- Email: [email protected]
Collective dose at ITER feat
Fusion Engineering and Design 63 /64 (2002) 199 /203 www.elsevier.com/locate/fusengdes
Collective dose at ITER feat Sandro Sandri a, , Luigi Di Pace b,1 a
b
ENEA ION-IRP, C.R. Frascati, Via E. Fermi, 45, 00044 Frascati, Rome, Italy Assoc. Euratom-ENEA sulla Fusione, C.R. Frascati, Via E. Fermi, 45, 00044 Frascati, Rome, Italy
Abstract The safety study performed until December 2001 to assess the collective dose to the workers based on the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) Fusion Energy Advanced Tokamak (FEAT) project, is presented in this work together with the relevant results. All systems located in the tokamak building of ITER FEAT facility important from the radiological point of view are considered. Radiological source terms with an important collective dose impact are airborne tritium and activated corrosion products (ACP) in the coolant of the water cooling system (WCS). A suitable computer code is used to assess the ACP inventory in the different WCS components. The dose rate is then assessed by considering walls attenuation with the 3D transport code MCNP, a Monte Carlo code that performs gamma ray transport calculation. Working activities needed to operate, maintain and replace each component of systems under study are partly provided by system designers and partly derived from the experience developed in operating nuclear fission reactors. In conclusion the collective dose result is shown and partly compared with that of previous ITER design stages considering the different systems and solutions and pointing out ALARA improvements. # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Dose; ITER; Nuclear fission reactor
1. Introduction The scope of the current analysis is providing information and results related to Occupational Safety during normal operation at main systems of International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) Fusion Energy Advanced Tokamak (FEAT) plant. The main goal is the assessment of
Corresponding author. Tel.: /39-06-9400-5475; fax: /3906-9400-5274 E-mail address: [email protected] (S. Sandri). 1 Tel.: /39-06-9400-5321.
the collective dose or Occupational Radiation Exposure (ORE). Information were collected about the hands-on assistance to the RH operations for maintaining the following systems/components: . . . . . . . .
Blanket modules. Limiter modules. Divertor cassettes. Cryopump. RF heating systems. Ion Cyclotron Heating (ICH). Electron Cyclotron Heating (ECH). Lower Hybrid (LH).
0920-3796/02/$ - see front matter # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 9 2 0 - 3 7 9 6 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 1 9 0 - 4
200
S. Sandri, L.D. Pace / Fusion Engineering and Design 63 /64 (2002) 199 /203
A specific analysis was carried out for the following cooling water loops: . First wall/blanket (FW/BLK). . Divertor/limiter (DIV). . Neutral beam injectors (NBI). The assessment of the collective dose was provided about the hands-on activities for maintaining, inspecting and/or replacing the components of the above systems. The analyses were mainly based on Design documents related to previous and reference ITER designs and on outcomes of technical meetings with ITER designers. The collective dose assessed for working activities different from those performed at the cooling system is affected by high uncertainty due to the shortage of information and data available about working procedures and radiation fields. For the Water Cooling System (WCS) a quite fixed picture exists related to the maintenance/ inspection requirements and to the dose rate fields around the main components.
2. General ITER FEAT layout In this study only activities taking place in the ITER tokamak building are considered due to the relatively small impact on the collective dose of the operations performed in the remaining premises. In the tokamak building is located the ITER FEAT torus, i.e. the plasma chamber of the fusion machine, and three main levels are interested by maintenance activities involving human assistance to the remote handling (RH) operations. At each level 18 port systems allow access to RH tools and human beings until to the plasma facing components throughout three confinement barrier: the bio-shield, the cryostat and the vacuum vessel. Bio-shield provides adequate radiological protection to the workers and a typical dose rate lower than 0.5 mSv/h is achieved, after plasma shutdown, during maintenance operations. The WCS is composed by four main sections: the first wall/blanket (FW/BLK, 3 loops), the
divertor/limiter (DIV, 1 loop), the Neutral Beam Injector (NBI, 1 loop) and the vacuum vessel (VV, 2 loops). The last one (VV) represents a minor concern from the radiological protection point of view due to the low expected Activated Corrosion Products (ACP) inventory and the related assessment was neglected in this work. Main components of the WCS are located in a specific vault above the tokamak and outside of the bio-shield.
3. Source terms and dose rates Three source terms are considered: neutron activation of structural materials, ACP onto cooling system components and pipes and airborne tritium concentration in working premises. Neutron activation was evaluated with suitable computer codes by other experts [1]. It plays a fundamental role affecting the dose rate around the RH ports but its contribution to the dose rate in the WCS vault is negligible. ACP inventory onto cooling pipes and system components was evaluated by using PACTITER code [2 /5] and the related dose rate outside of the cooling system components and pipes was calculated with MCNP computer code [6,7]. This contribution is mainly important in assessing collective dose during maintenance and inspection of WCS components but it was considered also in the activities at the RH ports due to the crossing cooling pipes. Tritium concentration and associated protective factors were assumed in a conservative way from a study performed for previous ITER design stages [8] and revised for ITER FEAT [9] with minor modifications. In Table 1 dose rate values at the tokamak RH ports are reported. Dose rates due to ACP around WCS components is assessed considering two average operator positions: 30 and 100 cm from the external surface. In Table 2 related results are shown and in Table 3 dose rate due to airborne tritium in WCS rooms is reported as well.
S. Sandri, L.D. Pace / Fusion Engineering and Design 63 /64 (2002) 199 /203
201
Table 1 Dose rates at the RH ports Reference area
Dose rate due to neutron activation (mSv/h)
Outside bioshield 1 (out-bio) Outside cryostat 50 (out-cryo) Outside vacuum ves- 100 sel (out-vv)
Dose rate due to ACP per cooling pipe (mSv/h)
Equivalent tritium dose Total dose rate (four rate (mSv/h) cooling pipes) (mSv/h)
2
1
10
2
10
62
2
0.5
4. Working activities and collective dose When assessing ORE the dose rate has to be related to the working strategy, i.e. number of persons, time period, operator position and working procedures needed to perform each working task. In the RH assistance the 18 ports located at each one of the three levels of the ITER FEAT torus are interested by maintenance activities also involving human access. Many system components located behind these ports have to be maintained or replaced on regular basis and the related impact on the collective dose to the personnel was considered.
108.5
Working strategy for these activities is not yet well defined. Only for some operation a specific analysis has been done and the relevant data are available [7]. When specific information are not available generic operations, like opening and closing the closure plugs, that have to be performed hands-on are considered and the related person /power (PP) is guessed from information collected during technical meetings with ITER designers and from experience developed in studying ITER Final Design Report (FDR) [10]. For maintenance and inspection of WCS components a detailed working strategy was developed by ITER Designers [11] and these PP data were used for assessing the collective dose.
Table 2 ACP dose rates around WCS components System-component
Main pump Low flow pump Heat exchanger Pressurizer Heater Pipe and support Instrument Large valve Small valve Relief valve Relief tank CVCS Rec HX CVCS cooler CVCS filter CVCS resin bed CVCS control tank CVCS Re-injection pump
FW/IBB dose rate (mSv/h)
DIV and NBI dose rate (mSv/h)
30 cm
1m
30 cm
1m
2.46E/00 8.05E/00 7.40E/00 2.28E/00 3.77E/00 2.33E/00 2.33E/00 2.33E/00 2.33E/00 2.33E/00 2.33E/00 2.69E/00 7.36E/00 3.59E/00 3.59E/00 1.07E /01 1.56E /01
1.10E/00 3.07E/00 4.75E/00 8.01E /01 1.44E/00 1.04E/00 1.04E/00 1.04E/00 1.04E/00 1.04E/00 1.04E/00 9.46E /01 2.58E/00 1.26E/00 1.26E/00 3.74E /02 5.49E /02
8.95E/00 8.90E/00 3.27E/01 5.92E/00 1.46E/01 8.45E/00 8.45E/00 8.45E/00 8.45E/00 8.45E/00 8.45E/00 1.97E/01 2.68E/01 2.79E/00 2.79E/00 4.10E /01 6.57E /01
4.00E/00 3.40E/00 2.03E/01 2.07E/00 5.55E/00 3.78E/00 3.78E/00 3.78E/00 3.78E/00 3.78E/00 3.78E/00 6.91E/00 9.39E/00 9.79E /01 9.79E /01 1.44E /01 2.30E /01
S. Sandri, L.D. Pace / Fusion Engineering and Design 63 /64 (2002) 199 /203
202
Table 3 Airborne tritium oxide DAC levels assumed for WCS rooms Location
Component
Comments
WCS vault
All except valves
HTO DAC
During inspection, maintenance with components unopened Work on open components with potential hold-up of water containing tritium Final activities before close-up Final activities after close-up WCS vault All valves During inspection, maintenance with components unopened and final activities after close-up Valves B/13 cm Component open Valves /13 cm Component open Outside the WCS Components with poten- Components with potential hold-up opened vaults tial hold-up Components with potential hold-up un-opened or final activities after close-up All other components
Dose rate (mSv/h)
1
2
50
1000
2 1 1 1 2 50
5 0.5
2 10 2 5 2 5 2 5 2 10 1000 0.5
0.1
1
1
0.1
1
1
In Tables 4 and 5 annual collective doses (or ORE) assessed for RH assistance and for WCS operations are shown, respectively.
Table 4 Annual collective dose for RH assistance operations System
PF
Annual collective dose (person mSv/year)
Blanket and limiter maintenance 27.4 and replacement Divertor full repair and replace4.34 ment Divertor partial repair and repla2.00 cement Cryopumps 5.93 Ion Cyclotron Heating 31 Electron Cyclotron Heating 125.9 Total 196.57
5. Conclusion ORE assessed in this study takes into account about all the radiological exposures of workers during normal operation at ITER FEAT plant. The overall result of about 258 person mSv/year could be compared with the 200/300 person mSv/ year of the more recent nuclear fission stations [12], showing a distinguished performance analogue to that of the more advanced technical solutions. For previous ITER designs only partial calculations were performed assessing collective dose for some system [12,13]. A comparison could be made
Table 5 Total ORE for the loops of the cooling system
FW/IBB DIV/LIM NBI Total
Tritium ORE (person mSv/year)
ACP ORE (person mSv/year)
Total ORE (person mSv/year)
2.08E/01 8.41E/00 8.90E/00 3.81E/01
8.96E/00 6.89E/00 8.29E/00 2.41E/01
2.98E/01 1.53E/01 1.72E/01 6.22E/01
S. Sandri, L.D. Pace / Fusion Engineering and Design 63 /64 (2002) 199 /203
203
Table 6 History of ITER WCS collective dose due to ACP Year or model
WCS ORE due to ACP (person Sv/year)
Number of loops
Average ORE per WCS loop (person mSv/year)
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 ITER FEAT
1.4 0.37 0.25 0.30 0.23 0.024
18 18 18 18 18 5
77.8 20.6 13.9 16.7 12.8 4.80
considering WCS system and ACP source only. For such a combination many analysis were done in the past and the results are compared in Table 6. ITER FEAT shows the best performance due to the reduced dimensions and to the improved ALARA approach implemented into this advanced design.
References [1] F. Wasastjerna, ‘Neutronic Calculation on an ICRF Port in ITER FEAT: Neutron Flux Above 1 MeV and Nuclear Heating in the ICRF Launcher’, ITER Nuclear Analysis Group, September 2000. [2] D. Tarabelli, J.C. Robin, ‘PACTITER: a PACTOLE Adaptation for Copper’, CEA tech. Note NT DRN/ DEC/SECA/LTC 97-123, November 1997. [3] L. Di Pace, D.G. Cepraga, ‘Interim report on activated corrosion products evaluation for the ITER-FEAT TCWS’, ENEA ERG FUS TN SIC 11/00, rev. 0, October 2000. [4] L. Di Pace, D.G. Cepraga, ‘Activated corrosion products evaluation for The ITER TCWS’, ENEA ERG FUS TN SIC 11/00, rev. 1, December 2000.
[5] L. Di Pace, ‘Activated corrosion products evaluation for the ITER TCWS DIV/LIM loop’, ENEA FUS TN SA SE R 014, May 2001. [6] S. Sandri, ‘Radiological safety of the scheduled working activities at the main ITER FEAT system components’, ENEA-FUS TN SIC 13/00, rev. 2, November 2000. [7] S. Sandri, ‘Collective dose for the scheduled working activities at the main ITER FEAT system components’, ENEA-FUS TN SA SE R 13, June 2001. [8] Y. Kataoka, Tokamak cooling water system in ITERFEAT (latest design), Water Cooling Systems Group, Naka-JCT, rev. 3, 23 March 2001. [9] K. Moshonas, ‘Radiation protection for NSSR: tritium exposure estimate: 1996 task’, CFFTP G-9701, January 1997. [10] K. Moshonas, ‘Occupational safety assessment specifications’, Revision 2, ITER Garching JWS, October 2000. [11] S. Sandri, ‘Update of the occupational radiation exposure assessment for the ITER FDR water cooling system’, ENEA FUS TN SIC 2/00, July 2000. [12] S. Sandri, ‘Characterisation of working environment and identification of working conditions for the ITER plant, from the radiation protection point of view’, ENEA-FUS/ TECN S&E TR 1/98, rev. 3, May, 1998. [13] S. Sandri, ‘Occupational radiation exposure assessment for the water cooling system of the ITER divertor’, ENEA FUS/TECN SIC 01/99, rev. 1, September 1999.
Collective dose at ITER feat Sandro Sandri a, , Luigi Di Pace b,1 a
b
ENEA ION-IRP, C.R. Frascati, Via E. Fermi, 45, 00044 Frascati, Rome, Italy Assoc. Euratom-ENEA sulla Fusione, C.R. Frascati, Via E. Fermi, 45, 00044 Frascati, Rome, Italy
Abstract The safety study performed until December 2001 to assess the collective dose to the workers based on the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) Fusion Energy Advanced Tokamak (FEAT) project, is presented in this work together with the relevant results. All systems located in the tokamak building of ITER FEAT facility important from the radiological point of view are considered. Radiological source terms with an important collective dose impact are airborne tritium and activated corrosion products (ACP) in the coolant of the water cooling system (WCS). A suitable computer code is used to assess the ACP inventory in the different WCS components. The dose rate is then assessed by considering walls attenuation with the 3D transport code MCNP, a Monte Carlo code that performs gamma ray transport calculation. Working activities needed to operate, maintain and replace each component of systems under study are partly provided by system designers and partly derived from the experience developed in operating nuclear fission reactors. In conclusion the collective dose result is shown and partly compared with that of previous ITER design stages considering the different systems and solutions and pointing out ALARA improvements. # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Dose; ITER; Nuclear fission reactor
1. Introduction The scope of the current analysis is providing information and results related to Occupational Safety during normal operation at main systems of International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) Fusion Energy Advanced Tokamak (FEAT) plant. The main goal is the assessment of
Corresponding author. Tel.: /39-06-9400-5475; fax: /3906-9400-5274 E-mail address: [email protected] (S. Sandri). 1 Tel.: /39-06-9400-5321.
the collective dose or Occupational Radiation Exposure (ORE). Information were collected about the hands-on assistance to the RH operations for maintaining the following systems/components: . . . . . . . .
Blanket modules. Limiter modules. Divertor cassettes. Cryopump. RF heating systems. Ion Cyclotron Heating (ICH). Electron Cyclotron Heating (ECH). Lower Hybrid (LH).
0920-3796/02/$ - see front matter # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 9 2 0 - 3 7 9 6 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 1 9 0 - 4
200
S. Sandri, L.D. Pace / Fusion Engineering and Design 63 /64 (2002) 199 /203
A specific analysis was carried out for the following cooling water loops: . First wall/blanket (FW/BLK). . Divertor/limiter (DIV). . Neutral beam injectors (NBI). The assessment of the collective dose was provided about the hands-on activities for maintaining, inspecting and/or replacing the components of the above systems. The analyses were mainly based on Design documents related to previous and reference ITER designs and on outcomes of technical meetings with ITER designers. The collective dose assessed for working activities different from those performed at the cooling system is affected by high uncertainty due to the shortage of information and data available about working procedures and radiation fields. For the Water Cooling System (WCS) a quite fixed picture exists related to the maintenance/ inspection requirements and to the dose rate fields around the main components.
2. General ITER FEAT layout In this study only activities taking place in the ITER tokamak building are considered due to the relatively small impact on the collective dose of the operations performed in the remaining premises. In the tokamak building is located the ITER FEAT torus, i.e. the plasma chamber of the fusion machine, and three main levels are interested by maintenance activities involving human assistance to the remote handling (RH) operations. At each level 18 port systems allow access to RH tools and human beings until to the plasma facing components throughout three confinement barrier: the bio-shield, the cryostat and the vacuum vessel. Bio-shield provides adequate radiological protection to the workers and a typical dose rate lower than 0.5 mSv/h is achieved, after plasma shutdown, during maintenance operations. The WCS is composed by four main sections: the first wall/blanket (FW/BLK, 3 loops), the
divertor/limiter (DIV, 1 loop), the Neutral Beam Injector (NBI, 1 loop) and the vacuum vessel (VV, 2 loops). The last one (VV) represents a minor concern from the radiological protection point of view due to the low expected Activated Corrosion Products (ACP) inventory and the related assessment was neglected in this work. Main components of the WCS are located in a specific vault above the tokamak and outside of the bio-shield.
3. Source terms and dose rates Three source terms are considered: neutron activation of structural materials, ACP onto cooling system components and pipes and airborne tritium concentration in working premises. Neutron activation was evaluated with suitable computer codes by other experts [1]. It plays a fundamental role affecting the dose rate around the RH ports but its contribution to the dose rate in the WCS vault is negligible. ACP inventory onto cooling pipes and system components was evaluated by using PACTITER code [2 /5] and the related dose rate outside of the cooling system components and pipes was calculated with MCNP computer code [6,7]. This contribution is mainly important in assessing collective dose during maintenance and inspection of WCS components but it was considered also in the activities at the RH ports due to the crossing cooling pipes. Tritium concentration and associated protective factors were assumed in a conservative way from a study performed for previous ITER design stages [8] and revised for ITER FEAT [9] with minor modifications. In Table 1 dose rate values at the tokamak RH ports are reported. Dose rates due to ACP around WCS components is assessed considering two average operator positions: 30 and 100 cm from the external surface. In Table 2 related results are shown and in Table 3 dose rate due to airborne tritium in WCS rooms is reported as well.
S. Sandri, L.D. Pace / Fusion Engineering and Design 63 /64 (2002) 199 /203
201
Table 1 Dose rates at the RH ports Reference area
Dose rate due to neutron activation (mSv/h)
Outside bioshield 1 (out-bio) Outside cryostat 50 (out-cryo) Outside vacuum ves- 100 sel (out-vv)
Dose rate due to ACP per cooling pipe (mSv/h)
Equivalent tritium dose Total dose rate (four rate (mSv/h) cooling pipes) (mSv/h)
2
1
10
2
10
62
2
0.5
4. Working activities and collective dose When assessing ORE the dose rate has to be related to the working strategy, i.e. number of persons, time period, operator position and working procedures needed to perform each working task. In the RH assistance the 18 ports located at each one of the three levels of the ITER FEAT torus are interested by maintenance activities also involving human access. Many system components located behind these ports have to be maintained or replaced on regular basis and the related impact on the collective dose to the personnel was considered.
108.5
Working strategy for these activities is not yet well defined. Only for some operation a specific analysis has been done and the relevant data are available [7]. When specific information are not available generic operations, like opening and closing the closure plugs, that have to be performed hands-on are considered and the related person /power (PP) is guessed from information collected during technical meetings with ITER designers and from experience developed in studying ITER Final Design Report (FDR) [10]. For maintenance and inspection of WCS components a detailed working strategy was developed by ITER Designers [11] and these PP data were used for assessing the collective dose.
Table 2 ACP dose rates around WCS components System-component
Main pump Low flow pump Heat exchanger Pressurizer Heater Pipe and support Instrument Large valve Small valve Relief valve Relief tank CVCS Rec HX CVCS cooler CVCS filter CVCS resin bed CVCS control tank CVCS Re-injection pump
FW/IBB dose rate (mSv/h)
DIV and NBI dose rate (mSv/h)
30 cm
1m
30 cm
1m
2.46E/00 8.05E/00 7.40E/00 2.28E/00 3.77E/00 2.33E/00 2.33E/00 2.33E/00 2.33E/00 2.33E/00 2.33E/00 2.69E/00 7.36E/00 3.59E/00 3.59E/00 1.07E /01 1.56E /01
1.10E/00 3.07E/00 4.75E/00 8.01E /01 1.44E/00 1.04E/00 1.04E/00 1.04E/00 1.04E/00 1.04E/00 1.04E/00 9.46E /01 2.58E/00 1.26E/00 1.26E/00 3.74E /02 5.49E /02
8.95E/00 8.90E/00 3.27E/01 5.92E/00 1.46E/01 8.45E/00 8.45E/00 8.45E/00 8.45E/00 8.45E/00 8.45E/00 1.97E/01 2.68E/01 2.79E/00 2.79E/00 4.10E /01 6.57E /01
4.00E/00 3.40E/00 2.03E/01 2.07E/00 5.55E/00 3.78E/00 3.78E/00 3.78E/00 3.78E/00 3.78E/00 3.78E/00 6.91E/00 9.39E/00 9.79E /01 9.79E /01 1.44E /01 2.30E /01
S. Sandri, L.D. Pace / Fusion Engineering and Design 63 /64 (2002) 199 /203
202
Table 3 Airborne tritium oxide DAC levels assumed for WCS rooms Location
Component
Comments
WCS vault
All except valves
HTO DAC
During inspection, maintenance with components unopened Work on open components with potential hold-up of water containing tritium Final activities before close-up Final activities after close-up WCS vault All valves During inspection, maintenance with components unopened and final activities after close-up Valves B/13 cm Component open Valves /13 cm Component open Outside the WCS Components with poten- Components with potential hold-up opened vaults tial hold-up Components with potential hold-up un-opened or final activities after close-up All other components
Dose rate (mSv/h)
1
2
50
1000
2 1 1 1 2 50
5 0.5
2 10 2 5 2 5 2 5 2 10 1000 0.5
0.1
1
1
0.1
1
1
In Tables 4 and 5 annual collective doses (or ORE) assessed for RH assistance and for WCS operations are shown, respectively.
Table 4 Annual collective dose for RH assistance operations System
PF
Annual collective dose (person mSv/year)
Blanket and limiter maintenance 27.4 and replacement Divertor full repair and replace4.34 ment Divertor partial repair and repla2.00 cement Cryopumps 5.93 Ion Cyclotron Heating 31 Electron Cyclotron Heating 125.9 Total 196.57
5. Conclusion ORE assessed in this study takes into account about all the radiological exposures of workers during normal operation at ITER FEAT plant. The overall result of about 258 person mSv/year could be compared with the 200/300 person mSv/ year of the more recent nuclear fission stations [12], showing a distinguished performance analogue to that of the more advanced technical solutions. For previous ITER designs only partial calculations were performed assessing collective dose for some system [12,13]. A comparison could be made
Table 5 Total ORE for the loops of the cooling system
FW/IBB DIV/LIM NBI Total
Tritium ORE (person mSv/year)
ACP ORE (person mSv/year)
Total ORE (person mSv/year)
2.08E/01 8.41E/00 8.90E/00 3.81E/01
8.96E/00 6.89E/00 8.29E/00 2.41E/01
2.98E/01 1.53E/01 1.72E/01 6.22E/01
S. Sandri, L.D. Pace / Fusion Engineering and Design 63 /64 (2002) 199 /203
203
Table 6 History of ITER WCS collective dose due to ACP Year or model
WCS ORE due to ACP (person Sv/year)
Number of loops
Average ORE per WCS loop (person mSv/year)
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 ITER FEAT
1.4 0.37 0.25 0.30 0.23 0.024
18 18 18 18 18 5
77.8 20.6 13.9 16.7 12.8 4.80
considering WCS system and ACP source only. For such a combination many analysis were done in the past and the results are compared in Table 6. ITER FEAT shows the best performance due to the reduced dimensions and to the improved ALARA approach implemented into this advanced design.
References [1] F. Wasastjerna, ‘Neutronic Calculation on an ICRF Port in ITER FEAT: Neutron Flux Above 1 MeV and Nuclear Heating in the ICRF Launcher’, ITER Nuclear Analysis Group, September 2000. [2] D. Tarabelli, J.C. Robin, ‘PACTITER: a PACTOLE Adaptation for Copper’, CEA tech. Note NT DRN/ DEC/SECA/LTC 97-123, November 1997. [3] L. Di Pace, D.G. Cepraga, ‘Interim report on activated corrosion products evaluation for the ITER-FEAT TCWS’, ENEA ERG FUS TN SIC 11/00, rev. 0, October 2000. [4] L. Di Pace, D.G. Cepraga, ‘Activated corrosion products evaluation for The ITER TCWS’, ENEA ERG FUS TN SIC 11/00, rev. 1, December 2000.
[5] L. Di Pace, ‘Activated corrosion products evaluation for the ITER TCWS DIV/LIM loop’, ENEA FUS TN SA SE R 014, May 2001. [6] S. Sandri, ‘Radiological safety of the scheduled working activities at the main ITER FEAT system components’, ENEA-FUS TN SIC 13/00, rev. 2, November 2000. [7] S. Sandri, ‘Collective dose for the scheduled working activities at the main ITER FEAT system components’, ENEA-FUS TN SA SE R 13, June 2001. [8] Y. Kataoka, Tokamak cooling water system in ITERFEAT (latest design), Water Cooling Systems Group, Naka-JCT, rev. 3, 23 March 2001. [9] K. Moshonas, ‘Radiation protection for NSSR: tritium exposure estimate: 1996 task’, CFFTP G-9701, January 1997. [10] K. Moshonas, ‘Occupational safety assessment specifications’, Revision 2, ITER Garching JWS, October 2000. [11] S. Sandri, ‘Update of the occupational radiation exposure assessment for the ITER FDR water cooling system’, ENEA FUS TN SIC 2/00, July 2000. [12] S. Sandri, ‘Characterisation of working environment and identification of working conditions for the ITER plant, from the radiation protection point of view’, ENEA-FUS/ TECN S&E TR 1/98, rev. 3, May, 1998. [13] S. Sandri, ‘Occupational radiation exposure assessment for the water cooling system of the ITER divertor’, ENEA FUS/TECN SIC 01/99, rev. 1, September 1999.