Uncertainty and source term reconstruction with environmental air samples.

Environmental air sampling is one of the principal monitoring technologies employed for the verification of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). By combining the analysis of environmental samples with Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion Modelling (ATDM), and using a Bayesian source reconstruction algorithm, an estimate of the release location, duration, and quantity can be computed. Bayesian source reconstruction uses an uncertainty distribution of the input parameters, or priors, in a statistical framework to produce posterior probability estimates of the event parameters. The quality of the event reconstruction directly depends on the accuracy of the prior uncertainty distribution. With many of the input parameters, the selection of the uncertainty distribution is not difficult. However, with environmental samples, there is one component of the uncertainty at the interface between sample measurements and the ATDM that has been overlooked. Typically, a much smaller volume or quantity of material is sampled from the much larger domain represented in the ATDM. By examining the response of a dense network of radionuclide detectors on the West Coast of Canada during the passage of the Fukushima debris plume, an initial estimate of this uncertainty was determined to be between 20% and 30% depending on sample integration time.

International challenge to model the long-range transport of radioxenon released from medical isotope production to six Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty monitoring stations.

After performing a first multi-model exercise in 2015 a comprehensive and technically more demanding atmospheric transport modelling challenge was organized in 2016. Release data were provided by the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organization radiopharmaceutical facility in Sydney (Australia) for a one month period. Measured samples for the same time frame were gathered from six International Monitoring System stations in the Southern Hemisphere with distances to the source ranging between 680 (Melbourne) and about 17,000 km (Tristan da Cunha). Participants were prompted to work with unit emissions in pre-defined emission intervals (daily, half-daily, 3-hourly and hourly emission segment lengths) and in order to perform a blind test actual emission values were not provided to them. Despite the quite different settings of the two atmospheric transport modelling challenges there is common evidence that for long-range atmospheric transport using temporally highly resolved emissions and highly space-resolved meteorological input fields has no significant advantage compared to using lower resolved ones. As well an uncertainty of up to 20% in the daily stack emission data turns out to be acceptable for the purpose of a study like this. Model performance at individual stations is quite diverse depending largely on successfully capturing boundary layer processes. No single model-meteorology combination performs best for all stations. Moreover, the stations statistics do not depend on the distance between the source and the individual stations. Finally, it became more evident how future exercises need to be designed. Set-up parameters like the meteorological driver or the output grid resolution should be pre-scribed in order to enhance diversity as well as comparability among model runs.

The Sensitivity of Atmospheric Dispersion Calculations in Near-field Applications: Modeling of the Full Scale RDD Experiments with Operational Models in Canada, Part I.

Three radiological dispersal devices were detonated in 2012 under controlled conditions at Defence Research and Development Canada's Experimental Proving Grounds in Suffield, Alberta. Each device comprised a 35-GBq source of (140)La. The dataset obtained is used in this study to assess the MLCD, ADDAM, and RIMPUFF atmospheric dispersion models. As part one of a two-part study, this paper focuses on examining the capabilities of the above three models and evaluating how well their predictions of air concentration and ground deposition match observations from the full-scale RDD experiments.

Radiation Modeling and Finite Cloud Effects for Atmospheric Dispersion Calculations in Near-field Applications: Modeling of the Full Scale RDD Experiments with Operational Models in Canada, Part II.

Three radiological dispersal devices were detonated in 2012 under controlled conditions at Defence Research and Development Canada's Experimental Proving Grounds in Suffield, Alberta. Each device comprised a 35-GBq source of (140)La. The dataset obtained is used in this study to assess the MLCD, ADDAM, and RIMPUFF atmospheric dispersion models. As a continuation of Lebel et al. (2016), this paper examines different methodologies for making dose estimates with atmospheric dispersion models.

International challenge to predict the impact of radioxenon releases from medical isotope production on a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty sampling station.

The International Monitoring System (IMS) is part of the verification regime for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban-Treaty Organization (CTBTO). At entry-into-force, half of the 80 radionuclide stations will be able to measure concentrations of several radioactive xenon isotopes produced in nuclear explosions, and then the full network may be populated with xenon monitoring afterward. An understanding of natural and man-made radionuclide backgrounds can be used in accordance with the provisions of the treaty (such as event screening criteria in Annex 2 to the Protocol of the Treaty) for the effective implementation of the verification regime. Fission-based production of (99)Mo for medical purposes also generates nuisance radioxenon isotopes that are usually vented to the atmosphere. One of the ways to account for the effect emissions from medical isotope production has on radionuclide samples from the IMS is to use stack monitoring data, if they are available, and atmospheric transport modeling. Recently, individuals from seven nations participated in a challenge exercise that used atmospheric transport modeling to predict the time-history of (133)Xe concentration measurements at the IMS radionuclide station in Germany using stack monitoring data from a medical isotope production facility in Belgium. Participants received only stack monitoring data and used the atmospheric transport model and meteorological data of their choice. Some of the models predicted the highest measured concentrations quite well. A model comparison rank and ensemble analysis suggests that combining multiple models may provide more accurate predicted concentrations than any single model. None of the submissions based only on the stack monitoring data predicted the small measured concentrations very well. Modeling of sources by other nuclear facilities with smaller releases than medical isotope production facilities may be important in understanding how to discriminate those releases from releases from a nuclear explosion.

World Meteorological Organization's model simulations of the radionuclide dispersion and deposition from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident.

Five different atmospheric transport and dispersion model's (ATDM) deposition and air concentration results for atmospheric releases from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident were evaluated over Japan using regional (137)Cs deposition measurements and (137)Cs and (131)I air concentration time series at one location about 110 km from the plant. Some of the ATDMs used the same and others different meteorological data consistent with their normal operating practices. There were four global meteorological analyses data sets available and two regional high-resolution analyses. Not all of the ATDMs were able to use all of the meteorological data combinations. The ATDMs were configured identically as much as possible with respect to the release duration, release height, concentration grid size, and averaging time. However, each ATDM retained its unique treatment of the vertical velocity field and the wet and dry deposition, one of the largest uncertainties in these calculations. There were 18 ATDM-meteorology combinations available for evaluation. The deposition results showed that even when using the same meteorological analysis, each ATDM can produce quite different deposition patterns. The better calculations in terms of both deposition and air concentration were associated with the smoother ATDM deposition patterns. The best model with respect to the deposition was not always the best model with respect to air concentrations. The use of high-resolution mesoscale analyses improved ATDM performance; however, high-resolution precipitation analyses did not improve ATDM predictions. Although some ATDMs could be identified as better performers for either deposition or air concentration calculations, overall, the ensemble mean of a subset of better performing members provided more consistent results for both types of calculations.