EIS-0113_Section_9 - Hanford Site

4 2
Ef.
•.
B91
Ln
W
3.3.2.2
3 .3.2.2
2.4.1.9
2.4.1.1
Given the risks from grouting of high-level wastes, It is
Puzzling why no mention of calcination of high-level wastes
is mentioned anywhere by the department as a viable cleanup
option. By converting wastes to Powder,-calcinated wastes
a e ..11-suited to gI ... ification for deep geologic burial.
It also eliminates the need for grouting of ...too.
True, calcination is a better investment as a front-end
production change; I..., to eliminate the future production
of liquid waeten Nat now and up t.red I. tanks and
trenches. But its Potential application to existing inplace
waste has been totally neglected in the DEIS. Such a
unique and proven disposal alternative deserves serious
examination-
2. TO OPERATE A DEFENSE WASTE MANAGEMENT-PLAN IN COM-
PLIANCE WITH THE SAME FEDERAL STANDARDS THAT GOVERN
PRIVATE SECTOR WASTE. MANAGHMENT PRACTICES
Double standards are indefensible. The nation's cradleto-grave
hazardous waste protection. law--the Resource.Conservation
and Recovery Act, or RCRA--applies to federal
agency waste management and disposal practice..
Statements in the DEIS on compliance with federal law are
vague and conflicting. The DEIS does not address the requirements
and the intent of federal environmental law. My
attempt to seek exemptions of defense wastes in matter. of
environmental safety, measured in geologic time, cannot be
justified.
RECEIVED DOE-RL
The fact that high-level military waste is indeed a mixture
of hazardous and radioactive materials means that, under
RCRA regulations, landfilling or shallow pond disposal is
prohibited.
What we first used from the Department of Energy I. a ..hedole
to bring current waste disposal practices into rem
pliance with EPA and Washington state health and safety
standards. Concurrently, the department must fully inventory
and identify hazards of waste that has been dumped in
soil over the past 40 years, Knowing what is there, and how
much, is essential to its proper cleanup.
The department must commit to a date to Atop routine dumping
into the soil of low and intermediate toxic and radioactive
Waste liquids from POREK, the Hanford N-Reactor and the
high-level waste tank farms. Such disposal practice I.
outmoded and dangerous. The department. has entered into a
Memorandum of Understanding with South Carolina to stop such
.oil dumping by 1988. A similier agreement fa sought by
Washington state. To date, the department has been
reluctant to negotiate.
Certainly, the department's. FY87 budget request of $1.6
million for two more surface disposal ponds is not a sign of
a commitment to safe and sound disposal of high-level.
waeten.
1. TO PREVENT THE DEFENSE WASTE CLEANUP PLAN FROM DIS-
APPEARING INTO THE BUREAUCRACY AFTER THESE HEARINGS.
TO PROVIDE A TANGIBLE FYBB BUDGET COMMITMENT TO
CLEANUP, NOT FURTHER CONTAINMENT.
2.4.1.9
2 .4.1.1
3 .1.1.1
2.2.10
2.5.5
JUL 14 1986
WM DIVISION
We want a eastern of good faith from the department . that a
cleanup plan will be implemented and funded prior to the
RECEIVED DOE-RL
G.005 4
0.005 5 JUL 14 1986
WM DIVISION