Hanford expects to map out how it will develop new cleanup technologies in the next few months, which could determine how quickly one of the most radioactive river shore areas may be addressed.

The Department of Energy's Richland office expects to send a technology development plan to its Washington, D.C., headquarters in February or March, said DOE's Hanford Manager Keith Klein.

He discussed that plan after a Monday public forum on DOE's plan to accelerate cleanup along Hanford's Columbia River shore so it can show significant progress by 2012.

New technologies will be a key to how fast DOE can tackle burial sites 618-10 and 618-11 - possibly the most troublesome spots along the river.

About 80 people attended the forum in Richland. DOE officials outlined the plan to speed the removal of contaminated river-side soil plus the demolition and sealing of old reactor complexes. DOE also wants to accelerate cleanup of the 300 Area.

How this plan materializes will greatly depend on what the new presidential administration and new Congress will agree to appropriate for fiscal 2002. DOE's 2002 budget request will be unveiled in February or maybe a little later.

For 2001, DOE's Richland office is getting $755 million, while the Office of River Protection is getting $780 million for a total of $1.535 billion.

But starting in 2002, DOE's Richland office will need about $800 million annually to pay for its accelerated river shore cleanup.

That proposed increase will come as the Office of River Protection asks for about $1.075 billion for 2002 as the tank waste glassification project cranks up. That means Hanford needs roughly $1.875 billion in 2002 - about $340 million more than in 2001 - to accomplish DOE's plans.

Klein is optimistic extra money will materialize because the federal government is benefiting from a good economy, plus he believes Washington, D.C., power brokers realize spending cleanup money now will head off bigger cleanup bills later.

Six audience members spoke Monday, mostly supporting the plan or asking technical questions. Gene Weisskopf of the B Reactor Museum Association pushed for early cleanup around B Reactor to boost efforts to create a museum there.

Ken Bracken, co-vice chairman of the Hanford Advisory Board, said a public workshop is needed to hammer out what standards a cleaned-up river shore should meet.

Sources of tension regarding this acceleration plan are the highly radioactive 610-10 and the bigger and more radioactive 618-11 burial sites. These wastes can be removed only with yet-to-be-invented remote-control handling equipment.

Last week, the Hanford Advisory Board voted to support DOE's plan if it speeds up developing technologies to handle sites 618-10 and 618-11. Board members also worry that the 618-11 site, possibly the most radioactive near the river, and how to deal with its contaminant plumes, are being short-changed in this plan.

Klein said the accelerated river shore cleanup is supposed to tackle projects doable by 2012. Questions exist on what is technically feasible now and later regarding 618-11 and the plumes, he said.

"We're not trying to kid anyone that we can fix the 618-10 or 11 situation or the plumes in that (2012) time fame. We're trying to tell Congress what we can do in that time," Klein said.

He said 618-10 and 618-11 are being closely watched but have not shown signs that their actual cleanup needs to be accelerated from DOE's tentative plans to start about a decade from now.

However, he said coming up with ways to clean out 618-10 and 618-11 likely will be high priorities in the upcoming technology development plan.

But he cautioned that ground water fix-it measures, finding better and cheaper ways to determine contents inside of transuranic waste barrels, and other sampling and analysis needs will also be high priorities.

Doug Sherwood, the EPA's Hanford site manager, agreed tackling 618-10 and 618-11 need to wait for the right technologies to be developed. He also noted the high costs - at least $300 million for 618-11 - will require extra increases on DOE's strained cleanup budgets. Plus Hanford has not figured out how to process and store wastes after they are removed from 618-10 and 618-11.

However, Sherwood said the EPA has not seen DOE make "a very big investment" so far in developing technologies to deal with 618-10 and 618-11.