Range Fires

[Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@cpeo.org>]

*******************************************************************

Theodore (Ted) J. Henry, MS

*Managing Director,
Community Health Assessment & Public Participation (CHAPP) Center

*Technical Advisor,
Aberdeen Proving Ground Superfund Citizens Coalition(APGSCC)

737 West Lombard Street, Room 540
Baltimore, Maryland 21201-1041
(410) 706-1767 - phone
(410) 706-6203 - fax
thenry@umaryland.edu
*******************************************************************

Dear Listserver Participants:

 I have received a few different calls regarding the planned
burning of range area at Fort Ord. With these calls, there appears to
be a need to further explore this issue of planned burns for ranges.
I am aware of the fire that burned out of control last year and the
munitions that cooked-off during this fire. Having worked on military
issues almost exclusively for the last 5 years, I am familiar past and
apparently current efforts that cook-off UXO, although it has been
expressed that these planned fires over the next 6 months are directed
at
burning the brush. Certainly there are positive aspects of controlled
burns, but certainly there are potentially toxic consequences that need
to
be studied as well.

 Clearly, the potential releases from such fires are a legitimate
exposure pathway concern. A few samples taken from a range fire at APG
last year revealed benzene and styrene in the smoke samples in an
apparent
gradient with the highest concentrations from the three samples being
closest to the fire. This issue is still under investigation at APG and
a modeling study has just been released, but certainly efforts to assess
this potential exposure pathway will not end with one modeling study. A
range fire started last week from testing activities and it burned
through
a field where approximately 6,000 pounds of nerve agent had been tested
(among other things).

 Lastly, this is particularly a valuable issue to discuss, as
various individuals on this listserver (including myself) are currently
participating in the National Policy Dialogue on Munitions. Certainly
the
issue of range fires, UXO and range management are major topics
requiring discussion. So I ask those citizens, military folks and
regulators to speak up on this issue.

 To help start this discussion in a lively manner and educate
myself (with your help) at the same time, I pose the following
questions:

1. Is there really going to be 3 burns a week (when weather permits)
for
the next 6 months? Burning approximately 100 acres with each burn?

2. Is this being done under a removal action? Time critical?

3. How does the local fire departments and city local elected officials
feel about this?

4. Where is the EPA on this matter?

5. What lessons did anyone learn from last year that are being applied
to
these current efforts?

6. What air monitoring is going to be conducted? By whom?

I will start this question by stating that I am not aware of any
military
data from range fire monitoring. In turn, it is only logical to measure
for every major class of compounds including explosives, chemical
warfare
materiel (it is my understanding that CWM vials have been found on Fort
Ord) and radiologicals. If certain classes are being excluded, crystal
clear reasoning should be presented, particularly if Fort Ord dates back
to the 1950's and before (sorry for not being up on my Fort Ord
history).

Not even considering the burden of breathing "regular old" smoke, the
potential exposure from burning areas containing military unique
material
and possibly other contamination certainly should be assessed. If the
monitoring is adequate, the Army, the regulators and the community
should
be able to review data together as it becomes available and determine if
the burning is or is not releasing potentially harmful levels of
contaminants from the range area. Thus, lets say after 1 or 2 months of
burning, everyone could make some kind of judgement regarding the level
of
risks associated with continuing these burns. Important
considerations include at what distances and at what heights the
monitoring should be conducted from; the modeling study by Argonne may
provide some guidance on these and other questions, although I have not
read the final version yet.

8. What public involvement has taken place regarding these burns? Were
citizens allowed to comment on the monitoring plan?

9. Is it really true that some regulators out there are assuming that
rounds are not going to cook off during this process?

Thanks for considering these issues.

Sincerely

Ted
*******************************************************************

Theodore (Ted) J. Henry, MS

*Managing Director,
Community Health Assessment & Public Participation (CHAPP) Center

*Technical Advisor,
Aberdeen Proving Ground Superfund Citizens Coalition(APGSCC)

737 West Lombard Street, Room 540
Baltimore, Maryland 21201-1041
(410) 706-1767 - phone
(410) 706-6203 - fax
thenry@umaryland.edu
*******************************************************************