First-of-a-kind Equipment for a One-of-a-kind Mission
The U.S. Army Element, Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives program
After the chamber doors were placed, the 19,000-pound main heating drum for the Metal Parts Treater at BGCAPP was lifted into place on March 9, 2010. The MPT was constructed by Parsons, and was the second major piece of process equipment designed, built, and tested under FOAK phase one. U.S. Army photo
Tasked with a one-of-a-kind mission to destroy chemical weapons using means other than the baseline incineration method, the U.S. Army Element, Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives (ACWA) program is developing, testing, fabricating, and installing First-of-a-Kind (FOAK) equipment for its two project sites in Colorado and Kentucky.
ACWA is responsible for destroying 10 percent of the stockpile of chemical weapons in the United States. About 8 percent of those are stored at the Pueblo Chemical Depot in Colorado, with the remaining 2 percent stored at Blue Grass Army Depot in Kentucky.
Although the U.S. Army Chemical Materials Agency (CMA) is responsible for safe storage of the nation’s entire stockpile of chemical weapons, as well as the destruction of 90 percent of the original stockpile, Congress established ACWA in 1996 to explore alternative destruction technologies to incineration. In 2002, the program became responsible for the destruction of the Colorado and Kentucky stockpiles.
“That technology program [incineration] was based upon assessments that we had performed that said incineration really provided a holistic approach to getting rid of the chemical weapons: the agent, the energetics or explosives, as well as thermally decontaminating the metal bodies and disposing of any exposed secondary waste,” explained Kevin Flamm, ACWA program manager and former program manager for the Elimination of Chemical Weapons within CMA.
“However, our view of incineration was not shared by all of the stakeholders in the different states where the stockpiles were located. Particularly two sites – one in Kentucky and one in Colorado – were really opposed to using incineration.”
In 2002, the Department of Defense selected neutralization followed by biotreatment as the destruction technology for the stockpile in Colorado, and in 2003 neutralization followed by Supercritical Water Oxidation (SCWO) was selected for stockpile destruction in Kentucky. The neutralization step of each process destroys the agent, which produces a byproduct called hydrolysate.
“What we found is that biotreatment lent itself very readily to the further treatment of the mustard-based hydrolysate, and since Pueblo only has mustard-filled chemical weapons, that worked very well,” Flamm explained. “We found that the phosphorus in the hydrolysate from the nerve agents didn’t lend itself to biotreatment as readily as the mustard hydrolysate did. SCWO is a more robust process, as it was better able to handle the hydrolysate from not only mustard, but also the nerve agents GB and VX.”
As the more costly of the two technologies, SCWO was only selected for the Kentucky stockpile, which consists of 523 tons of GB and VX nerve agents, and mustard agent (both HD and HT), in rockets and projectiles. Biotreatment will be used in Colorado, which has 2,611 tons of mustard agent in projectiles and cartridges.
In 2002, Bechtel Pueblo was selected as the systems contractor to design, construct, systemize, pilot test, operate, and close the Pueblo Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant (PCAPP). Subsequently, Bechtel Parsons Blue Grass was selected in 2003 as the systems contractor responsible for all of the project phases at the Blue Grass Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant (BGCAPP).
“At our project [PCAPP], we’re just dealing with mustard agent, but our challenge is the number of munitions that we have to handle,” Paul Henry, Bechtel Pueblo project manager, said. “We have a large volume of munitions – 780,000 rounds. Blue Grass has a smaller number [101,000], but the complexity is the multiple types of agent that they have to dispose of.”
However, both plants must deal with the same critical challenge of accessing the agent in order to neutralize it. As this destruction technology has never been employed exactly in this manner, and the necessary equipment is not available for purchase ready to use, ACWA established its First-of-a-Kind equipment program.
“We started with something basic and then added components,” said Walton Levi, deputy site project manager for PCAPP, as he discussed the FOAK program. “For example, the Munitions Treatment Unit came from the automotive industry. They use it for forming sheet metal. We were able to take that technology and have them modify it for our use so we could run our mortars and projectiles through it.
“It’s called FOAK because we’re really the first ones to use that technology in this format, and then test it and make sure it works at the various vendors, meets our criteria, has the throughput, maintenance issues, and compatibility.”
The FOAK equipment at PCAPP includes:
• Linear Projectile/Mortar Disassembly (LPMD), fabricated by Wright Industries in Nashville, Tenn.
• Munitions Washout System (MWS) and Cavity Access Machine (CAM), fabricated by Parsons in Pasco, Wash.
• Munitions Treatment Unit (MTU), fabricated by Abbott Furnace in St. Marys, Pa.
At PCAPP, the munitions will go through a disassembly process to separate the explosive components, or energetics, from the munition body using the LPMD machine in an Explosive Containment Room.
This machine will allow workers to remove the energetics from the munitions remotely, Henry explained.
The LPMD is a robot that is also similar to what is used in auto manufacturing facilities. At the baseline incineration facilities, a similar technique was used with a Projectile Mortar Disassembly machine, which moved the munitions around a circular table to various equipment stations.
Lessons learned indicated that the rotating table was something of a maintenance nightmare and ACWA decided to replace it with a six-axis industrial robot. The circular concept was redesigned so that the equipment stations will now be lined up and the LPMD will move the munitions from station to station in a straight line.
After the explosive components have been removed, the energetic-free munitions are transported to the Agent Processing Building, where they will go through the Munitions Washout System, which includes the CAM.
In the MWS, a CAM will access the projectile agent cavity by collapsing the burster well with a hydraulic ram, allowing the agent to drain. The ram will retract to a wash position and the munition will begin to rotate. High-pressure warm water will be used to flush agent liquids and residues from the munition body.
While a somewhat simplistic approach to removing the agent from the munition bodies, the MWS truly is a FOAK piece of equipment that has streamlined the process, Flamm said. The way agent was removed from munitions at the baseline plants was by inserting a metal bar in the burster well of upright munitions, with the nose at top, extracting the burster well, then inserting a siphon tube to pump out all of the agent.
Colorado stakeholders view the testing of the Linear Projectile Mortar Disassembly system at the Anniston Chemical Agent Disposal Facility. U.S. Army photo
Since some of the mustard agent tends to solidify, the MWS allows gravity to drain out the agent by inverting the munitions and then using a high-pressure water spray to remove any thickened or solidified agent.
Once the agent is collected, the neutralization process begins inside the Agent Neutralization Reactor, with the introduction of hot water. After about 30 minutes of vigorous agitation, sodium hydroxide, commonly known as caustic, is added.
“The caustic is added to balance the pH so that when it goes to the next process the microbes will be able to digest it,” explained Jack Fahrion, mechanical engineer at PCAPP. “Otherwise it will be too acidic for them.”
Following neutralization, the biotreatment phase begins with the hydrolysate pumped into storage tanks with microbes that will digest it and break it down further. The remaining byproduct is a brine solution, which will be processed through the Brine Reduction System where an evaporator will collect the water to be reused at the plant.
Finally, in order to ensure that the empty munitions bodies are completely decontaminated before they are recycled, they go through the Munitions Treatment Unit that will thermally treat them at 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit for 15 minutes.
With the implementation of FOAK equipment, the development of FOAK testing has become a necessity.
Henry explained that developing the criteria to test the FOAK equipment has been a collaborative process involving the government, government contractors, systems contractor, and vendors.
“We establish, through a collaborative effort, criteria to complete testing to deem that the equipment is ready,” he said. “We’ve been testing in some form or fashion since the beginning of the project. By doing this in an integrated fashion it streamlines the process.”
Although construction is just over 50 percent complete at PCAPP, the FOAK equipment program is already resulting in project milestones ranging from testing to installation of equipment.
“In the last year, we’ve been able to complete the FOAK testing on all of our process units and we’re into production and manufacturing,” Henry said. “Meaning that these are the units that go in; plant-ready equipment. We’ve been fabricating the plant-ready equipment. We’ve received the MTUs and we’ll receive the MWS in August [2010], followed by the LPMD machines.
“The MTU is complete and installed in the facility. The MWS – we’ve completed all the FOAK testing, so the FOAK scope of the work is done. We’re into the production, fabrication, and testing of the process lines.”
Additionally, the MWS (including the CAMs) for the 155 mm projectiles are complete and were shipped in August, and the MWS for the 105 mm projectiles will be completed and shipped to the site by the end of 2010.
While work at the site in Kentucky began after the PCAPP, the BGCAPP is also making great strides.
The FOAK equipment at BGCAPP includes:
• Energetics Batch Hydrolyzer (EBH), fabricated by General Atomics in San Diego, Calif.
• Munitions Washout System (MWS) and Cavity Access Machine (CAM), fabricated by Parsons in Pasco, Wash.
• Metal Parts Treater (MPT), Parsons
•Rocket Cutter Machine (RCM), Parsons
•Rocket Shear Machine (RSM), Parsons
“Our program for FOAK was really broken down into two phases,” explained Jeffrey Brubaker, site project manager for BGCAPP. “The first phase completed earlier this year and it basically consisted of design, fabrication, and testing of two systems, one being the Energetics Batch Hydrolyzer system. The second major piece of process equipment designed, built, and tested under FOAK phase one is the Metal Parts Treater.”
Those systems were included in the first phase because they were considered to be the most complex FOAK systems.
Unlike Pueblo, part of the Blue Grass stockpile consists of M55 rockets, which require a different process and unique FOAK equipment to complete destruction.
At BGCAPP, rockets will be processed through the Rocket Cutter Machine, which separates the agent-filled warhead from the motor. The non-contaminated motors are then transferred to separate rooms for packaging and shipment to an appropriate disposal facility.
The warhead portions are then sent to an Explosive Containment Room where the Rocket Shear Machine will punch holes in the warhead, drain the agent, and flush the interior with high-pressure hot water. The chemical agent and the washout water will be transferred in separate streams for further processing.
Once the agent has been removed, the warhead is then cut into four pieces, which will be transferred to the Energetics Batch Hydrolyzer for further processing. The drained agent will be pumped to the Agent Neutralization Reactors to be neutralized, and its byproduct, or hydrolysate, will be processed in the Supercritical Water Oxidation system.
“Both the agents as well as the energetics are neutralized using heated water and sodium hydroxide,” explained Brubaker. “That neutralization occurs separately so the agents are first neutralized and verification is performed that the required destruction criteria are met.”
The EBH will treat the munitions parts in batches, neutralizing explosives and other components with heated water and caustic. It will consist of large rotating drums similar to cement mixers, into which robots will transfer the munitions pieces for neutralization.
The solids from that neutralization process will go to the Metal Parts Treater for thermal decontamination and the liquids will go to the Energetics Neutralization Reactors for further processing.
Although similar to the MTU that will be at PCAPP, the MPT is a larger-scale treatment unit. It will thermally decontaminate any residual agent on metal components as well as process secondary waste that may have been contaminated with agent during the process by heating items to 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit for 15 minutes.
“The SCWO process is our post [secondary] treatment process, where we bring together the neutralized material from the two reactions and we feed that material through the process using a combination of high temperature and high pressure to break down very complicated compounds into more simplified products such as water, carbon dioxide, and a series of salt compounds,” said Brubaker. “It’s important to note that our neutralization process will destroy the chemical agents before the secondary treatment process occurs.”
Similar to PCAPP, the majority of the water remaining after the final phase of destruction is recycled back into the plant.
“About 75 percent of the water is recycled back into the plant to serve as the basis for neutralizing additional agent or energetic compounds,” Brubaker said. “The remaining 25 percent of the water as well as all of the salts are chemically tested to verify their composition, and depending on the results of that testing, they will be disposed of accordingly.”
The installation of these pieces of FOAK equipment and construction progress at BGCAPP are intricately connected.
“These systems [MPT] are quite large and could not be lowered into place after the facility was constructed and the roof was on the facility,” Brubaker said. “Since they [MPT and EBH] needed to be here very early in the construction process, it was very important and a very satisfying milestone that we were able to complete factory testing in late 2009 – early 2010.”
The MPT has already been installed inside the Munitions Demilitarization Building at BGCAPP, and the fabrication and integrated testing of the EBH has been completed. The EBH is currently being stored at General Atomics in San Diego, where it was fabricated and tested, and will be shipped to the site for installation later in 2010.
Phase two of FOAK design, fabrication, and testing recently began and will include the Rocket Cutting Machine, Rocket Shear Machine, and Munitions Washout System.
According to Brubaker, these systems are much smaller in size and can be transported into the processing facility once the walls and roof are in place, making it less critical for them to be fabricated and tested as early as the other components.
“I think the major driver to success for FOAK phase one is the intense effort up front to get all of the team performers together and work collaboratively to identify early what we define as our success criteria,” Brubaker said. “Then we take those success criteria and we utilize those as a basis for developing our test plans.”
According to the ACWA program manager, there are several facets of ACWA’s success in executing the FOAK program.
He credits using lessons learned from earlier chemical weapons destruction facilities, and bringing operating contractors on board early to work with equipment designers and contractors, as well as ensuring vigorous testing of all of the equipment and systems.
“This collaborative teamwork between government and contractor, ACWA and CMA, and ACWA and other Army agencies is really bringing us great confidence that not only will the equipment operate as we intend, but help us overcome some of the challenges that were encountered previously at other chemical weapons destruction facilities.”
This article was first published in U.S. Army Materiel Command: 2010-2011 Edition.
U.S. Army Explores 'Quick Fix' Camouflage Solutions
Representatives from the Multifunctional Materials Team, Warfighter Science, Technology and Research...
Army Releases AAS Request for Updated Information
After months of anticipation, the U.S. Army has released a new request for information (RFI) seeking...
Army GCV Program Explores Existing Combat Platforms
In parallel with the ongoing technology development (TD) efforts for the U.S. Army’s Ground Combat...
The Future of U.S. Armored Combat Vehicles
While an early December 2011 Government Accountability Office (GAO) protest denial decision renewed ...
Leave a Comment