1. Heavy Metals on Army Training Lands NDIA Environmental Meeting April 2004 San Diego, CA
Stephen P. Shelton, PhD, PE, DEE
President, Dowbiggin Partners, LLC
Albuquerque, NM
Steven J. Stone, PE, DEE*
Program Director, Energy and Environment
LMI, McLean, VA
*presenter
NDIA Abstract
The Army began considering policy issues related to non-lead heavy metals use following the Gulf War when negative public perceptions of depleted uranium prompted Congress to request an Army study. The study of health and environmental issues related to depleted uranium use identified the need for assessing the impacts of all heavy metals deposited on Army ranges. This paper demonstrates the continued need to assess heavy metal use in historical, existing, and future contexts. Understanding how historical and existing uses have affected Army testing and training lands is crucial to ensuring that significant health and environmental impacts are not created by current and future operations. Understanding the potential for future weapons with heavy metal components to pose significant health and environmental impacts are important components in assuring training land sustainability. Improving the knowledge base about these materials, as well as improving the policies that guide their management, will affect long-term sustainability at Army training and test installations.
This paper provides background information on three key drivers: public perception, metal transport, and metal residual distribution in the environment. These issues prompt the study of the technical and policy issues associated with heavy metal use. Technical issues, policy decisions, and management approaches are inextricably linked, and this paper assesses the areas that require research to ensure that effective policies are adopted and that practical and effective management approaches are taken. Necessary policy-relevant research revolves around
¿      Evaluating existing programs that implemented recommendations from previous studies
¿      Evaluating programs and improving the knowledge base related to managing heavy metals
¿      Assessing the environmental consequences of a variety of materials deposited on Army ranges and training lands
¿      Better understanding material flows related to material selection for weapons development
Finally, the authors recommend specific ways the Army can fashion effective approaches for identifying and addressing the challenges that heavy metals pose to range and training sustainability.
12/31/2018

2. Sustainability on Army Ranges: Management of Heavy Metals
Lead Oxide
Depleted Uranium Oxide
12/31/2018

3. Why is Heavy Metals Policy an Issue?
Concerns about the relationship between Army range contaminants and sustainability
Concerns that Army heavy metals policy does not meet the President’s Management agenda of “Base Policy on Science”
Concerns about the Army’s management of heavy metals in new and existing weapons system—is the tungsten “green bullet” really green?
12/31/2018

4. What Does the Army Need to Do?
Broaden heavy metal considerations to include range sustainability as related to environment, safety, and occupational health, e.g.
All heavy metals are toxic at some concentration
Heavy metals are a long-term range sustainability problem
Heavy metals must be managed across the Army to assure operational sustainability
Residuals from accelerants and explosives linked to heavy metals range sustainability issues
12/31/2018

5. Range Sustainability Environmental Contaminants
Heavy Metals (Today’s Focus)
Residuals from accelerants and explosives
12/31/2018

6. Health/Environmental Effects & Force Protection
Issues are not well defined or understood
Technical disagreement on impacts
Weak science on many issues
12/31/2018

7. Problem Heavy Metals are a major range sustainability issue
Management of heavy metals on Army ranges is diffuse across many organizations
Recent heavy metal environmental contamination issues have closed some ranges and restricted training on others
The Army’s implementation of the findings in the 1995 report to Congress on depleted uranium is under scrutiny
12/31/2018

8. Background Health & environment perceptions
Institutional
Public
Transport of heavy metals through environmental media
Heavy metal residual distribution
Differences due to soil and geology
Differences due to climate
12/31/2018

9. Policy Analyses Required
Evaluate implementation of the Army’s 1995 commitments to Congress on managing depleted uranium
Evaluate the health & environmental consequences of past, current and future use of primary heavy metals
12/31/2018

10. Policy Analyses Needs
Evaluate health & environmental consequences of past, current and future use of heavy metal alloys
Evaluate health & environmental consequences of future use of heavy metal complexes contemplated for new-generation kinetic energy weapons
12/31/2018

11. Scientific Assessment & Evaluation
Assess emerging weapon systems fit within the existing heavy metal health and environmental effects knowledge base
Evaluate shifts in material flows to assess the sustainability of major shifts in heavy metal usage in Army weapon systems
12/31/2018

12. Study Conclusions
Policy promulgated by the Secretariat on emerging weapon systems and associated materials should consider the following:
12/31/2018

13. Study Conclusions (Continued)
1. Addressing long-term issues related to heavy metals
New technology impacts
Public perception
Material stocks and flows
2. Developing partnering relationships among Army organizations such as AEC, CHPPM, OTSG, developers, AFRRI and others to affect heavy metals policy
12/31/2018

14. Study Conclusions (Continued)
3. Developing partnering relationships with universities and the private sector
4. Integrating existing information on heavy metal contamination on ranges across the Army to support policy analysis and research
12/31/2018

15. Study Conclusions (Continued)
5. Developing an integrated strategy for the management and/or remediation of heavy metal contamination for BRAC sites
6. Developing an integrated policy on environment, safety, and occupational health issues associated with heavy metals in existing and candidate weapon systems
12/31/2018

16. Study Conclusions (Continued)
7. Ensuring that environment, safety, and occupational health issues are independently considered in the lifecycle cost of new weapon systems
12/31/2018

17. Solution Migration of Soluble DU(VI) Into the Soil Matrix at YPG
DU(VI) Yellow
Soil Brown
12/31/2018