Environmental Management FY 2006 Budget Request DRAFT

1
State of the DOEs Environmental Management
Program Update on DOEs Waste Disposition
Strategy
Combined Meeting of the Intergovernmental
Groups Snowbird, Utah ? November 13, 2008
Frank Marcinowski Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Regulatory Compliance Office of Environmental
Management
Inés Triay Principal Deputy Assistant
Secretary Office of Environmental Management
2
20 Years of Progress Summary

• The Departments Responsibility
• Cleanup of radioactive waste and contamination
  generated by nuclear energy research and weapons
  production
• Protection of groundwater and soil
• Reduction of risk to the nations citizens
• 2009 Marks 20 Years of Our Cleanup Effort
• Demonstrated progress in cleanup
• Technological breakthroughs
• Introduction of project management practices
• Our Future
• More nuclear waste challenges to be solved
• Implications for the worlds energy future
• Benefits from enhanced project management
  competencies

2
3
Our Vision Every Project as Successful as This
Rocky Flats today National Wildlife Refuge
1960s Plutonium Manufacturing Rocky Flats,
Colorado
Cleanup
3
4
The Inherently High-Risk Work of Nuclear Cleanup
We work with some of the most dangerous
substances known to humanity
Workers using glovebox to handle plutonium
Performing first-of-a-kind tasks in highly
hazardous work environments
Holding basin for spent nuclear fuel
Working with high-level waste
5
5
We Solve Problems That Once Seemed Unsolvable
The Departments work has led to the design,
construction and operation of first-of-a-kind
facilities and technologies.
Hanford, Washington Liquid Waste Treatment Plant
US12 Billion
Device for removing sludge from bottom of liquid
waste storage tank
Microfilter for separating solids and liquids
developed at Savannah River National Laboratory
6
6
Latest Project Success Idahos Test Area North

• Accomplished 4-1/2 years ahead of schedule, due
  to
• Regulators involvement in developing schedule,
  merging RCRA and CERCLA requirements
• Crews working as dedicated work units, moving
  from job to job, and participating in decision
  making
• Flexibility in cleanup methods e.g., explosives
  used to demolish Hot Shop

4
7
Overall Challenge Maintaining Program Momentum

• Safety and Quality Assurance
• Rigorous Project Management
• Technology and Innovation
• Communication, Collaboration, and Transparency

7
8
From a National perspective

• DOE plays a central role in critical national
  priorities
• Energy Independence
• National Security
• Global Initiatives
• Environmental Cleanup
• DOE programs established and continue to support
  the current nuclear fuel cycle
• A comprehensive waste management system is needed
  to support the fuel cycle
• As DOEs lead office for radioactive waste
  management, EM and its waste disposition
  strategies have National significance

7
9
EMs waste and materials disposition scope is
significant

• Liquid tank waste (HLW and low activity waste)
  and other HLW streams
• 88 million gallons of liquid waste, stored in
  over 200 tanks
• Also, calcined HLW and cesium and strontium
  capsules
• Transuranic (TRU) waste
• 157,000 m3 legacy wastes managed as TRU waste
• Future TRU will be generated by DOE mission
  activities

• Low-Level Waste and Mixed Low-Level Waste
  (LLW/MLLW)
• Majority of legacy wastes disposed over 1
  million m3 disposed to date
• DOE mission activities and EM cleanup generate
  LLW/MLLW wastes
• DOE owned and managed spent nuclear fuel (SNF)
• EM managed surplus nuclear materials

Enough nuclear waste to fill the Beijing National
Olympic Stadium
10
DOEs radioactive waste management priorities.

• Continue to manage waste inventories in safe,
  compliant manner
• Address high risk waste in a cost-effective
  manner
• Maintain and optimize current disposal capability
  for future generations
• Develop future disposal capacity in an complex
  environment
• Promote the development of treatment alternatives
  in the commercial sector
• Review and strengthen current DOE policies and
  directives

11
DOE waste management-related concerns.

• Availability of resources needed to support
  existing site cleanup commitments
• Increasing costs due to growing scope and market
  conditions
• Ability to address excess facilities and
  materials scope within constrained resources
• Uncertainty in availability of future disposal
  capacity
• Potential challenges to DOE policies and
  strategies
• Potential natural resource damages
• Increasing inquiries from outside DOE for access
  to DOE low-level and mixed low-level waste
  facilities, due to changing circumstances
• Uncertainty of future waste projections (GTCC)
  resulting from GNEP initiatives

12
DOEs Waste Materials Management Configuration
13
DOE-EM has extensive, proven experience in
radioactive waste management

• The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), is the
  Nations only operating deep geologic disposal
  facility that accepts defense-related transuranic
  (TRU) waste.
• Over 7,000 TRU waste shipments have been made
  (including over 189 remote- handled shipments)
  and over 57,000 m3 of waste emplaced since WIPP
  opened in 1999.

14
Transuranic (TRU) Waste Disposition Update

• Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Summary
• 57,452 m3 of defense transuranic waste disposed
• Completed 7,010 shipments
• Remote-handled (RH) shipments began from INL in
  January 2007 and from Argonne National Laboratory
  in August 2008
• 189 RH-TRU shipments received at WIPP to date
• Removed legacy TRU waste from 14 sites shipments
  from large generator sites continue
• Some smaller sites wastes were previously
  consolidated at large sites
• DOE is currently planning for an additional
  intersite campaign
• EM strives to sustain an average of 21
  contact-handled TRU (CH-TRU) and 5 remote-handled
  TRU (RH-TRU) shipments per week
• Shipping rate is dependent on waste availability
  at generator sites
• Annual shipping plan developed and maintained to
  retain complexs focus on fully utilizing the
  TRU pipeline

Shipment data as of 11/03/08
15
TRU Shipments Received as of 11/03/08
15
16
Initial FY 2009 TRU Waste Shipping Goals
16
17
Optimizing TRU Waste Disposition Plans for
Inter-site Shipments to INL for Characterization
and Treatment

• DOE intends to send both CH- and RH-TRU waste to
  Idaho National Laboratory to be treated and
  characterized prior to shipment to WIPP for
  disposal.
• DOE completed additional NEPA analysis and
  published an Amended Record of Decision (ROD) in
  Federal Register on March 7, 2008.
• Approximately 2,067 CH-TRU shipments and 188
  RH-TRU shipments could move to INL for treatment
  and characterization
• Approximately 795 shipments of CH TRU and 621 of
  RH TRU would then require transport to WIPP for
  disposal
• Planning for implementation of intersite shipment
  campaign continues.
• However, DOE will continue to comply with the
  Idaho Settlement Agreement terms and milestones
• Implementation to begin in late 2008 with NTS
  shipments to INL, during planned maintenance
  outage at WIPP

18
Potential Inter-site TRU Shipments to INL

• Generator/Shipping Sites
• Hanford Site (Richland, WA)
• Nevada Test Site (Las Vegas, Nevada)
• Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley,
  CA)
• Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
  (Livermore, CA)
• GE Vallecitos Nuclear Center (Sunol, CA)
• Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne, IL)
• Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory (Schenectady, NY)
• Separations Process Research Unit (SPRU)
  (Schenectady, NY)
• Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant (Paducah, KY)
• Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory (Nuclear Fuel
  Services) (Erwin, TN)
• Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory (West Mifflin, PA)
• Sandia National Laboratory (Albuquerque, NM)

Sites analyzed in 2008 SA and ROD
19
Low-Level and Mixed Low-Level (LLW/MLLW)
Disposition Update

• On-site disposal continues at most sites
• Expansion of some on-site facilities underway or
  planned
• New on-site facilities under evaluation for
  future large DD projects
• Volumes requiring off-site waste disposal
  continue to drop
• Expect trend to continue due to DOE budget
  constraints.
• Retention of off-site disposal options is
  critical, as some streams require it
• Taking steps to optimize disposal operations at
  DOE facilities
• Commercial disposal continues to be cost
  effective alternative for many lower activity
  debris and soil streams
• Many MLLW treatment needs are met by off-site
  commercial firms
• Closure of TSCA Incinerator planned in FY 2009

20
LLW/MLLW Issues and Priorities

• Near term disposal plans will likely be
  constrained, and opportunities to optimize costs
  are critical to continued disposal progress
• Increased emphasis of near term planning and
  cost-benefit analyses
• Economies of scale are being sought
• Off-site waste shipments to Hanford remain
  suspended
• Pending completion of the Hanford Tank Closure
  Waste Management EIS and subsequent decisions
• DOE disposal capacity for MLLW (at NTS) ends in
  Nov 2010
• Future alternatives are being evaluated, but
  remain uncertain
• Legal issues stand to impact general availability
  of NTS
• Forecast volumes remain somewhat uncertain
• For example, some higher activity MLLW volumes
  fall out of TRU inventory

21
Off Site LLW/MLLW disposition has declined On
Site disposition follows similar trend, but at
higher volumes
22
DOE EM is closely monitoring changing
circumstances in the nations LLW management
system

• Reduced disposal access for Class B C wastes
• Calls for changes to Low Level Waste Policy Act
• Possible increased disposal demand to address
  disused sealed sources
• Changes in disposal marketplace
• Developments in Texas compact (Waste Control
  Specialists)
• Changes in treatment capabilities
• Contemplated changes in NRC waste classification
  systems and waste related guidance documents
• Branch technical position on concentration
  averaging
• Updated guidance on storage of BC wastes

23
High-Level/Liquid Tank Waste Management
Disposition Overview

• Liquid waste management activities comprise
  nearly one third of the EM annual budget
• Efforts span a wide range of activities,
  including scientific analysis, design
  engineering, RD, technology development, tank
  farm operations, treatment facility construction,
  treatment and disposition operations
• Tank retrieval progress continues
• Implementation of Section 3116 authorities
  continues at Idaho and Savannah River Site (SRS)
• Allows residual waste (tank heels) to be left in
  place and managed to meet LLW requirements
• Permits separated and treated low-activity waste
  to be disposed on site
• Tank closures achieved at Idaho and SRS
• Facility construction continues
• Waste Treatment Plant and related facilities at
  Hanford
• Integrated Waste Treatment Unit at Idaho for
  Sodium Bearing Waste
• Salt Waste Processing Facility at SRS
• Regulatory analysis underway regarding calcined
  HLW
• Significant EM effort to support DOE defense of
  Yucca Mountain License Application

24
High-Level/Liquid Tank Waste Management Update

• HLW Corporate Board established two meetings
  held
• The Board will identify need for and develop
  policies, planning, standards and guidance and
  provide the integration necessary to implement an
  effective and efficient national HLW program
• The Board will also evaluate the implications of
  HLW issues and their potential impact across the
  complex and recommend solutions
• Corporate issues
• Need to better document and understand tank
  inventory
• Tank farm integrity, operability, life extension.
• Effectiveness of different pre-treatment
  technologies
• Tank residual goals to be driven by performance
  assessment
• Waste determination technical issues
• Strategy for disposal of hazardous waste forms in
  repository
• Actively reviewing and revising EM HLW-related
  standards and guidance to reflect new
  information, support current activities and align
  with repository requirements

25
Surplus and Special Nuclear Material Disposition
Update

• Surplus Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU)
• Enriched Uranium Disposition Project established
  in August 2006
• Utilize H-Canyon at the Savannah River Site (SRS)
  to disposition about 21 metric tons of surplus
  HEU located across the DOE complex (includes 13.5
  metric tons of HEU in the form of aluminum-clad
  spent nuclear fuel)
• HEU down-blended to low enriched uranium for use
  into commercial fuel
• Excess Uranium
• Secretarial Policy on Management of DOEs Excess
  Uranium Inventory issued in March 2008
• Request For Proposal for potential sale/reuse of
  initial lots of excess uranium located at the
  Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant issued in
  August 2008
• Continue with planning for disposition of other
  excess uranium materials located at Portsmouth
  and Paducah sites
• Surplus Plutonium-239
• Decision to consolidate surplus non-pit plutonium
  from Hanford, Lawrence Livermore National
  Laboratory, and Los Alamos National Laboratory to
  SRS issued September 2007
• Consolidation ongoing Hanford on track to
  complete by September 2009
• Two-pronged disposition strategy identified as
  preferred alternative June 2008 subject to
  completion of NEPA
• Other Nuclear Materials
• Implementation Plan for Disposition of Surplus
  U-233 approved October 2007
• Implementation Plan for Pu-238 Disposition and
  Consolidation under preparation

26
EM-owned Spent Nuclear Fuel Update

• Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF)
• Prepare EM Strategic Plan for Management and
  Disposition of SNF
• Process aluminum clad SNF in H-Canyon as part of
  Enriched Uranium Disposition Project
• Package non-aluminum clad SNF at INL and Hanford
  for disposal in Yucca Mountain
• Continue planning efforts to consolidate aluminum
  clad SNF at SRS
• Assist ongoing NRC review of License Application
  for Yucca Mountain
• Continue ongoing activities in receipt of foreign
  and domestic research reactor fuel

27
In closing

• Many DOE activities are linked to National
  priorities
• DOE missions and many US initiatives rely on the
  DOE waste management system
• EM has 20 years of progress and experience in
  safely managing radioactive wastes and nuclear
  materials
• We solve problems that once seemed unsolvable
• A strong partnership with our regulators and
  stakeholders is required to maintain and support
  the DOE waste management system

28
Additional and Background Information
29
Greater-Than-Class C (GTCC) LLW EIS

• The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act
  Amendments of 1985 assigned the Federal
  Government DOE the responsibility to develop
  disposal capacity for Greater-Than-Class C (GTCC)
  Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW)
• The Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005 required
  DOE to provide a report on the estimated cost and
  schedule to develop an environmental impact
  statement on GTCC LLRW disposal
• Report to Congress submitted in July 2006
• Also requires submission of a second Report to
  Congress on disposal alternatives and action by
  Congress before Record of Decision (ROD) can be
  issued

30
Status of GTCC EIS Activities
7/10
5/09
5/09
Submit Report
Issue Draft
Issue Draft
to Congress
EIS
EIS
Disposal on
Alternatives
Summer 09 Conduct Public Meetings
Await Congressional Action
7/07 9/07 Conducted Public Scoping Process
(9 public meetings and 250 commenters)
TBD
TBD
Issue Record
Issue Record
6/10 Issue Final EIS
of Decision
of Decision
31
Preliminary Waste Inventory for EIS Analysis
32
Disposal Alternatives for EIS Evaluation

• Remarks
• EIS will identify whether legislation or
  regulatory modifications that may be needed to
  implement any of these alternatives
• Combination of alternatives may be feasible
• EIS being structured so that decisions can be
  made on a waste stream-by-waste stream basis

33
Summing up GTCC LLW EIS

• Preparation of EIS in full scale production
• Waste inventory developed but subject to change
• Public scoping comments received and are being
  considered
• Additional opportunity to comment on Draft EIS
  (mid 09)
• High level of internal and external coordination
• Action by Congress required before disposal
  decision

34
DOE programs established and continue to support
the current nuclear fuel cycle
Irradiate fuel in reactors for defense purposes
Remove spent nuclear fuel from reactor
Fabricate uranium fuel
Reprocess spent nuclear fuel
Recovered uranium from spent nuclear fuel
Convert and enrich uranium
Mine uranium ore
35
and a comprehensive waste management system is
needed to support the fuel cycle
Trasuranic waste
Low-level waste
Irradiate fuel in reactors for defense purposes
Remove spent nuclear fuel from reactor
Fabricate uranium fuel
Reprocess spent nuclear fuel
Low-level waste
Recovered uranium from spent nuclear fuel
Convert and enrich uranium
High- level waste
Plutonium/ Uranium for weapons fabrication
Mine uranium ore
Depleted uranium Low-level waste
Mill tailings waste