ERDC/CERL TR-XX-DRAFT
DoD Corrosion Prevention and Control Program CPC Report Title Final Report on Project XXX-XXXX
Construction Engineering Research Laboratory	First M. Lastname1, Second M. Lastname2, and Third M. Lastname3	Month Year
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

The U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) solves the nation’s toughest engineering and environmental challenges. ERDC develops innovative solutions in civil and military engineering, geospatial sciences, water resources, and environmental sciences for the Army, the Department of Defense, civilian agencies, and our nation’s public good. Find out more at www.erdc.usace.army.mil. To search for other technical reports published by ERDC, visit the ERDC online library at http://acwc.sdp.sirsi.net/client/default.

DoD Corrosion Prevention and Control Program	ERDC/CERL TR-XX-DRAFT Month Year
CPC Report Title Final Report on Project XXX-XXXX
First M. Lastname1, First M. Lastname2, and First M. Lastname3 Construction Engineering Research Laboratory U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center 2902 Newmark Drive Champaign, IL 61822 First M. Lastname1, First M. Lastname2, and First M. Lastname3 Contractor or Partner Agency, otherwise delete whole block Street Address City, ST ZIP-FOUR First M. Lastname1, First M. Lastname2, and First M. Lastname3 Second Contractor or Partner Agency, otherwise delete whole block Street Address City, ST ZIP-FOUR
Final report
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
Prepared for Office of the Secretary of Defense (OUSD(AT&L)) Washington, DC 20301-3090 Under Project F##-AR##, “Project Title”

Abstract

[[[Write a 200-word summary covering the military corrosion problem, technological solution/demonstration objective, demonstration site, work description, result, ROI, and recommendation for future use.]]]

DISCLAIMER: The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication, or promotional purposes. Citation of trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial products. All product names and trademarks cited are the property of their respective owners. The findings of this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents. DESTROY THIS REPORT WHEN NO LONGER NEEDED. DO NOT RETURN IT TO THE ORIGINATOR.

Contents

Abstract	ii

Figures and Tables	iv

Preface	v

Executive Summary	vi

Unit Conversion Factors	vii

1	Introduction	1

1.1	Problem statement	1

1.2	Objective	1

1.3	Approach	1

2	Technical Investigation	2

2.1	Technology overview	2

2.2	Field work	2

2.3	Commissioning and monitoring	2

3	Discussion	3

3.1	Metrics	3

3.2	Results	3

3.3	Lessons learned	3

4	Economic Analysis	4

4.1	Costs and assumptions	4

4.2	Projected return on investment (ROI)	4

5	Conclusions and Recommendations	6

5.1	Conclusions	6

5.2	Recommendations	6

5.2.1	Applicability	6

5.2.2	Implementation	6

References	7

Appendix A: What to Put in Appendices	8

Report Documentation Page

Figures and Tables

Figures

Figure 1. Example of figure and caption placement.	2

Tables

Table 1. ROI analysis.	6

Preface

This demonstration was performed for the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) under Department of Defense (DoD) Corrosion Prevention and Control Project <XXXXX>, “Title.” The proponent was the U.S. Army Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management (ACSIM) and the stakeholder was the U.S. Army Installation Management Command (IMCOM). The technical monitors were Daniel J. Dunmire (OUSD(AT&L)), Bernie Rodriguez (IMPW-FM), and Valerie D. Hines (DAIM-ODF).

The work was performed by the Engineering and Materials Branch (CEERD-CF-M), Facilities Division (CF), U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center – Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (ERDC-CERL), Champaign, IL. Significant portions of this work were performed by [[[fill in Contractor Company Names, City, ST]]]. At the time of publication, Vicki L. Van Blaricum was Chief, CEERD-CF-M; L. Michael Golish was Chief, CEERD-CF; and Kurt Kinnevan, CEERD-CV-T, was the Technical Director for Adaptive and Resilient Installations. The Deputy Director of ERDC-CERL was Dr. Kirankumar Topudurti and the Director was Dr. Ilker Adiguzel.

The following individuals are gratefully acknowledged for their contributions to this project:

Person 1 – Title, Institutional Affiliation (OFFICE SYMBOL)

Person 2 – Title, Institutional Affiliation (OFFICE SYMBOL)

etc.

The Commander of ERDC was COL Jeffrey R. Eckstein and the Director was Dr. Jeffery P. Holland.

Executive Summary

[[[Write a one-page summary. See separate ERDC-CERL Content Requirements document.]]]

Unit Conversion Factors

Multiply	By	To Obtain
degrees Fahrenheit	(F-32)/1.8	degrees Celsius
feet	0.3048	meters
gallons (U.S. liquid)	3.785412 E-03	cubic meters
inches	0.0254	meters
mils	0.0254	millimeters
square feet	0.09290304	square meters

[[[Author: this is a sample table only; provide conversions for the units that are used in the report and delete the ones that don’t apply.]]]

Introduction

Problem statement

[[[Describe corrosion problem and its military significance, including costs. Describe the technology to be demonstrated, and how it is expected to solve the problem. See separate ERDC-CERL Content Requirements document.]]]

Objective

[[[Fill in the project objective from the approved PMP. See separate ERDC-CERL Content Requirements document for more.]]]

Approach

[[[Briefly describe the salient points of the demonstration, including where and when it was executed, and generally what was involved in the field work. Do not go into detail about the technology, though; save the detail for section 2.1, “Technology overview.” See separate ERDC-CERL Content Requirements document for more.]]]

Technical Investigation

Technology overview

[[[Provide a clear and complete description of how the technology works, but avoid excessive detail. Illustrate with explanatory diagrams or photographs (Figure 1). All photos must be sourced from the public domain or accompanied by permission to reprint by the owner. See separate ERDC-CERL Content Requirements document for more information on acquiring photos.]]]

Figure 1. Example of figure and caption placement.

Field work

[[[Describe the sequence of tasks in the work plan, including permits, external coordination with utilities, site preparation, installation, problems, and site cleanup. Avoid routine administrative detail. See separate ERDC-CERL Content Requirements document for more.]]]

Commissioning and monitoring

[[[Describe any commissioning, inspection, or other tasks performed to verify that the technology was correctly installed and ready for use. Include any remote-monitoring or data-logging systems.]]]

[[[Also discuss all periodic inspection and/or continuous monitoring activities that began after commissioning or technology acceptance, including setup of outdoor exposure coupons or in-lab testing. See separate ERDC-CERL Content Requirements document for more.]]]

Discussion

Metrics

[[[Begin this section with a clear statement of the performance goal by which success of the technology was measured.]]]

[[[List the industry standards that were used as metrics to empirically document technology performance. Examples include methods or test procedures published by standards bodies such as NACE International, ASTM International, etc. See separate ERDC-CERL Content Requirements document for more.]]]

Results

[[[This section will include narrative on observations and summaries of performance data collected during the demonstration period. Minimize narrative text by using clear figures and tables. See separate ERDC-CERL Content Requirements document for more.]]]]]]

Lessons learned

[[[This section discusses the lessons learned from handling problems that emerged during field application of the technology (sections 2.2 and 2.3) and operation of the technology during the demonstration performance period (section 3.2). See separate ERDC-CERL Content Requirements document for more.]]]

Economic Analysis

[[[Begin this chapter with the following statement:]]] This analysis is performed in accordance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-94, Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal Programs.

Costs and assumptions

Demonstration Project Costs. [[[Present these as a table using values from the PMP reclama. OSD wants these costs figured into the analysis for Alternative 2 below.]]]

Alternative 1 (Baseline Case). [[[This section is clearest if presented in the form of a table with concise supporting text. Cover the costs expected if the site continued to use the conventional technology or methods currently in place at demonstration site. Include all first costs, annual operating and maintenance costs, and any periodic component replacement or refurbishment that would be expected during a 30-year service life. Explicitly state any other relevant assumptions.]]]

Alternative 2 (Demonstrated Technology). [[[As above, this section also is clearest if presented in the form of a table with concise supporting text. State the direct first costs of procuring and installing the demonstrated technology, annual operating and maintenance costs, and any periodic component replacement or refurbishment that would be expected during a 30-year service life. Explicitly state all assumptions that uniquely relate to the subject technology, and justify any that may not be self-evident to a prospective user in the field.]]]

Projected return on investment (ROI)

[[[The following text can be used as an introduction here:]]] A 7% discount rate is used for the ROI calculation, consistent with CPC program guidance (OMB Circular A-94). The projected ROI is #.## over 30 years. The calculation is based on a required CPC project investment of $###,###. A summary of the analysis is shown in Table 1.

[[[A sample of the ROI table is shown below, with placeholder values from a previous report. The ROI table should look like the one below; it is generated from a standard ERDC-CERL CPC spreadsheet. Get a copy of the spreadsheet from the CPC Program Manger.]]]

Table 1. ROI analysis.

[[[Supplemental explanation may be needed to interpret ROI figures that are unusually low or high. It also may be worthwhile to explain how future developments could affect the ROI, such as changes in utility rates, reduced technology procurement costs, etc. It is also reasonable to note here that the ROI for applying the demonstrated technology may be higher since field implementation will not incur CPC project-management costs.]]]

Conclusions and Recommendations

Conclusions

[[[Briefly summarize the demonstration results (section 3.2) and interpret the results so the reader clearly understands the implications of technology performance and costs. See separate ERDC-CERL Content Requirements document for more.]]]

Recommendations

Applicability

[[[Recommend whether DoD and the Army should adopt the demonstrated technology, and for what types of applications. See separate ERDC-CERL Content Requirements document for more.]]]

Implementation

[[[State which DoD engineering criteria documents should be revised to promote implementation of the demonstrated technology. Provide full cites for all relevant UFGSs, UFCs, and others. Provide draft language for revising these documents to incorporate the demonstrated technology. See separate ERDC-CERL Content Requirements document for more.]]]

References

[[[Every CPC report must include a list of references, presented alphabetically by author. These will include applicable regulations, laws, standards, and other documented metrics for determining the effectiveness and costs of the demonstrated technology. The first reference shown below relates to the Economic Summary, and it is included in all CPC technical reports. The highlighted examples below it show model examples for an ASTM standard, an ERDC technical report, an article from an online publication, a NACE standard, a U.S. patent, a book, and a journal article. They are edited in the ERDC-standard format, which is based on The Chicago Manual of Style (16th Edition). Use them as format models for CPC references, and make your references as correct and complete as possible.]]]

Office of Management and Budget (OMB). 1994. Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal Programs. OMB Circular No. A-94. Washington, DC: Office of Management and Budget.

ASTM International. 2008 Standard Test Method for Evaluation of Painted or Coated Specimens Subjected to Corrosive Environments. D1654-08. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International.

Bailey, D.M. August 2003. MicroROOFER for Windows User Guide Version 2.0. ERDC/CERL SR-03-8. Champaign, IL: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (ERDC-CERL).

Deign, Jason. 3 January 2012. "Make or break time for CIGS." PV Insider, http://news.pv-insider.com/thin-film-pv/make-or-break-time-cigs, accessed 4 April 2013.

NACE International. 2001. External Cathodic Protection of On-Grade Carbon Steel Storage Tank Bottoms. RP0193-2001. Houston, TX: NACE International.

Pitts Jr., M. Michael. Electrostatic Device for Water Treatment. U.S. Patent 5,591,317, filed 16 February 1994, and issued 7 January 1997.

Speyer, R.F. 1994. Thermal Analysis of Materials. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.

Vand, V. 1948. “Viscosity of Solutions and Suspensions: Experimental Determination of the Viscosity-Concentration Function of Spherical Suspensions.” Journal of Physical Colloid Chemistry 52: 300–321.

Appendix A: What to Put in Appendices

[[[Use only as many appendices as necessary. Designate each one with a letter of the alphabet, beginning with A.]]]

[[[Do not include the PMP, the Safety Plan, or any other documents that do not directly pertain to how the demonstrated technology works or performance information.]]]

[[[Common examples include excerpts from literature on the demonstrated technology, Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for coatings or other materials used in field implementation, remote-monitoring data (tables or plots), large sets of photographic documentation of exposure coupons, large photo sets documenting chronological installation procedures, etc.]]]