Hanford site

Irradiated Fuel A historically important and continuing mission at the Hanford site is to chemically process irradiated reactor fuel to recover and purify weapons-grade plutonium. Over the last 40 years, or so, several processes and plants— Bismuth Phosphate, REDOX, and PUREX—have been operated to accomplish this mission. Presently, only the Hanford PUREX Plant is operational, and although it has not been operated since the fall of 1972, it is scheduled to start up in the early 1980 s to process stored and currently produced Hanford -Reactor fuel. Of nine plutonium-production reactors built at the Hanford site, only the N-Reactor is still operating. 

Plutonium Scrap Processing. In addition to recovering plutonium from irradiated reactor fuel, a Plutonium Reclamation Facility (PRF)( 7,8) is operated at the Hanford site to recover, separate, and purTfy kilogram amounts of plutonium from a wide range of unirradiated scrap materials. A 20 percent TBP-CC1 k solution is used to extract Pu(IV) from HN03-HF-A1(N03)3 solutions of dissolved scrap. 

Spent Zirflex Process Decladdent. The basic perceived need is to devise an3 develop a simple process for selective and efficient removal of plutonium (and 21 1Am) from spent Zirflex process decladdent solution. To satisfy this need, it may be necessary--or prove beneficial—to determine, by appropriate physiochemical methods, the nature of the plutonium (and americium) species in the decladding solution. Availability of a satisfactory transuranium removal scheme may be one of the key factors in devising an alternative to storage in expensive double-shell tanks for spent Zirflex process solution at the Hanford site. 

PRF—See Plutonium reclamation facility, Hanford site Procedure... 

Hanford. 1999. Hanford site environmental report for calendar year 1998. Sec. 2.5 Waste management. PNNL-12088, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA. http //www.hanford.gov/docs/annualrp98/sec2,5. December 12, 2000. 

Petersen GR, Gilbert ES, Buchanan JA, et al. 1990. A case-cohort study of lung cancer, ionizing radiation, and tobacco smoking among males at the Hanford site. Health Phys 58(1) 3-11. 

Fayer, M. J., Gee, G.W., and Jones, T.L., UNSAT-H Version 1.0 Unsaturated Flow Code Documentation and Application for the Hanford Site, PNL-5899, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, 1986. 

Hanford and Richland, Washington, was selected for industrial-scale plutonium production and chemical separations facilities on January 16, 1943. This site was named the Hanford Engineer Works (later named the Hanford Site). 

In only 30 months, the Manhattan Project built 554 buildings including reactors, separation plants, laboratories, craft shops, warehouses, and electrical substations. The Hanford Site plutonium production reactors (B, D, and F) were rectangular, measured 36 feet long by 28 feet wide by 36 feet high, used 200 tons of uranium metal fuel and 1200 tons of graphite, were water cooled, and operated at an initial power level of 250 million watts (thermal). They dwarfed the reactors at other sites. 

On September 13, 1944, the Hanford Site started the B Reactor. For approximately 1 hour all went well, but the reactor malfunctioned as a result of fission product poisons. On December 17, 1944, the Hanford Site D reactor was started and the B reactor was repaired and restarted. Large-scale plutonium production was under way. On February 25, 1945, the Hanford F Reactor was started. With these three reactors operating simultaneously, the theoretical plutonium production capacity was approximately 21 kilograms per month. 

Plutonium from the Hanford Site was shipped to Los Alamos every 5 days, and enriched uranium was shipped to Los Alamos from Oak Ridge. At 5 30 a.m. on Monday, July 16, 1945, the U.S. tested the first plutonium bomb, named Trinity, at the White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico. The bomb exploded with a force of approximately 18.6 kilotons. After this test there was no longer any question that the plutonium bomb would work. 

Gerber, M.S., The Plutonium Production Story at the Hanford Site Processes and Facility History, WHC-MR-0521, Rev. 0, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, WA, 1996. 

Gilbert, E.S. and Sever, L.E., Draft Presentation Studies of Congenital Malformations and the Hanford Site, PNL-10469-225, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, WA, 1987. 

FIGURE 3.25 Graphs of hydraulic conductivity vs. volumetric water content showing characteristic curves for different sediments from the VOC-arid site integrated demonstration at the Hanford site. 

Liu C, Zachara JM, Smith SC, McKinley JP, Ainsworth CC (2003) Desorption kinetics of radiocesium from subsurface sediments at Hanford Site USA. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 67 2893-2912 Loffredo E, Senesi N (2006) Eate of anthropogenic organic pollutants in soils with emphasis on adsorption/desorption processes of endocrine disruptor compounds. Pure App Chem 78 947-961... 

After a demonstration at the Hanford Site C Reactor in 1998, the DOE estimated that it would cost approximately 50,000 to remediate the 1956 contaminated lead bricks on site. Costs would range from 0.96 per pound if the bricks were presurveyed for contamination levels to 0.99 per pound if the bricks were not presurveyed. The presurveying option is less expensive because not all of the bricks would require decontamination. These estimates do not include money earned from the salvage value of the bricks (D198327, pp.l6, 17). The DOE notes that TechXtract was not cost effective at Hanford due to the cheap costs of landfill disposal at the facility (D222719, p. 6). 

Studies are being conducted by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) to investigate the use of clinoptilolite as an in situ permeable barrier to strontium (Sr °) migration in groundwater at the site referred to as the 100-N area of the Hanford Site. This technology uses clinoptilolite to absorb radioactive Sr ° from groundwater. 

Based on a cost analysis performed at the U.S. Department of Energy s Hanford site, in Richland, Washington, PSVE was found to be a cost-effective method for remediation of soils containing lower concentrations of volatile contaminants. PSVE used on wells that average 10 standard cubic feet per minute (scfm) airflow rates was found to be more cost-effective than active soil vapor extraction for concentrations below 500 parts per million (ppm) by volume of carbon tetrachloride. For wells that average 5 scfm, PSVE is more cost effective below 100 ppm (D14489S, p. iii). For further details of this analysis, refer to Table 1. 

Hanford Site, Richland, Washington, nuclear reactor Hexavalent Cr 1997 480,000 for design and installation... 

In 1995, the total cost to remediate 187,000 m of liquid high-level radioactive waste (HEW) at the Hanford site in Richland, Washington, was estimated to be 6,543 billion. Approximately 163 million was allocated to purchase the resin. The costs of the facilities and operations were estimated at 530 million. The remaining 5,850 billion were associated with the vitrification and disposal of the used resin (D19431U, pp. 5, 11). 

Yokel, J. and Delistraty, D.A. (2003) Arsenic, lead, and other trace elements in soils contaminated with pesticide residues at the Hanford site USA. Environmental Toxicology, 18(2), 104-14. 

Another credible assumption is that permanent access to the site could occur at the end of the 100 y period of institutional control. This assumption has been used in establishing waste acceptance criteria at all DOE low-level waste disposal sites (DOE, 1988c 1999c), including the Hanford site, based on an acceptable dose from chronic exposure of an inadvertent intruder of 1 mSv y Therefore, the waste acceptance criteria for the Hanford site already take into account an acceptable dose to an inadvertent intruder from permanent site occupancy, so the waste is acceptable for near-surface disposal as low-hazard waste according to this scenario without the need for further analysis. 

The most urgent needs were identified at the Hanford Site and SRS, where respectively 55 and 37 million gallons of alkaline HLW had accumulated from defense-related reprocessing activities. Other than the roughly 10-15% of the waste mass that consists of mostly metal hydroxide sludge, the bulk of the waste, often referred to as salt waste, can be described as a mixture of sodium hydroxide, sodium nitrate, and other soluble salts whose radionuclide content is dominated by 137Cs. 

High-level radioactive defense waste solutions, originating from plutonium recovery and waste processing operations at the U.S. Department of Energy s Hanford Site, currently are stored in mild steel-lined concrete tanks located in thick sedimentary beds of sand and gravel. Statistically designed experiments were used to identify the effects of 12 major chemical components of Hanford waste solution on radionuclide solubility and sorption. 

---