I'm going to switch gears and turn it over to your official session. Moderator.
Jeffre, who's gonna be joining us from you say, And so, Jeff, i'm gonna move the view over to you, and I will let you get things started as I call up the agenda for a session
today. Alright, thanks, Jean, Hey, This is the second of our M.
2 s 2 webinars series for this fiscal year of 22, I believe we're in, and we're going to do another another 3 sessions next year in fy 23 and we're gonna
we'll come out with the agenda for those but if you'll see the agenda up on the screen.
We are going to start each session precisely at on time, and these are Eastern state or times.
So 1 10, we will start the first session and then a 140 the second, and a 2 20 that away.
If there's people that would just like to sit in on one particular session, and then they know exactly what time to start again, Gene.
Sorry talk to you about the Q A. box so i've got about the 5 min here. so what i'm going to do is i'm gonna go ahead and introduce the instructors one by one they're gonna give you just a little bit of
a little rundown on who they are and then at precisely at 1 10, and we'll start the first session, so i'd like to introduce Mr.
Richard Perry, if you could go ahead and just chime in and give us a little tell us a little bit about yourself.
Oh, good afternoon. My name is Richard perry i'm a geophysicist with the arbor corn engineer engineering support center in Huntsville. I've been with the core for about 5 years now
previous to come to the core, I was a contractor supporting the Mmrp.
Program for about 14 years. Thanks. thanks, Mr. Perry second Presenter we'll have, is Dr.
Heather Macdonald. Hello, Everyone my name is heather Mcdonald and I'm.
A technical manager at home School Center. I work for the core for about 4 years.
And My background is, I have an undergraduate degree in chemical engineering and graduate degrees and environmental engineering. and my research was completely different than what I work on now.
But that's all right, because I really like what I do so thanks, Dr.
Mcdonald and last we have is juliet hi Everybody I'm Julie Ange I am the chief of the environmental production and utilities branch at huntsville Center with the core.
I've had that role since about the beginning of this year. Prior to that I was a technical manager within the branch for about 5 years, and I started my career with about 10 years doing primarily Emissions response work
with the Alabama Department of Environmental management as a an environmental regulator.
Thanks, Julie alright, that those will be our instructors today.
At the end of the presentation. we got a couple of slides talking about the next slot, in fact.
Good. You bring up the next slide there. for me.
There. Thank you. There we go this will be the next webinar we have.
I'll be on July twentieth risk assessment and the ros for munitions response again.
Go to clue in just like you did for this one to register and Jean.
Then we'll make sure everybody gets the information on how to chime in on the on the presentations. So that side of come up again later on today, and i'll I've already sent out a lot of emails 2
different services, branches and offices. That, should be forwarding that out to everybody.
But keep that on your calendar again. we'll put that slide up again at the end of the our presentations today, and with that I think that's all we've got I won't get just like a couple of minutes so I think we'll go ahead
and get started. so again i'd like to introduce Mr.
Richard Perry. if you want to go ahead and share your screen and bring it presentation
Is it coming through? Okay, it comes. it's coming through perfectly go right ahead.
Okay, So again, my name is Richard perry i'm with Geofficus, with the engineering Sports Center, Nunsville, Alabama.
I was going to talk to you all today about evolution of the conceptual site model for Boston Bomb target, and I've tried to insert pictures to just give you an idea some of the work that was conducted and what the field
teams dealt with. This first picture we have is from our to 2,019 filled season.
We were doing data collection along the transect.
So what you would expect for a shot like this when we'll get into it, but quite a bit of vegetation and elements that the teams are dealing with
Okay, So just want to acknowledge that the figures and content of this presentation they are sourced from our draft final rifice report.
This report is still in development, and it's not quite finalized yet.
And then another picture here also from our 2,019 filled season.
This is some dynamic data collection with our em, 61 and one of our grids, and you can see the gentleman there collecting
And then they have their R. 10 Gps. In fact, let me switch over, pointing out better
We got our Gps here, our data logger here, and they are surveying the grid before we get into it.
Did want to go over some acronyms that you'll see in this presentation.
I think a lot of us familiar with them, but for those that are not advanced.
Geophysical classification was one component that we did during the food work for this site.
You'll see that is rebated agc normally per acre, which we'll get into that just skipping down conceptual site model as a Csm. digital geophysical mapping will be
Dgm: And then one of our stakeholders Florida department, environmental protection skipping down.
Let you look over a little bit, but we will talk about some some munitions, and supposed to be concerned, some Mac some munitions debris, another one of our stakeholders.
Which would be the St. Louis district Mvs.
And then skipping down to the bottom we'll talk about we'll have a figure later on from visual sampling plan that we'll talk about, and that's abbreviated vsp
Okay, so to go into our stakeholders they include the army coordinators, Jacksonville district.
The engineering support center in Huntsville, the Florida Department of Environmental protection, and of course, the property owners who actually own the property that we did the project on, and wanted to point out that all of these stakeholders
that were all participate in development of the project, approach our technical approach and sampling that we did on the site.
Our picture over to the right is from our 2019 filled season.
The 2 personnel. There are queuing targets with the Tim tats, which is an Agc. advance to a physical classification instrument.
This particular work is done, following the dynamic survey, where we actually identify targets of interest.
And these folks are going and actually doing a queued survey a static survey over each one of those targets of interest. This is done prior to the intrusive investigation.
Okay, so we'll jump in the site here. so in 1940 the Navy acquired 640 acres about 3 miles northwest of Boston, and putting them County Florida The target, became known as both the Boston
bomb target and the putting them bombing range I believe for this presentation I mainly refer to it as the Boston bomb target, but you can see in the map there.
It's it's about an hour so I don't have south of Jacksonville.
Florida,
Okay. So, continuing on our site history, So the inventory project report
It confirmed the location. The historical use of this site.
The bomb target, which is right here in the central portion of the Mrs.
The bomb target was calculated to extend beyond the target center by about 3,000 feet for total of 649 acres, and originally it was the 640 acre red box.
Here. It included safety buffers for uncertainties and outitude and flight speed of the training aircraft which will become important later.
As we discussed the evolution of the Csm.
Did want to point out there's no historical evidence of bombing activities outside of this 640 acre funds property, and you're by asking yourself where we have this large range fan the yellow fan and this is from the 2
1,004 archive search report, and established the the fan about just over 3,100 acres, and this was based on how far an aircraft rocket could travel.
After it was fired, the the point being when they went to hit the bomb target.
Dick. They were flying, training aircraft and dropping the munitions on the target
So one more slide, I believe, about site history. Some important things to note.
Here is the 640 acre bomb target that we talked about.
This is the actual. If you can look look at a historical photograph.
There is an approach factor that the training aircraft came from the north heading to the south to hit the target, and then also coming from the South heading to the north to hit the target. So that's gonna come in to
a great importance later, as we'd get into this presentation a couple things to point out there was some meg that was found during the 2,010.
Si down in this location here, as well as some munitions debris,
Okay, So let's talk about the current use and receptors.
So the Mr. S. is primarily used for pine tree harvesting the preliminary conceptual site model for the Mrs.
Indicated, potentially complete pathways for mechanismc and exposure to human receptors at the Mrs.
And that's talks about the on-site workers September harvesting the Wetland surveyors.
And of course, any recreational users, and I wanted to include this picture over to the right.
This is from the 2020 field season. This is a transect prior to brush cutting.
But it's what you expect in that part of Florida.
Very thick very challenging to deal with
Okay, moving along to the data quality objective. So the project, Dqos were to obtain data to characterize nature and extent of any Macrom see contamination present at the Mrs.
This picture below is from the 2,020 filled season.
All these items were all munitions, debris you're looking at us a mark, 1 2 7 5 inch rocket warheads, some bdu, 33 practice bombs, and a mark 89 practice ball but
all of these word munitions debris there was no Mac found there
So let's talk about the field work that was done i've kind of alluded to.
It. There were 2 field seasons, both in 2,019 and 2020, so the initial Ri characterization effort again it's centered around the 640 acre target, and that was for both the 2,019 and
2020 field season. so we collected dynamic Dgm.
Primary along these transects that you see the the purple transects are from the 20 ninth field season, and they were based on they were space 547 feet apart and they were based in detecting
a 275 inch rocket target area.
No! During the 2019 field season we did find some 20 projectile munitions debris.
Those were not anticipated, not party initial conceptual site model.
So this led to a data gap, and so we wanted an additional investigation.
During the 2,020 filled season, and then we move into 2,020 field season, and you can see that the orange transsex there 275 feet apart during the field season, because the 20 is a lot harder to
detect, we actually lowered the height. The standard height of 60.
One is 42 cm. We lower that down to 20 cm, and we did that to aiden the detection of the 20 projectile, and just looking at the figure over on the right you can see again, the
purple transsex from the 2,019 filled Season the yellow transects from
Sorry the orange transsex from the 2,020 field season, and then the smaller polygons and symbology.
You see, those are the various grids that we collected in each field season.
The yellow grids were from 2,019, and the green grids were collected in 2020
So we talked about Vsp. back in the Academy list, but following the dynamic survey.
We did get an online density map that was generated in Vsp.
Now we had 2 different coal heights in 2,019 versus 20.
20 survey data. So for 2,019 we did an analysis in Vsp.
And for 2020 we did a separate independent analysis. so the critical density, and if I could discuss the critical density is basically the boundary where we go from a a high density area kind of in this large red bull's eye
here to a lower density. so that's what that critical density is, and that line for the 2019 data was 350 anomalies per acre, and that was based on our dynamic transsect
survey , i'm so sorry before you go any further.
You see, at the very bottom of your screen how it says the Us.
Zoom is sharing your screen just to the right there's a little hide link.
If you click that . Thank you so much. Sorry about that.
Thank you to go back. so they're in the 2,020 field season.
We collected additional data beyond that 640 acre target area, and we ended up coming up with a critical density of 80 anomalies per acre.
And you can see some of that down in this area, for example.
And then the other thing I want to point out goes back to receptors.
If you see this hashed area that's common throughout the Mri, that is the area where timber harvesting is conducted.
So just let you know how extensive that is across the site
So, following where we had the anomaly density, and we had those boundaries.
The Pdt. was presented, proposed grid locations.
These grid locations were placed in the the higher density area, where some of the grids to try and confirm what the nature of some of that a high density amount of targets that we saw, and then we
also had grids that were placed in the load and stay outside of that we had variable dimensions that were used anywhere from 50 by 50 to 33 by a 1,000, and the reason that that long rectangular
grid is because given that it's timber harvesting they do plant and rows on the site.
And so that led to those long rectangular grids where we collect in between the tree rows.
So the grids collected during the 2,019 season. we're collected at the standard cool height of 42 cm, and we used a 5 millivolts on channel 2 with the em 61 to detect that
t oi, and then the grids collected. During the 2020 field season.
Again. we used the lower coal height of 20 cm, but we did have a threshold of 9.6, because when you lower the cool to the ground, you do end up with higher signals and noise ratios so
that that is part of the reason why we added that so, following that dynamic survey in the high density grids, we did a cute survey of the targets of interest in the 2,019 filled season we use
the Tim Tads 2 by 2 to do a a queued Agc.
Survey, and then in the 2020 field season we use the metal map or 2 by 2
And this particular picture is from the 2020 field season, and collected in one of our high density grids
So after we call it, completed our cute survey, we dug all of our targets of interest, and as part of that we ended up with the total of just over 1,700 investigations, and we did dig along both
transsex, and in grids. So, following that intrusive investigation, we ended up with about £1,300 of munitions debris, some small arms, and about a £185 of
non-munitions related to debris. I wanted to reiterate that during the Ri we found no mech items during that investigation. and talking about the pictures here, you can see one personnel.
Is doing some menu excavation of the t Oi and that's for some of the shallow ones you can see the Gps in the background there that they were using.
And then, additionally, in the upper right. You can see also, during the 2019 field season, for some of the deeper targets of interest they use mechanical excavator to aid in that intrusive investigation
So let's talk about some intrusive results here we're looking at the high use areas.
We had quite a bit that was used. the 2 2 5 inch practice rocket, the 2 7, 5 inch practice.
Rocket again with the 20 training practice projectile the three-pound practice Bomb and I did want to point out on this that we had a that even though we did find the practice bombs down to 40
inches. The model depth of detection that we had for the metal mapper was only down to 21.7 inches.
That this basically means that we were not able to get some of the deeper.
We were not able to select some of the deeper three-bound practice bonds as T Oi at this side that that limitation of that data was noted in the data usability assessment that was That's part of
the report for this site. to go down and talk some more again.
The hot 5 inch have our practice rockets, and £250 practice bombs and £56 practice bombs, and we found a total of 549 and again, these were all munitions
debris, everything that was found
So then we also did, digging outside of the How you series in the lowest areas in the in some grids.
Yeah, pretty similar to what we saw in the high East area.
Again the 2, 2, 5 practice rocket, the 20 the three-pound practice Bombs the Bdu, 33, and things like the market, 89, £56 practice bomb, and We found a total of
66 of these, outside of the highuse area
And in this we have those results plotted on our map.
Again. This is the 649 acre target area, and then we have the symbology of where the various munitions items were located
So after we got done doing the filled work we we noticed a couple things that didn't quite seem to line up.
So we went back, and we talked to St. Louis district, and we wanted to reassess that 3,100 acre range fan that was generated from the 2,004 archive search report.
Now that range fan, at the time when the Asr was done, was a standard air to ground rocket range that was developed by St.
Louis in the early 2 thousands based on historical range regulations that they had available at that time.
Now the findings from the Ri. they did not match up to that 3,100 acre range fan, and it was not reflective of the training that had been conducted at the site.
So based on these findings and follow up Pdt.
Meet meetings with St. Louis, St. Louis noted that additional historical range regulations had been used since the early 2 thousands. so from the additional regulations, the figure to the right is a rocket range fan drawn from 1,940
7 This was incorporated into the conceptual site model versus the 3,100 acre range fan from the 2,004 Asr.
And it. This was done, and it more accurately reflected the on-site training that was conducted, and it lined up with the findings that we had from the from the review investigation.
And if you look, I know it's hard to read but it's basically the smaller range fan it comes up.
It's about 6,500 feet by about 6,000 feet. it's significantly smaller than that 3,100 acre range fan that we started with
So based on that we did revise the high-use area or low use area, and there are no evidence of use boundaries.
Looking at the figure that, looking at the Ri results, and remembering that we, looking at all the historical records, looking at the findings from the Ri, the findings seem to indicate that we again we had the training
aircraft that started from the north and headed south.
And then also there are other approach factors starting from the south and headed north.
So this ends up giving us this little bit of a laptop a kind of an hour glass shape, where we came up with the 2 overlapping range fans.
And again, This is based on the updated regulations that St.
Louis was able to provide to us, and it matched much better to what we had found from the Ri
So part of the final, the the acreage for the high use area.
It was revised to 189 acres.
The low use areas to just over a 1,000. acres and then the no evidence of you. Syria, which is from the legacy range fan ends up being 1,800.
We'll get into that later. on Why, why that's important as well.
So some lessons learn throughout the ri phase It's. important for the Pdts to Confirm.
The Mrs boundaries in line with historical data training records, historical photographs, interviews, findings from previous investigations that all needs to be incorporated in the Pdt needs to be thinking about that so, if the shape of
the Mr. Spounder is not indicative of historical training, and Ri.
Results that that should be a red flag, and the Pdt.
Should fall up with St. Louis. We need to make sure that we understand the origin of our Mrs.
Boundary, and how it was applied. This point is particularly important for the odor Asrs, for example, our system 2,004, where more historical regulations are now available and used to ensure the Ms.
Foundry It's still applicable so we talked I mentioned on the last slide about how we needed still account for that original fuds acreage must still be accounted for if there's an mri's boundary reduction we can't just throw
it out that still has to be tracked
And then this comes to the end of my presentation, and this particular one picture is from a transsect from the 2,020 field season that the crews had to deal with.
Thank you. Alright, thank you, Mr. Barry we've got about 9 questions in the queue.
So i'm gonna kind of run through them and just answer them as best she can.
Alright. So first question is, where can we find the final report when it is finalized.
So it'll be part of the public record you you say so we'll have a copy of it.
And then there also be a coffee that should be source locally as well.
Part of the administrative record. So those will be various places.
That that we will have that document alright. next question is, how many targets of interest were there?
So the targets of interest don't have that off top my head.
But an important thing to note is, we did only do a agc survey in the high density area. But we did dig all of those targets.
So I I don't have the t oi off top of my head.
But again we did have over 1,700 intrusive investigations.
So it was a smaller population than that. All right. Some of the questions keep jumping up and disappearing here.
Is there an acronym list for m 2 s 2 I'm sure there is
I tried to include all the acronyms that I had, but that slide was getting very busy.
Alright, did the Ri work? Yeah, my question here keep shifting around here.
Okay, here we go. Did the ri work shift or improve your initial conceptual site model, and that's the question.
And it says I'm. curious about any refinement that you may have made to the Csl.
Absolutely the Ri sampling. As a noted it, it identified a piece of munitions that we do not have as part of Csm.
It showed that we did need to expand outside of that 640 acre target area in various places.
So it absolutely. And then it was fundamental, and realizing that the range hand that we have was not indicative of the training that was conducted.
So it was very important. Alright, next one says Great presentation so far.
How did you decide on the quality or i'm sorry the quantity of grids to be placed within high density areas?
We tried to look at back on the anomaly density figure.
We did try to. Inside that there were various various harder areas and cooling areas, even side of the high-use area.
We tried to praise those both geospatially across that area.
As well as trying to sample the various anomaly densities.
So so we had a good sampling across the whole Aa.
And then also in the low use area, We we had various features on the side that could have been things like impact craters and whatnot that we wanted to put some grids there to take a look and see what was there?
Okay, next question is you mentioned, Vsp: What is that?
Bsp is a visual sampling plan We use it to help decide how we're gonna sample these munitions.
Response Sites So for our site in particular. if you go into Vsp, you, input, for example, your Mrs boundary and then you look for you.
Look at your conceptual site model and you figure out a target area that you're looking for.
So for 2,019 we were looking for the 275 inch rocket.
So our initial sampling was based on transects to both traverse and detect that target.
We realized from that 2,019 field work that that wasn't quite going to do it because we had a smaller target area via the 20 mills that could potentially be out there.
So we had tighter spacing I believe it's 275 feet apart to look for that 20 and so we did additional trans 6 that were tighter space to look for that smaller target area
And so that's what Vsp basically is it helps you design that sampling approach.
And then, once you conduct that sampling approach in our case we did the Dynamic transsex use in the in 61 you can generate a a heat map and anomaly didn't normally per acre
map, and that showed the the crigging that we saw previously.
And from that you get an idea of where your high use area boundary is where your low use area boundary is, and and then you go and place grids in those, and actually do some intrusive sampling to figure out what the
nature of those of those hotspots are and it's free software publicly available.
All right. The next question is, are you using any visual software for managing your site data for the conceptual site model?
Like again. Nutshell has pronounced ecosystem.
I apologize. i'm not familiar with that we do have all of our data.
It is all geospatially in a gis platform as we art map.
We have in that location. we have all of the geophysical data that was collected both with Gps and the Agc.
Data that was also collected with Gps. We have all of that geospatially recorded, and that is part of the project record.
And the maps that I showed you are actually that that all comes from Mark map where that information is stored.
Okay, next question. Your conceptual site model looks very 2. D.
Was there any analysis in 3? D. there was I had some tables showing the the vertical distribution of some of the ind that was found, and there were some additional figures that I could have pulled as well from the report that
shows the 3 dimension. but yes, versus the horizontal it's also very important to get an idea of the vertical distribution of any munitions debris on the side all right, questions keep rolling in by the way
so we've got about 4 min left here next question Sorry if I missed it was the 2,019 rein interpreted for shallow 20 projectiles, even if that data couldn't detect deeper ones after
the quo was lowered for the 2020 field session, so no because we it'd be like a little bit like mixing apples and oranges the 2,020 filled season in addition to covering the
transsex from the 2,019 field season it had transsects that were spaced roughly halfway in between.
And so, even though we didn't read examined the 2,019 data, we did cover that day to a transsex with the 2,020 filled season at the shorter coral height of a 20
centimeters. Okay, Any info on the Mc Aspects of the conspiracy conceptual site model.
I I did not include that as part of the presentation.
If i'm understanding right from an mc perspective maybe I'm not understanding it right?
Well, we did not find anything. okay with the discovery of neck change the approach, especially if Mac was discovered outside the high-use area absolutely.
And I did want to point out that there was Mac found during the Si.
That was done prior to the remedial investigation and so we're not walking away from this area.
There is going to be further remediation. that will be necessary.
But but absolutely alright. Got just a couple of minutes here.
Got 2 more questions. Can you explain how the target threshold was chosen after lowering the high eighth of the Em: 60?
One. Yeah, we did a A depth response curve, and that was using the
We have a depth response curve which can be used.
That you plug in your munition and your offset of the coil, and that can be modeled in various software. And then you can input the site noise that, for example, from the geology on the side or whatnot
and as long as it's above that side noise and it's wherever that curve is above the side noise that gave us an idea of where we would be able to detect detect the various items of interest all right
last question what ppe and other precautions were used while in the field, I believe.
And it was just your standard. If If the teams were out there they had your safety boots.
They had their high, viz. they had. If they were around any sort of machinery, you know, they would have used hard hats and whatnot.
So it was basically for the folks who were collecting the geographical data.
Not much more than some safety glasses, some vest, and some boots, I believe a level D.
But for folks who are actually digging a work on excavator, they obviously had a higher level of Pp: that was necessary.
Okay, perfect. that's actually all the questions we've got and we're fixed up right on time.
Very good appreciate it, Mr. Barry so with that we're gonna go ahead and roll into the next presentation, and they'll be Dr.
Heather, Mcdonald, when you are ready to share your screen.
You may be getting
Okay, is that coming up? i'm still seeing a black screen at the moment?
It may be just taking a second. Yeah, and while you're waiting, if you'd like to enable your camera as well, we can confirm that, though.
Sorry
Okay, your slides are up in your videos up. Okay, Great alright. Hello, Everyone Today i'm going to talk about a case study for a site at Reson arsenal.
We call it Marshall 3 and it's the development of Vcsm.
And how we're going to refine it
Okay, So the agenda will first give some information about the site location the background of the site and how it type into reson arsenal and marshall space flight center and then our initial site characterization
activities for the site and that's kind of the user physical data, and it was collected as well as the intrusive investigation results and sampling.
And then Our selected inter measures alternatives that came out as a result of those investigations and then.
Now, the interim measures implementation that we are currently carrying out.
So Marshall 3 is located in the central part of Resston Arsenal.
Regson Arsenal is this black and white dash area here.
It is located west of Huntsville and and south of Hansville.
In Marshall. 3 is the red dot here, and within that and it's a very busy part of redesign arsenal.
It's within marshall space flight center which is has a lease from the army for that area we have blue origin.
Is we seen space from Nasa for a test sand that's west of our site.
We also have the historical place. the historic redstone testing just north of our site, and we have a little bit further north east is we have an FBI facility.
So it's a very busy part of the Arsenal, So some background into redstone Arsenal in general. so we as I mentioned before, it's next to Harrisco Alabama, within Madison County,
and it is was formally comprised of 3 separate areas.
We have the resort ordinance, plant arsenal, and the gold chemical Warfare Depot, and all of these facilities are used in the forties to produce conventional and chemical munitions for use in World
war. 2 Communist and casings were filled at hard principal arsenal, and and that was had 3 production plants, which produced several types of chemical warfare material new munitions and 1 min once They
were filled at Huntsville Arsenal. Then they were transported to Redstone, or next plant for final assembly.
After World War 2 rose and arsenal mission change, and to reverse and development of rocketry and guided missile systems.
And then the 3 facilities were combined into one facility under the name Redstone Arsenal, and red and arsenal regulatory, wise.
It's currently under a recordsa product permit So and that that permit is administered by the State of Alabama, and so that dictates a lot of the way.
We do things as far as our investigations and our cleanup strategies.
So continuing on with the background, and 1960 Marshall space flight center was established, and within the Huntsville arsenal plants area.
And so Nasa has a 100 year lease with the army for this property, for Marshall, Space Flight center and marshall space fight, center, Marshall Marshall 3 lies within that property and it encompasses about
50 acres, and, historically speaking, if it was a waste disposal area within Huntsville arsenal.
And so because it's on nash nasa property. there's a lot of activities at the site.
It includes office support as stand, operation, compound support to the test fans and all kind of point.
Some of these areas out, as we see some diggers later.
So specific to marshal 3. we have that the site boundary was established by the army in 2,007, and it includes 4 historical waste disposal areas.
We have Marshall 3, which is the what we call the bone yard, and this was used, based on historical information by various laboratories and construction contractors to dispose of scrap material, and Waste.
And then we have marshall threee which is East of Marshall 3, and i'll give you'll see this on a figure in a moment.
And so, when the historic testing that I mentioned was established, they had to excavate soil to install water reservoirs for cooling water for the test sand, and so that excavated soil is what is known as
partial 3 E. where that where that foil was relocated to, and then we have the others.
The final 2 areas are Marshall, a 2 and A.
To south, and this is for southern two-thirds of the as marshall 3, and they're within a boundary of what we call historical area.
11, and these types slightly different site, use and They were documented as having accepted reject chemical munitions from the deactivation of harmful arsenal.
And they were not just having both and destruction. grounds for different types of chemical agent and also white prosperous. So here's a figure showing those 4 areas.
So we've got the The main area where which was our bone yard, the blue area 3, which is 3, then 3.
E is across the dog road here that runs north south, where our disposed the the soil that was excavated for the tanks was disposed of, and then we have 82 south, which were our disposal and destruction
areas. So because of the very site history. with this, these portions of the site, it was split up into 3.
Mr. Munitions response sites. so Mr. s one which is the
The eastern portion of the site. that includes the historical ways to expose the landfill located that we're referred to as Marshall 3 E.
And feel work which i'll discuss more in death determined that there was mean.
There were munitions and explosives of concern present, and these disposal areas, However, no Cwm chemical warfare material was identified in that area, and then Ms.
2 is our central area, where that was what we refer to as the bone yard, and that was
Individual single point anomalies that contain met, and also some other kind of debris associated with disposal of munitions.
And Then we have the third Mr. is associated with the Marshall 82, 82 south areas, and those had a more of a destruction operation.
So i've mentioned that redstone has a record, permit, and the permit list all all of this solid waste management units within redstone arsenal of which marshall 3 is one and
it's is listed as a new that requires an interim measures and or source removal, and it also it requires a recre facility.
Investigation and the permit language specific quickly requires for this type that it that we need to have an enter measures work, plan to include removal of disposed chemical munitions, plastic materials, chemical waste and burn
pits and So this is a pretty big side it's a pretty big job.
So what we did to facilitate that intermeasures work plan as we split the interim, measure space into 2 into 2 parts.
First week with phase. one will we characterize the site, and we find out what is there, and where is where is it?
And then phase 2 would be where we implemented the inter measure.
And ad phase 2 is where we produce that intermeasures work.
Plan. So phase, one investigation of the Rs.
One and 2 was completed in 2,016 and mri 3.
We're anticipating to award phase one investigation for that work, and this this and we separated those because Ms.
3 is a spherically associated with other operations and so we're going to save that for a later time.
So in order to characterize our Ms. one and 2.
During the phase one activities. we did a few things.
We performed geophysics using, and am 61, as well as an Am.
31 and also we did some 10 tags surveys on a few grids within the site.
As a result of the geophysics, we identify nearly 12,000 single point anomalies within, and and all of those single point announcements were within Mri to the bone yard.
The central area. and then we also identify 20 .
7 area targets and area targets are where our due physical data. response data shows just so many anomalies in one particular area that they can't be you can't separate them individually.
So we just say that it's a saturday response area one large area.
So after the geophysics. So we had an idea where we wanted to investigate to see what was there based on the geographical data.
So we use that some of that advanced classification from the Tim Tab and
All of that was used to determine 310 single point anomaly locations that were intuitively investigated.
And then, in order to and characterize the area targets, we exorcated 36 test pits located within those area targets.
We also perform some environmental sampling. So we did some groundwater and soil sampling.
Then, if a single point anomaly was the location of a Mac Item, then soil samples were collected below that that location, and then, if we saw evidence of burning operations like this colored soil, or
disposal pits things like that what were taken in those areas as well, and then for area targets.
Several of the for all of the area targets.
Oh, no, Several actually sorry about that. So we installed 8 coilblings, and so then collected different quantities of soil, a different level step, and and we also collected 11 groundwords Yeah, and all of those samples
were analyzed. So because we have this side has an elevated Cwm.
Probability they first require as head spacing for chemical agents on site, which in this case they were headed for Mustard and Lewisite.
And then, once those are clear, those get the soil.
Samples were collected and tripled and so they'll go back, and once those are clear on site, they get sent to off off site lab for further screen for chemical agent.
And if those samples come up as clear for a chemical agent, then they're sent for our into our analytical lab for other analytics, such as our standard package which would be vocs as cocs metals,
explosives, and so on, so as far as the area target.
So I mentioned, we had a number of area targets and here are where they're at.
We have our Mrs one which the area targets those are in yellow, and there were no single point now. we've identified in that, Mr.
And then more x 2, which is our middle, Mr. S. and you can see the the location of those area targets.
We like to refer, to this large when it's home place so that's a it's a very big secary response area, as you can see, and then we have so Mr.
S 2. We have our single point an hour and as I mentioned. We have over 10,000 single point out, So the that's quite a lot of anomalies to do so.
Just keep that in mind going forward so as once we did our intrusive investigations.
These are our results that we have found regarding munitions and explosives of concern.
There were a couple of potential Cwm. items found at the site, but they were already later determined to be munitions.
Debris, and then we had a number of reminations and explosives of concern, and then, finally, we have a number of Md.
Items that were found. And then we did see evidence of burn ticks and chemical drum debris, and these are what we call our permit specified features, and those were evidence and several locations.
And here are is a figure of our Mac or intuitive results.
So we have. This is our home plate up here. We did the yellow triangles.
Our test hit locations, and so you can see some results.
Say, for example, this test pay per day from 4 point, 2 inch mortar, and then we have test it over in different, you know, within each of our factory response areas and the permit specified features.
We found evidence of in several locations, and those include burn pace containers, such as drums and things like that.
So our intuitive investigation is definitely showing evidence of what we, what we based on the historical background.
What we might expect to see at the site. So, in summary of the phase, one characterizedation so based on the results, we can establish that we need to perform some kind of interim measure at the site and other kids what the
unacceptable near-term hazard and risk human health in the environment, always by munitions and explosives of concern and potential.
Ewm. So our objectives of the For the Im where to minimize direct and current and future direct exposure to Mac and to minimize current and future direct or indirectly exposure to chemical agent or chemical
agent containing material. So this that I am process is is very similar to going through at like a rifs, and then producing a decision document.
And so we have. We look at alternatives and screen them for which inter measures alternative.
We want to select, and the selected alternative from that process was to remove our Mac and permit specify beforeal features using.
Agc. and so we want to go and remove all of the Mac and permit specify features, and Mrs one and 2.
Remember that M Rf 3 isn't included in this port or part of the investigation and inter measure, and in order to apply our Agc.
We're going to perform full coverage as you see and our central Mr.
Srs 2, where we had all those single point anomalies, and what our goal here for the Apc.
To determine what to find our targets of interest and our targets of interest for that site, based on the historical background is the 4 point, 2 inch mortar, and this is the only munition likely to be
chemically considered at this site. and this is an example here of a 4 point.
2 is smarter that we used and it would during this is during our Qa.
Seating process. And so Then the Atc. data collected will be used to classify all anomalies as either targets of interest or non targets of interest.
And hopefully, then, the anomalies that we'll have to dig that are we pick our potentially cwm aren't 12,000 families?
It would be a lot less than that number, and therefore only there will only be investigating.
Those targets have been Chris and our area targets under full Cwm protocol.
And visit result. This approach will result hopefully in X-ray and few anomalies. and the the reason this is so important is because when we investigate under coding protocols, it requires a lot more
personnel and and things like we have to have a rear.
Real time air monitoring. We have to have a personal decontamination station.
We have to have emergency person on site at all times, and these are.
This is all required by regulations for cwm sites so we don't have to have all of that level of effort for the field work that would really reduce what the the the the time and and money that it would cost
to to the do the inter measure for this if you're stupid like showing our selected enter measure which I mentioned.
So Mr. s one we're going to excavate all of these area targets. M. R. S.
2. we're going to excavate the area targets but also perform full coverage Adc.
Within the entire Mri. and so that brings us to late last year, where we is our atc collection, using 2 methods large.
Most of the site we were able to do perform full coverage.
Using our ultra 10 classifier, which is shown here on the right and and then a small portion of the site was covered, using the screener.
And this is the person portable letter and it's used for example, in areas like in the picture where you see flow, or maybe areas that are very close to building, where our classifier cannot reach.
And then the rest of the site was either comprised of a building or a tank, or a portion that we could not collect.
Data. Here are the results from our at Gc. collection.
So what what happened here is we have a reduction we able. we're able to see a reduction in the size of the footprint for our our our area targets.
If you remember, this was our home plate, and we were able to shrink it somewhat.
Here. as far as having a factory response area. So the table here at the right shows our acres before Atc and after Atc.
And you can see we have a nearly 20% reduction in our saturated response area, so that's potentially a savings of of a lot of time and effort to that we don't have to go in here and excavate all
of those that that much less able. So We are currently underway with field work for these area targets and So we have several area targets that have been completed.
Several that are being excluded. right now. This large one here, Mrs 102, is currently being excavated for, and
We have a couple of other small ones and it's you know this is a multi-year fuel effort.
And another thing to that's interesting about the site because as I mentioned.
We have a lot of nearby site sentence people working and not office buildings test dance.
All of our fill work takes place for our intrusive operations at night.
So. That makes it also a lot more challenging. And this is an example of an area target excavation that Mr.
S one o 2 and you can start to see here on the edges.
We have some evidence of our app and such, but we have to have light towers, and
All, all of this work has to be taking place. after hours, for when most people are working.
Okay, so that was the area target. So we were also able to refine the Csm.
With Atc for the single point. now. so, as I mentioned, we had almost 12,000 single point anomalies, using our em 60.
One data. and then from our agc data, we have 17,000 knowledge. Now that seems like, Wow, we just got more nonlies.
And while that's true and it's because our agency be sensor boils, and result has a higher resolution than the Am.
61. So where some of these 1112,000 around these might be, you know, one anomaly or V.
In 61, the resolution could for Agc. that might end up being 2 anomalies, and that data.
And but the really great thing we can do with this is that the data set is to look at our targets of interest.
Based on the Agc data. We determined that there were a total of 672 targets of interest.
And so that means they're very likely to be a 4.2 inch more, and that's the one that we're looking for that we that the only munition that we expect to have a cwm fill that we
would require to be excavated under Cgm protocols.
So we invested those under feed in the protocol, and then the remaining anomaly raining 17,000 anomalies that are left out of that 6 after those or excavated, we are planning to
investigate under Cwm. contingency protocols, so that those are not requiring real time, air, monitoring, and all the emergency.
First thing else to be present on site when those happen. so.
Because of that. So that's the 95% percent reduction in the number of nonlies that we have to investigate under these devices, so that represents a huge cost agency to us
And here's a visual representation what we we went from, so that we had our before Atc.
Here on the left, on the right, where we had many, many, many single point anomalies excavate under a Cwm.
And then. Now we can excavate only a very small subset of those
I don't think I mentioned on this slide but where we but we are going to excavate all of our anomalies, but we just aren't doing them all under zoom for the calls.
And this is one of the only way. 8 have not.
We have not applied Abc. in this way before any other site so we're excited to try to use the Agc.
In this way to apply it to, not just leave, not necessarily leave things in the ground and walk away.
But to select between how we dig them. So in summary.
So Marshall 3 is an area that was used and red from arsenal in the 1,900 fiftys for waste disposal, which include munitions, construction, debris.
And so on. during the phase one intuitive investigation of the site.
Oh, evidence of chemical munitions, Cwm and burn pits and chemical
And the geophysical data collection from em. 60.
One assets, one the ended within Mr. S. 2 as hacking Over, 12,000 individual anomalies and 2 acres of saturated response area.
And using Apc data collection, we were able to refine that at those anomaly account to have the acreage of the Saturday responsaries within M. Rs.
2 to be reduced almost 20%. And then the individual anomalies.
Did it increase to 17,000. However, the Atc data collection and data allowed us to reduce our anomalies that we have to dig under our chemical Pwm protocols under 700. and currently we are conducting
our case to inter measure, and We've intrusively investigate all of our Cwm.
Our Qi and we're intrusively and our area targets, and then the rest we will remove under our Cdwm contingency protocol.
So the take home here is that by using agency to refine our Csm, we were able to reduce the level of effort.
We would have to do to that's the inter measure that's it?
Are there any questions? All right, We do have actually about 9 questions, so we may be running right on schedule here.
First question is, How are boundaries for the mri areas defined?
So they're based on site use. so I will show you just on that based on the historical site.
Use. So we have the disposal area where soil was excavated and placed here on historic area, 3 E.
And in the bone yard area where we had just the general disposal. And then our 82 and 82 south, which were had a little bit different site.
Use. So it's basically based on site usage okay next question up there.
Hold on. Alright, can you talk about white phosphorus?
Was any detected. How did you care about and respond with that on site?
Yes, we did have somewhat customers encounter during the phase.
One investigation. and does. This has some script requirements in our.
In our permit we are permitted to dispose of for the entire keep right on our small £80 of white phosphorus and our opioid area per year.
And we anticipate we haven't found any yet during the phase 2 but we anticipate we will find white phosphorus and
We are still working through the disposal methods for with egom on that.
We've got several options on the table but that's white process is difficult, because it's it's not a Cwm.
And it's not really something the regulators allow us to dispose of in a conventional way.
Okay, This question was asked for the last presentation. But how are you storing your site data?
What feels, what visualization tool are you? Are you being used?
Was being used too familiar with that. I know that
Our contractors. have There's a database and they do a reference all of their data, but i'm not too familiar with how that how we do it.
Beyond that. Okay, how many mobilization did you do to the site to complete the All right?
Okay. So the phase one investigation It took place over a couple of years.
We had in 2013 to 2014 that's when we did our data collection.
For geophysics, and then we then did some additional atc surveys in 2,015 and 2,016, so that phase one characterization finish in 2,016.
Then we started. I see. 2019, I think, is about when we started the current or phase 2 activities, and that should take this field work to take several years to complete.
And then, after all of that is done, we will move on to the Rfi phase of which we still have to produce an Rfi for this site.
We're gonna be there a while. Okay, What is an sp a Okay. So that's a single point.
Anomaly. I I try to find in my presentation the first use, like, for example, here, and that's where the geophysical data collected identified something in the ground that's not normal like not couldn't be there, so to speak,
so not soil it's something that's anomalous to the the the soil of the site, and that it could be a possible munition.
It could be relationships. it's hard to tell until we dig it up
Let's see. Okay, Did you use any historical aerial image to help in your initial conceptual site model old sandboard maps and old photos have often time given us locations to start sampling that we would never
have known about the based just on old documents. Yeah.
When we were doing our phase. One investigation we looked at.
We have lidar images of residential and
This site wasn't particularly I mean we don't we also look in historical imagery as well to see where areas could be disturbed.
So we do do that. So some other site on Redstone. we've definitely found using library We can see disposal trenches very clearly.
So those are very helpful for us, and we always do look at historical imagery over time.
If it's it can be very useful. I think Okay, will you be providing training or stand-ups on using Agc at future sites.
I i'm no geographicist but I certainly wouldn't wanted to teach you anything about Abc.
But i'm sure as the core starts to learn more is use this technology more and learn how we can use it and implementation.
You know, I think the the you know the core would definitely present more about that and more fights. You do this That will definitely have a lot more information to to share with everyone with the Thank you.
Okay, You mentioned there were 672 tdois.
What number of those 2 lies were 4 point, 2 mortars or other.
Mac. I don't think that was I think about a 100 of them were 4.2 h mortars, and we'd had a lot of pipes in that list of the 672 so you
know a a 4 inch pipe will probably look very similar to a 4 point, 2 inch mortar and What was the second part?
How many were 4 point, 2, and what else or other?
Mac. Okay. yeah, we I don't believe we've had of those same 272. we didn't have other Mac, and in all of those 4.2 inch motors that we found were not neither.
None of them were Cwm, and none of them were Mac items.
They were Md. items. Okay, what type of sampling methodology was used in collecting environmental samples, discrete composite mislanes, etc.
Why, specifically, was that methodology selected over the others?
How were the results of the environmental sampling used in identifying?
I am alternatives and identifying the select. I am so
We did this free sampling during our phase one investigation.
And for the because this isn't an rfi level investigation.
We do take those samples and the results, and perform a risk assessment.
But none of the levels of anything. found I did that's not part of the presentation, but I think we might have found some groundwater contamination, and maybe I don't believe we had anything soil wise
that were above risk levels. but nothing was at the level that required a near term.
That that proposed in your term unacceptable risk.
Whereas we do have Mac that does so. the there were we further soil, sampling and criminal sampling taking place during the Rfi investigation.
And if there is any, you know exceedances that require addressing because of risk that those will be I I taken care of during the corrective measures for the Rfi.
Okay, what is the current agency confidence level Additionally, How do you account for T. O.
At a test testing facility. If the munition item is not included in the classification database, then the Agc data evaluation for reducing the digs may miss items of interest.
Okay, that was long. What was the first, the first Oh, what is the current agency confidence level?
Okay, Well, it depends on who you ask. but I I think at this site, because we're using it to refine our Csm.
And and I i'm confident it but of course it's a tool that it does have limitations, for example, if you have items, and Richard addresses as well.
That are the low that are deeper than your detection limits.
So so that that can affect your confidence. and what your agency is telling you and it's now what was the second part about the target area.
How do you account for? tis at a testing facility. Okay.
So the All of the items that we're finding here can be attributed to the historical operations at the site.
This the testing facility for Nasa. these are these are test fans like I mentioned blue origin.
They have a test stand just west of our what of our site We there's also another test stand east of our site and
They their activities. are don't are separate from the historical background, and we have websites where we do find munitions exposed to that concern at the site.
But it's not historical. It might be like a toe missile. So that would not change our conceptual site model for the site, because we're our purposes to deal with the historical cleanup, and not was currently there because
of present day activities. Alright, we only got a couple more minutes before the next presentation.
I got 2 more questions here, so we're gonna go ahead and move on to the next question.
Can you describe the efficiency of Agc use on a disposal site where various metallic debris and multiple target? areas?
So. yeah, I mean you've got things for Oh, is that is that there's more i'm sorry.
Oh, yeah, just a little bit more. Here is the use of Agc and the sites meant to identify potential.
Cwm. only so we're using acc with that purpose here.
We're using it to establish which items are possible.
Cwm, and which are not so that we can as that can affect our inter measure activities.
So that's that's how we're applying Apc.
Right, and we do plan to do this at other sites on Redstone.
We're just we're using it to help us just where to dig, because under Cdw.
Un pro the calls, because Redstone has a lot of areas that are used.
And you know, and all reduces our workload as far as the night operations and so on.
Okay, we just ran out time. We had one last question. I think it would have been a long one to answer.
But i'm gonna go and just read it anyways Could you please describe the rick was so part x requirements for treatment.
Disposal of Mac Md. and cwa burn pits, etc.
I think that's gonna be a long. answer so what we can do is maybe we can shelf that till after at the end of the presentations for 2 months later.
Okay, but that's all the questions so you did great job appreciate Dr.
Mcdonald and we're gonna move on to our next present presentation, Julie Ancient, if you're go ahead and up your share screen, and you may proceed proceed when you're ready
Everything looks great. sounds good. Okay, So today i'm gonna talk about
The Yahoo Island target formally used to fence site.
And we're gonna go through a a brief overview in the world history.
The Csm. as it was devote throughout Theri
Some inconsistencies in the csm and then we're gonna talk about some csm elements that we didn't really fully consider in the Fs and dd and then this site's a little bit
different, and that we are in the remial action phase So we've had some field work to this point and we'll talk about that, and some some possible revisions to the csm and lessons learned
acronyms hopefully. Everybody's familiar with with most of these we will talk about M. P.
H. or material present, potentially presenting an explosive hazard which I don't think we've talked about too much yet today.
Other than that. I think most of these are pretty pretty standard.
So first of all, site overview the Oahu Island target.
Floods property. is the entire property and we are going to specifically Talk about the target islands and surrounding waters and more us.
That's about 57 acres and It's located off the northeast coast of Oahu.
I initially the property prior to conducting the Ri.
Was the entire beige area that's shown here the 3 white color areas.
That are called out are the the target islands and Ms.
And then there's also a couple of features to point out here. There is a State recreation area right here.
There is Ya. Point, which is a popular tourist stop off right here, and just for reference.
If you you've been to this part of the Polynesian Cultural Center is sort of back here.
Historically These These sites were used as bombing targets.
They were the first island. Muku Ouya was also known as Goat Island, was least in May 1943.
There was a separate lease for the 3 target islands and our Ms.
And in 1952. There was a surface clearance of this island.
Here. it's the only one that has any soil on it.
The the 3 target islands in our Ms. are are strictly rocks.
And then in February, 1953. all of the islands were formally transferred back to this well with territory.
At the time in the early eighties there was an eod clearance that was done around that northernmost island.
It, which was primarily large bombs and it's made inch projectiles. 2,008.
There was a site inspection for the mra.
It was just visual inspection of the the islands, the 3 target islands that are in Rmrs.
Only Md. was observed. no metal fragments.
There was swell scenes on goat island that didn't reveal any Mc.
Contamination. But the the islands, the 3 islands in our target. Ms.
Do not have any soil to sample So then we move on to the remedial investigation, and those field activities were conducted.
September, the mid October of 2,012
There was no further inspection of the islands themselves.
The the The Ri consisted of some visual snorkel train sacks, side scanner and scuba transsex, which we'll talk more about in just a minute.
13 munitions Items were located and destroyed, 5 and 6 inch projectiles, £20 fragment bombs, and 3.5 inch rocket warheads.
The highest. Mac density was estimated at about 3 items an acre, and at the conclusion of the or I the targeted islands and surrounding waters.
Mr. S. was delineated out. that was initially
There was a recommendation to do each island separately. but they were in the in combined, and the rest of the mra became no, no action
In in a deep in a decision document. So for a visual of the the Ri investigation.
This kind of beige area over here, which goes from shoreline to 12 feet deep, was gone with visual snorkel transacts.
Out here in the blue. We did sideskin sonor
And then, because that had trouble seeing up around the islands, they added 100 meter scuba transacts.
That were more or less radially radial to the to the islands themselves.
But you can see they're not really evenly spaced and they're the the divers I'm sure had a very hard time staying in a straight line.
So for for the snorkel again up to 12 feet deep.
And if there was sand they did do scuba diving to investigate that sand for the size cancel.
Or they had some issues because of the the rough seas.
At the time, like I said. this was done in September and October.
Which is not the best time of year for weather. at this site.
And so they ended up having to to change from a totary to a a whole mounted community.
And then, like I said, they had to add those scuba transects.
They identified a 133 sonars center targets.
And then they sent divers to investigate a 100% of those
The other thing about the side skin, so in ours that the seas were so rough that they could not travel parallel to the islands they had to go into and out of the the waves.
So that was another change to the the work plan.
Going into this
This is a visual of this size. gans zone or t oi you can see you know it's mostly the north south pattern that you would expect.
And then here's what was identified as mek and Md.
At the end of the Ri
Just a quick overview of what munitions were found, at which island this is, from moving from the north to the south, and then for Demo, they actually saved all of the items to do demo at the end of the field work
they did all of them via low employees even though they had planned to do consolidation and that wasn't really fully explained in the Ri report.
They. The other thing to note with this is that they had trouble identifying a lot of the items prior to conducting them, and used fragments that were left over for identification.
So here we have our estimate and magnet city straight out of the Ri report.
I'm not entirely sure. how they estimated This because it's mostly all of those those transacts that were certainly not even link-based, and they were more or less radial.
So they somebody had to do something a little fancy with Cbsb to get this
The major challenge during theri we're we're the sea conditions. fall it's starting to get into a really rough season.
There's nothing at the site to break up waves as they're coming in.
You know there's no reefs no no large reefs or anything.
The wind speeds were 2023 miles an hour.
Most of the time they were out there. that resulted in like 6 8 foot wind waves, and additional 3 or 4 foot swell.
So that would be fairly rough conditions, and they had a really hard time.
Just getting through the or at that time of year so the i'm gonna run through the all right from Csm.
Really quickly. just gonna highlight a few things really here, though.
The Mrs boundaries. This is at the end of the Ri. our notional and based on fragmentation buffer areas for some merge munitions at 18 meters or more.
I think that probably did not get updated from the Pre or Icsm.
But that was just an interesting thing to note the physical profile, the the munitions themselves are ranging from the the shore of those 3 islands.
Which goes to depth of about 5 meters just basically straight down.
So minimum of fifth of, say 15 fetish 16 feetish of water out to about 15 meters at the edges of the defined Mr.
S's. or did define Mr. s sorry they stated that no significant sand areas existed within the target islands.
Ms there's reefs but not like they're They're mostly fish habitat They're not any like special reefs that a lot of people would want to be diving and looking at
for the the lane. use and exposure. profile.
This was. This is a very interesting one. During rare calm ocean periods. the sorry dial in may be accessed by swimmers, and this is considered a rare occurrence.
They're only human receptors that they were considering were recreational users.
And then for ecological there are endangered species. we've got green sea turtles Hawaiian monk seals There's some birds, of course, these islands are managed currently as barred
sanctuaries, and then, during the migration season, their humpback wills off score of these islands.
Uxo, and then B were discovered on the ocean polar surface.
Penetration of the flat rock is not anticipated and of course, there weren't a whole lot of sand areas.
That they located, and then our our exposures can be direct contact.
But humans, while life with the editions on the sea floor there wasn't really any expectation that they were going to migrate as most of them were a fixed to the sea floor, unless you know somebody actually tried to release
them, and then we get to the pathway. and we state that them Ms.
Waters are frequented by a fisherman, that divers and snorkelers who may encounter ux on the C floor.
So the pathway is complete. and Then for mc it it's an underwater environment.
So they considered that one in complete something else. of note to to consider is when you move on to the Macco cause.
Of course this this preceded the the risk matrices there's several things to think about with accessibility.
The distance to the islands themselves which you know they're 3 quarters to a mile offshore.
To interact with those munitions. requires a boat, or just one that distance.
And then once you get there, you've got to get down at least 1516 feet to get to the first munitions.
There's also the possibility of dropping a boat anchor on on the uxo but and addition to that, it's not easy to get there in a boat.
The nearest boat ran up 6 miles away, and it's kind of limiting vessel size, and in addition, what we found, c.
State during most of the year. is not conducive to having smaller craft delivery.
And so, for those reasons the The met call said that it was not frequented by large numbers of people, and under a baseline assessment
The sites would be considered very limited accessibility but just because it's limited doesn't mean that nobody ever accesses the islands also as part of Theori.
There were 3 interviews conducted. All 3 of those interviewees reported diving off of the coast of that southern island.
Here, and one of them also stated that they they would dive and click items off the sea floor around the central one. and you can kind of see from this. Why,
This island may be more accessible. just the distance is not quite so great.
This. There's kind of a path here. and the the conditions make that a little less likely that people are gonna swim out there.
So then, in the Fs really, we we considered land use controls as a general technology removal and then disposal with blue in place or consolidated shots, only using high explosives.
And they did note that it's potentially destructive of the coral and that potentially we might have to do a bit if items are unsafe to move or affixed to the sea floor
but otherwise the preference was going to be for Consolidated shots.
For errors just of note there's the endanger space exact marine mammals Hawaii regulations on stony corals and live rocks.
So what's to consider there in the fs the actual alternatives, or we had no action.
Lane use controls only surface and subsurface. Mac removal with Leny's controls.
And there was also a fourth alternative: which was for ue that was considered to not be implementable.
Alternative 3 again. if Max deemed unsafe to move, it would be bit otherwise.
Or if it would damage lab rock or coral it would be left in place and and not destroyed.
The goal 100% removal. And there is this little thing over here about demo phase will require coordination.
With all these people. which turned out to be a little bit more difficult than I think was anticipated.
So in the Dd. the selected remedy is Mac removal from the surface and subsurface of the sea floor and walks
No further investigation of the islands and then to implement a lane use control program with signs and safety education, and our Rio was to provide protection to human health by reducing or mitigating the potential hazards posed by mech associated
with reasonably anticipated future use. So also in the Dd.
In the executive summary we're still talking about recreational uses, including primitive camping and rustic cabins for rent which is clearly still talking about the state state recreation area that was part
of the Mri, but not the Mr. s but the dd doesn't make any distinction there.
We're talking about site visitors for the first time. with no, no, no mention of what those site visitors are actually doing, or how they would would interact with munitions on the C floor.
And we start talking about scuba divers being at the site.
We also note that this the amarasis open to the public, which is true, and that it's heavily used, which completely contradicts what's in the the risk assessment portion of the ra and then
finally It also includes subsurface c. floor munitions.
And we we state that they could migrate v inactral processes.
So somehow between the Ri and the Dd. that that also managed to change.
So that brings us to the the regional action. That, was the the latest action at the site.
And we. So the goal was obviously to implement the remedy.
We installed signs at the State recreation area and distributed educational materials.
Completed a survey of the Mrs boundaries, which identified 215, and Pp.
H, including some much larger bombs that had had been dropped from the Csm.
In the Uri, and then we pilot tested of a Vulcan Low order, Deflation Disposal Method Project stakeholders uses Honolulu and Huntsville design center.
We had the Hawaii Department of Health, and then the Hawaii department of Land and Natural resources.
Which manages that property. and then we had no nimps.
So for the remial action approach We conducted instrument assisted diver diver surveys over the entirety of the defined Mrs is around the islands.
That was conducted. March through October 2019
We took a break for 2020, when Hawaii was locked down for Covid, and then started again in March through May of 2021
The divers had, you know, divorced propulsion and analog detectors, and sharp marine Gps equipment the dive teams were were 5 had 5 members one in the water and 4 on a
service providing support they launched an inflatable boats from the shore.
For the most part and then the divers swam the transsex
If they found an item. They stopped, investigated to pictures of both the item and the surrounding area.
To see. you know what all sensitive species may be around it.
Of note. They found a lot of heavy marine groups on the munitions, and so they use the best.
Guess at identifying munitions based on measurements and historical knowledge, and also of note.
They ended up having to be ready, or any of 7 days a week due to the C.
States, because, even though they were conducting operations in the summertime, when it's calmer, that doesn't mean it's actually calm.
Most of the time. summer is also hurricane season.
And it does not take a full hurricane to calls the site to get pretty rough.
Just a normal summer storm or a low pressure system is pulling you to do that.
So our biggest problem as you might guess, was being able to do demo on these items.
That were found. as soon as we got into the Spp meetings with with all the stakeholders.
They started raising concerns about using high explosives.
The originally proposed method of Demo was to put a bubble curtain around the items.
The stakeholders didn't think that there was enough information on how much of an impact that bubble curtain would have and lowering the the explosive effects.
So while we were working on trying to figure out that piece of it to give them more information,
The the contractor actually decided that if it might not be terribly effective to use a bubble curtain anyway.
So we we planted on that idea and started looking for another another option.
Additionally our our oes, and our closest 50 people fault that you know.
Moving Mp. Ph. that was sent submitted to the c floor might not be ideal for something like consolidation.
And there's no way. land within the umrs that's really suitable to conduct and consolidated shots out of the water.
So that really wasn't an option and so demo operations were defined until the Pdt.
Could reach agreement on suitable demo methods. We did eventually gain concurrency on proceeding with the Vulcan system, which does works through deflation without that nation.
And that actually ended up being limited by the the field season.
So results so far. for the remedial action.
The dive teams have surveyed all of the the defined atmospheres.
They they found 215, and P. Ph. that were identified, which works out to about 4 items an acre which is considerably more than the R.
I would have predicted and the density was up to about 16 items an acre.
We did conduct that pilot shot with the Vulcan system, which was very successful.
And then we had one other demo event in 2021 before the the weather.
Conditions just got too bad to do anything else. And these pictures are just because most of the time the site is really rough, but you can also see in these.
It can, it can spread out, and how people might actually be able to get out to these these sites.
We did identify additional types of Mp. Ph: quite a few actually
And the survey results indicated that there's certainly potential for more to be outside of the currently defined boundaries.
Including there was a 5 inch projectile that a divergence happened to pass it for.
When he got washed out of up one of his transactions.
So just visually, very quickly. these are the the finds for me to the islands moving north to south.
And you can see you know we're up very close to the boundary on all of these and that's the the 5 inch projectile that was found outside.
But there's there's quite a bit around the the boundaries there.
Just quickly the types, and what was found where the larger bombs were all in the north, which is where that eod operation was conducted in the eighties.
And then you know things that we were expecting more or less.
The moving further to the south. This is the revised Csm.
Out of the draft on unreviewed by the Pdt.
Site specifically final report from the the current action.
And you can see that. we are sort of moving towards getting this refined a little bit.
Added the the additional types potential types of Mac we did start talking about Meg being submitted to the sea floor and embedded in coral which is the the typical way that it's going to be found very
low potential for migration, and the sandwiches aren't really a big big issue.
They're they're shallow but we still have scuba divers and our our receptors.
And we still got site visitors and We still haven't explained what they're doing.
So what did we learn? that at the conclusion of the ri the Csm wasn't really consistent for land use receptors or exposure profile, and that really could have been solved by just
making sure, when it the Csm. was updated when the site was delineated, that we were being existent for what's inside the new Mrs versus what's outside of it?
It didn't fully capture nature or extent and then it also sort of glossed over some of those conditions that could be expected for remedial action, such as whether in C state which in your I and the fs they just
basically said the weather's better in the summer so it'll be It'll be great just do it then.
And then we didn't really fully consider a productive species especially the monks.
Ill that lives in the area. Yeah, We didn't think about things like repeated exposures.
And how we were gonna enforce an exclusion zone for those species just a little bit different than trying to do it for people.
The remial alternatives analysis in the fs we didn't really consider the full csm like I said, How are you gonna enforce that?
That exclusions zone is it really realistic to say we're gonna consolidate things that are primarily, if not all, affixed to this sea floor.
And you know we didn't really talk to the stakeholders until we got to the remedial action, and then we tried to to take care of those those concerns.
It might have been better to do it ahead of time, and finally
If we had conducted the Pre Rfp. Project scoping Spp meetings to reach consensus on the Csm.
And Dqos that probably would have helped the Pdf.
Recognize most of those problems before we we got to releasing a contract.
And it, it would have likely made the process quite a bit smoother and that's the end.
Thank you very much, Julie. That was really really great.
Well, we have I got about 8 questions or so here lined up for you. so let's go ahead and knock these out.
Let's see the first one here. is what is a visual snorkel trip transaction is there any underwater video or photos taken as part of that.
There's not a vision. Okay, So a visual snorkel transact is someone snorkeling visually looking at the ocean floor?
It it wasn't instrument assisted or anything of that nature.
I don't know about video I was not part of the Pdt: at that point.
Okay, did you do investigation below the sediment surface?
If so, how deep They did go down and investigate
Any sand covered areas. those 4 of the ocean at this location is basically just bedrock.
I mean it's there's not much on it unless there's a depression, and then there there may be a bit of sand.
It's a highly dynamic environment. so there's not much that that can settle there.
Okay, was the sight. Seated in advance of side scanned Sonar survey.
How were the seats deployed? I don't know the answer to that question?
Like. I said I was not part of the the Ri team. and no one that's currently on the the Pdd.
Was involved with that. Okay, did you consider postponing the Ai work till whether was better?
Was that the ri work or the r a work I don't know like I said I I don't know if they considered postponing or not
It. It would perhaps have given them a better idea of what conditions to expect if they had tried to do it at a a more ideal time.
But I I again I don't know the answer to that Okay, is the area where side skins are only was used, considered a data gap.
It was not at the time. No. Okay, So these other ones here discuss a private contractor that has access to Vulcan technology.
And as data to support the minimal environmental impact of low order, defication techniques.
I can't sit here and talk about a private contractor.
That would be I should say advertising for them.
So I can build. I don't feel comfortable about reading the these next questions, because they bring up this contractor in here.
Of that. What we have here so many things for a great session.
You know. Thanks for hosting all this stuff so that's all the questions I really have for you.
But I do. If Dr. Mcdonald is still on we can.
I got one question for her if we can switch over to her.
Okay, for the last question. Could you please to speak the Rick Rest Subpart X requirements for treatment.
Disposal of mech md cw it's I guess a Cwm.
They put C. W. A. but cwm burn pits and etc. Yes, so
If we have conventional met items sounded a site.
Our contractor disclosures of those items if we have which we haven't found any yet at Red phone.
But if we have a Cwm. item, then the Government would make that.
Those are initially once they're once they're assessed, and you see it, Ram, there's a big long process for that.
Then the Government would be responsible for the destruction of those items.
And then we have the white phosphorus which is kind of the in between. that we're trying to work, through, and likely what ultimately would happen at Redstone is we will have destruction technology we are
permitted for an electrostatic or an ebs detonation chamber.
We don't have one yet at rest though because we haven't started to.
We're just marshall 3 is our first inter measure site. where we're doing in removing items to be that might be needed that the the destruction technology might be before So hope that answers everything hope So Okay,
this is last call for questions, so we've got about 5 min before the end of session.
So we've got the 3 instructors still online Any questions at all from anybody just type in the Qa.
We can get it answered, if nobody has any questions, and we will go ahead and close this out.
And Jeff. this is Jean i'll just offer a quick suggestion to the audience.
If they have no questions, they can also send that message into the Q A. and confirm that they are thoroughly satisfied with our time usage, and that they don't have any additional questions for our instructors you can also drop
that on the Q. A. And while we wait, do you mind if I pull up that reminder for our next session?
Oh, please!
Alright, as you can see on the screen. Now, this is the next upcoming webinar.
Go ahead and put on your calendars if you haven't Seen the invite that was sent out through multiple agencies.
And if not, just keep a keep, a look on and you could find it.
There that's where you have to register was just like this one.
So that's all I have I like getting like think our presenters. Mr. Perry, Dr.
Mcdonald, and and change and thank you all for putting on a great presentation today.
Did very well I Don't think I've had instructors Be that on time for everything Well done, and i'm gonna turn that over to Jean Alright.
Thank you so very much, Jeff. and I echo your thanks to each of our presenters for offering their expertise and and staying right to schedule for today's session.
I also want to thank the over 170 in individuals who joined us for today's live session.
We really appreciated you. taking time out of your busy schedules, and sharing your questions and comments for our presenters today.
We hope that you can join us on a future webinar remember we're offering these through the cleanup information network at Kuwan Org.
So I encourage you to visit us there and sign up for our free monthly Newsletter tech direct, which I send out on the first of each month.
So if you're interested in staying informed when we have additional webinars such as today session, be sure to add yourself to that free monthly newsletter, the other thing I wanted to cover for anyone who may have joined
us late. Remember there is a seminar home page that has been dedicated for this particular session, with information about our speakers as well as links to download their presentation material.
So it's shown here in red on this url here. so you can bookmark that and save it.
It's the same website that you went to when signing up.
It's the same website that you went to when red when checking in for today.
It's the same website that we would have included in all of your reminder emails as well. So if you're looking for copies of those presentation materials, you will find it there on the seminar homepage
and I do often get asked if we offer ceos or pdhs for participation in our session, and I don't offer those types of credit hours. But I can provide you with a webinar certificate So if you fill out the
online feedback form which is accessible from the seminar homepage.
You'll be a box at the very bottom of that feedback form as long as you check that box to certify you were here for the entire live session, and then submit your feedback.
Form you'll immediately have access to a participation certificate.
You can then save or print out for your own records.
We will also email a copy of it to you. But I do know some times junk or spam filters will block those emails.
So I encourage that. you download it from that confirmation screen right when you submit your feedback form.
If you happen to have multiple people participating from your particular location, each person can fill out that feedback form, even if they didn't register individually.
So if you are the one who signed the group up, I encourage you to go ahead and copy the website to the seminar home page and then share that with your colleague, so that they can fill out their own feedback and get their own
certificate, and I do read each and every one of these forms.
We really do count on and appreciate your insights to help us to continue to improve our webinars.
So again, just a quick, gentle reminder that that some in our homepage is available from today forward.
If you happen to be one of the lucky people watching the recorded version of today's webinar right about now, somewhere over my head in the upper right corner in the online version, you'll also see a link to that very same
feedback form. You can click that button. fill out feedback based off of your replay.
Vr. Archive again, noting that you'll need to check that box certifying you.
Watch the whole thing, and then you 2 can get a participation certificate based off of your replay for your own records.
Our recording should be available in about one week You'll automatically get an email for me as soon as that Archive is available for on-demand playback.
So with that reaching our scheduled end time, I have concluded all of my final reminders.
So just one great big thank you to you all for joining us and we'll go ahead and formally conclude today's live broadcast.