U.S. Department of Energy’s Analytical Services Program George E. Detsis Manager, Analytical Services Program Office of Corporate Safety Programs, HS-31 Presented before the DOE Annual Site Environmental Report Workshop October 26-28, 2010 Argonne National Laboratory, Chicago, Illinois

Presentation Outline Program Overview FY2010 Radiological Waste Issues Distribution of FY2010 Findings Priority I Finding Context FY2011 DOECAP Planned Audits

Elements of Analytical Services Program Systematic Planning and Data Assessment Tools and Training Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program Department of Energy Consolidated Audit Program

Analytical Services Program Mission Reduce data quality uncertainty Ensure waste accountability/disposition Identify potential DOE liabilities/risk for elimination/reduction

SPADAT Visual Sample Planning Improves quality of environmental field and facility sampling strategies Minimizing number of samples needed to meet regulatory requirements

Environmental Field Sampling VSP programming will automatically locate un-sampled areas and add samples to ensure hotspot detections

Within Building D&D Use of VSP to plan sampling designs and data analysis for Beryllium surveys and decommissioning or decontamination of buildings New tools for building setup from images/pdf files, furniture libraries, delineation of rooms, and multi-floor visualization.

Software Development Toolkits Program Accomplishments Field training (6) – cost shared (2) Grand Junction Office - November 3-4, 2009 ANL – January 19-22, 2010 LLNL – June 8-11, 2010 ASP Workshop – September 24, 2010 Hanford CHPRC Rad Techs – August 30-31, 2010 Hanford CHPRC Soil and GW Experts – July 7-8, 2010 Extensive VSP work with the Office of Legacy Management (Grand Junction Project Office) for ground water monitoring/trending software in support of long-term surveillance Quick consultations with DOE field on VSP applications

MAPEP Background Program Purpose: To test and evaluate environmental analytical laboratory performance To provide defensible data that instills confidence in DOE decision-making

MAPEP Background Program Focus: ISO & ISO Accredited PT Provider with traceability to NIST Radiological, stable inorganic, and organic constituents Soil, water, air filter, and vegetation media Interaction with DOECAP and QSAS MAPEP required for all laboratories performing analysis for DOE Technical assistance

MAPEP Laboratories MAPEP Laboratory Participants: 110 Domestic Laboratories 27 International Laboratories Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Laboratories New Zealand (1) Brazil (1) Ecuador (1) Spain (1) Cooperative Monitoring Canada (2) United Kingdom (6)

MAPEP Laboratories MAPEP Laboratory Participants: Middle Eastern Nations Jordan (3) Oman (1) Kuwait (2) Qatar (2) Turkey(1) Morocco (1) Israel (1) Lebanon (1) Tunisia (1) International Atomic Energy Agency (1)

The Fifth Annual Workshop for Radiation Measurements Cross Calibration Doha, Qatar

MAPEP Accomplishments Radiological and Environmental Sciences Laboratory (RESL) Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, Idaho Construction of new RESL facility in Idaho Falls scheduled for completion in June 2011 Proficiency testing results indicate that less than 1% failure rate of all analyses performed (approximately 14K annual analyses for about 1400 annual MAPEP samples) MAPEP open to all laboratories supporting DOE’s missions and programs

Proficiency Testing Analyses MAPEP Series 23Matrix Id. Total Samples Foreign Labs Mixed-Analyte SoilMaS11727 Mixed-Analyte WaterMaW13724 Semi-volatile Organic Water OrW240 Radiological VegetationRdV8023 Radiological Air Filters RdF9019 Gross alpha/beta WaterGrW7617 Gross alpha/beta FilterGrF7517 Over 700 Samples Distributed to Participating Laboratories in MAPEP Series 23 (2010)

Proficiency Testing Analyses Fiscal YearSeries Number of MAPEP Samples # of Analyses by Laboratories FY0715 & FY0817 & FY0919 & FY1021 & Consistent Growth in Samples Distributed and Total Analyses Performed by Participant Laboratories for MAPEP

DOE Consolidated Auditing Program DOECAP identifies and reduces the Department’s risks and liabilities, ensures defensible environmental data, and verifies radioactive and chemical waste disposition tracking/accountability/treatment/disposal. Overall Goal: Improve performance FY10 DOECAP Auditing Activities: FY10 DOECAP Auditing Activities: 27 Analytical Environmental Laboratories -26 audits -1 laboratory closure audit 11 Treatment Storage and Disposal Facilities -8 radiological TSDFs -3 non-radiological TSDFs

Radiological Waste Issues Waste Identification and Labeling Waste Storage and Processing Shipping Radiological Screening

Waste Identification and Labeling Materials were not recognized as wastes, and therefore not properly managed as hazardous, radiological, or mixed waste Waste was not being properly characterized Container labels were either illegible due to deterioration or were not visible due to improper orientation of the container

Waste Storage and Processing Waste not being disposed within regulatory time limits Unstable stacking of waste containers and pallets Insufficient lift compaction for Class A waste materials (under challenge) Potential worker exposure during radiological waste sorting processes

Shipping Incorrect weights, volumes, or units on shipping documentation Failure to verify sum of fractions unity evaluations Incorrect documentation due to incorrect interpretation of “environmental sample” exemption Incorrect Emergency Response Contact information

Shipping (cont.) Failure to properly retain shipping records (not scanned into records retention systems) Failure to properly train shipping personnel Unclear or insufficient shipping Standard Operating Procedures Acceptance of rail shipment prior to actual receipt

Radiological Screening Insufficient training and guidance for radiological screening activities and processes Failure to perform radiological screening Improper or indefensible radiological screening

Distribution of FY2010 TSDF Findings

Distribution of FY2010 Lab Findings

FY2010 Findings Review DOECAP conducted: 38 audits in FY % of all FY2009 audit findings were closed during FY2010: 88% of the Lab findings 82% of the TSDF findings New Findings Identified: FY2006 = 233 FY2007 = 340 FY2008 = 218 FY2009 = 273 FY2010 = 219

Priority I Finding (current programmatic definition) A factual statement issued by the DOECAP to document a significant item of concern, or significant deficiency regarding key management/programmatic control(s) or practice(s), which represents a concern of sufficient magnitude to potentially render the audited facility unacceptable to provide services to the DOE, or present substantial risk and liability to DOE if not resolved via immediate and expedited corrective action(s).

Priority I Finding (example issues) Key programmatic/systematic failures Imminent threat to worker or public safety/health Documented unlawful or unethical practices Significant data quality failures Failure to implement corrective actions/repeat deficiencies

Priority I Finding (programmatic context) A Priority I finding constitutes the highest censure the DOECAP can issue against an audited facility Each DOE contract holder using or potentially using the facility must determine for themselves if they will utilize a facility that has been issued a Priority I finding

Audit Findings Priority II Finding: Nonconformance with internal requirements/ procedures Undocumented procedures/processes Nonconformance with DOE requirements Observation: Isolated instances/minor deficiencies Opportunities for improvement

Auditing Criteria -- USAGE INQUIRY FOR FY 2011 Multiple DOE field site contractual agreements with laboratories/waste vendor facilities Anticipated FY 2011/2012 Usage ($) Identify auditor participation (program line/field)

FY2011 Planned TSDFs Audits Diversified Scientific Services, Inc., Kingston, TN Energy Solutions, LLC, Oak Ridge, TN Energy Solutions of Utah, Clive, Utah Materials and Energy Corporation, Oak Ridge, TN Perma-Fix Northwest, Richland, WA Perma-Fix of Florida, Gainesville, FL Waste Control Specialists, Andrews, TX IMPACT Services, Inc., Oak Ridge, TN Clean Harbors Environmental Services, Aragonite, UT Clean Harbors Environmental Services, El Dorado, AR Clean Harbors Environmental Services, Deer Park, TX

FY2011 Planned Lab Audits ALS Laboratory, Fort Collins, COLionville Laboratory, Exton, PA ALS Laboratory, Salt Lake City, UTMCL, Inc., Oak Ridge, TN American Radiation Serv., Port Allen, LAORISE, Oak Ridge, TN B&W Y-12 ACO, Oak Ridge, TNRMAL, Oak Ridge, TN B&W RAC Laboratory, Lynchburg, VAPaducah Analytical, Paducah, KY BC Laboratories, Inc., Bakersfield, CAPortsmouth Analytical, Piketon, OH Caltest Analytical Laboratory, Napa, CAShealy Environmental, Columbia, SC CEBAM Analytical, Inc., Bothell, WASouthwest Research, San Antonio, TX Davis and Floyd, Inc., Greenwood, SC Test America, Inc. Arvada, CO Eberline Analytical Corp., Oak Ridge, TN Test America, Inc. Earth City, MO Eberline Analytical Corp., Richmond, CA Test America, Inc. Knoxville, TN GEL Laboratories, LLC, Charleston, SC Test America, Inc., Richland, WA

A DOECAP Laboratory Audit – in progress

A DOECAP TSDF Audit – in progress

Proficiency Test Preparation

ASP Program Contact Information George E. Detsis, Analytical Services Program (ASP) Manager Phone: (301) Jorge Ferrer - DOECAP Manager, DOE -- Oak Ridge Phone: (865) Guy Marlette, MAPEP Coordinator, DOE -- Idaho Phone: (208) Brent Pulsipher, VSP Coordinator, PNNL Phone: (509)