Compliance Status

This section summarizes the activities conducted to ensure that the Hanford Site is in compliance with federal environmental protection statutes and related Washington State and local environmental protection regulations and the status of Hanford's compliance with these requirements. Environmental permits required under the environmental protection regulations are discussed under the applicable statute.

Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order

• Completed construction and initiated operations of expanded laboratory hot cells in the 200-West Area for high-level radioactive mixed waste analysis
• Completed remediation of the entire ALE Reserve
• Completed remediation of the North Slope area
• Completed demolition of the 107-C and four of six 107-K Retention Basins and began removing steel panels from the 107-C Basin area
• Initiated full-scale operations of the 300 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility, ending discharges to the 300 Area process trenches
• Removed over 41,000 kg (90,000 lb) of carbon tetrachloride from the soil using a soil vapor extraction system in the 200-West Area
• Started five ground-water treatability tests in the 100 and 200 Areas and treated over 11 million L (3 million gal) of water to remove contaminants
• Initiated a field test installation of a barrier wall for the N Springs Expedited Response Action at the 100-N Area
• Implemented closed-loop cooling for buildings 291-Z, 234-5Z, and 236-Z. This reduced the discharge of cooling water to the 216-Z-20 crib
• Installed one additional RCRA monitoring well near the U-12 crib
• Completed construction of piping upgrades between the 234-5Z, 236-Z, and 241-Z tank systems
• Designed and fabricated a spare mixer pump for tank 241-SY-101
• Started emergency pumping (interim stabilization) of tank 241-T-111 (one of three tanks to be interim stabilized for fiscal year 1994)
• Demonstrated single-shell tank waste retrieval technology and completed scale-model testing
• Initiated operation of the low-level mixed waste laboratory near the 200-West Area
• Completed construction of the 242-A Evaporator/PUREX Condensate Treatment Facility
• Issued a compendium of Columbia River contaminant data. A series of workshops was held in Hood River, Oregon, and the Tri-Cities to familiarize the public with the assessment
• Began analyzing core samples from single-shell tanks.

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)

Preliminary assessments conducted for the Hanford Site revealed that there are approximately 1,100 known individual waste sites where hazardous substances may have been disposed. These 1,100 sites have been grouped into 62 operable units, which have been further grouped into four aggregate areas using identifiable geographic boundaries. The four aggregate areas have been placed on the EPA's National Priorities List, which requires a schedule and actions for the remediation of each area.

DOE is actively pursuing remedial investigation/feasibility studies at some operable units on the Hanford Site. The operable units currently being studied were selected as a result of Tri-Party Agreement negotiations. The Tri-Party Agreement provides the framework for meeting CERCLA cleanup requirements. All milestones related to the CERCLA process established for 1994 were achieved, and the Hanford Site was in compliance with these CERCLA requirements.

Expedited Response Actions

Carbon Tetrachloride Vapor Extraction

N Springs

North Slope

In March 1993, an agreement was signed by the DOE, Ecology, and EPA Region 10 to identify additional measures to accelerate Hanford Site cleanup. As part of the newly renegotiated Tri-Party Agreement, a new milestone was established focusing on removal of physical hazards and asbestos from the North Slope. This milestone required that the remediation of the North Slope be completed by October 1994.

Remedial actions were completed in September 1994. Remediation consisted of cleaning up 39 waste sites and decommissioning 16 wells. A record of decision is expected from the regulators in mid-1995. Hazardous waste removed from the North Slope included the following: () of DDT-contaminated soil, () of petroleum-contaminated soil, several hundred containers of various petroleum-based lubricants and solvents, and lead-acid battery plates. The soils were disposed of at waste facilities in Arlington, Oregon and Pasco, Washington. The other wastes were taken to the 100-N storage pad. Additionally, several of the water wells had been broken into and used for the disposal of waste motor oil. These wells were cleaned to Ecology standards before being decommissioned.

Fitzner/Eberhardt Arid Lands Ecology Reserve

Treatability Studies

Carbon Tetrachloride Ground-Water Plume

Uranium/Technetium Ground-Water Plume

200-East Area Ground-Water Plumes

Chromium Ground-Water Plume

Burial Ground Excavation Treatability Test

Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act and Pollution Prevention Act, Section 6607

The Hanford Site 1994 Tier Two Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory (DOE 1995a) was issued to the State Emergency Response Commission, local emergency planning committees, and local fire departments in February 1995. The report contained information on hazardous materials stored in quantities at or above mandated threshold levels throughout the Hanford Site in 1994. The Hanford Site 1993 Toxic Chemical Release Inventory (DOE 1994b) was issued to the EPA and the state in June 1994. Accordingly, the Hanford Site was in compliance with the reporting requirements contained in this Act.

EPA has issued two final rules expanding the list of toxic chemicals subject to reporting under Section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act and Section 6607 of the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990. The first expansion was effective for the 1994 reporting year and will be considered during preparation of the 1995 Toxic Chemical Release Inventory covering calendar year 1994. This expansion consists of 21 chemicals and two chemical categories that are listed wastes under RCRA, and 11 halogenated chlorofluorocarbons listed as ozone depleting substances under the Clean Air Act. An additional 286 chemicals, including six chemical categories, are added to the toxic chemical list, effective for the 1995 reporting year. These chemicals were added from lists of substances regulated under the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, RCRA, California's Proposition 65, and other sources.

Reporting and Pollution Prevention Program

The 17 priority chemicals targeted for reduction in this program are a subset of the chemicals listed in Section 313 of this Act. The thresholds listed in the Act are used to determine participation. DOE is committed to reducing the releases of these 17 priority chemicals by 50% (compared to the 1988 baseline) by 1995. Each DOE site annually evaluates its use and release of these 17 priority chemicals. The information is provided to DOE Headquarters, where it is aggregated for an annual progress report provided to the EPA.

Hanford did not exceed the reporting threshold for the use of any of the 17 priority chemicals during 1994.

The Hanford Site Pollution Prevention Program was designed to meet the requirements of DOE Orders 5400.1, and 5820.2A, the DOE Waste Minimization Cross Cut Plan (DOE 1994e) and EPA program guidance, and State of Washington Pollution Prevention Planning requirements. The major elements of the program were 1) establishment of management support, 2) identification and implementation of pollution prevention opportunities through an assessment process, 3) setting and measuring the progress of waste reduction goals, 4) development of waste generation baseline and tracking systems, 5) creation of employee awareness, training, and incentives programs, 6) championing sitewide pollution prevention initiatives, and 7) technology transfer, information exchange, and public outreach. The Pollution Prevention Opportunity Assessment is the cornerstone of the pollution prevention program and the primary mechanism used to identify and prioritize options to prevent pollution and reduce waste. These assessments are performed on waste-generating activities by a team of individuals selected for their process knowledge.

These assessments are a systematic approach to identify the materials entering, the pollutants and wastes exiting, and the activities that make up a waste-generating process. Potential pollution prevention opportunities are identified, evaluated, and prioritized according to environmental, health, safety, and economic criteria. Once pollution prevention opportunities are identified, schedules are developed, and the opportunities are implemented.

A methodology for pollution prevention opportunity assessments, specific to Hanford Site needs, was developed in 1992 and further refined in 1993. The baseline year established for waste generation was 1993. Significant waste streams for that year have been identified, prioritized, and scheduled for future assessment.

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

Hanford Site Facility RCRA Permit

RCRA/Dangerous Waste Permit Applications and Closure Plans

Management of Listed-Waste-Contaminated Soil

To facilitate implementation of this policy, sampling and analysis plans are being developed for the tank farms. These sampling and analysis plans will describe the protocol necessary to properly characterize tank farm soil for contaminants.

RCRA Ground-Water Monitoring Project Management

The 183-H Solar Evaporation Basins were included as part of the Sitewide RCRA Permit. Ground-water monitoring will be conducted in accordance with the final status regulations and is planned to be implemented in FY 1995.

Three wells were constructed to support the ground-water monitoring network being established for the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. The facility is a CERCLA landfill but will follow RCRA monitoring requirements. This monitoring program will be conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 264 final status RCRA regulations.

Ground-Water Impact Assessments

Two ground-water monitoring wells were installed to support ground-water impact assessments in fiscal year 1994. One well was drilled at each of the 216-T-1 and 216-T-4-2 Ditches. The wells were used to better define stratigraphy, ground-water flow direction and flow rates, and the nature and extent of any contamination. Three test pits were also excavated at each of the two ditches. These were used to determine the lateral extent of contamination within the vadose zone.

RCRA Waste Characterization Methods

Underground Storage Tank Program

Hanford Site Backlog Waste Program

In August 1994, the Richland Operations Office notified Ecology that waste designations for the contents of the 2,276 containers had been completed. The containers were processed according to the Waste Analysis Plan for Confirmation or Completion of Tank Farms Backlog Waste Designation. Copies of relevant portions of the Solid Waste Information and Tracking System database were provided to meet the requirement for a report detailing the final designation and selected waste management options for all containers identified in the Order. With the completion of these actions, all nine compliance actions of the Order have been completed.

RCRA Inspections

• Ecology issued an Order and Notice of Penalty against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) for accidentally disposing of dangerous waste at the Richland Landfill, and against DOE for not providing adequate dangerous waste training to COE employees. Ecology assessed a penalty of $9,500 against DOE and a $6,000 penalty against COE. The dangerous waste resulted from cleanup activities on the North Slope. The incident occurred late in 1993. All compliance actions identified in the Order have been completed and Ecology considers this item closed.
• Ecology issued a compliance letter regarding noncompliance with personnel training requirements after an inspection was conducted at tank farms in March 1994, to determine compliance with generator requirements. The inspector stated that, at the time of the inspection, a random sample of training records was selected and approximately half of those were deficient.

• Ecology issued a compliance letter after an inspection was conducted in February 1994, to assess completion of Milestones 21, 22, and 23 of the Tri-Party Agreement. The compliance letter alleged seven violations of Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-303 dangerous waste regulations. Ecology's concerns were about RCRA interim status requirements being relaxed on the facilities that were inspected and are scheduled for closure or are undergoing a change in mission. Ecology was concerned that relaxed management of hazardous waste during these periods may cause a threat to human health or the environment. All violations have been corrected to Ecology's satisfaction except one, which is still being negotiated on an established timeline. This remaining violation concerns the adequacy of the barrier around the 100-D Ponds and public access to the ponds from the river.
• Ecology issued a compliance letter after a dangerous waste compliance assessment of the 325 Shielded Analytical Laboratory in April 1994. Four areas of noncompliance with WAC 173-303 were identified: 1) inadequate closure of a container in storage, 2) faulty facility recordkeeping, 3) interim status permit violations, and 4) absence of tracking dangerous waste volumes after small quantities of liquid wastes were mixed with large quantities of water in the radioactive mixed waste sewer. All corrective actions have been completed.
• Ecology issued a compliance letter after an inspection at the 204-AR Waste Transfer Facility in October 1994. This facility is operating as an interim status facility under a revised Part A permit. Three violations were noted: 1) emergency procedures were not in place, 2) the contingency plan was not adequate, and 3) transfer operations procedures were inadequate. Resolution of this item is ongoing.
• Ecology issued a compliance letter after a November 1994 inspection of dangerous waste generator facilities. Three facilities were inspected, and violations were identified at the 271-U 90-Day accumulation area. The violations are as follows: 1) the spill kit did not contain all the required equipment, 2) the waste inventory log sheet did not correspond to the labeling on the container, and 3) the weekly inspection log for the facility indicated no problems were found with any safety and emergency equipment; however, safety and emergency equipment were missing, damaged, or out of certification. All corrective actions have been completed and Ecology considers this item closed.
• Ecology issued a compliance letter after a November 1994 inspection of satellite accumulation areas in the 200-East and 200-West Areas. The letter alleged three violations: 1) the accumulation containers were not under the control of the operator or secured, 2) paint materials in the buckets at the area were left to air-dry, which constituted nonpermitted treatment and disposal, and 3) it appeared that spilled materials were not mitigated or prevented. The items in question were corrected, and other corrective actions were taken to prevent recurrence of similar deficiencies. Ecology was satisfied with the corrective actions and considers this action closed.

Clean Air Act

EPA has retained authority in Washington State for regulating certain hazardous pollutants under the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), in accordance with 40 CFR 61. These standards are designed to protect the public from hazardous air pollutants (for example, arsenic, asbestos, beryllium, mercury, radionuclides, and vinyl chloride).

Pursuant to this program within the Clean Air Act, the EPA has promulgated regulations specifically addressing asbestos emissions. These regulations apply at the Hanford Site in building demolition and/or disposal and waste disposal operations. Of the approximately 1,400 facilities on the Hanford Site, 456 facilities currently contain asbestos. During 1994, approximately () of asbestos were removed and disposed of in the Hanford Central Landfill in accordance with applicable regulations.

Revised Clean Air Act requirements for radioactive air emissions were issued in December 1989 under 40 CFR 61, Subpart H. Emissions from the Hanford Site are within the new EPA offsite emission standards of 10 mrem/yr (effective dose equivalent). The 1989 requirements for flow and emissions measurements, quality assurance, and sampling documentation are in the process of being implemented at all Hanford Site sources.

These specific reporting and monitoring requirements necessitate additional effort. The Richland Operations Office received a 2-year compliance extension for the Subpart H requirements until December 1991. During this extension period, evaluations were conducted to determine the need for any additional continuous sampling equipment and other actions to meet EPA criteria. Negotiations continued with the EPA in 1992 and 1993. In February 1993, the DOE Richland Operations Office received a Compliance Order and Information Request from EPA, Region 10. The Order required 1) evaluation of all radionuclide emission points on the Hanford Site to determine which are subject to continuous emission measurement requirements in 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart H, and 2) continuous measurement of radionuclide emissions in accordance with 40 CFR Part 61.93. DOE Richland Operations Office submitted a compliance plan to the EPA, Region 10, in April 1993. The compliance plan included, as one of its milestones, the requirement to develop a Federal Facility Compliance Agreement. In February 1994, the NESHAP Federal Facility Compliance Agreement for the Hanford Site was approved. This agreement was signed by the EPA, Region 10, and DOE Richland Operations Office. It provides a compliance plan and schedule to bring the Hanford Site into compliance with the Clean Air Act, as amended, and its implementing regulations in 40 CFR Part 61, NESHAP; Radionuclides.

Title VI of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 requires regulation for the use and disposal of ozone-depleting substances through the requirements in 40 CFR Part 82. The Site operating and engineering contractor was assigned the lead by a DOE Richland Operations Office directive to coordinate the development of a sitewide plan to implement the Title VI requirements. Ozone-depleting substance management on the Hanford Site is administered through a sitewide implementation plan prepared and issued during 1994. This implementation plan will be updated periodically to reflect changing federal regulations.

The local air authority, Benton County Clean Air Authority, enforces Regulation 1, which pertains to detrimental effects, fugitive dust, incineration products, open burning, odor, opacity, asbestos disposal, and sulfur oxide emissions. They have been delegated the authority to enforce EPA asbestos regulations under NESHAP. In 1994, the Site was in compliance with the regulations.

During 1994, Hanford Site air emissions remained below all regulatory limits set for radioactive and other pollutants. Routine reports of air emissions were provided to each air quality agency in accordance with requirements.

Department of Health Enforcement Inspections

• DOH conducted a sitewide quality assurance (QA) audit in August 1994, which focused on the overall QA program of the DOE Richland Operations Office and its contractors. Four findings were identified. DOH stated in their letter that a new category of findings, finding level IVs, would be created to replace the former category of observations, that had not been responded to in the past, and that all formerly identified observations from past audits would be changed to finding level IVs. DOH also expects corrective actions for these former observations to be completed.
• DOH issued a compliance letter that followed an inspection at the 200-West Tank Farms in October 1994. Stack monitoring systems for five stacks in the 200-West tank farms were examined and three findings were identified.
• DOH conducted an audit of 200-East Area Tank Farms during March and April 1992, identifying 21 findings, 10 observations, and 9 best management practices related to radioactive emissions from the tank farms. Ten open findings remain. These ten findings were previously classified as "observations," so were originally not responded to (see first bullet, above).

Clean Water Act

The number of active outfalls operating within permit number WA-000374-3 has been reduced from eight to four over the past year. The active outfalls are located in the 100-K Area (outfall 004), the 100-N Area (N-Springs and outfall 009), and the 300 Area (outfall 003). A new permit, number WA-002591-7, was issued for the 300 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility, which became operational in December 1994. No instances of noncompliance occurred during 1994.

Liquid Effluent Consent Order

The Miscellaneous Streams Plan and Schedule was submitted to Ecology for approval, as required by the Consent Order, in December 1994. This plan and schedule addresses how and when the remaining miscellaneous streams will become compliant with State regulations. The Plan and Schedule proposed that four categorical permits be submitted over the next 4 years to ensure the efficient use of both state and federal resources in the permit development.

Lawsuits Filed

In July 1993, a class-action lawsuit was filed against the current Site operating and engineering contractor and Westinghouse Electric Corporation in Yakima Superior Court in Yakima, Washington. The plaintiffs are seeking damages to provide medical monitoring and an injunction against further discharges to the environment. The federal court has dismissed all claims against the current operating and engineering contractor. DOE has consolidated the defenses for litigation purposes.

Safe Drinking Water Act

Toxic Substances Control Act

Various concentrations of PCBs are found in electrical equipment throughout the Hanford Site. The majority of transformers have been sampled and characterized. Nineteen PCB transformers (those with a PCB concentration greater than 500 ppm) remain in service. Schedules have been developed for removing these PCB transformers.

Defueled, decommissioned submarine reactor compartments shipped by the U.S. Navy to the Hanford Site for disposal contain small quantities of PCBs bound within the matrix of nonmetallic materials such as thermal insulation, electrical cables, and some synthetic rubber items. Because PCBs are present, the reactor compartments are regulated under this Act. A compliance agreement between EPA and DOE defines the process by which a chemical waste landfill approval under this Act will be issued for the disposal trench. The EPA Region 10 will grant a TSCA authorization for the disposal site after the State has issued a dangerous waste permit. The reactor compartments are currently stored in the trench without being covered by soil.

Nonradioactive PCB waste is stored and disposed of in accordance with the 40 CFR 761 requirements. Effective nationwide treatment and disposal capacity and technologies have not been developed for radioactive PCB waste. This waste remains in storage on the Site pending the development of adequate treatment and disposal technologies and capacities. A draft DOE-wide Federal Facilities Compliance Agreement allowing the storage of radioactive PCB wastes beyond the regulatory limit has been developed and is in the review cycle.

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act

Endangered Species Act

Bald eagles, a threatened species, are seasonal visitors to the Hanford Site. Over the past years, several bald eagles have begun nesting onsite. In compliance with the Bald Eagle Management Plan for the Hanford Site and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, access roads in the nesting areas are closed in the early spring to protect the nesting environment.

In 1993, the Richland Operations Office directed that an ecological review be conducted on all projects both on and off the Site that have the potential to affect the biological environment. The scope of the review includes evaluating whether any species protected by the Act occur in a proposed project area, quantifying any impacts that might result, and identifying mitigation to minimize or eliminate impacts. Reviews have been conducted on an ongoing basis. There were no additional compliance issues during 1994.

National Historic Preservation Act, Archaeological Resources Protection Act, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, and American Indian Religious Freedom Act

The American Indian Religious Freedom Act requires federal agencies to help protect and preserve the rights of Native Americans to practice their traditional religions. The Richland Operations Office cooperates with Native Americans by providing Site access for organized religious activities.

There were no additional compliance issues during 1994.

National Environmental Policy Act

Recently Approved Environmental Impact Statements

The final EIS was issued as an addendum to the draft EIS in December 1992. The record of decision was published in the Federal Register in September 1993 (58 FR 48509). DOE has decided on safe storage followed by deferred one-piece removal of these eight surplus production reactors at the Hanford Site. DOE intends to complete this decommissioning action consistent with the proposed Hanford cleanup schedule for remedial actions included in the Tri-Party Agreement. Therefore, the safe storage period would be shorter than the 75 years outlined in the final EIS. Until decommissioning is initiated, DOE will continue to conduct routine maintenance, surveillance, and radiological monitoring activities to ensure continued protection of the public and the environment during the safe-storage period.

Environmental Impact Statements in Progress

Another EIS in progress is the Weapons Complex Reconfiguration Modernization Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, DOE Headquarters, Office of Defense Programs. The purpose of this programmatic EIS is to evaluate alternative approaches for reconfiguring the DOE defense program and its facilities, on both a programmatic and site-specific level. With the end of the Cold War, the U.S. is reducing its stockpile of nuclear weapons. This reduction requires DOE to reevaluate its earlier alternatives for reconfiguring the nuclear weapons complex. A revised notice of intent was published in the Federal Register in July 1993 (58 FR 39528). Significant changes include the addition of consolidated long-term storage facilities for plutonium and uranium, and consolidation of all weapons-complex functions at one site. The Nevada Test Site has been proposed as a new candidate site, and the Hanford Site was dropped from further consideration. The scope is continuing to be reviewed.

Another EIS is the DOE Programmatic Spent Nuclear Fuel Management and Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Programs EIS. The purpose of the programmatic part of this EIS is to evaluate alternatives for the management of spent nuclear fuel within the DOE complex. The EIS will evaluate the use of several sites, including Hanford, as potential sites for spent nuclear fuel storage. This EIS is on an accelerated schedule. The EIS will also evaluate environmental and waste management issues at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. In August 1993, Hanford was requested to support the preparation of this EIS. DOE issued the draft EIS in June 1994, and the final EIS in April 1995.

Site-Specific Environmental Impact Statements In Progress

The Tank Waste Remediation System EIS has its origin in two DOE decisions. The first was an October 1990 commitment by the Secretary of Energy to prepare a supplemental EIS to the Hanford Defense Waste EIS (DOE 1987a) to address tank management and safety issues. The second was a December 1991 decision by the Secretary of Energy to revise the entire tank safety/tank waste treatment and disposal program and to accelerate retrieval of single-shell tank wastes. This EIS combines the scope of the originally planned supplemental EIS and the tank safety mitigation/remediation issues EIS. The notice of intent (59 FR 4052) was published in the Federal Register in January 1994. Public scoping was conducted during February and March of 1994.

An EIS is also underway for a proposed Multi-function Waste Tank Facility. The EIS will review potential environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of six new 3.8 million L (1 million gal) double-shell waste tanks. The notice of intent in January 1994 for the Tank Waste Remediation System EIS also included the new tanks. The new tanks will be addressed under NEPA by an interim action EIS. In July 1994, the implementation plan and the draft EIS for the Safe Interim Storage of Hanford Tank Wastes were released for public review and comment.

Potential environmental impacts of CERCLA and RCRA past-practices remediation activities at the Hanford Site, particularly cumulative impacts, will be assessed in the Hanford Remedial Action EIS. This EIS will cover environmental restoration of past-practices liquid effluent disposal sites, buried solid low-level wastes, pre-1970 transuranic wastes, high-activity wastes associated with storage tanks and their piping, and miscellaneous dangerous and nondangerous waste sites. Additional NEPA documentation could be prepared, as needed, for specific remediation of individual operable units or construction of waste management facilities. The Hanford Remedial Action EIS will not make site-specific level-of-cleanup decisions. Instead, the final decision on this EIS may establish future site use objectives that in turn support the regulatory framework for establishing individual waste site cleanup levels. The scope of this EIS will be clear once the implementation plan is issued. The notice of intent was published in the Federal Register during August 1992. The final decision on this EIS is targeted for 1995.

Planned Environmental Impact Statements

Another EIS is anticipated for spent nuclear fuel at the Hanford Site. The EIS would support implementation of the final decision that is expected to be made in the record of decision in June 1995 for the DOE programmatic spent nuclear fuel EIS.

Return to Table of Contents