national analytical management program (namp) savannah river national laboratory u.s. department of...
TRANSCRIPT
National Analytical Management Program (NAMP)Savannah River National Laboratory
U.S. Department of Energy Savannah River
National Analytical Management Program
Analytical Services Program (ASP) WorkshopSeptember 15, 2015
Cecilia DiPrete, Savannah River National LaboratoryBerta Oates, CBFO Technical Assistance Contractor, Portage, Inc.
2
Outline of Talking Points• History and Mission• Organizational Structure• Integrated Consortium of Laboratory
Networks (ICLN)• Environmental Response Laboratory
Network (ERLN) Coordination Office• Radiological Response Laboratory
Network (RRLN)• NAMP Initiatives within Subcommittees• Collaborations and Strategic Partnerships • Questions and Answers
3
Charged with creating a DOE Environmental Response Laboratory Network Coordination Office to establish an effective integrated response in a national emergency
Background and NAMP Today
NAMP Mission• Work to serve as a focal point to
coordinate analytical resources within the DOE complex
• Help other agencies and organizations gain access to analytical capabilities and expertise within participating laboratories– Create DOE Environmental Response
Laboratory Network Coordination Office– Support the need to maintain and
expand analytical capabilities• Promote training and education
4
NAMP Scope• Identify sources of analytical capability• Help coordinate internal ICLN activities• Provide a focal point for collaboration
across laboratories• Establish reimbursement mechanisms for
services• Help standardize methods and procedures• Assist in developing academic or training
opportunities in radiological sciences and radiochemistry
• Address needs for radiological reference materials
• Pursue funding for scope
5
NAMP Evolution: 2010-20146
Today: NAMP Organizational Structure
7
Integrated Consortium of Laboratory Networks (ICLN)
8
• Established 2005• Signed MOA between 10 federal agencies, including EPA and DOE
• Renewed 2012• Provides a nation-wide integrated system of laboratory networks
ICLN Organization
Technical Working Groups:
• Environmental Anthrax Sampling
• Radiological Lab Response
• Sample Prioritization
9
10
Anatomy of a Response
11
Provides efficient coordination of analytical laboratory services for Chemical/Biological/Radiological incidents
• inter-network strategic and operational planning
• identification of accountabilities• communication and information
sharing• resource optimization• response coordination
Why is the ICLN Important?
Environmental Response Laboratory Network (ERLN)• All hazards-all environmental media
laboratory network• Addresses preparedness, response,
remediation, and recovery activities• EPA and DOE jointly share the
responsibility to ensure capability of response to a radiological incident
12
SRS
ORISE
WIPP Labs
Y-12
SNL
INL
NAMP Laboratories in ERLN13
14
DOE Network Missing in ICLN
The Need for a Radiological Response Laboratory Network (RRLN)
• Difficulty reaching to DOE Laboratories for support (independent entities)
• Current ICLN laboratory capacity is not sufficient• Flexibility in directing resources for emergency response• PREPARE DOE National Laboratories to respond and
assist in a nuclear incident• Capability to accept and analyze high activity radiological
samples (unique DOE infrastructure)• DOE National Laboratories bring:
– Largest analytical capacity– Technical expertise– Unique capabilities (R&D mission)– Largest laboratory infrastructure
15
Radiological Response Laboratory Network (RRLN)
• Merges NAMP activities with Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center (FRMAC) responsibilities to provide consolidated response
• Provides valuable assets to Nation during an emergency
• Reduces costs across DOE analytical laboratory complex
16
Population Monitoring
Following an environmental release of radioactive material, large numbers of people may require external and/or internal monitoring and, if indicated, decontamination.
17
Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) Subcommittee
• Significant gap between the Nation’s radiobioassay capabilities and capacity and those that would be needed to respond to a potential radiological terrorist attack or nuclear incident
• NAMP CLIA subcommittee established to provide surge capacity
• CLIA Compliance within NAMP laboratories will allow for expansion of services to CDC and State Public Health Laboratories
• Goal is to have signed interagency (i.e. DOE / CDC) Memorandum of Understanding
18
2007 Congressional Hearing The House Committee on Science and Technology’s Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight revealed a significant gap between the Nation’s radiobioassay capabilities and capacity and those that would be needed to respond to a potential radiological terrorist attack or nuclear incident.
19
2007 Congressional Hearing
20
21
What is CLIA?• Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) of
1988 are United States federal regulatory standards that apply to all clinical laboratory testing performed on humans in the United States, except clinical trials and basic research.
• Regulated by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)
• The CLIA regulations establish quality standards for laboratory testing performed on materials derived from the human body, such as blood, body fluid and tissue, for the purpose of providing information for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of any disease or impairment of, or the assessment of the health of, human beings. Laboratory testing includes procedures to determine, measure, or otherwise describe the presence or absence of various substances or organisms in the body.
Laboratory must have a quality assurance program Written procedure manual for all tests, assays, and
examinations - Establishment and verification of performance specifications- Maintenance and function checks- Calibration and calibration verification procedures- Control procedures- Comparison of test results- Corrective actions- Test records- Analytic systems assessment- Postanalytic systems- Test reports- Postanalytic systems assessment
Laboratory Director - Hold an earned doctoral degree in a chemical, physical,
biological or clinical laboratory science- Certified by a board approved by HHS
Approved proficiency testing (PT) program twice per year
State requirements, if applicable
Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) Subcommittee
22
Quality Assurance Programs• Laboratory must have a
quality assurance program- Establishment and verification
of performance specifications- Maintenance and function
checks- Calibration verification
procedures- Control procedures- Comparison of test results- Corrective actions- Test records- Analytic systems assessment- Test reports- Postanalytic systems
assessment
23
24
On-going Strategy to Meet Goal • Four DOE labs voluntarily pursued CLIA
Certification in accordance with 42 CFR requirements
– CMS CLIA Registration forms completed.– On-site Assessments completed at 3 of
the 4– Challenge in meeting CLIA Lab Director
requirements• Draft DOE/CDC MOU is awaiting
approval and signatures– Assumes DOE labs attain CLIA
certification– DOE signatory level needs to be
determined• The CLIA Subcommittee provides an
effective forum for constructive DOE/CDC dialogue on resource coordination during a radiological event
• DOE and CDC will continue to partner to ensure effective response preparedness in event of radiological incident
High Dose Laboratories Subcommittee
• Develop an integrated structure for moderate, high-level, and hot cell radiological laboratories
• Capacity needed for highly radioactive samples – “ground zero” of an
RDD– nuclear accident
• Shielded cells and remote analytical capabilities must be available and coordinated
25
26
New Radiological Reference Materials
• Lack of reference materials with activity levels and diverse matrices to support consequence management and recovery
• Everyone agrees we need reference materials– Method development– Method verification– Method validation– PT testing– Exercises
• Focus on getting the message heard in high places
26
27
PT Studies: Multi-agency Benefits
•Provides a measure of laboratory performance
•Encourages laboratories to improve performance
•Provides an opportunity for laboratories to compare methods
•Allows an opportunity to practice processes
Overall Objectives
# ofSamples
Decreasing Detection LimitIncreasing Requirements for Defensible Results
Incr
easi
ng
Un
cert
ain
tyIn
crea
sed
Urg
ency
for
Res
ult
s
28
29
Education and Training Subcommittee
• Promote training and education in radiochemistry
• Avert catastrophic loss of expertise
• Partnering of federal agencies and universities
• Highly successful webinar series
• Archived webinar presentations
29
30
Partnerships
Declining Radiochemistry Workforce
• In May 2012, the National Academy of Sciences issued a report on the demand for and supply of nuclear and radiochemistry experts
• Current workforce approaching retirement age
• Number of students opting for careers in nuclear and radiochemistry has decreased
National Research Council, “Assuring a Future U.S.-Based Nuclear and Radiochemistry Expertise, May 2012, http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13308
US granted PhD degrees in Nuclear Chemistry from 1970 to 2004, ranging from 35 to 4
31
32
• 2008: 46 active faculty identified– Across 20 universities– Producing 114 PhD’s– 7 universities were “singlets”– 5 universities were “doublets”
– Largest program was Washington State University, with 6 faculty in nuclear chemistry program
2012 Findings– Faculty base was extremely vulnerable
– Little or no undergraduate curricula– Programs with only one faculty were unsustainable– Funding was limited and unpredictable– Data sources for tracking the academic health of the field are poor or missing– Specific programs were helping, but not fast enough
Faculty Base Concerns
National Research Council, “Assuring a Future U.S.-Based Nuclear and Radiochemistry Expertise, May 2012, http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13308
Ensuring Future Workforce via NAMP Webinars
33
Issues and Challenges
•Aging facilities within the DOE complex•Declining workforce•Few universities teaching radiochemistry•Lack of professors•Lack of facilities for training
Radiochemistry Webinars•Promote radiochemistry education •Introduce radiochemistry to a new audience•Advance the knowledge of personnel in the discipline
Audience
•Managers•Technicians•Students•Regulators•Health Physicists•Quality Assurance Officers•Chemists
34
Series 1-Actinide Chemistry April 2012 to April 2013
Series 2-Environmental Radiochemistry / Bioassay May 2013 to May 2014
Webinar Topic Attendance Archived Viewings Webinar Topic Attendance Archived
Viewings
An Overview of Actinide Chemistry 165 763 Radiological Data Validation and Verification 205 155
Uranium Chemistry 183 279 Traceability and Uncertainty 260 78
Plutonium Chemistry – General Properties of Plutonium 142 198 Bioassay 182 92
Environmental Behavior of Plutonium 136 182 Gamma Spectrometry (Part 1) 273 264
Environmental Behavior of Uranium 164 96 Gamma Spectrometry (Part 2) 184 81
Analytical Chemistry of Plutonium and Uranium 210 82 Overview of EPA Incident Response Guides and
Rapid Methods 182 46
Source Preparation for Alpha Spectroscopy 153 232 Detection Decisions and Detection Limits 234 70
Sample Dissolution 186 98 Guide to Uncertainty in Measurement 226 69
Neptunium Chemistry 157 59 Mass Spectrometry 235 53
Trivalent Actinides 151 54 Alpha Spectroscopy 237 120
Transplutonium Actinides 115 36 Applications in Liquid Scintillation Counting 236 117
Radium Chemistry 235 167 Unconventional Drilling/Hydraulic Fracturing and Natural Radioactivity 269 135
Webinar Series Participation
35
Series 3 Nuclear Fuel CycleWebinar Title Presenter Date Attendance
Introduction to the Fuel Cycle Stephanie Cornet, NEA/OECD June 26, 2014 151/189Front End--Uranium Mining, Milling, Enrichment and UO2 production Mikael Nilsson, UC-Irvine July 24, 2014 211/120Environmental and human contamination in the Front End of the Fuel Cycle for Uranium Mining and Milling Kenya de Almeida, UNM August 21, 2014
133/66
Nuclear Fuels and Fuel Fabrication Thomas Hartmann, UNLV September 25, 2014 146/78
Overview of Nuclear Reactors Roger Blomquist, ANL October 23, 2014 214Chemistry and radiochemistry of the reactor coolant system Dr. Robert Litman, EMS November 20, 2014 137/65
The PUREX Process Dr. Jimmy Bell, Bell Consultants December 11, 2014 166/65
Advanced Partitioning Technologies in the U.S. Jennifer Braley, Colorado School of Mines January 22, 2015 155/9
Advanced Partitioning Technologies in Europe Dr. Dominique Warin, Commissariat a l’Energie Atomique (CEA) February 26, 2015 80/5
Radiation Chemistry at the Back End of the Nuclear Fuel CycleBruce Mincher, INLSteve Mezyk, California State University Long Beach
March 26, 2015 128
Pyroprocessing Technology Supathorn PhongikaroonVirginia Common-Wealth University April 30, 2015 42
Nuclear Waste Management-Application to Technetium Edward Mausolf, PNNL June 4, 2015 109
Nuclear Repository Science and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Lindsay Shuller-Nickles, Clemson University July 16, 2015 109
High Level Waste Rick Demmer, INL August 27, 2015 129
Total Attendance 6610 Total Archived Viewings 4123
Average 174/webinar
36
Mini-SeriesWebinar Title Presenter Tentative Date
High Resolution Gamma-Ray Spectrometry Analyses for Normal Operation and Radiological Incident Response
Dr. Robert Litman, Environmental Management Services September 24, 2015
Radiation Safety Dr. Dave Roelant, Florida International University October 22, 2015
The Diverse Geologic Environments of Natural Uranium Resources Dr. Phil Goodell, University of Texas El Paso November 19, 2015
37Upcoming Series 5—Nuclear Forensics
Webinar Title Presenter Tentative DateIntroduction Dr. Walter Loveland, Oregon State University December 2015
Nuclear Fission/Nuclear Devices Dr. John McCLory, US Air Force Institute of Technology January 2016
Thorium and Uranium Resources and Enrichment Dr. Lindsay Shuller-Nickles, Clemson University February 2016
Chronometry Dr. Michael Schultz, University of Iowa March 2016
Sample Matrices and Collection, Sample Preparation Dr. Amy Hixon, University of Notre Dame April 2016
Nuclear Materials Analysis — Physical and Spectroscopic Methods Dr. Jeff Terry, Illinois Institute of Technology May 2016
Nuclear Materials Analysis — Chemical Methods Dr. Brian Powell, Clemson University June 2016
Nuclear Materials Analysis — Non-Destructive Analysis Dr. Azaree T. Lintereur, University of Utah July 2016
Nuclear Materials Analysis — Radioanalytical Methods Dr. Alena Paulenova, Oregon State University August 2016
Nuclear Materials Analysis — Mass Spectroscopy Dr. Ken Marcus, Clemson University September 2016
Development of Signatures Dr. Kiel Holliday and Dr. Leonard Grey, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
October 2016
Statistics in Nuclear Forensics Dr. Luther McDonald, University of Utah November 2016
Source and Route Attribution Dr. Jenifer Braley, Colorado School of Mines December 2016
Case Studies Part 1 Dr. Lindsay Shuller-Nickles, Clemson University January 2017
Case Studies Part 2 Dr. Timothy A. DeVol, Clemson University January 2017
38
Webinar Attendee Comments
“I thought it was very interesting. The material is not often presented in other than a graduate school setting so many
of us don't have access to it; other than from books. Thank you for making it possible.”
“Only criticism - too much info too fast! providing a copy of the presentation was the cure.”
“I appreciate if you can send copy of the presentations as attached to the desired participants emails. It is good initiative to gather scientists from radiochemistry community world-wide to refresh their knowledge in such ease and advanced way.”
“Thank you for providing another
great webinars! I've been getting
caught up on some of the older ones and they are proving to be very
useful.”
“This is the most
applicable talk to my work that I have heard so far, and I can really
use the information
they are providing.”
International Programs• Promote radiochemistry and nuclear
chemistry curriculum development• Committed to foster an international
environment for nuclear science and education
• International education opportunities in radiochemistry and nuclear chemistry through student and staff exchanges
39
40
NAMP’s Outreach
• Since 2010, the NAMP organization has significantly increased its influence, initiatives, and membership
• NAMP has established proof of concept and serves with NNSA as DOE’s liaison with DHS, EPA, CDC and other agencies
41
• Participation in National Academy of Science Meetings
• Presentations in both national and international conferences
• Peer reviewed publications
• DOE EM Press Releases• Advertising in
Environmental Laboratory Newsletters
• Articles in APHL Bridges Publications
• Brochures• Website
42
• Participation in National Academy of Science Meetings
• Presentations in both national and international conferences
• Peer reviewed publications
• DOE EM Press Releases• Advertising in
Environmental Laboratory Newsletters
• Articles in APHL Bridges Publications
• Brochures• Website
43
• Participation in National Academy of Science Meetings
• Presentations in both national and international conferences
• Peer reviewed publications
• DOE EM Press Releases• Advertising in
Environmental Laboratory Newsletters
• Articles in APHL Bridges Publications
• Brochures• Website
44
• Participation in National Academy of Science Meetings
• Presentations in both national and international conferences
• Peer reviewed publications
• DOE EM Press Releases• Advertising in
Environmental Laboratory Newsletters
• Articles in APHL Bridges Publications
• Brochures• Website
45
• Participation in National Academy of Science Meetings
• Presentations in both national and international conferences
• Peer reviewed publications
• DOE EM Press Releases• Advertising in
Environmental Laboratory Newsletters
• Articles in APHL Bridges Publications
• Brochures• Website
46
• Participation in National Academy of Science Meetings
• Presentations in both national and international conferences
• Peer reviewed publications
• DOE EM Press Releases• Advertising in
Environmental Laboratory Newsletters
• Articles in APHL Bridges Publications
• Brochures• Website
47
• Participation in National Academy of Science Meetings
• Presentations in both national and international conferences
• Peer reviewed publications
• DOE EM Press Releases• Advertising in
Environmental Laboratory Newsletters
• Articles in APHL Bridges Publications
• Brochures• Website
48
• Participation in National Academy of Science Meetings
• Presentations in both national and international conferences
• Peer reviewed publications
• DOE EM Press Releases• Advertising in
Environmental Laboratory Newsletters
• Articles in APHL Bridges Publications
• Brochures• Website
www.wipp.energy.gov/namp
49
NAMP – In Summary• Fills need for a central point
of contact for Federal agencies to access DOE capabilities
• Serves as focal point for labs joining ERLN
• Supports coordination between laboratories and other federal agencies
• Promotes education and training
• Jointly with the FRMAC functions as the DOE RRLN
49
NAMP Initiatives to Address Ongoing Needs
• Expand network laboratories – SRNL, ORNL,
Hanford, LANL, LLNL, PNNL, Pantex
• Laboratory level funding needed
• Method development
• Method validation for emergency response
• PT participation• Exercise
participation
50
51
The Future of NAMP
• Continue to work with the roadmap that currently exists, with a focused effort on – Funding– Strategic partnerships– Productive communication
51
52
QuestionsCecilia DiPreteNAMP [email protected]
Berta OatesTechnical [email protected]
Visit the NAMP website at: www.wipp.energy.gov/namp