SURVEYING EXCESS DOE FACILITIES FOR TRANSFER TO DEACTIVATION AND DECOMMISSIONING

Transcription

1 SURVEYING EXCESS DOE FACILITIES FOR TRANSFER TO DEACTIVATION AND DECOMMISSIONING C. A. Negin, Project Enhancement Corporation J. P. Hayfield, Jr., Polestar Applied Technology, Inc. A. P. Szilagyi, U. S. Department of Energy ABSTRACT The transition of a Department of Energy (DOE) facility from an operating mission to a disposition mode requires planning for stabilization and looking ahead to deactivation and decommissioning (D&D). Initial steps to identify actions for compliance with requirements can include a survey to: 1) determine facility conditions, 2) assess hazard stabilization actions needed, 3) identify activities and estimate the cost of surveillance and maintenance while awaiting final disposition, and 4) provide insight on the likely deactivation and/or decommissioning path forward. During 1999 and 2000, approximately 20 facilities at 5 sites were surveyed by a team of engineers reporting to DOE-Headquarters (Environmental Management s National Facility Deactivation Initiative Program). This paper summarizes the results and experience gained from those surveys. In addition, it outlines the survey process, walkdown aids, and reporting protocol that have been developed to ensure consistency. The material is available via the DOE-EM web site. Managers, engineers, and planners of a facility for which the mission is ending will be interested in DOE s seamless approach to shutting down a facility. For those responsible for facilities that have already been shut down, comprehensive checklists are available to assist with stabilization, deactivation and decommissioning planning. The methods and approaches discussed are useful for complying with the transition phase of DOE O 430.1A, LIFE CYCLE ASSET MANAGEMENT (LCAM) and with DOE G , TRANSITION IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE. More and more radioactively and chemically contaminated facilities at DOE sites will become excess and ultimately require decommissioning. The survey experience and survey process addressed in this paper provide a useful method of screening such facilities for decisions related to stabilization and the D&D path forward. INTRODUCTION Background Facilities at the DOE s sites that have no future mission are defined as excess. A large backlog of excess facilities was assigned to Environmental Management (EM) in a wholesale manner in the early 1990s as site-by-site transfers. A subsequent moratorium was placed on assigning additional facilities to EM to allow time to catch up with deactivating and/or decommissioning the backlog, and for developing a more rational process fully integrated with the overall annual budget and planning process. During this time, the experience gained evolved a systematic

2 process that was incorporated in the disposition life cycle phase in a newly updated DOE Order 430.1A, LIFE CYCLE ASSET MANAGEMENT (LCAM). During the moratorium, many excess facilities remained the responsibility of programs offices; that is, Defense, Science, and Nuclear Energy. These facilities are referred to as in the pipeline for transfer to EM. In 1999, the pipeline was re-opened for identifying and planning for transfers in Contrasted with previous assignments to EM, transfer of facilities is now subject to LCAM s requirements. Four guides augment LCAM. One of them, DOE G TRANSITION IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE, includes guidance associated with the requirement to assess facilities for transfer. Its implementation has resulted in an approach indicated by Table I, which is a checklist for transfer, and Figure 1 that outlines the transfer steps. The transfer checklist is available via the WEB site cited later. Table I: Transfer Checklist # Subject Notes 1. Decision to Proceed, Planning The facility is declared excess and EM receives a request for transfer. A schedule of activities is identified using this checklist. Interface contacts are identified in 2. Physical Boundaries/Transfer Scope transferring and disposition organization. Identify all structures, outbuildings, tanks, etc. that should be in the scope of the transfer. Identify any issues related to separation of systems that serve other facilities that are not to be transferred. 3. Conduct a Facility Survey Determine condition/status of structures and systems. Identify what characterization (#11 below) is needed. Identify pre-transfer operations (#16 below) that should be conducted. 4. Cost Evaluation Break down the current surveillance and maintenance (S&M) budget into task listings and evaluate for sufficiency of S&M after transfer. 5. Budget Identify budget and target for S&M to be transferred. 6. Staffing Identify staff that know the plant and would be important to continuity for deactivation or decommissioning. Where possible, arrange for re-assignment. 7. Identify actions to be tracked prior to transfer as well as other commitments that will be assumed by EM 8. Permits, Licenses, Agreements, Safety Analysis, Stakeholder Commitments, etc. Generate a list. For example, facility repairs to be completed, contracts and purchase orders that need to remain in place, and others. Identify and coordinate with commitments that will be assumed by EM after transfer. For example, regulatory agreements to the State and DNFSB.

3 Table I: Transfer Checklist # Subject Notes 9. Nuclear & Fissionable Materials Inventory Obtain a listing. Unless otherwise agreed, removal would be the responsibility of the transferring organization (per 10. Toxic, Hazardous and Radioactive materials LCAM) and record the results. Obtain a listing. Determine what is to be removed by the transferring organization (based on LCAM justifiable criteria or as otherwise mutually agreed) and record results. 11. Characterization Summarize the radiological and hazardous chemical contamination conditions that exist. 12. Authorization Basis Report the status, list the defining documents, and identify the S&M requirements to maintain the safety envelope. Update or revise as appropriate for completion of stabilization activities. 13. Safe Shutdown Implementation Plan (if applicable) Verify safe shutdown needs. Address the configuration and contamination conditions that should be established prior to transfer. 14. Property Assets Construct a list of excess assets that are of significant value. Identify property that should transfer. 15. Schedule Integration Develop a conceptual level schedule that integrates completion of operations and stabilization with initiation of deactivation and/or decommissioning. 16. Pre-Transfer Operations For stabilization and hazard elimination activities, agree and conduct as a condition of transfer. 17. Formal documents for conducting the transfer Draft, negotiate, revise, and finalize transfer memoranda and agreements as decided.

4 Candidate Facility Identified Candidate Facility Identified Pre-Survey Pre-Survey Questionnaire Questionnaire Sent Sent and and Returned Returned D&D D&D Candidate Candidate?? No Facility Facility Owner Owner Dispositions Dispositions Yes Arrange Arrange for for Site Site Visit Visit Conduct Conduct Pre-Existing Pre-Existing Condition Condition Walkdown Walkdown Estimate Estimate Surveillance Surveillance & Maintenance Maintenance Cost Cost Identify Identify Significant Significant Hazards Hazards & Risks Risks Identify Identify Stabilization Stabilization Operations Operations Budget Budget Input: Input: Funds Funds Transfer Transfer Timing Timing Transfer Transfer Conditions Conditions Agreed Agreed?? No Resolve Resolve by by Management Management Yes Transfer Agreement (MOA) Transfer Agreement (MOA) Establish Conditions Establish Conditions Conduct Transfer Conduct Transfer Fig. 1. Facility Assessment in the Context of Excess Facility Transfer to D&D

5 Purpose The near term future will see more DOE facilities become candidate for transfer to EM. This paper focuses on newly developed processes for assessing a facility s conditions and reporting the results of that assessment. Surveying and assessing an excess facility focus on: Identifying hazardous conditions and recommending stabilization actions. Emphasis is placed on stabilization actions that require existing staff operational skills and knowledge of the facility for efficient conduct. Identifying characterization information. (e.g., radiation, radioactive contamination, radioactive and hazardous materials, structural conditions, etc.) Identifying and estimating the cost of surveillance and maintenance activities after stabilization and transfer. Providing insight on the likely deactivation and/or decommissioning path forward. The memoranda of agreement (MOA) and budget transfer subjects indicated in Table I and Figure 1 are to a large degree based on the survey report. However, those subjects are not specifically addressed in this paper. ACCESS TO MATERIALS This material is available via the DOE-EM WEB site. To go to the material, start at the DOE- EM Office of Integration and Disposition home page ( and proceed via links to the Office of Technical Integration and subsequently via the Remediation and D&D Team. PRE-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE The primary method for assessing a facility s condition is via an on-site walkdown of the facility. Prior to the walkdown a pre-survey questionnaire is used to familiarize the survey team with the facility s current status. The questionnaire addresses structures, systems, materials, degree of degradation, potential for hazardous conditions, authorization basis status, and other subjects. It is expected that the response will have sufficient familiarization detail so that the walkdown can be conducted in one day or less for simple facilities. SURVEY WALKDOWN CHECKIST The purpose of an initial walkdown is not to comprehensively document the facility, but rather to perform a screening evaluation. In some situations, a second comprehensive walkdown may be required. To support the walkdown, a detailed checklist is used that has the following major subjects, each of which is expanded in detail in the checklist. The items on the detailed checklist should serve as reminders of what to look for/at. It is not intended that each listed item be thoroughly documented; rather, practice has been to use a level of detail that is by exception.

6 That is, only conditions that are significant to safety, stability, or S&M budgets are noted/documented. The major areas of the physical survey and a limited set of examples are presented below: 1. Exterior Structure - Roofs, walls, foundations, tanks, walkways, animal nesting. 2. Interior Structure - Ceilings, floors, walls, sumps, hot cells; general housekeeping, access control provisions. 3. Environmental Compliance - Liquid and gaseous effluents including review of liquid discharge points, stacks, other emission sources, trenches and local disposal, ponds, sampling and monitoring. There is a need to understand chemical management, including spills and releases, in-building storage, and tank storage. 4. Process Systems - Systems and equipment that were used to support the facility s mission such as fluid systems, hot cells, glove boxes, mechanical process lines. These are the systems that would in general be contaminated and/or contain hazardous or special materials. 5. Infrastructure & Support Systems - Facility and process support systems and components such as HVAC, compressed air, water supply, cooling, drains, sanitary, electrical, ventilation, cranes, elevators, and many others. 6. Nuclear Safety & Materials - Presence, location, and status of plutonium, uranium, thorium, nuclear fuel, transuranics, etc. 7. Hazardous Material - Presence, location, and status of process chemicals. Environmental, industrial, biological, and chemical waste hazards. Presence of RCRA storage areas. 8. Radioactive Contamination & Waste - Presence, location, and status of internal and external radioactive contamination, radioactive waste. The detailed checklist is available via the WEB site cited above. SURVEY REPORT The survey report notes hazards, conditions and primarily recommends stabilization and characterization activities as a condition of transfer. The report is functional in nature; that is, recommendations do not address how to achieve the stabilization. That is left to the expertise of the transferor. The survey report consists of the following sections. Effort has been taken to develop a standard report that minimizes discussion and focuses on results and recommendations. The survey report format and content are available via the WEB site cited above. Survey Report; Introduction The introduction states the purpose of the report, which is to identify facility conditions and issues that need to be addressed to transfer responsibility for the facility from the current program office to EM. The second purpose is to provide EM with insight regarding the facility s

7 risks and liabilities that may influence the management of eventual downstream life-cycle activities. The introduction includes a brief facility description that includes a listing of buildings and/or external structures; and brief description of each including approximate floor area and height or number of stories. It describes process systems, process support systems, facility support systems, and major equipment within the scope of transfer. Finally, the introduction lists respective organization representatives and survey participants and their contact information. Survey Report; Summary, Conclusions & Recommendations The report summary provides an overall assessment in the context of LCAM requirements with regard to hazards and conditions. The following subjects are addressed: Prior missions for the facility for which information may be sketchy. Key points of actions required to transfer, and specifically characterization and stabilization requirements. Post-transfer S&M cost estimate and unique S&M issues. This is important to identify post-transfer budget requirements. Surveyors insights, opinions, or recommendations as to what EM should do with the facility after transfer are described, even though these are not a condition of transfer. Management risk is stated for specific vulnerabilities of the facility as a result of unknown conditions or lacking information. Survey Report; Survey Results The survey results focus on the physical conditions of the facility, its systems and spaces, and materials. The following are specifically addressed: Facility Structure The overall age, type, and condition of the structure are stated with particular attention to degrading conditions. The condition of internal structure, external structure, and roof are recorded, including the most recent structural inspections and significant repairs. With respect to the roof, determine if there have been formal inspections, if there is leakage, and when the last re-roofing was done. Process Systems - Identifies process systems and their operational status. This includes major process equipment and areas such as gloveboxes and hot cells. Indicates systems for which clean out runs should be conducted. Infrastructure and Support Systems - Identifies systems, or types of systems used for process support and facility operation. Indicates the general condition, operational status, and specifically addresses those that are in poor condition. Notes any special considerations for transfer. Nuclear Safety & Materials - Identifies nuclear materials that need to be addressed either prior to the transfer or for which EM will assume custody. If allowed by security, lists the specific types and amounts.

8 Hazardous Material - Lists hazardous materials that need to be removed or stabilized, and/or for which a permit applies. Notes fluids such as oil. Radioactive Contamination and Waste - Notes types and extent of radioactive contamination and where in general it is located. Indicates systems that are contaminated. Indicates the degree to which these will cause difficulty during deactivation or demolition, for example to gain access. If there are significant amounts of non-contaminated items/materials that require clearance prior to release, survey data is obtained to support cost estimating. Environmental - Notes any exterior special conditions or systems for environmental protection. Indicates if there are special cleanup considerations related to contamination not contained within buildings or tanks. Characterization Information - Indicates the extent to which information exists that provides quantitative information regarding the above subjects. If conditions are unknown, points out where this could be problematic. Surveillance and Maintenance - Indicates the degree to which surveillance and maintenance has been conducted routinely (if appropriate) or neglected. Notes specific areas that appear to need attention. Survey Report; Stabilization and Other Action Required for Transfer This section addresses stabilization actions and other activities that should be conducted prior to transfer. (Stabilization focuses on activities where knowledge of the current facility staff is important to operating equipment.) Typically, activities for transfer include the following: Characterization where conditions are unknown and thought to represent hazards or risks Isolation of hazards or systems containing hazardous materials that do not otherwise require stabilization actions, such as electrical systems no longer in use, etc. Stabilization such as cleanout runs for systems containing hazards, and removal of hazardous or precious materials. Removal of RCRA wastes, and/or items that would become RCRA waste as a function of transfer. This is to avoid unnecessary declaration of waste or the need to establish a RCRA storage area. Determine if any of the process equipment remaining in the facility is of historical significance, and if so, who will remove it. Agreements (Permits, Licenses, Purchase Orders, Contracts, etc.) - Provide a list and description, or supporting documents, of facility specific permits, licenses, purchase orders, contracts, and other commitments and agreements, if any, that would become the responsibility of EM upon transfer.

9 Survey Report; Surveillance and Maintenance After Transfer An overview of the post-transfer S&M regimen and an estimate of the costs are provided. The estimate will depend on the overall conditions resulting from stabilization activities, whether the facility is to be occupied or not, if equipment and utilities are operational, and if there is material requiring surveillance and security measures. S&M costs are addressed for the following categories of labor, and capital if needed: Nuclear Safety Occupational Safety Health Fire Protection Radiation Protection Emergency Management Control, Accountability, Security for SNM Training and Qualification Quality Assurance Engineering Configuration Control Environmental & Waste Management Administration Facility Structural S&M Facility Systems & Components Surveillance Site Assessment Costs and Utilities Security and other Site Services RESULTS During FY 2000, approximately 15 facilities at Brookhaven, Los Alamos, Oak Ridge, Pantex, and Savannah River sites were surveyed by a team of engineers reporting to DOE-EM teamed with on-site representatives from transferring programs and EM. By focusing on facility conditions, the walkthroughs were conducted for most facilities in less than one day, with the follow up report requiring another day or two. A standard reporting format has been developed that is focused and to the point and is drafted within a week. After both program offices agree on the results the survey report becomes an adjunct to the transfer Memorandum of Agreement. Overall the results are those envisioned by the LCAM transfer agreements. Specifically that the owning program has responsibility for stabilization and transferring the facility in a condition that supports DOE-EM assuming management of the facility s surveillance and maintenance, deactivation, and/or decommissioning in a safe condition and at a reasonable cost. CONCLUSIONS The survey experience and survey process addressed in this paper provide a useful method of screening excess facilities for decisions related to establishing conditions and the D&D path forward. Further, the methods are not necessarily limited to cases for facility transfer. Much of the process can be adapted to evaluating any facility for hazards and S&M requirements regardless of whether it is subject to change in management responsibility.