Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Aging Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DNFSB hearing urges holistic, risk‑based management of DOE aging infrastructure
Summary
At a DNFSB public hearing, outside experts from GAO, ANS, NRC, the Army Corps and NASA urged DOE to adopt systematic asset management, better data and standards such as ANS‑3.14, and to address workforce and funding constraints so aging infrastructure does not undermine safety or missions.
The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board convened external experts on July 26, 2024, to examine how aging physical infrastructure affects safety at DOE defense nuclear sites and what practices other agencies use to manage those risks. Chair Joyce Connery opened the hearing saying the Board will take a more holistic view of infrastructure rather than a case‑by‑case "whack‑a‑mole" approach.
The hearing framed aging infrastructure as a risk‑management problem because replacement of all old facilities is neither affordable nor fast. DNFSB technical director Timothy Dwyer illustrated the point with the recent Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse and said organizations need up‑to‑date condition and risk assessments to understand how changing missions alter hazards. A recorded message from IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi reinforced the need for standards, peer reviews and workforce knowledge transfer.
GAO witnesses described leading practices — formal asset management plans, prioritized investments, quality data and continuous performance evaluation — and flagged DOE components where data and modeling are incomplete. GAO said NNSA has made progress but faces major program delays on replacement facilities that force continued operation of aging buildings; EM faces data gaps, quality assurance weaknesses and workforce shortages that can obscure risk. The American Nuclear Society explained ANS‑3.14, a consensus standard aimed at aging management for nonreactor facilities and including a risk‑prioritization appendix adapted from Y‑12 practice.
Regulators and operators shared practical models. NRC detailed how license renewal and the Generic Aging Lessons Learned report structure inspections and aging programs for reactors and fuel‑cycle facilities. The Army Corps described condition ratings, asset registries and Operational Condition Assessments that convert inspection findings into portfolio‑level risk rankings. NASA described an agency master plan that maps mission relevancy against facility condition for roughly 5,300 assets, and a move toward reliability‑centered and predictive maintenance.
Taken together, witnesses emphasized the same themes: improve condition data, use risk‑informed prioritization and modeling, strengthen contractor accountability and quality assurance, address workforce attrition and obsolescence, and adopt or reference consensus standards where appropriate. The Board left the record open for public comment through Sept. 13, 2024 and said staff will consider how to apply these lessons to DNFSB oversight of DOE defense nuclear facilities.
