Impact of the Revised 10 CFR 835 on the Neutron Dose Rates at LLNL

Abstract

In June 2007, 10 CFR 835 [1] was revised to include new radiation weighting factors for neutrons, updated dosimetric models, and dose terms consistent with the newer ICRP recommendations. A significant aspect of the revised 10 CFR 835 is the adoption of the recommendations outlined in ICRP-60 [2]. The recommended new quantities demand a review of much of the basic data used in protection against exposure to sources of ionizing radiation. The International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements has defined a number of quantities for use in personnel and area monitoring [3,4,5] including the ambient dose equivalent H*(d) to be used for area monitoring and instrument calibrations. These quantities are used in ICRP-60 and ICRP-74. This report deals only with the changes in the ambient dose equivalent and ambient dose rate equivalent for neutrons as a result of the implementation of the revised 10 CFR 835. In the report, the terms neutron dose and neutron dose rate will be used for convenience for ambient neutron dose and ambient neutron dose rate unless otherwise stated. This report provides a qualitative and quantitative estimate of how much the neutron dose rates at LLNL will change with the implementation of the revised 10 CFR 835. Neutron spectra and dose rates from selected locations at the LLNL were measured with a high resolution spectroscopic neutron dose rate system (ROSPEC) as well as with a standard neutron rem meter (a.k.a., a remball). The spectra obtained at these locations compare well with the spectra from the Radiation Calibration Laboratory's (RCL) bare californium source that is currently used to calibrate neutron dose rate instruments. The measurements obtained from the high resolution neutron spectrometer and dose meter ROSPEC and the NRD dose meter compare within the range of {+-}25%. When the new radiation weighting factors are adopted with the implementation of the revised 10 CFR 835, the measured dose rates will increase by up to 22%. The health physicists should consider this increase for any areas that have dose rates near a posting limit, such as near the 100 mrem/hr for a high radiation area, as this increase in measured dose rate may result in some changes to postings and consequent radiological controls.