DOE’s “New” National Strategy for Waste Management

1. DOE’s “New” National Strategy for Waste Management Christine Gelles Director, Commercial Disposition Options, EM-12 Office of Environmental Management Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting

2. “A decade ago, environmental cleanup was a ‘boutique industry.’ Today, it’s a cost of doing business.” - Former Under Secretary of Energy Robert Card

3. Getting to this point… • EM’s “Sweet 16” • Programmatic Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement -- a decade old • 1st five years – planning, scoping • 2nd five years – analysis, negotiation, coordination • 3rd five years – decisions, wide-spread implementation, reform • Today – refining strategy, significant results

4. Along the way… • Budgets grew…and peaked in FY 2005 (~$7.1B) • Strategies matured • Technical, acquisition, project planning • Priorities identified • Risk reduction, safety, acceleration • Significant results achieved • Team diversified • Increased use of commercial services

5. Growing pains? • Curtailed corporate life-cycle waste projections • Obstacles to disposition paths • Legal challenges to waste management policy • Technical issues • Contract protests • Ambitious goals • Unsuccessful realignment proposals • Programmatic vulnerabilities • Key stakeholder concerns

6. EM Project overview • EM project is well defined with controlled scope, cost and schedule • Complete cleanup by 2035, at a cost of ~$142B. • EM budget reflects significant progress to close major sites by 2006. • FY 2005 Comparable Appropriation -- $7.054B • FY 2006 Congressional Budget Request -- $6.505B • Scope includes remediation and processing of approximately: • 25 tons of plutonium • 108 tons of plutonium residues • 88 million gallons of radioactive liquid waste • 2,500 tons of spent nuclear fuel • 137,000 cubic meters of transuranic waste • 1.3 million cubic meters of low-level waste • 324 nuclear facilities, 3,300 industrial facilities, hundreds of radiological facilities

7. Transportation logistics and waste disposition are key to the success of the EM Project • Ensuring disposition paths are identified for all EM waste and materials • Providing and coordinating disposition resources • Optimizing operations of DOE’s waste management facilities • Improving EM’s transportation infrastructure and ensuring all shipments are completed safely and compliantly • Responding to dynamic circumstances • Addressing “gridlock”

8. EM’s transportation efforts are significant • In FY 2004, we completed approximately 20,000 shipments of radioactive waste and material • Most were LLW (~15,000) & MLLW (~1,500) • Include both Highway (~18,600) & Rail (~1,400) • In FY 2005, potential for 40,000 shipments

9. Commercial Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility (Note: Envirocare also treats waste) DOE Generator Site (no on-site disposal facility) DOE Offsite Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility (NTS and Hanford are also generator sites and dispose of some waste onsite) A complex network… Shipment lines do not portray actual transportation routes. This map is not inclusive of all past or planned shipments. From Naval Reactor sites located in several states Hanford To Permafix To Hanford Pacific EcoSolutions To Oak Ridge Treatment To Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Idaho National Lab West Valley Brookhaven Yucca Mtn (proposed) Stanford Linear Accelerator Fermi Argonne Princeton Envirocare Columbus Lawrence Livermore Mound Rocky Flats To Envirocare Fernald Nevada Test Site Portsmouth Paducah Los Alamos Permafix Waste Control Specialists Oak Ridge To Nevada Test Site To Oak Ridge Treatment Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Savannah River To Nevada Test Site Permafix From Naval Reactor sites located in several states To Yucca Mtn Transuranic Waste Disposal Shipment Spent Nuclear Fuel/High-Level Waste Disposal Shipment Low-Level Waste/Mixed Low-Level Waste Disposal Shipment Transuranic Waste Processing/Storage Shipment Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage, Treatment, or Repackaging Shipment Low-Level Waste/Mixed Low-Level Waste Treatment Shipment DOE Onsite Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility Commercial Radioactive Waste Treatment Facility DOE Offsite Radioactive Waste Treatment Facility

10. Major DOE Radioactive Waste Transfers (includes commercial facilities) • MLLW/LLW from ANL-E, BNL, Fermi, Hanford, INL, Naval Reactor Sites, Paducah, Portsmouth, PPPL, RF, SLAC, and SR for disposal [Naval Reactor sites are located in several states and are not shown on map] • TRU from Columbus for processing/storage • SNF and HLW to Yucca Mtn for disposal • SNF to INL for storage • TRU to WIPP for disposal • MLLW to PEcoS, Permafix, and OR for treatment • SNF to INL and SR for storage, treatment, or repackaging • TRU to WIPP for disposal • MLLW/LLW to Envirocare and NTS, for disposal Hanford • HLW, SNF, and D/FRR to Yucca Mtn for disposal • TRU to WIPP for disposal • MLLW/LLW to Envirocare, Hanford, and NTS for disposal • MLLW to PEcoS, Permafix, and OR for treatment • MLLW from Fernald, Hanford, INL, LLNL, NTS, OR, Paducah, Portsmouth, RF, and SR for treatment • MLLW/LLW from OR for disposal MLLW from Hanford, INL, and RF for treatment Pacific EcoSolutions (PEcoS) • SNF from Hanford, OR, and WV, and D/FRR for storage, treatment, or repackaging • M/LLW from INL for disposal Outgoing Waste Shipment Idaho National Lab (INL) Brookhaven National Lab (BNL) West Valley (WV) Fermi National Accelerator Lab Yucca Mtn (proposed) Envirocare Princeton Plasma Physics Lab (PPPL) Argonne National Lab-East (ANL-E) Mound Stanford Linear Accelerator Lab (SLAC) Columbus Lawrence Livermore National Lab (LLNL) Rocky Flats (RF) Fernald Portsmouth MLLW from Hanford, INL, LLNL, RF, and SR for treatment Nevada Test Site (NTS) HLW and SNF from Hanford, INL, SR, and WV, and D/FRR for disposal Paducah Permafix Los Alamos National Lab (LANL) Oak Ridge (OR) Waste Control Specialists • MLLW to OR for treatment • TRU to WIPP for disposal Savannah River (SR) • SNF from OR and D/FRR for storage, treatment, or repackaging • TRU from Mound for processing/storage • LLW from SR and Naval Reactors for disposal MLLW from RF for treatment Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Permafix MLLW/LLW from ANL-E, Fernald, INL, LANL, LLNL, Mound, NTS, Paducah, Portsmouth, PPPL, OR, RF, SR, and WV for disposal TRU from ANL-E. BNL, Hanford, INL, LANL, LLNL, NTS, OR, RF, SR, and WV for disposal MLLW/LLW from ANL-E, BNL, Columbus, Fermi, Fernald, INL, LANL, LLNL, Mound, Paducah, Portsmouth, OR, RF, SLAC, SR, and WV for treatment and/or disposal • HLW and SNF to Yucca Mtn for disposal • TRU to WIPP for disposal • MLLW/LLW to Envirocare, Hanford, and NTS for disposal • MLLW to OR for treatment MLLW from INL and RF for treatment Low-Level Waste (LLW) Mixed Low-Level Waste (MLLW) High-Level Waste (HLW) Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Domestic/Foreign Research Reactor Fuel (D/FRR) Transuranic Waste (TRU) DOE Generator Site (no on-site disposal facility) DOE Off-site Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility (NTS and Hanford are also generator sites and dispose of some waste on-site) Commercial Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility (Note: Envirocare also treats waste) DOE On-site Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility DOE Off-site Waste Treatment Facility Commercial Radioactive Waste Treatment Facility Waste exports from DOE Generator Sites are shown in the incoming shipment boxes for the treatment and disposal facilities. This map is not inclusive of all past or planned shipments. Incoming Waste Shipment EXHIBIT B

11. DOE Generator Site (no on-site disposal facility) DOE’s Waste Disposal Facility Configuration Hanford West Valley Knolls Fermi INL Ames RMI ANL-W Mound Bettis LEHR ANL-E LBNL Fernald Rocky Flats BCL Kansas City NTS Portsmouth Brookhaven LLNL Paducah LANL SLAC Oak Ridge Princeton (PPPL) ETEC Sandia Sandia General Atomics ITRI Savannah River Pantex Plant WIPP Legend Regional Disposal Facility LLW Operations Disposal Facility MLLW Operations Disposal Facility MLLW Operations Disposal Facility (currently on-site waste only) CERCLA Disposal Facility Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)

12. Key lessons to date… • Circumstances will change – flexibility is a must • Seeking alternate strategies for wastes planned for disposal at Hanford pending resolution of litigation • Alternate strategy for Fernald silo wastes, managed as 11e.(2) by-product material • Re-evaluation of planned closure of the TSCA Incinerator at Oak Ridge • Get back to basics • Core project management – clear scope and realistic schedule goals • Incentivize performance • Pursue economies of scale • Seek and preserve alternatives

13. The “new” strategy for waste management • Document the complex-wide program in formal schedules • Integrate sites’ baselines • Identify interfaces • Gap analysis • Cost analysis • Target problem waste streams (“orphans”) • Resume corporate life-cycle waste data system • Provide corporate treatment opportunities • Complete broad spectrum • Pursue new acquisition

14. Integration is our organizational mandate Deputy Asst. Secretary for Logistics and Waste Disposition Enhancements Frank Marcinowski • Developing national strategies – business cases – for transportation and waste disposition • Integrating sites’ parallel efforts to accelerate cleanup • Enabling and improving on baseline plans Commercial Disposition Options Christine Gelles Federal Disposition Options Cynthia Anderson Transportation Dennis Ashworth HLW, SNF, SNM, TRU Most wastes/materials GTCC, LLW, MLLW, 11e2

15. Additional Detail

16. Current DOE/EM Waste Management Policy • LLW and MLLW: • If practical, disposal on the site at which it is generated • If on site disposal not available, at another DOE disposal facility • At commercial disposal facilities if compliant, cost effective, and in best interest of the Department • TRU waste: • If defense, disposed at Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, New Mexico • If non-defense, safe storage awaiting future disposition • HLW and SNF • Stabilization, if necessary, and safe storage until geologic disposal is available

17. EM’s Waste Management Assets • Multiple onsite disposal cells (mostly CERCLA) for site-specific remediation wastes • Two regional LLW disposal facilities – Hanford and Nevada Test Site (NTS) • Planned: Two regional MLLW disposal facilities • Hanford currently limited to onsite MLLW • NTS has submitted application for RCRA Part B Permit • National repository for defense TRU waste – WIPP (Carlsbad, NM) • TSCA Incinerator (Oak Ridge, TN) • However, EM also disposes of large volumes of LLW and MLLW at commercial facilities

18. Use of commercial capabilities allows optimization of resources and supports acceleration efforts • Treatment and packaging • Certification to disposal criteria • Interim storage • Disposal • Transfer for future release and disposal • Support for accelerated site closure In many cases, the resolution of waste issue requires cooperation among multiple vendors and sites

19. Transportation safety is critical…. • EM senior management monitors transportation activity and events closely • EM Office of Transportation established and deployed to institutionalize transportation safety • Transportation Risk Reduction • Legislative & Regulatory Compliance • Site Support & Logistics • Emergency Preparedness & Outreach • In FY 2004, we completed approximately 23,000 shipments of radioactive waste and material • Shipment numbers significantly increased as site cleanup and closure continue • Utilized both highway and rail shipments

20. Over the last several years, we’ve made tremendous progress in waste management • Significantly increased volumes of waste disposed • Worked off vast majority of stored legacy waste • Resolved large quantities of “orphan wastes” at closure sites • Took steps to fully implement DOE’s complex-wide waste management policies and strategies

21. Transportation safety is critical • In FY04, EM had 23 reported off-site incidents. • Most significant incident was the release of radioactive material onto road surfaces at Oak Ridge • Other areas of concern -- load securement and shipping paper violations • FY04 Incident Rate = 23/2.0 = 11.5 Incidents/10,000 Shipments • In FY05 year-to-date, EM has had 9 reported incidents representing a ~30% reduction from the same period in FY04. • Transportation Incident Review -- Management review of corrective actions and sharing of lessons learned among sites

22. There will be significant developments in 2005 • National strategy for LLW/MLLW disposition • Workshop in May 2005 • Complex-wide treatment acquisition • Broad Spectrum contract expires mid-2005 • Seeking commercial alternatives to TSCAI • Initiation of NEPA for greater-than-class C waste disposition • Re-evaluation of commercial waste disposal needs and the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act • Maintaining delicate balance between Federal and private sectors

23. EM’s Top to Bottom Review • Secretary of Energy concerned by EM program’s lack of focus and the uncontrolled cost and schedule required to complete the cleanup mission • Top to Bottom Review (Feb 2002) concluded significant opportunities existed to accelerate risk reduction and better focus resources on cleanup • Top to Bottom Review became a mandate for significant changes within the program • Strategic plans to accelerate risk reduction and cleanup (Site “Accelerated Cleanup Plans”) • Project controls and validated baselines • Aggressive contract reform • Realignment of resources and refined mission focus • Reorganization