1 / 21

Oak Ridge Prioritization Project

CRESP. Oak Ridge Prioritization Project. David Kosson, Vanderbilt University Charles W. Powers, Vanderbilt University Joanna Burger, Rutgers University James Clarke, Vanderbilt University Steven L. Krahn, Vanderbilt University Michael Gochfeld, UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School

suchin
Download Presentation

Oak Ridge Prioritization Project

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CRESP Oak Ridge Prioritization Project David Kosson, Vanderbilt University Charles W. Powers, Vanderbilt University Joanna Burger, Rutgers University James Clarke, Vanderbilt University Steven L. Krahn, Vanderbilt University Michael Gochfeld, UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School Henry Mayer, Rutgers University Kevin Brown, Vanderbilt University DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT

  2. The Evolution of Needed Concepts

  3. Cost 4 Urgency 5 Consequences Consequences Time 3 a Project Sequencing needed to complete Project number Hazard Hazard Public Consequences Hazard Pathways E C O Urgency Urgency Urgency Occupational Likelihood, vital, importance, priority, significant, Building a Risk Prioritization Tool and Process = Fundamental Risk Evaluation DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT

  4. Questions asked of every project Can you standardize/simplify the answers to the Risk Questions?

  5. + ETTP GW Treatability Study

  6. There really are a modest number of real possibilities and they can be linked to a series of clarifying questions for every OR EM project type Oak Ridge Prioritization – Integration of Hazard, Pathway and Consequence ratings *VH if Hazard=VH **H if Hazard=VH

  7. Problem / Project Definition(s) Risk Rating Narrative Project Summary Risk Rating Bins for Problems / Projects DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT

  8. Linking Risk Evaluation with Risk Management to Inform Prioritization • Availability of • Disposition Options • Workforce Capacity Risk Reduction Effectiveness Efficiency & Sequencing What risk reduction can be achieved? Project Sequencing Project Cost Mortgage Reduction Cost of Delay DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT

  9. Risk- Rated Problems / Projects Risk Management Multiple Project Option for Risk Mitigation Evaluation of Risk Mitigation Options Risk Reduction Effectiveness Risk Management – Step 1 DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT

  10. Risk Reduction Effectiveness 2 1 Efficiency Capacity Capacity Efficiency (Modifiers +/−) + ⁞ − + ⁞ − + ⁞ − + ⁞ − + ⁞ − + ⁞ − -1 0 Risk Management - Step 2 DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT

  11. How do you “combine” the results to prepare to make a risk-informed judgment ? DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT

  12. Risk- Rated Problems / Projects Mercury at EFPC Risk Management Flow Augmentation Evaluation of Risk Mitigation Options Y-12 D&D (e.g., Beta 4) 81-10 Soils? Risk Reduction Effectiveness Efficiency Capacity + ⁞ − + ⁞ − + ⁞ − + ⁞ − Capacity Efficiency/Sequencing (Modifiers +/−) + ⁞ − + ⁞ − + ⁞ − + ⁞ − Sequencing Project Elements Impedes Risk Mitigation Risk Management Its complexities X 81-10 Flow Y-12 Y-12 81-10 Flow DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT

  13. Risk- Rated Problems / Projects Project Elements for Risk Mitigation Risk Management Evaluation of Risk Mitigation Options Risk Reduction Effectiveness Efficiency Capacity + ⁞ − + ⁞ − + ⁞ − + ⁞ − Capacity Efficiency (Modifiers +/−) + ⁞ − + ⁞ − + ⁞ − + ⁞ − Risk and Risk Management Exogenous Factors Tri-Party Prioritization (DOE-TDEC-EPA) Stakeholders and Tribes DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT

  14. The concept of set-asides to reduce uncertainty when risks may or may not be High but evaluation impossible due to data gaps / or that the situation may be evolving – and in either case there is a sound “method” or activity that reduces the uncertainty. How should the tool address these cases? Mitigation Option Effectiveness - e.g., treatability studies Unknown unknowns - e.g., Characterization studies DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT

  15. Risk- Rated Problems / Projects Project Elements for Risk Mitigation Risk Management Evaluation of Risk Mitigation Options Risk Reduction Effectiveness Efficiency Capacity + ⁞ − + ⁞ − + ⁞ − + ⁞ − Capacity Efficiency (Modifiers +/−) + ⁞ − + ⁞ − + ⁞ − + ⁞ − Risk and Risk Management Exogenous Factors Tri-Party Prioritization (DOE-TDEC-EPA) Stakeholders and Tribes DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT

  16. Mercury at Oak Ridge Redbreast Sunfish

  17. Mercury at Oak Ridge

  18. Mercury at Oak Ridge

  19. Mercury at Oak Ridge 51,000 lbs to air Buildings Y-12 Leaks and spills 428,000 lbs to soil/rocks NPDES EPA freshwater criterion of 0.3 ppm in fish East Fork Poplar Creek 240,000 lbs to creek Total Inventory to Oak Ridge = 24,000,000 lbs Not accounted for = 1,300,000 lbs They account for = 2,034,000 lbs

  20. Mercury at Oak Ridge HAZARD - MERCURY 600,000+ pounds under & in Y-12 PATHWAY - Complete to eco-receptors top trophic –level fish fish consumers Complete on & off-site CONSEQUENCES – Neurological and other High Interdiction Projects Capacity & Workforce Sequencing, costs Vary by Risk Reduction Effectiveness $52M Total Source Reduction Y-12 Building Removals & Soil Remediation Several Years at $1.8B

  21. Mercury at Oak Ridge

More Related