Technical Interchange Meeting

1. Technical Interchange Meeting MALS-36 Notes and Action Items (1/3) Not Intended for General Presentation. Prepared by: SSgt Napolitano

2. Structure of this Presentation • Action Chits from MALS-36 • Action Chits will be listed in sequence as released by the program office sequence and annotated utilizing their sequencing system. • Each Action Chit (AC) will have the related notes and documents related to that topic included in the following slides. • Some information included in this presentation are identical to the presentation materials utilized by the Program Office CC brief given by Gunnery Sergeant Gipson. The source material he used, with permission, was material created here at MALS-36 by SSgt Napolitano. • The LIR Action Chit breakdown has been placed into its own presentation due to file size and complexity of the justification. • The Conditional Inspection information is broken out into its own presentation and includes the CRSP/CARC information. • A brief snapshot from www.6499.info is included following the remainder of the points. This site is native to MALS-36.

3. 1st MAW-9 (Welding Qual) PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 60C is dispositioning MFs to structural corrosion failure in the structural members (i.e. corner posts, z members etc...) According to the publication, 19-25-177 and MIL-HDBK-138-B, the MALS should be able to fix this problems at the MALS level. RECOMMENDATION: We should expand our welding school requirements to include the structural welding qual not just the Oxy/Ace SMAW for aircraft purposes. If 60C perform the maintenance IRT the publication, 60C would be able to save "CSC Failure Repairable MFs" at the MALS level saving the MF Program money. MMF PROGRAM RESOLUTION: • This is a training issue and should be addressed by TECOM. • MMF Program Managers thoughts: • Continue to use assist MAFs in support of welding requirements • Ramp up corrosion prevention and corrosion control efforts and oversight • Identify the mechanism through which we damage corner posts and Z-Members to a point where they require welding to repair and eliminate that mechanism. ACTION REQUIRED: • Address desired training/school with TECOM. • Aggressively seek to improve local sense of urgency with regard to corrosion control and prevention as well as careful handling of MMFs with forklifts and other heavy equipment. SSGT NAP NOTES: • Seek support and assistance from the Program Office in identifying Solid Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) and advanced welding school as following career schools for the 6499 MOS. • Internally to MALS, Identify potential needs for Tungsten Inert Gas (TIG) and Metal Inert Gas (MIG) welding qualifications.

4. 1st MAW-10 (ECU Anchors) PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: • As of right now, 60C do not have ability to replace the ECU anchors on the MFs. Simply, the Work Center cannot order the anchors needed to perform the maintenance action. RECOMMENDATION: • One solution, getting contract made with a distributor if there are any out there to make these anchors and have them available for purchase. MMF PROGRAM RESOLUTION: • This P/N will be updated to: • Part Number: HM-37516-50 • NSN: 5325005816769 • We are also going to add the Keensert as a suitable substitute. ACTION REQUIRED: • In the future, address issues like this via TPDR. Don't wait for an MMF Program TIM. SSGT NAP NOTES: • Straight forward issue that seems resolved. MFPO could initiate pub changes and notify fleet when these issues are resolved.

5. 1st MAW-11 (CSC Reinspections) PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: • The order need to have a more rigid set of guidelines when it comes to CSC inspections. There is a lot that is left to individual interpretation and this is where we get the disparity between what one inspector might consider a failure and another does not. RECOMMENDATION: • Setting guidelines and tolerances to what is within manufacture specifications and then adhering to set specifications. MMF PROGRAM RESOLUTION: • Guidelines are provided in MIL-HDBK-138B along with what determines a major (CSC Failure) or a minor failure. ACTION REQUIRED: • No action required by MFP. • OJT recommended. SSGT NAP NOTES: • Supporting documents in the following slides hopefully address concerns, potential questions, and include examples from the MIL-HDBK-138B to outline specific areas of contention. • Primary concern is that MMFs are not disposable, limited use ISO containers. A new ISO container can cost between $3,000 to $5,000 compared to a new MMF that can run ~$123,000. • Guidelines to the inspection and maintenance of such containers should be appropriate to the investment placed in such assets. Perspective: your $5k Okinawa beater versus a >$100,000 POV state-side would get the same repair, inspection, and care?

6. 1st MAW-11 (CSC Reinspections)Excerpts from MIL-HDBK-138B • Determinant for Inspection for a Shelter • 4.4.8 Shelter. An ISO container which provides live-in or work-in capability. A shelter is inspected with the same criteria as a general cargo container. • Corner Fitting Inspection (ISO Corner) • This is the primary criteria for inspection specific to an ISO Corner. • 5.2.5 Corner Fittings. Refer to Figure 5.2.5. (IMDG or non IMDG) Corner fittings must not be distorted or cracked and must not have any worn, broken or gouged apertures that would prevent engagement or safe use of transport securement devices or container lifting devices. No repairs may be performed on a corner fitting. • Here is the secondary, generic criteria applied to all ‘primary structural members’ including ISO corners. • a. General Cargo Container (non IMDG). If the container is to be used for shipping general cargo or is a shelter, a major defect includes: • 1) A crack, break, cut, tear, puncture, or corrosive failure in any primary structural component; • 2) A missing, cracked, or broken weld at the juncture between any primary structural components; • 3) A loose or missing fastener at the juncture between any primary structural components; • 4) Any deformation such as a dent, bend or bow in any primary structural component that is in excess of ISO external dimensional tolerances as depicted in Figure 5.1; • 5) An improper splice (e.g. less than 6 inches long) in any primary structural component; • 6) Any damage to or degradation within a structural component which could place any person in danger during subsequent handling, stacking, or transport of the intermodal container. • Figure 5.1 included on next slide for reference. It refers to the dimensions of the ISO container not specifics for the structural members. This is sufficient for disposable containers, not MFs.

7. These dimensional limitations are given for the proper mating and conformity of an ISO container for shipment and engagement purposes. It does not define sufficient tolerances for the corner fittings themselves. However, ISO Corners do have specifications they must adhere to at production. Our recommendation it to conform to this standard since it provides a uniform, pre-engineered standard which will allow the MALS to identify MFs approaching these limits due to corrosion and properly triage them appropriately. Rather than the current ‘swag’ outlined by the 138B. The specifications of an ISO corner and MFs are attached in the following slides and provide the basis for a uniform inspection criteria. All MFs utilize ISO 1161 corner fittings.

8. ISO 1161 Corner Fitting Spec.

9. Example MMF Specifications (Gichner)

10. 1st MAW-12 (Tectyl 2423) PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: • When MALS-36 receives a new MF shipped from the configuration site, the MF arrives with surface corrosion found on all ISO corners and in the fork lift pocket area of the side rail, and any other metal area that contact is made against the paint during the shipping and handling process. MALS-36 60C generally expends approximately 40 hours on average to perform proper corrosion treatment on a new MF. The corrosion treatment process consists of corrosion removal, application of rust stop, polyurethane primer, and white topcoat paint to return the MF back to a like new condition. There is also an issue with the Tectyl 121B undercoating on new MF's arriving in a cracked and brittle state, which does not provide the intended adequate protection. MALS-36 60C is required to recoat these areas during the corrosion treatment process. With limited hazmat quantities as a frequent issue, MALS-36 60C worked to find a better solution to reducing the expenditures of hazmat and man hours required for corrosion treatment of MF's. Typically in Okinawa, the corrosion treatment process performed on an MF will only last about 3 months before signs of corrosion. RECOMMENDATION: • Recommend configuration sites treat all new MF metal structural members with the Tectyl coating (undercarriage, all ISO corners inside/outside, corner posts, gussets, side rails). Last year, MALS-36 60C previously reworked an FS-01 with the proper corrosion treatment process, then applied Tectyl 2423 as the final topcoat. This MF has gone over 12 months with no sign of corrosion evident. MALS-36 60C recently performed a complete rework process on a CA-09 MF transferred to MALS-24. The required paint applications were used, with Tectyl 2423 applied to all metal structural members as the final coating. Although damaged in shipment, this MF spent 2 months at sea and was handled multiple times at three different ports along the way and showed no signs of corrosion upon arrival at MALS-24. These two MF examples provide sufficient justification on the benefits of using the Tectyl coating on all MF metal structural members. This benefits the configuration sites with helping to ensure new MF's arrive in the best possible condition with no corrosion, and benefits the fleet unit by not expending a large amount of man hours and hazmat performing corrosion treatment on a new MF before issuing to the organizational user. **Note** Tectyl 2423 is stocked and used by JEMMS and MARFORSYSCOM CARC treatment facilities CONUS/OCONUS on all tactical equipment. This is the Tectyl version is readily available to order for MALS-36, and has also been found to be an excellent corrosion preventative compound for use here in Okinawa. This Tectyl product remains flexible, does not get brittle and crack, and is durable under all weather conditions, to include typhoon conditions.

11. 1st MAW-12 (Tectyl 2423) MMF PROGRAM RESOLUTION: • All MFCs should understand that corrosion treatment will be required on all new MMF deliveries. ISO corners and forklift pockets are going to get scratched up when MMFs are lifted and moved. Part of new MMF acceptance should include a thorough treatment of any paint damage incurred during shipment. • Cracked and brittle undercoating has been observed by the MMF Program on MMFs returned from fleet activities, but in very limited quantities and usually on MMFs 15 years of age and older. We have inspected several fleet returned MMFs and do not see the trend GySgt Gipson is referring to. • While Tectyl 2423 may be stocked locally aboard MCAS Okinawa, it is not stocked at every MALS nor does it have an NSN. If fleet activities desire to use Tectyl 2423 they are authorized. ACTION REQUIRED: • None. SSGT NAP NOTES: • Photographic evidence of this issue has been provided to the Program Office and is in the possession of Gunnery Sergeant Gipson. This is occurring on LDS and JCM series serial numbers within 90 days of receipt. Not 15yr old MFs. • Procurement information provided via MSDS in the following documentation slides. • A minimalistic perspective by the program office does not mirror the expectation of service life of MFs. The correlation between a $5k Okinawa beater and >$100k sports car applies once again. The minimum should not be something we apply to assets with this type of price tag and cannot afford to replace. • An MF has an active service life of 15 years (20 years inactive). MFs are not replaced after 15 years because funding for such support is well beyond the program’s budget. The true service life for most MFs extends well past the 20 year mark.

12. Tectyl 2423 MSDS