100-KE REACTOR CORE REMOVAL PROJECT ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS WORKSHOP REPORT

HARRINGTON RA

关键词: CONCRETES;    DEACTIVATION;    DEMOLITION;    DESIGN;    ECOLOGY;    EVALUATION;    EXPLOSIVES;    HARMONICS;    INFORMATION CENTERS;    OPENINGS;    PROGRAM MANAGEMENT;    RADIATION PROTECTION;    REACTOR CORES;    REMOVAL;    SAFETY;    SHIELDS;    THERMAL SHIELDS;    US EPA;    VALID;   

DOI  :  10.2172/970558
RP-ID  :  CHPRC-00573 Rev 0
PID  :  OSTI ID: 970558
Others  :  TRN: US201003%%237

学科分类：材料科学（综合）

美国|英语

来源: SciTech Connect

【 摘 要 】

On December 15-16, 2009, a 100-KE Reactor Core Removal Project Alternative Analysis Workshop was conducted at the Washington State University Consolidated Information Center, Room 214. Colburn Kennedy, Project Director, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company (CHPRC) requested the workshop and Richard Harrington provided facilitation. The purpose of the session was to select the preferred Bio Shield Alternative, for integration with the Thermal Shield and Core Removal and develop the path forward to proceed with project delivery. Prior to this workshop, the S.A. Robotics (SAR) Obstruction Removal Alternatives Analysis (565-DLV-062) report was issued, for use prior to and throughout the session, to all the team members. The multidisciplinary team consisted ofrepresentatives from 100-KE Project Management, Engineering, Radcon, Nuclear Safety, Fire Protection, Crane/Rigging, SAR Project Engineering, the Department of Energy Richland Field Office, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, Defense Nuclear Facility Safety Board, and Deactivation and Decommission subject matter experts from corporate CH2M HILL and Lucas. Appendix D contains the workshop agenda, guidelines and expectations, opening remarks, and attendance roster going into followed throughout the workshop. The team was successful in selecting the preferred alternative and developing an eight-point path forward action plan to proceed with conceptual design. Conventional Demolition was selected as the preferred alternative over two other alternatives: Diamond Wire with Options, and Harmonic Delamination with Conventional Demolition. The teams preferred alternative aligned with the SAR Obstruction Removal Alternative Analysis report conclusion. However, the team identified several Path Forward actions, in Appendix A, which upon completion will solidify and potentially enhance the Conventional Demolition alternative with multiple options and approaches to achieve project delivery. In brief, the Path Forward was developed to reconsider potential open air demolition areas; characterize to determine if any zircaloy exists, evaluate existing concrete data to determine additional characterization needs, size the new building to accommodate human machine interface and tooling, consider bucket thumb and use ofshape-charges in design, and finally to utilize complex-wide and industry explosive demolition lessons learned in the design approach. Appendix B documents these results from the team's use ofValue Engineering process tools entitled Weighted Analysis Alternative Matrix, Matrix Conclusions, Evaluation Criteria, and Alternative Advantages and Disadvantages. These results were further supported with the team's validation of parking-lot information sheets: memories (potential ideas to consider), issues/concerns, and assumptions, contained in Appendix C. Appendix C also includes the recorded workshop flipchart notes taken from the SAR Alternatives and Project Overview presentations. The SAR workshop presentations, including a 3-D graphic illustration demonstration video have been retained in the CHPRC project file, and were not included in this report due to size limitations. The workshop concluded with a round robin close-out where each member was engaged for any last minute items and meeting utility. In summary, the team felt the session was value added and looked forward to proceeding with the recommended actions and conceptual design.