Rep. Hastings Seeking Answers on Hanford’s K Basin Project
WC Monitor
10/24/2014
After the Department of Energy missed a Sept. 30 milestone to begin removing sludge out of Hanford’s K-Basin, Rep. Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) this week asked DOE for a detailed plan on the project. This month, the Environmental Protection Agency denied DOE’s extension request for the project and said it could begin fining the Department up to $10,000 per week for missing the milestone in Hanford’s Tri-Party Agreement. Hastings is seeking answers on cost and schedule DOE did not provide in its extension request. “It is important for all decision makers and stakeholders to understand the impact that delays would have on public and environmental risks as well as on future cleanup costs. To help facilitate that, I request the cost, schedule and risk analysis associated with slowing or stopping K West sludge removal in the near term,” the lawmaker wrote in an Oct. 22 letter to acting Assistant Energy Secretary for Environmental Management Mark Whitney.
Hastings is looking for more information on the Department’s plans for the project moving ahead with current funding. “I write to request the Department of Energy’s detailed plan for dealing with this EPA notification and for completing the sludge project as required under the Tri-Party Agreement,” he said. “I request details including, but not limited to, plans for spending remaining FY2015 funds-recognizing that this is not a new project and that both the House-passed and Senate Energy and Water appropriations bills include funds for sludge. I also request information regarding the funding required to continue this project in Fiscal Year 2016, as well as details about the mortgage and monitoring costs associated with further delays.”
Total Cost Adds up to $450 Million
DOE’s FY’15 budget requested $31.6 million for the K-Basin sludge project and calls for a total project cost of $308 million with an estimated completion date in Fiscal Year 2018. But factoring in additional costs, the project is likely to have a total cost of $450 million, according to the Hastings letter. The heavy sludge in the basin is a mixture of concrete, sediment and debris from spent fuel rods produced at the site and stored in two water-filled basins—K-West and K-East. Fuel rods and sludge was removed out of the east basin in the 2000s and stored in stainless steel boxes, which were moved for storage underwater in the west side while decommissioning and demolition was completed at the east basin. The goal now is for DOE and contractor CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company to demolish the west basin, reducing risk of contamination entering the river.
Fines Add Up to $10,000 Per Week
The EPA sent a letter to DOE earlier this month denying its extension request and stating that fines are being assessed. The fine for the first week is $5,000, increasing to $10,000 for each additional week that DOE fails to start removing sludge. DOE has 15 days to start dispute resolution on whether it failed to meet the milestone. It also has 30 days to submit a written statement if it disputes EPA’s denial of its proposal to set new milestones.
Inspection at Cocooned F Reactor Finds No Issues
WC Monitor
10/24/2014
F Reactor has passed its five-year check-up, with Hanford workers finding nothing amiss after unsealing and entering what remains of the reactor. Hanford workers have cocooned six reactors, tearing them down to little more than their radioactive core, sealing up all openings and reroofing them. They are planned to remain in interim storage for 75 years to allow radioactivity to decay to more manageable levels. This was the second time Hanford workers have ground away the welds from around the steel door of F Reactor to go inside since the reactor was cocooned in 2003. “This inspection gives us an opportunity to conduct radiological surveys, make any repairs to the roof and remove any hazardous substances,” said Rick Moren, director of long-term stewardship for Mission Support Alliance. “During the inspection, workers found the reactor to be in good shape and almost identical to the last time it was inspected.”
The workers who entered saw no wild creatures, but they did find a small amount of bat guano and a few spider webs, Moren said. There was no moisture, despite the recent rains. The door to the reactor was unsealed a few days before the first entry to allow it to air out and for air samples to be collected to make sure it is clear of contaminants. Radon is a particular concern in closed-up Hanford reactors.
Reactors to be Inspected Every Five Years
DOE is required to inspect cocooned reactors every five years to check for structural integrity and make sure any remaining hazardous materials remain confined. But F Reactor was sealed up a little longer than that before being reopened. As a cost-savings measure, the Department of Energy has received permission from the Washington State Department of Ecology and the Environmental Protection Agency to adjust the schedule for inspecting reactors, said Keith Grindstaff, manager of the DOE Long-Term Stewardship Program. It is moving toward inspecting the six Hanford reactors that have been cocooned so far in quick succession every five years. That should avoid the cost of repeatedly mobilizing entry crews. This coming spring, the C, D, H and N Reactors will be inspected. Those reactors have been inspected from three to seven years ago. The other reactor cocooned so far, the DR Reactor, was last inspected in 2013.
Mission Support Alliance decided to start with an entry only into F Reactor because it had not opened up a cocooned reactor before. The previous entries and inspections have been done by Washington Closure Hanford, but with much of the cleanup along the Columbia River close to completion, the cocooned F Reactor has been moved to DOE’s Long-Term Stewardship Program, with inspections conducted by Mission Support Alliance. “This entry marks a transition of sorts,” Grindstaff said. “As the river corridor cleanup work is completed and transitioned to long-term stewardship, our program will manage any ongoing requirements.”
