Environmental Management Technology-Development Program at the Department of Energy 1995 Review (1996) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGH-LEVEL WASTE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGH-LEVEL WASTE
Pages 49-58
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 49... ...
The approach was to comment on the technology issues and needs relative to the current approaches berg taken for remediabon of the tank wastes by DOE and its contractors. Prior to discussing technology needs, a limited amount of background infonnabon is provided based principally onRad~oacfive Tank Waste Remediation Focus Area (USDOE, l99Sa)
|
From page 50... ...
The report focuses on the identification of those technology needs that appear to be pertinent, generally, to the five sites currently holding such waste. These sites' i.e., Hanford, Sarah River, West Valley, Oak Ridge, and the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant (ICPP)
|
From page 51... ...
. It is the subcommittee's intention to emphasize what Me scenario evaluations indicate as the overarching needs and issues that directly affect many components of technology development and indirectly affect all aspects of tank waste remediation.
|
From page 52... ...
Prioritizing a scenario at this early stage will most likely be done against a much smaller set of performance measures such as safety and regulatory acceptability. Common Technology Needs Evaluation of the presentations made and DOE documents led to the conclusion Hat Here are significant common technology~evelopment needs related to He management of highAevelwaste inks.
|
From page 53... ...
However, removal of multiphase waste from tanks in various states of disrepair will be an activity at all sites. While both Savannah River and West Valley apparently have produced satisfactory waste removal systems, such is not He case for Hanford and Oak Ridge.
|
From page 54... ...
However, it is clearly within DOE's authority and ability to examine the history and Rends in end points (i.e., wast~cceptance criteria) and establish moderately conservative interim end points that will provide a consistent focus for technology development.
|
From page 55... ...
the subcommittee will focus on them as areas to be evaluated as it obtains data from DOE tank sites, and (b) DOOM should consider explicitly addressing them to provide He necessary framework for technology development.
|
From page 56... ...
This indicates the need to integrate technology~evelopment efforts through mechanisms such as focus area and cross-cutting programs, although the subcommittee has not yet had the opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness of the existing focus area Recommendation: An integrated technology~evelopment program such as a foals area continues to be desirable to cost eife~vely develop technologies and share the results to the extent they are mutually applicable. Conclusion: An effective technology~evelopment program requires definition of key boundary conditions and the ability to establish how much technology development is required.
|
From page 57... ...
DOE Ofice of Environmental Management Technology Development DOE/EM~255.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.