 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Witness Testimony
Mr. John T. Mitchell
A Review of the Department of Energy's Yucca Mountain Project, and Proposed Legislation to Alter the Nuclear Waste Trust Fund (H.R. 3429 and H.R. 3981).
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: Thank you for the invitation to appear before you today and report on the progress made on the Yucca Mountain Project since the last oversight hearing in June of 2000. As you know, significant strides have been made and I am confident that, given adequate funding, the Project is on track to submit a high-quality docketable license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by the end of 2004 and begin waste acceptance at the repository in 2010. Before I begin with Project-specific testimony, let me tell you who I am and who I represent. My name is John Mitchell and I am the Bechtel/SAIC Project Manager for Yucca Mountain Project. Bechtel National, together with Science Applications International Corporation, formed Bechtel SAIC Company, LLC (BSC) to be the management and operating contractor for the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) Program. We were awarded the five-year contract in November of 2000 and began work in February of 2001. In July of 2002, after strong votes of approval in both the Senate and House, President Bush signed a Joint Resolution (PL 107-200) designating Yucca Mountain as the site for our nation's permanent repository for spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. This site recommendation was the culmination of more than 20 years of scientific study and represents a major milestone in the development of the repository. The recommendation allows DOE to take the next step in establishing a safe repository - submittal of a License Application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). DOE plans to submit the License Application by December of 2004. The application will include an overview of the repository's engineering design concept as well as a safety analysis report demonstrating how the repository can be constructed, operated, and closed in a manner that protects public and worker health and safety while preserving the quality of the environment. DOE has the strong support of our national laboratories to aid in the scientific and investigatory work that is ongoing. DOE, BSC and the national labs are all working together effectively in support of our one common goal - constructing and operating a first-of-its-kind, world-class facility to store this nation's spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. We are aggressively proceeding with numerous activities in support of the December 2004 goal. Design work is underway on both the surface and subsurface facilities and progress continues on both the Preclosure Safety Analysis and the Total System Performance Assessment. Other activities include completing and certifying the Licensing Support Network no later than June 2004. In addition, work proceeds on closing the nine Key Technical Issues (KTIs) identified by the NRC in pre-licensing interactions. 293 agreements were made prior to site recommendation, largely for documentation and data confirmation. The NRC used these agreements as a basis for their sufficiency comments that accompanied the site recommendation. As of March 17, 2004, 213 of these agreements have been submitted to the NRC with 90 closed and 123 in various stages of NRC review. 80 remain to be addressed and submitted to the NRC between now and License Application in December 2004. Becoming an NRC licensee is more than closing KTIs and filing a license application. BSC is working closely with DOE to implement a nuclear operational culture to ensure the effectiveness of licensing, design, and construction activities under NRC oversight. As we enter this environment, together we must do a number of things to gain and keep regulator confidence and trust. First and foremost is establishing a strong and sustainable safety culture. As part of the Management Improvement Initiatives (MII), a program established last year to identify and focus attention on changes necessary to be a successful license applicant, a rigorous Safety-Conscious Work Environment, where every employee is free to raise and resolve concerns without fear of retribution, is being strengthened on the Project. I am pleased to report that consecutive surveys have shown improvement in employee attitudes and perceptions. The results are encouraging and both BSC and DOE are committed to addressing the results of these surveys and continue making improvements. As part of the MII, we have completed a major reorganization of BSC that reflects a move from a functional structure to a line-accountability, project-focused structure. I believe this new structure will better reflect the work to be done and will allow for closer coordination and integration of Project personnel and activities. I have also brought to the Project a new Quality Assurance manager with directly applicable experience to revamp and revitalize this important function. Quality is not just a buzzword - it is our integrity and our credibility. It is the only acceptable way to do our work and the first step for a successful License Application. From the top down, our organization is devoted to achieving quality in everything we do so that we might provide an objective and visible basis for confidence that we are doing things right the first time. Quality is each individual's responsibility and senior management will assure that clear direction and accountability are provided for a visible and effective process. The majority of our work between now and December 2004 will focus on the License Application. We are on schedule to submit a complete, high-quality LA to the NRC by the end of this year. Once the NRC receives the LA, it will conduct extensive technical reviews and hearings during which it will consider the scientific and design information submitted on the repository. The NRC will grant a construction authorization only if it concludes from its investigations and public hearings that the repository will protect the safety and health of workers and the public. If construction authorization is granted, DOE will begin initial construction of the repository. This may occur in early 2008. Before completing construction, DOE would have to update its LA for a license to receive and possess waste. If the amended license is granted, initial receipt of waste would begin in 2010. You may have noticed a lot of "ifs" in my previous testimony. That's because this Program, which has one single focus - to build a permanent high-level waste repository, will only succeed if - there's that word again - if it is fully funded by the Congress. The Department cannot begin repository operations by 2010 if adequate funding is not available to license and construct a facility. Nor will waste be moved if we don't have a transportation system up and running in time. Yes, lots of things other than money are required for success but cold hard cash is the lynch pin. Without it, all the hard work and good intentions of the thousands of people involved will not make the project a success. As you are all well aware, this Program has a long history of being significantly underfunded and thus, behind schedule. FY2004, thanks to Chairman David Hobson, was an exception -- the Program was funded at only $11 million less than the Administration's request. And because we received adequate funding, we have maintained our 2004 schedule -- even with five months of a Continuing Resolution - and are on track to submit a high-quality, docketable License Application to the NRC by the end of this calendar year. As I mentioned earlier in my testimony, receipt of waste in 2010 is heavily dependent on adequate funding. Success is achievable, but will be jeopardized if the Program suffers from inadequate funding. Full funding of this Program has always been crucial, yet from 1986 to 2003, appropriations have consistently fallen short of the budget request. Steady and adequate funding is crucial as we make the critical transition from scientific site investigation to preparation for licensing, constructing and operating a repository. Past underfunding has forced the DOE to delay and reprioritize the work leading to successful milestone achievement. Continued underfunding, and the delay that inevitably follows, will only increase costs to the federal government - for both storage of defense waste and liability to civilian reactors. Some estimate the cost of delay at $1 billion a year. This year, funding the Project is not as simple as merely requesting and receiving an adequate appropriation. Though the Administration's request of $880 million is large and adequate for this year's Project activities, the request assumes passage of legislation to "fix" the Nuclear Waste Fund by reclassifying fees as offsetting collections. Without this, or a similar fix, the appropriations committees will be left with a $750 million shortfall- a very serious problem for both appropriators and the Project. I urge the Members of this Committee to give very serious consideration to the bills that are the subject of today's hearing - HR 3429 and HR 3981 - and recognize that without the solution they offer, this Program cannot succeed. I am a project manager, not a lawyer or legislator so I won't tell you how to fix the funding - I can just tell you it needs to be fixed. If I, or any other project manager, is given funding adequate to the task, then I will succeed at that task. Inadequate funding will only lead to more delay and eventual failure of the project. I cannot emphasize enough the importance of adequate funding. We are already operating on the margins as a result of previous cuts and cannot withstand much more without schedule slippage. Any less than the budget request for FY2005 seriously jeopardizes receipt of waste in 2010. Any funds in addition to the request would increase confidence that we could meet the 2010 date. Thank you for your time. I am happy to answer any questions you may have. Related Documents |
|||||||||||
|
