2015 

Hanford Lifecycle 

Scope, Schedule and 

Cost Report 

Approved for Public Release;

Further Dissemination Unlimited

DOE/RL-2014-11 

Revision 0 

2015 HANFORD LIFECYCLE 

SCOPE, SCHEDULE AND COST 

REPORT

Date Published 

December 2014 

Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy

Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management 

P.O. Box 550, MS A7-75 

Richland, Washington 99352 

Release Approval Date 

 

By Janis D. Aardal at 10:32 am, Dec 11, 2014

Approved for Public Release;

Further Dissemination Unlimited
DOE/RL-2014-11 

Revision 0 

LEGAL DISCLAIMER 

Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or 

service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does 

not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, 

or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof or 

its contractors or subcontractors. 

This report has been reproduced from the best available copy. 

Printed in the United States of America
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

ES-1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Purpose

This Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report (Lifecycle Report [LCR]) describes the scope, 

schedule and cost estimates for Hanford Site cleanup. This LCR reflects all cleanup work that is to be 

completed by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Richland Operations Office (RL) and Office of 

River Protection (ORP). 

The LCR is prepared and submitted by DOE to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and 

Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) annually by January 31, in time to support DOE’s 

annual budget process and to help inform decision makers about schedule and work prioritization. 

The LCR will serve as an agreed-upon foundation for preparing budget requests and for informational 

briefings to affected Tribal Nations, the State of Oregon, and Hanford stakeholders. The LCR supports 

continued discussions with EPA and Ecology on how and when RL and ORP will complete cleanup, and 

how milestone changes and adjustments will affect lifecycle scope, schedule and cost.

While it is important to understand what this report will do, it is just as important to understand what it 

does not do. This report does not make or replace any cleanup decisions, nor is it a Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 USC 9601) or Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (42 USC 6901) document. This report does not substitute for, nor 

preempt, the cleanup decision processes as set forth in the following:

 Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order1(commonly referred to as the Tri-Party 

Agreement or TPA)

 The Consent Decree in State of Washington v. Department of Energy, Case No 08-5085-FVS 

(E.D. Wa. October 25, 2010) (DOE and Ecology, 2010)

 Other legal requirements.

Background

On October 25, 20102, DOE, EPA, and Ecology (Tri-Party agencies) agreed to modify the TPA to 

incorporate a new milestone, M-036-01, requiring annual submittal of a LCR. The LCR reflects all 

actions necessary for DOE to meet all applicable environmental obligations.

The 2015 LCR is the fifth version and information reflects scope, schedule and cost status that is current 

as of August 31, 2014 (exceptions, such as the ORP last certified baseline (2009), are noted in the 

relevant sections of the LCR). Changes to cleanup obligations and related costs that have occurred after 

this date are noted in Section 1.5 and will be incorporated into future reports.

Public Involvement Process

The Tri-Party agencies encourage and support public participation, and believe it is essential to the 

cleanup process (Ecology et al. 2012, Hanford Public Involvement Plan). 

The ORP planning case in this LCR is the same as that presented in previous LCRs, based on the River 

Protection Project System Plan (ORP-11242, Rev. 4) in order to remain consistent with ORP’s last 

certified baseline and approved baseline change request. ORP expects to update the cost and schedule 

planning case in the LCR when a new baseline is approved and in place.

 

1

Ecology et al. 1989, Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, Washington State Department of Ecology, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington, as amended.

2 M-036-01 was negotiated as part of broader negotiations that occurred between the parties, culminating in the above-referenced 

Consent Decree and a package of TPA modifications, all of which became effective when the Consent Decree was signed and 

entered into Federal District Court on October 25, 2010.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

ES-2

The Tri-Party agencies will make the 2015 LCR available to all interested parties on the DOE website at 

www.hanford.gov. Feedback regarding the 2015 LCR will be considered as future reports are developed.

Feedback can be emailed until April 30, 2015, to lcssc@rl.gov.

Milestone Requirements

TPA M-036-01 requires that the LCR include all monitoring and related actions necessary to complete 

cleanup, and that it takes critical resource availability and the practical limits of project acceleration into 

consideration. Cost and schedule information in the LCR is to be presented at the project baseline 

summary (PBS) level, with costs to be provided at one level below the PBS, and at levels below that for 

the next 2 to 5 years (near term). The appendices of this report explain the preparation of the LCR,

including existing cleanup decisions, future cleanup actions, and detailed cost and schedule information.

Summary of Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost

Hanford Site cleanup consists of three major components: River Corridor Cleanup, Central Plateau

Cleanup, and Tank Waste Cleanup, which is located geographically within the Central Plateau. The 

cleanup also includes Mission Support activities that provide essential infrastructure and services to 

Hanford cleanup efforts or contractors. 

Hanford’s remaining active cleanup schedule covers activities for cleanup and waste management, 

leading to transition of portions of the Hanford Site to long-term stewardship (LTS). The active cleanup

schedule is from fiscal year (FY)2015 to FY2060, and LTS extends through FY2090. Although the time 

period evaluated in this report ends at 2090, LTS extends longer because some waste sites and disposal 

facilities will have caps that require maintenance and institutional controls beyond that date. The Federal 

Government plans on having a presence at Hanford well beyond FY2090.

This report presents RL and ORP configuration-controlled planning cases. The ORP planning case is the 

same as that presented in previous LCRs, and cost and schedule information are based on the River 

Protection Project System Plan (ORP-11242, Rev. 4) in order to remain consistent with ORP’s last 

certified baseline and approved baseline change request, which is the current technical baseline for ORP. 

ORP expects to update the cost and schedule planning case in the LCR when a new baseline is approved 

and in place.

The Hanford remaining estimated cleanup costs3total approximately $110.2 billion (Figure ES-1). This 

includes the estimated cost to complete cleanup within the River Corridor, Central Plateau, Tank Waste, 

and the Mission Support components, as well as reasonable allowances for cost and schedule 

uncertainties. Table ES-1 provides a summary of total costs by PBS.

The 2015 LCR total cost estimate is about $0.9 billion less than the costs for the same remaining work in 

the 2014 LCR. The difference is primarily due to refined estimates for RL work and LTS costs.

Remaining estimated cleanup costs do not include upper bound cost estimates prepared for selected future 

cleanup actions in prior LCRs. These costs are provided in Appendix B, Table B-5.

Cost Estimate Alternative Analyses for Selected Cleanup Actions

The Tri-Party agencies reviewed the alternative analyses included in the 2011, 2012 and 2013 LCRs, the 

level of effort required to conduct those analyses, and the benefits and insights gained from those 

analyses. After considering the remaining cleanup actions to be analyzed (Appendix B, Table B-6), the 

timing of anticipated regulatory decisions, the potential benefits and the effort required to conduct the 

analyses, the Tri-Party agencies agreed the 2015 LCR would not include an alternative analysis. Similar 

studies are performed elsewhere as required by other regulatory processes.

 

3

The expression “cleanup costs” is used to represent the costs for those remaining actions that are necessary for DOE to fully 

meet all applicable environmental obligations and complete the Hanford Site cleanup mission.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 ES-3 

Figure ES-1. Hanford Site Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year (includes both RL and ORP). 

Table ES-1. Hanford Site Remaining Cleanup Cost Estimates by PBS. 

Project Work Scope 

Estimated 

Cleanup Costs1 

(Billion $) 

NM Stabilization and Disposition – PFP (PBS RL-0011) $0.4 - $0.6 

SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) $0.5 

Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition - 200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) $7.5 - $7.8 

Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) $3.6 

Soil and Water Remediation - Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) $8.4 - $8.9 

Nuclear Facility D&D - Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040) $14.3 - $18.0 

Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) $3.9 - $4.0 

Nuclear Facility D&D - River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) $1.4 

Nuclear Facility D&D - Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) $0.9 - $1.0 

Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100) $1.2 

Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) $54.4 

Major Construction - Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) $2.2 

Hanford Site Total Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs $98.7 - $103.5 

Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS)2 $4.8

Final Reactor Disposition2 $1.9 

DOE-Office of Environmental Management Total Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs $105.4 - $110.2 1

 Cost ranges are shown in this table to reflect cost and schedule uncertainty where available, and the higher number is used 

throughout this report. Values are rounded, see Appendix C for details. 2

 Shown separate to align with DOE-Headquarters fund source accounting. 

D&D = decontamination and decommissioning. 

DOE = U.S. Department of Energy. 

NM = nuclear materials. 

ORP = U.S. Department of Energy, Office of River 

Protection. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations 

Office. 

SNF = spent nuclear fuel. 

$0.0

$1.0

$2.0

$3.0

$4.0

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060 2065 2070 2075 2080 2085 2090

Costs (Billion $) 

Fiscal Year 

See Appendix C for cost and schedule data. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 ES-4 

This page intentionally left blank. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 i 

CONTENTS 

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 1-1

1.1 PURPOSE OF THE LIFECYCLE REPORT .................................................................. 1-1

1.2 PREPARING THE LIFECYCLE REPORT .................................................................... 1-1

1.2.1 Tribal Involvement ............................................................................................. 1-1

1.2.2 Oregon Department of Energy ............................................................................ 1-2

1.2.3 Hanford Advisory Board .................................................................................... 1-3

1.3 HANFORD CLEANUP OVERVIEW ............................................................................ 1-3

1.3.1 Hanford Cleanup Goals ...................................................................................... 1-4

1.3.2 Hanford Cleanup and Management Areas .......................................................... 1-4

1.4 CLEANUP DECISIONS AND ALTERNATIVES ......................................................... 1-6

1.5 CHANGES FROM PREVIOUS REPORT ..................................................................... 1-8

1.5.1 Incorporated Changes ......................................................................................... 1-8

1.5.2 Future Report Changes ....................................................................................... 1-9

1.6 LIFECYCLE REPORT AND HANFORD BUDGET SCHEDULE ............................... 1-9

1.7 PLANNING AND INTEGRATION OVERVIEW ....................................................... 1-10

1.7.1 Annual Budget Formulation Process ................................................................ 1-10

1.7.2 U.S. Department of Energy Project Formulation Process ................................ 1-11

1.8 SCOPE, SCHEDULE AND COST FOR HANFORD CLEANUP ............................... 1-12

2.0 HANFORD LIFECYCLE SUMMARY ....................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 HANFORD SITE LIFECYCLE SCOPE ......................................................................... 2-1

2.2 HANFORD CLEANUP SCHEDULE ............................................................................. 2-2

2.3 HANFORD SITE ESTIMATED CLEANUP COSTS .................................................... 2-3

3.0 RIVER CORRIDOR CLEANUP ................................................................................................. 3-1

3.1 NUCLEAR FACILITY D&D–RIVER CORRIDOR CLOSURE PROJECT 

(PBS RL-0041) ................................................................................................................ 3-2

3.2 SNF STABILIZATION AND DISPOSITION (PBS RL-0012) ...................................... 3-6

3.3 FINAL REACTOR DISPOSITION ................................................................................ 3-8

3.4 RIVER CORRIDOR CLEANUP ASSUMPTIONS AND UNCERTAINTIES .............. 3-9

4.0 CENTRAL PLATEAU CLEANUP ............................................................................................. 4-1

4.1 NM STABILIZATION AND DISPOSITION–PFP (PBS RL-0011) .............................. 4-4

4.2 SOIL AND WATER REMEDIATION–GROUNDWATER/VADOSE ZONE 

(PBS RL-0030) ................................................................................................................ 4-7

4.3 NUCLEAR FACILITY D&D–REMAINDER OF HANFORD (PBS RL-0040) ......... 4-11

4.4 NUCLEAR FACILITY D&D–FAST FLUX TEST FACILITY PROJECT 

(PBS RL-0042) .............................................................................................................. 4-14

4.5 SOLID WASTE STABILIZATION AND DISPOSITION–200 AREA 

(PBS RL-0013C) ............................................................................................................ 4-16

4.6 CENTRAL PLATEAU CLEANUP ASSUMPTIONS AND UNCERTAINTIES ........ 4-20

5.0 TANK WASTE CLEANUP ......................................................................................................... 5-1

5.1 RADIOACTIVE LIQUID TANK WASTE STABILIZATION AND 

DISPOSITION (PBS ORP-0014) .................................................................................... 5-5

5.2 MAJOR CONSTRUCTION – WASTE TREATMENT PLANT 

(PBS ORP-0060) .............................................................................................................. 5-8

5.3 TANK WASTE CLEANUP ASSUMPTIONS AND UNCERTAINTIES ................... 5-10

6.0 MISSION SUPPORT.................................................................................................................... 6-1

6.1 SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY (PBS RL-0020) ....................................................... 6-1
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 ii 

6.2 RICHLAND COMMUNITY AND REGULATORY SUPPORT (PBS RL-0100) ........ 6-2

6.3 INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES (PBS RL-0040) ............................................... 6-3

6.3.1 Reliability Projects and HAMMER .................................................................... 6-3

6.3.2 Site-wide Services............................................................................................... 6-5

6.4 LONG-TERM STEWARDSHIP (PBS RL-LTS) ............................................................ 6-5

7.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................ 7-1

7.1 SCHEDULE AND COST LIMITATIONS ..................................................................... 7-1

7.2 OTHER LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................. 7-1

8.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 8-1

APPENDICES 

A HANFORD SITE EXISTING CLEANUP DECISIONS ............................................................. A-i 

B FUTURE CLEANUP ACTIONS AND PLAUSIBLE ALTERNATIVES .................................. B-i 

C HANFORD ESTIMATED SCHEDULE AND COST STATUS ................................................. C-i 

FIGURES 

Figure 1-1. Hanford Site Map Showing Principal Areas Designated for Cleanup. .................................. 1-3

Figure 1-2. Relationship Between DOE Budget Planning and LCR Schedule. ...................................... 1-10

Figure 2-1. Hanford Site Remaining Cleanup Schedule. .......................................................................... 2-3

Figure 2-2. Hanford Site Estimated Cleanup Cost Distribution by DOE Field Office. ............................ 2-3

Figure 2-3. Hanford Site Remaining Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. ....................................................... 2-4

Figure 2-4. Hanford Site Remaining Cleanup Costs by Project Baseline Summary. ............................... 2-4

Figure 3-1. C Reactor Before Interim Safe Storage. ................................................................................. 3-2

Figure 3-2. C Reactor in Interim Safe Storage. ......................................................................................... 3-2

Figure 3-3. Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) Remaining 

Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. ............................................................................. 3-5

Figure 3-4. Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) Remaining 

Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element. ........................................................................ 3-5

Figure 3-5. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Remaining Estimated Cleanup 

Costs by Fiscal Year. ............................................................................................................ 3-7

Figure 3-6. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Remaining Estimated Cleanup 

Costs by Work Element. ....................................................................................................... 3-7

Figure 3-7. Final Reactor Disposition Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. .................. 3-8

Figure 4-1. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Remaining Estimated 

Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. .............................................................................................. 4-6

Figure 4-2. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Remaining Estimated 

Cleanup Costs by Work Element. ......................................................................................... 4-6
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 iii 

Figure 4-3. Soil and Water Remediation-Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Remaining 

Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. ........................................................................... 4-10

Figure 4-4. Soil and Water Remediation-Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Remaining 

Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element. ...................................................................... 4-10

Figure 4-5. Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Estimated Cleanup 

Costs by Fiscal Year. .......................................................................................................... 4-13

Figure 4-6. Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Estimated Cleanup 

Costs by Work Element. ..................................................................................................... 4-13

Figure 4-7. Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) Remaining 

Estimated Costs by Fiscal Year. ......................................................................................... 4-15

Figure 4-8. Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) Remaining 

Estimated Costs by Work Element. .................................................................................... 4-15

Figure 4-9. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Remaining 

Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. ........................................................................... 4-19

Figure 4-10. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Remaining 

Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element. ...................................................................... 4-19

Figure 5-1. Simplified Process Diagram for Tank Waste Retrieval and Treatment. ................................ 5-2

Figure 5-2. Depictions of Typical Tank Contents. .................................................................................... 5-4

Figure 5-3. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) 

Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. .......................................................... 5-7

Figure 5-4. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) 

Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element. ..................................................... 5-7

Figure 5-5. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Remaining Estimated 

Costs by Fiscal Year. ............................................................................................................ 5-9

Figure 5-6. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Remaining Estimated 

Costs by Work Element. ....................................................................................................... 5-9

Figure 6-1. Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) Remaining Estimated Costs by Fiscal Year. ........ 6-1

Figure 6-2. Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100) Remaining Estimated 

Costs by Fiscal Year. ............................................................................................................ 6-2

Figure 6-3. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Estimated Costs by Fiscal 

Year. ..................................................................................................................................... 6-4

Figure 6-4. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Estimated Costs by Work 

Element. ................................................................................................................................ 6-4

Figure 6-5. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Remaining Estimated Costs by Fiscal Year. ......... 6-7

Figure 6-6. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Remaining Estimated Costs by Work 

Element. ................................................................................................................................ 6-7

TABLES 

Table 1-1. Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-036-01. ............................................................................. 1-2

Table 1-2. Cleanup Goals Identified for the Hanford Site.1

 ...................................................................... 1-4

Table 1-3. Cleanup Actions for which Final Decisions Have Not Been Made. (2 pages) ........................ 1-7
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 iv 

Table 1-4. Hanford Site Cleanup Project Baseline Summary. (2 pages) ................................................ 1-12

Table 1-5. Example Cleanup Project Baseline Summary and Work Breakdown to Level 3. ................. 1-13

Table 1-6. Example of a Level 6 Work Breakdown Structure. ............................................................... 1-13

Table 2-1. Hanford Project Baseline Summaries (PBS)–RL and ORP Contractors. (2 pages) ............... 2-1

Table 2-2. Hanford Site Remaining Cleanup Cost Estimates by PBS. ..................................................... 2-5

Table 3-1. River Corridor Cleanup Key Tri-Party Agreement Milestones. (2 pages) .............................. 3-1

Table 3-2. Reactor Status. ......................................................................................................................... 3-3

Table 3-3. Nuclear Facility D&D-River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) Level 2 Scope. 

(2 pages) ............................................................................................................................... 3-3

Table 3-4. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Level 2 Scope Summary. ....................... 3-6

Table 4-1. Central Plateau Cleanup Key Tri-Party Agreement Milestones. (3 pages) ............................ 4-2

Table 4-2. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Level 2 Scope Summary. ............... 4-5

Table 4-3. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) 

Level 2 Scope Summary. (2 pages) ..................................................................................... 4-8

Table 4-4. Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040) Level 2 Scope Summary................... 4-12

Table 4-5. Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) 

Level 2 Scope Summary. .................................................................................................... 4-14

Table 4-6. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) 

Level 2 Scope Summary. (2 pages) .................................................................................... 4-17

Table 5-1. Tank Waste Cleanup Key Tri-Party Agreement and Consent Decree Milestones. (2 

pages) .................................................................................................................................... 5-4

Table 5-2. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) 

Level 2 Scope Summary. ...................................................................................................... 5-6

Table 5-3. Major Construction–Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) 

Level 2 Scope Summary. ...................................................................................................... 5-8

Table 6-1. Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) Level 2 Scope Summary. ....................................... 6-1

Table 6-2. Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100) 

Level 2 Scope Summary. ...................................................................................................... 6-2

Table 6-3. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) Level 2 Scope Summary. ................................... 6-3

Table 6-4. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Level 2 Scope Summary. ....................................... 6-6

 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 v 

TERMS 

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 

1980

CH contact-handled 

CSB Canister Storage Building 

CWC Central Waste Complex 

D&D decontamination and decommission 

D4 deactivation, decontamination, decommission, and demolition 

DOE U.S. Department of Energy 

DQO data quality objectives 

DST double-shell tank 

Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology 

EIS environmental impact statement 

EM U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

ERDF Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility 

ETF Effluent Treatment Facility 

FFTF Fast Flux Test Facility 

FY fiscal year 

HAB Hanford Advisory Board 

HAMMER Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response; also known as the 

Volpentest HAMMER Training and Education Center 

HFFACO Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order 

HLW high-level waste 

HQ U.S. Department of Energy, Headquarters 

HWMA Hazardous Waste Management Act (Washington State) 

IDF Integrated Disposal Facility 

IHLW immobilized high-level waste 

ISS interim safe storage 

LAW low-activity waste 

LCR Lifecycle Report 

LDR Land Disposal Restrictions 

LERF Liquid Effluent Retention Facility 

LM Legacy Management 

LTS long-term stewardship 

MLLW mixed low-level waste 

MSC Mission Support Contract 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

NM nuclear materials 

NRDAR Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

ORP U.S. Department of Energy, Office of River Protection 

OU operable unit 

PBS project baseline summary 

PFP Plutonium Finishing Plant 

PNNL Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 

PRC Plateau Remediation Contract 

PUREX Plutonium Uranium Extraction (Plant) 

RCCC River Corridor Closure Contract 

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 

REDOX Reduction-Oxidation Facility (S Plant) 

RH remote-handled 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 vi 

RI/FS remedial investigation/feasibility study 

RL U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office 

ROD record of decision 

RPP River Protection Project 

RTD remove, treat and dispose 

S&M surveillance and maintenance 

SNF spent nuclear fuel 

SST single-shell tank 

TBD to be determined 

TEDF Treated Effluent Disposal Facility 

TOC Tank Operations Contract 

TPA Tri-Party Agreement 

Tri-Party agencies U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and 

Washington State Department of Ecology 

TRU transuranic 

TRUM transuranic mixed (waste) 

TSD treatment, storage, and disposal 

USDOE U.S. Department of Energy 

WBS work breakdown structure 

WESF Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility 

WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot Plant 

WRAP Waste Receiving and Processing (Facility) 

WTP Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant 

WTPC Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Contract 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 1-1 

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

In October 2010, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 

and Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) (Tri-Party agencies) added a new milestone to 

the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Ecology et al. 1989), commonly referred to 

as the Tri-Party Agreement (TPA). TPA M-036-01 requires that DOE submit a Hanford Lifecycle Scope, 

Schedule and Cost Report (Lifecycle Report [LCR]) to EPA and Ecology each year. 

This document is the LCR for 2015. This report reflects scope, schedule and cost estimate information 

from fiscal year (FY)2015 to FY2090. The 2015 LCR information reflects scope, schedule and costs that 

are current as of August 31, 2014, and are configuration controlled. Changes that have occurred after this 

cutoff date are noted in Section 1.5 and will be incorporated into future reports. The costs shown have 

been escalated for inflation. 

1.1 PURPOSE OF THE LIFECYCLE REPORT 

To plan for the future and make the best use of each year’s funding, the Tri-Party agencies work together 

and share information about the scope, schedule and cost of cleaning up the Hanford Site. TPA M-036-01 

states that the LCR should serve: 

“...as an agreed upon foundation for preparing budget requests and for informational 

briefings of affected Tribal Governments and Hanford stakeholders.”

“...as the basis for annual discussions among USDOE, EPA, and Ecology on how and 

when the USDOE will complete cleanup, how Congressional appropriations for the 

Hanford Site for that year may affect assumptions presented in the report, and how 

milestone changes and adjustments will affect lifecycle scope, schedule and cost.”

TPA M-036-01 includes a number of requirements for the LCR. Table 1-1 provides the full text of the 

approved TPA M-036-01. 

Detail regarding logic used by the Tri-Party agencies to meet the intent of the milestone can be found in 

Section 1.5 of the 2013 LCR (DOE/RL-2012-13). 

1.2 PREPARING THE LIFECYCLE REPORT 

DOE considers input from numerous affected parties, as discussed in the sections below. 

1.2.1 Tribal Involvement 

Four Tribal Nations are involved in the Hanford Site cleanup: 

x The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation is made up of the Cayuse, Umatilla, and 

Walla Walla people, and is federally recognized under the Treaty with the Walla Walla, Cayuse and 

Umatilla, 1855. 

x The Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation are descendants of 14 tribes and bands 

that were federally recognized under the Treaty with the Yakama, 1855. 

x The Nez Perce Tribe is federally recognized under the Treaty with the Nez Perces, 1855. 

x The Wanapum Band is a non-federally recognized tribe that historically resided on Hanford lands and 

participates in discussions regarding Hanford cleanup. 

Representatives from the Tribal Nations work in a government-to-government relationship with DOE 

officials on decisions affecting cleanup of Hanford and protection of the land. DOE consults with the 

Tribal Nations regularly and will continue to update relevant LCR information about their values. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 1-2 

Table 1-1. Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-036-01. 

M-036-01A (Subsequent Annual Milestones to be Lettered B, C, D, etc.) 

Due date to submit the report to be January 31 and annually thereafter, except that the first report to be due no 

sooner than 9 months after incorporation of this milestone in TPA.

The USDOE shall prepare and submit to EPA and Ecology a report setting out the lifecycle scope, schedule and 

cost for completion of the Hanford Site cleanup mission. The report shall reflect all of those actions necessary for 

the USDOE to fully meet all applicable environmental obligations including those under the HFFACO, the consent 

decree in State of Washington V. Chu, Case No. 08-5085-FVS, and the Hanford RCRA/HWMA Permit. The 

report shall include scope, schedule and cost for completing work at each of the operable units and RCRA TSD 

groups/units that are listed in Appendixes B and C of the HFFACO, in the consent decree in State of Washington 

V. Chu, Case No. 08-5085-FVS and in the Hanford RCRA/HWMA Permit, including the Hanford Waste 

Treatment and Immobilization Plant. The report will include all other cleanup and monitoring activities (including 

post-closure activities) and all related actions necessary to complete the cleanup mission to provide a complete 

understanding of the resources necessary for the Hanford cleanup mission. 

This report shall take into account circumstances existing as of the end of the fiscal year preceding the month of 

the report, including funds appropriated by Congress for the Hanford cleanup, but shall not assume any limitation 

on funding for future years. However, the report will take into consideration critical resource availability not based 

upon assumed future funding limitations and the practical limits of project acceleration when developing an 

executable plan. USDOE may also include costs other than those directly related to environmental obligations 

(such as security costs) but shall clearly distinguish expenditures for environmental obligations from other 

expenditures. Costs shall be displayed by program baseline summary. Additional levels of detail will appear in 

appendixes to the report. Cost information will provide sufficient detail to validate consistency with the scope and 

schedule for individual cleanup projects. Reporting in the appendixes will typically be one level below the PBS for 

the lifecycle, and at levels below that for the next two to five years beyond the execution year (usually at the 

activity level within the budget assigned to a specific project, e.g., RL-0011, WBS element 011.04.01, Nuclear 

Material Stabilization and Disposition – PFP, Disposition PFP, Transition 234 5Z). EPA and Ecology project 

managers may request additional levels of detail be provided by their DOE counterparts. 

In circumstances where final cleanup decisions have not yet been made, the report shall be based upon the 

reasonable upper bound of the range of plausible alternatives or may set forth a range of alternative costs including 

such a reasonable upper bound. In making assumptions for the purpose of preparing the initial report, USDOE 

shall take into account the views of EPA and Ecology and shall also take into account the values expressed by the 

affected Tribal Governments and Hanford stakeholders regarding work scope, priorities and schedule. The report 

shall include the scope, schedule and cost for each such PBS level two element and shall set forth the bases and 

assumptions for each cleanup activity.

After USDOE submits the report, the USDOE will revise the report based upon EPA and Ecology comments to 

reflect a common vision of the scope, schedule and budget for the remainder of the cleanup mission. If the 

agencies are unable to reach resolution on specific aspects of the scope of cleanup actions, the revised document 

will present a range of potential actions with the associated schedule and budget, thereby completing the milestone. 

DOE, EPA and Ecology shall attempt to reach agreement on the report so it can serve as an agreed upon 

foundation for preparing budget requests and for informational briefings of affected Tribal Governments and 

Hanford stakeholders. The report shall also serve as the basis for annual discussions among USDOE, EPA and 

Ecology on how and when the USDOE will complete cleanup, how Congressional appropriations for the Hanford 

Site for that year may affect assumptions presented in the report, and how milestone changes and adjustments will 

affect lifecycle scope, schedule and cost. 

Without limiting any DOE obligation under any other provisions of this agreement, and without limiting any DOE 

obligation to disclose information that is otherwise publicly available, nothing in this milestone shall be construed, 

either alone or in combination with any other provision of the HFFACO, to require disclosures related to internal 

federal budget deliberations.

1.2.2 Oregon Department of Energy 

DOE recognizes the State of Oregon’s interests in Hanford cleanup and protection of the Columbia River 

and its uses. Consistent with legal and other agreements, DOE has committed to share information and 

maintain an active dialogue with Oregon representatives about decisions and activities affecting cleanup 

at Hanford. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 1-3 

1.2.3 Hanford Advisory Board 

The Hanford Advisory Board (HAB) is a non-partisan and broadly representative body consisting of a 

balanced mix of the diverse interests that are affected by Hanford cleanup issues. The primary mission of 

the HAB is to provide informed recommendations and advice to the Tri-Party agencies on selected major 

policy issues related to cleanup. The HAB is a DOE Office of Environmental Management (EM) 

Site-Specific Advisory Board, a stakeholder board that provides DOE’s Assistant Secretary for EM and 

designees with independent advice, information, and recommendations on issues affecting the EM 

program at Hanford. 

The HAB recommended a similar approach in 2009, to that of the Consent Decree, that DOE prepare 

information similar to an LCR. HAB Consensus Advice No. 223, “Lifecycle Cost and Schedule Report of 

the Proposed Consent Decree and the Tri-Party Agreement (TPA) Modifications,” was issued 

November 6, 2009; HAB Consensus Advice No. 252 was issued November 4, 2011; HAB Consensus 

Advice No. 267 was issued June 7, 2013; and HAB Consensus Advice No. 276 was issued June 5, 2014. 

The HAB has prepared advice that relates to cleanup decisions throughout the Hanford Site. The HAB 

advice and the Tri-Party agencies’ responses to advice can be found on DOE’s website at 

www.hanford.gov/?page=453. That advice was considered in the development of this report. 

1.3 HANFORD CLEANUP OVERVIEW 

The 586-square-mile Hanford Site is located along the Columbia River in southeastern Washington state 

(Figure 1-1). Beginning in the 1940s with the Manhattan Project, Hanford played a pivotal role in the 

nation’s defense, eventually producing approximately 74 tons of plutonium — nearly two-thirds of all the 

plutonium recovered for government purposes in the United States. Today, the Hanford Site includes 

numerous former nuclear material production areas, active and closed research facilities, waste storage 

and disposal sites, and large areas of natural habitat and buffer zones all underlain by groundwater. 

Figure 1-1. Hanford Site Map Showing Principal Areas Designated for Cleanup. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 1-4 

Under the direction of DOE, the Hanford workforce is now engaged in the environmental cleanup of 

contaminated facilities, groundwater, and soil. Hanford cleanup is further described in Hanford Site 

Cleanup Completion Framework (DOE/RL-2009-10). 

1.3.1 Hanford Cleanup Goals 

The overarching goals for cleanup are noted in Table 1-2. These goals embody more than 20 years of 

dialogue among the Tri-Party agencies, Tribal Nations, State of Oregon, stakeholders, and the public. The 

goals carry forward key values captured in earlier forums such as the Hanford Future Site Uses Working 

Group, the Tank Waste Task Force, Hanford Summits, and HAB Exposure Scenario Workshops, as well 

as more than 270 advice letters issued by the HAB (http://www.hanford.gov/page.cfm/hab). These goals 

help guide all aspects of cleanup. Cleanup activities at various areas of the site support the achievement of 

one or more of these goals. These goals help set priorities to apply resources and sequence cleanup efforts 

for the greatest benefit. 

These goals reflect DOE’s recognition that the Columbia River is a critical resource for the people and 

ecology of the Pacific Northwest. The 50-mile stretch of the river that flows through the Hanford Site is 

known as the Hanford Reach and is the last free-flowing section of the Columbia River in the United 

States. As one of the largest rivers in North America, its waters support a multitude of uses that are vital 

to the economic and environmental wellbeing of the region and it is particularly important in sustaining 

the culture of Native Americans. 

Table 1-2. Cleanup Goals Identified for the Hanford Site.1 

Goals for Cleanup 

Goal 1: Protect the Columbia River. 

Goal 2: Restore groundwater to its beneficial use to protect human health, the environment, and the Columbia 

River. 

Goal 3: 

Clean up River Corridor waste sites and facilities to: 

x Protect groundwater and the Columbia River 

x Shrink the active cleanup footprint to the Central Plateau 

x Support anticipated future land uses. 

Goal 4: 

Clean up Central Plateau waste sites and facilities to: 

x Protect groundwater and the Columbia River 

x Minimize the footprint of areas requiring long-term waste management activities 

x Support anticipated future land uses. 

Goal 5: 

Safely mitigate and remove the threat of Hanford’s tank waste:

x Safely store tank waste until it is retrieved for treatment 

x Safely and effectively immobilize tank waste 

x Close tank farms and mitigate the impacts from past releases of tank waste to the ground. 

Goal 6: Safely manage and transfer legacy materials scheduled for offsite disposition, including special nuclear 

material (including plutonium), spent nuclear fuel, transuranic waste, and immobilized high-level waste. 

Goal 7: Consolidate waste treatment, storage, and disposal operations on the Central Plateau. 

Goal 8: 

Develop and implement institutional controls and long-term stewardship activities that protect human 

health, the environment, and Hanford’s unique cultural, historical, and ecological resources after 

cleanup activities are completed. 1 DOE/RL-2009-10, 2013, Hanford Site Cleanup Completion Framework, Rev. 1, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland 

Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

1.3.2 Hanford Cleanup and Management Areas 

Hanford cleanup is overseen at DOE Headquarters (HQ) by the EM, and is directed and implemented 

locally by two DOE field offices: the Richland Operations Office (RL) and the Office of River Protection 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 1-5 

(ORP).4 RL manages cleanup of most of the Hanford Site and provides human resource, administration, 

and security services, as well as physical infrastructure necessary to perform the cleanup. ORP was 

established in response to Section 3139 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 1999 to manage the River Protection Project (RPP). The RPP is responsible for the safe 

storage, retrieval, and transfer of tank waste currently stored in the 200 Area Tank Farms; construction of 

the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) to process and immobilize the tank waste in a 

process known as vitrification; and associated tank farm operation, maintenance, engineering, and 

construction activities. 

Hanford cleanup focuses on two broad geographic areas: The River Corridor and the Central Plateau. 

Tank Waste Cleanup is a separate cleanup component located in the Central Plateau. The River Corridor 

includes approximately 220 square miles of the Hanford Site, encompassing the 100 and 300 Areas along 

the south shore of the Columbia River, portions of the 400 and 600 Areas, and the contiguous lands that 

extend to the Central Plateau boundaries. This includes a considerable land area not directly affected by 

production operations (non-operational areas). The 100 Area contains nine retired plutonium production 

reactors, numerous support facilities, solid and liquid waste disposal sites that have contaminated soil and 

groundwater. The 300 Area, located north of the city of Richland, contained fuel fabrication facilities, 

nuclear research and development facilities, and associated solid and liquid waste disposal sites that have 

contaminated soil and groundwater. The non-operational areas include substantial land area adjacent to 

the 100 and 300 Areas and extending to the Central Plateau that was never used for production operations. 

For sites in the River Corridor, the goal of remedial action is to restore groundwater to drinking water 

standards wherever practicable, and to achieve ambient water quality standards in the groundwater prior 

to it discharging into the Columbia River. In those instances where remedial action objectives are not 

achievable in a reasonable time frame, or are determined to be technically impracticable, programs will be 

implemented to limit contaminant migration and prevent exposure to contaminated groundwater. River 

Corridor Cleanup work also removes sources of contamination, which are close to the Columbia River, to 

the Central Plateau for final disposal. The intent is to shrink the footprint of active cleanup to within the 

75-square-mile area of the Central Plateau by removing excess facilities and remediating waste sites. 

Cleanup actions will support anticipated future land uses consistent with the Hanford Reach National 

Monument, where applicable, and the Final Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan Environmental 

Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0222-F). 

The River Corridor has been divided into six geographic areas to achieve source and groundwater remedy 

decisions. These decisions will provide comprehensive coverage for all areas within the River Corridor 

and will incorporate ongoing interim action cleanup activities. Cleanup levels will be achieved that 

support the anticipated land uses of conservation and preservation for most of this area and industrial use 

for the 300 Area. At the conclusion of cleanup actions, the Federal Government will retain ownership of 

most land in the River Corridor and will implement long-term stewardship (LTS) activities to ensure 

protection of human health and the environment. 

The Central Plateau consists of about 75 square miles in the central portion of the Hanford Site and 

includes an Inner Area (~10 square miles) and Outer Area (~65 square miles). The Inner Area contains 

major nuclear fuel processing, waste management, and disposal facilities. The Inner Area will be 

dedicated to long-term waste management and containment of residual contamination. The Outer Area is 

that portion of the Central Plateau outside the boundary of the Inner Area. The Outer Area will be 

remediated to be protective of human health, the environment and groundwater. Cleanup levels will 

support future reasonably anticipated land uses. Cleanup of the Outer Area is planned to be completed in 

the 2016 to 2020 time period as funding allows. Completing cleanup of the Outer Area will shrink the 

footprint of active cleanup by an additional 65 square miles leaving just the Inner Area remaining. 

 

4

 In addition to the ongoing cleanup mission, numerous research and environmental support activities are conducted at Hanford 

by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, which is overseen by DOE’s Office of Science, Pacific Northwest Site Office.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 1-6 

Cleanup of the Central Plateau is a highly complex activity because of the large number of waste sites, 

surplus facilities, active treatment and disposal facilities, and areas of deep soil contamination. Past 

discharges of more than 450 billion gallons of liquid waste and cooling water to the soil have resulted in 

about 73 square miles of contaminated groundwater across the site. Today, some plumes extend far 

beyond the plateau. Containing and remediating these plumes remains a high priority. For areas of 

groundwater contamination in the Central Plateau, the goal is to restore the aquifer to achieve drinking 

water standards. In those instances where remediation goals are not achievable in a reasonable time 

frame, programs will be implemented to contain the plumes, prevent exposure to contaminated 

groundwater, and evaluate further risk reduction opportunities as new technologies become available. 

Near-term actions will be taken to control plume migration until remediation goals are achieved. 

At the completion of cleanup efforts, some residual hazardous and radioactive contamination will remain, 

both in surface disposal facilities and in subsurface media within portions of the Inner Area. DOE’s goal 

is to limit the area used for long-term waste management activities that require institutional controls to 

ensure protection of human health and the environment. 

Tank Waste Cleanup focuses on retrieving and treating Hanford’s tank waste, and closing or remediating 

the tank farms. The tank farms comprise 18 distinct waste storage units that include a total of 177 

underground storage tanks (149 single-shell tanks [SSTs] and 28 double-shell tanks [DSTs]) located in 

the Inner Area of the Central Plateau. The storage tanks range in capacity from about 55,000 to 

1,250,000 gallons and, in total, contain approximately 56 million gallons of chemically hazardous 

radioactive waste from past processing operations. Sixty-seven of the SSTs are confirmed or presumed to 

have collectively leaked up to 1 million gallons of contamination into the ground. In some areas, releases 

from some SST farms have reached groundwater. DOE expects these impacts to groundwater could 

increase in the future unless near-term actions are taken. 

Today, actions are being taken to slow the movement of those contaminants that were previously 

released. DOE is also containing and recovering those contaminants once they reach groundwater. A key 

step in reducing the risk that tank waste poses to human health and the environment is to retrieve as much 

waste from SSTs as possible and put it into DSTs. Then, the waste must be fed to the WTP for processing 

and converted by a process called vitrification into solid glass waste forms. A number of associated tank 

waste facilities, waste transfer lines, the 242-A Evaporator, and the WTP (under construction) are 

associated with the Tank Waste Cleanup component. This component of cleanup is one of Hanford’s most 

challenging legacies. 

Significant portions of the Hanford Site have been designated and preserved as part of the Hanford Reach 

National Monument (Figure 1-1). Much cleanup work has been accomplished within the designated 

monument area, and remaining work is expected to be completed within the next few years either as part 

of the River Corridor or Central Plateau cleanup projects. DOE is coordinating with the U.S. Department 

of Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and other agencies to provide care and maintenance of the 

Hanford Reach National Monument lands. 

DOE leases Hanford Site land to several non-DOE entities, such as the Laser Interferometer Gravitational 

Wave Observatory and the State of Washington, which in turn leases land to US Ecology, Inc., a private 

firm that operates burial grounds for commercial radioactive low-level waste. DOE leases land to Energy 

Northwest (a consortium of public utility companies), which operates Washington’s only operating 

commercial nuclear power reactor, the Columbia Generating Station. These operations are not part of 

cleanup at Hanford and are not included in the LCR. 

1.4 CLEANUP DECISIONS AND ALTERNATIVES 

Cleanup is achieved through an ongoing process for making and then implementing cleanup decisions in 

accordance with approved work plans and procedures, which are the bases for performing cleanup 

actions. When making cleanup decisions, the Tri-Party agencies ensure compliance with applicable laws 

and regulations, compare various cleanup alternatives, consider the interests of the public and other 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 1-7 

affected parties, consult with Tribal Nations, and document selected cleanup actions in legally binding 

records. 

In portions of the cleanup, the Tri-Party agencies have agreed to schedule final cleanup decisions to be 

made at a time when more information and experience can be gained, or after certain facilities are no 

longer needed. For example, decisions on cleaning up the T Plant Canyon Building in the Central Plateau 

will not be made until the Tri-Party agencies have determined when T Plant will not be needed to support 

Hanford cleanup. 

The LCR is required to include scope, schedule and cost information for the entire Hanford Site 

regardless of whether final cleanup decisions have been made. Where cleanup decisions are not known or 

only partially defined (i.e., not final), the LCR is based on the reasonable upper bound for the range of 

plausible alternatives, or a range of alternative costs, including a reasonable upper bound or a basis of 

existing estimates. These bases introduce several concepts that are not fully defined in TPA M-036-01: 

x Cleanup decisions. How are cleanup decisions made and when are they considered to be final 

decisions? 

x Alternatives. How are alternatives considered when making cleanup decisions and determining what 

cleanup actions should be performed? 

x Reasonable upper bound. How is a reasonable upper bound defined for a range of alternatives and 

how are an upper bound cost and schedule calculated? 

Appendix A describes the multiple kinds of cleanup decisions made at Hanford and identifies decisions 

that are considered to be final for the site. Appendix B describes future actions required to complete 

Hanford cleanup and presents information on plausible alternatives for future cleanup actions. Table 1-3 

lists the cleanup actions for which final cleanup decisions have not yet been made. 

Table 1-3. Cleanup Actions for which Final Decisions Have Not Been Made. (2 pages) 

River Corridor Cleanup Actions 

x Disposition N Reactor 

x Disposition 100 Area K West Basin 

x Remediate 100 Area Contaminated Soil Sites 

x Restore 100-BC-5 Groundwater OU to Beneficial 

Use 

x Restore 100-KR-4 Groundwater OU to Beneficial 

Use 

x Restore 100-NR-2 Groundwater OU to Beneficial 

Use 

x Restore 100-HR-3 Groundwater OU to Beneficial 

Use 

x Disposition 300 Area Facilities Retained by PNNL 

x Disposition 100 Area former Orchard Contaminated 

Soil Sites (100-OL-1 OU) 

Central Plateau Cleanup Actions 

x Disposition Remaining Outer Area Buildings and 

Facilities (200-OA-1 OU) 

x Remediate Remaining Outer Area Contaminated 

Soil Sites (200-OA-1, 200-CW-1, 200-CW-3 OUs) 

x Disposition Below-Grade Portions of Plutonium 

Finishing Plant 

x Disposition B Plant Canyon Building/Associated 

Waste Sites (200-CB-1 OU) 

x Disposition PUREX Canyon Building/Associated 

Waste Sites (200-CP-1 OU) 

x Disposition PUREX Storage Tunnels (200-CP-1 

OU) 

x Disposition REDOX Canyon Building/Associated 

Waste Sites (200-CR-1 OU) 

x Disposition T Plant Canyon Building/Associated 

Waste Sites 

x Disposition Cesium/Strontium Capsules 

x Remediate 200-SW-1 OU 

x Disposition Remaining Waste Treatment, Storage, 

and Disposal Facilities 

x Remediate Pipelines, Pits, Diversion Boxes and 

Associated Tanks (200-IS-1 OU) 

x Remediate Land Disposal Units (200-SW-2 OU)

x Remediate Remaining 200 West Inner Area 

Contaminated Soil Sites (200-WA-1 OU) 

x Remediate Remaining 200 East Inner Area 

Contaminated Soil Sites (200-EA-1 OU) 

x Disposition FFTF Complex 

x Disposition Remaining Buildings and Facilities 

within FFTF Complex 

x Disposition Remaining Inner Area Buildings and 

Facilities 

x Remediate Contaminated Deep Vadose Zone 

(200-DV-1 OU) 

x Restore 200 West Groundwater (200-UP-1 OU) to 

Beneficial Use 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 1-8 

Table 1-3. Cleanup Actions for which Final Decisions Have Not Been Made. (2 pages) 

x Disposition Remaining Liquid Waste Disposal 

Facilities 

x Restore 200 East Groundwater (200-PO-1/200-BP-5 

OUs) to Beneficial Use 

Tank Waste Cleanup Actions 

x Tank Retrieval and Single-Shell Tank Farm Closure 

x Tank Waste Treatment 

x Secondary Waste Treatment 

x Double-Shell Tank Closure 

x Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Closure 

FFTF = Fast Flux Test Facility. 

OU = operable unit. 

PNNL = Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. 

PUREX = Plutonium Uranium Extraction (Plant). 

REDOX = Reduction-Oxidation Facility (S Plant). 

The LCR includes many assumptions about future cleanup actions and decisions, considers the ranges of 

plausible alternatives for specific cleanup actions, and what would be reasonable upper bounds for the 

ranges of alternatives. Alternatives and upper bounds for future cleanup actions contemplate potential 

decisions, events, contingencies, and cost and/or schedule uncertainties, and take into account the views 

and values of regulators, Tribal Nations, and stakeholders. 

The Tri-Party agencies have agreed the LCR should consider developing in-depth information about some 

of the future cleanup actions for which final decisions have not been made. The Tri-Party agencies 

identified approximately 36 cleanup actions for which final cleanup decisions are still needed (Table 1-3), 

and Appendix B (Table B-6) proposes a schedule for preparing cost estimate alternative analyses for these 

cleanup actions. The Tri-Party agencies reviewed the alternative analyses included in the 2011, 2012 and 

2013 LCRs, the level of effort required to conduct those analyses and the benefits and insights gained 

from those analyses. After considering the remaining cleanup actions to be analyzed (Appendix B, 

Table B-6), the timing of anticipated regulatory decisions, the potential benefits and the effort required to 

conduct the analyses, the Tri-Party agencies agreed that the 2015 LCR would not include an alternative 

analysis. 

1.5 CHANGES FROM PREVIOUS REPORT 

1.5.1 Incorporated Changes 

Written feedback related to this LCR and prior LCRs was considered when preparing this report. 

Comments received on the 2014 LCR are available on the DOE website at www.hanford.gov. 

Significant changes made in the 2015 LCR include the following: 

x Updated cost and schedule planning basis for each project baseline summary (PBS) to incorporate 

updated scope, regulatory changes, and contract changes so this information reflects the RL and ORP 

configuration-controlled planning cases that are current as of August 31, 2014. Significant PBS 

changes from the 2014 LCR for the same remaining work include the following: 

- RL-0012 SNF Stabilization and Disposition – $113 million increase due to increased operations 

costs and schedule. 

- RL-0013C Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area - $621 million increase due to 

increased scope in Sludge Disposition, T-Plant operations, and redistribution of Site-wide 

Services between RL-0013C and RL-0040 Infrastructure and Services. 

- RL-0020 Safeguards and Security - $470 million increase due to refined estimates. 

- RL-0030 Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone – $432 million increase due to 

refined estimates for 200-ZP-1 Operable Unit remedial action, Integration and Assessments and 

Groundwater Monitoring and Performance Assessments. 

- RL-0040 Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford - $1.3 billion increase due to 

incorporation of the 200-PW-1/-3/-6 and 200-CW-5 operable units record of decision (ROD) 

remedies, refined estimates for planned out year remedies, and redistribution of Site-wide 

Services. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

1-9

- RL-0040 Infrastructure and Services - $2.8 billion decrease due to revised estimates for 

infrastructure services over the cleanup lifecycle and redistribution of Site-wide Services between 

RL-0040 Infrastructure and Services and RL-0013C.

- RL-0041 Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project - $90 million increase due to 

redistribution of Site-wide Services between RL-0041 and RL-0040 Infrastructure and Services.

- RL-0042 Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project - $240 million increase due to 

revision to risk posture and redistribution of Site-wide Services between RL-0042 and RL-0040 

Infrastructure and Services.

- RL-0100 Richland Community and Regulatory Support - $788 million decrease due to revised 

estimates for support activities based on recent actual costs.

- RL-LTS Long-Term Stewardship - $570 million decrease due to refined estimates and liquid 

waste efficiencies.

- The Site-wide Services work element was renamed Site-wide Services and Other Distributed 

Costs; this work element includes costs for the previous LCR work elements RL Directed 

Activities, Usage-Based Services Distributions, and Usage-Based Services, General and 

Administrative, and Direct Distributions.

 In response to feedback, tables of key TPA milestones are included as part of the PBS scope 

description.

 The Tank Waste cleanup cost and/or schedule uncertainty has been clarified in Section 5.3 to address 

highly probable risks that an offsite geologic repository will not be available to accept immobilized 

high-level waste canisters from the Hanford Site starting in April 2023 and construction of additional 

interim high-level waste storage on the Hanford Site if the repository is delayed in opening or does 

not open.

 Reduced the size of the report and made it easier to read. Schedule figures in previous LCRs were 

removed with concurrence of the Tri-Party agencies because this information is provided in other 

LCR figures and tables.

1.5.2 Future Report Changes

The scope, schedule and cost information presented in this LCR is current as of August 31, 2014. This 

section summarizes regulatory decisions and other changes that may have occurred or been completed 

after the August 31, 2014 cutoff date. Other pending changes that are not reflected in this LCR but will be 

incorporated in future reports also are noted.

The report presents the RL and ORP current configuration-controlled planning cases. The ORP planning 

case is the same as that presented in previous LCRs and is the current technical baseline for ORP. ORP 

expects to update the cost and schedule planning case in the LCR when a new baseline is approved and in 

place.

The Tri-Party agencies discussed revisions to various TPA milestone due dates. Approved revised 

milestones that have been incorporated into the planning cases are presented in this LCR. Any future 

changes to the planning cases will be included in future reports.

Decision documents recently have been released including the 300 Area ROD, the first in a series of 

RODs pursuant to the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for 

the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington (DOE/EIS-0391, December 2013), and the 100-F and Isolated 

Unit Area ROD. The scope, schedule and costs of these decisions will be integrated in future LCRs.

1.6 LIFECYCLE REPORT AND HANFORD BUDGET SCHEDULE

In developing the LCR milestone, the Tri-Party agencies sought to align submittal of the report with the 

annual Federal budget planning process. For most fiscal years, Federal planning begins about 2 years 

before the funded work is executed (Figure 1-2). The cycle begins when DOE field offices receive fiscal 

year budget planning guidance from the President of the United States, HQ, and the Office of 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 1-10 

Management and Budget (OMB). During the next 12 to 15 months, the DOE field offices develop their 

budgets, submit to HQ and OMB for review, and then the budgets are provided as part of the President’s 

budget that is submitted annually to Congress. Approximately 8 months later (under normal 

circumstances), before the start of the new Federal fiscal year (October 1), Congress approves a budget, 

funding is made available, and DOE begins executing work to the approved budget. 

As shown in Figure 1-2, the Tri-Party agencies scheduled the LCR to be completed in time to support the 

field offices’ budget planning process each year. Each LCR will have the latest information available 

when planning begins for the next 2-year budget cycle. The period of time for developing the LCR each 

year overlaps with the funding approval process for the current budget execution year and with the HQ 

and OMB review of funding requests for the next fiscal year. 

Figure 1-2. Relationship Between DOE Budget Planning and LCR Schedule. 

1.7 PLANNING AND INTEGRATION OVERVIEW 

This section introduces the Federal budget formulation process and DOE’s overall planning and budget 

development practices. A general understanding of common terms and methodology will be useful later 

in this LCR, particularly where information about project costs is presented. 

1.7.1 Annual Budget Formulation Process 

Each year, DOE formulates budget requests for Congressional appropriations. The planning cycle begins 

between December and January, nearly 2 years before the start of a budgeted fiscal year. The process 

begins with budget formulation where funding requirements are analyzed, prioritized, requested and 

received. Budget requests are submitted by the DOE field offices to HQ in early spring and continue with 

post-formulation monitoring and responding to questions to estimate impacts of actual or potential 

changes to budget requests. The process ends with receipt of Congressional appropriations. DOE’s budget 

process occurs in four distinct phases: 

1. Field Budget Process. This is the first phase of DOE’s annual budget formulation process. RL and 

ORP submit field budget data to HQ for use in the corporate review budget process. 

2. HQ Corporate Review Budget Process. The HQ organizations use field budget data and spring 

planning decisions to develop initial organizational budget requests that are jointly evaluated and 

considered in DOE’s internal budget review. 

3. OMB Budget Review Process. This process is the principal mechanism for preparing DOE’s annual 

budget submission to the OMB, which is responsible for assembling the President’s annual budget 

request to Congress. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 1-11 

4. Congressional Budget Review Process. This process determines DOE’s final appropriations for the 

next Federal fiscal year, based on policy determinations in conjunction with Federal budget 

deliberations by Congress. 

Annual budgets developed by DOE and appropriated for spending by Congress are allocated to the 

responsible DOE projects. Congressional budgets commonly provide different allocations, include 

additional requirements, or provide other directions that can affect project planning. If adjustments are 

required, DOE goes through a scheduling and resource-leveling process to adjust plans and accommodate 

the authorized budget. Sometimes this can result in cost and schedule changes to reconfigure activities 

resulting from budget or other constraints. DOE must determine the appropriations that will be used to 

fund each task to comply with applicable budget direction. Based on final Congressional appropriations, 

budget formulation, project planning and re-planning are intertwined and involve iterative processes with 

similar steps. DOE’s process for defining and managing projects and their baseline summaries are 

described below. 

1.7.2 U.S. Department of Energy Project Formulation Process 

DOE follows a structured approach that organizes all EM activities into discrete projects. The following 

summarizes key components of DOE’s cleanup project management approach. 

Project Baseline Summary (PBS). EM projects that have common attributes, such as geographic 

location or activity type, typically are grouped as a PBS. Congressional funding authorizations typically 

are also allocated by PBS. Each PBS contains a logical grouping of work activities organized in discrete 

projects or activities by establishing technical scope, schedule and cost baselines; defining performance 

metrics; and providing financial history, budget request justification, as well as other information; 

e.g., programmatic risk and compliance drivers. DOE may define a cleanup project as the entire PBS, or a 

project may be a portion of a single or multiple PBSs. A PBS or project may include operations and 

facility support activities such as surveillance and maintenance (S&M). 

Work Breakdown Structure (WBS). The work scope associated with each PBS is further organized into 

discrete WBS elements. The WBS provides a product/activities-oriented system to arrange, define, and 

depict all work in a structured framework. This step is essential to developing comprehensive bases for 

planning and managing project-specific scope, schedule and cost. Whether the government or a contractor 

performs the elements, the structure must be compatible with cost estimating and scheduling 

requirements. 

Resource Allocation. The next step is to define the resources necessary to execute each WBS element. 

Resources include labor, materials, and equipment. These resources are a part of work packages, which 

define the work for each WBS element. Planning packages are used when the work has not been 

completely defined. Budget is assigned to planning packages based on a mature estimate until such time 

as a work package can be developed. 

Project Master Schedule. With a solid WBS and well-developed work packages in place, DOE can 

develop a master schedule that contains a reliable estimate of the total time required to accomplish each 

task and the sequence of execution. The master schedule should reveal tasks that must be completed or 

partially completed before other tasks begin. These interrelationships help define the project’s critical 

path (the sequence of activities that must be completed on schedule for the entire project to be completed 

on schedule). Task schedules evolve by balancing the work to be done against the required completion 

date to achieve project milestones. 

Resource Leveling. All resources are finite and not all work can be accomplished simultaneously, so 

work must be organized to ensure existing resources are not overtaxed or underutilized; e.g., an 

engineering or craft labor individual cannot be scheduled to accomplish more than one work package 

simultaneously, and the same piece of equipment cannot be operated in more than one location at a time. 

The sequencing of tasks, therefore, addresses not only the order of things to be accomplished, but the 

availability and optimal use of resources. Resource leveling may result in the need to revise or update a 

project’s master schedule. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 1-12 

Uncertainty and Project Risk. Risk management is essential for project management. Cost and schedule 

uncertainty are included in the development of Total Project Cost and the approved DOE planning case 

and are reserved to accommodate additional work scope related to risk events that may occur from 

conditions and events that were not known during project planning and other unanticipated changes or 

uncertainties. This includes estimates for cost and schedule uncertainty based on risk analysis methods 

that comply with DOE guidelines and orders. These estimates are identified as “cost and/or schedule 

uncertainty” in the Appendix C tables. 

Uncertainty addresses cost-based and schedule-based impacts on a project. Cost uncertainty is the portion 

of the project budget that is available for risk uncertainty related to the project, but is held outside the 

contract budget and is part of the government’s planning case estimate. Schedule uncertainty is the 

risk-based, quantitatively derived portion of the overall project schedule duration that is estimated to 

allow for time-related risk impacts and other project uncertainties. 

Cost and schedule uncertainty is established to manage or cover the cost of unexpected events 

(e.g., changed conditions discovered by environmental sampling and characterization as cleanup 

proceeds). Money and time that has been reserved to address risks may be used to account for their effects 

or the handling actions necessary to mitigate or avoid risk events, but may not be used for work that is 

outside the scope of the planning case. Uncertainty is calculated based on DOE risks that are contained in 

a centralized risk register for each project. The risks are derived from various sources including project 

team members, project documentation, review teams and other sources. These risks are documented and 

are used in calculating cost uncertainty. To identify the required amount of uncertainty, a quantitative risk 

analysis (using a Monte Carlo methodology) is performed using the project schedule, complete with the 

costs of each work activity and applying risks and uncertainty to the schedule. Stochastic modeling is 

used to develop a probability distribution and to calculate project cost and schedule uncertainty. 

Escalation. In a budget request, cost is represented in escalated dollars. Escalation is the provision in a 

cost estimate for increases in cost of equipment, material, labor, etc., due to continuing price changes over 

time. Escalation is used to estimate the future cost of a project or to bring historical costs to the present. 

Most cost estimating is done in “current” dollars and then escalated to the time when the project will be 

accomplished. An escalation rate between 2 and 4 percent per year is used. 

1.8 SCOPE, SCHEDULE AND COST FOR HANFORD CLEANUP 

RL and ORP have organized their work into PBSs. These PBSs include detailed work breakdowns to 

describe in greater context the scope of DOE’s projects and operations at Hanford. Hanford cleanup 

encompasses 12 PBSs; 10 managed by RL, and 2 managed by ORP as shown in Table 1-4 and discussed 

further in other chapters of this LCR. 

Table 1-4. Hanford Site Cleanup Project Baseline Summary. (2 pages) 

PBS Title 

RL-0011 NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP 

RL-0012 SNF Stabilization and Disposition 

RL-0013C Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area 

RL-0020 Safeguards and Security 

RL-0030 Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone 

RL-0040 Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford and Infrastructure and Services 

RL-0041 Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project 

RL-0042 Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project 

RL-0100 Richland Community and Regulatory Support 

RL-LTS Long-Term Stewardship 

TBD Final Reactor Disposition 

ORP-0014 Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition 

ORP-0060 Major Construction–Waste Treatment Plant 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 1-13 

Table 1-4. Hanford Site Cleanup Project Baseline Summary. (2 pages) 

PBS Title 

D&D = decontamination and decommission. 

LTS = Long-Term Stewardship. 

NM = nuclear materials. 

ORP = U.S. Department of Energy, Office of River 

Protection. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. 

SNF = spent nuclear fuel. 

TBD = to be determined. 

Table 1-5 shows Level 2 and Level 3 work breakdown associated with a single PBS. This presents a 

typical EM cleanup project down to a third tier of planning detail. Most work at Hanford is similarly 

broken down to at least Level 3. 

Table 1-5. Example Cleanup Project Baseline Summary and Work Breakdown to Level 3. 

PBS (Level 1) RL-0012 SNF Stabilization and Disposition 

Level 2 RL-12.12 K Basins Closure Project 

Level 3 

RL-12.12.01 100–K Safe and Compliant 

RL-12.12.02 K Basins Operations and Maintenance 

RL-12.12.03 Facility Operations 

RL-12.12.11 100-K Facilities Deactivation 

RL-12.12.15 105-K West Basin Deactivation and Demolition 

RL-12.12.16 Sludge Treatment Project 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. 

SNF = spent nuclear fuel. 

Depending on the complexity of work scope, project maturity, contract period of performance, etc., 

DOE’s contractors typically plan their near-term work down to Level 6 and further to manage and 

schedule designs, approvals, and resources needed for their projects. This scope, schedule and cost 

information rolls up and is included in the upper tier planning information. Table 1-6 is an example of 

work planning to Level 6 and how it incorporates Levels 1 through 5. 

Table 1-6. Example of a Level 6 Work Breakdown Structure. 

PBS (Level 1) RL-0041 Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor 

Level 2 041.03 Field Remediation Closure 

Level 3 041.03.02 Field Remediation – 100-D Area 

Level 4 041.03.02.02 Field Remediation – 100-DR-1 

Level 5 041.03.02.02.06 Field Remediation – Burial Grounds – 100-DR-1 

Level 6

041.03.02.02.06.01 Remediate Burial Ground – 100-D-32 

041.03.02.02.06.02 Remediate Burial Ground – 100-D-33 

041.03.02.02.06.04 Remediate Burial Ground – 100-D-41 

041.03.02.02.06.05 Remediate Burial Ground – 100-D-45 

041.03.02.02.06.06 Remediate Burial Ground – 126-D-2 

D&D = decontamination and decommission. 

PBS = project baseline summary 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office.

For years beyond the contractor’s near-term work, DOE maintains “out-year” planning estimates for the 

remaining cleanup. Out-year planning estimates are not as well developed as near-term planning 

(typically no further than Level 3 or Level 4). 

Cost information will be updated each year to reflect work completion, recent decisions, and other 

changes affecting the lifecycle scope (e.g., upgrades or infrastructure modernization to support major 

projects). Chapters 3.0 through 6.0 summarize information at PBS Level 2, including work breakdown for 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 1-14 

each PBS, descriptions of the lifecycle work scope and associated work elements, and schedules for 

completing the work elements. 

Each chapter provides estimated cleanup costs for corresponding work elements, and includes costs that 

are not work elements directly performed under the respective PBS; e.g., Site-wide Services is not a work 

element directly performed in each PBS, but an estimated support cost for the entire PBS lifecycle (see 

Section 6.3.2). 

Appendix C provides more detail at Level 3 for near-term work and at Level 2 for all Hanford cleanup. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 2-1 

2.0 HANFORD LIFECYCLE SUMMARY 

This chapter presents the overall Hanford cleanup scope, schedule and cost. Chapters 3.0 through 6.0 and 

Appendix C present additional details on the PBSs that cover the lifecycle cleanup work scope in the 

three major cleanup components and Mission Support. 

2.1 HANFORD SITE LIFECYCLE SCOPE 

Cleanup consists of three major scope components: River Corridor, Central Plateau, and Tank Waste (the 

Tank Waste component is contained geographically within the Central Plateau). Cleanup also includes 

Mission Support activities that provide key infrastructure and services for Hanford. Cleanup is a complex 

task that involves multiple contractors performing discrete, yet interdependent, scopes of work. The prime 

contract related to each PBS is noted in Table 2-1. The scope of cleanup work is broken down into a 

series of PBSs. Table 2-1 describes the general scope of each PBS and the chapter/section each PBS is 

addressed. 

Table 2-1. Hanford Project Baseline Summaries (PBS)–RL and ORP Contractors. (2 pages) 

LCR 

Section PBS Official Title Alternate Titles General Scope Prime Contract 

CHAPTER 3.0 – RIVER CORRIDOR CLEANUP 

River 

Corridor 

(Section 3.1) 

RL-0041 Nuclear Facility 

D&D–River Corridor 

Closure Project

None Cleanup of the River Corridor 

waste sites and facilities, including 

placing the reactors in interim safe 

storage (this scope excludes 

groundwater remediation, which is 

addressed through PBS RL-0030). 

RCCC 

Includes 105-KW SNF Basin 

deactivation and removal work 

scope that was transferred from 

RL-0012 in FY2012. 

PRC 

River 

Corridor 

(Section 3.2) 

RL-0012 SNF Stabilization and 

Disposition

K Basins Closure 

Project

Removal of the K Basin sludge, 

found SNF and fuel scrap. 

PRC 

River 

Corridor 

(Section 3.3) 

TBD TBD Final Reactor 

Disposition

Disposition of 100 Area production 

reactors (excluding B Reactor). 

TBD 

CHAPTER 4.0 – CENTRAL PLATEAU CLEANUP 

Central 

Plateau 

(Section 4.1) 

RL-0011 NM Stabilization and 

Disposition–PFP

PFP Closure Project Demolition of aboveground 

facilities and structures at PFP. 

PRC 

Central 

Plateau 

(Section 4.2) 

RL-0030 Soil and Water 

Remediation–

Groundwater / 

Vadose Zone 

Groundwater Project Decision-making process for 

groundwater and waste sites and 

Hanford Site-wide groundwater 

remediation. 

PRC 

Central 

Plateau 

(Section 4.3) 

and Mission 

Support 

(Section 6.3) 

RL-0040 Nuclear Facility 

D&D–Remainder of 

Hanford

This PBS has two 

parts: 

1. RL-0040.01.1 

Central Plateau 

Remediation 

2. RL-0040.01.2 

Infrastructure and 

Services or 

Mission Support 

Site-wide 

Services 

1. Cleanup of the Central Plateau 

waste sites and facilities, 

including canyon facilities. 

PRC 

2. Management, repair, and 

capital upgrades to 

infrastructure and other sitewide services. 

MSC 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 2-2 

Table 2-1. Hanford Project Baseline Summaries (PBS)–RL and ORP Contractors. (2 pages) 

LCR 

Section PBS Official Title Alternate Titles General Scope Prime Contract 

Central 

Plateau 

(Section 4.4) 

RL-0042 Nuclear Facility 

D&D–Fast Flux Test 

Facility Project 

None Demolition of the Fast Flux Test 

Facility and associated waste sites 

and structures. 

PRC 

Central 

Plateau 

(Section 4.5) 

RL-0013C Solid Waste 

Stabilization and 

Disposition–200 Area 

Solid and Liquid 

Waste Disposition 

Project

Waste management operations 

including treatment, storage, and 

disposal of Hanford Site waste 

streams and offsite wastes1

. 

PRC 

CHAPTER 5.0 – TANK WASTE CLEANUP 

Tank Waste 

Cleanup 

(Section 5.1) 

ORP-0014 Radioactive Liquid 

Tank Waste 

Stabilization and 

Disposition 

None Operations, retrieval, treatment, and 

closure of the single-shell and 

double-shell tanks. 

TOC 

Tank Waste 

Cleanup 

(Section 5.2) 

ORP-0060 Major Construction–

Waste Treatment 

Plant 

None Construction of the Waste 

Treatment Plant.

WTPC 

CHAPTER 6.0 – MISSION SUPPORT 

Mission 

Support 

(Section 6.1) 

RL-0020 Safeguards and 

Security

None Protection of the Hanford Site, 

special materials, resources, and 

workers. 

MSC 

Mission 

Support 

(Section 6.2) 

RL-0100 Richland Community 

and Regulatory 

Support

None Support for community and 

regulatory interaction, including 

Hanford Advisory Board, Natural 

Resource Trustee Council, Oregon 

Department of Energy, and 

Washington State Department of 

Ecology. 

Various 

Mission 

Support 

(Section 6.4) 

RL-LTS Long-Term 

Stewardship (LTS) 

Post-cleanup LTS 2 Infrastructure support, surveillance 

and maintenance, community 

support, and management activities 

following completion of cleanup 

activities. 

TBD 

1 Waste from other sites will not be received until the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant is operational. 2

 See Section 6.3.2 for the current ongoing LTS program.

D&D = decontamination and decommission. 

LCR = Lifecycle Report. 

LTS = long-term stewardship. 

MSC = Mission Support Contract. 

NM = nuclear materials. 

ORP = U.S. Department of Energy, Office of River 

Protection. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant. 

PRC = Plateau Remediation Contract. 

RCCC = River Corridor Closure Contract. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations 

Office. 

SNF = spent nuclear fuel. 

TBD = to be determined 

TOC = Tank Operations Contract. 

WTPC = Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Contract.

2.2 HANFORD CLEANUP SCHEDULE 

The remaining cleanup schedule covers activities for waste cleanup and waste management, leading to 

transition of portions of the Hanford Site to LTS. Chapters 3.0 through 6.0 and Appendix C present 

additional schedule details for the River Corridor, Central Plateau, Tank Waste, and Mission Support 

activities. 

To support cleanup, RL has responsibility for Mission Support activities related to safeguards and 

security, community and regulatory support, and Hanford Site infrastructure and site-wide services. These 

activities align with the cleanup through FY2060. RL also has planned for an LTS period that runs from 

FY2060 through FY2090 as part of Mission Support. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 2-3 

Figure 2-1 shows River Corridor Cleanup complete by FY2024, Final Reactor Disposition complete by 

FY2068, Tank Waste Cleanup complete by FY2050, and Central Plateau Cleanup complete by FY2065 

(including schedule uncertainty). 

 

Figure 2-1. Hanford Site Remaining Cleanup Schedule. 

2.3 HANFORD SITE ESTIMATED CLEANUP COSTS 

The remaining cleanup costs5

 are estimated to be about $110.2 billion to complete the scope for the River 

Corridor, Final Reactor Disposition, Central Plateau, Tank Waste, Mission Support activities, and LTS. 

RL’s scope accounts for about $53.6 billion of the total costs and ORP’s scope accounts for about 

$56.6 billion. These estimates include cost uncertainty because many of the final cleanup decisions have 

not been made. Once these decisions are made, estimates will be revised. 

Figure 2-2 summarizes the estimated remaining cleanup cost between RL and ORP. Figure 2-3 shows the 

remaining cleanup costs by year for RL and ORP. Figure 2-4 summarizes the estimated cleanup costs by 

RL and ORP PBSs. Table 2-2 provides a summary of total estimated cleanup costs for each PBS. 

Figure 2-2. Hanford Site Estimated Cleanup Cost Distribution by DOE Field Office. 

 

5 The expression “cleanup costs” is used to represent the costs for those remaining actions that are necessary for DOE to fully 

meet all applicable environmental obligations and complete the Hanford Site cleanup mission. 

FY2010 FY2020 FY2030 FY2040 FY2050 FY2060 FY2070 FY2080 FY2090 FY2100

Tank Waste Cleanup

Hanford Site Remaining Cleanup Schedule

The cleanup effort at the Hanford Site focuses on three major components with Mission Support activities 

that provide key infrastructure and services to the cleanup mission. The remaining schedule progresses from 

obtaining regulatory decisions, through designing cleanup remedies, to implementing those remedies, and 

finally, to the transition to long-term stewardship.

Central Plateau Cleanup

Mission Support

River Corridor Cleanup

Scale dates represent start of fiscal year

Final Reactor Disposition

Long-Term Stewardship

DOE-RL 

$53.6 billion DOE-ORP 

$56.6 billion 

Hanford Site

Remaining Cost 

Estimate

FY2015 - FY2090 

$110.2 billion
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 2-4 

Figure 2-3. Hanford Site Remaining Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. 

Figure 2-4. Hanford Site Remaining Cleanup Costs by Project Baseline Summary. 

$0.0

$1.0

$2.0

$3.0

$4.0

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060 2065 2070 2075 2080 2085 2090

Costs (Billion $) 

Fiscal Year 

DOE-RL Remaining Cleanup Costs by Year DOE-ORP Remaining Cleanup Costs by Year

See Appendix C for cost and schedule data. 

$0.0

$1.0

$2.0

Costs (Billion $) 

Fiscal Year 

NFD&D = Nuclear Facility D&D 

I&S = Infrastructure and Services 

See Appendix C for cost and schedule data. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 2-5 

Table 2-2. Hanford Site Remaining Cleanup Cost Estimates by PBS. 

Project Work Scope 

Estimated Cleanup 

Costs1

(Billion $) 

RL Total Remaining Estimated Costs $48.8 - $53.6

NM Stabilization and Disposition – PFP (PBS RL-0011) $0.4 - $0.6 

SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) $0.5 

Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition - 200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) $7.5 - $7.8 

Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) $3.6 

Soil and Water Remediation - Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) $8.4 - $8.9 

Nuclear Facility D&D - Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040) $14.3 - $18.0 

Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) $3.9 - $4.0 

Nuclear Facility D&D - River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) $1.4 

Nuclear Facility D&D - Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) $0.9 - $1.0 

Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100) $1.2 

Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) $4.8 

Final Reactor Disposition $1.9 

ORP Total Remaining Estimated Costs $56.6 

Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) $54.4 

Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) $2.2 

Total Remaining Estimated Costs $105.4 - $110.2

NOTE: The remaining estimated cleanup cost does not include the upper bound cost estimates prepared for selected future 

cleanup actions. These are summarized in Appendix B, Table B-5. 1

 Cost ranges have been shown in this table to reflect cost and schedule uncertainty; the higher number is used throughout this

report. Values are rounded, see Appendix C for details. 

D&D = decontamination and decommission. 

LTS = long-term stewardship. 

NM = nuclear materials. 

ORP = U.S. Department of Energy, Office of 

River Protection. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. 

SNF = spent nuclear fuel. 

 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 2-6 

This page intentionally left blank. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 3-1 

3.0 RIVER CORRIDOR CLEANUP 

The River Corridor, the area of the Hanford Site along the Columbia River, includes four production and 

operations areas: 

x 100 Area – Location of nine former production reactors, associated support facilities, and related 

waste sites. 

x 300 Area – Location of research and development, fuel fabrication facilities, and related waste sites. 

x 400 Area – Buildings and waste sites other than operating facilities, Fuels and Materials Examination 

Facility, and the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF). 

x 600 Area – Location of two major burial grounds (618-10 and -11) with some additional soil and 

debris sites. 

The majority of the River Corridor Cleanup is on track for completion by FY2020. Final remedial 

activities (excluding final reactor disposition) may extend until FY2024. DOE manages the River 

Corridor Cleanup through two projects that are planned and funded under separate PBSs: 

1. Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) addresses cleanup of waste 

sites, burial grounds, and facilities in the 100, 300, 400, and 600 Areas and the interim safe storage 

(ISS) of the C, D, DR, F, H, KE, KW, and N Reactors. This project is currently responsible for 

operating and maintaining the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) located on the 

Central Plateau, which is the disposal location for the remediation waste from the River Corridor and 

other Hanford cleanup operations. Section 3.1 discusses the scope of this project. 

2. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) addresses removal of fuel and sludge from the 

K Basins. The 105-KW Basin deactivation and removal work scope has been transferred to PBS 

RL-0041. Section 3.2 discusses the scope of this project. 

Although currently not considered to be a project, Final Reactor Disposition will address cleanup of the 

100 Area surplus production reactors. Section 3.3 discusses the scope of this activity. 

Groundwater cleanup is ongoing in the River Corridor. RL manages the groundwater cleanup through 

Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030), which covers groundwater 

remediation for the entire Hanford Site. Groundwater associated with the River Corridor is discussed in 

the Central Plateau Cleanup in Section 4.2. 

Cleanup is performed in accordance with interim and final RODs and action memoranda as listed in 

Appendix A and with key TPA milestones listed in Table 3-1. These TPA milestones provide the 

structure that the Tri-Party agencies have agreed to for Hanford priorities and scope sequencing. 

Table 3-1. River Corridor Cleanup Key Tri-Party Agreement Milestones. (2 pages) 

Milestone Title Compliance 

Date 

Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) 

M-016-00A Complete all response actions for the 100 Areas, excluding K Area. 03/31/2017 

M-016-00B Complete all interim 300 Area remedial actions. 09/30/2018 

M-016-00C Complete all response actions for the 100-K Area. 12/31/2020

M-016-69 Complete all interim 300 Area remedial actions (300-FF-2 OU waste sites). 09/30/2015 

M-016-143 Complete the interim response actions for the 100-K Area within the perimeter 

boundary and to the river for Phase 2 actions. 12/31/2015 

M-089-00 Complete closure of mixed waste units in 324 Building Cells B and D. TBD 

M-093-00 Complete final disposal of 100 Areas surplus production reactor buildings. TBD 

M-093-27 Complete 105-KE and KW Reactor ISS. 12/31/2019 

M-094-00 Complete disposition of 300 Area surplus facilities. 09/30/2018 

M-016-178 Initiate Deactivation of 105-KW Fuel Storage Basin. 12/31/2015
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

3-2 

Table 3-1. River Corridor Cleanup Key Tri-Party Agreement Milestones. (2 pages)

Milestone Title Compliance 

Date

M-016-181 Complete Deactivation, Demolition and Removal of 105-KW Fuel Storage Basin. 09/30/2019

M-016-186 Initiate Soil Remediation Under 105-KW Fuel Storage Basin. 12/31/2019

SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012)

M-016-173 Select K Basin sludge treatment and packaging technology and propose new interim 

sludge treatment and packaging milestones.

03/31/2015

M-016-176 Complete sludge removal from 105-KW Fuel Storage Basin. 12/31/2015

D&D = decontamination and decommissioning.

ISS = interim safe storage.

OU = operable unit.

PBS = project baseline summary.

TBD = to be determined.

3.1 NUCLEAR FACILITY D&D–RIVER CORRIDOR CLOSURE 

PROJECT (PBS RL-0041) 

The Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) will clean up the areas of 

Hanford located in the Columbia River Corridor in accordance with existing RODs (see Appendix A). 

Anticipated land uses for the River Corridor are described in DOE/EIS-0222-F and in the pursuant ROD.

The River Corridor Closure Project established the following cleanup objectives: 

 Remediate waste sites.

 Deactivation, decontamination, decommission, and demolition (D4) of facilities.

 Place eight plutonium production reactors into ISS. Figure 3-1 and Figure 3-2 depict C Reactor before

and after the ISS process. Table 3-2 provides the status of the reactors. Note B Reactor’s status as part

of the newly established Manhattan Project National Historical Park.

 Operate ERDF to support disposal of waste generated during D4, field remediation, ISS, and support

to other Hanford waste generators.

 Complete substantive remediation to allow the 100 and 300 Areas to be deleted from the National

Priorities List.

 The River Corridor Closure Project includes remediation of the 600 Area burial sites 618-10 and

618-11.

Figure 3-1. C Reactor Before Interim Safe 

Storage. 

Figure 3-2. C Reactor in Interim Safe Storage. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

3-3 

Table 3-2. Reactor Status.

Reactor Status Remaining Activity

B

Named National Historic Landmark by U.S. 

Department of Interior in 2008. Reactor open 

for escorted public tours.

On December 19, 2014, the Manhattan Project National 

Historical Park was authorized, which includes 

B Reactor as the world’s first production reactor.

C Reactor placed in ISS. Final disposition of reactor block.

D Reactor placed in ISS. Final disposition of reactor block.

DR Reactor placed in ISS. Final disposition of reactor block.

F Reactor placed in ISS. Final disposition of reactor block.

H Reactor placed in ISS. Final disposition of reactor block.

KE

Fuel storage basin demolished; continued 

deactivation, decommissioning, and demolition 

activities in preparation for emplacement of safe 

storage enclosure.

Reactor ISS began in 2011 and is scheduled for 

completion by 2019; final disposition of reactor block.

KW

Awaiting sludge removal to proceed with 

demolition of adjacent buildings and installation 

of safe storage enclosure to complete ISS

activities.

ISS is scheduled for completion by 2019; final 

disposition of reactor block.

N Reactor placed in ISS. Final end state of the reactor has not been determined.

ISS = interim safe storage.

Table 3-3 summarizes the scope for the Level 2 work elements. 

Table 3-3. Nuclear Facility D&D-River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) Level 2 Scope. (2 pages)

Work Element Scope Description

D4 Closure

Includes D4 of approximately 500 facilities, provision of utility and surveillance and 

maintenance services during D4, and closure of utilities located in the River Corridor. The D4 

closure buildings are located throughout the River Corridor in the 100, 300, 400, and 

600 Areas. Typical hazards associated with the buildings include radiological contamination 

(e.g., uranium, mixed fission products, activation products, plutonium), hazardous materials

(e.g., asbestos, chemicals), and industrial hazards (e.g., elevated working locations, degraded 

roofs, biological hazards, electrical hazards, excavations). The D4 process includes obtaining 

regulatory approvals; characterizing hazards and waste; deactivating the facility by removing 

loose hazardous materials and equipment; decontaminating the facility to allow open-air 

demolition; and decommissioning the facility by disconnecting utilities and services. 

The structure is then demolished using heavy equipment (e.g., track hoe, processor, loader, 

cranes), explosives, cutting equipment, or other methods and the demolition debris is 

disposed, generally to ERDF. Following demolition, samples are collected to verify cleanup 

criteria are met, and the sites are backfilled and revegetated. 

Field Remediation 

Closure

Includes performing CERCLA field remediation and closure of contaminated waste sites in 

the River Corridor (liquid waste disposal facilities, burial grounds, burn pits, disposal pits, 

unplanned release sites, and contaminated pipelines), including confirmatory sampling, 

remediation design, RTD activities, verification sampling, and closure documentation. RODs 

for the Field Remediation Closure work scope generally identify RTD as the preferred 

alternative (RODs are identified in Appendix A).

In addition to RTD, sites were identified that require confirmatory sampling to determine the 

need for RTD. Following sampling, these sites become RTD sites or are closed as no-action 

sites. Contamination in the waste sites and burial grounds of the River Corridor include 

chemical and radioactive constituents such as metals, hexavalent chromium, petroleumrelated compounds, strontium, uranium, and cesium. The cleanup process involves sampling 

and analyzing the site to determine the extent and type of contamination, excavating 

contaminated waste materials, and restoring the landscape through site backfill, grading, and 

revegetation.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

3-4 

Table 3-3. Nuclear Facility D&D-River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) Level 2 Scope. (2 pages) 

Work Element Scope Description 

Waste Operations 

Includes the transportation, disposal, and treatment (if required) of waste from the River 

Corridor Cleanup activities, as well as from other Hanford cleanup operators. Waste 

operations will expand and operate the ERDF, and transition the ERDF to a successor 

operator at the end of the Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project. 

End State/Final 

Closure

Includes preparing an integrated River Corridor work plan for a CERCLA baseline risk 

assessment; preparing a baseline risk assessment for 100 and 300 Areas; conducting a risk 

evaluation for River Corridor areas outside 100 and 300 Areas; conducting orphan site 

evaluations; conducting surface soil surveys; preparing remedial action reports that document 

completion of interim remedial actions for each geographic area; conducting closure reviews; 

preparing a remedial investigation/feasibility study and proposed plan for six River Corridor 

source and groundwater areas; and preparing transition and turnover packages for the six 

geographic areas for transition to Hanford Long-Term Stewardship. 

Mission Support/ 

General Support 

Includes functional support and business operations necessary to achieve River Corridor 

Closure and field project objectives, providing trained and qualified staff, performance 

standards, facilities services, and office supplies. General support functions include safety, 

health and quality, regulatory and environmental management, project integration, project 

services, engineering services, and Office of the Project General Manager. 

Plateau 

Remediation 

Contract River 

Zone 

Environmental 

Includes work remaining to complete 100-K Area remediation, demolition of K East Basin, 

disposition of K East and K West Reactors, and D4 of support structures. In K West Basin, 

near-term deactivation includes removal of containerized sludge and any found scrap/scrap 

fuel, and finally removal of the fuel basin.

Site Infrastructure 

& Utility/Logistics 

& Transportation 

(B Reactor) 

Includes management and oversight for B Reactor facility activities, including planning, 

directing, and providing technical support to maintain, upgrade, and preserve the B Reactor 

facility in a safe condition. After PBS RL-0041 ends, this scope will transfer to PBS 

RL-0040. 

Site-wide Services 

and Other 

Distributed Costs 

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See Section 6.3.2 for 

details.

x Includes administrative and technical support, service assessment pool, and other 

activities. Details are provided in Table C-21. 

x Includes services that are charged based on predetermined rates, and services that are 

directly charged to Other Hanford Contractors. Details are provided in Table C-21. 

x Includes contractor’s fee, pension, management reserve and Government & Administrative 

allocations. 

CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act, 

42 USC 9601.

D4 = deactivation, decontamination, decommission, 

and demolition. 

D&D = decontamination and decommission. 

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

ROD = record of decision. 

RTD = remove, treat, and dispose. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations 

Office. 

Figure 3-3 presents the remaining cleanup costs for PBS RL-0041 by fiscal year, and Figure 3-4 presents 

the remaining estimated costs by work element. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

3-5 

Figure 3-3. Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) Remaining Estimated 

Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. 

Figure 3-4. Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) Remaining Estimated 

Cleanup Costs by Work Element. 

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year 

$0

$50

$100

$150

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

See Appendix C, Table C-22 for cost and schedule data. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 3-6 

3.2 SNF STABILIZATION AND DISPOSITION (PBS RL-0012) 

The SNF Stabilization and Disposition Project (PBS RL-0012) provides for safe stabilization, packaging, 

and interim storage of SNF sludge. After removing the sludge, the 105-KW Basin deactivation and 

removal work scope will be performed under PBS RL-0041. At the completion of this project, significant 

hazards to workers, the public, and the environment will have been eliminated. Major cleanup objectives 

for the SNF Stabilization and Disposition Project are: 

x All SNF will be removed from K Basins and repackaged, dried, and transported to interim storage at 

the Canister Storage Building (CSB). 

x Sludge material from K Basin knock-out pots will be pretreated, packaged, dried, and transported to 

interim storage at the CSB pending disposal at a future repository. Once stabilized and placed into 

storage, this waste stream and the remaining sludge will be transferred to another project 

(PBS RL-0013C, Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area; see Table 4-6 Sludge 

Disposition) for final disposition to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico or other 

disposal facility. 

x The remaining sludge will be retrieved and shipped to an interim onsite storage facility (T Plant), then 

treated and packaged for shipment to an offsite disposal facility. 

x Debris within the 105-KW Basin will be packaged and transported for disposal. 

Additional scope information on these work elements is provided in Table 3-4. 

Table 3-4. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Level 2 Scope Summary. 

Work Element Scope Description 

Program 

Management 

Provides project management for 100-K Area work activities. 

K Basins 

Operations and 

Maintenance

Includes dose data gathering and analysis; sampling and characterization of radioactive and 

hazardous waste to maintain compliance in 105-KW Basin (note that 105-KE Basin has 

been demolished); basic plant maintenance; and general duties and operations to keep 

105-KW Basin and the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility in a safe and compliant condition. 

Facility 

Operations

Includes auxiliary operations support, conduct of operations support, waste management 

support, and sample management support. Specific tasks include, but are not limited to, 

operational and environmental sampling, operation of potable and service water supplies, 

and conduct of operations. 

Sludge Treatment 

Project

Includes the design, procurement, fabrication, installation, testing, startup, operation, 

deactivation, and decontamination of the equipment necessary to perform the functions to 

remove consolidated containerized sludge, then stabilize and package the sludge for interim 

storage at Hanford. Once stabilized and placed into storage, the waste stream will be 

transferred to another project area (PBS RL-0013C, Solid Waste Stabilization and 

Disposition–200 Area) for final disposition to WIPP or other disposal facilities. 

Site-wide 

Services and 

Other Distributed 

Costs

Includes proportional share of costs for site-wide services and infrastructure. See 

Section 6.3.2 for details. 

- Includes administrative and technical support and other activities. Details are provided in 

Table C-4. 

- Includes services that are charged based on predetermined rates and services that are 

directly charged to Other Hanford Contractors. Details are provided in Table C-4. 

- Includes contractor’s fee and management reserve.

PBS = project baseline summary. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. 

SNF = special nuclear fuel. 

WIPP = Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. 

Figure 3-5 presents remaining estimated cleanup costs for SNF Stabilization and Disposition 

(PBS RL-0012) by fiscal year, and Figure 3-6 presents remaining estimated cleanup costs by work 

element. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

3-7

Figure 3-5. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal 

Year. 

Figure 3-6. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work 

Element. 

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

2015

2016

2017

2018

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

$0

$50

$100

$150

Costs (Million) 

Fiscal Year 

See Appendix C, Table C-5 for cost and schedule data. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

3-8

3.3 FINAL REACTOR DISPOSITION

Final Reactor Disposition will address cleanup of the 100 Area surplus production reactors in accordance 

with TPA M-093-00. Disposition of the 100 Area reactors (except for B Reactor which is part of the 

newly established Manhattan Project National Historical Park) was one of the cost estimate alternative 

analyses evaluated in the 2011 LCR (DOE/RL-2010-25). See summary in Appendix B, Table B-5, River 

Corridor - Disposition 100 Area Reactors.

Six reactors (C, D, DR, F, H, and N) have been placed in ISS configuration (see Table 3-2). KE Reactor 

has completed interim ISS and is in a minimum safe state; KE Reactor and KW Reactor are scheduled to 

complete ISS by FY2019. After being placed in ISS, the reactors will undergo surveillance, monitoring, 

and maintenance for up to 75 years to allow radionuclides to decay. Following this period, the reactor 

blocks will be removed from their current locations and transported to the Central Plateau Inner Area for 

disposal. 

The 2011 LCR identified the most plausible alternative for the reactors as safe storage followed by 

deferred one-piece removal. This alternative was developed and evaluated in a final environmental impact 

statement (EIS) (DOE/EIS-0119F, Final Environmental Impact Statement Decommissioning of Eight 

Surplus Production Reactors at the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington) and in a subsequent engineering 

evaluation (DOE/RL-2005-45, Surplus Reactor Final Disposition Engineering Evaluation). DOE issued 

58 FR 48509, “Record of Decision: Decommissioning of Eight Surplus Production Reactors at the 

Hanford Site, Richland, Washington,” in September 1993, which implements the recommendation for 

safe storage followed by deferred one-piece removal of the surplus reactors. N Reactor was not included 

in the EIS because it was not available for decommissioning at the time of the National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) EIS and ISS was approved through the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) process. Final disposition of N Reactor 

will be determined by a subsequent NEPA or CERCLA decision process. In the planning case presented 

in this report, N Reactor is assumed to undergo safe storage followed by deferred one-piece removal.

Figure 3-7 provides the remaining estimated costs by fiscal year. The schedule is based on a 14-year 

implementation period for one-piece removal and completion of reactor removal by FY2068 based on the 

ROD issue date of 1993 with a maximum 75-year storage period. Reactor removal must start by FY2054. 

The estimated $1.9 billion to complete Final Reactor Disposition by FY2068 is the escalated $676 million 

removal cost (in 2010 constant dollars) presented in Table 4-5 of the 2011 LCR.

Figure 3-7. Final Reactor Disposition Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year.

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

2054

2056

2058

2060

2062

2064

2066

2068

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year

See Appendix C, Table C-32 for cost and schedule data.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

3-9

3.4 RIVER CORRIDOR CLEANUP ASSUMPTIONS AND 

UNCERTAINTIES 

In planning for the Hanford Site lifecycle, there are uncertainties that are analyzed to estimate potential 

scope, schedule and cost changes. The following assumptions were identified for Nuclear Facility D&D–

River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) work scope: 

x Regulatory changes will not require additional activities (e.g., document revisions, additional 

sampling) that would significantly impact costs or schedules. 

x Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) operating facilities will need to be available to 

support Office of Science missions. After PBS RL-0041 is completed, the facility D&D/waste site 

cleanup work will transfer to PBS RL-0040 Nuclear Facility D&D – Remainder of Hanford. 

x The Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration (NRDAR) and risk assessment litigation 

brought by the Yakama Nation will not significantly affect cost or schedule. 

x The Hanford Natural Resource Trustee Council activities, including studies and NRDAR process will 

not significantly affect cost or schedule. 

For SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012), the following assumptions were identified: 

x Compliance with regulatory standards and requirements will provide an adequate level of protection 

for the worker, public health, safety, and the environment during operations activities and after D4 is 

complete. 

x ERDF waste acceptance criteria will not change substantially. 

x T Plant is acceptable for interim sludge storage and no pretreatment for the sludge is needed before 

transfer. Subsequent treatment and packaging of the sludge will be performed by the work scope in 

PBS RL-0013C. 

x Post-CERCLA ROD treatability studies and focused feasibility studies will not affect the sludge 

treatment process. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

3-10 

This page intentionally left blank. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

4-1

4.0 CENTRAL PLATEAU CLEANUP 

The Central Plateau is a 75-square-mile area located near the center of Hanford, which contains about 

900 excess facilities, including five massive chemical processing facilities called canyons, and roughly 

800 non-tank farm waste sites. The Central Plateau is home to ongoing waste management operations, 

such as the Mixed Waste Low-Level Burial Grounds, liquid waste facilities, and the Waste Receiving and 

Processing (WRAP) Facility. Infrastructure services (e.g., power, water, telecommunication lines), either 

existing or to be constructed, in the Central Plateau are needed to support cleanup. These facilities, waste 

sites, canyons, and ongoing waste management operations and infrastructure are spread across the Central 

Plateau. The tank waste and WTP facilities on the Central Plateau are discussed in Chapter 5.0 as part of 

ORP’s scope. 

During site operations, 450 billion gallons of liquid waste were discharged to the ground; most within the 

Central Plateau (TRAC-0151-VA, Historical Perspective of Radioactively Contaminated Liquid and 

Solid Wastes Discharged or Buried in the Ground at Hanford). These past releases have created extensive 

plumes of groundwater contamination that exceed drinking water standards with a combined area of 

approximately 73 square miles (DOE/RL-2014-32, Hanford Site Groundwater Monitoring Report for 

2013). A significant portion of contamination remains in the soil column above the water table and poses 

a potential threat to groundwater. 

Interim and final groundwater treatment is in place for contaminant plumes in the 200 West Area and in 

several locations in the 100 Areas. The ROD for the large carbon tetrachloride plume in the 200 West 

Area (200-ZP-1 Operable Unit [OU]) was signed in 2008 (EPA 2008, Record of Decision Hanford 200 

Area 200-ZP-1 Superfund Site, Benton County, Washington) and operation of the expanded 200 West 

Pump-and-Treat Facility began in FY2012. The ROD for plutonium-contaminated and 

cesium-contaminated soil sites (200-PW-1/3/6 and 200-CW-5 OUs) was signed in FY2011 (EPA 2011, 

Record of Decision Hanford 200 Area Superfund Site 200-CW-5 and 200-PW-1, 200-PW-3, and 

200-PW-6 Operable Units) and a new interim action ROD for 200-UP-1 groundwater OU was approved 

in 2012 (EPA 2012, Record of Decision for Interim Remedial Action Hanford 200 Area Superfund Site, 

200-UP-1 Operable Unit). The Central Plateau cleanup is organized into the following three principal 

components (DOE/RL-2009-10): 

x Inner Area – The footprint of the Central Plateau that will be dedicated to long-term waste 

management and containment of residual contamination and will remain under Federal ownership and 

control as long as a potential hazard exists. The Inner Area contains the majority of Hanford’s active 

waste treatment, storage and disposal facilities, including hundreds of waste sites, surplus facilities, 

miles of buried pipelines, tank farms, and large canyon facilities. Cleanup of the Inner Area will make 

this footprint as small as practical. 

x Outer Area – All areas of the Central Plateau beyond the boundary of the Inner Area. It is DOE’s 

intent to clean up the Outer Area to a level comparable to the River Corridor (i.e., suitable for 

unrestricted surface use under continued Federal ownership and control and consistent with DOE’s 

anticipated future land use of conservation/mining). Contaminated soil and debris removed as part of 

Outer Area cleanup will be placed within the Inner Area for final disposal. Completion of cleanup for 

the approximately 65-square-mile Outer Area will shrink the active footprint of cleanup for the 

Central Plateau to the Inner Area. 

x Groundwater and Deep Vadose Zone Remediation – DOE’s goal is to restore groundwater to its 

beneficial uses (Table 1-2, Goal 2), unless restoration is determined to be technically impracticable. 

An important element of groundwater protection and remediation is to develop and implement ways 

to protect groundwater from continuing influx of contaminants from the deep vadose zone. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

4-2 

The cleanup work scope in the Central Plateau is managed through five projects: 

x NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP, PBS RL-0011 (Inner Area). 

x Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone, PBS RL-0030 (entire Hanford Site, 

including Inner and Outer Areas and the River Corridor). 

x Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford, PBS RL-0040 (geographical cleanup of waste sites 

and facilities, including the remaining canyon facilities in the Inner and Outer Areas). 

x Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project, PBS RL-0042 (includes FFTF located in River 

Corridor). 

x Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area, PBS RL-0013C (Inner Area). 

Cleanup is being performed in accordance with RODs and action memoranda as listed in Appendix A and 

with key TPA milestones listed in Table 4-1. 

Table 4-1. Central Plateau Cleanup Key Tri-Party Agreement Milestones. (3 pages) 

Milestone Description Compliance Date 

NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP, PBS RL-0011 

M-083-44

Complete transition of the 234-5Z (Plutonium Conversion Facility) and 

ZA (Plutonium Conversion Support Facility), 243-Z Low-Level Waste 

Treatment Facility, 291-Z Exhaust Building, and 291-Z-1 Exhaust Stack 

to support PFP decommissioning. 

09/30/2015

M-083-00A Complete PFP facility transition and selected disposition activities. 09/30/2016 

Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford, PBS RL-0040 

M-016-00 Complete remedial actions for all non-tank farm and non-canyon OUs. 09/30/2024 

M-016-200A Complete U Plant Canyon (221-U Facility) demolition in accordance 

with the remedial design/remedial action work plan. 09/30/2017 

M-016-200B Complete U Plant Canyon (221-U Facility) barrier construction in 

accordance with the remedial design/remedial action work plan. 09/30/2021 

M-037-10

Complete unit-specific closure requirements according to the closure 

plan(s) for seven (7) TSD units: 207-A South Retention Basin, 

216-A-29 Ditch, 216-A-36B Crib, 216-A-37-1 Crib, 216-B-63 Trench, 

Hexone Storage and Treatment Facility (276-S-141/142), and 241-CX 

Tank System (241-CX-70/71/72). 

09/30/2020 

M-037-11 Complete unit-specific closure requirements for two (2) TSD units: 

216-B-3 Main Pond system and 216-S-10 Pond and Ditch. 09/30/2016 

M-085-00

Complete response actions for the canyon facilities/associated past 

practice waste sites, other Tier 1 Central Plateau facilities not covered by 

existing milestones, and Tier 2 Central Plateau facilities. This includes 

B Plant, PUREX, and REDOX canyons and associated past practice 

waste sites in 200-CB-1, 200-CP-1, and 200-CR-1 OUs. 

TBD 

M-085-01 Submit a change package to establish a date for major milestone 

M-085-00. 09/30/2022 

Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area, PBS RL-0013C 

M-091-00

Complete the treatment to LDR treatment standards for all Hanford Site 

RCRA MLLW and RCRA TRUM waste. DOE may choose to complete 

certification and shipment of TRUM waste for disposal at the WIPP in 

lieu of LDR treatment if, as of the time of shipment, such waste is 

exempt from LDR treatment standards when disposed at WIPP. 

Date to be established 

pursuant 

to M-091-44T

M-091-01

Complete the acquisition of new facilities, modification of existing 

facilities, and modification of planned facilities necessary for retrieval, 

storage, and treatment/processing of all Hanford Site RCRA TRUM 

waste. 

Date to be established 

pursuant to 

M-091-01A and 

M-091-01B 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

4-3

Table 4-1. Central Plateau Cleanup Key Tri-Party Agreement Milestones. (3 pages) 

Milestone Description Compliance Date 

M-091-01A 

Complete the conceptual design for acquisition of capabilities and/or 

acquisition of new facilities, modification of existing facilities, and/or 

modification of planned facilities necessary for retrieval, designation, 

storage, and treatment/processing prior to disposal of all Hanford Site 

RH TRUM waste and TRUM waste in large containers (in aboveground 

storage as of June 30, 2009 and in retrievable storage). In addition, 

submit a milestone change package (based on the conceptual design) for 

annual construction milestones for the planned facilities necessary for 

retrieval, storage, and treatment/processing of all Hanford Site RH 

TRUM waste and large container CH TRUM waste. 

09/30/2016 

M-091-01B 

Complete the definitive design for acquisition of capabilities and/or 

acquisition of new facilities, modification of existing facilities, and/or 

modification of planned facilities necessary for retrieval, designation, 

storage, and treatment/processing prior to disposal of all Hanford Site 

RH TRUM waste and TRUM waste in large containers (in aboveground 

storage as of June 30, 2009 and in retrievable storage). In addition, 

submit a milestone change package documenting any substantial 

variations, based on the definitive design, from annual construction 

milestones finalized pursuant to M-091-01A. 

09/30/2018 

M-091-40 Complete the retrieval and designation of CH retrievably stored waste in 

burial grounds 218-W-4B, 218-W-3A, and 218-E-12B. 09/30/2016 

M-091-41 Complete retrieval and designation of RH retrievably stored waste 

(regardless of package size, including the 200 Area caissons). 12/31/2018 

M-091-41A Complete retrieval of non-caisson RH, retrievably stored waste. 09/30/2016

M-091-42

Complete the treatment of small container CH MLLW (in aboveground 

storage as of June 30, 2009 and in retrievable storage) to meet applicable 

LDR treatment standards in compliance with WAC 173-303-140. 

09/30/2017

M-091-43

Complete the treatment of large container CH MLLW and RH MLLW 

(in aboveground storage as of June 30, 2009 and in retrievable storage) 

to applicable LDR treatment standards in compliance with WAC 173-

303-140. 

09/30/2017

M-091-44

Complete the treatment of large container CH TRUM waste and RH 

TRUM waste (in aboveground storage as of June 30, 2009 and in 

retrievable storage). 

12/31/2030

M-091-44T 

Submit a change package for annual milestones to treat or certify and 

ship large container CH TRUM waste and RH TRUM waste (in 

aboveground storage as of June 30, 2009 and in retrievable storage) to 

complete the disposition of this waste. 

09/30/2018 

M-091-46 Complete the certification of small container CH TRUM waste (in 

aboveground storage as of June 30, 2009 and in retrievable storage). 09/30/2017 

M-091-46H Complete offsite shipment of all small container CH TRUM waste (in 

aboveground storage as of June 30, 2009 and in retrievable storage). 09/30/2018 

M-092-05 Determine disposition path and establish interim agreement milestones 

for Hanford Site cesium/strontium capsules. 06/30/2017 

Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone, PBS RL-0030 

M-015-00

Complete the RI/FS (or RCRA facility investigation/corrective measures 

study and RI/FS) process for all non-tank farm OUs except for 

canyon/associated past practice waste site OUs covered in M-085-00. 

12/31/2016 

M-015-21A Submit a 200-BP-5 and 200-PO-1 OU feasibility study report and 

proposed plan(s) to Ecology. 06/30/2015 

M-015-38B 

Submit a revised feasibility study report and revised proposed plan(s) for 

the 200-CW-1, 200-CW-3, and 200-OA-1 OUs for waste sites in the 

Outer Area of the Central Plateau to EPA. 

10/30/2015 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

4-4 

Table 4-1. Central Plateau Cleanup Key Tri-Party Agreement Milestones. (3 pages) 

Milestone Description Compliance Date 

M-015-91B Submit feasibility study report(s) and proposed plan(s) for the 

200-BC-1/200-WA-1 OUs (200 West Inner Area) to EPA. 12/31/2015 

M-015-92B 

Submit corrective measures study and feasibility study report(s) and 

proposed corrective action decision(s)/proposed plan(s) for the 

200-EA-1 and 200-IS-1 OUs (Central Plateau 200 East Inner Area) to 

Ecology. 

12/31/2016 

M-015-93B 

Submit RCRA facility investigation/corrective measures study and 

RI/FS report and proposed corrective action decision/proposed plan for 

the 200-SW-2 OU to Ecology. 

12/31/2016 

M-015-110B 

Submit corrective measures study and feasibility study report and 

proposed plan/proposed corrective action decision for the 200-DV-1 OU 

to Ecology. 

09/30/2015 

M-024-00O Complete required well installations in accordance with the RCRA and 

CERCLA groundwater requirements. TBD 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, 42 USC 9601, et seq. 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, 42 USC 6901, et seq. 

WAC 173-303-140, “Land Disposal Restrictions,” Washington Administrative Code, Olympia, Washington. 

CERCLA= Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act.

CH = contact-handled. 

D&D = decontamination and decommissioning.

Ecology = Washington State Department of Ecology. 

EPA = U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

LDR = Land Disposal Restrictions. 

MLLW = mixed low-level waste. 

NM = nuclear material. 

OU = operable unit. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant. 

PUREX = Plutonium Uranium Extraction (Plant). 

RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.

REDOX = Reduction-Oxidation Facility (S Plant). 

RH = remote-handled. 

RI/FS = remedial investigation/feasibility study. 

TBD = to be determined. 

TRUM = transuranic mixed (waste). 

TSD = treatment, storage, and disposal. 

WIPP = Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. 

4.1 NM STABILIZATION AND DISPOSITION–PFP (PBS RL-0011) 

The Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) complex was constructed in the 200 West Area in the late 1940s. Its 

mission was to convert plutonium nitrate product to the more stable oxide, metal, and oxalate forms for 

safer shipment to nuclear weapons fabrication facilities. In 1989, plutonium production operations ended 

at PFP and removing the plutonium inventory and plant D4 were assigned high national priority 

(HNF-EP-0924, History and Stabilization of the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) Complex Hanford 

Site). 

Cleanup and demolition to slab-on-grade of the PFP complex is being performed as a closure project 

under NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011), also known as the PFP Closure Project 

(DOE/RL-2005-13, Action Memorandum for the Plutonium Finishing Plant Above-Grade Structures 

Non-Time Critical Removal Action). To begin the PFP closure process, about 20 tons of 

plutonium-bearing material stored at PFP required an integrated DOE-wide disposition strategy. In 2004, 

PFP completed the project to recover, stabilize, and package the inventory to meet updated safety 

standards in addition to shipping designated plutonium-bearing material to WIPP. Shipment of the 

remaining PFP plutonium inventory to DOE storage facilities was completed in 2009. 

The PFP Closure Project scope requires D4 of PFP systems and structures to accomplish the defined 

project endpoint completion criteria in compliance with all applicable agreements, regulations, CERCLA, 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), and other applicable processes. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

4-5

This effort eliminates significant hazards to workers, the public, and the environment, and additionally 

minimizes long-term risks and costs. Major cleanup objectives for PFP closure are to: 

x Remove plutonium-bearing material and waste, including un-irradiated fuel, slightly irradiated fuel, 

and other nuclear materials from PFP facilities (removing the plutonium inventory was completed in 

2009; residual plutonium is removed in the cleanup process). 

x Eliminate the Protected Area at PFP (this scope was completed in 2009). 

x Clean out and demolish facilities in the PFP complex (currently underway with two major and 

numerous minor facilities complete). 

x Transfer the remainder of the PFP complex to RL-0040 for final remediation. Waste sites and 

subsurface facilities will be managed through remediation of the 200-PW-1/3/6 and 200-CW-5 OUs 

and the new 200-WA-1 OU. 

Table 4-2 provides a summary of the scope of each of these work elements.

Table 4-2. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Level 2 Scope Summary. 

Work Element Scope Description 

Maintain Safe 

and Compliant 

PFP 

Maintain building integrity and safety systems during D4 efforts. Tasks include maintaining 

worker/public health and environmental safety, an environmentally compliant facility, 

facility systems and components, the maintenance program, and special projects. 

Disposition PFP 

Facility

Includes planning, preparing, engineering, sampling, procurement, and other tasks necessary 

to execute removal of plutonium holdup material (e.g., material in ducting), deactivation, and 

disposition of aboveground PFP facilities before transitioning the below-grade components 

(e.g., below-grade structures and waste sites) to Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of 

Hanford (PBS RL-0040) for surveillance and maintenance and final remediation. D4 

activities will be completed for buildings and facilities in the PFP area, reducing them to 

slab-on-grade. Slab-on-grade is defined as a concrete slab, typically the first floor of a 

building resting on grade (earth) that is free of dispersible radiological contamination. 

Project 

Management 

and Support 

Includes project management and support to PFP D4 activities including procurement and 

project controls. This also includes technical support such as engineering, quality assurance, 

and procedure and document maintenance. 

Site-wide 

Services and 

Other 

Distributed 

Costs 

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See Section 6.3.2 for 

details.

- Includes services that are charged based on predetermined rates, and services that are 

directly charged to Other Hanford Contractors. Details are provided in Table C-1. 

- Includes contractor’s fee and management reserve.

D4 = deactivation, decontamination, 

decommission, and demolition. 

D&D = decontamination and decommission. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. 

PFP transition is planned to be complete in FY2016 per TPA M-083-00A. Cost and/or schedule 

uncertainty extends the schedule beyond FY2016. 

Figure 4-1 presents the remaining estimated cleanup costs for NM Stabilization and Disposition-PFP 

(PBS RL-0011) work scope by fiscal year; Figure 4-2 presents the remaining estimated cleanup costs by 

work element. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

4-6 

Figure 4-1. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Remaining Estimated 

Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. 

Figure 4-2. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Remaining Estimated 

Cleanup Costs by Work Element. 

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

$0

$40

$80

$120

$160

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

See Appendix C, Table C-2 for cost and schedule data. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

4-7

4.2 SOIL AND WATER REMEDIATION–GROUNDWATER/VADOSE ZONE 

(PBS RL-0030) 

Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030), also known as the Groundwater 

Project, includes the following: 

x Regulatory decision-making process for all groundwater OUs on the Hanford Site. 

x Remediation of all groundwater on the Hanford Site in accordance with the groundwater OU 

decisions. 

x Regulatory decision-making process for Central Plateau waste sites (remediation of waste sites is part 

of the Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford [PBS RL-0040] project scope). 

x Regulatory decision-making process and remediation for soil contamination in the Central Plateau 

deep vadose zone. 

The project includes soil and groundwater characterization, groundwater monitoring, groundwater 

treatment, well drilling, treatability testing, evaluation of remediation options, and preparing the 

regulatory documentation necessary to obtain final RODs on remedial actions for soil waste sites and 

groundwater, including the River Corridor and Central Plateau. 

Much of the contamination remains in the vadose zone soil column above the water table; however, at 

waste sites where large volumes of liquid were released, the more mobile contaminants have reached 

groundwater. The tritium groundwater contaminant plume from the Central Plateau has reached the 

Columbia River. Additional groundwater contaminant plumes such as chromium, strontium-90, and 

uranium originating in the 100 or 300 Areas also have reached the Columbia River. 

The major chemical contaminants present in the groundwater include carbon tetrachloride, hexavalent 

chromium, cyanide, nitrate, and trichloroethene. Major radioactive contaminants include iodine-129, 

strontium-90, technetium-99, tritium, and uranium. Other groundwater contaminants that exceed drinking 

water standards in several Hanford Site areas, but are of limited extent, include a volatile organic 

compound (cis-1,2-dichloroethene) and radioactive contaminants (carbon-14, cesium-137, gross beta and 

plutonium-239/240) (DOE/RL-2014-32). The Groundwater Project (DOE/RL-2002-59, Hanford Site 

Groundwater Strategy Protection, Monitoring, and Remediation) has three major objectives: 

x Take actions necessary to prevent degradation of the groundwater 

x Remediate groundwater to restore it to beneficial use where practicable and protect the river 

x Monitor groundwater to identify emerging problems and guide the remediation process. 

To be successful, the Groundwater Project needs to obtain sufficient characterization data, evaluate 

performance of early actions, and develop remedial action objectives. Hanford is divided into ten 

groundwater OUs; six in the River Corridor (100-BC-5, 100-KR-4, 100-NR-2, 100-HR-3, 100-FR-3, 

300-FF-5) and four in the Central Plateau (200-ZP-1, 200-UP-1, 200-BP-5, 200-PO-1). Groundwater 

monitoring activities are also required by the Atomic Energy Act, CERCLA, and the Hanford Facility 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Permit, Dangerous Waste Portion, Revision 8C, for the 

Treatment, Storage, and Disposal of Dangerous Waste (WA7890008967). Table 4-3 provides additional 

details on the scope of work for each of the work elements. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

4-8 

Table 4-3. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Level 2 Scope 

Summary. (2 pages) 

Work 

Element Scope Description 

Integration 

and 

Assessments 

Includes eight elements: Strategic Integration; Technical Integration; Remediation Decision 

Support; Remediation Science and Technology; Sample Management and Reporting; 

Environmental Databases; Value Engineering Studies; and Systematic Planning Integration. This 

integration function coordinates and focuses Hanford Site characterization and assessment efforts 

to ensure consistency, eliminate information gaps and overlaps, apply science and technology 

new to Hanford, foster technical peer review, and integrate remediation decisions. 

Drilling

Includes planning, coordinating, and implementing well drilling and well decommissioning for 

Hanford wells according to project-specific requirements. This includes drilling wells to 

Washington State standards and preparing all required submittals and notifications required by 

Washington State law and providing well-related information for Hanford databases. Aspects of 

drilling include technical coordination, procurement, labor, subcontracts, materials, and 

equipment for project planning; documentation; field support during drilling; and project closeout 

to support drilling wells for groundwater monitoring and optimization of groundwater treatment 

systems. 

Project 

Management 

Includes program management oversight; business management and integration; project control 

and integration; engineering and maintenance; environmental, safety, health and quality; and 

technical support. 

Integrated 

Field Work 

Includes services, infrastructure, material, equipment, labor, and contracts used to plan, support, 

and perform field work. It includes non-OU related well maintenance, monitoring, and reporting. 

Major elements include operations and maintenance, training, field equipment purchases, 

unanticipated field work, and maintenance, monitoring, and reporting for wells that are not 

aligned with a specific OU. 

Groundwater 

Monitoring & 

Performance 

Assessments 

Includes: 

x Operation, maintenance, sampling, and dismantlement of the Modutanks that are used for 

disposal of groundwater from onsite well sampling and maintenance, characterization, and 

remediation activities. 

x Groundwater sampling, analysis, monitoring, evaluation, assessment, and reporting for RCRA 

TSDs, CERCLA OUs, and other permitted facilities and sites. 

x Coordination and management of groundwater sampling and water level determinations. 

x Operation, maintenance, and relocation of the Hanford Geotechnical Sample Library, the 

repository for historical sediment, core, and other soil and sediment samples used for scientific 

studies including laboratory studies, bench tests, conceptual model development, and fate and 

transport evaluations for contaminant migration. 

x Project management for these activities. 

x Well maintenance, monitoring, and reporting. 

x Geophysical sciences and borehole logging. 

Groundwater 

OUs Decision 

Documents & 

Remediation 

Includes management and implementation of groundwater remediation for Hanford, including: 

x Implementing the RI/FS process for groundwater OUs by performing RI/FSs leading to final 

RODs. 

x Preparing DQO reports, sampling and analysis plans, waste management plans, and other 

regulatory documentation, as needed, for all groundwater OUs. 

x Conducting as needed field studies to support decision making and design. 

x Designing treatment systems in accordance with RODs and remedial action work plans. 

x Implementing treatment systems in accordance with the design and the ROD requirements or 

modifying and expanding the remedy to optimize remediation. 

x Conducting ongoing monitoring and reporting. 

x Maintaining system and monitoring wells. 

x Final D&D of remedy components. 

The work scope is managed by OU and is consistent between the OUs. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 4-9 

Table 4-3. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Level 2 Scope 

Summary. (2 pages) 

Work 

Element Scope Description 

Regulatory 

Decisions &

Closure 

Integration 

Includes planning, management, characterization, documentation, and other associated activities 

necessary to complete the remedial decision process for each closure zone, including closure 

plans for RCRA TSD sites. Specific activities include RI/FSs, proposed plans, closure plans, 

engineering evaluation/cost analyses, DQOs, sampling and analysis plans, RODs, and other 

documents and activities leading to remedial decisions and remediation planning. Following 

completion of assessment activities through decision documentation (e.g., ROD or closure plan), 

completion of the remedial design/remedial action work plan and waste site/facility remediation 

and/or closure will be addressed under Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford 

(PBS RL-0040). 

Deep Vadose 

Zone 

Treatability 

Tests 

This involves deep vadose zone treatability testing in accordance with DOE/RL-2007-56, 

conducting engineering and technical studies necessary to support decision-making for Central 

Plateau remediation of the deep vadose zone OU, and evaluating tradeoffs associated with 

remedial action decisions. The initial work phase focuses on conducting laboratory work and 

numerical modeling to address uncertainties associated with the technology and employing the 

technology in the deep vadose zone. The second phase involves the design and implementation of 

treatability testing in the field at carefully selected locations, using one or more technologies -

depending on the success of the initial testing. 

Deep Vadose 

Zone OU 

Addresses mitigation of the contamination present in the deep vadose zone at Hanford. Initial 

actions planned for this OU are field studies and deployment activities and developing decision 

documents. Other tasks for this OU, such as remedial action planning and implementation; well 

support activities; monitoring and reporting support; OU modifications and expansions; and final 

D&D of the OU remediation activities at the conclusion of the project will be included following 

the decision process. Changes to the TPA have been undertaken to add milestones for testing 

remedial technologies and to establish a new deep vadose zone OU (200-DV-1). Also, DOE is 

establishing a project team to focus on the development and evaluation of deep vadose zone 

remedies. DOE is also establishing the Deep Vadose Zone Applied Field Research Center at 

Hanford, which would be the focal point for investigation and resolution of critical deep vadose 

zone issues at Hanford and within the DOE complex. 

Site-wide 

Services and 

Other 

Distributed 

Costs

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See Section 6.3.2 for 

details.

- Includes administrative and technical support provided to the project. Details are provided in 

Table C-12. 

- Includes services that are charged based on predetermined rates, and services that are directly 

charged to Other Hanford Contractors. Details are provided in Table C-12. 

- Includes contractor’s fee and management reserve, allocated pensions and General and 

Administrative. 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, 42 USC 9601. 

DOE/RL-2007-56, 2008, Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Test Plan for the Hanford Central Plateau, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, 42 USC 6901. 

CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act. 

D&D = decontamination and decommission.

DOE = U.S. Department of Energy. 

DQO = data quality objectives. 

OU = operable unit. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. 

RI/FS = remedial investigation/feasibility study. 

RL = Richland Operations Office. 

ROD = record of decision. 

TPA = Tri-Party Agreement. 

TSD = treatment, storage, and disposal. 

Figure 4-3 presents the remaining estimated cleanup costs for Soil and Water Remediation–

Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) by fiscal year; Figure 4-4 presents the remaining estimated 

cleanup costs by work element. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 4-10 

Figure 4-3. Soil and Water Remediation-Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Remaining 

Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. 

Figure 4-4. Soil and Water Remediation-Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Remaining 

Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element. 

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

2015

2025

2035

2045

2055

2065

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

Costs (Million$) 

Fiscal Year 

See Appendix C, Table C-13 for cost and schedule data. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 4-11 

4.3 NUCLEAR FACILITY D&D–REMAINDER OF 

HANFORD (PBS RL-0040) 

Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040) is the geographically based cleanup and 

closure of the Central Plateau and remaining scope in the other Hanford Site areas. In addition to the 

Central Plateau cleanup scope, PBS RL-0040 includes the infrastructure and services scope under Mission 

Support, which is discussed in Chapter 6.0. This section focuses on the cleanup-related elements of the 

PBS, also known (and referred to in the rest of this section) as the Central Plateau Remediation Project 

(PBS RL-0040). The Central Plateau Remediation Project scope includes the demolition and remediation 

scope that is organized into 21 geographical areas referred to as closure zones. 

Following completion of assessment activities through decision documentation (e.g., ROD or closure 

plan) under Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030), completion of the 

remedial design/remedial action work plan and waste site/facility remediation and/or closure will be 

addressed under the Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040). The Central Plateau 

Remediation Project scope includes implementing the decisions through the physical cleanup of canyon 

facilities, buildings and structures, waste sites, pipelines, and miscellaneous sites (e.g., debris piles), and 

utilities to ensure appropriate protection has been provided for the cleanup. 

To accomplish the Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040), the following major objectives 

have been established: 

x Perform safe S&M of facilities and waste sites pending remediation 

x Integrate planning and execution activities with other Central Plateau projects 

x Remediate waste sites 

x Decontamination and decommission (D&D) canyons 

x D&D excess facilities. 

The project will be complete when the following endpoint criteria have been reached: 

x Canyons and surplus facilities removed or dispositioned and ready for transition to LTS 

x Central Plateau waste sites remediated in accordance with approved decisions 

x Legacy wastes and 300 Area PNNL facilities have cleanup decisions 

x Institutional controls implemented 

x Post-remediation operations and maintenance requirements implemented. 

The work scope for the Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040) is organized into three 

primary Level 2 work elements. Table 4-4 provides additional details on the scope of work for each of 

these work elements. 

The duration, in part, is dependent on transition of the tank farms to the project for final disposition after 

closure activities are completed by ORP (see Chapter 5.0). It is also dependent on transition of waste 

management facilities that are no longer needed to support Hanford cleanup from Solid Waste 

Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) to the project for final disposition (see 

Section 4.5).
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 4-12 

Table 4-4. Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040) Level 2 Scope Summary. 

Work Element Scope Description 

Regulatory Decisions and 

Closure Integration

Includes general management direction and technical/environment, safety, health, 

and quality support, engineering and technical studies necessary to support decision 

making for Central Plateau remediation and to evaluate tradeoffs associated with 

remedial action and facility disposition decisions, regulatory decisions for canyons 

and related nuclear process facilities, regulatory decisions for below-slab 

remediation for non-canyon facilities, hazard reduction and emergency response 

tasks necessary to address aging facility or waste site conditions that are above and 

beyond anticipated operational and maintenance plans. 

Zone Environmental 

Remediation

Includes geographic remediation of closure zones in the Central Plateau. Each zone 

has a variety of cleanup features that can include waste sites, facilities, canyons, 

pipelines, and remedial barriers. 

Actions to be taken for cleaning up each waste site, including pipelines, will be 

determined through the regulatory decision processes (under Soil and Water 

Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone, PBS RL-0030) and as part of remedial 

definition activities. Potential remedial actions for waste sites range from monitored 

natural attenuation to capping or removal, depending on waste site conditions. 

Contamination levels, risks, proximity to facilities, and other considerations are 

factored into the selection. Existing structures (other than the canyon facilities) are 

expected to be demolished and the debris disposed at the Environmental Restoration 

Disposal Facility. 

S&M and Min-Safe for 

Facilities and Waste Sites 

Includes CERCLA 5-year reviews, surveillance and system, structural, equipment, 

and other maintenance on Central Plateau facilities/buildings and waste sites. 

Site-wide Services and 

Other Distributed Costs

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See 

Section 6.3.2 for details: 

x Includes services that are charged based on predetermined rates, and services that 

are directly charged to Other Hanford Contractors. Details are provided in 

Table C-15. 

x Includes contractor’s fee, management reserve, allocated pensions and General 

and Administrative allocations. 

CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, Liability Act.

PBS = project baseline summary. 

S&M = surveillance and maintenance. 

Figure 4-5 presents the remaining estimated cleanup costs for the Central Plateau Remediation Project 

(PBS RL-0040) by fiscal year; Figure 4-6 presents the remaining estimated cleanup costs by work 

element. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 4-13 

Figure 4-5. Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by 

Fiscal Year. 

Figure 4-6. Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Estimated 

Cleanup Costs by Work Element. 

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060 2065

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

$0

$150

$300

$450

$600

$750

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

See Appendix C, Table C-16 for cost and schedule data. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 4-14 

4.4 NUCLEAR FACILITY D&D–FAST FLUX 

TEST FACILITY PROJECT (PBS RL-0042) 

FFTF is a deactivated, 400-megawatt (thermal) liquid-metal (sodium)-cooled, research and test reactor 

located in the 400 Area. The facility was used to develop and test advanced fuels and materials for the 

Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor Program and to serve as a prototype facility for future Liquid Metal 

Fast Breeder Reactor Program facilities. DOE issued a shutdown order for FFTF in December 1993 

because the Liquid Breeder Reactor Program had been cancelled. 

The scope of Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) is to provide for safe 

D&D, secure storage and stabilization of hazardous/radioactive materials, interim maintenance of 

facilities, demolition, and disposal of the waste. The mission requires removing and dispositioning 

sodium coolant, the reactor containment building, reactor support buildings, and auxiliary facilities and 

support systems. The project’s technical objective will achieve the following: 

x Remove and disposition sodium coolant and clean residual sodium 

x Fill spaces with grout below 550-feet elevation level (grade level) of the reactor containment building 

x Decommission and demolish all facilities. 

The regulatory decision for the FFTF containment building final closure, including the de-fueled reactor 

vessel, will be determined following the appropriate environmental analysis process. For planning 

purposes, the reactor containment dome is assumed to be removed, the below-grade reactor containment 

building grouted and entombed, and support facilities and structures demolished to 3 feet below grade and 

backfilled. The FFTF alternatives have been evaluated in DOE/EIS-0391, Final Tank Closure and Waste 

Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington and a 

December 13, 2013, ROD (78 FR 75913). 

Waste sites in the 400 Area are included as part of the 300-FF-2 OU, which is being remediated under the 

Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041). Table 4-5 summarizes the work 

scope. 

Table 4-5. Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) Level 2 Scope Summary. 

Work Element Scope Description 

FFTF Cleanup

Includes monitoring, surveillance, and maintenance of FFTF and surrounding area in a 

safe and compliant manner until D&D; deactivate FFTF; disposition FFTF sodium; 

construct a sodium reaction facility; decommission FFTF in accordance with a future 

record of decision; and project management for these activities. 

Infrastructure Services Includes legal support. 

Site-wide Services and 

Other Distributed Costs 

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See Section 

6.3.2 for details: 

x Includes services that are charged based on predetermined rates, and services that 

are directly charged to Other Hanford Contractors. Details are provided in 

Table C-24. 

x Includes contractor’s fee, management reserve, allocated pensions and General and 

Administrative allocations. 

D&D = decontamination and decommission. 

FFTF = Fast Flux Test Facility. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. 

Figure 4-7 presents the remaining estimated cleanup costs for the Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test 

Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) by fiscal year; Figure 4-8 shows the remaining estimated cleanup costs by 

work element. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 4-15 

Figure 4-7. Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) Remaining Estimated 

Costs by Fiscal Year. 

Figure 4-8. Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) Remaining Estimated Costs 

by Work Element. 

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

$140

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

$0

$30

$60

$90

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

See Appendix C, Table C-25 for cost and schedule data. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 4-16 

4.5 SOLID WASTE STABILIZATION AND 

DISPOSITION–200 AREA (PBS RL-0013C) 

The scope of the Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) project is to 

provide waste treatment and disposal services for Hanford facilities and operations. The major mission 

objectives are to: 

x Operate waste treatment facilities, including T Plant, WRAP Facility, and 200 Area Liquid Effluent 

Treatment Facility (ETF). 

x Provide Base Waste Management Operations at the CSB and 200 Area Interim Storage Area, 

Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF), Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility (WESF) for 

cesium/strontium capsule storage, and Low-Level Burial Grounds and mixed waste disposal trenches. 

Additional objectives are: 

x Retrieve and ship transuranic (TRU) waste for disposal to the WIPP or other permitted facility. 

x Develop alternative methods for treatment and disposal of orphan waste. This could include seeking 

land disposal restrictions variance approvals, expanding commercial treatment facilities permit limits 

and construction and operation of additional onsite treatment capabilities. 

x Obtain processing capabilities to repackage large and remote-handled (RH) contaminated waste 

containers. 

The Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) includes completing the 

following activities: 

x Cesium and strontium capsules will be transferred to dry storage and/or permanent disposal. 

x Irradiated nuclear fuels will be removed offsite to a national repository for final disposition. 

x Stored underground TRU waste will be retrieved and disposed. 

x Mixed low-level waste and low-level waste will be treated as necessary and disposed. 

x Waste management facilities will be deactivated at the end of their useful lives and will be transferred 

to Nuclear Facility D&D-Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040) for final disposition. 

x Low-Level Burial Grounds (including the mixed waste trenches) will be closed and transferred to 

Nuclear Facility D&D-Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040) for final disposition and remedial 

action. 

x ERDF will be operated to provide solid waste treatment and disposal services in support of Hanford 

cleanup after completion of the Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project 

(PBS RL-0041). 

x IDF will be closed according to the closure plan requirements in the Dangerous Waste Permit 

(WA7890008967). Closure will follow completion of tank waste vitrification. 

Table 4-6 summarizes each scope element. As waste management facilities are no longer needed to 

support Hanford cleanup, they will be transitioned to Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford 

(PBS RL-0040) for final disposition. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 4-17 

Table 4-6. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Level 2 Scope Summary. 

(2 pages) 

Work Element Scope Description 

Project 

Management 

Provides for the overall project management, coordination, direction, and customer interface 

to ensure the proper conduct of operation for this project. 

Capsule Storage 

and Disposition 

Addresses operation of the WESF pool cells, and includes life extension upgrades to ensure 

safe and compliant operations, retrieval and disposition of cesium/strontium capsules, and 

transition of WESF for final D&D. 

CSB

Includes safe storage of SNF and immobilized high-level waste from the WTP while 

awaiting final disposition at the geologic repository, repackaging SNF for shipment, and 

coordination with the offsite repository for evaluations and information. 

MLLW 

Treatment

Addresses treatment of MLLW to meet regulatory requirements including alternative 

methods for treatment and disposal of orphan waste. Treatment technologies include macroencapsulation, stabilization, or thermal techniques such as vacuum desorption. Once 

categorized, the waste will be prepared for shipment to the appropriate processing or 

treatment facility. 

TRU Retrieval Consists of the retrieval, designation, and transfer to a TSD facility of both CH and RH 

solid stored underground TRU waste. 

TRU 

Repackaging

Provides funding for WIPP production, TRU repacking operations at T Plant and WRAP (or 

a commercial facility), TRU program support for repackaging, and RH/large packaging 

capabilities. 

WRAP Facility Provides base and minimum safe operations at the WRAP to support processing of TRU 

wastes to WIPP and includes transition to final D&D. 

T Plant Addresses the operation and maintenance of the T Plant Complex for waste processing 

operations, including necessary upgrades and transition to final D&D of the canyon. 

CWC

Includes operation and maintenance of the CWC, including upgrades to maintain needed 

capability and transition to final D&D. The scope includes provision of an alternate 

capability (other than WRAP) to load CH TRU waste into shipping containers for shipment 

to WIPP. 

ERDF

Addresses the operation of the ERDF after turnover from the River Corridor Closure Project 

through the end of Hanford cleanup, including cell expansion and ERDF interim cover 

construction. 

Liquid Effluent 

Facilities 

Includes operation and maintenance of LERF, ETF, and 200 Area TEDF to receive, store, 

treat, and dispose of liquid effluents from Hanford cleanup activities. 

IDF

Provides for the preparation, startup, and operation of the IDF to receive and store low-level 

waste and MLLW in accordance with applicable waste acceptance criteria. The scope 

includes provisions for IDF expansion. 

Solid Waste Base 

Operations 

Provides for the minimum staffing to maintain a viable waste management program and to 

capture those waste support activities that are essentially fixed cost in nature. 

TRU Disposition 

Provides funding and resources for the TRU Program’s coordination with the Central 

Characterization Project to certify TRU waste according to the WIPP Waste Acceptance 

Criteria. This work element also provides funding to perform Hanford WIPP closeout 

activities, TRU waste characterization activities at the direction or guidance of the Central 

Characterization Project and to establish shipping capabilities for RH TRU waste and 

additional CH TRU waste shipping capabilities. 

SNF Disposition 

Includes design and construction of a Fuel Preparation Facility, turnover of the facility to 

operations, and level of effort support to the DOE Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste 

Management and National Spent Nuclear Fuel Program activities. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 4-18 

Table 4-6. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Level 2 Scope Summary. 

(2 pages) 

Work Element Scope Description 

Mixed Waste 

Disposal 

Trenches 

Includes operation of the mixed waste disposal trenches and the design, construction, and 

other activities necessary to add operational layers in the trenches to maintain their ready-toserve status and to place temporary caps on the trenches. 

Sludge 

Disposition

Includes activities to stabilize and package the sludge from the 105-KW Basin for final 

disposition to WIPP or other disposal facilities, including Phase 2 treatment and packaging 

shutdown and deactivation of needed equipment, and management and support. 

Site-wide 

Services and 

Other Distributed 

Costs

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See Section 6.3.2 for 

details: 

- Includes administrative and technical support and other activities. Details are provided in 

Table C-7. 

- Includes services that are charged based on predetermined rates, and services that are 

directly charged to Other Hanford Contractors. Details are provided in Table C-7. 

- Includes contractor’s fee, management reserve, allocated pensions and General and 

Administrative allocations. 

CH = contact-handled. 

CSB = Canister Storage Building. 

CWC = Central Waste Complex. 

D&D = decontamination and decommission. 

DOE = U.S. Department of Energy. 

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. 

ETF = Effluent Treatment Facility. 

IDF = Integrated Disposal Facility. 

LERF = Liquid Effluent Retention Facility. 

MLLW = mixed low-level waste. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

RH = remote-handled. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland 

Operations Office. 

SNF = spent nuclear fuel. 

TEDF = Treated Effluent Disposal Facility. 

TRU = transuranic. 

TSD = treatment, storage, and disposal. 

WESF = Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility.

WIPP = Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. 

WRAP = Waste Receiving and Processing (Facility). 

WTP = Waste Treatment Plant. 

Figure 4-9 shows the remaining estimated cleanup costs for the Solid Waste Stabilization and 

Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) by fiscal year; Figure 4-10 shows the remaining estimated 

cleanup costs by work element. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 4-19 

Figure 4-9. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Remaining Estimated 

Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. 

Figure 4-10. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Remaining 

Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element.

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

See Appendix C, Table C-8 for cost and schedule data. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 4-20 

4.6 CENTRAL PLATEAU CLEANUP ASSUMPTIONS 

AND UNCERTAINTIES 

In planning for the Hanford Site lifecycle, there are uncertainties considered regarding estimated scope, 

schedule and cost. While a number of assumptions are made to support lifecycle development, the 

assumptions presented here are major assumptions that drive costs. 

For Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030), the following assumptions 

were identified: 

x Planned characterization of the vadose zone below the high-level waste (HLW) tanks will be 

sufficient to evaluate remedies for protection of groundwater 

x No substantial new requirements will be added to meet the state’s implementation of RCRA.

For Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040), the following assumptions were 

identified: 

x An industrial worker scenario will be used to define the exposure scenarios and the threshold cleanup 

levels for waste sites located in the Inner Area. Cleanup levels for waste sites in the Outer Area will 

support the reasonably anticipated future land use of conservation/mining. 

x The Central Plateau area will remain under Federal control for the foreseeable future. 

x All low-level legacy waste will be managed and treated on Hanford via remove, treat, and dispose 

(RTD) to approved onsite disposal facilities. 

x Planning assumes that geographic aggregate barriers will be utilized. The aggregate barriers are 

assumed to cover canyons or other large facilities and adjacent waste sites or to cover multiple 

adjacent waste sites 

x Removal excavations are assumed to be 15 feet below grade for planning and estimating purposes. 

Decision documents will identify the actual removal excavation criteria (soil cleanup level or 

excavation depth) for waste sites. 

For Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042), the following assumption was 

identified: 

x FFTF funding to accomplish the scope can be carried over from year to year. Beginning in FY2019, 

budget levels are to reflect an optimal ramp up to complete sodium residuals cleaning, bulk sodium 

processing, and D4 work scope. 

For Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C), the following assumptions 

were identified: 

x New treatment facilities are not required to support longer WTP operations 

x T Plant will be available for modification to be the facility necessary for retrieval, storage, and 

treatment/processing of all Hanford RCRA transuranic mixed (TRUM) waste as required by 

TPA M-091-01 

x WIPP will remain operational through the end of Hanford cleanup operations that have the potential 

to generate TRU waste. Current planning has processing and shipping of TRU waste to WIPP until 

FY2030. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

5-1

5.0 TANK WASTE CLEANUP

Tank waste cleanup is part of the River Protection Project (RPP) and is being performed under the 

authority of ORP. ORP manages the RPP as required by the Strom Thurmond National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999, and augmented by the Floyd D. Spence National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001.

The RPP mission is to retrieve and treat Hanford tank waste and close the tank farms to protect the 

Columbia River. As a result, ORP is responsible for the retrieval, treatment, and disposal of 

approximately 56 million gallons of mixed waste contained in Hanford waste tanks, and closure of all the 

tanks and associated facilities. The RPP work scope consists of two major elements:

 Safely manage the radioactive mixed waste stored in Hanford’s underground storage tanks. This work 

element is conducted under Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition 

(PBS ORP-0014).

 Design, construct, and commission the WTP, which will treat and immobilize tank wastes into a 

vitrified glass form. This work element is conducted under Major Construction – Waste Treatment 

Plant (PBS ORP-0060).

Figure 5-1 illustrates the relationships between the various activities and integration of the elements for 

retrieval of the waste from the tanks, treatment to reduce hazards, and disposal.

The RPP comprises the tank farms and WTP systems - nearly 200 interrelated waste storage, transfer, 

treatment, transportation, and disposal facilities. The RPP and these facilities are an important element of 

the DOE mission to protect the Columbia River. This chapter describes the RPP mission and scope as 

presented in the River Protection Project System Plan (ORP-11242, Rev. 4). Cost and schedule 

information are based on Revision 4 of ORP-11242 in order to remain consistent with ORP’s last certified 

baseline and approved baseline change request, which is the current technical baseline for ORP. ORP 

expects to update the cost and schedule planning case in the LCR when a new baseline is approved and in 

place.

The underground waste storage tanks were built in groups of 2 to 18 tanks; each group is known as a tank 

farm (A, AN, AP, AW, AX, AY, AZ, B, BX, BY, C, S, SX, SY, T, TX, TY, and U). Seven tank farms 

(comprised of 86 tanks) are located in the 200 West Area and 11 tank farms (comprised of 91 tanks) are 

located in the 200 East Area. The tanks were constructed in below-grade excavations to take advantage of 

the natural radiation shielding provided by the earth. The 177 underground storage tanks represent two 

basic design types: SSTs and DSTs. The smallest SSTs have ~55,000 gallons of capacity, while the 

largest DSTs hold up to ~1,250,000 gallons.

When Hanford was in production mode, irradiated fuel from the reactors was transported to six 

separations facilities for isolating the desirable radionuclides from other reactor products. From 1944 to 

1989, the separations processes yielded millions of gallons of highly radioactive and chemically 

hazardous waste, which was pumped through underground transfer lines and subsequently stored in the 

underground storage tanks. Although the reactors and separations facilities have long since ceased 

operations, the underground waste tanks and their contents remain. The radioactive liquid waste was 

transferred from the separations facilities as slurry (liquid with suspended solids). Over time, the 

radioactive solids settled to the bottom of the tanks, creating a layer known as sludge. The clarified 

radioactive liquid above the sludge is known as supernate. 

The ORP planning case in this LCR is the same as that presented in previous LCRs, based on the River 

Protection Project System Plan (ORP-11242, Rev. 4) in order to remain consistent with ORP’s last 

certified baseline and approved baseline change request. ORP expects to update the cost and schedule 

planning case in the LCR when a new baseline is approved and in place.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 5-2  2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

Figure 5-1. Simplified Process Diagram for Tank Waste Retrieval and Treatment. 

Misc. 

New 

Wastes

Other Hanford 

Facilities and 

IMUSTS

Evaporator

Liquid Effluent 

Retention Facility/ETF

A

Hanford Shipping 

Facility

Supplemental CH-TRU 

Treatment Systems

28 Double-Shell Tanks

149 SingleShell Tanks

STORAGE TREATMENT

Planned Geologic Repository

Integrated Disposal Facility

State Approved Land 

Disposal Site

DISPOSAL (OFF-SITE)

DISPOSAL (ON-SITE)

WASTE TREATMENT PLANT

Retrieval 

Water and 

Chemicals

Retrieved 

Waste

Supernate for 

SST Waste 

Retrieval

Dilute 

Waste Evaporator 

Bottoms

Water

Offgas

Evaporator Condensate

11 of the 149 SSTs may contain CH-TRU

Air

Carrier

Offgas

Liquid 

Effluent

Packaged TRU

A

C

High Level Waste

Low Activity Waste

Pretreatment

PT LAW

PT HLW

Solid Waste

Recycle

D

Recycle

Chemicals Air Offgas Air Glass 

Formers Chemicals

Solid Waste

IHLW

Offgas

B

Liquid Effluent C

Offgas

Solid Waste

ILAW

Solid Waste

B

D

Treated Liquids

IHLW

Liquid Effluent

Retrieval 

Water and 

Chemicals

Air

Glass Formers

Chemicals

Second Low 

Activity Waste y

Air

Glass Formers

Chemicals

HLW & LAW Feed

Liquid Effluent

Liquid Effluent F

Offgas

Solid Waste

ILAW

F

E

Excess PT LAW

E

Recycle

Interim Storage at

Central Waste Complex

Legend

Existing Facilities

Design or Construction

Future Facilities

CH = contact-handled.

ETF = Effluent Treatment Facility.

HLW = high-level waste.

IHLW = immobilized high-activity waste.

ILAW = immobilized low-activity waste.

IMUST = inactive miscellaneous underground storage tank.

LAW = low-activity waste.

PT = Pretreatment.

TRU = transuranic.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

5-3

To reduce the total quantity of waste to be stored, the supernate is periodically decanted and transferred 

out of waste tanks to a waste evaporation process. The evaporation process results in a separation of the 

heated waste slurry to a steam condensate fraction, which is relatively clean, for further treatment and safe 

disposal, and a waste slurry fraction, which becomes more concentrated and is returned to the 

underground waste storage tanks. Historically, the concentrated waste slurry fraction cooled and began to 

form saltcake, a crystalline solid waste form. At one time, most tanks contained supernate, slurry, and 

saltcake waste forms simultaneously. The current typical content of the tanks is depicted in Figure 5-2.

Long-term storage at high temperatures, as a result of heat from fission product decay, contributed to the 

formation of a solid mass or group of large solids not easily removed called hard heels in the bottom of 

some tanks. Cesium and strontium capsules, currently stored in the WESF, resulted from efforts to reduce 

fission products in the tanks. More information regarding the tanks and the RPP can be found in 

ORP-11242.

The current strategy for tank waste cleanup involves a number of interrelated activities essential to the 

mission to retrieve and treat Hanford’s tank waste and close the tank farms to protect the Columbia River. 

ORP will reduce risk to the environment posed from tank waste by:

 Retrieving the waste from 149 SSTs, transferring it to 28 DSTs, and delivering the waste to the WTP. 

 Constructing and operating the WTP, which will safely treat the entire HLW fraction contained in the 

tank farms. Approximately one-third of the low-activity waste (LAW) fraction will be immobilized in 

the WTP LAW Vitrification Facility.

 Developing and deploying supplemental treatment capability to treat the remaining two-thirds of the 

LAW.

 Developing and deploying waste feed preparation capability to mitigate sodium management issues. 

The goal is to minimize the quantity of glass by reducing contaminants that would require the 

addition of glass-forming additives.

 Developing and deploying treatment and packaging capability for potential contact-handled (CH) 

TRU tank waste with onsite storage prior to final disposition.

 Deploying interim storage capacity for the immobilized high-level waste (IHLW) pending 

determination of the final disposal pathway (national repository).

 Closing the SST and DST farms, ancillary facilities, and associated waste management and treatment 

facilities.

The overall schedule objective is to complete retrieval, treatment, and closure activities by the end of 

FY2050. Once closure activities are completed, the tank farms will be transitioned to Nuclear Facility 

D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040) for final disposition or LTS.

ORP is developing and implementing operating strategies to address the actions in applicable regulatory 

milestones, including those in the Consent Decree in State of Washington v. Department of Energy, 

Case No. 08-5085 (E.D. Wa. October 25, 2010) (DOE and Ecology, 2010) (the “Consent Decree”). 

The milestones shown in Table 5-1 were selected as key measures for significant progress.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 5-4 

Figure 5-2. Depictions of Typical Tank Contents. 

Table 5-1. Tank Waste Cleanup Key Tri-Party Agreement and Consent Decree Milestones. (2 pages) 

Milestone Description Compliance 

Date 

M-062-40 Submit a system plan to Ecology describing the disposition of all tank waste 

managed by the Office of River Protection.

10/31/2011; 

every 3 years 

thereafter 

M-062-45 

Negotiate a one-time supplemental treatment selection and milestones. 

Every 6 years, within 6 months of the issuance of the last revision of the system 

plan, the parties will negotiate tank waste retrieval sequencing and milestones, and 

milestones for installation of infrastructure to feed tank waste from the DST system 

to the tank waste treatment system for the next 8 years. 

04/30/2015; 

every 6 years 

thereafter 

M-045-82 

Submit complete permit modification requests for Tiers 1, 2, and 3 (see Appendix I 

of Tri-Party Agreement) of the SST system, to support final closure requirements 

for WMA C. 

09/30/2015 

M-062-31-T01 

Complete final design and submit a complete RCRA Part B permit modification 

request for Enhanced WTP and/or Supplemental Vitrification Treatment Facility 

based on the M-062-45 decision. 

04/30/2016 

D-00A-14 Pretreatment facility construction substantially complete. 12/31/2017 

D-00A-171 Hot start of WTP. 12/31/2019 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 5-5 

Table 5-1. Tank Waste Cleanup Key Tri-Party Agreement and Consent Decree Milestones. (2 pages) 

Milestone Description Compliance 

Date 

M-045-85 

Complete negotiations of HFFACO interim milestones for closure of the remaining 

WMAs (including a schedule for 200 West Area closures, the submittal of closure 

plans and risk assessments, and final closure dates for each WMA). 

01/31/2022 

D-00B-041 Complete retrieval of tank wastes from the nine SSTs selected to satisfy 

D-00B-021

. 09/30/2022 

M-062-34-T01 Complete hot commissioning (startup and readiness prior to full operations) of 

Supplemental Treatment Vitrification Facility and/or WTP Enhancements. 12/30/2022 

D-00A-011 Achieve initial plant operations for the WTP. 12/31/2022 

M-047-00 Complete work necessary to provide facilities for management of secondary waste 

from the WTP. 12/31/2022 

M-045-70 Complete waste retrieval from all remaining SSTs. Retrieval standards and 

completion definitions are provided in M-045-00. 12/31/2040 

M-045-00 Complete the closure of all SST farms. 01/31/2043 

M-062-00 Complete pretreatment processing and vitrification of Hanford high-level waste and 

low-activity waste tank wastes. 12/31/2047 

M-42-00A Complete the closure of all DST farms. 09/30/2052 

1

 Milestones from Consent Decree and Tri-Party Agreement Settlement Package (DOE and Ecology, 2010). 

DOE = U.S. Department of Energy. 

DST = double-shell tank. 

Ecology = Washington State Department of Ecology. 

HFFACO = Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and 

Consent Order. 

RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. 

SST = single-shell tank. 

WMA = waste management area. 

WTP = Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant.

5.1 RADIOACTIVE LIQUID TANK WASTE STABILIZATION AND 

DISPOSITION (PBS ORP-0014) 

The 177 underground waste storage tanks and ancillary equipment, along with various support facilities 

and buildings, are primarily located in the Central Plateau 200 East and 200 West Areas. The waste 

composition varies widely, necessitating a variety of unique waste retrieval and treatment methods. 

ORP’s cleanup strategy focuses on achieving significant environmental risk reduction by the retrieval and 

treatment of Hanford’s tank waste and the closure of the tank farms to protect the Columbia River. The 

primary accomplishments anticipated for FY2015 involve continuing preparation of the tank farms to 

provide waste streams to the WTP upon hot commissioning. Work also continues on construction of the 

WTP. Completion and commissioning is driven by the Consent Decree and TPA milestones. 

After closure, the remainder of the facilities will be transferred to Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of 

Hanford (PBS RL-0040) for final disposition or LTS. 

The tank farms scope in this report includes planning for the lifecycle of the tank farms as detailed in 

ORP-11242, Revision 4. Additional scope information on these work elements is provided in Table 5-2. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 5-6 

Table 5-2. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) 

Level 2 Scope Summary. 

Work Element Scope Description 

Base Operations Provides for safe storage of waste, reduces the volume of waste through evaporation, 

provides laboratory support, and includes necessary support activities. 

Retrieve and Close 

SSTs 

Includes retrieval of waste from the SSTs and transfer to interim storage in DSTs. 

SSTs will then undergo closure in accordance with regulatory requirements, as will 

other associated sites in the tank farms. 

Waste Feed 

Delivery/Treatment 

Planning/DST 

Retrieval/Closure

Covers modeling of waste characteristics and volumes; transfer, treatment and 

preparation of the wastes to meet the requirements for safe retrieval of the DST wastes; 

successful operation of the WTP; and closure of the DSTs to protect the environment 

and the community. This work element also includes treatment of secondary wastes 

generated during handling and processing of tank wastes. 

Supplemental 

Treatment 

Includes planning and analysis for supplemental low-activity waste treatment and 

contact-handled TRU handling, up to and including design and construction. 

Treat Waste Includes preparation for hot commissioning, closure planning, and final closure 

activities. 

Facility Closures

Includes closure and monitoring of buildings and structures in the tank farms areas, but 

not covered elsewhere. Closure within this scope occurs mostly in the out-years and 

includes mobile facilities, office buildings, and support facilities (e.g., 200 East and 

West Evaporators). 

Tank Operations 

Contract–ORP Project 

Support 

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See 

Section 6.3.2 for details. 

DST = double-shell tank. 

ORP = Office of River Protection. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

SST = single-shell tank. 

TRU = transuranic. 

WTP = Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant. 

Figure 5-3 presents the remaining estimated cleanup costs for Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste 

Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) by fiscal year; Figure 5-4 presents the remaining 

estimated cleanup costs by work element. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 5-7 

Figure 5-3. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) Remaining 

Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. 

Figure 5-4. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) Remaining 

Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element. 

$0.0

$0.5

$1.0

$1.5

$2.0

$2.5

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

Costs (Billion $) 

Fiscal Year 

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

$700

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

See Appendix C, Table C-33 for cost and schedule data. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 5-8 

5.2 MAJOR CONSTRUCTION – WASTE TREATMENT PLANT (PBS ORP-0060) 

The mission of Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) is to design, construct, and 

commission the WTP for pretreating and immobilizing the mixed wastes currently stored in Hanford’s 

underground storage tanks. Work is complete when WTP construction is complete and the facilities are 

turned over to ORP’s operations contractor. The following five main facilities are being constructed in the 

WTP: 

x Pretreatment 

x Low-Activity Waste Vitrification 

x High-Level Waste Vitrification 

x Balance of Facilities 

x Dedicated Analytical Laboratory. 

Additional scope information on these work elements is provided in Table 5-3. 

Table 5-3. Major Construction–Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Level 2 Scope Summary. 

Work 

Element Scope Description 

Pretreatment 

Includes design, construction, and commissioning of the Pretreatment Facility. When finished, 

pretreatment will physically and chemically condition the waste feed stream, separating the lowactivity radioactive waste from the high-level radioactive waste. 

Low-Activity 

Waste (LAW) 

Includes design, construction, and commissioning of the LAW Vitrification Facility. When 

finished, the LAW will go into a melter preparation vessel where silica and other glass-forming 

material are added and the mixture will be fed into one of two melters. The mixture will be 

heated to 2,100 °F using Joule heating. The molten mixture will be poured into large stainless 

steel canisters that are then welded shut. 

High-Level 

Waste (HLW) 

Includes design, construction, and commissioning of the HLW Vitrification Facility. Similar to 

the LAW, when finished the HLW will be mixed with glass-forming materials, heated to molten, 

and poured into stainless steel canisters. 

Balance of 

Facilities 

Includes design, construction and commissioning of the Balance of Facilities. When finished, the 

dedicated facilities and utilities will support the WTP. 

Analytical 

Laboratory 

Includes design, construction, and commissioning of the Analytical Laboratory. When finished, 

samples will be analyzed to ensure the glass product meets requirements. 

Shared 

Services - 

Plant Wide 

Includes crosscutting services and equipment provided to the construction site (e.g., project 

controls, engineering design and management, environmental, nuclear safety, construction 

services) as well as a proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure (see Section 

6.3.2). 

HLW = high-level waste. 

LAW = low-activity waste. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

WTP = Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant. 

Figure 5-5 presents the remaining estimated costs for Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant 

(PBS ORP-0060) by fiscal year; Figure 5-6 presents the remaining estimated costs by work element. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 5-9 

Figure 5-5. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Remaining Estimated 

Costs by Fiscal Year. 

Figure 5-6. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Remaining Estimated 

Costs by Work Element.

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

See Appendix C, Table C-35 for cost and schedule data. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

5-10

5.3 TANK WASTE CLEANUP ASSUMPTIONS AND UNCERTAINTIES

The activities described for the RPP are assumed to be consistent with, and encompassed by, the outcome 

of the NEPA process. The operating scenarios continue to be reviewed against the assumptions in 

DOE/EIS-0391 as the planning process continues, and updated as appropriate. Unanticipated changes 

resulting from the NEPA process could impact assumptions. Detailed designs and processing of permits 

are subject to completion of the NEPA process and ROD issuance. ORP-11242, Revision 4, details 

assumptions and uncertainties for the RPP. 

The following is a summary of key assumptions and uncertainties:

 Cesium and strontium capsules will not be processed in the WTP. (The December 13, 2013, ROD 

[78 FR 75913] states that DOE is not deciding on treatment of the cesium and strontium capsules.)

 The RPP baseline presented in this report includes cost and/or schedule uncertainty to address highly 

probable risks that an offsite geologic repository will not be available to accept IHLW canisters from 

the Hanford Site starting in April 2023 and construction of additional interim HLW storage (up to 

16,000 canisters) on the Hanford Site if the repository is delayed in opening or does not open.

 The current strategy to comply with the IHLW acceptance criteria is described in 24590-HLW-PLRT-07-0001, IHLW Waste Form Compliance Plan for the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and 

Immobilization Plant. It is assumed that the strategy will be acceptable to the Office of Civilian 

Radioactive Waste Management. It is further assumed that the WTP prepared hazardous waste 

delisting petition for the IHLW is accepted by Ecology and the receiving state before shipping the 

waste to the planned offsite geologic repository.

 Supplemental LAW treatment capacity could be provided by a second LAW vitrification facility 

located adjacent to the WTP, under the same technical assumptions as the WTP LAW Vitrification

Facility, to complete hot commissioning on September 30, 2021, and begin full operations on 

October 1, 2021.

 Packaged CH-TRU waste will be interim stored onsite at the Central Waste Complex, and will be 

acceptable for disposal at the WIPP (a number of conditions, including approval of a RCRA Part B 

Permit Class III permit modification, would need to be satisfied prior to disposal at WIPP).

 CH-TRU waste treatment and packaging process capability will be available in FY2015 to support 

TRU tank waste retrieval.

 Waste previously assumed to be RH-TRU waste will be retrieved and treated at the WTP together 

with the HLW.

 The DSTs will remain fully operational for the nominal 40-year waste treatment mission duration.

 The 242-A Evaporator will continue to operate, as needed, through the life of the mission to support 

SST retrieval and to maintain the sodium concentration in the delivered feed within WTP feed 

specifications. The 242-A Evaporator will not be available during scheduled maintenance outages.

 Selected technologies will be able to meet retrieval (tank residual) requirements.

 Laboratory services required to support waste characterization for tank farm projects and operations 

are available and provided in a timely manner.

 WTP secondary solid waste will be disposed at the IDF and WTP secondary liquid waste will be 

treated at the ETF and disposed at IDF.

 The IDF is currently in standby mode and will be ready to serve upon completion of a performance 

assessment, permit modification, operational readiness review, etc. The activation will be completed

when the IDF is needed by the WTP. The IDF will provide permanent disposal for the immobilized 

LAW, other low-level waste, and mixed low-level waste, including:

 LAW glass packages from the WTP
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 5-11 

 Solid waste from the WTP, including spent LAW and HLW melters 

 Solid waste from the ETF from treating liquid wastes. 

The IDF can be expanded as needed to support the mission. 

x The baseline case implicitly assumes that the outcome of official Waste Incidental to Reprocessing 

Waste Determinations will be consistent with the assumed disposition of the primary and secondary 

waste forms prior to disposal. 

x The cross-site transfer system will be modified as needed to allow transfer of slurry in multiple DSTs 

to provide operational flexibility in managing waste and staging feed to the WTP. 

x Fiscal year funding will be available to support the baseline case, including funding required for risk 

mitigating actions. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 5-12 

This page intentionally left blank. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 6-1 

6.0 MISSION SUPPORT 

The Mission Support function is service-oriented and provides key infrastructure, utility, resource, and 

other Hanford site-wide cleanup support. DOE has responsibilities to protect personnel, nuclear material, 

and physical property on the Hanford Site. These activities are performed under Safeguards and Security 

(PBS RL-0020). DOE works closely with the regulatory agencies and community to provide support to 

Hanford cleanup through Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100). 

There are a number of infrastructure-related Mission Support activities in place to support cleanup of the 

Hanford Site. These Mission Support activities are managed under Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of 

Hanford (PBS RL-0040). Following cleanup efforts at the Hanford Site, DOE will have ongoing 

activities to maintain the protectiveness of the cleanup actions and support transition to future land uses. 

This period is referred to as LTS and is covered by PBS RL-LTS. 

6.1 SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY (PBS RL-0020) 

The scope of this PBS includes one primary work element: Safeguards and Security. Table 6-1 describes 

the work scope. Safeguards and Security will be required until cleanup is complete, then protection of 

human health and the environment transfers to PBS RL-LTS. The level of effort required to ensure 

protectiveness may diminish as nuclear material is shipped offsite and as the cleanup progresses. 

Table 6-1. Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) Level 2 Scope Summary. 

Work Element Scope Description 

Safeguards and 

Security

This work element includes management, training, and equipment for staff; physical 

protective systems, such as intrusion protection, Hanford Site access, and badging; 

information and cyber security; personnel security; material control and accountability; 

and security program management. 

PBS = project baseline summary. RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. 

Figure 6-1 provides the remaining estimated costs for Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) by fiscal 

year. 

Figure 6-1. Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) Remaining Estimated Costs by Fiscal Year. 

$0

$25

$50

$75

$100

$125

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 6-2 

6.2 RICHLAND COMMUNITY AND REGULATORY 

SUPPORT (PBS RL-0100) 

This PBS includes support to the communities that are influenced by the Hanford cleanup and the scope 

of work is summarized in Table 6-2. 

Table 6-2. Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100) Level 2 Scope Summary. 

Work Element Scope Description 

Richland 

Community and 

Regulatory Support 

This work element includes RL support to community activities and regulatory agencies, 

such as the Hanford Advisory Board, the Oregon Department of Energy, the Natural 

Resource Trustee Council, the Washington State Department of Ecology, Washington 

State Department of Health and other entities through grants, permits and payment of 

fees. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. 

Figure 6-2 provides the remaining estimated costs for Richland Community and Regulatory Support 

(PBS RL-0100) by fiscal year. 

Figure 6-2. Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100) Remaining Estimated 

Costs by Fiscal Year. 

$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

2015 2020 2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

2055

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 6-3 

6.3 INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES (PBS RL-0040) 

Infrastructure and Services play a key role in completing the cleanup mission, and as noted in Chapters 

2.0 and 4.0, the work scope is included within PBS RL-0040. 

6.3.1 Reliability Projects and HAMMER 

Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) provides cost-effective infrastructure and site services that are 

essential to accomplishing the Hanford Site environmental cleanup mission. These essential services 

cover a broad spectrum and range from the basic to highly-specialized services that reflect the complexity 

and scale of the environmental cleanup mission. The scope description for these work elements is 

provided in Table 6-3. 

Table 6-3. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) Level 2 Scope Summary. 

Work Element Scope Description 

Reliability 

Projects

Includes repair and replacement of infrastructure systems and provides capital upgrades to 

the infrastructure, including larger scale expense projects. Also included are construction and 

capital equipment expenditures associated with replacements for biological control, crane and 

rigging, electrical system, facilities, Hanford Fire Department, network and 

telecommunications, studies and estimates, transportation, water and sewer utilities and other 

infrastructure reliability projects. 

HAMMER Includes operations and maintenance activities at the HAMMER facility in support of the 

Hanford Site and other training programs. 

Site-wide 

Services and 

Other 

Distributed 

Costs

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. This work element 

includes emergency services (safeguards and security, fire and emergency response, 

emergency management), environmental integration services (site-wide safety standards, 

environmental integration, public safety and resource protection, radiological site services, 

and offsite laboratory sample analysis), information management (information management 

planning and controls, information systems, content and records management, 

infrastructure/cyber security, information resources/content management, and information 

support services), site infrastructure and utilities/logistics and transportation (roads and 

grounds, biological services, electrical services, water/sewer services, facility services, 

transportation, mail, property systems/acquisitions, railroad services, technical services, 

energy management, work management, land and facilities management), support functions 

(business operations, human resources, safety, health and quality), and portfolio management 

(portfolio planning, analysis and performance, project acquisition and support, and 

independent assessment and analysis).

- Includes contracted technical services in key areas such as audit, regulatory analysis, cost 

and risk analysis and estimating. Also includes mission critical support services to DOE 

and its contractors in key areas such as occupational medicine, information and 

telecommunications, janitorial, radiological laundry, electrical power and facilities rentals; 

critical independent legal counsel and litigation services in support of DOE and its 

contractors; and other mission critical support services to DOE and its contractors in key 

areas such as land transfers, acquisition and contract closeout, acquisition of natural gas 

utility services, energy conservation and management (including steam), natural resource 

trusteeship, Tribal Nation support, and other small contracts. 

- Includes contractor’s fee, management reserve, allocated pensions and General and 

Administrative allocations. 

DOE = U.S. Department of Energy. 

HAMMER = Hazardous Materials Management and 

Emergency Response Training and Education 

Center. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland 

Operations Office. 

Figure 6-3 presents the remaining estimated costs for Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) by fiscal 

year and Figure 6-4 presents the remaining estimated costs by work element. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 6-4 

Figure 6-3. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Estimated Costs by Fiscal Year. 

Figure 6-4. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Estimated Costs by Work Element. 

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055

2060

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

2055

2060

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 6-5 

6.3.2 Site-wide Services 

The Site-wide Services program provides direct operations support to RL, ORP and their contractors with 

cost-effective infrastructure and site services integral and necessary to accomplish the environmental 

cleanup mission. The scope includes five primary functions: Safety, security and environment; site 

infrastructure and utilities; site business management; information resources and content management; 

and portfolio management. 

Under the safety, security and environment function, both Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) and 

HAMMER (PBS RL-0040, Section 6.3.1) are funded through their respective projects and not through 

Site-wide Services. Other work elements under the safety, security and environment function include: 

Fire and emergency response services; emergency operations; site safety standards; radiological 

assistance program; environmental regulatory management; public safety and resource protection; and 

radiological site services. 

The work elements under the site infrastructure and utilities function include: Offsite laboratory sample 

analysis; biological control; facility services; transportation; railroad services; roads and grounds; utilities 

(water, electricity), sewer systems; and sanitary waste management and disposal. 

The work elements under the site business management function include: Real property asset 

management; property systems/acquisition and materials management; sponsorship, management and 

administration of employee pension and other benefits plans; Energy Employees Occupational Illness 

Compensation Program Act/workers compensation; external affairs and other interactions; mail services; 

and reproduction, correspondence control and multi-media. 

As part of real property asset management, RL has established the LTS program to provide planning and 

interim execution of LTS for portions of the Hanford Site as they are cleaned up and before they are 

transferred to the DOE Office of Legacy Management (LM). The current LTS program is part of PBS 

RL-0040 Infrastructure and Services until it is transferred to LM – this future LTS program under LM is 

referred to as PBS RL-LTS in this report. The scope of the current and future LTS program is described in 

Section 6.4. 

The work elements under the information resources and content management function include: Strategic 

planning and program management; telecommunications; information systems; and content (records) 

management. 

The work elements under the portfolio management function include: Hanford portfolio planning, 

analysis and performance assessment; project acquisition and support; and independent analysis and 

assessments. 

6.4 LONG-TERM STEWARDSHIP (PBS RL-LTS) 

Following the completion of Hanford cleanup actions, the disposal facilities and other areas will require 

long-term management. Administration of the institutional controls activities will be required for portions 

of the Hanford Site to ensure protection of human health and the environment. As portions of the site are 

cleaned up, they are managed in accordance with the Hanford Site Long-Term Stewardship Program, as 

described in DOE/RL-2010-35, Hanford Long-Term Stewardship Program Plan, under PBS RL-0040 

Infrastructure and Services. When all of the cleanup actions defined by decision documents are 

completed, the Hanford Site will be turned over to DOE-LM. This PBS element pertains to the LM 

activities at Hanford. 

LTS refers to all activities necessary to ensure protection of human health and the environment following 

completion of cleanup, disposal, or stabilization at a site or a portion of a site. LTS includes engineered 

and institutional controls designed to contain or to prevent exposures to residual contamination and waste, 

such as surveillance activities, recordkeeping activities, inspections, groundwater monitoring, ongoing 

pump-and-treat activities, cap repair, maintenance of entombed buildings or facilities, maintenance of 

other barriers and containment structures, access control, and posting signs. LTS begins when cleanup is 

completed and the selected remedy cleanup objectives and goals are met, as defined by the applicable 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 6-6 

CERCLA or RCRA decision documents, or when long-term remediation systems are constructed and 

operating as intended (e.g., groundwater pump-and-treat systems). 

The current Hanford Site LTS Program manages the geographic areas for which cleanup has been 

completed in accordance with the post-cleanup requirements specified in the associated decision 

documents. These decisions include, but are not limited to, the CERCLA RODs and RCRA post-closure 

plans. In addition to managing the post-cleanup completion obligations, the LTS Program manages 

Hanford’s natural and cultural resources through the framework of DOE/EIS-0222-F and 64 FR 61615, 

“Record of Decision: Hanford Comprehensive Land Use Plan Environmental Impact Statement (HCP 

EIS),” and in accordance with Federal laws, executive orders, Tribal Nation treaties, DOE directives, and 

Hanford Site procedures. The planning basis for the Hanford Site LTS Program scope integrates 

stewardship and institutional controls elements into the program from present day to 2060. 

The scope, schedule and costs of LTS and institutional controls, to the extent predictable, have been 

included in this LCR for the period from 2060 to 2090. The Federal Government will have a presence at 

Hanford well beyond 2090 – especially in the Inner Area of the Central Plateau – to ensure that the 

cleanup remedies remain protective of people and the environment. As cleanup decisions are made and 

LTS requirements and institutional controls are refined, more specific information will be included in this 

LCR. 

Table 6-4 provides a summary of the scope. Figure 6-5 shows remaining estimated costs for PBS RL-LTS 

by fiscal year and Figure 6-6 shows the remaining estimated costs by work element. 

Table 6-4. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Level 2 Scope Summary. 

Work Element Scope Description 

Infrastructure and Waste 

Management

Includes operation and maintenance of Hanford Site infrastructure following 

cleanup activities. Specific scope will include supplying electrical and water 

utilities, operating and maintaining emergency services (Hanford Fire Department), 

and maintaining roads as needed to support Hanford Site Long-Term Stewardship 

activities. Includes operation and maintenance of 200 Area liquid effluent facilities 

in support of groundwater treatment and monitoring activities. 

Site and Environmental 

Monitoring 

Includes ongoing Hanford Site and environmental monitoring of groundwater, soil, 

vadose zone, and monitoring for public safety and resource protection. 

Post-Closure Surveillance 

and Maintenance, and 

Environmental 

Compliance

Includes real estate and Hanford Site planning, land management, and surveillance 

and maintenance activities for the 100 and 200 Areas. Includes activities to ensure 

environmental compliance and protection.

Payment in Lieu of Taxes Includes payment in lieu of taxes. 

Management and 

Administration 

Provides for management and administration of these Long-Term Stewardship 

activities. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 6-7 

Figure 6-5. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Remaining Estimated Costs by Fiscal Year. 

Figure 6-6. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Remaining Estimated Costs by Work Element. 

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

2060

2065

2070

2075

2080

2085

2090

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

$0

$50

$100

2060

2065

2070

2075

2080

2085

2090

Costs (Million $) 

Fiscal Year 

See Appendix C, Table C-30 for cost and schedule data. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 6-8 

This page intentionally left blank. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 7-1 

7.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS 

7.1 SCHEDULE AND COST LIMITATIONS 

The LCR is based on an annual compilation of estimated scope, schedule and cost information. In order to 

finish preparing the LCR, it is necessary to select a deadline each year when the scope, schedule and cost 

information used to prepare the report will be “locked down.” 

For the 2015 LCR, August 31, 2014, serves as the cutoff date. Unless noted otherwise, changes in the 

TPA and other applicable requirements, budget requests, appropriations, program funding allocations, and 

other scope, schedule and cost changes after the cutoff date are not reflected in the 2015 LCR. 

7.2 OTHER LIMITATIONS 

Some of the activities described in the LCR are subject to the analysis and decision-making requirements 

of CERCLA, RCRA, or other applicable statutes and regulations. The information included in the LCR is 

for planning purposes only, not for regulatory decision making, which will be conducted following the 

applicable statutory and regulatory programs. 

The LCR does not include resources that may be required to accomplish significant restoration of natural 

resources related to any liability of the United States for NRDAR. 

Several non-DOE entities operate and manage property on the Hanford Site, typically under lease 

agreements with DOE. Examples include: 

x Energy Northwest, a consortium of public utility companies that oversee the Columbia Generating 

Station nuclear power reactor. 

x Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory, operated by a consortium of the California 

Institute of Technology and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 

x State of Washington, which in turn leases land to US Ecology, Inc., a private firm that operates burial 

grounds for commercial low-level radioactive waste. 

Operation, maintenance, and any subsequent future cleanup associated with activities at these facilities 

are subject to the terms and conditions of the leases (and/or other agreements) in place between the 

operating entities and DOE. Potential environmental liabilities for these and similar non-DOE operations 

are not currently considered to be part of the Hanford Site cleanup, and so are not included in the 

DOE-EM program. Consequently, lifecycle scope, schedule and cost for these non-DOE operations are 

not included in the LCR. 

 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 7-2 

This page intentionally left blank. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 8-1 

8.0 REFERENCES 

08-5085-FVS, Consent Decree, State of Washington V. Chu, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Energy 

and the U.S. Department of Energy, Filed 10/25/10. 

24590-HLW-PL-RT-07-0001, 2008, IHLW Waste Form Compliance Plan for the Hanford Tank Waste 

Treatment and Immobilization Plant, Rev. 2, Bechtel National, Inc., Richland, Washington. 

58 FR 48509, 1993, “Record of Decision: Decommissioning of Eight Surplus Production Reactors at the 

Hanford Site, Richland, Washington,” Federal Register, Vol 58, No. 178, pp 48509. September 16, 

1993. 

64 FR 61615, “Record of Decision: Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan Environmental Impact 

Statement (HCP EIS),” Federal Register, Vol 64, No. 218, pp 61615, November 12, 1999. 

78 FR 75913, 2013, “Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for 

the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington,” Record of Decision, Federal Register, Vol 78, No. 240, 

pp 75913, December 13, 2013. 

Atomic Energy Act, 1954, as amended, 42 USC 2011, et seq. 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, 42 USC 9601, et seq. 

DOE and Ecology, 2010, Consent Decree in State of Washington v. Department of Energy, Case No. 

08-5085-FVS (E.D. Wa. October 25, 2010). 

DOE/EIS-0119F, 1992, Final Environmental Impact Statement Decommissioning of Eight Surplus 

Production Reactors at the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Washington, D.C. 

DOE/EIS-0222-F, 1999, Final Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan Environmental Impact Statement, 

U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. 

DOE/EIS-0391, 2012, Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for 

the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. 

DOE/RL-2002-59, 2004, Hanford Site Groundwater Strategy Protection, Monitoring, and Remediation, 

U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2005-13, 2005, Action Memorandum for the Plutonium Finishing Plant Above-Grade 

Structures Non-Time Critical Removal Action, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland 

Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2005-45, 2005, Surplus Reactor Final Disposition Engineering Evaluation, Rev. 0, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland Washington. 

DOE/RL-2007-56, 2008, Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Test Plan for the Hanford Central Plateau, Rev. 

0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2009-10, 2013, Hanford Site Cleanup Completion Framework, Rev. 1, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2010-25, 2011 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2010-35, 2012, Hanford Long-Term Stewardship Program Plan, Rev. 1, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2011-93, 2012 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 8-2 

DOE/RL-2012-13, 2013 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2014-32, 2014, Hanford Site Groundwater Monitoring Report for 2013, Rev. 0, 

U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

Ecology, EPA and DOE, 1989, Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, Washington 

State Department of Ecology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and U.S. Department of 

Energy, Olympia, Washington, as amended. 

Ecology, EPA and DOE, 2012, Hanford Public Involvement Plan, Washington State Department of 

Ecology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington, as amended. 

EPA, 2008, Record of Decision Hanford 200 Area 200-ZP-1 Superfund Site, Benton County, Washington, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 

EPA, 2011, Record of Decision Hanford 200 Area Superfund Site 200-CW-5 and 200-PW-1, 200-PW-3, 

and 200-PW-6 Operable Units, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle, 

Washington. 

EPA, 2012, Record of Decision for Interim Remedial Action Hanford 200 Area Superfund Site, 200-UP-1 

Operable Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 

Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001, Public Law 106-398, 

114 Stat. 1654A-38. 

HAB 223, 2009, “Life Cycle Cost and Schedule Report for the Proposed Consent Decree and the TriParty Agreement (TPA) Modifications,” (letter to D. Brockman, S. Olinger, P. Zehm, and M. 

Pirzadeh from S. Leckband), Hanford Advisory Board Consensus Advice #223, Richland, 

Washington, November 6. 

HNF-EP-0924, 1997, History and Stabilization of the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) Complex, 

Hanford Site, Rev. 0, Fluor Hanford, Richland, Washington. 

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, Public Law 91-190, 42 USC 4321, et seq. 

ORP-11242, 2009, River Protection Project System Plan, Rev. 4, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of 

River Protection, Richland, Washington. 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, 42 USC 6901, et seq. 

Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999, Public Law 105-261, 112 

Stat. 1921. 

TRAC-0151-VA, 1991, Historical Perspective of Radioactively Contaminated Liquid and Solid Wastes 

Discharged or Buried in the Ground at Hanford, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, 

Washington. 

Treaty with the Nez Perces, 1855, 12 Stat. 957, June 11, 1855, Ratified March 8, 1859, Proclaimed 

April 29, 1859. 

Treaty with the Walla Walla, Cayuse and Umatilla, 1855, 12 Stat. 945, June 9, 1855, Ratified March 8, 

1859, Proclaimed April 11, 1859. 

Treaty with the Yakama, 1855, June 9, 1855, 12 Stat. 951, Ratified March 8, 1859, Proclaimed April 18, 

1859. 

WA7890008967, 2013, Hanford Facility Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Permit, Dangerous 

Waste Portion, Revision 8C, for the Treatment, Storage, and Disposal of Dangerous Waste, 

Washington State Department of Ecology, Nuclear Waste Program, Richland, Washington, 

September 30. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-i 

APPENDIX A 

HANFORD SITE EXISTING CLEANUP DECISIONS 

 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-ii 

This page intentionally left blank. 

 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-iii 

CONTENTS 

A.1 PRINCIPAL HANFORD CLEANUP DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES ................................. 1

A.2 DECISIONS THAT CAN AFFECT HANFORD CLEANUP ........................................................ 2

A.2.1 COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, 

AND LIABILITY ACT OF 1980 DECISIONS ................................................................. 2

A.2.2 PERMITS, LICENSES, AND OTHER STATUTORY/REGULATORY 

PROGRAM APPROVALS ................................................................................................ 3

A.2.3 TRI-PARTY AGREEMENT DECISIONS ........................................................................ 4

A.2.4 OTHER FEDERAL AND STATE DECISIONS ............................................................... 4

A.3 SUMMARY OF HANFORD CLEANUP DECISIONS – FINAL AND NOT YET 

FINAL .............................................................................................................................................. 4

A.4. REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 23

TABLES 

Table A-1. CERCLA Records of Decision and Associated Changes. (8 pages) ......................................... 5

Table A-2. CERCLA Action Memoranda. (7 pages) ................................................................................ 12

Table A-3. Permits, Licenses, and Other Statutory/Regulatory Program Decisions Affecting 

Hanford Cleanup. (3 pages) ................................................................................................... 18

Table A-4. Tri-Party Agreement Decisions Affecting Hanford Cleanup. ................................................. 20

Table A-5. Other Federal and State Decisions Affecting Hanford Site Cleanup. (4 pages) ..................... 20

 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-iv 

TERMS 

AM Action Memorandum 

ARAR applicable or relevant and appropriate requirement 

bgs below ground surface 

CCN correspondence control number 

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 

1980

D&D decontamination and decommission 

D4 deactivation, decontamination, decommissioning, and demolition 

DOE U.S. Department of Energy 

DOE/RL U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office 

Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology 

EE/CA engineering evaluation/cost analysis 

EIS environmental impact statement 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

ERA expedited response action 

ERDF Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility 

ESD explanation of significant differences 

HLW high-level waste 

IC institutional controls 

INL Idaho National Laboratory 

ISRM in situ redox manipulation 

ISS interim safe storage 

LCR Lifecycle Report 

MCL maximum contaminant level 

NPL National Priorities List 

NTCRA non-time-critical removal action 

OU operable unit 

P&T pump-and-treat 

PCB polychlorinated biphenyl 

PFP Plutonium Finishing Plant 

PRG preliminary remediation goal 

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 

RD/RAWP remedial design/remedial action work plan 

ROD record of decision 

RTD remove, treat, and dispose 

SNF Spent Nuclear Fuel 

SST single-shell tank 

TCRA time critical removal action 

TPA Tri-Party Agreement 

TRU transuranic 

TSD treatment, storage, and disposal 

WIDS Waste Information Data System 

WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot Plant 

WTP Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-1 

APPENDIX A 

HANFORD SITE EXISTING CLEANUP DECISIONS 

Pursuant to the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Ecology et al. 1989), commonly 

referred to as Tri-Party Agreement (TPA), M-036-01 requires the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to 

prepare an annual Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report (Lifecycle Report [LCR]). The 

LCR is expected to reflect all actions necessary for DOE to meet all applicable environmental obligations 

as it completes the Hanford cleanup mission. These environmental obligations are established in 

accordance with various decision-making processes that DOE, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) (Tri-Party agencies), and other agencies 

conduct under Federal and State regulatory programs. 

Several decisions affecting the Hanford cleanup mission have been made, and actions to implement these 

decisions have been completed, or are/will soon be under way. Many other cleanup decisions, however, 

cannot be made yet, are in preliminary planning stages, and/or are the subject of final agreements that are 

being developed. The absence of final decisions is addressed in TPA M-036-01: 

“In circumstances where final cleanup decisions have not yet been made, the report 

shall be based upon the reasonable upper bound of the range of plausible alternatives 

or may set forth a range of alternative costs including such a reasonable upper 

bound.”

This appendix provides current information about decisions that affect cleanup, and when these decisions 

might be considered to be final cleanup decisions for LCR purposes. Specifically: 

x Section A.1 provides a general overview of the principal processes that are employed at Hanford to 

reach decisions about future cleanup actions. 

x Section A.2 describes in more detail the Federal and State decisions that can affect Hanford cleanup, 

the legal and/or regulatory authorities on which the decision making is based, and the types of 

documents used to embody and formalize these decisions. 

x Section A.3 summarizes current decisions that, for purposes of this LCR, are considered to be 

cleanup decisions and which cleanup decisions can be identified as final cleanup decisions. 

This appendix will be updated to reflect new and changed final cleanup decisions and to provide a basis 

each year for determining cleanup actions to evaluate in the latest LCR. 

A.1 PRINCIPAL HANFORD CLEANUP DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES 

To implement the cleanup mission, the Tri-Party agencies reach decisions about what actions need to be 

performed to protect public and worker health and the environment. Cleanup decisions are based on a 

variety of legal and regulatory authorities such as the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) (42 USC 9601) and the Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) (42 USC 6901) that require the consideration of various alternatives before 

selecting cleanup actions. In some cases, the agencies develop interim or partial decisions that enable 

cleanup work to proceed pending the ability to make final decisions (e.g., to alleviate urgent concerns, 

acquire better information, develop technological advances, obtain needed funding). 

The TPA is the primary legal framework that the Tri-Party agencies use to achieve Hanford cleanup. 

Cleanup decisions made through the TPA integrate and implement primarily the following regulatory 

processes: 

x CERCLA processes will support remedial decision making for most past-practice waste sites, canyon 

facilities, and structures that contain radioactive contamination or other hazardous substances. The 

TPA also identifies a subset of waste sites as RCRA past-practice sites. Consistent with EPA 

directives and guidance, the TPA establishes the expectation that either a RCRA corrective action or a 

CERCLA remedial action will lead to an equivalent cleanup result. In practice, this expectation 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-2 

becomes complicated when radioactive materials are present because RCRA authority does not 

extend to radionuclides. Regardless of this issue with RCRA, cleanup of radionuclides in RCRA 

waste sites will be protective and consistent with CERCLA cleanup practices. 

x RCRA closure processes generally will be used to achieve final closure decisions for active RCRA 

treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) facilities. RCRA corrective action processes also are 

applicable when RCRA wastes from past hazardous waste practices must be cleaned up. EPA has 

delegated implementation of the RCRA program to the State of Washington. Ecology implements the 

program via RCRA-equivalent State regulations and through facility-specific permits. RCRA closure 

and post-closure requirements are contained in the Hanford Site RCRA Permit (WA7890008967, 

Hanford Facility Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Permit, Dangerous Waste Portion, 

Revision 8C, for the Treatment, Storage, and Disposal of Dangerous Waste). 

The clear intent of the TPA is to minimize duplication and overlap of regulatory authorities while 

ensuring compliance with applicable requirements. As noted above, RCRA authority does not extend to 

the cleanup of radionuclides, while CERCLA does. The TPA states that the cleanup process selected for 

an operable unit (OU) will be sufficiently comprehensive to satisfy the technical requirements of both 

authorities and the respective regulations. 

In addition to RCRA and CERCLA, DOE is responsible for regulating the radioactive materials that it 

manages, including setting standards that affect cleanup decisions for radionuclides. DOE O 435.1, 

Radioactive Waste Management, defines additional requirements and processes that are applicable to 

cleaning up radioactive facilities and media. DOE develops and implements cleanup decisions under this 

regulatory program. 

Land use is also an important factor in making cleanup decisions because remedial action objectives are 

to reflect the reasonably anticipated future land use(s). These future land-use assumptions allow risk 

assessments and feasibility studies to focus on developing practical and cost-effective remedial 

alternatives. These alternatives should then support future site activities that are consistent with the 

reasonably anticipated future land use. DOE is responsible for designating land uses on the Hanford Site 

and for identifying future land uses that will guide risk assessments and cleanup decisions. Pursuant to a 

record of decision (ROD) published on November 2, 1999 (64 FR 61615, “Record of Decision: Hanford 

Comprehensive Land-Use Plan Environmental Impact Statement (HCP EIS)”) and amended ROD 

published on September 26, 2008 (73 FR 55824, “Amended Record of Decision for the Hanford 

Comprehensive Land-Use Plan Environmental Impact Statement”), DOE has adopted and implemented a 

comprehensive land-use plan for the Hanford Site. As DOE’s decision stated: 

“The purpose of this land-use plan and its implementing policies and procedures is to 

facilitate decision making about the site’s uses and facilities over at least the next 50 years. 

The Department’s decision seeks to balance the Department’s continuing land-use needs at 

Hanford with its desire to preserve important ecological and cultural values of the site and 

allow for economic development in the area.” (64 FR 61615 – 61616) 

An area as large and complex as the Hanford Site has an extraordinary number of regulatory decisions 

that need to be made to carry out the cleanup mission. While many cleanup decisions have been made, 

only some of these decisions are considered to be final; many are either interim decisions, or decisions 

that lay the groundwork for future final decisions. The rest of this appendix provides a more extensive 

discussion of the decisions that have been made and that affect cleanup of Hanford, and includes several 

tables that list and summarize the effects of these decisions. 

A.2 DECISIONS THAT CAN AFFECT HANFORD CLEANUP 

A.2.1 COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND 

LIABILITY ACT OF 1980 DECISIONS 

CERCLA, as modified by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act 1986 (42 USC 103), 

established the Federal program to cleanup uncontrolled or abandoned waste sites as well as accidents, 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-3 

spills, and other emergency releases of pollutants and contaminants into the environment. Under 40 CFR 

300, “National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan,” DOE is the lead agency with 

lead agency responsibilities by the National Contingency Plan and Executive Order 12580, Superfund 

Implementation. EPA is the lead regulatory agency under the TPA and oversees the cleanup activities 

conducted under 40 CFR 300. EPA also has certain oversight authorities granted through CERCLA and 

the TPA. The most common documentation used to implement cleanup decisions under CERCLA 

includes the following: 

x CERCLA ROD. The CERCLA ROD is a public document, developed from information generated 

during the remedial investigation/feasibility study that explains which remediation alternatives will be 

used to clean up a site. A ROD contains information about the site history, site description, site 

characteristics, community participation, enforcement activities, past and present activities, 

contaminated media, the contaminants present, scope and role of response action, and the remedy 

selected for cleanup. RODs can be final or interim; interim RODs are used to allow cleanup actions to 

proceed until a final decision can be reached. 

x Explanation of Significant Differences and ROD Amendment. Documents used to modify or 

clarify an existing ROD. The Explanation of Significant Difference is used when changes to a 

component of a remedy do not fundamentally alter the overall cleanup approach. The amendment is 

used when there are fundamental changes, or a number of significant changes, that together have the 

effect of a fundamental change to the remedy selected in the ROD. 

x Action Memorandum. A public document used to exercise the CERCLA removal authority and 

enable cleanup action to proceed where a site presents a relatively time-sensitive, non-complex 

problem that can and should be readily addressed. 

Several CERCLA documents have been completed that include or have resulted in decisions that affect 

cleanup. These CERCLA documents and summaries of the relevant cleanup decisions are listed in 

Section A.3. 

A.2.2 PERMITS, LICENSES, AND OTHER STATUTORY/REGULATORY PROGRAM 

APPROVALS 

RCRA, as modified by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, gave EPA authority to 

control the generation, transportation, and TSD of hazardous waste. The amendments expanded the scope 

of RCRA to require corrective action for certain releases of hazardous waste constituents to the 

environment from RCRA facilities regardless of time of release (similar to CERCLA remedial action). 

Unlike CERCLA, EPA may delegate authority for implementing RCRA to the states, and in Washington 

state, Ecology has lead authority for most elements of RCRA. Principal documents used to implement 

Hanford cleanup decisions under RCRA include: 

x Final Status Permit. A final status permit includes explicit descriptions of the conditions and 

requirements that must be met by a facility at which TSD of regulated hazardous waste (or dangerous 

waste, in Washington State) occur. A TSD facility may receive a final status permit even though it is 

closed and not operating, if there are ongoing caretaking activities that must be maintained after 

closure (i.e., during the post-closure care period). At Hanford, a single final status permit covers the 

entire site, but is being issued in phases because of the number of TSD facilities that exist. The final 

status permit includes decisions about how Federal and State statutes, regulations, and guidance have 

been interpreted and applied to specific activities conducted at each TSD facility. 

x Closure/Post-Closure Plan. Some TSD facilities have closed or may close before they are covered 

under the final status permit. In such cases, a closure plan must be prepared to describe the activities 

necessary to close the TSD facility and address any remaining dangerous wastes. If dangerous waste 

will remain after closure, a post-closure plan is required to address residual contamination. Ecology 

must approve closure/post-closure plans before they are implemented, and in the process, decisions 

will be made and included in the closure/post-closure plans about how to close the TSD facility and, 

where required, conduct post-closure care. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-4 

x Corrective Action. Corrective actions to cleanup releases from RCRA TSD facilities may be 

required before a final status permit is issued. Decisions about degree/methods for cleanup will be 

made and implemented through a corrective action plan approved by Ecology. 

In addition to RCRA, several other programs authorized under existing Federal and State statutes and 

regulations require permits, licenses and other approvals that can affect cleanup at Hanford. These other 

decision documents establish, among other conditions, limits on emissions of radionuclides and other 

hazardous constituents to the air, water, and ground. Section A.3 lists the various permits, licenses, and 

other types of approvals authorized under applicable regulatory and statutory programs that include or 

have resulted in decisions affecting Hanford cleanup. 

A.2.3 TRI-PARTY AGREEMENT DECISIONS 

Among other functions, the TPA helps define how CERCLA and RCRA programs will be implemented 

when they have overlapping authorities. The TPA is used to determine which decision-making process 

and documentation (e.g., CERCLA ROD, RCRA permit) will be used to establish cleanup actions for the 

waste sites and facilities at Hanford, but it is that subsequent documentation (not the TPA) where cleanup 

decisions are formally established. These may include provisions that set specific waste retrieval 

objectives and technology performance standards for certain types of cleanup actions. These TPA-based 

decisions are listed in Section A.3. 

A.2.4 OTHER FEDERAL AND STATE DECISIONS 

There are a variety of other decisions embodied in executive, legislative, and judicial documents that can 

affect cleanup at Hanford. Section A.3 lists various Executive Orders, Presidential Proclamations, 

Congressional Acts, judicial orders/decrees, and Federal and State decisions that may affect cleanup. 

A.3 SUMMARY OF HANFORD CLEANUP DECISIONS – FINAL AND NOT YET 

FINAL 

The statutory/regulatory authorities discussed in Section A.2 resulted in a multitude of national, regional, 

and/or State decisions across numerous projects and programs. Some of these decisions establish 

environmental obligations that affect the cleanup mission and are summarized in this section. 

While some decisions more clearly affect Hanford than others, care has been taken to include decisions 

that have indirect effects on cleanup. Examples of such indirect decisions might include those that define 

national standards for risk-based exposure limits, enable offsite activities that contribute contaminants to 

Hanford environmental media, or constrain the ability to disposition materials or wastes at or from 

Hanford. As stated earlier, the LCR is required to consider cleanup alternatives “where final cleanup 

decisions have not yet been made” (TPA M-036-01, third paragraph) at Hanford. Some cleanup decisions 

may appear to be final but are not: 

x They may be “interim” remedies until a final cleanup decision can be made, or 

x They may be “partial” actions within a much larger cleanup effort. 

Even where final decisions have been made, there are legal mandates to perform periodic reviews to 

ensure that selected remedies continue to be effective; new decisions may be needed depending on how 

well cleanup actions are working. To stay as simple as possible, the term “final” has been interpreted 

literally. 

For purposes of this LCR, a cleanup decision will be treated as a final cleanup decision if: 

x The decision is embodied in a statutory/regulatory document that is titled final (e.g., final permit, final 

ROD); or 

x The decision is explicitly represented as final in a document, and such representation is compliant 

with the statutory/regulatory authority that produced the document. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-5 

Hanford cleanup decisions summarized in Tables A-1, A-3, and A-5 indicate whether the decision is 

considered to be final by placing the word FINAL after the decision title in the first column. In addition 

to decisions that have been made, whether final or not, many cleanup decisions are yet to be made. By 

definition, the absence of a decision means there is not a final cleanup decision. It would be very difficult 

to develop an exhaustive list of all the decisions that still need to be made to complete Hanford cleanup. 

However, as these decisions are reached, they will be incorporated into this section of the LCR. 

Table A-1. CERCLA Records of Decision and Associated Changes. (8 pages)

Record of Decision 

Title: Record of Decision, USDOE Hanford 1100 Area (EPA/ROD/R10-93/063) FINAL 

ROD Type: CERCLA Final ROD 

Area: 1100 

Date Approved: Sep-93 

Initial Decision: Cap Horn Rapids Landfill; offsite disposal of PCB-contaminated soils; offsite incineration of bis 

(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate contaminated soils; monitored natural attenuation of groundwater contamination. 

Revision Title Type Date Revised Decision 

Explanation of Significant Differences for 

the Record of Decision for the USDOE 

Hanford 1100 Area Benton County, 

Washington (EPA 2010a) 

ESD Sep-10 Documents significant differences to the 

selected remedies in the ROD. In summary, 

this ESD clarifies the IC requirements for the 

Horn Rapids Landfill. 

Record of Decision 

Title: Declaration of the Record of Decision for the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (EPA/ROD/R10-

95/100) FINAL 

ROD Type: CERCLA Final ROD 

Area: 200 West 

Date Approved: Jan-95 

Initial Decision: Initial construction of two cells; maximum size of 1.6 mi2; landfill construction in accordance with 

RCRA; capped at completion.

Revision Title Type Date Revised Decision 

USDOE Environmental Restoration 

Disposal Facility, Hanford Site, Benton 

County, Washington, Explanation of 

Significant Difference (ESD)

(EPA/ESD/R10-96/145) 

ESD Jul-96 Allow disposal of investigation-derived waste 

and RCRA past-practice waste to ERDF; allow 

disposal of non-process inactive TSD waste to 

ERDF; allow use of ERDF leachate for dust 

suppression/compaction activities at ERDF. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 

Environmental Restoration Disposal 

Facility, Hanford Site – 200 Area, Benton 

County, Washington, Amended Record of 

Decision, Decision Summary and 

Responsiveness Summary, (also see 

proposed plan for amendment) 

(EPA/AMD/R10-97/101) 

Amended 

ROD 

Sep-97 Authorizes two additional disposal cells and the 

option of treating waste as needed by 

containerization and encapsulation at ERDF 

instead of at the OU. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 

Environmental Restoration Disposal 

Facility, Hanford Site – 200 Area, Benton 

County, Washington, Amended Record of 

Decision, Decision Summary and 

Responsiveness Summary, (also see 

proposed plan for amendment) 

(EPA/AMD/R10-99/038) 

Amended 

ROD 

Mar-99 Establishes conditional approval for delisting 

of the ERDF leachate. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 

Environmental Restoration Disposal 

Facility, Hanford Site – 200 Area, Benton 

County, Washington, Amended Record of 

Decision, Decision Summary and 

Responsiveness Summary, (also see 

Amended 

ROD 

Jan-02 Authorizes four additional disposal cells and 

the option of staging waste at ERDF pending 

treatment and/or disposal. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-6 

Table A-1. CERCLA Records of Decision and Associated Changes. (8 pages)

proposed plan for amendment) 

(EPA/AMD/R10-02/030) 

U.S. Department of Energy, 

Environmental Restoration Disposal 

Facility, Hanford Site-200 Area, Benton 

County, Washington, Amended Record of 

Decision, Decision Summary and 

Responsiveness Summary (EPA 2007a) 

Amended 

ROD 

May-07 Allows specific waste, such as waste associated 

with surveillance and maintenance of Hanford 

facilities, environmental research/development 

activities, sample analyses, liquid effluent 

waste treatment, infrastructure support, and 

environmental monitoring programs, to be 

disposed at ERDF; identifies a plug-in 

approach for ERDF disposal of additional 

similar Hanford cleanup waste generated in 

support of RCRA/CERCLA cleanup actions. 

Declaration: U.S. Department of Energy, 

Environmental Restoration Disposal 

Facility, Hanford Site - 200 Area, Benton 

County, Washington (EPA 2009a) 

Amended 

ROD and 

ESD

Aug-09 Allows for ERDF expansion of an area equal to 

4 cells or 2 super cells; updates cell design to 

allow super cell concept and allows for ERDF 

expansion via EPA approval and fact sheets 

rather than ROD amendments. 

Record of Decision 

Title: Declaration of the Interim Record of Decision for the 200-ZP-1 Operable Unit (EPA/ROD/R10-95/114)

ROD Type: CERCLA Interim Action ROD 

Area: 200 West; 200-ZP-1 OU 

Date Approved: May-95 

Initial Decision: P&T to address carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, and trichloroethylene; treatment with air stripping 

and vapor phase activated carbon; interim action to continue until final action instituted; reinjection of treated water.

Record of Decision 

Title: Record of Decision, Hanford 200 Area, 200-ZP-1 Operable Unit Superfund Site, Benton County, Washington

(EPA 2008) FINAL 

ROD Type: CERCLA Final ROD 

Area: 200 West; 200-ZP-1 OU 

Date Approved: Sep-08 

Initial Decision: P&T to address carbon tetrachloride, nitrate, chromium, trichloroethylene, I-129, Tc-99, and 

tritium; monitored natural attenuation; flow-path control through injection of treated water; and ICs.

Record of Decision 

Title: Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 100-DR-1, and 100-HR-1 Operable Units, Hanford 

Site, Benton County, Washington (EPA/ROD/R10-95/126)

ROD Type: CERCLA Interim Action ROD 

Area: 100; 100-BC-1, 100-DR-1, and 100-HR-1 OUs 

Date Approved: Sep-95 

Initial Decision: Remove contaminated soil, structures and debris using the Observational Approach; treatment, by 

thermal desorption to remove organics and/or soil washing for volume reduction, or as needed to meet waste disposal 

criteria; disposal of contaminated materials at ERDF; backfill of excavated areas followed by revegetation.

Revision Title Type Date Revised Decision 

Amendment to the Interim Action Record 

of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 100-DR-1, 

and 100-HR-1 Operable Units, Hanford 

Site, Benton County, Washington (see 

Draft B ESD and Proposed Amendment 

documents preceding this ROD 

amendment) (EPA/AMD/R10-97/044) 

Amended 

ROD 

Apr-97 Incorporates 34 additional waste sites into the 

ROD; refines remedial cost estimate for 

original 37 sites and additional 34 sites based 

on actual data, streamlining, and lessons 

learned; documents that soil washing is not an 

effective treatment.

Record of Decision 

Title: Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-IU-1, 100-IU-3, 100-IU-4, and 100-IU-5 Operable Units, 

Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington (EPA/ROD/R10-96/151) FINAL 

ROD Type: CERCLA Final ROD 

Area: 100; 100-IU-1, 100-IU-3, 100-IU-4, and 100-IU-5 OUs 

Date Approved: Feb-96 

Initial Decision: No action.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-7 

Table A-1. CERCLA Records of Decision and Associated Changes. (8 pages)

Record of Decision 

Title: Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-HR-3 and 100-KR-4 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton 

County, Washington (EPA/ROD/R10-96/134)

ROD Type: CERCLA Interim Action ROD 

Area: 100; 100-H, 100-K 

Date Approved: Mar-96 

Initial Decision: Interim action to remove hexavalent chromium from groundwater; 30 extraction wells; ion 

exchange treatment; reinject treated effluent; monitor; institute ICs.

Revision Title Type Date Revised Decision 

U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Site 

– 100 Area, Benton County, Washington, 

Amended Record of Decision, Decision 

Summary and Responsiveness Summary 

(EPA/AMD/R10-00/122) 

Amended 

ROD 

Oct-99 Implements In Situ Redox Manipulation barrier 

for second chromium plume in 100-HR-3 OU; 

existing P&Ts remain in operation. 

Explanation of Significant Difference for 

the 100-HR-3 Operable Unit Record of 

Decision (EPA 2002) 

ESD Oct-02 Provides justification for increased 

schedule/cost from the 1999 Amendment 

associated with a greater number of wells and 

aquifer thickness that affected implementation 

of the ISRM barrier. 

Explanation of Significant Difference for 

the 100-HR-3 Operable Unit Record of 

Decision (EPA/ESD/R10-03/606)

ESD Mar-03 Provides justification for increased 

schedule/cost from the 1999 Amendment 

associated with a greater number of wells and 

aquifer thickness that affected implementation 

of the ISRM barrier. 

Explanation of Significant Differences for 

the 100-HR-3 and 100-KR-4 Operable 

Units Interim Action Record of Decision, 

Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington

(EPA 2009b)

ESD Aug-09 Provides justification for increased cost and 

location of reinjection wells from the 1999 

Amendment associated with operation beyond 

initial 5-year estimate and need to control 

plume migration. 

Record of Decision 

Title: Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 300-FF-1 and 300-FF-5 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton 

County, Washington, (EPA/ROD/R10-96/143) 

Note: The ROD is only FINAL for the 300-FF-1 OU; it is an interim action for 300-FF-5 OU.

ROD Type: CERCLA Final ROD 

Area: 300; 300-FF-1 and 300-FF-5 OUs 

Date Approved: Jul-96 

Initial Decision: 300-FF-1: Remove contaminated soil and debris; dispose at ERDF; backfill and recontouring; ICs. 

300-FF-5: Monitoring and ICs for groundwater.

Revision Title Type Date Revised Decision 

USDOE Hanford 300 Area, 300-FF-1 

Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Benton 

County, Washington Explanation of 

Significant Difference (ESD)

(EPA/ESD/R10-00/505) 

ESD Jan-00 Provides a site-specific land disposal restriction 

treatability variance for lead contamination 

found in the 628-4 or Landfill 1D waste site. 

Explanation of Significant Difference for 

the 300-FF-5 Record of Decision 

(EPA/ESD/R10-00/524)

ESD Jun-00 Expanded scope of 300-FF-5 ROD to include 

groundwater in 300 Area, including 300-FF-2 

sites and any sites plugged into 300-FF-1 ROD. 

Record of Decision 

Title: Declaration of the Interim Record of Decision for the 300-FF-2 Operable Unit (EPA/ROD/R10-01/119)

ROD Type: CERCLA Interim Action ROD 

Area: 300; 300-FF-2 OU 

Date Approved: Apr-01 

Initial Decision: Remove contaminated soil, structures, and debris; treat as needed; dispose at ERDF, WIPP, or 

other; backfill and revegetate; establish ICs; continued groundwater monitoring; and define plug-in approach.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-8 

Table A-1. CERCLA Records of Decision and Associated Changes. (8 pages)

Revision Title Type Date Revised Decision 

Explanation of Significant Differences for 

the 300-FF-2 Operable Unit Record of 

Decision (EPA 2004b)

ESD May-04 Modified uranium soil cleanup level from 350 

to 267 pCi/g based on engineering study to 

ensure protectiveness of the groundwater and 

river; modified land-use assumption for 8 

outlying waste sites from industrial to 

unrestricted, changed cleanup levels for these 

sites to those consistent with 100 Area cleanup. 

Explanation of Significant Differences for 

the 300-FF-2 Operable Unit Interim 

Action Record of Decision, Hanford Site, 

Benton County, Washington (EPA 2009e)

ESD Aug-09 Incorporates 14 plug-in sites into the ROD and 

subsequent ESDs; incorporates 2 newly 

discovered sites into the ROD and subsequent 

ESDs; allows future newly discovered sites to 

be incorporated into the ROD and ESDs as 

long as cost impacts are within specified limits. 

Explanation of Significant Differences, 

Hanford 300 Area, 300-FF-2 Operable 

Unit, 618-10 Burial Ground (EPA 2011b)

ESD Aug-11 Modified remedy to allow necessary treatment 

of liquid waste in bottles, up to 1 gal/bottle, to 

occur in trays within the excavation area in 

accordance with an approved work plan. 

Record of Decision 

Title: Record of Decision for 300-FF-2 and 300-FF-5, and Record of Decision Amendment for 300-FF-1 Hanford 

Site, Benton County, Washington (EPA and DOE, 2013) FINAL 

ROD Type: CERCLA Final ROD 

Area: 300; 300-FF-1, 300-FF-2 and 300-FF-5 

Date Approved: Nov-13 

Initial Decision: This ROD selects a remedy for the waste sites in 300-FF-2, a remedy for the groundwater in 

300-FF-5 and amends the remedy for three 300-FF-1 waste sites. The interim action remedy for 300-FF-5, selected in 

1996 and the interim action remedy for 300-FF-2 selected in 2001 are replaced with this final action remedy. The 

remedy for 300-FF-1 selected in 1996 is amended for additional remedial action of uranium from three sites. 

Contaminated buildings are being removed in accordance with CERCLA Action Memoranda and are not part of the 

OUs addressed by this ROD.

The major components of the selected remedy for the 300-FF-2 OU are: 

x Remove, treat and dispose (RTD) at waste sites 

x Temporary surface barriers and pipeline void filling 

x Enhanced attenuation of uranium using sequestration in the vadose zone, PRZ and top of the aquifer 

x ICs, including the requirement that DOE prevent the development and use of property that does not meet 

residential cleanup levels at the 300 Area Industrial Complex and 618-11 for other than industrial uses, including 

use of property for residential housing, elementary and secondary schools, childcare facilities and playgrounds. 

The major components of the selected remedy for the 300-FF-5 OU are: 

x Monitored Natural Attenuation 

x Groundwater monitoring 

x Enhanced attenuation of uranium at the top of aquifer 

x ICs. 

The major component of the amended remedy for 300-FF-1 is: 

x Enhanced attenuation of uranium using sequestration in the vadose zone, PRZ and top of the aquifer. 

Record of Decision 

Title: Record of Decision, Hanford 200 Area, Superfund Site 200-CW-5 and 200-PW-1, 200-PW-3 and 200-PW-6 

Operable Units Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington (EPA 2011c) FINAL 

ROD Type: CERCLA Final ROD 

Area: 200 East and 200 West 

Date Approved: Sep-11 

Initial Decision: RTD of soil and debris to specified depths cleanup levels for plutonium-contaminated soils and 

subsurface structures/debris. Soil vapor extraction at three 200-PW-1 waste sites will continue until vadose zone 

cleanup levels are met. Soil covers will be used to a depth of at least 15 ft over cesium-contaminated soils. Removal 

of sludge followed by tank stabilization for two tanks. No action for two waste sites. ICs and long-term monitoring 

for waste sites where contamination is left in place and an unrestricted land use is precluded. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-9 

Table A-1. CERCLA Records of Decision and Associated Changes. (8 pages)

Record of Decision 

Title: Declaration of the Record of Decision, USDOE Hanford 200 Area, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington

(EPA/ROD/R10-97/048)

ROD Type: CERCLA Interim Action ROD 

Area: 200 West; 200-UP-1 OU 

Date Approved: Feb-97 

Initial Decision: Extract groundwater from high concentration zone of uranium and Tc-99 plumes and treat at 

Effluent Treatment Facility.

Revision Title Type Date Revised Decision 

Explanation of Significant Differences for 

the Interim Action Record of Decision for 

the 200-UP-1 Groundwater Operable 

Unit, Hanford Site, Benton County, 

Washington (EPA 2009c) 

ESD Feb-09 Adds National MCL of 30 μg/L for uranium as 

ARAR for treating extracted water; replaces 

190 gal/min pumping with a pumping 

requirement from existing and new wells 

consistent with approved RD/RAWP until 

uranium and Tc-99 concentrations are less than 

10 times the MCL for 4 consecutive quarters; 

adds sampling requirements and updates cost 

estimates and IC requirements. 

Record of Decision for Interim Remedial 

Action Hanford 200 Area Superfund Site 

200-UP-1 Operable Unit (EPA 2012)

Interim 

Action 

ROD 

Sep-12 Supersedes previous interim action ROD (Feb97) and ESD (Feb-09). Includes groundwater 

extraction/treatment (with flow path control

through injection of treated water) in 

combination with monitored natural attenuation 

for Tc-99, uranium, chromium (total and 

hexavalent), nitrate, carbon tetrachloride and 

tritium; hydraulic containment and further 

treatment technology evaluation for I-129; 

remedy performance monitoring and ICs. 

Record of Decision 

Title: Interim Action Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 100-BC-2, 100-DR-1, 100-DR-2, 100-FR-1, 100-FR-2, 

100-HR-1, 100-HR-2, 100-KR-1, 100-KR-2, 100-IU-2, 100-IU-6, and 200-CW-3 Operable Units, Hanford Site, 

Benton County, Washington (EPA/ROD/R10-99/039)

ROD Type: CERCLA Interim Action ROD 

Area: 100, 200 North 

Date Approved: Jul-99 

Initial Decision: RTD for 46 sites; plug-in approach for remaining 100 Area and 200 North sites; plug-in approach 

for newly identified 100 Area sites; disposal of debris from B, D, H, and K reactors to ERDF; provides decision 

framework for leaving waste in place, generally below 15-ft depth.

Revision Title Type Date Revised Decision 

Explanation of Significant Difference for 

the 100 Area Remaining Sites ROD, 

USDOE Hanford 100 Area, 100-IU-6 

Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Benton 

County, Washington

(EPA/ESD/R10-00/045) 

ESD Jun-00 Plugs in 600-23 and JA Jones #1 waste sites to 

the Remaining Sites ROD.

Explanation of Significant Differences for 

the 100 Area Remaining Sites Interim 

Remedial Action Record of Decision 

(EPA 2004a)

ESD Feb-04 Adds 28 sites to ROD; adds 10 CFR 1022 and 

40 CFR 6, Appendix A as ARARs to ROD; 

revises annual ICs report date to be coincident 

with the due date for the Sitewide ICs Plan for 

Hanford CERCLA Response Actions. 

Explanation of Significant Differences for 

the 100 Area Remaining Sites Interim 

Remedial Action Record of Decision, 

Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington

(EPA 2009d)

ESD Aug-09 Authorizes adding 200-CW-3 OU wastes sites, 

99 newly discovered waste sites, and 87 

candidate sites using the plug-in approach in 

the ROD and any newly discovered waste sites 

that will be documented in the Administrative 

Record and in an annual fact sheet. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-10 

Table A-1. CERCLA Records of Decision and Associated Changes. (8 pages)

Record of Decision

Title: Record of Decision Hanford 100 Area Superfund Site 100-FR-1, 100-FR-2, 100-FR-3, 100-IU-2, and 100-IU-6 

Operable Units (EPA 2014) FINAL 

ROD Type: CERCLA Final ROD 

Area: 100 Area 

Date Approved: Sep-14 

Initial Decision: RTD at 91 waste sites, ICs at 15 waste sites, no additional action due to interim remedial actions 

completed at 198 waste sites, monitored natural attenuation to address nitrate, hexavalent chromium, trichloroethene, 

and strontium-90 in 100-FR-3 groundwater and ICs. 

Record of Decision 

Title: Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-KR-2 Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Benton County, 

Washington (EPA/ROD/R10-99/059)

ROD Type: CERCLA Interim Action ROD 

Area: 100-K 

Date Approved: Sep-99 

Initial Decision: Remove spent nuclear fuel from basins; remove sludge from basins; treat and remove water from 

the basins; remove debris from the basins; deactivate the basins; and institute ICs.

Revision Title Type Date Revised Decision 

Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision 

Amendment, U.S. Department of Energy; 

100 K Area K Basins, Hanford Site - 100 

Area, Benton County, Washington (EPA 

2005a) 

Amended 

ROD 

Jun-05 Modifies remedy for sludge by including 

sludge treatment prior to interim storage and 

shipment to a national repository; modifies 

remedy for debris by including grouting in 

place some of the basin debris followed by 

removal along with the removal of the basins. 

Record of Decision 

Title: Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision for the 100-NR-1 and 100-NR-2 Operable Units, Hanford Site, 

Benton County, Washington (EPA/ROD/R10-99/112)

ROD Type: CERCLA Interim Action ROD 

Area: 100-N 

Date Approved: Sep-99 

Initial Decision: ICs for shoreline site; in situ and RTD with ex situ bioremediation for petroleum sites; RTD for 

remainder of sites in 100-NR-1; maintain ERA P&T for 100-NR-2.

Revision Title Type Date Revised Decision 

Explanation of Significant Difference for 

the 100-NR-1 Operable Unit Treatment, 

Storage, and Disposal Interim Action 

Record of Decision and 100-NR-1/100-

NR-2 Operable Unit Interim Action 

Record of Decision

(EPA/ESD/R10-03/605)

ESD May-03 Removes July 31 annual ICs reporting 

requirements, consolidates reporting with the 

site-wide IC annual report; eliminates 

requirement to evaluate applying 30 in. of 

irrigation water to determine if remaining 

contaminants will impact groundwater; 

identifies need for additional ICs to preclude 

access to contaminated groundwater which will 

be incorporated into site-wide IC document. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 100-NR-1 

and NR-2 Operable Units, Hanford Site - 

100 Area, Benton County, Washington, 

Amended Record of Decision, Decision 

Summary and Responsiveness Summary

(EPA 2010b)

Amended 

ROD 

Sep-10 Deploys the apatite sequestration technology 

for remediating Sr-90 in the 100-NR-2 OU by 

extending existing apatite permeable reactive 

barrier to ~2,500 ft, allows for deployment of 

the apatite sequestration technology elsewhere 

in the 100-NR-2 OU in accordance with an 

Ecology approved work plan, and includes 

decommissioning the treatment components of 

the existing P&T system. 

Explanation of Significant Differences for 

the 100-NR-1 and 100-NR-2 Operable 

Units Interim Remedial Action Record of 

Decision, Hanford Site, Benton County, 

Washington (EPA 2011a)

ESD Mar-11 Adds 45 additional waste sites in the 100-NR-1 

OU for remediation by RTD (characterized per 

the 100-N Area sampling and analysis plan)

and increases the total cost 38% to 

$67,510,386. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-11 

Table A-1. CERCLA Records of Decision and Associated Changes. (8 pages)

Explanation of Significant Difference for 

the 100-NR-1 and 100-NR-2 Operable 

Units Interim Remedial Action Record of 

Decision, Hanford Site, Benton County, 

Washington (EPA 2013)

ESD Aug-13 Adds 2 additional waste sites in the 100-NR-1 

OU for remediation by RTD and increases the 

total cost by $401,500. 

Record of Decision 

Title: Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision Declaration, U.S. Department of Energy 100 Area, 100-NR-1 

Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington (EPA/ROD/R10-00/120)

ROD Type: CERCLA Interim Action ROD for 2 RCRA TSDs and an associated site 

Area: 100-N 

Date Approved: Jan-00 

Initial Decision: RTD of 116-N-1 and 116-N-3 Cribs with ERDF disposal; backfill and revegetate; any pipelines 

will be removed or sampled and left in place based on sample results.

Revision Title Type Date Revised Decision 

Explanation of Significant Difference for 

the 100-NR-1 Operable Unit Treatment, 

Storage, and Disposal Interim Action 

Record of Decision and 100-NR-1/100-

NR-2 Operable Unit Interim Action 

Record of Decision

(EPA/ESD/R10-03/605)

ESD May-03 Removes July 31 annual ICs requirement and 

consolidates reporting with the site-wide IC 

annual report; eliminates requirement to 

evaluate applying 30 in. of irrigation water to 

determine if remaining contaminants will 

impact groundwater; identifies need for 

additional ICs to preclude access to 

contaminated groundwater which will be 

incorporated into site-wide IC document. 

Record of Decision 

Title: Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 100-BC-2, 100-DR-1, 100-DR-2, 100-FR-2, 

100-HR-2 and the 100-KR-2 Operable Units (EPA/ROD/R10-00/121)

ROD Type: CERCLA Interim Action ROD 

Area: 100 

Date Approved: Sep-00 

Initial Decision: Remove contaminated soil, structures, and debris; treat as needed; dispose at ERDF; backfill and 

revegetate. Applies to 45 burial grounds in 100 Area.

Revision Title Type Date Revised Decision 

Explanation of Significant Difference for 

the Interim Action Record of Decision for 

the 100-BC-1, 100-BC-2, 100-DR-1, 

100-DR-2, 100-FR-2, 100-HR-2, and 

100-KR-2 Operable Units (100 Area 

Burial Grounds) (EPA 2007b)

ESD Nov-07 Established limit of RTD excavation at the 

118-B-1 Burial Ground considering the 

balancing factors in the ROD and required 

additional ICs for protection of groundwater 

and the Columbia River.

Record of Decision 

Title: Record of Decision 221-U Facility (Canyon Disposition Initiative), Hanford Site, Washington (EPA 2005b) 

FINAL

ROD Type: CERCLA Final ROD 

Area: 200 West 

Date Approved: Oct-05 

Initial Decision: Remove waste from vessels and equipment in the facility with levels of transuranic isotopes greater 

than 100 nCi/g and eventual disposal at WIPP; removal of liquids from the facility or treatment to remove liquids; 

partial removal of contaminated equipment and piping from the gallery side of the facility and dispose at ERDF; 

demolition and subsequent stabilization of the railroad tunnel, 271-U, 276-U, 291-U, and 292-U structures and 

291-U-1 and 296-U-10 stacks and dispose at ERDF; constructing an engineered barrier; planting semiarid-adapted 

vegetation on the barrier; ICs; post-closure care; and ongoing barrier performance and groundwater monitoring.

ARAR = applicable or relevant and appropriate 

requirement. 

CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act.

EPA = U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

ERA = expedited response action. 

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. 

OU = operable unit. 

P&T = pump-and-treat. 

PCB = polychlorinated biphenyl. 

PRZ = Periodically Rewetted Zone. 

RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. 

RD/RAWP = remedial design/remedial action work plan. 

ROD = record of decision. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-12 

Table A-1. CERCLA Records of Decision and Associated Changes. (8 pages)

ESD = explanation of significant difference. 

IC = institutional controls. 

ISRM = in situ redox manipulation. 

MCL = maximum contaminant limit.

RTD = remove, treat, and dispose. 

TSD = treatment, storage, and disposal. 

WIPP = Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.

Unless otherwise noted in Table A-2, decisions made through Action Memoranda are considered final 

and are available in the TPA Administrative Record (http://pdw.hanford.gov/arpir/). These decisions 

focus mainly on the deactivation, decontamination, decommissioning, and demolition (D4) of buildings 

and generally are considered final actions because buildings are demolished and the waste disposed to 

approved facilities; or remove, treat, and dispose (RTD) of contaminated soil from waste sites, which are 

generally considered final actions for individual waste sites. Slabs and contaminated soils underlying the 

buildings may require additional decision making as part of appropriate source OUs. Similarly, waste 

sites that undergo RTD as a removal action will likely have a final ROD covering the decision, even 

though no additional cleanup activities are anticipated. 

Table A-2. CERCLA Action Memoranda. (7 pages) 

Title Date Action Removal Action/Decision 

“618-9 Burial Ground 

Expedited Response 

Action, Phase I Project 

Plan” (CCN 9100749) 

Feb-91 TCRA Provides for trench excavation and removal of drummed liquid 

wastes from 618-9 Burial Ground. Treatment and/or disposal of 

liquids and contaminated soils (if present) is considered part of 

the Phase 2 activities and is not considered time critical. 

“Action Memorandum 

Approval: 316-5 Process 

Trenches, USDOE Hanford 

Site, Richland, WA”

(CCN 9103432) 

Jul-91 ERA Provides for excavation of soil from the 316-5 Process Trenches 

and interim stabilization pending further remedial action as part 

of the 300-FF-1 OU. This AM initially was not a final action; 

however, the ROD for 300-FF-1 OU, which covers these 

trenches, is a final CERCLA action. 

“Action Memorandum: 

Expedited Response Action 

Proposal for 200 West Area 

Carbon Tetrachloride 

Plume” (CCN 9200423)

Jan-92 ERA Identifies installing a soil vapor extraction system with granular 

activated carbon recovery and offsite granular activated carbon 

regeneration at 216-Z-1A followed by systems at 216-Z-18 and 

216-Z-9. While this ERA is not a final decision; a final decision 

has been made through the CERCLA remedial process for 

200-ZP-1 OU. 

“Action Memorandum 

Approval: Sodium 

Dichromate Barrel Landfill, 

USDOE Hanford Site, 

Richland, WA” (CCN 

9307470) 

Mar-93 ERA Identifies excavation and disposal of drums and homestead 

debris from the landfill and sampling any other wastes 

encountered during excavation; the expedited reaction would 

result in cleanup of the landfill to unrestricted levels.

“Action Memorandum: 

Expedited Response Action 

Proposal; Riverland Site, 

USDOE Hanford Site, 

Richland, WA” 

(CCN 9305567) 

Jun-93 ERA Provides for cleanup of the Riverland Site, part of the 100-IU-1 

OU, through excavation to address pesticide and hydrocarbon 

contamination, ordnance survey and removal, and sandblasting 

to decontaminate concrete.

“Action Memorandum: 

North Slope (Wahluke 

Slope) Expedited Response 

Action Cleanup Plan, 

USDOE Hanford Site, 

Richland, WA” (Ecology 

and EPA 1994a) 

Mar-94 ERA Provides for mitigation of physical hazards, excavation of the 

worst-case landfill, characterization of other landfills, and if 

needed, excavation of other landfills based on characterization 

results; includes investigation and as needed, mitigation of 

ordinance burial pits. As stated in the AM, the intent is to 

provide for the final removal action taken at the 100-IU-3 OU 

(the Wahluke Slope). 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-13 

Table A-2. CERCLA Action Memoranda. (7 pages) 

Title Date Action Removal Action/Decision 

“Action Memorandum; 

N Springs Expedited 

Response Action Cleanup 

USDOE Hanford Site, 

Richland, WA” (Ecology 

and EPA 1994b) 

Sep-94 ERA Identifies a P&T system combined with a vertical barrier for 

implementation at N Springs. These systems comprise a 

component of overall cleanup of N Springs but were also 

intended to provide additional information to the ongoing 

CERCLA and RCRA processes. This ERA is not a final 

decision. 

“Action Memorandum: 

Expedited Response Action 

Proposal; 100-BC-1 

Demonstration Project; 

USDOE Hanford Site; 

Richland, Washington”

(EPA and Ecology 1995) 

Jun-95 ERA Allows contaminated soil from 116-B-4, 116-B-5, and 116-C-1 

to be excavated and temporarily stored pending start of ERDF 

operations; actions under this AM would provide additional 

information to support remedial design, including cost 

information, for 100-BC-1 OU. The ERA was not intended as a 

final decision; 100-BC-1 OU has been incorporated into an 

interim ROD and is undergoing a final ROD process. 

“Action Memorandum, 

183-H Solar Evaporation 

Basin Waste Expedited 

Response Action Cleanup 

Plan” (CCN 040739) 

Nov-96 ERA Identifies ERDF as the disposal location for 183-H Solar 

Evaporation Basin waste generated through cleanup activities. 

“Action Memorandum, N 

Area Waste Expedited 

Response Action Cleanup 

Plan” (CCN 038546) 

Nov-96 ERA Identifies ERDF as the disposal location for contaminated 

sediment and debris from the Emergency Dump Basin, facility 

deactivation waste, and environmental investigation waste from 

the 100-N Area. 

“Action Memorandum; 

100-B/C Area Ancillary 

Facilities and the 

108-F Building Removal 

Action, USDOE Hanford 

Site, Richland, WA” (EPA 

1997) 

Jan-97 NTCRA Identifies D4 with ERDF disposal for facilities in 100-B and 

100-F Areas: 111-B, 115-B, 118-C-4, 119-B, 105-C reactor 

waste, and 108-F Building. The B Reactor and ISS of 105-C 

Reactor are not included in the AM. This action is considered 

final for ancillary facilities and demolished portions of the 

reactor. Additional decisions are expected on the reactor core 

that is in ISS. 

“Action Memorandum: 

Removal Action at the 

233-S Plutonium 

Concentration Facility, 

USDOE Hanford Site, 

Benton County, WA”

(DOE and EPA 1997) 

Mar-97 NTCRA Identifies D&D as the preferred alternative for 233-S and 

233-SA Buildings, including subsurface systems and structures 

to a depth of 3 ft (further actions beyond the 3-ft depth would be 

deferred to the associated source OU). Waste meeting the 

criteria would be disposed at ERDF; other waste would be 

disposed as appropriate.

“Action Memorandum, 

USDOE Hanford 100 Area 

NPL, 100-IU-3 Operable 

Unit (Wahluke Slope), 

Hanford Site, Adams, 

Grant, and Franklin 

Counties, WA” (Ecology 

and DOE 1997) 

Jul-97 TCRA Addresses contaminated soils/drums at the 2,4-D Burial Ground 

in 200-IU-3 OU. Removal action includes excavating 

dioxin-contaminated soil for offsite disposal; bioremediation of 

2,4-D contaminated soil; and excavating, cleaning, and 

disposing drums at ERDF. In the 1994 AM for Wahluke Slope, 

only 2,4-D Burial Ground was identified for sampling. 

Subsequently, additional contamination was found, prompting 

another AM. Completing this AM action allows continuation of 

the deletion process for the OU from the NPL. 

“Action Memorandum: 

USDOE Hanford 100 Area 

National Priorities List, 

105-F and 105-DR Reactor 

Buildings and Ancillary 

Facilities, Hanford Site, 

Benton County, WA”

(CCN 059689) 

Jul-98 NTCRA Identifies ISS for 105-F and 105-DR reactor cores and D&D for 

reactor components up to the cores and for 116-D, 116-DR, 

117-DR, and 119-DR ancillary facilities. Demolition will 

extend generally to 3 ft bgs; however, substructures and/or soil 

beneath the facilities that exceed cleanup levels will be 

excavated. This action is considered final for the ancillary 

facilities and demolished portions of reactors. Additional 

decisions are expected on the reactor cores in ISS. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-14 

Table A-2. CERCLA Action Memoranda. (7 pages) 

Title Date Action Removal Action/Decision 

“Action Memorandum: 

USDOE Hanford 100 Area 

National Priorities List, 

100-N Area Ancillary 

Facilities; Hanford Site, 

Benton County, WA”

(DOE et al. 1998)

Dec-98 NTCRA Provides for D&D of the inactive contaminated ancillary 

facilities in 100-N Area, facilities in the buffer zone, Hanford 

Generating Plant, and solid waste management units inside 

Hanford Generating Plant support facilities (D&D of 105-N and 

109-N are excluded from the AM). Contaminated soils under 

the facilities would be addressed through 100-N Area decision 

documents for waste sites. 

“Action Memorandum: 

USDOE, Hanford 300 Area 

National Priorities List 

(NPL), 331-A Virology 

Laboratory Building, 

Hanford Site, Benton 

County, WA” (DOE and 

EPA 2000) 

Feb-00 NTCRA Per the AM, the walls and floors of the 331-A Building would 

be demolished and the concrete slab would be scraped to 

remove physical hazards; wastes would be disposed at ERDF. 

The concrete slab and underlying soils would remain in place. 

“Action Memorandum: 

USDOE Hanford 100 Area 

National Priorities List 

(NPL); 105-D and 105-H 

Reactor Facilities and 

Ancillary Facilities; 

Hanford Site; Benton 

County, WA” (DOE and 

Ecology 2000) 

Dec-00 NTCRA Identifies ISS for the 105-F and 105-DR reactor cores and D&D 

for the reactor components up to the cores and for the 116-D, 

116-DR, 117-DR, and 119-DR ancillary facilities. Demolition 

will extend generally to 3 ft bgs; however, substructures and 

soil beneath the facilities that exceed cleanup levels will be 

excavated. This action is considered final for the ancillary 

facilities and demolished portions of the reactors. Additional 

decisions are expected on the reactor cores that are in ISS. 

“Action Memorandum; 

USDOE, Hanford 100 Area 

National Priorities List, 

105-B Reactor Facility, 

Hanford Site, Benton 

County, WA” (DOE and 

EPA 2001) 

Dec-01 NTCRA Identifies appropriate actions at B Reactor to mitigate the threat 

to site workers, public health or welfare or the environment by 

removing hazardous substances from the facility; these actions 

are consistent with increased public access to the reactor 

building; surveillance and maintenance activities would 

continue. Any wastes generated during the mitigation activities 

would be disposed at ERDF. 

“Action Memorandum; 200 

West Area, Central Waste 

Complex, 183-H Solar 

Evaporation Basin Waste, 

Hanford Site, Benton 

County, WA” (DOE et al. 

2003) 

Jun-03 NTCRA Allows for the treatment and disposal to ERDF of wastes 

generated during the RCRA closure of 183-H basin. 

“Action Memorandum; 

USDOE, 200 Area, Burial 

Ground 218-W-4C Waste 

Retrieval, Hanford Site, 

Benton County, WA”

(DOE et al. 2004)

Apr-04 TCRA Provides for the treatment and disposal of low-level and mixed 

low-level waste at ERDF from the M-091 TRU retrieval 

activities at the 218-W-4C Burial Ground. TRU is excluded 

from the AM.

“Action Memorandum: 

Request for Time Critical 

Response for Treatment 

and Disposal of Sludge 

from the 105-K East North 

Loadout Pit, USDOE 

Hanford Site” (DOE and 

EPA 2004) 

Jun-04 TCRA Requires treatment of 105-K East North Loadout Pit waste prior 

to temporary storage at Hanford and ultimate disposal at WIPP. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-15 

Table A-2. CERCLA Action Memoranda. (7 pages) 

Title Date Action Removal Action/Decision 

“Action Memorandum for 

the Non-Time-Critical 

Removal Action for the 

224-B Plutonium 

Concentration Facility”

(DOE/RL-2004-36) 

Jun-04 NTCRA Provides for removing nonradiological and radiological 

hazardous substances from 224-B Facility, removing equipment 

and associated piping, decontaminating structure and stabilizing 

contamination, demolishing structure to slab, disposing waste 

generated, and stabilizing area. Samples will be used to 

determine the need for additional cleanup of the remaining slab 

and any subsurface soils. These cleanup actions are not included 

in the AM, but deferred to future activities. 

“Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation and Liability 

Act Non-Time-Critical 

Removal Action 

Memorandum for Removal 

of the 232-Z Contaminated 

Waste Recovery Process 

Facility from the Plutonium 

Finishing Plant” (CCN 

0093881) 

Nov-04 NTCRA Provides for the remaining contaminated equipment to be 

removed and the building decontaminated, stabilized, and 

dismantled leaving the building slab, which will be addressed 

under a future CERCLA action. 

“Action Memorandum for 

the Non-Time-Critical 

Removal Action for the U 

Plant Ancillary Facilities”

(DOE/RL-2004-67) 

Dec-04 NTCRA Provides for removing nonradiological and radiological 

hazardous substances from U Plant Ancillary Facilities, 

removing equipment/associated piping, decontaminating 

structures and stabilizing contamination, demolishing structures 

to slab, disposing the waste generated, and stabilizing the area 

around U Plant. The AM includes the specific facilities. Slabs 

and underlying soils will be addressed as needed through future 

CERCLA actions. 

“Action Memorandum #1 

for the 300 Area Facilities”

(DOE and EPA 2005a) 

Jan-05 NTCRA Provides for D4 of 72 buildings/structures in the northern part 

of 300 Area, disposing D4 waste at ERDF. An additional 

10 buildings/structures were included in the EE/CA that 

supports the AM; however, those buildings/structures were 

demolished and had no hazardous materials prior to the AM. 

“Action Memorandum; 

USDOE, 100 Area, 105-N 

Reactor Facility and 109-N 

Heat Exchanger Building, 

Hanford Site, Benton 

County, WA” (DOE and 

Ecology 2005) 

Mar-05 NTCRA Provides for D&D of portions of 105-N and 109-N facilities and 

constructing a protective cover over the 105-N Reactor block, 

109-N steam generator cells and pipe gallery, placing them into 

ISS, and waste generally disposed at ERDF. Final D&D of these 

facilities would be done in the future to allow decay of 

radionuclides in the reactor block. Identifies ISS as 64 years. 

This action is considered final for demolished portions of the 

reactor and heat exchange building. Additional decisions are 

expected on the reactor core and buildings in ISS. 

“Action Memorandum for 

the Plutonium Finishing 

Plant, Above-Grade 

Structures Non-TimeCritical Removal Action”

(DOE/RL-2005-13) 

May-05 NTCRA Provides for removing nonradiological and radiological 

hazardous substances from PFP above-grade structures, 

removing equipment/associated piping, decontaminating 

structures and stabilizing contamination, demolishing structures 

to slab, disposing the waste generated, and stabilizing and 

covering the area around PFP. Provides a listing of the specific 

structures. Slabs and underlying soils would be addressed as 

needed through future CERCLA actions. 

“Action Memorandum for 

the Non-Time-Critical 

Removal Action for the 

100-K Area Ancillary 

Facilities” (DOE and EPA 

2005b) 

Jun-05 NTCRA Provides for D4 of 27 buildings/structures in northern part of 

100-K Area with D4 waste going to ERDF. In general, slabs 

and subsurface structures would be removed with about 1 m of 

surrounding soil; however, on a case-by-case basis, the slabs, 

below-grade structures and soils can be deferred to CERCLA 

actions associated with 100-KR-1 and 100-KR-2 source OUs. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-16 

Table A-2. CERCLA Action Memoranda. (7 pages) 

Title Date Action Removal Action/Decision 

“Action Memorandum for 

the Non-Time-Critical 

Removal Action for the 

224-T Plutonium 

Concentration Facility”

(DOE/RL-2004-68) 

Jun-05 NTCRA Provides for removing nonradiological and radiological 

hazardous substances from 224-T Facility, removing 

equipment/associated piping, decontaminating structure and 

stabilizing contamination, demolishing structure to slab, 

disposing the waste generated, and stabilizing the area. Samples 

will determine the need for additional cleanup of the remaining 

slab and any subsurface soils. These cleanup actions are not 

included in the AM, but deferred to future activities. 

“Action Memorandum for 

the Time-Critical Removal 

Action for Support 

Activities to 200-UW-1 

Operable Unit”

(DOE/RL-2005-71) 

Sep-05 TCRA Provides activities to support U Canyon barrier construction, 

including removing part of the 200-W-42 pipeline, rerouting 

Treated Effluent Disposal Facility line and stabilizing/removing 

wastewater line; complete or partial removal of concrete slab; 

remove and seal 3 vent risers; and relocate various 

markers/utilities. The TCRA accelerated work consistent with 

weather conditions and to take advantage of available 

specialized resources. The action is not considered final; the 

decision process is ongoing for U Plant waste sites. The U Plant 

barrier ROD is considered final. 

“Action Memorandum #2 

for the 300 Area Facilities” 

(DOE and EPA 2006a) 

May-06 NTCRA Provides for D4 of the 324 and 327 Buildings and ancillary 

facilities in the 300 Area with D4 waste going to ERDF. The 

AM provides a list of the ancillary facilities. In general, slabs 

and subsurface structures would be removed along with about 

1 m of surrounding soil; however, on a case-by-case basis, the 

slabs and/or below-grade structures and soils can be deferred to 

CERCLA actions associated with the 300-FF-2 OU. 

“Action Memorandum #3 

for the 300 Area Facilities”

(DOE and EPA 2006b) 

Nov-06 NTCRA Provides for D4 of 110 buildings/structures in southern part of 

the 300 Area with D4 waste going to ERDF. An additional 

30 buildings/structures were included in the EE/CA that 

supports the AM; however, those buildings/structures are not 

included in the AM because DOE identified alternative uses for 

them. 

“Action Memorandum for 

the Non-Time-Critical 

Removal Action for the 

105-KE and 105-KW 

Reactor Facilities and 

Ancillary Facilities” (DOE 

and EPA 2007) 

Jan-07 NTCRA Identifies ISS for 105-KE and 105-KW reactor cores, D&D of 

reactor components up to the cores and for remaining buildings 

and structures in 100-K Area. Subsurface structures will be 

removed 3 ft bgs; substructures and soil beneath facilities that 

exceed cleanup levels will be evaluated through source OU 

cleanup activities that are considered final for the ancillary 

facilities and demolished portions of the reactors. Further 

decisions are expected on reactor cores in ISS. 

“Action Memorandum for 

the Non-Time-Critical 

Removal Action for the 

Northern Part of the BC 

Controlled Area 

(UPR-200-E-83) 

“(DOE/RL-2008-21) 

May-08 NTCRA Provides removal, treatment as needed, and disposal, generally 

to ERDF, of UPR-200-E-83 Zone A soils to a depth of 6 in, or 

until PRGs are met, and Zone B soils in areas of elevated 

radioactivity above PRGs. Excavation activities must consider 

old growth vegetation, avoiding destruction of existing plant 

life. 

“Action Memorandum for 

the Non-Time-Critical 

Removal Action for the 

212-N, -P and -R 

Facilities”

(DOE/RL-2008-80) 

May-09 NTCRA Provides for removing nonradiological and radiological 

hazardous substances from 212-N, -P, and -R facilities 

equipment and associated piping; decontaminating structures, 

stabilizing contamination, demolishing basins and underlying 

soils to 1 m depth, disposing waste generated, and stabilizing 

surrounding area. Samples will be collected from underlying 

soils to evaluate the need for additional cleanup activities. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-17 

Table A-2. CERCLA Action Memoranda. (7 pages) 

Title Date Action Removal Action/Decision 

“Action Memorandum for 

Non-Time-Critical 

Removal Action for

11 Waste Sites in 

200-MG-1 Operable Unit”

(DOE/RL-2009-48) 

Jul-09 NTCRA Provides for cleanup of 11 waste sites in the 100-MG-1 OU 

using either a confirmatory sampling/no further action 

alternative (8 sites) or RTD alternative (3 sites). Cleanup levels 

will be consistent with existing 100 Area cleanup levels. If 

confirmatory sites do not meet cleanup levels, they will be 

addressed by the RTD alternative. 

“Investigation-Derived 

Waste Purgewater 

Management Action 

Memorandum”

(DOE/RL-2009-39) 

Aug-09 NTCRA Provides for additional purge water management capacity by 

relining an existing unit and installing up to 3 new units, each 

with leak-detection systems. The purge water management units 

will be operated according to requirements, monitored during 

operations, and disassembled and dispositioned to appropriate 

requirements following the operational period. 

“Action Memorandum for 

Non-Time-Critical 

Removal Action for 

200-MG-2 Operable Unit”

(DOE/RL-2009-37) 

Oct-09 NTCRA Provides for cleanup of 34 waste sites in the 100-MG-2 OU 

using a confirmatory sampling/no further action alternative 

(16 sites) or an RTD alternative (18 sites). If the confirmatory 

sites do not meet cleanup levels, they will be addressed by the 

RTD alternative. The remaining 200-MG-2 OU sites are not 

included because contamination may exceed 15 ft bgs; they will 

be addressed through the CERCLA remedial process. 

“Action Memorandum for 

Non-Time-Critical 

Removal Action for 37 

Waste Sites in the 

200-MG-1 Operable Unit”

(DOE/RL-2009-86) 

Apr-10 NTCRA Provides for cleanup of 37 waste sites in 100-MG-1 OU using a 

confirmatory sampling/no further action alternative (21 sites) or 

RTD alternative (16 sites). Cleanup levels will be consistent 

with existing 100 Area cleanup levels. If confirmatory sites do 

not meet cleanup levels, they will be addressed by the RTD 

alternative. Remaining 200-MG-1 OU sites are not included 

because contamination may exceed 15 ft bgs; they will be 

addressed through the CERCLA remedial process. 

“Action Memorandum for 

General Hanford Site 

Decommissioning 

Activities”

(DOE/RL-2010-22) 

Apr-10 NTCRA Establishes D4 for excess industrial buildings/structures and 

cleanup of various debris; provides for removing contaminated 

soil or evaluating contaminated soils for inclusion as a waste 

site through WIDS; identifies ERDF as the preferred location 

for wastes meeting ERDF disposal criteria; allows the 

possibility of using certain wastes in other remedial actions, 

such as fill material under barriers; and for incorporating 

additional, similar buildings and structures in the AM. 

“Action Memorandum for 

the Non-Time-Critical 

Removal Action for the 

212-N, 212-P, and 212-R 

Facilities, Addendum 1: 

Disposition of Railcars”

(DOE/RL-2008-80-ADD1) 

Dec-10 NTCRA Provides for D4 of 16 railcars located in 200 North Area with 

disposal to ERDF and includes an option to evaluate some of 

the cars for movement to the B Reactor for preservation. The 

AM identifies a pathway for addressing contaminated soils 

either by removal at the time of D4 or transfer to another OU 

for continued CERCLA action.

“Action Memorandum for 

Decontamination, 

Deactivation, 

Decommissioning, and 

Demolition (D4) Activities 

for 200 East Tier 2 

Buildings/Structures”

(DOE/RL-2010-102) 

Feb-11 NTCRA Established D4 to slab-on-grade for 57 Tier 2 buildings / 

structures in 200 East Area; plug or grout below-grade piping 

and drains; remove equipment; remove and fill below-grade 

voids; send waste to ERDF or other approved facility for 

treatment and disposal; characterize nature and extent of 

remaining hazardous substances for future decisions; initiate 

waste site evaluation through WIDS for sites that may require 

further work; stabilize area as needed. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-18 

Table A-2. CERCLA Action Memoranda. (7 pages) 

Title Date Action Removal Action/Decision 

AM = Action Memorandum. 

bgs = below ground surface. 

CCN = correspondence control number. 

CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980. 

D4 = deactivate, decontaminate, decommission, and 

demolish. 

D&D = decontamination and decommission. 

EE/CA = engineering evaluation/cost analysis. 

ERA = expedited response action. 

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. 

ISS = interim safe storage. 

NTCRA = non-time-critical removal action. 

OU = operable unit. 

P&T = pump-and-treat. 

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant. 

PRG = preliminary remediation goal. 

RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 

1976.

ROD = record of decision. 

RTD = remove, treat, and dispose. 

TCRA = time critical removal action. 

TRU = transuranic. 

WIDS = Waste Information Data System. 

WIPP = Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. 

Table A-3. Permits, Licenses, and Other Statutory/Regulatory Program Decisions Affecting Hanford Cleanup. 

(3 pages) 

Document Summary 

Hanford Facility Resource Conservation 

and Recovery Act Permit, Dangerous 

Waste Portion, Revision 8C, for the 

Treatment, Storage, and Disposal of 

Dangerous Waste (WA7890008967).

FINAL

Ecology issued a Draft Hanford Facility 

Dangerous Waste Permit, Rev. 9, for 

public review and comment from 

May 1, 2012, through October 22, 2012. 

Until Ecology reaches a final decision, 

Rev. 8C Permit remains in effect. 

This dangerous waste permit, for the TSD of dangerous waste at Hanford, 

is the RCRA Permit for the Hanford Facility. The permit allows a stepwise permitting process to ensure the proper implementation of the TPA. 

In order to accomplish this, the permit consists of six parts: 

x Part I, Standard Conditions 

x Part II, General Facility Conditions 

x Part III, Unit-Specific Conditions for Final Status Operations 

x Part IV, Unit-Specific Conditions for Corrective Action 

x Part V, Unit-Specific Conditions for Units Undergoing Closure 

x Part VI, Unit-Specific Conditions for Units in Post-Closure. 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Permit No. PSD-X80-14, issued to RL 

by the EPA, Region 10. 

FINAL

Covers emission of NOx to the atmosphere from the Plutonium Uranium 

Extraction Plant and the Uranium-Trioxide Plant. No expiration date. 

Record of Decision: Decommissioning 

of Eight Surplus Production Reactors at 

the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington 

(58 FR 48509) 

FINAL

In December 1992, DOE issued the Final Environmental Impact Statement 

on Decommissioning of Eight Surplus Production Reactors at the Hanford 

Site, Richland, WA (DOE/EIS-0119F). The final EIS analyzed alternatives 

for decommissioning eight water-cooled, graphite-moderated plutoniumproduction reactors located along the Columbia River. The eight reactors 

(B, C, D, DR, F, H, KE and KW) operated between 1944 and 1971 and are 

retired from service. The alternatives analyzed in the EIS included no 

action, immediate one-piece removal, safe storage followed by deferred 

one-piece removal, safe storage followed by deferred dismantlement, and 

in situ decommissioning alternatives. The ROD was signed September 10, 

1993 (58 FR 48509). The ROD documented the DOE decision for safe 

storage followed by deferred one-piece removal of the eight surplus 

reactors. DOE prepared a supplemental analysis to the EIS in July 2010 

(Supplement Analysis, Decommissioning of Eight Surplus Production 

Reactors at the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington [DOE/EIS-0119F-SA01]) to broaden the possible decommissioning approach, retaining the onepiece removal option and including the option for immediate 

dismantlement. DOE determined that the proposed action is not a 

substantial change to the alternatives previously analyzed in the EIS so a 

supplement to DOE/EIS-0119F or new EIS is not needed. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-19 

Table A-3. Permits, Licenses, and Other Statutory/Regulatory Program Decisions Affecting Hanford Cleanup. 

(3 pages) 

Document Summary 

Record of Decision: Final Tank Closure 

and Waste Management Environmental 

Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, 

Richland, Washington (78 FR 75913) 

FINAL

In December 2013, DOE issued the first in a series of RODs pursuant to 

the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact 

Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington (TC&WM EIS, 

DOE/EIS–0391, December 2012). In this ROD DOE announced several 

decisions, including: to implement Tank Closure Alternative 2B, 

‘‘Expanded WTP Vitrification and Landfill Closure,’’ without 

supplemental treatment at WTP and without technetium-99 removal in the 

WTP Pretreatment facility; to implement FFTF Alternative 2 Entombment; 

and, to implement Waste Management Alternative 2. 

Hanford Site Air Operating Permit 

00-05-006, Renewal 2 

FINAL

Covers operations on the Hanford Site having a potential to emit airborne 

emissions. The permit provides a compilation of applicable Clean Air Act 

of 1977 (42 USC 7401) requirements for radioactive and nonradioactive 

emissions at Hanford. It will be implemented through Federal and State 

programs. Effective April 1, 2013 through March 31, 2018. 

Attachment 1 contains Ecology’s permit terms and conditions. 

Attachment 2 contains the State of Washington Department of Health 

Radioactive Air Emissions License (FF-01) as permit terms and conditions. 

Attachment 3 contains the Benton Clean Air Agency permit terms and 

conditions applicable to the regulations of open burning and asbestos. 

Permit WA-002591-7, Clean Water Act 

of 1977 – National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System Permit

FINAL

Authorizes discharge of water from 100 Area facilities to the Columbia 

River from Outfall 004 in accordance with discharge point, effluent 

limitations, monitoring requirements and other conditions. Effective 

December 1, 2009 through July 31, 2014. 

Permit WAR10B90F, Clean Water Act 

of 1977 – National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System General Permit 

FINAL

Authorizes storm water discharges associated with construction activities 

from the Hanford Site to the Columbia River in accordance with a Storm 

Water Pollution Prevention Plan. No expiration date is specified; the 

estimated project completion date identified in the most recent Notice of 

Intent is May 27, 2014. 

Permit CR-IU005, Clean Water Act of 

1977 – National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System Permit

FINAL

Allows wastewater from the Environmental Molecular Sciences 

Laboratory to be discharged to the city of Richland’s wastewater treatment 

facility.

Permit ST-4500, Washington State 

Department of Ecology – State 

Wastewater Permit

FINAL

Allows treated wastewater from the Effluent Treatment Facility to be 

discharged to the State-Approved Land Disposal Site. This permit expired 

August 1, 2005, and has not been reissued. The old permit will remain in 

effect until the new permit is issued. 

Permit ST-0004502, Washington State 

Department of Ecology – State 

Wastewater Permit

FINAL

Allows treated effluent from the 200 East and 200 West Areas to be 

discharged to the 200 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility. This permit 

revised and replaced Permit ST-4502 and will remain in effect from July 1, 

2012 to June 30, 2017. 

Permit ST-4511, Washington State 

Department of Ecology – State 

Wastewater Permit

FINAL

Consolidation of permits: ST-4501, ST-4508, ST-4509, and ST-4510. This 

Categorical State Waste Discharge Permit authorizes the discharge of 

wastewater from maintenance, construction, and hydrotesting activities and 

allows for cooling water, condensate, and industrial storm water discharges 

at the Hanford Site. This permit was issued February 16, 2005 and was set 

to expire February 16, 2010. A renewal application was submitted to 

Ecology in August 2009, and a supplemental request was submitted in 

April 2010 to incorporate Permit ST-4501 as well. This permit will remain 

in effect until the new permit is issued. 

Permit ST0045514, Washington State 

Department of Ecology – State 

Wastewater Permit

FINAL

Allows domestic wastewater to be treated in a non-discharging, lined 

evaporative lagoon located northeast of the 200 West Area. Effective 

July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2017. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-21 

Table A-5. Other Federal and State Decisions Affecting Hanford Site Cleanup. (4 pages) 

Other Federal/State Decision Summary of Decision 

Federal Facilities Compliance 

Act of 1992. 

FINAL

This act amended RCRA, Section 6961 and other sections and requires DOE to 

prepare plans that develop treatment capacity for mixed waste stored or generated at 

each facility, except for those facilities subject to a permit that establishes a schedule 

for treatment of such waste or an existing agreement or order governing the 

treatment of such waste to which the State is a party. The host state and/or EPA must 

approve each plan. Washington State, EPA, and DOE had the TPA, which addressed 

compliance with the storage prohibition for mixed waste at the time this law was 

enacted and was not required to develop a new plan. A violation of the TPA may 

concurrently be a violation of the Federal Facilities Compliance Act of 1992 (i.e., 

Washington State may seek judicial enforcement under RCRA (42 USC 6901).

Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 

1982 (42 USC 10101). 

FINAL

This act directed DOE to characterize and evaluate the Yucca Mountain site for 

suitability as a potential repository for disposal of commercial SNF and HLW. The 

act directed the President to evaluate the need for a separate repository for HLW 

resulting from atomic energy defense activities. On April 30, 1985, President 

Reagan completed this evaluation. The result was that HLW from atomic energy 

defense activities may be disposed in the proposed repository along with SNF. After 

passage by the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate, on July 23, 2002, 

President Bush signed House Joint Resolution 87 approving the site at Yucca 

Mountain for developing a repository for disposal of HLW and SNF, pursuant to the 

Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. 

As indicated in the Obama Administration’s FY2010 budget request, the 

Administration intends to terminate the Yucca Mountain program while developing 

nuclear waste disposal alternatives. Notwithstanding the decision to terminate the 

Yucca Mountain program, DOE remains committed to meeting its obligations to 

manage and dispose of HLW and SNF. The Administration directed establishing the 

Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future (Commission) to evaluate 

alternative approaches for meeting these obligations. The Commission submitted its 

final report to the Secretary of Energy in January 2012. The Commission did not 

evaluate Yucca Mountain or any other location and recommended a waste 

management approach to resolve the current impasse, which has eight key elements: 

1. A new consent-based approach to siting future nuclear waste management 

facilities. 

2. A new organization dedicated solely to implementing the waste management 

program and empowered with the authority and resources to succeed. 

3. Access to the funds nuclear utility ratepayers are providing for the purpose of 

nuclear waste management. 

4. Prompt efforts to develop one or more geologic disposal facilities. 

5. Prompt efforts to develop one or more consolidated storage facilities. 

6. Prompt efforts to prepare for eventual large-scale transport of SNF and HLW to 

consolidated storage/disposal facilities when such facilities become available.

7. Support continued U.S. innovation in nuclear energy technology and workforce 

development. 

8. Active U.S. leadership in international efforts to address safety, waste 

management, non-proliferation, and security concerns. 

In January 2013, DOE responded to the Blue Ribbon Commission’s final report in 

the Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and HighLevel Radioactive Waste. This policy document proposes a framework for moving 

toward a sustainable program to deploy an integrated system capable of transporting, 

storing, and disposing of SNF and HLW from civilian nuclear power generation, 

defense, national security and other activities. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-20 

Table A-3. Permits, Licenses, and Other Statutory/Regulatory Program Decisions Affecting Hanford Cleanup. 

(3 pages) 

Document Summary 

Permit WAG-50-5180, Washington 

State Department of Ecology – State 

Sand and Gravel General Permit 

FINAL

Permit for wastewater discharges associated with handling sand and gravel 

for the Concrete Batch Plant in the 200 East Area. Effective October 1, 

2010 through October 1, 2015. 

Permit WAG-50-5181, Washington 

State Department of Ecology – State 

Sand and Gravel General Permit 

FINAL

Permit for wastewater discharges associated with Pit 30 Quarry operations 

in the 200 East Area. Effective October 1, 2010 through October 1, 2015. 

Large Onsite Sewage Systems (LOSS) 

“Permit to Operate” HAN099 

FINAL

Lists systems in the various areas. 

Underground Injection Control (UIC) 

Wells

Hanford has a number of UIC wells – storm water, non-storm water and 

septic systems. The Mission Support Contractor maintains the inventory 

and locations of active and inactive wells. 

Table A-4. Tri-Party Agreement Decisions Affecting Hanford Cleanup. 

TPA Documentation Summary of Decision 

x M-045-00 

x Appendix C Part 1: 

Required Retrieval 

Technologies 

x Appendix H 

Closure will follow retrieval of as much tank waste as technically possible, with tank 

waste residues not to exceed 360 ft3

 in each of the 100-series tanks, 30 ft3 in each of 

the 200-series tanks, or the limit of waste retrieval technology capability. 

Table A-5. Other Federal and State Decisions Affecting Hanford Site Cleanup. (4 pages) 

Other Federal/State Decision Summary of Decision 

Executive Order 11514, 

Protection and Enhancement 

of Environmental Quality, as 

amended by Executive Order 

11991

This order requires Federal agencies to continually monitor and control their 

activities to protect and enhance the quality of the environment and develop 

procedures to ensure the fullest practicable provision of timely public information 

and understanding of Federal plans and programs that may have potential 

environmental impacts so that interested parties can submit their views. DOE issued 

regulations 10 CFR 1021, “National Environmental Policy Act Implementing 

Procedures” and DOE O 451.1B, National Environmental Policy Act Compliance 

Program for compliance with this order. 

Executive Order 12088, 

Federal Compliance with 

Pollution Control Standards

This order directs Federal agencies to comply with applicable administrative and 

procedural pollution control standards established by, but not limited to: Clean Air 

Act of 1977 (42 USC 7401); Noise Control Act of 1972 (42 USC 4901); Clean Water 

Act of 1977 (33 USC 1251); Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 (42 USC 300); Toxic 

Substances Control Act of 1976 (15 USC 2601); and RCRA (42 USC 6901). 

Executive Order 12580, 

Superfund Implementation

This order delegates a number of Federal departments and agencies the authority and 

responsibility to implement certain provisions of CERCLA. Policies and procedures 

for implementing these provisions (e.g., response actions and fulfilling natural 

resource trusteeship responsibilities) are provided in the National Contingency Plan. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-22

Table A-5. Other Federal and State Decisions Affecting Hanford Site Cleanup. (4 pages)

Other Federal/State Decision Summary of Decision

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant 

Land Withdrawal Act

(Public Law 102-579). 

FINAL

The act withdrew land from the public domain for purposes of creating and 

operating WIPP, the geologic repository in New Mexico designated as the national 

disposal site for defense TRU waste. In addition to establishing the location for the 

facility, the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act defines the characteristics and amount of 

waste that will be disposed at the facility. Amendments to the WIPP Land 

Withdrawal Act exempt waste designated by the Secretary of Energy for disposal at 

WIPP from the RCRA land disposal restrictions. However, these amendments do not 

exempt mixed TRU waste from other RCRA requirements. WIPP does have a 

RCRA permit and can accept mixed TRU waste. On May 15, 2003, EPA Region 6 

approved DOE’s request to dispose TRU and mixed TRU waste containing PCBs at 

WIPP subject to certain “conditions of approval.”

Spent Fuel Settlement 

Agreement (No. CV-91-0035-

S-EJL and No. CV-91-0054-SEJL), October 17, 1995

This agreement allows INL to receive SNF and mixed waste from offsite and 

establishes schedules for the treatment of existing HLW, TRU waste, mixed waste, 

and removal of SNF from the State. 

This consent decree established a court-enforceable, technically sound schedule for 

pumping liquid nuclear waste from the remaining 29 unstabilized SSTs. The key 

elements of the consent decree included: 

 Pumping the tanks that pose the greatest environmental risk first, thus providing 

additional protection for the Columbia River and public health.

 Accelerating the schedule for pumping so that 98% of approximately 6.2 million 

gallons of remaining pumpable liquid is removed by September 30, 2003, with 

the final 2% scheduled to be removed by September 30, 2004 (this was 

completed).

 Increasing DOE funding to a level that supports successful execution of the new 

schedule for tank stabilization.

 Work under the consent decree has been completed and the court has terminated 

the consent decree.

Consent Decree for 

Stabilization of SSTs at 

Hanford Site between U.S. 

Department of Energy and 

Washington State Department 

of Ecology (No. CT-99-5076-

EFS) September 29, 1999.

FINAL

Presidential Proclamation 

7319, Establishment of the 

Hanford Reach National 

Monument (June 9, 2000).

FINAL

This proclamation set apart and reserved the Hanford Reach National Monument to 

protect all lands and interests in lands owned or controlled by the U.S. within the 

boundaries of the monument area. The lands reserved consist of approximately 

195,000 acres, and are appropriated and withdrawn from all forms of entry, location, 

selection, sale, or leasing or other disposition under the public land laws. The 

monument is to be managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under existing 

agreements with DOE. DOE retains its responsibilities under applicable 

environmental laws, including the remediation of hazardous substances or the 

restoration of natural resources at the Hanford Site.

Executive Order 13175, 

Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal 

Governments (November 6, 

2000).

FINAL

This order supplements “Government-to-Government Relations with Native 

American Tribal Governments” (59 FR 22951), and states that each executive 

department and agency shall consult, to the greatest extent practicable and to the 

extent permitted by law, with Tribal Nations prior to taking actions that affect 

Federally recognized tribal governments. This order also states that each executive 

department and agency shall assess the impact of Federal government plans, 

projects, programs, and activities on tribal trust resources and ensure that tribal 

government rights and concerns are considered during the development of such 

plans, projects, programs, and activities.

U.S. Department of Interior 

Announcement, National 

Historic Landmark, August 19, 

2008.

Hanford’s B Reactor, has been designated a National Historic Landmark by the U.S. 

Department of Interior. Since then, efforts have continued to include B Reactor in a 

new National Historical Park.

2015 National Defense 

Authorization Act

President Obama signed the 2015 National Defense Authorization Act into law on 

December 19, 2014, authorizing the Manhattan Project National Historical Park. 

B Reactor as the world’s first production reactor is a signature facility of the 

Manhattan Project National Historical Park.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-23 

Table A-5. Other Federal and State Decisions Affecting Hanford Site Cleanup. (4 pages) 

Other Federal/State Decision Summary of Decision 

Consent Decree in State of 

Washington v. Department of 

Energy, Case No. CV-08-

5085-FVS (E.D. Wa. October 

25, 2010)

The Consent Decree imposes milestones for the construction, commissioning, and 

startup of the WTP, as well as continued retrieval of waste from Hanford’s SSTs. 

Significant milestones in the Consent Decree require DOE to meet deadlines for the 

WTP’s facilities to keep construction on pace; start treating tank waste through the 

WTP by 2019; achieve initial plant operations by 2022; retrieve the waste from the 

remaining 10 tanks in the “C” tank farm by 2014; identify nine other SSTs to 

retrieve waste from by 2014; and finish retrieving the waste from those nine other 

tanks by 2022. The Consent Decree also covers reporting requirements for waste 

retrievals from SSTs, regulatory coordination, and a process to resolve disputes 

between the agencies. 

Settlement Agreement between 

the State of Washington and 

the U.S. Department of Energy 

(No. 2: 03CV-05018-AAM

January 6, 2006). 

FINAL

Prior to the issuance of the Final Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) 

Waste Program Environmental Impact Statement, Richland, Washington (HSW EIS) 

(DOE/EIS-0286F) and record of decision (69 FR 39449, “Record of Decision for the 

Solid Waste Program, Hanford Site, Richland, WA: Storage and Treatment of LowLevel Waste and Mixed Low-Level Waste; Disposal of Low-Level Waste and 

Mixed Low-Level Waste, and Storage, Processing, and Certification of Transuranic 

Waste for Shipment to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant”), the State initiated litigation 

on issues related to the importation, treatment, and disposal of radioactive and 

hazardous waste generated off the Hanford Site as a result of nuclear defense and 

research activities. The court enjoined shipment of offsite TRU waste to Hanford for 

processing and storage pending shipment to WIPP located near Carlsbad, New 

Mexico. DOE, the State, and the U.S. Department of Justice signed a Settlement 

Agreement ending the litigation on January 6, 2006. The agreement is intended to 

resolve the State’s concerns about HSW EIS (DOE/EIS-0286F) groundwater and 

other analyses. The agreement specifies that when the Draft Tank Closure and 

Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, 

Washington (DOE/EIS-0391) is complete, it will supersede the HSW EIS. Until that 

time, DOE will not rely on HSW EIS groundwater analyses for decision-making and 

will not import offsite waste to Hanford with certain limited exemptions as specified 

in the agreement. 

CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980.

DOE = U.S. Department of Energy. 

EPA = U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

HLW = high-level waste. 

HSW EIS = Final Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and 

Hazardous) Waste Program Environmental 

Impact Statement, Richland, Washington.

INL = Idaho National Laboratory. 

PCB = polychlorinated biphenyl. 

RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976.

SNF = spent nuclear fuel. 

SST = single-shell tank. 

TPA = Tri-Party Agreement. 

TRU = transuranic. 

WIPP = Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. 

WTP = Waste Treatment Plant. 

A.4 REFERENCES 

10 CFR 1021, “National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures,” Code of Federal 

Regulations. 

10 CFR 1022, “Compliance with Floodplain and Wetland Environmental Review Requirements,” Code of 

Federal Regulations. 

40 CFR 6, “Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act and Assessing the 

Environmental Effects Abroad of EPA Actions,” Code of Federal Regulations. 

40 CFR 300, “National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan,” Code of Federal 

Regulations. 

58 FR 48509, 1993, “Record of Decision: Decommissioning of Eight Surplus Production Reactors at the 

Hanford Site, Richland, Washington, Federal Register, December 16. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-24 

59 FR 22951, 1994, “Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments,”

Federal Register, May 4. 

64 FR 61615, 1999, “Record of Decision: Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan Environmental Impact 

Statement (HCP EIS),” Federal Register, November 12. 

69 FR 39449, 2004, “Record of Decision for the Solid Waste Program, Hanford Site, Richland, WA: 

Storage and Treatment of Low-Level Waste and Mixed Low-Level Waste; Disposal of Low-Level 

Waste and Mixed Low-Level Waste, and Storage, Processing, and Certification of Transuranic Waste 

for Shipment to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant,” Federal Register, June 30. 

73 FR 55824, 2008, “Amended Record of Decision for the Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan 

Environmental Impact Statement,” Federal Register, September 26. 

78 FR 75913, 2013, “Record of Decision: Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental 

Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington,” Federal Register, December 13. 

CCN 038546, 1996, “Action Memorandum, N Area Waste Expedited Response Action Cleanup Plan” (letter to 

R.F. Smith, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and M.A. Wilson, Washington State Department of 

Ecology from L.L. Piper), U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington, 

November 7. 

CCN 040739, 1996, “Action Memorandum, 183-H Solar Evaporation Basin Waste Expedited Response 

Action Cleanup Plan” (letter to R.F. Smith, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and M.A. Wilson, 

Washington State Department of Ecology from L.L. Piper, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland 

Operations Office), U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington, 

November 26. 

CCN 059689, 1998, “Action Memorandum: USDOE Hanford 100 Area National Priorities List (NPL); 

105-F and 105-DR Reactor Buildings and Ancillary Facilities; Hanford Site; Benton County, 

Washington,” Washington State Department of Ecology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and 

U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington, July 14. 

CCN 9100749, 1991, “618-9 Burial Ground Expedited Response Action, Phase I Project Plan, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington, February 13. 

CCN 9103432, 1991, “Action Memorandum Approval: 316-5 Process Trenches, U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) Hanford Site, Richland, Washington” (letter to W. Bixby, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Richland Operations Office from C.E. Findley and R. Stanley), Washington State Department of 

Ecology and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Seattle, Washington, July 15. 

CCN 9200423, 1992, “Action Memorandum: Expedited Response Action Proposal for 200 West Area 

Carbon Tetrachloride Plume” (letter to R.D. Izatt, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations 

Office from R.F. Smith and R. Stanley), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Washington 

State Department of Ecology, Richland, Washington, January 21. 

CCN 9305567, 1993, “Action Memorandum: Expedited Response Action Proposal; Riverland Site, U.S. 

Department of Energy Hanford Site, Richland, Washington” (letter to L.E. Little, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland Operations Office from R.F. Smith and R. Stanley), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency and Washington State Department of Ecology, Richland, Washington, June 23. 

CCN 9307470, 1993, “Action Memorandum Approval: Sodium Dichromate Barrel Landfill, U.S. 

Department of Energy Hanford Site, Richland, WA” (letter to L.E. Little, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Richland Operations Office from R.F. Smith and R. Stanley), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

and Washington State Department of Ecology, Richland, Washington, March 8. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-25 

CCN 0093881, 2004, “Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act 

(CERCLA) Non-Time Critical Removal Action Memorandum for Removal of the 

232-Z Contaminated Waste Recovery Process Facility from the Plutonium Finishing Plant” (letter to 

M.A. Wilson, Washington State Department of Ecology from K.A. Klein), U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington, November 5. 

Clean Air Act of 1977, 42 USC 7401, et seq. 

Clean Water Act of 1977, 33 USC 1251, et seq. 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, 42 USC 9601, et seq. 

Consent Decree between the State of Washington and the U.S. Department of Energy, order signed 

January 6, 2006, in State of Washington v. Bodman, Civil Action No. 2: 03CV-05018-AAM. 

Consent Decree in State of Washington v. Department of Energy, Case No. 08-5085-FVS (E.D. Wa. 

October 25, 2010). 

Consent Decree for Stabilization of Single-shell Tanks at Hanford Site between U.S. Department of 

Energy and Washington State Department of Ecology, order signed September 29, 1999, in State of 

Washington v. United States Department of Energy, Eastern District of Washington, Civil Action No. 

CT-99-5076-EFS. 

DOE and Ecology, 2000, “Action Memorandum: United States Department of Energy Hanford 100 Area 

National Priorities List (NPL); 105-D and 105-H Reactor Facilities and Ancillary Facilities; Hanford 

Site; Benton County, Washington,” U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office and 

Washington State Department of Ecology, Richland, Washington, December 8. 

DOE and Ecology, 2005, “Action Memorandum; United States Department of Energy, 100 Area, 105-N 

Reactor Facility and 109-N Heat Exchanger Building, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington,” 

U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, and Washington State Department of 

Ecology, Nuclear Waste Program, Richland, Washington, March 10. 

DOE and EPA, 1997, “Action Memorandum: Removal Action at the 233-S Plutonium Concentration 

Facility, United States Department of Energy (USDOE) Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington,” 

U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Richland, Washington, March 24. 

DOE and EPA, 2000, “Action Memorandum: U.S. Department of Energy, Hanford 300 Area National 

Priorities List (NPL), 331-A Virology Laboratory Building, Hanford Site, Benton County, 

Washington,” U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office and U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Richland, Washington, February 15. 

DOE and EPA, 2001, “Action Memorandum; U.S. Department of Energy, Hanford 100 Area National 

Priorities List (NPL) 105-B Reactor Facility, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington,” U.S. 

Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Richland, Washington, December 27. 

DOE and EPA, 2004, “Action Memorandum: Request for Time Critical Response for Treatment and 

Disposal of Sludge from the 105-K East North Loadout Pit, USDOE Hanford Site,” U.S. Department 

of Energy, Richland Operations Office and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, 

Washington, June 4. 

DOE and EPA, 2005a, “Action Memorandum #1 for the 300 Area Facilities,” U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland Operations Office and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, 

Washington, January 20. 

DOE and EPA, 2005b, “Action Memorandum for the Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for the 100-K 

Area Ancillary Facilities,” U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, and U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, Washington, June 7. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-26 

DOE and EPA, 2006a, “Action Memorandum #2 for the 300 Area Facilities,” U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland Operations Office and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, 

Washington. 

DOE and EPA, 2006b, “Action Memorandum #3 for the 300 Area Facilities, DOE/RL-2005-87” Letter 

Number 07-AMRC-0046, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office and U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, Washington, November 30. 

DOE and EPA, 2007, “Action Memorandum for the Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for the 105-KE 

and 105-KW Reactor Facilities and Ancillary Facilities,” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

100-K Area Cleanup Project Manager and U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, 

Richland, Washington, January 4. 

DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, Chg. 1, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. 

DOE O 451.1B, National Environmental Policy Act Compliance Program, Chg. 3, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Washington, D.C. 

DOE, EPA, and Ecology, 1998, “Action Memorandum; USDOE Hanford 100 Area National Priorities 

List, 100-N Area Ancillary Facilities; Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington,” U.S. Department 

of Energy, Richland Operations Office; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; and Washington 

State Department of Ecology, Richland, Washington, December 17. 

DOE, EPA, and Ecology, 2003, “Action Memorandum: U.S. Department of Energy, 200 West Area, 

Central Waste Complex, 183-H Solar Evaporation Basin Waste, Hanford Site, Benton County, 

Washington,” U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office; U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency; and Washington State Department of Ecology, Richland, Washington, June 25. 

DOE, EPA, and Ecology, 2004, “Action Memorandum: U.S. Department of Energy, 200 Area, Burial 

Ground 218-W-4C Waste Retrieval, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington,” U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland Operations Office; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; and Washington State 

Department of Ecology, Richland, Washington, April 19. 

DOE/EIS-0119F, 1992, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Decommissioning of Eight Surplus 

Production Reactors at the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Washington, D.C. 

DOE/EIS-0119F-SA-01, 2010, Supplemental Analysis, Decommissioning of Eight Surplus Production 

Reactors at the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland 

Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/EIS-0286F, 2004, Final Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program 

Environmental Impact Statement, Richland, Washington, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland 

Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/EIS-0391, 2009, Draft Environmental Impact Statement Tank Closure and Waste Management for 

the Hanford Site, Richland Washington, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, 

Richland, Washington. 

DOE/EIS-0391, 2012, Final Environmental Impact Statement Tank Closure and Waste Management for 

the Hanford Site, Richland Washington, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, 

Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2004-36, 2004, Action Memorandum for the Non-Time Critical Removal Action for the 224-B 

Plutonium Concentration Facility, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, 

Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2004-67, 2004, Action Memorandum for the Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for the U Plant 

Ancillary Facilities, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, 

Washington. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-27 

DOE/RL-2004-68, 2005, Action Memorandum for the Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for the 224-T 

Plutonium Concentration Facility, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, 

Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2005-13, 2005, Action Memorandum for the Plutonium Finishing Plant, Above-Grade 

Structures Non-time Critical Removal Action, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland 

Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2005-71, 2005, Action Memorandum for the Time-Critical Removal Action for Support 

Activities to 200-UW-1 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations 

Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2008-21, 2008, Action Memorandum for the Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for the 

Northern Part of the BC Controlled Area (UPR-200-E-83), Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2008-80, 2009, Action Memorandum for the Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for the 212-N, -

P and –R Facilities, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, 

Washington. 

DOE/RL-2008-80-ADD1, 2010, Action Memorandum for the Non-Time Critical Removal Action for the 

212-N, 212-P, and 212-R Facilities, Addendum 1: Disposition of Railcars, Rev. 0, U.S. Department 

of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2009-37, 2009, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 

200-MG-2 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, 

Washington. 

DOE/RL-2009-39, 2009, Investigation-Derived Waste Purgewater Management Action Memorandum, 

Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2009-48, 2009, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 11 Waste Sites 

in 200-MG-1 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, 

Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2009-86, 2010, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 37 Waste Sites 

in the 200-MG-1 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, 

Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2010-22, 2010, Action Memorandum for General Hanford Site Decommissioning Activities, 

Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2010-102, 2011, Action Memorandum for Decontamination, Deactivation, Decommissioning, 

and Demolition (D4) Activities for 200 East Tier 2 Buildings/Structures, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

Ecology, EPA and DOE, 1989, Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, 2 vols., as 

amended, Washington State Department of Ecology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and 

U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

Ecology and DOE, 1997, “Action Memorandum, USDOE Hanford 100 Area NPL, 100-IU-3 Operable 

Unit (Wahluke Slope), Hanford Site, Adams, Grant, and Franklin Counties, Washington,” (signed by 

M. Wilson and L. Piper), Washington State Department of Ecology and the U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland, Washington. 

Ecology and EPA, 1994a, “Action Memorandum: North Slope (Wahluke Slope) Expedited Response 

Action Cleanup Plan, U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Site, Richland, WA” (letter to R. Izatt, 

U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office from D. Butler, Washington State 

Department of Ecology and R.F. Smith, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency), Washington State 

Department of Ecology, Kennewick, Washington, March 17. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-28 

Ecology and EPA, 1994b, “Action Memorandum; N Springs Expedited Response Action Cleanup Plan, 

U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Site, Richland, WA” (letter to R. Izatt, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland Operations Office from R.F. Smith, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and D. 

Butler, Washington State Department of Ecology), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, 

Washington, September 23. 

EPA and Ecology, 1995, “Action Memorandum: Expedited Response Action Proposal; 100-BC-1 

Demonstration Project; U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Site; Richland, Washington” (letter to

L.K. McClain, U.S. Department of Energy, Environmental Restoration from R.F. Smith, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency and M.A. Wilson, Washington State Department of Ecology), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, Washington, June 27. 

EPA, 1997, “Action Memorandum; 100-B/C Area Ancillary Facilities and the 108-F Building Removal 

Action, U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Site, Richland, WA” (letter to J.M. Bruggeman, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office from D. Faulk), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 10 Hanford Project Office, Richland, Washington, January 29. 

EPA, 2002, Explanation of Significant Difference for the 100-HR-3 Operable Unit Record of Decision, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and 

U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2004a, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 100 Area Remaining Sites Interim Remedial 

Action Record of Decision, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of 

Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2004b, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 300-FF-2 Operable Unit Record of Decision, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. 

Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2005a, Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision Amendment, U.S. Department of Energy, 100 K 

Area K Basins, Hanford Site - 100 Area, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 

EPA, 2005b, Record of Decision 221-U Facility (Canyon Disposition Initiative), Hanford Site, 

Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and 

U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2007a, U.S. Department of Energy, Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, Hanford Site - 

200 Area, Benton County, Washington, Amended Record of Decision, Decision Summary and 

Responsiveness Summary, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of 

Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2007b, Explanation of Significant Difference for the Interim Action Record of Decision for the 

100-BC-1, 100-BC-2, 100-DR-1, 100-DR-2, 100-FR-2, 100-HR-2, and 100-KR-2 Operable Units 

(100 Area Burial Grounds), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of 

Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2008, Record of Decision, Hanford 200 Area, 200-ZP-1 Operable Unit Superfund Site, Benton 

County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of 

Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2009a, Declaration: U.S. Department of Energy, Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, 

Hanford Site - 200 Area, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2009b, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 100-HR-3 and 100-KR-4 Operable Units 

Interim Action Record of Decision, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, 

Olympia, Washington. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-29 

EPA, 2009c, Explanation of Significant Differences for the Interim Action Record of Decision for the 

200-UP-1 Groundwater Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, 09-AMCP-0082, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. 

Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2009d, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 100 Area Remaining Sites Interim Remedial 

Action Record of Decision, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 

EPA, 2009e, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 300-FF-2 Operable Unit Interim Action 

Record of Decision, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 

EPA 2010a, Explanation of Significant Differences for the Record of Decision for the USDOE Hanford 

1100 Area Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State 

Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2010b, U.S. Department of Energy, 100-NR-1 and NR-2 Operable Units, Hanford Site - 100 Area, 

Benton County, Washington, Amended Record of Decision, Decision Summary and Responsiveness 

Summary, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and 

U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2011a, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 100-NR-1 and 100-NR-2 Operable Units 

Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department 

of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2011b, Explanation of Significant Differences, Hanford 300 Area, 300-FF-2 Operable Unit, 618-10 

Burial Ground, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, 

and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2011c, Record of Decision, Hanford 200 Area, Superfund Site 200-CW-5 and 200-PW-1, 200-PW-3 

and 200-PW-6 Operable Units Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, 

Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2012, Record of Decision for Interim Remedial Action Hanford 200 Area Superfund Site, 200-UP-1 

Operable Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, 

and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2014, Record of Decision Hanford 100 Area Superfund Site 100-FR-1, 100-FR-2, 100-FR-3, 100-

IU-2, and 100-IU-6 Operable Units, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Department of 

Energy, Seattle, Washington. 

EPA and DOE, 2013, Record of Decision for 300-FF-2 and 300-FF-5, and Record of Decision 

Amendment for 300-FF-1 Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency and U.S. Department of Energy, Richland, Washington. 

EPA/AMD/R10-97/044, 1997, Amendment to the Interim Action Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 

100-DR-1, and 100-HR-1 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department 

of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/AMD/R10-97/101, 1997, U.S. Department of Energy, Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, 

Hanford Site – 200 Area, Benton County, Washington, Amended Record of Decision, Decision 

Summary and Responsiveness Summary, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle, 

Washington. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-30 

EPA/AMD/R10-99/038, 1999, U.S. Department of Energy, Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, 

Hanford Site – 200 Area, Benton County, Washington, Amended Record of Decision, Decision 

Summary and Responsiveness Summary, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle, 

Washington. 

EPA/AMD/R10-00/122, 1999, U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Site – 100 Area, Benton County, 

Washington, Amended Record of Decision, Decision Summary and Responsiveness Summary, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department 

of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/AMD/R10-02/030, 2002, U.S. Department of Energy, Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, 

Hanford Site – 200 Area, Benton County, Washington, Amended Record of Decision, Decision 

Summary and Responsiveness Summary, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle, 

Washington. 

EPA/ESD/R10-96/145, 1996, USDOE Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, Hanford Site, 

Benton County, Washington, Explanation of Significant Difference (ESD), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, 

Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ESD/R10-00/045, 2000, Explanation of Significant Difference for the 100 Area Remaining Sites 

ROD, USDOE Hanford 100 Area, 100-IU-6 Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Benton County, 

Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and 

U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ESD/R10-00/505, 2000, USDOE Hanford 300 Area, 300-FF-1 Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Benton 

County, Washington Explanation of Significant Difference (ESD), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 

EPA/ESD/R10-00/524, 2000, Explanation of Significant Difference for the 300-FF-5 Record of Decision, 

Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ESD/R10-03/605, 2003, Explanation of Significant Difference for the 100-NR-1 Operable Unit 

Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Interim Action Record of Decision and 100-NR-1/100-NR-2 

Operable Unit Interim Action Record of Decision, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ESD/R10-03/606, 2003, Explanation of Significant Difference for the 100-HR-3 Operable Unit 

Record of Decision, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of 

Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-93/063, 1993, Record of Decision, USDOE Hanford 1100 Area, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, 

Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-95/100, 1995, Declaration of the Record of Decision for the Environmental Restoration 

Disposal Facility, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, 

and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-95/114, 1995, Declaration of the Interim Record of Decision for the 200-ZP-1 Operable 

Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. 

Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-95/126, 1995, Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 100-DR-1, and 

100-HR-1 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-31 

EPA/ROD/R10-96/134, 1996, Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-HR-3 and 

100-KR-4 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-96/143, 1996, Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 300-FF-1 and 

300-FF-5 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-96/151, 1996, Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-IU-1, 100-IU-3, 

100-IU-4, and 100-IU-5 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and 

U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-97/048, 1997, Declaration of the Record of Decision, USDOE Hanford 200 Area, 

Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State 

Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-99/039, 1999, Interim Action Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 100-BC-2, 100-DR-1, 

100-DR-2, 100-FR-1, 100-FR-2, 100-HR-1, 100-HR-2, 100-KR-1, 100-KR-2, 100-IU-2, 100-IU-6, 

and 200-CW-3 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, 

Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-99/059, 1999, Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-KR-2 Operable Unit, 

Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State 

Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-99/112, 1999, Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision for the 100-NR-1 and 

100-NR-2 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-00/120, 2000, Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision Declaration, U.S. Department 

of Energy 100 Area, 100-NR-1 Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of 

Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-00/121, 2000, Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 100-BC-2, 

100-DR-1, 100-DR-2, 100-FR-2, 100-HR-2 and the 100-KR-2 Operable Units, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, 

Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-01/119, 2001, Declaration of the Interim Record of Decision for the 300-FF-2 Operable 

Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. 

Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

Executive Order 11514, 1970, Protection and Enhancement of Environmental Quality, Richard M. Nixon, 

March 5. Sec. 2 amended by Executive Order 11991 of May 24, 1977, 42 FR 26967, 3 CFR, 1977 

Comp., p. 123. 

Executive Order 11991, 1977, Relating to Protection and Enhancement of Environmental Quality, Jimmy 

Carter, May 24, 1977, 42 FR 26967. 

Executive Order 12088, 1978, Federal Compliance with Pollution Control Standards, James E. Carter, 

October 13. Sec. 1-8 amended by Executive Order 12580 of Jan. 23, 1987, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 

Comp., p. 193. 

Executive Order 12580, 1987, Superfund Implementation, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 A-32 

Executive Order 13175, 2000, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 

William J. Clinton, November 6. 

Federal Facilities Compliance Act of 1992, Public Law 102-386, October 6, 1992, 106 Stat. 1505. 

Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, Public Law 98-616, November 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3221. 

Noise Control Act of 1972, 42 USC 4901, et seq. 

Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, 42 USC 10101, et seq. 

Presidential Proclamation 7319, 2000, Establishment of the Hanford Reach National Monument, 

William J. Clinton, June 9. 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, 42 USC 6901, et seq. 

Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, 42 USC 300, et seq. 

Spent Fuel Settlement Agreement between the State of Idaho and U.S. Department of Energy, order 

signed October 16, 1995, in Public Service Co. of Colorado v. Batt (CV-91-0035-S-EJL) and United 

States V. Batt (CV-91-0054-S-EJL). 

Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, 42 USC 103, et seq. 

Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976, 15 USC 2601, et seq. 

WA7890008967, 2013, Hanford Facility Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Permit, Dangerous 

Waste Portion, Revision 8C, for the Treatment, Storage, and Disposal of Dangerous Waste, 

Washington State Department of Ecology, Nuclear Waste Program, Richland, Washington, 

September 30. 

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Land Withdrawal Act, 1992, Public Law 102-579, October 30, 106 Stat.4777. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-i 

APPENDIX B 

FUTURE CLEANUP ACTIONS AND ALTERNATIVE ANALYSES 

 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-ii 

This page intentionally left blank. 

 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-iii 

CONTENTS 

B.1 IDENTIFYING FUTURE CLEANUP ACTIONS FOR THE HANFORD SITE ........................... 1

B.2 IDENTIFYING RANGES OF PLAUSIBLE ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYZING 

ALTERNATIVES FOR FUTURE CLEANUP ACTIONS ............................................................. 3

B.2.1 RANGE OF PLAUSIBLE ALTERNATIVES ................................................................... 3

B.2.2 DOE’S APPROACH FOR ANALYZING ALTERNATIVES AND 

DESCRIBING THE REASONABLE UPPER BOUND .................................................. 18

B.3 RATIONALE FOR ANNUAL SELECTION OF FUTURE CLEANUP ACTIONS TO 

BE ANALYZED ............................................................................................................................ 18

B.4 COMPLETED CLEANUP ACTION ALTERNATIVES ............................................................. 18

B.5 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 22

TABLES 

Table B-1. Future Cleanup Actions for which Final Decisions Have Not Been Made. .............................. 2

Table B-2. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – River Corridor. 

(5 pages) .................................................................................................................................. 4

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central Plateau. 

(9 pages) .................................................................................................................................. 8

Table B-4. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Tank Waste. (2 

pages) ..................................................................................................................................... 17

Table B-5. Summary of Completed Cleanup Action Alternatives. ........................................................... 19

Table B-6. Anticipated Schedule for Detailed Analyses of Future Cleanup Action Alternatives. 

(3 pages) ................................................................................................................................ 20

 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-iv 

This page intentionally left blank. 

 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-v 

TERMS 

ABAR aggregate barrier 

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980

CSNA confirmatory sampling to support no further cleanup action 

D&D decontamination and decommission 

D4 deactivation, decontamination, decommissioning, and demolition 

DOE U.S. Department of Energy 

DST double-shell tank 

Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology 

EIS environmental impact statement 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

ERDF Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility 

ESD explanation of significant differences 

ETF Effluent Treatment Facility 

FBSR fluidized bed steam reforming 

FFTF Fast Flux Test Facility 

HLW high-level waste 

IBAR individual barrier 

IC institutional controls 

IDF Integrated Disposal Facility 

ILAW immobilized low-activity waste 

INL Idaho National Laboratory 

ISS interim safe storage 

LAW low-activity waste 

LCR Lifecycle Report 

LERF Liquid Effluent Retention Facility 

LTS long-term stewardship 

MESC maintain existing soil cover 

MNA monitored natural attenuation 

N/A not applicable 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

NRDWL Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill 

OU operable unit 

P&T pump-and-treat 

PFP Plutonium Finishing Plant 

PNNL Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 

PUREX Plutonium Uranium Extraction (Plant) 

RAO remedial action objective 

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 

REDOX Reduction-Oxidation Facility (S Plant) 

RI/FS remedial investigation/feasibility study 

ROD record of decision 

RTD remove, treat, and dispose 

SALDS State-Approved Land Disposal Site 

S&M surveillance and maintenance 

SSE safe storage enclosure 

SST single-shell tank 

SWL solid waste landfill 

TBD to be determined 

TC&WM EIS Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement 

TPA Tri-Party Agreement 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-vi 

TRU transuranic 

TSD treatment, storage, and disposal 

WAC Washington Administrative Code

WESF Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility 

WRAP Waste Receiving and Processing Plant 

WTP Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-1 

APPENDIX B 

FUTURE CLEANUP ACTIONS AND ALTERNATIVE ANALYSES 

In accordance with the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Ecology et al. 1989), 

commonly referred to as the Tri-Party Agreement (TPA) M-036-01 requires that where final cleanup 

decisions have not yet been made, the Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report (Lifecycle 

Report [LCR]) may consider ranges of alternatives and present a reasonable upper bound: 

“In circumstances where final cleanup decisions have not yet been made, the report 

shall be based upon the reasonable upper bound of the range of plausible alternatives 

or may set forth a range of alternative costs including such a reasonable upper 

bound.” 

The TPA milestone specifies that when making assumptions (e.g., about alternative cleanup actions), the 

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is to take into account the views of the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) and Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), as well as the values expressed 

by affected Tribal Governments and Hanford stakeholders. 

Cleanup decisions are made so that DOE can implement future cleanup actions at the Hanford Site. 

As discussed in Section B.1, the LCR has grouped remaining Hanford Site cleanup work into 

approximately 36 separate cleanup actions. 

Because final cleanup decisions have not yet been made for many of the remaining Hanford cleanup 

work, the LCR may consider the range of plausible alternatives (or alternative costs) and present a 

reasonable upper bound. DOE has decided that information about the range of plausible alternatives, 

rather than just a range of alternative costs, would be most useful for this LCR. DOE also believes that in 

most cases, cost estimates include allowances for uncertainties in current planning that encompass a wide 

range of potential alternatives. Section B.2 includes information about the range of plausible alternatives 

for each future cleanup action. 

Because many final decisions remain to be made, a reasonable upper bound will need to be defined, along 

with schedule and costs, for a number of remaining cleanup actions. To give each action a sufficient level 

of analysis and detail, DOE has decided to take a methodical and planned approach to developing 

in-depth analyses of cleanup action alternatives, including definition of reasonable upper bound schedules 

and costs. 

Section B.3 proposes a rationale and schedule for when different cleanup actions may undergo in-depth 

alternatives analyses in the LCR. 

Information provided in this appendix has been developed for the sole purpose of preparing the LCR and 

fulfilling the requirements of TPA M-036-01; the LCR is not a decision-making document. Cleanup 

actions and decisions discussed in this appendix are still undergoing formal development, review, and 

eventual approval pursuant to procedures established in the TPA and applicable Federal and State 

requirements. Information in this appendix does not presume nor is it intended to prejudice the outcome 

of the requirements that must be followed by the Tri-Party agencies (DOE, Ecology, and EPA). Any 

errors or discrepancies in this appendix will be superseded by the results of the legally applicable 

decision-making processes. 

B.1 IDENTIFYING FUTURE CLEANUP ACTIONS FOR THE HANFORD 

SITE 

The term “cleanup action” is used to conceptually describe work that enables cleanup to proceed for 

common or related contaminants that occur in a relatively well-defined environmental media (or waste 

management system) within a generally contiguous geographic area. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-2 

This cleanup action concept is consistent with the operable unit (OU) cleanup approach taken in the TPA 

and enables future cleanup actions and alternatives to be addressed in a manner consistent with the way 

cleanup decisions are being made for Hanford. This approach also provides a reasonable middle ground 

for looking at cleanup work that is performed onsite. 

The Tri-Party agencies developed a set of cleanup actions for the LCR. Table B-1 lists the future cleanup 

actions for which final cleanup decisions do not yet exist. 

Table B-1. Future Cleanup Actions for which Final Decisions Have Not Been Made. 

River Corridor Cleanup Actions 

x Disposition N Reactor 

x Disposition 100 Area K West Basin 

x Remediate 100 Area Contaminated Soil Sites 

x Restore 100-BC-5 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use 

x Restore 100-KR-4 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use 

x Restore 100-NR-2 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use 

x Restore 100-HR-3 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use 

x Disposition 300 Area Facilities Retained by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 

x Disposition of 100 Area former Orchard Contaminated Soil Sites (100-OL-1 OU) 

Central Plateau Cleanup Actions 

x Disposition Remaining Outer Area Buildings and Facilities (200-OA-1 OU) 

x Remediate Remaining Outer Area Contaminated Soil Sites (200-OA-1, 200-CW-1, and 200-CW-3 OUs) 

x Disposition Below-Grade Portions of Plutonium Finishing Plant 

x Disposition B Plant Canyon Building/Associated Waste Sites (200-CB-1 OU) 

x Disposition PUREX Canyon Building/Associated Waste Sites (200-CP-1 OU) 

x Disposition PUREX Storage Tunnels (200-CP-1 OU) 

x Disposition REDOX Canyon Building/Associated Waste Sites (200-CR-1 OU) 

x Disposition T Plant Canyon Building/Associated Waste Sites 

x Disposition Cesium/Strontium Capsules 

x Remediate 200-SW-1 OU 

x Disposition Remaining Liquid Waste Disposal Facilities 

x Disposition Remaining Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities 

x Remediate Pipelines, Pits, Diversion Boxes and Associated Tanks (200-IS-1 OU) 

x Remediate Land Disposal Units (200-SW-2 OU) 

x Remediate Remaining 200 West Inner Area Contaminated Soil Sites (200-WA-1 OU) 

x Remediate Remaining 200 East Inner Area Contaminated Soil Sites (200-EA-1 OU) 

x Disposition Fast Flux Test Facility Complex 

x Disposition Remaining Buildings and Facilities Within Fast Flux Test Facility Complex 

x Disposition Remaining Inner Area Buildings and Facilities 

x Remediate Contaminated Deep Vadose Zone (200-DV-1 OU) 

x Restore 200 West Groundwater to Beneficial Use (200-UP-1 OU) 

x Restore 200 East Groundwater to Beneficial Use (200-PO-1/200-BP-5 OUs) 

Tank Waste Cleanup Actions 

x Tank Retrieval and Single-Shell Tank Farm Closure 

x Tank Waste Treatment 

x Secondary Waste Treatment 

x Double-Shell Tank Closure 

x Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Closure 

OU = operable unit. 

PUREX = Plutonium Uranium Extraction (Plant). 

REDOX = Reduction-Oxidation Facility (S Plant).
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-3 

Cleanup work at Hanford can be complex and extend over long periods. Frequently, interim decisions are 

made and incremental cleanup steps are taken, followed by improved decisions as more is learned and 

other, better alternatives become available. Even relatively simple cleanup actions can encompass many 

sequenced activities and a substantial amount of work lasting several years. Thus, many of the cleanup 

actions discussed in the LCR will evolve over time and may have a different scope in future reports as 

progress is made in completing Hanford cleanup. 

B.2 IDENTIFYING RANGES OF PLAUSIBLE ALTERNATIVES AND 

ANALYZING ALTERNATIVES FOR FUTURE CLEANUP ACTIONS 

The LCR provides information about ranges of plausible alternatives for future cleanup actions. 

Alternatives are included based on current understandings among the Tri-Party agencies, the status of 

existing and forthcoming cleanup decisions, and whether current planning adequately encompasses the 

range of plausible alternatives. The Tri-Party agencies developed and maintain the range of plausible 

alternatives presented in Section B.2.1. 

As discussed further in Section B.2.2, a more in-depth analyses of the alternatives for individual future 

cleanup actions will be performed in order to describe a reasonable upper bound for the scope and costs of 

a specific cleanup action. The Tri-Party agencies have agreed to take a graded approach and to analyze 

alternatives and develop a reasonable upper bound scope and cost estimate as a sensitivity analysis for a 

limited set of future cleanup actions in each annual LCR. The main reasons for this approach include the 

following: 

x Developing and analyzing alternatives for every separate cleanup action in every annual edition of the 

LCR would be resource intensive and inefficient 

x Final cleanup decisions are expected soon for a number of cleanup actions, and the decision process 

will produce thorough and detailed analyses of potential alternatives 

x Many interim cleanup actions are underway, the results of which will improve the ability to analyze 

alternatives in future LCRs. 

In lieu of analyzing alternatives for all cleanup actions every year, the LCR proposes a schedule and 

rationale for when different cleanup actions will undergo in-depth analyses. Section B.3 provides this 

information. 

B.2.1 RANGE OF PLAUSIBLE ALTERNATIVES 

The range of plausible alternatives for each future cleanup action was originally developed through a 

series of working sessions involving the Tri-Party agencies’ subject matter experts applying their 

knowledge of Hanford Site cleanup work and best professional judgment. Each range of plausible 

alternatives, in the opinion of the agency experts, has alternatives that include a maximum cleanup effort 

(e.g., a likely upper bound) for that cleanup action. In addition, the ranges of plausible alternatives 

exclude alternatives that could not be part of a reasonable upper bound (e.g., no action). Determining the 

range of plausible alternatives and likely upper bounding cleanup effort took into account, among other 

factors, current requirements under the TPA and other environmental obligations, and the status of 

alternatives being considered under existing and forthcoming cleanup decisions. The range of plausible 

alternatives for each cleanup action was intended to encompass the most current planning assumptions 

with respect to that cleanup action. This list is updated by the Tri-Party agencies annually. 

Tables B-2, B-3, and B-4 list and are organized by the identified future cleanup actions for River 

Corridor, Central Plateau, and Tank Waste. These tables include the following: 

x For each cleanup action, a summary of the current cleanup decisions that have been made pursuant to 

the TPA and other environmental obligations, and a list of relevant cleanup decision documents 

x For each cleanup action, a list that encompasses the likely range of plausible alternatives. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-4 

Table B-2. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – River Corridor. (5 pages) 

CLEANUP 

ACTION: RC-1a1

 River Corridor – Disposition N Reactor 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

In September 1993, DOE issued 58 FR 48509, “Record of Decision: Decommissioning of Eight Surplus 

Production Reactors at the Hanford Site, Richland, WA,” which implements the recommendation for safe storage 

followed by deferred one-piece removal of the surplus reactors. N Reactor was not included in the EIS as it was 

not available for decommissioning at the time of the NEPA EIS and ISS was approved through the CERCLA 

process. Final disposition of N Reactor will be determined by a subsequent NEPA or CERCLA decision process. 

x DOE and Ecology, 2000, “Action Memorandum: United States Department of Energy Hanford 100 Area 

National Priorities List (NPL); 105-D and 105-H Reactor Facilities and Ancillary Facilities; Hanford Site; 

Benton County, Washington,” U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office and Washington State 

Department of Ecology, Richland, Washington, October.

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Demolition of the reactor block in ISS and transport the reactor block intact on a tractor transporter from the 

present 100 Area location to the 200 West Area for disposal.

x Safe storage for a period of up to 75 years of surveillance, monitoring, and maintenance at the end of the safe 

storage period, demolition of the reactor block and transport of the reactor block intact on a tractor transporter 

from the present 100 Area location to the 200 West Area for disposal. 

x Safe storage for a period of up to 75 years of surveillance, monitoring, and maintenance at the end of the safe 

storage period, demolition of the reactor buildings and piece-by-piece dismantlement of the reactor core and 

transport of radioactive waste to the 200 West Area for burial. Demolition of the reactor buildings and SSE 

and filling voids beneath and around the reactor block, the reactor block, adjacent shield walls, and the spent 

fuel storage basin together with the contained radioactivity, gravel, and grout covered to a depth of at least 

5 meters with a mound containing earth and gravel. CLEANUP 

ACTION: RC-2 River Corridor – Disposition 100 Area K West Basin 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

An interim ROD, ROD amendment, and action memorandum are in place for the removal, treatment, and interim 

onsite storage of spent nuclear fuel and sludge from the K Basins.

x EPA/ROD/R10-99/059, 1999, Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-KR-2 Operable Unit, 

Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State 

Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x DOE and EPA, 2004, Action Memorandum: Request for Time Critical Response for Treatment and Disposal 

of Sludge from the 105-K East North Loadout Pit, USDOE Hanford Site, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Richland Operations Office and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, Washington, June 4. 

x EPA, 2005, Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision Amendment, Declaration, U.S. Department of 

Energy, 100 K Area K Basins, Hanford Site - 100 Area, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Remove, treat, and transfer sludge for interim storage at T Plant; transfer fuel scrap for interim storage at 

Canister Storage Building; D4 K West Basin and ancillary structures; remediate below-grade portions 

consistent with 100 Area contaminated soil sites.* 

* May require removing K Reactors to access below-grade contaminated soils. K East Basin was demolished 

in 2009.

CLEANUP 

ACTION: RC-3 River Corridor – Remediate 100 Area Contaminated Soil Sites 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

Interim RODs, ROD amendments, ESDs, and Annual Fact Sheets (100 Area “Plug-In” and Candidate Waste Sites 

for FY2010) are in place to remove contaminated soil, structures, debris, and burial grounds using the 

observational and plug-in approaches with onsite disposal at ERDF. 

x EPA, 2004, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 100 Area Remaining Sites Interim Remedial Action 

Record of Decision, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and 

U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-5 

Table B-2. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – River Corridor. (5 pages) 

x EPA, 2007, Explanation of Significant Difference for the Interim Action Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 

100-BC-2, 100-DR-1, 100-DR-2, 100-FR-2, 100-HR-2, and 100-KR-2 Operable Units (100 Area Burial 

Grounds), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and 

U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x EPA, 2009a, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 100 Area Remaining Sites Interim Remedial 

Action Record of Decision, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x EPA, 2011, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 100-NR-1 and 100-NR-2 Operable Units Interim 

Remedial Action Record of Decision, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 

x EPA/ROD/R10-95/126, 1995, Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 100-DR-1, and 

100-HR-1 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x EPA/AMD/R10-97/044, 1997, Amendment to the Interim Action Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 

100-DR-1, and 100-HR-1 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 

x EPA/ROD/R10-99/039, 1999, Interim Action Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 100-BC-2, 100-DR-1, 

100-DR-2, 100-FR-1, 100-FR-2, 100-HR-1, 100-HR-2, 100-KR-1, 100-KR-2, 100-IU-2, 100-IU-6, and 

200-CW-3 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington.

x EPA/ESD/R10-00/045, 2000, Explanation of Significant Difference for the 100 Area Remaining Sites ROD, 

USDOE Hanford 100 Area, 100-IU-6 Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department 

of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x EPA/ROD/R10-00/120, 2000, Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision for the 100-NR-1 Operable Unit, 

Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State 

Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington.

x EPA/ESD/R10-03/605, 2003, Explanation of Significant Difference for the 100-NR-1 Operable Unit 

Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Interim Action Record of Decision and 100-NR-1/100-NR-2 Operable Unit 

Interim Action Record of Decision, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of 

Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x EPA/ROD/R10-00/121, 2000, Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 100-BC-2, 100-DR-1, 

100-DR-2, 100-FR-2, 100-HR-2, 100-KR-2 Operable Units, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, (42 USC 6901), et seq.

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x RTD contaminated soil sites to achieve RAOs* and applicable closure performance standards**; backfill, 

contour, and revegetate excavations. 

Note: The 100 Area interim RODs for waste sites will be covered by the six final RODs for the River Corridor 

currently being worked through a final RI/FS process.

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness. 

* In accordance with applicable interim action RODs. 

** Closure of several 100-N facilities will be according to approved RCRA closure plans. CLEANUP 

ACTION: RC-4.1 River Corridor – Restore 100-BC-5 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

No cleanup decisions have been made for this OU; however, a proposed plan went through public review and the 

ROD is expected to be completed in late 2014. Groundwater monitoring and annual reporting continue to track 

groundwater contamination in this OU. 

x WAC 173-340, “Model Toxics Control Act -- Cleanup,” Washington Administrative Code, Olympia, 

Washington. 

 WAC 173-340-720, “Groundwater Cleanup Standards.”
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-6 

Table B-2. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – River Corridor. (5 pages) 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Install P&T system in 100-BC-5; transition to S&M for post-treatment groundwater monitoring. 

x Incorporate bioremediation for chromium. 

x Allow monitored natural attenuation to proceed under LTS with institutional controls. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness.

CLEANUP 

ACTION: RC-4.2 River Corridor – Restore 100-KR-4 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

An interim ROD is in place to clean up hexavalent chromium in the groundwater using P&T. 

x EPA, 2009d, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 100-HR-3 and 100-KR-4 Operable Units Interim 

Action Record of Decision, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x EPA/ROD/R10-96/134, 1996, Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-HR-3 and 

100-KR-4 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x WAC 173-340, “Model Toxics Control Act -- Cleanup,” Washington Administrative Code, Olympia, 

Washington. 

– WAC 173-340-720, “Groundwater Cleanup Standards.”

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Expand the P&T system in 100-KR-4; transition to S&M for post-treatment groundwater monitoring. 

x Continue operation of P&T system with incorporation of bioremediation for chromium. 

x Allow monitored natural attenuation to proceed under LTS with institutional controls. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness.

CLEANUP 

ACTION: RC-4.3 River Corridor – Restore 100-NR-2 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

An action memorandum, interim ROD, and ESD are in place to clean up strontium-90 in the groundwater using 

P&T and physical barriers. An in situ apatite barrier and phytoremediation treatability tests are being evaluated for 

use in the cleanup of strontium-90 in groundwater. 

x EPA, 2011, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 100-NR-1 and 100-NR-2 Operable Units Interim 

Remedial Action Record of Decision, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 

x EPA, 2010, Amended Record of Decision, Decision Summary and Responsiveness Summary U.S. Department 

of Energy 100-NR-1 and NR-2 Operable Units, Hanford Site – 100 Area, Benton County, Washington, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, 

Olympia, Washington. 

x Ecology and EPA, 1994, “Action Memorandum; N Springs Expedited Response Action Cleanup U.S. 

Department of Energy Hanford Site, Richland, WA” (letter to R. Izatt, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland 

Operations Office from R.F. Smith, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and D. Butler, Washington State 

Department of Ecology), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, Washington, September 23.

x EPA/ESD/R10-03/605, 2003, Explanation of Significant Difference for the 100-NR-1 Operable Unit 

Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Interim Action Record of Decision and 100-NR-1/100-NR-2 Operable Unit 

Interim Action Record of Decision, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of 

Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington.

x EPA/ROD/R10-99/112, 1999, Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision for the 100-NR-1 and 

100-NR-2 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington.

x WAC 173-340, “Model Toxics Control Act -- Cleanup,” Washington Administrative Code, Olympia, 

Washington. 

– WAC 173-340-720, “Groundwater Cleanup Standards.”
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-7 

Table B-2. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – River Corridor. (5 pages) 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Resume operation of existing P&T system; operate and expand system as necessary until cleanup objectives 

are achieved; transition to S&M for post-treatment groundwater monitoring. 

x Construct an impermeable barrier along the shoreline to reǦdirect groundwater flow and increase travel times 

for radioactive decay to achieve cleanup objectives. 

x Expand the apatite permeable reactive barrier to promote sequestration of strontium-90.

x Incorporate phytotechnology.

x Use sequestration and immobilization technologies for inner portion of strontium-90 plume. 

x Allow monitored natural attenuation to proceed under LTS with institutional controls. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness.

CLEANUP 

ACTION: RC-4.4 River Corridor – Restore 100-HR-3 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents

An interim ROD, ROD amendment, and ESDs are in place to clean up hexavalent chromium in the groundwater 

using P&T and an in situ reduction/oxidation (“redox”) manipulation barrier. 

x EPA/ROD/R10-96/134, 1996, Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-HR-3 and 

100-KR-4 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x EPA/AMD/R10-00/122, 1999, Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision Amendment: 100-HR-3 Operable 

Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department 

of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x EPA, 2002, Explanation of Significant Difference for the 100-HR-3 Operable Unit Record of Decision, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department 

of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x EPA/ESD/R10-03/606, 2003, Explanation of Significant Difference for the 100-HR-3 Operable Unit Record 

of Decision, USDOE Hanford 100 Area, 100-HR-3 Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department 

of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x EPA, 2009b, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 100-HR-3 and 100-KR-4 Operable Units Interim 

Action Record of Decision, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x WAC 173-340, “Model Toxics Control Act -- Cleanup,” Washington Administrative Code, Olympia, 

Washington. 

– WAC 173-340-720, “Groundwater Cleanup Standards.”

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Expand P&T system in 100-HR-3; transition to S&M for post-treatment groundwater monitoring.

x Maintain and repair in situ redox manipulation barrier. 

x Incorporate bioremediation. 

x Allow monitored natural attenuation to proceed under LTS with institutional controls. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-8 

Table B-2. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – River Corridor. (5 pages) 

CLEANUP 

ACTION: RC-5 River Corridor – Disposition 300 Area Facilities Retained By PNNL 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

Action memoranda are in place for the remaining 300 Area buildings and facilities, and DOE anticipates extending 

those cleanup decisions to include the PNNL-retained facilities once their operations end. DOE considers D&D of 

buildings and other structures to be final cleanup decisions if the facility is removed in accordance with an 

applicable action memorandum. The removal action work plan will need to be modified to address PNNL retained 

facilities once PNNL declares the facilities as surplus. Alternatives do not need to be considered where such D&D 

has been completed. Decision documents for D&D of 300 Area buildings and facilities that may have future 

application for the PNNL-retained facilities are listed here. 

x DOE and EPA, 2005, Action Memorandum #1 for the 300 Area Facilities, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Richland Operations Office and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, Washington, January 20. 

x DOE and EPA, 2006a, Action Memorandum #2 for the 300 Area Facilities, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Richland Operations Office and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, Washington, May 16. 

x DOE and EPA, 2006b, Action Memorandum #3 for the 300 Area Facilities, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Richland Operations Office and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, Washington, November 30. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Following end of operational period for PNNL facilities (assumed no earlier than 2023), D4 all buildings and 

facilities; remediate consistent with 300 Area contaminated soil sites if needed.

D4 = deactivate, decontaminate, decommission, and demolish. 

D&D = decontamination and decommission. 

DOE = U.S. Department of Energy. 

EIS = environmental impact statement. 

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. 

ESD = explanation of significant differences. 

FFTF = Fast Flux Test Facility. 

ISS = interim safe storage. 

LTS = long-term stewardship. 

NEPA = National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. 

OU = operable unit. 

P&T = pump-and-treat. 

PNNL = Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.

RAO = remedial action objective. 

RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. 

RI/FS = remedial investigation/feasibility study. 

ROD = record of decision. 

RTD = remove, treat, and dispose. 

S&M = surveillance and maintenance. 

SSE = safe storage enclosure. 

WAC = Washington Administrative Code. 1 RC-1 River Corridor – Disposition 100 Area Reactors (Except B Reactor) was removed from the LCR in response to comments that the 1993 

National Environmental Policy Act ROD is considered a final action (see Appendix A, Table A-3)

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central Plateau. (9 pages)

CLEANUP 

ACTION: CP-1 Central Plateau – Disposition Remaining Outer Area Buildings and Facilities 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

Action memoranda are in place to D4 buildings and facilities to slab-on-grade and evaluate below-grade portions 

for contamination. Future cleanup decisions for remaining buildings and facilities will be included in decision 

documents (e.g., action memoranda, RODs). DOE considers D&D of buildings and other structures to be final 

cleanup decisions if all regulated contaminants have been removed in accordance with an applicable action 

memorandum. Alternatives do not need to be considered where such D&D has been completed. 

x DOE/RL-2008-80-ADD1, 2010, Action Memorandum for the Non-Time Critical Removal Action for the 

212-N, 212-P, and 212-R Facilities, Addendum 1: Disposition of Railcars, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

x DOE/RL-2010-22, 2010, Action Memorandum for General Hanford Site Decommissioning Activities, Rev. 0, 

U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x D4 all buildings and facilities to slab-on-grade; evaluate below-grade portions for residual contamination; if 

needed, remediate below-grade portions consistent with Central Plateau Outer Area contaminated soil sites.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-9 

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central Plateau. (9 pages)

CLEANUP 

ACTION:

CP-2 Central Plateau – Remediate Remaining Outer Area Contaminated Soil Sites 

(200-OA-1, 200-CW-1, and 200-CW-3 OUs) 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

An interim ROD, ESD, and action memoranda are in place to remove contaminated soil, structures, and debris with 

disposal at ERDF. Future cleanup decisions for remaining soil sites will be included in decision documents (e.g., 

action memoranda, RODs). 

x EPA/ROD/R10-99/039, 1999, Interim Action Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 100-BC-2, 100-DR-1, 

100-DR-2, 100-FR-1, 100-FR-2, 100-HR-1, 100-HR-2, 100-KR-1, 100-KR-2, 100-IU-2, 100-IU-6, and 

200-CW-3 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x EPA, 2009a, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 100 Area Remaining Sites Interim Remedial Action 

Record of Decision, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x DOE/RL-2009-48, 2009, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 11 Waste Sites in 

200-MG-1 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, 

Washington. 

x DOE/RL-2009-37, 2009, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 200-MG-2 Operable 

Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

x DOE/RL-2009-86, 2010, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 37 Waste Sites in the 

200-MG-1 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, 

Washington. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x RTD contaminated soil sites to achieve RAOs comparable to 100 Areas; backfill, contour, and revegetate 

excavations.

x RTD all sites except ponds; allow monitored natural attenuation for large pond sites with presence of existing 

vegetated soil covers. 

x Allow monitored natural attenuation to proceed for all sites with appropriate institutional controls. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness.

CLEANUP 

ACTION: CP-3 Central Plateau – Disposition Below-Grade Portions of Plutonium Finishing Plant 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

A non-time critical action memorandum is in place, associated TPA milestone decision documents are approved, 

and D4 activities are being completed for above-grade structures of PFP. Final decisions and cleanup actions have 

not been made for below-grade structures/contaminated areas and are not identified in the action memorandum.

x DOE/RL-2005-13, 2005, Action Memorandum for the Plutonium Finishing Plant, Above-Grade Structures 

Non-Time Critical Removal Action, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, 

Washington. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Evaluate below-grade portions for residual contamination; leave remaining below-grade structures and 

contaminated areas in-place and transition to LTS with appropriate institutional controls. 

x RTD all PFP below-grade structures and contaminated areas; backfill and revegetate. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness.

CLEANUP 

ACTION:

CP-4 Central Plateau – Disposition B Plant Canyon Building/Associated Waste Sites 

(200-CB-1 OU) 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

Several action memoranda are in place to remove contaminated soil, structures, and debris from waste sites with 

disposal at ERDF. Future cleanup decisions for remaining buildings and waste sites will be included in decision 

documents (e.g., action memoranda, RODs). 

x DOE/RL-2009-48, 2009, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 11 Waste Sites in 

200-MG-1 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, 

Washington.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-10 

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central Plateau. (9 pages)

x DOE/RL-2009-37, 2009, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 200-MG-2 Operable 

Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

x DOE/RL-2009-86, 2010, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 37 Waste Sites in the 

200-MG-1 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, 

Washington. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Remove all contents and D4 B Plant Canyon Building, including below-grade foundation; remove all 

contaminated materials, associated waste sites, and contaminated soils to achieve RAOs; dispose all waste and 

debris at approved facility. 

x Condition contents for placement in spaces below canyon deck level; stabilize and fill voids; remove 

contaminated wastes and soils from associated waste sites and dispose at approved facility; partially demolish 

building to canyon deck level; place engineered barrier over demolished structure; maintain institutional 

controls and perform post-closure monitoring and caretaking.

x Condition contents, retrieve associated waste site contaminated soils and debris, and place in B Plant Canyon 

for entombment; stabilize and fill voids; surround with clean fill and place an engineered barrier over the 

canyon building; maintain institutional controls and perform post-closure monitoring and caretaking. 

x Same as preceding (entombment) alternative, with addition of disposal capability to allow receipt of wastes 

from cleanup activities. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness.

CLEANUP 

ACTION:

CP-5 Central Plateau – Disposition PUREX Canyon Building/Associated Waste Sites 

(200-CP-1 OU) 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

Several action memoranda are in place to remove contaminated soil, structures, and debris from waste sites with 

disposal at ERDF. Future cleanup decisions for remaining buildings and waste sites will be included in decision 

documents (e.g., action memoranda, RODs). 

x DOE/RL-2009-48, 2009, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 11 Waste Sites in 

200-MG-1 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, 

Washington. 

x DOE/RL-2009-37, 2009, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 200-MG-2 Operable 

Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

x DOE/RL-2009-86, 2010, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 37 Waste Sites in the 

200-MG-1 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, 

Washington. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Remove all contents and D4 PUREX Canyon Building including below-grade foundation; remove all 

contaminated materials, associated waste sites and contaminated soils to achieve RAOs; dispose all waste and 

debris at approved facility. 

x Condition contents to place in spaces below canyon deck level; stabilize and fill voids; remove contaminated 

wastes and soils from associated waste sites and dispose at approved facility; partially demolish building to 

canyon deck level; place engineered barrier over demolished structure; maintain institutional controls and 

perform post-closure monitoring and caretaking.

x Condition contents, retrieve associated waste site contaminated soils and debris, and place in PUREX Canyon 

for entombment; stabilize and fill voids; surround with clean fill and place an engineered barrier over the 

canyon building; maintain institutional controls and perform post-closure monitoring and caretaking.

x Same as preceding (entombment) alternative, with addition of disposal capability to allow receipt of wastes 

from cleanup activities.

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness. 

Note: Cleanup decisions affecting disposition of the PUREX Canyon Building/associated waste sites and 

disposition of PUREX Storage Tunnels should be aligned and cleanup actions should be coordinated and integrated 

as much as practical.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-11 

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central Plateau. (9 pages)

CLEANUP 

ACTION: CP-6 Central Plateau – Disposition PUREX Storage Tunnels (200-CP-1 OU) 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

No cleanup decisions have been made for the PUREX Storage Tunnels. 

x TBD – No decision documents currently available. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Maintain safe storage, perform hazardous waste facility closure consistent with RCRA Permit, remediate 

radionuclides consistent with CERCLA, and conduct post-closure monitoring. 

x Stabilize waste and prepare tunnels for in-place disposal, install barrier, perform post-closure care and 

transition to LTS. 

x Remove and dispose waste and contaminated equipment from tunnels, evaluate tunnels for residual 

contamination; if needed, remediate tunnels consistent with 200 East Inner Area contaminated soil sites.

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness. 

Note: Cleanup decisions affecting disposition of PUREX Storage Tunnels and disposition of PUREX Canyon 

Building/associated waste sites should be aligned and cleanup actions should be coordinated and integrated as 

much as practical.

CLEANUP 

ACTION:

CP-7 Central Plateau – Disposition REDOX Canyon Building/Associated Waste Sites 

(200-CR-1 OU) 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

Several action memoranda are in place to remove contaminated soil, structures, and debris from waste sites with 

disposal at ERDF. Future cleanup decisions for remaining buildings and waste sites will be included in decision 

documents (e.g., action memoranda, RODs). 

x DOE/RL-2009-48, 2009, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 11 Waste Sites in 

200-MG-1 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, 

Washington. 

x DOE/RL-2009-37, 2009, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 200-MG-2 Operable 

Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

x DOE/RL-2009-86, 2010, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 37 Waste Sites in the 

200-MG-1 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, 

Washington. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Remove all contents and D4 REDOX Canyon Building including below-grade foundation; remove all 

contaminated materials, associated waste sites and contaminated soil to achieve RAOs; dispose all waste and 

debris at approved facility. 

x Condition contents for placement in spaces below canyon deck level; stabilize and fill voids; remove 

contaminated waste and soil from associated waste sites and dispose at approved facility; partially demolish 

building to canyon deck level; place engineered barrier over demolished structure; maintain institutional 

controls and perform post-closure monitoring and caretaking. 

x Condition contents, retrieve associated waste site contaminated soil and debris, and place in REDOX Canyon 

for entombment; stabilize and fill voids; surround with clean fill and place an engineered barrier over the 

canyon building; maintain institutional controls and perform post-closure monitoring and caretaking.

x Same as preceding (entombment) alternative, with addition of disposal capability to allow receipt of wastes 

from cleanup activities. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness.

CLEANUP 

ACTION: CP-8 Central Plateau – Disposition T Plant Canyon Building/Associated Waste Sites 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

No cleanup decisions have been made for the T Plant Canyon Building and Associated Waste Sites. Current 

expectations are that T Plant will continue to be used to support other remediation and waste management work. 

x TBD – No decision documents currently available. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-12 

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central Plateau. (9 pages)

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Continue ongoing operations until 2036; transition to D4 in 2038; fulfill hazardous waste facility closure 

obligations consistent with RCRA Permit. 

x Remove all contents and D4 T Plant Canyon Building including below-grade foundation; remove all 

contaminated materials, associated waste sites and contaminated soil to achieve RAOs; dispose all waste and 

debris at approved facility.

x Condition contents for placement in spaces below canyon deck level; stabilize and fill voids; remove 

contaminated wastes and soils from associated waste sites and dispose at approved facility; partially demolish 

building to canyon deck level; place engineered barrier over demolished structure; maintain institutional 

controls and perform post-closure monitoring and caretaking.

x Condition contents, retrieve associated waste site contaminated soil and debris, and place in T Plant Canyon 

for entombment; stabilize and fill voids; surround with clean fill and place an engineered barrier over the 

canyon building; maintain institutional controls and perform post-closure monitoring and caretaking.

x Same as preceding (entombment) alternative, with addition of disposal capability to allow receipt of waste 

from cleanup activities. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness.

CLEANUP 

ACTION: CP-9 Central Plateau – Disposition Cesium/Strontium Capsules 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

No cleanup decisions have been made for final disposition of the cesium/strontium capsules. Decisions have been 

deferred to future decision-making processes. 

x TBD – No decision documents currently available. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Package and transport capsules from WESF to dry storage; store capsules pending final disposition; direct 

dispose of capsules at a geologic repository. 

x Incorporate capsules into immobilized high-level waste glass at WTP. 

x Store capsules at Hanford for 300 years (approximately 10 half-lives); after natural decay, direct dispose of 

capsules as mixed low-level radioactive waste. CLEANUP 

ACTION: CP-10 Central Plateau – Remediate 200-SW-1 OU* 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

No cleanup decisions have been made for the 200-SW-1 OU. 

x TBD – No decision documents currently available. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

The following alternatives are being considered as part of DOE/EA-1707D, Environmental Assessment Closure of 

Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill (NRDWL) and Solid Waste Landfill (SWL); these alternatives are not 

intended to presume the outcome of the ongoing environmental assessment process:

x Install an evapotranspiration barrier over both landfills; upgrade monitoring and infrastructure systems; 

perform post-closure monitoring and caretaking. 

x Partial RTD with removal of waste material from both landfills and impacted soil as deep as 10 feet below the 

waste material; backfill and revegetate; if necessary (e.g., contaminated residues remain), perform post-closure 

monitoring and caretaking.

x Remove all waste material from both landfills; excavate and RTD all contaminated soil to groundwater, if 

necessary; backfill and revegetate. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness. 

* Includes NRDWL and SWL. 

CLEANUP 

ACTION: CP-11 Central Plateau – Disposition Remaining Liquid Waste Disposal Facilities* 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

No cleanup decisions have been made for the Remaining Liquid Waste Disposal Facilities. 

TBD – No decision documents currently available. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-13 

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central Plateau. (9 pages)

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Closure of facilities will be according to approved operating plans and closure plans. 

x If needed, may remediate contaminated soil under zone closure; may include partial RTD with various capping 

alternatives; monitoring and institutional controls after closure may be required. 

x RTD all contaminated soil; backfill and revegetate. 

x Allow monitored natural attenuation to proceed under LTS with appropriate institutional controls.

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness. 

* Includes State-Approved Land Disposal Site; State Waste Discharge Permit Sites; 100-N Sewage Lagoon; onsite 

Sewage Systems; National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Outfalls; and Underground Injection Control 

Well Sites.

CLEANUP 

ACTION:

CP-12 Central Plateau – Disposition Remaining Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal 

Facilities* 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

No cleanup decisions have been made for the Remaining Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities. 

x TBD – No decision documents currently available. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Closure of facilities will be according to approved operating plans and closure plans (e.g., RCRA Closure 

Plans); consequently, cleanup actions will be determined and accomplished in accordance with applicable 

regulatory and permit/license requirements. No other alternatives are being considered. 

* Includes LERF/ETF, WESF, WRAP, 222-S Laboratory, IDF, and Inert Waste Landfill/Pit 9. 

CLEANUP 

ACTION:

CP-13 Central Plateau – Remediate Pipelines, Pits, Diversion Boxes and Associated Tanks 

200-IS-1 OU 

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

The 200-IS-1 OU waste sites include tanks (except to be included in the Tank Farms), pipelines, pits, diversion 

boxes, and associated ancillary equipment. Several pipelines are being addressed (in part) per 200-MG-1 removal 

actions; final remediation decisions will be addressed in RODs; TSD ancillary equipment will be addressed in 

future RCRA Closure Plan(s); other media may be addressed via CERCLA process. 

x TBD – No decision documents currently available. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x RTD all contaminated equipment, materials, debris and soil to a depth that is determined by the Tri-Party 

agencies to be protective of human health and ecological resources (depth TBD); backfill and revegetate. 

x RTD all contaminated equipment, materials, debris and soil; backfill and revegetate. 

x Stabilize select equipment in place using technologies yet to be determined. 

x Leave everything in place; maintain under LTS with appropriate institutional controls. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness.

CLEANUP 

ACTION: CP-14 Central Plateau – Remediate Land Disposal Units (200-SW-2 OU)

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

No cleanup decisions have been made to remediate the 200-SW-2 OU. (Note that this OU is not a single 

contaminated site, but comprises a large number of land disposal units.) 

x TBD – No decision documents currently available. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Excavation, treatment (as necessary), and disposal of all waste from within individual landfills. 

x Excavation, treatment (as necessary), and disposal of waste from selected sections of individual landfills 

followed by capping of remaining waste; includes continued cap maintenance and monitoring. 

x Capping of individual landfills; includes continued cap maintenance and monitoring. 

x In situ treatment/stabilization (e.g., vitrification or grouting) of portions of individual landfills followed by 

capping; includes continued cap maintenance and monitoring. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-14 

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central Plateau. (9 pages)

CLEANUP 

ACTION:

CP-15 Central Plateau – Remediate Remaining 200 West Inner Area Contaminated Soil Sites 

(200-WA-1 OU)

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

Several action memoranda are in place to remove contaminated soil, structures, and debris from 200 West Inner 

Area soil sites with disposal at ERDF. Future cleanup decisions for remaining waste sites will be included in 

decision documents (e.g., action memoranda, RODs). 

x DOE/RL-2009-37, 2009, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 200-MG-2 Operable 

Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

x DOE/RL-2009-86, 2010, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 37 Waste Sites in the 

200-MG-1 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, 

Washington.

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x RTD approximately half of waste sites and cap remainder. 

x RTD all waste sites; backfill and revegetate. 

x Cap and maintain under LTS with monitoring and appropriate institutional controls. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness. 

CLEANUP 

ACTION:

CP-16 Central Plateau – Remediate Remaining 200 East Inner Area Contaminated Soil Sites 

(200-EA-1 OU)

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

Several action memoranda are in place to remove contaminated soil, structures, and debris from 200 East Inner 

Area soil sites with disposal at ERDF. Future cleanup decisions for remaining waste sites will be included in 

decision documents (e.g., action memoranda, RODs). 

x DOE/RL-2009-37, 2009, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 200-MG-2 Operable 

Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

x DOE/RL-2009-86, 2010, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 37 Waste Sites in the 

200-MG-1 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, 

Washington. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x RTD approximately half of waste sites and cap remainder. 

x RTD all waste sites; backfill and revegetate. 

x Cap and maintain under LTS with monitoring and appropriate institutional controls. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness. 

CLEANUP 

ACTION: CP-17 Central Plateau – Disposition Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) Complex

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

In 1995, DOE determined FFTF would be deactivated. Other decisions have been deferred to future decisionmaking processes. 

x TBD – No decision documents currently available. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

The following reflect alternatives considered as part of DOE/EIS-0391, Final Tank Closure and Waste 

Management Environmental Impact Statement (TC&WM EIS); these alternatives are not intended to presume the 

outcome of the environmental impact decision process: 

x Entombment – Consolidate buildings and waste, compact, and fill void spaces in the reactor containment 

building and contaminated ancillary buildings; install a landfill barrier over remaining structures and extend as 

needed to cover contaminated below-grade portions.

x Removal – Remove contaminated equipment and structures; reduce above-grade portions of reactor 

containment building and ancillary buildings to slab-on-grade; backfill with soil, compact and stabilize 

remaining below-grade portions; contour and revegetate.

x Remove and treat remote-handled special components onsite or at INL; dispose treated components at IDF or 

Nevada Test Site.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-15 

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central Plateau. (9 pages)

x Store sodium; convert to caustic sodium hydroxide solution onsite or at INL; reuse caustic sodium hydroxide 

solution for tank corrosion control or processing tank waste at WTP. 

x Leave structures in place with inert gas blanket for sodium residuals; transition to LTS with appropriate 

institutional controls. 

CLEANUP 

ACTION: CP-18 Central Plateau – Disposition Remaining Buildings and Facilities in FFTF Complex

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

In 1995, DOE determined FFTF would be deactivated. Other decisions have been deferred to future decisionmaking processes. 

x TBD – No decision documents currently available. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x D4 all buildings per appropriate removal action work plan; if needed, remediate below-grade portions. 

x Leave structures in place and transition to LTS with appropriate institutional controls. CLEANUP 

ACTION: CP-19 Central Plateau –Disposition Remaining Inner Area Buildings and Facilities

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

Cleanup decisions have been made for D&D of some of the Remaining Inner Area Buildings and Facilities, and the 

applicable action memorandum is expected to cover future D&D activities. DOE considers D&D of buildings and 

other structures to be final cleanup decisions if all regulated contaminants have been removed in accordance with 

an applicable action memorandum. Alternatives do not need to be considered where such D&D has been 

completed. (Note that cleanup decisions have been or will be made for the Canyon Buildings and Associated Waste 

Sites; see separate cleanup actions for these facilities.)

x DOE/RL-2010-22, 2010, Action Memorandum for General Hanford Site Decommissioning Activities, Rev. 0, 

U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x D4 all buildings and facilities to slab-on-grade; evaluate below-grade portions for residual contamination; if 

needed, remediate below-grade portions consistent with contiguous contaminated soil sites. 

x Leave structures in place and transition to LTS with appropriate institutional controls. CLEANUP 

ACTION: CP-20 Central Plateau – Remediate Contaminated Deep Vadose Zone (200-DV-1 OU)

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

No cleanup decisions have been made for the Deep Vadose Zone.

x TBD – No decision documents currently available. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Implement results of treatability testing in accordance with CERCLA and/or RCRA final decisions. 

x RTD all contaminated soils to groundwater if necessary and technically practical; backfill and revegetate. 

x In place treatment to destroy, immobilize, or capture, treat and dispose contaminants. 

x Soil flushing with P&T or pore water removal. 

x Install surface barriers. 

x Allow monitored natural attenuation to proceed under LTS with appropriate institutional controls. CLEANUP 

ACTION: CP-21 Central Plateau – Restore 200 West Groundwater To Beneficial Use (200-UP-1 OU)

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

An interim ROD for 200-UP-1 OU was issued in September 2012 that superseded the previous remedy decisions 

for this OU and a final ROD is in place for the 200-ZP-1 OU to address all contaminants. 

x EPA, 2012, Record of Decision for Interim Remedial Action Hanford 200 Area Superfund Site, 200-UP-1 

Operable Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. 

Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x EPA/ROD/R10-95/114, 1995, Declaration of the Interim Record of Decision for the 200-ZP-1 Operable Unit, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of 

Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

x EPA/ROD/R10-97/048, 1997, Declaration of the Record of Decision, USDOE Hanford 200-UP-1 Operable 

Unit, 200 Area, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-16 

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central Plateau. (9 pages)

x EPA, 2009c, Explanation of Significant Differences for the Interim Action Record of Decision for the 

200-UP-1 Groundwater Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington.

x EPA, 2008, Record of Decision Hanford 200 Area 200-ZP-1 Superfund Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, 

Olympia, Washington. 

x WAC 173-340, “Model Toxics Control Act -- Cleanup,” Washington Administrative Code, Olympia, 

Washington. 

– WAC 173-340-720, “Groundwater Cleanup Standards.”

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Expand 200-ZP-1 extraction, treatment and injection capacity; install extraction and transfer system for 

200-UP-1; operate P&T system to achieve RAOs; continue monitoring. 

x Allow monitored natural attenuation to proceed under LTS with appropriate institutional controls. 

x Hydraulic containment of the iodine-129 groundwater plume. 

x Groundwater monitoring and institutional controls. 

CLEANUP 

ACTION:

CP-22 Central Plateau – Restore 200 East Groundwater to Beneficial Use 

(200-PO-1/200-BP-5 OUs)

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

No cleanup decisions have been made for 200 East Groundwater. 

x WAC 173-340, “Model Toxics Control Act -- Cleanup,” Washington Administrative Code, Olympia, 

Washington. 

– WAC 173-340-720, “Groundwater Cleanup Standards.”

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Install P&T system for 200-BP-5 OU; implement monitored natural attenuation for 200-PO-1 OU; perform 

well support and maintenance activities. 

x Allow monitored natural attenuation to proceed under LTS with appropriate institutional controls. 

x Install P&T system for 200-BP-5 and selective P&T for 200-PO-1 hot spots. 

Note: 400 Area groundwater cleanup actions are included as part of 200-PO-1 OU. 

CERCLA= Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980. 

D&D = decontamination and decommission. 

D4 = deactivation, decontamination, 

decommissioning, and demolition. 

DOE = U.S. Department of Energy. 

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. 

ESD = explanation of significant difference. 

ETF = Effluent Treatment Facility. 

FFTF = Fast Flux Test Facility. 

IDF = Integrated Disposal Facility. 

INL = Idaho National Laboratory. 

LERF = Liquid Effluent Retention Facility. 

LTS = long-term stewardship. 

NRDWL = Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill. 

OU = operable unit. 

P&T = pump-and-treat. 

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant. 

PUREX = Plutonium-Uranium Extraction (Plant). 

RAO = remedial action objective. 

RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. 

REDOX = reduction-oxidation. 

ROD = record of decision. 

RTD = remove, treat, and dispose. 

SWL = solid waste landfill. 

TBD = to be determined. 

TPA = Tri-Party Agreement. 

TSD = treatment, storage, and disposal. 

WAC = Washington Administrative Code. 

WESF = Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility. 

WRAP = Waste Receiving and Processing Plant. 

WTP = Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-17 

Table B-4. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Tank Waste. (2 pages) 

CLEANUP 

ACTION: TW-1 Tank Waste – Tank Retrieval and Single-Shell Tank Farm Closure

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

In the February 26, 1997 Federal Register, DOE decided to retrieve and treat tank waste (62 FR 8693). Further 

decisions have been deferred to future decision-making processes. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Retrieve SST wastes (assumes two retrieval technologies) to meet milestones in the Consent Decree (DOE and 

Ecology, 2010); achieve designated retrieval objectives or limits of technology; remediate structures and soil 

and install cover/cap to meet closure performance standards; maintain post-closure care and monitoring 

consistent with RCRA Permit.

The following reflect alternatives considered as part of the TC&WM EIS (DOE/EIS-0391); these alternatives are 

not intended to presume the outcome of the environmental impact decision process: 

x Grout, cap and close SSTs with residual waste in place; monitor and implement institutional controls after 

closure; eventual transition to LTS. 

x Construct new DST capacity sufficient to complete SST retrieval; close SSTs and implement post-closure care, 

monitoring, and institutional controls; eventual transition to LTS. 

x RTD some SSTs and ancillary facilities, residual waste, and contaminated soils; backfill and revegetate. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness. 

CLEANUP 

ACTION: TW-2 Tank Waste – Tank Waste Treatment

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

In the February 26, 1997 Federal Register, DOE decided to retrieve, separate, vitrify, and dispose the tank waste 

(62 FR 8693). The ILAW would be prepared for onsite disposal and the vitrified HLW would be placed in interim 

storage pending future disposal at a national geologic repository. Further decisions have been deferred to future 

decision-making processes. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Pretreat, condition and immobilize tank wastes in the WTP to meet TPA milestones and comply with RCRA 

Permit; operate supplemental treatment systems (assumed to be second LAW) to augment WTP capacity; 

place immobilized waste in canisters; transfer ILAW for disposal at the IDF; provide capacity to store all 

immobilized HLW in Hanford Shipping Facility or Interim Hanford Storage Facility (new) until a final 

repository is available. 

x Perform blending and waste characterization at a new Enhanced Waste Receiving Facility. CLEANUP 

ACTION: TW-3 Tank Waste – Secondary Waste Treatment

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

No cleanup decisions have been made. Decisions have been deferred to future decision-making processes. 

x TBD – No decision documents currently available. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Recycle liquid waste streams in WTP; manage residual liquid waste at LERF/ETF/SALDS; treat solid waste 

from WTP and ETF and dispose at IDF; manage and disposition other secondary waste (e.g., failed melters). 

Other plausible alternatives will be determined at a later date.

Note: Any radioactive HLW will be stored and eventually shipped to a geologic repository. CLEANUP 

ACTION: TW-4 Tank Waste – Double-Shell Tank Closure

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

No cleanup decisions have been made. Decisions have been deferred to future decision-making processes. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Retrieve DST wastes consistent with TPA; achieve designated retrieval objectives or limits of technology; 

remediate structures and soil and install cover/cap to meet closure performance standards; maintain 

post-closure care and monitoring consistent with RCRA Permit. 

x RTD DSTs and ancillary facilities, residual waste, and contaminated soil; backfill and revegetate. 

x Stabilize, cap and close DSTs with residual waste in place; monitor and implement institutional controls after 

closure; eventual transition to LTS. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-18 

Table B-4. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Tank Waste. (2 pages) 

CLEANUP 

ACTION: TW-5 Tank Waste – WTP Closure

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents 

The RCRA Hanford Dangerous Waste Permit, Operable Unit-10, Chapter 11 states “Clean closure is the goal for 

the WTP. The closure plan will be revised if efforts to achieve the clean closure standards for the WTP structures 

or soil are unsuccessful. The “modified closure” approach may be followed if feasible, as provided in Condition 

II.K.3 of the Hanford RCRA Permit. It also may be closed as a landfill, as provided in Condition II.K.4 of the 

Hanford RCRA Permit, if the clean closure standards are not technically or economically feasible. The revised 

closure plan will be accompanied by a written request for modification of the permit.” Further decisions have been 

deferred to future decision-making processes. 

x WA7890008967, 2013, Hanford Facility Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Permit, Dangerous Waste 

Portion, Revision 8C, for the Treatment, Storage, and Disposal of Dangerous Waste, Washington State 

Department of Ecology, Nuclear Waste Program, Richland, Washington, September 30. 

Range of Plausible Alternatives 

x Demolish ancillary facilities/structures to the primary containment structure; seal containment structure and 

construct a soil-based environmental barrier over the containment structure; remediate structures and soils; 

maintain post-closure care and monitoring consistent with RCRA Permit. 

x D4 all buildings and facilities to slab-on-grade; evaluate below-grade portions for residual contamination; if 

needed, remediate below-grade portions.

x Perform clean closure of WTP and all ancillary facilities/structures. 

x Leave structures in place and transition to LTS with appropriate institutional controls. 

If residual contamination remains after cleanup actions are completed, cleanup work will transition to LTS, 

including institutional controls and 5-year reviews of remedy effectiveness. 

D4 = deactivation, decontamination, 

decommissioning, and demolition. 

DOE = U.S. Department of Energy. 

DST = double-shell tank. 

ETF = Effluent Treatment Facility. 

HLW = high-level waste. 

IDF = Integrated Disposal Facility. 

ILAW = immobilized low-activity waste. 

LAW = low-activity waste. 

LERF = Liquid Effluent Retention Facility. 

LTS = long-term stewardship. 

RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. 

RTD = remove, treat, and dispose. 

SALDS = State-Approved Land Disposal Site. 

SST = single-shell tank. 

TBD = to be determined. 

TC&WM EIS = Tank Closure and Waste Management 

 Environmental Impact Statement. 

TPA = Tri-Party Agreement. 

WTP = Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant. 

B.2.2 DOE’S APPROACH FOR ANALYZING ALTERNATIVES AND DESCRIBING THE 

REASONABLE UPPER BOUND 

TPA M-036-01 refers to a “reasonable upper bound” with respect to presenting information about cleanup 

alternatives, but the milestone does not include a ready definition for “reasonable upper bound.” To 

ensure the LCR provides information that meets the requirement and intent of the milestone, DOE has 

relied on a conceptual framework as described in the 2013 LCR (Appendix A, Section A.2.2). 

B.3 RATIONALE FOR ANNUAL SELECTION OF FUTURE CLEANUP ACTIONS 

TO BE ANALYZED 

DOE will consider recommendations from EPA and Ecology, government-to-government consultations 

(e.g., Tribal Nations, Oregon), Hanford Advisory Board advice, input from Hanford stakeholders, and 

public comments received on previous LCRs selecting the future cleanup actions to be analyzed in the 

LCR. Additional details regarding the rationale used to select the future cleanup actions to be analyzed in 

the LCR are described in the 2013 LCR (Appendix A, Section A.3). 

B.4 COMPLETED CLEANUP ACTION ALTERNATIVES 

The cleanup actions that have been analyzed in-depth in LCRs are summarized in Table B-5. For details 

about the cost estimate alternative analysis of any of these cleanup actions, see the specific LCR 

referenced in Table B-5. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-19 

Table B-5. Summary of Completed Cleanup Action Alternatives. 

2011 HANFORD LIFECYCLE SCOPE, SCHEDULE AND COST REPORT (DOE/RL-2010-25) 

Cleanup Action Cost Estimate Alternative Analysis (Million $) Final Decision Reference 

River Corridor–Disposition 

100 Area Reactors 

Reactors Remain in Place - $0 

Remove Reactors - $676 

Record of Decision; 

Decommissioning of Eight 

Surplus Production Reactors 

at the Hanford Site, 

Richland, WA (58 FR 

48509) 

Central Plateau–Remediate 

200-SW-2 OU 

Barriers - $823 

Remove, Treat, Dispose of Waste - $16,614 

TBD 

2012 HANFORD LIFECYCLE SCOPE, SCHEDULE AND COST REPORT (DOE/RL-2011-93) 

Cleanup Action Cost Estimate Alternative Analysis (Million $) Final Decision Reference

Tank Waste Cleanup Action–

Tank Retrieval and Single-Shell 

Tank Farm Closure 

1 – Baseline Case - $59,900 

2 – TRU Waste to WTP - $61,600 

3 – FBSR for supplemental treatment - $58,100 

4 – WTP delay with +10% vitrification capacity - 

$66,000 

5 – 2020 Vision One System - $58,000 

6 – WTP delay with new DST farm - $68,700

7 – Enhanced tank waste strategy - $57,300 

8 – Accelerated SST retrievals - $62,800 

9 – Early U Farm closure - $59,600 

10 – Slow SST retrievals - $60,800 

TBD 

Tank Waste Cleanup Action–

Tank Waste Treatment 

TBD 

Tank Waste Cleanup Action–

Secondary Waste Treatment

TBD 

2013 HANFORD LIFECYCLE SCOPE, SCHEDULE AND COST REPORT (DOE/RL-2012-13)

Cleanup Action Cost Estimate Alternative Analysis (Million $) Final Decision Reference

Central Plateau-Remediate 

Remaining Outer Area 

Contaminated Soil Sites (200-

OA-1, 200-CW-1, and 200-CW-3 

OUs)

The DOE planning case cleanup remedies for the 

190 waste sites evaluated includes:

RTD - $98.3 

CSNA - $4.9 

MESC/MNA/IC - $3.2 

IBAR - $19.2 

ABAR - $19.8 

Total - $145.4

TBD 

Central Plateau-Remediate 

Remaining 200 West Inner Area 

Contaminated Soil Sites (200-

WA-1 OU)

TBD 

2014 HANFORD LIFECYCLE SCOPE, SCHEDULE AND COST REPORT (DOE/RL-2013-02)

Cleanup Action Cost Estimate Alternative Analysis (Million $) Final Decision Reference

None selected for 2014 N/A N/A 

2015 HANFORD LIFECYCLE SCOPE, SCHEDULE AND COST REPORT (DOE/RL-2014-11)

Cleanup Action Cost Estimate Alternative Analysis (Million $) Final Decision Reference

None selected for 2015 N/A N/A 

ABAR = aggregate barrier. 

CSNA = confirmatory sampling to support no further cleanup action. 

DOE = U.S. Department of Energy. 

DST = double-shell tank. 

FBSR = fluidized bed steam reformer. 

IBAR = individual barrier. 

IC = institutional controls. 

MESC = maintain existing soil cover. 

MNA = monitored natural attenuation. 

N/A = not applicable. 

OU = operable unit. 

RTD = remove, treat and dispose. 

SST = single-shell tank. 

TBD = to be determined. 

TRU = transuranic. 

WTP = Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant. 

Considering the criteria described above and cleanup actions analyzed in previous LCRs, DOE developed 

an anticipated schedule for performing in-depth analyses of plausible alternatives for each future cleanup 

action remaining at Hanford. Table B-6 presents this schedule and includes an explanation of the rationale 

for analyzing alternatives in the recommended LCR year. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-20 

Table B-6. Anticipated Schedule for Detailed Analyses of Future Cleanup Action Alternatives. (3 pages) 

Cleanup Action Alternative 

x Central Plateau–Disposition B Plant Canyon 

Building/Associated Waste Sites (200-CB-1 OU) 

x Central Plateau–Disposition PUREX Canyon 

Building/Associated Waste Sites (200-CP-1 OU) 

x Central Plateau–Remediate Contaminated Deep 

Vadose Zone (200-DV-1 OU) 

Based on new TPA milestones for these canyon facilities, it is 

unlikely that extensive evaluation of alternatives will have been 

performed yet (e.g., in feasibility studies). It may be reasonable 

to develop alternatives after 2015 that could benefit future 

planning and budget requests.

x Central Plateau–Restore 200 East Groundwater to 

Beneficial Use (200-PO-1/200-BP-5 OUs) 

TPA M-015-21A requires FS/proposed plan submittal by June 

30, 2015. May be reasonable to develop alternatives in the 2016 

LCR to benefit future planning and budget requests. 

x Central Plateau– Remediate Pipelines, Pits, 

Diversion Boxes and Associated Tanks (200-IS-1 

OU) 

x Central Plateau–Remediate Remaining 200 East 

Inner Area Contaminated Soil Sites (200-EA-1 

OU) 

CERCLA/RCRA decision document submittals are scheduled 

by December 31, 2016 (TPA M-015-92B). Analyzing potential 

alternatives in the 2016 LCR could provide information to help 

inform the decision process. 

x Central Plateau–Disposition Below-Grade 

Portions of PFP 

x Central Plateau–Remediate 200-SW-1 OU 

Cleanup is proceeding with existing decisions (e.g., interim 

ROD, action memorandum, RCRA interim status/final permit) 

and reflected in current planning documents. Final decisions 

could be made within 1-2 years of 2015 timeframe and are 

expected to be compatible with interim decisions. Prior to 

developing the 2016 LCR, decide whether alternatives should 

be analyzed based on status of final cleanup decision making. 

x River Corridor–Disposition 100 Area former 

orchard contaminated soil sites (100-OL-1 OU) 

TPA M-015-95 required RI/FS work plan submittal by April 30, 

2013. May be reasonable to develop alternatives in the 2016

LCR or later that could benefit future planning and budget 

requests. 

x Central Plateau–Disposition FFTF Complex It is expected that the TC&WM EIS (DOE/EIS-0391) and final 

ROD will address decisions related to this cleanup action before 

cleanup must begin. If, instead, cleanup decisions have not been 

made, it may be timely to reassess whether the FFTF cleanup 

action could be analyzed. 

x Central Plateau–Disposition REDOX Canyon 

Building/Associated Waste Sites (200-CR-1 OU) 

May be reasonable to develop alternatives after 2016 that may 

benefit future planning/budget requests. 

x Central Plateau–Disposition Cesium/Strontium 

Capsules 

TPA M-092-05 requires DOE to determine a disposition path 

and establish interim milestones for the cesium/strontium 

capsules by June 30, 2017. Capsules are in safe storage; no 

immediate action is required. Other activities will provide data 

and potential problem resolutions that will enhance considering 

alternatives for management/disposition of the cesium/strontium 

capsules. Prior to the 2017 LCR, decide if alternatives would 

benefit future planning/budget requests. 

x Central Plateau–Restore 200 West Groundwater 

to Beneficial Use (200-UP-1 OU) 

An interim action ROD was issued in September 2012 that 

superseded the previous 200-UP-1 OU decisions. Deferral to 

after 2015 would allow final decisions to be made and coincide 

with subsequent CERCLA 5-year review. 

x River Corridor–Disposition 300 Area Facilities 

Retained by PNNL 

Facilities will be maintained operational by PNNL until 2023, 

which is the assumed date to start closure and disposition of the 

facilities. Earlier analysis of alternatives would be premature 

and not needed for out-year budget planning. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-21

Table B-6. Anticipated Schedule for Detailed Analyses of Future Cleanup Action Alternatives. (3 pages)

Cleanup Action Alternative

 Central Plateau (Outer Area)–Disposition 

Remaining Outer Area Buildings and Facilities 

(200-OA-1 OU)

The few remaining structures in the Outer Area do not present 

imminent or significant threats to health or environment.

Cleanup actions are likely to be non-controversial and focused 

on RTD, with scope, schedule and cost accounted for in 

planning documents. Analysis of alternatives before 2016 is not 

likely to contribute useful information for out-year budget 

planning.

 Central Plateau–Disposition PUREX Storage 

Tunnels (200-CP-1 OU)

Prior to development of the 2017 LCR, decide whether 

development of alternatives would benefit future planning and 

budget requests.

 Central Plateau–Disposition T Plant Canyon 

Building/Associated Waste Sites

 Central Plateau–Disposition Remaining Liquid 

Waste Disposal Facilities

 Central Plateau–Disposition Remaining Waste 

Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities

These facility operations are integral to the long-term cleanup 

mission and will continue well after 2020. Any likely cleanup 

actions are not expected for at least 20+ years in the future so 

earlier analyses would be premature and not needed before 2018

for out-year budget planning.

 Central Plateau–Disposition Remaining Buildings 

and Facilities Within FFTF Complex

 Central Plateau–Disposition Any Remaining 

Inner Area Buildings and Facilities

Continuing with the current planning bases and uncertainties is 

sufficient for health and environmental protection and scope and 

budget planning before 2018. Information about conditions after 

other cleanup actions have occurred (e.g., disposition of FFTF) 

would be insufficient for useful analyses. It would be premature 

to analyze alternatives for cleanup actions before the 2018 LCR.

 Tank Waste–Double-Shell Tank Closure 

 Tank Waste–WTP Closure

DST closure is not expected to begin before 2034 and WTP 

closure before 2050. No imminent or significant health/environmental concerns were identified that need to be addressed.

Earlier planning and budget development would be unnecessary 

and not account credibly for future decisions and conditions.

CLEANUP ACTIONS FOR WHICH ALTERNATIVES WOULD NOT BE ANALYZED

River Corridor–B Reactor Preservation - B Reactor is designated a National Historic Landmark and is a signature 

facility of the newly established Manhattan Project National Historical Park so no cleanup actions are anticipated.

Minor conditioning/maintenance activities will be performed consistent with National Park Service decision making 

under the National Environmental Policy Act (42 USC 4321) and/or National Historic Preservation Act (16 USC 470).

River Corridor-Disposition Remaining 100 Area Buildings/Facilities and Disposition Remaining 300 Area

Buildings/Facilities (except facilities retained for use by PNNL) - Although cleanup actions are ongoing for these

buildings/facilities, excess buildings/facilities in the 100 and 300 Areas are expected to undergo D&D according to

applicable action memoranda. DOE considers D&D of buildings/structures to be final cleanup decisions if all regulated 

contaminants are removed in accordance with an action memorandum so alternatives do not need to be analyzed.

River Corridor–Remediate Remaining Contaminated Sites Within Hanford Reach National 

Monument - National Monument remediation is being implemented to fulfill obligations under a Presidential 

Proclamation that establishes a de facto final decision. RTD and decontamination in the Monument areas were 

substantially completed in 2012 (some residual cleanup in the 100 Area portions of the Monument is expected to be 

complete within the next few years as part of the River Corridor or Central Plateau cleanup projects).

River Corridor - Disposition 100 Area K West Basin

River Corridor - Remediate 100 Area Contaminated Soil Sites

River Corridor - Restore 100-BC-5 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use

River Corridor - Restore 100-KR-4 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use

River Corridor - Restore 100-NR-2 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use 

River Corridor - Restore 100-HR-3 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use

The Tri-Party agencies agreed that for cleanup actions close to having final decisions there would be little value in 

presenting a cost estimate alternatives analysis in the LCR. Because K West Basin cleanup action was limited to only 

one alternative (see Table B-2) the agencies agreed to remove it from the alternatives analysis in the LCR.

Central Plateau–Disposition U Plant (Canyon Building/Associated Waste Sites) - U Plant remediation was

approved according to a CERCLA Final ROD. If performed, further analysis of alternatives should be done as part of 

the process under which the current final cleanup decisions were made.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-22 

Table B-6. Anticipated Schedule for Detailed Analyses of Future Cleanup Action Alternatives. (3 pages) 

Cleanup Action Alternative 

Central Plateau–Manage ERDF - ERDF was approved according to a CERCLA Final ROD and closure and postclosure care are part of the operating documentation. Alternatives need not be analyzed, unless future decisions are 

made that modify the current final ERDF decisions. 

CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980. 

D&D = decontamination and decommission. 

DOE = U.S. Department of Energy. 

DST = double-shell tank. 

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. 

FFTF = Fast Flux Test Facility. 

FS = feasibility study. 

LCR = Lifecycle Report. 

OU = operable unit. 

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant. 

PNNL = Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. 

PUREX = Plutonium-Uranium Extraction (Plant). 

RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. 

REDOX = Reduction-Oxidation (Facility). 

RI/FS = remedial investigation/feasibility study. 

ROD = record of decision. 

RTD = remove, treat, and dispose. 

TPA = Tri-Party Agreement. 

WTP = Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant. 

B.5 REFERENCES 

58 FR 48509, “Record of Decision; Decommissioning of Eight Surplus Production Reactors at the 

Hanford Site, Richland, WA,” Federal Register (September 16, 1993). 

62 FR 8693, “Record of Decision for the Tank Waste Remediation System, Hanford Site, Richland, 

WA,” Federal Register (February 26, 1997). 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, 42 USC 9601, et seq. 

DOE and Ecology, 2000, “Action Memorandum: United States Department of Energy Hanford 100 Area 

National Priorities List (NPL); 105-D and 105-H Reactor Facilities and Ancillary Facilities; Hanford 

Site; Benton County, Washington,” U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office and 

Washington State Department of Ecology, Richland, Washington, October. 

DOE and Ecology, 2010, Consent Decree in State of Washington v. Department of Energy, Case No. 

08-5085-FVS (E.D. Wa. October 25, 2010). 

DOE and EPA, 2004, Action Memorandum: Request for Time Critical Response for Treatment and 

Disposal of Sludge from the 105-K East North Loadout Pit, USDOE Hanford Site, U.S. Department 

of Energy, Richland Operations Office and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, 

Washington, May 25. 

DOE and EPA, 2005, Action Memorandum #1 for the 300 Area Facilities, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Richland Operations Office and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, Washington, 

January 20. 

DOE and EPA, 2006a, Action Memorandum #2 for the 300 Area Facilities, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Richland Operations Office and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, Washington, May 

16. 

DOE and EPA, 2006b, Action Memorandum #3 for the 300 Area Facilities, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Richland Operations Office and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, Washington, 

November. 

DOE/EA-1707D, 2011, Environmental Assessment Closure of Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill 

(NRDWL) and Solid Waste Landfill (SWL), Revised Predecisional Draft, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/EIS-0391, 2012, Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for 

the Hanford Site, Richland Washington, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, 

Richland, Washington. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-23 

DOE/RL-2005-13, 2005, Action Memorandum for the Plutonium Finishing Plant, Above-Grade 

Structures, Non-Time Critical Removal Action, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland 

Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2008-80-ADD1, 2010, Action Memorandum for the Non-Time Critical Removal Action for the 

212-N, 212-P, and 212-R Facilities, Addendum 1: Disposition of Railcars, Rev. 0, U.S. Department 

of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2009-37, 2009, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 

200-MG-2 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, 

Washington. 

DOE/RL-2009-48, 2009, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 11 Waste Sites 

in 200-MG-1 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, 

Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2009-86, 2010, Action Memorandum for Non-Time-Critical Removal Action for 37 Waste Sites 

in the 200-MG-1 Operable Unit, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, 

Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2010-22, 2010, Action Memorandum for General Hanford Site Decommissioning Activities, 

Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2010-25, 2011 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2011-93, 2012 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

DOE/RL-2012-13, 2013 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. 

Ecology and EPA, 1994, “Action Memorandum; N Springs Expedited Response Action Cleanup U.S. 

Department of Energy Hanford Site, Richland, WA” (letter to R. Izatt, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Richland Operations Office from R.F. Smith, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and D. Butler, 

Washington State Department of Ecology), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, 

Washington, September 23. 

Ecology, EPA, and DOE, 1989, Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, 2 vols., as 

amended, Washington State Department of Ecology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and 

U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2002, Explanation of Significant Difference for the 100-HR-3 Operable Unit Record of Decision, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and 

U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2004, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 100 Area Remaining Sites Interim Remedial 

Action Record of Decision, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of 

Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2005, Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision Amendment, Declaration, U.S. Department of 

Energy, 100 K Area K Basins, Hanford Site - 100 Area, Benton County, Washington, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department 

of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2007, Explanation of Significant Difference for the Interim Action Record of Decision for the 

100-BC-1, 100-BC-2, 100-DR-1, 100-DR-2, 100-FR-2, 100-HR-2, and 100-KR-2 Operable Units 

(100 Area Burial Grounds), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of 

Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-24 

EPA, 2008, Record of Decision Hanford 200 Area 200-ZP-1 Superfund Site, Benton County, Washington, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. 

Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2009a, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 100 Area Remaining Sites Interim Remedial 

Action Record of Decision, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 

EPA, 2009b, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 100-HR-3 and 100-KR-4 Operable Units 

Interim Action Record of Decision, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, 

Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2009c, Explanation of Significant Differences for the Interim Action Record of Decision for the 

200-UP-1 Groundwater Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of 

Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2009d, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 100-HR-3 and 100-KR-4 Operable Units 

Interim Action Record of Decision, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, 

Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2010, Amended Record of Decision, Decision Summary and Responsiveness Summary U.S. 

Department of Energy 100-NR-1 and NR-2 Operable Units, Hanford Site – 100 Area, Benton County, 

Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and 

U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2011, Explanation of Significant Differences for the 100-NR-1 and 100-NR-2 Operable Units 

Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of 

Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA, 2012, Record of Decision for Interim Remedial Action Hanford 200 Area Superfund Site, 200-UP-1 

Operable Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, 

and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/AMD/R10-00/122, 1999, Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision Amendment: 100-HR-3 

Operable Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, 

and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/AMD/R10-97/044, 1997, Amendment to the Interim Action Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 

100-DR-1, and 100-HR-1 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department 

of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ESD/R10-00/045, 2000, Explanation of Significant Difference for the 100 Area Remaining Sites 

ROD, USDOE Hanford 100 Area, 100-IU-6 Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Benton County, 

Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and 

U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ESD/R10-03/605, 2003, Explanation of Significant Difference for the 100-NR-1 Operable Unit 

Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Interim Action Record of Decision and 100-NR-1/100-NR-2 

Operable Unit Interim Action Record of Decision, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-25 

EPA/ESD/R10-03/606, 2003, Explanation of Significant Difference for the 100-HR-3 Operable Unit 

Record of Decision, USDOE Hanford 100 Area, 100-HR-3 Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Benton 

County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of 

Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-00/120, 2000, Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision for the 100-NR-1 Operable 

Unit, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington 

State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-00/121, 2000, Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 100-BC-2, 

100-DR-1, 100-DR-2, 100-FR-2, 100-HR-2, 100-KR-2 Operable Units, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, 

Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-95/114, 1995, Declaration of the Interim Record of Decision for the 200-ZP-1 Operable 

Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. 

Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-95/126, 1995, Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 100-DR-1, and 

100-HR-1 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-96/134, 1996, Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-HR-3 and 

100-KR-4 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-97/048, 1997, Declaration of the Record of Decision, USDOE Hanford 200-UP-1 

Operable Unit, 200 Area, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-99/039, 1999, Interim Action Record of Decision for the 100-BC-1, 100-BC-2, 100-DR-1, 

100-DR-2, 100-FR-1, 100-FR-2, 100-HR-1, 100-HR-2, 100-KR-1, 100-KR-2, 100-IU-2, 100-IU-6, 

and 200-CW-3 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, 

Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-99/059, 1999, Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 100-KR-2 Operable Unit, 

Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State 

Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. 

EPA/ROD/R10-99/112, 1999, Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision for the 100-NR-1 and 

100-NR-2 Operable Units, Hanford Site, Benton County, Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, 

Washington. 

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 USC 4321, et seq. 

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, 16 USC 470, et seq. 

Presidential Proclamation 7319, 2000, Establishment of the Hanford Reach National Monument, 

William J. Clinton, June 9. 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, 42 USC 6901, et seq. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 B-26 

WA7890008967, 2013, Hanford Facility Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Permit, Dangerous 

Waste Portion, Revision 8C, for the Treatment, Storage, and Disposal of Dangerous Waste, 

Washington State Department of Ecology, Nuclear Waste Program, Richland, Washington, 

September 30. 

WAC 173-340, “Model Toxics Control Act -- Cleanup,” Washington Administrative Code, Olympia, 

Washington. 

WAC 173-340-720, “Groundwater Cleanup Standards,” Washington Administrative Code, Olympia, 

Washington. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-i 

APPENDIX C 

HANFORD ESTIMATED SCHEDULE AND COST STATUS 

 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-ii 

This page intentionally left blank. 

 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-iii 

CONTENTS 

C.1 RICHLAND OPERATIONS OFFICE PROJECT BASELINE SUMMARY 

INFORMATION ............................................................................................................................. 1

C.1.1 NM STABILIZATION AND DISPOSITION–PFP (PBS RL-0011) SCHEDULE 

AND COST DETAILS ....................................................................................................... 2

C.1.2 SNF STABILIZATION AND DISPOSITION (PBS RL-0012) SCHEDULE 

AND COST DETAILS ....................................................................................................... 4

C.1.3 SOLID WASTE STABILIZATION AND DISPOSITION–200 AREA 

(PBS RL-0013C) SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS .................................................... 6

C.1.4 SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY (PBS RL-0020) SCHEDULE AND COST 

DETAILS .......................................................................................................................... 16

C.1.5 SOIL AND WATER REMEDIATION–GROUNDWATER / VADOSE ZONE 

(PBS RL-0030) SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS ..................................................... 18

C.1.6 NUCLEAR FACILITY D&D–REMAINDER OF HANFORD 

(PBS RL-0040.01.1) SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS ............................................. 29

C.1.7 INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES (PBS RL-0040.01.2) SCHEDULE AND 

COST DETAILS ............................................................................................................... 35

C.1.8 NUCLEAR FACILITY D&D-RIVER CORRIDOR CLOSURE PROJECT 

(PBS RL-0041) SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS ..................................................... 38

C.1.9 NUCLEAR FACILITY D&D–FAST FLUX TEST FACILITY PROJECT 

(PBS RL-0042) SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS ..................................................... 44

C.1.10 RICHLAND COMMUNITY AND REGULATORY SUPPORT (PBS RL-0100) 

SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS ............................................................................... 46

C.1.11 LONG-TERM STEWARDSHIP (PBS RL-LTS) SCHEDULE AND COST 

DETAILS .......................................................................................................................... 48

C.1.12 FINAL REACTOR DISPOSITION SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS ..................... 50

C.2 OFFICE OF RIVER PROTECTION PROJECT BASELINE SUMMARY 

INFORMATION ........................................................................................................................... 50

TABLES 

Table C-1. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Level 3 Scope Summary. .................. 2

Table C-2. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Remaining Lifecycle 

Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). .......................................... 3

Table C-3. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Near-Term Schedule and 

Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). ................................................................ 3

Table C-4. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Level 3 Scope Summary. ......................... 4

Table C-5. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule 

and Costs, Level 2 by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). .......................................................... 5

Table C-6. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, 

Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). ........................................................................... 5

Table C-7. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Level 3 Scope 

Summary. (4 pages) ................................................................................................................. 6
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-iv 

Table C-8. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition –200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Remaining 

Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000 Escalated). (3 pages) ........ 10

Table C-9. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Near-Term 

Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (3 pages) ....................... 13

Table C-10. Safeguards and Securities (PBS RL-0020) Level 2 Scope Summary. ................................... 16

Table C-11. Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, 

Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000 Escalated). .......................................................................... 17

Table C-12. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Level 3 

Scope Summary. (3 pages) ................................................................................................... 18

Table C-13. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Remaining 

Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (4 

pages) ..................................................................................................................................... 21

Table C-14. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Near-Term 

Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (4 pages) ....................... 25

Table C-15. Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040.01.1) Level 3 

Scope Summary. (3 pages) .................................................................................................... 29

Table C-16. Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040.01.1) Remaining 

Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). ........................ 32

Table C-17. Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040.01.1) Near-Term 

Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (2 pages) ....................... 33

Table C-18. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040.01.2) Level 3 Scope Summary. ......................... 35

Table C-19. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040.01.2) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and 

Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). .............................................................. 36

Table C-20. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040.01.2) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, 

Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). ......................................................................... 37

Table C-21. Nuclear Facility D&D-River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) Level 3 

Scope Summary. (3 pages) ................................................................................................... 38

Table C-22. Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041), Remaining 

Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). ........................ 41

Table C-23. Nuclear Facility D&D-River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041), Near-Term 

Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (2 pages) ....................... 42

Table C-24. Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) Level 3 

Scope Summary. .................................................................................................................... 44

Table C-25. Nuclear Facility D&D-Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042), Remaining 

Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). ........................ 45

Table C-26. Nuclear Facility D&D-Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042), Near-Term 

Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). ........................................ 45

Table C-27. Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100) Level 3 

Scope Summary. .................................................................................................................... 46

Table C-28. Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100), Remaining Lifecycle 

Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). ........................................ 47

Table C-29. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Level 2 Scope Summary. ...................................... 48
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-v 

Table C-30. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, 

Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). ......................................................................... 49

Table C-31. Final Reactor Disposition Level 2 Scope Summary. ............................................................. 50

Table C-32. Final Reactor Disposition Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by 

Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). ............................................................................................ 50

Table C-33. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) 

Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, 

Escalated). (2 pages) .............................................................................................................. 51

Table C-34. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014), 

Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (2 

pages) ..................................................................................................................................... 52

Table C-35. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Remaining Lifecycle 

Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). ........................................ 53

Table C-36. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Near-Term Schedule 

and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (4 pages) ....................................... 54

 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-vi 

This page intentionally left blank. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-vii 

TERMS 

BOF Balance of Facilities 

CCP Central Characterization Project 

CENRTC capital equipment not related to construction 

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 

1980

CH contact-handled 

CSB Canister Storage Building 

CWC Central Waste Complex 

D&D decontamination and decommissioning 

D4 deactivation, decontamination, decommissioning, and demolition 

DOE U.S. Department of Energy 

DST double-shell tank 

Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

ERDF Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility 

ESH&Q environmental safety, health and quality 

ETF Effluent Treatment Facility 

FFTF Fast Flux Test Facility 

FY fiscal year 

GRP Groundwater Remediation Project 

HAMMER Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response (Facility); also 

known as the Volpentest HAMMER Training and Education Center 

HLW high-level waste 

IDF Integrated Disposal Facility 

IFW Integrated Field Work 

KE K East Basin 

KW K West Basin 

LAW low-activity waste 

LCR Lifecycle Report 

LDR land disposal restriction 

LERF Liquid Effluent Retention Facility 

LLBG low-level burial ground 

LOE level of effort 

LTS Long-Term Stewardship 

MLLW mixed low-level waste 

MS/GS Mission Support/General Support 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NM nuclear material 

O&M operations and maintenance 

OHC Other Hanford Contractor 

ORP U.S. Department of Energy, Office of River Protection 

OU operable unit 

PBS project baseline summary 

PFP Plutonium Finishing Plant 

PRC Plateau Remediation Contract 

PT pretreatment 

PUREX Plutonium Uranium Extraction (Plant) 

RH remote-handled 

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-viii 

REDOX Reduction-Oxidation Facility (S Plant) 

RL U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office 

ROD record of decision 

RTD remove, treat, and dispose 

S&M surveillance and maintenance 

SNF spent nuclear fuel 

SST single-shell tank 

STSC Sludge Transfer Storage Container 

SWOC Solid Waste Operations Complex 

TEDF Treated Effluent Disposal Facility 

TOC Tank Operations Contract 

TPA Tri-Party Agreement 

TRU transuranic 

TSD treatment, storage, and disposal 

WAC Washington Administrative Code

WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot Plant 

WESF Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility 

WRAP Waste Receiving and Processing (Facility) 

WTP Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-1 

APPENDIX C 

HANFORD ESTIMATED SCHEDULE AND COST STATUS 

As directed in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Ecology et al. 1989), also 

referred to as the Tri-Party Agreement (TPA)1, M-036-01, additional schedule and cost details are 

provided in this appendix. The schedules and costs are provided by project baseline summary (PBS) and 

reflect the scope discussed in Chapters 3.0 through 6.0 of this Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and 

Cost Report (LCR), additional scope information is provided in this appendix in summary form. 

The schedules and costs provided in this appendix are reported to Level 2 for the entire lifecycle and to 

Level 3 for the execution year (fiscal year [FY] 2015) and a period of approximately 5 more years. Due to 

the complexity of the Level 3 schedules, the information is reported in table format with costs by year. 

The start and finish of each Level 3 work element is reflected by the initial and final years that include 

costs. Information for each PBS is provided in the following subsections as a series of tables: 

x A scope table that summarizes the Level 3 work elements. In some instances, the scope descriptions 

have been developed only to Level 2. In these cases, the information has been presented in the main 

chapters of the report and is not repeated here. These PBSs are identified in the appropriate 

subsections. 

x A cost and schedule table for the remaining lifecycle is presented at Level 2 by fiscal year. The costs 

are escalated and include site-wide service allocations and cost and/or schedule uncertainty (also 

referred to as contingency in the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant [WTP] PBS). Costs are 

presented from FY2015 through the final year of the lifecycle for all PBSs. PBS RL-LTS extends 

from FY2060 through FY2090. 

x A near-term cost and schedule table at Level 3 by fiscal year that extends for about 5 years. 

Risk management is an essential function of project management. Cost and schedule uncertainty are 

included in the development of the Total Project Cost and the approved U.S. Department of Energy 

(DOE) planning case. Information provided in this LCR includes estimates for both cost and schedule 

uncertainty based on risk analysis methods that comply with DOE guidelines and orders. These estimates 

are identified as “cost and/or schedule uncertainty” in the tables in this appendix. Additional information 

about uncertainty and project risk is included in Section 1.7.2. 

C.1 RICHLAND OPERATIONS OFFICE PROJECT 

BASELINE SUMMARY INFORMATION 

The DOE, Richland Operations Office (RL) manages their assigned cleanup mission through the 

following PBSs (at Level 1): 

x Nuclear Materials Stabilization and Disposition–PFP, PBS RL-0011 

x SNF Stabilization and Disposition, PBS RL-0012 

x Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area, PBS RL-0013C 

x Safeguards and Security, PBS RL-0020 

x Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone, PBS RL-0030 

x Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford, PBS RL-0040.01.1 

x Infrastructure and Services, PBS RL-0040.01.2 

x Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Cleanup Project, PBS RL-0041 

x Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project, PBS RL-0042 

 

1 Ecology, EPA, and DOE, 1989, Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, Washington State Department of 

Ecology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington, as amended. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-2 

x Richland Community and Regulatory Support, PBS RL-0100 

x Long-Term Stewardship, PBS RL-LTS 

x Final Reactor Disposition. 

C.1.1 NM STABILIZATION AND DISPOSITION–PFP 

(PBS RL-0011) SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS 

Table C-1. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Level 3 Scope Summary. 

Level 2 Work 

Element 

Level 3 Work 

Element Scope Summary 

Maintain Safe 

and Compliant 

PFP

Maintain Safe 

and Compliant 

PFP

Provide safety, emergency management, Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration programs, fire protection programs, environmental 

management and administration, permitting, NEPA support, ensures the 

facility configuration minimizes risks, protects the environment, and remains 

in a safe and compliant condition, provides resources to manage and 

implement the PFP maintenance program, and provides special projects to 

safely sustain required facility capabilities. 

Disposition PFP 

Facility

Disposition PFP 

Facility

Addresses progressive deactivation and dismantling of systems, components, 

and structures in compliance with CERCLA process and resulting in 

established criteria (i.e., clean slab-on-grade). Activities include necessary 

maintenance during D&D and activities to maintain temporary safe 

configurations. 

Project 

Management and 

Support 

Project 

Management and 

Support 

Provide management functions, including management and 

technical/engineering support to the project mission.

Site-wide 

Services and 

Other Distributed 

Costs

Site-wide 

Services and 

Other Distributed 

Costs

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure and 

services that are charged based on predetermined rates and services directly 

charged to OHCs: 

- Examples charged to OHCs include janitorial, facility services, and motor 

carrier services. 

- Examples with predetermined rates include training, reproduction, offsite 

laboratory sample analysis, crane and rigging, fleet maintenance, desktop 

and user services, and telecommunications. 

- Also includes management reserve (an amount of the total contract budget 

withheld for management control purposes by the contractor) and 

contractor’s fee. 

NOTE: See Tables C-2 and C-3 for schedule and budget information. 

CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act. 

D&D = decontamination and decommissioning. 

NEPA = National Environmental Policy Act. 

OHC = Other Hanford Contractors.

NM = nuclear materials. 

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. 
2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-3 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-2. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year 

($1,000, Escalated). 

Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total 

Maintain Safe and Compliant PFP 31,685 33,476 450 0 0 65,611 

Disposition PFP Facility 85,591 106,889 137,004 59,782 43,477 432,743 

Project Management and Support 9,191 4,257 244 35 0 13,727 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 22,604 40,450 17,312 1 3 80,370 

Total 149,071 185,072 155,010 59,818 43,480 592,451 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant. 

Table C-3. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total 

1 NM Stabilization and Disposition – PFP 

2 Maintain Safe and Compliant PFP 31,685 33,476 450 0 0 65,611 

3 Maintain Safe and Compliant PFP 30,512 32,990 0 0 0 63,502 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 1,173 486 450 0 0 2,109 

2 Disposition PFP Facility 85,591 106,889 137,004 59,782 43,477 432,743 

3 Disposition PFP Facility 67,813 67,506 1,404 0 0 136,723 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 17,778 39,383 135,600 59,782 43,477 296,020 

2 Project Management and Support 9,191 4,257 244 35 0 13,727 

3 Project Management & Support 8,731 4,013 0 0 0 12,744 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 460 244 244 35 0 983 

2 Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 22,604 40,450 17,312 1 3 80,370 

3 Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 22,604 40,450 17,312 1 3 80,370 

Total 149,071 185,072 155,010 59,818 43,480 592,451

PBS = project baseline summary. PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-4 

C.1.2 SNF STABILIZATION AND DISPOSITION (PBS RL-0012) 

SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS 

Table C-4. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Level 3 Scope Summary. 

Level 2 Work 

Element 

Level 3 Work 

Element Scope Summary 

Program 

Management 

100-K Area 

Project 

Management 

Provide overarching project management for 100-K Area work activities. 

K Basins 

Operations 

and

Maintenance 

KW Basin 

Provide operations support to keep KW Basin in a safe and compliant mode until finish 

of dewatering and turnover to D&D; includes support to preventative maintenance, 

operation of equipment, system walk downs, daily routines, management oversight, 

review and approve work package, and safety inspections. 

Facility 

Operations 

100-K Facility 

Operations 

and Support 

Provide infrastructure maintenance support for non-reactor buildings (e.g., janitorial 

services, project support, direct supervision, sampling support, corrective maintenance, 

modifications); includes activities to operate all support facilities required to maintain 

KW Basin safe and compliant, including operation of water plant and all potable water 

services; routine surveillance, sampling, maintenance support in compliance with state 

and federal drinking water requirements; operation of facilities, including auxiliary 

systems (boilers; compressor; heating, ventilation, and air conditioning units; fire 

systems, etc.) at KE, KW, and the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility; and management of 

the National Pollution Discharge Environmental System at 100-K Area; also provides 

for field operations for waste handling support for waste flows not specific to sludge 

treatment and D&D, including waste characterization and designation, planning, 

preparation of waste management plans, waste area operations, and shipment 

documentation and coordination. 

Sludge 

Treatment 

Project

Management 

and Support 

Provide project management; engineering; training; safety and health support activities; 

dose data gathering and analysis, sampling, and characterization of radioactive and 

hazardous waste; baseline management; and updating waste volume projections. 

Process 

Containerized 

Sludge

Includes designing/testing a system to retrieve, package, and transport sludge stored in 

engineered containers in KW Basin to an interim storage facility on the Central Plateau; 

procuring Containerized Sludge Retrieval and transportation system; modifications to 

existing 105-KW Facility and construction of a new facility, including installing all 

equipment necessary in the KW Facility and the new Annex; readiness and startup 

activities; retrieving sludge from the engineered containers in KW Basin, loading 

sludge into STSC, transporting the STSCs to T Plant, receiving the STSCs at T Plant 

and placing into interim storage; nuclear safety support; containerized sludge testing; 

sludge sampling and analysis; performing sludge treatment and packaging; T Plant 

modifications including project management, clear deck as required and cleanout cells, 

modify additional cells, and update safety documentation. 

Site-wide 

Services and 

Other 

Distributed 

Costs

Site-wide 

Services and 

Other 

Distributed 

Costs

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure and services that 

are charged based on predetermined rates and services directly charged to OHCs: 

- Examples charged to OHCs include janitorial, facility services, and motor carrier 

services. 

- Examples with predetermined rates include training, reproduction, offsite laboratory 

sample analysis, crane and rigging, fleet maintenance, desktop and user services, 

and telecommunications. 

- Also includes management reserve (an amount of the total contract budget withheld 

for management control purposes by the contractor) and contractor’s fee. 

- Also includes technical support services (e.g., audit, regulatory analysis, cost and 

risk analysis, estimating), Tribal Nation support and other small contracts. 

NOTE: See Tables C-5 and C-6 for schedule and budget information. 

D&D = decontamination and decommissioning. 

KE = K East. 

KW = K West. 

OHC = Other Hanford Contractor. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

STSC = Sludge Transfer Storage Container. 
2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-5 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-5. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2 by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated).

Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 

Program Management 1,605 2,773 2,978 3,011 10,367 

K Basins Operations and Maintenance 8,360 5,159 6,789 350 20,658 

Facility Operations 9,052 11,056 12,485 10,502 43,095 

Sludge Treatment Project 54,995 132,527 124,906 23,902 336,330 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 29,693 33,798 30,686 6,958 101,135 

Total 103,705 185,313 177,844 44,723 511,585 

Table C-6. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 

1 SNF Stabilization and Disposition 

2 Program Management 1,605 2,773 2,978 3,011 10,367 

3 100K Area Project Management 1,510 2,671 2,872 2,903 9,956 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 95 102 106 108 411 

2 K Basins Operations and Maintenance 8,360 5,159 6,789 350 20,658 

3 KW Basin 8,048 4,833 6,467 0 19,348 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 312 326 322 350 1,310 

2 Facility Operations 9,052 11,056 12,485 10,502 43,095 

3 100-K Facility Operations & Support 8,721 10,648 12,001 10,140 41,510 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 331 408 484 362 1,585 

2 Sludge Treatment Project 54,995 132,527 124,906 23,902 336,330 

3 Management and Support 5,395 11,772 12,727 0 29,894 

3 Process Containerized Sludge 49,600 120,755 112,179 23,902 306,436 

2 Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 29,693 33,798 30,686 6,958 101,135 

3 Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 29,693 33,798 30,686 6,958 101,135 

Total 103,705 185,313 177,844 44,723 511,585 

KW = K West. PBS = project baseline summary. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-6 

C.1.3 SOLID WASTE STABILIZATION AND DISPOSITION–200 AREA (PBS RL-0013C) 

SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS 

Table C-7. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Level 3 Scope Summary. 

(4 pages) 

Level 2 Work 

Element 

Level 3 Work 

Element Scope Summary 

Project 

Management 

Project 

Management 

Provide overall management function in support of the waste management mission. 

Capsule 

Storage and

Disposition 

WESF Base 

Operations

Includes activities to safely store cesium/strontium capsules in the WESF pool cells, 

operate and maintain WESF facilities and associated waste sites, structures, operating 

systems and equipment, and monitoring systems within the authorization envelope, 

prepare and package waste streams for disposition as required, dispose as 

appropriate, and maintain systems necessary for environmental compliance, 

radiological control, personnel safety and capsule integrity. 

Cesium/ 

Strontium 

Capsule 

Disposition 

Includes retrieval of cesium/strontium capsules from WESF pool cells and 

packaging, transportation, and placement of capsules into dry storage. Provides for 

construction, including contracting/construction management oversight, and 

operations and maintenance of the interim dry storage area. 

Canister 

Storage 

Building 

(CSB)

Canister Storage 

Building

Includes activities to safely store SNF (primarily from K Basins) and immobilized 

high-level waste from WTP, while awaiting final disposition at a national repository. 

Includes operation and maintenance of CSB facilities and associated structures, 

operating systems and equipment, and monitoring systems. Also includes various 

corrective maintenance tasks, facility modifications, or capital projects necessary to 

continue safe, cost-effective, and compliant operations throughout the operating life 

of the facility. 

Mixed LowLevel Waste 

(MLLW) 

Treatment

TPA M-091-42 

(MLLW)

Prepare MLLW packages in aboveground storage at SWOC facilities (including 

Waste Retrieval Project) for treatment, as required to meet regulatory requirements. 

Includes management of offsite commercial MLLW treatment/ disposal contracts and 

receipt of MLLW packages into the onsite Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches for 

disposal once treatment has been completed and the packages have been determined 

to be LDR compliant. Development of alternative methods for treatment and disposal 

of orphan waste may include LDR variance approvals, expanding commercial 

treatment facilities permit limits and construction and operation of additional onsite 

treatment capabilities. 

TPA M-091-43 

(MLLW)

Prepare large MLLW containers and RH packages in aboveground storage at SWOC 

facilities or retrieved from the LLBGs for treatment, as required to meet regulatory 

requirements. Includes management of offsite commercial MLLW treatment 

contracts, as well as the receipt of MLLW packages into the onsite Mixed Waste 

Disposal Trenches for disposal once the treatment has been completed and the 

package determined to be LDR compliant. 

Other Treatment 

Activities

Includes the identification and disposition of LLW packages in aboveground storage 

at SWOC facilities to meet rad waste storage compliance requirements. Disposition 

of these containers includes onsite and offsite processing and/or treatment activities. 

As such, this scope also includes management of offsite commercial contracts. 

Includes final disposition of the processed containers (e.g., management of receipt 

into appropriate disposal facility). 

MLLW Project 

Management 

Includes management and maintenance of the MLLW treatment and disposal project 

as well as the management of offsite commercial MLLW treatment/disposal 

contracts. It also includes the receipt of MLLW packages into the onsite Mixed 

Waste Disposal Trenches for disposal once the treatment has been completed and the 

packages have been determined to be LDR compliant. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-7 

Table C-7. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Level 3 Scope Summary. 

(4 pages) 

Level 2 Work 

Element 

Level 3 Work 

Element Scope Summary 

TRU Retrieval 

CH Waste 

Retrieval 

Operations 

Provides for retrieval, designation, and transfer to a TSD facility of CH suspect TRU 

waste from LLBGs 218-W-4C, 218-W-4B, 218-E-12B, and 218-W-3B. 

RH Waste 

Retrieval 

Operations 

Provides for retrieval, designation, and transfer to a TSD facility of RH suspect TRU 

waste from LLBGs 218-W-4C, 218-W-4B, 218-E-12B, and 218-W-3B. 

TRU 

Repackaging 

TRU 

Repackaging 

Provides for WIPP production, TRU repacking operations at T Plant and WRAP, 

TRU program support for repack, and RH/large packaging capabilities. It includes 

staffing, contracts and consumables directly related to operations. 

Waste 

Receiving and 

Processing 

Facility

(WRAP)

WRAP Base 

Operations 

Provides operations and maintenance of the WRAP facility to support shipping and 

receiving activities associated with WIPP shipments. 

WRAP 

Transition 

Following operations, WRAP will be transitioned to a condition ready for D&D. 

WRAP Min Safe 

Operations 

Provides surveillance and maintenance of structures, systems, components, and 

processes to ensure operation within the approved safety and compliance 

requirements envelope, including preventive maintenance, repair of failed and 

malfunctioning equipment, walkdown of safety systems, equipment, and facility 

grounds (operational surveillance); and routine radiological surveys during nonoperational period and during TRU package transporter only operational period. 

T Plant 

T Plant Base 

Operations 

Provides services necessary to maintain the T Plant Complex in a ready-to-serve 

status (base operations) for waste processing operations. 

T Plant 

Upgrades 

Provides upgrades to waste processing equipment, systems components, and 

computer interface equipment, including physical upgrades to T Plant Facility. 

Central Waste 

Complex 

(CWC)

CWC

Provides services necessary to maintain CWC in a ready-to-serve status (base 

operations) for interim storage of LLW, MLLW, TRU waste and waste receipts from 

RL approved generators. 

Low-Level 

Waste Burial 

Grounds

(LLBG) 

Provides operation of the LLBGs in a safe, compliant, and cost-effective manner, 

including activities such as emergency preparedness, assessments and surveillances, 

environmental monitoring and sampling, fire protection, engineering, and training. 

Environmental 

Restoration 

Disposal 

Facility 

(ERDF)

ERDF Cell 

Expansion 

Provide expansion of ERDF as needed to support site cleanup efforts. 

ERDF Interim 

Cover 

Provide interim covers to be placed over ERDF cells as they are filled. 

ERDF 

Operations

Includes ERDF operations-related activities, such as leachate pump preventive 

maintenance, pump replacement, and air monitoring. Disposal and transportation 

costs are not included here, but are included for each PBS generating waste. 

Liquid Effluent 

Facilities

(LEF)

200 Area LEF 

Base Operations 

Provides safe, cost-effective, and environmentally compliant operation and 

maintenance of the LERF, ETF, and TEDF, and includes receiving, storing, treating, 

and disposing of liquid effluents from Hanford cleanup activities. 

200 Area LEF 

Upgrades 

Provides modifications to ETF, TEDF and LERF to improve operations, extend 

useful life, ensure regulatory compliance, and/or correct identified deficiencies. 

Integrated 

Disposal 

Facility (IDF) 

IDF Operations 

Provides operation of IDF in a safe, compliant and cost-effective manner, including 

emergency preparedness; assessments and surveillances; environmental monitoring 

and sampling; fire protection; engineering; and training. 

IDF Regulatory 

and Safety

Includes safety oversight and Industrial Safety, such as assist in review of documents 

for safety impacts, perform safety surveillances, inspections and support, assist in 

maintenance of the Health and Safety Plan, and update baseline hazards assessments; 

includes regulatory support, such as performance assessment, associated permit 

modifications, and other requirements (e.g., operational readiness reviews) needed 

for the existing IDF to be in “ready-to-serve” status.
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-8 

Table C-7. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Level 3 Scope Summary. 

(4 pages) 

Level 2 Work 

Element 

Level 3 Work 

Element Scope Summary 

Solid Waste 

Base 

Operations 

Solid Waste 

Ready to Serve 

Provides the minimum staffing to maintain a viable waste management program and 

to capture those waste support activities that are essentially fixed cost in nature. 

TRU 

Disposition 

Central 

Characterization 

Project (CCP) 

Support 

Provides resources to develop and maintain an interface with Hanford Site generators 

and CCP to perform TRU Certification activities. Includes support for generators of 

TRU waste to define CH and RH waste volumes and packaging requirements and 

resources to perform WIPP closeout activities to the current Hanford WIPP Program. 

Establish 

Shipping 

Capability 

Includes modifications to an existing CWC 2404 series structure to provide an 

additional or alternative CH shipping capabilities and establishing RH shipping 

capabilities, including all capital funded activities. 

TRU Shipping 

Provides the WRAP facility to support TRU waste characterization in support of the 

CCP, including staffing, overtime and consumables directly related to providing 

waste containers and operating equipment under the guidance or control of CCP. 

Spent Nuclear 

Fuel (SNF) 

Disposition 

Fuel Prep 

Facility/Offsite 

SNF Disposition 

Includes design, construction and turnover to operations of a Fuel Preparation 

Facility to repackage fuel stored at the 200 Area Interim Storage Area into DOE 

Standard Canisters that satisfy repository acceptance requirements. The facility will 

include a shielded hot cell and remote welding capabilities. Also includes activities to 

facilitate final disposition of Hanford SNF inventories at a National Repository 

including compliance document review, technical and programmatic interface with 

the National SNF and Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, SNF data 

package compliance, and planning for SNF disposition. 

Mixed Waste 

Disposal 

Trenches

Mixed Waste 

Disposal 

Trenches Base 

Operations 

Provides operation of the Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches in a safe, compliant, and 

cost-effective manner, including activities such as emergency preparedness; 

assessments and surveillances; environmental monitoring and sampling; fire 

protection; engineering; and training. 

Mixed Waste 

Disposal

Trenches 

Upgrades 

Provides design, construction, and other activities necessary to add operational layers 

in the Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches to maintain their ready-to-serve status and for 

placing temporary caps on the trenches prior to turnover to PBS RL-0040.01.1 for 

final cleanup and closure. 

Sludge 

Disposition 

Sludge 

Disposition

Includes activities to stabilize and package sludge from 105-KW Basin for final 

disposition to WIPP or other disposal facility, including Phase 2 treatment and 

packaging, shutdown and deactivation of needed equipment, and management and 

support. 

Site-wide 

Services and 

Other 

Distributed 

Costs

Site-wide 

Services and 

Other 

Distributed 

Costs

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure and services 

that are charged based on predetermined rates and services directly charged to 

OHCs:

- Examples charged to OHCs include janitorial, facility services, and motor carrier 

services. 

- Examples with predetermined rates include training, reproduction, offsite 

laboratory sample analysis, crane and rigging, fleet maintenance, desktop and 

user services, and telecommunications. 

- Also includes management reserve (an amount of the total contract budget 

withheld for management control purposes by the contractor) and contractor’s 

fee. 

- Also includes technical support services (e.g., audit, regulatory analysis, cost and 

risk analysis, estimating), Tribal Nation support and other small contracts. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-9 

Table C-7. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Level 3 Scope Summary. 

(4 pages) 

Level 2 Work 

Element 

Level 3 Work 

Element Scope Summary 

NOTE: See Tables C-8 and C-9 for schedule and budget information. 

CCP = Central Characterization Project. 

CENRTC = capital equipment not related to construction. 

CH = contact-handled. 

CSB = Canister Storage Building. 

CWC = Central Waste Complex. 

D&D = decontamination and decommissioning. 

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. 

ETF = Effluent Treatment Facility. 

IDF = Integrated Disposal Facility. 

LDR = land disposal restriction. 

LERF = Liquid Effluent Retention Facility. 

LLBG = Low-Level Burial Grounds. 

LLW = low-level waste. 

MLLW = mixed low-level waste. 

OHC = Other Hanford Contractors.

PBS = project baseline summary. 

RH = remote-handled. 

SNF = spent nuclear fuel. 

SWOC = Solid Waste Operations Complex. 

TEDF = Treated Effluent Disposal Facility. 

TRU = transuranic. 

TSD = treatment, storage, and disposal. 

WESF = Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility. 

WIPP = Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. 

WRAP = Waste Receiving and Processing (Facility). 

WTP = Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant. 
 C-10 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-8. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition –200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000 

Escalated). (3 pages)

Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 

Project Management 23,695 27,863 30,739 27,290 21,195 21,721 24,456 24,956 24,925 25,440 

Capsule Storage and Disposition 11,319 23,806 38,987 39,408 25,572 22,488 9,931 8,545 3,792 252 

Canister Storage Building 6,884 7,423 7,791 3,079 6,624 6,758 6,976 7,107 7,114 7,258 

MLLW Treatment 0 6,520 7,862 3,758 1,758 1,206 464 439 435 444 

TRU Retrieval 191 172,078 55,753 71,262 71,712 33,250 481 0 0 0 

TRU Repackaging 5,500 5,500 5,500 5,500 5,500 5,500 5,500 0 0 0 

WRAP 10,120 11,965 12,460 3,717 17,702 9,875 6 0 0 0 

T Plant 13,739 19,841 19,737 19,590 25,451 18,976 19,483 19,872 19,934 77,397 

Central Waste Complex 10,005 13,425 11,806 6,964 13,129 13,169 12,202 11,940 11,862 12,124 

ERDF 192 102 102 58 71 6 129 133 132 135 

Liquid Effluent Facilities 3,720 8,790 6,256 6,411 8,882 8,809 16,561 9,504 9,930 10,490 

Integrated Disposal Facility 481 2,667 1,510 6,149 3,644 3,548 3,661 3,728 3,725 6,828 

Solid Waste Base Operations 94 97 104 106 0 0 0 0 0 0 

TRU Disposition 0 0 0 79 35,405 33,293 39,616 35,790 33,434 34,124 

Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposition 333 341 367 371 20,297 37,349 34,105 18,125 898 1,158 

Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches 591 625 648 263 4,162 2,160 0 0 0 0 

Sludge Disposition 0 0 11,594 166,183 364,041 240,514 64,071 16,329 25,115 21,518 

Site-wide Services and Other 

Distributed Costs 44,511 47,712 29,445 49,671 65,649 41,582 42,664 39,517 36,403 58,451 

Total 131,375 348,755 240,661 409,859 690,794 500,204 280,306 195,985 177,699 255,619 

Fiscal Year 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 

Project Management 26,720 16,384 6,967 7,216 7,359 7,603 8,088 8,387 8,507 8,681 

Capsule Storage and Disposition 206 217 24,280 25,040 1,269 164 79 0 0 0 

Canister Storage Building 7,572 7,200 7,485 7,708 7,933 8,184 8,683 9,001 9,074 9,298 

MLLW Treatment 470 492 514 532 545 566 601 622 625 633 

TRU Retrieval 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

TRU Repackaging 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

WRAP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

T Plant 93,635 88,600 91,549 94,525 97,520 100,297 106,563 110,574 111,868 114,363 

Central Waste Complex 6,429 7,149 7,038 7,250 7,486 7,648 5,150 4,813 4,852 4,959 

ERDF 143 12,085 7,339 7,124 4,913 870 181 184 187 191 

Liquid Effluent Facilities 10,594 10,980 11,256 11,637 11,775 12,088 12,395 12,687 13,042 13,365 

Integrated Disposal Facility 19,204 34,412 10,139 4,467 4,511 4,630 4,904 5,062 5,182 5,262 

Solid Waste Base Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
 C-11 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-8. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition –200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000 

Escalated). (3 pages)

TRU Disposition 35,929 37,797 39,201 40,431 41,659 42,891 24,963 9,733 0 0 

Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposition 34,753 19,605 21,888 32,981 35,037 5,482 4,966 5,118 5,354 5,516 

Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Sludge Disposition 14,668 13,533 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Site-wide Services and Other 

Distributed Costs 82,445 89,969 77,452 80,178 68,764 65,632 63,420 69,000 69,786 71,284 

Total 332,768 338,423 305,108 319,089 288,771 256,055 239,993 235,181 228,477 233,552 

Fiscal Year 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 

Project Management 8,945 9,329 10,105 10,387 11,138 10,982 11,471 10,709 10,551 11,726 

Capsule Storage and Disposition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Canister Storage Building 9,559 11,703 13,743 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 

MLLW Treatment 654 691 740 770 824 811 839 797 776 864 

TRU Retrieval 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

TRU Repackaging 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

WRAP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

T Plant 117,527 121,226 50,912 38,136 14,462 7,223 960 1,725 2,360 3,763 

Central Waste Complex 5,694 20,094 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

ERDF 199 205 220 230 246 243 253 237 238 256 

Liquid Effluent Facilities 13,487 13,976 14,329 14,587 14,756 15,471 15,607 16,159 16,481 16,701 

Integrated Disposal Facility 5,396 5,695 6,092 6,286 6,773 6,655 6,971 6,532 6,477 7,103 

Solid Waste Base Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

TRU Disposition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposition 5,857 6,066 10,507 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Sludge Disposition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Site-wide Services and Other 

Distributed Costs 66,530 74,115 43,838 30,587 20,032 17,136 22,809 15,638 12,468 16,906 

Total 233,848 263,100 150,486 101,023 68,231 58,521 58,910 51,797 49,351 57,319 

Fiscal Year 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 

Project Management 11,741 12,253 13,137 14,441 14,315 14,823 13,080 15,800 16,273 10,906 

Capsule Storage and Disposition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Canister Storage Building 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

MLLW Treatment 870 913 971 1,061 1,068 1,175 1,023 

TRU Retrieval 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

TRU Repackaging 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

WRAP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

T Plant 5,954 6,089 3,896 3,520 2,473 1,178 445 

Central Waste Complex 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
 C-12 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-8. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition –200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000 

Escalated). (3 pages)

ERDF 257 271 285 6,376 6,188 0 0 0 0 0 

Liquid Effluent Facilities 17,221 17,541 17,879 18,257 18,826 19,136 19,501 19,759 20,423 21,071 

Integrated Disposal Facility 7,123 7,464 8,046 8,788 1,507 1,902 2,051 2,078 1,954 2,001 

Solid Waste Base Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

TRU Disposition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Sludge Disposition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Site-wide Services and Other 

Distributed Costs 15,384 16,134 9,796 13,095 8,964 8,455 4,860 7,071 6,555 4,605 

Total 58,550 60,665 54,010 65,538 53,341 46,669 40,960 44,708 45,205 38,583 

Fiscal Year 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 Total 

Project Management 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 600,304 

Capsule Storage and Disposition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 235,355 

Canister Storage Building 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 184,197 

MLLW Treatment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43,333 

TRU Retrieval 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 404,727 

TRU Repackaging 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38,500 

WRAP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 65,845 

T Plant 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,645,363 

Central Waste Complex 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 205,188 

ERDF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49,981 

Liquid Effluent Facilities 22,835 23,671 24,704 24,237 22,043 0 0 667,830 

Integrated Disposal Facility 2,613 1,827 1,972 1,646 695 458 284 250,103 

Solid Waste Base Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 401 

TRU Disposition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 484,345 

Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 306,474 

Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,449 

Sludge Disposition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 937,566 

Site-wide Services and Other 

Distributed Costs 1,718 2,442 2,635 3,636 3,858 0 0 1,622,802 

Total 27,166 27,940 29,311 29,519 26,596 458 284 7,750,763 

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. MLLW = mixed low-level waste. 

PBS = project baseline summary.

TRU = transuranic. 

WRAP = Waste Receiving and Processing Facility.
 C-13 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-9. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year 

($1,000, Escalated). (3 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

1 Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area 

2 Project Management 23,695 27,863 30,739 27,290 21,195 21,721 152,503 

3 Project Management 23,695 27,863 30,739 27,290 21,195 21,721 152,503 

2 Capsule Storage and Disposition 11,319 23,806 38,987 39,408 25,572 22,488 161,580 

3 WESF Base Operations 6,922 7,443 7,628 7,566 6,747 6,797 43,103 

3 Cesium/Strontium Capsule Disposition 4,148 13,543 31,130 31,596 17,819 14,598 112,834 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 249 2,820 229 246 1,006 1,093 5,643 

2 Canister Storage Building (CSB) 6,884 7,423 7,791 3,079 6,624 6,758 38,559 

3 Canister Storage Building 6,645 7,185 7,349 2,812 6,376 6,424 36,791 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 239 238 442 267 248 334 1,768 

2 Mixed Low Level Waste (MLLW) Treatment 0 6,520 7,862 3,758 1,758 1,206 21,104 

3 M-091-42 (MLLW) 0 5,063 7,038 3,051 0 0 15,152 

3 M-091-43 (MLLW) 0 811 338 0 0 0 1,149 

3 MLLW Project Management 0 541 162 0 402 405 1,510 

3 Other Treatment Activities 0 105 44 0 0 0 149 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 0 280 707 1,356 801 3,144 

2 TRU Retrieval 191 172,078 55,753 71,262 71,712 33,250 404,246 

3 CH Waste Retrieval Operations 0 149,170 30,205 25,141 17,015 14,034 235,565 

3 RH Waste Retrieval Operations 0 22,424 24,454 4,399 0 0 51,277 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 191 484 1,094 41,722 54,697 19,216 117,404 

2 TRU Repackaging 5,500 5,500 5,500 5,500 5,500 5,500 33,000 

3 TRU Repackaging 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 500 500 500 500 500 500 3,000 

2 Waste Receiving and Processing Facility (WRAP) 10,120 11,965 12,460 3,717 17,702 9,875 65,839 

3 WRAP Base Operations 4,971 6,756 6,871 0 0 0 18,598 

3 WRAP Transition 0 0 0 0 17,021 9,165 26,186 

3 Min-Safe Operation 4,658 4,774 5,133 3,558 0 0 18,123 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 491 435 456 159 681 710 2,932 

2 T-Plant 13,739 19,841 19,737 19,590 25,451 18,976 117,334 

3 T-Plant Base Operations 12,012 14,649 15,373 9,262 23,485 18,293 93,074 

3 T-Plant Upgrades 998 3,772 3,493 8,577 0 0 16,840 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 729 1,420 871 1,751 1,966 683 7,420 
 C-14 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-9. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year 

($1,000, Escalated). (3 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

2 Central Waste Complex 10,005 13,425 11,806 6,964 13,129 13,169 68,498 

3 Central Waste Complex 8,962 9,982 10,841 4,875 10,896 10,977 56,533 

3 Low-Level Waste Burial Grounds 717 1,130 679 210 0 0 2,736 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 326 2,313 286 1,879 2,233 2,192 9,229 

2 Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) 192 102 102 58 71 6 531 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 192 102 102 58 71 6 531 

2 Liquid Effluent Facilities (LEF) 3,720 8,790 6,256 6,411 8,882 8,809 42,868 

3 200 Area LEF Base Operations 3,720 8,164 2,667 0 4,288 4,441 23,280 

3 200 Area LEF Upgrades 0 626 3,104 5,911 3,569 3,596 16,806 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 0 485 500 1,025 772 2,782 

2 Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) 481 2,667 1,510 6,149 3,644 3,548 17,999 

3 IDF Operations 331 2,425 1,301 5,862 1,944 1,959 13,822 

3 IDF Regulatory and Safety 133 222 184 168 1,528 1,377 3,612 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 17 20 25 119 172 212 565 

2 Solid Waste Base Operations 94 97 104 106 0 0 401 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 94 97 104 106 0 0 401 

2 TRU Disposition 0 0 0 79 35,405 33,293 68,777 

3 Central Characterization Project Support 0 0 0 0 963 970 1,933 

3 Establish Shipping Capability 0 0 0 0 1,046 570 1,616 

3 TRU Shipping 0 0 0 0 31,787 30,329 62,116 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 0 0 79 1,609 1,424 3,112 

2 Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Disposition 333 341 367 371 20,297 37,349 59,058 

3 Fuel Prep Facility/ Offsite SNF Disposition 323 331 356 360 20,197 37,246 58,813 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 10 10 11 11 100 103 245 

2 Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches 591 625 648 263 4,162 2,160 8,449 

3 Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches Base Operations 574 607 629 243 0 0 2,053 

3 Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches Upgrades 0 0 0 0 4,051 2,103 6,154 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 17 18 19 20 111 57 242 

2 Sludge Disposition 0 0 11,594 166,183 364,041 240,514 782,332 

3 Sludge Disposition 0 0 11,594 143,940 348,042 225,758 729,334 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 0 0 22,243 15,999 14,756 52,998 

2 Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 44,511 47,712 29,445 49,671 65,649 41,582 278,570 

3 Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 44,511 47,712 29,445 49,671 65,649 41,582 278,570 

Total 131,375 348,755 240,661 409,859 690,794 500,204 2,321,648 
 C-15 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-9. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year 

($1,000, Escalated). (3 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

CH = contact-handled. 

CSB = Canister Storage Building. 

CWC = Central Waste Complex. 

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. 

IDF = Integrated Disposal Facility. 

LEF = Liquid Effluent Facility. 

MLLW = mixed low-level waste. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

RH = remote-handled. 

SNF = spent nuclear fuel. 

TRU = transuranic. 

WESF = Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility. 

WRAP = Waste Receiving and Processing (Facility). 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-16 

C.1.4 SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY (PBS RL-0020) 

SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS 

Scope information for Safeguards and Security, PBS RL-0020, is presented in Table C-10. This PBS is 

not broken down to Level 3 details, so no additional scope is presented; however, both near-term and 

remaining estimated cost information is provided. 

Table C-10. Safeguards and Securities (PBS RL-0020) Level 2 Scope Summary. 

Work Element Scope Description 

Safeguards and 

Security

Includes management, training, and equipment for staff; physical protective systems, such as 

intrusion protection, Hanford Site access, and badging; information and cyber security; 

personnel security; material control and accountability; and security program management. 

NOTE: See Table C-11 for schedule and budget information. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. 
 C-17 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-11. Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000 Escalated). 

Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 

Safeguards and Security 63,700 83,986 80,864 77,756 79,226 88,722 70,715 81,917 66,260 67,537 

Fiscal Year 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 

Safeguards and Security 71,459 75,318 78,155 80,574 83,180 85,514 91,099 94,215 95,675 98,014 

Fiscal Year 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 

Safeguards and Security 100,899 104,721 114,613 52,570 56,390 55,631 58,086 54,362 52,613 58,324 

Fiscal Year 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 

Safeguards and Security 58,546 61,227 65,468 72,008 71,295 78,675 69,022 84,188 86,747 87,840 

Fiscal Year 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 

Safeguards and Security 79,639 93,631 97,977 118,111 122,993 

Total 3,569,462 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-18 

C.1.5 SOIL AND WATER REMEDIATION–GROUNDWATER / VADOSE ZONE 

(PBS RL-0030) SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS 

Table C-12. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Level 3 Scope 

Summary. (3 pages)

Level 2 Work 

Element Level 3 Work Element Scope Summary 

Integration and 

Assessments

Strategic Integration Coordinates and focuses on site characterization 

and assessment efforts to ensure consistency and 

technical defensibility in the application of 

CERCLA processes, eliminate information gaps 

and overlaps, apply science and technology new to 

Hanford, foster technical peer review, integrate 

remediation decisions, and develop necessary and 

sufficient strategies.

Technical Integration 

Remediation Decision Support 

Remediation Science and Technology 

Sample Management and Reporting 

Environmental Databases 

Value Engineering Studies 

Systematic Planning Integration 

Drilling

100-KR-4 Drilling Planning, coordinating, and implementing well 

drilling and well decommissioning for Hanford Site 

wells according to project-specific requirements. 

100-NR-2 Drilling 

100-HR-3 Drilling 

200-BP-5 Drilling 

200-PO-1 Drilling 

200-UP-1 Drilling 

200-ZP-1 Drilling 

TPA M-24-00 Well Drilling 

Miscellaneous Well Drilling 

Decommission Non-Tank Farm Wells 

100-BC-5 Well Drilling 

100-FR-3 Well Drilling 

300-FF-5 Well Drilling 

Deep Vadose Zone 

Project 

Management Project Management and Support Planning, management direction, evaluation, and management system outputs for this PBS. 

Integrated Field 

Work (IFW)

IFW – Operations and Maintenance Includes general and common activities, services, 

infrastructure, material, equipment, labor, and 

contracts used to plan, support, and perform nonOU specific field work.

IFW – GRP Field Work Projects 

IFW – Field Equipment Purchases (CENRTC) 

Spare Parts 

Groundwater 

Monitoring and 

Performance 

Assessments

Modutanks Includes operation, maintenance, sampling, and 

dismantling the Modutanks used for disposing 

groundwater from onsite well sampling and 

maintenance; geophysical borehole logging and 

reporting, groundwater sampling, water level 

monitoring, evaluating and reporting for RCRA 

treatment, storage and disposal facilities, CERCLA 

OUs, and other permitted facilities and sites; 

operation and maintenance of the Hanford 

Geotechnical Sample Library which is the 

repository for historical sediment, core, and other 

soil and sediments samples used for scientific 

studies including laboratory studies, bench tests, 

conceptual model development, and fate and 

transport evaluations for contaminant migration; 

well maintenance; and development of an updated 

soil survey map of the Hanford Site. 

Geophysical Sciences and Logging 

Groundwater Data Evaluation and Reporting 

Groundwater Sample Collection 

Hanford Geotechnical Library 

Groundwater Lab Analysis and Data 

Management 

Well Maintenance, Monitoring and Reporting 

100-BC-5 

Operable Unit 

100-BC-5 OU Project Management Includes project management, CERCLA process 

implementation for final remedy, remedial actions, 

and monitoring and reporting. 

100-BC-5 CERCLA Process Implementation 

100-BC-5 Remedial Actions-Interim and Final 

100-BC-5 Monitoring and Reporting 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-19 

Table C-12. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Level 3 Scope 

Summary. (3 pages)

Level 2 Work 

Element Level 3 Work Element Scope Summary 

100-KR-4 

Operable Unit 

100-KR-4 OU Project Management Includes project management, CERCLA process 

implementation for final remedy, remedial actions, 

well support, monitoring and reporting, 

modifications and expansions, and final D&D of 

remedy components.

100-KR-4 CERCLA Process Implementation 

100-KR-4 Remedial Actions-Interim and Final 

100-KR-4 Monitoring and Reporting 

100-KR-4 Modifications and Expansions 

100-KR-4 D&D 

100-KR-4 Well Support 

100-NR-2 

Operable Unit 

100-NR-2 OU Project Management Includes project management, CERCLA process 

implementation for final remedy, remedial actions, 

monitoring and reporting, well support, and final 

D&D of remedy components. 

100-NR-2 CERCLA Process Implementation 

100-NR-2 Remedial Actions-Interim and Final 

100-NR-2 Monitoring and Reporting 

100-NR-2 Well Support 

100-NR-2 D&D 

100-HR-3 

Operable Unit 

100-HR-3 Project Management Includes project management, decision documents 

for final remedy, remedial actions, well support, 

monitoring and reporting, modifications and 

expansions, and final D&D of remedy components. 

100-HR-3 Decision Documentation 

100-HR-3 Remedial Actions-Interim and Final 

100-HR-3 Well Support 

100-HR-3 Monitoring and Reporting 

100-HR-3 Modifications and Expansions 

100-HR-3 D&D 

100-FR-3 

Operable Unit 

100-FR-3 OU Project Management Includes project management, CERCLA process 

implementation for final remedy, and monitoring 

and reporting. 

100-FR-3 CERCLA Process Implementation 

100-FR-3 Monitoring and Reporting 

200-BP-5 

Operable Unit 

200-BP-5 Project Management Includes project management, decision documents 

for final remedy, remedial actions, monitoring and 

reporting, and field studies and deployment. 

200-BP-5 Decision Documentation 

200-BP-5 Remedial Actions – Interim and 

Final 

200-BP-5 Monitoring and Reporting 

200-BP-5 Field Studies and Deployment 

200-PO-1 

Operable Unit 

200-PO-1 OU Project Management Includes project management, decision documents 

for final remedy, remedial actions, and monitoring 

and reporting. 

200-PO-1 Decision Documentation 

200-PO-1 Remedial Actions-Interim and Final 

200-PO-1 Monitoring and Reporting 

200-UP-1 

Operable Unit 

200-UP-1 OU Project Management Includes project management, remedial actions, 

monitoring and reporting, well support, and final 

D&D of remedy components. 

200-UP-1 Remedial Actions-Interim and Final 

200-UP-1 Monitoring and Reporting 

200-UP-1 Well Support 

200-UP-1 D&D 

200-ZP-1 

Operable Unit 

200-ZP-1 OU Project Management Includes project management, decision 

documentation, remedial actions, and monitoring 

and reporting.

200-ZP-1 Decision Documentation 

200-ZP-1 Remedial Actions-Interim and Final 

200-ZP-1 Monitoring and Reporting 

200-PW-1 

Operable Unit 

200-PW-1 OU Project Management Includes project management, remedial actions, and 

200-PW-1 Remedial Actions-Interim and Final monitoring and reporting.

200-PW-1 Monitoring and Reporting 

300-FF-5 

Operable Unit 

300-FF-5 OU Project Management Includes project management, decision documents 

for final remedy, remedial actions, well support, 

and monitoring and reporting. 

300-FF-5 Decision Documentation 

300-FF-5 Remedial Actions – Interim and 

Final 

300-FF-5 Monitoring and Reporting 

300-FF-5 Well Support 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-20 

Table C-12. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Level 3 Scope 

Summary. (3 pages)

Level 2 Work 

Element Level 3 Work Element Scope Summary 

Regulatory 

Decisions and 

Closure 

Integration

Closure Zones

Includes CERCLA and RCRA assessment activities 

for the Central Plateau source OUs, including 

project management, planning, documentation, and 

field and other activities necessary to complete the 

final remedy decision process. 

Deep Vadose 

Zone Treatability 

Tests

Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests

Includes planning for and conducting laboratory 

and field treatability tests to investigate options for 

remediating the deep vadose zone in the Central 

Plateau. 

Deep Vadose 

Zone Operable 

Unit

Deep Vadose Zone OU The Deep Vadose Zone OU will address mitigation 

of the contamination present in the deep vadose 

zone at Hanford. The initial actions planned for this 

OU are the development of the decision documents, 

field studies, and deployment activities. Other tasks 

for this OU, such as remedial action planning and 

implementation; well support activities; monitoring 

and reporting support; OU modifications and 

expansions; and final D&D of the OU remediation 

activities at the conclusion of the project, will be 

further developed following the decision process. 

Deep Vadose Zone Decision Documentation 

Deep Vadose Zone Field Studies and 

Deployment

Site-wide 

Services and 

Other Distributed 

Costs

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 

Includes proportional share of costs for site services 

and infrastructure and services that are charged 

based on predetermined rates and services directly 

charged to OHCs:

- Examples charged to OHCs include janitorial, 

facility services, and motor carrier services.

- Examples with predetermined rates include 

training, reproduction, offsite laboratory sample 

analysis, crane and rigging, fleet maintenance, 

desktop and user services, and 

telecommunications. 

- Also includes management reserve (an amount 

of the total contract budget withheld for 

management control purposes by the 

contractor) and contractor’s fee. 

- Includes technical support services (e.g., audit, 

regulatory analysis, cost and risk analysis, 

estimating), Tribal Nation support and other 

small contracts. 

NOTE: See Tables C-13 and C-14 for schedule and budget information. 

CENRTC = capital equipment not related to construction. 

CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act. 

D&D = deactivation and decommissioning. 

GRP = Groundwater Remediation Project. 

IFW = Integrated Field Work. 

OHC = Other Hanford Contractor. 

OU = operable unit. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. 

TPA = Tri-Party Agreement. 
 C-21 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-13. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year 

($1,000, Escalated). (4 pages) 

Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 

Integration and Assessments 7,504 18,079 13,653 13,204 21,750 19,594 20,116 18,655 18,174 18,591 

Drilling 5,223 30,192 17,938 26,835 8,255 5,942 4,063 9,606 8,944 8,720 

Project Management 7,761 8,105 8,680 11,685 16,761 15,813 14,396 10,086 9,829 10,026 

Integrated Field Work 7,080 7,601 7,321 7,342 16,646 16,146 15,588 15,477 15,358 15,676 

GW Monitoring/Performance Assessment 24,341 26,565 28,218 30,089 34,323 30,710 33,258 33,924 34,186 34,866 

100-BC-5 Operable Unit 1,844 978 8,760 106,484 39,049 3,730 4,836 3,136 4,252 6,103 

100-KR-4 Operable Unit 14,475 137,440 21,542 10,431 11,070 6,970 6,844 6,903 19,279 4,553 

100-NR-2 Operable Unit 4,816 18,568 3,057 1,045 3,861 5,887 3,467 159 89 85 

100-HR-3 Operable Unit 25,624 29,439 11,677 17,096 38,369 32,222 11,715 7,074 6,358 5,004 

100-FR-3 Operable Unit 5,111 6,840 4,125 3,978 3,370 4,550 4,677 3,805 3,988 4,101 

200-BP-5 Operable Unit 625 18,518 35,812 13,292 9,933 6,925 5,858 5,130 4,311 3,836 

200-PO-1 Operable Unit 508 1,105 3,813 1,700 457 438 8 0 0 0 

200-UP-1 Operable Unit 5,863 17,882 16,329 21,256 7,539 7,263 1,249 1,280 1,271 1,305 

200-ZP-1 Operable Unit 19,453 29,683 42,175 35,882 32,556 25,244 16,965 17,288 17,236 17,646 

200-PW-1 Operable Unit 1,025 1,024 1,098 1,361 265 0 0 0 0 0 

300-FF-5 Operable Unit 4,276 28,114 5,065 5,405 1,687 1,580 400 382 399 402 

Regulatory Decisions/Closure Integration 101,268 54,993 12,235 16,116 14,120 7,939 1,633 184 22 0 

Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests 876 9,823 3,205 3,024 1,290 634 11 0 0 0 

Deep Vadose Zone Operable Unit 1,373 19,056 42,582 57,208 49,974 47,818 35,685 29,086 14,481 3,918 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed 

Costs 57,759 100,621 87,565 82,678 76,754 89,072 31,005 30,239 30,207 27,746 

Total 296,805 564,662 374,850 466,111 388,029 328,477 211,774 192,414 188,384 162,578 

Fiscal Year 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 

Integration and Assessments 19,576 20,575 21,678 21,998 22,653 23,347 24,804 26,071 26,009 26,604 

Drilling 10,827 13,106 7,594 7,380 7,596 10,783 8,325 7,265 7,483 7,549 

Project Management 10,539 11,087 11,421 8,489 8,284 8,556 4,818 4,236 4,274 4,325 

Integrated Field Work 16,525 15,009 15,000 13,455 13,519 13,835 9,067 8,282 8,377 8,564 

GW Monitoring/Performance Assessment 35,826 38,251 39,521 40,879 42,892 43,397 48,675 47,203 47,898 48,828 

100-BC-5 Operable Unit 5,740 6,580 6,195 6,165 6,554 5,334 5,249 6,270 6,030 4,904 

100-KR-4 Operable Unit 3,846 3,884 3,983 4,160 4,375 4,357 4,593 4,671 4,610 4,806 

100-NR-2 Operable Unit 90 94 98 105 109 113 121 125 127 129 

100-HR-3 Operable Unit 4,070 3,494 3,328 3,438 3,628 3,630 3,718 3,758 4,077 4,095 

100-FR-3 Operable Unit 2,948 3,145 2,377 939 1,004 1,206 220 228 230 235 

200-BP-5 Operable Unit 2,529 1,973 1,901 1,132 516 238 0 0 0 0 

200-PO-1 Operable Unit 340 7 0 0 0 404 7 0 0 0 

200-UP-1 Operable Unit 1,300 1,276 1,327 1,361 1,395 1,447 1,536 1,588 1,612 1,640 

200-ZP-1 Operable Unit 23,948 19,726 20,183 20,830 21,475 28,544 23,746 24,352 24,837 25,235 
 C-22 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-13. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year 

($1,000, Escalated). (4 pages) 

200-PW-1 Operable Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

300-FF-5 Operable Unit 367 386 413 448 430 464 460 397 410 494 

Regulatory Decisions/Closure Integration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Deep Vadose Zone Operable Unit 2,221 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed 

Costs 23,768 24,458 28,498 29,546 33,498 39,391 41,678 41,684 39,831 37,952 

Total 164,460 163,051 163,517 160,325 167,928 185,046 177,017 176,130 175,805 175,360 

Fiscal Year 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 

Integration and Assessments 27,333 28,209 30,577 31,427 33,703 33,231 34,721 32,374 30,908 33,833 

Drilling 11,314 1,340 0 0 0 4,277 91 0 0 0 

Project Management 4,478 4,665 5,072 5,232 5,592 5,552 8,226 7,675 7,573 8,401 

Integrated Field Work 8,832 7,847 8,159 8,393 9,038 8,896 11,721 10,833 10,696 11,881 

GW Monitoring/Performance Assessment 48,357 50,739 54,139 55,599 60,160 55,896 57,589 55,303 55,298 59,774 

100-BC-5 Operable Unit 6,085 4,613 3,716 5,401 4,204 3,809 4,704 3,705 3,338 1,994 

100-KR-4 Operable Unit 4,755 2,755 593 297 318 313 328 310 305 334 

100-NR-2 Operable Unit 130 135 148 154 164 162 169 158 156 173 

100-HR-3 Operable Unit 4,212 2,621 613 370 397 391 409 378 376 418 

100-FR-3 Operable Unit 242 252 273 282 303 307 321 300 296 328 

200-BP-5 Operable Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

200-PO-1 Operable Unit 478 7 0 0 0 587 8 0 0 0 

200-UP-1 Operable Unit 1,695 1,765 1,907 1,972 2,096 2,079 2,137 1,939 10,191 304 

200-ZP-1 Operable Unit 33,534 27,177 29,438 30,272 32,407 33,149 33,549 30,992 10,848 14,790 

200-PW-1 Operable Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

300-FF-5 Operable Unit 482 512 396 568 521 543 595 446 542 495 

Regulatory Decisions/Closure Integration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Deep Vadose Zone Operable Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed 

Costs 45,976 39,673 53,884 44,347 53,005 45,460 46,265 30,818 19,183 23,868 

Total 197,903 172,310 188,915 184,314 201,908 194,652 200,833 175,231 149,710 156,593 

Fiscal Year 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 

Integration and Assessments 33,521 33,365 34,352 37,482 36,925 40,610 35,734 43,363 44,704 45,119 

Drilling 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Project Management 8,429 8,823 9,442 10,464 10,377 11,367 9,985 12,085 12,469 12,618 

Integrated Field Work 11,987 12,616 13,467 14,798 14,682 16,186 14,220 17,163 17,717 17,949 

GW Monitoring/Performance Assessment 59,057 61,938 65,373 70,544 72,157 75,742 74,596 80,023 82,054 83,163 

100-BC-5 Operable Unit 2,222 3,978 2,517 2,418 3,920 2,321 2,128 1,498 1,713 2,974 

100-KR-4 Operable Unit 322 346 373 322 259 252 218 266 273 277 

100-NR-2 Operable Unit 174 181 193 212 211 232 204 247 254 255 
 C-23 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-13. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year 

($1,000, Escalated). (4 pages) 

100-HR-3 Operable Unit 424 443 318 254 235 0 56 0 0 0 

100-FR-3 Operable Unit 328 344 366 403 398 438 387 468 483 488 

200-BP-5 Operable Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

200-PO-1 Operable Unit 612 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

200-UP-1 Operable Unit 699 1,146 976 660 394 412 361 445 466 461 

200-ZP-1 Operable Unit 17,521 19,182 13,520 3,285 0 0 0 0 0 0 

200-PW-1 Operable Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

300-FF-5 Operable Unit 462 630 654 579 808 683 572 715 687 599 

Regulatory Decisions/Closure Integration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Deep Vadose Zone Operable Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed 

Costs 21,450 22,014 24,518 29,833 25,189 29,531 15,948 25,693 23,809 19,924 

Total 157,208 165,006 166,069 171,254 165,555 177,774 154,409 181,966 184,629 183,827 

Fiscal Year 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 2063 2064 

Integration and Assessments 40,794 19,584 15,866 13,483 13,079 13,404 2,119 1,655 457 189 

Drilling 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Project Management 11,534 3,736 932 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Integrated Field Work 16,373 5,211 1,179 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 

GW Monitoring/Performance Assessment 78,743 42,787 33,316 21,912 27,077 10,730 8,994 2,565 421 0 

100-BC-5 Operable Unit 506 3,155 245 1,329 1,458 3,095 1,086 1,952 569 661 

100-KR-4 Operable Unit 251 118 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

100-NR-2 Operable Unit 225 41 57 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 

100-HR-3 Operable Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

100-FR-3 Operable Unit 475 81 75 23 6 0 0 0 0 0 

200-BP-5 Operable Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

200-PO-1 Operable Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

200-UP-1 Operable Unit 429 37 75 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 

200-ZP-1 Operable Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

200-PW-1 Operable Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

300-FF-5 Operable Unit 572 247 278 229 230 381 384 266 202 209 

Regulatory Decisions/Closure Integration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Deep Vadose Zone Operable Unit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed 

Costs 11,248 1,986 2,190 3,548 4,399 48,959 0 0 0 0 

Total 161,150 76,983 54,236 40,621 46,249 76,569 12,583 6,438 1,649 1,059 
 C-24 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-13. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year 

($1,000, Escalated). (4 pages) 

Fiscal Year 2065 Total 

Integration and Assessments 0 1,224,756 

Drilling 0 230,648 

Project Management 0 373,898 

Integrated Field Work 0 515,754 

GW Monitoring/Performance Assessment 0 2,247,896 

100-BC-5 Operable Unit 0 319,507 

100-KR-4 Operable Unit 0 296,400 

100-NR-2 Operable Unit 0 46,209 

100-HR-3 Operable Unit 0 233,729 

100-FR-3 Operable Unit 0 64,744 

200-BP-5 Operable Unit 0 112,529 

200-PO-1 Operable Unit 0 10,479 

200-UP-1 Operable Unit 0 128,391 

200-ZP-1 Operable Unit 0 816,668 

200-PW-1 Operable Unit 0 4,773 

300-FF-5 Operable Unit 493 66,959 

Regulatory Decisions/Closure Integration 0 208,510 

Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests 0 18,863 

Deep Vadose Zone Operable Unit 0 303,402 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed 

Costs 0 1,666,668 

Total 493 8,890,783 
 C-25 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-14. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, 

Escalated). (4 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

1 Soil and Water Remediation-Groundwater/Vadose Zone, PBS RL-0030

2 Integration and Assessments 7,504 18,079 13,653 13,204 21,750 19,594 93,784 

3 Strategic Integration 743 762 819 828 2,116 1,859 7,127 

3 Technical Integration 1,535 5,908 4,478 2,657 3,470 3,496 21,544 

3 Remediation Decision Support 313 642 490 495 1,753 1,767 5,460 

3 Remediation Science and Technology 0 5,086 1,872 2,791 5,884 5,928 21,561 

3 Sample Management and Reporting 1,360 1,394 1,499 1,515 1,537 1,549 8,854 

3 Environmental Databases 2,423 2,886 3,371 3,407 4,240 4,271 20,598 

3 Value Engineering Studies 0 405 0 440 0 0 845 

3 Systematic Planning Integration 719 550 671 678 0 0 2,618 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 411 446 453 393 2,750 724 5,177 

2 Drilling 5,223 30,192 17,938 26,835 8,255 5,942 94,385 

3 100-KR-4 Drilling 0 5,130 1,428 1,443 54 412 8,467 

3 100-NR-2 Drilling 0 1,092 1,458 4,394 0 0 6,944 

3 100-HR-3 Drilling 0 653 702 710 2,022 1,945 6,032 

3 200-UP-1 Drilling 0 9,842 0 0 1,414 1,422 12,678 

3 200-ZP-1 Drilling 205 2,680 2,859 2,024 0 1,080 8,848 

3 200-PW-1 Drilling 0 0 0 0 1,830 78 1,908 

3 M-24-00 Well Drilling 1,853 1,470 1,162 1,175 780 783 7,223 

3 Miscellaneous Well Drilling 742 761 818 827 0 0 3,148 

3 Decommission Non-Tank Farm Wells 0 2,772 5,262 6,640 0 0 14,674 

3 100-BC-5 Well Drilling 0 0 0 2,153 0 0 2,153 

3 100-FR-3 Well Drilling 0 513 0 554 0 0 1,067 

3 300-FF-5 Well Drilling 0 3,864 3,268 3,727 117 0 10,976 

3 Deep Vadose Zone 844 0 0 0 492 0 1,336 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 1,579 1,415 981 3,188 1,546 222 8,931 

2 Project Management 7,761 8,105 8,680 11,685 16,761 15,813 68,805 

3 Project Management and Support 7,460 7,800 8,402 11,332 15,244 15,350 65,588 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 301 305 278 353 1,517 463 3,217 

2 Integrated Field Work (IFW) 7,080 7,601 7,321 7,342 16,646 16,146 62,136 

3 IFW – Operations and Maintenance 6,297 6,454 6,605 6,675 9,874 9,927 45,832 

3 IFW – GRP Field Work Projects 0 0 0 0 2,539 2,558 5,097 

3 IFW – Field Equipment Purchases (CENRTC) 0 228 0 0 1,590 1,602 3,420 

3 Spare Parts 386 395 425 430 0 0 1,636 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 397 524 291 237 2,643 2,059 6,151 

2 Groundwater Monitoring and Performance Assessments 24,341 26,565 28,218 30,089 34,323 30,710 174,246 

3 Modutanks 407 414 421 428 1,229 1,242 4,141 

3 Geophysical Sciences and Logging 2,171 2,208 2,246 3,465 150 752 10,992 

3 GW Lab Analysis & Data Management 8,919 9,143 9,830 9,934 11,675 11,797 61,298 

3 GW Sample Collection 5,996 6,146 6,608 6,678 3,326 3,351 32,105 
 C-26 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-14. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, 

Escalated). (4 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

3 Hanford Geotechnical 78 80 85 86 92 92 513 

3 Groundwater Data Evaluation and Reporting 3,432 3,517 3,782 3,822 286 288 15,127 

3 Efficiency Challenge (2,136) 0 0 0 0 0 (2,136)

3 Well Maintenance, Monitoring and Reporting 1,480 1,518 1,632 1,623 2,932 2,641 11,826 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 3,994 3,539 3,614 4,053 14,633 10,547 40,380 

2 100-BC-5 Operable Unit 1,844 978 8,760 106,484 39,049 3,730 160,845 

3 100-BC-5 Operable Unit Project Management 179 152 155 158 68 69 781 

3 100-BC-5 CERCLA Process Implementation 647 603 369 514 0 0 2,133 

3 100-BC-5 Monitoring and Reporting 384 195 222 212 69 70 1,152 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 634 28 8,014 105,600 38,912 3,591 156,779 

2 100-KR-4 Operable Unit 14,475 137,440 21,542 10,431 11,070 6,970 201,928 

3 100-KR-4 Project Management 343 351 378 382 0 0 1,454 

3 100-KR-4 CERCLA Process Implementation 260 584 0 0 0 0 844 

3 100-KR-4 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 4,056 4,286 4,367 4,610 0 0 17,319 

3 100-KR-4 Well Support 0 0 0 0 154 155 309 

3 100-KR-4 Monitoring and Reporting 603 502 540 546 306 308 2,805 

3 100-KR-4 Modifications and Expansions 0 3,443 2,165 1,897 0 0 7,505 

3 100-KR-4 D&D 0 0 0 164 0 0 164 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 9,213 128,274 14,092 2,832 10,610 6,507 171,528 

2 100-NR-2 Operable Unit 4,816 18,568 3,057 1,045 3,861 5,887 37,234 

3 100-NR-2 Project Management 269 276 297 300 462 466 2,070 

3 100-NR-2 CERCLA Process Implementation 542 0 0 0 0 0 542 

3 100-NR-2 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 849 13,691 1,574 542 401 676 17,733 

3 100-NR-2 Well Support 0 0 0 0 79 80 159 

3 100-NR-2 Monitoring and Reporting 46 45 44 45 210 212 602 

3 100-NR-2 D&D 0 0 338 0 0 0 338 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 3,110 4,556 804 158 2,709 4,453 15,790 

2 100-HR-3 Operable Unit 25,624 29,439 11,677 17,096 38,369 32,222 154,427 

3 100-HR-3 Project Management 343 351 378 382 0 0 1,454 

3 100-HR-3 Decision Documentation 341 224 147 0 0 0 712 

3 100-HR-3 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 5,534 5,634 5,896 6,314 2,684 456 26,518 

3 100-HR-3 Well Support 0 0 0 0 193 195 388 

3 100-HR-3 Monitoring and Reporting 453 465 500 505 565 569 3,057 

3 100-HR-3 Modifications and Expansions 0 0 0 0 641 0 641 

3 100-HR-3 D&D 0 988 0 1,884 0 9,435 12,307 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 18,953 21,777 4,756 8,011 34,286 21,567 109,350 

2 100-FR-3 Operable Unit 5,111 6,840 4,125 3,978 3,370 4,550 27,974 

3 100-FR-3 Operable Unit Project Management 179 152 155 158 70 71 785 

3 100-FR-3 CERCLA Process Implementation 277 0 0 0 0 0 277 

3 100-FR-3 Monitoring and Reporting 380 412 419 448 79 80 1,818 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 4,275 6,276 3,551 3,372 3,221 4,399 25,094 
 C-27 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-14. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, 

Escalated). (4 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

2 200-BP-5 Operable Unit 625 18,518 35,812 13,292 9,933 6,925 85,105 

3 200-BP-5 Project Management 365 251 212 215 686 281 2,010 

3 200-BP-5 Decision Documentation 0 875 677 0 0 0 1,552 

3 200-BP-5 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 0 13,446 12,756 5,881 359 0 32,442 

3 200-BP-5 Monitoring and Reporting 218 223 240 243 0 0 924 

3 200-BP-5 Field Studies and Deployment 0 359 25 0 0 0 384 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 42 3,364 21,902 6,953 8,888 6,644 47,793 

2 200-PO-1 Operable Unit 508 1,105 3,813 1,700 457 438 8,021 

3 200-PO-1 Project Management 366 251 269 215 0 0 1,101 

3 200-PO-1 Decision Documentation 0 354 280 0 0 292 926 

3 200-PO-1 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 0 290 161 81 7 0 539 

3 200-PO-1 Monitoring and Reporting 120 123 133 134 0 0 510 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 22 87 2,970 1,270 450 146 4,945 

2 200-UP-1 Operable Unit 5,863 17,882 16,329 21,256 7,539 7,263 76,132 

3 200-UP-1 Project Management 82 111 113 115 53 54 528 

3 200-UP-1 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 5,605 17,142 12,888 20,718 6,831 6,846 70,030 

3 200-UP-1 Well Support 0 0 0 0 146 147 293 

3 200-UP-1 Monitoring and Reporting 167 171 184 186 131 132 971 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 9 458 3,144 237 378 84 4,310 

2 200-ZP-1 Operable Unit 19,453 29,683 42,175 35,882 32,556 25,244 184,993 

3 200-ZP-1 Project Management 591 605 651 658 938 945 4,388 

3 200-ZP-1 Decision Documentation 489 472 508 495 0 219 2,183 

3 200-ZP-1 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 17,381 27,613 39,328 32,082 18,304 22,704 157,412 

3 200-ZP-1 Monitoring and Reporting 162 166 179 181 216 217 1,121 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 830 827 1,509 2,466 13,098 1,159 19,889 

2 200-PW-1 Operable Unit 1,025 1,024 1,098 1,361 265 0 4,773 

3 200-PW-1 Project Management 67 69 74 75 0 0 285 

3 200-PW-1 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 844 840 903 1,156 0 0 3,743 

3 200-PW-1 Monitoring and Reporting 75 77 83 84 0 0 319 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 39 38 38 46 265 0 426 

2 300-FF-5 Operable Unit 4,276 28,114 5,065 5,405 1,687 1,580 46,127 

3 300-FF-5 Project Management 173 148 150 153 330 332 1,286 

3 300-FF-5 Decision Documentation 24 0 0 0 0 0 24 

3 300-FF-5 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 0 24,641 3,226 4,285 0 0 32,152 

3 300-FF-5 Well Support 0 0 0 0 118 119 237 

3 300-FF-5 Monitoring and Reporting 40 41 41 42 828 834 1,826 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 4,039 3,284 1,648 925 411 295 10,602 

2 Regulatory Decisions and Closure Integration 101,268 54,993 12,235 16,116 14,120 7,939 206,671 

3 Closure Zones 27 16,760 10,296 9,013 4,024 140 40,260 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 101,241 38,233 1,939 7,103 10,096 7,799 166,411 
 C-28 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-14. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, 

Escalated). (4 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

2 Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests 876 9,823 3,205 3,024 1,290 634 18,852 

3 Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests 0 9,345 2,894 2,975 503 0 15,717 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 876 478 311 49 787 634 3,135 

2 Deep Vadose Zone Operable Unit 1,373 19,056 42,582 57,208 49,974 47,818 218,011 

3 Deep Vadose Zone OU 89 462 297 251 68 69 1,236 

3 Deep Vadose Zone Decision Documentation 61 121 2,882 802 344 135 4,345 

3 Deep Vadose Zone Field Studies and Deployment 0 6,106 6,125 823 945 961 14,960 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 1,223 12,367 33,278 55,332 48,617 46,653 197,470 

2 Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 57,759 100,621 87,565 82,678 76,754 89,072 494,449 

3 Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 57,759 100,621 87,565 82,678 76,754 89,072 494,449 

Total 296,805 564,626 374,850 466,111 388,029 328,477 2,418,898 

CENRTC = capital equipment not related to construction. 

CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

D&D = decontamination and decommissioning. 

GRP = Groundwater Remediation Project. 

IFW = Integrated Field Work. 

OU = operable unit. 

PBS = performance baseline summary. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-29 

C.1.6 NUCLEAR FACILITY D&D–REMAINDER OF HANFORD 

(PBS RL-0040.01.1) SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS 

Table C-15. Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040.01.1) Level 3 Scope Summary. 

(3 pages)

Level 2 Work Element Level 3 Work Element Scope Summary 

Regulatory Decisions 

and Closure Integration 

Central Plateau Project 

Management 

Provides overall management function in support of the nuclear 

facility D&D mission on the Central Plateau. 

Central Plateau 

Engineering Studies 

Provides crosscutting engineering and technical studies and tradeoff evaluations necessary to optimize design and execution for 

Central Plateau facility and waste site remediation/restoration with 

consideration of groundwater and vadose zone remediation and 

ongoing operations. 

Emergency Response 

for Facility/Waste Site 

ESH&Q

Includes the tasks necessary to address aging facility or waste site 

conditions that are above and beyond anticipated operational and 

maintenance plans. Activities may include hazard removal, RTD, 

stabilization, or increased S&M of waste sites; or D&D or increased 

S&M of buildings. Activities are focused on unplanned or 

unforeseen facility or waste site conditions impacting safety, human 

health, or environment (e.g., major equipment failure, spread of 

contamination, structural failure). 

Below Slab 

Remediation ROD 

Non-Canyon Facilities 

Includes preparation of a feasibility study, proposed plan, and ROD 

for remediation below slab of the non-canyon facilities. 

Hazard Reduction Provides the necessary resources and equipment to establish and 

execute hazard reduction in advance of scheduled facility D&D. 

Zone Environmental 

Remediation

For each closure zone, provide remediation definition, remediation of pipelines, installation of 

barriers, utility relocations, post-ROD confirmatory sampling, S&M/O&M of installed barriers, 

and zone closure activities. Potential waste site remediation range includes no action, in situ 

treatment (e.g., grouting), monitored natural attenuation, capping, RTD, or combinations of 

these techniques. Buildings and structures are assumed to undergo D4 activities, including 

demolition to slab-on-grade. Below-grade portions will be addressed through the waste site 

cleanup process. Actual remedial actions will be determined through the appropriate decision 

process and applied through a geographical implementation strategy. The information in this 

table is a summary of the planning assumptions. 

Balance of East IA This area contains waste sites, buildings and structures, and 

pipelines that will be addressed through zone closure. 

Balance of West IA This area contains waste sites, buildings and structures, and 

pipelines that will be addressed through zone closure. 

B Farm Zone 

This zone contains waste sites, buildings and structures, and 

pipelines that will be addressed through zone closure. This zone 

also contains a tank farm and will require remedial coordination 

with the tank farm cleanup efforts. 

B Plant Zone 

This zone contains a canyon (B Plant), waste sites, buildings and 

structures, and pipelines that will be addressed through zone 

closure. 

C Farm Zone 

This zone contains waste sites, buildings and structures, pipelines, 

and utility relocations that will be addressed through zone closure. 

This zone also contains a tank farm (C Farm) and will require 

remedial coordination with the tank farm cleanup efforts. 

ERDF Zone This zone contains waste sites and buildings and structures that will 

be addressed through zone closure. 

PFP Zone This zone contains waste sites, buildings and structures, pipelines, 

and utility relocations that will be addressed through zone closure. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-30 

Table C-15. Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040.01.1) Level 3 Scope Summary. 

(3 pages)

Level 2 Work Element Level 3 Work Element Scope Summary 

PUREX Zone

This zone contains a canyon (PUREX), waste sites, buildings and 

structures, pipelines, and utility relocations that will be addressed 

through zone closure. 

REDOX Zone

This zone contains a canyon (REDOX), waste sites, buildings and 

structures, pipelines, and utility relocations that will be addressed 

through zone closure. 

S/U Farm Zone 

This zone contains waste sites, buildings and structures, and utility 

relocations that will be addressed through zone closure. This zone 

also contains tank farms and will require remedial coordination with 

the tank farm cleanup efforts. 

Solid Waste Zone This zone contains waste sites and buildings and structures that will 

be addressed through zone closure. 

T Farm Zone 

This zone contains waste sites and buildings and structures that will 

be addressed through zone closure. This zone also contains tank 

farms and will require remedial coordination with the tank farm 

cleanup efforts. 

T Plant Zone 

This zone contains a canyon (T Plant), waste sites, buildings and 

structures, pipelines, and utility relocations that will be addressed 

through zone closure. 

U Plant Zone 

This zone contains a canyon (U Plant), waste sites, buildings and 

structures, pipelines, and utility relocations that will be addressed 

through zone closure. 

Waste Management 

Zone 

This zone contains waste sites, buildings and structures, pipelines, 

and utility relocations that will be addressed through zone closure. 

WTP/A Farm Zone 

This zone contains waste sites, buildings and structures, pipelines, 

and utility relocations that will be addressed through zone closure. 

This zone also contains tank farms and will require remedial 

coordination with the tank farm cleanup efforts. 

100 Area This area contains buildings and structures that will be addressed 

through zone closure. 

600 Area This zone contains buildings and structures that will be addressed 

through zone closure. 

300 Area This area contains buildings and structures that will be addressed 

through zone closure. 

400 Area This zone contains buildings and structures that will be addressed 

through zone closure. 

Outer Area

This includes the demolition of structures, remediation of waste 

sites, construction of barriers, and closure of the zone. Includes 

deactivation of existing structures as applicable, formal evaluation 

(Facility Decommissioning Evaluation) of deactivated structures to 

determine if and which CERCLA decommissioning path is 

appropriate, generation of regulatory and work documents as 

applicable, demolition of structures, remediation of waste sites and 

pipelines, closure of wells not required for future monitoring, 

construction of barriers, O&M, utility relocations, closure of the 

zone, and post-ROD confirmatory sampling. 

Surveillance and 

Maintenance and MinSafe for Facilities and 

Waste Sites 

S&M and Min-Safe for 

Facilities and Waste 

Sites 

Includes CERCLA 5-year reviews, visual surveillance, surface 

maintenance, maintain facilities and waste sites in minimum safe 

condition to protect personnel and the environment, documentation, 

environmental protection, ISMS, nuclear safety, occupational safety 200 Area S&M 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-31 

Table C-15. Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040.01.1) Level 3 Scope Summary. 

(3 pages)

Level 2 Work Element Level 3 Work Element Scope Summary 

300 Area S&M and health, quality assurance, emergency preparedness, radiation 

protection, safeguards and security, baseline controls, and training. 400 Area S&M 

600 Area S&M 

Site-wide Services and 

Other Distributed Costs 

Site-wide Services and 

Other Distributed Costs 

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and 

infrastructure and services that are charged based on predetermined 

rates and services directly charged to OHCs: 

- Examples charged to OHCs include janitorial, facility services, 

and motor carrier services. 

- Examples with predetermined rates include training, 

reproduction, offsite laboratory sample analysis, crane and 

rigging, fleet maintenance, desktop and user services, and 

telecommunications. 

- Also includes management reserve (an amount of the total 

contract budget withheld for management control purposes by 

the contractor) and contractor’s fee. 

NOTE: See Tables C-16 and C-17 for schedule and budget information. 

CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980. 

D&D = decontamination and decommissioning. 

D4 = deactivation, decommissioning, 

decontamination, and demolition. 

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal 

Facility. 

ESH&Q = Environment, Safety, Health, and Quality. 

IA = implementation area. 

ISMS = Integrated Safety Management System. 

O&M = operation and maintenance. 

OHC = Other Hanford Contractor. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant. 

PUREX = Plutonium Uranium Extraction (Plant). 

REDOX = Reduction-Oxidation (Plant). 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland 

Operations Office. 

ROD = record of decision. 

RTD = remove, treat, dispose. 

S&M = surveillance and maintenance. 

WTP = Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant. 
 C-32 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-16. Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040.01.1) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, 

Escalated). 

Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 

Regulatory Decisions & Closure Integration 1,231 1,715 19,220 33,387 44,219 20,998 21,082 21,505 21,024 20,940 

Zone Environmental Remediation 0 128,068 72,730 193,222 571,376 626,827 467,605 511,027 636,947 655,987 

S&M & Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 11,188 8,067 8,279 8,524 13,360 13,394 13,821 13,997 14,812 14,314 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 1,718 4,859 6,963 14,968 7,354 30 99,649 101,194 98,714 78,228 

Total 14,137 142,709 107,192 250,101 636,309 661,249 602,157 647,723 771,497 769,469 

Fiscal Year 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 

Regulatory Decisions & Closure Integration 21,911 23,070 23,976 24,741 25,445 26,212 27,812 28,781 29,250 29,883 

Zone Environmental Remediation 332,990 199,450 160,665 142,296 106,346 87,233 61,659 55,808 69,400 82,990 

S&M & Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 15,028 15,281 15,303 14,811 14,910 15,329 16,364 17,977 17,195 17,497 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 42,559 32,987 37,677 28,329 25,745 24,273 26,943 26,068 29,313 35,445 

Total 412,488 270,788 237,621 210,177 172,446 153,047 132,778 128,634 145,158 165,815 

Fiscal Year 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 

Regulatory Decisions & Closure Integration 30,776 31,932 34,731 35,694 38,283 37,747 39,400 36,931 36,357 40,249 

Zone Environmental Remediation 102,017 166,868 182,228 257,976 234,281 224,780 239,863 533,574 875,184 556,714 

S&M & Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 18,052 18,804 20,419 20,879 22,447 22,157 23,139 21,957 22,180 25,742 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 28,963 24,463 34,553 56,389 52,821 61,550 50,764 73,261 85,080 69,051 

Total 179,808 242,067 271,931 370,938 347,832 346,234 353,166 665,723 1,018,801 691,756 

Fiscal Year 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 

Regulatory Decisions & Closure Integration 40,351 42,186 45,054 49,557 49,031 54,008 47,543 57,635 59,429 60,138 

Zone Environmental Remediation 403,412 286,219 248,372 162,380 235,006 184,549 380,554 183,473 172,385 153,261 

S&M & Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 25,837 26,948 28,915 31,182 30,020 32,789 29,048 35,053 35,863 35,635 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 68,630 61,603 61,340 45,493 49,192 37,566 51,207 29,898 25,003 23,495 

Total 538,230 416,956 383,681 288,612 363,249 308,912 508,352 306,059 292,680 272,529 

Fiscal Year 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 2063 2064 

Regulatory Decisions & Closure Integration 54,722 64,051 67,011 79,930 84,187 29,057 31,378 30,650 27,316 9,110 

Zone Environmental Remediation 286,123 235,255 313,738 253,539 283,152 240,973 277,939 231,000 137,595 25,675 

S&M & Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 31,988 36,975 38,605 46,261 49,107 14,316 16,209 15,216 12,687 4,042 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 28,319 39,929 40,259 38,453 39,597 0 0 0 0 0 

Total 401,152 376,210 459,613 418,183 456,043 284,346 325,526 276,866 177,598 38,827 

Fiscal Year 2065 Total 

Regulatory Decisions & Closure Integration 51 1,810,897 

Zone Environmental Remediation 737 13,231,448 

S&M and Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 43 1,071,966 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 0 1,899,895 

Total 831 18,014,206 

PBS = project baseline summary. S&M = surveillance and maintenance. 
 C-33 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-17. Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040.01.1) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). 

(2 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

1 Nuclear Facility D&D-Remainder of Hanford, PBS RL-0040.01.1

2 Regulatory Decisions & Closure Integration 1,231 1,715 19,220 33,387 44,219 20,998 120,770 

3 Central Plateau Project Management 1,186 131 13,023 20,162 27,903 11,777 74,182 

3 Central Plateau Engineering Studies 0 0 0 0 823 830 1,653 

3 Emergency Response for Facility/Waste Site ESH&Q or Remediation - 

FY2015 - FY2048 0 1,555 3,134 8,177 7,340 7,395 27,601 

3 Below Slab Remediation ROD Non-Canyon Facilities 0 0 0 0 1,083 0 1,083 

3 Hazard Reduction 0 0 2,514 4,141 5,079 0 11,734 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 45 29 549 907 1,991 996 4,517 

2 Zone Environmental Remediation 0 128,068 72,730 193,222 571,376 626,827 1,592,223 

3 B Plant Zone 0 0 0 0 806 809 1,615 

3 C Farm Zone 0 0 0 0 302 1,783 2,085 

3 ERDF Zone 0 0 0 0 41 41 82 

3 PFP Zone 0 2 5,390 41,080 61,771 72,458 180,701 

3 PUREX Zone 0 0 0 0 7,409 7,144 14,553 

3 REDOX Zone 0 0 0 0 10,343 10,379 20,722 

3 S/U Farm Zone 0 0 0 0 81 0 81 

3 Solid Waste Zone 0 0 0 0 26,085 28,389 54,474 

3 T Plant Zone 0 0 0 0 7,170 7,195 14,365 

3 U Plant Zone 0 40,891 41,129 63,670 103,108 79,206 328,004 

3 Waste Management Zone 0 0 0 0 37,289 58,063 95,352 

3 600 Area (and Misc.) 0 0 73 0 17,483 17,544 35,100 

3 400 Area 0 0 0 0 540 542 1,082 

3 Outer Area 0 41,380 14,606 68,553 92,990 226,880 444,409 

3 Balance of West IA 0 0 1,213 1,015 39,169 16,864 58,261 

3 Balance of East IA 0 45,795 338 2 58,353 43,086 147,574 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 0 9,981 18,902 108,436 56,444 193,763 

2 S&M and Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 11,188 8,067 8,279 8,524 13,360 13,394 62,812 

3 S&M and Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 8,018 7,729 7,898 8,044 608 581 32,878 

3 200 Area S&M 0 0 0 0 11,772 11,860 23,632 

3 400 Area S&M 0 0 0 0 130 131 261 

3 600 Area S&M 0 0 0 0 130 131 261 

3 300 Area S&M 0 0 0 0 264 266 530 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 3,170 338 381 480 456 425 5,250 

2 Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 1,718 4,859 6,963 14,968 7,354 30 35,892 

3 Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 1,718 4,859 6,963 14,968 7,354 30 35,892 

Total 14,137 142,709 107,192 250,101 636,309 661,249 1,811,697 
 C-34 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-17. Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040.01.1) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). 

(2 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. 

ESH&Q = environment, safety, health, and quality. 

FY = fiscal year. 

IA = implementation area. 

PBS = Project Baseline Summary. 

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant. 

PUREX = Plutonium Uranium Extraction (Plant).

REDOX = Reduction-Oxidation (Plant). 

ROD = record of decision. 

S&M = surveillance and maintenance. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-35 

C.1.7 INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES (PBS RL-0040.01.2) SCHEDULE AND 

COST DETAILS 

Table C-18. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040.01.2) Level 3 Scope Summary. 

Level 2 Work 

Element 

Level 3 Work 

Element Scope Summary 

Reliability Projects Reliability Projects 

Includes repair and replacement of infrastructure systems and provides capital 

upgrades to the infrastructure, including larger scale expense projects. This 

includes construction and capital equipment expenditures associated with 

replacements for biological control, crane and rigging, electrical system, 

facilities, Hanford Fire Department, network and telecommunications, sewer 

system, studies and estimates, transportation – CENTRC, transportation 

system, water system, emerging facility and infrastructure upgrades and other 

infrastructure reliability projects. 

HAMMER Ready 

to Serve 

HAMMER Ready to 

Serve 

Includes operations and maintenance activities at the HAMMER facility in 

support of Hanford Site and other training. 

Site-wide Services 

and Other 

Distributed Costs 

Site-wide Services and 

Other Distributed 

Costs

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure and 

services that are charged based on predetermined rates and services directly 

charged to OHCs:

- Examples charged to OHCs include janitorial, facility services, and 

motor carrier services. 

- Examples with predetermined rates include training, reproduction, offsite 

laboratory sample analysis, crane and rigging, fleet maintenance, desktop 

and user services, and telecommunications. 

- Also includes management reserve (an amount of the total contract 

budget withheld for management control purposes by the contractor) and 

contractor’s fee. 

- Also includes technical support services (e.g., audit, regulatory analysis, 

cost and risk analysis, estimating), Tribal Nation support and other small 

contracts. 

NOTE: See Tables C-19 and C-20 for schedule and budget information. 

CENTRC = capital equipment not related to 

construction. 

HAMMER = Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency 

Response. 

OHC = Other Hanford Contractor.
 C-36 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-19. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040.01.2) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). 

Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 

Reliability Projects 589 44,088 52,833 51,614 49,645 48,957 18,467 22,106 19,597 20,024 

HAMMER Ready to Serve 6,549 6,509 6,657 6,821 7,354 7,483 7,018 5,853 5,847 5,982 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 48,131 65,988 93,365 110,960 128,755 177,660 57,070 59,052 58,656 66,229 

Total 55,269 116,585 152,855 169,395 185,754 234,100 82,555 87,011 84,100 92,235 

Fiscal Year 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 

Reliability Projects 21,000 23,055 24,575 24,359 24,468 16,156 17,083 17,577 17,792 18,263 

HAMMER Ready to Serve 6,329 6,684 5,846 5,982 6,191 6,395 6,789 5,865 5,921 6,094 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 44,488 45,923 48,206 49,951 52,052 50,537 53,447 54,343 54,398 55,039 

Total 71,817 75,662 78,627 80,292 82,711 73,088 77,319 77,785 78,111 79,396 

Fiscal Year 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 

Reliability Projects 18,752 19,389 22,954 22,533 23,192 22,763 23,853 22,236 21,848 24,341 

HAMMER Ready to Serve 6,250 6,511 5,699 5,844 6,310 6,181 6,480 4,573 4,477 4,956 

Site-wide Services 59,192 58,530 62,580 61,417 64,566 61,708 63,229 60,335 51,673 41,575 

Total 84,194 84,430 91,233 89,794 94,068 90,652 93,562 87,144 77,998 70,872 

Fiscal Year 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 

Reliability Projects 24,603 25,787 28,943 31,531 30,528 31,855 25,761 25,837 25,628 25,935 

HAMMER Ready to Serve 4,989 5,235 3,740 4,144 4,102 4,491 3,941 2,398 2,498 2,520 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 41,658 42,833 42,108 45,670 43,882 45,933 43,396 44,989 40,627 40,586 

Total 71,250 73,855 74,791 81,345 78,512 82,279 73,098 73,224 68,753 69,041 

Fiscal Year 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 

Reliability Projects 23,460 13,911 14,175 14,559 14,347 11,195 5,743 

HAMMER Ready to Serve 2,268 2,652 4,686 6,128 103 0 0 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 39,459 38,243 39,416 40,806 40,578 0 0 

Total 65,187 54,806 58,277 61,493 55,028 11,195 5,743 

Fiscal Year Total 

Reliability Projects 1,127,907 

HAMMER Ready to Serve 239,345 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 2,589,239 

Total 3,956,491 

HAMMER = Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response (Facility). 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. 

 
 C-37 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-20. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040.01.2) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated).

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

1 Infrastructure and Services, PBS RL-0040.01.2

2 Reliability Projects 589 44,088 52,833 51,614 49,645 48,957 247,726 

3 Reliability Projects 0 41,782 50,548 49,753 45,499 46,273 233,855 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 589 2,306 2,285 1,861 4,146 2,684 13,871 

2 HAMMER Ready to Serve 6,549 6,509 6,657 6,821 7,354 7,483 41,373 

3 HAMMER Ready to Serve 6,549 6,509 6,657 6,821 6,985 7,104 40,625 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 0 0 0 369 379 748 

2 Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 48,131 65,988 93,365 110,960 128,755 177,660 624,859 

3 Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 48,131 65,988 93,365 110,960 128,755 177,660 624,859 

Total 55,269 116,585 152,855 169,395 185,754 234,100 913,958 

HAMMER = Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response. PBS = project baseline summary. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-38 

C.1.8 NUCLEAR FACILITY D&D-RIVER CORRIDOR CLOSURE PROJECT 

(PBS RL-0041) SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS 

Table C-21. Nuclear Facility D&D-River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) Level 3 Scope Summary. 

(3 pages) 

Level 2 Work 

Element 

Level 3 Work 

Element Scope Summary 

D4 Closure

324/327 Area 

(does not 

include 300-296 

remediation) 

Includes D4 of approximately 500 facilities, provision of utility and S&M services 

during D4, and closure of utilities located in the River Corridor. The D4 closure 

buildings are located throughout the River Corridor in the 100 and 300 Areas. Typical 

hazards associated with the buildings include radiological contamination (e.g., 

uranium, mixed fission products, activation products, plutonium), hazardous materials 

(e.g., asbestos, chemicals), and industrial hazards (e.g., elevated working locations, 

degraded roofs, biological hazards, electrical hazards, excavations). The D4 process 

includes obtaining regulatory approvals; characterizing hazards and waste; 

deactivating the facility by removing loose hazardous materials and equipment; 

decontaminating the facility to allow open-air demolition; and decommissioning the 

facility by disconnecting utilities and services. The structure is then demolished using 

techniques such as track hoe, processor, loader, cranes; explosives, cutting equipment, 

or other methods and the demolition debris are disposed, generally to ERDF. 

Following demolition, samples are collected to verify that cleanup criteria are met, 

and the sites are backfilled and revegetated. 

300 Area Sites 

S&M

Periodic surveillance and maintenance activities to maintain safe access to facilities 

undergoing deactivation, to prevent or correct biological vectors at waste sites and to 

maintain compliance with closure conditions or post-closure care requirements. 

Field 

Remediation 

Closure

100-B/C Area Includes performing CERCLA field remediation and closure of contaminated waste 

sites (liquid waste disposal facilities, burial grounds, burn pits, disposal pits, 

unplanned release sites, and contaminated pipelines) in the River Corridor. This 

includes confirmatory sampling, remediation design, RTD activities, verification 

sampling, and closure documentation. The RODs for the Field Remediation Closure 

work scope generally identify RTD as the preferred alternative (RODs are identified 

in Appendix A). In addition to RTD, confirmatory sites were identified that require 

sampling to determine the need for RTD. Following sampling, these sites become 

RTD sites or are closed as no-action sites. Contamination in the waste sites and burial 

grounds of the River Corridor include chemical and radioactive constituents, such as 

metals, hexavalent chromium, petroleum related compounds, strontium, uranium, and 

cesium. The cleanup process involves sampling and analyzing the site to determine 

the extent and type of contamination, excavating contaminated waste materials, and 

restoring the landscape through backfill, grading, and revegetation. 

100-D Area 

100-H Area 

100-N Area 

100 Area 

Remaining Sites 

300 Area Sites 

600 Area

Misc. 

Restoration

Includes field remediation of abandoned aboveground utilities and structures, 

railroads, surplus fencing, and debris, associated restoration of landscape through 

backfilling and grading to match natural contours of the area, restore positive 

drainage, and reestablish native vegetation. 

Management & 

Support 

Provides support of the field remediation mission. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-39 

Table C-21. Nuclear Facility D&D-River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) Level 3 Scope Summary. 

(3 pages) 

Level 2 Work 

Element 

Level 3 Work 

Element Scope Summary 

Waste 

Operations

200 Area Waste 

Operations

Includes the transportation, disposal, and treatment (if required) of waste from the 

River Corridor cleanup activities and other site cleanup operators. Waste operations 

will expand and operate the ERDF, and transition the ERDF to a successor operator at 

the end of the Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project. 

Management & 

Support 

Provides for management function in support of the waste operations mission. 

End State/Final 

Closure

End State/Final 

Closure

Includes preparing an integrated River Corridor work plan for a CERCLA baseline 

risk assessment; preparing a baseline risk assessment for the 100 and 300 Areas; 

conducting a risk evaluation for River Corridor areas outside 100 and 300 Areas; 

conducting orphan site evaluations; conducting surface soil surveys; preparing 

remedial action reports documenting completion of interim remedial actions for each 

geographic area; conducting closure reviews; preparing a remedial 

investigation/feasibility study and proposed plan for six River Corridor source and 

groundwater areas; and preparing transition turnover packages for the six geographic 

areas for transition to Hanford Long-Term Stewardship Program. 

Management & 

Support 

Provides for management function in support of the final closure mission. 

Mission 

Support/ 

General Support 

Project 

Integration 

Consists of functional support and business operations necessary to achieve River 

Corridor Closure and field project objectives. This includes providing trained and

qualified staff, performance standards, facilities services, and office supplies. General 

support functions include safety health and quality, regulatory and environmental 

management, project integration, project services, engineering services, and Office of 

the Project General Manager.

Project Services 

SH&Q 

Engineering 

Regulatory and 

Environmental 

Management 

Office of the 

Project General 

Manager 

PRC River Zone 

Environmental 

100-K 

Regulatory 

Closure 

Documents 

Final remediation of waste sites and D4 of buildings and structures in the 100-K Area 

will be completed when all spent nuclear fuel is removed from the K Basins. Includes 

the interim safe storage of the KE and KW reactors consistent with the other 100 Area 

reactors and project management. 

100-K Group 1 

Remediation 

100-K Group 2 

Remediation 

100-K Group 3 

Remediation 

KW 

Deactivation 

105-KE & 105-

KW Reactor 

Disposition 

100-K Project 

Management 

Site Infrastructure & Utility/ 

Logistics &

Transportation 

B Reactor

Includes management and oversight for B Reactor facility activities, including 

planning, directing, and providing technical support to maintain, upgrade, and 

preserve the B Reactor facility in a safe condition. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-40 

Table C-21. Nuclear Facility D&D-River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) Level 3 Scope Summary. 

(3 pages) 

Level 2 Work 

Element 

Level 3 Work 

Element Scope Summary 

Site-wide 

Services and 

Other 

Distributed 

Costs

Site-wide 

Services and 

Other 

Distributed 

Costs

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure and services 

that are charged based on predetermined rates and services directly charged to OHCs: 

- Examples charged to OHCs include janitorial, facility services, and motor carrier 

services. 

- Examples with predetermined rates include training, reproduction, offsite 

laboratory sample analysis, crane and rigging, fleet maintenance, desktop and user 

services, and telecommunications. 

- Also includes management reserve (an amount of the total contract budget 

withheld for management control purposes by the contractor) pension and 

contractor’s fee. 

- Also includes technical support services (e.g., audit, regulatory analysis, cost and 

risk analysis, estimating), Tribal Nation support and other small contracts. 

NOTE: See Tables C-22 and C-23 for schedule and budget information. 

CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, 

and Liability Act. 

D&D = decontamination and decommissioning. 

D4 = deactivation, decontamination, decommissioning, and 

demolition. 

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. 

KE = K East. 

KW = K West. 

OHC = Other Hanford Contractor. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

PRC = Plateau Remediation Contract. 

ROD = record of decision. 

RTD = remove, treat, and dispose. 

S&M = surveillance and maintenance. 

SH&Q = Safety, Health & Quality. 
 C-41 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-22. Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041), Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year 

($1,000, Escalated).

Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 

D4 Closure 7,033 11,209 48,604 40,336 0 0 0 0 

Field Remediation Closure 95,448 80,407 63,792 63,415 0 0 0 0 

Waste Operations 15,108 32,141 27,379 55,835 0 0 0 0 

End State/Final Closure 4,019 1,691 1,186 1,207 0 0 0 0 

Mission Support/General Support 21,477 39,158 24,164 17,495 0 0 0 0 

PRC River Zone Environment 57,123 117,305 69,021 58,552 52,221 6,845 7,693 11,655 

Site Infrastructure & Utility/Logistics & 

Transportation 2,108 2,094 2,141 2,192 2,143 2,179 0 0 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 96,811 75,944 73,610 68,915 7,052 6,754 7,703 6,522 

Total 299,127 359,949 309,897 307,947 61,416 15,778 15,396 18,177 

Fiscal Year 2023 2024 Total 

D4 Closure 0 0 107,182 

Field Remediation Closure 0 0 303,062 

Waste Operations 0 0 130,463 

End State/Final Closure 0 0 8,103 

Mission Support/General Support 0 0 102,294 

PRC River Zone Environment 7 0 380,422 

Site Infrastructure & Utility/ Logistics & 

Transportation 0 0 12,857 

Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 1,066 115 344,492 

Total 1,073 115 1,388,875 

D4 = deactivation, decontamination, decommission, and demolition. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

PRC = Plateau Remediation Contract. 

 
 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-42 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-23. Nuclear Facility D&D-River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041), Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, 

Escalated). (2 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

1 Nuclear Facility D&D-River Corridor Closure Project, PBS RL-0041

2 D4 Closure 7,033 11,209 48,604 40,336 0 0 107,182 

3 D4-324/327 Area (does not include 300-296 remediation) 0 6,066 43,426 40,018 0 0 89,510 

3 D4-300 Area Sites 174 0 0 318 0 0 492 

3 D4-S&M 6,859 5,143 5,178 0 0 0 17,180 

2 Field Remediation Closure 95,448 80,407 63,792 63,415 0 0 303,062 

3 Field Remediation - 100 B/C Area 210 0 0 0 0 0 210 

3 Field Remediation.- 100 D Area 4,844 0 0 0 0 0 4,844 

3 Field Remediation - 100 H Area 1,370 0 0 0 0 0 1,370 

3 Field Remediation - 100 N Area 1,715 5 0 0 0 0 1,720 

3 Field Remediation - 100 Area Remaining Sites 2,963 6 0 0 0 0 2,969 

3 Field Remediation - 300 Area Sites 31,982 24,095 16,817 0 0 0 72,894 

3 Field Remediation - 600 Area 49,827 44,297 42,522 63,278 0 0 199,924 

3 Field Remediation - Misc Restoration 24 5,000 4,000 0 0 0 9,024 

3 Field Remediation - Management and Support 2,513 7,004 453 137 0 0 10,107 

2 Waste Operations 15,108 32,141 27,379 55,835 0 0 130,463 

3 200 Area Waste Operations 12,868 29,834 25,002 53,387 0 0 121,091 

3 Waste Ops-Management and Support 2,240 2,307 2,377 2,448 0 0 9,372 

2 End State/Final Closure 4,019 1,691 1,186 1,207 0 0 8,103 

3 End State/Final Closure 3,616 1,370 855 866 0 0 6,707 

3 Management and Support 403 321 331 341 0 0 1,396 

2 Mission Support/General Support (MS/GS) 21,477 39,158 24,164 17,495 0 0 102,294 

3 MS/GS-Project Integration 3,426 11,200 10,180 9,148 0 0 33,954 

3 MS/GS-Project Services 9,785 20,906 9,204 5,871 0 0 45,766 

3 MS/GS-Safety, Health and Quality 3,482 3,709 2,511 1,306 0 0 11,008 

3 MS/GS-Engineering 144 470 317 166 0 0 1,097 

3 MS/GS-Regulatory and Environmental Management 1,391 981 661 349 0 0 3,382 

3 MS/GS-Office of the Project Gen. Manager 3,249 1,892 1,291 655 0 0 7,087 

2 PRC River Zone Environment 57,123 117,305 69,021 58,552 52,221 6,845 361,067 

3 100-K Area Regulatory Closure Documents 0 259 71 71 65 290 756 

3 100-K Group 1 Remediation 6,800 90,360 42,729 3,714 13,008 961 157,572 

3 100-K Group 2 Remediation 0 216 1,206 153 2,298 0 3,873 

3 100-K Group 3 Remediation 1,998 3,127 5,264 10,619 2,393 239 23,640 
 C-43 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-23. Nuclear Facility D&D-River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041), Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, 

Escalated). (2 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

3 KW Deactivation 0 3,103 3,156 31,055 24,325 0 61,639 

3 105-KE & 105-KW Reactor Disposition 0 4,735 7,197 3,678 2,555 2,927 21,092 

3 100-K Project Management 48,325 15,505 9,398 9,262 7,577 2,428 92,495 

2 Site Infrastructure & Utility/Logistics & Transportation 2,108 2,094 2,141 2,192 2,143 2,179 12,857 

3 B Reactor 2,108 2,094 2,141 2,192 2,143 2,179 12,857 

2 Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 96,811 75,944 73,610 68,915 7,052 6,754 329,086 

3 Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 96,811 75,944 73,610 68,915 7,052 6,754 329,086 

Total 299,127 359,949 309,897 307,947 61,416 15,778 1,354,114 

D&D = decontamination and decommission. 

D4 = deactivation, decontamination, decommissioning, and demolition. 

KE = K East. 

KW = K West. 

MS/GS = mission support/general support. 

PRC = Plateau Remediation Contractor. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-44 

C.1.9 NUCLEAR FACILITY D&D–FAST FLUX TEST FACILITY PROJECT (PBS RL-0042) 

SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS 

Table C-24. Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) Level 3 Scope Summary. 

Level 2 Work 

Element 

Level 3 Work 

Element Scope Summary 

FFTF Cleanup 

Maintain Safe and 

Compliant FFTF 

Provide monitoring, surveillance, and maintenance of the FFTF while the 

facility is in a cold and dark state pending future D&D activities. 

Transition FFTF Provides the progressive shutdown of facility support systems, including 

sodium, electrical substations, and cooling systems. 

Disposition FFTF 

Sodium 

Includes removing sodium residuals throughout the life of the project, sodium 

shipment and conversion, and operating the Sodium Storage Facility. 

Decommission 

FFTF Complex 

Final closure of the FFTF was published in December 2013 (see Appendix A). 

The scope includes: 

- Demolition of all structures within the 400 Area Protected Area, except for 

reactor containment, to at least 3 feet below grade followed by backfill and 

revegetation; decommissioning waste would be disposed to appropriate 

disposal facilities. 

- Removal and disposition of the above grade containment dome. 

- Grouting of the below grade portion of the reactor containment building and 

the reactor vessel. 

- Installing a RCRA-compliant engineered barrier over the grouted area. 

- Post-closure care would include long-term monitoring of air, groundwater 

and the vadose zone. 

FFTF Project 

Management Provides management in support of the project mission. 

Sodium Reaction 

Facility

Provide design, construction, and turnover to operations of a new facility in the 

Hanford 400 Area to convert FFTF sodium for use as caustic feed to the Waste 

Treatment Plant. 

Infrastructure 

Services Other Includes legal support.

Site-wide 

Services and 

Other Distributed 

Costs

Site-wide 

Services and 

Other Distributed 

Costs

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure and 

services that are charged based on predetermined rates and services directly 

charged to OHCs:

- Examples charged to OHCs include janitorial, facility services, and motor 

carrier services. 

- Examples with predetermined rates include training, reproduction, offsite 

laboratory sample analysis, crane and rigging, fleet maintenance, desktop 

and user services, and telecommunications. 

- Also includes management reserve (an amount of the total contract budget 

withheld for management control purposes by the contractor) and 

contractor’s fee. 

NOTE: See Tables C-25 and C-26 for schedule and budget information. 

D&D = decontamination and decommission. 

FFTF = Fast Flux Test Facility. 

OHC = Other Hanford Contractors. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. 
 C-45 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-25. Nuclear Facility D&D-Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042), Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year 

($1,000, Escalated). 

Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 

FFTF Cleanup 2,520 2,181 2,356 2,379 4,258 2,974 12,323 17,194 86,375 72,543 

Infrastructure Services 37 37 37 37 39 39 41 16 17 22 

Site-wide Services and Other 

Distributed Costs 120 461 455 476 100 958 2,503 3,641 13,132 11,118 

Total 2,677 2,679 2,848 2,892 4,397 3,971 14,867 20,851 99,524 83,683 

Fiscal Year 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 

FFTF Cleanup 73,596 73,110 69,788 78,196 94,478 81,453 52,744 34,280 21,647 64,754 

Infrastructure Services 69 51 53 56 60 61 62 64 65 76 

Site-wide Services and Other 

Distributed Costs 14,459 14,144 15,286 18,626 25,952 25,420 18,864 12,201 8,139 358 

Total 88,124 87,305 85,127 96,878 120,490 106,934 71,670 46,545 29,851 65,188 

Fiscal Year 2035 2036 Total 

FFTF Cleanup 11,111 0 860,260 

Infrastructure Services 308 17 1,264 

Site-wide Services and Other 

Distributed Costs 1 0 186,414 

Total 11,420 17 1,047,938 

FFTF = Fast Flux Test Facility. PBS = project baseline summary. 

Table C-26. Nuclear Facility D&D-Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042), Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year 

($1,000, Escalated).

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

1 Nuclear Facility D&D-Fast Flux Test Facility Project, PBS RL-0042

2 FFTF Cleanup 2,520 2,181 2,356 2,379 4,258 2,974 16,668 

3 Maintain Safe and Compliant FFTF Complex 2,317 1,978 2,127 2,150 2,571 1,758 12,901 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 203 203 229 229 1,687 1,216 3,767 

2 Infrastructure Services 37 37 37 37 39 39 226 

3 Other 25 25 25 25 25 25 150 

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 12 12 12 12 14 14 76 

2 Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 120 461 455 476 100 958 2,570 

3 Site-wide Services and Other Distributed Costs 120 461 455 476 100 958 2,570 

Total 2,677 2,679 2,848 2,892 4,397 3,971 19,464 

D&D = decontamination and decommission. 

FFTF = Fast Flux Test Facility. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-46 

C.1.10 RICHLAND COMMUNITY AND REGULATORY SUPPORT (PBS RL-0100) 

SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS 

Table C-27. Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100) Level 3 Scope Summary. 

Level 2 Work Element Level 3 Work Element Scope Summary 

Regulatory Federal and 

State Grant Support 

Regulatory Federal and 

State Grant Support 

Includes RL support to community activities and regulatory 

agencies, such as the Hanford Advisory Board, the Oregon 

Department of Energy, the Natural Resource Trustee Council, the 

Washington State Department of Ecology, Washington State 

Department of Health, and other entities through grants, permits, 

and payment of fees. Includes studies for Natural Resource 

Damage Assessment but does not include significant restoration of 

natural resources to resolve any liability of the United States for 

Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration. 

NOTE: See Table C-28 for schedule and budget information. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. 
 C-47 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-28. Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100), Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year 

($1,000, Escalated). 

Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 

Richland Community and Regulatory Support 14,701 21,347 21,347 21,347 21,347 21,347 24,158 24,304 24,547 24,793 

Fiscal Year 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 

Richland Community and Regulatory Support 24,504 24,749 24,996 25,246 25,499 25,754 26,011 26,192 26,454 26,719 

Fiscal Year 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 

Richland Community and Regulatory Support 26,986 27,160 27,432 27,706 27,983 28,263 28,445 28,729 29,017 29,307 

Fiscal Year 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 

Richland Community and Regulatory Support 29,600 29,790 30,088 30,389 30,693 30,999 31,309 31,623 29,822 30,120 

Fiscal Year 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 Total 

Richland Community and Regulatory Support 30,421 30,726 31,033 31,343 31,657 1,216,003 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

 C-48 

C.1.11 LONG-TERM STEWARDSHIP (PBS RL-LTS) SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS 

Scope information for Long-Term Stewardship, PBS RL-LTS, is presented in Table C-29. This PBS is 

not broken down to Level 3 scope, and there are no near-term cost details for this PBS due to when the 

work is planned to begin. 

Table C-29. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Level 2 Scope Summary. 

Work Element Scope Description 

Infrastructure and Waste 

Management

Includes operation and maintenance of Hanford Site infrastructure following cleanup 

activities. Specific scope will include supplying electrical and water utilities, operating 

and maintaining emergency services (Hanford Fire Department), and maintaining roads 

as needed to support Hanford Site Long-Term Stewardship activities. Includes operation 

and maintenance of 200 Area liquid effluent facilities in support of groundwater 

treatment and monitoring activities.

Site and Environmental 

Monitoring 

Includes ongoing Hanford Site and environmental monitoring of groundwater, soil, 

vadose zone, and monitoring for public safety and resource protection. 

Post-Closure Surveillance 

and Maintenance, and 

Environmental Compliance 

Includes real estate and Hanford Site planning, land management, and surveillance and 

maintenance activities for the 100 and 200 Areas. Includes activities to ensure 

environmental compliance and protection.

Payment in Lieu of Taxes Includes payment in lieu of taxes. 

Management and 

Administration Provides for management and administration of these Long-Term Stewardship activities. 

NOTE: See Table C-30 for schedule and budget information. 
 C-49 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-30. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated).

Fiscal Year 2060 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065 2066 2067 2068 2069 

Infrastructure 33,957 34,773 35,607 36,460 37,336 38,232 39,150 40,090 41,052 42,036 

Site and Environmental Monitoring 12,192 12,483 12,784 13,089 13,403 13,726 14,056 14,393 14,738 15,092 

Post-Closure Surveillance & Maintenance 27,877 28,547 29,232 29,934 30,652 31,388 32,141 32,913 33,702 34,511 

Payment in Lieu of Taxes 25,571 26,184 26,813 27,456 28,115 28,790 29,481 30,188 30,913 31,655 

Management and Administration 7,403 7,580 7,762 7,949 8,139 8,335 8,535 8,739 8,949 9,164 

Total 107,000 109,567 112,198 114,888 117,645 120,471 123,363 126,323 129,354 132,458 

Fiscal Year 2070 2071 2072 2073 2074 2075 2076 2077 2078 2079 

Infrastructure 43,046 44,079 45,137 46,221 47,329 48,466 49,628 50,819 52,038 53,288 

Site and Environmental Monitoring 15,453 15,825 16,205 16,593 16,993 17,399 17,818 18,246 18,684 19,131 

Post-Closure Surveillance & Maintenance 35,339 36,188 37,056 37,947 38,857 39,788 40,743 41,720 42,722 43,748 

Payment in Lieu of Taxes 32,415 33,193 33,989 34,805 35,640 36,496 37,371 38,268 39,187 40,127 

Management and Administration 9,384 9,609 9,840 10,076 10,318 10,565 10,819 11,079 11,345 11,617 

Total 135,637 138,894 142,227 145,642 149,137 152,714 156,379 160,132 163,976 167,911 

Fiscal Year 2080 2081 2082 2083 2084 2085 2086 2087 2088 2089 

Infrastructure 54,567 55,877 57,217 58,591 59,998 61,437 62,911 64,422 65,968 67,551 

Site and Environmental Monitoring 19,590 20,061 20,542 21,036 21,540 22,057 22,586 23,129 23,683 23,937 

Post-Closure Surveillance & Maintenance 44,799 45,873 46,974 48,100 49,256 50,439 51,649 52,888 54,157 55,458 

Payment in Lieu of Taxes 41,090 42,077 43,086 44,120 45,179 46,264 47,374 48,511 49,675 50,867 

Management and Administration 11,896 12,181 12,473 12,773 13,079 13,393 13,715 14,044 14,381 14,695 

Total 171,942 176,069 180,292 184,620 189,052 193,590 198,235 202,994 207,864 212,508 

Fiscal Year 2090 Total 

Infrastructure 69,171 1,536,454 

Site and Environmental Monitoring 27,533 553,997 

Post-Closure Surveillance & Maintenance 56,788 1,261,386 

Payment in Lieu of Taxes 52,088 1,156,988 

Management and Administration 0 319,837 

Total 205,580 4,828,662 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-50

C.1.12 FINAL REACTOR DISPOSITION SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS

Scope information for Final Reactor Disposition is presented in Table C-31. This work is not broken 

down to Level 3 details, so no additional scope is presented and there are no near-term cost details due to 

when the work is planned to begin.

Table C-31. Final Reactor Disposition Level 2 Scope Summary.

Work Element Scope Description

Final Reactor 

Disposition

Includes final reactor disposition of the 100 Area surplus production reactors (except for 

B Reactor which is part of the newly established Manhattan Project National Historical Park). 

Following a safe storage period of up to 75 years, final reactor disposition would include 

demolition of the interim safe storage enclosure and transport of each of the eight reactor 

blocks intact on a tractor-transporter from its present location in the 100 Areas to the Central 

Plateau Inner Area for disposal. Following reactor removal, the site formerly occupied by 

each reactor would be backfilled, graded, and seeded. Although the final end state of N 

Reactor has not been determined, the planning case is to disposition it the same as the other 

reactors.

NOTE: See Table C-32 for schedule and budget information.

Table C-32. Final Reactor Disposition Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year 

($1,000, Escalated). 

Fiscal Year 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060

Final Reactor Disposition 18,811 37,623 37,623 56,434 94,057 94,057 131,679

Fiscal Year 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065 2066 2067

Final Reactor Disposition 282,170 282,170 282,170 188,113 188,113 94,057 56,434

Fiscal Year 2068

Final Reactor Disposition 37,623

Total 1,881,134

C.2 OFFICE OF RIVER PROTECTION PROJECT BASELINE SUMMARY 

INFORMATION

The DOE, Office of River Protection (ORP) manages their assigned cleanup mission through the 

following PBSs (at Level 1):

 Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition, PBS ORP-0014

 Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant, PBS ORP-0060.

Scope information for PBS ORP-0014 and PBS ORP-0060 is presented in Chapter 5.0 of the LCR. 

No additional scope is presented here. Near-term and estimated costs are presented below.
 C-51 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-33. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal 

Year ($1,000, Escalated). (2 pages) 

Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 

Base Operations 366,504 367,606 393,976 380,201 491,668 472,975 445,198 466,042 455,014 470,787 

Retrieve and Close SSTs 124,749 238,683 225,082 268,002 218,965 126,326 136,402 108,807 71,703 54,898 

Waste Feed Delivery/Treatment 

Planning/ DST Retrieval/Closure 189,059 188,453 226,247 197,348 189,059 187,686 168,954 166,352 175,094 182,991 

Supplemental Treatment 97,424 213,596 304,519 314,010 328,815 30,074 23,061 169,656 171,626 176,101 

Treat Waste 20,310 33,995 105,413 195,452 411,621 410,079 406,116 413,095 420,508 431,471 

Facility Closure 3,484 1,923 912 0 4,604 6,400 2,579 2,893 5,985 45,140 

TOC-ORP Project Support 39,498 43,420 59,917 62,353 48,354 45,702 45,055 45,931 47,175 52,460 

Total 841,028 1,087,676 1,316,066 1,417,366 1,693,086 1,279,242 1,227,365 1,372,776 1,347,105 1,413,848 

Fiscal Year 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 

Base Operations 496,481 485,865 508,862 567,468 539,961 567,671 548,171 576,551 582,061 632,972 

Retrieve and Close SSTs 115,761 115,140 174,473 297,347 206,817 163,133 208,752 266,323 294,811 418,714 

Waste Feed Delivery/Treatment 

Planning/ DST Retrieval/Closure 161,213 151,474 160,483 166,190 163,648 151,104 145,679 146,633 148,179 150,839 

Supplemental Treatment 179,975 183,935 187,981 192,117 195,564 200,663 205,078 210,421 214,200 218,044 

Treat Waste 440,964 450,665 460,580 470,712 479,159 491,651 502,468 515,560 524,820 534,237 

Facility Closure 7,779 4,728 1,394 1,729 1,336 3,214 2,319 1,882 1,844 2,596 

TOC-ORP Project Support 49,210 51,056 51,332 54,637 58,005 56,796 55,192 59,837 60,673 65,146 

Total 1,451,383 1,442,863 1,545,105 1,750,200 1,644,490 1,634,232 1,667,659 1,777,207 1,826,588 2,022,548 

Fiscal Year 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 

Base Operations 652,033 648,967 628,512 640,207 646,168 557,149 484,418 462,563 447,632 439,637 

Retrieve and Close SSTs 470,008 544,391 458,892 456,143 376,012 216,360 175,960 181,185 104,816 69,823 

Waste Feed Delivery/Treatment 

Planning/ DST Retrieval/Closure 157,589 168,247 177,267 204,991 225,125 238,573 265,977 295,916 343,050 335,495 

Supplemental Treatment 222,841 225,396 229,445 234,492 239,651 243,952 250,312 255,819 260,935 267,210 

Treat Waste 545,990 562,448 572,550 585,146 598,020 608,751 624,622 559,604 544,302 528,167 

Facility Closure 11,213 7,983 11,725 4,113 1,326 747 11,530 10,195 15,046 13,392 

TOC-ORP Project Support 64,184 69,834 71,263 68,816 73,029 70,324 72,943 69,655 73,186 73,232 

Total 2,123,858 2,227,266 2,149,654 2,193,908 2,159,331 1,935,856 1,885,762 1,834,937 1,788,967 1,726,956 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 C-52  2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

Table C-33. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal 

Year ($1,000, Escalated). (2 pages) 

Fiscal Year 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 Total 

Base Operations 407,393 300,834 261,134 187,889 93,459 62,484 16,736,513 

Retrieve and Close SSTs 104,364 52,641 45,307 18,166 0 0 7,108,956 

Waste Feed Delivery/Treatment 

Planning/ DST Retrieval/Closure 409,323 238,259 194,255 85,757 17,388 757 6,774,654 

Supplemental Treatment 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,246,913 

Treat Waste 513,673 488,927 500,693 253,327 0 0 15,205,096 

Facility Closure 33,132 83,973 43,314 38,195 11,774 3,253 403,652 

TOC-ORP Project Support 75,827 16,622 12,602 10,295 4,272 2,850 1,880,683 

Total 1,543,712 1,181,256 1,057,305 593,629 126,893 69,344 54,356,467 

DST = double-shell tank. 

ORP = U.S. Department of Energy, Office of River Protection. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

SST = single-shell tank. 

TOC = Tank Operations Contract 

Table C-34. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014), Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year 

($1,000, Escalated). (2 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

1 Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition, PBS ORP-0014

2 Base Operations 366,504 367,606 393,976 380,201 491,668 472,975 2,472,930 

3 Base Operations 88,836 79,520 77,720 83,444 85,499 87,886 502,905 

3 DST Space Management 13,627 10,798 18,442 12,382 9,063 10,755 75,067 

3 TOC Facility Operations 41,214 43,054 57,124 35,537 28,555 27,198 232,682 

3 Tank Farm Upgrades 10,927 21,278 22,186 12,434 10,851 41,150 118,826 

3 Project Support 211,900 212,956 218,504 236,404 357,700 305,986 1,543,450 

2 Retrieve and Close SSTs 124,749 238,683 225,082 268,002 218,965 126,326 1,201,807 

3 Retrieval/Closure Program 28,756 38,954 101,760 82,909 25,217 9,887 287,483 

3 SST Retrieval East Area 51,314 108,421 90,129 81,952 60,813 8,352 400,981 

3 SST Retrieval West Area 0 10,018 6,151 77,784 80,339 21,620 195,912 

3 Closure Program 806 456 627 437 481 472 3,279 

3 SST Closure 43,873 80,834 26,415 24,920 52,115 85,995 314,152 
 C-53 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-34. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014), Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year 

($1,000, Escalated). (2 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

2 Waste Feed Delivery/Treatment Planning/DST 

Retrieval/Closure 189,059 188,453 226,247 197,348 189,059 187,686 1,177,852 

3 WTP Feed Delivery Program 22,203 23,467 24,669 24,879 26,169 26,858 148,245 

3 Construct DST Systems 53,872 41,408 40,057 44,232 57,929 59,175 296,673 

3 Immobilization Program 51,315 32,497 54,628 33,770 18,446 15,537 206,193 

3 WTP Operational Readiness 4,122 4,221 4,322 4,426 344 353 17,788 

3 Tank Waste Pretreatment Project 31,145 39,387 52,772 45,406 45,036 43,750 257,496 

3 Secondary Waste Treatment/ETF 26,402 47,473 49,799 44,635 41,135 42,013 251,457 

2 Supplemental Treatment 97,424 213,596 304,519 314,010 328,815 30,074 1,288,438 

3 Supplemental Treatment 97,424 213,596 304,519 314,010 328,815 30,074 1,288,438 

2 Treat Waste 20,310 33,995 105,413 195,452 411,621 410,079 1,176,870 

3 Waste Treatment Facility 20,310 33,995 105,413 195,452 411,621 410,079 1,176,870 

2 Facility Closures 3,484 1,923 912 0 4,604 6,400 17,323 

3 TFC Facility and Other Closure 3,484 1,923 912 0 4,604 6,400 17,323 

2 Tank Operations Contract - ORP Project Support 39,498 43,420 59,917 62,353 48,354 45,702 299,244 

3 Tank Operations Contract - ORP Project Support 39,498 43,420 59,917 62,353 48,354 45,702 299,244 

Total 841,028 1,087,676 1,316,066 1,417,366 1,693,086 1,279,242 7,634,464 

DST = double-shell tank. 

ETF = Effluent Treatment Facility. 

ORP = U.S. Department of Energy, Office of River Protection. 

PBS = project baseline summary.

SST = single-shell tank. 

TFC = Tank Farm Contractor. 

TOC = Tank Operations Contract. 

WTP = Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant.

Table C-35. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, 

Escalated).

Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

Pretreatment 210,179 131,306 100,888 76,461 103,515 5,436 627,785 

Low-Activity Waste 33,682 80,325 60,474 31,348 42,382 1,208 249,419 

High-Level Waste 134,006 97,297 64,996 64,624 64,501 18,718 444,142 

Balance of Facilities 80,098 52,759 24,728 12,691 10,507 484 181,267 

Analytical Laboratory 26,726 39,691 28,184 17,030 18,590 1,345 131,566 

Shared Services – Plant Wide 236,250 179,672 132,785 52,156 1,660 0 602,523 

Total 720,941 581,050 412,055 254,310 241,155 27,191 2,236,702 

PBS = project baseline summary. 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 C-54  2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

Table C-36. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (4 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

1 Major Construction - Waste Treatment Plant, PBS ORP-0060

2 Pretreatment Facility (PT) 210,179 131,306 100,888 76,461 103,515 5,436 627,785 

3 Engineering Design - PT 1,425 480 0 0 0 0 1,905 

3 Plant Equipment - PT 13,722 8,976 0 0 0 0 22,698 

3 Environmental and Nuclear Safety - PT 2,544 3,444 2,963 2,214 128 0 11,293 

3 Startup - PT 10,982 15,768 0 0 0 0 26,750 

3 Construction Field Non Manual - PT 13,079 3,427 0 0 0 0 16,506 

3 Crafts (Construction) - PT - Civil 12,360 3,625 0 0 0 0 15,985 

3 Crafts (Construction) - PT - Distribs 2,680 656 77 0 0 0 3,413 

3 Crafts (Construction) - PT - Electrical 18,336 4,395 0 0 0 0 22,731 

3 Crafts (Construction) - PT - Mechanical 9,517 396 0 0 0 0 9,913 

3 Crafts (Construction) - PT - Piping and Instrumentation 31,501 7,464 0 0 0 0 38,965 

3 Construction Subcontracts - PT 19,368 3,249 0 0 0 0 22,617 

3 Liner Plate and Vessel Const Subcontract - PT 1,341 0 0 0 0 0 1,341 

3 Special Protective Coating Const Subcontract - PT 599 3 0 0 0 0 602 

3 Intermech Construction Subcontract - PT 2,358 0 0 0 0 0 2,358 

3 Commissioning - PT 18,664 32,688 57,052 33,196 0 0 141,600 

- Fee 17,279 9,343 18,955 29,886 50,137 1,457 127,057 

- Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 34,424 37,392 21,841 11,165 53,250 3,979 162,051 

2 Low-Activity Waste Facility (LAW) 33,682 80,325 60,474 31,348 42,382 1,208 249,419 

3 Engineering Design - LAW 194 19 0 0 0 0 213 

3 Plant Equipment - LAW 0 20,780 95 (23,362) 0 0 (2,487)

3 Equipment Engineering - LAW 14 15 0 0 0 0 29 

3 Environmental and Nuclear Safety - LAW 1,043 2,386 2,219 1,642 33 0 7,323 

3 Research and Technology - LAW 239 247 0 0 0 0 486 

3 Startup - LAW 8,345 2,136 0 0 0 0 10,481 

3 Construction Field Non Manual - LAW 1,318 115 0 0 0 0 1,433 

3 Crafts (Construction) - LAW - Distribs 1,082 339 40 0 0 0 1,461 

3 Commissioning - LAW 11,330 29,573 38,461 41,717 0 0 121,081 
 C-55 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-36. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (4 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

- Fee 914 3,191 10,114 18,304 23,613 1,257 57,393 

- Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 9,203 21,524 9,545 (6,953) 18,736 (49) 52,006 

2 High-Level Waste Facility (HLW) 134,006 97,297 64,996 64,624 64,501 18,718 444,142 

3 Engineering Design - HLW 1,235 563 20 0 0 0 1,818 

3 Plant Equipment - HLW 12,277 725 4,857 (13,880) 0 0 3,979 

3 Equipment Engineering - HLW 34 177 89 0 0 0 300 

3 Environmental and Nuclear Safety - HLW 2,209 3,337 2,523 1,969 95 0 10,133 

3 Research and Technology - HLW 370 252 261 135 0 0 1,018 

3 Startup - HLW 255 11,151 5,560 0 0 0 16,966 

3 Construction Field Non Manual - HLW 8,868 3,504 0 0 0 0 12,372 

3 Crafts (Construction) - HLW - Civil 10,700 3,154 0 0 0 0 13,854 

3 Crafts (Construction) - HLW - Distribs 1,679 549 60 0 0 0 2,288 

3 Crafts (Construction) - HLW - Electrical 10,714 7,527 0 0 0 0 18,241 

3 Crafts (Construction) - HLW - Mechanical 7,449 2,275 0 0 0 0 9,724 

3 Crafts (Construction) - HLW - Piping and Instrumentation 18,588 6,387 0 0 0 0 24,975 

3 Construction Subcontracts - HLW 15,671 4,835 0 0 0 0 20,506 

3 Liner Plate and Vessel Const Subcontract - HLW 14 0 0 0 0 0 14 

3 Special Protective Coating Const Subcontract - HLW 1,082 0 0 0 0 0 1,082 

3 Intermech Construction Subcontract - HLW 4,306 2,878 0 0 0 0 7,184 

3 Commissioning - HLW 8,368 15,456 27,350 41,118 0 0 92,292 

- Fee 6,189 6,177 12,324 26,596 21,091 14,816 87,193 

- Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 23,998 28,350 11,952 8,686 43,315 3,902 120,203 

2 Balance of Facilities (BOF) 80,098 52,759 24,728 12,691 10,507 484 181,267 

3 Engineering Design - BOF 466 22 25 0 0 0 513 

3 Plant Equipment - BOF 18,633 0 0 0 0 0 18,633 

3 Environmental and Nuclear Safety - BOF 484 502 432 280 16 0 1,714 

3 Startup - BOF 9,153 5,497 0 0 0 0 14,650 

3 Construction Field Non Manual - BOF 5,236 3,000 0 0 0 0 8,236 

3 Crafts (Construction) - BOF 12,070 5,265 62 0 0 0 17,397 

3 Crafts (Construction) - BOF - Distribs 834 301 26 0 0 0 1,161 

3 Construction Subcontracts - BOF 4,184 2,709 144 0 0 0 7,037 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 C-56  2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

Table C-36. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (4 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

3 Commissioning - BOF 13,258 22,122 20,996 16,768 0 0 73,144 

- Fee 3,935 1,902 3,510 2,195 1,059 529 13,130 

- Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 11,845 11,439 (467) (6,552) 9,432 (45) 25,652 

2 Analytical Laboratory (Lab) 26,726 39,691 28,184 17,030 18,590 1,345 131,566 

3 Engineering Design - Lab 50 0 0 0 0 0 50 

3 Plant Equipment - Lab 1,671 1,398 0 0 0 0 3,069 

3 Environmental and Nuclear Safety - Lab 792 773 689 561 32 0 2,847 

3 Startup - Lab 643 0 0 0 0 0 643 

3 Crafts (Construction) - Lab - Distribs 195 66 7 0 0 0 268 

3 Commissioning - Lab 19,546 28,499 27,408 22,960 0 0 98,413 

- Fee 1,089 1,508 4,678 2,997 5,679 1,332 17,283 

- Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 2,740 7,447 (4,598) (9,488) 12,879 13 8,993 

2 Plant Wide 236,250 179,672 132,785 52,156 1,660 0 602,523 

3 Safety Assurance - General 2,678 2,941 2,916 3,011 41 0 11,587 

3 Procurement & Subcontracts Freight - Plant Wide 403 215 115 12 0 0 745 

3 Project Controls - General 8,145 7,038 5,082 3,015 121 0 23,401 

3 Engineering Design - Plant Wide 3,105 1,001 409 36 14 0 4,565 

3 Engineering Design LOE - Plant Wide 5,300 3,729 3,368 2,394 306 0 15,097 

3 Engineering Management - Plant Wide 3,893 297 260 0 0 0 4,450 

3 Equipment Engineering - Plant Wide 2,464 228 175 176 11 0 3,054 

3 Environmental & Nuclear Safety - Plant Wide 6,202 4,970 4,318 5,738 448 0 21,676 

3 Environmental & Nuclear Safety LOE - Plant Wide 3,358 3,426 2,581 2,546 220 0 12,131 

3 Material Craft Services - Plant Wide 1,108 120 0 0 0 0 1,228 

3 Procurement & Subcontracts - Procurement - Shared Services 6,555 3,810 1,516 770 0 0 12,651 

3 Quality Assurance - General 7,521 6,534 6,464 3,488 55 0 24,062 

3 Process Engineering and Flowsheet Modeling - Plant Wide 701 302 33 913 93 0 2,042 

3 Startup - Plant Wide 4,642 3,268 605 0 0 0 8,515 

3 Shared Services - General 43,266 40,787 33,747 25,670 766 0 144,236 

3 Construction Field Non Manual – Shared Services 33,797 26,366 12,316 4,923 0 0 77,402 
 C-57 

2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

Table C-36. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (4 pages) 

Schedule 

Level Scope 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 

3 Crafts (Construction) - Shared Services - Distribs 17,783 (7,386) (6,961) 0 0 0 3,436 

3 Construction Subcontracts - Plant Wide 4,412 3,494 0 0 0 0 7,906 

3 Construction Subcontracts - Shared Services - Distribs 3,689 1,230 0 0 0 0 4,919 

3 Intermech Construction Subcontract - Plant Wide 111 0 0 0 0 0 111 

3 Bulk Material (Civil) - Plant Wide 135 461 0 0 0 0 596 

3 Bulk Material (Electrical) - Plant Wide 4,608 2 0 0 0 0 4,610 

3 Bulk Material (Piping & Instrumentation) - Plant Wide 19 0 0 0 0 0 19 

3 Commissioning - General 68,644 72,948 63,420 (2,146) (520) 0 202,346 

3 Project Operations - General 3,711 3,891 2,421 1,610 105 0 11,738 

Total 720,941 581,050 412,055 254,310 241,155 27,191 2,236,702 1

 Negative numbers are Bechtel National, Inc., planned give backs.

BOF = Balance of Facilities. 

HLW = High-Level Waste (Facility). 

LAB = Analytical Laboratory. 

LAW = Low-Activity Waste (Facility). 

LOE = level of effort. 

ORP = U.S. Department of Energy, Office of River Protection. 

PBS = project baseline summary. 

PT = Pretreatment (Facility). 
DOE/RL-2014-11, Rev. 0 

 C-58  2015 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

This page intentionally left blank.