Similarities and Differences A C A Comp mparis ison o of C CWM - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Similarities and Differences A C A Comp mparis ison o of C CWM v vs. C . Conventio ional M l MEC Re Response O Operatio ions s Chris ten Braak, M2S2 Webinar, September 18, 2019 A Comparison of CWM vs. Conventional MEC Response Operations

Agenda • Defi finitions s • Pl Planning g • Pe Personnel l • Tr Train ainin ing g • Field W Work P Phases s • Su Summary y No Non-c -compliant S Suspect C CWM WM A Assessment t A Comparison of CWM vs. Conventional MEC Response Operations 2

Definitions • What is Chemical Agent (CA)? A compound producing lethal or other damaging effects on human beings that is • intended for use in military operations to kill, seriously injure, or incapacitate a person through its physiological effects • What is Chemical Warfare Materiel (CWM)? Munitions containing CA • Bulk CA containers (e.g., 55-gallon drums and 1-ton containers) • Miscellaneous containers (e.g., laboratory bottles) that, based on location, may • contain CA Munitions with unknown liquid fills • • What is not CWM? Compound Classification Riot control agents, chemical herbicides, • Distilled Mustard (HD) blister agent smoke- and flame-producing items, Nitrogen Mustard (HN-1) blister agent recovered soil, and debris contaminated with CA Lewisite (L) blister agent VX nerve agent CAIS containing dilute CA or industrial • chemicals Sarin (GB) nerve agent Cyanogen Chloride (CK or CC) Industrial Chemical • CWM items must be addressed by DoD Phosgene (PS) Industrial Chemical Chloropicrin (PS) Industrial Chemical A Comparison of CWM vs. Conventional MEC Response Operations 3

Chemical Agent Identification Sets (CAIS) • CAIS: Issued for training until mid-1960s • CAIS that contain dilute CA or industrial chemicals are hazardous waste • CAIS that contain neat CA (i.e., CAIS K941 and CAIS K942) and any CAIS found to contain dilute nerve agent are CWM A Comparison of CWM vs. Conventional MEC Response Operations 4

What is a CWM Site? • Do you have a CWM site? Refer to Guidance Document (the “CWM Bible”) • 10+ years old; identifies conduct of CWM responses • • Probability of encountering CWM Installation or District Commanders approve an assessment • of the probability of encountering CWM prior to intrusive where there is evidence (e.g., historical or physical) that CWM may be present Documented per DA PAM 385-30, Mishap Risk Management • CWM site if MRS known or suspected to contain CWM – • “Occasional” or higher probability • CWM sites require CEHNC involvement • Some CWM sites may also have MEC, HTW, or all three Mishap Risk Management Probability Categories Pr Probability y Sy Symbol l Definition De n Fr Frequent t A Occurs very often known to happen regularly. Li Likely ely B Occurs several times; a common occurrence Oc Occasi sional l C Occurs sporadically, but is not uncommon Se Seldom m D Remotely possible; could occur at some point Un Unlikely y E Can assume will not occur but not impossible A Comparison of CWM vs. Conventional MEC Response Operations 5

Overview: Project Phases for Conventional and CWM Sites • To highlight the differences Project Planning & QAPP Development between conventional and CWM sites, we will review the different Site Preparation fieldwork phases & Training • Project Planning & QAPP Development DGM & Intrusive • Field Operations Investigation • Reporting & Project Closeout MEC/CWM Handling • Most of these phases require extra & Disposal activities for CWM sites Environmental Sampling & Analysis IDW Handling & Disposal Reporting & Project Closeout A Comparison of CWM vs. Conventional MEC Response Operations 6

Planning & QAPP Development Conventional Site CWM Site Project Planning & QAPP Development • QAPP • QAPP • ESP/ESS Site Preparation • CSP/CSS & Training MGFD/HFD/MFD • MCE/1% Lethality/NOSE • Magazine siting • MGFD/HFD/MFD DGM & Intrusive • Investigation • APP/SSHP Magazine & Interim Holding Facility (IHF) • siting MEC/CWM Handling • APP/SSHP & Disposal Site Layout Plan (EZ and work zones) • Environmental Decontamination (Personnel & Eqpt) • Sampling & Analysis Respiratory Protection Plan • Hazard Communication • IDW Handling & Disposal Emergency Response & Contingency Plan • Medical Support Plan • Reporting & Radiation Plan (x-ray) • Project Closeout A Comparison of CWM vs. Conventional MEC Response Operations 7

Planning & QAPP Development – Additional Plans & Activities Additional Supporting Plans Additional Planning Activities Project Planning & QAPP Development • Medical Support Agreements • IDW Plan Hospital and onsite ambulance • Site Preparation • Extra complications & Training • Toxic Chemical Training Course for Medical Support Personnel • Interim Holding Facility (IHF) Plan DGM & Intrusive • Medical surveillance • Air Monitoring Plan (CCDC-CBC) Investigation • Notify commercial analytical lab in writing that samples may contain CA • Vulnerability Assessment MEC/CWM Handling & Disposal • Plans for the establishment of Exclusion • Identification and Description of Zone (EZ), Contamination Reduction Zone Potential Threats (CRZ), and Support Zone Environmental Sampling & Analysis • Physical Security Plan • Planned egress routes that allow personnel to be removed on a stretcher and access to IDW Handling the ambulance • Public Protection Plans & Disposal • Public emergency notification procedures and public evacuation/shelter in place Reporting & training Project Closeout A Comparison of CWM vs. Conventional MEC Response Operations 8

Planning & QAPP Development – Exclusion Zones Maximum Credible Event (MCE) Project Planning & QAPP Development • Maximum release of CA from a munition, container, or process that might realistically result from an unintended, unplanned, or accidental occurrence Site Preparation & Training • Uses air dispersion computer model (D2PC) 1% Lethality Distance • DGM & Intrusive Investigation No Significant Effects (NOSE Distance) • EZ based on greater of “Hazardous Fragmentation • Distance” (MGFD-based) or the 1% Lethality Distance MEC/CWM Handling (MCE-based) & Disposal • EZs can be quite large without costly engineering controls Environmental Sampling & Analysis Model Inputs (partial) Wind Speed IDW Handling E EXAMPLE Air Stability Factor & Disposal Atmospheric Pressure Mixing Height Reporting & EX Project Closeout A Comparison of CWM vs. Conventional MEC Response Operations 9

Planning & QAPP Development – Personnel Requirements Conventional Site CWM Site Project Planning & QAPP Development • SUXOS, UXOSO/UXOQC • SUXOS, UXOSO, UXOQC Site Preparation • Geophysics (as needed) • Geophysics (as needed) & Training • Intrusive team(s) (~5-7 persons) • Downrange Team(s) (2 each; DGM & Intrusive min. 3 each) Investigation • Sample Coordinator MEC/CWM Handling & Disposal • PDS Team (3 persons min.) Environmental • Rescue Team (2 persons) Sampling & Analysis • Air Monitoring (4+ persons) IDW Handling & Disposal • Package/Assessment/Transport team (4+ persons) Reporting & Project Closeout • Medics (2 persons) A Comparison of CWM vs. Conventional MEC Response Operations 10

Field Operations: Site Preparation & Training Conventional Site CWM Site Project Planning & QAPP Development • Magazine (fence & lightning • IHF (fence & lightning protection) protection) Site Preparation • Site-Specific Training (up to 2 weeks) & Training • Site Specific Training ( ½ day) • Run through scenarios DGM & Intrusive • Huntsville Readiness Review (3 days) Investigation • DA Pre-Operational Survey (3 days) MEC/CWM Handling & Disposal • Evaluate response operations Environmental • Table Top Exercise ( ½ day) Sampling & Analysis • Coordination meeting with response agencies IDW Handling & Disposal • Medical Training (1 day) Reporting & • Hospital staff and Ambulance EMTs Project Closeout A Comparison of CWM vs. Conventional MEC Response Operations 11

Field Operations – DGM & Intrusive Investigation • Geophysics Project Planning & QAPP Development • No significant difference; PPE upgrade as needed Site Preparation • PPE Levels & Training • Level B DGM & Intrusive • Level C Investigation • Modified Level D MEC/CWM Handling & Disposal Environmental Sampling & Analysis IDW Handling & Disposal Reporting & Project Closeout Level B Level C Level D – Modified Slung Mask A Comparison of CWM vs. Conventional MEC Response Operations 12

Field Operations – DGM & Intrusive Investigation, cont’d. • Medical Support Project Planning & QAPP Development Ambulance onsite during intrusive • Both ambulance and hospital require • Site Preparation special training and special medication & Training Closest capable hospital may not be the • one that is closest to site DGM & Intrusive Investigation • Air Monitoring Calibration & challenge • MEC/CWM Handling At work zone and site perimeter • & Disposal Environmental Sampling & Analysis IDW Handling & Disposal Reporting & Project Closeout MINICAMS and DAAMS A Comparison of CWM vs. Conventional MEC Response Operations 13