Search

U.S. Department of Energy (US DOE) remediation responsibilities include the Hanford site in Washington State. Cleanup is governed by the Tri-Party Agreement (TPA) between the US DOE as the responsible party and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Washington State Department of Ecology as joint regulators. In 2003, the US DOE desired to implement a “Risk-Based End State” (RBES) policy at Hanford, with remediation measures driven by acceptable risk standards using exposure scenarios based on the 1999 Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan. Facing resistance from regulators and stakeholders, the US DOE solicited public input on its policy. This led to a Hanford Site End State Vision in 2005 and a commitment that the TPA would continue to control remediation. This article describes how regulator and public participation modified RBES to an end-state vision. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The U.S. Department of Energy's (US DOE's) responsibilities for its former national nuclear weapons complex include remediation of the Hanford Site in Washington State. In 1989, the site's primary mission shifted from nuclear weapons material production to cleanup of the extensive radioactive and chemical contamination that represented the production legacy. Cleanup is governed by the Tri-Party Agreement (TPA), between the US DOE, as responsible party, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Washington State Department of Ecology, as joint regulators. Nearly 20 years have passed since the TPA was signed, but the Hanford remediation is expected to require decades longer. This article covers the cleanup progress to date and challenges that remain, particularly from millions of gallons of highly radioactive liquid wastes and proposals to bring new wastes to Hanford. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Remediation responsibilities of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) encompass a vast national complex of highly contaminated former weapons facilities. During the mid-1990s, DOE announced its intentions to consolidate some waste types at specific sites. At about the same time, organizations and public officials around DOE sites urged a National Dialogue, designed to develop comprehensive solutions to the Department's needs for waste disposition ( transportation, treatment, and storage). Recent opposition from citizens and elected officials in Nevada and Washington State has presented obstacles to DOE's plans. Additionally, chairs of nine site-specific advisory boards recommended that DOE support a National Stakeholder Forum, similarly designed to develop solutions to disposition needs. This article reviews the chronology of DOE's disposition efforts, along with public and state reactions and recommendations. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

One of the most difficult remediation challenges facing the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is the need to immobilize some 50 million gallons of highly ra-dioactive, liquid wastes stored in underground tanks at the Hanford site in Washington State. In part as a result of public participation, the technical strat-egy for tank waste treatment was revised in 1994: high-activity and low-activity waste fractions would both be immobilized in a vitrified glass form, although the low-activity fraction would remain at Hanford. This strategy has been subjected to cycles of reargument, reanalysis, and reconfirmation. As DOE proceeds with remediation of the Hanford tank wastes, it would be to the Department's advan-tage to understand that public participation has already made positive contribu-tions to technical decisions. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Background Midline abdominal hernia is a common problem seen by the general surgeon. Recurrence rates are as high as 49% when an autogenous repair is performed, and as high as 11% when prosthetic mesh is used as a “bridge” or “onlay.” Methods This study analyzes results of midline abdominal hernia repair in 106 cases using prosthetic mesh, in the retrorectus position, as described by Stoppa and Wantz. Charts were reviewed, patient satisfaction determined by telephone interview, and recurrence rate by physician examination. Results Major systemic complications occurred in 17%. There were no deaths. Eighteen percent developed a wound complication, requiring a return to the operating room in 5%. There were three recurrences (3.5%). Conclusions Retrorectus placement of prosthetic mesh in the repair of midline abdominal hernia is effective and compares favorably with other methods. Significant complications are low, recurrence is rare, and patient satisfaction is high.

International audience; no abstract