THE NORWEGIAN DEFENCE ESTATES AGENCY

Reducing leaching of metals

on Norwegian small arms

firing ranges

Magne Bolstad

Carl Einar Amundsen

Soil amendments vs. water treatment used in bullet

traps in basic shooting ranges.

23 years of water sampling have given basic

knowledge about Lead and Copper leaching from

training areas

Further assessment have recommended measures

to be taken in several areas. The work started in

2014

50 – 150 year range history

New Permits – for prioritized training areas

Government focus on exit streams The European

Water Framework – Good water quality (Pb)

National regulations expected (Cu)

Implementation of “new” methods

Basic Firing Ranges (with Bullet Trap and

back stop)

“No Leaching Policy” or BAT in new installations

Implemented from 2014

Better maintenance

Layers of Old pollutants buried in berm - costs

New standard for sand traps – water treatment

Sand trap preferred – low cost

Steel traps – high cost for low volume

Sand trap

(soil

amendment

or water

treatment

Mobile Steel target

Cardboard target

• Construction and maintenance of bullet trap

• Water control - Filter systems

• Fragments and dust on Range floor

• Soil additives og water tratment

50m2

Water treatment

Soil amendments in sand trapFerric amendments have

shown best results

Must be mixed into soil

2-4 % (weight)

60-90 % reduced leaching

Method my not be

applicable in all types of

soil

• Lime (2-4 mm)

• Ferric hydroxide

• Casting slagg

Water collected on membrane

New Training Ammunition

Made of sintered copper

Chosen for the training effect used on

steel targets

Low cost ammunition

Leach tests suggests that mobility is

strongly pH sensitive

More metals added to the range floor

Metal fragments/powder from

firing on steel target«New» targets

30 m range

Prepared for frangible

Membrane installed

under both bullet trap

and range floor

• Limestone (2-4 mm)

• Ferric hydroxide

• Reference

Breakthrough after 9 months

Lysimeters fitted into the range floor

• Limestone (2-4 mm)

• Ferric hydroxide

• Olivine (>1000 m2)

• Reference

Lysimeters installed April 2014Top soil (0-2 cm): 10.000 mg/kg Cu

Dato Sample pH Cond. Turbiditet TOC Pb Cu Sb Zn Fe Ca

27.06.2014 HOS, JH 1 0,27 2,3 1,8 3,8

2014-09-15 HOS, JH 1 - - - - <0.2 3,4 1,1 <3 - -

20.10.2014 HOS, JH 1 8,1 12,1 4,7 <1 0,57 3,6 0,91 3,2 0,47 9,2

2015-03-24 HOS, JH 1 8 12,8 5,1 <1 0,47 2,1 0,77 <3 0,46 9,6

27.06.2014 HOS, JH 2 7,9 196 0,26 3,2 0,13 1,9 1,5 3,8 <0,1 200

2014-09-15 HOS, JH 2 8,2 27,2 0,59 <1 <0.2 2 0,63 <3 0,23 18

20.10.2014 HOS, JH 2 8,4 12,6 3,3 <1 0,37 2,8 1,6 1,6 0,21 18

2015-03-24 HOS, JH 2 8,4 13,5 2 <1 <0.2 1 0,67 <3 0,14 11

27.06.2014 HOS, Kalk 1 8,2 32,4 0,46 3 0,43 2 2,7 3,9 0,14 38

2014-09-15 HOS, Kalk 1 8 24,2 0,88 <1 <0.2 1,7 1,6 <3 0,48 29

20.10.2014 HOS, Kalk 1 8,1 13,8 2,3 <1 <0,2 1,1 2,4 <3 0,21 18

2015-03-24 HOS, Kalk 1 8,2 15,8 1,7 <1 <0.2 0,65 2,5 <3 0,12 17

2014-09-15 HOS, Kalk 2 8 20,6 0,38 <1 <0.2 1,7 1,5 <3 0,1 25

27.06.2014 HOS, Kalk 2 8,1 29,1 0,89 3,9 0,12 1,5 1,5 2,3 0,17 31

20.10.2014 HOS, Kalk 2 8,1 14,7 1,9 <1 <0,2 1,9 2,1 <3 0,23 20

2015-03-24 HOS, Kalk 2 8,3 13,3 1,9 <1 <0.2 1,6 2,8 <3 0,12 15

27.06.2014 HOS, Ref 1 8,1 35 0,33 2,7 0,093 1,5 1,3 1,1 0,05 41

2014-09-15 HOS, Ref 1 8 21,8 0,7 <1 <0.2 1,4 1,4 <3 0,11 26

20.10.2014 HOS, Ref 1 8,1 14,5 1,5 <1 <0,2 0,71 2,2 <3 0,1 19

2015-03-24 HOS, Ref 1 8,1 6,47 6,4 <1 1,2 21 1,3 3,1 0,38 6,2

27.06.2014 HOS, Ref 2 8,1 35 1,4 2,7 0,24 1,5 1,9 1,4 0,22 38

2014-09-15 HOS, Ref 2 8,1 21,7 0,62 <1 <0.2 1,8 1,5 <3 0,24 26

20.10.2014 HOS, Ref 2 8,1 13,8 1,7 <1 <0,2 1,4 1,8 <3 0,16 18

2015-03-24 HOS, Ref 2 7,8 8,84 8,6 <1 1 4,8 3,2 4,9 0,67 8

28.11.2014 Høgre banehalvdel 8,2 29,4 0,56 <1 0,23 1,6 0,51 6,9 0,16 15

2015-03-24 Høgre banehalvdel 6,7 1,98 4,6 <1 2,1 19 0,65 17 0,24 1,1

28.11.2014Venstre banehalvdel 8,2 32,6 1,2 <1 0,58 5 0,79 <3 0,32 13

2015-03-24

Venstre banehalvdel 8,1 19,9 0,89 <1 <0.2 0,8 1,1 <3 0,08 18

28.11.2014 Kulefang 7,1 2,93 2,8 1 6,5 59 0,98 23 1,5 1,4

2015-03-24 Kulefang 8,2 23,5 4,1 <1 1 16 1,2 <3 0,36 17

9 months

Field firing ranges

Fixed firing stand – permanent and temporary targets

Most difficult terrain and soils have the highest discharge of

lead and copper

(access, surface water, peatland, erosion, no electric power)

Fragmentation on bedrock and exposed stony surfaces

Wet and difficult soils (stony, thin, mixed, )

Large polluted surfaces

Many small streams

Erosion

pH

First approach: Restore and improve

Mixed terrain

Surface water

Difficult soils

FragmentationLarge surfaces

polluted

Erosion

pH

Many small

streams

Exit sample

Methods to reduce leaching

Methods Objective Risks/Durability/Practical side

Add layer of

protective soil,

restore eroded

areas

Reduce erosion

and mobility -

prevent

fragmentation

Access, revegetate, effect

uncertain, water still a problem,

Soil amendments Reduced mobility

of metals

Not tested on organic rich soils,

high costs, must be repeated

Sedimentation

ponds

Treat larger

quantities of water

Several installations, varying

results, small particles flows

though.

Total remediation

of polluted area

Remove source Cost/Benefit – new pollutants will

be added, possible to reconstruct

with better soils

Reactive

Barriers/Infiltration

High content of

organic material

Surface runoff dominat, durability

Adsorption Filter Treat runoff from

small area, < 1l/s

Manageable size, small catchment

area, durability of filter (>300 days),

high TOC load,

Small dam in trench

Filterwell Giskås SØF (FeOH + olivine)

Filterkummer Giskås

Filterwell Giskås SØF (FeOH + lime)

Prevention

Remediation