Robert Edwards, ManagerDepartment of Energy

Portsmouth/Paducah Project OfficeNovember 18, 2016

DOE Environmental Management On-site Waste Disposal

2016 Intergovernmental Meeting

www.energy.gov/EM 2

Environmental Cleanup–a Key DOE Strategic Goal

• EM supports DOE’s Strategic Plan to

position the Department to meet the

challenges of the 21st century and

the nation’s Manhattan Project and

Cold War legacy responsibilities.

• Goal is to reduce the environmental

liability associated with the EM

program (third largest US government

financial liability).

• Waste Management is a key element

in achieving success.

www.energy.gov/EM 3

DOE EM Waste Management Approach

Management strategy set through

Waste Management Programmatic EIS

• Treatment

All sites conduct minimal

treatment/packaging

• Storage

All sites store on-site pending disposal

• Disposal

SRS, Oak Ridge, Idaho, Hanford, NNSS,

and LANL may dispose LLW on-site at

existing landfills

All sites may dispose LLW at commercial

facilities if cost effective

• Remediation/D&D LLW may be

similarly disposed

www.energy.gov/EM 4

Waste Management Planning - Large Sites

WashingtonHanford

Richland Operations OfficeOffice of River Protection

New MexicoLos Alamos

IdahoIdaho National Laboratory

MissouriWeldon Springs

KentuckyPaducah

South Carolina Savannah River

Tennessee Oak Ridge

OhioFernaldPortsmouth

In 1999, the major cleanup site estimates indicated approximately 50

million cubic meters of environmental media and demolition debris

needed to be addressed.

www.energy.gov/EM 5

DOE EM Waste Management Alternatives

Off-site alternative

Make a site-wide decision to ship

waste that does not meet existing

landfill disposal criteria to licensed

off-site disposal facilities

On-site alternative

• Design, build, and operate

on-site waste disposal

facility

• May continue to dispose of

waste that meets existing

landfill requirements.

• Ship waste not meeting on-site

disposal criteria to licensed off-

site disposal facilities

No-action alternative

Continue making decisions project-

by-project

Offsite shipping routes (representative)

www.energy.gov/EM 6

Alternative Considerations

On-site Alternative Considerations

• Depth to groundwater

• Distance to residential property,

floodplains, streams, and DOE

property boundary

• Expandability (aesthetics)

• Terrain stability

• Impacts to NEPA

considerations (e.g., wetlands,

threatened or endangered

species, etc.)

Off-site Alternative Considerations

• Transportation risk

• Waste packaging

• State equity

• Cost

• Uncertainty in future disposal

capacity

• Uncertainty in future disposal

waste acceptance

www.energy.gov/EM 77

CERCLA Decision Process

Public comment

period (45 days)

Public meeting will

be held

Provide a

Responsiveness

Summary to

comments received

during the public

comment period

Ongoing project

briefings with

SSAB/CAB,

community leaders,

and other

interested parties

CERCLA Process

Regulatory

concurrence

Public Participation

RI/FS

Report*

Description of and

rationale supporting

the recommended

alternative

Regulatory

concurrence

Proposed

Plan

Public comment

period (45 days)

Public meeting will

be held

Formal Public

Participation

Final decision

document

Record of Decision

(ROD)

Plan for enhanced

public participation

www.energy.gov/EM 8

DOE EM Onsite Waste Disposal

Fernald

Los Alamos National LaboratoryTechnical Area 54, Area G

Portsmouth

Paducah

Idaho National LaboratoryIdaho CERCLA Disposal Facility

RWMC LLW Disposal Facility

Idaho Tank Farm Facility

Remote-Handled LLW Facility

Hanford Site200 West Burial Grounds

200 East Burial Grounds

Integrated Disposal Facility

ERDF

18 Tank Farms

Savannah River SiteE Area LLW Facility

Saltstone Disposal Facility

F Area Tank Farm

H Area Tank Farm

Nevada National Security SiteArea 5 Rad Waste Management

Area 3 Rad Waste Management

Oak RidgeEM Waste Management Facility

EM Disposal Facility (expansion cell)

SWSA 6

Existing CERCLA Disposal Facility

LLW Operations Disposal Facility

Closed Disposal FacilityFuture CERCLA Disposal Facility/Decision

Future LLW Disposal Facility

Disposal Facilities

Weldon Springs

www.energy.gov/EM 9

Weldon Spring Site

• Construction groundbreaking for on-site cell occurred April 24, 1997.

• The disposal cell contains approximately 1.48 million cubic yards of waste.

• Final placement of waste in the disposal cell took place on June 3, 2001.

• Transferred to Office of Legacy Management in 2003; now part of Weldon Spring

Interpretive Center.

www.energy.gov/EM 10

Hanford Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility – ERDF

• Disposal construction completed; operations began in 1996

• Operating facility covering 107 acres.

• 18 million tons of contaminated soil, debris and solid wastes from

cleanup activities at the Hanford site have been placed in the

disposal facility.

www.energy.gov/EM 11

2006

• Operations began in the first of

eight cells in 1997.

• Excavated and dispositioned

over 2.95 million cubic yards of

contaminated soil and debris

• The final cap of cell 8 was

installed in 2006

• The site transferred to the Office

of Legacy Management in 2006

• Site renamed Fernald Reserve

in 2007

Fernald On-Site Disposal Facility (OSDF)

www.energy.gov/EM 12

Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF)

• Idaho Cleanup Project is one of Idaho’s three site missions

• Construction of the first landfill cell began in 2001; placement of waste began in

September 2003

• Operations continue with a capacity of 510,000 cubic yards of waste

www.energy.gov/EM 13

Oak Ridge Environmental Management Waste Management Facility (EMWMF)

• Operations began in 2002

• Capacity of 2.2M cubic yards is approximately 70% full

• Cleanup of the K-25 site anticipated to be complete in 2020

www.energy.gov/EM 14

Site Activities

• Surveillance and Maintenance

Routine

Operational

• CERCLA Five-Year Reviews

• Site-Specific Working Groups

Share Lessons Learned

Independent Technical Reviews

• Stakeholder and Public Outreach

Public Meetings

SSAB/CAB meetings

Site Specific meetings

www.energy.gov/EM 15

Low Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group (LFRG)

• LFRG: Internal regulatory oversight group for Low-Level Waste

(LLW), including CERCLA disposal facilities to protect long-term

environmental and public impact

LFRG reports directly to EM senior management

Membership:

Co-Chairs from EM 4.31 and EM 4.2

DOE-HQ Organizations – EM, AU, NNSA, NE, SC

DOE Sites – ID, EM-LA, NSO, ORO, ORP, PPPO, RL, SRS

• Currently there are 13 disposal facilities (LLW & CERCLA)

All facilities require a Performance Assessment (PA) and Composite

Analysis (CA)

All 13 disposal sites require Disposal Authorization Statements (DAS)

All documentation required to be updated and revised periodically

www.energy.gov/EM 16

DOE Office of Legacy Management

• Monitoring and Oversight

continue after DOE EM’s

mission is complete

• Sites transfer to Office of

Legacy Management

• Post-closure responsibilities of

LM maintain oversight of

onsite waste disposal facilities Regulatory monitoring

requirements continue

Public outreach and

information continues

www.energy.gov/EM 17

Onsite Waste Disposal Benefit

• Over lifecycle, provides cost savings in contrast to off-site disposal

• Accelerates cleanup by allowing more funds to be directed to cleanup

• Reduces program risk by allowing control of waste disposal availability, increasing success rate for sequencing strategies and project execution

• Reduces transportation risk and eliminates associated carbon emissions

www.energy.gov/EM 18

Current Decisions – Portsmouth OSWDF

• A Record of Decision was signed in 2015 between DOE and Ohio EPA for the construction of the On-site Waste Disposal Facility to support cleanup efforts at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant

• Construction efforts began in 2016, clearing 300 acres, installing a 3,000’ raw water line, a 10,000’ fence and ancillary facilities

www.energy.gov/EM 19

Current Decisions – Oak Ridge EMDF

• A new onsite disposal facility is currently

being planned in Oak Ridge to support

future cleanup work at Y-12 and ORNL

• The new facility is estimated to be

roughly 2.2M cy in capacity and be

located in Bear Creek Valley, not far

from the existing EMWMF

• The project is currently near the end of

the RI/FS phase

• The FFA parties have reached a tentative

agreement on a path forward; Proposed

Plan anticipated in spring/summer 2017

www.energy.gov/EM 20

Current Decisions – Paducah OSWDF

• Place On-Site Waste Disposal

Facility Decision and potential

construction on hold for 10 years –

re-appropriate current funds for the

C-400 investigation

• Continue Lifecycle baseline

planning to fully integrate

sequencing remedial actions and

D&D of PGDP

• Delay burial grounds actions until

after the potential OSWDF is

constructed to maximize fill-to-

debris ratio

www.energy.gov/EM 21

Waste Management Summary

In these budget-constrained times, it is more important than ever that DOE optimize its waste management system to ensure environmental cleanup can continue

• Continued integration and flexibility are critical • Financial and economic factors present real constraints • Pending and contemplated regulatory changes will also have impact

The Path Forward….

• Continue to encourage innovation and identification of new disposition options

• Continue close consultation with and among stakeholders • Ensure plans are risk informed