B08_Attach_4_PMIS_236143_Final_Specifications_-_Appendix_C.pdf

ANOMALY AVOIDANCE

WORK PLAN

for:

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND SUBSURFACE

TESTING IN SUPPORT OF SHORELINE BARRIER REPAIR AT

SMILING COVE AND OUTER COVE, SAIPAN, CNMI

Order No:

1P0P2021P0007

Reference Number:

0040523163

Prepared for:

NATIONAL PARKS SERVICE – DENVER SERVICE CENTER

12795 W ALAMEDA PKWY

LAKEWOOD, CO 80228

Prepared by

RELYANT GLOBAL, LLC

335 HIGH STREET

MARYVILLE, TN 37804

February 2021

UXO Avoidance, Smiling Cove and Outer Cove

February, 2021 iii

Project Name: MEC Avoidance for Archaeological Su rvey and Geotechnical Testing in Support of Shoreline Barrier Repairs, Smiling and Outer Coves, Saipan.

Order #: 140P2021P0007

Reference #: 0040523163

Company and Address: RELYANT Global, LLC 335 High Street Maryville, TN 37804

Prepared and Approved by:

John (Bud) Murray, P.E., PMP DATE: 24 February 2021 RELYANT Global PM

Accepted by:

Brian Heitman, P.E., PMP DATE: 24 February 2021 AMME National Parks Service Project Manager

February, 2021 iii

UXO Avoidance for Archaeological Survey and Subsurface Testing in Support Shoreline Barrier Repair, Smiling Cove and Outer Cove, Saipan

Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Project Identification

1.2 Purpose

1.3 Location

1.4 Current and Future Land-Use

1.5 Topography

1.6 Climate

1.7 Vegetation

1.8 Geology

1.9 Site History

1.10 History of MEC at the Site

1.11 Previous Studies and MEC Clearances

Chapter 2 Technical Management & Field Investigation Plan

2.1 Technical Scope and Field Schedule

2.2 Project Organization

2.3 Project Communication and Reporting

2.4 Anomaly Avoidance for Subsurface Soil Investigations

2.5 Minimum Separation Distances

2.6 MEC AND MPPEH

2.7 Guidance, Regulations, and Policy

Chapter 3 QC Plan

3.1 Introduction

3.2 Definable Features of Work

3.3 Equipment Calibration and Maintenance

3.4 QC Management

3.5 QC Plan Processes

3.6 Corrective/Preventative Action

3.7 Quality Documentation

3.8 Training Requirements

Chapter 4 Environmental Protection Plan

4.1 Purpose

4.2 Existing Conditions Survey

4.3 Potential Environmental Resource Impact

4.4 Existing Waste Disposal Sites

4.5 Mitigation Procedures

4.6 Post-Activity Clean-up

4.7 Air Monitoring

Chapter 5 References

February, 2021 iii

UXO Avoidance for Archaeological Survey and

Appendices Appendix A – Project Maps Appendix B – Forms Appendix C – Resumes and Certifications

List of Tables Table 2-1: Key Project Members

UXO Avoidance for Archaeological Survey and vii

Acronyms and Abbreviations

% percent °F degrees Fahrenheit AFB Air Force Base AOC area of concern AP armor-piercing APP Accident Prevention Plan ARAR applicable or relevant and appropriate requirement ATF Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives BSI blind seed item CAR Corrective Action Request CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act CFR Code of Federal Regulations cm centimeter CNMI Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands CSP Certified Safety Professional CWM Chemical Warfare Material DD Decision Document DDESB Department of Defense Explosives Safety Board DFOW definable feature of work DID Data Item Description DMM discarded military munitions DN Deficiency Notice DoD Department of Defense DON Department of the Navy DOT Department of Transportation EM Engineer Manual EOD Explosive Ordnance Disposal EODMUFIVE EOD Mobile Unit Five EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESS Explosives Safety Submission EZ exclusion zone FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation FEAD Facilities Engineering and Acquisition Division GIS Geographical Information System GPS Global Positioning System HAZWOPER Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response HC hexachloroethane HFD hazard fragment distance HSP Health and Safety Plan HTRW hazardous, toxic or radiological waste IAW in accordance with in inch(es) INST Instruction viii

IVS Instrument Verification Strip JA Japanese JRM Joint Region Marianas KO Contracting Officer MD munitions debris MEC munitions and explosives of concern MFD maximum fragment distance MGFD munitions with the greatest fragmentation distance mm millimeter MPPEH material potentially presenting an explosive hazard MR Munitions Response MSD Minimum Separation Distance N/A not applicable NAVFAC Naval Facilities Engineering Command NAVSEA Naval Sea Systems Command NCR Non-Conformance Report NOSSA Naval Ordnance Safety and Security Activity NTR Navy Technical Representative OP Ordnance Pamphlet OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration PDT Project Delivery Team POC point of contact PPE personal protective equipment QA Quality Assurance QC quality control QCI Quality Conformance Inspection QCIR Quality Conformance Inspection Record RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RDX cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine RG RELYANT Global, LLC ROC Regional Operations Center SME Subject Matter Expert SOP Standard Operating Procedure SOW Statement of Work SWDA Solid Waste Disposal Act SWPD Storm Water Planning Division TNT trinitrotoluene TOI Target of Interest TP Technical Paper TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act U.S. United States U.S.C. United States Code USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers UXO unexploded ordnance WP Work Plan

Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Project Identification

Project Name: Repair Shoreline Barriers at Smiling Cove and Outer Cove, Saipan

Order #: 1P0P2021P0007

Reference #: 0040523163

Company and Address: RELYANT Global, LLC 335 High Street Maryville, TN

Date of Issue: February, 2021

1.2 Purpose

Presented in this Work Plan is a summary of conducting anomaly avoidance operations approved in the Munitions Response Sites, Saipan Construction Support Explosives Safety Submission (ESS), (July 2014) to Conduct Archaeological Survey and Subsurface Testing in Support of Barrier Repair at Smiling Cove and Outer Cove to avoid potential Munitions and Explosives of Concern (MEC) and Material Potentially Presenting an Explosive Hazard (MPPEH). Intrusive anomaly investigation is not authorized for this project.

1.3 Location

The project limits of the Archaeological Survey and Subsurface Testing Project are located on the western part of Saipan. Maps depicting the locations of the site are provided in Appendix A, Maps. The project boundaries identified in the ESS for the Archaeological Survey and Subsurface Testing Project location have been assigned a moderate risk for MEC hazards. The munitions with the greatest fragmentation distance (MGFD) for the American Memorial Park, Area 4 is a 37mm M63 projectile, and the minimum safe distance (MSD) for non-essential personnel for intrusive investigations is 118 feet.

1.4 Current and Future Land-Use

The current project site comprises of undeveloped and developed government land and is part of the American Memorial Park. The long-term future use of the Archaeological Survey and Subsurface Testing Project Site is expected to remain unchanged.

1.5 Topography

The island of Saipan is of volcanic origin, surrounded by coral reefs. The western side of the island is lined with sandy beaches and an offshore coral reef creates a large lagoon. The eastern shore of Saipan is composed primarily of rugged rocky cliffs and a reef. A narrow underwater bank of Marpi Reef lies 28 mi (45 km) north of the Saipan, and CK Reef lies in the west of the island Elevation at the sites ranges between 1-3 meters above sea level (ASL).

1.6 Climate

The mean annual temperature of Saipan is 81 degrees Fahrenheit (°F); generally, the range is from the low 70s °F to the middle 80s °F. The coolest and least humid months, marked by prevailing westerly trade winds, are in December through February. Although the warmest months are from March through August, the refreshing trade winds blow steadily. The annual rainfall totals 80 to 110 inches (in).

1.7 Vegetation

The current vegetation at the Archaeological Survey and Subsurface Testing Project is grass, shrubs and manicured trees bordered by government roads and Smiling Cove/Outer Cove.

1.8 Geology

The island of Saipan is 12 miles long and 5.6 miles wide. Unlike the Anatahan volcano in the Northern Marianas Islands, Saipan is not volcanically active. However, due to its proximity to Anatahan, vog does occasionally affect Saipan. A coral table reef with deep-water channels surrounds most of Saipan. Sandy beaches, rock cliff lines, and mangroves characterize the coastline area. Sheer limestone coastal cliffs dominate the north, while the southern end of the island is mountainous, with lower hills in between. The island bedrock comprises volcanic stone, limestone, and coral with little soil covering the mantle.

1.9 Site History

The Mariana Islands were colonized by Spain in the 17th century. After losing the Spanish American War, Spain agreed to sell the Northern Mariana Islands to Germany, while the U.S.

gained possession of Guam. In 1914 during World War I, the Empire of Japan captured the Northern Mariana Islands. After the war, Japan was given complete control of the islands by the League of Nations as part of the South Seas Mandate. By 1943 the Japanese population on Saipan was 29,348. The U.S. military returned to Saipan in June 1944 to capture the island from Japan. The project site is within the American Memorial Park dedicated to the courage and sacrifice of the US Servicemen and Chamorro and Carolinian civilians who were killed in the battles between the United States and Japan that took place on Saipan, Tinian, and the Philippine Sea in 1944.

1.10 History of MEC at the Site

Upon review of the ESS it is anticipated that the types of ordnance that could be encountered on the project site include: 37mm M63, 75mm Mk.1, 5-inch projectile MK 41, 8-inch projectile Mk

24. Japanese ordnance is not expected at the project site.

1.11 Previous Studies and MEC Clearances

Although no detailed previous studies of the extent of MEC and material potentially presenting an explosive hazard (MPPEH) have been conducted for the project areas, pertinent information have been gathered and reviewed to assess the probability for encountering MEC and MPPEH within each of the areas in the ESS. Section 3.0 of the ESS includes detailed lists of the type and quantity of MEC/MPPEH found in the various areas of Saipan.

Chapter 2 Technical Management & Field Investigation Plan

2.1 Technical Scope and Field Schedule

The excavation of the test pit locations will be conducted by a qualified archaeologist and specialty geotechnical company with an UXO Tech III as an escort. The test pits will be approximately 5-meters long, and the width of a backhoe bucket. These pits will be excavated to the water table, coral bedrock, or the maximum safe depth achievable by the excavator. There will also be soil borings of 6”-8” in diameter to a depth of 10-30 feet below the existing ground surface. Excavated soil will not be screened but will be visually inspected and combed through for cultural material. We anticipate spending approximately 6 days to complete the investigations of the test pits and soil borings.

Prior to any subsurface disturbance, the required MEC/MPPH clearance survey will be conducted as outlined below.

2.2 Project Organization

Relyant Global will provide field management for munitions response operations and ensures compliance with all approved plans and applicable requirements

The Field Team is comprised of a single UXO Technician, Level III. The resume for the Tech III is included in Appendix C.

All UXO personnel meet or exceed the minimum qualifications defined in DDESB TP 18, Minimum Qualifications for UXO Technicians and Personnel (DDESB, 2015).

Key project members of the project team as shown in Table 2-1.

Table 2-1: Key Project Members

Project Manager Relyant Global Mr. John (Bud) Murray bmurray@RELYANTGlobal.com

(423) 999-1754

UXOTIII

Mr. Matt Nisbet oldschoolbomber@gmail.com

(623) 258-3014 NPS Project Manager

Mr. Brian Heitman brian_heitman@nps.gov

(720) 951-7292

AE Prime Project Manager June Nakamura jnakamura@kaulaae.com

(808) 285-1561

Geotech Project Manager James Ripple jripple@marianasgeotech.com

Geotech Drilling Foreman

Keala Pono Archaeologist Windy Keala McElroy wkm@keala-pono.com

(808) 381-2361

AMME Superintendent Barbara Alberti barbara_alberti@nps.gov

(671) 688-1954

2.3 Project Communication and Reporting

The success of this project depends on proactive and open communication among the key project personnel. Such communication ensures a mutual understanding of the project and the UXO support. The reports below will be completed and submitted accordingly:

a. Safety and Inspection Log– submitted daily for onsite work.

2.4 Anomaly Avoidance for Subsurface Soil Investigations

The Archeology Survey and Subsurface Testing Site potentially contains MEC. The term “MEC” includes (a) unexploded ordnance (UXO) as defined in 10 United States Code (U.S.C.) 2710 (e) (9), (b) discarded military munitions (DMM) as defined in 10 U.S.C. 2710 (e) (2), or (c) munitions constituents (i.e., trinitrotoluene [TNT], cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine [RDX]) present in high enough concentrations to pose an explosive hazard. Contaminants at the sites may also include those identified and regulated under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA), and petroleum, oils, and lubricants. Nuclear, biological, and chemical warfare agents are not expected.

The NPS has contracted RELYANT Global (RG) to provide anomaly avoidance procedures as defined in the Munitions Response Sites, Saipan Construction Support Explosives Safety Submission (ESS), (July 2014). All the planned investigation areas are in an area that has been mailto:bmurray@RELYANTGlobal.com mailto:oldschoolbomber@gmail.com mailto:brian_heitman@nps.gov mailto:jnakamura@kaulaae.com mailto:jripple@marianasgeotech.com mailto:wkm@keala-pono.com mailto:barbara_alberti@nps.gov designated a moderate MEC probability area. The RG UXO Technician III will perform visual assessment and an anomaly survey with a metal detector at each location where International Archaeology intends to conduct survey operations. Test Pit digging and soil boring will only occur where an area is cleared by the UXO technician with a hand-held detector. If the scan indicates a possible anomaly, then the investigation will move to another suitable location nearby that is anomaly free.

This cycle will be repeated until a clear area is located. During digging, test pits will be re-checked at 12-18 inches in depth and then at 12-18 inch intervals thereafter until groundwater or coral bedrock is encountered. If an anomaly is discovered at any phase, the pit or boring will be abandoned and backfilled and another location will be utilized.

2.5 Minimum Separation Distances

Minimum separations distances are not required during anomaly avoidance procedures.

2.6 MEC AND MPPEH

2.6.1 MEC

If any material or object believed to be MEC/MPPEH is encountered the immediate control of the item, as well as preventing unauthorized access to the item is of paramount importance. The UXO Technician will inform the other members of the AMME Team of his suspicion and direct them to avoid the immediate area. The UXO Technician will then call local police on 911 to control the area and prevent public access to the suspect UXO. The UXO Technician will either verify that the police contact EOD Mobile Unit Five, or the Technician will contact the EOD unit directly by contacting JRM Operations Center at +1 671 349-4004. This number is staffed 24/7/365.

During anomaly avoidance operations, subsurface detected anomalies will not be investigated.

If any MEC/MPPEH is discovered outside of construction excavation activities, RG will notify NPS immediately. Coordination with Explosive Ordnance Disposal will be conducted who will provide military EOD support should MEC and/or MPPEH be encountered at the sites.

2.6.2 MPPEH Processing

Not applicable for this scope of work.

2.7 Guidance, Regulations, and Policy

MEC is a safety hazard and may constitute an imminent and substantial endangerment to the site personnel and local populace. Thus, 29 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1910.120 applies.

The contractor will work in a manner consistent with CERCLA, Section 104, and the National Contingency Plan, Sections 300.120(d) and 300.400(e) (EPA, 2002). This WP complies with ESS guidelines and was prepared IAW NAVSEA OP 5, Volume 1, Seventh Revision and the NOSSA

INST 8020.15D.

Chapter 3 QC Plan

3.1 Introduction

This Quality Management Plan (QMP) describes the procedures for planning, assuring, controlling, and improving the project execution quality. This plan applies to the project work performed by Relyant, its subcontractors, and suppliers.

The objectives of the QMP are to ensure and document that project processes and data collected, stored, reported or used is statistically valid, repeatable, defensible, and of known precision and accuracy. The quality staff maintains all quality records with access strictly limited to quality personnel. Government personnel will be allowed access to the quality records, documents, logs, data, and/or reports necessary to provide objective evidence of the effectiveness of the Quality System.

This QMP is designed to monitor project contract compliance on and off site. The process is designed to plan, modify, implement and complete all tasks on each delivery order in compliance with contract requirements using proper record keeping and reporting procedures. The team will conform to the requirements of the contract clauses relating to inspection during this project. To ensure compliance with the contract requirements, Relyant will:

• Provide a continuous inspection program to examine the quality of materials, maintain standards of workmanship, identify and correct deficiencies, and provide finished products which are at, or exceed the contract requirements; and

• Maintain qualified personnel, equipment, and facilities that are required for the completion of this project.

3.2 Definable Features of Work

Operation Inspection Audit Pass/Fail Criteria

Anomaly Avoidance Conforms to project plan, work plan, SOPs, QCP, QAPP, etc.

Provide MEC avoidance procedures for geotechnical activities.

100% verification that geotechnical activity location is free of anomalies.

3.3 Equipment Calibration and Maintenance

The equipment that the UXO Technician will use during this project is calibrated by the manufacturer and is not intended for manual calibration in the field. Field equipment function checks will be documented and records kept on-site and/or placed on a designated Project Portal by the PM.

The Team performs equipment maintenance during this project. Equipment found to be inoperable, damaged, or out-of-calibration will be tagged, segregated, and shipped offsite for repair and replacement.

3.4 QC Management

The QC Manager has the responsibility of ensuring that QC procedures are implemented IAW the SOW.

The QC Manager will provide the quality management oversight for the project. The QC Manager is a part of the project team, but is authorized to elevate any quality problems that cannot be resolved by the project team. The QC Manager interacts with the Project Manager, UXO Technician, staff, other personnel (as appropriate), and NPS personnel to prevent and/or correct problem situations. Vendors and subcontractors will be monitored to assure that they supply items and services, which meet the contractor’s QA requirements. The UXO Technician performs a function check of the handheld detector at the beginning of each shift and record the check out in his/her logbook/production report. The QC Manager also ensures that:

Required site training is conducted prior to the start of field activities.

The UXO Technician III is qualified and trained IAW DDESB TP-18.

The requirements of the QC Plan are adhered to.

Effective day-to-day field QC management is delegated to the on-site UXO Technician, during anomaly avoidance services. He/she will interact daily with the project team to ensure that all QC procedures presented in the WP are followed in the accomplishment of all project tasks. The UXO Technician reports directly to the QC Manager on any quality concerns.

The UXO Technician has the authority to:

• Initiate action to prevent the occurrence of non-conformance’s relating to the provided anomaly avoidance services;

• Identify and record any problems relating to the anomaly avoidance services;

• Initiate, recommend, or provide solutions through the on-site management channel;

• Verify the implementation of solutions;

• Control further actions of any non-conforming services until the unsatisfactory conditions have been corrected; and

• Elevate quality concerns, which cannot be resolved on site, to the QC Manager.

All project team members are responsible for and will be held accountable for the quality of their work. Every team member has Stop-Work-Authority when an immediate safety situation is observed which could cause personal injury or damage to property and equipment. All project team members are encouraged to identify potential quality problems and are encouraged to suggest solutions or corrective actions to ensure all work conforms to the approved WP and QA requirements. During site-specific training, personnel will be briefed by the QC Manager or the PM, on the importance of quality work and the above stated requirements. This briefing is aimed at ensuring that all site personnel understand the contractor’s commitment to quality.

3.5 QC Plan Processes

This section documents the processes and essential steps to ensure a quality product is delivered to the Government.

3.5.1 Audits

Periodic audits will be performed to ensure that the requirements of this QC Plan are being followed. On-site audits are not anticipated, although documentation review will be performed.

Training records, periodic reports, and adherence to all aspects of this QC Plan will be monitored to ensure compliance.

3.5.2 Install Blind Seed Items

Blind seeds will not be installed for anomaly avoidance operations.

3.5.3 Daily Checks

All instruments, vehicles/machinery, and equipment will be checked prior to the start of each workday. Batteries will be replaced as needed. Metal detectors will be checked against a known metal source. The UXO technician is responsible for ensuring that QC checks are made and recorded.

3.6 Corrective/Preventative Action

3.6.1 Deficiencies and Nonconformance

The RG PM will notify the NPS PM of all deficiencies and nonconformance identified during the course of the field activities. This notification ensures that each occurrence is documented, reported, and tracked, and that corrective actions are implemented in a timely manner.

The quality staff will report the identified deficiencies and nonconformance in the Daily Report, noting the following:

• The items found to be deficient or nonconforming

• The date

• The time and location

• The person who identified the deficiency or nonconformance

• The status of the item to which the deficiency applies

If the deficiency has the potential to result in the need for rework or jeopardizes the quality of future work, the quality staff has the ability to stop work and consult with the Field Management Team to implement immediate corrective action.

When an item is identified as deficient or nonconforming, the quality staff will also complete a deficiency notice (DN) or nonconformance report (NCR), as appropriate. If the deficiency is minor in nature and not problematic throughout the process, the quality staff will issue a DN. If the problem is such that overall quality of the product is affected and/or the problem is widespread, the quality staff will issue an NCR. These forms provide documentation on the status of the deficiency or nonconformance and include the documented history of the problem as corrective action proceeds.

The quality staff will update the status of the deficiency when there is a change in status. Before the start of each work day, the quality staff will note the deficiencies or nonconformance that requires follow up verification that day. The quality staff will enter the new or changed status into the DQCR. All deficiencies and nonconformance will be resolved prior to completion of the project and in the timeliest manner possible.

3.6.2 Root Cause Analysis

The root cause is always “upstream” from where the problem was detected. Two strategies that will be employed for determining the root cause of a deficiency or nonconformance for this project are: (a) tracing the problem back to the source, and (b) evaluation of the cause using basic questions such as who, what, when, where, why, and how. The question “Why?” is probably the most beneficial question when attempting to arrive at a root cause. This question may need to be asked multiple times before the root cause is identified. For example, “Why did A happen?” Answer:

“Because of B,” “Why did B happen?” Answer: “Because of C.” This process is carried on until the real cause is identified. Usually, the question “Why?” is asked five times to reach the true root cause.

Root cause analysis is a process designed for use in investigating and categorizing the root causes of events with safety, quality, and production impacts. Root cause analysis is a tool designed to help identify not only what and how an event occurred, but also why it happened.

The purpose of the root cause analysis is to pinpoint exactly where the system failed. Work that has been conducted up to the point of system failure will be accepted, and once corrective actions have been taken, rework (if necessary) should only be redone from the point of system failure onward.

3.6.3 Corrective Action

Following the root cause analysis, the Field Management Team will perform analysis of potential solutions (corrective actions) to identify the most effective in correcting the problem. This process will include all appropriate staff and will be documented via meeting notes and information listed in the proper sections on the DN or NCR. Potential remedies considered will include:

• Supplemental staff training

• Changes of equipment or modification of equipment currently in use

• Acquisition of supplemental equipment

• Implementation of new procedures or modification of existing procedures

• Changes in quality procedures

The Relyant PM is responsible for the final approval of all remedies, with the concurrence of NPS and other agencies, if applicable.

The quality staff will document the successful implementation of corrective action in the DN or NCR. This documentation will be supported by changes to the inspection procedures or schedule as warranted. The quality staff will not certify that corrective action has been taken until inspection of the actions and the resulting changes in the program are complete.

The Team will correct all deficiencies and nonconformance before delivery to the customer. If the identified condition can be corrected quickly, the quality staff will document the condition on the surveillance report as corrected without issuing a DN or NCR. When the identified deficiency is determined to be other than trivial, or is not an isolated case, then the process must be carried further. If the deficiency is minor in nature and not problematic throughout the process, the quality staff will issue a DN. If the problem is such that overall quality of the product is affected and/or the problem is widespread, the quality staff will issue an NCR. If the deficiency has the potential to result in a need for rework or jeopardizes the quality of future work, the quality staff will stop work and/or recommend and implement immediate corrective action to address the deficiency

3.7 Quality Documentation

3.7.1 Quality Inspection Checklists

Inspections conducted by the quality staff typically result in the development of list of items that do not conform to approved designs, plans, and specifications. During the course of each inspection, the quality staff will document items of non-compliance on the quality inspection checklist for corrective action. The checklist will also record what and when corrective actions were conducted, and when the specific items are completed or closed out.

3.7.2 Notifications

The RG team will inform the NPS of the identification and progress towards the resolution of deficiencies and nonconformance. This notification will be accomplished in accordance with the Communication Plan, through attendance at meetings, or direct contact.

3.7.3 Logbooks

A field logbook will be assigned to the UXO Technician for documenting details of site activities.

The information in the log book is intended to serve as a memory aide and in addressing follow-up questions that may arise. All pertinent information will be documented in the daily production reports and considered official project records.

3.8 Training Requirements

3.8.1 Site-Specific and Routine Training

The Field Management Team will provide on-the-job training to newly assigned project staff on their job requirements and techniques, with particular emphasis on problem prevention and documentation.

On-site training will include (but not limited to):

• Initial Indoctrination - Indoctrination on the methods and procedures detailed in the Work

Plan and QC Plan.

• Ordnance Identification – Review of the descriptions, fuse function, hazards, and key identification features of ordnance potentially present at the site.

3.8.2 Safety and Health

Accidents can happen on any project. For UXO Projects, the most common injuries are: 1) insect bites, 2) foot/ankle injuries, and 3) back strains. Safety and Health requirements for the drilling and test pit excavation will be managed by that contractor. For the MEC avoidance, PPE includes boots with composite toe/shank protection, gloves high visibility vest, and safety glasses. Hearing protection will be required if needed due to noise from the equipment. Hardhats are not required for the MEC avoidance but may be needed during equipment operations.

Routes to both ambulatory medical care and the emergency room are provided in Appendix A.

Chapter 4 Environmental Protection Plan

4.1 Purpose

The goal is to complete the SOW on schedule and without a safety incident or environmental incident through careful planning, training, supervision, and QC related to all aspects of the project.

The project site work and restoration (as required) will be performed IAW applicable regulations, guidance, and procedures, and in coordination with appropriate officials and agencies.

4.2 Existing Conditions Survey

The onsite AMME team will make a joint existing conditions survey, if required, prior to beginning field work. The survey will identify areas within the project site where proposed work may have a negative environmental impact. Sensitive areas will be identified and marked.

Workers will be given instructions on the activities that can and cannot be performed in these areas.

4.3 Potential Environmental Resource Impact

4.3.1 Endangered, Threatened, or Sensitive Species

The listed endangered species for Saipan includes the humped tree snail. MEC activities are unlikely to impact this species. If any endangered species or endangered species of concern are encountered during project operation, all activities will be stopped until a biological consultation can be discussed with the project team.

4.3.2 Wetlands

There are no known wetlands within the project site.

4.3.3 Cultural, Archaeological, and Water Resources within the Project Area

This project is to determine the presence of cultural and archaeological resources in the project area. Water resources are not known to be in the vicinity of the Archaeological Survey and Subsurface Testing Project.

4.3.4 Coastal Zones

The project area is adjacent to coastal areas. Tides are not expected to impact MEC operations.

4.4 Existing Waste Disposal Sites

No known waste disposal sites are located in the project area.

4.5 Mitigation Procedures

4.5.1 Manifesting, Transportation, and Disposal of Wastes

The contractor does not plan on the packaging, transportation, and/or disposal of hazardous wastes.

4.5.2 Burning Activities

There are no brush burning activities associated with this project.

4.5.3 Dust and Emission Control

Light/medium trucks, as well as hand tools will be used on a limited basis and will, to the extent practicable, avoid creating high traffic areas. All vehicles will be operated at low rates of speed to reduce dust. Dust emissions will be controlled through the use of administrative controls, such as speed limits and varied traffic patterns.

4.5.4 Spill Control and Prevention

Vehicles designed to travel on roads will be fueled at commercial filling stations that are designed to prevent and control potential spills. Fuel will not be stored on site.

4.5.5 Access Routes

The need to construct access routes is not anticipated. The site will be accessed from existing roads and off-road routes designated by the PM.

4.5.6 Control of Water Run-on and Run-off

There are no anticipated concerns with water run-on or run-off in the clearance site. The PM will be responsible for any Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) measures required.

4.5.7 Minimizing Areas of Disturbance

Work will only take place in areas defined in the SOW.

4.6 Post-Activity Clean-up

After completing the sub-surface sampling while utilizing anomaly avoidance techniques, the PM will ensure that all areas included in the scope are properly cleaned. No debris, with the exception of limited cut vegetation, will be left as a result of activities on the Site. The area will be backfilled to grade before departure each day.

4.7 Air Monitoring

No air monitoring requirements are anticipated during the work associated with this removal action.

Chapter 5 References

Department of the Navy (DON) NOSSA Instruction 8020.11B, Standard Operating Procedures Development, Implementation, and Maintained for Ammunition and Explosives, April 27, 2011.

. NOSSA Instruction 8020.15D, January 2013.

Department of Transportation (DOT). (2004). Title 49 CFR 177.835 (g). Class I Materials.

October 1, 2004.

DoD. (1991). 4160.21-M 1: Defense Demilitarization Manual. October 21. Revised February 14, 1995.

. DDESB TP18. (2015). Minimum Qualifications for UXO Technicians and Personnel.

. AR 200-1. (2007). Environmental Protection and Enhancement.

. 6055.09-M (2010). August 4, 2010. Ammunition and Explosive Safety Standards.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2002). 40 CFR 300. National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan. September 24, 2002.

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). (2005). Subpart 45.5. Management of Government Property in the Possession of Contractors. May 3, 2005.

NAVFAC, (July 2014) Munitions Response Sites, Saipan Construction Support Explosives Safety Submission (ESS)

NAVSEA Ammunition and Explosives Ashore: Safety Regulations for Handling, Storing, Production, Renovation, and Shipping, OP 5, Volume 1, Seventh Revision, 2007.

OSHA. General Industry Standards. 29 CFR 1910 and Construction Industry Standards, 29

CFR 1926.

http://www.osha.gove/pls/oshaweb/owasrch.searc_form?p_doc_type=STANDARDS& p_ toc_level=0 SWPD 3, Clean Water Act.

USACE. (2008). DID. Munitions Response (MR)-09-001. (2009). Work Plans.

. EM 385-1-1. (2014). Safety and Health Requirements Manual.

. EM 385-1-97. (2008). Explosives - Safety and Health Requirements Manual.

Revised September 15, 2008. Errata Sheet No. 1 & No. 2 Revised June 1, 2009, Errata Sheet No.

3 Revised July 13, 2009, Errata Sheet No. 4, Revised July 16, 2009, Errata Sheet No. 5, Revised July 21, 2010.

Note: In all cases, the most recent revisions of the above documents shall apply.

http://www.osha.gove/pls/oshaweb/owasrch.searc_form?p_doc_type=STANDARDS&p_ http://www.osha.gove/pls/oshaweb/owasrch.searc_form?p_doc_type=STANDARDS&p_

APPENDIX A

MAPS

Figure 1. Work Area

Route to medical, non-emergency ambulatory care:

Pacific Medical Center, Inc.

PMC Building, Middle Road, Gualo Rai Phone: +1 670 233-8100 Hours: 8AM-3PM, M-F

From the project site:

1. Head southwest, 290m

2. Turn left, 400m

3. Turn left onto Beach Rd/Rte 30, 400m

4. Turn right toward Middle Rd, 120m

5. Turn right onto Middle Rd, 2.6km

6. Destination will be on the left

Route to Emergency Medical Care:

Commonwealth Healthcare Corporation Emergency Room Garapan, Saipan, Northern Mariana Islands Phone: 911 or +1 670 234 8950 Hours: 24x7 Always Open

From the Project Site:

1. Take Beach Rd/Rte 30 to Middle Rd (400m)

2. Turn right onto Middle Rd (1.1km)

3. Drive to the destination on the left.

APPENDIX B

FORMS

DAILY SAFETY AND INSPECTION LOG

APPENDIX C

RESUMES

Matthew Nisbet 2664 Poe Rd, Soddy Daisy, TN 37379

(623) 258-3014 Cell oldschoolbomber@gmail.com

SUMMARY PROFILE:

For over the past 30 years, I have been an accomplished results-oriented professional leader in positions of increasing responsibility that included being an Army First Sergeant, Master Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Technician, Dignitary/Personnel/Facility Security Specialist, Program Manager; Certified Test Manager; and a Master Instructor. I have done Presidential, US and foreign dignitary personnel and High Threat Protection security. 100% disable Veteran

WORK HISTORY:

Relyant Global Nov 2017- Nov 2018

• Senior Unexploded Ordnance Supervisor (SUXOS) for new project in Guam. Assisted with Project Operations Management

• Assisted in Proposal writing

• Assisted in recruiting personnel for numerous projects.

Volunteer Veterans Service Officer Mar 2016- Present

• I have assisted numerous veterans with submitting full developed claims and appeals

• Developed training program to help Veterans sign up for EBenefits and My Health Vet

• Assisted multiple Veterans in starting their own Businesses

I established three Service Disable Veteran Owned Small Businesses (SDVOSB), ran operations and sold all three for a profit.

Professional Event Management Phoenix, AZ. May 2015-Jan2016 Military Recruiter Liaison/ Site Security Manager

• Sought out military personnel to work part and full time with company

• Selected to be personnel security for assistant coaches during ASU home games

• Supervised personnel at large events bag search, ticket taking, ejecting personnel

GO VETS Foundation Phoenix, AZ. Nov 2014- May 2015 Corporate & Government Relations

• Initial contact with new customers. Establish contracts and continue program management

• Company POC for VA and other programs. Develop training programs

ScaVet Technologies, Sewell, NJ Mar 2013-Feb 2015 Lead Field Engineer, as needed or contract permits

• Lead the team of highly qualified data collectors responsible for protocol data collection and training for the new Cargo Image Review Process (IRP) for DHS

• Collected baseline and IRP follow-up data using 10 Transportation Security Agency (TSA) certified Cargo Screeners at three air cargo screening facilities in two cities

Triple Canopy-Baghdad, Iraq Mar-Dec 2011 Senior EOD Technician, Worldwide Security Services (WPS)

• Supported the Ambassadors security team. Providing personnel and site security

• Supervised multiple WPS EOD teams throughout the International Zone (IZ) and other locations in Iraq for responding to and rendered safe explosive hazards including Improvised Explosive Devices (IED) for the US Embassy, other facilities and personnel

• Developed and provide training for Department of State (DoS) personnel in Building, Site, and Motorcade searches

• Maintained over 2 million dollar of Government equipment

EOD TECHNOLOGY INC. Tennessee Feb 2005-Feb 2010 Senior UXO Supervisor (SUXOS), PM, Business Development

• Program manager, SUXOS, Lead Instructor Weapons Intelligence Team (WIT), Recruiter

• Worked multiple tours in Iraq as Country Safety Manager, TWISS FOB Program Manager, PSD, Convoy Security, Business Development, and Site Manager Cache destruct team

• Developed and Managed IED training program certified by the DHS Grants and Training board currently in use today by first responders (fire, EMT, police)

• Deployed solo to Australia multiple times on classified projects

US Army Multiple Locations 1982-1985 1996-2005 First Sergeant / Unit Supervisor/ Team Leader, Member

• Three Years National response team leader for CBRNE West Coast

• Selected three times for security duty at the White House with USSS

• Test Manager assigned to the Pentagon, for numerous WMD test Programs.

• Security Advisor Atlanta, Sydney, Salt Lake Olympics

• Developed training programs for special Army and Marine Corp units

• Worked with UNSCOM Iraq as a weapons Inspector, On Site Inspection Agency (OSIA), and Office Counter Proliferation of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)

• Developed and taught training programs for Numerous Government Agencies

Demonstrated Specialized Occupational Skill Sets:

• NAVSCOLEOD Graduate 1990, Master EOD Cert 1998

• CQM Certificate 05/18,OSHA 40, 8HR, 30HR Hazards for Construction Certs 09/20

• Experienced Master EOD, Supervisor and Trainer

• CCW Arizona and Tennessee/ Armed and Unarmed Guard card Arizona

• Experienced in Personnel, Static, and Mobile Security

• Test Manger certified, experienced Project Manager

• CARVER Vulnerability Assessment certified instructor

• Master Instructor for General Dynamics Laser Program

• Certified Veterans Service Officer through the DAV Jun 2016, Knowledgeable on CFR38 part4, VA programs assisting Veterans

EDUCATION:

• California High School Whittier CA. Graduated Jun 1980 General Studies

• B.S. General Studies degree 183 College Credits

• Experienced user of MS Office, Word, Excel, Power Point and Outlook

PROFESSIONAL REFERENCES

Available upon request

Chapter 5 References