id? UL 30 ita5 ENGINEERING DATA TRANSMllTAL SWMFE SWM 1000 C (04194)GEFO~PGMACPATH-GEF Page 1 of 1.EDT 11. Receiver Remarks: BD I

Transcription

1 ita5 UL 30 id? 14 ENGINEERING DATA TRANSMllTAL Page 1 of 1.EDT SWMFE SWM 11. Receiver Remarks: BD (04194)GEFO~PGMACPATH-GEF 1000 C BD I

2 WHC-SD-WM-ES-395, Rev 0. CAISSON UNI-1 STUDY PROVIDE PERMANENT STRUCTURE AROUND THE CAISSON FILL PIPE W.A. Hansen Westinghouse Hanford Co, Richland, WA U.S. Department o f Energy Contract DE-AC06-87RL10930 EDT/ECN: Drg Code: B&R Code: EW Key Words: U(: 510 Ct arge Code: Tc t a l Pages:.,%56Tb CAISSONS, UNI, BURIAL GROUND CAISSONS, Abstract: This document i s an Engineering Study and a n a l y s i s t o determine t h e best way t o p r o v i d e a permanent s t r u c t u r e around t h e UNI-1 Caisson f i l l pipe. TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER. Reference here n t o any s p e c i f i c conrnercial prodllct process o r s e r v i c e by trade name, t r d e m r k, nurufacturer, w a t h e r r i s c, does not necessarily c o k t i t u t e Ar i n p l y i t s endorsement, r e c n n m l e t i o n, o r favor ng by the United States G o v e r m t o r any agency thereof or i t s contractors or s k o n t r a c t o r s. P r i n t e d i n the United States o f lnrri a. To o b t a i n copies o f t h i s document, contact: UHClECS D o c m t Control Services, P.O. Box 1'170, Mailstop H6-08. Richland UA , P h w ( 5 W ) ; Fax ( ) Release Approval r+&l Date Approved for Public Release A (10195) GEF321 Release Stanp

3 WH ;-SD-WM-ES-395, % ev. CAISSON UNI-1 STUDY PROVIDE PERIWANENT STRUCTURE AROUND THE CAISSON FILL PIPE JUNE, 1996

4 WlIC.SD.WM.ES.395, qeu. o CONTENTS 1.0 OBJECTIVE BACKGROUND AND SCOPE SUMMARY PURPOSE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVI ESTIMATED COST RECOMMENDATIONS AND C0NCLUI;IONS RECOMMENDATIONS UNCERTAINTIES ALTERNATIVES AND SOLUTIONS CRITERIA ASSUMPTIONS ALTERNATIVES

5 WHI:-SD-WM-ES-395, 'Red. 0 Engineering Study 1.0 OBJECTIVE Solid Waste Engineering has been tasked with determining the most effective and cost effectivl? way to more permanently enclose the wooden structure that maintains a ;oil radiation barrier around Caisson UNI 1 fill pipe. 1.1 BACKGROUND AND SCOPE Underground Caissons are us:d for the storage of small packages of TRU waste. One of these Caissois UNI 1 has a square wood box constructed around the inlet pipe to th: caisson which is filled with soil, to reduce the radiation level iear the pipe to an acceptable level. The installation was made after waste hung up in the caisson inlet pipe which increased the radiatim levels measured round the pipe and at ground level. The wood is starting to deteriorate and may allow the soil used as a radiation molerator to sluff, which in turn would allow the radiation levels to inc-ease in the vicinity of Caisson UNI 1. A permanent structure needs t) be put in place to preclude any increases in personnel radiation exposure. The wood structure is 10 ft. 8 inches square, 1 side is within 13 1/2" of the Caisson vent pipe. 2.0 SUMMARY 2.1 Purpose To evaluate various options to provide a permanent structure around the UNI 1 fill pipe which would preclude soil sluffing causing the radiatiln levels in the vicinity of Caisson UNI 1 to increase. 2.2 Description of the 'referred Alternative The recommended alt!rnative is a prefabricated, concrete square 11 ft 8" square (inside dimension) by 7 ft high with a cover that can be placed ising a crane. 2.3 Estimated Cost Pacific Internation 11 estimated that a shape the size required would cost 511,665.1)O FOB Hanford. -1-

6 WtC-SD-WM-ES-395, Rev. o RECORMENOATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 3.1 Recommendations It is recommended that the prefabricated concrete square be pursued as the 1st alternative (Para below). This alternative is based on: 1) reducing time spent in a radiation zone, 2) installing a structure that will contain the wood structure, 3) be easily removed in the future, 4) reduce the time spent on this project by SWM Operations. UNCERTAINTIES 5.0 ALTERNATIVES AND SOLUTIONS Criteria Criteria for making the selection of the structure will be cost, durability, and 1ok personnel radiation exposure (during application of the proposed solution). Assumotions The wooden structure retaining the soil around the UNI 1 fill pipe is deteriorating and needs to be covered so that deterioration does not cause the soil providing the radiation shielding to sluff and cause an increase in the background radiation level near the Caisson. A1 ternatives Build forms and pour a concrete 11 ft X 11 ft wall to house the wood structure. a. b. Advantaaes The form would fit close to the existing wooden timbers containing the soil shielding, support a concrete cover, be aesthetically correct, and contain soil that will be added to accommodate any wood timber deterioration. Disadvantaaes The fabrication of the forms and pouring of the concrete is very expensive because of the labor involved, workers may be required to suit up in at least white clothing, building the forms and placing the reenforcement i s very time consuming. The forms would not be easy to remote when and if the caissons were to be emptied. C. Safetv Considerations and Imoacts chance of accid2nts is high Being labor intensive the

7 WHC-SD-WM-ES-395, 0 d. e. f. Environmental InDacts and Permittina Reauirements All alternatives considered will be equal with regard to this item. Cost and Schedule Estimates The labor required to complete this alternative would cause this alternative to be expensive. (no cost data has been obtained for this alternative). Other Informati= The area where work will be done is in a low level radiation area. Therefore, an alternative that requires less time near the Caissons is preferred Purchase a prefabri :ated, reinforced, concrete square and place it around the wood structure. a. Advantaaes The concrete square could be ordered with very little impact 01 other work underway at SWM, and include a1 of the advantag?s discussed in The square could be set in place very quickly using riggers which would reduce personnel radiation exposure. The square would be easy to remove when the waste retrieval from the caissons is performed some time in the future. b. Disadvantaaes The assembly would be very heavy to handle. A level base woild need to be established on which to set the concrete sqiare assembly. c. Safety Consideritions and Imoacts The lifting and handling that would be pzrformed will need to be addressed in the JHA. d. Environmental IinDacts and Permittina Reauirements See para d e. Cost and Schedule Estimates Prefabricating the concrete assembly off si ;e should prove to be less expensive than forming the assmbly in the field. (Pacific International of Tacoma estimited that a square 11.3 ft X 11.3 ft inside dimension and 1,!.2 outside dimension X 8 ft high with a top would cost $ll,ii65.00) -- The height could be a little less -- 7 ft bu. the inside dimension needs to be 11.5 ft based on the 10 ft 8 inch 6x6 that is part of the existing form). SEE SKE'CH tl - 3 -

8 Wt IC-SD-WM-ES-395, 'Rev. 0 Place a mound t'f rocky soil over the Caisson and the wood -- then cover the soil with rick rack. a. Advantaaes Th.s alternative has many advantages such as cost and ease tlf application. b. Disadvantaaes The mound of soil would cover part of the breather filtei, assembly. The mound of soil might sluff during windy 01' rainy conditions Place concrete Eco'ogy Blocks around the wood structure on 3 sides and 2/3s of ihe 4th side (to accomnodate the breather vent tube). Prefabricaie a concrete slab to enclose the 4th side and purchase a prefabr. cated top. Advantaaes Thr' ecology blocks are inexpensive $25.00 each, and the prefab),icated concrete slabs to fit in the 4th side and the top sht'uld be relatively inexpensive and easy to handle. Disadvantaaes The ecology blocks do not fit tightly together and miy allow some soil erosion and sluffing. Safety Considetations and ImDacts Most of the labor would be in rigging ihe blocks to form the wall, therefore, care would have to te taken when positioning the blocks. Cost and Schedtle Estimates The alternative would take 44 ecology blocks at for each block and a concrete slab approximately lft X 7ft. ($ plus the slabs for the probably less than $ for the side and top -- material ). SEt SKETCH # P1 ace corrugated si eel around the wooden structure. Corrugated steel structure coild be purchased and bolted together to form the structure. a. Advantaaes The corrugated structure might be less expensive than the concrete discussed above and could be installed by site forces as it could be scheduled. b. Disadvantaaes The corrugated steel only comes in circular shapes and therefore, would fit properly between the existing wood structure and the vent pipe. The fabrication would require that work be accomplished in radiation area which would cause personnel to receive radiation

9 -- PLAN VIEW. 8' - SECIIONED VIEW

10