NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND

ANTIFOULING NEEDS AND OBJECTIVES

ASTM MEETING
June 2008

Mr. Mark Ingle, P.E.

SEA 05P23
(202) 781-3665
mark.w.ingle@navy.mil
1
 OBJECTIVES

• Summarize evolving Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) organization

and antifouling coating requirements:
•• Headquarters NAVSEA organization.
•• Specifications, standards, and requirements.

• NAVSEA needs that could be satisfied by additional Navy / Department of Defense

Research and Development activities:
•• Biocidal coatings that are free of copper and zinc.
•• Coatings that reduce hull drag while preventing or inhibiting fouling
(e.g., foul-release coatings).
•• Current “state of the art” coatings from the NAVSEA perspective.

• Summarize NAVSEA antifouling coating test program progress:

•• Qualification of EPA registered, copper-free product.
•• Advanced foul-release coating testing.

• Discuss future NAVSEA ship developments that require “new” coatings.

•• High-speed vessels.
•• Aluminum hulls.

2
 Ship Integrity & Performance (SEA 05P)
Group Director
Ship Integrity & Performance
Michael R. Kistler

Deputy Group Director

Susan Yang
Admin EA
Event (Tina) Brewer Tammy King

Division Director Division Director

05P1 Ship Survivability Division Ship Structures & Materials Division 05P2
Vacant E. Dail Thomas

05P11 05P12 05P13 05P14 05P21 05P22 05P23 05P24 05P25

TWH & Supervisor TWH & Supervisor Supervisor & PM Supervisor Supervisor Supervisor Shipboard Environmental
TWH & Supervisor TWH & Supervisor
Above Water Signatures & Acoustics & DC/FF/CBD Surface Ships Structural Submarine Structural Materials Branch Protection Branch
Ship Vulnerability Corrosion Control Branch
Electromagnetic K. Lyons Integrity Branch Integrity Branch Michael
Susceptibility Michael C. Winnette David A. Qualley Lindsay Miller Beau E. Brinckerhoff TWH – Env. Prot. Sys.
Richard Wiersteiner Signatures Bjornson Michael Chapkovich
Richard Taddeo TWH
TWH Damage & Fire TWH TWH – Fabrication & Welding
EM Vulnerability Recoverability TWH Structural Integrity - EM – Mach, Pipe & Press. Vessels Env. Quality Program,
EM Structural Integrity -Surface Ships
Topside Signatures – Reduction David Satterfield (Acting) Submarines Senior Coatings Engr. Gene Mitchell Manager
Signatures and Natale Nappi, Jr. Benito Martir Mark Ingle Peter McGraw
Surface Ships
Requirements Roger M. Nutting Jr.
Richard Warfield Jr, TWH (Acting)
Manager Damage Control & TWH
EM TWH
Harry M. Nicholson Personnel Protection TWH NDT&E TWH – Fuels &
Sr. Ship Survivability Structural Integrity –
EM Henry Kuzma (Acting) Structural Integrity - Sub Cathodic Protection K. Lipetzky (Acting) Lubricants
Systems Engineer Aircarft Carriers
Topside Signatures EM William Will Systems
Gregory S. Toms
Michael J. Campbell Evelisse B. Martir
Life-Cycle Submarine Signatures TWH Andrew Seelinger TWH
Programs/Materials (Acting)
Manager Fire Protection Systems Nonmetallic Materials
Suk Hee Yi Michael F. Shaw EM EM
Mary Hunstad (Acting) Mark Lattner (Acting) EM
Sr. Ship Survivability EM (YD-871-3) In-Service Fleet EM (YD-806-3)
Fuels & Lubs
Systems Engineer – Shock Structural Integrity -Surface Ships Support Coatings & Corrosion
EM (YD-830-3) TWH Richard Leung
Dana R. Johansen TWH VACANT Marc P. Guilbert Control TWH
Above Water Electro-Magnetic Chem/Bio Defense for VACANT Ferrous Materials
Signatures Eng Signature Reduction Navy Warfighters EM Joseph Blackburn Acq Intern
VACANT Michael D. Riley Jon Cofield (Acting) EM Combatant Design,
EM (YD-871-3) Combatant Ship Mgr
(Acting) Lety Gonell
(Acting) Special Projects
Ordance & Weapons Michael W. Sieve Ronald S. Barbaro
Shock EM
TWH EM
EM (YD-830-3) VACANT Chemical Fire
TWH Non-Ferrous
Surface Ship Extinguishing Systems Engineer Materials Solid Waste. Pollution
Submarine Structural
Acoustics Manager Douglas J. Barylski Joel Clark Cathy Wong Prevention
EM Closures, Hull Outfitting EM (Acting) TBD
VACANT
LFT&E EM
Escape & Rescue & Special Corrosion Control &
TBD DC & PP CVN, Amphibs
Warfare Systems
Brandan B. Shea, Jr.
Coatings
Engineer & Sub TBD EM
Boyang Li Mark R. Campbell Welding & Materials
EM TWH TBD
Vulnerability Structural Deep
EM Submergence Systems
Ben Pedersen New Ship Design – Karl M. Bell-Slusser
Chemical, Bio Defense (Acting)
Engineer
Alexis D. Hawkins-Nunley EM
Submarine Hatches
Engineering Manager
Matthew V. Clifford
EM
Fire Fighting
TBD

WFC Developmental
Pre-decisional Key: “Pilot” Vacancy
3 Intern
 ANTIFOULING COATING PROGRAM
Specifications & Requirements

• NAVSEA defines “needs” for antifouling coatings/treatments in accordance

with established requirements.
Material: Military specifications used to define either formulas or
establish performance minimums.
MIL-PRF-24647D “PAINT SYSTEM ANTICORROSIVE
AND ANTIFOULING, SHIP HULL” 16 Feb. 2005.
Application: Coatings applied in accordance with NAVSEA
Standard Item 009-32 “Cleaning and Painting; Accomplish”
26 Sept. 2008.
Husbandry: Naval Ships Technical Manual, Chapter 081,
“Waterborne Underwater Hull Cleaning of
Navy Ships 1 April 2006.
Maintenance: Naval Ships Technical Manual, Chapter 631,
“Preservation of Ships in Service” 1 Nov. 2008.

• NAVSEA procures antifouling coatings/treatments as part of ship procurement

and maintenance:
Shipbuilding Contract: Defines coating to be used on new ships.
Maintenance Work Package: Defines type and level of antifouling
repair/replacement. 4
 ANTIFOULING COATING PROGRAM
Material Specifications

• NAVSEA cancelled the last “Formula” antifouling MIL-P-15931, on 19 April 2005

because of environmental regulations.

• NAVSEA updated MIL-PRF-24647D “PAINT SYSTEM ANTICORROSIVE

AND ANTIFOULING, SHIP HULL” on 16 Feb. 2005.
•• Specification “TYPES” address key applications.
Type I – Biocidal, ablative or self polishing, copper free products.
Type II - Biocidal, ablative or self polishing, copper-bearing products.
Type III – Non-biocidal, foul-release products.
Type IV - Non-polishing, biocidal products.
•• Simplified “APPLICATIONS” help work planners & shipbuilders select
systems:
Application 1 - LESS THAN 3 years.
Application 2 - LESS THAN 7 years.
Application 3 - LESS THAN 12 years
Application 4 - LESS THAN 2 years, for high-speed craft.

• NAVSEA establishes environmental, safety, & performance requirements.

SPECIFICATIONS HELP DEFINE AREAS FOR RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT
5
 ANTIFOULING COATING PROGRAM
Material Specifications
• NAVSEA establishes environmental, safety, & performance requirements in
specifications.
Requirement Rationale
Requires system of primer and topcoat One vendor liable for entire system performance.

Requires performance testing in tropical Validates coating works on Navy ships.

Immersion service.

Limits soluble and total metals Minimizes waste disposal & worker health issues.

Limits soluble and total metals Minimizes waste disposal & worker health issues.

Limits biocides and biocide toxicity Requires EPA registration & worker health issues.

Pot Life Supports applicability.

Flash point Dry dock safety.

Volatile Organic Compound / Hazardous Air Complies with 40 CFR 63 Shipbuilding & Ship Repair rules.
Pollutant limits

Dry time Supports shipyard/shipbuilder production.

Color Supports S636 Camouflage Manual requirements.

14 other requirements, all of which are important.

6
 From Provide Qualification Application to NAVSEA QUALIFICATION TESTING OF MIL-PRF-24647
NAVSEA Application
Review
Fail Modify
Product TYPE I, II, & IV ANTI FOULING COATINGS
Entry Criteria- perquisites
For the Navy to
consider product
Pass
General Criteria- Required Product Test Path
Tests/inspections to
Qualify product Performance Test Path
Resistance to Tropical Biofouling Organism Attachment
Pass PANEL TEST Fail Modify Decision/Action
(12 months or 24 months) Product
Typical Government Field
Fail Correct Testing Path
DCMA Audit Facility Cathodic Protection
Deficiencies Compatibility Less Likely Government
(3 months) Field Testing Path
Pass

Conduct Panel Test s

Product Testing Positive Results

Ablation/erosion rate Resistance to Tropical Biofouling

Volatiles Organism Attachment Fail Modify
Nonvolatile Vehicle SHIP PATCH TEST Product
Toxicity Government (Minimum 12 months)
Flash Point Or Commercial (Minimum 24 months)
Consistency
Metal ( Pb) Content Modify Pass Fail Modify
Dry Times Product Resistance to Tropical Biofouling Product
Sag Resistance Organism Attachment
Condition in Container
Unacceptable SHIP FULL TEST
Color
Partially full container Government (Minimum 12 months)
NEHC Complete Or Commercial (Minimum 24 months)
Spraying properties Review
Brushing properties Performance
Acceptable Testing
Rolling properties Pass
Pressure cycling Modify
Product Product Approved
Accelerated &
Storage Stability Fail Placed on QPL
(30 days)
Compile Pass Complete
Recoatability (3 months) Submission Submit to Performance
Shelf Life (24 months) Package NAVSEA 05Q Testing
Start

2 months 4 months 14-28 26-52 38 months

months months Minimum
7
Approximate Time (From Application Submittal)
 ANTIFOULING COATING PROGRAM
Overall Goals
• Navy needs to control underwater-hull fouling using environmentally
acceptable methods.
Fouling control is important to allow Navy ships to:
•• Attain critical speed – 2% speed loss.
•• Reduce noise.
•• Minimize operating expenses:
- 6% to 45% increase in fuel
cost ($910K/year per DDG).
- $22M to $44M spent annually on
underwater-hull coating
& diver cleanings.
•• Last for up to 12-years with no
docking or touch-up.

• NAVSEA goal is to adopt new, advanced coating systems for

fleet-wide implementation.
•• Current Navy fleet underwater-hull area,
99% coated with copper ablative – 12,434,472 ft2 or 1,155,200 m2
•• Foul-release coatings on 26,635 ft2 or 2,660 m2
Effective, copper-free or foul-release will become new Navy standard.

8
 ANTIFOULING COATING PROGRAM
Need to Enhance Fuel Economy
• SEA 05 questioned from CNO & via congressional inquiry about technology
available to reduce ship fuel consumption.

• Increasing cost of fuel leading to renewed interest in foul-release coatings.

6.00 Navy copper

Percentage Fuel Penalty vs. Years ablative
coatings
5.00

4.00
CDP
Hybrid
3.00
SPC
Foul release
2.00
New, Low-speed,
foul-release
1.00
coating to be
demonstrated in
0.00 2009 by NAVSEA
Start AHR Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
International Paint Data, C. Anderson 9
 ANTIFOULING COATING PROGRAM
Environmental Drivers Of Change
• World-wide antifouling coating environmental regulations are changing:
•• International Maritime Organization (IMO) tributyl tin (TBT) ban to come into
force on 17 Sept. 2008 – TBT paints are banned.
•• Canada, 40 ug/cm2/day limit on copper emissions from antifouling paints.
•• Sweden has copper emissions limits on antifouling coatings
in Baltic, 200 ug/cm2/14-day.
•• Netherlands bans cleaning or scrubbing of copper-bearing antifouling.
INTERNATIONAL PRECEDENTS ESTABLISHED FOR BIOCIDE & Cu REGULATION

• Local water-quality issues in ports with military & civilian

ships leading to new domestic regulations.
•• San Diego violates federal water quality standards – California evaluating
new regulations. San Diego Regional Water Quality Board issued a
20-year plan to phase out copper-bearing paints (San Diego, Times Union,
28 April 2005), so phase out in 2025.
•• Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (PSNS) has had NOVs for copper
discharge from drydocks.
•• Hull-coating leachate is identified UNDS discharge.
NUMERICAL UNDS COPPER EMISSION LIMIT TO BE PROPOSED IN 2009.

“NEW” COATING MUST SATISFY CURRENT & FUTURE ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS

10
 UNIFORM NATIONAL DISCHARGE STANDARDS
Hull Coating Leachate
„ Constituents that leach, dissolve, ablate, or erode from the paint on the
hull into the surrounding seawater

„ Marine Pollution Control Devices (MPCDs) given full technical evaluation:

– Establish a maximum allowable copper release rate.
– Advanced antifouling coatings.
– Foul-release coatings.

„ Performance standard is expected to be based on a combination of all

three MPCDs – coating selection will be vessel dependent:

STEEL, COMPOSITE, RIGID HULL ALUMINUM FLEXIBLE

11
Source: EPA UNDS OUTREACH BRIEF (Fall 2003).
 ANTIFOULING COATING PROGRAM
Domestic Copper Discharge limits evolving
• UNDS Process is ongoing.
Identify and Joint EPA/DoD Final Report
Phase I Characterize Rule Published
Discharges

Establish MPCD Joint EPA/DoD Final Rule

Phase II Performance Rule Expected 2009
Standards

Develop
Phase III Implementing DoD Rule Negotiation
Instructions

Numerical UNDS copper emission limit to be proposed in 2009.

Specific provisions of UNDS regulations are deliberational:
1. UNDS Rules are coming in 2009, all current MIL-PRF-24647, QPL
coatings may be at compliance risk.
2. UNDS rule likely to be based on ASTM-D-6442 data over 90 days.
3. Future UNDS numerical limit on copper emissions, with compliance testing.
4. Meeting goals discussed publicly by NAVSEA since 2001 for paints
that release 50% less copper than vendor’s MIL-PRF-24647, QPL
coatings would reduce UNDS compliance risk.

12
 ANTIFOULING COATING PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL &
PERFORMANCE GOALS
OPTION 1: NON-COPPER
• DEVELOPMENTAL
COATINGS.
• NOT EPA REGISTERED.
• SHORT HALF-LIFE
(e.g., 10-hour) BIOCIDES.
MIL-PRF-24647D category
Two products failed ship test,
Sherwin Williams HMF registered with
EPA 30 June 2008. State registration
in place for VA, FL, SC.
Two other copper-free being
registered.
Program Approach
OPTION 2: LOW-COPPER
CO-BIOCIDE COATING
• COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS
• SOME CO-BIOCIDES,
NOT EPA REGISTERED.
• SHORT HALF-LIFE
(e.g., 10-hour) BIOCIDES.
BEST OPTION 2 PRODUCTS
Don’t currently meet Navy needs.
No product of interest under testing
OPTION 3: FOUL-RELEASE
NON-TOXIC COATINGS
• COMMERCIAL COATINGS.
• NAVSEA SPECIFICATION
REVISION IN PROGRESS.
• TEST INSTALLATIONS
ON MCM-1 & MCM-14.
MIL-PRF-24647D INCLUDES
CATEGORY.
International Intersleek 425 included
on MIL-PRF-24647D Qualified Products List
International Intersleek 900 started
ship trials.
13
 ANTIFOULING COATING PROGRAM
SHIPBOARD TESTING TO DATE

• NAVSEA patch tests on navy ships & USCG craft in fouling-prone, warm
water.

• Testing initiated in 2001 through 2007, Testing in 2008

USS ALDIE
(Option 1 & 2)

USS JOHN PAUL JONES USCG 41’ UTILITY BOAT

(Option 1 & 2) (Option 1)

USCG 47’ LIFEBOAT

USS RENTZ
(Option 3)
(Option 1 & 2)
USS AVENGER USCG 41’ UTILITY BOAT
(Option 1) (Option 1)

USCG MARLIN USCG MATINICUS

USS PORT ROYAL?
(Option 1 & 2) (Option 1 & 2)
(Option 3)
USCG KNIGHT ISLAND USCG CUSHING
USCG 47’ LIFEBOAT (Option 1)
(Option 1)
(Option 1) 14
 ANTIFOULING COATING PATCH TESTING
USCG MLB 47256 with Copper-free Coating

ANTIFOULING SYSTEM: Copper-free product, ablative matrix,

TEST SYSTEM APPLIED: January 9 - 22, 2005

LOCATION OF WORK: USCG STATION, SAN JUAN, PR
INSPECTED: Aug. 2005 LIGHT ALGAE GROWTH.
Other pulls not recorded, no complaints to NAVSEA about speed.
April 2008 Pulled for engine work, cleaned well, may have been
over-coated.

BATELLE TEST SITE, 58 MONTH, FULL

IMMERSION RESULTS

PRESSURE WASH, ALGAE SOME HARD FOULING ON

EASILY REMOVED, POLISHING WELDS, NOT A SPEED PROBLEM,
APPARENT. BOAT CREWS WANT MORE Option 1 Cu Control
15
MATERIAL.
 OPTION 1 SHIP TEST
Full ship Test of Option 1 Failed in 2006
Antifouling test system: red top coat of option 1 over
Cu ablative. EPA EUP granted in Nov. 2004 for USCG
KNIGHT ISLAND (WPB-1348) based in Tampa, FL.

Test system application: February, 2005

Master Marine – Bayou LaBatre, LA

Inspected: June 2005, & April 2006

Option 1 / ablative full-
• Soft fouling & hard fouling apparent. immersion panels, 18
months Biscayne Bay, FL
USCG had speed problems.
• Hull only cleaned with abrasive pads.
• Option 1 not as good as Cu ablative.

April 2006
June 2005

Cu Ablative

Cu-ablative

Option 1 16
Option 1
 TYPE III, FOUL-RELEASE COATING TESTING
Advanced, Foul-release for Lower-speed Ships
● New, “second generation,” silicone-based
product introduced to Navy and commercial
industry in May 2007.
●● Fluorinated polymer with silicone resin.
●● Ampiphilic surface (i.e., with mixed
hydrophobic and hydrophilic areas)
inhibit organism settlement and adhesion.
●● Surface is smoother than conventional
silicone-based foul-release.

● Tanker and container ship owners reporting that

ships with speeds in excess of 10 knots can achieve
11% & 4% fuel savings because ampiphilic
coating is smoother and stays clean at lower
speeds.

● NAVSEA to conduct demonstration install on USS

PORT ROYAL (CG-73).
1. Foul-release environmentally acceptable
and easy to manage/repair in-service.
2. Commercial sector showing savings, Royal Navy
and MSC “think” product is performing.
3. NAVSEA must learn to manage foul-release and avoid coating
damage due to cleaning because of LCS-2. 17
 FOUL-RELEASE COATINGS
Ship Operations Drive Foul-release Performance

● Commercial success is on ships steaming 78% of the time at a speed of

22- to 24-knots. DDGs steam 31% of the time, while FFGs steam 34% of the time.

● International Paint states Intersleek 700 is a viable coating for ships operating
in excess of 15 knots, but Intersleek 900 is viable coating for ships operating
in excess of 10 knots. DDGs operate in excess of 15 knots 47% of the time,
while FFGs operate in excess of 15 knots 27% of the time.

DDG FFG Containership

80
70 Intersleek 900 Intersleek 700
recommended recommended
60

50
Percent Time
40
(Annual)
30
20

10
0
<10 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25+
Speed (knots)
18
 FOUL-RELEASE COATING TESTING
Plan to Collect “Real” Fuel Savings
• Given likely fouling in-port, foul-release coatings will need cleaning. Need to develop business
case that balances fuel savings against material cost premium and cleanings.

• “Black Box” Ship Power Condition Monitoring (SPCM) system to be installed on CG-73
by NSWC-CD would tie into:
- Global positioning system. - Shaft torque meters.
- Shaft Speed - Speed Log – Propeller Pitch
- Wind Speed/Direction – Gyro Heading
- Roll & Pitch
- The SPCM is NOT integrated into ship’s network (it is a temporary installation)

• SPCM will collect average speed/power over a long periods of time and plot as
Shaft Horsepower (SHP) over Speed cubed = SHP/V^3

• Better to monitor POWER than FUEL CONSUMPTION – more accurate approach.

3
Change in shaft horsepower/V ratio over time
USS Leyte Gulf at one speed
Indicates accumulation of
4.00
biofouling
3.00
3
SHP/v

2.00

1.00
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Elapsed time (days)

NAVSEA interested in improved means of monitoring ship hull drag & fuel economy. 19
 NAVY ANTIFOULING PROGRAM
Foul-Release Coatings, Damage Limits Service Life
DAMAGE OF OPTION 3 FOUL-RELEASE COATINGS

• Durability issue is critical for Navy ships. Silicone topcoat

Any scratch or defect can lead to Epoxy Primer
tenacious fouling growth.
Steel Hull

• Navy ships regularly cleaned during long

pier-side periods. Improper cleaning damages
coating.

• Marine organisms grow at scratches and become

very difficult to remove – leading to more damage.

• Navy stopped using foul-release coatings

on MCMs in 2006 because coatings were
to vulnerable to damage.

Damage Tolerant, functional, lower speed

foul-release coatings of interest to NAVSEA
20
 ANTIFOULING COATING QUALIFICATION
Foul-release Coating Panel Evaluation
100
90
80 FOULING
Percent Fouling

70
60 ACCUMULATION ON
50 EXPOSED PANEL
40
30
20
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Exposure Cycles

Soft Fouling Hard Fouling

MIL-PRF-24647D
100
90
Percent Remaining Fouling

80

FOULING 70
60
RELEASE IN 50

FLOW CHANNEL 40
30
20
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Exposure Cycle

% Remaining @ 20 kts % Remaining @ 30 kts

21
FOUL-RELEASE COATING QUALIFICATION
Foul-release Panel Test Results
FOULING RELEASE IN FLOW CHANNEL
(POOR PERFORMER)
80

70
Percent Remaining Fouling

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
1 2 3 4 5
Exposure Cycles

% Remaining @ 20 kts % Remaining @ 30 kts

22
 NAVY ANTIFOULING PROGRAM
State of the Art

• NAVSEA learned that Econea biocide has been registered by U.S. EPA
on 23 April 2007.
•• Registration of one new biocide took 7 years.
•• Registration of new biocides unlikely, high cost, long payback period.
Biocidal coatings development limited in near term.

• NAVSEA has renewed level of interest in Option 3 coatings that are being
formulated to function well on slower vessels and that can withstand the
mechanical damage that can occur on Navy ships.
Coatings that shed fouling, repel fouling, or that release fouling are
potentially significant area for research:
1. Duty cycle key, need to prevent fouling while static for months.
2. Durability is key, need to withstand tugs, fenders, cleaning.
3. Producability is key, cannot radically increase docking time or cost.
• NAVSEA interested in working with R&D community and coating vendors
to looking in new directions. Biocides are limited by cost to bring to market,
paint chemistry may have to change to ensure long-term performance.
Coatings that are “out of the box” of interest to NAVSEA:
1. 100% solids, hydrolysable coating to rapidly polish and deliver
newer biocides.
2. Single-coat paints taking over tank coating, antifouling?
3. Surface chemistry that repels fouling in a hard, tough layer.
4. Hull-bug to keep coating clean an boost performance.
23
 NAVY ANTIFOULING PROGRAM
Future Navy Ship Developments
• NAVSEA needs to reduce operating costs and improve ship performance.
• NAVSEA needs to develop copper-free coatings to address evolving
environmental regulations.
•• Development & testing of additional copper-free coatings.
•• Conduct additional tests of foul-release coatings.
•• Monitor already initiated tests.

• New Navy ships will challenge existing current antifouling

coatings.
•• Smaller, faster craft operating at > 40knots.
•• Budget pressure to save time & drydock dollars.
•• Aluminum hulls.
Need antifouling coatings for these ships.

24
Backup slides

25
 TOTAL ANNUAL COPPER LOADINGS
Non-Oily
Total Cu Load = 345,480 lb/yr
Machinery
Wastew ater U/W Ship (156,707 kg/yr)
Firem ain <1% Husbandry
System s 485 lbs 1%
2% (220 kg) 4,279 lbs
8,618 lbs Other
(1,941 kg)
(3,909 kg) <1%
691 lbs
(314 kg)

Hull Coating
S/W Cooling
Leachate
Discharge
64%
32%
216,657 lbs
112,100 lbs
(98,274 kg)
(50,847 kg)

Distillation &
RO Brine
<1%
2,649 lbs
(1,201 kg)

*Estimates are for all discharges and vessels covered by Source: Technical Development Document Phase I
UNDS within contiguous zone (<12 nm) Uniform National Discharge Standards for
Vessels of the Armed Forces26
EPA 821-R-99-001, April 1999
 INTERNATIONAL INTERSLEEK 900
System Application
Application of final anticorrosive (AC) epoxy
coat* {after substrate blast-cleaning} Application of tie coat*
(*Intergard 264 – black) (*Intersleek 731 – light pink/gray)

Thickness (dft): 10 mil, min.*

Masking: lower freeboard

*AC coats, combined

Thickness (dft): 3-6 mil

Masking: lower freeboard

Application of topcoat/hull* Application of topcoat/boottop*

(*Intersleek 970 – blue) (*Intersleek 970 – black)

Thickness (dft): 6-8 mil

Masking: lower freeboard,
boottop

Thickness (dft): 6-8 mil

Masking: lower freeboard,
upper hull
27
 NAVSEA ANTIFOULING COATING PROGRAM
GOALS

VOC < 400 g/l

Cu RELEASE < 10 ug/cm2/day

SUPPORT 12-year DOCKING
OR 50% OF ABC-3/BRA-640
WITHOUT CLEANING
OR NO COPPER
COATING THAT
MEETS NAVSEA
NEEDS

WITHSTAND 35-knot FLOW

APPLICABLE USING NAVY
STANDARD EQUIPMENT
(COMPARABLE TO ABC-3,
EPA REGISTERED BRA-640, HEMPEL OLYMPIC)
IN U.S.

28
 NAVSEA ANTIFOULING COATING PROGRAM
GOALS
VOC < 400 g/l
CAN USE OXOL.
SUPPORT 12-year DOCKING
Cu RELEASE < 10 ug/cm2/day
WITHOUT CLEANING
OR 50% OF BRA-640
CAN ACCEPT CLEANINGS
OR NO COPPER ANALOGOUS TO CURRENT
ASTM-D-6442 METHOD, COATINGS.
90-DAY PERIOD. COATING THAT
MEETS NAVSEA
NEEDS

WITHSTAND 35-knot FLOW APPLICABLE USING NAVY

STANDARD EQUIPMENT
CAN USE HIGH-SOLIDS
PUMPS.
EPA REGISTERED IN U.S.
CANNOT HAVE NUMEROUS
EXTRA COATS OR DRY TIME.

29
 ANTIFOULING COATING PROGRAM
Application Specifications
• NAVSEA Standard Item 009-32 defines how a coating will be applied as a “turn-key”
document for contracting for coating removal, application, and repair.
Requirement Rationale
Requires use of MIL-PRF-24647 system One vendor liable for entire system performance.
& vendor-supplied ASTM-F-718 data sheet.

Requires dry film thickness checks on each coat Validates adequate paint is applied.
in accordance with SSPC PA-2.

Requires surface preparation for replacement Key parameter for coating adhesion.
& repair using SSPC, SP-1, SP-3, SP-10 or SP-11.

Requires 2-4 mils of surface profile. Key parameter for coating adhesion.

Defines allowable levels of soluble salts on Parameter minimizes level of in-service blistering.

Defines number & sequence of coats. Ensures desired service life and supports husbandry.

Defines “touch-tacky” application requirement. Essential to ensuring inter-coat adhesion.

Defines allowable application temperature Parameter ensures cure & working time.

Defines allowable Dew point relative to Prevents application over condensate and coating failure.
Surface temperature

Dry time Supports shipyard/shipbuilder production.

22 other requirements, all of which are important. 30