eabslides feb 2013 20130206 - robinseab.orgrobinseab.org/documents/eabslides_feb_2013.pdf · energy...

Welcome

Environmental Advisory Board

Meeting

Robins Air Force BaseFebruary 7, 2013

1

Welcome and Program Introduction

Dr. Linda SmythEAB Community Co-chair

2

Acronyms and Abbreviations

oF – degrees Farhenheit AFCEC – Air Force Civil Engineer Center bgs – below ground surface BIA – Base Industrial Area CCF – Corrosion Control Facility CIO – Chief Information Officer DPT – Direct Push Technology DoD – Department of Defense EMS – Energy Management System ESTCP – Environmental Security Technology Certification Program FDD – Fault Detection and Diagnosis GA EPD – Georgia Environmental Protection Division HVAC – Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning

3

Acronyms and Abbreviations

kWh – kilowatt hours LCD – Liquid Crystal Display NILM – Non-Intrusive Load Monitoring O&M – Operations and Maintenance PCB – Polychlorinated Biphenyl RCRA – Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RFI – RCRA Facility Investigation RSL – Regional Screening Level SERDP – Strategic Environmental Research and Development

Program sf – square feet SVOC – Semivolatile Organic Compound US EPA – United States Environmental Protection Agency VOC – Volatile Organic Compound

4

SS-C508(Building 169)

Update on Progress

Environmental Advisory Board

February 7, 2013

Dean Williamson, P.E.Technical Lead

CH2M HILL

5

Overview

Background Purpose and Objectives of Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act (RCRA) Facility Investigation (RFI) RFI Field Activities RFI Report Content/Format Preliminary Findings Path Forward

6

Background

7

Aircraft Parts Repair Facility in the Greater Base Industrial Area

Soil Contamination Discovered beneath Floor Slab in Two Rooms in 2009• Volatile organic compounds

(VOCs)• Semivolatile organic

compounds (SVOCs)• Metals

Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GA EPD) April 11, 2011 Letter Requested Limited RFI for Soil around Perimeter of Building 169

Excavation Plan for the Base Industrial Area (BIA) has been Updated to Include Building 169

Land Use Controls are in Place as Part of Interim Corrective Measures

8

Background

Building 169Building 169

Define Nature and Extent of Soil Contamination around Perimeter of Building 169

Complete Focused Human Health Risk Assessment and Ecological Exposure Assessment for Building 169 Perimeter Soil and Leaching to Groundwater• Identification of contaminants of potential concern

• Exposure assessment

• Toxicity assessment

• Risk characterization

• Uncertainty assessment

Determine Path Forward

Purpose and Objectives of RCRA RFI

9

Direct Push Technology (DPT) Used for Field Investigation• Early September 2012 – 20 soil

borings, approximately 15 to 20 feet deep

• Mid-October 2012 – Four additional borings near northwest corner of Building 169 to delineate contamination near SB02

DPT Track Rig

RFI Field Activities

10

RFI Field Activities

Collected up to Three Soil Samples per Boring• Unpaved areas sampled from 0 to 2 feet below ground surface (bgs)• One sample collected from 2-foot interval immediately above water

table• One sample collected from 2-foot interval exhibiting highest

headspace reading Collected a Total of 52 Samples from 24 Borings Analyzed samples for:

• VOCs• SVOCs• RCRA metals• Hexavalent chromium• Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)• Total organic carbon

11

RFI Field Activities

12

Perimeter Soil Boring Locations

RFI Report Content/Format

Background Information

Summary of Findings

Conceptual Site Model

Baseline Risk Assessment

Conclusions and Recommendations

13

Preliminary Findings

Detected Analytes were Screened against Three Criteria:• Adjusted residential Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) from

United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) risk-based table (non-carcinogenic RSLs divided by 10)

• Soil screening levels from US EPA risk-based table (multiplied by a dilution attenuation factor of 20)

• Background concentrations (for inorganic compounds)

Six VOCs were Detected above Screening Criteria Eleven SVOCs (primarily polycyclic aromatic

hydrocarbons) were Detected above Screening Criteria Hexavalent Chromium was the Only Metal Detected

above Screening Criteria No PCBs were Detected 14

15

Preliminary Findings

Hexavalent Chromium

In all borings except SB23 and

SB24

VOCs

Only SB02

SVOCs

In all borings except SB06, SB12,

SB17, and SB20

Boring Locations with Detections above Screening Levels

Submit RFI Report to GA EPD (January 2013)

Goal to Obtain GA EPD Approval (March 2013)

Path Forward

16

QUESTIONS/COMMENTS?

17

A Tool to Meet Air Force Energy Reduction Goals –

Building 59 Energy Management System

Brian Adair, Ph.D.Senior Chemical Engineer

Geosyntec Consultants

February 7, 2013

Environmental Advisory Board

18

OVERVIEW

Project Background Building 59 Background Environmental Security Technology Certification Program

(ESTCP) Project Components Summary

19

PROJECT BACKGROUND

Department of Defense (DoD) is Largest Consumer of Energy within Federal Government

Air Force is Largest Consumer of Energy within DoD Air Force Annual Energy Expenditures – $9 Billion

• 84 percent for aviation fuel• 12 percent for facilities (primarily electricity and natural gas)• 4 percent for vehicle and

ground equipment

2020

PROJECT BACKGROUND

Air Force Energy Plan• Reduce demand through

conservation and efficiency• Increase supply through

renewable and alternative energy sources

• Create a culture change –make energy a consideration in all we do

Key Goal• Reduce facility energy

intensity by 3 percent per year based on 2003 baseline (30 percent by 2015)

21

DoD Research Programs• Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program

(SERDP)─ Environmental science and technology program─ Invests in basic and applied research and advanced development

• ESTCP ─ Demonstration and validation program ─ Promotes transfer of innovative technologies from proof of concept to

field or production use

22

PROJECT BACKGROUND

Geosyntec Awarded ESTCP Energy Project• Energy Management System (EMS) for Building 59

(Large Aircraft Corrosion Control Paint/Depaint Facility)• Base Champion:

─ Environmental and Ergonomics Office, WR-ALC/QPE• Collaboration:

─ Geosyntec Consultants─ University of North Carolina at Charlotte

• Three year demonstrationprogram

23

PROJECT BACKGROUND

Building 59

BUILDING 59 BACKGROUND

225,000 square foot (sf) Corrosion Control Facility (CCF)

Two 65,000 sf Hangar Bays for Paint and Depaint

Small-parts Bay Common Central Facility Systems Process Equipment Plant

EAB Members Received Tour of Building 59 in April 2008

Paint and Depaint Hangars Fully Encloses C-5s and Other Aircraft

24

BUILDING 59 BACKGROUND

Paint/Depaint in CCFs Requires Monitoring and Control of:• Lighting• Air flow• Temperature• Relative humidity• Concentrations of particulate matter and

VOCs

25

Significant Energy Demand to Maintain Strict Environmental Control Requirements• Energy usage correlates with climate conditions

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

Ave

rage

Dai

ly E

lect

ricity

Con

sum

ptio

n (k

Wh)

Build

ing

59

Ave

rage

Tem

pera

ture

War

ner

Robi

ns, G

eorg

ia (o F

)

TemperatureElectricity

kWh – kilowatt hoursoF – degrees Fahrenheit

BUILDING 59 BACKGROUND

26

First Facility in Air Force to have Air Recirculation System• 80 percent of air recycled • 20 percent new air

BUILDING 59 BACKGROUND

27

BUILDING 59 BACKGROUND

Integrated Control System for Building Systems• Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC)• Lights

28

BUILDING 59 BACKGROUND

Building 59 Energy Usage• Even with automated controls, Building 59 energy demand

represents almost 10 percent of Robins AFB energy usage

Gas + ElectricityAll of Robins AFB

$23.9M

Building 59 Gas

$250K

Building 59Electricity

$1.7M

Misc. (mainly compressors)$340K

Fans$820K

Gas*$250K

Pumps$100K

Chillers$100K

Lights$100K

Building 59 Energy Use by Equipment* Gas used in air heating, hot water, and steam generation

2011 Electricity and Gas Costs

29

Scope of ESTCP Project• Demonstration and validation of

comprehensive and integrated energy management system─ Optimize in place light and

HVAC control system ─ Integration of:

Climate data Paint/depaint schedule Building occupancy Process mode (e.g., active painting,

curing, no aircraft) Equipment efficiency sensors

─ Development of tools to communicateenergy savings opportunities

“Most energy efficiency in industry is achieved through changes in how energy is managed in a facility” – Paul Scheihing, Technology

Manager, Department of Energy, 2009

“Primary demand reduction opportunities [for Building 59]

are operational changes” – Engineering Energy Analysis,

402nd Maintenance Wing

ESTCP PROJECT COMPONENTS

30

OptiRTC Platform • Flexible platform developed by Geosyntec• Collect data

─ Sensors─ Mobile field-forms─ Web data─ Historical sources

• Post data in Web-based dashboards─ Data visualization─ Manipulating system controls─ Establishing system alerts

• Use data to make intelligent system control decisions in real time

Platform

ESTCP PROJECT COMPONENTS

31

Conceptual Schematic of Energy Management System for Building 59

ESTCP PROJECT COMPONENTS

32

Add Sensors to Diagnose Equipment and Identify Problems• Non-Intrusive Load Monitoring (NILM)

─ Algorithms applied to measured electrical current

• Fault Detection and Diagnosis (FDD) by analyzing transients, operating schedules, frequency spectra, etc.

Forecast Problems and Plan Ahead

0 5 10 15 20 25 300.7

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

Time (sec)Po

wer

(kW

)

CloggedFilter

CleanFilter

Clogged (left) and Unclogged (right) Filters

ESTCP PROJECT COMPONENTS

33Signal from NILM

Time (seconds)Po

wer

(Kilo

wat

ts)

ESTCP PROJECT COMPONENTS

Additional Inputs• Painting, maintenance, and

personnel schedules• Utility usage data• Equipment status• Climate data• Building occupancy

sensors

34

Additional Outputs (via text messages, emails, displays, flashing lights)• VOC concentrations• Hazardous conditions• Sensor failures• Equipment not

functioning• Utility usage reports

Example Timeline for Painting Aircraft

35

ESTCP PROJECT COMPONENTS

LC D – Liquid Crystal Display

“The DoD Chief Information Officer (CIO) is committed to accelerating the adoption of cloud computing within the Department and to providing a secure, resilient enterprise Cloud Environment through an alignment with Department‐wide IT efficiency initiatives, federal data center consolidation and cloud computing efforts.”

“Cloud Computing Strategy”, DoD CIO, July 2012

ESTCP PROJECT COMPONENTS

36

Cloud Computing

Applications

Security & Integration

Databases

Server

Virtualization

Server Hardware

Storage

Networking

Runtimes

37

Applications

Security & Integration

Databases

Server

Virtualization

Server Hardware

Storage

Networking

Runtimes

Applications

Security & Integration

Databases

Server

Virtualization

Server Hardware

Storage

Networking

Runtimes

Private(On-Premise)

Infrastructure(as a Service)

Platform(as a Service)

You

Man

age Yo

u M

anag

e

You

Man

age

Managed by V

endor

Managed by V

endorESTCP PROJECT COMPONENTS

38

ESTCP PROJECT COMPONENTS

Applications

Security & Integration

Databases

Server

Virtualization

Server Hardware

Storage

Networking

Runtimes

Applications

Security & Integration

Databases

Server

Virtualization

Server Hardware

Storage

Networking

Runtimes

Platform(as a Service)

Private(DoD) Cloud Facility

You

Man

age

You

Man

age

ESTCP Project

Potential DoD Deployment

Strategyon

Appliance

on

Other CCFs• B-52 Bomber – Corrosion Control Hangar at Tinker AFB• C-17 – Corrosion Control Hangar at Charleston AFB • C-130 – Corrosion Control Hangar at Hill AFB

Small Paint Shops and Workshops throughout DoD• Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort• Marine Expeditionary Force’s Corrosion Repair Facility at

Camp Pendleton• Mobile Facility at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma

ESTCP PROJECT COMPONENTS

39

Savings from Better Control of Building Mode • Depaint Hangar Estimated at $150K per Year• Paint Hangar Estimated at $300K per Year

Expect to Realize Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Savings as Equipment Faults and Other Inefficiencies are Identified and Addressed

Simple Payback is Estimated at 3.9 Years

SUMMARY

40

Task

2013 2014 2015

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Project KickoffEstablish Building 59 Energy Consumption Baselines

Project Design

System Installation and Startup

System Operation

Reporting

Issue Guidance DocumentsQ1 = Feb-Mar-Apr; Q2 = May-Jun-Jul; Q3 = Aug-Sep-Oct; Q4 = Nov-Dec-Jan

SUMMARY

Preliminary Project Schedule with Key Milestones*

*Assumes Project Award by March 2013 41

QUESTIONS / COMMENTS

Contact Information:

Brian AdairSenior Chemical Engineer

badair@geosyntec.com(980) 333-2954

42

New Businessand

Program Closing

Dr. Linda SmythEAB Community Co-chair

43

Next EAB Meeting

Thursday, 2 May 2013

44

Please…Complete the meeting evaluation and feedback form and leave at your seat

Leave your name tag at the sign-in table for the next meeting

Thank you!45