View Document Here - Hanford Site

Appendix G -Detailed Description of Alternative 4: DOF1R1,-200i-11
^ Entombment with Internal and External Waste Disposal Rev. I Draft B
Redline/Strikeout
l plumes above 1Vashirtgton Admrn)arrarive Code (WAC) 173-340 .', Genfowl.Ae
2 (14F6A}industrial limits associated with the Alternative 4 activities. During Alternative 4
3 activities (such as buried pipe and exterior ventilation tunnel removal), if soil contamination
4 above 1- 0 industrial limits is identified, then the Tri-Parties would need
5 to evaluate the situation and make the decision whether to remove the contamination.
6 Contaminated equipment and piping from demolition activities would be disposed at the
7 Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF).
8
9 2. Facilities to be decontaminated and decommissioned in support of implementation of
10 Alternative 4 are the 221-U Facility stairwells, the railroad tunnel, the 271-U Office
I l Building, and the 276-U Solvent Recovery Facility. Aboveground facilities that are within
12 the footprint of the Alternative 4 environmental cap would be removed as part of
13 Alternative 4 activities. These facilities include the 21 I-U and 21 I-UA Tank Farms,
14 241-WR Vault'Iitorium Storage, 271-U Office Building, 276-U Solvent Recovery Facility,
15 2714-U Warehouse, 275-UR Chemical Storage Warehouse, 200-W-44 Sand Filter, 291-U
16 Process Unit Plant, 291-U-1 Stack, 296-U-10 Stack, 222-U Office Lab, 224-U Concentration
17 Facility, 224-UA Calcination Facility, 272-U Maintenance Shop, 2715-UA Maintenance
18 Shop, and 292-U Stack Monitoring Station. The rcmediation of these facilities is to be
19 performed by others and. therefore, such rem diation work is not accounted for in the
20 Alternative 4 cost estimate. However. disposition and removal of the same facilities after
t^21 they have been remediat de are corsidcred part of the Alternative 4 scopc and are includcd in
22 the cost estimates in Sections 5 .0 and 6 .0 and in Appendix K of this final feasibility study
23 (FS),
24
25 3. Waste sites that are within the footprint of the environmental cap and must be remediated by
26 other projects in time to support Alternative 4 include the 216-U-4 Reverse Well; 216-U-4A
27 French Drain; 216-U-4B French Drain; 216-U-5 Trench; 216-U-6 Trench; 216-U-7 French
28 Drain; 216-U-15 Trench; 224-U-FIWSA; 224-U CNT; 241-UX-154 Diversion Box;
29 241-IJX-302A Catch Tank; 2607-W-7 Septic Tank and Drain Field; 270-W Tank; unplanned
30 releases (UPRs) UPR 200W-33, UPR 200-W-39, UPR 200-W-55, UPR 200W-60,
31 UPR 200-W-78, UPR 200-W-101, UPR-200-W-117, UPR 200-W-1 18, UPR 200-W-125,
32 UPR 200-W-138, and UPR 200-W-162; and portions of process lines associated with
33 200-W42, 200-W-84, and UPR-600-20. Three wells are located within the footprint of the
34 environmental cap: wells 299-W 19-8, 299-W 19-55, and 299-W 19-98. It is assumed that
35 these wells would be decommissioned in time to support Alternative 4. This work scope is
36 not included in the cost estimatc
37
38 4. Unless otherwise noted In this appendix, wastes from legacy structure removal and removal
39 of the operating gallery equipment and piping would be disposed at ERDF. This maintains
40 the canyon and gallery volume for disposal of Class C wastes from other waste sites on the
41 Hanford Site. For removal and hauling to ERDF, remediation waste would be in accordance
42 with ERDF waste acceptance criteria (BHI 1997, 200Ib), and compliancc with size and
43 weight reguirementj would be coordinated with ERDF operations during final design if this
44 alternative is selected.
45
Final Feastbility Stady for the Canyon DisposFlton teltlative (?21•U FadAky)
June '1oo G-2