EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 2003 

SAFETY 

EXPLOSIVES SAFETY SUBMISSION 

ENGINEER PAMPHLET 

“Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.” 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

AVAILABILITY 

Electronic copies of this and other U.S. Army Corps of Engineers publications are available 

on the Internet at http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/usace-docs/. This site is the only 

repository for all official USACE engineer regulations, circulars, manuals, and other 

documents originating from HQUSACE. Publications are provided in portable document 

format (PDF). 

 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY EP 385-1-95b 

 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

CESO Washington, DC 20314-1000 

Pamphlet 28 March 2003 

No. 385-1-95b 

Safety 

EXPLOSIVES SAFETY SUBMISSION (ESS)

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Paragraph Page

CHAPTER 1. GENERAL 

 Introduction .................................................................................1-1 1-1 

 ESS Overview .............................................................................1-2 1-1 

 Regulatory Authorities................................................................1-3 1-2 

CHAPTER 2. REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBMISSION OF AN ESS 

 Introduction .................................................................................2-1 2-1 

OE Response Action Projects Requiring an ESS........................2-2 2-1 

OE Response Action Projects Not Requiring an ESS.................2-3 2-1 

CHAPTER 3. TYPES OF ESS’s 

 Introduction .................................................................................3-1 3-1 

Removal Action ESS...................................................................3-2 3-1 

Institutional/Engineering Controls ESS ......................................3-3 3-2 

 NDAI ESS ...................................................................................3-4 3-3 

 TCRA ESS...................................................................................3-5 3-3 

CHAPTER 4. PREPARATION OF AN ESS 

 Introduction .................................................................................4-1 4-1 

 Organizational Responsibilities...................................................4-2 4-1 

Parties Responsible for Preparation of the ESS ..........................4-3 4-2 

Contents of the ESS.....................................................................4-4 4-2 

 Technical References ..................................................................4-5 4-3 

i 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Paragraph Page

CHAPTER 5. ESS APPROVAL PROCESS 

 Introduction .................................................................................5-1 5-1 

FUDS Projects Executed by the USACE Removal District........5-2 5-1 

FUDS Projects Executed by an OE Design Center.....................5-3 5-1 

Installation Projects.....................................................5-4 5-3 

 TCRA ESS...................................................................................5-5 5-4 

Addresses for Routing and Approval ..........................................5-6 5-6 

CHAPTER 6. CHANGES TO AN ESS 

 Introduction .................................................................................6-1 6-1 

Amendment to an ESS.................................................................6-2 6-1 

Correction to an ESS ...................................................................6-3 6-2 

APPENDIX A – REFERENCES .......................................................................................A-1 

APPENDIX B – EXPLOSIVES SAFETY SUBMISSION FOR 

 INSTITUTIONAL/ENGINEERING CONTROLS 

 (EXAMPLE FORMAT).........................................................................B-1 

APPENDIX C – EXPLOSIVES SAFETY SUBMISSION FOR 

 NO DOD ACTION INDICATED (EXAMPLE FORMAT)...................C-1 

APPENDIX D – EXPLOSIVES SAFETY SUBMISSION FOR A 

 TIME-CRITICAL REMOVAL ACTION (EXAMPLE FORMAT).......D-1 

GLOSSARY........................................................................................................... Glossary-1 

TABLES 

Table 4.1 Technical References for Use in the Preparation of an ESS .............................4-4 

ii 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page

FIGURES 

Figure 5-1 ESS Review and Approval Process for FUDS Projects....................................5-2 

Figure 5-2 ESS Review and Approval Process for BRAC Projects – 

ESS Prepared by OE Design Center or District ................................................5-4 

Figure 5-3 ESS Review and Approval Process for TCRA..................................................5-5 

iii 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

CHAPTER 1 

GENERAL 

1-1. Introduction. This Engineer Pamphlet (EP) presents requirements and procedures for 

preparing Explosives Safety Submissions (ESS) for conventional ordnance and explosives 

(OE) response actions conducted by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 

This EP also delineates roles and responsibilities of various entities in the preparation, 

review, and approval of an ESS. 

1-2. ESS Overview. 

a. Description of the ESS. 

(1) The ESS provides the safety specifications for execution of the selected response 

alternative(s). 

(2) An ESS must be done for all response actions, even if the recommended response 

action is either No Department of Defense (DOD) Action Indicated (NDAI) or 

Institutional/Engineering Controls. Typically the ESS will be done during the design phase. 

An ESS is not required for the purpose of investigation. 

(3) The ESS must be approved prior to the implementation of the recommended 

response alternative. 

(4) The ESS will be prepared based on the anticipated worst case scenario using the 

Munition with the greatest fragmentation distance (MGFD) (i.e., the largest unexploded 

ordnance (UXO) item with the largest net explosive weight and the greatest fragmentation 

distance, or even multiple rounds unintentionally firing together). The MGFD will be 

determined based upon the UXO items that are realistically expected to be located at the 

site. 

b. Purpose of the ESS. The purpose of the ESS is to ensure that all applicable DOD 

and Department of the Army (DA) explosive safety standards are applied during an OE 

response action. The OE project team will ensure that the ESS, Work Plan (if applicable), 

Scope of Work, and Action Memorandum are consistent with each other. 

c. Utilization of the ESS. 

1-1 

(1) Intrusive operations performed for the purpose of removing OE will be executed in 

accordance with the ESS. Intrusive or surface removal operations may not begin, during an 

OE removal action, until the ESS has being approved by the appropriate authority. 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

Approved ESS changes must be incorporated into the Work Plan, and vice versa, before 

intrusive or surface removal operations begin. 

(2) All personnel working at, or visiting, a site during an OE removal action must 

comply with the ESS. 

(3) A copy of the approved ESS will be maintained at the project site. 

(4) In the event that a more hazardous situation is encountered in the field than is 

identified in the approved ESS, then an amended ESS will be prepared that covers the newly 

identified hazard. Work may continue on site until the amended ESS has been approved; 

however, the more restrictive measures (e.g., increase in the exclusion zone) will be 

implemented immediately. See Chapter 6 for additional details on preparing changes to an 

approved ESS. 

1-3. Regulatory Authorities. A discussion of the laws and regulations governing OE 

response actions is provided in EP 1110-1-18, entitled “Ordnance and Explosives 

Response”. This discussion provides an overview of the legal authorities for conducting an 

OE response action and includes the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), National Oil and Hazardous Substance 

Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) 

[including the Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) program and Installation Restoration 

Program (IRP)], Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) program, Resource Conservation 

and Recovery Act (RCRA), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Military 

Munitions Rule. 

1-2 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

CHAPTER 2 

REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBMISSION OF AN ESS 

2-1. Introduction. This chapter discusses the applicability of the ESS process (i.e., which 

projects require an ESS). As previously stated, the ESS process described in this EP applies 

to response actions addressing conventional OE. The following sections describe the 

applicability of the ESS process to projects at various types of properties. General guidance 

for Recovered Chemical Warfare Materiel (RCWM) CSS' are found in EP 75-1-3. 

2-2. OE Response Action Projects Requiring an ESS. An ESS is required for OE response 

actions at the following types of properties. 

a. FUDS. A FUDS OE response is an action taken to reduce the risk to human health 

and the environment from exposure to OE resulting from past DOD operations at a site. 

b. BRAC sites. OE response actions at transferring installations are conducted under 

the BRAC program. {Defense Base Closure and Realignment Acts of 1988 (Public Law 

100-526), and 1990 (Public Law 101-510)} 

c. Transferring excess property other than BRAC. 

d. IRP sites. 

e. Projects located in off-post areas near active installations. For example, areas that 

contain munitions unintentionally fired off post. 

2-3. OE Response Action Projects Not Requiring an ESS. 

a. An ESS is not required for emergency OE removal actions [e.g., emergency 

response actions conducted by military Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) units]. 

b. An ESS is not required for range clearance operations conducted on active and 

inactive ranges that reside on DOD property. 

c. An ESS is not required for site characterization activities conducted on OE sites. 

Site characterization activities will be conducted in accordance with an approved Work Plan 

and Site-Specific Safety and Health Plan. EP 1110-1-18 and Engineer Manual (EM) 1110-

1-4009, both titled “Ordnance and Explosives Response”, include details regarding the site 

characterization phase of an OE project. 

2-1 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

d. An ESS is not required for standby construction activities, but may be required for 

any removal conducted in the construction footprint prior to construction activities starting. 

2-2 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

CHAPTER 3 

TYPES OF ESS’s 

3-1. Introduction. 

a. This chapter discusses the four types of ESSs. The four types are listed below and 

are described in more detail in the following sections. 

(1) An ESS prepared as part of a response action when the recommended response 

alternative in the decision document is the physical removal of conventional OE. 

(2) An ESS prepared as part of a response action when the recommended response 

alternative in the decision document is Institutional/Engineering Controls. 

(3) An ESS prepared as part of a response action when the recommended response 

alternative in the decision document is NDAI. Once a site has been listed on the DOD's 

munitions response inventory, it cannot proceed to a NDAI without an ESS, regardless of 

the response phase completed. 

(4) An ESS prepared for a Time Critical Removal Action (TCRA). 

b. Depending on the circumstances at a site, different identified OE areas may not be 

included in the same ESS. If this is the case, the ESS will identify the other areas and 

explain why they were not included (e.g., the other areas were covered in a previous ESS or 

will be covered in a future ESS). In the event that an ESS had been previously approved for 

a different OE area at a site, then the previously approved ESS will be referenced in the new 

ESS. 

 

3-2. Removal Action ESS. 

a. This type of ESS is prepared as part of the removal design phase of a response 

action when the recommended response alternative in the decision document involves the 

physical removal of conventional OE. 

b. The ESS must be approved prior to the initiation of intrusive operations. 

3-1 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

c. The format for a removal action ESS is described in the Department of 

Defense Explosive Safety Board’s (DDESB’s) “Memorandum Guidance for Clearance 

Plans”, dated January 1998. This memorandum may also be found on the U.S. Army

Technical Center for Explosive Safety’s (USATCES’) website at 

http://www.dac.army.mil/es/documents/esslist.pdf. Additional information on this type of 

ESS is provided in the OE Mandatory Center of Expertise’s (MCX’s) Data Item Description 

(DID) OE-060, “Conventional Explosives Safety Submission”, which is located on the OE 

MCX website at http://www.hnd.usace.army.mil/oew/dids.asp. 

d. The ESS will include a description of the Recurring Review Plan as 

presented in the EE/CA report. 

e. The ESS will describe the type of engineering controls that will be used 

during the removal action, if applicable. An engineering control is any process or device 

designed to reduce the blast or fragmentation effects of an OE detonation. Engineering 

controls may be used to reduce the Minimum Separation Distances (safe separation 

distances) for removal actions. 

(1) Engineering controls may be used as needed with prior approval from

DDESB at any USACE project. The OE Design Center will review any application of an 

approved engineering control to assure proper utilization at the specific site. This sitespecific application will be described in the ESS. The technical data package and DDESB 

approval must be maintained on site during the application of the engineering control. 

(2) An engineering control may be submitted without prior approval by DDESB 

as part of the ESS for DDESB approval, but will only be approved for that specific site and 

the specific application(s) described in the ESS. 

(3) “Prior approval” as used here means a separate (not site-specific) report 

describing the design, testing, and capabilities of an engineering control was developed, sent 

through explosives safety channels for review and concurrence, and was ultimately 

approved by DDESB for general application. Example engineering controls applications 

can be found on the OE MCX website at 

http://www.hnd.usace.army.mil/oew/tech/analytical tools/analindx.htm.

3-3. Institutional/Engineering Controls ESS. 

a. This type of ESS is prepared upon finalization of the decision document that 

identifies Institutional/Engineering Controls as the recommended response alternative for an 

OE site. 

b. The ESS is submitted for approval after the approval of the decision document. 

3-2 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

c. The format for an Institutional/Engineering Controls ESS is provided in Appendix 

B. Because UXO is not being removed, several sections required for a removal action ESS 

are not applicable to the Institutional/Engineering Controls ESS. 

3-4. NDAI ESS. 

a. This type of ESS is prepared upon finalization of a decision document that 

identifies NDAI as the recommended response alternative for an OE site. The ESS is 

prepared after the public comment period has been held on the decision document and any 

comments received as a result of the public comment period have been addressed in the 

decision document. 

b. The ESS is submitted for approval after the decision document has been approved. 

c. The format for a NDAI ESS is provided in Appendix C. Because UXO is not 

being removed, several sections required for a removal action ESS are not applicable to the 

NDAI ESS. 

3-5. TCRA ESS. 

a. A TCRA may be required to respond to an imminent danger posed by OE hazards 

at a site, such that cleanup or stabilization actions must be initiated within six months to 

reduce the risk to public health or the environment. The increased urgency of a TCRA 

requires an ESS process, which is described below. 

b. The format for a TCRA ESS is provided in Appendix D. 

c. A TCRA will not proceed to a NDAI status without a Site Specific Final Report 

that addresses all items required in a NTCRA ESS and justifies the NDAI. Site Specific 

Final Reports will be reviewed and approved in accordance with the requirements for a 

NTCRA ESS. 

3 -3
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

CHAPTER 4 

PREPARATION OF AN ESS 

4-1. Introduction. This chapter discusses the preparation of an ESS, including a description 

of the roles and responsibilities of USACE organizations in the preparation of an ESS, 

contents of an ESS, and technical references useful in the preparation of an ESS. 

a. DOD is the lead agency for all OE response actions. Responsibility for executing 

an OE response action, and hence approval authority for an ESS, depends on whether the 

site is a FUDS or an active or transferring installation. The ESS approval process is 

discussed in Chapter 5. 

(1) OE response actions at sites that were contaminated while under the jurisdiction of 

DOD, but which subsequently have been transferred out of DOD control (i.e., FUDS) are 

conducted under the DERP-FUDS program. OE response actions at FUDS are described in 

EP 1110-1-18. Authority for executing OE response actions at FUDS has been delegated to 

USACE by DOD through HQDA. 

(2) Active and Transferring Installations. USACE may or may not be involved in OE 

response actions at active and transferring installations. 

(3) Engineer Regulation (ER) 1110-1-8153, “Ordnance and Explosives Response”, 

provides roles and responsibilities for USACE elements in managing and executing OE 

response actions and authorizes and provides for the delegation of such roles and 

responsibilities. 

b. Throughout this document, district review and approval responsibilities for project 

activities are discussed. These responsibilities have been delegated by the Major 

Subordinate Command (MSC) to the assigned district for project sites within their 

geographic area. 

c. Districts requiring additional information beyond that discussed in this document 

should contact the OE MCX. 

4-2. Organizational Responsibilities. 

a. MSC Commanders are assigned overall responsibility for the safe and efficient 

execution of OE response actions for all projects for which they are the Project Manager 

(PM) in accordance with ER 5-1-11. 

4-1 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

b. The responsibilities of Headquarters, United States Army Corps of Engineers 

(HQUSACE) for planning and executing OE response actions are discussed in ER 1110-1-

8153 and EP 1110-1-18. 

c. USATCES is responsible for review and approval of ESSs at DA. 

d. DDESB is responsible for review and approval of ESSs at DOD. 

e. The responsibilities presented in this chapter are FUDS specific. For projects 

under the management of an active or transferring installation, the installation must retain 

some degree of management control. In such cases, the PM will hire the appropriate OE 

Design Center to provide USACE assistance in a manner that is transparent to the customer, 

but the PM will remain the interface with the installation. 

f. It is the responsibility of all USACE personnel involved with the OE Program to 

safely execute OE response projects in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, and 

policies. All USACE organizations will ensure that all personnel involved with on-site 

activities at project sites are familiar with and have access to copies of the approved ESS 

prepared for the site-specific activities to be conducted. 

g. All USACE elements will ensure that OE response actions include provisions for 

meaningful stakeholder involvement pursuant to all applicable laws, regulations, and 

policies. 

4-3. Parties Responsible for Preparation of the ESS. 

a. The ESS will be developed with the full involvement of the OE project team. 

b. Responsibilities for preparation and approval of an ESS are discussed in chapter 5. 

c. The OE project team, under the direction of the district PM, will be fully involved 

in the preparation of the ESS. The OE project team members include the district PM; other 

representatives from the district, as required; the OE Design Center; the OE MCX, as 

required; the Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste (HTRW) MCX and/or HTRW

Design Center, as required; federal land managers; the prime contractor PM; state and 

federal regulators; the Native American Tribal Government point of contact, if applicable; 

and other key technical and non-technical individuals, as appropriate. 

4-4. Contents of the ESS. As described in Chapter 3, the four types of ESSs will contain 

varying types of information depending on the type of response action discussed in the ESS. 

Preliminary studies, OE sampling reports, and the Work Plan for the response action provide 

much of the required information. 

4-2 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

a. The format for a NTCRA ESS is described in the DDESB Memorandum, 

“Guidance for Clearance Plans”, dated January 1998. This memorandum may be found on 

the USATCES website at http://www.dac.army.mil/es/documents/esslist.pdf. Additional 

information on this type of ESS is provided in the OE MCX DID OE-060, “Conventional 

Explosives Safety Submission”, which is located on the OE MCX website at 

http://www.hnd.usace.army.mil/oew/dids.asp. 

b. Appendices B and C, respectively, contain example formats for the NTCRA ESS 

for Institutional/Engineering Controls and NTCRA ESS for a NDAI recommendation. 

c. Appendix D contains an example format for a TCRA ESS. 

4-5. Technical References. Table 4.1 presents a summary of technical references that may 

be applicable to the preparation of an ESS. These documents can be found on the OE MCX 

website at http://www.hnd.usace.army.mil/oew or the HQUSACE website at 

http://www.usace.army.mil. 

4-3 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

Table 4.1 

Technical References for Use in the Preparation of an ESS 

Directive/Regulation Title Reference Contents

DOD 6055.9-STD, 

DOD Ammunition 

and Explosives Safety

Standards, July 1999 

Facilities Construction

and Siting 

Chapter 5 indicates that construction features and location 

are important safety considerations in planning facilities 

that are to be a potential explosive source (PES) or exposed 

to the damaging effects of potential explosions. The effects 

of potential explosions may be altered significantly by

construction features that limit the amount of explosives 

involved, attenuate resultant blast overpressure or thermal

radiation, and reduce the quantity and range of hazardous 

fragments and debris. Proper location of exposed sites in

relations to PESs ensures against unacceptable damage and 

injuries in the event of an incident. This chapter contains 

siting and construction standards to be used within the 

DOD. 

DOD 6055.9-STD, 

DOD Ammunition 

and Explosives Safety

Standards, July 1999 

Lightning Protection Chapter 7 defines minimum explosive safety criteria for the 

design, maintenance, testing and inspection of lightning 

protection systems. Properly maintained lightning 

protection is required (with exceptions) for ammunition and 

explosives facilities. If other lightning protection systems 

for these facilities are used, they shall offer equivalent

protection of the types prescribed in Chapter 7. 

DOD 6055.9-STD, 

DOD Ammunition 

and Explosives Safety

Standards, July 1999 

Hazard Identification 

for Fire Fighting and 

Emergency Planning 

Chapter 8 establishes standard fire fighting hazard 

identification measures to ensure a minimum practicable 

risk in fighting fires of ammunition and explosives. These 

identification measures are based on the classification of 

fires into four fire divisions according to the hazard they 

present. Chapter 8 establishes minimum guidelines for the 

development of emergency plans, including safety, 

security, and environmental protection, which have been 

coordinated with local authorities. 

4-4 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

Table 4.1 (continued) 

Technical References for Use in the Preparation of an ESS 

Directive/Regulation Title Reference Contents

DOD 6055.9-STD, 

DOD Ammunition 

and Explosives Safety

Standards, July 1999 

Quantity-Distance 

(Q-D) 

Chapter 9 indicates the damage or injury potential of 

explosions is normally determined by the prevailing 

distance between the PES and the exposed site (ES); the 

ability of the PES to suppress blast overpressure, primary 

and secondary fragments, and debris; and the ability of the 

ES to resist explosion effects. Chapter 9 sets minimum

standards for separating a PES from an ES that takes into 

account anticipated explosion effects suppression and 

resistance. Q-D relationships are established for related 

and unrelated PES's and explosives and non-explosives 

ES's. 

DDESB-KO 

Memorandum, 

27 Oct 98 

Procedures for 

Demolition of Multiple 

Rounds (Consolidated 

Shots) on Ordnance 

and Explosives (OE) 

Sites, (Terminology

Updated March 2000) 

Indicates the Minimum Separation Distance (MSD) for all 

personnel will be the greater of the overpressure distance 

based on total net explosive weight (NEW) or the 

appropriate fragment range as determined by the 

maximum fragment range or the mitigated fragment range. 

HNC-ED-CS-S-98-1 Methods for Predicting 

Primary Fragmentation 

Characteristics of 

Cased Explosives, 

January 1998 

This document details the methods used to determine 

fragmentation characteristics of cased explosives. An 

example and uses of fragmentation characteristics are 

discussed. Blast overpressure, thermal effects, ground 

shock and noise from an accidental explosion are not 

addressed in this document.

HNC-ED-CS-S-98-2 Method for Calculating 

Range to No More 

Than One Hazardous 

Fragment per 600 

Square Feet, January

1998 

This document details the theory and method used to

determine the range to no-more-than one hazardous 

fragment per 600 square feet. Software has been 

developed using the theory described in HNC-ED-CS-S98-2. The use of this software is described and an 

example detailed in this document. 

4-5 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

Table 4.1 (continued) 

Technical References for Use in the Preparation of an ESS 

Directive/Regulation Title Reference Contents

EM 1110-1-4009 Blast and Fragment

Protection in Ordnance 

and Explosives 

Response, 23 June 2000 

Chapter 11 of this document describes the blast and 

fragment protection requirements for unintentional and 

intentional detonation to include a planning checklist and 

MSD requirements. 

ENGINEERING CONTROLS 

HNC-ED-CS-S-96-8 Guide for Selection and 

Siting of Barricades for 

Selected Unexploded 

Ordnance, Revision 1, 

September 1997 

This document provides information on selection and 

siting of barricades to defeat primary fragments from

selected ordnance items. This document does not address 

effects from blast overpressure and noise. 

HNC-ED-CS-S-97-7 Buried Explosion

Module (BEM): A 

Method for Determining 

the Effects of 

Detonation of a Buried 

Munition, Revision 1, 

January 1998 

The BEM is a software program designed to calculate the 

residual velocity of fragments produced by a buried 

munition and the maximum ejecta radius of large soil

fragments produced by the buried explosion. The 

document discusses the theory used in BEM and the input

required. Example problems are also provided in the 

document.

HNC-ED-CS-S-98-7 Use of Sandbags for 

Mitigation of

Fragmentation and Blast

Effects Due to 

Intentional Detonation 

of Munitions, August

1998 

This document provides a summary of the test results and 

guidelines developed for the use of sandbag enclosures for 

fragments and blast mitigation due to intentional 

detonations at OE sites. The guidelines include required 

sandbag thicknesses, configuration and construction of the 

sandbag enclosures, and exclusion zone based on sandbag 

throw distances. 

4-6 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

Table 4.1 (continued) 

Technical References for Use in the Preparation of an ESS 

Directive/Regulation Title Reference Contents

ENGINEERING CONTROLS (continued) 

HNC-ED-CS-S-98-8 Miniature Open Front

Barricade, November 

1998 

Provides guidance information on miniature open front

barricades (MOFB) designed to defeat the primary

fragments due to an accidental/unintentional detonation 

of selected ordnance during intrusive operation. The 

document indicates that the MOFB is not designed to

mitigate the effects from blast overpressure and noise 

and are not intended for reuse after an incident. 

Guidelines include barricade design, required aluminum

and sandbag thicknesses, and the required exclusion 

zone. 

HNC-ED-CS-S-99-1 Open Front and 

Enclosed Barricades, 

March 1999 

(Terminology Updated 

March 2000) 

Provides guidance information on open front barricades 

(OFB) and enclosed barricades (EB) designed to defeat

the primary fragments due to an accidental/unintentional 

detonation of selected ordnance during intrusive 

operations. The document indicates that OFBs and EBs 

are not designed to mitigate the effects from blast 

overpressure and noise and are not intended for reuse 

after an incident. Guidelines include barricade design, 

required aluminum and sandbag thicknesses, and the 

required exclusion zone. 

HNC-ED-CS-S-00-3 Use of Water for 

Mitigation of

Fragmentation and Blast

Effects Due to 

Intentional Detonation 

of Munitions 

This document provides a summary of the test results

and guidelines developed for the use of water for 

fragments and blast mitigation due to intentional 

detonations at OE sites. 

4-7 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

5-1 

CHAPTER 5 

ESS APPROVAL PROCESS 

5-1. Introduction. This chapter presents the ESS review and approval process for projects 

involving USACE initiatives. A period of 60 to 90 days should be provided for the review 

and approval of an ESS. The ESS will be routed and approved in accordance with DOD 

6055.9-STD as implemented by DA and HQUSACE. HQUSACE delegated Major 

Command (MACOM) review and approval of ESSs to the Commander, U. S. Army 

Engineering and Support Center, Huntsville (USAESCH). HQUSACE and CESO retained 

the authority to review and approve ESSs for certain high risk or high visibility projects and 

to provide dispute resolution with respect to issues that cannot be resolved between 

USAESCH and the concerned party. 

5-2. FUDS Projects Executed by the USACE Removal District. 

 a. The following process will be used in the preparation and review of an ESS for 

FUDS projects executed by the USACE removal district: 

 (1) The USACE Removal District will prepare the ESS and forward 4 copies to the 

OE Design Center. 

 (2) The OE Design Center forwards three copies of the ESS to the OE MCX for 

review and MACOM approval. 

 (3) The OE MCX reviews and provides MACOM approval and forwards two copies to 

USATCES for review and Army approval. 

 (4) USATCES will forward one copy to DDESB for final approval. 

 b. Figure 5-1 illustrates the ESS review and approval process for FUDS projects 

executed by the USACE removal district. 

5-3. FUDS Projects Executed by an OE Design Center. 

 a. The following process will be used in the preparation and review of an ESS for 

FUDS projects executed by the OE Design Center: 

 (1) The OE Design Center is responsible for preparing the ESS. 

 (2) The OE Design Center forwards four copies to the USACE removal district and 

three copies to the OE MCX for review and MACOM approval. 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

5-2 

1 If the OE Design Center prepares the ESS, four copies will also be forwarded to the District at the 

beginning of the review process. 

1 Copy

2 Copies 

3 Copies 

4 Copies 

DDESB 

(Final Approval) 

USATCES 

(Army Approval)

OE MCX 

(Review and MACOM Approval)

OE Design Center (1)

(Prepare)

Removal District 

Figure 5-1. ESS Review and Approval Process for FUDS Projects 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

5-3 

 (3) The OE MCX reviews and provides MACOM approval and forwards two copies to 

USATCES for review and Army approval. 

 (4) USATCES will forward one copy to DDESB for final approval. 

 b. Figure 5-1 illustrates the ESS review and approval process for FUDS projects 

executed by the OE Design Center. 

5-4. Installation Projects. The ESS may be prepared by the installation (active, BRAC, 

Excess and/or off-post (other than FUDS)) or the installation may request that the district or 

the OE Design Center prepare the ESS. 

 a. ESS prepared by the District or OE Design Center for an Installation Project. 

 (1) If the ESS is prepared by the USACE removal district or the OE Design Center, 

the following review and approval process will be followed: 

 (a) The OE MCX will conduct concurrent reviews of ESS prior to submittal to the 

installation. 

 (b) The installation will then gain approval in accordance with current service 

requirements. 

 (2) Figure 5-2 illustrates this ESS review and approval process. 

 b. ESS Prepared by the Installation for Installation Project to be executed by USACE. 

If the ESS is prepared by the installation, the following review and approval process will be 

followed: 

 (1) The installation provides two copies to the USACE removal district. 

 (2) The USACE removal district provides a copy to the OE MCX. Concurrently, the 

removal district coordinates comments with the OE MCX. 

 (3 ) The removal district forwards coordinated comments to the installation. 

 (4) The removal district needs to be in close coordination with the installation to 

ensure knowledge of any changes to the plan (changes to the plan will be coordinated with 

the OE MCX). 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

Figure 5-2. ESS Review and Approval Process for Installation Projects – 

 ESS Prepared by OE Design Center or District 

5-5. TCRA ESS. 

a. The following process will be used in the preparation, review, and approval of a 

TCRA ESS: 

(1) FUDS: The USACE removal district is responsible for preparation of the ESS. If 

the TCRA will be performed by the OE Design Center, the ESS will be prepared by the OE 

Design Center. 

 (2) Other: The ESS will be submitted to the OE MCX for review and MACOM 

approval. 

(3) The OE MCX will forward the ESS to USATCES for review and Army approval. 

(4) USATCES will forward to DDESB for final approval. 

b. Figure 5-3 illustrates this review and approval process. 

c. A TCRA will not proceed to a NDAI status without an After Action Report that 

addresses all items required in a NTCRA ESS and justifies the NDAI. After Action Reports 

will be reviewed and approved in accordance with the requirements for a NTCRA ESS 

5-4 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

5-5 

 

 

Approval) 

DDESB 

(Final Approval) 

USATCES 

(Review and Army Approval) 

OE MCX 

(Review, Comment and MACOM 

OE Design Center or District 

(Prepare) 

Figure 5-3. ESS Review and Approval Process for TCRA 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

5-6 

5-6. Addresses for Routing and Approval. 

 (1) DDESB: Chairman, Department of Defense Explosives Safety Board (DDESBKO), 2461 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22331-0600. 

 (2) DA Safety: Chief of Staff (DACS-SF), 200 Army Pentagon, Washington, DC 

20310-0200. 

 (3) CESO: USACE Headquarters, ATTN: CESO, 441 G Street, NW, Washington, 

DC 20314-1000. 

 (4) OE MCX: Commander, U.S. Army Engineering and Support Center (Huntsville), 

ATTN: CEHNC-OE-CX, P.O. Box 1600, Huntsville, AL 35807-4301. 

 (5) USATCES: Director, Defense Ammunition Center, ATTN: SOSAC-ESL, 

Building 35, 1 C Tree Road, McAlester, OK, 74501-9053. 

 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

CHAPTER 6 

CHANGES TO AN ESS 

6-1. Introduction. This chapter discusses requirements for modifying an approved ESS. 

During the course of an OE response action, the hazards, risks, or explosives safety 

controls may change based on the actual conditions encountered. Depending on the type of 

change, either an amendment or a correction to the ESS is required. 

6-2. Amendment to an ESS. 

a. An amendment is required for changes regarding the assumed or known explosives 

hazards or any proposed changes in work activities or safety controls that can potentially 

affect worker or public safety. 

b. An amendment requires approval through the same process followed for the 

original ESS (see Chapter 5). 

(1) For a change that specifies less restrictive requirements (e.g., reduction in 

exclusion zone), the requirements of the approved ESS will not be implemented until the 

amendment is approved. 

(2) When changes would be more restrictive than the requirements specified in the 

approved ESS (e.g., increase in the exclusion zone), the more restrictive measures will be 

implemented until the ESS amendment is approved. 

(3) In some instances work will cease at a site until the ESS amendment has been 

approved. These situations will be on a case-by-case basis. Contact the OE MCX for 

specific guidance on when work will need to stop pending approval of the ESS amendment. 

c. Example changes that require an amendment to the ESS. 

(1) A change in the planned reuse of the property changes the clearance depth. 

(2) A change in the clearance depth changes the planned reuse. For example, the ESS 

states that OE will be removed to a depth of four feet. However, circumstances are such that 

a clearance can only be performed to a depth of one foot. As a result, the reuse of the land 

must be further restricted. 

(3) A change in the land use restrictions. For example, the ESS states that the property 

will be cleared to a depth of four feet and the land use will be restricted to surface 

6-1 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

recreation, surface storage, and vehicle parking after the removal action. During the 

removal action, all of the OE is found at shallow depths and there is no reason to believe OE 

exists deeper than four feet. Therefore, it may be appropriate to change the land use 

restrictions. An amendment to the ESS must be prepared, providing the results of the 

removal action and explaining why it is highly unlikely that OE would be found deeper. 

(4) The estimated OE depth changes, causing a change in the clearance depth (e.g., OE 

is consistently found at less than the estimated depths and a reduced clearance depth is 

desired). 

(5) The clearance depth changes from below the frost line to above the frost line. The 

amendment should give: the frost line depth, state what the old clearance depth was, what 

the new clearance depth is, an explanation for the change, and what the follow-on 

monitoring procedures will be for upward migration due to frost heave. 

(6) Property owners or stakeholders cause a decrease in the area to be cleared at a 

FUDS (e.g., right of entry denied). 

(7) Incorporation of new or modified engineering controls not included in the 

approved ESS. 

(8) Change in Q-D arcs. 

(9) A new magazine storage area or demolition ground is established. 

6-3. Correction to an ESS. 

a. Corrections are changes that do not have the potential to affect worker or public 

safety. Corrections are typically administrative changes. 

b. Corrections do not require approval through the process described in Chapter 5. 

Once the OE MCX concurs with a correction for a FUDS project, routing to higher-level 

offices is for information only. 

c. The project team should use their best judgement in deciding whether such a 

change is significant enough to make a correction to the ESS. For example, a correction 

should be submitted if the area to be cleared is substantially increased (e.g., increase from

200 acres to 300 acres) with no other changes, however a correction would not be necessary 

if the change is minimal (e.g., increase from 200 acres to 203 acres). 

6-2 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

d. When in doubt about whether an amendment or correction is required, call the OE 

MCX.

6-3 
EP 385-1-95b 

 28 Mar 03 

APPENDIX A 

REFERENCES 

A-1. Section I 

Required Publications 

Base Realignment and Closure Act of 1988, Public Law (PL) 100-526, 102 Stat. 2632 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 

1980, PL 96-510, 94 Stat 2767, 42 USC 9601 

Defense Base Realignment and Closure Act of 1990, PL 101-510, 104 Stat. 1808 

Defense Environmental Restoration Program, PL 99-499, Section 211, 100 Stat 1719, 10 

USC 2701 et seq. 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976, PL 94-580, 90 Stat 2796, 42 

USC 6901, et seq., as amended 

Superfund Amendment and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986, PL 99-499, 100 Stat 

1613, amending CERCLA, 42 USC 9601 et seq., and miscellaneous other sections 

29 CFR 1910.120 

OSHA Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response 

40 CFR Part 260, et al 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Military Munitions Rule 

40 CFR Part 300 

EPA National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan 

49 CFR Part 172 

Hazardous Materials Table, Special Provisions, Hazardous Materials Communications, 

Emergency Response Information and Training Requirements 

Federal Acquisition Regulation as of January 1, 1999 

Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

A-1 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

Engineer Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

DOD 6055.9-STD 

Ammunition and Explosives Safety Standards 

AR 200-1 

Environmental Protection and Enhancement 

AR 385-10 

The Army Safety Program

AR 385-64 

Ammunition and Explosives Safety Standards 

AR 405-90 

Disposal of Real Estate 

ER 5-1-11 

Program and Project Management 

ER 385-1-92 

Safety and Occupational Health Document Requirements for Hazardous, Toxic, and 

Radioactive Waste (HTRW) Activities 

ER 1110-1-12 

Quality Management 

ER 1110-1-8153 

Ordnance and Explosives Response 

ER 1110-1-8158 

Corps-Wide Centers of Expertise Program

EP 200-1-2 

Process and Procedures for RCRA Manifesting 

EP 1110-1-18 

Ordnance and Explosives Response 

EP 1110-3-8 

Public Participation in the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) for 

Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) 

A-2 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

EM 1110-1-4009 

Ordnance and Explosives Response 

EM 385-1-1 

Safety and Health Requirements Manual 

DOD Explosives Safety Board Memorandum

Guidance for Clearance Plans, 27 January 1998. 

NIOSH/OSHA/USCG/EPA “Occupational Safety and Health Guidance Manual for 

Hazardous Waste Activities” 

A-2. Section II 

Related Publications 

A related publication is merely a source of additional information. The user does not have 

to read it to understand this pamphlet. 

AR 385-40 

Accident Reporting and Records 

DA Pam 385-64 

Ammunition and Explosives Safety Standards 

TM 5-855-1 

Fundamentals of Design for Conventional Weapons 

EP 385-1-95a 

Basic Safety Concepts and Considerations for Ordnance and Explosives Operations 

HNC-ED-CS-S-96-8 

Guidance for Selection and Siting of Barricades for Selected Unexploded Ordnance 

HNC-ED-CS-S-97-7 

Buried Explosion Module (BEM): A Method for Determining the Effects of Detonation of a 

Buried Munition 

HNC-ED-CS-S-98-1 

Methods for Predicting Primary Fragmentation Characteristics of Cased Explosives 

HNC-ED-CS-S-98-2 

Method for Calculating Range to No More than One Hazardous Fragment per 600 Square 

Feet 

A-3 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

HNC-ED-CS-S-98-7 

Use of Sandbags for Mitigation of Fragmentation and Blast Effects Due to Intentional 

Detonation of Munitions 

HNC-ED-CS-S-98-8 

Miniature Open Front Barricade 

HNC-ED-CS-S-99-1 

Open Front and Enclosed Barricades 

HNC-ED-CS-S-00-3 

Use of Water for Mitigation of Fragmentation and Blast Effects Due to Intentional 

Detonation of Munitions 

Procedures for Demolition of Multiple Rounds (Consolidated Shots) on Ordnance and 

Explosives (OE) Sites 

A-4 
EP 385-1-95b 

 28 Mar 03 

APPENDIX B 

EXPLOSIVES SAFETY SUBMISSION FOR 

INSTITUTIONAL/ENGINEERING CONTROLS 

(EXAMPLE FORMAT) 

B-1. Reason for Ordnance and Explosives. 

Provide a brief description of why Ordnance and Explosives (OE) contamination exists in 

the specific area(s) of the site covered in the Explosives Safety Submission (ESS). This 

information may be derived from the following project documents: Inventory Project 

Report; Preliminary Assessment of Eligibility; Historical Records Searches; Archives 

Search Report; and/or Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA). 

Provide a brief explanation that the site is under the Formerly Used Defense Site (FUDS) or 

Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) program. 

Provide a brief explanation that following an EE/CA or a risk assessment, the response 

action alternative of “Institutional/Engineering Controls” has been recommended. Include a 

description of the recommended institutional controls. 

B-2. Maps. 

a. Regional Map. 

Provide a map showing the regional location of the site. For example, provide a state 

map with the site identified on it. 

b. Site Map. 

Provide a site map, which illustrates the OE area(s) addressed in the ESS. Show the 

current use of each area (for FUDS) or the expected reuse of each area (for BRAC). The 

specific boundaries of the area(s) should be clearly noted. If other areas of the site are 

not covered by the ESS, the reasoning for their exclusion should be explained. For 

example, these areas may be covered in a future ESS or were addressed by a previous 

ESS. If an area was covered in a previously approved ESS, then a copy of this ESS must 

be referenced in the new ESS and a copy of the approved ESS attached as an addendum

to the new ESS. 

Show the location of any areas, which will be addressed by institutional or engineering 

controls. For example, if deed restrictions are to be imposed, show the area affected. As 

another example, if an area will be fenced off, show the fence line. 

B-1 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

c. Soil Sampling Map. 

If sampling of soils or groundwater occurred during the site investigation, provide a map 

outlining the area(s) sampled and the location and depth of the sampling points. Identify 

the field screening methods used and the concentrations of munitions constituents for 

each sampling point. Identify any environmental or legal considerations that are 

important to the implementation of institutional/engineering controls. 

B-3. Justification. 

Provide justification for institutional or engineering controls at the area(s) addressed in the 

ESS. This justification should include the following: 

a. The amounts and types of OE found during the site investigation. Present a brief 

synopsis of the results of the surface and intrusive investigations. This discussion 

should be supported by a table showing: the amount of OE; type of OE; and the depths 

of OE found in each area investigated. 

b. A summary of the risk analysis performed on the area(s) addressed in the ESS. 

c. A summary of the cost- benefit analysis, if performed. 

d. Provide a summary for the rationale for the selection of institutional or engineering 

controls as the most appropriate action, based on the amount, type, and depth of OE 

found; the risk analysis; and (if available) the cost-benefit analysis. 

e. If a Land Use Control Plan is available, provide it as an attachment to the ESS. If not 

available, describe each institutional or engineering control in detail. List the 

mechanism or agency where each control will reside (e.g., deed, local zoning board, 

building permit agency, local ordinance, etc). List who will monitor the effectiveness of

the controls. List who will enforce the controls. List who will maintain any engineering 

controls (e.g., fences, signs). List any legal penalties, as applicable, for violation of any 

control. If public education is one of the selected controls, list who will be educated and 

how often and by what means. If fences and/or signs will be used, describe the type of

fencing and the signage (content, spacing, size). If deed restrictions are used, include 

the restrictive language in substantially the same form, as it will appear in the deed, if 

possible. 

B-4. Start Date. 

Not applicable. 

B-5. Migration of OE. 

B-2 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

If the existing amounts, types, and depths of OE are expected to increase due to migration, 

describe what impact this will have on the level of risk at the site in the future. If the level 

of risk is expected to escalate back to an unacceptable level, describe what the plans are to 

address this escalation. Principle migration mechanisms are discussed below: 

a. Frostline. State the depth of the frostline at the site. Where OE is above the frostline but 

is currently deep enough to be an acceptable risk with the chosen controls, but may 

migrate upward and cause trouble in the future, describe what provisions will be made 

for continued surveillance of the area. 

b. If the area(s) encompass water bodies, then provide a discussion on the impact of wave 

action, tides, currents, storms, etc, on any potential OE migration. 

c. If the area lies in a watershed such that runoff and erosion can carry OE from upstream

into the area, address this concern. 

B-6. Clearance Techniques. 

Not applicable. 

B-7. Alternate Techniques. 

Not applicable. 

B-8. Quantity-Distance. 

Not applicable. 

B-9. Off-site Disposal. 

Not applicable. 

B-10. Technical Support. 

Not applicable. 

B-11. Public Involvement. 

Discuss the public participation activities, which occurred as part of the EE/CA process, 

including: 

• Public meeting(s); 

• Restoration Advisory Board, if applicable; 

• 30-day public comment period; 

• Press conference(s); 

B-3 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

• Media day(s); and 

• Location of the Administrative Record. 

B-12. After Action Report. 

An After Action Report will not be produced. A FUDS Completion Memorandum or 

Statement of Clearance will be executed to close out the project. 

B-13. Recurring Reviews. 

Include a description of the Recurring Review Plan. 

B-14. Summary. 

Present a summation of the project, which mirrors the language in the conclusion of the 

EE/CA. 

Shall state that "A FUDS Completion Memorandum or Statement of Clearance will be 

placed in the Information Repository and may be placed in the Administrative Record." 

B-4 
EP 385-1-95b 

 28 Mar 03 

APPENDIX C 

EXPLOSIVES SAFETY SUBMISSION FOR NO DOD ACTION INDICATED 

(EXAMPLE FORMAT) 

C-1. Reason for Ordnance and Explosives 

Provide a brief description of why Ordnance and Explosives (OE) contamination exists in 

the specific area(s) of the site covered in the Explosives Safety Submission (ESS). This 

information may be derived from the following project documents: Inventory Project 

Report; Preliminary Assessment of Eligibility; Historical Records Searches; Archives 

Search Report; and/or Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA). 

Provide a brief explanation that the site is under the Formerly Used Defense Site (FUDS) or 

Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) program. 

Provide a brief explanation that following an EE/CA or a risk assessment, the response 

action alternative of “No DOD Action Indicated” has been recommended. 

C-2. Maps. 

a. Regional Map.

Provide a map showing the regional location of the site. For example, provide a state 

map with the site identified on it. 

b. Site Map. 

Provide a site map, which illustrates the OE area(s) addressed in the ESS. Show the 

current use of each area (for FUDS) or the expected reuse of each area (for BRAC). The 

specific boundaries of the area(s) should be clearly noted. If other areas of the site are 

not covered by the ESS, the reasoning for their exclusion should be explained. For 

example, these areas may be covered in a future ESS or were addressed by a previous 

ESS. If an area was covered in a previously approved ESS, then a copy of this ESS must 

be referenced in the new ESS and a copy of the approved ESS attached as an addendum

to the new ESS. 

c. Soil Sampling Map. 

If sampling of soils or groundwater occurred during the site investigation, provide a map 

outlining the area(s) sampled and the location and depth of the sampling points. Identify 

the field screening methods used and the concentrations of munitions constituents for 

each sampling point. 

C-1 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

C-3. Justification. 

Provide justification for No DOD Action Indicated at the area(s) addressed in the ESS. This 

justification should include the following: 

a. The amounts and types of OE found during the site investigation. Present a brief 

synopsis of the results of the surface and intrusive investigations. This discussion 

should be supported by a table showing: the amount of OE, type of OE, and the depths 

of OE found in each area investigated. 

b. A summary of the risk analysis performed on the area(s) addressed in the ESS. 

c. A summary of the cost-benefit analysis, if performed. 

C-4. Start Date. 

Not applicable. 

C-5. Migration of OE. 

If the existing amounts, types, and depths of OE are expected to increase due to migration, 

describe what impact this will have on the level of risk at the site in the future. If the level 

of risk is expected to increase to an unacceptable level, describe what the plans are to 

address this escalation. Principal migration mechanisms are discussed below: 

a. Frostline. State the depth of the frostline at the site. Where OE is above the frostline but 

is currently deep enough to be an acceptable risk, but may migrate upward and cause 

trouble in the future, describe what provisions will be made for continued surveillance of 

the area. 

b. If the area(s) encompass water bodies, then provide a discussion on the impact of wave 

action, tides, currents, storms, etc, on any potential OE migration. 

c. If the area lies in a watershed such that runoff and erosion can carry OE from upstream

into the area, address this concern. 

C-6. Clearance Techniques. 

Not applicable. 

C-7. Alternate Techniques. 

Not applicable. 

C-2 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

C-8. Quantity-Distance. 

Not applicable. 

C-9. Off-site Disposal. 

Not applicable. 

C-10. Technical Support. 

Not applicable. 

C-11. Public Involvement. 

Discuss the public participation activities which occurred as part of the EE/CA process, 

including: 

• Public meeting(s); 

• Restoration Advisory Board, if applicable; 

• 30-day public comment period; 

• Press conference(s); 

• Media day(s); and 

• Location of the Administrative Record. 

C-12. After Action Report. 

An After Action Report will not be produced. A FUDS Completion Memorandum or 

Statement of Clearance will be executed to close out the project. 

C-13. Recurring Reviews. 

Include a description of the Recurring Review Plan. 

C-14. Summary. 

Present a summation of the project that mirrors the language in the conclusion of the 

EE/CA. 

State that “A FUDS Completion Memorandum or Statement of Clearance will be placed in 

the Information Repository and may be placed in the Administrative Record.” 

C-3 
EP 385-1-95b 

 28 Mar 03 

APPENDIX D 

EXPLOSIVES SAFETY SUBMISSION 

FOR A TIME-CRITICAL REMOVAL ACTION 

(EXAMPLE FORMAT) 

1. SITE: 

a. Name: FUDS #:

b. Location: State: County: 

2. ANTICIPATED DATES: 

 a. Start: 

 b. Complete: 

3. PURPOSE OF TCRA: 

For example, specific OE hazards to be controlled and populations to be protected. 

4. EXECUTING AGENCIES. 

a. Corps District: POC: Telephone: 

b. Huntsville: POC: Telephone: 

c. Contractor: POC: Telephone: 

5. SCOPE OF REMOVAL ACTION: 

a. Number of Areas: 

 b. Total Acres: 

 c. Removal Depths: 

D-1 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

d. Other response actions. If other actions are taken in addition to physical removal, list 

them (e.g., fences, signs, public education, closure, notification of local police, etc). 

6. SAFETY CRITERIA: 

a. Munition item with greatest Fragmentation Distance: 

Calculated Maximum Fragmentation Range (in feet): 

b. Q-D: OE Areas: Minimum Separation Distance (in feet): 

Team Separation Distance (in feet): 

c. Q-D Intentional Detonation Activities (in feet): 

d. Q-D Explosives Storage Magazines (in feet): 

e. DDESB Approved Engineering Controls in use: 

7. Provide Q-D map(s) showing the siting for the OE area(s), explosives storage magazines, 

and planned or established OB/OD areas. 

8. Field operational safety principals are contained in Engineering Pamphlet 385-1-95a, 

“Basic Safety Concepts and Considerations for Ordnance and Explosives Operations”, dated 

29 June 2001. This document is located at: http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/usace-docs/engpamphlets/ep385-1-95a/toc.htm

 

D-2 
EP 385-1-95b 

 28 Mar 03 

GLOSSARY 

Section I 

Abbreviations 

AR..............................Army Regulation 

ARARs ......................Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements 

BEM ..........................Buried Explosion Module 

BRAC ........................Base Realignment and Closure 

CERCLA ...................Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 

Liability Act 

CESO.........................Corps of Engineers Safety Office 

DA .............................Department of the Army

DA Pam .....................Department of the Army Pamphlet 

DDESB......................Department of Defense Explosives Safety Board 

DERP.........................Defense Environmental Restoration Program

DID............................Data Item Description 

DOD ..........................Department of Defense 

EB..............................Enclosed Barricade 

EE/CA........................Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis 

EM.............................Engineer Manual 

EOD...........................Explosive Ordnance Disposal 

EP ..............................Engineer Pamphlet 

EPA............................Environmental Protection Agency 

ER..............................Engineer Regulation 

ESS ............................Explosives Safety Submission 

FUDS.........................Formerly Used Defense Site 

HTRW .......................Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste 

HQDA........................Headquarters, Department of the Army

HQUSACE ................Headquarters, United States Army Corps of Engineers 

IRP.............................Installation Restoration Program

MACOM....................Major Command 

MCX..........................Mandatory Center of Expertise 

MOFB........................Miniature Open Front Barricade 

MGFD........................Munition With The Greatest Fragmentation Distance 

MSC...........................Major Subordinate Command 

MSD ..........................Minimum Separation Distance 

NCP ...........................National Contingency Plan 

NEW..........................Net Explosive Weight 

NDAI.........................No DOD Action Indicated 

NTCRA......................Non-Time-Critical Removal Action 

Glossary-1 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

OE..............................Ordnance and Explosives 

OE MCX....................Ordnance and Explosives Mandatory Center of Expertise 

OFB ...........................Open Front Barricade 

OSHA ........................Occupational Safety and Health Administration 

PM .............................Project Manager 

Q-D............................Quantity Distance 

RCRA ........................Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 

RCWM ......................Recovered Chemical Warfare Material 

TCRA ........................Time-Critical Removal Action 

USACE......................United States Army Corps of Engineers 

USAESCH.................U.S. Army Engineering and Support Center, Huntsville 

USATCES .................U.S. Army Technical Center for Explosives Safety 

UXO ..........................Unexploded Ordnance 

Section II 

Terms 

Action Memorandum 

Approves time-critical removal action and also concludes the engineering evaluation/cost 

analysis. Provides a concise, written record of the decision to select an appropriate removal 

action. As the primary decision document, it substantiates the need for a removal action, 

identifies the proposed action, and explains the rationale for the removal action selected. 

Active Installations 

Installations under the custody and control of DOD. Includes operating installations, 

installations in a standby or layaway status, and installations awaiting closure under the 

Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) legislation. Examples include but are not limited to 

posts, camps (including National Guard camps), forts, depots, activities, ports, ammunition 

supply points, basic load ammunition storage areas, and ammunition plants. 

Administrative Record 

The body of documents that “forms the basis” for the selection of a particular response at a 

site. Documents that are included are relevant documents that were relied upon in selecting 

the response action as well as relevant documents that were considered but were ultimately 

rejected. (ER 1110-1-8153) 

Applicable, Relevant, and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) 

Applicable requirements are cleanup standards, standards of control, and other substantive 

environmental protection requirements promulgated under federal or state environmental 

law that specifically address a hazardous substance, pollutant, contaminant, remedial action, 

location or other circumstance found at a CERCLA site. Relevant and appropriate 

Glossary-2 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

requirements are cleanup standards that while not “applicable”, address situations 

sufficiently similar to those encountered at a CERCLA site that their use is well-suited to the 

particular site. 

Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 

Program governing the scheduled closing of Department of Defense sites. (Base Closure 

and Realignment Act of 1988, Public Law 100-526, 102 Stat. 2623, and the Defense Base 

Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Public Law 101-510, 104 Stat. 1808) 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 

(CERCLA) 

Also known as “Superfund”, this congressionally enacted legislation provides the 

methodology for the removal of hazardous substances resultant from past / former 

operations. Response actions must be performed in accordance with the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan. 

Conventional Ordnance and Explosives 

The term “conventional OE” refers to ordnance and explosives (see definition) other than 

CWM, BWM and nuclear ordnance. (ER 1110-1-8153) 

Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) 

Established in 1984, DERP promotes and coordinates efforts for the evaluation and cleanup 

of contamination at Department of Defense installations. (10 U.S.C. 2701) 

Design Center 

A specified USACE field office assigned a singular technical mission that is permanent and 

USACE-wide in scope. The designated office is to be considered the “lead activity” in a 

specialized area where capability needs to be concentrated for maximum effectiveness, 

economy, and efficiency. The OE Design Center (in coordination with the district PM) will 

execute all phases of the OE response project after the approval of the INPR unless the 

removal action is transferred to an approved district. Only the USAESCH OE Design 

Center is authorized to execute any phase of a Non-Stockpile CWM response. (ER 1110-1-

8153) 

Districts Approved to Execute OE Removal Actions 

These districts are selected and approved by the MSC Commander with concurrence from

the OE MCX, trained, and assigned the mission of conducting OE removal actions. The 

districts are responsible for final removal action execution. (ER 1110-1-8153) 

Glossary-3 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

Easement 

An easement allows the holder to use the land of another or to restrict the uses of the land. 

An easement “appurtenant” provides a specific benefit to a particular piece of land. For 

example, allowing a neighbor to walk across your land to get to the beach. The neighbor’s 

land, the holder of the easement, benefits by having beach access through your land. An 

easement “in gross” benefits an individual or company. For example, allowing the utility 

company to come on your land to lay a gas line. The utility company, the holder of the 

easement, benefits by having use of the land to lay the gas line. An affirmative easement 

allows the holder to use another person’s land in a way that, without the easement, would be 

unlawful - for example, allowing a use that would otherwise be a trespass. A negative 

easement prohibits a lawful use of land - for example, creating a restriction on the type and 

amount of development of land. 

Emergency Removal Response Actions 

Emergency Removal Response Actions address immediate, unacceptable hazards. These 

actions are normally accomplished by Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) units and may 

or may not require USACE support. 

Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA) 

An EE/CA is prepared for all non-time-critical removal actions as required by Section 

300.415(b)(4)(i) of the NCP. The goals of the EE/CA are to identify the extent of a hazard, 

to identify the objectives of the removal action, and to analyze the various alternatives that 

may be used to satisfy these objectives for cost, effectiveness, and implementability. 

Exclusion Zone 

A safety zone established around an OE work area. Only project personnel and authorized, 

escorted visitors are allowed within the exclusion zone. Examples of exclusion zones are 

safety zones around OE intrusive activities and safety zones where OE is intentionally 

detonated. (DDESB-KO, 27 January 1990) 

Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) 

The detection, identification, field evaluation, rendering safe, recovery, and final disposal of 

unexploded ordnance or munitions. 

Explosives Safety Submission (ESS) 

The document, which serves as the specifications for conducting work activities at the 

project. The ESS details the scope of the project, the planned work activities, and potential 

hazards (including the maximum credible event) and the methods for their control. (EP 

1110-1-18) 

Glossary-4 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

Explosive Soil 

Explosive soil refers to mixtures of explosives in soil, sand, clay, or other solid media at 

concentrations such that the mixture itself is explosive. 

(a) The concentration of a particular explosive in soil necessary to present an explosion 

hazard depends on whether the particular explosive is classified as “primary” or 

“secondary.” Guidance on whether an explosive is classified as “primary” or “secondary” 

can be obtained from the OE MCX or Chapters 7 and 8 of TM 9-1300-214, Military 

Explosives. 

(b) Primary explosives are those extremely sensitive explosives (or mixtures thereof) that 

are used in primers, detonators, and blasting caps. They are easily detonated by heat, 

sparks, impact, or friction. Examples of primary explosives include Lead Azide, Lead 

Styphnate, and Mercury Fulminate. 

(c) Secondary explosives are bursting and boostering explosives (i.e., they are used as the 

main bursting charge or as the booster that sets off the main bursting charge). Secondary 

explosives are much less sensitive than primary explosives. They are less likely to detonate 

if struck or when exposed to friction or to electrical sparks. Examples of secondary 

explosives include Trinitrotoluene (TNT), Composition B, and Ammonium Picrate 

(Explosive D). 

(d) Soil containing 10 percent or more by weight of any secondary explosive or mixture of 

secondary explosives is considered “explosive soil.” This determination was based on 

information provided by the USAEC as a result of studies conducted and reported in 

USAEC Report AMXTH-TE-CR 86096. 

(e) Soil containing propellants (as opposed to primary or secondary high explosives) may 

also present explosion hazards. (ER 1110-1-8153) 

Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) 

FUDS includes those properties previously owned, leased, or otherwise possessed by the 

U.S. and under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Defense; or manufacturing facilities for 

which real property accountability rested with DOD but were operated by contractors 

(Government owned - contractor operated) and which were later legally disposed of. FUDS 

is a subprogram of the DERP. Restoration of military land was extended to formerly used 

sites in 1983 under Public Law 98-212. (DOD Appropriations Act of FY84). 

Glossary-5 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

Intrusive Activity 

An activity, which involves or results in the penetration of the ground surface at an area 

known or suspected to contain OE. Intrusive activities can be of an investigative or removal 

action nature. (ER 385-1-95) 

Mandatory Center of Expertise (MCX) 

An MCX is a USACE organization that has been approved by HQUSACE as having a 

unique or exceptional technical capability in a specialized subject area that is critical to 

other USACE commands. Specific mandatory services to be rendered by an MCX are 

identified on the MCX’s homepage. These services may be reimbursable or centrally 

funded. The USAESCH is the OE MCX for the USACE. (ER 1110-1-8153) 

Maximum Credible Event (MCE) 

The worst single event that could occur at any one time, with maximum release of a 

chemical agent from a munition, container, or process as a result of unintended, unplanned, 

or accidental occurrence. (HQDA Interim Guidance for Biological Warfare Material 

(BWM) and Non-Stockpile Chemical Warfare Material (CWM) Response Activities) 

Military Munitions 

All ammunition products and components produced or used by or for the US DOD or the 

US Armed Services for national defense and security, including military munitions under 

the control of the DOD, the US Coast Guard, the US DOE, and National Guard personnel. 

The term military munitions includes: confined gaseous, liquid, and solid propellants, 

explosives, pyrotechnics, chemical and riot control agents, smokes, and incendiaries used by 

DOD components, including bulk explosives and chemical warfare agents, chemical 

munitions, rockets, guided and ballistic missiles, bombs, warheads, mortar rounds, artillery 

ammunition, small arms ammunition, grenades, mines, torpedoes, depth charges, cluster 

munitions and dispensers, demolition charges, and devices and components thereof. 

Military munitions do not include wholly inert items, improvised explosive devices, and 

nuclear weapons, nuclear devices, and nuclear components there-of. However, the term

does include non-nuclear components of nuclear devices, managed under DOE’s nuclear 

weapons program after all required sanitization operations under the Atomic Energy Act of 

1954, (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.), have been completed. (10 U.S.C. 2710) 

National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) 

Revised in 1990, the NCP provides the regulatory framework for responses under CERCLA. 

The NCP designates the Department of Defense as the removal response authority for 

ordnance and explosives hazards. 

Glossary-6 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

Non-Time-Critical Removal Action (NTCRA)

NTCRAs are actions initiated in response to a release or threat of a release that poses a risk 

to human health, its welfare, or the environment. Initiation of removal cleanup actions may 

be delayed for six months or more. 

Operational Range 

A military range that is currently in service and is being regularly used for range activities. 

(40 CFR 266.201) 

Ordnance and Explosives (OE) 

OE consists of either (1) or (2) below: 

(1) Ammunition, ammunition components, chemical or biological warfare materiel or 

explosives that have been abandoned, expelled from demolition pits or burning pads, lost, 

discarded, buried, or fired. Such ammunition, ammunition components, and explosives are 

no longer under accountable record control of any DOD organization or activity. (HQDA 

Policy Memorandum “Explosives Safety Policy for Real Property Containing Conventional 

OE”) 

(2) Explosive Soil. See definition under “Explosive Soil.” (ER 1110-1-8153) 

Project Completion Memorandum (PCM) 

The document prepared by the agency executing a FUDS removal action to record the 

specific removal actions taken at a site. Guidance on preparing this document can be found 

in Chapter 17, EP 1110-1-18. 

Quantity Distance (Q-D) 

The quantity of explosives material and distance separation relationships that provide 

defined types of protection. These relationships are based on levels of risk considered 

acceptable for the stipulated exposures and are tabulated in the appropriate Q-D tables 

provided in DOD 6055.9-STD. Separation distances are not absolute safe distances but are 

relative protective safe distances. Greater distances than those shown in the Q-D tables shall 

be used whenever possible. (DOD 6055.9-STD) 

Removal Action 

The cleanup or removal of OE from the environment to include the disposal of removed 

materiel. The term includes, in addition, without being limited to, security fencing or other 

measures to prevent, minimize, or mitigate damage to the public health or welfare or to the 

environment. (ER 1110-1-8153) 

Glossary-7 
EP 385-1-95b 

28 Mar 03 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 

Enacted in 1976, RCRA promotes the protection of health and the environment. It regulates 

waste generation, treatment, storage, transportation, and disposal for facilities currently in 

operation. The OE removal process is affected by RCRA if OE must be disposed off-site. 

Response Action 

Action taken instead of or in addition to a removal action to prevent or minimize the release 

of OE so that it does not cause substantial danger to present or future public health or 

welfare or the environment. (ER 1110-1-8153) 

Stakeholder 

Stakeholders include federal, state, and local officials, community organizations, property 

owners, and others having a personal interest or involvement, or having a monetary or 

commercial involvement in the real property, which is to undergo an OE response action. 

(ER 385-1-95) 

Time-Critical Removal Action (TCRA) 

TCRAs respond to a release or threat of release that poses such a risk to public health 

(serious injury or death), or the environment, that clean up or stabilization actions must be 

initiated within six months. 

Unexploded Ordnance (UXO) 

Military munitions that have been primed, fuzed, armed, or otherwise prepared for action, 

and have been fired, dropped, launched, projected or placed in such a manner as to 

constitute a hazard to operations, installation, personnel, or material and remain unexploded 

either by malfunction, design, or any other cause. (40 CFR 266.201) 

UXO Personnel 

Contractor personnel who have completed specialized military training in EOD methods or a 

recognized and certified DOD equivalent course. Various grades and contract positions are 

established based on skills and experience. Check with the OE MCX for current ratings. 

Glossary-8