ML110030943
| ML110030943 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 02/24/2008 |
| From: | Luna R E, SooHoo M S, Yoshimura H R Sandia |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| SECY RAS | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML110030939 | List: |
| References | |
| RAS 19374, 50-293-LR, ASLBP 06-848-02-LR, PWA 00009 | |
| Download: ML110030943 (7) | |
Text
PWA00009 Pilgrim LR Proceeding SO-293-LR , 06-848-02-LR Survey of Costs Arising From Potential Radionuclide Scattering Events. Robert Luna. SNL. WM2008 Conference.
February 24-28. 2008. Phoenix AZ-Lessons Learned SUI. .. -ey o f Costs Arising from Po tl'n tiaI R.'1wonudid
.1' Sc attl'ling En n.15 -8 U? ABSTR.ACT Robert E. Luna, PhD , PE , Consultant Albuq uerque , JI.L"M &7 1 1 1 H. Richard Yoshimura and Mad S. Soo Hoo Sandia. a ti onaI La boratories' Albuq uerque , JI.L"M &7 1 85 The potential effect s from sca t tering radioocti,'e m,1't erial s in public p l aces include he atth, soci al , and eco n omic comequence.s" These. are consequences relative to po en ti al terror activ itie s that include use of radioactive IlU e rial dispersa l de vi ces (RDD s). S u c.h an e v en t wid! radio nu clides rel eased and deposited o n Sl1Ii'aces outsid e. and inside people's res i de nc es and p l aces of wod:: , commerce, and recre.:ltion will require decisions o n bow t o recover fr o m the e v ent. One aspec t of those deci;ions
" ,ill b e die co.'" t o clean up the re Jidnal radioactive co n t amination t o wake the area fuuctioml again v er sus abandollllleJl!
andlo r razing and reb tl il dillg. De velopme:oi o f cleanup processes have bee Jl Ihe. subj ee t o f experimen t from the beginning o f !be nuclear age, but forwalized coot bre.akdowns are r elatively me and mostly applicab l e to l o n g temJ. rele ases in uo n-pub li c si t es" Pre*e v ent cleanup coot estimation.
of cost fo r cleanup of ra-dioactive IlU erials re l eased to the publi.c. environmem is an iss ue tha t has seen s poradic activ i ty over the l as t 20 to 30 y ears. This paper will bri.efly sev eral of th e more importan t eff orts to e."1i.ma te die costs ofr eme dia , ti o n or razing and reoonstmction of radioactively co n t aminated <lrea s. The cos t estima t e ,;; for s u c h recoverie s v.ill be , compared in t erms o f 2005 do ll<lr s for the sak e of consistency. Dependence of cost estima tes on popula tion density and nee ded degree of deco nt<llllinatio n will be sbom l to be q uite in the o verall presenlation o f the data. UTIR\T V RE OYIR\1EW Te clmiq ues used fo r cases o fre l eared raw.ooctive ma t erial s in Ihe event of an a.ccident during transport ha v e bee n a principal s ource of cost estimating tec hni ques. These <Ire contained in the RADIR.A!J'l iIansport risk codes that wer e fu:s t produced in 1 9 7 4 fo r m e in preparing NU REG-O 170 (NRC , 1 9 77) That versi.on, RADlRAJl'l I , had several re v i si.ons in s ucceeding issues o f the code t o the prese nt versio n contained in RADTRAN V I. T wo no n-RADI RA lI'l
- sand i a a 100 1 program 1_Cf)' 'opBa:ed by Sanlla CIllpOfa:l Ill1. a OCUIeed Maru n cccn pall)'.1llr Ur1:: ed S1 a:E<& *j>aI1mEf1l or E h2'11l" H alro na l ucl2a r S e<Utty All 1="" undEr COnl ra.ct I'1\g e 1 1 methodologies are also notabl e. F'rnt, i s an :mruy.;;is co mp l e t ed t o e stima t e the cost of cleaning up pbrrtouiUill scattered as a r eso]t of a n uc l ear weapo ns accident that was comp l e t ed in ] 99 , 6 (Ohanin, 1996). Seco nd is a compt!ll er code de v e loped m the UK.(:m appare:ntly o nl yma ble for {)X gov en:unent pllllPoses) called CONDO (Charnock , 2003). In adllitio ll, s ome cl e.an up co.. ... estima t es ha v e been pu t fon'ioard in a paper (R.e i cluw.tb, 200'5) fo r the Department o f Home]and S e aml), t h at gives cle<Dll1po co!>t e.stimates for hi gh populatio n d e m i t}' areas based on RADTRAN IV cakulatious and oot u a l costs fo r remediatioll of the W or l d Trade Center ()!.'TC) s i t e in New York City. PROCE SS L iS ED The metbodo l.ogy for estimating demup C05ts uses two principaJ parame t eIS" 1be fust md J:IJOO! basic is the acceptable resid u alleveJ of contaminatio n detemJined fo r each m l c1ide released ilia t \'i ill avo id a gi r ven level of ra d iological dose t o per.sons , w h o "ill remain livin g/working m th e cont:mJimted are.'!. The acoep t able dose and!, hence , the residual conta:mina tion l e v e l for eac h nu clide, is lik el y to be ne gotia te d fo r each re1ease ell'ell t (DHS , -007). The second parameter is the Decontamiml tio n F ac t o r , DF , wbich can be ratio na lized in t wo ""aYs:
- A t my po in t at the of the rndioo.ctive material.
rele.'!se , it i s the ratio of the l ocal co ntanJina'tio n l evel for a released ID l cl!id e t o th e aroept i b l e Fesid uru contaminatio n le v e l, (O F.)
- A measure of the Cllpllbilit}
' o f a gi v en d e:m u po method (like wa t er ho sing) to red u ce the c ontaminatio n level for a giv e n surfuoe 1lll\rena:l. 'Illm., .i t i s the r atio of contlnJinlltio n I.e , v el befo r e lreatmen!
t o co n tamination le vel after tr e.artmeni , (D F.,J Spec illc cleanup teclmoJ!ogies applied to spec illc smfaces and n u cli<ks are ch:!rai: .erized by the max i mum D Fm achievable" IT the D F, is l ess th llll the effects of all the cleanup proce.;;ses lhat co ul d be iippl!ied sequentially O F , <::E OF""lhe n cl e rump is succe.;;sful, but i f the DE is greate I than the eft'eo tli , of all the cleanup processes that are app li ed seq uen ti ally , D F. :> 1: D Fm, then o ther altern ativ e s, like razing and r drui l ding 01' inte<<lictio n IlllIh'1 be iipp]i e d Th e me thod o logi e s used in the all of the cit ed li t eratme recognized
!be limi t ations of deam l p and employ razing o r in t erdi ctioll in th e e v ent that !he required D F, fo r a giVell s i t u atioll cmdd n o be achi e ved by mmdard cleanup p r ocesses. F o r m.o!>t oflh e early cart , e stimatio n techniques, it was allS1!lllled tha t a D Fm of 50lvas general.1)'
a tt ainable, bu t mO l'e F ecent data, nicely S l1lJlDlaIized in the CONDO report, s ugges lbat a D F mgrearterthm
]Oo r so (v.ithsome iro late dexceptions) i s ull lik dy t o be a ttained This suggests ilia t the e.arlier costest:imates would be expec J ted to be somewha t l ow., s:ml)e cl eanup costs are gene ndl y low er Iihan rnze and rebuild or in t erdiction melbodS. Page 2/
Fo r the da ta presented be l'm , v the o rigina l cle an u p co&t p resented!
i ll the soum e docume ms we.re extr act ed:mdl ec n .. 'eI1e d t o 200 S ecru u s ing stanrl'rud CO B t de:1ilat ors (Wil!liamsOll!, -GI06}. In gener aJI, oosIs \V elTe &tratiified by the i niti al.l e v el of c on tamiinatio n all , r epresented b y D F , v alDes , L i g h t c o n taminatio n co rrespo n ded! t o , a D F. : meWlIIlll, S o::: DF. <]0; and he a\'}', DF. >10. Cost s in r eports i'e I e f l.l r lhe r matified by a s pecmc-.a tion re l ating t o popul a tio n densi t y (rund, su bmban, omduro an) colFespo n iting t o mean popu]a 1i o n iJenlo iJ tie s: of a oo ut 10 7 50 and 38 00 persons per k nl r espec , tivel y. I n the Cha:nirn r epok mban pop ul aticm demi t y va l ues \.Y eJ7e , taki en t o be a bo ut 13 5 0 pe;rso us/ J:m2 (oo rresponiling to a. mean populaticm densi t y in aFeas i de n tiifie d as mOOnized!by the cem us burea u). Rei c hm uth. &t a ted that pop ula J tio n dens.' tie s (PO iin 'i vere as fo ll ows: Rm:aI 0 <PD < 50 U r ilan 5 0 < PD < 3 HOl) Hi gh Dens ity Uwan 3 000 0::: P D < 10,000 H y pe r De n si ty LiIban 10 000 0::: PD As i s o b\.-i oos fiom the ahO\'e 1h ece is no s trict tr ans la ti o n of\"'ords descn1liingpoP l.l la rtion densii ty t erminolog y.in q u a n ti tati.\'e t erul5 but 1!heFe is eno 1lJ gh specific i t y to. compare v ario us ecsts e&t:ima t e s all a fiuroti O il ofpo pulla tio n de mit}'. The SN L study (CbruJin, 1996) pro ,,-i de d a faIT l y detailed me th odo l og y in 'iv bich t oestiimare o o sts. For an urban area, the o ,,-eran resul ts , that came om of Iihe e ffort are m o\.u l in T a b l e 1 'Fabl e 1 U r ban Area (] 3 44 perso m i'km") ReJDEJdi ation Co sts for Ye ar 200 S in $M.'k m 2 fr o m A ppe n dix G <<(,'brurin, 1 99'6). Ol , sts per sq. !km Aua Costs Ar'eli U!!lII ge' ligtI1 MOO!!'ae HeuJ .ma Light MOO!!'ae HenJ l)'P" (5< [)F.<l O) (D F ,>]O) F ramna (5<DF ,<l O) Res i dmtW' $7 2.'1 $]63.9 $3 0 1.2 0.3 1 6 $22.9 IS 1.8 $952 $1 95.3 1295.5 , $85 1.2 0.17 3 $33.8 $S 1.1 $1 4:-13 Indu5t:!:iaI
$61-'1.0 $7642 $1, 24 5.9 O.OM S43.1 S4 5.1 $1'9'.7 StIe£il s $15.9 $1 8.5 $247.7 0.17:5 $2.8 $1.2 $433 Va mmL:mi $81.1 $85.7 $95.2 0.2:72 1 $233 $':25.9 OII wall C.ost per sq. bn $1"14., 6 $1 74.:5 $3 9 1.'1 " ioo"nl&5 s ingle and and i!piI!III:.eIW l!an;e; 'Fabl e I d'elmn&tra t e s the methodo l ogy u s ed asw e l!l as r es l!llJIs. Co sts W eJ7e , estiima ed for generic. ]:m d u se are as and 1be:nwe i ghte d bylbe fractio n. OE the o v e raIl ar e.ll .in. thlIt ]:md u se class. S hort of repeating the comidern hl e , elifort in developing the r eport r eB uIls , \'iiba t options exist for e&timarting th e cl eanup ec s! fo r hi gherpop u l m i on densi t y are.as ,'! If da ta :is availa b l e f o r kland m e area irnctions in the hi gherpop u l a ti cm area then 1111 estimate can be lDlIiIe b)T Plu gging iin thos e vaJnes in the )111 ro hmm o f T ab l e 1 I n a d'diti o n, an adj l us tmem for popula t i o n densi t y can be made by n()ting t h a t higber poop u bilion densi ty irmpl!ies tha t there are more ch.,'elling uniils pe l" knr and tha t 1he cools s lIm.ll m T a b l e I areb<l.'Jled onindividruli dwelling;;
_ lu a remh, mu l tiplymg fue res:icJenjjal cost;;. by a ratio of populatio n sh()uld atf j u st f o r IJigber popu]atio llS in the SlIlDe area_ In a ddition, inre commerc: ial is li kel y t o expand! \,.ith popu]atio n connner cial \ralues wou l d also be adjw;t e d in a sim:ila:r manneT. These are appro:mnal:em.eth ods and lI s efu] o nl y f o r order ofmagnitllldle e,rtima t es. The r esul o f mch adjlllrimenls is shm>;u in T a b e IL Table II. Estima t ed R!emedia ti o n Costs fu:r i e"" Y o rk City Reflecting land Use Distnlm"tion and P'opu l ation Dem i t y_
l:i:!'II:t MiId!r:l f e Hefi}" (5<: DF ,<l O) F ram DII.' Res:idellfu l 0.287 $20.3 1 $45.99 $8'1.5] 6.82" $B 8..55 $3B.64 $51 6 ,.3 S 0.1 64 $32.00' $43.55 $139'.84 6.82" $218..M $331.1.2 $953.80 $455 1 $47.55 $&1.12 L OO .$45.5 1 $47..5 05 $84.1 2 U9"7 $4_62 $6 1.88 1.00 Sl.97 $'1.62 $6 1..88 $1 9'.29' $2 0.38 $22.64 Va.rnJl 0.238 1.00 $1 929' $20 38 $22.64 1.00 o.."eruI , (',;)st (SM'kut $1 2 1.2 $167.1 $}93*.0 $42 6 $717 S 1 ,@9
- dm1.ledfrom.
N ew Yod;: C i ty dam (h.'1!p:l Iu.1.\w..nyc.ga>.1 ,'htIlll lfl¥P{pdf i l aJJdJEefx ls i laduse t?b l e s.!!df)
- rn ti o Cilypopul;;.lioIl dm;ity to ttm t m Table]" (9 1 6&1 l4!4 = 6.82) The p ro ces.s m ed t o produce T abl e II c.anbe*w;edJ t o derive re mediatio n oos! , estimartes fo r other popu]atio n areas as sholl by I:b.e lrioogle points in F i gure t Figure 1 abo c ontains. r emedi Mion cost data n-0Dl I:b.e so u rc e docmnent;;. mscussed!
abo v e. The Legend .in Figure 1 is q u i t e ]Mge , but.is ¥'o r l1e} ed fo r oom.e addition clari ty_ Red lill.e:s. md symbols are f or (D F , >]0) ornnge for (S <: D F. <: to}, anrlI green fo r (1 <: D F. <: S).Pwpl e symbols are for estima t es. tha t are 1.UlSpeCmc abo l!lt the D F. tlre y app]y t o , bmlbe val'oe.s c01ll1d be as l an re 0lS 50_ Figur"e 1 a f air imlOlm t oh.rn.a bi1!ity i n 1he co."1s estimated b y t h e vari ou s medKKlS and! s omce s a)\'eI"ed in tl:W;. ovenriew. The Ihree s tr alii gh t ]IDes. penciled i n on lhe po ilFe intended!
t o s ugges h o wlbe cools migh t \'aIJ' wiilipopula ti OIl densi t y and degree of C on t aminatiOD_ The lIines are a reasonable represe n t ati on ofmuch of1he IDforn:JaJ ti o n, bu t s ome da t a. points. de ,,;;a e SlIDs tantially
- mdwill b e mrousseci m e. The t wo red mscpoiints tha t arewe H above the ourves aTe fromdte pape r by Re i clmn l fu and are based o n , estima:tes of co s1 derived to cl ean -up and r estore (n-o t retmiI.d) the 1 6 a c , re\VTC :site ill -a\' YOlk a fte r 9f] 1. The cost 0 rep l a ce I:b.e facilities is e s<tiima ed t o be an orde r o f ma gni rudle large r (no t sho wn on the p r o t).
$1 00,00;) SlD,DOl $1 , 00 SlOO +U ** LlI.H ... ...... * ...., ........ n* ..
I .".dlillr .............
d .... L* .. iIi , ....... hl.,OJ ... *"".i1I *
- lIk4.Jnhtr:t.r
..... 10 0 1 ,000 Popu I<l ti o ll Density tpe r SOI'llS/sq. krill F i gure 1: Remedia ti on Co s t Estimate;:. Co mpared.. lO,OOO 10 0 , 0 0 0 S inc e the esliwa t ed 005! "\'35 based. Q n the ilfea of the WTC :s it e , oot the aot u al expendimre cove r ed a otiQ ns ma1ie O,ref the sumxmdmg areas and inclu ded. ations oo me l ... *bat beyoudw h at \"\'o u l d!be expected in response tOo aD. RDD f:1,'eIlt , the acllllal cm:t/krn? cOll.ddbe m t erestimated by 5001., t o 60%. The pmpl'e SCJ1!IaFes b e lmv fue ctll'll'e re p r esem the that "v eli e do ne using RAD'IRAN I in the mid ]970's \,oiJtb. an un sop h i stica t ed meth odology_ Moreove r the , estimates me the a I des and most sUb-ect t ol.mCeltrin t y associa t ed with selecting the bes t dell.a t or IaJ ti s ti c fo r updating C O&ts. The R:AIJIR.."-L1f 6 estima t es (pmp l e diamonds) also Me be l QW the tren d!.1in.es b u t IlO t as pr ooOl mc ed an e fi'ec as , .. idt RADlI1R., M-l" 6 (Osborn, 20 0" i)_ No e that the RAD TR AN 6 values (square.;;: , w illi center c r osses) fit nnroh more close l y'iVi ili the other , estirmilltes and thetre , nd l:IDes" The tren d! l in es favo r tbe cost values generateil by the Sand!i<a s tudy (Chanin, ] 996) becomre o f the detail in'lo'O]v ed in llb.e initial e&timar e s and the abili t y t o pro j ect the c o .. tslo o fuer pop ul a ti OIl d ensilie.s , and hod! use area m.otiQllS.
-The l:i1reJ!ih.ood of a " Dirty Bo m b atta-d: in ilie U or e l sew here is un knowlli. Moru somces sugges t t e , g. Kar am, 20(5) that the radiOlogical consequences o f :suCh an a tt ack ar e milik e Fy tOo be life thre.a aIing andl h a tlhe gr e.artesf llIDrtal is t o peI"S"1lUS expo.sed tOo hlia&t from the d e v i ce (ass umin g 1bat is i t s m ode of operation). H owe\;eI the , e xpernIi h u-es , needed to recm .. 'ef fr o m a. sucre-,ssful attack u sing an R OD t ype de nc e as depioted!
in F'i gt lre; 1 , are J!ik cly t o be s i gniIican t from the standpo in t o f Je.i01!ll"ces ava il a ble t o loca] Q r state governm.ents
_ E\ eJl ll. device that contamirna t es an area o f a fe,,¥ hlUl dred. a cre,;; (a SCJ1!Iare kilometer) t o a I b'e1 that r equires !lIDd!estTeJD.eiliatio n is li kcly t o produce co rus nmgirng fi-om': , lOM to *:3OOM or more depending Q n-e m.i.ty of commercializa
-OD., pop u lation density , and d.etai.Ils o fl lm:l! use in the ar e.a_ As a re s ult , i t:is i.nljxIrtant t o p ut appro pri at e emphru:is Olli thee ff orunow beinglak eJl by the Department of Ene r gy , N u cl ear R.egulaw r y C<J:mm:ission., andl!b.e Dep artmen t o f Home L 1!Il.d. Secw:iJty t Oo pr O\;ri.de aCCO\!IIltmcy for ra dioo.cfu.'e u sed iin the public and. p ri.""te s ee ton and! to detect as f il II}' as , poss ibl e, traffic in porerui al dlrtybomb ma t eri'lils wirlhin and! on the borders o f the SA.
{Clmnin, 1996): Chanin, 1).1.00 I. and Mw:fiin Wal t e£ R ""S ite , Res t ornlio n: Estimatio n of Attributili l e Com From P Imoni m n.llispersaJi Acoidents", Sandia ationru Laboratories, R!eport SAl'll) g6-09 57, May 1 996_ (Clml'llock, 1003): Ohamook, 'I.e al, " CONDO: Sofu,,'me fo r Esfunal:ing the Consequenres of' Deconlrunina ri o n Options'\ Nationa] Radio l ogical Pro t ecnonBoru:d, Repon NRPB-\V43 ,!May (03). , (D R S,.!O : DepMtmen t o f Ho:mel.md S ec urity , PFeplU'edne:ss lliTecwllIre
- " Pr otective Ac , ti o n Guides fOT Railio l ogi.ca] Dispe r sa l De\ice (RO D) an d I mprovised!
Nuc l ear I)e"i e (IND)', F edera] Regist er , Vo L 7 1 , 0'_ 1 Jamary 3 , 2006.pH4-196. (Kanipe,1992)
- _ Kanipe F' and aihause r , K S o, " RADTRAN 4: Vo l um e 41 Jor ognmnner:s Mannail , Sandia National Labo ra to ri es , Repon SAND89-1370 Jll l y] 992_ '(Karam, 1 00::-): KacmJ, AndIew " Radiologrc.
'll T errariBilll," Human and Eoo l ogica] Risk Vo l. 11 1005 pp. 50 1-523. ,_ iJeubllU5el', 1 99 1): -euhauser , K. S. andKanipe E RA.DTRAN 4: Voll!lm e 3 UsaGWd e Sandia ationaJ Laoornl:ori
.es R e por t SANDS9-1370 , Jimnmy 1 992_ 'IN eubllU5el*
.1 993): Neuhauser., K. S_ and Kani pe F. R.A.DTRAN 4: Voll/lllle 2 T echni.cal MannaiI , Sandia._ atiorull Laoo ra tories , RepoJt. SAND89-1370 , Au:ms t 1993_ (OsOOl'll!, 200 : Pri" a t e CoJllllll!.lllicartion
'lith. DDuglia s O:sbom, SNL rebliv e to* estio:Jared c e rump cost , estimared by RADTRAN VI , October 2007. (fe uist f R, 100 : Pemst e n, 1. P_ and Weiner R " An &.o n omic Mode l of a Ra.dioac , ti" e Materi.als. Transportation Aoc i dent f or the RIillTRAN Risk Code' Pr oceedings of' Waste }-l l anagemen t 1005 , F ebruary 27 -Marc h 3 1005 T ucso n,.A2 (SANDlooS-3801 C). (NRC, 1 9 : " F inal En" ironm.emaJ.
State me nt on th e Tranq>OrtatioJ:]
o f Radiooctii
'l;'e Mlteriah by.Ali and Olli.e r!Mode:S" NLlREG-0l.7O, US Nu cl e.ar Regul!awJ)'
Colllllliss i on, DC Deo e mlba 1 977. Re ich muth, B.., e t aI , Economic Consequences o f a R.ADJlNUC At t ack: Clemnw , Standards S:i gnifi amtly Aff'ec C<Jsf', .Pro ceeding:;:
o f WoOOng T ogelhe£ R&D Partnerships in H o m.e]aIOd Security B os t o n, Ml\., April 1003 (Pacmc No:rth\\'est Natio n a l Labora t ory , PiNNL-SA-4 5256). (*\\'illiaIM OD ,.OO6,): Wi.lIliamscm, Sannre l H 'Fi¥e Ways to Compute the Rclam.'e V al ue ofa .s. Do ll ar Amount, 1 90 -2005 ," M.eamringWorthCom, 2006 (Wql': ll wWl. ... *.meamriingworfu.comlcalcn liat ors it lSOO rtyJ areke:ml1_pbl" .