QA Perspective From An NQA-1 Vendor

QA Perspective from an NQA-1 VendorByMike McNamaraPresidentTHOR Treatment TechnologiesSeptember 16, 2010PrintClose

Introduction and Background THOR Treatment Technologies, is an LLC formed by URSCorporation and Studsvik of Sweden, in 2002. TTT was formed to bring the Steam Reforming process,used by Studsvik for treatment of commercial radioactivewaste at their plant in Erwin, TN since 1999, into the DOEcomplex. THOR?– THermal Organic Reforming All of TTT’s work requires the application of NQA-12PrintClose

Introduction and BackgroundThermal Organic Reforming THOR uses 2 privately funded, patented, intellectual propertyprotected, non-incineration forms of thermal organic treatment:– Fluidized Bed Steam Reforming (FBSR) of radioactive liquidwaste destroys organics and binds radionuclide's in an insolublematrix using superheated steam, along with co-reactants, in afluidized bed reactor– Autoclave pyrolysis of TRU waste, evaporates any liquids anddestroy the organic content of TRU and mixed waste streams3PrintClose

Steam Reforming Overview Used extensively in the US and abroad forthermal treatment processes––––––– 100 years experienceBiomass gasificationSyngas productionMetal reductionChemical processesPetroleum refinery applicationsPulp and paper industrySuccessfully deployed on commercial nuclearproduction scale– Studsvik Processing Facility for 10 years4PrintClose

Studsvik Processing Facility Full-scale facility treatscommercial power plant waste– Radionuclide retention in solidproduct 99.99%– 200,000 cu ft of LLW processed– 1,600 shipments– LLW dose rates up to 500 R/hr (Cs)– Waste feed: ion exchange resins,plastics, cellulose, carbon, oils:Studsvik Processing Facility, Erwin TN High salt content waste High organic content– Developed mineralization additives– 28 months from start of design to LLWoperations– Air permit (State of TN)– Radioactive materials license (State ofTN)5PrintClose

FLUIDIZED BED STEAM REFORMING6PrintClose

Steam Reforming Treatment ProductsTHOR Mineral WasteFormTHOR Monolith7PrintClose

TTT Current Projects- Idaho Cleanup Project(ICP) Integrated WasteTreatment Unit (IWTU)Provide process start-uptechnical support for the IWTUfacility, employing the THOR FBSR Process to treat 1 milliongallons of radioactive sodiumbearing wasteCH2M WG Idaho, LLC,(CWI)NQA-15/2005—12/2012Advanced RemediationTechnologies (ART)Phase IIDemonstrate THOR FBSRProcess for Treatment ofHanford LAW and WTP SWwaste streamsDepartment of Energy(DOE-EM-31)NQA-111/2007—9/2010Savannah River SiteTank 48 WasteTreatmentDesign, procurement, fabricationand start-up support services fora THOR FBSR Process to treat 300K gallons of radioactivewasteSavannah RiverRemediation LLC(SRR)NQA-18/2009—9/20158PrintClose

TTT Current Projects – IWTU Background– TTT Mission: Demonstrate process, design, and assist with startup of a THOR facility to treat 1 million gallons of sodium bearingwaste at INL– Contract awarded to TTT May 2005– Carbonate flow sheet pilot plant and reporting work completedAugust 2006; facilitated construction start April 2007– Mineralizing pilot plant work and reporting completed July 2007– Most of detailed design (CD-3) completed by TTT when CWIassumed all design agency functions in late 2008– Currently supporting ORR and start up9PrintClose

INTEC –IWTU Facility For Sodium BearingWaste Treatment10PrintClose

IDAHO ENGINEERING SCALE DEMONSTRATIONMix Tanks and Product ReceiverReformer and Filter11PrintClose

TTT Current Projects – ART Background– Mission: Demonstrate capability of THOR Process to convertHanford LAW and WTP SW waste streams into a final waste formsuitable for long-term on-site disposal– Phase 2 contract awarded September 2007– Completed FBSR pilot plant work July 2008– BSR work at SRNL in 2008/2009 produced final monolith wasteforms that show considerable promise to meet Hanford Sitemission– On going BSR (hot) work at SRNL12PrintClose

SRR Tank 48 Project Background– Completed initial pilot plant demonstration test in 2006– 3 Phases of additional pilot demonstration pilot plant workcompleted in 2009– Design, procurement, fabrication and support awarded to TTT on8/3/09– Scope includes design and fabrication of a FBSR plant to treat 300,000 gallons of waste stored in the SRS Tank 48– FBSR to be installed by SRR in existing Bldg. 241-96H at the SRS13PrintClose

Bench-Scale Demonstration SystemsSRNLBench-Top Steam Reformer14PrintClose

Savannah River Site Tank 48 Project15PrintClose

16PrintClose

TTT’s Quality Assurance Program 18 Criteria from NQA-1– Criterion 1 (Organization) through 18 (Audits) Policy Statement that:–––– Reinforces integrityDiscusses Price Anderson Act applicationAssigns management of the QA Program to the QA ManagerAssigns QA Program Ownership to the PresidentQA Introduction Section that Discusses:– Application of the QAP– Project specific implementation procedures– The Graded approach to quality17PrintClose

Perspective From an NQA-1 VendorSome Lessons Learned from the Nuclear Environment Technical issues– Base materials (piping, plate, structural shapes, forgings, castings)– Welding: (IGSCC, hydrogen cracking, delayed cracking, materials,consumables, fit up, WPS/PQR’s, welder qualification, documentation)– High strength bolt problems (friction vs. bearing connections, A325 vs.A490)– Rebar problems (bending, dimensional tolerances, welding)– Concrete problems (mix designs, slump, constituent storage, vibration,weather, curing, testing)– Nelson stud welding problems– Snubbers, ASME Section XI issues– NDE problems (RT, UT, PT, MT)– Too numerous to mention, but 100’s of millions spent18PrintClose

Perspective From an NQA-1 VendorSome Lessons Learned from the Nuclear Environment Non Technical issues– Training of personnel– Graded approach to quality and spent fuel storage programs– Commercial grade dedications– Configuration management QA Programmatic Issues––––––––Institutional memoryUse of non NQA-1 vendorsNew managementNew marketsNew personnelCost cutting initiativesClient requested changesOverall industry atrophy of NQA-1 knowledge and experience19PrintClose

Perspective From an NQA-1 VendorThe Role of the QA Program Owner; The QA manager typically reports to a management level where there issufficient independence from cost and schedule considerations.– This is usually the QA Program ownerThe QA program owner must be capable of assuring compliance withall applicable QA, regulatory and contractual requirements and fordeveloping and maintaining a culture of continuous improvement andhigh integrity.––How does the QA program owner do this?Quality issues must never be off their radar screen!20PrintClose

Perspective From an NQA-1 VendorQA Program Essentials–Identification of conditions adverse to quality –The production sEvaluating the condition and the specifics of non compliance Understanding the conditionApplicable documentsRegulatory requirementsPerspective of the client and the vendor21PrintClose

Perspective From an NQA-1 VendorQA Program Essentials The Corrective Action Process– Conditions adverse to quality, DR’s, NCR’s, etc.– Screening and evaluation– Significant conditions adverse to quality– Extent of condition– Root cause evaluations– Measures to prevent recurrence– Effectiveness of corrective actions22PrintClose

Perspective From an NQA-1 VendorSummary Quality is everyone’s responsibility You cannot inspect quality into the work Quality begins with the contract––––––––QA programExecution proceduresPersonnel knowledge and trainingWorkers provided with the time and resources to performCompliance with documented requirementsDocumentation of resultsManagement’s visible support of qualityContinuous improvement of the QAP23PrintClose

NQA-1 NQA-1 NQA-1 QA 8/2009—9/2015 11/2007—9/2010 5/2005—12/2012 Performance Period Savannah River Remediation LLC (SRR) Design, procurement, fabrication and start-up support services for a THOR FBSR Process to treat 300K gallons of radioactive waste Savannah River Site Ta