Minot AFB CSE Phase II_Final Report_Master1.pdf

Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota Comprehensive Site Evaluation Phase II

Final CSE Phase II Report

May 2011

Military Munitions Response Program

Page left blank intentionally

Comprehensive Site Evaluation Phase II

Final CSE Phase II Report

Military Munitions Response Program

May 2011

Prepared For:

Air Force Global Strike Command

HQ AFGSC/A7AN

41 Orville Wright Avenue, Building 5341 Barksdale AFB, LA 71110

Minot Air Force Base Minot AFB

5 CES/CEANR

320 Peacekeeper Place Room 115 Minot AFB, ND 58705

Prepared and Presented by:

U.S Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District

CENWO-PM-HA

1616 Capitol Avenue, Suite 9000 Omaha, NE 68102-4901

Sky Research, Inc.

12850 E. Control Tower Road Centennial, CO 80112

Final Report MMRP CSE Phase II

May 2011 i

Table of Contents Executive Summary…………………………………………………….................ES-1

1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................. 1-1

1.1 Purpose ...................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1.1 The United States Air Force Military Munitions Response Program .... 1-1

1.1.2 Comprehensive Site Evaluation Phase II ............................................ 1-5

1.2 Project Data Quality Objectives .................................................................. 1-6

1.3 Project Management................................................................................... 1-6

1.4 Project Scope ............................................................................................. 1-7

1.5 Report Organization.................................................................................... 1-9

2.0 Installation Background ............................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Location and Setting ................................................................................... 2-1

2.2 Installation Mission and Operational History ............................................... 2-1

2.3 Summary of Munitions and Explosives of Concern Related Activities ......... 2-2

2.3.1 History of MEC Activities .................................................................... 2-2

2.3.1.1 Trap and Skeet Range (TS322) ..................................................... 2-2

2.3.1.2 Grenade Range (GR320) .............................................................. 2-3

2.3.1.3 Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321) ........................................... 2-3

2.3.1.4 Old EOD Range (XU317) .............................................................. 2-4

2.4 Identification of Munitions Response Areas ................................................ 2-9

2.5 Identification of Munitions Response Site Subdivisions ............................... 2-9

2.6 Previous Investigations ............................................................................... 2-9

2.6.1 Trap and Skeet Range (TS322).......................................................... 2-9

2.6.2 Grenade Range (GR320) ................................................................... 2-9

2.6.3 Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321) ................................................ 2-9

2.6.4 Old EOD Range (XU317) ................................................................... 2-9

2.6.5 Comprehensive Site Evaluation Phase I Results .............................. 2-11

2.6.5.1 Deviations from CSE Phase I Recommendations ........................ 2-11

2.6.5.1.1 Visual Survey ............................................................................ 2-11

2.6.5.1.2 XRF Sampling ........................................................................... 2-11

3.0 Physical and Environmental Setting ............................................................ 3-1

3.1 Climate ....................................................................................................... 3-1

3.2 Topography ................................................................................................ 3-1

3.3 Hydrology ................................................................................................... 3-2

3.4 Soil and Vegetation Types .......................................................................... 3-2

3.4.1 Soil Characterization .......................................................................... 3-2

3.4.2 Vegetation Types ............................................................................... 3-9

3.5 Geology and Hydrogeology ...................................................................... 3-10

3.5.1 Geology ............................................................................................ 3-10

3.5.1.1 Geomorphology ........................................................................... 3-10

May 2011 ii

3.5.1.2 Bedrock Geology ......................................................................... 3-10

3.5.1.3 Unconsolidated Rock Deposits .................................................... 3-11

3.5.2 Hydrogeology ................................................................................... 3-11

3.5.2.1 Occurrence and Movement ......................................................... 3-12

3.5.2.2 Groundwater Quality .................................................................... 3-13

3.5.2.3 Groundwater Uses....................................................................... 3-13

4.0 Investigation Scope and Approach .............................................................. 4-1

4.1 Visual Survey.............................................................................................. 4-1

4.1.1 Methodologies .................................................................................... 4-1

4.1.2 Technologies ...................................................................................... 4-2

4.1.2.1 Schonstedt Model GA-52 Cx Metal Detector ................................. 4-2

4.1.2.2 Trimble Model GeoXT GPS ........................................................... 4-2

4.1.2.3 Ricoh Model 500SE Camera ....................................................... 4-13

4.1.3 Quality Control Procedures .............................................................. 4-13

4.1.3.1 Calibration Procedures ................................................................ 4-13

4.1.3.2 Daily Quality Control Report ........................................................ 4-13

4.2 Geophysical Survey .................................................................................. 4-13

4.2.1 Geophysical Methodologies ............................................................. 4-13

4.2.1.1 Geophysical Sampling Techniques .............................................. 4-14

4.2.1.2 Grid-Based Surveys .................................................................... 4-14

4.2.1.3 Geophysical Instrumentation and Technologies .......................... 4-14

4.2.1.3.1 EM61 ........................................................................................ 4-14

4.2.1.4 Positioning Systems .................................................................... 4-15

4.2.1.5 Geophysical Data Acquisition ...................................................... 4-15

4.2.1.5.1 Calibration Test Area................................................................. 4-16

4.2.1.5.2 Equipment Warm-Up ................................................................. 4-16

4.2.1.5.3 Static Background and Spike Test............................................. 4-16

4.2.1.5.4 Cable Shake Test ...................................................................... 4-19

4.2.1.5.5 Time Calibration Test ................................................................ 4-19

4.2.1.5.6 Point Position Test .................................................................... 4-19

4.2.1.5.7 Repeat Data .............................................................................. 4-19

4.2.1.6 Data Processing .......................................................................... 4-19

4.3 Environmental Media Sampling and Analysis ........................................... 4-20

4.3.1 Soil Sampling Activities .................................................................... 4-21

4.3.1.1 X-Ray Fluorescence Sampling and Analysis ............................... 4-21

4.3.1.1.1 Technology ............................................................................... 4-22

4.3.1.1.2 Surface Soil ............................................................................... 4-22

4.3.1.1.3 XRF Correlation Samples .......................................................... 4-24

4.3.1.2 Munitions Constituents Sampling ................................................. 4-29

4.4 Comprehensive Site Evaluation Phase II Screening Criteria ..................... 4-29

May 2011 iii

4.4.1 Screening Level Assessments ......................................................... 4-29

4.4.1.1 Human Health Screening Level Assessments ............................. 4-29

4.4.1.2 Ecological Screening Level Assessments .................................... 4-29

4.4.2 Background Level Assessment ........................................................ 4-29

4.4.3 Screening Criteria Uncertainty Analysis ............................................ 4-30

4.5 Data Quality Approach .............................................................................. 4-33

4.5.1 Data Quality Objectives .................................................................... 4-34

4.5.2 Laboratory Analytical Data Quality Assurance .................................. 4-35

4.5.3 Analytical Methodology .................................................................... 4-36

4.5.3.1 Lead ............................................................................................ 4-37

4.5.3.2 PAHs ........................................................................................... 4-37

4.5.4 Data Review ..................................................................................... 4-37

4.5.5 Data Validation ................................................................................. 4-37

4.6 Data Management .................................................................................... 4-38

4.6.1 Electronic Data ................................................................................. 4-38

4.6.2 Hardcopy Data ................................................................................. 4-38

4.6.3 Geographical Information System Data ............................................ 4-38

5.0 Munitions Response Areas ......................................................................... 5-1

5.1 Trap and Skeet Range (TS322) .................................................................. 5-1

5.1.1 Site Description .................................................................................. 5-1

5.1.2 History of Munitions and Explosives of Concern Activities .................. 5-1

5.1.3 Land Use ............................................................................................ 5-1

5.1.4 Access Controls ................................................................................. 5-1

5.1.5 Restrictions ........................................................................................ 5-2

5.1.6 Field Investigation Results .................................................................. 5-2

5.1.6.1 Visual Survey Results .................................................................... 5-2

5.1.6.2 X-Ray Fluorescence Sampling ...................................................... 5-2

5.1.6.3 Media Sampling Results ................................................................ 5-2

5.2 Grenade Range (GR320) ......................................................................... 5-33

5.2.1 Site Description ................................................................................ 5-33

5.2.2 History of Munitions and Explosives of Concern Activities ................ 5-33

5.2.3 Land Use .......................................................................................... 5-33

5.2.4 Access Controls ............................................................................... 5-33

5.2.5 Restrictions ...................................................................................... 5-33

5.2.6 Field Investigation Results ................................................................ 5-34

5.2.6.1 Visual Survey Results .................................................................. 5-34

5.2.6.2 Media Sampling Results .............................................................. 5-34

5.3 Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321) ...................................................... 5-37

5.3.1 Site Description ................................................................................ 5-37

5.3.2 History of Munitions and Explosives of Concern Activities ................ 5-37

May 2011 iv

5.3.3 Land Use .......................................................................................... 5-37

5.3.4 Access Controls ............................................................................... 5-38

5.3.5 Restrictions ...................................................................................... 5-38

5.3.6 Field Investigation Results ................................................................ 5-38

5.3.6.1 Visual Survey Results .................................................................. 5-38

5.3.6.2 Media Sampling Results .............................................................. 5-39

5.4 Old EOD Range (XU317) ......................................................................... 5-43

5.4.1 Site Description ................................................................................ 5-43

5.4.2 History of Munitions and Explosives of Concern Activities ................ 5-43

5.4.3 Land Use .......................................................................................... 5-44

5.4.4 Access Controls ............................................................................... 5-44

5.4.5 Restrictions ...................................................................................... 5-44

5.4.6 Field Investigation Results ................................................................ 5-44

5.4.6.1 Visual Survey Results .................................................................. 5-44

5.4.6.2 Geophysical Survey Results ........................................................ 5-45

5.4.6.3 Media Sampling Results .............................................................. 5-46

5.5 Natural and Cultural Resources ................................................................ 5-51

5.5.1 Natural Resources............................................................................ 5-51

5.5.1.1 Threatened, Endangered, and Special Status Species ................ 5-51

5.5.1.2 Sensitive Ecological Settings ....................................................... 5-51

5.5.2 Cultural Resources ........................................................................... 5-51

5.6 Identification of Potential Receptors .......................................................... 5-52

6.0 Evaluation of Known/Suspected Munitions and Explosives of Concern ....... 6-1

6.1 Munitions and Explosives of Concern Technical Data................................. 6-1

6.1.1 Trap and Skeet Range (TS322).......................................................... 6-1

6.1.2 Grenade Range (GR320) ................................................................... 6-1

6.1.3 Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321) ................................................ 6-1

6.1.4 Old EOD Range (XU317) ................................................................... 6-2

6.2 Munitions and Explosives of Concern Primary Sources and Release Mechanisms .......................................................................................................... 6-2

6.2.1 Trap and Skeet Range (TS322).......................................................... 6-2

6.2.2 Grenade Range (GR320) ................................................................... 6-6

6.2.3 Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321) ................................................ 6-6

6.2.4 Old EOD Range (XU317) ................................................................... 6-6

6.3 Munitions and Explosives of Concern Secondary Sources ......................... 6-6

6.4 Munitions and Explosives of Concern Penetration Estimates ...................... 6-6

6.5 Special Consideration Munitions and Explosives of Concern ...................... 6-6

6.6 Known/Suspected Munitions Constituents .................................................. 6-7

6.7 Explosive Safety Submission Information ................................................... 6-7

6.7.1 Munitions with the Greatest Fragmentation Distance .......................... 6-7

May 2011 v

6.7.2 Maximum Credible Event ................................................................... 6-7

6.7.3 Frost Line ........................................................................................... 6-8

7.0 Evaluation of Hazardous Waste/Substances ............................................... 7-1

7.1 Hazardous Waste Activities ........................................................................ 7-1

7.2 Hazardous Waste Characteristics ............................................................... 7-1

7.3 Identification of Source Areas ..................................................................... 7-1

7.4 Characterization of Potential Contaminants of Concern Known/Suspected Releases ............................................................................................................... 7-1

7.5 Special Considerations ............................................................................... 7-1

8.0 Conceptual Site Models .............................................................................. 8-1

8.1 Munitions and Explosives of Concern ......................................................... 8-1

8.1.1 MEC Exposure Pathway Analysis ...................................................... 8-1

8.1.1.1 Transport Processes ..................................................................... 8-1

8.1.1.2 Exposure Media and Accessibility ................................................. 8-2

8.1.1.3 MEC Exposure Receptors ............................................................. 8-2

8.1.1.4 MEC Exposure Conclusions ........................................................ 8-13

8.2 Munitions Constituents, Hazardous Substances, Pollutants, and Contaminants of Concern Conceptual Site Model ............................................... 8-13

8.2.1 Soil Exposure Pathway Analysis ...................................................... 8-13

8.2.1.1 Soil Exposure Receptors ............................................................. 8-13

8.2.1.2 Soil Exposure Conclusions .......................................................... 8-14

8.2.2 Sediment Exposure Pathway Analysis ............................................. 8-14

8.2.2.1 Sediment Exposure Receptors .................................................... 8-21

8.2.2.2 Sediment Exposure Conclusions ................................................. 8-21

8.2.3 Surface Water Exposure Pathway Analysis ...................................... 8-21

8.2.3.1 Surface Water Exposure Receptors ............................................ 8-21

8.2.3.2 Surface Water Exposure Conclusions ......................................... 8-21

8.2.4 Groundwater Exposure Pathway Analysis ........................................ 8-21

8.2.4.1 Groundwater Exposure Receptors ............................................... 8-22

8.2.4.2 Groundwater Exposure Conclusions ........................................... 8-22

9.0 Screening Level Human Health Risk Assessment ....................................... 9-1

9.1 General Approach ...................................................................................... 9-1

9.2 Pathways and Receptors ............................................................................ 9-1

9.3 Human Health Screening Criteria ............................................................... 9-1

9.4 Soil ............................................................................................................. 9-1

9.4.1 Trap and Skeet Range (TS322).......................................................... 9-1

9.5 Surface Water............................................................................................. 9-2

9.6 Sediment .................................................................................................... 9-2

9.7 Groundwater ............................................................................................... 9-2

9.8 Human Health Risk Assessment Conclusions and Recommendations ....... 9-2

May 2011 vi

10.0 Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment ........................................... 10-1

10.1 General Approach .................................................................................... 10-1

10.2 Habitat and Receptors .............................................................................. 10-1

10.3 Ecological Screening Criteria .................................................................... 10-1

10.4 Soil ........................................................................................................... 10-1

10.4.1 Trap and Skeet Range (TS322)........................................................ 10-2

10.5 Additional Ecological Issues ..................................................................... 10-2

10.6 Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment Conclusions and Recommendations .............................................................................................. 10-2

11.0 Munitions Response Site Prioritization Protocol ........................................ 11-1

11.1 Explosive Hazard Evaluation Module ........................................................ 11-1

11.2 Chemical Warfare Materiel Hazard Evaluation Module ............................. 11-3

11.3 Health Hazard Evaluation Module............................................................. 11-4

11.4 Munitions Response Site Prioritization Protocol Priority Scores ................ 11-6

12.0 Perchlorate Reporting ............................................................................... 12-1

13.0 Summary and Conclusions ....................................................................... 13-1

13.1 Summary of Comprehensive Site Evaluation Phase II Activities ............... 13-1

13.2 Summary of Comprehensive Site Evaluation Phase II Findings ................ 13-1

13.2.1 Trap and Skeet Range (TS322)........................................................ 13-1

13.2.2 Grenade Range (GR320) ................................................................. 13-2

13.2.3 Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321) .............................................. 13-2

13.2.4 OLD EOD Range (XU317) ............................................................... 13-3

13.3 Assessment of Potential Munitions Constituent Releases ......................... 13-4

14.0 Recommendations (Future Investigation and/or Action) ............................ 14-1

14.1 Cohort Assignment ................................................................................... 14-1

14.2 Process Streamlining Opportunities .......................................................... 14-2

14.3 Additional Munitions Response Site Designations (Splitting the Munitions Response Areas) ................................................................................................ 14-2

14.3.1 Trap and Skeet Range (TS322)........................................................ 14-2

14.3.2 Grenade Range (GR320) ................................................................. 14-3

14.3.3 Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321) .............................................. 14-3

14.3.4 Old EOD Range (XU317) ................................................................. 14-3

14.4 Changes to Munitions Response Area/Munitions Response Site Footprints ................................................................................................................. 14-3

14.5 Future Response Actions and Objectives ................................................. 14-3

14.6 Identify Gaps in Conceptual Site Model .................................................. 14-15

14.7 DoD MRSPP Priority............................................................................... 14-15

14.8 Site Sequencing Considerations ............................................................. 14-15

May 2011 vii

List of Tables

Table 1-1 Key Project Personnel................................................................................. 1-6 Table 1-2 Data Requirements for Minot AFB CSE Phase II ........................................ 1-8 Table 2-1 MRA Summary Information for Minot AFB .................................................. 2-5 Table 3-1 Characteristics of Predominant Soil Types .................................................. 3-4 Table 4-1 Summary of Samples Collected During the CSE Phase II Field Activities . 4-21 Table 4-2 Minot AFB XRF Correlation Analysis ......................................................... 4-24 Table 4-3 Screening Criteria for the Minot AFB CSE Phase II ................................... 4-31 Table 4-4 Data Quality Indicators .............................................................................. 4-35 Table 5-1 Visual Survey Results – Trap and Skeet Range (TS322) ............................ 5-2 Table 5-2 XRF Sampling Results for Trap and Skeet Range (TS322) ....................... 5-15 Table 5-3 Chemicals Detected In Surface Soil Trap and Skeet Range (TS322) ........ 5-31 Table 5-4 Visual Survey Results – Grenade Range (GR320) .................................... 5-34 Table 5-5 Visual Survey Results – Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321) ................ 5-39 Table 5-6 Visual Survey Results – Old EOD Range (XU317) .................................... 5-45 Table 6-1 Munitions and Explosives of Concern ......................................................... 6-3 Table 8-1 Conceptual Site Models .............................................................................. 8-3 Table 9-1 Trap and Skeet Range (TS322) Human Health Screening .......................... 9-5 Table 10-1 Trap and Skeet Range (TS322) Ecological Screening ............................ 10-3 Table 11-1 Summary of the EHE Data Element Scores ............................................ 11-3 Table 11-2 Summary of the CHE Data Element Scores ............................................ 11-4 Table 11-3 Summary of the HHE Data Element Scores ............................................ 11-6 Table 11-4 Priority Ratings for Minot AFB MRSs ...................................................... 11-7 Table 14-1 USAF MMRP Cohort Assignments .......................................................... 14-1 Table 14-2 Conclusions and Recommendations ..................................................... 14-13

May 2011 viii

List of Figures

Figure 1-1 Munitions Response Areas, Minot AFB, ND ............................................... 1-3 Figure 2-1, Site Layout, Minot AFB, ND ...................................................................... 2-7 Figure 2-2 Trap and Skeet Range (TS322), Minot AFB, ND ...................................... 2-13 Figure 2-3 Grenade Range (GR320), Minot AFB, ND ............................................... 2-15 Figure 2-4 Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321), Minot AFB, ND ............................ 2-17 Figure 2-5 Old EOD Range (XU317), Minot AFB, ND ............................................... 2-19 Figure 3-1 Topography, Minot AFB, ND ...................................................................... 3-5 Figure 3-2 Soil Types, Minot AFB, ND ........................................................................ 3-7 Figure 4-1 Proposed Visual Survey Areas, Minot AFB, ND ......................................... 4-3 Figure 4-2 Proposed Visual Survey Transects, Trap and Skeet Range (TS322), Minot

AFB, ND ..................................................................................................... 4-5 Figure 4-3 Proposed Visual Survey Transects, Grenade Range (GR320), Minot AFB, ND .............................................................................................................. 4-7 Figure 4-4 Proposed Visual Survey Transects, Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321), Minot AFB, ND ............................................................................................ 4-9 Figure 4-5 Proposed Visual Survey Transects, Old EOD Range (XU317), Minot AFB, ND ............................................................................................................ 4-11 Figure 4-6 Proposed Geophysical Survey Old EOD Range (XU317), Minot AFB, ND

................................................................................................................. 4-17 Figure 4-7 Proposed XRF Sample Locations, Trap and Skeet Range (TS322), Minot

AFB, ND ................................................................................................... 4-25 Figure 4-8 XRF Correlation Results .......................................................................... 4-27 Figure 5-1 Visual Survey Results, Transects, and Features of Interest, Trap and Skeet

Range (TS322), Minot AFB, ND .................................................................. 5-3 Figure 5-2 XRF Sample Locations and Results, Trap and Skeet Range (TS322), Minot

AFB, ND ..................................................................................................... 5-5 Figure 5-2a XRF Sample Locations and Results, Trap and Skeet Range (TS322), Minot

AFB, ND ..................................................................................................... 5-7 Figure 5-2b XRF Sample Locations and Results, Trap and Skeet Range (TS322), Minot

AFB, ND ..................................................................................................... 5-9 Figure 5-2c XRF Sample Locations and Results, Trap and Skeet Range (TS322), Minot

AFB, ND ................................................................................................... 5-11 Figure 5-3 PAH Sample Location, Trap and Skeet Range (TS322), Minot AFB, ND . 5-13 Figure 5-4 Visual Survey Results, Transects, and Features of Interest, Grenade Range

(GR320), Minot AFB, ND .......................................................................... 5-35 Figure 5-5 Visual Survey Results, Transects, and Features of Interest, Camp Laird

Grenade Range (GR321), Minot AFB, ND ................................................ 5-41 Figure 5-6 Visual Survey Results, Transects, and Features of Interest, Old EOD Range

(XU317), Minot AFB, ND ........................................................................... 5-47 Figure 5-7 Geophysical Anomaly Density, Old EOD Range (XU317), Minot AFB, ND

................................................................................................................. 5-49

May 2011 ix

Figure 8-1 MEC Conceptual Site Model (Graphical) For Trap and Skeet Range (TS322) ................................................................................................................... 8-7

Figure 8-2 MEC Conceptual Site Model (Graphical) For Grenade Range (GR320) ..... 8-9 Figure 8-3 MEC Conceptual Site Model (Graphical) For Old EOD Range (XU317) ... 8-11 Figure 8-4 MC Conceptual Site Model (Graphical) For Trap and Skeet Range (TS322) ..

................................................................................................................. 8-15 Figure 8-5 MC Conceptual Site Model (Graphical) For Grenade Range (GR320) ..... 8-17 Figure 8-6 MC Conceptual Site Model (Graphical) For Old EOD Range (XU317) ..... 8-19 Figure 14-1 Munitions Response Site, Trap and Skeet Range (TS322), Minot AFB, ND

................................................................................................................. 14-5 Figure 14-2 Munitions Response Site, Grenade Range (GR320), Minot AFB, ND .... 14-7 Figure 14-3 Munitions Response Site, Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321), Minot

AFB, ND ................................................................................................... 14-9 Figure 14-4 Munitions Response Site, Old EOD Range (XU317), Minot AFB, ND .. 14-11

May 2011 x

List of Appendices

Appendix A Definitions

Appendix B Abbreviations and Acronyms

Appendix C References

Appendix D Photo Documentation Log

Appendix E Field Notes and Forms

Appendix F Summary of Analytical Data

Appendix G Data Validation Reports

Appendix H MRSPP Tables

Appendix I RACER Worksheets

Appendix J EESOH-MIS Worksheets (Formerly AFRIMS)

Appendix K Public Participation

Appendix L Geophysical Survey Data

Executive Summary

May 2011 ES-1

The following Executive Summary provides a brief summary of the conclusions and recommendations as a result of the Comprehensive Site Evaluation (CSE) Phase II project. The Minot AFB CSE Phase II field work was performed in September through October 2009. The four Munitions Response Areas (MRAs) associated with the Minot AFB CSE Phase II investigation include the following:

� Trap and Skeet Range (TS322)

� Grenade Range (GR320)

� Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321)

� Old EOD Range (XU317)

It was determined by Minot AFB following the CSE Phase II field activities that Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321) will be used in the future for Civil Engineering Training, Expeditionary Combat Skills Training and Security Forces Training. As a result, Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321) is considered an “Operational Range” and is not eligible for inclusion in the Military Munitions Response Program (MMRP).

The CSE Phase II field investigation at Minot AFB included visual surveys at all four MRAs; X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) sampling and analysis at the Trap and Skeet Range (TS322); and Geophysical surveys at the Old EOD Range (XU317).

The CSE Phase II compiled and evaluated information about Minot AFB MRAs relating to the possible presence of Munitions and Explosives of Concern (MEC) and associated contamination of environmental media from Munitions Constituents (MC). A summary of findings for each MRA, based on data collected during the CSE Phase II is provided in Section 13.

The data collected from the MRAs at Minot AFB were evaluated to determine the appropriate designation of Munitions Response Sites (MRSs). Based on this evaluation, it is recommended that the MRAs be subdivided into separate MRSs, as follows, to facilitate cleanup, additional investigation, or recommendations for No Further Action (NFA). The following is a summary of the recommendations included in Section 14:

Trap and Skeet Range (TS322)

See Figure 14-1 for the Trap and Skeet Range (TS322) MRSs.

� TS322 MRS – Trap and Skeet Range (Contaminated)– Approximately 2.7 acres

� TS322a MRS – Trap and Skeet Range (Uncontaminated) – Approximately

25.3 acres

Conclusions and Recommendation for the Trap and Skeet Range (TS322) MRSs are summarized below and included in Table 14-2 Conclusions and Recommendations.

� TS322 MRS – Trap and Skeet Range – Removal Action (removal of PAH contaminated soils and associated clay target debris)

May 2011 ES-2

� TS322a MRS – Trap and Skeet Range – No Further Action (NFA)

Grenade Range (GR320)

See Figure 14-2 for the Grenade Range (GR320) MRSs.

� GR320 MRS – Grenade Range (Munitions Debris) – Approximately 1.9 acres

� GR320a MRS – Grenade Range (Unsurveyable) – Approximately 6.5 acres

Conclusions and Recommendation for the Grenade Range (GR320) MRSs are summarized below and included in Table 14-2 Conclusions and Recommendations.

� GR320 MRS – Grenade Range (Munitions Debris) – Further Munitions Response Action

� GR320a MRS – Grenade Range (Unsurveyable) – Further Munitions Response Action

Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321)

See Figure 14-3 for the Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321) MRS.

� GR321 MRS – Camp Laird Grenade Range (Operational Range) – Approximately 38.3 acres

Conclusions and Recommendations for the Camp Laird Grenade Range (GR321) MRSs are summarized below and included in Table 14-2 Conclusions and Recommendations.

� GR321 MRS – Camp Laird Grenade Range – Operational Range (MRS is not eligible for inclusion in MMRP and should be administrative closed.)

Old EOD Range (XU317)

See Figure 14-4 for the Old EOD Range (XU317) MRSs.

� XU317 MRS – Old EOD Range (Geophysical Anomalies) – Approximately

64.7 acres

� XU317a MRS – Old EOD Range (Sewage Lagoons) – Approximately 26.1 acres

Conclusions and Recommendations for the Old EOD Range (XU317) MRSs are summarized below and included in Table 14-2 Conclusions and Recommendations.

� XU317 MRS – Old EOD Range – Remedial Investigation (Geophysical Anomalies)

� XU317a MRS – Old EOD Range – Base Sewage Lagoons (No Known or Suspected Hazard) – NFA

The CSE Phase II Report is organized into 14 Sections and each sections’ purpose is summarized in Section 1.5.

May 2011 1-1

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Purpose

In Support of the U.S. Air Force (USAF) Military Munitions Response Program (MMRP), a Comprehensive Site Evaluation (CSE) Phase II was performed at Minot Air Force Base (AFB) in September through October 2009. The goal of the USAF MMRP is to make munitions response areas (MRAs) safe for reuse and to protect human health and the environment in the process. The MMRP addresses issues related to munitions and explosives of concern (MEC) and munitions constituents (MC) associated with each MRA, as well as related hazardous substances, pollutants, and potential contaminants of concern (PCOCs). The MRAs evaluated in the CSE Phase II for Minot AFB are presented in Figure 1-1.

1.1.1 The United States Air Force Military Munitions Response Program

An MRA is defined as any area on a defense site that is known or suspected to contain MEC and/or MC (e.g., former ranges, or munitions burial areas). Based on information gathered during the CSE Phase I & II, and depending on site-specific factors, each MRA may be designated as a single munitions response site (MRS), or it may be subdivided for the purposes of evaluation and response into multiple MRSs, which represent discrete locations within an MRA that, based on investigation or historical records, are known or suspected to contain MEC and/or MC and require a munitions response.

Subdividing MRAs into multiple MRSs allows for more efficient characterization so that munitions responses specific to local conditions can be conducted.

The USAF developed the CSE concept from existing data acquisition methods and data analysis, tracking and reporting tools to serve as the initial Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) preliminary assessment (PA) and site inspection (SI) for the MMRP inventory. The CSE is a holistic approach to munitions response and environmental restoration that assesses the unique challenges faced at MRAs. This includes explosives safety issues posed by MEC [e.g., unexploded ordnance (UXO) and discarded military munitions (DMM)], MC in high enough concentrations to pose an explosive hazard, and associated releases of MC [e.g., hazardous substances; pollutants; contaminants; and petroleum, oil, and lubricant (POL)] to the environment.

The CSE process provides the historical, anecdotal, visual, analytical and geophysical data that serves as the basis for USAF decision making regarding follow-on munitions response actions. The CSE is conducted in two distinct phases: CSE Phase I generally consists of historical records review (HRR), visual reconnaissance, and interviews, and is analogous to the CERCLA PA. CSE Phase II generally consists of visual surveys, environmental sampling, and geophysical surveys. CSE Phase II is analogous to the CERCLA SI. The CSE Phase I and II investigations differ from the traditional CERCLA PA and SI with respect to the data requirements. To meet the goals established by the Department of Defense (DoD), the CERCLA PA and SI are primarily focused on obtaining data to input into the DoD Munitions Response Site Prioritization Protocol (MRSPP) and for the purposes of site sequencing for clean-up.

May 2011 1-2

The CSE, however, includes an expanded array of analytical, tracking and reporting tools to support decision making and, therefore, has greater data requirements. Tools utilized as part of the CSE include:

� Conceptual Site Model (CSM) - for project communication, hazard assessment, and data gap analysis

� MRSPP - to prioritize sites for further munitions response actions based on relative risk

� Hazard Ranking System (HRS) - data elements to ensure full characterization of the MRA

� Enterprise Environmental, Safety, and Occupational Health Management Information System (EESOH-MIS), which is a comprehensive, web based, automated information system for aggregation and collection of Environmental, Safety and Occupational Health data and its use in enhancing operational capabilities.

� Air Force Restoration Information Management System (AFRIMS) - for a range of program management functions, including data calls and audits (if required to support EESOH-MIS)

� Remedial Action Cost Engineering Requirements (RACER), MMRP Module for estimating the costs of future munitions response actions

Fi na l R ep or t

M M

R P

C

SE

P ha se

II

M in ot

A ir

Fo rc e B as e, N or th D ak ot a M ay

1-gu re

-1 M un iti on s

R es po ns e A re as

, M in ot A

FB

, N

D

F al R ep or t M

M R

P C

S E

P ha ot

A ir

Fo rc e B as e, N or th D ak ot a

M ay

1-

P ag e le ft bl an k in te nt io lly

May 2011 1-5

1.1.2 Comprehensive Site Evaluation Phase II

The primary goals of the CSE Phase II are as follows:

� Determine if further munitions response actions are required at each MRA investigated

� Determine if there is need for an emergency response and/or other removal action at any MRA on the installation

� Determine the boundaries of the MRAs investigated, and where appropriate, make recommendations to subdivide the MRAs into discreet MRSs

� Clarify the original munitions related activities or sources of MEC [e.g., target areas, open burn/open detonation (OB/OD) areas] that occurred on the MRSs

� Identify the locations of anomalies and estimate anomaly densities � Identify specific receptors located on or near the MRS boundaries � Determine the accessibility of the MRSs by specific receptors and the likelihood that known or suspected MEC can affect said receptors � Identify any hazardous substances, pollutants and contaminants, or other

PCOCs (e.g., POL) that may be present � Determine whether MC, hazardous substances, pollutants and contaminants, or other constituents have been released into the environment

� Determine whether MC, hazardous substances, pollutants and contaminants, or other constituents have affected specific receptors

� Collect information to support completion of the Explosive Hazard Evaluation (EHE), Heath Hazard Evaluation (HHE), and Chemical Warfare Material Hazard Evaluation (CHE) modules of the MRSPP for each

MRA/MRS

� Collect information (e.g., frost heave potential, overland flow, geologic conditions, erosion activity) to determine the migration potential for MEC and/or MC

� Collect sufficient data to facilitate evaluation of pathway characteristics, analytical data, and target receptor information

� Identify specific current and future land use activities within the MRSs � Collect sufficient data to support the development of an accurate CSM � Collect sufficient data to support cost estimating for further munitions response actions using RACER � Collect sufficient data to support updating program management information in EESOH-MIS, or the current management information system (MIS) system

May 2011 1-6

1.2 Project Data Quality Objectives

The data quality objectives (DQOs) for this investigation are based on data requirements specified in AF Guide for Conducting the Comprehensive Site Evaluation Phase II at Air Force Munitions Response Areas (Version 4.0) (USAF 2006) for completion of Phase II investigations. Collected data were used to complete the following data worksheets:

MRSPP (Appendix H), RACER (Appendix I) and EESOH-MIS (Appendix J).

1.3 Project Management

This CSE Phase II report has been prepared by Sky Research, Inc., with technical support from URS, Corp. A list of key personnel is provided in Table 1-1.

Table 1-1 Key Project Personnel

Organization Name and Project Role Telephone Number/Email Address

AF Global Strike Command Carl Lanz

(318) 456-2422 Carl.Lanz@barksdale.af.mil

AFCEE Eric Barefoot

(210) 395-8581 Eric.Barefoot.1@us.af.mil

Minot AFB

Michael G. Getty Chief, Environmental Management

Michael.Getty@minot.af.mil

Robert Lowe Environmental Restoration Program Manager

(701) 723-4847 Robert.Lowe@minot.af.mil

USACE Omaha

Glenn Marks Project Manager

(402) 995-2286 Glenn.Marks@usace.army.mil

Janie Carrig Technical Lead

(402) 995-2283 Janie.E.Carrig@ usace.army.mil

Chris Bryant OE Safety Specialist

(402) 995-2279 Christopher.A.Bryant@usace.army.mil

Sky Research, Inc. Meggan Pickner Project Manager

(541) 552-5163 Meggan.Pickner@skyresearch.com

Sky Research, Inc. Andrew Biaggi Project Support

(541) 552-5149 Andrew.Biaggi@skyresearch.com

Sky Research, Inc. Pamela Blanton Field Manager

(541) 552-5157 Pamela.Blanton@skyresearch.com

URS, Corp. Jeff Voelker Technical Lead

(402) 952-2558 Jeffrey_Voelker@urscorp.com

May 2011 1-7

1.4 Project Scope

The CSE Phase II project objectives were achieved through the following specific tasks:

� Preparation and submittal of a CSE Phase II Work Plan, and Site-Specific Health and Safety Plan (SSHP)

� Visual surveying to identify MEC or MEC-related items and/or features � Geophysical surveying to identify the locations of anomalies and estimate anomaly densities � Sampling and analysis of surface and subsurface soil to determine if MC, hazardous substances, pollutants and contaminants, or other constituents have been released into the environment

� Evaluating analytical data from the sampling effort to determine whether released MC or other possible contaminants present significant potential risk to specific MRA receptors

� Collecting sufficient data to determine migration potential for MEC and/or MC, and evaluation of potential pathway characteristics for each MRA

� Supporting public participation activities, including the preparation of two fact sheets; one introducing the CSE Phase II, and the second presenting the results of the investigation

� Collecting information to support updating tables for the EHE, CHE, and HHE modules of the MRSPP for MRAs

� Updating the RACER and EESOH-MIS data to include CSE Phase II information

� Entering the updated MRSPP, RACER, and EESOH-MIS data into the Data Management Tool (DMT) database

� Preparation and submittal of this CSE Phase II Report in accordance with the outline provided by the USAF, AF Guide for Conducting the Comprehensive Site Evaluation Phase II at Air Force Munitions Response Areas (Version 4.0) (USAF 2006)

� Updating the Administrative Record (AR) and Information Repository (IR)

The proposed CSE Phase II data requirements as presented in the Work Plan for each MRA are listed below in Table 1-2. The data collected from each MRA during the field work is identified in Sections 4.0 and 5.0.

May 2011 1-8

Table 1-2 Data Requirements for Minot AFB CSE Phase II

MRA

(Range Type)

Scope Proposed CSE Phase II Activities

Potential Results and Proposed Path Forward

Trap and Skeet Range

(TS322)

Evaluate whether lead and/or polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are present above applicable regulatory action levels.

Perform a visual survey of the MRA to evaluate the location and features of the site.

Conduct XRF and off-site laboratory analytical correlation sampling of surface and subsurface soil to evaluate if lead is present above the 400 mg/kg regulatory action level.

Define vertical and horizontal extent of contamination if elevated levels of lead are detected.

Collect soil samples from the shotfall area and locations where there is evidence of clay target debris for off-site laboratory analysis to evaluate if PAHs are present above the regulatory action levels.

If lead or PAHs are present above regulatory action levels, recommend appropriate response actions.

If no lead or PAHs are present above regulatory action levels, propose

NFA.

Grenade Range

(GR320)

Evaluate extent of MEC and MC present at the former grenade range.

Perform visual survey of the MRA to evaluate the location and features of the site and the extent of any surface MEC at the site.

If MEC is found during the visual surveys, collect surface soil samples for off-site laboratory analysis to evaluate if MC are present in soil above regulatory action levels.

If MEC is found or if MC are present above the regulatory action levels, recommend appropriate response actions.

If no MEC is identified, no MC sampling will be performed.

If no MEC is identified and no MC are present above the regulatory action levels, propose

NFA.

Camp Laird Grenade Range

(GR321)(1)

Evaluate extent of MEC and MC present at the former grenade range.

Perform visual survey of the MRA to evaluate the location and features of the site and the extent of any surface MEC at the site.

If MEC is found or if MC are present above the regulatory action levels, recommend appropriate response actions.

May 2011 1-9

Table 1-2 Data Requirements for Minot AFB CSE Phase II

MRA

(Range Type)

Scope Proposed CSE Phase II Activities

Potential Results and Proposed Path Forward

If MEC is found during the visual surveys, collect surface soil samples for off-site laboratory analysis to evaluate if MC are present in soil above regulatory action levels.

If no MEC is identified, no MC sampling will be performed, If no MEC is identified and no MC are present above the regulatory action levels, propose

NFA.

Old EOD Range

(XU317)

Evaluate extent of MEC and MC present at the former EOD range.

Perform visual survey of the MRA to evaluate the location and features of the site and the extent of any surface MEC at the site.

Perform geophysical surveys at the MRA to determine the locations of anomalies and estimate anomaly density.

If MEC is found during the visual surveys, collect surface soil samples for off-site laboratory analysis to evaluate if MC are present in soil above regulatory…