[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 117 (Monday, June 18, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32797-32801]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-15281]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


DOE Response to Recommendation 2001-1 of the Defense Nuclear 
Facilities Safety Board, High-Level Waste Management at the Savannah 
River Site.

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 
2001-1, concerning high-level waste management at the Savannah River 
Site, was published in the Federal Register on April 3, 2001 (66 FR 
17689). In accordance with section 315(b) of the Atomic Energy Act of 
1954, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2286d(b), the Secretary transmitted the 
following response to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board on 
May 18, 2001.

DATES: Comments, data, views, or arguments concerning the Secretary's 
response are due on or before July 18, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Send comments, data, views, or arguments concerning the 
Secretary's response to: Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 625 
Indiana Avenue NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Mark Frei, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Project Completion, Office of Environmental Management, 
Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 
20585.

    Issued in Washington, DC on May 18, 2001.
Mark B. Whitaker, Jr.,
Departmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety 
Board.

[[Page 32798]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18JN01.000


[[Page 32799]]



Current Status of High Level Waste System Relative to DNFSB 
Recommendation 2001-1

General

    The Department shares the Board's concern about reliance on older 
equipment for long-term operations. The Department, however, believes 
that due attention is being afforded these areas. Furthermore, the 
Department believes that, because an adequate safety margin is in 
place, it is more prudent to pursue activities that result in waste 
stabilization than to focus on activities that may improve short-term 
storage conditions while delaying ultimate stabilization. The 
Department believes careful consideration was given to the technical 
safety issues and the risks and benefits were properly balanced prior 
to the re-use of old style tanks.
    While the Department shares the Board's concerns about the 
decreasing operational flexibility in the Tank Farms due to increasing 
material backlogs as a result of equipment and process problems, the 
Department does not agree that the margin of safety has been reduced by 
recent events and actions. Authorization Basis and environmental 
regulatory requirements have all been met without using reserve storage 
space.
    Finally, the Department recognizes and shares the Board's desire to 
move forward expeditiously with efforts toward long-term solutions. The 
Department is committed to ensuring the best solutions are chosen after 
careful identification and consideration of safety and programmatic 
risks. As the Board is aware, the early identification and resolution 
of technical issues significantly reduces project delays, redesign, and 
compensatory measures during the construction and operational phases of 
a project. As discussed below in response to the specific 
subrecommendation related to salt disposition, progress in this area is 
being made on schedule, and the time spent resolving issues is proving 
worthwhile.
    In summary, the Department is aware of the loss of operational 
flexibility currently being experienced in the Tank Farms as a result 
of process and equipment failures. The Department and its contractors 
are committed to restoring operational flexibility in a safe and timely 
manner. In developing this implementation plan all actions are assumed 
to be fully funded.

Specific Recommended Actions

1. Initiate actions to remove transferable HLW liquid from Tank 6 to a 
level below all known leak sites.
    The Department accepts this subrecommendation. An initial transfer 
of 40,000 gallons of liquid from Tank 6 into Tank 8 was completed on 
March 27, 2001. As committed to in our video conference call with the 
Board on March 22, 2001, the Department has continued to evaluate the 
Tank 6 condition and the overall HLW system. Based on our evaluation 
the Department has concluded that additional lowering of the waste in 
the tank to below the lowest known leak site is appropriate and this 
direction was given to the site contractor on May 1, 2001.
    DOE recognizes that situations compromising the integrity of the 
primary containment are undesirable. The Department has determined that 
the Tank 6 waste can be lowered below the lowest known leak site 
without significantly compromising the primary mission objective of HLW 
retrieval and vitrification. This will allow a reduction in Tank 6 
surveillance activities related to the status of identified leak sites.
    The Department implementation milestone for this subrecommendation 
is:
    Commitment 1.1 Pump tank to below the lowest known leak site.
    Lead Responsibility: Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Project 
Completion.
    Due Date: May 31, 2001.
2. Reassess the schedule and priority for selecting a technology for a 
salt processing capability, and vigorously accelerate the schedule 
leading to operation of a salt processing facility.
    The Department accepts this subrecommendation and will assess the 
schedule for salt processing once the preferred technology decision is 
made and will accelerate this critical activity where possible. The 
Department will then provide a briefing to the Board.
    The selection of a salt processing technology is a critical 
priority of the Department and the process remains on schedule for a 
July 2001 decision date. Radioactive waste test demonstrations 
currently in progress are a key element of the selection process. 
Acceleration of this date at this time is not considered feasible. 
Since March 2000, the Department has been working towards identify a 
preferred technology in June in accordance with the Action Plan 
defining the Savannah River Site Salt processing Project Roles and 
Responsibilities. Under this Plan, a joint Headquarters/Savannah River 
site Technical Working Group (TWG) was established to lead the effort 
for technology selection. Key activities selection include the 
development of selection criteria and conduct of extensive research and 
development testing that will address high technical risks for each of 
the technologies under consideration. These activities have been 
completed or they are on schedule to identifying a preferred technology 
in June. The Salt Processing Alternatives Draft Supplemental 
Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) has been issued for public 
comment and the final SEIS is on schedule to support the decision-
making process. The Department currently plans to have the Record of 
Decision for this SEIS embody the DOE selection, with issuance by July 
2001. Once this decision is made, the Request for Proposals (RFP) will 
be issued to seek up to two Engineering, Procurement, and Construction 
(EPC) contractors to perform conceptual design of the full-scale 
facility.
    Planning for the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) includes a 
pilot plant for the technology selected. A pilot plant is viewed as 
critical to further mitigate technical risks prior to final design and 
construction of the SWPF and will improve confidence in project 
execution. To this end, pilot-plant design, construction, and operation 
are being planned to provide meaningful input to the conceptual and 
preliminary design.
    Efforts are being made to ensure that the decision date will be met 
and that follow-on design, construction and startup activities can 
begin on schedule. It should be noted that part of the overall strategy 
for this effort is one of continually identifying and implementing 
actions to ensure that an effective salt-processing technology is 
selected and constructed on or ahead of schedule. This project is 
managed in accordance with DOE Order 413.3 and has incorporated 
``lessons learned'' from other projects.
    The Department is committed to ensuring that the best technology is 
chosen after careful identification and consideration of safety and 
programmatic risks. Given the long-term nature of this program, and 
consistent with DOE Order 413.3, the Department believes that the 
establishment of program/project milestones beyond technology selection 
is counterproductive until a firm baseline is established (35% design 
completion). However, DOE commits to continue to assess the schedule in 
an effort to accelerate this critical activity, and therefore accepts 
this subrecommendation.

[[Page 32800]]

    The Department implementation milestone for this subrecommendation 
is:
    Commitment 2.1: Make a preferred technology selection and issue 
ROD.
    Lead Responsibility: Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Project 
Completion.
    Due Date: July 2001.
    Commitment 2.2: Brief the Board on the preferred salt processing 
technology selection, schedule, and opportunities for acceleration.
    Lead Responsibility: Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Project 
Completion.
    Due Date:  July 2001.
3. Develop and implement an integrated plan for HLW tank space 
management that emphasizes continued safe operation of the Tank Farms 
throughout its life cycle. This plan should include enough margin to 
accommodate contingencies and reduce overall programmatic risk. The 
plan should also restore operating margin to the Tank Farms by 
including action to:
    The Department accepts this subrecommendation and the HLW system 
Plan update will be provided to the Board. The Tank Farm space 
management strategy is based on a set of key assumptions involving 
canister production rates, influent stream volumes, Tank Farm 
evaporator performance, and space gain initiative implementation. Tank 
space management is a sub-set of the overall integrated HLW System Plan 
and as such is a life-cycle look at the space available to accommodate 
contingencies and support site missions. The HLW System Plan is updated 
annually and considers the latest data available as well as the current 
conditions, challenges and potential impacts to Tank Farm operations. 
The next revision to the HLW System Plan, scheduled for issue in May 
2001, will provide enhance coverage of areas not previously highlighted 
and will include management of type I, II, and Type IV tanks.
    Each of the specific actions in the Board's Recommendation is 
addressed below.
    a. Reduce or eliminate the DWPF recycle stream. Several proposals 
already have been made to reduce the volume of DWPF recycle waste sent 
to the Tank Farm. A major reduction effort was implemented in January 
2000 to isolate the steam atomized scrubber system from the melter off-
gas system. This resulted in an annual 700,000-gallon reduction in 
recycle being sent to the Tank Farm. Proposals associated with the frit 
transfer system and reductions in sample line flushes resulted in 
additional water generation reductions. It is anticipated that the 
annual recycle being sent to the Tank Farm will be reduced from 
approximately 2,200,000 gallons for a 250 can-per-year production rate 
to approximately 1,400,000 gallons or less. Additional DWPF recycle 
reduction proposals, such as the installation of a DWPF acid 
evaporator, will be evaluated
    b. Recover former ITP tanks for Tank Farm operations. A schedule 
has been implemented to return Tank 49 (previously an ITP salt 
processing tank) to waste concentrate storage. A briefing for the Board 
on August 2,2000, provided the Department's plans relative to Tank 49. 
Tank 49 currently contains approximately 200,000 gallons of benzene-
bearing solution from ITP demonstration runs that must be removed prior 
to its return to waste storage service. The decomposition of benzene 
producing phenylborate compounds will be performed in two phases. The 
first phase was completed in March 2001 when the material in Tank 49 
has heated to 40 degrees Celsius. The second phase involves the 
introduction of copper catalyst to Tank 49. The first copper addition 
occurred in March 2001 and subsequent additions are scheduled to be 
completed by May 2001. Once the decomposition of the phenylborates is 
complete, the material in Tank 49 will be transferred to Tank 50. 
Modifications required to tie Tank 49 into the H-Tank Farm transfer 
system already have been completed. Tank 49 is expected to be available 
to receive concentrated waste later this year.
    Tank 50, currently being used as a receipt tank for Effluent 
Treatment Facility (ETF) bottoms, is scheduled for return to waste 
concentrate storage in late 2002. The associated construction/project 
work has been initiated to support this effort. A Baseline Change 
Package authorizing the start of this work was approved April 23, 2001.
    Additionally, Tank 48, which already is addressed in the 
Recommendation 96-1 Implementation Plan, is an option and will be 
considered for future revisions of the HLW System Plan. Lessons learned 
from returning Tank 49 to service will be incorporated into the future 
Tank 48 plans and factored into future revisions of the HLW System 
Plan.
    c. Assess the desirability of adding an additional HLW evaporator 
to support Tank Farm operations. Construction of an additional 
evaporator is not a viable alternative for the near-term. The current 
issues impacting evaporator operations are not associated with 
evaporator capacity. The current issues are process and equipment 
related which, would also exist with a new evaporator system. These 
problems are specifically addressed in paragraph (e) below. The 
Department considers that a more prudent and cost-effective approach to 
resolve the problem is by optimizing existing evaporator operations by 
means of resolving waste compatibility and equipment degradation 
problems.
    Previous studies have shown that the three evaporator systems 
currently available have sufficient capacity to handle the expected 
demands of the HLW system once the process and equipment issues 
associated with the 2H and 3H Evaporator systems are overcome. These 
studies also show that the three evaporator systems operating at 
planned capacity will provide margin to accommodate future system 
upsets and allow the option to shutdown the 2F Evaporator system at 
some point in the future. The 2F Evaporator system could potentially be 
used as a ``contingency'' when this margin is achieved.
    The Department concludes that a new evaporator is not a feasible 
near-term solution, and it projects that an excess evaporation capacity 
will exist in the long-term.
    d. Assess the feasibility of constructing new HLW tanks. Previous 
consideration of this option indicates that it is a costly approach 
that has many regulatory, stakeholder, and permitting issues. In 
addition, constructing and operating new HLW tanks would add to the 
ultimate environmental management and restoration cleanup mission. This 
option is not considered feasible as a short-term remedy to gain 
operating safety margin in the Tank Farms. It has been estimated that 
the permitting and construction period required to have tanks suitable 
for storage of HLW would take from seven to ten years.
    The Department concludes that new HLW storage tanks are not a near-
term solution, but it will evaluate them as a longer-term solution if 
salt processing capability is not achieved as planned.
    e. Resolve waste compatibility and equipment degradation problems 
to allow unconstrained operation of the three existing evaporators. 
Improvements made to the 2F Evaporator system during FY 2000 have made 
that system more reliable and current performance is better than 
expected. This system is operational and a new vessel is currently on 
hand should it be necessary to replace the existing vessel.
    The 2H Evaporator experienced erratic lift rates and was shut down 
in

[[Page 32801]]

January 2000 when attempts to correct the lift rate were unsuccessful. 
Sample results from solids previously found in the evaporator pot 
revealed that the material consisted of sodium aluminosilicate and 
sodium diuranate. Initial analysis indicated that these solids form in 
the presence of high silica and high aluminum feed. The Savannah River 
Technology Center (SRTC) continues to analyze methods of preventing the 
aluminisilicate formation in the evaporator pot. Until this work is 
completed, appropriate controls have been put in place to limit the 
amount of silica content in the feed to the 3H and 2F Evaporators.
    Operations are now underway to the 2H Evaporator to remove the 
solids. The 2H Evaporator cleaning and recovery efforts are behind 
schedule but this system is expected back into operations in FY 2001.
    The 3H Evaporator system is operating in a limited mode due to 
cooling coil problems in Tank 30 (the 3H Evaporator drop tank). A 
project to convert Tank 37 to drop tank service, by installing a drop 
line from the evaporator to the tank, has been initiated and the 
Baseline Change Proposal (BCP) authorizing funding was approved on 
April 23, 2001. The schedule to have the 3H system functioning at full 
capacity is late 2002.
    The revised HLW System Plan accounts for these difficulties and the 
resolutions described above are underway.
    The Department implementation milestone for this subrecommendation 
is:
    Commitment 3.1: Issue Revision 12 of the HLW System Plan.
    Lead Responsibility: Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Project 
Completion.
    Due Date: May 2001.
4. Reassess contractor incentives to ensure that near--term production 
at DWPF is not overemphasized at the expense of safety margin in the 
Tank Farms
    The DOE accepts this subrecommendation. The Department has re-
assessed the contractor incentive package to identify whether 
additional incentives are needed to promote near term improvements in 
Tank Farm operations.
    The current incentive package is based upon significant amounts of 
fee at risk if the safety and long-term reliability of the system is 
allowed to deteriorate in order to meet short term DWPF production. In 
trying to minimize the potential that the contractor would pursue 
short-term gain at the expense of longer-term system reliability, 
several features were incorporated into the final set of incentives 
currently being used:
    1. The number of canisters produced in the later years of the 
contract period earn larger fees than those produced earlier. This 
feature was incorporated to ensure that work on the preparation of 
sludge batch 3 was maintained and that this batch of feed would be 
ready to support the overall canister production goals.
    2. Specific evaporation and tank farm space goals were allotted 
separate incentives to ensure that the tank farm health at the end of 
the period was sufficient to support continued operations after the 
contract period.
    3. Separate incentives were identified for specific safety 
documentation goals.
    4. Minimum levels of performance were established. Failure to 
attain these levels could result in application of the Conditional 
Payment of Fee clause. Under this clause significant reductions in 
previously earned fees could result from a failure to meet the minimum 
levels of performance specified.
    5. Unallocated fee was set aside for emergent activities/situations 
that may warrant incentivization. This is a continually ongoing process 
and will be the basis for the Department's current re-assessment.
    The Department plans to assess the appropriateness of these 
incentives annually throughout the term of the existing contract.
    Commitment 4.1: The Department will provide a briefing to the Board 
on specific elements of the current incentive package at Savannah River 
Site.
    Lead Responsibility: Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Project 
Completion.
    Due Date: July 2001.
[FR Doc. 01-15281 Filed 6-15-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P