Overview of the disposal of military munitions at sea by DoD. History and other data that should be collected to characterize disposal sites.

1. Historic Disposal of Military Munitions
in US Coastal Waters
Second International Dialogue on Underwater Munitions
Honolulu, Hawaii
February 2009
1

2. Highlights
• Definitions
• History of DoD sea disposal operations
• Reason for study
• Using historical information in designing characterization
studies
• General references
2

3. Definition – Military Munitions
Military munitions means all ammunition products and
components produced for or used by the armed forces for national
defense and security, including ammunition products or components under the control
of the Department of Defense, the Coast Guard, the Department of Energy, and the
National Guard. The term includes confined gaseous, liquid, and solid propellants;
explosives, pyrotechnics, chemical and riot control agents, smokes, and incendiaries,
including bulk explosives, and chemical warfare agents; chemical
munitions, rockets, guided and ballistic missiles, bombs, warheads, mortar rounds,
artillery ammunition, small arms ammunition, grenades, mines, torpedoes, depth
charges, cluster munitions and dispensers, demolition charges; and devices and
components thereof.
(10 U.S.C. 101(e)(4)(A) through (C))
3

4. Definition – Discarded Military Munitions (DMM)
DMM are military munitions that have been abandoned without
proper disposal or removed from storage in a military magazine
or other storage area for the purpose of disposal. The term does
not include UXO, military munitions that are being held for future use
or planned disposal, or military munitions that have been properly
disposed of, consistent with applicable environmental laws and
regulations.
(10 U.S.C. 2710(e)(2))
4

5. Definition - UXO
Unexploded Ordnance (UXO) – Military munitions that
(A) have been primed, fuzed, armed, or otherwise prepared for action;
(B) have been fired, dropped, launched, projected, or placed in such a manner as
to constitute a hazard to operations, installations, personnel, or material; and
(C) remain unexploded whether by malfunction, design, or any other cause.
(10 U.S.C. 101(e)(5)(A) through (C))
• DMM were taken from storage for disposal
• Less chance of functioning than UXO
• May not have all of the components needed for them to function
5

6. History of US Sea Disposals
• Military forces have always needed to dispose of excess,
obsolete and unserviceable ammunition such as
– Inventory following an major conflict exceeding available storage or
expected need
– Ammunition for weapons no longer in the inventory (e.g.,
cannonballs)
– Deteriorating items (e.g., leaking or exuding) or those not performing
as designed
– Captured enemy ammunition
• Disposals were generally conducted following
specific regulations, policy, etc.
– Done to minimize potential hazards
– Locations reported to hydrographic office
6

7. History of US Sea Disposals
• Disposal options were limited, particularly for chemical warfare
materials (CWM)
• Use as intended (e.g., training)
• Salvage/demilitarization
• Open burn/open detonation
• Burial on land
• Burial in water
• Disposals included:
− Conventional and chemical munitions, often co-disposed
− Bulk materials (explosives and chemical agent )
− Other materials, such as radiological waste, may have been co-
disposed
7

8. Timeline
1905 Earliest known sea disposal
1919 Earliest known sea disposal of CWM
News articles on disposals
1944 – 1948 Large scale disposals of captured enemy ammunition
and excess US inventories
1946 – 1961 LST 519 was frequently used for routine sea disposals
1964 – 1970 Operation CHASE disposal of 19 hulks filled with
conventional munitions and CWM
15 conventional disposals, greater than 11,860 tons net
explosive weight
1971 Secretary of Navy declares end of sea disposals
1972 Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act
restricts sea disposal activities
8

9. Overarching Goal
Manage risk associated with sea disposed
military munitions
9

10. Types of Impacts
• Acute
– Explosion
– Fire
– Chemical exposure that results in death or serious
injury
• Chronic
– Requires prolonged exposure
– Example cancer
• Can be human or ecological
• Risk communication is a highly effective tool in reducing
injuries
10

11. Characterization Needs
• Where
• Size of area
• What
• Quantity
• Condition
• Use of area
11

12. Disposal Locations
• DoD policy and guidelines provide an indication of site locations
− Authorized disposal sites ranged from 5 to over 250 miles from
shore
− Depths ranged from 50 to 16,000 feet
• Designated sites
− Were generally 100 square miles (10 miles x 10 miles)
− May also have been used by others for disposal of
industrial and municipal wastes
• Formally established sites reported to hydrographic office
• Accuracy in logbook only to nearest minute (about 1 nm)
12

13. DoD Policy & Guidelines on Disposals
Year Distance from shore Minimum depth
1917 (Navy) “Totally unserviceable powder and chemicals … shall be condemned to be thrown
overboard or otherwise destroyed.” It is unclear if this applied only to ships supplies or
also included cargo. Application to munitions is also unclear.
1920 “They [CWM] should not be thrown into water, and care must be taken that they are not
(War Department) buried near sources of water supply.” Prohibition may not have applied to saline
waters
1928 (Army) Allowed to be “placed on barges and towed out to sea”
1941 (Army) Not specified Deep ocean
1944 10 miles Deep place or ledge sloping seaward
(War Department)
1944 (Navy - OCONUS) Not specified 300 feet (April);
600 feet (December)
1945 10 miles 600 feet (April & August)
(War Department) 900 feet (June)
1945 (Navy) 10 miles 900 feet (April),
3,000 feet for conventional munitions
6,000 feet for CWM (December)
1946 (Navy & 10 miles 3,000 feet for conventional munitions
War Department) 6,000 feet for CWM
1949 (Army & 10 miles 6,000 feet
Air Force)
1951 (Army) 10 miles 6,000 feet
1969 (Army) – Emergency 10 miles 6,000 feet
Only
1973 (Army) Prohibited Prohibited 13

14. CWM Disposal Sites
Unknown Under 10 11 - 100
11% 2% 12%
Percent of chemical agent disposal
by miles from shore
Over 101 Over 10,000
75% 51%
Unknown
11%
Percent of chemical agent
disposal by depth in feet
Under 1,000
2%
6,000-9,999 1,000 - 5,999
34% 2%
14
Graphs based on net agent weight, FY06 data

15. Charted Disposal Sites
15

16. Sea Disposal Methods
• Loose or “over the side” disposals
– Disperses items over a large area
– Items may penetrate well beneath surface of sea floor
– May make targets hard to find on seafloor
– Widely used method until WWII
• Consolidation in hulks and sinking
– Only method used between 1964 and 1970
– Large sonar target
16

17. Quantities
• Events ranged from a few items to 1,000s of tons
• Individual items could be a few ounces to 1,000 or
more pounds
17

18. How Much CWM Did DoD Sea Dispose?
Nerve (GB, GA, VX)
1%
Mustard
55%
Lewisite
36%
Arsenic, AsCl3,
Cl2S2
2%
Blood (CK, AC)
Phosgene Unspecified Agent 1%
0% 5%
•Approximately 30,000 tons of chemical agent was disposed in US waters
Data published in Defense Environmental Programs
FY08 Annual Report to Congress (ARC), Appendix Q
18

19. Conventional Munitions Constituents
• Common high explosive fillers (secondary explosives)
• TNT
• RDX
• Explosive D
• Metal components
Energetic Materials
Explosives Propellants Pyrotechnics
Primary Single Base Flares
Inorganic Organic Double Base Smoke
Secondary Triple Base Tracers
Composite Incendiaries
19

20. Drawings of Munitions
• Show sizes of items in HI waters
• Relate to detection equipment
• Amount per release
• Boxcar diagram
• Corrosion time for shells
• Release mechanism (drwgs from Geoff report)
20

21. Releases Depend on Breaching of Item
Release of Low Solubility Fill
It is just a matter of time
Distribution of Releases
Release of High Solubility Fill
Figures after MEDEA, 1997 21

22. Condition of Items
• Some items were in poor condition
at time of disposal
• Drums often failed on disposal
• Some items remain in seawater for
extended periods w/o corroding
Corrosion
Leak
22

23. Military Munitions Design
• Manufactured to strict specifications
• Information on materials and quantities are
available
• Minimum wall thicknesses are known and can
be used to develop gross estimates of when
breakthrough will occur
23

24. Basic Desktop Information to Support
Characterization
• Nautical charts for location and depth
• Chemical fate and transport data based on
knowledge of what was disposed – supports
development of conceptual site model
• State department of natural resources to
determine current site usage
• Journals or geological references for information
on bottom materials
24

25. Planning the Study
• Selection of acoustic, optical or chemical
detection equipment based on:
– Site area
– Item size
– Distribution on bottom
– Depth
• Selection of analytical suite
– Constituents in items disposed
– Toxicity
– Persistence
– Mass of constituents
Per container
Total
25

26. Best References on US Disposals
Most up-to-date data on quantities and locations of disposals
• Current Defense Environmental Programs Annual Report to
Congress, Appendix on Sea Disposal of Military Munitions
(www.denix.osd.mil)
Overview of issues
• U.S. Disposal of Chemical Weapons in the Ocean: Background
and Issues for Congress, Congressional Research Service
Report RL33432, 2007
Modeling of chemical agent releases
• Ocean Dumping of Chemical Munitions: Environmental Effects
in Arctic Seas, 1997 (www.foia.cia.gov)
26

27. Contact Information
Geoff Carton
Senior Analyst
CALIBRE Systems, inc
Geoff.Carton@calibresys.com
27

28. Dispersion and Zone of Influence
• Physical properties
• Rate of release
• Toxicity
• Disposal site properties (currents)
A number of gross predictions
on fate and effects can be made
with knowledge of materials
disposed and the location
28

29. Where Did DoD Conduct CWM Disposal
Operations in US Coastal Waters?
Carribean (1 site)
0%
Atlantic
(11 sites)
52%
Pacific CONUS
(1 site)
35%
Gulf of Mexico
(2 sites)
Alaska 1%
Hawaii (1 site)
(3 sites) 3%
9%
Graph based on net agent weight 29

30. Why Should We Conduct Historical Research?
• Advance research maximizes efficiency of field effort
• Archival research is inexpensive compared to field work
• Historical information:
– Provides a location for starting survey effort
– Allows advance identification of munitions types/fills
– Supports selection of equipment and analytical suite
• Identifying disposal locations on charts is a quick and highly
effective way of reducing unintentional encounters with
munitions
30