***Joint***

***Waste Minimization Coordinator Conference Call and***

***P2 in ER Conference Call***

***Minutes from the Thursday, 11/16/00 Call***

[Introduction]{.underline} - Bob Fleming (301-903-7627)
*robert.fleming@em.doe.gov*

Bob introduced the conference call participants and stated that even
though he is no longer involved in P2 directly, he has observed the
effects of successful P2 integration into ER and D&D projects and
encouraged ER project managers and teams to investigate P2
opportunities. He noted that the P2 assessment team process has provided
sites with a new avenue for identifying cost saving and waste reducing
practices.

[P2 Assessment Update]{.underline} - Lisa Burns (513-782-4686)
*lburns@theitgroup.com*

Lisa reported that the LEHR, Rocky Flats, and Brookhaven Graphite
Research Reactor (BGRR) P2 Assessment Final Reports have been issued and
can be obtained by calling or e-mailing your request to her.

The INEEL Test Area North Excess Facilities P2 assessment will be final
in early December. The assessment focused on the disposition of excess
industrial building materials (an estimated 500,000 cubic yards of
waste) and landfill waste from the Test Area North. The waste is
contaminated with chemicals, asbestos, and very small amounts of
radioactive contamination. The assessment team identified alternative
dispositions for the waste rather than disposal. Some of the
opportunities identified included the following: 1) utilizing The Oak
Ridge National Electronics Recycle Center, 2) recycle/reuse of concrete
and rubble, 3) optimizing material disposition by using contractual
mechanisms such as bulk metals contracts or assets for sales contracts,
and 4) integrating P2 into project planning by creating thorough
building profiles, and applying regulatory guidelines for recycling
regulated materials such as the TSCA Megarule.

The INEEL Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC) P2
assessment took place in September of this year. The draft report will
be available in early December. Processes at INTEC generate hazardous
and radioactive liquid waste, which is stored in the Tank Farm. The
Settlement Agreement between DOE, the Navy, and the State of Idaho
requires that all sodium-bearing waste in the Tank Farm must be calcined
by the end of 2012. Each gallon of new liquid waste added to the Tank
Farm thus becomes one more gallon which must be processed prior to these
commitments. An agreement signed in 1997 by the DOEs Assistant
Secretary for Environmental Management and the Manager of the DOE Idaho
Operations Office required INTEC to develop a Waste Minimization Plan
that detailed how the INTEC would reduce liquid waste going to the Tank
Farm by 43% from FY-98 through FY-02. A new incentive package for an
annual reduction of 47%, was signed by Bechtel BWXT, LLC in October
1999. The 2000 goal is now 50 % reduction. These agreements and
commitments provided the INTEC personnel with an important incentive to
continually search and implement liquid waste reduction solutions. The
Expert Team was asked to assist the INTEC personnel in identifying
additional methods and techniques to reduce radioactive liquid waste.

The processes at INTEC which were assessed included the New Waste
Calcine Facility filter leach process and decontamination procedures
(wet and dry), spent fuel, flushes and filtration, and laboratory
operations. The assessment team identified opportunities in each area.

A P2 Experts Team brochure has been developed and is available by
contacting Lisa or Greg McBrien. The brochure explains how the P2
assessment process works and provides some details on how to request and
assessment at your site or project. Please let Greg McBrien or Lisa know
if you are interested in having a P2 assessment done at your site. The
P2 assessment program will continue this fiscal year.

The P2 assessment reports, as well as the brochure and other information
regarding P2 in environmental restoration will be available on the DOE
P2 website in late December. The new address will be transmitted to call
participants when it is up and running.

[INTEC P2 Assessment]{.underline} - Rick Demmer, Radioactive Liquid
Waste Reduction Group (RLWR) Manager; 208-526-3412; *rickd@inel.gov*

Rick stated that the P2 assessment process helped the RLWR group
identify concerns and challenges that INTEC must address in order to
reduce the liquid waste entering the tank farm. The assessment forced
the group to examine what has already been deployed at INTEC and what
opportunities remain to be evaluated for potential implementation. The
P2 assessment team, along with the INTEC staff, identified over 40
potential P2 alternatives during the site assessment.

Rick stated that the RLWR group chose eight of the P2 alternatives to
evaluate immediately for cost-savings and waste reduction potential.
These were opportunities that could be implemented rather quickly. Once
the report is issued, additional alternatives may be evaluated further.

The alternatives chosen for potential implementation include: evaluating
micropurge (low-flow sampling), using the old spent fuel basin water as
the make-up water for the newer FAST basin (eliminates treatment of old
basin water and conserves water), investigating filter leach process
modifications, re-starting the CO2 pellet blasting decontamination
process, integrating P2 into the NWCF and Tank Farm Closure Plans, and
replacing the old acid waste scrubber duct system with stainless steel
ducts and hoods.

Rick also discussed INTECs demonstration process for two novel
decontamination processes, the Siemens Power Corp. low waste
decontamination technology (HP/CORD-UV) and the liquid abrasive grit
decontamination process. Both technologies were very effective and
reduced waste from decontamination activities. Call or e-mail Rick for
more information.

[BGRR Decommissioning Project P2 Applications]{.underline} - Clyde
Newson, BGRR Project Engineer; 631-344-2646; *newson@bnl.gov*

The BGRR decommissioning project is following an accelerated
decommissioning strategy. The BGRR is being decommis­sioned in compliance
with the Brookhaven Interagency Agreement (IAG), between DOE, EPA and
the of New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC),
and the EPA/DOE Joint Policy on Decommissioning DOE facilities. This
joint agreement specifies that DOE facilities should be decommissioned
as removal actions under CERCLA.

The BGRR removal action objectives include achieving the Record Of
Decision (ROD) in a man­ner which protects human health and the
environment, achieves future land-use objectives

(which are yet to be determined), removes or permanently isolates
contaminants of concern, and minimizes the impacts of waste management,
transportation and disposal. The removal action will reduce the
footprint of the graphite pile in order to reach a stable end-point, as
determined by the stakeholders.

Characterization information for the BGRR has been limited, but is an
ongoing process. The BGRR decommis­sioning project team, lead by Bechtel,
decided on an approach of limited characterization up-front in the
proj­ect and more detailed characterization as the project commences in
order to speed up the work activities and not spend so much time doing
sampling and analysis early in the project. Waste estimates and waste
types were based upon limited characterization data. The estimates were
calculated utilizing extensive historical information and documents to
create assumptions for waste planning purposes.

Clyde stated that the P2 assessment team provided three very important
functions for the BGRR project team:

1\) The assessment helped the project team focus on waste issues; how
much, the cost, and the alternative disposition options.

2\) The P2 expert team provided new insights into changing regulations,
such as the TSCA megarule, and what effect these have on the BGRR waste
streams.

3\) The P2 assessment report provided the BGRR project team with a
document that could be shown to stakeholders to explain how the team has
investigated and evaluated waste reducing and cost reducing
alternatives.

Clyde also stated that the project team has already utilized some of the
ideas and approaches identified by the P2 assessment team and have found
that these techniques can be applied to many aspects of the project on a
continuing basis. Please let Lisa know if you would like a copy of the
final report.

[Call Participants:]{.underline}

Bob Fleming; EM-44

Susan Weber; EM-22

Dottie Brown; EM-33

Dwight Emerson; EH

Tony Bindoikas; DOE CH

Harvey Rice; DOE Oak Ridge

Doug Maynor; DOE OH Field Office

Mike Sweitzer; DOE AL

Lisa Burns; IT Corp.

Rick Demmer; INEEL

Brian Bowers; Paducah

Tamar Krantz; Rocky Flats

Clyde Newson; BNL

Doug DuVon; Bechtel Hanford

Dave Janke; INEEL

Carol Laumeier; SAIC

Dave McCune; Oak Ridge, Bechtel