This page captures the Reviews-Reports that were published under each Focus area in the “CRESP Projects” category.

Waste Processing & Special Nuclear Materials

CRESP Review of Alternatives for Treatment of Waste in SRS Tank 48
This report presents CRESP findings and recommendations resulting from our review of the testing program in support of design of the fluidized bed steam reforming (FBSR) process and wet air oxidation (WAO) for treating high level waste currently stored in Tank 48 at the Savannah River Site (SRS).

Office of River Protection Waste Treatment Plant Reviews (Letter Reports 1-7 follow)

CRESP was requested by the Manager of the Office of River Protection Project, to form an independent expert review team in support of treatment of high level waste currently stored in tanks at the Office of River Protection (ORP). The CRESP Review Team, in an on-going manner, is to provide input to the Manager of the Office of River Protection Project on the adequacy of available data, test plans and testing results to support design, integration and operation of specific component processes, and issue resolution for the Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) and alternate Low Activity Waste (LAW) treatment technologies.

CRESP ORP Review Team Letter Report 1, January 2007
CRESP independent expert review team report to the manager of the Office of River Protection Program on the adequacy of available data, test plans and testing results to support design, integration and operation of specific component processes, and issue resolution for the Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) and alternate Low Activity Waste (LAW) treatment technologies.

CRESP ORP Review Team Letter Report 2, March 19, 2007
CRESP independent expert review team report to the manager of the Office of River Protection Program on the adequacy of available data, test plans and testing results to support design, integration and operation of specific component processes, and issue resolution for the Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) and alternate Low Activity Waste (LAW) treatment technologies

CRESP ORP Review Team Letter Report 3. June 26, 2007
This letter report is in review of the Issue Response Plan for Effects of Anti-foam Agent on Gas Retention/Release and the draft RPP-WTP Support Program Test Plan.

CRESP ORP WTP Letter4 Final 5-8-08
This letter report is in follow up to the CRESP ORP Review Team meetings with ORP on February 21 and 22, 2008 and supporting documentation, providing updates on (i) M-12, pretreatment testing and evaluation, including planned pretreatment engineering platform (PEP) testing (Phase I), results of laboratory testing of actual waste samples, simulant development and testing, (ii) M-1, line plugging, and (iii) M-3, vessel mixing. The primary focus of the review was on the draft test plans for the PEP.

CRESP ORP Review Team Letter Report 5. October 2, 2009
The CRESP review team was asked to review the status of progress by Office of River Protection and its contractors to achieve resolution and closure to the EFRT issues of M-3 Undemonstrated Mixing and M-12 Undemonstrated Leaching Process.

CRESP ORP Review Team Letter Report 6 . December 27, 2009
This letter report is to provide feedback on the status of progress by ORP and its contractors to achieve resolution and closure to the External Flowsheet Review Team (EFRT) issue of M-3 Undemonstrated Mixing as part of the Pretreatment Facility (PT) at the Waste Treatment Plant (WTP).

CRESP ORP Review Team Letter Report 7. July 1, 2010
This letter report is to evaluate responses to the EFRT M-3 and related pulse jet mixing concerns with respect to closure of M-3 remaining uncertainties and risks, and recommendations for future actions to reduce uncertainties and risks.

Engineered Cementitious Barriers for Low-Activity Radioactive Waste Disposal Workshop Summary and Recommendations for DOE Office of Environmental Management Cementitious_Workshop_Summary_Mar_28_2007

Remediation, Near-Surface Disposal & Long-Term Stewardship

Reports

Engineered Cementitious Barriers for Low-Activity Radioactive Waste Disposal – Workshop Summary and Recommendations for DOE Office of Environmental Management

Dissertations

Life-Cycle Risk Analysis for Department of Energy (DOE) Buried Waste by Kevin G. Brown (May 2008) Ph.D. Dissertation, Vanderbilt University –
Volume I
Volume II

Monitoring the Long-Term Performance of Engineered Containment Systems: The Role of Ecological Processes by Brooke Traynham (May 2010) Ph.D. Dissertation, Vanderbilt University

Probabilistic Durability Analysis of Cementitious Materials under External Sulfate Attack by Sohini Sarkar (August 2010)
Ph.D. Dissertation, Vanderbilt University

Nuclear Waste Management Policy and Strategy

In this focus area CRESP develops and demonstrates the appropriate use of methodologies for advancing, and communicating methods for comparative life-cycle risk, benefit (human health and ecological resources) and cost assessment as tools for risk-informed selection amongst different environmental restoration and nuclear waste management options.  Pictured above is the Hanford Arid Lands Ecological Reserve.

Current Activities

Nuclear Waste Policy and Law

Regional Economic Impacts of EM Funding Choices

Stakeholder Engagement & Communication

M. Greenberg, Are Nuclear Facilities LULUS? What Do United States Data Tell Us? Proceedings in Honor of Frank Parker, Nashville, TN: 2008.

Michael Greenberg, Karen Lowrie, Justin Hollander, Joanna Burger, Charles Powers, and Michael Gochfeld, Citizen Board Issues and Local Newspaper Coverage of Risk, Remediation and Environmental Management: Six United States Nuclear Weapons Facilities, Remediation, 18(3), 79-90, 2008.

M. Greenberg, B. West, Karen Lowrie, and H. Mayer, The Reporters Handbook on Nuclear Materials, Energy, and Waste Management. Nashville, Tennessee: Vanderbilt University press, March 2009.

J. Burger, M. Gochfeld, C. Powers, D. Kosson, and M. Greenberg, Managing environmental problems during transition: the Department of Energy as a case study, Remediation. October 8, 2008.

M. Greenberg, Energy sources, public policy, and public preferences: analysis of US national and site-specific data, Energy Policy, 37: 3242-3249, 2009.

M. Greenberg, NIMBY, CLAMP and the Location of New Nuclear-Related Facilities: U.S. National and Eleven Site-Specific Surveys, Risk Analysis, An International Journal. 29(9), 1242-1254, 2009.

M. Greenberg, What Environmental Issues Do People Who Live Near Major Nuclear Facilities Worry About? Analysis of National and Site-Specific Data, Environmental Planning and Management. 52(7), 919-937, 2009.

M. Greenberg and H. Truelove, Right Answers and Right-Wrong Answers: Sources of Information Influencing Knowledge of Nuclear-Related Information, Socioeconomic Planning Sciences, electronic publication, April 13, 2010, volume 44, 2010, 130-140.

M. Greenberg, Energy Parks for Former Nuclear Weapons Sites? Public Preferences at Six Regional Locations and the United States as a Whole, Energy Policy, volume 38, 5098-5107, 2010.