The Hanford Site (also known as the Hanford Reservation) occupies approximately 1,450 km2 (560 square miles) along the Columbia River in south-central Washington, north of the city of Richland. The site was established by the federal government in 1943 to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons. Currently, the mission of the site, under the responsibility of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), is management of wastes generated by the weapons program and remediation of the environment contaminated by that waste. As part of that mission, DOE and the State of Washington Department of Ecology prepared the Hanford Site Tank Waste Remediation System Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS).
The Hanford Tanks is a general review of the DEIS. Its findings and recommendations are the subject of this report. Selection of a disposition plan for these wastes is a decision of national importance, involving potential environmental and health risks, technical challenges, and costs of tens to hundreds of billions of dollars. The last comprehensive analysis of these issues was completed 10 years ago, and several major changes in plans have occurred since. Therefore, the current reevaluation is timely and prudent. This report endorses the decision to prepare this new environmental impact statement, and in particular the decision to evaluate a wide range of alternatives not restricted to those encouraged by current regulatory policies.
- THE HANFORD TANKS: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND POLICY CHOICES
- Copyright
- PREFACE
- Contents
- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
- PRINCIPAL FINDINGS - TANKS
- Uncertainties
- Decision Strategy
- PRINCIPAL FINDINGS - CAPSULES AND MISCELLANEOUS TANKS
- RECOMMENDATIONS
- 1 INTRODUCTION
- 2 BACKGROUND
- THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND DECISION PROCESS
- NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT ANALYSIS AFFECTING THE HANFORD SITE
- DESCRIPTION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
- Large High-Level Waste Storage Tanks
- Miscellaneous Underground Storage Tanks
- Encapsulated Cesium and Strontium
- What Is Not Addressed
- DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES
- 3 FINDINGS
- TECHNOLOGY UNCERTAINTIES
- COST ESTIMATE UNCERTAINTIES
- PERFORMANCE UNCERTAINTIES
- REGULATORY UNCERTAINTIES
- UNCERTAINTIES IN TANK AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERIZATION
- HEALTH RISK UNCERTAINTIES
- Presentation of Key Risk Parameters and Health Impact Projections
- Use of Guidance on Collective Dose
- Risk Assessment for Comparison of Alternatives
- Intruder Scenario Estimates
- Dose-Response Estimates
- UNCERTAINTIES ABOUT REMEDIATION OF RESIDUAL CONTAMINATION
- TRANSFER OF RISK TO OFF-SITE POPULATIONS
- FUTURE LAND USE UNCERTAINTIES AND EFFECT ON ALTERNATIVES
- CAPSULES AND MISCELLANEOUS TANKS
- Cesium and Strontium Capsules
- Cesium Capsules
- Strontium Capsules
- Miscellaneous Underground Storage Tanks
- 4 RECOMMENDATIONS
- RECOMMENDED APPROACH
- Phasing
- Range of Alternatives to Consider
- Summary
- THE FIRST PHASE
- Uncertainties About Technology, Performance, Cost, and Risks
- Policy and Regulatory Uncertainties
- Uncertainties About Characteristics of Wastes Inside and Outside the Tanks
- Range of Technologies
- Interrelationships with Other Hanford Site Cleanup Decisions
- 5 SUGGESTIONS FOR CLARIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
- ABBREVIATIONS
- REFERENCES CITED
- APPENDIX A REQUEST FOR STUDY
- APPENDIX B DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES
- NO ACTION
- LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT
- IN SITU FILL AND CAP
- IN SITU VITRIFICATION
- EX SITU/IN SITU COMBINATION
- EX SITU/IN SITU COMBINATION VARIATION
- EX SITU NO SEPARATIONS
- EX SITU INTERMEDIATE SEPARATIONS
- EX SITU EXTENSIVE SEPARATIONS
- PHASED IMPLEMENTATION
Text
Audio
Adobe DRM
Login to your account