Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

Appendix F: FFRDC Response to National Academy of Sciences Recommendations for "Review of the Continued Analysis of Supplemental Treatment Approaches of Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation: Review #2"
Pages 53-56

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 53...
... : FFRDC Approach/Response Applicable Section A: Include a discussion of the tank integrity program with • Added References & Discussion of 1.3.2 references to describe the strategy that is adopted and the Hanford structural integrity programs status to provide perspective for decision makers. • FFRDC scope does not assess or predict structural failures B: The affordability concept should be removed from "the • Changed to "benchmark annual funding" Executive Summary, likelihood of successful mission completion" criterion and • Expanded discussion of insensitivity to 3.2, 4.1, 5.0, and 6.1 not assume any funding limit for this purpose.
From page 54...
... discussing what is known meets Class A enabling two off-site about public acceptance regarding potential grouted options SLAW disposal in Texas and Utah; and (3) providing more • Did not discuss Public Acceptance at offinformation surrounding the orphaned waste issue including site locations (consistent with approach specifics on how the issue might develop and what the to criterion 6)
From page 55...
... If regulatory and public acceptance factors were not considered, except as significant uncertainties, by the FFRDC in developing its recommendation this should be made explicit. NOTES: The first column is the NAS recommendation.


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.