Chemical Legacy: Techniques and ... - University of Hawaii of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology, University of Hawaii . Brian Bingham. College of Engineering, University of Hawaii

Chemical Legacy:Techniques and Results of a Deep-Water Munitions AssessmentMargo Edwards, Roy Wilkens, Mark Rognstad, Chris Kelley, Eric DeCarloSchool of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology, University of Hawaii

Brian BinghamCollege of Engineering, University of Hawaii

Sonia Shjegstad, Christian Briggs, Shelby Koide, Lukas Sheild, Deserie Bala, Jeff SilvaEnvironet Incorporated

Chris MahSmithsonian Institution

Rich Camilli, Dan FornariWoods Hole Oceanographic Institution

Carter DuValUniversity of Delaware

J.C. KingHeadquarters Department of the Army, Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary (ESOH)

Geoff CartonCALIBRE Systems

18 March 2015VERIFIN ChemBio 2015

History of Munitions in Hawaii

Image: National Archives

Schofield Barracks, Oahu Pre-WWII

Leakage of Mustard Agent

Sea-Disposal Around Hawaii circa 1944

HUMMA Site characteristics:

• south of Oahu, Hawaii (Pearl Harbor).• 5-26 km from shore.• water 300-600m deep.• ambient T of 5°C.• almost no coral growth• sea life limited to shrimp, anemones, starfish and other bottom dwellers with occasional visits from sharks, rays and mid-water species.

This area is not typically fished, in part because it is in an active shipping lane.

Conventional/Chemical Munitions Disposed in Deep Water: Hawaii Undersea Military Munitions Assessment

Summary of HUMMA Field Programs2007 Sonar Mapping Survey

2009 Sampling and Analysis:Human Occupied Vehicles

2011 Sonar Mapping Survey

2012 Sampling and Analysis:Human Occupied Vehicles

2014 Sampling and Analysis:Remotely Operated VehicleJASON 2 (WHOI); 21-28Oct14

Total field programs: 5Total days at sea: 45Total cost: $US 7.5M

The Technologies

HUMMA Instrumentation - Mapping Tools:R/V Kilo Moana Hull-Mounted 95 kHz SONAR System

IMI-120 Towed Sidescan Sonartowed at 50-75m altitude

~1.5km swath width

HMRG and R/V Kilo Moanaparticipants: Steve Tottori, Roger Davis, Les Kajiwara; Captain Gray Drewery and crew.

HUMMA Instrumentation - Sampling Tools:HURL’s Pisces IV and V Submersibles

Images: Hawaii Undersea Research Lab.

HURL and Ka'imiki-o-Kanaloa participants: Terry Kerby, Max Cremer, Steve Price, Doug Bloedorn, Colin Wollerman, Dan Greeson, Pete Townsend; Captains Ross Barnes, Clary Gutzeit and crews.

HUMMA Instrumentation - Sampling Tools:WHOI’s JASON 2 Remotely Operated Vehicle

WHOI JASON 2 participants: Tito Collasius, Jim Varnum, Casey Agee, Jon Howland, Lisa Borden, Korey Verhein, Scotty McCue, Hugh Popenoe, Scot Hansen and James Pelowski.

HUMMA Instrumentation – Time-Lapse Photography:Woods Hole Time-Lapse Camera and “MR. CAM”

HUMMA Instrumentation - Woods Hole Oceanographic/Tethys

Deep Ocean Mass Spectrometer

WHOI participants: Rich Camilli and Aggelos Mallios

A Variety of Toolsfor Collecting Physical Samples and Marking

Sample Locations

HUMMA Safety Procedures –Edgewood Chemical Biological Center

ECBC participants:Tim Blades, Mike Knudsen, Chris Hagler, Wendy Smith, Jim Swank, Mike Glorioso, Lou Alvano and John Schwarz

Resultsthrough

2013

Result 1: We Can Detect Targetsnear the Resolution Limits of Towed Sonar

Corollary 1: Targets are Likely Munitions

Result 2: Trails of Reflective Targets are Munitions

Technical Finding: IMU Performance Matters2007 Shipwreck and Trails 2011 Shipwreck and Trails

4th International Dialog on Undersea Munitions03 October 2012

San Juan, Puerto Rico

Result 3: Evidence of Chemical Munitions

Result 4: Detected Mustard Agent or Byproducts in Sediments <2m from

Munitions

Highest detection:• 15 ppb mustard• 2100 ppb 1,4-dithiane• 87 ppb 1,4-thiozane

Result 5: 2012 Detection Amounts Were Very Small

Technical Finding: Mass Spec Confirmed Spatial Distribution and Relative Amounts of Mustard/Byproducts

Result 6: Some Fauna are in Direct Contact with Chemical Munitions

Result 7: Some Fauna Prefer Munitions as Habitats Relative to Sediments

Ascothoracida – unusual relatives of barnacles that can enter into the body cavity of sea stars (and other echinoderms) and affix themselves to the internal body structures.

Result 9: No Mustard or Byproducts in Sea Stars

Shipboard Preparation

Result 10: Energetics, not Mustard, Detected in ShrimpC

once

ntra

tion

(ppm

)

EPA Method 8330A

Technology Demonstration for Jason 2versus (combined) Pisces IV and V

• Over 8 hours, 2 subs and 1 ROV collect about the same number of samples, but the ROV can stay on bottom 24/7 by sending samples to the surface on elevators; the subs have to return daily.

• Jason 2 is a better at reconnaissance because the topside navigator and pilot can systematically “mow the lawn.”

• Jason 2 can carry more equipment and samples.

• Pisces IV and V move independently of ship and are less likely to get entangled.

KM1422 Preliminary Technical Findings

Demonstrated Ability to Return to (Monitor) Sites

What We Know, Think and Need to Know

Low Detection of Mustard in HAWAII• Hydrolysis Probably Occurred During Disposal when Casings Imploded• Small Sample Size – More Data Is Needed• Shallower Disposal Sites May Have Different Results• At What Depth Did the Casings Implode?

No Evidence of Mustard Affecting Fauna• Sea Stars Can Move, but Don’t Leave Munitions Habitat• Is This Typical Faunal Behavior?• Are There Other Faunal Interactions that were Not Documented?

Remediation: When is the Solution Worse than the Problem?

The 1,000 Word Picture – What is Natural Deterioration?

www.hummaproject.com

Find out More at the HUMMA Project Website

Kiitos!