References
Cotton, F.A., G. Wilkinson, C.A. Murillo, and M. Bochmann. 1999. Advanced Inorganic Chemistry, 6th ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Croff, A.G., and S.L. Krahn. 2015. A Simple Improved Measure of Risk from a Geologic Repository. Proceedings of the 15th International High-Level Radioactive Waste Conference, Charleston, South Carolina, April 12-16, 2015.
Darab, J.G., and P.A. Smith. 1996. The chemistry of technetium and rhenium species during low-level radioactive waste vitrification. Chemistry of Materials 8(5):1004.
DNFSB (Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board). 1990a. DNFSB Recommendation 90-3, “Future Monitoring Programs at Hanford’s HLW Tanks.” Federal Register Notice Vol. 55, No. 62, March 30, 1990.
DNFSB. 1990b. DNFSB Recommendation 90-7, “Implementation Plan for Recommendation 90-3 at the Department of Energy’s Hanford Site, WA.” Federal Register Notice Vol. 55, No. 202, October 18, 1990.
DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1988. Disposal of Hanford Defense High-Level, Transuranic, and Tank Waste, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington. Record of Decision (ROD) for DOE/EIS-0113, April 8, 1988.
DOE. 2011a. Technology Readiness Assessment Guide, DOE G 413.3-4A, September 15, 2011.
DOE. 2011b. Radioactive Waste Management Manual, DOE M 435.1-1, Change 2.
DOE. 2013. Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington. Record of Decision. Federal Register Notice Vol. 78, No. 240, December 13, 2013.
DOE-EM (U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Environmental Management). 2018. Hanford Test Bed Initiative. Fact Sheet and FAQ. July 2018.
DOE-ORP (U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of River Protection). 2017. River Protection Project System Plan, Revision 8, ORP-11242, Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy’s Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management, October 2017.
Dunning, D. 2016. History of Vitrification at Hanford. Presentation to Oregon Hanford Cleanup Board. May 16, 2016.
Fuhrmann, M., and A.L. Schwartzman. 2008. Corrected Kd values for selenium. Health Physics 94(2):192.
GAO (U.S. General Accounting Office). 1991. Nuclear Waste: Pretreatment Modifications at DOE Hanford’s B Plant Should Be Stopped, Report to the Chairman, Environment, Energy, and Natural Resources Subcommittee, Committee on Government Operations, House of Representatives, GAO/RCED-91-165, June 1991.
GAO (U.S. Government Accountability Office). 2014. Hanford Cleanup: Condition of Tanks May Further Limit DOE’s Ability to Respond to Leaks and Intrusions, Report to the Honorable Ron Wyden, U.S. Senate, GAO-15-40, November 2014.
GAO. 2015. Hanford Waste Treatment: DOE Needs to Evaluate Alternatives to Recently Proposed Projects and Address Technical and Management Challenges, Report to the Committee on Armed Service, U.S. Senate, GAO-15-354, May 2015.
GAO. 2017. Nuclear Waste: Opportunities Exist to Reduce Risks and Costs by Evaluating Different Waste Treatment Approaches at Hanford, Report to Congressional Addressees, GAO-17-306, May 2017.
Helton, J.C., C.W. Hansen, and C.J. Sallaberry. 2014. Expected dose for the nominal scenario class in the 2008 performance assessment for the proposed high-level radioactive waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 122:267-271.
Lee, P. 2018. “Overview of the 2017 IDF Performance Assessment for LAW,” Washington River Protection Solutions, Public Meeting, Richland, Washington, February 28, 2018. http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/nrsb/miscellaneous/Hanford2/hanford8.pdf (accessed August 9, 2019).
Lukens, W., D.K. Shuh, N.C. Schroeder, and K.R. Ashley. 2004. Identification of the non-pertechnetate species in Hanford Waste Tanks, Tc(I)-carbonyl complexes. Environmental Science & Technology 38:229-233.
NASEM (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine). 2018a. Review of the Analysis of Supplemental Treatment Approaches of Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation: Review #1. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
NASEM. 2018b. Review of the Draft Analysis of Supplemental Treatment Approaches of Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation: Review #2. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Peterson, R.A., E.C. Buck, J. Chun, R.C. Daniel, D.L. Herting, E.S. Ilton, G.J. Lumetta, and S.B. Clark. 2018. Review of the scientific understanding of radioactive waste at the U.S. DOE Hanford Site. Environmental Science & Technology 52(2):381-396.
Roberson, J. 2001. Memorandum from Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management Jessie Roberson sent a memorandum to the Director of office of Management, Budgut, and Evaluation, Department of Energy. November 14, 2001.
Sattelberger, A.P. 2005. Technetium Compounds. In Multiple Bonds Between Metal Atoms, 3rd ed. F.A. Cotton, C.A. Murillo, and R.A. Walton, editors. New York: Springer. Chapter 7.
Schroeder, N.C., S.D. Radzinski, K.R. Ashley, A.P. Truong, and P.A. Sczcepaniak. 1998. Technitium Oxidation State Adjustment for Hanford Waste Processing. In Science and Technology for Disposal of Radioactive Tank Wastes, W.W. Schulz and N.J. Lombardo, editors. New York: Plenum Press. P. 301.
Sheppard, M., and D.H. Thibault. 1990. Default soil solid/liquid partition coefficients, Kds, for four major soil types: A compendium. Health Physics 59:471-482.
WRPS (Washington River Protection Solutions). 2018. “The Tanks.” https://wrpstoc.com/tank-operations/the-tanks (accessed June 12, 2019).
