Overview of theU.S. Department of Energy
Office of Environmental ManagementMission
Jeff Griffin, Ph. D.
EM Advisor &Associate Laboratory Director
Environmental Stewardship Directorate
Savannah River National Laboratory
August 6, 2018www.energy.gov/EM1

Outline of Presentation•

Overview of EM Mission•

Scope of EM’s Cleanup Challenge•

Organization of the EM Program•

Approaches and Tools Utilized by EM•

Path Toward Completion• Hanford Site Progress• Savannah River Site Progress•Strong Record of Success• Rocky Flats• Fernald• Keys to Success• Sharing and Learning in Collaboration with Japan2

EM Mission Today
EM is charged with completing cleanup of the most complex nuclear waste sites in the U.S.
as safely, effectively and efficiently as possible.
•U.S. government’s 3rd highest liability – environmental
remediation obligations•

Facility D&D, tank waste disposition, TRU and low level
waste disposal, groundwater and soil remediation, storage
and disposal of spent fuel and other nuclear materials•

Complex regulatory environment with active stakeholders•

Approximately $6.5 billion annual budget•

Approximately $300 billion lifecycle cost to go•

Utilizing best in U.S industry•

Innovative cleanup solutions•

Focus on the field - safety paramount3

Magnitude of EM Cleanup Challenges
The EM Complex

Initial Challenge:••••

107 waste sites
Over 8000 square km
5000 contaminated facilities
Almost 400 million liters liquid radioactivewaste• 700,000 tons depleted uranium• 40 million cubic meters of contaminated soil
• Over 6.5 trillion liters of contaminatedgroundwater4

Progress Through Action
Progress to Date:
••
•
•
•
•
•

Closed 91 EM sites, leaving only 16
Reduced overall cleanup footprint by 90%
Transformed radioactive liquid waste into 4000 canisters ofsafe, stable glass (Savannah River)Remediated about 75% of soil/groundwater release sites
Completed D&D of a site’s entire uranium-enrichment
gaseous diffusion buildings (Oak Ridge)
Operating only separations facility in U.S. for nuclear
material disposition
Established nation’s only deep geological repository (WIPP)

5EM- Focused on the Sites

6

EM’s Project Management Approach• Focus on end-states• Work with regulators/communities early andoften• Approach used: Manage contract, notcontractor• Partner with contractors• Private sector companies• Employ over 20,000 for EM mission• Incorporate lessons learned• Technical• Procurement/contracting• Incentivize safety, efficiency and innovation• Set smart evaluation criteria• Expect issues• Identify early to reduce impact
7

Moving Toward Completion
Idaho
Washington• Idaho National Laboratory• Hanford
Richland Operations Office
Office of River Protection

Sites Remaining 2018

Click to edit
Master title styleKentucky• PaducahCalifornia• Energy TechnologyEngineering Center• Lawrence Berkeley• Lawrence LivermoreOhio• Portsmouth

Click to edit Master subtitle styleNevada• Nevada Field OfficeUtah• MoabNew York• West Valley• SPRUSouth Carolina• Savannah RiverNew Mexico• Los Alamos• Sandia• CarlsbadTennessee• Oak Ridge

www.energy.gov/EM8

Hanford Site Progress
Background• Cleanup mission began in 1989
• 1520 square km• 9 reactors• 2,300 tons of plutonium• 210 million liters of waste in 177 tanks• 1,715 facilities• 2,032 waste sites
Scope• Tank waste retrieval/disposition• Transuranic waste and Mixed LLW disposition• Soil/Groundwater remediation• Decommissioning and decontamination• Spent Nuclear FuelProgress• Active footprint reduction of ~200 sq. km• River Corridor Closure Contract complete• Waste Treatment Plant for liquid waste underconstruction• Pu Finishing Plant demolished• 40 billion liters of groundwater treated• Over 1.6 billion kg of materials disposed at
Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF)• Moving sludge away from Columbia River (video)www.energy.gov/EM9

Click to edit
Master title style
Click to edit Master subtitle stylewww.energy.gov/EM10

Savannah River Site Progress
Background• 800 square km• 5 reactors• Over 120 million liters tank waste in 51 waste tanks
Scope• Tank waste retrieval/disposition• TRU/Mixed LLW disposition• Soil/Groundwater remediation• Decommissioning & Decontamination• Special Nuclear Materials ManagementProgress• Over 4,000 canisters of vitrified waste (50% complete)
at DWPF• 8 waste tanks closed• Salt Waste Processing Facility construction complete –will accelerate liquid waste mission• Over 400 of 515 waste sites remediated• Reprocessing facility remains in operation• Nuclear material storage capabilities – lynchpin for U.S.
www.energy.gov/EM11

Rocky Flats – From Nuclear Waste Site to Wildlife Refuge
Starting Point:• 40 years of operation• Legal cleanup agreement• 25 square kilometer site
• 800 buildings – many highly contaminated• 21 tons of weapons grade materials• 100 metric tons plutonium
Challenge:• Manage waste, materials• Clean up, convert site to beneficial use• Work in safe, environmentally responsible, cost effective manner

Outcome:• Completed in 10 years for $7 billion• Original estimated at $37 billion over 65 years• Stabilized, consolidated waste offsite• Decommissioning and demolition of facilities• Soil and groundwater remediation
Impact:• National Wildlife Refuge• Closure contract lessons• Technological innovations
12Fernald - From Nuclear Waste Site to Wetlands Preserve
Starting Point:• 4.3 square kilometer site
• 11,000 cubic meters LLW• 1.0 square kilometer plume under Great Miami Aquifer• 1.7 million cubic meters contaminated soil
• 15 million kilograms uranium product
Challenge:• First EM site to begin cleanup• Operations halted with material in process line
• Workforce transition• Strained relationships with stakeholders
Outcome:• Completed - $80 million under budget, ahead of schedule
Impact:• Eliminated world’s largest source of radon gas• Wetlands preserve open to public• Lasting lessons learned:••••

Importance of stakeholder/regulator partnerships
Getting labor on board
Need for technological innovation
Balance of on-site disposal versus offsite shipments
13

Keys to EM Success• Commitment to completion mindset, “can-do”
attitudeKeys toSuccess• Incentivized contracts that reward schedule and cost
performance• Strong partnerships with regulators, stakeholders,community• Leveraging National Laboratories and industry forinnovative solutions• Preparing next generation workforce• Removing regulatory barriers• Timely deliberate decision-making with bias toward
actionwww.energy.gov/EM14

Strong Partnerships
Proactive engagement with partners is key to safe, efficient, cost-effective cleanup.
• Public education initiatives• Open communication – newsletters, social media, site
tours, meetings, events• Site Advisory Boards• Actively solicit input from regulators and stakeholders
on key decisions• Maximize partnerships with academia, national labs,international peers• Maintain strong relationship with appropriators• Help them understand the challenges

www.energy.gov/EM15

National Laboratory Support for EM
National Laboratories Provide Innovative Technologies andApproaches for:

•Waste Stabilization, Treatment & Disposition– Complex wide process engineering support andflowsheet development– Development of waste forms– Waste treatment technologies•Remediation & Cleanup of Legacy Contamination– Soil & Groundwater technology development– Nuclear facility decommissioning technologies•Assessment & Verification of Effectiveness– Test beds for commercial technologies– Modeling and performance assessment support– Innovative long-term monitoring approaches– Independent validation to support remediationwww.energy.gov/EM16

U.S. Japan Collaboration
Opportunities to leverage capabilities/expertise in areas of: immobilization of waste, packaging
of HLW and SNF, repository development, D&D technologies, large-scale remediation2011 – BLC established to strengthen support for Fukushima
recovery•

Provides mechanism for dialogue on safe and secure use of
nuclear energy, including response to accident•

BLC Decommissioning and Environmental Management WorkingGroup• Co-chairs: EM, EPA, MOE, METI2013 – Initiated Savannah River National Laboratory/PacificNorthwest National Lab support for TEPCO••••

Sharing expertise/lessons learned
Providing independent assessment of technologies
Providing technology and approach options
Since 2017, TEPCO has detailed an engineer to SRNL to assist
www.energy.gov/EM17

Sharing and Learning in Collaboration• DOE and it’s National Laboratories continue to be actively involved with the Japanese
Government and technical organizations on issues of mutual concern• Challenges related to EM cleanup are not unique to the U.S.
• While remaining scope is immense, EM is making steady and stable progress• Successfully putting a number of tools to work to get the job done
• Shared experience and collaborations like this are keys to success

Questions?

www.energy.gov/EM18