1 arroyo center r uxo risk assessment methods: critical review jacqueline macdonald, debra knopman,...
TRANSCRIPT
1Arroyo CenterR
UXO Risk Assessment Methods: Critical Review
Jacqueline MacDonald, Debra Knopman, J. R. Lockwood, Gary Cecchine,
Henry Willis
RAND
2Arroyo CenterR
Briefing Outline
1. Need for UXO risk assessment methods Prioritization Site-specific assessment
2. RAND review of existing methods: tasks, approach
3. Design features and limitations of existing methods
4. RAND recommendations for improving UXO risk assessment
Prioritization Site-specific assessment
3Arroyo CenterR
Need for UXO Risk Assessment
Prioritization: mandated by Congress Site-specific assessment
Alternative response options have enormous cost implications
Total current cost estimate of $14 billion assumes mag-and-flag approach
Alternative approaches proposed by regulatory agencies could cost much more
DOD needs to understand risk reduction differences among alternative approaches
4Arroyo CenterR
Alternatives for UXO Response
Surface clearance only Scan with metal detector, and excavate each
anomaly to a specific depth (e.g. 2 ft, 3 ft) Scan, excavate each anomaly, scan bottom of
hole, and excavate again if anomaly is detected Scan and excavate anomalies, and then repeat the
process two or more times Excavate the entire site in one-foot lifts to depths
of 2 ft, 4 ft, or more; sift the excavated soil to remove UXO
5Arroyo CenterR
Alternatives Proposed at Ft. X
Scan land (surface & 1ft) Excavate entire site to 2 ft
Scan land (2ft level) Excavate entire site to 3 ft
Scan land (3ft level) Excavate entire site to 4 ft
Excavate anomalies found
Excavate anomalies found
Excavate anomalies found
Scan land (4ft level) Excavate anomalies found
Scan land with best available
technology (at surface, one scan
effort)
Provide construction support to property
developers
Excavate all anomalies found to maximum depth (4
feet)
Army’s Preferred Approach
State EPA’s Preferred Approach
6Arroyo CenterR
Cost Differences Among Ft. X Options Are Hundreds of Millions of Dollars
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0 1 2 3 4
Clearance Depth
Cos
t in
Mill
ions
Army State
7Arroyo CenterR
Briefing Outline
1. Need for UXO risk assessment methods Prioritization Site-specific assessment
2. RAND review of existing methods
3. Design features and limitations of existing methods
4. RAND recommendations for improving UXO risk assessment
Prioritization Site-specific assessment
8Arroyo CenterR
RAND Tasks
Client: Army Chief of Staff for Installation Management
Tasks:
1. Conduct a preliminary analysis of ongoing efforts in UXO risk assessment, including:• Ordnance and Explosives Cost-Effectiveness
Risk Tool• Interim Range Rule Risk Methodology• Ordnance and Explosives Risk Impact
Analysis• Risk Assessment Code
9Arroyo CenterR
Tasks, continued
2. Study methods used by the Department of Energy, National Aeronatuics and Space Administration, and others to evaluate and measure risk of low-probability and high-consequence events.
3. Recommend how the Army could develop a risk assessment/risk management protocol for UXO sites.
10Arroyo CenterR
Study Approach
1. Develop criteria for a technically sound risk assessment, based on risk assessment literature survey and consultations with experts
2. Read all documentation for available methods; test software if available
3. Interview method developers
4. Evaluate extent to which each method satisfies the evaluation criteria
11Arroyo CenterR
Evaluation Criteria Are in Three Categories
12Arroyo CenterR
Briefing Outline
1. Need for UXO risk assessment methods Prioritization Site-specific assessment
2. RAND review of existing methods
3. Design features and limitations of existing methods
4. RAND recommendations for improving UXO risk assessment
Prioritization Site-specific assessment
13Arroyo CenterR
IR3M Design
14Arroyo CenterR
Operation of the Explosives Safety Risk Tool
(Add all slides from UXO/Countermine Forum briefing)
15Arroyo CenterR
OECert Design
16Arroyo CenterR
RAND Evaluation of OECert
17Arroyo CenterR
OERIA Design
18Arroyo CenterR
RAND Evaluation of OERIA
19Arroyo CenterR
RAC Design
20Arroyo CenterR
RAND Evaluation of RAC
21Arroyo CenterR
Natural and Cultural Resources Bank Design
22Arroyo CenterR
RAND Evaluation of Natural and Cultural Resources Bank
23Arroyo CenterR
[Insert red light/green light slide]
24Arroyo CenterR
Briefing Outline
1. Need for UXO risk assessment methods Prioritization Site-specific assessment
2. RAND review of existing methods
3. Design features and limitations of existing methods
4. RAND recommendations for improving UXO risk assessment
Prioritization Site-specific assessment
25Arroyo CenterR
[Insert slides on prioritization system from final briefing]
26Arroyo CenterR
Briefing Outline
1. Need for UXO risk assessment methods Prioritization Site-specific assessment
2. RAND review of existing methods
3. Design features and limitations of existing methods
4. RAND recommendations for improving UXO risk assessment
Prioritization Site-specific assessment
27Arroyo CenterR
We Searched Other Agencies for Risk Assessment Models
[Use slide from countermine forum briefing, but modify “scenarios approach” to read “PRA”; also, place EPA first in list, and split FAA and NRC, and eliminate OSHA]
Then, insert slides 28, 29, 30 from countermine forum briefing
28Arroyo CenterR
Summary of Recommended Approach for Site-Specific Risk
Assessment
1. Use EPA Risk Assessment Guidace for Superfund methods to assess risks of munitions constituents
2. Develop probabilistic risk assessment method specific to UXO to assess explosion risks Development should be overseen by a
technical advisory committee The method should be independently peer
reviewed Template “trees” should be developed Trees then could be modified at individual
sites, with substantial stakeholder input
29Arroyo CenterR
Summary
Existing methods for UXO risk assessment do not satisfy criteria for technical credibility
New prioritization method should include a two-tier screen:
Tier 1: sort by explosion risks (using RRSE or HRS)
Tier 2: sort by constituent risks (using new method—possibly a modified RAC)
New site-specific assessment method should Use RAGS for constituent risks Use new PRA method for explosion risks
30Arroyo CenterR
[Insert quote used at UXO Forum]