secondary waste working group back brief 18 november 2013
Upload: program-executive-office-assembled-chemical-weapons-alternatives-peo-acwa
Post on 07-May-2015
38 views
DESCRIPTION
Back Brief Secondary Waste Working Group (SWWG) Meeting Nov. 18, 2013 2 p.m.TRANSCRIPT
Back BriefSecondary Waste Working Group (SWWG) MeetingNov. 18, 20132 p.m.
List of Participants:
Blue Grass Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant (BGCAPP) Team Members:Jeff BrubakerStephanie Parrett
Bechtel Parsons Blue Grass Team Members:John BartonGeorge Rangel
Kentucky Chemical Demilitarization Citizens’ Advisory Commission (CAC) and Chemical Destruction Community Advisory Board (CDCAB) Members:Jeanne HibberdDoug HindmanCarl RichardsCraig Williams
Blue Grass Chemical Stockpile Outreach Office (ORO):Debbie HoganSusan Kahler
Synopsis:
On Nov. 18, four members of the SWWG met at the ORO to be briefed on the topic of cyanide formation in the energetics neutralization process and suggested treatment for the cyanide. Jeff Brubaker, site project manager, and John Barton, Bechtel Parsons Blue Grass chief scientist teamed up to give the briefing, discussing the background as well as the chemistry of and the technical challenges posed by the cyanide formation. They also discussed the options considered for treatment and the suggested best path forward with a treatment option.
Questions and discussion focused on the cyanide hazard and risk to the workforce; point of generation; connection between cyanide generation and the agent destruction process; what would happen to the cyanide using the suggested treatment process; reformation of cyanide; if the cyanide remaining in the hydrolysate after treatment would be safe for the supercritical water oxidation process; protective apparel and equipment that might be necessary for workers in the hazard areas if untreated as well as apparel with suggested treatment path forward; National Research Council (NRC) involvement with the research process and relation to NRC’s recently published report; project budget and schedule impacts to suggested treatment process; potential option involving the possibility of
1
reducing the volume of the Energetics Neutralization Reactor process to allow for faster heating of the contents; the filtration of the vapors in the Aluminum Precipitation and Filtration processes; and the fact that the public may ask why they are only finding out about this issue now. The group then discussed how to best present this topic to the full CAC and CDCAB.
The next meeting of the group was not discussed.
#
2