# Presentation: 937732

## Use of ORPS Information in the Quantitative Evaluation of Contamination Consequences (QECC) Database

**Use of ORPS Information in the ****Quantitative Evaluation of Contamination Consequences (QECC) Database**

**May 4-7, 1998 TRADEing POST****ORPS Users Workshop—OR SIG Spring Meeting**
**Savannah River Site, South Carolina**

- Charles R. Watson and Daniel J. Strom
- Risk Analysis & Health Protection, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
- Richland, Washington
- Work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy
- Office of Environment, Safety and Health (ES&H) Office of Worker Protection Programs and Hazards Management under
- Contract No. DE-AC06-76RLO 1830

## QECC Approach

**Goal: *****quantitative *****lessons learned **
**radiological**
**chemical**
**Emphasize human health consequences**
**Assemble, organize, analyze historical data**
**Tap previous research (journals, reports)**
**Future: collect info that’s out there already**

## Sources of Data

**IAEA reports**
**NRC Information Notices**
**NRC NUREGs**
**DOE Occurrence Reporting and Processing System (ORPS)**
**Peer-reviewed literature**
**Nuclear Power industry (?)**

## Elements of QECC Database

**Main Tables **
**Events - highest level**
**Situations - may be several associated with event**
**Persons - may be many associated with situation**
**Agents - radionuclides, chemicals**
**“****Situagents” - agents in context of a situation (includes how much of agent)**
**Records associated with a situation**
**airborne contamination**
**surface contamination**
**room volume, surface area**
**Records associated with persons**
**skin contamination**
**organ insult (dose, chemicals, activity, etc.)**
**medical outcomes**

## QECC Outcome Measures

**Intake per “Surface Unit”**
**Intake per “Airborne Unit”**
**Intake per “Skin Unit”**
**Fraction-Taken-In**
**Fraction-Taken-On**
**Time-and-proximity Factor (Unshielded)**
**Representativeness of Air Samples - GA/BZ**
**Representativeness of Air Samples - BZ/Intake**
**Performance of Respirators under Field Conditions**
**Resuspension Factor and Related Quantities**

## Example: Intake per “Airborne Unit”

**Values needed (we’ll do unit conversions):**
**A Intake (activity in Bq) by person**
**B Activity (Bq/m****2****) on contaminated surface**
**C Area of contaminated surface (m****2****)**
**D Time person was in contact with contamination (h)**
**E Protection Factor of respirator (if missing, use 1.0)**
**X = A********E  /  (B********C********D)**

## Application of Quantitative Lessons Learned

**Rationalize reporting levels**
**Establish upper bounds for risk analyses**
**Justify risk-based workplace practices**

## Numeric Data is Essential

**type and amount of material in process**
**the nature, extent and amounts of removable and total surface contamination, air sample results when available**
**description of work or incident and amount of time workers were present **
**for each individual involved:**
**personal protective equipment in use**
**intakes**
**ontakes (skin contamination)**
**bioassay results**
**nasal smear results**
**doses**
**medical outcomes (if any)**

## Difficulties with Reported Data

**Completeness is a real problem**
**the people involved in the event knew everything we need to know, but rarely report it**
**Reporting as “less than” or “undetectable” **
**known as “censoring” data**
**without decision level (*****DL***** = *****L******C*****)**
**many reports confuse *****DL***** with minimum detectable amount (*****MDA***** = *****L******D*****) **
**The minimum detectable amount (*****MDA*****), decision level (*****DL*****), and uncertainty for each measurement method used are seldom reported but are certainly available.**

## Our Experience with ORPS

**Downloaded 790 reports for evaluation**
**Hanford, Los Alamos, and a few other sites**
**“****nasal smear” as indicator of contamination**
**Convert from text file to database records**
**WordPerfect 8 macro**
**Access import function**
**Methodology and software available on request**
**Individually reviewed for applicability (we could not automate evaluation)**

## Evaluation of 790 Selected ORPS

**259 records—****Top Priority: contains source and intake data that can go directly into QECC **
**52 records—****Second Priority: further research (e.g. RWP, SOP or Work Order retrieval) needed for usefulness in QECC **
**479 records—****Low Priority: unlikely to provide quantitative relationship between any 2 of these 3: (1) Surface Contamination (2) Airborne Contamination (3) Intake, Ontake, or Dose Data**
**Conclusion: 70% were not useful because ORPS did not include numeric information**

## How Can You Help? Include These Numbers in Reports

**Amount of material in process (grams, curies)**
**“****detection limit” (*****MDA***** and***** DL*****) values**
**Uncertainties **
**value**
**type (SD, SE, range, etc.)**
**RWP, SOP or Work Order  number**
**Incident report number **

## Conclusions

**Real world is less hazardous than worst-case models predict**
**QECC Database is powerful analytical tool**
**Data we need are already out there, but rarely recorded**
**Data need to be complete for *****quantitative *****lessons to be learned**

## Questions or Comments?

**Chuck Watson, PNNL**
**(509) 376-3483**
**Chuck.Watson@pnl.gov**
**Dan Strom, PNNL**
**(509) 375-2626**
**daniel.j.strom@pnl.gov**

**Joel Rabovsky, DOE, EH52**
**(301) 903-2135**
**joel.rabovsky@eh.doe.gov**