13 Using Roadmaps in Pollution Prevention: The Los Alamos Model Thomas P Starke Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico James H Scott Abaxial Technologies, Los Alamos, New Mexico INTRODUCTION Roadmapping is a powerful technique for displaying the structural relationships among science, technology, applications, and results of applications Because they can incorporate complex, multiple relationships, they are used to display the possible paths from the present state to a desired end state Well-constructed, comprehensive roadmaps are used for science and technology management, including strategic planning, evaluating cost/risk, and program execution; for enhancing communications among researchers, technologists, managers, and stakeholders; for identifying deficiencies and opportunities in science and technology programs; and for identifying obstacles to achieving a desired end state There are several roadmap methodologies in use today, including forecast roadmaps, retrospective roadmaps, and process evaluation roadmaps Because roadmapping methodology is so flexible, it can be used in many applications; it is frequently used for process evaluation, technology forecasting, and for defining investment Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved strategies Roadmaps have been used successfully by the U.S Department of Defense (DoD), the semiconductor industry, and various manufacturing concerns The starting point for all roadmapping methodologies consist of a defined current state and a very well-defined desired end state; in general, one cannot have a high-quality map without a carefully and comprehensively defined end state A complex project or process will have a number of intermediate states or goals between the current state and the desired end state The roadmap itself consists of a network of nodes representing activities, events, or processes Nodes can contain a variety of information, depending on the purpose of the node Nodes are linked by actions The network of nodes and links ideally represents all pathways from the current state to the desired end state in such a way that schedule, cost, and technical risk can be evaluated along each pathway Analysis of high-quality maps can help evaluate options relative to risk, cost, and schedule; define deficiencies in current programs; and identify opportunities ROADMAP METHODOLOGY In 1997 the Environmental Stewardship Office (ESO) at Los Alamos National Laboratory decided to prepare a roadmap for reaching the laboratory pollution prevention goal of substantially eliminating waste generation and pollutant release by the year 2010 The purpose of the roadmap was to identify: Areas in which waste minimization and pollution prevention would have the greatest impact Options for preventing pollution or minimizing waste in those areas Costs, technical risk, time, and return on investment associated with implementing those options The most cost-effective strategies for reaching the goal of substantially eliminating pollution and waste resulting from laboratory operations In order to prepare this roadmap, ESO chose a methodology that is based on technology roadmap principles developed by the Office of Naval Research and widely used in the DoD community (1) This methodology was modified by Los Alamos to incorporate the principals of process mapping developed by Robert Pojasek (2) The resulting methodology produces a roadmap with very broad scope but sufficient detail to allow identification of specific sources of pollution and waste and, consequently, specific remedial action options ROADMAP CONSTRUCTION The DoD roadmap methodology is hierarchical and proceeds through a series of submaps or map elements from general to specific Thus, the roadmap is made up of several levels, with the higher levels being more general and less detailed Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved The highest level contains only the definition of the desired goal or end state, the overall strategy for achieving that goal, and the definition of the waste types to be considered in the roadmap Normally, the highest-level map element is called the zero level, or the mission-level map element This element is comprehensive in that it identifies the current condition and lays the foundation for the succeeding map elements In the zero level map element the waste types from any particular set of operations are defined Level one maps take the waste types defined at level zero and develop process flow diagrams for each waste type A process flow diagram is an overview of the process that generates the waste Process flow diagrams provide a summary of the processes and activities that result in the generation of waste These diagrams are used to decompose each waste type into specific waste streams For example, a waste type may be sanitary waste, and waste streams within that type may be food waste, paper, and glass At level two, process diagrams are developed for each waste steam within a waste type These diagrams depict the process flow at a greater level of detail In addition to these waste stream process diagrams, new or modified procedures, processes, or technologies are identified which may reduce or eliminate the waste stream The point in the process flow where the new technology can be deployed is identified, along with the likely impact of deployment For some high-priority waste streams, further detail is provided in a third level, including assessment of various options The hierarchical structure described above is shown schematically in Figure As an example of roadmap structure and how the roadmap can be used, consider a path through Figure The mission-level map element defines the N waste types These waste types could be sanitary, hazardous, liquid effluent, or many others, depending on the nature of the operations at level zero At level one we define each waste stream within a waste type In the example, we have associated five waste streams with the second waste type The other waste types also have associated streams, not shown here for simplicity’s sake At level two, a process map element is constructed to describe the processes that produce each waste stream An adjunct to the process flow map element is the definition of procedure, process, or technology options for treating the object The likely impact of each option is then described Technical risk, schedule risk, cost, and health and safety impacts are assessed For high-priority or complex waste streams the options identified in the process flow map element are broken down in further detail, and a series of issues and attributes is developed to aid in comparing options To clarify the construction process, we will show how each of the map elements at various levels is constructed Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved Level Zero Map Element Mission Level Type Waste Type Waste Type Waste Level One Map Element Waste Type Stream Mission Level Map Element … Type N Waste Waste Waste Stream Defined For each Waste Type Waste Type Stream Waste Type Stream Waste Type Stream Waste Type Stream Process Flow Process flow defined for each Level Two Waste stream Map Element Possible Sol'tns For each process flow define waste minimization or pollution prevention actions defined Level Three Map Element Defined Option Element Option Element Option Element Option Element In some cases, solution options detailed with issues or further mapped FIGURE Roadmap hierarchy example 3.1 Example: Los Alamos Environmental Stewardship Roadmap To illustrate the techniques used in construction of the roadmap elements we will follow the specific path for sanitary waste through the Los Alamos Environmental Stewardship roadmap The techniques can and should be generalized to other applications We will start with a conceptual mission-level map for Los Alamos National Laboratory 3.1.1 Level Zero or Mission-Level Map Element Construct mission-level map element Define waste types Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved This mission level map is constructed to represent the laboratory as a system with a series of material and energy flows, both into and out of the system The first step in constructing the mission-level map is to decide the scope of the initial system In this case, the system is the entire laboratory site We can also choose to examine a smaller subset if we wish to focus on a particular area Figure shows the laboratory process map, which is a view of the laboratory from the local environmental perspective The perspective can be important If we had chosen a regional perspective, the resulting roadmap would have been quite different The map element is constructed by identifying inflows of materials and energy to the system, identifying the operations that use the materials and energy, and identifying system outflows, including all the products of the operations including wastes and pollutants The wastes are accrued into a number of broad waste types This is a critical step since it will form, in many cases, the foundation for all subsequent analysis The waste types must be comprehensive and include all wastes generated from operations The laboratory performs work for government sponsors and private industry In performing this work, the laboratory procures services, materials, equipment, new facilities, and commodities (electricity and natural gas) The laboratory also takes in water from the regional aquifer and air from the surrounding atmosphere This series of inflows is shown at the left in Figure Once in the laboratory, the inflows are used in the six different kinds of operations listed in Figure Most person-hours are spent conducting office operations These involve office space, furniture, information processing equipment, paper, and office Emissions Los Alamos National Laboratory Products Materials • Office Operations • Experimental Operations Power • Production Operations • Maintenance and Infrastructure Operations • Construction Water • Environmental Restoration Effluents Ecosystem Impact, LLW & Sanitary Disposal FIGURE Laboratory process map Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved TRU Waste MLLW Hazardous Waste Excess Property supplies Energy is expended to operate equipment and provide climate control Water is used in evaporative cooling to transfer waste heat to the atmosphere Experimental operation includes bench-scale and large-scale research Energy is expended to operate the equipment and provide climate control Water is used in evaporative cooling to remove waste heat Experimental operations typically procure large amounts of equipment but small amounts of chemicals and other materials Production operations include all the site production operations Production operations consume material, water, and energy, but in this particular case energy and water usage is modest Maintenance and infrastructure operations include all maintenance activities, facility management activities, and site-wide infrastructure systems, such as the sanitary wastewater plant, on-site power plant, water influent system, and highway system These operations consume large quantities of chemicals and produce most of the site’s hazardous waste They also consume significant amounts of energy and water Construction includes both smaller construction projects and major construction projects Construction operations are important not only as a source of immediate environmental impact during construction activities; design decisions made during the construction process can lock in environmental impact for the lifetime of the facility Environmental remediation includes all remediation activities on the site For purposes of this roadmap, only newly generated wastes and pollutants were considered, but that need not have been the case Because the products of the laboratory are mostly information, most material inflows become by-product or waste outflows Identified outflows of waste and pollutants are divided into the eight categories shown in Figure These include transuranic waste (TRU), mixed low-level waste (MLLW), lowlevel waste (LLW), hazardous waste, solid sanitary waste, excess property entering the salvage system for reuse or recycle, gaseous emissions, and liquid outfalls Another result of operation also occurs The presence of laboratory facilities, infrastructure, operations, and land management affects local ecosystems Much of this is unavoidable, and much of it is not necessarily harmful to the local environment This local ecosystem impact can be minimized through wise operational choices Once the operations and outflows have been identified, a fundamental choice must be made The subsequent lower-level maps can be organized and broken down according to either operation or waste type, depending on the specific goals of the mapping activity Roadmaps based on operations are particularly good if one wishes to focus on organizational structure and its impact on pollution and waste generation and may include issues such as structure, Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved funding, and customer base Roadmaps based on waste type are generally more useful for devising pollution prevention and waste minimization strategies and choosing among technological alternatives As an example, we will construct a map based on waste type and follow a specific waste type—sanitary waste— through the succeeding map elements Janet Watson constructed the complete ESO sanitary roadmap, from which this was abstracted 3.1.2 Level One or Waste Stream Definition Level Construct waste type process flow diagram Define waste streams Define issues and constraints Prioritize waste streams Since we have chosen to follow the development of roadmap elements through the sanitary waste type, we first construct a sanitary waste process flow diagram This diagram is constructed using the same principles that are used in all process flow diagrams: the inflows of materials and energy are identified, the process or operations are identified, and the outflows of waste material are identified At this level, quantification becomes important, since it will be used to prioritize waste streams for waste reduction activities The first-level map element that emerges from examination of the data is shown in Figure Nonhazardous, nonradioactive materials enter the laboratory as procured items, mail, food, and various other substances such as glass, brush, and construction materials These items are used by the laboratory and are either recycled, reused, or salvaged, or are disposed in the county landfill Materials disposed include such items as construction waste, food and food-contaminated wastes, paper products, glass, Styrofoam, and various other substances Material outflow pathways are shown at the right of the diagram The composition of materials in those pathways is broken down in the pie charts at the bottom It is important to carefully and completely identify the constituents of the waste and to quantify the volumes, since that information will form the foundation for the succeeding process flow diagrams In this case, we will examine the dumpster waste in greater detail There are a number of waste streams to be considered As a normal part of the roadmapping process, it is important to prioritize these waste streams for action based on some criteria The basic question here is: Which waste streams should we attempt to minimize first? Other questions that need to be addressed are the cost of minimization and the return on investment for minimization activities Before choosing criteria, it is necessary to examine all issues and constraints associated with the waste streams Issues might involve such considerations as lifetime of the landfill If the landfill has a short lifetime and there are no easy alternatives to disposal at the current landfill, an overriding consideration Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved Internal recycle/reuse Procurement External Recycle Laboratory Mail Laboratory Processes Food Disposal at landfill Construction Substances External Salvage Internal Salvage Recycle/reuse Cardboard Paper Construction Dumpsters Sanitary Waste Glass Metal Wood Styrofoam Food Waste Plastic Office Supplies Dumpster Waste FIGURE Sanitary waste streams might be to minimize the volume of material sent to the landfill, even if the cost savings for that action are small compared to other possible actions Constraints might involve such things as regulatory requirements or operating policy Actions designed to meet regulatory requirements will probably be placed high on the priority list even if the costs are high and the return on investment is low In many pollution prevention and waste minimization programs, actions are prioritized based on Pareto analysis The underlying assumption of Pareto analysis, generally surprisingly good, is that 80% of the waste comes from 20% of the operations and that 20% is where you should concentrate your efforts at prevention If the operations are fully compliant with regulation and there are no overriding local issues, Pareto analysis is a very good way to prioritize activities In a classic Pareto chart, the volumes of waste are plotted for each waste stream in a bar chart The streams that contain 80% of the waste are then identified If there are no overriding constraints, these are the streams that are selected for intervention, usually either in the order of total waste quantity or total waste cost Robert Pojasek, in “Prioritizing P2 Alternatives” (Pollution Prevention Review, vol 7, Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved no 1, pp 105–112, 1997), discusses Pareto analysis and its major variants in detail At this point, it is usual to construct a table listing the waste streams, issues, constraints, the cost of treatment, handling, and disposal, the cost of regulatory support, and quantities for each stream If the costs can be obtained on a unit quantity basis, calculating the cost associated with each stream is straightforward These factors all influence the final prioritization of the waste stream As stated previously, issues and constraints may outweigh the more obvious cost arguments For this exercise we will not prioritize the sanitary waste streams but will choose to examine a subset of the paper waste stream—mail—in detail 3.1.3 Level Two or Waste Stream Process Definition Construct waste stream process flow diagram Identify intervention points Identify prevention options The process flow diagram for the “mail” waste stream is constructed like the previous process flow diagrams However, at this level the operations are diagramed explicitly and in some detail rather than being simply listed This is necessary because at this level we are trying to identify sources of waste and potential intervention points Often, physical inspection of the operation is required to develop the necessary detail For manufacturing or processing operations, these diagrams can become very complex In this diagram, we have diagramed all the major pathways for mail between receiving and final disposition Each box or node identifies a process or handling step Every year the laboratory receives and distributes 714 MT of mail This mail includes junk mail, catalogs, telephone directories, and various documents, as well as business mail The mail received by the laboratory includes a small amount of classified mail The process flow diagram for the mail waste stream is shown in Figure Mail, including internally generated mail, is received by the laboratory and distributed Any unwanted mail can be sent by the recipient to Mail Stop A1000 for sorting and recycle Documents such as catalogs and directories that are glue-bound must first have the bindings sheared off before the paper is recycled The bindings are sent to the landfill for disposal Mail is also disposed by discarding in green desk-side containers or trash bins The contents of the green containers are sent to recycle, while the contents of the trash bins are sorted for recyclable materials at the Material Recovery Facility (MRF) Classified material may not be disposed unless it has been security (crosscut) shredded The stripshredded material can be recycled, but crosscut shredded material currently goes to the landfill Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved LAB Mail Publications - Distribute internally generated mail & publications -Distribute External Green Bins Recycle Collection Trash Bins MRFSort Discard Sandia Mail Stop A1000 Glue Bindings Recycle Dumpster Landfill Shearing Paper Recycle FIGURE Mail and document distribution and disposal With the advent of MRF operations, the opportunity to recover nearly all the discarded recyclable mail is realized The emphasis will then be on reducing the source of unwanted mail At this point, it is usual to identify possible intervention points Examination of the process flow diagram shows limited opportunities to reduce the quantity of mail going to the landfill The strategy has to be either to prevent mail from entering the laboratory or to increase the fraction of discarded mail that is recycled Eliminating all incoming mail is, of course, not an option, but there may be ways to reduce particular incoming mail streams Most notably, it is possible to reduce the volume of “junk mail” and certain print documents such as paper telephone books This upstream approach has the advantage of preventing waste so that it never has to be handled At the disposal end of the diagram, the only destinations for waste mail are recycle and the landfill, so if the quantity of discarded mail going to the landfill is to be reduced, the recycle fraction must be increased Planning meetings with the personnel involved in recycle revealed two promising avenues to pursue With the intervention points identified, a set of initiatives are formulated, with the numbers keyed to process flow diagram Initiative 1: Reduction of “junk mail.” A substantial fraction of the mail consists of recurring, unwanted “junk” mail A centralized stop-mail service for “junk mail” is currently in the pilot phase Any laboratory employee who wishes to request removal of his or her name from a mailing list can use this service Initiative 2: Eliminate paper phonebooks Paper phonebooks are widely used and are difficult to recycle US West directories, which are routinely distributed to all employees, will be eliminated as a source of waste by restricting delivery and asking employees to use the “on-line” directory Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved instead Approximately 22 MT of waste per year can be avoided in this way Initiative 3: Additional items in paper recycle system The current paper recycle program is limited to white and pastel paper; options for including other types of paper products (mail items) in this mix are being evaluated Initiative 4: Increase use of MS A1000 Although MS A1000 is widely used as a means of recycling various materials, many employees are still unaware of its existence A publicity campaign will be developed to increase awareness; self-inking stamps (with the A1000 logo) will also be distributed to each mail stop within the laboratory to encourage use of this program These initiatives must be analyzed, of course, according to a number of relevant variables such as potential cost and effect on the waste stream The variables that describe each of the initiatives are called factors and are sometimes tabulated in a spreadsheet A very simple version of such a spreadsheet is shown in Table In most cases, a cost is assigned to each of the initiatives In this case, costs were not readily available or were being developed through pilot programs at the time the roadmap was constructed 3.2 Differentiating Among Technology Solutions at Level Two In the above example from the ESO roadmap, all the initiatives proposed were programs that did not require new technologies Frequently, this is not the case and, in fact, some sets of initiatives feature competing technologies Conceptually, the process flow diagram for such a project might look like Figure This chart is representative of a many manufacturing processes, particularly those involving distillation or refining Following an initial process step, the product stream is separated into two streams for further processing Both of the streams have subsequent processing steps Assume that at point there is an opportunity to intervene and reduce the path B waste stream Often in manufacturing processes, this intervention will involve deployment of a new technology, and there may be more than one candidate technology In that case, the evaluation of the potential initiatives will be very different from the previous case involving mail Now we are not dealing with administrative controls or modified processes alone, but must consider the relative merits of the competing technologies Some of the factors that must be considered might include the relative maturity of the technologies, which is usually understood to mean the scale of prior operation—i.e., bench, pilot, or full scale—schedule for deployment, cost to develop, cost to deploy, cost to operate, efficiency of the process or throughput, quantity of waste avoided, nature of any secondary waste streams from a Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved TABLE Waste Minimization Initiatives Initiative or project Reduce “junk mail.” Develop a centralized stop-mail service for “junk mail.” Eliminate paper phonebooks Delivery of US West Telephone directories is restricted; employees are requested to use the “on-line” directory instead Approximately 22 MT of waste per year can be avoided in this way Include additional items in paper recycle system Include other paper products (mail items) in the program Increase use of MS A1000 Although MS A1000 is widely used as a means of recycling various materials, many employees are still unaware of its existence This program within the laboratory will encourage use of this program Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved Action/milestone Status Evaluate pilot results; determine if results justify expense Continue restricted delivery in future years Ongoing Pilot test: completed Ongoing This option is being evaluated Not funded A publicity campaign will be developed to increase awareness Self-inking stamps (with the A1000 logo) will also be distributed to each mail stop Ongoing Funding source Waste avoided Base program Source reduction, 4.4 MT/year Base program Source reduction, 22 MT/year Increased recycle Base program Increased recycle Path A Path A Waste Stream Inflows Process Process Process A1 Segregate Path B Waste Stream Process B2 Process B1 Path B FIGURE Conceptual technology process map particular process, and safety of the processes A matrix similar to the one shown previously can be constructed and weights assigned to each of the factors Issues frequently arise when trying to determine weights for the particular factors, and it is best to agree early about any constraints that must be applied Typical constraints include the stipulation that the chosen process must be at least as safe and efficient as the process it will replace Once weights are assigned to the various factors, the roadmapping team must meet with the technology advocates and the operations personnel to quantify the factors Since each technology is likely to have advocates and detractors, it is important to gather information on each technology from all concerned parties, including operators Even then, it may be impossible to reach a consensus view with respect to all the relevant factors For this reason, it is important to decide in advance how conflicts will be resolved Normally, the roadmapping team resolves conflicts after gathering information from the technology advocates After the factors have been quantified, one of several algorithms can be used to evaluate each of the competitive technologies In this way technologies can be differentiated with regard to deployment in a particular process step and a basis for an action decision is established USING THE COMPLETED ROADMAP To review briefly: At level zero, the overall system operation was mapped and waste types were identified Frequently this step is left out if waste types are well known or if only one waste type is of interest At level one, each of the waste types was broken down into waste streams The size and nature of the waste streams was quantified and the waste streams were prioritized for minimization or prevention action Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved At level two, detailed process maps for the waste streams were prepared, points of intervention were defined, and initiatives for minimization or prevention at these points were identified Data were prepared for each of the initiatives to form a foundation for decision making At this point, a number of paths forward are possible The zero level and level one maps are useful for many purposes, including education, training, and monitoring The level two maps are normally used to enhance decision making and monitoring progress Part of the decision-making process involves developing an investment strategy An investment strategy involves four items: A decision about priorities and which waste streams should be addressed first with respect to minimization or prevention A decision about which initiatives should be pursued first for the high-priority waste streams An allocation of resources against the selected initiatives Development of a fallback or contingency position for the initiatives, particularly those that require development and/or deployment of new technologies Finally, a schedule for implementing the initiatives is developed and overlaid on the process map The schedule is normally prepared by redrawing the process map to represent the end state that will result from the implementation of selected initiatives The redrawn map element includes an earliest start/latest finish date in the appropriate process nodes A project control chart is frequently included as part of the revised process flow chart The project control chart can include many or few schedule and control parameters such as start date, finish date, cost, and any other desired parameters The redrawn process flow chart shown in Figure would then look like Figure Clearly, if there are several initiatives in the same waste stream, the roadmap element can become complicated In that case, it is usually easier to redraw a revised map element for each initiative so that the complete data on each initiative in a particular waste stream are located on its own map element The redrawn map elements can be retained in one location for ease of review In addition, some roadmap developers include risk as part of the revised map element The risk may be technical risk, programmatic risk, cost risk, or funding risk The risk is usually specified as the risk of not being able to move successfully from one process node to the next The risk is then associated with the link between nodes and aggregated along all pathways in the revised map element In this way, risk to the project can be assessed, the sources of greatest risk can be identified, and contingency plans can be developed for those areas Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved Path A Path A Waste Stream Inflows Process Process Segregate Process A1 Path B Waste Stream Earliest start Process B2 Modified Process B1 Latest finish Path B Activity A Activity B Activity N FIGURE Start Finish Man-hours Redrawn process map element for project control Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved Cost ETC… Estimation of risk is necessarily subjective and cannot be taken too literally The risk estimates serve simply as a guide to controlling risk Planning is a dynamic activity Since pollution prevention operations change, hopefully in response to good planning, it is necessary to update the roadmaps periodically The usual period for updates is yearly, but this can be adjusted to reflect the actual rate of changes in the system CONCLUSIONS Roadmaps are useful tools for systematically evaluating the generation of waste and pollution in virtually any type of operation, large or small For large systems like Los Alamos National Laboratory, the roadmap can be extensive The Los Alamos ESO roadmap can be found online at http://emso.lanl.gov/publications Roadmaps provide a mechanism for evaluating the current state in detail, for deciding how to move toward a desired end state, for assessing the effectiveness of alternative options in moving toward the end state, for making investment decisions, and for controlling risk More detailed information on the various aspects of roadmapping, as applied by a variety of institutions and industries, can be found in the bibliography that follows SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY The following bibliography presents further information on roadmap construction and use and contains examples of different types of roadmaps The Kostoff citation contains an exhaustive bibliography Aerospace Industries Association of America, Detailed Technology Roadmap for Superconductivity Washington, DC: AIAA, Superconductivity Committee, 1992 D Barker, and D Smith, Technology Foresight Using Roadmaps Long Range Planning, vol 28, no 2, pp 21–29, 1995 Electronic Industry Environmental Roadmap, available from MCC Corporation, 3500 West Balcones Center Drive, Austin, TX 78759, 1998 M P Espenschied, Graphical Status Monitoring System for Project Managers Pretoria, South Africa: National Institute for Aeronautics and Systems Technology, Funder: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC, Report CSIRNIAST817, 1981 J H Gurtcheff, US Strategic Nuclear Strategy and Forces: A Roadmap for the Year 2000 Study Project Carlisle Barracks, PA: Army War College, 1991 R N Kostoff, Science and Technology Roadmaps, http://www.dtic.mil/ dtic/kostoff/Mapweb2I.html Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved ORNL, Oak Ridge National Laboratory Technology Logic Diagram Volume 1, Technology Evaluation: Part A, Decontamination and Decommissioning Oak Ridge K-25 Site, TN, Report ORNLM2751V1PTA, 1993 R B Pojasek, P2 Programs, Plans and Projects: Some Thoughts on Making Them Work Pollution Prevention Review, vol 9, no 2, 1999 U.S Department of Energy, National TRU Waste Management Plan, DOE/ NTP-96-1204, Revision 1, 1997 REFERENCES R N Kostoff, Science and Technology Roadmaps, http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/kostoff/ Mapweb2I.html R B Pojasek, P2 programs, Plans and Projects: Some Thoughts on Making Them Work Pollution Prevention Review, vol 9, no 2, 1999 Copyright 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc All Rights Reserved  ... Level Type Waste Type Waste Type Waste Level One Map Element Waste Type Stream Mission Level Map Element … Type N Waste Waste Waste Stream Defined For each Waste Type Waste Type Stream Waste Type... generation of waste These diagrams are used to decompose each waste type into specific waste streams For example, a waste type may be sanitary waste, and waste streams within that type may be food waste, ... of specific sources of pollution and waste and, consequently, specific remedial action options ROADMAP CONSTRUCTION The DoD roadmap methodology is hierarchical and proceeds through a series of