International Experience and Expertise in Registration

1,96

MB

Investigation, Assessment, and Clean-Up of Contaminated

410

stron

Military Sites

1930

ID

URS Deutschland GmbH, Dames & Moore Group

1996

rok

Contents

1. Introduction

* 1.-1.0 Project Background and Objectives

* 1.-2.0 Methodology

* 1.-3.0 Terminology

* 1.-4.0 Structure of the Country Reports

o 1. Introduction

o 2. Definitions

o 3. Legislative Framework, Administrative System, Responsibilities

o 4. Financing

o 5. Profile of Contamination

o 6. Registration of Suspected Contaminated Sites (SCS)

o 7. Methods for the Investigation of CMS

+ 7.1 Registration and Preliminary Assessment

+ 7.2 First Investigation, Detailed Investigation, Risk Assessment

+ 7.3 Technical Instruments for Risk Assessments

o 8. Clean-up Attainment Goals

o 9. Clean-up Technologies

o 10. Prioritizing of Sites

+ 11. Health & Safety

+ 12. Cost Estimates

+ 13. Research & Development

* 1.-5.0 Final Remark on the Translation

1.-1.0 Project Background and Objectives

The total area of land used for military purposes in the Federal Republic of Germany until the

beginning of the 1990ies amounts to approx. 1 million heactare. The six Western Allies, the German

Federal Armed Forces (Bundeswehr) and the NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) have

abandonded numerous sites due to the European disarmament process. The withdrawal of former

Soviet troops which had been based in the former GDR (WGT) was finished in 1994. In Germany,

approximately half of the military properties will be abandonded by the forces and converted into

civil properties. In many countries in Eastern Europe, which once belonged to the Warsaw Treaty

and from which the Soviet troops were withdrawn after 1989, the situation is similar.

The conversion of former military properties into civil properties is closely linked with the

registration and assessment of contaminated sites on these properties. Generally, the registration

and assessment of suspected contaminated sites (SCS) on military properties in Germany is

almost completed. Next steps will involve the prioritizing of sites, investigations with regard to risk

assessment and, where necessary, containment and clean-up measures.

Up to now, there is no international overview of the different approaches to the registration,

investigation and assessment of SCS and the containment and clean-up of Contaminated Military

Sites (CMS) which exist in the individual countries. Therefore, it is the aim of this Study to provide

this international comparison and to derive from these different international approaches and

experiences Germany's need for further technology research & development.

This Study documents the progress made regarding the management of CMS in 21 countries. The

countries were selected on the basis of certain criteria. One of the most important criteria was the

question of comparability, i.e. is the country selected converting military properties into civil

properties after the withdrawal of foreign troops too and facing the same urgency to manage its

CMS in connection with this conversion as Germany. Especially the countries in Central and

Eastern Europe are currently facing the same problem.

Beyond this, those countries were selected, where it was likely that a clear and dedicated concept

for the registration, investigation, assessment and remediation of CMS would exist.

The following countries are subject of this Study:

NATO Member States in Europe:

- Belgium

- France

- Germany

- The Netherlands

- Norway

- United Kingdom

NATO Member States outside Europe:

- Canada

- United States of America (USA)

NATO associates in Central and Eastern Europe:

- Belorussia

- Czech Republic

- Estonia

- Hungary

- Latvia

- Lithuania

- Poland

- Russian Federation

- Slovakia

- Ukraine

Neutral States:

- Australia

- Austria

- Sweden.

Unless stated otherwise, the data contained in this Study are based on the information which were

publicly available till April 1996.

The first part of this Study (Sections 2 to 21), looks - in alphabetical order - in detail at all selected

countries (except France) following a given structure which is described below. Section 22 contains

a short description of the progress made with the management of CMS in France. The last part of

this Study, Section 23, summarizes relevant aspects of the individual approaches, contrasts them

with each other and identifies Germany's need for further research & development concerning

technologies and procedures for the registration, assessment and clean-up of CMS.

1.-2.0 Methodology

The data gathering for this Study started with the compilation of already existing written

documentation on the management of CMS in the individual countries. As an example, with its

CCMS Programme (Committee on Challenges of Modern Society), the NATO has created an

international forum for the exchange of information on CMS management.

However, in general only in few countries a comprehensive documentation on CMS management

exists. There are various reasons for this. In Eastern European countries, for example, there is no

funding for a systematic CMS management and documentation on this work and its results. Often

only several pilot projects have been carried out so far and the results of these pilot projects have

been published.

Other countries were not affected by the political changes in the late 1980ies, no foreign troops

were withdrawn, the own forces were not reduced, and therefore the need to convert formerly

military properties into civil properties in those countries has been less urgent than in Central and

Eastern Europe. Those countries have started with the systematic management of CMS either

much later or not yet at all. Written documentation which would summarize their experience was

therefore not available, and much of the information gathered for this Study had to be gained from

conversations with representatives of pertinent ministeries or authorities. The persons interviewed

for this Study involved mainly senior employees in Environmental Ministries and Defence

Ministries. In some countries, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe, one or several engineering

firms are in charge of CMS management and coordination. In such cases, for example in Hungary

and Poland, these engineering firms were contacted for their experience in this field.

Often the methods used for the registration, investigation, assessment and containment/clean-up

of CMS are the same methods used for the management of civil contaminated sites (CCS). In

order to find out what the individual national approaches to CMS management have in common or

what is different, it was therefore necessary to look also at the management of CCS, at least to a

certain extent.

The work on the individual Country Sections of this Study was performed by different Dames &

Moore offices or subcontractors. Because of the different authors and due to the country-specific

differences in terms of CMS management, the individual Country Sections may differ in terms of

their style and may partly emphasize different aspects. It was not possible by editing these texts

to overcome these differences completely.

1.-3.0 Terminology

In German-speaking countries a number of specific terms are used, such as for example the term

"Altlasten", "Militärische Altlasten" und "Rüstungsaltlasten", which cannot be translated literally into

other languages. These terms posed a problem while translating this Study.

* In Germany, the term "Altlasten" (literally: "old burden") generally refers to "abandoned landfills

where in the past industrial wastes were treated, stored or disposed of ("Altablagerungen"), and

abandoned industrial sites, where in the past through industrial or commercial activities

environmentally dangerous substances were used or dealt with ("Altstandorte"), which pose or are

likely to pose a risk to the environment, particularly to human health." There is no literal English

translation of the term "Altlast". The English term "contaminated site" cannot be used as synonym

for "Altlast", since the term "contaminated site" does not necessarily imply the aspect of risk.

* According to the German Council of Experts on Environmental Issues (Rat der Sachverständigen

für Umweltfragen/SRU) the term "contaminated military site" (Militärische Altlast) refers both to

former military production sites and sites where in the past military operations have taken place and

which pose an existing or potential risk to the environment and particularly to human health now.

However, former military production sites are not subject of this Study. Subject of this Study are

only sites where military operations have taken place in the past, i.e. abandoned military facilities

which were formerly used for testing and using military equipment and where during military

activities environmentally-hazardous substances were handled. In this connection the term "military

equipment" or "military activities" refers to equipment or activities which serve military purposes or

which are used by the military.

However, it was not possible to make a consequent distinction between the term "military production

site" and "site of military operation" throughout the entire Study, since in some countries military

production sites are included in the CMS management.

More details on divergent terminology can be found in Section 23.-2.0.

1.-4.0 Structure of the Country Reports

Except Section 22 which comprises a summary of the limited information available on France, the

individual Country Sections 2 to 21 follow the same structure. Each Country Section starts with an

alphabetical list of acronyms. This list of acronyms is followed by 13 Sub-sections:

1. Introduction

This Sub-section contains general geographic and demographic information on the respective