Skip to main content

Tank Waste Retrieval, Processing, and On-site Disposal at Three Department of Energy Sites Final Report (2006) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

XI Conclusions
Pages 121-126

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 121...
... tank waste remediation program. DOE has only the Savannah River Site and from tanks with leaks at the recently made public its justification for tank waste disposi- Hanford Site and assessing the uncertainties in the perfortion decisions and many of its quantitative examinations of mance of planned waste processing approaches, such as the questions relevant to the committee's charge.
Read the entire page →
From page 122...
... Following erly, decoupling for individual tanks need not delay the final closure, modification of stabilized tank waste that is left on- closure of the tank farms. There is little technical advantage site will be difficult, meaning that the form, concentration, in the accelerated closure of the tanks.
Read the entire page →
From page 123...
... was funded by is to adopt a more risk-informed, participatory, transparent, DOE's Office of Science and Technology to provide technical assistance and consistent decision-making process. Such a process, as with issues related to tank wastes at the Savannah River Site, Hanford Site, recommended in a previous National Research Council Idaho National Laboratory, Fernald Site, and West Valley Demonstration report (NRC, 2005b)
Read the entire page →
From page 124...
... The Hanford bulk vitrification process is currently committee reiterates, however, that DOE should seek alter- less well developed technically than either the Savannah natives to the DDA process, either by slowing waste inputs River Site saltstone or the Idaho National Laboratory steam (slowing operations or gaining efficiencies) or by finding reforming.
Read the entire page →
From page 125...
... The committee judges that monitoring in greater detail for processing purposes and to confirm within the disposal facility is the most desirable location for compliance with performance objectives, but this must be the early detection of problems, followed by detection in the done after waste retrieval when mixing makes representative vadose zone, and finally by detection in the nearest aquifer. sampling of the retrieved waste possible and when samples The committee's overall impressions are that the sites' moniof the tank heels can be taken.
Read the entire page →
From page 126...
... approach and by · Remediation of pipelines, leaking underground pipes following a risk-informed, consistent, and transparent and interwall spaces in double-walled tanks, and other methodology, such as the one outlined in a previous National auxiliary equipment in the tank farms could be challenging, Research Council report Risk and Decisions About Disposiparticularly at Hanford where there are about 100 plugged tion of Transuranic and High-Level Radioactive Waste pipelines (see Chapter III)
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • river site
  • idaho national
  • monitoring programs
  • monitoring program
  • monitoring plan

  • vadose zone
  • disposal facility
  • tank farms
  • tank farm
  • disposal sites

  • site characterization
  • disposal facilities
  • operations monitoring
  • waste treatment
  • tank closures

  • saltstone vault
  • overall impressions
  • performance assessments
  • resource conservation
  • individual tank

  • nearest aquifer
  • regulatory commission
  • desirable location
  • waste disposition
  • federal facility


    • 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.