U.S. ARMY 1 Sustainable Painting Operations for the Total Army Mr. Patrick Taylor Dr. Daniel Verdonik Hughes Associates, Inc. Presented at Joint Services.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
METAL FURNITURE SURFACE COATING MACT OVERVIEW 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART RRRR July 2006.
Advertisements

METAL COIL SURFACE COATING MACT OVERVIEW 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART SSSS May CFR PART 63, SUBPART SSSS May 2006.
METAL CAN SURFACE COATING MACT OVERVIEW 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June 2006.
METAL CAN SURFACE COATING MACT FACILITY INSPECTIONS 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June, CFR PART 63, SUBPART KKKK June, 2006.
IRON & STEEL FOUNDRY MACT QUESTION & ANSWERS
The Committee and Research – Where are we and where might we be going?
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Natural Gas STAR Program Optimize Separator Operating Pressures to Reduce Flash Losses SPE Paper B. Boyer -
Roadmap for Sourcing Decision Review Board (DRB)
Air Permitting and Compliance Smithfield Foods Environmental Conference Chicago, IL July 2013.
Cleaner Production- A Move Towards Sustainability
Facility Lead Corrective Action Approaches Voluntary Agreements RCRA National Meeting August 13, 2003 Jennifer Shoemaker EPA Region 3.
I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - E x c e l l e n c e Headquarters U.S. Air Force 1 JTEG Overview of Air Force Corrosion Prevention and Control Dr. David.
Denver Federal Center Calibration Silo Removal Project What are the DFC Calibration Silos? Installed in 1981 by Bureau of Mines Support minerals industry.
Regulatory Drivers for Reducing Solvent Emissions Barbara Johnson, PE Kansas State University Kansas Small Business Environmental Assistance Program March.
The Massachusetts Approach to Power Plant Clean-up Policy Making and Standards Setting to Reach Clean Air Sonia Hamel Massachusetts Executive Office of.
Cleaner Production Assessment (Chapter 4)
Katrina Pielli U.S. Environmental Protection Agency CHP Partnership
TRP Chapter Chapter 4.2 Waste minimisation.
Top Tactics for Maximizing GMP Compliance in Blue Mountain RAM Jake Jacanin, Regional Sales Manager September 18, 2013.
NESHAP: Paint Stripping and Miscellaneous Surface Coating at Area Sources NEWMOA Web Conference January 22, 2008.
Federal Aviation Administration CLEEN (Continuous Lower Energy, Emissions and Noise) Program Technologies Development AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Jim.
Sustainable Consumption and Production
Collision Repair Hazardous Waste Environmental Compliance Paid for, in part, by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment.
Copyright of Shell Alternative EnergiesMay 5, HYDROGEN REFUELING COST REDUCTION TO ENABLE COMMERCIALISATION National Hydrogen Association 2010 Conference.
Compliance Assistance and Ambient Air Monitoring Brian Hutchins Supervisor, Air Quality Bureau July 2014.
Identifying Source Reduction Opportunities and Engineering Trade-Offs Kenneth R. Stone Engineering Trade-Offs Team Leader Kenneth R. Stone Engineering.
NEW SOURCE REVIEW REFORM/SIMPLIFICATION JOHN A. PAUL STAPPA/ALAPCO MAY, 2002.
Where to find Information About Facilities. Overview of Title V Permits.
Air Quality 101 Kansas Air Quality Program overview.
Innovative Environmental Policy Air Permits David Neleigh Chief, Air Permits Section EPA Region 6 May 10, 2006.
Copyrights I Global Manager Group | Revision 0.1 Feb 2009 | 1 GMG DEMO OF ISO: ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AUDITOR TRAINING PRESENTATION KIT.
A N N I S T O N A R M Y D E P O T Environmental Management System Implementation at Anniston Army Depot April 8, 2004.
Developing responsible and ethical laboratory animal care and use programs which benefit the well being of animals while mutually working together with.
| Philadelphia | Atlanta | Houston | Washington DC Boiler MACT Compliance Plans: Failure to Develop Plans Is Planning to Fail Susie Bowden|
Presented by: Tony Serdenes, Greenman-Pedersen
Kimberton, PA | Kennesaw, GA | Strategic Air Planning: Is the Time for a PAL Here? Mark Wenclawiak, CCM|
THE GREEN SUPPLIERS NETWORK- MICHIGAN Presented for: The Great Lakes Regional Pollution Prevention Roundtable Winter Meeting March 8-9, 2005, McCormick.
Title V Operating Permit Program 1 Section 1: Intro to Title V Laura McKelvey U.S. EPA.
Title V: The Big Picture
1 This archive has the corrected slides. Audio for this archive references these slides. SERDP Funding Opportunities Dr. Jeffrey Marqusee SERDP Executive.
Phoenix Convention Center Phoenix, Arizona District or Distributed Integrated EnergyDistrict Heating and Cooling Robert McMillin Siemens Industry, Inc.
The Soldier: America’s Most Deployed Combat System Joint Small Arms Coordinating Group (JSACG) Small Arms Item Unique Identification Update Mike Friedman.
EMS in Agriculture and Agribusiness - United Egg Producers XL Project.
Proposed Rule for Preventive Controls for Animal Food.
Proposed Rule: 21 CFR 507 Proposed Rule for Preventive Controls for Animal Food 1.
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Permit Training Other Aspects of PSD Title V Permitting.
California Environmental Protection Agency AIR RESOURCES BOARD Public Transit Bus Fleet Rule and Emission Standards for New Urban Buses California Air.
SERDP Funding Opportunities Dr. Jeffrey Marqusee SERDP Executive Director.
The Paper and Other Web Coating (POWC) MACT – Executive Summary The executive summary is a power point presentation designed to be used for basic education.
Pollution Prevention in Air Quality A Government Perspective H. Patrick Wong, Chief Air Quality Management Division Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental.
I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - E x c e l l e n c e Headquarters U.S. Air Force 1 AFCEE BAA Program – Funding Opportunities Adria Bodour, Ph.D. Technology.
Feasibility Study.
Update on Methane Regulations Affecting Landfills Pat Sullivan Senior Vice President SCS Engineers Nov. 10, 2015.
Air Quality Management Comparison of Cap-and-Trade, Command-and Control and Rate-Based Programs Dr. Ruben Deza Senior Environmental Engineer Clean Air.
Vessel Wash Wastewater Management – Options for Marinas Presented by: Michael J. Danko New Jersey Sea Grant Consortium Virginia Marine Trades Conference.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS Air Quality Update Regional Council February 28, 2007.
1 IMPLEMENTING DOE ORDER ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS U.S. Department of Energy Richland Operations Office.
Environmental Management System Implementation. Practices, Aspects, Impacts- Concepts Mission Resource Impact Resource Impact Activities/ Operations Practices.
Evaluation Measures for Municipal Storm Water Management Programs Daniel Rourke Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District October 15, 2003 Counting Raindrops.
Demonstrating and Promoting Best Techniques and Practices for Reducing Health Care Waste to Avoid Environmental Releases of Dioxins and Mercury Project.
Date Planning for Compliance with the Final 316(b) Phase II Regulations For APPA – March 8, 2004 David E. Bailey EPRIsolutions.
A N N I S T O N A R M Y D E P O T Clean Air Act Implementation Through an Environmental Management System April 2004.
City of Joliet - Sustainability City of Joliet Sustainability Initiatives American Planning Association National Conference April 16, 2013.
Water Audits and Best Management Practice Life Cycle Cost Analyses for Army Medical and Health Care Facilities Presented By: Lisa Raysby Hardcastle, P.E.
Board Questions Loan denial Incentives and small fleets Cattle trucks Additional credits for compliant fleets Lower use school buses Water trucks Enforcement.
Fort Stanwix National Monument Energy Audit Contract
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN IOWA 800/
Implementing Effective Energy O&M Strategies on a Limited Budget
CTMA Investment - $1.1M; Industry Cost Share - $2.7M
Presentation transcript:

U.S. ARMY 1 Sustainable Painting Operations for the Total Army Mr. Patrick Taylor Dr. Daniel Verdonik Hughes Associates, Inc. Presented at Joint Services Environmental Management Conference & Exhibition April 14, 2005

2 U.S. ARMY Solving Environmental Problems for Army Programs Outline  Approach  Risk Mitigation  Program Areas De-Painting Rubber to Metal Bonding CARC and Other Paints Solvents / Cleaners / Thinners Sealants, Adhesives & Miscellaneous Coatings Munitions Coatings  Implementation  Conclusion

3 U.S. ARMY Solving Environmental Problems for Army Programs Two Parts of the Equation Get Funding Provide Solutions

4 U.S. ARMY Solving Environmental Problems for Army Programs Questions…  What Are the Bad Actors?  Which Ones Are Easy and Which Are Hard?  Will the Alternatives End Up Costing More than the Controls?  Are there Hidden Implementation Costs to the PMs?  Is this Approach Going to Fail and Force Me to Install the Controls Anyway?

5 U.S. ARMY Solving Environmental Problems for Army Programs …Answers  What Are the Bad Actors? Over 500 Suspected (Based on MMPP/PPP) Site Visits, Detailed Databases in Hand  Which Ones Are Easy and Which Are Hard? Easy: De-Painting, Non-Munitions Coatings & Sealants Hard: Solvents, Munitions Coatings Potential Alternatives Identified  Will the Alternatives End Up Costing More than the Controls? NO  Are there Hidden Implementation Costs to the PMs? Cost is Major Driver in Downselects Picture Looks Good Overall – PMs Will Be Involved  Is this Approach Going to Fail and Force Me to Install the Controls Anyway? Our Track Record Says NO!

6 U.S. ARMY Solving Environmental Problems for Army Programs Program Areas Process AreaBad ActorsAlternatives Identified Total Cost De-Painting118$XXX Rubber to Metal Bonding 23$XXX CARC and Other Paints 2225$XXX Solvents / Cleaners / Thinners $XXX Sealants, Adhesives & Misc. Coatings $XXX Munitions Coatings33 $XXX Implementation PEO/PM Support $XXXX

7 U.S. ARMY Solving Environmental Problems for Army Programs Mitigating Risk  RDECs Developed Original Program Plans and Estimates  Collected Data from Army Industrial Base Facilities Identified the Bad Actors, How Much, Where, on What  Performed Industrial Base Operational Analyses Prioritized Bad Actors – Easy to Hard Identified Opportunities for EPA Negotiations  Performed Trade Studies Analyzed COTS, GOTS, and the Gaps Estimated Costs of Alternatives and Alternative Approaches Prepared Roadmaps to Implementation (by Industrial Site and by Commodity)  Risk Mitigation Plan Verified RDEC Program Plans and Estimates Work with Vendors & Suppliers Negotiations with EPA RDEC Involvement, PM Implementation No Basic Research or Applied Research

8 U.S. ARMY Solving Environmental Problems for Army Programs De-Painting  Bad Actors – 1  Performed at Depots and Troop Installations  Advanced Technology Development: FY03-FY06 Trade Study Identified 34 Potential Alternatives Selected 18 for Performance Evaluation Coordinate Depot Implementation Technology Demonstration at ANAD  Demonstration / Validation: FY06-FY08 Performed at Three Sites: CCAD, LEAD, and ANAD Coordinate PM Approval  Operations & Maintenance 24 Specifications / Documents Identified SOPs, TMs, DMWRs, etc. Will be Modified ANAD High Volume Dip Tank  Two Approaches for ANAD Alternative Materials – Higher Risk Housekeeping and Dip Tank Changes – Low Risk No Cost Trade-Off – Both Options have Zero Net Cost Reduced Material Costs More than Cover Changes Covered Through AWCF/CIP 5% Army Usage 15% VOHAPs

9 U.S. ARMY Solving Environmental Problems for Army Programs Rubber to Metal Bonding  Bad Actors – 2  Performed Only at RRAD  Advanced Technology Development: FY06 Reformulate 2 Existing Adhesives – Change Solvents Evaluate 3 COTS Alternatives Coordinate RRAD Implementation  Demonstration / Validation: FY06-FY07 Conduct Qualification / Validation Testing Support PEO GCS and PEO CS&CSS Approval  Operations & Maintenance 3 Specifications and 5 DMWRs/SOPs  Cost Trade-Off Scrubber: Capital Investment + Annual Maintenance Alternative COTS Materials: Capital Investment + Higher Annual Material Cost Reformulated Materials: No Cost Difference

10 U.S. ARMY Solving Environmental Problems for Army Programs CARC and Other Paints  Bad Actors – 22  Performed Everywhere Except Ammo Plants  Aerosols – Expect to be Exempted  CARC Family: 9 Specifications – No Cost Re-Formulated CARC has No Cost Changes New CARC More Durable, More Expensive (~$20/ GL) PM Can Choose Best Option  Non-CARC: 13 Specifications Advanced Technology Development: FY03-FY06 Re-Formulate 5 and Evaluate 20 COTS Coordinate Depot Implementation Demonstration / Validation: FY06–FY08 Downselect and DEM/VAL 13 at Depots DEM/VAL CARC at 3 Remaining Depots Coordinate PM Approvals Operations & Maintenance 13 Specifications  Cost Trade-off No Performance Gains – Expect Comparable Cost 45% Army Usage 40% VOHAPs

11 U.S. ARMY Solving Environmental Problems for Army Programs Solvents / Cleaners / Thinners  Bad Actors – 100  Performed Everywhere  Trade Study Identified 350 Potential Alternatives with 33 Solvent, 19 Cleaner, and 12 Thinner Specifications)  Advanced Technology Development: FY03-FY06 Joint Service Solvent Substitution Methodology Sharing Costs Evaluate 40 – Downselect to 8 for DEM/VAL  Demonstration / Validation: FY06-FY08 DEM/VAL at LEAD, CCAD, ANAD, and TYAD Coordinate PM Approval Transition through TM to Field  Operations & Maintenance Revise 3 Specifications, Develop 1 New Specification Cancel / Inactivate for Army Coating Use 61 Specifications  Cost Trade-Off CCAD Experience – $1M to $2M per Year (Aerospace Rule) Requires Process Relocations New Solvents Generally Cost More Cost Validated During Downselect Working with EPA on Emission Standards / Limits 20% Army Usage 40% VOHAPs

12 U.S. ARMY Solving Environmental Problems for Army Programs Sealants, Adhesives & Misc. Coatings  Bad Actors 400 out of 1500 Many Low Use – Expect to be Exempted Many Small Container Sizes – Expect to be Exempted  Performed Everywhere  Advanced Technology Development: FY04-FY07 ASTM Test Standard Evaluate 100 materials Downselect 60 to 75 for DEM/VAL  Demonstration / Validation: FY06–FY08 Qualification Less Complicated and Smaller Scale DEM/VAL Up to 75 Materials PM Approval Expected for 400 Current Materials  Operations & Maintenance 25 Specification Changes Anticipated  Cost Trade-off Requires Process Relocations New Materials Generally Cost More Cost Validated During Downselect 30% Army Usage 5% VOHAPs

13 U.S. ARMY Solving Environmental Problems for Army Programs Munition Coatings  Bad Actors – 33  Performed at All Plants except 1  Joint Service Requirements – Investigating Shared Cost  Delayed Compliance Date for Munitions Clean Air Act Emissions Reductions in Other Areas Good Performance Demonstrated by the Army in Exceeding Reductions Gained by Aerospace, Shipbuilding NESHAPs EPA Working with Us – This Program Shows Commitment  Ammunition Coatings Drivers – Throughput & Costs Changes Require Round Qualifications GOCO / AAP Implementation is Intricate  Analyses Identified 33 Different Coatings at AAPs  Advanced Technology Development: FY04-FY09 33 Reformulations and Laboratory Validations  Demonstration / Validation: FY06-FY10 30 Round Qualifications  Operations & Maintenance: FY06-FY11 33 Specification Revisions Drawing / TDP Changes  Coordinating PEO Ammo IB Approval

14 U.S. ARMY Solving Environmental Problems for Army Programs Implementation  Operations & Maintenance funds FY06-FY11 Tied Directly to Non-Munition Areas Non-Specification Document / TDP Changes 99 TMs & TBs Identified Commodity Management NSNs Prevent Re-Introduction of Bad Actors Reduce Recordkeeping Burden and Costs  RDT&E Management Support: FY06-FY09 Provide Direct Support to PMs & Depots for Implementation Annual Management Oversight Coordination with EPA

15 U.S. ARMY Solving Environmental Problems for Army Programs Program Areas 20% 45% 5% Usage 40%350100Solvents / Cleaners / Thinners 40%2522CARC and Other Paints 15%181De-Painting VOHAP Emissions Alternatives Identified Bad ActorsProcess Area 30%5%100400Sealants, Adhesives & Misc. Coatings

16 U.S. ARMY Solving Environmental Problems for Army Programs Without ANAD Methylene Chloride 20% 50% Usage 50%350100Solvents / Cleaners / Thinners 45%2522CARC and Other Paints VOHAP Emissions Alternatives Identified Bad ActorsProcess Area <1% 181De-Painting 30%5%100400Sealants, Adhesives & Misc. Coatings

17 U.S. ARMY Solving Environmental Problems for Army Programs Bottom Line  Compliance-Driven Option: Install and Operate Controls $XXXM  Pollution Prevention Option: Reformulate, Qualify & Implement Alternatives $ XXM