Upload
alannah-cameron
View
214
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Balancing Institutional Controls and Beneficial Reuse at
U.S. Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management Sites
Steven R. SchiesswohlU.S. Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management,
Asset Management Team Lead
Thomas C. PaulingU.S. Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management,
Director, Office of Site Operations
Ronneburg, GermanyMay 25 through 27, 2011
2
Legacy Management’s (LM) Mission Manage the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) post-
closure responsibilities and ensure the future protection of human health and the environment
LM has control and custody for legacy land, structures, and facilities and is responsible for maintaining them at levels consistent with DOE’s long-term plans
Includes
• Maintaining the remedy
• Monitoring to ensure integrity of the remedy
• Complying with regulatory requirements
• Providing for disposition and beneficial reuse of legacy assets
3
LM’s Mission Goals
Protect human health and the environment Preserve, protect, and share legacy records
and information Meet commitments to the contractor work force Optimize the use of land and assets Sustain management excellence
4
LM Sites
5
LM’s Diversity LM has 87 sites in 28 states and Puerto Rico Sites are added every year; more than 108 sites are
expected by 2015 Sites are regulated by numerous federal cleanup
regulations requiring Institutional Controls (ICs) (e.g., Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act [UMTRCA], Formerly Utilized Sites Remediation Action Program [FUSRAP], Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act [CERCLA], and Nuclear Waste Policy Act [NWPA])
Sites are also subject to applicable state regulations ICs are part of a remedy and are maintained wherever
needed including on adjacent properties and on transferred properties in beneficial reuse by others
6
Legacy of LM Sites
UMTRCA – uranium processing and disposal sites
• Title I – federal cleanup and long-term stewardship
• Title II – private cleanup and transfer to LM for long-term stewardship
FUSRAP – industrial sites used for research, production, and testing of nuclear weapons
CERCLA, decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) – other sites with no continuing mission, but with residual contamination requiring long-term stewardship
IC challenge: Majority of LM sites have contamination that must be considered in any proposal for reuse
8% 7%
7
The ICs HighwayLots of Rules - USA
8
The ICs HighwayLots of Rules - Europe
9
IC Regulatory Drivers – To Name a Few
Federal laws and regulations
• Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEC)
• UMTRCA, FUSRAP, CERCLA, and NWPA
State agencies and local regulations
• Uranium Leasing Program – Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment and Colorado Department of Reclamation and Mining Safety
• Permits, zoning, and inspections
Federal agencies
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
DOE policy
• DOE Policy 454.1, Use of Institutional Controls
10
The ICs Highway – A Little Complex – USA
11
The ICs Highway – A Little Complex - Europe
12
LM’s Approach to ICs
DOE Policy 454.1, Use of Institutional Controls
“DOE policy is to use institutional controls as essential components of defense-in-depth strategy that uses multiple independent layers of safety to protect human health and the environment…”
Defense-in-depth strategy includes “a layered approach to protectiveness”
• Administrative controls
• Notices
• Engineered components and structures
Integrate use of well-designed and reliable ICs for protectiveness of DOE lands during stewardship, under reuse scenarios, and for disposition to other parties
13
Implementing and Evaluating ICs
Most sites are already remediated and come to LM with established ICs
LM reviews ICs prior to transition for long-term stewardship Establishing ICs for land undergoing groundwater
remediation
• LM works with local government agencies and private landowners for ICs on non-DOE-owned property
Sites routinely reevaluated for risk and to determine if ICs are appropriate and mechanisms are protective
Implementing Maintaining EnforcingPlanning
LM’s Goal for Beneficial Reuse
DOE is fourth-largest federal landholding agency LM established mission requirements for beneficial reuse
• Manage legacy land and assets, emphasizing protective real and personal property reuse and disposition
• Identify uses that benefit others, are compatible with ICs, and are protective
LM must ensure ICs are appropriate for proposed reuse, are visible to those using the land, and are enforceable
14
15
ICs for Renewable Energy DOE is the leader for renewable energy in federal
government LM reviewed all sites for renewable energy potential Durango, Colorado, Disposal Site: uranium mill tailings
disposal cell that was attractive for solar photovoltaic development; model for future reuse
• Can implement project and abide by restrictions required
• Regulator approval ensures protectiveness of cell and associated structures
• Existing infrastructure, electrical capacity, and industry interest
• Developer must meet technical requirements and IC constraints
• Tailor land lease to ensure developer adherence to ICs and remedy requirements, and construct lease to allow private sector financial investment to meet private sector expectations
16
LM’s ICs Roadmap – Looking for Reuse Opportunities While Being Protective
Durango, Colorado, Disposal Site
Durango Disposal Site
Reuse at the Durango site is a good example of the balance between beneficial reuse and maintaining the restrictions needed to preserve the integrity of the site and its associated structures.
17
18
ICs for Agriculture
Western sites are remote and surrounded by U.S. Bureau of Land Management and ranching operations
Most sites lack infrastructure for renewable energy uses (e.g., transmission lines)
Grazing is nonintrusive, compatible reuse
• Grazing of vegetative cover helps control weeds
ICs are primarily engineered controls
• Fencing to keep livestock away from cells or associated structures
19
Edgemont, South Dakota Beneficial Reuse – Grazing
20
Let Others Use the Land!
Weldon Spring, MissouriEducational and RecreationReuse
Fernald Preserve, OhioWildlife Preservation
2121
LM Dispositions and Reuse Update
2121
2222
Cumulative Acres in Beneficial Reuse
Salmon, Mississippi, Site
In December 2010, LM transferred a 595-hectare site, located in Lamar County, Mississippi, to the State of Mississippi. The site will be managed by the state as a wildlife refuge and working demonstration forest.
23
Remediation in early 1970
Salmon site as it appears today
Rincón, Puerto Rico
Dr. Modesto Iriarte Technological Museum (formerly known as the Boiling Nuclear Superheater [BONUS] Decommissioned Reactor Site)
24
25
Summary
Reuse is a national priority LM challenge is to promote beneficial reuse of underutilized
land while ensuring ICs are effective for hundreds or thousands of years
• Continually evaluate risks and protectiveness
• Monitor ICs to ensure visibility and awareness of regulators and all land users
• Monitor land uses for real property transferred to third parties to ensure uses are consistent with ICs
Anatomy of theDisposal FacilityWeldon Spring, Missouri
26
27
Weldon Spring, Missouri, Disposal Cell
Weldon Spring, Missouri, Disposal Cell with biking and hiking trails and adjacent interpretive-education center
Spook, Wyoming, Disposal Site
UMTRCA Title I site Former uranium-ore upgrading facility Cleanup took place from 1989 to 1992
28
Open pit uranium mine operated from 1962 to 1965 Remediation complete
Ambrosia Lake, New Mexico, Disposal Site
UMTRCA Title I site Former uranium-ore processing facility Cleanup took place from 1987 to 1995
29
Ambrosia Lake uranium milloperated from 1958 to 1982
Ambrosia Lake Disposal Cell
Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, Disposal Site
UMTRCA Title I site Former uranium-ore processing facility Cleanup took place from 1987 to 1995
30
Canonsburg uranium mill operated from 1911 to 1957
Canonsburg Disposal Site
Gunnison, Colorado, Disposal and Processing Sites UMTRCA Title I site Former uranium-ore processing facility Cleanup took place from 1992 to 1995
31
Gunnison uranium milloperated from 1958 to 1962 Gunnison Disposal Site
Monticello, Utah, Disposal and Processing Sites UMTRCA Title I site Former uranium-ore upgrading facility Cleanup took place from 1989 to 1992
32
Monticello uranium mill
Monticello disposal cell under construction
Rifle, Colorado, Sites
UMTRCA Title I sites Two uranium- and vanadium-processing sites Cleanup took place from 1992 to 1996
33
Rifle uranium mill1924–1932; 1942–1958 Rifle disposal cell
Tuba City, Arizona, Disposal Site
UMTRCA Title I site Former uranium mill Cleanup took place from 1988 to 1990
34
Tuba City uranium mill operated from 1956 to 1966Tuba City solar panels
Rocky Flats, Colorado, Site
CERCLA and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) site
Former weapons production facility Cleanup took place from 1994 to 2005 Approximately 1,619 hectares transferred to U.S. Department of
Interior to be managed as a national wildlife refuge
35
Rocky Flats Nuclear Weapons Plant operated from 1952 to 1994 Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge
Rocky Flats, Colorado – Off the Grid
Durango, Colorado, Disposal and Processing Sites UMTRCA Title I site Former uranium-ore processing facility Cleanup took place from 1986 to 1991
37
Durango uranium mill operated from 1942 to 1963
Durango Disposal Site
Weldon Spring, Missouri, Site
CERCLA site Produced explosives and later uranium feed materials plant Cleanup took place from 1986 to 1995
38
Weldon Spring Interpretive Center
Weldon Spring Chemical Plantoperated from 1941 to 1967
Fernald Preserve, Ohio
CERCLA site Uranium-processing facility for high-purity uranium metal
products for weapons production Cleanup took place from 1989 to 2006
39
Fernald Preserve Visitors Center
Fernald Feed Materials Production Center operated from 1951 to 1989
Uranium Leasing Program
40
C-JD-5 Mine (headframe and hoist house)
Exploration drilling at C-CM-24