National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 4 Report Limitations
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Review of the Continued Analysis of Supplemental Treatment Approaches of Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation: Review #3. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26872.
×

References

Bates, W. F., D. T. Herman, C. A. Langston, D. T. McCabe, W. G. Ramsey, and M. E. Stone. 2023. Follow-On Report of Analysis of Approaches to Supplemental Treatment of Low-Activity Waste at Hanford Nuclear Reservation (Volumes I and II). (SRNL-STI-2023-00007). doi: 10.2172/1922493.

Bates, W. F. 2022a. Follow-On Report of Analysis of Approaches to Supplemental Treatment of Low Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation: Supporting Information Volume II. (SRNL-STI-2022-00185). doi: 10.2172/1863801.

Bates, W. F. 2022b. Follow-On Report of Analysis of Approaches to Supplemental Treatment of Low Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation: Volume I. (SRNL-STI-2022-00184). doi: 10.2172/1863802.

Connolly, K. J., and R. Pope. 2016. A Historical Review of the Safe Transport of Spent Nuclear Fuel, Rev. 1. (ORNL/ TM-2016/390; AF5865020; NEAF372; ORNL/SR-2016/261 Rev. 1). doi: 10.2172/1345783.

Daniel, R. C., C. A. M. Burns, R. A. Peterson, V. L. Saldana, and N. L. Canfield. 2020. Testing of an AP-105 Precipitation Simulant. United States. doi: 10.2172/1609062.

GAO (U.S. Government Accountability Office). 2021 Nuclear Waste Disposal: Actions Needed to Enable DOE Decision That Could Save Tens of Billions of Dollars. Edited by U.S. Government Accountability Office.

NASEM (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine). 2020. Final Review of the Study on Supplemental Treatment Approaches of Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation: Review #4. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

NASEM. 2022a. Review of the Continued Analysis of Supplemental Treatment Approaches of Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation: Review #2. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

NASEM. 2022b. Review of the Continued Analysis of the Supplemental Treatment Approaches of Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation: Review #1. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Niles, K. 2014. Hanford Cleanup: The First 25 Years. Oregon Department of Energy (September 2014). https://www.oregon.gov/energy/safety-resiliency/Documents/Hanford%2025%20Year%20Report.pdf.

Office of the Federal Register. 2013. 78 FR 75913 - Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington. National Archives and Records Administration.

U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management. 2020. Packaging and Transportation Safeguards for Shipment of Liquid Low-Level Radioactive Waste. https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2020/08/f77/Liquid-Transportation-Fact-Sheet-SRS-DWPF-08-04-2020.pdf.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Review of the Continued Analysis of Supplemental Treatment Approaches of Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation: Review #3. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26872.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Review of the Continued Analysis of Supplemental Treatment Approaches of Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation: Review #3. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26872.
×
Page 33
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Review of the Continued Analysis of Supplemental Treatment Approaches of Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation: Review #3. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26872.
×
Page 34
Next: Appendix A: Section 3125 of Fiscal Year 2021 National Defense Authorization Act and Section 3134 of Fiscal Year 2017 National Defense Authorization Act »
Review of the Continued Analysis of Supplemental Treatment Approaches of Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation: Review #3 Get This Book
×
 Review of the Continued Analysis of Supplemental Treatment Approaches of Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation: Review #3
Buy Paperback | $23.00 Buy Ebook | $18.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The Hanford Nuclear Reservation in the state of Washington produced about two-thirds of the nations plutonium for nuclear weapons from 1944 until the last reactor was shut down in 1987. The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) manages the ongoing clean-up at Hanford and has built a plant to convert the high-level radioactive waste into a glass form (vitrification) for safe disposal. However, decisions remain about how best to treat and dispose of the low-level waste at Hanford, which comprises over 90% of the volume of waste. To inform its decision, DOE contracted with key Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDC), led by Savannah River National Laboratory, to carry out an analysis. This final in a trilogy of reports from the National Academies reviews the FFRDC third report released in January 2023.

The review finds that the FFRDC team made a strong technical case that converting the supplemental low-level waste from the vitrification process to a grout form (like cement) is the best option in terms of cost-effectiveness and timeliness, and that off-site disposal of that grout is a valid option as it will be away from potable water. The FFRDC provided a useful framework to help decision-makers understand the issues and trade-offs of the disposal options and did an excellent job of isolating specific factual considerations that can be analyzed, often quantified, and compared with each other. The FFRDC chose to provide a purely technical analysis that excluded analysis of two important factors to be considered - securing regulatory permissions and public acceptance - treating them, for now, as uncertainties. Looking ahead, the DOE faces many uncertainties and should emphasize flexibility in its overall approach, allowing for multiple, redundant options and pathways, as well as the ability to change over time.

READ FREE ONLINE

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!