Greg B. Frandsen and Lucy C. Reed
INEEL

Eleven major Department of Energy (DOE) sites were chartered by the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (EM) to use a systems engineering approach to develop and evaluate technically defensible cost savings opportunities across the complex. This initiative, known as Complex-Wide Environmental Management Integration (EMI), is considered a key element in achieving accelerated cleanup of the DOE weapons complex. This paper provides an overview of the EMI initiative, accomplishments to date, and future direction.

The DOE manages a multibillion-dollar EM Program. DOE-EM faces significant technical and financial challenges in cleaning up the environmental legacy of nuclear weapons production. In addition, future funding levels to perform this work are uncertain. DOE-EM programs need effective solutions that meet environmental cleanup standards, environmental regulations, and significantly reduce the gap between projected costs and target funding levels.

In July 1996, the DOE Assistant Secretary of Energy for EM chartered a contractor-led effort to develop a suite of technically defensible, integrated alternatives that meet the EM mission. Historically, the individual DOE sites have managed their programs focusing on site specific needs. While this approach maximized successes at individual sites, it has resulted in a more costly program than if more integration across the DOE system occurred. The contractor team was challenged to think "outside of the box" for solutions that cross traditional site boundaries and enable the programs to get the job done at an earlier date and at a lower cost.

Subject matter experts (SME) were assembled from each of the eleven^a major DOE sites. The SMEs across the DOE complex were responsible for the technical content of the information products, while systems engineers were responsible for defining and implementing the integration process, as well as data management operations. This structure created a productive team effort.

To accomplish this integration effort, a prescriptive systems approach was used to review the current DOE baseline, identify and evaluate alternatives, and set forth "opportunities" to improve the EM system, see Figure 1, Systems Engineering Process.

The process was initiated with the systems engineering and subject matter experts from around the DOE complex defining the driving requirements for full waste and material disposition and identifying the tasks needed to meet those requirements. The result was the establishment of a waste and material disposition baseline, in a common format, for each of the eleven sites. With the common baseline established, cost-saving alternative waste and material disposition strategies were developed and evaluated.

An initial baseline for each of the sites' current and near term projected volumes, costs, and schedules was established for the six major waste and material streams [low level waste (LLW), mixed low level waste (MLLW), transuranic waste (TRU), high level waste (HLW), spent nuclear fuel (SNF), and waste generated by the Environmental Restoration program].

This baseline data was documented on waste disposition maps, see Figure 2, Disposition Map Example. These maps portray the disposition steps for the life cycle of each waste or material stream including storage, characterization/treatment, and ultimate disposition. In addition, facilities and functional capabilities have been documented. Input/Output drawings derived from this data clearly illustrate the movement of waste/materials at each of the eleven DOE sites. The cost baseline information used for this effort was formulated from the sites' draft Ten-Year Plans submitted in July 1996. Although the current focus is on the present to 2006 timeframe, all ten-year plan input referenced in this document is for ongoing life-cycle clean-up efforts.

With the EM Integration initial baseline established, the SME teams developed sets of alternatives to improve the baseline through integration of processes, facilities, and/or through changing requirements.

To accomplish this, workouts were held for each waste and material stream where the SMEs used their collective resources to review and discuss each site's plans for material disposition, see Figure 3, Complex- Wide EM Integration Team--TR U waste subteam. SME systematic reviews of planned waste and material disposition identified synergistic problems, evaluated treatment technologies and solutions, then selected common paths forward. By integrating these strategies across the complex, the EM Integration team was able to develop opportunities with the potential for significant benefits.

The integration alternatives evaluated were encompassed by these high-level strategies:

1. Utilize complex-wide system resources effectively (eliminate redundancy);
2. Cross program boundaries where effective;
3. Challenge requirements;
4. Apply site successes complex-wide; and,
5. Employ national procurements to fill unique DOE needs.

Crosscutting integration over all programs projects potential cost savings and avoidances of $24 billion, accelerated cleanup schedules, and no significant increase in risk.

Even with the potential of large cost savings, these opportunities are not "free"; significant barters exist and must be addressed to achieve the projected successes. The major areas requiring review include:

• Transportation of wastes and materials between sites,
• Regulatory, political, site equity interests, and
• Requirements changes.

The specific integration recommendations were rolled-up into higher level opportunities. Of these, DOE plans to prepare "evaluation plans" for 22 of the recommended integration opportunities. The plans will describe the Department's evaluation process and specific actions for stakeholder involvement prior to a decision on whether to implement the recommendation. This effort is documented in A Contractor Report to the Department of Energy on EM Baseline Programs and Integration Opportunities, Discussion Draft, May 1997.¹

A review of updated Draft Ten-Year Plans was performed. The purpose of this review was to evaluate site-submitted Plans for missing or incomplete planning "gaps". A workout with the EM Integration team SMEs and ten-year plan personnel from eleven sites and the EM-30 waste-type program managers was held. The Gap Analysis "workout" was successful in identifying 104 gaps, complete with recommended paths forward for 77 of the gaps.

The original contractor efforts have been expanded to include six major areas in FY-98: 1) development of the EM technical baseline/disposition maps (supporting the 2006 Plan), 2) "proposed configuration" workshops and stakeholder interactions, 3) technology development (TD) linkage to the programs, 4) national transportation systems engineering, 5) nuclear material disposition systems engineering, and 6) implementation of opportunity evaluation plans. This is a team effort, with each of the sites both contractor and federal employees as major contributors.

The technical baseline as depicted in disposition maps has been accepted as the preferred method to display the 2006 Plan. These maps communicate the "big picture" requirements for the DOE complex. To fully document and graphically depict the important cleanup tasks, the disposition maps need to be matched scope for scope with the 2006 Plan. Completion of this task will align the communication tools (waste and material disposition maps, input/output maps, volume, schedule and site-specific data) with the 2006 Plan.

To accomplish this alignment, "Proposed Configuration" workshops are scheduled to incorporate these baseline disposition maps into the 2006 Plan. Aimed at achieving consensus on the Complex-Wide configuration of waste and material, this is among the most significant challenges of FY-1998. The Proposed Configuration workshops will update site specific baseline disposition maps with the most current information prior to the release of the 2006 Plan. The proposed configuration will support stakeholder discussions and preparation of Records of Decisions for waste disposition.

EM Integration will develop an interactive tool to match needs with technology and science and provide a defensible technical baseline against which the opportunities and effectiveness of the Office of Science and Technology program can be determined. This will be accomplished through identifying specific waste and material streams that require new technology for full disposition, or for which disposition is cost prohibitive. TD needs will be identified on the disposition maps and electronically linked to data that contain technology development/deployment and science activities. These disposition maps will allow managers to pin point specific disposition paths supported by specific TD activities.

To capture Complex-Wide transportation needs, site specific baselines for transportation of waste and material (TRU, MLLW, LLW, HLW, and SNF including waste generated by the Environmental Restoration program) will be developed. The intersite transportation needs required to achieve waste and material disposition are currently being identified for the baseline. All transportation needs, where capabilities are inadequate, will be displayed through disposition maps with intersite shipments, number of shipments, shipping corridors, and proposed packaging. When the transportation baseline and the driving requirements are well understood and documented, transportation SMEs will perform an alternatives analysis to identify opportunities for integration and cost-savings specific to transportation.

To improve cost-effective and efficient Nuclear Material disposition, a similar systems engineering evaluation will be performed. Disposition maps and required backup data for Nuclear Materials included in the 2006 Plan but not part of previous integration activities, e.g. Plutonium and Uranium, will be produced. SMEs will participate in identifying the driving and constraining requirements, documenting the added scope into the baseline, and performing alternative analysis to identify integration opportunities.

With the projected costs for full disposition of DOE-EM owned waste and material exceeding the EM budget, implementation of cost saving opportunities is imperative to achieve a workable, integrated national 2006 Plan. With acceptance of the "Proposed Configuration," EM Integration will incorporate the missing data into the communication tools thus permitting an accurate analysis of the recommended "opportunities".

Most of these "opportunities" remain under consideration by EM while input is being sought during the public comment period. DOE continues to actively pursue the recommendations in order to achieve the cost savings identified by Complex-Wide EM Integration.

As the Office of Environmental Management continues to be driven to do more with less, integration across sites and programs provides an opportunity to achieve full waste and material disposition within tight fiscal constraints. DOE has embraced a unifying vision of maximizing environmental cleanup during the next decade and has developed a baseline National Plan for waste and material disposition. This baseline can become even more effective in meeting the vision by managing the multiple waste and material program areas across the complex as a cohesive unit rather than as independent sites. The initial integration efforts have identified potential net savings and cost avoidances of $24B. The integration opportunities introduce cooperative efforts among the major DOE sites and aggressive approaches in challenging many existing constraints and requirements.

EM Integration is working with DOE to provide the technical resources needed to obtain an integrated and consistent national 2006 Plan. With a National Integrated Plan in place, the way will be open to accomplish the desired cleanup faster and save the taxpayer millions of dollars.

1. A Contractor Report to the Department of Energy on EM Baseline Programs and Integration Opportunities, Discussion Draft, Complex-Wide EM Integration Team, May 1997.