Representative Sampling for Energetic Compounds at Military Training Ranges

Abstract Field sampling experiments were conducted at various locations on training ranges at three military installations within North America. The areas investigated included an anti-tank range firing point, an anti-tank range impact area, an artillery-range firing point, and an artillery-range impact area. The purpose of this study was to develop practical sampling strategies to reliably estimate mean concentrations of residues from munitions found in surface soil at various types of live-fire training ranges. The ranges studied differ in the types of energetic residues deposited and the mode of deposition. In most cases, the major source zones for these residues are the top two or three centimeters of soil. Multi-increment sampling was used to reduce the variance between field sample replicates and to enhance sample representativeness. Based on these criteria the results indicate that a single or a few discrete samples do not provide representative data for these types of sites. However, samples built from at least 25 increments provided data that was sufficiently representative to allow for the estimation of energetic residue mass loading in surface soils and to characterize the training activity at a given location, thereby addressing two objectives that frequently are common to both environmental and forensic investigations.

[1]  Thomas A. Ranney,et al.  Sampling strategies near a low-order detonation and a target at an artillery impact area , 2004 .

[2]  Marianne E. Walsh,et al.  On-Site Processing and Subsampling of Surface Soil Samples for the Analysis of Explosives , 2003 .

[3]  Thomas A. Ranney,et al.  Coping with Spatial Heterogeneity Effects on Sampling and Analysis at an HMX-Contaminated Antitank Firing Range. , 1999 .

[4]  Michael R. Walsh.  Field sampling tools for explosives residues developed at CRREL , 2004 .

[5]  Snezana Lawrence.  October , 1855, The Hospital.

[6]  Thomas A. Ranney,et al.  Characterization of Explosives Contamination at Military Firing Ranges Characterization of Explosives Contamination at Military Firing Ranges Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program , 2022 .

[7]  Marianne E Walsh,et al.  The effect of particle size reduction by grinding on subsampling variance for explosives residues in soil. , 2002, Chemosphere.

[8]  Thomas A. Ranney,et al.  Assessment of Sampling Error Associated with Collection and Analysis of Soil Samples at Explosives-Contaminated Sites. , 1996 .

[9]  Thomas A. Ranney,et al.  Use of Snow-Covered Ranges to Estimate Explosives Residues from High-Order Detonations of Army Munitions , 2002 .

[10]  Thomas A. Ranney,et al.  SITE CHARACTERIZATION FOR EXPLOSIVES CONTAMINATION AT A MILITARY FIRING RANGE IMPACT AREA , 1998 .

[11]  Eric R. Ziegel,et al.  Pierre Gy's Sampling Theory and Sampling Practice , 1989 .

[12]  Thomas A. Ranney,et al.  Sampling error associated with collection and analysis of soil samples at TNT‐contaminated sites , 1997 .

[13]  Susan Taylor,et al.  TNT particle size distributions from detonated 155-mm howitzer rounds. , 2004, Chemosphere.

[14]  Thomas A. Ranney,et al.  Estimates for Explosives Residue from the Detonation of Army Munitions , 2003 .

[15]  Thomas A. Ranney,et al.  Representative sampling for energetic compounds at an antitank firing range , 2004 .

[16]  Michael R. Walsh,et al.  Range Characterization Studies at Donnelly Training Area, Alaska: 2001 and 2002 , 2004 .