EIS-0113_Section_9 - Hanford Site

ss.
M
0044
J.
RECEIVED DQE-RL
JUL 14 10
WM DIVISION
.2!Vcti MERL
auL 1 4 1386
WM DIVISION
3d Thechances i i distribution of onosmanants sho po I/
CF at the contami next. be migrated. 2/ that contamination has
passed a w
heren
ontamnation a I. f ound iil
n the soil
(betwe ,,the p ]t t d if t . and3/that
3.5.2.44 ont amenatio mov have extended to the ground water an. been
vetl before retortion. It is . also paible ss that, i/ the
,'char act erizatlon" data has c sid...his 3
In either r
ontamination s not abe proven to be
contained by the "in place" design of Figure n9.
35.6 . .
3e Climate stability prdvidino continuation of present
rid conditions,.r essential requirements for the Proposed
-place" design (with no events oreater than double present
rage r i.4.11). On a Iong term basis this is not likely nor
er ifiable. Past climatic fluctuations a shown by palynological
and marine st,.ti,r.phir data indicate major fluctuations Io the
past (Holocene time).
3c Risk tc. the water s`up ply of Cre non s m ,ibisw
ater table.. at Boardman and potential for nf'lt t' nfr om the
ncludino Portland has not been oval noted. The extremely low
Columbia Raver M1as not been add ... b.d. In the event of Bull Run
water prcblems Portlantlhas the option of using the newly
developed Portland welt field a a back upsupply, yet the
drawdown of aquifers in Portland Could result in depressed water.
tables like those at Boardman. .Infiltration of Columbia River.
water into the Portland well field aquifers is real possibility
under that easily passible .condition.
3.5.2.44
y'l
W
Environmental Values and Coate are net differentiated
The eaJor. problems with the MIS are the failure to
.cognize the ..Jor anvironmemtal values, and the uncontested and
2.3.1.2 untes ad easumption of continuation of the amistinq precedent for
nuclear processing and disposal use of the Hanford site without
site suitability comparative analyeb.
3 .2.6.2
p
3. "Value" and " oat" are not differentiated nor
valuated. Water has value but
me cost
(only the cast of
delivery). The value of the Columbia River and the adjacent
sedimentary basins to the livelihood of the region are very o eat
but are not atltlressed. The value and cost of less of purity , of
the Columbia River is not addressed.
In this BEIS, cost is calculated in the short term as
3.2.6. 8
dollar. and risk to live% in the disposal process.
No comparison is made of the potential long term
productivity of the water and ..it of the .,.a, for a ample, a
an agricultural site (and the number of lives which could be
supported in the area) compared to the long term productivity and
r}sk ds a hazardous and nuclear waste site.
31, Comparison of the long term cultural value of the
special soil and drainage conditions in the Pasco Basin Manford)
to the areas less suitable for agriculture is not evaluated.
3.2.6.2
Eco nomicgeographyanalysee r
should provide greater recognition of
the comparison to other geological sites most probably much
better suited for waste disposal and much less suitable for
agriculture and productive land use.