An introduction to the yucca mountain the department of energy

Ten percent of the waste will be shipped by truck, using the Interstate system.

An introduction to the yucca mountain the department of energy

The following were universally accepted as elements that needed to be addressed within the policy: But Subpart C lacks requirements for written safety and health programs or a formal analysis of project hazards.

The fundamental basis for these comments was twofold—it included cost and liability. There was a belief that anything beyond the requirements of Subpart C would cause project costs to increase far beyond any direct benefits received and that prescribing and enforcing compliance with essential elements of a contractor's safety and health plan would increase DOE liability in the event of a job-related injury or illness.

There are, however, compelling arguments against these positions.

The tremendous costs associated with injury and illness in the construction industry, or more specifically, the cost of insuring against these losses, has recently been the subject of considerable discussion. The escalation of worker's compensation costs has resulted in premiums that are now nearly percent of direct-labor costs for particular trades in certain states.

Yet this remains a fraction of the total costs of a disabling injury, in that indirect costs are generally estimated to be approximately four times direct, or insured, costs.

This is particularly pertinent to DOE, because, by and large, the agency reimburses contractors directly for such costs. According to a report entitled "Improving Construction Safety Performance" The Business Roundtable,which used extremely conservative data, the ratio of benefits to costs for administering effective safety and health programs was 3.

With regard to liability, there are two prevailing bodies of opinion as to the advantages and disadvantages of prescribing and overseeing contractor safety and health programs. The first is that such involvement increases owner and construction manager liability exposure and should therefore be avoided.

The National Academies Press. There is a considerable body of case law supporting the latter argument, as was emphatically underscored in a recent Washington State Supreme Court ruling State v. MTA Construction, ; Weinert v.

Interestingly, one of the more contentious issues during the development of this policy was the definition of construction. There were two primary reasons for this seemingly mundane point being discussed so thoroughly.

First, unlike some other government agencies or private sector companies whose primary mission is construction management, DOE's mission involves a wide range of activities, from building, maintaining, and operating complex industrial facilities to scientific research and electrical power distribution.

Accordingly, a definition that clearly distinguished between construction and maintenance was needed, because many questioned the benefit and cost effectiveness of applying the policy to daily maintenance activities. Second, the diverse organized labor representation on DOE facilities had an interest in whether future DOE environmental restoration and waste management work would be considered construction or the continued operation of a facility, albeit with a different product.

This distinction could play a major role in determining which unions perform the bulk of future environmental restoration work. There was accordingly an expressed desire of the affected parties to use the revised policy as the arbiter of this issue.

A policy document for the management of construction safety, however, is not the proper vehicle with which to resolve such an issue. Any effort to do so not only would have been inappropriate but also would have politicized and overburdened the process unnecessarily, resulting in many unneeded fights and delays as well as the risk of continued dissension by those adversely affected.

It was, therefore, decided to defer to the definition of construction provided within the Davis-Bacon Act used for wage-rate determination on federally funded construction projects. The requirement for the construction contractor to perform a written analysis of projected hazards for each project phase elicited a significant number of comments.

Many expressed concern that the level of effort demanded by this requirement would parallel that required by another DOE directive, which requires safety analysis reports to evaluate, Page 18 Share Cite Suggested Citation: It is important to note that the job safety analysis or activity hazard analysis that is common to most successful construction safety programs is considerably less rigorous and resource-intensive.

A shortcoming of some construction safety programs that require a hazard analysis for each project phase is that a definition for the term project phase is not provided in the program, nor is there a requirement for a determination in advance of the construction activities that comprise a project phase and require such an analysis.

In these cases, it is often difficult to assess a contractor's implementation of the contract's safety program requirements. Proactive, pre-job safety and health planning, the objective of such hazard analyses, is not always achievable when it is unclear which elements of the project require it and no clear tie can be made back to the project schedule.

An introduction to the yucca mountain the department of energy

The DOE Order OSHA standards define a competent person as "one who is capable of identifying existing and predictable hazards All engineering requirements are then completed prior to commencement of work on the affected project phase.

For the sake of flexibility and economy, the Order allows for the preliminary hazard analysis to be completed in advance and provided within the bid documents or to be completed concurrently with the activity hazard analysis by the construction contractor, provided that all requirements are fulfilled.

In addition to containing customary employee safety orientation and weekly toolbox training, the DOE Order uses the completed activity hazard analysis to ensure that employees are trained specifically regarding identified project hazards and the appropriate control measures.

This method was chosen to address what all too frequently occurs in the construction industry: Another fundamental element of a program that effectively manages construction 'safety and health is a means to evaluate prospective bidders' safety and health records to ascertain whether they meet a minimum level of performance.

In this element, the methods used in the private sector may not fit the constraints of the federal procurement Page 19 Share Cite Suggested Citation: For example, in the private sector, prospective bidders are frequently prequalified on the basis of several indicators of past safety and health performance.

These may include a review of each contractor's safety and health plan, the worker's compensation experience modifier rate, the OSHA Log a required listing of recordable injuries and illnessesor the incidence rate derived from the OSHA Log.

As meaningful as these indicators might be, for several reasons their use is problematic in the federal sector.SUBJECT: Review of Alleged Conflicts of Interest Involving a Legal Services Contract for the Yucca Mountain Project Introduction In September , the Department of Energy awarded a contract to the law firm of the Department's then-Yucca Mountain management and operating contractor;.

YUCCA MOUNTAIN. Introduction. Yucca Mountain as a national nuclear waste repository, which according to the most recent information from the U.S. Department of Energy, will not be ready to accept spent fuel before Numerous reasons have caused the delay, including scientific.

YUCCA MOUNTAIN. Introduction. Yucca Mountain as a national nuclear waste repository, which according to the most recent information from the U.S. Department of Energy, will not be ready to accept spent fuel before Numerous reasons have caused the delay, including scientific.

4 INTRODUCTION Yucca Mountain has been selected as the site for the Department of Energy’s (DOE) geologic repository designed to store and dispose of . The Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository, Introduction. Spent nuclear fuel is the radioactive by-product of electricity generation at commercial nuclear power plants, EPA's rule requires the Department of Energy to show that Yucca Mountain can safely contain wastes.

introduction Purpose and Scope he Department of Energy (DOE) has proposed to transport radioactive waste to the proposed repository at Yucca Mountain in Nye County using "mostly rail.".

Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository - Wikipedia