National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Appendix C: Committee and Staff Biographies
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Presentations and Site Visits." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Independent Assessment of Science and Technology for the Department of Energy's Defense Environmental Cleanup Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25338.
×

D

Presentations and Site Visits

December 5, 2017, Washington, DC, Presentations

  • Overview of Environmental Management Science and Technology Program. Rodrigo V. Rimando, Jr., Department of Energy–Office of Environmental Management.
  • Report of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board’s Task Force on Technology Development for Environmental Management. Richard A. Meserve, Covington & Burling LLP.
  • Comments from Congress on the Study Request. Drew Walter and Leonor Tomero, House Armed Services Committee.
  • Perspectives from the Government Accountability Office. David Trimble and Timothy Persons, Government Accountability Office.
  • Perspectives from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Science and Technology for the Department of Energy’s Defense Environmental Cleanup Program. Christine Ridge, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

January 29–31, 2018, Savannah River, South Carolina, Presentations and Site Visit

  • Savannah River Remediation Technology Deployment Initiatives and Needs. Kent Fortenberry, Vijay Jain, and David Dooley, Savannah River National Laboratory.
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Presentations and Site Visits." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Independent Assessment of Science and Technology for the Department of Energy's Defense Environmental Cleanup Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25338.
×
  • Incorporating Innovation into Soil and Groundwater Cleanup at the Savannah River Site. Brian Looney, Savannah River National Laboratory.
  • Innovative Technologies and Approaches for Excess Assets Nuclear Facility Deactivation and Decommissioning Operations. Mike Serrato, Savannah River National Laboratory.
  • Technology Impacts of NM Processing and Disposition. Bill Bates and Jimmy Winkler, Savannah River National Laboratory.
  • Specific Technology and Deployment Initiatives and Needs in SRS Nuclear Materials. Bill Bates and Jimmy Winkler, Savannah River National Laboratory.
  • SRNL’s Role in EM Mission Success. Jeff Griffin, Savannah River National Laboratory.
  • Technology Impacts to Liquid Waste Mission. David Dooley, Savannah River National Laboratory, and Kent Fortenberry, Savannah River Remediation.
  • Soil, Groundwater, and D&D Technology Implementation and Needs. Chris Bergen, Savannah River Nuclear Solutions.
  • Comments from the Environmental Protection Agency. Jon Richards, Environmental Protection Agency.
  • Perspectives from the Savannah River Site Citizens Advisory Board. Gil Allensworth, Savannah River Site Citizens Advisory Board.
  • Perspectives from the Citizens for Nuclear Technology Awareness. James Marra, Executive Director, Citizens for Nuclear Technology Awareness.
  • Perspectives from the Community Reuse Organization. Rick McLeod, Community Reuse Organization.
  • Perspectives from the SRS Heritage Foundation. Joseph Ortaldo and Walt Joseph, SRS Heritage Foundation.

April 23–25, 2018, Hanford, Washington, Presentations and Site Visit

  • Hanford Overview. Brian Vance and Jon Peschong, Office of River Protection.
  • Overview of Office of River Protection Mission Challenges, Opportunities, Highlights, and Recommendations. Elaine Diaz, Office of River Protection.
  • Office of River Protection Key Technology Development Priorities for FY18. Naomi Jaschke, Office of River Protection.
  • WRPS Technology Development Process and Initiatives. Jason Vitali, Washington River Protection Solutions.
  • Perspectives from Hanford Communities. Pam Larsen, Hanford Communities.
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Presentations and Site Visits." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Independent Assessment of Science and Technology for the Department of Energy's Defense Environmental Cleanup Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25338.
×
  • Perspectives from the Hanford Advisory Board. Susan Leckband, Hanford Advisory Board.
  • Perspectives from the Tri-Cities Development Economic Council. David Reeploeg, Tri-Cities Development Economic Council.
  • Perspectives from the Washington State Department of Ecology. Alex Smith, Washington State Department of Ecology.
  • Nez Perce Tribe’s Involvement with Cleanup at the Hanford Site. Jack Bell, Nez Perce Tribe Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Program.
  • Perspectives from Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation. Matt Johnson, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation.
  • Perspectives from Yakama Nation Fisheries. Dave Rowland, Yakama Nation Fisheries.

May 16–17, 2018, Idaho Falls, Idaho, Presentations and Site Visit

  • Idaho Department of Environmental Quality Communications Related to CERCLA Projects at the Idaho National Laboratory. Mark Clough, Idaho National Laboratory.
  • Integrated Waste Treatment Unit Approach to Resolve Issues and Prepare for Operations. Joe Giebel and Leo Thompson, Fluor Idaho.
  • Idaho Spent Fuel Overview. Ken Brewer, Fluor Idaho.
  • Calcine Retrieval Project Update. Howard Forsythe, Fluor Idaho.
  • Dry Storage of Aluminum-Clad Spent Nuclear Fuel. Michael Connolly, Idaho National Laboratory.
  • Behavior/Chemistry of Oxyhydroxide Layers During ASNF Dry Storage. Tedd Lister, Idaho National Laboratory.
  • Radiation Chemistry Inside Aluminum-Clad Spent Nuclear Fuel Dry Storage Canisters. Gregory Horne, Elizabeth Parker-Quaiffe, and Peter Zalupski, Idaho National Laboratory; and Chris Vest and Charles Crawford, Savannah River National Laboratory.
  • Multiphysics Modeling of Coupled Thermal Convective Transport of Radiolysis Generated Species Inside Sealed and Unsealed Canisters. Hai Huang and Alex Abbound, Idaho National Laboratory; Kellie Metzger and Tracy Rudisill, Savannah River National Laboratory.
  • Perspectives from the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality. Mark Clough, Idaho Department of Environmental Quality.
  • Chairs Round Robin EM SSAB Chairs Meeting. Keith Branter, Idaho Cleanup Project Citizens Advisory Board.
  • Perspectives from the Regional Economic Development Eastern Idaho. Dana Kirkham, Regional Economic Development Eastern Idaho.
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Presentations and Site Visits." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Independent Assessment of Science and Technology for the Department of Energy's Defense Environmental Cleanup Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25338.
×
  • Perspectives from Fort Hall Business Council, Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. Talia Martin, Fort Hall Business Council, Shoshone-Bannock Tribes.

August 8–9, 2018, Portsmouth, Ohio, Presentations and Site Visit

  • Technology Impacts. Marty Reibold, Fluor.
  • Future Needs and Potential Technologies. Marty Reibold and J. D. Chiou, Fluor.
  • Programmatic Path Forward. Marty Reibold and J. D. Chiou, Fluor.
  • Perspectives from Ohio EPA. Jim Sferra.
  • Perspectives from PORTS Environmental Management Site Specific Advisory Board. Julie Galloway, Portsmouth Site Advisory Board.
  • Perspectives from Southern Ohio Diversification Initiative. Kevin Shoemaker, Southern Ohio Diversification Initiative.

August 9–10, 2018, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Presentations and Site Visit

  • Technology Development and Challenges at Oak Ridge. Kent Fortenberry, UCOR.
  • Deactivation and Demolition (D&D) Processes and Future D&D Challenges Where Technologies Are Needed. John Wrapp, Oak Ridge Reservation.
  • ORR Waste Stream Challenges: Where Technologies Are Needed. John Wrapp, UCOR.
  • Overview of Mercury Contamination at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Site: History, Hydrogeochemical Setting, and Challenges. Scott Brooks, Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
  • The Use of Science and Technology to Address Mercury at Y-12. Janice Hensley, UCOR.
  • ORR Environmental Remediation Issues That Could Benefit from Technology Development. R. H. Ketelle, Environmental Management Operations, UCOR.
  • Integration of Science and EM. Eric Pierce, Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
  • Perspectives from the Tennessee Department of Environmental Conservation. Mike Higgins, Tennessee Department of Environmental Conservation.
  • Perspectives from the Oak Ridge Site Specific Advisory Board. Dennis Wilson, Oak Ridge Site Specific Advisory Board.
  • Perspectives from the Energy Technology and Environmental Business Association. Tim Griffin, Energy Technology and Environmental Business Association.
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Presentations and Site Visits." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Independent Assessment of Science and Technology for the Department of Energy's Defense Environmental Cleanup Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25338.
×
  • Perspectives from the Oak Ridge City Council. Ellen Smith, Oak Ridge City Council.

PRESENTATIONS VIA REMOTE CONFERENCING

March 14, 2018

  • Pathways from Scientific Advances to Technology Development Relevant to DOE-EM’s Cleanup Mission: Energy Frontier Research Centers. Andy Schwartz, Energy Frontier Research Centers, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Department of Energy.
  • Biological and Environmental Research. Sharlene Weatherwax, Biological and Environmental Research, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Department of Energy.

May 3, 2018

  • A Robotics Perspective. Philip Heermann, Sandia National Laboratories.
  • UK Nuclear Robotics in Twelve Minutes. Robert Buckingham, UKAEA.
  • Unmanned Aerial Systems for Primary Containment Vessel Exploration. Monica Garcia, Southwest Research Institute.
  • NASA and DOE-EM Robotics. Robert Ambrose, NASA JSC Engineering.
  • Applied Research in Robotics and Remote Systems for Nuclear Environments. Bill Hamel, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.

May 31, 2018

  • Convergent Research to Address Societal Needs. Joseph DeSimone, University of North Carolina.
  • Growing Convergence Research at NSF. Dragana Brzakovic, National Science Foundation.
  • Collaboration Models for High Impact Research and Development in DOE-EERE. Michael Berube, Vehicle Technologies Office, Department of Energy.
  • Traveling Wave Reactor: Lessons Learned. John Gilleland, TerraPower.
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Presentations and Site Visits." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Independent Assessment of Science and Technology for the Department of Energy's Defense Environmental Cleanup Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25338.
×

June 4, 2018

  • Waste Management Working Group Presentation for the National Academies for the National Academies Assessment of Science and Technology for DOE-EM Environmental Cleanup Program. Sonny Goldston, EFCOG Waste Management Working Group.

August 21, 2018

  • Briefing from John Marra, Chief Engineer, DOE-EM.

September 7, 2018

  • Advanced Waste Glass Program. John Vienna, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.
  • Office of River Protection Glass Science Program. Albert A. Kruger, Office of River Protection.

October 5, 2018

  • Briefing from Mark Gilbertson and Kenneth G. Picha, DOE-EM.

October 15, 2018

  • Nuclear Decommissioning Authority R&D: Delivering Progress in Nuclear Decommissioning. Melanie Brownridge and James McKinney, Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, UK.

October 19, 2018

  • Briefing from Rodrigo V. Rimando, Jr., Technology Development Office, DOE-EM.
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Presentations and Site Visits." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Independent Assessment of Science and Technology for the Department of Energy's Defense Environmental Cleanup Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25338.
×
Page 97
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Presentations and Site Visits." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Independent Assessment of Science and Technology for the Department of Energy's Defense Environmental Cleanup Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25338.
×
Page 98
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Presentations and Site Visits." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Independent Assessment of Science and Technology for the Department of Energy's Defense Environmental Cleanup Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25338.
×
Page 99
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Presentations and Site Visits." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Independent Assessment of Science and Technology for the Department of Energy's Defense Environmental Cleanup Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25338.
×
Page 100
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Presentations and Site Visits." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Independent Assessment of Science and Technology for the Department of Energy's Defense Environmental Cleanup Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25338.
×
Page 101
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Presentations and Site Visits." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Independent Assessment of Science and Technology for the Department of Energy's Defense Environmental Cleanup Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25338.
×
Page 102
Next: Appendix E: DOE Sites Visited by the Committee »
Independent Assessment of Science and Technology for the Department of Energy's Defense Environmental Cleanup Program Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $65.00 Buy Ebook | $54.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2017 contained a request for a National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine review and assessment of science and technology development efforts within the Department of Energy's Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM). This technical report is the result of the review and presents findings and recommendations.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!