EIS-0113_Section_11 - Hanford Site

f 3
231
COMMENTS ON APPENDIX R
ASSESSMENT OP -LONG-TERM PERFORMANCE OF WASTE
DISPOSAL SYSTEMS
3.5.5.8
M general, this Is the mast hypothetical appendix. Conclusions are based on analy ti cal
techniques which may or may not he valid As stated in this appendix, groundwater
transport of the contaminants is the most probable scenario for the release of the
contaminants from a disposal site. Yet, there ere more unknowns concerning the
mechanisms involved in the groundwater transport sconaAo than In any other acoustic.
As pointed out in Appendix V, the construction of a valid groundwater model of the
Hanford site is very . liffe.lL Even using "conservative long^ varietiore in the
hyd pegeology make long-term prediction with any certainty very difficult. Without a
high degree of certainty in the analysis, the long-term predictions on the effects on man
are merely put0ng numbers out of the air. The following Comments Peter to Appendix R:
4.
S.
people may have died in is Single earthquake in China and 100,000 may MI. died In
a single cyclone to B" O&drh Within the short period of a few Years after these
netmel disasters, framers are ageln plowing the fields and low. see being rebuilt
Mon.'., if ..all natural disease, else spread highievel radioactive isotopes and
created en environment too contaminated to support life far thmneads of Penn, the
impacts
I fe in the region would be far greeter. Th., statements that radiation
would be a "small factor" should, therefore; he carefully reevelueted.
e
3.413.1
On page 11.64, no le-bebigtive ere given for the -1111... crash ... 0.1..
3.4.3.6
0. pages 13.68 and R.82, the "in-place abb0hMtfdd- alternative meet include an
impenetrable cover to prevent Individual maximum annull d.m foe the we11
drilling and mmavation scenarios of 1,0o0 to 100,000 rem/yr. Such a cover b
3.5.1.9
technically feasible, although at considerably higher cost than the proposed cover.
This Increase might make the geolrgic disposal alternative more competitive
In price with the inpiece stabIll terid. alternative.
(l
00
VI
3.5.5.8
I. In the tables presenting the performance of each alternative, definition of terms
(i.e., Transport Assessment Table) should beadded to the text.
3.5.5.8 2. A table presenting various health standards should be added.
I. Whet Is. Transport Aseessment Table?
3.5.5.8
4 Why did Nu appendix not address the performance of the various alternatives In
3.4.3.1
3.5.6.35
terms of the chemical species which mey be released from the storage sites?
5. At the Mme, groundwater ..dole cannot be fully developed for the site beeauee of
the high degree of uncertainty in the geology; therefore, groundwater travel times
cannot be accurately predicted.
9. On page A.44 and In Table 9.54, the use of any impermeable membrane on the
surface of the ground In .rid area has been proven. to create increased. moisture
3.5.1.27
below the membrane due to cepUluy rise and condensation from an moving through
the ..IL This is the experience of highway departments with impermeable paving,
mining companies with pond Users, and tundscepen with plastic sheeting in are as of
expensive soil. When such Boll moisture Is produced, plant roan grow Into the area
of higher moisture even if May have to grow through the membrane or horizontally
beneath It If the proposed Impermeobte cover over the ewderaste It planbs! with
shellowKOCted grasses, outer deeper-rooted vegetation will eventually establish on
the cover through natural migration methods. As this new vegetation grow; roots
will move Into tie moisture collecting below the membrane and eventually move
into the waste. For example, the VSOS box cases of alfalfa roofs
penetratirg into underground mine workings at depths of several hundred feet M
tie,.&, because the mines formed the nearest water table to the surface in this
6. On pages RA3, R.90, and R.93, DOE her a tendency to dismiss come "catastrophic" .id r,hm.
accident scenarios with a stat .... I that "... waste would be a.mail factor In tie
devastation from grant meteorite," flood, volcano, etc. Although obvious net 10. On page R-86, "5 ama-ft/yr per acre" should be "12.2 acre-ftly, per acre" and the
such a destructive event would destroy numerous man-made structures and, use of tie word "erode" in has 13 Is q..0 ... be.
4.2.55
Probably, kill a number of people, such destruction is temporary and such natural
events have occurred numerous times throughout history. For example, 200,000
26
27