C. H. Estes, J. R. Hightower, L. J. Mezga, K. D. Simpson
Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc.;

R. D. Korynta
U. S. Department of Energy
Oak Ridge Operations Office;

F. H. Miller
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.

The Broad Spectrum Treatment Initiative is a major element of the Department of Energy (DOE) Oak Ridge Operations Office strategy to fulfill the State of Tennessee’s Department of Environment and Conservation Commissioner’s Order concerning treatment of mixed low level wastes. The purpose of this initiative is to implement a national procurement, made accessible to all DOE sites, for treatment and disposal of a wide range of low-activity mixed wastes. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems on behalf of DOE will place the procurement and award contract(s). Wastes have been grouped into five waste matrix categories with each category consisting of waste streams that have similar treatment requirements. At the Oak Ridge Reservation, these wastes are a significant portion of the "balance of inventory" legacy wastes awaiting treatment.

This procurement will provide savings to DOE by: eliminating on-site construction of new treatment facilities; improving treatment schedules; maximizing economies of scale; enhancing competition; and eliminating redundant individual procurement actions. For this initiative to achieve its maximum benefit, the participation of all DOE sites is needed.

The initiative offers innovative approaches that: (1) provide incentives to the contractor to minimize disposal volume; (2) supply assurances that the vendor is capable of accomplishing the work; (3) protects DOE from numerous change orders; (4) supply the bidder with the maximum information available in a readily accessible form; (5) address NEPA requirements through the use of the environmental critique process; and (6) ease utilization of the contracts by interested generators. The paper will describe these approaches; the structure of the procurement; DOE site and vendor responsibilities; and the treatment implementation schedule, including a two-year period to allow for vendor modification of existing facilities and obtaining permits and licenses.

The Federal Facility Compliance Act requires that all DOE facilities identify treatment for Low Level Mixed Waste (LLMW). In most cases this requires construction of new facilities or establishing new contracts with private sector firms having the capability to treat LLMW. However, volumes of LLMW at many DOE facilities are small, making the economies of many small treatment efforts unfavorable.

To take advantage of economies of scale, the DOE Oak Ridge Operations Office has initiated a Broad Spectrum Treatment Initiative (BSTI) for treatment of a wide variety of LLMW. This contracting action will make LLMW treatment available to all DOE facilities. There are roughly 80 separate waste streams or approximately 14 million pounds of LLMW stored on the Oak Ridge Reservation that will be included in this action. Many other DOE sites have similar waste streams in storage and some sites continue to generate LLMW with potential to treat 40 million pounds of LLMW.

The BSTI approach consists of a contractor-led procurement: (1) allowing competitive bids for five different categories of waste that reflect the spectrum of legacy mixed wastes in DOE; and (2) that is available to all sites as a National Procurement. These five categories were chosen to maximize the competition between qualified firms and result in multiple contract awards. DOE treatment schedules are expected to be shortened as a result of greater DOE access to commercial mixed waste treatment capacity through the BSTI. For those wastes where there is a lack of existing treatment capability at DOE sites, the BSTI will eliminate the need to construct new treatment facilities at DOE sites.

Qualified bidders must have existing, or applications for: RCRA Part-B permits; NRC licenses; and/or TSCA approvals, depending on which categories they bid. For all waste in each category, vendors will transport the raw waste to their treatment facility and treat to meet waste acceptance criteria of a disposal facility under DOE contract at the time of disposal or successfully recycle the waste. The vendor’s on-site activities will be limited to picking up containerized waste from staging areas at each site. After treatment, the vendors will be required to package and transport all treated and ancillary waste for disposal.

The BSTI is structured so that up to five awards can be made, one award for each waste category. Awarding five contracts results in two key benefits to DOE: 1) competition will be fostered because contractors that were not qualified to propose on all the wastes in the BSTI but that have, or wish to develop, limited mixed waste treatment capability will be qualified for some waste groups; and 2) this single procurement action will cover multiple awards and allow all DOE sites to utilize the awarded contracts, thereby eliminating redundant individual procurements.

Once contracts have been placed, work by the vendor will be directed through the issuance of task order contracts. Payment for these task orders will be based on the price agreement submitted by the vendor. This price agreement has multiple price elements to account for the variability of waste characteristics within each category.

The waste categories were developed based on waste type, treatment technologies, and regulatory requirements and are described below:

Treatment Category A:

The waste offered for treatment is generally expected to consist of non-combustible, low-level, contact-handled soils, sludges, and other solids material meeting the EPA definition of debris, all of which is contaminated with organic constituents alone, or organic constituents and RCRA metals, including mercury. The predominant waste codes in this category will be D004 through D011 and F001 through F007. Additional codes that are expected include D018 through D043 and those list codes that may need similar treatment technology. PCBs, at levels requiring regulation under TSCA are not present in this waste. The radionuclides in the raw waste will be below licensing levels at the disposal facility, such as Envirocare of Utah, Inc. which is currently under DOE contract, and consist of elements that are accepted for disposal at the disposal facility.

Treatment Category B:

This category is generally expected to consist of non-combustible, low-level, contact-handled soils, sludges, and other solids material meeting the EPA definition of debris, all of which is contaminated with PCBs above levels requiring regulation under TSCA. The waste will also contain organic constituents alone, or organic constituents and RCRA metals, including mercury. The predominant waste codes in this category will be D004 through D011 and F001 through F007. Additional codes that are expected include D018 through D043 and those list codes that may need similar treatment technology. The radionuclides in the raw waste will be below licensing levels at the disposal facility, such as Envirocare of Utah, Inc. which is currently under DOE contract, and consist of elements that are accepted for disposal at the disposal facility.

Treatment Category C:

This category is generally expected to consist of non-combustible, low-level, contact-handled, non-combustible soils, sludges, and other solids material meeting the EPA definition of debris, all of which is contaminated with RCRA metals. The predominant waste codes in this category will be D004 through D011, F006, and F007 and those list codes that may need similar treatment technology. Mercury levels will be below 260 ppm. The radionuclides in the raw waste will be below licensing levels at the disposal facility, such as Envirocare of Utah, Inc. which is currently under DOE contract, and consist of elements that are accepted for disposal at the disposal facility.

Treatment Category D:

This category consists of low-level, contact-handled, combustible and non-combustible material including soils, sludges, and may contain some material meeting the EPA definition of debris. All of of this waste is contaminated with PCBs above levels requiring regulation under TSCA. The waste will also contain RCRA constituents that require incineration and may contain other RCRA constituents that may be treated by incineration or stabilization. The radionuclides in the raw waste will be below licensing levels at the disposal facility, such as Envirocare of Utah, Inc. which is currently under DOE contract, and consist of elements that are accepted for disposal at the disposal facility.

Treatment Category E:

This category consists of low-level, contact-handled, combustible and non-combustible soils, sludges, electrical equipment and debris contaminated with PCBs above levels requiring regulation under TSCA and needing thermal treatment or permitted alternative. RCRA regulated materials are not present. The radionuclides in the raw waste will be below licensing levels at the disposal facility, such as Envirocare of Utah, Inc. which is currently under DOE contract, and consist of elements that are accepted for disposal at the disposal facility.

The vendor’s on-site activities will be limited to picking up containerized wastes from staging areas at each site. Vendors will only drive transport vehicles on-site to be loaded and secured by DOE contractor employees, then drive the loaded vehicles off-site to their treatment facility.

The treated waste must meet the Land Disposal Restriction treatment standards and the Waste Acceptance Criteria of a disposal site under DOE contract at the time of disposal. After treatment, vendors will be required to package and transport to the dispose site all treated and ancillary waste.

Once taken, if the seller cannot treat the waste to disposal criteria, the waste will be returned to compliant storage at the site of origin at no cost to DOE with all vendor-developed characterization data.

The following is a list of the services to be provided by the DOE site, as called for in the approved contracts:

• Selection of all containerized waste awarded for treatment, and delivery of this waste, in accordance with an agreed-to schedule, to a designated staging area at a DOE site.
• Development of staging areas on the DOE sites, where containerized waste will be staged for loading prior to transport to the treatment facility.
• Obtain a waiver to DOE Order 5820.2A to allow disposal of radioactive waste off the DOE site.
• Provide National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation as required.
• If seller’s treatment facility WAC requires completed waste profile forms, the origin site will complete as required.
• At the staging areas, provide all equipment and labor, and load all containerized untreated waste on the Seller's transporting vehicles.
• After loading, complete all marking, labeling, and placarding activities as required by DOT regulations 49 CFR 172 Subparts D, E, and F, respectively.
• Perform Health Physics survey for radioactivity and release for transport off-site.
• Perform QA inspection and release for transport off-site.
• Provide required characterization data to meet RCRA, TSCA, DOT and vendor waste profile requirements to ship the wastes off site and fill out shipping papers and manifests for each load of untreated waste leaving a staging area for transport to the seller’s treatment facility.
• DOE-ORO will be conducting annual audits of the facilities. If other sites wish, they will be free to participate as members of the audits. If additional audits are needed, they will also be conducted by DOE approved personnel.

The following criteria was required to be submitted by each proposer:

• submit evidence on the ability to treat or to obtain a permit/license/authorization to treat or recycle RCRA, radioactive, or TSCA contaminated wastes;
• have experience directly associated with the handling of low-level radioactive, mixed or hazardous waste and the transportation of same;
• submit a process description sufficient to allow LMES a thorough understanding of the process to be utilized in treating the waste;
• have a management plan which is sufficient for LMES to thoroughly understand how the project will be managed and includes an estimated project schedule, a project management system description, and a plan for coordinating with LMES;
• because of the likelihood that a bidder may not have in place all permits, recycling exemptions, and licenses, or have the facilities, systems, and equipment needed to treat and process all waste in a category, the bidder was required to complete and submit a Treatment Milestone Schedule and fully describe the actions required to meet this milestone schedule and start First Article Test (FAT) treatment of the awarded waste by the required date;
• submit a health and safety plan;
• have a satisfactory record in environmental, health and safety matters;
• supply requested NEPA documentation.

The implementation schedule calls for the completion of an environmental critique process, M&O/M&I audits of each treatment vendor after award, the development of environmental impact statements (EIS) or environmental assessments (EA), the successful completion of a first article test (FAT), and adequate characterization of legacy waste to the treatment vendor’s waste acceptance criteria (WAC).

The NEPA environmental critique process is described in 10 CFR 1021.216 and began prior to issuance of the request for proposal (RFP) with initial stakeholder meetings and the development of environmental checklists and templates. At the time of contract award, the M&O/M&I will publish the environmental critique synopsis that will briefly describe the results of the NEPA screening and review of the proposed action. Stakeholders will be allowed to comment on the synopsis and a determination will be made on the level of NEPA review.

Any contracts awarded as a result of this procurement shall be contingent upon completion of the NEPA process. A two year limit with respect to completion of NEPA requirements has been placed on the awards. If NEPA requirements have not been completed within this two year time period, the contract may be terminated at either LMES’s or the vendor's request.

In addition, a treatment milestone schedule, to be submitted with the proposal, is required for each category of waste on which a proposer makes an offer. The milestone dates must allow the bidder to start FAT treatment within two years (104 weeks) after award of the contract. Starting the FAT within 104 weeks after contract award and starting the full production treatment within 116 weeks after contract award is mandatory performance under the contract.

The treatment contracts will extend for five years from the date of award and will include the time necessary to modify facilities or obtain necessary permits or licenses.

In order to provide an incentive to minimize disposal volumes and, therefore, cost to the government, LMES has included a method to benefit the vendor if disposal volumes are less than anticipated at the time of award or penalize the vendor if disposal volumes exceed the anticipated amount. To accomplish this, the proposer must include a formula in their proposal that will calculate the anticipated disposal volume of treated waste based on the initial waste characteristics and the proposer’s treatment process.

The formula, along with a specified disposal price, will be used in determining the total price to the government for each proposer and must address the factors that are considered important to the proposer to establish the disposal volume for mixed waste. After award, this formula will be used in determining the final payment to the vendor by comparing the actual disposal volume with the calculated disposal volume. If the disposal volume of treated waste is less than that calculated, LMES will provide compensation to the proposer at 50 percent of the volume difference times a specified disposal price per cubic foot. If the disposal volume is greater than that calculated, LMES will withhold compensation from the vendor at 100 percent of the volume difference times the same disposal price per cubic foot.

In order to obtain reasonable assurance the vendor is capable of performing the required treatment, LMES will require one First Article Test (FAT) be conducted for each treatment category awarded under the contract. FAT quantities will be offered from what is available for treatment at the time of request by the contractor and within the awarded treatment category.

The Contractor shall perform the FAT using the same facilities, systems, equipment, method of treatment, technology, and personnel that are planned for full production processing. These planned facilities must meet the throughput requirements to accomplish treatment of minimum specified amounts within the contractual period. The same method for container handling, delidding, emptying, debris separation, blending, transfer, packaging, and residual waste management, described in the Project Plan for full production treatment, shall be used for the FAT. Also, all FAT activities shall adhere to all aspects of sampling, testing, inspection, safety, and quality plans that were submitted to LMES.

The Contractor shall sample, characterize, and inspect each container or package of residual waste produced during the FAT. All FAT residual material must be accepted for disposal or recycle, as evidenced by acceptance of approved profile sheets by the disposal site or accepted for resale, prior to LMES approval of the FAT. The contractor will be compensated for waste treated during the FAT on the same per unit basis as full production processing.

If, by his actions, the Contractor is unable to start or complete the FAT in accordance with the treatment schedule milestone, or if the final product does not meet the disposal contractor’s WAC or is not accepted for resale and the FAT is determined unsuccessful, the Contractor will not be allowed to start production treatment of the awarded grouping of waste and must return the waste to compliant storage at the generating DOE site. The Contractor will not be paid for an unsuccessful FAT.

Although all the waste anticipated to be treated through the BSTI has not been fully characterized, a price agreement list has been developed that will reduce the number of change orders. This price agreement list requests unit prices for those waste characteristics that are expected to result in significant differences in treatment prices within a given waste category. For example, within one waste category separate costs are requested for waste contaminated with organics and wastes contaminated with organics and metals, or for wastes contaminated with mercury above 260 parts per million (ppm) and for those contaminated with mercury below 260 ppm. In addition, different handling prices have been requested for wastes contained in 55-gallon drums or B-25 boxes.

In order to supply the proposer with the maximum available information in a readily accessible format, LMES has developed a CD ROM presentation of all significant BSTI data. Although there is an enormous amount of information contained in the RFP package, the structure of the CD ROM allows the proposer to quickly determine the information it needs to review for proposal development and, because of the electronic format, allows the proposer to quickly access that information. In addition, use of the CD ROM supports the LMES belief that supplying the proposer with all available information will allow development of an informed proposal and lead to the best price for the government and minimize complications during the conduct of the work.

The information on the CD ROM addresses the text of the request for proposal and statement of work; detailed analytical characterization data for waste streams, where available; over 800 photographs of open containers showing the condition and variety of the waste; a listing of all potential waste streams from all DOE sites; and, a unit price calculation spreadsheet which develops the unit price for each category based on the baseline definition of each waste category and proposer-supplied prices.

DOE carries the burden of conducting the NEPA review, however, the vendor (post-awards) shall be prepared to provide additional information to support this review to DOE upon request.

DOE deferred determination as to the level of NEPA review until after awards were made. Any contracts awarded as a result of the BSTI procurement was contingent upon completion of the NEPA process. A two-year limit on the completion of NEPA requirements was placed on each selected vendor. If NEPA requirements have not been completed within this two-year time period, the contract may be terminated at either LMES or the vendor’s request.

The three major steps in the BSTI NEPA process were developed from the "Integrated DOE NEPA Implementing Procedures" (10CFR 1021.216). These steps consisted of: requesting environmental data and analyses from proposers with their proposals; prepare an environmental critique prior to award, based on the bidder information; and award contracts contingent on completion of NEPA review.

The environmental information requested as part of the proposals will only be what is readily available to bidders. To meet qualification requirements for the BSTI, bidders must provide proof of permit applications or existing permits. A brief description of potential environmental impact from the proposed action should not be a heavy burden on the bidders if they are in the waste treatment business and have begun the permitting process for treatment of mixed waste. The requirement for environmental data/analysis will be considered on a pass/fail basis.

DOE developed specific guidance on what is adequate information and specified the threshold levels for impacts to the environment as a result of stakeholder meetings early in the development of the RFP. From this data DOE developed an environmental critique based on the information supplied in each proposal. The critique was a decision document and required an independent review of the information provided by the proposers. If a selected bidder’s information satisfied NEPA requirements, e.g. an EIS had been done, no further NEPA review was conducted and a contract was awarded without a contingency on developing approved NEPA documentation. If a selected bidder’s information satisfied the threshold levels to qualify for award but did not provide sufficient information to complete the NEPA review, a contract was awarded with implementation contingent on completion of NEPA review. The environmental critique was considered proprietary information and was not shared with the public. An environmental synopsis derived from the critique was provided to the public after contract award. This documented the consideration given to environmental factors in the award process and provided the rationale for any additional NEPA review required.

It is anticipated that, to complete the NEPA review on a selected vendor’s proposal, it may be necessary for DOE to do an Environmental Assessment (EA). An example of when this will be necessary is when the vendor’s proposal provides an environmental analysis that meets the thresholds for qualification but does not satisfy NEPA requirements or stakeholder concerns. In this case DOE will complete the NEPA review upon receipt of the contractor’s more detailed environmental analysis compared with the no action alternative. DOE must prepare the EA because the vendor will not be able to perform analysis on the no action alternative.

Additional information needed from the contractor to complete the NEPA review after award was specified in the statement of work and included:

• an overview of the facilities and processes being offered;
• the location(s) of all facilities and processes and information on the local population centers;
• a brief description of the site(s) including whether or not any surveys for sensitive resources (e.g., wetlands, floodplains, cultural resources, threatened and endangered species) have been conducted and if any such resources have been identified;
• any by-products or secondary waste streams that would be associated with implementation of the proposal and how they would be disposed of based on the representative waste definitions provided in the RFP;
• any infrastructure requirements (e.g., utilities, roadways) not already developed and available; and
• the anticipated workforce to be used during implementation of the proposal (e.g., local or other);
• records of regulatory history, including all correspondence from or to any regulatory agencies for the past 3 years. If any correspondence has left an action or determination pending, it was required to be included regardless of date;
• copies of minutes or queries resulting from public meetings or permit reviews if available;
• copies of any existing NEPA documentation for the facility or process and any existing environmental analyses such as transportation/accident, if available.

The vendors were cautioned to take no action with potential adverse environmental impact until the NEPA review was complete. In addition, the cost recovery for NEPA support was limited to an amount pre-agreed upon at the time the support is provided.

In order to make access to the BSTI information easy and use of BSTI contracts straightforward, a website has been developed. The objective of the website is to simplify use of this complex contractual vehicle and gain the maximum participation of DOE sites in the BSTI which will result in the maximum benefit to DOE.

The information contained at the website includes: 1) waste category descriptions; 2) vendor descriptions; 3) vendor waste acceptance criteria; 4) shipment forms which can be filled out and submitted electronically; 5) contract responsibilities of the vendor and DOE sites; 6) description of contract access; 7) the capability to determine treatment and disposal prices prior to vendor contact for a waste stream with given characteristics; and 8) information on vendor availability and time lapse between shipment to the vendor and final disposal acceptance.

The information is presented in a manner that should allow the interested generator to quickly determine if the BSTI has a treatment option available that will suit the generator’s needs, calculate the price to treat the waste, and determine who to contact and how to proceed in accessing BSTI contracts. Finally, once the generator has verified that the BSTI is the correct treatment option, the generator can easily access and complete shipment forms required by the vendor and electronically submit them to the proper organization.

Because of the ease of use afforded by the website, it is expected that the BSTI will be the first treatment option to be evaluated by all DOE generators for its waste treatment needs. such as Envirocare of Utah, Inc. which is currently under DOE contract

BACK