Environmental Monitoring and Assessment

, Volume 38, Issue 1, pp 51–65 | Cite as

Parameter uncertainty and sensitivity in a liquid-effluent dose model

  • T. C. Hyman
  • D. M. Hamby


Radioactive materials which are released into streams on the Savannah River Site (SRS) eventually flow into the Savannah River. Tritium, 90Sr, 137Cs, and 239Pu account for the majority of the radiation dose received by users of the Savannah River. This paper focuses on the dose uncertainties originating from variability in parameters describing the transport and uptake of these nuclides. Parameter sensitivity has also been determined for each liquid pathway exposure model. The models used here to estimate radiation dose to an exposed individual provide a range of possible dose estimates that span approximately one order of magnitude. A pathway analysis reveals that aquatic food and water consumption account for more than 95% of the total dose to an individual.


Radiation Radiation Dose Environmental Management Total Dose Tritium 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Georgia Department of Natural resources: 1990, ‘Outdoor Recreation Assessment and Policy Plan 1989, in the Georgia Recreation Planning Processes’, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
  2. Hamby, D. M.: 1992a, ‘Site-specific Parameter Values for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Food Pathway Dose Model’, Health Physics 62, 136–143.Google Scholar
  3. Hamby, D. M.: 1992b, ‘A Methodology for Estimating the Radiological Consequence of an Acute Aqueous Release’, Health Physics 62, 567–570.Google Scholar
  4. Hamby, D. M.: 1995, ‘A Comparison of Sensitivity Analysis Techniques’, Health Physics 68, 195–204.Google Scholar
  5. International Atomic Energy Agency: 1989, ‘Evaluating the Reliability of Predictions Made Using Environmental Transfer Models’, Report No. 100, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  6. International Commission on Radiological Protection: 1974, ‘Report of the Task Group on Reference Man’, Report No. 23, Pergamon Press, new York.Google Scholar
  7. International Commission on Radiological Protection: 1977, ‘Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection’, Report No. 26, Pergamon Press. New York.Google Scholar
  8. International Commission on Radiological Protection, ‘Limits for Intakes of Radionuclides by Workers, Part 1’, Report No. 30, Pergamon Press, new York.Google Scholar
  9. Lutz, S. M., Smallwood, D. M., Blaylock, J. R. and Hama, M. Y.: 1982, Changes in Food Consumption and Expenditures in American Households During the 1980s’, Report No. 44, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  10. Northern Ireland Department of Employment,: 1971, Handbook of Radiological Protection, Part I: Data, Ministry of health and Social Services, Her Majesty's Stationery Office. London, Engeland: Report No. SNB 11-360079-8.Google Scholar
  11. Vanderploeg, H. A., Parzyck, D. C., Wilcox, W. H., Kercher, J. R. and Kaye, S. V.: 1975, ‘Bioaccumulation Factors for Radionuclides in Freshwater Biota’, Report No. ORNL-5002. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge, TN.Google Scholar
  12. Osborne, R. V.: 1966, ‘Absorption of Tritiated Water Vapor by People’, Health Physics 12, 1527–1537.Google Scholar
  13. Pao, E. M., Fleming, K. H., Guenther, P. M. and Mickle, S. J.: 1992, ‘Foods Commonly Eaten by Individuals: Amount Per Day and Per Eating Occasion’, Report No. 849, United States Department of Agriculture. Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  14. Pinson, E. A. and Langham, W. H.: 1997, ‘Physiology and Toxicology of tritium in Man’, Journal of Applied Physiology 10, 108–126.Google Scholar
  15. Polikarpov, G. G.: 1966, Radioecology of Aquatic Organisms, North-Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  16. Roseberry, A. M. and Burmaster, D. E.: 1992, ‘Longnormal Distributions for Water Intake by Childeren and Adults’ Risk Analysis 12, 99–104.Google Scholar
  17. Simpson, D. B. and McGill, B. L.: 1977, LADTAP II: A Program for Calculating Radiation Exposure to Man From Routine Release of Nuclear Reactor Liquid Effluents’, Report No. NUREG/CR-1276, Engineering Physics Division, Oak Ridge, TN.Google Scholar
  18. Soldat, J. K., Robinson, N. M. and Baker, D. A.: 1974, ‘Models and Computer Codes for Evaluating Environmental Radiation Doses, Report No. BNWL-1754, Pacific Northwest Laboratories. Richland, WA.Google Scholar
  19. Thompson, S. E., Burton, C. A., Quinn, D. J. and Ng, Y. C.: 1972, ‘Concentration Factors of Chemical Elements in Edible Aquatic Organisms’, Report No. UCRL-50564, Rev. 1, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, Livermore, CA.Google Scholar
  20. Tsoulfanidis, N.: 1983, Measurement and Detection of Radiation, Hemisphere Publishing Corporation, new York.Google Scholar
  21. United States department of Agriculture: 1993, Food Consumption: Households in the South, Seasons and year 1977–1978. Report No. H-9, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  22. United States Department of Energy: 1988a, ‘External Dose Rate Conversion Factors for the Calculation of Dose to the Public’, report No. DOE/EH-0070, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  23. United States Department of Energy: 1988b, Internal Dose Conversion Factors for the Calculation of Dose to the Public, Report No. DOE/EH-0071, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  24. United States Geological Survey: 1993, ‘Water Resources Data-Georgia Water Year 1992, Report No. GA-92-1, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  25. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ‘Calculation of Annual Doses to Man From Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance With 10 CFR Part 50, Appenfix I, Regulatory Guide 1. 109, Office of Standards development, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  26. Westinghouse Savannah River Company: 1989, Savannah River Site Environmental Report, Cummings, C. L. Martin, D. K. and Martin, J. L. (eds), Report No. WSRC-IM-90-60, Aiken, SC.Google Scholar
  27. Westinghouse Savannah River Company: 1990, Savannah River Site Environmental Report, Cummings, C. L. Martin, D. K. and Martin, J. L. (eds), Report No. WSRC-IM-91-28, Aiken, SC.Google Scholar
  28. Westinghouse Savannah River Company: 1991, Savannah River Site Environmental Report, Arnett, M. W. Karapatakis, L. K. Mamatey, A. R. and Todd, J. L. (eds), Report No. WSRC-TR-92-186, Aiken, SC.Google Scholar
  29. Westinghouse Savannah River Company: 1992, Savannah River Site Environmental Report, Arnett, M. W. Karapatakis, L. K. and Mamatey, A. R. (eds), No. WSRC-TR-93-075, Aiken, SC.Google Scholar
  30. Whicker, F. W., Schultz, V.: 1982, Radioecology Energy and the Environment, Vol. 2, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. C. Hyman
    • 1
  • D. M. Hamby
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Nuclear Engineering SciencesUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA
  2. 2.Department of Environmental and Industrial HealthUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations