&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics
7408 '
EPA745-K-95-OQ5
August 1995
EPA's 33/5O Program
Company Profile
LOCKHEED MARTI
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
-------
EPA's 33/50 PROGRAM
COMPANY PROFILES
This Company Profile is part of a series of reports
being developed by EPA to highlight the accom-
plishments of companies participating in. the 33/50
Program, the 33/50 Program is an EPA voluntary
pollution reduction initiative that promotes reduc-
tions in direct environmental releases and offsite
transfers of 17 high-priority toxic chemicals. The
program derives its name from its overall goals
an interim goal of a 33% reduction by 1992 and
an ultimate goal of a 50% reduction by 1995. The
program uses 1988 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
reporting as a baseline. In February, 1991, EPA
began contacting the parent companies of TRI
facilities that reported using 33/50 Program
chemicals since 1988 to request their participation
in the 33/50 Program. As of November, 1995,
nearly 1,300 companies had elected to participate
in the Program, pledging to reduce emissions of
the 17 target chemicals by more than 380 million
pounds by 1995. Companies set their own reduc-
tion targets, which may vary from the Program's
national 33% and 50% reduction goals.
Industry exceeded the 33/50 Program's interim 33%
reduction goal by more than 100 million pounds in
1992. National emissions of Program chemicals
were reduced by an additional 100 million pounds
in 1993, bringing total reductions since 1988 to
JBt3CHE 33/50 PROGRAM
CHROMIUM & CQJ^UNDS.,
''
METHYLISOBSTYLTKBTONE
-NICKEL & COMPOUNDS- <
TQLUBNE
iCHLO^.OE
" TR1CHLPROHTHXPN1'; .
"' '
* Ais6 rafered. to as mejhyferie chloride
'*"*' * *"' "'
more than 685 million pounds (46%). Facilities' TRI projections suggest that the Program's ultimate 50%
reduction goal will be observed to have been achieved or exceeded in the 1994 TRI data, a full year ahead
of schedule. The 1,300 companies enrolled in the 33/50.Program have accounted for most of the Progra-
m's pollution reductions. Representing just 15% of eligible companies and owning only a third of the facil-
ities reporting Program chemicals to TRI, participants are responsible for 78% of the reductions since
1988 and 98% of the 100 million pounds reduced in 1993. ,
EPA is committed to recognizing companies for their participation in the 33/50 Program and for the
emissions reductions they achieve. The Program issues periodic Progress Reports, in which participat-
ing companies are listed and highlighted. In addition, Company Profiles, such as this one, are being
prepared to provide more detailed information about how companies have achieved their emissions
reductions. Information presented in these profiles is drawn from a number of sources, including the
company's written communications to the 33/50 Program, extensive interviews with company representa-
tives, the annual TRI reports submitted by the company's facilities (including Pollution Prevention Act
data reported to TRI in Section 8 of Form R), and, in many cases, site visits to one or more of the com-
pany's facilities. Mention of trade names, products, or services in this document does not convey, and
should not be interpreted to convey, official EPA approval, endorsement, or recommendation.
Copies of other 33/50 Program Company Profiles, as well as Reductions Highlights documents
summarizing all of these Profiles, may be obtained by contacting the Program as specified in the box
below. In addition, all written company communications to EPA regarding the 33/50 Program are avail-
able to the public upon request.
an th& 33/5Q PrdgrwA, Contact the TSCA Wattfaeat (W2) 554-1404 or comact JJ/58f
Prvgram
-------
lilllHjiiH^^^^ ..... ijpliilM l
, , 'H p| | II f I, ;, J ! ,! ' i.J '! , "If (i I '
' KKTBSSIZirl
"""" ," ',"r""-:-Tli!lr -"1 "t*,"' :'";
its
I ! \ = i ; ; :, li = ; ; 3 : , |E
uiiiiiiiiiiiainiiina
' '
.
iljiilihl 1:1 iiililii||ii!il|l|ln|i i ! 'in !
iiihiiiiiiiiiiiiiiniliniil i ii will '.niiKiiiiipi'iit'iiiiiiiiii'ii'iii i liiiiiiiiiigi * "iiiniiniinii'iiiiiiliii JNIIII iii|iiiMliliiij|iiiiiiiuiilj!
s""i i I!!"1" !| ! ! ! j i':: "f":", ; i i1:1"1;1"! ' ""' ! "i ;;; , ft "i'i"" ; ,, !
_;;;, ;;;-; fj-; :,;;-;_;;; V :_, -J-i ;::£:::;
I ; ; Ijj ; ;;lni|||ill| |li|ln| ' ;|l| ,
lUIKRIIIRIIIIIIW^ I
I IIU!- I Hill 11
: . .
i:iii::j=^^
IllilH
, ; : -if; ; : t<;
i i i i .4,1. iiy , , i,,,
! ; :; f! f"! i* y ; ; j ;
, ,, ,,. ,, i i , ,-,., - , in, .., i . ,,. r.ni " ii ' ' i - -' ".
'iilll:^^
.- ;n;n|i|i ,: :;,, l:ii;n|i|,;n|i m; j,:,;;,,;,,,;,,;,,;,,
-------
SUMMARY
1988 and 1993, Lockheed
Corporation reduced releases and
off-site transfers of targeted 33/50
Program chemicals from 5,515,000
pounds to 1,298,000 pounds, approxi-
mately a 77 percent decrease. These fig-
ures represent reductions primarily in sol-
vents, paints, coatings, and metal finish-
ing materials used in aerospace manufac-
turing processes, including cleaning,
degreasing, painting, bonding, anodizing,
and plating.
COMPANY BACKGROUND
r i Jh*s Profile provides highlights of
I three particular 33/50 Program
.&- chemical reduction projects:
eliminating hazardous chemical usage
and solvent emissions from cleaning/
. degreasing operations by substituting
aqueous cleaning;
process changes in the cleaning and
coating of printed circuit boards; and
eliminating hazardous chemicals and
paint solvent emissions by using plas-
tic media blasting.
Lockheed Corporation and Martin Marietta Corporation merged on March
15, 1995 to form Lockheed Martin Corporation. This Profile focuses on
the former Lockheed business units of Lockheed Martin. It is noteworthy
that the former Martin Marietta companies have made similar progress in elimi-
nating the use of 33/50 Program chemicals to that made by Lockheed. Martin
Marietta'achievements were well recognized in 1994. The EPA awarded Martin
Marietta the 1994 EPA Stratospheric Protection Award. Martin Marietta was also
the 1994 winner of the national Renew America Award for Pollution Prevention.
Lockheed Martin is a Fortune 25 company headquartered in Bethesda,
Maryland. It is the largest defense contractor in the world and the largest aero-
space company in the United States. Lockheed Martin manufactures aircraft, mis-
siles, space launch systems, and satellite and electronic systems; refurbishes air-
LOCKHEEO MARTIN
. 33/50 PROGRAM COMPANY PROFILE: LOCKHEED MARTIN
-------
^si 'ijTze 'L^cjjieed
Corporate'Groups
ll;,:ii! and Divisions
THE LOCKHEED CORPORATION
Electronic Systems
Group
Lockheed Sander*
Lockheed Canada
Lockheed Commercial
Electronic* Company
CalComp
Lockheed Commercial;
Aircraft Canter
Lockheed Support
Syatatna
Lockheed Information
Management
Service* Company
Lockheed
Environmental
Systems and
Tachnolotfies Company
* Lockheed
Idaho Technology
: Company
Lockheed Support
\ System* Incorporated
ferns;refurbishes air-
>":;:;, ','' "C . IIIIIII*1:; If J friv.,ir> > :«"!' '.'it!
I craft: ana £erfor/ns a
tiffioty'o? aircraft
craft; and performs a variety of aircraft maintenance services. Lockheed Martin
is also a major contractor to the Department of Energy and provides clients with
environmental remediation and consulting services. Included within these manu-
facturing operations and services are metal and composite cleaning/degreasing,
finishing/plating, and painting/coating procedures.
I , , , . i , ' , , :; j1, ,, ','.
At former Lockheed sites, approximately 78,000 employees work at 450
facilities located across the United
States and around the world. At the end
of 1993, Lockheed's business mix con-
sisted of 64- percent U.S. government
defense, 13 percent nondefense (pri-
'.' space program)," 10
and 13 percent
foreign military markets. In 1994, total
sales for Lockheed totalled over $13
\
billion. Lockheed corporate groups
and their divisions are shown in Exhibit
1.
, "f
I : ^ ; ' i: ; *
"Lockheed Corporation is
committed to conscientious
stewardship of the environ-
ment, employee health and
safety, and compliance with all relevant
laws and regulations. We will operate
facilities in a manner that is environmen-
tally responsible and that ensures the
health and safety of employees and the
public. This is consistent with our com-
mitment to active, responsible citizenship
in all the communities in which we
reside."
-Dan Tellep
Lockheed Martin Chairman and CEO
ii i. ,. i .i'1 . ,; : ', :
!!!! il!!!! ! ! : ! iil , Si iii i iiiii ii! !
i ......... ! ....... II ......... i ..................... I ....... i ...... I
i mi ..... i ii i ii ........ i"j ii ............
l ........ pin ..... nil in ............. i iiiili|i!iiilliliiiiiiiii! ..... I ................ I ........ I ..... lij .............. if ..... I ...... i ...... In il i" .................. I ..... ' i ........ " il ............ 'nil i ......... ' nil" iliii ....... I!
iil in
33/50 PROGRAM COMPANY PROFILE: LOCKHEED MARTIN
.[;
-------
LOCKHEED ' s POLLUTION
PREVENTION STRATEGY
Establish partnerships with customers and
other key stakeholders
Emphasize environmental technology inno-
vation ,
Leverage environmental technology across
the corporation -
Integrate a hazardous material manage-
ment process into all programs
Institutionalize pollution prevention without
creating a new institution
Use extensive metrics to monitor progress
and focus resources
ENVIRONMENTAL
STRATEGY
Lockheed's commitment to
environmental protection is
delineated in its Corporate
Management Policy Statement
(MPS) 173 and its Operations
Directive (OD) 17. These two
documents establish the goals of
the corporation and the lines of
responsibility, from top manage-
ment through the individual oper-
ating companies, to ensure that all
Lockheed operations are conduct-
ed in a manner that protects, the
environment and worker safety
and health.
MPS 173, published in 1972, directs operating company management to
"ensure that a hazardous material, environmental, safety, and health (ESH) review
is conducted prior to introduction and/or new use of hazardous materials and that
programs are established to prevent or reduce waste and emissions whenever fea-
sible." The MPS also initiated extensive technology and data sharing require-
ments between departments and Lockheed companies, a formal self-evaluation
process, and corporate-wide performance standards. OD 17, published in 1986,
establishes key program elements and basic structures such as a hazardous mate-
rial review process, a pollution prevention program, and a "lessons learned" pro-
gram at each company. Exhibit 2 shows the high-level organization of Lockheed's
environmental program. ..'.'.
An ESH procedures manual is used throughout the corporation. This
manual assists in institutionalizing OD 17 requirements and provides detailed
guidelines for self-inspections, methods of measuring performance, developing
and implementing
new technology,
and disseminating
"lessons learned"^
across the corpora-
tion. In addition,
mechanisms are in
.place to ensure
technology transfer
across the corpora-
tion, including an
Environmental
Technologies (ET)
Certified
Certified
ESH BOARD AND
CORPORATE STAFF
/ \
ESH TASK ^ Operating ^\ ET TASK
FORCE y^Companies^Y' FORCE
Toxicologists Certified Industrial Hy
Safety Professionals Professional Engineei
gienists
s
Lockheed's environ-
mental programs
are designed to allow
the integration of
ideas between
hands-on labor,
engineers, scientists,
and top management.
Exhibit 2
Organization of
Lockheed's
Environmental
Initiatives
33/50 PROGRAM COMPANY PROFILE: LOCKHEED MARTIN
-------
IP IIP Mil ||l||i|i /I] i 1,111! |S! i iMj
IlilH^ IIIIIIH III Illllh > llll(lll|i|llllllillll llllllllll I'll I III I IlllII 111 Illl IIIII l||l|llllll|i|i| IIIHIII Illlllllllll II Illl IIIIIIIIIii|ll|i|llIII JI|I|IIHIII llllllillHllll IIIII
iliiiii|iliigii niinini in 1 |lnnnnlnlnnnnnnnniiiiiiiinliniinnnnii|iii nlinlill|||i|n|lnii inlnnil||||i|||||iilii|iniini||iiini i ni i in ilninni inn nil i nn i nil in i inn ml in nil iiniini iniiiiinnilin nqi nil MINI n in iii|iii|ni in nn in n Inn in i n iiillin 11111 ill in in nil In iigiinn
nil linn 11 iiiliiiiini in in 11111 in in 1 lull iiiiiiiiin linn 111 ip iiiiiiiii i ni iniiinni niiiiiii|iiiiil|liiiiiii|| in n n ni n in in i n 111 in 11 in 11 In iiiinnn i in | In nn nil in 11 i iiillin n l|n i in i n nn in 11 n nil i i in n n in in Inn in i nn 11 n i n| n 111 n n i i in nn in 11 in nil iiliiln 111 In i in in in i 11 ill n 11 fn in i Ii1 In 11 in in i 11 In 111 nliiiiini i
fl ' 1 i 1(1 ' I I
iiiiiiiii i mil i ill iiiii iiiiiiiii ii in i iiiiiiiM n ii||iiii(ii
111 1 1 1 1 | Illl 1 |l
II 111 III III I IIIII IF III11 IIIII II III 11 IIIII III III III IIIII II Illl ll|l|lllllllllllllllllllllll|lllll
1 I I i ' "
^^3^!^,h/aa<&^afl1*2 ITask Force,an Advanced Materials Task Force, and regularly scheduled ESH cor-
|i||||Pi||i!E| VP !5pp|| ^ora^e conferences." In addition, the corporate ESH staff coordinates business unit
!i :'!" < ": - '' Si : ",v« -'i!;':|;" 5"' "'i'
sl., i:; ,r' ,! Program chemicals,
i*= 6lMloc/()iee£/'
activities an3"publis'h"es a"Kimbntnly "analysis' o'fTcey issues arid a pollution pre-
vention bulletin.
liiji r --
use
Lockheed's corporate-wide management structure assists in implementing
1these goals and directives. Elements include an integrated Corporate ESH Board
*cofrlprised of top Lockheed officials whose decisions ultimately influence corpo-
ijft rife direction, an ESH Task Force comprised of ESH coordinators from the major
Operating companies, and an ET task force of scientists and engineers who focus
bri eliminating hazardous materials through innovations in product design and
manufacturing processes.
Lockheed's environmental programs are designed to allow the integration
of ideas between hands-on labori: engineers, scientists, and top management.
Each Lockheed employee is encouraged to be aware of and involved in the issues
and challenges' that face individual Lockheed companies, as well as the corpora-
tion as a whole.
, Partial List of Awards
l! ; ! Received by Lockheed
ir,;;:;: ,. : ^ ,A Companies
' '
.i','»'i,
SELECTED ENVIRONMENTAL AWARDS PRESENTED TO
LOCKHEED COMPANIES
Lockheed Corporation:
1994 EPA Stratospheric Protection Award ,
Lockheed Missiles and Space Company (LMSC), Sunnyvale, CA:
7994 Honor Roll Award from the nonprofit National Environmental Development Association
1993 National Storm Water Program Excellence Award from the U.S.-EPA
1992-1993 Susanne Wilson Environmental Achievement Award from the County of Santa Clara
1993 Golden Vision Award from the San Francisco Chapter of International Television Associates
1992 Commendation Letter from the City of Palo Alto for waste minimization
Lockheed Aeronautical Systems Company (LASC); Marietta, GA:
7993 Merit Award for Paper Recycling from the Cobb Clean Commission
1993 Certificate of Recognition from the National Safety Council
1993 Industrial Lab of the Year Award from the Georgia Water and Pollution Control Association
1992 EPA Certificate of Recognition for reducing painting operation a/remissions
Lockheed Fort Worth Company (LFWC), Fort Worth, TX:
7993 EPA Certificate of Recognition for significant reductions of hazardous air pollutants through
innovative measures
1992 EPA Stratospheric Protection Award
Lockheed Aircraft Services Company (LAS), Ontario, Canada:
1993 EPA Certificate of Recognition for eliminating VOC/HAP emissions
I
v iiii/';';!; ijiii iiniii "giiiliHi'i|ii;i|!h! j||||||i||i|||||||[j ligiU'nit: :ji; isfjjBW!"l|3!!i!l!J!!!!Jl!Fl|l!!!!i'i*,uif*1,!:!!!'!;!;!!;!*\'>*""II, iJ1"1"11 ,:>;!:",!'!!;!!l|!!!||l!!!!!!i!:;!;l:!l!l!|!!!,!!!li:'11!!!1 "II!"!!!!!1!'!:'I;1'1!!1!'il'!!!!!!!!!
COMPANY PROFILE: LOCKHEED MARTIN
jj;;j |:!flg l^iliiiiiijllliJi
-------
In addition to reduced use of 33/50 Program chemicals, Lockheed, by the
end of 1993, reduced corporate-wide use of ozone-depleting chemicals (ODCs)
by 88 percent. In March, 1995, Lockheed Fort Worth Company completely elim-
inated all use of ODCs in the manufacture of the F-46 aircraft. ,Also by the end
of 1993, reductions in releases and transfers of all TRI compounds reached 65
percent from ,1988 levels. In addition, many of the individual operating compa-
nies administer recycling programs, manage energy and water conservation
efforts, and conduct community-directed activities addressing toxics-use reduc-
tion. As a result of these efforts, Lockheed companies have received numerous
awards and commendations from the U.S. EPA^ local regulatory agencies, and
non-profit groups, as shown in Exhibit 3.
OVERVIEW OF 33/5O PROGRAM AND TRI
CHEMICAL RELEASES^ AND TRANSFERS
Since 1988, Lockheed operating companies have reported releases and trans-
fers of 11 of the 17 chemicals targeted by the 33/50 Program. A summary
of Lockheed's releases and transfers is presented in Exhibit 4. Exhibits 5
and 6 provide a breakdown of 1988 releases and transfers by chemical and by
media. Additional detail is p
profile. The following is a 1
at Lockheed:
Chromium and compounds
minum deoxidizing, anodiz-
ing, and sealing. Chromium
compounds continue to be
used for several of these
processes. The majority of
chromium was transferred
off-site for processing; the
remaining chromium was
emitted into the air.
Virtually all chromium
compounds currently used
are transferred off-site. The
remaining chromium is dis-
charged into surface water
or emitted into air.
Dichloromethane is used to
strip paint. Emissions are
primarily to air, and a small
percentage of dichloro-
methane is transferred off-
site.
st of these Chemicals and their source of emissions
were used in metal finishing processes such as alu-
LOGKHEED'S RELEASES AND
TRANSFERS OF TRI CHEMICALS
33/50 Chemicals n.ooos ibsi 1 988 1 993
Cadmium compounds NR NR
Chromium & compounds 34,050 147,849
DichloroTnethane ' 181,350 - 88,085
Lead NR NR
s Methyl ethyl ketone 564,150 115,371
Methyl isobutyl ketone 116,750 23,128
Tetrachloroethylene 498,850 NR
Toluene 530,870 74,884
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 1,103,150 293,493
Trichloroethylene 2,007,900 482,103
Xylene 478,365 73,198
33/50 Subtotal* ' 5,515.435 1.298.111
Other TRI Chemicals: . 1,327,050 340,378
TOTAL* . - 6,842,485 1,638,489
NR: Not reported to TRI; use below reporting threshold.
* Columns. do not sum to total due to rounding.
From 1985 through
1990, various
Lockheed companies
and departments
investigated the
feasibility of substi-
tuting aqueous/
semi-aqueous,
nonaqueous, and
other alternative
cleaners for ozone-
depleting and other
chlorinated solvents
used in vapor
degreasing.
Exhibit 4
Releases and Transfers
of TRI Chemicals by
Lockheed Corporation
33/50 PROGRAM COMPANY PROFILE: LOCKHEED MARTIN
-------
TP&rcerifaee Breakdown
" !"! ; ; : r i i. ' '; r : :' c !: ft
..It;:
Xylene (8.67%)
Tetrachloroethylene (9.04%)
\
Other* (6.03%)
TCE (36.41%)
Toluene (9.63%)
MEK (10.23%)
TCA (20.00%)
*Other- MIBK (2.12%), Dichloromethane (3.29%), and
Chromium/Chromium Compounds (0.62%)
II
^Toluene and xyiene are used in chemical milling maskants and in painting and
boating applications. Toluene is a component of a conformal coating sprayed onto
circuit boards, and xylene is a component of a solvent used to clean spray guns
and support equipment in the conformal coating process. Toluene and xylene
emissions are primarily to air, with their remainders transferred off-site.
.Tillillllijl! . .IE!" ;:» "', ,'!
'I " I',,, l|", ' , , , , ' , , ' ,!, ', , " ''.,.' u " !!'!!' , i , ,1 ' ' ' ,
SSE^SSE* '^Methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) is used in painting applications^ in the application of
specialty coatings, and at some sites for cleaning paint application equipment.
,,,. ' * » w ,., i _ -
lr~i »;3/!rtu ally" all" emlss ions are to air, "with "a" small' percentage of the chemical trans-
ferred ,prTf-site. h_ . : , ' ,, i: : , ^ \
JMethyl isobutyl ketone (MIBK) is used in wipe-cleaning applications. Emissions
|fe fo air, with a fraction of the chemical transferred off-site.
n|| ,,ni ,n| , in /in , » .,,,.. ,' |!|,|,,|,' , , i ' I,,; I, | || . L. i' g. , ' , " ' .. ' I
^^,l-T^ichloroethane_(TCA) is used to clean and degrease metal, to clean elec-
tronics, and to apply specialty coatings! The majority of releases are to air, with
a small amount of the chemical transferred off-site.
Transfers Off-site for (9.19%)
Treatment/Disposal/Other
Other*(.16%)
Air Emissions (90.65%)
*Other - Transfers to POTW (0.15%), Discharges to Surface Water (0.01%)
33/50 PROGRAM COMPANY PROFILE: LOCKHEED MARTIN
!.,..: :>: :..., ::::: .., :?.: I ::.i:i. i.: :.: -Ji;..:.:::.,.,, !,, ii =....: ;: ":.:.: :....! :,,; :::::. !.:.! ,1:1..: SE.::!.:::. : sfcii^LjL
.; i Si :::
-------
Trichloroethylene (TCE) was used extensively as a metal cleaner prior to 1992.
Tetrachloroethylene had been used for the same purpose in the late 1980s and vir-
tually all emissions had been to air. Trichloroethylene emissions are predomi-
nantly to air, with a small quantity of the chemical transferred off-site.
In the 1988 baseline year, Lockheed companies reported releases and
transfers of 6,842,485 pounds of all TRI chemicals. 33/50 Program chemicals
accounted for approximately 81 percent of this total, with releases and transfers
of 5,515,435 pounds.
33/50 PROGRAM GOALS AND REDUCTION
PROJECTS
In July of 1991, Lockheed joined the 33/50 Program, agreeing to voluntarily
reduce releases and transfers of targeted chemicals by 33 percent in 1992, and
by 50 percent in 1995, using 198.8 as a baseline year. Based upon 1988 fig-
ures, these reductions would total 1,820,094 and 2,757,718 pounds, respectively.
In order to reach these goals, the company focussed on seven operations that
could potentially reduce releases and transfers by using improved, cost-effective
technologies and more efficient production methods. Exhibit 7 outlines the oper-
ations targeted
for modification,
the chemicals
historically used
within that
process, and the
process changes
enacted to reduce
transfers and
emissions of
33/50 Program
chemicals. Three
of Lockheed's
emissions-reduc-
tion projects
(labeled 1, 2 and
3 in Exhibit 7)
are the focus of
this Profile.
33/50 PROGRAM CHEMICAL
ELIMINATION PROJECTS
OPERATION(S) CHEMICAL(S) ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES
1. Metal cleaning
and degreasing
2. Electronics circuit
board coating
3. De-painting
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene.
Tetrachlorpethyiene
Toluene
Xylene
Dichlofomethane
Aqueous/semi-aqueous cleaners (Project #1)
Low vapor pressure wipe solvents
"No clean" methods
Water emulsifiable forming fluids
and lubricants
UV-cure conformal coating (Project #2)
Plastic media blasting (Project #3)
4. Electronics circuit
board cleaning
5. Metal finishing
6. Painting
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Cadmium
Chromium
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Toluene
Xylene
7. Application of 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
specialty coatings Methyl ethyl ketone
Aqueous, alkaline cleaners
Water-soluble fluxes
Non-chromium deoxidizers, etchants and
anodizing solutions
Solution regeneration and recycling
Ion vapor deposition aluminum
High solids paints
High transfer efficiency paint guns
Automated paint gun cleaning systems
Low vapor pressure paint gun cleaning
solvents
Robotic painting systems
Improved parts-handling and sequencing
Aqueous/semi-aqueous solvents and earners
Low vapor pressure, non-hazardous air
pollutant solvents and carriers
Exhibit 7
The Operations and
Chemicals Targeted for
Modification at
Lockheed and the
Alternative Technology
Substituted
33/50 PROGRAM COMPANY PROFILE: LOCKHEED MARTIN
-------
' '. ~
gf
, ,, |i";"l'1" ..
uires multiple
' fi protessing steps.
--i.- i- ! i ~ £ ; : ' - '~m^ -₯r
lliminating^chjorinatedsolvent usage in metal cleaning
..Historically, Lockheed companies used chlorinated solvents, such as
1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA) and trichloroethylene (TCE), in vapor degreasing
equipment to clean aircraft components. Vapor degreasing efficiently cleans,
rinses, and dries the various components prior to their painting, assembly, or stor-
age:Lockheed's corporate goal to develop cleaning methods with minimal haz-
ardous material use and emissions, coupled with the production phaseout dead-
lines for Class I ozone-depleting substances ''under'"me 'Montreal Protocol and the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, served to focus company efforts on finding
alternatives to chlorinated solvents, such as TCE and TCA, used in this applica-
tion.
From 1985 through 1990, Lockheed investigated the viability of substi-.
tuting aqueous/semi-aqueous, nonaqueous, and other alternative cleaners for
ozone-depleting and other chlorinated solvents used in vapor degreasing. During
that time, Lockheed successfully phased out the use of chlorinated solvents to
"precision" clean small space and military hardware components. However,
many Lockheed operations continued to use chlorinated solvents for large-scale
industrial cleaning. Such was the case at Lockheed Missile and Space Company
(LMSC) in Sunnyvale, California, where TCA-based vapor degreasing was used
to clean rocket motor components, sucK as casings and nozzle parts, prior to paint-
ing and liner installation. .. , ,
, .
In 1987, experts from various LMSC departments, including engineering,
...^..-^ prociuction, facilities, industrial hygiene, and environmental pro-
tection, collaborated on an effort to find an alternative to TCA in this application.
Within two years, analysis suggested that aqueous cleaning could be substituted
for solvent-based metal parts cleaning at LMSC". The National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA) agreed with LMSC's assessment and approved the
modification of the contract and design requirements for the implementation of an
alternate degreasing operation. Approval of this alternative cleaner allowed
i .5 halt trie" construction of a 5(P!bot ^^^ 15-foot wide, TCA vapor
degreaser, which was designed to degrease rocket motor components fabricated
for NASA's Advanced Solid Rocket Motor (ASRM) project.
I I II II I II I III III 1-1 Ill: :litt "fif.. :.'<; ',!'-.:" ...'.] I..;,," ,
j I I I I I Hi'"!* j.,.,1 .'ill :.i|||i|ill||'l!inll . ii'ij1, :' '..Mil IP ''ill i»4;
LMSC reviewed over 100 cleaners in their search to find a feasible alter-
native to TCA degreasing. Fifty of the initially reviewed cleaners"wairr anted fur-
ther screening. This initial review addressed the efficiency, product quality, reli-
ability, employee safety, and environmental benefits of the alternative cleaning
systems compared with chlorinated solvent degreasing operations. Ultimately,
the research identified four commercially available alkaline cleaners as possible
replacements for TCA: Daraclean 282, Blue Gold, Turco 4338, and Brulin
815GD.
"' - i ' -
Th.e.next phase in the two-part screening and testing procedure involved
running a series of optimization studies in which the company cleaned test panels
with each of the candidate solutions and examined them for paint adhesion, adhe-
il f l
33/50 PROGRAM COMPANY PROFILE: ' TO'CKHEED "JJJRTIN'
i
-------
sive bond strength, and part corrosion. The optimization studies also evaluated
bath and rinse water chemistry for any negative trends that could be associated
with heavy usage of the cleaner, such as etching and drag-out (a measure of clean-
er loss).
v
As part of the optimization studies, testing was also done to compare mea-
sured amounts of non-volatile residue.,(NVR), a.technique used to determine the
cleanliness of a degreased surface. All tests conducted by Lockheed on aqueous
cleaners through June, 1992, demonstrated NVR levels equal to or less than those
associated with TCA use. For example, during comparison testing at LMSC, pan-
els degreased with TCA exhibited an NVR level of 19 rng/sq.ft. while panels
cleaned with an alkaline solution had an NVR level of 9 mg/sq.ft., less than half
the NVR level obtained from TCA. Similar process changes at Lockheed Fort
Worth for aircraft tube cleaning have also demonstrated higher levels of cleanli-
ness with aqueous cleaning. .
The optimization studies showed that aqueous cleaners worked as well as
or better than TCA to clean metal parts in large-scale manufacturing operations.
The Blue Gold and Daraclean 282 aqueous solutions were subsequently adopted.
Implementing the aqueous cleaning system at LMSC required purchasing
a new small-spray washing machine for the plumbing shop. This washing
machine primarily cleans fluid transfer tubing used in launch and missile systems.,
Conversion of an existing solvent immersion tank to use as an aqueous cleaner
provided LMSC with the capability to degrease larger objects. Materials and
processes and facilities engineers teamed in a traditio'nal design and construction
approach to select and convert the aqueous degreasing equipment.
The aqueous degreasing process currently in operation at LMSC requires
multiple processing steps (see Exhibit 8). First, the metal part to be cleaned is
lowered into the aqueous degreasing tank. The aqueous solution in the tank is
mechanically agitated, creating a scrubbing motion both inside.and outside of the
immersed part. As the metal part is removed from the tank an external and inter-
nal rinse spray is activated. The mist created by the spray is blown down, and
fumes are exhausted into a scrubbing unit. The nominal amount of chemical
residue captured in the scrubber is moved to a wastewater treatment facility for
processing and possible reuse. The metal part is then placed into a chamber for
final rinsing and drying. The spent solution in the final rinse and drying tank is
constantly monitored for consistency to allow for its reuse.
Wastewater from the cleaning operation is directed to a holding tank
where its composition is monitored. If the water is determined to be recyclable,
it is sent through a series of filtration and regeneration steps, followed by a reverse
osmosis unit and a deionizer. Finally, it is stored in a deionized water tank. If the
water is not recyclable, it is transported to an on-site wastewater treatment sys-
tem, which was operational before the implementation of aqueous cleaning.
Among the advan-
tages of aqueous
cleaning over TCA
degreasing is the
elimination of the
need for expensive
emissions
control equipment.
Another advantage of
aqueous cleaning
over TCA
degreasing is lower
operating costs.
33/50 PROGRAM COMPANY PROFILE: LOCKHEED MARTIN
-------
JnTF^ ' '
m i i
: Iff S" :: : ; ; ; -"- i 3=H" :: =^TI >?* -r ' £? ; »-
ilpiiiij ! "'":
; !=:(*'
JiSzSiSS
:i!!:;
,:" , I* " J V IB!1"1,! I
ii: iii:^
'^i^degreasing.
'^II^uIIlI,
:::::::"D
WATER
DEIONIZER
(DEIONIZED^. A A.
WATER TANKj §|f
REVERSE OSMOSIS
UNIT
-RINSE SYSTEM-
EXHAUST SYSTEM
ji
La
VENT AQUEOUS
| DECREASING/
I RINSE TANK
Jl
FINAL RINSE
AND DRYING
TANK
FILTRATION/
REGENERATION
SYSTEM :
(HOLDING^
TANK J
-RECYCLE LOOP-
^To WASTE
TREATMENT
The advantages of aqueous cleaning over TCA degreasing include:
Elimination of chlorinated chemical emissions and reduced environmental
impacts;
Elimination of the need for expensive emission control equipment;
Reduction in the cost and risk of hazardous material storage and handling;
Double containment and leak detection monitoring are no longer
mandatory;
Monitoring devices for volatile organic compound emissions are no longer
, required; and
Reduced energy consumption.
in ii1 ' ' "i1! ii j!i , K^1|*lSi%;i5-i:(M';rf.tfjyiWi|;v1|'j;^.i4'lijSR;^.Lii:J!
^^^ ....... !^^
Disadvantages of implementing aqueous degreasing include:
Additional processing steps compared to cleaning with TCA;
Additional, operator time and expertise;
Additional floor space and equipment to properly clean, rinse, and dry the
components; and
Support equipment necessary to prepare and recycle rinse water.
" LMSC is pleased with its conversion from solvent clegreasing to aqueous
degreasing. This process change provided the company with a solution for
addressing its concerns regarding solvent use and occupational safety and health.
Lockheed representatives also state that aqueous cleaning has led to a high degree
of customer satisfaction due to improved product quality, reduced operating costs,
reduced potential for environmental, health, and safety regulatory non-compli-
ance, arid improved overall work-area cleanliness.
-------
Project #2: Eliminating solvent usage from printed circuit board coating
operations
, . -.;' .
: As part of Lockheed's continuous effort to eliminate environmental emis-
sions, Lockheed Aircraft Services.Company (LAS), headquartered in Ontario,
California, implemented a "zero emissions" technique for coating printed circuit
boards used in flight data recorders.
Printed circuit boards installed in applications where they may be exposed
to contamination or moisture are often coated with a protective layer to prevent
damage. These coatings are referred to as conformal coatings. Historically, LAS
spra'yed circuit boards with a methyl methacrylate adhesive coating containing
toluene and dimethylbenzene. This coating formulation produced volatile organ-
ic compound (VOC) emissions of 660 grams/liter of coating. After applying the
coating to the circuit boards, the spray gun and support equipment required clean-
ing with a solvent containing xylerie.
The solvent-based coating process previously used by LAS required a
labor-intensive 24-hour processing cycle per board. During the process, an aver-
age of 10 percent of the boards had to be reworked because of drip marks or insuf-
ficient coating thicknesses.
To aid in their search for an alternative to toluene and xylene, LAS teamed
with Southern California Edison's Clean Air Technologies Program. Working
together, Lockheed and Southern California Edison sought a coating that would
reduce solvent emissions, reduce costs, and improve productivity. The research
team identified an innovative technology using solvent-free conformal coating
cured with ultraviolet light, and in 1993 LAS adopted this process.
In the UV-cure conformal coating process, the coating is sprayed on one
side of the print-
ed circuit board
inside a spray
booth. The coat-
ed board is then
placed on the
conveyor belt of
the curing system
(pictured in
Exhibit 9) for
exposure to UV
light." After pass-
ing through the
instrument, the
board is turned
over, and the
process is repeat-
ed. The whole
Working together,
Lockheed and
Southern California
Edison developed
a coating that elimi-
nated solvent
emissions, reduced
costs, and improved
productivity.
Exhibits
The Ultraviolet Curing
System
33/50 PROGRAM COMPANY PROFILE: LOCKHEED MARTIN
-------
cure coating
oe superi-
; BFfo $ie soivent-
;!! i";:i;jiHii!:iiS!:,!iii!: ::::iiui:i!^^
based process.
jl1;;11" I f";",1 i ' : i1,,*.;
',, if J
, 'i ik1,i ,
' if
minutes, which saves almost 24-hours compared
with the previously used solvent-based coating process.
Advantages offered by the UV-cure coating process include:
Improved product quality;
Lowered material costs;
Reduced per-board cycle process time;
No reworking of boards necessary;
f Zero, emissions of 'pollutants into the atmosphere; and
Rapid return on investment.
........... " ............... ' . ' . 1 ' " " i i ' , '
Limitations of the UV-cure coating process include:
The size of the UV equipment limits the height and size of circuit boards;
Workers must -wear protective gloves.
' ' " 1
wii*11!! :
The UV-cure conformal coating is a 100 percent solids material consist-
ing of a single component UV-sensitive polymeric coating, Dymax Multi-Cure
984-LVF. This polymer is specifically formulated for rapid curing at room tem-
perature when exposed to long- wave (320-380 nanometer) UV light.
LAS considers the new technique to be superior to the solvent-based
process. The UV system produces a more uniform coating with no "drip marks,
fpd the coating requires no rework. After spr'ayfrig,"the applicator requires no
cleaning, minimizing time and costs associated with cleanup activities. Also, the
UV system uses one-fourth of the raw materials required by solvent-based coat-
ing operations, and any residual spray material can be recovered and reused. The
UV conformal coating meets Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) specifica-
tions for protective coatings and is approved for use by the U.S. Air Force.
I11'11- ' !- '
By adopting the new process, LAS has increased the plant's circuit board
production potential" while "entirely eliminating toxic air emissions. In addition,
'^"^j^g'fgQp' |.p the new process requires" mmimaT'training and reduces the time
liriployees spend on each part.
Initial capital expenditure costs for the UV-cure coating equipment were
$16,260. LAS environmental personnel estimated that substituting the UV-cure
process for the previously used solvent- based coating process would provide an
annual cost savings of more than $560,000. The company initially estimated a
payback period of two to three months based on historical production levels.
.ijowe'ver, ffie day after"the ijy^-y^g sy'stem" was" installed LAS received an
pnusually large purchase order requiring 100 circuit boards to be coated and cured
|p pn'e 3ayl Because of this high v6lume"of work, the process change paid for
itself in a single day, and LAS realized a $30,000 savings in the first month of the
UV-coating system's operation. At current'decreased production levels, cost sav-
ings are approximately $60,000 annually. Exhibit 10 compares the solvent-based
coating method with the UV-cure coating method.
ii
in iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii|i |i iiii ill i ill i pi nun i iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiliii in iiiiliiililiili up 1 1 liliiiiiiii|iiiiiiiiiii
In i| ll| |l|i i if
33/SO PROGRAM COMPANY PROFILE: LOCKHEED MARTIN
ni, i1 .
i'liUili
-------
COMPARISON OF COATING TECHNIQUES
SOLVENT-BASED UV-CURE COATING
Capital cost, of new equipment $16,260
Regulatory compliance
- SCAQMD permit . . '. Yes . Exempt
- Air scrubbing and monitoring Yes No
Processing/curing time >24 hours 5-10 minutes
Percentage parts reworked 10-15 0
VOC(g/I) ,660 <1
Estimated Annual Costs $845,400 $281,160
Project #3: Eliminating hazardous chemical use during paint stripping
by using plastic media blasting
One step in refurbishing aircraft is to remove old paint from components
and the airframe prior to the application of new paints and coatings. Historically,
this process required the use of dichloromethane, a potential human carcinogen
and one of the chemicals targeted by the 33/50 Program. In 1988, LAS, LADC,
and LFWC began testing a new paint stripping method, Plastic Media J3 lasting
(PMB), which strips paint effectively without using hazardous liquid chemicals.
This case history covers the LAS project.
Lockheed specialists selected this method for two reasons. First, PMB is
considered to be the Best Available Control Technology (BACT) by the
California South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Using
BACT is required under the Clean Air Act in serious nonattainment areas for par-
ticulates, a criteria air pollutant. Second, PMB provides an economical solution
to aircraft paint stripping.
1 i . . r .
Plastic Media Blasting involves impingement of aircraft surfaces with
plastic beads. PMB equipment uses high-velocity air to project small, irregular-.
ly shaped plastic particles onto surfaces to mechanically remove paint and other
coatings. The beads, leased to LAS from US Technology (UST) in Canton, Ohio,
are usually 16 to 40 mesh in size (mesh is a sizing term relating to the number of
openings per linear inch of a network, such as a screen; the smaller the mesh size,
the larger the pellet). The lease price is $2.50/lb., which includes all packaging,
shipping, handling, and return of spent media. The process is similar to sand
blasting, but is more controlled due to the use of plastic media instead of sand.
The beads are hard enough to remove paint, but soft enough to prevent damage to
substrate materials.
Exhibit 10
A Comparison Between
the Solvent-based .,
Coating Technique and
the UV-Cure Coating
Technique
Plastic Media
Blasting involves
impingement of.
aircraft surfaces
with plastic
beads.
33/50 PROGRAM COMPANY PROFILE: LOCKHEED MARTIN
-------
; ; ! I :
i I ,,;
II ;?
; : I;-:-] - (JJJ^- ;; ; -;!-;:*; -':^if!f-
?*fti0cMeei(? estates
Advantages of PMB include:
Elimination of liquid cleanup and disposal;
No personnel exposure to toxic chemicals;
Elimination of environmental hazards and liability associated
with liquid chemical stripping;
Plastic beads can be used for almost all types of paint stripping and coat
ing removal operations. Beads are available in different sizes and hard
r^eSs values for use in a variety of applications; and
, Time required to strip an aircraft reduced by 50%, with a 70% savings of
personnel time compared with chemical stripping.
Disadvantages of PMB include:
Requirement of employee certification and training in the use of PMB and
equipment operating experience in order to efficiently remove paints and
.,... .. ,
Paint stripping facilities must be modified to accommodate the PMB
and handle the dust^ generated during operation; and
,?,LEmployees required to wear personal protective clothing and ear protec-
W^^'l^'^'tion. ' ' '
LAS used PMB solely on small components, but extended its
application to different sizes and types of parts such as radomes, flight control sur-
Jages, nacenes, and cargo ramps. In 1990, LAS operators stripped a complete C-
130 airframe in a demonstration for the U.S. Air Force, exhibiting a personnel
jinje savings of nearly 70 percent, and an elapsed time span savings of 50 percent
compared with chemical stripping. The successful results prompted the Air Force
to approve the process for future PMB stripping of all C-130 aircraft at LAS.
|;
IT
The environmental, health, and safety impacts of PMB are significantly
less than those of chemical paint stripping. PMB eliminated the annual use of
hundreds of gallons of stripper and the production of thousands of gallons of con-
laminated water associated with chemical stripping, all of which had to be dis-
posed of as hazardous wastev With PMB, the media is recaptured through the
*" j equipment, separated from the contaminants, and then returned to UST. UST
j transports the spent media to its facility in Canton, Ohio, where it is used as a sub-
stitute for calcium carbonate in the manufacture of products such as bathroom
sinks, countertop sinks, and shower floors. The paint waste is reduced to one 55-
"gallon 3"fu"m" o'f~Sry speint"meSia p'er ifi'-T^U aircraft'" and""disposed" of as hazardous
AVaste. The waste generated by PMB is significantly less than that of chemical
stripping, which can yield 60,000 gallons of waste liquid and five drums of waste
sludge per C-130 aircraft.
=T-^ l \ I h III IJ l» h
Lockheed estimates that conversion to PMB, based solely upon work-
hour decreases and product scheduling, accounts for approximately a $1 million
InffQal savings. Associated hazardous waste and chemical cost savings have not
uantified by the company, but would add to this amount. As a result of such
perioH for "the "project was less than six
-------
33/50 PROGRAM PROGRESS AND TRI DATA
SUMMARY
The projects profiled here provide notable examples of efforts made
across Lockheed Corporation to reduce toxic chemical usage. Through undertak-
ings such as these, Lockheed surpassed its 33/50 Program commitment far in
advance of set deadlines, reporting 1,298,111 pounds of releases and transfers of
33/50 Program chemicals in 1993, compared to 5,515,435 pounds in 1988. This
represents an overall reduction of approximately 77 percent. This reduction
included a,comple,te elimination of releases and transfers of cadmium compounds,
lead compounds, and tetrachlorpethylene. The other major contributors to
Lockheed's success include the following reductions:
bichloromethane
Methyl Ethyl Ketone -
Methyl Isobutyl Ketone-
Toluene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane -
Trichloroethylene
Xylene -
88,085 pounds (51 percent)
115,371 pounds (.80 percent)
23,128 pounds (80 percent)
74,884 pounds (86 percent)
293,493 pounds (73 percent)
482,103 pounds (76 percent)
73,198 pounds (85 percent)
- Although it was not part of its stated 33/50 Program goal, Lockheed also
achieved significant reductions in releases and transfers of non-33/50 TRI chem-
icals during the period 1988 to 1993. Total non-33/50 TRI releases and transfers
were 340,378 pounds in 1993, down 986,672 pounds (66 percent) from the 1988
baseline. Exhibit 11 illustrates the reductions in 33/50 Program and other TRI
chemical releases and transfers at Lockheed. Exhibits 12 and 13 provide a break^
down of Lockheed's 1993 releases and transfers by chemical and by media.
o in
= £
mo
si
sE
« v>
PI Non-33/50 Chemicals
133/50 Chemicals
33/50
Goal
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
Exhibit 11
Lockheed's Progress
Toward Meeting Its
33/50 Program Goals
33/50 PROGRAM COMPANY PROFILE: LOCKHEED MARTIN
-------
Exhibit 12
:i;:J Chemica) "Releases an3
ti&j&g&for
v ~f i ^ F : t PF
r lijiilll'f,, r )',.> ,.
-------
Report", a Lockheed Martin publication containing information on technical
developments. The distribution of this publication encourages implementation of
such technological progressions.
Current efforts are focused on helping all-Lockheed Martin companies
take full advantage of process advancements in the following areas:
Eliminating all Class I ODCs used in manufacture and maintenance
of products;
Eliminating solvents from degreasing and cleaning operations;
Reducing VOC/HAP use and emissions in painting operations;
. Eliminating chromium and cadmium from plating, anodizing, deoxidizing,
primer painting, and sealant materials; and
Recycling of process solutions and rinse waters through electrodialysis,
ultrafiltration, and reverse osmosis.
CONTACT FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
For additional information on any of the infor-
mation provided in this case study, please con-
tact the following individual:
Stephen Evanoff, P.E., DEE, R.E.M.
Corporate Environment, Safety,
and Health
Lockheed Martin Corporation
7921 Southpark Plaza
Suite 204
Littleton, CO 80120
TEL: (303) 971-1880
FAX: (303) 971-6065
33/50 PROGRAM COMPANY PROFILE: LOCKHEED MARTIN
-------
i :;.: : : :._ :; : ^ ,j |s: $ ;i;i; , ^
"',' "!',: , ' | ' ,. | H,^. '
!'" ',' ' ," ,'' '. ' ",!'|!t" ' j' ii, , !' n * "",' !' i'1^'^ f 7!|!i'!" "|"'l',"ij"i '7' !''|t
iuihiiiiniiii'iiinuiqiii^^ liKiiiiiiillEiiiviliiilEiilijiiiliiiniiiiniiSiiiKiiil
!i|ii;|i|;iiiit|;|i;iiiiiiig^ LinjIiijiliiil'iBjd
!h.i
-------
CO
ON
ON
. 2
00
ON
Cfl
II '
< S u
*T3 -Q t^
lj| -
. i r
t CO -
1
'3 .
..
x
** O CO n ' "H of
rj- o en Tt ^- cs
i ( *-H i-H * 4
OOOOO OOVJOV>VJ
m co v> v> vj vj
o
C*4 CN C^ CN CN
CO Tj- ^ ^H 10 CN Vi
o ^ i CN m oooNO^-icMm
O\ O\ O\ G\ OO OO OS ON O\ O\
O\; O\O\O\ C3\O\O\O\C3\O\
. . .
' '
: -. o
: S
J3
1
O.
i
o
*R
! , o,
°9
CNO o ^o oo in c-~ i
* ^ SPSoSS
t-~o ooc^-ot^oo
TJ- ol ^d* NO -vo ^-i CM in
d- co CM -^^ co
oo ooinomo
o in
in CN
>n o o o o o o o
- » .»
-
oo ovovoviinco
oo o t-- cs vo co .
OQ vo o, in m o
^f CO CN CO CN i i
O i i CO , C\ O * < CN fO
O\-O\' 00 .00 O\ O\ O\ O\
o\ cr\ c3\ o\ o\ o\ o\ o\
u>
G
,
3
1 1. .
S d>
8 *
o ^
s »
-------
-------
». .
.. H
o\ s t«
*T 8
oo ai n
3 S H
3 -a
§
I
&
'*""!«
C\ CO CO
en en o «"
8
o\
s s
>nooo mOo.ooo
vo *-< '^
o o .o o o o o o o o o o o in
f~> \o
en_ oo^
ob" t--"
oo
m
OOOOOO OOOOOO
oovo
oo
o .0
r-.ooo*oo
oocoo\oo
t~-oot-~o
csen-^o^o
en ov o oo v~>
o >n oo' o m vo'
uif-~*o.c--o
oo -*'rt
ooo\-o*-H
ooooo\,o\
o\cj\o\o\
I
I
§
CO
CO
§
&
-------
Til 1'B|;ili'!'i,, ! i'! 7?'? lii'i" i «"i nV i " ,""! in ,'' ! 1 ! !'! ,T
i I Ill I I i 1 li I" i 1 ! i I i i i II in i i| | |
1 . _ «
-
ii|iiii |i|i| i iiiiiilii! i i li | i i in i iiiii|ib i| I i i ii i i i ii| i ill i i mi I i ink 1111 i |ii i ji iipi ifi iii i |i ! i i|ii( i
I i
4r
;i! i; .A ';;:«,
ill; ;,-
LIlMni
it,
IE
£ r-4 Q
?..* a
III
%
V)
*
I
is
in en vo ~* oo o\
oo in t~- CN vj oo
* o . c-i ~H r- en
oo^ in n <-H o\
r~ * o
>o cs
o -H p- -
S
"T.
o" c
cs oi
r-
o\
. .
o" -"
oJ CM c4
e>J -^J- o\ cs oo
S
°X ^°, ~i
en en en
in c\
en *t
o o)
of -T
oo o\
oo oo
O\ O\
III
8 8
u
I
6
| «,
2 -a
co 3
s I
pL( O
11^
1 I
1 '111 I'ill i
I
I
i
«
a
§
en
o\
o\
8
I
H
a
I
It; iNiililillliilBiiiLlilliiL.,,,, liiJiliiiiftiiiriiliaiii,.!!; IH. ;. id 8,. iJ'.! aj^Ltt A I:. Jc :f - i !.ai *
^ -I
-------
a
» = S
o o
in m
CN Cs»
^^ ^D
to .in
- ^3
o
^3
»n
^3
*n
o
6
o
i
CO
H
CO
1
5
Z
1
O
O
O
00 ,O\
OO .OO
O\ O\
I
tS '-
1
(H
o
3
Q
00
OO
o\
I'
14
£
s
&
«
oo c\ oo o\
CO CO CO OO
O\ O\ O\ OS
t ( ^^ i-H , rt
3
1
' S
:1 ^
s f°
. en f-3
m i;t!
o
in
CM
o
O
o o in *n m
o *n o »n *-<
en rt t^ en <*
o o
in »o
CS CN
p o o o o
o o
in
eo o\ o c4 ' m
OO 00 O\ CT> O\
-------
So o o o
o v in o
o o o o o o
o o o o o o
o o o o o o oooooo
oo o\ o >-i cJ en
oo co o\ o\ cr> o\
O\ ON O\ ON ON O\
CO O\ O ^H CN CO
CO 00 CTi O\ O\
O\ O\ OV O\ ON ON
-------
1
i
o o m o m o
in o vo \o cvi a\
m CM in CM -* o\
VO O < O rt
*-;:-; in in rl-
^t- en CM ~* »-<
CM OO CM VI GO
o o v> in
in <-H o ^o
r- in >n cs
o o o o o o
o in in in o
cr» t~- CM r-- in oo
O\ ON -^- O CO OO
CO CM CM < -)
oo o\ o ^^ CM ni
OO 00 O\ O\ O\ O\
O\ OS O\ O\ ON O\
60
-
-------
f;; 'ii'!f,: '>'f f ". : i ' ' ""if
";""! f li "; ! '! "1 ; 71 " f "! i I - i1?1"
-w}"i fArVrf '!'" I- ;''!'L^">/
8 8 3 ° °
t~-o«noo
o o o o o
oooo'o ooooo ooooo
00000 00000 00.0 00
< en r- oo
00, ^ g g
c-ine4oot-~
o o o o o
ooooo
gggg
o o
ooooo ooooo
o\ o\ o\
O\ ON , O>, O\ O\
-------
0,
.s?
o
tn
^"^ ^~~< O\
t*- C-- O
o . o i
oo \n v
o en v
8 8
2 8
°i ^
oo" c-~"
r- co
CO **
oo
1
VO ON o\
co" co" co"
CO -H .-<
ooooo
§v"t iri
^H *c
co"
ON OO O O
en oo o o
VO O Tf O O
ON ^H o\ o O
ON^ OO^ -r^ OO^ O^
vb" xrT. vo" ^H" vT
ON oo ON ^f co
I
s
ON
I
ON
tI
o
OOOOO
OOOOO
r- o r~
* o ON . _
t"-^ O^ OO^ VO CO
m" co" co"
I CO <-H
-
*f a
O O 'O O O OOOOO
ooooo
vo \o
yf -^
ooooo
g,i
1
S? -
C^
O\
OOOO
8 8
O O O O CO O O
in m vo *-i
Si
O
OOOOO
o o
CO OO
oooo ooooo
o o oo o o
O O ON O O
I
1
o
ooooo ooooo o .o, ^-oo ooooo
^^^4OC)O -^OOO
cs en -^- irj
OV O\O\O\
O\ O\ O\ O\
'O\CTlO\
O\ O\ O\
^c^cn^-v) '-HcM.m-^-
o\ o\ ON o\
ON ON OX O\
8
o
I
§'
-------
-------
I SI
* 1
it
* ° g *a
# 5 A
S o
E-3 O
II
. - .
o in" oC
**D O ~H
t- in o
en en >-
Ol CO OO ft
VO
O
c en en r *
vo oo oo t en
'T. ''i °V ^t. ^
en" of *-T ^ ^ T
10 vi
\o <
r« ~* *O O
^ vo m tn
** o vi o o
oo 01 i< \5 o
oo en vo t*- oo
^" ON o\ ON 10
q\ t-- * .00 y>
o\ oo co ^3 vi
vf oC oo" oT -^
CS O 00 CM VH
O O ON
o\ o n-
oo_ c oo_
8
§000
O Tf O
r^ o^ -^ o^
o o\ -^ rn"
^H cs co
ON ON ON
ON ON ON
I
2
. H
o vo
t-~ in
^ ^ 5S
»n oo tn
in ^o vo
o\ o o\
CT\ O 051
§ -'3
<* m £
1 I
1 s
s I
§ I
»
-------
-------
ft, os g
a -I
a,">
*-0 a
"3 . PJ ^H
CM
a
1
33 l
S
*o o
5 -a
"§ w
I § 1
1-11
181
A
§0000
CO CO CO .CO
°^, "~t "-^ f-i.
oo oo xn~ vT cT
CN 3 2 ^ *
8
o o o o o
^f CO CO fl CO
o^ c^ o^ o
" "
C3 C3" ^D ^3 ^D
§O O O O
°°- 1. ^ R.
o t-^ co^ cT cT
o o o
-H csj co * in
O\ ON O\ OS Ov
O\ OS O\ OS OS
''I
o
B
o
("7-
CO O\ CO
*
CO GO CO
Ol O
CO O
O 00
o o
o o
CO CO
-* 00 O O
o o o
So o
"-I p^
vo" vcT cT o
CO CO CO
o o o
§0
o
OS
OS
I
I
o
-------
------- |