1997 Congressional HearingsSpecial Weapons
Nuclear, Chemical, Biological and Missile
1997 Congressional Hearings|
Statement of Alvin L. Alm Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I appreciate this opportunity to appear before you to discuss the Department of Energy=s (DOE) Environmental Management (EM) program and its Fiscal Year 1998 budget request. The Fiscal Year 1998 budget is a transitional one. We are shifting from a program that was projected to span many decades to one designed to accelerate cleanup and complete as much work as possible during the next ten years. We are implementing strong incentives for contractor performance and privatization with a focus on efficiency. I have challenged the program managers to develop site Ten-Year Plans with a vision of accelerating cleanup schedules to reduce risk faster and substantially reduce long-term costs. Large sites such as Hanford, the Savannah River Site, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory and Oak Ridge will take longer than ten years, some of them substantially longer, but with the implementation of the Ten Year Plan we can make considerable progress. This vision will drive budget decisions, the sequencing of projects, and the management of the program. Through the first four years of the Clinton Administration, we have succeeded in driving down many of the costs of our program while increasing productivity. The financial and management changes implemented by my predecessor have provided the springboard for the program to transition from cleanup to closure in this era of tight federal budget resources. For the Defense portion of the Fiscal Year 1998 budget for the Environmental Management program, the Department is requesting $5,052 billion in new budget authority; $1 billion for the privatization initiative; and $643 million for the Defense Asset Acquisition Account. In the Non-defense portion of the budget, we are requesting $682 million in new budget authority under our Energy, Supply, Research and Development account; $2 million in the Energy Assets Acquisition account; and $249 million for the Uranium Enrichment D&D Fund. Although the Fiscal Year 1998 budget was developed prior to the Ten-Year Plan, it is being incorporated into the Plan. We are currently reviewing and analyzing draft Site Plans submitted to Headquarters on February 28, 1997, at a summary level. We are exploring opportunities for greater productivity, improved sequencing of work, and more efficient contracting mechanisms that will reduce the overall cost of the program. I have met with the senior field managers and expect the draft National Ten-Year Plan to be released for public review and comment soon. In this testimony, I wish to focus on the following elements of the EM program:
HISTORY Fifty years of manufacturing nuclear weapons in support of World War II and the Cold War has left a legacy of environmental contamination. The U.S. Department of Energy is comparable to a major industrial complex and has been the largest government-owned industry in the U.S. The Department=s facilities occupy a total area of about 2.1 million acres -- equal in size to the states of Rhode Island and Delaware combined. This enormous infrastructure still exists, and is largely being maintained and remediated by the Environmental Management program, the largest environmental stewardship program in the world. The EM program was born in the aftermath of the Cold War. The EM budget grew from an initial $1.3 billion in Fiscal Year 1989 to $6 billion by Fiscal Year 1993. At that time, the budget was projected to rise to more than $10 billion per year by the year 2000. In Fiscal Year 1996, the Department estimated the total cost for stabilizing and cleaning up its facilities to be approximately $220 billion over a 70-year period, depending on the expected future land use and project efficiency. In June 1996, we set a new goal for cleaning up
all but the largest contaminated sites within a decade. By establishing
the vision of completing as much remediation as possible within a decade,
we can hope to see closure of most sites, and show significant progress
on the other, larger facilities. Through this strategy, we also believe
that costs can be substantially reduced by appropriately sequencing projects,
privatizing activities where appropriate, improving efficiency, initiating
fixed-price contracts and reducing support costs. ACCOMPLISHMENTS The Ten-Year Plan vision is only possible through the financial and management improvements made in the program over the last four years. Through aggressive management, the program has achieved many milestones and made many improvements, including:
Overall, we have accelerated the program's activities in the face of fewer resources. This has been accomplished through better management practices, tailoring the workforce to meet specific needs, and innovation by DOE and its contractors. CHALLENGES FACING THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM The challenges facing the Environmental Management program are enormous, and include:
These unique challenges drive the strategies and
modus operandi of the Environmental Management Program. The Department
is meeting these challenges in a manner that involves States, Tribes and
the public in an open decision-making process. To guide these efforts as
we move toward completion of our work, I have established three strategic
goals. Goal I. Reduce the most serious risks first. Unstable plutonium, spent nuclear fuel and reactor targets, and high level waste tanks are the most serious risks at our sites. The Fiscal Year 1998 request addresses these urgent risks directly. The budget will also be used to reduce the immediate and long-term storage risks associated with the radioactive decay and potential for chemical reactions in high-level waste as well as reducing the health and safety threat from corroded nuclear materials at a number of our sites, including the Savannah River Site, Hanford, the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, and Rocky Flats. Activities to reduce risks include:
Subject to authorization from the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and issuance of a RCRA Part B permit by the New
Mexico Environment Department, we plan to open the Waste Isolation Pilot
Plant (WIPP), a geologic repository for transuranic waste in Carlsbad,
New Mexico. Assuming the required regulatory approvals are obtained, during
Fiscal Year 1998, WIPP will receive shipments of transuranic waste from
the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, the Los Alamos
National Laboratory in New Mexico, and the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology
Site in Colorado. Shipments of transuranic waste to WIPP will start with
two shipments per week, ramping up to five shipments each week by the end
of Fiscal Year 1998. Three new privatization projects for the transportation
and treatment of transuranic waste are expected to yield life-cycle cost
savings of more than $250 million. Goal II. Reduce mortgage and support costs to achieve cleanup of most sites within a decade. As landlord and steward for thousands of contaminated buildings, facilities, waste streams and land for the Department of Energy, the Environmental Management program has enormous costs in simply maintaining the complex in its present state. Reducing these huge fixed costs is key to both reducing risk and reducing the burden of these costs on future generations. We are, however, in an era of decreasing federal budget resources. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the Department to use existing funding for this monumental task as efficiently as possible. EM is taking a number of steps to allocate and utilize the taxpayers' dollars in a cost-effective and official manner. One important initiative in making the EM program more efficient is reducing support costs. Currently support costs are roughly 45 per cent of the total costs at EM-managed DOE sites. EM has established a Astretch goal@ to reduce support costs to 30 per cent of the total costs at EM sites by the year 2000, and to establish an overall efficiency target similar to that used in the private sector and invest those savings in risk reduction and Amortgage reduction.@ The term Amortgage reduction@ refers to the reduction of fixed costs for safely maintaining either a facility or a single project. An example of mortgage reduction is the Plutonium Uranium Extraction facility (PUREX) at Hanford. A former spent fuel and irradiated target reprocessing facility, PUREX was costing $35 million a year to maintain in a safe condition. When the facility is completely deactivated in May 1997, the surveillance and maintenance cost will fall to a little over $1 million per year. We have used our experiences with PUREX and are applying them to the stabilization of the Hanford B-Plant to drive down mortgage costs and achieve results. The Hanford B-Plant was the second chemical separation canyon built at the Hanford site for the Manhattan Project during World War II. In 1995, annual maintenance costs for the B-Plant were $18.7 million. We intend to reduce those annual costs to $1 million or less by complete deactivation of the B-Plant. With a $35 million investment, the Hanford site expects to avoid $100 million in surveillance, maintenance and additional deactivation costs through 2002. Mortgage reduction will occur at all of our sites by speeding up cleanup and more efficiently sequencing projects. For example, at Rocky Flats, the original life-cycle cost estimate for cleaning up the site was $37 billion over a 40 year period. The latest life-cycle cost estimate for concluding our work is $6 to $8 billion over a ten-year period. There are a number of reasons for the dramatic difference in the estimates, including changes in cleanup levels and scope of work. However, the acceleration of remediation and sequencing of projects results in much of the cost savings. Accelerating cleanup at the numerous small sites around the country represents another way to reduce fixed costs. We intend to complete two-thirds of the small sites, such as the Oxnard Facility in California or the Inhalation Toxicology Research Institute and South Valley Superfund sites in New Mexico, by the year 2000. By expeditiously finishing the small sites, we can avoid significant outyear maintenance costs -- and turn over more dollars and resources to larger, more complex sites. Contract reform is also critical to getting more for our dollars. Within the Department of Energy, our program is at the forefront of contract reform. We believe that increasing competition, using results-oriented statements of work, improving financial accountability and management, increasing the use of fixed-price contracts, and using quantitative incentives to motivate the contractors to finish the job will help drive down program costs and ensure that we are paying for results, not for just Ashowing up.@ These kinds of reforms have been included in our new performance-based incentive contracts. Another important source of cost-savings will be the use of new, efficient technologies for treating and cleaning up waste. The Environmental Management program is confronted with some of the most intractable technical problems in the world. Investing in solutions to these problems is crucial to reducing the long-term costs of the program. Unlike many hazardous chemical wastes, radioactive waste cannot simply be broken down into constituent elements; it requires isolation from the environment through treatment and disposal while it decays. To continue reducing costs and risks from these wastes, we must continue to invest in technology development. But new technologies can only be effective if they are deployed in the field. For this reason, EM created the Technology Deployment Initiative to promote the rapid deployment of innovative technologies currently in the development Apipeline,@ as an alternative to using older, less effective technologies. This initiative provides incentives for Department Operations Offices to use new technologies and innovative approaches to expedite site cleanup. The initiative will fund applications of "breakthrough" technologies that meet the needs of multiple sites. By reducing and minimizing the financial risk of "breakthrough" technologies at sites across the complex, cleanups can be accelerated, savings can be achieved, and regulatory approval can potentially be streamlined by the application of more efficient technologies. One other potential for cost savings is through
integrating our waste treatment and disposal capabilities across the complex.
However, any such shifts or changes of responsibilities among sites for
the treatment and disposal of wastes will be controversial. The Department
cannot make these decisions by itself. We will continue our dialogue with
the regulators, affected communities and other stakeholders on how to achieve
an equitable and efficient use of capabilities within the complex. Goal III. Meet regulatory and safety requirements. DOE will comply with its legal obligations under laws and regulations, compliance agreements and with its commitments to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB). As the program resources become more limited, innovation and close collaboration with regulators and stakeholders will be required to achieve the objective of meeting our compliance requirements in the most practical and efficient manner possible. We will work closely with regulators and the DNFSB to assure that we are able to reach agreement on how to achieve this objective. The Fiscal Year 1998 budget funds progress toward the commitments we have made under compliance agreements and in response to recommendations of the DNFSB. Some of the key highlights in our submission include:
Over the past four years, this Administration has done much to involve local communities directly in its Federal programs. DOE has established 12 Site Specific Advisory Boards (SSABs) to advise it on the cleanup program and options for meeting its environmental and safety obligations. Where cooperation has been closest, this Aopenness@ has reduced costs in some cases. For example, working closely with affected communities and regulators has resulted in life-cycle cost savings of $1 billion at Fernald and $400 million at East Fork Poplar Creek at Oak Ridge. Ensuring the safety of our workers is a key goal
for the Department and EM. Historically, the Environmental Management program=s
safety record is better than both the U.S. average and the average for
the construction industry, but we still have to work harder at incorporating
safety as a fundamental value in our daily work as the cleanup program
gathers momentum. We have recently developed a policy of Ado
work safely or don=t
do it.@
Environmental Management continues to use management practices that incorporate
safety and health protection as a basic component of all activities. PRIVATIZATION Privatization is key to our ability to accelerate the program and reduce the mortgage. Under the traditional system, whenever the Department needed a product or service, the Management and Operating (M&O) contractor at a site would build or procure the needed item or service. In effect, the Department would pay for a level of effort plus fee. The Department has been increasingly using fixed-price contracts and other incentive-based contracting methods to assure the Department is obtaining the most effective contracts. Under our privatization initiative, contracts are competed with the private sector for the product or service, and the government pays for the product or service when it is delivered and determined to meet specifications. The competitive process alone should sharply reduce the costs of these products or services to the Department. This approach should also substantially reduce the Department=s need to build and maintain its own facilities to produce the needed product or service -- thus reducing the Department=s life cycle costs for the project as well as potentially reducing near-term outlays. The private sector instead provides the funding and assumes many of the risks that were formerly borne by the Department. The appropriations and authorization requested by the Department are necessary for the government to be able to enter into privatization contracts. The $1.0 billion budget authority for privatization in this year=s request is intended to reflect the government=s determined commitment to the privatized projects. Appropriations in the early years for privatization projects will primarily cover the costs of the government=s obligation should it choose to terminate the project prior to completion. Actual government outlays would not generally occur until the product or service is delivered under the contract as specified. Some of the major privatization projects we are proposing in Fiscal Year 1998 include: Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS). DOE has entered into two contracts for the treatment of high-level waste in Hanford tanks. In Fiscal Year 1997, Congress enacted $170 million for this activity, while the Fiscal Year 1998 budget requests $427 million. The Hanford TWRS project is proceeding consistent with a compliance agreement with the Washington Department of Ecology and the EPA. Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project (AMWTP). At the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, the Department has entered into a contract for a total of $1.18 billion with British Nuclear Fuels Limited, Inc. to treat mixed waste. $70 million has been obligated to the contract for Fiscal Year 1998. The cost savings are anticipated to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars over the cost-plus approach. Spent Nuclear Fuel Transfer and Storage. At the Savannah River Site, an open fixedprice competitive procurement will be used to select a contractor to prepare spent nuclear fuel for interim dry storage in a "roadready" form for shipping to and disposal at a Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensed geologic repository. The contractor will also be responsible for the deactivation and cleanout of the required facilities. Spent Nuclear Fuel Dry Storage. At the
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. The Department
will be privatizing the construction of a spent nuclear fuel dry storage
facility. This project will provide the capabilities to initiate interim
dry modular storage of spent nuclear fuel assemblies at the site. PROMOTING EFFICIENCY IN THE TEN-YEAR PLAN Achievement of the Ten-Year Plan requires the same elements as those driving the Fiscal Year 1998 budget, namely, reducing urgent risks, reducing fixed costs, meeting regulatory commitments and working collaboratively with regulators and stakeholders. In addition, the Plan requires stable funding and substantial productivity improvements. We plan to achieve these productivity improvements through the following mechanisms:
To implement the Ten-Year Plan, EM is establishing
a new Integrated Planning, Accountability and Budgeting System (IPABS)
to establish quantitative goals and metrics to track progress. The new
integrated management system will use projects as the basic measures of
progress, assuring a focus on completion, rather than on perpetual activities.
The new system will also eliminate current management and tracking systems,
reviews, and reports that are duplicative. PROGRESS IN RESPONDING TO CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTIVES Before I conclude, I would like to report that we are making good progress in addressing the specific concerns of Congress as expressed in last year's Defense Authorization Act. As noted previously, we have accelerated the production of vitrified highlevel waste canisters from the Defense Waste Processing Facility at Savannah River. We expect to produce 180 canisters in FY 1997, an increase of 17 percent over last year's projections for FY 1997. I am also pleased to report that to meet the commitment in the Department=s response to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 941, we have allocated $43 million to the Savannah River Site. These funds will be used to develop and implement a program to accelerate the receipt, reprocessing, stabilization, and interim storage of highlevel nuclear waste associated with Department of Energy aluminum clad spent fuel rods, and other nuclear materials. Last year the Congress authorized and appropriated $42 million above the Department's request for the waste management account. In addition to accelerating production at DWPF, the Department used the funds to demonstrate stirmelter technology at the Savannah River Site, to develop of technologies for treating highlevel waste at Richland, to fund the State of New Mexico for improvements for the transportation corridor to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), and to prepare transuranic waste at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. Furthermore, you also directed the Department
to reduce our Program Direction Account by $35 million. We have reduced
administrative overhead (i.e., support service contracts and travel) by
that amount with a primary focus on reducing headquarters expenditures.
Headquarters took over two-thirds of the reduction to non-technical support
service contracts. And we are in the process of reducing the number of
federal employees at headquarters. The EM Redeployment Initiative follows
several courses of action to achieve a reduced headquarters workforce that
is appropriate for the changing mission and the new relationship we will
have with the field offices. The initiative is consistent with the Department=s
Strategic Alignment Initiative (SAI), and the National Performance Review
recommendations. First, EM has facilitated the transfer of individual EM
Headquarters personnel to field offices, when vacancies exist, consistent
with the need to enhance the federal workforce in the field where the work
is being done. Second, EM has determined that certain national programs
could be more effectively conducted in the field and has chosen to establish
Centers of Excellence in certain technical areas as well. EM also is transferring
headquarters employees to the field to help staff these centers. Finally,
EM has aggressively pursued job opportunities for its headquarters staff
at other Federal agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency and
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to further reduce the headquarters workforce.
If these efforts do not achieve the results desired, EM will initiate a
reduction in force to bring headquarters employment down to appropriate
levels. CONCLUSION The Environmental Management program is setting an ambitious agenda for the future. The objective to clean up much of the former weapons complex within ten years will involve a strong commitment to cut unnecessary costs and improve efficiency. Even with such an effort, a substantial amount of work will still need to be undertaken beyond 2006 at larger DOE sites. Failure to reduce the high fixed costs of this program through reducing the mortgages will result in much greater long-term costs to the taxpayer. Failure also will transfer both the risks and the costs of maintaining this deteriorating system to our children and grandchildren. Our Environmental Management program meets our obligation to provide sound technical and financial investments to resolve the environmental legacy of the Cold War. I look forward to working with you on these most important challenges. APPENDIX A STATUS OF SITES IN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM HANFORD The Hanford Site, the nation=s
first full-sized plutonium production operation, encompasses 560 square
miles in southeastern Washington. The site contains production reactors,
processing plants, fuel fabrication buildings and laboratories, and many
other associated facilities. Hanford is the site of some of our most urgent
risks -- including hundreds of large, underground high level radioactive
waste tanks, some of which have leaked, and some of which may pose a danger
of explosion unless properly managed. The current and future mission of
the site is to manage the facilities and inventories of special nuclear
materials and to remedy the environmental contamination caused by activities
related to plutonium production. The Tri-Party Agreement signed between
the DOE, the State of Washington, and the Environmental Protection Agency
in 1989, and amended most recently in 1996, provides a schedule for site
activities to achieve compliance for major waste streams managed at the
site. Activities conducted under the Ten-Year Plan will dramatically accelerate
the pace of the cleanup as well as drive down the long-term costs at the
site. Accomplishments Through Fiscal Year 1997
Fiscal Year 1998 Major Commitments
Privatization for Fiscal Year 1998 Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) -- DOE is privatizing the treatment
and vitrification of approximately 56 million gallons of high-level radioactive
waste that is currently stored in 177 tanks at the Hanford site. The first
phase of the two phase project was initiated with the award in 1996 of
contracts to British Nuclear Fuels Limited, Inc. and Lockheed Martin Advanced
Environmental Services. By increasing competition and the participation
of vendors with diverse skills, the Department expects technology innovation
that will lead to better solutions in hazardous waste management and cleanup
problems and reduce costs and risks. Progress expected by 2006
IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY The Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) is a multi-purpose DOE laboratory that encompasses 890 square miles in southern Idaho. The site manages a large amount of spent nuclear fuel, transuranic, and high-level waste. The Laboratory=s Environmental Management program is driven in large part by a cleanup agreement (the Federal Facility Agreement) established under CERCLA and the 1995 Settlement Agreement between the State of Idaho, the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Department of the Navy. The Settlement Agreement accelerated waste treatment and disposal of spent nuclear fuel, transuranic waste, and high-level waste. The agreement requires the Department to begin transuranic waste shipments to WIPP by April 1999, and to remove all spent nuclear fuel from the state by Fiscal Year 2035. It allows the Navy to resume shipping spent fuel to Idaho to enable naval warships to perform their national security mission, and provides for essential DOE spent fuel shipments to occur over the next several years. Other key elements of the settlement agreement include: continuing shipments
of Naval spent nuclear fuel shipments to INEEL for examination and storage;
allowing for DOE shipments of spent fuel for purposes such as nuclear nonproliferation
and national security; accelerating waste treatment and cleanup in Idaho;
establishing INEEL as the DOE complex-wide lead laboratory for spent fuel
research and development; and provisions for improved (dry) storage of
existing spent nuclear fuel at INEEL. Accomplishments Through Fiscal Year 1997
Fiscal Year 1998 Major Commitments
NEVADA TEST SITE The Nevada Test Site, located on 1,350 square miles in the Nevada desert, was the site for many of the country=s above ground and underground nuclear tests. Since the 1992 weapons testing moratorium, the site has focused on remediating inactive sites and facilities contaminated during earlier testing activities. Low-level radioactive waste that originates from the site and from other DOE sites is disposed of on site. The contamination that resulted from historic nuclear testing activities poses a significant environmental remediation challenge for the site. Accomplishments Through Fiscal Year 1997
Progress by 2006
ROCKY FLATS ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY SITE The Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site, located approximately
16 miles northwest of Denver, comprises approximately 11 square miles.
Until 1989, the site=s primary
mission was to produce nuclear weapons components manufactured from uranium,
plutonium and other metals. In 1992, the primary mission of the site changed
from nuclear weapons production to cleanup and restoration. Rocky Flats=
mission now focuses on waste and nuclear materials management, environmental
remediation, and deactivation and conversion of facilities for disposition
or alternative uses. The highest priority at Rocky Flats continues to be
the protection of workers, the public and the environment from exposure
to plutonium and other hazardous materials, and to safeguard plutonium. Accomplishments Through Fiscal Year 1997
Fiscal Year 1998 Major Commitments
Privatization for Fiscal Year 1998
Progress by 2006
SAVANNAH RIVER SITE The Savannah River Site, located on 310 square miles in south-central
South Carolina, was established to produce special radioactive isotopes
for nuclear weapons, particularly tritium and plutonium. With the end of
the Cold War, the mission of the site changed from national defense to
environmental management. Despite this shift, the Savannah River Site remains
a major defense installation capable of processing and purifying tritium
and plutonium. The site also plays an important role in support of the
nation=s nonproliferation policy
by storing urgent relief foreign research reactor spent nuclear fuel. Accomplishments Through Fiscal Year 1997
Fiscal Year 1998 Major Commitments
Privatization in Fiscal Year 1998
Progress by 2006
The Fernald Environmental Management Project (FEMP) site, located 17 miles northwest of Cincinnati, Ohio, covers approximately 1,050 acres. From 1953 to 1989, the site produced uranium metals and compounds for the nation=s defense program. The FEMP was placed on the National Priorities List in November, 1989. In 1991, operations were halted permanently . The site=s main mission is to remediate the site and any off-site contamination. All interim removal actions have been completed to address immediate site risks. Remediation of all the operable units will be initiated by the end of Fiscal Year 1997. Accomplishments Through Fiscal Year 1997
Fiscal Year 1998 Major Commitments
Privatization in Fiscal Year 1998
Progress by 2006
WASTE ISOLATION PILOT PLANT The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) is a geologic
repository for transuranic wastes from nuclear weapons production activities.
The site is located 26 miles from Carlsbad, New Mexico, and occupies 10,240
acres. Subject to receiving required regulatory authorization from the
Environmental Protection Agency and the New Mexico Environment Department,
disposal operations at WIPP will begin in Fiscal Year 1998. Opening of
the WIPP is critical to the success of the EM Ten-Year Plan as well as
to meeting the commitments of the Idaho Settlement Agreement (i.e., requirement
to begin shipping transuranic waste from Idaho by April 1999, and remove
all transuranic waste from Idaho by 2035). Shipments of transuranic waste
to WIPP will start at a rate of two per week, ramping up to five shipments
each week by the end of Fiscal Year 1998. Accomplishments Through Fiscal Year 1997
Fiscal Year 1998 Major Commitments
Fiscal Year 1998 Privatization $ Contact-Handled TRU Waste Transportation -- The fixed-price contract will be for a private vendor to provide for transportation of TRU waste from DOE generator/storage sites across the country to WIPP in Nuclear Regulatory Commission-certified containers.
Progress by 2006
OAK RIDGE RESERVATION The Oak Ridge Reservation consists of several
major sites in the state of Tennessee, and several off-site locations.
The three main sites include the Y-12 site, which supports manufacturing
and development engineering associated with the production and fabrication
of nuclear weapons components; the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL),
whose mission is to perform leading-edge nonweapon research and development;
and the K-25 site, which was built to supply enriched uranium for nuclear
weapons production. During its 50 years of operation, portions of the Oak
Ridge Reservation have become contaminated with radioactive and hazardous
materials. Remediation of the sites is now a key mission. Accomplishments Through Fiscal Year 1997
Fiscal Year 1998 Major Commitments
Privatization for Fiscal Year 1998
Progress by 2006
APPENDIX B ANALYSIS OF THE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT BUDGET BY PROGRAM AREA The Environmental Management program is organized into four major program offices: Waste Management, Environmental Restoration, Nuclear
Material and Facility Stabilization, and Science and Technology Development,
to carry out the core missions of the Environmental Management program,
with assistance from other Departmental offices. Our Fiscal Year 1998 program
commitments are provided in Appendix A. The Department is requesting $7,246,635,000 in
new budget authority for Fiscal Year 1998. This includes $5,052 billion
in new budget authority under the Defense account. We are requesting $682
million in new budget authority under our Energy, Supply, Research and
Development account; $1 billion for the privatization initiative; $643
million for the Defense Asset Acquisition Account; $2 million in the Energy
Assets Acquisition account; and $249 million for the Uranium Enrichment
D&D Fund. This budget falls under six separate accounts:
the Energy Supply Research and Development account (roughly 9 percent of
the budget); the Defense Environment Restoration and Waste Management portion
of the Atomic Energy Defense Activities account (roughly 66 percent of
the budget); and the Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning
(D&D) Fund account (roughly 3 percent of the budget). Beginning in
Fiscal Year 1998, funding is being requested in three new appropriations
accounts: the Privatization account (roughly 13 percent of the budget);
the National Defense Assets Acquisition account (roughly 8 percent of the
budget); the Energy Assets Acquisition account (roughly 1 percent of the
budget). Waste Management Budget Request: $2,068,798,000 (27 percent of the total Environmental
Management budget) In Fiscal Year 1998, the Waste Management Program
will continue its efforts to manage safely and efficiently the storage,
treatment, and disposal of the Department=s
wastes. Waste streams managed by the Waste Management Program include high-level,
low-level, mixed low-level, transuranic, and hazardous wastes. With a focus
on mission completion as defined by the Ten-Year Plan, the Waste Management
Program will direct its efforts toward moving more waste out of storage
and into treatment and disposal. Process improvements, including privatization
and re-engineering, will contribute significantly to achieving the program=s
Ten-Year Vision. In Fiscal Year 1998 more high-level waste and
mixed low-level waste will be treated than in Fiscal Year 1997, while the
budget for both waste streams will be lowered. At the Savannah River Site,
the production of canisters of vitrified high-level waste will increase
as the Defense Waste Processing Facility approaches steady-state operations.
At West Valley, the Phase I Vitrification campaign will be completed. The
award of a privatization contract through the Oak Ridge Operations Office
will enhance the Department=s
access to commercial treatment of mixed low-level waste. The Consolidated
Incineration Facility at the Savannah River Site will also commence operations,
increasing the Department=s
capacity for the treatment of mixed low-level waste. More low-level waste
will be disposed in 1998 than in 1997, and at a lower cost. A key element of the program=s
success for Fiscal Year 1998 will be the start-up of disposal operations
at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) is required regulatory approval
is obtained. In such case, WIPP will receive shipments of transuranic waste
from the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, the Los
Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, and the Rocky Flats Environmental
Technology Site in Colorado. Shipments of transuranic waste to WIPP will
start with two per week, increasing to five shipments each week by the
end of Fiscal Year 1998. Three new privatization projects for the transportation
and treatment of transuranic waste will yield life-cycle cost savings of
more than $250 million. Stabilization of the high-level waste in the Richland
underground tanks will continue to be a high priority. More than two million
gallons of liquid tank waste at Richland will be evaporated and five of
the single-shell tanks will be stabilized. The calcining of non-sodium-bearing
high-level liquid waste at Idaho will be completed. A pilot program for the re-engineering of Waste
Management=s
treatment, storage, and disposal system will be initiated in Fiscal Year
1998. Approximately $16 million will be transferred to other DOE programs
that generate waste for the management of their newly generated waste.
By returning managerial and financial responsibility to the mission program,
waste generation and overall program cost will be reduced. The five pilot
programs will include Fermi, Argonne National Laboratory-West, the Stanford
Linear Accelerator Center, the Kansas City Plant, and tritium operations
at the Savannah River Site. Environmental Restoration Budget Request: $2,450,986,000 (32 percent of the total Environmental
Management budget) The Office of Environmental Restoration, with the largest percentage
of the Fiscal Year 1998 budget request, is responsible for the assessment
and remediation of facilities and land formerly used for nuclear weapons
production, as well as other inactive sites. These sites include contaminated
buildings, and abandoned or inactive waste disposal sites. Environmental
Restoration (ER) is sometimes referred to as the Environmental Management
Acleanup program@. The ER program has made considerable progress in continuing to increase
the amount of funds that are spent on cleanup activities and by focusing
these funds on achieving near term results. Cleanup progress has been realized
by completing all ER cleanup responsibilities at various geographic sites
across the nation and by continuing to make progress at individual release
sites (discrete areas of contamination within a geographical site) and
facilities (contaminated structures). By the end of Fiscal Year 1998, approximately
4,400 of 10,000 release sites and facilities will be completed (approximately
44 percent). The Environmental Restoration program is contributing
to the overall EM effort of moving toward completion and reducing the long-term
mortgage costs in a number of ways. Besides the ongoing large-scale remediation
work at our larger sites (e.g., Hanford or the Savannah River Site), Environmental
Restoration has had marked success with our AExit
Strategy@
for small sites that includes the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Act (UMTRA)
program and Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Programs (FUSRAP).
By the end of Fiscal Year 1998, EM will complete cleanup of 45 small sites,
leaving only fifty small sites. More specifically, out of the 46 total
FUSRAP sites, 23 sites will have been Acleaned
up@
as of the end of Fiscal Year 1998. By Fiscal Year 2000, we expect to clean
up 5 more sites. Our goal is to complete the FUSRAP cleanup by 2002. Accelerating
the pace of cleanup at these sites and reducing the costs of maintaining
them over time will free up dollars to be reinvested in the longer-term
issues. The cleanup program is on track to continue its efforts in the most
efficient, safe, and effective manner. Performance measures are in place
to accurately gauge our progress. We believe that our results orientation
will ensure that our cleanup milestones are met in compliance with negotiated
agreements and with the support of the public and stakeholders. Nuclear Material and Facility Stabilization Budget Request: $1,374,615,000 (18 percent of the total Environmental Management
budget) The mission of the Nuclear Material and Facility
Stabilization program is to reduce the high-risk conditions associated
with unstable nuclear and chemical materials stored at former nuclear weapons
production facilities and to reduce the surveillance and maintenance costs
associated with surplus buildings waiting for decontamination or final
disposition. Protection of workers and the environment from exposure and
contamination, the stabilization of hazardous nuclear and chemical materials,
deactivation of facilities to attain the lowest surveillance and maintenance
costs, and transfer of facilities to the Office of Environmental Restoration
for decontamination and decommissioning, are among the myriad activities.
This program deals with some of the Department=s
highest risks: plutonium and spent nuclear fuel. This program is working to address urgent risks
to protect the health and safety of the Department=s
workers and the public, through implementation of the material stabilization
and spent fuel management programs. The efforts to stabilize nuclear materials
include the following activities in Fiscal Year 1998: dilution of 230,000
liters of highly enriched uranium solution for conversion to low enriched
uranium oxide at Savannah River, stabilization of 240 containers of plutonium
scrap and 380 containers of plutonium-containing sand, slag and crucible
material at the Savannah River Site, and stabilization of 253 kilograms
of plutonium solutions and 1,678 kilograms of plutonium in residues at
Hanford. Although they are funded under the Environmental Restoration Program,
this program is also responsible for managing stabilization activities
at the Rocky Flats site which in Fiscal Year 1998 will include: draining
and solidifying 3,000 liters of plutonium solution, and the commencement
of full operation of the stabilization and packaging system to prepare
plutonium metal and oxides at Rocky Flats for long-term storage. The efforts to stabilize spent nuclear fuel include
the following activities which the program expects to undertake in Fiscal
Year 1998: removal of approximately 250 spent fuel assemblies and cans
containing pieces of assemblies from Idaho=s
CPP-603 fuel storage facility to safe storage; and begin removal of spent
nuclear fuel from the K-Basins near the Columbia River at Hanford and placement
in Hanford=s
dry fuel canister Storage Facility. In Fiscal Year 1998, the Department
will receive foreign research reactor spent nuclear fuel in support of
the United States=
nonproliferation initiatives. There currently are an estimated 22,000 spent
nuclear fuel elements in 41 countries. Over a period of 13 years, more
than one hundred shipments of this fuel will be received at the Savannah
River Site and the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory.
In Fiscal Year 1998, approximately 30 casks (about 1000 elements) of fuel
will be received at the Savannah River Site and five casks will be received
at Idaho. Also, the Department has begun developing alternative
technologies for the storage and the treatment of spent nuclear fuel to
a form suitable for future geological disposal. This program, which is
focused on methods to achieve direct disposal in a geologic repository
with minimum pretreatment, will continue in Fiscal Year 1998. For example,
at the Savannah River Site, this program will include experimental projects
to establish the feasibility of these alternative approaches for aluminum-uranium
alloy fuel, as well as development, in consultation with the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, of the requirements for ultimate disposition of this material
in a geologic repository. Programs to prepare spent fuel for ultimate disposition
are also underway for the spent fuel at the Hanford Site and the Idaho
National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. The program also focuses on Areducing
the mortgage@
by completing deactivation projects and related activities. For example,
in Fiscal Year 1998, deactivation activities at the B-Plant at Hanford
will be completed three years ahead of schedule, reducing surveillance
and maintenance requirements for the facility from approximately $20 million
per year to an estimated $3 million per year. This will save nearly $100
million over the life of the facility. Further, construction will begin
on the Actinide Packaging and Storage Facility at the Savannah River Site
to consolidate nuclear materials currently contained in a number of buildings
across the site. When completed, this facility will not only safely store
and secure the stabilized materials, but also will facilitate the deactivation
of numerous inactive buildings including the canyon processing facilities. For the past three years, a major component of
the deactivation program has been the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) at
Hanford. Recently, however, the Department has decided to place FFTF in
a Ahot
standby@
status pending a scheduled December 1998 determination on the possible
role of this reactor as a new tritium supply source in support of the Nation=s
nuclear weapons stockpile. The Department will submit a Fiscal Year 1998
budget amendment to reflect this consideration of FFTF for a tritium supply
mission. In recent years, the utilization of the F- and
H- processing canyons at the Savannah River Site has been under review.
The Department conducted a study in 1995 to determine the most cost-effective
utilization of these aging and costly facilities for stabilization and
potential material disposition and other future missions. The study recommended
consolidation to the F-Canyon facilities, reserving H-Canyon for cold standby.
This recommendation was not implemented because of concerns that a decision
to consolidate was premature due to limited progress complex-wide on stabilization
activities and the uncertainty of other mission needs for these facilities.
Because a number of changes have occurred since this evaluation and significant
progress has been made in stabilization activities and future mission decisions,
the Department has embarked on a new evaluation of operational strategies
for these facilities. The results of this evaluation will be used as the
basis for the multi-year plan for these facilities required to be submitted
to Congress by the Fiscal Year 1997 Defense Authorization Act. Science and Technology Budget Request: $307,881,000 (4 percent of the total Environmental
Management budget) The Office of Science and Technology conducts an aggressive national program of basic and applied research, development, demonstration, testing, and evaluation for environmental cleanup, waste management and related missions. These activities are focused on EM=s major environmental problem areas: mixed waste, radioactive tank waste, subsurface contamination, and decontamination and decommissioning. Our strategy is to invest in technology development to develop new or improved technologies in these areas to reduce risks to workers, the public, and the environment, reduce cleanup costs, and provide cleanup solutions that do not currently exist. Recognizing ongoing budgetary restraints, developing new, effective technologies presents the best opportunity to ensure a reduction of risks and costs. For instance, there are 3 million cubic meters of radioactive and hazardous buried waste in the DOE complex. The landfill caps have breached and pose a potential threat to people and the environment. In FY 1998, we expect to complete full-scale demonstration of a set of advanced landfill capping methods and monitoring techniques to mitigate this problem. New technology is critical to achieving the goals
of the Ten Year Plan -- by accelerating cleanup schedule and thereby reducing
cleanup costs, the savings from which can be applied to other cleanup projects.
We have recently performed a study of the potential cost savings from 37
of our innovative technologies and called upon the Army Corps of Engineers
to peer review our cost savings analyses. Their initial review of these
37 technologies indicates that there is sufficient documentation to support
potential cost savings in the order of magnitude of $20 billion. We are
continuing, with the help of the Corps=
expertise, to conduct a more detailed and expanded cost analysis. But these technologies must be deployed widespread
to fully realize their cost savings potential. To facilitate the use of
innovative technology, our FY 1998 budget request includes $50 million
for a new Technology Deployment Initiative that will serve as a catalyst
for the DOE Operations Offices to use new technologies and innovative approaches
to accelerate site cleanup. The initiative will completely fund the first
application of a technology meeting a multi-site performance specification.
This will allow the problem(s) to be eliminated ahead of schedule and provide
user-validated performance data and regulatory acceptance for the technology.
Cost savings will be realized through this initiative by accelerating the
cleanup schedule, applying more efficient technologies, and reducing the
programmatic risk of using alternative technologies at other sites through
the DOE complex. In 1996, the Department established a $50 million
Environmental Management Science Program in partnership between EM=s
Office of Science and Technology and the Department=s
Office of Energy Research to bridge the gap between broad fundamental research
that has wide-ranging applicability with applied technology development.
The Fiscal Year 1998 budget request includes $42 million to continue the
Environmental Management=s
Science Program, which is aimed at DOE=s
most intractable environmental problems. The research results are focused
on science areas addressing high-level radioactive waste tanks, spent nuclear
fuel, mixed radioactive and hazardous waste, waste disposal forms, and
risk, quantitative methodological, human and environmental health analyses. The Office of Environmental Management=s
risk activities are also conducted from the Office of Science and Technology.
These activities support decision making by developing policy and guidance
for implementing credible and dependable risk assessment, management and
communication processes to assure that EM funds activities to address DOE=s
most threatening and widespread environmental problems. Privatization Initiative Budget Request: $1,006,000,000 (13 percent of the total Environmental
Management budget) Privatization is a critical component in the Environmental
Management program=s
strategy to reduce costs and Amortgages.@
Under the traditional system, whenever the Department needed a product
or service, the Management and Operating (M&O) contractor at a site
would build or procure the needed item or service. In effect, the Department
would pay for a level of effort plus fee. The Department has been increasingly
using fixed-price contracts and other incentive-based contracting methods
to assure the Department is obtaining the most effective contracts. Under
privatization, contracts are competed with the private sector for the product
or service, and the government pays for the product or service when it
is delivered and determined to meet specifications. The competitive process
alone should sharply reduce the costs of these products or services to
the Department. This approach should also substantially reduce the Department=s
need to build and maintain its own facilities to produce the needed product
or service thus reducing the Department=s
life cycle costs for the project as well as potentially reducing near-term
outlays. The private sector instead provides the funding and assumes many
of the risks that were formerly borne by the Department. Appropriations
in the early years for privatization projects will primarily cover the
costs of termination in case the government should choose to terminate
the project. Actual government outlays would not generally occur until
the product or service is delivered and is determined to meet the previously
agreed-upon specifications. Privatization initiatives currently underway:
$ In
Washington -- Hanford Tank Waste Remediation
Privatization initiatives to be begin in Fiscal Year 1998:
|