Treatment Plan DOE Logo
DOE/RL-97-56


Hanford Treatment Strategy

Rather than select a specific treatment option, this Treatment Plan incorporates the full range of options in mitigating the potential effects of maintenance, deactivation, alteration, and demolition on properties within the Historic District. The uniting element for these treatment measures will be the comprehensive final report on the history of events and processes that qualify the Hanford Site for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. As noted in the Introduction, The Hanford Site Manhattan Project and Cold War Era Historic District Final Treatment Report will be a multi-leveled chronicling of the unique history of the Hanford Site, its technology, and the people who worked here. The organizing principle will be the historic narratives written for each property type and/or process which call out changes, modifications, adaptations, or adjustments in the property type or process over time. The representative buildings selected for mitigation will then be factored into these narratives as key properties that support, typify, or exemplify aspects of that history. Those buildings not selected for mitigation will be included as appropriate to provide full topical coverage. The final report is expected to contain approximately 800 pages.

The breakdown of the final report will be as follows:

Chapter 1: Historic Overview

Chapter 1 will offer a synthesized history of the Hanford Site. It will encapsulate the detailed information contained within Chapter 2. The objective of Chapter 1 is to provide the reader with a summary statement of the Hanford Site's significance in nuclear defense, the development of nuclear technology, and nuclear research throughout its operational period. It will also offer the reader insights into the political and social environments which the workers experienced as world events influenced Hanford missions. Discussion will be organized by the following headings:

Site Selection, Acquisition, Design, and Construction
Architectural History
Manhattan Project
Cold War Era
Worker Experience

This chapter could serve as a stand-alone document for those who wish to become acquainted with the Hanford Site. For those whose desire goes beyond acquaintance, it will serve as the prelude to the document.

Chapter 2: Historic Narratives and Building Discussions

Throughout its operational history, the Hanford Site was dedicated to the production of plutonium. This fact both differentiates and aligns the Hanford Site with other industrial complexes designed to manufacture a product. Like a standard industry, the Hanford Site required a support structure comprised of workers, machinery, and infrastructure to bring the product to market. These requirements are expressed in the craft shops, warehouses, power plants, railroads, utility lines, and administrative offices among other facilities on site. Unlike other industries, the Hanford Site's primary market was the U.S. Department of Defense, and its product was produced under conditions of extreme security. Operations required specialized training, took place in highly engineered environments, and often utilized one-of-a-kind equipment and machinery designed on-site. The end product, as well as most of the waste stream associated with its production, was life-threatening. These operations and their related safety and security measures are reflected in reactor buildings, separation canyons, process lines, and waste structures.

Chapter 2 represents the heart of the treatment document. Each of the primary functions will be examined together with the operational and support systems necessary to successfully carry out the mission(s) at the Hanford Site. The following headings will organize the discussion:

Construction History
Fuel Manufacturing
Reactor Operations/Water Treatment
Chemical Separation/By Products
Plutonium Finishing
Waste Management
Research and Development
Site Security
Military Operations
Health and Safety
Transportation, Communication, General Site Support
History of Workers at the Hanford Site

Each subchapter will consist of approximately 50 pages of text, written in clear prose, designed to facilitate the reader's understanding of the significance of the processes or events being addressed. Illustrations, drawings, and photographs drawn from the historic record, will be included to orient the reader in time and space. It will be here that the individual buildings selected for documentation will be used as the focal points for discussion. Other facilities, including those previously demolished, will be brought into the discussion as they illustrate or carry the theme.

The following research design was developed for the reactor operations section and illustrates the general approach to be taken:

Historical Documentation Objectives

There are three historical documentation objectives: 1) document the reactor history and technology, 2) tie the buildings and structures identified as mitigation properties in the Programmatic Agreement (DOE 1996a) to the discussion, as appropriate, 3) identify reactor-related resources to facilitate future research. These objectives are discussed in greater detail below.

  1. Document Hanford History and Technology

    The history and technology of Hanford [Reactor Operations] will be documented by a) providing the chronologies, statistics, events, and other basic information as succinctly as possible, and b) providing descriptions of technological systems and support systems...this information will be presented in summary fashion, drawing mainly from previous research already conducted by others. The product will be a scholarly, public-oriented monograph that is well-illustrated and easy-to-understand.

  2. Link Key Buildings and Structures to Discussion

    Key buildings and structures will be used to illustrate the base technologies and support systems, as well as the changes that occurred. B Reactor will be used to focus the reactor technology discussion, with KW and N Reactors used to highlight major advancements. A series of structures will be used in a similar fashion to highlight the water treatment system. Other buildings and structures identified for mitigation will be worked into the chapter as appropriate.

  3. Identify Important Resources for Future Researchers

    Most information for this chapter will be drawn from secondary sources. However, as these resources are investigated, a list of key reference materials and collections will be kept for inclusion in the Guide to Resources chapter of the mitigation report. Major references, photographic collections, architectural drawing collections, and physical objects known to exist will be identified and their locations noted. The procedures to follow to access these materials will also be identified.

Research Goals

There are four main research goals for the reactor chapter:

First, trace the development of Hanford reactor technology from the laboratory through the Hanford advancements, including the relationship of Hanford reactor technology to reactor technology in general.

Second, illustrate the primary technological and support systems, using key buildings and structures to the extent possible.

Third, document the changes in technology and procedures that were made following the construction and operation of the original three reactors.

Fourth, document the significance of Hanford reactors to the production mission, nuclear technology, and the local economy and environment.

The research design then lists a series of 39 questions that will be investigated to achieve the research goals. These questions include: What was the production process? Where did the design come from? Who built? Who operated? What types of technical problems were encountered? How were they solved? How were Hanford reactor wastes managed? What were the environmental impacts? What was the security system at reactor sites and how did it change? How many worked at the reactors? What were the jobs? What was dress, language, tools, artifacts? What worker issues emerged over time?

As noted by the Secretary of the Interior: "Documentation should incorporate rather than duplicate the findings of previous research" (NPS 1983, p. 44729). In keeping with this objective, the final report will utilize existing information on Hanford's built environment to the fullest extent possible. This report is not intended to be the definitive history of the Hanford Site. That undertaking is left for future researchers. Rather, this document will present a solid recounting of the events occurring at the Hanford Site from 1943 through 1990 with an emphasis on how the buildings and structures now on site manifest or reflect those events.

Chapter 3: Guide to Resources

An information guide will be provided that directs researchers to existing documentation as well as data generated in support of the mitigation effort (for example, oral histories). This chapter represents the bridge between preservation documentation and academic history. Professional standards require that one cite the sources of information contained within a report. This final report will take that obligation many steps forward by providing a researcher's guide to existing documentation identified but not utilized in the report. The following types of resources will be cataloged:

Primary Documents
Technical Reports
Drawings, Maps, and Plans
Photographs
Industrial Artifacts
Oral Histories

While it remains uncertain at this point where these resources will ultimately be curated, the question of what to retain has been largely resolved. Concurrent with the development of this Treatment Plan, an independent effort was undertaken to generate a curation strategy that would address the key issue of how artifacts with long-range curation requirements are to be differentiated from objects of interest.

Procedures for acquisition (in other words, deciding what to keep) and disposition (in other words, deciding what to let go) were written, and personnel essential to the conduct of these reviews were identified by disciplines. This curation strategy was developed through professional and public workshops, and was revised in light of public comments received on interim proposals. The final document, entitled "Procedure for Identifying Manhattan Project and Cold War Era Artifacts and Records" (DOE 1997), was issued on December 15, 1997. This strategy now guides the performance of all building content walkthroughs currently underway on site.

Chapter 4: Recommendations

The highest form of preservation is retention in place. Properties which are occupied in association with ongoing functions are maintained and serviced so as to remain in operable condition. With the focus on cleanup, the majority of Manhattan Project and Cold War Era buildings and structure no longer make a contribution to the Hanford mission. That is not to say, however, that specific properties lack value. For example, the 105-B Reactor clearly should be retained as an interpretive center. The B Reactor Museum Association has long championed this alternative to demolition. This Treatment Plan fully supports their recommendation. Likewise, the 100-K Area Flocculation Basins and Clearwells were not designed to accommodate the rearing of salmon, sturgeon and other fish species, but the operation of these pools as a hatchery by the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Indian Nation is a perfect example of adaptive use that provides both economic benefit and returns a natural resource to the Columbia River.

As noted earlier, DOE-RL will solicit recommendations for future uses of properties from the public. Alternatives to be considered include, but are not limited to:

Adaptive Use
Public Education and Interpretation
Economic Development

DOE-RL will also examine its own future facility needs in keeping with the National Historic Preservation Act which advises that:

Prior to acquiring, constructing, or leasing buildings for purposes of carrying out agency responsibilities, each Federal agency shall use, to the maximum extent feasible, historic properties available to the agency (NHPA 1992, § 110(a)(1)).

And:

...any Federal agency, after consultation with the Council, shall, to the extent practicable, establish and implement alternatives for historic properties, including adaptive use, that are not needed for current or projected agency purposes, and may lease an historic property owned by the agency to any person or organization...if the agency head determines that the lease...will adequately insure the preservation of the historic property (NHPA 1992, § 111(a)).

This solicitation of future uses and examination of future needs will refine the Facilities D&D Goal contained within the current Hanford Strategic Plan which instructs DOE-RL simply to "remove non-essential, surplus buildings and facilities that don't have identified post-cleanup uses" (DOE 1996b). Given that no buildings or facilities are identified in the Hanford Strategic Plan, direction from the public, as well as from within the agency itself, is clearly required and essential. Once DOE-RL has formally determined which properties have a future use, this decision "will take precedence over the planning goals expressed in the Hanford Strategic Plan, and all strategic planning documents will be updated accordingly" (DOE 1996b).

Appendices

An appendix to the final report will contain a short biography of each of the Historic Buildings Task Group members, past and present, as well as their contributions to the identification, evaluation, and treatment of the Manhattan Project and Cold War Era built environment on the Hanford Site. These statements will present the skills and interests each member brought to the team and will serve as a basis for others to evaluate those responsible for making the decisions reflected in the contents of the final report.

A second appendix will contain the site forms documenting the buildings and structures selected to serve as the representative sample of the Hanford Site. Historic American Engineering Records (HAER) will be written for the 105-B Reactor, the 221-T Plant, and the 313 Metal Fuels Fabrication Facility. Each of these buildings not only represents the key functions that called the Hanford Site into being, but they were also the first of their kind in the world. Clearly, these deserve a place in the Library of Congress. These HAER documents will be written in consultation with the National Park Service as required by the Secretary of the Interior.

Expanded Historic Property Inventory Forms (ExHPIFs) will be written for those properties which capture or represent critical processes or events (see Table A.5 in Appendix A). The contributions these facilities made to the Hanford Site could not be summarized in a few short paragraphs. Guidelines developed by the Task Group for ExHPIFs recommend that each meet the following criteria:

Narrative: Approximately 8-10 Pages.

Subject Areas to be Considered

Number and Type of Photos:

Construction Drawings:

This appendix will also contain three maps of each Area - one each for the World War II period, the early/mid-1960s, and current/mid-1990s. These maps will identify each of the representative buildings selected for mitigation.

Historic Property Inventory Forms (HPIFs) will be prepared for the remainder of those buildings and structures selected for individual treatment (see Table A.5 in Appendix A). These site forms will contain a written narrative and physical description of the property that may extend up to one continuation page beyond the form itself. It will generally include one to two photographs and may incorporate one engineered-drawing of the property.

Treatment Plan | Hanford Home Page
For questions or comments about this page, please send email to sandra.cannon@pnl.gov
URL: http://www.hanford.gov/docs/rl-97-56/strategy.htm
Document Number: DOE/RL-97-56
Document Date: January 1998
Posted: May 20, 1998