1. ERDC Knowledge Core
  2. Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC)
  3. Environmental Laboratory (EL) - (4/16/1978 - present)
  4. Publication
  5. Technical Report
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/11681/7027
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorEnvironmental Quality and Installations Program (U.S.)-
dc.contributorUnited States Military Academy. Department of Systems Engineering-
dc.contributorCenter for Nation Reconstruction and Capacity Development-
dc.contributor.authorFarr, John V.-
dc.contributor.authorMartin, W. Andy-
dc.contributor.authorLarson, Steven L.-
dc.contributor.authorBallard, John H.-
dc.contributor.authorNestler, Catherine C.-
dc.contributor.authorMackey, Jarrett-
dc.contributor.authorMaki, Kahlan-
dc.contributor.authorWalters, Joseph-
dc.contributor.authorNorthcutt, Raymond-
dc.creatorApplied Research Associates-
dc.date.accessioned2016-03-28T14:30:41Z-
dc.date.available2016-03-28T14:30:41Z-
dc.date.issued2014-04-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11681/7027-
dc.descriptionTechnical Report-
dc.descriptionAbstract: The United States (US) Army and the other services are mandated to comply with all federal, state, and local environmental regulations. Recent concerns over potential human exposure to depleted uranium (DU) at US Army test ranges, primarily, have resulted in research into numerous innovative remediation technologies. Developing methods and processes for estimating the life cycle costs (LCC) of implementing these various techniques is important in identifying cost-effective solutions. Total ownership costs (TOC) models were developed for four candidate alternatives using two new technologies; Alternative 1- Physical Separation and Chemical Treatment; Alternative 2- Selective Excavation; Alternative 3- Selective Excavation with Physical Separation and Chemical Treatment; Alternative 4- Containment and Monitoring. The team chose a generic sandy soil site roughly 10 miles square for cost estimates. A bottom up estimate was applied to all alternatives in order to get a baseline cost; Alternative 3 had the best estimate for an efficient and effective remediation method. A cost-estimating relationship was generated and simulation-based costing (SBC) was then applied to Alternative 3. Lastly, two alternatives were evaluated for DU remediation of catchboxes. Identifying the key cost drivers from SBC modeling is significant to future investments in research and development.-
dc.publisherEnvironmental Laboratory (U.S.)-
dc.publisherEngineer Research and Development Center (U.S.)-
dc.relationhttp://acwc.sdp.sirsi.net/client/en_US/search/asset/1034161-
dc.relation.ispartofseriesERDC/EL TR ; 14-5.-
dc.rightsApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited.-
dc.sourceThis Digital Resource was created in Microsoft Word and Adobe Acrobat-
dc.subjectBottom up estimate-
dc.subjectCost estimating relationships-
dc.subjectDepleted uranium-
dc.subjectMunitions-
dc.subjectOrdnance-
dc.subjectLife cycle costing-
dc.subjectSimulation-based costing-
dc.subjectTotal ownership costs-
dc.subjectSite remediation-
dc.subjectEnvironmental Quality and Installations Research and Development Program (U.S.)-
dc.subjectCenter for Nation Reconstruction and Capacity Development-
dc.titleCost analysis of remediation systems for depleted uranium-
dc.typeReporten_US
Appears in Collections:Technical Report

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
ERDC-EL-TR-14-5.pdf8.52 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Show simple item record