Earth Sciences Waste Disposal Investigations, January--June 1967.

Eliason, J.R.

doi:10.2172/4556413

Cited by 2 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The distribution of tritium in the unconfined aquifer reported by Eliason (1966a) is illustrated in Figure 7. The distribution in Figure 7 reflects refined analytical techniques for measuring tritium concentrations and changes in interpretation of ground-water monitoring data for the unconfined aquifer.…”

Section: Estimates Of Travel Time From Ground-water Monitoring Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimation of ground-water travel time at the Hanford Site: Description, past work, and future needs

Freshley¹,

Graham²

1988

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Estimates Of Travel Time From Ground-water Monitoring Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimation of ground-water travel time at the Hanford Site: Description, past work, and future needs

Freshley¹,

Graham²

1988

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The interpreted distribution of gross beta contamination in the unconfined aquifer changed only minor amounts from July 1966 through December 1974 (Eliason 1967b;Kipp 1973aKipp , 1973bRaymond et al 1976). cautioned that concentration contours presented in the report should not be interpreted as indicating that no radioactivity was present in the ground water beyond the outermost boundary of the interpreted plume.…”

Section: •[1j00-mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…This concentration was consistent with the 2300 pCi/ml (2,300,000 pCi/L) concentration for the same well during the previous reporting period. Eliason (1967b) mapped both the tritium and gross beta plumes as having reached the Columbia River. The distribution of tritium ( Figure 6.30) includes a zone of detectable concentrations (2 to 4 pCi/ml; 2000 to 4000 pCi/L) that appear intermittently in wells as a result of river fluctuations.…”

Section: Tritiummentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The distribution of tritium ( Figure 6.30) includes a zone of detectable concentrations (2 to 4 pCi/ml; 2000 to 4000 pCi/L) that appear intermittently in wells as a result of river fluctuations. Eliason (1967b) 1965(after Eliason 1966a extent of the tritium plume. The area covered by the 100 , 000 to 1, 000,000 pCi/L concentration range increased over the previous 6-month period.…”

Section: Tritiummentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The area covered by the 100 , 000 to 1, 000,000 pCi/L concentration range increased over the previous 6-month period. Eliason (1967b) attributed this increase in tritium activity to disposal of condensate wastes from B Plant. ~ Essig (1968) reported a much smaller extent of tritium contamination in the unconfined aquifer during July through December 1967 ( Figure 6.31).…”

Section: Tritiummentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Ground-water contribution to dose from past Hanford operations

Freshley¹,

Thorne²

1992

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Hanford Environmental Dose Reconstruction (HEOR) Project is being conducted to estimate radiation doses that populations and individuals could have received from Hanford Site operations from 1944 to the present. Four possible pathways by which radionuclides originating in ground water on the Hanford Site could have reached the public have been identified: 1) through contaminated ground water migrating to the Columbia River; 2) through wells on or adjacent to the Hanford Site; 3) through wells that draw some or all of their water from the Columbia River (riparian wells); and 4) through atmospheric deposition resulting in the contamination of a small watershed that, in turn, results in contamination of a shallow well or spring. These four pathways make up the "ground-water pathway , " which is the subject of this study. The objective of the study was to assess the extent to which the groundwater pathway contributed to radiation doses that populations or individuals may have received from past operations at Hanford. The assessment presented in this report was performed by 1) reviewing the extensive •literature on ground water and groundwater monitoring at Hanford and 2) performing simple calculations to estimate radionuclide concentrations in ground water and the Columbia River resulting from groundwater discharge. Radiation doses that would result from exposure to this ground water and surface water were calculated. The study conclusion is that the groundwater pathways did not contribute significantly to dose. Compared with background radiation in the Tri-Cities {300 mrem/yr), estimated doses are small: 0.02 mrem/yr effective dose equivalent from discharge of contaminated ground water to the Columbia River; 1 mremjyr effective dose equivalent from Hanford Site wells; 11 mremjyr effective dose equivalent from riparian wells; and 1 mrem/yr effective dose equivalent from the watershed. Because the estimated doses are so small, the recommendation is that further work on the groundwater pathway be limited to tracking ongoing groundwater studies at the Hanford Site. ix # xiv The maximum dose estimated with a simple calculation for the watershed pathway was 1 mrem/ yr effective dose equivalent (during 1945) for a range of possible parameters used. Ruthenium-106 was the only radionuclide predicted to reach the hypothetical well or spring through the shallow groundwater system in significant concentrations. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION Analyses of the groundwater pathways led to the conclusion that gro~nd water did not make a significant contribution to dose during the study period, 1944 to the present. The dose estimates are small compared with doses from average natural background radiation (300 mrem/yr) in the Tri-Cities (Jaquish and Bryce 1990). People in Richland, Pasco and Kennewick who get their drinking water from the Columbia River would be the primary group potentially exposed to groundwater discharges to the river. Both the dose estimates from published literature and calculations performed to address the o...

show abstract

Earth Sciences Waste Disposal Investigations, January--June 1967.

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Estimation of ground-water travel time at the Hanford Site: Description, past work, and future needs

Estimation of ground-water travel time at the Hanford Site: Description, past work, and future needs

Ground-water contribution to dose from past Hanford operations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About