Overview of a Developing Data System and Future Data Call Needs

1
Overview of a Developing Data System and Future
Data Call Needs

• Douglas Tonkay
• Office of Commercial Disposition Options
• June 22, 2005

2
EM planning has evolved

• Site Roadmaps/ 5-Year Plans
• Baseline EM Reports
• FFCAct Implementation
• Paths-to-Closure
• EM Integration
• Top-to-Bottom Review
• Project Baselines
• Business Strategy

• 1990

Today
3
Several reasons we need corporate waste data

• Business strategy and analyses
• Facilitating baseline and alternate options
• GFS/I requirements
• Informed decisions
• Disposition graphics
• Waste program planning (complex-wide)
• DOE Order 435.1 requirements
• Transportation planning

4
More reasons we need corporate waste data

• Dialogue with stakeholders
• Congressional QAs and GAO requests
• International reporting
• US National Report - Joint Convention on the
  Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety
  of Radioactive Waste Management
• Net-Enabled Waste Management Data Base
• Central Internet data base settlement agreement

5
What data exists?

• Site baseline and contract documents
• Ideally, volumes and schedules in project
  management systems
• Butwhat is really out there?
• Site treatment plans (MLLW subset)
• EM Corporate Project Team Report
• Budget documents and gold chart
• Corporate performance metric LLW and MLLW
  disposed
• Not a complete picture

6
What data exists? (Continued)

• Disposal site data
• Hanford Solid Waste EIS and RODs
• Annual disposal forecasts at NTS and Hanford
• Ad hoc data calls, e.g., to support RODs and
  litigation
• Stream disposition data (SDD) ca 2000-2001
• Does not reflect current site baselines
• Populates Central Internet Database
• Florida International Universitys Waste
  Information Management System (WIMS)
• Last year from Oak Ridge and Savannah River

7
What went wrong with the last corporate waste
data effort?

• One shoe-sized to fit all
• Many data requirements
• Data suppliers often not project managers
• Extensive work for stop lights/risk scores
• Rollup of waste stream data to a level not useful
  by the site project managers
• Streams split between budget accounts (PBSs)

8
What went well?

• Disposition maps and flow diagrams - liked by
  stakeholders
• Inventory and lifecycle waste forecast
• Reconciled disconnects between shipping and
  receiving sites
• Consistent format and approach
• Electronic data transfer
• Used for program decisions (WM PEIS)

9
(No Transcript)
10
What are we thinking about?

• Efficiently collect needed LLW/MLLW information
  to support business strategy and ongoing systems
  analysis
• Place minimal burden on projects
• Utilize existing corporate systems or processes
  to the extent possible
• Direct correlation with site baselines
• Configuration control organize around a Waste
  Breakdown Structure

11
WBS numbering

• Unique MLLW and LLW stream id
• Example 02012111010202t
• Generator program EM (02)
• Generator site Oak Ridge (01
• Waste Class MLLW (2), not GTCC (1), CH (1),
  lt10nCi/g alpha (1)
• Physical waste description debris (01)
• Treatment incineration (02)
• Disposal site Envirocare (02)
• Shipment mode truck (t)

12
Result is a smaller data set

• Descriptive information provided largely through
  unique WBS identifier
• Starting inventory and life-cycle waste volume
  projection
• Some additional data with capability to add
  comment or .pdf files as backup
• Waste Streams and TSDs limited detail

13
Options for data collection

• Waste Information Management System as proposed
  by FIU
• State-of-the art graphics and web technology
• Existing system with flexible features
• Ease of use and access
• New IPABS Waste Baseline Module with options
  for web-based access and/or electronic file
  transfer input
• Build under corporate IT standards and
  requirements
• Corporate visibility and acceptance
• Capability for multiple and archived data sets
• Hybrid of the above options