Radioactivity in Water: Project Rulison.

Nork, W.E.; Fenske, P.R.

doi:10.2172/4173481

Cited by 9 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The geology and hydrogeology of the Rulison site are described by many authors, including Hurr et al (1969), Nork (1969), Voegeli (1969), Larson and Beetem (1970), Nork and Fenske (1970), Reynolds etal. (1970), Voegeli and West (1970), Voegeli and Claassen (1971a), Claassen (1971b), andDOE (1984).…”

Section: Hydrogeologic Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Aquifers in the Rulison area are generally limited to alluvium and terrace deposits, as the underlying formations are typically impermeable, and produce little water, if any (Reynolds et al, 1970). Nork and Fenske (1970) suggest that groundwater in the Mesaverde may be immobile. An inventory of wells and springs in the surrounding area indicated that only one well produced any significant amount of water from bedrock; this well is reported to be 233 m deep (completed in the Green River Formation), over 2,300 m above the shot point (Voegeli and West, 1970).…”

Section: Hydrogeologic Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because the pressure was monitored only in a limited number of sections of the formation, the vertical extent of this low-pressure zone is unknown, but presumably any radionuclides moving upward from the cavity would be drawn out into this low-pressure zone before moving more than 400 m upward through the formation or annular cracks. The low-pressure zone thus eliminates the possibility of migration to a formation overlying the Mesaverde (Nork and Fenske, 1970). Given these facts, it appears that the migration of radionuclides away from the cavity is likely limited to movement through the formation in which the device was emplaced.…”

Section: Release Scenariomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nork and Fenske (1970) list the masses of over 20 other radionuclides that would be present in the cavity 180 days after the test (Table 2); these masses were used as the source terms for each radionuclide listed. Smith et al (1995) discuss several factors that typically cause hydrologic source terms (the amount of radionuclides available for groundwater transport) to be smaller than radiologic source terms (the total amount of radionuclides produced from a test), many of which apply to Rulison.…”

Section: Source Termsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This results in a possible underestimation of nuclides included in unburned fuel, and an uncertainty in the activation and fission products that can be reduced in future transport calculations. Nork and Fenske, 1970). Activity values represent those present 180 d after the shot.…”

Section: Source Termsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Assessment of hydrologic transport of radionuclides from the Rulison Underground Nuclear Test Site, Colorado

Earman¹,

Chapman²,

Andričević³

1996

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is operating an environmental restoration program to characterize, remediate, and close non-Nevada Test Site locations that were used for nuclear testing.Evaluation of radionuclide transport by groundwater from these sites is an important part of the preliminary risk analysis. These evaluations are undertaken to allow prioritization of the test areas in terms of risk, provide a quantitative basis for discussions with regulators and the public about future work at the sites, and provide a framework for assessing data needs to be filled by site characterization. The Rulison site in west-central Colorado was the location of an underground detonation of a 40-kiloton nuclear device in 1969. The test took place 2,568 m below ground surface in the Mesaverde Formation. Though located below the regional water table, none of the bedrock formations at the site yielded water during hydraulic tests, indicating extremely low permeability conditions. The scenario evaluated was the migration of radionuclides from the blast-created cavity through the Mesaverde Formation. Transport calculations were performed using the solute flux method, with input based on the limited data available for the site. Model results suggest that radionuclides from the test are contained entirely within the area currently administered by DOE. The transport calculations are most sensitive to changes in the mean groundwater velocity and the correlation scale of hydraulic conductivity, with transport of strontium and cesium also sensitive to the sorption coefficient. This modeling was performed to investigate how the uncertainty in various physical parameters affects calculations of radionuclide transport at the Rulison site, and to serve as a starting point for discussion regarding further investigation at the site; it was not intended to be a definitive simulation of migration pathways of radionuclide concentration values. Given the sparse data, the modeling results may differ significantly from reality. If needed, confidence in transport predictions can be increased by obtaining more site data, including ascertaining the amount of radionuclides available for transport (i.e., not trapped in melt glass or vented during gas flow testing), and determining accurate values for the mean groundwater velocity, correlation scale for hydraulic conductivity, and sorption coefficients for strontium and cesium. CONTENTS

show abstract

Section: Hydrogeologic Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%