Transfer of Pollution Prevention Technologies (2002)

The activities of the Department of Defense (DOD) and its contractors in manufacturing, testing, maintaining, and disposing of military equipment make up a significant portion of the industrial processes conducted in the United States. As is the case with the commercial industries, some of these activities, such as metal plating, have resulted in industrial pollution and environmental contamination. With increasing environmental regulation of such processes in recent decades, defense facilities have been faced with growing compliance issues. Department of Defense efforts to manage, correct, and prevent these problems have included the establishment of the National Defense Center for Environmental Excellence (NDCEE) under the management of the U.S. Army Industrial Ecology Center (IEC).

The National Research Council’s Committee to Evaluate Transfer of Pollution Prevention Technology for the U.S. Army was formed to identify major barriers to the transfer of pollution prevention technologies and to recommend pathways to success. To address the study objectives, the committee (1) reviewed the NDCEE’s technology transfer activities, (2) examined efforts to transfer technology in four areas, two of which were identified at the outset by the NDCEE as successful and two of which were identified as unsuccessful, and (3) identified opportunities for improving the transfer of pollution prevention technologies to maintenance and rework facilities in the Department of Defense and to industrial manufacturing facilities performing defense-related operations.

To facilitate the evaluation, four case studies of technology transfer were chosen that were representative of major industrial pollution programs in the Industrial Ecology Center and the Department of Defense. Two of these technologies, electrocoat and powder coating, are methods for applying coatings. The third technology, ion beam surface modification, is a method for improving coatings and surface condition, and the fourth, ultrahigh-pressure waterjet technology, is used for coatings removal and surface preparation. These technologies are within the purview of the NDCEE, which the Industrial Ecology Center managed from 1993 through 2000. The NDCEE’s thrust areas are not limited to coatings, but these four areas were selected because they constitute a definitive and substantial part of the IEC’s program. This report describes activities that occurred in the period from the NDCEE’s inception until September 30, 2000.

Military maintenance depots carry out a wide range of functions to refurbish and distribute materiel. Given this broad responsibility, certain technologies may be more appropriate than others in meeting an operation’s needs. The complex requirements that coating technologies must satisfy encompass process reliability, throughput, and product performance as well as environmental impact.

One technology addressed early in the NDCEE program was electrocoat processing. For various reasons, electrocoat was not found by the committee to be appropriate for depot refinishing applications. It is a highly capital-intensive process and is suited almost exclusively to original equipment manufacturer, or OEM, applications. For the few specialized cases where electrocoat may be appropriate, commercial suppliers can readily fill the testing and demonstration needs.

Also, ion beam technology, which has tremendous potential for application in surface modification, was not considered to be at an appropriate state of maturity for the investments made by the NDCEE. The NDCEE can maintain competency in the area in preparation for the future by establishing closer ties with research laboratories in the United States, both inside and outside the Department of Defense, and overseas that are actively and successfully engaged in ion beam surface modification research.

Transfer of powder coating technologies was similarly unsuccessful, and the NDCEE’s documentation showed very limited evidence of implementation at Department of Defense facilities. While powder coating may result in improved performance and associated cost savings, the savings are unlikely to be large enough to offset the costs incurred by NDCEE for the overall development effort. Indirect costs, including those for permitting, monitoring, reporting, penalties, or damages, must be considered when evaluating the costs of implementing such new technologies.

Among the technologies examined, ultrahigh-pressure waterjet cleaning was the most appropriate for the NDCEE and offers numerous possibilities for pollution prevention across the services. Although the NDCEE has achieved some degree of success in transferring this technology, the limitations of the facility at the NDCEE must be overcome before the potential for this technology can be achieved.

Successful technology transfer occurs when the organization receiving a technology assumes the cost of using the technology as part of its normal operating expenses. Successful technology transfer requires implementation of new technologies, not simply demonstration or implementation only after extremely long delays. Although technology awareness is raised by demonstrations, appropriate planning for technology transfer must identify the specific regulatory, organizational, and technical barriers to implementation from the beginning of the process.

The NDCEE’s technology demonstration activities are substantial. However, results demonstrating cost-effective implementation of new processes have not been quantified. Planned program milestones could ensure visibility for the technologies across a broader array of potential users and help to establish government-industry implementation teams.

Implementing new technologies imposes costs on the user, on the organizations required to evaluate and approve the technology, and on the transferring organization. Consideration must be given to funding the efforts needed to test, approve, and implement the technologies demonstrated by the NDCEE at the Department of Defense system commands and the receiving depots. These depots are essential contributors to the success of any technology transfer.

Some specific coating technologies were selected for implementation at a very early stage in the NDCEE’s operations. These coating technologies were identified as solutions to environmental problems at user facilities before the specifics of the situation were fully analyzed. For example, powder

coat and electrocoat appear to have been applied where more in-depth consideration would have led instead to the use of high-solids or aqueous spray systems. These alternatives would offer improved environmental performance combined with easier implementation. Because the NDCEE chose the more complex technologies, power coat and electrocoat only reached the demonstration phase. As a result, pollution prevention technologies have not yet been implemented at many sites where they are needed.

Prior to accepting any projects, the NDCEE should perform a market survey of the site to assess the need to change or add technology. This assessment should include an economic analysis of any proposed process changes. The alternatives must be shown to offer improved environmental performance combined with easier implementation.

Both the establishment of the NDCEE and the concept of providing technical and financial support during the later stages of technology transfer for pollution prevention are appropriate uses of government funding. An intermediary with the means to develop technological capabilities and the mandate to work through the organizational and technical barriers to adoption of pollution prevention technology has the potential to be a very effective agent for positive change.

Any intermediary such as the NDCEE that seeks to transfer technologies in a large, diverse organization such as the Department of Defense must bridge various organizational and cultural gaps. No matter what the environmental benefit, managers are understandably resistant to change in many defense systems, especially when lives depend on their successful operation. This cautious approach necessitates that the military system commands and the original equipment manufacturers be the primary arbiters of a technology transfer program’s success.

The NDCEE appears to function at its best in support of organizations such as the Joint Group on Pollution Prevention and the Army’s Tank-automotive and Armaments Command. In these efforts, the NDCEE is integrated with the overall Department of Defense operation and has an organizational connection with the commands that can approve implementation of process changes.

The complex organizational structure of environmental programs in the Department of Defense also plays a part in the difficulty of implementing new technologies. Because programs such as the Environmental Security Technology Certification Program and the NDCEE operate substantially in parallel, it is difficult to develop an overall picture of these programs in order to understand their effectiveness.

Another structural barrier involves management of equipment depots. Depot managers take a short-term approach to return on investment in commercial applications, yet their focus may not be to optimize payback. Although life-cycle costing for a piece of equipment may make sense from a total organizational standpoint, an individual depot manager may have different incentives and criteria for success. An organization like the NDCEE can be invaluable in demonstrating the overarching benefits of implementing a new technology.

A more pervasive structural barrier to implementation of new pollution prevention technologies is the use of military specifications or outdated procedures. Some specifications require processes and test procedures that may be inappropriate or outdated, and that can lead to false estimations of product life and life-cycle costs. Also, some may be written so as to give preference to the use of a specific technology, excluding other promising alternatives.

Information that would allow interested parties to learn about the activities of the NDCEE is currently limited. The NDCEE has not emphasized publishing its project results in either refereed literature or industry magazines, and data concerning NDCEE projects on its World Wide Web site generally consists of one- or two-page project descriptions. Greater access to more complete information would aid greatly in technology transfer efforts—both directly by attracting customers to the NDCEE and indirectly by contributing to general knowledge about the technologies under consideration.

A related issue is the lack of highly specialized subject-matter experts in the various technologies considered for implementation. Given the great breadth of activities the NDCEE has been tasked with over its history, the use of specialized experts from a broad range of institutions is essential to ensure program success. Such experts would cut down the learning period for new technologies, as well as help to gain the respect of organizations ultimately responsible for approving implementation of NDCEE programs.

Technology transfer is widely accepted as a difficult and costly challenge. The mission of the NDCEE toward this end is commendable, and the concept of establishing an intermediary organization to introduce and transfer new technologies for pollution prevention is certainly worthwhile. In practice at the NDCEE, unfortunately, this model has not been successfully demonstrated. The demonstration factory capabilities at the NDCEE investigated in this study are not a necessary or cost-effective means of demonstrating environmental technologies. Reliance on industrial facilities commonly used by the commercial users of coatings would be cost-effective and could lead to further collaboration with manufacturers.

Realization of several key elements of an effective intermediary strategy is necessary for success in transferring pollution prevention technology. These elements include (1) bridging the organizational gaps between the intermediary (the NDCEE), the technology users (the military system commands), and the technology suppliers (the original equipment manufacturers); (2) selecting and completing relevant projects with significant and quantifiable impacts; (3) supporting highly respected technical personnel both on staff and as external advisors; and (4) disseminating and publishing timely information on both successful and unsuccessful demonstrations.