9. Germany

• Acronyms
• 9.-1.0 Introduction
• 9.-2.0 Definitions
• 9.-3.0 Legislative Framework, Administrative System, Responsibilities
• 9.-4.0 Financing
• 9.-5.0 Profile of Contamination
• 9.-6.0 Registration of Suspected Contaminated Sites (SCS)
• 9.-7.0 Methods for the Investigation of CMS
  • 9.-7.1 Registration and Preliminary Assessments
  • 9.-7.2 First Investigation, Detailed Investigation, Risk Assessment
  • 9.-7.3 Technical Instruments for Risk Assessments
• 9.-8.0 Clean-up Attainment Goals
• 9.-9.0 Clean-up Technologies
• 9.-10.0 Prioritizing of Sites
• 9.-11.0 Health and Safety
• 9.-12.0 Cost Estimates
• 9.-13.0 Research and Development (R&D)
• References
  • Appendix Appendix 9-3:

Acronyms

Alte Bundesländer
literally: "old federal states", meaning: the federal states of the Federal Republic of Germany before the German Unification in 1990 (Schleswig-Holstein, Lower Saxony, Bremen, Hamburg, North Rhine-Westphalia, Rhineland-Palatinate, Bavaria, Berlin, Hesse, Baden-Württemberg, Saarland)
BBG Brandenburg venture for managing and selling conversion sites (Brandenburger Boden Gesellschaft für Grundstücksverwaltung und Grundstücksverwertung)
BEMA Risk assessment model for Phase I
BiAS Bismuth-active Substances
BimSchG Clean Air Act (Bundesimmissionsschutzgesetz)
BMF Federal Treasury (Bundesministerium für Finanzen)
BMBF Federal Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Development (Bundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und Entwicklung)
BMVg Federal Defence Ministry (Bundesministerium der Verteidigung)
BV Federal Property (Bundesvermögen)
BVÄ Federal Property Authorities (Bundesvermögensämter)
BMBau Federal Ministry for Urban and Regional Planning and Construction (Bundesministerium für Raumordnung, Bauwesen und Städtebau)
BMU Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit)
BTEX Benzene - Toluene - Ethyl benzene - Xylenes
Bundeswehr Federal Armed Forces in Germany
CCS Contaminated Civil Sites
CMS Contaminated Military Sites
DFG German Research Association (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft)
DM German currency (Deutschmark)
EC European Communities
ECU European Currency Unit
EFA I Data base for Phase I data
EFA II Data base for Phase II data
EU European Union
FBV d.L. Financial Building Administration Authorities of the Länder (Finanzbauverwaltungen der Länder)
FCHC Fluoro-Chloro Hydrocarbons
FKST Technical Commission on Drinking Water in the Federal Ministry of Public Health (Fachkommission Soforthilfe Trinkwasser)
FRG Federal Republic of Germany
GDR German Democratic Republic
ha hectare
H&S Health and safety
INSA Contaminated sites information system (Informationssystem Altlasten)
KOSAL Model for estimating remedial costs
LAGA Joint Working Group of the Länder on Waste (Länderarbeitsgemeinschaft Abfall)
LAWA Joint Working Group of the Länder on Water (Länderarbeitsgemeinschaft Wasser)
LABO Joint Working Group of the Länder on Soil (Länderarbeitsgemeinschaft Boden)
Land German federal state
Länder German federal states
LEG Venture for managing and selling conversion sites in Thuringia (Landesentwicklungsgesellschaft)
MAGMA Risk assessment model for Phase II assessing relative risks
MBAS Methylene-blue Active Substances
MdI Ministry of the Interior of the former GDR (Ministerium des Inneren)
MEMURA Risk assessment model for Phase I assessing relative risks
MfS Ministry of State Security of the former GDR (Ministerium für Staatssicherheit)
MURL Ministry for Environment, Regional Planning and Agriculture, North rhine-Westfalia (Ministerium für Umwelt, Raumordnung und Landwirtschaft des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen)
Neue Bundesländer
literally: "new federal states", meaning: the federal states on the territory of the former German Democratic Republic (Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, Thuringia, Mecklenburg-West Pomerania, Brandenburg)
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization
NTS NATO- Status of Forces Agreement (NATO-Truppenstatut)
OFD Regional Finance Office (Oberfinanzdirektion)
OH&S Occupational Health and Safety
PAH Polyaromatic hydrocarbons
PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyls
PCP Pentachlorophenol
PRISAL Model for prioritizing contaminated sites for remedial action
PVC Polyvinyl chloride
Reichswehr German Armed Forces 1919 - 1935
SCS Suspected Contaminated Site
SRU Council of Experts on Environmental Issues (Rat der Sachverständigen für Umweltfragen)
StOV Military base management agency (Standortverwaltung)
SVHHC Semi-volatile Halogenated Hydrocarbons
TAV Agreement on Withdrawal of Soviet Trooops from Germany (Truppenabzugsvertrag)
TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Mineralölkohlenwasserstoffe - MKW)
UBA Federal Environment Agency (Umweltbundesamt)
UMS Toxicological model for the assessment of human exposure to contaminants from contaminated sites (Umweltmedizinische Beurteilung der menschlichen Schadstoffexposition durch Altlasten)
UP Protocol on the ZA-NTS
US United States (short for USA)
USA United States of America
USSR Union of Socialistic Soviet Republics
VHHC Volatile Halogenated Hydrocarbons
VOC Volatile Organic Compounds
WBV Regional administration centres of the Bundeswehr (Wehrbereichs-verwaltung)
Wehrmacht German Armed Forces 1935 - 1945
WGT Armed Forces of the former Soviet Union based in the former GDR
WHG Clean Water Act (Wasserhaushaltsgesetz)
WHO World Health Organization
ZA-NTS Supplementary Agreement to the NTS (Zusatzabkommen zum NATO-Truppenstatut)

9.-1.0 Introduction

This section of the Study deals with the German experience made with the registration, investigation and remediation of Suspected Contaminated Sites (SCS) on military sites and known Contaminated Military Sites (CMS). The Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) is a federation of 16 States (Länder). It covers a total area of approx. 35 million ha.
Between 1945 and 1990, as a result of World War II, there were two German states on German territory: the FRG with a total area of approx. 25 million ha and about 65 million inhabitants and the German Democratic Republic (GDR) covering a total area of approx. 10 million ha with about 15 million inhabitants. In general, the western part of Germany, with approx. 264 inhabitants per km², is much more densely populated than the eastern part with approx. 144 inhabitants per km².
Till 1990, an area of approx. 960 000 ha was used for military purposes in Germany, i.e. approx. 2.8 % of the total area of Germany. This figure included in former West Germany:
* approx. 253,000 ha (i.e. approx. 7,000 sites) used by the German Federal Armed Forces (Bundeswehr), and
* approx. 200,000 ha used by the Western Allies (USA, UK, France, Canada, Belgium, and the Netherlands),
and in the former GDR:
* approx. 240,000 ha (approx. 3,300 sites) used by the National People's Army of the GDR (NVA), and
* approx. 250,000 ha (ca. 1,030 sites) used by the former Soviet Armed Forces based in the former GDR (WGT).
Approximately another 5,000 properties used by the Ministry of State Security (MfS) and the Ministry of the Interior (MdI) of the former GDR are also classified as military sites.
Many of the sites which have been used by German and foreign armed forces since 1945, had been used for military purposes by German troops before and during World War II already.
Due to the global political changes after 1989, foreign troops were withdrawn from Germany, the NVA was dissolved, and the size of the Bundeswehr was reduced, so that a large number of military sites are no longer used for military purposes now. This affects both a large number of NVA and WGT sites as well as several hundreds of sites of the Western Allies. The total area of abandoned military sites amounts to approx. 500,000 ha.
On many of these abandoned military sites, the environmental damage encountered results not only from use after 1945, but also from military operations during and before World War II. Before such a site can be used for civil purposes, it is necessary to investigate and, where necessary, remediate the site, in order to avoid ecological damage, financial loss, and health risks. The same applies when the site owner changes, i.e. when a military site is returned to the Bundeswehr. Therefore, the registration, investigation, assessment and remediation of SCS on military sites or known CMS have a high political priority in Germany.

9.-2.0 Definitions

There is no nation-wide definition of the term "contaminated site". In their Report issued in 1989, the Council of Experts on Environmental Issues (Rat der Sachverständigen für Umweltfragen - SRU) define "contaminated sites (Altlast)" as
"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."
This definition refers to clearly defined areas only and does not include long-range impacts from diffuse sources (e.g. by air emission). However, this definition coincides with how the term "contaminated sites" is defined in the Waste Acts of the individual Länder and it will also be adopted by the future Federal Soil Protection Act. Every area which is suspected to be contaminated is treated as "Suspected Contaminated Site/SCS" until it is proven otherwise. (It is essential to emphasize at this point, that the definition of Altlast which in the text is translated as "contaminated sites" necessarily includes that contamination at the respective site poses a risk! In Germany, merely increased levels of contaminant concentrations do not mean that a site is classified as Altlast or "contaminated site" as we understand it in this study.)
As far as the term CMS is concerned, there is no clear definition. In discussions, the two German terms "contaminated military site" (Militärische Altlast) and "site contaminated due to armaments production" (Rüstungsaltlast) are often used as synonyms. However, according to the official definition of the term "Rüstungsaltlast" (Bundesdrucksache 11/6972) by the Federal Government, the meaning of this term is rather limited and refers only to chemical contamination of soil, water and/or air caused by:
* chemical weapons
* explosives
* smoke generators
* propellants
* chemicals which are added to warfare agents to meet tactic requirements
* wastes and intermediate products from the production and residues from the destruction of chemical weapons.
According to this definition, the term "Rüstungsaltlast" would include only the following:
- former manufacturing facilities
- ammunition depots
- disarming facilities
- gunnery ranges
- ammunition disposal plant
- interim and final storage facilities for chemical weapons.
The large amount of military operations such as, for example, barracks, maintenance facilities or training areas (see Subsection 9.-1.0) would not be included in this term.
The SRU have tried to further specify this term and suggested in 1989 in the their First Assessment Report (erstes Sondergutachten) the term "contaminated sites due to war activities and armaments production" (kriegs- und rüstungsbedingte Altlasten). However, this term referred mainly to activities before, during or immediately after WW II such as:
- disposal of ammunition, chemical weapons and residues from armaments production
- contaminated areas and wastewater systems of former armament production facilities
- destruction of armament production facilities including means of transport as well as of military facilities.
Due to the political changes and the disposal of sites formerly used for military purposes resulting from these changes, the SRU have extended their definition in the Second Assessment Report (Sondergutachten Altlasten II) as follows:
* "CMS are former military production sites and abandoned operational military sites which pose or are suspected to pose a risk to the environment, particularly to human health." In this definition
- "former military production sites"(Altstandorte der Militärproduktion) are defined as sites with abandoned facilities which were formerly used for the development, manufacturing, storage and destruction of military equipment, and
- "abandoned operational military sites" (Altstandorte des Militärbetriebes) are abandoned military sites which were formerly used for testing and application of military equipment or for performing any military activity,
* where environmentally hazardous substances were handled. Military equipment or military activities are equipment or activities which served military purposes or which were performed on behalf the armed forces.
The SRU suggested the following categories:

Thus, the term "Contaminated Military Site" is the generic term. It comprises apart from "abandoned operational military sites" owned by the Government, also "former military production sites" which were privately owned. However, subject of this Study are "abandoned operational military sites" only. Sites which fall under the SRU definition of "Rüstungsaltlast" are not to be investigated within the scope of this Study.
The pertinent Ministries (see text below) agree to this SRU definition in their Paper on the Implementation of the BMBau (Federal Ministry for Urban and Regional Planning and Construction) Guidelines for the Remediation of Contaminated Soils (Arbeitshilfen zur Anwendung der baufachlichen "Richtlinien für die Planung und Ausführung der Sicherung und Sanierung belasteter Böden" des BMBau für Liegenschaften des Bundes). The upcoming Federal Soil Protection Act will not contain a definition of the term CMS.

9.-3.0 Legislative Framework, Administrative System, Responsibilities

General Legal Framework for the Management of Contaminated Sites
The FRG is a federation of states (Länder) with each state (Land) having its own legislative power according to the Constitution.
There is no national approach towards the management of contaminated sites. There are some provisions included in several federal acts which are relevant to the management of contaminated sites (See Table 9.-1.0), however, these provisions are insufficient. A Federal Soil Protection Act which is currently under preparation aims to complement the existing provisions, to prevent future soil contamination and to harmonize the different approaches of the individual Länder towards the management of contaminated sites.

Due to the lack of national legislation covering the registration, investigation and assessment of SCS and the clean-up of confirmed contaminated sites, the individual Länder have developed relevant laws and regulations. Site contamination is mainly subject to the respective Länder Waste Acts, only in some cases to Water Acts or Soil Protection Acts. Different definitions of the term "SCS" and "contaminated site" as well as a variety of different Länder-specific remediation goals have emerged in the individual Länder. CMS are partly excluded from the Länder legislation, for example site contamination due to warfare agents/weapons is excluded in Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Brandenburg, North-Rhine Westphalia and Rhineland-Palatinate, or explicitly incorporated in the Länder legislation of e.g. Hesse, Lower Saxony and Saxony.
In order to harmonize the environmental legislation, the Länder cooperate in different bodies:
* the Committee of Environmental Ministers (Umweltministerkonferenz)
* the Joint Working Group of the Länder on Waste (Länderarbeitsgemeinschaft Abfall - LAGA)
* the Joint Working Group of the Länder on Water (Länderarbeitsgemeinschaft Wasser - LAWA)
* the Joint Working Group of the Länder on Soil (Länderarbeitsgemeinschaft Boden - LABO)
LAGA is in charge of developing reference values for relevant contaminants related to the use and environmental sensitivity of different sites. Within the LAGA, a Subgroup which is in charge of contaminated sites management was established. LAWA and LABO also deal with different aspects of soil protection.
Where specific provisions are missing in the respective Länder laws, the Police Acts of the individual Länder determine who is held liable for a contaminated site. On the basis of these Police Acts, the responsible authorities can take all measures necessary to fulfill their task to prevent risk, i.e. if a contaminated area poses a risk to the public, the authorities can require site investigation, monitoring, remediation, protection measures etc. or measures to minimize the immediate risk.
Typically the person/party who caused the contamination pays for its clean-up. For cases in which the actual polluter cannot be held liable, public funding is provided.
According to the Police Acts, usually the technical authorities at the lowest administration level, i.e. generally the district and city councils, are in charge of the management of SCS and confirmed contaminated sites.
Responsibility for Military Sites and Contaminated Military Sites
Depending on the user, in Germany it can be distinguished between three categories of military sites:
- Sites used by the different German armed forces - Reichswehr (German Armed Forces 1919 - 35), Wehrmacht (German Armed Forces 1935 - 45), NVA and Bundeswehr.
- Sites of the Allies after WW II (Western Allies and WGT), and
- Sites used by troops which are stationed in Germany on the basis of bilateral treaties and the NATO.
Due to the withdrawal of foreign armed forces from both parts of Germany since 1991, a large number of sites have been abandoned. All these sites were transferred into the General Property of the Federal Government of Germany (allgemeines Grundvermögen des Bundes), irrespective of which country the troops who used the site came from. At this point, the Federal Government being the new owner of the site becomes fully responsible for any potential contamination on the site. All military sites are considered to be potentially contaminated unless proven otherwise.
As soon as it is proven that a site poses a risk to the public or to sensitive environmental receptors, the relevant regulatory authority and technical agency depending on the Länder-specific administrative and legislative structure, (e.g. local environmental authority Umweltfachamt or regional council Regierungspräsidium) become involved in the management of the contaminated site, since the Federal Government - being the owner of the site - is subject to the respective Länder law.
Responsibilities of German Authorities
As far as the Federal Government of Germany is in charge of the administration of military sites, this responsibility is shared between the different ministries (See Table 9-2).
The organizational structure is illustrated in Fig. A and B (Appendix 9-1). The Bundeswehr administration (Bundeswehrverwaltung) consisting of regional administration centres (WBV) and at the lowest level of individual base management (Standortverwaltung -StOV) administer the individual properties on behalf of the BMVg.
At Länder level, the authorities who administer the Federal Property on behalf of the Treasury (Bundesfinanzministerium - BMF), i.e. the Regional Finance Offices (Oberfinanzdirektionen - OFD) with their Departments of Federal Property (Bundesvermögen - BV) and the Federal Property Authorities (Bundesvermögensämter - BVÄ) are in charge of the management of the individual properties. At federal level, the responsibility for the management of SCS and confirmed contaminated sites is divided depending on whether the contaminated site in question is a Contaminated Civil Site (CCS) or a Contaminated Military Site (CMS). The BMBau is in charge of the management of CCS, the BMVg is in charge of the management of Bundeswehr or NATO properties.

Notes:
* Former WGT properties located in Brandenburg, Saxony and Thuringia, which are not used by the Bundeswehr now and which are not used by the Federal Government for civil purposes were to some extent taken over by these Länder Governments. (See text below)
For the BMBau and the BMVg, the Financial Building Administration Authority of the Länder (Finanzbauverwaltungen der Länder - FBV d.L.) have assumed the function of the supervisory authority and technical agency for construction activities on properties of the Federal Government. The FBV consists of Länder Building Departments (Landesbauabteilungen) of the OFDs and their Building Control Offices (Bauämter). The OFD Hanover was appointed as Lead-OFD, in order to guarantee consistency in the management procedures and assessment criteria for SCS on military sites and CMS. The OFD Hanover is also in charge of developing and maintaining a central data base for the BMBau, BMVg and other users. An engineering company was engaged to coordinate this project under technical supervision of the Lead-OFD.
The Lead-OFD Hanover is also in charge of implementing immediate risk abatement measures on abandoned military sites which were formerly used by the WGT in the five Neue Bundesländer (former GDR).
Any further activities are initiated by the FBV d.L., with type and extent of any registration, investigation and protection/remediation measures being determined in cooperation with the responsible environmental authorities in the individual Länder and, if necessary, with the Lead-OFD.
The FBV d.L. engage local engineering companies with the practical implementation of these measures. The results of investigation/protection/remediation measures are collected centrally at the Lead-OFD, processed and filed in a data base.
From 1993 on, former WGT properties located in Brandenburg, Saxony and Thuringia, which were not planned to be used by the Bundeswehr have been transferred into the property of these Länder on the basis of the Agreement on WGT Properties Transfer (Verwaltungsabkommen zur Übertragung der von der Westgruppe der Truppen - WGT - genutzten Liegenschaften). Together with the properties, these Länder also assumed all rights and duties associated with these properties from the Federal Government. For the administration and management of these sites including the management of contaminated sites, these Länder established the following three companies:
- in Brandenburg: Brandenburgische Boden Gesellschaft für Grundstücksverwaltung und -verwertung (BBG);
- in Saxony: Sachsen LB Immobiliengesellschaft;
- in Thuringia: Landesentwicklungsgesellschaft (LEG) Thuringia.
In these Länder, the management of contaminated sites is not carried out under the supervision of the Lead-OFD Hannover.
Sites of Foreign Armed Forces
Since 1955 when the two German States (GDR and FRG) regained their sovereignty, foreign armed forces have been stationed in Germany only on the basis of the approval by the former GDR or the FRG respectively. All foreign armed forces enjoy immunity on the sites used exclusively by them , i.e. they basically do not fall under German legislation and jurisdiction.
In agreements like the
- NATO Truppenstatut (NTS)
- Amendment to the NATO Truppenstatut (ZA-NTS), and
- Ratification Document on the Amendment (UP)
it is stipulated that the western armed forces stationed in Germany enjoy their own sovereign rights. However, according to Para. II of the NTS, the western armed forces stationed in Germany also have to respect German legislation which requires them to clean-up contamination on the sites they use or regulates the payment of compensation respectively.
The legal status of the armed forces of the former Soviet Union is regulated in the so-called Agreement on Troop Withdrawal (Truppenabzugsvertrag - TAV) dated 12 October 1990 between the USSR and FRG. According to this agreement, also the WGT would have been required to comply with the German Federal and Länder law and remediate their contaminated sites. However, in practice this has not happened. On 16 December 1992, in the Agreement on the so-called "Zero Option", compensation for environmental damage caused by the WGT was waived.
As long as a military site is still operated by foreign armed forces, the above mentioned Agreements guarantee that SCS can be investigated by German authorities. However, the German authorities cannot impose site remediation or payment of compensation on the foreign armed forces, until the armed forces hand their sites over.

9.-4.0 Financing

Properties Used by German Armed Forces
The sites which in the past and in the present have been used by German armed forces only, i.e. former properties of the Reichswehr (German Armed Forces 1919 - 35), Wehrmacht (German Armed Forces 1935 - 45), and NVA as well as properties which were or are used by the Bundeswehr, fall exclusively under the responsibility of the Federal Government. This responsibility includes the management of SCS and CMS. The financial means necessary for the management of SCS and CMS are provided with taxpayer funds.
Properties Used by Foreign Armed Forces
In 1994 with the Agreement on the Clarification of Issues Resulting from War and Post-war Occupation (Vertrag zur Regelung aus Krieg und Besatzung entstandener Fragen), the Federal Government waived any claims against the western victorious powers in West Germany. In 1955, with the Act on the Compensation for Damage due to Military Occupation (Gesetz über die Abgeltung von Besatzungsschäden), the Federal Government agreed to pay compensation to third parties for damage resulting from military manoeuvres and from "routine operations". With the ZA-NTS the waiver of the Federal Government was partly annulled and retrospectively, it was agreed that the FRG and the respective dispatching country each pay half of the compensation for damages which were caused before 5 May 1955. As far as contamination on non-private properties caused during that period of time is concerned, the Federal Government can make no claims against the respective dispatching country.
Since 1955 when the two German States regained their sovereignty, foreign armed forces have been stationed in Germany only with the approval by the former GDR or FRG respectively.
For the period of time from 5 May 1955 to 1 July 1963, i.e. the date when the FRG joined the NATO, the Federal Government waived per agreement claims against the respective dispatching countries for damage at their federal properties including claims for environmental damage due to contamination.
When the FRG joined the NATO, apart from the North Atlantic Treaty, the NTS and the ZA-NTS became part of the legal framework for the stationing of foreign armed forces in Germany. The ZA-NTS was revised in 1993. According to the revised ZA-NTS, the German environmental legislation also applies to NATO troops in Germany being a binding minimum standard for them and the FRG can make claims against the respective dispatching country for soil contamination, if the contamination was caused wilfully or by culpable negligence and signifies a violation of the duty of the dispatching country to maintain their sites as stipulated by contract.

In a joint Declaration of the German Chancellor and the President of the Russian Federation dated 16 December 1992, Germany waived any claims against the Russian Federation being the legal successor of the USSR. Thus, the financial responsibility for the contaminated sites management on WGT properties was passed on to the Federal Government.
Till 1991, due to its four-power status, Berlin fell under a special law. With the law dated 3 January 1994, the FRG waived compensation claims for damage caused by the occupying forces in Berlin. Today, the responsibility for contamination on sites formerly used by the Allies lies basically with the present site owner, i.e. usually with the Federal Government or the Land of Berlin.
Only private owners of contaminated sites formerly used for military operations may make claims on the basis of the Act on Compensation for Damage Caused by Occupying Forces (Gesetz über die Abgeltung von Besatzungsschäden) or the so-called Landesbe-schaffungsgesetz respectively.
As far as abandoned WGT properties are concerned, the Federal Government has financed the registration and preliminary assessment of SCS with a total amount of approx. DM 95 million. The work was performed on behalf of the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit - BMU) with technical guidance by the Federal Environment Agency (Umweltbundesamt - UBA) and completed at the end of 1995.
Federal Properties
As described above, all abandoned military sites are transferred into the Property of the Federal Government of Germany first. In order to promote new uses and the development of these sites, private investors, Länder, districts, and communities can purchase such buildings and properties at reduced costs or on a deferred payment system (various Decrees by the BMF between 1992 and 1994). In such as case, the new use of the site or building has to be for a specific purpose and the benefit of the general public. Sites in the Neue Bundesländer can also be sold at a reduced price, if it is planned to build administration buildings for the Governments of the Neue Bundesländer, or for district and community councils there. Provided that such sites are planned to be developed for council housing or students accommodation, the interest to be paid on capital raised from public funds can be reduced in the first years.
With these incentives, the Federal Government stimulates the conversion of military sites. However, when a property is purchased from the Federal Government, the financial responsibility for the management of contamination on this site is not passed on to the purchaser.
Länder Properties
In 1993, the Federal Government has offered the Neue Bundesländer to take over the WGT properties which are not planned to be used by the Bundeswehr, including the responsibility for any site contamination, and to market them on their own. The Länder Thuringia, Brandenburg and Saxony have partly made use of this offer and taken over such properties. Due to the unpredictable risks, the Länder Saxony-Anhalt and Mecklenburg-West Pomerania have not taken over any former WGT sites.
On the sites taken over by the individual Länder, the Federal Government covers the costs for the removal of ordnances only. Additionally, the Federal Government covers the costs for the disposal of hazardous and non-hazardous wastes. For example, in Brandenburg the Federal Government paid DM 28 million for the disposal of 960,000 m; domestic waste and 25,000 m; hazardous wastes.
In the three Länder which have taken over former military sites of the WGT, these properties were declared as "Special Property" (Sondervermögen). For the management of this Special Property, these Länder have formed companies (Verwertungsgesellschaften) (See Sub-Section 9-3.0). These companies develop concepts for the future use of these sites and try to cover the costs for the management of SCS and CMS by means of the proceeds from the sale of these properties.
However, due to their geographic location or partly because of their contamination it may be difficult to sell many of these properties or to find an economically viable future use of the sites, e.g. in many cases, a conversion into housing or commercial areas might be impossible. Also, the costs for site investigation and clean-up may be unjustifiably higher than the current market value of a property. In this case, taxpayer funds will have to be used for the management of the contamination.

EU Funding Programmes
In 1991/92, within its PERIFA Programme the EC supported selected projects which included the management of contaminated sites within the framework of the conversion of military sites into civil sites. Within the 1994 KONVER Programme, the EU promotes the economic diversification of regions which historically depend to a large extent on the military sector. This support focuses e.g. on the improvement of the environment and remediation of contamination caused by military operations. The total amount of financial means provided within the KONVER programme amounts to ECU 500 million (approx. DM 925 million). At this moment in time, it is not possible to determine what portion of this total amount will be provided for the clean-up of former military sites.

9.-5.0 Profile of Contamination

Since 1989, when the systematic management of SCS on military sites and of CMS started in Germany, different contamination profiles have been established on properties which fall under the responsibility of BMBau and BMVg including WGT sites and numerous sites of the western forces, particularly of the US and Great Britain.
However, the contamination profiles discussed in the following can basically not be compared with each other. On the one hand, they are based on different types of data ("soft data", "hard data"), on the other hand the categorization with respect to different site uses is not consistent.
Contamination Profiles on the Basis of "Soft Data"
In 1992, the Environmental Ministries of the Länder North-Rhine Westphalia and Lower Saxony published a brochure called "Guide to the Management of SCS on abandoned military sites" (Wegweiser für den Umgang mit Altlast-Verdachtsflächen auf freiwerdenden militärisch genutzten Liegenschaften). It contains a matrix which demonstrates the connection between a potential contamination pattern, i.e. a certain range of contaminants and extent of contamination, and different military site uses. The matrix refers to sites used by the western troops. In the matrix, different service establishments such as barracks, airfields, rocket/radar installations, rifle ranges, base and military training areas, ammunition depots and fuel depots, are divided into individual activities such as garages, tanks, fire protection installations, testing areas etc.. These again are linked to relevant individual contaminants or groups of contaminants respectively (Annex 9-2). For each use and contaminant/group of contaminants listed it is indicated whether there is a very high potential of contamination, a high potential, or whether the contaminant has only limited relevance or a contamination is not very likely at all.
The matrix was developed mainly on the basis of the review and assessment of available data and literature.
In 1995, on behalf of the BMBau another data collection on contaminants was developed (Arbeitshilfen Schadstoffinformation). When compiling this data collection, the specific needs for formal risk assessment (See Sub-Section 9.-7.3) and cost planning (See Sub-section 9.-10.0) were taken into account. This data collection comprises information on typical contamination patterns for approx. 180 different site uses, mainly military ones. Main contaminants are highlighted. There are data sheets for more than 500 different contaminants describing their chemical, physical and toxicological properties. It is planned to use this data collection as data base to be added to the Information System on Contaminated Sites (See Subsection 9.-7.1)
Contamination Profiles on the Basis of "Hard Data"
* Contamination Profile on Bundeswehr Properties and former NVA Properties
In 1989, the Bundeswehr has begun with the systematic registration of SCS on properties used by the Bundeswehr and on NATO properties used by other armed forces starting with properties in the Alte Bundesländer first. Since the end of 1990, also 381 military bases of the former NVA have been investigated. The current status is summarized in Sub-Section 9.-6.0.
The sites were divided into the following categories:

The site uses with the highest environmental impact include petrol stations, paint storage facilities, chemical storage and tank farms. Approx. 90 % of all cases which require remediation measures are facilities where fuels were stored or handled.
Looking at on-going clean-up activities, petrol stations constitute the highest proportion:

The investigations showed that main contaminants were petroleum hydrocarbons (43.1%), heavy metals (14.8%), BTEX (11.9%), halogenated compounds (11.9%), and PAH (8.6%)
Table 9-3 gives an overview of the contaminants detected in the detailed investigations (Phase IIb) performed on military properties of the Bundeswehr up to now:

* In the order of frequency (metals indicated as chemical symbols)
* Contamination Profile on Former WGT Sites
Between 1991 and 1995, on behalf of the BMU/UBA a comprehensive programme of registration, assessment and risk assessment of SCS was carried out on 1026 former WGT properties. The total area of these 1026 closed military sites amounts to 243 016 ha (see also Sub-Section 9.-5.0). These sites were divided into the following categories:

A total number of 33,750 SCS or potential sources of soil contamination covering a total area of 5,707.5 ha were identified.
Most of the SCS on WGT properties were found at barracks, on military training areas, storage areas, and airfields. Table 9-4 indicates the contamination profiles established on the basis of soft data.
According to this Table, main contaminants were mineral oil products, metal wastes and mineral wastes. Only 3% of the contamination found were explosives and warfare agents.

Sources: Relative Frequency: Kubald & Heinrich, 1995; Amount of Contaminants: Burckhard & Forsthofer, 1995
On 18 properties detailed investigations were performed in order to assess the risks. On the basis of these investigations, i.e. on the basis of the "hard data" obtained during these investigations, detailed contamination profiles were developed for 40 SCS according to Appendix 9-3.
During the first assessment phase of WGT properties, the following contamination profiles with regard to sensitive environmental receptors were detected (in % of cases; source: SRU, 1995):
- humans: 8.9%
- animals : 2.5%
- plants/vegetation: 21.4%
- soil: 84.7%
- surface waters: 2.7%
- groundwater: 34.6%
- air: 7.1%.
On the basis of the results of these first assessments, 16 362 immediate measures for the minimization of acute risk were initiated. These measures focussed on 9862 SCS on approx. 500 properties. 91 % of these measures did not include construction measures. These measures can be divided into the following categories:
- 4,851 protection and restriction measures
- 1,126 measures for the detection and disposal of ammunition
- 7,288 measures for the removal and disposal of contaminants (mainly mineral oil products, solvents, antifreeze, brake fluids, paints and compressed gas bottles)
- waste removal.
In all other cases, construction measures had to be taken to minimize indirect risks.
A special feature that is characteristic for many former WGT military are so-called "shifted areas" (geschobene Flächen). They stem from the final phase of the withdrawal of WGT troops, when large quantities of wastes were buried in the ground. Type and exact amount of these wastes are often not documented. However, it can be assumed that particularly waste oil, chemical irritants, domestic waste, solvents, ammunition, demolition wastes and scrap metals were buried. For the investigation of these sites, these areas pose a special problem.
Contamination Profile of Gunnery Ranges
Within the framework of a research project, a detailed contamination profile was developed for heavy metal contamination of gunnery ranges on the NATO training area in Bergen, Lüneburger Heide. It was found out that in areas with intensive shooting activities the soil contamination with lead, cadmium and copper is particularly high.
Nickel, chromium and arsenic play only a minor role in a few cases. The highest lead contamination was detected on infantry ranges. Cadmium and copper contamination concentrated mainly on tank ranges. The highest concentration of heavy metals was found to be present in areas where emissions do not spread but concentrate on a limited area, as for example, on hand grenade training areas.

9.-6.0 Registration of Suspected Contaminated Sites (SCS)

Registration
In the 1980ies already, several Länder have started with the systematic registration of SCS on former sites of the German armaments industry (e.g. Lower Saxony, North Rhine Westphalia) and have initiated the management of SCS and confirmed contaminated areas on properties which are being abandoned by the Western Allies. After the fundamental political changes in 1989, the management of suspected and known contaminated military sites became a systematic and nation-wide programme.
The Contaminated Sites Programme of the Bundeswehr
In 1989, the Bundeswehr initiated the systematic registration of SCS on properties used by the Bundeswehr and the NATO starting in the Alte Bundesländer first. Since 1991, 381 former NVA sites have been included in the investigation programme (Later in this Sub-Section, the registration/first assessment of former NVA sites will be discussed in more detail.). Additionally, 18 former WGT sites now used by the Bundeswehr were assessed in a preliminary assessment within the scope of the WGT project (see text below).
Up to now, the Contaminated Sites Programme of the Bundeswehr has been implemented as follows:
- total amount of properties: 3,385; on 614 of these properties approx. 4,170 SCS were registered.
- A preliminary assessment was made for approx. 2,440 SCS.
- Phase II investigations were performed on a total of 3,062 SCS.
- On 129 areas clean-up measures were initiated.
The registration of SCS on the 381 former NVA bases which were taken over and are used by the Bundeswehr now, has basically been completed. On 290 properties, first investigations were initiated. Most of them have been completed already. On more than 90 properties detailed investigations were started and have been completed to a great extent.
A total of approx. 1,900 SCS or confirmed contaminated areas have been registered on the former NVA properties. The results of the preliminary assessments and subsequent investigations of 1,140 SCS are compiled in Table 9-5. They include SCS resulting from both military operations and armaments production during the World Wars as well as from civil uses either during or before the military site use.
The findings of the investigations performed on former NVA properties can be summarized as follows:
* on approx. 40% of the SCS investigated, the suspected contamination could not be confirmed,
* on approx. 40% of the SCS investigated, the suspected contamination was confirmed,
* on approx. 10% of the SCS investigated, protection/clean-up measures have to be taken,
* on approx. 4% of the SCS investigated, immediate measures to abate acute risks were necessary.

The WGT properties taken over by the Bundeswehr are not included in this evaluation.
In general, the number of SCS and confirmed contaminated areas in proportion to the number and size of properties is higher on former NVA properties in the Neue Bundesländer than on Bundeswehr properties in the Alte Bundesländer. However, there are no data available which would make an exact comparison between Bundeswehr and former NVA sites possible.
Programme for the Registration and Preliminary Assessment of the WGT Properties
Between 1991 and 1995 the BMU financed a programme for the registration, preliminary assessment and risk assessment of former WGT properties. Within the scope of this programme, a total of approx. 1,030 military sites with a total area of approx. 256,000 ha were considered. Purpose of this programme was to create a basis for negotiations with the WGT forces on cost compensation for environmental damages. At the end of 1992, however, Germany waived cost compensation completely (see Section 9.-4.0).
The project comprised the following three sub-projects:
- Sub-project A: Identification of SCS on all sites by flights over the entire area, assessment of aerial photographs and historical reviews.
- Sub-project B: Identification of SCS by site inspections
- formal preliminary assessment via computer programme
- action plan with immediate measures to minimize acute risk
- Subproject C: Investigation of 18 selected properties and subsequent risk assessment
- follow-up investigations in order to assess the potential risk for 2 properties
- development of remediation concepts for 6 properties with three different potential uses
- cost estimates for clean-up of 6 properties
The immediate measures which were proposed to minimize acute risk (part of Sub-project B) included the following:
- protection and restriction of access measures in 8,183 cases and
- further investigations in 1,178 cases.
A final report issued on 14 December 1995 documents these measures. Since 1992, the impacts of CMS on the drinking water supply in the Neue Bundesländer has been investigated by a Working Group of the Technical Commission on Drinking Water (Fachkommission Soforthilfe Trinkwasser - FKST) in the Federal Ministry of Public Health. Since 1993, in Thuringia 13 WGT properties have been investigated in detail and, where necessary, been remediated. No summary report on these measures was available.
Registration and Preliminary Investigation of SCS on Properties Used by Armed Forces of the Former GDR
Military sites in the former GDR were operated by:
- the NVA and border guards (more than 3,000 properties)
- the MfS (approx. 5,000 properties), and
- the MdI.
Most of the 3,000 military sites of the former NVA and border guards were taken over by the Bundeswehr in 1990. As mentioned above, approx. 380 of these properties will continue to be used for military purposes and remain under the responsibility of the BMVg in the long run. The identification, registration and management of SCS takes place within the scope of the special Contaminated Sites Programme of the Bundeswehr for the Neue Bundesländer (Altlastenprogramm Ost).
All other properties are transferred into the general property of the Federal Government. Up to now, the identification and investigation of SCS on these properties has happened in a few cases only, except the Land of Berlin. In Berlin, first investigations (without sampling) have been initiated on properties of former GDR forces in the eastern part of the city already. (See text below). Up to now, the FKST has started to assess 2,235 properties of the NVA and GDR border guards. The FKST applies an assessment model which classifies the sites into six different risk groups with regard to hazard to drinking water. For the three lower categories no immediate action is required. A site which is classified in one of the upper three risk groups requires further investigation, assessment and, if necessary, risk minimization measures. The preliminary assessments performed till April 1995 have shown that only for approx. 33% of all properties considered enough information is available to classify these sites into one of the three lower categories. In 26 cases, the need for immediate action was identified.
Military Sites in the Land of Berlin
In 1992, the Berlin Department for Town Planning and Environmental Protection (Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung und Umweltschutz) engaged an engineering company to identify and assess SCS on properties used for military purposes in Berlin. The properties to be investigated were military sites used by the US forces, the British and French forces, the NVA, the border guards of the former GDR, Civil Defence Corps of the former GDR and the former MfS. On Berlin territory, 161 properties with a total area of approx. 2,000 ha were assessed and divided into three risk categories (See Table 9-6).

Category A: It is either proven or can be assumed with a high probability that these sites pose a high risk. A risk assessment is required.
Category B: Due to their past use (e.g. garages, tank farms, storage areas, car depots, firing ranges, ammunition depots, workshops, barracks), these sites have a potential for contamination or are located near protected areas respectively. Further investigation is needed.
Category C: These sites are not suspected to have contaminated areas (e.g. administration and office buildings, border checkpoints, district recruiting offices, housing areas, restaurants, cultural facilities, sport and leisure facilities)
In order to classify the sites into the above risk categories, all information available on the property was reviewed, site parameters were assessed, interviews were performed, any reports on previous site investigations were evaluated and the condition of structures was evaluated. New investigations were not performed.
Military Sites of the Western Allies
The western allies USA, France, Great Britain, the Netherlands and Canada have started their own programmes for the identification of SCS on the sites used by their armed forces in Germany. These programmes are not subject of this Study.

9.-7.0 Methods for the Investigation of CMS

As far as the management of contaminated sites is concerned, there are differences between Bundeswehr properties which will continue to be used for military purposes and military sites which will be converted into civil sites ("conversion sites"). On conversion sites, SCS are identified, investigated and remediation measures are triggered for the following reasons:
- identification and elimination of acute risk
- identification of damages due to site use by foreign forces
- identification and assessment, if necessary including risk assessment and cost estimate, with regard to future use of the site and/or sale of the property.
In general, all measures taken on conversion sites focus on the elimination of acute risk and aim at selling the property as soon as possible. Extensive investigations covering the entire area were performed on WGT properties only.

The Contaminated Sites Programme of the Bundeswehr is mainly related to planning purposes and aims at screening all properties used by the Bundeswehr for contaminated areas and remediate them, where necessary. Although the various programmes for the management of contaminated military sites in Germany have different goals, they basically follow the same approach, e.g. comprising the following three phases:
Phase I: Identification of SCS and preliminary assessment
Phase II: Risk assessment
IIa: First investigation
IIb: Detailed Investigation
Phase III: Containment/remediation and monitoring
IIIa: Remedial investigation and planning of clean-up measures
IIIb: Clean-up/construction measures
IIIc: Aftercare and monitoring.
In order to standardize the work throughout the individual phases and the data collection, the Lead-OFD in Hanover has developed a manual on contaminated sites management (Arbeitshilfen Altlasten) which was issued by the BMBau and BMVg with the approval of the BMF and BMU.
For the collection and processing of data during all phases, a contaminated sites information system (Informationssystem Altlasten - INSA) was established at the OFD in Hanover. Central part of this information system are a data base and a geographic information system. Beyond this, the system comprises programmes for filing data (EFA I for Phase I data and EFA II for Phase II data) and programmes for risk assessment (BEMA and MAGMA) as well as for cost calculation (KOSAL). The structure of this system is described in Appendix 9-4.

9.-7.1 Registration and Preliminary Assessments

Within the Contaminated Sites Programme of the Bundeswehr, the Phase I work is done by the respective Bundeswehr departments which are in charge of property management with their own qualified scientists who perform the preliminary assessment (military geologists). For Phase I work on all other sites qualified engineering companies are engaged.
The identification/registration and preliminary assessment (Phase I) aims at
- identifying the location of SCS;
- assessing the possible extent of the potential contamination;
- making a first assessment of the risk associated with this potential contamination.
The findings of Phase I either clear a site from the suspicion that it is contaminated or lead to further investigations.
In Phase I, the following data are reviewed:
- administrative data on the property;
- site history and past uses;
- site description;
- description of SCS.
This phase does not involve sampling, but includes the following methods only:
- contacts and interviews with all relevant authorities, agencies, departments and possibly contemporary witnesses;
- site inspection in order to identify and register all areas on the site which may potentially pose a risk to the environment;
- compilation, review and assessment of all documentation available on the handling of hazardous substances on the site;
- collection of all available and accessible information on geological/ hydrogeological and biological site conditions (such indications like stressed or damaged vegetation) as well as information on organoleptic contamination of soil, groundwater and surface water;
- compilation, review and assessment of already available documents and investigation reports (geotechnical investigation reports, geological and hydrogeological data/reports);
- assessment of maps and aerial photographs/satellite images (The manual on contaminated sites management (Arbeitshilfen Altlasten) issued by the OFD Hanover (BMBau/BMVg) contains detailed information on the availability of aerial photographs and on how to assess them).
In principle, also satellite-based remote sensing methods and geophysical methods can be applied for Phase I on military properties. In practice, however, these methods are applied only very rarely.
In 1992, the Environmental Ministries of the Länder North Rhine Westphalia and Lower Saxony developed a matrix for the determination of typical contamination profiles for different military site uses (See Appendix 9-2). On behalf of the OFD Hanover, an even more comprehensive register of typical contaminants for different military site uses has been developed which is intended to be used as assessment basis in Phase I (see Section 9.-5.0).
The results of Phase I are documented in a standardized form, i.e. on special data sheets or on data carriers respectively. Via the data filing programme EFA I (for Phase I data) these data can be filed and processed in the central data base INSA at the OFD Hanover (see text above). The data filing programme is made available to engineering companies.
The following data gained during the Phase I work are fed into the central data base INSA:
- general data on the site (administrative data, site history, uses);
- topographic data (maps and aerial photographs);
- information on geology and hydrogeology;
- wastewater and waste disposal (sewer system, wastewater treatment plants, landfills);
- emergencies, leakages, breakdowns;
- already existing investigation reports and assessments;
- description of SCS (description of contaminants, wastes, size of area, risk to environmentally sensitive receptors, list of actions needed and photo documentation);
- assessment of the SCS.
For the registration of SCS on WGT properties, the contaminated sites information system ALADIN was developed on behalf of the BMU. ALADIN is a PC database for storing data obtained in reviews of aerial photographs and documentation as well as site inspections without extensive sampling.
ALADIN contains an integrated module MEMURA which supports the preliminary assessment of military properties. It was applied specifically for the preliminary assessment of WGT properties (See also Sub-Section 9.-7.3). Basically, the same type of Phase I data which is fed into INSA is also fed into ALADIN (see text above). However, in general INSA goes beyond ALADIN, since it is able to process also the data which are necessary for cost calculations with KOSAL (see Subsection 9.-12.0).
With the help of EFA I, EFA II and INSA or ALADIN respectively, the collected data can be fed in and processed via user-friendly menus. The data base INSA can be linked to a geographic information system (see Appendix 9-4) so that aerial photographs and maps can be included in the data processing. It is possible to issue a report with standard format which can be complemented with maps or photographs, if necessary.

9.-7.2 First Investigation, Detailed Investigation, Risk Assessment

Independent engineering companies are engaged to perform Phase II work. The first investigations (Phase IIa) include focused geological/hydrogeological and chemical/physical investigations. With a minimal input, sufficient information on the presence, mobility and impact of contaminants shall be obtained, so that at the end of Phase IIa the suspicion that an area is contaminated is either cleared or confirmed. In special and particularly urgent cases, the Phase IIa investigations can be performed together with detailed Phase IIb investigations.
Before any field works can start, the area to be investigated needs to be cleared from ammunition/ordnances. Soil sampling methods include window sampling and test pits in the suspected contamination centres.
If there is any evidence of the presence of fugitive contaminants like BTEX or highly volatile halogenated hydrocarbons, soil vapour samples have to be taken. For extensive investigations and for the detection of warfare agents in soil vapour, passive adsorptive sampling methods are recommended. Currently, a special sensor technique for the field detection of TNT in soils is being developed (see Sub-Section 9.-13.0).
If the findings of Phase I indicate possible groundwater contamination, groundwater monitoring wells have to be installed to determine the hydraulic gradient and groundwater flow direction. Selected samples should be analysed for groups of substances like petroleum hydrocarbons, absorbable organic halogenated compounds, PAH etc. first. It may be recommended to perform field measurements or quick tests (e.g. TNT quick tests, mobile GC/MS+RFA). For this purpose, the Bundeswehr has developed a tank which can detect 420 chemical substances typically used during military operations.
The results of Phase IIa decide on type and extent of further measures. If it is not possible to clear a site from suspicion or if the results of Phase IIa are not sufficient for a final assessment, further investigations (Phase IIb) are necessary. Aim of such a Phase IIb is the exact determination of the distribution of contaminants in the various media, a risk assessment as well as the elaboration of recommendations concerning further actions needed (e.g. special investigations in order to check the feasibility of different containment/remediation methods, long-term monitoring programmes, modelling and forecasting, tracer tests etc.). Generally there is no difference between the methods applied in Phase IIa and Phase IIb.
However, it may be useful to install more sophisticated groundwater wells such as nested groundwater monitoring wells to assess the presence of multi-aquifer contamination. The groundwater investigation in Phase IIb includes also the collection of data on hydraulic parameters (such as transmissivity, storage coefficient, characterization of fractures etc.).
The analysis programme is determined on the basis of the findings of Phase IIa. If, as a result of the risk assessment in Phase IIb, containment or remediation measures turn out to be necessary, further investigations have to be performed before such measures can be planned. The investigation for remediation in Phase III leads to a feasibility study and must cover the following issues:
- selection of remediation/containment methods which are suitable for the specific site taking into account the technological feasibility;
- efficiency test of the selected methods;
- comparison of the different methods proposed taking into account the following aspects:
- likelihood of successful remediation
- cost factor (cost efficiency)
- time factor
- current and future use of the site and adjacent sites
- follow-up measures
- acceptance by technical agencies and permitting authority
- legal framework
- acceptance by third parties
- health and safety etc.
- development of a proposal for remediation/containment taking into account relevant guide and limit values;
- elaboration of tender documents including scope of work required;
- preparation and carrying out of the necessary permitting procedures;
- development of a monitoring programme for the implementation of the planned containment/remediation measures.
When tank farms on WGT sites in Mecklenburg-West Pomerania were dismantled, a slightly different approach was developed and applied. Instead of a Phase II investigation before starting the work on the tank farms, the dismantling takes place under permanent technical supervision. The engineering company which was engaged to do this technical supervision, is in charge of the following:
- make sure that the relevant legal requirements are fulfilled.
- check and document possible contamination of upper soil layers.
The engineer decides on site by means of mobile analysis equipment whether or not soil excavation is required. In case the technological means are not sufficient for excavation of an appropriate amount of soil, borings should be performed in the contaminated area so that on the basis of the results of these borings and subsequent analytical testing, a risk assessment can be made. The technical supervision on site basically corresponds with the investigations normally performed during Phase II.
On behalf of the BMVg, the Lead-OFD Hanover has developed a concept, including a scope of work, which is especially designed for the dismantling of tank farms. The BMBau has approved this concept and it is now widely used by planning departments in Germany for this purpose.

9.-7.3 Technical Instruments for Risk Assessments

In the 1990ies, in the FRG two models for risk assessment were developed within the framework of identification and assessment of SCS on WGT sites:
* On the basis of data gathered in the first investigation, a preliminary assessment of military sites can be made and the need for action can be determined with the help of the PC programme MEMURA. The data are fed into this programme via ALADIN (See Sub-Section 7.1). The programme evaluates the "soft" data of Phase I. It can also process the results from qualitative analyses of samples, if necessary.
* The risk assessment model MAGMA can help to prioritize SCS after soil and groundwater investigations.
MEMURA is based on a method which was originally developed for SCS on civil sites and was later modified to the special needs of SCS on military sites by taking into account specific contaminants and wastes which are typical for military sites. However, as far as the assessment methods for SCS are concerned, in MEMURA there is no difference between civil and military sites.
Assessed is the direct risk for human health and the indirect risk via sensitive environmental receptors like groundwater, surface water, soil and air posed by each individual contaminant on site. After a preliminary assessment of the various SCS on a property, MEMURA helps to prioritize the individual areas in terms of future actions.
There are several risk categories which are based on the German waste classification system:
1. Excavated soil
2. Demolition and construction waste
3. Mineralized domestic waste
4. Non-mineralized domestic waste ("fresh" waste)
5. Hazardous waste which can be land filled
6. Hazardous waste which cannot be land filled.
Contaminants and wastes which do not pose a risk to one of the sensitive environmental receptors are excluded from the assessment (e.g. solids without soluble compounds do not pose a risk to groundwater).
The contaminant-specific risk r_o can be determined via certain properties of the substance such as for instance density, viscosity, solubility as well as biological and chemical degradability (see Appendix 9-6). The real risk to the individual environmental receptors is expressed with the help of environmental transfer factors (m₁ - m₄) which describe the migration of substances away from the SCS to the sensitive environmental receptors and the transport within, impact on and significance of the sensitive environmental receptor. Proceeding from a reference situation defined in the model, the risk factors for each SCS are minimized or maximized with the help of the collected data. For the environmental receptor "human being" a special assessment algorithm is applied, which takes into account the different types of danger which may be posed by a building or contaminant on site (e.g. danger of fire, danger of suffocation, explosion, chemical burns etc.).
The total risk r₄ represents a measurement for the need for action with regard to the assessed environmental receptor. If there are several contaminants and types of waste on an SCS the total risk r_4total is determined by correcting the highest substance-specific risk factor r_4max as follows:
r_4total = r_4max + 0,1 x [[summation]]r₄
From the different risk values for the individual environmental receptors a total assessment of the SCS with regard to the sensitive environmental receptors can be derived.
The need for action can be derived from the total risk factor r₄ as follows:
- r₄ < 3: no acute need for action, action probably needed, when site use is planned to be changed
- r₄ < 6: suspected low contamination, further investigations are recommended
- r₄ <10: suspected high contamination, further investigations are recommended
- r₄ > 10: measures for risk minimization have to be taken into consideration, further investigations are needed
(MEMURA does not give further details on the type of action possibly needed.)
If on an SCS contaminants with a high specific risk factor r>5 are detected, independently of the r₄ value, it is recommended to take measures for risk minimization into consideration.
In order to recognize automatically the need for action when dangers to human health are identified with MEMURA, the respective risk factors are relatively high, i.e. significantly above 10. It is not possible to assess the concentration of contaminants in so-called "shifted areas" (waste dumps) and burial pits without appropriate investigations. Therefore, the presence of such areas is automatically rated as r₄ = 10.
The total risk factors in MEMURA refer to individual SCS only. The priority concerning the need for further investigations/action which is calculated with the help of MEMURA refers to the individual sensitive environmental receptors. An integrated statement which would include all sensitive environmental receptors of an SCS is deliberately avoided. However, taking into account all SCS of a property it is possible to establish a risk profile for the entire property.
The Lead-OFD Hanover uses a similar programme, BEMA, for the formal preliminary assessment after Phase I. BEMA is continuously adjusted to the specific requirements of CMS and the constants used within this system, "r" and "m", are permanently updated according to the latest findings. The programme can also be used for SCS on civil sites or confirmed CCS.
After the detailed investigation and risk assessment (Phase IIb), another model, MAGMA, is used for the assessment of SCS. MAGMA helps to set priorities, i.e. to decide on how necessary containment/decontamination measures are on a specific area. MAGMA takes into account the migration of substances in water, soil and air and distinguishes between the individual transfer media groundwater, surface water, soil and air. The assessment is based on an anthropocentric assessment of the SCS, in which the human being is considered to be the end of a transport chain of substances through the various media.
MAGMA uses data which are obtained with the help of reviews, sampling and analysis in detailed investigations in Phase IIb with. However, this model cannot replace the individual assessment of each SCS and does not give a prognosis. The objectives of MAGMA are:
1. to make SCS or confirmed contaminated areas comparable
2. to set priorities
3. to assess the potential risk from an anthropocentric point of view.
For each transfer medium on an SCS, contaminant-specific parameters (Schadstoffspezifische Parameter - SP) and site-specific parameters (Umgebungs-spezifische Parameter - UP) are determined. Their combination forms the so-called MAGMA value M (See Appendix 9-7).
The contaminant-specific parameter SP evaluates the concentration of a contaminant as well as its behaviour and distribution in the ground. The calculation is based on a basis value which is formed by the substance-specific toxicity ( e.g. carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, persistency) and the concentration of the contaminant. Other parameters which influence the contamination status are combined with this basis value.
The site-specific parameter (UP) considers the site sensitivity and use of the affected transfer medium. For this model, receptor-specific scenarios were developed. With the help of these scenarios, the site-specific basis value (Umgebungsgrundwert) is calculated. This site-specific basis value is multiplied with other site-specific assessment criteria for groundwater (e.g. precipitation), surface water (e.g. water quality), soil (e.g. type of soil) and air (e.g. wind speed).
The MAGMA model is based on a "worst case" consideration. The calculation of SP and UP is based on a basis value (Grundwert) which can be diminished by other factors, but not elevated. Where no data are available, the model automatically assumes the "worst case".
With the data collected during the WGT project, it was possible to fix the parameters SP and UP taking into account the specific conditions of a CMS ( such as, for example, a high concentration of mineral oil products). When SP and UP are mathematically combined to form the value M, both parameters are taken into account equally, so that a change of their individual values can lead to the same degree to a modification of the M value. The parameters SP and UP and the MAGMA value M can reach a maximum score of 10.
The score reflects the risk that is posed by a specific contamination to human health:
- 0 < M-Value < 2,0 There is no or only a low risk, given the present site use, no action is needed.
- 2,0 < M-Value < 5,0 There is a risk, action or restricted site use is recommended.
- 5,0 < M-Value < 8,0 Risk is high, action is needed.
- 8,0 < M-Value < 10,0 Risk is high, action is urgently needed.
By means of the individual values for SP and UP it is possible to determine whether the need for action is mainly triggered by the potential risk posed by the contamination or by the high sensitivity of the site (see Appendix 9-7). Currently it is possible to evaluate approx. 220 substances with MAGMA.
Another risk assessment model which can be used both on SCS on civil and military sites and on CCS and CMS has been integrated into the KOSAL programme for cost estimates of clean-up costs used by the OFD Hanover (see Subsection 9.-12.0). For risk assessments with KOSAL the following criteria are used:
- the probability for contamination with a specific contaminant (ranging from "In general, contamination with this substance is possible only in case of non-routine events/emergencies." to "There is typically an extremely high potential for contamination with this substance."), depending on how this substance was used, on how long/often and over which period of time it was used,
- the probability of release depending on how much of a substance was used/generated (There are four categories ranging from "This substance was used in small quantities only as aggregate", or "This waste was generated only in small quantities" to "frequent use of this substance in large quantities" or "This type of waste was generated in large quantities").
On the basis of a matrix which combines the individual criteria (type of use, frequency and duration of use and amount of substance used) the emission factor (Emissionsfaktor - EF) can be calculated for each contaminant. In a second matrix, the combination of chemical and physical properties of a contaminant and health and safety (H&S) assessment criteria lead to a risk factor (Gefährdungszahl - GZ) for each contaminant. The product of EF and GZ finally leads to a contaminant-specific risk value (Gefährdungswert - GW).
The site-specific risk potential (standortspezifisches Gefährdungspotential - GP) is calculated by degressive addition, while the cumulative risk potential must be kept above the maximum individual value. The standardized values of the risk potential GP are classified into five different risk categories G. From these categories, the priority to take action can be derived. In practice, risk assessments made with KOSAL are used only as interim result for further calculations of clean-up costs (see Section 9.-12.0).
UMS, a model which was also developed in the 1990ies, is a tool for the assessment of the absolute potential for risk to human health. The abbreviation UMS stands for toxicological assessment of human exposure to contaminants from contaminated sites (Umweltmedizinische Beurteilung der menschlichen Schadstoffexposition durch Altlasten). The risk is assessed by comparing quantitative exposure and toxicologically tolerable intakes. In practice, UMS is still in its pilot phase. It has not been applied to CMS in Germany yet.

9.-8.0 Clean-up Attainment Goals

Today there are no national criteria for the assessment of contaminated soils and the determination of clean-up goals in Germany. Possibly, the Federal Soil Protection Act which is currently under preparation will bring along national soil values depending on uses and environmental sensitivity of the site and its vicinity.
It is current practice that the clean-up target values are determined in cooperation with the environmental authorities of the individual Länder. Some Länder have issued lists which can be used by the authorities for decision-making. However, these lists are not legally binding. They are based on a number of sources as for example the WHO lists, EU guidelines, "Kloke"-list, Dutch list, US American lists, the German Drinking Water Ordinance etc..
Primary objective of containment or remediation measures on a contaminated site is the minimization/prevention of risks to human health. Another objective is the prevention of risks to the natural environment taking into account the current or planned future use of the site. Beyond this, technological and financial feasibility is another relevant factor for the stipulation of clean-up targets. A strict application of lists cannot take aspects like this into account. Therefore it is a general policy to establish site-specific clean-up targets related to site use and sensitivity.
Especially for contaminants which are not included in conventional lists, a more pragmatic approach has been taken in the past, i.e. the clean-up goals took into account issues such as technological feasibility. In some cases, at least in the German armaments industry, also the risk assessment approach was used for contaminated sites. This included path-specific exposure and risk assessments as well as the simulation of uncertainties (Monte Carlo methods).
The present draft of the Federal Soil Protection Act e.g. provides for an assessment of contaminated soils on the basis of site-use related investigation and remediation values. Are the investigation values exceeded, further investigations are triggered. Are the remediation values exceeded, remediation measures are required without any further investigations.
The investigation and remediation values for the Federal Soil Protection Act are derived on the basis of toxicological criteria taking into account exposure routes and direct intake of contaminants via soil - plants - humans. However, the development of these investigation and remediation values has not been completed yet. Up to now, values have been proposed for a number of heavy metals, Aldrin, Benz(a)pyrene, DDT, HCB, chlorinated hydrocarbons, PCBs, dioxin, furans. Many of the contaminants which are typical for military sites have not been taken into account.
The remediation target levels must be lower than the investigation values. However, as long as the future use of a site is unclear, a decisive factor for the development of remediation target values is missing.
When remediation target values for contaminated areas on properties which will continue to be used for military purposes are set, the Site Use and Development Plan of the Bundeswehr (Benutzungs- und Bodenbedeckungsplan) is taken into account. This plan is some kind of land use plan for Bundeswehr properties which indicates also biotopes and areas which must not be used for military purposes.

9.-9.0 Clean-up Technologies

The measures for minimizing environmental impacts from contaminated areas can be divided into four categories:
- protection measures and access restrictions, i.e. decrees, recommendations, restricted site use;
- containment measures, i.e. minimization or prevention of further exposition of a contaminant;
- decontamination measures/clean-up, i.e. the reduction of the concentration of a contaminant by treating the affected environmental receptor;
- excavation and off site disposal.
Protection and access restriction measures are taken after Phase I, i.e. the first investigation of an SCS, already. The other measures listed above are part of Phase IIIb.
In principle there is rarely any difference between clean-up measures for CMS and CCS, mainly due to the fact that often there is no difference between the contamination profile of CMS and CCS. For example, 90% of the Bundeswehr properties or former NVA properties now used by the Bundeswehr which are currently being remediated are sites with contamination due to fuels. 31% of all clean-up measures refer to petrol stations.
On the 66 former NVA sites, which are either being remediated or prepared for remediation within the Contaminated Sites Programme of the Bundeswehr for the Neue Länder, the following methods are applied:
- microbiological soil treatment, off-site: 40%
- soil treatment, excavation and landfill: 25%
- microbiological soil treatment, on-site: 15%
- soil vapour extraction: 5%
- other methods such as, for example, immobilization,
capping and encapsulation, bioventing, soil washing 15%
- groundwater clean-up 15%
In many cases, various different methods are combined.
Land filling is the preferred option, when during construction activities small amounts of contaminated soil are found which need to be disposed of urgently.
Military sites contaminated with chemicals pose a specific issue. They require a special approach in terms of containment or clean-up. Due to long-term contamination and the adsorption properties of military chemicals, contaminants often accumulate in the micropores or clay minerals. In such cases it is not possible to remove them with conventional remediation methods.
However, the experiences made with chemically-contaminated military sites up to now refer mainly to identification/registration, assessment of SCS and immediate measures. Only little actual clean-up work has taken place up to now. The contaminated material, mainly soil, has been excavated only and is currently stored in temporary storage facilities. Remediation techniques are still under development and decontamination plants for the treatment of soils which are contaminated with military chemicals are still in their planning or construction phase (see Sub-Section 9.-13).

9.-10.0 Prioritizing of Sites

The standardized risk assessments after Phase I with BEMA or MEMURA (see Sub-Section 9.-7.3) and with MAGMA after Phase II as well as the programme used for cost planning KOSAL (see Sub-Section 9.-12.0) generate benchmark figures, which can be used for prioritizing sites and areas with regard to further measures:
- The benchmark generated by BEMA/MEMURA is the total risk factors r₄.
- The benchmark generated by MAGMA is the MAGMA value M.
- The benchmark generated by KOSAL is the cost estimate
In reality, prioritizing sites is strongly influenced by regional planning, privatisation issues, authority requests, political decisions or others. These issues generally override the above "model priorities". A model PRISAL which has been developed recently accounts for such socio-economic, political or other factors relevant to decisions with respect to setting priorities; the model has, however, not yet been used for managing contaminated sites.

9.-11.0 Health and Safety

Anybody who works on SCS on military sites must comply with the regulatory health and safety (H&S) requirements. The Trade Inspectorates (Gewerbeaufsichtsämter) in co-operation with the Trade Associations (Berufsgenossenschaften) make sure that the H&S requirements are complied with.
The manual on contaminated sites management (Arbeitshilfen Altlasten) issued by the OFD Hanover (BMBau/BMVg) contains a comprehensive set of H&S guidelines, which are binding for all investigation measures. The manual refers to the guidelines for works on contaminated sites (Richtlinien für Arbeiten in kontaminierten Bereichen) issued by the Trade Association of relevant construction companies (Tiefbauberufsgenossenschaft - BG Tiefbau) and, as far as the removal of warfare agents and destruction of explosives are concerned, to the guidelines for the disposal of ammunition (Richtlinien für das Zerlegen und Vernichten von Munition) issued by the Trade Association of Chemical Industry (Berufsgenossenschaft der chemischen Industrie - BG Chemie). The H&S regulations which are applicable to civil sites in Germany also apply to Bundeswehr properties.
Before works on contaminated areas, in particular investigation/remediation works on former armament production sites, are started, a H&S plan needs to be prepared according to the guidelines for works on contaminated sites by the BG Tiefbau. Such a H&S plan is required to cover the following issues:
- general information (general information on the site, client, relevant authorities, relevant Trade Association, responsibilities etc.)
- a site description (summary and assessment of already existing findings, e.g. from historical reviews, available investigation reports etc., a description of geological and hydrogeological site conditions, maps)
- scope of work
- H&S measures
- procedures for the handling and disposal of contaminated protective equipment and other contaminated items (incl. maintenance of contaminated machines)
- documentation of H&S monitoring.
If necessary, before works on contaminated areas are started, toxicological studies are performed.
In general, the principle "technological and organizational H&S measures" come before "personal protective equipment" applies. Technological and organizational H&S measures include all measures which exclude or minimize the direct handling of hazardous substances. All technological and organizational H&S measures which are possible and feasible must be taken, in order to reduce the use of personal protection equipment to a minimum.
For developing a H&S plan, the contractors receive all available information on type and extent of the contamination, including the relevant data sheets from the data collection on contaminants (Arbeitshilfen Schadstoffinformation) developed in 1995 on behalf of the BMBau, which contains H&S recommendations according to the Federal Ordinance on Hazardous Substances (Gefahrstoffverordnung).
For SCS on military sites which are suspected to be contaminated with conventional contaminants only, the H&S requirements are no different from H&S requirements on civil sites. Special measures on CMS become necessary where explosives have to be removed. Areas with a potential danger of explosions have to be divided into different safety zones. For reasons of labour safety, as soon as ammunition or ammunition parts are found during drillings on military sites, the drillings have to be stopped immediately and a search for ammunition has to be undertaken. When ammunition and explosives are handled, the above mentioned BG Chemie guidelines have to be followed. The guidelines on the destruction of ammunition regulate amongst other things, for example, the following:
- H&S instructions
- medical surveillance
- safety measures for the disposal of ammunition and recycling of explosives
- distances between the sites where ammunition is handled and housing areas/public roads.
However, the guidelines detail only relatively few safety measures. They basically contain the following requirements:
- Only qualified persons are allowed to disarm ammunition (Bundeswehr sites have the specialist staff needed for this purpose).
- It has to be made sure that unauthorized persons have no access to working areas. - In case machines are used, the persons who operate these machines have to be protected by technological H&S measures against the impacts of any explosions.

9.-12.0 Cost Estimates

Cost Estimates
Up to now, there have not been enough data available for determining the total amount of money needed for the remediation of CMS. Only for the Neue Bundesländer, there are some rough estimates for NVA and WGT properties. However, these estimates are based on the following uncertainties:
- When the estimates were made, the exact number of SCS was not known yet;
- The number of confirmed contaminated sites was estimated only roughly;
- It was not possible to determine precise remediation costs, since the remediation goals were not known when the estimates were made. The costs estimates are therefore based on rough estimates only.
A first estimate for WGT properties, based on risk assessments of six properties with three potential uses each, amounts to a total amount of 18.75 thousand million DM out of which approx. 2.5 thousand million DM are allotted to immediate measures for risk minimization. After the assessment of 254 bases, the total amount needed for former NVA sites was estimated at approx. 2 thousand million DM out of which approx. 45 million are allotted to risk assessments.
As far as clean-up costs for Bundeswehr sites which will be closed are concerned, there are no estimates available. For 363 former US sites which have been abandoned since 1991, KOSAL estimates were made.
For budget reasons, the Federal Government, the Länder and local Governments do currently not perform any clean-up activities which would go beyond immediate risk minimization on their own military sites. However, with regard to regional development, particularly Länder and communities must be interested in the development of new housing areas or business parks on properties which were formerly used for military purposes.
Private investors will be interested in developing such sites only if the remediation and planned future site use promise sufficient return on capital and this will be the case only if the Government sets financial incentives, either via considerably lowered sale prices of such properties, via direct contributions to the clean-up costs or via securities.
Since it is uncertain how much direct and indirect public funding will be necessary for the development and future use of such sites, it is difficult to make precise cost estimates for the total costs the German State will have to pay for the management of SCS and confirmed contaminated areas on military sites.
Models for cost estimation
The OFD Hanover uses a data processing model for the estimation of likely clean-up costs which is used for the individual project phases discussed in Sub-Section 9.-7.0. The reliability of the cost estimates increases with increased data availability in the successive project phases. Practical experiences have shown that cost estimates made after Phase I (identification and first assessment) are not useful, despite the fact that KOSAL can theoretically produce cost estimates after Phase I.
KOSAL consists of four modules which are successively linked with each other:
Module 1: Input Data
Data on size and use of the site, type and extent of the contamination, geology and hydrogeology as well as cleanup-specific data like distance from the landfill or transport costs are fed into the computer. For data which are not known, the system uses standard values. Background data which are already available in the system include specific data which are assigned to each contaminant (for example: contaminant - preferred remediation methods) and specific parameters (like for example physical and chemical properties of a contaminant).
Module 2: Risk Assessment
On the basis of the input data, a risk assessment is made (for details see Section 9.-7.3)
Module 3: Remediation Scenario
The theoretically suitable methods are assessed by means of a number of main and auxiliary criteria: the expected contamination profile, the geological conditions at the SCS, the extent or geometry of the contamination. Other criteria include the scope of work required prior to, during and after the construction works associated with the clean-up. The possible clean-up options are then ranked using a score between 0 and 100 with the best suitable option being assigned the highest score. The system comprises a total of 29 remediation options.
Module 4: Cost Calculation
The total costs are estimated on the basis of the individual costs for each work item necessary prior to, during and after the construction works associated with the clean-up (including preparation and follow-up measures). The cost estimation is based on the assessment of approx. 300 remediation project performed between 1988 and 1992, i.e. the costs used in the model are generally based on already completed remediation projects. An authorized person can, if needed, adjust the costs to the present market prices.
KOSAL is suitable for both CCS and CMS.

9.-13.0 Research and Development (R&D)

In Germany environmental research projects are promoted mainly by the BMU and the BMBF. Beyond this, there are funds provided by the German Research Association (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft -DFG) and the individual Länder.
In the following, the most important research projects on CMS of the BMU carried out in the last years are listed:
- development of a data base with toxicological data of approx. 80 substances which are relevant for contaminated sites and another 17 of the main contaminants resulting from armaments production
- the derivation of intake-effect factors of contaminants and contaminant compounds
- the development of standardized data processing models for risk assessments (e.g. MAGMA; See Sub-Section 9.-7.3)
- the development of standardized models for prioritizing contaminated sites with regard to their clean-up (PRISAL) and for remediation cost planning (KOSAL).
During the last ten years, the BMBF supported research projects on contaminated sites with approx. DM 220 million. However, between 1990 and 1994 within the research programme on waste management and remediation of contaminated sites, the BMBF funded only four projects which had some relevance for CMS. The research projects on CMS which have been carried out up to now, have focussed mainly on chemical contamination resulting from military production only, although they have some relevance for operational military sites too. Particularly contamination with explosives can be found not only on old military production sites, but also on operational military sites.
Three of the four research projects funded between 1990 and 1994 have been completed already. The last project is still ongoing. Its objective is the development of an environmentally friendly containment or clean-up model for an ammunition production site which was destroyed during World War II and which is contaminated with warfare agents. The site is characterized by high concentrations of arsenic compounds and dioxin. The organizational project preparations have been completed and the invitation for tenders has started.
The Fraunhofer Institute for Chemical Technology is currently developing a simple and cost-efficient detection method for TNT in soil. The potentiometric sensor can detect 2,4,6-TNT in suspended soil selectively, i.e. also in the presence of other nitro compounds and their metabolites. This method will be applied where 2,4,6-TNT or similar substances can serve as lead substances for characterizing larger areas or amounts of soil.
Due to the danger of explosion, conventional thermal methods cannot be applied for the remediation of soil which is contaminated with explosives. The following decontamination methods are currently being developed and tested for military sites with chemical contamination:
- wet chemical pulping
- different extraction methods (with acids and complexing agents, high pressure extraction)
- thermal desorption (hot air stripping, steam stripping, plasma pyrolysis)
- chemical treatment and destruction
- direct thermal-oxidative destruction
- microbiological treatment.
In Munster a pilot plant for the disposal of warfare agents is currently being built. The plant includes a physical/chemical soil washing unit with a throughput of 2.5 t per hour which is followed by a thermal inertization plant (Plasmox plant) with a maximum throughput of one tonne per hour.

References

Bachmann, G., Freier, K., Konietzka, R.: Soil Levels Based on the German Asoil Protection Bill. In: Contaminated Soil ´95, Vol. I, Proc. Of the Fifth International FZK/TNO Conference on Contaminated Soil, 30. October 1995, Maastricht, The Netherlands. Eds.: W. J. Van den Brink, R. Bosman and F. Arendt. Kluwer Academic Press Publishers Dordrecht, Boston, London, pp. 711-719. 1995
Berufsgenossenschaft der chemischen Industrie: Richtlinien für das Zerlegen und Vernichten von Munition. ZH 1-Sammelwerk Nr. ZH 1/47.1 Abruf Nr. 201, 32 Pages. Edition of October 1989
Bothe, M.: Völkerrechtliche Situation bei militärischen Altlasten. In: Management zur Sanierung von Rüstungsaltlasten. Eds.: Thomé-Kozmiensky, Spyra, Lohs, Preussner und Rüden. EF-Verlag für Energie und Umwelttechnik, Berlin, pp. 139-153. 1992
Bundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und Technologie: Projektträgerschaft Abfallwirtschaft und Altlastensanierung, Vorhaben 1988 - 1994. Umweltbundesamt, Berlin, 447 pages. May 1995
Bundesministerium der Finanzen: Bestellung von Erbbaurechten an bundeseigenen Grundstücken a) zur Schaffung von Wohnungen, b) zur Schaffung von Studentenwohnraum. Decree of 2 June 1992 (VI C 1 - VV 2585 - 15/92)
Bundesministerium der Finanzen: Verbilligte Veräußerung/Nutzung bundeseigener Grundstücke an/durch Länder, Kreise und Gemeinden in den neuen Bundesländern zum Aufbau Ihrer Verwaltungen. Decree of 26 March 1993 (VI A 1 - VV 2400 - 1/93)
Bundesministerium der Finanzen: Richtlinien für den verbilligten Verkauf bundeseigener bebauter und unbebauter Grundstücke zur Förderung des Wohnungsbaus (VerbRWo). Decree of 29 March 1993 (VI A 1 - VV 2400 - 2/93)
Bundesministerium der Finanzen: Richtlinien für den verbilligten Verkauf bundeseigener bebauter und unbebauter Grundstücke zur Schaffung von Studentenwohnraum (VerbRStud). Decree of 30 March 1993 (VI A 1 - VV 2400 - 3/93)
Bundesministerium der Finanzen: Anwendung des Haushaltsvermerks zur erweiterten Stundungsmöglichkeit bei Kapitel 0807 Titel 131 01. Decree of 20 December 1993 (VI A 1 - VV 2400 - 2/94)
Bundesministerium der Finanzen: Grundsätze für die verbilligte Veräußerung/Nutzungs-überlassungen und unentgeltliche Veräußerung bundeseigener Grundstücke (VerbGs). Decree of 22 February 1994 (VI 1 - VV 2400 - 1/94)
Bundesministerium für Raumordnung, Bauwesen und Städtebau und Bundesministerium der Verteidigung: Arbeitshilfen Altlasten: Arbeitshilfen zur Anwendung der baufachlichen "Richtlinien für die Planung und Ausführung der Sicherung und Sanierung belasteter Böden" des BMBau für Liegenschaften des Bundes. 1992
Burkhardt, D.: Environmental Problems at Military Installations in Germany. In: Clean-up of Former Soviet Military Installations - Identification and Selection of Environmental Technologies for Use in Central and Eastern Europe. Springer Verlag, pp. 157 - 172. 1995
Burkhardt, D. and Forsthofer: Ermittlung von Altlastverdachtsflächen auf den Liegenschaften der Westgruppe der sowjetischen Liegenschaften; Abschlußdokumentation Volume 1 - Abstract. IABG, 73 pages. 1995
Der Rat von Sachverständigen für Umweltfragen (SRU): Sondergutachten "Altlasten": Bundestagsdrucksache 11/6191 Dt. Bundestag, 304 Pages, Bonn. 1989
Der Rat von Sachverständigen für Umweltfragen: Sondergutachten "Altlasten II" (SRU). Bundestagsdrucksache 13/380, Dt. Bundestag, 304 Pages, Bonn. 1995
Deubel, E.: Umweltschutz und Bundeswehr, Sachstand - Absichten - Anmerkungen. In: Militärische Altlasten - Militärisch genutzte Flächen 1993, Erstbewertung - Untersuchung - Sanierung. Eds.: Pfaff-Schley. Abfallwirtschaft in Forschung und Praxis, Volume 63, Erich Schmidt Verlag, Berlin, Pages 9-40. 1993
Eversmann, B.: Finanzierung der Sanierung von Rüstungsaltlasten. In: Management zur Sanierung von Rüstungsaltlasten. Eds.: Thomé-Kozmiensky, Spyra, Lohs, Preussner und Rüden. EF-Verlag für Energie und Umwelttechnik, Berlin, Pages 221-224, 1992
Feige-Munzig, A.: Der Sicherheits- und Gesundheitsplan als Grundlage für den Arbeits- und Gesundheitsschutz bei der Bearbeitung Militärischer Lasten. Militärische Altlasten 1995, Offenbach am Main. February 1995
Forsthofer, K., Hoppe, Ch., Heinrich, B., Schäfer, J., Engel, H., Späte, A., Lauer, U.: Erfassung und Bewertung von Militärischen und Rüstungsaltlasten - DV-Modelle. Umweltbundesamt Texte 35/95, 163 pages. 1995
Franzius, V.: Kosten und Finanzierungsbedarf der Altlastensanierung in den neuen Bundesländern. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Umweltforschung, Sonderheft 5/1994 "Altlastensanierung", Analytica-Verlag, pp. 21 - 35. 1994
Franzius, V.: Perspectives on the Remediation of Contaminated Land in Germany. Chemistry & Industry, pp. 505-508. Juli 1995
Franzius, V., and Grimski, D.: Recent Developments in Contaminated Land Remediation in the Federal Republic of Germany: Current Programms and Future Research. Land Contamination and Reclamation, 3 (1), pp. 47-54. 1995
Fries, H.-J.: Rechtliche Grundlagen und bisherige Maßnahmen zur Erfassung und Sanierung von Altlasten im Bereich der Bundeswehr. In: Management zur Sanierung von Rüstungsaltlasten. Eds.: Thomé-Kozmiensky, Spyra, Lohs, Preussner und Rüden. EF-Verlag für Energie und Umwelttechnik, Berlin, pp. 113-121. 1992
Forsthofer, K., Bongartz, A., Engel, H., Heinrich, B., Hingst, G., Karutz, J., Späte, A.: Inventarisierung von Bodenkontaminationen auf Liegenschaften der Westgruppe der ehemals sowjetischen Truppen. Umweltbundesamt Texte 36/95, 1995b, 378 pages. 1995
Garn, S.: "Militärische und Rüstungsaltlasten in Thüringen" - Schwerpunkte, Lösungswege. In: Militärische Altlasten 1994. Eds.: Pfaff-Schley. Abfallwirtschaft in Forschung und Praxis, Vol. 69, pp. 77-83. 1994
Goos, H.: Sicherheitsmaßnahmen für Untersuchungen und Sanierung auf kontaminierten Flächen der Bundeswehr. In: Rüstungsaltlasten '91. Eds.: Kiefer, Pfaff-Schley, Schimmelpfeng. Abfallwirtschaft in Forschung und Praxis, Vol. 40, pp. 77-93, Berlin. 1991
Heinze, L., Saupe, A., Koehler, P.: Ergebnisse zu Voruntersuchungen für die Altlastenproblematik in Hallschlag - Analytik und Verfahrenskonzepte. Conference "Militärische Altlasten 1995", Offenbach am Main. February 1995
Karbardin, B. and Lychatz, S.: Vorgehensweise, Besonderheiten und Ergebnisse der Altlastenerkundung militärisch genutzter Flächen in Berlin. In: Militärische Altlasten - Militärisch genutzte Flächen 1993, Erstbewertung - Untersuchung - Sanierung, Eds.: Pfaff-Schley. Abfallwirtschaft in Forschung und Praxis, Vol. 63, pp. 106-111, Berlin. 1993
Kommission der Europäischen Gemeinschaften: Mitteilung an die Mitgliedsstaaten zur Festlegung von Leitlinien für die von ihnen vorgeschlagenen Operationellen Programme oder Globalzuschüsse im Rahmen einer Gemeinschaftsinitiative für die Rüstungs- und Standortkonversion (KONVER). Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften Nr. C 180/18-21. 1 July 1994
Kubald, L. and Heinrich, B.: Die Umweltsituation auf den Liegenschaften der ehemaligen Westgruppe der (sowjetischen) Truppen. Conference "Militärische Altlasten 1995", Offenbach am Main. February 1995
Lenke, H., Daun, G., Bryniok, D., Knackmuß, H.-J.: Biologische Sanierung von Rüstungsaltlasten. Spektrum der Wissenschaft, 2, pp 106-108. 1993
LOBBE GmbH: Militärische Altlasten - Lösungen für ein explosives Problem. Umwelttechnik Forum, Vol. 10, S 9 -10. March 1995
Ministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Raumordnung des Landes Brandenburg: Bundesprojekt auf militärischen Altlast-Verdachtsflächen abgeschlossen. Brandenburger Umweltjournal, pp. 13-15. November 1995
Ministerium für Umwelt, Raumordnung und Landwirtschaft des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen & Niedersächsisches Umweltministerium: Wegweiser für den Umgang mit Altlast-Verdachtsflächen auf freiwerdenden militärisch genutzten Liegenschaften. 40 pp., 4 Fig., Düsseldorf/Hannover. 1992
Mulisch, H.-M. and Krüger, W.: Auswirkungen militärischer Altlasten auf Einzugsgebiete von Trinkwassergewinnungsanlagen. Wasser & Boden, Vol. 48, pp. 11-23. April 1996
Reppe, S.: Militärische Altlasten - Ergebnisse aus der Erfassung und Erstbewertung von Altlastverdachtsflächen auf den Liegenschaften der Westgruppe der sowjetischen Truppen (WGT). Conference "Militärische Altlasten 1995", Offenbach am Main. February 1995
Schäfer, J.: Presentation of MEMURA, MAGMA, KOSAL and Applications on Hermannswerder Military Hospital, Münchenbernsdorf Fuel Depot, Oberlungwitz Tank Repair Shop. Minutes from the Garmisch Meeting: NATO CCMS Pilot Study "Environmental Aspects of Reusing Former Military Lands", Garmisch Partenkirchen, pp. 209-244. 8-12 May 1995
Schlimm, J.: Ziele der Bundesregierung zur Erfassung, Sicherung und Sanierung von Altlasten. Eds.: Thomé-Kozmiensky, Spyra, Lohs, Preussner und Rüden. EF-Verlag für Energie und Umwelttechnik, Berlin, pp. 1-8. 1992
Schröder, W.: Altlastenprogramm der Bundeswehr - Stand der Untersuchung und Sanierungsmaßnahmen. Presentation at UTECH Berlin, Forum "Sanierung kontaminierter Standorte 1996. Pp. 197-207. 26/27 February 1996
Thieme, J., Heinrichsdorf, F., Haas, R., König, W., Kopecz, P., Espelage, G.: Bestandsaufnahme von Rüstungsaltlastverdachtsstandorten in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. UBA-Texte 8/93. March 1993
Tiefbau-Berufsgenossenschaft: Richtlinien für Arbeiten in kontaminierten Bereichen. ZH 1-Sammelwerk Nr. ZH 1/83, Abruf Nr. 201, Edition 4.1992, printed 1995, 47 pages. 1995
Ulrici, W.: Internationale Erfahrungen zur Altlastensanierung - Synopse, Bewertung und Prüfung der Übertragbarkeit von Methoden und Konzeption. Bundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und Technologie, Bonn. 1995
Voss, J. H. und Urban, B.: Erfassung und Bewertung von Schwermetallbelastungen auf militärischen Truppenübungs- und Schießplätzen dargestellt am Beispiel des NATO-Truppenübungsplatzes Bergen (Lüneburger Heide). In: Management zur Sanierung von Rüstungsaltlasten. Eds.: Thomé-Kozmiensky, Spyra, Lohs, Preussner und Rüden. EF-Verlag für Energie und Umwelttechnik, Berlin, pp. 371-392. 1992
Wandel, R.: Art und Umfang der Ordnungspflichten. In: Altlasten - eine Herausforderung für die Industrie, Conference 6/7 April 1992 at the Hanover Fair '92. ITVA-Schriftenreihe, Vol. 2, Erich Schmidt Verlag, Berlin. 1992
Wulf, U.: Militärische Altlasten: Beurteilung von Ausmaß und Bearbeitungsstand aus Sicht des Bundes. Conference "Militärische Altlasten 1995", Offenbach am Main. February 1995
Click here for Picture
Click here for Picture
Click here for Picture
Click here for Picture
Click here for Picture

Click here for Picture

Click here for Picture
Click here for Picture

Click here for Picture
Click here for Picture
Click here for Picture
Appendix 9-2 (continued):

Contamination Profile according to MURL
Legend: s: contamination unlikely or only rarely observed
x: possibly relevant
xx: high potential for contamination
xxx: very high potential for contamination

Appendix Appendix 9-3:

Contamination Profile at WGT-Military Bases

Appendix 9-3: (continued)

Appendix 9-3: (continued)

Appendix 9-3: (continued)

Appendix 9-3: (continued)

Appendix 9-3: (continued)

Appendix 9-3: (continued)

Appendix 9-3: (continued)

Appendix 9-3: (continued)

Appendix 9-3: (continued)

Click here for Picture

Click here for Picture

Click here for Picture

Click here for Picture