1 / 14

Recalculation of RG 1.109 Milk Consumption Rates

Recalculation of RG 1.109 Milk Consumption Rates. Bill Eakin Dominion – Millstone Power Station. RG 1.109 Milk Consumption Rates. Tables E-4 and E-5: Recommended Values for Average and Maximum Exposed Individual In-Lieu of Site Specific Data

barclay-rivera
Download Presentation

Recalculation of RG 1.109 Milk Consumption Rates

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Recalculation of RG 1.109 Milk Consumption Rates Bill Eakin Dominion – Millstone Power Station

  2. RG 1.109 Milk Consumption Rates Tables E-4 and E-5: Recommended Values for Average and Maximum Exposed Individual In-Lieu of Site Specific Data RG footnote: Average consumption rates obtained from Ref. 19 and age-prorating and maximums from techniques contained in Ref. 10.

  3. Why Re-calculate Milk Consumption? • Event • Bad fuel caused increased iodine releases in outage • Dose assessment • Method 1 calculation yielded thyroid >2.5 mrem • Condition Report generated • NRC comparison • Reviewed event calculation, performed verification with PCDOSE • Recommendation • Reduce conservatism in method (lower consumption)

  4. Millstone 5 miles

  5. RG 1.109 Footnote Average consumption rates obtained from Ref. 19 and age-prorating and maximums from techniques contained in Ref. 10. • Ref. 10 – HERMES code, contains a relationship assumed between age specific maximum consumption to age specific average consumption • Ref. 19 - AER-138 lists total fluid dairy consumed from 1960-1973

  6. HERMESHanford Engineering Regional Model for Environmental Study Based on local dietary surveys, HERMES estimates: • Maximum to average milk consumption ratio ChildTeenAdult Ratio 2 2 3 • Comparison of HERMES with RG 1.109

  7. Agricultural Economic Report AER-138 (1974) • Average milk consumption around the period when RG 1.109 was probably being developed was ~130 Liters/Year • Compare with RG 1.109 Table E-4 Using RG Avgage: Adult (110), Teen (200), Child (170) Liters/Year & Age fractions from RG 1.109 App. D: Adult (.71), Teen (.11), Child (.18) RG Avg 0.71·110 + 0.11·200 + 0.18·170 = 130.7 Liters/Year

  8. Per Capita Milk Consumption Rate Trend

  9. Agricultural Economic Report AER-820 (2003) • Average milk consumption since year 2000 is <65 Liters/Year • Projected to remain relatively level for the next 20 years • Why is milk consumption lower? • Dietary habits • Soda

  10. Average Milk Consumption Comparison 1970: 32 Gallons consumed yearly per person 2000: 16 Gallons consumed yearly per person Consumption considers fluid milk products

  11. New Milk Consumption Rates Assumption 1: RGAvgpercapita FAdult·RGAvgAdult+ FTeen·RGAvgTeen +FChild·RGAvgChild Assumption 2: Assumption 3:

  12. New Milk Consumption Rates • New values are essentially ½ of original RG recommended values • Since consumption rates are U.S. averages, these values are applicable to the entire industry.

  13. Justification for Change • RG 1.109 encourages licensees to develop site or regional specific parameters in-lieu of general approaches and assumptions provided • Method used to develop original RG values remains unchanged • Up-to-date consumption estimates, from a similar source, show consumption at ½ of original basis value

  14. References • Ref 10: USAEC Report HEDL-TME-71-168 HERMES Computer Code, 1971. • Ref 19: AER-138, “Food Consumption, Prices and Expenditures”, USDA, 1974. • AER-820, Food and Agricultural Commodity Consumption in the United States: Looking Ahead to 2020”, USDA, 2003.

More Related