The Air Force Military Munitions Response Program

1
The Air Force Military Munitions Response Program
For Mr. William BarryAF/ILEVR
2
Munitions Response (MR) Other than Operational
Ranges

• Drivers
• FY02 National Defense Authorization Act
• Inventory developed/updated annually
• Required development of a prioritization tool
• New program element (0708003F)
• Sep 01, Office of Deputy Under Secretary of
  Defense (IE)
• Requires munitions response actions IAW CERCLA
  the National Oil and Hazardous Substances
  Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP)
• DoD Site Prioritization Protocol published in
  Federal Register as a Proposed Rule
• Status
• FY03 Military MR Program inventory currently
  contains 261 sites with current cost-to-complete
  of 838M
• FY02 Baseline 241 sites and cost-to-complete of
  706M
• Air Force proposing use of a Performance Based
  Management approach to execute program Focused
  on Safe to Reuse goal

3
Performance Based Management - Introduction

• Military Munitions Response (MR) program
• A new program with new challenges
• Integrates environmental restoration
  withexplosives safety
• Objective Make sites - Safe to Reuse"
• Focus is end state, not process
• New paradigm required
• Capitalize on experience gained in Installation
  Restoration program
• Results are drivers
• Seize upon successes, avoid the past pitfalls

4
Premise for Performance Based Management (PBM) in
the MR Program

• Similar sites should have
• Similar solutions
• Comparable costs
• Take about the same time to ready for reuse
• Evaluating past performance can
• Streamline responses
• Drive decisions
• Be basis for performance based remedial
  objectives
• Provide objective standards and tools to monitor
  performance
• Baseline data for performance based contracting

Factoring Appropriate Land/Resource Use
Resource AvailableforReuse
Safe toReuse
Data on Performanceat Completed MR Sites
Streamline Response
Regulatory Agency Buy-in to Construct
5
Distribution of Air Force MR Sites
Preliminary Cohort AssignmentUSAF Military Munitions Response Program Category Sites Preliminary Cohort AssignmentUSAF Military Munitions Response Program Category Sites Preliminary Cohort AssignmentUSAF Military Munitions Response Program Category Sites Preliminary Cohort AssignmentUSAF Military Munitions Response Program Category Sites Preliminary Cohort AssignmentUSAF Military Munitions Response Program Category Sites Preliminary Cohort AssignmentUSAF Military Munitions Response Program Category Sites Preliminary Cohort AssignmentUSAF Military Munitions Response Program Category Sites Preliminary Cohort AssignmentUSAF Military Munitions Response Program Category Sites Preliminary Cohort AssignmentUSAF Military Munitions Response Program Category Sites Preliminary Cohort AssignmentUSAF Military Munitions Response Program Category Sites Preliminary Cohort AssignmentUSAF Military Munitions Response Program Category Sites
TotalSites of Sites Small ArmsRanges Bore-sightRange OB/ODor EOD CWM sites Pyro or Practice All OtherRanges Total Acres Cost to Complete (M)
ACC 37 18 13 3 0 6 2 13 22,756 116.0
AFRC 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 10 11.2
AMC 25 12 15 0 1 1 2 6 236 16.0
ANG 15 7 9 0 0 0 0 6 41 10.8
AETC 27 13 17 0 0 0 2 8 95,893 148.5
AFMC 53 25 11 0 4 0 1 37 80,358 335.0
PACAF 17 8 7 0 0 0 1 9 134 22.5
AFSOC 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 1.2
AFSPC 31 15 11 0 0 0 5 15 73,703 176.5
Total Sites 209 100 84 3 5 7 13 97
Total Acres 14,119 3 2,079 6,810 25,976 224,150 273,137
CTC 114.8M 2.8M 10.8M 21.7M 108.5M 579.1M 837.7M
Note 6 October 2003 End-of-Year Data
Additional sites may be identified within
cohort.
6
Past PerformanceStreamlines Responses
Cohort A Small ArmsRanges
Streamlined Site Investigation
Presumptive Remedy
Set Future Use/DQOs
Focused Site Evaluation
Cohort B Boresight Ranges
Set Future Use/DQOs
EE/CA
RemovalAction
Focused Site Evaluation
Cohort C EOD Ranges OB/OD Sites
Set Future Use/DQOs
Streamlined Remedial Investigation
Focused Feasibility Study
RemedialAction
Site Evaluation
Cohort D CWM Sites
Safe to Reuse
Set Future Use/DQOs
Remedial Investigation
Focused Feasibility Study
Remedial Action
Site Evaluation
209 Munitions Response Sites
Cohort E Pyro/Prac Sites
Remedial Investigation
Focused Feasibility Study
Remedial Action
Set Future Use/DQOs
Site Evaluation
Cohort F All Other Sites
Set Future Use/DQOs
Remedial Investigation
Feasibility Study
Remedial Action
Site Evaluation
Cohort G MunitionsConstituents
Set Future Use/DQOs
Remedial Investigation
Feasibility Study
Remedial Action
Remedy Operation
Site Evaluation
7
Presumptive Remedy for Small Arms Ranges

• Small arms ranges
• Spent solid metal bullets
• Leachable metallic fines
• Standard solution
• Excavate and sift bullets
• Chemically treat soil
• Dispose residuals off-site
• Lots of guidance already
• Regulatory agency acceptance
• Cost 150-250/ton
• Duration 4-18 months
• Size dependent

8
Plan of Action
Acceptance of Plan of Action
Evaluate Existing Policies
Identify Policy Changes For PBM
Apply PBM Policies
Monitor Performance
Identify cohorts
Analyze data on cohorts
Group into cohorts
Use PBM Derived Tools
Reach Done
Resource Available to Operators
Streamlined investigation
Small arms ranges
Small arms ranges
Number
Distribution
Boresight ranges
Presumptive Remedies
Boresight ranges
Property transferred
EOD ranges/ OB/OD units
Cleanup objectives
EOD ranges/ OB/OD units
Removals
Land Put to Use
Remedies selected
CWM sites
Focused FS
CWM sites
Performance- Based RODs
All other sites
All other sites
Designs of Remedies
Munitions constituents sites
Munitions constituents sites
Alternative Contract Methods
Cost
Time to complete
Sites With Completed Work
Sites With Work To Be Completed
9
MR is moving forward!

• Monthly MAJCOM MR Workgroup Meetings Established
• Telecon Second Wednesday of every month
• UXO Safety Certification Training Program
• AFCESA developed 2-hour CD/desktop tool
• Reviewed and approved by Air Force Safety Center
• MR RACER Module Developed by the USAF released 13
  Feb 04
• Exploring Centralized Execution
  options/alternatives
• Applying resources at appropriate points to
  leverage lean program s
• Web-Based MR Management Tool/ Execution Calendar
• Policy memoranda, Guidance Documents, etc.
• Milestones for field data submission
• Milestones for submissions to OSD

10
Summary

• Goal - make sites safe for reuse
• Lessons learned in the IR Program are being
  applied to the
• MR Program
• Performance Based Program is the key to cost
  effective
• use of scarce resources
• Air Force MR program is results driven, not
  process driven