Tank Waste Retrieval, Processing, and On-site Disposal at Three Department of Energy Sites Final Report (2006) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
VIII Decision-Making Process
VIII Decision-Making Process
Pages 91-100
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 91... ...
DOE's decision-making paradigm has evolved with a different management and legal environment than the time; and Savannah River Site and Idaho National Laboratory, which are located in states covered under Section 3116. Neverthe less, the considerations relevant to management and decision making under Section 3116 are fundamentally the same as 1Programmatic risk is the risk to cost, schedule, and technical perfor those that apply to a process for determining an acceptable mance of a program.
|
From page 92... ...
. However, the risk-benefit analyses presented 2In this chapter, risk is intended in a generic sense as risk to workers, the in the Idaho National Laboratory and Savannah River Site public, and the environment.
|
From page 93... ...
wastes qualify for disposal at WIPP. The recent regulatory An analysis and understanding of the performance objec- problems that Hanford encountered in its transuranic waste tives is the logical starting place for an analysis of risks posed determinations has a real impact on the entire DOE waste by tank wastes at the Savannah River Site, Hanford, and the management program (see Sidebar VIII-1 and GAO, 2004)
|
From page 94... ...
Federal legislation passed in October 2004 provided authority for DOE to carry out its acceleration completion strategy at its Savannah River Site and Idaho National Laboratory. However, the law excluded the Hanford Site.
|
From page 95... ...
For waste streams that are to be addressed in the near For the past 50 years DOE (or its predecessor agencies) term, the reasoning that supports waste disposition decisions has had the authority and responsibility to manage the highto be laid out in a manner that is accessible to regulators and level waste stored in tanks at the Idaho National Laboratory, stakeholders as part of a transparent, risk-informed, decision- the Savannah River Site, and Hanford.
|
From page 96... ...
They may help specify a desired future state for a site, make DOE's tank waste management program more robust, particularly in terms of its preferred future uses; in the sense that it is more likely to succeed in its mission, 4. They may help decide the relative balance of contami- and more transparent, so that regulators, Congress, and the nant reduction, contaminant isolation, and stewardship public have a clearer idea of the challenges and choices that activities to be used in achieving a desired future state DOE faces (see Recommendation VIII-3)
|
From page 97... ...
. In summary, the critical elements for implementing a risk- The recent Savannah River Site and Idaho National Laboinformed approach are ratory waste determinations, and the Hanford exemption for tank C-106 show the beginning of trade-offs among public · Identify a specific set of options; risk, worker risk, and cost (e.g., Davis, 1998; Gilbreath, · List the information or data needs for deciding among 2005; and Sams, 2004)
|
From page 98... ...
not relying on institutional controls exclusively (in lieu of waste removal or other engiManagement of Long-Term Risks and Long-Term neered and natural barriers)
|
From page 99... ...
The National Research Council published three be desirable. For instance, if assumptions about land use reports on long-term stewardship relevant to the DOE based on the site being zoned "industrial use, in perpetuity" weapons complex, which includes Hanford, Idaho National prove to be incorrect, what would be the consequences in Laboratory, and the Savannah River Site (NRC, 2000c, case no action is taken and in case the tanks are re-remediated?
|
From page 100... ...
DOE is taking steps toward this approach through the waste determinations required by Section 3116 1. The unique risks created by the proposed decision for the Savannah River Site and Idaho National Laboratory.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.