Laserfiche WebLink
<br />257 <br /> <br /> 1 As I said in my previous response, it <br /> 2 was an election to provide positive containment <br /> 3 solutions for this facility. To do that, we <br /> 4 designed a facility which provides adequate <br /> 5 containment for solutions in terms of our design <br />! 6 concept and the operation physically of this <br /> 7 facility. <br /> e <br /> Q Thank you. Would the double liner <br />' 9 provide additional containment precautions? <br /> 10 A So would three and four and five, yes. <br /> 11 Q Okay. And a leak detection system under <br /> 12 the liners would give additional precaution; is that <br />' 13 correct? <br /> 14 A Not on the premise of the discussion I <br />' 15 i <br />th <br />b <br />t <br />t <br />d <br />d i <br />i <br />i <br /> gave <br />e su <br />n <br />m <br />ss <br />ons <br />he Boar <br />an <br />n my <br />o <br /> 16 testimony today, that the level of seepage that is <br /> 17 predicted is going to be difficult, if not <br /> 18 impossible, to be able to be detected beneath ~rhe <br /> 19 composite liner system. <br /> 20 Q You have indicated that the potential <br /> 21 for leakage is de minimis. Are you talking about <br /> i <br /> 22 th <br />s leakage with the single liner system? <br /> 23 A With the current design system, yes. <br /> 24 q Correct. That's what you are saying? <br />' 25 A Yes. <br />' AGREN, BLANDO & BILLINGS <br /> <br />