EIS-0113_Section_11 - Hanford Site

Z3.3.5.4
mi
"P.ee p .—P l
217
Ada 8
- 2 -
(Ju
N
.dames P. Thomas
E. 4l4 August. Avenue
spekane, WA. 99207
Cement. on the Draft Environmental paper[ Statement
for the Disposal of Hanford Defense Nigh-Level. Tramuuraaic
and Tank Wastes
I . To begin with. I estimated the Department for investing
their time and energy poet the past six months to Iuform and
educate the people of the Northwest on the complex ai—ciao
I Hanford defense wastes. Unfortunately. the Deparrmeat has
failed to include all of the Hanford wae[as and has only
2.3.1.14
dt pact de the problem. I rd that w end the
- Department of Energy consider all of the defense caste. at
hanfard in
as ...In a Environmental Impact g cacemenc. This
should include the wastes in the 100 and 300 areas such as
the eight old production reactors. To nut do this is asking
people to solve a jigsaw. puzzle with many of the pieces
missing.
3.1.6.1
-
2. Whereas much d ern has been raised about the
radioactive nuclear Wes s, there I. insufficient at[entiw
to the pz.bla. of ...I. chemical naarea. Vs, Deparrmeac of
EnargY has vac co mu.Plev. a. ompvehensive inventory or the.
chemical TheDoem,come. has not adago.eefy addressed
the disposal' of those
nor has it presented anything
oo how th h 1 1nt et with the 1 area. 1.
face, this draft Enviz.a ne.l.Smpa¢t.St t negl¢cca no
consider . Juae 1985 Battelle study of thei c ei
.between Raeford's chemical add welesi t This report
explored thpgsaib
e possibilit ies of explosions existing . Waste
tanks (PUL-5453, Cot lexant stability Investigation, Task 2 -
Organic E.C. Martin)..
remonenw. The United Heave........... mwv then is
necessary to ease any reasonable need for national security.
Hnreover, even [hough this draft Environmental Ippacc
Sta true nt speaks of future defense Wastes, it offers n 2.5.6
-justlflZri.. for future plutuni.. Prod..riam. She Girl....
of the Northwest meat be told why they should ...11 .. to
live with the rttles of Heeford operations.
4. With regards to the [Area disposal options presented
in the draft EIS, I Would favor the Oepsrrment directing its
research to the. geologic disposal option. I an aware that
'his ruled mean leer ... ad radiation ......xe to Hanford -
warksrs sad that it Ss [he most expensive alternative.
However I believe that this current generation is vitally
obligated = cept all the risks and coats associated _ With
of the American
three was ta e The w
e
have
1' .
peopl
notes d t the It a ene h violent weapons by their
teats an x. ess. I[ has s been this yC weapons buildupu that ban aLaox
B s
t n netad arheas, Names.. e d 1m f the United states.
though I an net one. gre.e that t the beaks of these vas Ins are
c urity, e e ao-called of rsel na
uriiy. supposedly
Wen by America's nuclear arsenal. net . IDs
present obligation is to cleanup the tastes that have been
produced. With any Wastes left an Hanford soils, future
generations Will only reap the riakn Without enjoying any of -
the benefits.
3.3.1. 1
5 ogive.th lack of information ny asyec es
of Bamford'.vns a of Which theDepartmentreadily
acknowledges. theDoE se concede itself, at 1 i . to a
2.3.2.3
ppl aal n EIS .old Bugg t [n e a tied p of five
Y. s u14 be gl fee the D p [. ne to Provide the
Public with sufficient information.. Citizens d this
information
responsibly Participate the decision-vakiag
process.
6. There I. eetafderableGainey abest the pOE
0. After reading the draft EIS it becoves cleer that
having sufficient tinaw¢zt r .es to in ere the adeovafe.
most of the p roposed disposal cathode have yet to be proven.
Although the Department F rived support fee glaesi£ying
disposal of all defense waste The people of the Northwest
Will have to generate the trumpery P olitical support for the
the liquid waste. in thed ble-shell tasks, I e not It
geologic tea... ¢f the existing vase. Bourret. the' Items of
evinced that this technology is suitable for deep
2.2.9
I...to earn. (a..uming continued plutonium production)
disposal. ".-,her analo gy is she a bvotddg of sum Z the
should be funded en a pay-as-you-go basis. Similar co
A r d1 g to D ld P f Wa hingt n state,
tins tY h and chemicals and therefore Fell.
provisions contained in the Notice, Wince Policy Act of 1992
(fee the disposal of eammerclal wclear
Zone oo Provisions ofthe 8etmar Cunde 1 n add Re ¢very
Posts.), the trite of
special nuclear
Ac R=%) Tho draft EIS d - c explain how or when
erials should Includes surcharge
it
-efficient to gua ant.e the safe disposal subsequent
meet the RUPA req uirements. nOrher methods are still in
the c talcum design stage or rely ideas on paper. no s'
Desert .. t of Ener, do.. Putknew flow to f i dispose df )
eh...rr c ID F.ru theD p I should halt the
high-1 1 and hi h
to or.
Within the present gement
Production of plutonium until the t stockpile of wastes
systemof defense
it fa too easy to bypass certain
-dispose d f t bl
at.
Arguments taut Path
2.5.6 di 1 requirements by simply reel ... ifyt g the area.
fl plutonium production halt would harm national security are _ _ West v once high-Level —act Is seaconsidered law-level
EXHIBIT P
eU $ Is,%
name continue. td be
confusion la to what —ate. ae 3.1.1.9
3aw 8 Les cw