Нашли опечатку? Выделите ее мышкой и нажмите Ctrl+Enter
Название: Evaluation of Alternative Technologies for Disposal of Liquid Wastes from the Explosive Destruction System
Автор: Committee on Review and Evaluation of the Army Non-Stoc
The Committee on Review and Evaluation of the Army Non-Stockpile Chemical Materiel Disposal Program (see Appendix A for biographies of committee members) was appointed by the National Research Council (NRC) to
conduct studies on technical aspects of the U.S. Army Non-Stockpile Chemical Materiel Disposal Program. During its first year, the committee evaluated the Army’s plans to dispose of chemical agent identification sets (CAIS)—test kits used for soldier training (NRC, 1999d). During the second year, the committee recommended non incineration technologies that might be used for the post treatment of neutralization wastes from Army nonstockpile materiel disposal systems. For this third year, the Army asked the committee to supplement its report on neutralent wastes to include wastes produced by the Army’s newest mobile system, the explosive destruction system (EDS) (NRC, 2(X)la). In addition, in a report to be published in the spring of 2002, the committee is assessing the operational concepts for mobile and semipermanent facilities being developed by the product manager. At its meetings, the committee was given a number of briefings (see Appendix B) and held subsequent deliberations. The committee is grateful to the many individuals, particularly Lt. Col. Christopher Ross, Product Manager for Non-Stockpile Chemical Materiel, and his staff, who provided technical information and insights during these briefings. This information provided a sound foundation for the committee’s deliberations. This study was conducted under the auspices of the
NRC’s Board on Army Science and Technology. The committee acknowledges the continued superb support of the director, Bruce A. Braun, associate director Michael A. Clarke, NRC staff, committee members, the study director, support staff, and the publication staff, who all worked diligently on a demanding schedule to produce this report. In addition, I would like to particularly recognize the extra leadership and effort by committee member Douglas Medville in the preparation of this specific report.