washington

Washington

Long-Term Stewardship Site Highlights

(Dawn) Ford Site (page 3) Total Site Area- Currently 202 hectares (500 acres); 81 hectares (200 acres) are expected to be transferred to DOE Current Landlord- Dawn Mining Company Expected Future Landlord- U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction Office

Hanford (page 7) Major Activities - institutional controls; maintenance; surveillance and

monitoring Site Size- 152,000 hectares (375,000 acres) Estimated Average Annual Cost 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

(Dawn) Ford Site

(WNI) Sherwood Site

Hanford

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

(Dawn) Ford Site ............................................................................................................................................... 3

Hanford .............................................................................................................................................................. 7

(WNI) Sherwood Site ...................................................................................................................................... 65

Washington

National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Long-Tenn Stewardship Report

Washington 2

(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

1This 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

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.

Anticipated site-wide long-term stewardship activities include restricting access by fencing and posting warning signs along the site boundary. DOE will repair the fence and replace signs, as necessary. DOE will staff a 24-hour phone line for reporting site concerns. Drilling and other intrusive activities will be prevented within site boundaries through institutional controls.

'eArden Jare4•-

_.MdyBiueCroek

_.)

('/ ,/

\, :j" /,/''·,.._ (Dawn) Ford Sit~ •' r- ', .s-, • ,.Ford

,,~;:~~~-~'-- / /

0 10 20

Miles

-----· _:_..!._

eVaJiey

{ \ .,.,.

Furport Dalk;na•_ e

>;i\f~/~ --,-----.7': ... ~X'{<:;_, ~ \~ )

,<~·;;~ .(_i I I T

\27,

'c"--\ q_ '~·< r:ic

(Dawn) Ford Site

Groundwater at the site is known to be contaminated as a result of uranium processing activities. The extent of groundwater contamination that will be present at the time of site transfer cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. DOE assumes that groundwater will require monitoring on a periodic basis. The precise monitoring requirements will be prescribed in the long-term surveillance plan that will be developed and approved by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at the time of site transfer.

Site records will be placed in permanent storage at the DOE Grand Junction Office in Colorado. The types of records maintained include site characterization data, remedial action design information, the site completion report, long-term monitoring plans, annual inspection reports, and current and historic monitoring data.

Washington 4

(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 [email protected]

5

National Defense Authm·ization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report

Washington 6

Hanford

HANFORD1

1.0 SITE SUMMARY

The need for new long-term site management processes is being evaluated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site because 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


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

1In 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.

2For 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

National Defense Authm·ization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report

0

Washington

1.5

Miles

Fitzner-Eberhardt Arid lands Ecology Reserve

(AlE)

3

Wahluke Slope

Hanford

1100 Area

8

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, U03, used mainly for the recovery of uranium. The product from the U03 facility was sent to the Plutonium Finishing Plant for final extraction. Hanford's C Plant (Strontium Semiworks) was a semi -scale test facility. Separation of strontium and cesium from waste streams was performed in the B Plant. The aqueous wastes from these operations were sent to cribs, ponds, or trenches for disposal via soil infiltration or evaporation. The chemical wastes and slurries were sent to Hanford's 177large underground storage tanks for disposal. Solid wastes were disposed in trenches and caissons at Hanford.

Beginning in 1964, DOE sharply curtailed plutonium production in response to the nation's changing defense needs. By 1971, eight 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 U03 Plant; however, these plants are now permanently shut down.

As a result of the reduction of plutonium production activities, the resources and capabilities of Hanford were refocused toward developing nonmilitary applications 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


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

Site-wide Submit Columbia River Impact Assessment

lOOArea N-Reactor Deactivation Pre-Record of Decision Remedial Action Decommissioning

200Area Environmental Restoration

DATE Fiscal Year

1996 (done)

1997 (done) 1998 (done) 2016 2038

Disposal Facility Operational 1996 (done) Non-tank Areas Site Investigation Remedial Action Decommissioning

300Area Pre-Record of Decision Site Investigation Remedial Action Decommissioning

400Area Remedial Action Decommissioning

2024 2038 2048

1997 (done) 2038 2045

2038 2047

Comprehensive and verifiable inventories of Hanford's waste volumes are currently being developed or upgraded. Location and volume of the first type of waste are generally well known. However, the sampling and analysis of these wastes is expensive and involves radiation and chemical exposure risks to workers. For example, for high-level waste tanks, obtaining a single sample may cost as much as $750,000, and much of the work involves application of full ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) controls for worker protection. Generating inventories for the second type of waste involves environmental sampling and analysis, followed by prediction 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

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


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

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 1 OOs 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


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

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 Decommissioning Decommissioning Buildings Initiated Complete

U Plant Complex 30 Ongoing 2038

Reduction-Oxidation Plant Complex 45 Ongoing 2040

Plutonium-Uranium Extraction Plant 100 2039 2043 Complex

B Plant Complex 88 2035 2048

T Plant Complex 20 2044 2048

Plutonium Finishing Plant Complex 150 2035 2048

Support Services 61 2025 2048

1.2.3 300 Area

The 300 Area is a 46-hectare (115-acre) industrial area just north of the city of Richland and adjacent to the Columbia River. The facilities in this area have been used for fabrication of reactor fuel assemblies, reactor research and development, metalworking, chemical process development, and research and development sponsored by DOE. Many of the buildings in the 300 Area are still used for research and development; others are currently being cleaned out and refurbished for new uses; and others are 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

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

Facility Complex Number of Decommissioning Decommissioning Buildings Initiated Complete

Production Reactor Fuel Fabrication 17 2039 2045

Laboratories Complex 4 2039 2045

Support Services 70 2039 2045

1.2.4 400 Area

The Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF), which is currently in hot standby, and several state-of-the-art laboratory facilities are located in the 400 Area. In 1999, the Secretary of Energy ordered that a programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) be conducted to evaluate the future missions for the FFTF. The draft Programmatic 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

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 1 00-year flood plain, distant (more than 11 kilometers, or seven miles) from the Columbia River, far (73 meters, or 240 feet) from the water table, and adjacent to lands the public will not use in the foreseeable future.

To ensure the safe isolation of waste deposited at this facility, the facility is engineered to prevent rainwater and snowmelt from entering the contaminated soil and

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION DISPOSAL FACILITY RECORD OF DECISION

The Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility is a large disposal trench operated by the Environmental Restoration program and authorized to accept CERCLA waste from remediation activities. Innovations include large-scale "just in time" trench design, commercialized operations, downsized facility requirements, and improved planning and proactive coordination among programs and agencies. The project received a Record of Decision in January 1995, making it the first project of its kind to be approved. DOE expects further design enhancements and construction efficiencies will reduce the estimated life-cycle cost of this facility by more than $100 million.

spreading contamination. A double liner that complies with requirements of RCRA was installed beneath the contaminated material, and there is an effluent collection system between the liners to collect any liquids. As portions of the facility are filled, a cover is constructed over the top of the waste. The top cover is designed to conduct water away from the contaminated soil and prevent the spread of contaminants.

1.2. 7 Other Remedial Actions

Management 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

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

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


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

Hanford Site Progress to Date Accomplishment

Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval and Treatment Installed upgraded tank ventilation system for tank farms Completed Cross-Site Transfer Line replacement to move waste from 200W to 200E, critical in the staging process for the vitrification plant Complete 30% of preparation for construction of vitrification plant Complete characterization of all tanks

K Basins- Removal and Onsite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel Completed installation of the Integrated Water Treatment System at K West Basin Completed installation of the Fuel Retrieval System at K West Basin Completed the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility Completed the Canister Storage Building

Groundwater/ Vadose Zone Integration Project Pump and Treat facilities processed three billion liters (792 million gallons) of groundwater Decommissioned 28 nonessential monitoring wells Restarted Vapor Extraction at 200-ZP-2, removed over 2,220+ kilograms (4900+ pounds) of carbon tetrachloride

Environmental Restoration and Storage and Disposal Facility (ERDF) Excavated more than 1,800,000 metric tons (two billion tons) of contaminated soil/waste material from near Columbia River (100B/C, 100D, 300 Areas) and disposed in ERDF Expanded ERDF with construction of cells 3 and 4 -ready to accept waste

Decontamination and Decommissioning (D&D) and Transition of Facilities Reduced footprint of DR and F Reactors by 40% in preparation for interim safe storage of reactors Started D&D of Plutonium Concentration Facility (233-S) Closed four, 100 Area electrical substations Closed WWII-era coal- and oil-fired steam plants in 200 and 300 Areas 700 square meters (7500 sq. ft.) of laboratory space was leased to the Tri-Cities branch ofthe Washington State University

Waste Management and Disposal Cleaned up 85 waste sites to either "release" or long-term stewardship status

Anticipated Accomplishments for Hanford Site by 2006

Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval and Treatment Start tank waste immobilization Complete interim stabilization of single shell tanks Start waste removal on 10 single-shelled tanks

K Basins- Removal and Onsite Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel Initiate K West Basin spent nuclear fuels removal2000 Complete removal of all K East Basin spent nuclear fuel Initiate full scale KEast Basin sludge removal Complete sludge removal from K Basins

Environmental Restoration and Storage Facility (ERDF) Dispose of 2.5 million cubic meters (3.3 million cubic yards) of soil in ERDF

D&D and Transition of Facilities (Major Challenges) Complete deactivation of SP-100 GES Test Facility, Bldg. 309 Complete deactivation of Post Irradiation Test Lab., Bldg. 327 (326 buckets TRU removed by 1998) Complete deactivation of Chemical Engineering Lab., Bldg. 324 (750,00 curies of cesium-137 removed by 1998)

Begin plutonium stabilization at the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) Complete stabilization at Plutonium Finishing Plant Complete D&D of Reactors on the River Facilities for 76 of -178 facilities Complete deactivation of 24 of 34 facilities in 300 Area Complete decommissioning and conversion to alternate use for 73 buildings in 300 Area

Waste Management and Disposal Remove spent nuclear fuel from T Plant Canyon Complete cleanup of 450 waste sites in 100-200-300-1100 Areas Ship 25% of transuranic waste to Waste Isolation Pilot Plant or dispose onsite

Washington

Hanford

Date

1998

1998 2000 1999

1999 1999 1999 2000

1999 1998

1999

1999 1999

1999 1998 1998 1998

1998

1999

2002 2003 2006

2004 2002 2004

2006

2002 2004

2004 2000 2002 2006 2006 2006

2001 2006 2006

21


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

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 (MLL W) 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


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 ( 1 0) 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 TP A. 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

Hanford

system "Docs Open" maintains the administrative record for documents. As required by the Surface Environmental Surveillance Project, sample data (including historical data from Hanford Engineer Works operations) is stored in the HEIS database, and chain-of-custody forms and other sample collection documentation are stored in the Federal Records Center in Seattle. Long-term stewardship records will likely be maintained in similar databases and records retention facilities, and remediation project records will likely be managed per the requirements of the land-owning agency.

2.2 Assumptions and Uncertainties

DOE assumes the following in planning its long-term stewardship activities for the Hanford Site:

• Hanford will implement long-term stewardship activities as part of the broader long-term site management process that includes natural resource management and completion of new site missions.

• Products 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.

2.3 Estimated Site-Wide Long-Term Stewardship Costs

Estimated costs for long-term stewardship of the Hanford Site are identified in the table below. The costs for the years FY 2000 through FY 2045 consist of long-term surveillance and maintenance costs from Project Baseline Summary ER-07 and TW -04 (revised from, but as discussed in the 1998 Accelerating Cleanup: Paths

Washington 25


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

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**

1 00 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 1 OOB/C Area portion consists of 249 hectares ( 616 acres), is located immediately adjacent to the Columbia River, and includes the B and C Reactors. The lOOB/C Area was the first reactor area to be developed for Hanford. Construction ofthe B Reactor began in 1942 and the reactor operated from 1944 to 1968. Construction of the C Reactor began in 1951 and the reactor operated from 1952 to 1969.

The B Reactor is being developed as a museum. There

lOOBIC AREA PORTION HIGHLIGHTS

Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities -maintain the C Reactor in interim safe storage, institutional controls Portion Size- 249 hectares (616 acres) Estimated Volume of Residual Contaminants- soil- to be determined, facilities - 3 facilities Long-Term Stewardship Start-End Years- current-in perpetuity

are some issues (such as plumbing and some contamination) that need to be dealt with before the B Reactor is in its long-term, stable state. The B Reactor will be maintained, presumably in perpetuity, as a historic site. Long-term stewardship costs for B Reactor and the non-reactor areas are unknown.

The C Reactor is currently in long-term stewardship and is expected to remain so for up to 75 years. The end of the long-term stewardship period will occur when the decision is made to move the reactor to the interior plateau.

Washington 27

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

Hanford

Priorities List site."

When the B Reactor museum becomes a reality, additional institutional controls (e.g., fences, barricades, and signs) may be required for museum visitors.

The C Reactor is designed to be a minimal maintenance facility. Barriers and postings are used to prevent unwarranted access. No locked fence is necessary around the C Reactor because the structure walls are 1- to 1.5-meters (3 to 5-feet) thick and the metal access doors are spot-welded shut. The C Reactor structure is designed to remain in safe storage for up to 75 years and the reactor has temperature and flood sensors that are remotely monitored. Surveillance and maintenance activities include structural integrity checks, barriers and posting, radiological surveys, repair of confinement systems and structural components, and removal of hazardous substances.

3.1.1 Soil

There are 81 soil waste sites in the lOOB/C portion, covering 58.8 hectares (143 acres). Fifty-nine of these will require long-term stewardship activities by 2006, including 13 burial/dump sites, 281iquid effluent-related sites (ponds, basins, pipelines, french drains, cribs), two burn pits, 11 septic sites, and five chemical storage tanks. The 100B/C Area is the area associated with operations of the Band C Reactors, which had historic missions of special nuclear material production. Contamination resulted from uncontained releases (either by design or unplanned) of radioactive materials and hazardous chemicals. Typical contamination sources were: 1) water treatment chemicals required to clean the river water prior to its use as a reactor coolant; 2) cooling water discharged from the reactor, which was contaminated with radionuclides; 3) Fuel Storage Basin water and sludge from contamination by leaky irradiated reactor fuel; 4) chemicals used to decontaminate other materials and equipment; 5) septic system waste; and 6)disposal of paints and solvents.

The strategy of removing contaminated soil to a depth of 4.6 meters (15 feet), with site-specific determinations made for contamination remaining below 4.6 meters (15 feet), will remove most contamination. The amount of contamination remaining deeper than 4.6-meters (15 feet) is unknown. In many cases, site characterization activities will not be completed until soil removal is initiated. Residual constituents would include mixed fission products from reactor operations, hazardous chemicals common to older reactor operations (e.g., lead, cadmium, and mercury), and hazardous materials used in water treatment (chromium). Antimony contamination is also of potential concern at 100B/C.

3.1.2 Facilities

There are 13 facility waste sites totaling 9,820 square meters (106,000 square feet) in the 100B/C portion. Three of these waste sites will require long-term stewardship activities by 2006, including two reactors (B and C) and one reactor exhaust stack from the B Reactor. The Surplus Production Reactor EIS concluded that all Hanford reactors need to be removed from their near-river locations. However, it was decided to temporarily (~50-75 years) continue surveillance and maintenance to allow further radiological decay. Current plans include leaving the B Reactor in place as a signature building in response to the goals of the Natural Historic Preservation Act. This temporary storage is not expected to result in increased environmental or health risks, but permits radiological decay of energetic gamma emitters to reduce worker and environmental risks.

The stabilized Band C Reactors will contain tritium, carbon-14, chlorine-36, calcium-41, nickel-59, cobalt-60, and lead. The mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and oil in the C Reactor facility were removed prior to long-term stewardship status. If any hazardous materials other than the lead in the reactor block are encountered during long-term stewardship, they will be removed. Any residual radioactive contamination in the B Reactor or B Stack will be contained to prevent exposures of the public visiting the museum.

Washington 29


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 1 OOD Area portion consists of 285 hectares (704 acres), is located adjacent to the Columbia River, and includes two reactors located in the lOOD Area- the D Reactor and the DR Reactor. The D Reactor operated from 1944 to 1967 and the DR Reactor operated from 1950 to 1964. The DR Reactor is located immediately adjacent to the Columbia River where the river flows to the northeast.

The DR Reactor will be stabilized in accordance with the interim action Record of Decision by 2007.

JOOD AREA PORTION HIGHLIGHTS

Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities- maintain reactors in interim safe storage until final disposition, institutional controls Portion Size- 285 hectares (704 acres) Estimated Volume of Residual Contaminants- to be determined Long-Term Stewardship Start -End Years for Portion-2007- in perpetuity

Because DOE plans to remove the contaminated soil in the 4.6 meters (15 feet) below grade from the site, 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

Hanford

~ D

Soil Contamination Efd_a~ 0 [=:J o D

0 350 ~ CJ

Feet

0

1000 Area

groundwater use determinations will be evaluated per the Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan EIS and must be consistent with the selected remedy.

The DR Reactor engineered controls will be the same as those currently in place for the C Reactor. The reactor storage facility will be designed to be a minimal maintenance facility. Barriers and postings will be used to prevent unwarranted access. No locked fence will be necessary around the DR Reactor because the structure walls are 1- to 1.5-meters (3 to 5-feet) thick and the metal access doors will be spot-welded shut. The DR Reactor structure will be designed to remain in safe storage for up to 75 years, and the reactor will have temperature and flood sensors that are remotely monitored. Surveillance and maintenance activities will include structural integrity checks, barriers and postings, radiological surveys, repair of confinement systems and structural components, and removal of hazardous substances. The lOOD soil sites will be cleaned to a 4.6-meter (15-foot) depth and will have intrusion controls with deed restrictions and requirements for drilling permits.

3.2.1 Soil

There are 97 soil waste sites in the lOOD portion, covering 11 hectares (26 acres). Fifty-three of these will require long-term stewardship activities by 2006 and include 14 burial grounds, 29 liquid or sludge discharge sites (cribs, trenches, ponds, basins, unplanned releases), nine septic systems and storage tanks, and one pumping/flushing station. The 53 sites are those known or likely locations of sites with soil contamination resulting from uncontained releases (either by design or unplanned) of radioactive materials and hazardous

Washington 31

National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Long-Tet·m Stewardship Report

chemicals. The actual volume of contamination below the 4.6-meter (15-foot) remediation depth is unknown. In many cases, site characterization activities will not be completed until soil removal is initiated. Contaminants consist of mixed fission products from reactor operations, hazardous chemicals common to older reactor operations (lead cadmium, and mercury), and hazardous materials used in water treatment and older buildings (chromium and asbestos). Also included are chemicals commonly used in decontamination (e.g., sodium oxalate). Because the lOOD Area is a production reactor area, all contamination results from reactor operations. 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 close proximity of the sites to the Columbia River argues for removal of the waste to the interior of the Hanford Site in order to reduce the risk from human intrusion. None of the sites designated in the Proposed Plan for the 100 Area Burial Grounds Interim Remedial Action are located below the high water table, and, therefore, spread of the contamination via groundwater should not occur in the short term. In the 100 Area Burial Grounds Focused Feasibility Study, DOE proposed a "retrieve, treat, and dispose" remediation strategy. This would effectively remove all waste, moving it to the 200 Area Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility site or other appropriate disposal site. Any residuals would be left if found deeper than the remediation depth of 4.6 meters ( 15 feet) below ground surface. A Record of Decision for interim remedial actions was published in 1995 and updated in 1997 (to add additional similar sites) for a number of 100 Area liquid disposal sites.

The end use for the Columbia River corridor, as specified in the Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan EIS preferred alternative, is unrestricted use of surface areas. A buffer zone around reactor areas would be maintained until the reactors are moved. Plans include a "visitor services" area near the D/DR Reactor site along a proposed recreational trail. Intrusion and activities that result in liquid effluent disposal would not be permitted.

3.2.2 Facilities

There are 14 facility waste sites, totaling 3,730 square meters (40,200 square feet), in the 100D portion. By 2007, both the D Reactor and the DR Reactor will require long-term stewardship. The Surplus 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 for further radiological decay. 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 DR Reactor block contains the primary constituents of concern, namely, the long-lived radionuclides ( carbon-14, chlorine-36, technetium-99, and uranium-238) and relatively short-lived radionuclides ( cobalt-60, cesium-137, strontium-90, nickel-63, tritium, and europium-152 and -154 ). Lead and cadmium are the hazardous chemicals of most concern. Also of concern are chromium, mercury, PCBs and asbestos. The reactor block will sit for more than 50 years, when it will be removed to the 200 Area. Essentially all structures that lie outside of the shield walls that surround the DR Reactor are to be removed (e.g., fuel storage basins and pump houses). A new roof will be 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 resulting from removal operations will be closed to prevent animal intrusion and water leakage. A single access door will be provided to allow periodic inspection of the facility. Prior to removal, a restricted area will be fenced around the facility. Other areas in the reactor vicinity are expected to be light, recreational surface use areas.

Washington 32

3.3 lOOF Area

The lOOF Area portion consists of 256 hectares (632 acres) and is located immediately adjacent to the Columbia River near the old town site of White Bluffs. The F Reactor in the 100 Area and all qualifying waste sites within the reactor exclusion fenceline are included in the portion. The F Reactor operated from 1945 to 1965. One unique feature of the F Area, compared to other Hanford 100 Areas, is the animal farm research facility. Activities at the animal farm investigated the effects of reactor materials (both transuranics and mixed fission products) on domestic animals.

Hanford

lOOF AREA PORTION HIGHLIGHTS

Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities - maintain reactors in interim safe storage until final disposition, institutional controls Portion Size- 256 hectares (632 acres) Estimated Volume of Residual Contaminants- to be determined Long-Term Stewardship Start-End Years- 2003-in perpetuity

Institutional controls for the 1 OOF Area will be extensive. Because the area will still have numerous 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 ofthe final remedy for the operable unit(s) contained in the 100F Area as part ofthe 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.

The F Reactor engineered controls will be the same as those currently in place for the C Reactor. The reactor storage facility will be designed to be a minimal maintenance facility. Barriers and postings will be used to prevent unwarranted access. No locked fence will be necessary around the F Reactor because the structure walls are 1- to 1.5-meters (3 to 5-feet) thick, and the metal access doors will be spot-welded shut. The F Reactor structure will be designed to remain in safe storage for up to 7 5 years, and the reactor will have temperature and flood sensors that are remotely monitored. Surveillance and maintenance activities will include structural integrity checks, barriers and posting, radiological surveys, repair of confinement systems and structural components, and removal of hazardous substances. The lOOF soil sites will be cleaned to a 4.6-meter (15-foot) depth and will have intrusion controls with deed restrictions and requirements for drilling permits.

3.3.1 Soil

There are 71 soil waste sites in the 100F portion, covering 18 hectares (45 acres). Forty-five of these will require long-term stewardship activities by 2006, including eight inactive burial grounds and 37 liquid effluent management sites (e.g., basins, cribs, trenches, septic sites, unplanned releases, and animal farm waste disposal sites). These sites are all associated with operations of the F Reactor and are located in close proximity to the Columbia River. They are all inactive.

The contaminated sites resulted from uncontained releases (either by design or unplanned) of radioactive materials and hazardous chemicals. The burial grounds contain an undetermined amount of contaminated reactor parts and equipment, animal waste, organic and hazardous wastes, and demolition waste. The contaminants are mixed fission products from reactor operations, hazardous chemicals common to older reactor operations (lead, cadmium, and mercury), and hazardous materials used in water treatment and older buildings (chromium and asbestos). Also included are chemicals commonly used in decontamination (e.g., sodium oxalate). Liquid effluent contamination resulted from: chemicals used in the pre-treatment of river water prior to reactor use,

Washington 33


F

D [)

g ~ Soil Contamination

0

CJ 0

0 300

~ Feet

lOOF Area

post-reactor water, water used in the fuel storage basins to shield and cool irradiated reactor fuel, sludge remaining in fuel storage basin pools from fuel ruptures, wash water from the animal farm, decontamination liquid disposal, and historic disposal practices for paints and solvents. The amount of contamination remaining below the 4.6-meter (15-foot) remediation depth is unknown. In many cases, site characterization activities will not be completed until soil removal is initiated.

The close proximity of the sites to the Columbia River argues for removal of the waste to the interior of the Hanford Site in order to reduce the risk of human intrusion. One site designated in the Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan EIS (118-F-2) is close enough to the river that it might be impacted by a high groundwater table, and, therefore, groundwater cleanup standards might also need to be applied at that waste site.

3.3.2 Facilities

There are 11 facility waste sites totaling 4,110 square meters ( 44,300 square feet) in the lOOP portion. One of these (the F Reactor) will be in long-term stewardship by 2006. The F Reactor is scheduled for long-term surveillance and maintenance status beginning in 2003. The Surplus Reactor EIS concluded that all Hanford reactors need to be removed from their near-river locations. However, it was decided to temporarily continue surveillance and maintenance to allow further radiological decay. This temporary storage is not expected to result in increased environmental or health risks but permits radiological decay to reduce future worker and environmental risks.

Washington 34

Hanford

The reactor block contains the same radionuclides and hazardous chemicals of concern as the DR Reactor. The reactor block will remain in place for more than 50 years, after which time it will be removed to the 200 Area. Prior to removal, a restricted area will be fenced around the facility. Other areas in the reactor vicinity are expected to be light, recreational surface use areas. A new roof will be 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 resulting from removal operations will be closed to prevent animal intrusion and water leakage. A single access door will be provided to allow periodic inspection of the facility. Essentially all structures that lie outside of the shield walls that surround the F Reactor are to be removed (e.g., fuel storage basins and pump houses).

3.4 lOOH Area

The lOOH Area portion covers 149 hectares (368 acres) and is located immediately adjacent to the Columbia River where the river sweeps from flowing northeast to southeast. The H Reactor operated from 1949 to 1966. Because the H Reactor will not be in interim safe storage by 2006, the H Reactor and all sites within the reactor exclusion fenceline are not included in this portion for this report. However, 22 soil waste sites are covered.

The 1 OOH area will have fewer remaining contaminated

JOOH AREA PORTION HIGHLIGHTS

Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities - institutional controls Portion Size- 149 hectares (368 acres) Estimated Volume of Residual Contaminants- to be determined Long-Term Stewardship Start-End Years- 2007-in perpetuity

sites to consider than most of the other reactor areas. The lOOH sites will be cleaned to a 4.6-meter (15-foot) depth. 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 lOOH area as part of the CERCLA five-year review.

Because DOE plans to remove the contaminated soil in the 4.6 meters (15 feet) below grade from the site (as discussed in Section 3 .4.1, below), long-term stewardship activities will be limited to confirming that all significant contamination has been removed and revegetation efforts have been successful. Some contamination 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. 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 100H Area. Long-term stewardship activities would decrease over time as sampling needs for specific sites are eliminated.

Institutional Controls for the lOOH Area 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. For sites that have been remediated to a depth of 4.6 meters (15 feet), deed restrictions and covenants may need to be filed. One site ( 116-H-6, Solar Evaporation Basins) currently has a deed restriction filed. Also, restrictions on certain activities may be required at some locations to prevent spreading of contaminants. 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.

The preferred removal option for many of the 1 OOH areas under consideration precludes the need for engineered controls.

Washington 35


3.4.1 Soil

Soil Contamination 0

300 600

Feet

lOOHArea

There are 55 soil waste sites covering 11 hectares (28 acres) in the 100H portion. Twenty-two of these will require long-term stewardship activities by 2006 and include five burial areas, 12 sites of intentional and unintentional liquid effluent disposal to the soil (e.g., leaks, sludge disposal areas, basins, cribs, trenches, septic sites), three burning grounds, an electrical substation, and an underground petroleum tank site. These sites are all associated with operations of the H Reactor. All H Area facilities are inactive. Burial grounds contain contaminated reactor parts. Liquid effluent contamination resulted from: chemicals used in the pre-treatment of river water prior to reactor use, post-reactor water, water used in the fuel storage basins to shield and cool irradiated reactor fuel, decontamination liquid disposal, and historic disposal practices for paints and solvents. Contaminants are mixed fission products from reactor operations, hazardous chemicals common to older reactor operations (lead, cadmium, and mercury), and hazardous materials used in water treatment and older buildings (chromium and asbestos). Nitrates and fluorides are of particular concern for one site. Other hazardous metals known to be present are: arsenic, barium, silver, copper, and zinc. Polychlorinated biphenyls exist at some locations. Undetermined inorganics and organics are potentially problematic at some sites. Further characterization of the soils is needed.

The close proximity of these sites to the Columbia River argues for removal of the waste to the interior of the Hanford Site to reduce the risk of human intrusion. For the 1 OOH burial grounds, DOE has proposed a preferred alternative of "retrieve, treat, and dispose." Implementing the preferred alternative would effectively remove all

Washington 36

Hanford

the waste to the 200 Area Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility site or to another appropriate disposal site. The amount of contamination remaining below the 4.6-meter (15-foot) remediation depth is unknown. In many cases, site characterization activities will not be completed until soil removal is initiated. One site has already been cleaned up (solar evaporation basin), but high levels of nitrates and fluorides remaining in the ground have required a deed restriction to be filed.

3.5 lOOK Area

The lOOK Area portion covers 98 hectares (242 acres) and is located immediately adjacent to the Columbia River just east of the lOOB/C Area. The K-West and K-East Reactors operated from 1956 to 1971. Unlike most other reactor areas, the K Area has a current active mission as a storage site for legacy spent fuel (it is the site used for consolidating the remaining Hanford Site unprocessed spent fuel). Because the K-East and KWest Reactors will not be in interim safe storage by 2006, the K-East and K-West Reactors and all sites within the reactor exclusion fenceline are not included

lOOK AREA PORTION HIGHliGHTS


in the portion for this report. However, 43 soil waste sites are covered. The 1 OOK sites will be cleaned to a 4.6-meter (15-foot) depth. 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 lOOK area as part of the CERCLA five-year review.

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 contamination 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. Due to the scattered nature of these waste sites among sites that will be remediated in the future, long-term stewardship activities are expected to encompass the entire lOOK Area. Long-term stewardship activities will decrease over time as sampling needs for specific sites are eliminated.

Institutional controls for the lOOK Area 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 the spread of contaminants. 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.

The removal option for many of the 1 OOK Area waste sites under consideration precludes the need for engineered controls. The engineered controls of surrounding contaminated areas are expected to drive the engineered control needs for the 1 OOK Area.

3.5.1 Soil

There are 85 soil waste sites in the lOOK portion covering 27 hectares (68 acres). Forty-three of these will require long-term stewardship activities by 2006 and include 22 chemical or septic tanks and tank foundations, 19 liquid effluent sites (e.g., french drains, sump pits, retention basins, trenches), one burn pit, and one dump site.

Washington 37


0

Soil Contamination

0

c::J

250

K-Wast Water Treatment Plant

lOOK Area

A 4,1 00-foot (1 ,250 meter) long trench, which runs parallel to the river, roughly defines the interior boundary of an underlying chromium-contaminated groundwater plume that is undergoing pump-and-treat remediation. All of these sites were associated with K Reactor operations.

Contaminated sites resulted from uncontained releases (either by design or unplanned) of radioactive materials and hazardous chemicals. Typical contamination sources are: 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 became 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) historic disposal practices for paints and solvents. Original contaminants are mixed fission products from reactor operations, hazardous chemicals common to older reactor operations (lead, cadmium, and mercury), and hazardous materials used in water treatment. Other hazardous materials of potential concern are: arsenic, barium, silver, copper, selenium, zinc, sulfate, and petroleum products.

The strategy of removing the top 4.6 meters ( 15 feet) of contaminated soil, with site-specific determinations made for contamination deeper than 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.

Long-term stewardship activities for this site will likely be impacted by the remediation action for the

Washington 38

Hanford

groundwater plume. Many of the sites are not radiologically contaminated. The Hanford Comprehensive LandUse Plan EIS and the Surplus Reactor EIS have concluded that remediation and restoration will return the Columbia River Corridor to an undeveloped, natural condition for preservation or low-intensity recreational land use. However, restrictions on certain activities may continue to be necessary to prevent spread of the contaminants. The most obvious restrictions are to water discharges to the soil or to excavations below 4.6 meters (15 feet). However, the restoration process may stretch over 75 years, and remediation technologies and/or land use designation may change during that period.

3.6 lOON Area

The 1 OON Area portion consists of about 64 hectares (160 acres) and is located immediately adjacent to the Columbia River between the lOOK and lOOD and DR Areas. The N Reactor was the last of the nine Hanford reactors to be built and operated from 1963 to 1987. The N Reactor was still operational at the time the decision was made to remove the other eight reactors to the central plateau. Therefore, a long-term decision for N Reactor has not been made. Because the N Reactor will not be in interim safe storage by 2006, the N Reactor and all sites within the reactor exclusion

lOON AREA PORTION HIGHLIGHTS


fenceline are not included in the portion for this report. However, 36 soil waste sites and an oil storage building are covered. Designers benefitted from previous reactor experience and designed the N Reactor with the only closed-loop cooling system at Hanford, eliminating the discharge of significant amounts of contamination to the environment. Therefore, few of the waste sites in the lOON portion contain radiological contamination. One unique feature of lOON is that it was the only reactor that was used for both special nuclear material production and electricity generation. The electrical generation component created some oil contamination areas. Another unique feature of the 1 OON Area is the existence of springs that seep contaminated groundwater along approximately 850 meters (2,800 feet) of riverbank. During N Reactor operations, liquid effluent discharges resulted in greater springflow (seep duration and volume) than exists today. Spring activity continues but is now driven by river-level fluctuations resulting from dam operations.

The riverbank shoreline site has an interim remedial action strategy of institutional control that restricts access to the site. Because DOE plans to remove the contaminated soil in the 4.6 meters (15 feet) below grade from the site (as discussed in Section 3.6.1), long-term stewardship activities will be limited to confirming that all the residual contamination was removed and revegetation efforts have been successful. Some waste may remain deeper than 4.6 meters (15 feet). For these sites, long-term stewardship consists of ensuring that the residual contamination will not harm humans or the environment in the future. 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 1 OON Area. Long-term stewardship will decrease over time as sampling needs for specific sites are eliminated.

Institutional controls for the N Reactor 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 the spread of contaminants. 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. The removal option for many of the 1 OON areas under consideration precludes the need for engineered controls.

Washington 39


0

3.6.1 Soil

Soil Contamination

0 c:::J

200

lOON Area

There are 129 soil waste sites in the lOON portion (outside of theN Reactor exclusion area fenceline) covering 25 hectares ( 61 acres). Thirty-six of these will require long-term stewardship activities by 2006 and include eight below-ground and above-ground tank sites, four burn pits, eight dumping areas, 13 liquid effluent sites (e.g., cribs, trenches, leak sites, ponds), a former military compound, and two chemical storage areas. Contaminated sites resulted from uncontained releases (either by design or unplanned) of hazardous chemicals. Only a few sites are suspected of containing radiological contaminants. Typical contamination sources are: 1) chemicals used to decontaminate other materials and equipment, 2) petroleum products required for lubrication of the generating

Washington 40

Hanford

plant turbine, 3) septic system waste, and 4) historic disposal practices for paints and solvents. Minor levels of mixed fission products exist at some sites. Most of the contaminants are hazardous chemicals (for example, PCBs, acids and bases (e.g., sulfuric acid and sodium hydroxide), petroleum products, lead, and mercury).

The interim Records of Decision have been published for many of the relevant sites. Of the 36 sites included in this report, 12 were not identified for actions in the reviewed Record of Decision. These 12 sites include two septic sites, four tanks (one gas, one oil, and two radioactive/hazardous chemical storage), one 90-day pad, three french drains/drywells, one dumpsite, and one liquid effluent crib. The strategy of removing the waste to 4.6 meters (15 feet) for the remaining sites, 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 (lead, cadmium, and mercury), and hazardous materials used in water treatment (chromium).

3.6.2 Facilities

There are nine facility waste sites in the lOON portion. One of these, an oil storage facility at the Hanford Generating Plant, will require long-term stewardship by 2006. The nine-square-meter (97- square-foot) facility was used as an oil storage building for the electrical generating plant. It is a basement storage room containing petroleum-contaminated concrete. The interim Records of Decisions for the lOON site designated removal of the contamination or in-situ bioremediation. There will be no remaining contamination unless unexpected petroleum products or other contamination is found below the cement floor.

3.7 100 Other Areas

The 100 Other Area portion comprises 4,600 hectares (11,400 acres). This portion consists of soil contamination sites that are, for the most part, located in an interior location (i.e., a substantial distance from the river) that is not within a specific reactor area. Most of these sites are located in the vicinity and west of the old Hanford town site, along the Columbia River south of lOOP and north of the 300 Area. In addition, two sites are located inland within the northern bend of the Columbia River, one between the lOOD Area and the lOOH A~;ea and the other between the lOON Area

100 OTHER AREAS PORTION HIGHLIGHTS

Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities- institutional controls Portion Size- 4,600 hectares (11,400 acres) Estimated Volume of Residual Contaminants- to be determined Long-Term Stewardship Start-End Years- 2007-in perpetuity

and lOOP Area. The sites range over an area of about 19 kilometers by 5.6 kilometers (12 miles by 3.5 miles). These sites are inactive, inert sites, or sites whose remediation or interim remediation plans will have been finalized or proposed for Record of Decision consideration. The sites will be remediated and revegetated with native plants.

Institutional controls will consist of deed restrictions on sites where contamination remains below the remediation level of 4.6-meters ( 15-feet deep). If the site is cleaned to below the appropriate Washington State Model Toxics Control Act cleanup level, unrestricted surface or residential use of the site would not be prohibited.

It is unlikely that engineered controls will be necessary for any of these sites, especially given the selected remediation strategy of removal of contaminants for most of the sites.

Washington 41

National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardshi11 Report

o·

100 Other Areas

3.7.1 Soil

Soil Contamination 0

c:J 0.5

Miles

This soil media sites in this portion are not associated with any specific reactor area but are located across the 100 Area geographic region. There are 81 soil waste sites in the 100 Other Areas portion covering 30 hectares (74 acres). Seventeen of these will require long-term stewardship activities by 2006 and include: five burial/dumping areas, four liquid disposal sites, two septic disposal areas, one storage vault, one underground storage tank, one unplanned release from a laboratory fire, two burn pits, and a rifle range. The sites result from a variety of activities: sites that supported construction of the reactor areas, pre-Hanford facilities, sewage disposal, Hanford site security, chemical storage and handling, and an unplanned release potentially containing radioactive materials. The contents of the waste sites in the 100 Other Area portion are largely uncharacterized. Some old burial grounds contain asbestos and leaded paint. Other potential contaminants in older landfills include organics and pesticides. Brine water, pickling acid, and septic discharges were disposed of in the liquid disposal sites. The burial sites are early solid waste disposal sites. One site is pre-Hanford Reservation.

The Record of Decision for the 100 Area Remaining Sites includes 14 of the 17 sites. Not included are two septic sites and one underground fuel tank, the existence of which is uncertain. The remediation actions identified call for disposal of the contamination in a Hanford interior disposal facility. The amount of contamination remaining below 4.6-meters (15 feet) is unknown. In many cases, site characterization activities will not be completed until soil removal is initiated.

Washington 42

3.8 200 North Area

The 200 North Area portion covers approximately 225 hectares (556 acres) and is located 7 to 12 kilometers (4 to 7.5 miles) south of the 100 Area and immediately north of the 200 Area (for more on the 100 and 200 Areas, see Section 1.2). The 200 North Area lies within an erosional channel that formed during the waning stages of the cataclysmic flooding that ended about 13,000 years ago. The elevation in the vicinity of the 200 North Area ranges from approximately 181 meters (593 feet) in the northeastern corner to approximately 170 meters (560 feet) in the southeastern corner. The

Hanford

200 NORTH AREA PORTION HIGHLIGHTS

Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities - institutional and engineered controls, long-term monitoring Portion Size- 225 hectares (556 acres) Estimated Volume of Residual Contaminants- to be determined Long-Term Stewardship Start-End Years- 2007-in perpetuity

vadose zone is approximately 49 meters (160 feet) thick along the western part of the 200 North Area. The groundwater table occurs primarily within the Hanford formation (uncemented gravels, sands, and silts) in the 200 East and 200 North Areas. Former river and flood channels that have become buried may provide preferential pathways for groundwater and contaminant movement.

The 200 North Area waste sites received cooling water and sludge from 100 Area reactor operations. The waste sites included in this submittal are inactive, inert sites, or sites whose remediation or interim remediation plans

Soil Contamination

0 c:::J

0 1

Miles

Arid Lands

Washington

Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility

200 North Area

43

National Defense Authodzation Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report

will have been finalized or proposed for Record of Decision consideration by 2006. There will be contaminated sites that will not have been remediated remaining in the 200 North Area beyond 2006. The waste sites in this group are similar to liquid waste disposal sites in the 100 Area and are, therefore, considered in the 100 Area Remaining Sites Record of Decision. An Interim Record of Decision (1999) for the 200 North waste site is in place, but these waste sites consist of contaminated soil, structures, and debris for which sufficient information does not exist to determine if remediation is needed to protect human health and the environment. The Interim Action Record of Decision provides a decision framework for deciding whether to leave some contamination in place at a limited number of sites, specifically where contamination is located at depths greater than 4.6 meters (15 feet).

EPA's assumption of land use in this area is for "unrestricted use," but the Tri-Parties may re-evaluate Remedial Action objectives and cleanup goals selected in this Interim Action Record of Decision following issuance of land use determinations by DOE. In the Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan EIS, the preferred alternative land use designation for the 200 North portion is Conservation Mining. Conservation mining would enable the extraction of valuable near-surface geologic resources after demonstrating compliance with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), RCRA, or CERCLA.

Institutional and engineered controls and long-term monitoring will be required for sites where wastes are left in place and unrestricted land use is precluded. Additional measures may be necessary to ensure the long-term viability of institutional controls if the final remedial actions selected do not allow for unrestricted land use. Any additional controls will be specified as part of the final remedy. Engineered controls will consist of managed site entry, sign installation, and maintenance and surveillance.

3.8.1 Soil

There are seven soil waste sites covering five hectares (13 acres) in the 200 North portion. Seven of these contain structures, debris, and soil with contaminants similar to those found in the 100 Area reactor areas. Potential contaminants include: cobalt-60, strontium-90, cesium-137, europium-155, uranium-238, and plutonium-239 and -240. DOE anticipates that remediation will not be necessary, but confirmatory sampling will be conducted. These sites are candidates for remediation using the "remove, treat, and dispose" alternative. However, since the nature and extent of contamination at the 200 North waste sites is unknown, some residual contamination may be left in place at a limited number of sites, specifically where contamination is located at depths greater than 4.6 meters (15 feet).

3.9 200-P0-1 Operable Unit (Groundwater)

The 200-P0-1 Operable Unit underlies nine RCRA treatment, storage and disposal units (tank farms, four cribs, one ditch, one pond and a portion of another pond, and one landfill) and covers 23,400 hectares (57,900 acres). The operable unit originated from historical liquid waste disposal during operations of the Plutonium/Uranium Extraction Plant and the B Plant in the 200East Area. The majority of the plume is south and east of the 200 Area. The 200-P0-1 Operable Unit is bound by the 2,000 picocuries per liter (pCi/L) tritium contamination plume as it extends eastward and southward from the source(s) located at the southern

200 -PO-l GROUNDWATER PORTION HIGHliGHTS

Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities - institutional and engineered controls Portion Size- 23,400 hectares (57,900 acres) Estimated Volume of Residual Contaminantsgroundwater - to be determined Long-Term Stewardship Start-End Years- 2007-in perpetuity

portion of the 200East Area. The eastern boundary is the Columbia River from the Old Hanford town site to the 300 Area. The southern boundary is adjacent to the 300-FF-5 Operable Unit boundary and does not extend south

Washington 44

of the 399-1-18 A, B, and C well cluster. The operable unit is bounded on the north by the 200-BP-5 Groundwater Operable Unit.

The 200 Area has been listed on EPA's National Priorities List due to soil and groundwater contamination. The groundwater beneath the 200East Area has been divided into two groundwater operable units based on an eastwest-trending groundwater divide that exists on the potentiometric surface of the aquifer. The groundwater to the south of the divide flows south and east to the Columbia River and is addressed by the 200-P0-1 Operable Unit. Groundwater flow beneath the 200East Area portion of the 200-P0-1 Operable Unit is complex and changing. The 200-P0-1 Operable Unit lies within the Pasco Basin. The basin is underlain by at least 3,200 meters (10,500 feet) of Columbia River Basalt, which is, in turn, overlain by 0 to over 215 meters (0 to over 700 feet) of fluvial, lacustrine, glaciofluvial, and eolian sediments.

Two corrective measure

0

~ Groundwater Contamination

Miles

Arid Lands Ecology Reser;e

(ALE)

200 Area PO-l Operable Unit (Groundwater)

Hanford

Area

alternatives were identified in the RCRA Corrective Measure Study for the 200-P0-1 Operable Unit (1997) (a final Record of Decision has not been completed). The no-action alternative is protective of human health and the environment in the short term (until2018 or loss of DOE control ofthe site) because access to groundwater is controlled. However, after loss of controls, access to contaminated groundwater could result in risk to human health and the environment. Also, because the groundwater RCRA Facility Investigation/Corrective Measures Study (RFIICMS) process is ahead of the process for the source operable units, some uncertainty exists concerning the relationship between the near-surface operational units and groundwater containment. High levels of tritium in a groundwater monitoring well near the 618-11 burial ground may significantly impact disposition of this groundwater plume. This is a recent discovery and limited information is currently available. Treatability testing for the operable unit contaminants may be required; however, the need for this testing is also being evaluated through supporting studies.

If the Institutional Controls alternative is selected, controls will be maintained after the year 2018 to prevent human contact with the contaminated groundwater until contaminant concentrations are reduced through natural attenuation. Restrictions on drinking water wells and providing alternate water supplies eliminate a major pathway for ingestion of contaminants, resulting in limited risk. Risks associated with ingestion of contaminants

Washington 45

National Defense Authol'ization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report

at the river are low because of reduced intakes associated with recreational exposure and natural attenuation of the tritium through decay. Groundwater monitoring is currently in place to track contaminants; this will continue as part of all the alternatives until acceptable groundwater concentrations are reached. Any waste generated as part of the alternative will be properly disposed of according to State and Federal requirements. Other regulatory requirements, such as air emissions standards, are not applicable to the proposed alternatives.

Engineered controls will consist of managed site entry, sign installation, maintenance and surveillance, and administrative systems.

3.9.1 Groundwater

The 200-P0-1 Operable Unit has been designated as a RCRA past-practice unit in the Tri-Party Agreement. This designation places the operable unit in the RCRA Facility Investigation/Corrective Measures Study process. The source operable units associated with the groundwater in the 200-P0-1 Operable Unit are a mix of CERCLA and RCRA past-practice operable units, and the documentation for these units will likewise be a mix between CERCLA and RCRA. A final Record of Decision will likely document the decision for the 200 Area National Priorities List site and incorporate information from all the CERCLA and RCRA documents, as appropriate. The Tri-Party Agreement identifies each site in the 200East Area and the controlling regulatory cleanup process. Closures and cleanup activities under RCRA and remedial activities under CERCLA will be coordinated to ensure efficiency of resources.

Three major plumes extend from the 200East Area toward the Columbia River: iodine-129, nitrate, and tritium. These plumes represent the major contaminants associated with this operable unit. Historical evidence from an earlier plume associated with PUREX operations from 1955 to 1972 indicates that the travel time for tritium to the Columbia River from the 200East Area is approximately 15 to 20 years. Other contaminants or small contaminant plumes are contained on the 200 Area plateau. In general, these contaminants are associated with specific waste sites and treatment, storage, and disposal facilities and include: arsenic, chromium, manganese, strontium-90, and vanadium.

DOE does not currently know how much residual contamination will remain in the groundwater following treatment. Potential corrective measures are being developed and evaluated. However, trends indicate that the majority of contaminant concentrations are declining through either radioactive decay (such as tritium and strontium-90) or dispersion of the contaminants through plume movement. As recent as January 2000, high levels of tritium were found in a groundwater monitoring well near the 618-11 burial ground and this may significantly impact disposition of this groundwater plume. Treatability testing of the operable unit contaminants may be required; however, the need for this testing is also being evaluated through supporting studies.

The groundwater will be cleaned up to standards set by the Washington State Model Toxics Control Act. The Washington State Model Toxics Control Act groundwater cleanup levels would be used as follows: 1) for contaminants contained on the plateau, Washington State Model Toxics Control Act-C industrial levels would be the standard; and 2) for contaminants off the plateau or those with the potential to migrate offsite at significant concentration, Washington State Model Toxics Control Act-B levels would be used. In the absence of an appropriate Washington State Model Toxics Control Act standard, the Safe Drinking Water Act maximum concentration limits would be used. Otherwise, the level would default to background. For contaminants with background values greater than regulatory standards, the background value would become the cleanup goal.

DOE expects that long-term monitoring and institutional controls will be maintained in perpetuity. Restrictions will be placed on drinking water wells.

Washington 46

3.10 300 Area

The 300 Area Portion covers about 51 hectares ( 126 acres) and is located in the southeast comer of Hanford, approximately five miles north of Richland, Washington. The 300 Area began as a fuel fabrication complex in 1943. As production reactors shut down, fuel fabrication ceased, but research and development activities increased over the years. Two operable units are located within the 300 Area portion: 300-FF-1 and 300-FF-5 (sites currently in the 300-FF-2 Operable Unit are not included in the portion for this report). The two sites are related based on geography and on the basis of

Hanford

300 AREA PORTION HIGHLIGHTS

Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities- institutional and engineered controls Portion Size- 51 hectares (126 acres) Estimated Volume of Residual Contaminantsgroundwater and soil - to be detennined Long-Term Stewardship Start-End Years- current-in perpetuity

the threat or potential threat to public health, welfare, or the environment and, therefore, are treated as a single site under the 1996 Record of Decision for the Hanford 300 Area 300-FF-1 and 300-FF-5 Operable Units. It should be noted that redesignation of boundaries in the mid-2000 time frame may result in the 300-FF-2 sites being included in the 300-FF-5 Operable Unit. A recent proposal has been made to move just the 300-FF-2 waste sites known to impact groundwater into the 300-FF-5 Groundwater Operable Unit. The groundwater plume included in this submittal contains constituents that are migrating into 300-FF-5 that have not yet been fully addressed (e.g., tritium). This is not the only groundwater contamination in the area. Other areas in the 300 Area

0 Contaminated Soil

c:::J Contaminated Soil

~ Groundwater Contaminatic

0 500 1.000

Feet

Washington

r------------1

i l I

:

~ j I I

i :

I i I

!

300 Area

47


will not have been remediated by 2006. In addition to the groundwater, there are 39 soil waste sites in the 300 area that contain various degrees of contamination (36 are covered in this report).

3.10.1 Groundwater

Groundwater contamination in the vicinity of the 300-FF-5 Operable Unit generally consists of three main plumes covering 648 hectares (1,600 acres). The first, and only one of the three that is derived from 300 Area operations, is centered beneath the 300-FF-1 Operable Unit. Maximum concentrations occur primarily in the vicinity of the Process Trenches and the north and south process ponds. A second plume, consisting of tritium, is present throughout the north and eastern portions of the 300-FF-5 Operable Unit. This plume is derived from operations in the 200 Area and is migrating into the 300-FF-5 Operable Unit from the north (to be addressed in future Records of Decision). The third plume is migrating from the west (1100-EM-1 Operable Unit) and it has been verified that the plume did not migrate into the 300-FF-5 Operable Unit. Seventeen potential contaminants of concern were identified for 300-FF-5: chloroform, 1,2-dichloroethene (cis), 1,2-dichloroethene (total), dichloroethene (trans) (70 mg/1), trichloroethene (5 mg/1), total coloform, copper, nickel, nitrate, ruthenium- I 06, strontium-90, technetium-99, tritium, uranium-234, uranium-235, uranium-238, and total uranium (20 mg/1).

The unconfined aquifer is composed of two hydrogeologically distinct formations. Flow in the unconfined system is generally to the Columbia River. Groundwater eventually discharges through springs/seeps in the river bottom and bank. The groundwater flow system has a significant impact on the contaminant distribution observed in the aquifer.

The selected remedy for the 300-FF-5 Operable Unit is an interim remedial action that involves imposing restrictions on the use of the groundwater until such time as health-based criteria are met for uranium, trichloroethene, and 1, 2-dichlorethene (i.e., compliance with Federal and State "applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements" and cost-effectiveness). This is an interim action because there are other constituents (e.g., tritium) which are migrating into the 300-FF-5 Operable Unit that have not yet been fully addressed and because a portion of 300-FF-5 is overlaid by uncharacterized waste sites in 300-FF-2. The inclusion of 300-FF-2 sites has led to questions from EPA regarding characterization. A final remedial action decision for 300-FF-5 will be made after these issues have been addressed. There is a greater degree of uncertainty associated with the exposure assessment, which is based on a large number of assumptions regarding the physical setting of the waste sites and the exposure conditions on the receptor population.

The interim remedy selected will result in hazardous substances remaining onsite above health-based levels for groundwater. Therefore, a review will be conducted within five years after commencement of remedial action to ensure that the remedy continues to provide adequate protection of human health and the environment. Migrating constituents (e.g., tritium) and overlying, uncharacterized waste sites increase uncertainty about the volume of residual contamination in the groundwater.

Continued groundwater monitoring is necessary to verify modeled predictions of contaminant attenuation and to evaluate the need for active remedial measures. The monitoring system will be designed and optimized to confirm that attenuation is occurring. The monitoring frequency will be selected to ensure that achievement of the Remedial Action objectives can be verified. The specific locations and measurements will be documented in an operation and maintenance plan for 300-FF-5, which requires approval by EPA. If monitoring does not confirm the predicted decrease of contaminant levels, DOE and EPA will evaluate the need to perform additional response actions. The RIIFS predicted that the Remedial Action objectives would be attained in three-to-ten years, but progress will be evaluated in a CERCLA five-year review, which is currently ongoing. Although not all contaminants have specified cleanup levels, it is anticipated that target levels will be achieved in 2010.

Current institutional controls will continue, and restrictions on groundwater withdrawal and use will be put in

Washington 48

Hanford

place and will continue until remediation goals are met. Residual contamination (300-FF-1) and groundwater (300-FF-5) institutional controls include placing written notification of the remedial action in the facility land use master plan. DOE will prohibit any activities that would interfere with the remedial activity without concurrence from EPA. In addition, measures acceptable to EPA that are necessary to ensure the continuation of these restrictions will be taken before any transfer or lease of the property. A copy of the notification will be given to any prospective purchaser/transferee before any transfer or lease. DOE will provide EPA with written verification that these restrictions have been put in place. The first five-year inspection of the 300-FF-5 Operable Unit has been completed and DOE is finalizing paperwork to close the inspection process. A recent deed restriction for the 300 Area Process Ponds has been recorded with the Benton County Auditor's Office.

3.10.2 Soil

There are 39 soil waste sites in the 300 Area portion covering about 16 hectares ( 40 acres). Thirty-six of these sites will require long-term stewardship by 2006 and include two burial grounds, one burn pit, one coal ash pit, three dumping areas, three ponds, one surface impoundment, and 25 unplanned releases. All of these waste sites are in the 300-FF-1 Operable Unit, which consists of nine waste sites that warranted remedial action using the selected remedy. These sites have been subdivided into two categories, namely, process waste sites (eight) and a burial ground (one). The process waste sites were processing ponds that received primarily liquid wastes. The burial ground received primarily solid waste. There are also more than 20 unplanned releases that are associated with the ponds. Three landfills that received solid waste and a burn pit were grouped with the process waste sites because they were relatively small in size and were located near the ponds.

Remedies selected for 300-FF-1 Operable Unit soils include selective excavation and disposal of contaminated soiV debris from the process waste units and excavation and removal of Burial Ground 618-4. Contaminated soil and debris from process waste units and Burial Ground 618-4 that are above cleanup standards will be removed and disposed of in Hanford's Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. If the 15-mrem/year industrial cleanup level at process waste units is exceeded by the combination of uranium and cobalt -60 after remediation, institutional controls may be used to allow the cobalt-60 to decay. Any material at the burial ground that exceeds disposal facility acceptance criteria would be stored at the 300-FF-1 Operable Unit in accordance with applicable requirements until acceptance criteria are met by treatment or approval of a treatability variance. The remedies selected will result in hazardous substances remaining onsite above health-based standards. The volume of residual contamination will not be known until remediation is complete. Therefore, a review will be conducted within five years after commencement of remedial action to ensure that the remedies continue to provide adequate protection of human health and the environment.

3.11 1100 Area

The 1100 Area was listed on EPA's National Priorities List in November 1989. This listing was based on the proximity of the 1100-EM-1, 1100-EM-2, and 1100-EM-3 Operable Units to groundwater wells used by the City of Richland to supply drinking water and because up to 56,800 liters (15,000 gallons) of battery acid were disposed in a sand pit in the 1100-EM-1 Operable Unit. The 1100 Area covers 114 hectares (281 acres) and is located near the southeastern corner of Hanford, extending to the upper city limits of Richland, Washington. In 1998, DOE transferred the 100 Area to the Port of Benton, a State of Washington organization.

1100 AREA PORTION HIGHLIGHTS

Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities- monitor and maintain the cap at the Hom Rapids Landfill, enforce institutional controls Portion Size- 114 hectares (281 acres) Estimated Volume of Residual Contaminants- soil- to be determined Long-Term Stewardship Start-End Years -current-in perpetuity

However, the northernmost part of the area, also known as the Horn Rapids Landfill, is still owned and managed

Washington 49


l~ \ 'Q 1--------•\•L•anliidfiiiiiill~;;;;;;;;;;~n;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;.;;;;;;;;;;;;;~------~r .... _. .... -~'\

Rapids Road ....

0

\ 1100 Area

0 ~ 0

!. 3000 Area

a ~ Q ... _ ro

.110 0

• .a .II (1)

~ ., ~·

(J) ::s

/? • "b @: • • .. p '6

0 :J

• i )(}. .Fii. ~~ • G

r • .. ...

:

"Ifill ~ .9 1!1 0 Soil Contamination .

0 500 1,000 Feet

1100 Area

by DOE. The Horn Rapids Landfill is located approximately 3.2 kilometers (two miles) west of the southeastern corner of Hanford and approximately eight kilometers (five miles) north of Richland, Washington. It was an unlined landfill used for disposal of trash and was capped to prevent problems due to airborne asbestos.

Washington 50

Hanford

The 1100 Area is located along the southeastern margin of Hanford, adjacent to the Columbia River. The geologic structure beneath the 1100 Area consists of three distinct levels of soil formations. The deepest level is a thick series of basalt flows that have been warped and folded. The Ringold formation (with its layers of silt, gravel, and sand) forms the middle level. The uppermost level, the Hanford formation, consists of gravels and sands deposited by catastrophic floods during glacial retreat.

A Record of Decision was issued in 1993 for the 1100 Area, and remediation of waste sites was completed in 1995. Although most of the lands in the 1100 Area were transferred to Port of Benton, DOE is still responsible for remediation of any contamination identified in the future.

The groundwater in the vicinity of the Horn Rapids Landfill (HRL) is to be monitored annually to verify that the trichloroethene contamination continues to attenuate and that the plume does not expand beyond designated early warning wells. Plans are in place for DOE to inspect and maintain cap integrity and fencing at HRL. Continued groundwater monitoring around HRL is necessary to verify the modeled contaminant attenuation predictions and to evaluate the need for active remedial measures.

3.11.1 Soil

There are 32 soil waste sites in the 1100 Area portion covering 17 hectares (42 acres). All of these are currently in long-term stewardship and include five depressions/pits, two dumping areas, one pond, one sanitary landfill, one military compound, four septic tanks, 15 storage areas and tanks, three unplanned release areas, and one process unit. All 32 sites are in the 1100-EM-1, 1100-EM-2, and 1100-EM-3 Operable Units that previously contained the central warehousing, vehicle maintenance, and transportation distribution center for the entire Hanford Site. The selected remedy for the 1100 Area National Priorities List Site includes: offsite incineration of BEHP-contaminated soils at the Discolored Soil Site, offsite disposal of PCB contaminated soils at the Ephemeral Pool, an asbestos cap at the HRL, and offsite disposal of contaminated soil and debris from the 1100-EM-2 and 1100-EM-3 Operable Units

The Horn Rapids Landfill, located in the northernmost portion of the 1100-EM-1 Operable Unit, is still owned and managed by DOE. The landfill was an unlined depression that was used for disposal of trash. The volume of residual contamination at the landfill is unknown. The Horn Rapids Landfill was closed as an Asbestos Landfill in accordance with the Asbestos National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) (40 CFR 61.151). Before the landfill cap was installed, a localized area of soil (contaminated with PCBs) was removed. The HRL asbestos cap was constructed by placing 37,100 cubic meters (48,500 cubic yards) of clean random fill material over the 1 0-hectare (25-acre) site. Forty-five centimeters ( 18 inches) of random fill material was placed uniformly over the site following existing contours; no effort was made to direct surface run-off water away from the cap area. Placement ofthe first 15 centimeters (six inches) layer of this material required the use of special construction practices to limit the exposure of remedial workers to fugitive dust. An additional 15 centimeters (six inches) of topsoil layer was placed and seeded to dryland grasses. Total cap thickness was 60 centimeters (two feet). Plans are in place for DOE to inspect and maintain the integrity of the cap and fencing at the Horn Rapids Landfill. DOE recently recorded a notation on the Horn Rapids Landfill deed after completion of the first CERCLA five-year review following a positive inspection on the Horn Rapids Landfill cap and signage.

Although remedial actions attempted to clean up the area, if there are residual contaminants above certain Washington State Model Taxies Control Act levels (applying to certain units), then adequate institutional controls will be provided to monitor the sites after remediation to prevent future receptor exposure to contaminants. Since hazardous substances remained onsite above levels allowing for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, a statutory five-year review was conducted in 1998.

Washington 51


Soil and debris from waste sites in the 1100-EM2 and1100-EM-3 Operable Units that were contaminated above Washington State Model Toxics Control Act levels were removed and disposed in a permitted offsite landfill. Field monitoring and analyzed samples were used to confirm that cleanup levels had been met.

All simulated high-level waste slurry (SHLWS) treatment and storage wastes, including a vinyl liner and dangerous waste containers, have been treated and removed. Soils beneath the SHL WS treatment and storage wastes have been sampled, analyzed and removed, as necessary. The 1999 Closure Plan for the SHLWS Treatment and Storage Unit indicates that closure was based on removal of all dangerous wastes and dangerous waste residues, groundwater monitoring, and leachate collection. Run-on and run-off controls are not expected to be necessary.

3.11.2 Facilities

The 1100 Area includes the SHLWS Treatment and Storage facility, which is approximately 0.8 hectares (two acres) in size. The SHLWS Treatment and Storage (T/S) unit was an open area, within a fenced-in yard, that was used to treat and store containerized, simulated high-level waste slurry. It was a unique facility, used to blend chemical products to simulate high-level wastes for use in experimental waste treatment programs. The unit was also used to treat this waste in a grout/stabilization process. The untreated slurry was originally considered to be a mixed waste because, in addition to being designated a dangerous waste, it contained elevated levels of natural radioactivity. However, analysis ofthe waste at the time of treatment indicated that the radioactivity of the waste was low enough for it to be managed as a nonradioactive waste, defined by the U.S. Department of Transportation under 49 CPR 173 as less than two nanocuries per gram (nCi/g). The slurry was designated as a dangerous waste because it contained toxic constituents, was corrosive and ignitable, and contained dissolved metals above the limits given in the Extraction Procedure Toxicity test. The treated slurry was not designated as dangerous waste, and the levels of radioactivity in the treated waste were low enough for the waste to be managed at Hanford as nonradioactive solid waste.

The SHL WS was procured for a research demonstration program that was subsequently canceled. The treatment program was initiated on September 13, 1988, and ended on October 28, 1998. The SHLWS unit was divided among cordoned areas, including one area used for storage of SHL WS in drums, another used for SHL WS treatment, and one used for accumulations of containerized dangerous wastes for less than 90 days. The treated wastes were removed from the unit and disposed of, and the unit was not used for any additional dangerous or mixed waste management activities. The areas surrounding the facility were used for nonregulated activities, including storage of raw materials and structural materials.

Raw materials stored in the unit included the grout-forming chemicals used for treatment (fly ash, blast furnace slag, and Portland cement). Each area of the SHL WS TIS units was closed by removal of all dangerous wastes and dangerous waste residues. Soil beneath the SHL WS drum storage area, the 90-day-or-less accumulation area, and the treatment area was sampled and analyzed as described in the Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP). The facility was clean closed and there are no post closure requirements.

All land and facilities within the former 3000 Area were cleaned up and vacated by DOE in 1996. These lands were turned over to the Port of Benton and the 3000 Area designation was retired.

3.12 Arid Land Ecology Reserve

The 1100 Area, including Fitzner/Eberhardt Arid Lands

Washington

FITZNER/EBERHARDT ARID LANDS ECOLOGY RESERVE PORTION HIGHLIGHTS

Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities - institutional and engineered controls Portion Size - 30,900 hectares (76,400 acres) Estimated Volume of Residual Contaminants- to be determined Long-Term Stewardship Start-End Years- current -in perpetuity

52

r--------------l I ~ i I ' 1 (l 300 600

l ____ Feet

Fitzner-Eberhardt Arid Lands Ecology Reserve

(ALE)

WasteSrtes


Laser Interferometry Gravitational Wave

Obse/Yatory

Hanford

Ecology Reserve, was listed on the National Priorities List in November 1989. The listing was based on the proximity of the reserve (1100-IU-1 Operable Unit) to a former NIKE missile base and control missile launching/maintenance and living quarters for personnel located on Rattlesnake Mountain within the Fitzner/Eberhardt Arid Lands Ecology Reserve. The U.S. Army closed/ decommissioned the base in the 1960s. The 311-square-kilometer (120-square-mile) reserve covers 30,900 hectares (76,400 acres) and is a large contiguous block of land forming the southwestern boundary of Hanford. The easternmost boundary of the reserve is approximately 24 kilometers (15 miles) west of Richland, Washington.

A Record of Decision for the 1100 Area was issued in 1993. Waste sites in the 1100-IU-1 Operable Unit were remediated in 1995. The Washington State Department of Ecology and EPA concurred with the proposed deletion of thellOO Area, including the 1100-IU-1 Operable Unit, from the National Priorities List in 1996. According to the Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan EIS, the preferred alternative land use designation for the Fitzner/Eberhardt Arid Lands Ecology Reserve portion is "Preservation."

The Record of Decision for the 1100 Area, which includes the Fitzner/Eberhardt Arid Lands Ecology Reserve, addressed all areas of concern described in the national priorities list listing, as well as areas that were not initially mentioned at the time of the listing. As a result of the remedial actions performed at the Hanford 1100 Area, all possible exposure pathways from contaminated soils were eliminated, and all remedial action objectives established in the Record of Decision have been met. Active groundwater remediation was not required to protect human health or the environment at the 1100 Area; however, continued monitoring is necessary to ensure that contamination levels continue to decrease.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages the Fitzner/Eberhardt Arid Land Ecology Reserve for DOE.

Washington 53

National Defense Authol"ization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Repm·t

Although institutional controls are not required for waste sites at the reserve, the reserve is fenced with locked gate access. The public is not permitted access to ensure preservation of wildlife and native ecosystems. Intermittent surveillance and maintenance of the reserve is conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

3.12.1 Soil

The Fitzner/Eberhardt Arid Land Ecology Reserve contains six soil waste sites covering 0. 7 hectare ( 1. 72 acres) that comprise the 11 00-IU-1 Operable Unit. All six sites, which include two dumping areas and four septic tanks, are in the 1100-IU-1 Operable Unit, which is the location of a former NIKE missile base consisting of structures which supported missile launch, control, and maintenance functions, as well as living quarters for base persoimel, and storage buildings for hazardous substances used in the maintenance of the physical plant and missile operations. The waste sites in these areas are associated with vehicle maintenance activities and sewage systems built to support the missile base.

A Record of Decision was issued in 1993. As a result, soil and debris that were contaminated above Washington State Model Toxics Control Act levels were removed and disposed in a permitted offsite landfill. Remediation of the site was complete in 1995, and a final close-out report was issued in July 1996. No residual contamination remains in the soil waste sites included in the 11 00-IU-1 Operable Unit. Field monitoring and analyzed samples were used to confirm that cleanup levels had been met. A review will be conducted within five years after commencement of remedial action to ensure that the remedy continues to provide adequate protection of human health and the environment and to determine long-term stewardship responsibilities.

3.13 Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility

Disposal of radioactive, hazardous/dangerous, asbestos, PCB, and mixed wastes resulting from the remediation of operable units within the 100, 200, and 300 Area National Priorities List sites of Hanford will occur in the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. The Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility is a double-lined landfill meeting RCRA 40 CFR Part 264, Subpart N landfill and Subpart F groundwater monitoring requirements. The Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility is located in the central portion of Hanford, southeast of the 200West Area and southwest of the 200East Area, approximately 32 kilometers (20 miles) west of Richland, Washington. The Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility is

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION DISPOSAL FACILITY PORTION HIGHLIGHTS

Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities- monitoring and maintenance of closed Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility cells, and groundwater monitoring Portion Size- 65 hectares (160 acres) Estimated Volume of Residual Contaminants -engineered unit 1.8 million metric tons (2 million tons) equivalent of 0.9 million cubic meters (1.2 million cubic yards) for cells 1 and 2 only Long-Term Stewardship Start-End Years- 2000-in perpetuity

included in this submittal because Cells 1 and 2 are mostly complete. of the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility.

However, this report does not cover all

All cells will be located within a single waste trench. The Phase I design was a single, 21.3-meter (70-foot) deep trench consisting of two side-by-side cells with final dimensions of 432.8 meters (1 ,420 feet) long by 219.5 meters (720-feet) wide at the top of the trench. The initial two disposal cells are expected to provide an approximate waste disposal capacity of 0.92 million cubic meters (1.2 million cubic yards). The same RCRA design selected for the existing Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility disposal cells has been used for the Phase II cells (Cells 3 and 4). The facility is equipped with a RCRA double-liner and leachate collection and recovery system. The Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility leachate may be collected and stored at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility for use within the trench, as appropriate. Appropriate uses are limited to dust suppression and waste compaction. The leachate must comply with land disposal restrictions,

Washington 54

•

f.

II,. 300 600

il·.i= .................. ~~= Feet

II..

--=~-~-====t=::=··-······

~~ r-; . ~------ I 1.---,-

l 1 Environmental Restoration '~..____ \ Disposal Fac111ty

------~-·'· .. ,


(ALE)

·,~,4r0 '<'t~otlf?.

~"a <I ~--~-------·····

Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility

Hanford

Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility Washington Administrative Code, and other health-based limits (whichever is more restrictive). Leachate in excess of Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility recycling capacity/acceptable contaminant levels will be sent to the Effluent Treatment Facility or another approved facility for management

3.13.1 Engineered Unit

Only Hanford environmental cleanup wastes generated as a result of CERCLA or RCRA cleanup actions (investigation-derived waste, decontamination and decommissioning wastes, and RCRA past-practice wastes) are eligible for disposal in the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, provided the waste meets Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility Washington Administrative Code and the appropriate decision documents are in place. Additionally, non-process waste (e.g., contaminated soil, debris) generated from closure of inactive RCRA treatment, storage and disposal units may be placed in the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility if: 1) the units are within the boundaries of a CERCLA or RCRA past-practice operable unit, 2) the closure wastes are sufficiently similar to CERCLA or RCRA past-practice wastes placed in the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, 3) the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility waste acceptance criteria are satisfied, and 4) the appropriate CERCLA decision documents are in place. Revision of the RCRA Permit and closure plans may be required. Actual wastes may consist of hazardous/dangerous, radioactive, mixed (containing both hazardous/dangerous and radioactive waste), PCB (minor amounts), and asbestos wastes. Waste treatment may be conducted before disposal at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility instead of at the operable units.

The wastes being disposed of at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility are as follows:

Washington 55


Waste from the 100 Area

Includes soil, solid wastes, sediments, and sludges Solid wastes include hard waste, soft waste, demolition waste and pipes. Soft wastes include collapsed cardboard boxes, paper, rags, clothing, plastic, and miscellaneous trash. Hard wastes include aluminum tubes and spacers, failed steel and stainless steel equipment, timbers, and metal drums.

Investigation-derived waste generated during RCRA Facility Investigation/Corrective Measures Studies (FIICMS) or CERCLA Remedial Investigation/Corrective Measures Studies (RIICMS) may be placed in ERDF if waste criteria are met.


• Information is not currently available on the physical characterization of 200 Area soils likely to be disposed in ERDF.

• Investigation-derived waste totals about 380 cubic meters (500 cubic yards). Volumes to be disposed from the 200-ZP-1 Operable Unit and volumes to be generated during future activities will be addressed in the future.


Wastes are in two categories, based on similarities of cleanup requirements: 1) contaminated soil, and 2) solid waste (e.g., pipelines, burial ground waste).

Investigation-derived waste generated during RCRA Facility Investigation/Corrective Measures Studies (FIICMS) or CERCLA Remedial Investigation/Corrective Measures Studies (RI/CMS) may be placed in ERDF if waste criteria are met.

The total volume of residual contamination from wastes from the 300 Area is estimated to be about one million cubic meters (1.3 million cubic yards) of contaminated soil and solid waste.

Potential contaminants of concern in the 300 Area waste sites include: Non-radioactive (ammonia, arsenic, benzo( a)pyrene, cadmium, chrysene, PCBs, thallium, tetrachloroethene, trichloroethene (TCE)) and radioactive ( cesium-137, cobalt -60, thorium-228, uranium-234, uranium-235, uranium-238, zinc-65) contaminants.

A Record of Decision was issued in 1995, and three amendments to the Record of Decision (1996, 1997, 1999) have been issued. A Closure Plan for the first two Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility cells has been developed. The first two cells have received nearly 1.8 million metric tons (two million tons) of contaminated material since mid-1996. Both cells will have an interim cover by July 2000. Construction of two additional cells (Cells 3 and 4) was authorized in 1998 and completed in 1999; Cells 3 and 4 will begin receiving waste in May 2000. A final cover will be placed on Cells 1, 2, 3, and 4 in the 2006-to-2007 time frame (actual date of cover placement is driven by waste volume, settlement/subsidence, and the geometry of the site).

A modified RCRA-compliant closure cover will be placed over the waste. The cover will prevent direct exposure to the waste and includes a vegetated surface layer of fine-grained soils to retain moisture and encourage evapotranspiration, thereby minimizing infiltration and vadose zone transport of contaminants to groundwater.

Washington 56

Hanford

The upper 50 em (20 in.) of the soil cover system is composed of a mixture of silt and gravels, which is intended to both reduce infiltration through the cover and enhance the resistance of the cover to burrowing animals and long-term wind erosion. The RCRA-compliant cover will be modified by providing a total of approximately 4.6 meters (15 feet) of soil to deter intrusion. Additional research into closure covers may result in site-specific enhancements to RCRA-compliant designs. Construction of the cover will occur incrementally as the trench is expanded. The design will, at a minimum, comply with applicable RCRA requirements found at 40 CFR Part 264, Subpart N. Hanford Site borrow-pit basalt will not be required for the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility cover.

Institutional controls will restrict public access to the landfill upon closure. Additional measures may be necessary to ensure long-term viability of the institutional controls if the final remedial actions selected do not allow for unrestricted land use. Any additional controls will be specified as part of the final remedy. Currently active institutional controls include fences, signs, patrols badging/visitor escort, and access restriction language to any land transfer/sale/lease of property, as appropriate. Passive institutional controls will consist of markers, offsite records, and a surface barrier that is at least 4.6 meters (15 feet) thick. The institutional controls will prevent intrusion into the waste for at least 100 years, and passive controls will prevent intrusion for 500 years. DOE will perform annual evaluations of the institutional controls to determine their effectiveness and implementation and will perform five-year reviews from the commencement of remedial actions until final remediation objectives are achieved.

3.14 North Slope

TheN orth Slope (sometimes called theW ahluke Slope) is a large block of land (about 35,600 hectares, or 87,900 acres) located north of the Columbia River in the northeastern portion of Hanford, approximately 32-40 kilometers (20-25 miles) north of Richland, Washington. It is managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as part of the Hanford Reach National Monument. Historically tribal land, the area was homesteaded by pioneers before it was taken by the Federal government in 1943 as a security buffer to protect Hanford's defense production facilities. Anti-aircraft artillery and missile sites were located on this

NORTH SLOPE PORTION HIGHLIGHTS

Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities -limit access to maintain the buffer zone around the site; continue revegetation efforts Portion Size- 35,600 hectares (87,900 acres) Estimated Volume of Residual Contaminants- to be determined Long-Term Stewardship Start-End Years- current -in perpetuity

land; plutonium production plants or storage facilities were never built there. The topography of the North Slope is marked by the Saddle Mountains to the north and the Columbia River to the south. The geologic structure beneath the North Slope is similar to much of the rest of Hanford, which consists of three distinct levels of soil formations. The waste sites covered in this submittal include all contaminated sites on the North Slope 100-IU-3 Operable Unit.

3.14.1 Soil

There are 39 soil waste sites covering 210 hectares (518 acres) in the North Slope portion. All ofthese sites are in long-term stewardship and are associated with: homesteading activities that occurred prior to 1943, military activities relating to the defense of Hanford, and Bureau of Reclamation Activities in support of the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project. Many of the sites in this group were landfills for former military installations, with soil contamination resulting from the historic use of petroleum products and pesticides by the military.

All contaminants of concern have been cleaned up to below the Washington State Model Taxies Control Act residential standards. Remediation of sites in the North Slope was completed by the end of 1994. The 39 sites

Washington 57

I


~ Soil Contamination

0 Wahluke Slope

c:::J 0 0 2 co 0o

Miles 0

0

100 Other Area

0 0

Arid Lands

North Slope

on the North Slope have been investigated, characterized, and remediated where necessary to comply with Washington State Model Taxies Control Act cleanup levels. Cleanup of the 39 sites included the removal of soil contaminated with the pesticide 24-D, DDT and their associated breakdown products and disposal of them in a hazardous waste landfill in Arlington, OR. Petroleum-contaminated soil (PCS) was transported to a PCS treatment facility in Pasco, W A for bioremediation. Several 208-liter (55-gallon) drums of miscellaneous and hazardous substances were sent to appropriate handling facilities. Non-hazardous trash, debris, and concrete were either returned to the excavations or recycled. No known hazardous substances remain onsite. This is supported by the confirmatory sampling results. EPA delisted the North Slope from the National Priorities List on July 8, 1998. Because no hazardous substances remain onsite above Washington State Model Taxies Control Act health-based levels, a five-year review process does not apply to this portion. However, DOE commits to the development and implementation of a Mitigation Action Plan, in coordination with the Natural Resource Trustees, for any additional required mitigation measures. An administrative record of all project documentation is stored at the DOE Richland Administrative Record Center, at the EPA Region 10 Superfund Record Center, and at the Washington State Department of Ecology, Administrative Record in Lacey, Washington.

The entire North Slope is included in the Hanford Reach National Monument, though the land is retained by DOE. Thus, general administrative engineered controls (e.g., surveillance and maintenance and other access controls) are in place.

Institutional controls for residual wastes are not necessary -- no known hazardous wastes remain onsite ( 100-IU-

Washington 58

Hanford

3 Operable Unit). According to the Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan EIS, the preferred alternative land use· designation for the North Slope portion is "Preservation."

3.15 Riverland

The Riverland Portion covers about 3,500 hectares (8,650 acres) and is included in the Hanford Reach Monument. The Riverland Portion includes the RiverlandRail Yard. TheRiverlandRail Yard(lOO-IU-1 Operable Unit) supported Hanford construction and operation activities from 1943 until 1954, while decontamination of radioactive rail cars continued until 1956. Although the Riverland Rail Yard has been remediated, the other operable units are still contaminated and will remain in the Riverland Area beyond 2006.

RIVERLAND PORTION HIGHLIGHTS

Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities- none Portion Size- 3500 hectares (8650 acres) Estimated Volume of Residual Contaminants- to be determined Long-Term Stewardship Start-End Years- current -in perpetuity

The geologic structure beneath the 100 Area is similar to much of the rest of Hanford, which consists of three distinct levels of soil formations.

0

Washington

0 Contaminated Soil

c=J Contaminated Soil

Miles

Arid Lands

2

North Slope

0

0

100 Other Area 0 0

Riverland Portion

59


3.15.1 Soil

There are 12 soil waste sites in the Riverland Rail Yard. Seven of these, covering over 2.2 hectares (5.5 acres), will require long-term stewardship in 2006 and include a 2, 4-D pesticide container site, a rail yard maintenance facility, and two former military installations with associated demolition debris.

Between 1992 and 1994, DOE performed a CERCLA expedited response action for the cleanup of the River land Rail Yard Maintenance Facility and pesticide container sites and closure of an empty munitions cache hole. Diesel-contaminated concrete and soil from the rail yard and pesticide sites were removed from the site for bioremediation. Sampling results indicated that levels of the contaminants remaining in the soil at the rail yard are below Washington State Model Toxics Control Act residential standards. Radioactive decontamination of this facility occurred around 1963, after which the maintenance facilities were dismantled and sold. Follow-up radiological surveys were performed in 1977, 1978, and 1993, revealing only natural background levels. Also during the cleanup, a site containing 2,4-D pesticide containers was discovered, sampled, and cleaned up to Washington State Model Toxics Control Act residential standards. Contaminants of concern included Aldrin, Dieldrin, and diesel and heavy oil (all of which have been cleaned up to Washington State Model Toxics Control Act levels). A Record of Decision issued in 1996 declared that no further action is required at the Riverland 100-IU-1 Operable Unit. However, DOE will develop and implement a Mitigation Action Plan, in coordination with the Natural Resource Trustees, for any additional required mitigation measures. EPA and the Washington State Department of Ecology have determined these actions are protective of human health and the environment.

Institutional or engineered controls for residual wastes are not necessary for the Riverland Portion (100-IU-1 Operable Unit) -- no known hazardous substances remain onsite.

Although the remedial action was cleanup under CERCLA, a five-year review does not apply since hazardous substances are not left onsite above health-based levels. The administrative record of this cleanup action is stored at the DOE-Richland Administrative Record Center, the EPA Region 10 Superfund Record Center, and the Washington State Department of Ecology's Administrative Record at Lacey, Washington.

According to the Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan EIS, the preferred alternative land use designation for the Riverland portion is "Preservation."

4.0 FUTURE USES

The Federal government is expected to maintain ownership of most of the site once cleanup is completed, with the DOE Environmental Management program as the steward for all areas of the site retained by the Federal government in perpetuity. To date, about 50 percent of Hanford Site lands have been cleaned up or transferred for alternate uses, mostly for economic development or preservation use. The North Slope, ALE and Reach land have been put under the management of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as the Hanford Reach National Monument , but remains under DOE ownership to maintain a safety buffer zone and pristine habitat.

The Final Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan EIS was issued in September 1999 and the Record of Decision released in November 1999. Of the totall52,000 hectares (375,000 acres), the preferred alternative described in the Comprehensive Land-Use Plan includes eventual land use for Hanford as follows: conservation (mining) - 442,000 hectares (109,000 acres); Industrial- 15,300 hectares (37,900 acres); Industrial-Exclusive- 5,060 hectares (12,500 acres); Preservation- 78, 100 hectares ( 193,000 acres); High-Intensity Recreation- 125 hectares (309 acres); Low-Intensity Recreation- 334 hectares (825 acres); R&D- 4910 hectares (12,100 acres); and Columbia River- 3,640 hectares (9,000 acres). This land use distribution will not be complete by 2007.

Washington 60

Hanford

Haiz.(ord Site Land-Use Desif{nations Land-Use Designation Definition Industrial-Exclusive An area suitable and desirable for treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous,

dangerous, radioactive, and nonradioactive wastes. Includes related activities consistent with Industrial-Exclusive uses.

Industrial An area suitable and desirable for activities, such as reactor operations, rail, barge transport facilities, mining, manufacturing, food processing, assembly, warehouse, and distribution operations. Includes related activities consistent with Industrial uses.

Agricultural An area designated for the tilling of soil, raising of crops and livestock, and horticulture for commercial purposes along with all those activities normally and routinely involved in horticulture and the production of crops and livestock. Includes related activities consistent with agricultural uses.

R&D An area designated for conducting basic or applied research that requires the use of a large-scale or isolated facility, or smaller scale time-limited research conducted in the field or within facilities that consume limited resources. Includes scientific, engineering, technology development, technology transfer, and technology deployment activities to meet regional and national needs. Includes related activities consistent with Research and Development.

High-Intensity Recreation An area allocated for high-intensity, visitor-serving activities and facilities (commercial and governmental), such as golf courses, recreational vehicle parks, boat launching facilities, Tribal fishing facilities, destination resorts, cultural centers, and museums. Includes related activities consistent with High-Intensity Recreation.

Low-Intensity Recreation An area allocated for low-intensity, visitor-serving activities and facilities, such as improved recreational trails, primitive boat launching facilities, and permitted campgrounds. Includes related activities consistent with Low-Intensity Recreation.

Conservation (Mining & An area reserved for the management and protection of archeological, cultural, Grazing) ecological, and natural resources. Limited and managed mining (e.g., quarrying for

sand, gravel, basalt, and topsoil for governmental purposes) and grazing could occur as a special use (i.e., a permit would be required) within appropriate areas. Limited public access would be consistent with resource conservation. Includes activities related to Conservation (Mining and Grazing), consistent with the protection of archeological, cultural, ecological, and natural resources.

Conservation (Mining) An area reserved for the management and protection of archeological, cultural, ecological, and natural resources. Limited and managed mining (e.g., quarrying for sand, gravel, basalt, and topsoil for governmental purposes) could occur as a special use (i.e., a permit would be required) within appropriate areas. Limited public access would be consistent with resource conservation. Includes activities related to Conservation (Mining), consistent with the protection of archeological, cultural, ecological, and natural resources.

Preservation An area managed for the preservation of archeological, cultural, ecological, and natural resources. No new consumptive uses (i.e., mining or extraction of non-renewable resources) would be allowed within this area. Limited public access would be consistent with resource preservation. Includes activities related to Preservation uses.

Final decisions on the level of cleanup to be performed on individual waste units continue to be made through the CERCLA or RCRA decision processes. As CERCLA and RCRA decisions are made, revisions to the baseline and Comprehensive Land-Use Plan will be made, as required. End-state goals for the preferred alternative of the Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan EIS for the portions that will require long-term

stewardship in 2006 are as follows:

Washington 61


Portion End State Goal Columbia River Corridor (Portions Land-use designations include high-intensity recreation near the Vernita Bridge, a lOOB/C, lOOD, lOOF, lOOH, lOOK, proposed museum facility at the B Reactor, and two areas on the Wahluke Slope; lOON, 100 Other, 300) low-intensity recreation between the Vernita Bridge and the B Reactor museum,

near the White Bluffs boat ramp and across the river on the Wahluke Slope, and for proposed recreation facilities near the D/DR Reactors, at the old Hanford High School, and just north of Energy Northwest; and conservation (mining) for the remainder. The river islands and a quarter-mile buffer zone along the river will be designated as preservation to protect cultural and ecological resources. The 300 Area land is designated for industrial use.

Portions 1100 Area and ALE The 1100 Area is designated for industrial use and has been transferred to the Port of Benton. Most of the Fitzner/Eberhardt Arid Land Ecology Research (ALE) is designated for preservation which is consistent with current management practices by US Fish and Wildlife Service. Part of the ALE is designated for conservation (mining) as a source of materials for remediation

I projects on Hanford. Wahluke Slope (Portion North The entire slope is designated for preservation, except near the Vernita Bridge, to Slope) provide protection for sensitive areas or species. The Wahluke Slope is managed

by the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Central Plateau (Portion The Central Plateau is designated for industrial- exclusive use to allow for Environmental Restoration continuation of Waste Management operations such as the Environmental Disposal Facility) Restoration Disposal Facility. Portions 200 North and 200-P0-1 groundwater

Plume are under lands designated for conservation (mining). Portion Riverland The land in the vicinity of the Riverlands Rail Yard is designated for

preservation; however, the extant railroad grade across the area is considered an active permitted infrastructure.

Since the Final Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan EIS was issued, the Hanford 1100 Area and the Hanford railroad southern connection (from Hom Rapids Road to Columbia Center) have been transferred from DOE ownership to Port of Benton ownership in order to support future economic development. Land use of the 1100 Area and the railroad southern connection would remain Industrial, as proposed in the EIS.

Energy Northwest (formerly known as the Washington Public Power Supply System, or 40 WPPSS) has requested DOE approval of a sublease of a portion of the land they lease from DOE north of the 300 Area. This sublease would be for siting, construction, and operation of an aluminum smelter. Land use of the Energy Northwest-leased land would remain Industrial, as proposed in the EIS.

Planning for Possible Future Missions

The Record of Decision for the Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan EIS identifies lands required to support DOE's current Environmental Management and Science and Technology missions at Hanford, as well as lands for future economic development. DOE is proposing that additional lands be maintained under the Industrial land-use designation in areas where existing infrastructure is available and other compatible uses exist. DOE believes it is prudent to retain land under the Industrial land-use designation to support possible future missions, rather than convert the land to the Conservation or Preservation land-use designation at this time. This would avoid possible conflicts with future missions. DOE anticipates that the need for land under the Industrial landuse designation would continue to be evaluated during future planning efforts, which may result in conversion of some lands to the Conservation, Preservation, or other land-use designations. However, such lands would be managed as conservation until such time as a specific economic development use is identified.

Washington 62

.,. Environmental

Restoration Disposal Facility

Land uses

~ Industrial 0

!

Washington

Nonconformance after 50 years Recreation Research & Development Remainder of site is Preservation and Conservation

Laser Interferometry Gravitational-Wave

Observatory (LIGO)

Hanford Land Use Map

Hanford

63


For additional information about the Hanford Site, please contact:

Mr. James Daily U.S. Department of Energy Building 825 JADWIN, Room 548 825 Jadwin A venue Richland, W A 99352 phone: 509-376-7721 [email protected] or visit the Hanford Home Page at http://www.hanford.gov

Washington 64

(WNI) Sherwood Site

(WNI) SHERWOOD SITE

1.0 SITE SUMMARY

1.1 Site Description and Mission

The (WNI) Sherwood Site is the location of a former uranium milling site that operated from 1978 until 1984. The site is located near the town of Wellpinit, in western Washington State on the Spokane Indian Reservation. The former mill site is licensed and was operated by Western Nuclear, Inc. (WNI), and covers approximately 154 hectares (380 acres), including a 38-hectare (94-acre) disposal cell used to dispose of the uranium mill tailings and other process-related wastes generated from mill operations. The primary land use in the vicinity of the site is logging, livestock grazing, and wildlife habitat.

The disposal cell is located approximately 1.6 kilometers ( 1 mile) northeast of the Spokane River arm of Roosevelt Lake. It is in the northern portion of the


Major Long-Term Stewardship Activities - disposal cell monitoring; groundwater monitoring Total Site Area- 154 hectares (380 acres) Estimated Volume of Residual Contaminants- disposal cell: soil268,000 cubic meters (350,000 cubic yards), 2.9 million tons of mill tailings; groundwater unknown Long-Term Stewardship Start-End Years- 2000-in perpetuity Average Annual Long-Term Stewardship Cost FY 2000-2006- $38,700 Landlord- U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction Office

tailings impoundment area and has an elevation of 563.8 meters (1,850 feet) above sea level, at its southern boundary, and 710 meters (2,330 feet) above sea level, at its northern boundary. Drainage on the site is toward the south and southwest. The site also includes a groundwater monitoring network and surface water diversion channel. The site is underlain by alluvium and a conductive bedrock zone.

The (WNI) Sherwood 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 active when UMTRCA was passed, or thereafter. The majority of the mining and milling conducted at these sites was for private sale. As such, DOE is responsible for performing long-term stewardship activities at the site, but is not responsible for site remediation.

The historic mission of the site was to provide uranium concentrate exclusively to private industry. Reclamation of the site has been completed, and there is no ongoing mission. In 2000, the site will be transferred to the DOE Grand Junction office, which will perform long-term stewardship activities. After transfer, the site's mission will be long-term surveillance and maintenance of the disposal cell, and groundwater monitoring.

1.2 Site Cleanup and Accomplishments

Mill decommissioning activities were initiated in 1992 and were completed in 1995. Washington State regulations prohibit proliferation of small disposal sites; therefore, contaminated materials from the mill site were consolidated in one disposal cell. Acid-leached tailings were neutralized with lime prior to disposal. Approximately 2.9 million tons of uranium mill tailings are disposed of in the cell. In addition, 268,000 cubic meters (350,000 cubic yards) of contaminated soil, building equipment, and debris were removed from the mill site and were also disposed of in the disposal cell. The mill debris had been encapsulated in a compacted clay liner, and a cover was placed within the synthetically lined tailings impoundment prior to the final reclamation of the tailings impoundment.

A containment dam was constructed at the down gradient (south) face of the disposal cell to enclose the disposal

Washington 65

National Defense Authorization Act (NOAA) Long-Term Stewardshi11 Report

cell drainage area, and riprap (a rocky layer) was used to stabilize the downslope face of the embankment. The disposal cell has a synthetic liner over the bottom and sides of the cell and is capped with between 4 and 6 meters (12.5 and 20 feet) of uncompacted local soil, 15 centimeters (6 inches) of topsoil, and self-sustaining vegetation, including native grass, shrubs, and trees as a radon barrier.

0 0.5

Miles

(WNI) Sherwood Site

To Spokane, WA (-35 miles)

As a result of the tailings neutralization process, there are few hazardous constituents identified in the tailings fluid in concentrations above background groundwater concentrations or state or federal standards. Groundwater outside the tailings impoundment is apparently not contaminated. However, groundwater in the vicinity of the former tailings impoundment may be contaminated.

No active remediation is planned. DOE will conduct groundwater monitoring for designated indicator parameters and will collect samples annually from three monitoring wells, including one background well and two point-ofcompliance wells. Indicator parameters will include sulfates, chloride, and total dissolved solids. Groundwater monitoring results will be included in the annual inspection report for the site. Any changes in the groundwater monitoring plan indicated by the groundwater monitoring data will be coordinated with the Spokane Tribe and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and will be submitted to the NRC for review and approval.

2.0 SITE-WIDE LONG-TERM STEWARDSHIP

2.1 Long-Term Stewardship Activities

The DOE Grand Junction Office will be responsible for performing long-term stewardship activities at the site. The disposal cell is within the reservation held in trust by the Bureau of Indian Affairs for the Spokane Tribe of

Washington 66

(WNI) Sherwood Site

Indians. DOE and the NRC will have permanent rights of access for necessary long-term stewardship and regulatory activities. These activities will include disposal cell surveillance and maintenance, and groundwater monitoring. DOE will perform long-term stewardship activities, as required under the NRC general license to maintain protectiveness and regulatory compliance. Access will be restricted through the use of barriers and warning signs, posted where historic roads cross the site boundaries. DOE maintains a 24-hour phone line for reporting site concerns. Drilling and other intrusive activities will be prevented within site boundaries through institutional controls. DOE will conduct an annual inspection to ensure the integrity of the cell covers and other engineered features and that institutional controls remain effective.

Site records will be kept in permanent storage at the DOE Grand Junction Office. The types of records to be maintained include characterization data, remedial action design information, the site completion report, the longterm monitoring plan, annual inspection reports, and monitoring data.

2.2 Specific Long-Term Stewardship Activities

Engineered Units

The Washington State Department of Health and Environment has indicated that the site reclamation design for the 38-hectare (94-acre) disposal cell meets state regulatory requirements for permanent isolation without ongoing active maintenance, and that the previous three years of state inspections found no long-term site instability. Therefore, the Washington State Department of Health and Environment anticipates that only minor site monitoring and maintenance activities will be required after termination of the state license and transfer of site custody to DOE. The

STAKEHOWER INVOLVEMENT

Because the (WNI) Sherwood Site is on Reservation land, the Spokane Tribe is provided the opportunity to review and comment on the Final Report on Reclamation Activities and other site documentation. Copies of the annual inspection report for the WNI Sherwood Site and other sites will be distributed to the Tribe, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the local library and any stakeholders that request copies. The report also will be published on the DOE Grand Junction Office website at www.doegjpo.com.

disposal cell's vegetated cover and rock-covered dam will prevent erosion, and the cover vegetation will prevent infiltration of precipitation into the disposal cell.

The reclamation site will not be fenced to allow access for cattle grazing and wildlife habitat. The reclamation site and disposal cell will require annual monitoring to ensure the integrity of the cap, vegetation, and drainage system. The site has a minimum 3.9- meter (13-foot) thick unconsolidated soil cover that acts as a radon barrier, as well as a rooting medium for natural vegetation. Vegetation on the disposal cell cover will be monitored by annual visual inspections. Any reseeding that is indicated as a result of visual inspection will be conducted in accordance with the specification for the disposal cell.

Groundwater

DOE will collect annual samples of groundwater from three monitoring wells in the vicinity of the former tailings impoundment. Additional groundwater monitoring or remediation activities may be determined, in coordination with the Spokane Tribe and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (subject to NRC approval), depending on results of sampling.

2.3 Regulatory Regime

The site was licensed to WNI by the Washington State Department of Health and Environment, Division of Radiation Protection, under the NRC's Agreement State licensing program. The Washington State Department of Health and Environment was responsible for overseeing all reclamation of the Site. Reclamation of the site has been completed and there is no ongoing mission for the site, except for long-term surveillance of the disposal

Washington 67

National Defense Autho1·ization Act (NDAA) Long-Term Stewardship Report

cell by DOE. Because the disposal cell is located on the Spokane Indian Reservation, which is owned by the Federal Government and held in trust for the Tribe, no agreement of transfer is required to convey property rights for the (WNI) Sherwood Site to DOE. In accordance with the provisions of Section 83(b )(8) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, DOE and the Spokane Tribe of Indians have executed an agreement that provides DOE with the necessary rights of site access to carry out its mission in accordance with the terms of the NRC license for the site. The Agreement has not yet been signed, but all parties are expected to do so.

The site is regulated under the Title II provisions of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 (UMTRCA). The Washington State licensing program for UMTRCA Title II sites operates under state regulation as part of the Agreement State Program. The Washington State Department of Health and Environment will terminate the state license for the (WNI) Sherwood Site in accordance with NRC requirements. A perpetual care and maintenance fund is to be transferred to the Federal Government in accordance with NRC license termination procedures.

DOE anticipates that the state license for the site will be terminated sometime in the second half of 2000. As part of transfer of the site to DOE, the site will come under a general license issued by NRC for custody and long-term care of residual radioactive disposal sites (contained at Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 40.28). The purpose of the general license is to ensure that such sites will be cared for in a manner that protects human health and safety and the environment. The general license will go into effect when NRC concurs that the site conforms to cleanup standards and formally accepts the site-specific long-term surveillance plan. DOE will be the long-term custodian for the site under the NRC license for long-term surveillance. States do not have right of first refusal for long-term custody of federally-owned Title II sites that are located on reservation land. The Spokane Tribe of Indians and the Bureau oflndian Affairs will review any changes to the site's long-term surveillance plan.

In addition to UMTRCA, long-term stewardship activities at the (WNI) Sherwood Site will be governed by several requirements in the following regulations: the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; a cooperative agreement between DOE and the State of Washington; and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.

2.4 Assumptions and Uncertainties

The site's long-term surveillance plan is currently under review by the NRC. Significant revisions are not expected. Cleanup levels will be achieved before the site is transferred to DOE. Groundwater monitoring will be conducted to verify continued compliance with cleanup levels. Site inspections will continue indefinitely as a condition of the NRC license. Groundwater monitoring may or may not continue indefinitely, based on sitespecific hydrology and circumstances or until the cell demonstrates infiltration control.

3.0 ESTIMATED LONG-TERM STEWARDSHIP COSTS

Cost estimates are based on the actual cost oflong-term stewardship activities at this site and other disposal cells currently managed by the DOE's Grand Junction Program. The annual long-term stewardship costs are higher in fiscal year 2000 due to pre transfer requirements, including the development of the site's long-term stewardship plan and negotiating an access agreement with the Spokane Tribe of Indians.

Washington 68

(WNI) She1·wood Site

Site Long-Term Stewardship Costs (Constant Year 2000 Dollars)

Year(s) Amount Year(s) Amount Year(s) Amount

FY 2000 $52,900 FY 2008 $35,100 FY 2036-2040 $170,500

FY 2001 $41,600 FY 2009 $35,100 FY 2041-2045 $170,400

FY 2002 $36,100 FY 2010 $34,300 FY 2046-2050 $170,500

FY 2003 $34,900 FY 2011-2015 $163,500 FY 2051-2055 $170,400

FY 2004 $35,300 FY 2016-2020 $159,200 FY 2056-2060 $170,500

FY 2005 $35,500 FY 2021-2025 $159,700 FY 2061-2065 $170,400

FY 2006 $34,800 FY 2026-2030 $168,700 FY 2066-2070 $170,500

FY 2007 $35,300 FY 2031-2035 $170,400

4.0 FUTURE USES

The (WNI) Sherwood Site will be a permanent uranium mill tailings repository. The reclamation site will not be fenced to allow access for grazing and wildlife habitat.

For more information about the (WNI) Sherwood Site, 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 69

washington

Documents

site summary

site description

site cleanup activities

dawn fmd site dawn ford

wni sherwood site page

historic mission ofthe

department of energy

longterm monitoring