Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Hanford”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Identification and Quantification of Technetium Species in Hanford Waste Tank AN-102

Technetium-99 (Tc) generated from the fission of 235U and 239Pu in high yields is one of the most difficult contaminants to be addressed at the U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Site. In strongly alkaline solutions typifying Hanford tank waste, Tc exists as pertechnetate (TcO4-) (oxidation state VII) as well as in reduced forms (oxidation state < VII) collectively known as non-pertechnetate species. Designing strategies for effective Tc management, including separation and immobilization, necessitates understanding the molecular structure of the non- pertechnetate species and their identification in the actual tank waste samples, which would facilitate development of new treatment technologies effective for dissimilar Tc species. Toward this objective, a spectroscopic library of the Tc(I) [fac-Tc(CO)3]+ and Tc(IV, VII) compounds was generated using a range of techniques and applied to the characterization of the actual tank waste supernatant collected from the tank 241-AN-102 at Hanford, WA. A sample of the 241-AN-102 tank waste supernatant was processed to adjust Na concentration to about 5.6 M and remove 137Cs by spherical resorcinol-formaldehyde (sRF) ion exchange resin. Cesium-loaded sRF column was eluted with 0.5 M HNO3. As received AN-102, Cs-depleted AN-102 effluent, and sRF eluate fractions were comprehensively characterized for chemical composition and speciation of Tc using 99Tc nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy and X-ray absorption spectroscopy. It was demonstrated for the first time that non-pertechnetate Tc present in the 241-AN-102 tank waste is composed of several low-valent Tc species, including the Tc(I) [fac-Tc(CO)3]+ and Tc(IV) compounds. This is the second experimental observation of the [fac-Tc(CO)3]+ species in the Hanford tank waste and the first demonstration of multiple forms of non-pertechnetate species existing simultaneously in the waste, cumulatively highlighting their importance for the waste processing.

Low Activity Waste (LAW), High Level Waste, nuclea↗
DOE OSTI2021

Measurement of Iodine, Iodide, and Iodate in Hanford Tank Waste: Technology Transfer from PNNL to Hanford 222-S Laboratory

This report summarizes the measurement of the inorganic chemical forms of iodine in Hanford tank waste. The Hanford tank wastes have roughly a part per million iodine. Part of the iodine is the long-lived beta emitter 129I, and the rest is stable 127I. Because tank waste iodine is radioactive and radiotoxic, its chemical form must be known so that its behavior in the vitrification process can be reliably known and anticipated in various waste streams (glass, secondary liquid and solid waste, and offgas emissions) at Hanford. Iodine in tank wastes exists in the inorganic chemical forms iodide and iodate (and possibly also periodate) and also as organic forms such as alkyl iodides. The measurement of organic iodides is very different from the measurement of inorganic forms and is outside the scope of this report. The inorganic chemical forms are chemically separated, in sequence, from the raw tank waste using solvent extractions and several redox reactions, then measured by ICP-MS. The inorganic chemical forms of iodine are chemically reactive, and so is the tank waste. The chemistry must be carefully designed to avoid unintended reactions that could convert one form of iodine to another during the analysis, which would skew the data and report iodine in the wrong chemical form. This iodine analysis, developed at PNNL, is being transferred to the DOE 222-S Laboratory on the Hanford Site, in Washington State, for implementation during waste processing operations.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

A History of Hanford Tank Waste, Implications for Waste Treatment and Disposal

More than 40 years of plutonium processing have left almost 56 million gallons of mixed radioactive waste sequestered in 177 underground tanks on the Hanford Site. Three different processing technologies were employed for plutonium purification in addition to uranium scavenging and fission product removal from the tank waste. All of these chemical processes have contributed to a complex waste stream that varies from tank to tank that presents downstream processing challenges to render the waste into a safe form for long-term storage. The current disposition pathway for Hanford tank waste is vitrification. To maximize waste loading and minimize the number of high-level waste canisters stored in a geologic repository, pretreatment of the waste is required. Both pretreatment and vitrification operations are impacted by the waste composition.

Separations, filtration, ion exchange↗
DOE OSTI2022

Measurement of Total, Elemental, and Methyl Mercury in Hanford Tank Waste: Technology Transfer from PNNL to Hanford 222-S Laboratory

This report describes the chemical separations used to measure the amount and chemical form of mercury in Hanford tank waste and provides the technical basis and recommendations for transferring and implementing this new ultra-trace mercury analytical technique at Hanford’s 222-S Laboratory. In the Hanford tank waste, mercury can exist as either elemental, inorganic, or organic mercury species. Of key interest is understanding the quantification and speciation of total (elemental + inorganic + organic), elemental, and organic (assumed to be only methyl mercury) mercury. The tanks may also have other organic mercury species, but their direct measurement is outside the scope of this report.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

Hanford Site Composite Analysis Special Analysis: Inventory and Solid Waste Release Modeling for the LLBG Sensitivity Case - UCAQ-22-01 Inventory Discrepancies for 218-E-12B, 218-W-3A, and 218-W-3AE in the Hanford Site Composite Analysis

This environmental calculation file (ECF) documents the methodologies, assumptions, and results of four sensitivity analyses that reevaluate the representativeness of solid-waste radionuclide inventory and release rate from three solid waste sites included in the recently completed Hanford Site Composite Analysis (CA) (DOE-RL-2019-52, Composite Analysis for Low-Level Waste Disposal in the Hanford Site Central Plateau (FY 2020), Rev. 1) (hereinafter called the CA Update). Specifically, this ECF reevaluates the representativeness of the base case inventory and radionuclide waste release rates from three solid waste sites (i.e., 218-E-12B, 218-W-3A, and 218-W-3AE) and two radionuclides (i.e., carbon-14 [C-14] and technetium-99 [Tc-99]). These three waste sites and two radionuclides were identified as being the most significant contributors to groundwater contamination and dose in the CA Update for the Inner Area boundary at times periods after the compliance period. This ECF first evaluates the representativeness of the C-14 and Tc-99 inventory and second, radionuclide release rates for the three waste sites1. If the inventory and release rates assumed in the CA Update are determined to be not representative, as hypothesized in the CA Update, then this ECF evaluates the impact of more representative inventories and release rates on the transfer of radionuclides to the vadose zone. The four analyses described in this ECF are as follows: 1) 218-E-12B C-14 Inventory and Release Rate Sensitivity Case – Determine the representativeness of the C-14 inventory and associated waste release rate from the 218-E-12B waste site assumed in the CA Update. If the inventory and associated waste release are more appropriately characterized as being different from the assumptions in the CA Update, then update the predicted C-14 release rate and compare the results to the results presented in the CA Update (DOE/RL-2019-52); 2) 218-W-3A C-14 Inventory and Release Rate Sensitivity Case – Determine the representativeness of the C-14 inventory and associated waste release rate from the 218-W-3A waste site assumed in the CA Update. If the inventory and associated waste release are more appropriately characterized as being different from the assumptions in the CA Update, then update the predicted C-14 release rate and compare the results to the results presented in the CA Update (DOE/RL-2019-52); 3) 218-W-3AE Tc-99 Release Rate Sensitivity Case – Determine the representativeness of the Tc-99 inventory and associated waste release rate from the 218-W-3AE waste site assumed in the CA Update. If the inventory and associated waste release are more appropriately characterized as being different from the assumptions in the CA Update, then update the predicted Tc-99 release rate and compare the results to the results presented in the CA Update (DOE/RL-2019-52); 4) 218-W-3AE Tc-99 Release Footprint Sensitivity Case – Determine the representativeness of the Tc-99 waste area footprint for the 218-W-3AE waste site assumed in the CA Update. If the footprint of the waste is more appropriately characterized as being different from the assumptions in the CA Update, then update the predicted Tc-99 release rate and compare the results to the result presented in the CA Update (DOE/RL-2019-52).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

Composite Analysis for Low-Level Waste Disposal in the Hanford Site Central Plateau (FY 2020) (Rev. 2)

This document provides an updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA). A Hanford Site CA was prepared and issued in 1998 (PNNL-11800) with an addendum provided in 2002 (PNNL-11800 Addendum 1). The CA was approved in 2002 (Frei, 2002) and has been maintained (DOE/RL-2000-29 and subsequent revisions) to support low-level waste disposal performance assessments (PAs) and disposal authorizations for facilities at the Hanford Site, including the following: Continued operation of the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) and the 200 East and 200 West Low-Level Burial Grounds; Construction of the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF); Forthcoming closure of tank residual waste systems such as Waste Management Area (WMA) C. The CA maintenance program resulted in a determination in 2015 (DOE/RL-2015-66) that the Hanford Site CA needed an update for the following reasons: While the initial Hanford Site CA has been maintained since 2001, the accumulation of basis changes reported in the annual summary reports over the succeeding 14 years merit evaluation in an updated analysis; The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Headquarters requested in a memorandum in 2015 (Gilbertson and Marcinowski, 2015) that “as soon as the relevant PAs are complete, the CA will be revised to account for all of the new information.” This updated Hanford Site CA accounts for the following new information: 1. Inclusion of a detailed Hanford Site baseline disposition that projects remedial activities through site closure. There have been significant changes through decision making in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) process that were not available when the original CA was produced; 2. Inclusion of an updated inventory basis, new modeling capabilities, and new decisions reached in the associated record of decision (ROD) that was provided by issuance of DOE/EIS-0391 in fiscal year (FY) 2013. Development of a Hanford Site groundwater model from the baseline provided in a technical transfer of models for the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0391) commenced in FY 2014 and resulted in the plateau-to-river (P2R) groundwater flow model that is used in this updated Hanford Site CA; 3. Accounting for pump and treat systems, which were not evaluated in the initial CA. Pump and treat systems have had significant impact on groundwater flow system behavior, contaminant transport, and contaminant removal from Hanford Site groundwater. This process is accounted for in the use of the P2R model for this updated Hanford Site CA; 4. Inclusion of water-level data collected since the initial CA was completed. Data collected as the unconfined aquifer water levels continue to recede since the cessation of large liquid discharges in the late 1990s have led to marked improvement in understanding of the flow system for future conditions, particularly regarding northward flow potential in the critical Gable Gap area. The calibration in the latest version of the P2R model accounts for this information; 5. Inclusion of results from the revised ERDF PA completed in 2013 (WCH-5209) that account for updated inventory and expansion of the ERDF facility to about twice the size that was evaluated in the original CA; 6. Use of updated geoframeworks to provide the structural basis for numerical fate and transport models in the groundwater pathway of this updated CA. The geologic basis for groundwater models has continued to improve with additional data collection and interpretation with the creation and maintenance of the Hanford South Geoframework and the Central Plateau Vadose Zone Geoframework tools; 7. Incorporation of updated tank residual inventory estimates. Tank residual inventory estimates have improved with the incorporation of tank retrieval inventory data for those tanks that have completed retrieval. The CA inventory data package includes this updated information; 8. Incorporation of WMA C PA results. Two additional PAs for tank farm closure decisions are in preparation during the period required to prepare an updated Hanford Site CA: WMA C (FY 2016) and WMA A-AX (in preparation). The WMA C PA results are incorporated into the updated Hanford Site CA, and its grouted residuals model is used as the basis for a release model to account for the other tank farm systems modeling in this updated CA; 9. An update to the IDF PA was submitted in FY 2017 and has been reviewed and approved. The results of the IDF PA are incorporated into this updated CA; 10. Updated risk assessment scenarios. The risk assessment scenarios currently in use for Hanford Site CERCLA and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) analyses differ from those evaluated in the initial Hanford Site CA. The representative person exposure scenario evaluated in this updated Hanford Site CA is consistent with recent PAs and CERCLA and RCRA analyses as the Hanford Site. This updated Hanford Site CA provides the following: A comparison of the updated Hanford Site CA all-pathway dose results with the performance measures during the compliance period, which is assumed to begin with site closure in calendar 2070 with the last scheduled disposal action and continue for 1,000 years postclosure (to calendar year 3069); A comparison of Hanford Site CA all-pathway dose results with the performance measures during the postcompliance period to address potential peaks beyond the compliance period. This is accomplished by evaluating dose in the period for 9,000 years following the compliance period (i.e., from calendar year 3070 to 12070).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2025

Evaluating Movement Patterns of the Rattlesnake Hills Elk Herd on Hanford for Calendar Years 2019-2024

Biologists first documented elk on the Hanford Site in 1972; since then, the elk herd known as the Rattlesnake Hills Elk Herd (RHEH) has grown substantially (PNNL-13331, Population Characteristics and Seasonal Movement Patterns of the Rattlesnake Hills Elk Herd: Status Report 2000). Through the 1990s, the core range of the RHEH was focused on the portion of the Hanford Reach National Monument known as the Fitzner-Eberhardt Arid Lands Ecology (ALE) Reserve. More recently, larger numbers of elk have been occupying the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Hanford Field Office (HFO), formerly the DOE, Richland Operations Office managed portion- of the Hanford Site, known as central Hanford (Figure 1-1). This began with bachelor groups of bulls occupying the site intermittently, and the herd has grown to resident herds, including bulls, cows, and calves. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) established a target herd size for the RHEH of less than 350 animals to minimize damages on adjacent private agricultural lands (Washington State Elk Herd Plan–Yakima Elk Herd [WDFW 2002]). Attempts to control the RHEH population through hunting on private lands and a relocation effort during 2000 have failed to limit growth of the population toward the WDFW target, and the herd exceeds 1,600 according to recent counts (PNNL-13331; DOE/RL- 2023-20, Hanford Annual Site Environmental Report for Calendar Year 2022). Although elk are present on central Hanford year-round, they continue to move between areas offsite, the ALE Reserve, and central Hanford throughout the year, and it is these movements that result in many of the elk-vehicle collisions (EVC) that occur along Hanford Site roads and on the Washington State highways bordering the site. In addition, changes in management strategies on the ALE Reserve, including recent and potential future tribal elk hunts, may alter herd behavior and result in additional animals transiting onto and off central Hanford.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Central Hanford Ecological Integrity Assessments: Final Report

The Hanford Site is comprised of an expanse of shrub-steppe habitats that provides exceptional ecological value to plants and animals located on the site and in the surrounding greater Columbia Basin. The U.S. Department of Energy, Hanford Field Office (HFO)-managed portion of the Hanford Site, referred to herein as Central Hanford, has been the focus of various ecological monitoring efforts, such as vegetation monitoring. The scope and goals of vegetation surveys have varied greatly since the Hanford Site was established, but studies have documented a rapidly changing landscape, making it clear that routine vegetation monitoring is integral to understanding ecological changes and preserving the ecological value of the Hanford Site. A new vegetation monitoring effort was initiated in calendar year (CY) 2023 and continued through CY 2025 using methods based on ecological integrity assessments (EIA) (NHR-2024-04, Field Manual for Applying Rapid Ecological Integrity Assessments in Upland Plant Communities of Washington State ) developed by the Washington Natural Heritage Program (WNHP), a division of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and NatureServe.® The methods were modified and supplemented to meet monitoring goals at the Hanford Site. The EIA monitoring effort consisted of field surveys to evaluate vegetation and soil conditions for upland habitats throughout Central Hanford. Vegetation cover estimates were used to score a variety of metrics for vegetation condition. This report summarizes monitoring methods, monitoring results, and provides management recommendations.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Evaluation of Data Catalog Software for Hanford Site Environmental Datasets

Environmental information and data underpin achievement of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) mission at the Hanford Site. The Hanford Environmental Data Management (HEDM) Program is the DOE Richland Operations Office (RL) approach to develop and implement a formal program for managing environmental data and the associated records, materials, and systems at the Hanford Site. The current project, contract, organization, and contractor-specific efforts at managing environmental data sets are insufficient to provide orderly, long-term, site-wide access. A vital element to be created within the HEDM program plan is a catalog of data sources, called the Hanford Environmental Information and Data Index (HEIDI), that will enable long-term access and retrievability for the multiple independent sources of data that might otherwise be difficult to discover. This report compares leading open source and commercial data catalog platforms using criteria to assess the functionality needed to develop the HEIDI catalog of Hanford data sources that connects and exchanges data with established Hanford Local Area Network (HLAN) enterprise information technology systems. Proprietary platforms evaluated included ArcGIS Enterprise Sites, Junar, OpenDataSoft, and Socrata, and non-proprietary platforms included Energy Data eXchange (EDX), Comprehensive Knowledge Archive Network (CKAN), and DKAN (a Drupal-based open data portal based on CKAN). Capabilities supporting data discoverability, retrieval, and archival, as well as metadata standard requirements and integration into the HLAN were rated as either failing to meet requirements (F), meeting requirements (M), or exceeding requirements by delivering additional desired features (E). The lowest rating for any capability area was assigned as the overall rating for the platform. These findings enable DOE-RL and the contractors implementing the HEDM plan to focus on candidate tools likely to meet the requirements for implementing HEIDI. All of the platforms receiving an overall rating of ‘F’ were unable to be deployed on Hanford infrastructure or within dedicated cloud resources. A propriety software-as-a-service (SaaS) model of delivering a data catalog (e.g., found in software such as Junar and OpenDataSoft) favors consistency across customers at the expense of customization and configurable roles that are needed for Hanford work. Hosting data on a shared commercial platform places limits on dataset size (maximum of 240 Mb for OpenDataSoft), a significant limitation for HEIDI implementation. EDX, a government data catalog based on CKAN, received the ‘F’ rating due to an inability to incorporate authentication from HLAN into the system. Among platforms rated ‘M’ or ‘E’, only the Socrata platform had a SaaS delivery model. In contrast to other SaaS platforms, Socrata provided custom roles and gateways that allow local datasets to be incorporated into an online catalog. Socrata also complies with the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program, a significant benefit for cloud-based management of Hanford data. The other platforms rated ‘M’ or ‘E’, ArcGIS Enterprise Sites, CKAN, and DKAN, provide fully self-hosted options, allowing for greater control and flexibility with the HEIDI catalog. These widely used tools have supportive communities of practice, extensive customization options, and demonstrated deployments that provide evidence that they can meet requirements, often deliver additional desired features, and work well with federal government systems. Completely customized alternatives built on a collection of applications were not evaluated because achieving similar performance to CKAN or DKAN requires substantial resources, especially in the absence of the active communities that have grown to support these tools. ArcGIS Enterprise Sites, Socrata, CKAN, and DKAN were evaluated as strong candidates for successful implementation with HEIDI.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Managing Hanford's Direct Feed Low Activity Waste Program - 20002

The Office of River Protection (ORP) is responsible for the management and completion of the River Protection Project (RPP) mission, which comprises both the Hanford Site tank farms operations and the completion and operation of the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Project. The RPP mission is to safely retrieve, treat, and immobilize Hanford's high-level and low-activity tank waste and close the tank farms to protect the Columbia River. The Direct-Feed Low-Activity Waste (DFLAW) Program is a major subset of the overall RPP mission, providing disposition of low-activity waste. The scope is to retrieve, treat, and immobilize the low-activity waste at the Low-Activity Waste Facility. DFLAW will begin operations no later than December 2023. The DFLAW Program overarches a suite of individual projects, activities, and infrastructure upgrades. The major projects and activities include multiple contractors under both ORP and the Richland Operations Office, underscoring the need for effective integration, coordination, and collaboration. The objectives of the DFLAW Program leadership team are to: - Effectively coordinate and integrate the projects that comprise the DFLAW Program - Manage the interfaces between the projects so that the integrated DFLAW Program is completed successfully - Ensure the DFLAW portfolio of projects operate as required without gaps or conflicts at the interfaces. DOE is accomplishing these objectives through a newly established leadership model that integrates the DOE and contractor work streams and promotes a teamwork model to enable collaborative success. Long considered one of the most formidable cleanup challenges at Hanford, the Department of Energy and its contractors are on the verge of achieving a cleanup commitment that has been decades in the making. DOE is preparing to vitrify (turn to glass) Hanford's chemical and radioactive tank waste using the DFLAW process. The Modified Consent Decree milestone for completing hot commissioning of the Hanford Site's Low- Activity Waste Facility is Dec. 31, 2023. While this milestone may seem distant under normal project management circumstances, it is a relatively short period of time for the operational and cultural transformation necessary to successfully begin treating tank waste at Hanford. Direct feed means separating the waste at a tank farm to remove the more radioactive portion (i.e., solids and cesium) so that the resulting low-activity (less radioactive) waste can be fed directly to the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant's Low-Activity Waste Facility. Starting DFLAW will require a singular, intensive leadership focus, along with a sustained, collective commitment to excellence and teamwork by the Department and its contractors. Major upgrades to Hanford's infrastructure will occur prior to startup. Supporting DFLAW operations requires significant integration between the DFLAW facilities - the Waste Treatment Plant, Hanford's tank farms, effluent treatment facilities, disposal facilities - and between all of the site contractors to achieve success. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

Hanford Site Rare Plant Monitoring Report for Calendar Year 2022

Rare plants are monitored on the Hanford Site as distribution and abundance data of current and historic rare plant populations are necessary to make well-informed environmental and ecological resource management decisions. The Central Hanford Rare Plant Management Plan (DOE/RL-2021-35) guides rare plant monitoring methodology in the context of resource management at the Hanford Site. In 2022, a rare plant monitoring effort occurred on the portion of the Hanford Site (referred to herein as Central Hanford) managed by the U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL; Figure 1). The goal of this effort was to revisit known occurrences of upland rare plant populations on Central Hanford to improve baseline information on locations of rare plant populations on the Hanford Site. Rare upland plants were thoroughly surveyed in 2021 but unusually low precipitation that year limited germination of many upland annual plants. Surveys in 2022 focused on rare upland annual species after the Hanford Site received higher than average spring precipitation that was expected to increase germination. Rainfall from April 2022 to June 2022 was 76% higher than average; however, these months were also colder than average. Winter rainfall from January 2022 to March 2022 was 84% lower than average. The high spring precipitation in 2022 appears to have triggered the germination of some populations of rare upland annuals but the dry winter and cold spring may have inhibited others. Population stability, viability, and threats were evaluated and will be used to inform future management of rare plant species.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Hanford Site Roadside Bird Surveys Report for Calendar Years 2021-2023

The U.S. Department of Energy, Hanford Field Office (HFO) conducts ecological monitoring on the Hanford Site to collect and track data needed to ensure compliance with an array of environmental laws, regulations, and policies governing HFO activities. Ecological monitoring data provide baseline information about the plants, animals, and habitats under HFO stewardship at Hanford which is required for decision-making under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). The Hanford Site Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP, DOE/EIS-0222-F), which is the Environmental Impact Statement for Hanford Site activities, helps ensure that HFO, its contractors, and other entities conducting activities on the Hanford Site are in compliance with NEPA.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Townsend's Ground Squirrel Conservation on the Hanford Site for Calendar Year 2025

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Hanford Field Office (HFO) conducts ecological monitoring on the DOE-managed portion of Hanford Site (hereby referred to as Central Hanford) to collect and track data needed to ensure compliance with an array of environmental laws, regulations, and policies governing HFO activities. Ecological monitoring data provides baseline information about the plants, animals, and habitat under HFO stewardship on the Hanford Site, which is required for accurate ecological impact assessment decision making under the National Environmental Policy Act and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. In addition, ecological monitoring helps ensure that HFO, its contractors, and other entities conducting activities on the Hanford Site are in compliance with DOE/EIS-0222-F, Final Hanford Comprehensive Land Use Plan Environmental Impact Statement. HFO places priority on monitoring plant and animal species or habitats that have specific regulatory protections or requirements; that are rare and/or declining (federal or state listed endangered, threatened, or sensitive species); or are of significant interest to federal, state, or tribal governments or to the public.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

The legacy of weapons grade plutonium production: Health status of Hanford complex workers who manage the waste

The extent and etiology of health effects in workers who maintain underground storage tanks at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation (Hanford) have been subjects of controversy and concern for several decades. Hanford is a decommissioned nuclear production complex managed by the US Department of Energy in southeast Washington State. This integration-of-evidence review evaluates the relationship between exposure to vapors from mixed chemical and radioactive waste stored in underground storage tanks at Hanford and worker health. Hanford workers’ health information was gathered from technical reports, media reports, and published literature, including the systematic search of seven databases. This review describes the health status and health concerns of Hanford tank farm workers based on the integration of the available health effects data from disparate sources. In interviews with external groups, Hanford workers reported both irritant-type symptoms and diseases that they believe are attributable to tank farm vapors. However, the results of this integration-of-evidence review indicated that no pervasive pattern of occupational disease was identified that can be associated with exposure to tank farm vapors. Inhalation exposure to asbestos and beryllium is associated with lung disease from various types of nuclear industry work but not from work on tank farms. This review concluded that while irritant-type symptoms and isolated cases of occupational disease are plausible under certain conditions, the currently available data do not support a pervasive pattern of occupational disease associated with vapor exposure.

Cherry, Debra↗
DOE OSTI2019

Review of Amendment Delivery and Distribution Methods, and Relevance to Potential In Situ Source Area Treatment at the Hanford Site

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Hanford Site in southeastern Washington State is a complex of multiple facilities where historical release events in the Central Plateau area have resulted in subsurface contamination of the vadose zone, a perched-water zone, and underlying aquifer. Although some contaminants have already migrated through the vadose zone into the groundwater, contaminants remaining in the unsaturated zone are a potential long-term risk as a source for further groundwater contamination. Moreover, a perched-water zone located in the 200-DV-1 Operable Unit at Hanford creates further remediation difficulties. Remediation options are limited for contaminants located in the vadose and perched-water zones within the Central Plateau due to considerable depth, co-located contaminants, and complexities associated with physical and biogeochemical heterogeneities. Existing comprehensive reviews discuss potential remedial technologies relevant to Hanford Site conditions (e.g., deep vadose zone and perched water) and provide treatment technology recommendations. Many of the recommended in situ remediation technologies rely on introduction of amendments into the subsurface to achieve remedial goals. However, there are currently few review or guidance documents that provide a comprehensive look at mechanisms and considerations related to amendment delivery and distribution. This document summarizes amendment types, delivery techniques, subsurface access methods, and the applicability of delivery methods and amendments for specific subsurface target zones, including in the context of Hanford Central Plateau applications. Guidance on the appropriateness of a remedial technology for a specific site and contaminant is not included within this document. Rather, this document is intended to be used when considering remediation technologies and the associated amendments. An overview of amendment types (i.e., liquid, gas, and solids) and access/distribution methods used in subsurface remediation is provided, along with discussion of the maturity level (low, medium, or high), advantages, and limitations that relate to the potential effectiveness of each approach in the context of site-specific factors (subsurface geology, geochemistry, contaminant properties, etc.). There are many Hanford Site-specific factors that influence the suitability and appropriateness of amendment delivery strategies. Excluding amendment delivery approaches that are unsuitable for the Hanford context, each approach was assessed for applicability to the following target zones: unsaturated high permeability, unsaturated low permeability, perched water, saturated high permeability, and saturated low permeability zones. This compilation and discussion related to amendment delivery mechanisms provides a useful resource for evaluating remedial alternatives for source area contamination in the Hanford Central Plateau.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

2023 Central Hanford Ecological Integrity Assessments Monitoring Report

The Hanford Site is comprised of an expanse of shrub-steppe habitats that provides exceptional ecological value to plants and animals located on the site and in the surrounding greater Columbia Basin. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-managed portion of the Hanford Site, referred to from here on as Central Hanford, has been the focus of various ecological monitoring efforts, including vegetation monitoring. The scope and goals of vegetation surveys have varied greatly since the Hanford Site was established, but previous studies have documented a rapidly changing landscape, making it clear that continued vegetation monitoring is integral to preserving the ecological value of Central Hanford. A new vegetation monitoring effort was initiated in 2023 using methods based on ecological integrity assessments (EIA) (Natural Heritage Report [NHR] 2020-05) developed by the Washington Natural Heritage Program (WNHP), a division of the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and NatureServe®. The methods were modified and supplemented to meet monitoring goals at the Hanford Site. The 2023 EIA monitoring effort consisted of field surveys to evaluate vegetation and soil condition across Central Hanford. Surveys were focused on upland habitats, and areas under consideration for upcoming projects were prioritized. Vegetation cover estimates were used to score a variety of metrics for vegetation conditions in each area. In 2023, approximately half of the site was surveyed. Monitoring methods and results for the 2023 field season are summarized in this report, and management recommendations are also provided.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 98B: Treatment of Low-Activity Tank Waste at Hanford: Considering the Alternatives

This panel focused on alternative treatment of the Hanford Low-Activity Tank Waste. Currently, Tank Waste at the Hanford Site is to be separated into low-activity (LAW) and high-level waste (HLW) fractions, and then vitrified to produce immobilized LAW glass for onsite disposal, and HLW glass for ultimate geologic disposal. This panel discussed several commissioned studies by the National Laboratories, National Academies, and General Accountability Office to evaluate the risks, costs, and benefits associated with considering options for immobilizing portions of the Hanford LAW waste forms. Panelists with presentations: Analysis of Supplemental Treatment Approaches for Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation Overview and Conclusions (Michael Stone); Analysis of Supplemental Treatment Approaches for Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation: Disposal Performance Evaluation (Tom Brouns); National Academies Review of the Study on Supplemental Treatment Approaches of Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation (Charles Ferguson); GAO Observations on Immobilizing Low-Activity Waste at DoE's Hanford Site (David Trimble)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗