[Federal Register: August 22, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 163)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 50899-50941]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr22au03-32]
[[Page 50899]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part IV
Department of Defense
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
32 CFR Part 179
Munitions Response Site Prioritization Protocol; Proposed Rule
[[Page 50900]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 179
Munitions Response Site Prioritization Protocol
AGENCY: Department of Defense.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Defense (DoD) is proposing a rule that
establishes the Munitions Response Site Prioritization Protocol
(hereinafter referred to as the ``Protocol''). The purpose of the
Protocol is to assign a relative priority for munitions responses to
each location in the inventory of munitions response sites known or
suspected of containing unexploded ordnance, discarded military
munitions, or munitions constituents.
DATES: Written comments on this proposed rule will be accepted until
November 20, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be mailed to: Munitions Response
Site Prioritization Protocol, P.O. Box 4231, McLean, Virginia 22103-
4231. Comments will also be accepted via electronic mail (``e-mail'')
at mmrp@www.denix.osd.mil or via the World Wide Web at http://
www.denix.osd/mil/MMRP. For comments submitted via electronic mail,
please include in the subject line the statement ``Comments on Proposed
Protocol.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If there are specific questions,
please contact Ms. Patricia Ferrebee, Office of the Deputy Under
Secretary of Defense (Installations & Environment) (ODUSD(I&E)), 703-
695-6107. This proposed rule along with relevant background information
is available on the World Wide Web at the Defense Environmental Network
& Information eXchange Web site, http://www.denix.osd.mil/MMRP.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Protocol
The Protocol reflects the statement in 10 U.S.C. 2710(b)(2) that
the priority assigned should be based on the overall conditions at each
location, taking into consideration various factors relating to safety
and environmental hazard potential. As required under 10 U.S.C.
2710(b)(1), the priority assigned to each munitions response site will
be included with the inventory information made publicly available. The
requirement for an inventory of munitions response sites known or
suspected of containing unexploded ordnance, DMM, or MCs is found at 10
U.S.C. 2710(a). The assigned priority will be updated annually to
reflect new information that becomes available.
The Protocol evaluates the following potential explosive safety and
environmental hazards:
[sbull] Explosive hazards posed by unexploded ordnance (UXO) and
discarded military munitions (DMM)
[sbull] Hazards associated with the effects of chemical warfare
materiel (CWM)
[sbull] The chronic health and environmental hazards posed by
munitions constituents (MC) or other chemical constituents.
DoD recognizes the different hazards inherent to each class of
materials. To address these differences, the Protocol has three hazard
evaluation modules, each of which is specific to one type of hazard,
specifically:
[sbull] Explosive hazards are evaluated using the Explosives Hazard
Evaluation (EHE) module.
[sbull] CWM-related hazards are evaluated using the Chemical
Warfare Materiel Hazard Evaluation (CHE) module.
[sbull] Health and environmental hazards posed by MC are evaluated
using the Relative Risk Site Evaluation (RRSE) module.
DoD recognizes that sufficient data to apply all three of the
hazard evaluation modules may not be immediately available for some
munitions response sites. In such cases where data are available for
only one or two of the modules, the priority will be assigned based on
the modules for which sufficient data are available. This initial
priority may change when additional data are collected and all three
modules are evaluated. Modules for which there are insufficient data
will be assigned a status of ``evaluation pending.''
Upon completion of all necessary munitions responses at a munitions
response site, the status ``prioritization no longer required'' will be
assigned. The sequencing of munitions response sites for environmental
restoration activities will be based primarily on the priority assigned
using this Protocol, but may also reflect other relevant information,
such as stakeholder concerns, economic issues, and program management
considerations.
DoD is proposing to promulgate this Protocol as a Federal
regulation. When promulgated as a Federal regulation, per 10 U.S.C.
2710(b)(3), the priority assigned to each munitions response site ``* *
* shall not impair, alter, or diminish any applicable Federal or State
authority to establish requirements for the investigation of, and
response to, environmental problems'' at the munitions response site.
It is also important to note that the priority assigned does not impact
the actions taken during a munitions response. All munitions response
sites known or suspected to contain UXO, DMM, or MC will be
investigated and, as required by site-specific conditions, the UXO,
DMM, or MC present will be addressed through removal actions, remedial
actions, or a combination of removal and remedial actions.
II. Legal Authority
This part is proposed under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2710(b).
III. Background
Through the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP), the
Department of Defense (DoD) is protecting human health and the
environment at its active and closing installations, as well as at
Formerly Used Defense Sites. In all 50 States, the District of
Columbia, and U.S. territories, DoD is making measurable progress in
cleaning up chemical contamination from past defense activities to
protect its forces, their families, and civilian neighbors from
environmental health and safety hazards. DoD is now beginning to
undertake similar efforts under the DERP to address potential health
and safety hazards associated with its past use of military munitions.
A. Scope of the Defense Environmental Restoration Program
Section 211 of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
(SARA) of 1986 \1\ (codified at 10 U.S.C. 2701) established the DERP.
Per the provisions in 10 U.S.C. 2701(a), the ``Secretary of Defense
shall carry out a program of environmental restoration at facilities
under the jurisdiction of the Secretary.'' The phrase ``under the
jurisdiction of the Secretary'' is further described by 10 U.S.C.
2701(c), which states: ``The Secretary shall carry out (in accordance
with the provisions of this chapter and CERCLA) all response actions
with respect to releases of hazardous substances from each of the
following: (A) Each facility or site owned by, leased to, or otherwise
possessed by the United States and under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary. (B) Each facility or site which was under the jurisdiction
of the Secretary and owned by, leased to, or otherwise
[[Page 50901]]
possessed by the United States at the time of actions leading to
contamination by hazardous substances. (C) Each vessel owned or
operated by the Department of Defense.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ SARA was signed into law on October 17, 1986, amending the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA) of 1980, 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq. Related sections in
Title 10 of the United States Code, 10 U.S.C. 2702-2710 and 2810-
2811, further define the DERP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The scope of the DERP is defined at 10 U.S.C. 2701(b), which
states: ``Goals of the program shall include the following: (1) The
identification, investigation, research and development, and cleanup of
contamination from hazardous substances, and pollutants and
contaminants. (2) Correction of other environmental damage (such as
detection and disposal of unexploded ordnance) which creates an
imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health or welfare
or to the environment.* * *''
B. Military Munitions Use
Military munitions are used in training for combat, in munitions
testing, and in weapons research, development, testing, and evaluation.
When a military munition is used, but remains unexploded either by
malfunction, design, or any other cause, it is called unexploded
ordnance (UXO) and may pose an explosive hazard. Other military
munitions may have been disposed of or abandoned, becoming what is
known as a discarded military munitions (DMM). DMM are sometimes
disposed of or abandoned through an attempt at treatment by burning or
open detonation; other times DMM are directly disposed of or abandoned.
When UXO or DMM are present at a location where DoD no longer intends
to use military munitions, there are potential hazards. DoD established
the Military Munitions Response program (MMRP) as part of the DERP
specifically to address potential explosive and environmental hazards
associated with UXO, DMM, and the chemical constituents of these
munitions (i.e., munitions constituents). The purpose of this Protocol
is to assign a relative priority to locations where a munitions
response is needed to mitigate these potential hazards.
C. Implementing Guidance for the DERP
DoD's primary implementing guidance for the DERP is the Management
Guidance for the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (September
28, 2001), hereinafter referred to as the Management Guidance. The
Management Guidance is issued by the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
(Installations & Environment) (DUSD (I&E)) and is available on the
World Wide Web at http://www.dtic.mil/envirodod/Policies/PDDERP.html.
The Management Guidance defines the basic program structure for DoD's
environmental restoration activities and includes specific provisions
addressing munitions responses. These provisions include:
[sbull] Establishing the Military Munitions Response program
category within the DERP to implement and track munitions responses
[sbull] Defining munitions responses as actions, including
investigation, removal actions, and remedial actions, to address the
explosives safety, human health, or environmental risks presented by
UXO, DMM, or MC
[sbull] Directing the DoD Components to identify and establish an
inventory of certain locations where a munitions response may be
required
[sbull] Requiring DoD Components to evaluate the hazards posed
where the presence of UXO, DMM, or MC are known or suspected to be
present, and to conduct an appropriate munitions response
[sbull] Requiring the DoD Components to conduct munitions responses
in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.),
Executive Order (E.O.) 12580, Superfund Implementation (January 23,
1986) and E.O. 13016 Superfund Amendments (August 28, 1996), and the
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP)
(40 CFR part 300).
D. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002
As DoD began to implement these requirements, Congress passed and
the President signed into law several new requirements related to UXO,
DMM, and MC. These provisions, found in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107), Sections
311-313, were codified 10 U.S.C. 2703 and 2710.
One of these requirements, specifically 10 U.S.C. 2710(a), directed
the Secretary of Defense to develop an inventory of munitions response
sites that are known or suspected to contain UXO, DMM, or MC. Per 10
U.S.C. 2710(b), DoD is also required to develop, in consultation with
representatives of the States and Indian Tribes, a proposed protocol
for assigning to each munitions response site in this inventory a
relative priority for response activities related to UXO, DMM, and MC
based on the overall conditions at the munitions response site.
Further, after public notice and comment on the proposed protocol, DoD
is to issue a final protocol and apply the final protocol to all
munitions response sites listed on the inventory.
The statute specifically excludes from the inventory required under
10 U.S.C. 2710(a) and, therefore, from application of this Protocol all
locations that are:
[sbull] Not currently or were not previously owned by, leased to,
or otherwise possessed or used by DoD (excluded because these locations
do not meet the definition of a defense site)
[sbull] Not known or suspected of containing UXO, DMM, or MC
(excluded because these locations are not included in the inventory)
[sbull] Outside the United States (excluded per 10 U.S.C.
2710(d)(1))
[sbull] Locations where the presence of military munitions is a
result of combat operations (excluded per 10 U.S.C. 2710(d)(2))
[sbull] An operating storage or manufacturing facility (excluded
per 10 U.S.C. 2710(d)(3))
[sbull] Used for, or were permitted for, the treatment or disposal
of military munitions (excluded per 10 U.S.C. 2710(e)(1))
[sbull] An operational range (excluded per 10 U.S.C. 2710(d)(4) and
10 U.S.C. 2710(e)(1)).
As of the end of FY02, DoD has identified 2,307 munitions response
sites in the inventory, an increase of 553 from the number DoD
initially reported at the end of FY01. The FY02 inventory is comprised
of 1,691 munitions response sites at FUDS, 542 at active installations,
and 74 at installations subject to closure as part of the Base
Realignment and Closure program. The current estimate of the costs of
munitions responses for munitions response sites in the inventory
exceeds $11.5 billion. More detailed information on the inventory can
be found in the Fiscal Year 2002 Defense Environmental Restoration
Program Annual Report to Congress. This report can be accessed via the
World Wide Web at http://www.dtic.mil/envirodod/DERP/DERP.htm.
IV. Development of the Protocol
Soon after enactment of 10 U.S.C. 2710, the Office of the Deputy
Under Secretary of Defense (Installations & Environment) convened a
working group with representatives from the DoD Components
knowledgeable in explosive safety or environmental restoration. This
DoD work group led the effort to develop the Protocol for prioritizing
munitions response sites, including conducting preliminary discussions
and interviews, constructing and testing the Protocol, and consulting
with stakeholders
[[Page 50902]]
throughout the process to gain their input and address their concerns.
A. Preliminary Interviews
As part of the initial effort in the development of the Protocol,
the DoD work group conducted a small number of preliminary interviews
of people within and outside DoD, including representatives of the DoD
Components, other Federal and State agencies, American Indian and
Alaska Native Tribes, and the public. The intent of these preliminary
interviews was to query a small number of people familiar with or
interested in the prioritization of DoD's munitions response sites to
establish a baseline for the development effort. Approximately 100
people were interviewed.
The interviews involved a standard questionnaire requiring a
combination of structured (e.g., multiple choice) and narrative answers
related to four areas the work group thought important to developing
the Protocol:
[sbull] General characteristics for the Protocol
[sbull] The respondents' knowledge of the requirements for
developing the Protocol, as those requirements were detailed in 10
U.S.C. 2701(b)
[sbull] The respondents' views on the importance of various data
elements found in similar priority setting models, and
[sbull] Whether or not the respondent had any additional comments
not covered in the structured questions
In general, the responses indicated that the Protocol should:
[sbull] Be simple in approach and operation
[sbull] Be easy to understand
[sbull] Have standardization of application
[sbull] Provide consistent and repeatable results
[sbull] Prioritize all munitions response sites into between 3 and
6 categories, and
[sbull] Keep the evaluation of the explosive hazards and the
environmental hazards separate
The information gathered during these interviews provided the DoD work
group with ideas for the initial characteristics that the Protocol
should and should not contain. The work group considered these
characteristics throughout the process of constructing the Protocol,
including during the review of selected priority setting models.
B. Review of Selected Priority-Setting Models
Reflecting on the preferred characteristics identified during the
preliminary interviews, DoD reviewed six existing tools used to
prioritize sites for environmental restoration activities and analyzed
the characteristics of each. Among the characteristics reviewed, the
DoD work group sought to understand the means each tool used to balance
differing concerns so that no one type of information dominated the
model. One characteristic that became readily apparent was the number
of major factors considered. Adopting the term ``axis'' to describe
each major factor in the construct of the models reviewed, the work
group sought to determine the number of axes the Protocol should have
as the number of axes determines or limits the weight that can be
applied to any one type of information. To achieve sufficient
differentiation among sites, it is important that no one axis dominate
the method.
Risk Assessment Code (RAC). Since 1990, the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) has applied the RAC at both Formerly Used Defense
Sites (FUDS) and Base Realignment and Closure installations as a tool
for prioritizing ordnance and explosives response actions. In the
Management Guidance, DoD adopted the RAC as an interim tool for
prioritizing munitions response sites. The RAC is a two-axis model that
assumes risk is a function of (1) exposure and (2) the hazard posed by
the munitions present. The RAC assigns sites to one of five classes
from high risk (RAC Score 1) to negligible risk (RAC score 5). It is a
simple model that can be applied with limited information.
Range Rule Risk Methodology (R3M). The R3M was developed during
DoD's effort to promulgate the DoD Range Rule. The Qualitative Risk
Evaluation (QRE) is the first of three evaluations under the R3M. It is
a three-axis, qualitative system designed as a screening tool for
determining which sites required additional risk evaluation for
explosive hazards. Its three factors (i.e., axes) are UXO density,
frequency of entry to the site, and UXO type. The Detailed and
Streamlined Risk Evaluation (DRE and SRE) are the other two elements of
the R3M and are applied to sites that were not screened out by the QRE.
The SRE estimates the maximum quantitative degree of UXO risk to which
receptors may be exposed. The DRE is a comprehensive assessment that
uses site characterization data. The SRE and the DRE essentially are
one-axis, quantitative models that focus on the probability of
exposure.
Former Lowry Bombing and Gunnery Range Prioritization Tool. USACE
and stakeholders developed this site-specific model to prioritize sites
that encompass a very large FUDS. It is a one-axis system with multiple
data elements. It requires extensive information and input from
internal and external stakeholders.
Interim Range Rule Risk Methodology (IR3M) Baseline Explosives
Hazard Evaluation. The IR3M baseline explosives risk evaluation tool
was derived from the R3M and focused on the comparative evaluation of
response alternatives against the baseline (i.e., the amount of
potential risk prior to response). It is a three-axis system, which
assigns sites to one of five classes. The three axes are accessibility,
overall hazard, and exposure. Modeling has suggested that application
of the IR3M to sites results in reasonable distribution among the five
classes.
Native American Lands Environmental Mitigation Program (NALEMP)
Model. DoD developed this model to assist in prioritizing actions to be
conducted under the NALEMP. It is a three-axis, quantitative system,
specifically designed to consider risk and non-risk-based factors, such
as life ways, programmatic, government-to-government, and economic
considerations that are unique to Indian lands. The NALEMP model uses
RRSE and RAC for the risk evaluation components. It also takes into
consideration a range of potential impacts affecting traditional and
customary uses of land and cultural and ecological resources vital to
American Indian and Alaska Native life ways.
Hazard Ranking System (HRS). The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency developed this system to score sites for inclusion on the
National Priorities List. It is a quantitative system that assigns a
numerical score to each site based on the contaminant hazards in the
groundwater, surface water, soil, and air. The HRS requires extensive
data to operate and does not address explosive hazards.
While the USACE has used RAC for 13 years as a means of assigning a
relative priority to FUDS, the DoD work group determined that neither
RAC nor any of the other models reviewed provided the characteristics
necessary to meet all the requirements in 10 U.S.C. 2710(b). The
analysis of each model's strengths and weaknesses provided DoD with
critical information regarding the characteristics the Protocol should
possess. Based on information from this review and the preliminary
interviews, the DoD work group began constructing a new model (i.e.,
the Protocol) to more effectively evaluate the explosive safety and
environmental hazards posed by UXO, DMM, and MC at munitions response
sites.
[[Page 50903]]
C. Consultation With States, Tribes, and Others
As DoD worked to develop this Protocol, it engaged in extensive
consultation with States, Tribes, and other Federal agencies. DoD also
provided opportunity for interested members of the public to provide
input during the development. DoD's efforts to engage stakeholders in
the development process are summarized in a subsequent section.
Although DoD notified all American Indian and Alaska Native Tribes of
the Protocol development effort, DoD's consultation concentrated on
those Tribes with interest in lands that are known or suspected of
containing UXO, DMM, or MC.
V. Scope and Applicability
A. Terms Pertinent to the Protocol
In developing the Protocol, DoD realized the need for a term to
describe the universe of locations subject to inclusion in the
inventory and prioritization using the Protocol. DoD is creating the
term ``munitions response site'' for this purpose. Although 10 U.S.C.
2710 had introduced the term ``defense site,'' this term is not
considered appropriate for the purposes of prioritization as not all
locations that meet the definition of defense sites are known or
suspected to contain UXO, DMM, or MC. By definition, the term ``defense
site'' refers to all locations that are or were owned, leased, or
otherwise used by DoD (and contains several exclusions related to the
types of activities occurring at the location). For a specific location
to be included in the inventory (i.e., a munitions response site), it
must be (1) a location that is, or was, owned by, leased to, or
otherwise possessed or used by DoD (i.e., a defense site), and (2)
known or suspected to contain UXO, DMM, or MC.
DoD formally established its Military Munitions Response program, a
subset of the DERP, in September 2001. DoD is working to build the MMRP
into a robust program to address the safety and environmental hazards
associated with UXO, DMM, and MC. With the exception of FUDS
properties, which have been further characterized, DoD is just
beginning to identify the locations where it knows of or suspects the
presence of UXO, DMM, and MC remaining from its past use of military
munitions. In many cases, the identified locations are large geographic
areas, sometimes encompassing an entire former range. Former ranges,
often comprising hundreds of thousands of acres, supported various
activities on different parts of the range. These locations meet the
criteria for inclusion in the inventory, as they are (1) defense sites,
and (2) known or suspected to contain UXO, DMM, or MC. DoD proposes to
use the term ``munitions response area (MRA)'' for these large
locations. MRA is defined as ``. . . any area on a defense site that is
known or suspected to contain UXO, DMM, or MC. Examples are former
ranges or munitions burial areas. A munitions response area is
comprised of one or more munitions response sites.''
Because an MRA may be large and complex, DoD will work to
characterize each MRA and subdivide it into discrete locations so that
munitions responses specific to local conditions can be conducted.
Subdivision of an MRA is not required, but permitted as needed for
purposes of implementing a munitions response. A munitions response
site (MRS) is defined as ``. . . a discrete location within an MRA that
is known to require a munitions response.'' Because every MRA is
associated with at least one MRS and the MRS is defined by the need for
a munitions response, consistent with the statutory requirement to
assign a priority for response activities, the Protocol will be applied
to MRS.
DoD will track the acreage of the MRA as well as each MRS to ensure
that all acreage is accounted for regardless of whether or not an MRA
is subdivided into more than one MRS. The total acreage of all MRS
associated with the MRA must equal the total acreage of the MRA.
Information about the size of each MRA and each MRS will be included
with the other information in the inventory disclosed in response to
the requirements of 10 U.S.C. 2710(a)(2).
B. Definitions
This proposed rule includes definitions for terms that describe the
scope and applicability of the Protocol as well as terms that are
integral to the hazard evaluation modules that comprise the Protocol.
These definitions, unless codified elsewhere in the U.S. Code or Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) apply only to this part. Many of the terms
relevant to this part are already defined in 10 U.S.C. 2710(e) and the
CFR. Where this is the case, the existing statutory and regulatory
definitions will be adopted for use in this part and are repeated here
strictly for ease of reference.
American Indian and Alaska Native Tribes are any Federally
recognized American Indian and Alaska Native tribal entity as defined
by the most current Department of Interior/Bureau of Indian Affairs
list of tribal entities published in the Federal Register pursuant to
section 104 of the Federally Recognized Tribe Act.
Barrier means a natural obstacle or obstacles (e.g., difficult
terrain, dense vegetation, deep or fast moving water), a man-made
obstacle or obstacles (e.g., fencing), or a combination of natural and
man-made obstacles.
Chemical agent identification sets (CAIS) are military training
aids containing small quantities of various chemical warfare agents and
other chemicals.
Chemical warfare agents (CWA) are the V- and G-series nerve agents,
H-series (i.e., ``mustard'' agents) and L-series (i.e., lewisite)
blister agents, and certain industrial chemicals used by the military
as weapons, including hydrogen cyanide (AC), cyanogen chloride (CK), or
carbonyl dichloride (called phosgene or CG)). CWA do not include riot
control agents (e.g., w-chloroacetophenone (CN) and o-
chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile (CS) tear gas), chemical herbicides,
smoke or incendiary compounds, and industrial chemicals that are not
configured as a military munition.
Chemical Warfare Material (CWM) is a general term that includes
four subcategories of specific materials:
[sbull] CWM, explosively configured are all munitions that contain
a CWA fill and any explosive component. Examples include M55 rockets
with CWA, the M23 VX mine, and the M360 105-millimeter GB artillery
cartridge.
[sbull] CWM, nonexplosively configured are all munitions that
contain a CWA fill but that do not include any explosive components.
Examples include any chemical munition that does not contain an
explosive component and VX or mustard agent spray canisters.
[sbull] CWM, bulk container are all non-munitions-configured
containers of CWA (e.g., a ton container).
[sbull] Chemical agent identification sets (CAIS). All forms of
CAIS are scored the same except for CAIS K941, toxic gas set M-1; and
K942, toxic gas set M-2/E11, which are scored higher due to the
relatively large quantities of agent they contain.
In the Protocol, the general term ``CWM'' means all four
subcategories. Where the name of one or more of the subcategories is
used, the statement is specific to the subcategories specified.
Cultural resources means there are recognized cultural,
traditional, spiritual, religious, or historical features or properties
(e.g., structures, artifacts, symbolism) on the munitions response
site. For example, American Indians and Alaska Natives deem portions of
or the entire munitions response site sacred.
[[Page 50904]]
Another example of cultural resources are areas that American Indians
and Alaska Natives use for subsistence activities (e.g., hunting,
fishing). (Note: Specific requirements for determining if a particular
feature is a cultural resource may be found in the National Historic
Preservation Act, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation
Act, Archeological Resources Protection Act, Executive Order 13007, and
the American Indian Religious Freedom Act.).
Defense site means locations that are or were owned by, leased to,
or otherwise possessed or used by the Department of Defense. The term
does not include any operational range, operating storage or
manufacturing facility, or facility that is used for or was permitted
for the treatment or disposal of military munitions. (10 U.S.C.
2710(e)(1)).
Department of Defense (DoD) Components means the Office of the
Secretary of Defense, the Military Departments, the Defense Agencies,
the DoD Field Activities, and any other DoD organizational entity or
instrumentality established to perform a government function.
Discarded military munitions (DMM) means military munitions that
have been abandoned without proper disposal or removed from storage in
a military magazine or other storage area for the purpose of disposal.
The term does not include unexploded ordnance, military munitions that
are being held for future use or planned disposal, or military
munitions that have been properly disposed of, consistent with
applicable environmental laws and regulations. (10 U.S.C. 2710(e)(2)).
Ecological resources means: (1) A threatened or endangered species
(designated under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)) is present on the
munitions response site; or (2) the munitions response site is
designated under the ESA as critical habitat for a threatened or
endangered species; or (3) there are identified sensitive ecosystems
such as wetlands or breeding grounds present on the munitions response
site.
Former (as in ``former range'') means the munitions response site
is a location that was: (1) Closed by a formal decision made by the DoD
Component with administrative control over the location, or (2) put to
a use incompatible with the presence of UXO, DMM, or MC.
Historical evidence means that the investigation: (1) Found written
documents or records, or (2) documented interviews of persons with
knowledge of site conditions, or (3) found and verified other forms of
information.
In the subsurface means the munition or CWM is: (1) Entirely
beneath the ground surface, or (2) fully submerged in a water body.
Military munitions means all ammunition products and components
produced for or used by the armed forces for national defense and
security, including ammunition products or components under the control
of the Department of Defense, the Coast Guard, the Department of
Energy, and the National Guard. The term includes confined gaseous,
liquid, and solid propellants, explosives, pyrotechnics, chemical and
riot control agents, smokes, and incendiaries, including bulk
explosives and chemical warfare agents, chemical munitions, rockets,
guided and ballistic missiles, bombs, warheads, mortar rounds,
artillery ammunition, small arms ammunition, grenades, mines,
torpedoes, depth charges, cluster munitions and dispensers, demolition
charges, and devices and components thereof. The term does not include
wholly inert items, improvised explosive devices, and nuclear weapons,
nuclear devices, and nuclear components, except that the term does
include non nuclear components of nuclear devices that are managed
under the nuclear weapons program of the Department of Energy after all
required sanitization operations under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954
(42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.) have been completed. (10 U.S.C. 2710(e)(3) and
40 CFR 260.10)
Military range means designated land and water areas set aside,
managed, and used to research, develop, test, and evaluate military
munitions, other ordnance, or weapon systems, or to train military
personnel in their use and handling. Ranges include firing lines and
positions, maneuver areas, firing lanes, test pads, detonation pads,
impact areas, and buffer zones with restricted access and exclusionary
areas. (40 CFR 266.201).
Munitions constituents (MC) means any materials originating from
unexploded ordnance, discarded military munitions, or other military
munitions, including explosive and non-explosive materials, and
emission, degradation, or breakdown elements of such ordnance or
munitions. (10 U.S.C. 2710(e)(4))
Munitions response means response actions, including investigation,
removal actions, and remedial actions, to address the explosives
safety, human health, or environmental risks presented by UXO, DMM, or
MC.
Munitions response area (MRA) means any area on a defense site that
is known or suspected to contain UXO, DMM, or MC. Examples include
former ranges or munitions burial areas. An MRA is comprised of one or
more munitions response sites.
Munitions response site (MRS) means a discrete location within an
MRA that is known to require a munitions response.
On the surface means the munition or CWM is: (1) Entirely or
partially exposed above the ground surface, or (2) entirely or
partially exposed above the surface of a water body (e.g., as a result
of tidal activity).
Operational range means a military range that is used for range
activities, or a military range that is not currently being used but
that is still considered by the Secretary to be a range area, is under
the jurisdiction, custody, or control of the Department of Defense, and
has not been put to a new use that is incompatible with range
activities. (10 U.S.C. 2710(e)(5)).
Physical evidence means: (1) Recorded observations from on-site
investigations, such as finding intact UXO or DMM, or components,
fragments, or other pieces of military munitions, or (2) the results of
field or laboratory sampling and analysis procedures, or (3) the
results of geophysical investigations.
Practice munitions means munitions that contain an inert filler
(e.g., wax, sand, concrete), a spotting charge (i.e., a pyrotechnic
charge), and a fuze. For a munition to be classified as a ``practice
munition,'' the fuze cannot be considered ``sensitive.''
Range activities means research, development, testing, and
evaluation of military munitions, other ordnance, and weapons systems;
and the training of military personnel in the use and handling of
military munitions, other ordnance, and weapons systems.
Small arms ammunition means ammunition that is .50 caliber or
smaller and shotgun shells.
Unexploded ordnance (UXO) means military munitions that: (1) Have
been primed, fuzed, armed, or otherwise prepared for action; (2) have
been fired, dropped, launched, projected, or placed in such a manner as
to constitute a hazard to operations, installations, personnel, or
material; and (3) remain unexploded either by malfunction, design, or
any other cause. (10 U.S.C. 2710(e)(9) and 40 CFR 266.201).
United States means, in a geographic sense, the States,
territories, and possessions and associated navigable waters,
contiguous zones, and ocean waters of which the natural resources are
under the exclusive management authority of the United States. (10
U.S.C. 2710(e)(10).
[[Page 50905]]
I. Application of the Munitions Response Site Prioritization Protocol
A. General Requirements
There are a number of activities that the DoD Components must
undertake as part of the application of the Protocol. Among other
requirements, the DoD Components will:
(1) Ensure the total acreage of each MRA is evaluated and apply the
Protocol to all MRS under their administrative control.
(2) Involve the local community in the munitions response process
as early as possible and seek continued involvement of the local
community throughout the process.
(3) Use a team approach, where each team includes members with the
expertise needed to apply the Protocol at a specific MRS. Each team
should be comprised of DoD Component representatives from required
functional areas (e.g., explosives or chemical safety, environmental)
and EPA, State regulators, and other Federal land managers, where
appropriate. The DoD Component is also expected to seek involvement
from American Indian or Alaskan Native Tribes when any portion of the
MRS affects tribal lands, the affected local restoration advisory board
(RAB) or technical review committee (TRC), and local stakeholders in
the application of the Protocol. DoD is committed to working with
Tribes on a government-to-government basis in recognition of their
sovereignty and in a continuing effort to implement the 1998 DoD
American Indian and Alaska Native Policy. To ensure American Indian and
Alaskan Native Tribes, EPA, other Federal agency, State regulatory
agencies, and local government officials are aware of the opportunity
to participate in the application of the Protocol, the DoD Component
organization responsible for implementing a munitions response at the
MRS will send a certified letter to the heads of these organizations
(or their designated point-of-contact), as appropriate, seeking their
involvement. A copy of these letters will be placed in the
Administrative Record and Information Repository for the MRS.
(4) Develop and maintain records on the application of this
Protocol for each MRS. At a minimum, the records will contain
references to all information and documents used for the evaluation
(e.g., data from preliminary assessments, worksheets). These records
will be included in the Administrative Record and the Information
Repository for the MRS.
(5) Document in a Management Action Plan (MAP) or its equivalent
all aspects of the munitions responses required at all MRS for which
that MAP is applicable. DoD guidance requires that MAPs are developed
and maintained at an installation (or FUDS property) level. For the
FUDS program, a State-wide MAP may also be developed.
(6) Establish a quality assurance panel to review all MRS
prioritization decisions. To ensure objectivity, this panel will not
include any person that was directly involved with the application of
the Protocol to a specific MRS. If the panel concludes that a different
priority should be assigned to a given MRS, the DoD Component will
report the rationale for this change to ODUSD(I&E) with their inventory
data. The DoD Component will also provide this rationale to the
appropriate regulators and stakeholders for review and comment before
finalizing the change.
(7) Update the priority as necessary to reflect new information
that has become available.
(8) Following the panel review, report the priority for each MRS
and the ratings for each hazard evaluation module to ODUSD (I&E) (or
successor organizations) for inclusion in the inventory of MRS that is
made publicly available.
A. Application of the Protocol
Components will apply the Protocol at an MRS when there are
sufficient data to populate all the data elements in at least one of
the three hazard evaluation modules (i.e., the Explosive Hazard
Evaluation, the CWM Hazard Evaluation, and Relative Risk Site
Evaluation modules) that comprise the Protocol. It is expected that
this will occur after the CERCLA preliminary assessment phase is
completed but before the CERCLA site inspection phase is completed.
Any hazard evaluation module for which there is insufficient
information to complete the evaluation will be assigned the
``evaluation pending'' rating for that module, and the MRS's relative
priority will be assigned based on the ratings of the hazard evaluation
modules for which sufficient data are available to complete the hazard
evaluation. The Protocol will be reapplied as soon as the data to run
the hazard evaluation modules assigned ``evaluation pending'' ratings
becomes available.
The Protocol will be reapplied at a MRS under the following
circumstances:
(1) Upon completion of a response action that could change the site
conditions evaluated by the hazard evaluation modules at the MRS.
(2) To update or validate a previously rated hazard evaluation
module when new information is available.
(3) To update or validate an MRS priority that was previously
assigned based on evaluation of only one or two of the three hazard
evaluation modules.
(4) Upon further delineation and characterization of an MRA into
MRS.
(5) To categorize MRS previously classified as ``evaluation
pending.''
When a munitions response is fully completed and no additional
munition response is required, as agreed to by appropriate Federal and
State regulatory agencies, the MRS will be assigned the rating ``no
longer required.''
It is important to note that the Protocol is a prioritization tool
only and does not impact the actions taken at an MRS. The responsible
DoD Component will thoroughly investigate all MRS known or suspected to
contain UXO, DMM, or MC and, as required by site-specific conditions,
address any UXO, DMM, or MC through removal actions, remedial actions,
or a combination or removal and remedial actions.
VII. The Hazard Evaluation Modules
The three modules that evaluate the potential hazards present at an
MRS are the central feature of the Protocol. Using a hazard evaluation
module developed specifically to address the unique characteristics of
each type of hazard, DoD will evaluate each MRS in three distinct
areas:
[sbull] Explosive hazards posed by UXO and DMM through the
Explosives Hazard Evaluation (EHE) module,
[sbull] Chemical hazards associated with the physiological effects
of CWM through the Chemical Warfare Materiel Hazard Evaluation (CHE)
module, and
[sbull] Health and environmental hazards posed by MC using the
Relative Risk Site Evaluation (RRSE) module.
Each hazard evaluation module is constructed using three
categories, or factors, of information. As discussed earlier in the
Preamble, this is a three-axis construct as three primary factors of
information are used to derive the results of each hazard evaluation
module. This characteristic is important as it limits the influence of
any one factor on the outcome. Although the specifics of the three
factors vary for each of the three hazard evaluation modules, each
module is comprised of standard factors for source of hazard, pathways
for exposure, and receptors. Further, each factor is comprised of
multiple data elements that are intended to capture site-specific
information. While developing the data elements, the
[[Page 50906]]
DoD work group worked to ensure that each data element within the three
modules was:
[sbull] Essential for characterization of site conditions;
[sbull] Easily collected during the early phases of the CERCLA
process; and
[sbull] Sufficiently defined to ensure consistent, repeatable, and
supportable results for prioritizing an MRS.
The structure, application, and output of each of these modules are
discussed in detail in the following parts of this section. Figure 1 is
an illustration of the structure of the Protocol.
BILLING CODE 5001-08-P
[[Page 50907]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP22AU03.001
[[Page 50908]]
A. The Explosive Hazard Evaluation (EHE) Module
The EHE module is used to conduct a relative comparison of the
potential explosive hazards posed by UXO or DMM at an MRS. The EHE
module determines the explosive hazard through evaluation of three
general factors (i.e., categories of information), each of which is
comprised of two to four specific data elements. The factors comprising
the EHE module are:
[sbull] Explosive hazard, which has the elements Munitions Type and
Source of Hazard and characterizes the cause of the hazard;
[sbull] Accessibility, which has the elements Information on the
Location of Munitions, Ease of Access, and Status of Property and
characterizes the pathway or means by which a receptor can encounter
the hazard; and
[sbull] Receptors, which has the elements Population Density,
Population Near Hazard, Types of Activities/Structures, and Ecological
and/or Cultural Resources and accounts for any receptors likely to be
impacted by exposure to the hazard.
Each data element is assigned a maximum numerical value and
consists of several classifications (each of which is assigned a
numeric value ranging up to the maximum value of the data element) that
are intended to capture certain site-specific conditions. The DoD work
group developed these values based on the knowledge of technical
experts within DoD and comments received from stakeholders. The values
were adjusted based on the results of extensive testing of the Protocol
and stakeholders' comments. The total value assigned to each data
element as well as the value of the specific classifications within
each element are relative evaluations of each element's contribution to
the overall explosive hazard. The sum of these values is the EHE module
score for the MRS, which is used to derive the EHE module hazard
evaluation rating. Additional information on each factor and data
element is provided in the text.
(1) Explosive Hazard Factor
The Explosive Hazard factor of the EHE module is comprised of two
data elements, Munitions Type and Source of Hazard, and constitutes 40
percent of the numerical score of the EHE module.
The Munitions Type data element classifies munitions according to
their potential to detonate and their inherent explosive power.
Portability, the ability for a munition to be readily transported, is
indirectly accounted for in this element. The DoD work group initially
considered including portability as a distinct data element under the
Accessibility factor, but because UXO can be found in many different
configurations (e.g., intact warheads, fuzes or other components that
have separated from the munitions) that would be considered portable,
DoD found it too difficult to define the criteria necessary to address
portability separately in the EHE module.
In developing the data elements within this factor, the DoD work
group determined the need for separate classifications for many common
munitions types but also recognized that there are exceptions to
several categories. For example, although there is a separate
classification for practice munitions, when the associated fuze is
determined to be sensitive by a technically qualified individual, the
munition will be classified as sensitive not as practice to more
accurately reflect the greater explosive hazard presented by sensitive
fuzes. Similarly, while the Protocol provides a separate classification
for small arms ammunition to reflect the limited explosives hazard they
posed because they lack an explosive charge. To select the small arms
ammunition classification, there must be evidence that only small arms
ammunition was used at the MRS. If there is evidence that munitions
other than small arms ammunition were used or could be present on the
MRS, the munition type with the highest numeric value (i.e., the
greatest potential hazard) is used for the evaluation. DoD has also
included an ``evidence of no munitions'' classification, which can only
be used if, after investigation, there is physical or historical
evidence that indicates there are no munitions present. The definition
for ``evidence of no munitions'' is important as it requires DoD to
investigate all MRS for the presence of UXO or DMM. Further, DoD
adopted the criteria for physical and historical evidence as an
affirmation that the DoD Components will collect information upon which
to base decisions. This approach to physical or historical evidence is
intended to preclude decisions based on the logic that ``* * * there is
no physical/historical evidence of * * *,'' which could mean there is
an absence of information on what physical or historical evidence is
available.
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical scores for the Munitions Type data element are
presented in Table 1.
Table 1.--Classifications Within the EHE Module Type Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sensitive........................ [sbull] All UXO that are 30
considered likely to
function upon any
interaction with
exposed persons,
including:
submunitions, cluster
munitions, 40mm high-
explosive grenades,
white phosphorus (WP)
munitions (including
practice munitions with
sensitive fuzes, but
excluding all other
practice munitions),
and high-explosive anti-
tank (HEAT) munitions.
[sbull] All hand
grenades containing an
explosive filler..
High explosive (used or damaged). [sbull] All UXO 25
containing a high-
explosive filler (e.g.,
RDX, Composition B)
that are not considered
``sensitive''.
[sbull] All DMM
containing a high-
explosive filler that
have been damaged by
burning or detonation..
[sbull] All DMM
containing a high-
explosive filler that
have deteriorated to
the point of
instability..
Pyrotechnic...................... [sbull] All UXO 20
containing pyrotechnic
fillers other than
white phosphorous
(e.g., flares, signals,
simulators, smoke
grenades).
[sbull] All DMM
containing pyrotechnic
fillers other than
white phosphorous
(e.g., flares, signals,
simulators, smoke
grenades) that have
been damaged by burning
or detonation or that
have deteriorated to
the point of
instability..
[[Page 50909]]
High explosive (unused).......... [sbull] All DMM 15
containing a high-
explosive filler that
have not been damaged
by burning or
detonation..
[sbull] All DMM
containing a high
explosive filler that
are not deteriorated to
the point of
instability..
Propellant....................... [sbull] All UXO 15
containing only a
single-, double-, or
triple-based
propellant, or
composite propellants
(e.g., a rocket motor).
[sbull] All DMM
containing only a
single-, double-, or
triple-based
propellant, or
composite propellants
(e.g., a rocket motor)..
Bulk HE, pyrotechnics, or [sbull] Bulk high 10
propellant. explosives, including:
demolition charges
(e.g., C4 blocks), high
explosives not
contained in a
munition, and
concentrated mixtures
of high explosives or
other munitions
constituents mixed with
environmental media or
debris in
concentrations that
result in the mixture
being explosive (e.g.,
``explosive soil'').
[sbull] All pyrotechnic
material that is not
contained in a munition
(i.e., ``bulk
pyrotechnics'')..
[sbull] All single-,
double-, or triple-
based propellant, or
composite propellants
that are not contained
in a munition (i.e.,
``bulk propellant'')..
Practice......................... [sbull] All UXO that are 5
a practice munition not
associated with a
sensitive fuze.
[sbull] All DMM that are
a practice munition not
associated with a
sensitive fuze that
have been damaged by
burning or detonation..
[sbull] All DMM that are
a practice munition not
associated with a
sensitive fuze that
have deteriorated to
the point of
instability..
Riot control..................... [sbull] All UXO or DMM 3
containing only a riot
control agent (e.g.,
tear gas).
Small arms....................... [sbull] All UXO or DMM 2
that are classified as
small arms ammunition.
Evidence that no other
munitions type (e.g.,
grenades, subcaliber
training rockets,
demolition charges) was
used or is present on
the MRS is required for
selection of this
category.
Evidence of no munitions......... [sbull] Following 0
investigation of the
MRS, there is physical
evidence there are no
UXO or DMM present or
there is historical
evidence indicating
that no UXO or DMM are
present.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
[sbull] Former (as in ``former range'') means the MRS is a location that
was: (1) Closed by a formal decision made by the DoD Component with
administrative control over the location, or (2) put to a use
incompatible with the presence of UXO, DMM, or MC.
[sbull] Historical evidence means that the investigation: (1) Found
written documents or records, or (2) documented interviews of persons
with knowledge of site conditions, or (3) found and verified other
forms of information.
[sbull] Physical evidence means: (1) Recorded observations from on-site
investigations, such as finding intact UXO or DMM, or components,
fragments, or other pieces of military munitions, or (2) the results
of field or laboratory sampling and analysis procedures, or (3) the
results of geophysical investigations.
[sbull] Practice munitions means munitions that contain an inert filler
(e.g., wax, sand, concrete), a spotting charge (i.e., a pyrotechnic
charge), and a fuze.
[sbull] The term small arms ammunition means solid projectile ammunition
that is .50 caliber or smaller and shotgun shells.
The Source of Hazard data element considers the previous uses of
the MRS. It reflects the type of munitions that may be present and the
manner and extent munitions were used or disposed of at the MRS. The
classifications provided are the common locations where a munition can
be found during its lifecycle.
The classification former range has the maximum value within the
Source of Hazard data element. Former ranges will have supported live-
fire training and testing and consist of locations, such as impact
areas, that are expected to contain large concentrations of UXO and,
therefore, pose the greatest potential explosive hazard. Although some
areas on a former range are not expected to contain high concentrations
of UXO (e.g., the firing point), there is still a potential for UXO or
DMM to be present. The DoD work group provided a distinct
classification for firing points that are separated from other parts of
a former range.
Other classifications within Source of Hazard include
manufacturing, storage, and transfer facilities--reflecting the early
parts of the munition lifecycle--and treatment units and burial pits,
which represent the end of the lifecycle. As with the Munitions Type
data element, DoD has provided an ``evidence of no munitions''
classification for the Source of Hazard data element. This
classification can only be selected if an investigation finds there is
physical or historical evidence indicating there is no UXO or DMM
present. The definition for ``evidence of no munitions'' is important
as it requires DoD to investigate all MRS for the presence of UXO or
DMM. Further, DoD adopted the criteria for physical and historical
evidence as an affirmation that the DoD Components will collect
information upon which to base decisions. This approach to physical or
historical evidence is intended to preclude decisions based on the
logic that ``* * * there is no physical/historical evidence of * * *''
which could mean there is an absence of information on what physical or
historical evidence is available.
The eleven classifications, the definition for each classification,
and associated numerical scores for the Source of Hazard data element
are presented in Table 2.
[[Page 50910]]
Table 2.--Classifications Within the EHE Module Source of Hazard Data
Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Former range..................... [sbull] The MRS is a 10
former military range
where munitions
(including practice
munitions with
sensitive fuzes) have
been used. Such areas
include: impact or
target areas,
associated buffer and
safety zones, firing
points, and live-fire
maneuver areas.
Former munitions treatment (i.e., [sbull] The MRS is a 8
OB/OD) unit. location where UXO or
DMM (e.g., munitions,
bulk explosives, bulk
pyrotechnic, or bulk
propellants) were
burned or detonated for
the purpose of
treatment prior to
disposal.
Former practice munitions range.. [sbull] The MRS is a 6
former range on which
only practice munitions
without sensitive fuzes
were used.
Former maneuver area............. [sbull] The MRS is a 5
former maneuver area
where no munitions
other than flares,
simulators, smokes, and
blanks were used. There
must be evidence that
no other munitions were
used at the location to
place an MRS into this
category.
Former burial pit or other [sbull] The MRS is a 5
disposal area. location where DMM were
buried or disposed of
(e.g., disposed of into
a water body) without
prior thermal treatment.
Former industrial operating [sbull] The MRS is a 4
facilities. location that is a
former munitions
manufacturing or
demilitarization
facility.
Former firing points............. [sbull] The MRS is a 4
firing point, when the
firing point is
delineated as an MRS
separate from the rest
of a former range.
Former missile or air defense [sbull] The MRS is a 2
artillery emplacements. former missile defense
or air defense
artillery (ADA)
emplacement not
associated with a range.
Former storage or transfer points [sbull] The MRS is a 2
location where
munitions were stored
or handled for transfer
between modes (e.g.,
rail to truck, truck to
weapon system).
Former small arms range.......... [sbull] The MRS is a 1
former military range
where only small arms
were used. There must
be evidence that no
other type of munitions
(e.g., grenades) were
used or are present at
the location to place
an MRS into this
category.
Evidence of no munitions......... [sbull] Following 0
investigation of the
MRS, there is physical
evidence that no UXO or
DMM are present, or
there is historical
evidence indicating
that no UXO or DMM are
present.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
[sbull] Former (as in ``former range'') means the MRS is a location that
was: (1) closed by a formal decision made by the DoD Component with
administrative control over the location, or (2) put to a use
incompatible with the presence of UXO, DMM, or MC.
[sbull] Historical evidence means that the investigation: (1) Found
written documents or records, or (2) documented interviews of persons
with knowledge of site conditions, or (3) found and verified other
forms of information.
[sbull] Physical evidence means: (1) Recorded observations from on-site
investigations, such as finding intact UXO or DMM, or components,
fragments, or other pieces of military munitions, or (2) the results
of field or laboratory sampling and analysis procedures, or (3) the
results of geophysical investigations.
[sbull] Practice munitions means munitions that contain an inert filler
(e.g., wax, sand, concrete), a spotting charge (i.e., a pyrotechnic
charge), and a fuze.
[sbull] The term small arms ammunition means solid projectile ammunition
that is .50 caliber or smaller and shotgun shells.
(2) Accessibility Factor
The Accessibility factor of the EHE module focuses on the potential
for receptors to encounter the UXO or DMM that may be present on a MRS.
This factor consists of three data elements that constitute 40 percent
of the numerical score of the EHE module.
The data element Information on the Location of Munitions is an
evaluation of the following three conditions that were combined into
one data element to best represent the potential for encountering
munitions.
[sbull] The confirmed or suspected presence of munitions based on
physical evidence (e.g., presence or absence of munitions, fragments,
firing records, anecdotal information)
[sbull] The likelihood for direct contact with the munition based
on its proximity to the surface
[sbull] The potential for the munitions to be brought to the
surface by dynamic site conditions (e.g., erosion).
This data element differentiates among MRS where intact UXO or DMM
are present, as opposed to the MRS where only munitions fragments are
found. This data element also differentiates between ``confirmed''
versus ``suspected'' evidence. As with both data elements in the
Explosive Hazard factor, this data element has an ``evidence of no
munitions'' classification, which can only be used if, after
investigation, there is physical or historical evidence that indicates
there are no munitions present. The definition for ``evidence of no
munitions'' is important as it requires DoD to investigate all MRS for
the presence of UXO or DMM. Further, DoD adopted the criteria for
physical and historical evidence as an affirmative that the DoD
Components will collect information upon which to base decisions. This
approach to physical or historical evidence is intended to preclude
decisions based on the logic that ``* * * there is no physical/
historical evidence of * * *, which could mean there is an absence of
information on what physical or historical evidence is available.
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical scores for the Information on the Location of
Munitions data element are presented in Table 3.
Table 3.--Classifications Within the EHE Information on the Location of
Munitions Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confirmed surface................ [sbull] Physical 25
evidence indicates
there are UXO or DMM on
the surface of the MRS.
[sbull] Historical
evidence (e.g., a
confirmed incident
report or accident
report) indicates there
are UXO or DMM on the
surface of the MRS..
[[Page 50911]]
Confirmed, subsurface, active.... [sbull] Physical 20
evidence indicates the
presence of UXO or DMM
in the subsurface of
the MRS and the
geological conditions
at the MRS are likely
to cause UXO or DMM to
be exposed in the
future by naturally
occurring phenomena
(e.g., drought,
flooding, erosion,
frost, heat heave,
tidal action), or there
are on-going intrusive
activities (e.g.,
plowing, construction,
dredging) at the MRS
that are likely to
expose UXO or DMM.
[sbull] Historical
evidence indicates that
UXO or DMM are located
in the subsurface of
the MRS and the
geological conditions
at the MRS are likely
to cause UXO or DMM to
be exposed in the
future by naturally
occurring phenomena
(e.g., drought,
flooding, erosion,
frost, heat heave,
tidal action), or there
are on-going intrusive
activities (e.g.,
plowing, construction,
dredging) at the MRS
that are likely to
expose UXO or DMM.
Confirmed subsurface, stable..... [sbull] Physical 15
evidence indicates the
presence of UXO or DMM
in the subsurface of
the MRS and the
geological conditions
at the MRS are not
likely to cause UXO or
DMM to be exposed in
the future by naturally
occurring phenomena, or
there are no intrusive
activities occurring at
the MRS that are likely
to either occur, or if
the activities do
occur, are likely to
cause UXO or DMM to be
exposed.
[sbull] Historical
evidence indicates that
UXO or DMM are located
in the subsurface of
the MRS and the
geological conditions
at the MRS are not
likely to cause UXO or
DMM to be exposed in
the future by naturally
occurring phenomena, or
there are no intrusive
activities occurring at
the MRS that are likely
to either occur, or if
the activities do
occur, are likely to
cause UXO or DMM to be
exposed.
Suspected (physical physical [sbull] There is 10
evidence). physical evidence other
than the documented
presence of UXO or DMM,
indicating that UXO or
DMM may be present at
the MRS.
Suspected (historical evidence).. [sbull] There is 5
historical evidence
indicating that UXO or
DMM may be present at
the MRS.
Subsurface, physical constraint.. [sbull] There is 2
physical or historical
evidence indicating the
UXO or DMM may be
present in the
subsurface, but there
is a physical
constraint (e.g.,
pavement, water depth
over 120 feet)
preventing direct
access to the UXO or
DMM.
Small arms (regardless of [sbull] The presence of 1
location). small arms ammunitions
is confirmed or
suspected, regardless
of other factors such
as geological
stability. There must
be evidence that no
other types of
munitions (e.g.,
grenades) were used or
are present at the MRS
to include it in this
category.
Evidence of no munitions......... [sbull] Following 0
investigation of the
MRS, there is physical
evidence there are no
UXO or DMM present or
there is historical
evidence indicating
that no UXO or DMM are
present.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
[sbull] Historical evidence means that the investigation: (1) Found
written documents or records, or (2) documented interviews of persons
with knowledge of site conditions, or (3) found and verified other
forms of information.
[sbull] Physical evidence means: (1) Recorded observations from on-site
investigations, such as finding intact UXO or DMM, or components,
fragments, or other pieces of military munitions, or (2) the results
of field or laboratory sampling and analysis procedures, or (3) the
results of geophysical investigations.
[sbull] In the subsurface means the munition (i.e., a DMM or UXO) is (1)
entirely beneath the ground surface, or (2) fully submerged in a water
body.
[sbull] On the surface means the munition (i.e., a DMM or UXO) is: (1)
entirely or partially exposed above the ground surface, or (2)
entirely or partially exposed above the surface of a water body (e.g.,
as a result of tidal activity).
[sbull] The term small arms ammunition means solid projectile ammunition
that is .50 caliber or smaller and shotgun shells.
The Ease of Access data element focuses on the means for a receptor
to encounter a munition based on the extent of controls preventing
access or entry to the MRS. Both natural obstacles (e.g., dense
vegetation, rugged terrain, water) and man-made controls (e.g.,
fencing) are considered in this analysis. DoD initially deliberated
over numerous data elements and associated definitions to best capture
these conditions. DoD found the conditions within this data element
difficult to capture, especially for large MRS that have not been fully
characterized and have varying conditions across the MRS (e.g., short
grass and dense swamp).
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical scores for the Ease of Access element are
presented in Table 4.
Table 4.--Classifications Within the EHE Ease of Access Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No barrier....................... [sbull] There is no 10
barrier preventing
access to all parts of
the MRS (i.e., all
parts of the MRS are
accessible).
Barrier to MRS access is [sbull] There is a 8
incomplete. barrier preventing
access to parts of the
MRS but not the entire
MRS.
Barrier to MRS access is complete [sbull] There is a 5
but not monitored. barrier preventing
access to all parts of
the MRS, but there is
no surveillance (e.g.,
by a guard) to ensure
that the barrier is
effectively preventing
access to all parts of
the MRS.
[[Page 50912]]
Barrier to MRS access is is [sbull] There is a 0
complete and monitored. barrier preventing
access to all parts of
the MRS, and there is
active, continual
surveillance (e.g., by
a guard, video
monitoring) to ensure
that the barrier is
effectively preventing
access to all parts of
the MRS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Barrier means a natural obstacle or obstacles (e.g., difficult
terrain, dense vegetation, deep or fast moving water), a man-made
obstacle or obstacles (e.g., fencing), or a combination of natural and
man-made obstacles.
The last data element in the Accessibility factor is Status of
Property. Its purpose is to differentiate between MRS that DoD controls
and MRS that DoD does not control. Based on input received during the
development of the Protocol, DoD revised the definition of Non-DoD
control to specifically include all Indian lands (i.e., trust lands,
allotments, and Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA)-conveyed
property). DoD also included property transferring from DoD control
within 3 years in this data element to address those MRS that may be
currently controlled by DoD but are planned for transfer to non-DoD
entities in the near future. There are three property classifications,
DoD control, Scheduled for transfer from DoD control, and Non-DoD
control.
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical values for the Status of Property data element are
presented in Table 5.
Table 5.--Classifications Within the EHE Status of Property Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-DoD control.................. [sbull] The MRS is at a 5
location that is no
longer owned by, leased
to, or otherwise
possessed or used by
the DoD. Examples are
privately owned land or
water bodies; land or
water bodies owned or
controlled by American
Indian or Alaskan
Native Tribes, or State
or local governments;
and lands or water
bodies managed by other
Federal agencies.
Scheduled for transfer from DoD [sbull] The MRS is on 3
control. land or is a water body
that is owned, leased,
or otherwise possessed
by DoD, and DoD plans
to transfer that land
or water body to the
control of another
entity (e.g., a State,
American Indian,
Alaskan Native, or
local government; a
private party; or
another Federal agency)
within 3 years from the
date the Protocol is
applied.
DoD control...................... [sbull] The MRS is on 0
land or is a water body
that is owned, leased,
or otherwise possessed
by the DoD. With
respect to property
that is leased or
otherwise possessed,
DoD must control access
to the MRS 24-hours per
day, every day of the
calendar year.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Receptor Factor
The Receptor factor focuses on the human and ecological populations
that may be impacted by the presence of UXO or DMM. Its four data
elements constitute 20 percent of the numerical score of the EHE
module.
The Population Density data element is used to assess the number of
persons that could potentially access the MRS and potentially be at
risk from any known or suspected UXO or DMM present. Using U.S. Census
Bureau statistics, Population Density is based on the number of people
per square mile in the county in which the MRS is located. If the MRS
is located in more than one county, DoD will use the largest population
value among the counties. DoD selected county population density for
this data element because city population information was not
consistently available for all MRS, especially those in rural or remote
locations. If the MRS is within or borders on city limits, the
population density of the city should be used instead of the county
population density. During consultation with States, Tribes, and other
Federal agencies, some agencies expressed a desire to use alternate and
other readily available data (e.g., daily visitor counts to national
recreational areas) in place of census data. DoD considered this
approach but, for consistency in the Protocol's application, determined
that such site-specific data would best be addressed through
implementation guidance or possibly considered as ``risk plus'' or
``other'' factors when determining the sequencing for MRS. DoD also
initially considered differentiating between on-site and off-site
populations but found such an approach unworkable.
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical scores for the Population Density data element are
presented in Table 6.
Table 6.--Classifications Within the EHE Population Density Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
500 persons per [sbull] There are more 5
square mile. than 500 persons per
square mile in the
county in which the MRS
is located, based on
U.S. Census Bureau data.
100-500 persons per square mile.. [sbull] There are 100 to 3
500 persons per square
mile in the county in
which the MRS is
located, based on U.S.
Census Bureau data.
< 100 persons per square mile.... [sbull] There are fewer 1
than 100 persons per
square mile in the
county in which the MRS
is located, based on
U.S. Census Bureau data.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: If an MRS is in more that one county, the DoD Component will use
the largest population value among the counties. If the MRS is within
or borders a city or town, the population density for the city or town
instead of the county population density is used.
[[Page 50913]]
The Population Near Hazard data element is estimated based on the
number of inhabited structures \2\ on the MRS and within a 2-mile
distance, extending out from the boundary of the MRS. Although this
data element is defined based on the number of inhabited structures,
DoD's focus is on the potential for people to be present in the
structures, not on the structures themselves.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Under the DoD Explosives Safety Standards, inhabited
structures are considered as structures, including schools,
churches, residences, aircraft passenger terminals, stores, shops,
factories, hospitals, and theaters, other than DoD munitions-related
structures, routinely occupied for any portion of the day, both
within and outside of DoD facilities. Occupied temporary structures
are also included.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical scores for the Population Near Hazard data element
are presented in Table 7.
Table 7.--Classifications Within the EHE Population Near Hazard Data
Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
26 or more structures............ [sbull] There are 26 or 5
more inhabited
structures located up
to 2 miles from the
boundary of the MRS,
within the boundary of
the MRS, or both.
16 to 25......................... [sbull] There are 16-25 4
inhabited structures
located up to 2 miles
from the boundary of
the MRS, within the
boundary of the MRS, or
both.
11 to 15......................... [sbull] There are 11-15 3
inhabited structures
located up to 2 miles
from the boundary of
the MRS, within the
boundary of the MRS, or
both.
6 to 10.......................... [sbull] There are 6-10 2
inhabited structures
located up to 2 miles
from the boundary of
the MRS, within the
boundary of the MRS, or
both.
1 to 5........................... [sbull] There are 1-5 1
inhabited structures
located up to 2 miles
from the boundary of
the MRS, within the
boundary of the MRS, or
both.
0................................ [sbull] There are no 0
inhabited structures
located up to 2 miles
from the boundary of
the MRS, within the
boundary of the MRS, or
both.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: The term inhabited structures means permanent or temporary
structures, other than DoD munitions-related structures, that are
routinely occupied by one or more persons for any portion of a day.
The Types of Activities/Structures data element is used to assess
the nature of the population near the hazard. Through this element, DoD
strives to address multiple factors, including the amount, type, and
intrusiveness of activities that may result in an encounter with UXO or
DMM and the likelihood of people to congregate on-site and within a 2-
mile radius of the MRS. Residential and recreational areas are weighted
highest to reflect the greater number and types of activities and
population that may be in their vicinity. In response to Tribal
comments, DoD also included subsistence issues in the highest
classification.
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical scores for the Types of Activities/Structures data
element are presented in Table 8.
Table 8.--Classifications Within the EHE Types of Activities/Structures
Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Residential, educational, [sbull] Activities are 5
commercial, or subsistence. conducted or inhabited
structures are located
up to 2 miles from the
MRS's boundary or,
within the MRS's
boundary that are
associated with any of
the following purposes:
residential,
educational, child
care, critical assets
(e.g., hospitals, fire
and rescue, police
stations, dams),
hotels, commercial,
shopping centers, play
grounds, community
gathering areas,
religious sites, or
sites used for
subsistence hunting,
fishing, and gathering.
Parks and recreational areas..... [sbull] Activities are 4
conducted or inhabited
structures are located
up to 2 miles from the
MRS's boundary or
within the MRS's
boundary that are
associated with parks,
nature preserves or
other recreational uses.
Agricultural, forestry........... [sbull] Activities are 3
conducted or inhabited
structures are located
up to 2 miles from the
MRS's boundary or
within the MRS's
boundary that are
associated with
agriculture or forestry.
Industrial or warehousing........ [sbull] Activities are 2
conducted or inhabited
structures are located
up to 2 miles from the
MRS's boundary or
within the MRS's
boundary that are
associated with
industrial activities
or warehousing.
No known or recurring activities. [sbull] There are no 1
known or recurring
activities occurring up
to 2 miles from the
MRS's boundary or
within the MRS's
boundary.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
[sbull] The term inhabited structures means permanent or temporary
structures, other than DoD munitions-related structures, are routinely
occupied by one or more persons for any portion of a day.
Through the Ecological and/or Cultural Resources data element, DoD
recognizes the importance of ecological and cultural resources present
on an MRS. This data element considers threatened and endangered
species, critical habitat, sensitive ecosystems, natural resources,
historical sites, historic properties, cultural items, archaeological
resources, and American Indian and Alaska Native sacred sites.
Requirements for determining if a particular feature is a cultural
resource are found in the National Historic Preservation Act, Native
American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, Archaeological
Resources Protection Act, Executive Order 13007, and the
[[Page 50914]]
American Indian Religious Freedom Act. The greatest weight is awarded
to MRS with both cultural and ecological resources.
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical scores for the Ecological and/or Cultural
Resources data element are presented in Table 9.
Table 9.--Classifications Within the EHE Ecological and/or Cultural
Resources Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ecological and cultural resources [sbull] There are both 5
present. ecological and cultural
resources present on
the MRS.
Ecological resources present..... [sbull] There are 3
ecological resources
present on the MRS.
Cultural resources present....... [sbull] There are 3
cultural resources
present on the MRS.
No ecological or cultural [sbull] There are no 0
resources present. ecological resources or
cultural resources
present on the MRS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
[sbull] Ecological resources means that: (1) A threatened or endangered
species (designated under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)) is present
on the MRS; or (2) the MRS id designated under the ESA as critical
habitat for a threatened or endangered species; or (3) there are
identified sensitive ecosystems such as wetlands or breeding grounds
present on the MRS.
[sbull] Cultural resources means there are recognized cultural,
traditional, spiritual, religious, or historical features (e.g.,
structures, artifacts, symbolism) on the MRS. For example, American
Indians or Alaska Natives deem the MRS to be of religious significance
or there are areas that are used by American Indians or Alaska Natives
for subsistence activities (e.g., hunting, fishing). Requirements for
determining if a particular feature is a cultural resource are found
in the National Historic Preservation Act, Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act, Archaeological Resources Protection
Act, Executive Order 13007, and the American Indian Religious Freedom
Act.
(4) EHE Module Rating
As described earlier in discussion of the EHE module, each data
element provides a numeric value that contributes to the EHE module
score. The sum of the nine data elements is the EHE module score.
There are seven EHE module ratings derived from the EHE module
scores, as illustrated in Table 10, plus three alternatives to account
for the explosive hazard potential at an MRS.
Table 10.--Determining the EHE Rating From the EHE Module Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall EHE Module Score EHE Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The MRS has an overall EHE module score from EHE Rating A
92 to 100.
The MRS has an overall EHE module score from EHE Rating B
82 to 91.
The MRS has an overall EHE module score from EHE Rating C
71 to 81.
The MRS has an overall EHE module score from EHE Rating D
60 to 70.
The MRS has an overall EHE module score from EHE Rating E
48 to 59.
The MRS has an overall EHE module score from EHE Rating F
38 to 47.
The MRS has an overall EHE module score less EHE Rating G
than 38.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, there are three other possible outcomes:
[sbull] Evaluation pending. This category is used when UXO or DMM
are believed or known to be present at an MRS, but sufficient
information is not available to conduct the evaluation.
[sbull] No longer required. Within the EHE module, this category is
reserved for MRS that no longer require evaluation for an explosives
hazard potential because DoD has conducted a response, all response
objectives set out in the decision document for the MRS have been
achieved, and no further action, except for long-term management and
recurring reviews, is required.
[sbull] No known or suspected explosive hazard. This category is
reserved for MRS that do not require evaluation under the EHE module
because no potential explosive hazard was identified.
B. The Chemical Warfare Materiel Hazard Evaluation (CHE) Module
The second hazard evaluation module comprising an MRS priority is
evaluation of the chemical hazards associated with the physiological
effects of chemical warfare materiel (CWM). The CHE module is used only
when CWM are known or suspected of being present at an MRS.
CWM is a general term that is comprised of four subcategories:
[sbull] CWM, explosively configured are all munitions that contain
a CWA fill and any explosive component. Examples are M55 rockets with
CWA, the M23 VX mine, and the M360 105-millimeter GB artillery
cartridge.
[sbull] CWM, nonexplosively configured are all munitions that
contain a CWA but that do not include any energetic material. Examples
are any chemical munition that does not contain explosive components
(e.g., a burster, fuze), and VX or mustard agent spray canisters.
[sbull] CWM, bulk container are all non-munitions-configured
containers of CWA (e.g., ton containers).
[sbull] Chemical agent identification sets (CAIS) are military
training aids containing small quantities of various CWA and other
chemicals. All forms of CAIS are scored the same in this Protocol,
except CAIS K941, toxic gas set M-1; and K942, toxic gas set M-2/E11,
which are scored higher due to the relatively large quantities of agent
they contain.
The CWA contained in each of the subcategories of CWM are chemicals
chosen for military applications, and are intended to kill, seriously
injure, or incapacitate a person through physiological effects. CWA is
comprised of V- and G-series nerve agents, H-series (i.e., ``mustard''
agents) and L (i.e., lewisite) blister agents, and certain industrial
chemicals used by the military as weapons, including phosgene, hydrogen
cyanide (AC), cyanogen chloride (CK), or carbonyl dichloride (called
phosgene or CG). CWA does not include riot control agents (e.g., w-
chloroacetophenone (CN) and o-chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile (CS) tear
gas), chemical herbicides, smoke or incendiary compounds, and
[[Page 50915]]
industrial chemicals that are not configured as military munitions.
Some CWM will be UXO (e.g., a fired Stoke's mortar round that
contains a phosgene fill); some will be DMM (e.g., a discarded munition
containing a chemical fill, or CAIS that were buried as a means of
disposal).
This module is not used to evaluate environmental media and debris
containing chemical warfare agents (i.e., CWA-media and CWA-debris), as
they are evaluated using the Relative Risk Site Evaluation module.
Under the CHE module, nine data elements of MRS information
comprising three areas are evaluated: CWM Hazard, Accessibility, and
Receptors. The CWM Hazard factor is structured to evaluate the unique
characteristics of CWM. The data elements in the Accessibility factor
and Receptor factor are identical with those in the EHE module.
(1) CWM Hazard Factor
The CWM Hazard factor is comprised of two data elements, CWM
Configuration and Sources of CWM, and constitutes 40 percent of the CHE
module score. The CWM Hazard factor is similar to the Explosive Hazard
factor of the EHE module, but has been modified to address the unique
characteristics of CWM.
The CWM Configuration data element estimates the potential hazard
based on the amount of CWA that may be contained in the munition, its
likelihood to be dispersed, and the condition of the munition. Similar
to the Munitions Type data element in the EHE module, DoD has also
included an ``evidence of no CWM'' classification, which can only be
used if, after investigation, there is physical or historical evidence
that indicates there is no CWM present. The definition for ``evidence
of no CWM'' is important as it requires DoD to investigate all MRS for
the presence of CWM. Further, DoD's adoption of the criteria for
physical and historical evidence serves as an affirmation that the DoD
Components will collect information upon which to base decisions. This
approach to physical or historical evidence is intended to preclude
decisions based on the logic that ``* * * there is no physical/
historical evidence of * * *'' where the phrase could mean that there
is an absence of information on what physical or historical evidence is
available.
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical scores for the CWM Configuration data element are
presented in Table 11.
Table 11.--Classifications Within the CHE CWM Configuration Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CWM, explosive configuration, The CWM known or 30
either UXO or damaged DMM. suspected of being
present at the MRS is:.
[sbull] Explosively
configured CWM that are
UXO (i.e., CWM/UXO)..
[sbull] Explosively
configured CWM that are
DMM that have been
damaged (CWM/DMM).
CWM mixed with UXO............... [sbull] The CWM known or 25
suspected of being
present at the MRS are
CWM/DMM that are co-
mingled with
conventional munitions
that are UXO.
CWM, explosive configuration that [sbull] The CWM known or 20
are DMM (unused). suspected of being
present at the MRS are
explosively configured
CWM/DMM that have not
been damaged.
CWM, not-explosively configured The CWM known or 15
or CWM, bulk container. suspected of being
present at the MRS is:.
[sbull] Non-explosively
configured CWM/DMM.
[sbull] Bulk CWM/DMM
(e.g., ton container).
CAIS K941 and CAIS K942.......... [sbull] The CWM/DMM 12
known or suspected of
being present at the
MRS is CAIS K941-toxic
gas set M-1 or CAIS
K942-toxic gas set M-2/
E11.
CAIS (chemical agent [sbull] The CWM known or 10
identification sets). suspected of being
present at the MRS are
only CAIS/DMM. The CAIS
present cannot include
CAIS K941, toxic gas
set M-1; and K942,
toxic gas set M-2/E11
for the MRS to be
assigned this rating.
Evidence of no CWM............... [sbull] Following 0
investigation, the
physical evidence
indicates that CWM are
not present at the MRS,
or the historical
evidence indicates that
CWM are not present at
the MRS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
[sbull] The notation CWM/DMM means CWM that are DMM.
[sbull] The term CWM /UXO means CWM that are UXO.
[sbull] Historical evidence means that the investigation: (1) Found
written documents or records, or (2) documented interviews of persons
with knowledge of site conditions, or (3) found and verified other
forms of information.
[sbull] Physical evidence means: (1) Recorded observations from on-site
investigations, such as finding intact UXO or DMM, or components,
fragments, or other pieces of military munitions, or (2) the results
of field or laboratory sampling and analysis procedures, or (3) the
results of geophysical investigations.
The Sources of CWM data element addresses the type of activities
that were conducted at the MRS and how and to what extent CWM were used
or may be present. The source expected to pose the greatest hazard is a
range that supported live-fire testing or training using explosively
configured CWM. MRS where chemical munitions were only stored or
transferred during transport pose the least hazard. As with the CWM
Configuration data element, DoD has provided an ``evidence of no CWM''
classification for the Sources of CWM data element.
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical scores for the Sources of CWM data element are
presented in Table 12.
[[Page 50916]]
Table 12.--Classifications Within the CHE Sources of CWM Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live-fire involving CWM.......... [sbull] The MRS is a 10
range that supported
live-fire of
explosively configured
CWM, and the CWM/UXO
are known or suspected
of being present on the
surface or in the
subsurface
[sbull] The MRS is a
range that supported
live-fire with
conventional munitions,
and CWM/DMM are on the
surface or in the
subsurface co-mingled
with conventional
munitions that are UXO.
Damaged CWM/DMM or CAIS/DMM, [sbull] There are 10
surface or subsurface. damaged CWM/DMM on the
surface or in the
subsurface at the MRS
Undamaged CWM/DMM or CAIS/DMM, [sbull] There are 10
surface. undamaged CWM/DMM on
the surface at the MRS
Undamaged CWM/DMM, or CAIS/DMM, [sbull] There are 5
subsurface. undamaged CWM/DMM in
the subsurface at the
MRS
Production facilities of CWM or [sbull] The MRS is a 3
CAIS. facility that engaged
inproduction of CWM,
and there are CWM/DMM
suspected of being
present on the surface
or in the subsurface
Research, Development, Testing, [sbull] The MRS is at a 3
and Evaluation (RDT&E) facility facility that was
using CWM or CAIS. involved in non-live
fire RDT&E activities
(including static
testing) involving CWM,
and there are CWM/DMM
suspected of being
present on the surface
or in the subsurface
Training facility using CWM or [sbull] The MRS is a 2
CAIS. location that was
involved in training
activities involving
CWM and/or CAIS (e.g.,
training in recognition
of CWA, decontamination
training), and CWM/DMM
are suspected of being
present on the surface
or in the subsurface
Storage or transfer points of CWM [sbull] The MRS is a 1
former storage facility
or transfer point
(e.g., inter-modal
transfer) for CWM
Evidence of no CWM............... [sbull] Following 0
investigation, the
physical evidence
indicates that CWM are
not present at the MRS,
or the historical
evidence indicates that
CWM are not present at
the MRS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
[sbull] The notation CWM/DMM means CWM that are DMM.
[sbull] The term CWM /UXO means CWM that are UXO.
[sbull] Historical evidence means that the investigation: (1) Found
written documents or records, or (2) documented interviews of persons
with knowledge of site conditions, or (3) found and verified other
forms of information.
[sbull] Physical evidence means: (1) Recorded observations from on-site
investigations, such as finding intact UXO or DMM, or components,
fragments, or other pieces of military munitions, or (2) the results
of field or laboratory sampling and analysis procedures, or (3) the
results of geophysical investigations.
[sbull] In the subsurface means the CWM (e.g., a DMM or UXO) is: (1)
Entirely beneath the ground surface, or (2) fully submerged in a water
body.
[sbull] On the surface means the CWM (i.e., a DMM or UXO) is: (1)
Entirely or partially exposed above the ground surface, or (2)
entirely or partially exposed above the surface of a water body (e.g.,
as a result of tidal activity).
(2) Accessibility Factor
The Accessibility factor of the CHE module focuses on the potential
for receptors to encounter the CWM known or suspected to be present on
a MRS. This factor consists of three elements that constitute 40
percent of the CHE module numerical score.
The data element Information on the Location of CWM is an
evaluation of the following three conditions that were combined into
one data element to best represent the potential for encountering CWM:
[sbull] The confirmed or suspected presence of CWM based on
physical evidence (e.g., presence or absence of munitions fragments,
firing records, anecdotal information)
[sbull] The likelihood for direct contact with CWM based on its
proximity to the surface
[sbull] The potential for the CWM to reach the surface due to
dynamic site conditions (e.g., erosion).
This data element attempts to differentiate MRS where a true hazard
is present opposed to the numerous MRS where only CWM fragments remain
or where CWM were only transferred or stored. It also differentiates
between ``known'' versus ``suspected'' evidence.
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical scores for the Information on the Location of CWM
element are presented in Table 13.
Table 13.--Classifications Within the CHE Information on the Location of
CWM Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confirmed surface................ [sbull] Physical 25
evidence indicates
there are CWM on the
surface of the MRS.
[sbull] Historical
evidence (e.g., a
confirmed incident
report or accident
report) indicates there
are CWM on the surface
of the MRS..
Confirmed subsurface, active..... [sbull] Physical 20
evidence indicates the
presence of CWM in the
subsurface of the MRS
and the geological
conditions at the MRS
are likely to cause CWM
to be exposed in the
future by naturally
occurring phenomena
(e.g., drought,
flooding, erosion,
frost, heat heave,
tidal action), or there
are on-going intrusive
activities (e.g.,
plowing, construction)
at the MRS that are
likely to expose CWM.
[sbull] Historical
evidence indicates that
CWM are located in the
subsurface of the MRS
and the geological
conditions at the MRS
are likely to cause CWM
to be exposed in the
future by naturally
occurring phenomena
(e.g., drought,
flooding, erosion,
frost, heat heave,
tidal action), or there
are on-going intrusive
activities (e.g.,
plowing, construction,
dredging) at the MRS
that are likely to
cause CWM..
[[Page 50917]]
Confirmed subsurface, stable..... [sbull] Physical 15
evidence indicates the
presence of CWM in the
subsurface of the MRS
and the geological
conditions at the MRS
are not likely to cause
CWM to be exposed in
the future by naturally
occurring phenomena, or
there are no intrusive
activities occurring at
the MRS that are likely
to either occur, or if
the activities do
occur, are likely to
cause CWM to be
exposed..
[sbull] Historical
evidence indicates that
CWM are located in the
subsurface of the MRS
and the geological
conditions at the MRS
are not likely to cause
CWM to be exposed in
the future by naturally
occurring phenomena, or
there are no intrusive
activities occurring at
the MRS that are likely
to either occur, or if
the activities do
occur, are likely to
cause CWM to be
exposed..
Suspected (physical evidence).... [sbull] There is 10
physical evidence other
than the documented
presence of CWM,
indicating that CWM may
be present at the MRS.
Suspected (historical evidence).. [sbull] There is 10
historical evidence
indicating that CWM may
be present at the MRS.
Subsurface, physical constraint.. [sbull] There is 2
physical or historical
evidence indicating the
CWM may be present in
the subsurface, but
there is a physical
constraint (e.g.,
pavement, water depth
over 120 feet)
preventing direct
access to the CWM.
Evidence of no CWM............... [sbull] Following 0
investigation of the
MRS, there is physical
evidence there is no
CWM present, or there
is historical evidence
indicating that no CWM
are present.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
[sbull] Historical evidence means that the investigation: (1) found
written documents or records, or (2) documented interviews of persons
with knowledge of site conditions, or (3) found and verified other
forms of information.
[sbull] Physical evidence means: (1) Recorded observations from on-site
investigations, such as finding intact UXO or DMM, or components,
fragments, or other pieces of military munitions, or (2) the results
of field or laboratory sampling and analysis procedures, or (3) the
results of geophysical investigations.
[sbull] In the subsurface means the munition (i.e., a DMM or UXO) is (1)
entirely beneath the ground surface, or (2) fully submerged in a water
body.
[sbull] On the surface means the CWM (e.g., a DMM or UXO) is (1)
entirely or partially exposed above the ground surface, or (2)
entirely or partially exposed above the surface of a water body (e.g.,
as a result of tidal activity).
[sbull] The term small arms ammunition means solid projectile ammunition
that is .50 caliber or smaller and shotgun shells.
The Ease of Access data element focuses on the means for an
encounter with CWM based on the extent of controls preventing access or
entry to the MRS. Both natural obstacles (e.g., dense vegetation,
rugged terrain, water) and man-made controls (e.g., fencing) are
considered in this analysis. DoD deliberated over numerous data
elements and associated definitions to best capture these conditions.
DoD found the conditions within this data element difficult to capture,
especially for large MRS that have not been characterized and had
varying conditions across the MRS (e.g., short grass and dense swamp).
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical scores for the Ease of Access data element are
presented in Table 14.
Table 14.--Classifications Within the CHE Ease of Access Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No barrier....................... [sbull] There is no 10
barrier preventing
access to all parts of
the MRS (i.e., all
parts of the MRS are
accessible).
Barrier to MRS access is [sbull] There is a 8
incomplete. barrier preventing
access to parts of the
MRS but not the entire
MRS.
Barrier to MRS access is complete [sbull] There is a 5
but not monitored. barrier preventing
access to all parts of
the MRS, but there is
no surveillance (e.g.,
by a guard) to ensure
that the barrier is
effectively preventing
access to all parts of
the MRS.
Barrier to MRS access is complete [sbull] There is a 0
and monitored. barrier preventing
access to all parts of
the MRS, and there is
active continual
surveillance (e.g., by
a guard, video
monitoring) to ensure
that the barrier is
effectively preventing
access to all parts of
the MRS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Barrier means a natural obstacle or obstacles (e.g., difficult
terrain, dense vegetation, deep or fast moving water), a man-made
obstacle or obstacles (e.g., fencing), or a combination of natural and
man-made obstacles.
The last data element in the Accessibility factor is Status of
Property. Its purpose is to differentiate between MRS that DoD controls
and MRS that DoD does not control. Based on comments received during
the consultation with the Tribes, DoD revised the definition of Non-DoD
control to specifically include all Indian lands (i.e., trust lands,
allotments, and Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA)-conveyed
property). DoD also included property transferring from DoD control
within 3 years in this data element to address those MRS that may be
currently controlled by DoD but are planned for transfer to non-DoD
entities in the near future. There are three classifications, DoD
control, Scheduled for transfer from DoD control, and Non-DoD control.
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical scores for the Status of Property data element are
presented in Table 15.
[[Page 50918]]
Table 15.--Classifications Within the CHE Status of Property Data
Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-DoD control.................. [sbull] The MRS is at a 5
location that is no
longer owned by, leased
to, or otherwise
possessed or used by
the DoD. Examples are
privately owned land or
water bodies; land or
water bodies owned or
controlled by American
Indian or Alaskan
Native Tribes, or State
or local governments;
and lands or water
bodies managed by other
Federal agencies.
Scheduled for transfer from DoD [sbull] The MRS is on 3
control. land or is a water body
that is owned, leased,
or otherwise possessed
by control DoD, and DoD
plans to transfer that
land or water body to
control of another
entity (e.g., a State,
American Indian,
Alaskan Native, or
local government; a
private party; another
Federal agency) within
3 years from the date
the Protocol is applied.
DoD control...................... [sbull] The MRS is on 0
land or is a water body
that is owned, leased,
or otherwise possessed
by the DoD. With
respect to property
that is leased or
otherwise possessed,
DoD controls access to
the property 24-hours
per day, every day of
the calendar year.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Receptor Factor
The Receptor factor focuses on the human and ecological populations
that may be impacted by the presence of CWM. Its four data elements
constitute 20 percent of numerical score of the CHE module.
The Population Density data element is used to both assess the
number of persons that could potentially access the MRS and potentially
be at risk from known or suspected CWM present at the MRS. Using U.S.
Census Bureau data, it is based on the number of people per square mile
in the county in which the MRS is located. If the MRS is located in
more than one county, DoD will use the largest population value among
the counties. DoD selected county population density for this element
because city population information was not consistently available for
all MRS, especially those in more rural or remote locations. If the MRS
is within or borders on city limits, the population density of the city
should be used instead of the county population density. During
consultation with States, Tribes, and other Federal agencies, some
agencies expressed a desire to use alternate and other readily
available data (e.g., daily visitor counts to national recreational
areas) in place of census data. DoD considered this approach but, for
consistency in the Protocol's application, determined that such site-
specific data would best be addressed in implementation guidance or
considered as ``risk plus'' or ``other'' factors when determining the
sequencing for MRS. DoD also initially considered differentiating
between on-site and off-site populations but found such an approach
unworkable.
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical scores for the Population Density data element are
presented in Table 16.
Table 16.--Classifications Within the CHE Population Density Data
Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Definition Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
500 persons per [sbull] There are more 5
square mile. than 500 persons per
square mile in the
county in which the MRS
is located, based on
U.S. Census Bureau data.
100-500 persons per square mile.. [sbull] There are 100 to 3
500 persons per square
mile in the county in
which the MRS is
located, based on U.S.
Census Bureau data.
< 100 persons per square mile.... [sbull] There are fewer 1
than 100 persons per
square mile in the
county in which the MRS
is located, based on
U.S. Census Bureau data.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
[sbull] If an MRS is in more that one county, the DoD Component will use
the largest population value among the counties. If the MRS is within
or borders a city or town, the population density for the city or town
instead of the county population density is used.
The Population Near Hazard data element is estimated based on the
number of inhabited structures \3\ on the MRS and within a 2-mile
distance extending out from the boundary of the MRS. Although this
element is defined based on the number of inhabited structures, DoD's
focus is on the potential for human populations within the structures,
not on the structures themselves.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Under the DoD Explosive Safety Standards, inhabited
structures are considered as structures, including schools,
churches, residences, aircraft passenger terminals, stores, shops,
factories, hospitals, and theaters, other than DoD munitions-related
structures, routinely occupied for any portion of the day, both
within and outside of DoD facilities. Occupied temporary structures
are also included.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical scores for the Population Near Hazard data element
are presented in Table 17.
Table 17.--Classifications Within the CHE Population Near Hazard Data
Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
26 or more structures............ [sbull] There are 26 or 5
more inhabitated
structures located up
to 2 miles from the
boundary of the MRS,
within the boundary of
the MRS, or both.
16 to 25......................... [sbull] There are 16 -- 4
25 inhabitated
structures located up
to 2 miles from the
boundary of the MRS,
within the boundary of
the MRS, or both.
[[Page 50919]]
11 to 15......................... [sbull] There are 11 -- 3
15 inhabitated
structures located up
to 2 miles from the
boundary of the MRS,
within the boundary of
the MRS, or both.
6 to 10.......................... [sbull] There are 6 -- 2
10 inhabited structures
located up to 2 miles
from the boundary of
the MRS, within the
boundary of the MRS, or
both.
1 to 5........................... [sbull] There are 1 --5 1
inhabited structures
located up to 2 miles
from the boundary of
the MRS, within the
boundary of the MRS, or
both.
0................................ [sbull] There are no
inhabited structures
located up to 2 miles
from the boundary of
the MRS, within the
boundary of the MRS, or
both .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: The term inhabited structures means permanent or temporary
structures, other than DoD munitions-related structures, that are
routinely occupied by one or more persons for any portion of a day.
The Types of Activities/Structures data element is used to assess
information about the population and activities near the hazard.
Through this data element, DoD strives to address multiple factors,
including the amount, type, the intrusiveness of activities, and the
likelihood of people to congregate onsite and within a 2-mile radius of
the MRS. Consideration is made to reflect the nature of the activities
that may result in an encounter with CWM. Residential and recreational
areas are weighted highest to reflect the types of activities and
population (e.g., children) that may be in their vicinity. In response
to Tribal comments, DoD included subsistence issues in the highest
classification.
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical scores for the Types of Activities/Structures
element are presented in Table 18.
Table 18.--Classifications Within the CHE Types of Activities/Structures
Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Residential, educational, [sbull] Activities are 5
commerical, or subsistence. conducted or inhabited
structures are located
up to 2 miles from the
MRS's boundary, or
within the MRS's
boundary that are
associated with any of
the following purposes;
residential,
educational, child
care, critical assets
(e.g., hospitals, fire
and rescue, police
stations, dams),
hotels, commercial
shopping centers,
playgrounds, community
gathering areas,
religious sites or
sites used for
subsistence hunting,
fishing, and gathering.
Parks and recreational areas..... [sbull] Activities are 4
conducted or inhibited
structures are located
up to 2 miles from the
MRS's boundary or
within the MRS's
boundary that area
associated with parks,
nature preserves or
other recreational uses.
Agricultural, forestry........... [sbull] Activities are 3
conducted or inhabited
structures are located
up to 2 miles from the
MRS's boundary, within
the MRS's boundary that
are associated with
agriculture or forestry.
Industrial or warehousing........ [sbull] Activities are 2
conducted or inhabited
structures are located
up to 2 miles from the
MRS's boundary, within
the MRS's boundary that
are associated with
industrial activities
or warehousing.
No known or recurring activities. [sbull] There are no 1
known of recurring
recurring activities
occurring up to 2
activities miles from
the MRS's boundary or
within the MRS's
boundary.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: The term inhabited structures means permanent or temporary
structures, other than DoD munitions-related structures, are routinely
occupied by one or more persons for any portion of a day.
Through the Ecological and/or Cultural Resources data element, DoD
recognizes the importance of the ecological and cultural resources
present on an MRS. This data element considers threatened and
endangered species, critical habitat, sensitive ecosystems, natural
resources, historical sites, historic properties, cultural items,
archeological resources, and American Indians or Alaska Natives
spiritual sites (e.g., the MRS is deemed by American Indian or Alaska
Natives to be of spiritual significance, or there are areas that are
used by American Indian and Alaska Natives for subsistence activities,
such as hunting or fishing). Requirements for determining if a
particular feature is a cultural resource are found in the National
Historic Preservation Act, Native American Graves Protection and
Repatriation Act, Archeological Resources Protection Act, Executive
Order 13007, and the American Indian Religious Freedom Act. The
greatest weight is awarded to MRS with both cultural and ecological
resources.
The classifications, the definition for each classification, and
associated numerical scores for the Ecological and/or Cultural
Resources data element are presented in Table 19.
Table 19.--Classifications Within the CHE Ecological and/or Cultural
Resources Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification Description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ecological and cultural resources [sbull] There are both 5
present. ecological and cultural
resources present on
the MRS.
Ecological resources present..... [sbull] There are 3
ecological resources
present on the MRS.
Cultural resources present....... [sbull] There are 3
cultural resources
present on the MRS.
[[Page 50920]]
No ecological or cultural [sbull] There are no 0
resources present. ecological resources or
cultural resources
present on the MRS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
[sbull] Ecological resources means that: (1) A threatened or endangered
species (designated under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)) is present
on the MRS; or (2) the MRS is designated under the ESA as critical
habitat for a threatened or endangered species; or (3) there are
identified sensitive ecosystems such as wetlands or breeding grounds
present on the MRS.
[sbull] Cultural resources means there are recognized cultural,
spiritual, traditional, religious, or historical features (e.g.,
structures, artifacts, symbolism) on the MRS. For example, American
Indians or Alaska Natives deem the MRS to be of spiritual significance
or there are areas that are used by American Indians or Alaska Natives
for subsistence activities (e.g., hunting, fishing). Requirements for
determining if a particular feature is a cultural resource are found
in the National Historic Preservation Act, Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act, Archeological Resources Protection
Act, Executive Order 13007, and the American Indian Religious Freedom
Act.
(4) CHE Module Rating
As described earlier in discussion of the CHE module, each data
element provides a numeric value that contributes to the CHE module
score. The sum of the nine data elements is the CHE module score.
There are seven CHE module ratings derived from the CHE module
scores, as illustrated in Table 20, plus three alternatives to account
for the chemical hazard potential at an MRS.
Table 20.--Determining the CHE Rating From the CHE Module Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall CHE module score CHE rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The MRS has an overall CHE module score CHE Rating A
from 92 to 100.
The MRS has an overall CHE module score CHE Rating B
from 82 to 91
The MRS has an overall CHE module score CHE Rating C
from 71 to 81
The MRS has an overall CHE module score CHE Rating D
from 60 to 70
The MRS has an overall CHE module score CHE Rating E
from 48 to 59
The MRS has an overall CHE module score CHE Rating F
from 38 to 47
The MRS has an overall CHE module score CHE Rating G
less than 38
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, there are three other possible outcomes:
[sbull] Evaluation pending. This category is used when CWM is
believed or known to be present but sufficient information is not
available to conduct the evaluation.
[sbull] No longer required. This category is reserved for MRS that
no longer require an evaluation for a potential CWM hazard because DoD
has conducted a response, all response objectives set out in the
decision document for the MRS have been achieved, and no further
action, except for long-term management and recurring reviews, is
required.
[sbull] No known or suspected CWM Hazard. This category is reserved
for MRS that do not require evaluation under the CHE module.
C. The Relative Risk Site Evaluation (RRSE) Hazard Module
In 1994, the DoD Inter-Service Relative Risk Working Group,
comprised of representatives from the DoD Components, developed the
RRSE framework for use in prioritizing sites under the Installation
Restoration program (IRP) category of the DERP. The RRSE framework
addresses chronic health and environmental effects of many of the
chemicals known to have been released into the environment from
activities at DoD installations and FUDS. The RRSE was revised in 1997,
to address questions, comments, and DoD initiatives that arose during
the first twenty months of implementation.
DoD will use the RRSE module to evaluate the potential hazards
posed by munitions constituents or CWA at a MRS relative to the hazard
potential at other MRS. The grouping of MRS into high, medium, or low
relative risk categories is not a substitute for a baseline risk
assessment or health assessment, nor is it a means for selecting a
remedy or placing MRS into a Response Complete/No Further Action
category.
DoD has elected to apply the RRSE framework to evaluate the
potential chronic health and environmental effects of munitions
constituents at MRS because it has been successfully used at sites in
the IRP. Using the same framework to evaluate IRP sites and MRS ensures
consistency in the approach taken to evaluate chronic health and
environmental effects of chemicals released to the environment.
In the RRSE module, MRS with releases of munitions constituents or
CWA are grouped in high, medium, and low priority categories based on
an evaluation of MRS information using three factors and four media and
their exposure endpoints:
[sbull] Factors:
--Contaminant hazard factor (CHF)
--Migration pathway factor (MPF)
--Receptor factor (RF)
[sbull] Endpoints:
--Groundwater, considering only a human receptor endpoint
--Surface water, using both a human and an ecological endpoint
--Sediments, using both a human and an ecological endpoint
--Surface soils (i.e., soils in the depth range of 0-6 inches)
using a human endpoint.
Each environmental medium is evaluated using three factors that
relate to the three structural components of the conceptual site model
used in environmental risk assessments: source, pathway, and receptor.
In the RRSE, the CHF (relationship of contaminants to comparison
values) is the source term; MPF (likelihood/extent of contaminant
migration) is the pathway term; and RF (likelihood of receptor exposure
to contamination) is the receptor term.
Each of these three factors is rated on a scale of three values
(e.g., the scale for the contaminant hazard factor is significant,
moderate, or minimal) based on up-to-date and representative MRS
information. For each environmental medium, factor ratings are combined
to determine the environmental medium-specific rating of high, medium,
or low. The MRS is then placed in an overall priority category of high,
medium, or low, based on the highest medium-specific rating.
(1) Contaminant Hazard Factor
The CHF is based on the ratio of the maximum concentration of a
contaminant detected in an environmental medium to an established risk-
based comparison value for the contaminant in that medium. The CHF is
rated significant, moderate or minimal. A significant rating is given
when the sum of ratios of the maximum concentration of a contaminant
detected
[[Page 50921]]
to the comparison value is greater than 100. A moderate rating is given
when the ratios are greater than 2 but less than 100. A minimal rating
is assigned when the ratios are less than 2. The framework uses
available site information to evaluate three media of concern:
groundwater, surface water and sediment, and surface soils.
The calculation is shown in Figure 2.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP22AU03.002
The comparison values used for this evaluation are provided in the
Relative Risk Site Evaluation Primer (Summer 1997, Revised Edition),
which can be referenced through the World Wide Web in the publications
sections at http://www.dtic.mil/envirodod. DoD will update these values
on an as needed basis to reflect the latest information available from
sources such as the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)
maintained by the EPA or the EPA Region IX Preliminary Remediation
Goals (PRGs).
(2) Migration Pathway Factor
The MPF represents the likelihood of transport of contaminants
through groundwater, surface water and sediment, and soil. The MPF is
determined by matching available site information on pathways with the
corresponding definitions about the likelihood of contaminant
migration. The MPF is rated evident, potential, or confined according
to the following definitions about the likelihood of contaminant
migration for each environmental medium:
(a) Groundwater
[sbull] Evident--Analytical data or observable evidence indicates
that contamination in the groundwater is moving or has moved away from
the source area.
[sbull] Potential--Contamination in the groundwater has moved only
slightly beyond the source (i.e., tens of feet), could move but is not
moving appreciably, or information is not sufficient to make a
determination of Evident or Confined.
[sbull] Confined--Information indicates that the potential for
contaminant migration from the source via the groundwater is limited
(due to geological structures or physical controls).
(a) Surface Water and Sediment
[sbull] Evident--Analytical data or observable evidence indicates
that contamination in surface water and/or sediment is present at,
moving toward, or has moved to a point of exposure.
[sbull] Potential--Contamination in surface water or sediment has
moved only slightly beyond the source (i.e., tens of feet), could move
but is not moving appreciably, or information is not sufficient to make
a determination of Evident or Confined.
[sbull] Confined--Information indicates a low potential for
contaminant migration from the surface water or sediment source to a
potential point of exposure (could be due to presence of geological
structures or physical controls).
(c) Soils
[sbull] Evident--Analytical data or observable evidence that
contamination in the soil is present at, is moving toward, or has moved
to a point of exposure.
[sbull] Potential--Contamination in the soil has moved only
slightly beyond the source (i.e., tens of feet), could move but is not
moving appreciably, or information is not sufficient to make a
determination of Evident or Confined.
[sbull] Confined--Information indicates a low possibility for
contamination to be present at or migrate to a point of exposure.
(3) Receptor Factor
Information about the present or future likelihood of receptors for
each MRS is summarized as the Receptor Factor (RF). RF of identified,
potential, or limited are determined by analysis of available
information on receptors at MRS. Human and ecological receptors (i.e.,
endpoints for exposure) to be considered are as follows:
(a) Groundwater
Human receptors include those individuals that may be exposed to
groundwater contamination via onsite and down gradient water supply
wells used for human consumption or in food production. Groundwater is
classified using the EPA's Guidelines for Groundwater Classification
Under the EPA Groundwater Protection Strategy, Office of Groundwater
Protection, 1986. Ecological receptors are not evaluated.
(b) Surface Water and Sediment
These two media are discussed together since they potentially
affect the same receptors. Human receptors for
[[Page 50922]]
surface water and sediment share the same migration pathway and,
therefore, include those individuals that may be exposed to surface
water or sediment contamination through onsite and down gradient water
supplies and recreational areas. Receptors include down gradient water
supplies used for drinking water, irrigation of food crops, watering of
livestock, aquaculture, and recreational activities such as fishing.
Ecological receptors for surface water and sediment are limited to
critical habitats and other similar environments that are reasonably
expected to be impacted by a MRS.
(c) Surface Soil.
Human receptors include residents, people in schools and daycare,
and workers who have direct access to contamination on a frequent
basis. Ecological receptors are not considered for evaluation of the
surface soil since ecological standards are generally not available for
the CHF calculation; however, ecological receptors may be incorporated
into the soil evaluation if ecological standards become available.
(4) Calculation of the RRSE Module Rating
For each medium at a MRS, the CHF, MPF, and RF are combined to
obtain the relative risk (high, medium, or low) for that medium. The
highest RRSE result for a medium determines the RRSE designation for
the MRS. If there is insufficient information to complete the RRSE
evaluation, the MRS is assigned a value of ``evaluation pending.'' DoD
will determine each MRS's relative priority after combining its RRSE
rating with the ratings determined from the EHE and CHE modules.
The matrix for assigning the overall RRSE hazard rating is provided
in Table 21.
Table 21.--Relative Risk Site Evaluation Module Hazard Rating
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Migration pathway
Contaminant hazard factor and --------------------------------------------------------------------------
receptor factor Evident Potential Confined
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Significant:
Identified....................... High................... High................... Medium.
Potential........................ High................... High................... Medium.
Limited.......................... Medium................. Medium................. Low.
Moderate:
Identified....................... High................... High................... Low.
Potential........................ High................... Medium................. Low.
Limited.......................... Medium................. Low.................... Low.
Minimal:
Identified....................... High................... Medium................. Low.
Potential........................ Medium................. Low.................... Low.
Limited.......................... Low.................... Low.................... Low.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Assigning the MRS Priority--Integrating the EHE, CHE, and RRSE
Module Ratings
As illustrated in Table 22, DoD proposes a MRS prioritization
concept for comment that considers the results of the three hazard
evaluation modules. The concept involves comparing the individual
evaluation of the EHE, CHE, and RRSE modules using Table 22. Once the
appropriate ratings are selected for each hazard evaluation module, the
module with the lowest numerical value (e.g., Priority 1 versus
Priority 5) determines the MRS priority. For example, if the EHE module
rating for an MRS is Hazard Rating A, the CHE module rating is Hazard
Rating E, and the RRSE module rating is medium, the MRS would be
assigned to Priority 2, based on the EHE module rating.
Table 22.--MRS Priority Based on Highest Hazard Evaluation Module Rating
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EHE module rating Priority CHE module rating Priority RRSE module rating Priority
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
........ Hazard Evaluation A 1
(Highest).
Hazard Evaluation A (Highest)...... 2 Hazard Evaluation B... 2 High (highest)....... 2
Hazard Evaluation B................ 3 Hazard Evaluation C... 3 ........
Hazard Evaluation C................ 4 Hazard Evaluation D... 4 ........
Hazard Evaluation D................ 5 Hazard Evaluation E... 5 Medium............... 5
Hazard Evaluation E................ 6 Hazard Evaluation F... 6 ........
Hazard Evaluation F................ 7 Hazard Evaluation G 7 ........
(Lowest).
Hazard Evaluation G (Lowest)....... 8 ...................... ........ Low.................. 8
No Longer Required................. ........ No Longer Required.... ........ No Longer Required... ........
Evaluation Pending................. ........ Evaluation Pending.... ........ Evaluation Pending... ........
No Known or Suspected Explosive ........ No Known or Suspected ........ ..................... N/A
Hazard. CWM Hazard.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each MRS will ultimately be assigned one of eight MRS priorities
based on the ratings of the three hazard evaluation modules. Only MRS
with a potential CWM hazard can be assigned to Priority 1, and no MRS
with CWM can be assigned to Priority 8. A ``prioritization no longer
required'' designation is used to indicate that a MRS no longer
requires prioritization. This designation is used only when all three
hazard evaluation modules are rated as ``no longer required'' or ``no
known or suspected explosive hazard'' or ``no known or suspected CWM
hazard.''
As described previously, any hazard evaluation module for which
there is insufficient information to complete the hazard evaluation
will be placed into an ``evaluation pending'' rating for that
[[Page 50923]]
module, and the MRS priority will be assigned based on the modules (if
any) for which sufficient data were available for a complete evaluation
of the hazard. The Protocol will be reapplied to the MRS when data to
complete evaluation of the remaining modules is obtained.
DoD Components will review each MRS priority at least annually and
update the priority as necessary to reflect new information that has
become available. The Protocol will be reapplied at a MRS under the
following circumstances:
(1) Upon completion of a response action that could change the site
conditions evaluated by the hazard evaluation modules at the MRS.
(2) To update or validate a previous module evaluation at an MRS
when new information is available.
(3) To update or validate an MRS priority that was previously
assigned based on evaluation of only one or two of the three hazard
evaluation modules.
(4) Upon further delineation and characterization of an MRA into
MRS.
(5) To categorize MRS previously classified as ``evaluation
pending.''
DoD Components are directed to develop and maintain records on the
application of the Protocol for each MRS. At a minimum, the records
shall contain references to all information and documents used for the
evaluation (e.g., field logs, data from preliminary assessments, site
inspections, or remedial investigations/feasibility studies, risk
assessments), evaluation documentation (e.g., worksheets), and database
records. These records will be included in the Administrative Record
for the MRS.
DoD Components will also report the MRS priority and the ratings
for each hazard evaluation module to the Office of the Deputy Under
Secretary of Defense (Installations & Environment) for inclusion in the
DERP Annual Report to Congress.
IX. Schedule for Application of the Protocol and for Addressing MRS
Assigned a Rating of ``Evaluation Pending''
DoD intends that the Protocol be applied to any given MRS as soon
as the information required to populate any of the modules is
available. Where a DoD Component has some, but not all the data to
apply any of the modules, DoD believes it appropriate to establish
programmatic goals and specific milestones for applying the Protocol.
For example, the Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) program has most of
the data required for application of the EHE and CHE modules at a
significant number of FUDS. This is known because FUDS have been
evaluated using the risk assessment code, one of the two interim tools
DoD adopted to prioritize munitions responses. There are also a much
smaller number of sites that have been evaluated using the RRSE tool,
the other interim tool DoD adopted in the Management Guidance to
prioritize munitions responses. DoD also realizes that it does not have
any of the data required to apply the Protocol at other MRS. These MRS
will be initially assigned the rating of ``evaluation pending.''
DoD intends to establish specific milestones for applying the
Protocol that differentiate among MRS that have undergone a RAC or RRSE
evaluation, MRS with a status of ``evaluation pending,'' and MRS
identified after May 31, 2003. While DoD does not intend to include
such goals and milestones in the final regulation, DoD believes that
input from interested parties may prove valuable in determining an
appropriate time frame for application of this Protocol to the MRS in
the inventory, and suggests the following goals are appropriate:
[sbull] For each MRS in the inventory as of May 31, 2003, that has
not been evaluated using the RAC or RRSE tools and which is assigned a
status of ``evaluation pending:''
--A priority will be assigned based on an evaluation using at least
one hazard evaluation module by May 31, 2007.
--A priority will be assigned based on an evaluation using all
hazard evaluation modules by May 31, 2012.
[sbull] For each MRA or MRS identified after May 31, 2003:
--A priority will be assigned based on an evaluation using at least
one hazard module within 2 years of identification or by May 31, 2007,
whichever is later.
--A priority will be assigned based on an evaluation using all
hazard modules within 4 years of identification or by May 31, 2012,
whichever is later.
X. Protocol Testing Methodology
In developing the Protocol, DoD conducted extensive testing of
various alternative constructions. This testing helped DoD develop the
numeric values for the data elements and factors, achieve consistent
and repeatable results, ensure an appropriate spread of MRS across the
priority outcomes, and ensure MRS were assigned appropriate outcomes
based on site conditions.
A. Selection of Sites
During development of the Protocol, more than 70 MRS were tested
using the Protocol. The majority of MRS selected for testing were FUDS
because DoD had the most data for these MRS. Within FUDS, MRS ranging
from a minimal hazard to the highest hazard were tested. In addition,
DoD selected MRS known to contain multiple hazards (i.e., EHE, CHE,
and/or RRSE) as a means to test the logic of the evaluation of each
hazard module and the overall Protocol.
B. Testing Format
DoD tested the Protocol on numerous occasions. Testing was
completed during presentations to stakeholders, during weekly internal
working group meetings, and during several concentrated testing
sessions with DoD personnel. Testing working groups typically consisted
of a small group of DoD experts knowledgeable in munitions response and
environmental restoration. The majority of testing was conducted by a
core group of participants to promote consistency.
The group testing the model typically scored three to five MRS at a
time, reviewing available data and documenting their findings in a
worksheet developed specifically for the testing. Worksheets were
developed specific to each module. Other personnel compiled the scores
as the group testing the model completed each grouping of MRS. The
compiled scores facilitated discussion held after every three to five
MRS to give the group a chance to discuss any significant issues or
problems encountered. As revisions were made to the Protocol,
additional testing was performed to ensure the validity of the changes.
C. Testing Conclusions
After the final testing session, DoD performed a detailed data
analysis on both the results received from hands-on testing, as well
extensive modeling analysis. Testing was completed to ensure that there
was a logical spread across MRS, and that the scores themselves were
logical for each MRS. Modeling was conducted as a final step to analyze
the logic in the scorings and weightings. Upon completion of the
analysis, the DoD work group discussed the results and made the
necessary modifications.
DoD is confident that the testing conducted indicated the Protocol
provides a useful tool for prioritizing MRS. The testing and the
comments received from stakeholders were critical in assisting DoD with
developing this proposal.
[[Page 50924]]
XI. Determination of Site Sequencing
DoD believes that the sequencing of MRS for implementation of
response actions should be based primarily on the relative priority
assigned by the Protocol, but may also consider other factors. This
approach to decision making is embodied in the current Management
Guidance and grew out of the recommendations of the Federal Facilities
Environmental Restoration Dialogue Committee (FFERDC). One of the main
issues the Committee considered was need to set priorities due to the
magnitude of the challenge of environmental restoration at Federal
facilities. The Committee believed that priority setting and funding
allocation must be done in a manner that stakeholders perceive fair and
inclusive. The Committee developed consensus policy recommendations
aimed at improving the process by which Federal facility environmental
restoration decisions are made, such that these decisions reflect the
priorities and concerns of all stakeholders. In the area of
consideration of human health and environmental risk and other factors
in Federal facility environmental restoration decision making, the
Committee made the following recommendation:
Risk to human health and the environment is an important and
well-established factor that should continue to be a primary
consideration in Federal facility cleanup decision making, including
setting environmental cleanup priorities and milestones. However:
(a) Human health and environmental risk assessments and other
analytical tools used to evaluate risks to human health (including
non-cancer as well as cancer health effects) and the environment all
have scientific limitations and require assumptions in their
development. As decision-aiding tools, risk assessments should only
be used in a manner that recognizes those limitations and
assumptions. Moreover, risk assessments ought not be used by any
party as a basis for unilaterally setting aside legal requirements
that embody public health principles and other important societal
values.
(b) In addition to human health and environmental risk, other
factors that warrant consideration in setting environmental cleanup
priorities and milestones include:
[sbull] Cultural, social, and economic factors, including
environmental justice considerations,
[sbull] Short-term and long-term ecological effects and
environmental impacts in general, including damage to natural
resources and lost use,
[sbull] Making land available for other uses,
[sbull] Acceptability of the action to regulators, Tribes, and
public stakeholders,
[sbull] Statutory requirements and legal agreements,
[sbull] Life cycle costs,
[sbull] Pragmatic considerations, such as the ability to execute
cleanup projects in a given year, and the feasibility of carrying
out the activity in relation to other activities at the facility,
[sbull] Overall cost and effectiveness of a proposed activity,
and
[sbull] Actual and anticipated funding availability.
The sequencing process described in this regulation builds on DoD's
experience in implementing the FFERDC recommendations over the past 10
years. In addition, DoD received comments from a wide range of
stakeholders supporting a decision making process that considers other
factors in making sequencing decisions.
Generally, MRS that present a greater relative risk to human
health, safety, or the environment will be addressed before MRS that
present a lesser risk; however, in evaluating other factors as part of
making sequencing decisions, DoD will consider a broad range of
factors. These ``risk-plus'' or ``other management'' factors do not
influence or change the prioritization results but may influence the
sequence in which MRS are addressed. Specific examples of factors DoD
may consider include:
[sbull] Concerns expressed by stakeholders.
[sbull] Cultural and social factors.
[sbull] Economic factors, including economic considerations
pertaining to environmental justice issues, economies of scale,
evaluation of total lifecycle costs, and estimated valuations of long-
term liabilities.
[sbull] The reasonably anticipated future land use, especially when
planning response actions, conducting evaluations of response
alternatives, or establishing specific response action objectives.
[sbull] Community reuse requirements at BRAC installations.
[sbull] Implementation and execution considerations (e.g., funding
availability; the availability of the necessary equipment and people to
implement a particular action; examination of alternatives to responses
that entail significant capital investments, a lengthy period of
operation, or costly maintenance; considering alternatives to removal
or treatment of contamination when existing technology cannot achieve
established standards, such as maximum contaminant levels.
[sbull] The availability of technology to detect, discriminate,
recover, and destroy UXO or DMM.
[sbull] Implementing standing commitments including those in formal
agreements with regulatory agencies, requirements for continuation of
remedial action operations until response objectives are met, other
long-term management activities, and program administration.
[sbull] Tribal trust lands, which are lands held in trust by the
United States for the benefit of any Indian Tribe or individual. The
United States holds the legal title to the land and the Tribe holds the
beneficial interest.
[sbull] Established program goals and initiatives.
[sbull] Short-term and long-term ecological effects and
environmental impacts in general, including injuries to natural
resources.
DoD uses its process for developing and updating Management Action
Plans (MAP) or an equivalent document as the vehicle for making
sequencing decisions. Each installation or FUDS is required to develop
and maintain a MAP or its equivalent. MAPs are required to be updated
on at least an annual basis. Guidance on preparing and updating the MAP
is provided in the Management Guidance. Sequencing decisions at
installations and FUDS are developed with input from stakeholders, such
as the regulatory and community members of an installation's RAB, and
are documented in the MAP.
During the annual update of the MAP, installation or FUDS personnel
will be required to publish an announcement in a local community
publication notifying the public of the following:
(1) The existence of MRS, including a brief description of each MRS
addressed, the conditions, and assigned priority,
(2) The intention to develop or update the MAP for the MRS,
(3) The intention to apply the Protocol to each MRS,
(4) The specific means the public or Tribes can use to submit
information about each MRS that may influence the priority assigned or
the funding sequence assigned, and
(5) The name and contact information for the designated DoD
spokesperson for each MRS.
Final sequencing may also be impacted by DoD Component program
management considerations. If the sequencing of any MRS is changed from
the sequencing reflected in the current MAP, the DoD Component will
provide information to the stakeholders documenting the reasons for the
sequencing change and will request their review and comment on that
decision.
In addition, DoD Components will ensure that all information
influencing the sequencing of an MRS is included in the Administrative
Record and the Information Repository. On a
[[Page 50925]]
programmatic level, DoD Components will report the results of
sequencing to the ODUSD (I&E).
XII. Consultation
The provisions of 10 U.S.C. 2710 required the DoD to develop this
proposed Protocol in consultation with States and Tribes. DoD has
followed Congress' direction, specifically working with States, Tribes,
and other interested stakeholders throughout the development process.
DoD appreciates the involvement and contributions of these stakeholders
in the development process. Many of the comments received were
incorporated into the Protocol. Some of the actions DoD took include:
A. Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. On March 20, 2002, DoD
published an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal
Register to inform stakeholders of DoD's efforts to develop a tool for
prioritizing MRS and to request suggestions on current prioritizing
methods in use and factors to consider in developing the Protocol. DoD
has reviewed all comments received and has considered them in its
development of the Protocol.
B. DENIX Web site. Beginning in March 2002, DoD established a
Website specific to the Protocol development effort on the Defense
Environmental Network & Information eXchange. DoD provided information
on the Protocol regarding background and status of development efforts
as well as an opportunity for stakeholders to submit comments
electronically.
C. Consultation with other Federal Agencies. In December 2002 and
February 2003, ODUSD (I&E) personnel met with representatives from the
U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Interior, and EPA to
discuss their concerns and comments on the Protocol.
D. Consultation With States
(1) Formal Notice for Protocol Development. Although DoD discussed
the Protocol with State representatives at meetings of various
organizations, the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Environment)
(ADUSD(E)) sent a letter to the head (e.g., Secretary, Commissioner,
Director) of the environmental agency for each State and U.S. territory
providing notification and background on the Protocol development
effort and requesting a point of contact for future correspondence. DoD
received formal responses from 15 States and territories. DoD
considered all submitted comments during its development of the
Protocol.
(2) State Meeting. To facilitate State involvement in the
development of the Protocol, in November 2002 and February 2003, DoD
invited representatives from the 50 States and U.S. territories to
attend a meeting to discuss State concerns. Participants reviewed the
Protocol and discussed their comments with representatives from the
ODUSD (I&E)) and DoD Components.
(3) Munitions Response Committee. DoD established the Munitions
Response Committee (MRC) to coordinate, identify and synchronize
efforts among DoD, other Federal agencies, the States, and Tribes to
ensure munitions responses at locations on other than operational
ranges are conducted in a manner that protects public health and the
environment while allowing the military to fulfill its mission. DoD
worked with the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste
Management Officials (ASTSWMO) and National Association of Attorneys
General (NAAG) to determine how best to achieve representation of State
interests and concerns on the MRC. Delegates from the ASTSWMO Board of
Directors and Committees served as representatives expressing potential
State concerns in managing activities at MRS. DoD also engaged the
National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) to participate in the MRC.
DoD discussed its Protocol development efforts with the MRC at meetings
held in March, May, July, and November 2002, as well as through
numerous teleconferences. The July meeting was conducted in conjunction
with the annual Defense and State Memorandum of Agreement Conference.
(4) ASTSWMO. In addition to coordination with the Association of
State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO)
through the MRC, DoD also sought to engage ASTSWMO members directly. In
October 2002 and April 2003, DoD representatives participated in
ASTSWMO's annual meeting--presenting a brief update at a breakout
session and individually discussing the Protocol with members.
E. Consultation With Tribes
DoD is committed to working with Tribes on a government-to-
government basis in recognition of their sovereignty and in a
continuing effort to implement the 1998 DoD American Indian and Alaska
Native Policy. In recognition of this commitment and policy and to
fulfill congressional requirements, DoD consulted with Tribes
throughout the development of the Protocol.
(1) Formal Notice for Protocol Development. In April 2002, the
ADUSD(E) sent a letter to each Tribal leader of the 586 Federally-
recognized Tribes notifying them of the effort to develop the Protocol
to prioritize MRS known or suspected to have UXO, DMM, or MC, inviting
them to participate in the effort, and requesting of them any
information regarding the presence of UXO, DMM, or MC on their lands.
(2) National Tribal Conference on Environmental Management. In June
2002, DoD participated in the 6th National Tribal Conference on
Environmental Management. DoD representatives briefed interested
conference attendees on the background and develop of the Protocol and
requested comments and factors to consider in its development. DoD
asked several interested Tribal members to participate in a subsequent
MRC meeting.
(3) Tribal Consultation Meetings. In September 2002 and April 2003,
DoD hosted meetings specifically for Tribes whose lands may be impacted
by UXO, DMM, or MC. The meeting was intended to ensure that DoD fully
considers concerns specific to Tribes in the Protocol. DoD briefed the
Tribal participants on the status of the development efforts and
discussed their comments and concerns.
(4) National Congress of American Indians. In November 2002, DoD
attended the 59th Annual Session of the National Congress of American
Indians. DoD briefed conference participants in a breakout session on
the draft Protocol construct and requested participants to provide
their comments and concerns.
(5) Native American Lands Environmental Mitigation Program Meeting.
DoD provided materials for distribution to interested Tribal members at
the annual meeting of the Native American Lands Environmental
Mitigation Program in November of 2002 in Juneau, Alaska.
F. DoD Response to Preliminary Comments
In developing this Protocol, DoD actively solicited ideas from
interested stakeholders on the scope, structure, and specific features
of a Protocol for prioritizing MRS. In addition to the Federal Register
notice announcing development of the Protocol and requesting input from
interested parties, DoD set up a Web site where parties could submit
comments and ideas. DoD also actively sought ideas in numerous meetings
with other Federal agencies, States, Tribes, and the public.
DoD was pleased with the response to its request for ideas, having
received comments and ideas from other Federal agencies, States,
Tribes, and members of
[[Page 50926]]
the public. The comments and ideas received were in five general areas,
including:
[sbull] Definitions. Most of these comments and ideas submitted
addressed recommendations that would provide greater clarity in the
definitions.
[sbull] Factors or Data Elements. Most of these comments and ideas
addressed the need for a specific data element that the commenter
thought should be included in the Protocol. Other comments addressed
the scores for each of the data elements and factors included in one of
the deliberative drafts provided to stakeholders during the development
process.
[sbull] Policy. In general, the comments and ideas in this area
related to questions or recommendations related to the scope and
application of the Protocol.
[sbull] Other Protocols. These comments and ideas focused primarily
on other Protocols or tools that DoD should evaluate for their utility
as a prioritization tool. Other comments addressed specific features
(e.g., data elements) of other tools that the commenter thought DoD
should consider in developing this Protocol.
[sbull] Other Issues. The comments and ideas in this area were
unrelated to the development of this Protocol. Examples include
comments regarding the inventory of MRS required under 10 U.S.C.
2710(a) and funding policy.
DoD carefully reviewed and considered each of the comments
submitted. The value of these comments and ideas is shown by the fact
that this Protocol incorporates many of the ideas provided by
interested parties. DoD would like to express its gratitude to all who
gave of their time and effort by submitting comments and ideas. To
ensure that DoD did consider each of the comments or ideas submitted, a
matrix was developed, each comment tracked, and DoD's response to the
comment documented. A summary of the comments and DoD's responses can
be found at http://www.denix.mil/MMRP_Protocol/comments.html.
XIII. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
DoD now solicits comments from the public on this Protocol. In
particular, DoD seeks comment on the form and workability of the
Protocol, the data elements considered in each module, the factors
considered in each module, the rating system for each module, the
weight afforded to each module in determining its evaluation hazard
score, and the rating system for each MRS priority.
XIV. Summary
The Protocol developed by DoD in consultation with States and
Tribes is proposed for public comment for subsequent codification in
the Code of Federal Regulations. DoD developed the Protocol to meet the
requirements set out in the 10 U.S.C. 2710 to consider and assign
relative priorities to MRS based on environmental and explosive
hazards. These hazards are evaluated in three areas:
[sbull] The explosive hazards posed by any UXO or DMM present at
the MRS,
[sbull] The hazards posed by any CWM present at the MRS, and
[sbull] The health and environmental hazards posed by any MC at the
MRS.
The priority assigned to each MRS, as well as the ratings of each
of the three hazard evaluation modules (i.e., Explosive Hazard
Evaluation, Chemical Warfare Materiel Hazard Evaluation, and Relative
Risk Site Evaluation) will be reported in an inventory.
XV. Administrative Requirements
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive Order 12866
Executive Order 12866, (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)) requires
each Agency taking regulatory action to determine whether that action
is ``significant.'' The Agency must submit any regulatory actions that
qualify as ``significant'' to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review, assess the costs and benefits anticipated as a result of
the proposed action, and otherwise ensure that the action meets the
requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant
regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere
with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter
the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4)
raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the
President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive
Order.
DoD has determined that today's Protocol is not a significant rule
under Executive Order 12866 because it is not likely to result in a
rule that will meet any of the four prerequisites.
(1) The Protocol will not have an annual effect on the economy of
$100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy,
a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal
governments or communities.
The primary effect on the economy will be the necessity for State
and/or local governments to conduct oversight of the environmental
restoration activities. The Department of Defense has determined it
would not place a burden in excess of $100 million each year on State,
local, and Tribal governments from implementing the Protocol.
In completing (in FY02) the initial inventory of MRS known or
suspected to contain UXO, DMM, or MC, the DoD Components identified
2,307 MRS. The current estimate of the costs of munitions responses is
in excess of $11.5 billion, which will be expended over many years.
Although this is a significant expenditure, the proposed rule will not
increase or decrease response costs, it will only prioritize the
response effort among sites.
In determining the total burden placed on State oversight as a
result of applying the Protocol at these MRS, a number of specific
oversight steps are assumed. Assumptions regarding individual steps in
Protocol application and the estimated time necessary to complete each
step were based on experience gained during Protocol testing as well as
DoD's experience in the application of other priority-setting models,
such as the Risk Assessment Code (RAC) applied to FUDS and BRAC
installations, the Range Rule Risk Methodology (R3M) used to screen
explosives hazards, as well as other models. In addition, DoD has
developed a significant body of experience in conducting activities
similar to those required in application of the Protocol during the
course of its execution of the DERP. DoD estimates that State
regulators, when applying the Protocol to MRS, will first perform a
preliminary document review. It is assumed that this step would include
reviewing the Protocol materials and guidance; reviewing existing site
background documents, such as USACE Archive Search Reports or State and
local property records; and preparing materials for a site inspection.
DoD assumes this step to take between 2 and 8 hours. DoD then assumes
State regulators would perform a non-invasive site inspection,
including a site walkthrough and various interviews with personnel
familiar with the site. DoD assumes an after-action report, detailing
the findings and results of the site inspection, would then be written
[[Page 50927]]
by the State regulators. For the site inspection, interviews, and after
action report, DoD estimates this step to require between 3 and 24
hours. The final step in State oversight of applying the Protocol would
be for the regulators to meet with DoD personnel to discuss and apply
the Protocol to MRS using the available information. DoD estimates this
step would require between 3 and 8 hours. In total, between 8 and 40
hours would be required for State oversight at each site.
An average labor cost of $24.25 per hour for oversight is assumed.
To arrive at this average, DoD assumed an average yearly salary as
$50,000, with 2,060 business hours per year. For the purposes of this
estimate, DoD assumes a State would use a three-person team to
accomplish all requirements of overseeing the application of the
Protocol within their State. To this end, DoD estimates the approximate
average per MRS cost for State oversight of administering the Protocol
is between $194 and $2,910. These low and high site estimates translate
into an estimated oversight cost of between $340,276 and $10,208,280
for the entire munitions response site inventory. In addition, since
DoD reimburses States for the costs incurred as a result of oversight
through the Defense and State Memorandum of Agreement (DSMOA) program,
the overall impact to a State is further reduced.
Otherwise, the Protocol will not adversely affect the economy as a
whole, any particular sector of the economy, productivity, competition,
or jobs since the Protocol does not establish any new spending amounts.
Rather, the Protocol merely provides guidance on allocating funds among
the MRS.
The Protocol does not have a direct adverse effect on the
environment, public health, and safety even though certain sites will
be designated as a low priority and, as a result, not see response
activities begin in the near-term. Any adverse effects were either a
result the actions that caused the UXO, DMM, or MC to be present at the
site (e.g., use as a range, treatment of waste military munitions, all
of which pre-date the application of the Protocol) or are the result of
the munitions response activities that are implemented after the
application of the Protocol. In the former instance, any effects should
have been evaluated as part of the decision to undertake the actions.
In the latter case, munitions response activities are undertaken under
CERCLA and the NCP. The evaluation of response alternatives under
CERCLA and the NCP has been determined by the U.S. Department of
Justice (DOJ) to be the functional equivalent of an assessment under
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
The Protocol also does not have any adverse affect on the economy,
environment, public health, and/or safety programs of State, local, or
Tribal governments or communities near a MRS. Again, any adverse
effects were either a result of the actions that caused the UXO, DMM,
or MC to be present at the site (e.g., use as a range, treatment of
waste military munitions, all of which pre-date the application of the
Protocol) or are the result of the munitions response activities that
are implemented after the application of the Protocol. With respect to
impacts occurring as a result of the munitions response at the MRS,
State, local, or Tribal governments are offered the opportunity to be
involved in the planning and execution of the munitions response. The
DoD has estimated that the cost of engaging or overseeing munitions
response activities is not significant, as that measure is defined by
Executive Order 12866. Further, DoD believes that the resources
expended on oversight will be returned in the form of benefits to the
community through reuse of the property.
For these reasons, DoD has determined that the Protocol will not
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities.
(2) The Protocol will not create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency.
Implementation of the Protocol will not create a serious
inconsistency or otherwise interfere with another agency's action
because DoD has lead authority for administering the DERP under 10
U.S.C. 2701(a)(1). The DERP statute delineates the responsibilities of
DoD and authority of EPA to some extent. The DoD is required by 10
U.S.C. 2701(a)(3) to consult with the EPA in its administration of the
environmental restoration program. Further, Section 2701(c)(2) of the
statute gives DoD the responsibility of conducting environmental
restoration activities on all properties owned or leased by it, except
those for which EPA has entered into a settlement with a potentially
responsible party. The Protocol ranking system will not interfere with
the Hazard Ranking System (HRS) maintained by the EPA because each
serves its own purpose. EPA uses the HRS to place uncontrolled waste
sites on the National Priorities List (NPL). EPA does not use the HRS
to determine the priority in funding EPA remedial response actions. The
DoD will use the Protocol to rank the risks posed by each site,
relative to other sites, and may use the Protocol as a basis for
determining which sites will receive funding. The DoD's use of the
Protocol generally will not interfere with EPA's use of the HRS. DoD
action may interfere with EPA action in a situation where EPA decides
to pursue response action at a site that DoD has designated as a low
priority. Where this occurs, DoD will cooperate with EPA to the extent
possible and rely on existing interagency processes to reach agreement
on site priorities and response actions. Based on the above reasoning,
DoD has determined that there is minimal potential for inconsistencies
or interference with action by any other agency.
(3) The Protocol does not materially alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof.
The Protocol will not materially alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof because no entitlements, grants, user
fees, or loan programs are invoked through prioritization of sites for
response activities.
(4) The Protocol will not raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the
principles set forth in the Executive Order.
Finally, the Protocol does not raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the
principles set forth in the Regulatory Impact Analysis. Congress has
already established the requirement for environmental restoration of
MRS and for DoD's development of a Protocol for prioritization of MRS.
The Protocol is merely a method for DoD to determine a relative
priority of MRS for response action. DoD has identified no novel legal
or policy issues that this Protocol will create on either a MRS-
specific basis or overall. Nor has DoD identified any novel legal or
policy issues arising out of the President's priorities or principles
set forth in the Regulatory Impact Analysis.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996), requires that an agency conduct a regulatory flexibility
analysis when
[[Page 50928]]
publishing a notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule. The
regulatory flexibility analysis determines the impact of the rule on
small entities (i.e., small businesses, small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions). SBREFA amended the Regulatory Flexibility
Act to require Federal agencies to state the factual basis for
certifying that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
DoD hereby certifies that the Protocol will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The nature
of the Protocol here provides the factual basis for a determination
that no regulatory flexibility analysis is required. The Protocol
merely provides a procedure by which DoD may prioritize MRS for
remediation. No costs are directly imposed on small entities, nor is
any action directly required of small entities through this Protocol.
Because DoD bears the financial responsibility for remediating MRS, and
the source of its funding is Congress, implementation of the Protocol
will not directly affect small entities in a financial manner. For the
foregoing reasons, DoD believes that this proposed rule, if
promulgated, would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
C. Unfunded Mandates
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the
private sector. Section 202 of the UMRA requires that, prior to
promulgating proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures by State, local, and Tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year, the Agency must prepare a written statement, including a
cost-benefit analysis of the rule. Under section 205 of the UMRA, DoD
must also identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory
alternatives to the rule and adopt the least costly, most cost-
effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rule. Certain exceptions to section 205 exist. For example, when
the requirements of section 205 are inconsistent with applicable law,
section 205 does not apply. In addition, an Agency may adopt an
alternative other than the least costly, most cost-effective, or least
burdensome in those cases where the Agency publishes with the final
rule an explanation of why such alternative was not adopted. Section
203 of the UMRA requires that the Agency develop a small government
agency plan before establishing any regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including Tribal
governments. The small government agency plan must include procedures
for notifying potentially affected small governments, providing
officials of affected small governments with the opportunity for
meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals
with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing,
educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the
regulatory requirements.
The DoD has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local, and Tribal governments in the aggregate, or by the
private sector in any one year. The term ``Federal mandate'' means any
provision in statute or regulation or any Federal court ruling that
imposes ``an enforceable duty'' upon State, local, or Tribal
governments, and includes any condition of Federal assistance or a duty
arising from participation in a voluntary Federal program that imposes
such a duty. The Protocol does not contain a Federal mandate because it
imposes no enforceable duty upon State, Tribal or local governments.
DoD is responsible for funding munitions responses and imposes no costs
on other entities by prioritizing MRS using this Protocol. DoD
recognizes that the State, local or Tribal government may expend funds
to conduct oversight of the response activities. The Protocol, however,
does not require such oversight. To the degree such oversight is
required, it is required by pre-existing law on which the Protocol has
no effect.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.,
prohibits a Federal agency from conducting or sponsoring a collection
of information that requires OMB approval, unless such approval has
been obtained, and the collection request displays a currently valid
OMB control number. Nor is any person required to respond to an
information collection request that has not complied with the PRA. The
term ``collection of information'' includes collection of information
from ten or more persons. The DoD has determined that the PRA does not
apply to this regulatory action because, although DoD will collect
information on the MRS, it will not use people who are not agency
personnel as the source of such information. Therefore, the PRA does
not apply to this Protocol.
E. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note), directs Federal agencies to use voluntary consensus for
technical standards in its regulatory activities, except in those cases
in which using such standards would be inconsistent with applicable law
or otherwise impractical. ``Technical standards'' means performance-
based or design-specific technical specifications and related
management systems practices. Voluntary consensus means that the
technical standards are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards organizations. In those cases in which a Federal agency does
not use voluntary consensus standards that are available and
applicable, the agency must provide OMB with an explanation.
Proposal of this Protocol does not involve performance-based or
design-specific technical specifications or related management systems
practices. The values for relative risk used in the Relative Risk Site
Evaluation module, to the extent they qualify as technical standards,
were formed through consensus. The Protocol is therefore in compliance
with the NTTAA.
F. Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice
Under Executive Order 12898, ``Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations,'' a Federal agency must, where practicable and
appropriate, collect, maintain, and analyze information assessing and
comparing environmental and human health risks borne by populations
identified by race, national origin, or income. To the extent practical
and appropriate, Federal agencies must then use this information to
determine whether their activities have disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations
and low-income populations.
DoD believes that implementation of this Protocol will address
environmental justice concerns in several ways. First, the Protocol
will address environmental justice by ensuring that prioritization is
based primarily on risk to the human health and environment of all
populations. The DoD recognizes that prioritization of MRS for response
action could result a
[[Page 50929]]
low-priority designation for some MRS located in low-income or minority
neighborhoods. Under the risk-based approach, however, such
prioritization would result in environmental injustice only if low-
income and minority populations were disproportionately located near
low-risk MRS. If this is, in fact, the case, DoD will reassess its
Protocol once an initial ranking is conducted. Second, DoD has reserved
a step in the Protocol for consideration of environmental justice
concerns, having supplemented the risk-based prioritization decision
with consideration of whether low-income or minority populations are
near the MRS. Third, because the Protocol will provide DoD with an
established method for choosing which MRS to address first, it will
ensure uniformity among decisions and eliminate the potential for
intentional discrimination against low-income and minority populations.
Finally, DoD's engagement with various stakeholders, most notably
Native American governments, in developing the Protocol, has helped to
build consideration of environmental justice concerns into the
Protocol.
DoD plans to continue to study the environmental justice effects
once the Protocol is implemented. Until that time, no data exists
regarding whether low-income and minority populations live near high-
risk MRS as opposed to low-risk MRS. As such, there is currently no way
of determining whether generally focusing response efforts first at
those MRS that pose a relatively higher risk will in any way adversely
affect these segments of the population. DoD decided to include
environmental justice considerations in the body of the Protocol as a
precautionary measure, but will examine the effect of the Protocol on
low-income and minority populations once DoD has implemented it and has
data from which to draw.
At this time, DoD believes that no action will directly result from
the proposed rule that will have a disproportionately high and adverse
human health and environmental effect on any segment of the population.
DoD will examine, however, the effects of implementation to ensure that
no disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effect occurs.
G. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), establishes certain requirements for Federal agencies
issuing regulations, legislative comments, proposed legislation, or
other policy statements or actions that have ``Federal implications.''
Under the Executive Order, any of these agency documents or actions
have ``Federal implications'' when they have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' Section 6 of
the Executive Order prohibits any agency from issuing a regulation that
has Federal implications, imposes substantial direct compliance costs
on State and local governments, and is not required by statute. Such a
regulation may only be issued if the Federal government provides the
funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by State
and local governments, or the agency consults with State and local
officials early in the process of developing the proposed regulation.
Further, a Federal agency may issue a regulation that has Federalism
implications and preempts State law only if the agency consults with
State and local officials early in the process of developing the
proposed regulation.
This proposed rule does not have Federalism implications because it
will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. The statute authorizing DoD's environmental restoration
program, 10 U.S.C. 2701, clearly defines the role and responsibilities
of DoD with respect to State and local governments. The role and
primary responsibility of DoD is to implement an appropriate
environmental restoration program at MRS. The DoD funds environmental
restoration activities and does not directly affect States in any
manner. The only potential dispute regarding distribution of power may
arise where the State attempts to require DoD to remediate its property
under a State hazardous waste law, and DoD has not ranked the MRS as a
high priority or allocated funding for environmental restoration of the
MRS. Such a situation, however, would be dealt with per established
legal principles regarding the relationship of States to the Federal
government. The Protocol does not alter this relationship.
Additionally, it would not be appropriate for this proposed rule to
attempt to assign roles to DoD or any State because such assignment of
roles is outside the scope of the statutory mandate. The Protocol does
not impose direct compliance costs on State or local governments
because DoD funds environmental restoration activities. Nevertheless,
DoD consulted with State and local officials throughout development of
this Protocol. Finally, development of a Protocol for prioritizing
action at MRS was specifically required by statute. The requirements of
section 6 of the Executive Order therefore do not apply to this rule.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 179
Government property; Military personnel; Hazardous substances;
Environmental protection.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 179 is proposed to be added to Chapter 1,
Subchapter H to read as follows:
PART 179--MUNITIONS RESPONSE SITE PRIORITIZATION PROTOCOL
Sec.
179.1 Purpose.
179.2 Applicability and scope.
179.3 Definitions.
179.4 Policy.
179.5 Responsibilities.
179.6 Procedures.
179.7 Sequencing.
Appendix A to 32 CFR part 179--Tables of the Munitions Response Site
Prioritization Protocol
Authority: 10 U.S.C. 2710 et seq.
Sec. 179.1 Purpose.
The Department of Defense (DoD) is adopting this Munitions Response
Site Prioritization Protocol (hereinafter referred to as the
``Protocol'') under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2710. Provisions of 10
U.S.C. 2710 require that DoD assign to each munitions response site in
the inventory required by 10 U.S.C. 2710(a) a relative priority for
response activities based on the overall conditions at each location
and taking into consideration various factors related to safety and
environmental hazards.
Sec. 179.2 Applicability and scope.
(a) This part applies to the Office of the Secretary of Defense,
the Military Departments, the Defense Agencies and the DoD Field
Activities, and any other DoD organizational entity or instrumentality
established to perform a government function (hereafter referred to
collectively as the ``DoD Components'').
(b) This part and the Protocol described herein shall be applied at
all locations:
(1) That are, or were, owned by, leased to, or otherwise possessed
or used by the DoD, and
(2) That are known to, or suspected of, containing unexploded
ordnance
[[Page 50930]]
(UXO), discarded military munitions (DMM), or munitions constituents
(MC), and
(3) That are included in the inventory established pursuant to 10
U.S.C. 2710(a).
(c) This part and the Protocol described herein shall not be
applied at the locations not included in the inventory required under
10 U.S.C. 2710(a). The locations not included in the inventory are:
(1) Locations that are not, or were not, owned by, leased to, or
otherwise possessed or used by the DoD,
(2) Locations not known to, or suspected of, containing UXO, DMM,
or MC,
(3) Locations outside the United States,
(4) Locations where the presence of military munitions resulted
solely from combat operations,
(5) Operating military munitions storage and manufacturing
facilities,
(6) Locations that are used for, or were permitted for, the
treatment or disposal of military munitions, and
(7) Operational ranges.
Sec. 179.3 Definitions.
This part includes definitions for many terms that clarify its
scope and applicability. Many of the terms relevant to this part are
already defined, either in 10 U.S.C. 2710(e) or the Code of Federal
Regulations. Where this is the case, the statutory and regulatory
definitions are repeated here strictly for ease of reference. Unless
used elsewhere in the U.S. Code or the Code of Federal Regulations,
these terms are defined only for purposes of this part.
Barrier means a natural obstacle or obstacles (e.g., difficult
terrain, dense vegetation, deep or fast moving water), a man-made
obstacle or obstacles (e.g., fencing), and combinations of natural and
man-made obstacles.
Chemical warfare agents (CWA) means the V- and G-series nerve
agents, H-series (i.e., ``mustard'' agents) and L (i.e., lewisite)
blister agents, and certain industrial chemicals used by the military
as weapons, including hydrogen cyanide (AC), cyanogen chloride (CK), or
carbonyl dichloride (called phosgene or CG). CWA does not include riot
control agents (e.g., w-chloroacetophenone (CN) and o-
chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile (CS) tear gas), chemical herbicides,
smoke or incendiary compounds, and industrial chemicals that are not
configured as a military munition.
Chemical Warfare Material (CWM) is a general term that is comprised
of four subcategories of specific materials:
(1) CWM, explosively configured are all munitions that contain a
CWA fill and any explosive component. Examples are M55 rockets with
CWA, the M23 VX mine, and the M360 105-mm GB artillery cartridge.
(2) CWM, nonexplosively configured are all munitions that contain a
CWA fill but that do not contain any explosive components. Examples are
any chemical munition that does not contain an explosive components and
VX or mustard agent spray canisters.
(3) CWM, bulk container are all non-munitions-configured containers
of CWA (e.g., a ton container).
(4) Chemical agent identification sets (CAIS) are military training
aids containing small quantities of various CWA and other chemicals.
All forms of CAIS are scored the same in this Protocol, except CAIS
K941, toxic gas set M-1; and K942, toxic gas set M-2/E11, which are
scored higher due to the relatively large quantities of agent they
contain.
Defense site means locations that are or were owned by, leased to,
or otherwise possessed or used by the Department of Defense. The term
does not include any operational range, operating storage or
manufacturing facility, or facility that is used for or was permitted
for the treatment or disposal of military munitions. (10 U.S.C.
2710(e)(1))
Department of Defense (DoD) Components means the Office of the
Secretary of Defense, the Military Departments, the Defense Agencies,
the DoD Field Activities, and any other DoD organizational entity or
instrumentality established to perform a government function.
Discarded military munitions (DMM) means military munitions that
have been abandoned without proper disposal or removed from storage in
a military magazine or other storage area for the purpose of disposal.
The term does not include unexploded ordnance, military munitions that
are being held for future use or planned disposal, or military
munitions that have been properly disposed of, consistent with
applicable environmental laws and regulations. (10 U.S.C. 2710(e)(2))
Military munitions means all ammunition products and components
produced for or used by the armed forces for national defense and
security, including ammunition products or components under the control
of the Department of Defense, the Coast Guard, the Department of
Energy, and the National Guard. The term includes confined gaseous,
liquid, and solid propellants, explosives, pyrotechnics, chemical and
riot control agents, smokes, and incendiaries, including bulk
explosives and chemical warfare agents, chemical munitions, rockets,
guided and ballistic missiles, bombs, warheads, mortar rounds,
artillery ammunition, small arms ammunition, grenades, mines,
torpedoes, depth charges, cluster munitions and dispensers, demolition
charges, and devices and components thereof. The term does not include
wholly inert items, improvised explosive devices, and nuclear weapons,
nuclear devices, and nuclear components, except that the term does
include nonnuclear components of nuclear devices that are managed under
the nuclear weapons program of the Department of Energy after all
required sanitization operations under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954
(42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.) have been completed. (10 U.S.C. 2710(e)(3) and
40 CFR 260.10)
Military range means designated land and water areas set aside,
managed, and used to research, develop, test, and evaluate military
munitions, other ordnance, or weapon systems, or to train military
personnel in their use and handling. Ranges include firing lines and
positions, maneuver areas, firing lanes, test pads, detonation pads,
impact areas, and buffer zones with restricted access and exclusionary
areas. (40 CFR 266.201)
Munitions constituents means any materials originating from
unexploded ordnance, discarded military munitions, or other military
munitions, including explosive and non-explosive materials, and
emission, degradation, or breakdown elements of such ordnance or
munitions. (10 U.S.C. 2710(e)(4))
Munitions response means response actions, including investigation,
removal actions, and remedial actions, to address the explosives
safety, human health, or environmental risks presented by unexploded
ordnance (UXO), discarded military munitions (DMM), or munitions
constituents (MC).
Munitions response area (MRA) means any area on a defense site that
is known or suspected to contain UXO, DMM, or MC. Examples are former
ranges or munitions burial areas. An MRA is comprised of one or more
munitions response sites.
Munitions response site (MRS) means a discrete location within an
MRA that is known to require a munitions response.
Operational range means a military range that is used for range
activities, or a military range that is not currently being used but
that is still considered by the Secretary to be a range area, is under
the jurisdiction, custody, or control of the Department of Defense, and
has not been put to a new use that is
[[Page 50931]]
incompatible with range activities. (10 U.S.C. 2710(e)(5))
Range activities means research, development, testing, and
evaluation of military munitions, other ordnance, and weapons systems;
and the training of military personnel in the use and handling of
military munitions, other ordnance, and weapons systems.
Unexploded ordnance (UXO) means military munitions that:
(1) Have been primed, fuzed, armed, or otherwise prepared for
action;
(2) Have been fired, dropped, launched, projected, or placed in
such a manner as to constitute a hazard to operations, installations,
personnel, or material; and
(3) Remain unexploded either by malfunction, design, or any other
cause. (10 U.S.C. 2710(e)(9) and 40 CFR 266.201)
United States means, in a geographic sense, the States,
territories, and possessions and associated navigable waters,
contiguous zones, and ocean waters of which the natural resources are
under the exclusive management authority of the United States. (10
U.S.C. 2710(e)(10))
Sec. 179.4 Policy.
(a) In assigning a relative priority for response activities, DoD
generally considers those MRS posing the greatest hazard as having the
highest priority for action. The priority assigned should be based on
the overall conditions at each location, taking into consideration
various factors relating to safety and environmental hazard potential.
(b) It is DoD policy to ensure that EPA, other Federal agencies (as
appropriate or required), State regulatory agencies, Native American or
Alaskan Native Tribes, local restoration advisory boards (RABs) or
technical review committees (TRCs), and local stakeholders are offered
opportunities to participate in the application of the Protocol and
making sequencing decisions.
Sec. 179.5 Responsibilities.
For the MRS in the inventory required under 10 U.S.C. 2710(a), each
DoD Component shall:
(a) Apply the Protocol to each MRS:
(1) Under its administrative control.
(2) Within an MRA such that the total acreage of each MRA is
evaluated.
(3) When sufficient data are available to populate all the data
elements within at least one of the three hazard evaluation modules
that comprise the Protocol.
(i) In such cases where data are not sufficient to populate one or
two of the hazard evaluation modules (e.g., there is no constituent
sampling data for the relative risk site evaluation module), DoD
Components will assign an MRS priority based on the hazard evaluation
modules evaluated and reapply the Protocol once sufficient data to run
the remaining hazard evaluation modules are available.
(ii) When an MRS comprises the total area of its MRA (i.e., the MRA
has either not been characterized such that more than one MRS has been
delineated, or characterization has determined that further delineation
is not necessary), DoD Components shall apply the Protocol to that MRS
when sufficient data are available to populate all the data elements
within at least one of the three hazard evaluation modules. Upon
further delineation and characterization of the MRA into more than one
MRS, Components shall reapply the Protocol to all MRS within the MRA.
(b) Ensure that EPA, other Federal agencies (as appropriate or
required), State regulatory agencies, Native American or Alaskan Native
Tribes, local RABs or TRCs, and local community stakeholders are
offered opportunities as early as possible and throughout the process
to participate in the application of the Protocol and making sequencing
decisions.
(1) To ensure EPA, other Federal agencies, State regulatory
agencies, Native American and Alaskan Native Tribes, and local
government officials are aware of the opportunity to participate in the
initial application of the Protocol, the DoD Component organization
responsible for implementing a munitions response at the MRS shall send
a certified letter to the heads of these organizations (or their
designated point-of-contact), as appropriate, seeking their
involvement. A copy of these letters will be placed in the
Administrative Record and Information Repository for the MRS.
(2) To ensure the local community is aware of the opportunity to
participate in the initial application of the Protocol, the DoD
Component organization responsible for implementing a munitions
response at the MRS shall publish an announcement in a local community
publication requesting information pertinent to prioritization or
sequencing decisions.
(c) Establish a quality assurance panel to review all MRS
prioritization decisions. This panel will not include any participant
involved in applying the Protocol to the MRS. If the panel recommends a
change that results in a different priority, the DoD Component shall
report, in the inventory data submitted to the Office of the Deputy
Under Secretary of Defense (Installations & Environment), the rationale
for this change. The DoD Component shall also provide this rationale to
the appropriate regulatory agencies and involved stakeholders for
comment before finalizing the change.
(d) Following the panel review, submit the results of applying the
Protocol along with the other inventory data that 10 U.S.C. 2710(c)
requires be made publicly available, to the ODUSD (I&E). ODUSD (I&E)
shall publish this information in the Defense Environmental Restoration
Program Annual Report to Congress for that fiscal year. If sequencing
decisions result in action at an MRS with a lower MRS priority ahead of
an MRS with a higher MRS priority, the DoD Component shall provide
specific justification to ODUSD (I&E).
(e) Document in a Management Action Plan (MAP) or its equivalent
all aspects of the munitions responses required at all MRS for which
that MAP is applicable. DoD guidance requires that MAPs are developed
and maintained at an installation (or Formerly Used Defense Site (FUDS)
property) level. For the FUDS program, a State-wide MAP may also be
developed.
(f) Sequencing decisions at installations and FUDS shall be
developed with input from stakeholders, such as the regulatory and
community members of an installation's RAB or TRC, and be documented in
the MAP. Final sequencing may be impacted by DoD Component program
management considerations. If the sequencing of any MRS is changed from
the sequencing reflected in the current MAP, the DoD Component shall
provide information to the stakeholders documenting the reasons for the
sequencing change and shall request their review and comment on that
decision.
(g) Ensure that information provided by stakeholders that may
influence the MRS priority assigned or sequencing decision concerning
an MRS is included in the Administrative Record and the Information
Repository.
(h) Review each MRS priority, at least annually, and update the
priority as necessary, to reflect new information. Reapplication of the
Protocol is required under any of the following circumstances:
(1) Upon completion of a response action that could change site
conditions evaluated by the hazard evaluation modules at the MRS.
(2) To update or validate a previous module evaluation at an MRS
when new information is available.
[[Page 50932]]
(3) To update or validate an MRS priority that was previously
assigned based on evaluation of only one or two of the three hazard
evaluation modules.
(4) Upon further delineation and characterization of an MRA into
MRS.
(5) To categorize any MRS previously classified as ``evaluation
pending.''
Sec. 179.6 Procedures.
The Protocol is comprised of the following three hazard evaluation
modules.
(a) Explosive Hazard Evaluation (EHE) Module. (1) The EHE module
provides a single, consistent, DoD-wide approach for the evaluation of
explosive hazards. This module is used when there is a known or
suspected presence of an explosive hazard. The EHE module is composed
of three factors, each of which is comprised of two to four data
elements that are intended to assess the specific conditions at an MRS.
These factors are:
(i) Explosive hazard, which has the data elements Munitions Type
and Source of Hazard (see Appendix A to this part, Tables 1 and 2) and
comprises 40 percent of the EHE module score.
(ii) Accessibility, which has the data elements Location of
Munitions, Ease of Access, and Status of Property (see Appendix A to
this part, Tables 3, 4, and 5) and comprises 40 percent of the EHE
module score.
(iii) Receptors, which has the data elements Population Density,
Population Near Hazard, Types of Activities/Structures, and Ecological
and/or Cultural Resources (see Appendix A to this part, Tables 6, 7, 8,
and 9) and comprises 20 percent of the EHE module score.
(2) Based on MRS-specific information, each data element is
assigned a numeric value, and the sum of these values is the EHE module
score. The EHE module score results in an MRS being placed into one of
the following ratings (See Appendix A to this part, Table 10):
(i) Hazard Evaluation A (Highest) is assigned to MRS with an EHE
module score of more than 91.
(ii) Hazard Evaluation B is assigned to MRS with an EHE module
score between 82 and 91.
(iii) Hazard Evaluation C is assigned to MRS with an EHE module
score between 71 and 81.
(iv) Hazard Evaluation D is assigned to MRS with an EHE module
score of between 60 and 70.
(v) Hazard Evaluation E is assigned to MRS with an EHE module score
of between 48 and 59.
(vi) Hazard Evaluation F is assigned to MRS with an EHE module
score between 38 and 47.
(vii) Hazard Evaluation G (Lowest) is assigned to MRS with an EHE
module score less than 38.
(3) There are also three other possible outcomes for the EHE
module:
(i) Evaluation pending. This category is used when there are known
or suspected UXO or DMM, but sufficient information is not available to
populate the nine data elements of the EHE module.
(ii) No longer required. This category is reserved for MRS that no
longer require an assigned priority because DoD has conducted a
response, all objectives set out in the decision document for the MRS
have been achieved, and no further action, except for long-term
management and recurring reviews, is required.
(iii) No Known or Suspected Explosive Hazard. This rating is
reserved for MRS that do not require evaluation under the EHE module.
(4) The EHE module rating shall be considered with the CHE and RRSE
module ratings to determine the MRS priority.
(5) MRS lacking information for determining an EHE module rating
shall be programmed for additional study and evaluated as soon as
sufficient data are available. Until an EHE module rating is assessed,
MRS shall be rated as ``evaluation pending'' for the EHE module.
(b) Chemical Warfare Materiel Hazard Evaluation (CHE) Module. (1)
The CHE module provides an evaluation of the chemical hazards
associated with the physiological effects of CWM. The CHE module is
used only when CWM are known or suspected of being present at an MRS.
Like the EHE module, the CHE module is comprised of three factors, each
of which is comprised of two to four data elements that are intended to
assess the conditions at an MRS.
(i) The CWM Hazard factor is comprised of two data elements, CWM
Configuration and Sources of CWM, and constitutes 40 percent of the CHE
score. (See Appendix A to this part, Tables 11 and 12.)
(ii) The Accessibility factor focuses on the potential for
receptors to encounter the CWM known or suspected to be present on an
MRS. This factor consists of three data elements, Location of CWM, Ease
of Access, and Status of Property, and constitutes 40 percent of the
CHE score. (See Appendix A to this part, Tables 13, 14, and 15.)
(iii) The Receptor factor focuses on the human and ecological
populations that may be impacted by the presence of CWM. It has the
data elements Population Density, Population Near Hazard, Types of
Activities/Structures, and Ecological and/or Cultural Resources and
constitutes 20 percent of the CHE score. (See Appendix A to this part,
Tables 16, 17, 18, and 19.)
(2) Similar to the EHE module, each data element is assigned a
numeric value, and the sum of these values (i.e., the CHE module score)
is used to determine the CHE rating (See Appendix A to this part, Table
20):
(i) Hazard Evaluation A (Highest) is assigned to MRS with a CHE
score greater than 91.
(ii) Hazard Evaluation B is assigned to MRS with a CHE score
between 82 and 91.
(iii) Hazard Evaluation C is assigned to MRS with a CHE score
between 71 and 81.
(iv) Hazard Evaluation D is assigned to MRS with a CHE score
between 60 and 70.
(v) Hazard Evaluation E is assigned to MRS with a CHE score between
48 and 59.
(vi) Hazard Evaluation F is assigned to MRS with a CHE score
between 38 and 47.
(vii) Hazard Evaluation G (Lowest) is assigned to MRS with a CHE
score less than 38.
(3) There are also three other potential outcomes for the CHE
module:
(i) Evaluation pending. This category is used when there are known
or suspected CWM, but sufficient information is not available to
populate the nine data elements of the CHE module.
(ii) No longer required. This category is reserved for MRS that no
longer require an assigned priority because DoD has conducted a
response, all objectives set out in the decision document for the MRS
have been achieved, and no further action, except for long-term
management and recurring reviews, is required.
(iii) No Known or Suspected CWM Hazard. This category is reserved
for MRS that do not require evaluation under the CHE module.
(4) The CHE rating shall be considered with the EHE module and RRSE
module ratings to determine the MRS priority.
(5) MRS lacking information for assessing a CHE module rating shall
be programmed for additional study and evaluated as soon as sufficient
data are available. Until a CHE module rating is assigned, MRS shall be
rated as ``evaluation pending'' for the CHE module.
(c) Relative-Risk Site Evaluation (RRSE). (1) The RRSE, described
in the Relative-Risk Site Evaluation Primer (Summer 1997, Revised
Edition) provides a single, consistent DoD-wide
[[Page 50933]]
approach for evaluating the relative risk to human health and the
environment posed by chemical contamination present at an MRS (the RRSE
Primer can be found in the publications section at http://www.dtic.mil/envirodod
). The RRSE module shall be used for evaluating the potential
hazards posed by munitions constituents (MC) and other chemical
contaminants.
(2) Evaluation of three factors--contaminants present,
environmental migration pathways, and receptors--applied to four
media--soil, surface water, groundwater, and sediments--results in the
placement of MRS into RRSE module ratings of ``high,'' ``medium,'' or
``low.'' (See Table 21 of Appendix A to this part.)
(3) The RRSE module rating shall be considered with the EHE and CHE
module ratings to determine the MRS priority.
(4) There are also two other potential outcomes for the RRSE
module:
(i) Evaluation pending. This category is used when there are known
or suspected MC or chemical contaminants, but sufficient information is
not available to determine the RRSE module rating.
(ii) No longer required. This category is reserved for MRS that no
longer require an assigned MRS priority because DoD has conducted a
response, all objectives set out in the decision document for the MRS
have been achieved, and no further action, except for long-term
management and recurring reviews, is required.
(iii) MRS lacking information sufficient for assessing an RRSE
module rating shall be programmed for additional study and evaluated as
soon as sufficient data are available. Until an RRSE module rating is
assigned, MRS shall be classified as ``evaluation pending'' for the
RRSE module.
(d) Determining the MRS Priority. (1) An MRS priority is determined
based on the ratings from the EHE, CHE, and RRSE modules (see Appendix
A to this part, Table 22). Until all three hazard evaluation modules
have been evaluated, the MRS priority shall be based on the results of
the modules completed.
(2) Each MRS is assigned to one of eight MRS priorities based on
the ratings of the three hazard evaluation modules, where Priority 1
indicates the highest potential hazard and Priority 8 the lowest
potential hazard. Under the Protocol, only MRS with CWM can be assigned
to Priority 1 and no MRS with CWM can be assigned to Priority 8.
(3) Where there is insufficient information to assess any of the
three hazard evaluation modules, MRS shall receive an ``evaluation
pending'' rating for that module. DoD shall develop program metrics
focused on reducing the number of MRS with a status of ``evaluating
pending'' for any of the three modules.
(4) A ``prioritization not required'' rating is used to indicate
that a MRS no longer requires prioritization. This designation is used
only when all three hazard evaluation modules are rated as ``no longer
required'' or ``no known or suspected explosive hazard'' or ``no known
or suspected CWM hazard.''
Sec. 179.7 Sequencing.
(a) Sequencing considerations. The sequencing of MRS for action
shall be based primarily on the MRS priority determined through
applying the Protocol. Generally, MRS that present a greater relative
hazard to human health, safety, or the environment will be addressed
before MRS that present a lesser relative hazard. Other factors,
however, may warrant consideration when determining the sequencing for
specific MRS. In evaluating other factors in its sequencing decisions,
DoD will consider a broad range of issues. These ``risk-plus'' or
``other'' factors do not influence or change the MRS priority but may
influence the sequencing for action. Examples of factors that DoD may
consider are:
(1) Concerns expressed by stakeholders
(2) Cultural and social factors
(3) Economic factors, including economic considerations pertaining
to environmental justice issues, economies of scale, evaluation of
total lifecycle costs, and estimated valuations of long-term
liabilities
(4) The findings of health, safety, or ecological risk assessments
or evaluations based on MRS-specific data
(5) The reasonably anticipated future land use, especially when
planning response actions, conducting evaluations of response
alternatives, or establishing specific response action objectives
(6) Community reuse requirements at BRAC installations
(7) Tribal trust lands, which are lands held in trust by the United
States for the benefit of any Indian Tribe or individual. The United
States holds the legal title to the land and the Tribe holds the
beneficial interest.
(8) Implementation and execution considerations (e.g., funding
availability; the availability of the necessary equipment and people to
implement a particular action; examination of alternatives to responses
that entail significant capital investments, a lengthy period of
operation, or costly maintenance; considering alternatives to removal
or treatment of contamination when existing technology cannot achieve
established standards (e.g., maximum contaminant levels)
(9) For responses to address UXO or DMM, the availability of
technology to detect, discriminate, recover, and destroy the UXO or DMM
(10) Implementing standing commitments including those in formal
agreements with regulatory agencies, requirements for continuation of
remedial action operations until response objectives are met, other
long-term management activities, and program administration
(11) Established program goals and initiatives
(12) Short-term and long-term ecological effects and environmental
impacts in general, including injuries to natural resources.
(b) Procedures and documentation for sequencing decisions. (1) Each
installation or FUDS is required to develop and maintain a MAP or its
equivalent. Sequencing decisions, which will be documented in the MAP,
at installations and FUDS shall be developed with input from
stakeholders, such as the regulatory and community members of an
installation's RAB or TRC. If the sequencing of an MRS is changed from
the sequencing reflected in the current MAP, information documenting
the reasons for the sequencing change will be provided for inclusion in
the MAP. Notice of the change in the sequencing shall be provided to
those stakeholders that provided input to the sequencing process.
(2) In addition to the information on prioritization, DoD
Components shall ensure that information provided by stakeholders that
may influence the sequencing of a MRS is included in the Administrative
Record and the Information Repository.
(3) DoD Components shall report the results of sequencing to ODUSD
(I&E) (or successor organizations). ODUSD (I&E) shall compile the
sequencing results reported by each DoD Component and publish the
sequencing in the Defense Environmental Restoration Program Annual
Report to Congress. If sequencing decisions result in action at an MRS
with a lower MRS priority ahead of MRS with a higher priority, specific
justification shall be provided to ODUSD (I&E).
[[Page 50934]]
Appendix A to 32 CFR Part 179--Tables of the Munitions Response Site
Prioritization Protocol
The tables in this Appendix are solely for use in implementing
32 CFR part 179.
Table 1.--Classifications Within the EHE Module Munitions Type Data
Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sensitive:
All UXO that are considered likely to function upon any 30
interaction with exposed persons (i.e., submunitions,
cluster munitions, 40mm high-explosive grenades, white
phosphorus (WP) munitions (including practice munitions
with sensitive fuzes, but excluding all other practice
munitions), and high explosive anti-tank (HEAT) munitions..
All hand grenades containing an explosive filler............ 30
High explosive (used or damaged):
All UXO containing a high-explosive filler (e.g., RDX, 25
Composition B) that are not considered ``sensitive''.......
All DMM containing a high-explosive filler that have been 25
damaged by burning or detonation...........................
All DMM containing a high-explosive filler that have 25
deteriorated to the point of instability...................
Pyrotechnic:
All UXO containing pyrotechnic fillers other than white 20
phosphorous (e.g., flares, signals, simulators, smoke
grenades)..................................................
All DMM containing pyrotechnic fillers other than white 20
phosphorous (e.g., flares, signals, simulators, smoke
grenades) that have been damaged by burning or detonation
or that have deteriorated to the point of instability......
High explosive (unused):
All DMM containing a high-explosive filler that have not 15
been damaged by burning or detonation......................
All DMM containing a high explosive filler that are not 15
deteriorated to the point of instability...................
Propellant:
All UXO containing only a single-, double-, or triple-based 15
propellant, or composite propellants (e.g., a rocket motor)
All DMM containing only a single-, double-, or triple-based 15
propellant, or composite propellants (e.g., a rocket motor)
Bulk HE, pyrotechnics, or propellant:
Bulk high explosives, including: demolition charges (e.g., 10
C4 blocks), high explosives not contained in a munition,
and concentrated mixtures of high explosives or other
munitions constituents mixed with environmental media or
debris in concentrations that result in the mixture being
explosive (e.g., ``explosive soil'').......................
All pyrotechnic material that is not contained in a munition 10
(i.e., ``bulk pyrotechnics'')..............................
All single-, double-, or triple-based propellant, or 10
composite propellants that is not contained in a munition
(i.e., ``bulk propellant'')................................
Practice:
All UXO that are a practice munition not associated with a 5
sensitive fuze.............................................
All DMM that are a practice munition not associated with a 5
sensitive fuze that have been damaged by burning or
detonation.................................................
All DMM that are a practice munition not associated with a 5
sensitive fuze that have deteriorated to the point of
instability................................................
Riot control: All UXO or DMM containing only a riot control 3
agent (e.g., tear gas).........................................
Small arms: All UXO or DMM that are classified as small arms 2
ammunition. Evidence that no other munitions type (e.g.,
grenades, subcaliber training rockets, demolition charges) was
used or is present on the MRS is required for selection of this
category.......................................................
Evidence of no munitions: Following investigation of the MRS, 0
there is physical evidence there are no UXO or DMM present or
there is historical evidence indicating that no UXO or DMM are
present........................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
Former (as in ``former range'') means the MRS is a location that was:
(1) closed by a formal decision made by the DoD Component with
administrative control over the location, or (2) put to a use
incompatible with the presence of UXO, DMM, or MC.
Historical evidence means that the investigation: (1) Found written
documents or records, or (2) documented interviews of persons with
knowledge of site conditions, or (3) found and verified other forms of
information.
Physical evidence means: (1) Recorded observations from on-site
investigations, such as finding intact UXO or DMM, or components,
fragments, or other pieces of military munitions, or (2) the results
of field or laboratory sampling and analysis procedures, or (3) the
results of geophysical investigations.
Practice munitions means munitions that contain an inert filler (e.g.,
wax, sand, concrete), a spotting charge (i.e., a pyrotechnic charge),
and a fuze.
The term small arms ammunition means solid projectile ammunition that is
.50 caliber or smaller and shotgun shells.
Table 2.--Classifications Within the EHE Module Source of Hazard Data
Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Former range: The MRS is a former military range where munitions 10
(including practice munitions with sensitive fuzes) have been
used. Such areas include: impact or target areas, associated
buffer and safety zones, firing points, and live-fire maneuver
areas..........................................................
Former munitions treatment (i.e., OB/OD) unit: The MRS is a 8
location where UXO or DMM (e.g., munitions, bulk explosives,
bulk pyrotechnic, or bulk propellants) were burned or detonated
for the purpose of treatment prior to disposal.................
Former practice munitions range: The MRS is a former range on 6
which only practice munitions without sensitive fuzes were used
Former maneuver area: The MRS is a former maneuver area where no 5
munitions other than flares, simulators, smokes, and blanks
were used. There must be evidence that no other munitions were
used at the location to place an MRS into this category........
Former burial pit or other disposal area: The MRS is a location 5
where DMM were buried or disposed of (e.g., disposed of into a
water body) without prior thermal treatment....................
Former industrial operating facilities: The MRS is a location 4
that is a former munitions manufacturing or demilitarization
operating facility.............................................
Former firing points: The MRS is a firing point, when the firing 4
point is delineated as an MRS separate from the rest of a
former range...................................................
Former missile or air defense artillery emplacements: The MRS is 2
a former missile defense or air defense artillery (ADA)
emplacement not associated with a range........................
Former storage or transfer points: The MRS is a location where 2
munitions were stored or handled for transfer between different
modes of transportation (e.g., rail to truck, truck to weapon
system)........................................................
[[Page 50935]]
Former small arms range: The MRS is a former military range 1
where only small arms were used. There must be evidence that no
other type of munitions (e.g., grenades) were used or are
present at the location to place an MRS into this category.....
Evidence of no munitions: Following investigation of the MRS, 0
there is physical evidence that no UXO or DMM are present, or
there is historical evidence indicating that no UXO or DMM are
present........................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
Former (as in ``former range'') means the MRS is a location that was:
(1) closed by a formal decision made by the DoD Component with
administrative control over the location, or (2) put to a use
incompatible with the presence of UXO, DMM, or MC.
Historical evidence means that the investigation: (1) Found written
documents or records, or (2) documented interviews of persons with
knowledge of site conditions, or (3) found and verified other forms of
information.
Physical evidence means: (1) Recorded observations from on-site
investigations, such as finding intact UXO or DMM, or components,
fragments, or other pieces of military munitions, or (2) the results
of field or laboratory sampling and analysis procedures, or (3) the
results of geophysical investigations.
Practice munitions means munitions that contain an inert filler (e.g.,
wax, sand, concrete), a spotting charge (i.e., a pyrotechnic charge),
and a fuze.
The term small arms ammunition means solid projectile ammunition that is
.50 caliber or smaller and shotgun shells.
Table 3.--Classifications Within the EHE Information on the Location of
Munitions Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confirmed surface:
Physical evidence indicates there are UXO or DMM on the 25
surface of the MRS.........................................
Historical evidence (e.g., a confirmed incident report or 25
accident report) indicates there are UXO or DMM on the
surface of the MRS.........................................
Confirmed subsurface, active:
Physical evidence indicates the presence of UXO or DMM in 20
the subsurface of the MRS and the geological conditions at
the MRS are likely to cause UXO or DMM to be exposed in the
future by naturally occurring phenomena (e.g., drought,
flooding, erosion, frost, heat heave, tidal action), or
there are on-going intrusive activities (e.g., plowing,
construction, dredging) at the MRS that are likely to
expose UXO or DMM..........................................
Historical evidence indicates that UXO or DMM are located in 20
the subsurface of the MRS and the geological conditions at
the MRS are likely to cause UXO or DMM to be exposed in the
future by naturally occurring phenomena (e.g., drought,
flooding, erosion, frost, heat heave, tidal action), or
there are on- going intrusive activities (e.g., plowing,
construction, dredging) at the MRS that are likely to
expose UXO or DMM..........................................
Confirmed subsurface, stable:
Physical evidence indicates the presence of UXO or DMM in 15
the subsurface of the MRS and the geological conditions at
the MRS are not likely to cause UXO or DMM to be exposed in
the future by naturally occurring phenomena, or there are
no intrusive activities occurring at the MRS that are
likely to either occur, or if the activities do occur, are
likely to cause UXO or DMM to be exposed...................
Historical evidence indicates that UXO or DMM are located in 15
the subsurface of the MRS and the geological conditions at
the MRS are not likely to cause UXO or DMM to be exposed in
the future by naturally occurring phenomena, or there are
no intrusive activities occurring at the MRS that are
likely to either occur, or if the activities do occur, are
likely to cause UXO or DMM to be exposed...................
Suspected (physical evidence): There is physical evidence other 10
than the documented presence of UXO or DMM, indicating that UXO
or DMM may be present at the MRS...............................
Suspected (historical evidence): There is historical evidence 5
indicating that UXO or DMM may be present at the MRS...........
Subsurface, physical constraint: There is physical or historical 2
evidence indicating the UXO or DMM may be present in the
subsurface, but there is a physical constraint (e.g., pavement,
water depth over 120 feet) preventing direct access to the UXO
or DMM.........................................................
Small arms (regardless of location): The presence of small arms 1
ammunitions is confirmed or suspected, regardless of other
factors such as geological stability There must be evidence
that no other types of munitions (e.g., grenades) were used or
are present at the MRS to include it in this category..........
Evidence of no munitions: Following investigation of the MRS, 0
there is physical evidence there are no UXO or DMM present or
there is historical evidence indicating that no UXO or DMM are
present........................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
Historical evidence means that the investigation: (1) Found written
documents or records, or (2) documented interviews of persons with
knowledge of site conditions, or (3) found and verified other forms of
information.
Physical evidence means: (1) Recorded observations from on-site
investigations, such as finding intact UXO or DMM, or components,
fragments, or other pieces of military munitions, or (2) the results
of field or laboratory sampling and analysis procedures, or (3) the
results of geophysical investigations.
In the subsurface means the munition (i.e., a DMM or UXO) is (1)
entirely beneath the ground surface, or (2) fully submerged in a water
body.
On the surface means the munition (i.e., a DMM or UXO) is: (1) entirely
or partially exposed above the ground surface, or (2) entirely or
partially exposed above the surface of a water body (e.g., as a result
of tidal activity).
The term small arms ammunition means solid projectile ammunition that is
.50 caliber or smaller and shotgun shells.
Table 4.--Classifications Within the EHE Ease of Access Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No barrier: There is no barrier preventing access to all parts 10
of the MRS (i.e., all parts of the MRS are accessible).........
Barrier to MRS access is incomplete: There is a barrier 8
preventing access to parts of the MRS but not the entire MRS...
Barrier to MRS access is complete but not monitored: There is a 5
barrier preventing access to all parts of the MRS, but there is
no surveillance (e.g., by a guard) to ensure that the barrier
is effectively preventing access to all parts of the MRS.......
[[Page 50936]]
Barrier to MRS access is complete and monitored: There is a 0
barrier preventing access to all parts of the MRS, and there is
active, continual surveillance (e.g., by a guard, video
monitoring) to ensure that the barrier is effectively
preventing access to all parts of the MRS......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Barrier means a natural obstacle or obstacles (e.g., difficult
terrain, dense vegetation, deep or fast moving water), a man-made
obstacle or obstacles (e.g., fencing), or a combination of natural and
man-made obstacles.
Table 5.--Classifications Within the EHE Status of Property Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-DoD control: The MRS is at a location that is no longer 5
owned by, leased to, or otherwise possessed or used by the DoD.
Examples are privately owned land or water bodies; land or
water bodies owned or controlled by American Indian or Alaskan
Native Tribes or State or local governments; and lands or water
bodies managed by other Federal agencies.......................
Scheduled for transfer from DoD control: The MRS is on land or 3
is a water body that is owned, leased, or otherwise possessed
by DoD, and DoD plans to transfer that land or water body to
the control of another entity (e.g., a State, American Indian,
Alaskan Native, or local government; a private party; another
Federal agency) within 3 years from the date the Protocol is
applied........................................................
DoD control: The MRS is on land or is a water body that is 0
owned, leased, or otherwise possessed by the DoD. With respect
to property that is leased or otherwise possessed, DoD must
control access to the MRS 24-hours per day, every day of the
calendar year..................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6.--Classifications Within the EHE Population Density Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and definition Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
500 persons per square mile There are more than 500 5
persons per square mile in the county in which the MRS is
located, based on U.S. Census Bureau data......................
100-500 persons per square mile: There are 100 to 500 persons 3
per square mile in the county in which the MRS is located,
based on U.S. Census Bureau data...............................
< 100 persons per square mile: There are fewer than 100 persons 1
per square mile in the county in which the MRS is located,
based on U.S. Census Bureau data...............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: If an MRS is in more than one county, the DoD Component will use
the largest population value among the counties. If the MRS is within
or borders a city or town, the population density for the city or town
instead of the county population density is used.
Table 7.--Classifications Within the EHE Population Near Hazard Data
Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
26 or more structures: There are 26 or more inhabited structures 5
located up to 2 miles from the boundary of the MRS, within the
boundary of the MRS, or both...................................
16 to 25: There are 16-25 inhabited structures located up to 2 4
miles from the boundary of the MRS, within the boundary of the
MRS, or both...................................................
11 to 15: There are 11-15 inhabited structures located up to 2 3
miles from the boundary of the MRS, within the boundary of the
MRS, or both...................................................
6 to 10: There are 6-10 inhabited structures located up to 2 2
miles from the boundary of the MRS, within the boundary of the
MRS, or both...................................................
1 to 5: There are 1-5 inhabited structures located up to 2 miles 1
from the boundary of the MRS, within the boundary of the MRS,
or both........................................................
0: There are no inhabited structures located up to 2 miles from 0
the boundary of the MRS, within the boundary of the MRS, or
both...........................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The term inhabited structures means permanent or temporary
structures, other than DoD munitions-related structures, that are
routinely occupied by one or more persons for any portion of a day.
Table 8.--Classifications Within the EHE Types of Activities/Structures
Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Residential, educational, commercial, or subsistence: Activities 5
are conducted or inhabited structures are located up to 2 miles
from the MRS's boundary or, within the MRS's boundary that are
associated with any of the following purposes: residential,
educational, child care, critical assets (e.g., hospitals, fire
and rescue, police stations, dams), hotels, commercial,
shopping centers, play grounds, community gathering areas,
religious sites, or sites used for subsistence hunting,
fishing, and gathering.........................................
Parks and recreational areas: Activities are conducted or 4
inhabited structures are located up to 2 miles from the MRS's
boundary or within the MRS's boundary that are associated with
parks, nature preserves or other recreational uses.............
Agricultural, forestry: Activities are conducted or inhabited 3
structures are located up to 2 miles from the MRS's boundary or
within the MRS's boundary that are associated with agriculture
or forestry....................................................
Industrial or warehousing: Activities are conducted or inhabited 2
structures are located up to 2 miles from the MRS's boundary or
within the MRS's boundary that are associated with industrial
activities or warehousing......................................
No known or recurring activities: There are no known or 1
recurring activities occurring up to 2 miles from the MRS's
boundary or within the MRS's boundary..........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The term inhabited structures means permanent or temporary
structures, other than DoD munitions-related structures, are routinely
occupied by one or more persons for any portion of a day.
[[Page 50937]]
Table 9.--Classifications Within the EHE Ecological and/or Cultural
Resources Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ecological and cultural resources present: There are both 5
ecological and cultural resources present on the MRS...........
Ecological resources present: There are ecological resources 3
present on the MRS.............................................
Cultural resources present: There are cultural resources present 3
on the MRS.....................................................
No ecological or cultural resources present: There are no 0
ecological resources or cultural resources present on the MRS..
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Ecological resources means that: (1) A threatened or endangered
species (designated under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)) is present
on the MRS; or (2) the MRS is designated under the ESA as critical
habitat for a threatened or endangered species; or (3) there are
identified sensitive ecosystems such as wetlands or breeding grounds
present on the MRS.
Cultural resources means there are recognized cultural, traditional,
spiritual, religious, or historical features (e.g., structures,
artifacts, symbolism) on the MRS. For example, American Indians or
Alaska Natives deem the MRS to be of religious significance or there
are areas that are used by American Indians or Alaska Natives for
subsistence activities (e.g., hunting, fishing). Requirements for
determining if a particular feature is a cultural resource are found
in the National Historic Preservation Act, Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act, Archeological Resources Protection
Act, Executive Order 13007, and the American Indian Religious Freedom
Act.
Table 10.--Determining the EHE Rating From the EHE Module Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall EHE module score EHE rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The MRS has an overall EHE module score from EHE Rating A
92 to 100.
The MRS has an overall EHE module score from EHE Rating B
82 to 91.
The MRS has an overall EHE module score from EHE Rating C
71 to 81.
The MRS has an overall EHE module score from EHE Rating D
60 to 70.
The MRS has an overall EHE module score from EHE Rating E
48 to 59.
The MRS has an overall EHE module score from EHE Rating F
38 to 47.
The MRS has an overall EHE module score less EHE Rating G
than 38.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 11.--Classifications Within the CHE CWM Configuration Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CWM, explosive configuration, either UXO or damaged DMM:
The CWM known or suspected of being present at the MRS is:
Explosively configured CWM that are UXO (i.e., CWM/UXO). 30
Explosively configured CWM that are DMM that have been 30
damaged (CWM/DMM)......................................
CWM mixed with UXO: The CWM known or suspected of being present 25
at the MRS are CWM/DMM that are co-mingled with conventional
munitions that are UXO.........................................
CWM, explosive configuration that are DMM (unused): The CWM 20 20
known or suspected of being present at the MRS are explosively
configured CWM/DMM that have not been damaged..................
CWM, not-explosively configured or CWM, bulk container:
The CWM known or suspected of being present at the MRS is:
Non-explosively configured CWM/DMM...................... 15
Bulk CWM/DMM (e.g., ton container)...................... 15
CAIS K941 and CAIS K942: The CWM/DMM known or suspected of being 12
present at the MRS is CAIS K941-toxic gas set M-1 or CAIS K942-
toxic gas set M-2/E11..........................................
CAIS (chemical agent identification sets): The CWM known or 10
suspected of being present at the MRS are only CAIS/DMM. The
CAIS present cannot include CAIS K941, toxic gas set M-1; and
K942, toxic gas set M-2/E11 for the MRS to be assigned this
rating.........................................................
Evidence of no CWM: Following investigation, the physical 0
evidence indicates that CWM are not present at the MRS, or the
historical evidence indicates that CWM are not present at the
MRS............................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
The notation CWM/DMM means CWM that are DMM.
The term CWM/UXO means CWM that are UXO.
Historical evidence means that the investigation: (1) Found written
documents or records, or (2) documented interviews of persons with
knowledge of site conditions, or (3) found and verified other forms of
information.
Physical evidence means: (1) Recorded observations from on-site
investigations, such as finding intact UXO or DMM, or components,
fragments, or other pieces of military munitions, or (2) the results
of field or laboratory sampling and analysis procedures, or (3) the
results of geophysical investigations.
Table 12.--Classifications Within the CHE Sources of CWM Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live-fire involving CWM:
The MRS is a range that supported live-fire of explosively 10
configured CWM and the CWM/UXO are known or suspected of
being present on the surface or in the subsurface..........
The MRS is a range that supported live-fire with 10
conventional munitions, and CWM/DMM are on the surface or
in the subsurface co-mingled with conventional munitions
that are UXO...............................................
Damaged CWM/DMM or CAIS/DMM, surface or subsurface: There are 10
damaged CWM/DMM on the surface or in the subsurface at the MRS.
Undamaged CWM/DMM or CAIS/DMM, surface: There are undamaged CWM/ 10
DMM on the surface at the MRS..................................
Undamaged CWM/DMM, or CAIS/DMM, subsurface: There are undamaged 5
CWM/DMM in the subsurface at the MRS...........................
Production facilities of CWM or CAIS: The MRS is a facility that 3
engaged in production of CWM, and there are CWM/DMM suspected
of being present on the surface or in the subsurface...........
[[Page 50938]]
Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation (RDT&E) facility 3
using CWM or CAIS: The MRS is at a facility that was involved
in non-live fire RDT&E activities (including static testing)
involving CWM, and there are CWM/DMM suspected of being present
on the surface or in the subsurface............................
Training facility using CWM or CAIS: The MRS is a location that 2
was involved 2 in training activities involving CWM and/or CAIS
(e.g., training in recognition of CWA, decontamination
training) and CWM/DMM are suspected of being present on the
surface or in the subsurface...................................
Storage or transfer points of CWM: The MRS is a former storage 1
facility or transfer point (e.g., inter-modal transfer) for CWM
Evidence of no CWM: Following investigation, the physical 0
evidence indicates that CWM are not present at the MRS, or the
historical evidence indicates that CWM are not present at the
MRS............................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
The notation CWM/DMM means CWM that are DMM.
The term CWM/UXO means CWM that are UXO.
Historical evidence means that the investigation: (1) Found written
documents or records, or (2) documented interviews of persons with
knowledge of site conditions, or (3) found and verified other forms of
information.
Physical evidence means: (1) Recorded observations from on-site
investigations, such as finding intact UXO or DMM, or components,
fragments, or other pieces of military munitions, or (2) the results
of field or laboratory sampling and analysis procedures, or (3) the
results of geophysical investigations.
In the subsurface means the CWM (i.e., a DMM or UXO) is (1) Entirely
beneath the ground surface, or (2) fully submerged in a water body.
On the surface means the CWM (i.e., a DMM or UXO) is: (1) Entirely or
partially exposed above the ground surface, or (2) entirely or
partially exposed above the surface of a water body (e.g., as a result
of tidal activity).
Table 13.--Classifications Within the CHE Information on the Location of
CWM Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confirmed surface:
Physical evidence indicates there are CWM on the surface of 25
the MRS....................................................
Historical evidence (e.g., a confirmed incident report or 25
accident report) indicates there are CWM on the surface of
the MRS....................................................
Confirmed subsurface, active:
Physical evidence indicates the presence of CWM in the 20
subsurface of the MRS and the geological conditions at the
MRS are likely to cause CWM to be exposed in the future by
naturally occurring phenomena (e.g., drought, flooding,
erosion, frost, heat heave, tidal action), or there are on-
going intrusive activities (e.g., plowing, construction,
dredging) at the MRS that are likely to expose CWM.........
Historical evidence indicates that CWM are located in the 20
subsurface of the MRS and the geological conditions at the
MRS are likely to cause CWM to be exposed in the future by
naturally occurring phenomena (e.g., drought, flooding,
erosion, frost, heat heave, tidal action), or there are on-
going intrusive activities (e.g., plowing, construction,
dredging) at the MRS that are likely to expose CWM.........
Confirmed subsurface, stable:
Physical evidence indicates the presence of CWM in the 15
subsurface of the MRS and the stable geological conditions
at the MRS are not likely to cause CWM to be exposed in the
future by naturally occurring phenomena, or there are no
intrusive activities occurring at the MRS that are likely
to either occur, or if the activities do occur, are likely
to cause CWM to be exposed.................................
Historical evidence indicates that CWM are located in the 15
subsurface of the MRS and the geological conditions at the
MRS are not likely to cause CWM to be exposed in the future
by naturally occurring phenomena, or there are no intrusive
activities occurring at the MRS that are likely to either
occur, or if the activities do occur, are likely to cause
CWM to be exposed..........................................
Suspected (physical evidence): There is physical evidence other 10
than the documented presence of CWM, indicating that CWM may be
present at the MRS.............................................
Suspected (historical evidence): There is historical evidence 5
indicating that CWM may be present at the MRS..................
Subsurface, physical constraint: There is physical or historical 2
evidence indicating the CWM may be present in the subsurface,
but there is a physical constraint (e.g., pavement, water depth
over 120 feet) preventing direct access to the CWM.............
Evidence of no CWM: Following investigation of the MRS, there is 0
physical evidence there is no CWM present or there is
historical evidence indicating that no CWM are present.........
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
Historical evidence means that the investigation: (1) Found written
documents or records, or (2) documented interviews of persons with
knowledge of site conditions, or (3) found and verified other forms of
information.
Physical evidence means: (1) Recorded observations from on-site
investigations, such as finding intact UXO or DMM, or components,
fragments, or other pieces of military munitions, or (2) the results
of field or laboratory sampling and analysis procedures, or (3) the
results of geophysical investigations.
In the subsurface means the CWM (i.e., a DMM or UXO) is (1) entirely
beneath the ground surface, or (2) fully submerged in a water body.
On the surface means the CWM (i.e., a DMM or UXO) is (1) entirely or
partially exposed above the ground surface, or (2) entirely or
partially exposed above the surface of a water body (e.g., as a result
of tidal activity).
The term small arms ammunition means solid projectile ammunition that is
.50 caliber or smaller and shotgun shells.
Table 14.--Classifications Within the CHE Ease of Access Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No barrier: There is no barrier preventing access to all parts 10
of the MRS (i.e., all parts of the MRS are accessible).........
Barrier to MRS access is incomplete: There is a barrier 8
preventing access to parts of the MRS but not the entire MRS...
Barrier to MRS access is complete but not monitored: There is a 5
barrier preventing access to all parts of the MRS, but there is
no surveillance (e.g., by a guard) ensure that the barrier is
effectively preventing access to all parts of the MRS..........
[[Page 50939]]
Barrier to MRS access is complete and monitored: There is a 0
barrier preventing access to all parts of the MRS, and there is
active continual surveillance (e.g., by a guard, video
monitoring) to ensure that the barrier is effectively
preventing access to all parts of the MRS......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Barrier means a natural obstacle or obstacles (e.g., difficult
terrain, dense vegetation, deep or fast moving water), a man-made
obstacle or obstacles (e.g., fencing), or a combination of natural and
man-made obstacles.
Table 15.--Classifications Within the CHE Status of Property Data
Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-DoD control: The MRS is at a location that is no longer 5
owned by, leased to, or otherwise possessed or used by the DoD.
Examples are privately owned land or water bodies; land or
water bodies owned or controlled by American Indian or Alaskan
Native Tribes, or State or local governments; and lands or
water bodies managed by other Federal agencies.................
Scheduled for transfer from DoD control: The MRS is on land or 3
is a water body that is owned, leased, or otherwise possessed
by control DoD, and DoD plans to transfer that land or water
body to control of another entity (e.g., a State, American
Indian, Alaskan Native, or local government; a private party;
another Federal agency) within 3 years from the date the
Protocol is applied............................................
DoD control: The MRS is on land or is a water body that is 0
owned, leased, or otherwise possessed by the DoD. With respect
to property that is leased or otherwise possessed, DoD controls
access to the property 24-hours per day, every day of the
calendar year..................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 16.--Classifications Within the CHE Population Density Data
Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and definition Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
500 persons per square mile: There are more than 500 5
persons per square mile in the county in which the MRS is
located, based on U.S. Census Bureau data......................
100-500 persons per square mile: There are 100 to 500 persons 3
per square mile in the county in which the MRS is located,
based on U.S. Census Bureau data...............................
< 100 persons per square mile: There are fewer than 100 persons 1
per square mile in the county in which the MRS is located,
based on U.S. Census Bureau data...............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: If an MRS is in more that one county, the DoD Component will use
the largest population value among the counties. If the MRS is within
or borders a city or town, the population density for the city or town
instead of the county population density is used.
Table 17.--Classifications Within the CHE Population Near Hazard Data
Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
26 or more structures: There are 26 or more inhabited structures 5
located up to 2 miles from the boundary of the MRS, within the
boundary of the MRS, or both...................................
16 to 25: There are 16-25 inhabited structures located up to 2 4
miles from the boundary of the MRS, within the boundary of the
MRS, or both...................................................
11 to 15: There are 11-15 inhabited structures located up to 2 3
miles from the boundary of the MRS, within the boundary of the
MRS, or both...................................................
6 to 10: There are 6-10 inhabited structures located up to 2 2
miles from the boundary of the MRS, within the boundary of the
MRS, or both...................................................
1 to 5: There are 1-5 inhabited structures located up to 2 miles 1
from the boundary of the MRS, within the boundary of the MRS,
or both........................................................
0: There are no inhabited structures located up to 2 miles from 0
the boundary of the MRS, within the boundary of the MRS, or
both...........................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The term inhabited structures means permanent or temporary
structures, other than DoD munitions-related structures, that are
routinely occupied by one or more persons for any portion of a day.
Table 18.--Classifications Within the CHE Types of Activities/Structures
Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Residential, educational, commercial, or subsistence: Activities 5
are conducted or inhabited structures are located up to 2 miles
from the MRS's boundary or within the MRS's boundary that are
associated with any of the following purposes: residential,
educational, child care, critical assets (e.g., hospitals, fire
and rescue, police stations, dams), hotels, commercial,
shopping centers, play grounds, community gathering areas,
religious sites or sites used for subsistence hunting, fishing,
and gathering..................................................
Parks and recreational areas: Activities are conducted or 4
inhabited structures are located up to 2 miles from the MRS's
boundary or within the MRS's boundary that are associated with
parks, nature preserves or other recreational uses.............
Agricultural, forestry: Activities are conducted or inhabited 3
structures are located up to 2 miles from the MRS's boundary,
within the MRS's boundary that are associated with agriculture
or forestry....................................................
Industrial or warehousing: Activities are conducted or inhabited 2
structures are located up to 2 miles from the MRS's boundary,
within the MRS's boundary that are associated with industrial
activities or warehousing......................................
No known or recurring activities: There are no known or 1
recurring activities occurring up to 2 miles from the MRS's
boundary or within the MRS's boundary..........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: The term inhabited structures means permanent or temporary
structures, other than DoD munitions-related structures, are routinely
occupied by one or more persons for any portion of a day.
[[Page 50940]]
Table 19.--Classifications Within the CHE Ecological and/or Cultural
Resources Data Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classification and description Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ecological and cultural resources present: There are both 5
ecological and cultural resources present on the MRS...........
Ecological resources present: There are ecological resources 3
present on the MRS.............................................
Cultural resources present: There are cultural resources present 3
on the MRS.....................................................
No ecological or cultural resources present: There are no 10
ecological resources or cultural resources present on the MRS..
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
Ecological resources means that: (1) A threatened or endangered species
(designated under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)) is present on the
MRS; or (2) the MRS is designated under the ESA as critical habitat
for a threatened or endangered species; or (3) there are identified
sensitive ecosystems such as wetlands or breeding grounds present on
the MRS.
Cultural resources means there are recognized cultural, spiritual,
traditional, religious, or historical features (e.g., structures,
artifacts, symbolism) on the MRS. For example, American Indians or
Alaska Natives deem the MRS to be of spiritual significance or there
are areas that are used by American Indians or Alaska Natives for
subsistence activities (e.g., hunting, fishing). Requirements for
determining if a particular feature is a cultural resource are found
in the National Historic Preservation Act, Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act, Archeological Resources Protection
Act, Executive Order 13007, and the American Indian Religious Freedom
Act.
Table 20.--Determining the CHE Rating From the CHE Module Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall CHE module score CHE rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The MRS has an overall CHE module score from CHE Rating A
92 to 100.
The MRS has an overall CHE module score from CHE Rating B
82 to 91.
The MRS has an overall CHE module score from CHE Rating C
71 to 81.
The MRS has an overall CHE module score from CHE Rating D
60 to 70.
The MRS has an overall CHE module score from CHE Rating E
48 to 59.
The MRS has an overall CHE module score from CHE Rating F
38 to 47.
The MRS has an overall CHE module score less CHE Rating G
than 38.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 21.--Relative Risk Site Evaluation Module Hazard Rating
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Migration pathway
Contaminant hazard factor and --------------------------------------------------------------------------
receptor factor Evident Potential Confined
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Significant:
Identified....................... High................... High................... Medium
Potential........................ High................... High................... Medium
Limited.......................... Medium................. Medium................. Low
Moderate:
Identified....................... High................... High................... Low
Potential........................ High................... Medium................. Low
Limited.......................... Medium................. Low.................... Low
Minimal:
Identified....................... High................... Medium................. Low
Potential........................ Medium................. Low.................... Low
Limited.......................... Low.................... Low.................... Low
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 22.--MRS Priority Based on Highest Hazard Evaluation Module Rating
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RRSE module
EHE module rating Priority CHE module rating Priority rating Priority
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
......... Hazard Evaluation 1 ....................
A (Highest).
Hazard Evaluation A (Highest). 2 Hazard Evaluation 2 High (highest)... 2
B.
Hazard Evaluation B........... 3 Hazard Evaluation 3
C.
Hazard Evaluation C........... 4 Hazard Evaluation 4
D.
Hazard Evaluation D........... 5 Hazard Evaluation 5 Medium........... 5
E.
Hazard Evaluation E........... 6 Hazard Evaluation 6
F.
Hazard Evaluation F........... 7 Hazard Evaluation 7
G (Lowest).
Hazard Evaluation G (Lowest).. 8 ................. ......... Low.............. 8
No Longer Required............ ......... No Longer ......... No Longer
Required. Required
Evaluation Pending............ ......... Evaluation ......... Evaluation
Pending. Pending
No Known or Suspected ......... No Known or ......... ................. N/A
Explosive Hazard. Suspected CWM
Hazard.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 50941]]
Dated: August 11, 2003.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 03-21013 Filed 8-21-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-08-C