Washington

173
-1

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
173
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Washington

  1. 1. Washington Long-Term Stewardship Site Highlights (Dawn) Ford Site (page 3) Total Site Area- Currently 202 hectares (500 acres); 81 hectares (200 acres) are expected to be transferred to DOE Current Landlord- Dawn Mining Company Expected Future Landlord- U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction Office Hanford (page 7) Major Activities - institutional controls; maintenance; surveillance and monitoring Site Size- 152,000 hectares (375,000 acres) Estimated Average Annual Cost FY2000-2006- $55,000 (WNI) Sherwood Site (page 65) Major Activities- disposal cell monitoring; groundwater monitoring Site Size- 154 hectares (380 acres) Start-End Years- 2000/in perpetuity Estimated Average Annual Cost FY2000-2006- $38,700 (Dawn) Ford Site (WNI) Sherwood Site Hanford
  2. 2. Table of Contents Table of Contents (Dawn) Ford Site ............................................................................................................................................... 3 Hanford .............................................................................................................................................................. 7 (WNI) Sherwood Site ...................................................................................................................................... 65 Washington
  3. 3. National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Long-Tenn Stewardship Report Washington 2
  4. 4. (Dawn) Fm·d Site (DAWN) FORD SITE1 1.0 SITE SUMMARY 1.1 Site Description and Mission The (Dawn) Ford Site (also known as the Ford Mill site) is the location ofa former uranium milling site that operated from 1956 until 1981. The site is located in Ford, Washington, on the eastern border of the Spokane Indian Reservation in Stevens County. Dawn Mining Company owns and operated the 202-hectare (500 acres) mill site. The site contains four disposal cells used to dispose of the uranium mill tailings and radioactive soil and rock that remained after uranium ore was processed. Three of the disposal cells are closed. LONG-TERM STEWARDSHIP HIGHLIGHTS Total Site Area- Currently 202 hectares (500 acres); 81 hectares (200 acres) are expected to be transferred to DOE Current Landlord - Dawn Mining Company Expected Future Landlord- U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction Office Reason Not Subject to NDAA Requirements - This site is an UMTRCA Title IT site that will not be transferred to the U.S. Department of Energy until2019 The (Dawn) Ford Site is subject to Title II of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 (UMTRCA). UMTRCA Title II sites are privately owned and operated sites that were under active license when UMTRCA was passed, or were licensed thereafter. The majority of the mining and milling conducted at these sites was for private sale, but a portion of the uranium was sold to the U.S. Government. Under UMTRCA, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for performing long-term stewardship activities at the site, but is not responsible for the site's remediation. The (Dawn) Ford Site is expected to be transferred to DOE in 2019. The number of acres that will be transferred to DOE has not yet been formalized but is expected to be approximately 81 hectares (200 acres). Once the site is transferred to DOE, the only activities will be long-term monitoring of the disposal cell. The historic mission ofthe site was to process uranium ore from the Midnite Mine, located on the Spokane Indian Reservation, approximately 25 miles west of the mill. The (Dawn) Ford Site processed uranium ore into yellow cake for the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (a predecessor agency to DOE) and disposed of the mill tailings and other process-related wastes onsite. Dawn Mining Company was originally licensed by the Atomic Energy Commission to process uranium for weapons production, but the oversight authority for the milling operations was transferred to the State of Washington in 1969. The mill was shut down in 1982 due to litigation pending against the Midnite Mine, which provided the source uranium for the milling operations. 1.2 Site Cleanup and Accomplishments The remediation approach for the (Dawn) Ford Site is to stabilize the uranium mill tailings and process-related 1 This report is developed in response to a Congressional request in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2000 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). As requested by the Act, this report addresses current and anticipated long-term stewardship activities at each site or portion of a site by the end of calendar year 2006 ("Conference Report on S.1059, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000," Congressional Record, August 5, 1999). Based on current planning, the (Dawn) Ford Site is not expected to be transferred to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for long-term stewardship until 2019, and for this reason the site is not the primary focus of this report. This brief summary of the site cleanup activities is provided for background information and potential future long-term stewardship activities. (See section 3.2 of Volume I). Washington 3
  5. 5. National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report wastes in place. Three of the four disposal cells have been closed. Demolition of the mill buildings and evaporation ofwater in the ponds, is yet to be completed. Also, the groundwater restoration strategy has not been finalized. 2.0 EXPECTED FUTURE USES AND SITE RESPONSIBILITY When remediation activities are complete, the site will have four onsite disposal cells containing approximately 1.8 million cubic meters (2.3 million cubic yards) of uranium mill tailings and contaminated material. The precise volume of material will not be known until remediation is completed. The disposal cells will have a low-permeability radon barrier with an erosion control layer. Erosion control will be provided for all potentially vulnerable features, and the site will be graded to provide positive drainage. Disturbed areas will be revegetated. The disposal cells will be similar to other uranium mill tailings disposal cells and will require similar long-term stewardship activities. Once the site is transferred to DOE in 2019, DOE will be responsible for long-term stewardship activities at the site. Anticipated site-wide long-term stewardship activities include restricting access by fencing and posting warning signs along the site boundary. DOE will repair the fence and replace signs, as necessary. DOE will staff a 24-hour phone line for reporting site concerns. Drilling and other intrusive activities will be prevented within site boundaries through institutional controls. 'eArden Jare4•- _.MdyBiueCroek _.) ('/ ,/ ,:j" /,/''·,.._ (Dawn) Ford Sit~•' r- ', .s-, • ,.Ford ,,~;:~~~-~'-- / / 0 10 20 Miles - - - - - ·_:_..!._ eVaJiey { .,.,. Furport Dalk;na•_ e >;if~/~ --,-----.7':...~X'{<:;_, ~ ~ ) ,<~·;;~ .(_i I I T 27, 'c"-- q_ '~·<r:ic (Dawn) Ford Site Groundwater at the site is known to be contaminated as a result of uranium processing activities. The extent of groundwater contamination that will be present at the time of site transfer cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. DOE assumes that groundwater will require monitoring on a periodic basis. The precise monitoring requirements will be prescribed in the long-term surveillance plan that will be developed and approved by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at the time of site transfer. Site records will be placed in permanent storage at the DOE Grand Junction Office in Colorado. The types of records maintained include site characterization data, remedial action design information, the site completion report, long-term monitoring plans, annual inspection reports, and current and historic monitoring data. Washington 4
  6. 6. (Dawn) Ford Site For additional information about the (Dawn) Ford Site, please contact: Art Kleinrath, Long-Term Surveillance and Maintenance Program Manager U.S. Department of Energy Grand Junction Office 2597 B3/4 Road, Grand Junction, CO 81503 Phone: 970-248-6037 or visit the Internet website at http://www.doegjpo.com Washington Gary Robertson Washington State Department of Health 1112 SE Quince Street Mail Stop PO Box 47890 Olympia, WA 98504 Phone:360-236-3241 or e-mail at glr030@doh.wa.gov 5
  7. 7. National Defense Authm·ization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report Washington 6
  8. 8. Hanford HANFORD1 1.0 SITE SUMMARY The need for new long-term site management processes is being evaluated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site because ofthe end ofthe historical weapon production operations and the prospect for significant hazards to remain at the site long after remediation. The site history, an overview of the current remediation activities, and brief descriptions of regulatory requirements and remediation accomplishments are provided in this chapter to present a perspective for the discussion on long-term stewardship in Section 2.0. 1.1 Description and Mission LONG-TERM STEWARDSHIP HIGHLIGHTS Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities- institutional controls, maintenance, surveillance and monitoring Total Site Area • 152,000 hectares (375,000 acres) Estimated Volume ofResidual Contaminants- to be determined Portions in Long-Term Stewardship as of2000 • 4 Average Annual Long-Term Stewardship Cost FY 2000-2006- $55,000 Landlord- U.S. Department of Energy; U.S. Forest Service; Bureau of Land Management; State of Washington; Port of Benton Hanford was established by the Federal government in 1943 (then called Hanford Engineering Works) for plutonium production, chemical processing, and research and development to support the nation's wartime effort to produce plutonium for the world's first nuclear weapons. Hanford's boundary encloses 1,517 square kilometers (586 square miles) in the southeastern portion of the State ofWashington. The Columbia River runs through the northern portion of the site and forms Hanford's eastern boundary. The City of Richland is located at the southern border of the site, and the cities of Kennewick and Pasco are located less than 24 kilometers (15 miles) southeast of the site. Hanford is divided into "Areas," which are numbered (e.g., 300 Area, 200East Area) as shown on the following map.2 The designation ofthe "600 Area" refers to all lands not specifically designated by another name. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers selected the site near the towns of White Bluffs and Hanford because of the remote location, good climate, and most important, the abundant supply of hydroelectric power and clean water from the Columbia River. The production of plutonium at Hanford involved three steps: 1) fuel fabrication- uranium was made into fuel elements in the 300 Area of the site; 2) fuel irradiation - fuel elements were irradiated in nuclear reactors in the 100 Area, converting small amounts of the uranium fuel to plutonium; and 3) chemical processing - the irradiated fuel elements, or "slugs," were chemically processed to extract the plutonium in the 200 Area facilities. The fabrication of the fuel elements that fed the plutonium production reactors was accomplished in the nuclear facilities of the 300 Area, which housed numerous large nuclear facilities used for research and development and one test reactor. By the 1950s, a total of eight plutonium production reactors had been built in the 100 Area (the B, C, D, DR, F, H, K-East, and K-West Reactors). N Reactor (located in the lOON Area) became operational in 1963 and was used for both plutonium production and steam generation. During the production period, while waiting for 1 In June 2000, amid the preparation of this Report, Columbia river land, the Wahluke Slope, the Arid Lands Reserve and portions of land north of the 300 Area were designated by the Administration as a National Monument. The impact of the Monument designation on planning, land management and cleanup has not been fully assessed, and therefore, not fully reflected in this Report. 2 For convenience, and in this Report only, a 200 North Area is specified; this is a "portion" as defined in this Report and is not a recognized Area at Hanford. Washington 7
  9. 9. National Defense Authm·ization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report 0 Washington 1.5 Miles Fitzner-Eberhardt Arid lands Ecology Reserve (AlE) 3 Wahluke Slope Hanford 1100 Area 8
  10. 10. Hanford chemical separation in the 200 Area, the irradiated fuel rods were stored in large basins filled with water at the back end of each reactor. Later, during shutdown of N Reactor, N Reactor fuel rods were transferred to the K- East and K-West Basins and were stored there while fuel treatment issues were resolved. These rods are scheduled for transfer to dry storage following stabilization. In addition to the nine production reactors, two test reactors were built for use in fuel materials testing, isotope production, and power research. The Plutonium Research Test Reactor is located in the 300 Area, and the much larger Fast Flux Test Facility reactor is in the 400 Area. The fabricated fuel was irradiated in the plutoniumproduction reactors, and chemical separation ofthe plutonium in the fuel slugs was conducted in the 200 Area by one of three different methods. Hanford's T-Plant, B-Plant and U-Plant all used the bismuth phosphate separation technology, with final extraction at 224-T Building, 231-Z Building and the Plutonium Finishing Plant. Hanford's REDOX Plant (S-Plant) used organic solution and aqueous phase separation technology, with plutonium and uranium recovery conducted at the 231-ZBuilding and U- Plant, respectively. The U-Plant was converted for a new separation technology, U03, used mainly for the recovery of uranium. The product from the U03 facility was sent to the Plutonium Finishing Plant for final extraction. Hanford's C Plant (Strontium Semiworks) was a semi-scale test facility. Separation of strontium and cesium from waste streams was performed in the B Plant. The aqueous wastes from these operations were sent to cribs, ponds, or trenches for disposal via soil infiltration or evaporation. The chemical wastes and slurries were sent to Hanford's 177large underground storage tanks for disposal. Solid wastes were disposed in trenches and caissons at Hanford. Beginning in 1964, DOE sharply curtailed plutonium production in response to the nation's changing defense needs. By 1971, eight ofthe nine production reactors had been shut down and by 1972, all related fuel separation facilities had ceased operations. In the early 1980s, DOE briefly restarted the REDOX Plant and U03 Plant; however, these plants are now permanently shut down. As a result of the reduction of plutonium production activities, the resources and capabilities of Hanford were refocused toward developing nonmilitary applications ofnuclear energy. In the late 1970s, the Energy Research and Development Administration, a predecessor agency to DOE, emphasized energy research programs, including solar, geothermal, and advanced systems; fossil energy; national security; conservation; energy policy analysis; and resource assessment. Through the 1980s, the Fast Flux Test Facility was used for large-scale nuclear fuels and reactors materials testing in support of nuclear energy research. In 1989, the defense-related plutonium production mission at Hanford was replaced by the environmental management mission. The current and future mission of Hanford is to manage the facilities and inventories of special materials, remediate the environmental contamination caused by decades of activities related to the production ofplutonium, and support national research efforts in environmental and other sciences. In addition to the reactors and nuclear facilities, Hanford has more than 500 DOE-owned structures. These structures support past and present operations and vary greatly in their use, their size, and their level of radiological and chemical contamination. 1.2 Cleanup and Accomplishments By 1989, when Hanford's mission had changed to that of environmental restoration, production activities had resulted in the discharge ofcontaminated liquids into the soil, groundwater, and the Columbia River; the disposal of solid waste throughout the area; and the accumulation of two-thirds of the nation's stored weapons-related radioactive waste. Hanford's cleanup deals with three types of waste, as described below: Washington 9
  11. 11. National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report The first type of waste includes high-level, low-level, transuranic, mixed, and hazardous wastes. High-level waste is defined as wastes from the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel, usually highly radioactive and containing fission products. Transuranic waste is defined as radioactive wastes contaminated with uranium-233 or transuranic elements having half-lives over 20 years. Low-level waste is defined as any radioactive wastes that are not high-level or transuranic, regardless oftheir level ofradioactivity. High-level, low-level, and transuranic wastes are, in some way, contained and require treatment and/or final disposal. Transuranic waste is currently stored awaiting shipment to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico. Shipments to WIPP began in the summer of 2000. The low-level wastes are buried at onsite low-level waste disposal facilities. The mixed waste and hazardous waste make up much of this first type of waste and are regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Under RCRA, most mixed and hazardous wastes cannot be buried and other approved treatment options must be used. Treatment will be determined through established regulatory processes. The second type of waste is material (radioactive or hazardous) that has escaped or was placed into the environment. This waste is hard to recover and is now located in Hanford's soils, unconsolidated geologic material, groundwater, plants and animals, and within the Columbia River's aqueous, biota, and sediment systems. In 1989, Hanford was placed on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National Priorities List under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, andLiabilityAct(CERCLA). Since that time, DOE has been committed to remediation and waste management to decrease potential risks to Hanford's work force, the public, and the environment. Disposal and treatment of wastes that have escaped into the environment are handled under CERCLA or RCRA, depending on the regulatory lead under the provisions of the Tri-Party Agreement. The third type of waste consists of building materials that became contaminated during the production era. This phase includes waste materials inside pipes, slab tanks, sumps, filters, and the building materials themselves (contaminated concrete, electrical equipment and wumg, steel gratings). Decommissioning and decontamination of these facilities will remove most ofthis contamination, which will be treated as CERCLA, RCRA, or low-level waste. MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION ACTIVITY MILESTONES TASK COMPLETION Site-wide Submit Columbia River Impact Assessment lOOArea N-Reactor Deactivation Pre-Record of Decision Remedial Action Decommissioning 200Area Environmental Restoration DATE Fiscal Year 1996 (done) 1997 (done) 1998 (done) 2016 2038 Disposal Facility Operational 1996 (done) Non-tank Areas Site Investigation Remedial Action Decommissioning 300Area Pre-Record of Decision Site Investigation Remedial Action Decommissioning 400Area Remedial Action Decommissioning 2024 2038 2048 1997 (done) 2038 2045 2038 2047 Comprehensive and verifiable inventories of Hanford's waste volumes are currently being developed or upgraded. Location and volume of the first type of waste are generally well known. However, the sampling and analysis of these wastes is expensive and involves radiation and chemical exposure risks to workers. For example, for high-level waste tanks, obtaining a single sample may cost as much as $750,000, and much of the work involves application of full ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) controls for worker protection. Generating inventories for the second type of waste involves environmental sampling and analysis, followed by prediction ofthe total mass and type ofthe contaminants in the environment. Computer models accomplish these predictions and a comprehensive estimate for all contaminated environmental media is being conducted. Many of the buildings at Hanford have been closed and sealed. Re-entry into these buildings requires months of Washington 10
  12. 12. Hanford preparation and involves potential radiological and hazardous chemical exposures for workers, again requiring ALARA controls for worker protection. In addition to worker exposure, generating inventories ofcontamination in pipe works and sumps requires extensive nonstandard sampling and analysis that is expensive. Part of the decontamination and decommissioning activities at Hanford includes investigation, evaluation, and application of innovative and transferable technologies for reducing the time, cost, and risks associated with facility contamination characterization and removal. The origination ofwastes and contamination at Hanford, and their nature and extent, are described further below. Hanford processed more than 100,000 metric tons (110,000 tons) of irradiated uranium and generated several hundred thousand metric tons ofchemical and radioactive waste. Much ofthe waste is contained in the 177large storage tanks in the 200 Area. Environmental contamination is found in surface and subsurface soils. In addition, liquids (principally liquid low-level radioactive waste effluents) were discharged into the soils and have contaminated 25 to 35% ofthe groundwater under Hanford. This groundwater contamination includes 12 known contaminants (tritium, carbon tetrachloride, chromium VI, nitrates, cobalt-60, strontium-90, cesium-137, technetium-99, iodine-129, plutonium-239, uranium-235, and uranium-238). Monitoring and data evaluation continue for the sub-surface at Hanford so that characterization of the nature and extent of the groundwater contamination is continually updated. These monitoring data are also used to continually improve predictions for contaminant migration. Prior to 1970, solid wastes contaminated with hazardous chemicals or plutonium or containing transuranic or low-level wastes were disposed in burial trenches. After 1970, most ofthe plutonium-contaminated wastes were placed into partially lined underground vaults or surface trenches designed for easier retrieval. Hanford also has sites in which packaged, low-level radioactive and hazardous wastes are buried. These packages include drums, boxes, and bags. Solid radioactive wastes were also disposed of in caissons (60 or 90-cm (2 or 3-foot) diameter and 6 to 35- meter (20 to 120-foot) long metal or concrete pipes buried vertically in the ground). The chemical processing of irradiated fuels generated the largest volume of Hanford's waste. The process wastewaters were divided into high-level radioactive alkaline slurries containing heavy metals, organic and inorganic salts; uranium, plutonium, and mixed fission products stored in underground waste tanks; and low-level waste streams, such as cooling water, condensates, and other similar waste discharged to the ground. Most of the high-level waste remains in the underground storage tanks and will be removed from the tanks and treated in the proposed Waste Processing and Immobilization Facility. Contamination resulting from discharge to the ground remains in the soil and groundwater at Hanford and is being treated and removed where possible by excavation and pump-and-treat operations. Contaminated facilities located in the 100, 200, 300, 400, and 600 Areas consist of shut-down production and test reactors, chemical separation and processing plants, waste-handling facilities, and various support structures. Many of these facilities are contaminated with radioactive and hazardous materials because of the various processes associated with fuel fabrication, fuel irradiation, and chemical processing, as described previously. DOE is decontaminating and decommissioning all existing contaminated buildings across the site. This effort requires disposition of more than 300 buildings currently in the surplus facility inventory, as well as more than 500 other buildings that will require decommissioning in the future. Environmental restoration activities are well underway at Hanford. Initial emphasis was on stabilizing sites with contamination posing near-term, more severe health risks, while concurrently seeking to characterize the extent of contamination in other areas. To date, DOE has successfully completed all required measures to contain surface contamination in a stable form, while continuing its monitoring and maintenance activities until it can remediate these sites. In addition, all known contaminated areas, groundwaterplumes, and surplus buildings have received at least preliminary characterization, and the levels of contamination for many sites and plumes have Washington 11
  13. 13. National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report been thoroughly defined. As DOE has stabilized and characterized high-risk sites, it has shifted the emphasis of its environmental restoration activities to designing and implementingremediation approaches. DOE's currentremediation strategy for these areas involves removing most surface contamination from the region along the Columbia River and near the City of Richland. DOE is moving contaminated waste materials to the Central Plateau (or 200 Area) for disposal in the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, which is the site's disposal facility for waste materials removed during site remediation and building decommissioning. This waste (the bulk ofwhich is low- level mixed waste), as well as other contamination within the Central Plateau, is contained and controlled in place. Sanitary waste is disposed of in the City of Richland landfill. Hazardous waste is sent to commercial facilities. Remediation plans for specific areas of Hanford are discussed below. 1.2.1 100 Area The 100 Area encompasses 6,800 hectares (17,000 acres), which is divided into six main, non-contiguous, operating areas (B/C, D, F, H, K and N Areas), separated by buffer zones (open spaces). These operating areas contain Hanford's nine production reactors, more than 200 inactive support buildings, 36 former solid waste burial sites, and more than 200 identified sites with surface or subsurface contamination. Eight of the reactors were shut down by 1971; the final reactor was shut down in 1987. At present, only a few facilities are being used to support the storage of spent nuclear fuel in the K Reactor basins (until a new dry storage facility is available in the Fall of 2000) and to support environmental restoration activities throughout the area. All ofthe production reactors, except theN Reactor, were "single-pass" reactors. Water was pumped from the Columbia River, through the reactor tubes to cool the uranium fuel, and then out of the reactor through large pipelines back into the river. Between the reactors and the river, the cooling water (effluent) was held in large tanks (retention basins) for short periods to allow the short-lived radionuclides, picked up in the reactors, to decay and for thermal cooling of the water. Lower concentrations of longer-lived isotopes from these units remained in the cooling water and were discharged directly into the Columbia River where the concentrations declined further due to dilution. There is evidence of radionuclides trapped in the sediments of the Columbia River downstream of Hanford; however, there is no indication of direct impacts to human heath due to these production-era releases, and much of contamination passed out of the Columbia River into the Pacific Ocean. Contaminants were also introduced into the environment when some of the basins and pipelines overflowed or leaked, releasing contaminants into the soil. Over the years, large quantities of sludge that settled out in the basins were pumped out into disposal trenches near each basin. Each area had sites where solid wastes generated during routine reactor operations (contaminated rags, filters, clothing, equipment, disposable supplies, etc.) were buried. In each of the operating areas, some of the contaminants introduced into the soil have migrated to the groundwater, which is relatively close to the surface in the 100 Area (less than 50 feet). Transport of these contaminants toward the Columbia River is currently slowed with pump-and-treat systems. Remediation of surface and subsurface soils in the 100 Area is being completed in phases. Remediation in the 100-B/C Area was initiated in late 1995 and will progress until all other areas are completed in 2016. During this period, DOE is excavating and removing contaminated soil and debris, filling excavated sites, and restoring natural vegetation to the remediated areas. The waste will be transported and disposed directly in the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility on the Central Plateau. As the soil is being excavated, samples are taken periodically and analyzed to determine the concentration ofcontaminants being removed. When complete, 100 Area remediation operations will have excavated and replaced an estimated three million cubic meters (four million cubic yards) of contaminated soils; analyzed more than 20,000 soil samples; and restored 256 hectares Washington 12
  14. 14. Hanford (640 acres) of previously controlled surface area for other uses. The level of contamination in the groundwater is currently monitored twice a year through a system of approximately 400 wells that are sampled and analyzed. In some cases, contaminated groundwater plumes are intercepted through a network of extraction wells and treated and returned to the ground. For the contaminants in the 100 Area, groundwater treatment includes ion exchange to remove strontium-90 and use of innovative in- situ technology for stabilization of chromium contamination. The tritium in the 100 Area groundwater cannot be removed using today's technology; therefore, water contaminated with tritium is reinjected up and away from the river shoreline after other contaminants are removed (giving tritium time to decay). Groundwater treatment systems will operate until 2002, with monitoring continuing through 2018. Unless regulations change dramatically, the continuing sampling and analysis will require extensive resources in the long-term. The groundwater treatment systems are evaluated periodically to determine their effectiveness. Based on the results of these evaluations and in conjunction with regulators and stakeholders, plans for the duration of operations of groundwater treatment systems are continually updated. Groundwater is not expected to meet current drinking water standards, so the use of groundwater will be restricted through institutional controls. Building decommissioning and other remedial activities in the 100 Area will generate approximately 3.3 million cubic meters (4.3 million cubic yards) of low-level waste. DOE does not expect any of this waste to require treatment before disposal. The waste is being transported and directly disposed of in the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility on the Central Plateau. The intact reactor blocks will be disposed of in a separate, specially constructed reactor block disposal area. 1.2.2 200 Area (Central Plateau) The 200 Area (also known has the Central Plateau) is divided into two main operating areas (east and west) where plutonium was extracted from irradiated reactor fuel in massive chemical processing facilities. Irradiated reactor fuel was transported by rail from the 100 Area reactors to chemical separation plants, where the fuel cladding was removed, and the fuel dissolved into a chemical slurry. Plutonium and uranium were separated from this slurry, purified, and concentrated in various stages, then packaged for shipment to other stages of weapons production. These large buildings have up to 7,400 square meters (80,000 square feet) of floor space and are surrounded by 1OOs of contaminated ancillary buildings that supported the chemical separations processes. The 200 Area encompasses 2,400 hectares (6,000 acres) and contains six chemical processing plants, more than 250 support and research buildings, all of Hanford's 177 high-level waste storage tanks, most ofHanford's waste disposal sites, as well as one million square meters (265 acres) of contaminated surface soil. During the operation of the processing plants, low-level waste was discharged directly to the soil through cribs, ditches, ponds, drain fields and wells. The direct disposal of waste to the soils was considered safe because the soils were thought to filter and trap a large portion of the radioactive contaminant in the top layers. More than 1.3 trillion liters (350 billion gallons) of liquid, ranging from cooling waters to supernatant from single shell tanks, have been discharged to the ground in the 200 Area. Not all radioactive contaminants were absorbed by the upper soil layers. Instead, they migrated to the subsurface and groundwater, along with chemical solvents (e.g., trichloroethylene, carbon tetrachloride) used by the processing plants. At least 24% of the groundwater under Hanford is known to be contaminated by radioactive materials and hazardous chemicals. Nine contaminants exist at levels exceeding current national drinking water standards. Other waste was piped to storage tanks, where it was to be retained until a final treatment option could be devised. Approximately 350 million liters (93 million gallons) ofwaste were pumped into 149 single-shell tanks between 1944 and 1980. The tanks and the piping systems associated with these single-shell tanks have leaked Washington 13
  15. 15. National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report at various times, releasing as much as 3.8 million liters (one million gallons) of high-level waste into the 200 Area soil. The Waste Management program at Hanford is responsible for managing and decommissioning the tank farms, as well as remediating contaminated soils within the tank farm boundaries. The 200 Area was also the location for managing waste generated during processing. Contaminated items such as clothing, tools, filters, construction material, laboratory ware, and failed process equipment were disposed in the 200 Area in trenches, typically measuring 275 by 6 by 6 meters (900 by 20 by 20 feet). A total of more than 400,000 cubic meters (523,000 cubic yards) of radioactive solid waste has been buried within the 200 Area, including approximately 140,000 cubic meters (183,000 cubic yards) of unsegregated transuranic waste. Government agencies and most stakeholders generally agree that restoring the entire 200 Area to a pristine condition is not a practical or technically feasible objective. Rather, DOE assumes that much of the Central Plateau may be used exclusively to manage contaminated media and dispose of waste materials. However, the 200 Area remediation is still a major effort, with extensive actions needed to control and contain contamination, minimize long-term maintenance operations, and ensure safe disposal of waste materials. Remediation efforts, as well as the accompanying decontamination and dismantling activities, will be completed by 2046. Since many facilities and waste management operations continue to be active, extensive remedial actions will not begin in the 200 Area until after 2006. However, a groundwater-monitoring program has been in place for several years. Many areas containing surface radiological contamination have been stabilized and, in 1994, systems began treating groundwater contaminated with carbon tetrachloride and radionuclides. DOE has also deployed a number ofvapor extraction systems to remove carbon tetrachloride from the soil, reducing the threat ofadditional groundwater contamination. In contrast to the excavation and disposal strategy employed in the 100 Area, DOE plans to leave contaminated soil and solid waste disposal sites in the 200 Area in place. However, it will take measures to control and contain sites in ways that will greatly reduce public health risks and the threat of further contamination of groundwater. Soil sites contaminated by hazardous chemicals and/or radioactive isotopes will be contained in place through the extensive use of engineered barriers placed over the area of contamination. Barrier design will vary depending on the level of contamination present, but caps dramatically reduce the amount of surface moisture seeping downward through the contaminated area, essentially eliminating further spread of contaminants and limiting the intrusion of plants and animals into the waste site. In some instances, vertical barriers may be constructed along the perimeter ofcontaminated sites to prevent contamination from spreading laterally through the soil. DOE may remove soils and waste from a small number of sites that cannot be suitably contained and dispose of them in the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. DOE will also apply caps and barriers to currently closed solid waste burial grounds. As remediation continues and other solid waste burial trenches are filled and closed, DOE will install caps and barriers for these trenches. By the time this remediation is complete in 2038, DOE will have installed approximately six million square meters (seven million square yards) of caps within the 200 Area. As DOE remediates other areas across Hanford, much of the waste will be brought to the 200 Area. Low-level wastes are to be disposed of in the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. Low-level mixed waste will be stored in the 200 Area in recoverable trenches until treatment options are determined and approved through established regulatory processes. Transuranic wastes and high-level wastes will be stabilized and packaged for transfer to WIPP and to the proposed high-level waste repository, respectively, for disposal. The 200Area also permanently stores 90 (inventory as of Spring 2000) de-fueled U.S. Navy reactor vessels in a shallow trench that must remain uncovered in accordance with agreement requirements for satellite surveillance. In 1968, the B Plant was modified to remove cesium and strontium from the high-level waste tank contents. The cesium and strontium were purified and placed into capsules that were stored or leased for industrial uses. Washington 14
  16. 16. Hanford However, some ofthe capsules deteriorated over time and all leased capsules were returned to Hanford by 1996. Currently, all of these capsules are stored at the Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility (WESF) at Hanford awaiting final disposal. The current baseline plan is to dispose of these by vitrification, though no decision has been made. The cesium and strontium capsules are a significant portion of Hanford's total curie inventory, and current plans are to vitrify the contents in the Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant. Hanford's groundwater monitoring activities are ongoing and will continue until the extent of contamination is well understood and beyond to provide periodic data for updating transport predictions and evaluating treatment efficacy. DOE expects that groundwater will be pumped to the surface in some areas ofthe 200 Area and treated to control the spread of plumes of contamination and to reduce contamination in areas of high concentration. DOE is currently evaluating various systems to treat this pumped groundwater and has already placed some systems into service to remove carbon tetrachloride and other organic contaminants from the groundwater, reducing the concentration and dispersion of these mobile contaminants. Schedule for Decommissioning Buildings in the 200 Area Facility Complex Nurnberof Decommissioning Decommissioning Buildings Initiated Complete U Plant Complex 30 Ongoing 2038 Reduction-Oxidation Plant Complex 45 Ongoing 2040 Plutonium-Uranium Extraction Plant 100 2039 2043 Complex B Plant Complex 88 2035 2048 T Plant Complex 20 2044 2048 Plutonium Finishing Plant Complex 150 2035 2048 Support Services 61 2025 2048 1.2.3 300 Area The 300 Area is a 46-hectare (115-acre) industrial area just north of the city of Richland and adjacent to the Columbia River. The facilities in this area have been used for fabrication of reactor fuel assemblies, reactor research and development, metalworking, chemical process development, and research and development sponsored by DOE. Many of the buildings in the 300 Area are still used for research and development; others are currently being cleaned out and refurbished for new uses; and others are beingprepared for decommissioning. In addition, the 300 Area houses several office buildings and support facilities (fire stations, security headquarters, water treatment plant, etc.). Much of the contamination found within the 300 Area is similar to that found in many industrial areas in the United States; that is, it includes solvents and petrochemicals. However, during fuel fabrication and materials processingresearch, radioactive materials were introduced via pipeline leaks, spills, airborne releases from shops, burial of process waste, and release of liquids into ponds. The bulk of the contamination is concentrated in buildings and in approximately 20 hectares (50 acres) of soil within the main industrial area. Contaminants such as nitrates, heavy metals, trichloroethylene, and uranium are also present in groundwater beneath the 300 Area. The remedial action plan for the 300 Area is designed to remove contaminants from surface and subsurface soils to levels compatible with continued industrial use. Soil in the 300 Area contaminated with low-level radionuclides or hazardous chemicals will be disposed of at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. Washington 15
  17. 17. National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewanlship Report Transuranic soil and buried waste (276 cubic meters, 360 cubic yards) will be retrieved and properly disposed at the WIPP in New Mexico. Currently, the 300 Area Accelerated Closure Project is being evaluated. Ifinitiated and accomplished, this project will make facilities and land available earlier than planned. Groundwater monitoring in the 300 Area indicates contaminant levels are decreasing, and contamination is not expected to pose any threat to public health or to the Columbia River in this area. A Record of Decision was issued for the groundwater associated with the 300 Area in 1996, which addressed specific contaminants (uranium, TCE, and DCE) only. Remedial action associated with other constituents (e.g., tritium) have not been addressed. Schedule for Decommissioning Buildings in the 300 Area Facility Complex Number of Decommissioning Decommissioning Buildings Initiated Complete Production Reactor Fuel Fabrication 17 2039 2045 Laboratories Complex 4 2039 2045 Support Services 70 2039 2045 1.2.4 400 Area The Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF), which is currently in hot standby, and several state-of-the-art laboratory facilities are located in the 400 Area. In 1999, the Secretary of Energy ordered that a programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) be conducted to evaluate the future missions for the FFTF. The draft Programmatic EISforAccomplishingExpanded Civilian Nuclear Energy Research andDevelopmentandIsotope Production Missions in the United States, Including the Role ofthe Fast Flux Test Facility has been issued for public review and is expected to lead to a Record of Decision in late calendar year 2000. Until the EIS is complete and a Record of Decision is issued, the future use of the Fast Flux Test Facility is unknown. The 400 Area is small and has very little contamination, most of which resulted from a few solid waste sites, sanitary systems, and four small process ponds. Characterization of contamination in this area is complete, and remediation designs have been developed. DOE currently plans to complete remediation ofthe 400 Area in 2046. Remediation activities in the 400 Area involve excavating approximately 2,300 cubic meters (3,000 cubic yards) of contaminated soil and debris from several waste burial pits, liquid disposal ponds, and spill areas. The contaminated soil and debris removed from the 400 Area will be disposed of in the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. 1.2.5 Other Hanford Areas Only a fraction of the Hanford Site was developed for production and research facilities (the 100, 200, 300, and 400 Areas). The remainder (the 1100 and 600 Areas, the Wahluke Slope, and the Arid Lands Ecology Reserve) provided buffer space around the operating areas or housed support operations. These open spaces were lightly developed, with the exception of a small zone near the City of Richland used for support operations such as offices, bus garages, warehouses, and shops. All buffer lands are being remediated to a condition suitable for public use. The relatively minor contamination is being removed from surface and subsurface soils, and any contaminated buildings and structures will be removed. Remediation of the 1100 Area, the North Slope, and the Arid Lands Ecology Reserve (ALE) has Washington 16
  18. 18. Hanford already been completed. The Wahluke Slope and ALE recently were designated part of the Hanford Reach National Monument, to be managed by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Contaminated sites known to exist within the 600 Area have been characterized and incorporated into remediation work plans developed for the adjoining 100, 200, and 300 Areas. In addition, contaminated structures in the 600 Area have been removed. Remaining buildings are not contaminated, are still in use, and will ultimately be handled by the current landlord program. A Record of Decision for the 1100 Area, North Slope, and ALE was issued in 1993 for remediation, which contained a No Further Action Required determination for the groundwater. Remediation ofthe southern section of these areas was completed in 1995. The contaminated soil and debris from the remediation of buffer areas were shipped off the Hanford Site during 1993 and 1994 to a commercial vendor for disposal. Any waste material removed from the 600 Area will be disposed ofin the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. The 1100 Area was transferred to the Port of Benton in 1998. The only decommissioning required involved several small structures that formerly housed Nike missiles. These structures have been completely decontaminated and filled. 1.2.6 Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility The Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility is located between the 200-East and the 200-West Areas. This facility provides trench disposal capacity for low- level and hazardous waste (primarily contaminated soil) to accommodate remedial actions over the next 30 to 40 years. Construction of the first phase of the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility started in 1995 and operations began in 1996. DOE selected the location for this disposal facility because it is geologically stable, located outside of the 100-year flood plain, distant (more than 11 kilometers, or seven miles) from the Columbia River, far (73 meters, or 240 feet) from the water table, and adjacent to lands the public will not use in the foreseeable future. To ensure the safe isolation of waste deposited at this facility, the facility is engineered to prevent rainwater and snowmelt from entering the contaminated soil and ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION DISPOSAL FACILITY RECORD OF DECISION The Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility is a large disposal trench operated by the Environmental Restoration program and authorized to accept CERCLA waste from remediation activities. Innovations include large-scale "just in time" trench design, commercialized operations, downsized facility requirements, and improved planning and proactive coordination among programs and agencies. The project received a Record of Decision in January 1995, making it the first project of its kind to be approved. DOE expects further design enhancements and construction efficiencies will reduce the estimated life-cycle cost of this facility by more than $100 million. spreading contamination. A double liner that complies with requirements of RCRA was installed beneath the contaminated material, and there is an effluent collection system between the liners to collect any liquids. As portions of the facility are filled, a cover is constructed over the top of the waste. The top cover is designed to conduct water away from the contaminated soil and prevent the spread of contaminants. 1.2.7 Other Remedial Actions Management ofenvironmental pathways to contaminated waste sites is important to protecting Hanford workers and the surrounding community. Uncontrolled wind-blown dust and vegetation (primarily tumbleweeds) can potentially spread surface contamination. Each year, more than 400 waste sites are inspected. Hanford also performs routine radiological surveys throughout the 1517-square kilometer (586-square mile) site, removes deep-rooted vegetation, maintains other vegetation controls on 1,840 hectares (4,600 acres), controls remaining areas of surface contamination, and maintains barricades of hazardous areas to meet safety criteria. Long-term monitoring and surveillance of the Hanford Site is conducted to demonstrate compliance with Washington 17
  19. 19. National Defense Authol'ization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report regulations, confirm adherence to environmental protection policies, support DOE decisions, and provide public information. The Surface Environmental Surveillance Project is a multimedia environmental monitoring effort to measure the concentration of radionuclides and chemicals in environmental media and assess the integrated effects of these materials on the environment and the public. The project collects samples of air, surface water, sediments, soil, natural vegetation, agricultural products, fish, and wildlife. In addition, the project measures ambient external radiation. The current surveillance project measures releases from DOE facilities, unplanned releases, and releases from non-DOE operations on and near the site. Surveillance results are reported annually in the Hanford Site Environmental Report and it is anticipated that this activity, with continual advancement in monitoring practices and techniques, will be the basis for long-term stewardship surveillance and monitoring activities at Hanford. 1.3 Regulatory Regime at Hanford During the production era, the waste produced at Hanford was managed in a manner that complied with existing standards; however, throughout much of the history of plutonium production at Hanford, there were few laws regulating waste management and environmental protection. In the 1970s and 1980s, new environmental laws were enacted regulating waste management, storage, disposal, andpollution emissions to the air and water. Because of national security concerns, nuclear production facilities like Hanford were self-regulated. Under the provisions oftheAtomic Energy Act, DOE was authorized to establish standards to protect health or minimize dangers to life or property for activities under DOE's jurisdiction. In the 1980's, much of DOE's authority to self-regulate facilities was eliminated, and other agencies became responsible for regulating many aspects of DOE's activities. TR~PARTYAGREEMENT In 1989, DOE, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the Washington State Department of Ecology entered into the Tri-Party Agreement, a formal agreement to reach compliance for major waste streams managed at the Hanford Site. The agreement currently provides a schedule for site activities and focuses on backlog waste that must be addressed by the Waste Management program. As part of the Tri- Party Agreement process, milestones are continually renegotiated and new milestones added as the Hanford remediation project warrants. Tri-Party Agreement milestone completion rate is the measurement used by many stakeholders to assess DOE's remediation success. The Clean Air Act originally was passed in 1970 and has been amended several times, including extensive amendments in 1977 and 1990. This law requires DOE to meet national air quality standards, ensure hazardous air emissions from existing and new sources are controlled to the extent practical, and obtain an operating permit for all major emission sources. The Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act regulate discharges to surface water, set national drinking water standards, and regulate emissions ofhazardous constituents to surface and groundwater. In 1986, regulators from EPA, the Department of Ecology, and DOE's Richland Operations Office began to examine how best to bring Hanford into compliance with RCRA and CERCLA. The regulators and DOE agreed to develop one compliance agreement that set agreed-upon milestones for cleaning up past disposal sites under CERCLA and bringing operating facilities into compliance with RCRA. Negotiations concluded in late 1988, and the Tri-Party Agreement was signed by the three entities on January 15, 1989. The Tri-Party Agreement is the primary framework for CERCLA and RCRA regulation of Hanford, including the tank farms. Although RCRA provides no regulatory framework for the disposal of radioactive waste, the Tri-Party Agreement does govern the disposal of radioactive wastes, and DOE reports progress on these activities via the Tri-Party Agreement reporting procedures. The Tri-Party Agreement is a negotiated agreement, and all parties have agreed to extend its coverage beyond the normal CERCLA and RCRA regulatory boundaries. The Tri-Party Agreement governs by setting remediation and cleanup milestones that are legally enforceable, and DOE reports quarterly on the progress made toward these milestones. Washington 18
  20. 20. Hanford In response to the continued accumulation of spent nuclear fuel, high-level radioactive waste, other hazardous waste, and growing public awareness and concern for public health and safety, Congress has passed numerous laws, including the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of1982, as amended (NWPA). The purpose of these laws was to establish a national policy and programs that would provide reasonable assurance that the public and the environment would be adequately protected from the hazards posed by these wastes. The NWPA authorized Federal agencies to develop geologic repositories for disposing ofhigh-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel from commercial reactors. In 1987, Congress amended the Nuclear Waste Policy Act to focus potential geologic repository development activity at one site, the Yucca Mountain Site in Nevada. EPA is authorized to establish generally applicable standards for a repository at Yucca Mountain, while NRC is authorized to regulate and license, if justified, a repository at Yucca Mountain. In addition to applicable laws and regulations, DOE has established a set of policies to guide DOE activities. In 1988, DOE issued DOE Order 5820.2A, which stated DOE's policy to process and dispose ofhigh-level waste in a potential geologic repository. For planning purposes, DOE assumes that some or all ofthe defense high-level waste that satisfies the repository acceptance criteria could be placed in the first potential geologic repository developed under the NWPA. By law, the first repository is limited to a total capacity of 70,000 metric tons (77,000 tons) of spent nuclear fuel or high-level waste, or a quantity of solidified high-level waste resulting from the reprocessing of such a quantity of spent fuel prior to operating a second repository. The allocated capacity for defense high-level waste in the first repository is 7,000 metric tons (7,700 tons). DOE must ensure that the high-level waste and spentnuclear fuel at Hanford meet the waste acceptance criteria for the proposed repository at Yucca Mountain. DOE has also developed the Hanford Comprehensive Land Use Plan Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to facilitate decision-making about the site's uses and facilities for at least the next 50 years. The Record of Decision was signed and adopted DOE's preferred alternative that seeks to balance DOE's continuing land-use needs with the desire to preserve important ecological and cultural values of the site, and allow for economic development in the area. There are three primary elements to Hanford's Comprehensive Land Use Plan EIS: Land-use maps that depict the planned future uses for Hanford; Nine land-use designations that define the permissible uses for areas of the site; and Policies and procedures for planning and implementing the review and approval of future land uses. 1.4 Accomplishments and Commitments Long-term stewardship activities are already being performed for significant portions of Hanford. Moving the bulk of remaining waste sites and facilities into long-term stewardship is a major long-term objective for the Hanford Site-- for it is indeed a measure of the success of remediating the site for alternative uses. There are many intermediate steps to this objective, not the least of which is remediating the site within technological and budgetary constraints and the regulatory environment within which the site functions. Considerable preparation is required even before decontamination and decommissioning can occur. Because of the complexity of the Hanford Site and the types of contamination and wastes, much of the effort through the late 1990s and through 2006 has been, and will continue to be, devoted to these remediation efforts as the initial stages of long-term resource management. In the long-term, Hanford activities will focus on removing facilities and contamination within the constraints mentioned above and, where not practical, will focus on stabilizing or managing the wastes in perpetuity until new treatment technologies can be developed and deployed. For example, the Central Plateau will be managed in perpetuity as a waste operations center, and the subsurface will be subject to continual surveillance and monitoring, with management methods updated to meet contemporary practices. In the 100 Area, access will be limited near entombed reactors until and potentially following final disposition. It is important to note that not all waste sites or portions of the site will require long-term stewardship. There Washington 19
  21. 21. National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report are accomplishments at Hanford that do not meet the reporting criteria of this report. In some cases, waste sites and facilities can be decontaminated, decommissioned, demolished and/or removed to the point where no further "traditional" long-term stewardship activities will be required, such as surveillance and monitoring. This part of the report summarizes accomplishments at Hanford so that a proper perspective is placed on the cleanup activities at the site. Several of the completed activities at the site are worth noting specifically. In 1998, final deactivation of the B Plant was completed. The project was completed four years ahead of schedule at $100 million savings over earlier cost estimates, thus avoiding tens of millions of dollars in maintenance costs. Planning for preservation of the B Reactor as a museum is underway. The C Reactor was placed in Interim Safe Storage, a condition requiring minimum expenditure of resources. The reactor will be maintained for up to 75 years until a final disposition for the reactors on the river is implemented. Twenty-three ancillary buildings were removed at the C Reactor along with contaminated waste, and a corrosion-resistant steel roof was installed over the reactor building. The most serious high heat waste tank issues have been resolved with pumping and sluicing work on Tanks SY-101 and C-106. The Waste Receiving and Processing Facility (WRAP) began operation as the final step at Hanford for recovering and preparing non-mixed transuranic waste for offsite burial at WIPP. Plans are for 55 cubic meters (72 cubic yards) of waste to be shipped from WRAP to WIPP in both 2000 and 2001, and the amount is expected to increase to approximately 375 cubic meters (490 cubic yards) for 2002. The first shipment was sent to WIPP in July 2000. Deactivation oftheN Reactor was completed and included deactivation of 85 facilities and cleaning out theN Fuel Basin. This is a critical early step in the process of preparing theN Reactor Area for long-term stewardship activities. In addition to activities in many of the historical production areas of the site, the Richland Operations Office made progress in transferring Hanford Site land to other land managers and opening new facilities for research and training. The 1100 Area was cleaned, released by regulators, and has been transferred to the Port ofBenton for local economic development. The transfer included land, buildings, and railroad track and rolling stock. The North Slope and the ALE were cleaned of asbestos and chemical contamination and removed from the National Priorities List. Both are now managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as part of the Hanford Reach National Monument. Completion of cleanup in these two areas made 50% of Hanford Site land available for other uses. The William R. Wiley Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory (EMSL) was opened to researchers in areas including atmospheric chemistry, health effects, bioremediation, geosciences, and computational modeling. EMSL is the newest national scientific user facility and an important resource for long- term economic and environmental management of Hanford. Another asset to Hanford that is a component of long-term resource planning is the HAMMER facility. HAMMER provides training and education to enhance skills and knowledge of workers and emergency responders. The tables below identifies some of the additional accomplishments to date at the Hanford Site that reflect the progression toward eventual long-term stewardship ofthe site and the progress that is anticipated by 2006. These tables are not inclusive but highlight the diverse nature of the challenges and progress at Hanford. Washington 20
  22. 22. Hanford Site Progress to Date Accomplishment Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval and Treatment Installed upgraded tank ventilation system for tank farms Completed Cross-Site Transfer Line replacement to move waste from 200W to 200E, critical in the staging process for the vitrification plant Complete 30% of preparation for construction of vitrification plant Complete characterization of all tanks K Basins- Removal and Onsite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel Completed installation of the Integrated Water Treatment System at K West Basin Completed installation of the Fuel Retrieval System at K West Basin Completed the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility Completed the Canister Storage Building Groundwater/ Vadose Zone Integration Project Pump and Treat facilities processed three billion liters (792 million gallons) of groundwater Decommissioned 28 nonessential monitoring wells Restarted Vapor Extraction at 200-ZP-2, removed over 2,220+ kilograms (4900+ pounds) of carbon tetrachloride Environmental Restoration and Storage and Disposal Facility (ERDF) Excavated more than 1,800,000 metric tons (two billion tons) of contaminated soil/waste material from near Columbia River (100B/C, 100D, 300 Areas) and disposed in ERDF Expanded ERDF with construction of cells 3 and 4 -ready to accept waste Decontamination and Decommissioning (D&D) and Transition of Facilities Reduced footprint of DR and F Reactors by 40% in preparation for interim safe storage of reactors Started D&D of Plutonium Concentration Facility (233-S) Closed four, 100 Area electrical substations Closed WWII-era coal- and oil-fired steam plants in 200 and 300 Areas 700 square meters (7500 sq. ft.) of laboratory space was leased to the Tri-Cities branch ofthe Washington State University Waste Management and Disposal Cleaned up 85 waste sites to either "release" or long-term stewardship status Anticipated Accomplishments for Hanford Site by 2006 Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval and Treatment Start tank waste immobilization Complete interim stabilization of single shell tanks Start waste removal on 10 single-shelled tanks K Basins- Removal and Onsite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel Initiate K West Basin spent nuclear fuels removal2000 Complete removal of all K East Basin spent nuclear fuel Initiate full scale KEast Basin sludge removal Complete sludge removal from K Basins Environmental Restoration and Storage Facility (ERDF) Dispose of 2.5 million cubic meters (3.3 million cubic yards) of soil in ERDF D&D and Transition of Facilities (Major Challenges) Complete deactivation of SP-100 GES Test Facility, Bldg. 309 Complete deactivation of Post Irradiation Test Lab., Bldg. 327 (326 buckets TRU removed by 1998) Complete deactivation of Chemical Engineering Lab., Bldg. 324 (750,00 curies of cesium-137 removed by 1998) Begin plutonium stabilization at the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) Complete stabilization at Plutonium Finishing Plant Complete D&D of Reactors on the River Facilities for 76 of -178 facilities Complete deactivation of 24 of 34 facilities in 300 Area Complete decommissioning and conversion to alternate use for 73 buildings in 300 Area Waste Management and Disposal Remove spent nuclear fuel from T Plant Canyon Complete cleanup of 450 waste sites in 100-200-300-1100 Areas Ship 25% of transuranic waste to Waste Isolation Pilot Plant or dispose onsite Washington Hanford Date 1998 1998 2000 1999 1999 1999 1999 2000 1999 1998 1999 1999 1999 1999 1998 1998 1998 1998 1999 2002 2003 2006 2004 2002 2004 2006 2002 2004 2004 2000 2002 2006 2006 2006 2001 2006 2006 21
  23. 23. National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report 2.0 Site-Wide Long-Term Stewardship Long term site management processes are being evaluated at Hanford that will address, in an integrated way, issues of reductions in site operations infrastructure, residual hazards after remediation, requirements for protection of site natural and cultural resources, the need to attract new missions for economic stability, and increased access to the site by the public. Hanford calls its long-term site management processes "Long-Term Resource Management" (LTRM). LTRM incorporates long-term stewardship activities described in this report. A key aspect of the Hanford long-term site management approach is time. Current planning, environmental, safety, and land use documents define stewardship and resource management activities under current missions and with current knowledge of site hazards. However, the long-term role of the Hanford Site is uncertain, site knowledge is incomplete, and different environmental conditions could exist in the future. Long-term site management at Hanford seeks to balance these uncertainties by enabling the best use of the site at the present time without an irrevocable use of resources that could preclude future flexibility to respond to change. Discussion of long-term site management processes and activities is in its infancy at Hanford. A specific description of each portion of Hanford that will require long-term stewardship by 2006 is introduced in this section and detailed in Section 3.0. However, because of the focus of this report on long-term stewardship activities by 2006, it presents an incomplete picture of the eventual cost and responsibilities of long-term site management. For example, the cost estimate of $287,000 per year for the next few years is about 0.1% of the eventual stewardship cost at the end of the remediation program. Also, the portions of the site described in this report include only a fraction ofthe residual hazard. Future expansions oflong-term stewardship activities will include management ofclosed waste disposal sites, entombed reactors, high-level waste tanks, spent nuclear fuel, surplus plutonium, additional environmental restoration sites, ongoing effluent treatment facilities, and waste storage facilities. The remainder of this section must also be considered from the long-term perspective in that the activities discussed are focused on specific facilities and locations. From a site-level perspective, Hanford's approach is to incorporate a strong connection between long-term site management and science and technology. This connection will be part of how the site will manage cost, accomplish the three major objectives, and respond to change. 2.1 Long-Term Stewardship Activities DOE is expected to act as the steward in perpetuity for all areas of the site retained by the Federal government. The site will restrict access to areas used for radioactive waste disposal, including buffer zones, for as long as necessary to ensure protection. Remote sensory technologies will be implemented to minimize entries into hazardous facilities. The site will maintain contaminated soil sites by controlling vegetation growth and removing contaminated vegetation and will conduct routine surveys and monitoring to ensure that areas remain properly vegetated. The Effluent and Environmental Monitoring Program will continue to monitor air and liquid effluent and surface contamination, and the Landlord Project will be responsible for maintaining and upgrading the necessary site infrastructure. Semi-annual monitoring ofgroundwater will continue for at least 30 years after closure of the last facilities. Major facility repairs will be conducted every five years and roofs will be replaced every 20 years. The site will determine institutional controls and surveillance and maintenance requirements for specific areas as remediation is completed and waste sites are certified as complete under either CERCLA or RCRA. An Institutional Control Plan will be developed (as required by EPA policy) to ensure the effectiveness and reliability of institutional controls. The Institutional Control Plan can include: development and approval of site-specific Institutional Control Plans (normally written after a Record ofDecision requires one or more land use controls); identification of the program and point-of-contact responsible for monitoring, maintaining and enforcing Institutional Control Plans; provisions for funding land use controls in budget allocation requests; Washington 22
  24. 24. Hanford quarterly onsite monitoring for compliance with Institutional Control Plans; and 60-day notifications to EPA and State regulators before "major changes in land use" are approved. A specific description of each portion of Hanford that will require long-term stewardship in 2006 is provided in Section 3.0. The description of each portion includes a summary of the cleanup and accomplishments that will occur in that portion and the resulting long-term stewardship activities that will be required to protect human health and the environment. It should be noted that, although these portions represent significant accomplishments in remediation and will transition to long-term stewardship by DOE, they do not encompass all long-term stewardship activities that will be required at Hanford. Some of the most challenging remediation tasks will not be completed until beyond the 2006 timeframe specified for this report but will ultimately require long-term stewardship. The major Hanford site remediation projects that will be ongoing beyond 2006, but are likely to require long-term stewardship, include the following: Cocoon or Otherwise Disposition B, C, D, DR, F, H, KE, KW and N Reactor Blocks Remediate Waste in 149 Single-Shell High-Level Waste Tanks Retrieve and Immobilize Waste in 28 Double-Shell High-Level Waste Tanks Clean up K-Basins and Retrieve and Package for Storage Associated Spent Nuclear Fuel • Stabilize Fuel and Disposition Plutonium Finishing Plant • Complete Remaining Environmental Restoration Clean Out and D&D Plutonium Uranium Extraction (PUREX)facility/UraniumTrioxide Plant Disposal Facility Cells • Manage and Disposition Other Spent Nuclear Fuel in Storage Manage and Close Low-Level Waste Burial Grounds • Operate, Close and D&D 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility • Operate and Close Commercial Low-Level Waste Landfill Operate, Close and D&D Solid Waste Retrieval Complex • Operate, Close and D&D Enhanced Radioactive and Mixed Waste Storage Facility Operate, Close and D&D Central Waste Support Complex Operate and Close Naval Reactor Disposal Trench Remediate 618110&11 Burial Grounds • Monitor and/or Treat Groundwater Institutional controls for the site will vary depending on the area. For reactors in the river geographic area, (Portions lOOB/C, lOOD, lOOP, lOOH, lOOK, lOON, and 100 Other) institutional controls will be implemented to protect ecological, cultural, and Native American resources. For facilities in interim safe storage, the site will conduct repairs as needed to maintain facilities in a safe condition pending final decontamination and decommissioning. Interim surveillance and maintenance will be required for at least 75 years while reactors are awaiting final disposition. During this interim phase, the reactor doors will be welded shut. Every five years, the doors will be opened, and personnel will check the stability of the building, the roof, conduct a radiological survey, and then re-weld the doors. For the Central Plateau geographic area (Portions Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, 100 Other, 200 North), the site will restrict access to radioactive waste disposal areas and buffer zones through the use of signs and fences for as long as necessary to ensure protection. Capped soil areas within the fence line will require periodic long-term surveillance and maintenance. The tank farms, closed burial grounds, Mixed Low-Level Waste (MLLW) trenches, and the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility will require CERCLA post-closure inspection and monitoring for a minimum of 30 years. The site anticipates the use ofdeed restrictions, fences, active surveillance, and other entry control and will monitor the high-level waste canisters and spent nuclear fuel stored in the Canister Storage Building in Washington 23
  25. 25. National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report accordance with DOE requirements pending ultimate disposition in offsite facilities. Plutoniumand other special nuclear material stored in the Plutonium Finishing Plant will also require active long-term stewardship activities pending final disposition. No institutional controls are required for the Wahluke Slope or ALE. Public access is limited by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for protection of sensitive areas and species under the National Monument designation. For the remainder of Hanford, areas not cleaned to unrestricted use will likely use a full spectrum of institutional controls. These could include entry control, signs and fences, active long-term surveillance, and deed restrictions. For land released for use to governmental agencies, institutional controls are further coordinated through their administrative methods. An example of this is the conservation plans used by the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife Service. STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT Public participation is open, ongoing, two-way communication (both formal and informal) between DOE-RL and its stakeholders, the regulators, and Tribal governments, as required by various laws and regulations governing Hanford cleanup (CERCLA Sees. 117 and 113(k), the National Contingency Plan, EPA guidance on public participation and administrative records, and the public participation requirements of RCRA and Ch. 70.105 RCW); and the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (TPA); and shall be implemented to meet the public participation requirements applicable to RCRA permits under 40 CFR Part 124 and RCRA Sec. 7004. Tribal Governments have a unique government-to-government relationship with the United States government, as set forth in the Constitution of the United States, treaties, statutes, and court decisions. Therefore, rather than seeking tribal participation through public forums, DOE-RL consults directly with Tribal Governments prior to taking the actions that may affect their rights and interests, as outlined in the DOE American Indian Policy. The public involvement process for implementing the Comprehensive Land-Use Plan includes input from the site Planning Advisory Board, which consists of representatives from Tribal Governments; U.S. Bureau of Land Management; U.S. Bureau of Reclamation; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Benton, Franklin, Grant, and Adams Counties; and the City of Richland. Public involvement regarding the Hanford Site includes: seeking and considering public input; informing the public in an understandable and timely manner of key decisions, progress of activities, emerging technologies, and opportunities for economic diversity; clearly defining access points for public involvement; and consistently incorporating public participation processes into program operations, planning activities, and decision-making processes. DOE-RL managers and contractors operate as an integrated team in planning local and regional public participation programs by combining resources, sharing information, and coordinating activities. Activities are coordinated between contractors to minimize costs and provide the most effective public participation program. DOE-RL managers work with Headquarters' (DOE-HQ) counterparts and the OEA to ensure appropriate DOE-HQ and field coordination. Record-Keeping There are currently no requirements or standardized practices that specifically address the management of information to be used in support of long-term stewardship activities. However, each party to the Tri-Party Agreement (TPA) is required to preserve for a minimum of ten (10) years after termination of the TPA all of the records in its or its contractors possession related to sampling, analysis, investigations, and monitoring conducted in accordance with the TPA. DOE is required to maintain information on waste sites that are not clean-closed under CERCLA and RCRA. The current administrative record for the waste sites is held at Bechtel Hanford, Inc. (BHI) in the form of three databases: the Hanford Environmental Information System (HEIS), Waste Information Data System (WIDS), and the Geographic Information System (GIS). The BHI document control Washington 24
  26. 26. Hanford system "Docs Open" maintains the administrative record for documents. As required by the Surface Environmental Surveillance Project, sample data (including historical data from Hanford Engineer Works operations) is stored in the HEIS database, and chain-of-custody forms and other sample collection documentation are stored in the Federal Records Center in Seattle. Long-term stewardship records will likely be maintained in similar databases and records retention facilities, and remediation project records will likely be managed per the requirements of the land-owning agency. 2.2 Assumptions and Uncertainties DOE assumes the following in planning its long-term stewardship activities for the Hanford Site: • Hanford will implement long-term stewardship activities as part of the broader long-term site management process that includes natural resource management and completion of new site missions. • Products ofScience and technology activities at Hanford, over time, will contribute to cost-effective and safe management of the site. • DOE, as a Federal agency, has a Trust responsibility to protect Tribal interests. DOE has a responsibility to consult with and recognize the interests of the cooperating agencies. DOE intends to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, as required by documents supporting the creation of the Hanford Reach National Monument. DOE has a role as co-manager with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for the Hanford Reach National Monument per the President's memorandum to the Secretary of Energy that accompanied the Monument designation in June 2000. DOE will support economic transition and potential industrial development by the City of Richland or the Port of Benton by encouraging the use of existing utility infrastructure on the Hanford Site. Other entities will ask for Hanford's resources and lands. • The public will continue to support protection of cultural and natural resources on the site, especially within the National Monument. Mining of onsite geologic materials will be needed to construct surface barriers and support site infrastructure, as required by Hanford Site remediation activities and ongoing missions. • Remediation ofthe site will continue, and, where necessary, the institutional controls currently in place will continue to be required at some level for at least the next 50 years. Institutional controls are transferable and can be shared with other governmental agencies. • Plutonium production reactor blocks will remain in the 100 Area throughout the 50-year planning period and will be considered a pre-existing, nonconforming use. Vadose zone contamination will persist in the All Other Areas, Central Plateau, and 100 Area. Contaminated groundwater will remain unremediated in the All Other Areas, Central Plateau, and 100 Area. The public will support preservation of the Manhattan Project's historical legacy and creation of a B Reactor Museum. • The public will support access to the Columbia River for recreational activities and public restrictions consistent with the protection of cultural and biological resources. Areas will be set aside specifically for R&D projects. • Sufficient area will be retained to support current and expected DOE facility safety requirements. An adequate land base and utility infrastructure will be maintained to support possible industrial development associated with future DOE missions. 2.3 Estimated Site-Wide Long-Term Stewardship Costs Estimated costs for long-term stewardship of the Hanford Site are identified in the table below. The costs for the years FY 2000 through FY 2045 consist of long-term surveillance and maintenance costs from Project Baseline Summary ER-07 and TW-04 (revised from, but as discussed in the 1998 Accelerating Cleanup: Paths Washington 25
  27. 27. National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report to Closure). The costs for the years FY 2046 through FY 2070 represent a best estimate of all long-term stewardship costs; are based on an independent, rough order-of-magnitude estimate; and include post-closure surveillance and monitoring, site and environmental monitoring, and infrastructure support. There is a significant difference in costs between 2045 and subsequent years. Prior to 2046, infrastructure and other apportioned costs are absorbed by ongoing activities. For example, roads are needed to transport wastes. No attempt has been made to pro-rate costs such as infrastructure or management costs to long-term stewardship activities at this time. For example, the portion of roads needed to serve portions of the site that are culTently in long-term stewardship has not been included. In the future, as cleanup decisions are made and details on the level ofinstitutional and engineering controls, information managementrequirements, etc., are known, refinement of these costs will occur. The costs include the portions discussed in this report, as well as long-term stewardship costs associated with remediation projects listed in Section 2.1 of this report. Site Long-Term Stewardship Costs (Constant Year 2000 Dollars) ··. Year(s) Amount fear(s) Amount Year(s) Amount FY 2000 $47,000 FY 2008 $66,000 FY 2036-2040 $5,328,500 FY 2001 $48,000 FY2009 $68,000 FY 2041-2045 $5,672,500 FY 2002 $50,000 FY 2010 $70,000 FY 2046-2050 $183,579,900 FY 2003 $58,000 FY 2011-2015 $519,000 FY 2051-2055 $201,000,000 FY 2004 $60,000 FY 2016-2020 $687,000 FY 2056-2060 $199,000,000 FY 2005 $61,000 FY 2021-2025 $1,201,000 FY 2061-2065 $199,000,000 FY 2006 $62,000 FY 2026-2030 $1,524,000 FY 2066-2070 $198,000,000 FY 2007 $64,000 FY 2031-2035 $2,122,000 3.0 PORTION OVERVIEW The remaining sections of this report discuss "portions" of the Hanford Site that will require long-term stewardship by 2006. For purposes of this report, a "portion" is defined as a geographically contiguous and distinct area (which may involve residually contaminated facilities, engineered units, soil, groundwater, and/or surface water/sediment) for which cleanup, disposal, or stabilization will have been completed and long-term stewardship will be required as of 2006. Hanford's historic groupings have been subdivided to allow for a more accurate discussion on the geographic location of long-term stewardship activities at the site as of 2006. Some geographic areas located on Hanford are not represented as portions since long-term stewardship will not be required for those areas, or because remediation activities will not be complete, or stabilization will not occur by 2006. The fifteen portions of Hanford that will require some long-term stewardship activities as of 2006 are listed below and are shown on the following table. All ofthe portions contain significant numbers of waste sites that will require long-term stewardship activities by 2006. However, there will still be contaminated waste sites and facilities in many of these portions beyond 2006 as described in the subsequent sections. The units covered in this report, and included in the following table, are only those within each geographic area that meet the elements of the data call. In only a few cases (1100 Area, Arid Land Ecology Reserve, North Slope, and Riverland) will the entire portion be in long-term stewardship. Washington 26
  28. 28. Hanford Long-Term Stewardship Information Portion Long-Term Stewardship Start Year 100B/C Area Current - C Reactor 2007- other waste sites included for data call** lOOD Area 2007- waste sites included for data call** lOOF Area 2003 - F Reactor 2007- other waste sites included for data call** lOOH Area 2007- waste sites included for data call** lOOK Area 2007- waste sites included for data call** lOON Area 2007- waste sites included for data call** 100 Other Areas 2007- waste sites included for data call** 200 North Area 2007- waste sites included for data call** 200-P0-1 Operable Unit 2007- waste sites included for data call** 300 Area 2000 - groundwater 2001- waste sites included for data call** 1100 Area Current Arid Land Ecology Current Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility 2000 - interim cover 2007 - final cover North Slope Current Riverland Portion Current **There will be contaminated sites remaining in this Area beyond 2006, therefore, not all ofthe portion will be in Long-Term Stewardship by the start date provided in the table. 3.1 lOOB/C Area The 1OOB/C Area portion consists of 249 hectares (616 acres), is located immediately adjacent to the Columbia River, and includes the B and C Reactors. The lOOB/C Area was the first reactor area to be developed for Hanford. Construction ofthe B Reactor began in 1942 and the reactor operated from 1944 to 1968. Construction of the C Reactor began in 1951 and the reactor operated from 1952 to 1969. The B Reactor is being developed as a museum. There lOOBIC AREA PORTION HIGHLIGHTS Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities -maintain the C Reactor in interim safe storage, institutional controls Portion Size- 249 hectares (616 acres) EstimatedVolume ofResidual Contaminants- soil- to be determined, facilities - 3 facilities Long-Term Stewardship Start-End Years- current-in perpetuity are some issues (such as plumbing and some contamination) that need to be dealt with before the B Reactor is in its long-term, stable state. The B Reactor will be maintained, presumably in perpetuity, as a historic site. Long-term stewardship costs for B Reactor and the non-reactor areas are unknown. The C Reactor is currently in long-term stewardship and is expected to remain so for up to 75 years. The end of the long-term stewardship period will occur when the decision is made to move the reactor to the interior plateau. Washington 27
  29. 29. National Defense Authorization Act (NOAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report Soil Contamination 300 600 Feet oo 0 0 lOOB/C Area Institutional controls for the reactors will be extensive. Because the area will still have contaminated sites in 2006, standard site institutional controls (e.g., badging program, excavation permits, signage, notification of trespass, annual evaluation of institutional controls) will govern the remaining contaminated areas and probably most of the portion. The institutional controls on the C Reactor Safe Storage facility will include a five-year internal area surveillance to verify facility status. This frequency may be adjusted later based on inspection history. An external visual inspection of the roof will be conducted annually. For sites with contamination remaining below 4.6 meters (15 feet) depth, deed restrictions and covenants may need to be filed. Not all sites have been completely characterized (surrogate sites were used to develop cleanup strategies), so the sites that will need such institutional controls will be determined at the time of cleanup. Also, restrictions on certain activities may be required at some locations to prevent the spreading of contaminants. The Remedial Action Objectives and cleanup standards will be re-evaluated as part of the final remedy for the operable unit(s) contained in the lOOB/C Area as part of the CERCLA five-year review. Future land use and groundwater use determinations will be evaluated per the Hanford Comprehensive Land Use Plan EIS and must be consistent with the selected remedy. As stated in the Record of Decision for 100 Area Remaining Sites: "Because the remedy may result in hazardous substances remaining onsite above levels that allow for unlimited use, a review will be conducted to ensure that the remedy continues to provide adequate protection of human health and the environment within five years after the commencement of the remedial action. This is an Interim Action Record ofDecision; therefore, review ofthis site and remedy will be ongoing as the Tri-Parties continue to develop final remedial measures for the 100 Area National Washington 28
  30. 30. Hanford Priorities List site." When the B Reactor museum becomes a reality, additional institutional controls (e.g., fences, barricades, and signs) may be required for museum visitors. The C Reactor is designed to be a minimal maintenance facility. Barriers and postings are used to prevent unwarranted access. No locked fence is necessary around the C Reactor because the structure walls are 1- to 1.5- meters (3 to 5-feet) thick and the metal access doors are spot-welded shut. The C Reactor structure is designed to remain in safe storage for up to 75 years and the reactor has temperature and flood sensors that are remotely monitored. Surveillance and maintenance activities include structural integrity checks, barriers and posting, radiological surveys, repair of confinement systems and structural components, and removal of hazardous substances. 3.1.1 Soil There are 81 soil waste sites in the lOOB/C portion, covering 58.8 hectares (143 acres). Fifty-nine of these will require long-term stewardship activities by 2006, including 13 burial/dump sites, 281iquid effluent-related sites (ponds, basins, pipelines, french drains, cribs), two burn pits, 11 septic sites, and five chemical storage tanks. The 100B/C Area is the area associated with operations of the Band C Reactors, which had historic missions of special nuclear material production. Contamination resulted from uncontained releases (either by design or unplanned) of radioactive materials and hazardous chemicals. Typical contamination sources were: 1) water treatment chemicals required to clean the river water prior to its use as a reactor coolant; 2) cooling water discharged from the reactor, which was contaminated with radionuclides; 3) Fuel Storage Basin water and sludge from contamination by leaky irradiated reactor fuel; 4) chemicals used to decontaminate other materials and equipment; 5) septic system waste; and 6)disposal of paints and solvents. The strategy of removing contaminated soil to a depth of 4.6 meters (15 feet), with site-specific determinations made for contamination remaining below 4.6 meters (15 feet), will remove most contamination. The amount of contamination remaining deeper than 4.6-meters (15 feet) is unknown. In many cases, site characterization activities will not be completed until soil removal is initiated. Residual constituents would include mixed fission products from reactor operations, hazardous chemicals common to older reactor operations (e.g., lead, cadmium, and mercury), and hazardous materials used in water treatment (chromium). Antimony contamination is also of potential concern at 100B/C. 3.1.2 Facilities There are 13 facility waste sites totaling 9,820 square meters (106,000 square feet) in the 100B/C portion. Three of these waste sites will require long-term stewardship activities by 2006, including two reactors (B and C) and one reactor exhaust stack from the B Reactor. The Surplus Production Reactor EIS concluded that all Hanford reactors need to be removed from their near-river locations. However, it was decided to temporarily (~50-75 years) continue surveillance and maintenance to allow further radiological decay. Current plans include leaving the B Reactor in place as a signature building in response to the goals of the Natural Historic Preservation Act. This temporary storage is not expected to result in increased environmental or health risks, but permits radiological decay of energetic gamma emitters to reduce worker and environmental risks. The stabilized Band C Reactors will contain tritium, carbon-14, chlorine-36, calcium-41, nickel-59, cobalt-60, and lead. The mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and oil in the C Reactor facility were removed prior to long-term stewardship status. If any hazardous materials other than the lead in the reactor block are encountered during long-term stewardship, they will be removed. Any residual radioactive contamination in the B Reactor or B Stack will be contained to prevent exposures of the public visiting the museum. Washington 29
  31. 31. National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report The lOOB/C facilities have two diverse end states. The B Reactor was entered in the National Register of Historic Places on April 3, 1992, by the National Park Service, has been designated a National Historic Mechanical Engineering Landmark and a National Civil Engineering Landmark, and has received a Nuclear Historic Landmark Award. Because ofthis, DOE must comply with the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470) prior to taking any action on the historic site. A report, entitled 105-B Reactor Facility Museum Phase I Feasibility Study Report, concluded that the use of the facility as a museum is feasible and conversion is ongoing. The primary mission of the B Reactor Museum Association (BRMA) is the long-term preservation of the retired B Reactor and the upgrading of the structure to allow public access and unrestricted tours. The C Reactor is currently in an interim storage state and is subjected to long-term surveillance and maintenance. The reactor block will sit for more than 50 years, when it will be removed to the 200 Area. All nearby associated facilities that lie outside of the shield walls that surround the reactor were removed (e.g., fuel storage basins and pump houses). A new roof was placed over the remaining structure using the existing shield walls as the "new" outside walls. All existing penetrations in the shield walls and any new penetrations that resulted from removal operations were closed to prevent animal intrusion and water leakage. A single access door was provided to allow periodic inspection of the facility. Prior to removal of the actual reactor block, a restricted area will be fenced around the facility. Other areas in the reactor vicinity are expected to be light, recreational surface use areas. 3.2 lOOD Area The 1OOD Area portion consists of 285 hectares (704 acres), is located adjacent to the Columbia River, and includes two reactors located in the lOOD Area- the D Reactor and the DR Reactor. The D Reactor operated from 1944 to 1967 and the DR Reactor operated from 1950 to 1964. The DR Reactor is located immediately adjacent to the Columbia River where the river flows to the northeast. The DR Reactor will be stabilized in accordance with the interim action Record of Decision by 2007. JOOD AREA PORTION HIGHLIGHTS Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities- maintain reactors in interim safe storage until final disposition, institutional controls Portion Size- 285 hectares (704 acres) Estimated Volume ofResidual Contaminants- to be determined Long-Term Stewardship Start -End Years for Portion- 2007- in perpetuity Because DOE plans to remove the contaminated soil in the 4.6 meters (15 feet) below grade from the site, long- term stewardship activities will be limited to confirming that all significant contamination has been removed and revegetation efforts have been successful. Some waste may remain deeper than 4.6 meters (15-feet) below grade. For these sites, long-term stewardship consists ofensuring that the residual contamination will not harm humans or the environment in the future. For the DR Reactor, the cost estimate is not fully developed and costs assume no major maintenance actions will be required. Due to the scattered nature of these waste sites among sites that will be remediated in the future, long-term stewardship is expected to encompass the entire 100D area. Long- term term stewardship would decrease over time as sampling needs for specific sites are eliminated. Institutional controls for the reactors will be extensive. Because the area will still have contaminated sites in 2006, standard site institutional controls (e.g., badging program, excavation permits, signage, notification of trespass, annual evaluation of institutional controls) will govern the remaining contaminated areas and probably most ofthe portion. Not all waste sites have been completely characterized (surrogate sites were used to develop cleanup strategies), so the sites that will need institutional controls will be determined at the time of cleanup. Also, restrictions on certain activities may be required at some locations to prevent spreading of contaminants. The Remedial Action Objectives and cleanup standards will be re-evaluated as part of the final remedy for the operable unit(s) contained in the 100D Area as part of the CERCLA five-year review. Future land use and Washington 30
  32. 32. Hanford ~ D Soil Contamination Efd_a~0 [=:J o D 0 350 ~ CJ Feet 0 1000 Area groundwater use determinations will be evaluated per the Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan EIS and must be consistent with the selected remedy. The DR Reactor engineered controls will be the same as those currently in place for the C Reactor. The reactor storage facility will be designed to be a minimal maintenance facility. Barriers and postings will be used to prevent unwarranted access. No locked fence will be necessary around the DR Reactor because the structure walls are 1- to 1.5-meters (3 to 5-feet) thick and the metal access doors will be spot-welded shut. The DR Reactor structure will be designed to remain in safe storage for up to 75 years, and the reactor will have temperature and flood sensors that are remotely monitored. Surveillance and maintenance activities will include structural integrity checks, barriers and postings, radiological surveys, repair of confinement systems and structural components, and removal of hazardous substances. The lOOD soil sites will be cleaned to a 4.6-meter (15-foot) depth and will have intrusion controls with deed restrictions and requirements for drilling permits. 3.2.1 Soil There are 97 soil waste sites in the lOOD portion, covering 11 hectares (26 acres). Fifty-three of these will require long-term stewardship activities by 2006 and include 14 burial grounds, 29 liquid or sludge discharge sites (cribs, trenches, ponds, basins, unplanned releases), nine septic systems and storage tanks, and one pumping/flushing station. The 53 sites are those known or likely locations of sites with soil contamination resulting from uncontained releases (either by design or unplanned) of radioactive materials and hazardous Washington 31

×