Presentation on theme: "DOE Office of Environmental Management GREENING, MAINTAINING AND DISPOSITIONING EMS REAL PROPERTY ASSETS Donna Green Office of D&D and Facility Engineering."— Presentation transcript:
DOE Office of Environmental Management GREENING, MAINTAINING AND DISPOSITIONING EMS REAL PROPERTY ASSETS Donna Green Office of D&D and Facility Engineering June 13, 2011
Outline EM Background –Mission –Facilities –Deactivation and Decommissioning (D&D) ARRA Accomplishments: Footprint Reduction Maintenance Program Reviews EM Sustainability –Performance Status –Challenges –Path Forward –High Performance Sustainable Building Strategy Summary Questions 2
3 EM Mission Largest environmental cleanup effort in the world, originally involving two million acres at 108 sites in 35 states Safely performing work in challenging environments Involving some of the most dangerous materials known to man Solving highly complex technical problems with first-of-a-kind technologies Operating in the worlds most complex regulatory environment Supporting other continuing DOE missions and stakeholder partnerships Complete the safe cleanup of the environmental legacy brought about from five decades of nuclear weapons development, production, and Government- sponsored nuclear energy research.
EM Mission: Program Priorities Essential activities to maintain a safe, secure, and compliant posture in the EM complex Radioactive tank waste stabilization, treatment, and disposal Spent nuclear fuel storage, receipt, and disposition Special nuclear material consolidation, stabilization, and disposition High priority groundwater remediation Transuranic (TRU) and mixed/low- level waste disposition Soil and groundwater remediation Excess facilities deactivation and decommissioning (D&D) 4
Locations of Major EM Sites Hanford Reservation Idaho National Lab Carlsbad - WIPP Savannah River Site Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office Oak Ridge - ETTP
Facilities: EM Real Property Assets Real Property AssetsDOE a EM b All Facilities Operating Only Facilities All EM (LPSO and Tenant) All EM (LPSO and Tenant) EM-LPSO Sites Total Footprint Owned121 MGSF 30.5 MGSF 25% of DOE 14.4 MGSF 11.9% of DOE 11.1 MGSF 9.2% of DOE RPV Owned c $94.8 B $17.4 B 18.4% of DOE $11.2 B 11.8% of DOE $8.8 B 9.3% of DOE Number of Assets - Buildings and Trailers 18,751 2,4031,8561468 Number of Assets - OSFs d 2,2711,719 1420 Total Number of Real Property Assets 4,6743,575 2,888 a Source: FIMS historical data for FY 2010. DOE assets reported include land and leased assets. b Source: FIMS historical data for FY 2010. Does not include leased property or land. Operating only facilities refers to those facilities designated in FIMS with a status code of Operating (1), Operating Standby (2), or Operating Pending D&D (6). c RPVs (Replacement Plant Value) across DOE complex updated in November of 2010. Many sites using FIMS asset models based on RS Means. d OSFs (Other Structures and Facilities) are assets not considered buildings (i.e. fences, paved surfaces, tanks, piping, and electrical systems).
7 EM Footprint Reduction to Date The graph below shows EM footprint reductions through FY 2010 and planned reductions due to disposal in FY2011 and FY2012. It does not reflect new construction or transfers into EM.
Deactivation and Decommissioning (D&D) D&D: The process of taking an active/excess/abandoned facility to a final disposition end state. D&D presents unique hazards that must be addressed from a safety, programmatic, environmental, and technological standpoint due to residual radioactivity, and other hazardous constituents, and the physical condition of EMs facilities. These facilities contain many complex systems (e.g. ventilation), miles of contaminated pipelines, glove boxes, and unique processing equipment that require labor intensive deactivation and decommissioning methods. More information about DOEs D&D program: www.em.doe.gov/pdfs/DDMaps.aspx 8
9 ARRA Program Funding Will demolish more than five million square feet of facilities by end of FY 2011 Will demolish more than six million square feet of facilities by end of FY 2012 Many of these facilities are not at EM sites EM Received $6 Billion in Recovery Act Funding - $3.32 Billion Allocated to D&D, Greatly Accelerating D&D over EM Baseline
ARRA Program Performance Metrics Target to Date (3/31/11) ARRA Total Actual to Date (3/31/11) CH TRU Waste Processed (Certification Ready) 6,485 m 3 6,103,207 sq. ft. m 3 4,036 m 3 sq. ft. 4,201,775 sq. ft. 20%80%100%60%40%0% m 3 3,824 m 3 Facility Square Footage Demolished sq. ft. 2,296,841 sq. ft. 120% 10 CH TRU Waste Certified for Final Disposal 3,740 m 3 m 3 2,224 m 3 m 3 2,226 m 3 7,888 m 3 Transuranic Waste Dispositioned from Inventory m 3 2,959 m 3 m 3 2,790 m 3 8 sites TRU Small Quantity Site Completions 3 3 sites 3 sites 81,301 m 3 LLW/MLLW Disposed (Legacy and NGW) m 3 78,925 m 3 m 3 72,498 m 3 Facility Completions 261 facilities 180 facilities 155 facilities Mill Tailings Disposed (Moab) 2,004,035 tons tons 2,184,252 tons tons 1,762,235 tons
Base Program FY 2011 Metrics FY 11 Actual to Date (3/31/11) FY 11 Target to Date (3/31/11) FY 11 Total Target 20%80% 100% 60%40%0% 11 Liquid Waste eliminated 892,000 gallons 375,000 gallons 508,000 gallons HLW packaged for disposition 311 containers 140 containers 158 containers 1,943 m 3 1,142 m 3 CH TRU Waste Certified for Final Disposal 1,151 m 3 m 3 5,984 m 3 Transuranic Waste Dispositioned from Inventory 1,832 m 3 m 3 2,728 m 3 LLW/MLLW Disposed (Legacy and NGW) 14,297 m 3 m 3 10,691 m 3 m 3 7,475 m 3 Facility Completions 121 facilities 34 facilities 47 facilities 188 release sites Remediation Complete 26 release sites 23 release sites 692,860 tons Mill Tailings Disposed tons 369,106 tons 346,430 tons
EM Maintenance Program Reviews Purpose –Meet EM responsibilities for oversight and awareness –Verify compliance with DOE Order 430.2B –Assess site programs for maintaining safe operating conditions at shut-down facilities EM-Headquarters and Field Offices jointly conducted reviews at: –Hanford –WIPP –Savannah River 13
Maintenance Program Review Results Results –Site maintenance programs are well managed –Field Offices and Contractors have a good understanding of maintenance needs –DOE corporate maintenance metrics for EM do not consistently reflect site conditions –EM has many beyond-design-life facilities and recapitalization investments have been limited –EM Guidance and site policies for surveillance of shut-facilities are generally implemented to ensure that critical maintenance needs are identified and addressed. 14
15 EM Maintenance Metrics Source: a – 2010 FIMS Snapshot, January 2011 b - 2010 FIMS Snapshot, EM Operating Facilities Only c – 2010 IFI Crosscut budget
EM Real Property Improvements EM sites continue to improve the quality of data in the FIMS database –Adding facilities to FIMS –Improving accuracy of replacement plant value estimates –Improving quality of Condition Assessment Surveys and resulting deferred maintenance estimates Savannah River replaced a forty year old coal-fired boiler with a new energy-efficient biomass cogeneration facility through an ESPC –EM may have more opportunities to recapitalize infrastructure through ESPC and similar mechanisms 16
EM FY2010 Sustainability Performance While completing significantly increased mission work: Met energy and water intensity reduction goals Slight decrease in Scopes 1 and 2 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Minimal increase in Scope 3 GHG emissions Nearly 40 percent increase in fleet petroleum use over FY2005 No buildings meet the High Performance Sustainable Building (HPSB) Guiding Principles 17
EM Sustainability Path Forward Broaden our risk management considerations to include greenhouse gas emissions and resource consumption in our decision making –Consider green remediation where appropriate In addition to potential reduction in fossil energy use, green remediation offers the potential for reduced water use, improved storm water management, and soil sequestration of carbon –Consider in-situ decommissioning (entombment) where appropriate –Use HPSB Guiding Principles as opportunity to reduce lifecycle costs and GHG emissions –Pursue ESPCs, UESCs, and similar third party financing mechanisms to recapitalize infrastructure and meet sustainability goals 19
In-Situ Decommissioning (ISD) ISD is the permanent entombment of a contaminated facility ISD Projects –Savannah River P-Area Production Reactor –Hanford U-Plant Canyon –Idaho National Lab 125 to 200 potential facilities $2.5 to $4 billion savings 900 to 1900 thousand metric tons CO 2 avoided 20 Before After
EM HPSB Strategy EM has few new buildings coming on line and will mainly need to address existing buildings - possibly including shut down and process buildings Approximately 50% of the Guiding Principles are to establish and implement site-wide policies, plans, or specifications EM sites implement most of the green procurement and waste minimization requirements and can take credit for existing programs Many Guiding Principles do not apply to non-occupied buildings Guiding Principles that do apply to non-occupied buildings can be valuable tools to reduce life-cycle costs and GHG emissions HPSB Guiding Principles are consistent with EMs environmental protection mission 21
Summary EMs mission supports DOEs sustainability goals EM assets are well-maintained considering age EM sites continue to improve the quality of FIMs data HPSB Guiding Principles can be tools to reduce GHG emissions and life-cycle costs ESPC and similar financing mechanisms might help EM meet its sustainability goals and recapitalize its infrastructure 22
Questions Contact Information: Donna Green Supervisor Office of Deactivation & Decommissioning and Facility Engineering Office of Environmental Management Department of Energy 202-586-1467 fax: 202-586-1492 E-mail: email@example.com@em.doe.gov For More Information: Office of Deactivation & Decommissioning and Facility Engineering http://www.em.doe.gov/EM20Pages/DDFE.aspx D&D Maps: http://www.em.doe.gov/pdfs/DDMaps.aspx 23