1. Washington
(Dawn) Ford Site
(WNI) Sherwood Site
Hanford
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 FY 2000-2006- $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 FY 2000-2006- $38,700

3. Table of Contents
Table of Contents
(Dawn) Ford Site ............................................................................................................................................... 3
Hanford .............................................................................................................................................................. 7
(WNI) Sherwood Site ...................................................................................................................................... 65
Washington

4. National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Long-Tenn Stewardship Report
Washington
2

5. (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 of a 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 of the 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

6. 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 of water 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.
Jare4•'eArden
_.MdyBiueCroek
_.)
Furport
e
Dalk;na•_
eVaJiey
{
('/
.,.,.
,/
, :j" /,/''·,.._
•' r-
(Dawn) Ford
' , .s-,
•
,,~;:~~~-~'-- / /
Sit~
,.Ford
>;if~/~
~X'{<:;_, ~ ~ )
--,-----.7':
...
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.
I
10
0
,<~·;;~
.(_i
I
T
20
Miles
27,
'c"--
r:ic
q_
- - - - - ·_:_..!._
'~·<
(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

7. (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, W A 98504
Phone:360-236-3241
or e-mail at glr030@doh.wa.gov
5

8. National Defense Authm·ization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report
Washington
6

9. Hanford
HANFORD 1
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 of the end of the 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 of Residual 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 of Washington. 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 of the "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 fabricationuranium 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

10. National Defense Authm·ization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report
0
1.5
3
Miles
Wahluke Slope
Fitzner-Eberhardt Arid
lands Ecology Reserve
(AlE)
1100
Area
Hanford
Washington
8

11. 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 KEast 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 plutonium production reactors, and chemical separation of the 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-Z Building and
U- Plant, respectively. The U-Plant was converted for a new separation technology, U0 3 , used mainly for the
recovery of uranium. The product from the U0 3 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 of the 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 U0 3 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 of nuclear 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 of plutonium, 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 of contaminated 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

12. 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 of their level of radioactivity. 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 of this contamination, which
will be treated as CERCLA, RCRA, or low-level waste.
MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION
ACTIVITY MILESTONES
TASK
COMPLETION
DATE
Fiscal Year
Site-wide
Submit Columbia River
Impact Assessment
lOOArea
N-Reactor Deactivation
Pre-Record of Decision
Remedial Action
Decommissioning
200Area
Environmental Restoration
Disposal Facility Operational
Non-tank Areas Site
Investigation
Remedial Action
Decommissioning
300Area
Pre-Record of Decision
Site Investigation
Remedial Action
Decommissioning
400Area
Remedial Action
Decommissioning
1996 (done)
1997 (done)
1998 (done)
2016
2038
1996 (done)
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 of the total mass and type of the 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

13. 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 of contamination
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 of wastes 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 of chemical and radioactive waste. Much of the 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% of the 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 of the 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, groundwater plumes, and surplus buildings have
received at least preliminary characterization, and the levels of contamination for many sites and plumes have
Washington
11

14. 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 implementing remediation approaches. DOE's current remediation 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 of which is lowlevel 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 of contaminants 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

15. 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 insitu 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 of Hanford'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) of waste 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

16. 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 of vapor extraction systems to remove carbon tetrachloride from the soil, reducing the threat of additional
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 of contaminated 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

17. Hanford
However, some of the 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 of the 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
Buildings
Decommissioning
Initiated
Decommissioning
Complete
U Plant Complex
30
Ongoing
2038
Reduction-Oxidation Plant Complex
45
Ongoing
2040
Plutonium-Uranium Extraction Plant
Complex
100
2039
2043
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 being prepared 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
processing research, 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

18. 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. If initiated
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
Number of
Buildings
Decommissioning
Initiated
Decommissioning
Complete
Production Reactor Fuel Fabrication
17
2039
2045
Laboratories Complex
4
2039
2045
70
2039
2045
Facility Complex
Support Services
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 EISfor Accomplishing Expanded Civilian Nuclear Energy Research and Development and Isotope
Production Missions in the United States, Including the Role of the 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 of the 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

19. 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 of the 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 of in 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 lowlevel 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.
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
To ensure the safe isolation of waste deposited at this
million.
facility, the facility is engineered to prevent rainwater
and snowmelt from entering the contaminated soil and
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 of environmental 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

20. 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, and pollution emissions
to the air and water. Because of national security
concerns, nuclear production facilities like Hanford
were self-regulated. Under the provisions of the Atomic
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 TriParty 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 of hazardous 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

21. 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 of 1982, 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 of high-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 of high-level waste
in a potential geologic repository. For planning purposes, DOE assumes that some or all of the 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 spent nuclear 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

22. 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 of theN 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 of Benton
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 longterm 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 of the 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

23. Hanford
Hanford Site Progress to Date
Accomplishment
Date
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
1998
1998
2000
1999
1999
1999
1999
2000
1999
1998
1999
1999
1999
1999
1998
1998
1998
1998
1999
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
2002
2003
2006
2004
2002
2004
2006
2002
2004
2004
2000
2002
2006
2006
2006
2001
2006
2006
21

24. 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 of closed 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 of groundwater 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 of Decision 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

25. 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/Uranium Trioxide 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 of deed 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

26. National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report
accordance with DOE requirements pending ultimate disposition in offsite facilities. Plutonium and 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

27. 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:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
2.3
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 of Science 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.
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

28. 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 of institutional and engineering controls, information management requirements, 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 of the 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

29. 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 of the 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.
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)
Estimated Volume of Residual Contaminants- soil- to
be determined, facilities - 3 facilities
Long-Term Stewardship Start-End Years- current-in
perpetuity
The B Reactor is being developed as a museum. There
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

30. 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 of Decision; therefore, review of this site and remedy
will be ongoing as the Tri-Parties continue to develop final remedial measures for the 100 Area National
Washington
28

31. 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 1.5meters (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

32. 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.
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 of Residual Contaminants- to be
determined
Long-Term Stewardship Start -End Years for Portion2007- in perpetuity
The DR Reactor will be stabilized in accordance with
the interim action Record of Decision by 2007.
Because DOE plans to remove the contaminated soil in the 4.6 meters (15 feet) below grade from the site, longterm 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 of ensuring 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. Longterm 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 of the 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