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 10
ELECTROMETALLURGICAL TECHNIQUES FOR DOE SPENT FUEL TREATMENT: STATUS REPORT ON ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY'S R&D ACTIVITY THROUGH SPRING 1997 between the two ANL sites. The committee is pleased to note that increased organizational structure is being brought to the project, and it believes a more focused, well-coordinated demonstration will result. Clarification of responsibilities at ANL-E and ANL-W is being achieved by increased use of the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) process (ANL, 1997). It could be helpful to augment the WBS process with a less detailed project implementation plan that addresses in particular the sequence in which tasks are performed at the two sites and their interactions and interdependencies. In this way, significant task overlaps and inefficiencies may be more readily noted and avoided. The committee looks forward to receiving the demonstration project implementation plan after it is approved by DOE. The plan should be easy to understand, allowing for analysis of the efficacy of the new organizational structure and the general manner in which ANL-E and ANL-W programs are being conducted in support of integration and coordination. Adequacy of the Criteria for Evaluating the Demonstration The May 15, 1996, Environmental Assessment (EA) (DOE, 1996) stipulated the amount of fuel that can be processed and defined a treatment technology that does not separate plutonium. The impact of the EA was to limit the processing operations to 100 driver assemblies and 25 blanket assemblies and to render the criteria established in 1995 inadequate (NRC, 1995b). In March 1997 the committee recommended, “A well-defined set of performance criteria needs to be developed [in light of the modified scope as defined by the EA]. . . . The achievement of those objectives would better position ANL to request approval to proceed to additional applications of its electrometallurgical technology program” (NRC, 1997a, pp. 1-2). In light of the EA, ANL has redefined its criteria for evaluating the success of the EBR-II demonstration to be concluded in 1999. The proposed criteria presented by ANL5 are as follows: Demonstration that the 100 driver and 25 blanket EBR-II assemblies can be treated in FCF within three years, with a throughput rate of 16 kg/month for driver assemblies sustained for a minimum of 3 months and a blanket throughput rate of 150 kg for one month. Quantification (for both composition and mass) of recycle, waste, and product streams that demonstrate projected material balance with no significant deviations. Demonstration of overall dependable and predictable process, considering uptime, repair and maintenance, and operating of linked process steps. 5 Presented by R. W. Benedict, Argonne National Laboratory, on May 15, 1997, Argonne, Ill.
Representative terms from entire chapter: