os
TABLE VI
NT OF VARIATION)
RELATIONSHIP OF PLUTONIUM CONCENTRATION VARIABILITY (COEFFICIE
CANYON
WITH SOIL PARTICLE SIZE FRACTION AND SOIL DEPTH IN MORTANDAD
62
0.58
0.93
0.62
44
0.65
0.46
0.55
13
0.11
0.16
Q.50
0.38
0.44
0.49
0.35
independent of the magnitude of plutonium concentra-
least-squares techniques cto determine the signif-
tion within the ranges of observed data.
ieance of plutonium concentration vs depth relation-
and horizontal inhomogeneity in plutonium contamina-
Only four comparisons were
those from Glenn, Trinity
tion within study areas comprises a part of the
total observed variabilicy, while soil particle size
Site (Ground Zero and Area 21), and macroplot 1 at
fractions do not appear to contribute significantly
Rocky Flats.
to the overall variability at those sires examined.
Regression slopes for the first three
areas were positive, whereas the slope was negative
Ic would appear that a
The relationship between UV and soil depth was
statistically significant in the study areas at
clear definition of such relationships would be
Trinity and Glenn and at macroplot 1 at Rocky Flats.
instrumental in efficient study design and would
The CV increased with depth at the Trinity Sire and
provide insight as to the mechanisms of soil pluto-~
Glenn study areas and decreased with depth in macro-
nium mobility.
‘plot 1 at Rocky Flats.
Conclusions.--Plutanium concentration variability in soils from 7 geographical regions ranged from
The CV was relatively consistent,
the diversity of environments and
er
“age”
se
However,
of the
considering that plutonium concentrations varied
plutonium at che various study sites likely con-
through 6 orders of magnitude and appeared to be
tribute to overali variability and certainly complicate interpretation of data between sites.
TABLE VII
Highest CVs were associated with accidental
LINEAR REGRESSION OF SOIL COEFFICTENT
releases of plutonium.
OF VARIATION WITH DEPTH
ay
a
Glenn
0.38
0.02
0.59"
Trinity Ground Zero
0.93
0.05
0.83"
Trinicy Area 21]
0.75
0.04
0.827
NTS-A-13, Strata 1
1.8
-0.02
G.17
NTS-A-13, Strata 6
0.63
0.02
6.16
NTS-A-5, Sctrata lL
0.98
0.01
0.06
NTS-A-5, Strata 4
lL.1
-0.02
0.28
Janet
1.7
0.02
0.27
rocky Flats
Macroplot 1
1.6
-0.06
0.534
Macroplot 2
2.2
-0.05
0.22
Equation of rhe form v = a_
nd x = soil depth (cm).
+ a, X. where y = CV
uncontaminated ecosystems.
Differences in methodologies at the various
study sites make comparison of the data difficulec
and emphasize the need for coordination of etfort
between sites to improve the utilicy and compar-
ability of the data.
Studies should be designed to
look specif~
ically at the components of overall variability.
Data from Rocky Flats and Los Alamos indicate cthac
the analytical componenc of overall variability
concributes less than 35% to the total.
Other fac-
tors which might be considered include variability
in mass of soil particle size fractions within study
plots and the relationship of plutonium CV to the
variability in other soil physical-chemical properties.
Ont
ay
wat
Location
This type of release would
be che most likely source of plutonium to presently
@ee
0.48 to 3.2.
Lower CV values were generally associated with
fallout and effluent sources of plutonium.
“4 ee
for the Rocky Flats area.
mee
(Table VIT).
significant (p < 0.05):
e1~
ships
Vertical
7
7.5-12.5
12.5-22
gow
0.54
wed
0.58
Oo
2.5-7.5
te os
0.64
0.49
e+
0.65
0.84
te
0.48
79
0-2.5
All available data were examined using linear
(2 to 23 mm)
(1 to 2mm)
a
Soil Particle Size Fraction
(500 to 1000 um)
(105 to 500 um)
wea
(53 to 105 um)
6
53 um)
oO
(<
oOo
Depch Profile (cm)