Maintaining Department of Energy (DOE) Waste Disposition Pathways in Today’s Uncertain Budgetary Environment Presented by: Lori West July 2015.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Transuranic Waste Processing Center Karen Deacon, Deputy Federal Project Director Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management.
Advertisements

1 Status of DOE Cleanup in Idaho Presentation to the “LINE Commission” By Rick Provencher Manager, DOE Idaho Operations Office April 7, 2012 Idaho Falls,
1 Best Practices for Risk-Informed Remedy Selection, Closure, and Post-closure Control for DOE’s Contaminated Sites October 30, 2013.
1 EM Update and Perspective David Huizenga Senior Advisor for Environmental Management 2012 DOE Project Management Workshop April 3, 2012.
1 Terry Tyborowski Deputy Assistant Secretary, Program Planning and Budget for Environmental Management February 27, 2014 Budget Update.
1 Northeast Public Power Association Electric Utility Basics Electric Rates and Cost of Service Studies.
Long Term Storage, The Failure of the Federal Government, and NIMBY.
Safety  performance  cleanup  closure M E Environmental Management National Spent Nuclear Fuel Program Role in DOE’s Transformation Barb Beller, Project.
CEEAM Components for Energy Efficiency in Transport by Additive Manufacturing Piyal Samara-Ratna Mechanical Engineer & Project Lead Space Research Centre.
Location Strategy and Layout Strategy
Making a Difference American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Thursday, February 25, 2010 Thomas Johnson, Jr. Deputy Director, EM Recovery Act Office of Environmental.
Hanford Site: Long-term Stewardship Boyd Hathaway Realty Officer Department of Energy – Richland Operations Office Hanford Long-Term Stewardship (LTS)
I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - E x c e l l e n c e Headquarters U.S. Air Force 1 “To BRAC or Not to BRAC” What happens if there is not a BRAC? ADC.
Biodiesel Production: Government Regulations (IL) Barry Latham, M.A.Ed. Biodiesel Production & Curriculum Chemistry & Physics Instructor Chicago Heights,
MODULE “STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT”
NRC Decommissioning Activities for the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Bruce A. Watson, CHP Chief, Reactor Decommissioning Branch Division of Decommissioning,
1 Hanford Transportation and Packing Overview Presented by: Jim Portsmouth and Marshall Myrick July 2015 CHPRC
Siemens sans siemens sans bold siemens sans italic siemens sans italic bold siemens sans black siemens black italic Siemens Building Technologies.
Public Transit Department Bus and Fuel Procurement Strategy AzTA/ADOT Transit Conference April 2013.
Capabilities & Competencies An Introduction to EnergySolutions September 19, 2007 Scott Baskett Erik Vogeley.
World Nuclear Association 38th Annual Symposium September 2013, Central Hall Westminster, London Nuclear Operation and Radioactive Waste Management.
Engineering Standards Working Group Annual Meeting June 24-25, 2002 DOE Nevada Support Facility June 2002 Joe B Stringer, PE Framatome ANP DE&S.
Server Virtualization: Navy Network Operations Centers
NARUC Energy Regulatory Partnership Program The Georgian National Energy Regulatory Commission and The Vermont Public Service Board by Geoff Commons Vermont.
Solar Energy Services: Delivering Cost Effective Solar Power March 18, 2004 Claire Broido SunEdison, LLC (443) 226.
Legacy Management Strategic Plan 2010 David Geiser Director, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or Department) Office of Legacy Management (LM) November 2010.
CANDU Fuel Options: Practical Adaptability Jerry Hopwood Vice President, Marketing & Product Development World Nuclear Association, Annual Symposium September.
Acquisition and Contract Management Update Jay Rhoderick Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tank Waste and Nuclear Material AtomEco-2012.
M E Environmental Management safety  performance  cleanup  closure The U.S. Department of Energy Environmental Management Intergovernmental Meeting.
1 Office of Legacy Management FY 2007 Budget U.S. Department of Energy February 6, 2006.
Office of River Protection 2015 Hanford ORP Site Status Report
EM-1 Office of Environmental Management Building the FY 2003 Budget u Transition budget to begin implementing the top-to-bottom review u Budget consists.
Chapter 14 Global Production, Outsourcing and Logistics 1.
Integrated Used Nuclear Fuel Management Regulatory Information Conference U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission March 11, 2009 Steven P. Kraft Senior Director.
Retrieval and Treatment of Problematic MLLW Streams Renee Echols Senior Vice President CTMA Partners in Progress, July 7, 2015.
DOE Consolidated Audit Program Don Dihel, CHMM Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office 2015 Portsmouth Site Status Report September 15, 2015 ASP 2015 Workshop.
EM Budget--- Past/Present/Future Mark W. Frei U.S. Department of Energy October 14, 2005.
1 X UCOR Oak Ridge Sample Management Office 2015 Site Status Report Presented by Dr. William Rogers.
1 Goals and Targets to Direct FY2010 Budget and Stimulus.
1 What’s New in Environmental Management? Karen Shears, Director Procurement and Contracts Division Oak Ridge Office of Environmental.
Planning for FY08: Managing the Transition of the LM Organization December 2004.
APPLYING RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES PRUDENTLY Paper No 192 Presented At 2011 ICHS Conference September 13, 2001 By Michael Pero, P.E. – Director of Risk.
1 X Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management 2015 Site Status Report Presented by Vanna Gaffney.
1 West Valley Demonstration Project FY 2014 Budget Briefing Bryan C. Bower May 22, 2013.
Sustainability Elements of the ARRA, and Getting the Most out of Stimulus Funding Jeannie Renne-Malone, LEED AP National Director – Climate Change & GHG.
1 Louisiana: Our Energy Future 2009 American Recovery & Reinvestment Act.
Integrating Your Environmental Management System With Community Stakeholders Mr. Jimmy Parrish Defense Supply Center Richmond April 7, 2004 Presented To.
Radioactive Waste sites
Status of Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) Compacts and Update on Commercial LLRW Disposal Facilities.
1 EM Update Presented to the National Governors Association Federal Facilities Task Force Dr. Inés Triay Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental.
Progress in EM’s Footprint Reduction for the Oakland Projects Office Projects Rich Schassburger November 16, 2010.
Update to National Governors’ Association Patty Bubar Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary Office of Integration and Disposition May 16, 2002.
The Challenge of Getting What You Asked For Integrated Safety Management Summit Knoxville TN August 24-27, 2009 Presented By: Patrice McEahern HNF
February 26 – March 1, 2012 ♦ Phoenix, Arizona Session # 90 Long–Term Stewardship at DOE’s Hanford Site Abstract #12575 Authors & Affiliation : Rick Moren:
August 28, Waste Inventory Records Keeping Systems United States of America Douglas Tonkay U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC Office of Commercial.
South Tyneside Homes The Decent Homes Programme January 2007.
American Recovery & Reinvestment Act Office of Environmental Management Presentation to Regulators March 6, 2009 Cynthia V. Anderson, EM Recovery Act Program.
Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLW) Disposition at the
Materials & Logistics Management
John Christian President, Logistics, Processing and Disposal
Bradley Smith February 28, 2017
Goals and Targets to Direct FY2010 Budget and Stimulus
Janet R. Schlueter Senior Director, Radiation and Materials Safety
Nuclear Waste Storage Current Status and Plans
Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management Update
Improving Energy Reliability & Performance
Improving Energy Reliability & Performance
Fission vs. Fusion.
Sustainable Public Procurement
U.S. Department of Energy Perspectives on Waste Classification
Presentation transcript:

Maintaining Department of Energy (DOE) Waste Disposition Pathways in Today’s Uncertain Budgetary Environment Presented by: Lori West July 2015

2 Commercial Providers 20+ year history of developing technologies and systems to meet DOE needs Invested in and piloted technologies to address DOE’s “difficult-to-treat” wastes Used these technologies to perform treatability studies to demonstrate final waste form characteristics Fielded technologies to address unique on-site problems Built fixed-base, high throughput facilities for volume and mass reduction

3 Commercial Providers – Attributes Ability to respond quickly in the marketplace Willingness to accept moderate to high risk Privately funded Robust licenses Broad spectrum of capabilities Very adaptable to unique waste forms Ability to innovate

4 Benefits to DOE Avoiding Expense Commercially developed technologies / capabilities have formed much of the basis for DOE long-range plans for clean-up ProjectNeeded DOE Onsite CapabilityCommercial Providers Rocky Flats, Fernald, and Mound Closures Sort, Survey, Package, Stabilize Thermal Treatment Technologies for Volume Reduction LLW/LLMW Disposal Facilities Perma-Fix Environmental Services, Oak Ridge, TN Duratek, Oak Ridge, TN Energy Solutions, Clive, UT Hanford Suspect TRU and CH/RH TRU WRAP, Cool & Dim WRAP 2 and 2A M-91 Perma-Fix Northwest, Richland, WA (CH TRU) Energy Solutions, Clive, UT Miscellaneous Specialty Storage/Disposal Projects Class C/Greater-than-Class C Disposal Facilities TRU and Spent Fuel Interim Storage Facilities Energy Solutions, Clive, UT Waste Control Specialists, Andrews, TX

5 The Impact of Rocky Flats Commercial providers were encouraged to develop DOE-centric capabilities through favorable procurements Providers aggressively pursued licenses and permits to expand treatment capabilities DOE and State regulators worked with commercial providers Significant cost savings and avoidances to DOE and its contractors using commercial capabilities Rocky Flats Project set new standard for Site D&D / Remediation: $36B reduced to $6B

6 The Impact of Rocky Flats (concluded) Similar savings realized at Fernald and Mound DOE and its contractors developed significant relationships to take advantage of the commercial supply chain DOE sought to attract commercial suppliers through competitive procurements Commercial providers continue to develop capabilities almost exclusive to DOE Many spin-off capabilities in areas such as bulk transportation, container manufacture, in-field processing, etc.

7 ARRA Infusion of funds to “shovel-ready” projects Funds applied to DOE wastes in storage across the complex –Created jobs nation-wide –Boosted local economies –Produced highly specialized / trained work force to replace existing, aging work force at DOE sites –Reduced long-term waste storage, surveillance, and maintenance cost and risk to DOE and Contractors –Encouraged expansion of commercial provider capabilities / throughputs

8 ARRA At Hanford, ARRA funds were used to create more efficient use of offsite commercial facilities for suspect TRU waste treatment Cost Avoidance – $550M Originally, Hanford’s suspect TRU wastes were to be dispositioned through the $1.2B M-91 Facility Today, 90% of Hanford’s suspect TRU wastes will be dispositioned using offsite commercial capabilities at a cost of $300M… The remaining 10% will be dispositioned through a highly specialized onsite capability with a life-cycle cost of $385M

9 Post ARRA Shifts in funding priorities Drove staffing levels to below pre-ARRA levels Necessitated placement of DOE facilities into a “Minimum Safe Operational” condition –Some went “Cold and Dark” and others “Cool and Dim” Drove arbitration and work force reductions complex wide Settlement Agreements diverted funding further At Hanford, the cost savings from placing facilities in min safe condition (more than $9 million in FY13) were redirected to non-remediation activities.

10 Shifts in funding priorities Post ARRA Hanford received level funding overall (~$100M less than pre-ARRA levels) CHPRC received $550 million less than pre-ARRA levels – a >50% decrease in funding Halted all CHPRC waste retrieval, D&D, and waste management activities Drove WRAP, T Plant, CSB and others to min safe

11 Affect on Commercial Processors Some closed unprofitable processes Unfortunately, fixed costs remained the same Shareholders could not understand why, with millions of cubic feet of waste stockpiled at DOE sites, commercial processing facilities sit idle. Loss of revenues, capabilities, and expertise Sharp decrease in stock prices Layoff’s Some closed their doors

12 D&D could last years D&D funding comes from funds set aside by the commercial entity as required by law In many NRC agreement states shortfalls in D&D funds are the responsibility of the State licensing entity Affect on Commercial Processors (concluded) There is no straddling the fence – the facility is either a processing facility or a facility in some state of decommissioning. Once declared, D&D may not be revocable or licenses and permits renewable

13 Retaining Commercial Capability is Good Business Delivers cost avoidances on numerous fronts –Supports DOE cleanup objectives –Reduces the risk and cost of storing and maintaining packaged wastes and storage facilities –Avoids cost of missed milestones and needless litigation Funds from the federal level are decreasing There are very few areas in which additional efficiencies can be realized Risk of loss of commercial capacity creates a spiraling cost increase for DOE to obtain funds to create capabilities Risks continue to climb as waste is stored for longer periods

14 Protect the Investment It’s our obligation to protect this national resource on which we spent tax payer money Establish a “minimum safe” funding supply to assure continued viability of commercial supply chain What would it take? An annual investment of ~$50 M < 1% of DOE EM’s annual allotment of $5.6B would maintain the commercial supply chain What would it take? An annual investment of ~$50 M < 1% of DOE EM’s annual allotment of $5.6B would maintain the commercial supply chain Managed by the Office of Waste Management Operations

15 Questions?