Overview of a Developing Data System and Future Data Call Needs Douglas Tonkay Office of Commercial Disposition Options June 22, 2005

EM planning has evolved Site Roadmaps/ 5-Year Plans Baseline EM Reports FFCAct Implementation Paths-to-Closure EM Integration Top-to-Bottom Review Project Baselines Business Strategy 1990 Today

Several reasons we need corporate waste data Business strategy and analyses –Facilitating baseline and alternate options –GFS/I requirements –Informed decisions –Disposition graphics Waste program planning (complex-wide) –DOE Order requirements Transportation planning

More reasons we need corporate waste data Dialogue with stakeholders Congressional Q&As and GAO requests International reporting –US National Report - Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management –Net-Enabled Waste Management Data Base Central Internet data base – settlement agreement

What data exists? Site baseline and contract documents –Ideally, volumes and schedules in project management systems –But……what is really out there? Site treatment plans (MLLW subset) EM Corporate Project Team Report Budget documents and “gold chart” –Corporate performance metric “LLW and MLLW disposed” –Not a complete picture

What data exists? (Continued) Disposal site data –Hanford Solid Waste EIS and RODs –Annual disposal forecasts at NTS and Hanford Ad hoc data calls, e.g., to support RODs and litigation Stream disposition data (SDD) ca –Does not reflect current site baselines –Populates “Central Internet Database” Florida International University’s Waste Information Management System (WIMS) –Last year from Oak Ridge and Savannah River

What went wrong with the last corporate waste data effort? “One shoe-sized to fit all” Many data requirements Data suppliers often not project managers Extensive work for “stop lights”/risk scores Rollup of waste stream data to a level not useful by the site project managers Streams split between budget accounts (PBSs)

What went well? Disposition maps and flow diagrams - liked by stakeholders Inventory and lifecycle waste forecast Reconciled disconnects between shipping and receiving sites Consistent format and approach Electronic data transfer Used for program decisions (WM PEIS)

What are we thinking about? Efficiently collect needed LLW/MLLW information to support business strategy and ongoing systems analysis Place minimal burden on projects Utilize existing corporate systems or processes to the extent possible Direct correlation with site baselines Configuration control – organize around a “Waste Breakdown Structure”

WBS numbering Unique MLLW and LLW stream id Example: t 1.Generator program = EM (02) 2.Generator site = Oak Ridge (01 3.Waste Class = MLLW (2), not GTCC (1), CH (1), <10nCi/g alpha (1) 4.Physical waste description = debris (01) 5.Treatment = incineration (02) 6.Disposal site = Envirocare (02) 7.Shipment mode = truck (t)

Result is a smaller data set Descriptive information provided largely through unique WBS identifier Starting inventory and life-cycle waste volume projection Some additional data with capability to add comment or.pdf files as backup Waste Streams and TSDs limited detail

Options for data collection Waste Information Management System as proposed by FIU –State-of-the art graphics and web technology –Existing system with flexible features –Ease of use and access New IPABS “Waste Baseline Module” with options for web-based access and/or electronic file transfer input –Build under corporate IT standards and requirements –Corporate visibility and acceptance –Capability for multiple and archived data sets Hybrid of the above options