Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Nuclear Waste Management”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 937 records · Page 52
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2017

From Dealing with Legacy Waste to Avoiding It - 17432

When dealing with radioactive waste management and its regulation, there are various national approaches. At the same time there is a growing tendency towards consideration of fundamental principles and standards thus forming the underlying basics in detailing the customized regulatory framework for specific applications. Dealing with legacy waste poses some particular problems as at the time of its production current safety principles were sometimes not well established. Considering today's standards this frequently requires remedial actions. Usually, this involves considerable effort and cost as well as radiation exposure for the involved personnel. Resolving legacy waste related problems not only benefits from an established regulatory framework but allows conclusions on how deal with legacy waste problems in general. The most important lessons learned from such operations might be how to prevent the production of legacy waste in the first place, thus avoiding further problems. By reflecting on practical applications from a number of countries the presentation is set to carve out the crucial recommendations from internationally recognized standards that give a substantial dividend in terms of not only time and budget but most of all safety and radiation exposure when properly implemented. The scope of the examples given ranges from dealing with legacy waste to avoiding it and includes recommendations towards essential features of best practice as seen from the perspective of an independent expert organization. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2017

Overview of the Carnegie Mellon University Robotics Institute DOE Trainee-ship in Environmental Management - 17493

The Robotics Institute of Carnegie Mellon University (CMU), through support from the Department of Energy (DOE), is offering an Environmental Management (EM) Trainee-ship program that is shaped by the inherent challenges in EM-related missions and seeks to cultivate the technical foundation and practical skills required to address these challenges. The trainee-ship program includes multiple new fellows per year of support (MS and/or PhD students) and builds on the existing core robotics curricula while introducing specialized topics that ensure a thorough understanding of EM-relevant concerns. The trainee-ship incorporates supervised research opportunities with CMU faculty advisors and through collaborations with DOE national labs (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and Savannah River National Laboratory). These research opportunities aim to produce specialists who have the skills required to envision, develop, and deploy autonomous and semi-autonomous systems that directly address DOE-EM needs. Specifically, the Robotics Institute identifies two specializations in addition to the three core areas that students must master in order to develop these kinds of systems: (1) a theory perspective of how to develop autonomous systems for applications in constrained environments, and (2) a practicum that challenges students to build systems that can operate in constrained EM-relevant environments. The DOE Trainee-ship in Robotics is formulated to provide a course of study that balances theory and practice with opportunities for field evaluation in collaboration with domain partners toward addressing relevant DOE-EM challenges through robotics. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2017

Radioactive Waste Management in a Treatability and Optimisation Perspective - 17527

In order to meet recycling criteria or to fulfil Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) for disposal there are many different management concepts for radioactive waste that can be applied. Which concept or set of concepts to use to optimize waste management depends on several factors, among them, the regulatory framework for recycling, the availability of a disposal facility and the acceptance criteria for disposal. The required pre-treatment and other pre-disposal activities should be carefully analyzed for each of the disposal options, as they are significant contributors to the total cost for managing the waste. Waste Acceptance Criteria are living documents that should be updated when regulatory framework changes as well as when new treatment methods and new packaging and barrier systems develop. Each waste treatment facility, has its own specific limitations and therefore its own WAC/CFA (conditions for acceptance), which depends both on the plant design and national legislation. Many waste owners, countries or licensees, have their preferred, and in some cases well established, waste routes for certain waste streams. In some countries, the full chain from waste treatment through to disposal of radioactive waste is in place, whilst other countries still are in the process of establishing their repository program. The worst case scenario for any licensee or waste owner is waste which is not possible to qualify for disposal. This can be due to poor or degraded waste containers, unspecified content in waste packages, or wastes that are not suitable for disposal in their current form. Such deficiencies result in expensive actions related to waste retrieval, new characterisation and/or costly investigations. The EDF Group has a fleet of waste treatment facilities and has, for decades, provided waste treatment services to domestic and international customers. This paper will discuss important waste owner considerations and EDF experiences related to the optimization of the waste management process. This will be from both a treatment and an end-state perspective. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2017

Statistical Tools and Lines of Evidence Used to Differentiate FUSRAP/Non-FURAP Related Material at an Inactive Landfill - 17553

The Middlesex Municipal Landfill (MML) Site is a former municipal landfill in Middlesex, New Jersey that operated between approximately 1940 and 1974; it is currently part of FUSRAP. Because of the lack of waste management regulations at the time, unregulated disposal of municipal and industrial waste occurred, including the acceptance of radioactively contaminated soils from the Middlesex Sampling Plant (MSP) that were used as cover material on the northwest side of the landfill. The radioactive MSP contaminated soils are described as 'FUSRAP-related materials.' In some areas of the landfill, FUSRAP-related material exists comingled with other non-FUSRAP radioactive waste (such as an antique radio-luminescent marker and concrete construction material with elevated gamma readings). However, in other areas of the landfill (specifically the street's right-of-way, called Pershing Avenue, which borders the landfill), non-FUSRAP material is isolated. Several lines of evidence and statistical tools were used to differentiate FUSRAP-related materials from non-FUSRAP-related material, including Z-Score analysis, Tukey-Kramer Honestly Significant Difference test, box-and-whisker plots, Wilcoxon Signed Rank test, and Principal Component Analysis. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2017

Value of Integrated Risk and Issue Management - 17589

Risk management is a tool that has been used by project managers for several decades to help manage scope, cost, and schedule baselines and to improve the likelihood of project success. More recently, the risk management process has been applied to the management of companies and corporations under the designation of Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) where it is used to help ensure success in meeting strategic objectives. All of this focus on risk (related to events or conditions that may occur) is normally done without considering how issues (related to events or conditions that will or has occurred) may impact the allocation of resources required to address risks, and perhaps more importantly, how resources required to support normal work scope may be impacted. This paper suggests the use of an integrated risk and issue management process, where risks and issues are managed concurrently using similar but separate and distinct processes. The benefit of using an integrated process is the organization and centralization of data related to risks and issues that becomes available for decision makers to use in prioritizing and allocating limited resources between performing normal work, addressing risks, or resolving issues. Applying integrated risk and issue management to any activity will lead to better decisions, whether the activity is personal, project, program, or enterprise. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2015

Strategic considerations for developing future underground research facilities - 15114

The suite of existing underground research facilities (URFs) and their various operational histories and contexts provides useful insights to consider when deciding a particular URF location and approach (generic or site-specific) for new disposal facility research programmes. Even the smallest URF represents a large capital investment and a significant ongoing operational mortgage when recognizing the typically decades-long site characterization and data collection thought necessary to support a defensible safety case or safety assessment. Thus making such investments should be approached with an understanding of the short- and long-term implications for such factors as cost, location, data quality, public acceptance, operational risk, opportunity for design optimization, etc. and with an understanding of the potential risk management issues to help ensure the URF programme achieves the intended objectives. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2016

Update on implementing geological disposal in the UK - 16266

For more than 60 years, Britain has been accumulating radioactive waste which is currently stored safely at over 20 sites around the country. Radioactive Waste Management (RWM) is responsible for making this waste even safer by disposing of it securely for the long term in a GDF. This paper provides an update on the implementation of the process for siting a Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) in the United Kingdom (UK) and the role of RWM as the developer in its implementation. The UK Government favours an approach for selecting a GDF site that is based on working in partnership with communities. In early 2013 when there were no longer any communities participating in the site selection process, the UK Government embarked upon a review to consider what lessons could be learned. Informed by this review the UK Government published in July 2014 a renewed approach to implementing geological disposal based on working with interested communities. The first two years of the programme comprises of initial actions overseen by Government recognising the need to provide additional information before the siting process is formally launched in 2017. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Panel Session 88: US DOE EM Tier 1 Procurement Activities and Strategy Update

This Panel was open to all WM participants, including exhibitors and was held in the Panel Zone of the Exhibit Hall attended by over 70 participants. The panel was complimentary to Session 73 - DOE EM End State Contracting. This panel placed focus on DOE EM and NNSA procurement activities including procurement strategies and planned activities for Tier 1 contracts. DOE federal and procurement officials provided the participants with DOE rationale and insights for recent and upcoming procurement strategy changes. Representatives for the Energy Community Alliance and the Energy, Technology and Environmental Business Association provided perspective on the DoE's procurement process improvements. Presentations proposed include: 1 - DOE-EM Tier 1 Procurement Activities and Strategy Update (Tamara Miles, US DOE (USA)); 2 - ECA - SRSCRO Perspective on US DOE Tier 1 Procurement Activities and Strategy Update (Rick McLeod, Savannah River Site Community Reuse Organization - SRSCRO (USA)); 3 - Tier 1 Procurement Activities (Greg Gonzales, US DOE NNSA (USA))

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 79: Challenges and Lessons Learned in Radwaste Packaging, Transportation, Compliance, and Receipt

This panel focused on challenges and lessons learned in radioactive waste packaging, transportation, compliance, and receipt for fabricators of radioactive waste packaging. World-wide companies are urged to participate. Participants provided their perspectives and suggestions on how to increase efficiencies through eliminating inconsistencies between specifications and other requirements to provide products at a reasonable cost and enhance communication to enable better service. Panelists with presentations: PACTEC (Bill Smart); Waste Packaging Strategy and Challenges at Whiteshell (Miles Smith); Challenges and Lessons Learned in Radwaste Packaging, Transportation, Compliance and Receipt (Dan Payne)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗