Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
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 17
--> Recommendations 1) The TWRS program should (a) develop a comprehensive systems engineering plan so that the performance requirements for the remediation of tank contents, tanks, and surrounding soils are fully integrated; (b) generate a complete system description that includes waste streams, containment and processing options, and the ultimate disposal of residual wastes in a manner consistent with an optimized site-wide plan; and (c) clearly articulate alternatives for meeting the integrated performance requirements of the entire system and delineate the logic for the baseline alternative as it relates to the complete system description. In other words, the TWRS program should focus on completing the technical baseline documentation (requirements, architectures, and supporting documents) in a manner that clearly articulates a complete TWRS program (tank contents, tanks, and soils). 2) An analysis equivalent to the Tank Waste Remediation System Mission Analysis should be performed and documented for the Hanford site-wide program. The analysis should include the last two elements of the previous recommendation; specifically, generate a complete system description that includes waste streams, containment options, and ultimate dispositioning; and clearly articulate alternatives for meeting the integrated performance requirements of the entire site. A description of the overall site environmental management system and the key interfaces between individual remediation projects should be generated. 3) The Hanford site-wide systems engineering effort should simplify its documentation requirements with an objective of providing a clear description of an integrated site-wide remediation/waste management program. The description should include integrated performance requirements and their relationship to individual site projects. The emphasis in documentation requirements should be on producing only those that are necessary for successful implementation of the programs and projects they support. 4) An iterative evaluation of system alternatives is an important and explicit part of the system engineering process. DOE should continue to evaluate alternative system solutions even if a single baseline option is specified in existing agreements such as the TPA. This represents an acknowledgment of the need to continue searching for improved solutions and to develop contingencies for options with large technical and institutional uncertainties. One way this goal could be accomplished is by assembling a small group of top-level analysts at the program management level to identify and assess options continually at the appropriate level of detail and without being bound by regulatory constraints and programmatic preconceptions. 5) DOE must continue to work to involve program management more strongly in its technical systems engineering effort. An example of a situation in which continued management involvement is needed is the determination of whether the constraints imposed by compliance agreements should be accepted as "givens" for the purposes of systems analysis. Top-level managers responsible for systems engineering must communicate across programs and projects on a regular basis.