TREATMEINTS FOR FARMLAND CONTAMINATED WITH RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL 



tlie other requirements with no more than a rea- 

 sonable eti'ort. Treatments that are feasible in 

 one situation may not be in another. 



In some cases it may be impractical, or even 

 impossible, to treat contaminated land because 

 of the condition of the land. An obvious limi- 

 tation would exist if the radiation level were 

 high enough to endanger workers in the field. 

 The existence of heavy vegetative or snow cover, 

 or of a frozen surface soil, would preclude the 

 use of most kinds of scraping equipment. Soil 

 characteristics such as surface roughness, shal- 

 lowness of fertile soil, or the presence of stones 

 might greatly increase the effort needed to reach 

 the desired effectiveness, or even prevent some 

 treatments. 



In order to compare the feasibility of various 

 treatments, their important characteristics are 

 given in tables 1, 2, 3, and 4. These character- 



istics include the effectiveness of the treatment, 

 the effort required for treatment and for disposal 

 of contaminated material, and the productivity of 

 treated land. Because soil and crop conditions 

 vary so widely, we attempt only the qualitative 

 evaluation of these characteristics. For example, 

 the effectiveness of a treatment is judged good 

 if test results generally showed more than 95 

 percent of surface contamination was removed, 

 poor if less than 75 percent was removed, and 

 fair if the amount removed was intermediate. 

 Few data are available for estimating effort re- 

 quired for treatment or disposal, or predicting 

 the productivity of treated land. Evaluations of 

 these characteristics are based on existing data, 

 supplemented by qualitative observations of test 

 procedures and general agricultural experience. 

 We found that machinery must be operated 

 with care to obtain clean i-emoval of contami- 



Table 1. — A comparison of methods for removing contaminated crops or mulches from lamd 



Effort required- 



Type of 

 vegetation 



Implement 



Removal of 

 radioactivity ' 



For 

 removal ' 



For 

 disposal '' 



Soybeans, 12" high Mower Poor Poor Fair. 



Soybeans, 12" high Flail harvester Poor Fair Good. 



Soybeans, full growth Flail harvester Poor Poor to fair Good. 



Soybeans, full growth Forage harvester Poor Poor to fair Good. 



Soybeans, mature Combine, straw removed Poor Poor Fair. 



Fescue-clover meadow- Forage harvester Poor Poor to fair Good. 



Sudan grass, 12" high Mower Poor Poor Fair. 



Sudan gras.s, 12" high Flail harvester Poor Fair Good. 



Rye, full growth Mow, rake and bale Poor Poor Good. 



Rye, full growth Forage harvester Poor Poor to fair Good. 



Rye, mature Combine, straw removed Poor Poor Fair. 



Wheat, mature Combine, straw removed Poor Poor Fair. 



Corn, full growth I'V)rage harvester Poor Poor Fair. 



Mulch, 5 tons wheat straw/acre Side-delivery rake Good Poor Fair. 



Mulch, .5 tons bermudagrass hay/acre Rake and bale Poor Poor Good. 



" Rating of removal of radioactivity : Good — •>95 percent removal. 



Fair — 75 to 95 percent removal. 

 Poor — <75 percent removal. 

 ° Rating of removal effort : Good — >5 acres per hour. 



Fair — 1 to 5 acres per hour. 

 Poor — <! acre per hour. 

 'Rating of disposal effort: Good — additional loading and hauling effort minimal. 



Fair — considerable effort in loading and hauling. 

 Poor — very great loading and hauling effort. 



