The purpose of this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is to provide environmental imput into the selection and implementation of final disposal actions for high-level, transuranic and tank wastes located at the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington, and into the construction, operation and decommissioning of waste alternatives. Specifically evaluated are a Hanford Waste Vitrification Plant, Transportable Grout Facility, and a Waste Receiving and Packaging Facility. Also an evaluation is presented to assist in determining whether any additional action should be taken in terms of long-term environmental protection for waste that was disposed of at Hanford prior to 1970 as low-level waste (before the transuranic waste category was established by the Atomic Energy Commission but which might fall into that category if gernerated today.).
The Cold War Era left the major participants, the United States and the former Soviet Union (FSU), with large legacies in terms of both contamination and potential accidents. Facility contamination and environmental degradation, as well as the accident vulnerable facilities and equipment, are a result of weapons development, testing, and production. Although the countries face similar issues from similar activities, important differences in waste management practices make the potential environmental and health risks of more immediate concern in the FSU and Eastern Europe. In the West, most nuclear and chemical waste is stored in known contained locations, while in the East, much of the equivalent material is unconfined, contaminating the environment. In the past decade, the U.S. started to address and remediate these Cold War legacies. Costs have been very high, and the projected cost estimates for total cleanup are still increasing. Currently in Russia, the resources for starting such major activities continue to be unavailable.
This report assesses the levels and effects of exposure to ionizing radiation. Scientific findings underpin radiation risk evaluation and international protection standards. This report comprises a report with two underpinning scientific annexes. The first annex recapitulates and clarifies the philosophy of science as well as the scientific knowledge for attributing observed health effects in individuals and populations to radiation exposure, and distinguishes between that and inferring risk to individuals and populations from an exposure. The second annex reviews the latest thinking and approaches to quantifying the uncertainties in assessments of risk from radiation exposure, and illustrates these approaches with application to examples that are highly pertinent to radiation protection.