Frazer R. Lockhart and Elizabeth A. Jordan
U. S.
Department of Energy Rocky Flats Field Office
Planning and Integration
Division
P.O. Box 928
Golden, Colorado 80402
Allen L. Schubert Kaiser-Hill, L.L.C.
Strategic Planning
Division
P.O. Box 464
Golden, Colorado 80402
ABSTRACT
Rocky Flats has taken full advantage of the Ten Year Planning process initiated by the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (EM), Alvin L. AIm. He directed all EM sites to develop draft Ten Year Plans (TYP) describing how the sites would achieve his vision of complete cleanup of most DOE EM sites within ten years. Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (RFETS) already had in place a new Integrating Management Contract (IMC); had already embarked on the RFETS Accelerated Site Action Project (ASAP) planning process, and was in the final stages of negotiating the Rocky Flats Cleanup Agreement (RFCA) and prepared a "VISION" of how the Site would be cleaned up and what the facility would look like in the future. Rocky Flats Field Office (RFFO)/Kalser-HiH (K-H) planning teams were focusing on the selection process for an ASAP "preferred alternative" and developing a life cycle baseline for closure of the site. With the birth of the TYP, ASAP became the Rocky Flats Ten-Year Plan, which is, the Rocky Flats Closure Project,
The Closure Project consists of SNM stabilization, consolidation, and storage, facility deactivation and decommissioning, waste management, and environmental restoration of the Site. An estimated $7.0 billion (FY97 constant dollars) is required to achieve an "intermediate site condition" where the only facilities remaining after the planning period would be an interim SNM storage building, a LLMW treatment facility, and several office and manufacturing buildings. All facilities would be demolished by 2015, except those leased to the private sector. The principal activity after 2015 is long term environmental monitoring. RFFO solicits stakeholder input throughout the planning process; is projectizing site work through a change controlled, real-work-oriented Work Breakdown Structure; and will maintain RFETS moving as a project on the clear path to closure. This paper will describe the process, issues, and resolution of cleaning up and closing the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site to the Department of Energy's vision.
INTRODUCTION
On June 20, 1996, the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (EM), Alvin L. Alm, issued a memorandum which directed all EM sites to develop draft Ten Year Plans (TYP). The TYPs described how the sites would achieve his vision of complete cleanup of most DOE EM sites within ten years. Once developed, integrated, and approved, these plans would serve to unify the EM Program's direction, thus driving budget decisions, sequencing of projects, and actions taken to meet program objectives.
BACKGROUND
The timing of this initiative was a unique fit in the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (RFETS) Accelerated Site Action Project (ASAP) planning process and the finalization of the Rocky Flats Cleanup Agreement (RFCA). In August 1995, the new Integrating Management Contract (IMC) initiated the ASAP concept using a "corporate mentality" to identify a total, integrated cleanup strategy at the site. These initial planning activities began Phase I of the ASAP. This phase focused on possible closure with no funding constraints (nearly doubling of the current year appropriation), maximum regulatory flexibility, and stakeholder acceptance of controversial storage, treatment, and disposal alternatives. Unlike the Baseline Environmental Management Report (BEMR), this plan did not extend into the middle of the 2 1st century, and for the first time, Field and Headquarters management were shown that near-term closure of the site was possible.
With the door now open for discussing near-term closure of Rocky Flats, the IMC initiated Phase II of ASAP to identify a range of alternatives for closure with conservative to progressive assumptions. The Phase H effort culminated in the development of the ASAP - Choices for Rocky Flats document. Concurrent with Phase H, site negotiation teams were entering the final phase of negotiation of the RFCA, a site-wide agreement establishing the framework for cleanup of the site that superseded the 1991 Interagency Agreement As part of this effort, DOE management and State Officials came together to discuss and agree to a "VISION" of how the site would be cleaned up and what the facility would look like near-term, mid-term, and long-term. These separate, but integrally-tied documents were released for public comment in April 1996 and were presented to Stakeholders as the what and when (Vision & RFCA) and the how (ASAP - Phase H). In July 1996, the RFCA was signed, and the site planning teams began to focus on the Phase HI of ASAP-selecting a "preferred alternative" and developing a life cycle baseline for closure of the site. With the birth of the Ten-Year Plan initiative, ASAP-Phase HI became the Rocky Flats Ten-Year Plan.
ROCKY FLATS CLOSURE PROJECT
Under the Rocky Flats Ten Year Plan, the following would occur. Special Nuclear Material (SNM) would be stabilized and either shipped offsite or stored onsite in a new, interim storage facility awaiting shipment. The vast majority of Site facilities would be demolished, including all of the former nuclear production facilities. Low-level radioactive waste (LLW), including low-level mixed waste (LLMW), would be placed in consolidated long-term storage facilities and treated either onsite or offsite. Offsite shipment of LLW and LLMW would proceed as quickly as possible. Transuranic (TRU) waste would be treated and shipped to DOE's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) for disposal. The Site would be cleaned up to levels that would allow open space and other appropriate uses. The estimated total cost to achieve this intermediate site condition is estimated at about $7.0 billion (FY97 constant dollars).
At the end of the planning period, the remaining facilities left onsite would be the interim storage facility for SNM, the LLMW Treatment Facility and several office and manufacturing buildings. All of the facilities would be demolished by the year 2015, except those leased to the private sector. Activities occurring after 2015 would consist primarily of long-term environmental monitoring. After 2015, following shipment of all of the SNM offsite, the estimated annual cost will be $10 million (FY97 dollars).
The March 1997 draft Rocky Flats Ten Year Plan discusses the following technical end state goals.
SNM Stabilization, Consolidation, and Storage Activities
Facility Decommissioning Activities
Waste Management Activities
Environmental Cleanup Activities
COST AND SCHEDULE
Rocky FIats can achieve almost complete cleanup and closure by the end of fiscal year 2012 {September 30, 2012) for a cost of approximately $7.0 billion (FY97 dollars). The total cost to manage the remaining plutonium from FY2012 until it is removed by ~ end of FY15, and perform environmental monitoring is estimated to cost an additional $300 million (FY97 dollars). Following removal of the plutonium and the demolition of the plutonium storage and remaining Site facilities by the end of 2015, the cost to perform the long-term environmental monitoring at the Site is estimated to be $10 million per year (FY97 dollars).
THE TEN YEAR PLAN AND THE INTEGRATING MANAGEMENT CONTRACT
The Rocky Flats IMC awarded to Kaiser-Hill, LLC in July 1995 provided DOE with a contract vehicle which was well suited to managing the cleanup and closure. This type of contract is results oriented with fee going to the contractor only if tangible work is accomplished.
Under the Kaiser-Hill performance-based contract, 85 percent of the company's fee is based on performance. The remaining 15 percent base fee covers contractual non-reimbursable costs such as interests on salaries accumulated before reimbursement by DOE. Kaiser-Hill must accomplish significant incentive fee earnings before it shows any net income.
At the beginning of each year, Kaiser-Hill and DOE work together to develop a set of performance measures for work to be accomplished during the coming year. Each performance measure has a definitized scope, schedule and fee attached to it. With the advent of the Site's cleanup strategies, beginning in 1995 with ASAP, and evolving to the Ten-Year Plan, Kaiser-Hill and DOE view the Site as a defined set of projects to be accomplished over time. As such, performance measures are negotiated for each fiscal year in keeping with the work logic of the Ten-Year Plan' s closure strategy. In this way, performance measures are directly linked to the activities needed to accomplish Site cleanup.
INTEGRATING ROCKY FLATS TEN YEAR PLAN WITH OTHER DOE SITES
In June 1996, Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management, Alvin AIm, initiated a parallel process to accompany the work being performed by the individual EM sites in developing their Ten Year Plans. That process, termed Complex-Wide EM Integration, is a DOE-contractor led effort to perform integration activities among the major DOE sites' Ten Year Plans in order to achieve even greater progress on cleanup of the sites, as well as identifying additional cost savings. Lockheed-Martin is managing this complex-wide EM integration effort.
The effort is focusing on the disposition of the various waste materials and cleanup activities that will occur as a result of the various sites' Ten Year Plans. Contractor teams have been formed around four "opportunity-rich" areas: 1) transuranic and low-level mixed wastes; 2) low-level, hazardous and special wastes; 3) environmental restoration and D&D; and 4) high level wastes and spent nuclear fuel. Early results of the integration effort for low-level mixed and transuranic wastes are indicating that life cycle cost savings of $1 billion are possible.
From a Rocky Flats perspective, about $50 million in potential savings have been identified by:
As the teams continue to evaluate opportunities for integration, it is expected that additional, significant savings will be identified. It is clear that if implemented, these integration opportunities ties can have a significant, positive affect on accelerating cleanup and reducing costs. The challenge that lays before the DOE Complex is implementing these integration opportunities; something the DOE has not been very good at in the past. Some of the key implementation challenges are:
RESOLUTION OF CROSS-SITE ISSUES
One of the primary goals of the Ten-Year Plan initiative is to resolve issues related to implementation of the ten-year vision. Resolution of issues and decision-making on opportunities is expected to be on-going and will result in modifications and updates to the individual Site's Ten Year Plan. DOE expects that issues and opportunities will arise from many areas, such as future stakeholder discussions, updates to the Ten-Year Plan, future EM integration efforts, or during implementation of the individual site's Plans.
EM Headquarters has focused on the resolution of cross site issues. Issues have been categorized into four time frames expected for resolution.
For example, intersite transfer of waste for treatment, storage, or disposal; and the development of a consistent transuranic waste policy is a Category D issue that will require continued work with stakeholders beyond the issuance of the September 1997 TYP. For Rocky Flats the biggest issue the site has is with the management and disposal of Pu residues.
Converting the residues to TRU Wastes, could be as simple as declaring them waste. The plutonium concentration below which the materials could be declared waste and above which they would remain residues was clarified recently when DOE issued guidance for safeguards termination. Materials which are in a form that qualifies for safeguards termination can be handled as waste. For a significant portion of the residues, the Pu concentration is such that either the plutonium must be immobilized in a matrix material (i.e. concrete) to markedly reduce the recoverability, or the Pu concentration must be reduced by some type of extraction process. Conversion to TRU waste provides a complete and permanent disposition while the Pu extraction process yields an enriched Pu compound that would have to be closely guarded. The dispositions of many of the residues is still being evaluated.
Rocky Flats is currently consolidating its non-waste Pu inventory into the most robust building on the site. This building was designed to be a production facility, does not meet current design standards, and is inefficient as a storage facility. The site has a contingency to construct a highly efficient storage vault. If DOE can remove the Pu from RFETS in a timely fashion, this contingency could be dropped, the vault would not be constructed and the money saved used for accelerated cleanup. RFETS will drop the vault contingency if DOE can formulate a national plan and implementation schedule for the removal of the Pu from the Site. A record of decision for the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials was in draft at the time of this writing.
PROJECTIZING THE ROCKY FLATS CLEANUP
Rocky Flats had been managed as an ongoing operation for its entire lifetime. Historically, the Site's mission consisted of multiple, interrelated process operations conducted on an ongoing basis. Although some activities within the overall operation were managed as specific projects, they were more operational in nature. With the DOE's concurrence, Kaiser Hill initiated projectizing the Rocky Flats cleanup during ASAP Phase II planning, since the mission of cleaning up Rocky Flats is more like a construction project with a finite staff and finish than a manufacturing operation. With a goal of implementing a project management and control system beginning with authorization of FY1997 work, Kaiser Hill began projectizing all work on the Site.
The first step was defining the totality of the project to be accomplished. The cost, schedule, and work scope of any project are interrelated. These interrelations are shown by means of a WBS. The WBS provides the structure to divide the project into manageable pieces. This structure dissects the entire project into successive levels of detail until individual tasks can be defined, quantified, estimated, and scheduled. The WBS reflects the total project, including all work tasks to achieve the final end state.
The WBS is also work product oriented. The top two levels represent the vision and the end state. The third level divides the work into cleanup zones to achieve the intermediate end state. Within a cleanup zone the work is divided by facility cluster, Individual Hazardous Substance Saite (IHSS) cluster, capital project, associated supporting work processes.
The WBS structure:
The next approach to projectizing asks how the project would be managed given no constraints other than doing the job safely and efficiently. Several questions are posed which illustrate possible paradigm shifts that could occur under the project approach. These are fundamental to the premise that the Site must be managed like a project.
On a construction site, the work force is normally built from the bottom up, maximizing the percentage of hourly workers actually performing work and keeping overhead to a minimum. Infrastructure would be minimized, and as much work as possible would be contracted out, further reducing overhead. When the project is completed, all workers would be laid off or reassigned to the next project at a different location. The end of the project is not a surprise, but a goal toward which -everyone works. At Rocky Flats, a large workforce oriented towards weapons manufacturing was "inherited", thus the Steelworkers Union and Kaiser Hill renegotiated a new labor agreement on how the workforce would be managed.
One of the most important improvements to support the Rocky Flats project is the FY1997 single source (Environmental Restoration) funding. This is expected to enhance the Site's ability to prioritize essential work to rapidly reduce baseline costs.
DOE and Kaiser Hill are refining the IMC performance based fee structure to provide for additional incentives. Beginning in FY1997 they agreed to two new categories of measures: super stretch and gateway. Super stretch are activities that go beyond the funded scope of work for the site. To accomplish them, Kaiser Hill must identify a cost savings, transfer money and apply it to accomplishing super stretch measures. Fees are in addition to the basic fee pool. Gateway measures are those measures linked through progression of multi-year work to activities to be completed as part of a future performance measure.
Rocky Flats is not yet fully projectized. We believe that with finalizing the Ten-Year Plan, the embodiment of the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) into the body of the management system, and the single source funding, we can move forward as a cleanup project
MANAGING THE TEN YEAR PLAN
The EM Headquarters initiative for the Integrated Strategic Planning, Budgeting, and Management System (ISPBMS) is directly aligned with the Rocky Flats efforts to projectize. The ISPBMS was developed through a process improvement team with broad Field involvement to streamline and align management systems with the complex-wide TYP efforts. In this way the content of the TYPs would be executed through management systems which were optimal to the project nature of the work. At the same time the ISPBMS aligns the TYPs with the budget process through use of a Project Baseline Summary (PBS) database. The PBS serves as the single source for strategic planning, budget request data, and performance reporting.
The Rocky Plats effort to organize and define its work into a project, align performance measures, and utilize the full power of the integrating management contract and Kaiser-Hill's labor agreement is facilitated by the ISPBMS implementation complex-wide. For Rocky Flats the definition of the project, and the systems to manage the project are converging toward greater alignment to facilitate actual implementation.
CONCLUSION
The release of the first draft Ten-Year Plan confirmed the viability of Alvin Alm's desire for substantial progress over the ten year period. At Rocky Flats, the Ten-Year Plan demonstrated that almost complete deactivation, dismantlement, and cleanup of the site could be achieved. More importantly, the effort provided a meaningful forum for discussion and clarification of controversial issues related to completion of the Ten- Year Plan. The value of this step, which had been anticipated while preparing for ASAP Phase III, continues to be borne out through the Ten-Year Plan stakeholder issue resolution. More than anything, the Ten-Year Plan continues to serve as a focal point for action at the site. It serves to define and clarify the critical actions necessary for site closure, and thus drive worker and management attention to the critical path actions or issues which are most in need of attention.
As a final note, we recognize that the Ten-Year Plan may suffer the fate of other planning efforts with change of Federal administrations or key agency personnel or funding projections. However, at Rocky Plats, the Ten-Year Plan will endure. Its impact on stakeholder and regulator engagement to resolve issues and move forward, and its impact on management and workers to approach the site activities like a project with a true end, will not be easily cast aside. No matter the change in name or budget, the fundamental shifts in focus and approach will keep the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site moving as a project on the clear path to closure.