Skip to main content

Review of the Continued Analysis of the Supplemental Treatment Approaches of Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation Review #1 (2022) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

2 The Committee's Technical Review of the FFRDC's Draft Analytic Framework
Pages 8-12

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 8...
... 2.1 QUESTION 1: DOES THE FFRDC'S REPORT CLEARLY LAY OUT A FRAMEWORK OF DECISIONS TO BE MADE AMONG THE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES, WASTE FORMS, AND DISPOSAL LOCATIONS? 2.1.1 Fundamental Constraints Faced with Cleanup of the Tanks The committee assesses that the FFRDC draft framework does not yet fully satisfy question 1, but 8
Read the entire page →
From page 9...
... (2) The costs of tank waste clean-up, under nearly any scenario, appear to far exceed current funding levels at Hanford.1 In 2019, GAO reported that the environmental liability costs at the Hanford Site increased by nearly $130 billion from fiscal years 2014 to 2018 and that most of the estimated increased costs are due to tank waste treatment.
Read the entire page →
From page 10...
... (2) Having the forthcoming FFRDC report address the risks associated with these potential leaking tanks as quantitatively as possible as well as potential structural failure of the tanks in a clear manner such that the decisionmakers will understand the magnitude of the problem and the potential risk and increased costs of the cleanup if waste retrieval is delayed until additional tank failures occur.
Read the entire page →
From page 11...
... 2.1.3 Organizing the FFRDC Analysis In addition to narrowing and defining the influence of the factors, the forthcoming FFRDC report needs to enable DOE and stakeholders to compare a limited number of alternatives according to the most decisionally relevant subset of factors. Using the FFRDC analysis, DOE will apply whatever process it deems appropriate to make the decisions.
Read the entire page →
From page 12...
... In Appendix D, in fulfilling its peer review function, the committee provides several observations on issues that the FFRDC might consider for its forthcoming report. The observations consist of issues relevant for the factors that the FFRDC is analyzing and comments on particular items of text in the FFRDC's draft framework.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • ffrdc draft
  • ffrdc report
  • tank waste
  • forthcoming ffrdc
  • ffrdc team

  • waste forms
  • relevant factors
  • hanford site
  • key factors
  • selection criteria

  • funding levels
  • ffrdc analysis
  • ffrdc compilation
  • draft report
  • tank space

  • waste treatment
  • current funding
  • review report
  • supplemental treatment
  • shell tanks

  • public meeting
  • major uncertainties
  • disposal locations
  • authorization act
  • relevant subset

  • treatment approaches
  • october public
  • treatment technologies
  • defense authorization
  • budgetary constraints


    • 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.