17.12.2013 Views

EIS-0113_Section_11 - Hanford Site

EIS-0113_Section_11 - Hanford Site

EIS-0113_Section_11 - Hanford Site

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

y<br />

^'<br />

d" ' w t¢ A 1 sd 93<br />

x<br />

45+23 6.423<br />

3.5.2.16<br />

Ooestions<br />

APPENDIX P RELEASE MODELS AND RADIONUCLIDE INVENTORIES FOR SUBSURFACE<br />

SOURCES<br />

0-1 Has any waste site monitoring experience (Appendix V) been used<br />

a) to calibrate contaminant movement in the saturatedzone, or General Co mm ents<br />

b) to quantify contaminant transport parameters in-the vadose<br />

zone?<br />

This appendix concerns the rate at which radionuclides are released<br />

from the waste and become available for trans port to the aquifer. The rate<br />

0.2 Given the preliminary judgements that recharge rates at <strong>Hanford</strong> of release predicted depends upon the form of the waste as well as the<br />

under existing dry conditions are between 0.5 and 5 cm/yr, how can manner in which it is stored. The rate of release predicted also is<br />

the D<strong>EIS</strong> selection of 0.5 cm/yr--the low of this range--be affected by physical and chemical constants and assumptions made as to the<br />

construed as conservative for the drier climate Scenario? appropriate mechanisms. Once released from their original location, the<br />

radionuclides are transported to the aquifer by recharge water moving<br />

0.3 In view of results of simulations p re sented in Appendix M, how can downward. The three models utilized in Appendix 0 are:<br />

5 cm/yr be construed as a conservative estimate of annual recharge<br />

at <strong>Hanford</strong> under a wetter climate?<br />

1. adsorption-controlled release,<br />

2.- solubility controlled release, and<br />

0-4 <strong>Section</strong> 0.4.<strong>11</strong> describes the unit hydraulic gradient model used<br />

-<br />

3. dissolution-controlled release.<br />

for hand calculating vertical g ro undwater travel times, in the<br />

vadose zone. Use of this model requi re s estimating or determining In addition, diffusion-controlled release is modeled to account for the<br />

three sail parameters:. the saturated moisture content, saturated horizontal movement of radionuclides under a protective harrier. This i<br />

hydraulic conductivity, and "b" value, the latter depending in followed by a discussion of the release model(s) that art applied to each<br />

.turn on the precise relationship between soil moisture content and waste form: Numerous tables summarize the results of the release<br />

capillary water potential. calculations and the data upon which they are based. -<br />

(Ti<br />

w<br />

Oh<br />

3.5.2.9<br />

3.5.2.17<br />

a) How were each of the required soil parameters characterized Our analysis of this Appendix suggests that radionuclides may travel<br />

under spatially and temporally varying conditions? faster than shown in this Appendix.<br />

b) Has an adequate range of soil conditions been investigated to Errors or Uncertainties<br />

be able re to confidently ascertain what a"censervative" soil<br />

- -<br />

moistu characterization is?<br />

The discussion in <strong>Section</strong> P.1..4 of Appendix P, on diffusion-controlled<br />

release th protective barrier, depends upon the assumption that the<br />

c) Were travel times in the vadose zone computed. by assuming a barrier done, will be 100 percent successful in eliminating infiltration, In the<br />

range of soil moisture contents? If not, which specific soil first . paragraph of <strong>Section</strong> P.1.4 it is stated that tha analysis is<br />

moisture characteristic data were used to obtain Ks and b predicated on "our professional judament' that the barrier will eliminate<br />

values?<br />

advection as viable or dominant Sache ism far the transport of<br />

- ` radionuclides and chemicals in the soils beneath the barrier. Such a<br />

0-5 What specific range of hydraulic conductivities was considered in conclusion appears unsubstantiated given the doubts about the efficacy of<br />

the vertical averaging of hydraulic conductivity? the protective barrier that were raised in the co mm ents provided previously<br />

on Appendix M.<br />

-<br />

0- 6 How were depth zones weighted, and what range of average values<br />

was used in the analysis?<br />

- - One of the principal assumptions madeon page is that the vertical<br />

distance from the bottom of the was" c to the water star<br />

a uniform<br />

0oei 4c<br />

i using more-conservative retardation factors-and diffusion<br />

1 5 meters. ofO the w the reported hart50 vertical istance for is tankst<br />

coefficcients affect travel times, first arrival, and peak le percent of the waste) is less than se meters, m and It is<br />

concentrations for the various release scenarios? less under other plausile scenarios see more detailed discussion fn our<br />

review of i eendfx p, this chapter). We understand<br />

the hat the<br />

transport path<br />

0-B What was

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!