FY04 Data from Camp Edwards
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
a1: US Army Corps * of Engineers® II Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program Distribution and Fate of Energetics on DoD Test and Training Ranges: Interim Report 5 Judith C. Pennington, Thomas F. Jenkins, Sonia Thiboutot, April 2005 Guy Ampleman, Jay Clausen, Alan D. Hewitt, Jeff Lewis, Michael R. Walsh, Marianne E. Walsh, Thomas A. Ranney, Bryan Silverblatt, Andr6 Marois, Annie Gagnon, Patrick Brousseau, Jon E. Zufelt, Ken Poe, M61anie Bouchard, Richard Martel, Deborah D. Walker, Charles A. Ramsey, Charolett A. Hayes, Sally L. Yost, Kevin L. Bjella, Luc Trepanier, Thomas E. Berry, Dennis J. Lambert, Pascal Dubk, and Nancy M. Perron AprvdfrpbiIees;dsrbto sulmtd Appvfi Strategic Environmental Research ERDC TR-05-2 and Development Program April 2005 Distribution and Fate of Energetics on DoD Test and Training Ranges: Interim Report 5 Judith C. Pennington, Thomas E. Berry Sally L. Yost, Charolett A. Hayes U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Computer Sciences Corporation Center 3530 Manor Drive, Suite 4 Environmental Laboratory Vicksburg, MS 39180 3909 Halls Ferry Road Vicksburg, MS 39180-6199 Richard Martel, Luc Trepanier Scientifique Thomas F. Jenkins, Alan D. Hewitt, Dennis J. Institut National de la Recherche Bueau 840 Lambert, Marianne E. Walsh, Nancy M. Perron, 880 Chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec GIK 9A9 Michael R. Walsh, Jon E. Zufelt, Kevin L. Bjella 490 rue de la Couronne, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Charles A. Ramsey Center Envirostate Inc. Cold Regions Research and Engineering PO. Box 636 Laboratory Fort Collins, CO 80522-0636 72 Lyme Road Hanover,NH 03755-1290 Bryan Silverblatt, Ken Poe Guy Ampleman, Sonia Thiboutot, Jeff Lewis, Annie Naval Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technology Gagnon, Patrick Brousseau, Andr6 Marois, M61anie Division Bouchard 2008 Stump Neck Road MD 20640-5070 Defence Research and Development Canada- Indian Head, Valcartier Pascal Dub6 2459 Pie XI Blvd. North VaI-B61air, Qu6bec, G3J 1X5 BCR Polysyntech 1065 Panneton Jay Clausen Ancienne-Lorette, QC, Canada G2E 6E7 AMEC Earth and Environmental Deborah D. Walker 239 Littleton Road, Suite 1B Westford, MA 01886 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Huntsville Center P.O. Box 1600 Thomas A. Ranney Huntsville, AL 35807-4301 Science and Technology Corporation Hanover, NH 03755 Interim report Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited Prepared for Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program Arlington, VA 22203 ABSTRACT: The potential for generation of environmental contamination in the form of residual muni- tions constituents during live-fire training activities on military ranges is a significant concern. The objec- tives of this project were to determine the nature and distribution of the potential contamination and to define transport properties of the constituents. Surface soils associated with impact craters, targets areas, and firing points on U.S. and Canadian ranges were investigated. Residues from high-order, low-order, unconfined charge, and blow-in-place detonations were characterized. Analyses of these residues defined concentrations and spatial distributions of munitions constituents under various firing activities for spe- cific munitions. Special emphasis was placed on developing representative sampling strategies. Residues from low-order detonations were assayed to develop a source term for use in fate and transport models and risk assessment models. Pertinent data from the Massachusetts Military Reservation was reviewed and compared to the database for other ranges. Results demonstrate that a systematic composite sampling protocol developed for artillery ranges improved reproducibility over random composite or discrete sam- pling protocols. Results of low-order detonation studies confirmed an inverse relationship between energy of detonation and residue generated. While directionality was unpredictable, the residue was dominated by larger particles, which resulted in conservation of the pre-detonation composition of the munition. Sev- eral heavy metals were of significant concern at antitank target areas, hand- and rifle-grenade ranges, and small arms ranges. Explosives detected were specific to range activity. Results of sympathetic detonation tests demonstrated that cracking was initiated by flying shrapnel rather than by the shock wave of the first detonation. High-order detonations generate by blow-in-place detonations resulted in low-milligram quantities of explosives residue. The results of this project define the relationship between various train- ing activities and residues of energetic materials, which provides a basis for sound management strategies supporting training range sustainment without conflicting with objectives of environmental stewardship. DISCLAIMER: The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication, or promotional purposes. Citation of trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial products. All product names and trademarks cited are the property of their respective owners. The findings of this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents. Contents Abbreviations ......................................................................................................... x Preface ................................................................................................................ xiii 1- Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 Background ...................................................................................................... 1 Scope of Project CPI 155 ................................................................................. 1 Objectives .................................................................................................. 2 Related Ongoing and Leveraged Studies ................................................... 3 Summ ary of Results Through 2003 ............................................................ 6 FY2004 Execution ................................................................................... 10 Form at of this Report ..................................................................................... 11 Appendix A : Bibliography of CP 1155 Publications ...................................... 11 Refereed Journal Articles: ....................................................................... 11 Governm ent Docum ents: ................................................................... 12 Conference Presentations: ................................................................... 15 2-Sampling Strategies Near a Low-Order Detonation and a Target at an Artillery Im pact Area ............................................................................... 22 Introduction ............................................................................................... 22 Objectives ................................................................................................ 22 Field Site ................................................................................................... 23 M ethods ..................................................................................................... 24 Results ..................................................................................................... 26 Samples Collected near Chunks of Energetic Residues ..................... 26 Samples collected near a mortar/artillery target ................................. 29 Summ ary and Conclusions ....................................................................... 30 References ................................................................................................. 31 3-Explosive Residues from Low-Order Detonations of Artillery M unitions ................................................................................................. 34 Introduction ............................................................................................... 34 Background ....................................................................................... 34 Objectives .......................................................................................... 35 M aterials and M ethods ........................................................................ 36 Detonations ........................................................................................ 36 Detonation properties ....................................................................... 37 iii Detonation configurations ................................................................. 38 Residue Recovery .............................................................................. 40 Results ....................................................................................................... 42 Energy Yields ..................................... ................ 42 Relationship between energy yield and mass recovered .................... 44 Relationship between mass recovered and areal distribution ............. 44 Particle size distribution ..................................................................... 48 Chemical composition of residues ...................................................... 50 Conclusions .............................................................................................. 52 References ...............................................................................................