 Home
BEMR
Contents
U.S.
Map
INTRODUCTION
Volumes II and III present the site data and assumptions used to
develop the Base Case for the 1996 Baseline Environmental Management Report.
Department of Energy field personnel obtained the raw data from existing
information sources and employed site-specific assumptions in concert with
programmatic assumptions and guidance developed by Headquarters personnel.
Headquarters personnel then integrated and modified the data to ensure that it
addressed complex-wide constraints, such as funding and waste management
capacity.
The site summaries are presented by state in two volumes.
Volume II covers Alaska through New Jersey and Volume
III covers New Mexico through Wyoming. The information represents the
best data and assumptions available as of October 1995. The assumptions have a
significant influence on the scope, schedule, and total cost of the
Environmental Management program; however, they can change for a variety of
reasons: continuing reductions in the Department's budgets; revisions to
current federal, state, or local regulations; renegotiation of compliance
agreements; modification of future land-use goals; shifts in national
priorities; and discovery or application of new technologies. Consequently, the
numbers presented in the site summaries do not represent outyear budget
requests by the field installations.
The individual site summaries do not represent stand-alone documents.
For example, the national assumptions described in Volume I are not repeated in
the site summaries. The national assumptions used and the methodology employed
to generate the site summaries must be clearly understood prior to reviewing
the data portrayed. The methodology is described in
Volume I, Appendix C. Also, costs for addressing issues at
Environmental Management program sites are often accounted for at other
installations. For example, costs for transportation and disposal associated
with all transuranic waste generated within the Environmental Management
program are principally accounted for in the Waste
Isolation Pilot Plant site summary in New
Mexico. Further, not all the data can be depicted concisely. The
supporting documentation used to prepare these site summaries, however, is
available for review at the field installations. Some sites, such as
Hanford, produced an extensive stand-alone baseline report, which is
available from the sites upon request. Points of contact are listed in the
stakeholder sidebars in each site summary.
This Reader's Guide, Table of Contents, and
Glossary are repeated in Volumes II and III for
convenience.
FORMAT
The site summaries provide specific information about the activities
and projected costs at each site as required by the 1995
National Defense Authorization Act (see Volume I, Appendix A). Each
summary provides a brief discussion of the site's past, current, and future
missions, which is followed by discussions of the projects and activities
necessary to manage and remediate the site. Estimated costs and schedules are
also provided. The projects and activities are organized by major program area:
Nuclear Material and Facility Stabilization, Environmental Restoration, and
Waste Management. Landlord site maintenance activities also are addressed,
where applicable. The national Science and Technology program is discussed in
the Headquarters site summary. Detailed descriptions of each of these major
program areas appear in Volume I, Chapter 2.
All summaries include relevant portions of the outline provided in
the Contents box on the following page. Most sites do not require the use of
all listed components. For example, three national programs: the Uranium Mill
Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) program, the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial
Action Program (FUSRAP),and the Nevada Offsites program are conducted
exclusively within the scope of Environmental Restoration and, therefore, do
not require Nuclear Material and Facility Stabilization program or Waste
Management program sections. Each of these national programs is introduced in a
program summary UMTRA program in the New Mexico
section, FUSRAP in the Tennessee section,
and Nevada Offsite program in the Nevada section
that addresses programmatic issues. All costs are apportioned, however, to the
individual sites.
The Albuquerque, Chicago, Oakland, Oak Ridge, and Ohio Operations
offices, as well as the Headquarters offices in Maryland and Washington, D.C.,
do not pose any environmental liability. Therefore, costs are limited to direct
program management, support, and direction provided for the sites under their
jurisdiction.
The national Science and Technology research centers - the Western
Environmental Technology Office in Montana, the Pittsburgh Energy Technology
Center in Pennsylvania, and the Morgantown Energy Technology Center in West
Virginia - also pose no environmental liability to the Department. All costs
are related to technology development and are included within the national
Science and Technology program estimates in the Headquarters site summary.
ADDITIONS
Major Activity Milestone tables appear under the program sections as
opposed to one chart per site in the 1995 report. These charts provide
completion dates for major program activities. In the 1995 Baseline Report,
costs for direct program management and support functions were portrayed in a
stand-alone section. The 1996 report apportions these costs as a line item in
the applicable program area (Nuclear Material and Facility Stabilization,
Environmental Restoration, and Waste Management). In addition, sidebars
highlight site-specific stakeholder interactions, technology development
activities, regulatory issues, and pollution prevention and waste minimization
initiatives.
Future Use
A "Future Use" section was added to the 1996 Baseline Report site
summaries. It depicts the assumed future use of a site as currently envisioned
by the Department and stakeholders. Discrepancies between the information
gathered by the field representatives and the current assumptions held by the
Department or stakeholders are clearly identified. The six future land-use
categories are defined in Volume I, Chapter 6. A
summary table defining the future-use categories is presented below.
Land Use Categories Used for the 1996 Baseline Report
Disposal/ Storage Area
(Controlled Access)
|
Restricted access areas maintained by
the Department for secure storage or disposal of nuclear materials or waste.
Access by unauthorized persons is prevented via barriers and security forces.
Wildlife and plants are controlled or removed. This category also is known as
"controlled access."
|
| Industrial
|
Active industrial facility where use
of ground water may be restricted.
|
| Open Space
|
Posted areas reserved generally as
buffer or wildlife management zones; permits occasional use of surface area by
Native Americans or other authorized parties. Access to or use of certain areas
may be prevented by passive barriers (e.g., where soil is capped). Limited
hunting or livestock grazing may be allowed.
|
| Recreational
|
Unfenced areas where daytime use for
recreational activities (e.g., hiking, biking, sports), hunting, and some
overnight camping is allowed. Fishing may be limited to catch-and-release.
|
| Residential
|
Unfenced areas where permanent
residential use predominates. There is no restriction on surface water, but
ground water use may be restricted.
|
| Agricultural
|
Unfenced areas where subsistence or
commercial agriculture predominates without restriction on surface or
ground-water use.
|
Description of Personnel
A "Description of Personnel" section was added that describes the
personnel required to complete activities or projects, the contracting
mechanism used at each site, and the projected future personnel needs. The
1995 National Defense Authorization Act required that the Department
discuss in the 1996 Baseline Report the personnel required to perform the work
at the sites. Based on this requirement, sites were asked to provide a count of
their human resource needs by program for a three-year period, beginning in FY
1996. They were also asked to breakout their counts by federal and contract
(both direct and indirect) employees. The projections of Full-Time Equivalent
levels, as reported in the site summaries, are an estimate of
personnel requirements necessary to meet Base Case funding levels rather than
the Administration's outyear budget targets. These estimates were developed for
analyses purposes and are not intended to supersede or replace any personnel
requirements established by the Department of Energy. See the box below for the
description of labor categories.
| LABOR CATEGORIES USED TO ESTIMATE PERSONNEL
REQUIREMENTS
General Managers, Executives, First Line Supervisors, and
Program/Project Managers - Persons who engage in activities related to
planning, scheduling, monitoring, coaching, overseeing, and evaluating the work
of others, and who control and distribute resources within their organizational
units, programs, or projects.
General Administrative, Secretarial, and Clerical Support Staff -
Persons who provide office support services to managerial, scientific,
engineering, and professional staff through activities such as typing, word
processing, making appointments, and answering telephones.
Administrative and Other Professional Occupations - Persons who
provide services and professional advice, inspect operations and facilities,
and/or maintain computer, communications, and financial systems.
Engineers - Persons who apply physical laws and principles for the
development and use of machines, materials, instruments, processes, and
services and engage in activities such as research, design, construction,
testing, procurement, production, operations, and sales.
Scientists - Persons who apply scientific methods to investigate the
laws of natural, physical, and social phenomena, and their application to
problems in fields such as engineering, medicine, production, and the
environment.
Technicians - Persons who apply scientific, technical, or
engineering principles to solve basic problems; who repair, maintain, or
provide basic operation of tools or equipment; or who collect and analyze data
via field sampling and laboratory analysis.
Operators - Persons who control and operate vehicles, machines,
systems, equipment, and plants to produce, destroy, move, and store materials
and supplies.
Craftsmen - Persons who construct, destruct, alter, and/or maintain
buildings, bridges, pipelines, and other structures and/or who fabricate
materials and machinery.
Laborers and General Service Workers - Persons who engage in manual
labor or general infrastructure support activities.
|
Comparison With Previous Estimate
A "Comparison with Previous Estimate" section that tabulates and
describes the cost differences between the 1995 Baseline Report and the 1996
Baseline Report is provided. Cost comparisons for the UMTRA, FUSRAP, and Nevada
Offsite program sites are consolidated in their program introduction site
summaries.
APPROACH
The process used to develop the 1996 site summaries was similar to
the process used for the 1995 Baseline Environmental Management Report.
However, the 1996 Baseline Report provides more accurate and complete
information regarding the approach and assumptions used to complete this
life-cycle cost estimate. Last year, the program was not fully prepared to
develop life-cycle costs at the site level. This year, the sites received the
time and support needed to complete their own estimates. By moving the
estimating process closer to the knowledge base, the Department achieved better
quality results, increased the sites' understanding of the estimating process,
empowered the sites to define long-range assumptions and outline potential
long-term strategies, and improved communications and integration across sites,
program areas, and other Department of Energy Secretarial Offices.
To ensure compliance with the requirements set forth in the 1995
National Defense Authorization Act, Headquarters developed guidance for the
field installations, suggesting how they should prepare cost data and site
summaries. The guidance included relevant portions of the overall methodology,
as discussed in detail in Volume I, Appendix C, and
national assumptions regarding the Environmental Management program (see
Volume I, Chapter 3).
The field representatives used existing information to develop their
data and initial narratives and exercised professional judgment regarding
various aspects of their sites where decisions are yet to be made. Headquarters
program managers and Baseline Environmental Management Report project
representatives reviewed the initial drafts, and returned them to the field
representatives with specific recommendations.
Following the field's second submission, Headquarters
representatives integrated the results in accordance with the project's
methodology. After the integration model compiled and modified the data
submitted by the field to meet funding, waste capacity, and other programmatic
constraints, field and Headquarters representatives conducted additional review
cycles. The results of this iteration were used to form the Base Case presented
in this volume.
DATA PRESENTATION
The shaded area in the State Total Tables and Site Total Tables
represents the annual Base Case results for the first five years. These numbers
were generated between June and October 1995. The numbers presented immediately
below the shaded area reflect the FY 1996 appropriation and the FY 1997
Congressional budget request. Because these numbers were not available until
Nov. 15, 1995 and March 18, 1996, respectively, they are not incorporated in
the Base Case. However, these numbers represent the new compliance level (the
funding level required to meet all current compliance agreements) for the
Environmental Management program. The impact of these modifications on the Base
Case will be determined in the next edition of the Baseline Environmental
Management Report. The numbers in the shaded area and the new compliance
funding levels are reported in current year dollars (three percent annual
inflation).
Additional estimated cost tables (for the state and site) are for
activities (nuclear material and facility stabilization, environmental
restoration, waste management, and landlord) and funding sources
(defense/nondefense). [Note: Congress appropriates funds to the Environmental
Management program in two accounts: (1) defense and (2) nondefense.] The
results presented in these tables are five-year annual averages over the life
cycle. These estimated costs and funding profiles are reported in constant 1996
dollars (no inflation), which is the standard approach used for making
long-range cost projections.
|
 |
Home
