Investigation and Remediation of a Small Arms Firing Range

1. Investigation and Remediation of a Small Arms Firing Range JP Messier U.S. Coast Guard Civil Engineering Unit - Cleveland

2. Presentation Overview • USCG Environmental Organization • Regulatory Framework • USCG Firing Ranges • Site Characterization • Remediation • O&M and Upgrades • Compliance • Pollution Prevention • References

3. U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Organization • Headquarters (G-SEC-3) • Policy, Guidance, and Funding • Washington, D.C. • Maintenance and Logistics Commands (MLC) • Program Management • Atlantic – Norfolk, Virginia • Pacific – Alameda, California

4. Facilities Design and Construction Center (FD&CC) • Major Construction and Design Services • Atlantic – Norfolk, Virginia • Pacific – Seattle, Washington • Civil Engineering Units (CEU) • Minor Construction, Design, Environmental, and Real Property Services • Cleveland • Honolulu • Juneau • Oakland • Miami • Providence

6. Regulatory Framework • CERCLA • EPCRA Section 313, TRI Form R • Release Notification and Corrective Actions • RCRA • Spent Ammunition, Bullet Fragments • Recycling/Reclamation – 40 CFR 261 • Reuse of Soils On Site • Military Munitions Rule – 40 CFR 266 • Clean Water Act – NPDES (State Regulations) • Other State Programs for Corrective Action

7. USCG Small Arms Firing Ranges (SAFR) • Active • Seattle, Ketchikan, Kodiak, Honolulu, Galveston, New Orleans, Portsmouth, Cape Cod, Sandy Hook, Petaluma, Cape May, Academy, and Yorktown • Closed/Inactive • Ketchikan, Cape May, and Galveston

8. Site Characterization • Investigation • Site Evaluation • Fate Transport of Considerations • Airborne Particulates • Storm Water Runoff and Erosion • Dissolved Lead in Groundwater/Surface Water • Range History and Layout • Ammunition Usage • Reclamation and Recycling • Firing Positions and Bullet Deposition • Future Land/Range Use

9. (Taken from ITRC training)

11. Investigation - continued • Sampling Plan • Locations and Depths • Vertical and Horizontal Extents • Hot Spots and Background • Contaminants of Concerns • Primarily Lead • Sampling Methodology • Field Screening Using XRF and/or Electron Tube Analyzers • USEPA Method 6200

15. Sampling Plan - continued • Analytical Method (SW-846) • Process Sample with a Sieve • Soil, Groundwater, and Surface Water • Total and Recoverable/Dissolved Metals • Amount of Lead Present in the Environment • Method 6010B – Analysis AA or ICP • Filtered and Unfiltered for Liquid Samples • pH • Buffering Capacity • Method 9045

16. Sampling Plan - continued • SEM:AVS • Acid Volatile Sulfide and Simultaneously Extracted Metals • Bioavailability and Binding Assessment • Ratio <1 Potential for Metals to Bind • Ratio >1 Insufficient Sulfides for Binding • Toxicity Testing • Sediment – In Situ or Ex Situ • Expensive, Last Measure, Higher Certainty of Risks from Impacts

17. Sampling Plan - continued • Total Organic Carbon • Solubility/Mobility Indicator • Method 9060 • Grain Size Distribution • Soil Classification Data • ASTM D-422 • Investigative Derived Wastes (IDW) • Waste Stream Classification • Toxicity Characteristics Leaching Procedure (TCLP) – Method 3010/6010

18. Ecological Risk Assessment • Tier I • Generic • Bulk Soil Sample Results • Comparison Against Published Standards • Tier II • Site Specific • Water Analytical and Additional Soils Data • Ecological Characterization • Exposure Pathway Identification • Estimate of Potential Risks

19. Remedial Alternatives Evaluation • Evaluation Factors • Future Land Use • Continued Range Operation • Industrial • Residential • Cleanup Goal Establishment • Budget and Timeframe

20. Remedial Alternatives Evaluation - continued • Technology Selection • Disposal, Recycling , and Reuse • Physical Separation • Stabilization/Solidification • Soil Washing • Chemical Extraction • Phytoremediation/Phytoextraction • Lower Cleanup Goals = Higher Costs

21. Remediation • Disposal • Off-Range Disposal • Toxicity Characteristics Leaching Procedure (TCLP) Testing Warranted to Define Waste Stream Classification • Hazardous or Non-Hazardous? • Haz Soil Can be Treated to Become Non-Haz • Physical Separation • Stabilization/Solidification • Soil Washing • Chemical Extraction

22. Soil Reuse • No Testing Required: On-Site Use • Physical Separation of Bullet Fragments • Berm Reconstruction • Other Uses within Range Boundary • Side/Wing Walls • Off-Site Use • Testing Required, Treatment Good Probability • Render and Prove Non-Haz • Show Totals Meet State Criterias • Fill Materials

23. Soil Recycling • Chemically Treat/Utilize Soils in a Product • Rendered Inseparable by Physical Means • Meets Universal Treatment Standards • Road Base Emulsions/Materials

24. Physical Separation • Use for On-Site Management or Off-Site Disposal • Dry Screening/Sifting • Bullet Fragment Removal/Recycling • Lower Limit of ¼ inch

25. Stabilization/Solidification • Stabilization • Phosphates, Sulfates, Hydroxides, and Carbonates • Solidification • Portland Cement, Cement Kiln Dust • Use for On-Site Management • Lower/Control Solubility, Leaching to Ground/Surface Water, and Bioavailability/Risk • Use for Off-Site Disposal • Render Non-Hazardous to Lower Disposal Costs and Long Term Risk

27. Stabilization/Solidification - continued • Pros: • Off-Site Disposal of Non-Haz Soils Reduces Tipping Fees • Risk Remains with Land Owner and Not Transferred to a Landfill for Potential Future Liabilities if Soils Remain On-Site

28. Stabilization/Solidification - continued • Cons: • If Volume is Small, Costs to Perform Option do not Outweigh Savings from Non-Haz Landfill • No Reduction in Total Metal Concentrations • Material is Heavily Bulked • Land Use Controls Warranted if On-Site • RCRA Permit May be Needed by State

29. Soil Washing • Mineral Processing Technique • Physical Sizing • Magnetic Separation • Soil Classification • Gravity Separation • Bench-Scale Study Required to Evaluate Process

30. Soil Washing - continued • Use for On-Site Management • Reduce/Eliminate Leaching to GW/SW • Lower Risk to Human Health and the Environment • Use for Off-Site Disposal • Render Non-Hazardous to Lower Disposal Costs and Long Term Risk

31. Soil Washing - continued • Pros: • Off-Site Disposal of Non-Haz Soils Reduces Tipping Fees • Risk Remains with Land Owner and Not Transferred to a Landfill for Potential Future Liabilities if Soils Remain On Site

32. Soil Washing - continued • Cons: • If Volume is Small, Costs to Perform Option do not Outweigh Savings at Non-Haz Landfill • Residuals May Warrant Land Use Controls Warranted if On-Site • RCRA Permit May be Required by State

33. Humates Washes Oversized Coarse Soil Boulders Separates by Size Soil Fines Particulate Contaminants Separates by Density

34. Chemical Extraction • Bench Scale Testing to Provide Effective System • pH, Buffering Capacity, Total Organic Carbon, Iron and Manganese Levels, Soil Type • Residuals of Metals and Leaching Solvent May Remain Bound in the Soils, Restricting Site Usage • Residual Acids Require Neutralization • Residual Solvents May Remain Toxic in Treated Soils

35. Phytoremediation/Phytoextraction • Limited Uptake Potential • Specific Plants and Conditions Warranted • Constructed Wetlands • Indian Mustard Plant • Organic Base – Topsoil, Humates, Sandy Loam • Soil Ph Levels, Temperature • Lead Needed in a More Soluble Form for Uptake • Amendment with Chelates

36. O&M and Upgrades • Best Management Practices • Monitoring and Adjusting Soil pH • Lime/Phosphate Addition • Control Runoff • Ground/Surface Cover • Grasses, Mulches, and Compost • Filter Beds • Containment Traps and Detention Ponds • Dams and Dikes • Ground Contouring

37. O&M and Upgrades – continued • Bullet Trap Systems • Decelerator • Granular Rubber • Block Rubber • SACON – Shock Absorbing Concrete • Earthen Berm

38. Compliance • EPCRA TRI Form-R Reporting • Release and/or Transfer of Toxic Chemicals • Lead – 100 pounds per year • Annual Submission; On/Before July 1st • EPA and State • EPA TRI-ME Software

39. Pollution Prevention • Lead-Free (Green) Ammunition • Frangible • Polymers, Nylon • Disintegrates upon Contact • Shorter Effective Range • Non Toxic • Copper Jackets over Zinc/Tin • Potential for Ricochet

40. References • Interstate Technology Regulatory Council (ITRC), Small Arms Firing Ranges; http://www.itrcweb.org • National Association of Shooting Ranges; http://www.rangeinfo.org • Lead Prevention and Migration from a SAFR; http://aec.army.mil/usaec/technology/leadmigration.pdf

41. Questions/Discussion