National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for 1 1979-2011 revision

  1. Radiological control manual. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kloepping, R.

    1996-05-01

    This Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Radiological Control Manual (LBNL RCM) has been prepared to provide guidance for site-specific additions, supplements and interpretation of the DOE Radiological Control Manual. The guidance provided in this manual is one methodology to implement the requirements given in Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 835 (10 CFR 835) and the DOE Radiological Control Manual. Information given in this manual is also intended to provide demonstration of compliance to specific requirements in 10 CFR 835. The LBNL RCM (Publication 3113) and LBNL Health and Safety Manual Publication-3000 form the technical basis for the LBNL RPP and will be revised as necessary to ensure that current requirements from Rules and Orders are represented. The LBNL RCM will form the standard for excellence in the implementation of the LBNL RPP.

  2. FTCP Corrective Action Plan- Revision 1

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    January 2007 FTCP Corrective Action Plan, Revision 1, which is Deliverable B for Commitment 13 in the Department of Energy (DOE) Implementation Plan to Improve Oversight of Nuclear Operations, issued in response to Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 2004- 1, Oversight of Complex, High-Hazard Nuclear Operations

  3. Hanford Site technical baseline database. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Porter, P.E.

    1995-01-27

    This report lists the Hanford specific files (Table 1) that make up the Hanford Site Technical Baseline Database. Table 2 includes the delta files that delineate the differences between this revision and revision 0 of the Hanford Site Technical Baseline Database. This information is being managed and maintained on the Hanford RDD-100 System, which uses the capabilities of RDD-100, a systems engineering software system of Ascent Logic Corporation (ALC). This revision of the Hanford Site Technical Baseline Database uses RDD-100 version 3.0.2.2 (see Table 3). Directories reflect those controlled by the Hanford RDD-100 System Administrator. Table 4 provides information regarding the platform. A cassette tape containing the Hanford Site Technical Baseline Database is available.

  4. Revisions

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    U.S. proved reserves of crude oil and lease condensate, crude oil, and lease condensate, 2004-14 million barrels Revisions a Net of Sales b New Reservoir Proved d Change Net and and New Field Discoveries Total c Estimated Reserves from Adjustments Revisions Adjustments Acquisitions Extensions Discoveries in Old Fields Discoveries Production 12/31 Prior Year Year (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) 2004 80 444 524 37 731 36 159 926 2,001 22,592 -514 2005 237 558 795 327 946 209 57 1,212

  5. Revisions

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    proved reserves of natural gas, wet after lease separation, 2001-14 billion cubic feet Revisions a Net of Sales b New Reservoir Proved d Change Net and and New Field Discoveries Total c Estimated Reserves from Adjustments Revisions Adjustments Acquisitions Extensions Discoveries in Old Fields Discoveries Production 12/31 Prior Year Year (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) Total natural gas (billion cubic feet) 2001 1,849 -2,438 -589 2,715 17,183 3,668 2,898 23,749 20,642 191,743 5,233

  6. Core fluctuations test. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Betts, W.S.

    1987-06-01

    Fluctuations were first encountered in the Fort St. Vrain reactor early in cycle 1 operation, during the initial rise from 40% to 70% power. Subsequent in-core tests and operation throughout cycles 1 and 2 demonstrated that fluctuations were repeatable, occurring at core pressure drops of between 2.5 psi and 4.0 psi, and that in each instance their characteristics were very similar. Subsequently, tests and analysis were done to understand the core fluctuation phenomenon. These efforts also lead to a design fix which stopped these fluctuations in the FSV reactor core. This fix required that keys be used in addition to the keys in the core support floor which already existed. This report outlines a test plan to validate that core fluctuations will not occur in the MHTGR core. 2 refs., 12 figs., 3 tabs.

  7. Revised DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 71.1 Headquarters Business...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    71.1 Headquarters Business Clearance Process Revised DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 71.1 Headquarters Business Clearance Process There was mention in the National Academy of Public ...

  8. Acquisition Planning: Revised DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 7.1 |

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    Department of Energy DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 7.1 Acquisition Planning: Revised DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 7.1 Acquisition Guide Chapter 7.1 is revised to remind the planner when planning for an interagency acquisition to perform a determination of best procurement approach, business case analysis and/or Economy Act determinations and findings, as applicable, in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 17.5 Interagency Acquisitions. Revisions to the guide chapter add to

  9. Master equipment list -- Phase 1. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jech, J.B.

    1995-04-28

    The purpose of this document is to define the system requirements for the Master Equipment List (MEL) Phase 1 project. The intended audience for this document includes Data Automation Engineering (DAE), Configuration Management Improvement and Control Engineering (CMI and CE), Data Administration Council (DAC), and Tank Waste Remedial System (TWRS) personnel. The intent of Phase 1 is to develop a user-friendly system to support the immediate needs of the TWRS labeling program. Phase 1 will provide CMI and CE the ability to administrate, distribute, and maintain key information generated by the labeling program. CMI and CE is assigning new Equipment Identification Numbers (EINs) to selected equipment in Tank Farms per the TWRS Data Standard ``Tank Farm Equipment Identification Number``. The MEL Phase 1 system will be a multi-user system available through the HLAN network. It will provide basic functions such as view, query, and report, edit, data entry, password access control, administration and change control. The scope of Phase 1 data will encompass all Tank Farm Equipment identified by the labeling program. The data will consist of fields from the labeling program`s working database, relational key references and pointers, safety class information, and field verification data.

  10. Microsoft Word - FINAL Class 1 Revise TRUPACT-III Management...

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    ... A.1 A-4 A-3 Item 1 Description: Revise the language in Attachment A1, "Container Storage," Section A1-1c(1) "TRUPACT-III Management" to address manual bolt removal from the ...

  11. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 457.1, Nuclear Counterterrorism

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2013-02-07

    Intent is to revise DOE O 457.1 and include the content of DOE M 457.1-1 as appendices to the revised order.

  12. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy Guide 424.1-1B...

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    (AU) is proposing to perform a full revision of DOE Guide 424.1-1B to incorporate lessons learned identified by DOE Program Offices since the Guide's last full revision in...

  13. Acquisition Planning: Revised DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 7.1

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Acquisition Guide Chapter 7.1 is revised to update references to DOE orders from 413.3A to 413.3B and 430.2A to 436.1 and DOE manual 413.3-1 to DOE Guide 413.3-13. Revisions to references for the DOE orders and DOE Guide are identified by vertical lines in the left margin.

  14. Acquisition Planning: Revised DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 7.1

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Acquisition Guide Chapter 7.1 is revised to remind the planner when planning for an interagency acquisition to perform a determination of best procurement approach, business case analysis and/or Economy Act determinations and findings, as applicable, in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 17.5 Interagency Acquisitions. Revisions to the guide chapter add to references FAR 17.5 and related guide chapter 17.1. Also, two revisions in the chapter are identified by vertical lines in the left margin on pages 11 and 14.

  15. Microsoft Word - CHAP02ESH _REVISED1_3.doc | Department of Energy

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    CHAP02ESH _REVISED1_3.doc Microsoft Word - CHAP02ESH _REVISED1_3.doc Microsoft Word - CHAP02ESH _REVISED1_3.doc (183.77 KB) More Documents & Publications Regulatory Aspects of ISM COMMENTS� A:\CHAP05PERFASSM(REVISED).PDF�

  16. Revision to DOE Order 435.1 | Department of Energy

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    Program Management » Compliance » Revision to DOE Order 435.1 Revision to DOE Order 435.1 The Office of Environmental Management has primary responsibility, within DOE, for DOE Order 435.1, the self-regulation of radioactive waste management. As part of this responsibility, EM has decided to update the Order to incorporate several changes to the regulatory process that have taken place over the last decade as well as streamline the Order to improve management of the waste. A comprehensive

  17. Acquisition Planning: Revised DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 7.1

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Acquisition Guide Chapter 7.1 has been revised to remove the requirement of obtaining the Deputy Secretary's approval of any Acquisition Plan for a contract exceeding $100 million. (The requirement appeared in the BACKGROUND section under the paragraph "Review and Approval Levels.")

  18. ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SCHEDULE 1: PERSONNEL RECORDS (Revision...

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    programs, job vacancies, unemployment compensation, recruitment and employee health ADM 10.pdf More Documents & Publications Administrative Records Schedule 1 ADMINISTRATIVE...

  19. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 483.1, Cooperative Research and Development Agreements and DOE M 483.1-1, Cooperative Research and Development Agreements Manual

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2013-02-21

    Justification memorandum approving revision of the outdated DOE O 483.1 to incorporate DOE M 483.1-1 into the revised order.

  20. Microsoft Word - PMTO 16-003 Technical Proposal revision 1

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    DOE CERCLA Structured Improvement Activity Revision Number: 1 Date: May 04, 2016 Start: May 09, 2016 Finish: September 30, 2016 1.0 DESCRIPTION MSA will provide subject matter experts to provide facilitation and project management support for Operating Excellence (OE) Structured Improvement Activities (SIA) for the Department of Energy Richland Operations Office CERCLA processes using Lean Six Sigma methodology. The subject matter experts will have training and background experience in project

  1. Desalination with carbon aerogel electrodes. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Farmer, J.C.; Richardson, J.H.; Fix, D.V.; Thomson, S.L.; May, S.C.

    1996-12-04

    Electrically regenerated electrosorption process (carbon aerogel CDI) was developed by LLNL for continuously removing ionic impurities from aqueous streams. A salt solution flows in a channel formed by numerous pairs of parallel carbon aerogel electrodes. Each electrode has a very high BET surface area (2-5.4x10{sup 6}ft{sup 2}lb{sup -1} or 400-1100 m{sup 2}g{sup -1}) and very low electrical resistivity ({le}40 m{Omega}). Ions are removed from the electrolyte by the electric field and electrosorbed onto the carbon aerogel. It is concluded that carbon aerogel CDI may be an energy-efficient alternative to electrodialysis and reverse osmosis for desalination of brackish water ({le}5000 ppM). The intrinsic energy required by this process is about QV/2, where Q is the stored electrical charge and V is the voltage between the electrodes, plus losses. Estimated requirement for desalination of a 2000 ppM feed is -0.53-2.5 Wh/gal{sup -1} (0.5-2.4 kJ L{sup -1}), depending on voltage, flow rate, cell dimensions, aerogel density, recovery ratio, etc. This assumes that 50-70% of the stored electrical energy is reclaimed during regeneration (electrical discharge). Though the energy requirement for desalination of sea water is also low, this application will be much more difficult. Additional work will be required for desalination of streams that contain more than 5000 ppM total dissolved solids (2000 ppM will require electrochemical cells with extremely tight, demanding tolerances). At this present time, the process is best suited for streams with dilute impurities, as recently demonstrated during a field test at LLNL Treatment Facility C.

  2. Perspectives on reactor safety. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Haskin, F.E.; Camp, A.L.; Hodge, S.A.

    1997-11-01

    The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) maintains a technical training center at Chattanooga, Tennessee to provide appropriate training to both new and experienced NRC employees. This document describes a one-week course in reactor safety concepts. The course consists of five modules: (1) the development of safety concepts; (2) severe accident perspectives; (3) accident progression in the reactor vessel; (4) containment characteristics and design bases; and (5) source terms and offsite consequences. The course text is accompanied by slides and videos during the actual presentation of the course.

  3. International Energy: Subject Thesaurus. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-11-01

    The International Energy Agency: Subject Thesaurus contains the standard vocabulary of indexing terms (descriptors) developed and structured to build and maintain energy information databases. Involved in this cooperative task are (1) the technical staff of the USDOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI) in cooperation with the member countries of the International Energy Agency`s Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDE) and (2) the International Atomic Energy Agency`s International Nuclear Information System (INIS) staff representing the more than 100 countries and organizations that record and index information for the international nuclear information community. ETDE member countries are also members of INIS. Nuclear information prepared for INIS by ETDE member countries is included in the ETDE Energy Database, which contains the online equivalent of the printed INIS Atomindex. Indexing terminology is therefore cooperatively standardized for use in both information systems. This structured vocabulary reflects thscope of international energy research, development, and technological programs. The terminology of this thesaurus aids in subject searching on commercial systems, such as ``Energy Science & Technology`` by DIALOG Information Services, ``Energy`` by STN International and the ``ETDE Energy Database`` by SilverPlatter. It is also the thesaurus for the Integrated Technical Information System (ITIS) online databases of the US Department of Energy.

  4. Nevada Test Site Radiological Control Manual. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None, None

    2010-02-09

    This document supersedes DOE/NV/25946--801, “Nevada Test Site Radiological Control Manual,” Revision 0 issued in October 2009. Brief Description of Revision: A minor revision to correct oversights made during revision to incorporate the 10 CFR 835 Update; and for use as a reference document for Tenant Organization Radiological Protection Programs.

  5. Seismic analyses of equipment in 2736-Z complex. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ocoma, E.C.

    1995-04-01

    This report documents the structural qualification for the existing equipment when subjected to seismic loading in the Plutonium Storage Complex. It replaces in entirety Revision 0 and reconciles the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) comments on Revision 0. The Complex consists of 2736-Z Building (plutonium storage vault), 2736-ZA Building (vault ventilation equipment building), and 2736-ZB Building (shipping/receiving, repackaging activities). The existing equipment structurally qualified in this report are the metal storage racks for 7 inch and lard cans in room 2 of Building 2736-Z; the cubicles, can holders and pedestals in rooms 1, 3, and 4 of Building 2736-Z; the ventilation duct including exhaust fans/motors, emergency diesel generator, and HEPA filter housing in Building 2736-ZA; the repackaging glovebox in Building 2736-ZB; and the interface duct between Buildings 2736-Z and 2736-ZA.

  6. A:\\ZAPPENDA1Matrix(FAR)(REVISED).PDF | Department of Energy

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    rix(FAR)(REVISED).PDF&0; More Documents & Publications Microsoft Word - Appendix A2006Jun A:ZAPPENDA3Matrix(DOEandOther)(REVISED).PDF&0; Acquisition Guide Chapter 1.0 -...

  7. EIS-0288-S1: Revision to EPA Notice of Availability Draft Supplemental...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    EIS-0288-S1: Revision to EPA Notice of Availability Draft Supplemental Environmental ... For more information: http:energy.govnode299827 Download Document EIS-0288-S1: ...

  8. Acquisition Planning: Revised Acquisition Letter 2009-03 and Revised DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 7.1

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Acquisition Letter (AL) 2009-03 and Acquisition Guide Chapter 7.1 have been revised to move the guidance regarding who approves an Acquisition Plan for a contract exceeding $1 00 million from the AL to the Acquisition Guide. To reflect the changes, AL-2009-03 Revision 1 has replaced AL-2009-03 and the affected parts of Acquisition Guide Chapter 7.1 have been modified. Additional minor revisions to the Guide chapter were made: references to obsolete AL 96-09 and obsolete AL 2006-1 1 were deleted; the requirement to begin acquisition planning for an M&O contract at least 18 months prior to contract expiration was changed to 24 months; minor editorial changes were made to the Property Management section; and attachment 2's milestone schedule was conformed to the SEB Monthly Status Report format (that status report was established in March 201 0; see http://management.enernv.gov/docurnents/SEBMonthly Status Remrtinn Requirement.pdf).

  9. Approved Site Treatment Plan, Volumes 1 and 2. Revision 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Helmich, E.H.; Molen, G.; Noller, D.

    1996-03-22

    The US Department of Energy, Savannah River Operations Office (DOE-SR), has prepared the Site Treatment Plan (STP) for Savannah River Site (SRS) mixed wastes in accordance with RCRA Section 3021(b), and SCDHEC has approved the STP (except for certain offsite wastes) and issued an order enforcing the STP commitments in Volume 1. DOE-SR and SCDHEC agree that this STP fulfills the requirements contained in the FFCAct, RCRA Section 3021, and therefore, pursuant to Section 105(a) of the FFCAct (RCRA Section 3021(b)(5)), DOE`s requirements are to implement the plan for the development of treatment capacities and technologies pursuant to RCRA Section 3021. Emerging and new technologies not yet considered may be identified to manage waste more safely, effectively, and at lower cost than technologies currently identified in the plan. DOE will continue to evaluate and develop technologies that offer potential advantages in public acceptance, privatization, consolidation, risk abatement, performance, and life-cycle cost. Should technologies that offer such advantages be identified, DOE may request a revision/modification of the STP in accordance with the provisions of Consent Order 95-22-HW. The Compliance Plan Volume (Volume 1) identifies project activity schedule milestones for achieving compliance with Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR). Information regarding the technical evaluation of treatment options for SRS mixed wastes is contained in the Background Volume (Volume 2) and is provided for information.

  10. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 452.1D, Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2014-06-05

    NNSA is proposing revisions for the suite of directives in order to (1) revise requirements to improve NES processes and (2) align the directives with the requirements of DOE Order 251.1C, Departmental Directives Program.

  11. Microsoft Word - FINAL Class 1 Revise TRUPACT-III Management Language 05-20-11.doc

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    May 24, 2011 Mr. John Kieling , Acting Bureau Chief Hazardous Waste Bureau New Mexico Environment Department 2905 Rodeo Park Drive East, Building 1 Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505-6303 Subject: Notification of a Class 1 Permit Modification to the Hazardous Waste Facility Permit, Permit Number: NM4890139088-TSDF Dear Mr. Kieling: Enclosed is a Class 1 Permit Modification Notification to: * Revise TRUPACT-III Management Language * Revise Procedure Reference for the Bolting Station in Table E-1 We

  12. EFFECTS OF GAMMA IRRADIATION ON EPDM ELASTOMERS (REVISION 1)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Clark, E.

    2013-09-13

    Two formulations of EPDM elastomer, one substituting a UV stabilizer for the normal antioxidant in this polymer, and the other the normal formulation, were synthesized and samples of each were exposed to gamma irradiation in initially pure deuterium gas to compare their radiation stability. Stainless steel containers having rupture disks were designed for this task. After 130 MRad dose of cobalt-60 radiation in the SRNL Gamma Irradiation Facility, a significant amount of gas was created by radiolysis; however the composition indicated by mass spectroscopy indicated an unexpected increase in the total amount deuterium in both formulations. The irradiated samples retained their ductility in a bend test. No change of sample weight, dimensions, or density was observed. No change of the glass transition temperature as measured by dynamic mechanical analysis was observed, and most of the other dynamic mechanical properties remained unchanged. There appeared to be an increase in the storage modulus of the irradiated samples containing the UV stabilizer above the glass transition, which may indicate hardening of the material by radiation damage. Revision 1 adds a comparison with results of a study of tritium exposed EPDM. The amount of gas produced by the gamma irradiation was found to be equivalent to about 280 days exposure to initially pure tritium gas at one atmosphere. The glass transition temperature of the tritium exposed EPDM rose about 10 ?C. over 280 days, while no glass transition temperature change was observed for gamma irradiated EPDM. This means that gamma irradiation in deuterium cannot be used as a surrogate for tritium exposure.

  13. Acquisition Letter 09 - Revision of Department of Energy (DOE) Order 350.1

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    and Special H Clause | Department of Energy 9 - Revision of Department of Energy (DOE) Order 350.1 and Special H Clause Acquisition Letter 09 - Revision of Department of Energy (DOE) Order 350.1 and Special H Clause The purpose of Acquisition Letter (AL) 2013-09 is to communicate the revisions to Chapters IV, Compensation; Chapter V, Benefits; and Chapter VI, DOE Contractor Pension Plans of DOE Order 350.1, Contractor Human Resource Management Programs (approved on April 29, 2013), and

  14. 2009.1 Revision of the Evaluated Nuclear Data Library (ENDL2009.1)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thompson, I. J.; Beck, B.; Descalles, M. A.; Mattoon, C.; Summers, N. C.

    2015-05-11

    LLNL’s Computational Nuclear Data and Theory Group have created a 2009.1 revised release of the Evaluated Nuclear Data Library (ENDL2009.1). This library is designed to support LLNL’s current and future nuclear data needs and will be employed in nuclear reactor, nuclear security and stockpile stewardship simulations with ASC codes. The ENDL2009 database was the most complete nuclear database for Monte Carlo and deterministic transport of neutrons and charged particles. It was assembled with strong support from the ASC PEM and Attribution programs, leveraged with support from Campaign 4 and the DOE/Office of Science’s US Nuclear Data Program. This document lists the revisions and fixes made in a new release called ENDL2009.1, by comparing with the existing data in the original release which is now called ENDL2009.0. These changes are made in conjunction with the revisions for ENDL2011.1, so that both the .1 releases are as free as possible of known defects.

  15. Revised DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 42.1 Indirect Rate Administration (October 2010)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Office of Procurement and Assistant Management (OPAM) has issued the above Acquisition Guide Chapter. DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 42.1 Indirect Rate Administration has been revised to provide the current references and requirements.

  16. Guidance document for revision of DOE Order 5820.2A, Radioactive Waste Technical Support Program. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kudera, D.E.; McMurtrey, C.D.; Meagher, B.G.

    1993-04-01

    This document provides guidance for the revision of DOE Order 5820.2A, ``Radioactive Waste Management.`` Technical Working Groups have been established and are responsible for writing the revised order. The Technical Working Groups will use this document as a reference for polices and procedures that have been established for the revision process. The overall intent of this guidance is to outline how the order will be revised and how the revision process will be managed. In addition, this document outlines technical issues considered for inclusion by a Department of Energy Steering Committee.

  17. Proposed Revision of the Decay Heat Standard ANSI/ANS-5.1-2005

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gauld, Ian C; Rapp, Michelle Brady; Schmittroth, F.; Wilson, W.

    2010-01-01

    The ANSI/ANS-5.1 [1] standard on decay heat in light water reactors is one of the most widely used standards for reactor design and safety analysis. The standard was last revised and issued in 2005. The 2005 revision included several important accomplishments, including incorporation of ENDF/B-VI nuclear data in the development of correction factors implemented in the standard, and revisions to the 'simplified method.' The status of the 2005 ANS-5.1 standard has been summarized previously [2]. Future revisions of the standard under consideration, as proposed by the working group, were to (a) improve the neutron capture effect specification, (b) include contributions from actinides not already addressed by the standard, and (c) specify values for the total recoverable decay energy Q for major fissionable elements. These items are carried over from recommendations by Dickens et al. [3] during development of the 1994 revision. The current working group has also identified the representation of decay heat uncertainties as an area for improvement. This paper discusses recent development activities to further improve and extend the utility of the ANS-5.1 decay heat standard. These developments are in progress, and this paper summarizes the status of the activities. The proposed revisions discussed in this paper are being considered by the working group for adoption in the next publication of the standard.

  18. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy Guide 580.1-1, Personal Property Management Guide

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2012-03-30

    The purpose of this revision is to remove outdated language and incorporate changes that support and provide additional guidance to DOE Order 580.1A, dated March 30, 2012, DOE Personal Property Management Program.

  19. Revised SRC-I project baseline. Volume 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1984-01-01

    International Coal Refining Company (ICRC), in cooperation with the Commonwealth of Kentucky has contracted with the United States Department of Energy (DOE) to design, build and operate a first-of-its-kind plant demonstrating the economic, environmental, socioeconomic and technical feasibility of the direct coal liquefaction process known as SRC-I. ICRC has made a massive commitment of time and expertise to design processes, plan and formulate policy, schedules, costs and technical drawings for all plant systems. These fully integrated plans comprise the Project Baseline and are the basis for all future detailed engineering, plant construction, operation, and other work set forth in the contract between ICRC and the DOE. Volumes I and II of the accompanying documents constitute the updated Project Baseline for the SRC-I two-stage liquefaction plant. International Coal Refining Company believes this versatile plant design incorporates the most advanced coal liquefaction system available in the synthetic fuels field. SRC-I two-stage liquefaction, as developed by ICRC, is the way of the future in coal liquefaction because of its product slate flexibility, high process thermal efficiency, and low consumption of hydrogen. The SRC-I Project Baseline design also has made important state-of-the-art advances in areas such as environmental control systems. Because of a lack of funding, the DOE has curtailed the total project effort without specifying a definite renewal date. This precludes the development of revised accurate and meaningful schedules and, hence, escalated project costs. ICRC has revised and updated the original Design Baseline to include in the technical documentation all of the approved but previously non-incorporated Category B and C and new Post-Baseline Engineering Change Proposals.

  20. Standard technical specifications: Combustion engineering plants. Volume 1, Revision 1: Specifications

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-04-01

    This report documents the results of the combined effort of the NRC and the industry to produce improved Standard Technical Specifications (STS), Revision 1 for Combustion Engineering Plants. The changes reflected in Revision 1 resulted from the experience gained from license amendment applications to convert to these improved STS or to adopt partial improvements to existing technical specifications. This NUREG is the result of extensive public technical meetings and discussions between the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff and various nuclear power plant licensees, Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS) Owners Groups, NSSS vendors, and the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI). The improved STS were developed based on the criteria in the Final Commission Policy Statement on Technical Specifications Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors, dated July 22, 1993. The improved STS will be used as the basis for individual nuclear power plant licensees to develop improved plant-specific technical specifications. This report contains three volumes. Volume 1 contains the Specifications for all chapters and sections of the improved STS. Volume 2 contains the Bases for Chapters 2.0 and 3.0, and Sections 3.1--3.3 of the improved STS. Volume 3 contains the Bases for Sections 3.4--3.9 of the improved STS.

  1. Hanford Facility dangerous waste permit application, general information. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-05-01

    The current Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application is considered to be a single application organized into a General Information Portion (this document, number DOE/RL-91-28) and a treatment, storage, and/or disposal Unit-Specific Portion, which includes documentation for individual TSD units (e.g., document numbers DOE/RL-89-03 and DOE/RL-90-01). Both portions consist of a Part A division and a Part B division. The Part B division consists of 15 chapters that address the content of the Part B checklists prepared by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology 1987) and the US Environmental Protection Agency (40 Code of Federal Regulations 270), with additional information requirements mandated by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 and revisions of Washington Administrative Code 173-303. For ease of reference, the Washington State Department of Ecology checklist section numbers, in brackets, follow the chapter headings and subheadings. Documentation contained in the General Information Portion (i.e., this document, number DOE/RL-91-28) is broader in nature and applies to all treatment, storage, and/or disposal units for which final status is sought. Because of its broad nature, the Part A division of the General Information Portion references the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Part A Permit Application (document number DOE/RL-88-21), a compilation of all Part A documentation for the Hanford Facility.

  2. JM to Revise DOE O 320.1, Acquiring and Positioning Human Resources--Withdrawn

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2014-07-17

    Withdrawn 3-25-15. The revision will update the order to transfer the requirements of Chapter V, Merit Promotion and incorporate any other policies relating to staffing and internal placement that were absent in the previous DOE 320.1 Order into the proposed DOE Order 335.1 Merit Promotion Pl an and Internal Placement Order.

  3. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    11 0 -2 0 0 -1 -1 Honduras 0 0 -1 0 0 -3 -3 India 0 0 0 8 0 2 2 Italy 0 0 0 3 0 16 16 Japan 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Korea, South 0 0 0 1 0 4 4 Latvia 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Lithuania 0 0 0 0 0 19...

  4. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy O 361.1B, Acquisition Career Management Program

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2008-01-24

    In accordance with Department of Energy (DOE) Order DOE O 251.1C, Departmental Directives Program, paragraph 7, pages 1-12 the purpose is to revise DOE Order 361.1B to reflect updates and changes since the last revision, January 24, 2008. The changes will align the Order with current Federal and Departmental directives.

  5. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 200.1A, Information Technology Management--Withdrawn

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2011-12-15

    Withdrawn 3-24-14. Although DOE O 200.1A was revised in December 2008, there have been significant changes in IT governance processes and Departmental use of new technologies such as Web 2.0 technologies since that time.

  6. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Petroleum Gases 5,202 15,123 23,191 36,994 - -1,344 1,693 1,039 79,122 5,357 EthaneEthylene 148 107 0 0 - 0 0 0 255 0 PropanePropylene 3,359 17,172 20,262 36,150 - -1,318 0...

  7. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    4,395 949 6,731 1,029 744 1,773 Non OPEC 928,991 3,672 19,941 130,776 874 9,600 10,474 Angola 81,615 10 1,979 1,923 0 0 0 Argentina 2,486 1 2,703 167 0 646 646 Aruba 0 0 0 23,145 0...

  8. Revisions to ANSI Z136.1-2007 : safe use of lasers.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Snell, Jonathan

    2008-10-01

    The parent document and cornerstone of the Z136 series of laser safety standards, the revised ANSI Z136.1 (2007) provides guidance for the safe use of lasers and laser systems by defining control measures for each of the four laser classes. As a result of advances in laser devices and applications, new guidelines have been incorporated into this 2007 revision. The new revision should be obtained by all laser end users and is a must for users of class 3B and 4 lasers as it renders all previous editions obsolete. Since the ANSI Z136.1 standard is the foundation of laser safety programs for industrial, military, medical, and educational applications nationwide, revisions to the previous version can and will affect the training and practice of laser safety in these environments. Changes to the previous version include the addition of new laser hazard classification definitions, new requirements for refresher training, and changes to medical surveillance requirements. The ANSI Z136.1 (2007) standard provides an updated and thorough set of guidelines for implementing a safe laser program. In addition to these changes, the standard covers laser safety program provisions including the duties and responsibilities of the LSO, non-beam hazards, administrative/engineering control measures, definitions, optical density, nominal hazard zone (NHZ), MPEs, accessible emission limit (AEL), bioeffects, standard operating procedures (SOPs), and example calculations.

  9. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Refining Districts, 2005 East Coast Appalachian No. 1 Total IN, IL, KY MN, WI, ND, SD OK, KS, MO Total Liquefied Refinery Gases 2.5 0.9 2.4 4.2 1.2 0.9 3.1 Finished Motor...

  10. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Pentanes Plus 30 - 1 -17 - 0 6 1 6 Liquefied Petroleum Gases 172 4 9 -141 - 0 9 1 34 EthaneEthylene 82 0 0 -76 - 0 0 0 6 PropanePropylene 57 8 7 -39 - 0 0 0 33 Normal Butane...

  11. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 0 662 0 0 0 Ecuador 68,516 0 0 0 0 0 0 Finland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Germany 0 0 0 198 0 0 0 Japan 0 0 0 176 0 209 209 Korea, South 0 0 41 0 0 1,444 1,444 Malaysia 2,417 0 90 1,443 0 43...

  12. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    0 1,605 9 0 1 1,627 9 0 Natural Gas Liquids and LRGs 17 41 64 101 - -4 5 3 220 Pentanes Plus 3 - 0 0 - 0 0 0 3 Liquefied Petroleum Gases 14 41 64 101 - -4 5 3 217 EthaneEthylene...

  13. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Oxygenates 29,966 1,285 31,251 26,396 9,648 5,726 41,770 Other HydrocarbonsHydrogen 0 0 0 1,077 678 587 2,342 Oxygenates 29,966 1,285 31,251 25,319 8,970 5,139 39,428...

  14. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8,039 6,932 14,971 Non OPEC 1,938,257 4,376 81,256 172,714 78,933 123,273 202,206 Angola 166,404 10 1,979 2,023 0 0 0 Argentina 20,608 1 2,831 788 0 3,353 3,353 Aruba 0 0 0...

  15. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    2005 (Thousand Barrels) East Coast Appalachian No. 1 Total IN, IL, KY MN, WI, ND, SD OK, KS, MO Total Liquefied Refinery Gases 14,825 298 15,123 33,928 1,840 2,446 38,214...

  16. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2005 (Thousand Barrels) East Coast Appalachian No. 1 Total IN, IL, KY MN, WI, ND, SD OK, KS, MO Total Total Net Input 199,173 1,285 200,458 117,409 24,041 20,032 161,482...

  17. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Liquefied Petroleum Gases 62,852 1,440 3,251 -51,618 - -58 3,410 185 12,388 1,382 EthaneEthylene 29,950 0 0 -27,892 - -9 0 0 2,067 323 PropanePropylene 20,635 2,967 2,659...

  18. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    1 423 424 2,395 7 Liquefied Petroleum Gases 1,039 3,426 8,005 185 6,684 19,338 53 EthaneEthylene 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PropanePropylene 206 544 7,332 12 5,589 13,683 37 Normal...

  19. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 0 0 0 576 128 RBOB for Blending with Ether 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 0 RBOB for Blending with Alcohol 22 26 0 24 0 0 394 0 Conventional 0 315 0 0 1,359 0 1,718 495 CBOB for Blending with...

  20. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    0 0 0 576 131 RBOB for Blending with Ether 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 0 RBOB for Blending with Alcohol 22 26 0 24 0 0 0 3,617 31,128 Conventional 105 315 0 615 1,359 0 0 1,962 17,808 CBOB...

  1. ETA-HTP11 - Vehicle Verification - Revision 1

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    ... Vehicles shall be capable of completing all HEV America tests without repairs exceeding a ... Yes No NA 5.1 6.6 Concentrations of explosive gases in the battery box shall not be ...

  2. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Refinery and Blender Net Production of Finished Petroleum Products by PAD and Refining Districts, 2005 (Thousand Barrels) East Coast Appalachian No. 1 Total IN, IL, KY MN, WI, ND,...

  3. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    - - - - - 14 - - - Natural Gas Liquids and LRGs 298 105 110 47 - -5 118 14 433 Pentanes Plus 33 - 1 25 - 0 48 4 7 Liquefied Petroleum Gases 265 105 109 22 - -4 70 9 426 Ethane...

  4. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    741 317 245 1,303 IsobutaneIsobutylene 206 7 213 155 55 184 394 Other HydrocarbonsHydrogenOxygenates 512 0 512 29 18 0 47 Other HydrocarbonsHydrogen 0 0 0 28 0 0 28...

  5. Waste management Quality Assurance Implementing Management Plan (QAIMP). Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-06-01

    This report contains a summary of the groundwater and surface-water quality monitoring activities to be performed during the 1993 calendar year at the Department of Energy Y- 12 Plant in Oak Ridge, Tennessee (Figure 1). Monitoring activities will be performed in three hydrogeologic regimes: (1) the Bear Creek Hydrogeologic Regime (BCHR), (2) the Upper East Fork Poplar Creek Hydrogeologic Regime (UEFPCHR), and (3) the Chestnut Ridge Hydrogeologic Regime (CRHR). The BCHR and UEFPCHR are located within Bear Creek Valley (BCV) and the CRHR is located south of the Y-12 Plant on Chestnut Ridge (Figure 2).

  6. The mixed waste management facility. Project baseline revision 1.2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Streit, R.D.; Throop, A.L.

    1995-04-01

    Revision 1.2 to the Project Baseline (PB) for the Mixed Waste Management Facility (MWMF) is in response to DOE directives and verbal guidance to (1) Collocate the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) and MWMF into a single complex, integrate certain and overlapping functions as a cost-saving measure; (2) Meet certain fiscal year (FY) new-BA funding objectives ($15.3M in FY95) with lower and roughly balanced funding for out years; (3) Reduce Total Project Cost (TPC) for the MWMF Project; (4) Include costs for all appropriate permitting activities in the project TPC. This baseline revision also incorporates revisions in the technical baseline design for Molten Salt Oxidation (MSO) and Mediated Electrochemical Oxidation (MEO). Changes in the WBS dictionary that are necessary as a result of this rebaseline, as well as minor title changes, at WBS Level 3 or above (DOE control level) are approved as a separate document. For completeness, the WBS dictionary that reflects these changes is contained in Appendix B. The PB, with revisions as described in this document, were also the basis for the FY97 Validation Process, presented to DOE and their reviewers on March 21-22, 1995. Appendix C lists information related to prior revisions to the PB. Several key changes relate to the integration of functions and sharing of facilities between the portion of the DWTF that will house the MWMF and those portions that are used by the Hazardous Waste Management (HWM) Division at LLNL. This collocation has been directed by DOE as a cost-saving measure and has been implemented in a manner that maintains separate operational elements from a safety and permitting viewpoint. Appendix D provides background information on the decision and implications of collocating the two facilities.

  7. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    2005 (Thousand Barrels) East Coast Appalachian No. 1 Total IN, IL, KY MN, WI, ND, SD OK, KS, MO Total Natural Gas Liquids 359 5,914 6,273 26,874 4,786 77,174 108,834 Pentanes...

  8. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    95 Liquefied Petroleum Gases 14,528 24,908 905 0 - -17 14,218 6,684 19,456 3,094 EthaneEthylene 44 0 0 0 - -1 0 0 45 0 PropanePropylene 4,842 20,540 672 0 - 130 0 5,589 20,335...

  9. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Petroleum Gases 96,786 38,214 39,774 8,116 - -1,564 25,650 3,426 155,378 28,105 EthaneEthylene 42,381 0 215 -20,104 - -929 0 0 23,421 2,622 PropanePropylene 36,474 39,477...

  10. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    221 0 17,018 47 Liquefied Petroleum Gases 23,191 39,774 52,534 3,251 905 119,655 328 Ethane 0 22 16 0 0 38 0 Ethylene 0 193 0 0 0 193 1 Propane 17,562 30,489 28,519 2,659 672...

  11. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Israel 0 0 2 0 220 0 220 Italy 0 0 74 0 0 0 0 Jamaica 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Japan 0 0 9 0 2 5 7 Korea, South 0 0 126 0 1 13 14 Lebanon 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mexico 0 0 10,916 0...

  12. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    562 0 856,883 Commercial 1,023,499 - 2,216,850 - 24,198 27,275 2,590,947 562 - 172,339 Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) - - 18,889 - - 8,944 - - - 684,544 Imports by SPR - - 0...

  13. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Crude Oil 2,804 - 6,125 -1,796 66 99 7,098 2 0 Commercial 2,804 - 6,074 - 66 75 7,098 2 - Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) - - 52 - - 25 - - - Imports by SPR - - 0 - - - - - -...

  14. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 313.1, Management and Funding of the

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Department's Overseas Presence - DOE Directives, Delegations, and Requirements JM-DOE O 313.1, Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 313.1, Management and Funding of the Department's Overseas Presence by Laura Smiley In fiscal year 2014 the Department moved to funding the overseas presence via the Working Capital Fund (WCF) from the earlier, ad hoc, individual program office contribution schema. This new WCF approach needs to be reflected in the Order, as well as several administrative changes

  15. Revised DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 71.1 Headquarters Business Clearance

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    Process | Department of Energy 71.1 Headquarters Business Clearance Process Revised DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 71.1 Headquarters Business Clearance Process There was mention in the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) report titled "Managing at the Speed of Light - Improving Mission Support Performance" that Departmental procurement personnel don't understand the Business Clearance (BC) process. In an effort to address this issue, each Procurement Director (PD) and

  16. Attachment J-16 Portfolio Management Task Order 13-003 Revision 1

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    J-16 Portfolio Management Task Order 13-003 Revision 1 Title: DOE-RL AMB HGET Training Approval Process SIA Date: August 6, 2013 Start: August 6, 2013 Finish: November 30, 2013 1.0 DESCRIPTION Mission Support Alliance (MSA) will provide subject matter experts to provide facilitation and project management support for an Operating Excellence (OE) Structured Improvement Activity (SIA) for the Department of Energy Richland (DOE-RL) Assistant Manager for Business and Financial Operations (AMB)

  17. EM Quaility Assurance Program (EM-QA-001 Revision 1)

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    EM-QA-001 Rev. 1 Issue Date 06/11/12 2 Project lifecycles including design, engineering, construction, commissioning, operation, and post-operation, e.g., surveillance and maintenance, deactivation, decommissioning, and environmental restoration. 3.0 APPLICABILITY The requirements contained within this document apply to EM HQ, EM Field/Project Offices, and EM contractors (including flow down to subcontractors, vendors, and suppliers) as applicable to the work being performed by each entity. Each

  18. PSA Vol 1 Tables Revised Ver 2 Print.xls

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 175 374 7,010 6,188 13,198 Non OPEC 259,980 0 17,385 23,792 78,059 104,593 182,652 Angola 53,254 0 0 100 0 0 0 Argentina 0 0 128 621 0 2,707 2,707 Aruba 0 0 0 1,163 0 0 0...

  19. Integrated thermal treatment system study -- Phase 2 results. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Feizollahi, F.; Quapp, W.J.

    1996-02-01

    This report presents the second phase of a study on thermal treatment technologies. The study consists of a systematic assessment of nineteen thermal treatment alternatives for the contact-handled mixed low-level waste (MLLW) currently stored in the US Department of Energy complex. The treatment alternatives consist of widely varying technologies for safely destroying the hazardous organic components, reducing the volume, and preparing for final disposal of the MLLW. The alternatives considered in Phase 2 were innovative thermal treatments with nine types of primary processing units. Other variations in the study examined the effect of combustion gas, air pollution control system design, and stabilization technology for the treatment residues. The Phase 1 study examined ten initial thermal treatment alternatives. The Phase 2 systems were evaluated in essentially the same manner as the Phase 1 systems. The alternatives evaluated were: rotary kiln, slagging kiln, plasma furnace, plasma gasification, molten salt oxidation, molten metal waste destruction, steam gasification, Joule-heated vitrification, thermal desorption and mediated electrochemical oxidation, and thermal desorption and supercritical water oxidation. The quantities, and physical and chemical compositions, of the input waste used in the Phase 2 systems differ from those in the Phase 1 systems, which were based on a preliminary waste input database developed at the onset of the Integrated Thermal Treatment System study. The inventory database used in the Phase 2 study incorporates the latest US Department of Energy information. All systems, both primary treatment systems and subsystem inputs, have now been evaluated using the same waste input (2,927 lb/hr). 28 refs., 88 figs., 41 tabs.

  20. Current experiments in elementary particle physics. Revision 1-85

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wohl, C.G.; Armstrong, F.E.; Rittenberg, A.; Trippe, T.G.; Yost, G.P.; Oyanagi, Y.; Dodder, D.C.; Grudtsin, S.N.; Ryabov, Yu.G.; Frosch, R.

    1985-01-01

    This report contains summaries of 551 approved experiments in elementary particle physics (experiments that finished taking data before 1 January 1980 are excluded). Included are experiments at Brookhaven, CERN, CESR, DESY, Fermilab, Moscow Institute of Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Tokyo Institute of Nuclear Studies, KEK, LAMPF, Leningrad Nuclear Physics Institute, Saclay, Serpukhov, SIN, SLAC, and TRIUMF, and also experiments on proton decay. Properties of the fixed-target beams at most of the laboratories are summarized. Instructions are given for searching online the computer database (maintained under the SLAC/SPIRES system) that contains the summaries.

  1. Water resources protection strategy: Revision 1, Attachment 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-12-10

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) must provide a demonstration of compliance with the final US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ground water protection standards for inactive mill sites pursuant to 40 CFR Part 192. This plan outlines the proposed strategy to demonstrate compliance with the ground water standards at the Maybell, Colorado, Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project site. This demonstration consists of (1) the ground water protection standard, (2) a performance assessment, (3) a closure performance demonstration, and (4) a performance monitoring and corrective action program.

  2. TRAC-P validation test matrix. Revision 1.0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hughes, E.D.; Boyack, B.E.

    1997-09-05

    This document briefly describes the elements of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission`s (NRC`s) software quality assurance program leading to software (code) qualification and identifies a test matrix for qualifying Transient Reactor Analysis Code (TRAC)-Pressurized Water Reactor Version (-P), or TRAC-P, to the NRC`s software quality assurance requirements. Code qualification is the outcome of several software life-cycle activities, specifically, (1) Requirements Definition, (2) Design, (3) Implementation, and (4) Qualification Testing. The major objective of this document is to define the TRAC-P Qualification Testing effort.

  3. Technical bases DWPF Late Washing Facility. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fish, D.L.; Landon, L.F.

    1992-08-10

    A task force recommended that the technical feasibility of a ``Late Wash` facility be assessed [1]. In this facility, each batch of tetraphenylborate slurry from Tank 49 would be given a final wash to reduce the concentrations of nitrite and radiolysis products to acceptable levels. Laboratory-scale studies have demonstrated that d the nitrite content of the slurry fed to DWPF is reduced to 0.01 M or less (and at least a 4X reduction in concentration of the soluble species is attained), (1) the need for HAN during hydrolysis is eliminated (eliminating the production of ammonium ion during hydrolysis), (2) hydrolysis may be done with a catalyst concentration that will not exceed the copper solubility in glass and (3) the non-polar organic production during hydrolysis is significantly reduced. The first phase of an aggressive research and development program has been completed and all test results obtained to date support the technical feasibility of Late Washing. Paralleling this research and development effort is an aggressive design study directed by DWPF to scope and cost retrofitting the Auxiliary Pump Pit (APP) to enable performing a final wash of each batch of precipitate slurry before R is transferred into the DWPF Soft Processing Cell (SPC). An initial technical bases for the Late Wash Facility was transmitted to DWPF on June 15, 1992. Research and development activities are continuing directed principally at optimization of the cross-f low fitter decontamination methodology and pilot-scale validation of the recommended benzene stripping metodology.

  4. Nevada Test Site Radiation Protection Program - Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Radiological Control Managers' Council

    2008-06-01

    Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 835, 'Occupational Radiation Protection,' establishes radiation protection standards, limits, and program requirements for protecting individuals from ionizing radiation resulting from the conduct of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) activities. 10 CFR 835.101(a) mandates that DOE activities be conducted in compliance with a documented Radiation Protection Program (RPP) as approved by DOE. This document promulgates the RPP for the Nevada Test Site (NTS), related (on-site or off-site) U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) operations, and environmental restoration off-site projects. This NTS RPP promulgates the radiation protection standards, limits, and program requirements for occupational exposure to ionizing radiation resulting from NNSA/NSO activities at the NTS and other operational areas as stated in 10 CFR 835.1(a). NNSA/NSO activities (including design, construction, operation, and decommissioning) within the scope of this RPP may result in occupational exposures to radiation or radioactive material. Therefore, a system of control is implemented through specific references to the site-specific NV/YMP RCM. This system of control is intended to ensure that the following criteria are met: (1) occupational exposures are maintained as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA), (2) DOE's limiting values are not exceeded, (3) employees are aware of and are prepared to cope with emergency conditions, and (4) employees are not inadvertently exposed to radiation or radioactive material.

  5. Battery Technology Life Verification Test Manual Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jon P. Christophersen

    2012-12-01

    The purpose of this Technology Life Verification Test (TLVT) Manual is to help guide developers in their effort to successfully commercialize advanced energy storage devices such as battery and ultracapacitor technologies. The experimental design and data analysis discussed herein are focused on automotive applications based on the United States Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC) electric vehicle, hybrid electric vehicle, and plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (EV, HEV, and PHEV, respectively) performance targets. However, the methodology can be equally applied to other applications as well. This manual supersedes the February 2005 version of the TLVT Manual (Reference 1). It includes criteria for statistically-based life test matrix designs as well as requirements for test data analysis and reporting. Calendar life modeling and estimation techniques, including a user’s guide to the corresponding software tool is now provided in the Battery Life Estimator (BLE) Manual (Reference 2).

  6. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant No-Migration Variance Petition. Revision 1, Volume 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hunt, Arlen

    1990-03-01

    The purpose of the WIPP No-Migration Variance Petition is to demonstrate, according to the requirements of RCRA {section}3004(d) and 40 CFR {section}268.6, that to a reasonable degree of certainty, there will be no migration of hazardous constituents from the facility for as long as the wastes remain hazardous. The DOE submitted the petition to the EPA in March 1989. Upon completion of its initial review, the EPA provided to DOE a Notice of Deficiencies (NOD). DOE responded to the EPA`s NOD and met with the EPA`s reviewers of the petition several times during 1989. In August 1989, EPA requested that DOE submit significant additional information addressing a variety of topics including: waste characterization, ground water hydrology, geology and dissolution features, monitoring programs, the gas generation test program, and other aspects of the project. This additional information was provided to EPA in January 1990 when DOE submitted Revision 1 of the Addendum to the petition. For clarity and ease of review, this document includes all of these submittals, and the information has been updated where appropriate. This document is divided into the following sections: Introduction, 1.0: Facility Description, 2.0: Waste Description, 3.0; Site Characterization, 4.0; Environmental Impact Analysis, 5.0; Prediction and Assessment of Infrequent Events, 6.0; and References, 7.0.

  7. Foil fabrication for the ROMANO event. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Romo, J.G. Jr.; Weed, J.W.; Griggs, G.E.; Brown, T.G.; Tassano, P.L.

    1984-06-13

    The Vacuum Processes Lab (VPL), of LLNL's M.E. Dept. - Material Fabrication Division (MFD), conducted various vacuum related support activities for the ROMANO nuclear physics experiment. This report focuses on the foil fabrication activities carried out between July and November 1983 for the ROMANO event. Other vacuum related activities for ROMANO, such as outgassing tests of materials, are covered in separate documentation. VPL was asked to provide 270 coated Parylene foils for the ROMANO event. However, due to the developmental nature of some of the procedures, approximately 400 coated foils were processed. In addition, VPL interacted with MFD's Plastics Shop to help supply Parylene substrates to other organizations (i.e., LBL and commercial vendors) which had also been asked to provide coated foils for ROMANO. The purposes of this report are (A) to document the processes developed and the techniques used to produce the foils, and (B) to suggest future directions. The report is divided into four sections describing: (1) nuclear target foil fabrication, (2) Parylene substrate preparation and production, (3) calibration foil fabrication, and (4) foil and substrate inspections.

  8. International energy: Research organizations, 1988--1992. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hendricks, P.; Jordan, S.

    1993-06-01

    This publication contains the standardized names of energy research organizations used in energy information databases. Involved in this cooperative task are (1) the technical staff of the US DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI) in cooperation with the member countries of the Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDE) and (2) the International Nuclear Information System (INIS). ETDE member countries are also members of the International Nuclear Information System (INIS). Nuclear organization names recorded for INIS by these ETDE member countries are also included in the ETDE Energy Database. Therefore, these organization names are cooperatively standardized for use in both information systems. This publication identifies current organizations doing research in all energy fields, standardizes the format for recording these organization names in bibliographic citations, assigns a numeric code to facilitate data entry, and identifies report number prefixes assigned by these organizations. These research organization names may be used in searching the databases ``Energy Science & Technology`` on DIALOG and ``Energy`` on STN International. These organization names are also used in USDOE databases on the Integrated Technical Information System. Research organizations active in the past five years, as indicated by database records, were identified to form this publication. This directory includes approximately 31,000 organizations that reported energy-related literature from 1988 to 1992 and updates the DOE Energy Data Base: Corporate Author Entries.

  9. Planning integration FY 1996 program plan. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-09-01

    This Multi-Year Program Plan (MAP) Planning Integration Program, Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Element 1.8.2, is the primary management tool to document the technical, schedule, and cost baseline for work directed by the US Department of Energy (DOE), Richland Operations Office (RL). As an approved document, it establishes an agreement between RL and the performing contractors for the work to be performed. It was prepared by Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) and Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL). The MYPPs for the Hanford Site programs are to provide a picture from fiscal year (FY) 1996 through FY 2002. At RL Planning and Integration Division (PID) direction, only the FY 1996 Planning Integration Program work scope has been planned and presented in this MAP. Only those known significant activities which occur after FY 1996 are portrayed in this MAP. This is due to the uncertainty of who will be accomplishing what work scope when, following the award of the Management and Integration (M&I) contract.

  10. 222-S Laboratory Quality Assurance Plan. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Meznarich, H.K.

    1995-07-31

    This Quality Assurance Plan provides,quality assurance (QA) guidance, regulatory QA requirements (e.g., 10 CFR 830.120), and quality control (QC) specifications for analytical service. This document follows the U.S Department of Energy (DOE) issued Hanford Analytical Services Quality Assurance Plan (HASQAP). In addition, this document meets the objectives of the Quality Assurance Program provided in the WHC-CM-4-2, Section 2.1. Quality assurance elements required in the Guidelines and Specifications for Preparing Quality Assurance Program Plans (QAMS-004) and Interim Guidelines and Specifications for Preparing Quality Assurance Project Plans (QAMS-005) from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are covered throughout this document. A quality assurance index is provided in the Appendix A. This document also provides and/or identifies the procedural information that governs laboratory operations. The personnel of the 222-S Laboratory and the Standards Laboratory including managers, analysts, QA/QC staff, auditors, and support staff shall use this document as guidance and instructions for their operational and quality assurance activities. Other organizations that conduct activities described in this document for the 222-S Laboratory shall follow this QA/QC document.

  11. Non-Salado flow and transport position paper. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Axness, C.; Beauheim, R.; Behl, Y.

    1994-12-15

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) is preparing to request the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to certify compliance of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) with long-term requirements of the environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Management and Standards for Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Waste (40 CFR Part 191). The DOE must also demonstrate compliance with the long-term requirements of the Land Disposal Restrictions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (40 CFR Part 268.6). Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) has ben conducting iterative performance assessments (PAs) for the the WIPP to provide guidance to the project on the technical activities required to determine long-term performance of the WIPP disposal system. The most recent PA was conducted in 1992. The objectives of this paper are to: (1) Identify and describe the relationship between non-Salado hydrology and the array of scenarios that might be relevant to the long-term performance of the repository. (2) Identify and describe the array of conceptual and mechanistic models that are required to evaluate the scenarios for the purpose of compliance. (3) Identify and describe the data/information that are required to support the conceptual and mechanistic models.

  12. Plutonium Focus Area research and development plan. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-11-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE) committed to a research and development program to support the technology needs for converting and stabilizing its nuclear materials for safe storage. The R and D Plan addresses five of the six material categories from the 94-1 Implementation Plan: plutonium (Pu) solutions, plutonium metals and oxides, plutonium residues, highly enriched uranium, and special isotopes. R and D efforts related to spent nuclear fuel (SNF) stabilization were specifically excluded from this plan. This updated plan has narrowed the focus to more effectively target specific problem areas by incorporating results form trade studies. Specifically, the trade studies involved salt; ash; sand, slag, and crucible (SS and C); combustibles; and scrub alloy. The plan anticipates possible disposition paths for nuclear materials and identifies resulting research requirements. These requirements may change as disposition paths become more certain. Thus, this plan represents a snapshot of the current progress and will continue to be updated on a regular basis. The paper discusses progress in safeguards and security, plutonium stabilization, special isotopes stabilization, highly-enriched uranium stabilization--MSRE remediation project, storage technologies, engineered systems, core technology, and proposed DOE/Russian technology exchange projects.

  13. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy Guide 424.1-1B, Implementation Guide for Use in Addressing Unreviewed Safety Questions Requirements

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2015-08-06

    The Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security (AU) is proposing to perform a full revision of DOE Guide 424.1-1B to incorporate lessons learned identified by DOE Program Offices since the Guide's last full revision in 2006. In 2010 a limited revision to the Guide was conducted to incorporate a clarification on use of evaluation of the safety of the situation and consolidation of the potentially inadequate analysis process within the Guide.

  14. Multi-Pack Disposal Concepts for Spent Fuel (Revision 1)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hardin, Ernest; Matteo, Edward N.; Hadgu, Teklu

    2016-01-01

    At the initiation of the Used Fuel Disposition (UFD) R&D campaign, international geologic disposal programs and past work in the U.S. were surveyed to identify viable disposal concepts for crystalline, clay/shale, and salt host media. Concepts for disposal of commercial spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level waste (HLW) from reprocessing are relatively advanced in countries such as Finland, France, and Sweden. The UFD work quickly showed that these international concepts are all “enclosed,” whereby waste packages are emplaced in direct or close contact with natural or engineered materials . Alternative “open” modes (emplacement tunnels are kept open after emplacement for extended ventilation) have been limited to the Yucca Mountain License Application Design. Thermal analysis showed that if “enclosed” concepts are constrained by peak package/buffer temperature, that waste package capacity is limited to 4 PWR assemblies (or 9 BWR) in all media except salt. This information motivated separate studies: 1) extend the peak temperature tolerance of backfill materials, which is ongoing; and 2) develop small canisters (up to 4-PWR size) that can be grouped in larger multi-pack units for convenience of storage, transportation, and possibly disposal (should the disposal concept permit larger packages). A recent result from the second line of investigation is the Task Order 18 report: Generic Design for Small Standardized Transportation, Aging and Disposal Canister Systems. This report identifies disposal concepts for the small canisters (4-PWR size) drawing heavily on previous work, and for the multi-pack (16-PWR or 36-BWR).

  15. Fiscal year 1998 Battelle performance evaluation agreement revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DAVIS, T.L.

    1998-10-22

    Fiscal Year 1998 represents the second full year utilizing a results-oriented, performance-based contract. This document describes the critical outcomes, objectives, performance indicators, expected levels of performance, and the basis for the evaluation of the Contractors performance for the period October 1, 1997 through September 30, 1998, as required by Articles entitled Use of Objective Standards of Performance, Self Assessment and Performance Evaluation and Critical Outcomes Review of the Contract DE-AC08-76RLO1830. In partnership with the Contractor and other key customers, the Department of Energy (DOE) Richland Operations Office has defined six critical outcomes that same as the core for the Contractors performance evaluation. The Contractor also utilizes these outcomes as a basis for overall management of the Laboratory. As stated above six critical outcomes have been established for FY 1998. These outcomes are based on the following needs identified by DOE-HQ, RL and other customers of the Laboratory. Our Energy Research customer desires relevant, quality and cost effective science. Our Environmental Management customer wants technology developed, demonstrated, and deployed to solve environmental cleanup issues. To ensure the diversification and viability of the Laboratory as a National asset, RL and HQ alike want to increase the Science and Technical contributions of PNNL related to its core capabilities. RL wants improved leadership/management, cost-effective operations, and maintenance of a work environment, which fosters innovative thinking and high morale. RL and HQ alike desire compliance with environment, safety and health (ES and H) standards and disciplined conduct of operations for protection of the worker, environment, and the public, As with all of Hanford, DOE expects contribution of the Laboratory to the economic development of the Tri-Cities community, and the region, to build a new local economy that is less reliant on the Hanford mission

  16. Event reporting guidelines 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Allison, D.P.; Harper, M.R.; Jones, W.R.; MacKinnon, J.B.; Sandin, S.S.

    1998-01-01

    Revision 1 to NUREG-1022 clarifies the immediate notification requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50, Section 50.72 (10 CFR 50.72), and the 30-day written licensee event report (LER) requirements of 10 CFR 50.73 for nuclear power plants. This revision was initiated to improve the reporting guidelines related to 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73 and to consolidate these guidelines into a single reference document. A first draft of this document was noticed for public comment in the Federal Register on october 7, 1991 (56 FR 50598). A second draft was noticed for comment in the Federal Register on February 7, 1994 (59 FR 5614). This document updates and supersedes NUREG-1022 and its Supplements 1 and 2 (published in September 1983, February 1984, and September 1985, respectively). It does not change the reporting requirements of 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73.

  17. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE Order 442.1A, Department of Energy Employee Concerns Program

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2016-06-14

    Revisions to DOE O 442.1A will help to bring about greater consistency throughout the DOE complex in the approach to processing employee concerns, and to support safety conscious work environment efforts.

  18. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE Order 522.1, Pricing of Departmental Materials and Services

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2015-11-05

    The purpose is to provide administrative updates and implement a Secretarial decision to revise user facility pricing.

  19. Acquisition Guide Chapter 17.1 – Interagency Acquisitions, Interagency Transactions, and Interagency Agreements – Minor Revision

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Acquisition Guide Chapter 17.1 – Interagency Acquisitions, Interagency transactions, and Interagency Agreements is revised to add under the paragraph C Exclusions that Power Marketing Administration's activities performed under its power marketing authority, policies, and procedures are excluded from this DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter. The revised chapter is attached with this flash. All other attachments from Policy Flash 2012-32 remain the same.

  20. Engineering work plan for tank 241-C-103 vapor phase characterization (ECN 613188). Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Conrad, R.B.

    1994-10-05

    The tasks described by this work plan have been completed. The purpose of this revision it to document what actually occurred during the performance of this work plan. The scope was and is limited to phases 1 and 2 as described in the program plan, revision 1. Phases 1 and 2 include the tank 241-C-103 (C-103) vapor. For economic and as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) reasons, we will limit our scope to characterize the C-103 vapor phase for the categories that could be expected to impact facility worker safety from a toxicological and flammability standpoint. In anticipation that a vapor treatment system may be required, categories necessary for design will also be included. It will be the intent of the C-103 vapor characterization program to: (1) identify the substances from the above list of categories that are applicable to the issues involving C-103, and (2) implement a phased plan which will develop the organic vapor phase characterization method and then characterize the organics and the other selected substances to the required quantitative certainty.

  1. Underground Test Area Activity Quality Assurance Plan Nevada National Security Site, Nevada. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Farnham, Irene; Krenzien, Susan

    2012-10-01

    This Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) provides the overall quality assurance (QA) requirements and general quality practices to be applied to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) Underground Test Area (UGTA) activities. The requirements in this QAP are consistent with DOE Order 414.1C, Quality Assurance (DOE, 2005); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans for Modeling (EPA, 2002); and EPA Guidance on the Development, Evaluation, and Application of Environmental Models (EPA, 2009). NNSA/NSO, or designee, must review this QAP every two years. Changes that do not affect the overall scope or requirements will not require an immediate QAP revision but will be incorporated into the next revision cycle after identification. Section 1.0 describes UGTA objectives, participant responsibilities, and administrative and management quality requirements (i.e., training, records, procurement). Section 1.0 also details data management and computer software requirements. Section 2.0 establishes the requirements to ensure newly collected data are valid, existing data uses are appropriate, and environmental-modeling methods are reliable. Section 3.0 provides feedback loops through assessments and reports to management. Section 4.0 provides the framework for corrective actions. Section 5.0 provides references for this document.

  2. Knowledge and abilities catalog for nuclear power plant operators: Boiling water reactors, Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-08-01

    The Knowledge and Abilities Catalog for Nuclear Power Plant Operators: Boiling-Water Reactors (BWRs) (NUREG-1123, Revision 1) provides the basis for the development of content-valid licensing examinations for reactor operators (ROs) and senior reactor operators (SROs). The examinations developed using the BWR Catalog along with the Operator Licensing Examiner Standards (NUREG-1021) and the Examiner`s Handbook for Developing Operator Licensing Written Examinations (NUREG/BR-0122), will cover the topics listed under Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 55 (10 CFR 55). The BWR Catalog contains approximately 7,000 knowledge and ability (K/A) statements for ROs and SROs at BWRs. The catalog is organized into six major sections: Organization of the Catalog, Generic Knowledge and Ability Statements, Plant Systems grouped by Safety Functions, Emergency and Abnormal Plant Evolutions, Components, and Theory. Revision 1 to the BWR Catalog represents a modification in form and content of the original catalog. The K/As were linked to their applicable 10 CFR 55 item numbers. SRO level K/As were identified by 10 CFR 55.43 item numbers. The plant-wide generic and system generic K/As were combined in one section with approximately one hundred new K/As. Component Cooling Water and Instrument Air Systems were added to the Systems Section. Finally, High Containment Hydrogen Concentration and Plant Fire On Site evolutions added to the Emergency and Abnormal Plant Evolutions section.

  3. Genomic structure, promoter sequence, and revised translation of human homeobox gene HLX1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kennedy, M.A.; Rayner, J.C.; Morris, C.M.

    1994-07-15

    The human homeobox gene HLX1 appears to be involved in hemopoietic development and may represent a candidate gene for various developmental or hemopoietic disorders. The authors have isolated genomic clones for the gene, determined its intron-exon organization, and confirmed its map location on chromosome 1q41-q42. The transcription initiation sites of HLX1 were identified, and DNA sequences upstream of these sites were established. Finally, several differences between the genomic sequence and the published cDNA sequence were noted. Translation based on this revised sequence gives rise to a putative protein with 86.5% homology to the product of the murine Hlx gene. 44 refs., 5 figs.

  4. REVISED-FINAL-1ST-QUARTER-FY-2013-SCORECARD-09-05-13.xlsx

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    REVISED MD-110 REFERENCE GUIDE SEPTEMBER 2015 BACKGROUND On August 5, 2015, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) approved the first revision to its Management Directive 110 (MD-110) since 1999. The revised MD-110 provides federal agencies with updated Commission policies, procedures, and guidance relating to the federal sector complaint process as set forth in 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 and reflects new developments in case law, as the federal workplace and EEO practices have evolved. The

  5. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 200.1A, Information Technology Management

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2013-11-21

    This revised Order is needed to clarify the roles and responsibilities, policies, and procedures for effectively managing IT investments to ensure mission success.

  6. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy Order 456.1,...

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    will be updated by comparing it to nationalinternational consensus standards on nanomaterial safety that have been developed and revised since this order was last reviewed....

  7. Office of Environment, Safety and Health Assessments Protocol for Site Leads, April 2015 (Revision 1) – PROTOCOL – EA-31-01

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Office of Environment, Safety and Health Assessments Protocol for Site Leads, April 2015 (Revision 1) – PROTOCOL – EA-31-01

  8. Fast Flux Test Facility transition project resource loaded schedule. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hulvey, R.K.

    1994-10-31

    Revision 1 of the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) Transition Project Resource Loaded Schedule (RLS) provides detail to manage the major elements, project baseline and cost estimate for the FFF Transition Project within the Advanced Reactors Transition Program, comprised of Activity Data Sheets (ADS) 6640, 6641, and 6642. The scope includes all work in the Budget and Reporting categories of Program Integration (PI), Surveillance and Maintenance (S and M), and Deactivation/Compliance (D/C). The transition activities are necessary to bring the FFTF and related facilities to a safe deactivation state, while maintaining worker health and safety. The scope of ADS 6640 and 6642 is the FFTF Transition Project while the scope of ADS 6641 is the Hanford Site Nuclear Energy Legacies.

  9. Codes and standards and other guidance cited in regulatory documents. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ankrum, A.; Nickolaus, J.; Vinther, R.; Maguire-Moffitt, N.; Hammer, J.; Sherfey, L.; Warner, R.

    1994-08-01

    As part of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Standard Review Plan Update and Development Program, Pacific Northwest Laboratory developed a listing of industry consensus codes and standards and other government and industry guidance referred to in regulatory documents. In addition to updating previous information, Revision 1 adds citations from the NRC Inspection Manual and the Improved Standard Technical Specifications. This listing identifies the version of the code or standard cited in the regulatory document, the regulatory document, and the current version of the code or standard. It also provides a summary characterization of the nature of the citation. This listing was developed from electronic searches of the Code of Federal Regulations and the NRC`s Bulletins, Information Notices, Circulars, Generic Letters, Policy Statements, Regulatory Guides, and the Standard Review Plan (NUREG-0800).

  10. Revised DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 7 1.1 Headquarters Business Clearance Process (wrong document under this file name)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    There was mention in the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) report titled "Managing at the Speed of Light - Improving Mission Support Performance" that Departmental procurement personnel don't understand the Business Clearance (BC) process. In an effort to address this issue, each Procurement Director (PD) and Head of Contracting Activity (HCA) was ask to review Acquisition Guide Chapter 7 1.1 Headquarters Business Clearance Process and identify anything that was unclear, as well as recommend changes or ideas which could improve Acquisition Guide Chapter 71.1 and the understanding of the Business Clearance process. Attached is the revised Acquisition Guide Chapter 71.1 (May 20 10) which reflects the comments and suggestions received.

  11. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Revised Manuscript 01 October 2012 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 4 D.R. Tilley 1,2 and H.R. Weller 1,3 1 Traingle Universities Nuclear Laboratory, Durham, NC 27706, USA 2 Department of Physics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA 3 Department of Physics, Duke University, Durham, NC 27706, USA G.M. Hale Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA Abstract: A compilation of information on A = 4 was published in Nuclear Physics A541 (1992), p. 1. Information

  12. ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SCHEDULE 21:AUDIOVISUAL RECORDS (Revision...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AUDIOVISUAL RECORDS (Revision 1) ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SCHEDULE 21:AUDIOVISUAL RECORDS (Revision 1) This schedule covers audiovisual and related records created by or for ...

  13. Technical assessment of TRUSAF for compliance with work place air sampling. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Butler, J.D.

    1995-01-23

    The purpose of this Technical Work Document is to satisfy WHC-CM-1-6, the ``WHC Radiological Control Manual.`` This first revision of the original Supporting Document covers the period from January 1, 1994 to December 31, 1994. WHC-CM-1-6 is the primary guidance for radiological control at Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC). As such, it complies with Title 10, Part 835 of the Code of Federal Regulations. In addition to WHC-CM-1-6, there is HSRCM-1, the ``Hanford Site Radiological Control Manual`` and several Department of Energy (DOE) Orders, national consensus standards, and reports that provide criteria, standards, and requirements for workplace air sampling programs. This document provides a summary of these, as they apply to WHC facility workplace air sampling programs. this document also provides an evaluation of the compliance of the TRUSAF workplace air sampling program to the criteria, standards, and requirements and documents. Where necessary, it also indicates changes needed to bring specific locations into compliance.

  14. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy Order 350.1, Contractor Human Resources Management Program

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2012-10-19

    DOE O 350.1 establishes responsibilities, requirements, and cost allow-ability criteria for the management an oversight of contractor human resource management programs, is being revised to remove contractor requirements from Chapter IV, Compensation, Chapter V, Benefits, and Chapter VI Pensions

  15. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE P 470.1A, Safeguards and Security Program

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2015-08-06

    The proposed revision of this directive will realign this policy to create an integrated security enterprise that effectively protects the Department's assets to institute enterprise-wide solutions to common challenges across the complex.

  16. 309 Building fire protection analysis and justification for deactivation of sprinkler system. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Conner, R.P.

    1997-06-25

    Provide a `graded approach` fire evaluation in preparation for turnover to Environmental Restoration Contractor for D&D. Scope includes revising 309 Building book value and evaluating fire hazards, radiological and toxicological releases, and life safety issues.

  17. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 430.1B, Real Property Asset Management

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2016-02-04

    The proposed revision would update the existing order to enact the Asset Management Plan, institutionalize the recommendations of the Laboratory Operations Board (LOB) working groups on infrastructure, and incorporate government-wide real property policies and practives mandated since 2003.

  18. Addendum to Revision 1 of the Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 98: Frenchman Flat, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (Addendum Revision No. 1)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Operations Office

    2001-06-06

    This document is submitted as an addendum to the Corrective Action Investigation Plan (CAIP) for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 98: Frenchman Flat, Nevada Test Site (NTS), Nevada. The addendum was prepared to propose work activities in response to comments resulting from the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) review of the draft Frenchman Flat CAU model of groundwater flow and contaminant transport completed in April 1999. The reviewers included an external panel of experts and the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection. As a result of the review, additional work scope, including new data-collection and modeling activities, has been identified for the Frenchman Flat CAU. The proposed work scope described in this addendum will be conducted in accordance with the revised Underground Test Area strategy contained in the December 2000 amendment to the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. The Frenchman Flat CAU model is a group of interdependent models designed to predict the extent of contamination in groundwater due to the underground nuclear tests conducted within this CAU. At the time of the DOE review, the CAU model consisted of a CAU groundwater flow and transport model comprised of two major components: a groundwater flow model and a recharge model. The CAU groundwater flow model is supported by a hydrostratigraphic model and a recharge model, whereas the CAU transport model is supported by a source-term model. As part of the modeling activities proposed in this addendum, two new major components may be added to the Frenchman Flat CAU model: a total-system model and two local groundwater flow and transport models. The reviewers identified several issues relating to insufficiency of data and inadequacy of the modeling process that should be addressed to provide additional confidence in the modeling results with respect to the potential for contaminant migration to the Lower Carbonate Aquifer. The proposed additional work scope includes new data

  19. Y-12 Groundwater Protection Program Groundwater Monitoring Data Compendium, Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2006-12-01

    This document is a compendium of water quality and hydrologic characterization data obtained through December 2005 from the network of groundwater monitoring wells and surface water sampling stations (including springs and building sumps) at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12) in Oak Ridge, Tennessee that have been sampled since January 2003. The primary objectives of this document, hereafter referenced as the Y-12 Groundwater Protection Program (GWPP) Compendium, are to: (1) Serve as a single-source reference for monitoring data that meet the requirements of the Y-12 GWPP, as defined in the Y-12 GWPP Management Plan (BWXT Y-12 L.L.C. [BWXT] 2004); (2) Maintain a detailed analysis and evaluation of the monitoring data for each applicable well, spring, and surface water sampling station, with a focus on results for the primary inorganic, organic, and radiological contaminants in groundwater and surface water at Y-12; and (3) Ensure retention of ''institutional knowledge'' obtained over the long-term (>20-year) history of groundwater and surface water monitoring at Y-12 and the related sources of groundwater and surface water contamination. To achieve these goals, the Y-12 GWPP Compendium brings together salient hydrologic, geologic, geochemical, water-quality, and environmental compliance information that is otherwise disseminated throughout numerous technical documents and reports prepared in support of completed and ongoing environmental contamination assessment, remediation, and monitoring activities performed at Y-12. The following subsections provide background information regarding the overall scope and format of the Y-12 GWPP Compendium and the planned approach for distribution and revision (i.e., administration) of this ''living'' document.

  20. COL Application Content Guide for HTGRs: Revision to RG 1.206, Part 1 - Status Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wayne Moe

    2012-08-01

    A combined license (COL) application is required by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for all proposed nuclear plants. The information requirements for a COL application are set forth in 10 CFR 52.79, “Contents of Applications; Technical Information in Final Safety Analysis Report.” An applicant for a modular high temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR) must develop and submit for NRC review and approval a COL application which conforms to these requirements. The technical information necessary to allow NRC staff to evaluate a COL application and resolve all safety issues related to a proposed nuclear plant is detailed and comprehensive. To this, Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.206, “Combined License Applications for Nuclear Power Plants” (LWR Edition), was developed to assist light water reactor (LWR) applicants in incorporating and effectively formatting required information for COL application review (Ref. 1). However, the guidance prescribed in RG 1.206 presumes a LWR design proposal consistent with the systems and functions associated with large LWR power plants currently operating under NRC license.

  1. Feasibility study report for the 200-BP-1 operable unit. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-01-01

    This feasibility study (FS) examines a range of alternatives and provides recommendations for selecting a preferred altemative for remediating contamination at the 200-BP-1 operable unit. The 200-BP-1 operable unit is located in the center of the Hanford Site along the northern boundary of the 200 East Area. The 241-BY Tank Farm is located immediately to the south of the operable unit. 200-BP-1 is a source operable unit with contaminated soils associated primarily with nine inactive cribs (known as the 216-B cribs). These cribs were used for disposal of low-level radioactive liquid waste from U Plant uranium recovery operations, and waste storage tank condensate from the adjacent 241-BY Tank Farm. The cribs used for disposal of U Plant waste were in operation from 1955--1965, and the cribs used for disposal of tank condensate were in operation from 1965-1975. In addition to the cribs, four unplanned releases of radioactive materials have occurred within the operable unit. Contaminated surface soils associated with the unplanned releases have been consolidated over the cribs and covered with clean soil to reduce contaminant migration and exposure. Discharge of wastes to the cribs has resulted in soil and groundwater contamination. The groundwater is being addressed as part of the 200 East Aggregate Area groundwater operable unit. Contaminated soils at the site can be categorized by the types of contaminants, their distribution in the soil column, and the risk posed by the various potential exposure pathways. Below the clean soil cover, the near surface soils contain low-:levels of contamination with cesium-137, radium-226, strontium-90, thorium-228 and uranium. The lifetime incremental cancer risk associated with these soils if they were exposed at the surface is 9 {times} 10{sup 5}.

  2. APS beamline standard components handbook, Version 1.3. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hahn, U.; Shu, D.; Kuzay, T.M.

    1993-02-01

    This Handbook in its current version (1.3) contains descriptions, specifications, and preliminary engineering design drawings for many of the standard components. The design status and schedules have been provided wherever possible. In the near future, the APS plans to update engineering drawings of identified standard beamline components and complete the Handbook. The completed version of this Handbook will become available to both the CATs and potential vendors. Use of standard components should result in major cost reductions for CATs in the areas of beamline design and construction.

  3. Savannah River Site mixed waste Proposed Site Treatment Plan (PSTP). Volumes 1 and 2 and reference document: Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Helmich, E.; Noller, D.K.; Wierzbicki, K.S.; Bailey, L.L.

    1995-07-13

    The DOE is required by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act to prepare site treatment plans describing the development of treatment capacities and technologies for treating mixed waste. This proposed plan contains Savannah River Site`s preferred options and schedules for constructing new facilities, and otherwise obtaining treatment for mixed wastes. The proposed plan consists of 2 volumes. Volume 1, Compliance Plan, identifies the capacity to be developed and the schedules as required. Volume 2, Background, provides a detailed discussion of the preferred options with technical basis, plus a description of the specific waste streams. Chapters are: Introduction; Methodology; Mixed low level waste streams; Mixed transuranic waste; High level waste; Future generation of mixed waste streams; Storage; Process for evaluation of disposal issues in support of the site treatment plans discussions; Treatment facilities and treatment technologies; Offsite waste streams for which SRS treatment is the Preferred Option (Naval reactor wastes); Summary information; and Acronyms and glossary. This revision does not contain the complete revised report, but only those pages that have been revised.

  4. Waste generation forecast for DOE-ORO`s Environmental Restoration OR-1 Project: FY 1995-FY 2002, September 1994 revision

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-12-01

    A comprehensive waste-forecasting task was initiated in FY 1991 to provide a consistent, documented estimate of the volumes of waste expected to be generated as a result of U.S. Department of Energy-Oak Ridge Operations (DOE-ORO) Environmental Restoration (ER) OR-1 Project activities. Continual changes in the scope and schedules for remedial action (RA) and decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) activities have required that an integrated data base system be developed that can be easily revised to keep pace with changes and provide appropriate tabular and graphical output. The output can then be analyzed and used to drive planning assumptions for treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) facilities. The results of this forecasting effort and a description of the data base developed to support it are provided herein. The initial waste-generation forecast results were compiled in November 1991. Since the initial forecast report, the forecast data have been revised annually. This report reflects revisions as of September 1994.

  5. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE G 226.1-2, Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2013-04-04

    This revision will incorporate new content devoted to Federal oversight and evaluation of effectiveness of activity-level work planning and control (WP&C) at Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities.

  6. Vault Safety and Inventory System users manual, PRIME 2350. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Downey, N.J.

    1994-12-14

    This revision is issued to request review of the attached document: VSIS User Manual, PRIME 2350, which provides user information for the operation of the VSIS (Vault Safety and Inventory System). It describes operational aspects of Prime 2350 minicomputer and vault data acquisition equipment. It also describes the User`s Main Menu and menu functions, including REPORTS. Also, system procedures for the Prime 2350 minicomputer are covered.

  7. Amendment1 - Revision1

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    will also include waste acceptance services to be performed at the NNSS and at waste generator sites across the DOE Complex. The Statements of Capabilities will assist the...

  8. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy Order 151.1C, Comprehensive Emergency Management System

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    A revision is necessary for several to address the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Recommendation 2014-1 for DOE to update its emergency management directive and to address conflicts, omissions, deficiencies, and inconsistent interpretations within the existing DOE O 151.1C have been self-identified by the Office of Emergency Management, or revealed by field elements and program offices since the order was issued in 2005. To address these a series of over 50 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) was developed to be integrated into the updated order, and to Include more emphasis on emergency management requirements related to severe events.

  9. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy Order 151.1C, Comprehensive Emergency Management System

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2015-08-06

    A revision is necessary for several to address the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Recommendation 2014-1 for DOE to update its emergency management directive and to address conflicts, omissions, deficiencies, and inconsistent interpretations within the existing DOE O 151.1C have been self-identified by the Office of Emergency Management, or revealed by field elements and program offices since the order was issued in 2005. To address these a series of over 50 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) was developed to be integrated into the updated order, and to Include more emphasis on emergency management requirements related to severe events.

  10. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE G 414.1-4, Safety Software Guide for Use with 10 CFR 830, Subpart A, Quality Assurance Requirements, and DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2013-07-17

    The revision to DOE G 414.1-4 will conform to the revised DOE O 414.1D and incorporate new information and lessons learned since 2005, including information gained as a result of the February 2011, Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, GAO-11-143.

  11. Safety assessment of discharge chute isolation barrier preparation and installation. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Meichle, R.H.

    1994-10-10

    This revision responds to RL comments and increases the discussion of the ``effective hazard categorization`` and the readiness review basis. The safety assessment is made for the activities for the preparation and installation of the discharge chute isolation barriers. The safety assessment includes a hazard assessment and comparison of potential accidents/events to those addressed by the current safety basis documentation. No significant hazards were identified. An evaluation against the USQ evaluation questions were made and the determination made that the activities do not represent a USQ. Hazard categorization techniques were used to provide a basis for readiness review classification.

  12. General statement of policy and procedures for NRC enforcement actions: Enforcement policy. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-05-01

    This document includes the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission`s (NRC`s or Commission`s) revised General Statement of Policy and Procedure for Enforcement Actions (Enforcement Policy) as it was published in the Federal Register on May 13, 1998 (63 ER 26630). The Enforcement Policy is a general statement of policy explaining the NRC`s policies and procedures in initiating enforcement actions, and of the presiding officers and the Commission in reviewing these actions. This policy statement is applicable to enforcement matters involving the radiological health and safety of the public, including employees` health and safety, the common defense and security, and the environment.

  13. Human-system interface design review guideline -- Reviewer`s checklist: Final report. Revision 1, Volume 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-06-01

    NUREG-0700, Revision 1, provides human factors engineering (HFE) guidance to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff for its: (1) review of the human system interface (HSI) design submittals prepared by licensees or applications for a license or design certification of commercial nuclear power plants, and (2) performance of HSI reviews that could be undertaken as part of an inspection or other type of regulatory review involving HSI design or incidents involving human performance. The guidance consists of a review process and HFE guidelines. The document describes those aspects of the HSI design review process that are important to the identification and resolution of human engineering discrepancies that could adversely affect plant safety. Guidance is provided that could be used by the staff to review an applicant`s HSI design review process or to guide the development of an HSI design review plan, e.g., as part of an inspection activity. The document also provides detailed HFE guidelines for the assessment of HSI design implementations. NUREG-0700, Revision 1, consists of three stand-alone volumes. Volume 2 is a complete set of the guidelines contained in Volume 1, Part 2, but in a checklist format that can be used by reviewers to assemble sets of individual guidelines for use in specific design reviews. The checklist provides space for reviewers to enter guidelines evaluations and comments.

  14. Solid waste integrated forecast technical (SWIFT) report: FY1997 to FY 2070, Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Valero, O.J.; Templeton, K.J.; Morgan, J.

    1997-01-07

    This web site provides an up-to-date report on the radioactive solid waste expected to be managed by Hanford's Waste Management (WM) Project from onsite and offsite generators. It includes: an overview of Hanford-wide solid waste to be managed by the WM Project; program-level and waste class-specific estimates; background information on waste sources; and comparisons with previous forecasts and with other national data sources. This web site does not include: liquid waste (current or future generation); waste to be managed by the Environmental Restoration (EM-40) contractor (i.e., waste that will be disposed of at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF)); or waste that has been received by the WM Project to date (i.e., inventory waste). The focus of this web site is on low-level mixed waste (LLMW), and transuranic waste (both non-mixed and mixed) (TRU(M)). Some details on low-level waste and hazardous waste are also provided. Currently, this web site is reporting data th at was requested on 10/14/96 and submitted on 10/25/96. The data represent a life cycle forecast covering all reported activities from FY97 through the end of each program's life cycle. Therefore, these data represent revisions from the previous FY97.0 Data Version, due primarily to revised estimates from PNNL. There is some useful information about the structure of this report in the SWIFT Report Web Site Overview.

  15. Preliminary environmental assessment for the Satellite Power System (SPS). Revision 1. Volume 2. Detailed assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1980-01-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE) is considering several options for generating electrical power to meet future energy needs. The satellite power system (SPS), one of these options, would collect solar energy through a system of satellites in space and transfer this energy to earth. A reference system has been described that would convert the energy to microwaves and transmit the microwave energy via directive antennas to large receiving/rectifying antennas (rectennas) located on the earth. At the rectennas, the microwave energy would be converted into electricity. The potential environmental impacts of constructing and operating the satellite power system are being assessed as a part of the Department of Energy's SPS Concept Development and Evaluation Program. This report is Revision I of the Preliminary Environmental Assessment for the Satellite Power System published in October 1978. It refines and extends the 1978 assessment and provides a basis for a 1980 revision that will guide and support DOE recommendations regarding future SPS development. This is Volume 2 of two volumes. It contains the technical detail suitable for peer review and integrates information appearing in documents referenced herein. The key environmental issues associated with the SPS concern human health and safety, ecosystems, climate, and electromagnetic systems interactions. In order to address these issues in an organized manner, five tasks are reported: (I) microwave-radiation health and ecological effects; (II) nonmicrowave health and ecological effectss; (III) atmospheric effects; (IV) effects on communication systems due to ionospheric disturbance; and (V) electromagnetic compatibility. (WHK)

  16. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Department of Energy Revised Guidance for Recruitment, Retention and Relocation Incentives Revised Guidance for Recruitment, Retention and Relocation Incentives 3Rs Revised Guidance.pdf (66.78 KB) CHCO Memo_3Rs Guidance_Attachment_05-12-2016_FINAL.pdf (181.71 KB) Responsible Contacts Tiffany Wheeler Human Resources Specialist E-mail tiffany.wheeler@hq.doe.gov Phone (202) 586-8481 More Documents & Publications Manager's Desk Reference on Human Capital Management Flexibilities DOE Handbook

  17. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE G 423.1-1A, Implementation Guide for Use in Developing Technical Safety Requirements

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2014-06-05

    The purpose of this revision is to incorporate lessons learned as identified by DOE program offices.

  18. SCALE: A modular code system for performing Standardized Computer Analyses for Licensing Evaluation. Volume 1, Part 2: Control modules S1--H1; Revision 5

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-03-01

    SCALE--a modular code system for Standardized Computer Analyses Licensing Evaluation--has been developed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory at the request of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The SCALE system utilizes well-established computer codes and methods within standard analysis sequences that (1) allow an input format designed for the occasional user and/or novice, (2) automated the data processing and coupling between modules, and (3) provide accurate and reliable results. System development has been directed at problem-dependent cross-section processing and analysis of criticality safety, shielding, heat transfer, and depletion/decay problems. Since the initial release of SCALE in 1980, the code system has been heavily used for evaluation of nuclear fuel facility and package designs. This revision documents Version 4.3 of the system.

  19. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff practice and procedure digest. Commission, Appeal Board and Licensing Board decisions, July 1972-September 1985. Digest No. 4, Revision No. 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1986-04-01

    This Revision 1 of the fourth edition of the NRC Staff Practice and Procedure Digest contains a digest of a number of Commission, Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board, and Atomic Safety and Licensing Board decisions issued during the period from July 1, 1972 to September 30, 1985 interpreting the NRC's Rules of Practice in 10 CFR Part 2. This Revision 1 replaces earlier editions and supplements and includes appropriate changes reflecting the admendments to the Rules of Practice effective through September 20, 1985.

  20. A spreadsheet-coupled SOLGAS: A computerized thermodynamic equilibrium calculation tool. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Trowbridge, L.D.; Leitnaker, J.M.

    1995-07-01

    SOLGAS, an early computer program for calculating equilibrium in a chemical system, has been made more user-friendly, and several ``bells and whistles`` have been added. The necessity to include elemental species has been eliminated. The input of large numbers of starting conditions has been automated. A revised spreadsheet-based format for entering data, including non-ideal binary and ternary mixtures, simplifies and reduces chances for error. Calculational errors by SOLGAS are flagged, and several programming errors are corrected. Auxiliary programs are available to assemble and partially automate plotting of large amounts of data. Thermodynamic input data can be changed on line. The program can be operated with or without a co-processor. Copies of the program, suitable for the IBM-PC or compatibles with at least 384 bytes of low RAM, are available from the authors. This user manual contains appendices with examples of the use of SOLGAS. These range from elementary examples, such as, the relationships among water, ice, and water vapor, to more complex systems: phase diagram calculation of UF{sub 4} and UF{sub 6} system; burning UF{sub 4} in fluorine; thermodynamic calculation of the Cl-F-O-H system; equilibria calculations in the CCl{sub 4}--CH{sub 3}OH system; and limitations applicable to aqueous solutions. An appendix also contains the source code.

  1. Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) Environmental Restoration Program (ERP), Baseline Safety Analysis File (BSAF). Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-06-20

    This document was prepared to take the place of a Safety Evaluation Report since the Baseline Safety Analysis File (BSAF)and associated Baseline Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) File do not meet the requirements of a complete safety analysis documentation. Its purpose is to present in summary form the background of how the BSAF and Baseline TSR originated and a description of the process by which it was produced and approved for use in the Environmental Restoration Program.The BSAF is a facility safety reference document for INEL environmental restoration activities including environmental remediation of inactive waste sites and decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) of surplus facilities. The BSAF contains safety bases common to environmental restoration activities and guidelines for performing and documenting safety analysis. The common safety bases can be incorporated by reference into the safety analysis documentation prepared for individual environmental restoration activities with justification and any necessary revisions. The safety analysis guidelines in BSAF provide an accepted method for hazard analysis; analysis of normal, abnormal, and accident conditions; human factors analysis; and derivation of TSRS. The BSAF safety bases and guidelines are graded for environmental restoration activities.

  2. Salt Repository Project site study plan for meteorology/air quality: Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1987-12-01

    The Site Study Plan for Meteorology/Air Quality describes a field program consisting of continuous measurements of wind speed and direction, temperature, humidity, dew point, and pressure neede for later modeling and dose calculations. These measurements will include upper level winds, vertical temperature structure, and vertical wind speed. All measurements will be made at a site located within the 9-m/sup 2/ site area but remote from the ESF. The SSP describes the need for each study; its design and design rationale; analysis, management, and use of data; schedule of field activities, organization of field personnel and sample management and quality assurance requirements. These studies will provide data needed to satisfy requirements contained in, or derived from, the Salt Repository Project Requirements Document. Although titled Meteorology/Air Quality, this SSP addresses only meteorology, as there are no air quality data needs in the SCP. A correction to the title will be made in a later revision. 27 refs., 6 figs., 3 tabs.

  3. Investigation of inconsistent ENDF/B-VII.1 independent and cumulative fission product yields with proposed revisions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pigni, Marco T; Francis, Matthew W; Gauld, Ian C

    2015-01-01

    A recent implementation of ENDF/B-VII. independent fission product yields and nuclear decay data identified inconsistencies in the data caused by the use of updated nuclear scheme in the decay sub-library that is not reflected in legacy fission product yield data. Recent changes in the decay data sub-library, particularly the delayed neutron branching fractions, result in calculated fission product concentrations that are incompatible with the cumulative fission yields in the library, and also with experimental measurements. A comprehensive set of independent fission product yields was generated for thermal and fission spectrum neutron induced fission for 235,238U and 239,241Pu in order to provide a preliminary assessment of the updated fission product yield data consistency. These updated independent fission product yields were utilized in the ORIGEN code to evaluate the calculated fission product inventories with experimentally measured inventories, with particular attention given to the noble gases. An important outcome of this work is the development of fission product yield covariance data necessary for fission product uncertainty quantification. The evaluation methodology combines a sequential Bayesian method to guarantee consistency between independent and cumulative yields along with the physical constraints on the independent yields. This work was motivated to improve the performance of the ENDF/B-VII.1 library in the case of stable and long-lived cumulative yields due to the inconsistency of ENDF/B-VII.1 fission p;roduct yield and decay data sub-libraries. The revised fission product yields and the new covariance data are proposed as a revision to the fission yield data currently in ENDF/B-VII.1.

  4. Investigation of inconsistent ENDF/B-VII.1 independent and cumulative fission product yields with proposed revisions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pigni, Marco T; Francis, Matthew W; Gauld, Ian C

    2015-01-01

    A recent implementation of ENDF/B-VII. independent fission product yields and nuclear decay data identified inconsistencies in the data caused by the use of updated nuclear scheme in the decay sub-library that is not reflected in legacy fission product yield data. Recent changes in the decay data sub-library, particularly the delayed neutron branching fractions, result in calculated fission product concentrations that are incompatible with the cumulative fission yields in the library, and also with experimental measurements. A comprehensive set of independent fission product yields was generated for thermal and fission spectrum neutron induced fission for 235,238U and 239,241Pu in order to provide a preliminary assessment of the updated fission product yield data consistency. These updated independent fission product yields were utilized in the ORIGEN code to evaluate the calculated fission product inventories with experimentally measured inventories, with particular attention given to the noble gases. An important outcome of this work is the development of fission product yield covariance data necessary for fission product uncertainty quantification. The evaluation methodology combines a sequential Bayesian method to guarantee consistency between independent and cumulative yields along with the physical constraints on the independent yields. This work was motivated to improve the performance of the ENDF/B-VII.1 library in the case of stable and long-lived cumulative yields due to the inconsistency of ENDF/B-VII.1 fission p;roduct yield and decay data sub-libraries. The revised fission product yields and the new covariance data are proposed as a revision to the fission yield data currently in ENDF/B-VII.1.

  5. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy Order 461.1B, Packaging and Transportation for Offsite Shipment of Materials of National Security Interest

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2015-01-15

    The purpose of this memorandum is to provide justification for the proposed revision of DOE O 461.1B, Packaging and Transportation for Offsite Shipment of Materials of National Security Interest, dated 12-16-2010, as part of the the quadrennial review and recertification as required by DOE O 251.1C, Departmental Directives Program.

  6. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff Practice and Procedure Digest. Commission, Appeal Board and Licensing Board decisions, July 1972--March 1991: Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-02-01

    This revision of the sixth edition of the NRC Practice and Procedure Digest contains a number of Commission, Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board, and Atomic Safety and Licensing Board decisions issued during the period of July 1, 1972 to March 31, 1991, interpreting the NRC`s Rules of Practice in 10 CFR Part 2.

  7. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy Integrated Safety Management Policy 450.4A, Order 450.2, and Guide 450.4-1C

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2015-11-05

    The proposed revisions will seamlessly integrate with the recently provided content in DOE G 226.1-2A, 2014, Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities, and HDBK 1211-2014,Activity-Level Work Planning and Control Implementation, addressing the activity-level work planning and control and safety culture features of ISM.

  8. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 331.1C, Chg 3, Employee Performance Management and Recognition Program

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    The revision incorporates recommendations from the FY12 National Council on Federal Labor-Management Relation's "Goals-Engagement-Accountability-Results (GEAR)" report and program requirements currently contained in the DOE Supervisory/Non-Supervisory Employee Performance Management and Recognition Desk Reference (Desk Reference) such as the DOE Monetary Awards Scale, as well as program requirements that have been established via memoranda since the Order was revised in October 2010.

  9. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 331.1C Chg 3, Employee Performance Management and Recognition Program

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2015-03-20

    The revision incorporates recommendations from the FY12 National Council on Federal Labor-Management Relation's "Goals-Engagement-Accountability-Results (GEAR)" report and program requirements currently contained in the DOE Supervisory/Non-Supervisory Employee Performance Management and Recognition Desk Reference (Desk Reference) such as the DOE Monetary Awards Scale, as well as program requirements that have been established via memoranda since the Order was revised in October 2010.

  10. SCALE: A modular code system for performing standardized computer analyses for licensing evaluation. Control modules -- Volume 1, Revision 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Landers, N.F.; Petrie, L.M.; Knight, J.R.

    1995-04-01

    SCALE--a modular code system for Standardized Computer Analyses Licensing Evaluation--has been developed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory at the request of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The SCALE system utilizes well-established computer codes and methods within standard analysis sequences that (1) allow an input format designed for the occasional user and/or novice, (2) automate the data processing and coupling between modules, and (3) provide accurate and reliable results. System development has been directed at problem-dependent cross-section processing and analysis of criticality safety, shielding, heat transfer, and depletion/decay problems. Since the initial release of SCALE in 1980, the code system has been heavily used for evaluation of nuclear fuel facility and package designs. This revision documents Version 4.2 of the system. This manual is divided into three volumes: Volume 1--for the control module documentation, Volume 2--for the functional module documentation, and Volume 3 for the documentation of the data libraries and subroutine libraries.

  11. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 341.1, Federal Employee Health...

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    compensation claim, and make minor updates, e.g., for organizational titles and internet links. 15 NOV 23 - DOE O 341.1 Federal Employee Health Services.pdf -- PDF Document,...

  12. Test plan/procedure for the SPM-1 shipping container system. Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Flanagan, B.D.

    1995-07-01

    The 49 CFR 173.465 Type A packaging tests will verify that SPM-1 will provide adequate protection and pass as a Type A package. Test will determine that the handle of the Pig will not penetrate through the plywood spacer and rupture the shipping container. Test plan/procedure provides planning, pre-test, setup, testing, and post-testing guidelines and procedures for conducting the {open_quotes}Free Drop Test{close_quotes} procedure for the SPM-1 package.

  13. Tank characterization report for single-shell tak 241-C-112. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Simpson, B.C.

    1997-06-11

    One major function of the Tank Waste Remediation System (IWRS) is to characterize wastes in support of waste management and disposal activities at the Hanford Site. Analytical data from sampling and analysis and other available information about a tank are compiled and maintained in a tank characterization report (CR). This report and its appendixes serve as the CR for single-shell tank 24 1 -C- 1 12. The objectives of this report are: 1) to use characterization data in response to technical issues associated with tank 24 1 -C- 1 12 waste, and 2) to provide a standard characterization of this waste in terms of a best-basis inventory estimate. Section 2.0 summarizes the response to technical issues, Section 3.0 shows the best-basis inventory estimate, and Section 4.0 makes recommendations regarding safety status and additional sampling needs. The appendixes contain supporting data and information. This report supports the requirements of the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, Milestone M-44-05 (Ecology et al. 1996).

  14. Hanford Waste Vitrification Plant Quality Assurance Program description: Overview and applications. Revision 3, Part 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-08-01

    This document (Parts 1 and 2) describes the requirements that must be implemented during the design and construction phases for the Hanford Waste Vitrification Plant Project Quality Assurance Program. This program is being implemented to ensure the acceptability of high-level radioactive canistered waste forms produced by the Hanford Waste Vitrification Plant for disposal in a licensed federal repository.

  15. Savannah River Site Environmental Monitoring Plan. Volume 1, Section 1000 Addendum: Revision 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jannik, G.T.

    1994-10-01

    This document -- the Savannah River Site Environmental Monitoring Plan (SRS EM Plan) -- has been prepared according to guidance contained in the DOE 5400 Series orders, in 10 CFR 834, and in DOE/EH-0173T, Environmental Regulatory Guide for Radiological Effluent Monitoring and environmental Surveillance [DOE, 1991]. The SRS EM Plan`s purpose is to define the criteria, regulations, and guideline requirements with which SRS will comply. These criteria and requirements are applicable to environmental monitoring activities performed in support of the SRS Environmental Monitoring Program (SRS EM Program), WSRC-3Q1-2, Volume 1, Section 1100. They are not applicable to monitoring activities utilized exclusively for process monitoring/control. The environmental monitoring program requirements documented in the SRS EM Plan incorporate all applicable should requirements of DOE/EH-0173T and expand upon them to include nonradiological environmental monitoring program requirements.

  16. Facility effluent monitoring plan for 242-A Evaporator facility. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Crummel, G.M.; Gustavson, R.D.

    1993-03-01

    A facility effluent monitoring plan is required by the US Department of Energy in DOE Order 5400.1* for any operations that involve hazardous materials and radioactive substances that could affect employee or public safety or the environment. A facility effluent monitoring plan determination was performed during Calendar Year 1991 and the evaluation showed the need for a facility effluent monitoring plan. This document is prepared using the specific guidelines identified in A Guide for Preparing Hanford Site Facility effluent Monitoring Plans, WHC-EP-0438-1**. This facility effluent monitoring plan assesses effluent monitoring systems and evaluates whether they are adequate to ensure the public health and safety as specified in applicable federal, state, and local requirements.

  17. Quality assurance plan for the Basic Environmental Compliance and Monitoring Program (BECAMP). Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Essington, E.H.

    1993-11-01

    This quality assurance plan (QAP) is designed ensure that the methodologies and the data used for environmental cleanup and treatment studies at the Nevada Test Site are both usable and defensible. The QAP serves two purposes in this regard: (1) to guide the preparation of procedures for carrying out the tasks of the Basic Environmental compliance and Monitoring program (BECAMP); and (2) to help management track the progress of those tasks.

  18. Supplemental design requirements document, Multifunction Waste Tank Facility, Project W-236A. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Groth, B.D.

    1995-01-11

    The Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility (MWTF) consists of four, nominal 1 million gallon, underground double-shell tanks, located in the 200-East area, and two tanks of the same capacity in the 200-West area. MWTF will provide environmentally safe storage capacity for wastes generated during remediation/retrieval activities of existing waste storage tanks. This document delineates in detail the information to be used for effective implementation of the Functional Design Criteria requirements.

  19. Sampling and analysis plan for Mount Plant D & D soils packages, Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1991-02-01

    There are currently 682 containers of soils in storage at Mound Plant, generated between April 1 and October 31, 1990 as a result of excavation of soils containing plutonium-238 at two ongoing Decontamination and Decommissioning (D&D) Program sites. These areas are known as Area 14, the waste transfer system (WTS) hillside, and Area 17, the Special Metallurgical (SM) Building area. The soils from these areas are part of Mound Plant waste stream number AMDM-000000010, Contaminated Soil, and are proposed for shipment to the Nevada Test Site (NTS) for disposal as low-level radioactive waste. The sealed waste packages, constructed of either wood or metal, are currently being stored in Building 31 and at other locations throughout the Mound facility. At a meeting in Las Vegas, Nevada on October, 26, 1990, DOE Nevada Operations Office (DOE-NV) and NTS representatives requested that the Mound Plant D&D soils proposed for shipment to NTS be sampled for Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) constituents. On December 14, 1990, DOE-NV also requested that additional analyses be performed on the soils from one of the soils boxes for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), particle size distribution, and free liquids. The purpose of this plan is to document the proposed sampling and analyses of the packages of D&D soils produced prior to October 31, 1990. In order to provide a thorough description of the soils excavated from the WTS and SM areas, sections 1.1 and 1.2 provide historical Information concerning the D&D soils, including waste stream evaluations and past sampling data.

  20. Technical assessment of workplace air sampling requirements at tank farm facilities. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Olsen, P.A.

    1994-09-21

    WHC-CM-1-6 is the primary guidance for radiological control at Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC). It was written to implement DOE N 5480.6 ``US Department of Energy Radiological Control Manual`` as it applies to programs at Hanford which are now overseen by WHC. As such, it complies with Title 10, Part 835 of the Code of Federal Regulations. In addition to WHC-CM-1-6, there is HSRCM-1, the ``Hanford Site Radiological Control Manual`` and several Department of Energy (DOE) Orders, national consensus standards, and reports that provide criteria, standards, and requirements for workplace air sampling programs. This document provides a summary of these, as they apply to WHC facility workplace air sampling programs. This document also provides an evaluation of the compliance of Tank Farms` workplace air sampling program to the criteria, standards, and requirements and documents compliance with the requirements where appropriate. Where necessary, it also indicates changes needed to bring specific locations into compliance.

  1. Technology development in support of the TWRS process flowsheet. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Washenfelder, D.J.

    1995-10-11

    The Tank Waste Remediation System is to treat and dispose of Hanford`s Single-Shell and Double-Shell Tank Waste. The TWRS Process Flowsheet, (WHC-SD-WM-TI-613 Rev. 1) described a flowsheet based on a large number of assumptions and engineering judgements that require verification or further definition through process and technology development activities. This document takes off from the TWRS Process Flowsheet to identify and prioritize tasks that should be completed to strengthen the technical foundation for the flowsheet.

  2. Volume generation of negative ions in high density hydrogen discharges. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hiskes, J.R.; Karo, A.M.

    1983-11-11

    An optimized tandem two-chamber negative-ion source system is discussed. In the first chamber high energy (E > 20 eV) electron collisions provide for H/sub 2/ vibrational excitation, while in the second chamber negative ions are formed by dissociative attachment. The gas density, electron density, and system scale length are varied as independent parameters. The extracted negative ion current density passes through a maximum as electron and gas densities are varied. This maximum scales inversely with system scale length, R. The optimum extracted current densities occur for electron densities near nR = 10/sup 13/ electrons cm/sup -2/ and for gas densities, N/sub 2/R, in the range 10/sup 14/ to 10/sup 15/ molecules cm/sup -2/. The extracted current densities are sensitive to the atomic concentration in the discharge. The atomic concentration is parametrized by the wall recombination coefficient, ..gamma.., and scale length, R. As ..gamma.. ranges from 0.1 to 1.0 and for system scale lengths of one centimeter, extracted current densities range from 8.0 to 80. mA cm/sup -2/.

  3. Safety equipment list for 241-C-106 waste retrieval, Project W-320: Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Conner, J.C.

    1994-11-15

    The goals of the C-106 sluicing operation are: (1) to stabilize the tank by reducing the heat load in the tank to less than 42 MJ/hr (40,000 Btu/hour), and (2) to initiate demonstration of single-shell tank (SST) retrieval technology. The purpose of this supporting document (SD) is as follows: (1) to provide safety classifications for items (systems, structures, equipment, components, or parts) for the waste retrieval sluicing system (WRSS), and (2) to document and methodology used to develop safety classifications. Appropriate references are made with regard to use of existing systems, structures, equipments, components, and parts for C-106 single-shell transfer tank located in the C Tank Farm, and 241-AY-102 (AY-102) double shell receiver tanks (DST) located in the Aging Waste Facility (AWF). The Waste Retrieval Sluicing System consists of two transfer lines that would connect the two tanks, one to carry the sluiced waste slurry to AY-102, and the other to return the supernatant liquid to C-106. The supernatant, or alternate fluid, will be used to mobilize waste in C-106 for the sluicing process. The equipment necessary for the WRSS include pumps in each tank, sluicers to direct the supernatant stream in C-106, a slurry distributor in AY-102, HVAC for C-106, instrumentation and control devices, and other existing components as required.

  4. UMTRA Surface Project management action process document. Final report: Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-04-01

    A critical mission of the US Department of Energy (DOE) is the planning, implementation, and completion of environmental restoration (ER) programs at facilities that were operated by or in support of the former Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) from the late 1940s into the 1970s. Among these facilities are the 24 former uranium mill sites designed in the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) of 1978 (42 USC {section} 7901 et seq.) Title 1 of the UMTRCA authorized the DOE to undertake remedial actions at these designated sites and associated vicinity properties (VP), which contain uranium mill tailings and other residual radioactive materials (RRM) derived from the processing sites. Title 2 of the UMTRCA addresses uranium mill sites that were licensed at the time the UMTRCA was enacted. Cleanup of these Title 2 sites is the responsibility of the licensees. The cleanup of the Title 1 sites has been split into two separate projects: the Surface Project, which deals with the mill buildings, tailings, and contaminated soils at the sites and VPs; and the Ground Water Project, which is limited to the contaminated ground water at the sites. This management action process (MAP) document discusses the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Surface Project only; a separate MAP document has been prepared for the UMTRA Ground Water Project.

  5. Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Associated-dissolved natural gas proved reserves, reserves changes, and production, wet after lease separation, 2014 billion cubic feet Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries Estimated Proved Reserves Adjustments Increases Decreases Sales Acquisitions Extensions Discoveries in Old Fields Production Reserves State and Subdivision 12/31/13 (+,-) (+) (-) (-) (+) (+) (+) (+) (-) 12/31/14 Alaska 6,428 -1 179 553 167 161 8 0 0 204 5,851 Lower 48 States 52,062 1,397

  6. Uranium hexafluoride packaging tiedown systems overview at Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Piketon, Ohio. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Becker, D.L.; Green, D.J.; Lindquist, M.R.

    1993-07-01

    The Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant (PORTS) in Piketon, Ohio, is operated by Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., through the US Department of Energy-Oak Ridge Operations Office (DOE-ORO) for the US Department of Energy-Headquarters, Office of Nuclear Energy. The PORTS conducts those operations that are necessary for the production, packaging, and shipment of uranium hexafluoride (UF{sub 6}). Uranium hexafluoride enriched uranium than 1.0 wt percent {sup 235}U shall be packaged in accordance with the US Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations of Title 49 CFR Parts 173 (Reference 1) and 178 (Reference 2), or in US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) or US Department of Energy (DOE) certified package designs. Concerns have been expressed regarding the various tiedown methods and condition of the trailers being used by some shippers/carriers for international transport of the UF{sub 6} cylinders/overpacks. Because of the concerns about international shipments, the US Department of Energy-Headquarters (DOE-HQ) Office of Nuclear Energy, through DOE-HQ Transportation Management Division, requested Westinghouse Hanford Company (Westinghouse Hanford) to review UF{sub 6} packaging tiedown and shipping practices used by PORTS, and where possible and appropriate, provide recommendations for enhancing these practices. Consequently, a team of two individuals from Westinghouse Hanford visited PORTS on March 5 and 6, 1990, for the purpose of conducting this review. The paper provides a brief discussion of the review activities and a summary of the resulting findings and recommendations. A detailed reporting of the is documented in Reference 4.

  7. Waste analysis plan for confirmation or completion of Tank Farms backlog waste designation. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-10-01

    On January 23, 1992, waste management problems in the Tank Farms were acknowledged through an Unusual Occurrence (UO) Report No. RL-WHC-TANKFARM-19920007 (DOE-RL 1992). On March 10, 1993, the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) issued Order 93NM-201 (Order) to the US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL) and the Westinghouse Hanford Company (Westinghouse Hanford) asserting that ``DOE-RL and Westinghouse Hanford have failed to designate approximately 2,000 containers of solid waste in violation of WAC 173-303170(l)(a) and the procedures of WAC 173-303-070`` (Ecology 1993). On June 30, 1993, a Settlement Agreement and Order Thereon (Settlement Agreement) among Ecology, DOE-RL, and Westinghouse Hanford was approved by the Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB). Item 3 of the Settlement Agreement requires that DOE-RL and Westinghouse Hanford submit a waste analysis plan (WAP) for the waste subject to the Order by September 1, 1993 (PCHB 1993). This WAP satisfies the requirements of Item 3 of the Order as amended per the Settlement Agreement. Item 3 states: ``Within forty (40) calendar days of receipt of this Order, DOE-RL and WHC provide Ecology with a waste analysis plan for review and approval detailing the established criteria and procedures for waste inspection, segregation, sampling, designation, and repackaging of all containers reported in item No. 1. The report shall include sampling plan criteria for different contaminated media, i.e., soils, compactable waste, high-efficiency particular air (HEPA) filters, etc., and a schedule for completing the work within the time allowed under this Order.``

  8. Environmental assessment of remedial action at the Naturita Uranium processing site near Naturita, Colorado. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-08-01

    The proposed remedial action for the Naturita processing site is relocation of the contaminated materials and debris to the Dry Flats disposal site, 6 road miles (mi) [ 1 0 kilometers (km)] to the southeast. At the disposal site, the contaminated materials would be stabilized and covered with layers of earth and rock. The proposed disposal site is on land administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and used primarily for livestock grazing. The final disposal site would cover approximately 57 ac (23 ha), which would be permanently transferred from the BLM to the DOE and restricted from future uses. The remedial action activities would be conducted by the DOE`s Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project. The remedial action would result in the loss of approximately 164 ac (66 ha) of soils, but 132 ac (53 ha) of these soils are contaminated and cannot be used for other purposes. Another 154 ac (62 ha) of soils would be temporarily disturbed. Approximately 57 ac (23 ha) of open range land would be permanently removed from livestock grazing and wildlife use. The removal of the contaminated materials would affect the 1 00-year floodplain of the San Miguel River and would result in the loss of riparian habitat along the river. The southwestern willow flycatcher, a Federal candidate species, may be affected by the remedial action, and the use of water from the San Miguel River ``may affect`` the Colorado squawfish, humpback chub, bonytail chub, and razorback sucker. Traffic levels on State Highways 90 and 141 would be increased during the remedial action, as would the noise levels along these transportation routes. Measures for mitigating the adverse environmental impacts of the proposed remedial action are discussed in Section 6.0 of this environmental assessment (EA).

  9. FY 93 thermal loading systems study final report: Volume 2. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1994-08-29

    The ability to meet the overall performance requirements for the proposed Mined Geology Disposal System at Yucca Mountain, Nevada requires the two major subsystem (natural barriers and engineered barriers) to positively contribute to containment and radionuclide isolation. In addition to the postclosure performance the proposed repository must meet preclosure requirements of safety, retrievability, and operability. Cost and schedule were also considered. The thermal loading strategy chosen may significantly affect both the postclosure and preclosure performance of the proposed repository. Although the current Site Characterization Plan reference case is 57 kilowatts (kW)/acre, other thermal loading strategies (different areal mass loadings) have been proposed which possess both advantages and disadvantages. The objectives of the FY 1993 Thermal Loading Study were to (1) place bounds on the thermal loading which would establish the loading regime that is ``too hot`` and the loading regime that is ``too cold``, to (2) ``grade`` or evaluate the performance, as a function of thermal loading, of the repository to contain high level wastes against performance criteria and to (3) evaluate the performance of the various options with respect to cost, safety, and operability. Additionally, the effort was to (4) identify important uncertainties that need to be resolved by tests and/or analyses in order to complete a performance assessment on the effects of thermal loading. The FY 1993 Thermal Loading Study was conducted from December 1, 1992 to December 30, 1993 and this final report provides the findings of the study. Volume 2 consists of 10 appendices which contain the following: Waste Stream Analysis; Waste Package Design Inputs; Subsurface Design Inputs; Thermal-Hydrologic Model Inputs; Near-Field Calculations; Far-Field; Reliability of Electronics as a Function of Temperature; Cost Analysis Details; Geochemistry; and Areas of Uncertainty in Thermal Loading.

  10. 3718-F Alkali Metal Treatment and Storage Facility Closure Plan. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1992-11-01

    The Hanford Site, located northwest of the city of Richland, Washington, houses reactors, chemical-separation systems, and related facilities used for the production of special nuclear materials, as well as for activities associated with nuclear energy development. The 300 Area of the Hanford Site contains reactor fuel manufacturing facilities and several research and development laboratories. The 3718-F Alkali Metal Treatment and Storage Facility (3718-F Facility), located in the 300 Area, was used to store and treat alkali metal wastes. Therefore, it is subject to the regulatory requirements for the storage and treatment of dangerous wastes. Closure will be conducted pursuant to the requirements of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-303-610 (Ecology 1989) and 40 CFR 270.1. Closure also will satisfy the thermal treatment facility closure requirements of 40 CFR 265.381. This closure plan presents a description of the 3718-F Facility, the history of wastes managed, and the approach that will be followed to close the facility. Only hazardous constituents derived from 3718-F Facility operations will be addressed.

  11. Information management fiscal year 1996 site support program plan, WBS 6.4. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-09-01

    In the recent past, information resource management (IRM) was a neatly separable component of the overall DOE mission, concerned primarily with procuring and implementing automatic data processing (ADP) systems. As the DOE missions have shifted from producing product to managing processes, those clear lines have blurred. Today, IRM is firmly embedded in all aspects of the DOE mission. BCS Richland, Inc., (BCSR) provides IRM for the Hanford Site. The main focus in executing this mission is to meet customer goals by providing high-quality, timely, and cost-effective electronic communication, computing, and information services. Information resources provide the US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office (RL) and the Hanford Site contractors the ability to generate, store, access, and communicate information quickly, reliably, and cost effectively. BCSR plans, implements, and operates electronic communication, computing and information management systems that enable effective operation of the Hanford Site. Five strategic initiatives to encompass the vision provide guidance and focus to the information technology (IT) direction for developing the BCSR program plan. These strategic initiatives are the program vision and are as follows: primary focus; fast response; accessible information; world class information management infrastructure; powerful desktop. The business directions that guide the development of the BCSR Program Plan are: (1) emphasize providing cost-effective and value-added communication, computing, and information systems products and services to the Site missions; (2) strengthen the alignment of products and services with Site projects and programs and eliminate duplications Sitewide; (3) focus on the effective resolution of critical Site information management (IM) issues.

  12. "INDEPENDENT CONFIRMATORY SURVEY SUMMARY AND RESULTS FOR THE FORD NUCLEAR REACTOR, REVISION 1, ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    ALTIC, NICK A

    2013-08-01

    At the NRC?s request, ORAU conducted confirmatory surveys of the FNR during the period of December 4 through 6, 2012. The survey activities included visual inspections and measurement and sampling activities. Confirmatory activities also included the review and assessment of UM?s project documentation and methodologies. Surface scans identified elevated activity in two areas. The first area was on a wall outside of Room 3103 and the second area was in the southwest section on the first floor. The first area was remediated to background levels. However, the second area was due to gamma shine from a neighboring source storage area. A retrospective analysis of UM?s FSS data shows that for the SUs investigated by the ORAU survey team, UM met the survey requirements set forth in the FSSP. The total mean surface activity values were directly compared with the mean total surface activity reported by UM. Mean surface activity values determined by UM were within two standard deviations of the mean determined by ORAU. Additionally, all surface activity values were less than the corresponding gross beta DCGL{sub W}. Laboratory analysis of the soil showed that COC concentrations were less than the respective DCGL{sub W} values. For the inter-lab comparison, the DER was above 3 for only one sample. However, since the sum of fractions for each of the soil samples was below 1, thus none of the samples would fail to meet release guidelines. Based on the findings of the side-by-side direct measurements, and after discussion with the NRC and ORAU, UM decided to use a more appropriate source efficiency in their direct measurement calculations and changed their source efficiency from 0.37 to 0.25.

  13. External Peer Review Team Report Underground Testing Area Subproject for Frenchman Flat, Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sam Marutzky

    2010-09-01

    An external peer review was conducted to review the groundwater models used in the corrective action investigation stage of the Underground Test Area (UGTA) subproject to forecast zones of potential contamination in 1,000 years for the Frenchman Flat area. The goal of the external peer review was to provide technical evaluation of the studies and to assist in assessing the readiness of the UGTA subproject to progress to monitoring activities for further model evaluation. The external peer review team consisted of six independent technical experts with expertise in geology, hydrogeology,'''groundwater modeling, and radiochemistry. The peer review team was tasked with addressing the following questions: 1. Are the modeling approaches, assumptions, and model results for Frenchman Flat consistent with the use of modeling studies as a decision tool for resolution of environmental and regulatory requirements? 2. Do the modeling results adequately account for uncertainty in models of flow and transport in the Frenchman Flat hydrological setting? a. Are the models of sufficient scale/resolution to adequately predict contaminant transport in the Frenchman Flat setting? b. Have all key processes been included in the model? c. Are the methods used to forecast contaminant boundaries from the transport modeling studies reasonable and appropriate? d. Are the assessments of uncertainty technically sound and consistent with state-of-the-art approaches currently used in the hydrological sciences? 3. Are the datasets and modeling results adequate for a transition to Corrective Action Unit monitoring studies—the next stage in the UGTA strategy for Frenchman Flat? The peer review team is of the opinion that, with some limitations, the modeling approaches, assumptions, and model results are consistent with the use of modeling studies for resolution of environmental and regulatory requirements. The peer review team further finds that the modeling studies have accounted for uncertainty

  14. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE Order 227.1, Independent Oversight Program, 08-03-11

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2014-06-27

    This directive is proposed for revision to reflect the establishment of the Office of Enterprise Assessments (EA) by Secretary Moniz in May 2014, and the Secretary's expectations for the enterprise-wide internal management assessment function performed by EA as articulated in his June 27, 2014, memorandum to all Departmental Elements.

  15. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 227.1, Independent Oversight Program, 08-30-11

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    This directive is proposed for revision to reflect the establishment of the Office of Enterprise Assessments (EA) by Secretary Moniz in May 2014, and the Secretary's expectations for the enterprise-wide internal management assessment function performed by EA as articulated in his June 27, 2014, memorandum to all Departmental Elements.

  16. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy Order 460.1C, Packaging and Transportation Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2015-01-15

    The purpose of this memorandum is to provide justification for the proposed revision of Department of Energy (DOE} Order (O} 460.lC, Packaging and Transportation Safety as part of the quadrennial review and recertification required by DOE O 251.lC, Departmental Directives Program.

  17. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE G 414.1-1B, Management and Independent Assessments Guide for Use with 10 CFR, Part 830, Subpart A, and DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance; DOE M 450.4-1, Integrated Safety Management System Manual; and DOE O 226.1A

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2013-04-18

    This memorandum provides justification for revising DOE G 414.1-1B, Management and Independent Assessments Guide for Use With 10 CFR, Part 830, Subpart A, and DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance; DOE M 450.4-1, Integrated Safety Management System Manual; and DOE O 226.1A, Implementation of Department of Energy Oversight Policy.

  18. Heating Oil and Propane Update - Revision report

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Revision reports Revision report 2015-2016 Revision report 2014-2015

  19. Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Lease condensate proved reserves, reserves changes, and production, 2014 million barrels Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries Estimated Proved Reserves Adjustments Increases Decreases Sales Acquisitions Extensions Discoveries in Old Fields Production Reserves State and Subdivision 12/31/13 (+,-) (+) (-) (-) (+) (+) (+) (+) (-) 12/31/14 Alaska 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 Lower 48 States 3,149 -76 712 618 318 407 591 13 12 326 3,546 Alabama 14 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 13

  20. SCALE: A modular code system for performing standardized computer analyses for licensing evaluation. Functional modules F1--F8 -- Volume 2, Part 1, Revision 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Greene, N.M.; Petrie, L.M.; Westfall, R.M.; Bucholz, J.A.; Hermann, O.W.; Fraley, S.K.

    1995-04-01

    SCALE--a modular code system for Standardized Computer Analyses Licensing Evaluation--has been developed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory at the request of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The SCALE system utilizes well-established computer codes and methods within standard analysis sequences that (1) allow an input format designed for the occasional user and/or novice, (2) automate the data processing and coupling between modules, and (3) provide accurate and reliable results. System development has been directed at problem-dependent cross-section processing and analysis of criticality safety, shielding, heat transfer, and depletion/decay problems. Since the initial release of SCALE in 1980, the code system has been heavily used for evaluation of nuclear fuel facility and package designs. This revision documents Version 4.2 of the system. The manual is divided into three volumes: Volume 1--for the control module documentation; Volume 2--for functional module documentation; and Volume 3--for documentation of the data libraries and subroutine libraries.

  1. Evaluation of severe accident risks: Methodology for the containment, source term, consequence, and risk integration analyses; Volume 1, Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gorham, E.D.; Breeding, R.J.; Brown, T.D.; Harper, F.T.; Helton, J.C.; Murfin, W.B.; Hora, S.C.

    1993-12-01

    NUREG-1150 examines the risk to the public from five nuclear power plants. The NUREG-1150 plant studies are Level III probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) and, as such, they consist of four analysis components: accident frequency analysis, accident progression analysis, source term analysis, and consequence analysis. This volume summarizes the methods utilized in performing the last three components and the assembly of these analyses into an overall risk assessment. The NUREG-1150 analysis approach is based on the following ideas: (1) general and relatively fast-running models for the individual analysis components, (2) well-defined interfaces between the individual analysis components, (3) use of Monte Carlo techniques together with an efficient sampling procedure to propagate uncertainties, (4) use of expert panels to develop distributions for important phenomenological issues, and (5) automation of the overall analysis. Many features of the new analysis procedures were adopted to facilitate a comprehensive treatment of uncertainty in the complete risk analysis. Uncertainties in the accident frequency, accident progression and source term analyses were included in the overall uncertainty assessment. The uncertainties in the consequence analysis were not included in this assessment. A large effort was devoted to the development of procedures for obtaining expert opinion and the execution of these procedures to quantify parameters and phenomena for which there is large uncertainty and divergent opinions in the reactor safety community.

  2. Acquisition Letter 09 - Revision of Department of Energy (DOE...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    9 - Revision of Department of Energy (DOE) Order 350.1 and Special H Clause Acquisition Letter 09 - Revision of Department of Energy (DOE) Order 350.1 and Special H Clause The ...

  3. Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Coalbed methane proved reserves, reserves changes, and production, 2014 billion cubic feet Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries Estimated Proved Reserves Adjustments Increases Decreases Sales Acquisitions Extensions Discoveries in Old Fields Production Reserves State and Subdivision 12/31/13 (+,-) (+) (-) (-) (+) (+) (+) (+) (-) 12/31/14 Alaska 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lower 48 States 12,392 1,796 3,299 1,020 442 680 395 0 0 1,404 15,696 Alabama 413 641 42 40 0 0 0

  4. Hanford Site Environmental Restoration Program 1994 fiscal year work plan. Work breakdown structure 2.0: Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-12-22

    Site Management System (SMS) guidance requires a Fiscal Year Work Plan (FYWP) to be prepared for the Environmental Restoration (ER) Mission Area and all related programs. This revision is a complete update to cover the FY 1994 time period. This document describes the overall ER Missions Area and provides FYWP appendices for each of the following five program areas: Remedial Action (RA); Decontamination and Decommissioning (D&D); Project Management and Support (PM&S); Surveillance and Maintenance (S&M); and Disposal Facilities (DF).

  5. RELAP5/MOD3 code manual: Summaries and reviews of independent code assessment reports. Volume 7, Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Moore, R.L.; Sloan, S.M.; Schultz, R.R.; Wilson, G.E.

    1996-10-01

    Summaries of RELAP5/MOD3 code assessments, a listing of the assessment matrix, and a chronology of the various versions of the code are given. Results from these code assessments have been used to formulate a compilation of some of the strengths and weaknesses of the code. These results are documented in the report. Volume 7 was designed to be updated periodically and to include the results of the latest code assessments as they become available. Consequently, users of Volume 7 should ensure that they have the latest revision available.

  6. Definitive design report: Design report project W-025, Radioactive Mixed Waste (RMW) Land Disposal Facility NON-DRAG-OFF. Revision 1, Volume 1 and 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Roscha, V.

    1994-11-29

    The purpose of this report is to describe the definitive design of the Radioactive Mixed Waste (RMW) Non-Drag-Off disposal facility, Project W-025. This report presents a n of the major landfill design features and a discussion of how each of the criteria is addressed in the design. The appendices include laboratory test results, design drawings, and individual analyses that were conducted in support of the design. Revision 1 of this document incorporates design changes resulting from an increase in the required operating life of the W-025 landfill from 2 to 20 years. The rationale for these design changes is described in Golder Associates Inc. 1991a. These changes include (1) adding a 1.5-foot-thick layer of compacted admix directory-under the primary FML on the floor of the landfill to mitigate the effects of possible stress cracking in the primary flexible membrane liner (FML), and (2) increasing the operations layer thickness from two to three feet over the entire landfill area, to provide additional protection for the secondary admix layer against mechanical damage and the effects of freezing and desiccation. The design of the W-025 Landfill has also been modified in response to the results of the EPA Method 9090 chemical compatibility testing program (Golder Associates Inc. 1991b and 1991c), which was completed after the original design was prepared. This program consisted of testing geosynthetic materials and soil/bentonite admix with synthetic leachate having the composition expected during the life of the W-025 Landfill., The results of this program indicated that the polyester geotextile originally specified for the landfill might be susceptible to deterioration. On this basis, polypropylene geotextiles were substituted as a more chemically-resistant alternative. In addition, the percentage of bentonite in the admix was increased to provide sufficiently low permeability to the expected leachate.

  7. Outcomes of Patients With Revised Stage I Clear Cell Sarcoma of Kidney Treated in National Wilms Tumor Studies 1-5

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kalapurakal, John A., E-mail: j-kalapurakal@northwestern.edu [Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois (United States); Perlman, Elizabeth J. [Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois (United States)] [Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois (United States); Seibel, Nita L. [Cancer Therapy and Evaluation Program, Bethesda, Maryland (United States)] [Cancer Therapy and Evaluation Program, Bethesda, Maryland (United States); Ritchey, Michael [Phoenix Children's Hospital, Phoenix, Arizona (United States)] [Phoenix Children's Hospital, Phoenix, Arizona (United States); Dome, Jeffrey S. [Children's National Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia (United States)] [Children's National Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia (United States); Grundy, Paul E. [University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB (Canada)] [University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB (Canada)

    2013-02-01

    Purpose: To report the clinical outcomes of children with revised stage I clear cell sarcoma of the kidney (CCSK) using the National Wilms Tumor Study Group (NWTS)-5 staging criteria after multimodality treatment on NWTS 1-5 protocols. Methods and Materials: All CCSK patients enrolled in the National Wilms Tumor Study Group protocols had their pathology slides reviewed, and only those determined to have revised stage I tumors according to the NWTS-5 staging criteria were included in the present analysis. All patients were treated with multimodality therapy according to the NWTS 1-5 protocols. Results: A total of 53 children were identified as having stage I CCSK. All patients underwent primary surgery with radical nephrectomy. The chemotherapy regimens used were as follows: regimen A, C, F, or EE in 4 children (8%); regimen DD or DD4A in 33 children (62%); regimen J in 4 children (8%); and regimen I in 12 children (22%). Forty-six patients (87%) received flank radiation therapy (RT). Seven children (13%) did not receive flank RT. The median delay between surgery and the initiation of RT was 9 days (range, 3-61). The median RT dose was 10.8 Gy (range, 10-36). The flank RT doses were as follows: 10.5 or 10.8 Gy in 25 patients (47%), 11-19.9 Gy in 2 patients (4%), 20-29.9 Gy in 9 patients (17%), and 30-40 Gy in 10 patients (19%). The median follow-up for the entire group was 17 years (range, 2-36). The relapse-free and cancer-specific survival rate was 100% at the last follow-up examination. Conclusions: The present results have demonstrated that children with revised stage I CCSK using the NWTS-5 staging criteria have excellent survival rates despite the use of varying RT doses and chemotherapy regimens in the NWTS 1-5 protocols.

  8. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    41 1956KO1A Koudijs, Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. of Utrecht (1956) 1956MA18 H. Mark and C. Goodman, Phys. Rev. 101 (1956) 768 1956NA1B Naggiar, Roclawski-Conjeaud, Szteinsznaider and...

  9. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    62 1957GR1D Groshev and Demidov, Sov. J. At. Energy 3 (1957) 853 1957HA1K S.S. Hanna and L. Meyer-Schutzmeister, Phys. Rev. 108 (1957) 1644 1957HE1C Hebbard, Ph.D.Thesis, Univ. of...

  10. EM Quality Assurance Program (EM-QA-001 Revision 0)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Previous revision of the Environmental Management Quality Assurance Program. The program is the EM management system to ensure we"do work correctly." This document has been superseded by Revision 1...

  11. Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Crude oil and lease condensate proved reserves, reserves changes, and production, 2014 million barrels Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries Estimated Proved Reserves Adjustments Increases Decreases Sales Acquisitions Extensions Discoveries in Old Fields Production Reserves State and Subdivision 12/31/13 (+,-) (+) (-) (-) (+) (+) (+) (+) (-) 12/31/14 Alaska 2,898 1 239 196 125 187 35 0 0 182 2,857 Lower 48 States 33,622 439 5,789 5,416 2,350 2,641 4,986 164 219

  12. Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Crude oil proved reserves, reserves changes, and production, 2014 million barrels Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries Estimated Proved Reserves Adjustments Increases Decreases Sales Acquisitions Extensions Discoveries in Old Fields Production Reserves State and Subdivision 12/31/13 (+,-) (+) (-) (-) (+) (+) (+) (+) (-) 12/31/14 Alaska 2,898 1 238 196 125 186 35 0 0 182 2,855 Lower 48 States 30,473 515 5,077 4,798 2,032 2,234 4,395 151 207 2,692 33,530 Alabama

  13. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 475.2A, Identifying Classified Information

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2014-03-06

    The revision will incorporate changes that were identified during the 1-year review after initial issuance

  14. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    1 March 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 13 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 13-15 was published in Nuclear Physics A449 (1986), p. 1. This version of A = 13 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  15. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    1 November 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 16 F. Ajzenberg-Selove a and T. Lauritsen b a University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 b California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-24 was published in Nuclear Physics 11 (1959), p. 1. This version of A = 16 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors dis- covered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted

  16. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    1 March 2016 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 18 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 18-20 was published in Nuclear Physics A190 (1972), p. 1. This version of A = 18 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  17. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    1 April 2016 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 19 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 18-20 was published in Nuclear Physics A300 (1978), p. 1. This version of A = 19 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  18. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    UNAM 5 (1982) 1 1982DO01 K.G.R. Doss, P.D. Barnes, N. Colella, S.A. Dytman, R.A. Eisenstein, C. Ellegaard, F. Takeutchi, W.R. Wharton, J.F. Amann, R.H. Pehl et al, Phys. Rev....

  19. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    See also (1986GU1D, 1986PO13) and (1983ANZQ, 1985PO10; theor.). 19 C (Fig. 8) 19 C has been observed in the 0.8 GeV proton bombardment of thorium (1986VI09) and in the ...

  20. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    See also (1989PO1K, 1990LO11). 19 C (Fig. 4) 19 C has been observed in the 0.8 GeV proton bombardment of thorium (1986VI09, 1988WO09) and in the fragmentation of 66 MeVA argon ...

  1. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Rev. 82 (1951) 305, DA12 1951RO16 W.D. Roseborough, J.J.G. McCue, W.M. Preston and C. Goodman, Phys. Rev. 83 (1951) 1133 1951YA1A Yaffe and Stevens, Can. J. Phys. 29 (1951) 186;...

  2. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    8 November 2010 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 6 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A490 (1988), p. 1. This version of A = 6 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. The introduction and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the

  3. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    9 February 2011 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 9 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A490 (1988), p. 1. This version of A = 9 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. The introduction and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the

  4. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    31 October 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 10 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A413 (1984), p. 1. This version of A = 10 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and Introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Also, Reference key numbers have been changed to the

  5. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    30 October 2012 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 13 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 13-15 was published in Nuclear Physics A523 (1991), p. 1. This version of A = 13 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. The introduction and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the

  6. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    November 2012 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 15 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 13-15 was published in Nuclear Physics A523 (1991), p. 1. This version of A = 15 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. The introduction and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the

  7. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    9 November 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 18 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 18-20 was published in Nuclear Physics A392 (1983), p. 1. This version of A = 18 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Also, Reference key numbers have been changed to the

  8. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy Order 456.1, Admin Chg 1, The Safe Handling of Unbound Engineered Nanoparticles, dated February 14, 2013

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2013-02-14

    This order will be updated by comparing it to national/international consensus standards on nanomaterial safety that have been developed and revised since this order was last reviewed. Additionally, it will be reviewed by representatives of affected DOE elements to include consideration of the recommendations from the external review completed by the DOE Office of Inspector General audit report, "Follow-up Audit of Nanoscale Material Safety at the Department's Laboratories," [Draft, April 2015].

  9. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy Order 456.1, Admin Chg 1, The Safe Handling of Unbound Engineered Nanoparticles

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    This order will be updated by comparing it to national/international consensus standards on nanomaterial safety that have been developed and revised since this order was last reviewed. Additionally, it will be reviewed by representatives of affected DOE elements to include consideration of the recommendations from the external review completed by the DOE Office of Inspector General audit report, "Follow-up Audit of Nanoscale Material Safety at the Department's Laboratories," [Draft, April 2015].

  10. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy Order 426.2 Change 1, Personnel Selection, Training, Qualification and Certification Requirements for DOE Nuclear Facilities

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    The Office of Nuclear Safety consulted field and Headquarters (HQ) offices on whether or not a revision is warranted for DOE O 426.2. As a result, certain aspects of DOE O 426.2 were identified as needing clarification and revision. Based on this feedback, the revision is intended to clarify educational requirements, certification requirements, and applicability. Addressing these concerns should improve operating training programs, and result in less time focused on managing ambiguous or possibly unnecessary requirements.

  11. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy Order 426.2 Change 1, Personnel Selection, Training, Qualification and Certification Requirements for DOE Nuclear Facilities

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2015-02-19

    The Office of Nuclear Safety consulted field and Headquarters (HQ) offices on whether or not a revision is warranted for DOE O 426.2. As a result, certain aspects of DOE O 426.2 were identified as needing clarification and revision. Based on this feedback, the revision is intended to clarify educational requirements, certification requirements, and applicability. Addressing these concerns should improve operating training programs, and result in less time focused on managing ambiguous or possibly unnecessary requirements.

  12. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    August 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 5 T. Lauritsen a and F. Ajzenberg-Selove b a California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California b University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics 78 (1966), p. 1. This version of A = 5 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discov- ered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from

  13. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    4 January 2016 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 5 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A227 (1974), p. 1. This version of A = 5 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL format.

  14. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    0 September 2014 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 5 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A320 (1979), p. 1. This version of A = 5 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the TUNL/NNDC

  15. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    March 2010 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 5 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A490 (1988), p. 1. This version of A = 5 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. The introduction and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  16. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    2 September 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 6 F. Ajzenberg-Selove a and T. Lauritsen b a University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 b California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-24 was published in Nuclear Physics 11 (1959), p. 1. This version of A = 6 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discov- ered after the article went to press. Figures and Introductory tables have been omitted

  17. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    5 August 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 6 T. Lauritsen a and F. Ajzenberg-Selove b a California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California b University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics 78 (1966), p. 1. This version of A = 6 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discov- ered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from

  18. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    7 January 2016 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 6 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A227 (1974), p. 1. This version of A = 6 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the TUNL/NNDC format.

  19. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    5 September 2014 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 6 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A320 (1979), p. 1. This version of A = 6 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the TUNL/NNDC

  20. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    3 August 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 6 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A413 (1984), p. 1. This version of A = 6 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Also, Reference key numbers have been changed to the TUNL/NNDC

  1. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    5 September 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 7 F. Ajzenberg-Selove a and T. Lauritsen b a University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 b California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-24 was published in Nuclear Physics 11 (1959), p. 1. This version of A = 7 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discov- ered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted

  2. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    6 August 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 7 T. Lauritsen a and F. Ajzenberg-Selove b a California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California b University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics 78 (1966), p. 1. This version of A = 7 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discov- ered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from

  3. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    2 February 2016 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 7 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A227 (1974), p. 1. This version of A = 7 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the TUNL/NNDC

  4. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    7 September 2014 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 7 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A320 (1979), p. 1. This version of A = 7 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the TUNL/NNDC

  5. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    5 September 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 7 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A413 (1984), p. 1. This version of A = 7 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and Introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Also, Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  6. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    4 April 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 7 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A490 (1988), p. 1. This version of A = 7 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. The introduction and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  7. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    7 August 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 8 T. Lauritsen a and F. Ajzenberg-Selove b a California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California b University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics 78 (1966), p. 1. This version of A = 8 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors dis- covered after the article went to press. Figures and ntroductory tables have been omitted from

  8. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    0 February 2016 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 8 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A227 (1974), p. 1. This version of A = 8 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the TUNL/NNDC

  9. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    2 September 2014 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 8 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A320 (1979), p. 1. This version of A = 8 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the TUNL/NNDC

  10. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    3 September 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 8 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A413 (1984), p. 1. This version of A = 8 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and Introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Also, Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  11. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    January 2011 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 8 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A490 (1988), p. 1. This version of A = 8 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. The introduction and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  12. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    3 October 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 9 F. Ajzenberg-Selove a and T. Lauritsen b a University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 b California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-24 was published in Nuclear Physics 11 (1959), p. 1. This version of A = 9 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discov- ered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from

  13. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    2 September 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 9 T. Lauritsen a and F. Ajzenberg-Selove b a California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California b University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics 78 (1966), p. 1. This version of A = 9 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discov- ered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted

  14. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    22 February 2016 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 9 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A227 (1974), p. 1. This version of A = 9 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the TUNL/NNDC

  15. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    30 September 2014 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 9 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A320 (1979), p. 1. This version of A = 9 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the TUNL/NNDC

  16. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    5 October 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 9 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A413 (1984), p. 1. This version of A = 9 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and Introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Also, Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  17. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    3 October 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 10 F. Ajzenberg-Selove a and T. Lauritsen b a University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 b California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-24 was published in Nuclear Physics 11 (1959), p. 1. This version of A = 10 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors dis- covered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted

  18. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    15 September 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 10 T. Lauritsen a and F. Ajzenberg-Selove b a California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California b University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics 78 (1966), p. 1. This version of A = 10 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors dis- covered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted

  19. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    7 March 2016 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 10 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A227 (1974), p. 1. This version of A = 10 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the TUNL/NNDC format.

  20. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    6 October 2014 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 10 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A320 (1979), p. 1. This version of A = 10 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  1. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    9 May 2012 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 10 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A490 (1988), p. 1. This version of A = 10 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. The introduction and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  2. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    0 February 2009 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 11 F. Ajzenberg-Selove a and T. Lauritsen b a University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 b California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-24 was published in Nuclear Physics 11 (1959), p. 1. This version of A = 11 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors dis- covered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted

  3. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    05 February 2009 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 11 F. Ajzenberg-Selove a and T. Lauritsen b a University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 b California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California Abstract: An evaluation of A = 11-12 was published in Nuclear Physics A114 (1968), p. 1. This version of A = 11 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted

  4. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    6 October 2015 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 11 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 11-12 was published in Nuclear Physics A248 (1975), p. 1. This version of A = 11 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  5. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    31 July 2014 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 11 F. Ajzenberg-Selove and C.L. Busch University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 11-12 was published in Nuclear Physics A336 (1980), p. 1. This version of A = 11 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the

  6. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    5 May 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 11 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 11-12 was published in Nuclear Physics A433 (1985), p. 1. This version of A = 11 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL format.

  7. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    5 June 2012 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 11 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 11-12 was published in Nuclear Physics A506 (1990), p. 1. This version of A = 11 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers are in the NNDC/TUNL format. (References

  8. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    9 August, 2015 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 12 F. Ajzenberg-Selove a and T. Lauritsen b a University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 b California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-24 was published in Nuclear Physics 11 (1959), p. 1. This version of A = 12 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors dis- covered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted

  9. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    3 July 2015 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 12 F. Ajzenberg-Selove a and T. Lauritsen b a University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 b California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California Abstract: An evaluation of A = 11-12 was published in Nuclear Physics A114 (1968), p. 1. This version of A = 12 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from

  10. Revised Manuscript

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    4 February 2016 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 12 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 11-12 was published in Nuclear Physics A248 (1975), p. 1. This version of A = 12 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL