Behavior of Energetic Materials in Ground Water at an Anti‐Tank Range
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An environmental issue has arisen with M-72 malfunction on anti-tank ranges because many of these rockets break into pieces without exploding on impact, dispersing their energetic materials content on the ground surface and exposing them to transport by infiltration of rainfall and snowmelt. A case study (1998--2005) at Arnhem Anti-Tank Range (Garrison Valcartier, Canada, in operation since the 1970s) revealed octahydro-1,3,5,7-tetranitro-1,3,5,7-tetrazocine (HMX) contamination and traces of 1,3,5-trinitro-1,3,5-triazine (RDX) and 2,4,6-trinitrotoluene (TNT) in ground water at varying concentrations, with all detected HMX concentrations below the USEPA guideline for drinking water of 400 microg L(-1). An HMX mass balance on a transect perpendicular to ground water flow, about 300 m downgradient of the impact area, indicated an HMX flux of about 3 g d(-1) (0.7-1 kg yr(-1), 2005). The HMX mass in the impact area on the sand terrace was estimated at 7 to 10 kg (in 2005). The annual dissolved HMX flux represents about 10% of the source. The dissolved HMX plume in ground water consisted of a series of slugs, generated at each significant infiltration event. HMX is weakly retarded by sorption and is neither biotransformed nor mineralized under the aerobic conditions of the aquifer. TNT and RDX exceeded the USEPA guideline (2 microg L(-1) RDX and 1 microg L(-1) TNT) in three and two samples, respectively. The TNT plume was discontinuous because this compound was not always present at the ground surface. TNT is biotransformed, weakly sorbed, and not mineralized. In two wells, perchlorate associated with the propellant was found at concentrations above the Health Canada preliminary guideline of 6 microg L(-1) near the firing position.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".