ITRC Implementation Workshop Quality Considerations for Munitions - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

October 22, 2008 Phoenix, AZ

Quality Considerations for Munitions Response Projects Bill Harmon, Michigan DEQ Guy Warren, Alaska DEC

ITRC Implementation Workshop

Overview

• Estimates indicate that over 10 million acres in the United States

may contain unexploded ordnance (UXO), at about 3,500 different sites (ARC 2007).

• State regulators nationwide are increasingly providing oversight

at munitions response (MR) projects.

• Proper application of a process approach to MR should produce

results of verifiable quality for defensible decision making.

• Although most regulators are familiar with quality management

practices for environmental cleanups, few have experience or knowledge of how these practices are applied to MR projects.

Tech-Reg Content

• UXO-5 provides guidance to environmental regulators on how to

systematically plan for and achieve quality results, and how to apply these concepts to processes common to an MR project. – UXO-5 emphasizes taking a whole-system approach to managing an MR to optimize quality. – Whole-system design means optimizing not just the parts, but the entire system. – Through the proper application of a process approach to plan and manage an MR project, the MR project should produce results of verifiable quality with sufficient QA and QC documentation for defensible decision making.

Tech-Reg Content (continued)

• Provides a description of the individual process, the tasks that

are typically performed, key factors to consider when planning each MR process, and QA/QC checks to monitor MR

• processes. The MR processes covered in the document are:

– vegetation clearance – surface removal – geophysical prove-out – geophysical investigation

• digital geophysical mapping
• analog or “mag and dig” investigation

– anomaly resolution – verification sampling

Steps to Achieve Impact

• The quality concepts presented in this document are

applicable to all U.S. DoD component programs (U.S. Army, Navy, etc.) and federal and state regulatory agencies.

• Regulators are encouraged to use UXO-5 to ensure quality in

MR projects.

• Proper application of UXO-5 can lead to:

– Cost savings – High confidence in project results – Defensible decision making

Where Tech-Reg Will Provide Impact

Build confidence that consistent QA/QC procedures are applied Inform them of quality procedures Stakeholders Expedited regulatory review and approval Consistent approach for developing planning document Contractors Cost savings, regulatory approval, and greater confidence in finished product Consistent approach to quality across projects DoD Component Services Expedited regulatory review and greater confidence in finished product. Approach is consistent with UFP-QAPP Tool to help evaluate MR work plans and final project documentation State and Federal Regulators

BENEFIT TO BE RECEIVED BY USERS INTENDED USE EXPECTED USER GROUP

Case Study of Tech-Reg Use

Regulator not involved until late in the process Regulator not involved until late in the process Regulator involved early in the planning process Regulator involved early in the planning process MR processes and quality requirements are clearly stated and understood by everyone involved MR processes and quality requirements are clearly stated and understood by everyone involved Regulator provided tools to assist in evaluating the quality

• f the project

Regulator provided tools to assist in evaluating the quality

• f the project

MR project results in verifiable quality for defensible decision making MR project results in verifiable quality for defensible decision making MR processes and quality requirements are not clearly stated and understood by everyone involved MR processes and quality requirements are not clearly stated and understood by everyone involved Project quality not adequate to achieve regulatory concurrence Project quality not adequate to achieve regulatory concurrence Potential re-work of project site or lack of confidence that response action was adequate to meet future land use Potential re-work of project site or lack of confidence that response action was adequate to meet future land use Inconsistent/varied approach to project planning Inconsistent/varied approach to project planning Project Team consults UXO-5 for guidance Project Team consults UXO-5 for guidance

Before… …After

Specific Implementation Target Ideas

• Generally speaking, the process approach can be used on any project

– UXO-5 can be used at any MR site

• Relevant Conferences and Organizations:

– EPA Quality Conference, October 2008 – NAOC, October 2008 – U.S. ACE Stand-down, December 17-18, 2008 (IBT) – Army Cleanup Workshop, March 2009 – UXO Forum, August 2009 – Navy Clean-up Conference – American Society for Quality (ASQ) – USAEC Tech Visits