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:

1 Context and Setting
Pages 4-7

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 4...
... weapons plutonium was produced and which used one reprocessing method to extract plutonium from irradiated nuclear fuels, the Hanford Site used three different methods for plutonium extraction and over time the resulting wastes were commingled and chemically altered in enormous underground tanks. The 177 tanks contain collectively about 211 million liters (about 56 million gallons)
Read the entire page →
From page 5...
... , because the SLAW must be treated concurrently to allow the HLW to be treated at the WTP's full potential capacity. In DOE's 2013 Record of Decision on Hanford tank waste management, DOE stated that it "does not have a preferred alternative regarding supplemental treatment for the LAW; DOE believes it is beneficial to study further the potential cost, safety, and environmental performance of supplemental treatment technologies" (DOE, 2013)
Read the entire page →
From page 6...
... The National Academies will publicly announce the specific dates for the meeting once these have been determined. To perform its peer review task, the National Academies formed a committee composed of 14 experts and one technical consultant whose expertise spans the issues relevant for reviewing the FFRDC's analysis, including risk assessments, cost estimation, cost-benefit analysis, waste processing, supplemental treatment approaches, legal and regulatory requirements, and large scale nuclear construction projects.
Read the entire page →
From page 7...
... April 2022 Anticipated month when the committee will receive the FFRDC's complete draft analytic report to review. Once the report is posted on the National Academies project website, the Academies will announce the start of the minimum 60-day public comment period and will begin collecting those comments for consideration in the second review report.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • review report
  • hanford nuclear
  • treatment approaches
  • public meetings
  • nuclear reservation

  • waste streams
  • waste forms
  • waste treatment
  • glass waste
  • treatment approach

  • public meeting
  • cementitious waste
  • draft report
  • academies committee
  • committee provides

  • weapons plutonium
  • continued analysis
  • authorization act
  • defense authorization
  • law treatment

  • waste management
  • review consists
  • final review
  • waste matter
  • waste form

  • doe national
  • review task
  • alternative treatment
  • regarding supplemental
  • iterative review


    • 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.