BOARD ON ARMY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Alternatives for the Demilitarization of Conventional Munitions Public Release Webinar December 6, 2018 Todd Kimmell, Chair Douglas Medville, Vice Chair Judith Bradbury, Member Rebecca Haffenden, Member Jim Myska, S tudy Director Bruce Braun, Director, BAS T
Committee Membership and Expertise Mr. Todd A. Kimmell, Chair Dr. Herek Clack Mr. James P. Pastorick Principal Investigator (retired) Associate Professor President (retired) Environmental Assessment Division University of Michigan UXO Pro, Inc. Argonne National Laboratory Air Monit oring, Mechanical Explosive Dest ruct ion Permit t ing and Environment al Law Engineering Technologies, Munit ions Demilit arizat ion Mr. Douglas M. Medville, Vice Chair Ms. Deborah L. Grubbe Program Leader, Chemical Materiel Owner and President Dr. Seth P. Tuler Disposal and Remediation (retired) Operations and S afety, LLC Associate Teaching Professor MITRE Chemical Engineering Worcester Polytechnic Institute Eliminat ion of Non-st ockpiled Public Involvement Weapons and Cont ained Ms. Rebecca A. Haffenden Independent Consultant Demilit arizat ion Technologies Mr. William J. Walsh Attorney S enior Counsel Dr. Judith A. Bradbury Argonne National Laboratory Clark Hill, PLC Independent Consultant Environment al Regulat ion Environment al Law and Public Public Involvement Policy Dr. Peter R. Jaffe Dr. Gail Charnley Professor Mr. Lawrence J. Washington Principal Princeton University Corporate Vice President (retired) HealthRisk S trategies, LLC Department of Civil and Dow Chemical Company Toxicology, Environment al Healt h Environmental Engineering Environment al Healt h and S af et y Risk Assessment Wat er Monit oring, Environment al Engineering and Wat er Resources Dr. Richard S. Magee Executive Director NJ Corporation for Advanced Technology (NJCAT) Munit ions Demilit arizat ion 3
S tatement of Task (S OT) As Set Out in Section 1421 National Defense Authorization Act 2017 • A review of the current conventional munitions demilitarization stockpile, including types of munitions and types of materials contaminated with propellants or energetics, and the disposal technologies used. • An analysis of disposal, treatment, and reuse technologies, including technologies currently used by the Department and emerging technologies used or being developed by private or other governmental agencies, including a comparison of cost, throughput capacity, personnel safety, and environmental impacts. • An identification of munitions types for which alternatives to open burning, open detonation, or non-closed loop incineration/ combustion are not used. • An identification and evaluation of any barriers to full-scale deployment of alternatives to open burning, open detonation, or non-closed loop incineration/ combustion, and recommendations to overcome such barriers. • An evaluation of whether the maturation and deployment of governmental or private technologies currently in research and development would enhance the conventional munitions demilitarization capabilities of the Department. 4
S cope of Work • The S OT directed that the committee address the seven sites that manage the conventional munitions demilitarization stockpile. • The scope also included contractor owned contractor operated (COCO) operations that demilitarize the conventional munitions demilitarization stockpile. • The committee did not address other open burning or open detonation operations (e.g., ammunition plants, other military, Department of Energy sites). • However, the committee’s findings and recommendations will have implications for and applicability to sites outside of the seven stockpile sites. 5
Demilitarization Enterprise 6
S ites Included in Report 7
Committee Activities • 5 full meetings – 3 data gathering meetings (webcast, 775 unique log-ins across 3 meetings) – 2 closed working meetings – Numerous closed committee teleconferences • S ite visit to Letterkenny Munitions Center • 4 teleconferences with PD Demil • 2 teleconferences with JMC P AO • Teleconference with S trategic Environmental Research and Development Program (S ERDP) • 3 teleconferences with representatives of public interest groups – California Communities Against Toxics – Cease Fire! Campaign – Environmental Patriots of the New River Valley • Extensive outreach to alternative technology vendors • Public comment email inbox open throughout data gathering, 39 emails and numerous documents received 8
Timeline • Contract award July 14, 2017 • First meeting August 22-24, 2017 Final (5 th ) meeting • June 11-13, 2018 • Concurrence July 9, 2018 • Report out to peer review August 16, 2018 • Response to review approved October 22, 2018 • Final Academies approval November 12, 2018 • Prepub delivered December 5, 2018 • Contract end January 13, 2019 9
Organizations Providing Information to the Committee • Technology Vendors Office of the Deputy Assistant S ecretary of the Army for • Dynasafe Environment, S afety, and • El Dorado Engineering Occupational Health • Expal US A • Non-S tockpile Chemical Materiel • General Atomics Disposal Program • General Dynamics • Product Director for • Gradient Technology Demilitarization • MuniRem • Program Executive Office for • US Demil Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives • S trategic Environmental Department of Defense Research and Development • Department of Defense Program Explosives S afety Board • U.S . Army Aviation and Missile • Joint Munitions Command Life Cycle Management Command 10
Organizations Providing Information to the Committee, cont inued Other U.S . Government Public Interest Groups • California Communities • U.S . Environmental Against Toxics Protection Agency • Cease Fire! Campaign • Center for Public and S tate Regulators Environmental Oversight • Alabama Department of • Environmental Patriots of the Environmental Management New River Valley • Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection 11
Demilitarization Overview (Numbers are approximate; the stockpile fluctuates, disposal is affected by budget, cost varies by situation) • Approximately 431,000 tons of stockpiled conventional munitions to be demilitarized • Approximately 23,000 tons/ year destroyed by OB/ OD (30% of total) • Approximately 52,000 tons/ year destroyed by other means (70% of total) • Average demilitarization cost, all technologies: $2,890/ ton • Average demilitarization cost, OB/ OD: $750/ ton • Range of demilitarization costs, alternative technologies: $2,000-$20,000/ ton S ource: Data provided by PD Demil, as of S eptember 30, 2017. 12
Munitions Being Treated by Open Burning, S tatic Firing, or Open Detonation • Rocket assisted proj ectiles containing grenades • Dispensers containing submunitions with shaped charges (proj ectiles and bombs) • High explosive proj ectiles containing grenades and shaped charges • Rocket and missile motors with double-based propellant • High explosive incendiary cartridges • Propellant charges • Bombs • High explosives • Fuzes and initiators 13
Example Alternative Technologies Used by Product Director for Demilitarization • Incineration (e.g. APE-1236 rotary kiln) • Autoclave meltout of energetics • High-pressure washout • Cryofracture (in testing for size reduction) • Pull Apart machines (for grenades and small arms ammunition) • Explosive detonation chambers • Contained rocket and missile motor firing (in testing) • Contractor facilities (automated disassembly lines, incinerators) • Other technologies include hydrolysis, white phosphorus conversion, and several forms of munitions down-sizing (shredding, cutting, submunition removal). 14
Technologies and Capabilities Reviewed by the Committee • Munitions Preparation and S ize Reduction – Mechanical cutting (band saws) – Water j et and slurry j et cutting – Cryofracture – Automated disassembly – Wash-out and melt -out of energetics • Explosive Detonation Chambers – Controlled Detonation Chamber (CDC) – Detonation of Ammunition in a Vacuum Integrated Chamber (DAVINCH) – Explosive Destruction S ystem (EDS ) • Contained Burn Chambers – Thermal treatment chambers – Flashing furnaces • Contained Rocket and Missile Motor Firing Chambers – Ammonium Perchlorate Rocket Motor Destruction (ARMD) Facility • S tatic Detonation Chamber (contained burn/ deflagration and contained detonation) 15
Technologies and Capabilities Reviewed by the Committee, cont inued • Deactivation furnaces/ rotary kilns – APE-1236, Explosive Waste Incinerator, Rotary Kiln Incinerator, Decineration • Non-Incineration Energetics Destruction – Industrial supercritical water oxidation (iS CWO) – Hydrolysis oxidation – S ulfur reduction chemistry 16
Examples of Technologies in Research and Development • Liquid/ vapor j et cutting (CO 2 , ammonia) • S upercritical fluid extraction • Photocatalytic degradation of energetics • Acoustic energy propagation (sonication) to degrade energetics • Biodegradation of energetics 17
Recommend
More recommend
