Sample records for disposal facility federal

  1. Integrated Disposal Facility Risk Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MANN, F. M.

    2003-06-03T23:59:59.000Z

    An environmental risk assessment associated with the disposal of projected Immobilized Low-Activity Waste, solid wastes and failed or decommissioned melters in an Integrated Disposal Facility was performed. Based on the analyses all performance objectives associated with the groundwater, air, and intruder pathways were met.

  2. Solid Waste Disposal Facilities (Massachusetts)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These sections articulate rules for the maintenance and operation of solid waste disposal facilities, as well as site assignment procedures. Applications for site assignment will be reviewed by the...

  3. Federal Facility Reporting and Data

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) provides information and tools to help agencies report annual energy and water consumption and resource management efforts within Federal facilities.

  4. Greening Federal Facilities: An Energy, Environmental, and Economic...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Greening Federal Facilities: An Energy, Environmental, and Economic Resource Guide for Federal Facility managers and Designers; Second Edition Greening Federal Facilities: An...

  5. Performance assessment for the class L-II disposal facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This draft radiological performance assessment (PA) for the proposed Class L-II Disposal Facility (CIIDF) on the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) has been prepared to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the US Department of Energy Order 5820.2A. This PA considers the disposal of low-level radioactive wastes (LLW) over the operating life of the facility and the long-term performance of the facility in providing protection to public health and the environment. The performance objectives contained in the order require that the facility be managed to accomplish the following: (1) Protect public health and safety in accordance with standards specified in environmental health orders and other DOE orders. (2) Ensure that external exposure to the waste and concentrations of radioactive material that may be released into surface water, groundwater, soil, plants, and animals results in an effective dose equivalent (EDE) that does not exceed 25 mrem/year to a member of the public. Releases to the atmosphere shall meet the requirements of 40 CFR Pt. 61. Reasonable effort should be made to maintain releases of radioactivity in effluents to the general environment as low as reasonably achievable. (1) Ensure that the committed EDEs received by individual who inadvertently may intrude into the facility after the loss of active institutional control (100 years) will not exceed 100 mrem/year for continuous exposure of 500 mrem for a single acute exposure. (4) Protect groundwater resources, consistent with federal, state, and local requirements.

  6. Composite analysis E-area vaults and saltstone disposal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cook, J.R.

    1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report documents the Composite Analysis (CA) performed on the two active Savannah River Site (SRS) low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal facilities. The facilities are the Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility and the E-Area Vaults (EAV) Disposal Facility. The analysis calculated potential releases to the environment from all sources of residual radioactive material expected to remain in the General Separations Area (GSA). The GSA is the central part of SRS and contains all of the waste disposal facilities, chemical separations facilities and associated high-level waste storage facilities as well as numerous other sources of radioactive material. The analysis considered 114 potential sources of radioactive material containing 115 radionuclides. The results of the CA clearly indicate that continued disposal of low-level waste in the saltstone and EAV facilities, consistent with their respective radiological performance assessments, will have no adverse impact on future members of the public.

  7. Addendum to the composite analysis for the E-Area Vaults and Saltstone Disposal Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cook, J.R.

    2000-03-13T23:59:59.000Z

    This report documents the composite analysis performed on the two active SRS low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities. The facilities are the Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility and the E-Area Vaults Disposal Facility.

  8. Toxic Substances Control Act Uranium Enrichment Federal Facility...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Toxic Substances Control Act Uranium Enrichment Federal Facility Compliance Agreement Toxic Substances Control Act Uranium Enrichment Federal Facility Compliance Agreement Toxic...

  9. Federal Finance Facilities Available for Energy Efficiency Upgrades...

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

    Federal Finance Facilities Available for Energy Efficiency Upgrades and Clean Energy Deployment Federal Finance Facilities Available for Energy Efficiency Upgrades and Clean Energy...

  10. FY 2006 ANNUAL REVIEW-SALTSTONE DISPOSAL FACILITY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Crapse, K; Benjamin Culbertson, B

    2007-03-15T23:59:59.000Z

    The Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF) consists of two disposal units, Vaults 1 and 4, described in the Performance Assessment (PA) (WSRC 1992). The FY06 PA Annual Review concludes that both vaults contain much lower levels of radionuclides (curies) than that allowed by the PA. The PA controls established to govern waste operations and monitor disposal facility performance are determined to be adequate.

  11. Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Regional Facility Act (Pennsylvania)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This act establishes a low-level radioactive waste disposal regional facility siting fund that requires nuclear power reactor constructors and operators to pay to the Department of Environmental...

  12. FEMP Helps Federal Facilities Develop Large-Scale Renewable Energy...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    FEMP Helps Federal Facilities Develop Large-Scale Renewable Energy Projects FEMP Helps Federal Facilities Develop Large-Scale Renewable Energy Projects August 21, 2013 - 12:00am...

  13. Procuring Solar Energy: A Guide for Federal Facility Decision Makers

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Procuring Solar Energy: A Guide for Federal Facility Decision Makers SEPTEMBER 2010 Solar Energy: www.ntis.gov/help/ordermethods.aspx PROCURING SOLAR ENERGY: A GUIDE FOR FEDERAL FACILITY DECISION MAKERS #12;September 2010 3 Procuring Solar Energy: A Guide for Federal Facility Decision Makers Blaise

  14. Integrated Disposal Facility FY2011 Glass Testing Summary Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pierce, Eric M.; Bacon, Diana H.; Kerisit, Sebastien N.; Windisch, Charles F.; Cantrell, Kirk J.; Valenta, Michelle M.; Burton, Sarah D.; Westsik, Joseph H.

    2011-09-29T23:59:59.000Z

    Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was contracted by Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC to provide the technical basis for estimating radionuclide release from the engineered portion of the disposal facility (e.g., source term). Vitrifying the low-activity waste at Hanford is expected to generate over 1.6 x 10{sup 5} m{sup 3} of glass (Certa and Wells 2010). The volume of immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW) at Hanford is the largest in the DOE complex and is one of the largest inventories (approximately 8.9 x 10{sup 14} Bq total activity) of long-lived radionuclides, principally {sup 99}Tc (t{sub 1/2} = 2.1 x 10{sup 5}), planned for disposal in a low-level waste (LLW) facility. Before the ILAW can be disposed, DOE must conduct a performance assessment (PA) for the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) that describes the long-term impacts of the disposal facility on public health and environmental resources. As part of the ILAW glass testing program PNNL is implementing a strategy, consisting of experimentation and modeling, in order to provide the technical basis for estimating radionuclide release from the glass waste form in support of future IDF PAs. The purpose of this report is to summarize the progress made in fiscal year (FY) 2011 toward implementing the strategy with the goal of developing an understanding of the long-term corrosion behavior of low-activity waste glasses.

  15. Acceptance test procedure: RMW Land Disposal Facility Project W-025

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Roscha, V. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

    1994-12-12T23:59:59.000Z

    This ATP establishes field testing procedures to demonstrate that the electrical/instrumentation system functions as intended by design for the Radioactive Mixed Waste Land Disposal Facility. Procedures are outlined for the field testing of the following: electrical heat trace system; transducers and meter/controllers; pumps; leachate storage tank; and building power and lighting.

  16. Support of the Iraq nuclear facility dismantlement and disposal program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Coates, Roger [International Atomic Energy Agency - IAEA, Wagramer Strasse 5, P.O. Box 100 - 1400 Vienna (Austria); Cochran, John; Danneels, Jeff [Sandia National Laboratories (United States); Chesser, Ronald; Phillips, Carlton; Rogers, Brenda [Center for Environmental Radiation Studies, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409 (United States)

    2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Available in abstract form only. Full text of publication follows: Iraq's former nuclear facilities contain large quantities of radioactive materials and radioactive waste. The Iraq Nuclear Facility Dismantlement and Disposal Program (the Iraq NDs Program) is a new program to decontaminate and permanently dispose of radioactive wastes in Iraq. The NDs Program is led by the Government of Iraq, under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) auspices, with guidance and assistance from a number of countries. The U.S. participants include Texas Tech University and Sandia National Laboratories. A number of activities are ongoing under the broad umbrella of the Iraq NDs Program: drafting a new nuclear law that will provide the legal basis for the cleanup and disposal activities; assembly and analysis of existing data; characterization of soil contamination; bringing Iraqi scientists to the world's largest symposium on radioactive waste management; touring U.S. government and private sector operating radwaste disposal facilities in the U.S., and hosting a planning workshop on the characterization and cleanup of the Al-Tuwaitha Nuclear Facility. (authors)

  17. Geosynthetic Clay Liner applications in waste disposal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McGrath, L.T.; Creamer, P.D. [RMT, Inc., Madison, WI (United States)

    1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    Geosynthetic Clay Liners (GCLs) are becoming a popular alternative to compacted clay barrier layers, and represent the state of the art in waste disposal facility design. They possess many of the same qualities of compacted clay barrier layers while occupying only a small fraction of the airspace. This is a very attractive feature to waste disposal facility owners and operators. There are many manufacturers of GCLs in the marketplace, providing numerous products that can be used in a wide variety of applications. Designing for the constructing with a GCL an be a challenging task; stability issues must be evaluated, selecting the appropriate product should be considered, comprehensive specifications are needed to ensure proper product selection and installation, and steps must be taken during installation to prevent damage to the GCL. Perhaps most importantly, state regulatory agencies must be convinced that GCLs will provide long-term protection equivalent to a clay barrier layer. This paper will discuss design considerations, specification guidelines, installation criteria, construction quality assurance guidelines and regulatory issues pertaining to GCL. The paper will also present three brief case histories of relevant GCL applications in waste disposal facility design and construction. The purpose of the paper is to demonstrate that GCLs are a viable alternative to compacted clay barrier layers and to provide useful information in designing, specifying and installing them in waste disposal facilities.

  18. Low-level radioactive mixed waste land disposal facility -- Permanent disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Erpenbeck, E.G.; Jasen, W.G.

    1993-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Radioactive mixed waste (RMW) disposal at US Department of Energy (DOE) facilities is subject to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). Westinghouse Hanford Company, in Richland, Washington, has completed the design of a radioactive mixed waste land disposal facility, which is based on the best available technology compliant with RCRA. When completed, this facility will provide permanent disposal of solid RMW, after treatment, in accordance with the Land Disposal Restrictions. The facility includes a double clay and geosynthetic liner with a leachate collection system to minimize potential leakage of radioactive or hazardous constituents from the landfill. The two clay liners will be capable of achieving a permeability of less than 1 {times} 10{sup {minus}7} cm/s. The two clay liners, along with the two high density polyethylene (HDPE) liners and the leachate collection and removal system, provide a more than conservative, physical containment of any potential radioactive and/or hazardous contamination.

  19. Radiological performance assessment for the Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cook, J.R.; Fowler, J.R. [Westinghouse Savannah River Co., Aiken, SC (United States)

    1992-12-18T23:59:59.000Z

    This radiological performance assessment (RPA) for the Savannah River Site (SRS) Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF) was prepared in accordance with the requirements of Chapter III of the US Department of Energy Order 5820.2A. The Order specifies that an RPA should provide reasonable assurance that a low-level waste (LLW) disposal facility will comply with the performance objectives of the Order. The performance objectives require that: (1) exposures of the general public to radioactivity in the waste or released from the waste will not result in an effective dose equivalent of 25 mrem per year; (2) releases to the atmosphere will meet the requirements of 40 CFR 61; (3) inadvertent intruders will not be committed to an excess of an effective dose equivalent of 100 mrem per year from chronic exposure, or 500 mrem from a single acute exposure; and (4) groundwater resources will be protected in accordance with Federal, State and local requirements.

  20. Integrated Disposal Facility FY 2012 Glass Testing Summary Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pierce, Eric M.; Kerisit, Sebastien N.; Krogstad, Eirik J.; Burton, Sarah D.; Bjornstad, Bruce N.; Freedman, Vicky L.; Cantrell, Kirk J.; Snyder, Michelle MV; Crum, Jarrod V.; Westsik, Joseph H.

    2013-03-29T23:59:59.000Z

    PNNL is conducting work to provide the technical basis for estimating radionuclide release from the engineered portion of the disposal facility for Hanford immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW). Before the ILAW can be disposed, DOE must conduct a performance assessment (PA) for the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) that describes the long-term impacts of the disposal facility on public health and environmental resources. As part of the ILAW glass testing program, PNNL is implementing a strategy, consisting of experimentation and modeling, to provide the technical basis for estimating radionuclide release from the glass waste form in support of future IDF PAs. Key activities in FY12 include upgrading the STOMP/eSTOMP codes to do near-field modeling, geochemical modeling of PCT tests to determine the reaction network to be used in the STOMP codes, conducting PUF tests on selected glasses to simulate and accelerate glass weathering, developing a Monte Carlo simulation tool to predict the characteristics of the weathered glass reaction layer as a function of glass composition, and characterizing glasses and soil samples exhumed from an 8-year lysimeter test. The purpose of this report is to summarize the progress made in fiscal year (FY) 2012 and the first quarter of FY 2013 toward implementing the strategy with the goal of developing an understanding of the long-term corrosion behavior of LAW glasses.

  1. Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Waste Acceptance Criteria

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    W. Mahlon Heileson

    2006-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Idaho Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Disposal Facility (ICDF) has been designed to accept CERCLA waste generated within the Idaho National Laboratory. Hazardous, mixed, low-level, and Toxic Substance Control Act waste will be accepted for disposal at the ICDF. The purpose of this document is to provide criteria for the quantities of radioactive and/or hazardous constituents allowable in waste streams designated for disposal at ICDF. This ICDF Complex Waste Acceptance Criteria is divided into four section: (1) ICDF Complex; (2) Landfill; (3) Evaporation Pond: and (4) Staging, Storage, Sizing, and Treatment Facility (SSSTF). The ICDF Complex section contains the compliance details, which are the same for all areas of the ICDF. Corresponding sections contain details specific to the landfill, evaporation pond, and the SSSTF. This document specifies chemical and radiological constituent acceptance criteria for waste that will be disposed of at ICDF. Compliance with the requirements of this document ensures protection of human health and the environment, including the Snake River Plain Aquifer. Waste placed in the ICDF landfill and evaporation pond must not cause groundwater in the Snake River Plain Aquifer to exceed maximum contaminant levels, a hazard index of 1, or 10-4 cumulative risk levels. The defined waste acceptance criteria concentrations are compared to the design inventory concentrations. The purpose of this comparison is to show that there is an acceptable uncertainty margin based on the actual constituent concentrations anticipated for disposal at the ICDF. Implementation of this Waste Acceptance Criteria document will ensure compliance with the Final Report of Decision for the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center, Operable Unit 3-13. For waste to be received, it must meet the waste acceptance criteria for the specific disposal/treatment unit (on-Site or off-Site) for which it is destined.

  2. Federal Finance Facilities Available for Energy Efficiency Upgrades...

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

    Finance Facilities Available for Energy Efficiency Upgrades and Clean Energy Deployment resource guide lists the various federal financing programs for which energy efficiency and...

  3. A strategy for increasing energy efficiency in federal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Salthouse, R.W.

    1994-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    The issues of energy efficiency in federal facilities is discussed. Resource problems and recommendations pertaining to energy efficiency technologies are described.

  4. Adopting LED Technology: What Federal Facility Managers Need to Know

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This document describes the presentation slides for the "Adopting LED Technology: What Federal Facility Managers Need to Know" webinar that took place on September 11, 2014.

  5. Federal Facility Reporting and Data | Department of Energy

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

    Management Program (FEMP) provides information and tools to help agencies report annual energy and water consumption and resource management efforts within Federal facilities....

  6. Generic protocol for environmental audits at federal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1989-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Generic Protocol is a supplement to earlier efforts by EPA to provide technical assistance to Federal agencies on environmental auditing. EPA`s Office of Federal Activities (OFA) issued the Federal Facility Compliance Strategy (referred to as the `Yellow Book`), prepared in 1984 and revised in 1988, as a framework for EPA`s media programs to follow to ensure that Federal facilities are fully integrated into Federal and State compliance monitoring and enforcement activities. The policy encourages Federal agencies to voluntarily develop comprehensive auditing programs to ensure environmental compliance.

  7. Developing operating procedures for a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sutherland, A.A.; Miner, G.L.; Grahn, K.F.; Pollard, C.G. [Rogers and Associates Engineering Corp., Salt Lake City, UT (United States)

    1993-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document is intended to assist persons who are developing operating and emergency procedures for a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility. It provides 25 procedures that are considered to be relatively independent of the characteristics of a disposal facility site, the facility design, and operations at the facility. These generic procedures should form a good starting point for final procedures on their subjects for the disposal facility. In addition, this document provides 55 annotated outlines of other procedures that are common to disposal facilities. The annotated outlines are meant as checklists to assist the developer of new procedures.

  8. Integrated Disposal Facility FY2010 Glass Testing Summary Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pierce, Eric M.; Bacon, Diana H.; Kerisit, Sebastien N.; Windisch, Charles F.; Cantrell, Kirk J.; Valenta, Michelle M.; Burton, Sarah D.; Serne, R Jeffrey; Mattigod, Shas V.

    2010-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

    Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was contracted by Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC to provide the technical basis for estimating radionuclide release from the engineered portion of the disposal facility (e.g., source term). Vitrifying the low-activity waste at Hanford is expected to generate over 1.6 × 105 m3 of glass (Puigh 1999). The volume of immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW) at Hanford is the largest in the DOE complex and is one of the largest inventories (approximately 0.89 × 1018 Bq total activity) of long-lived radionuclides, principally 99Tc (t1/2 = 2.1 × 105), planned for disposal in a low-level waste (LLW) facility. Before the ILAW can be disposed, DOE must conduct a performance assessement (PA) for the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) that describes the long-term impacts of the disposal facility on public health and environmental resources. As part of the ILAW glass testing program PNNL is implementing a strategy, consisting of experimentation and modeling, in order to provide the technical basis for estimating radionuclide release from the glass waste form in support of future IDF PAs. The purpose of this report is to summarize the progress made in fiscal year (FY) 2010 toward implementing the strategy with the goal of developing an understanding of the long-term corrosion behavior of low-activity waste glasses. The emphasis in FY2010 was the completing an evaluation of the most sensitive kinetic rate law parameters used to predict glass weathering, documented in Bacon and Pierce (2010), and transitioning from the use of the Subsurface Transport Over Reactive Multi-phases to Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases computer code for near-field calculations. The FY2010 activities also consisted of developing a Monte Carlo and Geochemical Modeling framework that links glass composition to alteration phase formation by 1) determining the structure of unreacted and reacted glasses for use as input information into Monte Carlo calculations, 2) compiling the solution data and alteration phases identified from accelerated weathering tests conducted with ILAW glass by PNNL and Viteous State Laboratory/Catholic University of America as well as other literature sources for use in geochemical modeling calculations, and 3) conducting several initial calculations on glasses that contain the four major components of ILAW-Al2O3, B2O3, Na2O, and SiO2.

  9. Low-level radioactive waste disposal facility closure

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    White, G.J.; Ferns, T.W.; Otis, M.D.; Marts, S.T.; DeHaan, M.S.; Schwaller, R.G.; White, G.J. (EG and G Idaho, Inc., Idaho Falls, ID (USA))

    1990-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Part I of this report describes and evaluates potential impacts associated with changes in environmental conditions on a low-level radioactive waste disposal site over a long period of time. Ecological processes are discussed and baselines are established consistent with their potential for causing a significant impact to low-level radioactive waste facility. A variety of factors that might disrupt or act on long-term predictions are evaluated including biological, chemical, and physical phenomena of both natural and anthropogenic origin. These factors are then applied to six existing, yet very different, low-level radioactive waste sites. A summary and recommendations for future site characterization and monitoring activities is given for application to potential and existing sites. Part II of this report contains guidance on the design and implementation of a performance monitoring program for low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities. A monitoring programs is described that will assess whether engineered barriers surrounding the waste are effectively isolating the waste and will continue to isolate the waste by remaining structurally stable. Monitoring techniques and instruments are discussed relative to their ability to measure (a) parameters directly related to water movement though engineered barriers, (b) parameters directly related to the structural stability of engineered barriers, and (c) parameters that characterize external or internal conditions that may cause physical changes leading to enhanced water movement or compromises in stability. Data interpretation leading to decisions concerning facility closure is discussed. 120 refs., 12 figs., 17 tabs.

  10. [Composite analysis E-area vaults and saltstone disposal facilities]. PORFLOW and FACT input files

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cook, J.R.

    1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This diskette contains the PORFLOW and FACT input files described in Appendix B of the accompanying report `Composite Analysis E-Area Vaults and Saltstone Disposal Facilities`.

  11. Closure Strategy for a Waste Disposal Facility with Multiple Waste Types and Regulatory Drivers at the Nevada Test Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    L. Desotell; D. Wieland; V. Yucel; G. Shott; J. Wrapp

    2008-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The U.S. Department of Energy, National Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) is planning to close the 92-Acre Area of the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) at the Nevada Test Site (NTS), which is about 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. Closure planning for this facility must take into account the regulatory requirements for a diversity of waste streams, disposal and storage configurations, disposal history, and site conditions. This paper provides a brief background of the Area 5 RWMS, identifies key closure issues, and presents the closure strategy. Disposals have been made in 25 shallow excavated pits and trenches and 13 Greater Confinement Disposal (GCD) boreholes at the 92-Acre Area since 1961. The pits and trenches have been used to dispose unclassified low-level waste (LLW), low-level mixed waste (LLMW), and asbestiform waste, and to store classified low-level and low-level mixed materials. The GCD boreholes are intermediate-depth disposal units about 10 feet (ft) in diameter and 120 ft deep. Classified and unclassified high-specific activity LLW, transuranic (TRU), and mixed TRU are disposed in the GCD boreholes. TRU waste was also disposed inadvertently in trench T-04C. Except for three disposal units that are active, all pits and trenches are operationally covered with 8-ft thick alluvium. The 92-Acre Area also includes a Mixed Waste Disposal Unit (MWDU) operating under Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Interim Status, and an asbestiform waste unit operating under a state of Nevada Solid Waste Disposal Site Permit. A single final closure cover is envisioned over the 92-Acre Area. The cover is the evapotranspirative-type cover that has been successfully employed at the NTS. Closure, post-closure care, and monitoring must meet the requirements of the following regulations: U.S. Department of Energy Order 435.1, Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 191, Title 40 CFR Part 265, Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) 444.743, RCRA requirements as incorporated into NAC 444.8632, and the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO). A grouping of waste disposal units according to waste type, location, and similarity in regulatory requirements identified six closure units: LLW Unit, Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 111 under FFACO, Asbestiform LLW Unit, Pit 3 MWDU, TRU GCD Borehole Unit, and TRU Trench Unit. The closure schedule of all units is tied to the closure schedule of the Pit 3 MWDU under RCRA.

  12. Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Compliance Demonstration for DOE Order 435.1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Simonds, J.

    2007-11-06T23:59:59.000Z

    This compliance demonstration document provides an analysis of the Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) Complex compliance with DOE Order 435.1. The ICDF Complex includes the disposal facility (landfill), evaporation pond, administration facility, weigh scale, and various staging/storage areas. These facilities were designed and constructed to be compliant with DOE Order 435.1, Resource Conservation and Recovery act Subtitle C, and Toxic Substances Control Act polychlorinated biphenyl design and construction standards. The ICDF Complex is designated as the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) facility for the receipt, staging/storage, treatment, and disposal of INL Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) waste streams.

  13. International low level waste disposal practices and facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nutt, W.M. (Nuclear Engineering Division)

    2011-12-19T23:59:59.000Z

    The safe management of nuclear waste arising from nuclear activities is an issue of great importance for the protection of human health and the environment now and in the future. The primary goal of this report is to identify the current situation and practices being utilized across the globe to manage and store low and intermediate level radioactive waste. The countries included in this report were selected based on their nuclear power capabilities and involvement in the nuclear fuel cycle. This report highlights the nuclear waste management laws and regulations, current disposal practices, and future plans for facilities of the selected international nuclear countries. For each country presented, background information and the history of nuclear facilities are also summarized to frame the country's nuclear activities and set stage for the management practices employed. The production of nuclear energy, including all the steps in the nuclear fuel cycle, results in the generation of radioactive waste. However, radioactive waste may also be generated by other activities such as medical, laboratory, research institution, or industrial use of radioisotopes and sealed radiation sources, defense and weapons programs, and processing (mostly large scale) of mineral ores or other materials containing naturally occurring radionuclides. Radioactive waste also arises from intervention activities, which are necessary after accidents or to remediate areas affected by past practices. The radioactive waste generated arises in a wide range of physical, chemical, and radiological forms. It may be solid, liquid, or gaseous. Levels of activity concentration can vary from extremely high, such as levels associated with spent fuel and residues from fuel reprocessing, to very low, for instance those associated with radioisotope applications. Equally broad is the spectrum of half-lives of the radionuclides contained in the waste. These differences result in an equally wide variety of options for the management of radioactive waste. There is a variety of alternatives for processing waste and for short term or long term storage prior to disposal. Likewise, there are various alternatives currently in use across the globe for the safe disposal of waste, ranging from near surface to geological disposal, depending on the specific classification of the waste. At present, there appears to be a clear and unequivocal understanding that each country is ethically and legally responsible for its own wastes, in accordance with the provisions of the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management. Therefore the default position is that all nuclear wastes will be disposed of in each of the 40 or so countries concerned with nuclear power generation or part of the fuel cycle. To illustrate the global distribution of radioactive waste now and in the near future, Table 1 provides the regional breakdown, based on the UN classification of the world in regions illustrated in Figure 1, of nuclear power reactors in operation and under construction worldwide. In summary, 31 countries operate 433 plants, with a total capacity of more than 365 gigawatts of electrical energy (GW[e]). A further 65 units, totaling nearly 63 GW(e), are under construction across 15 of these nations. In addition, 65 countries are expressing new interest in, considering, or actively planning for nuclear power to help address growing energy demands to fuel economic growth and development, climate change concerns, and volatile fossil fuel prices. Of these 65 new countries, 21 are in Asia and the Pacific region, 21 are from the Africa region, 12 are in Europe (mostly Eastern Europe), and 11 in Central and South America. However, 31 of these 65 are not currently planning to build reactors, and 17 of those 31 have grids of less than 5 GW, which is said to be too small to accommodate most of the reactor designs available. For the remaining 34 countries actively planning reactors, as of September 2010: 14 indicate a strong intention to precede w

  14. Preliminary Closure Plan for the Immobilized Low Activity Waste (ILAW) Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BURBANK, D.A.

    2000-08-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This document describes the preliminary plans for closure of the Immobilized Low-Activity Waste (ILAW) disposal facility to be built by the Office of River Protection at the Hanford site in southeastern Washington. The facility will provide near-surface disposal of up to 204,000 cubic meters of ILAW in engineered trenches with modified RCRA Subtitle C closure barriers.

  15. Conceptual Design Report for Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; David Duncan; Joan Connolly; Margaret Hinman; Charles Marcinkiewicz; Gary Mecham

    2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This conceptual design report addresses development of replacement remote-handled low-level waste disposal capability for the Idaho National Laboratory. Current disposal capability at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex is planned until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This conceptual design report includes key project assumptions; design options considered in development of the proposed onsite disposal facility (the highest ranked alternative for providing continued uninterrupted remote-handled low level waste disposal capability); process and facility descriptions; safety and environmental requirements that would apply to the proposed facility; and the proposed cost and schedule for funding, design, construction, and operation of the proposed onsite disposal facility.

  16. Preliminary Safety Design Report for Remote Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Timothy Solack; Carol Mason

    2012-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A new onsite, remote-handled low-level waste disposal facility has been identified as the highest ranked alternative for providing continued, uninterrupted remote-handled low-level waste disposal for remote-handled low-level waste from the Idaho National Laboratory and for nuclear fuel processing activities at the Naval Reactors Facility. Historically, this type of waste has been disposed of at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex. Disposal of remote-handled low-level waste in concrete disposal vaults at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex will continue until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This preliminary safety design report supports the design of a proposed onsite remote-handled low-level waste disposal facility by providing an initial nuclear facility hazard categorization, by discussing site characteristics that impact accident analysis, by providing the facility and process information necessary to support the hazard analysis, by identifying and evaluating potential hazards for processes associated with onsite handling and disposal of remote-handled low-level waste, and by discussing the need for safety features that will become part of the facility design.

  17. Preliminary Hazard Analysis for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

    2010-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The need for remote handled low level waste (LLW) disposal capability has been identified. A new onsite, remote-handled LLW disposal facility has been identified as the highest ranked alternative for providing continued, uninterrupted remote-handled LLW disposal capability for remote-handled LLW that is generated as part of the nuclear mission of the Idaho National Laboratory and from spent nuclear fuel processing activities at the Naval Reactors Facility. Historically, this type of waste has been disposed of at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex. Disposal of remote-handled LLW in concrete disposal vaults at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex will continue until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This document supports the conceptual design for the proposed remote-handled LLW disposal facility by providing an initial nuclear facility hazard categorization and by identifying potential hazards for processes associated with onsite handling and disposal of remote-handled LLW.

  18. Preliminary Hazard Analysis for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

    2010-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The need for remote handled low level waste (LLW) disposal capability has been identified. A new onsite, remote-handled LLW disposal facility has been identified as the highest ranked alternative for providing continued, uninterrupted remote-handled LLW disposal capability for remote-handled LLW that is generated as part of the nuclear mission of the Idaho National Laboratory and from spent nuclear fuel processing activities at the Naval Reactors Facility. Historically, this type of waste has been disposed of at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex. Disposal of remote-handled LLW in concrete disposal vaults at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex will continue until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This document supports the conceptual design for the proposed remote-handled LLW disposal facility by providing an initial nuclear facility hazard categorization and by identifying potential hazards for processes associated with onsite handling and disposal of remote-handled LLW.

  19. Conceptual Safety Design Report for the Remote Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen

    2010-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A new onsite, remote-handled LLW disposal facility has been identified as the highest ranked alternative for providing continued, uninterrupted remote-handled LLW disposal for remote-handled LLW from the Idaho National Laboratory and for spent nuclear fuel processing activities at the Naval Reactors Facility. Historically, this type of waste has been disposed of at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex. Disposal of remote-handled LLW in concrete disposal vaults at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex will continue until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This conceptual safety design report supports the design of a proposed onsite remote-handled LLW disposal facility by providing an initial nuclear facility hazard categorization, by identifying potential hazards for processes associated with onsite handling and disposal of remote-handled LLW, by evaluating consequences of postulated accidents, and by discussing the need for safety features that will become part of the facility design.

  20. Conceptual Safety Design Report for the Remote Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen

    2010-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A new onsite, remote-handled LLW disposal facility has been identified as the highest ranked alternative for providing continued, uninterrupted remote-handled LLW disposal for remote-handled LLW from the Idaho National Laboratory and for spent nuclear fuel processing activities at the Naval Reactors Facility. Historically, this type of waste has been disposed of at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex. Disposal of remote-handled LLW in concrete disposal vaults at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex will continue until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This conceptual safety design report supports the design of a proposed onsite remote-handled LLW disposal facility by providing an initial nuclear facility hazard categorization, by identifying potential hazards for processes associated with onsite handling and disposal of remote-handled LLW, by evaluating consequences of postulated accidents, and by discussing the need for safety features that will become part of the facility design.

  1. NOMINATION FOR THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE (PMI) PROJECT OF THE YEAR AWARD INTEGRATED DISPOSAL FACILITY (IDF)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MCLELLAN, G.W.

    2007-02-07T23:59:59.000Z

    CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc. (CH2M HILL) is pleased to nominate the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) project for the Project Management Institute's consideration as 2007 Project of the Year, Built for the U.S, Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of River Protection (ORP) at the Hanford Site, the IDF is the site's first Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)-compliant disposal facility. The IDF is important to DOE's waste management strategy for the site. Effective management of the IDF project contributed to the project's success. The project was carefully managed to meet three Tri-Party Agreement (TPA) milestones. The completed facility fully satisfied the needs and expectations of the client, regulators and stakeholders. Ultimately, the project, initially estimated to require 48 months and $33.9 million to build, was completed four months ahead of schedule and $11.1 million under budget. DOE directed construction of the IDF to provide additional capacity for disposing of low-level radioactive and mixed (i.e., radioactive and hazardous) solid waste. The facility needed to comply with federal and Washington State environmental laws and meet TPA milestones. The facility had to accommodate over one million cubic yards of the waste material, including immobilized low-activity waste packages from the Waste Treatment Plant (WTP), low-level and mixed low-level waste from WTP failed melters, and alternative immobilized low-activity waste forms, such as bulk-vitrified waste. CH2M HILL designed and constructed a disposal facility with a redundant system of containment barriers and a sophisticated leak-detection system. Built on a 168-area, the facility's construction met all regulatory requirements. The facility's containment system actually exceeds the state's environmental requirements for a hazardous waste landfill. Effective management of the IDF construction project required working through highly political and legal issues as well as challenges with permitting, scheduling, costs, stakeholders and technical issues. To meet the customer's needs and deadlines, the project was managed with conscientious discipline and application of sound project management principles in the Project Management Institute's Project Management Body of Knowledge. Several factors contributed to project success. Extensive planning and preparation were conducted, which was instrumental to contract and procurement management. Anticipating issues and risks, CH2M HILL prepared well defined scope and expectations, particularly for safety. To ensure worker safety, the project management team incorporated CH2M HILL's Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) into the project and included safety requirements in contracting documents and baseline planning. The construction contractor DelHur Industries, Inc. adopted CH2M HILL's safety program to meet the procurement requirement for a comparable ISMS safety program. This project management approach contributed to an excellent safety record for a project with heavy equipment in constant motion and 63,555 man-hours worked. The project manager worked closely with ORP and Ecology to keep them involved in project decisions and head off any stakeholder or regulatory concerns. As issues emerged, the project manager addressed them expeditiously to maintain a rigorous schedule. Subcontractors and project contributors were held to contract commitments for performance of the work scope and requirements for quality, budget and schedule. Another element of project success extended to early and continual involvement of all interested in the project scope. Due to the public sensitivity of constructing a landfill planned for radioactive waste as well as offsite waste, there were many stakeholders and it was important to secure their agreement on scope and time frames. The project had multiple participants involved in quality assurance surveillances, audits and inspections, including the construction contractor, CH2M HILL, ORP, the Washington State Department of Ecology, and independent certified quality assurance an

  2. Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group Manual

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2 OPAM Flash2011-12Approvedof6,Projects | Department

  3. California Federal Facilities: Rate-Responsive Buidling Operating for Deeper Cost and Energy Savings

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Fact sheet from the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) describes rate-responsive building operations for cost and energy savings in California federal facilities.

  4. Combined Heat and Power for Federal Facilities and the DOE CHP...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    and Power for Federal Facilities and the DOE CHP Technical Assistance Partnerships Hosted by: FEDERAL UTILITY PARTNERSHIP WORKING GROUP SEMINAR May 7 - 8, 2014 Virginia Beach, VA...

  5. Conceptual Design Report: Nevada Test Site Mixed Waste Disposal Facility Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Management

    2009-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

    Environmental cleanup of contaminated nuclear weapons manufacturing and test sites generates radioactive waste that must be disposed. Site cleanup activities throughout the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) complex are projected to continue through 2050. Some of this waste is mixed waste (MW), containing both hazardous and radioactive components. In addition, there is a need for MW disposal from other mission activities. The Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision designates the Nevada Test Site (NTS) as a regional MW disposal site. The NTS has a facility that is permitted to dispose of onsite- and offsite-generated MW until November 30, 2010. There is not a DOE waste management facility that is currently permitted to dispose of offsite-generated MW after 2010, jeopardizing the DOE environmental cleanup mission and other MW-generating mission-related activities. A mission needs document (CD-0) has been prepared for a newly permitted MW disposal facility at the NTS that would provide the needed capability to support DOE's environmental cleanup mission and other MW-generating mission-related activities. This report presents a conceptual engineering design for a MW facility that is fully compliant with Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and DOE O 435.1, 'Radioactive Waste Management'. The facility, which will be located within the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) at the NTS, will provide an approximately 20,000-cubic yard waste disposal capacity. The facility will be licensed by the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP).

  6. CHARACTERIZATION OF CORE SAMPLE COLLECTED FROM THE SALTSTONE DISPOSAL FACILITY

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cozzi, A.; Duncan, A.

    2010-01-28T23:59:59.000Z

    During the month of September 2008, grout core samples were collected from the Saltstone Disposal Facility, Vault 4, cell E. This grout was placed during processing campaigns in December 2007 from Deliquification, Dissolution and Adjustment Batch 2 salt solution. The 4QCY07 Waste Acceptance Criteria sample collected on 11/16/07 represents the salt solution in the core samples. Core samples were retrieved to initiate the historical database of properties of emplaced Saltstone and to demonstrate the correlation between field collected and laboratory prepared samples. Three samples were collected from three different locations. Samples were collected using a two-inch diameter concrete coring bit. In April 2009, the core samples were removed from the evacuated sample container, inspected, transferred to PVC containers, and backfilled with nitrogen. Samples furthest from the wall were the most intact cylindrically shaped cored samples. The shade of the core samples darkened as the depth of coring increased. Based on the visual inspection, sample 3-3 was selected for all subsequent analysis. The density and porosity of the Vault 4 core sample, 1.90 g/cm{sup 3} and 59.90% respectively, were comparable to values achieved for laboratory prepared samples. X-ray diffraction analysis identified phases consistent with the expectations for hydrated Saltstone. Microscopic analysis revealed morphology features characteristic of cementitious materials with fly ash and calcium silicate hydrate gel. When taken together, the results of the density, porosity, x-ray diffraction analysis and microscopic analysis support the conclusion that the Vault 4, Cell E core sample is representative of the expected waste form.

  7. Life-Cycle Cost Study for a Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility in Texas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    B. C. Rogers; P. L. Walter (Rogers and Associates Engineering Corporation); R. D. Baird

    1999-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report documents the life-cycle cost estimates for a proposed low-level radioactive waste disposal facility near Sierra Blanca, Texas. The work was requested by the Texas Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Authority and performed by the National Low-Level Waste Management Program with the assistance of Rogers and Associates Engineering Corporation.

  8. Managing commercial low-level radioactive waste beyond 1992: Transportation planning for a LLW disposal facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Quinn, G.J. [Wastren, Inc. (United States)

    1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical bulletin presents information on the many activities and issues related to transportation of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) to allow interested States to investigate further those subjects for which proactive preparation will facilitate the development and operation of a LLW disposal facility. The activities related to transportation for a LLW disposal facility are discussed under the following headings: safety; legislation, regulations, and implementation guidance; operations-related transport (LLW and non-LLW traffic); construction traffic; economics; and public involvement.

  9. CONTAINMENT OF LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE AT THE DOE SALTSTONE DISPOSAL FACILITY

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jordan, J.; Flach, G.

    2012-03-29T23:59:59.000Z

    As facilities look for permanent storage of toxic materials, they are forced to address the long-term impacts to the environment as well as any individuals living in affected area. As these materials are stored underground, modeling of the contaminant transport through the ground is an essential part of the evaluation. The contaminant transport model must address the long-term degradation of the containment system as well as any movement of the contaminant through the soil and into the groundwater. In order for disposal facilities to meet their performance objectives, engineered and natural barriers are relied upon. Engineered barriers include things like the design of the disposal unit, while natural barriers include things like the depth of soil between the disposal unit and the water table. The Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF) at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina is an example of a waste disposal unit that must be evaluated over a timeframe of thousands of years. The engineered and natural barriers for the SDF allow it to meet its performance objective over the long time frame. Some waste disposal facilities are required to meet certain standards to ensure public safety. These type of facilities require an engineered containment system to ensure that these requirements are met. The Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF) at the Savannah River Site (SRS) is an example of this type of facility. The facility is evaluated based on a groundwater pathway analysis which considers long-term changes to material properties due to physical and chemical degradation processes. The facility is able to meet these performance objectives due to the multiple engineered and natural barriers to contaminant migration.

  10. Renewable energy for federal facilities serving native Americans: preprint

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eiffert, P.; Sprunt Crawley, A.; Bartow, K.

    2000-05-15T23:59:59.000Z

    The Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is targeting Federal facilities serving Native American populations for cost-effective renewable energy projects. These projects not only save energy and money, they also provide economic opportunities for the Native Americans who assist in producing, installing, operating, or maintaining the renewable energy systems obtained for the facilities. The systems include solar heating, solar electric (photovoltaic or PV), wind, biomass, and geothermal energy systems. In fiscal years 1998 and 1999, FEMP co-funded seven such projects, working with the Indian Health Service in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Bureau of Indian Affairs in the U.S. Department of the Interior, and their project partners. The new renewable energy systems are helping to save money that would otherwise be spent on conventional energy and reduce the greenhouse gases associated with burning fossil fuels.

  11. Federal Facilities Compliance Act, Conceptual Site Treatment Plan. Part 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1993-10-29T23:59:59.000Z

    This Conceptual Site Treatment Plan was prepared by Ames Laboratory to meet the requirements of the Federal Facilities Compliance Act. Topics discussed in this document include: general discussion of the plan, including the purpose and scope; technical aspects of preparing plans, including the rationale behind the treatability groupings and a discussion of characterization issues; treatment technology needs and treatment options for specific waste streams; low-level mixed waste options; TRU waste options; and future waste generation from restoration activities.

  12. Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities

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

    2011-04-25T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of this Guide is to provide U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) line management with guidance that may be useful to them in effectively and efficiently implementing the requirements of DOE O 226.1B, Implementation of Department of Energy Oversight Policy, date April 25, 2011, as applied to Federal line management of hazard category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities.

  13. Hazard Classification of the Remote Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen

    2012-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Battelle Energy Alliance (BEA) at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) is constructing a new facility to replace remote-handled low-level radioactive waste disposal capability for INL and Naval Reactors Facility operations. Current disposal capability at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) will continue until the facility is full or closed for remediation (estimated at approximately fiscal year 2015). Development of a new onsite disposal facility is the highest ranked alternative and will provide RH-LLW disposal capability and will ensure continuity of operations that generate RH-LLW for the foreseeable future. As a part of establishing a safety basis for facility operations, the facility will be categorized according to DOE-STD-1027-92. This classification is important in determining the scope of analyses performed in the safety basis and will also dictate operational requirements of the completed facility. This paper discusses the issues affecting hazard classification in this nuclear facility and impacts of the final hazard categorization.

  14. Requirements and impacts of the Federal Facility Compliance Act on the Department of Energy

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chang, L.; Tripp, S.C. [Dept. of Energy, Washington, DC (United States). Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management

    1993-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Federal Facilities Compliance Act (FFCA, the Act) was signed into law on October 6, 1992, primarily as a means of waiving sovereign immunity for federal facilities with respect to requirements under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. DOE`s implementation of the FFCA will have significant effects on current and future DOE waste management operations. DOE will need to rethink its strategy in the area of future compliance agreements to ensure commitments and deliverables are made consistent throughout the different DOE facilities. Several types of agreements that address mixed waste land disposal restriction (LDR) compliance have already been signed by both DOE and the regulators. These agreements are in place at the Hanford Reservation, the Savannah River Site, the Oak Ridge Reservation (Oak Ridge National Laboratory, K-25, Y-12), and the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. The Rocky Flats Agreement is now being renegotiated. Los Alamos National Laboratory, Sandia/Albuquerque National Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and Idaho National Engineering Laboratory agreements are in progress. Major components of the FFCA include provisions on: sovereign immunity waiver; cost reimbursements; mixed waste requirements, including inventory reports on mixed waste and treatment capacity and technologies; and plans for the development of treatment capacities and technologies. Each of these components is discussed within this paper.

  15. Overview of hazardous-waste regulation at federal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tanzman, E.; LaBrie, B.; Lerner, K.

    1982-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report is organized in a fashion that is intended to explain the legal duties imposed on officials responsible for hazardous waste at each stage of its existence. Section 2 describes federal hazardous waste laws, explaining the legal meaning of hazardous waste and the protective measures that are required to be taken by its generators, transporters, and storers. In addition, penalties for violation of the standards are summarized, and a special discussion is presented of so-called imminent hazard provisions for handling hazardous waste that immediately threatens public health and safety. Although the focus of Sec. 2 is on RCRA, which is the principal federal law regulating hazardous waste, other federal statutes are discussed as appropriate. Section 3 covers state regulation of hazardous waste. First, Sec. 3 explains the system of state enforcement of the federal RCRA requirements on hazardous waste within their borders. Second, Sec. 3 discusses two peculiar provisions of RCRA that appear to permit states to regulate federal facilities more strictly than RCRA otherwise would require.

  16. Annual Groundwater Detection Monitoring Report for the Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (2008)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lorie Cahn

    2009-07-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This report presents the data collected for groundwater detection monitoring at the Idaho Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) Disposal Facility (ICDF) during calendar year 2008. The detection-monitoring program developed for the ICDF groundwater-monitoring wells is applicable to six wells completed in the uppermost portion of the Snake River Plain Aquifer. Five wells downgradient of the ICDF and one well upgradient. The ICDF detection-monitoring program was established to meet the substantive requirements of Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 264.97 and 264.98, which are applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements under CERCLA. Semiannal groundwater samples were collected and analyzed for indicator parameters in March and September. The indicator parameters focus on constituents that are found in higher concentrations in ICDF leachate than in groundwater (bicarbonate alkalinity, sulfate, U-233, and U-238). The only detection monitoring limits that were exceeded were for bicarbonate alkalinity. Bicarbonate alkalinity is naturally occuring in groundwater. Bicarbonate alkalinity found in ICDF detection monitoring wells is not a result of waste migration from the ICDF landfill or the evaporation pond. The U.S. Department of Energy will continue with detection monitoring for the ICDF, which is semiannual sampling for indicator parameters.

  17. Annual Groundwater Detection Monitoring Report for the Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (2008)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lorie Cahn

    2009-07-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This report presents the data collected for groundwater detection monitoring at the Idaho Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) Disposal Facility (ICDF) during calendar year 2008. The detection-monitoring program developed for the ICDF groundwater-monitoring wells is applicable to six wells completed in the uppermost portion of the Snake River Plain Aquifer ? five wells downgradient of the ICDF and one well upgradient. The ICDF detection-monitoring program was established to meet the substantive requirements of Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 264.97 and 264.98, which are applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements under CERCLA. Semiannual groundwater samples were collected and analyzed for indicator parameters in March and September. The indicator parameters focus on constituents that are found in higher concentrations in ICDF leachate than in groundwater (bicarbonate alkalinity, sulfate, U-233, U-234, and U-238). The only detection monitoring limits that were exceeded were for bicarbonate alkalinity. Bicarbonate alkalinity is naturally occurring in groundwater. Bicarbonate alkalinity found in ICDF detection monitoring wells is not a result of waste migration from the ICDF landfill or the evaporation pond. The U.S. Department of Energy will continue with detection monitoring for the ICDF, which is semiannual sampling for indicator parameters.

  18. Groundwater impact assessment report for the 1325-N Liquid Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Alexander, D.J.; Johnson, V.G.

    1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In 1943 the Hanford Site was chosen as a location for the Manhattan Project to produce plutonium for use in nuclear weapons. The 100-N Area at Hanford was used from 1963 to 1987 for a dual-purpose, plutonium production and steam generation reactor and related operational support facilities (Diediker and Hall 1987). In November 1989, the reactor was put into dry layup status. During operations, chemical and radioactive wastes were released into the area soil, air, and groundwater. The 1325-N LWDF was constructed in 1983 to replace the 1301-N Liquid Waste Disposal Facility (1301-N LWDF). The two facilities operated simultaneously from 1983 to 1985. The 1301-N LWDF was retired from use in 1985 and the 1325-N LWDF continued operation until April 1991, when active discharges to the facility ceased. Effluent discharge to the piping system has been controlled by administrative means. This report discusses ground water contamination resulting from the 1325-N Liquid Waste Disposal facility.

  19. Procuring Solar for Federal Facilities | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2 OPAM615_CostNSAR - TProcuring Solar for Federal Facilities Procuring Solar for

  20. Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Compliance Demonstration for DOE Order 435.1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. Simonds

    2006-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This compliance demonstration document provides an analysis of the Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) Complex compliance with DOE Order 435.1. The ICDF Complex includes the disposal facility (landfill), evaporation pond, admin facility, weigh scale, decon building, treatment systems, and various staging/storage areas. These facilities were designed and are being constructed to be compliant with DOE Order 435.1, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Subtitle C, and Toxic Substances Control Act polychlorinated biphenyl design and construction standards. The ICDF Complex is designated as the central Idaho National Laboratory (INL) facilityyy for the receipt, staging/storage, treatment, and disposal of INL Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) waste streams. This compliance demonstration document discusses the conceptual site model for the ICDF Complex area. Within this conceptual site model, the selection of the area for the ICDF Complex is discussed. Also, the subsurface stratigraphy in the ICDF Complex area is discussed along with the existing contamination beneath the ICDF Complex area. The designs for the various ICDF Complex facilities are also included in this compliance demonstration document. These design discussions are a summary of the design as presented in the Remedial Design/Construction Work Plans for the ICDF landfill and evaporation pond and the Staging, Storage, Sizing, and Treatment Facility. Each of the major facilities or systems is described including the design criteria.

  1. Evaluation of Low-Level Waste Disposal Receipt Data for Los Alamos National Laboratory Technical Area 54, Area G Disposal Facility - Fiscal Year 2011

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    French, Sean B. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Shuman, Robert [WPS: WASTE PROJECTS AND SERVICES

    2012-04-17T23:59:59.000Z

    The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL or the Laboratory) generates radioactive waste as a result of various activities. Operational or institutional waste is generated from a wide variety of research and development activities including nuclear weapons development, energy production, and medical research. Environmental restoration (ER), and decontamination and decommissioning (D and D) waste is generated as contaminated sites and facilities at LANL undergo cleanup or remediation. The majority of this waste is low-level radioactive waste (LLW) and is disposed of at the Technical Area 54 (TA-54), Area G disposal facility. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1 (DOE, 2001) requires that radioactive waste be managed in a manner that protects public health and safety, and the environment. To comply with this order, DOE field sites must prepare and maintain site-specific radiological performance assessments for LLW disposal facilities that accept waste after September 26, 1988. Furthermore, sites are required to conduct composite analyses that account for the cumulative impacts of all waste that has been (or will be) disposed of at the facilities and other sources of radioactive material that may interact with the facilities. Revision 4 of the Area G performance assessment and composite analysis was issued in 2008 (LANL, 2008). These analyses estimate rates of radionuclide release from the waste disposed of at the facility, simulate the movement of radionuclides through the environment, and project potential radiation doses to humans for several on-site and off-site exposure scenarios. The assessments are based on existing site and disposal facility data and on assumptions about future rates and methods of waste disposal. The accuracy of the performance assessment and composite analysis depends upon the validity of the data used and assumptions made in conducting the analyses. If changes in these data and assumptions are significant, they may invalidate or call into question certain aspects of the analyses. For example, if the volumes and activities of waste disposed of during the remainder of the disposal facility's lifetime differ significantly from those projected, the doses projected by the analyses may no longer apply. DOE field sites are required to implement a performance assessment and composite analysis maintenance program. The purpose of this program is to ensure the continued applicability of the analyses through incremental improvement of the level of understanding of the disposal site and facility. Site personnel are required to conduct field and experimental work to reduce the uncertainty in the data and models used in the assessments. Furthermore, they are required to conduct periodic reviews of waste receipts, comparing them to projected waste disposal rates. The radiological inventory for Area G was updated in conjunction with Revision 4 of the performance assessment and composite analysis (Shuman, 2008). That effort used disposal records and other sources of information to estimate the quantities of radioactive waste that have been disposed of at Area G from 1959, the year the facility started receiving waste on a routine basis, through 2007. It also estimated the quantities of LLW that will require disposal from 2008 through 2044, the year in which it is assumed that disposal operations at Area G will cease. This report documents the fourth review of Area G disposal receipts since the inventory was updated and examines information for waste placed in the ground during fiscal years (FY) 2008 through 2011. The primary objective of the disposal receipt review is to ensure that the future waste inventory projections developed for the performance assessment and composite analysis are consistent with the actual types and quantities of waste being disposed of at Area G. Toward this end, the disposal data that are the subject of this review are used to update the future waste inventory projections for the disposal facility. These projections are compared to the future inventory projections that were develope

  2. National Environmental Policy Act Compliance Strategy for the Remote-Handled Low-level Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Peggy Hinman

    2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) needs to have disposal capability for remote-handled low level waste (LLW) generated at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) at the time the existing disposal facility is full or must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the INL Subsurface Disposal Area in approximately the year 2017.

  3. Disposal of radioactive waste from nuclear research facilities

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Maxeiner, H; Kolbe, E

    2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Swiss radioactive wastes originate from nuclear power plants (NPP) and from medicine (e.g. radiation sources), industry (e.g. fire detectors) and research (e.g. CERN, PSI). Their conditioning, characterisation and documentation has to meet the demands given by the Swiss regulatory authorities including all information needed for a safe disposal in future repositories. For NPP wastes, arisings as well as the processes responsible for the buildup of short and long lived radionuclides are well known, and the conditioning procedures are established. The radiological inventories are determined on a routinely basis using a combined system of measurements and calculational programs. For waste from research, the situation is more complicated. The wide spectrum of different installations combined with a poorly known history of primary and secondary radiation results in heterogeneous waste sorts with radiological inventories quite different from NPP waste and difficult to measure long lived radionuclides. In order to c...

  4. Greening Federal Facilities: An Energy, Environmental, and Economic Resource Guide for Federal Facility managers and Designers; Second Edition

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742Energy ChinaofSchaefer To: CongestionDevelopment of aLoggingsubscriber to theFEDERAL FACILITIES

  5. Waste disposal technology transfer matching requirement clusters for waste disposal facilities in China

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dorn, Thomas, E-mail: thomas.dorn@uni-rostock.de [University of Rostock, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Department Waste Management, Justus-v.-Liebig-Weg 6, 18059 Rostock (Germany); Nelles, Michael, E-mail: michael.nelles@uni-rostock.de [University of Rostock, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Department Waste Management, Justus-v.-Liebig-Weg 6, 18059 Rostock (Germany); Flamme, Sabine, E-mail: flamme@fh-muenster.de [University of Applied Sciences Muenster, Corrensstrasse 25, 48149 Muenster (Germany); Jinming, Cai [Hefei University of Technology, 193 Tunxi Road, 230009 Hefei (China)

    2012-11-15T23:59:59.000Z

    Highlights: Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer We outline the differences of Chinese MSW characteristics from Western MSW. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer We model the requirements of four clusters of plant owner/operators in China. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer We examine the best technology fit for these requirements via a matrix. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer Variance in waste input affects result more than training and costs. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer For China technology adaptation and localisation could become push, not pull factors. - Abstract: Even though technology transfer has been part of development aid programmes for many decades, it has more often than not failed to come to fruition. One reason is the absence of simple guidelines or decision making tools that help operators or plant owners to decide on the most suitable technology to adopt. Practical suggestions for choosing the most suitable technology to combat a specific problem are hard to get and technology drawbacks are not sufficiently highlighted. Western counterparts in technology transfer or development projects often underestimate or don't sufficiently account for the high investment costs for the imported incineration plant; the differing nature of Chinese MSW; the need for trained manpower; and the need to treat flue gas, bunker leakage water, and ash, all of which contain highly toxic elements. This article sets out requirements for municipal solid waste disposal plant owner/operators in China as well as giving an attribute assessment for the prevalent waste disposal plant types in order to assist individual decision makers in their evaluation process for what plant type might be most suitable in a given situation. There is no 'best' plant for all needs and purposes, and requirement constellations rely on generalisations meaning they cannot be blindly applied, but an alignment of a type of plant to a type of owner or operator can realistically be achieved. To this end, a four-step approach is suggested and a technology matrix is set out to ease the choice of technology to transfer and avoid past errors. The four steps are (1) Identification of plant owner/operator requirement clusters; (2) Determination of different municipal solid waste (MSW) treatment plant attributes; (3) Development of a matrix matching requirement clusters to plant attributes; (4) Application of Quality Function Deployment Method to aid in technology localisation. The technology transfer matrices thus derived show significant performance differences between the various technologies available. It is hoped that the resulting research can build a bridge between technology transfer research and waste disposal research in order to enhance the exchange of more sustainable solutions in future.

  6. Webinar: Procuring Fuel Cells for Stationary Power: A Guide for Federal Facility Decision Makers

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Video recording and text version of the webinar titled, Procuring Fuel Cells for Stationary Power: A Guide for Federal Facility Decision Makers, originally presented on May 8, 2012.

  7. Expanding public involvement in the restoration of federal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, A.W.; Rouse, N.V. [ABB Environmental Services, Inc., Arlington, VA (United States); Lawley, S.B. [SOUTHNA VFACENGCOM, North Charleston, SC (United States)

    1994-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    In February of 1994, the Navy released a guidance document entitled Establishment of Restoration Advisory Boards. This guidance recommends that all Navy facilities with practicing Technical Review Committees (TRCs) transition these committees into Restoration Advisory Boards, or RABS. Subsequently, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in concert with the Department of Defense (DOD), issued similar draft guidance that also strongly recommends this transition to RABs be accomplished. The intent of creating RABs is to increase community participation in the federal facility environmental restoration process. The RAB`s mission is to provide an avenue for early, two-way communication between the affected community and the environmental decision makers. The Navy strongly believes that implementing RABs will accelerate cleanups by ensuring that the affected communities have a voice early in the restoration process. The Navy is implementing this guidance at a number of Navy facilities, including bases that have been targeted for closure. This paper discusses DOD and Navy policy and joint EPA and DOD guidelines for implementing RABs, techniques to recruit additional community members, the process for selecting RAB members, orientation of RAB members, and RAB operational considerations. It also provides insight into what the Navy has learned by establishing RABs.

  8. ANNUAL SUMMARY OF THE INTEGRATED DISPOSAL FACILITY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT FOR 2004

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MANN, F M

    2005-02-09T23:59:59.000Z

    As required by the US. Department of Energy (DOE) order on radioactive waste management (DOE 1999a) and as implemented by the ''Maintenance Plan for the Hanford Immobilized Low-Activity Tank Waste Performance Assessment'' (Mann 2004), an annual summary of the adequacy of the Hanford Immobilized Low-Activity Tank Waste Performance Assessment (ILAW PA) is necessary in each year in which a performance assessment is not issued. A draft version of the 2001 ILAW PA was sent to the DOE Headquarters (DOE/HQ) in April 2001 for review and approval. The DOE approved (DOE 2001) the draft version of the 2001 ILAW PA and issued a new version of the Hanford Site waste disposal authorization statement (DAS). Based on comments raised during the review, the draft version was revised and the 2001 ILAW PA was formally issued (Mann et al. 2001). The DOE (DOE 2003a) has reviewed the final 2001 ILAW PA and concluded that no changes to the DAS were necessary. Also as required by the DOE order, annual summaries have been generated and approved. The previous annual summary (Mann 2003b) noted the change of mission from ILAW disposal to the disposal of a range of solid waste types, including ILAW. DOE approved the annual summary (DOE 2003c), noting the expanded mission. Considering the results of data collection and analysis, the conclusions of the 2001 ILAW PA remain valid as they pertain to ILAW disposal. The new data also suggest that impacts from the disposal of the other solid waste will be lower than initially estimated in the ''Integrated Disposal Facility Risk Assessment'' (Mann 2003a). A performance assessment for the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) will be issued in the summer of 2005.

  9. Near-Field Hydrology Data Package for the Integrated Disposal Facility 2005 Performance Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Meyer, Philip D.; Saripalli, Prasad; Freedman, Vicky L.

    2004-06-25T23:59:59.000Z

    CH2MHill Hanford Group, Inc. (CHG) is designing and assessing the performance of an Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) to receive immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW), Low-Level and Mixed Low-Level Wastes (LLW/MLLW), and the Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) melters used to vitrify the ILAW. The IDF Performance Assessment (PA) assesses the performance of the disposal facility to provide a reasonable expectation that the disposal of the waste is protective of the general public, groundwater resources, air resources, surface water resources, and inadvertent intruders. The PA requires prediction of contaminant migration from the facilities, which is expected to occur primarily via the movement of water through the facilities and the consequent transport of dissolved contaminants in the pore water of the vadose zone. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) assists CHG in its performance assessment activities. One of PNNL’s tasks is to provide estimates of the physical, hydraulic, and transport properties of the materials comprising the disposal facilities and the disturbed region around them. These materials are referred to as the near-field materials. Their properties are expressed as parameters of constitutive models used in simulations of subsurface flow and transport. In addition to the best-estimate parameter values, information on uncertainty in the parameter values and estimates of the changes in parameter values over time are required to complete the PA. These parameter estimates and information were previously presented in a report prepared for the 2001 ILAW PA. This report updates the parameter estimates for the 2005 IDF PA using additional information and data collected since publication of the earlier report.

  10. EISA Section 432: Federal Facility Management and Benchmarking Requirements

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Federal Energy Management Program is responsible for tracking Federal agency progress toward meeting Section 432 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.

  11. Hazardous-Substance Generator, Transporter and Disposer Liability under the Federal and California Superfunds

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Vernon, James; Dennis, Patrick W.

    1981-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Carpenter-Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act ofincluding spills and hazardous- waste disposal sites thatlabel for the disposal of hazardous wastes. Id. at 607. The

  12. Technology Potential of Thermal Energy Storage (TES) Systems in Federal Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chvala, William D.

    2001-07-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This document presents the findings of a technology market assessment for thermal energy storage (TES) in space cooling applications. The potential impact of TES in Federal facilities is modeled using the Federal building inventory with the appropriate climatic and energy cost data. In addition, this assessment identified acceptance issues and major obstacles through interviews with energy services companies (ESCOs), TES manufacturers, and Federal facility staff.

  13. Decommissioning and waste disposal methods for an uranium mill facility in Spain

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Santiago, J.L. [ENRESA, Madrid (Spain); Sanchez, M. [INITEC, Madrid (Spain)

    1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    In the south of Spain on the outskirts of the town of Andujar an inactive uranium mill tailings pile is being stabilized in place. Mill equipment, buildings and process facilities have been dismantled and demolished and the resulting metal wastes and debris will be placed in the pile. The tailings mass is being reshaped by flattening the sideslopes and a cover system will be placed over the pile. This paper describes the technical procedures used for the remediation and closure of the Andujar mill site and in particular discusses the approaches used for the dismantling and demolition of the processing facilities and the disposal of the metal wastes and demolition debris.

  14. Model training curriculum for Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility Operations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tyner, C.J.; Birk, S.M.

    1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document is to assist in the development of the training programs required to be in place for the operating license for a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility. It consists of an introductory document and four additional appendixes of individual training program curricula. This information will provide the starting point for the more detailed facility-specific training programs that will be developed as the facility hires and trains new personnel and begins operation. This document is comprehensive and is intended as a guide for the development of a company- or facility-specific program. The individual licensee does not need to use this model training curriculum as written. Instead, this document can be used as a menu for the development, modification, or verification of customized training programs.

  15. Performance Assessment for the Idaho National Laboratory Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Annette L. Schafer; A. Jeffrey Sondrup; Arthur S. Rood

    2012-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This performance assessment for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility at the Idaho National Laboratory documents the projected radiological dose impacts associated with the disposal of low-level radioactive waste at the facility. This assessment evaluates compliance with the applicable radiological criteria of the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for protection of the public and the environment. The calculations involve modeling transport of radionuclides from buried waste to surface soil and subsurface media, and eventually to members of the public via air, groundwater, and food chain pathways. Projections of doses are calculated for both offsite receptors and individuals who inadvertently intrude into the waste after site closure. The results of the calculations are used to evaluate the future performance of the low-level radioactive waste disposal facility and to provide input for establishment of waste acceptance criteria. In addition, one-factor-at-a-time, Monte Carlo, and rank correlation analyses are included for sensitivity and uncertainty analysis. The comparison of the performance assessment results to the applicable performance objectives provides reasonable expectation that the performance objectives will be met

  16. Computer software design description for the Treated Effluent Disposal Facility (TEDF), Project L-045H, Operator Training Station (OTS)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Carter, R.L. Jr.

    1994-11-07T23:59:59.000Z

    The Treated Effluent Disposal Facility (TEDF) Operator Training Station (OTS) is a computer-based training tool designed to aid plant operations and engineering staff in familiarizing themselves with the TEDF Central Control System (CCS).

  17. Federal Technical Capability Policy for Defense Nuclear Facilities

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

    1998-12-10T23:59:59.000Z

    The policy regarding the Federal Technical Capability Program, which provides for the recruitment, deployment, development, and retention of Federal personnel with the demonstrated technical capability to safely accomplish the Department’s missions and responsibilities.

  18. HEU to LEU conversion and blending facility: UNH blending alternative to produce LEU oxide for disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The United States Department of Energy (DOE) is examining options for the disposition of surplus weapons-usable fissile materials and storage of all weapons-usable fissile materials. Disposition is a process of use or disposal of material that results in the material being converted to a form that is substantially and inherently more proliferation-resistant than is the original form. Examining options for increasing the proliferation resistance of highly enriched uranium (HEU) is part of this effort. This report provides data to be used in the environmental impact analysis for the uranyl nitrate hexahydrate blending option to produce oxide for disposal. This the Conversion and Blending Facility (CBF) alternative will have two missions (1) convert HEU materials into HEU uranyl nitrate (UNH) and (2) blend the HEU uranyl nitrate with depleted and natural assay uranyl nitrate to produce an oxide that can be stored until an acceptable disposal approach is available. The primary emphasis of this blending operation will be to destroy the weapons capability of large, surplus stockpiles of HEU. The blended LEU product can only be made weapons capable again by the uranium enrichment process. The blended LEU will be produced as a waste suitable for storage or disposal.

  19. Program Plan for Revision of the Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility Performance Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cook, James R.

    2005-12-07T23:59:59.000Z

    Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) and the Saltstone Project, are embarking on the next revision to the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF) performance assessment (PA). This program plan has been prepared to outline the general approach, scope, schedule and resources for the PA revision. The plan briefly describes the task elements of the PA process. It discusses critical PA considerations in the development of conceptual models and interpretation of results. Applicable quality assurance (QA) requirements are identified and the methods for implementing QA for both software and documentation are described. The plan identifies project resources supporting the core team and providing project oversight. Program issues and risks are identified as well as mitigation of those risks. Finally, a preliminary program schedule has been developed and key deliverables identified. A number of significant changes have been implemented since the last PA revision resulting in a new design for future SDF disposal units. This revision will encompass the existing and planned disposal units, PA critical radionuclides and exposure pathways important to SDF performance. An integrated analysis of the overall facility layout, including all disposal units, will be performed to assess the impact of plume overlap on PA results. Finally, a rigorous treatment of uncertainty will be undertaken using probabilistic simulations. This analysis will be reviewed and approved by DOE-SR, DOE-HQ and potentially the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). This revision will be completed and ready for the start of the DOE review at the end of December 2006. This work supports a Saltstone Vault 2 fee-bearing milestone. This milestone includes completion of the Vault 2 module of the PA revision by the end of FY06.

  20. Federal Finance Facilities Available for Energy Efficiency Upgrades...

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

    September 24, 2013 Clean Energy Finance: A Guide to Federal Financing Programs Available for Energy Efficiency Upgrades and Clean Energy Deployment 2 Agenda * Welcome - Molly Lunn,...

  1. FOA for Assisting Federal Facilities with Energy Conservation Technologies Informational Webinar

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This webinar will highlight the funding opportunity announcement (FOA) that was issued on March 6, 2015. The AFFECT grant will provide funding for renewable energy projects at federal facilities...

  2. A process for establishing a financial assurance plan for LLW disposal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, P. [EG and G Idaho, Inc., Idaho Falls, ID (United States). National Low-Level Waste Management Program

    1993-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document describes a process by which an effective financial assurance program can be developed for new low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal facilities. The report identifies examples of activities that might cause financial losses and the types of losses they might create, discusses mechanisms that could be used to quantify and ensure against the various types of potential losses identified and describes a decision process to formulate a financial assurance program that takes into account the characteristics of both the potential losses and available mechanisms. A sample application of the concepts described in the report is provided.

  3. Saltstone Disposal Facility Mechanically Stabilized Earth Vault Closure Cap Degradation: Sensitivity Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    PHIFER, MARK

    2004-03-19T23:59:59.000Z

    As part of the current Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF) Performance Assessment (PA) revision, Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) vault closure cap degradation mechanisms and their impact upon filtration through the MSE vault closure cap were evaluated for the base case land use scenario (i.e. institutional control to pine forest). The degradation mechanisms evaluated included pine forest succession, erosion, and colloidal clay migration (Phifer 2003). Infiltration through the upper hydraulic barrier layer of the closure cap as determined by this evaluation will be utilized as the infiltration input to subsequent PORFLOW vadose zone contaminant transport modeling, which will also be performed as part of the PA revision.

  4. Sandia National Laboratories support of the Iraq Nuclear Facility Dismantlement and Disposal Program.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cochran, John Russell; Danneels, Jeffrey John

    2009-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Because of past military operations, lack of upkeep and looting there are now enormous radioactive waste problems in Iraq. These waste problems include destroyed nuclear facilities, uncharacterized radioactive wastes, liquid radioactive waste in underground tanks, wastes related to the production of yellow cake, sealed radioactive sources, activated metals and contaminated metals that must be constantly guarded. Iraq currently lacks the trained personnel, regulatory and physical infrastructure to safely and securely manage these facilities and wastes. In 2005 the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) agreed to organize an international cooperative program to assist Iraq with these issues. Soon after, the Iraq Nuclear Facility Dismantlement and Disposal Program (the NDs Program) was initiated by the U.S. Department of State (DOS) to support the IAEA and assist the Government of Iraq (GOI) in eliminating the threats from poorly controlled radioactive materials. The Iraq NDs Program is providing support for the IAEA plus training, consultation and limited equipment to the GOI. The GOI owns the problems and will be responsible for implementation of the Iraq NDs Program. Sandia National Laboratories (Sandia) is a part of the DOS's team implementing the Iraq NDs Program. This report documents Sandia's support of the Iraq NDs Program, which has developed into three principal work streams: (1) training and technical consultation; (2) introducing Iraqis to modern decommissioning and waste management practices; and (3) supporting the IAEA, as they assist the GOI. Examples of each of these work streams include: (1) presentation of a three-day training workshop on 'Practical Concepts for Safe Disposal of Low-Level Radioactive Waste in Arid Settings;' (2) leading GOI representatives on a tour of two operating low level radioactive waste disposal facilities in the U.S.; and (3) supporting the IAEA's Technical Meeting with the GOI from April 21-25, 2008. As noted in the report, there was significant teaming between the various participants to best help the GOI. On-the-ground progress is the focus of the Iraq NDs Program and much of the work is a transfer of technical and practical skills and knowledge that Sandia uses day-to-day. On-the-ground progress was achieved in July of 2008 when the GOI began the physical cleanup and dismantlement of the Active Metallurgical Testing Laboratory (LAMA) facility at Al Tuwaitha, near Baghdad.

  5. The Vapor Plume at Material Disposal Are C in Relation to Pajarito Corridor Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Masse, William B. [Los Alamos National Laboratory

    2012-04-02T23:59:59.000Z

    A vapor plume made up of volatile organic compounds is present beneath Material Disposal Area C (MDA C) at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The location and concentrations within the vapor plume are discussed in relation to existing and planned facilities and construction activities along Pajarito Road (the 'Pajarito Corridor') and in terms of worker health and safety. This document provides information that indicates that the vapor plume does not pose a threat to the health of LANL workers nor will it pose a threat to workers during construction of proposed facilities along Pajarito Road. The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL or the Laboratory) monitors emissions, effluents, and environmental media to meet environmental compliance requirements, determine actions to protect the environment, and monitor the long-term health of the local environment. LANL also studies and characterizes 'legacy' waste from past Laboratory operations to make informed decisions regarding eventual corrective actions and the disposition of that waste. Starting in 1969, these activities have been annually reported in the LANL Environmental Report (formerly Environmental Surveillance Report), and are detailed in publicly accessible technical reports meeting environmental compliance requirements. Included among the legacy sites being investigated are several formerly used material disposal areas (MDAs) set aside by the Laboratory for the general on-site disposal of waste from mission-related activities. One such area is MDA C located in Technical Area 50 (TA-50), which was used for waste disposal between 1948 and 1974. The location of TA-50 is depicted in Figure 1. The present paper uses a series of maps and cross sections to address the public concerns raised about the vapor plume at MDA C. As illustrated here, extensive sampling and data interpretation indicate that the vapor plume at MDA C does not pose a threat to the health of LANL workers nor will it pose a threat to workers during construction of the proposed facilities and utility trenches. The public cannot be directly exposed to the vapor plume beneath MDA C because Pajarito Road is closed to the public.

  6. Inadvertent Intruder Analysis For The Portsmouth On-Site Waste Disposal Facility (OSWDF)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, Frank G.; Phifer, Mark A.

    2014-01-22T23:59:59.000Z

    The inadvertent intruder analysis considers the radiological impacts to hypothetical persons who are assumed to inadvertently intrude on the Portsmouth OSWDF site after institutional control ceases 100 years after site closure. For the purposes of this analysis, we assume that the waste disposal in the OSWDF occurs at time zero, the site is under institutional control for the next 100 years, and inadvertent intrusion can occur over the following 1,000 year time period. Disposal of low-level radioactive waste in the OSWDF must meet a requirement to assess impacts on such individuals, and demonstrate that the effective dose equivalent to an intruder would not likely exceed 100 mrem per year for scenarios involving continuous exposure (i.e. chronic) or 500 mrem for scenarios involving a single acute exposure. The focus in development of exposure scenarios for inadvertent intruders was on selecting reasonable events that may occur, giving consideration to regional customs and construction practices. An important assumption in all scenarios is that an intruder has no prior knowledge of the existence of a waste disposal facility at the site. Results of the analysis show that a hypothetical inadvertent intruder at the OSWDF who, in the worst case scenario, resides on the site and consumes vegetables from a garden established on the site using contaminated soil (chronic agriculture scenario) would receive a maximum chronic dose of approximately 7.0 mrem/yr during the 1000 year period of assessment. This dose falls well below the DOE chronic dose limit of 100 mrem/yr. Results of the analysis also showed that a hypothetical inadvertent intruder at the OSWDF who, in the worst case scenario, excavates a basement in the soil that reaches the waste (acute basement construction scenario) would receive a maximum acute dose of approximately 0.25 mrem/yr during the 1000 year period of assessment. This dose falls well below the DOE acute dose limit of 500 mrem/yr. Disposal inventory constraints based on the intruder analysis are well above conservative estimates of the OSWDF inventory and, based on intruder disposal limits; about 7% of the disposal capacity is reached with the estimated OSWDF inventory.

  7. SAVEnergy Action Plans: Implementing audits in federal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mayo, K H

    1994-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Department of Energy`s Federal Energy Management Program is charged with implementing key sections of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 and all of the Executive Order 12902, to make the Federal Government operate more energy and water efficient. A congressionally-mandated energy, renewables, and water conservation audit program is one component of this plan. The SAVEnergy Action Plan is designed to help energy managers identify specific energy and water projects and link these projects to appropriate funding mechanisms for implementation. FEMP`s SAVEnergy staff has been working with Federal agencies to develop strategies to complete their legislatively-mandated goals, both through FEMP`s programs and other programs available to the Federal sector.

  8. Terra-Gen Powers Coso Geothermal Facility Obtains Critical Federal...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Obtains Critical Federal Permit to Increase Its Renewable Energy Generation Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Terra-Gen Powers Coso...

  9. 2014 Assisting Federal Facilities with Energy Conservation Technologie...

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

    federal prisons. U.S. Department of the Interior (National Park Service in Virginia and North Carolina): The National Park Service will deploy 350 solar-powered safety lights...

  10. Federal Technology Alert: Ground-Source Heat Pumps Applied to Federal Facilities--Second Edition

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hadley, Donald L.

    2001-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Federal Technology Alert, which was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Federal Energy Management Programs, provides the detailed information and procedures that a Federal energy manager needs to evaluate most ground-source heat pump applications. This report updates an earlier report on ground-source heat pumps that was published in September 1995. In the current report, general benefits of this technology to the Federal sector are described, as are ground-source heat pump operation, system types, design variations, energy savings, and other benefits. In addition, information on current manufacturers, technology users, and references for further reading are provided.

  11. Mr. Todd Mullins Federal Facility Agreement Manager Kentucky...

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

    etc.). If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Robert Smith at (270) 441-6821. Sincerely, , " , U H U ' " Woodard Facility Agreement Manager...

  12. State waste discharge permit application: 200 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility (Project W-049H)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    As part of the original Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Concent Order negotiations, US DOE, US EPA and the Washington State Department of Ecology agreed that liquid effluent discharges to the ground to the Hanford Site are subject to permitting in the State Waste Discharge Permit Program (SWDP). This document constitutes the SWDP Application for the 200 Area TEDF stream which includes the following streams discharged into the area: Plutonium Finishing Plant waste water; 222-S laboratory Complex waste water; T Plant waste water; 284-W Power Plant waste water; PUREX chemical Sewer; B Plant chemical sewer, process condensate, steam condensate; 242-A-81 Water Services waste water.

  13. Annual Report for Los Alamos National Laboratory Technical Area 54, Area G Disposal Facility - Fiscal Year 2011

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    French, Sean B. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Shuman, Rob [WPS: WASTE PROJECTS AND SERVICES

    2012-05-22T23:59:59.000Z

    As a condition to the Disposal Authorization Statement issued to Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL or the Laboratory) on March 17, 2010, a comprehensive performance assessment and composite analysis maintenance program must be implemented for the Technical Area 54, Area G disposal facility. Annual determinations of the adequacy of the performance assessment and composite analysis are to be conducted under the maintenance program to ensure that the conclusions reached by those analyses continue to be valid. This report summarizes the results of the fiscal year 2011 annual review for Area G. Revision 4 of the Area G performance assessment and composite analysis was issued in 2008 and formally approved in 2009. These analyses are expected to provide reasonable estimates of the long-term performance of Area G and, hence, the disposal facility's ability to comply with Department of Energy (DOE) performance objectives. Annual disposal receipt reviews indicate that smaller volumes of waste will require disposal in the pits and shafts at Area G relative to what was projected for the performance assessment and composite analysis. The future inventories are projected to decrease modestly for the pits but increase substantially for the shafts due to an increase in the amount of tritium that is projected to require disposal. Overall, however, changes in the projected future inventories of waste are not expected to compromise the ability of Area G to satisfy DOE performance objectives. The Area G composite analysis addresses potential impacts from all waste disposed of at the facility, as well as other sources of radioactive material that may interact with releases from Area G. The level of knowledge about the other sources included in the composite analysis has not changed sufficiently to call into question the validity of that analysis. Ongoing environmental surveillance activities are conducted at, and in the vicinity of, Area G. However, the information generated by many of these activities cannot be used to evaluate the validity of the performance assessment and composite analysis models because the monitoring data collected are specific to operational releases or address receptors that are outside the domain of the performance assessment and composite analysis. In general, applicable monitoring data are supportive of some aspects of the performance assessment and composite analysis. Several research and development (R and D) efforts have been initiated under the performance assessment and composite analysis maintenance program. These investigations are designed to improve the current understanding of the disposal facility and site, thereby reducing the uncertainty associated with the projections of the long-term performance of Area G. The status and results of R and D activities that were undertaken in fiscal year 2011 are discussed in this report. Special analyses have been conducted to determine the feasibility of disposing of specific waste streams, to address proposed changes in disposal operations, and to consider the impacts of changes to the models used to conduct the performance assessment and composite analysis. These analyses are described and the results of the evaluations are summarized in this report. The Area G disposal facility consists of Material Disposal Area (MDA) G and the Zone 4 expansion area. To date, all disposal operations at Area G have been confined to MDA G. Material Disposal Area G is scheduled to undergo final closure in 2015; disposal of waste in the pits and shafts is scheduled to end in 2013. In anticipation of the closure of MDA G, plans are being made to ship the majority of the waste generated at LANL to off-site locations for disposal. It is not clear at this time if waste that will be disposed of at LANL will be placed in Zone 4 or if disposal operations will move to a new location at the Laboratory. Separately, efforts to optimize the final cover used in the closure of MDA G are underway; a final cover design different than that adopted for the performance assessment and composite analy

  14. An Evaluation of Long-Term Performance of Liner Systems for Low-Level Waste Disposal Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Arthur S. Rood; Annette L. Schafer; A. Jeffrey Sondrup

    2011-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Traditional liner systems consisting of a geosynthetic membrane underlying a waste disposal facility coupled with a leachate collection system have been proposed as a means of containing releases of low-level radioactive waste within the confines of the disposal facility and thereby eliminating migration of radionuclides into the vadose zone and groundwater. However, this type of hydraulic containment liner system is only effective as long as the leachate collection system remains functional or an overlying cover limits the total infiltration to the volumetric pore space of the disposal system. If either the leachate collection system fails, or the overlying cover becomes less effective during the 1,000’s of years of facility lifetime, the liner may fill with water and release contaminated water in a preferential or focused manner. If the height of the liner extends above the waste, the waste will become submerged which could increase the release rate and concentration of the leachate. If the liner extends near land surface, there is the potential for contamination reaching land surface creating a direct exposure pathway. Alternative protective liner systems can be engineered that eliminate radionuclide releases to the vadose zone during operations and minimizing long term migration of radionuclides from the disposal facility into the vadose zone and aquifer. Non-traditional systems include waste containerization in steel or composite materials. This type of system would promote drainage of clean infiltrating water through the facility without contacting the waste. Other alternatives include geochemical barriers designed to transmit water while adsorbing radionuclides beneath the facility. Facility performance for a hypothetical disposal facility has been compared for the hydraulic and steel containerization liner alternatives. Results were compared in terms of meeting the DOE Order 435.1 low-level waste performance objective of 25 mrem/yr all-pathways dose during the 1) institutional control period (0-100 years), compliance period (0-1000 years) and post-compliance period (>1000 years). Evaluation of the all pathway dose included the dose from ingestion and irrigation of contaminated groundwater extracted from a well 100 meters downgradient, in addition to the dose received from direct contact of radionuclides deposited near the surface resulting from facility overflow. Depending on the disposal facility radionuclide inventory, facility design, cover performance, and the location and environment where the facility is situated, the dose from exposure via direct contact of near surface deposited radionuclides can be much greater than the dose received via transport to the groundwater and subsequent ingestion.

  15. Federal Facility Agreement for the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan| Department of.pdf6-OPAMDepartment6Awards » Federal EnergyFederal

  16. Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities

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

    2014-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

    The Guide was developed in support of DOE O 226.1B to provide guidance that may be useful to DOE line management organizations in meeting the provisions of that order when applied to nuclear facilities.

  17. Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities

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

    2013-04-04T23:59:59.000Z

    The Guide was developed in support of DOE O 226.1B to provide guidance that may be useful to DOE line management organizations in meeting the provisions of that order when applied to nuclear facilities.

  18. Centrifuge modeling of radioactive waste migration through backfill in a near surface disposal facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gurumoorthy, C.; Kusakabe, O. [Geotechnical Engineering Division, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1 Ookayama Meguroku, Tokyo 1528552 (Japan)

    2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Investigations on the performance of backfill barrier in Near Surface Disposal Facility (NSDF) for radioactive wastes are important to ensure the long term safety of such disposal option. Favorable condition to delay migration of radionuclides from disposed waste to far fields is diffusion process. However, advective dispersion/diffusion mechanism plays an important role due to changes in backfill over a period of time. In order to understand these mechanisms, detailed laboratory experiments are usually conducted for developing mathematical models to assess the behaviour of backfill. However, these experiments are time consuming and suffer with the limitations due to material complexity. Also, there are constraints associated with validation of theoretical predictions due to intricacy of boundary conditions as well as the time scale is quite different as compared to the time required for completion of the processes in the field. Keeping in view these aspects, centrifuge modeling technique has been adopted by various researchers to model and understand various geo-environment problems in order to provide a link between the real life situation termed as the 'Prototype' and its model, which is exposed to a higher gravitational field. An attempt has been made in this paper to investigate the feasibility of this technique to model advective dispersion/diffusion mechanism of radionuclides through saturated Bentonite-Sand (B:S) backfill. Various stages of centrifuge modeling are highlighted. Column tests were conducted in the centrifuge to evaluate the hydraulic conductivity of B:S mixture under prototype NSDF stress conditions. Results showed that steady state hydraulic conductivity under saturated conditions was 2.86 10{sup -11} m/sec. Studies indicate the feasibility of centrifuge modeling technique and usefulness to model advective diffusion of radionuclides through B:S backfill. (authors)

  19. Geochemical Data Package for the 2005 Hanford Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Krupka, Kenneth M.; Serne, R JEFFREY.; Kaplan, D I.

    2004-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

    CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc. (CH2M HILL) is designing and assessing the performance of an integrated disposal facility (IDF) to receive low-level waste (LLW), mixed low-level waste (MLLW), immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW), and failed or decommissioned melters. The CH2M HILL project to assess the performance of this disposal facility is the Hanford IDF Performance Assessment (PA) activity. The goal of the Hanford IDF PA activity is to provide a reasonable expectation that the disposal of the waste is protective of the general public, groundwater resources, air resources, surface-water resources, and inadvertent intruders. Achieving this goal will require prediction of contaminant migration from the facilities. This migration is expected to occur primarily via the movement of water through the facilities, and the consequent transport of dissolved contaminants in the vadose zone to groundwater where contaminants may be re-introduced to receptors via drinking water wells or mixing in the Columbia River. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) assists CH2M HILL in their performance assessment activities. One of the PNNL tasks is to provide estimates of the geochemical properties of the materials comprising the IDF, the disturbed region around the facility, and the physically undisturbed sediments below the facility (including the vadose zone sediments and the aquifer sediments in the upper unconfined aquifer). The geochemical properties are expressed as parameters that quantify the adsorption of contaminants and the solubility constraints that might apply for those contaminants that may exceed solubility constraints. The common parameters used to quantify adsorption and solubility are the distribution coefficient (Kd) and the thermodynamic solubility product (Ksp), respectively. In this data package, we approximate the solubility of contaminants using a more simplified construct, called the solution concentration limit, a constant value. The Kd values and solution concentration limits for each contaminant are direct inputs to subsurface flow and transport codes used to predict the performance of the IDF system. In addition to the best-estimate Kd values, a reasonable conservative value and a range are provided. The data package does not list estimates for the range in solubility limits or their uncertainty. However, the data package does provide different values for both the Kd values and solution concentration limits for different spatial zones in the IDF system and does supply time-varying Kd values for the cement solidified waste. The Kd values and solution concentration limits presented for each contaminant were previously presented in a report prepared by Kaplan and Serne (2000) for the 2001 ILAW PA, and have been updated to include applicable data from investigations completed since the issuance of that report and improvements in our understanding of the geochemistry specific to Hanford. A discussion is also included of the evolution of the Kd values recommended from the original 1999 ILAW PA through the 2001 ILAW and 2003 Supplement PAs to the current values to be used for the 2005 IDF PA for the key contaminants of concern: Cr(VI), nitrate, 129I, 79Se, 99Tc, and U(VI). This discussion provides the rationale for why certain Kd have changed with time.

  20. Standard Guide for Evaluating Disposal Options for Concrete from Nuclear Facility Decommissioning

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    American Society for Testing and Materials. Philadelphia

    2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    1.1 This standard guide defines the process for developing a strategy for dispositioning concrete from nuclear facility decommissioning. It outlines a 10-step method to evaluate disposal options for radioactively contaminated concrete. One of the steps is to complete a detailed analysis of the cost and dose to nonradiation workers (the public); the methodology and supporting data to perform this analysis are detailed in the appendices. The resulting data can be used to balance dose and cost and select the best disposal option. These data, which establish a technical basis to apply to release the concrete, can be used in several ways: (1) to show that the release meets existing release criteria, (2) to establish a basis to request release of the concrete on a case-by-case basis, (3) to develop a basis for establishing release criteria where none exists. 1.2 This standard guide is based on the “Protocol for Development of Authorized Release Limits for Concrete at U.S. Department of Energy Sites,” (1) from ...

  1. Comparative approaches to siting low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Newberry, W.F.

    1994-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes activities in nine States to select site locations for new disposal facilities for low-level radioactive waste. These nine States have completed processes leading to identification of specific site locations for onsite investigations. For each State, the status, legal and regulatory framework, site criteria, and site selection process are described. In most cases, States and compact regions decided to assign responsibility for site selection to agencies of government and to use top-down mapping methods for site selection. The report discusses quantitative and qualitative techniques used in applying top-down screenings, various approaches for delineating units of land for comparison, issues involved in excluding land from further consideration, and different positions taken by the siting organizations in considering public acceptance, land use, and land availability as factors in site selection.

  2. HEU to LEU conversion and blending facility: Metal blending alternative to produce LEU oxide for disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    US DOE is examining options for disposing of surplus weapons-usable fissile materials and storage of all weapons-usable fissile materials. The nuclear material is converted to a form more proliferation- resistant than the original form. Blending HEU (highly enriched uranium) with less-enriched uranium to form LEU has been proposed as a disposition option. Five technologies are being assessed for blending HEU. This document provides data to be used in environmental impact analysis for the HEU-LEU disposition option that uses metal blending with an oxide waste product. It is divided into: mission and assumptions, conversion and blending facility descriptions, process descriptions and requirements, resource needs, employment needs, waste and emissions from plant, hazards discussion, and intersite transportation.

  3. Fissile Material Disposition Program: Deep Borehole Disposal Facility PEIS data input report for direct disposal. Direct disposal of plutonium metal/plutonium dioxide in compound metal canisters. Version 3.0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wijesinghe, A.M.; Shaffer, R.J.

    1996-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) is examining options for disposing of excess weapons-usable nuclear materials [principally plutonium (Pu) and highly enriched uranium (HEU)] in a form or condition that is substantially and inherently more difficult to recover and reuse in weapons production. This report is the data input report for the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). The PEIS examines the environmental, safety, and health impacts of implementing each disposition alternative on land use, facility operations, and site infrastructure; air quality and noise; water, geology, and soils; biotic, cultural, and paleontological resources; socioeconomics; human health; normal operations and facility accidents; waste management; and transportation. This data report is prepared to assist in estimating the environmental effects associated with the construction and operation of a Deep Borehole Disposal Facility, an alternative currently included in the PEIS. The facility projects under consideration are, not site specific. This report therefore concentrates on environmental, safety, and health impacts at a generic site appropriate for siting a Deep Borehole Disposal Facility.

  4. Comments by the American Electric Power System on Proposed Coordination of Federal Authorizations for Electric Transmission Facilities

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

     Proposed Coordination of Federal Authorizations for Electric Transmission Facilities – Interim Final Rule and Proposed Rule (DOE, 10 CR Part 900): The utility operating companies of the American...

  5. Corrective action management unit application for the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Evans, G.C.

    1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) is to accept both CERCLA (EPA-regulated) and RCRA (Ecology-regulated) remediation waste. The ERDF is considered part of the overall remediation strategy on the Hanford Site, and as such, determination of ERDF viability has followed both RCRA and CERCLA decision making processes. Typically, determination of the viability of a unit, such as the ERDF, would occur as part of record of decision (ROD) or permit modification for each remediation site before construction of the ERDF. However, because construction of the ERDF may take a significant amount of time, it is necessary to begin design and construction of the ERDF before final RODs/permit modifications for the remediation sites. This will allow movement of waste to occur quickly once the final remediation strategy for the RCRA and CERCLA past-practice units is determined. Construction of the ERDF is a unique situation relative to Hanford Facility cleanup, requiring a Hanford Facility specific process be developed for implementing the ERDF that would satisfy both RCRA and CERCLA requirements. While the ERDF will play a significant role in the remediation process, initiation of the ERDF does not preclude the evaluation of remedial alternatives at each remediation site. To facilitate this, the January 1994 amendment to the Tri-Party Agreement recognizes the necessity for the ERDF, and the Tri-Party Agreement states: ``Ecology, EPA, and DOE agree to proceed with the steps necessary to design, approve, construct, and operate such a ... facility.`` The Tri-Party Agreement requires the DOE-RL to prepare a comprehensive ``package`` for the EPA and Ecology to consider in evaluating the ERDF. The package is to address the criteria listed in 40 CFR 264.552(c) for corrective action management unit (CAMU) designation and a CERCLA ROD. This CAMU application is submitted as part of the Tri-Party Agreement-required information package.

  6. Disposing of Waste in ICCBL/NSRB Screening Facility The rules outlined below are applicable for most projects, but the screening facility

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Mitchison, Tim

    or at iccb_screen@hms.harvard.edu Solid Biological Waste Small sharps container (located on benchtop of here after proper treatment (see below). When box is 2/3 full, please notify staff. BSL2 waste binsDisposing of Waste in ICCBL/NSRB Screening Facility The rules outlined below are applicable

  7. EIS-0110: Central Waste Disposal Facility for Low-Level Radioactive Waste, Oak Ridge Reservation, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EIS assesses the environmental impacts of alternatives for the disposal of low-level waste and by-product materials generated by the three major plants on the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR). In addition to the no-action alternative, two classes of alternatives are evaluated: facility design alternatives and siting alternatives.

  8. Superfund Policy Statements and Guidance Regarding Disposition of Radioactive Waste in Non-NRC Licensed Disposal Facilities - 13407

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Walker, Stuart [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (United States)] [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (United States)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This talk will discuss EPA congressional testimony and follow-up letters, as well as letters to other stakeholders on EPA's perspectives on the disposition of radioactive waste outside of the NRC licensed disposal facility system. This will also look at Superfund's historical practices, and emerging trends in the NRC and agreement states on waste disposition. (author)

  9. Linking RESRAD-OFFSITE and HYDROGEOCHEM Model for Performance Assessment of Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility - 13429

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lin, Wen-Sheng [Hydrotech Research Institute, National Taiwan University, Taiwan (China)] [Hydrotech Research Institute, National Taiwan University, Taiwan (China); Yu, Charley; Cheng, Jing-Jy; Kamboj, Sunita; Gnanapragasam, Emmanuel [Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439 (United States)] [Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439 (United States); Liu, Chen-Wuing [Department of Bioenvironmental Systems Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taiwan (China)] [Department of Bioenvironmental Systems Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taiwan (China); Li, Ming-Hsu [Institute of Hydrological and Oceanic Sciences, National Central University, Taiwan (China)] [Institute of Hydrological and Oceanic Sciences, National Central University, Taiwan (China)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Performance assessments are crucial steps for the long-term radiological safety requirements of low-level waste (LLW) disposal facility. How much concentration of radionuclides released from the near-field to biosphere and what radiation exposure levels of an individual can influence on the satisfactory performance of the LLW disposal facility and safety disposal environment. Performance assessment methodology for the radioactive waste disposal consists of the reactive transport modeling of safety-concerned radionuclides released from the near-field to the far-field, and the potential exposure pathways and the movements of radionuclides through the geosphere, biosphere and man of which the accompanying dose. Therefore, the integration of hydrogeochemical transport model and dose assessment code, HYDROGEOCHEM code and RESRAD family of codes is imperative. The RESRAD family of codes such as RESRAD-OFFSITE computer code can evaluate the radiological dose and excess cancer risk to an individual who is exposed while located within or outside the area of initial (primary) contamination. The HYDROGEOCHEM is a 3-D numerical model of fluid flow, thermal, hydrologic transport, and biogeochemical kinetic and equilibrium reactions in saturated and unsaturated media. The HYDROGEOCHEM model can also simulate the crucial geochemical mechanism, such as the effect of redox processes on the adsorption/desorption, hydrogeochemical influences on concrete degradation, adsorption/desorption of radionuclides (i.e., surface complexation model) between solid and liquid phase in geochemically dynamic environments. To investigate the safety assessment of LLW disposal facility, linking RESRAD-OFFSITE and HYDROGEOCHEM model can provide detailed tools of confidence in the protectiveness of the human health and environmental impact for safety assessment of LLW disposal facility. (authors)

  10. Environmental effects of dredging. Documentation of the settle module for ADDAMS: Design of confined disposal facilities for solids retention and initial storage. Technical notes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hayes, D.F.; Schroeder, P.R.

    1992-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical note documents the SETTLE computer program which facilitates the design of a confined disposal facility (CDF) to retain solids, provide initial storage, and meet effluent discharge limitations for suspended solids during a dredged matenal disposal operation. Detailed information can be found in Engineer Manual 1110-2-5027, Confined Dredged Material Disposal. SETTLE is a part of the Automated Dredging and Disposal Alternatives Management System (ADDAMS).

  11. EISA Federal Covered Facility Management and Benchmarking Data | Department

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYouTube YouTube Note: Since the YouTube|6721 Federal Register / Vol.6: Record ofRecord of1:Departmentof Energy

  12. EISA Federal Facility Management and Benchmarking Reporting Requirements |

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYouTube YouTube Note: Since the YouTube|6721 Federal Register / Vol.6: Record ofRecord of1:Departmentof

  13. MONTICELLO PROJECTS FEDERAL FACILITIES AGREEMENT REPORT Report Period: January 1-

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA group currentBradleyTableSelling7111AWell:F E ,"^ IApril 1 -PROJECTS FEDERAL

  14. Purchasing Renewable Power at Federal Facilities | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742Energy China 2015of 2005UNS Electric,RM ExitProperty Transfer or TurnCompact fluorescentFederal

  15. Environmental effects of dredging. Corps of Engineers` procedures and policies on dredging and dredged material disposal (the federal standard). Technical note

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Engler, R.M.; Wright, T.; Lee, C.R.; Dillon, T.M.

    1988-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This note describes the Federal Standard pursuant to Corps` technical considerations and policies with regard to the disposal of dredged material in accordance with the Clean Water Act (CWA), which provides for selecting the least costly dredged or fill material disposal alternative consistent with sound engineering practices and appropriate environmental quality standards. This approach also generally applies to assessments conducted in accordance with the Ocean Dumping Act, even though the discussion centers on the CWA.

  16. Environmental Justice and Federal Facilities: Recommendations for Improving Stakeholder Relations Between Federal Facilities and Enviornmental Justice Communities

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011AT&T,OfficeEnd of Year 2010 SNFEnergySession0-02NationwideServices »E J FEDERAL

  17. FEDERAL FACILITY AGREEMENT FOR THE PADUCAH GASEOUS DIFFUSION PLANT

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan| Department of Energy 088:EnergyFAR27.pdfFE DOCKETFEDERAL FACILITY

  18. Safety Assessment for the Kozloduy National Disposal Facility in Bulgaria - 13507

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Biurrun, E.; Haverkamp, B. [DBE TECHNOLOGY GmbH, Eschenstr. 55, D-31224 Peine (Germany)] [DBE TECHNOLOGY GmbH, Eschenstr. 55, D-31224 Peine (Germany); Lazaro, A.; Miralles, A. [Westinghouse Electric Spain SAR, Padilla 17, E-28006 Madrid (Spain)] [Westinghouse Electric Spain SAR, Padilla 17, E-28006 Madrid (Spain); Stefanova, I. [SERAW, 52 A Dimitrov Blvd, 6 Fl., 1797 Sofia (Bulgaria)] [SERAW, 52 A Dimitrov Blvd, 6 Fl., 1797 Sofia (Bulgaria)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Due to the early decommissioning of four Water-Water Energy Reactors (WWER) 440-V230 reactors at the Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) near the city of Kozloduy in Bulgaria, large amounts of low and intermediate radioactive waste will arise much earlier than initially scheduled. In or-der to manage the radioactive waste from the early decommissioning, Bulgaria has intensified its efforts to provide a near surface disposal facility at Radiana with the required capacity. To this end, a project was launched and assigned in international competition to a German-Spanish consortium to provide the complete technical planning including the preparation of the Intermediate Safety Assessment Report. Preliminary results of operational and long-term safety show compliance with the Bulgarian regulatory requirements. The long-term calculations carried out for the Radiana site are also a good example of how analysis of safety assessment results can be used for iterative improvements of the assessment by pointing out uncertainties and areas of future investigations to reduce such uncertainties in regard to the potential radiological impact. The computer model used to estimate the long-term evolution of the future repository at Radiana predicted a maximum total annual dose for members of the critical group, which is carried to approximately 80 % by C-14 for a specific ingestion pathway. Based on this result and the outcome of the sensitivity analysis, existing uncertainties were evaluated and areas for reasonable future investigations to reduce these uncertainties were identified. (authors)

  19. Disposal Of Irradiated Cadmium Control Rods From The Plumbrook Reactor Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Posivak, E.J.; Berger, S.R.; Freitag, A.A. [WMG, Inc., Peekskill, NY (United States)

    2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Innovative mixed waste disposition from NASA's Plum Brook Reactor Facility was accomplished without costly repackaging. Irradiated characteristic hardware with contact dose rates as high as 8 Sv/hr was packaged in a HDPE overpack and stored in a Secure Environmental Container during earlier decommissioning efforts, awaiting identification of a suitable pathway. WMG obtained regulatory concurrence that the existing overpack would serve as the macro-encapsulant per 40CFR268.45 Table 1.C. The overpack vent was disabled and the overpack was placed in a stainless steel liner to satisfy overburden slumping requirements. The liner was sealed and placed in shielded shoring for transport to the disposal site in a US DOT Type A cask. Disposition via this innovative method avoided cost, risk, and dose associated with repackaging the high dose irradiated characteristic hardware. In conclusion: WMG accomplished what others said could not be done. Large D and D contractors advised NASA that the cadmium control rods could only be shipped to the proposed Yucca mountain repository. NASA management challenged MOTA to find a more realistic alternative. NASA and MOTA turned to WMG to develop a methodology to disposition the 'hot and nasty' waste that presumably had no path forward. Although WMG lead a team that accomplished the 'impossible', the project could not have been completed with out the patient, supportive management by DOE-EM, NASA, and MOTA. (authors)

  20. Characterization of 618-11 solid waste burial ground, disposed waste, and description of the waste generating facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hladek, K.L.

    1997-10-07T23:59:59.000Z

    The 618-11 (Wye or 318-11) burial ground received transuranic (TRTJ) and mixed fission solid waste from March 9, 1962, through October 2, 1962. It was then closed for 11 months so additional burial facilities could be added. The burial ground was reopened on September 16, 1963, and continued operating until it was closed permanently on December 31, 1967. The burial ground received wastes from all of the 300 Area radioactive material handling facilities. The purpose of this document is to characterize the 618-11 solid waste burial ground by describing the site, burial practices, the disposed wastes, and the waste generating facilities. This document provides information showing that kilogram quantities of plutonium were disposed to the drum storage units and caissons, making them transuranic (TRU). Also, kilogram quantities of plutonium and other TRU wastes were disposed to the three trenches, which were previously thought to contain non-TRU wastes. The site burial facilities (trenches, caissons, and drum storage units) should be classified as TRU and the site plutonium inventory maintained at five kilograms. Other fissile wastes were also disposed to the site. Additionally, thousands of curies of mixed fission products were also disposed to the trenches, caissons, and drum storage units. Most of the fission products have decayed over several half-lives, and are at more tolerable levels. Of greater concern, because of their release potential, are TRU radionuclides, Pu-238, Pu-240, and Np-237. TRU radionuclides also included slightly enriched 0.95 and 1.25% U-231 from N-Reactor fuel, which add to the fissile content. The 618-11 burial ground is located approximately 100 meters due west of Washington Nuclear Plant No. 2. The burial ground consists of three trenches, approximately 900 feet long, 25 feet deep, and 50 feet wide, running east-west. The trenches constitute 75% of the site area. There are 50 drum storage units (five 55-gallon steel drums welded together) buried in three rows in the northeast comer. In addition, five eight-foot diameter caissons are located at the west end of the center row of the drum storage units. Initially, wastes disposed to the caissons and drum storage units were from the 325 and 327 building hot cells. Later, a small amount of remote-handled (RH) waste from the 309 building Plutonium Recycle Test Reactor (PRTR) cells, and the newly built 324 building hot cells, was disposed at the site.

  1. Development of Risk Insights for Regulatory Review of a Near-Surface Disposal Facility for Radioactive Waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Esh, D.W.; Ridge, A.C.; Thaggard, M. [U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop T7J8, Washington, DC 20555 (United States)

    2006-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Section 3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (NDAA) requires the Department of Energy (DOE) to consult with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) about non-High Level Waste (HLW) determinations. In its consultative role, NRC performs technical reviews of DOE's waste determinations but does not have regulatory authority over DOE's waste disposal activities. The safety of disposal is evaluated by comparing predicted disposal facility performance to the performance objectives specified in NRC regulations for the disposal of low-level waste (10 CFR Part 61 Subpart C). The performance objectives contain criteria for protection of the public, protection of inadvertent intruders, protection of workers, and stability of the disposal site after closure. The potential radiological dose to receptors typically is evaluated with a performance assessment (PA) model that simulates the release of radionuclides from the disposal site, transport of radionuclides through the environment, and exposure of potential receptors to residual contamination for thousands of years. This paper describes NRC's development and use of independent performance assessment modeling to facilitate review of DOE's non-HLW determination for the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF) at the Savannah River Site. NRC's review of the safety of near-surface disposal of radioactive waste at the SDF was facilitated and focused by risk insights developed with an independent PA model. The main components of NRC's performance assessment model are presented. The development of risk insights that allow the staff to focus review efforts on those areas that are most important to satisfying the performance objectives is discussed. Uncertainty analysis was performed of the full stochastic model using genetic variable selection algorithms. The results of the uncertainty analysis were then used to guide the development of simulations of other scenarios to understand the key risk drivers and risk limiters of the SDF. Review emphasis was placed on those aspects of the disposal system that were expected to drive performance: the physical and chemical performance of the cementitious wasteform and concrete vaults. Refinement of the modeling of the degradation and release from the cementitious wasteform had a significant effect on the predicted dose to a member of the public. (authors)

  2. Overview on backfill materials and permeable reactive barriers for nuclear waste disposal facilities.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Moore, Robert Charles; Hasan, Ahmed Ali Mohamed; Holt, Kathleen Caroline; Hasan, Mahmoud A. (Egyptian Atomic Energy Authority, Cairo, Egypt)

    2003-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A great deal of money and effort has been spent on environmental restoration during the past several decades. Significant progress has been made on improving air quality, cleaning up and preventing leaching from dumps and landfills, and improving surface water quality. However, significant challenges still exist in all of these areas. Among the more difficult and expensive environmental problems, and often the primary factor limiting closure of contaminated sites following surface restoration, is contamination of ground water. The most common technology used for remediating ground water is surface treatment where the water is pumped to the surface, treated and pumped back into the ground or released at a nearby river or lake. Although still useful for certain remediation scenarios, the limitations of pump-and-treat technologies have recently been recognized, along with the need for innovative solutions to ground-water contamination. Even with the current challenges we face there is a strong need to create geological repository systems for dispose of radioactive wastes containing long-lived radionuclides. The potential contamination of groundwater is a major factor in selection of a radioactive waste disposal site, design of the facility, future scenarios such as human intrusion into the repository and possible need for retrieving the radioactive material, and the use of backfills designed to keep the radionuclides immobile. One of the most promising technologies for remediation of contaminated sites and design of radioactive waste repositories is the use of permeable reactive barriers (PRBs). PRBs are constructed of reactive material(s) to intercept and remove the radionuclides from the water and decontaminate the plumes in situ. The concept of PRBs is relatively simple. The reactive material(s) is placed in the subsurface between the waste or contaminated area and the groundwater. Reactive materials used thus far in practice and research include zero valent iron, hydroxyapatite, magnesium oxide, and others. As the contaminant moves through the reactive material, the contaminant is either sorbed by the reactive material or chemically reacts with the material to form a less harmful substance. Because of the high risk associated with failure of a geological repository for nuclear waste, most nations favor a near-field multibarrier engineered system using backfill materials to prevent release of radionuclides into the surrounding groundwater.

  3. Federal Facility Compliance Agreement on Storage of Polychlorinated Biphenyls, August 8, 1996

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan| Department of.pdf6-OPAMDepartment6Awards » Federal EnergyFederalFacility

  4. Proceedings of the tenth annual DOE low-level waste management conference: Session 3: Disposal technology and facility development

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1988-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document contains ten papers on various aspects of low-level radioactive waste management. Topics include: design and construction of a facility; alternatives to shallow land burial; the fate of tritium and carbon 14 released to the environment; defense waste management; engineered sorbent barriers; remedial action status report; and the disposal of mixed waste in Texas. Individual papers were processed separately for the data base. (TEM)

  5. Proposed On-Site Disposal Facility (OSDF) at the Paducah Gaseous...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    risks associated with worker safety and the environment (e.g., resource consumption, air pollution, air dispersal) that may be associated with exhumation and re-disposal of...

  6. SALTSTONE DISPOSAL FACILITY: DETERMINATION OF THE PROBABLE MAXIMUM WATER TABLE ELEVATION

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hiergesell, R

    2005-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A coverage depicting the configuration of the probable maximum water table elevation in the vicinity of the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF) was developed to support the Saltstone program. This coverage is needed to support the construction of saltstone vaults to assure that they remain above the maximum elevation of the water table during the Performance Assessment (PA) period of compliance. A previous investigation to calculate the historical high water table beneath the SDF (Cook, 1983) was built upon to incorporate new data that has since become available to refine that estimate and develop a coverage that could be extended to the perennial streams adjacent to the SDF. This investigation incorporated the method used in the Cook, 1983 report to develop an estimate of the probable maximum water table for a group of wells that either existed at one time at or near the SDF or which currently exist. Estimates of the probable maximum water table at these wells were used to construct 2D contour lines depicting this surface beneath the SDF and extend them to the nearby hydrologic boundaries at the perennial streams adjacent to the SDF. Although certain measures were implemented to assure that the contour lines depict a surface above which the water table will not rise, the exact elevation of this surface cannot be known with complete certainty. It is therefore recommended that the construction of saltstone vaults incorporate a vertical buffer of at least 5-feet between the base of the vaults and the depicted probable maximum water table elevation. This should provide assurance that the water table under the wet extreme climatic condition will never rise to intercept the base of a vault.

  7. Enhancing RESRAD-OFFSITE for Low Level Waste Disposal Facility Performance Assessment

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Abstract: The RESRAD-OFFSITE code was developed to evaluate the radiological dose and excess cancer risk to an individual who is exposed while located within or outside the area of initial (primary) contamination. The primary contamination, which is the source of all releases modeled by the code, is assumed to be a layer of soil. The code considers the release of contamination from the source to the atmosphere, to surface runoff, and to groundwater. The radionuclide leaching was modeled as a first order (without transport) release using radionuclide distribution coefficient and infiltration rate calculated from water balance (precipitation, surface runoff, evapotranspiration, etc.). Recently, a new source term model was added the RESRAD-OFFSITE code so that it can be applied to the evaluation of Low Level Waste (LLW) disposal facility performance assessment. This new improved source term model include (1) first order with transport, (2) equilibrium desorption (rinse) release, and (3) uniform release (constant dissolution). With these new source release options, it is possible to simulate both uncontainerized (soil) contamination and containerized (waste drums) contamination. A delay time in the source release was also added to the code. This allows modeling the LLW container degradation as a function of time. The RESRAD-OFFSITE code also allows linking to other codes using improved flux and concentration input options. Additional source release model such as diffusion release may be added later. In addition, radionuclide database with 1252 radionuclides (ICRP 107) and the corresponding dose coefficients (DCFPAK 3.02) and the Department of Energy’s new gender- and age-averaged Reference Person dose coefficients (DOE-STD-1196-2011) which is based on the US census data will be added to the next version of RESRAD-OFFSITE code

  8. Public perception of odour and environmental pollution attributed to MSW treatment and disposal facilities: A case study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    De Feo, Giovanni, E-mail: g.defeo@unisa.it [Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Salerno, via Ponte don Melillo 1, 84084 Fisciano (Italy); De Gisi, Sabino [Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Salerno, via Ponte don Melillo 1, 84084 Fisciano (Italy); Williams, Ian D. [Waste Management Research Group, Faculty of Engineering and the Environment, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton SO17 1BJ (United Kingdom)

    2013-04-15T23:59:59.000Z

    Highlights: ? Effects of closing MSW facilities on perception of odour and pollution studied. ? Residents’ perception of odour nuisance considerably diminished post closure. ? Odour perception showed an association with distance from MSW facilities. ? Media coverage increased knowledge about MSW facilities and how they operate. ? Economic compensation possibly affected residents’ views and concerns. - Abstract: If residents’ perceptions, concerns and attitudes towards waste management facilities are either not well understood or underestimated, people can produce strong opposition that may include protest demonstrations and violent conflicts such as those experienced in the Campania Region of Italy. The aim of this study was to verify the effects of the closure of solid waste treatment and disposal facilities (two landfills and one RDF production plant) on public perception of odour and environmental pollution. The study took place in four villages in Southern Italy. Identical questionnaires were administered to residents during 2003 and after the closure of the facilities occurred in 2008. The residents’ perception of odour nuisance considerably diminished between 2003 and 2009 for the nearest villages, with odour perception showing an association with distance from the facilities. Post closure, residents had difficulty in identifying the type of smell due to the decrease in odour level. During both surveys, older residents reported most concern about the potentially adverse health impacts of long-term exposure to odours from MSW facilities. However, although awareness of MSW facilities and concern about potentially adverse health impacts varied according to the characteristics of residents in 2003, substantial media coverage produced an equalisation effect and increased knowledge about the type of facilities and how they operated. It is possible that residents of the village nearest to the facilities reported lower awareness of and concern about odour and environmental pollution because the municipality received economic compensation for their presence.

  9. Geohydrologic evaluation for the 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility State-Approved Land Disposal Site: Addendum to WAC 173-240 Engineering Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ballantyne, N.A.

    1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document provides a geohydrologic evaluation for the disposal of liquid effluent from the 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility (ETF) at the Hanford Site. This work forms an addendum to the engineering report that supports the completion of the ETF.

  10. State waste discharge permit application for the 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility and the State-Approved Land Disposal Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Application is being made for a permit pursuant to Chapter 173--216 of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC), to discharge treated waste water and cooling tower blowdown from the 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility (ETF) to land at the State-Approved Land Disposal Site (SALDS). The ETF is located in the 200 East Area and the SALDS is located north of the 200 West Area. The ETF is an industrial waste water treatment plant that will initially receive waste water from the following two sources, both located in the 200 Area on the Hanford Site: (1) the Liquid Effluent Retention Facility (LERF) and (2) the 242-A Evaporator. The waste water discharged from these two facilities is process condensate (PC), a by-product of the concentration of waste from DSTs that is performed in the 242-A Evaporator. Because the ETF is designed as a flexible treatment system, other aqueous waste streams generated at the Hanford Site may be considered for treatment at the ETF. The origin of the waste currently contained in the DSTs is explained in Section 2.0. An overview of the concentration of these waste in the 242-A Evaporator is provided in Section 3.0. Section 4.0 describes the LERF, a storage facility for process condensate. Attachment A responds to Section B of the permit application and provides an overview of the processes that generated the wastes, storage of the wastes in double-shell tanks (DST), preliminary treatment in the 242-A Evaporator, and storage at the LERF. Attachment B addresses waste water treatment at the ETF (under construction) and the addition of cooling tower blowdown to the treated waste water prior to disposal at SALDS. Attachment C describes treated waste water disposal at the proposed SALDS.

  11. Restructuring, Tight Budgets and Executive Order 13123 Create New Incentives to Reduce Waste in Federal Industrial Facilities

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Verdict, M. E.

    This paper discusses the positive impact that electric utility industry restructuring, a reduction in the size of government operations, and the recent Presidential Executive Order 13123 should have on energy use in Federal industrial facilities...

  12. Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group Manual | Department

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial602 1,39732on ArmedManufacturingJunePracticeShipping Goal |

  13. Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group (LFRG) | Department

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYouTube YouTube Note: Since the.pdfBreaking ofOil & Gas »ofMarketing |Prepare for|TitaniumDepartment ofof

  14. DISTRIBUTION COEFICIENTS (KD) GENERATED FROM A CORE SAMPLE COLLECTED FROM THE SALTSTONE DISPOSAL FACILITY

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Almond, P.; Kaplan, D.

    2011-04-25T23:59:59.000Z

    Core samples originating from Vault 4, Cell E of the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF) were collected in September of 2008 (Hansen and Crawford 2009, Smith 2008) and sent to SRNL to measure chemical and physical properties of the material including visual uniformity, mineralogy, microstructure, density, porosity, distribution coefficients (K{sub d}), and chemical composition. Some data from these experiments have been reported (Cozzi and Duncan 2010). In this study, leaching experiments were conducted with a single core sample under conditions that are representative of saltstone performance. In separate experiments, reducing and oxidizing environments were targeted to obtain solubility and Kd values from the measurable species identified in the solid and aqueous leachate. This study was designed to provide insight into how readily species immobilized in saltstone will leach from the saltstone under oxidizing conditions simulating the edge of a saltstone monolith and under reducing conditions, targeting conditions within the saltstone monolith. Core samples were taken from saltstone poured in December of 2007 giving a cure time of nine months in the cell and a total of thirty months before leaching experiments began in June 2010. The saltstone from Vault 4, Cell E is comprised of blast furnace slag, class F fly ash, portland cement, and Deliquification, Dissolution, and Adjustment (DDA) Batch 2 salt solution. The salt solution was previously analyzed from a sample of Tank 50 salt solution and characterized in the 4QCY07 Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) report (Zeigler and Bibler 2009). Subsequent to Tank 50 analysis, additional solution was added to the tank solution from the Effluent Treatment Project as well as from inleakage from Tank 50 pump bearings (Cozzi and Duncan 2010). Core samples were taken from three locations and at three depths at each location using a two-inch diameter concrete coring bit (1-1, 1-2, 1-3; 2-1, 2-2, 2-3; 3-1, 3-2, 3-3) (Hansen and Crawford 2009). Leaching experiments were conducted with a section of core sample 3-2. All cores from location 3 were drilled without using water. Core sample 3-2 was drilled from approximately six inches to a depth of approximately 13 inches. Approximately six inches of the core was removed but it broke into two pieces during removal from the bit. At the time of drilling, core material appeared olive green in color (Smith 2008). The fact that the samples were cored as olive green and were received after storage with a gray outer layer is indicative that some oxidation had occurred prior to leaching studies.

  15. Saltstone Disposal Facility Closure Cap Configuration and Degradation Base Case: Institutional Control to Pine Forest Scenario

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Phifer, M.A.

    2004-03-19T23:59:59.000Z

    The Performance Assessment (PA) for the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF) is currently under revision. As part of the PA revision and as documented herein, the closure cap configuration has been reevaluated and closure cap degradation mechanisms and their impact upon infiltration through the closure cap have been evaluated for the institutional control to pine forest, land use scenario. This land use scenario is considered the base case land use scenario. This scenario assumes a 100-year institutional control period following final SDF closure during which the closure cap is maintained. At the end of institutional control, it is assumed that a pine forest succeeds the cap's original bamboo cover. Infiltration through the upper hydraulic barrier layer of the closure cap as determined by this evaluation will be utilized as the infiltration input to subsequent PORFLOW vadose zone contaminant transport modeling, which will also be performed as part of the PA revision. The impacts of pine forest succession, erosion, and colloidal clay migration as degradation mechanisms on the hydraulic properties of the closure cap layers over time have been estimated and the resulting infiltration through the closure cap has been evaluated. The primary changes caused by the degradation mechanisms that result in increased infiltration are the formation of holes in the upper GCL by pine forest succession and the reduction in the saturated hydraulic conductivity of the drainage layers due to colloidal clay migration into the layers. Erosion can also result in significant increases in infiltration if it causes the removal of soil layers, which provide water storage for the promotion of evapotranspiration. For this scenario, infiltration through the upper GCL was estimated at approximately 0.29 inches/year under initial intact conditions, it increased to approximately 11.6 inches/year at year 1000 in nearly a linear fashion, and it approached an asymptote of around 14.1 inches/year at year 1800 and thereafter. At year 1800, it was estimated that holes covered approximately 0.3 percent of the GCL due to root penetration, and that this resulted in an infiltration near that of typical background infiltration (i.e. as though the GCL were not there at all). This demonstrated that a very small area of holes essentially controlled the hydraulic performance of the GCL.

  16. ALL-PATHWAYS DOSE ANALYSIS FOR THE PORTSMOUTH ON-SITE WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, F.; Phifer, M.

    2014-04-10T23:59:59.000Z

    A Portsmouth On-Site Waste Disposal Facility (OSWDF) All-Pathways analysis has been conducted that considers the radiological impacts to a resident farmer. It is assumed that the resident farmer utilizes a farm pond contaminated by the OSWDF to irrigate a garden and pasture and water livestock from which food for the resident farmer is obtained, and that the farmer utilizes groundwater from the Berea sandstone aquifer for domestic purposes (i.e. drinking water and showering). As described by FBP 2014b the Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) model (Schroeder et al. 1994) and the Surface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP) model (White and Oostrom 2000, 2006) were used to model the flow and transport from the OSWDF to the Points of Assessment (POAs) associated with the 680-ft elevation sandstone layer (680 SSL) and the Berea sandstone aquifer. From this modeling the activity concentrations radionuclides were projected over time at the POAs. The activity concentrations were utilized as input to a GoldSimTM (GTG 2010) dose model, described herein, in order to project the dose to a resident farmer over time. A base case and five sensitivity cases were analyzed. The sensitivity cases included an evaluation of the impacts of using a conservative inventory, an uncased well to the Berea sandstone aquifer, a low waste zone uranium distribution coefficient (Kd), different transfer factors, and reference person exposure parameters (i.e. at 95 percentile). The maximum base case dose within the 1,000 year assessment period was projected to be 1.5E-14 mrem/yr, and the maximum base case dose at any time less than 10,000 years was projected to be 0.002 mrem/yr. The maximum projected dose of any sensitivity case was approximately 2.6 mrem/yr associated with the use of an uncased well to the Berea sandstone aquifer. This sensitivity case is considered very unlikely because it assumes leakage from the location of greatest concentration in the 680 SSL in to the Berea sandstone aquiver over time and does not conform to standard private water well construction practices. The bottom-line is that all predicted doses from the base case and five sensitivity cases fall well below the DOE all-pathways 25 mrem/yr Performance Objective.

  17. EIS-0412: Federal Loan Guarantee to Support Construction of the TX Energy LLC, Industrial Gasification Facility near Beaumont, Texas

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Department of Energy is assessing the potential environmental impacts for its proposed action of issuing a Federal loan guarantee to TX Energy, LLC (TXE). TXE submitted an application to DOE under the Federal loan guarantee program pursuant to the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005) to support construction of the TXE industrial Gasification Facility near Beaumont, Texas.

  18. ENGINEERED NEAR SURFACE DISPOSAL FACILITY OF THE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX FOR SOLID RADWASTE MANAGEMENT AT CHERNOBYL NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ziehm, Ronny; Pichurin, Sergey Grigorevich

    2003-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

    As a part of the turnkey project ''Industrial Complex for Solid Radwaste Management (ICSRM) at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (ChNPP)'' an Engineered Near Surface Disposal Facility (ENSDF, LOT 3) will be built on the VEKTOR site within the 30 km Exclusion Zone of the ChNPP. This will be performed by RWE NUKEM GmbH, Germany, and it governs the design, licensing support, fabrication, assembly, testing, inspection, delivery, erection, installation and commissioning of the ENSDF. The ENSDF will receive low to intermediate level, short lived, processed/conditioned wastes from the ICSRM Solid Waste Processing Facility (SWPF, LOT 2), the ChNPP Liquid Radwaste Treatment Plant (LRTP) and the ChNPP Interim Storage Facility for RBMK Fuel Assemblies (ISF). The ENSDF has a capacity of 55,000 m{sup 3}. The primary functions of the ENSDF are: to receive, monitor and record waste packages, to load the waste packages into concrete disposal units, to enable capping and closure of the disposal unit s, to allow monitoring following closure. The ENSDF comprises the turnkey installation of a near surface repository in the form of an engineered facility for the final disposal of LILW-SL conditioned in the ICSRM SWPF and other sources of Chernobyl waste. The project has to deal with the challenges of the Chernobyl environment, the fulfillment of both Western and Ukrainian standards, and the installation and coordination of an international project team. It will be shown that proven technologies and processes can be assembled into a unique Management Concept dealing with all the necessary demands and requirements of a turnkey project. The paper emphasizes the proposed concepts for the ENSDF and their integration into existing infrastructure and installations of the VEKTOR site. Further, the paper will consider the integration of Western and Ukrainian Organizations into a cohesive project team and the requirement to guarantee the fulfillment of both Western standards and Ukrainian regulations and licensing requirements. The paper provides information on the output of the Detail Design and will reflect the progress of the design work.

  19. Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis for Power Burst Facility (PER-620) Final End State and PBF Vessel Disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    B. C. Culp

    2007-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Preparation of this engineering evaluation/cost analysis is consistent with the joint U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Policy on Decommissioning of Department of Energy Facilities Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, (DOE and EPA 1995) which establishes the Comprehensive Environmental, Response, Compensation, and Liability Act non-time critical removal action process as an approach for decommissioning. The scope of this engineering evaluation/cost analysis is to evaluate alternatives and recommend a preferred alternative for the final end state of the PBF and the final disposal location for the PBF vessel.

  20. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Federal Facility Compliance Order, February 24, 1997 Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2 OPAM Flash2011-12Approvedof6, 1945:Laura Smith Morton About UsFederal Facility

  1. Issues in the review of a license application for an above grade low-level radioactive waste disposal facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ringenberg, J.D. [Nebraska Dept. of Environmental Quality, NE (United States)

    1993-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In December 1987, Nebraska was selected by the Central Interstate Compact (CIC) Commission as the host state for the construction of a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility. After spending a year in the site screening process, the Compact`s developer, US Ecology, selected three sites for detailed site characterization. These sites were located in Nemaha, Nuckolls and Boyd Counties. One year later the Boyd County site was selected as the preferred site and additional site characterization studies were undertaken. On July 29, 1990, US Ecology submitted a license application to the Nebraska Department of Environmental Control (now Department of Environmental Quality-NDEQ). This paper will present issues that the NDEQ has dealt with since Nebraska`s selection as the host state for the CIC facility.

  2. Grout disposal facility vault exhauster: Technical background document on demonstration of best available control technology for toxics

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Glissmeyer, J.A.; Glantz, C.S. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States); Rittman, P.D. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

    1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Grout Disposal Facility (GDF) is currently operated on the US Department of Energy`s Hanford Site. The GDF is located near the east end of the Hanford Site`s 200 East operations area, and is used for the treatment and disposal of low-level radioactive liquid wastes. In the grout treatment process, selected radioactive wastes from double-shell tanks are mixed with grout-forming solids; the resulting grout slurry is pumped to near-surface concrete vaults for solidification and permanent disposal. As part of this treatment process, small amounts of toxic particles and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) may be released to the atmosphere through the GDF`s exhaust system. This analysis constitutes a Best Available Control Technology for Toxics (T-BACT) study, as required in the Washington Administrative Code (WAC 173-460) to support a Notice of Construction for the operation of the GDF exhaust system at a modified flow rate that exceeds the previously permitted value. This report accomplishes the following: assesses the potential emissions from the GDF; estimates air quality impacts to the public from toxic air pollutants; identifies control technologies that could reduce GDF emissions; evaluates impacts of the control technologies; and recommends appropriate emissions controls.

  3. Procuring Solar Energy: A Guide for Federal Facility Decision Makers, September 2010

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stoltenberg, B.; Partyka, E.

    2010-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This guide presents an overview of the process for successfully planning for and installing solar technology on a federal site. It is specifically targeted to managers of federal buildings and sites, contracting officers, energy and sustainability officers, and regional procurement managers. The solar project process is outlined in a concise, easy-to-understand, step-by-step format. Information includes a brief overview of legislation and executive orders related to renewable energy and the compelling reasons for implementing a solar project on a federal site. It also includes how to assess a facility to identify the best solar installation site, project recommendations and considerations to help avoid unforeseen issues, and guidance on financing and contracting options. Case studies with descriptions of successful solar deployments across multiple agencies are presented. In addition, detailed information and sample documents for specific tasks are referenced with Web links or included in the appendixes. The guide concentrates on distributed solar generation and not large, centralized solar energy generation.

  4. Procuring Stationary Fuel Cells For CHP: A Guide for Federal Facility Decision Makers

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stinton, David P [ORNL; McGervey, Joseph [SRA International, Inc.; Curran, Scott [ORNL

    2011-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Federal agency leaders are expressing growing interest in using innovative fuel cell combined heat and power (CHP) technology at their sites, motivated by both executive branch sustainability targets and a desire to lead by example in the transition to a clean energy economy. Fuel cell CHP can deliver reliable electricity and heat with 70% to 85% efficiency. Implementing this technology can be a high efficiency, clean energy solution for agencies striving to meet ambitious sustainability requirements with limited budgets. Fuel cell CHP systems can use natural gas or renewable fuels, such as biogas. Procuring Stationary Fuel Cells for CHP: A Guide for Federal Facility Decision Makers presents an overview of the process for planning and implementing a fuel cell CHP project in a concise, step-by-step format. This guide is designed to help agency leaders turn their interest in fuel cell technology into successful installations. This guide concentrates on larger (100 kW and greater) fuel cell CHP systems and does not consider other fuel cell applications such as cars, forklifts, backup power supplies or small generators (<100 kW). Because fuel cell technologies are rapidly evolving and have high up front costs, their deployment poses unique challenges. The electrical and thermal output of the CHP system must be integrated with the building s energy systems. Innovative financing mechanisms allow agencies to make a make versus buy decision to maximize savings. This guide outlines methods that federal agencies may use to procure fuel cell CHP systems with little or no capital investment. Each agency and division, however, has its own set of procurement procedures. This guide was written as a starting point, and it defers to the reader s set of rules if differences exist. The fuel cell industry is maturing, and project developers are gaining experience in working with federal agencies. Technology improvements, cost reductions, and experienced project developers are making fuel cell projects easier to put into service. In this environment, federal decision makers can focus on being smart buyers of fuel cell energy instead of attempting to become experts in fuel cell technology. For agencies that want to pursue a fuel cell CHP this guide presents a four step process for a successful project. 1. Perform a preliminary screening of the energy needs energy costs and incentives. 2. Compare a detailed project plan. 3. Make a financing and contracting decision. 4. Execute the project plan including financing, installation, and operation. The simplest procurement method is designated funding for the outright purchase of the fuel cell CHP system, although this is usually not the most cost-effective option. This guide describes the following financing options: Power purchase agreement Energy savings performance contract Utility energy services contract Enhanced use lease Fuel cell CHP technology can help federal facility managers comply with agency objectives for reducing energy consumption and air pollution emissions. Fuel cells do not generate particulate pollutants, unburned hydrocarbons or the gases that produce acid rain. Fuel cells emit less carbon dioxide (CO2) than other, less efficient technologies and use of renewable fuels can make them carbon neutral. Fuel cell CHP technology can deliver reliable electricity and heat with high efficiency (70% to 85%) in a small physical footprint with little noise, making it a cost-effective option for federal facilities.

  5. Siting of low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities in Texas

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Isenhower, Daniel Bruce

    1982-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    University property was evaluated for suitability for disposal of low-level radioactive waste. This site was evaluated to demonstrate, briefly, the site characterization process and to determine the ability of the statewide study to accurately predict... these boreholes. Literature review was an additional method employed to characterize the site. The results of this site characterization reveal that a more extensive investigation would be necessary to completely evaluate the site and that the state- wide...

  6. Potential for selenium migration at a lignite power plant solid waste disposal facility

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Hall, Steven Douglas

    1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    . All groundwater that recharges on the disposal site is slightly saline and flows east, probably discharging into the Gibbons Creek Reservoir. Selenium, arsenic, boron, iron, manganese, and sulfate in the lignite waste effluent exceed either EPA... ( 1975) drinking water standards or EPA (1973) recommended livestock water standards. Since the natural groundwater contains higher concentrations of selenium, iron, manganese, and sulfate than the waste effluent, only arsenic and boron should...

  7. Environmental effects of dredging. Documentation of the dyecon module for ADDAMS: Determining the hydraulic retention and efficiency of confined disposal facilities. Technical note

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hayes, D.F.; Schroeder, P.R.; Engler, R.M.; Patin, T.R.

    1992-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical note describes procedures for determining mean hydraulic retention time and efficiency of a confined disposal facility (CDF) from a dye tracer slug test. These parameters are required to properly design a CDF for solids retention and for effluent quality considerations. Detailed information on conduct and analysis of dye tracer studies can be found in Engineer Manual 1110-2-5027, Confined Dredged Material Disposal. This technical note documents the DYECON computer program which facilitates the analysis of dye tracer concentration data and computes the hydraulic efficiency of a CDF as part of the Automated Dredging and Disposal Alternatives Management System (ADDAMS).

  8. RESULTS FOR THE MAY 19, 2010 INADVERTENT TRANSFER TO THE SALTSTONE DISPOSAL FACILITY SLURRY: SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Reigel, M.; Cozzi, A.

    2010-08-17T23:59:59.000Z

    This report details the chemical analysis results for the characterization of the May 19, 2010 inadvertent transfer from the Saltstone Production Facility (SPF) to the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF). On May 19, 2010, the Saltstone Processing Facility (SPF) inadvertently transferred approximately 1800 gallons of untreated low-level salt solution from the salt feed tank (SFT) to Cell F of Vault 4. The transfer was identified and during safe configuration shutdown, approximately 70 gallons of SFT material was left in the Saltstone hopper. After the shutdown, the material in the hopper was undisturbed, while the SFT has received approximately 1400 gallons of drain water from the Vault 4 bleed system. The drain water path from Vault 4 to the SFT does not include the hopper (Figure 1); therefore it was determined that the material remaining in the hopper was the most representative sample of the salt solution transferred to the vault. To complete item No.5 of Reference 1, Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) was asked to analyze the liquid sample retrieved from the hopper for pH, and metals identified by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). SRNL prepared a report to complete item No.5 and determine the hazardous nature of the transfer. Waste Solidification Engineering then instructed SRNL to provide a more detailed analysis of the slurried sample to assist in the determination of the portion of Tank 50 waste in the hopper sample.

  9. Assessment of Geochemical Environment for the Proposed INL Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    D. Craig Cooper

    2011-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Conservative sorption parameters have been estimated for the proposed Idaho National Laboratory Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility. This analysis considers the influence of soils, concrete, and steel components on water chemistry and the influence of water chemistry on the relative partitioning of radionuclides over the life of the facility. A set of estimated conservative distribution coefficients for the primary media encountered by transported radionuclides has been recommended. These media include the vault system, concrete-sand-gravel mix, alluvium, and sedimentary interbeds. This analysis was prepared to support the performance assessment required by U.S. Department of Energy Order 435.1, 'Radioactive Waste Management.' The estimated distribution coefficients are provided to support release and transport calculations of radionuclides from the waste form through the vadose zone. A range of sorption parameters are provided for each key transport media, with recommended values being conservative. The range of uncertainty has been bounded through an assessment of most-likely-minimum and most-likely-maximum distribution coefficient values. The range allows for adequate assessment of mean facility performance while providing the basis for uncertainty analysis.

  10. Saltstone Disposal Facility Mechanically Stabilized Earth Vault Closure Cap Degradation Base Case: Institutional Control To Pine Forest Scenario

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Phifer, MA

    2004-03-19T23:59:59.000Z

    As part of the current Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF) Performance Assessment (PA) revision, the closure cap configuration was reevaluated and closure cap degradation mechanisms and their impact upon infiltration through the closure cap was evaluated for the existing SDF concrete vaults (i.e. vaults 1 and 4) for the base case land use scenario (i.e. institutional control to pine forest scenario) and documented in Phifer and Nelson (2003). The closure cap configuration was modified from a compacted kaolin barrier layer concept to a geosynthetic clay layer (GCL) barrier layer concept. The degradation mechanisms developed included pine forest succession, erosion, and colloidal clay migration. These degradation mechanisms resulted in changes in the hydraulic properties of the closure cap layers and resulting increases in infiltration through the closure cap over time.

  11. Recommended Method To Account For Daughter Ingrowth For The Portsmouth On-Site Waste Disposal Facility Performance Assessment Modeling

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Phifer, Mark A.; Smith, Frank G. III

    2013-06-21T23:59:59.000Z

    A 3-D STOMP model has been developed for the Portsmouth On-Site Waste Disposal Facility (OSWDF) at Site D as outlined in Appendix K of FBP 2013. This model projects the flow and transport of the following radionuclides to various points of assessments: Tc-99, U-234, U-235, U-236, U-238, Am-241, Np-237, Pu-238, Pu-239, Pu-240, Th-228, and Th-230. The model includes the radioactive decay of these parents, but does not include the associated daughter ingrowth because the STOMP model does not have the capability to model daughter ingrowth. The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) provides herein a recommended method to account for daughter ingrowth in association with the Portsmouth OSWDF Performance Assessment (PA) modeling.

  12. Federal Facility Compliance Act: Conceptual Site Treatment Plan for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Department of Energy (DOE) is required by section 3021(b) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended by the Federal Facility Compliance Act (the Act), to prepare plans describing the development of treatment capacities and technologies for treating mixed waste. The Act requires site treatment plans (STPs or plans) to be developed for each site at which DOE generates or stores mixed waste and submitted to the State or EPA for approval, approval with modification, or disapproval. The Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) Conceptual Site Treatment Plan (CSTP) is the preliminary version of the plan required by the Act and is being provided to California, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and others for review. A list of the other DOE sites preparing CSTPs is included in Appendix 1.1 of this document. Please note that Appendix 1.1 appears as Appendix A, pages A-1 and A-2 in this document.

  13. Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal from Federal Projects in New York and New Jersey and the Military Ocean Terminal (MOTBY)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barrows, E.S.; Antrim, L.D.; Pinza, M.R.; Gardiner, W.W.; Kohn, N.P.; Gruendell, B.D.; Mayhew, H.L.; Word, J.Q.; Rosman, L.B. [Battelle Marine Sciences Laboratory, Sequim, Washington (United States)

    1996-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is authorized by Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA), Public Law 92-532, and by the Clean Water Act of 1972 (CWA) and Amendments of 1977 to permit, evaluate, and regulate the disposal of dredged material in ocean waters to minimize adverse environmental effects. Compliance with the regulations of the MPRSA calls for physical and biological testing of sediment proposed for dredging prior to its disposal in ocean waters. The testing required by the MPRSA criteria is conducted under a testing manual developed by the USACE and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal (Testing Manual), commonly referred to as the `Green Book.` Testing protocols in the Green Book include bulk sediment analysis, grain size analysis, elutriate testing, and biological testing. The biological testing includes bioassays for acute toxicity as well as analysis to determine bioaccumulation of certain contaminants by marine organisms. The objective of the USACE-NYD Federal Projects Program was to evaluate sediment proposed for dredging and unconfined ocean disposal at the Mud Dump Site. The results of analytical measurements and bioassays performed on the test sediments were compared with analyses of sediment from the Mud Dump Reference Site to determine whether the test sediments were acutely toxic to marine organisms or resulted in statistically significantly greater bioaccumulation of contaminants in marine organisms, relative to the reference sediment. Testing for the federal project areas was performed according to the requirements.

  14. Removal site evaluation report L-area rubble pile (131-3L) gas cylinder disposal facility (131-2L)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Palmer, E.R. [Westinghouse Savannah River Company, AIKEN, SC (United States); Mason, J.T.

    1997-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Removal Site Evaluation Report (RSER) is prepared in accordance with Sections 300.410 and 300.415 of the National Contingency Plan and Section XIV of the Savannah River Site (SRS) Federal Facility Agreement (FFA). The purpose of this investigation is to report information concerning conditions at the L-Area Rubble Pile (LRP) (131-3L) and the L-Area Gas Cylinder Disposal Facility (LGCDF) (131- 2L) sufficient to assess the threat posed to human health and the environment. This investigation also assesses the need for additional Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) actions. The scope of this investigation included a review of files, limited sampling efforts, and visits to the area. An investigation of the LRP (1131-3L) indicates the presence of semi volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), metals, and asbestos. Potential contaminants in the waste piles could migrate into the secondary media (soils and groundwater), and the presence of some of the contaminants in the piles poses an exposure threat to site works. The Department of Energy (DOE), United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) discussed the need for a removal action at the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Facility Investigation/Remedial Investigation (RFI/RI) work plan scoping meetings on the waste unit, and agreed that the presence of the waste piles limits the access to secondary media for sampling, and the removal of the piles would support future characterization of the waste unit. In addition, the DOE, EPA, and SCDHEC agreed that the proposed removal action for the LRP (131-3L) would be documented in the RFI/RI work plan. The LGCDF (131-2L) consists of a backfilled pit containing approximately 28 gas cylinders. The gas cylinders were supposed to have been vented prior to burial; however, there is a potential that a number of the cylinders are still pressurized. (Abstract Truncated)

  15. RCRA, superfund and EPCRA hotline training module. Introduction to: RCRA treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (40 cfr parts 264/265, subparts a-e) updated July 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The management of hazardous waste at treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) plays a large and critical role in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulatory scheme. The training module presents an overview of the general TSDF standards found in 40 CFR Parts 264/265, Subparts A through E.

  16. 1999 Report on Hanford Site land disposal restriction for mixed waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BLACK, D.G.

    1999-03-25T23:59:59.000Z

    This report was submitted to meet the requirements of Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) Milestone M-26-011. This milestone requires the preparation of an annual report that covers characterization, treatment, storage, minimization, and other aspects of managing land-disposal-restricted mixed waste at the Hanford Facility.

  17. User`s Manual for the SOURCE1 and SOURCE2 Computer Codes: Models for Evaluating Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility Source Terms (Version 2.0)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Icenhour, A.S.; Tharp, M.L.

    1996-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The SOURCE1 and SOURCE2 computer codes calculate source terms (i.e. radionuclide release rates) for performance assessments of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal facilities. SOURCE1 is used to simulate radionuclide releases from tumulus-type facilities. SOURCE2 is used to simulate releases from silo-, well-, well-in-silo-, and trench-type disposal facilities. The SOURCE codes (a) simulate the degradation of engineered barriers and (b) provide an estimate of the source term for LLW disposal facilities. This manual summarizes the major changes that have been effected since the codes were originally developed.

  18. Chiller Controls-related Energy Saving Opportunities in FederalFacilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Webster, Tom

    2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Chillers are a significant component of large facility energy use. The focus of much of the development of chilled water systems in recent years has been on optimization of set point and staging controls, improvements in chiller design to increase efficiency and accommodate chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) refrigerant replacements. Other improvements have been made by upgrading controls to the latest digital technologies, improving access and monitoring via communications and sophisticated liquid crystal displays (LCD), more robust fault diagnostics and operating and maintenance information logging. Advances have also been made in how chiller plant systems are designed and operated, and in the diversity of chiller products that are available to support innovative approaches. As in many industries, these improvements have been facilitated by advances in, and lower costs for, enabling technologies, such as refrigerants, compressor design, electronics for controls and variable frequency drives (VFD). Along with the improvements in electronics one would expect that advances have also been made in the functionality of unit controls included with chillers. Originally, the primary purpose of this project was to investigate the state of practice of chiller unit controllers in terms of their energy saving capabilities. However, early in the study it was discovered that advances in this area did not include incorporation of significantly different capabilities than had existed 10-15 years ago. Thus the scope has been modified to provide an overview of some of the basic controls-related energy saving strategies that are currently available along with guideline estimates of their potential and applicability. We have minimized consideration of strategies that could be primarily implemented via design practices such as chiller selection and plant design, and those that can only be implemented by a building management system (BMS). Also, since most of the floor space of federal buildings occurs in large buildings, we have focused on water-cooled screw and centrifugal chillers of 100 ton capacity and greater. However, the role of reciprocating and gas chillers (absorption and engine driven) is discussed briefly. Understanding the demographics of chiller deployment in the federal sector, state of practice of energy savings strategies and control features availability will help federal energy managers and program implementers to make informed decisions in support of energy saving performance contracting (ESPC) and other programs.

  19. Update on cavern disposal of NORM-contaminated oil field wastes.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Veil, J. A.

    1998-09-22T23:59:59.000Z

    Some types of oil and gas production and processing wastes contain naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM). If NORM is present at concentrations above regulatory levels in oil field waste, the waste requires special disposal practices. The existing disposal options for wastes containing NORM are limited and costly. Argonne National Laboratory has previously evaluated the feasibility, legality, risk and economics of disposing of nonhazardous oil field wastes, other than NORM waste, in salt caverns. Cavern disposal of nonhazardous oil field waste, other than NORM waste, is occurring at four Texas facilities, in several Canadian facilities, and reportedly in Europe. This paper evaluates the legality, technical feasibility, economics, and human health risk of disposing of NORM-contaminated oil field wastes in salt caverns as well. Cavern disposal of NORM waste is technically feasible and poses a very low human health risk. From a legal perspective, a review of federal regulations and regulations from several states indicated that there are no outright prohibitions against NORM disposal in salt caverns or other Class II wells, except for Louisiana which prohibits disposal of radioactive wastes or other radioactive materials in salt domes. Currently, however, only Texas and New Mexico are working on disposal cavern regulations, and no states have issued permits to allow cavern disposal of NORM waste. On the basis of the costs currently charged for cavern disposal of nonhazardous oil field waste (NOW), NORM waste disposal in caverns is likely to be cost competitive with existing NORM waste disposal methods when regulatory agencies approve the practice.

  20. Chemical modeling of arsenic(III, V) and selenium(IV, VI) adsorption by soils surrounding ash disposal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Goldberg, S.; Hyun, S.; Lee, L.S. [USDA, Riverside, CA (United States). US Salinity Laboratory

    2008-11-15T23:59:59.000Z

    Leachate derived from coal ash disposal facilities is a potential anthropogenic source of As and Se to the environment. To establish a practical framework for predicting attenuation and transport of As and Se in ash leachates, the adsorption of As(III), As(V), Se(IV), and Se(VI) had been characterized in prior studies for 18 soils obtained downgradient from ash landfill sites and representing a wide range of soil properties. The constant capacitance model was applied for the first time to describe As(III), As(V), Se(IV), and Se(VI) adsorption on soils as a function of equilibrium solution As(III), As(V), Se(IV), and Se(VI) concentrations. Prior applications of the model had been restricted to describing Se(IV) and As(V) adsorption by soils as a function of solution pH. The constant capacitance model was applied for the first time to describe As(III) and Se(VI) adsorption by soils. The model was able to describe adsorption of these ions on all soils as a function of solution ion concentration by optimizing only one adjustable parameter, the anion surface complexation constant. This chemical model represents an advancement over adsorption isotherm equation approaches that contain two empirical adjustable parameters. Incorporation of these anion surface complexation constants obtained with the constant capacitance model into chemical speciation transport models will allow simulation of soil solution anion concentrations under diverse environmental and agricultural conditions.

  1. RH-LLW Disposal Facility Project CD-2/3 to Design/Build Proposal Reconciliation Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Annette L. Schafer

    2012-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A reconciliation plan was developed and implemented to address potential gaps and responses to gaps between the design/build vendor proposals and the Critical Decision-2/3 approval request package for the Remote-Handled Low Level Waste Disposal Facility Project. The plan and results of the plan implementation included development of a reconciliation team comprised of subject matter experts from Battelle Energy Alliance and the Department of Energy Idaho Operations Office, identification of reconciliation questions, reconciliation by the team, identification of unresolved/remaining issues, and identification of follow-up actions and subsequent approvals of responses. The plan addressed the potential for gaps to exist in the following areas: • Department of Energy Order 435.1, “Radioactive Waste Management,” requirements, including the performance assessment, composite analysis, monitoring plan, performance assessment/composite analysis maintenance plan, and closure plan • Environmental assessment supporting the National Environmental Policy Act • Nuclear safety • Safeguards and security • Emplacement operations • Requirements for commissioning • General project implementation. The reconciliation plan and results of the plan implementation are provided in a business-sensitive project file. This report provides the reconciliation plan and non-business sensitive summary responses to identified gaps.

  2. Demand Response in the U.S.- Key trends and federal facility participation

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Presentation—given at the Federal Utility Partnership Working Group (FUPWG) Fall 2008 meeting—provides demand response (DR) definition, current status of DR in the United States, key DR trends, and federal participation issues.

  3. Oak Ridge Reservation Federal Facility Agreement: Quarterly report for the Environmental Restoration Program. Volume 2, January--March 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report provides information about ER Program activities conducted on the Oak Ridge Reservation under the Federal Facility Agreement (FFA). Specifically, it includes information on milestones scheduled for completion during the reporting period as well as scheduled for completion during the next reporting period (quarter), accomplishments of the ER Program, concerns related to program work, and scheduled activities for the next quarter. It also provides a listing of the identity and assigned tasks of contractors performing ER Program work under the FFA.

  4. 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)]

    2013-04-04T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  5. Issues and Recommendations Arising from the Idaho National Laboratory Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Composite Analysis - 13374

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rood, Arthur S.; Schafer, Annette L.; Sondrup, A. Jeff [Idaho National Laboratory, Battelle Energy Alliance, P.O. Box 1625, Idaho Falls, ID 83401-2107 (United States)] [Idaho National Laboratory, Battelle Energy Alliance, P.O. Box 1625, Idaho Falls, ID 83401-2107 (United States)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Development of the composite analysis (CA) for the Idaho National Laboratory's (INLs) proposed remote-handled (RH) low-level waste (LLW) disposal facility has underscored the importance of consistency between analyses conducted for site-specific performance assessments (PAs) for LLW disposal facilities, sites regulated by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) [1], and residual decontamination and decommissioning (D and D) inventories. Consistency is difficult to achieve because: 1) different legacy sources and compliance time-periods were deemed important for each of the sites evaluated at INL (e.g., 100 years for CERCLA regulated facilities vs. 1,000 years for LLW disposal facilities regulated under U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1 [2]); 2) fate and transport assumptions, parameters, and models have evolved through time at the INL including the use of screening-level parameters vs. site-specific values; and 3) evaluation objectives for the various CERCLA sites were inconsistent with those relevant to either the PA or CA including the assessment of risk rather than effective dose. The proposed single site-wide CA approach would provide needed consistency, allowing ready incorporation of new information and/or facilities in addition to being cost effective in terms of preparation of CAs and review by the DOE. A single site-wide CA would include a central database of all existing INL sources, including those from currently operating LLW facilities, D and D activities, and those from the sites evaluated under CERCLA. The framework presented for the INL RH-LLW disposal facility allows for development of a single CA encompassing air and groundwater impacts. For groundwater impacts, a site-wide MODFLOW/MT3D-MS model was used to develop unit-response functions for all potential sources providing responses for a grid of receptors. Convolution and superposition of the response functions are used to compute groundwater concentrations. A similar approach could be applied for the air pathway where air emissions are stored in a central database and air concentrations for unit releases could be scaled to actual releases. (authors)

  6. Summary of Conceptual Models and Data Needs to Support the INL Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Performance Assessment and Composite Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    A. Jeff Sondrup; Annette L. Schafter; Arthur S. Rood

    2010-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    An overview of the technical approach and data required to support development of the performance assessment, and composite analysis are presented for the remote handled low-level waste disposal facility on-site alternative being considered at Idaho National Laboratory. Previous analyses and available data that meet requirements are identified and discussed. Outstanding data and analysis needs are also identified and summarized. The on-site disposal facility is being evaluated in anticipation of the closure of the Radioactive Waste Management Complex at the INL. An assessment of facility performance and of the composite performance are required to meet the Department of Energy’s Low-Level Waste requirements (DOE Order 435.1, 2001) which stipulate that operation and closure of the disposal facility will be managed in a manner that is protective of worker and public health and safety, and the environment. The corresponding established procedures to ensure these protections are contained in DOE Manual 435.1-1, Radioactive Waste Management Manual (DOE M 435.1-1 2001). Requirements include assessment of (1) all-exposure pathways, (2) air pathway, (3) radon, and (4) groundwater pathway doses. Doses are computed from radionuclide concentrations in the environment. The performance assessment and composite analysis are being prepared to assess compliance with performance objectives and to establish limits on concentrations and inventories of radionuclides at the facility and to support specification of design, construction, operation and closure requirements. Technical objectives of the PA and CA are primarily accomplished through the development of an establish inventory, and through the use of predictive environmental transport models implementing an overarching conceptual framework. This document reviews the conceptual model, inherent assumptions, and data required to implement the conceptual model in a numerical framework. Available site-specific data and data sources are then addressed. Differences in required analyses and data are captured as outstanding data needs.

  7. Developing Renewable Energy Projects Larger Than 10 MWs at Federal Facilities (Book)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    2013-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    To accomplish Federal goals for renewable energy, sustainability, and energy security, large-scale renewable energy projects must be developed and constructed on Federal sites at a significant scale with significant private investment. The U.S. Department of Energy's Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) helps Federal agencies meet these goals and assists agency personnel navigate the complexities of developing such projects and attract the necessary private capital to complete them. This guide is intended to provide a general resource that will begin to develop the Federal employee's awareness and understanding of the project developer's operating environment and the private sector's awareness and understanding of the Federal environment. Because the vast majority of the investment that is required to meet the goals for large-scale renewable energy projects will come from the private sector, this guide has been organized to match Federal processes with typical phases of commercial project development. The main purpose of this guide is to provide a project development framework to allow the Federal Government, private developers, and investors to work in a coordinated fashion on large-scale renewable energy projects. The framework includes key elements that describe a successful, financially attractive large-scale renewable energy project.

  8. Health assessment for Royal Hardage Industrial Hazardous Waste Land Disposal Facility, Criner, Oklahoma, Region 6. CERCLIS No. OKD000400093. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1988-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Royal Hardage Industrial Hazardous Waste Land Disposal Facility (Hardage/Criner) National Priorities List Site is located in Criner, McClain County, Oklahoma. The site is located in an agricultural area. There are volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and several heavy metals present in the groundwater and soil, and VOCs in surface water and sediment. The Record of Decision signed November 1986 selected several remedial actions which included excavation of the primary source material and separation of the wastes for treatment, solids to be disposed of in an on-site landfill that meets Resource Conservation and Recovery Act requirements, organic liquids to be incinerated, and inorganic liquids to be treated by other means as necessary. The site is currently in the remedial-design phase.

  9. Plutonium Equivalent Inventory for Belowground Radioactive Waste at the Los Alamos National Laboratory Technical Area 54, Area G Disposal Facility - Fiscal Year 2011

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    French, Sean B. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Shuman, Rob [WPS: WASTE PROJECTS AND SERVICES

    2012-04-18T23:59:59.000Z

    The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) generates radioactive waste as a result of various activities. Many aspects of the management of this waste are conducted at Technical Area 54 (TA-54); Area G plays a key role in these management activities as the Laboratory's only disposal facility for low-level radioactive waste (LLW). Furthermore, Area G serves as a staging area for transuranic (TRU) waste that will be shipped to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant for disposal. A portion of this TRU waste is retrievably stored in pits, trenches, and shafts. The radioactive waste disposed of or stored at Area G poses potential short- and long-term risks to workers at the disposal facility and to members of the public. These risks are directly proportional to the radionuclide inventories in the waste. The Area G performance assessment and composite analysis (LANL, 2008a) project long-term risks to members of the public; short-term risks to workers and members of the public, such as those posed by accidents, are addressed by the Area G Documented Safety Analysis (LANL, 2011a). The Documented Safety Analysis uses an inventory expressed in terms of plutonium-equivalent curies, referred to as the PE-Ci inventory, to estimate these risks. The Technical Safety Requirements for Technical Area 54, Area G (LANL, 2011b) establishes a belowground radioactive material limit that ensures the cumulative projected inventory authorized for the Area G site is not exceeded. The total belowground radioactive waste inventory limit established for Area G is 110,000 PE-Ci. The PE-Ci inventory is updated annually; this report presents the inventory prepared for 2011. The approach used to estimate the inventory is described in Section 2. The results of the analysis are presented in Section 3.

  10. Oak Ridge Reservation Federal Facility Agreement for the Environmental Restoration Program. Volume 4. Quarterly report, July--September 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This quarterly progress report satisfies requirements for the Environmental Restoration (ER) Program that are specified in the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) established between the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the U.S. Environmental protection Agency (EPA), and the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC). The reporting period covered is July through September 1993 (fourth quarter of FY 1993). Sections 1.1 and 1.2 provide respectively the milestones scheduled for completion during the reporting period and a list of documents that have been proposed for transmittal during the following quarter but have not been approved as FY 1994 commitments.

  11. Oak Ridge reservation federal facility agreement for the Environmental Restoration Program. Volume 1. Quarterly report, October--December 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This quarterly progress report satisfies requirements for the Environmental Restoration (ER) Program that are specified in the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) established between the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC). The reporting period covered is October through December 1993 (first quarter of FY 1994). Sections 1.1 and 1.2 provide respectively the milestones scheduled for completion during the reporting period and a list of documents that have been proposed for transmittal during the following quarter but have not been approved as FY 1994 commitments.

  12. Oak Ridge Reservation Federal Facility Agreement. Quarterly report for the Environmental Restoration Program. Volume 4, July 1995--September 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This quarterly progress report satisfies requirements for the Environmental Restoration (ER) Program that are specified in the Oak Ridge Reservation Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) established between the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC). The reporting period covered herein is July through September 1995 (fourth quarter of FY 1995). Sections 1.1 and 1.2 provide respectively the milestones scheduled for completion during the reporting period and a list of documents that have been proposed for transmittal during the following quarter but have not been approved as FY 1995 commitments.

  13. Guidebook to excellence: A directory of federal facilities and other resources for mathematics and science education improvement. [Contains acronym list

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shipman, T.

    1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Guidebook to Excellence is a State-by-State directory of Federal facilities and other resources for improving mathematics and science education. This directory, the first of its kind, is being published to assist educators, parents, and students across the country in attaining the National Education Goals, particularly Goal No. 4: By the year 2000, US students will be first in the world in science and mathematics achievement. Some of the larger research facilities in this directory, such as those of NASA, EPA and the Departments of Energy, Commerce, and the Interior, provide a wide range of education programs, and some offer students and teachers hands on experience with state-of-the-art research in world class facilities. Other sites, such as those of the Department of Transportation or Agriculture may be quite small, but can provide assistance in a single field of research or workforce expertise. Also listed are individuals responsible for State or regional coordination of major programs, such as the US Department of Education's Eisenhower Mathematics and Science Education Program, or the National Science Foundation's Statewide Systemic Initiative Program. In addition, each State listing includes facilities or coordinators providing regional assistance from neighboring States.

  14. Low-Energy Building Design Guidelines: Energy-Efficient Design for New Federal Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zachman, W.; Carlisle, N.

    2001-07-19T23:59:59.000Z

    This guidebook has been prepared primarily for Federal energy managers to provide practical information for applying the principles of low-energy, whole-building design in new Federal buildings. An important objective of this guidebook is to teach energy managers how to be advocates for renewable energy and energy-efficient technologies, and how to apply specific strategies during each phase of a given project's time line. These key action items are broken out by phase and appear in abbreviated form in this guidebook.

  15. 1996 Hanford site report on land disposal restrictions for mixed waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Black, D.G.

    1996-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report was submitted to meet the requirements of Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order milestone M-26-OIF. This milestone requires the preparation of an annual report that covers characterization, treatment, storage, minimization, and other aspects of land disposal-restricted mixed waste management at the Hanford Site.

  16. Oak Ridge Reservation Federal Facility Agreement for the Environmental Restoration Program. Volume 1, Quarterly report, October--December 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Oak Ridge Reservation Federal Facility Agreement Quarterly Report for the Environmental Restoration Program was prepared to satisfy requirements for progress reporting on Environmental Restoration Program (ER) activities as specified in the Oak Ridge Reservation Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) established between the US Department of Energy (DOE), the US Environmental Protection Agency, and the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation. The reporting period covered in this document is October through December 1995. This work was performed under Work Breakdown Structure 1.4.12.2.3.04 (Activity Data Sheet 8304). Publication of this document meets two FFA milestones. The FFA Quarterly Report meets an FFA milestone defined as 30 days following the end of the applicable reporting period. Appendix A of this report meets the FFA milestone for the Annual Removal Action Report for the period FYs 1991--95. This document provides information about ER Program activities conducted on the Oak Ridge Reservation under the FFA. Specifically, it includes information on milestones scheduled for completion during the reporting period, as well as scheduled for completion during the next reporting period (quarter); accomplishments of the ER Program; concerns related to program work; and scheduled activities for the next quarter. It also provides a listing of the identity and assigned tasks of contractors performing ER Program work under the FFA.

  17. Compliance matrix for the mixed waste disposal facilities, trenches 31 and 34, burial ground 218-W-5. Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, K.D.

    1995-05-03T23:59:59.000Z

    This document provides a listing of applicable regulatory requirements to the Mixed Waste Disposal trenches. After the listing of regulations to be followed is a listing of documents that show how the regulations are being implemented and followed for the Mixed Waste trenches.

  18. Monticello NPL Sites Federal Facilities Agreement Meeting Minutes & Action Items

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA groupTuba City, Arizona, DisposalFourth Five-Year38Report3 Through AprilSiteS H

  19. Mr. Tim Murphy, Chief Bureau of Federal Facilities Division of Environmental Protection

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA groupTuba City, Arizona, DisposalFourth Five-Year38Report3DepartmentE-23Tim

  20. Ms. Chris Andres, Chief Bureau of Federal Facilities Division of Environmental Protection

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA groupTuba City, Arizona, DisposalFourth Five-Year38Report3DepartmentE-23TimMs.

  1. Office of Legacy Management Tim Murphy, Chief Bureau of Federal Facilities

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA groupTuba City, Arizona, DisposalFourthN V O 1 8 7 +NewAugust 4, 1992DOC F

  2. H. R. 4394: a bill to amend the Price-Anderson provisions of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to establish liability and indemnification for nuclear incidents arising out of federal storage, disposal, and related transportation of radioactive waste. Introduced in the House of Representatives, Ninety-Ninth Congress, Second Session, March 12, 1986

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Federal Radioactive Waste Liability Act of 1986 (H.R. 4394) amends the Price-Anderson Act so that the federal government assumes responsibility for compensation of liability claims resulting from nuclear incidents involving federal radioactive wastes. The Act corrects the fact that the 1954 Atomic Energy Act did not provide for claims arising from the storage, disposal, or transport of federal radioactive wastes. The legislation provides for payments from the Nuclear Waste Fund of $5 billion for any one incident.

  3. Fissile Material Disposition Program: Deep borehole disposal Facility PEIS date input report for immobilized disposal. Immobilized disposal of plutonium in coated ceramic pellets in grout with canisters. Version 3.0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wijesinghe, A.M.; Shaffer, R.J.

    1996-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

    Following President Clinton`s Non-Proliferation Initiative, launched in September, 1993, an Interagency Working Group (IWG) was established to conduct a comprehensive review of the options for the disposition of weapons-usable fissile materials from nuclear weapons dismantlement activities in the United States and the former Soviet Union. The IWG review process will consider technical, nonproliferation, environmental budgetary, and economic considerations in the disposal of plutonium. The IWG is co-chaired by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and the National Security Council. The Department of Energy (DOE) is directly responsible for the management, storage, and disposition of all weapons-usable fissile material. The Department of Energy has been directed to prepare a comprehensive review of long-term options for Surplus Fissile Material (SFM) disposition, taking into account technical, nonproliferation, environmental, budgetary, and economic considerations.

  4. Weldon Spring Site Federal Facility Agreement UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA group currentBradleyTableSelling7 AugustAFRICAN3uj:'I,\ W C -hSinceSite Federal

  5. FEMP Helps Federal Facilities Develop Large-Scale Renewable Energy Projects

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011AT&T,OfficeEnd of Year 2010SaltInstrumentation andFE DOCKET NO.FEDERAL ENERGYFEMP|

  6. Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) Signed at Oak Ridge | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan| Department of.pdf6-OPAMDepartment6Awards » Federal Energy and

  7. Federal Facility Agreement for the Laboratory for Energy-Related Health Research

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan| Department of.pdf6-OPAMDepartment6Awards » Federal Energy and

  8. Federal Facility Agreement for the Laboratory for Energy-Related Health Research Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan| Department of.pdf6-OPAMDepartment6Awards » Federal Energy andEnergy

  9. Federal Facility Agreement for the Oak Ridge Reservation, January 1, 1992

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan| Department of.pdf6-OPAMDepartment6Awards » Federal Energy andEnergy

  10. Federal Facility Agreement for the Oak Ridge Reservation, January 1, 1992 Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan| Department of.pdf6-OPAMDepartment6Awards » Federal Energy

  11. Federal Facility Compliance Agreement on Storage of Polychlorinated Biphenyls, August 8, 1996 Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan| Department of.pdf6-OPAMDepartment6Awards » Federal

  12. FEMP Helps Federal Facilities Develop Large-Scale Renewable Energy Projects

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYouTube YouTube Note: Since the YouTube|6721 FederalTexasManager FAQS Reference Guide| Department of Energy FEMP

  13. Oak Ridge Reservation Federal Facility Agreement quarterly report for the environmental restoration program. Volume 3: April--June 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This quarterly progress report satisfies requirements for the Environmental Restoration (ER) Program that are specified in the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) established between the US Department of Energy (DOE), the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC). Sections 1.1 and 1.2 provide respectively the milestones scheduled for completion during the reporting period and a list of documents that have been proposed for transmittal during the following quarter but have not been approved as FY 1995 commitments. The report describes the technical status of the following: Y-12 Plant; Oak Ridge National Lab; K-25 Plant; and Oak Ridge Reservation boundary areas. The report also describes technical programs, namely: the Oak Ridge environmental information system, remote sensing and special survey program, and the risk assessment program.

  14. Oak Ridge Reservation Federal Facility Agreement quarterly report for the environmental restoration program. Volume 2: January--March 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This quarterly progress report satisfies requirements for the Environmental Restoration (ER) Program that are specified in the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) established between the US Department of Energy (DOE), the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC). Sections 1.1 and 1.2 provide respectively the milestones scheduled for completion during the reporting period and a list of documents that have been proposed for transmittal during the following quarter but have not been approved as FY 1995 commitments. The report describes the technical status of the following: Y-12 Plant; Oak Ridge National Lab; K-25 Plant; and Oak Ridge Reservation boundary areas. The report also describes technical programs, namely: the Oak Ridge environmental information system, remote sensing and special survey program, and the risk assessment program.

  15. Weldon Spring Site Remedial Action Project Federal Facilities Agreement: Quarterly environmental data summary for third quarter 1998

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1998-11-06T23:59:59.000Z

    In support of the Weldon Spring Site Remedial Action Project Federal Facilities Agreement, a copy of the Quarterly Environmental Data Summary (QEDS) for the third quarter of 1998 is enclosed. The data presented in this letter and attachment constitute the QEDS. The data, except for air monitoring data and site KPA generated data (uranium analyses), were received from the contract laboratories, verified by the Weldon Spring Site verification group, and merged into the database during the third quarter of 1998. Air monitoring data presented are the most recent complete sets of quarterly data. Significant data, defined as data values that have exceeded defined above normal Level 2 values, are discussed in this letter for Environmental Monitoring Plan (EMP) generated data only. Above normal Level 2 values are based, in ES and H procedures, on historical high values, DOE Derived Concentration Guides (DCGs), NPDES limits, and other guidelines. The procedures also establish actions to be taken in the event that above normal data occur.

  16. Restructuring, Tight Budgets and Executive Order 13123 Create New Incentives to Reduce Waste in Federal Industrial Facilities 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Verdict, M. E.

    2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    . The Federal government is the single largest U.S. consumer of energy. Federal industrial and energy intensive operations cost the taxpayer $600 million in FY 1998 and were exempt from mandatory energy reduction goals. Executive Order 13123 requires Federal...

  17. Life-cycle costing manual for the Federal energy management program: a guide for evaluating the cost effectiveness of energy conservation and renewable energy projects for new and existing Federally owned and leased buildings and facilities. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ruegg, R.T.

    1980-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This manual is a guide to understanding the life-cycle costing method and an aid to calculating the measures required for evaluating energy conservation and renewable energy investments in all Federal buildings. It expands upon life-cycle costing criteria contained in the Program Rules of the Federal Energy Management Program (Subpart A of Part 436, Title 10, US Code of Federal Regulations) and is consistent with those criteria. Its purpose is to facilitate the implementation of the Program Rules by explaining the life-cycle costing method, defining the measures, describing the assumptions and procedures to follow in performing evaluations, and giving examples. It provides worksheets, a computer program, and instructions for calculating the required measurements. The life-cycle costing method and evaluation procedures set forth in the Federal Energy Management Program Rules and described in greater detail in this guide are to be followed by all Federal agencies for all energy conservation and renewable energy projects undertaken in new and existing buildings and facilities owned or leased by the Federal government, unless specifically exempted. The establishment of the methods and procedures and their use by Federal agencies to evaluate energy conservation and solar energy investments are required by Section 381(a) (2) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6361 (a) (2); Section 10 of Presidential Executive Order 11912, amended; and by Title V of the National Energy Conservation Policy Act, 92 Stat. 3275.

  18. Oversight and implementation of Federal Facility Agreement. Annual progress report, FY 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hucks, R.L.

    1995-07-27T23:59:59.000Z

    South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) reviewed 57 primary documents during fiscal year 1993 (October 1, 1992 through September 30, 1993). The primary documents reviewed consisted of 24 RCRA Facility Investigation/ Remedial Investigation (RFI/RI) workplans, 26 Site Evaluation (SE) reports, 3 Proposed Plans, 1 Record of Decision (ROD), and 3 miscellaneous primary documents. Numerous other administrative duties were conducted during the reporting period that are not accounted for above. These included, but are not limited to, extension requests, monitoring well approvals, treatability studies, and site visit reports.

  19. AVTA Federal Fleet PEV Readiness Data Logging and Characterization Study for NASA White Sands Test Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stephen Schey; Jim Francfort

    2014-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report focuses on the NASA White Sands Test Facility (WSTF) fleet to identify daily operational characteristics of select vehicles and report findings on vehicle and mission characterizations to support the successful introduction of plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) into the agencies’ fleets. Individual observations of these selected vehicles provide the basis for recommendations related to electric vehicle adoption and whether a battery electric vehicle (BEV) or plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) (collectively plug-in electric vehicles, or PEVs) can fulfill the mission requirements.

  20. Monitoring of Downstream Salmon and Steelhead at Federal Hydroelectric Facilities, 2000 Annual Report.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Martinson, Rick D.; Kovalchuk, Gregory M.; Ballinger, Dean (Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, Gladstone, OR)

    2001-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    2000 was the third season in the Smolt Monitoring Facility (SMF) at John Day Dam. Despite the continued presence of the NMFS The Dalles Dam spillway survival study, and a higher target number of study fish, sample numbers were down form 1999. Additionally, the average sample rate this year (25%) was nearly twice the average rate in 1999, (13%). Spill, expressed as a percent of river flow, was up slightly this year, about 3% in the spring and 8% through the summer and fall, which accounts for some of the decline in sample numbers. The largest declines in sample numbers were for yearling and subyearling chinook and wild sockeye. Descaling and mortality rates were very low for all species, the highest descaling was 11.2% for hatchery sockeye. River flow was lower than last year, debris was light, dissolved gas levels were generally below the Oregon and Washington water quality standards, and overall, migration conditions were good. Passage duration was generally similar to last year but timing varied considerably, depending on species. PIT tag detections were down to 41,848 from 138,705 the previous year. Increased spill passage is the likely explanation for the large decline. The Separation by Code component of the system was utilized by three different studies. At Bonneville Dam, index level sampling was transferred from the first powerhouse to the second powerhouse and occurred at the new Hamilton Island Juvenile Monitoring Facility. An estimated 2.7 million fish passed through the bypass system, 54,051 of which were sampled in the new facility. The location and method differ so much from previous years that comparisons are pointless. River conditions were similar to those described for John Day Dam; lower than in 1999, moderate debris, manageable gas levels, and normal temperatures. Passage timing and duration was very similar to last year for the chinook and steelhead but the coho migration started later and ended earlier, and sockeye were just the opposite. Descaling rates were up for all species and mortality was up for yearling and subyearling chinook and coho. PIT tag detection declined from 130,998 last year to 86,842 this year.

  1. Federal Environmental Regulations Impacting Hydrocarbon Exploration, Drilling, and Production Operations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Carroll, Herbert B.; Johnson, William I.

    1999-04-27T23:59:59.000Z

    Waste handling and disposal from hydrocarbon exploration, drilling, and production are regulated by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through federal and state regulations and/or through implementation of federal regulations. Some wastes generated in these operations are exempt under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) but are not exempt under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), and other federal environmental laws. Exempt wastes remain exempt only if they are not mixed with hazardous wastes or hazardous substances. Once mixture occurs, the waste must be disposed as a hazardous material in an approved hazardous waste disposal facility. Before the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990, air emissions from production, storage, steam generation, and compression facilities associated with hydrocarbon exploration, drilling, and production industry were not regulated. A critical proposed regulatory change which will significantly effect Class II injection wells for disposal of produced brine and injection for enhanced oil recovery is imminent. Federal regulations affecting hydrocarbon exploration, drilling and production, proposed EPA regulatory changes, and a recent significant US Court of Appeals decision are covered in this report. It appears that this industry will, in the future, fall under more stringent environmental regulations leading to increased costs for operators.

  2. Environmental Radio-Analytical Research in the Field of a New LILW Disposal Facility in Hungary - 12401

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Janovics, Robert; Bihari, Arpad; Major, Zoltan; Molnar, Mihaly; Palcsu, Laszlo; Papp, Laszlo [Institute of Nuclear Research of the HAS, Debrecen (Hungary); Veres, Mihaly [Isotoptech Co. Ltd., Debrecen (Hungary); Barnabas, Istvan; Laszlo, Zoltan [Public Agency for Radioactive Waste Management, Paks (Hungary)

    2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The new Hungarian National Radioactive Waste Repository was established in the granite of the Moragy Block Mountains (Bataapati) to store low and intermediate level radioactive waste originating from Paks Nuclear Power Plant. Before the start of the operation of the facility the environmental characteristics of the site and its vicinity, i.e. the so-called zero level was determined. The determination of the zero level is inevitable as the evaluation of the measurement data in the course of the operation of nuclear facilities should mainly be related to this zero level. In the course of the monitoring activity environmental elements, i.e. air, soil, water (springs, streams, precipitation, fall-out, wash-out, plant and animal samples were investigated from several points of view. From the samples radiocarbon, tritium, Sr-90, gamma emitters, gross alpha, gross beta, and field gamma measurements were carried out. Results reported show that the state preceding the operation of the facility can approximately be considered as the Hungarian background data. (authors)

  3. Monitoring of Downstream Salmon and Steelhead at Federal Hydroelectric Facilities, 2003 Annual Report.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Martinson, Rick D.; Kamps, Jeffrey W.; Kovalchuk, Gregory M. (Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, Portland, OR)

    2004-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The 2003 spring flows were within 7 kcfs of last year's flows, but the summer flows were significantly lower, averaging 194 kcfs compared to 278 kcfs last year. Late summer and fall flows were within 20 kcfs of last year's flows. These flow levels provided good migration conditions for juvenile salmonids, comparable to last year, except in June and July. Monthly average river flows were lower than the historical averages. The number of fish handled at John Day decreased from 257,741 last year to 166,209 this year. Part of this decline is due to reduced research effort which lowers the total number of fish needed. Descaling, compared to last year, varied by species, increasing for yearling chinook and clipped and unclipped steelhead, decreasing for coho and sockeye, and remaining about the same for subyearling chinook. Descaling was well below the average for the airlift years for all species except unclipped steelhead. This may be a function of unclipped hatchery steelhead being counted as unclipped steelhead, a category traditionally reserved for wild steelhead. Mortality continues to be low, at or below last year's levels for yearling chinook, subyearling chinook, clipped steelhead and sockeye; slightly higher than last year for unclipped steelhead and coho. With the exception of sockeye, mortality rates at the new facility are well below the average for the years of sampling with the airlift system. The spring migrants generally started migrating later and finished earlier, for a shorter overall duration. Sub-yearling chinook did just the opposite, starting earlier and ending later for a longer middle 80% duration. This was the fourth year of index level sampling at the Hamilton Island Juvenile Monitoring Facility at Bonneville. The number of fish handled declined from 85,552 last year to 80,303 this year. Descaling for all species was similar to the previous two years (within 2%) but in all cases lower than the historical average. Mortality was lower than last year for all species, and below 1% for all species except sockeye (1.9%). Passage timing and duration was similar to last year for all species. A total of 5,542 fish were handled in the first powerhouse for condition monitoring and gas bubble exams. Fish condition was good, with descaling and mortality below last year's levels for all species. Powerhouse 2 operational priority reduced operation of PH1 again this year especially in midsummer as river flow declined. This prompted a 31 July end to a season that was scheduled to go through August. After 23 June exams for gas bubble trauma symptoms were conducted in the Juvenile Monitoring Facility. A total of 3,473 fish were examined and only one fish with bubbles was observed.

  4. Pre-title I safety evaluation for the retrieval operations of transuranic waste drums in the Solid Waste Disposal Facility. Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rabin, M.S.

    1992-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Phase I of the Transuranic (TRU) Waste Facility Line Item Project includes the retrieval and safe storage of the pad drums that are stored on TRU pads 2-6 in the Solid Waste Disposal Facility (SWDF). Drums containing TRU waste were placed on these pads as early as 1974. The pads, once filled, were mounded with soil. The retrieval activities will include the excavation of the soil, retrieval of the pad drums, placing the drums in overpacks (if necessary) and venting and purging the retrieved drums. Once the drums have been vented and purged, they will be transported to other pads within the SWDF or in a designated area until they are eventually treated as necessary for ultimate shipment to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad, New Mexico. This safety evaluation provides a bounding assessment of the radiological risk involved with the drum retrieval activities to the maximally exposed offsite individual and the co-located worker. The results of the analysis indicate that the risk to the maximally exposed offsite individual and the co-located worker using maximum frequencies and maximum consequences are within the acceptance criteria defined in WSRC Procedural Manual 9Q. The purpose of this evaluation is to demonstrate the incremental risk from the SWDF due to the retrieval activities for use as design input only. As design information becomes available, this evaluation can be revised to satisfy the safety analysis requirements of DOE Orders 4700 and 5480.23.

  5. Development of biological and chemical methods for environmental monitoring of DOE waste disposal and storage facilities. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1989-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Hazardous chemicals in the environment have received ever increasing attention in recent years. In response to ongoing problems with hazardous waste management, Congress enacted the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) in 1976. In 1980, Congress adopted the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly called Superfund to provide for emergency spill response and to clean up closed or inactive hazardous waste sites. Scientists and engineers have begun to respond to the hazardous waste challenge with research and development on treatment of waste streams as well as cleanup of polluted areas. The magnitude of the problem is just now beginning to be understood. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) National Priorities List as of September 13 1985, contained 318 proposed sites and 541 final sites (USEPA, 1985). Estimates of up to 30,000 sites containing hazardous wastes (1,200 to 2,000 of which present a serious threat to public health) have been made (Public Law 96-150). In addition to the large number of sites, the costs of cleanup using available technology are phenomenal. For example, a 10-acre toxic waste site in Ohio is to be cleaned up by removing chemicals from the site and treating the contaminated groundwater. The federal government has already spent more than $7 million to remove the most hazardous wastes and the groundwater decontamination alone is expected to take at least 10 years and cost $12 million. Another example of cleanup costs comes from the State of California Commission for Economic Development which predicts a bright economic future for the state except for the potential outlay of $40 billion for hazardous waste cleanup mandated by federal and state laws.

  6. Closure Strategy for a Waste Disposal Facility with Multiple Waste Types and Regulatory Drivers at the Nevada Test Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    D. Wieland, V. Yucel, L. Desotell, G. Shott, J. Wrapp

    2008-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) plans to close the waste and classified material storage cells in the southeast quadrant of the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS), informally known as the '92-Acre Area', by 2011. The 25 shallow trenches and pits and the 13 Greater Confinement Disposal (GCD) borings contain various waste streams including low-level waste (LLW), low-level mixed waste (LLMW), transuranic (TRU), mixed transuranic (MTRU), and high specific activity LLW. The cells are managed under several regulatory and permit programs by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP). Although the specific closure requirements for each cell vary, 37 closely spaced cells will be closed under a single integrated monolayer evapotranspirative (ET) final cover. One cell will be closed under a separate cover concurrently. The site setting and climate constrain transport pathways and are factors in the technical approach to closure and performance assessment. Successful implementation of the integrated closure plan requires excellent communication and coordination between NNSA/NSO and the regulators.

  7. Technical assistance to Ohio closure sites; Technologies to address leachate from the on-site disposal facility at Fernald Environmental Management Project, Ohio

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hazen, Terry

    2002-08-26T23:59:59.000Z

    On August 6-7, 2002, a Technical Assistance Team (''Team'') from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Subsurface Contaminants Focus Area (SCFA) met with Fernald Environmental Management Project (FEMP) personnel in Ohio to assess approaches to remediating uranium-contaminated leachate from the On-Site Disposal Facility (OSDF). The Team was composed of technical experts from national labs, technology centers, and industry and was assembled in response to a request from the FEMP Aquifer Restoration Project. Dave Brettschneider of Fluor Fernald, Inc., requested that a Team of experts be convened to review technologies for the removal of uranium in both brine ion exchange regeneration solution from the Advanced Wastewater Treatment facility and in the leachate from the OSDF. The Team was asked to identify one or more technologies for bench-scale testing as a cost effective alternative to remove uranium so that the brine regeneration solution from the Advanced Waste Water Treatment facility and the leachate from the OSDF can be discharged without further treatment. The Team was also requested to prepare a recommended development and demonstration plan for the alternative technologies. Finally, the Team was asked to make recommendations on the optimal technical solution for field implementation. The Site's expected outcomes for this effort are schedule acceleration, cost reduction, and better long-term stewardship implementation. To facilitate consideration of the most appropriate technologies, the Team was divided into two groups to consider the brine and the leachate separately, since they represent different sources with different constraints on solutions, e.g., short-term versus very long-term and concentrated versus dilute contaminant matrices. This report focuses on the technologies that are most appropriate for the leachate from the OSDF. Upon arriving at FEMP, project personnel asked the Team to concentrate its efforts on evaluating potential technologies and strategies to reduce uranium concentration in the leachate.

  8. RCRA, superfund and EPCRA hotline training module. Introduction to: Land disposal restrictions (40 cfr parts 268) updated July 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The module presents an overview of the land disposal restrictions (LDR) program. It defines the basic terms and describes the structure of the LDR regulations. It identifies the statutory basis for LDR and describes the applicability of LDR. It explains how EPA sets treatment standards and identifies treatment standards for wastes subject to land disposal restrictions and cites the CFR section. It describes and identifies how exemptions and variances from treatment requirements are obtained, including federal register citations. It defines generator and Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facility (TSDF) requirements under the LDR program. It summarizes the schedule of existing restrictions and the plan for restricting newly identified wastes.

  9. Monitoring of Downstream Salmon and Steelhead at Federal Hydroelectric Facilities, 2004-2005 Annual Report.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Martinson, Rick D.; Kamps, Jeffrey W.; Kovalchuk, Gregory M. (Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, Portland, OR)

    2005-02-02T23:59:59.000Z

    The 2004 river flows were near or below the historical average for each month of the fish passage season (Mar-Oct) at John Day and Bonneville. These flow levels provided average migration conditions for juvenile salmonids, comparable to 2003. The number of fish handled at John Day increased from 166,209 in 2003 to 412,797 in 2004. This dramatic increase is due entirely to an increased sample rate to get fish for researchers, from an average of 8.5% last year to 18.5% this year. In the spring, 83% of fish sampled were for research, and in the fall, 92% were for research. Unusually small subyearling Chinook, on average 10 millimeters shorter than last year, made meeting the 110 mm fork length or 13 gram requirement difficult. Consequently, we had to sample even more fish to get the number required by researchers. Passage timing at John Day was similar to previous years, with the 10% and 90% dates within a week of last year for all species. Descaling was lower than last year for all species except sockeye and below the historical average for all species. At 5.4%, sockeye descaling was 2% higher than any other species. Mortality, while up from last year for all species and higher than the historical average for all species except sockeye, continued to be low, below 1% for all species. The number of fish sampled at Bonneville was five and one half times the number sampled last year, from 80,687 to 444,580. Like John Day, this increase resulted from research fish collections. Passage timing at Bonneville was early for spring migrants, with record early 10%, 50%, and 90% dates for yearling Chinook, unclipped steelhead, and coho. Clipped steelhead also passed Bonneville earlier than normal, with record early 50% and 90% dates and only missing the 10% date by two days. Sockeye were the exception this year with the 10% date only a couple of days different than the 50% date for three previous years and the latest 90% date of any year, except of 2001. The middle 80% of the yearling Chinook and unclipped steelhead runs took longer to pass Bonneville than any previous year, at 44 and 45 days, respectively. For subyearling Chinook, the middle 80% of the fish passed during the last three weeks of June and the first week of July, taking 35 days to pass the project, the same as last year. Descaling for all species was slightly higher than the average of the last five years. Compared to last year, descaling varied by species, increasing for yearling Chinook, coho, and sockeye and lower for subyearling Chinook and steelhead. Since sampling began in the juvenile monitoring facility, descaling has been quite consistent, staying below 3.6% for yearling and subyearling Chinook, unclipped steelhead and coho, and above 4.7% for clipped steelhead and sockeye. Mortality was slightly higher than last year and the historical average for yearling and subyearling Chinook and steelhead. Coho and sockeye mortality was lower than last year and the historical average. Mortality for all species was below 1%. Powerhouse 2 operational priority and research results showing higher survival of fish passing through the PH1 turbines rather than through the bypass system resulted in a complete disuse of the PH1 bypass system. Consequently, we removed the historic PH1 data from this report and refer readers to any prior report for information regarding first powerhouse fish sampling.

  10. RCRA, superfund and EPCRA hotline training module. Introduction to: Municipal solid waste disposal facility criteria updated July 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The module provides a summary of the regulatory criteria for municipal solid waste landfills (MSWLFs) and provides the statutory authority under RCRA and the Clean Water Act (CWA) directing EPA to develop the MSWLF criteria in 40 CFR Part 258. It gives the part 258 effective date and the compliance dates for providing demonstrations to satisfy individual regulatory requirements. It identifies the types of facilities that qualify for the small landfill exemption. It explains the requirements of each subpart of part 258 as they apply to states with EPA-approved MSWLF permit programs and states without approved permit programs. It compares the MSWLF environmental performance standards described in part 258 to the corresponding requirements for hazardous waste TSDFs in part 264, which are generally more stringent.

  11. Depleted uranium disposal options.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Biwer, B. M.; Ranek, N. L.; Goldberg, M.; Avci, H. I.

    2000-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Depleted uranium hexafluoride (UF{sub 6}) has been produced in the United States since the 1940s as part of both the military program and the civilian nuclear energy program. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is the agency responsible for managing most of the depleted UF{sub 6} that has been produced in the United States. The total quantity of depleted UF{sub 6} that DOE has to or will have to manage is approximately 700,000 Mg. Studies have been conducted to evaluate the various alternatives for managing this material. This paper evaluates and summarizes the alternative of disposal as low-level waste (LLW). Results of the analysis indicate that UF{sub 6} needs to be converted to a more stable form, such as U{sub 3}O{sub 8}, before disposal as LLW. Estimates of the environmental impacts of disposal in a dry environment are within the currently applicable standards and regulations. Of the currently operating LLW disposal facilities, available information indicates that either of two DOE facilities--the Hanford Site or the Nevada Test Site--or a commercial facility--Envirocare of Utah--would be able to dispose of up to the entire DOE inventory of depleted UF{sub 6}.

  12. Commissioning for Federal Facilities

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn't Your Destiny: Theof"Wave the WhiteNational| Department of Energy CommissionIntroduction

  13. Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Urabeck, F.J.; Phillips, K.E.

    1992-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Future disposal of dredged material in the Puget Sound estuary of the State of Washington is of major interest to Federal, state, and local governmental regulatory agencies, as well as those responsible for maintaining existing waterways and harbors. Elevated levels of toxic chemicals exist in bottom sediments of all the urban bays, with tumors and other biological abnormalities found in bottom fish associated with these water bodies. Public awareness of this situation has been heightened by extensive media coverage of recent government investigations of environmental conditions in Puget Sound. These investigations and public concerns have led to three ongoing regional planning efforts, all of which deal with Puget Sound water quality and marine bottom sediments. This paper reports on the Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis (PSDDA), a 3-year joint Federal-state study primarily focusing on unconfined, open-water disposal of material dredged from Federal and non-Federal navigation projects. Study objectives include (a) selection of unconfined, open-water disposal sites; (b) development of sampling, testing, and test interpretation procedures to be used in evaluating the suitability of dredged material for disposal in Puget Sound waters; and (c) formulation of disposal site management plans. Preliminary findings for each of these objectives are discussed for central Puget Sound, which includes the ports of Seattle, Tacoma, and Everett.

  14. Developing Renewable Energy Projects Larger Than 10 MWs at Federal Facilities: Large-Scale Renewable Energy Guide

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Guide helps agency personnel navigate the complexities of developing large-scale renewable energy projects and assists them in attracting the necessary private capital to complete these projects. It also serves as a general resource to develop Federal employees' awareness and understanding of a project developer’s operating environment and the private sector’s awareness and understanding of the Federal environment.

  15. 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.

    1994-11-29T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  16. RCRA/UST, superfund, and EPCRA hotline training module. Introduction to: Land disposal restrictions (40 CFR part 268) updated as of July 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This module presents an overview of the Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) Program. It defines the basic terms and describes the structure of the LDR regulation, identifies the statutory basis for LDR, and describes the applicability of LDR. It explains how EPA sets treatment standards and identifies treatment standards for wastes subject to land disposal restrictions and cites the CFR section. It describes and identifies how extensions and variances from treatment requirements are obtained, including, Federal Register citations. It defines generator and treatment, storage, and disposal facility (TSDF) requirements under the LDR program. It also summarizes the schedule of existing restrictions and the plan for restricting newly identified wastes.

  17. Integrated Disposal Facility - Hanford Site

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)Integrated Codes | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter

  18. Implementation Plan for Liquid Low-Level Radioactive Waste tank systems at Oak Ridge National Laboratory under the Federal Facility Agreement, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document summarizes the progress that has been made to date in implementing the plans and schedules for meeting the Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) commitments for the Liquid Low-Level Waste (LLLW) System at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). These commitments were initially submitted in ES/ER-17&Dl, Federal Facility Agreement Plans and Schedules for Liquid Low-Level Radioactive Waste Tank Systems at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Information presented in this document provides a comprehensive summary to facilitate understanding of the FFA compliance program for LLLW tank systems and to present plans and schedules associated with remediation, through the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) process, of LLLW tank systems that have been removed from service. ORNL has a comprehensive program underway to upgrade the LLLW system as necessary to meet the FFA requirements. The tank systems that are removed from service are being investigated and remediated through the CERCLA process. Waste and risk characterizations have been submitted. Additional data will be prepared and submitted to EPA/TDEC as tanks are taken out of service and as required by the remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) process. The plans and schedules for implementing the FFA compliance program that were submitted in ES/ER-17&Dl, Federal Facility Agreement Plans and Schedules for Liquid Low-Level Radioactive Waste tanks Systems at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, are updated in this document. Chapter 1 provides general background information and philosophies that lead to the plans and schedules that appear in Chaps. 2 through 5.

  19. Procuring Fuel Cells for Stationary Power: A Guide for Federal...

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

    Procuring Fuel Cells for Stationary Power: A Guide for Federal Facility Decision Makers Procuring Fuel Cells for Stationary Power: A Guide for Federal Facility Decision Makers This...

  20. Framework for DOE mixed low-level waste disposal: Site fact sheets

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gruebel, M.M.; Waters, R.D.; Hospelhorn, M.B.; Chu, M.S.Y. [eds.

    1994-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Department of Energy (DOE) is required to prepare and submit Site Treatment Plans (STPS) pursuant to the Federal Facility Compliance Act (FFCAct). Although the FFCAct does not require that disposal be addressed in the STPS, the DOE and the States recognize that treatment of mixed low-level waste will result in residues that will require disposal in either low-level waste or mixed low-level waste disposal facilities. As a result, the DOE is working with the States to define and develop a process for evaluating disposal-site suitability in concert with the FFCAct and development of the STPS. Forty-nine potential disposal sites were screened; preliminary screening criteria reduced the number of sites for consideration to twenty-six. The DOE then prepared fact sheets for the remaining sites. These fact sheets provided additional site-specific information for understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the twenty-six sites as potential disposal sites. The information also provided the basis for discussion among affected States and the DOE in recommending sites for more detailed evaluation.

  1. Estimating Groundwater Concentrations from Mass Releases to the Aquifer at Integrated Disposal Facility and Tank Farm Locations Within the Central Plateau of the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bergeron, Marcel P.; Freeman, Eugene J.

    2005-06-09T23:59:59.000Z

    This report summarizes groundwater-related numerical calculations that will support groundwater flow and transport analyses associated with the scheduled 2005 performance assessment of the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) at the Hanford Site. The report also provides potential supporting information to other ongoing Hanford Site risk analyses associated with the closure of single-shell tank farms and related actions. The IDF 2005 performance assessment analysis is using well intercept factors (WIFs), as outlined in the 2001 performance assessment of the IDF. The flow and transport analyses applied to these calculations use both a site-wide regional-scale model and a local-scale model of the area near the IDF. The regional-scale model is used to evaluate flow conditions, groundwater transport, and impacts from the IDF in the central part of the Hanford Site, at the core zone boundary around the 200 East and 200 West Areas, and along the Columbia River. The local-scale model is used to evaluate impacts from transport of contaminants to a hypothetical well 100 m downgradient from the IDF boundaries. Analyses similar to the regional-scale analysis of IDF releases are also provided at individual tank farm areas as additional information. To gain insight on how the WIF approach compares with other approaches for estimating groundwater concentrations from mass releases to the unconfined aquifer, groundwater concentrations were estimated with the WIF approach for two hypothetical release scenarios and compared with similar results using a calculational approach (the convolution approach). One release scenario evaluated with both approaches (WIF and convolution) involved a long-term source release from immobilized low-activity waste glass containing 25,550 Ci of technetium-99 near the IDF; another involved a hypothetical shorter-term release of {approx}0.7 Ci of technetium over 600 years from the S-SX tank farm area. In addition, direct simulation results for both release scenarios were provided to compare with the results of the WIF and convolution approaches.

  2. Rules and Regulations for the Disposal of Low-Level Radioactive Waste (Nebraska)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These regulations, promulgated by the Department of Environmental Quality, contain provisions pertaining to the disposal of low-level radioactive waste, disposal facilities, and applicable fees.

  3. Directions in low-level radioactive waste management: A brief history of commercial low-level radioactive waste disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report presents a history of commercial low-level radioactive waste management in the United States, with emphasis on the history of six commercially operated low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities. The report includes a brief description of important steps that have been taken during the 1980s to ensure the safe disposal of low-level waste in the 1990s and beyond. These steps include the issuance of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 61, Licensing Requirements for the Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste, the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980, the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985, and steps taken by states and regional compacts to establish additional disposal sites. 42 refs., 13 figs., 1 tab.

  4. RCRA/UST, superfund, and EPCRA hotline training module. Introduction to: Treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (40 CFR parts 264/265, subparts A-E) updated as of July 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The module presents an overview of the general treatment, storage, and disposal facility (TSDF) standards found in 40 CFR parts 264/265, subparts A through E. It identifies and explains each exclusion from parts 264/265, and provides definitions of excluded units, such as wastewater treatment unit and elementary neutralization unit. It locates and describes the requirements for waste analysis and personnel training. It also describes the purpose of a contingency plan and lists the emergency notification procedures. It describes manifest procedures and responsibilities, and lists the unmanifested waste reporting requirements.

  5. Idaho Waste Vitrification Facilities Project Vitrified Waste Interim Storage Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bonnema, Bruce Edward

    2001-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This feasibility study report presents a draft design of the Vitrified Waste Interim Storage Facility (VWISF), which is one of three subprojects of the Idaho Waste Vitrification Facilities (IWVF) project. The primary goal of the IWVF project is to design and construct a treatment process system that will vitrify the sodium-bearing waste (SBW) to a final waste form. The project will consist of three subprojects that include the Waste Collection Tanks Facility, the Waste Vitrification Facility (WVF), and the VWISF. The Waste Collection Tanks Facility will provide for waste collection, feed mixing, and surge storage for SBW and newly generated liquid waste from ongoing operations at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center. The WVF will contain the vitrification process that will mix the waste with glass-forming chemicals or frit and turn the waste into glass. The VWISF will provide a shielded storage facility for the glass until the waste can be disposed at either the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant as mixed transuranic waste or at the future national geological repository as high-level waste glass, pending the outcome of a Waste Incidental to Reprocessing determination, which is currently in progress. A secondary goal is to provide a facility that can be easily modified later to accommodate storage of the vitrified high-level waste calcine. The objective of this study was to determine the feasibility of the VWISF, which would be constructed in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws. This project supports the Department of Energy’s Environmental Management missions of safely storing and treating radioactive wastes as well as meeting Federal Facility Compliance commitments made to the State of Idaho.

  6. Program management plan for development, demonstration, testing, and evaluation efforts associated with Oak Ridge Reservation`s Land Disposal Restrictions Federal Facility Compliance Agreement

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Conley, T.B.

    1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This program management plan covers the development, demonstration, testing, and evaluation efforts necessary to identify treatment methods for all the waste listed in Appendix B of the ORR`s LDR/FFCA as well as any new wastes which meet Appendix B criteria. To successfully identify a treatment method, at least a proof-of-principle level of understanding must be obtained: that is, the candidate processes must be demonstrated as effective in treating the wastes to the LDR; however, an optimized process is not required. Where applicable and deemed necessary and where the budgets will support them, pilot-scale demonstrations will be pursued. The overall strategy being adopted in this program will be composed of the following activities: Scoping of the study; characterization; development and screening of alternatives; treatability investigations; and detailed analysis of alternatives.

  7. Coordination of Federal Transmission Permitting on Federal Lands...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    transmission facilities on federal lands. In most instances, the Departments of Agriculture or Interior will be the Lead Agency, since they have jurisdiction over most of the...

  8. Disposal rabbit

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Lewis, L.C.; Trammell, D.R.

    1983-10-12T23:59:59.000Z

    A disposable rabbit for transferring radioactive samples in a pneumatic transfer system comprises aerated plastic shaped in such a manner as to hold a radioactive sample and aerated such that dissolution of the rabbit in a solvent followed by evaporation of the solid yields solid waste material having a volume significantly smaller than the original volume of the rabbit.

  9. Disposable rabbit

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Lewis, Leroy C. (Idaho Falls, ID); Trammell, David R. (Rigby, ID)

    1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A disposable rabbit for transferring radioactive samples in a pneumatic transfer system comprises aerated plastic shaped in such a manner as to hold a radioactive sample and aerated such that dissolution of the rabbit in a solvent followed by evaporation of the solid yields solid waste material having a volume significantly smaller than the original volume of the rabbit.

  10. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 137: Waste Disposal Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Rev. No.:0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wickline, Alfred

    2005-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Corrective Action Investigation Plan (CAIP) contains project-specific information including facility descriptions, environmental sample collection objectives, and criteria for conducting site investigation activities at Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 137: Waste Disposal Sites. This CAIP has been developed in accordance with the ''Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order'' (FFACO) (1996) that was agreed to by the State of Nevada, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and the U.S. Department of Defense. Corrective Action Unit 137 contains sites that are located in Areas 1, 3, 7, 9, and 12 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS), which is approximately 65 miles (mi) northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada (Figure 1-1). Corrective Action Unit 137 is comprised of the eight corrective action sites (CASs) shown on Figure 1-1 and listed below: (1) CAS 01-08-01, Waste Disposal Site; (2) CAS 03-23-01, Waste Disposal Site; (3) CAS 03-23-07, Radioactive Waste Disposal Site; (4) CAS 03-99-15, Waste Disposal Site; (5) CAS 07-23-02, Radioactive Waste Disposal Site; (6) CAS 09-23-07, Radioactive Waste Disposal Site; (7) CAS 12-08-01, Waste Disposal Site; and (8) CAS 12-23-07, Waste Disposal Site. The Corrective Action Investigation (CAI) will include field inspections, radiological surveys, geophysical surveys, sampling of environmental media, analysis of samples, and assessment of investigation results, where appropriate. Data will be obtained to support corrective action alternative evaluations and waste management decisions. The CASs in CAU 137 are being investigated because hazardous and/or radioactive constituents may be present in concentrations that could potentially pose a threat to human health and the environment. Existing information on the nature and extent of potential contamination is insufficient to evaluate and recommend corrective action alternatives for the CASs. Additional information will be generated by conducting a CAI before evaluating and selecting corrective action alternatives.

  11. Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 139: Waste Disposal Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2009-07-31T23:59:59.000Z

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 139 is identified in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) as 'Waste Disposal Sites' and consists of the following seven Corrective Action Sites (CASs), located in Areas 3, 4, 6, and 9 of the Nevada Test Site: CAS 03-35-01, Burn Pit; CAS 04-08-02, Waste Disposal Site; CAS 04-99-01, Contaminated Surface Debris; CAS 06-19-02, Waste Disposal Site/Burn Pit; CAS 06-19-03, Waste Disposal Trenches; CAS 09-23-01, Area 9 Gravel Gertie; and CAS 09-34-01, Underground Detection Station. Closure activities were conducted from December 2008 to April 2009 according to the FFACO (1996, as amended February 2008) and the Corrective Action Plan for CAU 139 (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, 2007b). The corrective action alternatives included No Further Action, Clean Closure, and Closure in Place with Administrative Controls. Closure activities are summarized. CAU 139, 'Waste Disposal Sites,' consists of seven CASs in Areas 3, 4, 6, and 9 of the NTS. The closure alternatives included No Further Action, Clean Closure, and Closure in Place with Administrative Controls. This CR provides a summary of completed closure activities, documentation of waste disposal, and confirmation that remediation goals were met. The following site closure activities were performed at CAU 139 as documented in this CR: (1) At CAS 03-35-01, Burn Pit, soil and debris were removed and disposed as LLW, and debris was removed and disposed as sanitary waste. (2) At CAS 04-08-02, Waste Disposal Site, an administrative UR was implemented. No postings or post-closure monitoring are required. (3) At CAS 04-99-01, Contaminated Surface Debris, soil and debris were removed and disposed as LLW, and debris was removed and disposed as sanitary waste. (4) At CAS 06-19-02, Waste Disposal Site/Burn Pit, no work was performed. (5) At CAS 06-19-03, Waste Disposal Trenches, a native soil cover was installed, and a UR was implemented. (6) At CAS 09-23-01, Area 9 Gravel Gertie, a UR was implemented. (7) At CAS 09-34-01, Underground Detection Station, no work was performed.

  12. Federal Technical Capability Manual

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

    2000-06-05T23:59:59.000Z

    The Federal Technical Capability Manual provides the process for the recruitment, deployment, development, and retention of Federal personnel with the demonstrated technical capability to safely accomplish the Departments missions and responsibilities at defense nuclear facilities. Canceled by DOE M 426.1-1A. Does not cancel other directives.

  13. Performing Energy Security Assessments - A How-To Guide for Federal...

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

    Performing Energy Security Assessments - A How-To Guide for Federal Facility Managers Performing Energy Security Assessments - A How-To Guide for Federal Facility Managers Guide...

  14. Analysis of environmental regulations governing the disposal of geothermal wastes in California

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Royce, B.A.

    1985-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Federal and California regulations governing the disposal of sludges and liquid wastes associated with the production of electricity from geothermal resources were evaluated. Current disposal practices, near/far term disposal requirements, and the potential for alternate disposal methods or beneficial uses for these materials were determined. 36 refs., 3 figs., 15 tabs. (ACR)

  15. Successful Opening and Disposal to-Date of Mixed CERCLA Waste at the ORR-EMWMF

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Corpstein, P.; Hopper, P.; McNutt, R.

    2003-02-25T23:59:59.000Z

    On May 28, 2002, the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility (EMWMF) opened for operations on the Department of Energy's Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR). The EMWMF is the centerpiece in the DOE's strategy for ORR environmental cleanup. The 8+ year planned project is an on-site engineered landfill, which is accepting for disposal radioactive, hazardous, toxic and mixed wastes generated by remedial action subcontractors. The opening of the EMWMF on May 28, 2002 marked the culmination of a long development process that began in mid-1980. In late 1999 the Record of Decision was signed and a full year of design for the initial 400, 000-yd3 disposal cell began. In early 2000 Duratek Federal Services, Inc. (Federal Services) began construction. Since then, Federal Services and Bechtel Jacobs Company, LLC (BJC) have worked cooperatively to complete a required DOE readiness evaluation, develop all the Safety Authorization Basis Documentation (ASA's, SER, and UCD's) and prepare procedures and work controlling documents required to safely accept waste. This paper explains the intricacies and economics of designing and constructing the facility.

  16. Hanford land disposal restrictions plan for mixed wastes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Since the early 1940s, the Hanford Site has been involved in the production and purification of nuclear defense materials. These production activities have resulted in the generation of large quantities of liquid and solid radioactive mixed waste. This waste is subject to regulation under authority of both the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) and the Atomic Energy Act. The State of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology), the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the US Department of Energy (DOE) have entered into an agreement, the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) to bring Hanford Site Operations into compliance with dangerous waste regulations. The Tri-Party Agreement was amended to require development of the Hanford Land Disposal Restrictions Plan for Mixed Wastes (this plan) to comply with land disposal restrictions requirements for radioactive mixed waste. The Tri-Party Agreement requires, and the this plan provides, the following sections: Waste Characterization Plan, Storage Report, Treatment Report, Treatment Plan, Waste Minimization Plan, a schedule, depicting the events necessary to achieve full compliance with land disposal restriction requirements, and a process for establishing interim milestones. 34 refs., 28 figs., 35 tabs.

  17. Federal Register

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan| Department of.pdf6-OPAMDepartment6Awards »Facilities |Federal29853 Vol.

  18. DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL ECONOMICS By Jay R. Lund,1

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pasternack, Gregory B.

    DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL ECONOMICS By Jay R. Lund,1 Associate Member, ASCE ABSTRACT: Recent difficulties in siting dredged material disposal facilities are increasing interests in alternative disposal or reuse of dredged material and the possible adverse consequences of any increases in the generation

  19. Disposability Assessment: Aluminum-Based Spent Nuclear Fuel Forms

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vinson, D.W.

    1998-11-06T23:59:59.000Z

    This report provides a technical assessment of the Melt-Dilute and Direct Al-SNF forms in disposable canisters with respect to meeting the requirements for disposal in the Mined Geologic Disposal System (MGDS) and for interim dry storage in the Treatment and Storage Facility (TSF) at SRS.

  20. Use of Metering for Facility and Whole Building Energy Analysis by the U.S. Depratment of Energy Federal Energy Management Program

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Devine, K. D.; Mazzucchi, R. P.

    1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper details how the U.S. Department of Energy, Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) is applying metering technology to conduct empirically based analyses o f energy use by federal agencies. Continuing developments in sensors, data...

  1. Tritiated wastewater treatment and disposal evaluation for 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Allen, W.L. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

    1995-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A second annual summary and analysis of potential processes for the mitigation of tritium contained in process effluent, ground water and stored waste is presented. It was prepared to satisfy the Hanford Federal Facility and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) Milestone M-26-05B. Technologies with directed potential for separation of tritium at present environmental levels are organized into two groups. The first group consists of four processes that have or are undergoing significant development. Of these four, the only active project is the development of membrane separation technology at the Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL). Although research is progressing, membrane separation does not present a near term option for the mitigation of tritium. A second grouping of five early stage projects gives an indication of the breadth of interest in low level tritium separation. If further developed, two of these technologies might prove to be candidates for a separation process. At the present, there continues to be no known commercially available process for the practical reduction of the tritium burden in process effluent. Material from last year`s report regarding the occurrence, regulation and management of tritium is updated and included in the appendices of this report. The use of the State Approved Land Disposal Site (SALDS) for disposal of tritiated effluent from the 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility (ETF) begins in the fall of 1995. This is the most significant event impacting tritium in the environment at the Hanford Site this coming year.

  2. Hanford Facility dangerous waste permit application, liquid effluent retention facility and 200 area effluent treatment facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Coenenberg, J.G.

    1997-08-15T23:59:59.000Z

    The Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application is considered to 10 be a single application organized into a General Information Portion (document 11 number DOE/RL-91-28) and a Unit-Specific Portion. The scope of the 12 Unit-Specific Portion is limited to Part B permit application documentation 13 submitted for individual, `operating` treatment, storage, and/or disposal 14 units, such as the Liquid Effluent Retention Facility and 200 Area Effluent 15 Treatment Facility (this document, DOE/RL-97-03). 16 17 Both the General Information and Unit-Specific portions of the Hanford 18 Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application address the content of the Part B 19 permit application guidance prepared by the Washington State Department of 20 Ecology (Ecology 1987 and 1996) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 21 (40 Code of Federal Regulations 270), with additional information needs 22 defined by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments and revisions of 23 Washington Administrative Code 173-303. For ease of reference, the Washington 24 State Department of Ecology alpha-numeric section identifiers from the permit 25 application guidance documentation (Ecology 1996) follow, in brackets, the 26 chapter headings and subheadings. A checklist indicating where information is 27 contained in the Liquid Effluent Retention Facility and 200 Area Effluent 28 Treatment Facility permit application documentation, in relation to the 29 Washington State Department of Ecology guidance, is located in the Contents 30 Section. 31 32 Documentation contained in the General Information Portion is broader in 33 nature and could be used by multiple treatment, storage, and/or disposal units 34 (e.g., the glossary provided in the General Information Portion). Wherever 35 appropriate, the Liquid Effluent Retention Facility and 200 Area Effluent 36 Treatment Facility permit application documentation makes cross-reference to 37 the General Information Portion, rather than duplicating text. 38 39 Information provided in this Liquid Effluent Retention Facility and 40 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility permit application documentation is 41 current as of June 1, 1997.

  3. Operating Experience and Lessons Learned in the Use of Soft-Sided Packaging for Transportation and Disposal of Low Activity Radioactive Waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kapoor, A. [DOE; Gordon, S. [NSTec; Goldston, W. [Energy Solutions

    2013-07-08T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper describes the operating experience and lessons learned at U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) sites as a result of an evaluation of potential trailer contamination and soft-sided packaging integrity issues related to the disposal of low-level and mixed low-level (LLW/MLLW) radioactive waste shipments. Nearly 4.3 million cubic meters of LLW/MLLW will have been generated and disposed of during fiscal year (FY) 2010 to FY 2015—either at commercial disposal sites or disposal sites owned by DOE. The LLW/MLLW is packaged in several different types of regulatory compliant packaging and transported via highway or rail to disposal sites safely and efficiently in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations and DOE orders. In 1999, DOE supported the development of LLW containers that are more volumetrically efficient, more cost effective, and easier to use as compared to metal or wooden containers that existed at that time. The DOE Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), working in conjunction with the plastic industry, tested several types of soft-sided waste packaging systems that meet U.S. Department of Transportation requirements for transport of low specific activity and surface contaminated objects. Since then, soft-sided packaging of various capacities have been used successfully by the decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) projects to package, transport, and dispose D&D wastes throughout the DOE complex. The joint team of experts assembled by the Energy Facility Contractors Group from DOE waste generating sites, DOE and commercial waste disposal facilities, and soft-sided packaging suppliers conducted the review of soft-sided packaging operations and transportation of these packages to the disposal sites. As a result of this evaluation, the team developed several recommendations and best practices to prevent or minimize the recurrences of equipment contamination issues and proper use of soft-sided packaging for transport and disposal of waste.

  4. US Department of Energy`s Federal Facility Compliance Act Chief Financial Officer`s Report to Congress for fiscal year 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Federal Facility Compliance Act of 1992 (FFCAct) (Public Law 102-386) was enacted into law on October 6, 1992. In addition to amending the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the FFCAct requires the US Department of Energy (DOE) to prepare an annual report from the Chief Financial Officer to the Congress on compliance activities undertaken by the DOE with regard to mixed waste streams and provide an accounting of the fines and penalties imposed upon the DOE for violations involving mixed waste. This document has been prepared to report the necessary information. Mixed waste is defined by the FFCAct to include those wastes containing both hazardous waste as defined in the RCRA and source, special nuclear, or byproduct material subject to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 U.S.C. Section 2001 et seq.). Section 2 of this report briefly summarizes DOE Headquarters` activities conducted during Fiscal Year 1993 (FY 1993) to comply with the requirements of the FFCAct. Section 3 of this report provides an overview of the site-specific RCRA compliance activities, relating to mixed waste streams, conducted in FY 1993 for those sites that currently generated or store mixed waste that are subject to regulation under RCRA. Section 4 provides information on notifications of alleged RCRA violations involving mixed waste imposed upon the DOE during FY 1993 and an accounting of any fines and penalties associated with these violations. Appendix A provides site-specific summaries of RCRA compliance activities, relating to mixed waste streams, conducted in FY 1993 for those sites that currently generate or store mixed waste that are subject to regulation under RCRA.

  5. MEASUREMENT AND CALCULATION OF RADIONUCLIDE ACTIVITIES IN SAVANNAH RIVER SITE HIGH LEVEL WASTE SLUDGE FOR ACCEPTANCE OF DEFENSE WASTE PROCESSING FACILITY GLASS IN A FEDERAL REPOSITORY

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bannochie, C; David Diprete, D; Ned Bibler, N

    2008-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper describes the results of the analyses of High Level Waste (HLW) sludge slurry samples and of the calculations necessary to decay the radionuclides to meet the reporting requirement in the Waste Acceptance Product Specifications (WAPS) [1]. The concentrations of 45 radionuclides were measured. The results of these analyses provide input for radioactive decay calculations used to project the radionuclide inventory at the specified index years, 2015 and 3115. This information is necessary to complete the Production Records at Savannah River Site's Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) so that the final glass product resulting from Macrobatch 5 (MB5) can eventually be submitted to a Federal Repository. Five of the necessary input radionuclides for the decay calculations could not be measured directly due to their low concentrations and/or analytical interferences. These isotopes are Nb-93m, Pd-107, Cd-113m, Cs-135, and Cm-248. Methods for calculating these species from concentrations of appropriate other radionuclides will be discussed. Also the average age of the MB5 HLW had to be calculated from decay of Sr-90 in order to predict the initial concentration of Nb-93m. As a result of the measurements and calculations, thirty-one WAPS reportable radioactive isotopes were identified for MB5. The total activity of MB5 sludge solids will decrease from 1.6E+04 {micro}Ci (1 {micro}Ci = 3.7E+04 Bq) per gram of total solids in 2008 to 2.3E+01 {micro}Ci per gram of total solids in 3115, a decrease of approximately 700 fold. Finally, evidence will be given for the low observed concentrations of the radionuclides Tc-99, I-129, and Sm-151 in the HLW sludges. These radionuclides were reduced in the MB5 sludge slurry to a fraction of their expected production levels due to SRS processing conditions.

  6. RCRA/UST, superfund, and EPCRA hotline training module. Introduction to: Municipal solid waste disposal facility criteria, updated as of July 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The module provides a summary of the regulatory criteria for municipal solid waste landfills (MSWLFs). It provides the statutory authority under RCRA and the Clean Water Act (CWA) directing EPA to develop the MSWLF criteria in 40 CFR Part 258. It also provides the Part 258 effective date and the compliance dates for providing demonstrations to satisfy individual regulatory requirements. It identifies the types of facilities that qualify for the small landfill exemption. It explains the requirements of each subpart of Part 258 as they apply to states with EPA-approved MSWLF permit programs and states without approved permit programs. It compares the MSWLF environmental performance standards described in Part 258 to the corresponding requirements for hazardous waste TSDFs in Part 264, which are generally more stringent.

  7. SCFA lead lab technical assistance at Oak Ridge Y-12 national security complex: Evaluation of treatment and characterization alternatives of mixed waste soil and debris at disposal area remedial action DARA solids storage facility (SSF)

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Hazen, Terry

    2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    TREATMENT AND CHARACTERIZATION ALTERNATIVES OF MIXED WASTE SOIL AND DEBRIS AT DISPOSAL AREA REMEDIAL ACTION (DARA) SOLIDSTreatment and Characterization Alternatives for Mixed Waste Soil and Debris at Disposal Area Remedial Action (DARA) Solids

  8. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 545: Dumps, Waste Disposal Sites, and Buried Radioactive Materials Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Alfred Wickline

    2007-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Corrective Action Unit 545, Dumps, Waste Disposal Sites, and Buried Radioactive Materials, consists of seven inactive sites located in the Yucca Flat area and one inactive site in the Pahute Mesa area. The eight CAU 545 sites consist of craters used for mud disposal, surface or buried waste disposed within craters or potential crater areas, and sites where surface or buried waste was disposed. The CAU 545 sites were used to support nuclear testing conducted in the Yucca Flat area during the 1950s through the early 1990s, and in Area 20 in the mid-1970s. This Corrective Action Investigation Plan has been developed in accordance with the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order that was agreed to by the State of Nevada, the U.S. Department of Energy, and the U.S. Department of Defense. Under the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, this Corrective Action Investigation Plan will be submitted to the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for approval. Fieldwork will be conducted following approval.

  9. New Course Teaches Best Practices for Water Management for Federal...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    New Course Teaches Best Practices for Water Management for Federal Facilities New Course Teaches Best Practices for Water Management for Federal Facilities May 8, 2014 - 11:13am...

  10. Auxiliary analyses in support of performance assessment of a hypothetical low-level waste facility: Two-phase flow and contaminant transport in unsaturated soils with application to low-level radioactive waste disposal. Volume 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Binning, P. [Newcastle Univ., NSW (Australia); Celia, M.A.; Johnson, J.C. [Princeton Univ., NJ (United States). Dept. of Civil Engineering and Operations Research

    1995-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A numerical model of multiphase air-water flow and contaminant transport in the unsaturated zone is presented. The multiphase flow equations are solved using the two-pressure, mixed form of the equations with a modified Picard linearization of the equations and a finite element spatial approximation. A volatile contaminant is assumed to be transported in either phase, or in both phases simultaneously. The contaminant partitions between phases with an equilibrium distribution given by Henry`s Law or via kinetic mass transfer. The transport equations are solved using a Galerkin finite element method with reduced integration to lump the resultant matrices. The numerical model is applied to published experimental studies to examine the behavior of the air phase and associated contaminant movement under water infiltration. The model is also used to evaluate a hypothetical design for a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility. The model has been developed in both one and two dimensions; documentation and computer codes are available for the one-dimensional flow and transport model.

  11. FEMP (Federal Energy Management Program) Update, Spring 1989

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1989-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The FEMP Update, published quarterly by the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP), provides information that will assist federal managers in their energy management responsibilities. The Update is distributed primarily to federal facility and energy management personnel.

  12. Public and political issues in radioactive waste management in the Federal Republic of Germany

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Neis, A. [Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, Bonn (Germany)

    1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    The Federal Government`s radioactive waste management concept and regulations governing formal public participation in licensing procedures for radioactive waste management facilities are presented. The paper focuses on public and political issues arising from widely diverging views in different social groups on nuclear energy and on radioactive waste management. The resulting conflict between Federal and Laender (Federal constituent states) authorities and the actual course of public participation in a licensing procedure are illustrated with the example of planned final disposal of radioactive waste in the Konrad mine. Major national efforts to overcome the unsatisfying present situation are presented and the role of international consensus is briefly touched. Concluding remarks will particularly justify admissibility and emphasize the need to discuss and eventually decide on radioactive waste management issues regardless of diverging views on nuclear energy.

  13. Guidance on the application of quality assurance for characterizing a low-level radioactive waste disposal site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pittiglio, C.L. Jr.; Starmer, R.J.; Hedges, D.

    1990-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document provides the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's staff guidance to an applicant on meeting the quality control (QC) requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 61, Section 61.12 (10 CFR 61.12), for a low-level waste disposal facility. The QC requirements combined with the requirements for managerial controls and audits are the basis for developing a quality assurance (QA) program and for the guidance provided herein. QA guidance is specified for site characterization activities necessary to meet the performance objectives of 10 CFR Part 61 and to limit exposure to or the release of radioactivity. 1 tab.

  14. Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Coordination in Federal...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    transmission facilities on federal lands. In most instances, the Departments of Agriculture or Interior will be the Lead Agency, since they have jurisdiction over most of the...

  15. Specialized Disposal Sites for Different Reprocessing Plant Wastes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Forsberg, Charles W. [Nuclear Science and Technology Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, P.O. Box 2008, Oak Ridge, TN, 37831 (United States); Driscoll, Michael J. [Department of Nuclear Science and Technology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA, 02139 (United States)

    2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Once-through fuel cycles have one waste form: spent nuclear fuel (SNF). In contrast, the reprocessed SNF yields multiple wastes with different chemical, physical, and radionuclide characteristics. The different characteristics of each waste imply that there are potential cost and performance benefits to developing different disposal sites that match the disposal requirements of different waste. Disposal sites as defined herein may be located in different geologies or in a single repository containing multiple sections, each with different characteristics. The paper describes disposal options for specific wastes and the potential for a waste management system that better couples various reprocessing plant wastes with disposal facilities. (authors)

  16. Disposal Activities and the Unique Waste Streams at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Arnold, P.

    2012-10-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This slide show documents waste disposal at the Nevada National Security Site. Topics covered include: radionuclide requirements for waste disposal; approved performance assessment (PA) for depleted uranium disposal; requirements; program approval; the Waste Acceptance Review Panel (WARP); description of the Radioactive Waste Acceptance Program (RWAP); facility evaluation; recent program accomplishments, nuclear facility safety changes; higher-activity waste stream disposal; and, large volume bulk waste streams.

  17. UK FT PDU Facility Draft EA

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

    gas TSDF treatment, storage, and disposal facility UK University of Kentucky U.S. United States USC United States Code USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency...

  18. Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste (RHLLW) Disposal Project Code of Record

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S.L. Austad, P.E.; L.E. Guillen, P.E.; C. W. McKnight, P.E.; D. S. Ferguson, P.E.

    2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project addresses an anticipated shortfall in remote-handled LLW disposal capability following cessation of operations at the existing facility, which will continue until it is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of fiscal year 2015). Development of a new onsite disposal facility, the highest ranked alternative, will provide necessary remote handled LLW disposal capability and will ensure continuity of operations that generate remote-handled LLW. This report documents the Code of Record for design of a new LLW disposal capability.

  19. CRAD, Facility Safety- Nuclear Facility Safety Basis

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    A section of Appendix C to DOE G 226.1-2 "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities." Consists of Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) that can be used for assessment of a contractor's Nuclear Facility Safety Basis.

  20. Application for Permit to Operate a Class II Solid Waste Disposal Site at the Nevada Test Site - U10c Disposal Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Programs

    2010-03-31T23:59:59.000Z

    The Nevada Test Site (NTS) is located approximately 105 km (65 mi) northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) is the federal lands management authority for the NTS and National Security Technologies LLC (NSTec) is the Management and Operations contractor. Access on and off the NTS is tightly controlled, restricted, and guarded on a 24-hour basis. The NTS is posted with signs along its entire perimeter. NSTec is the operator of all solid waste disposal sites on the NTS. The site will be used for the disposal of refuse, rubbish, garbage, sewage sludge, pathological waste, Asbestos-Containing Material (ACM), industrial solid waste, hydrocarbon-burdened soil, hydrocarbon-burdened demolition and construction waste, and other inert waste (hereafter called permissible waste). Waste containing free liquids or regulated under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) will not be accepted for disposal at the site. Waste regulated under the Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA), excluding Polychlorinated Biphenyl [PCB], Bulk Product Waste (see Section 6.2.5) and ACM (see Section 6.2.2.2) will not be accepted for disposal at the site. The disposal site will be used as the sole depository of permissible waste which is: (1) Generated by entities covered under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Hazardous Waste Generator Identification Number for the NTS; (2) Generated at sites identified in the Federal Facilities Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO); (3) Sensitive records and media, including documents, vugraphs, computer disks, typewriter ribbons, magnetic tapes, etc., generated by NNSA/NSO or its contractors; (4) ACM generated by NNSA/NSO or its contractors according to Section 6.2.2.2, as necessary; (5) Hydrocarbon-burdened soil and solid waste from areas covered under the EPA Hazardous Waste Generator Identification Number for the NTS; (6) Other waste on a case-by-case concurrence by NDEP/BFF. The generator of permissible waste is responsible for preparing documentation related to waste acceptance criteria, waste characterization, and load verification. Waste and Water (WW) personnel are responsible for operating the disposal site and reviewing documentation to determine if the waste is acceptable.

  1. Impacts of proposed RCRA regulations and other related federal environmental regulations on fossil fuel-fired facilities: Final report, Volume 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1987-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Estimation of the costs associated with implementation of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations for non-hazardous and hazardous material disposal in the utility industry are provided. These costs are based on engineering studies at a number of coal-fired power plants in which the costs for hazardous and non-hazardous disposal are compared to the costs developed for the current practice design for each utility. The relationship of the three costs is displayed. The emphasis of this study is on the determination of incremental costs rather than the absolute costs for each case (current practice, non-hazardous, or hazardous). For the purpose of this project, the hazardous design cost was determined for minimum versus maximum compliance.

  2. Impacts of proposed RCRA regulations and other related federal environmental regulations on fossil fuel-fired facilities: Final report, Volume 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1987-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Estimation of the costs associated with implementation of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations for non-hazardous and hazardous material disposal in the utility industry are provided. These costs are based on engineering studies at a number of coal-fired power plants in which the costs for hazardous and non-hazardous disposal are compared to the costs developed for the current practice design for each utility. The relationship of the three costs is displayed. The emphasis of this study is on the determination of incremental costs rather than the absolute costs for each case (current practice, non-hazardous, or hazardous). For the purpose of this project, the hazardous design cost was determined for both minimum and maximum compliance.

  3. Waste Disposal (Illinois)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This article lays an outline of waste disposal regulations, permits and fees, hazardous waste management and underground storage tank requirements.

  4. Will new disposal regulations undo decades of progress?

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ward, J. [John Ward Inc. (United States)

    2009-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In 1980, the Belville Amendments to RCRA instructed EPA to 'conduct a detailed and comprehensive study and submit a report' to Congress on the 'adverse effects on human health and the environment, if any, of the disposal and utilization' of coal ash. In both 1988 and 1999, EPA submitted reports to Congress and recommended coal ash should not be regulated as hazardous waste. After the failure of a Tennesse power plant's coal ash disposal facility, EPA will be proposing new disposal regulations.

  5. Remedial Action and Waste Disposal Conduct of OperationsMatrix

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    M. A. Casbon.

    1999-05-24T23:59:59.000Z

    This Conduct of Operations (CONOPS) matrix incorporates the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) CONOPS matrix (BHI-00746, Rev. 0). The ERDF CONOPS matrix has been expanded to cover all aspects of the RAWD project. All remedial action and waste disposal (RAWD) operations, including waste remediation, transportation, and disposal at the ERDF consist of construction-type activities as opposed to nuclear power plant-like operations. In keeping with this distinction, the graded approach has been applied to the developmentof this matrix.

  6. Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility Lessons Learned

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Caulfield, R.

    2012-07-12T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of lessons learned is to identify insight gained during a project – successes or failures – that can be applied on future projects. Lessons learned can contribute to the overall success of a project by building on approaches that have worked well and avoiding previous mistakes. Below are examples of lessons learned during ERDF’s ARRA-funded expansion project.

  7. On-Site Disposal Facility Inspection Report

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    X HS7 East drain at Cell 23 X Callery pear and others X HS8 East drain at Cell 34 X Canada thistle in rocks X HS9 East drain at Cell 45 X Honeysuckle and others X HS10 East...

  8. Treated Effluent Disposal Facility - Hanford Site

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of ScienceandMesa del SolStrengthening a solidSynthesisAppliances »Contact-InformationFuelsTravelTreated

  9. On-Site Disposal Facility Inspection Report

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA groupTuba City, Arizona,Site Operations Guide Doc. No.GS05:or _^rOak

  10. On-Site Disposal Facility Inspection Report

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA groupTuba City, Arizona,Site Operations Guide Doc. No.GS05:or _^rOak72.1 06/14

  11. Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility - Hanford Site

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC) Environmental Assessments (EA) / Environmental ImpactSmith's Marketplace

  12. Radionuclide limits for vault disposal at the Savannah River Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cook, J.R.

    1992-02-04T23:59:59.000Z

    The Savannah River Site is developing a facility called the E-Area Vaults which will serve as the new radioactive waste disposal facility beginning early in 1992. The facility will employ engineered below-grade concrete vaults for disposal and above-grade storage for certain long-lived mobile radionuclides. This report documents the determination of interim upper limits for radionuclide inventories and concentrations which should be allowed in the disposal structures. The work presented here will aid in the development of both waste acceptance criteria and operating limits for the E-Area Vaults. Disposal limits for forty isotopes which comprise the SRS waste streams were determined. The limits are based on total facility and vault inventories for those radionuclides which impact groundwater, and or waste package concentrations for those radionuclides which could affect intruders.

  13. Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Act (Pennsylvania)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This act provides a comprehensive strategy for the siting of commercial low-level waste compactors and other waste management facilities, and to ensure the proper transportation, disposal and...

  14. RCRA Part A and Part B Permit Application for Waste Management Activities at the Nevada Test Site: Proposed Mixed Waste Disposal Unit (MWSU)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Management

    2010-07-19T23:59:59.000Z

    The proposed Mixed Waste Storage Unit (MWSU) will be located within the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC). Existing facilities at the RWMC will be used to store low-level mixed waste (LLMW). Storage is required to accommodate offsite-generated LLMW shipped to the Nevada Test Site (NTS) for disposal in the new Mixed Waste Disposal Unit (MWDU) currently in the design/build stage. LLMW generated at the NTS (onsite) is currently stored on the Transuranic (TRU) Pad (TP) in Area 5 under a Mutual Consent Agreement (MCA) with the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Federal Facilities (NDEP/BFF). When the proposed MWSU is permitted, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) will ask that NDEP revoke the MCA and onsite-generated LLMW will fall under the MWSU permit terms and conditions. The unit will also store polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) waste and friable and non-friable asbestos waste that meets the acceptance criteria in the Waste Analysis Plan (Exhibit 2) for disposal in the MWDU. In addition to Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) requirements, the proposed MWSU will also be subject to Department of Energy (DOE) orders and other applicable state and federal regulations. Table 1 provides the metric conversion factors used in this application. Table 2 provides a list of existing permits. Table 3 lists operational RCRA units at the NTS and their respective regulatory status.

  15. The Texas Solution to the Nation's Disposal Needs for Irradiated Hardware - 13337

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Britten, Jay M. [Waste Control Specialists LLC, Andrews, TX 79714 (United States)] [Waste Control Specialists LLC, Andrews, TX 79714 (United States)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The closure of the disposal facility in Barnwell, South Carolina, to out-of-compact states in 2008 left commercial nuclear power plants without a disposal option for Class B and C irradiated hardware. In 2012, Waste Control Specialists LLC (WCS) opened a highly engineered facility specifically designed and built for the disposal of Class B and C waste. The WCS facility is the first Interstate Compact low-level radioactive waste disposal facility to be licensed and operated under the Low-level Waste Policy Act of 1980, as amended in 1985. Due to design requirements of a modern Low Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) facility, traditional methods for disposal were not achievable at the WCS site. Earlier methods primarily utilized the As Low as Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) concept of distance to accomplish worker safety. The WCS method required the use of all three ALARA concepts of time, distance, and shielding to ensure the safe disposal of this highly hazardous waste stream. (authors)

  16. GAO-11-879T Federal Real Property: Overreliance on Leasing Contributed...

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

    issue. The administration's proposed Civilian Property Realignment Act (CPRA) would reform federal real property management and disposal. For this subcommittee, GAO is currently...

  17. STANDARD ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE 21.01.10.M0.02 Disposal of Surplus or Excess Property

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Management Manual, System Regulation 21.01.09. 2. DISPOSAL OF FEDERAL SURPLUS PERSONAL PROPERTY Unless property. Procedures and Responsibilities 1. GENERAL 1.1 The Federal Surplus Property Donation Program-consumable Federal surplus personal property and Federal excess personal property, other than scrap acquired

  18. Application for a Permit to Operate a Class III Solid Waste Disposal Site at the Nevada Test Site Area 5 Asbestiform Low-Level Solid Waste Disposal Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Programs

    2010-09-14T23:59:59.000Z

    The NTS solid waste disposal sites must be permitted by the state of Nevada Solid Waste Management Authority (SWMA). The SWMA for the NTS is the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Federal Facilities (NDEP/BFF). The U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) as land manager (owner), and National Security Technologies (NSTec), as operator, will store, collect, process, and dispose all solid waste by means that do not create a health hazard, a public nuisance, or cause impairment of the environment. NTS disposal sites will not be included in the Nye County Solid Waste Management Plan. The NTS is located approximately 105 kilometers (km) (65 miles [mi]) northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada (Figure 1). The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is the federal lands management authority for the NTS, and NSTec is the Management and Operations contractor. Access on and off the NTS is tightly controlled, restricted, and guarded on a 24-hour basis. The NTS has signs posted along its entire perimeter. NSTec is the operator of all solid waste disposal sites on the NTS. The Area 5 RWMS is the location of the permitted facility for the Solid Waste Disposal Site (SWDS). The Area 5 RWMS is located near the eastern edge of the NTS (Figure 2), approximately 26 km (16 mi) north of Mercury, Nevada. The Area 5 RWMS is used for the disposal of low-level waste (LLW) and mixed low-level waste. Many areas surrounding the RWMS have been used in conducting nuclear tests. A Notice of Intent to operate the disposal site as a Class III site was submitted to the state of Nevada on January 28, 1994, and was acknowledged as being received in a letter to the NNSA/NSO on August 30, 1994. Interim approval to operate a Class III SWDS for regulated asbestiform low-level waste (ALLW) was authorized on August 12, 1996 (in letter from Paul Liebendorfer to Runore Wycoff), with operations to be conducted in accordance with the ''Management Plan for the Disposal of Low-Level Waste with Regulated Asbestos Waste.'' A requirement of the authorization was that on or before October 9, 1999, a permit was required to be issued. Because of NDEP and NNSA/NSO review cycles, the final permit was issued on April 5, 2000, for the operation of the Area 5 Low-Level Waste Disposal Site, utilizing Pit 7 (P07) as the designated disposal cell. The original permit applied only to Pit 7, with a total design capacity of 5,831 cubic yards (yd{sup 3}) (157,437 cubic feet [ft{sup 3}]). NNSA/NSO is expanding the SWDS to include the adjacent Upper Cell of Pit 6 (P06), with an additional capacity of 28,037 yd{sup 3} (756,999 ft{sup 3}) (Figure 3). The proposed total capacity of ALLW in Pit 7 and P06 will be approximately 33,870 yd{sup 3} (0.9 million ft{sup 3}). The site will be used for the disposal of regulated ALLW, small quantities of low-level radioactive hydrocarbon-burdened (LLHB) media and debris, LLW, LLW that contains PCB Bulk Product Waste greater than 50 ppm that leaches at a rate of less than 10 micrograms of PCB per liter of water, and small quantities of LLHB demolition and construction waste (hereafter called permissible waste). Waste containing free liquids, or waste that is regulated as hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) or state-of-generation hazardous waste regulations, will not be accepted for disposal at the site. The only waste regulated under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) that will be accepted at the disposal site is regulated asbestos-containing materials (RACM). The term asbestiform is used throughout this document to describe this waste. Other TSCA waste (i.e., polychlorinated biphenyls [PCBs]) will not be accepted for disposal at the SWDS. The disposal site will be used as a depository of permissible waste generated both on site and off site. All generators designated by NNSA/NSO will be eligible to dispose regulated ALLW at the Asbestiform Low-Level Waste Disposal Site in accordance with the U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV) 325

  19. 1998 report on Hanford Site land disposal restrictions for mixed waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Black, D.G.

    1998-04-10T23:59:59.000Z

    This report was submitted to meet the requirements of Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) Milestone M-26-01H. This milestone requires the preparation of an annual report that covers characterization, treatment, storage, minimization, and other aspects of managing land-disposal-restricted mixed waste at the Hanford Facility. The US Department of Energy, its predecessors, and contractors on the Hanford Facility were involved in the production and purification of nuclear defense materials from the early 1940s to the late 1980s. These production activities have generated large quantities of liquid and solid mixed waste. This waste is regulated under authority of both the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of l976 and the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. This report covers only mixed waste. The Washington State Department of Ecology, US Environmental Protection Agency, and US Department of Energy have entered into the Tri-Party Agreement to bring the Hanford Facility operations into compliance with dangerous waste regulations. The Tri-Party Agreement required development of the original land disposal restrictions (LDR) plan and its annual updates to comply with LDR requirements for mixed waste. This report is the eighth update of the plan first issued in 1990. The Tri-Party Agreement requires and the baseline plan and annual update reports provide the following information: (1) Waste Characterization Information -- Provides information about characterizing each LDR mixed waste stream. The sampling and analysis methods and protocols, past characterization results, and, where available, a schedule for providing the characterization information are discussed. (2) Storage Data -- Identifies and describes the mixed waste on the Hanford Facility. Storage data include the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 dangerous waste codes, generator process knowledge needed to identify the waste and to make LDR determinations, quantities stored, generation rates, location and method of storage, an assessment of storage-unit compliance status, storage capacity, and the bases and assumptions used in making the estimates.

  20. Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 425: Area 9 Main Lake Construction Debris Disposal Area, Tonopah Test Range, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    K. B. Campbell

    2003-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 425 is located on the Tonopah Test Range, approximately 386 kilometers (240 miles) northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. CAU 425 is listed in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO, 1996) and is comprised of one Corrective Action Site (CAS). CAS 09-08-001-TA09 consisted of a large pile of concrete rubble from the original Hard Target and construction debris associated with the Tornado Rocket Sled Tests. CAU 425 was closed in accordance with the FFACO and the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection-approved Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan for CAU 425: Area 9 Main Lake Construction Debris Disposal Area, Tonopah Test Range, Nevada (U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office, 2002). CAU 425 was closed by implementing the following corrective actions: The approved corrective action for this unit was clean closure. Closure activities included: (1) Removal of all the debris from the site. (2) Weighing each load of debris leaving the job site. (3) Transporting the debris to the U.S. Air Force Construction Landfill for disposal. (4) Placing the radioactive material in a U.S. Department of Transportation approved container for proper transport and disposal. (5) Transporting the radioactive material to the Nevada Test Site for disposal. (6) Regrading the job site to its approximate original contours/elevation.

  1. Pesticide fate in an aboveground disposal system

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Vanderglas, Brian Richard

    1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Engineers, 1979). Prior to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976. , little attention had been given to pesticide waste solutions leading to careless and dangerous disposal practices. Rinsate and washwaters were rarely collected... health as well as to livestock and crops and other vegetation in the affected area. Recent amendments (1984) to RCRA's federal regulations require that pesticide users who generate more than one hundred kilograms per month of acutely hazardous wastes...

  2. Immobilized low-level waste disposal options configuration study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mitchell, D.E.

    1995-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report compiles information that supports the eventual conceptual and definitive design of a disposal facility for immobilized low-level waste. The report includes the results of a joint Westinghouse/Fluor Daniel Inc. evaluation of trade-offs for glass manufacturing and product (waste form) disposal. Though recommendations for the preferred manufacturing and disposal option for low-level waste are outside the scope of this document, relative ranking as applied to facility complexity, safety, remote operation concepts and ease of retrieval are addressed.

  3. Lessons learned -- a comparison of the proposed on-site waste management facilities at the various Department of Energy sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ciocco, J. [Dept. of Energy, Germantown, MD (United States); Singh, D. [Booz Allen and Hamilton, Germantown, MD (United States); Survochak, S. [DOE RFETS, Golden, CO (United States); Elo, M. [Burns and Roe, Germantown, MD (United States)

    1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    The Department of Energy Sites (DOE) are faced with the challenge of managing several categories of waste generated from past or future cleanup activities, such as 11(e)2 byproduct material, low-level radioactive (LL), low-level radioactive mixed (LLM), transuranic (TRU), high level radioactive (HL), and hazardous waste (HW). DOE must ensure safe and efficient management of these wastes while complying with all applicable federal and state laws. Proposed waste management strategies for the EM-40 Environmental Restoration (ER) program at these sites indicate that on-site disposal is becoming a viable option. For purposes of this paper, on-site disposal cells managed by the EM-40 program at Hanford, Weldon Spring, Fernald Environmental Management Project (FEMP) and Rocky Flats were compared. Programmatic aspects and design features were evaluated to determine what comparisons can be made, and to identify benefits lessons learned that may be applicable to other sites. Based on comparative analysis, it can be concluded that the DOE EM-40 disposal cells are very unique. Stakeholders played a major role in the decision to locate the various DOE on-site disposal facilities. The disposal cells will be used to manage 11(e)2 by-product materials, LL, LLM, and/or HLW. The analysis further suggests that the design criteria are comparable. Lessons learned relative to the public involvement activities at Weldon Spring, and the design approach at Hanford should be considered when planning future on-site disposal facilities at DOE sites. Further, a detailed analysis of progress made at Hanford should be evaluated for application at sites such as Rocky Flats that are currently planning on-site disposal facilities.

  4. Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 543: Liquid Disposal Units, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Closure Report (CR) documents closure activities for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 543, Liquid Disposal Units, according to the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO, 1996) and the Corrective Action Plan (CAP) for CAU 543 (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office [NNSA/NSO], 2007). CAU 543 is located at the Nevada Test Site (NTS), Nevada (Figure 1), and consists of the following seven Corrective Action Sites (CASs): CAS 06-07-01, Decon Pad; CAS 15-01-03, Aboveground Storage Tank; CAS 15-04-01, Septic Tank; CAS 15-05-01, Leachfield; CAS 15-08-01, Liquid Manure Tank; CAS 15-23-01, Underground Radioactive Material Area; CAS 15-23-03, Contaminated Sump, Piping; and CAS 06-07-01 is located at the Decontamination Facility in Area 6, adjacent to Yucca Lake. The remaining CASs are located at the former U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Farm in Area 15. The purpose of this CR is to provide a summary of the completed closure activities, to document waste disposal, and to present analytical data confirming that the remediation goals were met. The closure alternatives consisted of closure in place for two of the CASs, and no further action with implementation of best management practices (BMPs) for the remaining five CASs.

  5. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Poultry Farm Daily Disposal Methods 0;Disposal: Science and Theory First Composter in Delaware · Delmarva was of the first daily composting · 120 in USA over next 10 years #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Composting Procedure · Mixture ­ 1 ½ to 2

  6. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Table of Contents · Disposal options emergency mortality composting procedure · Use of composting during outbreaks #12;Disposal: Science and disinfection of farms and surveillance around affected flocks. " USDA APHIS VS EMD, 2007 #12;Disposal: Science

  7. A Strategy to Conduct an Analysis of the Long-Term Performance of Low-Activity Waste Glass in a Shallow Subsurface Disposal System at Hanford

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Neeway, James J.; Pierce, Eric M.; Freedman, Vicky L.; Ryan, Joseph V.; Qafoku, Nikolla

    2014-08-04T23:59:59.000Z

    The federal facilities located on the Hanford Site in southeastern Washington State have been used extensively by the U.S. government to produce nuclear materials for the U.S. strategic defense arsenal. Currently, the Hanford Site is under the stewardship of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM). A large inventory of radioactive and mixed waste resulting from the production of nuclear materials has accumulated, mainly in 177 underground single- and double-shell tanks located in the central plateau of the Hanford Site (Mann et al., 2001). The DOE-EM Office of River Protection (ORP) is proceeding with plans to immobilize and permanently dispose of the low-activity waste (LAW) fraction onsite in a shallow subsurface disposal facility (the Integrated Disposal Facility [IDF]). Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) was contracted to provide the technical basis for estimating radionuclide release from the engineered portion of the IDF (the source term) as part of an immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW) glass testing program to support future IDF performance assessments (PAs).

  8. Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application, general information portion

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hays, C.B.

    1998-05-19T23:59:59.000Z

    The Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application is considered to be a single application organized into a General Information Portion (document number DOE/RL-91-28) and a Unit-Specific Portion. Both the General Information and Unit-Specific portions of the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application address the content of the Part B permit application guidance prepared by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology 1996) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (40 Code of Federal Regulations 270), with additional information needed by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments and revisions of Washington Administrative Code 173-303. Documentation contained in the General Information Portion is broader in nature and could be used by multiple treatment, storage, and/or disposal units (e.g., the glossary provided in this report).

  9. Superfund record of decision (EPA Region 2): Federal Aviation Administration Technical Center (Area B Navy Fire Test Facility), Atlantic County, Atlantic City International Airport, NJ, September 20, 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This decision document presents the selected remedial action for Area B, the Navy Fire Test Facility, at the FAA Technical Center, Atlantic City Internatioal Airport, New Jersey. The selected remedy for Area B includes: Installation of additional monitoring wells; Continued ground water and surface water monitoring; Installation and operation of air sparging wells, vapor extraction wells and monitoring probes; On-site vapor treatment (if necessary); and Five year reviews.

  10. The use of protective barriers to deter inadvertent human intrusion into a mined geologic facility for the disposal of radioactive waste: A review of previous investigations and potential concepts

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tolan, T.L. [Tolan, Beeson and Associates, Kennewick, WA (United States)

    1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Sandia National Laboratories is evaluating the feasibility of developing protective barrier system for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) to thwart inadvertent human intrusion into this radioactive-waste disposal system for a period of 9,900 years after assumed loss of active institutional controls. The protective barrier system would be part of a series of enduring passive institutional controls whose long-term function will be to reduce the likelihood of inadvertent human activities (e.g., exploratory drilling for resources) that could disrupt the WIPP disposal system.

  11. Low-level waste inventory, characteristics, generation, and facility assessment for treatment, storage, and disposal alternatives considered in the US Department of Energy waste management programmatic environmental impact statement

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Goyette, M.L.; Dolak, D.A.

    1996-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report provides technical support information for use in analyzing environmental impacts associated with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) low-level radioactive waste (LLW) management alternatives in the Waste-Management (WM) Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). Waste loads treated and disposed of for each of the LLW alternatives considered in the DOE WM PEIS are presented. Waste loads are presented for DOE Waste Management (WM) wastes, which are generated from routine operations. Radioactivity concentrations and waste quantities for treatment and disposal under the different LLW alternatives are described for WM waste. 76 refs., 14 figs., 42 tabs.

  12. Disposal of drilling fluids

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bryson, W.R.

    1983-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Prior to 1974 the disposal of drilling fluids was not considered to be much of an environmental problem. In the past, disposal of drilling fluids was accomplished in various ways such as spreading on oil field lease roads to stabilize the road surface and control dust, spreading in the base of depressions of sandy land areas to increase water retention, and leaving the fluid in the reserve pit to be covered on closure of the pit. In recent years, some states have become concerned over the indescriminate dumping of drilling fluids into pits or unauthorized locations and have developed specific regulations to alleviate the perceived deterioration of environmental and groundwater quality from uncontrolled disposal practices. The disposal of drilling fluids in Kansas is discussed along with a newer method or treatment in drilling fluid disposal.

  13. Federal Policy G.C. Sciara

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Handy, Susan L.

    , or facilities; 8. preservation of abandoned railway corridors (including conversion and use of the corridors because... ­ Show federal priorities ­ Determine what kinds of projects · Old way: By facility type. pedestrian and bicycle facilities; 2. pedestrian and bicycle safety and education activities; 3. acquisition

  14. Long-Term Performance of Transuranic Waste Inadvertently Disposed in a Shallow Land Burial Trench at the Nevada Test Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gregory J. Shott; Vefa Yucel

    2009-07-16T23:59:59.000Z

    In 1986, 21 m3 of transuranic (TRU) waste was inadvertently disposed in a shallow land burial trench at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site on the Nevada Test Site. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) TRU waste must be disposed in accordance with Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 191, Environmental Radiation Protection Standard for Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level, and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes. The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant is the only facility meeting these requirements. The National Research Council, however, has found that exhumation of buried TRU waste for disposal in a deep geologic repository may not be warranted when the effort, exposures, and expense of retrieval are not commensurate with the risk reduction achieved. The long-term risks of leaving the TRU waste in-place are evaluated in two probabilistic performance assessments. A composite analysis, assessing the dose from all disposed waste and interacting sources of residual contamination, estimates an annual total effective dose equivalent (TEDE) of 0.01 mSv, or 3 percent of the dose constraint. A 40 CFR 191 performance assessment also indicates there is reasonable assurance of meeting all requirements. The 40 CFR 191.15 annual mean TEDE for a member of the public is estimated to reach a maximum of 0.055 mSv at 10,000 years, or approximately 37 percent of the 0.15 mSv individual protection requirement. In both assessments greater than 99 percent of the dose is from co-disposed low-level waste. The simulated probability of the 40 CFR 191.13 cumulative release exceeding 1 and 10 times the release limit is estimated to be 0.0093 and less than 0.0001, respectively. Site characterization data and hydrologic process modeling support a conclusion of no groundwater pathway within 10,000 years. Monte Carlo uncertainty analysis indicates that there is reasonable assurance of meeting all regulatory requirements. Sensitivity analysis indicates that the results are insensitive to TRU waste-related parameters. Limited quantities of TRU waste in a shallow land burial trench can meet DOE performance objectives for disposal of TRU waste and contribute negligibly to disposal site risk. Leaving limited quantities of buried TRU waste in-place may be preferred over retrieval for disposal in a deep geologic repository.

  15. Conceptual Design Report for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    David Duncan

    2011-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This conceptual design report addresses development of replacement remote-handled low-level waste disposal capability for the Idaho National Laboratory. Current disposal capability at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex is planned until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This conceptual design report includes key project assumptions; design options considered in development of the proposed onsite disposal facility (the highest ranked alternative for providing continued uninterrupted remote-handled low level waste disposal capability); process and facility descriptions; safety and environmental requirements that would apply to the proposed facility; and the proposed cost and schedule for funding, design, construction, and operation of the proposed onsite disposal facility.

  16. Conceptual Design Report for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; David Duncan; Joan Connolly; Margaret Hinman; Charles Marcinkiewicz; Gary Mecham

    2011-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This conceptual design report addresses development of replacement remote-handled low-level waste disposal capability for the Idaho National Laboratory. Current disposal capability at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex is planned until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This conceptual design report includes key project assumptions; design options considered in development of the proposed onsite disposal facility (the highest ranked alternative for providing continued uninterrupted remote-handled low level waste disposal capability); process and facility descriptions; safety and environmental requirements that would apply to the proposed facility; and the proposed cost and schedule for funding, design, construction, and operation of the proposed onsite disposal facility.

  17. Final Safety Evaluation Report to license the construction and operation of a facility to receive, store, and dispose of 11e.(2) byproduct material near Clive, Utah (Docket No. 40-8989)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Final Safety Evaluation Report (FSER) summarizes the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff`s review of Envirocare of Utah, Inc.`s (Envirocare`s) application for a license to receive, store, and dispose of uranium and thorium byproduct material (as defined in Section 11e.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended) at a site near Clive, Utah. Envirocare proposes to dispose of high-volume, low-activity Section 11e.(2) byproduct material in separate earthen disposal cells on a site where the applicant currently disposes of naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM), low-level waste, and mixed waste under license by the Utah Department of Environmental Quality. The NRC staff review of the December 23, 1991, license application, as revised by page changes dated July 2 and August 10, 1992, April 5, 7, and 10, 1993, and May 3, 6, 7, 11, and 21, 1993, has identified open issues in geotechnical engineering, water resources protection, radon attenuation, financial assurance, and radiological safety. The NRC will not issue a license for the proposed action until Envirocare adequately resolves these open issues.

  18. 2007 Federal Energy and Water Management Award Winners

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Federal Energy and Water Management Awards recognize individuals, groups, and agencies for their outstanding contributions in the areas of energy efficiency, water conservation, and the use of advanced and renewable energy technologies at federal facilities.

  19. 2006 Federal Energy and Water Management Award Winners

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Federal Energy and Water Management Awards recognize individuals, groups, and agencies for their outstanding contributions in the areas of energy efficiency, water conservation, and the use of advanced and renewable nergy technologies at federal facilities.

  20. Federal Procurement of Energy-Efficient Products January 2013 Update

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Welcome to the seventh issue of Federal Energy-Efficient Product Procurement! This bi-monthly update helps Federal procurement officials, facility managers, and others remain up to date on events, training, technology, and changes to acquisition requirements.

  1. 2005 Federal Energy and Water Management Award Winners

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Federal Energy and Water Management Awards recognize individuals, groups, and agencies for their outstanding contributions in the areas of energy efficiency, water conservation, and the use of advanced and renewable energy technologies at federal facilities.

  2. 2013 Federal Energy and Water Management Award Winners Video

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Federal Energy and Water Management Awards recognize individuals, groups, and agencies for the outstanding use of energy- and water-efficiency technologies at Federal facilities. This video honors the 25 individuals and teams that received awards in 2013.

  3. 2010 Federal Energy and Water Management Award Winners

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Federal Energy and Water Management Awards recognize individuals, groups, and agencies for their outstanding contributions in the areas of energy efficiency, water conservation, and the use of advanced and renewable energy technologies at federal facilities.

  4. 2008 Federal Energy and Water Management Award Winners

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Federal Energy and Water Management Awards recognize individuals, groups, and agencies for their outstanding contributions in the areas of energy efficiency, water conservation, and the use of advanced and renewable energy technologies at federal facilities.

  5. 2009 Federal Energy and Water Management Award Winners

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Federal Energy and Water Management Awards recognize individuals, groups, and agencies for their outstanding contributions in the areas of energy efficiency, water conservation, and the use of advanced and renewable energy technologies at federal facilities.

  6. University of California, Irvine Environmental Health and Safety www.ehs.uci.edu Questions Call: (949) 824-6200 Version 1.0 Facilities maintenance generates a variety of wastes that are regulated as a hazardous waste by local, state, and federal

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    George, Steven C.

    as a hazardous waste by local, state, and federal laws. A waste is considered a hazardous waste if it contains. Common Types Of Facilities Maintenance Operations Hazardous Waste Include: · Antifreeze · Lubricants if your waste is hazardous visit http://www.ehs.uci.edu/programs/enviro/hwasteguidelines.html. Hazardous

  7. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Construction and Operation of a Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion Facility at the Portsmouth, Ohio, Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    N /A

    2003-11-28T23:59:59.000Z

    This document is a site-specific environmental impact statement (EIS) for construction and operation of a proposed depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF{sub 6}) conversion facility at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Portsmouth site in Ohio (Figure S-1). The proposed facility would convert the DUF{sub 6} stored at Portsmouth to a more stable chemical form suitable for use or disposal. The facility would also convert the DUF{sub 6} from the East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP) site near Oak Ridge, Tennessee. In a Notice of Intent (NOI) published in the Federal Register on September 18, 2001 (Federal Register, Volume 66, page 48123 [66 FR 48123]), DOE announced its intention to prepare a single EIS for a proposal to construct, operate, maintain, and decontaminate and decommission two DUF{sub 6} conversion facilities at Portsmouth, Ohio, and Paducah, Kentucky, in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (United States Code, Title 42, Section 4321 et seq. [42 USC 4321 et seq.]) and DOE's NEPA implementing procedures (Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 1021 [10 CFR Part 1021]). Subsequent to award of a contract to Uranium Disposition Services, LLC (hereafter referred to as UDS), Oak Ridge, Tennessee, on August 29, 2002, for design, construction, and operation of DUF{sub 6} conversion facilities at Portsmouth and Paducah, DOE reevaluated its approach to the NEPA process and decided to prepare separate site-specific EISs. This change was announced in a Federal Register Notice of Change in NEPA Compliance Approach published on April 28, 2003 (68 FR 22368); the Notice is included as Attachment B to Appendix C of this EIS. This EIS addresses the potential environmental impacts from the construction, operation, maintenance, and decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) of the proposed conversion facility at three alternative locations within the Portsmouth site; from the transportation of all ETTP cylinders (DUF{sub 6}, low-enriched UF6 [LEU-UF{sub 6}], and empty) to Portsmouth; from the transportation of depleted uranium conversion products to a disposal facility; and from the transportation, sale, use, or disposal of the fluoride-containing conversion products (hydrogen fluoride [HF] or calcium fluoride [CaF{sub 2}]). An option of shipping the ETTP cylinders to Paducah is also considered. In addition, this EIS evaluates a no action alternative, which assumes continued storage of DUF{sub 6} in cylinders at the Portsmouth and ETTP sites. A separate EIS (DOE/EIS-0359) evaluates potential environmental impacts for the proposed Paducah conversion facility.

  8. 1995 Report on Hanford site land disposal restrictions for mixed waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Black, D.G.

    1995-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report was submitted to meet the requirements of Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order Milestone M-26-01E. This milestone requires the preparation of an annual report that covers characterization, treatment, storage, minimization, and other aspects of land disposal restricted mixed waste at the Hanford Site. The U.S. Department of Energy, its predecessors, and contractors at the Hanford Site were involved in the production and purification of nuclear defense materials from the early 1940s to the late 1980s. These production activities have generated large quantities of liquid and solid radioactive mixed waste. This waste is subject to regulation under authority of both the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 and Atomic Energy Act of 1954. This report covers mixed waste only. The Washington State Department of Ecology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and U.S. Department of Energy have entered into an agreement, the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (commonly referred to as the Tri-Party Agreement) to bring the Hanford Site operations into compliance with dangerous waste regulations. The Tri-Party Agreement required development of the original land disposal restrictions (LDRs) plan and its annual updates to comply with LDR requirements for radioactive mixed waste. This report is the fifth update of the plan first issued in 1990. Tri-Party Agreement negotiations completed in 1993 and approved in January 1994 changed and added many new milestones. Most of the changes were related to the Tank Waste Remediation System and these changes are incorporated into this report.

  9. Facility Status

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOEThe Bonneville Power AdministrationField8,Dist. Category UC-lFederalFYRANDOM DRUG TESTING The requirementFacility

  10. Corrective Action Plan for Corrective Action Unit 139: Waste Disposal Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 139, Waste Disposal Sites, is listed in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) of 1996 (FFACO, 1996). CAU 139 consists of seven Corrective Action Sites (CASs) located in Areas 3, 4, 6, and 9 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS), which is located approximately 65 miles (mi) northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada (Figure 1). CAU 139 consists of the following CASs: CAS 03-35-01, Burn Pit; CAS 04-08-02, Waste Disposal Site; CAS 04-99-01, Contaminated Surface Debris; CAS 06-19-02, Waste Disposal Site/Burn Pit; CAS 06-19-03, Waste Disposal Trenches; CAS 09-23-01, Area 9 Gravel Gertie; and CAS 09-34-01, Underground Detection Station. Details of the site history and site characterization results for CAU 139 are provided in the approved Corrective Action Investigation Plan (CAIP) (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office [NNSA/NSO], 2006) and in the approved Corrective Action Decision Document (CADD) (NNSA/NSO, 2007). The purpose of this Corrective Action Plan (CAP) is to present the detailed scope of work required to implement the recommended corrective actions as specified in Section 4.0 of the approved CADD (NNSA/NSO, 2007). The approved closure activities for CAU 139 include removal of soil and debris contaminated with plutonium (Pu)-239, excavation of geophysical anomalies, removal of surface debris, construction of an engineered soil cover, and implementation of use restrictions (URs). Table 1 presents a summary of CAS-specific closure activities and contaminants of concern (COCs). Specific details of the corrective actions to be performed at each CAS are presented in Section 2.0 of this report.

  11. RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL IN GRANITE

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Witherspoon, P.A.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL IN GRANITE Paul A. WitherspoonRADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL IN GRANITE Paul A. Wither spoona repository site in granite are to evaluate the suitability

  12. Hanford Site waste treatment/storage/disposal integration

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MCDONALD, K.M.

    1999-02-24T23:59:59.000Z

    In 1998 Waste Management Federal Services of Hanford, Inc. began the integration of all low-level waste, mixed waste, and TRU waste-generating activities across the Hanford site. With seven contractors, dozens of generating units, and hundreds of waste streams, integration was necessary to provide acute waste forecasting and planning for future treatment activities. This integration effort provides disposition maps that account for waste from generation, through processing, treatment and final waste disposal. The integration effort covers generating facilities from the present through the life-cycle, including transition and deactivation. The effort is patterned after the very successful DOE Complex EM Integration effort. Although still in the preliminary stages, the comprehensive onsite integration effort has already reaped benefits. These include identifying significant waste streams that had not been forecast, identifying opportunities for consolidating activities and services to accelerate schedule or save money; and identifying waste streams which currently have no path forward in the planning baseline. Consolidation/integration of planned activities may also provide opportunities for pollution prevention and/or avoidance of secondary waste generation. A workshop was held to review the waste disposition maps, and to identify opportunities with potential cost or schedule savings. Another workshop may be held to follow up on some of the long-term integration opportunities. A change to the Hanford waste forecast data call would help to align the Solid Waste Forecast with the new disposition maps.

  13. Subseabed Disposal Program Plan. Volume I. Overview

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None

    1981-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The primary objective of the Subseabed Disposal Program (SDP) is to assess the scientific, environmental, and engineering feasibility of disposing of processed and packaged high-level nuclear waste in geologic formations beneath the world's oceans. High-level waste (HLW) is considered the most difficult of radioactive wastes to dispose of in oceanic geologic formations because of its heat and radiation output. From a scientific standpoint, the understanding developed for the disposal of such HLW can be used for other nuclear wastes (e.g., transuranic - TRU - or low-level) and materials from decommissioned facilities, since any set of barriers competent to contain the heat and radiation outputs of high-level waste will also contain such outputs from low-level waste. If subseabed disposal is found to be feasible for HLW, then other factors such as cost will become more important in considering subseabed emplacement for other nuclear wastes. A secondary objective of the SDP is to develop and maintain a capability to assess and cooperate with the seabed nuclear waste disposal programs of other nations. There are, of course, a number of nations with nuclear programs, and not all of these nations have convenient access to land-based repositories for nuclear waste. Many are attempting to develop legislative and scientific programs that will avoid potential hazards to man, threats to other ocean uses, and marine pollution, and they work together to such purpose in meetings of the international NEA/Seabed Working Group. The US SDP, as the first and most highly developed R and D program in the area, strongly influences the development of subseabed-disposal-related policy in such nations.

  14. Guide to Federal Financing for Energy Efficiency and Clean Energy...

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

    Guide, Second Edition (updated Oct. 1, 2014) More Documents & Publications Federal Finance Facilities Available for Energy Efficiency Upgrades and Clean Energy Deployment...

  15. 1981 Memorandum of Understanding between the Federal Energy Regulatory...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Service Abstract Establishes a process to promote the non-Federal development of hydroelectric energy at existing Water and Power (Reclamation) facilities. Author FERC...

  16. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Federal Register Notice Volume...

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

    for proposed interstate electric transmission facilities pursuant to section 216(h) of the Federal Power Act (FPA). The proposed rule would require permitting entities to...

  17. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Foam Used in Actual Outbreak · Water #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Water Based Foam Culling Demo · First large scale comparison · Two:46 (m:s) #12;Disposal: Science and Theory WV H5N2 AIV 2007 · AIV positive turkeys ­ 25,000 turkey farm

  18. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Opciones para la producción de espuma espuma · Sistemas de boquilla #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Requisitos estimados: · Tiempo: 2 a 3 compactas ­ Equipo de respuesta propio de la industria Espuma de aire comprimido #12;Disposal: Science

  19. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Use of Composting · Composting has ­ British Columbia 2009 #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Initial farm linked to NY LBM · Two additional and pile procedure Delmarva 2004 #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Delmarva 2004 · Composting used

  20. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Las recomendaciones de campo se la espuma #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Múltiples especies de aves pueden despoblarse con espuma cesación #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Dentro de una especie, pueden existir variaciones ­ Los ánades

  1. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Foaming Options · Compressed Air Foam Systems (CAFS) · Foam Blower · Foam Generator · Nozzle Systems #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Compressed ­ Industry owned response team #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Commercial CAFS for Poultry · Poultry

  2. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Procedimiento básico ­ Desarrollar una pila de carcasas y lecho. Compostaje masivo de emergencia #12;Disposal: Science and Theory de emergencia #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Desarrollar planes antes de que ocurra una

  3. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory 0 20 40 60 80 100 Compostaje #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Delmarva fue de las primeras granjas en realizar el compostaje de en EE.UU. en los próximos 10 años. Pionera en compostaje en Delaware #12;Disposal: Science and Theory

  4. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Compostaje de aves de corralRouchey et al., 2005) Investigación previa #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Se ha evaluado y documentado el, bovino Investigación previa #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Experimento nro. 1 Impacto de la espuma en

  5. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Composting · Composting is defined drop #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Composting · Optimal composting ­ Carbon to nitrogen ratio (C;Disposal: Science and Theory Compost Composition · A variety of supplemental carbon materials have been

  6. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Opciones para la eliminación · ¿Qué compostaje durante brotes de enfermedades Lista de contenido #12;Disposal: Science and Theory "Ante un brote brotes de IIAP #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · En 2004, se despoblaron 100 millones de aves en todo el

  7. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Brief History of Foam 2004 ­ Bud and foam 2009 ­ No advantage for gas #12;Disposal: Science and Theory What is foam? · What is fire fighting system. #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Foam Composition · Foam can include ­ Mixture of surfactants

  8. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · El compostaje se ha usado como Virginia (2007) ­ British Columbia (2009) Uso del compostaje #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Primera apilamiento Delmarva (2004) #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · El compostaje se usó para proteger una densa

  9. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Mass Emergency Composting · Basic ­ Create carcass and litter windrow #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Mass Emergency Composting · Basic cover ­ Clean and disinfect house ­ Sample for virus again #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Mass

  10. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory 2004 ­ Participación de Bud Malone y la espuma 2009 ­ Ninguna ventaja para el gas Breve historia de la espuma #12;Disposal: Science sistema de boquilla ¿Qué es la espuma? #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · La espuma puede incluir: ­ Una

  11. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Gassing is a preferred #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Carbon Dioxide Gassing · Carbon dioxide (CO2) one of the standard sensitivity time #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Argon-CO2 gas depopulation evaluated under laboratory

  12. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Foam Generator Setup · Drop off foam generator cart at one end of house #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Foam Generator Setup · Trailer parked generator attached to hose #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Foam Generation Begins · Team of two to operate

  13. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Summary · Foam is currently a viable ­ Foam application directly to cage #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Legal Status of Foam · Procedure depopulation, culling, and euthanasia #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Acknowledgements · USDA AICAP2 · USDA

  14. Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project Code of Record

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S.L. Austad, P.E.; L.E. Guillen, P.E.; C. W. McKnight, P.E.; D. S. Ferguson, P.E.

    2012-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste (LLW) Disposal Project addresses an anticipated shortfall in remote-handled LLW disposal capability following cessation of operations at the existing facility, which will continue until it is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). Development of a new onsite disposal facility will provide necessary remote-handled LLW disposal capability and will ensure continuity of operations that generate remote-handled LLW. This report documents the Code of Record for design of a new LLW disposal capability. The report is owned by the Design Authority, who can authorize revisions and exceptions. This report will be retained for the lifetime of the facility.

  15. Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project Code of Record

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S.L. Austad, P.E.; L.E. Guillen, P.E.; C. W. McKnight, P.E.; D. S. Ferguson, P.E.

    2011-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste (LLW) Disposal Project addresses an anticipated shortfall in remote-handled LLW disposal capability following cessation of operations at the existing facility, which will continue until it is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). Development of a new onsite disposal facility, the highest ranked alternative, will provide necessary remote-handled LLW disposal capability and will ensure continuity of operations that generate remote-handled LLW. This report documents the Code of Record for design of a new LLW disposal capability. The report is owned by the Design Authority, who can authorize revisions and exceptions. This report will be retained for the lifetime of the facility.

  16. Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project Code of Record

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S.L. Austad, P.E.; L.E. Guillen, P.E.; C. W. McKnight, P.E.; D. S. Ferguson, P.E.

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste (LLW) Disposal Project addresses an anticipated shortfall in remote-handled LLW disposal capability following cessation of operations at the existing facility, which will continue until it is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). Development of a new onsite disposal facility, the highest ranked alternative, will provide necessary remote-handled LLW disposal capability and will ensure continuity of operations that generate remote-handled LLW. This report documents the Code of Record for design of a new LLW disposal capability. The report is owned by the Design Authority, who can authorize revisions and exceptions. This report will be retained for the lifetime of the facility.

  17. Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project Code of Record

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S.L. Austad, P.E.; L.E. Guillen, P.E.; C. W. McKnight, P.E.; D. S. Ferguson, P.E.

    2012-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste (LLW) Disposal Project addresses an anticipated shortfall in remote-handled LLW disposal capability following cessation of operations at the existing facility, which will continue until it is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). Development of a new onsite disposal facility will provide necessary remote-handled LLW disposal capability and will ensure continuity of operations that generate remote-handled LLW. This report documents the Code of Record for design of a new LLW disposal capability. The report is owned by the Design Authority, who can authorize revisions and exceptions. This report will be retained for the lifetime of the facility.

  18. Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project Code of Record

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S.L. Austad, P.E.; L.E. Guillen, P.E.; C. W. McKnight, P.E.; D. S. Ferguson, P.E.

    2014-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste (LLW) Disposal Project addresses an anticipated shortfall in remote-handled LLW disposal capability following cessation of operations at the existing facility, which will continue until it is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). Development of a new onsite disposal facility will provide necessary remote-handled LLW disposal capability and will ensure continuity of operations that generate remote-handled LLW. This report documents the Code of Record for design of a new LLW disposal capability. The report is owned by the Design Authority, who can authorize revisions and exceptions. This report will be retained for the lifetime of the facility.

  19. Low-Level Waste Disposal Alternatives Analysis Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Timothy Carlson; Kay Adler-Flitton; Roy Grant; Joan Connolly; Peggy Hinman; Charles Marcinkiewicz

    2006-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report identifies and compares on-site and off-site disposal options for the disposal of contract-handled and remote-handled low-level waste generated by the Idaho National Laboratory and its tenants. Potential disposal options are screened for viability by waste type resulting in a short list of options for further consideration. The most crediable option are selected after systematic consideration of cost, schedule constraints, and risk. In order to holistically address the approach for low-level waste disposal, options are compiled into comprehensive disposal schemes, that is, alternative scenarios. Each alternative scenario addresses the disposal path for all low-level waste types over the period of interest. The alternative scenarios are compared and ranked using cost, risk and complexity to arrive at the recommended approach. Schedule alignment with disposal needs is addressed to ensure that all waste types are managed appropriately. The recommended alternative scenario for the disposal of low-level waste based on this analysis is to build a disposal facility at the Idaho National Laboratory Site.

  20. Comparison of low-level waste disposal programs of DOE and selected international countries

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Meagher, B.G. [Lockheed Idaho Technologies Co., Idaho Falls, ID (United States); Cole, L.T. [Cole and Associates (United States)

    1996-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of this report is to examine and compare the approaches and practices of selected countries for disposal of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) with those of the US Department of Energy (DOE). The report addresses the programs for disposing of wastes into engineered LLW disposal facilities and is not intended to address in-situ options and practices associated with environmental restoration activities or the management of mill tailings and mixed LLW. The countries chosen for comparison are France, Sweden, Canada, and the United Kingdom. The countries were selected as typical examples of the LLW programs which have evolved under differing technical constraints, regulatory requirements, and political/social systems. France was the first country to demonstrate use of engineered structure-type disposal facilities. The UK has been actively disposing of LLW since 1959. Sweden has been disposing of LLW since 1983 in an intermediate-depth disposal facility rather than a near-surface disposal facility. To date, Canada has been storing its LLW but will soon begin operation of Canada`s first demonstration LLW disposal facility.

  1. Preliminary Hazard Analysis for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

    2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The need for remote handled low level waste (LLW) disposal capability has been identified. A new onsite, remote-handled LLW disposal facility has been identified as the highest ranked alternative for providing continued, uninterrupted remote-handled LLW disposal capability for remote-handled LLW that is generated as part of the nuclear mission of the Idaho National Laboratory and from spent nuclear fuel processing activities at the Naval Reactors Facility. Historically, this type of waste has been disposed of at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex. Disposal of remote-handled LLW in concrete disposal vaults at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex will continue until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This document supports the conceptual design for the proposed remote-handled LLW disposal facility by providing an initial nuclear facility hazard categorization and by identifying potential hazards for processes associated with onsite handling and disposal of remote-handled LLW.

  2. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Construction and Operation of a Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion Facility at the Paducah, Kentucky, Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    N /A

    2003-11-28T23:59:59.000Z

    This document is a site-specific environmental impact statement (EIS) for construction and operation of a proposed depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF{sub 6}) conversion facility at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Paducah site in northwestern Kentucky (Figure S-1). The proposed facility would convert the DUF{sub 6} stored at Paducah to a more stable chemical form suitable for use or disposal. In a Notice of Intent (NOI) published in the ''Federal Register'' (FR) on September 18, 2001 (''Federal Register'', Volume 66, page 48123 [66 FR 48123]), DOE announced its intention to prepare a single EIS for a proposal to construct, operate, maintain, and decontaminate and decommission two DUF{sub 6} conversion facilities at Portsmouth, Ohio, and Paducah, Kentucky, in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (''United States Code'', Title 42, Section 4321 et seq. [42 USC 4321 et seq.]) and DOE's NEPA implementing procedures (''Code of Federal Regulations'', Title 10, Part 1021 [10 CFR Part 1021]). Subsequent to award of a contract to Uranium Disposition Services, LLC (hereafter referred to as UDS), Oak Ridge, Tennessee, on August 29, 2002, for design, construction, and operation of DUF{sub 6} conversion facilities at Portsmouth and Paducah, DOE reevaluated its approach to the NEPA process and decided to prepare separate site-specific EISs. This change was announced in a ''Federal Register'' Notice of Change in NEPA Compliance Approach published on April 28, 2003 (68 FR 22368); the Notice is included as Attachment B to Appendix C of this EIS. This EIS addresses the potential environmental impacts from the construction, operation, maintenance, and decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) of the proposed conversion facility at three alternative locations within the Paducah site; from the transportation of depleted uranium conversion products to a disposal facility; and from the transportation, sale, use, or disposal of the fluoride-containing conversion products (hydrogen fluoride [HF] or calcium fluoride [CaF{sub 2}]). Although not part of the proposed action, an option of shipping all cylinders (DUF{sub 6}, low-enriched UF{sub 6} [LEU-UF{sub 6}], and empty) stored at the East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP) near Oak Ridge, Tennessee, to Paducah rather than to Portsmouth is also considered. In addition, this EIS evaluates a no action alternative, which assumes continued storage of DUF{sub 6} in cylinders at the Paducah site. A separate EIS (DOE/EIS-0360) evaluates the potential environmental impacts for the proposed Portsmouth conversion facility.

  3. Laboratory to demolish excavation enclosures at Material Disposal Area B

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    to hazardous and radiological contamination while excavating and packaging contaminated debris and soil from of a highly successful environmental cleanup project at Material Disposal Area B," said Ed Worth, federal project manager #12;- 2 - with the National Nuclear Security Administration's Los Alamos Site Office. "We

  4. Domestic Water Conservation Technologies: Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) Federal Technology Alert (Booklet)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    2002-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Executive Order 13123 calls for the Federal government to conserve water as well as energy in its 500,000 facilities. To help set priorities among water-saving measures, the Federal Energy Management Program conducted a study of Federal water use in 1997. The study indicated that the government consumes more than 50% of its water in just three types of Federal facilities: housing, hospitals, and office buildings. These facilities have enough kitchens, rest rooms, and laundry areas to provide facility managers with many opportunities to begin reducing their water use (and utility costs) with appropriate water-saving fixtures and products. Therefore, this Federal Technology Alert focuses on domestic technologies, products, and appliances such as water-efficient faucets, showerheads, toilets, urinals, washing machines, and dishwashers. Conserving water also saves the energy needed to treat, pump, and heat that water in homes, businesses, and other buildings.

  5. Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites (Iowa)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These sections contain information on fees and monitoring relevant to operators of hazardous waste disposal sites.

  6. Title 43 CFR 429 Use of Bureau of Reclamation Land, Facilities...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Federal RegulationFederal Regulation: Title 43 CFR 429 Use of Bureau of Reclamation Land, Facilities, and...

  7. 3DD - Three Dimensional Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel - 12449

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dvorakova, Marketa; Slovak, Jiri [Radioactive Waste Repository Authority (RAWRA), Prague (Czech Republic)

    2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Three dimensional disposal is being considered as a way in which to store long-term spent nuclear fuel in underground disposal facilities in the Czech Republic. This method involves a combination of the two most common internationally recognised disposal methods in order to practically apply the advantages of both whilst, at the same time, eliminating their weaknesses; the method also allows easy removal in case of potential re-use. The proposed method for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel will reduce the areal requirements of future deep geological repositories by more than 30%. It will also simplify the container handling process by using gravitational forces in order to meet requirements concerning the controllability of processes and ensuring operational and nuclear safety. With regard to the issue of the efficient potential removal of waste containers, this project offers an ingenious solution which does not disrupt the overall stability of the original disposal complex. (authors)

  8. IN HARM'S WAY: Lack Of Federal Coal Ash

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Short, Daniel

    IN HARM'S WAY: Lack Of Federal Coal Ash Regulations Endangers Americans And Their Environment 2010 Thirty-nine New Damage Cases of Contamination from Improperly Disposed Coal Combustion Waste, Editor and Contributing Author #12;IN HARM'S WAY: Lack of Federal Coal Ash Regulations Endangers

  9. Los Alamos National Laboratory opens new waste repackaging facility

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

    brought a third waste repackaging facility online to increase its capability to process nuclear waste for permanent disposal. March 7, 2013 A view of the new box line facility...

  10. Regulatory Facility Guide for Tennessee

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Anderson, S.S.; Bock, R.E.; Francis, M.W.; Gove, R.M.; Johnson, P.E.; Kovac, F.M.; Mynatt, J.O. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States); Rymer, A.C. [Transportation Consulting Services, Knoxville, TN (United States)

    1994-02-28T23:59:59.000Z

    This guide provides detailed compilations of international, federal, and state transportation related regulations applicable to shipments originating at or destined to Tennessee facilities. Information on preferred routes is also given.

  11. Recommendations and Justifications for Modifications for Use Restrictions Established under the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order with ROTC 1, Revision No. 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lynn Kidman

    2008-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Many Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) Use Restrictions (URs) have been established at various corrective action sites (CASs) as part of FFACO corrective actions (FFACO, 1996; as amended January 2007). Since the signing of the FFACO in 1996, practices and procedures relating to the implementation of risk-based corrective action (RBCA) have evolved. This document is part of an effort to re-evaluate all FFACO URs against the current RBCA criteria (referred to in this document as the Industrial Sites [IS] RBCA process) as defined in the Industrial Sites Project Establishment of Final Action Levels (NNSA/NSO, 2006c). Based on this evaluation, the URs were sorted into the following categories: 1. Where sufficient information exists to determine that the current UR is consistent with the RCBA criteria 2. Where sufficient information exists to determine that the current UR may be removed or downgraded based on RCBA criteria. 3. Where sufficient information does not exist to evaluate the current UR against the RCBA criteria. After reviewing all the existing FFACO URs, the 49 URs addressed in this document have sufficient information to determine that these current URs may be removed or downgraded based on RCBA criteria. This document presents recommendations on modifications to existing URs that will be consistent with the RCBA criteria.

  12. Approaches to LLW disposal site selection and current progress of host states

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Walsh, J.J.; Kerr, T.A.

    1990-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In accordance with the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 and under the guidance of 10 CFR 61, States have begun entering into compacts to establish and operate regional disposal facilities for low-level radioactive waste. The progress a state makes in implementing a process to identify a specific location for a disposal site is one indication of the level of a state's commitment to meeting its responsibilities under Federal law and interstate compact agreements. During the past few years, several States have been engaged in site selection processes. The purpose of this report is to summarize the site selection approaches of some of the Host States (California, Michigan, Nebraska, New York, North Carolina, Texas, and Illinois), and their progress to date. An additional purpose of the report is to discern whether the Host States's site selection processes were heavily influenced by any common factors. One factor each state held in common was that political and public processes exerted a powerful influence on the site selection process at virtually every stage. 1 ref.

  13. US Department of Energy mixed waste characterization, treatment, and disposal focus area technical baseline development process

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Roach, J.A.; Gombert, D. [Lockheed Martin Idaho Technologies, Idaho Falls, ID (United States)

    1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) created the Mixed Waste Characterization, Treatment, and Disposal Focus Area (MWFA) to develop and facilitate implementation of technologies required to meet its commitments for treatment of mixed wastes under the Federal Facility Compliance Act (FFCA), and in accordance with the Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Mixed wastes include both mixed low-level waste (MLLW) and mixed transuranic (MTRU) waste. The goal of the MWFA is to develop mixed waste treatment systems to the point of implementation by the Environmental Management (EM) customer. To accomplish this goal, the MWFA is utilizing a three step process. First, the treatment system technology deficiencies were identified and categorized. Second, these identified needs were prioritized. This resulted in a list of technical deficiencies that will be used to develop a technical baseline. The third step, the Technical Baseline Development Process, is currently ongoing. When finalized, the technical baseline will integrate the requirements associated with the identified needs into the planned and ongoing environmental research and technology development activities supported by the MWFA. Completion of this three-step process will result in a comprehensive technology development program that addresses customer identified and prioritized needs. The MWFA technical baseline will be a cost-effective, technically-defensible tool for addressing and resolving DOE`s mixed waste problems.

  14. 1997 Hanford site report on land disposal restrictions for mixed waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Black, D.G.

    1997-04-07T23:59:59.000Z

    The baseline land disposal restrictions (LDR) plan was prepared in 1990 in accordance with the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (commonly referred to as the Tn-Party Agreement) Milestone M-26-00 (Ecology et al, 1989). The text of this milestone is below. ''LDR requirements include limitations on storage of specified hazardous wastes (including mixed wastes). In accordance with approved plans and schedules, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) shall develop and implement technologies necessary to achieve full compliance with LDR requirements for mixed wastes at the Hanford Site. LDR plans and schedules shall be developed with consideration of other action plan milestones and will not become effective until approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (or Washington State Department of Ecology [Ecology]) upon authorization to administer LDRs pursuant to Section 3006 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA). Disposal of LDR wastes at any time is prohibited except in accordance with applicable LDR requirements for nonradioactive wastes at all times. The plan will include, but not be limited to, the following: Waste characterization plan; Storage report; Treatment report; Treatment plan; Waste minimization plan; A schedule depicting the events necessary to achieve full compliance with LDR requirements; and A process for establishing interim milestones.

  15. Recycling`s regulatory burden: A case study -- the Modesto Tire Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tomeo, E. [UAE Energy Operations Corp., San Ramon, CA (United States)

    1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    The Modesto Tire Disposal Project is a 14 MW electric power generating facility in Westley, CA fueled on whole waste tires. A by-product of the incineration process is a zinc-rich fly ash which contains low concentrations of lead and cadmium. The project`s preferred disposition for the fly ash is recycling through reclamation of its valuable metals. Under California regulation, the fly ash is considered a hazardous waste, and its handling and transportation is severely restricted. Federal regulation doe snot impose such restrictions. The fly ash from the project was recycled for years. However, internal regulatory review and subsequent conference with regulators determined that the environmentally sound transportation practices that had been utilized were not regulatorily compliant. As a result of compliance initiatives, the valuable fly ash had to be disposed of in class 1 landfills for the past year. The return to a recycle option remains elusive. This presentation reviews some of the regulatory hurdles and the economic harm done to the project in order to maintain strict compliance with California hazardous waste regulations.

  16. Challenges in Disposing of Anthrax Waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lesperance, Ann M.; Stein, Steven L.; Upton, Jaki F.; Toomey, Christopher

    2011-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Disasters often create large amounts of waste that must be managed as part of both immediate response and long-term recovery. While many federal, state, and local agencies have debris management plans, these plans often do not address chemical, biological, and radiological contamination. The Interagency Biological Restoration Demonstration’s (IBRD) purpose was to holistically assess all aspects of an anthrax incident and assist the development of a plan for long-term recovery. In the case of wide-area anthrax contamination and the follow-on response and recovery activities, a significant amount of material will require decontamination and disposal. Accordingly, IBRD facilitated the development of debris management plans to address contaminated waste through a series of interviews and workshops with local, state, and federal representatives. The outcome of these discussion was the identification of three primary topical areas that must be addressed: 1) Planning; 2) Unresolved research questions, and resolving regulatory issues.

  17. New Bedford Harbor Superfund Project, Acushnet River estuary engineering feasibility study of dredging and dredged-material disposal alternatives. Report 11. Evaluation of conceptual dredging and disposal alternatives. Technical report, August 1985-July 1988

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Averett, D.E.; Palermo, M.R.; Otis, M.J.; Rubinoff, P.B.

    1989-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report evaluates conceptual dredging and disposal alternatives for the Acushnet River Estuary, a part of the New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site. Dredging for removal of the highly contaminated sediment and subsequent disposal in upland or nearshore confined disposal facilities or disposal in contaminated aquatic disposal facilities are alternative considered in the Engineering Feasibility Study of Dredging and Dredged Material Disposal Alternatives. Sediment testing and sediment-transport modeling performed as earlier tasks of the study form the basis for evaluation of the alternatives. The technical feasibility of conceptual design options is based on site availability, capacity, and characteristics and on sediment physical characteristics and dredged-material settling behavior as defined by laboratory testing. Contamination releases during dredging and disposal operations are estimated for each disposal option. A preliminary cost estimate for implementation of each option evaluated is alo presented.

  18. Texas AgriLife Research Procedure 24.01.01.A1.11 Hazardous Chemical Waste Disposal Page 1 of 2 Texas AgriLife Research Procedures

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Texas AgriLife Research Procedure 24.01.01.A1.11 Hazardous Chemical Waste Disposal Page 1 of 2 Texas AgriLife Research Procedures 24.01.01.A1.11 HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL WASTE DISPOSAL Approved: November, 2012 PROCEDURE STATEMENT The disposal of hazardous chemicals is governed by local, state, and federal

  19. Regulatory Framework for Salt Waste Disposal and Tank Closure at the Savannah River Site - 13663

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thomas, Steve; Dickert, Ginger [Savannah River Remediation LLC, Savannah River Site, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States)] [Savannah River Remediation LLC, Savannah River Site, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The end of the Cold War has left a legacy of approximately 37 million gallons of radioactive waste in the aging waste tanks at the Department of Energy's Savannah River Site (SRS). A robust program is in place to remove waste from these tanks, treat the waste to separate into a relatively small volume of high-level waste and a large volume of low-level waste, and to actively dispose of the low-level waste on-site and close the waste tanks and associated ancillary structures. To support performance-based, risk-informed decision making and to ensure compliance with all regulatory requirements, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its current and past contractors have worked closely with the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to develop and implement a framework for on-site low-level waste disposal and closure of the SRS waste tanks. The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, provides DOE the authority to manage defense-related radioactive waste. DOE Order 435.1 and its associated manual and guidance documents detail this radioactive waste management process. The DOE also has a requirement to consult with the NRC in determining that waste that formerly was classified as high-level waste can be safely managed as either low-level waste or transuranic waste. Once DOE makes a determination, NRC then has a responsibility to monitor DOE's actions in coordination with SCDHEC to ensure compliance with the Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 61 (10CFR61), Subpart C performance objectives. The management of hazardous waste substances or components at SRS is regulated by SCDHEC and the EPA. The foundation for the interactions between DOE, SCDHEC and EPA is the SRS Federal Facility Agreement (FFA). Managing this array of requirements and successfully interacting with regulators, consultants and stakeholders is a challenging task but ensures thorough and thoughtful processes for disposing of the SRS low-level waste and the closure of the tank farm facilities. (authors)

  20. Federal Register Notice

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan| Department of.pdf6-OPAMDepartment6Awards »Facilities |Federal29853

  1. Waste disposal package

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Smith, M.J.

    1985-06-19T23:59:59.000Z

    This is a claim for a waste disposal package including an inner or primary canister for containing hazardous and/or radioactive wastes. The primary canister is encapsulated by an outer or secondary barrier formed of a porous ceramic material to control ingress of water to the canister and the release rate of wastes upon breach on the canister. 4 figs.

  2. Radioactive waste disposal package

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Lampe, Robert F. (Bethel Park, PA)

    1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A radioactive waste disposal package comprising a canister for containing vitrified radioactive waste material and a sealed outer shell encapsulating the canister. A solid block of filler material is supported in said shell and convertible into a liquid state for flow into the space between the canister and outer shell and subsequently hardened to form a solid, impervious layer occupying such space.

  3. Advance disposal fees and recycling: Partners or foes?

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Woods, R.

    1995-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A political trend of shifting government responsibilities from the federal to the state and local level is beginning to take hold in many municipalities this year. Evidence of this shift recently was codified by the passage of Congress`s unfunded mandates bills, which require a panel review of any federal government mandates that create a cost burden of at least $50 million on state and local government. Expecting to be freed from the yoke of the most costly unfunded federal laws, many states are taking a second look at their expensive recycling laws and considering reassessment of how funding mechanisms are structured. This search for ways to raise revenue has renewed the continuing debate over advance disposal fees (ADFs), which are included in the cost of a product to pay for its ultimate disposal or reuse. These ADFs have been used for several years in a majority of US states to help handle scrap tire disposal. Due to concern over fire hazards posed by the nation`s growing scrap tire piles, several states have implemented a $1--$2 fee on each tire to help pay for disposal, most of which have been reasonably successful.

  4. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Table of Contents · Why Depopulate? · Depopulation Methods · Basics of Foam · Types of Foam Equipment · Science Behind Foam · Implementing Foam Depopulation · Use of Foam in the Field · Conclusions #12;Disposal: Science and Theory "When HPAI outbreaks

  5. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · El compostaje se define como la: Science and Theory · Compostaje óptimo ­ Relación carbono/nitrógeno (C:N): 20:1 a 35:1 ­ Contenido de Compostaje #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Se ha utilizado satisfactoriamente una variedad de materiales

  6. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Se ubica el carretón con el enfriamiento Ventiladores de túnel de viento #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Se estaciona el remolque en uno: Science and Theory · Se usa un equipo de dos personas para hacer funcionar el sistema: ­ Operario del

  7. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Field recommendations based of activity ­ Corticosterone ­ EEG, ECG and motion studies · Large scale testing ­ Field scale units Science of Foam #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Cessation Time · Multiple bird species can be depopulated

  8. Waste Disposal Guide HOW TO PROPERLY DISPOSE OF WASTE MATERIALS

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Schaefer, Marcus

    Waste Disposal Guide HOW TO PROPERLY DISPOSE OF WASTE MATERIALS GENERATED AT DEPAUL UNIVERSITY.4 Hazardous Waste Defined p.5 Chemical Waste Procedure for Generating Departments p.6 o A of Containers p.8 o E. Disposal of Empty Containers p.8 o F. Storage of Waste Chemicals p.8,9 o G

  9. 2011 Federal Energy and Water Management Award Winners

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Federal Energy and Water Management Awards recognize individuals, groups, and agencies for their outstanding contributions in the areas of energy efficiency, water conservation, and the use of advanced and renewable energy technologies at federal facilities. Winners of the 2011 Federal Energy and Water Management Awards include:

  10. Material Disposal Areas

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

    Permit in its next request for permit modification. MDA V MDA V is categorized as a radiological facility. It consists of three historic wastewater absorption beds that...

  11. Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application, general information portion. Revision 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sonnichsen, J.C.

    1997-08-21T23:59:59.000Z

    For purposes of the Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application, the US Department of Energy`s contractors are identified as ``co-operators`` and sign in that capacity (refer to Condition I.A.2. of the Dangerous Waste Portion of the Hanford Facility Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Permit). Any identification of these contractors as an ``operator`` elsewhere in the application is not meant to conflict with the contractors` designation as co-operators but rather is based on the contractors` contractual status with the U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. The Dangerous Waste Portion of the initial Hanford Facility Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Permit, which incorporated five treatment, storage, and/or disposal units, was based on information submitted in the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application and in closure plan and closure/postclosure plan documentation. During 1995, the Dangerous Waste Portion was modified twice to incorporate another eight treatment, storage, and/or disposal units; during 1996, the Dangerous Waste Portion was modified once to incorporate another five treatment, storage, and/or disposal units. The permit modification process will be used at least annually to incorporate additional treatment, storage, and/or disposal units as permitting documentation for these units is finalized. The units to be included in annual modifications are specified in a schedule contained in the Dangerous Waste Portion of the Hanford Facility Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Permit. Treatment, storage, and/or disposal units will remain in interim status until incorporated into the Permit. The Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application is considered to be a single application organized into a General Information Portion (this document, DOE/RL-91-28) and a Unit-Specific Portion. The scope of the Unit-Specific Portion is limited to individual operating treatment, storage, and/or disposal units for which Part B permit application documentation has been, or is anticipated to be, submitted. Documentation for treatment, storage, and/or disposal units undergoing closure, or for units that are, or are anticipated to be, dispositioned through other options, will continue to be submitted by the Permittees in accordance with the provisions of the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. However, the scope of the General Information Portion includes information that could be used to discuss operating units, units undergoing closure, or units being dispositioned through other options. Both the General Information and Unit-Specific portions of the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application address the contents of the Part B permit application guidance documentation prepared by the Washington State Department of Ecology and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, with additional information needs defined by revisions of Washington Administrative Code 173-303 and by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments. Documentation contained in the General Information Portion is broader in nature and could be used by multiple treatment, storage, and/or disposal units (i.e., either operating units, units undergoing closure, or units being dispositioned through other options).

  12. Corrective Action Plan for Corrective Action Unit 543: Liquid Disposal Units, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2007-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 543: Liquid Disposal Units is listed in Appendix III of the ''Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order'' (FFACO) which was agreed to by the state of Nevada, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and the U.S. Department of Defense (FFACO, 1996). CAU 543 sites are located in Areas 6 and 15 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS), which is approximately 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. CAU 543 consists of the following seven Corrective Action Sites (CASs) (Figure 1): CAS 06-07-01, Decon Pad; CAS 15-01-03, Aboveground Storage Tank; CAS 15-04-01, Septic Tank; CAS 15-05-01, Leachfield; CAS 15-08-01, Liquid Manure Tank; CAS 15-23-01, Underground Radioactive Material Area; and CAS 15-23-03, Contaminated Sump, Piping. All Area 15 CASs are located at the former U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Farm, which operated from 1963 to 1981 and was used to support animal experiments involving the uptake of radionuclides. Each of the Area 15 CASs, except CAS 15-23-01, is associated with the disposal of waste effluent from Building 15-06, which was the primary location of the various tests and experiments conducted onsite. Waste effluent disposal from Building 15-06 involved piping, sumps, outfalls, a septic tank with leachfield, underground storage tanks, and an aboveground storage tank (AST). CAS 15-23-01 was associated with decontamination activities of farm equipment potentially contaminated with radiological constituents, pesticides, and herbicides. While the building structures were removed before the investigation took place, all the original tanks, sumps, piping, and concrete building pads remain in place. The Area 6 CAS is located at the Decontamination Facility in Area 6, a facility which operated from 1971 to 2001 and was used to decontaminate vehicles, equipment, clothing, and other materials that had become contaminated during nuclear testing activities. The CAS includes the effluent collection and distribution systems for Buildings 6-605, 6-606, and 6-607, which consists of septic tanks, sumps, piping, floor drains, drain trenches, cleanouts, and a concrete foundation. Additional details of the site history are provided in the CAU 543 Corrective Action Investigation Plan (CAIP) (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office [NNSA/NSO], 2004a), and the CAU 543 Corrective Action Decision Document (CADD) (NNSA/NSO, 2005).

  13. Reevaluation of Vitrified High-Level Waste Form Criteria for Potential Cost Savings at the Defense Waste Processing Facility - 13598

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ray, J.W. [Savannah River Remediation (United States)] [Savannah River Remediation (United States); Marra, S.L.; Herman, C.C. [Savannah River National Laboratory, Savannah River Site, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States)] [Savannah River National Laboratory, Savannah River Site, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    At the Savannah River Site (SRS) the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) has been immobilizing SRS's radioactive high level waste (HLW) sludge into a durable borosilicate glass since 1996. Currently the DWPF has poured over 3,500 canisters, all of which are compliant with the U. S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Waste Acceptance Product Specifications for Vitrified High-Level Waste Forms (WAPS) and therefore ready to be shipped to a federal geologic repository for permanent disposal. Due to DOE petitioning to withdraw the Yucca Mountain License Application (LA) from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in 2010 and thus no clear disposal path for SRS canistered waste forms, there are opportunities for cost savings with future canister production at DWPF and other DOE producer sites by reevaluating high-level waste form requirements and compliance strategies and reducing/eliminating those that will not negatively impact the quality of the canistered waste form. (authors)

  14. Operational Strategies for Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Site in Egypt - 13513

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mohamed, Yasser T. [Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center, Atomic Energy Authority, 3 Ahmed El-Zomor St., El-Zohour District, Naser City, 11787, Cairo (Egypt)] [Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center, Atomic Energy Authority, 3 Ahmed El-Zomor St., El-Zohour District, Naser City, 11787, Cairo (Egypt)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The ultimate aims of treatment and conditioning is to prepare waste for disposal by ensuring that the waste will meet the waste acceptance criteria of a disposal facility. Hence the purpose of low-level waste disposal is to isolate the waste from both people and the environment. The radioactive particles in low-level waste emit the same types of radiation that everyone receives from nature. Most low-level waste fades away to natural background levels of radioactivity in months or years. Virtually all of it diminishes to natural levels in less than 300 years. In Egypt, The Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center has been established since 1983, as a waste management facility for LLW and ILW and the disposal site licensed for preoperational in 2005. The site accepts the low level waste generated on site and off site and unwanted radioactive sealed sources with half-life less than 30 years for disposal and all types of sources for interim storage prior to the final disposal. Operational requirements at the low-level (LLRW) disposal site are listed in the National Center for Nuclear Safety and Radiation Control NCNSRC guidelines. Additional procedures are listed in the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility Standards Manual. The following describes the current operations at the LLRW disposal site. (authors)

  15. Federal Energy Resources Modernization Coordinating Committee

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Parker, G.B.

    1993-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report summarizes the broad range of activities that are focused on meeting the President's Executive Order on Federal Energy Management promulgated to meet energy savings goals and encourage more efficient management of all federal energy resources. These activities are reported semiannually under the auspices of the Federal Energy Resource Modernization (FERM) Coordinating Committee, and as such include activities undertaken from April 1, 1992, through September 30, 1992. The activities reported are classified into four major categories: (1) technology-base support, which includes development of processes, software, metering and monitoring equipment and strategies, and other tools for federal energy managers to better understand and characterize their energy resources; (2) federal energy systems testing and monitoring; (3) federal energy systems revitalization projects at federal installations in cooperation with the utilities serving the sites; and (4) energy supply, distribution and end-use conservation assessment for federal agencies and/or facilities. Lighting systems and air conditioning projects at federal facilities, especially military bases are updated.

  16. Radium bearing waste disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tope, W.G.; Nixon, D.A.; Smith, M.L.; Stone, T.J.; Vogel, R.A. [Fernald Environmental Restoration Management Corp., Cincinnati, OH (United States); Schofield, W.D. [Foster Wheeler Environmental Corp. (United States)

    1995-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Fernald radium bearing ore residue waste, stored within Silos 1 and 2 (K-65) and Silo 3, will be vitrified for disposal at the Nevada Test Site (NTS). A comprehensive, parametric evaluation of waste form, packaging, and transportation alternatives was completed to identify the most cost-effective approach. The impacts of waste loading, waste form, regulatory requirements, NTS waste acceptance criteria, as-low-as-reasonably-achievable principles, and material handling costs were factored into the recommended approach.

  17. Assisting Federal Facilities with Energy Conservation Technologies...

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

    contract, such as an energy savings performance contract or utility energy service contract, or as part of a renewable energy power purchase agreement. Applications for...

  18. Thermal Energy Storage at a Federal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    2000-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Utility partnership upgrades energy system to help meet the General Services Administration's (GSA) energy-saving goals

  19. Commissioning for Federal Facilities | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011AT&T, Inc.'sEnergyTexas1.Space Data CorporationPast ProjectsGuidance for ESPCsfor

  20. Weldon Spring Site Federal Facility Agreement

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA group currentBradleyTableSelling7 AugustAFRICAN3uj:'I,\ W C -hSince

  1. MRAP MONTICELLO PROJECTS FEDERAL FACILITY AGREEMENT REPORT

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA group currentBradleyTableSelling7111AWell:F E ,"^ IApril 11 DATAMRAP

  2. MSG MONTICELLO PROJECTS FEDERAL FACILITIES AGREEMENT REPORT

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA group currentBradleyTableSelling7111AWell:F E ,"^ IApril 11

  3. MSG MONTICELLO PROJECTS FEDERAL FACILITY AGREEMENT REPORT

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA group currentBradleyTableSelling7111AWell:F E ,"^ IApril 11August 2004

  4. MSG MONTICELLO PROJECTS FEDERAL FACILITY AGREEMENT REPORT

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA group currentBradleyTableSelling7111AWell:F E ,"^ IApril 11August

  5. MSG MONTICELLO PROJECTS FEDERAL FACILITY AGREEMENT REPORT

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA group currentBradleyTableSelling7111AWell:F E ,"^ IApril

  6. MSG MONTICELLO PROJECTS FEDERAL FACILITY AGREEMENT REPORT

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA group currentBradleyTableSelling7111AWell:F E ,"^ IAprilSeptember/October

  7. MSG MONTICELLO PROJECTS FEDERAL FACILITY AGREEMENT REPORT

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA group currentBradleyTableSelling7111AWell:F E ,"^

  8. MSG MONTICELLO PROJECTS FEDERAL FACILITY AGREEMENT REPORT

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA group currentBradleyTableSelling7111AWell:F E ,"^August/September 2005

  9. Hanford Federal Facility Agreement & Consent Order

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC) EnvironmentalGyroSolé(tm) Harmonic EngineHIVDecember 2013SeptemberAbout UsApproved

  10. Regulatory facility guide for Ohio

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Anderson, S.S.; Bock, R.E.; Francis, M.W.; Gove, R.M.; Johnson, P.E.; Kovac, F.M.; Mynatt, J.O. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States); Rymer, A.C. [Transportation Consulting Services, Knoxville, TN (United States)

    1994-02-28T23:59:59.000Z

    The Regulatory Facility Guide (RFG) has been developed for the DOE and contractor facilities located in the state of Ohio. It provides detailed compilations of international, federal, and state transportation-related regulations applicable to shipments originating at destined to Ohio facilities. This RFG was developed as an additional resource tool for use both by traffic managers who must ensure that transportation operations are in full compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements and by oversight personnel who must verify compliance activities.

  11. Large Component Removal/Disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wheeler, D. M.

    2002-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper describes the removal and disposal of the large components from Maine Yankee Atomic Power Plant. The large components discussed include the three steam generators, pressurizer, and reactor pressure vessel. Two separate Exemption Requests, which included radiological characterizations, shielding evaluations, structural evaluations and transportation plans, were prepared and issued to the DOT for approval to ship these components; the first was for the three steam generators and one pressurizer, the second was for the reactor pressure vessel. Both Exemption Requests were submitted to the DOT in November 1999. The DOT approved the Exemption Requests in May and July of 2000, respectively. The steam generators and pressurizer have been removed from Maine Yankee and shipped to the processing facility. They were removed from Maine Yankee's Containment Building, loaded onto specially designed skid assemblies, transported onto two separate barges, tied down to the barges, th en shipped 2750 miles to Memphis, Tennessee for processing. The Reactor Pressure Vessel Removal Project is currently under way and scheduled to be completed by Fall of 2002. The planning, preparation and removal of these large components has required extensive efforts in planning and implementation on the part of all parties involved.

  12. Policy Title: Policy Number: Facilities and

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Papautsky, Ian

    been supported by the federal government since that time. Indirect costs are also called "Facilities and Administrative" or F&A costs. These costs include facilities costs such as electricity, heating and airPolicy Title: Policy Number: Facilities and Administrative Distribution 2.1.11 Category: Financial

  13. Federal Register

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are being directed offOCHCO2: FinalOffers New Training on Energy6 Federal Energy1999; Exceeds Goal |of65541 Vol. 79,

  14. Federal Register

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA Approved:AdministrationAnalysisDarby/%2AO 474.2Y-12 Press989 Federal Register

  15. Federal Register

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA Approved:AdministrationAnalysisDarby/%2AO 474.2Y-12 Press989 Federal

  16. Federal Register

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA Approved:AdministrationAnalysisDarby/%2AO 474.2Y-12 Press989 Federal49

  17. Federal Register

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA Approved:AdministrationAnalysisDarby/%2AO 474.2Y-12 Press989 Federal4954

  18. Federated search

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC) Environmental Assessments (EA)Budget » FYU.S. DOE Office of SciencedefaultFederated

  19. B Plant complex treatment, storage, and disposal units inspection plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Beam, T.G.

    1994-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Owners or operators of facilities that treat, store, and/or dispose of dangerous waste and/or mixed waste as defined by WAC 173-303, {open_quotes}Dangerous Waste Regulations,{close_quotes} must inspect their facilities to prevent malfunctions and deteriorations, operator errors, and discharges that may cause or lead to the release of hazardous waste constituents to the environment and/or cause a threat to human health. The WAC regulations require a written inspection schedule be developed, implemented, and kept at the facility.

  20. New Bedford Harbor Superfund Project, Acushnet River estuary engineering feasibility study of dredging and dredged-material disposal alternatives. Report 1. Study overview. Technical report, August 1985-March 1988

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Francingues, N.R.; Averett, D.E.; Otis, M.J.

    1988-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Sediments in the New Bedford Harbor and Acushnet River Estuary have been contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyl compounds and heavy metals. The high levels of contamination have resulted in the New Bedford Harbor being placed on the National Priorities List of the Nation's worst hazardous waste sites. Efforts are under way to develop and implement remedial actions for protection of the environment under the Federal Superfund Program. This report is an introduction to and an overview of a series of reports describing the results of the EFS. It presents the overall study objectives and scope of work, describes the objectives and scope of the 10 EFS tasks, and presents a brief synopsis of the other 11 reports in the series. The EFS technical approach used field data-collection activities, literature reviews, laboratory (bench-scale) studies, and analytical and numerical modeling techniques to assess engineering feasibility and develop conceptual alternatives for dredging and dredged-material disposal. Technical and engineering issues addressed by the EFS included baseline mapping, geotechnical investigations, hydrodynamics, sediment resuspension and transport, contaminant releases to surface and ground water, dredged material settling properties, dredging equipment and controls, effluent treatment, solidification/stabilization of dredged material, confined-disposal-facility design, contained aquatic-disposal-facility design, and cost estimates for the alternatives evaluated.

  1. Radioactive waste material disposal

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Forsberg, C.W.; Beahm, E.C.; Parker, G.W.

    1995-10-24T23:59:59.000Z

    The invention is a process for direct conversion of solid radioactive waste, particularly spent nuclear fuel and its cladding, if any, into a solidified waste glass. A sacrificial metal oxide, dissolved in a glass bath, is used to oxidize elemental metal and any carbon values present in the waste as they are fed to the bath. Two different modes of operation are possible, depending on the sacrificial metal oxide employed. In the first mode, a regenerable sacrificial oxide, e.g., PbO, is employed, while the second mode features use of disposable oxides such as ferric oxide. 3 figs.

  2. Radioactive waste material disposal

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Forsberg, Charles W. (155 Newport Dr., Oak Ridge, TN 37830); Beahm, Edward C. (106 Cooper Cir., Oak Ridge, TN 37830); Parker, George W. (321 Dominion Cir., Knoxville, TN 37922)

    1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The invention is a process for direct conversion of solid radioactive waste, particularly spent nuclear fuel and its cladding, if any, into a solidified waste glass. A sacrificial metal oxide, dissolved in a glass bath, is used to oxidize elemental metal and any carbon values present in the waste as they are fed to the bath. Two different modes of operation are possible, depending on the sacrificial metal oxide employed. In the first mode, a regenerable sacrificial oxide, e.g., PbO, is employed, while the second mode features use of disposable oxides such as ferric oxide.

  3. Material Disposal Areas

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOEThe Bonneville PowerCherries 82981-1cnHighand Retrievals from a New 183-GHzMAR Os2010 TeppeiMaterial Disposal

  4. What`s new in federal energy management: FEMP program overview. Federal energy saver showcases

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    To promote widespread Federal energy efficiency, agencies are showcasing their best energy efficiency, water conserving, and solar and other renewable energy technologies. To highlight these successful energy-efficient projects, Executive Order 12902 directs agencies to designate at least one newly constructed or existing building as a showcase facility. At existing facilities, agencies must also try to incorporate cogeneration and indoor air quality improvements. Agencies are directed to develop and implement effective plans to make these showcase projects happen. Project successes will show the strength of partnering with other agencies, energy services companies, utilities, and national laboratories, and of using the US Department of Energy Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) as a resource. The goal is Federal facilities operating at peak efficiency. A Federal Energy Saver Showcase plaque is prominently displayed at each showcase site, notifying visitors they are entering a government building that successfully conserves energy and water and saves taxpayer dollars.

  5. STAR Facility Tritium Accountancy

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    R. J. Pawelko; J. P. Sharpe; B. J. Denny

    2007-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Safety and Tritium Applied Research (STAR) facility has been established to provide a laboratory infrastructure for the fusion community to study tritium science associated with the development of safe fusion energy and other technologies. STAR is a radiological facility with an administrative total tritium inventory limit of 1.5g (14,429 Ci) [1]. Research studies with moderate tritium quantities and various radionuclides are performed in STAR. Successful operation of the STAR facility requires the ability to receive, inventory, store, dispense tritium to experiments, and to dispose of tritiated waste while accurately monitoring the tritium inventory in the facility. This paper describes tritium accountancy in the STAR facility. A primary accountancy instrument is the tritium Storage and Assay System (SAS): a system designed to receive, assay, store, and dispense tritium to experiments. Presented are the methods used to calibrate and operate the SAS. Accountancy processes utilizing the Tritium Cleanup System (TCS), and the Stack Tritium Monitoring System (STMS) are also discussed. Also presented are the equations used to quantify the amount of tritium being received into the facility, transferred to experiments, and removed from the facility. Finally, the STAR tritium accountability database is discussed.

  6. STAR facility tritium accountancy

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pawelko, R. J.; Sharpe, J. P.; Denny, B. J. [Idaho National Laboratory, P.O. Box 1625, Idaho Falls, ID 83415 (United States)

    2008-07-15T23:59:59.000Z

    The Safety and Tritium Applied Research (STAR) facility has been established to provide a laboratory infrastructure for the fusion community to study tritium science associated with the development of safe fusion energy and other technologies. STAR is a radiological facility with an administrative total tritium inventory limit of 1.5 g (14,429 Ci) [1]. Research studies with moderate tritium quantities and various radionuclides are performed in STAR. Successful operation of the STAR facility requires the ability to receive, inventory, store, dispense tritium to experiments, and to dispose of tritiated waste while accurately monitoring the tritium inventory in the facility. This paper describes tritium accountancy in the STAR facility. A primary accountancy instrument is the tritium Storage and Assay System (SAS): a system designed to receive, assay, store, and dispense tritium to experiments. Presented are the methods used to calibrate and operate the SAS. Accountancy processes utilizing the Tritium Cleanup System (TCS), and the Stack Tritium Monitoring System (STMS) are also discussed. Also presented are the equations used to quantify the amount of tritium being received into the facility, transferred to experiments, and removed from the facility. Finally, the STAR tritium accountability database is discussed. (authors)

  7. Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 545: Dumps, Waste Disposal Sites, and Buried Radioactive Materials Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Alfred Wickline

    2008-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Corrective Action Decision Document (CADD)/Closure Report (CR) has been prepared for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 545, Dumps, Waste Disposal Sites, and Buried Radioactive Materials, in Areas 2, 3, 9, and 20 of the Nevada Test Site, Nevada, in accordance with the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order that was agreed to by the State of Nevada; U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Management; U.S. Department of Defense; and DOE, Legacy Management (1996, as amended February 2008). Corrective Action Unit 545 is comprised of the following eight Corrective Action Sites (CASs): • 02-09-01, Mud Disposal Area • 03-08-03, Mud Disposal Site • 03-17-01, Waste Consolidation Site 3B • 03-23-02, Waste Disposal Site • 03-23-05, Europium Disposal Site • 03-99-14, Radioactive Material Disposal Area • 09-23-02, U-9y Drilling Mud Disposal Crater • 20-19-01, Waste Disposal Site While all eight CASs are addressed in this CADD/CR, sufficient information was available for the following three CASs; therefore, a field investigation was not conducted at these sites: • For CAS 03-08-03, though the potential for subsidence of the craters was judged to be extremely unlikely, the data quality objective (DQO) meeting participants agreed that sufficient information existed about disposal and releases at the site and that a corrective action of close in place with a use restriction is recommended. Sampling in the craters was not considered necessary. • For CAS 03-23-02, there were no potential releases of hazardous or radioactive contaminants identified. Therefore, the Corrective Action Investigation Plan for CAU 545 concluded that: “Sufficient information exists to conclude that this CAS does not exist as originally identified. Therefore, there is no environmental concern associated with CAS 03-23-02.” This CAS is closed with no further action. • For CAS 03-23-05, existing information about the two buried sources and lead pig was considered to be sufficient, and safety concerns existed about the stability of the crater component. Therefore, a corrective action of close in place with a use restriction is recommended, and sampling at the site was not considered necessary. The purpose of this CADD/CR is to provide justification and documentation to support the recommendation for closure of CAU 545 with no further corrective action. To achieve this, corrective action investigation (CAI) activities were performed from August 20 through November 02, 2007, as set forth in the CAU 545 Corrective Action Investigation Plan. The purpose of the CAI was to fulfill the following data needs as defined during the DQO process: • Determine whether contaminants of concern (COCs) are present. • If COCs are present, determine their nature and extent. • Provide sufficient information and data to complete appropriate corrective actions. The CAU 545 dataset from the investigation results was evaluated based on the data quality indicator parameters. This evaluation demonstrated the quality and acceptability of the dataset for use in fulfilling the DQO data needs. Analytes detected during the CAI were evaluated against final action levels established in this CADD/CR. The results of the CAI identified no COCs at the five CASs investigated in CAU 545. As a best management practice, repair of the fence enclosing CAS 03-08-03 has been completed. Therefore, the DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office provides the following recommendations: • Close in place COCs at CASs 03-08-03 and 03-23-05 with use restrictions. • No further corrective action for CAU 545. • No Corrective Action Plan. • Corrective Action Unit 545 should be moved from Appendix III to Appendix IV of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. • A Notice of Completion to the DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office is requested from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for closure of CAU 545.

  8. Siting Study for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; Joan Connolly; Lance Peterson; Brennon Orr; Bob Starr

    2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The U.S. Department of Energy has identified a mission need for continued disposal capacity for remote-handled low-level waste (LLW) generated at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). An alternatives analysis that was conducted to evaluate strategies to achieve this mission need identified two broad options for disposal of INL generated remote-handled LLW: (1) offsite disposal and (2) onsite disposal. The purpose of this study is to identify candidate sites or locations within INL boundaries for the alternative of an onsite remote handled LLW disposal facility and recommend the highest-ranked locations for consideration in the National Environmental Policy Act process. The study implements an evaluation based on consideration of five key elements: (1) regulations, (2) key assumptions, (3) conceptual design, (4) facility performance, and (5) previous INL siting study criteria, and uses a five-step process to identify, screen, evaluate, score, and rank 34 separate sites located across INL. The result of the evaluation is identification of two recommended alternative locations for siting an onsite remote-handled LLW disposal facility. The two alternative locations that best meet the evaluation criteria are (1) near the Advanced Test Reactor Complex and (2) west of the Idaho Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act Disposal Facility.

  9. Project Execution Plan for the Remote Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Danny Anderson

    2014-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    As part of ongoing cleanup activities at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL), closure of the Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) is proceeding under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (42 USC 9601 et seq. 1980). INL-generated radioactive waste has been disposed of at RWMC since 1952. The Subsurface Disposal Area (SDA) at RWMC accepted the bulk of INL’s contact and remote-handled low-level waste (LLW) for disposal. Disposal of contact-handled LLW and remote-handled LLW ion-exchange resins from the Advanced Test Reactor in the open pit of the SDA ceased September 30, 2008. Disposal of remote-handled LLW in concrete disposal vaults at RWMC will continue until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the SDA (approximately at the end of fiscal year FY 2017). The continuing nuclear mission of INL, associated ongoing and planned operations, and Naval spent fuel activities at the Naval Reactors Facility (NRF) require continued capability to appropriately dispose of contact and remote handled LLW. A programmatic analysis of disposal alternatives for contact and remote-handled LLW generated at INL was conducted by the INL contractor in Fiscal Year 2006; subsequent evaluations were completed in Fiscal Year 2007. The result of these analyses was a recommendation to the Department of Energy (DOE) that all contact-handled LLW generated after September 30, 2008, be disposed offsite, and that DOE proceed with a capital project to establish replacement remote-handled LLW disposal capability. An analysis of the alternatives for providing replacement remote-handled LLW disposal capability has been performed to support Critical Decision-1. The highest ranked alternative to provide this required capability has been determined to be the development of a new onsite remote-handled LLW disposal facility to replace the existing remote-handled LLW disposal vaults at the SDA. Several offsite DOE and commercial disposal options exist for contact-handled LLW; however, offsite disposal options are either not currently available (i.e., commercial disposal facilities), practical, or cost-effective for all remote-handled LLW streams generated at INL. Offsite disposal of all INL and tenant-generated remote-handled waste is further complicated by issues associated with transporting highly radioactive waste in commerce; and infrastructure and processing changes at the generating facilities, specifically NRF, that would be required to support offsite disposal. The INL Remote-Handled LLW Disposal Project will develop a new remote handled LLW disposal facility to meet mission-critical, remote-handled LLW disposal needs. A formal DOE decision to proceed with the project has been made in accordance with the requirements of National Environmental Policy Act (42 USC§ 4321 et seq.). Remote-handled LLW is generated from nuclear programs conducted at INL, including spent nuclear fuel handling and operations at NRF and operations at the Advanced Test Reactor. Remote-handled LLW also will be generated by new INL programs and from segregation and treatment (as necessary) of remote handled scrap and waste currently stored in the Radioactive Scrap and Waste Facility at the Materials and Fuels Complex.

  10. Disposal of Hanford site tank wastes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kupfer, M.J.

    1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Between 1943 and 1986, 149 single-shell tanks (SSTs) and 28 double-shell tanks (DSTs) were built and used to store radioactive wastes generated during reprocessing of irradiated uranium metal fuel elements at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site in Southeastern Washington state. The 149 SSTs, located in 12 separate areas (tank farms) in the 200 East and 200 West areas, currently contain about 1.4 {times} 10{sup 5} m{sup 3} of solid and liquid wastes. Wastes in the SSTs contain about 5.7 {times} 10{sup 18} Bq (170 MCi) of various radionuclides including {sup 90}Sr, {sup 99}Tc, {sup 137}Cs, and transuranium (TRU) elements. The 28 DSTs also located in the 200 East and West areas contain about 9 {times} 10{sup 4} m{sup 3} of liquid (mainly) and solid wastes; approximately 4 {times} 10{sup 18}Bq (90 MCi) of radionuclides are stored in the DSTs. Important characteristics and features of the various types of SST and DST wastes are described in this paper. However, the principal focus of this paper is on the evolving strategy for final disposal of both the SST and DST wastes. Also provided is a chronology which lists key events and dates in the development of strategies for disposal of Hanford Site tank wastes. One of these strategies involves pretreatment of retrieved tank wastes to separate them into a small volume of high-level radioactive waste requiring, after vitrification, disposal in a deep geologic repository and a large volume of low-level radioactive waste which can be safely disposed of in near-surface facilities at the Hanford Site. The last section of this paper lists and describes some of the pretreatment procedures and processes being considered for removal of important radionuclides from retrieved tank wastes.

  11. Hanford site near-facility environmental monitoring annual report, calendar year 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Perkins, C.J.

    1997-08-05T23:59:59.000Z

    This document summarizes the results of the near-facility environmental monitoring results for 1996 in the 100, 200/600, and 300/400 areas of the Hanford Site in south-central Washington State. Surveillance activities included sampling and analyses of ambient air, surface water, groundwater, soil, sediments, and biota. Also, external radiation measurements and radiological surveys were taken at waste disposal sites, radiologically controlled areas, and roads. These activities were conducted to assess and control the effects of nuclear facilities and waste sites on the local environment. The monitoring implements applicable portions of DOE Orders 5400.1 (DOE 1988a), 5400.5 (DOE 1990), and 5820.2A (DOE 1988b); Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 246-247; and Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 61, Subpart H (EPA 1989). In addition, diffuse sources were monitored to determine compliance with federal, state, and/or local regulations. In general, although effects from nuclear facilities can still be observed on the Hanford Site and radiation levels were slightly elevated when compared to offsite locations, the differences are less than in previous years.

  12. Information related to low-level mixed waste inventory, characteristics, generation, and facility assessment for treatment, storage, and disposal alternatives considered in the U.S. Department of Energy Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wilkins, B.D.; Dolak, D.A.; Wang, Y.Y.; Meshkov, N.K.

    1996-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report was prepared to support the analysis of risks and costs associated with the proposed treatment of low-level mixed waste (LLMW) under management of the US Department of Energy (DOE). The various waste management alternatives for treatment of LLMW have been defined in the DOE`s Office of Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement. This technical memorandum estimates the waste material throughput expected at each proposed LLMW treatment facility and analyzes potential radiological and chemical releases at each DOE site resulting from treatment of these wastes. Models have been developed to generate site-dependent radiological profiles and waste-stream-dependent chemical profiles for these wastes. Current site-dependent inventories and estimates for future generation of LLMW have been obtained from DOE`s 1994 Mixed Waste Inventory Report (MWIR-2). Using treatment procedures developed by the Mixed Waste Treatment Project, the MWIR-2 database was analyzed to provide waste throughput and emission estimates for each of the different waste types assessed in this report. Uncertainties in the estimates at each site are discussed for waste material throughputs and radiological and chemical releases.

  13. Geological Disposal Concept Selection Aligned with a Voluntarism Process - 13538

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Crockett, Glenda; King, Samantha [Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, Building 587, Curie Avenue, Harwell Oxford, Didcot, Oxfordshire, OX11 0RH (United Kingdom)] [Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, Building 587, Curie Avenue, Harwell Oxford, Didcot, Oxfordshire, OX11 0RH (United Kingdom)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The UK's Radioactive Waste Management Directorate (RWMD) is currently at a generic stage in its implementation programme. The UK site selection process is a voluntarist process and, as yet, no communities have decided to participate. RWMD has set out a process to describe how a geological disposal concept would be selected for the range of higher activity wastes in the UK inventory, including major steps and decision making points, aligned with the stages of the UK site selection process. A platform of information is being developed on geological disposal concepts at various stages of implementation internationally and, in order to build on international experience, RWMD is developing its approach to technology transfer. The UK has a range of different types of higher activity wastes with different characteristics; therefore a range of geological disposal concepts may be needed. In addition to identifying key aspects for considering the compatibility of different engineered barrier systems for different types of waste, RWMD is developing a methodology to determine minimum separation distances between disposal modules in a co-located geological disposal facility. RWMD's approach to geological disposal concept selection is intended to be flexible, recognising the long term nature of the project. RWMD is also committed to keeping alternative radioactive waste management options under review; an approach has been developed and periodic reviews of alternative options will be published. (authors)

  14. CRAD, Engineering - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility | Department...

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

    Engineering - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility CRAD, Engineering - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility May 2007 A section of Appendix C to DOE G 226.1-2 "Federal Line...

  15. Costs for off-site disposal of nonhazardous oil field wastes: Salt caverns versus other disposal methods

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Veil, J.A.

    1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    According to an American Petroleum Institute production waste survey reported on by P.G. Wakim in 1987 and 1988, the exploration and production segment of the US oil and gas industry generated more than 360 million barrels (bbl) of drilling wastes, more than 20 billion bbl of produced water, and nearly 12 million bbl of associated wastes in 1985. Current exploration and production activities are believed to be generating comparable quantities of these oil field wastes. Wakim estimates that 28% of drilling wastes, less than 2% of produced water, and 52% of associated wastes are disposed of in off-site commercial facilities. In recent years, interest in disposing of oil field wastes in solution-mined salt caverns has been growing. This report provides information on the availability of commercial disposal companies in oil-and gas-producing states, the treatment and disposal methods they employ, and the amounts they charge. It also compares cavern disposal costs with the costs of other forms of waste disposal.

  16. Radioactive mixed waste disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jasen, W.G.; Erpenbeck, E.G.

    1993-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Various types of waste have been generated during the 50-year history of the Hanford Site. Regulatory changes in the last 20 years have provided the emphasis for better management of these wastes. Interpretations of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) have led to the definition of radioactive mixed wastes (RMW). The radioactive and hazardous properties of these wastes have resulted in the initiation of special projects for the management of these wastes. Other solid wastes at the Hanford Site include low-level wastes, transuranic (TRU), and nonradioactive hazardous wastes. This paper describes a system for the treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) of solid radioactive waste.

  17. Salt disposal of heat-generating nuclear waste.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Leigh, Christi D. (Sandia National Laboratories, Carlsbad, NM); Hansen, Francis D.

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report summarizes the state of salt repository science, reviews many of the technical issues pertaining to disposal of heat-generating nuclear waste in salt, and proposes several avenues for future science-based activities to further the technical basis for disposal in salt. There are extensive salt formations in the forty-eight contiguous states, and many of them may be worthy of consideration for nuclear waste disposal. The United States has extensive experience in salt repository sciences, including an operating facility for disposal of transuranic wastes. The scientific background for salt disposal including laboratory and field tests at ambient and elevated temperature, principles of salt behavior, potential for fracture damage and its mitigation, seal systems, chemical conditions, advanced modeling capabilities and near-future developments, performance assessment processes, and international collaboration are all discussed. The discussion of salt disposal issues is brought current, including a summary of recent international workshops dedicated to high-level waste disposal in salt. Lessons learned from Sandia National Laboratories' experience on the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant and the Yucca Mountain Project as well as related salt experience with the Strategic Petroleum Reserve are applied in this assessment. Disposal of heat-generating nuclear waste in a suitable salt formation is attractive because the material is essentially impermeable, self-sealing, and thermally conductive. Conditions are chemically beneficial, and a significant experience base exists in understanding this environment. Within the period of institutional control, overburden pressure will seal fractures and provide a repository setting that limits radionuclide movement. A salt repository could potentially achieve total containment, with no releases to the environment in undisturbed scenarios for as long as the region is geologically stable. Much of the experience gained from United States repository development, such as seal system design, coupled process simulation, and application of performance assessment methodology, helps define a clear strategy for a heat-generating nuclear waste repository in salt.

  18. REGULATIONS ON PHOTOVOLTAIC MODULE DISPOSAL AND RECYCLING.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    FTHENAKIS,V.

    2001-01-29T23:59:59.000Z

    Environmental regulations can have a significant impact on product use, disposal, and recycling. This report summarizes the basic aspects of current federal, state and international regulations which apply to end-of-life photovoltaic (PV) modules and PV manufacturing scrap destined for disposal or recycling. It also discusses proposed regulations for electronics that may set the ground of what is to be expected in this area in the near future. In the US, several states have started programs to support the recycling of electronic equipment, and materials destined for recycling often are excepted from solid waste regulations during the collection, transfer, storage and processing stages. California regulations are described separately because they are different from those of most other states. International agreements on the movement of waste between different countries may pose barriers to cross-border shipments. Currently waste moves freely among country members of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and between the US and the four countries with which the US has bilateral agreements. However, it is expected, that the US will adopt the rules of the Basel Convention (an agreement which currently applies to 128 countries but not the US) and that the Convection's waste classification system will influence the current OECD waste-handling system. Some countries adopting the Basel Convention consider end-of-life electronics to be hazardous waste, whereas the OECD countries consider them to be non-hazardous. Also, waste management regulations potentially affecting electronics in Germany and Japan are mentioned in this report.

  19. Promoting greater Federal energy productivity [Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hopkins, Mark; Dudich, Luther

    2003-03-05T23:59:59.000Z

    This document is a close-out report describing the work done under this DOE grant to improve Federal Energy Productivity. Over the four years covered in this document, the Alliance To Save Energy conducted liaison with the private sector through our Federal Energy Productivity Task Force. In this time, the Alliance held several successful workshops on the uses of metering in Federal facilities and other meetings. We also conducted significant research on energy efficiency, financing, facilitated studies of potential energy savings in energy intensive agencies, and undertook other tasks outlined in this report.

  20. Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket (docket). Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Federal Facilities Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket (``docket``) identifies Federal facilities that may be contaminated with hazardous substances and that must be evaluated to determine if they pose a risk to public health or the environment The docket, required by Section 120(c) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), also provides a vehicle for making information about potentially contaminated facilities available to the public. Facilities listed on the docket must complete site assessments that provide the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with information needed to determine whether or not the facility should be included on he National Priorities List (NPL). This Information Brief, which revises the previous Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compiliance Docket Information Brief, provides updated information on the docket listing process, the implications of listing, and facility status after listing.

  1. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 542: Disposal Holes, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Rev. No.: 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laura Pastor

    2006-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 542 is located in Areas 3, 8, 9, and 20 of the Nevada Test Site, which is 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. Corrective Action Unit 542 is comprised of eight corrective action sites (CASs): (1) 03-20-07, ''UD-3a Disposal Hole''; (2) 03-20-09, ''UD-3b Disposal Hole''; (3) 03-20-10, ''UD-3c Disposal Hole''; (4) 03-20-11, ''UD-3d Disposal Hole''; (5) 06-20-03, ''UD-6 and UD-6s Disposal Holes''; (6) 08-20-01, ''U-8d PS No.1A Injection Well Surface Release''; (7) 09-20-03, ''U-9itsy30 PS No.1A Injection Well Surface Release''; and (8) 20-20-02, ''U-20av PS No.1A Injection Well Surface Release''. These sites are being investigated because existing information on the nature and extent of potential contamination is insufficient to evaluate and recommend corrective action alternatives. Additional information will be obtained by conducting a corrective action investigation before evaluating corrective action alternatives and selecting the appropriate corrective action for each CAS. The results of the field investigation will support a defensible evaluation of viable corrective action alternatives that will be presented in the Corrective Action Decision Document. The sites will be investigated based on the data quality objectives (DQOs) developed on January 30, 2006, by representatives of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection; U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office; Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture; and Bechtel Nevada. The DQO process was used to identify and define the type, amount, and quality of data needed to develop and evaluate appropriate corrective actions for CAU 542. Appendix A provides a detailed discussion of the DQO methodology and the DQOs specific to each CAS. The scope of the CAI for CAU 542 includes the following activities: (1) Move surface debris and/or materials, as needed, to facilitate sampling. (2) Conduct radiological surveys. (3) Conduct geophysical surveys to locate previously unidentified features at CASs 03-20-07, 03-20-09, 03-20-10, 03-20-11, and 06-20-03. (4) Perform field screening. (5) Collect and submit environmental samples for laboratory analysis to determine whether contaminants of concern (COCs) are present. (6) Collect quality control samples for laboratory analyses to evaluate the performance of measurement systems and controls based on the requirements of the data quality indicators. (7) If COCs are present at the surface/near surface (< 15 feet below ground surface), collect additional step-out samples to define the extent of the contamination. (8) If COCs are present in the subsurface (i.e., base of disposal hole), collect additional samples to define the vertical extent of contamination. A conservative use restriction will be used to encompass the lateral extent of subsurface contamination. (9) Stake or flag sample locations in the field, and record coordinates through global positioning systems surveying. (10) Collect samples of investigation-derived waste, as needed, for waste management and minimization purposes. This Corrective Action Investigation Plan has been developed in accordance with the ''Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order'' that was agreed to by the State of Nevada, the U.S. Department of Energy, and the U.S. Department of Defense. Under the ''Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order'', this Corrective Action Investigation Plan will be submitted to the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for approval. Field work will be conducted following approval of the plan.

  2. Laboratory Waste Disposal HAZARDOUS GLASS

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sheridan, Jennifer

    Laboratory Waste Disposal HAZARDOUS GLASS Items that could cut or puncture skin or trash- can without any treatment. Hazardous Glass and Plastic: Items that can puncture, cut or scratch if disposed of in normal trash containers. Pasteur pipettes Other pipettes and tips (glass or plastic) Slides and cover

  3. Melter Disposal Strategic Planning Document

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BURBANK, D.A.

    2000-09-25T23:59:59.000Z

    This document describes the proposed strategy for disposal of spent and failed melters from the tank waste treatment plant to be built by the Office of River Protection at the Hanford site in Washington. It describes program management activities, disposal and transportation systems, leachate management, permitting, and safety authorization basis approvals needed to execute the strategy.

  4. Presented to: Federal Aviation

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Illinois at Chicago, University of

    Aviation Administration 2 Briefing Agenda · Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Overview · Chicago Federal Aviation Administration 5 FAA relationship with Airport Sponsors · Regulatory ­ airport Federal Aviation Administration 8 FAA involvement with the O'Hare Modernization Program · Special Projects

  5. Presented to: Federal Aviation

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Bustamante, Fabián E.

    Administration 2 Briefing Agenda · Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Overview · Chicago/Chicago Department of Aviation (CDA) and the O'Hare Modernization Program (OMP) · Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) actions Federal Aviation Administration 5 FAA relationship with Airport Sponsors · Regulatory ­ airport

  6. Vitrification Facility integrated system performance testing report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Elliott, D.

    1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report provides a summary of component and system performance testing associated with the Vitrification Facility (VF) following construction turnover. The VF at the West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) was designed to convert stored radioactive waste into a stable glass form for eventual disposal in a federal repository. Following an initial Functional and Checkout Testing of Systems (FACTS) Program and subsequent conversion of test stand equipment into the final VF, a testing program was executed to demonstrate successful performance of the components, subsystems, and systems that make up the vitrification process. Systems were started up and brought on line as construction was completed, until integrated system operation could be demonstrated to produce borosilicate glass using nonradioactive waste simulant. Integrated system testing and operation culminated with a successful Operational Readiness Review (ORR) and Department of Energy (DOE) approval to initiate vitrification of high-level waste (HLW) on June 19, 1996. Performance and integrated operational test runs conducted during the test program provided a means for critical examination, observation, and evaluation of the vitrification system. Test data taken for each Test Instruction Procedure (TIP) was used to evaluate component performance against system design and acceptance criteria, while test observations were used to correct, modify, or improve system operation. This process was critical in establishing operating conditions for the entire vitrification process.

  7. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 410: Waste Disposal Trenches, Tonopah Test Range, Nevada, Revision 0 (includes ROTCs 1, 2, and 3)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NNSA /NV

    2002-07-16T23:59:59.000Z

    This Corrective Action Investigation Plan contains the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Operations Office's approach to collect the data necessary to evaluate corrective action alternatives appropriate for the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 410 under the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. Corrective Action Unit 410 is located on the Tonopah Test Range (TTR), which is included in the Nevada Test and Training Range (formerly the Nellis Air Force Range) approximately 140 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. This CAU is comprised of five Corrective Action Sites (CASs): TA-19-002-TAB2, Debris Mound; TA-21-003-TANL, Disposal Trench; TA-21-002-TAAL, Disposal Trench; 09-21-001-TA09, Disposal Trenches; 03-19-001, Waste Disposal Site. This CAU is being investigated because contaminants may be present in concentrations that could potentially pose a threat to human health and/or the environment, and waste may have been disposed of with out appropriate controls. Four out of five of these CASs are the result of weapons testing and disposal activities at the TTR, and they are grouped together for site closure based on the similarity of the sites (waste disposal sites and trenches). The fifth CAS, CAS 03-19-001, is a hydrocarbon spill related to activities in the area. This site is grouped with this CAU because of the location (TTR). Based on historical documentation and process know-ledge, vertical and lateral migration routes are possible for all CASs. Migration of contaminants may have occurred through transport by infiltration of precipitation through surface soil which serves as a driving force for downward migration of contaminants. Land-use scenarios limit future use of these CASs to industrial activities. The suspected contaminants of potential concern which have been identified are volatile organic compounds; semivolatile organic compounds; high explosives; radiological constituents including depleted uranium, beryllium, total petroleum hydrocarbons; and total Resource Conservation and Recovery Act metals. Field activities will consist of geophysical and radiological surveys, and collecting soil samples at biased locations by appropriate methods. A two-step data quality objective strategy will be followed: (1) define the nature of contamination at each CAS location by identifying any contamination above preliminary action levels (PALs); and, (2) determine the extent of contamination identified above PALs. The results of this field investigation will support a defensible evaluation of corrective action alternatives in the corrective action decision document.

  8. 56647Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 28, 2005 / Notices SAFEGUARDS

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    and electricity transmission and distribution facilities (energy corridors). The Agencies have determined (PEIS) entitled, ``Designation of Energy Corridors on Federal Land in the 11 Western States'' (DOE

  9. EIS-0386: Designation of Energy Corridors on Federal Land in Western States

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EIS analyzes DOE's decision to designatate corridors on Federal land in the eleven Western States for oil, gas and hydrogen pipelines and electricity transmission and distribution facilities.

  10. Application for a Permit to Operate a Class III Solid Waste Disposal Site at the Nevada National Security Site Area 5 Asbestiform Low-Level Solid Waste Disposal Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Programs

    2010-10-04T23:59:59.000Z

    The Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) is located approximately 105 km (65 mi) northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. The U.S. Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) is the federal lands management authority for the NNSS and National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec) is the Management and Operations contractor. Access on and off the NNSS is tightly controlled, restricted, and guarded on a 24-hour basis. The NNSS is posted with signs along its entire perimeter. NSTec is the operator of all solid waste disposal sites on the NNSS. The Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) is the location of the permitted facility for the Solid Waste Disposal Site (SWDS). The Area 5 RWMS is located near the eastern edge of the NNSS (Figure 1), approximately 26 km (16 mi) north of Mercury, Nevada. The Area 5 RWMS is used for the disposal of low-level waste (LLW) and mixed low-level waste. Many areas surrounding the RWMS have been used in conducting nuclear tests. The site will be used for the disposal of regulated Asbestiform Low-Level Waste (ALLW), small quantities of low-level radioactive hydrocarbon-burdened (LLHB) media and debris, LLW, LLW that contains Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Bulk Product Waste greater than 50 ppm that leaches at a rate of less than 10 micrograms of PCB per liter of water, and small quantities of LLHB demolition and construction waste (hereafter called permissible waste). Waste containing free liquids, or waste that is regulated as hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) or state-of-generation hazardous waste regulations, will not be accepted for disposal at the site. Waste regulated under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) that will be accepted at the disposal site is regulated asbestos-containing materials (RACM) and PCB Bulk Product Waste greater than 50 ppm that leaches at a rate of less than 10 micrograms of PCB per liter of water. The term asbestiform is used throughout this document to describe RACM. The disposal site will be used as a depository of permissible waste generated both on site and off site. All generators designated by NNSA/NSO will be eligible to dispose regulated ALLW at the Asbestiform Low-Level Waste Disposal Site in accordance with the DOE/NV-325, Nevada National Security Site Waste Acceptance Criteria (NNSSWAC, current revision). Approval will be given by NNSA/NSO to generators that have successfully demonstrated through process knowledge (PK) and/or sampling and analysis that the waste is low-level, contains asbestiform material, or contains PCB Bulk Product Waste greater than 50 ppm that leaches at a rate of less than 10 micrograms of PCB per liter of water, or small quantities of LLHB demolition and construction waste and does not contain prohibited waste materials. Each waste stream will be approved through the Radioactive Waste Acceptance Program (RWAP), which ensures that the waste meets acceptance requirements outlined in the NNSSWAC.

  11. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Initial Report for PCB Disposal Authorization (40 CFR {section} 761.75[c])

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Westinghouse TRU Solutions

    2002-03-19T23:59:59.000Z

    This initial report is being submitted pursuant to Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) {section} 761.75(c) to request authorization to allow the disposal of transuranic (TRU) wastes containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) which are duly regulated under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Approval of this initial report will not affect the disposal of TRU or TRU mixed wastes that do not contain PCBs. This initial report also demonstrates how the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) meets or exceeds the technical standards for a Chemical Waste Landfill. Approval of this request will allow the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to dispose of approximately 88,000 cubic feet (ft3) (2,500 cubic meters [m3]) of TRU wastes containing PCBs subject to regulation under the TSCA. This approval will include only those PCB/TRU wastes, which the TSCA regulations allow for disposal of the PCB component in municipal solid waste facilities or chemical waste landfills (e.g., PCB remediation waste, PC B articles, and bulk PCB product waste). Disposal of TRU waste by the DOE is congressionally mandated in Public Law 102-579 (as amended by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997, Pub. L. 104-201, referred to as the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act [LWA]). Portions of the TRU waste inventory contain hazardous waste constituents regulated under 40 CFR Parts 260 through 279, and/or PCBs and PCB Items regulated under 40 CFR Part 761. Therefore, the DOE TRU waste program must address the disposal requirements for these hazardous waste constituents and PCBs. To facilitate the disposal of TRU wastes containing hazardous waste constituents, the owner/operators received a Hazardous Waste Facility Permit (HWFP) from the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) on October 27, 1999. The permit allows the disposal of TRU wastes subject to hazardous waste disposal requirements (TRU mixed waste). Informational copies of this permit and other referenced documents are available from the WIPP website. To facilitate the disposal of TRU wastes containing PCBs, the owner/operators are hereby submitting this initial report containing information required pursuant to the Chemical Waste Landfill Approval requirements in 40 CFR {section} 761.75(c). Although WIPP is defined as a miscellaneous unit and not a landfill by the New Mexico Hazardous Waste Act, WIPP meets or exceeds all applicable technical standards for chemical waste landfills by virtue of its design and programs as indicated in the Engineering Report (Attachment B). The layout of this initial report is consistent with requirements (i.e., Sections 2.0 through 12.0 following the sequence of 40 CFR {section} 761.75[c][i] -[ix] with sections added to discuss the Contingency and Training Plans; and Attachment B of this initial report addresses the requirements of 40 CFR {section} 761.75[b][1] through [9] in this order). This initial report includes a description of three proposed changes that will be subject to ''conditional approval.'' The first will allow the disposal of remote-handled (RH) PCB/TRU waste at WIPP. The second will allow the establishment of a central confirmation facility at WIPP. The third will allow for an increase in contact-handled Working Copy Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Initial Report for PCB Disposal Authorization DOE/WIPP 02-3196 (CH) waste storage capacities. These proposed changes are discussed further in Section 3.3 of this initial report. ''Conditional approval'' of these requests would allow these activities at WIPP contingent upon: - Approval of the HWFP modification (NMED) and Compliance Certification Application (CCA) change request (Environmental Protection Agency [EPA]) - Inspection of facility prior to implementing the change (if deemed necessary by the EPA) - Written approval from the EPA This initial report also includes the following three requests for waivers to the technical requirements for Chemical Waste Landfills pursuant to 40 CFR {section} 761.75(c)(4): - Hydrologic Conditions (40 CFR {section} 761.75[b][3]) - Monitoring Systems (40 CFR {sect

  12. 1994 Report on Hanford Site land disposal restrictions for mixed waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Black, D.G.

    1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The baseline land disposal restrictions (LDR) plan was prepared in 1990 in accordance with the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (commonly referred to as the Tri-Party Agreement) Milestone M-26-00 (Ecology et al. 1992). The text of this milestone is below. LDR requirements include limitations on storage of specified hazardous wastes (including mixed wastes). In accordance with approved plans and schedules, the US Department of Energy (DOE) shall develop and implement technologies necessary to achieve full compliance with LDR requirements for mixed wastes at the Hanford Site. LDR plans and schedules shall be developed with consideration at other action plan milestones and will not become effective until approved by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (or Washington State Department of Ecology [Ecology]) upon authorization to administer LDRs pursuant to Section 3006 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA). Disposal of LDR wastes at any time is prohibited except in accordance with applicable LDR requirements for nonradioactive wastes at all times. The plan will include, but not be limited to, the following: waste characterization plan; storage report; treatment report; treatment plan; waste minimization plan; a schedule depicting the events necessary to achieve full compliance with LDR requirements; a process for establishing interim milestones. The original plan was published in October 1990. This is the fourth of a series of annual updates required by Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-26-01. A Tri-Party Agreement change request approved in March 1992 changed the annual due date from October to April and consolidated this report with a similar one prepared under Milestone M-25-00. The reporting period for this report is from April 1, 1993, to March 31, 1994.

  13. Offsite commercial disposal of oil and gas exploration and production waste :availability, options, and cost.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Puder, M. G.; Veil, J. A.

    2006-09-05T23:59:59.000Z

    A survey conducted in 1995 by the American Petroleum Institute (API) found that the U.S. exploration and production (E&P) segment of the oil and gas industry generated more than 149 million bbl of drilling wastes, almost 18 billion bbl of produced water, and 21 million bbl of associated wastes. The results of that survey, published in 2000, suggested that 3% of drilling wastes, less than 0.5% of produced water, and 15% of associated wastes are sent to offsite commercial facilities for disposal. Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne) collected information on commercial E&P waste disposal companies in different states in 1997. While the information is nearly a decade old, the report has proved useful. In 2005, Argonne began collecting current information to update and expand the data. This report describes the new 2005-2006 database and focuses on the availability of offsite commercial disposal companies, the prevailing disposal methods, and estimated disposal costs. The data were collected in two phases. In the first phase, state oil and gas regulatory officials in 31 states were contacted to determine whether their agency maintained a list of permitted commercial disposal companies dedicated to oil. In the second stage, individual commercial disposal companies were interviewed to determine disposal methods and costs. The availability of offsite commercial disposal companies and facilities falls into three categories. The states with high oil and gas production typically have a dedicated network of offsite commercial disposal companies and facilities in place. In other states, such an infrastructure does not exist and very often, commercial disposal companies focus on produced water services. About half of the states do not have any industry-specific offsite commercial disposal infrastructure. In those states, operators take their wastes to local municipal landfills if permitted or haul the wastes to other states. This report provides state-by-state summaries of the types of offsite commercial disposal facilities that are found in each state. In later sections, data are presented by waste type and then by disposal method.

  14. Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation: Waste Disposal In Engineered Trench #3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hamm, L. L.; Smith, F. G. III; Flach, G. P.; Hiergesell, R. A.; Butcher, B. T.

    2013-07-29T23:59:59.000Z

    Because Engineered Trench #3 (ET#3) will be placed in the location previously designated for Slit Trench #12 (ST#12), Solid Waste Management (SWM) requested that the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) determine if the ST#12 limits could be employed as surrogate disposal limits for ET#3 operations. SRNL documented in this Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation (UDQE) that the use of ST#12 limits as surrogates for the new ET#3 disposal unit will provide reasonable assurance that Department of Energy (DOE) 435.1 performance objectives and measures (USDOE, 1999) will be protected. Therefore new ET#3 inventory limits as determined by a Special Analysis (SA) are not required.

  15. Engineering analysis for disposal of depleted uranium tetrafluoride (UF{sub 4}).

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Folga, S. M.; Kier, P. H.

    2001-06-22T23:59:59.000Z

    This report presents and evaluates options for disposing of depleted uranium in the chemical form of uranium tetrafluoride (UF{sub 4}). Two depleted uranium inventories are considered. One results from the original U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) inventory of 560,000 metric tons (te) of depleted uranium hexafluoride (UF{sub 6}); the other inventory is the original DOE inventory augmented by 145,000 te of depleted UF{sub 6} from the United States Enrichment Corporation. Preconceptual designs are included for three disposal options: disposal in a vault, disposal in an engineered trench, and disposal in a deep mine cavity. The disposal container is taken to be either a 30-gallon drum or a 55-gallon drum. Descriptions of the facilities associated with the three disposal options are provided. Staffing estimates for the construction and operation of the facilities are also provided. Wastes and emissions from the facilities during construction, operation, and maintenance have been estimated. Parametric studies have also been performed on the basis of 25% and 50% of the original inventory.

  16. ANALYSIS OF CHP POTENTIAL AT FEDERAL SITES

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HADLEY, S.W.

    2002-03-11T23:59:59.000Z

    This document was prepared at the request of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) under its Technical Guidance and Assistance and Project Financing Programs. The purpose was to provide an estimate of the national potential for combined heat and power (also known as CHP; cogeneration; or cooling, heating, and power) applications at federal facilities and the associated costs and benefits including energy and emission savings. The report provides a broad overview for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and other agencies on when and where CHP systems are most likely to serve the government's best interest. FEMP's mission is to reduce the cost to and environmental impact of the federal government by advancing energy efficiency and water conservation, promoting the use of renewable energy, and improving utility management decisions at federal sites. FEMP programs are driven by its customers: federal agency sites. FEMP monitors energy efficiency and renewable energy technology developments and mounts ''technology-specific'' programs to make technologies that are in strong demand by agencies more accessible. FEMP's role is often one of helping the federal government ''lead by example'' through the use of advanced energy efficiency/renewable energy (EERE) technologies in its own buildings and facilities. CHP was highlighted in the Bush Administration's National Energy Policy Report as a commercially available technology offering extraordinary benefits in terms of energy efficiencies and emission reductions. FEMP's criteria for emphasizing a technology are that it must be commercially available; be proven but underutilized; have a strong constituency and momentum; offer large energy savings and other benefits of interest to federal sites and FEMP mission; be in demand; and carry sufficient federal market potential. As discussed in the report, CHP meets all of these criteria. Executive Order 13123 directs federal facilities to use CHP when life-cycle costs indicate energy reduction goals will be met. FEMP can assist facilities to conduct this analysis. The model developed for this report estimates the magnitude of CHP that could be implemented under various performance and economic assumptions associated with different applications. This model may be useful for other energy technologies. It can be adapted to estimate the market potential in federal buildings for any energy system based on the cost and performance parameters that a user desires to assess. The model already incorporates a standard set of parameters based on available data for federal buildings including total building space, building type, energy use intensity, fuel costs, and the performance of many prime movers commonly used in CHP applications. These and other variables can be adjusted to meet user needs or updated in the future as new data become available.

  17. Canastota Renewable Energy Facility Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Blake, Jillian; Hunt, Allen

    2013-12-13T23:59:59.000Z

    The project was implemented at the Madison County Landfill located in the Town of Lincoln, Madison County, New York. Madison County has owned and operated the solid waste and recycling facilities at the Buyea Road site since 1974. At the onset of the project, the County owned and operated facilities there to include three separate landfills, a residential solid waste disposal and recycled material drop-off facility, a recycling facility and associated administrative, support and environmental control facilities. This putrescible waste undergoes anaerobic decomposition within the waste mass and generates landfill gas, which is approximately 50% methane. In order to recover this gas, the landfill was equipped with gas collection systems on both the east and west sides of Buyea Road which bring the gas to a central point for destruction. In order to derive a beneficial use from the collected landfill gases, the County decided to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the future use of the generated gas.

  18. LANSCE | Facilities

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

    LINAC Outreach Affiliations Visiting LANSCE Facilities Isotope Production Facility Lujan Neutron Scattering Center MaRIE Proton Radiography Ultracold Neutrons Weapons Neutron...

  19. Transportation, Aging and Disposal Canister System Performance...

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

    This document provides specifications for selected system components of the Transportation, Aging and Disposal (TAD) canister-based system. Transportation, Aging and Disposal...

  20. Ethidium Bromide: Disposal, Decontamination, and Destruction

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Jia, Songtao

    Ethidium Bromide: Disposal, Decontamination, and Destruction Procedure: 8.03 Created: 2 #12;Ethidium Bromide: Disposal, Decontamination, and Destruction Procedure: 8.03 Created: 2

  1. Hanford Landfill Reaches 15 Million Tons Disposed - Waste Disposal...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    ERDF comprises a series disposal areas called cells. Each pair of cells is 70 feet deep, 500 feet wide and 1,000 feet long at the base - large enough to hold about three million...

  2. Title I Disposal Site

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Mr. Bill; Von Till

    2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Office of Legacy Management and the Navajo Nation have been discussing an item specified in the Long Term Surveillance Plan (LTSP) for the Mexican Hat site for some time now, and we have come to a resolution on the matter. The LTSP specifies seep sampling at the site to confirm that the disposal cell is operating as designed. Typically, this is to be done for a specific time and then reevaluated, but, in this LTSP there is no time frame given. After 8 years of experience in sampling and observing these six seeps, it has been found that most are not flowing at all, and those that have any water running are so limited in flow that it is difficult to obtain a sample. In addition, several risk assessments have been performed over the years to evaluate the possible ecological risks associated with exposure to this seep water. The analysis indicates there would be no eco-risk based on the historic data to any wildlife or livestock. This information and a full analysis of the situation was submitted to the Navajo Nation for their consideration, and, in further discussions, they have agreed to limit the sampling to only making observations during the annual cell inspection, and if water is observed to be increased compared to historic observations, then sampling will resume. Their agreement to this change is noted in the enclosed copy of their letter to DOE dated July 25, 2006. I have enclosed a copy of this report,

  3. The Global Threat Reduction Initiative's Orphan Source Recovery Project in the Russian Federation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Russell, J. W. [NSTec; Ahumada, A. D. [NSTec; Blanchard, T. A. [NNSA

    2012-06-04T23:59:59.000Z

    After 9/11, officials at the United States Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) grew more concerned about radiological materials that were vulnerable to theft and illicit use around the world. The concern was that terrorists could combine stolen radiological materials with explosives to build and detonate a radiological dispersal device (RDD), more commonly known as a “dirty bomb.” In response to this and other terrorist threats, the DOE/NNSA formed what is now known as the Global Threat Reduction Initiative (GTRI) to consolidate and accelerate efforts to reduce and protect vulnerable nuclear and radiological materials located at civilian sites worldwide. Although a cooperative program was already underway in the Russian Federation to secure nuclear materials at a range of different facilities, thousands of sealed radioactive sources remained vulnerable at medical, research, and industrial sites. In response, GTRI began to focus efforts on addressing these materials. GTRI’s Russia Orphan Source Recovery Project, managed at the Nevada National Security Site’s North Las Vegas facility, was initiated in 2002. Throughout the life of the project, Joint Stock Company “Isotope” has served as the primary Russian subcontractor, and the organization has proven to be a successful partner. Since the first orphan source recovery of an industrial cobalt-60 irradiator with 647 curies (Ci) at an abandoned facility in Moscow in 2003, the GTRI Orphan Source Recovery Project in the Russian Federation has accomplished substantial levels of threat reduction. To date, GTRI has recovered and securely disposed of more than 5,100 sources totaling more that 628,000 Ci. This project serves as an extraordinary example of how international cooperation can be implemented by partners with mutual interests to achieve significant goals.

  4. Disposal of NORM-Contaminated Oil Field Wastes in Salt Caverns

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Blunt, D.L.; Elcock, D.; Smith, K.P.; Tomasko, D.; Viel, J.A.; and Williams, G.P.

    1999-01-21T23:59:59.000Z

    In 1995, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Fossil Energy, asked Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne) to conduct a preliminary technical and legal evaluation of disposing of nonhazardous oil field waste (NOW) into salt caverns. That study concluded that disposal of NOW into salt caverns is feasible and legal. If caverns are sited and designed well, operated carefully, closed properly, and monitored routinely, they can be a suitable means of disposing of NOW (Veil et al. 1996). Considering these findings and the increased U.S. interest in using salt caverns for NOW disposal, the Office of Fossil Energy asked Argonne to conduct further research on the cost of cavern disposal compared with the cost of more traditional NOW disposal methods and on preliminary identification and investigation of the risks associated with such disposal. The cost study (Veil 1997) found that disposal costs at the four permitted disposal caverns in the United States were comparable to or lower than the costs of other disposal facilities in the same geographic area. The risk study (Tomasko et al. 1997) estimated that both cancer and noncancer human health risks from drinking water that had been contaminated by releases of cavern contents were significantly lower than the accepted risk thresholds. Since 1992, DOE has funded Argonne to conduct a series of studies evaluating issues related to management and disposal of oil field wastes contaminated with naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM). Included among these studies were radiological dose assessments of several different NORM disposal options (Smith et al. 1996). In 1997, DOE asked Argonne to conduct additional analyses on waste disposal in salt caverns, except that this time the wastes to be evaluated would be those types of oil field wastes that are contaminated by NORM. This report describes these analyses. Throughout the remainder of this report, the term ''NORM waste'' is used to mean ''oil field waste contaminated by NORM''.

  5. Green Roofs: Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) Federal Technology Alert

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Scholz-Barth, K.; Tanner, S.

    2004-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In a ''green roof,'' a layer of vegetation (e.g., a roof garden) covers the surface of a roof to provide shade, cooler indoor and outdoor temperatures, and effective storm-water management to reduce runoff. The main components are waterproofing, soil, and plants. There are two basic kinds: intensive and extensive. An intensive green roof often features large shrubs and trees, and it can be expensive to install and maintain. An extensive green roof features shallow soil and low-growing, horizontally spreading plants that can thrive in the alpine conditions of many rooftops. These plants do not require a lot of water or soil, and they can tolerate a significant amount of exposure to the sun and wind. This Federal Technology Alert focuses on the benefits, design, and implementation of extensive green roofs and includes criteria for their use on federal facilities.

  6. Nuclear Facilities Production Facilities

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA Approved:AdministrationAnalysis andB -Reports|7/%2A en20 Federal Register

  7. Federal Aviation Administration

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    /Testing #12;16Federal Aviation Administration GMU CATSR 6 February 2012 The FAA William J. Hughes Technical operational test and evaluation agent for FAA #12;17Federal Aviation Administration GMU CATSR 6 February 2012Federal Aviation Administration Federal Aviation AdministrationNextGen: Primer, Challenges

  8. 1993 report on Hanford Site land disposal restrictions for mixed wastes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Black, D.

    1993-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Since the early 1940s, the contractors at the Hanford Site have been involved in the production and purification of nuclear defense materials. These production activities have resulted in the generation of large quantities of liquid and solid radioactive mixed waste (RMW). This waste is subject to regulation under authority of both the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976{sup 2}(RCRA) and Atomic Energy Act{sup 3}. This report covers mixed waste only. Hazardous waste that is not contaminated with radionuclides is not addressed in this report. The Washington State Department of Ecology, US Environmental Protection Agency, and US Department of Energy have entered into an agreement, the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order{sup 1} (commonly referred to as the Tri-Party Agreement) to bring the Hanford Site operations into compliance with dangerous waste regulations. The Tri-Party Agreement required development of the original land disposal restrictions (LDR) plan and its annual updates to comply with LDR requirements for RMW. This report is the third update of the plan first issued in 1990. The Tri-Party Agreement requires, and the baseline plan and annual update reports provide, the information that follows: Waste characterization information; storage data; treatment information; waste reduction information; schedule; and progress.

  9. TWRS Retrieval and Storage Mission and Immobilized Low Activity Waste (ILAW) Disposal Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BURBANK, D.A.

    1999-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This project plan has a twofold purpose. First, it provides a waste stream project plan specific to the River Protection Project (RPP) (formerly the Tank Waste Remediation System [TWRS] Project) Immobilized Low-Activity Waste (LAW) Disposal Subproject for the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) that meets the requirements of Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) Milestone M-90-01 (Ecology et al. 1994) and is consistent with the project plan content guidelines found in Section 11.5 of the Tri-Party Agreement action plan (Ecology et al. 1998). Second, it provides an upper tier document that can be used as the basis for future subproject line-item construction management plans. The planning elements for the construction management plans are derived from applicable U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) planning guidance documents (DOE Orders 4700.1 [DOE 1992] and 430.1 [DOE 1995a]). The format and content of this project plan are designed to accommodate the requirements mentioned by the Tri-Party Agreement and the DOE orders. A cross-check matrix is provided in Appendix A to explain where in the plan project planning elements required by Section 11.5 of the Tri-Party Agreement are addressed.

  10. Corrective Action Plan for Corrective Action Unit 543: Liquid Disposal Units, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2006-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 543, Liquid Disposal Units, is listed in Appendix III of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order of 1996. CAU 543 consists of seven Corrective Action Sites (CASs) located in Areas 6 and 15 of the Nevada Test Site, which is approximately 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. CAU 543 consists of the following seven CASs: {sm_bullet} CAS 06-07-01, Decon Pad {sm_bullet} CAS 15-01-03, Aboveground Storage Tank {sm_bullet} CAS 15-04-01, Septic Tank {sm_bullet} CAS 15-05-01, Leachfield {sm_bullet} CAS 15-08-01, Liquid Manure Tank {sm_bullet} CAS 15-23-01, Underground Radioactive Material Area {sm_bullet} CAS 15-23-03, Contaminated Sump, Piping From January 24, 2005 through April 14, 2005, CAU 543 site characterization activities were conducted, and are reported in Appendix A of the CAU 543 Corrective Action Decision Document (CADD) (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office [NNSA/NSO], 2005). The recommended corrective action as stated in the approved CADD is No Further Action for five of the CAU 543 CASs, and Closure In Place for the remaining two CASs.

  11. Ultimate disposal of low and medium radioactive waste in France

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ringeard, C. [National Radioactive Waste Management Agency, Fontenay aux Roses (France). Environmental, Safety, Quality Dept.

    1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    The National Radioactive Waste Management Agency (ANDRA) has been entrusted with the long-term management of radioactive waste. This paper presents the methodology of safety assessment used by ANDRA for a land disposal facility of radioactive waste with short or medium half-life and with low or medium specific activity. This methodology was used in the design of ``the Centre de stockage de l`Aube``.

  12. Remediation of a Former USAF Radioactive Material Disposal Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hoffman, D. E.; Cushman, M; Tupyi, B.; Lambert, J.

    2003-02-25T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper describes the remediation of a low-level radiological waste burial site located at the former James Connally Air Force Base in Waco, Texas. Burial activities at the site occurred during the 1950's when the property was under the ownership of the United States Air Force. Included is a discussion of methods and strategies that were used to successfully exhume and characterize the wastes for proper disposal at offsite disposal facilities. Worker and environmental protection measures are also described. Information gained from this project may be used at other similar project sites. A total of nine burial tubes had been identified for excavation, characterization, and removal from the site. The disposal tubes were constructed of 4-ft lengths of concrete pipe buried upright with the upper ends flush with ground surface. Initial ground level observations of the burial tubes indicated that some weathering had occurred; however, the condition of the subsurface portions of the tubes was unknown. Soil excavation occurred in 1-foot lifts in order that the tubes could be inspected and to allow for characterization of the soils at each stage of the excavation. Due to the weight of the concrete pipe and the condition of the piping joints it was determined that special measures would be required to maintain the tubes intact during their removal. Special tube anchoring and handling methods were required to relocate the tubes from their initial positions to a staging area where they could be further characterized. Characterization of the disposal tubes was accomplished using a combination of gamma spectroscopy and activity mapping methods. Important aspects of the project included the use of specialized excavation and disposal tube reinforcement measures to maintain the disposal tubes intact during excavation, removal and subsequent characterization. The non-intrusive gamma spectroscopy and data logging methods allowed for effective characterization of the wastes while minimizing disposal costs. In addition, worker exposures were maintained ALARA as a result of the removal and characterization methods employed.

  13. Calcined solids storage facility closure study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dahlmeir, M.M.; Tuott, L.C.; Spaulding, B.C. [and others] [and others

    1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The disposal of radioactive wastes now stored at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory is currently mandated under a {open_quotes}Settlement Agreement{close_quotes} (or {open_quotes}Batt Agreement{close_quotes}) between the Department of Energy and the State of Idaho. Under this agreement, all high-level waste must be treated as necessary to meet the disposal criteria and disposed of or made road ready to ship from the INEEL by 2035. In order to comply with this agreement, all calcined waste produced in the New Waste Calcining Facility and stored in the Calcined Solids Facility must be treated and disposed of by 2035. Several treatment options for the calcined waste have been studied in support of the High-Level Waste Environmental Impact Statement. Two treatment methods studied, referred to as the TRU Waste Separations Options, involve the separation of the high-level waste (calcine) into TRU waste and low-level waste (Class A or Class C). Following treatment, the TRU waste would be sent to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) for final storage. It has been proposed that the low-level waste be disposed of in the Tank Farm Facility and/or the Calcined Solids Storage Facility following Resource Conservation and Recovery Act closure. In order to use the seven Bin Sets making up the Calcined Solids Storage Facility as a low-level waste landfill, the facility must first be closed to Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) standards. This study identifies and discusses two basic methods available to close the Calcined Solids Storage Facility under the RCRA - Risk-Based Clean Closure and Closure to Landfill Standards. In addition to the closure methods, the regulatory requirements and issues associated with turning the Calcined Solids Storage Facility into an NRC low-level waste landfill or filling the bin voids with clean grout are discussed.

  14. Energy Savings Performance Contracts for Federal Agencies

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Energy savings performance contracts (ESPCs) allow federal agencies to procure energy savings and facility improvements with no up-front capital costs or special appropriations from Congress. An ESPC is a partnership between an agency and an energy service company (ESCO).

  15. About Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Energy savings performance contracts (ESPCs) are a partnership between a federal agency and an energy service company (ESCO). After being selected for a potential award, the ESCO conducts a comprehensive facility energy audit and identifies improvements to save energy. In consultation with the agency, the ESCO designs and constructs a project that meets the agency's needs and arranges financing to pay for the project.

  16. Solid Waste Disposal Act (Texas)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality is responsible for the regulation and management of municipal solid waste and hazardous waste. A fee is applied to all solid waste disposed in the...

  17. Facility Microgrids

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ye, Z.; Walling, R.; Miller, N.; Du, P.; Nelson, K.

    2005-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Microgrids are receiving a considerable interest from the power industry, partly because their business and technical structure shows promise as a means of taking full advantage of distributed generation. This report investigates three issues associated with facility microgrids: (1) Multiple-distributed generation facility microgrids' unintentional islanding protection, (2) Facility microgrids' response to bulk grid disturbances, and (3) Facility microgrids' intentional islanding.

  18. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act corrective measures study: Area 6 decontamination pond facility, corrective action unit no. 92

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) No. 92, the Area 6 Decontamination Pond Facility (DPF), is an historic disposal unit located at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) in Nye County, Nevada (Figures 1 - 1, 1-2, and 1-3). The NTS is operated by the U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV), which has been required by the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) to characterize the DPF under the requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Part A Permit (NDEP, 1995) for the NTS and Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 265 (1996c). The DPF is prioritized in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO, 1996) but is governed by the permit. The DPF was characterized through sampling events in 1994, 1996, and 1997. The results of these sampling events are contained in the Final Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Industrial Site Environmental Restoration Site Characterization Report, Area 6 Decontamination Pond Facility, Revision I (DOE/NV, 1997). This Corrective Measures Study (CMS) for the Area 6 DPF has been prepared for the DOE/NV`s Environmental Restoration Project. The CMS has been developed to support the preparation of a Closure Plan for the DPF. Because of the complexities of the contamination and regulatory issues associated with the DPF, DOE/NV determined a CMS would be beneficial to the evaluation and selection of a closure alternative.

  19. Facility effluent monitoring plan for the tank farm facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Crummel, G.M.

    1998-05-18T23:59:59.000Z

    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 impact employee or public safety or the environment. This document is prepared using the specific guidelines identified in A Guide for Preparing Hanford Site Facility Effluent Monitoring Plans, WHC-EP-0438. 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.

  20. Modeling transport of disposed dredged material from placement sites in Grays Harbor, WA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    US Army Corps of Engineers

    Modeling transport of disposed dredged material from placement sites in Grays Harbor, WA E- to mid- term dredge material management strategies for the Federal Navigation Project at Grays Harbor dredging quantities. However, the most heavily used dredged material placement sites lie in proximity

  1. Federal Regulations | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are being directed off Energy.gov. Are you sure you want toworldPowerHome |CookingFAQsFacilityFederal Regulations

  2. Federal Real Property Council Guidance

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011AT&T,OfficeEnd ofEvaluations in Covered FacilitiesAfterofFLASH 2004-12 April 5,Federal

  3. Summary - Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) at Idaho National...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    beneficial to other DOE sites were identified: Automated monitoring of leachate collections systems and leak detection zones should be employed at all landfills operated by...

  4. Property and Facilities Division VEHICLE PURCHASING & DISPOSAL REQUISITION PF330

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Blows, Mark

    Driver's Airbag Dual Airbag Headlight Protectors Cargo Blind (Wagon) Leather Trim Metallic Paint Mud

  5. Enhancing RESRAD-OFFSITE for Low Level Waste Disposal Facility...

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

    The RESRAD-OFFSITE code was developed to evaluate the radiological dose and excess cancer risk to an individual who is exposed while located within or outside the area of...

  6. Non-radioactive disposal facility -- Bioremediation horizontal well installation project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kupar, J.; Hasek, M.

    1998-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Sanitary Landfill Corrective Action Plan proposes a two pronged approach to remediation. The first part of the total remediation strategy is the placement of a RCRA style closure cap to provide source control of contaminants into the groundwater. The second part of the proposed remediation package is a phased approach primarily using an in situ bioremediation system for groundwater clean up of the Constituents of Concern (COCs) that exceed their proposed Alternate Concentration Limits (ACL). The phased in approach of groundwater clean up will involve operation of the in situ bioremediation system, followed by evaluation of the Phase 1 system and, if necessary, additional phased remediation strategies. This document presents pertinent information on operations, well locations, anticipated capture zones, monitoring strategies, observation wells and other information which will allow a decision on the acceptability of the remedial strategy as an interim corrective action prior to permit application approval. The proposed interim phase of the remediation program will position two horizontal bioremediation wells such that the respective zones of influence will intersect the migration path for the highest concentrations of each plume.

  7. Solid Waste Disposal Resource Recovery Facilities Act (South Carolina)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This legislation authorizes local governing bodies to form joint agencies to advance the collection, transfer, processing of solid waste, recovery of resources, and sales of recovered resources in...

  8. Residue disposal from waste-to-energy facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Walsh, P.; O'Leary, P.; Cross, F.

    1987-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    When considering a waste-to-energy project, some local officials believe that waste-to-energy is a complete alternative to landfilling. While these projects can reduce waste volume substantially, the process will still produce residues that must be properly handled in order to protect the environment. All systems produce fly ash and bottom ash, and some systems also produce wastewater. This article discusses alternative methods for addressing these residue control problems.

  9. D11 WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES FOR TRANSURANIC WASTE

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011AT&T,Office of Policy, OAPM | Department ofCommunications Infrastructure2 10 CFR Ch. X

  10. DOE Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011AT&T,Office of Policy, OAPM | DepartmentIOffshore WindEnergy's FY2016 BudgetApplauds

  11. Operational Issues at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility at

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are being directed offOCHCO2:Introduction toManagementOPAM PolicyOfEnergy Online1 March 27, 2012 Inside5Hanford |

  12. Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility at Idaho National Laboratory | Department of

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742Energy ChinaofSchaefer To:Department ofOralGovernmentStandards forand OpportunitiesIan

  13. OAK RIDGE CERCLA DISPOSAL FACILITY ACHIEVES SAFETY MILESTONE | Department

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn'tOrigin of Contamination in ManyDepartment of Order No. EA-212-AOAHU WIND INTEGRATION ANDof

  14. New Facility Will Test Disposal Cell Cover Renovation | Department of

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are being directed offOCHCO2:Introduction toManagement ofConverDynNet-Zero Campus atEnergy New

  15. Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities (TSDF) Guidance

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are8COaBulkTransmissionSitingProcess.pdfGetec AG|Information OpenEIHas BeenLegal Document- OtherOther: Hazardous|

  16. Operational Issues at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility at Hanford

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2 OPAM615_CostNSAR - T en Y earEnergy T H EaBuildingOperating

  17. 2009 Performance Assessment for the Saltstone Disposal Facility |

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613Portsmouth Site »StrategicReferencesRobotics Engineer: Lonnie Love 107

  18. Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility at Idaho National Laboratory

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2 OPAM Flash2011-12Approved on 24 JulyE, EXEMPTION

  19. Maintenance Guide for DOE Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2 OPAM Flash2011-12Approvedof6,Projects |MANAGEMENTMOJAVE MOJAVEDepartment of4 G

  20. Summary - Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) at Idaho National Laboratory

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2Uranium Transferon the Passing of AdmiraltheOil and Less CO2CausticNevadaINL,

  1. National Biomedical Tracer Facility: Project definition study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Heaton, R.; Peterson, E. [Los Alamos National Lab., NM (United States); Smith, P. [Smith (P.A.) Concepts and Designs (United States)

    1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

    The Los Alamos National Laboratory is an ideal institution and New Mexico is an ideal location for siting the National Biomedical Tracer Facility (NBTF). The essence of the Los Alamos proposal is the development of two complementary irradiation facilities that combined with our existing radiochemical processing hot cell facilities and waste handling and disposal facilities provide a low cost alternative to other proposals that seek to satisfy the objectives of the NBTF. We propose the construction of a 30 MeV cyclotron facility at the site of the radiochemical facilities, and the construction of a 100 MeV target station at LAMPF to satisfy the requirements and objectives of the NBTF. We do not require any modifications to our existing radiochemical processing hot cell facilities or our waste treatment and disposal facilities to accomplish the objectives of the NBTF. The total capital cost for the facility defined by the project definition study is $15.2 M. This cost estimate includes $9.9 M for the cyclotron and associated facility, $2.0 M for the 100 MeV target station at LAMPF, and $3.3 M for design.

  2. PV opportunities in the Federal sector

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thornton, J.P. [PV Engineering and Applications Branch National Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden, Colorado 81401 (United States)

    1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Federal government is the largest user of energy in the United States today. The Department of Defense (DOD) uses more than 80{percent} of that energy; the Department of Energy is the second largest user. In the 15 years from 1975 to 1989, {dollar_sign}128 billion was spent for Federal energy activities. In 1989 alone, the Federal government spent a total of {dollar_sign}8.7 billion on energy, of which {dollar_sign}3.5 billion was for buildings and {dollar_sign}2.4 billion was for electricity. The Federal government, which owns or leases 500,000 buildings, provided an additional {dollar_sign}3.9 billion on energy assistance for low-income housing in 1989 (1). Executive Order 12902 (Energy Efficiency and Water Conservation at Federal Facilities) of March 8, 1994 implements and expands the Federal energy management provisions stated in the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 1992. The goal is to reduce energy use in Federal buildings to 30{percent} of the 1985 levels by the year 2005. The Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) has been assigned the responsibility of implementing Executive Order 12902. Subsequently, DOE, FEMP, other Federal agencies and private industry have formed a unique partnership to develop a process and set of actions that will stimulate new opportunities for renewable energy technologies. If these Federal initiatives are successful, substantial investment in renewable and energy efficiency technologies will be stimulated, an important portion of the nation{close_quote}s energy needs will be supplied, and a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions will be achieved. {copyright} {ital 1996 American Institute of Physics.}

  3. Use of engineered soils and other site modifications for low-level radioactive waste disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission requires that low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal facilities be designed to minimize contact between waste and infiltrating water through the use of site design features. The purpose of this investigation is to identify engineered barriers and evaluate their ability to enhance the long-term performance of an LLW disposal facility. Previously used barriers such as concrete overpacks, vaults, backfill, and engineered soil covers, are evaluated as well as state-of-the-art barriers, including an engineered sorptive soil layer underlying a facility and an advanced design soil cover incorporating a double-capillary layer. The purpose of this investigation is also to provide information in incorporating or excluding specific engineered barriers as part of new disposal facility designs. Evaluations are performed using performance assessment modeling techniques. A generic reference disposal facility design is used as a baseline for comparing the improvements in long-term performance offered by designs incorporating engineered barriers in generic and humid environments. These evaluations simulate water infiltration through the facility, waste leaching, radionuclide transport through the facility, and decay and ingrowth. They also calculate a maximum (peak annual) dose for each disposal system design. A relative dose reduction factor is calculated for each design evaluated. The results of this investigation are presented for concrete overpacks, concrete vaults, sorptive backfill, sorptive engineered soil underlying the facility, and sloped engineered soil covers using a single-capillary barrier and a double-capillary barrier. Designs using combinations of barriers are also evaluated. These designs include a vault plus overpacks, sorptive backfill plus overpacks, and overpack with vault plus sorptive backfill, underlying sorptive soil, and engineered soil cover.

  4. Money crunch looms for Federal cleanup effort

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lobsenz, G.

    1992-12-03T23:59:59.000Z

    In an unprecedented acknowledgement that federal facility cleanup activities face a money crunch, a federal-state advisory panel is preparing a new strategy to avert enforcement showdowns when funding cuts prevent federal agencies from meeting legally required cleanup schedules set by states. In a draft report the panel said states must recognize that some cleanup [open quotes]milestones[close quotes] will have to be delayed due to budget pressures - a concession that will be politically difficult in some states. At the same time, the panel said federal agencies must be more forthcoming in working with states and local groups to determine how increasingly scarce resources will be distributed. As a general rule, the report recommended that federal agencies and state environmental officials agree on a [open quotes]fair share[close quotes] allocation method under which the pain of a budget cutback would be spread equally among all cleanup sites within an affected federal agency. That fair share approach would be altered only if the federal agency reached agreement with states that a funding cutback could be absorbed at selected sites without affecting any cleanup milestone.

  5. Tank Waste Disposal Program redefinition

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Grygiel, M.L.; Augustine, C.A.; Cahill, M.A.; Garfield, J.S.; Johnson, M.E.; Kupfer, M.J.; Meyer, G.A.; Roecker, J.H. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States); Holton, L.K.; Hunter, V.L.; Triplett, M.B. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States)

    1991-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The record of decision (ROD) (DOE 1988) on the Final Environmental Impact Statement, Hanford Defense High-Level, Transuranic and Tank Wastes, Hanford Site, Richland Washington identifies the method for disposal of double-shell tank waste and cesium and strontium capsules at the Hanford Site. The ROD also identifies the need for additional evaluations before a final decision is made on the disposal of single-shell tank waste. This document presents the results of systematic evaluation of the present technical circumstances, alternatives, and regulatory requirements in light of the values of the leaders and constitutents of the program. It recommends a three-phased approach for disposing of tank wastes. This approach allows mature technologies to be applied to the treatment of well-understood waste forms in the near term, while providing time for the development and deployment of successively more advanced pretreatment technologies. The advanced technologies will accelerate disposal by reducing the volume of waste to be vitrified. This document also recommends integration of the double-and single-shell tank waste disposal programs, provides a target schedule for implementation of the selected approach, and describes the essential elements of a program to be baselined in 1992.

  6. B Plant treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) units inspection plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Beam, T.G.

    1996-04-26T23:59:59.000Z

    This inspection plan is written to meet the requirements of WAC 173-303 for operations of a TSD facility. Owners/operators of TSD facilities are required to inspection their facility and active waste management units to prevent and/or detect malfunctions, discharges and other conditions potentially hazardous to human health and the environment. A written plan detailing these inspection efforts must be maintained at the facility in accordance with Washington Administrative Code (WAC), Chapter 173-303, ``Dangerous Waste Regulations`` (WAC 173-303), a written inspection plan is required for the operation of a treatment, storage and disposal (TSD) facility and individual TSD units. B Plant is a permitted TSD facility currently operating under interim status with an approved Part A Permit. Various operational systems and locations within or under the control of B Plant have been permitted for waste management activities. Included are the following TSD units: Cell 4 Container Storage Area; B Plant Containment Building; Low Level Waste Tank System; Organic Waste Tank System; Neutralized Current Acid Waste (NCAW) Tank System; Low Level Waste Concentrator Tank System. This inspection plan complies with the requirements of WAC 173-303. It addresses both general TSD facility and TSD unit-specific inspection requirements. Sections on each of the TSD units provide a brief description of the system configuration and the permitted waste management activity, a summary of the inspection requirements, and details on the activities B Plant uses to maintain compliance with those requirements.

  7. Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan for Corrective Action Unit 425: Area 9 Main Lake Construction Debris Disposal Area, Tonopah Test Range, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    K. B. Campbell

    2002-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan addresses the action necessary for the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 425, Area 9 Main Lake Construction Debris Disposal Area. This CAU is currently listed in Appendix III of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO, 1996). This site will be cleaned up under the SAFER process since the volume of waste exceeds the 23 cubic meters (m{sup 3}) (30 cubic yards [yd{sup 3}]) limit established for housekeeping sites. CAU 425 is located on the Tonopah Test Range (TTR) and consists of one Corrective Action Site (CAS) 09-08-001-TA09, Construction Debris Disposal Area (Figure 1). CAS 09-08-001-TA09 is an area that was used to collect debris from various projects in and around Area 9. The site is located approximately 81 meters (m) (265 feet [ft]) north of Edwards Freeway northeast of Main Lake on the TTR. The site is composed of concrete slabs with metal infrastructure, metal rebar, wooden telephone poles, and concrete rubble from the Hard Target and early Tornado Rocket sled tests. Other items such as wood scraps, plastic pipes, soil, and miscellaneous nonhazardous items have also been identified in the debris pile. It is estimated that this site contains approximately 2280 m{sup 3} (3000 yd{sup 3}) of construction-related debris.

  8. Annual report of 1991 groundwater monitoring data for the Kerr Hollow Quarry and Chestnut Ridge Sediment Disposal Basin at the Y-12 Plant: Reporting and statistical evaluation of the subsequent year (sixth) data

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McMahon, L.W. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States); Mercier, T.M. [H and R Technical Associates, Inc., Oak Ridge, TN (United States)] [comps.

    1992-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This annual report has historically been prepared to meet the annual reporting requirements of the Tennessee Department of and Environment and Conservation (TDEC), Hazardous Waste Management Regulation 1200-1-11-.05 (6)(e), for detection monitoring data collected on Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) wells in place around facilities which are accorded interim status. The regulatory authority for these units at the Y-12 Plant is currently in transition. A Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) with an effective date of January 1, 1992, has been negotiated with the Department of Energy (DOE) for the Oak Ridge Reservation. This agreement provides a framework for remediation of the Oak Ridge Reservation so that both RCRA and CERCLA requirements are integrated into the remediation process and provides for State, EPA, and DOE to proceed with CERCLA as the lead regulatory requirement and RCRA as an applicable or relevant and appropriate requirement. This report is presented for the RCRA certified wells for two interim status units at the Y-12 Plant. These units are Kerr Hollow Quarry and Chestnut Ridge Sediment Disposal Basin. Kerr Hollow is currently undergoing clean closure under RCRA. The Chestnut Ridge Sediment Disposal Basin (CRSDB) was closed in 1989 under a TDEC approved RCRA closure plan. The relevance of a RCRA Post-Closure Permit to either of these units is a matter of contention between DOE and TDEC since the FFA does not contemplate post-closure permits.

  9. Federal Agency NEPA Procedures

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Each Federal agency is required to develop NEPA procedures that supplement the CEQ Regulations. Developed in consultation with CEQ, Federal agency NEPA procedures must meet the standards in the CEQ...

  10. Depleted uranium disposal options evaluation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hertzler, T.J.; Nishimoto, D.D.; Otis, M.D. [Science Applications International Corp., Idaho Falls, ID (United States). Waste Management Technology Div.

    1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, has chartered a study to evaluate alternative management strategies for depleted uranium (DU) currently stored throughout the DOE complex. Historically, DU has been maintained as a strategic resource because of uses for DU metal and potential uses for further enrichment or for uranium oxide as breeder reactor blanket fuel. This study has focused on evaluating the disposal options for DU if it were considered a waste. This report is in no way declaring these DU reserves a ``waste,`` but is intended to provide baseline data for comparison with other management options for use of DU. To PICS considered in this report include: Retrievable disposal; permanent disposal; health hazards; radiation toxicity and chemical toxicity.

  11. The full fuel cycle of CO{sub 2} capture and disposal capture and disposal technology

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Saroff, L.

    1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    The overall objective of this study was to develop a methodology for the evaluation of the energy usage and cost both private and societal (external cost)for full fuel cycles. It was envisioned that other organizations could employ the methodology with minor alterations for a consistent means of evaluating full fuel cycles. The methodology has been applied to three fossil fuel electric generation processes each producing 500 MWe (net). These are: a Natural Gas Combined Cycle (NGCC) power plant burning natural gas with direct CO{sub 2} capture and disposal; an Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) power plant burning coal with direct CO{sub 2} capture and disposal; and a Pulverized Fuel (PC) power plant burning coal with a managed forest indirectly sequestering CO{sub 2}. The primary aim is to provide decision makers with information from which to derive policy. Thus, the evaluation reports total energy used, private costs to build the facility, emissions and burdens, and the valuation (externalities) of the impacts of the burdens. The energy usage, private costs including capture and disposal, and emissions are reported in this paper. The valuations and analysis of the impact of the plant on the environment are reported in the companion paper. The loss in efficiency (LHV) considering the full fuel cycle as opposed to the thermal efficiency of the power plant is; 0.9, 2.4, and 4.6 for the NGCC, IGCC, and PC+controls, respectively. Electricity cost, c/kWh, including capital, operating and fuel, at a 10% discount rate. ranges from 5.6 to 7.08 for NGCC and 7.24 to 8.61 for IGCC. The range is dependent on the mode of disposal, primarily due to the long pipeline to reach a site for the pope disposal in the ocean. For the PC+ controls then is a considerable range from 7.66 to over 16 c/kWh dependent on the size and cost of the managed forest.

  12. Facility Safety

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

    1996-10-24T23:59:59.000Z

    Establishes facility safety requirements related to: nuclear safety design, criticality safety, fire protection and natural phenomena hazards mitigation.

  13. Facility Safety

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

    1995-11-16T23:59:59.000Z

    Establishes facility safety requirements related to: nuclear safety design, criticality safety, fire protection and natural phenomena hazards mitigation.

  14. Disposable telemetry cable deployment system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Holcomb, David Joseph (Sandia Park, NM)

    2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A disposable telemetry cable deployment system for facilitating information retrieval while drilling a well includes a cable spool adapted for insertion into a drill string and an unarmored fiber optic cable spooled onto the spool cable and having a downhole end and a stinger end. Connected to the cable spool is a rigid stinger which extends through a kelly of the drilling apparatus. A data transmission device for transmitting data to a data acquisition system is disposed either within or on the upper end of the rigid stinger.

  15. Federal Employee Training Manual

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

    2001-10-11T23:59:59.000Z

    This Manual provides detailed requirements to supplement DOE O 360.1B, FEDERAL EMPLOYEE TRAINING. The information in this Manual is intended to assist in improving Federal workforce performance under Department of Energy (DOE) managed Federal employee training. Cancels DOE M 360.1A-1. Canceled by DOE O 360.1C.

  16. Federal Employee Training Manual

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

    1999-09-21T23:59:59.000Z

    This Manual provides detailed requirements to supplement DOE O 360.1A, Federal Employee Training, dated 9-21-99. The information in this Manual is intended to assist in improving Federal workforce performance under Department of Energy (DOE) managed Federal employee training. Canceled by DOE M 360.1-1B.

  17. Federal Aviation Administration 1

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Waliser, Duane E.

    , 2012 Federal Aviation Administration Introduction to the FAA COE CST & NASA Participation Options KenFederal Aviation Administration 1 COE CST Presentation to NASA Date of this revision: March 21 Davidian AST Director of Research Date of this revision: March 21, 2012 #12;Federal Aviation Administration

  18. Disposal of chemical agents and munitions stored at Anniston Army Depot, Anniston, Alabama

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hunsaker, D.B. Jr.; Zimmerman, G.P.; Hillsman, E.L.; Miller, R.L.; Schoepfle, G.M.; Johnson, R.O.; Tolbert, V.R.; Kroodsma, R.L.; Rickert, L.W.; Rogers, G.O.; Staub, W.P.

    1990-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of this Phase I report is to examined the proposed implementation of on-site disposal at Anniston Army Depot (ANAD) in light of more detailed and more recent data than those included in the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (EPEIS). Two principal issues are addressed: (1) whether or not the new data would result in identification of on-site disposal at ANAD as the environmentally preferred alternative (using the same selection method and data analysis tools as in the FPEIS), and (2) whether or not the new data indicate the presence of significant environmental resources that could be affected by on-site disposal at ANAD. In addition, a status report is presented on the maturity of the disposal technology (and now it could affect on-site disposal at ANAD). Inclusion of these more recent data into the FPEIS decision method resulted in confirmation of on-site disposal for ANAD. No unique resources with the potential to prevent or delay implementation of on-site disposal at ANAD have been identified. A review of the technology status identified four principal technology developments that have occurred since publication of the FPEIS and should be of value in the implementation of on-site disposal at ANAD: the disposal of nonlethal agent at Pine Bluff Arsenal, located near Pine Bluff, Arkansas; construction and testing of facilities for disposal of stored lethal agent at Johnston Atoll, located about 1300 km (800 miles) southwest of Hawaii in the Pacific Ocean; lethal agent disposal tests at the chemical agent pilot plant operations at Tooele Army Depot, located near Salt Lake City, Utah; and equipment advances. 18 references, 13 figs., 10 tabs.

  19. Hanford Site Near-Facility Environmental Monitoring Data Report for Calendar Year 2008

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Perkins, Craig J.; Dorsey, Michael C.; Mckinney, Stephen M.; Wilde, Justin W.; Poston, Ted M.

    2009-09-15T23:59:59.000Z

    Near-facility environmental monitoring is defined as monitoring near facilities that have the potential to discharge or have discharged, stored, or disposed of radioactive or hazardous materials. Monitoring locations are associated with nuclear facilities such as the Plutonium Finishing Plant, Canister Storage Building, and the K Basins; inactive nuclear facilities such as N Reactor and the Plutonium-Uranium Extraction (PUREX) Facility; and waste storage or disposal facilities such as burial grounds, cribs, ditches, ponds, tank farms, and trenches. Much of the monitoring consists of collecting and analyzing environmental samples and methodically surveying areas near facilities. The program is also designed to evaluate acquired analytical data, determine the effectiveness of facility effluent monitoring and controls, assess the adequacy of containment at waste disposal units, and detect and monitor unusual conditions.

  20. Preliminary technical and legal evaluation of disposing of nonhazardous oil field waste into salt caverns

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Veil, J.; Elcock, D.; Raivel, M.; Caudle, D.; Ayers, R.C. Jr.; Grunewald, B.

    1996-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Caverns can be readily formed in salt formations through solution mining. The caverns may be formed incidentally, as a result of salt recovery, or intentionally to create an underground chamber that can be used for storing hydrocarbon products or compressed air or disposing of wastes. The purpose of this report is to evaluate the feasibility, suitability, and legality of disposing of nonhazardous oil and gas exploration, development, and production wastes (hereafter referred to as oil field wastes, unless otherwise noted) in salt caverns. Chapter 2 provides background information on: types and locations of US subsurface salt deposits; basic solution mining techniques used to create caverns; and ways in which salt caverns are used. Later chapters provide discussion of: federal and state regulatory requirements concerning disposal of oil field waste, including which wastes are considered eligible for cavern disposal; waste streams that are considered to be oil field waste; and an evaluation of technical issues concerning the suitability of using salt caverns for disposing of oil field waste. Separate chapters present: types of oil field wastes suitable for cavern disposal; cavern design and location; disposal operations; and closure and remediation. This report does not suggest specific numerical limits for such factors or variables as distance to neighboring activities, depths for casings, pressure testing, or size and shape of cavern. The intent is to raise issues and general approaches that will contribute to the growing body of information on this subject.