DOE/RL-2013-02

Revision 1

2014 HANFORD LIFECYCLE 

SCOPE, SCHEDULE AND COST 

REPORT

Date Published

January 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

 Approved for Public Release;

Further Dissemination Unlimited

By Janis D. Aardal at 7:10 am, Jan 29, 2014
DOE/RL-2013-02

Revision 1

LEGAL DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an 

agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States 

Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor 

any of their contractors, subcontractors or their employees, makes any 

warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or 

responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or any third party's use 

or the results of such use of any information, apparatus, product, or 

process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe 

privately owned rights. 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. The views and 

opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect 

those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

This report has been reproduced from the best available copy. 

Printed in the United States of America
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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), including the Richland 

Operations Office (RL) and Office of River Protection (ORP). 

The LCR will be prepared and submitted 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 

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) (the “Consent 

Decree”), and 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 2014 LCR is the fourth version and information reflects scope, schedule and cost status that 

is current as of December 1, 2013 (exceptions, such as for the ORP certified baseline, 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 Tri-Party 

Agencies will make the 2014 LCR available to all interested parties on the DOE website at 

www.hanford.gov. Feedback regarding the 2014 LCR will be considered as future reports are 

developed. Feedback can be emailed to lcssc@rl.gov.

 

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 Milestone M-036-01 was negotiated as part of broader negotiations that occurred between the parties, culminating in the abovereferenced 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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

ES-2

Milestone Requirements

TPA Milestone M-036-01 requires that the LCR include all cleanup, monitoring, and related 

actions necessary to complete cleanup, and that it takes critical resource availability and the 

practical limits of project acceleration into consideration. 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 (located geographically within the Central Plateau). 

The cleanup also includes Mission Support activities that provide essential infrastructure and

services to Hanford cleanup. 

Hanford’s remaining 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)2014 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. DOE 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 the 2013 LCR, 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.

The Hanford remaining estimated cleanup costs3total approximately $113.6 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 2013 LCR total cost estimate was $114.8 billion. The cost decrease of $1.2 billion in the 

2014 LCR is attributed to scope completed in FY2013 and planning estimate refinements in RL 

scope.

The remaining estimated cleanup costs do not include the upper bound cost estimates prepared 

for selected future cleanup actions in the 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 that the 2014 LCR

would not include an alternative analysis. 

 

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-2013-02, Rev. 1

201

4 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).

$0.0

$1.0

$2.0

$3.0

$4.0

2014 2018 2022 2026 2030 2034 2038 2042 2046 2050 2054 2058 2062 2066 2070 2074 2078 2082 2086 2090

Costs (Billion $)

Fiscal Year

See Appendix C for cost and schedule data.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

ES-4

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

Project Work Scope

Estimated 

Cleanup Costs

1

(Billion $)

NM Stabilization and Disposition – PFP (PBS RL-0011) $0.4 - $0.8

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

Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition - 200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) $7.0 - $7.2

Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) $3.2

Soil and Water Remediation - Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) $8.1 - $8.6

Nuclear Facility D&D - Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040) $13.3 - $16.7

Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) $6.8 - $6.9

Nuclear Facility D&D - River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) $1.7

Nuclear Facility D&D - Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) $0.8

Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100) $2.0

Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) $55.0

Major Construction - Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) $3.1

Hanford Site Total Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs $101.9 - $106.4

Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS)2$5.4

Final Reactor Disposition2$1.9

DOE-Office of Environmental Management Total Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs $109.2 - $113.6

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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........................................................ 1-3

1.2.1 Tribal Involvement................................................................................... 1-3

1.2.2 Oregon Department of Energy................................................................. 1-3

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

1.3 HANFORD CLEANUP OVERVIEW ................................................................ 1-4

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

1.3.2 Hanford Cleanup and Management Areas............................................... 1-5

1.4 CLEANUP DECISIONS AND ALTERNATIVES............................................. 1-8

1.5 CHANGES FROM PREVIOUS REPORT ....................................................... 1-10

1.5.1 Incorporated Changes ............................................................................ 1-10

1.5.2 Future Report Changes .......................................................................... 1-10

1.6 LIFECYCLE REPORT AND HANFORD BUDGET SCHEDULE................. 1-11

1.7 PLANNING AND INTEGRATION OVERVIEW........................................... 1-11

1.7.1 Annual Budget Formulation Process..................................................... 1-11

1.7.2 U.S. Department of Energy Project Formulation Process ..................... 1-12

1.8 SCOPE, SCHEDULE AND COST FOR HANFORD CLEANUP................... 1-14

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) ......................... 3-8

3.3 FINAL REACTOR DISPOSITION .................................................................... 3-9

3.4 RIVER CORRIDOR CLEANUP ASSUMPTIONS AND 

UNCERTAINTIES............................................................................................ 3-14

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

4.1 NM STABILIZATION AND DISPOSITION–PFP (PBS RL-0011).................. 4-2

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) .................................................................................................. 4-13

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

(PBS RL-0042) .................................................................................................. 4-17

4.5 SOLID WASTE STABILIZATION AND DISPOSITION–200 AREA 

(PBS RL-0013C)................................................................................................ 4-21

4.6 CENTRAL PLATEAU CLEANUP ASSUMPTIONS AND 

UNCERTAINTIES............................................................................................ 4-27
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

ii

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).................................................................................................. 5-9

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

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

6.1 SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY (PBS RL-0020)........................................... 6-2

6.2 RICHLAND COMMUNITY AND REGULATORY SUPPORT 

(PBS RL-0100) .................................................................................................... 6-4

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

6.3.1 Reliability Projects, HAMMER, and RL Directed Activities.................. 6-6

6.3.2 Site-wide Services.................................................................................. 6-10

6.4 LONG-TERM STEWARDSHIP (PBS RL-LTS).............................................. 6-10

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

Figure 1-2. Relationship Between DOE Budget Planning and LCR Schedule. ....................... 1-11

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

Figure 2-2. Hanford Site Estimated Cleanup Cost Distribution by DOE Field Office............... 2-4

Figure 2-3. Hanford Site Remaining Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. ......................................... 2-5

Figure 2-4. Hanford Site Remaining Cleanup Costs by Project Baseline Summary.................. 2-6

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 Cleanup Schedule. ................................................................................. 3-3
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

iii

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

Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year............................................... 3-6

Figure 3-5. Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) 

Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element.......................................... 3-7

Figure 3-6. SNF Stabilization and Disposition Project (PBS RL-0012) 

Remaining Cleanup Schedule. ................................................................................. 3-8

Figure 3-7. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Remaining Estimated 

Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. ............................................................................... 3-10

Figure 3-8. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Remaining Estimated 

Cleanup Costs by Work Element. .......................................................................... 3-11

Figure 3-9. Final Reactor Disposition Remaining Cleanup Schedule. ..................................... 3-12

Figure 3-10. Final Reactor Disposition Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal 

Year. ....................................................................................................................... 3-13

Figure 4-1. Central Plateau Remaining Cleanup Schedule......................................................... 4-2

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

Schedule. .................................................................................................................. 4-4

Figure 4-3. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Remaining 

Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. ................................................................ 4-5

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

Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element. ........................................................... 4-6

Figure 4-5. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) 

Remaining Cleanup Schedule. ................................................................................. 4-8

Figure 4-6. Soil and Water Remediation-Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) 

Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year............................................. 4-11

Figure 4-7. Soil and Water Remediation-Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) 

Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element........................................ 4-12

Figure 4-8. Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Cleanup 

Schedule. ................................................................................................................ 4-14

Figure 4-9. Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Estimated 

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

Figure 4-10. Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Estimated 

Cleanup Costs by Work Element. .......................................................................... 4-16

Figure 4-11. Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility (PBS RL-0042) Remaining 

Cleanup Schedule. .................................................................................................. 4-18

Figure 4-12. Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) 

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

Figure 4-13. Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) 

Remaining Estimated Costs by Work Element. ..................................................... 4-20
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

iv

Figure 4-14. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) 

Remaining Cleanup Schedule. ............................................................................... 4-22

Figure 4-15. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) 

Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year............................................. 4-25

Figure 4-16. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) 

Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element........................................ 4-26

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. Tank Waste Remaining Cleanup Schedule.............................................................. 5-5

Figure 5-4. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition 

(PBS ORP-0014) Remaining Cleanup Schedule...................................................... 5-6

Figure 5-5. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition 

(PBS ORP-0014) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year. ................. 5-7

Figure 5-6. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition 

(PBS ORP-0014) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element............. 5-8

Figure 5-7. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Remaining 

Schedule. .................................................................................................................. 5-9

Figure 5-8. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Remaining 

Estimated Costs by Fiscal Year.............................................................................. 5-11

Figure 5-9. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Remaining 

Estimated Costs by Work Element......................................................................... 5-12

Figure 6-1. Mission Support Remaining Cleanup Schedule....................................................... 6-1

Figure 6-2. Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) Remaining Cleanup Schedule. ............... 6-2

Figure 6-3. Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) Remaining Estimated Costs by 

Fiscal Year................................................................................................................ 6-3

Figure 6-4. Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100) Remaining 

Schedule. .................................................................................................................. 6-4

Figure 6-5. Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100) Remaining 

Estimated Costs by Fiscal Year................................................................................ 6-5

Figure 6-6. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Schedule. ......................... 6-6

Figure 6-7. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Estimated Costs by 

Fiscal Year................................................................................................................ 6-8

Figure 6-8. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Estimated Costs by 

Work Element........................................................................................................... 6-9

Figure 6-9. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Remaining Schedule............................. 6-12

Figure 6-10. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Remaining Estimated Costs by 

Fiscal Year.............................................................................................................. 6-13
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

v

Figure 6-11. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Remaining Estimated Costs by 

Work Element......................................................................................................... 6-14

TABLES

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

Table 1-2. Cleanup Goals Identified for the Hanford Site.1....................................................... 1-5

Table 1-3. Cleanup Actions for which Final Decisions Have Not Been Made. ......................... 1-9

Table 1-4. Hanford Site Cleanup Project Baseline Summary................................................... 1-14

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

Level 3.................................................................................................................... 1-15

Table 1-6. Example of a Level 6 Work Breakdown Structure. ................................................ 1-15

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........................................ 2-7

Table 3-1. Reactor Status. (2 pages)........................................................................................... 3-2

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

2 Scope. (2 pages) .................................................................................................... 3-4

Table 3-3. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Level 2 Scope Summary.......... 3-9

Table 4-1. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) 

Level 2 Scope Summary. (2 pages).......................................................................... 4-3

Table 4-2. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) 

Level 2 Scope Summary. (2 pages)......................................................................... 4-9

Table 4-3. Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040) 

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

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

Level 2 Scope Summary......................................................................................... 4-18

Table 4-5. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) 

Level 2 Scope Summary. (2 pages)........................................................................ 4-23

Table 5-1. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition 

(PBS ORP-0014) Level 2 Scope Summary.............................................................. 5-6

Table 5-2. Major Construction–Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) 

Level 2 Scope Summary. (2 pages).......................................................................... 5-9

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

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

Level 2 Scope Summary........................................................................................... 6-4
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

vi

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

pages)........................................................................................................................ 6-6

Table 6-4. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Level 2 Scope Summary. ....................... 6-12
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

vii

TERMS

ABAR aggregate barrier

CCP Central Characterization Project

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

G&A General and Administrative

GSSC General Support Services Contract

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
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

viii

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

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

SAP Service Assessment Pool

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

UBS usage-based service

USDOE U.S. Department of Energy

WBS work breakdown structure

WCH Washington Closure Hanford

WESF Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility

WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot Plant

WMA waste management area

WRAP Waste Receiving and Processing (Facility)

WSCF Waste Sampling and Characterization Facility

WTP Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant

WTPC Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Contract
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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 Milestone 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 2014. This report reflects scope, schedule and cost estimate 

information from fiscal year (FY)2014 to FY2090. The 2014 LCR information reflects scope, 

schedule and costs that are current as of December 1, 2013, 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 Milestone 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 Milestone M-036-01 includes a number of requirements for the LCR. Table 1-1 provides 

the full text of the approved TPA Milestone 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).
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

1-3

1.2 PREPARING THE LIFECYCLE REPORT

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

1.2.1 Tribal Involvement

Four Tribal Nations are involved in the Hanford Site cleanup: 

 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. 

 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. 

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

 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.

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 sustain an active dialogue with Oregon representatives about decisions and 

activities affecting cleanup at Hanford.

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 that DOE prepare information similar to the 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; and No. 267 was issued June 7, 2013.

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

1-4

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.

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 stated 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. They carry forward key values captured in earlier forums such as 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

1-5

the Hanford Future Site Uses Working Group, 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.

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:

 Protect groundwater and the Columbia River

 Shrink the active cleanup footprint to the Central Plateau

 Support anticipated future land uses.

Goal 4:

Clean up Central Plateau waste sites and facilities to:

 Protect groundwater and the Columbia River

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

 Support anticipated future land uses.

Goal 5:

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

 Safely store tank waste until it is retrieved for treatment

 Safely and effectively immobilize tank waste

 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. 

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 known as the 

Hanford Reach 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. 

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 (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 

 

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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

1-6

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, contains 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 decision 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,

which includes the Inner Area (~10 square miles) and the Outer Area (~65 square miles). The 

Inner Area contains the 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 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

1-7

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.

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 59 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 minimize 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 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 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, including additional

underground tanks, 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 national monument lands.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

1-8

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 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 Milestone M-036-01:

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

final decisions?

 Alternatives. How are alternatives considered when making cleanup decisions and 

determining what cleanup actions should be performed?

 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 the future 

cleanup actions. Table 1-3 lists the cleanup actions for which final cleanup decisions have not yet 

been made.

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

1-9

Table 1-3. Cleanup Actions for which Final Decisions Have Not Been Made.

River Corridor Cleanup Actions

 Disposition N Reactor.

 Disposition 100 Area K West Basin.

 Remediate 100 Area Contaminated Soil Sites.

 Restore 100-BC-5 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use.

 Restore 100-KR-4 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use.

 Restore 100-NR-2 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use.

 Restore 100-HR-3 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use.

 Restore 100-FR-3 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use.

 Disposition 300 Area Facilities Retained by PNNL.

 Disposition 100 Area former Orchard Contaminated 

Soil Sites (100-OL-1 OU).

Central Plateau Cleanup Actions

 Disposition Remaining Outer Area Buildings and 

Facilities (200-OA-1 OU).

 Remediate Remaining Outer Area Contaminated Soil 

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

 Disposition Below-Grade Portions of Plutonium 

Finishing Plant.

 Disposition B Plant Canyon Building/Associated Waste 

Sites (200-CB-1 OU).

 Disposition PUREX Canyon Building/Associated 

Waste Sites (200-CP-1 OU).

 Disposition PUREX Storage Tunnels (200-CP-1 OU).

 Disposition REDOX Canyon Building/Associated 

Waste Sites (200-CR-1 OU).

 Disposition T Plant Canyon Building/Associated Waste 

Sites.

 Disposition Cesium/Strontium Capsules.

 Remediate 200-SW-1 OU.

 Disposition Remaining Liquid Waste Disposal 

Facilities.

 Disposition Remaining Waste Treatment, Storage, and 

Disposal Facilities.

 Remediate Pipelines, Pits, Diversion Boxes and 

Associated Tanks (200-IS-1 OU).

 Remediate Land Disposal Units (200-SW-2 OU).

 Remediate Remaining 200 West Inner Area 

Contaminated Soil Sites (200-WA-1 OU).

 Remediate Remaining 200 East Inner Area 

Contaminated Soil Sites (200-EA-1 OU).

 Disposition FFTF Complex.

 Disposition Remaining Buildings and Facilities within 

FFTF Complex.

 Disposition Remaining Inner Area Buildings and 

Facilities.

 Remediate Contaminated Deep Vadose Zone 

(200-DV-1 OU).

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

Beneficial Use.

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

OUs) to Beneficial Use.

Tank Waste Cleanup Actions

 Tank Retrieval and Single-Shell Tank Farm Closure.

 Tank Waste Treatment.

 Secondary Waste Treatment.

 Double-Shell Tank Closure.

 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 Tri-Party Agencies have agreed the LCR should consider development of in-depth 

information about some of the future cleanup actions (for which final decisions have not been 

made). The Tri-Party Agencies identified approximately 37 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 2014 LCR

would not include an alternative analysis.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

1-10

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 2013 LCR are available on the DOE website at www.hanford.gov.

Significant changes made in the 2014 LCR include the following:

 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 

December 1, 2013.

 Clarified that when PBS RL-0041 Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project

ends in FY2019 the remaining work scope (including B Reactor support) will transition to 

PBS RL-0040 Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford.

 Descriptions for the work elements RL Directed Activities, Usage-Based Services 

Distributions, and Usage-Based Services, General and Administrative (G&A), Direct 

Distributions have been added to the scope summary tables for each PBS and in Appendix C.

 Added the prime contract responsibility to the PBS summaries in Table 2-1.

 Clarified that T Plant is acceptable for interim sludge storage in Section 3.2.

 Clarified in Section 6.1 that when PBS RL-0020 Safeguards and Security ends in 2059, then 

protection of human health and the environment transfers to long-term stewardship

(PBS RL-LTS).

 Reduced the size of the report and made it easier to read.

1.5.2 Future Report Changes

The scope, schedule and cost information presented in this LCR is current as of December 1, 

2013. This section summarizes regulatory decisions and other changes that may have occurred or 

been completed after the December 1, 2013 cutoff date. Other pending changes that are not 

reflected in this LCR but will be incorporated in future reports are also noted.

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

planning case is the same as that presented in the 2013 LCR. Any future changes to the planning 

cases will be incorporated in future reports.

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 have recently been released for the 300 Area Record of Decision (ROD) and 

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 2013). The scope, schedule and costs of these decisions will be 

integrated in future LCRs.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

1-11

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 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 field offices to HQ in 

early spring and continue with post-formulation monitoring and responding to questions to 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

1-12

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.

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

for the next Federal fiscal year, based on final Presidential funding and 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, and other information such as 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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

1-13

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.

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 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

1-14

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 1-5 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 1-4. Hanford Site Cleanup Project Baseline Summary.

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

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

1-15

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 rolls up to 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 decision making, 

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 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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

1-16

This page intentionally left blank.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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 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 where in the LCR 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). 

Includes 105-KW SNF Basin 

deactivation and removal work 

scope which was shifted from 

RL-0012 in FY2012.

RCCC

River 

Corridor 

(Section 3.2)

RL-0012 SNF Stabilization and 

Disposition

K Basins Closure 

Project

Removal of the K Basin sludges, 

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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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 storage, treatment, 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.

MSC

Mission 

Support 

(Section 6.4)

RL-LTS Long-Term 

Stewardship (LTS)

Post-cleanup LTS 2Infrastructure 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. Figure 2-1 depicts the remaining 

schedule for the primary cleanup components. 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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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 FY2067 (including schedule uncertainty). 

Figure 2-1. Hanford Site Remaining Cleanup Schedule.

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 FY2063. RL also has planned for an 

LTS period that runs from FY2060 through FY2090 as part of Mission Support. 

2.3 HANFORD SITE ESTIMATED CLEANUP COSTS

The remaining cleanup costs5are estimated to be about $113.6 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 $55.5 billion of the total costs and ORP’s

scope accounts for about $58.1 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.

 

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.

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.

FY2010 FY2020 FY2030 FY2040 FY2050 FY2060 FY2070 FY2080 FY2090 FY2100

Scale dates represent start of fiscal year

Long-Term Stewardship*

Final Reactor Disposition

* See Section 6.3.2 for the current Long-Term Stewardship program.

Mission Support

River Corridor Cleanup

Central Plateau Cleanup
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

2-4

Figure 2-2 summarizes the estimated remaining cleanup cost distribution 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.

DOE-RL 

$55.5 billion

DOE-ORP 

$58.1 billion

Hanford Site

Remaining Cost

Estimate

FY 2014 - FY 2090

$113.6 billion
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

2-5

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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

$0.0

$1.0

$2.0

$3.0

$4.0

2014 2018 2022 2026 2030 2034 2038 2042 2046 2050 2054 2058 2062 2066 2070 2074 2078 2082 2086 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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

2-6

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

$0.0

$1.0

$2.0

Costs (Billion $)

Fiscal Year

NFD&D = Nuclear Facility D&D

I&S = Infrastructure and Services

NFD&D = Nuclear Facility D&D

I&S = Infrastructure and Services

See Appendix C for cost and schedule data.

NFD&D = Nuclear Facility D&D

I&S = Infrastructure and Services
DOE/RL-2012-13, Rev. 1

2013 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

2-7

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

Project Work Scope

Estimated Cleanup 

Costs

1

(Billion $)

RL Total Remaining Estimated Costs $51.1 - $55.5

NM Stabilization and Disposition – PFP (PBS RL-0011) $0.4 - $0.8

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

Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition - 200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) $7.0 - $7.2

Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) $3.2

Soil and Water Remediation - Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) $8.1 - $8.6

Nuclear Facility D&D - Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040) $13.3 - $16.7

Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) $6.8 - $6.9

Nuclear Facility D&D - River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) $1.7

Nuclear Facility D&D - Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) $0.8

Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100) $2.0

Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) $5.4

Final Reactor Disposition $1.9

ORP Total Remaining Estimated Costs $58.1

Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) $55.0

Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) $3.1

Total Remaining Estimated Costs $109.2 - $113.6

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.

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

2-8

This page intentionally left blank.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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:

 100 Areas – Location of nine former production reactors, associated support facilities, and 

related waste sites.

 300 Area – Location of research, development, and fuel fabrication facilities, and related 

waste sites.

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

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

 600 Area – Location of two major burial grounds (618-10 and -11) with some 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, which 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 underway 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 conducted in 

accordance with interim and final records of decision (RODs) and action memoranda as listed in 

Appendix A. Work schedule milestones and target dates are listed in Appendix D of the TPA 

Action Plan (see http://www.hanford.gov/files.cfm/ap-App-D.pdf). These TPA milestones 

provide the structure that the Tri-Party Agencies have agreed to for Hanford priorities and scope 

sequencing. 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

3-2

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 3-1 provides the status of the reactors. Note 

B Reactor’s status as a National Historic Landmark. 

 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.

Table 3-1. Reactor Status. (2 pages)

Reactor Status Remaining Activity

B

Named National Historic Landmark by U.S. 

Department of Interior in 2008. Reactor open for 

escorted public tours.

In July 2011, the National Park Service recommended to 

Congress inclusion of B Reactor into a Manhattan Project 

National Historic Park.

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 

Reactor ISS was started in 2011 and is scheduled for 

completion by 2019; final disposition of reactor block.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

3-3

Table 3-1. Reactor Status. (2 pages)

Reactor Status Remaining Activity

storage enclosure.

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 2022; final disposition 

of reactor block.

N Reactor placed in ISS. Final end state of the reactor has not been determined.

ISS = interim safe storage.

Figure 3-3 depicts the primary Level 2 work elements within the Nuclear Facility D&D–River 

Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) remaining cleanup schedule. Table 3-2 summarizes the 

scope for the Level 2 work elements.

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

Schedule.

Nuclear Facility D&D-River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) Remaining Cleanup Schedule

Regulatory decisions are in place for the majority of the Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project 

work scope. These decisions identify the remove, treat as needed, and dispose alternative for waste sites; 

deactivation, decontamination, decommission, and demolition for the buildings and structures; and enhanced 

attenuation of uranium using sequestration in the vadose zone, periodically rewetted zone and top of the 

aquifer. The reactors will be placed in interim safe storage pending a future action to move them to the 

Central Plateau. 

PRC River Zone Environmental

WCH Indirect Costs

Field Remediation Closure

Waste Operations

End State/Final Closure

Mission Support/General Support

D4 Closure

FY2014 FY2016 FY2018 FY2024

See Appendix C Tables C-22 and C-23 for cost and schedule data.

FY2020 FY2022

Site-wide Services

Management Reserve

Site Infrastructure & Utility/Logistics & Transportation

UBS Distributions

RL Directed Activities
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

3-4

Table 3-2. 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 ~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, 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 site backfill, grading, and revegetation.

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.

WCH Indirect Costs Includes WCH performance and incentive fee.

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

3-5

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

Work Element Scope Description

Site-wide Services Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See Section 6.3.2 

for details.

RL Directed 

Activities

Includes administrative and technical support provided to the project through the General 

Support Services Contract, service assessment pool, and other activities. Details are 

provided in Table C-21.

Usage-Based Service 

Distributions

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.

Management Reserve Includes contractor’s fee, management reserve and Government & Administrative 

allocations.

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, 42 USC 9601.

CERCLA= Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act.

D4 = deactivation, decontamination, decommission, 

and demolition.

D&D = decontamination and decommission.

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility.

ISS = interim safe storage.

PBS = project baseline summary.

ROD = record of decision.

RTD = remove, treat, and dispose.

RL = Richland Operations Office.

WCH = Washington Closure Hanford.

Figure 3-4 presents the remaining cleanup costs for PBS RL-0041 by fiscal year, and Figure 3-5

presents the remaining estimated costs by work element. 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

3-6

Figure 3-4. Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year.

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

2022

2023

2024

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

3-7

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Figure 3-5. Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element.

$0

$50

$100

$150

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year

See Appendix C, Table C-22 for cost and schedule data.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

3-8

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 sludges, 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: 

 All SNF will be removed from K Basins and repackaged, dried, and transported to interim 

storage at the Canister Storage Building (CSB). 

 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 handed 

off to another project (PBS RL-0013C, Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area; 

see Table 4-5 Sludge Disposition) for final disposition to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant 

(WIPP) or other disposal facilities.

 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. 

 Debris within the 105-KW Basin will be packaged and transported for disposal. 

The work scope for SNF Stabilization and Disposition Project (PBS RL-0012) is organized into 

the work elements shown in Figure 3-6, which also presents the remaining cleanup schedule. 

Additional scope information on these work elements is provided in Table 3-3.

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

SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Remaining Cleanup Schedule

Through the course of this project, hazards associated with spent nuclear fuel in the 100-K Area basins are 

reduced as the sludge is removed, processed, and properly disposed. The basins are demolished to support 

transition of the 105-K East and 105-K West Reactors to interim safe storage. Following sludge removal, the 

cleanup of the 100-K Area waste sites and facilities can be completed under Nuclear Facility D&D-River 

Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041).

See Appendix C Tables C-5 and C-6 for cost and schedule data.

Program Management

Facility Operations

Site-wide Services

FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017

K Basins O&M

Sludge Treatment Project

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution

RL Directed Activities

UBS Distributions

FY2018
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

3-9

Table 3-3. 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 handed off 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 Includes proportional share of costs for site-wide services and infrastructure. See 

Section 6.3.2 for details.

RL Directed 

Activities

Includes administrative and technical support provided to the project through the General 

Support Services Contract and other activities. Details are provided in Table C-4. 

UBS Distributions 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.

UBS, G&A and 

Direct Distribution

Includes contractor’s fee and management reserve.

G&A = general and administrative.

PBS = project baseline summary.

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

UBS = usage-based services.

WIPP = Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.

Figure 3-7 presents remaining estimated cleanup costs for SNF Stabilization and Disposition 

(PBS RL-0012) by fiscal year, and Figure 3-8 presents remaining estimated cleanup costs by 

work element. 

3.3 FINAL REACTOR DISPOSITION

Final Reactor Disposition will address cleanup of the 100 Area surplus production reactors in 

accordance with TPA Milestone M-093-00. Disposition of the 100 Area reactors (except for 

B Reactor which has been recommended to Congress for inclusion in a Manhattan Project 

National Historic 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 (Table 3-1). 

KE Reactor has completed interim ISS and is in a minimum safe state, KE Reactor is scheduled 

to complete ISS by 2019 and KW Reactor is scheduled to complete ISS by FY2022. 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. 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

3-10

Figure3-7. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year.

$0

$50

$100

$150

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

3-11

Figure 3-8. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element.

$0

$50

$100

Costs (Million)

Fiscal Year

See Appendix C, Table C-5 for cost and schedule data.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

3-12

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). In September 1993, DOE issued 58 FR 48509, 

“Record of Decision: Decommissioning of Eight Surplus Production Reactors at the Hanford 

Site, Richland, Washington,” 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 3-9 presents the remaining cleanup schedule and Figure 3-10 provides the remaining 

estimated costs by fiscal year. The schedule is based on a 14-year implementation period for 

one-piece removal work and completion of reactor removal by FY2068 based on the ROD issue 

date of 1993 and 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 3-9. Final Reactor Disposition Remaining Cleanup Schedule.

Final Reactor Disposition Remaining Cleanup Schedule 

After undergoing surveillance, monitoring, and maintenance for a period of up to 75 years to allow radionuclides to 

decay, the reactor blocks will be removed from their current locations and transported to the Central Plateau Inner 

Area for disposal.

Scale dates represent start of fiscal year

FY2054 FY2056 FY2058 FY2060 FY2062 FY2064 FY2066 FY2068

Final Reactor Disposition

See Appendix C Table C-32 for cost and schedule data.
2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

3-13

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Figure3-10. 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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

3-14

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:

 Regulatory changes will not require additional activities (e.g., document revisions, additional 

sampling) that would significantly impact costs or schedules.

 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.

 The Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration (NRDAR) and risk assessment 

litigation brought by the Yakama Nation will not significantly affect cost or schedule.

 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: 

 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. 

 ERDF waste acceptance criteria will not change substantially. 

 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 done by work 

scope in PBS RL-0013C.

 Post-CERCLA ROD treatability studies and focused feasibility studies will not affect the 

sludge treatment process.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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 and 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 with a combined area 

of approximately 59 square miles that exceeds drinking water standards (DOE/RL-2013-22, 

Hanford Site Groundwater Monitoring Report for 2012). 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):

 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.

 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.

 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 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-2

and implement ways to protect groundwater from continuing influx of contaminants from the 

deep vadose zone.

Cleanup work scope in the Central Plateau is managed through five projects:

 NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP, PBS RL-0011 (Inner Area).

 Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone, PBS RL-0030 (entire Hanford Site, 

including Inner and Outer Areas and the River Corridor).

 Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford, PBS RL-0040 (includes the geographical 

cleanup of waste sites and facilities, including the remaining canyon facilities [Inner and 

Outer Areas]).

 Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project, PBS RL-0042 (includes FFTF

[located in River Corridor]).

 Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area, PBS RL-0013C (Inner Area).

Figure 4-1 presents the remaining cleanup schedule for the Central Plateau. Cleanup is being 

done in accordance with RODs and action memoranda as listed in Appendix A. Work schedule 

milestones and target dates are listed in Appendix D of the TPA Action Plan (see 

http://www.hanford.gov/files.cfm/ap-App-D.pdf).

Figure 4-1. Central Plateau Remaining Cleanup Schedule.

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 

Central Plateau Remaining Cleanup Schedule

The Central Plateau contains large canyon facilities used for fuel processing that produced large volumes of 

liquid and solid waste. Some of this waste has been stored in underground tanks, while other waste was 

discharged to or placed in the ground. Cleanup of the Central Plateau is in the early phases of the regulatory 

decision process; however, records of decision are in place and active cleanup work is ongoing for the 

groundwater, a canyon facility, and a number of soil waste sites. End dates of some work elements support 

ORP scope.

FY2010 FY2020 FY2030 FY2040 FY2050 FY2060 FY2070

Scale dates represent start of fiscal year

NM Stabilization and Disposition – PFP

Nuclear Facility D&D – Remainder of Hanford 

FY2080

Nuclear Facility D&D – FFTF Project

Soil and Water Remediation – Groundwater/Vadose Zone

Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition-200 Area
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-3

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 conducted 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. 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:

 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).

 Eliminate the Protected Area at PFP (this scope was completed in 2009).

 Clean out and demolish facilities in the PFP complex (currently underway with two major 

and numerous minor facilities complete).

 Transfer the remainder of the PFP complex to RL-0040 for final remediation. Waste sites and 

subsurface facilities will be managed through the remediation of the 200-PW-1/3/6 and 

200-CW-5 OUs and the new 200-WA-1 OU.

Table 4-1 provides a summary of the scope of each of these work elements.

Table 4-1. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Level 2 Scope Summary. (2 pages)

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 Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See Section 6.3.2 for 

details.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-4

Table 4-1. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Level 2 Scope Summary. (2 pages)

Work Element Scope Description

UBS Distributions 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.

UBS, G&A and 

Direct Distribution

Includes contractor’s fee and management reserve.

D4 = deactivation, decontamination, 

decommission, and demolition.

D&D = decontamination and decommission.

G&A = general and administrative.

PBS = project baseline summary.

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant.

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

UBS = usage-based services.

Figure 4-2 presents the NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) work elements 

and remaining cleanup schedule. PFP transition is planned to be complete in FY2016 per TPA 

Milestone M-083-00A. Cost and/or schedule uncertainty extends the schedule beyond FY2016. 

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

Figure 4-3 presents the remaining estimated cleanup costs for NM Stabilization and 

Disposition-PFP (PBS RL-0011) work scope by fiscal year; Figure 4-4 presents the remaining 

estimated cleanup costs by work element. 

Maintain Safe and Compliant PFP

Disposition PFP Facility

Project Management and Support

NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Remaining Cleanup Schedule

In accordance with TPA Milestone M-083-00A, all hazardous and nuclear materials will be removed from 

the aboveground facilities at the complex and those facilities will be demolished to slab-on-grade by 

September 30, 2016. Remaining hazards associated with below-grade facilities will be transitioned to 

Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040) to undergo CERCLA cleanup activities. 

FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 FY2019

See Appendix C Tables C-2 and C-3 for cost and schedule data.

FY2020

Site-wide Services

UBS Distributions

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution
2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-5

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Figure4-3. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year.

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-6

Figure 4-4. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element.

$0

$40

$80

$120

$160

$200

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year

See Appendix C, Table C-2 for cost and schedule data.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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:

 Regulatory decision-making process for all groundwater OUs on the Hanford Site.

 Remediation of all groundwater on the Hanford Site in accordance with the groundwater OU 

decisions.

 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).

 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-2013-22). 

The Groundwater Project has three major objectives (DOE/RL-2002-59, Hanford Site 

Groundwater Strategy Protection, Monitoring, and Remediation): 

 Take actions necessary to prevent degradation of the groundwater

 Remediate groundwater to restore it to beneficial use where practicable and protect the river

 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 10 groundwater OUs; six in the River Corridor and four in the Central Plateau. 

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). 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-8

The work scope for the Groundwater Project is organized into Level 2 work elements as shown 

in Figure 4-5, which also presents the remaining cleanup schedule for PBS RL-0030. Table 4-2

provides additional details on the scope of work for each of these work elements.

Figure 4-5. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Remaining Cleanup 

Schedule.

Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Remaining 

Cleanup Schedule

Through the course of this project, drilling, field work, monitoring, and assessments support development of 

remedy decisions. The project implements and maintains remedies for groundwater and the deep vadose

zone. Remedies for the Central Plateau waste sites in the source operable units are implemented by Nuclear 

Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040).

*Includes the following operable units: 100-BC-5, 100-KR-4, 100-NR-2, 100-HR-3, 100-FR-3, 200-BP-5, 

200-PO-1, 200-UP-1, 200-ZP-1, 200-PW-1, and 300-FF-5.

Scale dates represent start of fiscal year

See Appendix C Tables C-13 and C-14 for cost and schedule data.

Regulatory Decisions and Closure Integration

Integration and Assessments

Integrated Field Work

Groundwater Monitoring and Performance Assessments

Groundwater Operable Units Decision Documents and Remediation*

Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests

Deep Vadose Zone Operable Unit

Drilling

Project Management

FY2014 FY2020 FY2026 FY2032 FY2038 FY2044 FY2050 FY2056 FY2062 FY2068

RL Directed Activities

Site-wide Services

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution

UBS Distributions
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-9

Table 4-2. 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 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:

 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.

 Groundwater sampling, analysis, monitoring, evaluation, assessment, and reporting for RCRA 

TSDs, CERCLA OUs, and other permitted facilities and sites. 

 Coordination and management of groundwater sampling and water level determinations.

 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.

 Project management for these activities.

 Well maintenance, monitoring, and reporting.

Groundwater 

OUs Decision 

Documents &

Remediation

Includes management and implementation of groundwater remediation for Hanford, including:

 Implementing the RI/FS process for groundwater OUs by performing RI/FSs leading to final RODs.

 Preparing DQO reports, sampling and analysis plans, waste management plans, and other regulatory 

documentation, as needed, for all groundwater OUs.

 Conducting as needed field studies to support decision making and design.

 Designing treatment systems in accordance with RODs and remedial action work plans.

 Implementing treatment systems in accordance with the design and the ROD requirements or 

modifying and expanding the remedy to optimize remediation.

 Conducting ongoing monitoring and reporting.

 Maintaining system and monitoring wells.

 Final D&D of remedy components.

The work scope is managed by OU and is consistent between the OUs. 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-10

Table 4-2. 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 

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See Section 6.3.2 for details.

RL Directed 

Activities

Includes administrative and technical support provided to the project through the General Support 

Services Contract. Details are provided in Table C-12. 

UBS 

Distributions

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.

UBS, G&A and 

Direct 

Distribution

Includes contractor’s fee and management reserve, allocated pensions and G&A allocations.

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 = deactivation and decommission.

DOE = U.S. Department of Energy.

DQO = data quality objectives.

G&A = General and Administrative.

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.

UBS = usage-based service.

Figure 4-6 presents the remaining estimated cleanup costs for Soil and Water Remediation–

Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) by fiscal year; Figure 4-7 presents the remaining 

estimated cleanup costs by work element.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-11

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Figure 4-6. Soil and Water Remediation-Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year.

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

2014 2018 2022 2026 2030 2034 2038 2042 2046 2050 2054 2058 2062

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-12

Figure 4-7. Soil and Water Remediation-Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element.

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

Costs (Million$)

Fiscal Year

See Appendix C, Table C-13 for cost and schedule data.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-13

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 

27 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 protectiveness has been 

provided for the cleanup.

To accomplish the Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040), the following major 

objectives have been established:

 Perform safe S&M of facilities and waste sites pending remediation

 Integrate planning and execution activities with other Central Plateau projects

 Remediate waste sites

 Decontaminate and decommission (D&D) canyons

 D&D excess facilities.

The project will be complete when the following endpoint criteria have been reached:

 Canyons and surplus facilities removed or dispositioned and ready for transition to LTS

 Central Plateau waste sites remediated in accordance with approved decisions

 Legacy wastes and facilities at PNNL dispositioned

 Institutional controls implemented

 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 as shown in Figure 4-8, which also presents the remaining 

cleanup schedule for this PBS. Table 4-3 provides additional details on the scope of work for 

each of these work elements.

The duration of the work elements in Figure 4-8 includes planning estimates for completing 

remedial actions for the 27 Central Plateau and remainder of Hanford closure zones. 

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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-14

Figure 4-8. Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Cleanup Schedule.

Table 4-3. 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 Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See Section 6.3.2 for 

details

UBS Distributions 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.

UBS, G&A, and Direct 

Distribution

Includes contractor’s fee, management reserve, allocated pensions and G&A allocations. 

CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, Liability Act.

G&A = General and Administrative.

PBS = project baseline summary.

S&M = surveillance and maintenance.

UBS = usage-based service.

Figure 4-9 presents the remaining estimated cleanup costs for the Central Plateau Remediation 

Project (PBS RL-0040) by fiscal year; Figure 4-10 presents the remaining estimated cleanup

costs by work element. 

Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Cleanup Schedule

This PBS implements cleanup of Central Plateau facilities, including canyon facilities and waste sites. 

Hazards associated with buildings and waste sites are progressively reduced using a systematic closure 

zone approach. Scope includes obtaining cleanup decisions for facilities, including canyon buildings, and 

implementing the cleanup actions for facilities and waste sites. 

Scale dates represent start of fiscal year

See Appendix C Tables C-16 and C-17 for cost and schedule data.

Regulatory Decisions and Closure Integration 

Zone Environmental Remediation 

S&M and Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 

FY2014 FY2020 FY2025 FY2030 FY2035 FY2040 FY2045 FY2050 FY2055 FY2060 FY2065 FY2070

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution

UBS Distributions

Site-wide Services
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-15

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Figure 4-9. Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year.

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

2014 2018 2022 2026 2030 2034 2038 2042 2046 2050 2054 2058 2062 2066

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-16

Figure 4-10. Central Plateau Remediation Project (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element.

$0

$150

$300

$450

$600

$750

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year

See Appendix C, Table C-16 for cost and schedule data.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-17

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. In December 1993, DOE issued 

a shutdown order for FFTF 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 technical objective will achieve the 

following:

 Remove and disposition sodium coolant and clean residual sodium

 Fill spaces with grout below the 550-foot elevation level (grade level) of the reactor 

containment building

 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).

Figure 4-11 shows Level 2 scope elements and remaining cleanup schedule for the Nuclear 

Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042). Table 4-4 summarizes the work 

scope.
DOE/RL-2012-13, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-18

Figure 4-11. Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility (PBS RL-0042) Remaining Cleanup Schedule.

Table 4-4. 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; deactivation of FFTF; disposition of FFTF sodium; 

construction of a sodium reaction facility; decommissioning of FFTF in accordance with a 

future record of decision; and project management for these activities. 

Site-wide Services Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See Section 6.3.2 for 

details.

Infrastructure 

Services

Includes legal support and other services. Details are provided in Table C-24. 

UBS Distributions 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.

UBS, G&A and 

Direct Distribution

Includes contractor’s fee, management reserve, allocated pensions and G&A allocations.

D&D = decontaminate and decommission.

FFTF = Fast Flux Test Facility.

G&A = General and Administrative.

PBS = project baseline summary.

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

UBS = usage-based services.

Figure 4-12 presents the remaining estimated cleanup costs for the Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast 

Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) by fiscal year; Figure 4-13 shows the remaining 

estimated cleanup costs by work element. 

Nuclear Facility D&D-Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) Remaining Cleanup Schedule

While some cleanup work in and around the 400 Area is included as part of the River Corridor, this PBS 

focuses on cleaning up FFTF and other facilities within the 400 Area Protected Area. FFTF is currently in a 

surveillance and maintenance mode, with some hazardous materials continuing to be removed and bulk 

sodium safely stored. Eventually, the sodium will be processed and final disposition will commence. 

Disposition decisions will be based on the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact 

Statement and a record of decision.

FFTF Cleanup

Site-wide Services

FY2010 FY2015 FY2020 FY2025 FY2030 FY2035 FY2040

Scale dates represent start of fiscal year

See Appendix C Tables C-25 and C-26 for cost and schedule data.

Infrastructure Services

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution

UBS Distributions
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-19

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Figure 4-12. Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) Remaining Estimated Costs by Fiscal Year.

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

2014

2017

2020

2023

2026

2029

2032

2035

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-20

Figure 4-13. Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) Remaining Estimated Costs by Work Element.

$0

$30

$60

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year

See Appendix C, Table C-25 for cost and schedule data.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-21

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:

 Operate waste treatment facilities, including T Plant, WRAP Facility, and 200 Area Liquid 

Effluent Treatment Facilities (ETF).

 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:

 Retrieve and ship transuranic (TRU) waste for disposal to the WIPP. 

 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.

 Obtain processing capabilities to include repackaging of large and remote-handled (RH) 

contaminated waste containers. 

The Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) includes completing 

the following activities: 

 Cesium and strontium capsules will be transferred to dry storage and/or permanent disposal. 

 Irradiated nuclear fuels will be removed offsite to a national repository for final disposition.

 Stored underground TRU waste will be retrieved and disposed.

 Mixed low-level and low-level waste will be treated as necessary and disposed.

 Waste management facilities will be deactivated at the end of their useful lives and will be 

turned over to Nuclear Facility D&D-Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040) for final 

disposition.

 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.

 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).

 IDF will be closed according to the closure plan requirements in the Dangerous Waste Permit 

(WA7890008967). Closure will follow completion of tank waste vitrification.

 Operate liquid waste retention/transfer facilities to support the Office of Science mission in 

the 300 Area.

Figure 4-14 presents the scope elements and remaining cleanup schedule for Solid Waste 

Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C). Table 4-5 summarizes each scope 

element. As waste management facilities are no longer needed to support Hanford cleanup, they 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-22

will be transitioned to Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040) for final 

disposition. 

Figure 4-14. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Remaining Cleanup 

Schedule.

FY2014 FY2019 FY2024 FY2029 FY2034 FY2049 FY2059

Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition-200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Remaining Cleanup 

Schedule

This PBS provides waste management services for the Hanford Site, including treatment, storage, and 

disposal capability to meet the needs of the cleanup. Scope includes operation of waste facilities and 

management of special wastes, such as special nuclear materials and spent fuel. Once PBS RL-0013C

activities are complete, waste facilities will be turned over to PBS RL-0040 for final disposition and long-term 

stewardship.

Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF)

Scale dates represent start of fiscal year

Project Management

Capsule Storage and Disposition

Canister Storage Building (CSB)

Mixed Low-Level Waste Treatment

T-Plant

Central Waste Complex (CWC)

Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches

TRU Disposition

TRU Retrieval

Waste Receiving and Processing Facility (WRAP)

Solid Waste Base Operations

See Appendix C Tables C-8 and C-9 for cost and schedule data.

Site-wide Services

FY2039 FY2044 FY2054

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution

UBS Distributions

Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Disposition

TRU Repackaging

Sludge Disposition

RL Directed Activities

Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF)

Liquid Effluent Facilities
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-23

Table 4-5. 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 of 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 CCP 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 CCP 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.

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

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See Section 6.3.2 for 

details.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-24

Table 4-5. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Level 2 Scope Summary.

(2 pages)

Work Element Scope Description

RL Directed 

Activities

Includes administrative and technical support provided to the project through the General 

Support Services Contract and other activities. Details are provided in Table C-7. 

UBS

Distributions

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.

UBS, G&A and 

Direct 

Distribution

Includes contractor’s fee, management reserve, allocated pensions and G&A allocations.

CCP = Central Characterization Project.

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.

G&A = General and Administrative.

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.

UBS = usage-based services.

Figure 4-15 shows the remaining estimated cleanup costs for the Solid Waste Stabilization and 

Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) by fiscal year; Figure 4-16 shows the remaining 

estimated cleanup costs by work element. 
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-25

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Figure 4-15. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year.

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

$700

2014

2019

2024

2029

2034

2039

2044

2049

2054

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-26

Figure 4-16. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element.

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400 Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year

See Appendix C, Table C-8 for cost and schedule data.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

4-27

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 are identified: 

 Planned characterization of the vadose zone below the high-level waste (HLW) tanks will be

sufficient to evaluate remedies for protection of groundwater

 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 

are identified: 

 An industrial worker scenario will be used to define the exposure scenarios and the threshold

cleanup levels for waste sites located in the 200 Areas

 The Central Plateau area will remain under Federal control for the foreseeable future

 All low-level legacy waste will be managed and treated on Hanford via remove, treat, and

dispose (RTD) to approved onsite disposal facilities

 Planning assumes that geographic aggregate barriers (ABAR) will be utilized. The ABARs

are assumed to cover canyons or other large facilities and adjacent waste sites or to cover

multiple adjacent waste sites

 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 

assumptions are identified: 

 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 are identified: 

 New treatment facilities are not required to support longer WTP operations

 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 Milestone M-091-01

 WIPP will remain operational through the end of Hanford cleanup operations that have the

potential to generate TRU waste. Current planning has shipping of TRU waste until FY2030.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

4-28

This page intentionally left blank.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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 the Office of River Protection (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 requests. ORP 

will evaluate the need for potential changes to the RPP baseline, and future baseline changes will 

be reflected in the LCR.

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

5-2

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

RecycleD

Recycle

Chemicals Air Offgas Air

Glass 

Formers Chemicals

Solid Waste

IHLW

Offgas B

Liquid Effluent C

Offgas

Solid Waste

ILAW

Solid Waste BD

Treated Liquids

IHLW

Liquid Effluent

Retrieval Water and 

Chemicals

Air

Glass Formers

Chemicals

Second Low 

Activity Waste 

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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

5-3

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 their operations, the underground waste tanks and their contents 

remain. The radioactive liquid waste was transferred from the separations facilities as slurry, a 

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 

supernatant or supernate. 

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 bottoms 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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

5-4

Figure 5-2. Depictions of Typical Tank Contents.

The work scope for tank waste cleanup is organized into two PBSs, as shown in Figure 5-3, 

which also presents the remaining cleanup schedule. 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 meet 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”). 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

5-5

Figure 5-3. Tank Waste Remaining Cleanup Schedule.

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 FY2014 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. The scope of PBS ORP-0014 is organized into seven work 

elements as shown in Figure 5-4, which also presents the remaining cleanup schedule. Additional 

scope information on these work elements is provided in Table 5-1.

Figure 5-5 presents the remaining estimated cleanup costs for Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste 

Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) by fiscal year; Figure 5-6 presents the remaining 

estimated cleanup costs by work element. 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

5-6

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

Cleanup Schedule.

Table 5-1. 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 contacthandled 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.

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

Cleanup Schedule

Through the course of this project, risks posed by 53 million gallons of radioactive and chemical waste 

stored in underground tanks at the Hanford Site are reduced. Wastes are moved out of aging single-shell 

tanks into newer and safer double-shell tanks and ultimately treated and vitrified. Challenges include the 

application of new and innovative technologies as the commitment to perform high-hazard work safely and 

effectively is maintained. Final disposition decisions are pending outcomes of the record of decision and 

review cycle of DOE/EIS-0391, Draft Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact 

Statement. 

Scale dates represent start of fiscal year

FY2015 FY2020 FY2025 FY2030 FY2035 FY2040 FY2045 FY2050

Base Operations

Retrieve and Close SSTs

Waste Feed Delivery/Treatment Planning/DST Retrieval/Closure

Supplemental Treatment

Treat Waste

Facility Closures

Tank Operations Contract – ORP Project Support

See Appendix C Tables C-33 and C-34 for cost and schedule data.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

5-7

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Figure 5-5. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Fiscal Year.

$0.0

$0.5

$1.0

$1.5

$2.0

$2.5

2014

2018

2022

2026

2030

2034

2038

2042

2046

2050

Costs (Billion $)

Fiscal Year
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

5-8

Figure 5-6. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP-0014) Remaining Estimated Cleanup Costs by Work Element.

$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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

5-9

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:

 Pretreatment

 Low-Activity Waste Vitrification

 High-Level Waste Vitrification

 Balance of Facilities

 Dedicated Analytical Laboratory.

The scope for PBS ORP-0060 is organized into six main work elements, as shown in Figure 5-7, 

which also presents the remaining cleanup schedule. Additional scope information on these work 

elements is provided in Table 5-2.

Figure 5-7. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Remaining Schedule.

Table 5-2. Major Construction–Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Level 2 Scope Summary. (2 pages)

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. 

Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Remaining Schedule

This project will finalize the design of the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant, finish construction, and 

perform cold and hot commissioning to demonstrate the operability and functionality of the plant.

Pretreatment

Low-Activity Waste

High-Level Waste 

Balance of Facilities

Analytical Laboratory

Plant Wide

FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 FY2019 FY2020

See Appendix C Tables C-35 and C-36 for cost and schedule data.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

5-10

Table 5-2. Major Construction–Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Level 2 Scope Summary. (2 pages)

Work Element Scope Description

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.

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 5-8 presents the remaining estimated costs for Major Construction – Waste Treatment 

Plant (PBS ORP-0060) by fiscal year; Figure 5-9 presents the remaining estimated costs by work 

element. 

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.

 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.)

 A planned offsite geologic repository will be ready to accept IHLW canisters from the 

Hanford Site starting in April 2023 at a rate that does not require construction of additional 

interim storage beyond that planned for the Hanford Shipping Facility. Onsite IHLW interim 

storage will be operational on or before May 17, 2019, and provide interim storage for at 

least 2,000 canisters.6

 The current strategy to comply with the IHLW acceptance criteria is described in 

24590-HLW-PL-RT-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.

 

6 ORP recognizes delays in the availability of a national geologic repository by April 2023 as a key uncertainty, and 

continues to assess potential actions to mitigate this uncertainty. For example, one option being considered is 

developing a capability to receive and temporarily store IHLW canisters in Interim Hanford Storage, with the IHLW 

canisters subsequently retrieved and transported to the Hanford Shipping Facility in preparation for shipment to a 

national repository when it becomes available. Interim Hanford Storage could be expandable in modules up to a 

maximum capacity of 16,000 canisters, which would accommodate the number of IHLW canisters projected for the 

WTP. This and other potential mitigating actions are being evaluated, but are not yet reflected in the RPP baseline 

schedule and cost.
2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

5-11

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Figure5-8. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Remaining Estimated Costs by Fiscal Year.

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

5-12

Figure 5-9. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Remaining Estimated Costs by Work Element.

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

$350

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year

See Appendix C, Table C-35 for cost and schedule data.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

5-13

 Supplemental LAW treatment capacity will be provided by a second LAW vitrification 

facility located adjacent to the WTP. The second LAW facility will have the same technical 

assumptions as the WTP LAW Vitrification Facility, will complete hot commissioning on 

September 30, 2021, and will 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

 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.

 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.

 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.

 Fiscal year funding will be available to support the baseline case, including funding required 

for risk mitigating actions.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

5-14

This page intentionally left blank.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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 the 

cleanup. 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; Figure 6-1

presents the remaining cleanup schedule for Mission Support.

Figure 6-1. Mission Support Remaining Cleanup Schedule.

Mission Support Remaining Cleanup Schedule

Mission Support provides for site-wide infrastructure, services, community relations, and regulatory agency 

support necessary to the cleanup mission. Safeguards and Security measures ensure protection of Site 

physical, human, and intellectual resources, while infrastructure is maintained to ensure utilities, office space, 

equipment, and specialized work forces are in place when needed at cleanup locations. Long-term 

stewardship requirements are identified and implemented throughout the cleanup process with final transition 

of the Hanford Site to Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) following completion of the cleanup. 

FY2010 FY2020 FY2030 FY2040 FY2050 FY2060 FY2070 FY2080 FY2090 FY2100

Scale dates represent start of fiscal year

* See Section 6.3.2 for the current Long-Term Stewardship program.

Safeguards and Security

Richland Community and Regulatory Support

Infrastructure and Services

Long-Term Stewardship*
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

6-2

6.1 SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY (PBS RL-0020)

The scope of this PBS includes one primary work element: Safeguards and Security. Figure 6-2 

presents the remaining cleanup schedule and 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. 

Figure 6-2. Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) Remaining Cleanup Schedule.

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 6-3 provides the remaining estimated costs for Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020)

by fiscal year. 

Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) Remaining Cleanup Schedule 

Specially-trained and equipped protective services ensure the safety of the Hanford Site, its workers, and the 

unique technical, physical, and radiological property located here. Intellectual property, as well as physical 

property, is protected.

Scale dates represent start of fiscal year

FY2014 FY2019 FY2024 FY2029 FY2034 FY2039 FY2044 FY2054 FY2059

Safeguards and Security

See Appendix C Table C-11 for cost and schedule data.

FY2049
2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

6-3

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Figure6-3. Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) Remaining Estimated Costs by Fiscal Year.

$0

$25

$50

$75

$100

2014

2019

2024

2029

2034

2039

2044

2049

2054

2059

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

6-4

6.2 RICHLAND COMMUNITY AND REGULATORY 

SUPPORT (PBS RL-0100) 

This PBS includes support to the communities that are influenced by the Hanford cleanup. 

Figure 6-4 provides the remaining cleanup schedule for Richland Community and Regulatory 

Support (PBS RL-0100) and Table 6-2 summarizes its scope of work. 

Figure 6-4. Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100) Remaining Schedule.

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 6-5 provides the remaining estimated costs for Richland Community and Regulatory 

Support (PBS RL-0100) by fiscal year. 

Richland Community and Regulatory Support

Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100) Remaining Schedule

DOE is committed to supporting the communities that are influenced by the Hanford cleanup and provides 

funding in the form of fees, grants, and payments to support public, regulatory, and other community 

participation in Hanford Site cleanup. The Hanford Advisory Board, the Natural Resource Trustee 

Council, the Washington State Department of Ecology, and Oregon Department of Energy all participate 

through this PBS. Richland Community and Regulatory Support is provided during cleanup activities 

under this PBS. Activities associated with this PBS move into PBS RL-LTS following cleanup activities.

FY2010 FY2015 FY2020 FY2025 FY2030 FY2035 FY2040 FY2045 FY2050 FY2055 FY2060 FY2065

Scale dates represent start of fiscal year

See Appendix C Table C-28 for cost and schedule data.
2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

6-5

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Figure6-5. Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100) Remaining Estimated Costs by Fiscal Year.

$0

$10

$20

$30

$40

$50

$60

2014 2019

2024

2029

2034

2039

2044

2049

2054

2059

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

6-6

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, HAMMER, and RL Directed Activities

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 work scope for Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) is organized into the work 

elements shown in Figure 6-6, which also presents the remaining cleanup schedule. The scope 

description for these work elements is provided in Table 6-3.

Figure 6-6. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Schedule.

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

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.

Scale dates represent start of fiscal year

Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Schedule

This PBS provides needed Hanford Site-wide services and infrastructure support through the course of the 

Hanford Site cleanup, including utilities, occupational medicine, renovation and maintenance, roads, and 

other key Site-wide elements that ensure the needed infrastructure and systems are in place.

See Appendix C Tables C-19 and C-20 for cost and schedule data.

FY2014 FY2020 FY2025 FY2030 FY2035 FY2040 FY2045 FY2050 FY2055 FY2060 FY2065 FY2070

Reliability Projects

HAMMER

Site-wide Services

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution

RL Directed Activities
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

6-7

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

Work Element Scope Description

Site-wide Services 

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 Waste Sampling and Characterization Facility analytical services), 

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).

RL Directed 

Activities

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.

UBS, G&A and 

Direct Distribution

Includes contractor’s fee, management reserve, allocated pensions and G&A allocations.

DOE = U.S. Department of Energy.

G&A = General and Administrative.

HAMMER = Hazardous Materials Management and 

Emergency Response Training and Education 

Center.

PBS = project baseline summary.

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland 

Operations Office.

UBS = usage-based services.

Figure 6-7 presents the remaining estimated costs for Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040)

by fiscal year and Figure 6-8 presents the remaining estimated costs by work element. 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

6-8

Figure6-7. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Estimated Costs by Fiscal Year.

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

2014

2021

2028

2035

2042

2049

2056

2063

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year
2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

6-9

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev.

Figure6-8. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040) Remaining Estimated Costs by Work Element.

1

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

2014

2021

2028

2035

2042

2049

2056

2063

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

6-10

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: Analytical services 

(e.g., the Waste Sampling and Characterization Facility [WSCF]); 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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

6-11

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 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. DOE 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. Figure 6-9 presents the remaining schedule and Table 6-4 provides a 

summary of the scope.

Figure 6-10 shows remaining estimated costs for PBS RL-LTS by fiscal year and Figure 6-11

shows the remaining estimated costs by work element. This PBS is assumed to extend from 

FY2060 through FY2090.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

6-12

Figure 6-9. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Remaining Schedule.

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

Work Element Scope Description

Infrastructure

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 LTS activities.

Waste Management 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

Includes real estate and Hanford Site planning, land management, and surveillance 

and maintenance activities for the 100 and 200 Areas.

Environmental 

Compliance Includes activities to ensure environmental compliance and protection.

Stakeholder Participation Includes continued support of stakeholder participation through fees and payment 

in lieu of taxes.

Management and 

Administration Provides for management and administration of these LTS activities.

LTS = long-term stewardship.

PBS = project baseline summary.

Infrastructure

Waste Management

Site and Environmental Monitoring

Post-Closure Surveillance and Maintenance

Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Remaining Schedule 

Following cleanup activities, DOE will continue activities at the Hanford Site to ensure the cleanup remains 

protective. Activities will include maintenance of infrastructure used to support monitoring and surveillance. 

DOE will provide management of the site, including ongoing stakeholder participation. 

Environmental Compliance

Stakeholder Participation

FY2060 FY2065 FY2070 FY2075 FY2080 FY2085 FY2090 FY2095

Management and Administration

Scale dates represent start of fiscal year

See Appendix C Table C-30 for cost and schedule data.
2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

6-13

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Figure6-10. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Remaining Estimated Costs by Fiscal Year.

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

2060

2065

2070

2075

2080

2085

2090

Costs (Million $)

Fiscal Year
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

6-14

Figure6-11. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Remaining Estimated Costs by Work Element.

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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 2014 LCR, December 1, 2013, 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 2014 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:

 Energy Northwest, a consortium of public utility companies that oversee the Columbia 

Generating Station nuclear power reactor.

 Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory, operated by a consortium of the 

California Institute of Technology and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

 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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

7-2

This page intentionally left blank.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

8-2

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-2012-13, 2013 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report, Rev. 0, 

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

DOE/RL-2013-22, 2013, Hanford Site Groundwater Monitoring Report for 2012, 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 

Tri-Party 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. 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

8-3

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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

8-4

This page intentionally left blank.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-i

APPENDIX A

HANFORD SITE EXISTING CLEANUP DECISIONS
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-ii

This page intentionally left blank.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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............................................3

A.2.1 COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, 

COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT OF 1980 DECISIONS.....................3

A.2.2 PERMITS, LICENSES, AND OTHER STATUTORY/REGULATORY 

PROGRAM APPROVALS .....................................................................................4

A.2.3 TRI-PARTY AGREEMENT DECISIONS .............................................................4

A.2.4 OTHER FEDERAL AND STATE DECISIONS ....................................................5

A.3 SUMMARY OF HANFORD CLEANUP DECISIONS – FINAL AND NOT YET 

FINAL..................................................................................................................................5

A.4. REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................25

TABLES

Table A-1. CERCLA Records of Decision and Associated Changes. (8 pages)........................... 6

Table A-2. CERCLA Action Memoranda. (7 pages) ................................................................. 13

Table A-3. Permits, Licenses, and Other Statutory/Regulatory Program Decisions 

Affecting Hanford Cleanup. (3 pages) ...................................................................... 19

Table A-4. Tri-Party Agreement Decisions Affecting Hanford Cleanup. ................................... 21

Table A-5. Other Federal and State Decisions Affecting Hanford Site Cleanup Mission. 

(4 pages) .................................................................................................................... 22
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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 decommissioning

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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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 the Tri-Party Agreement (TPA), Milestone 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 Site cleanup 

mission. These environmental obligations are established in accordance with various decisionmaking 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.

A number of 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 the TPA Milestone 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:

 Section A.1 provides a general overview of the principal processes that are employed at 

Hanford to reach decisions about future cleanup actions.

 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.

 Section A.3 summarizes current decisions that, for purposes of this LCR, are considered to 

be cleanup decisions and which cleanup decision 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, DOE, with EPA and Ecology, 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).
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-2

The TPA is the primary legal framework that the Tri-Party Agencies are using to achieve 

Hanford cleanup. Cleanup decisions made through the TPA integrate and implement primarily 

the following regulatory processes:

 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 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.

 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:
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-3

“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 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, 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:

 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.

 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.

 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, noncomplex problem that can and should be readily addressed.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-4

A number of 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, Ecology has lead authority for most 

elements of RCRA. Principal documents used to implement Hanford cleanup decisions under 

RCRA include:

 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.

 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.

 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 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-5

decision-making process and documentation (e.g., CERCLA ROD, RCRA permit) will be used 

to establish cleanup actions for the different waste sites and facilities across the Hanford Site, but 

it is that subsequent documentation (not the TPA itself) where cleanup decisions are formally 

established. The TPA includes some decisions that affect Hanford cleanup. 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 of Hanford. Section A.3 lists the various Executive Orders, Presidential 

Proclamations, Congressional Acts, judicial orders and decrees, and other types of 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 have 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. These cleanup 

decisions 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 

Milestone M-36-01, third paragraph) at Hanford. Some cleanup decisions may appear to be final 

but are not:

 They may be “interim” remedies until a final cleanup decision can be made, or 

 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:

 The decision is embodied in a statutory/regulatory document that is titled final (e.g., final 

permit, final ROD); or

 The decision is explicitly represented as final in a document, and such representation is 

compliant with the statutory/regulatory authority that produced the document.

Hanford cleanup decisions summarized in Tables A-1, A-3, and A-5 indicate whether the 

decision is considered to be final by inclusion of 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 at Hanford. By definition, the absence of a decision means there is 

not a final cleanup decision. It would not be possible to develop an exhaustive list of all the 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-6

decisions that still need to be made to complete the Hanford cleanup mission. 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, (see also 

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, (see also 

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, (see also 

proposed plan for amendment) 

(EPA/AMD/R10-02/030)

Amended

ROD

Jan-02 Authorizes four additional disposal cells and 

the option of staging waste at ERDF pending 

treatment and/or disposal.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-7

Table A-1. CERCLA Records of Decision and Associated Changes. (8 pages)

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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-8

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: removal of contaminated soil and debris; disposal to 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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-9

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, selects 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 that was 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 accord 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: 

 Remove, Treat and Dispose (RTD) at waste sites 

 Temporary surface barriers and pipeline void filling 

 Enhanced attenuation of uranium using sequestration in the Vadose Zone, Periodically Rewetted Zone (PRZ) 

and top of the aquifer 

 Institutional Controls (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: 

 Monitored Natural Attenuation 

 Groundwater monitoring 

 Enhanced attenuation of uranium at the top of aquifer 

 ICs. 

The major component of the amended remedy for 300-FF-1 is: 

 Enhanced attenuation of uranium using sequestration in the Vadose Zone, PRZ and top of the aquifer.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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 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 or specified cleanup levels for plutonium-contaminated 

soils and subsurface structures and 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 provide coverage 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. 

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-11

Table A-1. CERCLA Records of Decision and Associated Changes. (8 pages)

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.

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 

ROD

Sep-10 Deploys the apatite sequestration technology 

for remediating Sr-90 in the 100-NR-2 OU by 

extending existing apatite permeable reactive 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-12

Table A-1. CERCLA Records of Decision and Associated Changes. (8 pages)

Amended Record of Decision, Decision 

Summary and Responsiveness Summary

(EPA 2010b)

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.

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 45 100-Area burial grounds.

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-
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-13

Table A-1. CERCLA Records of Decision and Associated Changes. (8 pages)

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.

ESD = explanation of significant difference.

IC = institutional controls.

ISRM = in situ redox manipulation.

MCL = maximum contaminant limit.

OU = operable unit.

P&T = pump-and-treat.

PCB = polychlorinated biphenyl.

RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 

1976.

RD/RAWP= remedial design/remedial action work plan.

ROD = record of decision.

RTD = remove, treat, 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://www2.hanford.gov/arpir/). 

These decisions focus mainly on the deactivation, decontamination, decommissioning, and 

demolition (D4) of buildings, which are generally considered final actions because buildings are 

demolished and the waste disposed to approved facilities, or on the removal, treatment, and 

disposal (RTD) of contaminated soil from waste sites, which are generally considered final 

actions for individual waste sites. Slabs and contaminated soils underlying the buildings will 

likely go through 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 initially 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 with sampling of any other wastes 

encountered during excavation; the expedited reaction would 

result in cleanup of the landfill to unrestricted levels.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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: 

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).

“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 to 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; 

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, 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; 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 basins

“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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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; 

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. 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 

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.

“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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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; 

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. 

“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 #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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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 #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; 

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 conducted 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.

“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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-18

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 

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.

“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 

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. 

“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.

“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. 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-19

Table A-2. CERCLA Action Memoranda. (7 pages)

Title Date Action Removal Action/Decision

“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 

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 

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.

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 decommissioning.

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. 

 Part I, Standard Conditions

 Part II, General Facility Conditions 

 Part III, Unit-Specific Conditions for Final Status Operations

 Part IV, Unit-Specific Conditions for Corrective Action 

 Part V, Unit-Specific Conditions for Units Undergoing Closure

 Part VI, Unit-Specific Conditions for Units in Post-Closure.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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

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 

have been 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-SA-01]) to broaden the possible decommissioning 

approach, retaining the one-piece 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.

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 

(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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-21

Table A-3. Permits, Licenses, and Other Statutory/Regulatory Program Decisions Affecting Hanford Cleanup.

(3 pages)

Document Summary

Permit ST-4501, Washington State 

Department of Ecology – State 

Wastewater Permit

FINAL

Allows for the discharge of cooling water and other primarily 

uncontaminated wastewater from 400 Area facilities to two ponds located 

north-northeast of the 400 Area perimeter fence. This permit was effective 

October 1, 2003, and expired on October 1, 2008. It remains in effect 

pending proposed consolidation into Permit ST-4511.

Permit ST-4502, 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 

expired in May 2005 and remains in effect pending reissuance. A draft 

revised Permit ST-0004502 underwent public review and comment in 

November 2011. This permit 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. The renewal application 

is awaiting Ecology action.

Permit ST-0045514, 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.

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

 M-045-00 and

 Appendix C Part 1: 

Required Retrieval 

Technologies

 Appendix H

Closure will follow retrieval of as much tank waste as technically possible, with tank 

waste residues not to exceed 360 ft3in each of the 100-series tanks, 30 ft3in each of 

the 200-series tanks, or the limit of waste retrieval technology capability.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-22

Table A-5. Other Federal and State Decisions Affecting Hanford Site Cleanup Mission. (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 10101); 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.

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).
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-23

Table A-5. Other Federal and State Decisions Affecting Hanford Site Cleanup Mission. (4 pages)

Other Federal/State Decision Summary of Decision

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.

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.”
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-24

Table A-5. Other Federal and State Decisions Affecting Hanford Site Cleanup Mission. (4 pages)

Other Federal/State Decision Summary of Decision

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. On June 14, 2013 the Manhattan Project National 

Historical Park Act passed the House of Representatives in an amendment to H.R. 

1960, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014.

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-25

Table A-5. Other Federal and State Decisions Affecting Hanford Site Cleanup Mission. (4 pages)

Other Federal/State Decision Summary of Decision

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 the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant 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 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. 

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-26

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.

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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-27

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. 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-28

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 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, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C.

DOE O 451.1B, National Environmental Policy Act Compliance Program, Change 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, 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/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-29

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-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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-30

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. 

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-31

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.

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-32

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 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.

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-33

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.

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 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-34

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-35

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.

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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

A-36

This page intentionally left blank.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-i

APPENDIX B

FUTURE CLEANUP ACTIONS AND ALTERNATIVE ANALYSES
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-ii

This page intentionally left blank.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-iii

CONTENTS

B.1 IDENTIFYING FUTURE CLEANUP ACTIONS FOR THE HANFORD SITE ..............2

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.......................................19

B.3 RATIONALE FOR ANNUAL SELECTION OF FUTURE CLEANUP 

ACTIONS TO BE ANALYZED.......................................................................................20

B.4 COMPLETED CLEANUP ACTION ALTERNATIVES.................................................20

B.5 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................23

TABLES

Table B-1. Future Cleanup Actions for which Final Decisions Have Not Been Made. (2 

pages)........................................................................................................................... 2

Table B-2. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – River 

Corridor. (6 pages) ...................................................................................................... 4

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central 

Plateau. (9 pages) ........................................................................................................ 9

Table B-4. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Tank 

Waste. (2 pages) ....................................................................................................... 18

Table B-5. Summary of Completed Cleanup Action Alternatives. (2 pages) ............................. 20

Table B-6. Anticipated Schedule for Detailed Analyses of Future Cleanup Action 

Alternatives. (3 pages)............................................................................................... 21
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-iv

This page intentionally left blank.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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 decommissioning

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
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-vi

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

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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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), 

Milestone 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 39 separate cleanup actions.

Because final cleanup decisions (see Appendix A) 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 Milestone M-036-01; the LCR is not a decisionmaking 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 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-2

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.

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 the cleanup work that is performed on the 

site.

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. (2 pages)

River Corridor Cleanup Actions

 Disposition N Reactor

 Disposition 100 Area K West Basin

 Remediate 100 Area Contaminated Soil Sites

 Restore 100-BC-5 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use

 Restore 100-KR-4 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use

 Restore 100-NR-2 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use

 Restore 100-HR-3 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use

 Restore 100-FR-3 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use

 Disposition 300 Area Facilities Retained by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

 Disposition of 100 Area former Orchard Contaminated Soil Sites (100-OL-1 OU)

Central Plateau Cleanup Actions

 Disposition Remaining Outer Area Buildings and Facilities (200-OA-1 OU)

 Remediate Remaining Outer Area Contaminated Soil Sites (200-OA-1, 200-CW-1, and 200-CW-3 OUs)

 Disposition Below-Grade Portions of Plutonium Finishing Plant

 Disposition B Plant Canyon Building/Associated Waste Sites (200-CB-1 OU)

 Disposition PUREX Canyon Building/Associated Waste Sites (200-CP-1 OU)

 Disposition PUREX Storage Tunnels (200-CP-1 OU)

 Disposition REDOX Canyon Building/Associated Waste Sites (200-CR-1 OU)

 Disposition T Plant Canyon Building/Associated Waste Sites

 Disposition Cesium/Strontium Capsules

 Remediate 200-SW-1 OU

 Disposition Remaining Liquid Waste Disposal Facilities 

 Disposition Remaining Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities 

 Remediate Pipelines, Pits, Diversion Boxes and Associated Tanks (200-IS-1 OU)

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

 Remediate Remaining 200 West Inner Area Contaminated Soil Sites (200-WA-1 OU)

 Remediate Remaining 200 East Inner Area Contaminated Soil Sites (200-EA-1 OU)

 Disposition Fast Flux Test Facility Complex

 Disposition Remaining Buildings and Facilities Within Fast Flux Test Facility Complex

 Disposition Remaining Inner Area Buildings and Facilities

 Remediate Contaminated Deep Vadose Zone (200-DV-1 OU)

 Restore 200 West Groundwater to Beneficial Use (200-UP-1 OU)

 Restore 200 East Groundwater to Beneficial Use (200-PO-1/200-BP-5 OUs)
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-3

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

Tank Waste Cleanup Actions

 Tank Retrieval and Single-Shell Tank Farm Closure

 Tank Waste Treatment

 Secondary Waste Treatment

 Double-Shell Tank Closure

 Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Closure

OU = operable unit.

PUREX = Plutonium Uranium Extraction (Plant).

REDOX = Reduction-Oxidation Facility (S Plant).

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:

 Developing and analyzing alternatives for every separate cleanup action in every annual 

edition of the LCR would be resource intensive and inefficient

 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

 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 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-4

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, respectively. These tables include the following:

 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

 For each cleanup action, a list that encompasses the likely range of plausible alternatives. 

Table B-2. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – River Corridor. (6 pages)

CLEANUP 

ACTION: RC-1a

1 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.

 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

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-5

Table B-2. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – River Corridor. (6 pages)

 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

 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.

 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, 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.

 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, 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/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/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/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/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/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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-6

Table B-2. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – River Corridor. (6 pages)

 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/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.

 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, (42 USC 6901), et seq.

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 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. Groundwater monitoring and annual reporting continue to track 

groundwater contamination in this OU.

 WAC 173-340, “Model Toxics Control Act -- Cleanup,” Washington Administrative Code, Olympia, 

Washington.

 WAC 173-340-720, “Groundwater Cleanup Standards.”

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 Install P&T system in 100-BC-5; transition to S&M for post-treatment groundwater monitoring.

 Incorporate bioremediation for chromium.

 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.

 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/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.

 WAC 173-340, “Model Toxics Control Act -- Cleanup,” Washington Administrative Code, Olympia, 

Washington.

– WAC 173-340-720, “Groundwater Cleanup Standards.”

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 Expand the P&T system in 100-KR-4; transition to S&M for post-treatment groundwater monitoring.

 Continue operation of P&T system with incorporation of bioremediation for chromium.

 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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-7

Table B-2. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – River Corridor. (6 pages)

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.

 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, 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.

 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.

 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/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.

 WAC 173-340, “Model Toxics Control Act -- Cleanup,” Washington Administrative Code, Olympia, 

Washington.

– WAC 173-340-720, “Groundwater Cleanup Standards.”

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 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.

 Construct an impermeable barrier along the shoreline to re‐direct groundwater flow and increase travel times

for radioactive decay to achieve cleanup objectives.

 Expand the apatite permeable reactive barrier to promote sequestration of strontium-90.

 Incorporate phytotechnology.

 Use sequestration and immobilization technologies for inner portion of strontium-90 plume.

 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.

 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/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, 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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-8

Table B-2. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – River Corridor. (6 pages)

 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, 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.

 WAC 173-340, “Model Toxics Control Act -- Cleanup,” Washington Administrative Code, Olympia, 

Washington.

– WAC 173-340-720, “Groundwater Cleanup Standards.”

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 Expand P&T system in 100-HR-3; transition to S&M for post-treatment groundwater monitoring.

 Maintain and repair in situ redox manipulation barrier.

 Incorporate bioremediation.

 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-4.5 River Corridor – Restore 100-FR-3 Groundwater OU to Beneficial Use

Cleanup Decision Summary and Relevant Decision Documents

No cleanup decisions have been made for this OU. Groundwater monitoring and annual reporting continue to track 

groundwater contamination.

 WAC 173-340, "Model Toxics Control Act - Cleanup," Washington Administrative Code, Olympia, 

Washington.

– WAC 173-340-720, "Groundwater Cleanup Standards."

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 Install P&T system in 100-FR-3; transition to S&M for post-treatment groundwater monitoring.

 Incorporate bioremediation for chromium.

 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-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.

 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 30.

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-9

Table B-2. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – River Corridor. (6 pages)

D4 = deactivate, decontaminate, decommission, and demolish.

D&D = decontamination and decommissioning.

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.

 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-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

 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.

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).

 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, 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.

 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-2009-37, 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-2009-86, 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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-10

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central Plateau. (9 pages)

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 RTD contaminated soil sites to achieve RAOs comparable to 100 Areas; backfill, contour, and revegetate 

excavations.

 RTD all sites except ponds; allow monitored natural attenuation for large pond sites with presence of existing 

vegetated soil covers.

 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.

 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

 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.

 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).

 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-2009-37, 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-2009-86, 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

 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 wastes 

and debris at approved facility.

 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.

 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.

 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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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-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).

 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-2009-37, 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-2009-86, 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

 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 wastes and 

debris at approved facility.

 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.

 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.

 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.

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.

 TBD – No decision documents currently available.

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 Maintain safe storage, perform hazardous waste facility closure consistent with RCRA Permit, remediate 

radionuclides consistent with CERCLA, and conduct post-closure monitoring.

 Stabilize waste and prepare tunnels for in-place disposal, install barrier, perform post-closure care and 

transition to LTS.

 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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-12

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central Plateau. (9 pages)

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).

 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-2009-37, 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-2009-86, 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

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

 TBD – No decision documents currently available.

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 Continue ongoing operations until 2036; transition to D4 in 2038; fulfill hazardous waste facility closure 

obligations consistent with RCRA permit.

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-13

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central Plateau. (9 pages)

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.

 TBD – No decision documents currently available.

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 Package and transport capsules from WESF to dry storage; store capsules pending final disposition; direct 

dispose of capsules at a geologic repository.

 Incorporate capsules into immobilized high-level waste glass at WTP.

 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.

 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:

 Install an evapotranspiration barrier over both landfills; upgrade monitoring and infrastructure systems; 

perform post-closure monitoring and caretaking.

 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.

 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.

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 Closure of facilities will be according to approved operating plans and closure plans.

 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.

 RTD all contaminated soil; backfill and revegetate.

 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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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-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.

 TBD – No decision documents currently available.

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 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.

 TBD – No decision documents currently available.

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 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.

 RTD all contaminated equipment, materials, debris and soil; backfill and revegetate.

 Stabilize select equipment in place using technologies yet to be determined.

 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 is comprised of a large number of land disposal units.)

 TBD – No decision documents currently available.

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 Excavation, treatment (as necessary), and disposal of all waste from within individual landfills.

 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.

 Capping of individual landfills; includes continued cap maintenance and monitoring.

 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.

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).

 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-2009-86, 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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-15

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central Plateau. (9 pages)

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 RTD approximately half of waste sites and cap remainder.

 RTD all waste sites; backfill and revegetate.

 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).

 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-2009-86, 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

 RTD approximately half of waste sites and cap remainder.

 RTD all waste sites; backfill and revegetate.

 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.

 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:

 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.

 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.

 Remove and treat remote-handled special components onsite or at INL; dispose treated components at IDF or 

Nevada Test Site.

 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.

 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. 

 TBD – No decision documents currently available.

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 D4 all buildings per appropriate Removal Action Work Plan; if needed, remediate below-grade portions.

 Leave structures in place and transition to LTS with appropriate institutional controls.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-16

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central Plateau. (9 pages)

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.)

 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

 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.

 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.

 TBD – No decision documents currently available.

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 Implement results of treatability testing in accordance with CERCLA and/or RCRA final decisions.

 RTD all contaminated soils, to groundwater if necessary and technically practical; backfill and revegetate.

 In place treatment to destroy, immobilize, or capture, treat and dispose contaminants.

 Soil flushing with P&T or pore water removal.

 Install surface barriers.

 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.

 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/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/R10-97/048, 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, 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, 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.

 WAC 173-340, “Model Toxics Control Act -- Cleanup,” Washington Administrative Code, Olympia, 

Washington.

– WAC 173-340-720, “Groundwater Cleanup Standards.”
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-17

Table B-3. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Central Plateau. (9 pages)

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 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.

 Allow monitored natural attenuation to proceed under LTS with appropriate institutional controls.

 Hydraulic containment of the iodine-129 groundwater plume.

 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.

 WAC 173-340, “Model Toxics Control Act -- Cleanup,” Washington Administrative Code, Olympia, 

Washington.

– WAC 173-340-720, “Groundwater Cleanup Standards.”

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 Install P&T system for 200-BP-5 OU; implement monitored natural attenuation for 200-PO-1 OU; perform 

well support and maintenance activities.

 Allow monitored natural attenuation to proceed under LTS with appropriate institutional controls.

 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 decommissioning.

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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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-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

 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:

 Grout, cap and close SSTs with residual waste in place; monitor and implement institutional controls after 

closure; eventual transition to LTS.

 Construct new DST capacity sufficient to complete SST retrieval; close SSTs and implement post-closure care, 

monitoring, and institutional controls; eventual transition to LTS.

 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

 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.

 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.

 TBD – No decision documents currently available.

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-19

Table B-4. Summary of Future Cleanup Actions and Plausible Alternatives – Tank Waste. (2 pages)

Range of Plausible Alternatives

 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.

 RTD DSTs and ancillary facilities, residual waste, and contaminated soil; backfill and revegetate.

 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.

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.

 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

 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.

 D4 all buildings and facilities to slab-on-grade; evaluate below-grade portions for residual contamination; if 

needed, remediate below-grade portions.

 Perform clean closure of WTP and all ancillary facilities/structures.

 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 Milestone 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).
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-20

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 prior 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.

Table B-5. Summary of Completed Cleanup Action Alternatives. (2 pages)

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
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-21

Table B-5. Summary of Completed Cleanup Action Alternatives. (2 pages)

2014 HANFORD LIFECYCLE SCOPE, SCHEDULE AND COST REPORT (DOE/RL-2013-02)

Cleanup Action Cleanup Action Cleanup Action

None selected for 2014 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 currently remaining at Hanford. Table B-6 presents this schedule 

along with an explanation of the rationale for analyzing alternatives in the recommended LCR

year.

Table B-6. Anticipated Schedule for Detailed Analyses of Future Cleanup Action Alternatives. (3 pages)

Cleanup Action Alternative

 Central Plateau–Disposition B Plant Canyon 

Building/Associated Waste Sites (200-CB-1 

OU)

 Central Plateau–Disposition PUREX Canyon 

Building/Associated Waste Sites (200-CP-1 OU)

 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 in the 2015 LCR that could benefit future 

planning and budget requests.

 Central Plateau–Restore 200 East Groundwater 

to Beneficial Use (200-PO-1/200-BP-5 OUs)

TPA Milestone M-015-21A requires FS/proposed plan submittal 

by June 30, 2015. May be reasonable to develop alternatives in 

the 2015 LCR to benefit future planning and budget requests.

 Central Plateau– Remediate Pipelines, Pits, 

Diversion Boxes and Associated Tanks 

(200-IS-1 OU)

 Central Plateau–Remediate Remaining 200 East 

Inner Area Contaminated Soil Sites (200-EA-1 

OU)

Waste sites to be included in 200-IS-1/200-EA-1 OUs are subject 

to TPA negotiations that are expected to be resolved in the 2013 

timeframe. CERCLA/RCRA decision document submittals are 

scheduled by December 31, 2016 (TPA Milestone M-015-92B).

Analyzing potential alternatives in the 2015 LCR or later could 

provide information to help inform the decision process.

 Central Plateau–Disposition Below-Grade 

Portions of PFP

 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 2015 LCR, decide whether alternatives should be 

analyzed based on status of final cleanup decision making.

 River Corridor–Disposition 100 Area former 

orchard contaminated soil sites (100-OL-1 OU)

TPA Milestone M-015-95 requires RI/FS work plan submittal by 

April 30, 2013. May be reasonable to develop alternatives in the 

2015 LCR that could benefit future planning and budget requests.

 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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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–Disposition REDOX Canyon 

Building/Associated Waste Sites (200-CR-1 

OU)

TPA Milestone M-085-30A requires RI/FS work plan submittal 

by December 31, 2017. May be reasonable to develop alternatives after 2015 that may benefit future planning/budget requests.

 Central Plateau–Disposition Cesium/Strontium 

Capsules

TPA Milestone 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.

 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.

 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.

 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)

TPA Milestone M-085-20A requires DOE to submit an RI/FS 

Work Plan for the 200-CP-1 OU by September 30, 2015. 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 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).
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-23

Table B-6. Anticipated Schedule for Detailed Analyses of Future Cleanup Action Alternatives. (3 pages)

Cleanup Action Alternative

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 are expected 

to be substantially complete by 2012 (some residual cleanup in the 100 Area portions of the Monument will be 

addressed after 2012).

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

River Corridor - Restore 100-FR-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 cost estimate alternatives analysis in the LCR. Since the 100 Area K West Basin clean up action was limited 

to only one alternative (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.

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 decommissioning.

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/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-24

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-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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-25

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.

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-26

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.

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-27

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.

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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

B-28

This page intentionally left blank.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1 

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

C-i 

APPENDIX C 

HANFORD ESTIMATED SCHEDULE AND COST STATUS 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-ii

This page intentionally left blank.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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 ......................................................................5

C.1.3 SOLID WASTE STABILIZATION AND DISPOSITION–200 AREA 

(PBS RL-0013C) SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS .........................................9

C.1.4 SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY (PBS RL-0020) SCHEDULE AND 

COST DETAILS....................................................................................................20

C.1.5 SOIL AND WATER REMEDIATION–GROUNDWATER / VADOSE

ZONE (PBS RL-0030) SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS ..............................22

C.1.6 NUCLEAR FACILITY D&D–REMAINDER OF HANFORD

(PBS RL-0040.01.1) SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS..................................35

C.1.7 INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES (PBS RL-0040.01.2) 

SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS ....................................................................41

C.1.8 NUCLEAR FACILITY D&D-RIVER CORRIDOR CLOSURE 

PROJECT (PBS RL-0041) SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS........................45

C.1.9 NUCLEAR FACILITY D&D–FAST FLUX TEST FACILITY PROJECT 

(PBS RL-0042) SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS..........................................51

C.1.10 RICHLAND COMMUNITY AND REGULATORY SUPPORT 

(PBS RL-0100) SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS..........................................54

C.1.11 LONG-TERM STEWARDSHIP (PBS RL-LTS) SCHEDULE AND 

COST DETAILS....................................................................................................56

C.1.12 FINAL REACTOR DISPOSITION SCHEDULE AND COST DETAILS..........58

C.2 OFFICE OF RIVER PROTECTION PROJECT BASELINE SUMMARY 

INFORMATION................................................................................................................58

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

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

(2 pages) ...................................................................................................................... 5

Table C-5. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Remaining Lifecycle 

Schedule and Costs, Level 2 by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). .............................. 7
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-iv

Table C-6. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Near-Term Schedule and 

Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (2 pages).................................... 7

Table C-7. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) Level 

3 Scope Summary. (4 pages)....................................................................................... 9

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). (4 pages)................................................................................................. 13

Table C-9. Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area (PBS RL-0013C) NearTerm Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (3 

pages)......................................................................................................................... 17

Table C-10. Safeguards and Securities (PBS RL-0020) Level 2 Scope Summary. .................... 20

Table C-11. Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and 

Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000 Escalated).................................................... 21

Table C-12. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) 

Level 3 Scope Summary. (4 pages).......................................................................... 22

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)................................................................................................. 26

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). 

(5 pages) .................................................................................................................... 30

Table C-15. Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040.01.1) Level 3 

Scope Summary. (3 pages)........................................................................................ 35

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). (2 pages)................................................................................................. 38

Table C-17. Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford (PBS RL-0040.01.1) NearTerm Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (2 

pages)......................................................................................................................... 39

Table C-18. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040.01.2) Level 3 Scope Summary............ 41

Table C-19. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040.01.2) Remaining Lifecycle 

Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (2 pages) .......... 42

Table C-20. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040.01.2) Near-Term Schedule and 

Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated)................................................... 44

Table C-21. Nuclear Facility D&D-River Corridor Closure Project (PBS RL-0041) Level 

3 Scope Summary. (3 pages).................................................................................... 45

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). ................................................................................................................. 48
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-v

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) .................................................................................................................... 49

Table C-24. Nuclear Facility D&D–Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042) Level 

3 Scope Summary...................................................................................................... 51

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). (2 pages)................................................................................................. 52

Table C-26. Nuclear Facility D&D-Fast Flux Test Facility Project (PBS RL-0042), NearTerm Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated)................... 53

Table C-27. Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100) Level 3 

Scope Summary......................................................................................................... 54

Table C-28. Richland Community and Regulatory Support (PBS RL-0100), Remaining 

Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). ........... 55

Table C-29. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Level 2 Scope Summary. ....................... 56

Table C-30. Long-Term Stewardship (PBS RL-LTS) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and 

Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated)................................................... 57

Table C-31. Final Reactor Disposition Level 2 Scope Summary................................................ 58

Table C-32. Final Reactor Disposition Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 

2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated)........................................................................ 58

Table C-33. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP0014) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year 

($1,000, Escalated). (2 pages) ................................................................................... 59

Table C-34. Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition (PBS ORP0014), Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, 

Escalated). (2 pages).................................................................................................. 60

Table C-35. Major Construction – Waste Treatment Plant (PBS ORP-0060) Remaining 

Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). ........... 61

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) .......... 62
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-vi

This page intentionally left blank.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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

CVDF Cold Vacuum Drying Facility

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

G&A general and administrative

GM groundwater monitoring

GRP Groundwater Remediation Project

GSSC General Support Services Contract

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

ISA Interim Storage Area

ISS interim safe storage

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

MSC Mission Support Contract

MS/GS Mission Support/General Support

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-viii

NM nuclear material

O&M operations and maintenance

OHC Other Hanford Contractor

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

NRDWL non-radioactive dangerous waste landfill

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

OU operable unit

PA performance assessment

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

REA request for equitable adjustment

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

SAP Service Assessment Pool

SIF slightly irradiated fuel

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

UBS usage-based services

WAC Washington Administrative Code

WCH Washington Closure Hanford

WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot Plant

WESF Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility

WRAP Waste Receiving and Processing (Facility)

WSCF Waste Sampling and Characterization Facility

WTP Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 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

, Milestone M-036-01, additional schedule 

and cost details are provided in appendices to the Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost 

Report (Lifecycle Report [LCR]). The schedules and costs are provided by project baseline 

summary (PBS) and reflect the scope discussed in Chapters 3.0 through 6.0 of the 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] 2014) 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:

 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.

 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 FY2014 through the final year of the lifecycle for all 

PBSs. PBS RL-LTS extends from FY2060 through FY2090. 

 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):

 Nuclear Materials Stabilization and Disposition–PFP, PBS RL-0011

 SNF Stabilization and Disposition, PBS RL-0012

 

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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-2

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

 Safeguards and Security, PBS RL-0020

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

 Nuclear Facility D&D–Remainder of Hanford, PBS RL-0040.01.1

 Infrastructure and Services, PBS RL-0040.01.2

 Nuclear Facility D&D–River Corridor Cleanup Project, PBS RL-0041

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

 Richland Community and Regulatory Support, PBS RL-0100

 Long-Term Stewardship, PBS RL-LTS

 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

Provides safety, emergency management, OSHA, 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

Provides for management functions, including management and 

technical/engineering support to the project mission.

Site-wide 

Services Site-wide Services Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See Table C-18 for details.

UBS 

Distributions

Assessments for 

Mission Support

Contract Services

Includes services that are charged based on predetermined rates, and services 

directly charged to OHCs. Examples of UBS with predetermined rates 

include: Training, Reproduction, Waste Sampling and Characterization 

Facility Laboratory Sample Analysis, Crane and Rigging, Fleet Maintenance, 

Desktop and User Services, and Telecommunications. Examples of UBS

charged to OHCs include: Janitorial, Facility Services, and Motor Carrier 

Services.

UBS, G&A, and 

Direct 

Distribution

Fee and 

Management 

Reserve

Fee is contractor’s profit. Management Reserve is an amount of the total 

contract budget withheld for management control purposes by the contractor. 

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.

G&A = General & Administrative.

NEPA = National Environmental Policy Act.

OHS = Other Hanford Contractors.

NM = nuclear materials.

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant.

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

UBS = usage-based services.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-3

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total

Maintain Safe and Compliant PFP 31,044 35,566 15,120 0 0 0 0 81,730

Disposition PFP Facility 68,526 147,225 172,127 51,087 26,518 23,311 23,043 511,837

Project Management and Support 8,838 10,066 4,197 0 0 0 0 23,101

Site-wide Services 29,289 27,522 22,253 7,363 3,226 3,107 3,517 96,277

UBS Distributions 3,307 3,693 2,284 6 0 0 0 9,290

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 6,037 6,187 11,305 8,018 0 0 0 31,547

Total 147,041 230,259 227,286 66,474 29,744 26,418 26,560 753,782

G&A = general and administrative.

PBS = project baseline summary.

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant.

UBS = usage-based services.

Table C-3. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (2 pages)

Schedule 

Level Scope 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

1 NM Stabilization and Disposition – PFP

2 Maintain Safe and Compliant PFP 31,044 35,566 15,120 0 0 0 81,730

3 Maintain Safe and Compliant 31,044 30,651 14,648 0 0 0 76,343

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 4,915 472 0 0 0 5,387

2 Disposition PFP Facility 68,526 147,225 172,127 51,087 26,518 23,311 488,794

3 Disposition PFP Facility 68,526 68,213 68,305 1,429 0 0 206,473

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 79,012 103,822 49,658 26,518 23,311 282,321

2 Project Management and Support 8,838 10,066 4,197 0 0 0 23,101

3 Project Management & Support 8,838 8,782 4,061 0 0 0 21,681

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 1,284 136 0 0 0 1,420

2 Site-wide Services 29,289 27,522 22,253 7,363 3,226 3,107 92,790

3 Site-wide Services 29,289 27,522 22,253 7,363 3,226 3,107 92,790

2 UBS Distributions 3,307 3,693 2,284 6 0 0 9,290

3 Assessments for MSC Services to PRC 3,307 3,357 2,247 6 0 0 8,917

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty - UBS Distributions 0 336 37 0 0 0 374
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-4

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Table C-3. NM Stabilization and Disposition–PFP (PBS RL-0011) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (2 pages)

Schedule 

Level Scope 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

2 UBS G&A, Direct Distribution 6,037 6,187 11,305 8,018 0 0 31,547

3 Fee and Management Reserve 6,037 6,187 11,305 8,018 0 0 31,547

Total 147,041 230,259 227,286 66,474 29,744 26,418 727,222

G&A = general and administrative.

MSC = Mission Support Contract.

PBS = project baseline summary.

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant.

PRC = Plateau Remediation Contract.

UBS = usage-based services.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-5

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. (2 pages)

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 CVDF; 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

Provides for 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 Site-wide Services Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See Table C-18 for details.

RL Directed 

Activities

GSSC Support, 

Other

GSSC support includes contracted technical services in key areas such as audit, 

regulatory analysis and estimating. Other activities include 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 Nations support, and other small contracts.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-6

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

Level 2 Work 

Element

Level 3 Work 

Element Scope Summary

UBS 

Distributions

Assessments for 

Mission Support 

Contract Services

Includes services that are charged based on predetermined rates, and services 

that are directly charged to OHC. Examples of USBs with predetermined rates 

include: Training, Reproduction, WSCF Laboratory Sample Analysis, Crane 

and Rigging, Fleet Maintenance, Desktop and User Services, and 

Telecommunications. Examples of USBs that are directly charged to OHCs 

include: Janitorial, Facility Services, and Motor Carrier Services.

UBS G&A, 

Direct 

Distribution

Fee and 

Management

Reserve

Fee is contractor’s profit. Management Reserve is an amount of the total 

contract budget withheld for management control purposes by the contractor. 

NOTE: See Tables C-5 and C-6 for schedule and budget information.

CVDF = Cold Vacuum Drying Facility.

D&D = decontamination and decommissioning.

G&A = General & Administrative.

GSSC = General Support Services Contract.

KE = K East.

KW = K West.

OHC = Other Hanford Contractor.

PBS = project baseline summary.

STSC = Sludge Transfer Storage Container.

UBS = usage-based services.

WSCF = Waste Sampling and Characterization Facility.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-7

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total

Program Management 2,507 2,774 2,829 2,987 2,972 14,069

K Basins Operations and Maintenance 7,766 9,451 17,622 18,850 0 53,689

Facility Operations 8,686 9,687 11,105 12,437 10,382 52,297

Sludge Treatment Project 27,075 67,680 93,970 91,863 0 280,588

Site-wide Services 12,874 13,114 0 0 0 25,988

RL Directed Activities 512 1,249 1,288 0 0 3,049

Usage-Based Services Distributions 2,050 2,241 2,217 2,346 2,337 11,191

Usage-Based Services, General & Administrative, and Direct Distribution 3,521 4,047 8,300 6,440 545 22,583

Total 64,991 110,243 137,331 134,923 16,236 463,724

Table C-6. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (2 pages)

Schedule 

Level Scope 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total

1 SNF Stabilization and Disposition 

2 Program Management 2,507 2,774 2,829 2,987 2,972 14,069

3 100K Area Project Management 2,507 2,521 2,703 2,923 2,972 13,627

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 253 126 64 0 443

2 K Basins Operations and Maintenance 7,766 9,451 17,622 18,850 0 53,689

3 KW Basin 7,766 8,102 16,993 18,538 0 51,399

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 1,349 629 312 0 2,290

2 Facility Operations 8,686 9,687 11,105 12,437 10,382 52,297

3 100K Facility Operations & Support 8,686 8,772 10,774 12,215 10,382 50,829

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 915 331 222 0 1,467

2 Sludge Treatment Project 27,075 67,680 93,970 91,863 0 280,588

3 Management and Support 3,132 7,472 12,116 13,289 0 36,009

3 Process Containerized Sludge 23,943 60,208 81,854 78,574 0 244,578

2 Site-wide Services 12,874 13,114 0 0 0 25,988

3 Site-wide Services 12,874 13,114 0 0 0 25,988
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-8

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Table C-6. SNF Stabilization and Disposition (PBS RL-0012) Near-Term Schedule and Costs, Level 3, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). (2 pages)

Schedule 

Level Scope 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total

2 RL Directed Activities 512 1,249 1,288 0 0 3,049

3 GSSC Support 512 811 850 0 0 2,173

3 Other 0 438 438 0 0 876

2 UBS Distributions 2,050 2,241 2,217 2,346 2,337 11,191

3 Assessments for MSC Services to PRC 2,050 2,061 2,125 2,299 2,337 10,872

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 180 92 47 0 319

2 UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 3,521 4,047 8,300 6,440 545 22,853

3 Fee and Management Reserve 3,521 4,047 8,300 6,440 545 22,852

Total 64,991 110,243 137,331 134,923 16,236 463,724

GSSC = General Support Services Contract.

G&A = general and administrative.

KW = K West.

PBS = project baseline summary.

MSC = Mission Support Contract.

PRC = Plateau Remediation Contract.

UBS = usage-based services.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-9

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

Provides for 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.

Transition 

WESF

Provides for the WESF operating crews to transition the facility to a condition ready 

for D&D after transfer of the capsules and facility shutdown.

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

Tri-Party 

Agreement 

Milestone M-91-

42 (MLLW)

Prepare M-91-42 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.

M-91-43 

(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-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-10

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 for 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 for 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 for services necessary to maintain the T Plant Complex in a ready-to-serve 

status (base operations) for waste processing operations.

T Plant

Upgrades

Provides for upgrades to waste processing equipment, systems components, and 

computer interface equipment, including physical upgrades to T Plant Facility. 

T Plant 

Transition

Following operations, T Plant will be transitioned to a condition ready for D&D.

Central Waste 

Complex

(CWC)

CWC

Provides for 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.

CWC CENRTC

Provides for CENRTC that may be required to maintain CWC in a ready-to-operate 

condition, includes procurement of forklifts and other equipment necessary to 

maintain compliant facility operations for CWC, LLBG, and Mixed Waste Trenches.

CWC Transition Following operations, CWC will be transitioned to a condition ready for D&D.

Low-Level 

Waste Burial 

Grounds

(LLBG)

Provides for the 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

Provides for expansion of ERDF as needed to support site cleanup efforts.

ERDF Interim 

Cover

Provides for 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 PBSs generating waste.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-11

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

Liquid 

Effluent 

Facilities

200 Area Liquid 

Effluent 

Facilities Base 

Operations

Provides for 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 Site cleanup activities.

200 Area Liquid 

Effluent 

Facilities 

Upgrades

Provides for modifications to ETF, TEDF and LERF to improve operations, extend 

useful life, ensure regulatory compliance, and/or correct identified deficiencies.

300 Area Liquid 

Effluent 

Facilities Base 

Operations

Provides for maintenance of the 300 Area TEDF (310 TEDF) until it is transferred to 

decommissioning activities, surveillance and maintenance of the 340 Waste 

Handling Facility (340 Facility) until it is transferred to decommissioning activities, 

and operation of the 310 Retention/Transfer System which receives, samples, and 

disposes of liquid effluents generated in the 300 Area to the city of Richland sewer 

system.

Integrated 

Disposal 

Facility (IDF)

IDF Operations

Provides for 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.

IDF-East

Construction

Provides for additional onsite, expandable, integrated, disposal capacity for 

compliant immobilized low-activity waste stream packages produced at WTP and for 

MLLW and LLW; includes project management, permitting and safety, project 

support, and engineering, procurement, and construction.

Solid Waste 

Base 

Operations

Solid Waste 

Ready to Serve

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

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 for 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

Includes design, construction and turnover to operations of a Fuel Preparation 

Facility to repackage fuel stored at the 200 Area ISA into DOE Standard Canisters 

that satisfy repository acceptance requirements. The facility will include a shielded 

hot cell and remote welding capabilities.

Offsite SNF 

Disposition

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.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-12

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

Consolidate 

Slightly 

Irradiated Fuel

at ISA

Includes the care and custody of all slightly irradiated fuel and special nuclear 

material stored at the 200 Area ISA until such time as final disposition to a National 

Repository is complete.

Mixed Waste 

Disposal 

Trenches

Mixed Waste 

Disposal 

Trenches Base 

Operations

Provides for the 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 for the design, construction, and other activities necessary to add 

operational layers in the Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches to maintain their ready-toserve 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 facilities, including Phase 2 treatment and 

packaging, shutdown and deactivation of needed equipment, and management and 

support.

Site-wide 

Services 

Site-wide 

Services

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See Table C18 for details.

RL Directed 

Activities

GSSC Support, 

Other

GSSC support includes contracted technical services in key areas such as audit, 

regulatory analysis, cost and risk analysis and estimating. Other activities include 

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.

UBS 

Distributions

Assessments for 

Mission Support 

Contract 

Services, 

Assessments for 

other provided 

services

Includes services that are charged based on predetermined rates, and services that are 

directly charged to OHCs. Examples of UBSs with predetermined rates are: Training, 

Reproduction, Waste Sampling and Characterization Facility Laboratory Sample 

Analysis, Crane and Rigging, Fleet Maintenance, Desktop and User Services, and 

Telecommunications. Examples of UBSs that are directly charged to OHCs include: 

Janitorial, Facility Services, and Motor Carrier Services.

UBS, G&A, 

Direct 

Distribution

Fee and 

Management 

Reserve, 

Allocated 

Pensions, G&A 

Allocations

Fee is contractor’s profit. Management Reserve is an amount of the total contract 

budget withheld for management control purposes by the contractor. Allocated 

pensions are for the multi-employer pension plan for the contractor work force.

General and administrative costs are allocated to the project.

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.

G&A = General & Administrative.

GSSC = General Support Services Contract.

IDF = Integrated Disposal Facility.

ISA = Interim Storage Area.

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.

UBS = usage-based services.

WESF = Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility.

WRAP = Waste Receiving and Processing (Facility).

WTP = Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-13

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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). (4 pages)

Fiscal Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Project Management 14,010 17,628 18,116 19,238 18,247 16,457 16,917 17,269 17,710 18,090

Capsule Storage and Disposition 6,796 28,025 23,174 46,332 40,852 21,484 16,822 6,161 5,821 15,710

Canister Storage Building 6,837 7,446 7,552 7,768 3,147 4,074 4,167 4,279 4,357 4,434

MLLW Treatment 0 5 12,729 10,550 4,283 361 318 332 341 339

TRU Retrieval 0 1,953 172,997 95,029 67,843 29,528 17,413 2,320 0 0

TRU Repackaging 2,667 1,772 90,798 75,028 38,517 1,828 0 0 0 0

WRAP 3,196 10,346 23,796 12,396 4,228 12,066 9,494 0 0 0

T Plant 9,096 14,442 20,509 20,930 20,444 19,177 13,348 13,617 14,040 14,371

Central Waste Complex 8,762 10,190 10,330 10,286 4,344 7,781 8,005 8,410 8,398 8,632

ERDF 69 1,829 1,457 209 173 2,596 2,660 11,629 2,263 1,263

Liquid Effluent Facilities 23,576 17,396 23,222 26,866 13,346 0 0 0 0 0

Integrated Disposal Facility 332 583 631 845 2,147 2,534 2,471 2,531 2,581 2,644

Solid Waste Base Operations 3,119 3,269 3,291 3,547 3,600 0 0 0 0 0

TRU Disposition 0 23 264 2,736 13,180 31,437 25,469 25,558 24,600 24,474

Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposition 323 417 17,922 34,053 29,898 34,004 25,851 26,354 6,806 3,416

Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches 575 606 629 705 368 3,692 1,928 0 0 0

Sludge Disposition 0 0 0 12,318 156,055 317,159 194,466 14,775 0 0

Site-Wide Services 22,354 16,695 63,049 66,738 72,170 107,386 79,269 27,199 19,512 20,260

RL Directed Activities 0 0 0 1,377 1,389 1,040 618 630 0 0

UBS Distributions 6,780 4,622 7,519 8,388 3,799 2,184 2,350 1,933 2,116 2,316

UBS, G&A, Direct Distribution 3,191 2,841 15,192 12,425 16,582 30,852 44,262 27,245 18,103 18,823

Total 111,683 140,087 513,177 467,764 514,612 645,640 465,828 190,242 126,648 134,772

Fiscal Year 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033

Project Management 18,602 19,039 11,850 5,161 5,300 5,383 5,527 5,647 5,837 5,965

Capsule Storage and Disposition 14,822 1,044 137 141 144 364 159 0 0 0

Canister Storage Building 4,528 4,673 4,709 4,832 4,936 5,021 5,174 5,330 5,450 5,559

MLLW Treatment 350 358 388 388 411 397 401 410 429 430

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 56,727 67,056 61,764 62,666 64,501 65,575 67,341 69,158 71,059 72,192

Central Waste Complex 8,851 4,533 4,888 4,732 4,874 4,909 5,043 3,263 3,036 3,096

ERDF 1,289 1,322 1,349 1,378 1,407 3,020 106 109 114 115
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-14

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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). (4 pages)

Liquid Effluent Facilities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Integrated Disposal Facility 4,777 14,500 25,397 7,488 3,030 3,039 3,058 3,186 3,226 3,282

Solid Waste Base Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TRU Disposition 25,137 25,715 26,307 26,912 27,530 28,052 28,811 28,180 8,890 0

Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposition 3,478 3,547 3,116 3,188 3,286 5,739 5,858 5,993 6,179 6,295

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 35,868 45,042 43,707 38,147 37,470 38,647 35,951 41,782 41,012 34,156

RL Directed Activities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UBS Distributions 2,535 2,775 3,037 3,325 3,639 3,983 4,360 4,773 5,224 5,719

UBS, G&A, Direct Distribution 34,834 37,593 37,868 31,569 31,625 33,184 33,291 33,850 33,209 30,682

Total 211,798 227,197 224,517 189,927 188,153 197,313 195,080 201,681 183,665 167,491

Fiscal Year 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043

Project Management 6,058 6,214 6,404 6,556 6,707 6,855 6,927 7,162 7,362 7,480

Capsule Storage and Disposition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Canister Storage Building 5,615 5,753 7,112 7,939 29 0 0 0 0 0

MLLW 448 450 469 497 508 512 519 533 540 556

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 73,641 75,359 77,234 22,032 25,043 4,789 154 0 0 0

Central Waste Complex 3,147 3,551 14,151 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

ERDF 116 125 122 124 128 129 132 138 138 144

Liquid Effluent Facilities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Integrated Disposal Facility 3,383 3,473 3,574 3,665 3,687 3,817 3,866 3,981 4,052 4,215

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 6,440 6,588 6,749 13,437 13,824 14,142 14,521 14,743 15,119 62

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 33,085 32,861 28,657 14,901 14,450 8,880 11,238 8,432 8,345 7,695

RL Directed Activities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UBS Distributions 6,260 6,852 7,500 8,210 8,987 9,837 10,767 11,786 12,901 14,122

UBS, G&A, Direct Distribution 31,007 32,113 33,124 14,858 14,181 7,044 6,909 6,622 6,680 4,441

Total 169,200 173,339 185,096 92,219 87,544 56,005 55,033 53,397 55,137 38,715
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-15

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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). (4 pages)

Fiscal Year 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053

Project Management 7,696 7,822 7,954 8,171 8,410 8,584 8,245 8,467 8,217 8,406

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 578 581 608 596 610 622 643 661 0 0

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 1,051 3,796 4,362 4,700 3,928 2,106 1,628 526 28 123

Central Waste Complex 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

ERDF 148 148 152 160 3,490 3,501 0 0 0 0

Liquid Effluent Facilities 0 0 0 0 0 0 46,908 42,880 43,935 44,952

Integrated Disposal Facility 4,321 4,310 4,426 4,550 4,669 1,460 1,802 1,974 1,788 1,801

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 12,073 13,218 13,768 13,529 13,611 11,846 15,152 12,834 14,597 13,455

RL Directed Activities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UBS Distributions 15,458 16,920 18,521 20,273 22,191 24,291 26,589 29,105 31,858 34,873

UBS, G&A, Direct Distribution 6,150 7,797 8,010 8,167 9,942 8,906 15,038 13,853 14,865 15,353

Total 47,475 54,592 57,801 60,146 66,851 61,316 116,005 110,300 115,288 118,963

Fiscal Year 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 Total

Project Management 5,665 0 0 0 0 417,355

Capsule Storage and Disposition 0 0 0 0 0 227,988

Canister Storage Building 0 0 0 0 0 130,720

MLLW 0 0 0 0 0 43,151

TRU Retrieval 0 0 0 0 0 387,083

TRU Repackaging 0 0 0 0 0 210,610

WRAP 0 0 0 0 0 75,522

T Plant 0 0 0 0 0 1,118,513

Central Waste Complex 0 0 0 0 0 153,212
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-16

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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). (4 pages)

ERDF 0 0 0 0 0 43,252

Liquid Effluent Facilities 35,692 19,471 12,762 8,346 972 360,324

Integrated Disposal Facility 1,342 1,062 531 158 115 160,304

Solid Waste Base Operations 0 0 0 0 0 16,826

TRU Disposition 0 0 0 0 0 373,275

Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposition 0 0 0 0 0 331,348

Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches 0 0 0 0 0 8,503

Sludge Disposition 0 0 0 0 0 694,773

Site-Wide Services 10,554 2,376 1,672 1,338 179 1,205,160

RL Directed Activities 0 0 0 0 0 5,054

UBS Distributions 38,172 0 0 0 0 456,850

UBS, G&A, Direct Distribution 12,578 7,456 4,940 3,880 515 821,650

Total 104,003 30,365 19,905 13,722 1,781 7,241,473

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility.

G&A = general and administrative.

MLLW = Mixed Low-Level Waste.

PBS = project baseline summary.

TRU = transuranic.

UBS = usage-based services.

WRAP = Waste Receiving and Processing Facility.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-17

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

1 Solid Waste Stabilization and Disposition–200 Area 

2 Project Management 14,010 17,628 18,116 19,238 18,247 16,457 103,697

3 Project Management 14,010 14,422 15,721 16,928 17,670 15,668 94,420

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 3,206 2,395 2,310 577 789 9,277

2 Capsule Storage and Disposition 6,796 28,025 23,174 46,332 40,852 21,484 166,664

3 WESF Base Operations 6,796 6,834 7,127 7,620 7,747 4,425 40,548

3 Cesium/Strontium Capsule Disposition 0 4,172 13,703 31,684 32,348 13,547 95,454

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 17,019 2,344 7,028 757 3,512 30,661

2 Canister Storage Building (CSB) 6,837 7,445 7,552 7,768 3,147 4,074 36,824

3 Canister Storage Building 6,837 6,684 7,270 7,479 2,879 3,750 34,900

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 761 282 289 268 324 1,924

2 Mixed Low Level Waste Treatment 0 5 12,729 10,550 4,283 361 27,930

3 M-91-42 (MLLW) 0 0 2,934 9,301 3,227 0 15,463

3 M-91-43 (MLLW) 0 0 1,154 3 0 0 1,157

3 Other Treatment Activities 0 0 149 1 0 0 150

3 MLLW Project Management 0 0 926 92 0 301 1,320

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 5 7,566 1,153 1,056 60 9,840

2 TRU Retrieval 0 1,953 172,997 95,029 67,843 29,528 367,351

3 CH Waste Retrieval Operations 0 0 149,134 60,171 24,786 15,188 249,280

3 RH Waste Retrieval Operations 0 0 22,913 24,889 4,504 0 52,306

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 1,953 950 9,969 38,553 14,340 65,766

2 TRU Repackaging 2,667 1,772 90,798 75,028 38,517 1,828 210,610

3 TRU Repackaging 2,667 0 87,097 43,942 29,953 0 163,659

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 1,772 3,701 31,086 8,564 1,828 46,951

2 Waste Receiving and Processing Facility (WRAP) 3,196 10,346 23,796 12,396 4,228 12,066 66,028

3 WRAP Base Operations 0 6,842 6,836 6,993 0 0 20,672

3 WRAP Transition 0 0 0 0 0 11,498 11,498

3 Min-Safe Operation 3,196 2,812 4,831 5,225 3,643 0 19,706

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 692 12,129 178 585 568 14,152

2 T-Plant 9,096 14,442 20,509 20,930 20,444 19,177 104,598

3 T-Plant Base Operations 9,096 12,048 14,822 15,647 9,482 17,234 78,329

3 T-Plant Upgrades 0 1,004 3,817 3,555 8,781 0 17,157

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 1,390 1,870 1,728 2,181 1,943 9,112
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-18

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

2 Central Waste Complex 8,762 10,190 10,330 10,286 4,344 7,781 51,692

3 Central Waste Complex 8,269 6,771 8,804 9,241 3,735 7,427 44,246

3 Low-Level Waste Burial Grounds 493 721 1,144 691 215 0 3,264

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 2,698 382 354 394 354 4,181

2 Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) 69 1,829 1,457 209 173 2,596 6,333

3 ERDF Cell Expansion 0 0 0 0 0 1,955 1,955

3 ERDF Interim Cover 0 1,194 1,222 0 0 0 2,416

3 ERDF Operations 69 32 33 33 41 80 287

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 603 202 176 132 561 1,675

2 Liquid Effluent Facilities 23,576 17,397 23,222 26,866 13,346 0 104,407

3 200 Area Liquid Effluent Facilities Base Operations 23,396 16,142 21,407 22,526 6,208 0 89,679

3 200 Area Liquid Effluent Facilities Upgrades 0 0 633 3,160 6,797 0 10,590

3 300 Area Liquid Effluent Facilities Base Operations 180 209 212 233 91 0 926

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 1,045 970 947 250 0 3,212

2 Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) 332 583 631 845 2,147 2,534 7,072

3 IDF Operations 332 333 356 549 1,968 1,350 4,888

3 IDF Regulatory and Safety 0 134 225 188 172 1,094 1,812

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 116 50 108 7 90 372

2 Solid Waste Base Operations 3,119 3,269 3,291 3,547 3,600 0 16,826

3 Solid Waste Ready to Serve 3,119 3,129 3,219 3,474 3,525 0 16,467

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 140 72 73 75 0 359

2 TRU Disposition 0 23 264 2,736 13,180 31,437 47,640

3 CCP Support 0 0 178 548 303 712 1,741

3 Establish Shipping Capability 0 0 0 0 0 953 953

3 TRU Shipping 0 0 0 1,974 10,734 22,602 35,310

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 23 86 214 2,143 7,170 9,637

2 Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Disposition 323 417 17,922 34,053 29,898 34,004 116,616

3 Fuel Prep Facility 0 0 0 0 0 17,233 17,233

3 Offsite SNF Disposition 323 325 17,834 33,964 29,807 15,896 98,148

3 Consolidate SIF at ISA 0 0 0 0 0 434 434

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 92 88 89 91 441 801

2 Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches 575 606 629 705 368 3,692 6,576

3 Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches Base Operations 575 577 614 640 249 0 2,656

3 Mixed Waste Disposal Trenches Upgrades 0 0 0 0 0 3,692 3,692
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-19

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 29 15 65 119 0 228

2 Sludge Disposition 0 0 0 12,318 156,055 317,159 485,532

3 Sludge Disposition 0 0 0 10,490 133,227 269,674 413,391

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 0 0 1,828 22,828 47,485 72,141

2 Site-Wide Services 22,354 16,695 63,049 66,738 72,170 107,386 348,392

3 Site-Wide Services 22,354 16,695 63,049 66,738 72,170 107,386 348,392

2 RL Directed Activities 0 0 0 1,377 1,389 1,040 3,806

3 GSSC Support 0 0 0 939 951 602 2,492

3 Other 0 0 0 438 438 438 1,314

2 UBS Distributions 6,780 4,622 7,519 8,388 3,799 2,184 33,290

3 Assessments for MSC Services to PRC 2,374 2,352 2,510 3,116 1,527 518 12,396

3 Assessments -Other Provided Services to PRC 4,406 1,850 4,729 4,989 1,975 1,666 19,615

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 420 280 283 297 0 1,279

2 UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 3,191 2,841 15,192 12,425 16,582 30,852 81,063

3 Fee and Management Reserve 3,191 2,841 5,078 3,817 7,974 9,740 32,641

3 G&A Allocations 0 0 10,114 8,608 8,608 21,112 48,443

Total 111,683 140,087 513,177 467,764 514,612 645,640 2,392,963

CCP = Central Characterization Project.

CH = contact-handled.

CSB = Canister Storage Building.

CWC = Central Waste Complex.

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility.

G&A = general and administrative.

GSSC = General Support Services Contract.

IDF = Integrated Disposal Facility.

ISA = interim storage area.

MSC = Mission Support Contract.

MLLW = mixed low-level waste.

PRC = Plateau Remediation Contract.

PBS = project baseline summary.

RH = remote-handled.

SIF = slightly irradiated fuel.

SNF = spent nuclear fuel.

TRU = transuranic.

UBS = usage-based services.

WESF = Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility.

WRAP = Waste Receiving and Processing (Facility).
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-20

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.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-21

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Table C-11. Safeguards and Security (PBS RL-0020) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000 Escalated). 

Fiscal Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Safeguards and Security 70,240 71,519 71,864 72,958 78,541 98,365 59,333 63,381 66,584 67,979

Fiscal Year 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033

Safeguards and Security 69,941 70,906 72,411 74,470 76,230 77,704 79,824 82,712 86,753 87,254

Fiscal Year 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043

Safeguards and Security 88,565 90,818 91,101 93,143 41,369 42,497 45,498 45,100 45,751 49,532

Fiscal Year 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053

Safeguards and Security 55,370 57,321 58,145 59,323 60,602 61,735 58,942 59,615 64,403 66,217

Fiscal Year 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059

Safeguards and Security 68,002 68,123 69,993 74,797 77,491 77,409

Total 3,169,827
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-22

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. (4 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, including non-OU-related 

well maintenance, monitoring, and reporting.

IFW – GRP Field Work Projects

IFW – Field Equipment Purchases (CENRTC)

Well Maintenance, Monitoring & Reporting

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

RCRA Monitoring and Reporting

RCRA Field Support

Hanford Geotechnical 

GM/PA Project Management

Well Maintenance, Monitoring and Reporting

100-BC-5 

100-BC-5 OU Project Management Includes project management, CERCLA process 

100-BC-5 CERCLA Process Implementation implementation for final remedy, remedial actions, 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-23

Table C-12. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Level 3 Scope 

Summary. (4 pages)

Level 2 Work 

Element Level 3 Work Element Scope Summary

Operable Unit 100-BC-5 Remedial Actions-Interim and Final and monitoring and reporting.

100-BC-5 Monitoring and Reporting

100-KR-4 

Operable Unit

100-KR-4 OU Project Management Includes project management, CERCLA process 

implementation for final remedy, remedial actions, 

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-NR-2 

Operable Unit

100-NR-2 OU Project Management Includes project management, CERCLA process 

implementation for final remedy, remedial actions, 

monitoring and reporting, modifications and 

expansions, 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 Modifications and Expansions

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, remedial actions, 

and monitoring and reporting.

100-FR-3 CERCLA Process Implementation

100-FR-3 Remedial Actions

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, modifications and 

expansions, and final D&D of remedy components.

200-UP-1 Remedial Actions-Interim and Final

200-UP-1 Monitoring and Reporting

200-UP-1 Modifications and Expansions

200-UP-1 D&D

200-ZP-1 

Operable Unit

200-ZP-1 OU Project Management Includes project management, decision 

documentation, remedial actions, monitoring and 

reporting, and final D&D of remedy components.

200-ZP-1 Decision Documentation

200-ZP-1 Remedial Actions-Interim and Final

200-ZP-1 Monitoring and Reporting

200-ZP-1 D&D
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-24

Table C-12. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Level 3 Scope 

Summary. (4 pages)

Level 2 Work 

Element Level 3 Work Element Scope Summary

200-PW-1 

Operable Unit

200-PW-1 OU Project Management Includes project management, remedial actions, 

monitoring and reporting, and final D&D of 

remedy components.

200-PW-1 Remedial Actions-Interim and Final

200-PW-1 Monitoring and Reporting

200-PW-1 D&D

300-FF-5 

Operable Unit

300-FF-5 OU Project Management Includes project management, decision documents 

for final remedy, remedial actions, and monitoring 

and reporting.

300-FF-5 Decision Documentation

300-FF-5 Remedial Actions – Interim and 

Final

300-FF-5 Monitoring and Reporting

Regulatory 

Decisions and 

Closure 

Integration

200-B/C Cribs & Trenches Area Remediation 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.

200-TW-1/2 Scavenged Waste

200-PW-2/4 Uranium-Rich Process Waste 

Group

200-PW-1 Plutonium-Rich Waste Group

200-LW-1/2 Chemical Lab Waste Group

200-UR-1 Unplanned Releases Waste Group

200-SW-1/2 Solid Waste Disposal Areas

200-IS-1 Tanks, Lines, Pits & Boxes

Closure Zones

Deep Vadose 

Zone Treatability 

Tests

Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests Includes planning for and conducting both 

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 at the Hanford Site in 

the deep vadose zone. 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 

Site-wide Services Includes proportional share of costs for site services 

and infrastructure. See Table C-18 for details.

RL Directed 

Activities

General Support Services Contract Support Includes contracted technical services in key areas 

such as audit, regulatory analysis, cost and risk 

analysis and estimating.

UBS 

Distributions

Assessments for Mission Support Contract 

Services to Plateau Remediation Contract, 

Assessments for Other Provided Services to 

Plateau Remediation Contract

Includes services that are charged based on 

predetermined rates, and services that are directly 

charged to OHC. Examples of UBSs with 

predetermined rates include: training, reproduction, 

Waste Sampling and Characterization Facility

Laboratory Sample Analysis, crane and rigging, 

fleet maintenance, desktop and user services, and 

telecommunications. Examples of UBSs that are 

directly charged to OHCs include: Janitorial, 

facility services, and motor carrier services. Other 

Provided Services includes General Services 

Administration vehicle lease and mileage charges 

and Hanford Site job control system.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-25

Table C-12. Soil and Water Remediation–Groundwater/Vadose Zone (PBS RL-0030) Level 3 Scope 

Summary. (4 pages)

Level 2 Work 

Element Level 3 Work Element Scope Summary

UBS, G&A, and 

Direct 

Distribution

Fee and Management Reserve, Allocated 

Pensions, G&A Allocations

Fee is contractor’s profit. Management Reserve is 

an amount of the total contract budget withheld for 

management control purposes by the contractor. 

Allocated pensions are for the multi-employer 

pension plan for the contractor work force. G&A

costs are allocated to the project.

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.

G&A = General & Administrative.

GM/PA = groundwater monitoring/performance 

assessment.

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.

UBS = usage-based service.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-26

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Integration and Assessments 6,686 8,364 18,532 13,993 14,198 14,826 14,729 15,098 14,030 14,005

Drilling 5,550 18,245 23,215 18,835 24,446 5,310 4,314 3,008 7,092 6,757

Project Management 7,574 8,990 8,345 8,978 9,705 8,883 8,755 8,983 6,255 6,246

Integrated Field Work 8,271 11,491 10,279 10,407 12,208 9,986 10,012 10,385 10,647 10,846

GW Monitoring/Performance Assessment 8,545 14,508 12,652 13,660 14,917 21,355 21,362 22,755 23,376 23,760

100-BC-5 Operable Unit 1,758 144,186 5,362 4,696 6,566 8,596 8,684 14,398 17,573 18,276

100-KR-4 Operable Unit 6,398 153,803 44,328 20,109 15,314 10,160 9,004 8,477 6,701 22,189

100-NR-2 Operable Unit 2,558 30,251 13,582 1,653 1,030 8,485 8,905 6,682 4,292 339

100-HR-3 Operable Unit 13,525 35,186 43,456 38,732 30,767 41,924 26,280 14,226 10,457 10,484

100-FR-3 Operable Unit 1,130 21,740 8,559 4,995 3,761 4,725 5,414 4,894 5,058 3,232

200-BP-5 Operable Unit 2,538 2,618 13,859 14,408 16,506 18,741 11,965 11,430 8,744 6,712

200-PO-1 Operable Unit 0 949 674 3,107 3,578 5,721 4,970 2,804 1,336 929

200-UP-1 Operable Unit 516 7,344 8,181 5,078 21,483 6,244 7,193 1,915 1,919 5,508

200-ZP-1 Operable Unit 18,469 37,686 31,258 43,799 36,644 16,440 19,363 12,441 12,563 12,863

200-PW-1 Operable Unit 978 1,177 1,067 1,147 1,540 1,759 1,693 2,057 1,926 2,408

300-FF-5 Operable Unit 813 19,087 32,817 9,898 9,292 3,862 3,879 12,784 11,786 11,788

Regulatory Decisions/Closure Integration 26 5,523 17,192 13,537 17,595 9,152 37,039 23,742 2,596 1,102

Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests 4 618 3,537 4,084 1,605 682 234 18 0 0

Deep Vadose Zone Operable Unit 438 3,090 10,394 28,983 15,107 34,482 54,310 57,788 54,190 41,891

Site-wide Services 26,103 75,047 36,378 35,062 34,231 31,600 40,300 44,128 45,219 43,275

RL Directed Activities 6,745 7,716 7,777 11,741 11,646 0 0 0 0 0

UBS Distributions 3,840 5,830 5,338 5,136 5,445 0 0 0 0 0

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 4,806 5,737 9,424 4,549 8,262 16,292 26,679 40,087 39,168 37,885

Total 127,272 619,187 366,205 316,587 315,845 279,226 325,085 318,099 284,928 280,494

Fiscal Year 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033

Integration and Assessments 14,293 14,611 14,941 15,541 15,646 15,936 16,366 16,766 17,509 17,533

Drilling 6,569 7,909 9,554 5,192 5,231 5,271 7,489 5,456 4,820 4,955

Project Management 6,435 6,607 6,754 7,114 5,019 4,879 5,347 2,741 2,356 2,419

Integrated Field Work 11,156 11,441 10,071 9,993 8,732 8,753 9,398 5,653 5,166 5,246

GW Monitoring/Performance Assessment 24,556 24,677 25,812 26,450 27,135 28,172 28,039 30,412 29,484 30,142

100-BC-5 Operable Unit 18,560 8,537 7,954 7,056 5,136 5,465 5,036 4,741 4,813 5,148

100-KR-4 Operable Unit 6,436 5,983 6,136 6,123 6,455 6,207 6,706 6,882 7,113 7,173

100-NR-2 Operable Unit 156 160 163 167 172 183 129 75 77 79

100-HR-3 Operable Unit 10,080 8,870 8,482 7,838 7,850 7,932 8,198 8,579 8,911 8,975

100-FR-3 Operable Unit 2,559 3,001 1,846 490 1,295 1,099 627 234 248 253

200-BP-5 Operable Unit 5,230 3,672 3,267 1,835 2,488 1,425 1,286 1,103 330 266

200-PO-1 Operable Unit 741 636 382 363 371 378 663 397 408 416

200-UP-1 Operable Unit 1,635 1,384 1,374 568 522 543 551 559 539 550
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-27

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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-ZP-1 Operable Unit 13,147 17,622 13,905 14,048 14,423 14,680 19,567 15,374 15,827 16,137

200-PW-1 Operable Unit 1,758 197 97 100 101 103 105 107 211 170

300-FF-5 Operable Unit 8,831 1,402 380 369 405 345 315 439 345 335

Regulatory Decisions/Closure Integration 1,010 429 438 924 227 226 232 234 245 250

Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Deep Vadose Zone Operable Unit 21,487 13,329 16,825 31,417 43,334 47,284 34,571 27,272 18,771 6,784

Site-wide Services 40,194 41,664 40,066 43,890 46,569 46,932 42,333 43,090 45,037 36,559

RL Directed Activities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UBS Distributions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 27,707 23,134 19,973 22,834 28,614 29,568 27,741 25,224 26,173 22,627

Total 222,541 195,264 188,423 202,314 219,723 225,381 214,699 195,339 188,384 166,017

Fiscal Year 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043

Integration and Assessments 17,870 18,162 18,685 19,006 19,395 19,839 20,190 20,814 21,137 20,882

Drilling 5,049 8,112 398 0 0 0 2,524 46 0 0

Project Management 2,451 2,507 2,580 2,620 2,703 2,743 2,746 4,062 4,157 4,253

Integrated Field Work 5,308 5,571 4,885 4,813 4,868 5,034 4,951 6,449 6,604 6,781

GW Monitoring/Performance Assessment 30,668 31,056 32,452 33,014 33,787 35,189 34,971 35,851 36,716 37,594

100-BC-5 Operable Unit 4,171 2,114 3,118 5,651 2,662 4,316 3,598 3,596 1,515 1,943

100-KR-4 Operable Unit 7,254 6,851 5,109 4,016 183 187 190 195 200 205

100-NR-2 Operable Unit 84 86 88 90 90 91 93 96 98 100

100-HR-3 Operable Unit 9,228 9,035 6,406 5,158 226 227 232 238 243 249

100-FR-3 Operable Unit 258 227 228 233 238 244 248 255 261 267

200-BP-5 Operable Unit 271 277 286 291 298 304 310 318 326 334

200-PO-1 Operable Unit 424 738 445 456 466 465 813 487 501 513

200-UP-1 Operable Unit 568 591 592 266 266 266 187 183 201 192

200-ZP-1 Operable Unit 16,597 21,884 17,450 17,940 18,303 18,928 19,599 19,334 20,569 11,677

200-PW-1 Operable Unit 170 173 182 184 188 193 196 202 242 47

300-FF-5 Operable Unit 485 602 618 491 449 410 399 440 438 338

Regulatory Decisions/Closure Integration 257 257 10,973 4,806 903 11,879 10,704 5,217 1,117 0

Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Deep Vadose Zone Operable Unit 940 382 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Site-wide Services 33,101 33,915 25,116 24,498 21,618 22,931 32,038 22,129 20,228 25,697

RL Directed Activities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UBS Distributions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 21,472 21,933 20,250 20,980 20,353 23,701 29,771 22,199 20,660 30,815

Total 156,626 164,471 149,860 144,512 126,995 146,948 163,761 142,112 135,214 156,626
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-28

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053

Integration and Assessments 21,257 21,499 20,416 20,403 21,045 21,349 21,811 22,327 22,837 23,425

Drilling 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Project Management 4,368 4,431 4,581 4,748 4,868 4,980 5,148 5,176 5,380 5,496

Integrated Field Work 6,999 7,177 7,252 7,449 7,751 7,891 8,064 8,250 8,443 8,702

GW Monitoring/Performance Assessment 38,619 38,983 40,121 41,247 42,287 43,997 44,037 47,483 46,132 47,180

100-BC-5 Operable Unit 3,930 1,692 3,425 1,009 1,427 2,193 2,474 1,448 657 1,541

100-KR-4 Operable Unit 208 205 210 242 125 128 131 133 137 140

100-NR-2 Operable Unit 103 104 107 110 113 115 117 120 123 126

100-HR-3 Operable Unit 256 249 366 245 142 144 42 50 0 0

100-FR-3 Operable Unit 274 278 285 292 300 306 313 319 328 338

200-BP-5 Operable Unit 343 347 356 365 375 383 391 384 396 401

200-PO-1 Operable Unit 526 909 558 562 579 594 596 603 621 643

200-UP-1 Operable Unit 190 193 201 213 218 223 228 238 237 238

200-ZP-1 Operable Unit 6,379 3,583 1,427 48 0 0 0 0 0 0

200-PW-1 Operable Unit 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

300-FF-5 Operable Unit 387 324 517 344 287 302 521 332 518 330

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 35,900 32,723 31,665 28,268 25,987 25,060 15,379 13,837 15,168 13,732

RL Directed Activities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UBS Distributions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 40,633 41,579 40,016 38,030 38,552 39,476 31,292 30,579 37,697 39,523

Total 160,374 154,278 151,502 143,574 144,056 147,141 130,542 131,279 138,672 141,814

Fiscal Year 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 2063

Integration and Assessments 23,863 24,548 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Drilling 0 0 154 897 1,324 1,334 1,417 1,167 487 6

Project Management 5,654 5,744 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Integrated Field Work 8,874 9,063 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

GW Monitoring/Performance Assessment 47,683 55,118 15,846 11,613 7,995 8,242 7,425 5,499 2,786 0

100-BC-5 Operable Unit 1,495 1,758 282 34 99 119 0 0 0 0

100-KR-4 Operable Unit 143 157 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

100-NR-2 Operable Unit 129 132 0 0 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 346 354 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

200-BP-5 Operable Unit 407 417 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

200-PO-1 Operable Unit 670 675 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

200-UP-1 Operable Unit 241 264 71 14 85 46 19 37 14 0
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-29

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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-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 409 279 288 322 295 621 298 191 199 161

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 12,195 11,818 2,097 2,027 1,611 1,558 0 0 0 0

RL Directed Activities 0 0 0 0 0 0 27,718 0 0 0

UBS Distributions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 40,633 40,721 5,783 5,359 4,087 3,462 0 0 0 0

Total 142,741 151,047 24,554 20,267 15,496 15,384 36,877 6,894 3,486 167

Fiscal Year 2064 2065 Total

Integration and Assessments 0 0 754,363

Drilling 0 0 202,134

Project Management 0 0 223,780

Integrated Field Work 0 0 341,319

GW Monitoring/Performance Assessment 0 0 1,385,359

100-BC-5 Operable Unit 0 0 358,809

100-KR-4 Operable Unit 0 0 388,076

100-NR-2 Operable Unit 0 0 81,450

100-HR-3 Operable Unit 0 0 383,486

100-FR-3 Operable Unit 0 0 81,355

200-BP-5 Operable Unit 0 0 136,003

200-PO-1 Operable Unit 0 0 41,669

200-UP-1 Operable Unit 0 0 79,891

200-ZP-1 Operable Unit 0 0 589,972

200-PW-1 Operable Unit 0 0 20,475

300-FF-5 Operable Unit 70 2,359 143,198

Regulatory Decisions/Closure Integration 0 0 177,830

Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests 0 0 10,782

Deep Vadose Zone Operable Unit 0 0 563,070

Site-wide Services 0 0 1,367,973

RL Directed Activities 0 0 73,342

UBS Distributions 0 0 25,590

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 0 0 1,156,042

Total 70 2,359 8,585,968

G&A = general and administrative. UBS = usage-based services.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-30

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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). (5 pages)

Schedule 

Level Scope 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

1 Soil and Water Remediation-Groundwater/Vadose Zone, PBS RL-0030

2 Integration and Assessments 6,686 8,364 18,532 13,993 14,198 14,826 76,599

3 Strategic Integration 743 747 771 834 847 1,625 5,567

3 Technical Integration 1,518 1,858 6,050 4,558 2,720 2,699 19,401

3 Remediation Decision Support 176 315 650 498 507 1,228 3,375

3 Remediation Science and Technology 0 0 5,217 1,905 2,858 4,137 14,117

3 Sample Management and Reporting 1,409 1,368 1,411 1,526 1,551 1,077 8,342

3 Environmental Databases 2,302 2,437 2,921 3,431 3,488 2,970 17,550

3 Value Engineering Studies 0 0 409 0 450 0 859

3 Systematic Planning Integration 537 723 556 683 694 0 3,193

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 916 548 558 1,083 1,090 4,195

2 Drilling 5,550 18,245 23,215 18,835 24,446 5,310 95,602

3 100-KR-4 Drilling 574 2,674 1,343 1,453 1,477 38 7,559

3 100-NR-2 Drilling 0 0 0 512 3,081 0 3,593

3 100-HR-3 Drilling 155 1,182 661 715 727 1,423 4,863

3 200-BP-5 Drilling 881 365 0 0 0 0 1,246

3 200-PO-1 Drilling 0 0 1,105 972 1,417 0 3,494

3 200-UP-1 Drilling 0 2,084 4,034 0 0 1,008 7,126

3 200-ZP-1 Drilling 1,533 4,549 2,712 2,910 2,072 1,344 15,119

3 M-24-00 Well Drilling 858 2,219 1,487 1,183 1,203 557 7,506

3 Miscellaneous Well Drilling 626 1,006 770 833 847 0 4,081

3 Decommission Non-Tank Farm Wells 0 1,328 1,446 5,356 6,798 0 14,927

3 100-BC-5 Well Drilling 923 802 0 0 2,204 0 3,930

3 100-FR-3 Well Drilling 0 0 519 0 567 0 1,086

3 300-FF-5 Well Drilling 0 0 3,910 3,326 3,816 81 11,133

3 Deep Vadose Zone 0 849 0 0 0 449 1,298

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 1,188 5,227 1,576 237 412 8,639

2 Project Management 7,574 8,990 8,345 8,978 9,705 8,883 52,475

3 Project Management and Support 7,574 8,068 7,892 8,552 8,677 7,984 48,748

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 922 453 426 1,028 900 3,727

2 Integrated Field Work (IFW) 8,271 11,491 10,279 10,407 12,208 9,986 62,641

3 IFW – Operations and Maintenance 5,685 6,656 6,531 6,723 6,834 7,992 40,421

3 IFW – GRP Field Work Projects 2,088 2,565 2,234 2,286 3,547 1,101 13,821

3 IFW – Field Equipment Purchases (CENRTC) 0 0 230 0 0 0 230

3 Well Maintenance, Monitoring & Reporting 0 0 0 0 0 118 118
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-31

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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). (5 pages)

Schedule 

Level Scope 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

3 Spare Parts 498 388 400 433 440 0 2,159

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 1,882 883 966 1,387 774 5,892

2 Groundwater Monitoring and Performance Assessments 8,545 14,508 12,652 13,660 14,917 21,355 85,637

3 Modutanks 531 416 433 450 469 835 3,134

3 Geophysical Sciences and Logging 0 0 0 0 0 535 535

3 RCRA Monitoring and Reporting 0 0 0 0 0 6,747 6,747

3 RCRA Field Support 3,817 8,262 6,219 6,726 6,837 2,567 34,429

3 Hanford Geotechnical 78 78 80 87 88 66 477

3 GM/PA Project Management 2,900 1,810 3,559 3,849 3,913 216 16,248

3 Well Maintenance, Monitoring and Reporting 1,219 1,737 1,537 1,662 1,661 0 7,816

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 2,205 824 885 1,948 10,390 16,250

2 100-BC-5 Operable Unit 1,758 144,186 5,362 4,696 6,566 8,596 171,164

3 100-BC-5 Operable Unit Project Management 247 180 154 158 161 52 1,062

3 100-BC-5 CERCLA Process Implementation 892 661 610 376 526 0 3,065

3 100-BC-5 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 0 0 0 0 0 2,188 2,188

3 100-BC-5 Monitoring and Reporting 619 202 197 226 217 49 1,509

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 143,143 4,401 3,937 5,662 6,307 163,450

2 100-KR-4 Operable Unit 6,398 153,803 44,328 20,109 15,314 10,160 250,112

3 100-KR-4 Project Management 343 345 355 384 391 0 1,818

3 100-KR-4 CERCLA Process Implementation 111 261 591 0 0 0 963

3 100-KR-4 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 3,973 2,729 5,742 4,445 4,719 2,659 24,267

3 100-KR-4 Monitoring and Reporting 540 607 508 549 559 214 2,977

3 100-KR-4 Modifications and Expansions 1,432 0 3,542 2,204 1,942 0 9,120

3 100-KR-4 D&D 0 0 0 0 168 0 168

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 149,861 33,590 12,526 7,536 7,288 210,800

2 100-NR-2 Operable Unit 2,558 30,251 13,582 1,653 1,030 8,485 57,558

3 100-NR-2 Project Management 269 271 279 302 307 372 1,799

3 100-NR-2 CERCLA Process Implementation 839 545 0 0 0 0 1,384

3 100-NR-2 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 1,241 239 7,376 551 555 1,518 11,480

3 100-NR-2 Monitoring and Reporting 209 46 46 45 46 149 540

3 100-NR-2 Modifications and Expansions 0 0 0 0 0 5,980 5,980

3 100-NR-2 D&D 0 0 0 344 0 0 344

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 29,149 5,882 410 123 466 36,030
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-32

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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). (5 pages)

Schedule 

Level Scope 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

2 100-HR-3 Operable Unit 13,525 35,186 43,456 38,732 30,767 41,924 203,590

3 100-HR-3 Project Management 0 0 0 0 0 67 67

3 100-HR-3 Decision Documentation 484 343 227 149 0 0 1,204

3 100-HR-3 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 4,877 5,889 5,701 6,001 6,464 5,113 34,045

3 100-HR-3 Well Support 7,367 10,563 9,251 10,005 10,171 0 47,357

3 100-HR-3 Monitoring and Reporting 796 801 826 893 908 467 4,692

3 100-HR-3 Modifications and Expansions 0 0 0 0 0 441 441

3 100-HR-3 D&D 0 0 1,034 0 2,007 6,587 9,628

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 17,589 26,418 21,684 11,217 29,248 106,156

2 100-FR-3 Operable Unit 1,130 21,740 8,559 4,995 3,761 4,725 44,910

3 100-FR-3 Operable Unit Project Management 187 241 154 158 161 53 955

3 100-FR-3 CERCLA Process Implementation 541 278 0 0 0 0 819

3 100-FR-3 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 0 0 0 0 0 2,155 2,155

3 100-FR-3 Monitoring and Reporting 402 382 417 426 459 55 2,142

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 20,838 7,987 4,411 3,140 2,462 38,838

2 200-BP-5 Operable Unit 2,538 2,618 13,859 14,408 16,506 18,741 68,670

3 200-BP-5 Project Management 244 1,555 12,985 11,477 220 182 26,664

3 200-BP-5 Decision Documentation 1,728 754 568 150 0 0 3,201

3 200-BP-5 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 0 0 0 2,277 6,021 1,597 9,895

3 200-BP-5 Monitoring and Reporting 218 219 226 245 249 0 1,157

3 200-BP-5 Field Studies and Deployment 347 24 0 0 0 0 371

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 66 79 260 10,016 16,962 27,383

2 200-PO-1 Operable Unit 0 949 674 3,107 3,578 5,721 14,029

3 200-PO-1 Project Management 0 496 253 274 220 0 1,244

3 200-PO-1 Decision Documentation 0 187 (32) 87 0 0 241

3 200-PO-1 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 0 0 293 164 83 289 829

3 200-PO-1 Monitoring and Reporting 0 244 125 135 137 0 641

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 22 35 2,447 3,138 5,432 11,074

2 200-UP-1 Operable Unit 516 7,344 8,181 5,078 21,483 6,244 48,846

3 200-UP-1 Project Management 82 610 112 115 117 232 1,268

3 200-UP-1 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 232 0 5,363 1,788 18,298 3,594 29,275

3 200-UP-1 Monitoring and Reporting 203 168 173 188 191 785 1,708

3 200-UP-1 Modifications and Expansions 0 0 0 0 0 102 102
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-33

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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). (5 pages)

Schedule 

Level Scope 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 6,566 2,532 2,987 2,877 1,531 16,493

2 200-ZP-1 Operable Unit 18,469 37,686 31,258 43,799 36,644 16,440 184,296

3 200-ZP-1 Project Management 591 594 613 663 674 11,091 14,224

3 200-ZP-1 Decision Documentation 464 492 478 517 506 0 2,457

3 200-ZP-1 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 17,252 18,868 28,298 41,139 33,839 3,657 143,054

3 200-ZP-1 Monitoring and Reporting 162 163 168 182 185 155 1,016

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 17,568 1,701 1,299 1,440 1,538 23,545

2 200-PW-1 Operable Unit 978 1,177 1,067 1,147 1,540 1,759 7,668

3 200-PW-1 Project Management 67 68 70 76 77 210 568

3 200-PW-1 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 835 900 850 919 1,184 1,355 6,042

3 200-PW-1 Monitoring and Reporting 75 76 78 85 86 0 400

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 133 69 68 193 194 658

2 300-FF-5 Operable Unit 813 19,087 32,817 9,898 9,292 3,862 75,770

3 300-FF-5 Project Management 173 174 149 153 156 328 1,134

3 300-FF-5 Decision Documentation 507 65 10,824 0 0 0 11,396

3 300-FF-5 Remedial Actions (Interim and Final) 0 0 14,468 3,283 4,387 0 22,138

3 300-FF-5 Monitoring and Reporting 133 40 41 42 43 584 884

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 18,808 7,335 6,419 4,706 2,951 40,218

2 Regulatory Decisions and Closure Integration 26 5,523 17,192 13,537 17,595 9,152 63,025

3 Closure Zones 26 2,525 14,397 10,519 9,009 3,829 40,305

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 2,998 2,796 3,018 8,585 5,323 22,720

2 Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests 4 618 3,537 4,084 1,605 682 10,530

3 Deep Vadose Zone Treatability Tests 4 119 2,848 2,953 1,089 180 7,193

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 500 690 1,131 516 501 3,338

2 Deep Vadose Zone Operable Unit 438 3,090 10,394 28,983 15,107 34,482 92,494

3 Deep Vadose Zone OU 218 219 226 244 196 0 1,103

3 Deep Vadose Zone Decision Documentation 220 76 54 3,011 821 24,639 28,822

3 Deep Vadose Zone Field Studies and Deployment 0 2 4,732 5,764 0 0 10,498

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 2,792 5,382 19,964 14,089 9,843 52,071

2 Site-wide Services 26,103 75,047 36,378 35,062 34,231 31,600 238,421

3 Site-wide Services 26,103 75,047 36,378 35,062 34,231 31,600 238,421

2 RL Directed Activities 6,745 7,716 7,777 11,741 11,646 0 45,625
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-34

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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). (5 pages)

Schedule 

Level Scope 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

3 GSSC Support 6,745 7,716 7,777 11,741 11,646 0 45,625

2 UBS Distributions 3,840 5,830 5,338 5,136 5,445 0 25,590

3 Assessments for MSC Services to PRC 3,701 5,374 4,946 4,777 5,119 0 23,917

3 Assessments for Other Provided Services to PRC 139 172 170 164 176 0 822

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 284 221 195 151 0 850

2 UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 4,806 5,737 9,423 4,549 8,262 16,292 49,070

3 Fee and Management Reserve 4,806 5,737 9,367 4,437 8,018 5,773 38,138

3 G&A Allocations 0 0 57 112 245 10,519 10,932

Total 127,272 619,187 366,205 316,587 315,845 279,226 2,024,321

CENRTC = capital equipment not related to construction.

CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act.

D&D = decontamination and decommissioning. 

G&A = general and administrative.

GM/PM = groundwater monitoring/performance assessment.

GRP = Groundwater Remediation Project.

GSSC = General Support Services Contract.

IFW = Integrated Field Work.

MSC = Mission Support Contract.

OU = operable unit.

PBS = performance baseline summary.

PRC = Plateau Remediation Contract.

UBS = usage-based services.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-35

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 for overall management function in support of the nuclear 

facility D&D mission on the Central Plateau.

Central Plateau 

Engineering Studies

Provides for crosscutting engineering and technical studies and 

trade-off 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 or 

Remediation – FY2014 

to FY2048

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 of the non-canyon facility slabs.

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, provides for 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. 

Zone 1, 200-E Admin 

Zone

This zone contains waste sites, buildings and structures, and 

pipelines that will be addressed through zone closure.

Zone 2, 200-E Ponds 

Zone

This zone contains waste sites, buildings and structures, and 

pipelines that will be addressed through zone closure. This is the 

largest remediation zone on the Central Plateau. This zone also 

constitutes a considerable portion of the Outer Zone. 

Zone 3, 200-W Ponds 

Zone in Industrial 

Exclusive Zone

This zone contains waste sites, buildings and structures, and 

pipelines that will be addressed through zone closure.

Zone 4, 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.

Zone 5, B Plant Zone

This zone contains a canyon (B Plant), waste sites, buildings and 

structures, and pipelines that will be addressed through zone 

closure.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-36

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

Zone 6, 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.

Zone 7, CSB Zone This zone contains waste sites and buildings and structures that will 

be addressed through zone closure.

Zone 8, ERDF Zone This zone contains waste sites and buildings and structures that will 

be addressed through zone closure.

Zone 9, ETF Zone This zone contains waste sites and buildings and structures that will 

be addressed through zone closure.

Zone 10, PFP Zone This zone contains waste sites, buildings and structures, pipelines, 

and utility relocations that will be addressed through zone closure. 

Zone 11, PUREX Zone

This zone contains a canyon (PUREX), waste sites, buildings and 

structures, pipelines, and utility relocations that will be addressed 

through zone closure.

Zone 12, REDOX Zone

This zone contains a canyon (REDOX), waste sites, buildings and 

structures, pipelines, and utility relocations that will be addressed 

through zone closure.

Zone 13, 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.

Zone 14, Semi-Works 

Zone

This zone contains waste sites, buildings and structures, pipelines, 

and utility relocations that will be addressed through zone closure. 

Zone 15, Solid Waste 

Zone

This zone contains waste sites and buildings and structures that will 

be addressed through zone closure.

Zone 16, 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.

Zone 17, 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.

Zone 18, 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.

Zone 19, Waste 

Management Zone

This zone contains waste sites, buildings and structures, pipelines, 

and utility relocations that will be addressed through zone closure.

Zone 20, 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.

Zone 21, IDF Zone This zone contains waste sites that will be addressed through zone 

closure.

Zone 22, NRDWL/BC 

Control Zone

This zone contains waste sites and pipelines that will be addressed 

through zone closure.

Zone 23, 100 Area This zone contains buildings and structures that will be addressed 

through zone closure.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-37

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

Zone 24, 600 Area (and 

Misc.)

This zone contains buildings and structures that will be addressed 

through zone closure.

Zone 25, 300 Area

This zone does not currently have any identified scope in the 

lifecycle plan. Cleanup is assumed to be accomplished through 

RL-0041.

Zone 26, 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 

and health, QA, emergency preparedness, radiation protection, 

safeguards and security, baseline controls, and training.

200 Area S&M

600 Area S&M

300 Area S&M

Site-wide Services Site-wide Services Includes proportional share of costs for site services and 

infrastructure. See Table C-18 for details.

UBS Distributions

Assessments for Other 

Hanford Contractor 

Services to the Plateau 

Remediation Contract

Includes training, fleet services, reproduction services, motor carrier 

services, industrial hygiene equipment and measuring and test 

equipment calibration, Government Services Administration vehicle 

lease and mileage charges, Hanford Site job control system, and site 

laundry charges.

UBS, G&A, and Direct 

Distribution

Fee and Management 

Reserve, Allocated 

Pensions, G&A 

Allocations

Fee is contractor’s profit. Management Reserve is an amount of the 

total contract budget withheld for management control purposes by 

the contractor. Allocated pensions are for the multi-employer 

pension plan for the contractor work force. G&A costs are allocated 

to the project.

NOTE: See Tables C-16 and C-17 for schedule and budget information.

CERCLA= Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980.

CSB = Canister Storage Building.

D&D = decontamination and decommissioning.

D4 = deactivation, decommissioning, 

decontamination, and demolition.

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal 

Facility.

ESH&Q = Environment, Safety, Health, and Quality.

ETF = Effluent Treatment Facility.

FY = fiscal year.

G&A = General & Administrative.

IDF = Integrated Disposal Facility.

ISMS = Integrated Safety Management System.

NRDWL = non-radioactive dangerous waste landfill.

O&M = operation and maintenance.

PBS = project baseline summary.

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant.

PUREX = Plutonium Uranium Extraction (Plant).

QA = quality assurance.

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.

UBS = usage-based service.

WTP = Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-38

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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). (2 pages)

Fiscal Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Reg. Decisions & Closure Integration 1,949 4,745 1,644 18,753 26,336 36,265 21,244 21,446 16,039 16,269

Zone Environmental Remediation 9,009 101,604 293,466 307,521 453,517 536,045 788,102 507,424 422,495 392,774

S&M & Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 7,964 9,511 8,839 9,871 9,863 11,942 12,211 13,805 14,403 14,114

Site-wide Services 5,237 16,250 34,079 42,503 60,660 78,615 125,379 99,542 99,267 89,596

UBS Distributions 1,075 1,562 2,846 3,193 6,639 5,627 0 0 0 0

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 688 677 10,889 9,880 20,075 59,899 145,677 77,071 64,928 69,928

Total 25,923 134,349 351,762 391,721 577,090 728,394 1,092,613 719,289 617,132 582,680

Fiscal Year 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033

Reg. Decisions & Closure Integration 16,725 16,637 17,100 17,616 17,990 18,351 18,854 19,300 19,835 20,281

Zone Environmental Remediation 235,220 118,960 131,279 124,708 108,522 90,398 126,376 83,472 54,868 124,606

S&M & Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 14,553 13,341 13,669 13,990 14,345 15,759 17,378 15,007 15,466 15,053

Site-wide Services 67,749 46,406 49,549 49,604 44,330 38,348 46,455 39,041 33,789 53,215

UBS Distributions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 43,750 22,868 21,573 22,705 13,173 12,147 15,339 13,948 13,840 23,438

Total 377,997 218,212 233,170 228,623 198,360 175,002 224,403 170,768 137,799 236,593

Fiscal Year 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043

Reg. Decisions & Closure Integration 20,553 21,092 21,700 22,142 22,631 23,202 23,686 24,265 24,864 25,351

Zone Environmental Remediation 157,922 155,715 285,777 320,062 301,732 351,531 256,950 320,925 333,693 248,221

S&M & Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 15,357 15,777 16,226 16,601 16,997 17,258 16,240 16,656 17,394 16,915

Site-wide Services 61,014 58,401 75,224 85,605 83,730 86,849 90,447 79,571 78,214 84,106

UBS Distributions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 15,848 16,594 12,459 13,544 16,888 31,389 46,672 68,892 70,763 45,956

Total 270,694 267,579 411,387 457,954 441,979 510,228 433,994 510,309 524,928 420,549

Fiscal Year 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053

Reg. Decisions & Closure Integration 26,150 26,495 27,068 27,752 28,517 29,119 29,781 30,326 31,173 31,833

Zone Environmental Remediation 81,042 77,887 64,567 78,915 83,755 89,589 228,613 253,539 144,134 136,208

S&M & Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 17,380 17,623 18,109 18,668 19,144 15,597 15,761 15,702 15,878 16,297

Site-wide Services 51,415 48,029 41,943 44,100 41,314 39,221 48,407 45,980 32,516 27,510

UBS Distributions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 42,367 47,988 43,809 43,769 47,879 33,422 60,833 66,341 36,678 42,194

Total 218,354 218,022 195,496 213,204 220,609 206,949 383,396 411,888 260,379 254,042

Fiscal Year 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 2063

Reg. Decisions & Closure Integration 32,589 33,341 34,132 34,755 35,697 36,494 31,135 28,208 22,513 14,415

Zone Environmental Remediation 134,170 156,783 239,880 167,519 167,873 198,768 159,704 131,059 81,467 27,954

S&M & Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 16,717 17,075 17,573 17,984 18,518 19,040 12,966 11,693 10,377 6,264

Site-wide Services 23,944 23,979 36,667 34,666 36,521 38,238 0 0 0 0
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-39

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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). (2 pages)

UBS Distributions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 45,486 45,044 92,678 64,489 35,768 33,277 0 0 0 0

Total 252,906 276,221 420,929 319,412 294,377 325,817 203,805 170,960 114,357 48,633

Fiscal Year 2064 2065 2066 2067 Total

Reg. Decisions & Closure Integration 7,302 1,629 140 0 1,177,432

Zone Environmental Remediation 7,254 3,215 2,371 666 10,459,823

S&M and Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 1,578 214 0 0 746,662

Site-wide Services 0 0 0 0 2,517,226

UBS Distributions 0 0 0 0 20,942

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 0 0 0 0 1,783,519

Reg. Decisions & Closure Integration 16,134 5,058 2,511 666 16,705,604

G&A = general and administrative.

PBS = project baseline summary.

Reg. = Regulatory.

S&M = surveillance and maintenance.

UBS = usage-based services.

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

1 Nuclear Facility D&D-Remainder of Hanford, PBS RL-0040.01.1

2 Regulatory Decisions & Closure Integration 1,949 4,745 1,644 18,753 26,336 36,265 89,693

3 Central Plateau Project Management 1,199 1,206 1,057 10,721 16,700 19,756 50,639

3 Central Plateau Engineering Studies 0 0 0 0 0 439 439

3

Emergency Response for Facility/Waste Site ESH&Q or Remediation -

FY 2014 - FY 2048 750 0 0 5,558 5,603 8,845 20,756

3 Below Slab Remediation ROD Non-Canyon Facilities 0 0 0 0 0 2,342 2,342

3 Hazard Reduction 0 0 0 2,043 3,306 3,918 9,267

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 3,539 587 431 727 964 6,248

2 Zone Environmental Remediation 9,009 101,603 293,466 307,520 453,517 536,045 1,701,160

3 200-E Admin Zone 0 43 1,470 612 217 1,797 4,139

3 200-E Ponds Zone 0 0 52,550 4,706 11,272 8,364 76,892

3 200-W Ponds Zone in Industrial Exclusive Zone 0 0 38,401 5,547 41,427 15,993 101,367

3 B Farm Zone 0 0 606 1,262 261 2,465 4,595

3 B Plant Zone 0 0 7,051 1,397 5,605 15,985 30,038

3 CSB Zone 0 0 0 0 0 151 151

3 ERDF Zone 0 0 87 3 0 126 216

3 PFP Zone 0 0 4,005 4,898 63,609 58,620 131,132
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-40

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

3 PUREX Zone 0 0 0 4,612 3,097 47,069 54,778

3 REDOX Zone 0 0 0 3,968 1,180 6,889 12,037

3 S/U Farm Zone 0 0 0 0 114 2,071 2,185

3 Semi-Works Zone 0 0 0 0 117 20,900 21,017

3 Solid Waste Zone 0 0 588 2,585 8,938 30,239 42,350

3 T Farm Zone 0 0 0 0 3,341 432 3,773

3 T Plant Zone 0 0 0 9,287 6,513 96 15,896

3 U Plant Zone 0 0 39,311 84,396 57,857 81,609 263,172

3 Waste Management Zone 0 0 50 183 0 846 1,080

3 WTP/A Farm 0 0 0 0 7,330 0 7,330

3 NRDWL/BC Control Zone 0 0 0 40 1,596 3 1,639

3 100 Area 0 0 0 0 0 957 957

3 600 Area (and Misc.) 0 0 0 2,822 13,461 1,386 17,670

3 300 Area 0 0 0 0 0 845 845

3 400 Area 0 0 0 0 0 1,213 1,213

3 Outer Area 9,009 13,917 11,486 29,650 32,122 65,703 161,887

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty - Zone Environmental Remediation 0 87,643 137,861 151,552 195,460 172,286 744,803

2 S&M and Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 7,964 9,512 8,839 9,871 9,863 11,942 57,991

3 S&M and Min-Safe for Facilities and Waste Sites 7,964 8,152 8,310 8,956 9,104 383 42,868

3 200 Area S&M 0 0 0 0 0 10,760 10,760

3 600 Area S&M 0 0 0 0 0 81 81

3 300 Area S&M 0 0 0 0 0 256 256

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 1,360 529 915 759 462 4,025

2 Site-wide Services 5,237 16,250 34,079 42,503 60,660 78,615 237,344

3 Site-wide Services 5,237 16,250 34,079 42,503 60,660 78,615 237,344

2 UBS Distributions 1,075 1,562 2,846 3,192 6,639 5,627 20,942

3 Assessments for OHC Services to PRC 1,075 989 2,701 3,156 6,599 5,627 20,147

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 573 145 36 40 0 795

2 UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 688 678 10,889 9,880 20,074 59,899 102,108

3 Fee and Management Reserve 688 672 2,644 3,343 5,486 21,647 34,480

3 G&A Allocations 0 6 8,245 6,537 14,588 38,252 67,628

Total 25,922 134,350 351,763 391,719 577,089 728,392 2,209,235

CSB = Canister Storage Building.

ERDF = Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility.

ESH&Q = environment, safety, health, and quality.

ETF = Effluent Treatment Facility.

FY = fiscal year.

NRDWL = non-radioactive dangerous waste landfill.

OHC = Other Hanford Contractor.

PBS = Project Baseline Summary.

PFP = Plutonium Finishing Plant.

PRC = Plateau Remediation Contract.

PUREX = Plutonium Uranium Extraction (Plant).

REDOX = Reduction-Oxidation (Plant).

ROD = record of decision.

S&M = surveillance and maintenance.

UBS = usage-based services.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-41

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

Water System 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.

Sewer System 

Electrical System 

Transportation System

Facility System 

Studies & Estimates

Network &

Telecommunication 

CENTRC

WSCF-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 Site-wide Services

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 Waste Sampling and 

Characterization Facility analytical services), 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).

RL Directed 

Activities

GSSC Support, SAP, 

Legal Support, Other

RL Directed Activities

GSSC includes contracted technical services in key areas such as audit, regulatory 

analysis, cost and risk analysis and estimating. SAP 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. Legal support includes critical independent 

legal counsel and litigation services in support of DOE and its contractors. Other 

RL Directed includes 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.

UBS, G&A and 

Direct Distribution

Fee and Management 

Reserve, Allocated 

Pensions, G&A 

Allocations

Fee is contractor’s profit. Management Reserve is an amount of the total contract 

budget withheld for management control purposes by the contractor. Allocated 

pensions are for the multi-employer pension plan for the contractor work force. 

General and administrative costs are allocated to the project.

NOTE: See Tables C-19 and C-20 for schedule and budget information.

CENTRC = capital equipment not related to construction.

DOE = U.S. Department of Energy.

G&A = general and administrative.

GSSC = General Support Services Contract.

HAMMER = Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response. 

SAP = Service Assessment Pool.

WSCF = Waste Sampling and Characterization Facility.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-42

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Table C-19. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040.01.2) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). 

(2 pages)

Fiscal Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Reliability Projects 0 0 40,200 54,256 50,201 58,563 8,385 4,460 2,448 12,195

HAMMER Ready to Serve 6,814 6,971 7,132 7,296 7,463 12,900 5,408 5,511 4,574 4,676

Site-wide Services 13,990 8,102 11,610 14,919 14,798 18,126 12,159 13,838 16,216 17,845

RL Directed Activities 47,409 51,771 57,917 58,194 63,969 64,540 65,881 65,470 66,973 67,409

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 0 0 0 622 563 10,467 15,548 24,834 26,614 23,680

Total 68,213 66,844 116,859 135,287 136,994 164,596 107,381 114,113 116,825 125,804

Fiscal Year 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033

Reliability Projects 18,793 20,523 20,595 19,415 18,102 16,588 19,796 18,339 17,789 18,202

HAMMER Ready to Serve 4,842 4,976 5,111 4,357 4,485 4,562 4,715 4,817 4,080 4,168

Site-wide Services 23,496 29,899 30,186 31,396 31,808 30,821 29,996 34,456 39,288 35,574

RL Directed Activities 68,789 70,463 73,018 75,164 78,481 78,921 80,486 80,788 82,974 84,548

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 28,152 27,769 30,919 30,752 32,540 30,819 35,114 32,093 32,264 38,572

Total 144,072 153,630 159,829 161,084 165,416 161,711 170,107 170,493 176,395 181,064

Fiscal Year 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043

Reliability Projects 18,469 18,867 19,468 17,664 18,070 18,486 18,836 19,346 19,791 20,246

HAMMER Ready to Serve 4,263 4,329 4,485 3,663 3,740 3,839 3,889 4,029 3,081 3,140

Site-wide Services 34,244 33,750 26,950 27,741 29,515 26,982 8,002 27,418 26,319 10,890

RL Directed Activities 86,057 88,099 92,019 94,946 98,521 99,459 3,543 101,308 103,637 14,225

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 48,155 48,888 59,747 66,943 71,138 71,629 51,245 56,801 57,680 56,957

Total 191,188 193,933 202,669 210,957 220,984 220,395 85,515 208,902 210,508 105,458

Fiscal Year 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053

Reliability Projects 20,794 21,104 21,589 11,082 11,382 11,597 11,864 12,089 12,416 12,702

HAMMER Ready to Serve 3,243 3,306 3,411 2,316 2,391 2,427 2,487 2,546 1,291 1,332

Site-wide Services 23,992 24,106 25,084 20,627 19,345 17,517 7,737 6,684 9,330 8,794

RL Directed Activities 34,094 36,825 40,631 45,225 47,762 45,960 29,466 28,912 41,150 44,890

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 38,681 34,793 38,939 42,883 41,895 53,260 56,137 57,600 64,493 61,303

Total 120,804 120,134 129,654 122,133 122,775 130,761 107,691 107,831 128,680 129,021

Fiscal Year 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 2063

Reliability Projects 12,994 13,293 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

HAMMER Ready to Serve 1,343 1,393 1,431 1,688 1,771 1,805 0 0 0 0

Site-wide Services 8,266 7,827 6,623 10,109 10,937 10,584 0 0 0 0

RL Directed Activities 49,000 52,948 51,240 62,543 64,740 68,586 17,310 17,638 17,972 7,765

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 60,666 64,426 62,190 78,616 105,076 112,719 0 0 0 0

Total 132,269 139,887 121,484 152,956 182,524 193,694 17,310 17,638 17,972 7,765
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-43

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

Table C-19. Infrastructure and Services (PBS RL-0040.01.2) Remaining Lifecycle Schedule and Costs, Level 2, by Fiscal Year ($1,000, Escalated). 

(2 pages)

Fiscal Year Total

Reliability Projects 780,998

HAMMER Ready to Serve 187,497

Site-wide Services 927,896

RL Directed Activities 2,969,626

UBS, G&A, and Direct Distribution 1,984,182

Total 6,850,199

G&A = general and administrative.

HAMMER = Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response (Facility).

PBS = project baseline summary.

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

UBS = usage-based services.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-44

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

1 Infrastructure and Services, PBS RL-0040.01.2

2 Reliability Projects 0 0 40,200 54,256 50,201 58,563 203,220

3 Water System 0 0 7,764 1,797 10,511 15,714 35,786

3 Sewer System 0 0 0 1,795 0 2,537 4,332

3 Electrical System 0 0 6,698 7,558 5,243 0 19,499

3 Transportation System 0 0 19,447 6,969 7,993 0 34,409

3 Facility System Reliability Projects 0 0 5,638 17,738 16,356 22,092 61,824

3 Reliability Projects Studies & Estimates 0 0 653 856 876 1,965 4,350

3 Network and Telecommunication 0 0 0 6,203 1,095 8,757 16,055

3 Capital Equipment Not Related to Construction 0 0 0 11,340 3,684 6,828 21,852

3 WSCF-Projects 0 0 0 0 4,443 670 5,113

2 HAMMER Ready to Serve 6,814 6,971 7,132 7,296 7,463 12,900 48,576

3 HAMMER Ready to Serve 6,814 6,971 7,132 7,296 7,463 12,531 48,207

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 0 0 0 0 369 369

2 Site-Wide Services 13,990 8,102 11,610 14,919 14,798 18,126 81,545

3 Site-Wide Services 13,990 8,102 11,610 14,919 14,798 18,126 81,545

2 RL Directed Activities 47,409 51,771 57,917 58,194 63,969 64,540 343,800

3 GSSC Support 8,076 7,753 8,085 7,636 8,076 7,758 47,384

3 SAP 21,508 20,921 20,932 24,862 28,488 30,121 146,832

3 Legal Support 2,933 2,933 1,955 978 978 978 10,755

3 Other 14,892 16,922 25,280 23,133 24,805 24,053 129,085

3 RL Directed 0 3,242 1,665 1,585 1,622 1,630 9,744

2 UBS, G&A and Direct Distribution 0 0 0 622 563 10,467 11,652

3 Fee and Management Reserve 0 0 0 0 0 6,071 6,071

3 G&A Allocations 0 0 0 622 563 4,396 5,581

Total 68,213 66,844 116,859 135,287 136,994 164,596 688,793

GSSC = General Support Services Contract.

G&A = general and administrative.

HAMMER = Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response.

PBS = project baseline summary.

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

SAP = Service Assessment Pool.

WSCF = Waste Sampling and Characterization Facility.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-45

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

100 Area 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. 

324/327 Area 

(does not include 

300-296 

remediation)

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.

Operate and 

Close Utilities

Includes provision of electrical, water and sewer/septic systems to support D4 or 

other field activities, including utility location/scans, temporary rerouting of lines or 

services and cold-dark-dry utility isolations and outages.

Management &

Support

Provides management in support of the D4 mission.

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 B). 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-K Area

100-N Area

100 Area 

Remaining Sites

300 Area Sites 

(does not include 

300-296 

remediation)

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.

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. 
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-46

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

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 an 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 GM

WCH Indirect 

Costs

WCH 

Performance & 

Incentive Fee

Project performance and incentive fee.

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 ISS of the KE and KW reactors consistent with the other 100 Area 

100-K Group 1 reactors and project management.

Remediation

100-K Group 2 

Remediation

100-K Group 3 

Remediation

KW Deactivation

105KE & 105KW 

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.

Site-wide 

Services

Site-wide 

Services

Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See Table 

C-18 for details.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-47

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

RL Directed 

Activities

General Support 

Services Contract

Support, SAP, 

and Other RL 

Directed 

Activities

GSSC includes contracted technical services in key areas such as audit, regulatory 

analysis, cost and risk analysis and estimating. SAP 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. Other RL Directed includes 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.

UBS 

Distributions

Assessments for 

MSC Services to 

Plateau 

Remediation 

Contract

Includes services that are charged based on predetermined rates, and services that are 

charged to OHCs. Examples of UBSs with predetermined rates are: training, 

reproduction, WSCF Laboratory Sample Analysis, crane and rigging, fleet 

maintenance, desktop and user services, and telecommunications. Examples of UBSs 

that are directly charged to OHCs are: Janitorial, facility services, and motor carrier 

services.

Management 

Reserve

Fee and 

Management 

Reserve, G&A 

Allocations

Fee is contractor’s profit. Management Reserve is an amount of the total contract 

budget withheld for management control purposes by the contractor. General and 

administrative costs are allocated to the project.

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.

G&A = general and administrative.

GSSC = General Support Services Contract.

ISS = interim safe storage.

KE = K East.

KW = K West.

MSC = Mission Support Contract.

OHC = Other Hanford Contractor.

PBS = project baseline summary.

REA = request for equitable adjustment.

RCRA= Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.

ROD = record of decision.

RTD = remove, treat, and dispose.

S&M = surveillance and maintenance.

SAP = Service Assessment Pool.

SHQ = Safety, Health & Quality.

UBS = usage-based service.

WSCF= Waste Sampling and Characterization 

Facility.
2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-48

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

D4 Closure 40,022 7,033 11,209 48,604 40,336 0 0 0

Field Remediation Closure 98,152 96,728 79,122 74,820 68,127 438 0 0

Waste Operations 43,723 15,108 32,672 28,185 28,923 2,522 2,598 0

End State/Final Closure 1,944 4,019 1,715 1,223 1,256 351 362

Mission Support/General Support 31,462 21,477 30,777 24,704 18,224 0 0 0

WCH Indirect Costs 55,412 66,652 8,791 3,640 2,089 0 0 0

PRC River Zone Environment 6,104 7,262 110,596 74,899 64,792 48,199 7,036 10,150

Site Infrastructure & Utility/Logistics & 

Transportation 2,013 2,072 2,124 870 898 571 0 0

Site-wide Services 72,568 30,595 30,146 31,281 26,539 6,942 1,535 1,784

RL Directed Activities 5,238 4,940 4,143 0 0 0 0 0

UBS Distributions 1,405 516 2,917 2,277 1,760 0 0 0

Management Reserve 523 2,490 13,548 18,583 15,133 16,005 9,153 11,894

Total 358,566 258,892 327,761 309,086 268,077 75,028 20,684 23,828

Fiscal Year 2022 2023 2024 Total

D4 Closure 0 0 0 147,204

Field Remediation Closure 0 0 0 417,387

Waste Operations 0 0 0 153,731

End State/Final Closure 0 0 0 10,870

Mission Support/General Support 0 0 0 126,645

WCH Indirect Costs 0 0 0 136,584

PRC River Zone Environment 9,738 26 0 338,802

Site Infrastructure & Utility/ Logistics & 

Transportation 0 0 0 8,548

Site-wide Services 2,075 5 0 203,470

RL Directed Activities 0 0 0 14,321

UBS Distributions 0 0 0 8,875

Management Reserve 3,634 177 134 91,274

Total 15,447 208 134 1,657,711

D4 = deactivation, decontamination, decommission, and demolition.

ISS = interim safe storage.

PBS = project baseline summary.

PRC = Plateau Remediation Contract.

UBS = usage-based service.

WCH = Washington Closure Hanford.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-49

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

1 Nuclear Facility D&D-River Corridor Closure Project, PBS RL-0041

2 D4 Closure 40,022 7,033 11,209 48,604 40,336 0 147,204

3 D4-100 Area 4,835 0 0 0 0 0 4,835

3 D4-324/327 Area (does not include 300-296 remediation) 0 0 6,066 43,426 40,018 0 89,510

3 D4-300 Area Sites 21,175 174 0 0 318 0 21,667

3 D4-S&M 7,026 6,859 5,143 5,178 0 0 24,206

3 Operate and Close Utilities 745 0 0 0 0 0 745

3 D4-Management and Support 6,241 0 0 0 0 0 6,241

2 Field Remediation Closure 98,152 96,728 79,122 74,820 68,127 438 417,387

3 Field Remediation - 100 B/C Area 3,417 299 0 0 0 0 3,716

3 Field Remediation.- 100 D Area 14,427 4,844 499 418 137 0 20,325

3 Field Remediation - 100 H Area 4,392 1,370 0 0 0 0 5,762

3 Field Remediation - 100 K Area 347 0 20 35 0 0 402

3 Field Remediation - 100 N Area 8,564 1,715 5 0 0 0 10,284

3 Field Remediation - 100 Area Remaining Sites 3,723 3,058 6 0 0 0 6,787

3 Field Remediation - 300 Area Sites (does not include 300-296 remediation) 32,850 31,982 24,095 16,852 0 0 105,779

3 Field Remediation - 600 Area 23,309 51,108 54,497 57,515 67,990 438 254,857

3 Field Remediation - Misc Restoration 1,347 24 0 0 0 0 1,371

3 Field Remediation - Management and Support 5,776 2,328 0 0 0 0 8,104

2 Waste Operations 43,723 15,108 32,672 28,185 28,923 2,522 151,133

3 200 Area Waste Operations 39,971 12,868 30,365 25,808 26,475 0 135,487

3 Waste Ops-Management and Support 3,752 2,240 2,307 2,377 2,448 2,522 15,646

2 End State/Final Closure 1,944 4,019 1,715 1,223 1,256 351 10,508

3 End State/Final Closure 39,971 12,868 30,365 25,808 26,475 0 8,373

3 Management and Support 3,752 2,240 2,307 2,377 2,448 2,522 2,136

2 Mission Support/General Support (MS/GS) 31,462 21,477 30,778 24,704 18,224 0 126,646

3 MS/GS-Project Integration 4,381 3,426 11,557 10,720 9,877 0 39,961

3 MS/GS-Project Services 14,506 9,785 12,169 9,204 5,871 0 51,535

3 MS/GS-Safety, Health and Quality 6,453 3,482 3,709 2,511 1,306 0 17,461

3 MS/GS-Engineering 510 144 470 317 166 0 1,607

3 MS/GS-Regulatory and Environmental Management 1,526 1,391 981 661 349 0 4,908

3 MS/GS-Office of the Project Gen. Manager 4,086 3,249 1,892 1,291 655 0 11,173

2 WCH Indirect Costs 55,412 66,652 8,791 3,640 2,089 0 136,584

3 WCH Performance & Incentive Fee 55,412 66,652 8,791 3,640 2,089 0 136,584

2 PRC River Zone Environment 6,104 7,262 110,596 74,899 64,792 48,199 311,852
2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-50

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

3 100-K Area Regulatory Closure Documents 0 0 262 72 73 59 466

3 100-K Group 1 Remediation 0 559 90,954 46,854 4,280 11,786 154,433

3 100-K Group 2 Remediation 0 0 218 934 456 2,094 3,702

3 100-K Group 3 Remediation 0 0 5,300 6,905 11,222 2,181 25,608

3 KW Deactivation 0 0 3,247 3,378 34,013 23,533 64,171

3 105-KE & 105-KW Reactor Disposition 0 0 2,414 7,190 5,266 3,339 18,209

3 100-K Project Management 6,104 6,703 8,201 9,566 9,482 5,207 45,263

2 Site Infrastructure & Utility/Logistics & Transportation 2,013 2,072 2,124 870 898 571 8,548

3 B Reactor 2,013 2,072 2,124 870 898 571 8,548

2 Site-wide Services 72,568 30,595 30,146 31,281 26,539 6,942 198,071

3 Site-wide Services 72,568 30,595 30,146 31,281 26,539 6,942 198,071

2 RL Directed Activities 5,238 4,940 4,143 0 0 0 14,321

3 GSSC Support 484 367 0 0 0 0 851

3 SAP 3,839 3,658 3,639 0 0 0 11,136

3 Other 915 915 504 0 0 0 2,334

2 UBS Distributions 1,405 516 2,917 2,277 1,760 0 8,875

3 Assessments for MSC Services to PRC 1,405 516 2,917 2,277 1,760 0 8,875

2 Management Reserve 523 2,490 13,548 18,583 15,133 16,005 66,282

3 Fee and Management Reserve 523 382 6,355 5,466 4,674 6,545 23,495

3 G&A Allocations 0 2,108 7,193 13,117 10,459 9,460 42,337

Total 358,566 258,892 327,761 309,086 268,077 75,028 1,597,410

D&D = decontamination and decommission.

ISS = interim safe storage.

D4 = deactivation, decontamination, decommissioning, and demolition.

GSSC = General Support Services Contract.

KW = K West.

MSC = Mission Support Contract.

MS/GS = mission support/general support.

PRC = Plateau Remediation Contract.

REA = request for equitable adjustment.

SAP = Service Assessment Pool.

UBS = usage-based service.

WCH = Washington Closure Hanford.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-51

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 

Provides for 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 for the progressive shutdown of facility support systems, including 

sodium, electrical substations, and cooling systems.

Disposition FFTF 

Sodium

Includes removal of sodium residuals throughout the life of the project, 

sodium shipment and conversion, and the operation of the Sodium Storage 

Facility.

Decommission 

FFTF Complex

While the final closure of the FFTF has not yet been determined, the 

planning assumptions include:

 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.

 Installation of an engineered barrier over the grouted area.

 Installation of monitoring wells for long-term monitoring.

FFTF Project 

Management

Provides management in support of the project mission.

Sodium Reaction 

Facility

Provides for the 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.

Site-wide 

Services Site-wide Services Includes proportional share of costs for site services and infrastructure. See Table C-18 for details.

Infrastructure 

Services

Legal Support and

Other Services

Includes critical independent legal counsel and litigation services in support 

of DOE and its contractors. Other services includes 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.

UBS Distributions

Assessments for 

Mission Support 

Contract Services to 

Plateau Remediation 

Contract 

Includes services that are charged based on predetermined rates, and services 

directly charged to Other Hanford Contractors. Examples of UBSs with 

predetermined rates include: Training, Reproduction, Waste Sampling and 

Characterization Facility, Laboratory Sample Analysis, Crane and Rigging, 

Fleet Maintenance, Desktop and User Services, and Telecommunications. 

Examples of UBSs that are directly charged to Other Hanford Contractors 

include: Janitorial, Facility Services, and Motor Carrier Services.

UBS G&A and 

Direct 

Distribution

Fee and 

Management 

Reserve, Allocated 

Pensions, G&A 

Allocations

Fee is contractor’s profit. Management Reserve is an amount of the total 

contract budget withheld for management control purposes by the contractor. 

Allocated pensions are for the multi-employer pension plan for the contractor 

work force. General and administrative costs are allocated to the project.

NOTE: See Tables C-25 and C-26 for schedule and budget information.

D&D = decontamination and decommission.

FFTF = Fast Flux Test Facility.

G&A = general and administrative.

PBS = project baseline summary.

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

UBS = usage-based services.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-52

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

FFTF Cleanup 1,924 2,041 2,049 2,215 2,252 14,077 13,436 11,427 15,156 51,804

Site-wide Services 540 302 242 296 297 1,981 2,162 2,236 3,539 11,714

Infrastructure Services 33 26 25 25 24 27 28 29 29 30

UBS Distributions 0 9 9 10 10 0 0 0 0 0

UBS G&A and Direct Distribution 134 111 129 130 158 2,167 2,736 3,418 5,008 18,352

Total 2,630 2,489 2,457 2,676 2,742 18,251 18,362 17,109 23,732 81,899

Fiscal Year 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033

FFTF Cleanup 44,381 45,870 41,528 37,471 41,837 54,361 52,814 29,365 18,630 13,265

Site-wide Services 12,014 15,266 13,584 12,718 14,090 17,867 16,060 10,433 7,498 4,754

Infrastructure Services 31 101 104 106 108 110 110 112 115 118

UBS Distributions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UBS G&A and Direct Distribution 15,005 15,431 14,160 12,976 14,673 18,476 17,117 10,982 7,556 5,207

Total 71,430 76,669 69,376 63,271 70,708 90,815 86,102 50,892 33,800 23,343

Fiscal Year 2034 2035 Total

FFTF Cleanup 635 2 496,536

Site-wide Services 251 1 147,847

Infrastructure Services 120 0 1,412

UBS Distributions 0 0 38

UBS G&A and Direct Distribution 363 1 164,292

Total 1,369 4 810,125

FFTF = Fast Flux Test Facility. 

G&A = general and administrative.

PBS = project baseline summary. 

UBS = usage-based services.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-53

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

1 Nuclear Facility D&D-Fast Flux Test Facility Project, PBS RL-0042

2 FFTF Cleanup 1,924 2,041 2,049 2,215 2,252 14,077 24,557

3 Maintain Safe and Compliant FFTF Complex 1,917 1,935 1,995 2,157 2,193 7,085 17,282

3 Transition FFTF Complex 7 7 7 8 8 0 36

3 FFTF Project Management 0 0 0 0 0 6,392 6,392

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 99 48 50 51 600 848

2 Site-wide Services 540 302 244 296 297 1,981 3,660

3 Site-wide Services 540 302 244 296 297 1,981 3,660

2 Infrastructure Services 33 26 25 25 24 27 161

3 Legal Support 24 24 24 24 24 24 147

3 Other 9 0 0 0 0 0 9

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty – RL Directed 0 2 1 1 0 3 6

2 Usage Based Services Distributions 0 9 9 10 10 0 38

3 Assessments for MSC Services to PRC 0 8 9 9 9 0 36

3 Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 0 1 0 0 0 0 2

2 UBS G&A and Direct Distribution 134 111 129 130 158 2,167 2,829

3 Fee and Management Reserve 134 111 129 130 158 758 1,421

3 G&A Allocations 0 0 0 0 0 1,408 1,408

Total 2,630 2,489 2,457 2,676 2,742 18,251 31,246

D&D = decontamination and decommission.

FFTF = Fast Flux Test Facility.

G&A = general and administrative.

MSC = Mission Support Contract.

PBS = project baseline summary.

PRC = Plateau Remediation Contract.

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

UBS = usage-based services.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1 

 2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

C-54

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.

Regulatory Support 

Essential Services

Regulatory Support 

Essential Services

NOTE: See Table C-28 for schedule and budget information.

PBS = project baseline summary.

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-55

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Community and Regulatory Support 16,892 37,710 50,588 40,158 41,258 41,804 41,866 41,802 42,200 42,550

Fiscal Year 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033

Community and Regulatory Support 38,122 38,277 38,575 39,226 39,588 39,914 40,484 40,984 41,368 41,792

Fiscal Year 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043

Community and Regulatory Support 42,385 42,741 43,254 43,765 44,252 44,405 44,709 45,090 45,133 45,500

Fiscal Year 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053

Community and Regulatory Support 45,800 46,039 47,270 48,006 48,375 48,374 48,878 49,062 49,245 49,617

Fiscal Year 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 Total

Community and Regulatory Support 49,890 50,143 50,359 50,739 51,332 51,633 2,021,152

PBS = project baseline summary.

RL = U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office.
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1 

 2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

C-56

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

Includes operation and maintenance of 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 site LTS activities.

Waste Management Includes operation and maintenance of 200 Area Liquid Effluent Facilities in support of 

groundwater treatment and monitoring activities.

Site and Environmental 

Monitoring

Includes ongoing site and environmental monitoring of groundwater, soil, and the vadose 

zone, and monitoring for public safety and resource protection. 

Post-Closure Surveillance 

and Maintenance

Includes real estate and site planning, land management, and surveillance and maintenance 

activities for the 100 and 200 Areas.

Environmental 

Compliance

Includes activities to ensure environmental compliance and protection.

Stakeholder Participation Includes continued support of stakeholder participation through grants, and payment of fees 

in lieu of taxes.

Management and 

Administration

Provides for management and administration of these LTS activities.

NOTE: See Table C-30 for schedule and budget information.

LTS = Long-Term Stewardship.

PBS = project baseline summary.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-57

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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

Environmental Compliance 4,565 4,441 4,320 4,203 4,088 3,977 3,869 3,764 3,661 3,562

Infrastructure 27,367 26,623 25,900 25,194 24,510 23,843 23,194 22,563 21,950 21,352

Management and Administration 25,036 24,355 23,692 23,048 22,421 21,811 21,218 20,641 20,079 19,533

Post-Closure S&M 51,155 49,764 48,410 47,093 45,812 44,566 43,354 42,175 41,028 39,912

Site and Environmental Monitoring 54,967 53,472 52,017 50,602 49,226 47,887 46,584 45,318 44,085 42,886

Stakeholder Participation 20,781 20,216 19,666 19,131 18,611 18,104 17,612 17,133 16,667 16,214

Waste Management 91,520 89,031 86,609 84,254 81,962 79,732 77,564 75,454 73,402 71,405

Total 275,391 267,902 260,614 253,525 246,630 239,920 233,395 227,048 220,872 214,864

Fiscal Year 2070 2071 2072 2073 2074 2075 2076 2077 2078 2079

Environmental Compliance 3,428 3,300 3,176 3,058 3,131 2,885 2,659 2,451 2,510 2,570

Infrastructure 20,554 19,784 19,042 18,331 18,770 17,298 15,942 14,693 15,045 15,407

Management and Administration 18,802 18,098 17,420 16,768 17,170 15,824 14,584 13,440 13,763 14,093

Post-Closure S&M 38,418 36,979 35,594 34,262 35,084 32,333 29,799 27,463 28,122 28,796

Site and Environmental Monitoring 41,280 39,734 38,247 36,815 37,699 34,743 32,019 29,509 30,217 30,942

Stakeholder Participation 15,606 15,022 14,460 13,918 14,252 13,135 12,105 11,156 11,424 11,698

Waste Management 68,732 66,158 63,681 61,297 62,768 57,847 53,312 49,132 50,312 51,519

Total 206,820 199,075 191,620 184,449 188,874 174,065 160,420 147,844 151,393 155,025

Fiscal Year 2080 2081 2082 2083 2084 2085 2086 2087 2088 2089

Environmental Compliance 2,631 2,695 2,621 2,684 2,749 2,815 2,882 2,951 3,022 3,095

Infrastructure 15,775 16,154 15,715 16,092 16,479 16,874 17,279 17,694 18,118 18,553

Management and Administration 9,156 9,376 9,121 9,339 9,564 9,793 10,028 10,270 10,517 10,770

Post-Closure surveillance & maintenance 29,488 30,195 29,374 30,079 30,801 31,540 32,297 33,072 33,866 34,679

Site and Environmental Monitoring 31,685 32,445 31,562 32,320 33,096 33,891 34,703 35,536 36,389 37,263

Stakeholder Participation 11,979 12,266 11,933 12,219 12,512 12,813 13,120 13,435 13,757 14,088

Waste Management 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 13 20

Total 100,714 103,131 100,326 102,733 105,201 107,726 110,309 112,965 115,682 118,468

Fiscal Year 2090 Total

Environmental Compliance 3,169 100,932

Infrastructure 18,998 605,093

Management and Administration 11,029 490,759

Post-Closure surveillance & maintenance 35,511 1,131,021

Site and Environmental Monitoring 38,157 1,215,296

Stakeholder Participation 14,426 459,459

Waste Management 28 1,395,759

Total 121,318 5,398,319
DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1 

 2013 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report 

C-58

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 has been recommended to Congress for inclusion in a Manhattan Project 

National Historic 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.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-59

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Base Operations 356,555 366,504 367,605 393,976 380,201 491,668 472,975 445,198 466,041 455,013

Retrieve and Close SSTs 8 3,484 1,923 912 0 4,604 6,400 2,579 2,893 5,985

Waste Feed Delivery/Treatment Planning/

DST Retrieval/Closure 62,587 124,749 238,683 225,082 268,002 218,964 126,326 136,401 108,806 71,703

Supplemental Treatment 44,243 97,424 213,596 304,519 314,010 328,815 30,074 23,061 169,656 171,626

Treat Waste 34,101 39,498 43,420 59,917 62,353 48,354 45,702 45,055 45,931 47,175

Facility Closure 19,834 20,310 33,995 105,413 195,452 411,621 410,079 406,116 413,095 420,508

TOC-ORP Project Support 149,250 189,060 188,453 226,248 197,347 189,059 187,686 168,954 166,352 175,096

Total 666,578 841,029 1,087,674 1,316,067 1,417,366 1,693,084 1,279,242 1,227,364 1,372,775 1,347,106

Fiscal Year 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033

Base Operations 470,788 496,480 485,865 508,862 567,468 539,960 567,671 548,172 576,550 582,060

Retrieve and Close SSTs 45,140 7,779 4,728 1,394 1,729 1,336 3,214 2,319 1,882 1,844

Waste Feed Delivery/Treatment Planning/

DST Retrieval/Closure 54,898 115,761 115,140 174,473 297,347 206,817 163,133 208,752 266,322 294,811

Supplemental Treatment 176,101 179,975 183,935 187,981 192,117 195,564 200,663 205,078 210,421 214,200

Treat Waste 52,460 49,210 51,056 51,332 54,637 58,005 56,796 55,192 59,837 60,673

Facility Closure 431,471 440,964 450,665 460,580 470,712 479,159 491,651 502,468 515,560 524,820

TOC-ORP Project Support 182,990 161,213 151,475 160,483 166,190 163,649 151,105 145,680 146,634 148,180

Total 1,413,849 1,451,382 1,442,862 1,545,104 1,750,201 1,644,491 1,634,233 1,667,660 1,777,206 1,826,588

Fiscal Year 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043

Base Operations 632,972 652,033 648,968 628,511 640,206 646,170 557,148 484,417 462,563 447,632

Retrieve and Close SSTs 2,596 11,213 7,983 11,725 4,113 1,326 747 11,530 10,195 15,046

Waste Feed Delivery/Treatment Planning/

DST Retrieval/Closure 418,713 470,008 544,391 458,892 456,142 376,011 216,360 175,960 181,184 104,817

Supplemental Treatment 218,044 222,841 225,396 229,445 234,492 239,651 243,952 250,312 255,819 260,935

Treat Waste 65,146 64,184 69,834 71,263 68,816 73,029 70,324 72,943 69,655 73,186

Facility Closure 534,237 545,990 562,448 572,550 585,146 598,020 608,751 624,622 559,604 544,302

TOC-ORP Project Support 150,839 157,589 168,245 177,266 204,992 225,126 238,573 265,977 295,917 343,051

Total 2,022,547 2,123,858 2,227,265 2,149,651 2,193,908 2,159,333 1,935,853 1,885,761 1,834,937 1,788,968
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-60

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 Total

Base Operations 439,638 407,393 300,834 261,134 187,890 93,459 62,485 17,093,065

Retrieve and Close SSTs 13,392 33,132 83,973 43,314 38,195 11,774 3,253 7,171,540

Waste Feed Delivery/Treatment Planning/

DST Retrieval/Closure 69,822 104,365 52,641 45,307 18,166 0 0 6,923,910

Supplemental Treatment 267,210 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,291,155

Treat Waste 73,232 75,827 16,622 12,602 10,295 4,272 2,850 15,224,927

Facility Closure 528,167 513,673 488,927 500,693 253,327 0 0 403,661

TOC-ORP Project Support 335,495 409,323 238,259 194,255 85,757 17,388 757 1,914,784

Total 1,726,957 1,543,712 1,181,257 1,057,304 593,630 126,893 69,345 55,023,043

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

1 Radioactive Liquid Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition, PBS ORP-0014

2 Base Operations 356,555 366,504 367,605 393,976 380,201 491,668 2,356,508

3 Base Operations 80,707 88,836 79,520 77,720 83,444 85,499 495,726

3 DST Space Management 23,956 13,627 10,798 18,442 12,382 9,063 88,267

3 TOC Facility Operations 34,726 41,214 43,054 57,124 35,537 28,555 240,210

3 Tank Farm Upgrades 13,626 10,927 21,278 22,186 12,434 10,851 91,301

3 Project Support 203,540 211,900 212,956 218,504 236,404 357,700 1,441,004

2 Retrieve and Close SSTs 62,587 124,749 238,683 225,082 268,002 218,964 1,138,068

3 Retrieval/Closure Program 23,367 28,756 38,954 101,760 82,909 25,217 300,962

3 SST Retrieval East Area 28,207 51,314 108,421 90,129 81,952 60,813 420,836

3 SST Retrieval West Area 0 0 10,018 6,151 77,784 80,339 174,292

3 Closure Program 1,675 806 456 627 437 481 4,482

3 SST Closure 9,339 43,873 80,834 26,415 24,920 52,115 237,496
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-61

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

2

Waste Feed Delivery/Treatment Planning/DST 

Retrieval/Closure 149,250 189,060 188,453 226,248 197,347 189,059 1,139,417

3 WTP Feed Delivery Program 20,575 22,203 23,467 24,669 24,879 26,169 141,961

3 Construct DST Systems 59,979 53,872 41,408 40,058 44,232 57,929 297,478

3 Immobilization Program 22,978 51,315 32,497 54,628 33,770 18,446 213,634

3 WTP Operational Readiness 4,425 4,122 4,221 4,322 4,426 344 21,861

3 Tank Waste Pretreatment Project 27,083 31,145 39,387 52,772 45,406 45,036 240,830

3 Secondary Waste Treatment/ETF 14,209 26,402 47,473 49,799 44,635 41,135 223,653

2 Supplemental Treatment 44,243 97,424 213,596 304,519 314,010 328,815 1,302,607

3 Supplemental Treatment 44,243 97,424 213,596 304,519 314,010 328,815 1,302,607

2 Treat Waste 19,834 20,310 33,995 105,413 195,452 411,621 786,623

3 Waste Treatment Facility 19,834 20,310 33,995 105,413 195,452 411,621 786,623

2 Facility Closures 8 3,484 1,923 912 0 4,604 10,931

3 TFC Facility and Other Closure 8 3,484 1,923 912 0 4,604 10,931

2 Tank Operations Contract - ORP Project Support 34,101 39,498 43,420 59,917 62,353 48,354 287,644

3 Tank Operations Contract - ORP Project Support 34,101 39,498 43,420 59,917 62,353 48,354 287,644

Total 666,578 841,029 1,087,674 1,316,067 1,417,366 1,693,084 7,021,797

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total

Analytical Laboratory 28,416 26,726 39,691 28,184 17,030 18,590 1,345 159,982

Balance of Facilities 54,965 80,098 52,759 24,728 12,691 10,507 484 236,232

High-Level Waste 147,372 134,006 97,297 64,996 64,624 64,501 18,718 591,514

Low-Activity Waste 46,715 33,682 80,325 60,474 31,348 42,382 1,208 296,134

Plant Wide 266,486 236,250 179,672 132,785 52,156 1,660 0 869,009

Pretreatment 303,973 210,179 131,306 100,888 76,461 103,515 5,436 931,758

Total 847,927 720,941 581,050 412,055 254,310 241,155 27,191 3,084,629

PBS = project baseline summary.
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-62

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

1 Major Construction - Waste Treatment Plant, PBS ORP-0060

2 Pretreatment Facility (PT) 303,973 210,179 131,306 100,888 76,461 103,515 926,322

3 Engineering Design - PT 6,542 1,425 480 0 0 0 8,447

3 Plant Equipment - PT 59,259 13,722 8,976 0 0 0 81,957

3 Environmental and Nuclear Safety - PT 2,246 2,544 3,444 2,963 2,214 128 13,539

3 Plant Material - PT 14,222 0 0 0 0 0 14,222

3 Startup - PT 286 10,982 15,768 0 0 0 27,036

3 Construction Field Non Manual - PT 16,788 13,079 3,427 0 0 0 33,294

3 Crafts (Construction) - PT - Civil 21,521 12,360 3,625 0 0 0 37,506

3 Crafts (Construction) - PT - Distribs 3,238 2,680 656 77 0 0 6,651

3 Crafts (Construction) - PT - Electrical 16,037 18,336 4,395 0 0 0 38,768

3 Crafts (Construction) - PT - Mechanical 13,895 9,517 396 0 0 0 23,808

3 Crafts (Construction) - PT - Piping and Instrumentation 44,843 31,501 7,464 0 0 0 83,808

3 Construction Subcontracts - PT 23,909 19,368 3,249 0 0 0 46,526

3 Liner Plate and Vessel Const Subcontract - PT 3,664 1,341 0 0 0 0 5,005

3 Special Protective Coating Const Subcontract - PT 4,782 599 3 0 0 0 5,384

3 Intermech Construction Subcontract - PT 8,473 2,358 0 0 0 0 10,831

3 Commissioning - PT 5,865 18,664 32,688 57,052 33,196 147,465

- Fee 16,738 17,279 9,343 18,955 29,886 50,137 142,338

- Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 41,665 34,424 37,392 21,841 11,165 53,250 199,737

2 Low-Activity Waste Facility (LAW) 46,715 33,682 80,325 60,474 31,348 42,382 294,926

3 Engineering Design - LAW 456 194 19 0 0 0 669

3 Plant Equipment - LAW 3,795 0 20,780 95 (23,362) 0 1,308

3 Equipment Engineering - LAW 14 14 15 0 0 0 43

3 Environmental and Nuclear Safety - LAW 1,106 1,043 2,386 2,219 1,642 33 8,429

3 Research and Technology - LAW 232 239 247 0 0 0 718

3 Startup - LAW 2,594 8,345 2,136 0 0 0 13,075

3 Construction Field Non Manual - LAW 5,926 1,318 115 0 0 0 7,359
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-63

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

3 Crafts (Construction) - LAW 10,424 0 0 0 0 0 10,424

3 Crafts (Construction) - LAW - Distribs 1,507 1,082 339 40 0 0 2,968

3 Construction Subcontracts - LAW 1,443 0 0 0 0 0 1,443

3 Special Protective Coating Const Subcontract - LAW 7 0 0 0 0 0 7

3 Intermech Construction Subcontract - LAW 129 0 0 0 0 0 129

3 Commissioning - LAW 5,363 11,330 29,573 38,461 41,717 0 126,444

- Fee 8,076 914 3,191 10,114 18,304 23,613 64,212

- Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 5,643 9,203 21,524 9,545 (6,953) 18,736 57,698

2 High-Level Waste Facility (HLW) 147,372 134,006 97,297 64,996 64,624 64,501 572,796

3 Engineering Design - HLW 1,223 1,235 563 20 0 0 3,041

3 Plant Equipment - HLW 17,137 12,277 725 4,857 (13,880) 0 21,116

3 Equipment Engineering - HLW 4 34 177 89 0 0 304

3 Environmental and Nuclear Safety - HLW 1,584 2,209 3,337 2,523 1,969 95 11,717

3 Research and Technology - HLW 451 370 252 261 135 0 1,469

3 Startup - HLW 158 255 11,151 5,560 0 0 17,124

3 Construction Field Non Manual - HLW 11,138 8,868 3,504 0 0 0 23,510

3 Crafts (Construction) - HLW - Civil 16,757 10,700 3,154 0 0 0 30,611

3 Crafts (Construction) - HLW - Distribs 2,229 1,679 549 60 0 0 4,517

3 Crafts (Construction) - HLW - Electrical 7,497 10,714 7,527 0 0 0 25,738

3 Crafts (Construction) - HLW - Mechanical 9,612 7,449 2,275 0 0 0 19,336

3 Crafts (Construction) - HLW - Piping and Instrumentation 18,916 18,588 6,387 0 0 0 43,891

3 Construction Subcontracts - HLW 12,477 15,671 4,835 0 0 0 32,983

3 Liner Plate and Vessel Const Subcontract - HLW 449 14 0 0 0 0 463

3 Special Protective Coating Const Subcontract - HLW 2,913 1,082 0 0 0 0 3,995

3 Intermech Construction Subcontract - HLW 6,723 4,306 2,878 0 0 0 13,907

3 Commissioning - HLW 2,341 8,368 15,456 27,350 41,118 0 94,633

- Fee 10,079 6,189 6,177 12,324 26,596 21,091 82,456

- Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 25,684 23,998 28,350 11,952 8,686 43,315 141,985

2 Balance of Facilities (BOF) 54,965 80,098 52,759 24,728 12,691 10,507 235,748

3 Engineering Design - BOF 1,080 466 22 25 0 0 1,593
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-64

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

3 Plant Equipment - BOF 1,980 18,633 0 0 0 0 20,613

3 Environmental and Nuclear Safety - BOF 432 484 502 432 280 16 2,146

3 Plant Material - BOF 539 0 0 0 0 0 539

3 Startup - BOF 11,310 9,153 5,497 0 0 0 25,960

3 Construction Field Non Manual - BOF 4,752 5,236 3,000 0 0 0 12,988

3 Crafts (Construction) - BOF 12,661 12,070 5,265 62 0 0 30,058

3 Crafts (Construction) - BOF - Distribs 1,054 834 301 26 0 0 2,215

3 Construction Subcontracts - BOF 5,665 4,184 2,709 144 0 0 12,702

3 Commissioning - BOF 6,414 13,258 22,122 20,996 16,768 0 79,558

- Fee 3,034 3,935 1,902 3,510 2,195 1,059 15,635

- Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 6,044 11,845 11,439 (467) (6,552) 9,432 31,741

2 Analytical Laboratory (Lab) 28,416 26,726 39,691 28,184 17,030 18,590 158,637

3 Engineering Design - Lab 66 50 0 0 0 0 116

3 Plant Equipment - Lab 6,371 1,671 1,398 0 0 0 9,440

3 Equipment Engineering - Lab 148 0 0 0 0 0 148

3 Environmental and Nuclear Safety - Lab 691 792 773 689 561 32 3,538

3 Startup - Lab 5,507 643 0 0 0 0 6,150

3 Construction Field Non Manual - Lab 400 0 0 0 0 0 400

3 Crafts (Construction) - Lab 216 0 0 0 0 0 216

3 Crafts (Construction) - Lab - Distribs 249 195 66 7 0 0 517

3 Commissioning - Lab 11,657 19,546 28,499 27,408 22,960 0 110,070

- Fee 879 1,089 1,508 4,678 2,997 5,679 16,830

- Cost and/or Schedule Uncertainty 2,232 2,740 7,447 (4,598) (9,488) 12,879 11,212

2 Plant Wide 266,486 236,250 179,672 132,785 52,156 1,660 869,009

3 Safety Assurance - General 3,033 2,678 2,941 2,916 3,011 41 14,620

3 Procurement & Subcontracts Freight - Plant Wide 1,529 403 215 115 12 0 2,274

3 Project Controls - General 9,030 8,145 7,038 5,082 3,015 121 32,431

3 Engineering Design - Plant Wide 4,891 3,105 1,001 409 36 14 9,456

3 Engineering Design LOE - Plant Wide 5,853 5,300 3,729 3,368 2,394 306 20,950
201

4 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-65

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

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 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

3 Engineering Management - Plant Wide 5,957 3,893 297 260 0 0 10,407

3 Equipment Engineering - Plant Wide 5,518 2,464 228 175 176 11 8,572

3 Environmental & Nuclear Safety - Plant Wide 5,115 6,202 4,970 4,318 5,738 448 26,791

3 Environmental & Nuclear Safety LOE - Plant Wide 3,068 3,358 3,426 2,581 2,546 220 15,199

3 Material Craft Services - Plant Wide 1,625 1,108 120 0 0 0 2,853

3 Procurement & Subcontracts - Procurement - Shared Services 11,875 6,555 3,810 1,516 770 0 24,526

3 Quality Assurance - General 7,646 7,521 6,534 6,464 3,488 55 31,708

3 Process Engineering and Flowsheet Modeling - Plant Wide 414 701 302 33 913 93 2,456

3 Startup - Plant Wide 4,553 4,642 3,268 605 0 0 13,068

3 Shared Services - General 48,019 43,266 40,787 33,747 25,670 766 192,255

3 Construction Field Non Manual – Shared Services 33,731 33,797 26,366 12,316 4,923 0 111,133

3 Crafts (Construction) - Shared Services - Distribs 27,051 17,783 (7,386) (6,961) 0 0 30,487

3 Construction Subcontracts - Plant Wide 5,019 4,412 3,494 0 0 0 12,925

3 CB&I Construction Subcontract - Plant Wide 2,619 0 0 0 0 0 2,619

3 Construction Subcontracts - Shared Services - Distribs 3,958 3,689 1,230 0 0 0 8,877

3 Intermech Construction Subcontract - Plant Wide 3,489 111 0 0 0 0 3,600

3 Bulk Material (Civil) - Plant Wide 3,015 135 461 0 0 0 3,611

3 Bulk Material (Electrical) - Plant Wide 4,449 4,608 2 0 0 0 9,059

3 Bulk Material (Piping & Instrumentation) - Plant Wide 108 19 0 0 0 0 127

3 Commissioning - General 61,336 68,644 72,948 63,420 (2,146) (520) 263,682

3 Project Operations - General 3,585 3,711 3,891 2,421 1,610 105 15,323

Total 848,111 720,941 581,050 412,055 254,310 241,155 3,057,438

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).
2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope, Schedule and Cost Report

C-66

DOE/RL-2013-02, Rev. 1

This page intentionally left blank.