Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 22
--> contains discussions on areas of this type, i.e., vitrification, incineration, supercritical waste oxidation, and disposal technologies. This report covers the topics in varying degrees of detail but generally cites the reasons for the generic interest in each of the cross-cutting technologies. Some preliminary perspective on the status of technology development and on technological challenges requiring further effort is also included. As with the focus-area reviews, additional information will be collected and assessed in 1996. Recommendations to the cross-cutting areas are discussed below. Recommendations: Cross-Cutting Areas In planning the research and development needed to support a specific remediation project (e.g., the Hanford tanks), the technology-development activities must be structured to produce an integrated system to deal with all aspects of the project: characterization, retrieval, treatment, stabilization, and disposal. For example, the processes developed for separation of the various waste components during the treatment phase must be compatible with one another as well as with the stabilization technology and with the minimization of cost and risk in disposal and storage. Similarly, the stabilization processes must be designed to consider not only the nature of the treated waste but also the disposal conditions and the duration of the storage period. The DOE EM-50 robotics-development program has a broad range of ongoing projects with planned technology demonstrations and assessments. Documentation and presentations to date show that these projects have not been prioritized and funded according to DOE-EM needs, nor that there has been the required "buy-in" by other DOE organizations (EM-30, EM-40, etc.) for this work. DOE should carefully assess the robotics technology needs of all DOE-EM organizations, then plan, schedule, and budget for robotics demonstrations and assessments on a needs-driven basis. References National Research Council. 1995. Committee on Environmental Management Technologies Report for the Period Ending December 31, 1994. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE). 1994a. Merit Review with Peer Evaluation for EM Integrated Technology Development. Pre-Decisional Draft. 1994. U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE). 1994b. Environmental Management Program Strategic Plan. Draft. 1994.
Representative terms from entire chapter: