.
the extent of severe radiation injury.
d.
Evaluation of the impact of the various forms of therapy utilized in the acute radiation s clinical course. yndrome patients on survival rate, symptomatology and Discussion:
By examining the relationship between the dose received and the non-stochastic health effects observed, and the influence of dose rate and other factors on these relationships, it will be possible to test the validity of models currently being used to describe the occurrence of early and continuing, non stochastic effects and to reduce the uncertainty of risk assessment. This project can lead to a determination, in-a relatively short period of time, of the availability and suitability of needed clinical and dosimetric data.
Mechanism, Schedule,
Participants:
Phase I of the project can be accomplished by a two to three week visit to the USSR in May of 1990 of two American specialists -- one clinician (Dr.
Wald) and one dosimetry expert (Dr. Eckerman).
This team should spend time assessing and having access to clinical files at Moscow Hospital #6 and the files at the All-Union Scientific Center of Radiation Medicine in Kiev.
Phase II, which would develop a longer term study of this data, will be developed depending on the success or failure of Phase I.
Budget:-
The US Team would visit the USSR on a Host Country basis for I4 2I man days each pert.on.
If Phase I is successful, the US will sponsor a USSR team for a similar number of days, to develop the plans for Phase II and to become familiar with US non stochastic studies and clinical capabilities, w
l l
1
7.2 J
Title:
Effectiveness of Countersensures for Dose Reduction Objective:
Develop models for assessing the utility, effectiveness, detriments and costs of protective actions (countenneasures) used to protect persons from large releases of radioactive materials to the environment. Using these models, assess actions taken following the Chernobyl accident and prepare appropriate reports to update current knowledge and to facilitate emergency preparedness planning.
Discussion:
Protective actions were implemented in many countries following the radioactive releases from Chernobyl but the utility effectiveness, detriments ad costs of such actions are not well known.
Persons were evaluated and/or relocated, land areas were closed for use, and stable iodine prophylaxis was given to several million people.
Foodstuffs, drinking water, livestock, animal feed, and crops were extensively surveyed and controlled on short, intermediate and long term bases. Data and models pertinent to assessing these actions have been analyzed only in a general degree. An extensive evaluation of the date together with development of analytical models should be useful in ascertainin( the value of protective actions (countermeasures) both on a scientific basis and in showing the constraints encountered under widespread field conditions.
By the end of the year it should be possible to define the necessary data base and models and to initiate a preliminary analysis. No other accidental major release of radioactivity to the environment has provided the opportunity for such studies over the wide range of actions taken and varying field conditions for such a large population and geographical area affected. Outcome of the study is essential fcr a more realistic appraisal of doses received by the various population groups. The study should commence now so as to avoid loss of essential data and other widely distributed records. The chief value of the study is to show how potential detriments from large radioactive releases may be controlled, thereby improving emergency preparedness and allaying public concerns.
One may assume that the majority of these protective actions were needed and effective, considering the massiveness of the effort and the short time available for their implementation. However, careful evaluation of protective actions is needed for two purposes:
first, to allow dose projections for workers and members of the general public to be corrected to realistic values (and thereby to permit better projections of possible adverse health effects),
and second, to provide a more realistic framework for emergency preparedness planning. The Chernobyl experience represents a unique opportunity not only to study these methods of controlling and minimizing radiation doses in accident situations, but also to model the application of such actions in a disgrete, quantitative format.
Mechanism:
During Phase 1 (starting in 1990) it it proposed to (1) categorize the types of protective actions to be evaluated, (2) establish modeling and other analytical requirements, (3) define the necessary data base, (4) establish the means for collection and model analysis of such data, and (5) initiate data collection and analysis. A planning meeting in early 1990 is proposed to establish the working protocols and program, and to define the appropriate
7.2 J organizational structure and staffing.
Following this meeting, work would commence both in the US and USSR to bring these plans into action.
Another meeting is envisaged in late 1990 or esrly 1991 to (1) review the progress of the study, (2) modify it as necessary, (3) facilitate the data collection and analysis, an (/.) prepare an initial progress report. During Phase 2 (starting in FY 92), data analysis and model development and evaluation would accelerate, leading to a final report on protective action (countermeasure) methodologies.
Participants:
For the U.S.: Robert J. Catlin, Principal Investigator Marvin Goldman, UC-Davis Lynn R. Anspaugh, UC-Livermore For the USSR:
I. A. Likhtarev, Principal Investigator A.M. Barkhudarov M.I. Balonov
- 0. A. Pavlovsky (Other scientists as appropriate, knowledgeable in radiation exposure pathways and countermeasures)
Schedule:
Apr 90 Organize planning meeting May-Planning meeting (1 week)
June Establish wocking groups; begin data collection and model development Aug Data collection; model and data exchange Sep-Interim progress report Oct 90 Jan 91-Data collection; model development Feb-Program review meeting (1 week)
Mar-Study report Budget Elements:
Planning meeting:
5 days: May 1990: Kiev.
Program meeting:
5 days:
Feb 1991: Kiev.
l.
l l
I i
M
a-.-
a.
-,a 4
w--.+
aA mh.a,.-o.
a,,a-.
$L4a*L*
-e._,,,,,_,
>_n,x,,a_g,
,__a_,
t SAMPLE OF NRC COMPETITIVE RESEARCH PROJECTS i
TAB 1 Partial listing of compe21tive research projects initiated since 1987 TAB 2 Sample issue of Commerce Business Daily (publication containing informationonU.5.Governmentprocurements)
TAB 3 Two(2)sampleNRCnoticespublishedintheCommerceBusiness Detly for competitive research projects TAB 4 Two(2)sampleRequestsforProposalswhichcontainstatementsof work, evaluation criteria for contractor selectier. and NRC contract clauses TAB 5 Sample Broad Agency Announcement to solicit innovative research proposals l
O i
l r
-ive a
PARTIAL LISTING OF TYPICAL COMPETITIVE RESEARCH PROJECTS $1NCE 1987 (1) " Irradiation Ee.brittlement of Reactor Pressure Vessel Steels" Four (4) year contract to perform research aimed at providing analytical and experimental methods and data that are necessary to ensure the atructural safety and reliability of pressure boundary components in Light Water Reactor Systems.
(2) "Rulemaking and Regulatory Analysis Support for Requirements Involving Physical Modification Two (2) year contract to assist the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ia the development, documentation and implementation of rule, backfits, guides, responses to petitions and to assist in the preparation of supporting regulatory analyses.
(3)"ComprehensiveAgingofCircuitBreakers/RelaysPhase!! Study" Two (2) year contract to perform specific tasks which are required to satisfactorily fulfill Phase II of the Nuclear Plant Aging Research (NPAR) Program for circuit breakers and relays.
(4)"RevisionofNRCGuidanceonRespiratoryProtection" Eighteen (18) month contract to,covide assistance to the NRC for a major revision of Regulatory Guide B.15. " Acceptance Program for Respiratory Protection," and NUREG-Out), " Manual of Respiratory Protection Against Airborne Radioactive Meterial " based on new respiratory protection requirements, new American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standards and r,ew protective equipment.
(5) " Human Factors Evaluation of Industrial Radiography" Eighteen (18) month contract to perform evaluation of the human factors of industrial radiography ectivities, including those activities involving fixed and portable radiography equipment.
(6)"ExpertSystemVerificationandValidationMethodology" Two(2)yearcontracttodevelopanddocumentGuidelinesforVerifying and Validating Expert Systems.
These guidelines will'be in the form of an easy-to-read manual for use by designers, users, and regulators of expert systems.
M a
I
A g
- y.'.,* y.3,,P. a sor J,v.'
U.* t t ' tv,lPP '., * 'f or * %
.; t p
1 tuttm'r '# e $ O e-*
, MBIDM, w,3.e',A10 )
- t
.^ n e e 3,,* a r,g.....
,.,6 0 4Ib58 $lt.MiAM80 -
4 h humammter l, M
.e
.a.
-s...
e:,.,
gr <,
l {. A ane tot of U S. Govwiris't possomsed hvastoria, esensiessencseitschWomeimods, ems el meses j
r I.,,, s..,. s, s,.
'.,t
.u,, m.
.=
]
e
.is 4 a
'4.
M 9*5 o."
3..g f.g
.x
.n
.+-
s.
4v e
c.
t
,,,..., se j
i e
. +.,,,..
,,,,,,, c.y
- t....
.n e
,..,e..,.
~.
e-
,6 s. M w e,Jltra EFw.,s. m.., :
- t.'*
- .8
.m...
.*^v"
~ -
- wa t-
+
.a~ns.,
a
- o. v e.s
)
i s..
'*4 win"*
ms s.*+.
..,..,....(
e e. e.m.
..,e
. e e 4.-i a N.fi*.,.v.4 %.ea,. -., 4,e 3.<,
- ' * " '
- 9' 4.
e b ' ; d P ' t" ' 8 e-I r
-, e
'en'gu'peuse' eses as a tse met ei M e een t esas e ese
! [F goudt>lest75 sum %emafpippaistoteas,setenDA6'==== * -i=== sa= =rmi=
- n am as== a 'i==
=u=
- a=an ew e=e t e==Weg==
- e is= = see W U.h. 00VERNMENT
"" raw * *m* *o"e"at.een"e s '."i.E5 **1 "..*s *o*a'*s*i ' er a"s"ii.' = m"'W e"
~ ' 'c '
.P10C0REMENTS l,
i m,.==ms6 sa.'
sei es, sea one seene e og se is mamar W tesessues ama tagilR.
1 se apun onssi um esse sus seness eLeg to er men 39"ou heum te pensut w lease spent wem W paw a" v.
son met R e saa b somes seuer W M S W 9e gW e,s as,apoortas amm ed as esse buet must an mesu19Wl*g*Q Q hunse W k N W
, gg j
88 "* 8E 89 888 88""8 b "" "' UE
- 8'"4 8"""
,. 38 8C0, Pt aseth, feueret. B 21704 9014 asse W sewsmme a es't 4 av pu e e"m W e to W shui 8 CJ k LJ sr
.&. m m M fu m W 58toD he )
prier as #se lee to se h tru test pu sagens, t t assed tw sw km B FUt kn6m E EN N LE asse thee hast a hues.
l g
W see es e um in tuas e es w amat es taa e = m too sees ensass am tamium b unha huus assow win es si up e se esse auf a a edun IW5W40L apt Cub 96!',levapErv'~'
l I
"""U**""*'
- '"I
""'I U# ""esam"i ssue must ad Sussq tu Ibsu 9 8 passug the fle l Sgeftientsi Desskippestal,Iest glid hueseMh West ggi,gy.se,.pg10P410E % e
~.'n*...s.**'
gust s
..,,r.
3 c..
7.t* *. * *. Ossed be egen t super 89 Se tuus les se Wawe tune kBBWeb hidistel bES besit and ggbsd segursh) essumust, IIssef A> tumms w eses 4B46406, ha tende posuus se pausamm esignum esumswe essa l
aus enmue ass R ens aW tse terms er user mengsusi e l
I feud 42 toer. Deuser. 851884teso gC sensi rite b9Enteh4L CfWI Onff AfD ABeccanfte RIBBftflaf It.
3.gv asme WLaPOIR WithEM 9Y919 94A5tB) gius sW emanas esumass ses to pass usetwe ensam of l
EB fB m O 89t PE94MANCE 14CTElAL ABERAFT band aper ganggggeM 6p lilD #6 9. UNE Caes tow 4 0 last N/9? b muses # hD use WW Sus puusised h
'ilmusum Int 7pSW4001 husum t On Due tytt assesuset pigt gens, susik a yemm geese e og, e most e ease eau W e af te agosi t to bem tsus as tras tuelk we tr gu 5 est mW sees t gebulb ist M Dig issutets agd>
@ aussW W te resumW Who eses Se Saud 12 aues tun a gge seat penas tu Inst e ming 648 h gues Ru mer af tow a Dr eseI,"a"smeri mesem a er um an W me
==s=== n=== m asse t u emune m a seem
,w W n W = et.<em, W i sw somemens. a somme en l
A he serlan W se e use use k see seus es t beeW # 8 ' empsef Me be ases meest feesusfi seser props tseesi aW mee ap 9 e sessar aus de h to P Gusg amoreme.g asmoasa eso l
L epuses asser W se asse ne eW me e a enn t te
,,m., se a,yms. m.,a.ysts se, e si.en sween es, is,, tyer e
. v mie t mes= = em W w one== ===e= ====. e n4 w.
..s N
m = mm W w ge y, ese t te me rese W ar meus es s==* page= = a a=
est sunuwe we mism w :== asume war e e eas'm"en' asii uma smeeW emmemus assum, men euent a s Jese,g g ggg g,aussa eut - a seen, em ansmasus manw a pie sesasenwienw wonWsaw'e*s aan a mass me e een== we svei se s es ese we a ses meme g,q gg g, pyy,88ush. B 8582 af ses b esehr to N,let 94 Isad e et,oast use Maml9 4 88 m., sums.(e n W e enter to e em %.e Du s
s.easemascautmasca====P==a e souTc vaan ful 1sushelp assen a e use sW ses en sust eut ses as>W e assem a seus sneer e se tems som i hamme aat name 9 % Ibn 9fa! West;Its 13fst Itent e IE'au aus amL2 lames en gy a epiep tyees, esswag in tg 30 m asset t tim er pro eget g y age a 3Ag mamammeggt mas pte.asts b IRash enesen e e Itat L 4 tubi um pesar e 40 egen f (t 4 m h het loose seus e agese se em use tus e ir Opensa Deuse
$m O ser O 6 lesi e e meest seessun poem 4 les sem so y, e tise a sent h sadh a to anst t eassuet e 9m se se W sus l ghp asesi sif inapW Ipt paper W peut suu 8 sew emell t et t east I tdt esquise tesh messustsWes tr AAN[10Rb R M
.,,mE,'E,,,~,,,,,,.,^',,,.,,,,,-*
4' '
'd'C M ****N ,'~*
- a w w i m e w s sam,w m w===
. Gmem ter Bum OsM helipensM GuleNW' La
- a' gnagemp I behg new sugem W wise sensin p a
,Ae M E M L l af LN) 4 gegens supsth W W am W assert I f/&18 (LWi'llWC)
M8md Peas persy hL W. Ihm $14 Assak 8A 80B08 -A.usannaanemuuante e seus arm
,g,,,;,;,,,
.,w,. c.,,
e a,'u l c han se museamp D seemet amese suun t steen esa one MSCT190 DES AfD MMOleEWS SMMAI M S W 35 g
seem ashes,t es*== m = insa r o ma es = ten i.es.,
,g
. empaq asugh else teamt o tem esweed ud toetse seg PWel (sesi tsom J fagst est queekL anMS59tstP4 ObsIk
,y r;-*W 7- "g t
g, se est Its suusases es > aup to 12 esos ses ed fiesan sui le me adhe. as 142e41. mm Guest t Das emi che e oss e ese W
,,,,,,,,.,(,,,,,,,,
I gued e et en eseg em seus Ls4 mesame e aused passesh su, ampleuresad unspm W gedir e tune ammeps su Imges., g, g,,3 t,t,,, i g g,,,,, f,,,,,, 3,,
y, a gestd O gur an usef a to est h abad sul meget pumang, pta m tisi h Wtan a usefOn$ tiareA m e m afII 4, 3,4 - %.
,g
,s,,,
_ 3, 4),
4md ansusd b tusi e In tause pens 1 (musf usets sW tte aere gaf a 1 assou sensee W tests t se pwW suman auf a asesel e f In peam 2 he stori eBut t euwe Instet sW pass teemig ausedupet seese 8sestL 1 Ostus e em eseW est W tesest abst>
g...
eigh Gr seg I h epse)aspassa samf summa haben tWeens e 4 me hers W ammer W amm DW I mest te meer eOame>
t,,
augs usesepe of Osa spel sue sepJ tulm te aAssq to pumW shut pu sem Com W S em WMitW 9m$ h smiesn spm af W $51e as Peu Oss
$15 e gap RusW Chaiashgl ts 4 EaMelpesef sul b ese af to pond as b messi e may 1188 D I M"n h team W h de pg i esem e speeg me t 6 tue IW lesseest l' Peu Chsk $104 SmuW Chul tQ synd as ad satser W tudL ORust aus asses se e ese of so eman te emot W Os Sepsue ansigt ene te gafW pause fuey Rm litapp 519toegetpaser hfunt L
l Op9ap.s Waf een eBap d 8 Osm seussen se W asuariDW to pel W M seen tw te ese est et Dt 981, alma er usin W h al le prtessebyeuhe8 duegast aan e
/
i J.me esagt suyed se to sem to hper te seg lisi ty av p1past inf a fosui h sentes aus th # On eW 8 D Os E Aspen # er enW g, g aggg guests del sad i een W Sus pean fame eg, E
- E
- g, ggg, ggg gggggg gg gg'ggq gggg g g gggggg g I
( O $.m.al.mes W e das etsut W einget a te.smede else endf ashdL e
.f D== - -== w m==.==e
.,,,,>,,u q.,,
.s
..,,. *. fases se sus b sumuse te peut he es guet t tussemos suster W D ause a et 300 emust a masse W est se seesa e.,, ~
tlyspelf user enslag lip assualet sif a auf esamt Isids W ut af Desasi Assames and lesse Aesdaleseek tedded %use W Demet Its e har Cal en smOk he W4muth I suk tr es*
eseg a b emear I, m inns ensi e samf e en pass tse pas an, genaa/espn epuseet ased, esamesa.,e ee,,es..,g, j,
3
' a.pgangmer AggenpftenafDDERONufuutSW 3"shs punhan 08 hassees af humssk komme'pisan'g'a aan n oc m ma.s sat h a,ui mas assete m pu.
D80Le WEEKLY L88T980 0F '
sasee n EMDanftWfteq
- n N
- f',,v" W,$u.Twa nutseeneo woTus
.aqoneao:monana n m e==s my i am
- - +
e ma e, no t. qL i igbem tentAm upom pu tem te de af to bW tan tm ensimpus essess us t's eineman's ese'en se seen e a e aan W ensu e ens Os udsher e e ad> esse sum t Openg g, eenan som a sem ens se est been essen ea6.
en w a,s.ti gester esem e.r. Diet.a.etil as muse, o s.e se.
y W es, or essa sunk. as on ender e.isso, as,se es.
.,e W, s, tr -.n e,s. pas t -..
m em -
8"8" """ 8'8" *'88 8' '***"8 8" "8"""* 8"*9 mee namn assier sW enest as sean ame s papert e henum Chugs tud t lessees of tusen tesustmseg omm sugges a som a 1 e sei este anW es w as meet t a mee. me. esses w en tun tense tempt.unspo 6 tic _
i cesse una h e
'"***8""".'
i..m e e.m==. es m ensam W
..r
.a t m.
.(.
c,, ;t-
~
4 I
I
t
,M,1. 17N.. COMMERCE C%,
..,.,, -.i.m 7
A se#y not of govemme'it peewoment inW8tehens. eesheet eareres, ensi sales of sis 94tas pepor4
' We GP i
g S e* '
1 P
4 g
1
\\)
i l
8
~. =.
m m heeWm w m 8 W m m M'N M.NI M N M'N
~
GOVERNMENT a==
as s a=aa* * ="* '*
- 55 $8
.,iw m i. 4 m m m
,., = = a. m,=.a '..' e 4 m ee5 "* * *" 5 'a"" a*."",
s.wtan'8 j
,,,.- OCUREMENTS u
a==
euavi W..=* taro===
i Ha. s,x o..se,.g as a m m C E n.eli e nW
,, C
, W C e.
a ee (m.
t ans.
- h Ceuou hasuu tun seems tu IsWWipun truma W pumus em scis a sm==== W ===.
W-w
====..i gpguagea puNhIN Egul50edW P W WsW lPWEFW IRm thN pygg gyes NUR$ gpsom t SW4We h sWem 90 WR W IEWst 4 l GuS asest Dis' tugsf $flE F sin
- e to Omas 21m Quest se a 3 em als anses Imwe saunas esos a weer se asushe emmesure W pu mses essess Ier W tr Gef wee newes m C we team 22 peeg e es.a w t es== amma=== W tan e
seest senpuwe M h siesti W pelsted Pil WhEEst pWNik I E96 he&A LWR $1m $ Allege bass esser. R & L Spolut Pulset awasem a se tw se men war W h ma a meses 4 thus en A Bapenmental. Doessioneneel, feel and Reespoli Wed use soun,54. Iommer it FF968 ggg py, as gogg g sehe eID4 tul>W 99 m WWsq Hutsu C8 I
w pinisesi basi basis and gehsd senerW4 6.samassans support is M 654 M0tt w 01 in # eett si 6mer eswee se ass e 000 mws, erees e as ese a ase em th se pesq gnus wpes e flungest F11404W6 Inne flC gre t immem su e nas, p, wins,a a wtr e ases e assuem som sei mas s l
pues usur Wuf 9 esensa tunes is supu W gu unster ens W see pussy team elessee W esesti h45 llW n a se asynnen a*
l Sipetmast sf Commsen. basatim AgedIIpelme tulert Co* &us (speseg pg teen Cages 2000 9A1A tese i Naser t17734 me e easg le oesuusp esem Due ther s W ME!! blesse epsen es, pioswomsat as tem Deseum, NC3, MS Okensuer m H;G 62?h i
Seeger.C0 B abb&< lie seri es anse se euweres b tsier samme ayumsg espek se es*
minusnessitI * " huerera liona.sentauaran w te umspiert er utioon mat utte W m ia m in.Isna n=t se the bestusi 0ftse ed t bess w.me==*
== h ta=s suo l
to etwartis-me in. naso 0c., a we..
w e
, er te,ume,, w m sue,v an w ammes.
.e w 80'l101 tie asse Quessi ett asumssse Asseusser en sous eriwin tussri af k puums e asseum es Itkeeenf et cert nas>u. m a som se, amm o g sumune W e inDpum wasin a e pseu pu g eurett movest e sempsw a m scene smuur 1122m te g332. Delegm BC 30000 stur gros seter enst is teu manuet fle6 reitif Rekaar tha8' !(JtC85 assMuirn flu passer 8ekel tm WBsu W IIInr ilk R k A. fgacsusuta ant tanneen utpos ananaammt tv gmau iO go W 12 ese seer sem enrap een itemeri Wel k and se g gage as as ease e emer mass h essen gesuse ed aus en Mal the 10m Conset tiisas a lasega NL 26m8 fim a e ease ay y eumsg penser se set b he per air sup esWIpu #Wm puhfilf esas asseri and se usi i IML en ed a the Igir sus Utstaan he, y,g,,,,,,y y ya e easetsuiese4easserWampurResusk T tesen eust Desugs og asseus pa e gun lemuir habs sehe il ln 13) t tesi t IM) e list t lgph Die ugsg te poses a mir asse at W I 1sw. WR Bunspr6 OL enes su aswei W 88 LE1 '98 (bu b aftg auf ender as og enoept pumpg 9e PC testi 2 thug W esen 18 ou se ammer ear tu mai !! Tk puuus estaar em e aunt to gseen tape is 4 anstaar t e seg sweat its shot esas er Gueb essa 3, bderg e ausst aset In el Carususty tu agues sense est 046 gagt g paa ayuseg test t ge gang g (syuseg (puesett to ties one W mese se Csemos e pue supeW Iguas aspi is pusut t9o I Caroiseg e gas Im H seineq af ekspoin 8,lausuW eng W se usW4 95 Abse poet 88queur 6 balsasq pg lung h esser bassi 0mm ese h less as te leum bsuwas lame a menet assfuessa p 8 pseggiefg refuse SW an 80sWe gehser W ted esem g,, g,,, gg,g, g, gygeg gag eggs 3 esagny game aguem as ou e4 9e epipIL k halsg se sugaer sement 101 Pnesis a tulf guma est asse e encens eIW Wel W esusselh h spn) M ts campana espet espour se eneau Os fut p ge eggsar 9p og su lil taufg augue supert W tegRm fleul W pytusse 11044 to Chen t Isu8 esse tar se suu8md (TI) ties CC Lati fuse i go. 4mW e aseen em assent W lusi ese e er su uses anaest gouart t e tu Escuse e tes' OW W per ens Debane IInday Agsmsy. WI feesyquh hast Abassen V4 gas glisest up m pea.m maism W km maps a amm en g g gggg Q t ausene se anse las6 e m assa W se essess enne6 m Em g,ggg,gyg, gppgg79 gi ppgfggggg gg pggqA88 l'l Content unus ses 9 uptse e a um same tens 889'm A that bnear CD b WP
,,,,,g g,,gg g,,,,,,, g,,,,, gg) g gig e,,, y og iesass O engum Weg tee muu b'un 8Wir some er 4
- 3. pm 4esaur seus e M e empen pagame W toen saf taba.
4.
, N 944 It5 gue Q esissuq 4 mer eslamas aspe4 delt udWuq MI.h t gqy,g Coog snet put sun, set w e er new e i leksbg a ssear emessi esse - -
atsee tel mell tolerente ifneum he
,,,,,q,,,,,,,,, g g,,,i,,,,,,gme essa efu$ ed er mal e gpeng AIBus L....
... to
,,g,,,,,, g gg,,,,,q,,,,,,,g y,,,
..s. t s,
ss..t.
.r.
._ assus aumen a fMinar asssaan r h peg ubes summ 1 Me as avoir - r-a===== s=== a=== easts Engstasy Summeislun SEBL Sides of es* tamp buesuq touteL deer psabet a n pesus e as DOC musei esa.w.W to ass n sure en.b asg g ggg ee
,i,,, -. w.,
s.
e osa Assetst P 1942. Wesagm DC 30666 A
- IRfhAh f ACTSR IV44AIA11Bil er flLIMAAPI 18 El##1 h8 pass out est W esumed home er sus W se steep am W ese ggi,,, peg (km amog las e ins name Can emmy e ben 11. ass Csest Juseu Casa pausewe esmet (5181t? 45 y as, seg se sesump seem two ther p (BB BWil Russer Spie 6 tue le inaugam llE Peu (ksu lies Gesu Chus6 ytems(seenasass.Esna7* 6memaGames, ens neama ath 50u5 (FD
.gsee 00 asew6 e peu euhasse W h team luert af guleen s f,our,,em WIC e ins Ha e anon son nr as esa
,,,,,,,,,,,g,,g,,,,,,,,,,
es6 % lopen leert sensase d subt te aussee W 95 lunw&efuss
' gytsu spesq sw aseque pushst fung W Ouu suufsu e le tam 48.8. Afulp EEAMI SIBIpet Asgemia Assity, Ama N to Ordir tsW ouslow am he seg asma e se inmeere W bue Q puuns WW epWIIsw pastal WW seat lle ensi subes pumpg to MAac. Port guest. Psetsub., W 21343 0014 see6 Esarises fuseg ofta aussgest K 3e02 El IW WNIra adh W tuer mehswo a pse to WIC et h aselser W Inse lues) e A* PEP 4A47811W E 88488 8AA #EE E 8888888 M 80'ess sur aus W surgsut h muunt he fun men t W o psi ey.ge apens, essest fbe pour W estensee e 44 anse eseeg.IIS UA AWT 128
""""""f M.I,s e
.r.10 Die 910fm e, W.sen su a guer Cet am amuse atm smemmi 4 mm MAN ns 58E W ha
...<u..
s.-W yeen W pensasi me esas muumpe is en e se 01 her leew 0*
Reader,s Guide u.se pW Duesses.C.e.auwif t.(bug Desupwe Plyut Ihr.aiu.te W 9e 3,us, pagassa Cd hessement W Quasases Gassume feueg Wut
..,..e,
..e pie, am,..
p,.
,,,,it w amm e base es teamped, em ilse teen two passa suas 12 t is spewe a sur h aar meum as a e er perse W 3
meef emesse e iItsrupt aan pW d suas epsuus pg ang hun gg,,,,'temggme esse ens yes tem to das of to be hum Gus f **uma
- 8's Ca==*'m easum oss sheesar e $ nase Duksst De GRO e itseems k seus seen W teneur puunsa asus ser k pund e sW me ggggg pItsu 9dp9pf IF 969 d b 4 Bust 4 PWstEue dosi br essem was b amas aus e en buen opeus eat 8*888 8"
- "8'
- ,s,;e:s:: - ~.a--*-"a -- -
pd s
munit topuun RIE S #0 g hasess Omen isW D lesveren W Dension Gswwwe Pileg Met i
m.m..
pe......
=. - === = E" e = -"-d o
a
~
.e.e
- i. i eo
~
-- g,,
(
......c...
[,
50L! CITATION, 0FFER AND AWARD Page 1 of 2 Pages
- 1. This contract is a rated order under DPA5(15 CFR 350) RATING:
4 2
- 2. CONTRACT NO.
- 13. SOLICITATION NO.
- 14. TYPE OF SOLICITATION RS-RES-90-053 l
( ) SEALE0 BIO (IFB) j l
(X) NEGOTIATED (RFP) i,,
- 5. DATE ISSUED l6. REQUI51 TION / PURCHASE REQ. NO.
NOVEMBER 3, 1989 l
RES-90 053
!8 ADDRESS OFFER TO
- 7. ISSUED BY CODE i
1 (If other than Item 7 i
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
,l Offer must be addresse)d as shown Div. of Contracts & Property Mgmt.
in Item 7.
Handcarried offers P-1042 l
(including Express Mail) must be Washington, DC 20555 l
delivered to the address in Item 9 i
?!
NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations, " offer" and " offeror" mean " bid" and
" bidder".
SOLICITATION I
- 9. Sealed offers in original and 7 copies for furnishing the supplies or services in the Schedule will be received at the place specified in Item 8 or if handcarried, in the depository located in Room 1011, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814, untti 11:00 AM local time local time on DECEMBER 4,1989.
CAUTION-LATE submissions, Modifications, and Withdrawals: See Section L, Provision No. 52.214-7 or 52.215-10. All offers are subject to all terms and
'j conditions contained in this solicitation.
l.'
- 10. FOR INFORMATION!A. NAME:
l8. TELEPHONE NO. (Include Area Code)
CALL:
l l
(N0COLLECTCALL5) 30 Ice Bazin l
l 301-492-7182 i
n 11.
TABLE OF CONTENTS i
X SEC DESCRIPTION PAGE(5)
I PART I - THE SCHEDULE ~
A SOLICITATION / CONTRACT FORM i
B.
SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES / COSTS 4
C DESCRIPTION / SPECIFICATIONS / WORK STATEMENT D
PACKAGING AND MARKING E
INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE F
DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE I
G CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA H
SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS PART II - CONTRACT CLAUSES I
CONTRACT CLAUSES PART III - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS
~
J LIST OF ATTACHMENTS PART IV - REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS K
REPRESENTATIONS. CERTIFICATIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS OF 0FFER0R5 L-INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFER 0R$
M EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD OFFER (Must be fully completed by offeror) k NOTE:
Item 12 does not apply if the solicit' tion includes the provision at a
52.214-16, Minimum Bid Acceptance Period.
EXCEPTION 10 STANDARD FORM 33 (REV.4-85)
Prescribed by GSA FAR(48 CFR) 53.214(c)
FROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT RESEARCH AND DEVELOPPENT ON ISSUES RELATED TO SEVERE ACCIDENT ENAGEMENT STRATEGIES IN NUCLEAR REACTORS The US NRC is soliciting proposals for research and development in issues related to severe accident management strategies in nuclear reactors. Re'.earch should be focussed on 1) the identification of these issues 2) the deve'acoment of infomation necessary to imorove understanding of how these issue', affect accident progression and management strategies and 3) the quantificat'.on of associated uncertainties. The area of interest does not include is'.ues up to the inadequate core cooling.
It includes issues in in-vessel and ex-vessel accident management and on site release management. It does not include off-site emergency resoonse management. It is expected that this research will not involve performing experiments. Some examples of issues related to the severe accident management research and strategies are: 1) negative consequences of injecting water into a degraded core, 2) core coolability under degraded conditions and 3) advantage /disadvantageof diverting water from the vessel to the containment 4) effective strategies for preventing both short-tem and long-tem containment failure, 5) clant status indications which should be available to the operating staff during a severe accident.
Sources for research will be selected by a fomal technical / scientific / business decision process.
Individual crocosal evaluations may be based on acceptability or non-acceptabiliy without regard to other proposals submitted under the announcement.
Evaluation of proposals will be performed using the following criteria: 1) the overall scientific and technical merit, 2) the potential contribution and 1
relevance to theagency'smission,3)theofferor'scapabilities,related experience and accomplishments in accident management research, reactor systems, reactor operations and procrJures or unique combinations thereof and
- 4) the resonableness and realism of proposed contract costs and availabildcy of funds.
The NRC anticipates funding vill be available to support no more than a 3 staff year effort for all asards under this BAA. No project proposed should exceed a one year oorformance period.
Procesals should contain:
s
- a. A cover page including title, technical points of contact, and administrative points of contact,
- b. A one-page summary of the innovative claims for the proposed research,
- c. A one-page summary of the deliverables aated with proposed research.
4 i
DATE
.*N 9 ur 1
1 s
DISTRIBUTION:
G[n EDO 1
17-G-13 USDOE o n i - 4, 9,,
GPA HDenton 17-F-2 MSchulman ER-70, F-207 Gtn MCongdon ate JStepan:chuk EUR/S0V, 4225 GPA/IP JShea 3-H-S FKinnelly OES/NTS, 7B2B RHauber CEberhard EShomaker CThorne OES/NEC, 7820 GFowler RSenseney KHenderson J41e-USSR SEC ALSilvious 2-0-15 RES Dross NL-007 TSpeis gar 10tto BSheron JMurphy RBosnak GBurdick CSerpan NS-217C ATaboada SYaniv NS-139 AE00 EJordan 3701 MNBB CJHeltemes TNovak VBenaroya TMcKenna 3206 MNBB KRaglin TTC-CHAT NRR JSniezek 12-G-18 RI's LJCallan R-IV TCox 12-E.4 JClinville R-1 EButcher 12-H-26 PPNarbut JRichardson B-H-3 NRC SRI he j"
e ch, CA 93424 u
AThadani 7-E.4 PBrochman MRubi'i USNRC MWHo'sges 8-E-23 Rural Rt No 3 CER'sssi ll-E.4 Box 229A JShapaker Clinton, IL 61727 FCongel 10-E-4 RBarrett 10-A-2
.