The objective of this Topic Area is to seek proposals to demonstrate and validate prototype alternative technologies for closed destruction technology (CDT)1 of energetics or pre-processing of energetics in the demilitarization stockpile to enable more efficient CDT processing. Of particular, but not exclusive interest are the following alternative technologies:
- Prototype photoreactors that utilize light to breakdown energetic materials.
- Prototype electrochemically assisted processes to breakdown energetic materials.
The following criteria are required:
- The proposed technology shall be viable CDT alternative to open burning (OB) and open detonation.
- The alternative technology must be safe, scalable, and cost-effective technologies to treat (i.e., demilitarize) energetic components used for or within specific military munitions.
- Prototype process must pass energetics safety inspections.
- Proposed technologies should have low environmental impacts that would be quantified using a life cycle analysis2. Proposals should establish a lifecycle framework that can mature as the technology or process advances through the acquisition process. This tiered approach aims to develop and document a minimum data set at each stage of research and development that can be used to make informed decisions and streamline transition to an acquisition program. The life cycle analysis may include varying depths of data and information that can inform: the goal and scope of an analysis; the identity and quantity of relevant inputs and outputs to the system; and the estimation of life cycle impacts and costs.
- Prototype should demonstrate increased treatment rates compared with current CDT that would also be quantified within the life cycle analysis.
- Prototype should demonstrate reduced operations and maintenance costs compared with current CDT that would also be quantified within the life cycle analysis.
- Proposed research may involve the use of biological, chemical, and/or mechanical processes to safely break down the energetic materials into non-energetic products. Thermal processes that do not cause combustion of the energetics also may be considered.
- Proposals should identify viable energy, chemicals, and energetic materials input into the process.
- The proposal should identify any necessary pretreatment process that is required to create the necessary form factor for the energetic material for it to be used in proposed prototype.
- Proposals should identify all expected material waste streams from the process and the proposal should fully characterize and quantify these waste streams. Proposed processes should minimize or eliminate the use of TSCA-restricted chemicals and CERCLA hazardous substances.3
- The materials and processes to be demonstrated/validated should already be developed to a minimum Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 4, and the proposed project should bring them to TRL 7 or higher. Prototypes should be beyond laboratory-scale processes. Projects must demonstrate effectiveness in de-energizing the energetic material, and show promise to have manageable maintenance
- Projects must identify a DoW stakeholder to verify the safety, scaleability, and potential for transition for demilitarization operations.
Many CDTs are not proven, are expensive to build, permit, and operate, are typically energy intensive, and have lower treatment rates compared with open burning. Alternative demilitarization methods of energetics, if successfully developed, would position the DoW to demilitarize relevant munitions at a lower cost, and would reduce or eliminate open burning of waste explosives.
One method capable of safely and efficiently treating explosives is open burning, which is an environmentally regulated waste treatment process. A second method for treating waste explosives involves the use of CDTs that include closed disposal chambers. Several examples of potential CDTs have been identified.4 CDTs typically involve the burning and/or detonation of energetic materials within a hardened chamber with the emissions being filtered prior to release. Closed disposal chambers for detonation typically treat full rounds of munitions and have a treatment rate on the order of tens to hundreds of pounds per hour, which is considerably slower than DoW OB operations.
1 CDT is also referred to as contained disposal technology and closed demilitarization technologies in some reports. Closed demilitarization technologies, contained disposal technologies, and closed disposal technology are effectively synonymous.
4 U.S. EPA, “Alternative Treatment Technologies to Open Burning and Open Detonation of Energetic Hazardous Wastes,” Final Report, EPA 530-R-19-007, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, Dec 2019.
