Review Reports
- Antonio Petraglia1,
- Carmina Sirignano1,2 and
- Fabio Marzaioli1
- et al.
Reviewer 1: Anonymous Reviewer 2: Anonymous Reviewer 3: Anonymous Reviewer 4: Anonymous
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper with ID applsci-1819235 is well written and the information contained in this work is valuable and interesting from the perspective of environmental hazards due to sediments and water pollution with radionuclides in the vicinity of a nuclear power plant (Caserta, Italy) dismantled in 1987.
The tackled subject is relevant for the journal, the manuscript bringing novelty in the evaluation of radionuclides migration pathways in fluvial and marine ecosystems which is an important issue in planning the activities for the public health and environment protection in case of a nuclear accident.
Thus, I recommend the acceptance of this manuscript for publication in the journal “Applied Sciences”, after arranging the references in the relevant journal template and their citation in text according to the journal requirements (this can be also done in the proofing stage).
Author Response
Thus, I recommend the acceptance of this manuscript for publication in the journal “Applied Sciences”, after arranging the references in the relevant journal template and their citation in text according to the journal requirements (this can be also done in the proofing stage). Done
Reviewer 2 Report
The reviewed manuscript presents data on the ultrasensitive measurements of U and Pu content as well as their isotopic ratios. The Cs-137 was also measured together with natural radionuclide K-40.
The authors have clearly demonstrated that the only (or, at least, main) impact on radioecological situation in the investigated region is the global fall-out (nuclear weapon tests and Chernobyl accident).
The result are presented in very understable manner and with good language.
Thus, I recommend to accept manuscript in the present form.
The only comments and questions I have:
1. What were the chemical yields in the analytical pretreatment procedures?
2. Lines 229-230. Seems, like a verb is missing.
Author Response
The only comments and questions I have:
- What were the chemical yields in the analytical pretreatment procedures?Response: We specify in the manuscript that : Chemical yields are not reported here because they are the subject of a detailed optimization procedure that will be discussed in a future work.
2. Lines 229-230. Seems, like a verb is missing.
Response: Sorry, we did not find it: we think that line numbers can be different from the reviewer. However, we made a prooreading of the whole text.
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript reports a ultra sensitivity AMS study of actinides content in environment neighbouring the Garigliano NPP which has been decommissioned in 1970/80s which was the first decommissioned NPP in Italy as far as I know. The method is solid and the results indicate that contamination from the power plant operations is negligible. The paper is well written and informative. I support its prompt publication.
Some minor comments for the authors to consider:
Title: a nuclear power plant -> I think it is still fair to specify it as Garigliano NPP or decommissioned Garigliano NPP.
"The results show no evidence of NPP impact in water and marine sediments." Again one should specify it as Garigliano NPP or Garigliano river.
"A very 397 slight contribution appears in river sediments downstream of the NPP that could be due 398 to its discharges." I do appreciate if the authors could expand a bit their explanations for the increment here including their uncertainty study.
Author Response
Some minor comments for the authors to consider:
Title: a nuclear power plant -> I think it is still fair to specify it as Garigliano NPP or decommissioned Garigliano NPP.
Response: The title has been modified in “Ultrasensitive radionuclide analysis in water and sediments for environmental radiological assessment near the decommissioning Garigliano nuclear power plant (Italy)”
Reviewer 4 Report
This paper can be of great significance in sharing environmental radiation surveys and results on the marine environment around specific nuclear facilities, and can be used as good reference materials in related fields. However, it is better to mention the novelty of this study in the introduction.
Author Response
…
However, it is better to mention the novelty of this study in the introduction.
response: It is added in the Introduction: “The novelty of this work is that the concentrations of 236U, 238U, 239Pu, 240Pu and the isotope ratios 236U/238U, 239Pu/240Pu are measured by AMS on 160 samples of sea water and marine sediments…”