A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Dose assessment considerations for remedial action on plutonium‐contaminated soil
This article describes some of the dose assessment issues that should be considered when planning and executing a soil remedial activity. What is the proper dose scenario/ model? What are the appropriate cleanup criteria? How is the data gathered and analyzed (both before and after) cleanup?
By describing the features and aspects of how these issues and others were considered or not considered in planning for the remedial action underway at Maralinga, Australia (former site of the Nuclear Weapons Testing Program of the United Kingdom) when compared with historical international experience of this type, the author attempts to illustrate that it is almost nonsensical to preselect a single soil value for Pu in soil (for national or international use), particulariy when expressed as a soil concentration (pCi/g or bq/g). This is especially so when the problem is Pu on the surface or near the surface of the soil. This is the situation common at nuclear test sites where “one point safe tests” were conducted. At these locations aspects of resuspension (i.e., area size, particle size, wind speed, etc.) become the dominant drivers for the development of cleanup criteria, sampling regimes, data gathering, and analysis regimes, etc. These particular elements and others are discussed and illustrated.
Dose assessment considerations for remedial action on plutonium‐contaminated soil
This article describes some of the dose assessment issues that should be considered when planning and executing a soil remedial activity. What is the proper dose scenario/ model? What are the appropriate cleanup criteria? How is the data gathered and analyzed (both before and after) cleanup?
By describing the features and aspects of how these issues and others were considered or not considered in planning for the remedial action underway at Maralinga, Australia (former site of the Nuclear Weapons Testing Program of the United Kingdom) when compared with historical international experience of this type, the author attempts to illustrate that it is almost nonsensical to preselect a single soil value for Pu in soil (for national or international use), particulariy when expressed as a soil concentration (pCi/g or bq/g). This is especially so when the problem is Pu on the surface or near the surface of the soil. This is the situation common at nuclear test sites where “one point safe tests” were conducted. At these locations aspects of resuspension (i.e., area size, particle size, wind speed, etc.) become the dominant drivers for the development of cleanup criteria, sampling regimes, data gathering, and analysis regimes, etc. These particular elements and others are discussed and illustrated.
Dose assessment considerations for remedial action on plutonium‐contaminated soil
Church, Bruce W. (author)
Journal of Soil Contamination ; 6 ; 257-269
1997-05-01
13 pages
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
Unknown
plutonium , Pu‐oxide , dose , dose assessment , risk , risk assessment , cleanup criteria , exposure , inhalation , particle , pathway , contaminated soil , nuclear weapons tests , one‐point‐safe tests , resuspension , climate , seasonal variation , footprint , fetch , receptor , soil remediation , enhancement factor , Maralinga , Taranaki , Australia , Enewetak , Nevada Test Site
Temporary remedial treatment of contaminated groundwater
| Tema Archive | 1998
Temporary remedial treatment of contaminated groundwater
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 1998
Toward Realistic Remedial Action Plans
| Wiley | 1995
1998 FLOOD DAMAGES AND REMEDIAL ACTION
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2000