Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Wrapp, John

Publications and source records attributed to Wrapp, John.

Panel Session 120: Roundtable: Waste Management - Energy Facilities Contractor Operating Group (EFCOG WM)

This Roundtable focused on the WM EFCOG working group as they met to discuss a variety of issues of importance to US DOE waste management operations. The purpose of the WM EFCOG is to seek out and promote the best management and operating practices, cost effective technologies and disposal options for all waste streams generated at US DOE facilities whether destined for US DOE or commercial facilities. Each site representative provided a radioactive waste management lessons learned briefing. Panelists with presentations: Savannah River Site (SRS) Solid Waste Program Update (Kerri Crawford); Idaho Clean-up Project Status (Frederick Hughes); West Valley Demonstration Project Update - EFCOG Waste Management Working Group (John Rendall); Key Project Challenges and Successes (Kalli Shupe); EFCOG WMWG Challenging Waste Subgroup Update (Tammy Monday); CH TRU Difficult Waste Stream Processing Challenges (Daniel Pancake); Argonne Building 350 Clean-up Success Using Effective Work Control (Daniel Dilday); Problematic Waste Streams on the Oak Ridge Reservation (John Wrapp)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Session 097B - Panel: Pathway to End State at the East Tennessee Technology Park in Oak Ridge, TN (2/4) (R1.16b)

This panel was to focus on the 'Pathway to End State at the East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP)'. It was to discuss the DoE's long-term vision for the ETTP site and the process for converting the site into a multi-use industrial park, historic preservation and national park, and conservation area. The Panelists were to discuss the challenges in executing a cleanup project of this magnitude, the waste management, and the monitoring efforts that supported the achievement of the Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management (OREM) Vision 2020. This session integrated with panel sessions 97A, 97C, and 97D. Panelists with presentations: Beginning with the End in Mind (Kevin Ironside); Project Execution (Daniel Macias); Waste Management (John Wrapp); Environmental Remediation (Samantha Pack); Waste Management (Josh Pemberton); DOE's Long-Range Vision (Laura Wilkerson)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Retrieval of Transuranic Drums with Deflagration to Detonation Potential from a Vault at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory - 20207

During the final phase of a long-term project, a total of 80 TRU waste drums at ORNL have been retrieved from a below-grade storage vault in which they have remained untouched for about 25 years. The drums, which house material generated from past ORNL operations, are now stored and ready for eventual transfer to the Transuranic Waste Processing Center, located on Highway 95 in Oak Ridge. The Transuranic Waste Processing Center will process and ship the drums to WIPP in Carlsbad, New Mexico, for disposal. Workers lifted the drums one-by-one from the underground storage vault with a 110-ton crane over a one-week period in October 2017. Although the physical work was performed in one week, years of detailed planning preceded the fieldwork. A key obstacle needed to be overcome before the project could safely proceed. This obstacle involved the need to ensure controls were developed for the Deflagration to Detonation Transition (DDT) potential. DDT refers to a phenomenon in ignitable mixtures of a flammable gas and air (or oxygen) when a sudden transition takes place from a deflagration type of combustion to a detonation type of explosion. Basically, these drums, under certain circumstances, have a potential to detonate and overpressurize. Extensive analysis of the drums verified that detonation, while unlikely, was possible. Of the total 103 drums that were retrieved or moved in preparation for retrieval, 18 had DDT potential. Extensive security requirements were also necessary, due to the nature of the material, and this added another layer of complexity to the fieldwork. Prior to retrieving the drums from the underground storage vault, space needed to be made for them within the various above-grade facilities. Inventory and security requirements dictated what could be stored where, and the first step of the field work involved a number of drum movements in preparation for storage of the newly retrieved drums. This effort involved moving 21 drums already in the storage area to facilitate the addition of the newly retrieved ones. The retrieval project required a total of 107 critical lifts using the 110-ton crane, under 3 critical lift plans. The TRU waste storage facility is a Category 2 Nuclear Facility and is managed under an extensive Documented Safety Analysis. The TRU retrieval project was conducted in accordance with DOE Order 425.1D and included three Implementation Verification Reviews, two Management Assessments, one Readiness Assessment, and seven mock-ups in preparation for the field work. Despite being stored for 25 years, the drums were in good shape due to the integrity of the facilities where the drums were stored. Of the 80 drums that were retrieved, 12 were placed in special containers called 'overpacks' based on their content. The drums were removed safely and without incident, thanks to a lot of preparation and the efforts of a highly skilled team. Lessons learned through the DDT control development and the drum retrieval and overpacking process could be beneficial to others having to manage similar drums of TRU waste. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Panel Session 90: US DOE Mixed Waste: Proposals for Dealing with Problematic Waste Streams and Policy Changes

This panel focused on generation and management of low level and mixed low-level radioactive wastes, challenges for disposition, innovative solutions applied at DOE sites, and collaboration among sites to ensure that waste disposition pathways are understood. In addition, potential policy initiatives were discussed including depleted uranium, elemental mercury, and treatment of legacy mixed waste components. As part of the introduction, Theresa Kliczewski provided an overview of why this panel is relevant: problematic mixed waste streams still exist across the DOE cleanup complex. Theresa noted that the DOE EM Headquarters Office of Waste and Materials Management (EM-4.2), for which she is employed with, continues to work with the DOE cleanup sites on a path forward for these problematic mixed waste streams. As part of this effort, EM-4.2 requested that the Energy Facility Contractors Group (EFCOG) perform a review of all the DOE sites problematic mixed waste streams. Panelists with presentations: Challenging Waste Streams: Disposition of Depleted Uranium Oxide Conversion Product (Douglas Tonkay); EFCOG WMWG Challenging Waste Subgroup (Tammy Monday); Mercury Waste Challenges (John Wrapp); Legacy Large Mixed Waste Components (Kalli Shupe)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗