Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />Addendum to CDH Soil Plutonium"~'240 Surveys 1970-1991, Love, June, 1994 <br />The CDH: soil survey data can be used to answer all of the questions above. Any reservations are <br />due to the level of uncertainty and level of resolution provided with the data. <br />Other studies and research include similar uncertainty. <br />t The accuiracy needed in a particulaz area will depend on the outcome of the process for remedy <br />selection, management practices and future land use in the Buffer Zone. <br />The following discussion expands present technical issues and comparison of CDH Soil Survey <br />results to other study results for a better explanation of the spatial and temporal distribution of <br />plutoniunt""Z'0 in and around the Rocky Flats Plant. <br />' Resuspension of airborne particles containing plutonium <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />The effect and continued resuspension of plutonium laden particles is still an open question. The <br />role of infiltration and runoff are other open questions at this time. These technical questions <br />relate to whether mechanisms that redistribution soil plutonium spatially due to prevailing winds <br />and vertically deeper into the soil column. These questions are being addressed by the HAP and <br />EG&G/USDOE. The work to date supports the 903 Pad release as an event prior to 1970 with <br />some redistribution after that time period. However there is development ofa hypothesis by these <br />researchers: <br />that disturbed areas are the lone areas for potential soil plutonium resuspension and that <br />they are insignificant offsite under normal activities at the plant. <br />that vertical movement of soil plutonium in the OU2 area is absent at this time. <br />The disturbed areas are easily defined. Potentially disturbed areas due to remedial investigations <br />or remediation are also definable. Increased attention to monitoring plan development and <br />surveillance tied to specific activities should continue to consider disturbed land. Monitoring and <br />surveillance should be at the core of any quality assurance program and management activities for <br />affected ~ueas at the plant. Monitoring and surveillance should be the heart of a strategy to <br />control present or future activities to reduce or minimize any resuspension of plutonium laden soil <br />particles or other sources of potential contaminants. <br />1 <br />