of 43 /43
Summary Report ARH-ST-141 \.x~i M. 14. Baile June 1977 Prepared for the U.S. Energy Research ahd Development Administration Undei Contract EY-76-C-06-2130

Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    0

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

Summary Report

A R H - S T - 1 4 1

\.x~i

M . 14. B a i l e

J u n e 1 9 7 7

P r e p a r e d f o r t h e U . S . E n e r g y R e s e a r c h a h d D e v e l o p m e n t A d m i n i s t r a t i o n U n d e i C o n t r a c t E Y - 7 6 - C - 0 6 - 2 1 3 0

Page 2: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

BLANK PAGE

Page 3: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

Atlantic Richfield Hanford C o m p a n yRichland, Washington 99352

'* NOTICEMl— . — .................................1 *

T H I S W K P O K T W A D P R E P A R E D A S A N A C C O U N T OF W O R K S P O N S O R E D B Y T H E

U N I T E D S T A T E S G O V E R N M E N T . N r l T H E R " H E U N I T E D S T A T E S NOR T H E

U N I T E D S T A T E S E N E R G Y R E S E A R C H A N D D E V E L O P M E N T A D M IN I S T K A T I O N , NOR

A N Y o r "fMEIR E M P L O Y E E S , NOR A N Y O F T H E tR C O N T R A C T O R S , S U B C O N T R A C T O R ,

OR T H E I R E M P L O Y E E S , M A K E S A N Y W A R R A N T Y , E X P R E S V OR I M P L I E D , OR

A S S U M E S ANY. L £ < 3 A U L I A B I L I T Y OR R E S P O N S I B I L I T Y F O R T H E A C C U R A C Y ,

C O M P U i T C N E t S , OK U S E F U L N E S S O F A N Y I N F O R M A T I O N , A P P A R A T U S , i’ R O D U C T

OR P R O C E S S D I S C L O S E D , OR R E P R E S E N T S T H A T I T B U S E W O U L D N O T I N F R I N G E

P R I V A T E L Y O W N E D RIG H't S .

* «

A V A I L . - E \ .% F R O M T H E

NATIONAL TECHNICAL i m f o r m a t i o n s e r v i c e

S P R I N G F I E L D , VA 2 *2 161

( 'P R I C E ! M I C R O F I C H E ; $ 3 « 0 0

P A P E R C O P Y ; $ * * . 0 0

Page 4: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

1 ARH-ST-141

DECOMMISSIONING OF DIVISION OF MILITARY

APPLICATION EQUIPMENT

AT HANFORD

M. N. RAILE

P roject Engineering Department Research and Engineering Division

June 1977

ATLANTIC RICHFIELD HANFORD COMPANY RICHLAND, WASHINGTON

—.. ... . wonct — ■ .■—■—■ii.Tfcfe nyon «it m p fri m m accoant of « >rk apaaao mi by the IMud State* Cnwmtit. dM IMMI SbM aer tka IWlai State*Kwart sad Pm lufawal Atotoiamtfam, a o r m ' M i i^ loyw, mot aay «f (Mr coatrect*% Wb w r t a f lBi i , ot dM k w j h y w , n k n la y im atjr, cxpttai or lapM, or mw—i say hpl lablty of napoadbttty for tha actmey, coapbuani or w ftihia of tty Menaatkw, typm m , product or ptocaaa tftadoaad, or iinm m tka( to aaa wooM ao* jafHf i p* n d y n r a i l

Operated fo r the Energy Research and Development Adm inistration by A tlan tic R ichfield Hanford Company

Under Contract EY-76-C-06-2130

DfSTWBUHON Of THIS DOCUMENT IS UNUMlttft{

Page 5: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

v * • *

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION. ................................................... . . . . . ......................................1

OBJECTIVES. ....................................................... . . . . . ............................. . 1

SUMMARY . . . . » . . . *................. ..................................................................1

HISTORY . ....................................................................... .......................................... 2

discussion: . . . ... . . . . .................................. ... 2WORK AUTHORIZATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............... ................ 2

‘WORK PLAN AND PROCEDURES . . ............................................ ... 3

ORGANIZATION . . . . . . ........................ .......................................... .... . 3

CONTAINER DESIGN . . . ....................... . ........................................ 4

MATERIALS AND SPECIAL EQUIPMENT...............................................................4

DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL ........................................... ................................ 4

TRANSURANIC STORAGE. . ......................................................................... . 6

RECORDS AND REPORTS. . . . . . . . ....................................................... 6

COST SUMMARY .................... ... . . . . ....................................................... 7‘ »

FACILITY AS-BUILT.................... ........................... ... ...................................... 7

REFERENCES. .................... . . . 8j’

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.............................................................................. ... ................... 9

APPENDIX. . . . . . :. . . . ....................................... ....................... ... . 10

A-UNIQUE PROCEDURE 74-7-2. .........................................................................

B-LIST OF FIGURES {FIG, 1-14);. ................................................... ...

C-FRP PLYWOOD DESIGN DRAWING LIST. ..................................... . . ' . .

* ' ’ * *r 11 ARH-ST-141

% D-SPECIAL RECORD FORMS {FORMS 1-5) .. .....................

Page 6: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

111 ARH-ST-141

ABSTRACT

This report describes the successful decommissioning of plutonium- contaminated equipment used for weapon component fabrication and Inspec­tion at the U. S. Energy Research and Development Administration Hanford Plant In Washington state. Special materials, techniques, and equipment were employed during the course of the decommissioning program. Most significant was the development and design of large, double-wall fiber- glassed plywood boxes for long-term (20-years, minimum) retrievable stor­age of the contaminated equipment 1n underground transuranic waste trenches.

Page 7: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

' DECOMMISSIONING OF DIVISION -OF MILITARY EQWPMENT AT HANFORD* w ... .* „

' s>*

. " INTRODUCTION

The Division of Military Application (DMA) decommissioning program at Hanford was authorized through the U. S. Energy Research and Development Administration Albuquerque Operation Office (ERDA-AL) on November 12, 1973. The program wasdlrected by the Richland Operations Office (RL) with management by Atlantic Richfield Hanford Company, utilizing the onsite architect engineer (A-E) and cost plus fixed fee (CPFF) construc- 1 tlon service contractors. The DMA equipment and support facilities required for the RL production (KK) programs were retained and trans­ferred to that account.

This Report summarizes the results of the program with the details of the scope, of work, responsibilities and removal techniques delineated for possible application to other related ERDA programs being considered for the future.

* OBJECTIVES

The scope of the decommissioning program provided for the following objectives:

• Removal of all Division of Military Application (DH) fabrication and inspection hefd in standby status 1n the 234-5 Z Building.

• Disposition of all contaminated equipment and materials removed by packaging for. safe 20-yfear retrievable storage.

t Reclamation of salvageable materials and equipment for use onsite by other ERDA contractors. - .

• ■ Restoration of cl eared-out areas for other planned Richland Opera­tions Office programs.

SUMMARY

Decommissioning of the DMA*standby equipment and facilities was completed, with minor exceptions, on May 25, 1976, and within the estimated cost.The physical work was completecl over a 24-month period at final cost of $2,134,137.

Page 8: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

BLANK PAGE

Page 9: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

2 ARH-ST-141

The majority of the plutonium-contaminated equipment was loaded 1m>o special Hanford developed fiberglass-reinforced polyester (FRP) plywood boxes for 20-year retrievable storage 1r, a separate, earthen transoranlc,

.waste trench. Lead shielding, Instrumentation, and mechanical equipment With an'acquisition value of $120,000, was salvaged and transferred to the Battelle-Northwest(BNW) central equipment pool for onsite use by other ERQA-RL contractors*. A total of 61 boxes of varied size and type, with a'gross volume of 78,781 cubic feet, a net weight uf 328,950 pounds, and containing 5,591 grams of residual plutonium were transferred to the special DMA trench for 20-year retrievable storage. The total does not include sevien boxes of equipment from the 234-5 Z Building development laboratory which had been used In technological support of the weapons production program at Hanford. The cleared out areas, after decontamina­tion, painting* and renovation, are being utilized for other.ERDA-RL sponsored research and development programs.

HISTORY

The DMA equipment and facilities, located in the 234-5 Z Building at Han­ford, were used from 1949 to 1965 for the fabrication, inspection, and packaging for offsite shipment of plutonium weapons components. The DMA equipment occupied approximately two-thirds of the available produc­tion floor space. The facilities consisted of two separate production lines (RMA and RMC) each equipped with a central conveyor system tied into glove boxes with capability for casting, ingoting, machining, briquetting, shearforming, phase stabilization, product inspection, radiography, storage, packaging and loadout. From 1965, the majority of equipment was on standby status, although tied Into the building services for safety and contamination control. Some of the inspection equipment was transferred ta.other contractors onsite and certain equipment retained in support of ongoing plutonium production (Kip programs. The cost of continued surveillance, services, and monitoring of “the remaining, facil­ities, along with gradual deterioration of glove box gloves and contam­ination control (plastic) barriers, led to the ERDA decision to remove and package the inactive equipment for safe, retrievable underground storage.

’ #Atlantic Richfield Hanford Company (ARHCO), a prime contractor at Hanford, was assigned management responsibility for planning and execution of the DMA*decommissioning program.

DISCUSSION

Work Authorization

Various discussions were held between ERDA-RL and ARHCO from 1970 to 1973, on several proposed alternates for disposal of the inactive DMA

Page 10: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

3 ARH-ST-141

facilities. Two cases considered for preliminary engineering studies were:

• Continuation of 1n-place storage until special new facilities could be provided for dismantling and packaging the equipment in containers suitable for the then proposed salt mine repositories.

• Prompt removal and packaging of equipment 1n approved containers for 20-year retrievable storage in earthen trenches at Hanford.

The first alternative was ruled out since salt mine technology had not been fully developed, was long-term, and required a high (about $3,000,000) capital investment. The latter case was selected as an interim solution that could be accomplished in a relatively short period of time at less than one-third the total cost of the salt mine storage alternative.

Initial funds of $200,000 to proceed with the retrievable storage pro­posal were authorized to ARHC0 by ERDA-RL on November 26, 1973.

Work Plan and Procedures

The initial engineering study on interim, retrievable storage that was submitted as an alternate for decommissioning of the DMA facilities was modified and expanded to include ERDA-RL directive requirements and for­mally issued on April 26, 1974, as the official work plan document (reference 1) for management and execution of the program.. The document specified ARH-3032 (reference 2) as the official guide for handling and storage of radioactive waste. Special procedures, for handling and dis­posal of hydraulic fluid and oil for example, were prepared separately by ARHC0 as . equi red (see Appendix A).

The preparation of detailed procedures for removing individual glove -bokes and associated equipment was assigned to the onsite architect- engineer contra .tor, Vitro Engineering Company, with technical guidance by ARHC0. These procedures, which included applicable checklists, are enumerated in references 3, 4, and 5.

Organization

Atlantic Richfield Hanford Company was assigned prime responsibility for the conduct and execution of the decommissioning program, with assistance from other onsite contractors where required. Vitro Engineering Company provided design and related services while physical demolition and removal was assigned to the onsite construction service contractor, J. A. Jones, Company. Photographic and graphics services were obtained fcom BattelTe- Northwest. An organizational chart delineating lines of communication and prime responsibilities is shown in Figure 1. See Appendix B for all figures.

Page 11: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

4 ARH-ST-141

The primary design work requested of Vitro Engineering in early May, 1974, was for reliable storage containers to handle the large glove boxes and equipment without the need for dismantling and risking loss of contam­ination control. Because of the high cost and scarcity of steel ai the time, other materials of construction were evaluated. In view of thp approved us,e of fibergiassed, single-wall plywood boxes for containing transuranlc waste at the Rocky Flats Plant, it was*decided to evaluate the same basic concept for application to the Hanford design. As a result, modular, double-wall boxes of high structural integrity were developed at Hanford'using pre-fabricated FRP panels manufactured by Cor-Tec Inc'. and de'picted in figures 2, 3, and 4. Other approved containers weve utilized as conditions dictated and included Hanford steel tvDe I and II. Rocky Flats FRP type, and 55-gallon alkyd-coated steel drums, as shown in figures 5 and 6.

•*- • * , * ,, *.

Other design work by Vitro Engineering included architectural and struc­tural additions or modification, shoring requirements to protect low-1oad floor areas while moving heavy equipment, and material specifications.The specification for fabrication of the FRP plywood boxes, for example, is provided in reference 6 . The drawings that detail the FRP plywood boxes and lifting frame design are listed in Appendix C.

Materials and Special Equipment

Certain specialized equipment, along with routine materials required for handling potentially-contaminated equipment, were utilized in the con­duct of the decommissioning program. Plastic (polyethylene and polyvinyl chloride) sheeting was employed for fabrication of temporary containment enclosures (greenhouses) for plutonium contamination control. Cloth- backed taped was used for sealing joints and packages. Special poly­ethylene sleeves were utilized for containment while disconnecting glove boxes from the main conveyors by the "horsetailing" technique described later.

* ■ jf

A 50-50 mixture of diatomaceous earth (Dica-Sorb ) and commercial, oil - absorbing flonr sweeping compound was used for absorbing and converting contaminated oil and hydraulic fluids to a non-liquid form for contain­ment in polyethylene-lined 55-gallon steel drums prior to boxing and transferring to the transuranic storage trench.

Demolition and Removal

Following completion of design and procurement of essential material?, along with approval of work procedures, physical removal of equipment was Offi­cially started by J." A. Jones. Construction Company on May 28, 1974. A plot plan of the areas requiring equipment removal is shown in figure 7.

Container Desion * /

Page 12: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

5 ARH-ST-141

Work was initiated in the inspection area (room 192) since this was con­sidered the cleanest relative to the degree of contamination inside the glove box and the amount of residual plutonium. Gauging, polishing, radiography, and storage of plutonium weapons components were the only activities performed in the area, leaving the glove boxes contaminated but relatively free of plutonium residues.

All necessary permits, covering planned work sequence with detailed instructions and guidelines, were prepared and issued prior to the start of work for safety and contamination control. This included (a) radiation work procedure (RWP), (b) fire control permit for weld­ing and cutting, and (c) excavation and core-boring permits. These permits were supplemented with special procedures where unusual condi­tions or need for extra safety precautions existed. An example of this was a procedure, for the removal and transfer of the hydraulic fluid and oil from the mechanical equipment for absorption in a diatomaceous earth mixture to assure long-term containment. Other guidelines were firmed up, including limits established in the ERDA Manual Chapter 0511 for solid transuranic waste disposal of 10 nanocuries per gram activity where measurable. This was later modified to categorize any equipment or materials exceeding one (1) nanocurie per gram (where surveyable)-as transuranic waste to be conservative. This was equivalent to 2,500 disintegrations per minute as read with an alpha scintillation instrument such as a portable alpha meter (PAM or Poppy). If a surface were painted or inaccessible for survey, the item was considered poten­tially contaminated and classified as transuranic waste.

All glove boxes and equipment were counted with a portable sodium iodide (Nal) gamma instrument to determine residual plutonium content prior to performing any physical work as pictured in Figure 8 . Clean­outs were made to reduce the quantity to as low as practical value without dismantling equipment. A 500 gram maximum plutonium value was established for transuranic storage of an individual glove box.Good recoveries were obtained from several qlove boxes with a final total recovery figure of approximately 3,000 grams.

Using these guides, most of the equipment and materials external to the glove box were salvaged for use by other onsite contractors. Lead shielding on glove boxes was removed for salvage/ and to reduce equip­ment weight and containment box structural requirements. Less than one percent of the lead removed was found to be contaminated.

Removal of auxiliaries such as electrical services, piping, lead, or lead-glass shielding, and instrumentation was performed initially to strip the glove box and general area to the bare minimum. Differential pressure gauges were retained to maintain and monitor glove box negative continuously. Combustible materials such as rubber gloves, plastic bags, and the like were removed from glove boxes, however, and trans­ferred to the Z Plant Operations scrap incinerator for residual pluton­ium recovery.

Page 13: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

*6 , A R H - S T - 1 4 1

Plastic greenhouses and sleeves for containment and "horsetailing" glove* boxes from main conveyor were used extensively as shown in figure 9.All glove boxes were maintained on a one-half to one-inch water negative until physically removed. If a glove box could not be loaded into a storage box within 24 hours it was connected to auxiliary ventilation using flexible hoses as depicted figure 10. All box loadings were made outside of the building under ideal weather conditions relative to wind and precipitation. After closure of boxes, the lid was sealed with fiberglass and,resin and transported by flat-bed truck to trans­uranic trench.

Records* and' Reports

Accurate and detailed records were maintained throughout the decommission­ing program for historical purposes and accountability. Special forms were prepared for (1) itemizing box loadings, (2) nondestructive assay, (3) disposal and transfers, and (4) equipment and plutonium account­ability. Transuranic storage maps were maintained to show storage arrange ment of boxes in trahsuranic trench. Examples of the forms used are shown in*Appendix D. Monthly reports, providing detailed description of methods and techniques employed in decommissioning, along with tabulation of cost* plutonium accountability, and other statistical data, were pre­pared and issued by ARHCO. In addition, quarterly summary reports with photographs and special procedures, as well as statistical summaries were compiled by ARHCO and formally assembled and issued by ERDA-RL.The records and reports provided a chronological history and preserved significant data applicable to other planned decommissioning programs.

The quarterly reports that were issued contain all significant informa­tion and photographs relating to decommissioning procedures, techniques, and equipment. Consequently the step by step methods and detailed des­criptions are not repeated in this report. The quarterly reports have been provided with ARHCO document identification numbers for reference purposes as listed,in references 7, 8, and 9.

A composite-speech article report (reference 10} was also prepared covering initial DMA and related decommissioning programs at Hanford for presentation at the 1975 American Nuclear Society winter meeting in San Francisco, California.

Transuranic Storage

All boxes containing the removed DMA equipment were placed in a single• earthen trench that measured approximately 24 feet wide by 1,000 feet

long by 13 feet deep. The trench is located in the Hanford 200 West Area burial -garden 218rA-3A. The first box was located six feet from the adjacent box to permit easy recovery in five years to analyze the effects ,,of soil on the fiberglassed plywood. All other boxes were located with a '■'minimum spacing of one toot, except where the residual plutonium exceeded

Page 14: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

7 ARH-ST-141

250 grams, which necessitated three feet minimum spacing from otner containers. Single wall fiberglassed plywood boxes of the Rocky Flats type were stacked two deep to reduce earth load on the bottom box.

' * *total of 61 boxes of various types and sizes were stored in the trench

from the DMA and related weapons decommissioning programs. Additional spacing remains for storing other containers of obsolete, plutonium- contaminated equipment being removed from non-DMA laboratory and process areas in the 234-5Z Building. A tabulation of all DMA boxes *-ransferred to transuranic storage, along with a residual plutonium content, volume, and weight is provided 1n figure 1 1.

Cost Summary

The total cost for the decommissioning program was $2,134,317 compared to $1,960,000 estimated at the start of the program. Rescoping of the program in 1975 to include additional equipment and conveyor line removals increased the original estimated cost by $200,000 which was approved and budgeted. This work was completed at a lower cost to provide a net underrun of approximately $25,000, not including-the estimated

' $120,000 value in salvaged equipment and materials*.

A tabulation of costs by quarters and participants is provided in figures 12 and 13.

Facility As-Built

The service for detailed as-builting of the decommissioned areas was pro­vided jointly by Vitro and ARHC0 design personnel . The as-built work was performed over a five month period at a cost of $44,317. In total, 1,661 drawings were reviewed, 1,338 drawings voided, and 239 drawings revised. No attempt was made to as-built remaining existing facilities in the affected areas, such as duct level ventilation. Only those por­tions affected by the DMA removal work were as-built to the point of removal. If a portion of an electrical control or ventilation system were removed, that portion was delineated on drawings by cross-hatching or ruling out. An area arrangement plan of the facility with equipment removed and relocated is shown in figure 14 for comparison with facil­ity at start of program as shown in figure 7.

Page 15: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

8 ARH-ST-141

1. ARH-3079, April 26, 1974, H. E. Johnson, "Work Plan For. Removal of Division of Military Equipment 234-5Z Building''

>

2.. ARH-3032, April 29, 1976, J. E..Anderson, "Specifications andStandards for the Packaging, Storage and Disposal of Richland Opera­tions. Solid Wastes" ,

3. V1tro-R-286, June 1976, H. E. Adkins and H. C. Stahl, "Sequence andCheck Sheets for the Division of Military Application (DMA) Equip­ment Removal from 234-5Z Building, HI Line Equipment"

* • • '' •4» Vitro-R-297, July 1974, H, E. Adkins and H. C. Stahl, "Sequence and

Check Sheets for the Division of Military Application (DMA) Equip­ment Removal from 234-5Z Building, HA Line Equipment"

■' .* ■5. V1.tro-R-3H, December 1976, H. E. Adkins and H. C. Stahl, "Sequence

and Check Sheets for the Division of Military Application (DMA) ;£quipment Removal from 234-5Z Building, HC Line Equipment"

6 . CE-0948-PI, Revision 3, January 19, 1976, Vitro Engineering Corpora­tion, "Procurement Specification for Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic (FRP) Plywood Retrievable Container Modules"

7. ARH-R-169 4Q, June 1974, Energy Research and Development Administra­tion, "Quarterly Report - Decommissioning of Military Application Equipment at Richland Operations Office"

8. ARH-R-170 1Q-4Q, September 1974, .December 1974, March 1975, and June 1975, Energy Research and Development Administration, "Quarterly Report - Decommissioning of Military Application-Equipment at Rich­land Operations Office"

9. ARH-R-215 VQ-3Q, September 1975, December 1975, and March 1976,. Energy Research and Development Administration, "Quarterly Report -Decommissioning o f Military Application Equipment at Richland Opera­tions Office"

10. ARH-SA-223, May 1975, M. N. Raile, "Demolition and Removal ofPlutonium-Contaminated Facilities at Hanford"

REFERENCES

Page 16: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

9 ARH-ST-141

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The author wishes to acknowledge the assistance of Mr. D. W. Corbel! of ARHCO in providing ..ecessary tracking and liaison in Identifying and completing record forms necessary for equipment and plutonium account­ability, and to Mr. W. (Bill) Mailleaux of J. A. Jones Construction Company for his personal interest in directing construction activities along with providing timely suggestions and recommendations for improved and safer methods in the execution of the demolition and removal work.

Page 17: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

s~

10 ARH-ST-141

APPENDIX

Appendix A - Unique Procedure No. 74-7-2

% Appendix B - List of Figures (B-l - B-14)"Vr • * ■ ’

Appendix .C - FRP Box Drawing List '

Appendix 0 - Miscellaneous Forms (D-l - 0 5)e

Page 18: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

Plutonium Processing Unique Procedure

■Unique Procedure Ho.' 7^“7“2

11 ARH-ST-141 Appendix A

TRANSFERRING HYDRAULIC FLUID AND OIL

General

TKls procedure provides for transferring of radioactive hydraulic fluid and oil to 55-gallon drums for disposal. The liquids to be disposed of are those associated vith the 'Division of Military Application (DMA) equipment to be removed from the 23*1-5 Building. Reservoirs to he transferred are listed in table 1. Fluids, not requiring transuranic burial, may be disposed of using 30>gallon drums or any other suitable metal container.

Safety

Plutonium contamination is one of the anticipated hazards. Care must be taken to prevent the spread of contamination.

The* fluids themselves present tvo possible hazards. Some of the liquids are flammable, and appropriate precautions should be observed when handling them. Spillage may cause slippery floors, as veil as possible spread of contamination, and should be avoided.

Site preparation should be designed and carried out to allow safe and efficient operation. Appropriate preparation of the area is left to the • discretion of supervision in charge of transfer operation.

*

NOTE: ARH- 3 0 3 2 sets limits on plutonium content and activity ofmaterials to be buried at the transuranic burial site, in accordance vlth 20-year retrieval criteria. No more than 200 grams of plutonium may be buried in a 55-gallon drum.Laboratory results should therefore be received and evaluated before the fluids are transferred to the drum. The quantity of plutonium to be transferred to the drum should be estimated and verified as being less than 200 grams before proceeding with the transfer. *

Fluids of the same type may be mixed in the drums. Hovever,care must be taken to note total plutonium transferred to anyone drum. ' ,

• Accurate records of all transfers must be maintained. A data sheet is provided vith this procedure.

Procedure

1. Prepare area for transfer as supervision directs. Use absorbent paper to soak up any spills.

2. Obtain 55-SaU-on drum for liquid transfer. Inspect drum protectivecoating to insure integrity. A standard plastic drum liner should alsobe utilized.

Page 19: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

' 12 ARH-ST-141•>. Appendix A

P lu t o n iu m P r o c e s s i n g U n i q u a P r o c e d u r e.*'* ̂ ] * , *

U n iq u e P r o c e d u r e H o , T % - 7 - 2* , *'*/■ * - «r

* 3* Use vacuum punp and standard 3-liter 'bottle provided by project engineer. Do not transfer any fluid until plutonium content has "been determined and transfer'approved, ‘ .

Detenriine whether fluid addition plug or reservoir vent* plug is more accessible for fluid transfer. Transfer fluid frop most convenient

■ \ location. •

5* Obtain pi: otter's assistance in removing plug*

o. Secure pump «ujd transfer bottle in place*

. 7* Pill dsuni approximately one-third full on a veil-mixed 50-50 mixture of comne rcial oil-absorbing fu or sweeping compound and Grefco Inc. Dicasorb, John* s-Mansville Ml croce 11-E, or approved equal.

” S'

8. Transfer fluid into bottle, avoiding spillage. Do Wot Overfill.

9* Empty bottle onto tne absorbent mixture in the 55 -gallon drum* by pouring the fluid evenly over the surface of the mixture.- Ayoid

. liquid pooling in the drum by mixing with a stirring rod that can be disposed of.

•' * *10.' Record the volume of liquid transferred to the drum each time.

1 1 . Continue in like manner until about 8 gallons nave been transferred, or until the liquid is not readily absorbed by the absorbent mixture.Be sure to limit transfers to less than 200 grams plutonium equivalent.

12. Add another layer of absorbent mixture to the drum and repeat steps 8 -1 1 .

0 * »

13.. Continue until drum is. filled to vithin 3 inches of tne top, or as supervision directsi *

^ ' / *** »lU. Seal'drum liner and drum lid.

1 5 . -label,drum. Check supervisor for correct identification.

16 . Be cord total volume of liquids transferred to the drum and plutonium content. * .

i7 » Fenove vacuuc pump and transfer bottle from secured position.

18. Replace*resevoir plug. Obtain pipefitter’s assistance.* ■ ’ * / ' . ‘

1 9 . Kove drum to transfer storage area. If it is necessary to move an unfilled dr inn ~o another transfer area, seal it in plastic ana take care to aboid, spillage.

2 0 . Cle^n^up transfer area.

Page 20: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

13 ARH-3T-141Appendix A

P lu t o n iu m P r o c e s s i n g U n iq u e P r o c e d u r e

^ U n iq u e P r o c e d u r e H o . 7 H - 7 - 2

Prepared ”by_ ___ Date_Engineer - Plutonium Finishing Process Engineering

Reviewed "by * \ .4? ■ £ ) cl _____ Pate S //i/Tf-t Engineer - Plutonium Finishing Process Engineering

Approved T>y Q . _̂__Pate wf !% / 7VMaflager - Plutonium Finishing Process Engineering » I

Reviewed ~by * j J- \ ---- ------------;_______ Date A t j'/J'Planner and Scheduler - Plutonium Processing

*i

Issued "by_ < ? Q _ _____ Date^ Manager - Plutonium Processing

Voia After 8-1-75

Page 21: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

• •

LIST OF FIGURES

Flqflre ■ Description

1 ’ „ Division of Military Application Organization Chart

2 Partially Assembled FRP Box

'3 . Completed FRP Boxes

4 ' Filled FRP Box Being Loaded In Trench '

5". Hartford Type I Steel Box

6 Rooky Flats Type FRP Box

7 _ Div\siQn of Military Application Area Plot Plan - Prior' to Decommissioning

8 ' Portable Nal Gamma Counting Equipment In Use

9 Plastic "Horsetailing" Sequence - Glove Box Removal

10 , Glove Box Removed and Connected to Temporary Exhaust

11 Box Transuranic Storage Chart

12 , Program Cost Summary - By Fiscal Years

13 Program Cost Summary - By Participants

14 Division of Military Application Area Plot Plan - AfterDecommissioning

, \ ‘ 14 ARH-ST-H1

Page 22: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

DIVISION OF MILITARY APPLICATION DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAM

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART

ERDA-RL

Program Director

ARHCO

Program Management

I Vitro Battelle-Northwest ARHCO | J. A. Jones i! Engineering Services Technical Services Support Services ! ■

iConstruction i

i

• Special procedures • Photography • Plastic Fabrication • Materials• Design • Graphics • Ventilation Balancing t Containers• Specifications • Radiation Monitoring • Equipment• Calculations . • Nondestructive Assay • Decontamination• As-Builts • Trench Excavation • Demolition and

• .Analytical Removal• As-Built • Modifications

✓• Budget and Cost • Cleanup• Management

ERDA-AL* 4

Program Fundi ng

Figure 1

ARH-ST-141

Appendix B

Page 23: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

16

AKH-ST-141Appendix B-2

Figure 2

Partially assembled FRP plywood modular container for 20-yr. retrievable storage

Page 24: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

17

ARH-ST-141Appendix B-3

Figure 3

Completed FRP plywood modular containers for 20-yr. retrievable storage-

Page 25: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

wr. :.si

ARH-ST-141Appendix B-4

Figure 4

Filled FRP box being lowered in trench.

Page 26: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

ARH-ST-141Appendix B-5

I4

Figure 5

Hanford Type I steel box for transuranic storage.

Page 27: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

ARH-ST-141Appendix B-6

Figure 6

Rocky Flats type FRP box for transuranic storage.

Page 28: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

~sr fz. 30# Pctu 234-5 Building

DMA Equipment RemovalEquipment Requiring

Removal

Figure 7

Plot Plan DMA Area

ARH-ST-141 Appendix

B-7

Page 29: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

22 • ARH-ST-141Appendix B-8

>-

Figure 8

Horsetailing sequence-HC-40 separated from conveyor and plastic sleeve gathered and taped.

Page 30: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

23

ARH-ST-141Appendix G-9

Figure 9

Portable sodium iodide (Nal) ga^ma counting equipment in use.

Page 31: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

24

Appendix B-10

Figure 10

HI-73E Glovebox from main conveyor line and tied into temporary exhaust (top)

Page 32: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

DIVISION OF MILITARY APPLICATION EQUIPMENT REMOVAL

Fiscal Years 4

TRANSURANIC STORAGE DATA

Total •- I W E -

3 I4 8

30

7

26

'28,771

162,100

1,138

149

1,287

A. FRP PLYWOOD BOXES

12-foot12-foot custom 16-foot >20-foot

B. HANFORD TYPE STEEL BOXES

Type I Type II

C. ROCKY FLATS TYPE FRP BOXES

TOTAL BOXES

Total Volume (cubic feet)

Total Net Weight (lbs.)

Total DMA Plutonium (grams)

Total Operations Plutonium (grams)

TOTAL PLUTONIUM(COMBINED) (grams)

/

(1) Does not include seven boxes from development laboratory which havfc been reported under separate non-Division of Military Application accounting.

TotalT W

12, 0

. 3 15

31

1

35

50,010

166,850

4,036

268

4,304

GRANDTOTAL

151

723

6

1

78,781

328,950

5,174

417

5,591

FIGURE 11

Page 33: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

DIVISION OF MILITARY APPLICATION EQUIPMENT REMOVAL

QUARTERLY AND FISCAL YEAR COSTS

26 ARH-ST-141Appendix B-12

* r ■ i - •?

; Actual Cost Total Cost-• By Quarters By Fiscal Year

■ •. • j

FY 1974 $118,307 ' $ 118,307

FY 1975 ' . .i First Quarter-. " 152,080'Second Quarter 215,216» Third Quarter * 343,882Fourth Quarter 368,822 1,080,000

FY 1976 'First Quarter 245,155Second Quarter 269,150Third Quarter 255,291Fourth Quarter 122,097 891,693

TRANSITION FY 197o 44,317 44,317(ACCRUED FUNDS) *■

TOTAL COST ’ $2,134,317 $2,134,317

FIGURE 12

Page 34: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

DIVISION OF MILITARY APPLICATION EQUIPMENT REMOVAL

FISCAL YEAR COST SUMMARY BY PARTICIPANTS

Fiscal Year 1974 1975 1976 1977 TOTAL

J. A. Jones Company $73,533 $745,556 $550,828 $ 8,829 $1,378,756

Vitro .41,737 70,182 26,808 0,983) 136,744

Battelle-Northwest -0- 2,067 1,032 -0- 3,090

ARHCO 3,037 107,963 107,299 661 218,960

ARHCO Overheads -0- 154,232 240,085 -2,450 396,767

TOTAL $118,307. $1,080,000 $926,043 $9,967 $2,134,317'

(1) Credit .

(2)* Total billed to ERDA-AL was $2,124,350.47. Fiscal Year 1977 costs (after September 30, 1976) charged to ARHCO Z Plant operating expense account in lieu of excess transuranic boxes transferred.

FIGURE 13

ARH-ST-141

Appendix B-13

Page 35: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

DMA Equipment Removal

roOO

Figure 14

Plot Plan-DMA Area All Equipment Removed

ARH-ST-747 Appendix

B-14

Page 36: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

29 ARH-ST-141 Appendix C

FRP PLYWOOD BOX DESIGN DRAWING LIST

H-2-27440 Sheets 1-4 20-ft Modular Storage Container

H-2-27441 Sheets 1-3 16-ft Modular Storage Container

H-2-27442 Sheets 1-4 12-ft Modular Storage Container

H-2-27443 Lifting Frame

H-2-27445 Sheets 1-3 12-ft Custom Storage Container

Page 37: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

30 ARH-ST—141 Appendix D

. SPECIAL RECORD FORMS

1. DMA Equipment Removal - Box Record

2. PI utoniurn Accountabi.1 i ty and Safeguards Record

3. Onsite Radioactive Shipment Record

4. Solid Wasite*Burial Record • %- ^ . •

5. Transuranic Dry Waste Storage

Page 38: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

31 ARH-ST-141 Appendix D-l

DIVISION OF MILITARY APPLICATION EQUIPMENT REMOVAL

BOX RECORD

Sheet:__________ of

Date:

Box No.

Extension (1-Ft or 2-Ft)

*Grams Pu:

Gross Weight____________________________________________________ _________lbs.

Lift Frame Wt. _________________lbs.

**Box Tare _________________1 bs.

(-) Total Tare Weight___________________________________________1 bs.

Net Weight___________ _____________________________________________________ lbs,

Itemized List of Equipment Loaded (Show identification number where available).

* To be filled out by Operations Contact Engineer

** Box Tare includes lid, and extension when used.

Page 39: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

32 ARH-ST-141Appendix D-2

ATLANTIC RICHFIELD HANFORD COMPANY

DIVISION OF MILITARY APPLICATION EQUIPMENT REMOVAL - 234-5 Z BUILDING

PLUTONIUM ACCOUNTABILITY AND SAFEGUARDS

REPORT NO.

THIS IS TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT GLOVE BOX (OR EQUIPMENT PIECE) .

CUBIC FEET VOLUME HAS BEEN-COUNTED USINGOR APPROXIMATELY______________

A PORTABLE SODIUM IODIDE GAMflA SCINTILLATION DETECTOR. BASED UPON THESE

MEASUREMENTS THE RESIDUAL PLUTONIUM CONTENT IS CALCULATED TO BE IN THE

•RANGE OF

OF

TO

GRAMS.

GRAMS WITH A BEST VALUE

C. H. KINDLE, CHEMIST DATE D. E. TURNER, MANAGER PROCESS CONTROL LAB.

DATE

Distribution:

Original + Copy 1 - DE Turner Copy 2 ' JW JordanCopy 3 DW Corbel!Copy 4 ’ MN RailsCopy 5 GA,Nicholson

Page 40: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

Atlantic Richfield Hanford CompanyR i c h l a n d . WuMngton MKB

ARH-ST-141 Appendix D-3

R A D I A T I O N P R O T E C T I O N R E C O R D

ONSITE RADIOACTIVE SHIPMENT RECORD

N A M K B U I L D I N G A N D A R E A P H O N E

T O , *

F R O M

1

C A R R I E R v e w t c c f w b : ~ ....................................•

D E S C R I P T I O N

I T E M ! O R M A T E R I A L S

T Y P E O F I N N E R C O N T A I N E R S

- T Y P E O F O U T & R C O N T A I N E R }

:

'

R A D I A T I O N C O N D I T I O N S

O U T E R C O N T A I N E R *

D O S E R A T E S ( f i - y ) A T S U R F A C E . M R E M / H R . A T a F T , M R E M / H R .

* D O S E R A T E S ( T ) ) A T S U R F A C E ....... M R E M / H R . A T S F T . . M R E M / H R .

S M F A P A B 1 . E C O N T A M I N A T I O N f i - y a

* W H E N A P P L I C A B L E

*

S U R V E Y E D B Y D A T E

.......................................................... 1

| ) I N S P E C T I O N

| [ i n s p e c t i o n

N O T P E R M I T T E D

P E R M I T T E D

R A D I A T I O N M O N I T O R I N G A P P R O V A L D A T E

1I N S T R U C T I O N S

1. A F F I X T H E R A D I A T I O N S Y M B O L T O C O N T A I N E R S ) .

2 . D O N O T L E A V E S H I P M E N T U N A T T E N D E D W H E N N O T I N A R A D I A T I O N Z O N E .

S . I N C A S E O F A C C I D E N T O R S P I L L , N O T I F Y R A D I A T I O N M O N I T O R I N G I M M E D I A T E L Y .

4 . R E C E I V E R T O N O T I F Y R E C E I V I N G R A D I A T I O N M O N I T O R I N G A N D S E N D E R U P O N D E L I V E R Y *

T H I S S H I P M E N T R E C O R D | S V A L I D F O R T H E A P P R O V E D D A T E O N L Y .

A P P R O V A L

T O S H I P

A U T H O R I Z E D

S I G N A T U R E

□ C L A S S I F I E D

□ N O T C L A S S I F I E D

S H I P P I N G D A T E

C H E C K E D ^

O U T O F A R E A A R E A A R E A A R E A

P A T R O L M A N ^

N U M B E R

T I M E ^

/ D A T E

5 4 - 6 0 0 0 - 0 7 9 0 —7 3 ) DISTRIBUTION: WHITE - (RECORD COPY) TO RADIATION MONITORING AT ORIGINCANARY - ACCOMPANY SHIPMENT: TO RECEIVER

PINK - ARHCO SECURITY

BUFF - ATTACH TO SHIPMENT

Page 41: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

34 ARH-ST-141■Appendix D-4

S O L I D W A S T E B U R I A L R E C O R D*00 a r k a p l a t k a u disposal sitk o p e r a t e d f o r RU - ABC

■Y ATLANTIC M CH MLO HANPORD COMPANY

SHIPPERSHIPMENT NO*

%

COMPANY

BUILDING! a r e a *

ADDRESS (O rr ilT K )

rDATE

SIGNATURE*

DISPOSAL SITE ™>s «««•* 9 9 ***** t o i iW W ? ■ . ■ '■ ■ ■ 1 M M * ( U t » y T l * i u r * • akaliMJfettAa M M

AREA, BURIAL JQARDEN NO* t r e n c h n o *

CAISSON NO. COORDINATES

4 HI,

REMARKS

v *

f ' *-

DATEa *

TIME

SIGNATURE

PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION

+ ' ' V

T I M B E R S . R C S I N .

*

V - *

* , • *

B O X

N O . L E N G T H W I D T H h e i g h t •

□«

H A N F O R D S T A N D A R O

C A R D B O A R D

DRUM,N O . A N D S I Z E ‘

L O N T A I N t nN O A N D S I Z E

-* *

TOTAL VOLUME lFT*>

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTIONG E N E R A L A C T I V I T Y D E S C R I P T I O N !*•••• t O N H I V l O I S O T O P E S SUCH AS P U . t o . S p , C s S M I X C O M I S S I O N P R O D U C T S ; A C T I V A T I O N P R O O U C T S J

P L U T O N I U M

E N R IC H M E N T

A C T I V I T Y ( , r P U O R U < O N L Y U N I T S IN G R A M S R C Q U IR C O l

■ C U R I E S

O O ^ C R A T E

m R /h r at

C ) S U R F A C E

F | I N C H E S

D I S T R I B U T I O N :

A R H C O

B Y O R I G I N A T O R

W H I T E

Y E L L O W

PI N K „ - R E T A I N

6 0 1 D C H N 0 D (B N W ) t t O k D , S 2 S S L O O .

C O LO C N R O O - ( O U H ) W A S T E D I S P O S A L . C O O M D I N A T O N , J 7 0 0 -* * 1 .0 6 .

C O L O C N R D B - ( t T T / P S S ) E N 6 I N E E R I N G P K .A N M I « C ,R M .4 7 7 a? C 0 .S L D « .

B Y A R H C O - S I G N A N D F O R W A R D T O :

W H I T E A R H C O S U P E R V I S O R O P B U R IA L G R O U N D

Y E L L O W _ B N W W A S T E D I S P O S A L A N D D E C O N T A M I N A T I O N t 3 2 5 B L O C .

Y E L L O W - D U N / W A S T E D I S P O S A L C O O R D IN A T O R , 1 7 6 0 -M S L B C .

Y E L L O W — I T T / r S S E N G I N E E R I N G P L A N N I N O , R M . 4 7 7 P C D . 1 . 9 6 ,

•U-3333-S8! 13—SB)

Page 42: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

T R A N S U R A N I C D R Y W A S T E S T O R A G E

ARH-ST-14135 Appendix D-5

NON-COMBUSTIBLE MATERIALS COMBUSTIBLE MATERIALS

Drum N9 Oroma PuMlOMrtMRl

M«(M Operator Trench Drum N9 Grami Pu Nh w w m IIUfhe< Operator Trench •

. •

,

. •

«

CERTIFIED BY =______________________________ DATE:Supervisor

DISPOSAL SITE: DISPOSAL S ITE :Area Burial Garden NP j Trench N9 Area Burial Garden N<f Trench N9Caisson N9 Coordinates

N ?rth WestCaisson N9 Coordinates

North WestRemark* Remarks

Signature Date Signature Date

DRUMS ARE ACCEPTED per SOP 300.8

SignotureJULY 1ST* BC-6000-076 (1 0 -7 2 )

Date

Page 43: Summary Report - inis.iaea.org

36DISTRIBUTION

ARH-ST-141

6. W. Cunningham W. Ramsey

Energy Research and Development Administration,Richland Operations O f f i c e _______

D. G. Crafts J. P. Cummings J. P. Derouln P. G. Harris,P. G. Rhoades

Energy Research and Development Administration, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

Technical Information Center (189)

Battel 1e-Northwest- .

K. M. Harmon R. R. King, Jr.

J. A. Jones Construction Company

I. CorneliusG. L. Fredrickson L. B. Leonard, Jr.

Vitro Engineering, Division of Automation Industries, Inc.

D. A. Jensen D. R. Nelson L. J. Prues '

Energy Research and Development Administration, Headquarters

Rockwell Hanford Operations

J. D. Anderson D. A. Armstrong A. P. Boston ’D. C. Bartholomew D. J. CockeramD. W. Corbel1 N. C. Dresser.J. B. Fecht R. E. Felt R. B. Gelman R. J. Gimera Di R.. Gustavson

J. E. Hammond G, L. HansonA.H. Hinkson L. C. HubbardG. A. HuffR. E. IsaacsonH. E. Johnson, Jr. J. W. JordanJ. E. Kinzer-E. J. Kosiancic D. L. MerrickG. C. Owens

G. C. Oberg M. N. Raile R. C. Roal J. F. RossB. J. SaueressigH. P. ShawR. W. Szempruch R. E. Smith D. D. Wodrich Central File Rockwell Hanford Operations Document Service (2)

Extra (10)