Our Sponsors:

Read more »

Trending Stories

Our Members

Many thanks to Cindy Jennings and Michael Gallagher some of our many supporters.


Most Commented


    Hanford: Can't anybody here clean up a mess?

    After decades of pollution, the feds face a deadline in 2019. Seven years might sound like a lot of time but expectations of a federal request for a delay are already rising.

    Part of the Hanford site where a glassification, or vitrification, plant is being constructed

    Part of the Hanford site where a glassification, or vitrification, plant is being constructed U.S. Department of Energy

    Part of the cleanup at Hanford

    Part of the cleanup at Hanford EPA

    Serious cracks are appearing in Hanford's ability to meet its 2019 deadline to begin glassifying the site's most deadly wastes. Unresolved technical issues in a radioactive-waste-glassification plant could force Hanford to reorganize its schedule and budget to build the complex — meaning the start-up date could be delayed.

    It's the kind of problem that has occurred repeatedly in the efforts to address the daunting challenges of cleaning up the environment around the nuclear reservation that has been a center of production since the first atomic weapons were created.

    Hanford in southeastern Washington is arguably the most radiologically and chemically contaminated spot in the Western Hemisphere. Hanford's biggest clean-up project is to convert 53 million gallons of highly radioactive sludge in 177 underground tanks to a benign glass, to be stored for 10,000 years somewhere that is still undecided.

    The federal Department of Energy and lead contractor Bechtel National are designing and building a complex to put the wastes into glass form in central Hanford. But it is a troubled effort, with a long history of delays and cost increases.

    The most troubled part of the complex is a facility, dubbed the "pretreatment plant," that will take numerous types of radioactive liquids and sludges through 38 mixing tanks to prepare the material for glassification.

    The unresolved technical issues include whether the wastes will erode or corrode the tanks; whether hydrogen gases could cause flames or explosions that will damage the tanks and pipes; whether uncontrolled bursts of radiation will occur; whether the pipes could clog up with radioactive sludge; and what the chemical compositions of the various types of radioactive wastes will be.

    The importance of addressing these questions in advance is heightened by the fact that the interior of the pretreatment building will be highly radioactive and people will not be able to go inside most of the facility. Therefore, repairs will be extremely difficult and will have to be done by remote control.

    Susan Leckband, chair of the Hanford Advisory Board — a 32-member body representing the entire Hanford political spectrum in the Northwest, including state agencies, environmentalist, tribes, and Tri-Cities interests — said recently that the unresolved technical issues will likely lead to reorganizing the glassification complex's schedules and budgets.

    She said that whenever Hanford has done a revamp of this size in the past, the Department of Energy usually seeks changes in its legal deadline and overall budget for Hanford, a legal arrangement that is enforced by Washington's Department of Ecology and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. That revamping will also be prompted by the Obama administration asking Congress for $200 million less than needed for fiscal 2013 to keep Hanford's tank wastes project on schedule, Leckband said. 

    Legally, glassification, also called "vitrification," is supposed to begin in 2019. All the tank wastes are supposed to be dealt with by 2047, according to the legal contract dubbed the "Tri-Party Agreement."

    DOE does not know yet whether it will have to seek a delay in the project's Tri-Party Agreement deadlines, including the 2019 start-up date, said Scott Samuelson, manager of DOE's Office of River Protection, which is the federal sub-agency in charge of the glassification project. DOE has told Bechtel to study the timetable matter, especially under the current budget situation, with a report due in August.

    Samuelson and Leckband both spoke at a heavily attended March 22 meeting in Kennewick of the federal Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board to discuss those unresolved technical and safety issues at the pretreatment plant. The federal defense board, based in D.C., keeps tabs on and advises on technical issues on the cleanup of nuclear sites for the Department of Energy. The board has some — but not total— regulatory clout in watchdogging the Department of Energy, which sometimes creates tensions between the two federal agencies.

    The defense board got involved in the issues in 2010 after being contacted by Hanford whistleblower Walt Tamosaitis. Tamosaitis is a veteran Hanford URS Corp. engineering team leader who used to be in charge of making sure the 38 mixing tanks in the pretreatment plant would work as planned. The deadline to fix those design problems was June 30, 2010. DOE  was supposed to pay Bechtel and its lead subcontractor URS Corp. $5 million for meeting that deadline. At that time, DOE, Bechtel and URS agreed that the deadline was met, justifying the $5 million payment.

    Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!


    Posted Mon, Apr 9, 4:34 p.m. Inappropriate

    The Waste Treatment Plant is critical to immobilizing millions of gallons of nuclear waste, and keeping contamination out of the Columbia River. Many top engineers and scientists have been speaking out about concerns for the pre-treatment facility including Walt Tamosaitis, Donna Busche and Don Alexander. These concerns need to be solved and the design fixed before building (and operating!) a flawed facility.

    If you'd like to speak with one of the whistleblowers, come hear Donna Busche, the Waste Treatment Plant's Nuclear Safety Manger, on Friday, April 20th from 5-6:30pm at the Hanford Challenge office in Pioneer Square http://www.facebook.com/events/121359177988193/


    Posted Tue, Apr 10, 12:30 a.m. Inappropriate

    Trying to fix the mess at Hanford is an endless waste of effort. The contractors suck up all the money and nothing ever gets done. So it's time to start thinking outside the kitty litter container. The more creative solution would be to just leave Hanford alone and glassify the Tri-Cities instead. Each of the three burgs (whatever their names are) could be domed with a different flavored vitreous tint -- chocolate, strawberry and Yakima Vanilla Mint Chip. The obligatory cherry on top could be Chihulyized: instead of smooth and round it would have voluptuous tentacles like an octopus. It would rotate and whistle in the wind and mostly point down the road toward Walla Walla. After the Tri-Cities you better believe that Walla Walla can look mighty dad-gummed good.


    Posted Sat, May 19, 9:31 p.m. Inappropriate

    There is no shortage of people who can put their finger on the problem. What is needed is someone at the top who can turn it around and make this a successful project. It can not be successful if senior managers ignore or avoid confronting technical issues.

    Where would the Nuclear Navy be if Admiral Rickover's organization acted like the Hanford Bunch? The USS Nimitz would never had made it.

    FACTOID: The DOE senior safety manager slept through my 2002 ANS presentation (see my web site) on how the Nuclear Navy managed to build the USS Nimitz on time, using fundamentally different leadership and management than is currently in place at Hanford (both Bechtel and DOE). The chickens are coming home to roost, so I am pleased about that, but not so happy about the WTP and its failure to face reality.

    Bechtel and DOE simply do not know how such things have to be done, and neither does the NRC. DNFSB is very good at identifying problems, and they like to use self-serving language like "They don't ALWAYS.." gag-me-with-a-spoon in their reports, but they don't know how to actually do the project right, either. NNSA is better since they tend to face reality (a lot of Navy people who work very hard and tend to face facts).

    I may be the only one left from the Nimitz PRECOMMUNIT Reactor Department who is not yet retired, but it would take a Presidential Executive Order to get me to help these guys. All those SES's and Senior Project Managers and they still have whistle blowers coming out their ears. Does not happen in the Navy.

    FACTOID: Does anyone remember Jim Stone from Rocky Flats Plant (1989)? He did DOE a big favor by warning about Pu in the Pu-building ducts, but he still lost his job despite the independent criticality safety team's discoveries and the report that proved him right. He died a pauper, ignored by DOE and the DOE GC. Hanford will not succeed under any of these people, and the whistle blowers will get screwed by Bechtel as well as DOE, as usual.

    It is only a matter of time before Bechtel fails, gets fired, and another company gets to try it again. Technology is based on facts and reality, not on wishful thinking!

    Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.

    Join Crosscut now!
    Subscribe to our Newsletter

    Follow Us »