Science and Technology for Environmental Cleanup at Hanford (2001) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
2 Hanford Site Background
2 Hanford Site Background
Pages 11-39
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 11... ...
By the early 1 940s, the region had a population of about 19,000, supported mostly by farming and ranching. In December 1942, an officer assigned to the Army Corps of Engineers Manhattan Engineering District and two DuPont engineers began a tour of the western United States to locate a site for a highly classified "atomic" project associated with the war effort.
|
From page 12... ...
SOURCE: BHI, 1999, Figure 1-1; DOE, 1998a. south, on a plateau near the center of the site behind two elevated ridges called Gable Mountain and Gable Butte, two other industrial sites were established, referred to as the 200 East Area and 200 West Area, each containing two massively shielded chemical processing plants to dissolve the irradiated uranium slugs to recover plutonium.
|
From page 13... ...
The tanks were constructed below grade (note land surface at the rear of the photo) to provide radiation shielding.
|
From page 14... ...
Following the Soviet Union's detonation of its first atomic bomb in August 1949, a second expansion was undertaken that added yet another reactor, the REDOX chemical processing plant, additional underground waste storage tanks, and two waste evaporators to reduce the large volumes of tank waste being produced from chemical processing operations.4 The third and final expansion of the Hanford Site occurred during the peak of Cold War tensions during the Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson administrations: three more reactors were built along the Columbia River, another chemical processing plant (PUREX) went into operation, and additional underground waste storage tanks were constructed.
|
From page 15... ...
. Facility Operation Start Operation End Date Date Production Reactors B-Reactor 1944 1968 D-Reactor 1944 1967 F-Reactor 1945 1965 H-Reactor 1949 1965 DR-Reactor 1950 1964 C-Reactor 1952 1969 KW-Reactor 1954 1970 KE-Reactor 1955 1971 N-Reactor 1963 1987 Fuel Processing Facilities T-Plant 1944 1956 B-Plant 1945 1952 REDOX 1952 1967 U-Plant 1952 1958 PUREX 1956 1990 Materials Processing Plutonium Finishing Plant 1949 1989 Hiah-Level Waste Tanks B-Tank Farm 1945 Inactive T-Tank Farm 1945 Inactive C-Tank Farm 1946 Inactive U-Tank Farm 1946 Inactive BX-Tank Farm 1948 Inactive TX-Tank Farm 1949 Inactive BY-Tank Farm 1950 Inactive S-Tank Farm 1951 Inactive TY-Tank Farm 1953 Inactive SX-Tank Farm 1954 Inactive A-Tank Farm 1956 Inactive A)
|
From page 16... ...
The United States is now spending more than $1 billion per year at Hanford alone to manage residual waste and nuclear materials at the site and to clean up contaminated soil and grounclwater, reactors, tanks, chemical processing plants, and ancillary facilities. WASTE PRODUCTION AND MANAGEMENT The production of plutonium and other nuclear materials at Hanford consumed more than 95,000 metric tons of uranium fuel and created large volumes of liquid and solid wastes.
|
From page 17... ...
Although plutonium production took priority at the site, there was a concern about potential environmental impacts even from the earliest days of site operations. Programs were established to monitor and limit worker exposures and make environmental measurements of the Columbia River and its aquatic life, site vegetation, wildlife, and groundwater.
|
From page 18... ...
~8 Since and ~chno~ far e~nmen~/ Bang ~~'~;!
|
From page 19... ...
These contaminants are among the most significant potential environmental hazards that exist at the site today in addition to the spent nuclear fuel, high-level waste, and other nuclear materials under active management at Hanford. These releases can, for convenience, be grouped into the following three categories: (1 )
|
From page 20... ...
Liquid Waste Disposal Liquid radioactive and chemical wastes were discharged to the ground at all operating facilities on the Hanford Site. In terms of volume and toxicity, the most significant releases occurred in the 200 Area from chemical processing operations.
|
From page 21... ...
The following discussion is based on the inventory estimates given in Table 2.2. Chemical processing operations generated more than 500 million gallons of high-level waste with a radionuclide content of about 800 million curies.~5 This waste was transferred to the waste storage tanks by underground transfer lines.
|
From page 22... ...
Estimate does not include leaks from transfer lines and valves. eRadionuclides estimated to remain in plutonium production reactors and chemical separations facilities.
|
From page 23... ...
. These water discharges raised local groundwater levels beneath the 200 Area, thereby creating large groundwater "mounds" that changed local hydraulic gradients and promoted the movement of groundwater contaminants toward the Columbia River (Figure 2.6~.
|
From page 24... ...
24 Science and Technology for Environmental Cleanup ...
|
From page 25... ...
Large bodies of contaminated groundwater (groundwater plumes) are flowing southeast and northwest toward the Columbia River at rates of up to several tens of meters per year (Figure 2.8~.
|
From page 26... ...
26 Science and Technology for Environmental Cleanup 1 11 rrrrr~ "~_ 100 H ,_, Area I Area >~ ~ I 100 N ^t ~ Arca~ ~ ~ 100 F ~~ W~ ~S-Q. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ IO \_|'6ecorn'rnissior~ed3 ~ %~ ~ Om mu_ 'my 1` Hanford (1 200 Eastman - , cTowns~te ~ _ art\\\ Are ~ ~ 1` ~ _ L - ,, 200 W scam \1\~ l ERDF / 1`L(~ )
|
From page 27... ...
In the 100 Area, for example, leaking reactor cooling-water retention basins raised local groundwater levels, resulting in the creation of local springs along the riverbank as well as local changes in groundwater flow directions. The major releases have occurred in the 200 Area and involve
|
From page 28... ...
~1 W.~ ~, ~Ates _a f~s,l~ E98~0~214 Figure 2.8 Boundaries of major groundwater plumes at the Hanford Site: (A) radionuclide plumes, (B)
|
From page 29... ...
Hanford Site Background (B)
|
From page 30... ...
30 Science and Technology for Environmental Cleanup ; SIDEBAR,:(j1 ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ Th Range and lacustrIr~e :Group, or -.~-n~.~}ie Columbia .P t ~O Rome MUDS - basa.lts ~ And. ~~.~ ~ Panic ,~ die .p~a.ii of We Gil about ~ I..
|
From page 31... ...
Rather, leakage has been inferred by monitoring liquid levels in the tanks and by radiation monitoring in about 800 dry wells48 drilled in many of the tank farms (Figure 2.10~. The single-containment tanks were constructed beginning in 1945 and had a 20-year design life.
|
From page 32... ...
Vertical lines represent dry wells in which gamma-ray measurements were made to determine cesium concentrations. Tanks labeled in red font are known leakers.
|
From page 33... ...
By far the largest releases occurred from the eight "single-pass" production reactors in the 100 Area, which released about 1 10 million curies to the river (Heeb and Bates, 1994~.'9 Up to 200,000 gallons per minute of treated river water was used to cool these eight reactors, and as the treated water passed through the reactor cores, naturally occurring elements in the water became activated by capturing neutrons. Additionally, a small percentage of the radionuclides released to the water were fission products from damaged fuel elements.
|
From page 34... ...
Production activities in the 200 East Area have created large groundwater contaminant plumes that are discharging nitrate and tritium into the Columbia River downstream of the 100 Area (Figure 2.8~. About 3,000 curies, on average, of tritium is discharged into the river each year from the site, based on sampling data (e.g., PNNL, 1999, 2000a)
|
From page 35... ...
DOE's preferred alternative (Figure 2.11 ) includes the following provisions: 35 · The land surrounding the core of the Hanford Site (the Wahluke Slope north of the Columbia River and Arid Lands Ecology Reserve southwest of the Central Plateau)
|
From page 36... ...
Within the Central Plateau, the 200 Area will serve the site's continuing waste management mission. The major waste management Recreation (High Intensit!
|
From page 37... ...
· Facilities, with the exception of chemical processing facilities ("canyons") , will be torn down, and some may be covered with surface caps or barriers.
|
From page 38... ...
The tables list the material type requiring remediation, the corresponding HSDB assumptions, and data needs. A similar set of tables is available for the same three areas, which are titled "Identification of Differences and Issues for Material Type and Areas at Hanford."26 This has the advantage of referring to the Hanford Strategic Plan and to the environmental impact statements, environmental assessments, and records of decision to distinguish between disposition agreements, requirements, and assumptions.
|
From page 39... ...
Agreements are being reached one at a time. A system that generically addresses the concerns of site stakeholders using logical, scientifically based information could help accelerate these decisions.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.