Sept. 13 Kentucky Chemical Demilitarization Citizens’ Advisory Commission and CDCAB Meeting (2017)


>>Parke: “Okay, good afternoon everyone, thanks for
joining us today. My name is Sarah Parke… with the Blue Grass chemical stockpile
outreach office. I just want to cover a few administrative items before we begin. The exits are located in the front and the back of the room, the restrooms are
located outside the back double doors and to your left. If you’ve not already
done so, please silence your cell phones and media interviews would be
coordinated by Mark York and provided after the meeting. Mark is over here. We’re video recording today’s meeting and
live streaming on the Program Executive Office, Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives YouTube
channel. Live stream viewers have an opportunity to ask questions via chat throughout the
meeting. I would also like to remind Citizens’ Advisory Commission and
Chemical Destruction Community Advisory Board members to please position the
microphone directly in front of you when speaking. Please be aware the microphone
is sensitive and will pick up background noise such as tapping on the table. Opportunities for comments and questions will be provided following each
presentation. CAC/ CDCAB can members will lead with their questions and comments
followed by questions and comments from the public. When asking a question or
making a statement, please be sure to identify yourself. I would like to remind
all who are participating in today’s meeting to avoid the use of acronyms.
However, in the case that one is used, we’ve provided a list of acronyms in your
information packets. Finally, I encourage everyone to take breaks as needed
throughout the duration of this meeting. There are snacks and drinks located in
the back of the room. We’ll begin the meeting with introduction of all CAC and
CDCAB members starting here with Jeff.>>Brubaker: Good afternoon, I’m Jeff Brubaker, Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives, site
project manager.>>Milchling: Suzanne Milching, the Program Executive Officer
for Assembled Weapons Chemical Alternatives.>>Hink: Ron Hink, the Joint Venture Project Manager.>>Gould: Lieutenant Colonel Scott Gould, Commander
Blue Grass Chemical Activity.>>Shuplinkov: Georgie Shuplinkov, Chief of Staff
at Blue Grass Army Depot representing Colonol Fochs team selection commander.>>Burton: Dale Burton with the Kentucky Department for
Environmental Protection.>>Webb: April Webb with the Kentucky Department for
Environmental Protection.>>Witt: Ethan Witt with Senator Mitch McConnell’s
office.>>Taylor: Reagan Taylor, Madison
County Judge Executive.>>Williams: Craig Williams, CAC/CDCAB>>House: Terry House, CDCAB. *Inaudible*>>Hoggs: Mike Hoggs, CDCAB, Berea school district.>>Moberly: Harry Moberly, CAC/CDCAB>>Kerby: Diane Kerby, CAC/CDCAB>>Makinen: Bryan Makinen, Eastern Kentucky University.>>Maupin: Darcy Maupin, CDCAB Berea.>>Ridings: George Ridings, a perspective new member of
the community board.>>Klass: Mark Klass, Division Emergency Management.>>Parke: Okay, thanks everyone. If you will take a moment to look inside your meeting folder you will find the
following documents on the right side: A feedback form, a summary from the June meeting,
remaining 2017 meeting dates, proposed 2018 meeting dates, talking
points, acronym fact sheet, and an overview photo. On the left side you will
find a copy of today’s agenda, briefings and handouts and I’d also like to note
that during the Blue Grass plant update, the briefers will reference a
road map: a larger print out of this road map along with associated
acronyms is included in your information packets I’d also like to call attention
to the comment box located at the sign-in table. If you have a question or
comment that you would like addressed during the meeting today or at a later
date, please fill in the comments section of your feedback form in your folder and
place it in the box. We’ll check the box prior to the end of the
meeting and address any questions or comments during the next steps
portion. Let’s go ahead and quickly review our agenda. We will have the CDCAB co-chairs providing
opening remarks followed by an update on action items. The new program executive officer for the Assembled Chemical Weapons
Alternatives program Suzanne Milchling will provide a few
remarks to the group. Site project manager Jeff Brubaker and project manager Ron Hink will give a project update April Webb and Dale Burton will
provide an update on Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection permitting
activities and finally Craig Williams will discuss some comments submitted
regarding recent permitting activities. We’ll end the meeting with the summary of
action items and closing remarks by the chairs. So, opening our meeting today
Judge Taylor and Craig Williams.>>Taylor: I want to say welcome. Thank you everybody for being here, appreciate
what everybody does.>>Williams: Likewise and second greetings to
Ms. Milchling. We met her earlier in the month
or I guess late last month. Dr. Hindmann could not be here today, he’s the chairman of the governor’s commission. His wife had surgery yesterday. She’s stable, but not doing very well so he’s with her. I don’t think I would consider
her in critical condition, but she’s older than I am and so surgery is
high-impact. Also, so he sends his regards as does Jean Marie Hibbert from the
Berea Civic representative. Sheila Presley with EKU and Tara Long with
Baptist Health Richmond. Two of those ladies had conflicts with the CSEPP
tabletop exercise today being scheduled at the same time as the CDCAB meeting. I had to point out that Darcy had that conflict as well but found someone to
sit in for her so she made it to the meeting we appreciate that
and a comment on George…George has been asked to join the governor’s commission,
the CAC, he is having his legal team determine whether or not there’s a
conflict with his business to be on the governor’s commission or not we’re
hoping to get an answer from that fairly soon so that we can move forward with
asking the governor to appoint him or *Inaudible*>>Ridings: The legal team of my employeers. So everybody’s eyes… I don’t have a legal team. (laughter)>>Williams: So we are waiting now to see if he will be able to join us without a conflict so that’s the rundown of who’s not here and why and welcome to George and welcome to Ms.
Milchling.>>Parke: Thank you. We’ll move on to action items. We did have one action item
from the June meeting and that was to confirm 2018 CAC/CDCAB meeting dates. As I mentioned just a few moments ago the proposed 2018 meeting dates are included
in your information packets. Again, this meeting if no one has any comments on
the dates we can consider them final. Does anyone have any comments on those
dates? Okay thank you. All right, we’ll move on to presentations first up Ms. Milchling.>>Milchling: Good afternoon I’m Suzanne Milchling. Like I said, I’m the PEO for ACWA and we said what that was before so I think I
get a pass on acronyms. I joined the program at the end of June and like Craig said, I came out here in the beginning of I think it was August and I
participated in the CSEPP meetings that were going on. I toured the plant,
walked through it, it happened to be a nice day much nicer than today so it wasn’t too
bad going through. Saw what was going on better understood than all the briefings
that I had received today what was actually going to happen in the plant so
I could see how things were coming together. I’m a visual person so that was
great and then I met the members of the the leaders of the CAC Judge Taylor and
Craig and also Doug so that was great and I met the reps from KDEP as
well. I look forward to working with you all I plan to continue the transparency
in close collaboration that we’ve had and enjoyed as a program because I feel
it’s critical for eliminating the stockpile at this location as well as in
Pueblo, Kentucky. or, Pueblo, Colorado. Sorry. I’ve started an initiative to figure out
what we need to do to get rid of the stockpile in a more efficient faster way
but still maintaining safety and the environment. We need to do things
differently because as you know we’ve got challenges with the federal budget. This program takes a lot of money to operate but it’s something that we need
to do. From the treaty standpoint, it’s the right thing to do for you guys in
this community, but we need to figure out how to do it in a financially sound way. So I have to justify the program budget. I think when Conrad was here, he told you
that he had confessed that we were like over budget and over schedule… So I get
to, in the spring, identify what I think is a reasonable budget and reasonable
timeframe and there are lots of people who think they know exactly what we
should have done differently, what we should do differently in the future, and
so I’m hoping with my initiative effort that I can come up with some sound ideas
from the workers the people actually involved in the program day to day what
they think we need to do differently in order to get rid of the bullets, because
that the mission: Get rid of the bullets
safely and environmentally sound way, quickly, but in a fiscally responsible
manner. So as we come up with these ideas, as we as we as the government program
team with our systems contractor figure out what’s feasible, how would you get
there from here, we’ll talk to the CAC, the C- the whatever the other one is, the two community groups here, as well as
the state and the regulators to figure out
okay how can we do this? Does this make sense from your point of view? How do we
continue to move forward?’ My idea is to have a bag of tricks so when something
happens we’ve already thought of it. We know what we’re gonna do differently to
get out of there. I know I got problems they’re gonna happen in the plant. If I didn’t, I’d be crazy to think that Murphy didn’t live in that plant. I’ve seen it
in Colorado. They’re having challenges and they’re not they don’t have the
throughput that we anticipated. What’s their good throughput, I don’t know. We’re figuring that out as we move through the process. What’s your throughput? We got a number on paper. I don’t think it’s gonna get
there, but I don’t know if it’s gonna be half of it, three-quarters of it,
two-thirds of it, I don’t know and it may vary depending on what we’re eliminating
at that time. So I want to have a bag of tricks that says if this pile gives me a problem, here’s what we might want to do differently. Figure out and work with you
guys so that you agree to that plan ahead. Then if it happens, we’ll look at
the situation and say it’s pretty close to what our plan was, we may need to make
these tweaks, now we’re ready to move forward not that we’re scratching our
heads trying to come up with a plan. So in summary, I’m thrilled to be here
I’ve got some meetings tomorrow we have in one of our IPRs with the guys
from D.C. come to help us. So I’ll continue to come back on a periodic
basis to meet with you and also to see how we’re doing but I just want to
assure you that the transparency and the collaboration is going to continue. If there’s challenges, work through the groups and they’ll come to me. I’m here
to help this program move forward and see the elimination of these last two
stockpiles, so thank you.>>Parke: Any questions or comments for Ms. Milchling? Okay, next up, Jeff Brubaker and Ron Hink
with a plant update.>>Brubaker: Thanks Sarah. Good afternoon everyone, glad to be here with
you. We’ll go into the presentation. The first slide, this is just kind of a summary of where we are with the
progress with the, first, the main plant which I think Craig is asking for the
lights to be dimmed, if we can do that… For the main plant, which will destroy
the nerve agent weapons of Blue Grass. For those in attendance, many know that
construction was completed at the end of 2015. Systemization now stands at 50.4 percent. That’s up from 46.5 percent reported at the June meeting. At this point we are right
where we thought we would be at this point in terms of schedule progression,
and later, as Sarah mentioned, we’ll have the we’ll put up the project roadmap
towards Initiation of Plant Operations and I’ll walk through the series of
steps that we need to take from this point up to commencing agent destruction
which we’re currently working towards a target schedule of late 2019 to begin
the first GB weapons destruction. That’s a few months ahead of the acquisition
program baseline schedule of April of 2020 and still looking at about three to
three and a half years to complete the total stockpile elimination once
operations begin and then for our second facility, the
Explosive Destruction Technology using the Static Detonation Chamber as I
reported last meeting, we have received final permits from KDEP for that
facility and due to the unfortunate funding limits entering fiscal year ’17
we had to put that system and associated equipment into project layout back in
December of last year. We are getting ready very shortly to begin bringing
that equipment back out of lay up and working forward to complete remaining
construction and then move expeditiously into a start-up and systemization of the
EDT. And so as we go to the slide 3 I’ll talk first the EDT although that is
the second bullet on this slide but just to kind of talk about the next six
months or so with the EDT. Next month construction will resume. Heading up to that this month necessary construction oversight and supervision staff have
been reporting to the project going through their training and making sure
their work plans are complete before the manual craft come back to the site
starting next month. Our target is to complete all remaining construction
except the electronic security system by April of next year and then by the end
of this year, the end of 2017, we will be commencing initial startup and
Systemization activities and then we’re looking to down the road about two years
after that, we’ll be conducting the operational readiness review for that
system that’ll be performed after main plant operations begin with GB
rocket destruction. We were fortunate to receive supplemental funding. That funding arrived at the end of June, beginning of July, and we immediately
began actions in five areas, one of those as the EDT and bringing that back out of
lay-up which I just talked about, second area is the acceleration of SCWO
efforts, supercritical water oxidation, as I’ve briefed before the SCWO process
was also limited this year in 2017 due to the funding limits as well as
completion of the weld repairs that we reported last meeting as complete. So beginning in October next month there will be a lot of dedicated focus
resuming on SCWO start up in Systemization. We’ll also be accelerating
what’s called electronic security systems. That’s basically a network of
sensors, motion detectors, cameras, other electronic equipment, utilized to detect
a breach in security. There’s a lot of equipment and a lot of connections associated with that equipment. We’ll be moving out with award of supporting
contracts to support that and work to complete those activities earlier than
we currently are showing in the target schedule. The next item we briefed the
CAC/CDCAB back in June which was the need for a sampling glovebox to perform
air monitoring internal of the M55 rocket shipping and firing tube. Since the last meeting, the project has released a request for proposal to
industry for proposals to design and fabricate those gloveboxes. The evaluation of those proposals is ongoing and then as mentioned in June, starting
around early to mid May, we released a number of the startup crews to begin
working more than 40 hours. 50 hour work week was put in place as standard and that effort continues at this time and this peaked at about a hundred persons working that extended work schedule to support start-up. Okay next slide.>>Hink: Okay, once again I’m very happy to report from safety performance we continue to do
very well. We’ve got a recordable incident rate 0.34 I know that’s probably not meaningful to most folks in this room but if you look at that bottom
scale that really puts it in perspective. So we’re very very low into that
compared against some industries that typically don’t have a lot of labor and
don’t deal with the hazards we deal with so again very good performance by our
workforce we’ve got no lost time injuries which is excellent so that’s
100 percent below industry and for our recordable were at 86 percent lower than
industry. So if you look at these numbers, at we’re over 8 million hours and that
equates to about 3.25 years without a lost time so very good
performance. Talk about main plant progress that we’ve turned over the tray
handling system which that’s what’s shown in the picture there so that’s the
tray that holds the projectiles so for those have been on the tour you’ll
recognize what that is for those that haven’t tried to give you at least one
photo in here to help you understand it. Agent Collection System and Agent
Neutralization System demonstrations are complete. We installed the covers or
boots whatever you want to call them on the robots so if you familiar with the
automotive industry these robots that used to paint vehicles have the
covers on them to protect them- we’re installing those boots on the rockets. Sounds simple, but actually they don’t fit and operate as expected so we got a
little bit of rework there so it’s good that we checked it out. The control and
support building heating and ventilation system, this is a negative pressure building,
and we basically checked that system out and it’s good. So that’s very encouraging. Missions demilitarization building will be next in terms of testing out HVAC
systems. That was a problem for PCAPP. We’ve done some early testing. It’s very
positive. We’re not there yet, but it doesn’t look like we have the the leaks
in the building’s that one might expect with that type of construction so it’s
very very positive. Metal Parts Treater- we’ve energized that system, we’ve got it
up to low power, everything is going well. We did have some arcing as we tried to
come up and power off the main bus. We’ve replaced that, recoded that. We don’t
expect any further of problems. So we’ll continue coming up in the power level for Metal Parts Treater. That was one of our higher risk issues. We were very concerned that we could have heating up a rebar and embedded metal objects and
that type of stuff we didn’t see anything at low power so we’re
encouraged by that. Rocket motor sampling glove boxes- we’re in the process of procuring those so design is moving forward about ready to go out and award
those and as far as the disposal, rocket motor disposal, no decision yet on where
we’re going to go there.>>Brubaker: “Okay so for this chart as Sarah mentioned in your packet
there should be a handout that’s a printed a little bit larger – this is our
roadmap. This is a tool that the project has developed to help guide us to what
we call initiation of plant operations or essentially authorization to begin
moving munitions from storage into the demil facility for final destruction. So I’ll just review this briefly, we have plant preparation activities at the top. You can see the first line is our system demonstration procedures and
testing and what that represents in total, we have 59 systems each of which
will be individually tested and then turned over to our Operations group and
then from there we’ll work to build towards integrated operational
demonstrations and supporting that we have three levels of plant optimization
which will begin about six months prior to the target for initiating plant
operations. The operational readiness review is a very
thorough structured process. It involves managers being assigned to one of, let me make sure I’ve got the right number here, it’s a pretty large number here if I can read it, 298
individual systems or process and then each one of those goes through a
process of demonstration verification and then an independent assessment on top of that. Once
all of those are completed we’ll then be prepared to conduct the IOD or the
integrated operational demonstration which is targeted for the first part of
November 2019 and then we have about a 30-day period to be responsive and close
findings from that review. And then once that’s done that feeds into the approvals and the authorizations that are located at the bottom of this chart. The next line down is, we’ve separated the SCWO, supercritical water
oxidation, and it’s supporting aluminum filtration system, aluminum precipitation
system, and reverse osmosis water recovery systems. As I mentioned earlier,
that testing and actually start up and and pre-testing will begin in October. For those systems and that will continue until second quarter of 2019 where we
will enter what you’ve previously been briefed on which is the SCWO risk
mitigation testing. As you recall, there are 33 discrete tests that will be performed during that approximately six-month testing period and then that will be
followed by a longer run, we call that scroll provisional operation ,still
processing surrogate material looking to build confidence in SCWO operations
and then that will conclude with the readiness assessment and processing
starting in the SCWO with real hydrolysate approximately six months
after agent destruction begins in the agent reactors. Next line down- as our
treaty requirements, when we begin operations we will be hosting
international treaty inspectors. We can expect anywhere from six teams of
anywhere from six to eight inspectors. They’ll be one site 24 hours a day and
then leading up to that the treaty community does a couple of visits to the
site. The first is 240 days prior to initiating plant operations, that’s
called the initial visit, and then about 60 days prior to plant operations we
have the final engineering review and then about two weeks before
operations begin the inspectors will establish permanent residence at the
plant site. Surety- that is also a complex process of preparing our people that are
going to work in the either the chemical personnel reliability program or the
unescorted access program will have about 700 people working in one
or the other programs and then there is a independent
readiness assessment that the Army Materiel Command performs. That’s
scheduled about two months prior to initiation of plant operations. We’re currently working closely with Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection and Dale I think has a presentation coming up so I’m not going to steal too
much of his thunder but coming up later this year we look forward to receiving
what’s known officially I think is Rev. 6, revision six, of the Research
Development and Demonstration permit and that will be the permit that we use to
operate the plant for the entirety of the GB destruction campaign. And then
also working with EPA Region 4 out of Atlanta- they will be required to issue a
couple of sections of the permit related to organic air emissions and that permit
is not quite as far along and we look to receive that about a year from now as
our best estimate on that. And then a couple of other things just going down
the PEO ACWA line, the little blue box in the second quarter, I’ll use the pointer
to point to that right there, that’s our GB sampling program which we were you were
briefed on at the June meeting. We’ll go ahead and pull
actual samples of GB agent out of two 8-inch projectiles and then that agent
will support laboratory analytical monitoring verification activities. And then support from BGAD and BGCA. On the BGAD side, that’s going to be the
hiring and training of the security guard force to support plant operations
and then at BGCA, in addition to their support with moving munitions, right here
there’s a important readiness milestone that’s titled mask issue ready cotton
tapped ear support, so we will be utilizing the chemical activity to
provide the protective gear for our level C entries as well as equipment to
backup our DPE or level A entries and they’ve been stocking up with with that
material and getting ready to issue that out to us. So, this is will be updated and
will be presented each a CAC meeting as we go forward. Are there any questions on
the on the roadmap before I leave this because might be a little difficult to
come back to this at at the end of the presentation but hopefully that kind of
gives you a better sense of the the different but also very integrated
processes that we need to bring together as we prepare the plant to go into
operations. Okay, slide 7. For once, I actually have no comments on this slide. Plant from the outside doesn’t look any different than it did three months ago. On the inside it’s humming along. There’s a lot of noise. That’s good, that means
systems are running and things are being checked out mechanically and
electrically. So, uh, good news there. Ron’s going to give you an update on another
permitting update maybe?>>Hink: It’s your term permitting progress
so I think I can cover this quickly. Well quicker if I could use acronyms but
I’ll try to avoid it. So a Resource Conservation Recovery Act class II permit mod. for GB sampling operations public comment period closed August 19th. The next step is for Kentucky Department Environmental Protection to review an
issue draft permit for public comment. The next bullet there is Toxic
Substance Control Act polychlorinated biphenyls storage and processing
proposed approval. It would be a lot easier if it was TSCA PCBs but I got a lot anyway. Public comment period ended August 16th and the next step is for the U.S.
Environment Protection Agency to review any public comments and issue approval. Okay, just to point out some progress in
the plant, I’ll start at the top left and kind of work my way right. So what you’re
seeing there is some system check out. So again, we’re demonstrating systems as we go. We’ve got several of them completed and we’ve got quite a bit in front of us
as well. On the top right there, those are daily rounds, so as systems are brought
online and operating we have operators that check on the status and make any
corrective actions as necessary based on that information, that’s a conduct
of operations we got to get very good at before we go hot, so we start that very
early. Bottom left you’re seeing the robot interferences there. So what we’ve
got is, we’ve got several robots in the plant. We’ve now run those so we
programmed that we’ve run them we’ve got a few interferences. We got an end effect
that doesn’t work for the loading the rocket motor boxes and we’ve got a
couple pipes like two pipes and a conduit in the way at the cavity access
machine, the CAMs. Those are easy to fix but now
we know we’ve operate them we know it’s in our way so we will correct that. That’s why we check them out. Bottom right, again we got, we still have
some conduit going in the plant and other systems being installed. Most of
that work is done but electronic security system is where a lot of that conduit left to pull through the facility and
place underground still remains. Next slide. Again top left see material
handling that’s something that isn’t in there per design that’s something you
have to learn as you you operate the facility so we are starting to move
materials around the plant to make sure we’ve got the access we need and we’ve
got the workforce trained to do that safely. One of the middle there you’ll
see testing and calibration of the air monitoring systems in the lab so there’s
a lot of equipment that runs here. We’ve gotta get a lot of systems up and
running that’s what they’re working on. Right hand side there, that’s our rescue
training so again. Again, we’ve got to train our workforce to rescue personnel
should that be necessary. That training is best done now when we get the BGAD Response Force in there to train our workforce to do that. Bottom left is the
Energetics Batch Hydrolyzer. That’s the shaker and conveyor that we’re working
on now that’s one assistance we’re currently working through and a lot of
moving parts a lot of issues I would say the challenge there is to make sure we
have a maintainable system. It’s not easy to access as those have been on the plant can testify too so we got to make sure we understand how we will replace
components should they fail. Ok, economic impact. We’ve to date, we’ve got $169.5 million spent
in Kentucky companies. $101 million spent in Madison
County and the surrounding counties. Staffing, we were still at about 800, that
is down from where we were early last year or late last year. That will start
climbing back up probably six to nine months we’ll start to ramp up our
staffing but that’s where we’re currently at. That is sufficient to
handle the Systemization work we have but we need to start hiring and getting
our workforce trained and qualified for operations. So you’ll see a ramp up early
but we have what we need to actually maintain the plant as we’ve got it. Local payroll $881 million paid and you’ll see that
that picture on the right is one of the things is we work through the
systemization is we exit areas, we do final touch up on coding. So it doesn’t
make sense to do it early because you just have to go back in there repair it
again. So as we exit general areas that’s that’s kind of last thing we’ve seen an
area before you complete turn it over to operations. Okay I always talk these
slides from the minority’s staffing we track Kentucky very closely. As you can
see and from a female, the pioneer population, we actually are a little bit
better than the Kentucky statistics. We’ll continue to report these to you.>>Brubaker: Okay since the last meeting in
June we’ve done a couple of site tours. We hosted Bluegrass Tomorrow group back in
mid-June and then in August we had several members of Senator Mitch
McConnell’s staff come out and walk through the facilities. Also in August,
once again, we were pleased to support the Salvation Army food drive. It’s just
amazing the amount of support that the project provided. Basically we filled up
large part of the back of their truck and the members of Salvation Army were
very pleased to receive those donations. Next slide, and a little quick update on
our sister plant out in Pueblo, Colorado: September 7th, last week, marked the first
anniversary of commencement of agent destruction at PCAPP. That’s the Pueblo
Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant. So they’ve been in operations just a
little more than a year now. To date, they have destroyed 253 tons of chemical agent and nearly 43,000 155-millimeter projectiles. That represents about 10 percent of the stockpile located at PCAPP. As Ms. Milchling
indicated, their first year of operations, they have had a number of
challenges. They’ve had a couple of periods where they’ve actually had to pause operations anywhere from a couple of days to in some cases up to about two
months in duration. One of the challenges was the rapid filling of their temporary
Hydrolysate Storage Tanks and that coupled with a delay in bringing the Biotreatment
Area processes online. They had to make a decision about two months
ago to ship some untreated hydrolysate from PCAPP down to Veolia, that’s a
Treatment Storage and Disposal facility in Port Arthur, Texas, and just in the
last week or so, the last of that material was shipped from Pueblo and
safely received at Port Arthur. Of course, that shipping operation was temporarily
halted due to Hurricane Harvey I think it was,
but the folks down at Veolia were very responsive to the needs of PCAPP and
there’s some photos of the trucks and the trailers that were used. Each trailer
could transport about 4,500 gallons of hydrolysate and if I remember correctly
they made about 45 convoy shipments from Pueblo to Veolia Texas. And so we
continue to wish the folks at Pueblo well as they continue with agent
destruction there. And I think we’re up to the questions slide. Man these lights are bright up here. I’m kind of squinting to see people because
of these lights so, are there any questions? Yes Craig.>>Williams: I have a couple of
comments that I’d just like to share with folks over just a couple of minutes. First of all, I want to formally welcome Ms. Milchling and thank her for her
comments and point out to her, I’m sure that she knows, that many of the
objectives that she identified as far as being in front of the curve and being
able to deal with problems prior to their arriving and so on, it’s something
we’re very sensitive to as well. We have a number of working groups within the CDCAB that look at specific issues and drill down a little deeper on those, so
that when ACWA or Bechtel Parsons comes and says this is something that we’re
anticipating might happen like off site shipment of hydrolysate for example or
KDEP comes and says we have a problem with the permitting listings, which I’m
sure you’re sorry you weren’t around for that, it was a real joy, but so we’re on
the same page in that regard and anything that we can do through Jeff or
Ron that would help facilitate anticipation and approval and consensus
on whatever it might be please feel free to let us know. I’m very pleased to hear
that the SDC is starting to get attended to again. I think we’re all excited about
that. There was disappointment when we couldn’t move forward with that. As you
know, we wanted to do it before GB operations but sometimes things don’t go
the way you want. Also, I’d like to thank in particular
Senator McConnell for helping us acquire the funding that we needed, along with
the rest of our delegation and many other people both within ACWA and DOD. That’s something that is always challenging I guess I would put it since
we are in mixed company. Finally, I think it
would be difficult for anyone not to be impressed with the presentations,
particularly in the roadmap and a number of criteria that has to be gone over and
the redundancy in the systemization aspect of things, going back and
redoubling the effort, getting outside people to come in, look at what they
think they’ve done. A new sets of eyes are always good in the context of that
sort of thing and I feel personally like significant amount of progress
can be seen here now with where we are now compared to just the last CDCAB
meeting but certainly two meetings ago where systemization has really taken off. They’re actually operating parts of the system. With 59 independent systems to
integrate, it’s going to be challenging But, my confidence is very high based on
having toured the place a number of times and also to look at the
thoroughness and the backtracking and review and looking forward and looking
backward as they go through this process, this roadmap, I think is is very helpful. So those are my comments and thank you for the time.>>Brubaker: Okay, thank you.>>Parke: Okay, next we’ll have an update just
from their seats from the Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection.>>Burton: “Thank you, I’m Dale Burton. You will recall at the last CAC/CDCAB I gave an overview of everything that was on our plate. For a little bit of
background today I’m just going to do a brief overview of where we currently
stand with our reviews of the various applications as well as where we stand
with the permitting and then following that, April’s going to give a brief
update of where we stand with the current updates to our regulations. We
have a lot of things under review at present. It’s a pretty busy time. We’re
trying to finalize review of several documents, primarily revision six to the
RD&D, the research development and demonstration permit, and that’s
essentially an update you will recall of the permit that was originally issued in
2005. Obviously a lot of changes have occurred in the meantime so revision six
or Rev six that we call it will be a major update permit modification to that
permit. We’ve been meeting with the BGCAPP team on numerous occasions over the
last six weeks and we’ve made good progress and along with that there’s a
class II modification that we call it. Essentially that’s the one that would
remove the munitions washout and remove additional treatment to remove cyanide
from the process. That’s being reviewed concurrently because both of them go
hand-in-hand. It doesn’t make sense to issue one without the other. And we’re moving forward with that as well. We’ve had you know lots of meetings
just primarily to work through technical details, a lot of things that, where we
need to have an understanding of what’s going to be addressed now versus later
on through Systemization. And then finally, the waste analysis
plant which is an integral component of of the permit in terms of how are we
going to analyze at the various waste streams and ensure that all the
requirements are met. So that leads us to our goals then we’ve been reviewing
draft wording of the submittals and we expect that that will be finalized, it
will receive formal resubmittals of the three documents- the Rev six, the class
II modification, and the waste analysis plan by early October if not sooner. In the meantime, we’ve been drafting the revised permit to incorporate those
changes. Some of the permit is changes that we don’t have to have the final
application in order to draft those particular requirements, so we’ve been
doing that all along. Our goal is to have that draft, or research demonstration
development permit, done by the end of October, public notice in November, and
probably have a public meeting in early December. That’s our our current
goal as far as moving forward and that would lead to those permits being issued
or those modifications being issued around the end of the year, calendar year. On other items, we did review and send comments on the GB sampling permit
modification, we sent those out on August 24th. We anticipate a number of other
applications coming in. Those may include the rocket motor storage, the application
to do the static firing demil of the rocket motors in what we call the
Donovan chamber or a controlled detonation chamber. And there’s also that application that
that EPA will have the lead for for the subparts for organic air emissions what
we call BB and CC requirements. We will do a co-review with EPA on that. And then last but not least this is unrelated to demil but it’s of note
as far as BGAD, we’ve also been reviewing the open, burn open and detonation
permit modification and we hope to have that public notice this fall as well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *