Document dDnByDqBnVJq6Oowon6eBjOjB

IMPACT OF PFOS/AFFF PRODUCTION HALT RESTRICTIONS ON US NAVY OPERATIONS AFFF WORKSHOP 16 MARCH 2001 Dr. Frederick Williams Director, N avy Technology Center for Safety and Survivability NHL Code 6180 (202) 767-2476 Iwillia111@ccs.11rl.11avy.mil www.chemistry.nrl.navy.mil/6180 US00004432 AFFF PROVIDES UNIQUE CAPABILITY No other agent can equal its ability to rapidly extinguish a pool fire Does not require an aspirating nozzle Vital to confronting - potential ordinance cook-off - pool fires threatening aircraft crew - threat to concentrated high value assets NAVY DEPENDENCE ON FIXED AND PORTABLE AFFF SYSTEMS PROTECTION PROVIDED BY Ships, Submarines NAVSEA Planes NAVAIR with NAVSEA, NAVFAC Facilities NAVFAC US00004434 INSTALLED AFFI CONCENTRATE ESTIMATED QUANTITIES Ships, (Submarines) 500,000 (gal) Shore Fire Fighting Vehicles 72,000 Shore Base Reserve for Vehicles 288,000 Shore Aircraft Hangars 223,000 Shore -Other 55,000 Total 1,138,000 gal US00004435 ANNUAL USAGE DoD annual consumption is down to 286,000 gallons from 320,000 gallons 8 years ago. Navy consumes -160,000 gallons. DLA has purchased 200,000 gallons of 3M AFFF (PFOS) as the last shipment 3M will manufacture. Navy emergency use - 20,000 gal/yr Navy ship deck systems testing, accidental releases ~ 60,000 gal/yr Navy contained discharges - 80,000 gal/yr System test protocols have been modified in frequency and technique to limit discharge to environment. US00004436 DROP-IN VERSUS SUBSTITUTE True drop-in: Use same equipment (tanks, proportioned, piping, nozzles) Not true drop-in: Need to replace or modify existing shipboard delivery systems US00004437 AFFF SHIPBOARD SYSTEM REPLACEMENT IM PA C T Systems with characteristics based on AFFF performance parameters were designed into the ship and submarine construction Even if suitable alternative systems could be designed at significant space & weight penalty, their implementation would require unacceptable major ship alterations, out-of-service time and expense Must meet existing Navy fire performance requirements Can not tolerate performance degradation US00004438 INVENTION AND MONITORING OF AFFF NRL invention partnership with 3M NAVSEA maintains MILSPEC (M1-F-24385F) NRL serves as the only AFFF qualified test facility for determining compliance with the Mil Spec US00004439 AFFF QPL Manufacturer: 3M Ansul 3%, 6% 3%, 6% Chemguard National Foam Angus 3% 3%, 6% 3% 90 days to qualify a new formulation once product is at NRL One manufacturer undergoing spec test Two possible additional candidates US00004440 CONCLUSIONS Many applications worldwide depend on the capabilities of the US military developed AFFF While many of these applications may be capable of being satisfied by reduced performance products, the US military performance requirements cannot be reduced without potential loss of life and platform survivability US00004441