Powered by Deep Web Technologies
Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


1

WIPP Hazardous Waste Facility Permit - 2008 Update  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Important new changes to the Hazardous Waste Facility Permit (HWFP) were implemented during 2007. The challenge was to implement these changes without impacting shipping schedules. Many of the changes required advanced preparation and coordination in order to transition to the new waste analysis paradigm, both at the generator sites and at the WIPP without interrupting the flow of waste to the disposal facility. Not only did aspects of waste characterization change, but also a new Permittees' confirmation program was created. Implementing the latter change required that new equipment and facilities be obtained, personnel hired, trained and qualified, and operating procedures written and approved without interruption to the contact-handled (CH) transuranic (TRU) waste shipping schedule. This was all accomplished successfully with no delayed or cancelled shipments. Looking forward to 2008 and beyond, proposed changes that will deal with waste in the DOE TRU waste complex is larger than the TRUPACT-IIs can handle. Size reduction of the waste would lead to unnecessary exposure risk and ultimately create more waste. The WIPP is working to have the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) certify the TRUPACT-III. The TRUPACT-III will be able to accommodate larger sized TRU mixed waste. Along with this new NRC-certified shipping cask, a new disposal container, the Standard Large Box, must be proposed in a permit modification. Containers for disposal of TRU mixed waste at the WIPP must meet the DOT 7A standards and be filtered. Additionally, as the TRUPACT-III/Standard Large Box loads and unloads from the end of the shipping cask, the proposed modification will add horizontal waste handling techniques to WIPP's vertical CH TRU waste handling operations. Another major focus will be the Hazardous Waste Facility Permit reapplication. The WIPP received its HWFP in October of 1999 for a term of ten years. The regulations and the HWFP require that a new permit application be submitted 180-days before the expiration date of the HWFP. At that time, the WIPP will request only one significant change, the permitting of Panel 8 to receive TRU mixed waste. (author)

Kehrman, R.F.; Most, W.A. [Washington Regulatory and Environmental Services, Carlsbad, New Mexico (United States)

2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

2

Permits for Electricity Generating Facilities (Iowa)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

All applicants for conditional permits for electricity generating facilities must provide opportunity for public participation and quantify expected air emissions from the proposed project.

3

Solid Waste Disposal Facilities (Massachusetts) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Solid Waste Disposal Facilities (Massachusetts) Solid Waste Disposal Facilities (Massachusetts) Solid Waste Disposal Facilities (Massachusetts) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Fed. Government Fuel Distributor Industrial Installer/Contractor Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Municipal/Public Utility Rural Electric Cooperative State/Provincial Govt Transportation Tribal Government Utility Program Info State Massachusetts Program Type Siting and Permitting Provider Department of Environmental Protection 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 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection as well as the Department of Public

4

Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application, 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application documentation consists of both Part A and a Part B permit application documentation. An explanation of the Part A revisions associated with this treatment and storage unit, including the current revision, is provided at the beginning of the Part A section. Once the initial Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit is issued, the following process will be used. As final, certified treatment, storage, and/or disposal unit-specific documents are developed, and completeness notifications are made by the US Environmental Protection Agency and the Washington State Department of Ecology, additional unit-specific permit conditions will be incorporated into the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit through the permit modification process. All treatment, storage, and/or disposal units that are included in the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application will operate under interim status until final status conditions for these units are incorporated into the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit. The Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application, 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility contains information current as of May 1, 1993.

Not Available

1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

5

ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND DISPOSAL OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS AT A RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY  

SciTech Connect

The use of hazardous waste disposal facilities permitted under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (''RCRA'') to dispose of low concentration and exempt radioactive materials is a cost-effective option for government and industry waste generators. The hazardous and PCB waste disposal facility operated by US Ecology Idaho, Inc. near Grand View, Idaho provides environmentally sound disposal services to both government and private industry waste generators. The Idaho facility is a major recipient of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers FUSRAP program waste and received permit approval to receive an expanded range of radioactive materials in 2001. The site has disposed of more than 300,000 tons of radioactive materials from the federal government during the past five years. This paper presents the capabilities of the Grand View, Idaho hazardous waste facility to accept radioactive materials, site-specific acceptance criteria and performance assessment, radiological safety and environmental monitoring program information.

Romano, Stephen; Welling, Steven; Bell, Simon

2003-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

6

Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application, general information portion  

SciTech Connect

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).

Hays, C.B.

1998-05-19T23:59:59.000Z

7

Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application, PUREX storage tunnels  

SciTech Connect

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. The scope of the Unit-Specific Portion is limited to Part B permit application documentation submitted for individual, operating treatment, storage, and/or disposal units, such as the PUREX Storage Tunnels (this document, DOE/RL-90-24). 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 US Environmental Protection Agency (40 Code of Federal Regulations 270), with additional information needs defined by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments and revisions of Washington Administrative Code 173-303. For ease of reference, the Washington State Department of Ecology alpha-numeric section identifiers from the permit application guidance documentation (Ecology 1996) follow, in brackets, the chapter headings and subheadings. A checklist indicating where information is contained in the PUREX Storage Tunnels permit application documentation, in relation to the Washington State Department of Ecology guidance, is located in the Contents Section. 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 the General Information Portion). Wherever appropriate, the PUREX Storage Tunnels permit application documentation makes cross-reference to the General Information Portion, rather than duplicating text. Information provided in this PUREX Storage Tunnels permit application documentation is current as of April 1997.

Price, S.M.

1997-09-08T23:59:59.000Z

8

Permitting of Wind Energy Facilities: A Handbook  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

This handbook has been written for individuals and groups involved in evaluating wind projects: decision-makers and agency staff at all levels of government, wind developers, interested parties and the public. Its purpose is to help stakeholders make permitting wind facility decisions in a manner which assures necessary environmental protection and responds to public needs.

NWCC Siting Work Group

2002-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

9

New Facility Will Test Disposal Cell Cover Renovation | Department...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Services Ecosystem Management Team New Facility Will Test Disposal Cell Cover Renovation New Facility Will Test Disposal Cell Cover Renovation Calibration Facilities...

10

Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility at Idaho National Laboratory ...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility at Idaho National Laboratory Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility at Idaho National Laboratory Full Document and Summary Versions are available for...

11

Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility at Idaho National Laboratory ...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Facility at Idaho National Laboratory Summary - Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) at Idaho National Laboratory More Documents & Publications Environmental Management...

12

GRR/Section 18-AK-c - Waste Disposal Permit Process | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AK-c - Waste Disposal Permit Process AK-c - Waste Disposal Permit Process < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-AK-c - Waste Disposal Permit Process 18AKC - WasteDisposalPermitProcess (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations & Policies AS 46.03.110 Waste Disposal Permit Regulations 18 AAC 60.200 et seq Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18AKC - WasteDisposalPermitProcess (1).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) is responsible

13

WIPP Documents - Hazardous Waste Facility Permit (RCRA)  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

of Energy to manage, store, and dispose of contact-handled and remote-handled transuranic mixed waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Mixed waste contains radioactive and...

14

GRR/Section 18-NV-c - Waste Disposal Permit | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

NV-c - Waste Disposal Permit NV-c - Waste Disposal Permit < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-NV-c - Waste Disposal Permit 18NVCWasteDisposalPermit.pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Nevada Division of Environmental Protection Regulations & Policies Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18NVCWasteDisposalPermit.pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative Within the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection in Nevada, the Bureau of Waste Management (BWM) operates a permitting and compliance

15

Maintenance Guide for DOE Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

Maintenance Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Low-Level Waste Disposal  Facility Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses

16

Upgrades to meet LANL SF, 121-2011, hazardous waste facility permit requirements  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Members of San IIdefonso have requested information from LANL regarding implementation of the revision to LANL's Hazardous Waste Facility Permit (the RCRA Permit). On January 26, 2011, LANL staff from the Waste Disposition Project and the Environmental Protection Division will provide a status update to Pueblo members at the offices of the San IIdefonso Department of Environmental and Cultural Preservation. The Waste Disposition Project presentation will focus on upgrades and improvements to LANL waste management facilities at TA-50 and TA-54. The New Mexico Environment Department issued LANL's revised Hazardous Waste Facility permit on November 30, 2010 with a 30-day implementation period. The Waste Disposition Project manages and operates four of LANL's permitted facilities; the Waste Characterization, Reduction and Repackaging Facility (WCRRF) at TA-SO, and Area G, Area L and the Radioassay and Nondestructive Testing facility (RANT) at TA-54. By implementing a combination of permanent corrective action activities and shorter-term compensatory measures, WDP was able to achieve functional compliance on December 30, 2010 with new Permit requirements at each of our facilities. One component of WOP's mission at LANL is centralized management and disposition of the Laboratory's hazardous and mixed waste. To support this mission objective, WOP has undertaken a project to upgrade our facilities and equipment to achieve fully compliant and efficient waste management operations. Upgrades to processes, equipment and facilities are being designed to provide defense-in-depth beyond the minimum, regulatory requirements where worker safety and protection of the public and the environment are concerned. Upgrades and improvements to enduring waste management facilities and operations are being designed so as not to conflict with future closure activities at Material Disposal Area G and Material Disposal Area L.

French, Sean B [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Johns - Hughes, Kathryn W [Los Alamos National Laboratory

2011-01-21T23:59:59.000Z

17

DOE Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility DOE Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility DOE Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility June 6, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis The Waste Control Specialists Federal Waste Disposal Facility in Andrews, Texas. The Waste Control Specialists Federal Waste Disposal Facility in Andrews, Texas. ANDREWS, Texas - DOE officials participated in an event today to celebrate the opening of the first commercial disposal facility of its kind. EM Senior Advisor Dave Huizenga and several other federal, state and local officials attended the event at Waste Control Specialists (WCS) in Andrews and witnessed the first container being placed in the new state-of-the-art facility. WCS is a waste processing and disposal company. "I am proud to be here today to celebrate this historic event. We

18

DOE Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility DOE Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility June 6, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis The Waste Control Specialists Federal Waste Disposal Facility in Andrews, Texas. The Waste Control Specialists Federal Waste Disposal Facility in Andrews, Texas. ANDREWS, Texas - DOE officials participated in an event today to celebrate the opening of the first commercial disposal facility of its kind. EM Senior Advisor Dave Huizenga and several other federal, state and local officials attended the event at Waste Control Specialists (WCS) in Andrews and witnessed the first container being placed in the new state-of-the-art facility. WCS is a waste processing and disposal company. "I am proud to be here today to celebrate this historic event. We

19

DOE Permitting Hydrogen Facilities: Hydrogen Fueling Stations  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Stations Stations Public-use hydrogen fueling stations are very much like gasoline ones. In fact, sometimes, hydrogen and gasoline cars can be fueled at the same station. These stations offer self-service pumps, convenience stores, and other services in high-traffic locations. Photo of a Shell fueling station showing the site convenience store and hydrogen and gasoline fuel pumps. This fueling station in Washington, D.C., provides drivers with both hydrogen and gasoline fuels Many future hydrogen fueling stations will be expansions of existing fueling stations. These facilities will offer hydrogen pumps in addition to gasoline or natural gas pumps. Other hydrogen fueling stations will be "standalone" operations. These stations will be designed and constructed to

20

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Regional Facility Act Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Regional Facility Act (Pennsylvania) Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Regional Facility Act (Pennsylvania) < Back Eligibility Utility Investor-Owned Utility State/Provincial Govt Industrial Construction Municipal/Public Utility Local Government Program Info State Pennsylvania Program Type Environmental Regulations Fees 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 Resources funds to be utilized for disposal facilities. This act ensures that nuclear facilities and the Department comply with the Low-Level Radioactive Disposal Act. The regional facility siting fund is used for reimbursement of expenses

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


21

Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group Manual  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

This Revision 3 of the Low-Level Waste Disposal  Facility Federal Review Group (LFRG) Manual was prepared primarily to include review criteria for the review of transuranic (TRU) waste disposal...

22

Composite analysis E-area vaults and saltstone disposal facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Cook, J.R.

1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

23

Summary - Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) at Idaho National...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

INL, Idaho EM Project: Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility ETR Report Date: December 2007 ETR-10 United States Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) External...

24

Summary - Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) at Idaho National Laboratory  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

INL, Idaho INL, Idaho EM Project: Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility ETR Report Date: December 2007 ETR-10 United States Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) External Technical Review of Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) At Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Why DOE-EM Did This Review The Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) is a land disposal facility that is used to dispose of LLW and MLW generated from remedial activities at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). Components of the ICDF include a landfill that is used for disposal of solid waste, an evaporation pond that is used to manage leachate from the landfill and other aqueous wastes (8.3 million L capacity), and a staging and treatment facility. The ICDF is located near the southwest

25

OAK RIDGE CERCLA DISPOSAL FACILITY ACHIEVES SAFETY MILESTONE | Department  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

OAK RIDGE CERCLA DISPOSAL FACILITY ACHIEVES SAFETY MILESTONE OAK RIDGE CERCLA DISPOSAL FACILITY ACHIEVES SAFETY MILESTONE OAK RIDGE CERCLA DISPOSAL FACILITY ACHIEVES SAFETY MILESTONE December 1, 2010 - 12:00pm Addthis OAK RIDGE CERCLA DISPOSAL FACILITY ACHIEVES SAFETY MILESTONE Oak Ridge, TN - The Environmental Management Waste Management Facility (EMWMF) provides the onsite disposal capability for the majority of cleanup-generated wastes on the Oak Ridge Reservation. EMWMF has continued a long-standing pattern of safe, complaint operations with 3,000 days without a lost workday case since operations commenced on May 28, 2002. The EMWMF has placed 1.5 million tons of waste and fill in the facility. The EMWMF receives waste from many Oak Ridge cleanup projects, including American Recovery and Reinvestment Act-funded projects, multiple

26

Lessons Learned from Radioactive Waste Storage and Disposal Facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The safety of radioactive waste disposal facilities and the decommissioning of complex sites may be predicated on the performance of engineered and natural barriers. For assessing the safety of a waste disposal facility or a decommissioned site, a performance assessment or similar analysis is often completed. The analysis is typically based on a site conceptual model that is developed from site characterization information, observations, and, in many cases, expert judgment. Because waste disposal facilities are sited, constructed, monitored, and maintained, a fair amount of data has been generated at a variety of sites in a variety of natural systems. This paper provides select examples of lessons learned from the observations developed from the monitoring of various radioactive waste facilities (storage and disposal), and discusses the implications for modeling of future waste disposal facilities that are yet to be constructed or for the development of dose assessments for the release of decommissioning sites. Monitoring has been and continues to be performed at a variety of different facilities for the disposal of radioactive waste. These include facilities for the disposal of commercial low-level waste (LLW), reprocessing wastes, and uranium mill tailings. Many of the lessons learned and problems encountered provide a unique opportunity to improve future designs of waste disposal facilities, to improve dose modeling for decommissioning sites, and to be proactive in identifying future problems. Typically, an initial conceptual model was developed and the siting and design of the disposal facility was based on the conceptual model. After facility construction and operation, monitoring data was collected and evaluated. In many cases the monitoring data did not comport with the original site conceptual model, leading to additional investigation and changes to the site conceptual model and modifications to the design of the facility. The following cases are discussed: commercial LLW disposal facilities; uranium mill tailings disposal facilities; and reprocessing waste storage and disposal facilities. The observations developed from the monitoring and maintenance of waste disposal and storage facilities provide valuable lessons learned for the design and modeling of future waste disposal facilities and the decommissioning of complex sites.

Esh, David W.; Bradford, Anna H. [U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Two White Flint North, MS T7J8, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852 (United States)

2008-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

27

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

SciTech Connect

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.

Cook, J.R.

2000-03-13T23:59:59.000Z

28

On-Site Disposal Facility Inspection Report  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

8947.1 8947.1 09/13 On-Site Disposal Facility Inspection Report September 2013 6319-D6242 8947.2 09/13 East Face Cell 1 West Face Cell 1 6319D-6208 6319D-6231 8947.3 09/13 North Face Cell 1 North Drainage (looking west) 6319D-6206 6319D-6205 8947.4 09/13 East Face Cell 2 West Face Cell 2 6319D-6230 6319D-6209 8947.5 09/13 East Face Cell 3 West Face Cell 3 6319D-6229 6319D-6210 8947.6 09/13 East Face Cell 4 West Face Cell 4 6319D-6227 6319D-62111 8947.7 09/13 East Face Cell 5 West Face Cell 5 6319D-6226 6319D-6213 8947.8 09/13 East Face Cell 6 6319D-6214 6319D-6225 West Face Cell 6 8947.9 09/13 East Face Cell 7 6319D-6215 6319D-6223 West Face Cell 7 8947.10 09/13 East Face Cell 8 6319D-6217 6319D-6220 West Face Cell 8 8947.11 09/13 South Face Cell 8 6319D-6219 6319D-6218 South Drainage (looking west) 8947.12 09/13

29

2009 Performance Assessment for the Saltstone Disposal Facility |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Performance Assessment for the Saltstone Disposal Facility Performance Assessment for the Saltstone Disposal Facility 2009 Performance Assessment for the Saltstone Disposal Facility This Performance Assessment (PA) for the Savannah River Site (SRS) was prepared to support the operation and eventual closure of the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF). This PA was prepared to demonstrate compliance with the pertinent requirements of the United States Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1, Change 1, Radioactive Waste Management, Chapter IV, and Title 10, of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 61, Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste, Subpart C as required by the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2005, Section 3116. [DOE O 435.1-1, 10 CFR 61, NDAA_3116]

30

Permits  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Other Permits Permits We are committed to meeting our environmental requirements for air, waste, and water quality permitting. Contact Environmental Communication & Public...

31

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

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

NSTec Environmental Programs

2010-09-14T23:59:59.000Z

32

Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group Manual  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

LEVEL WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY FEDERAL REVIEW GROUP MANUAL REVISION 3 JUNE 2008 (This page intentionally left blank) Low-Level JVllsfe Disposal Fllcili~l' Federal Review Group il1allUlli Revision 3, June 200S Concurrence The Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group Manual, Revision 3, is approved for use as of the most recent date below. Date Chair, Low-Level Waste Disposal Federal Review Group Andrew WalJo, 1II Deputy Director, Otlice of Nuclear Safety, Quality Assurance, and Environment Department of Energy OHlce of Health, Safety, and Security e C. WilJiams Associate Administrator for Infrastructure and Environment National Nuclear Security Administration Low-Level 'Vaste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group J1aJll/ai

33

Impacts of Secondary Waste on Near-Surface Disposal Facility ...  

Impacts of Secondary Waste on Near-Surface Disposal Facility at Hanford ... DOE low-level and mixed low-level waste. 1E-06 1E-05 1E-04 1E-03 1E-02 ...

34

200 Area treated effluent disposal facility operational test report  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This document reports the results of the 200 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility (200 Area TEDF) operational testing activities. These completed operational testing activities demonstrated the functional, operational and design requirements of the 200 Area TEDF have been met.

Crane, A.F.

1995-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

35

Disposal Facility Reaches 15-Million-Ton Milestone  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

RICHLAND, Wash. – EM’s Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) — a massive landfill for low-level radioactive and hazardous waste at the Hanford site — has achieved a major cleanup milestone.

36

Environmental Permitting of a Low-BTU Coal Gasification Facility  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

The high price of natural gas and fuel oil for steam/power generation has alerted industry's decision makers to potentially more economical ways to provide the needed energy. Low-Btu fuel gas produced from coal appears to be an attractive alternate that merits serious consideration since only relatively small modifications to the existing oil or gas burner system may be required, and boiler derating can be minimized. The environmental permitting and planning process for a low-Btu coal gasification facility needs to address those items that are not only unique to the gasification process itself, but also items generic to conventional firing of coal. This paper will discuss the environmental data necessary for permitting a low-Btu gasification facility located in the State of Louisiana. An actual case study for a 500,000 lb/hr natural gas-fired process steam plant being converted to low Btu gas will be presented. Typical air, water and solid waste effluents that must be considered will also be described.

Murawczyk, C.; Stewart, J. T.

1983-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

37

Readiness Assessment Plan, Hanford 200 areas treated effluent disposal facilities  

SciTech Connect

This Readiness Assessment Plan documents Liquid Effluent Facilities review process used to establish the scope of review, documentation requirements, performance assessment, and plant readiness to begin operation of the Treated Effluent Disposal system in accordance with DOE-RLID-5480.31, Startup and Restart of Facilities Operational Readiness Review and Readiness Assessments.

Ulmer, F.J.

1995-02-06T23:59:59.000Z

38

GRR/Elements/18-CA-c.1 - What Level of Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Does  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Elements/18-CA-c.1 - What Level of Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Does GRR/Elements/18-CA-c.1 - What Level of Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Does the Facility Require < GRR‎ | Elements Jump to: navigation, search Edit 18-CA-b.1 - What Level of Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Does the Facility Require California employs a five-tier permitting program which imposes regulatory requirements matching the degree of risk posed by the level of hazardous waste: * The Full Permit Tier includes all facilities requiring a RCRA permit as well as selected non-RCRA activities under Title 22 California Code of Regulations. * The Standardized Permit Tier includes facilities that manage waste not regulated by RCRA, but regulated as hazardous waste in California. * Onsite Treatment Permits (3-Tiered) includes onsite treatment of non-RCRA waste regulated in California.

39

PERMIT ATTACHMENT DD Contingency Plan – Section 10 of the Permit Application; and Hanford Test and Demonstration Facility Contingency Plan – Appendix C of the Permit Application  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

The following listed documents are hereby incorporated, in their entirety, by reference into this Permit. Some of the documents are excerpts from the Permittees ’ DBVS Facility Research, Development, and Demonstration Dangerous Waste Permit Application dated May 10, 2004 (document #04-TED-036); hereafter called the Permit Application. Ecology has, as deemed necessary, modified specific language in the attachments. These modifications are described in the permit conditions (Parts I through V), and thereby supersede the language of the attachment. These incorporated attachments are enforceable conditions of this Permit, as modified by the

unknown authors

2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

40

Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility at Idaho National Laboratory  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Idaho Operations Idaho Operations Review of the Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) at Idaho National Laboratory By Craig H. Benson, PhD, PE; William H. Albright, PhD; David P. Ray, PE, and John Smegal Sponsored by: The Office of Engineering and Technology (EM-20) 5 December 2007 i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE 1 3. LINE OF INQUIRY NO. 1 2 3.1 Containerized Waste 2 3.2 Compacted Mixtures of Soil and Debris 3 3.3 Final Cover Settlement 3 3.4 Leachate Collection System and Leak Detection Zone Monitoring 4 4. LINE OF INQUIRY NO. 2 4 5. LINE OF INQUIRY NO. 3 5 6. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 6 7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 6 FIGURES 7 1 1. INTRODUCTION The Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) is a land disposal facility authorized by the US

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


41

RCRA Permit for a Hazardous Waste Management Facility Permit Number NEV HW0101 Annual Summary/Waste Minimization Report Calendar Year 2011  

SciTech Connect

This report summarizes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identification number of each generator from which the Permittee received a waste stream; a description and quantity of each waste stream in tons and cubic feet received at the facility; the method of treatment, storage, and/or disposal for each waste stream; a description of the waste minimization efforts undertaken; a description of the changes in volume and toxicity of waste actually received; any unusual occurrences; and the results of tank integrity assessments. This Annual Summary/Waste Minimization Report is prepared in accordance with Section 2.13.3 of Permit Number NEV HW0101.

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2012-02-16T23:59:59.000Z

42

RCRA Permit for a Hazardous Waste Management Facility Permit Number NEV HW0101 Annual Summary/Waste Minimization Report Calendar Year 2012, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect

This report summarizes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identification number of each generator from which the Permittee received a waste stream, a description and quantity of each waste stream in tons and cubic feet received at the facility, the method of treatment, storage, and/or disposal for each waste stream, a description of the waste minimization efforts undertaken, a description of the changes in volume and toxicity of waste actually received, any unusual occurrences, and the results of tank integrity assessments. This Annual Summary/Waste Minimization Report is prepared in accordance with Section 2.13.3 of Permit Number NEV HW0101, issued 10/17/10.

,

2013-02-21T23:59:59.000Z

43

Integrated Disposal Facility FY2011 Glass Testing Summary Report  

SciTech Connect

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.

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

44

Maintenance Guide for DOE Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

4 4 G Approved: XX-XX-XX IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE for use with DOE M 435.1-1 Maintenance Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DOE G 435.1-4 i (and ii) DRAFT XX-XX-XX LLW Maintenance Guide Revision 0, XX-XX-XX Maintenance Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.1 Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.3 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.3.1 Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

45

200 Area treated effluent disposal facility operational test specification  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This document identifies the test specification and test requirements for the 200 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility (200 Area TEDF) operational testing activities. These operational testing activities, when completed, demonstrate the functional, operational and design requirements of the 200 Area TEDF have been met.

Crane, A.F.

1995-01-12T23:59:59.000Z

46

200 Area treated effluent disposal facility operational test specification  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This document identifies the test specification and test requirements for the 200 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility (200 Area TEDF) operational testing activities. These operational testing activities, when completed, demonstrate the functional, operational and design requirements of the 200 Area TEDF have been met.

Crane, A.F.

1995-02-02T23:59:59.000Z

47

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

SciTech Connect

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.

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

1994-12-12T23:59:59.000Z

48

FINAL DETERMINATION, CLASS 2 MODIFICATION REQUEST WIPP HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY PERMIT  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Dear Dr. Moody and Mr. Sharif: The New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) hereby approves with changes the permit modification request (PMR) to the WIPP Hazardous Waste Facility Permit as submitted to the Hazardous Waste Bureau in the following document:

Bill Richardson; Diane Denish; Ron Curry; Sarah Cottrell; David Moody Manager; Farok Sharif

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

49

GRR/Section 18-MT-b - Hazardous Waste Facility Permit | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 18-MT-b - Hazardous Waste Facility Permit GRR/Section 18-MT-b - Hazardous Waste Facility Permit < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-MT-b - Hazardous Waste Facility Permit 18MTBHazardousWasteFacilityPermit.pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Montana Department of Environmental Quality Regulations & Policies Montana Code Annotated Title 75, Chapter 10, Part 4 Administrative Rules of Montana Title 17, Chapter 53 40 CFR 260 through 40 CFR 270 40 CFR 124 Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18MTBHazardousWasteFacilityPermit.pdf 18MTBHazardousWasteFacilityPermit.pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range.

50

Iraq nuclear facility dismantlement and disposal project (NDs Project).  

SciTech Connect

The Al Tuwaitha nuclear complex near Baghdad contains a number of facilities from Saddam Hussan's nuclear weapons program. Past military operations, lack of upkeep and looting have created an enormous radioactive waste problem at the Al Tuwaitha complex, which contains various, uncharacterized radioactive wastes, yellow cake, sealed radioactive sources, and contaminated metals that must be constantly guarded. Iraq has never had a radioactive waste disposal facility and the lack of a disposal facility means that ever increasing quantities of radioactive material must be held in guarded storage. The Iraq Nuclear Facility Dismantlement and Disposal Program (the NDs Program) has been initiated by the U.S. Department of State (DOS) to assist the Government of Iraq (GOI) in eliminating the threats from poorly controlled radioactive materials, while building human capacities so that the GOI can manage other environmental cleanups in their country. The DOS is funding the IAEA to provide technical assistance via Technical Cooperation projects. Program coordination will be provided by the DOS, consistent with GOI policies, and Sandia National Laboratories will be responsible for coordination of participants and waste management support. Texas Tech University will continue to provide in-country assistance, including radioactive waste characterization and the stand-up of the Iraq Nuclear Services Company. The GOI owns the problems in Iraq and will be responsible for implementation of the NDs Program.

Cochran, John Russell

2010-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

51

GRR/Section 14-OR-e - Water Pollution Control Facility Permit | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 14-OR-e - Water Pollution Control Facility Permit GRR/Section 14-OR-e - Water Pollution Control Facility Permit < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 14-OR-e - Water Pollution Control Facility Permit 14OREWaterPollutionControlFacilityPermit.pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Regulations & Policies OAR Division 45 Regulations Pertaining to NPDES and WPCF Permits Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 14OREWaterPollutionControlFacilityPermit.pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) issues Water

52

Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Waste Acceptance Criteria  

SciTech Connect

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.

W. Mahlon Heileson

2006-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

53

D11 WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES FOR TRANSURANIC WASTE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

10 CFR Ch. X (1-1-12 Edition) Pt. 1022 D11 WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES FOR TRANSURANIC WASTE Siting, construction or expansion, and op- eration of disposal facilities for transuranic (TRU) waste and TRU mixed waste (TRU waste also containing hazardous waste as designated in 40 CFR part 261). D12 INCINERATORS Siting, construction, and operation of in- cinerators, other than research and develop- ment incinerators or incinerators for non- hazardous solid waste (as designated in 40 CFR 261.4(b)). PART 1022-COMPLIANCE WITH FLOODPLAIN AND WETLAND EN- VIRONMENTAL REVIEW REQUIRE- MENTS Subpart A-General Sec. 1022.1 Background. 1022.2 Purpose and scope. 1022.3 Policy. 1022.4 Definitions. 1022.5 Applicability. 1022.6 Public inquiries. Subpart B-Procedures for Floodplain and

54

Operational Issues at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility at Hanford  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Hanford Operations Hanford Operations Evaluating Operational Issues at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility at Hanford By Craig H. Benson, PhD, PE; William H. Albright, PhD; and David P. Ray, PE Sponsored by: The Office of Engineering and Technology (EM-20) 17 June 2007 i TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv INTRODUCTION 1 BACKGROUND 1 Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility 1 Source of Concern 2 LINES OF INQUIRY 2 1. Validate Scope of Identified Problems 2 2. Assess Contractor Evaluation of the Elevated Leachate Level on the Landfill Liner 3 3. Evaluate Adequacy of Landfill Performance in View of the Discovered Falsified Compaction Data and Potential Leachate Level Problems 4

55

Format and Content Guide for DOE Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Closure Plans  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

Format and Content Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Closure Plans

56

DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program: Permitting Hydrogen Facilities Home  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Hydrogen Fueling Stations Telecommunication Fuel Cell Use Hazard and Risk Analysis U.S. Department of Energy Hydrogen Fueling Stations Telecommunication Fuel Cell Use Hazard and Risk Analysis U.S. Department of Energy The objective of this U.S. Department of Energy Hydrogen Permitting Web site is to help local permitting officials deal with proposed hydrogen fueling stations, fuel cell installations for telecommunications backup power, and other hydrogen projects. Resources for local permitting officials who are looking to address project proposals include current citations for hydrogen fueling stations and a listing of setback requirements on the Alternative Fuels & Advanced Vehicle Data Center Web site. In addition, this overview of telecommunications fuel cell use and an animation that demonstrates telecommunications site layout using hydrogen fuel cells for backup power should provide helpful

57

DOE Permitting Hydrogen Facilities: Using Fuel Cells for Backup...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

cells provide highly effective backup to power these facilities in event of electrical grid power outages. The telecommunications industry has expanded rapidly as mobile...

58

Integrated Disposal Facility FY2010 Glass Testing Summary Report  

SciTech Connect

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.

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

59

Low-level radioactive waste disposal facility closure  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

60

Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (Project W-296) Safety Assessment  

SciTech Connect

This Safety Assessment is based on information derived from the Conceptual Design Report for the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (DOE/RL 1994) and ancillary documentation developed during the conceptual design phase of Project W-296. The Safety Assessment has been prepared to support the Solid Waste Burial Ground Interim Safety Basis document. The purpose of the Safety Assessment is to provide an evaluation of the design to determine if the process, as proposed, will comply with US Department of Energy (DOE) Limits for radioactive and hazardous material exposures and be acceptable from an overall health and safety standpoint. The evaluation considered affects on the worker, onsite personnel, the public, and the environment.

Armstrong, D.L.

1994-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


61

Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Public Comments to Community Relations Plan  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Last saved on: 7/22/2011 Final CRP comment for June 2011 1 SECTION TEXT COMMENT POST? GENERAL COMMENTS N/A We urge the DOE, NNSA and LANL to establish a community calendar so that the various LANL organizations who are scheduling public meetings are aware of other community events, such as the public comment periods on various documents, including PMRs, semi-annual meetings (e.g., CMRR and storm water permit meetings), Northern New Mexico Citizens' Advisory Board meetings, RACER, New Mexico Community Foundation FEED meetings, tours, etc. Such a community calendar would be an efficient and effective way to reduce the back and forth about the need for extensions of time and requests to reschedule meetings. It

62

Disposal Facility Reaches 15-Million-Ton Milestone | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Disposal Facility Reaches 15-Million-Ton Milestone Disposal Facility Reaches 15-Million-Ton Milestone Disposal Facility Reaches 15-Million-Ton Milestone July 30, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis Matt McCormick, manager of the Richland Operations Office, commends a large group of Hanford workers for the 15-million-ton milestone at a public event at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. Matt McCormick, manager of the Richland Operations Office, commends a large group of Hanford workers for the 15-million-ton milestone at a public event at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. RICHLAND, Wash. - EM's Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) - a massive landfill for low-level radioactive and hazardous waste at the Hanford site - has achieved a major cleanup milestone. Since beginning operations in 1996, workers supporting the Richland

63

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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`.

Cook, J.R.

1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

64

Format and Content Guide for DOE Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

Format and Content Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses

65

Proposed On-Site Waste Disposal Facility (OSWDF) at the Portsmouth...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

2008 ETR-12 United States Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) External Technical Review of the Proposed On-Site Waste Disposal Facility (OSWDF)...

66

International low level waste disposal practices and facilities  

SciTech Connect

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

Nutt, W.M. (Nuclear Engineering Division)

2011-12-19T23:59:59.000Z

67

The WIPP is the nation's first geologic facility designed for permanent disposal of transuranic  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

The WIPP is the nation's first geologic facility designed for permanent disposal of transuranic, New Mexico to dispose of this waste. The TRU waste being disposed at the WIPP is packaged into drums-level waste and spent nuclear fuel. The WIPP has a total capacity of 6.2 million cubic feet of TRU waste

68

Hydrologic test plan for the Environmental Remediation Disposal Facility  

SciTech Connect

Hydrologic tests are planned at seven wells that will be drilled at the proposed Environmental Remediation Disposal Facility (ERDF). These wells are supporting hydrologic, geologic, and hydrochemical characterization at this new facility. Hydrologic testing will consist of instantaneous slug tests, slug interference tests, step-drawdown tests, and constant rate discharge tests (generally single-well). These test results and later groundwater monitoring data will be used to determine groundwater flow directions, flow rates, and the chemical makeup of the groundwater below the proposed ERDF. The seven wells will be drilled in two phases. In Phase I four wells will be drilled and tested: Two to the top of the uppermost aquifer (water table) and two as characterization boreholes to the top of basalt. The Phase I wells are located in the northern portion of the proposed ERDF site (699-32-72, 699-SDF-6, -7 and -8) (Figure 1). If Phase II drilling proceeds, the remaining three wells will be installed and tested (two deep and one shallow). A phased approach to drilling is warranted because of current uncertainty in the land use requirements at the proposed ERDF.

Swanson, L.C.

1993-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

69

Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Compliance Demonstration for DOE Order 435.1  

SciTech Connect

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.

Simonds, J.

2007-11-06T23:59:59.000Z

70

GRR/Section 18-CA-b - RCRA Process (Hazardous Waste Facility Permit) | Open  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

18-CA-b - RCRA Process (Hazardous Waste Facility Permit) 18-CA-b - RCRA Process (Hazardous Waste Facility Permit) < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-CA-b - RCRA Process (Hazardous Waste Facility Permit) 18CABRCRAProcess (2).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies California Environmental Protection Agency Department of Toxic Substances Control Regulations & Policies Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 40 CRF 261 Title 22, California Code of Regulations, Division 4.5 Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18CABRCRAProcess (2).pdf 18CABRCRAProcess (2).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative

71

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

BURBANK, D.A.

2000-08-31T23:59:59.000Z

72

Corrective action management unit application for the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Evans, G.C.

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

73

Performance assessment for a hypothetical low-level waste disposal facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Disposing of low-level waste (LLW) is a concern for many states throughout the United States. A common disposal method is below-grade concrete vaults. Performance assessment analyses make predictions of contaminant release, transport, ingestion, inhalation, or other routes of exposure, and the resulting doses for various disposal methods such as the below-grade concrete vaults. Numerous assumptions are required to simplify the processes associated with the disposal facility to make predictions feasible. In general, these assumptions are made conservatively so as to underestimate the performance of the facility. The objective of this report is to describe the methodology used in conducting a performance assessment for a hypothetical waste facility located in the northeastern United States using real data as much as possible. This report consists of the following: (a) a description of the disposal facility and site, (b) methods used to analyze performance of the facility, (c) the results of the analysis, and (d) the conclusions of this study.

Smith, C.S.; Rohe, M.J.; Ritter, P.D. [and others

1997-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

74

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

SciTech Connect

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.

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

2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

75

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

SciTech Connect

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.

Timothy Solack; Carol Mason

2012-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

76

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

SciTech Connect

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.

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

2008-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

77

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

2010-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

78

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

2010-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

79

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

SciTech Connect

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.

Boyd D. Christensen

2010-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

80

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Boyd D. Christensen

2010-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


81

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

MCLELLAN, G.W.

2007-02-07T23:59:59.000Z

82

The Effect of Congress' Mandate to Create Greater Efficiencies in the Characterization of Transuranic Waste through the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Hazardous Waste Facility Permit  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Effective December 1, 2003, the U.S. Congress directed the Department of Energy (DOE) to file a permit modification request with the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) to amend the Hazardous Waste Facility Permit (hereinafter 'the Permit') at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). This legislation, Section 311 of the 2004 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, was designed to increase efficiencies in Transuranic (TRU) waste characterization processes by focusing on only those activities necessary to characterize waste streams, while continuing to protect human health and the environment. Congressionally prescribed changes would impact DOE generator site waste characterization programs and waste disposal operations at WIPP. With this legislative impetus, in early 2004 the DOE and Washington TRU Solutions (WTS), co-permittee under the Permit, submitted a permit modification request to the NMED pursuant to Section 311. After a lengthy process, including extensive public and other stakeholder input, the NMED granted the Permittees' request in October 2006, as part of a modification authorizing disposal of Remote-Handled (RH) TRU waste at WIPP. In conclusion: Implementation of the Permit under the revised Section 311 provisions is still in its early stages. Data are limited, as noted above. In view of these limited data and fluctuations in waste feed due to varying factors, at the current time it is difficult to determine with accuracy the impacts of Section 311 on the costs of characterizing TRU waste. It is safe to say, however, that the there have been many positive impacts flowing from Section 311. The generator sites now have more flexibility in characterizing waste. Also, RH TRU waste is now being disposed at WIPP - which was not possible before the 2006 Permit modification. As previously noted, the RH modification was approved at the same time as the Section 311 modification. Had the Section 311 changes not been implemented, RH TRU waste may not have been successfully permitted for disposal at WIPP. Changes made pursuant to Section 311 helped to facilitate approval of the proposed RH TRU modifications. For example, the three scenarios for use in AK Sufficiency Determination Requests, described herein, are essential to securing approval of some RH TRU waste streams for eventual disposal at WIPP. Thus, even if characterization rates do not increase significantly, options for disposal of RH TRU waste, which may not have been possible without Section 311, are now available and the TRU waste disposal mission is being accomplished as mandated by Congress in the LWA. Also, with the Section 311 modification, the Permittees commenced room-based VOC monitoring in the WIPP repository, which is also a positive impact of Section 311. Permit changes pursuant to Section 311 were a good beginning, but much more is need to encourage more efficient methodologies in waste characterization activities for TRU mixed waste destined for WIPP. Although the Permittees now have more flexibility in characterizing waste for disposal at WIPP, the processes are still lengthy, cumbersome, and paper-intensive. As the generator sites continue to characterize waste under Section 311, more data will likely be compiled and evaluated to assess the longer term cost and technical impacts of Section 311. Also, further refinements in TRU waste characterization requirements through Permit modifications are likely in future years to eliminate, improve, and clarify remaining unnecessary and redundant Permit provisions. Continuous improvements to the TRU waste characterization program are bound to occur, resulting in even greater efficiencies in the characterization and ultimate disposal of TRU waste. (authors)

Johnson, G.J. [Washington TRU Solutions, LLC, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Carlsbad, New Mexico (United States); Kehrman, R.F. [Washington Regulatory and Environmental Services, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Carlsbad, New Mexico (United States)

2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

83

The potential for criticality following disposal of uranium at low-level waste facilities: Uranium blended with soil  

SciTech Connect

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether or not fissile uranium in low-level-waste (LLW) facilities can be concentrated by hydrogeochemical processes to permit nuclear criticality. A team of experts in hydrology, geology, geochemistry, soil chemistry, and criticality safety was formed to develop achievable scenarios for hydrogeochemical increases in concentration of special nuclear material (SNM), and to use these scenarios to aid in evaluating the potential for nuclear criticality. The team`s approach was to perform simultaneous hydrogeochemical and nuclear criticality studies to (1) identify some achievable scenarios for uranium migration and concentration increase at LLW disposal facilities, (2) model groundwater transport and subsequent concentration increase via sorption or precipitation of uranium, and (3) evaluate the potential for nuclear criticality resulting from potential increases in uranium concentration over disposal limits. The analysis of SNM was restricted to {sup 235}U in the present scope of work. The outcome of the work indicates that criticality is possible given established regulatory limits on SNM disposal. However, a review based on actual disposal records of an existing site operation indicates that the potential for criticality is not a concern under current burial practices.

Toran, L.E.; Hopper, C.M.; Naney, M.T. [and others

1997-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

84

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

SciTech Connect

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.

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

1999-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

85

FAQ 27-Are there any currently-operating disposal facilities that can  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

currently-operating disposal facilities that can accept all of the depleted uranium oxide that would be generated from conversion of DOE's depleted UF6 inventory? currently-operating disposal facilities that can accept all of the depleted uranium oxide that would be generated from conversion of DOE's depleted UF6 inventory? Are there any currently-operating disposal facilities that can accept all of the depleted uranium oxide that would be generated from conversion of DOE's depleted UF6 inventory? With respect to available capacity, three sites could accept the entire inventory of depleted uranium oxide: the Department of Energy's (DOE's) Hanford site in Washington State, DOE's Nevada Test Site, or EnergySolution Clive, Utah Facility, a commercial site. Each of these sites would have sufficient capacity for either the grouted or ungrouted oxide forms of depleted uranium (for the two DOE sites, this also takes into account other projected disposal volumes through the year 2070).

86

Summary - Proposed On-Site Disposal Facility (OSDF) at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Paducah, KY Paducah, KY EM Project: On-Site Disposal Facility ETR Report Date: August 2008 ETR-16 United States Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) External Technical Review of the Proposed On-Site Disposal Facility(OSDF) at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant Why DOE-EM Did This Review The Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant (PGDP) is an active uranium enrichment facility that was placed on the National Priorities List. DOE is required to remediate the PGDP in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). DOE is evaluating alternatives to dispose of waste generated from the remedial activities at the PGDP. One option is to construct an on-site disposal facility (OSDF) meeting the CERCLA requirements.

87

300 Area treated effluent disposal facility operating specifications document  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

These specifications deal with the release of treated water into the Columbia River via the TEDF submerged outfall. Specific limits are set for contaminants to be discharged in NPDES permit WA-002591-7. This section contains the operating ranges that will be used to best meet the permit limits.

Olander, A.R.

1994-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

88

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

89

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

SciTech Connect

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.

Jordan, J.; Flach, G.

2012-03-29T23:59:59.000Z

90

Disposal of personal property from ERDA facilities being decommissioned  

SciTech Connect

Problem areas which should be considered early in planning the decommissioning of a facility are pointed out. (LK)

French, J.D.

1975-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

91

The performance assessment process for DOE low-level waste disposal facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Safety of the low-level waste disposal facilities, as well as al US DOE facilities, is a primary criterion in their design and operation. Safety of low-level waste disposal facilities is evaluated from two perspectives. Operational safety is evaluated based on the perceived level of hazard of the operation. The safety evaluations vary from simple safety assessments to very complex safety analysis reports, depending on the degree of hazard associated with the facility operation. Operational requirements for the Department's low-level waste disposal facilities, including long-term safety are contained in DOE Order 5820.2A, Radioactive Waste Management (1). This paper will focus on the process of conducting long-term performance analyses rather than on operational safety analysis.

Wilhite, E.L.

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

92

The performance assessment process for DOE low-level waste disposal facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Safety of the low-level waste disposal facilities, as well as al US DOE facilities, is a primary criterion in their design and operation. Safety of low-level waste disposal facilities is evaluated from two perspectives. Operational safety is evaluated based on the perceived level of hazard of the operation. The safety evaluations vary from simple safety assessments to very complex safety analysis reports, depending on the degree of hazard associated with the facility operation. Operational requirements for the Department`s low-level waste disposal facilities, including long-term safety are contained in DOE Order 5820.2A, Radioactive Waste Management (1). This paper will focus on the process of conducting long-term performance analyses rather than on operational safety analysis.

Wilhite, E.L.

1992-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

93

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  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

NSTec Environmental Programs

2010-10-04T23:59:59.000Z

94

File:Permitting of Wind Energy Facilities 2002.pdf | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

of Wind Energy Facilities 2002.pdf of Wind Energy Facilities 2002.pdf Jump to: navigation, search File File history File usage File:Permitting of Wind Energy Facilities 2002.pdf Size of this preview: 463 × 599 pixels. Other resolution: 464 × 600 pixels. Go to page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 Go! next page → next page → Full resolution ‎(1,275 × 1,650 pixels, file size: 1.93 MB, MIME type: application/pdf, 58 pages) National Wind Coordinating Collaborative: Permitting of Wind Energy Facilities Source: http://www.nationalwind.org/asset.aspx?AssetId=185 File history Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time. Date/Time Thumbnail Dimensions User Comment

95

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Boyd D. Christensen

2012-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

96

Septage Disposal, Licensure (Montana)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

This statute describes licensing requirements for septage disposal, and addresses land disposal and processing facilities.

97

Proposed On-Site Waste Disposal Facility (OSWDF) at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

OH OH EM Project: On-Site Disposal Facility ETR Report Date: February 2008 ETR-12 United States Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) External Technical Review of the Proposed On-Site Waste Disposal Facility (OSWDF) at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant Why DOE-EM Did This Review The On-Site Waste Disposal Facility (OSWDF) is proposed for long-term containment of contaminated materials from the planned Decontamination and Decommissioning (D&D) activities at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant. Acceptable performance of the proposed OSWDF will depend on interactions between engineered landfill features and operations methods that recognize the unique characteristics of the waste stream and site-

98

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Program Management » Compliance » Low-Level Waste Program Management » Compliance » Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group (LFRG) Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group (LFRG) The Office of Environmental Management (EM) Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group (LFRG) was established to fulfill the requirements contained in Section I.2.E(1)(a) of the Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and exercised by the senior managers of EM. The LFRG assists EM senior managers in the review of documentation that supports the approval of performance assessments and composite analyses or appropriate Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)documents as described in Section II of the LFRG Charter. Through its efforts, the LFRG supports the issuance

99

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

100

Format and Content Guide for DOE Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

2 2 G Approved: XX-XX-XX IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE for use with DOE M 435.1-1 Format and Content Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DOE G 435.1-2 i DRAFT XX-XX-XX LLW PA and CA Format and Content Guide Revision 0, XX-XX-XX Format and Content Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses CONTENTS List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v List of Acronyms and Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v PART A: INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


101

Radiological performance assessment for the E-Area Vaults Disposal Facility  

SciTech Connect

This report is the first revision to ``Radiological Performance Assessment for the E-Area Vaults Disposal Facility, Revision 0'', which was issued in April 1994 and received conditional DOE approval in September 1994. The title of this report has been changed to conform to the current name of the facility. The revision incorporates improved groundwater modeling methodology, which includes a large data base of site specific geotechnical data, and special Analyses on disposal of cement-based wasteforms and naval wastes, issued after publication of Revision 0.

Cook, J.R.

2000-04-11T23:59:59.000Z

102

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

SciTech Connect

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.

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

103

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

104

Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Compliance Demonstration for DOE Order 435.1  

SciTech Connect

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.

J. Simonds

2006-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

105

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

2012-04-17T23:59:59.000Z

106

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Peggy Hinman

2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

107

Development of high integrity, maximum durability concrete structures for LLW disposal facilities  

SciTech Connect

A number of disposal facilities for Low-Level Radioactive Wastes have been planned for the Savannah River Site. Design has been completed for disposal vaults for several waste classifications and construction is nearly complete or well underway on some facilities. Specific design criteria varies somewhat for each waste classification. All disposal units have been designed as below-grade concrete vaults, although the majority will be above ground for many years before being encapsulated with earth at final closure. Some classes of vaults have a minimum required service life of 100 years. All vaults utilize a unique blend of cement, blast furnace slag and pozzolan. The design synthesizes the properties of the concrete mix with carefully planned design details and construction methodologies to (1) eliminate uncontrolled cracking; (2) minimize leakage potential; and (3) maximize durability. The first of these vaults will become operational in 1992. 9 refs.

Taylor, W.P. [Main (Charles T.), Inc., Charlotte, NC (United States)

1992-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

108

Development of high integrity, maximum durability concrete structures for LLW disposal facilities  

SciTech Connect

A number of disposal facilities for Low-Level Radioactive Wastes have been planned for the Savannah River Site. Design has been completed for disposal vaults for several waste classifications and construction is nearly complete or well underway on some facilities. Specific design criteria varies somewhat for each waste classification. All disposal units have been designed as below-grade concrete vaults, although the majority will be above ground for many years before being encapsulated with earth at final closure. Some classes of vaults have a minimum required service life of 100 years. All vaults utilize a unique blend of cement, blast furnace slag and pozzolan. The design synthesizes the properties of the concrete mix with carefully planned design details and construction methodologies to (1) eliminate uncontrolled cracking; (2) minimize leakage potential; and (3) maximize durability. The first of these vaults will become operational in 1992. 9 refs.

Taylor, W.P. (Main (Charles T.), Inc., Charlotte, NC (United States))

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

109

Potential for and consequences of criticality resulting from hydrogeochemically concentrated fissile uranium blended with soil in low-level waste disposal facilities  

SciTech Connect

Evaluations were done to determine conditions that could permit nuclear criticality with fissile uranium in low-level-waste (LLW) facilities and to estimate potential radiation exposures to personnel if there were such an accident. Simultaneous hydrogeochemical and nuclear criticality studies were done (1) to identify some realistic scenarios for uranium migration and concentration increase at LLW disposal facilities, (2) to model groundwater transport and subsequent concentration via sorption or precipitation of uranium, (3) to evaluate the potential for nuclear criticality resulting from potential increases in uranium concentration over disposal limits, and (4) to estimate potential radiation exposures to personnel resulting from criticality consequences. The scope of the referenced work was restricted to uranium at an assumed 100 wt% {sup 235}U enrichment. Three outcomes of uranium concentration are possible: uranium concentration is increased to levels that do pose a criticality safety concern; uranium concentration is increased, but levels do not pose a criticality safety concern; or uranium concentration does not increase.

Hopper, C.M.; Parks, C.V.

1997-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

110

Class 1 Permit Modification Notification Addition of Structures within Technical Area 54, Area G, Pad 11, Dome 375 Los Alamos National Laboratory Hazardous Waste Facility Permit, July 2012  

SciTech Connect

The purpose of this letter is to notify the New Mexico Environment Department-Hazardous Waste Bureau (NMED-HWB) of a Class 1 Permit Modification to the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Hazardous Waste Facility Permit issued to the Department of Energy (DOE) and Los Alamos National Security, LLC (LANS) in November 2010. The modification adds structures to the container storage unit at Technical Area (TA) 54 Area G, Pad 11. Permit Section 3.1(3) requires that changes to the location of a structure that does not manage hazardous waste shall be changed within the Permit as a Class 1 modification without prior approval in accordance with Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40 (40 CFR), {section}270.42(a)(1). Structures have been added within Dome 375 located at TA-54, Area G, Pad 11 that will be used in support of waste management operations within Dome 375 and the modular panel containment structure located within Dome 375, but will not be used as waste management structures. The Class 1 Permit Modification revises Figure 36 in Attachment N, Figures; and Figure G.12-1 in Attachment G.12, Technical Area 54, Area G, Pad 11 Outdoor Container Storage Unit Closure Plan. Descriptions of the structures have also been added to Section A.4.2.9 in Attachment A, TA - Unit Descriptions; and Section 2.0 in Attachment G.12, Technical Area 54, Area G, Pad 11 Outdoor Container Storage Unit Closure Plan. Full description of the permit modification and the necessary changes are included in Enclosure 1. The modification has been prepared in accordance with 40 CFR {section}270.42(a)(l). This package includes this letter and an enclosure containing a description of the permit modification, text edits of the Permit sections, and the revised figures (collectively LA-UR-12-22808). Accordingly, a signed certification page is also enclosed. Three hard copies and one electronic copy of this submittal will be delivered to the NMED-HWB.

Vigil-Holterman, Luciana R. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Lechel, Robert A. [Los Alamos National Laboratory

2012-08-31T23:59:59.000Z

111

200 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility operational test specification. Revision 2  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This document identifies the test specification and test requirements for the 200 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility (200 Area TEDF) operational testing activities. These operational testing activities, when completed, demonstrate the functional, operational and design requirements of the 200 Area TEDF have been met. The technical requirements for operational testing of the 200 Area TEDF are defined by the test requirements presented in Appendix A. These test requirements demonstrate the following: pump station No.1 and associated support equipment operate both automatically and manually; pump station No. 2 and associated support equipment operate both automatically and manually; water is transported through the collection and transfer lines to the disposal ponds with no detectable leakage; the disposal ponds accept flow from the transfer lines with all support equipment operating as designed; and the control systems operate and status the 200 Area TEDF including monitoring of appropriate generator discharge parameters.

Crane, A.F.

1995-02-09T23:59:59.000Z

112

Summary - Operational Issues at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) at Hanford  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

ERDF ERDF ETR Report Date: June 2007 ETR-6 United States Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) External Technical Review of the Operational Issues at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility(ERDF) at Hanford Why DOE-EM Did This Review The ERDF is a large- scale disposal facility authorized to receive waste from Hanford cleanup activities. It contains double-lined cells with a RCRA Subtitle C- type liner and leachate collection system. By 2007, 6.8 million tons of waste with 39,000 Curies of radioactivity had been placed in the ERDF. In 2006, events occurred that affected the operation of the automatic leachate transfer pumps and a technician confessed to having not performed compaction tests and to falsification of the data.

113

Format and Content Guide for DOE Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Closure Plans  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

3 3 G Approved: XX-XX-XX IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE for use with DOE M 435.1-1 Format and Content Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Closure Plans U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DOE G 435.1-3 i DRAFT XX-XX-XX LLW Closure Plan Format and Content Guide Revision 0, XX-XX-XX Format and Content Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Closure Plans CONTENTS PART A: INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1. PURPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2. ORGANIZATION OF DOCUMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3. BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3.1 Closure Objectives and Relationship to Other Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3.2

114

Radiological performance assessment for the Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility  

SciTech Connect

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.

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

1992-12-18T23:59:59.000Z

115

Potential Radiological Doses From Groundwater Contaminated By The Saltstone Disposal Facility  

SciTech Connect

Assessments of radiological dose from usage of groundwater potentially contaminated by the Saltstone Disposal Facility (Z-Area) were made for a hypothetical future resident farmer. These assessments were made using the routine aqueous release model LADTAP XL (C), which is the model used for demonstrating liquid pathway dose compliance at SRS. The dose factors used in LADTAP XL (C) are those specified by the Department of Energy.

GERALD, JANNIK

2005-02-14T23:59:59.000Z

116

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

2012-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

117

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

118

Readiness plan, Hanford 300 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility: Revision 1  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The 300 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility (TEDF) is designed for the collection, treatment, and eventual disposal of liquid waste from the 300 Area Process Sewer (PS) system. The PS currently discharges water to the 300 Area Process Trenches. Facilities supported total 54 buildings, including site laboratories, inactive buildings, and support facilities. Effluent discharges to the process sewer from within these facilities include heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems, heat exchangers, floor drains, sinks, and process equipment. The wastewaters go through treatment processes that include iron coprecipitation, ion exchange and ultraviolet oxidation. The iron coprecipitation process is designed to remove general heavy metals. A series of gravity filters then complete the clarification process by removing suspended solids. Following the iron coprecipitation process is the ion exchange process, where a specific resin is utilized for the removal of mercury. The final main unit operation is the ultraviolet destruction process, which uses high power ultraviolet light and hydrogen peroxide to destroy organic molecules. The objective of this readiness plan is to provide the method by which line management will prepare for a Readiness Assessment (RA) of the TEDF. The self-assessment and RA will assess safety, health, environmental compliance and management readiness of the TEDF. This assessment will provide assurances to both WHC and DOE that the facility is ready to start-up and begin operation.

Storm, S.J.

1994-11-08T23:59:59.000Z

119

Report for the HWMA/RCRA Post Closure Permit for the INTEC Waste Calcining Facility at the INL Site  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Waste Calcining Facility (WCF) is located at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center. In 1998, the WCF was closed under an approved Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (HWMA/RCRA) Closure Plan. Vessels and spaces were grouted and then covered with a concrete cap. The Idaho Department of Environmental Quality issued a final HWMA/RCRA post-closure permit on September 15, 2003, with an effective date of October 16, 2003. This permit sets forth procedural requirements for groundwater characterization and monitoring, maintenance, and inspections of the WCF to ensure continued protection of human health and the environment. The post-closure permit also includes semiannual reporting requirements under Permit Conditions III.H. and I.U. These reporting requirements have been combined into this single semiannual report.

Idaho Cleanup Project

2006-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

120

Stormwater Permits (Vermont)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

Stormwater permits are required for the construction of a new generation facility, the reconstruction or expansion of a facility, the operation of a generation facility which discharges stormwater...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


121

Microsoft Word - 11-0702 _WRES 11-103 Att._ _Notification of Planned Change to the Permitted Facility_TRUPACT-III_  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

0, 2011 0, 2011 New Mexico Environment Department 2905 Rodeo Park Drive East, Building 1 Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505-6303 Subject: Notification of Planned Change to the Permitted Facility to Support TRUPACT-1I1 Dear Mr. Bearzi: The purpose of this letter is to notify you of planned changes to the permitted facility in accordance with the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Hazardous Waste Facility Permit, Part 1, General Permit Conditions, Section 1.7.11 .1, Reporting Planned Changes. The changes to the permitted facility are planned to occur during the current maintenance outage, and are described in the enclosed Notification of Planned Change to the Permitted Facility-Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. If you have any questions regarding this notification, please contact George Basabilvazo

122

Microsoft Word - 11-0702 _WRES 11-103 Att._ _Notification of Planned Change to the Permitted Facility_TRUPACT-III_  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

January 10, 2011 January 10, 2011 Mr. James Bearzi, Chief Hazardous Waste Bureau New Mexico Environment Department 2905 Rodeo Park Drive East, Building 1 Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505-6303 Subject: Notification of Planned Change to the Permitted Facility to Support TRUPACT-III Dear Mr. Bearzi: The purpose of this letter is to notify you of planned changes to the permitted facility in accordance with the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Hazardous Waste Facility Permit, Part 1, General Permit Conditions, Section 1.7.11.1 , Reporting Planned Changes. The changes to the permitted facility are planned to occur during the current maintenance outage, and are described in the enclosed Notification of Planned Change to the Permitted Facility-Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. If you have any questions regarding this notification, please contact George Basabilvazo

123

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

SciTech Connect

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.

1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

124

INADVERTENT INTRUDER ANALYSIS FOR THE PORTSMOUTH ON-SITE WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY  

SciTech Connect

An On-Site Alternative is being evaluated as part of the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS) process for evaluation of alternatives for the disposal of waste generated from decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) at Portsmouth. The On-Site Alternative involves construction of an On-Site Waste Disposal Facility (OSWDF). An inadvertent intruder analysis must be conducted for the OSWDF. 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. 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. Therefore, after active institutional control ceases, certain exposure scenarios are assumed to be precluded only by the physical state of the disposal facility, i.e., the integrity of the engineered barriers used in facility construction or the thickness of clean material above the waste. Passive institutional controls, such as permanent marker systems at the disposal site and public records of prior land use, also could prevent inadvertent intrusion after active institutional control ceases, but the efficacy of passive institutional controls is not assumed in this analysis. 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.

Smith, F.; Phifer, M.

2013-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

125

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

SciTech Connect

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.

Cook, James R.

2005-12-07T23:59:59.000Z

126

ASTM STANDARD GUIDE FOR EVALUATING DISPOSAL OPTIONS FOR REUSE OF CONCRETE FROM NUCLEAR FACILITY DECOMMISSIONING  

SciTech Connect

Within the nuclear industry, many contaminated facilities that require decommissioning contain huge volumes of concrete. This concrete is generally disposed of as low-level waste at a high cost. Much of the concrete is lightly contaminated and could be reused as roadbed, fill material, or aggregate for new concrete, thus saving millions of dollars. However, because of the possibility of volumetric contamination and the lack of a method to evaluate the risks and costs of reusing concrete, reuse is rarely considered. To address this problem, Argonne National Laboratory-East (ANL-E) and the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory teamed to write a ''concrete protocol'' to help evaluate the ramifications of reusing concrete within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). This document, titled the Protocol for Development of Authorized Release Limits for Concrete at U.S. Department of Energy Site (1) is based on ANL-E's previously developed scrap metal recycle protocols; on the 10-step method outlined in DOE's draft handbook, Controlling Release for Reuse or Recycle of Property Containing Residual Radioactive Material (2); and on DOE Order 4500.5, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment (3). The DOE concrete protocol was the basis for the ASTM Standard Guide for Evaluating Disposal Options for Concrete from Nuclear Facility Decommissioning, which was written to make the information available to a wider audience outside DOE. The resulting ASTM Standard Guide is a more concise version that can be used by the nuclear industry worldwide to evaluate the risks and costs of reusing concrete from nuclear facility decommissioning. The bulk of the ASTM Standard Guide focuses on evaluating the dose and cost for each disposal option. The user calculates these from the detailed formulas and tabulated data provided, then compares the dose and cost for each disposal option to select the best option that meets regulatory requirements. With this information, the reuse of concrete may be possible, thus reducing dose and decontamination and decommissioning costs. This paper outlines ten steps required to release concrete for reuse and discusses the disposal options covered in the ASTM Standard Guide.

Phillips, Ann Marie; Meservey, Richard H.

2003-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

127

Treated Effluent Disposal Facility (TEDF) Operator Training Station (OTS) System Configuration Management Plan  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Treated Effluent Disposal Facility Operator Training Station (TEDF 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). It consists of PC compatible computers and a Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) designed to emulate the responses of various plant components connected to or under the control of the CCS. The system trains operators by simulating the normal operation but also has the ability to force failures of different equipment allowing the operator to react and observe the events. The paper describes organization, responsibilities, system configuration management activities, software, and action plans for fully utilizing the simulation program.

Carter, R.L. Jr.

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

128

Model tracking system for low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities: License application interrogatories and responses  

SciTech Connect

This report describes a model tracking system for a low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal facility license application. In particular, the model tracks interrogatories (questions, requests for information, comments) and responses. A set of requirements and desired features for the model tracking system was developed, including required structure and computer screens. Nine tracking systems were then reviewed against the model system requirements and only two were found to meet all requirements. Using Kepner-Tregoe decision analysis, a model tracking system was selected.

Benbennick, M.E.; Broton, M.S.; Fuoto, J.S.; Novgrod, R.L.

1994-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

129

Long-term criticality control in radioactive waste disposal facilities using depleted uranium  

SciTech Connect

Plant photosynthesis has created a unique planetary-wide geochemistry - an oxidizing atmosphere with oxidizing surface waters on a planetary body with chemically reducing conditions near or at some distance below the surface. Uranium is four orders of magnitude more soluble under chemically oxidizing conditions than it is under chemically reducing conditions. Thus, uranium tends to leach from surface rock and disposal sites, move with groundwater, and concentrate where chemically reducing conditions appear. Earth`s geochemistry concentrates uranium and can separate uranium from all other elements except oxygen, hydrogen (in water), and silicon (silicates, etc). Fissile isotopes include {sup 235}U, {sup 233}U, and many higher actinides that eventually decay to one of these two uranium isotopes. The potential for nuclear criticality exists if the precipitated uranium from disposal sites has a significant fissile enrichment, mass, and volume. The earth`s geochemistry suggests that isotopic dilution of fissile materials in waste with {sup 238}U is a preferred strategy to prevent long-term nuclear criticality in and beyond the boundaries of waste disposal facilities because the {sup 238}U does not separate from the fissile uranium isotopes. Geological, laboratory, and theoretical data indicate that the potential for nuclear criticality can be minimized by diluting fissile materials with-{sup 238}U to 1 wt % {sup 235}U equivalent.

Forsberg, C.W.

1997-02-19T23:59:59.000Z

130

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

SciTech Connect

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.

Cochran, John Russell; Danneels, Jeffrey John

2009-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

131

Annual Hanford Site Environmental Permitting status report  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The information contained in, and/or referenced in, this Annual Hanford Site Environmental Permitting Status Report addresses Permit Condition II.W (Other Permits and/or Approvals) of the Dangerous Waste Portion of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Permit for the Treatment, Storage, and Disposal of Dangerous Waste, issued by the Washington State Department of Ecology (WA7890008967). Condition II.W specifies that the Permittees are responsible for obtaining all other applicable federal, state, and local permits authorizing the development and operation of the Hanford Facility. Condition II.W further specifies that the Permittees are to use their best efforts to obtain such permits. For the purposes of this Permit Condition, ''best efforts'' mean submittal of documentation and/or approval(s) in accordance with schedules specified in applicable regulations, or as determined through negotiations with the applicable regulatory agencies.

SONNICHSEN, J.C.

1999-10-18T23:59:59.000Z

132

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2012-05-22T23:59:59.000Z

133

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

SciTech Connect

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.

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

2011-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

134

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

2004-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

135

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

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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 ...

American Society for Testing and Materials. Philadelphia

2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

136

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

SciTech Connect

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.

1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

137

Disposal Of Irradiated Cadmium Control Rods From The Plumbrook Reactor Facility  

SciTech Connect

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)

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

2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

138

Waste Form Release Data Package for the 2005 Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment  

SciTech Connect

This data package documents the experimentally derived input data on the representative waste glasses; LAWA44, LAWB45, and LAWC22. This data will be used for Subsurface Transport Over Reactive Multi-phases (STORM) simulations of the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) for immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW). The STORM code will be used to provide the near-field radionuclide release source term for a performance assessment to be issued in July 2005. Documented in this data package are data related to 1) kinetic rate law parameters for glass dissolution, 2) alkali (Na+)-hydrogen (H+) ion exchange rate, 3) chemical reaction network of secondary phases that form in accelerated weathering tests, and 4) thermodynamic equilibrium constants assigned to these secondary phases. The kinetic rate law and Na+-H+ ion exchange rate were determined from single-pass flow-through experiments. Pressurized unsaturated flow (PUF) and product consistency (PCT) tests where used for accelerated weathering or aging of the glasses in order to determine a chemical reaction network of secondary phases that form. The majority of the thermodynamic data used in this data package were extracted from the thermody-namic database package shipped with the geochemical code EQ3/6, version 8.0. Because of the expected importance of 129I release from secondary waste streams being sent to IDF from various thermal treatment processes, parameter estimates for diffusional release and solubility-controlled release from cementitious waste forms were estimated from the available literature.

Pierce, Eric M.; McGrail, B. Peter; Rodriguez, Elsa A.; Schaef, Herbert T.; Saripalli, Prasad; Serne, R. Jeffrey; Krupka, Kenneth M.; Martin, P. F.; Baum, Steven R.; Geiszler, Keith N.; Reed, Lunde R.; Shaw, Wendy J.

2004-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

139

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Lorie Cahn

2009-07-31T23:59:59.000Z

140

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

SciTech Connect

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.

Lorie Cahn

2009-07-31T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


141

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

SciTech Connect

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.

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

142

Risk-Based Disposal Plan for PCB Paint in the TRA Fluorinel Dissolution Process Mockup and Gamma Facilities Canal  

SciTech Connect

This Toxic Substances Control Act Risk-Based Polychlorinated Biphenyl Disposal plan was developed for the Test Reactor Area Fluorinel Dissolution Process Mockup and Gamma Facilities Waste System, located in Building TRA-641 at the Reactor Technology Complex, Idaho National Laboratory Site, to address painted surfaces in the empty canal under 40 CFR 761.62(c) for paint, and under 40 CFR 761.61(c) for PCBs that may have penetrated into the concrete. The canal walls and floor will be painted with two coats of contrasting non-PCB paint and labeled as PCB. The canal is covered with open decking; the access grate is locked shut and signed to indicate PCB contamination in the canal. Access to the canal will require facility manager permission. Protective equipment for personnel and equipment entering the canal will be required. Waste from the canal, generated during ultimate Decontamination and Decommissioning, shall be managed and disposed as PCB Bulk Product Waste.

R. A. Montgomery

2008-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

143

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

SciTech Connect

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.

Ziehm, Ronny; Pichurin, Sergey Grigorevich

2003-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

144

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

SciTech Connect

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.

B. C. Culp

2007-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

145

Fall Semiannual Report for the HWMA/RCRA Post Closure Permit for the INTEC Waste Calcining Facility at the INL Site  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Waste Calcining Facility (WCF) is located at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center. In 1998, the WCF was closed under an approved Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (HWMA/RCRA) Closure Plan. Vessels and spaces were grouted and then covered with a concrete cap. The Idaho Department of Environmental Quality issued a final HWMA/RCRA post-closure permit on September 15, 2003, with an effective date of October 16, 2003. This permit sets forth procedural requirements for groundwater characterization and monitoring, maintenance, and inspections of the WCF to ensure continued protection of human health and the environment.

D. F. Gianotto N. C. Hutten

2007-01-12T23:59:59.000Z

146

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

range from low intensity applications such as a nature park with walking trails to high intensity applications such as athletic facilities (e.g., soccer fields, baseball park,...

147

Design and operational considerations of United States commercial near-surface low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

In accordance with the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985, states are responsible for providing for disposal of commercially generated low-level radioactive waste (LLW) within their borders. LLW in the US is defined as all radioactive waste that is not classified as spent nuclear fuel, high-level radioactive waste, transuranic waste, or by-product material resulting from the extraction of uranium from ore. Commercial waste includes LLW generated by hospitals, universities, industry, pharmaceutical companies, and power utilities. LLW generated by the country`s defense operations is the responsibility of the Federal government and its agency, the Department of Energy. The commercial LLRW disposal sites discussed in this report are located near: Sheffield, Illinois (closed); Maxey Flats, Kentucky (closed); Beatty, Nevada (closed); West Valley, New York (closed); Barnwell, South Carolina (operating); Richland, Washington (operating); Ward Valley, California, (proposed); Sierra Blanca, Texas (proposed); Wake County, North Carolina (proposed); and Boyd County, Nebraska (proposed). While some comparisons between the sites described in this report are appropriate, this must be done with caution. In addition to differences in climate and geology between sites, LLW facilities in the past were not designed and operated to today`s standards. This report summarizes each site`s design and operational considerations for near-surface disposal of low-level radioactive waste. The report includes: a description of waste characteristics; design and operational features; post closure measures and plans; cost and duration of site characterization, construction, and operation; recent related R and D activities for LLW treatment and disposal; and the status of the LLW system in the US.

Birk, S.M.

1997-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

148

Radiological performance assessment for the E-Area Vaults Disposal Facility. Appendices A through M  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

These document contains appendices A-M for the performance assessment. They are A: details of models and assumptions, B: computer codes, C: data tabulation, D: geochemical interactions, E: hydrogeology of the Savannah River Site, F: software QA plans, G: completeness review guide, H: performance assessment peer review panel recommendations, I: suspect soil performance analysis, J: sensitivity/uncertainty analysis, K: vault degradation study, L: description of naval reactor waste disposal, M: porflow input file. (GHH)

Cook, J.R.

1994-04-15T23:59:59.000Z

149

Assessment of Potential Flood Events and Impacts at INL's Proposed Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Sites  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Rates, depths, erosion potential, increased subsurface transport rates, and annual exceedance probability for potential flooding scenarios have been evaluated for the on-site alternatives of Idaho National Laboratory’s proposed remote handled low-level waste disposal facility. 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 flood impacts are required to meet the Department of Energy’s Low-Level Waste requirements (DOE-O 435.1), its natural phenomena hazards assessment criteria (DOE-STD-1023-95), and the Radioactive Waste Management Manual (DOE M 435.1-1) guidance in addition to being required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) environmental assessment (EA). Potential sources of water evaluated include those arising from (1) local precipitation events, (2) precipitation events occurring off of the INL (off-site precipitation), and (3) increased flows in the Big Lost River in the event of a Mackay Dam failure. On-site precipitation events include potential snow-melt and rainfall. Extreme rainfall events were evaluated for the potential to create local erosion, particularly of the barrier placed over the disposal facility. Off-site precipitation carried onto the INL by the Big Lost River channel was evaluated for overland migration of water away from the river channel. Off-site precipitation sources evaluated were those occurring in the drainage basin above Mackay Reservoir. In the worst-case scenarios, precipitation occurring above Mackay Dam could exceed the dam’s capacity, leading to overtopping, and eventually complete dam failure. Mackay Dam could also fail during a seismic event or as a result of mechanical piping. Some of the water released during dam failure, and contributing precipitation, has the potential of being carried onto the INL in the Big Lost River channel. Resulting overland flows from these flood sources were evaluated for their erosion potential, ability to overflow the proposed disposal facility, and for their ability to increase migration of contaminants from the facility. The assessment of available literature suggests that the likelihood of detrimental flood water impacting the proposed RH-LLW facility is extremely low. The annual exceedance probability associated with uncontrolled flows in the Big Lost River impacting either of the proposed sites is 1x10-5, with return interval (RI) of 10,000yrs. The most probable dam failure scenario has an annual exceedance probability of 6.3x10-6 (1.6x105 yr RI). In any of the scenarios generating possible on-site water, the duration is expected to be quite short, water depths are not expected to exceed 0.5 m, and the erosion potential can easily be mitigated by emplacement of a berm (operational period), and an engineered cover (post closure period). Subsurface mobilization of radionuclides was evaluated for a very conservative flooding scenario resulting in 50 cm deep, 30.5 day on-site water. The annual exceedance probability for which is much smaller than 3.6x10-7 (2.8x106 yr RI). For the purposes of illustration, the facility was assumed to flood every 500 years. The periodically recurring flood waters were predicted to marginally increase peak radionuclide fluxes into the aquifer by at most by a factor of three for non-sorbing radionuclides, and to have limited impact on peak radionuclide fluxes into the aquifer for contaminants that do sorb.

A. Jeff Sondrup; Annette L. Schafter

2010-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

150

Fall 2010 Semiannual (III.H. and I.U.) Report for the HWMA/RCRA Post Closure Permit for the INTEC Waste Calcining Facility and the CPP 601/627/640 Facility at the INL Site  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Waste Calcining Facility is located at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center. In 1999, the Waste Calcining Facility was closed under an approved Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (HWMA/RCRA) Closure Plan. Vessels and spaces were grouted and then covered with a concrete cap. The Idaho Department of Environmental Quality issued a final HWMA/RCRA post-closure permit on September 15, 2003, with an effective date of October 16, 2003. This permit sets forth procedural requirements for groundwater characterization and monitoring, maintenance, and inspections of the Waste Calcining Facility to ensure continued protection of human health and the environment. The post closure permit also includes semiannual reporting requirements under Permit Conditions III.H. and I.U. These reporting requirements have been combined into this single semiannual report, as agreed between the Idaho Cleanup Project and Idaho Department of Environmental Quality. The Permit Condition III.H. portion of this report includes a description and the results of field methods associated with groundwater monitoring of the Waste Calcining Facility. Analytical results from groundwater sampling, results of inspections and maintenance of monitoring wells in the Waste Calcining Facility groundwater monitoring network, and results of inspections of the concrete cap are summarized. The Permit Condition I.U. portion of this report includes noncompliances not otherwise required to be reported under Permit Condition I.R. (advance notice of planned changes to facility activity which may result in a noncompliance) or Permit Condition I.T. (reporting of noncompliances which may endanger human health or the environment). This report also provides groundwater sampling results for wells that were installed and monitored as part of the Phase 1 post-closure period of the landfill closure components in accordance with HWMA/RCRA Landfill Closure Plan for the CPP-601 Deep Tanks System Phase 1. These monitoring wells are intended to monitor for the occurrence of contaminants of concern in the perched water beneath and adjacent to the CPP-601/627/640 Landfill. The wells were constructed to satisfy requirements of the HWMA/RCRA Post-Closure Plan for the CPP 601/627/640 Landfill.

Boehmer, Ann

2010-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

151

Interim Control Strategy for the Test Area North/Technical Support Facility Sewage Treatment Facility Disposal Pond - Two-year Update  

SciTech Connect

The Idaho Cleanup Project has prepared this interim control strategy for the U.S. Department of Energy Idaho Operations Office pursuant to DOE Order 5400.5, Chapter 11.3e (1) to support continued discharges to the Test Area North/Technical Support Facility Sewage Treatment Facility Disposal Pond. In compliance with DOE Order 5400.5, a 2-year review of the Interim Control Strategy document has been completed. This submittal documents the required review of the April 2005 Interim Control Strategy. The Idaho Cleanup Project's recommendation is unchanged from the original recommendation. The Interim Control Strategy evaluates three alternatives: (1) re-route the discharge outlet to an uncontaminated area of the TSF-07; (2) construct a new discharge pond; or (3) no action based on justification for continued use. Evaluation of Alternatives 1 and 2 are based on the estimated cost and implementation timeframe weighed against either alternative's minimal increase in protection of workers, the public, and the environment. Evaluation of Alternative 3, continued use of the TSF-07 Disposal Pond under current effluent controls, is based on an analysis of four points: - Record of Decision controls will protect workers and the public - Risk of increased contamination is low - Discharge water will be eliminated in the foreseeable future - Risk of contamination spread is acceptable. The Idaho Cleanup Project recommends Alternative 3, no action other than continued implementation of existing controls and continued deactivation, decontamination, and dismantlement efforts at the Test Area North/Technical Support Facility.

L. V. Street

2007-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

152

Siting industrial waste land disposal facilities in Thailand: A risk based approach  

SciTech Connect

The Thailand Industrial Works Department (IWD) has established a toxic industrial waste Central Treatment and Stabilization Center (CTSC) for textile dyeing and electroplating industries located in the Thonburi region of the Bangkok metropolitan area. Industrial waste is treated, stabilized, and stored at the CTSC. Although the IWD plans to ship the stabilized sludge to the Ratchaburi Province in western Thailand for burial, the location for the land disposal site has not been selected. Assessing the relative health risks from exposure to toxic chemicals released from an industrial waste land disposal site is a complicated, data-intensive process that requires a multidisciplinary approach. This process is further complicated by the unique physical and cultural characteristics exhibited by the rapidly industrializing Thai economy. The purpose of this paper is to describe the research approach taken and to detail the constraints to health risk assessments in Thailand. issues discussed include data availability and quality, effectiveness of control or mitigation methods, cultural differences, and the basic assumptions inherent in many of the risk assessment components.

Fingleton, D.J.; Habegger, L.; Peters, R.; Tomasko, D.; Liengcharernsit, W.; Hastings, P.; Boonraksa, C.; Phantumvanit, D.; Smith, K.; Carpenter, R. (Argonne National Lab., IL (USA); Thailand Development Research Inst., Bangkok (Thailand). Natural Resources and Environment Program; Environment and Policy Inst., Honolulu, HI (USA))

1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

153

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

D. Craig Cooper

2011-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

154

Evaluation of a performance assessment methodology for low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities: Validation needs. Volume 2  

SciTech Connect

In this report, concepts on how validation fits into the scheme of developing confidence in performance assessments are introduced. A general framework for validation and confidence building in regulatory decision making is provided. It is found that traditional validation studies have a very limited role in developing site-specific confidence in performance assessments. Indeed, validation studies are shown to have a role only in the context that their results can narrow the scope of initial investigations that should be considered in a performance assessment. In addition, validation needs for performance assessment of low-level waste disposal facilities are discussed, and potential approaches to address those needs are suggested. These areas of topical research are ranked in order of importance based on relevance to a performance assessment and likelihood of success.

Kozak, M.W.; Olague, N.E. [Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (United States)

1995-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

155

Summary of treatment, storage, and disposal facility usage data collected from U.S. Department of Energy sites  

SciTech Connect

This report presents an analysis for the US Department of Energy (DOE) to determine the level and extent of treatment, storage, and disposal facility (TSDF) assessment duplication. Commercial TSDFs are used as an integral part of the hazardous waste management process for those DOE sites that generate hazardous waste. Data regarding the DOE sites` usage have been extracted from three sets of data and analyzed in this report. The data are presented both qualitatively and quantitatively, as appropriate. This information provides the basis for further analysis of assessment duplication to be documented in issue papers as appropriate. Once the issues have been identified and adequately defined, corrective measures will be proposed and subsequently implemented.

Jacobs, A.; Oswald, K. [Lockheed Idaho Technologies Co., Idaho Falls, ID (United States); Trump, C. [EG and G Rocky Flats, Golden, CO (United States)

1995-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

156

Proposed On-Site Disposal Facility (OSDF) at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

i i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. LINE OF INQUIRY NO. 1 - Future Uses of the Subtitle D Landfill 2 3. LINE OF INQUIRY NO. 2 - OSDF Siting in a Brownfield Area 3 4. LINE OF INQUIRY NO. 3 - Seismic Issues 4 5. LINE OF INQUIRY NO. 4 - Post-Closure Public Use of the OSDF 5 6. LINE OF INQUIRY NO. 5 - Public Communication Plan 7 7. LINE OF INQUIRY NO. 6 - Baseline Schedule 8 8. RECOMMENDATIONS 8 9. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 10 10. REFERENCES 10 APPENDIX 11 1 1. INTRODUCTION The Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant (PGDP) is an active uranium enrichment facility that is owned by the US Department of Energy (DOE). Uranium enrichment facilities at PGDP are leased to and operated by the United States Enrichment Corporation. In 1994, PGDP was placed

157

Prevention of significant deterioration permit application for the Fueled Clad Fabrication System, the Radioisotope Power Systems Facility, and the Fuel Assembly Area  

SciTech Connect

This New Source Review'' has been submitted by the US Department of Energy-Richland Operations Office (PO Box 550, Richland, Washington 99352), pursuant to WAC 173-403-050 and in compliance with the Department of Ecology Guide to Processing A Prevention Of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permit'' for three new sources of radionuclide emissions at the Hanford Site in Washington State. The three new sources, the Fueled Clad Fabrication System (FCFS), the Radioisotope Power Systems Facility (RPSF), and the Fuel Assembly Area (FAA), will be located in one facility, the Fuels and Materials Examination Facility (FMEF) of the 400 Area. The FMEF was originally designed to provide for post-irradiation examination and fabrication of breeder reactor fuels. These FMEF missions were cancelled before the introduction of any fuel materials or any irradiated material. The current plans are to use the facility to fabricate power supplies for use in space applications and to produce Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) fuel and target assemblies. The FCFS and the RPSF will produce materials and assemblies for application in space. The FAA project will produce FFTF fuel and target assemblies. The FCFS and the RPSF will share the same building, stack, and, in certain cases, the same floor space. Given this relationship, these systems will be dealt with separately to the extent possible. The FAA is a comparatively independent operation though it will share the FMEF complex.

Not Available

1989-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

158

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

SciTech Connect

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.

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

2008-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

159

Final Environmental Impact Statement to construct and operate a facility to receive, store, and dispose of 11e.(2) byproduct material near Clive, Utah (Docket No. 40-8989)  

SciTech Connect

A Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) related to the licensing of Envirocare of Utah, Inc.`s proposed disposal facility in Tooele county, Utah (Docket No. 40-8989) for byproduct material as defined in Section 11e.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act, as amended, has been prepared by the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. This statement describes and evaluates the purpose of and need for the proposed action, the alternatives considered, and the environmental consequences of the proposed action. The NRC has concluded that the proposed action evaluated under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and 10 CFR Part 51, is to permit the applicant to proceed with the project as described in this Statement.

Not Available

1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

160

SRS seeks RCRA Hazardous Waste Permit Renewal  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

ery Act (RCRA) permit be renewed. The current permit for the Mixed Waste Storage Buildings (MWSB), Mixed Waste Man- agement Facility (MWMF), and Sanitary Landfill (SLF)...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


161

PP-16 Alendatory Permit | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Permit to construct, operate, and maintain electric transmission facilities at the U.S-Mexican border. PP-16 Alendatory Permit More Documents & Publications PP-16-1 UNS...

162

Air Pollution Control Permit to Construct and Permit to Operate...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

may be required prior to commencing construction of the facility. Fuel-burning boilers, coal, oil, or natural gas-fired boiler steam generators require a permit. Gas...

163

300 Area TEDF NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring Plan  

SciTech Connect

This monitoring plan describes the activities and methods that will be employed at the 300 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility (TEDF) in order to ensure compliance with the National Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Included in this document are a brief description of the project, the specifics of the sampling effort, including the physical location and frequency of sampling, the support required for sampling, and the Quality Assurance (QA) protocols to be followed in the sampling procedures.

Loll, C.M.

1994-10-13T23:59:59.000Z

164

Gypsum treated fly ash as a liner for waste disposal facilities  

SciTech Connect

Fly ash has potential application in the construction of base liners for waste containment facilities. While most of the fly ashes improve in the strength with curing, the ranges of permeabilities they attain may often not meet the basic requirement of a liner material. An attempt has been made in the present context to reduce the hydraulic conductivity by adding lime content up to 10% to two selected samples of class F fly ashes. The use of gypsum, which is known to accelerate the unconfined compressive strength by increasing the lime reactivity, has been investigated in further improving the hydraulic conductivity. Hydraulic conductivities of the compacted specimens have been determined in the laboratory using the falling head method. It has been observed that the addition of gypsum reduces the hydraulic conductivity of the lime treated fly ashes. The reduction in the hydraulic conductivity of the samples containing gypsum is significantly more for samples with high amounts of lime contents (as high as 1000 times) than those fly ashes with lower amounts of lime. However there is a relatively more increase in the strengths of the samples with the inclusion of gypsum to the fly ashes at lower lime contents. This is due to the fact that excess lime added to fly ash is not effectively converted into pozzolanic compounds. Even the presence of gypsum is observed not to activate these reactions with excess lime. On the other hand the higher amount of lime in the presence of sulphate is observed to produce more cementitious compounds which block the pores in the fly ash. The consequent reduction in the hydraulic conductivity of fly ash would be beneficial in reducing the leachability of trace elements present in the fly ash when used as a base liner.

Sivapullaiah, Puvvadi V., E-mail: siva@civil.iisc.ernet.in [Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012 (India); Baig, M. Arif Ali, E-mail: reach2arif@gmail.com [Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012 (India)

2011-02-15T23:59:59.000Z

165

Material Disposal Areas  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

wastewater absorption beds that received effluent from the DP Site radioactive laundry facility from 1945 to 1963, two surface debris disposal sites, and a former septic...

166

State of New Mexico Issues Permit For Remote-Handled Waste at WIPP |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

of New Mexico Issues Permit For Remote-Handled Waste at WIPP of New Mexico Issues Permit For Remote-Handled Waste at WIPP State of New Mexico Issues Permit For Remote-Handled Waste at WIPP October 16, 2006 - 1:35pm Addthis Enables DOE to Permanently Move Waste to the WIPP Repository for Safe Disposal CARLSBAD, NM - U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced that the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) issued a revised hazardous waste facility permit for DOE's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in Carlsbad, New Mexico. The revised permit enables WIPP to receive and dispose of remote-handled (RH) transuranic (TRU) radioactive waste currently stored at DOE clean-up sites across the country. WIPP expects to receive its first RH-TRU waste shipment in the coming months, as soon as the regulatory approvals are obtained.

167

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

SciTech Connect

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.

Annette L. Schafer

2012-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

168

Laboratory Testing of Bulk Vitrified Low-Activity Waste Forms to Support the 2005 Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The purpose of this report is to document the results from laboratory testing of the bulk vitri-fied (BV) waste form that was conducted in support of the 2005 integrated disposal facility (IDF) performance assessment (PA). Laboratory testing provides a majority of the key input data re-quired to assess the long-term performance of the BV waste package with the STORM code. Test data from three principal methods, as described by McGrail et al. (2000a; 2003a), are dis-cussed in this testing report including the single-pass flow-through test (SPFT) and product con-sistency test (PCT). Each of these test methods focuses on different aspects of the glass corrosion process. See McGrail et al. (2000a; 2003a) for additional details regarding these test methods and their use in evaluating long-term glass performance. In addition to evaluating the long-term glass performance, this report discusses the results and methods used to provided a recommended best estimate of the soluble fraction of 99Tc that can be leached from the engineer-ing-scale BV waste package. These laboratory tests are part of a continuum of testing that is aimed at improving the performance of the BV waste package.

Pierce, Eric M.; McGrail, B. Peter; Bagaasen, Larry M.; Rodriguez, Elsa A.; Wellman, Dawn M.; Geiszler, Keith N.; Baum, Steven R.; Reed, Lunde R.; Crum, Jarrod V.; Schaef, Herbert T.

2006-06-30T23:59:59.000Z

169

The Environmental Agency's Assessment of the Post-Closure Safety Case for the BNFL DRIGG Low Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility  

SciTech Connect

The Environment Agency is responsible, in England and Wales, for authorization of radioactive waste disposal under the Radioactive Substances Act 1993. British Nuclear Fuels plc (BNFL) is currently authorized by the Environment Agency to dispose of solid low level radioactive waste at its site at Drigg, near Sellafield, NW England. As part of a planned review of this authorization, the Environment Agency is currently undertaking an assessment of BNFL's Post-Closure Safety Case Development Programme for the Drigg disposal facility. This paper presents an outline of the review methodology developed and implemented by the Environment Agency specifically for the planned review of BNFL's Post-Closure Safety Case. The paper also provides an overview of the Environment Agency's progress in its on-going assessment programme.

Streatfield, I. J.; Duerden, S. L.; Yearsley, R. A.

2002-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

170

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Veil, J. A.

1998-09-22T23:59:59.000Z

171

Spring 2009 Semiannual (III.H. and I.U.) Report for the HWMA/RCRA Post-Closure Permit for the INTEC Waste Calcining Facility at the INL Site  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Waste Calcining Facility is located at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center. In 1999, the Waste Calcining Facility was closed under and approved Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Closure plan. Vessels and spaces were grouted and then covered with a concrete cap. This permit sets forth procedural requirements for groundwater characterization and monitoring, maintenance, and inspections of the Waste Calcining Facility to ensure continued protection of human health and the environment.

Boehmer, Ann M.

2009-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

172

Treatment and Disposal of Unanticipated 'Scavenger' Wastewater  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Savannah River Site often generates wastewater for disposal that is not included as a source to one of the site's wastewater treatment facilities that are permitted by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control. The techniques used by the SRS contract operator (Westinghouse Savannah River Company) to evaluate and treat this unanticipated 'scavenger' wastewater may benefit industries and municipalities who experience similar needs. Regulations require that scavenger wastewater be treated and not just diluted. Each of the pollutants that are present must meet effluent permit limitations and/or receiving stream water quality standards. if a scavenger wastewater is classified as 'hazardous' under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) its disposal must comply with RCRA regulations. Westinghouse Savannah River Company obtained approval from SCDHEC to dispose of scavenger wastewater under specific conditions that are included within the SRS National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit. Scavenger wastewater is analyzed in a laboratory to determine its constituency. Pollutant values are entered into spreadsheets that calculate treatment plant removal capabilities and instream concentrations. Disposal rates are computed, ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements and protection of treatment system operating units. Appropriate records are maintained in the event of an audit.

Payne, W.L.

2003-09-15T23:59:59.000Z

173

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

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.

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

2010-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

174

Estimation of natural ground water recharge for the performance assessment of a low-level waste disposal facility at the Hanford Site  

SciTech Connect

In 1994, the Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) initiated the Recharge Task, under the PNL Vitrification Technology Development (PVTD) project, to assist Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) in designing and assessing the performance of a low-level waste (LLW) disposal facility for the US Department of Energy (DOE). The Recharge Task was established to address the issue of ground water recharge in and around the LLW facility and throughout the Hanford Site as it affects the unconfined aquifer under the facility. The objectives of this report are to summarize the current knowledge of natural ground water recharge at the Hanford Site and to outline the work that must be completed in order to provide defensible estimates of recharge for use in the performance assessment of this LLW disposal facility. Recharge studies at the Hanford Site indicate that recharge rates are highly variable, ranging from nearly zero to greater than 100 mm/yr depending on precipitation, vegetative cover, and soil types. Coarse-textured soils without plants yielded the greatest recharge. Finer-textured soils, with or without plants, yielded the least. Lysimeters provided accurate, short-term measurements of recharge as well as water-balance data for the soil-atmosphere interface and root zone. Tracers provided estimates of longer-term average recharge rates in undisturbed settings. Numerical models demonstrated the sensitivity of recharge rates to different processes and forecast recharge rates for different conditions. All of these tools (lysimetry, tracers, and numerical models) are considered vital to the development of defensible estimates of natural ground water recharge rates for the performance assessment of a LLW disposal facility at the Hanford Site.

Rockhold, M.L.; Fayer, M.J.; Kincaid, C.T.; Gee, G.W.

1995-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

175

GRR/Section 18-OR-b - Hazardous Waste Permit Process | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

OR-b - Hazardous Waste Permit Process OR-b - Hazardous Waste Permit Process < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-OR-b - Hazardous Waste Permit Process 18ORBHazardousWastePermitProcess (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies United States Environmental Protection Agency Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Oregon Public Health Division Oregon Public Utility Commission Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon Water Resources Department Regulations & Policies OAR 340-105: Management Facility Permits OAR 340-120: Hazardous Waste Management ORS 466: Storage, Treatment, and Disposal Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18ORBHazardousWastePermitProcess (1).pdf

176

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

2012-04-18T23:59:59.000Z

177

Air Pollution Control Permit to Construct and Permit to Operate...  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

to commencing construction of the facility. Fuel-burning boilers, coal, oil, or natural gas-fired boiler steam generators require a permit. Gas turbines, as well as simple cycle...

178

Report on waste burial charges. Escalation of decommissioning waste disposal costs at low-level waste burial facilities, Revision 4  

SciTech Connect

One of the requirements placed upon nuclear power reactor licensees by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is for the licensees to periodically adjust the estimate of the cost of decommissioning their plants, in dollars of the current year, as part of the process to provide reasonable assurance that adequate funds for decommissioning will be available when needed. This report, which is scheduled to be revised periodically, contains the development of a formula for escalating decommissioning cost estimates that is acceptable to the NRC. The sources of information to be used in the escalation formula are identified, and the values developed for the escalation of radioactive waste burial costs, by site and by year, are given. The licensees may use the formula, the coefficients, and the burial escalation factors from this report in their escalation analyses, or they may use an escalation rate at least equal to the escalation approach presented herein. This fourth revision of NUREG-1307 contains revised spreadsheet results for the disposal costs for the reference PWR and the reference BWR and the ratios of disposal costs at the Washington, Nevada, and South Carolina sites for the years 1986, 1988, 1991 and 1993, superseding the values given in the May 1993 issue of this report. Burial cost surcharges mandated by the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 (LLRWPAA) have been incorporated into the revised ratio tables for those years. In addition, spreadsheet results for the disposal costs for the reference reactors and ratios of disposal costs at the two remaining burial sites in Washington and South Carolina for the year 1994 are provided. These latter results do not include any LLRWPAA surcharges, since those provisions of the Act expired at the end of 1992. An example calculation for escalated disposal cost is presented, demonstrating the use of the data contained in this report.

Not Available

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

179

Report on waste burial charges: Escalation of decommissioning waste disposal costs at Low-Level Waste Burial facilities. Revision 5  

SciTech Connect

One of the requirements placed upon nuclear power reactor licensees by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is for the licensees to periodically adjust the estimate of the cost of decommissioning their plants, in dollars of the current year, as part of the process to provide reasonable assurance that adequate funds for decommissioning will be available when needed. This report, which is scheduled to be revised periodically, contains the development of a formula for escalating decommissioning cost estimates that is acceptable to the NRC. The sources of information to be used in the escalation formula are identified, and the values developed for the escalation of radioactive waste burial costs, by site and by year, are given. The licensees may use the formula, the coefficients, and the burial escalation factors from this report in their escalation analyses, or they may use an escalation rate at least equal to the escalation approach presented herein. This fifth revision of NUREG-1307 contains revised spreadsheet results for the disposal costs for the reference PWR and the reference BWR and the ratios of disposal costs at the Washington, Nevada, and South Carolina sites for the years 1986, 1988, 1991, 1993, and 1994, superseding the values given in the June 1994 issue of this report. Burial cost surcharges mandated by the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 (LLRWPAA) have been incorporated into the revised ratio tables for those years. In addition, spreadsheet results for the disposal costs for the reference reactors and ratios of disposal costs at the two remaining burial sites in Washington and South Carolina for the year 1995 are provided. These latter results do not include any LLRWPAA surcharges, since those provisions of the Act expired at the end of 1992. An example calculation for escalated disposal cost is presented, demonstrating the use of the data contained in this report.

NONE

1995-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

180

B Plant treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) units inspection plan  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Beam, T.G.

1996-04-26T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


181

Options and cost for disposal of NORM waste.  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Oil field waste containing naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) is presently disposed of both on the lease site and at off-site commercial disposal facilities. The majority of NORM waste is disposed of through underground injection, most of which presently takes place at a commercial injection facility located in eastern Texas. Several companies offer the service of coming to an operator's site, grinding the NORM waste into a fine particle size, slurrying the waste, and injecting it into the operator's own disposal well. One company is developing a process whereby the radionuclides are dissolved out of the NORM wastes, leaving a nonhazardous oil field waste and a contaminated liquid stream that is injected into the operator's own injection well. Smaller quantities of NORM are disposed of through burial in landfills, encapsulation inside the casing of wells that are being plugged and abandoned, or land spreading. It is difficult to quantify the total cost for disposing of NORM waste. The cost components that must be considered, in addition to the cost of the operation, include analytical costs, transportation costs, container decontamination costs, permitting costs, and long-term liability costs. Current NORM waste disposal costs range from $15/bbl to $420/bbl.

Veil, J. A.

1998-10-22T23:59:59.000Z

182

Hanford Landfill Reaches 15 Million Tons Disposed - Waste Disposal Mark  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Landfill Reaches 15 Million Tons Disposed - Waste Disposal Landfill Reaches 15 Million Tons Disposed - Waste Disposal Mark Shows Success Cleaning Up River Corridor Hanford Landfill Reaches 15 Million Tons Disposed - Waste Disposal Mark Shows Success Cleaning Up River Corridor July 9, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis Media Contacts Cameron Hardy, DOE, (509) 376-5365 Cameron.Hardy@rl.doe.gov Mark McKenna, WCH, (509) 372-9032 media@wch-rcc.com RICHLAND, Wash. - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its contractors have disposed of 15 million tons of contaminated material at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) since the facility began operations in 1996. Removing contaminated material and providing for its safe disposal prevents contaminants from reaching the groundwater and the Columbia River. ERDF receives contaminated soil, demolition debris, and solid waste from

183

Facilities  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Environment Feature Stories Public Reading Room: Environmental Documents, Reports LANL Home Phonebook Calendar Video About Operational Excellence Facilities Facilities...

184

Microsoft Word - Groundwater Discharge Permit  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

State Renews Groundwater Discharge Permit for WIPP CARLSBAD, N.M., September 11, 2008 - The New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) has renewed the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) groundwater discharge permit until 2013. The permit regulates the discharge of water from WIPP facilities and operations to lined ponds, which protect groundwater resources. The permit allows WIPP to discharge domestic wastewater, non-hazardous wastewater and storm water into 13 on-site, synthetically-lined ponds. The new permit also provides for increased daily discharge volumes to allow more flexibility in plant operations. "This permit is the result of a positive year-long effort with the New Mexico Groundwater Quality Bureau," said Jody Plum, DOE Carlsbad Field Office Permitting and

185

Construction Permits and Fees (New Mexico)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

Industries that wish to build or modify facilities that emit air pollutants (emissions) into the air must obtain an air quality permit prior to constructing. Thus, these permits are called...

186

COMPOSITE ANALYSIS OF LLW DISPOSAL FACILITIES AT THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY'S SAVANNAH RIVER SITE  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Composite Analyses (CA's) are required per DOE Order 435.1 [1], in order to provide a reasonable expectation that DOE low-level waste (LLW) disposal, high-level waste tank closure, and transuranic (TRU) waste disposal in combination with Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and deactivation and decommissioning (D&D) actions, will not result in the need for future remedial actions in order to ensure radiological protection of the public and environment. This Order requires that an accounting of all sources of DOE man-made radionuclides and DOE enhanced natural radionuclides that are projected to remain on the site after all DOE site operations have ceased. This CA updates the previous CA that was developed in 1997. As part of this CA, an inventory of expected radionuclide residuals was conducted, exposure pathways were screened and a model was developed such that a dose to the MOP at the selected points of exposure might be evaluated.

Hiergesell, R; Mark Phifer, M; Frank02 Smith, F

2009-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

187

Wastewater Construction and Operation Permits (Iowa)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

These regulations describe permit requirements for the construction and operation of facilities treating wastewater, and provide separation distances from other water sources.

188

Material Disposal Areas  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Material Disposal Areas Material Disposal Areas Material Disposal Areas Material Disposal Areas, also known as MDAs, are sites where material was disposed of below the ground surface in excavated pits, trenches, or shafts. Contact Environmental Communication & Public Involvement P.O. Box 1663 MS M996 Los Alamos, NM 87545 (505) 667-0216 Email Material Disposal Areas at LANL The following are descriptions and status updates of each MDA at LANL. To view a current fact sheet on the MDAs, click on LA-UR-13-25837 (pdf). MDA A MDA A is a Hazard Category 2 nuclear facility comprised of a 1.25-acre, fenced, and radiologically controlled area situated on the eastern end of Delta Prime Mesa. Delta Prime Mesa is bounded by Delta Prime Canyon to the north and Los Alamos Canyon to the south.

189

Evaluation of standard and alternative methods for the decontamination of VX and HD in chemical agent disposal facilities. Final report, February 1992-February 1993  

SciTech Connect

Standard decontaminant formulations, aqueous sodium hydroxide and aqueous sodium hypochlorite, were providing slow and incomplete results when used to decontaminate certain operating facilities at the Johnston Atoll Chemical Agent Disposal System and the Chemical Agent Disposal System (Utah). A study was undertaken to define the capabilities and limitations of using concentrated sodium hydroxide to decontaminate VX, the effect of adding hydrogen peroxide to the sodium hydroxide for the decontamination of VX, the efficacy of aqueous oxone for the decontamination of VX, and the efficacy of oxone in a water/1-methyl-2-pyrrolidinone (MP) mixture for the decontamination of HD. Using aqueous sodium hydroxide alone was not desirable since the formation of toxic EA2192 could not be averted. However, the addition of hydrogen peroxide resulted in effective VX decontamination without EA2192 formation. Aqueous oxone was also found to be effective for both VX and HD. The incorporation of MP did little to improve HD dissolution and reacted with the oxone to reduce the effective usable life of the decontamination solution. Thus, the use of MP in HD decontamination was not recommended.

Hovanec, J.W.; Szafraniec, L.L.; Albizo, J.M.; Beaudry, W.T.; Henderson, V.D.

1993-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

190

Drainage, Sanitation, and Public Facilities Districts (Virginia) |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Drainage, Sanitation, and Public Facilities Districts (Virginia) Drainage, Sanitation, and Public Facilities Districts (Virginia) Drainage, Sanitation, and Public Facilities Districts (Virginia) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Developer Industrial Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Municipal/Public Utility Rural Electric Cooperative Systems Integrator Tribal Government Utility Savings Category Water Buying & Making Electricity Home Weatherization Program Info State Virginia Program Type Siting and Permitting Provider Local Governments and Districts This legislation provides for the establishment of sanitary, sanitation, drainage, and public facilities districts in Virginia. Designated districts are public bodies, and have the authority to regulate the construction and development of sanitation and waste disposal projects in their

191

General Air Permits (Louisiana) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

General Air Permits (Louisiana) General Air Permits (Louisiana) General Air Permits (Louisiana) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Construction Industrial Investor-Owned Utility Municipal/Public Utility Rural Electric Cooperative Utility Program Info State Louisiana Program Type Environmental Regulations Provider Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality Any source, including a temporary source, which emits or has the potential to emit any air contaminant requires an air permit. Facilities with potential emissions less than 5 tons per year of any regulated air pollutant do not need a permit. The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality issues Title V General Permits. The permit is developed based on equipment types versus facility types, the general permits are not limited in their use to a specific industry or category. Title V permits combine

192

Offsite commercial disposal of oil and gas exploration and production waste :availability, options, and cost.  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Puder, M. G.; Veil, J. A.

2006-09-05T23:59:59.000Z

193

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

SciTech Connect

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.

Rabin, M.S.

1992-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

194

Water Permits (Louisiana)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

The Water Permits Division authorizes permits administered under the Water Quality Regulations. Louisiana's Water Quality Regulations require permits for the discharge of pollutants from any point...

195

Oak Ridge Reservation Facilities  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

processed for shipment to the Nevada Test Site or other appropriate disposal facility. Molten Salt Reactor Experiment Facility The Molten Salt Reactor Experiment (MSRE) operated...

196

Gas, Heat, Water, Sewerage Collection and Disposal, and Street Railway  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Gas, Heat, Water, Sewerage Collection and Disposal, and Street Gas, Heat, Water, Sewerage Collection and Disposal, and Street Railway Companies (South Carolina) Gas, Heat, Water, Sewerage Collection and Disposal, and Street Railway Companies (South Carolina) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Industrial Installer/Contractor Investor-Owned Utility Municipal/Public Utility Rural Electric Cooperative Utility Program Info State South Carolina Program Type Generating Facility Rate-Making Siting and Permitting Provider South Carolina Public Service Commission This legislation applies to public utilities and entities furnishing natural gas, heat, water, sewerage, and street railway services to the public. The legislation addresses rates and services, exemptions, investigations, and records. Article 4 (58-5-400 et seq.) of this

197

CoalFleet IGCC Permitting Guidelines  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report provides guidance to owners of planned Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) power plants in order to assist them in permitting these advanced coal power generation facilities. The CoalFleet IGCC Permitting Guidelines summarize U.S. federal requirements for obtaining air, water, and solid waste permits for a generic IGCC facility, as described in EPRI report 1012227, the CoalFleet User Design Basis Specification (UDBS). The Guidelines present characteristics of IGCC emissions that mus...

2006-11-16T23:59:59.000Z

198

GRR/Section 15-ID-b - Air Quality Permit - Tier II Operating Permit | Open  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 15-ID-b - Air Quality Permit - Tier II Operating Permit GRR/Section 15-ID-b - Air Quality Permit - Tier II Operating Permit < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 15-ID-b - Air Quality Permit - Tier II Operating Permit 15IDBAirQualityPermitTierIIOperatingPermit.pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Idaho Department of Environmental Quality Regulations & Policies IDAPA 58.01.01 Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 15IDBAirQualityPermitTierIIOperatingPermit.pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative Tier II Operating Permits are issued to facilities or stationary sources

199

Permitting plan for the high-level waste interim storage  

SciTech Connect

This document addresses the environmental permitting requirements for the transportation and interim storage of solidified high-level waste (HLW) produced during Phase 1 of the Hanford Site privatization effort. Solidified HLW consists of canisters containing vitrified HLW (glass) and containers that hold cesium separated during low-level waste pretreatment. The glass canisters and cesium containers will be transported to the Canister Storage Building (CSB) in a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-provided transportation cask via diesel-powered tractor trailer. Tri-Party Agreement (TPA) Milestone M-90 establishes a new major milestone, and associated interim milestones and target dates, governing acquisition and/or modification of facilities necessary for: (1) interim storage of Tank Waste Remediation Systems (TWRS) immobilized HLW (IHLW) and other canistered high-level waste forms; and (2) interim storage and disposal of TWRS immobilized low-activity tank waste (ILAW). An environmental requirements checklist and narrative was developed to identify the permitting path forward for the HLW interim storage (HLWIS) project (See Appendix B). This permitting plan will follow the permitting logic developed in that checklist.

Deffenbaugh, M.L.

1997-04-23T23:59:59.000Z

200

Facilities  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Facilities Facilities Facilities LANL's mission is to develop and apply science and technology to ensure the safety, security, and reliability of the U.S. nuclear deterrent; reduce global threats; and solve other emerging national security and energy challenges. Contact Operator Los Alamos National Laboratory (505) 667-5061 Some LANL facilities are available to researchers at other laboratories, universities, and industry. Unique facilities foster experimental science, support LANL's security mission DARHT accelerator DARHT's electron accelerators use large, circular aluminum structures to create magnetic fields that focus and steer a stream of electrons down the length of the accelerator. Tremendous electrical energy is added along the way. When the stream of high-speed electrons exits the accelerator it is

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


201

Disposal of NORM-Contaminated Oil Field Wastes in Salt Caverns  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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''.

Blunt, D.L.; Elcock, D.; Smith, K.P.; Tomasko, D.; Viel, J.A.; and Williams, G.P.

1999-01-21T23:59:59.000Z

202

disposal_cell.cdr  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

With the With the April 24, 1997, ceremonial ground-breaking for disposal facility construction, the Weldon Spring Site Remedial Action Project (WSSRAP) moved into the final stage of cleanup, treatment, and disposal of uranium- processing wastes. The cleanup of the former uranium- refining plant consisted of three primary operations: Demolition and removal of remaining concrete pads and foundations that supported the 44 structures and buildings on site Treatment of selected wastes Permanent encapsulation of treated and untreated waste in an onsite engineered disposal facility In September l993, a Record of Decision (ROD) was signed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), with concurrence by the Missouri Department of Natural

203

Recommended strategy for the disposal of remote-handled transuranic waste  

SciTech Connect

The current baseline plan for RH TRU (remote-handled transuranic) waste disposal is to package the waste in special canisters for emplacement in the walls of the waste disposal rooms at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). The RH waste must be emplaced before the disposal rooms are filled by contact-handled waste. Issues which must be resolved for this plan to be successful include: (1) construction of RH waste preparation and packaging facilities at large-quantity sites; (2) finding methods to get small-quantity site RH waste packaged and certified for disposal; (3) developing transportation systems and characterization facilities for RH TRU waste; (4) meeting lag storage needs; and (5) gaining public acceptance for the RH TRU waste program. Failure to resolve these issues in time to permit disposal according to the WIPP baseline plan will force either modification to the plan, or disposal or long-term storage of RH TRU waste at non-WIPP sites. The recommended strategy is to recognize, and take the needed actions to resolve, the open issues preventing disposal of RH TRU waste at WIPP on schedule. It is also recommended that the baseline plan be upgraded by adopting enhancements such as revised canister emplacement strategies and a more flexible waste transport system.

Bild, R.W. [Sandia National Lab., Albuquerque, NM (United States). Program Integration Dept.

1994-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

204

GRR/Section 15-CA-b - Air Permit - Operating Permit | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

15-CA-b - Air Permit - Operating Permit 15-CA-b - Air Permit - Operating Permit < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 15-CA-b - Air Permit - Operating Permit 15CABAirPermitOperatingPermit.pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies California Air Resources Board Regulations & Policies Clean Air Act (42 USC 1857 et seq.) California Air Pollution Control Laws Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 15CABAirPermitOperatingPermit.pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative A developer operating a facility that emits air pollutants must obtain an

205

DOE/EA-1308; Environmental Assessment for the Offsite Transportation of Certain Low-Level and Mixed Radioactive Waste from the Savannah River Site for Treatment and Disposal at Commercial and Government Facilities (February 2001)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

08 08 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE OFFSITE TRANSPORTATION OF CERTAIN LOW-LEVEL AND MIXED RADIOACTIVE WASTE FROM THE SAVANNAH RIVER SITE FOR TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL AT COMMERCIAL AND GOVERNMENT FACILITIES FEBRUARY 2001 U. S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY SAVANNAH RIVER OPERATIONS OFFICE SAVANNAH RIVER SITE i ii This page is intentionally left blank iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Purpose and Need for Action 6 2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 6 2.1 Proposed Action 6 2.2 Alternatives to the Proposed Action 11 2.2.1 No Action, Continue to Store These Waste Forms at SRS 11 2.2.2 Construct and Operate Onsite Treatment and Disposal Facilities 11 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 12 3.1 Onsite Loading Operations 12 3.2 Transportation Impacts

206

Major Source Permits (District of Columbia) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Major Source Permits (District of Columbia) Major Source Permits (District of Columbia) Major Source Permits (District of Columbia) < Back Eligibility Utility Commercial Industrial Program Info State District of Columbia Program Type Environmental Regulations Provider District Department of the Environment The District reviews designs for new pollution sources and design modifications for existing sources. Permits are issued to allow sources to emit limited and specified amounts of pollution as allowed by air quality laws and regulations. Major sources include power plants, heating plants, and large printing facilities. Three types of permits are issued: pre-construction review permits; new source review permits; and operating permits. These permits include conditions intended to minimize emissions of

207

RCRA facility assessments  

SciTech Connect

The Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA) broadened the authorities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) by requiring corrective action for releases of hazardous wastes and hazardous constituents at treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) facilities. The goal of the corrective action process is to ensure the remediation of hazardous waste and hazardous constituent releases associated with TSD facilities. Under Section 3004(u) of RCRA, operating permits issued to TSD facilities must address corrective actions for all releases of hazardous waste and hazardous constituents from any solid waste management unit (SWMU) regardless of when the waste was placed in such unit. Under RCRA Section 3008(h), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may issue administrative orders to compel corrective action at facilities authorized to operate under RCRA Section 3005(e) (i.e., interim status facilities). The process of implementing the Corrective Action program involves the following, in order of implementation; (1) RCRA Facility Assessment (RFA); (2) RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI); (3) the Corrective Measures Study (CMS); and (4) Corrective Measures Implementation (CMI). The RFA serves to identify and evaluate SWMUs with respect to releases of hazardous wastes and hazardous constituents, and to eliminate from further consideration SWMUs that do not pose a threat to human health or the environment. This Information Brief will discuss issues concerning the RFA process.

NONE

1994-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

208

Consolidated Incineration Facility (CIF) development  

SciTech Connect

The Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) will produce as average of 150 gallons per day of a benzene rich organic steam as a byproduct of precipitate hydrolysis. The organic product is separated and decontaminated by two stages of batch distillation and discharged from the canyon facility. Originally the product was to be stored in a 150,000 gallon storage tank and disposed of by combustion in the Consolidated Incineration Facility (CIF). However, recent delays in design completion and RCRA permitting for the CIF have resulted in an estimated 18 month delay in the facility startup. On-site destruction of the contaminated material is prudent since there is no EPA (or other government agency) deminimus to allow unrestricted use of the material. This report details a preliminary review of four technologies suitable to destroy the organic steams. These include: A silver catalyzed dissolver, A super critical water reactor, the Westinghouse Electric Pyrolyzer, and the Synthetica Detoxifier. Each option is discussed.

Carter, J.T.; Morrison, J.

1990-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

209

Operating Permits (New Jersey) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Operating Permits (New Jersey) Operating Permits (New Jersey) Operating Permits (New Jersey) < Back Eligibility Utility Fed. Government Commercial Agricultural Investor-Owned Utility State/Provincial Govt Industrial Construction Municipal/Public Utility Local Government Residential Installer/Contractor Rural Electric Cooperative Tribal Government Low-Income Residential Schools Retail Supplier Institutional Multi-Family Residential Systems Integrator Fuel Distributor Nonprofit General Public/Consumer Transportation Program Info State New Jersey Program Type Siting and Permitting Provider Department of Environmental Protection The owner or operator of a facility subject to this article shall obtain and maintain an operating permit for the facility. The owner or operator of a facility subject to this article shall ensure that no person shall use or

210

Wind Energy Permitting Standards (North Carolina)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

North Carolina has statewide permitting requirements for wind energy facilities. Any wind turbine or collection of wind turbines located within a half mile of each other with a collective rated...

211

Wind Project Permitting | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Project Permitting Project Permitting Jump to: navigation, search Invenergy is the developer of the 129-MW Forward Wind Energy Center project near Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, that came online in 2008. Photo by Ruth Baranowski, NREL 16412 As with other energy facility permitting processes, the goal of the wind project permitting process is to reach decisions that are timely, minimize challenges, and ensure compliance with laws and regulations that provide for necessary environmental protection.[1] Resources National Wind Coordinating Committee. (2002). Permitting of Wind Energy Facilities. Accessed August 28, 2013. This handbook is written for individuals and groups involved in evaluating wind projects: decision-makers and agency staff at all levels of government, wind developers, interested parties and the public.

212

WHC-SD-W252-FHA-001, Rev. 0: Preliminary fire hazard analysis for Phase II Liquid Effluent Treatment and Disposal Facility, Project W-252  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

A Fire Hazards Analysis was performed to assess the risk from fire and other related perils and the capability of the facility to withstand these hazards. This analysis will be used to support design of the facility.

Barilo, N.F.

1995-05-11T23:59:59.000Z

213

Coalfleet IGCC Permits Database  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The CoalFleet IGCC Permits Database presents comprehensive information on permitting requirements and permit conditions for Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) power plants in an online database format. This Technical Update is a compilation of the Database contents as of April 1, 2009.

2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

214

DOE Permitting Hydrogen Facilities: Hydrogen Fueling Station...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Limited Access Yes Yes Addition to Existing Station With Gasoline Yes With Compressed Natural Gas New Construction Standalone Yes Yes With Gasoline With Compressed Natural Gas...

215

Modeling of the sub-surface reducing environment of the Z-Area Saltstone disposal facility at the Savannah River Site  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Low-level radioactive liquid wastes at the U.S. Department of Energy Savannah River Site are treated by mixing the wastes with Saltstone grout to generate the Saltstone waste form that is poured into the concrete vaults for long-term disposal. The formula ... Keywords: contaminant transport, environmental science, radioactive waste, radionuclides

Thong Hang; Daniel I. Kaplan

2007-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

216

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (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.

217

Disposable rabbit  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

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.

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

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

218

Disposal rabbit  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

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.

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

1983-10-12T23:59:59.000Z

219

Biomass Anaerobic Digestion Facilities and Biomass Gasification Facilities (Indiana)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

The Indiana Department of Environmental Management requires permits before the construction or expansion of biomass anaerobic digestion or gasification facilities.

220

Presidential Permits | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Assurance Cybersecurity Below is a listing of all the presidential permits grouped by Canada and Mexico. View the Presidental Permits - Mexico View the Presidential Permits -...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


221

Solar and Wind Permitting Laws | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Permitting Laws Permitting Laws Solar and Wind Permitting Laws < Back Eligibility Commercial Industrial Nonprofit Residential Schools Savings Category Solar Buying & Making Electricity Wind Program Info State New Jersey Program Type Solar/Wind Permitting Standards Provider New Jersey Department of Community Affairs New Jersey has enacted three separate laws addressing local permitting practices for solar and wind energy facilities. The first deals with solar and wind facilities located in industrial-zoned districts; the second with wind energy devices sited on piers; and the third addresses permitting standards small wind energy devices in general. All three are described below. '''Solar and Wind as Permitted Uses in Industrial Zones''' In March 2009 the state enacted legislation (A.B. 2550) defining facilities

222

Laboratory to demolish excavation enclosures at Material Disposal...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

waste disposal facility. MDA B was used from 1944 to 1948 as a waste disposal site for Manhattan Project and Cold War-era research and production. The Laboratory received 212...

223

HQ Work Control Permit | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

HQ Work Control Permit HQ Work Control Permit HQ Work Control Permit To ensure safe operations when undertaking work at DOE Headquarters, the Office of Headquarters Health and Safety has developed a Work Permit document (doc) to help ensure the safety of all workers and headquarters employees. The form should be completed and brought to the Office of Headquarters Safety, Health and Security office at GE-112 at the Forrestal facility, or the Germantown Building Manager's office at E-076 for review and sign off. Any questions can be directed to the HQ Health and Safety office on (202) 586-1005. HQ_Work_Control_Permit.docx More Documents & Publications Preliminary Notice of Violation, Petsco and Son, Inc - EA-96-06 OSS 19.10 Barriers and Postings 5/26/95 OSS 19.3 Confined Space Entry 5/23/95

224

HQ Work Control Permit | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

HQ Work Control Permit HQ Work Control Permit HQ Work Control Permit To ensure safe operations when undertaking work at DOE Headquarters, the Office of Headquarters Health and Safety has developed a Work Permit document (doc) to help ensure the safety of all workers and headquarters employees. The form should be completed and brought to the Office of Headquarters Safety, Health and Security office at GE-112 at the Forrestal facility, or the Germantown Building Manager's office at E-076 for review and sign off. Any questions can be directed to the HQ Health and Safety office on (202) 586-1005. HQ_Work_Control_Permit.docx More Documents & Publications Preliminary Notice of Violation, Petsco and Son, Inc - EA-96-06 OSS 19.3 Confined Space Entry 5/23/95 WA_02_026_UNITED_TECHNOLOGIES_Waiver_of_Domestic_and_Foreign

225

State Water Permit Regulation (Arkansas) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Permit Regulation (Arkansas) Permit Regulation (Arkansas) State Water Permit Regulation (Arkansas) < Back Eligibility Fuel Distributor Industrial Utility Program Info State Arkansas Program Type Environmental Regulations Siting and Permitting Provider Department of Environmental Quality It is the purpose of this regulation to adopt standards applicable to the storage, discharge, or disposal of any waste which, if unregulated, will cause pollution of waters of the state or result in wastes being placed in a location where it is likely to cause pollution of the waters of the state. These standards are intended to protect public health and the environment, and prevent, control, or abate pollution. The State Water Permit Regulation is implemented to adopt standards applicable to the storage, discharge, or disposal of any waste that, if

226

Coal Fleet Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC Permitting) Guidelines  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report provides guidance to owners of planned Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) power plants in order to assist them in permitting these advanced coal power generation facilities. The CoalFleet IGCC Permitting Guidelines summarize U.S. federal requirements for obtaining air, water, and solid waste permits for a generic IGCC facility, as described in the CoalFleet User Design Basis Specification (UDBS). The report presents characteristics of IGCC emissions that must be considered in the p...

2006-03-14T23:59:59.000Z

227

Air permitting of IGCC plants  

SciTech Connect

The IGCC process is, currently, the preferred choice over conventional thermal power production in regard to cleanup of fuel and significantly reduced contaminant emissions. The air permitting requirements include the review of: feed preparation and PM emissions; feed gasification and contaminant emissions; elemental sulfur recovery and SO{sub 2} emissions; options for carbon-dioxide recovery; syngas characteristics for combustion; CT design and combustion mechanisms; air contaminant emissions of CT; controlled CT emissions of nitrogen-oxides and carbon-monoxide gases using the SCR and oxidation catalysts, respectively; and, emission of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). However, the IGCC processes are being rigorously reviewed for the system integration and reliability, and significant reduction of air contaminant emissions (including the greenhouse gases). This paper included a review of IGCC air contaminant emission rates, and various applicable regulatory requirements, such as NSR (New Source Review), NSPS (New Source Performance Standards), and MACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology). The IGCC facility's NOX, CO, SO{sub 2}, PM, VOCs, and HAPs emission rates would be significantly low. Thus, effective, construction and installation, and operation air permits would be necessary for IGCC facilities.

Chitikela, S.R.

2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

228

Chapter 38 Hazardous Waste Permitting Process (Kentucky) | Department of  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

8 Hazardous Waste Permitting Process (Kentucky) 8 Hazardous Waste Permitting Process (Kentucky) Chapter 38 Hazardous Waste Permitting Process (Kentucky) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Developer Fed. Government Industrial Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Municipal/Public Utility Rural Electric Cooperative Schools State/Provincial Govt Transportation Tribal Government Utility Savings Category Alternative Fuel Vehicles Hydrogen & Fuel Cells Program Info State Kentucky Program Type Environmental Regulations Provider Department for Environmental Protection This administrative regulation establishes the general provisions for storage, treatment, recycling, or disposal of hazardous waste. It provides information about permits and specific requirements for containers, tanks,

229

Evaluation of waste disposal by shale fracturing  

SciTech Connect

The shale fracturing process is evaluated as a means for permanent disposal of radioactive intermediate level liquid waste generated at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The estimated capital operating and development costs of a proposed disposal facility are compared with equivalent estimated costs for alternative methods of waste fixation.

Weeren, H.O.

1976-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

230

Finding of No Significant Impact for the Offsite Transportation of Certain Low-Level and Mixed Radioactive Waste from Savannah River Site for Treatment and Disposal at Commercial and Government Facilities, DOE/EA-1308 (02/15/01)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Finding of No Significant Impact Finding of No Significant Impact for the Offsite Transportation of Certain Low-level and Mixed Radioactive Waste from the Savannah River Site for Treatment and Disposal at Commercial and Government Facilities Agency: U. S. Department of Energy Action: Finding of No Significant Impact Summary: The Department of Energy (DOE) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) (DOE/EA-1308) to analyze the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed offsite transportation of certain low-level radioactive waste (LLW) and mixed (i.e., hazardous and radioactive) low-level radioactive waste (MLLW) from the Savannah River Site (SRS), located near Aiken, South Carolina. Based on the analyses in the EA, DOE has determined that the action is not a major Federal action significantly affecting

231

Microsoft Word - SRSSaltWasteDisposal.doc | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Savannah River Site - Tank 48 SRS Review Report 2009 Performance Assessment for the Saltstone Disposal Facility DOE Order 435.1 Performance Assessment Savannah River Site...

232

Pioneering Nuclear Waste Disposal  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

2 2 3 T he journey to the WIPP began nearly 60 years before the first barrels of transuranic waste arrived at the repository. The United States produced the world's first sig- nificant quantities of transuranic material during the Manhattan Project of World War II in the early 1940s. The government idled its plutonium- producing reactors and warhead manu- facturing plants at the end of the Cold War and scheduled most of them for dismantlement. However, the DOE will generate more transuranic waste as it cleans up these former nuclear weapons facilities. The WIPP is a cor- nerstone of the effort to clean up these facilities by providing a safe repository to isolate transuranic waste in disposal rooms mined out of ancient salt beds, located 2,150 feet below ground. The need for the WIPP

233

Hanford Landfill Reaches 15 Million Tons Disposed - Waste Disposal...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Million Tons Disposed - Waste Disposal Mark Shows Success Cleaning Up River Corridor Hanford Landfill Reaches 15 Million Tons Disposed - Waste Disposal Mark Shows Success...

234

Storm Water Discharge Permits (Wisconsin) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Storm Water Discharge Permits (Wisconsin) Storm Water Discharge Permits (Wisconsin) Storm Water Discharge Permits (Wisconsin) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Developer Fed. Government Fuel Distributor General Public/Consumer Industrial Installer/Contractor Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Low-Income Residential Multi-Family Residential Municipal/Public Utility Nonprofit Residential Retail Supplier Rural Electric Cooperative Schools State/Provincial Govt Systems Integrator Transportation Tribal Government Utility Program Info Start Date 08/2004 State Wisconsin Program Type Siting and Permitting Provider Department of Natural Resources Wisconsin's storm water runoff regulations include permitting requirements for construction sites and industrial facilities, including those

235

Disposability Assessment: Aluminum-Based Spent Nuclear Fuel Forms  

SciTech Connect

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.

Vinson, D.W.

1998-11-06T23:59:59.000Z

236

Waste Disposal Site and Radioactive Waste Management (Iowa)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

This section describes the considerations of the Commission in determining whether to approve the establishment and operation of a disposal site for nuclear waste. If a permit is issued, the...

238

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act: Part B Permit application [for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)]. Volume 5, Revision 1  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report, part of the permit application for the WIPP facility, presents engineering drawings and engineering change orders for the facility. (CBS)

Not Available

1991-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

239

Chapter 47 Solid Waste Facilities (Kentucky)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

This chapter establishes the permitting standards for solid waste sites or facilities, the standards applicable to all solid waste sites or facilities, and the standards for certification of...

240

Risk analyses for disposing nonhazardous oil field wastes in salt caverns  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Salt caverns have been used for several decades to store various hydrocarbon products. In the past few years, four facilities in the US have been permitted to dispose nonhazardous oil field wastes in salt caverns. Several other disposal caverns have been permitted in Canada and Europe. This report evaluates the possibility that adverse human health effects could result from exposure to contaminants released from the caverns in domal salt formations used for nonhazardous oil field waste disposal. The evaluation assumes normal operations but considers the possibility of leaks in cavern seals and cavern walls during the post-closure phase of operation. In this assessment, several steps were followed to identify possible human health risks. At the broadest level, these steps include identifying a reasonable set of contaminants of possible concern, identifying how humans could be exposed to these contaminants, assessing the toxicities of these contaminants, estimating their intakes, and characterizing their associated human health risks. The contaminants of concern for the assessment are benzene, cadmium, arsenic, and chromium. These were selected as being components of oil field waste and having a likelihood to remain in solution for a long enough time to reach a human receptor.

Tomasko, D.; Elcock, D.; Veil, J.; Caudle, D.

1997-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


241

Pioneering Nuclear Waste Disposal  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

18 18 19 T he WIPP's first waste receipt, 11 years later than originally planned, was a monumental step forward in the safe management of nuclear waste. Far from ending, however, the WIPP story has really just begun. For the next 35 years, the DOE will face many challenges as it manages a complex shipment schedule from transuranic waste sites across the United States and continues to ensure that the repository complies with all regulatory requirements. The DOE will work to maintain the highest level of safety in waste handling and trans- portation. Coordination with sites Disposal operations require coordination with sites that will ship transuranic waste to the WIPP and include periodic certification of waste characterization and handling practices at those facilities. During the WIPP's

242

Generic Deep Geologic Disposal Safety Case | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Deep Geologic Disposal Safety Case Deep Geologic Disposal Safety Case Generic Deep Geologic Disposal Safety Case The Generic Deep Geologic Disposal Safety Case presents generic information that is of use in understanding potential deep geologic disposal options in the U.S. for used nuclear fuel (UNF) from reactors and high-level radioactive waste (HLW). Potential disposal options include mined disposal in a variety of geologic media (e.g., salt, shale, granite), and deep borehole disposal in basement rock. The Generic Safety Case is intended to be a source of information to provide answers to questions that may arise as the U.S. works to develop strategies to dispose of current and future inventories of UNF and HLW. DOE is examining combinations of generic geologic media and facility designs that could potentially support

243

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

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.

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

244

Regulatory and Permitting Issues  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

As part of the West Coast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (WESTCARB), Terralog Technologies USA, Inc., reviewed current state and federal regulations related to carbon dioxide capture and storage within geologic formations and enhanced carbon uptake in terrestrial ecosystems. We have evaluated and summarized the current and possible future permitting requirements for the six states that comprise the West Coast Regional Partnership. Four options exist for CO{sub 2} injection into appropriate geologic formations, including storage in: (1) oil and gas reservoirs, (2) saline formations, (3) unmineable coal beds, and (4) salt caverns. Terrestrial CO{sub 2} sequestration involves improved carbon conservation management (e.g. reduction of deforestation), carbon substitution (e.g., substitution for fossil fuel-based products, energy conservation through urban forestry, biomass for energy generation), and improved carbon storage management (e.g., expanding the storage of carbon in forest ecosystems). The primary terrestrial options for the West Coast Region include: (1) reforestation of under-producing lands (including streamside forest restoration), (2) improved forest management, (3) forest protection and conservation, and (4) fuel treatments for the reduction of risk of uncharacteristically severe fires (potentially with associated biomass energy generation). The permits and/or contracts required for any land-use changes/disturbances and biomass energy generation that may occur as part of WESTCARB's activities have been summarized for each state.

Larry Myer

2005-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

245

Hanford Facility Annual Dangerous Waste Report Calendar Year 2002  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Hanford CY 2002 dangerous waste generation and management forms. The Hanford Facility Annual Dangerous Waste Report (ADWR) is prepared to meet the requirements of Washington Administrative Code Sections 173-303-220, Generator Reporting, and 173-303-390, Facility Reporting. In addition, the ADWR is required to meet Hanford Facility RCRA Permit Condition I.E.22, Annual Reporting. The ADWR provides summary information on dangerous waste generation and management activities for the Calendar Year for the Hanford Facility EPA ID number assigned to the Department of Energy for RCRA regulated waste, as well as Washington State only designated waste and radioactive mixed waste. The Solid Waste Information and Tracking System (SWITS) database is utilized to collect and compile the large array of data needed for preparation of this report. Information includes details of waste generated on the Hanford Facility, waste generated offsite and sent to Hanford for management, and other waste management activities conducted at Hanford, including treatment, storage, and disposal. Report details consist of waste descriptions and weights, waste codes and designations, and waste handling codes. In addition, for waste shipped to Hanford for treatment and/or disposal, information on manifest numbers, the waste transporter, the waste receiving facility, and the original waste generators are included. In addition to paper copies, electronic copies of the report are also transmitted to the regulatory agency.

FREEMAN, D.A.

2003-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

246

HANFORD FACILITY ANNUAL DANGEROUS WASTE REPORT CY2005  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Hanford Facility Annual Dangerous Waste Report (ADWR) is prepared to meet the requirements of Washington Administrative Code Sections 173-303-220, Generator Reporting, and 173-303-390, Facility Reporting. In addition, the ADWR is required to meet Hanford Facility RCR4 Permit Condition I.E.22, Annual Reporting. The ADWR provides summary information on dangerous waste generation and management activities for the Calendar Year for the Hanford Facility EPA ID number assigned to the Department of Energy for RCRA regulated waste, as well as Washington State only designated waste and radioactive mixed waste. An electronic database is utilized to collect and compile the large array of data needed for preparation of this report. Information includes details of waste generated on the Hanford Facility, waste generated offsite and sent to Hanford for management, and other waste management activities conducted at Hanford, including treatment, storage, and disposal. Report details consist of waste descriptions and weights, waste codes and designations, and waste handling codes, In addition, for waste shipped to Hanford for treatment and/or disposal, information on manifest numbers, the waste transporter, the waste receiving facility, and the original waste generators are included. In addition to paper copies, the report is also transmitted electronically to a web site maintained by the Washington State Department of Ecology.

SKOLRUD, J.O.

2006-02-15T23:59:59.000Z

247

Land Management and Disposal | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Land Management and Disposal Land Management and Disposal Land Management and Disposal Land Management and Disposal 42 USC 2201(g), Section 161(g), of the AEA 42 USC Section 2224, Section 174 DOE, July 2004, Real Property Desk Guide Requirements: Document Title P.L. 83-703 (68 Stat. 919), Section 161g Grants Special Authority as Required in the Act to Acquire, Sell, Dispose, etc., of Real Property in Furtherance of the Department's Mission (Under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954) P.L. 95-91, 91 Stat. 578 (Sections 302 and 347) Department of Energy Organizational Act of 1977, Delegated Authority for Real Property P.L. 106-580 Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, As Amended P.L. 105-85 Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, As Amended 10 CFR 770 Transfer of Real Property at Defense Nuclear Facilities for Economic Development

248

DOE to Hold Public Information Meetings on Requested Permit Modifications  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Requested Permit Modifications Requested Permit Modifications CARLSBAD, N.M., March 15, 2001 -- The public is invited to comment on requested modifications to the Hazardous Waste Facility Permit for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). Submittal of the proposed modification request to the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) begins a formal review process that includes a 60-day public comment period and public information meetings. In its submittal, DOE requests five permit changes to modify conditions at the facility. The proposed modifications conform to industry standards for the handling of hazardous materials and would continue to protect the safety of the facility, its employees, and the public. The first two requested changes would eliminate redundant and obsolete training

249

Disposal configuration options for future uses of greater confinement disposal at the Nevada Test Site  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for disposing of a variety of radioactive and mixed wastes, some of which are considered special-case waste because they do not currently have a clear disposal option. The DOE`s Nevada Field Office contracted with Sandia National Laboratories to investigate the possibility of disposing of some of this special-case waste at the Nevada Test Site (NTS). As part of this investigation, a review of a near-surface and subsurface disposal options that was performed to develop alternative disposal configurations for special-case waste disposal at the NTS. The criteria for the review included (1) configurations appropriate for disposal at the NTS; (2) configurations for disposal of waste at least 100 ft below the ground surface; (3) configurations for which equipment and technology currently exist; and (4) configurations that meet the special requirements imposed by the nature of special-case waste. Four options for subsurface disposal of special-case waste are proposed: mined consolidated rock, mined alluvium, deep pits or trenches, and deep boreholes. Six different methods for near-surface disposal are also presented: earth-covered tumuli, above-grade concrete structures, trenches, below-grade concrete structures, shallow boreholes, and hydrofracture. Greater confinement disposal (GCD) in boreholes at least 100 ft deep, similar to that currently practiced at the GCD facility at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site at the NTS, was retained as the option that met the criteria for the review. Four borehole disposal configurations are proposed with engineered barriers that range from the native alluvium to a combination of gravel and concrete. The configurations identified will be used for system analysis that will be performed to determine the disposal configurations and wastes that may be suitable candidates for disposal of special-case wastes at the NTS.

Price, L. [Science Applications International Corp., Albuquerque, NM (United States)

1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

250

Drilling Waste Management Fact Sheet: Offsite Disposal at Commercial  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Commercial Disposal Facilities Commercial Disposal Facilities Fact Sheet - Commercial Disposal Facilities Although drilling wastes from many onshore wells are managed at the well site, some wastes cannot be managed onsite. Likewise, some types of offshore drilling wastes cannot be discharged, so they are either injected underground at the platform (not yet common in the United States) or are hauled back to shore for disposal. According to an American Petroleum Institute waste survey, the exploration and production segment of the U.S. oil and gas industry generated more than 360 million barrels (bbl) of drilling wastes in 1985. The report estimates that 28% of drilling wastes are sent to offsite commercial facilities for disposal (Wakim 1987). A similar American Petroleum Institute study conducted ten years later found that the volume of drilling waste had declined substantially to about 150 million bbl.

251

Presidential Permits - Procedures | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Permits - Procedures Presidential Permits - Procedures Electricity Advisory Committee Technology Development Electricity Policy Coordination and Implementation Transmission...

252

Dredged and Fill Material Disposal (North Dakota) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Dredged and Fill Material Disposal (North Dakota) Dredged and Fill Material Disposal (North Dakota) Dredged and Fill Material Disposal (North Dakota) < Back Eligibility Utility Fed. Government Commercial Agricultural Investor-Owned Utility State/Provincial Govt Industrial Construction Municipal/Public Utility Local Government Residential Installer/Contractor Rural Electric Cooperative Tribal Government Low-Income Residential Schools Retail Supplier Institutional Multi-Family Residential Systems Integrator Fuel Distributor Nonprofit General Public/Consumer Transportation Savings Category Alternative Fuel Vehicles Hydrogen & Fuel Cells Buying & Making Electricity Water Home Weatherization Solar Wind Program Info State North Dakota Program Type Siting and Permitting This chapter provides regulations for the disposal of dredged and fill

253

Request for Information on Permitting of Transmission Lines: Federal  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Request for Information on Permitting of Transmission Lines: Request for Information on Permitting of Transmission Lines: Federal Register Notice Volume 77, No. 38 - Feb. 27, 2012 Request for Information on Permitting of Transmission Lines: Federal Register Notice Volume 77, No. 38 - Feb. 27, 2012 The Department of Energy's Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability requested information on questions related to permitting of transmission lines. Infrastructure projects - such as high voltage, long distance, electric transmission facilities - often involve multiple Federal, State, local and Tribal authorizations and are subject to a wide array of processes and procedural requirements in order to obtain all necessary permits and other authorizations. Delays in securing required statutory reviews, permits, and consultations can threaten the completion

254

Presidential Permit Holders - Annual Reports | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Permit Holders - Permit Holders - Annual Reports Presidential Permit Holders - Annual Reports Presidential permit holders are responsible for reporting the gross amount electric energy which flows into and out of the United States over the permitted international transmission facility regardless if the energy is wheeled to or for another entity. For example, utility A receives a Presidential permit for a single international transmission line across the U.S.-Canadian border. During the calendar year just completed, 300,000,000 kilowatt-hours (kwh) are imported from Canada across this line. Utility A arranged for the purchase of 200,000,000 kwh for its own use and wheeled 100,000,000 kwh to neighboring utility B. Utility A must report 300,000,000 kwh of imports over the international

255

DOE Seeking Information on Transmission Line Permitting | Department of  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Seeking Information on Transmission Line Permitting Seeking Information on Transmission Line Permitting DOE Seeking Information on Transmission Line Permitting February 27, 2012 - 3:25pm Addthis The Department of Energy's Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability is seeking information on the questions related to permitting of transmission lines. Infrastructure projects - such as high voltage, long distance, electric transmission facilities - often involve multiple Federal, State, local, and Tribal authorizations and are subject to a wide array of processes and procedural requirements in order to obtain all necessary permits and other authorizations. Delays in securing required statutory reviews, permits, and consultations can threaten the completion projects of national and regional significance. This Request for

256

Request for Information on Permitting of Transmission Lines: Federal  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Request for Information on Permitting of Transmission Lines: Request for Information on Permitting of Transmission Lines: Federal Register Notice Volume 77, No. 38 - Feb. 27, 2012 Request for Information on Permitting of Transmission Lines: Federal Register Notice Volume 77, No. 38 - Feb. 27, 2012 The Department of Energy's Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability requested information on questions related to permitting of transmission lines. Infrastructure projects - such as high voltage, long distance, electric transmission facilities - often involve multiple Federal, State, local and Tribal authorizations and are subject to a wide array of processes and procedural requirements in order to obtain all necessary permits and other authorizations. Delays in securing required statutory reviews, permits, and consultations can threaten the completion

257

Individual Permit for Storm Water  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Individual Permit Individual Permit Individual Permit for Storm Water The Individual Permit authorizes the discharge of storm water associated with historical industrial activities at LANL from specified solid waste management units and areas of concern, collectively referred to as Sites. October 15, 2012 Sandia Canyon Wetlands Sandia Canyon Wetlands in the early morning looking north. Get Expertise Environmental Communications & Public Involvement Email In the Individual Permit, to 'minimize' means to reduce and/or eliminate discharges of pollutants in storm water to the extent achievable. What is the Individual Permit for Storm Water? The Permit - NPDES No. NM0030759 - was issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, on September 30, 2010 to Los Alamos National

258

Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility Lessons Learned  

SciTech Connect

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.

Caulfield, R.

2012-07-12T23:59:59.000Z

259

On-Site Disposal Facility Inspection Report  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

3122013 March 2013 Site Inspection 40 1638 A6B No Large areas of teasel 3122013 March 2013 Site Inspection 52 Herbicide applied August-13 1639 Cell 8, south toe No Rock 312...

260

slc_disposal.cdr  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Disposal Disposal Site This fact sheet provides information about the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 Title I disposal site at Salt Lake City, Utah. This site is managed by the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management. Salt Lake City, Utah, Disposal Site ENERGY Office of Legacy Management U.S. DEPARTMENT OF Site Description and History Regulatory Setting The Salt Lake Disposal Site is located approximately 81 miles west of Salt Lake City and 2.5 miles south of Interstate 80 on the eastern edge of the Great Salt Lake Desert. The disposal cell is adjacent to Energy Solutions, Inc., a commercial low-level radioactive materials disposal site. The surrounding area is sparsely populated, and the nearest residences are at least 15 miles from the site. Vegetation in the area is sparse and typical of semiarid low shrubland. The disposal cell encapsulates about

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


261

Hanford Site air operating permit application  

SciTech Connect

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, which amended the Federal Clean Air Act of 1977, required that the US Environmental Protection Agency develop a national Air Operating Permit Program, which in turn would require each state to develop an Air Operating Permit Program to identify all sources of ``regulated`` pollutants. Regulated pollutants include ``criteria`` pollutants (oxides of nitrogen, sulfur oxides, total suspended particulates, carbon monoxide, particulate matter greater than 10 micron, lead) plus 189 other ``Hazardous`` Air Pollutants. The Hanford Site, owned by the US Government and operated by the US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, is located in southcentral Washington State and covers 560 square miles of semi-arid shrub and grasslands located just north of the confluence of the Snake and Yakima Rivers with the Columbia River. This land, with restricted public access, provides a buffer for the smaller areas historically used for the production of nuclear materials, waste storage, and waste disposal. About 6 percent of the land area has been disturbed and is actively used. The Hanford Site Air Operating Permit Application consists of more than 1,100 sources and in excess of 300 emission points. Before January 1995, the maintenance and operations contractor and the environmental restoration contractor for the US Department of Energy completed an air emission inventory on the Hanford Site. The inventory has been entered into a database so that the sources and emission points can be tracked and updated information readily can be retrieved. The Hanford Site Air Operating Permit Application contains information current as of April 19, 1995.

NONE

1995-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

262

The Determinants of Hazardous Waste Disposal Choice:  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

In this paper, we estimate conditional logit models of generator’s choice of waste management facilities (TSDFs) for shipments of halogenated solvent waste documented by the manifests filled out in California in 1995. We find that the probability that a facility is selected as the destination of an off-site shipment of halogenated solvent waste depends on the cost of shipping and disposal at that facility, on measures of existing contamination at the site, and on the track record of the receiving facility. Generators do seem to balance current disposal costs with the likelihood of future liability, should the TSDF become involved in either the state or federal Superfund program. In general, we find no evidence that generators prefer “wealthier ” TSDFs or “larger ” facilities, suggesting that there is a role for smaller, private companies in the management of halogenated solvent waste. When attention is limited to so-called “restricted ” wastes containing halogenated compounds, which cannot be landfilled, the best match between the waste and the treatment offered by the facility may be more important than saving on the cost of disposal, and price may even be interpreted as a signal for quality of the facility. 3

Anna Alberini; John Bartholomew; Anna Alberini; John Bartholomew

1998-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

263

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

SciTech Connect

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; large volume bulk waste streams.

Arnold, P.

2012-10-31T23:59:59.000Z

264

Disposal Practices at the Nevada Test Site 2008  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Area 5 LLRW & MLLW Disposal Area 5 LLRW & MLLW Disposal ETR Report Date: July 2008 ETR-14 United States Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) External Technical Review of Disposal Practices at the Nevada Test Site Why DOE-EM Did This Review Radioactively contaminated materials from the Nevada Test Site (NTS), other DOE facilities and other federal agencies are disposed of at NTS at two low-level radioactive waste (LLRW) management sites: Areas 3 and 5. Disposal operations at Area 3 have been discontinued, but the facility is available for future disposal. The anticipated closure date for Area 3 is 2027. Area 5 is operating and will be expanded to accept future wastes. LLRW and mixed low-level radioactive

265

Summary - Disposal Practices at the Nevada Test Site  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Nevada Test Site, NV Nevada Test Site, NV EM Project: Area 5 LLRW & MLLW Disposal ETR Report Date: July 2008 ETR-14 United States Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) External Technical Review of Disposal Practices at the Nevada Test Site Why DOE-EM Did This Review Radioactively contaminated materials from the Nevada Test Site (NTS), other DOE facilities and other federal agencies are disposed of at NTS at two low-level radioactive waste (LLRW) management sites: Areas 3 and 5. Disposal operations at Area 3 have been discontinued, but the facility is available for future disposal. The anticipated closure date for Area 3 is 2027. Area 5 is operating and will be expanded to accept future wastes. LLRW and mixed low-level radioactive waste (MLLW) are disposed of in Area 5 in shallow

266

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Act (Pennsylvania) | Department of  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Act (Pennsylvania) Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Act (Pennsylvania) Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Act (Pennsylvania) < Back Eligibility Utility Commercial Investor-Owned Utility State/Provincial Govt Municipal/Public Utility Local Government Rural Electric Cooperative Transportation Program Info State Pennsylvania Program Type Environmental Regulations Provider Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection 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 storage of low-level radioactive waste. Commercial incineration of radioactive wastes is prohibited. Licenses are required for low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities not licensed to accept low-level radioactive waste. Disposal at

267

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

268

Defense High Level Waste Disposal Container System Description Document  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Defense High Level Waste Disposal Container System supports the confinement and isolation of waste within the Engineered Barrier System of the Monitored Geologic Repository (MGR). Disposal containers are loaded and sealed in the surface waste handling facilities, transferred to the underground through the accesses using a rail mounted transporter, and emplaced in emplacement drifts. The defense high level waste (HLW) disposal container provides long-term confinement of the commercial HLW and defense HLW (including immobilized plutonium waste forms [IPWF]) placed within disposable canisters, and withstands the loading, transfer, emplacement, and retrieval loads and environments. US Department of Energy (DOE)-owned spent nuclear fuel (SNF) in disposable canisters may also be placed in a defense HLW disposal container along with commercial HLW waste forms, which is known as co-disposal. The Defense High Level Waste Disposal Container System provides containment of waste for a designated period of time, and limits radionuclide release. The disposal container/waste package maintains the waste in a designated configuration, withstands maximum handling and rockfall loads, limits the individual canister temperatures after emplacement, resists corrosion in the expected handling and repository environments, and provides containment of waste in the event of an accident. Defense HLW disposal containers for HLW disposal will hold up to five HLW canisters. Defense HLW disposal containers for co-disposal will hold up to five HLW canisters arranged in a ring and one DOE SNF canister inserted in the center and/or one or more DOE SNF canisters displacing a HLW canister in the ring. Defense HLW disposal containers also will hold two Multi-Canister Overpacks (MCOs) and two HLW canisters in one disposal container. The disposal container will include outer and inner cylinders, outer and inner cylinder lids, and may include a canister guide. An exterior label will provide a means by which to identify the disposal container and its contents.

N. E. Pettit

2001-07-13T23:59:59.000Z

269

Coordination of Federal Transmission Permitting on Federal Lands (216(h)) |  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Coordination of Federal Transmission Permitting on Federal Lands (216(h)) Coordination of Federal Transmission Permitting on Federal Lands (216(h)) Coordination of Federal Transmission Permitting on Federal Lands (216(h)) On October 23, 2009, the Department of Energy and eight other Federal agencies entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to improve coordination among project applicants, federal agencies, states and tribes involved in the siting and permitting process for electric transmission facilities on Federal land. The MOU will improve uniformity, consistency, and transparency by describing each entity's role and responsibilities when project applicants wish to build electric transmission facilities. Additionally, the MOU designates a "Lead Agency" serving as the single point-of-contact for coordinating all federal environmental reviews

270

Water Use Permitting (Wisconsin) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Permitting (Wisconsin) Water Use Permitting (Wisconsin) Eligibility Utility Program Information Start Date 2011 Wisconsin Program Type Siting and Permitting Withdrawers in the...

271

Nevada test site experience with greater confinement disposal  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

At the NTS, we consider Greater Confinement Disposal (GCD) to be a good waste management practice rather than a disposal technology. This is an important distinction because it redefines the nature of GCD. All disposal facilities operate under the principal of ''as low as reasonably achievable'' (ALARA) in reducing personnel and public exposures. ALARA is not a technology or method but a principal put into practice. We view GCD in the same manner.

Dickman, P.T.; Boland, J.R.

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

272

Disposal Cost Savings Considerations in Curie Reduction Programs  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

In 1996, the Low Level Radioactive Waste (LLW) Disposal Facility in Barnwell, South Carolina, announced a new fee structure for the disposal of radioactive wastes based on waste density, dose rate, and activity (curies). This report provides a detailed discussion of the current Barnwell Disposal Fee Structure along with its cost impact on various types of wastes generated. The report also evaluates various curie reduction options, their practical application, and their cost savings potential to help LLW ...

1998-03-30T23:59:59.000Z

273

Open Burning Permit Events Management  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Open Burning Permit Events Management Form Revision Date: 09/29/2010 OpenBurningPermit.docx A Use being burned: (check all that apply) [ ] Small logs (less than 16 in. long) [ ] Finished Lumber________________________________ As the individual responsible for this event, I have read the attached Regulations for Open Burning. The sponsoring

Manning, Sturt

274

Expedited Permitting Process for Solar Photovoltaic Systems ...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Expedited Permitting Process for Solar Photovoltaic Systems (Vermont) Expedited Permitting Process for Solar Photovoltaic Systems (Vermont) Eligibility Agricultural Commercial...

275

Presidential Permits | Department of Energy  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Presidential Permits Presidential Permits Presidential Permits Below is a listing of all the presidential permits grouped by Canada and Mexico. View the Presidental Permits - Mexico View the Presidential Permits - Canada PRESIDENTIAL PERMITS - CANADA BACK TO TOP Docket No. Company Date Issued PP-6 Puget Sound Energy 04/28/81 PP-10 BPA 10/27/45 PP-10-1 BPA 11/30/65 PP-11-2 Fraser Papers 02/29/99 PP-11 Fraser Papers (Rescinded in PP-366) 11/18/10 PP-12 Maine 12/05/63 PP-13 NiMo Hogansburg 01/31/48 PP-18 Glacier Electric 12/12/52 PP-20 Eastern Maine 05/25/65 PP-22 BC Hydro 08/24/67 PP-22-1 BC Hydro 07/21/55 PP-22-2 BC Hydro 02/04/58 PP-22-3 BC Hydro 08/24/67 PP-22-4 BCTC 09/05/07 PP-23 Netley 07/20/55 PP-24 Long Sault 06/06/80 PP-25 NYPA 06/06/80 PP-28 Northern Electric 04/17/63

276

Norfolk Southern boxcar blocking/bracing plan for the mixed waste disposal initiative project. Environmental Restoration Program  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy`s (DOE) Environmental Restoration and Waste Management programs will dispose of mixed waste no longer deemed useful. This project is one of the initial activities used to help meet this goal. The project will transport the {approximately}46,000 drums of existing stabilized mixed waste located at the Oak Ridge K-25 Site and presently stored in the K-31 and K-33 buildings to an off-site commercially licensed and permitted mixed waste disposal facility. Shipping and disposal of all {approximately}46,000 pond waste drums ({approximately}1,000,000 ft{sup 3} or 55,000 tons) is scheduled to occur over a period of {approximately}5--10 years. The first shipment of stabilized pond waste should transpire some time during the second quarter of FY 1994. Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., proposes to line each of the Norfolk Southem boxcars with a prefabricated, white, 15-mm low-density polyethylene (LDPE) liner material. To avoid damaging the bottom of the polyethylene floor liner, a minimum .5 in. plywood will be nailed to the boxcars` nailable metal floor. At the end of the Mixed Waste Disposal Initiative (MWDI) Project workers at the Envirocare facility will dismantle and dispose of all the polyethylene liner and plywood materials. Envirocare of Utah, Inc., located in Clive, Utah, will perform a health physic survey and chemically and radiologically decontaminate, if necessary, each of the rail boxcars prior to them being released back to Energy Systems. Energy Systems will also perform a health physic survey and chemically and radiologically decontaminate, if necessary, each of the rail boxcars prior to them being released back to Norfolk Southem Railroad.

Seigler, R.S.

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

277

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

278

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

279

Aerosol can waste disposal device  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

Disclosed is a device for removing gases and liquid from containers. The ice punctures the bottom of a container for purposes of exhausting gases and liquid from the container without their escaping into the atmosphere. The device includes an inner cup or cylinder having a top portion with an open end for receiving a container and a bottom portion which may be fastened to a disposal or waste container in a substantially leak-proof manner. A piercing device is mounted in the lower portion of the inner cylinder for puncturing the can bottom placed in the inner cylinder. An outer cylinder having an open end and a closed end fits over the top portion of the inner cylinder in telescoping engagement. A force exerted on the closed end of the outer cylinder urges the bottom of a can in the inner cylinder into engagement with the piercing device in the bottom of the inner cylinder to form an opening in the can bottom, thereby permitting the contents of the can to enter the disposal container.

O' Brien, Michael D. (Las Vegas, NV); Klapperick, Robert L. (Las Vegas, NV); Bell, Chris (Las Vegas, NV)

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

280

Aerosol can waste disposal device  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

Disclosed is a device for removing gases and liquid from containers. The device punctures the bottom of a container for purposes of exhausting gases and liquid from the container without their escaping into the atmosphere. The device includes an inner cup or cylinder having a top portion with an open end for receiving a container and a bottom portion which may be fastened to a disposal or waste container in a substantially leak-proof manner. A piercing device is mounted in the lower portion of the inner cylinder for puncturing the can bottom placed in the inner cylinder. An outer cylinder having an open end and a closed end fits over the top portion of the inner cylinder in telescoping engagement. A force exerted on the closed end of the outer cylinder urges the bottom of a can in the inner cylinder into engagement with the piercing device in the bottom of the inner cylinder to form an opening in the can bottom, thereby permitting the contents of the can to enter the disposal container. 7 figures.

O' Brien, M.D.; Klapperick, R.L.; Bell, C.

1993-12-21T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


281

Well Permits (District of Columbia)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

Well permits are required for the installation of wells in private and public space. Wells are defined as any trest hole, shaft, or soil excavation created by any means including, but not limited...

282

Immobilized low-level waste disposal options configuration study  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Mitchell, D.E.

1995-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

283

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)  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Not Available

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

284

HANFORD FACILITY ANNUAL DANGEROUS WASTE REPORT CY2003 [SEC 1 & 2  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Hanford Facility Annual Dangerous Waste Report (ADWR) is prepared to meet the requirements of Washington Administrative Code Sections 173-303-220, Generator Reporting, and 173-303-390, Facility Reporting. In addition, the ADWR is required to meet Hanford Facility RCRA Permit Condition I.E.22, Annual Reporting. The ADWR provides summary information on dangerous waste generation and management activities for the Calendar Year for the Hanford Facility EPA ID number assigned to the Department of Energy for RCRA regulated waste, as well as Washington State only designated waste and radioactive mixed waste. The Solid Waste Information and Tracking System (SWITS) database is utilized to collect and compile the large array of data needed for preparation of this report. Information includes details of waste generated on the Hanford Facility, waste generated offsite and sent to Hanford for management, and other waste management activities conducted at Hanford, including treatment, storage, and disposal. Report details consist of waste descriptions and weights, waste codes and designations, and waste handling codes. In addition, for waste shipped to Hanford for treatment and or disposal, information on manifest numbers, the waste transporter, the waste receiving facility, and the original waste generators are included. In addition to paper copies, the report is also transmitted electronically to a web site maintained by the Washington State Department of Ecology.

FREEMAN, D.A.

2004-02-17T23:59:59.000Z

285

Energy Generation Project Permitting (Vermont) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Generation Project Permitting (Vermont) Generation Project Permitting (Vermont) Energy Generation Project Permitting (Vermont) < Back Eligibility Construction Industrial Installer/Contractor Investor-Owned Utility Municipal/Public Utility Rural Electric Cooperative Utility Savings Category Alternative Fuel Vehicles Hydrogen & Fuel Cells Buying & Making Electricity Water Home Weatherization Solar Wind Program Info State Vermont Program Type Environmental Regulations Provider Agency of Natural Resources The Vermont Energy Generation Siting Policy Commission is mandated to survey best practices for siting approval of electric generation projects (all facilities except for net- and group-net-metered facilities) and for public participation and representation in the siting process, and to report to the Governor and to the Vermont Legislature on their findings by

286

State Waste Discharge Permit application: 200-W Powerhouse Ash Pit  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

As part of the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order negotiations; the US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, the US Environmental Protection Agency, and the Washington State Department of Ecology agreed that liquid effluent discharges to the ground on the Hanford Site which affect groundwater or have the potential to affect groundwater would be subject to permitting under the structure of Chapter 173-216 (or 173-218 where applicable) of the Washington Administrative Code, the State Waste Discharge Permit Program. This document constitutes the State Waste Discharge Permit application for the 200-W Powerhouse Ash Pit. The 200-W Powerhouse Ash Waste Water discharges to the 200-W Powerhouse Ash Pit via dedicated pipelines. The 200-W Powerhouse Ash Waste Water is the only discharge to the 200-W Powerhouse Ash Pit. The 200-W Powerhouse is a steam generation facility consisting of a coal-handling and preparation section and boilers.

Atencio, B.P.

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

287

Permitting and interconnection of solar PV generators for the Marin Energy Authority Feed-in Tariff Program.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

?? Lack of access to information on the cost and timeframe for the permitting and interconnection of distributed renewable energy generation facilities may hinder renewable… (more)

Rogers, Stephen Daniel

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

288

State Waste Discharge Permit application: 400 Area Septic System  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

As part of the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order negotiations, the US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, the US Environmental Protection Agency, and the Washington State Department of Ecology agreed that liquid effluent discharges to the ground on the Hanford Site which affects groundwater or has the potential to affect groundwater would be subject to permitting under the structure of Chapter 173-216 (or 173-218 where applicable) of the Washington Administrative Code, the State Waste Discharge Permit Program. This document constitutes the State Waste Discharge Permit application for the 400 Area Septic System. The influent to the system is domestic waste water. Although the 400 Area Septic System is not a Public Owned Treatment Works, the Public Owned Treatment Works application is more applicable than the application for industrial waste water. Therefore, the State Waste Discharge Permit application for Public Owned Treatment Works Discharges to Land was used.

Not Available

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

289

Delicate disposal of PCBs  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) has published three handbooks to help utilities evaluate the alternatives for disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), which will continue to be a utility responsibility for some time. The identification of PCBs as a toxic substance in 1976 ended their use as a capacitor and transformer insulator, but 375 million pounds are distributed in equipment and their disposal must be carefully planned. The booklets outline Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations, the disposal technology by incineration or landfill which is currently available, and guidelines for preventing spills and controlling risks. (DCK)

Lihach, N.; Golden, D.

1980-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

290

permitting | OpenEI Community  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

permitting permitting Home Alevine's picture Submitted by Alevine(5) Member 29 July, 2013 - 14:46 Texas Legal Review BHFS flora and fauna leasing Legal review permitting roadmap Texas The NREL roadmap team recently met with our legal team Brownstein Hyatt Farber and Schreck (www.bhfs.com) for a review of the Texas portion of the Geothermal Regulatory Roadmap (GRR). BHFS provided excellent suggestions to the Section 3 flowcharts for geothermal leases on Texas state lands. The Texas portion of the GRR now encompasses a flowchart for Texas state land leasing on Permanent School Fund Lands, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Lands, Land Trade Lands, and Relinquishment Act Lands. Additionally, BHFS provided many other helpful tips for clarifying other issue Kyoung's picture Submitted by Kyoung(155)

291

Disposal of low-level and mixed low-level radioactive waste during 1990  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Isotopic inventories and other data are presented for low-level radioactive waste (LLW) and mixed LLW disposed (and occasionally stored) during calendar year 1990 at commercial disposal facilities and Department of Energy (DOE) sites. Detailed isotopic information is presented for the three commercial disposal facilities located near Barnwell, SC, Richland, WA, and Beatty, NV. Less information is presented for the Envirocare disposal facility located near Clive, UT, and for LLW stored during 1990 at the West Valley site. DOE disposal information is included for the Savannah River Site (including the saltstone facility), Nevada Test Site, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Hanford Site, Y-12 Site, and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Summary information is presented about stored DOE LLW. Suggestions are made about improving LLW disposal data.

Not Available

1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

292

Microsoft Word - SRSSaltWasteDisposal.doc  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Salt Waste Disposal - References - §3116 Determination (RWR NDAA of 2005) Salt Waste Disposal - References - §3116 Determination (RWR NDAA of 2005) Doc. No. Filename Title Main Document References 1. 2005 RWR DAA §3116 NDAA.pdf "Ronald W. Regan National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2005," Section 3116, 2004. 2. CBU-PIT-2004-00024 CBU-PIT-2004-00024.pdf Ledbetter, L. S., CBU-PIT-2004-00024, 12/01/04 - December Monthly WCS Curie and Volume Inventory Report," Revision 0, December 9, 2004. 3. CBU-PIT-2005-00031 CBU-PIT-2005-00031.pdf Rios-Armstrong, M. A., CBU-PIT-2005-00031, "Decontaminated Salt Solution Volume to be transferred to the Saltstone Disposal Facility from Salt Treatment and Disposition Activities," Revision 0, February 13, 2005.

293

Permits handbook for coal development  

SciTech Connect

This coal permits handbook was prepared for Region VIII comprised of the states of Colorado, Utah, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, and South Dakota. The first part of the handbook provides the background and overview of information on coal with emphasis on federal and state regulatory authority and includes a status report on litigation affecting the coal industry. A discussion on specific analyses of the majority of environmental permits required to operate and develop coal mines comprises the second part of the book. Significant supportive information including the content of state regulations and standards, sample forms, guidelines, and a discussion of coal severance taxation are included on the appendices. (BLM)

Wayman, C.H.; Genasci, G.A.

1980-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

294

Ultimate Disposal of Wastes by Pyrolysis and Incineration  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

fan into the stack to atmosphere. The system incorporates the latest available designs in combustion This paper describes a new disposal facility designed to reduce thermally, without causing pollution, liq authorized the design and construction of a facility to reduce liquid/fluid industrial wastes by pyrolysis

Columbia University

295

Pioneering Nuclear Waste Disposal  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

request for further delays After the EPA certified that the WIPP met the standards for disposal of transuranic waste in May 1998, then-New Mexico Attorney General Tom Udall...

296

Pioneering Nuclear Waste Disposal  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Department of Energy (DOE) is closing the circle on the generation, management, and disposal of transuranic waste. But the WIPP story is not just about radioactive waste. It is...

297

State of Tennessee Hazardous Waste Management Permit, TNHW-127  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Class 1 1 Modification, Dated: 10/20/06 TABLE OF CONTENTS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, Y-12 NATIONAL SECURITY COMPLEX OAK RIDGE, TENNESSEE HAZARDOUS WASTE CONTAINER STORAGE AND TREATMENT UNITS BUILDINGS 9206, 9212, 9720-12, 9811-9, AND 9812 AND THE ORGANIC HANDLING UNIT EPA ID NUMBER: TN3 89 009 0001 Page Number I. STANDARD CONDITIONS A. EFFECT OF PERMIT I-1 B. SEVERABILITY I-1 C. DEFINITIONS I-2 D. GENERAL DUTIES AND REQUIREMENTS I-4 E. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION I-10 F. DOCUMENTS TO BE MAINTAINED AT THE FACILITY I-10 G. ANNUAL MAINTENANCE FEE I-10 H. REQUIRED NOTICES I-10 I. ORDER OF PRECEDENCE I-11 J. PERMIT STRUCTURE I-11 II. GENERAL FACILITY CONDITIONS A. HAZARDOUS WASTES TO BE MANAGED II-1 B. MAINTENANCE OF THE FACILITY II-1

298

State of Tennessee Hazardous Waste Management Permit, TNHW-122  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Class 1 1 Modification, Dated: 12/18/06 TABLE OF CONTENTS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, Y-12 NATIONAL SECURITY COMPLEX OAK RIDGE, TENNESSEE HAZARDOUS WASTE CONTAINER STORAGE AND TREATMENT UNITS BUILDINGS 9720-9, 9720-25, AND 9720-31 EPA ID NUMBER: TN3 89 009 0001 Page Number I. STANDARD CONDITIONS A. EFFECT OF PERMIT I-1 B. SEVERABILITY I-1 C. DEFINITIONS I-2 D. GENERAL DUTIES AND REQUIREMENTS I-4 E. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION I-10 F. DOCUMENTS TO BE MAINTAINED AT THE FACILITY I-10 G. ANNUAL MAINTENANCE FEE I-10 H. REQUIRED NOTICES I-10 I. ORDER OF PRECEDENCE I-11 J. PERMIT STRUCTURE I-11 II. GENERAL FACILITY CONDITIONS A. HAZARDOUS WASTES TO BE MANAGED II-1 B. MAINTENANCE OF THE FACILITY II-1 C. SAMPLING, ANALYSIS, AND MONITORING II-1

299

Transuranic 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

Transuranic waste (TRUW) loads and potential contaminant releases at and en route to treatment, storage, and disposal sites in the US Department of Energy (DOE) complex are important considerations in DOE`s Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS). Waste loads are determined in part by the level of treatment the waste has undergone and the complex-wide configuration of origination, treatment, storage, and disposal sites selected for TRUW management. Other elements that impact waste loads are treatment volumes, waste characteristics, and the unit operation parameters of the treatment technologies. Treatment levels and site configurations have been combined into six TRUW management alternatives for study in the WM PEIS. This supplemental report to the WM PEIS gives the projected waste loads and contaminant release profiles for DOE treatment sites under each of the six TRUW management alternatives. It gives TRUW characteristics and inventories for current DOE generation and storage sites, describes the treatment technologies for three proposed levels of TRUW treatment, and presents the representative unit operation parameters of the treatment technologies. The data presented are primary inputs to developing the costs, health risks, and socioeconomic and environmental impacts of treating, packaging, and shipping TRUW for disposal.

Hong, K.; Kotek, T.; Folga, S.; Koebnick, B.; Wang, Y.; Kaicher, C.

1996-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

300

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


301

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

302

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

303

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

304

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

305

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

306

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

307

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

308

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

309

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

310

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

311

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

312

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

313

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

314

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

315

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

316

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

317

PERMITTING LEADERSHIP IN THE UNITED STATES  

SciTech Connect

In accordance with the Southern States Energy Board (SSEB) proposal, as incorporated into NETL/DE-FC26-97FT34199, the objective of this agreement is to streamline the environmental technology permitting process site-to-site, state-to-state, and industry-to-industry to achieve remediation and waste processing faster, better and cheaper. SSEB is working with member Governors, legislators and regulators to build consensus on streamlining the permitting process for new and innovative technologies for addressing the legacy of environmental problems from 50 years of weapons research, development and production. This report reviews mechanisms whereby industry consortiums and the Department of Energy (DOE) have been working with State regulators and other officials in technology deployment decisions within the DOE complex. The historic development of relationships with State regulators is reviewed and the current nature of the relationships examined. The report contains observations from internal DOE reviews as well as recommendations from the General Accounting Office (GAO) and other external organizations. The report discusses reorganization initiatives leading up to a DOE Top-to-Bottom review of the Environmental Management (EM) Program and highlights points of consideration for maintaining effective linkages with State regulators. It notes how the proposed changes will place new demands upon the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) and how NETL can leverage its resources by refocusing existing EM efforts specifically to states that have DOE facilities within their borders (host-states). Finally, the report discusses how SSEB's Permitting Leadership in the United States (PLUS) program can provide the foundation for elements of NETL's technical assistance program that are delivered to regulators and other decision- makers in host-states. As a regional compact commission, SSEB provides important direct linkages to regulators and stakeholders who need technical assistance to evaluate DOE's cleanup plans. In addition, the PLUS program has facilitated the involvement of key regulators from host-states beyond the Southern region.

Ken Nemeth

2002-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

318

DOE Permitting Hydrogen Facilities: Animation of a Telecommunications Site  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Animation of a Telecommunications Site Example Layout Animation of a Telecommunications Site Example Layout The animation below provides an example of a telecommunications site layout that uses hydrogen fuel cells for backup power along with some of the codes and standards that apply to such a site. Roll over each of the colored bars below to reveal individual setback requirements, which identify the mandatory separation distances of the site's various components, or select the "Go to Setback Details" button for a chart that summarizes these requirements as defined by the 2006 International Fire Code. Select the "Construction Approval" button for a detailed list of codes and standards related to the construction of a site, or select the "Operation Approval" button for codes and standards related to ongoing operation and

319

Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Public Comments to Community...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

which will be issued before June 28, 2011, will describe how LANL will 1. establish an open working relationship with communities and interested members of the public; 2....

320

NPDES Individual Permit for Industrial Facilities - Mail Merge Template  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

No. TN0002968 No. TN0002968 Authorization to discharge under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Issued By Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation Division of Water Pollution Control 401 Church Street 6th Floor, L & C Annex Nashville, Tennessee 37243-1534 Under authority of the Tennessee Water Quality Control Act of 1977 (T.C.A. 69-3-101 et seq.) and the delegation of authority from the United States Environmental Protection Agency under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended by the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 1251, et seq.) Discharger: USDOE-Oak Ridge Y12 National Security Complex is authorized to discharge: process wastewaters and other wastewaters which have been accepted for treatment via waste acceptance procedures, cooling

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


321

DOE Permitting Hydrogen Facilities: Hazard and Risk Analysis  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

are expected as the hydrogen infrastructure grows. And like developers of conventional gas stations, hydrogen-fueling-station developers must analyze and mitigate potential...

322

Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Public Comments to Community...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Annual Summary of Comments for July 2012 through August 2013 Last saved on: 8302013 Annual Summary of CRP comment for July 2011- August 2012 1 SECTION COMMENT POST? 2.0 & 4.0 1....

323

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

2011-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

324

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

SciTech Connect

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.

David Duncan

2011-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

325

Transmission/Permitting Atlas | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Atlas < Transmission Jump to: navigation, search PermittingAtlasHeader.png Roadmap Compare States General Transmission Dashboard Permitting Atlas Compare States Arizona California...

326

Water Pollution Control Permit Regulations (Vermont)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

These regulations outline the permits and permitting processes for point discharges to surface waters and outline the monitoring and reporting requirements.

327

Direct Discharge Permit (Vermont) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Discharge Permit (Vermont) Direct Discharge Permit (Vermont) Eligibility Utility Agricultural Investor-Owned Utility Industrial MunicipalPublic Utility Rural Electric Cooperative...

328

Wind Energy Permitting Standards | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Wind Energy Permitting Standards Wind Energy Permitting Standards < Back Eligibility Commercial Construction Industrial InstallerContractor Savings Category Wind Buying & Making...

329

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Ethanol and Hydrogen Production Facility  

Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center (EERE)

Ethanol and Hydrogen Ethanol and Hydrogen Production Facility Permits to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Ethanol and Hydrogen Production Facility Permits on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Ethanol and Hydrogen Production Facility Permits on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Ethanol and Hydrogen Production Facility Permits on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Ethanol and Hydrogen Production Facility Permits on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Ethanol and Hydrogen Production Facility Permits on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Ethanol and Hydrogen Production Facility Permits on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type

330

AQUIS: A PC-based air inventory and permit manager  

SciTech Connect

The Air Quality Utility Information System (AQUIS) was developed to calculate and track sources, emissions, stacks, permits, and related information. The system runs on IBM-compatible personal computers with dBASE IV and tracks more than 1,200 data items distributed among various source categories. AQUIS is currently operating at nine US Air Force facilities that have up to 1,000 sources. The system provides a flexible reporting capability that permits users who are unfamiliar with database structure to design and prepare reports containing user-specified information. In addition to six criteria pollutants, AQUIS calculates compound-specific emissions and allows users to enter their own emission estimates.

Smith, A.E.; Huber, C.C.; Tschanz, J. [Argonne National Lab., IL (United States); Ryckman, S.J. Jr. [Air Force Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH (United States). Environmental Engineering Division

1992-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

331

AQUIS: A PC-based air inventory and permit manager  

SciTech Connect

The Air Quality Utility Information System (AQUIS) was developed to calculate and track sources, emissions, stacks, permits, and related information. The system runs on IBM-compatible personal computers with dBASE IV and tracks more than 1,200 data items distributed among various source categories. AQUIS is currently operating at nine US Air Force facilities that have up to 1,000 sources. The system provides a flexible reporting capability that permits users who are unfamiliar with database structure to design and prepare reports containing user-specified information. In addition to six criteria pollutants, AQUIS calculates compound-specific emissions and allows users to enter their own emission estimates.

Smith, A.E.; Huber, C.C.; Tschanz, J. (Argonne National Lab., IL (United States)); Ryckman, S.J. Jr. (Air Force Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH (United States). Environmental Engineering Division)

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

332

GRR/Section 15-CO-a - Air Permit - Construction Permit | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

5-CO-a - Air Permit - Construction Permit 5-CO-a - Air Permit - Construction Permit < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 15-CO-a - Air Permit - Construction Permit 15COAAirPermitConstructionPermit.pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Regulations & Policies 5 CCR 1001-5 Colorado Stationary Source Permitting and Air Pollution Control Emission Notice Requirements Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 15COAAirPermitConstructionPermit.pdf 15COAAirPermitConstructionPermit.pdf 15COAAirPermitConstructionPermit.pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) Air

333

Low-Level Waste Disposal Alternatives Analysis Report  

SciTech Connect

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.

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

2006-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

334

Low and medium level radioactive waste disposal in France  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

ANDRA, as the national radioactive waste management agency of France, was created in 1979 as part of the French Atomic Energy, Commission and is responsible for radioactive waste disposal. Legislation passed on December 30, 1991 gave ANDRA greater autonomy and responsibility for radioactive waste management by making it a Public Service Company separate from the CEA and by placing it under the supervisory authority of the Ministries of Industry, of the Environment and of Research. The legislation specifically delegates the following responsibilities to ANDRA: (1) establishment of specifications for radioactive waste solidification and disposal; (2) design, siting and construction of new waste disposal facilities; (3) disposal facility operations; and (4) participation in research on, and design and construction of, isolation systems for long lived waste.

Potier, J.M.

1994-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

335

Southwestern Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact (South Dakota) |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Southwestern Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact (South Southwestern Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact (South Dakota) Southwestern Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact (South Dakota) < Back Eligibility Utility Investor-Owned Utility Industrial Construction Municipal/Public Utility Rural Electric Cooperative Fuel Distributor Program Info State South Dakota Program Type Siting and Permitting Provider Southwestern Low-Level Radioactive Waste Commission This legislation authorizes the state's entrance into the Southwestern Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact, which provides for the cooperative management of low-level radioactive waste. The Compact is administered by a commission, which can regulate and impose fees on in-state radioactive waste generators. The states of Arizona, California,

336

Solid Waste Disposal, Hazardous Waste Management Act, Underground Storage  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Disposal, Hazardous Waste Management Act, Underground Disposal, Hazardous Waste Management Act, Underground Storage Act (Tennessee) Solid Waste Disposal, Hazardous Waste Management Act, Underground Storage Act (Tennessee) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Developer Fuel Distributor Industrial Installer/Contractor Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Municipal/Public Utility Nonprofit Rural Electric Cooperative Schools State/Provincial Govt Systems Integrator Tribal Government Utility Program Info State Tennessee Program Type Environmental Regulations Siting and Permitting Provider Tennessee Department Of Environment and Conservation The Solid Waste Disposal Laws and Regulations are found in Tenn. Code 68-211. These rules are enforced and subject to change by the Public Waste Board (PWB), which is established by the Division of Solid and Hazardous

337

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

338

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

339

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

340

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


341

TYPE OF OPERATION R Research & Development T& Facility Type  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

-- R Research & Development T& Facility Type 0 Production scale testing a Pilat scale Y-. Bench Scale Process i Theoretical Studies Sample & Analysis 0 Productian 0 Disposal...

342

Facilities Management Facilities Management  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

) with the fire prevention office and the permit issued by a fire inspector. Unless advanced notice is given Services - Fire Prevention Office. The requestor must understand that all permit requests for scheduled in requests so the Fire Inspector can make contact with the requester. In situations where an EMERGENCY ONLY

Noakes, David R.

343

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

344

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

SciTech Connect

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.

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

345

GRR/Section 6-AK-b - Construction Storm Water Permitting | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 6-AK-b - Construction Storm Water Permitting GRR/Section 6-AK-b - Construction Storm Water Permitting < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 6-AK-b - Construction Storm Water Permitting 06AKBConstructionStormWaterPermitting (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations & Policies 18 AAC 72: Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 06AKBConstructionStormWaterPermitting (1).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative From DEC Website: The goal of the Storm Water Program is to reduce or eliminate pollutants in

346

GRR/Section 18-CO-a - Underground Storage Tank Permit | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 18-CO-a - Underground Storage Tank Permit GRR/Section 18-CO-a - Underground Storage Tank Permit < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-CO-a - Underground Storage Tank Permit 18COAUndergroundStorageTankPermit (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Colorado Department of Labor and Employment Regulations & Policies Solid Waste Disposal Act 7 CCR 1101-14 Article 2 Underground Storage Tanks Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18COAUndergroundStorageTankPermit (1).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative The design, installation, registration, construction, and operation of

347

Pioneering Nuclear Waste Disposal  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

PIONEERING NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL U.S. Department of Energy Carlsbad Area Office February 2000 DOECAO-00-3124 T h e W a s t e I s o l a t i o n P i l o t P l a n t ii Table of...

348

Radioactive waste disposal package  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

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.

Lampe, Robert F. (Bethel Park, PA)

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

349

Waste disposal package  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

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.

Smith, M.J.

1985-06-19T23:59:59.000Z

350

Permit Regulations for the Construction and, or Operation of...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Type Environmental Regulations Siting & Permitting The Permit Board will issue two types of air pollution control permits, a permit to construct air emissions equipment and...

351

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Previous Research · Composting, et.al. 2005; Bendfeldt et al., 2006; DeRouchey et al., 2005) #12;Disposal: Science and Theory: Science and Theory Scientific Validation of Composting · Experiment 1 Impact of foam on composting

Benson, Eric R.

352

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

353

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

354

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

355

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

Benson, Eric R.

356

Defense High Level Waste Disposal Container System Description  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Defense High Level Waste Disposal Container System supports the confinement and isolation of waste within the Engineered Barrier System of the Monitored Geologic Repository (MGR). Disposal containers are loaded and sealed in the surface waste handling facilities, transferred to the underground through the accesses using a rail mounted transporter, and emplaced in emplacement drifts. The defense high level waste (HLW) disposal container provides long-term confinement of the commercial HLW and defense HLW (including immobilized plutonium waste forms (IPWF)) placed within disposable canisters, and withstands the loading, transfer, emplacement, and retrieval loads and environments. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-owned spent nuclear fuel (SNF) in disposable canisters may also be placed in a defense HLW disposal container along with commercial HLW waste forms, which is known as 'co-disposal'. The Defense High Level Waste Disposal Container System provides containment of waste for a designated period of time, and limits radionuclide release. The disposal container/waste package maintains the waste in a designated configuration, withstands maximum handling and rockfall loads, limits the individual canister temperatures after emplacement, resists corrosion in the expected handling and repository environments, and provides containment of waste in the event of an accident. Defense HLW disposal containers for HLW disposal will hold up to five HLW canisters. Defense HLW disposal containers for co-disposal will hold up to five HLW canisters arranged in a ring and one DOE SNF canister in the ring. Defense HLW disposal containers also will hold two Multi-Canister Overpacks (MCOs) and two HLW canisters in one disposal container. The disposal container will include outer and inner cylinders, outer and inner cylinder lids, and may include a canister guide. An exterior label will provide a means by which to identify the disposal container and its contents. Different materials will be selected for the disposal container inner and outer cylinders. The two metal cylinders, in combination with the Emplacement Drift System, drip shield, and natural barrier, will support the design philosophy of defense-in-depth. The use of materials with different properties prevents a single mode failure from breaching the waste package. The inner cylinder and inner cylinder lids will be constructed of stainless steel and the outer cylinder and outer cylinder lids will be a barrier made of high-nickel alloy. The defense HLW disposal container interfaces with the emplacement drift environment and the internal waste by transferring heat from the canisters to the external environment and by protecting the canisters and their contents from damage/degradation by the external environment. The disposal container also interfaces with the canisters by limiting access of moderator and oxidizing agents to the waste. A loaded and sealed disposal container (waste package) interfaces with the Emplacement Drift System's emplacement drift waste package supports upon which the waste packages are placed. The disposal container interfaces with the Canister Transfer System, Waste Emplacement /Retrieval System, Disposal Container Handling System, and Waste Package Remediation System during loading, handling, transfer, emplacement, and retrieval for the disposal container/waste package.

NONE

2000-10-12T23:59:59.000Z

357

CCA-Treated wood disposed in landfills and life-cycle trade-offs with waste-to-energy and MSW landfill disposal  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) regulations, it produces energy and does not emit fossil carbonCCA-Treated wood disposed in landfills and life-cycle trade-offs with waste-to-energy and MSW in waste-to-energy (WTE) facilities. In other countries, the predominant disposal option for wood

Florida, University of

358

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Initial Report for PCB Disposal Authorization (40 CFR {section} 761.75[c])  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Westinghouse TRU Solutions

2002-03-19T23:59:59.000Z

359

PP-82-3 The Joint Owners of the Highgate Interconnection Facilities...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

3 The Joint Owners of the Highgate Interconnection Facilities PP-82-3 The Joint Owners of the Highgate Interconnection Facilities Presidential Permit authorizing The Joint Owners...

360

Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No: PP-371 Northern Pass  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

No: PP-371 Northern No: PP-371 Northern Pass Transmission: Comments from William and Michelle Shoemaker Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No: PP-371 Northern Pass Transmission: Comments from William and Michelle Shoemaker Application from Northern Pass Transmission to construct, operate and maintain electric transmission facilities at the U.S. - Canada Border. Shoemaker_Comments.pdf More Documents & Publications Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-371 Northern Pass Transmission: Comments from Linda Upham Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-371 Northern Pass Transmission: Comments from City of Concord - James Kennedy Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-371 Northern Pass Transmission: Comments from Fred Brownson

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


361

Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 International  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Reply Comments Reply Comments Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 International Transmission Company: Reply Comments Reply Comments of International Transmission Company in reference to application from International Transmission Company to construct, operate, and maintain electric transmission facilities at the U.S. - Canada Border. PP-230-4 International Transmission Company More Documents & Publications Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 International Transmission Company: Supplemental Comments of the Independent Electricity System Operator Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 International Transmission Company: Letter from New York Transmission Owners Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 International

362

Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 International  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Midwest Independent Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 International Transmission Company: Comments of the Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator Comments of the Midwest Independent Transmission System Operaton on the application from International Transmission Company to construct, operate, and maintain electric transmission facilities at the U.S-Canada border. Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. 230-4 International Transmission Company More Documents & Publications Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 International Transmission Company: Supplemental Comments of the Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 International

363

Scenarios of the TWRS low-level waste disposal program  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

As a result of past Department of Energy (DOE) weapons material production operations, Hanford now stores nuclear waste from processing facilities in underground tanks on the 200 Area plateau. An agreement between the DOE, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Washington state Department of Ecology (the Tri-Party Agreement, or TPA) establishes an enforceable schedule and a technical framework for recovering, processing, solidifying, and disposing of the Hanford tank wastes. The present plan includes retrieving the tank waste, pretreating the waste to separate into low level and high level streams, and converting both streams to a glass waste form. The low level glass will represent by far the largest volume and lowest quantity of radioactivity (i.e., large volume of waste chemicals) of waste requiring disposal. The low level glass waste will be retrievably stored in sub-surface disposal vaults for several decades. If the low level disposal system proves to be acceptable, the disposal site will be closed with the low level waste in place. If, however, at some time the disposal system is found to be unacceptable, then the waste can be retrieved and dealt with in some other manner. WHC is planning to emplace the waste so that it is retrievable for up to 50 years after completion of the tank waste processing. Acceptability of disposal of the TWRS low level waste at Hanford depends on technical, cultural, and political considerations. The Performance Assessment is a major part of determining whether the proposed disposal action is technically defensible. A Performance Assessment estimates the possible future impact to humans and the environment for thousands of years into the future. In accordance with the TPA technical strategy, WHC plans to design a near-surface facility suitable for disposal of the glass waste.

NONE

1994-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

364

Air Permitting for Stationary Sources (New Hampshire)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

The permitting system implements the permitting requirements of RSA 125-C and 125-I to regulate the operation and modification of new and existing stationary sources, area sources, and devices to...

365

WIPP Hazardous Waste Permit - Approved Modifications  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

August 3, 2011 Class 1 Permit Modification Notification - Revise Tables 4.1.1 and G-1 dated August 8, 2011 Class 2 Permit Modification Request TRUPACT-III dated January 10, 2011...

366

Equity of commercial low-level radioactive waste disposal fees. Report to Congress  

SciTech Connect

In the Report accompanying the Fiscal Year 1997 Senate Energy and Water Development Appropriations Bill, the Senate Appropriations Committee directed the Department of Energy (DOE) to prepare a study of the costs of operating a low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal facility such as the one at Barnwell, South Carolina, and to determine whether LLW generators are paying equitable disposal fees. The disposal costs of four facilities are reviewed in this report, two operating facilities and two planned facilities. The operating facilities are located at Barnwell, South Carolina, and Richland, Washington. They are operated by Chem-Nuclear, LLC, (Chem-Nuclear), and US Ecology, Inc., (US Ecology), respectively. The planned facilities are expected to be built at Ward Valley, California, and Sierra Blanca, Texas. They will be operated by US Ecology and the State of Texas, respectively. This report found that disposal fees vary significantly among facilities for a variety of reasons. However, the information suggests that at each disposal facility, LLW generators pay equitable disposal fees.

1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

367

Disposal concepts and characteristics of existing and potential low-waste repositories - 9076  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The closure of the Barnwell low-level waste (LLW) disposal facility to non-Atlantic Compact users poses significant problems for organizations seeking to remove waste material from public circulation. Beta-gamma sources such as {sup 137}Cs and {sup 90}Sr in particular create problems because in 36 states no path forward exists for disposal. Furthermore, several other countries are considering disposition of sealed sources in a variety of facilities. Like much of the United States, many of these countries currently have no means of disposal. Consequently, there is a greater tendency for sources to be misplaced or stored in insufficient facilities, resulting in an increased likelihood of unwitting exposure of nearby people to radioactive materials. This paper provides an overview of the various disposal concepts that have been employed or attempted in the United States. From these concepts, a general overview of characteristics necessary for long-term disposal is synthesized.

Johnson, Peter J [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Zarling, John C [Los Alamos National Laboratory

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

368

Chapter 37 Land Disposal Restrictions (Kentucky) | Department...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

7 Land Disposal Restrictions (Kentucky) Chapter 37 Land Disposal Restrictions (Kentucky) Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Developer Fed. Government Fuel Distributor...

369

Transportation, Aging and Disposal Canister System Performance...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Transportation, Aging and Disposal Canister System Performance Specification: Revision 1 Transportation, Aging and Disposal Canister System Performance Specification: Revision 1...

370

Waste Disposal (Illinois) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Waste Disposal (Illinois) Waste Disposal (Illinois) Eligibility Commercial Construction Industrial Utility Program Information Illinois Program Type Environmental Regulations This...

371

ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SCHEDULE 4: PROPERTY DISPOSAL RECORDS...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

DISPOSAL RECORDS (Revision 2) More Documents & Publications Records Management Handbook PROPERTY DISPOSAL RECORDS ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SCHEDULE 9: TRAVEL AND...

372

GRR/Section 18-CO-b - Hazardous Waste Permit Process | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 18-CO-b - Hazardous Waste Permit Process GRR/Section 18-CO-b - Hazardous Waste Permit Process < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-CO-b - Hazardous Waste Permit Process 18COBHazardousWastePermitProcess.pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Regulations & Policies Colorado Hazardous Waste Regulations Part 260 Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18COBHazardousWastePermitProcess.pdf 18COBHazardousWastePermitProcess.pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative Hazardous waste is a regulated substance and facilities that treat, store

373

GRR/Section 3-WA-c - Utility Franchise or Permit Process | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 3-WA-c - Utility Franchise or Permit Process GRR/Section 3-WA-c - Utility Franchise or Permit Process < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 3-WA-c - Utility Franchise or Permit Process 3-WA-c - Utility Franchise or Permit Process (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Washington State Department of Transportation Regulations & Policies WAC 468-34-060 WAC 468-34-080 WAC 468-34-110 WAC 468-34-160 WAC 468-34-170 Triggers None specified This flowchart illustrates the process of obtaining a franchise or permit through a state highway right of way in Washington State. A utility permit or franchise is required for occupancy of a highway right of way by utility facilities, including private lines. WAC 468-34-160. The process is

374

Application for Presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 International  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 International Transmission Company: Comments of the Independent Electricity System Operator Application for Presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 International Transmission Company: Comments of the Independent Electricity System Operator Comments of the Independent Electricity System Operator on the application from International Transmission Company to construct, operate, and maintain electric transmission facilities at the U.S-Canada border. Application for persidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 International Transmission Company More Documents & Publications Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-362 Champlain Hudson Power Express Inc Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 International

375

Application to Amend Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 British  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

to Amend Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 to Amend Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 British Columbia Transmission Corporation: Federal Register Notice Volume 72, No. 78 - Apr. 24, 2007 Application to Amend Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 British Columbia Transmission Corporation: Federal Register Notice Volume 72, No. 78 - Apr. 24, 2007 Application from British Columbia Transmission Corporation to amend Presidential Permit to construct, operate and maintain electric transmission facilities at the U.S. - Canada Border: Federal Register Notice Application to Amend Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 British Columbia Transmission Corporation: Federal Register Notice, Volume 72, No. 78 More Documents & Publications Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 British Columbia

376

Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-334 Baja Wind U.S  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-334 Baja Wind presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-334 Baja Wind U.S Transmission LLC: Federal Register Notice Volume 73, No. 36 - Feb. 22, 2008 Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-334 Baja Wind U.S Transmission LLC: Federal Register Notice Volume 73, No. 36 - Feb. 22, 2008 Federal Register Notice in Vol 73 No 36 of Application from Baja Wind U.S Transmission LLC to construct, operate, and maintain electric transmission facilities at the U.S-Mexico border. Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-334 Baja Wind U.S Transmission LLC More Documents & Publications Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-334 Baja Wind Transmission, LLC Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-334 Baja Wind U.S Transmission LLC: Update

377

GRR/Section 15-WA-b - Air Operating Permit | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Page Page Edit with form History Facebook icon Twitter icon » GRR/Section 15-WA-b - Air Operating Permit < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 15-WA-b - Air Operating Permit 15-WA-b - Air Operating Permit.pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Washington State Department of Ecology Regulations & Policies WAC 173-401-500 WAC 173-401-800 WAC 173-401-810 WAC 173-401-735 WAC 173-401-610 Triggers None specified This flowchart illustrates the process for obtaining an Air Operating Permit in Washington State. The Washington State Department of Ecology (WSDE) issues Air Operating Permit under WAC 173-401. An Air Operating Permit is required if a facility has the potential to emit

378

Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-230-3 International  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Permit OE Docket No. PP-230-3 Permit OE Docket No. PP-230-3 International Transmission Company d/b/a ITCTransmission Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-230-3 International Transmission Company d/b/a ITCTransmission Application for Presidential Permit authorizing International Transmission Company to construct, operate, and maintain electric transmission facilities at teh U.S. - Canada Border. PP-230-3 International Transmission Company More Documents & Publications Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-230-3 International Transmission Company d/b/a ITCTransmission Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-2 and PP-230-3 ITC Holdings Corporation Limited Partnership, International Transmission Company, and DTE Energy Company PP-230-3 International Transmission Company

379

Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 British Columbia  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 British for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 British Columbia Transmission Corporation Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 British Columbia Transmission Corporation Application from British Columbia Transmission Corporation to construct, operate and maintain electric transmission facilities at the U.S. - Canada Border. Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 British Columbia Transmission Corporation More Documents & Publications Application to Amend Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 British Columbia Transmission Corporation: Federal Register Notice Volume 72, No. 78 - Apr. 24, 2007 Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-369 British Columbia Transmission Corporation and British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority

380

Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-230-3 International  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-230-3 Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-230-3 International Transmission Company d/b/a ITCTransmission Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-230-3 International Transmission Company d/b/a ITCTransmission Application from International Transmission Company d/b/a ITCTransmission to construct, operate and maintain electric transmission facilities at the U.S. - Canada Border. Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-230-3 International Transmission Company d/b/a ITCTransmission More Documents & Publications Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-230-3 International Transmission Company d/b/a ITCTransmission Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-2 and PP-230-3 ITC Holdings Corporation Limited Partnership, International Transmission

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


381

GRR/Section 15-CA-a - Air Permit - Authority to Construct | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 15-CA-a - Air Permit - Authority to Construct GRR/Section 15-CA-a - Air Permit - Authority to Construct < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 15-CA-a - Air Permit - Authority to Construct 15CAAAirPermitAuthorityToConstruct (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies California Air Resources Board Regulations & Policies Clean Air Act (42 USC 1857 et seq.) California Air Pollution Control Laws Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 15CAAAirPermitAuthorityToConstruct (1).pdf 15CAAAirPermitAuthorityToConstruct (1).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative A developer seeking to construct, modify, or operate a facility or

382

Evaluation of nuclear facility decommissioning projects: Summary status report: Three Mile Island Unit 2. Radioactive waste and laundry shipments  

SciTech Connect

This document summarizes information concerning radioactive waste and laundry shipments from the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit 2 to radioactive waste disposal sites and to protective clothing decontamination facilities (laundries) since the loss of coolant accident experienced on March 28, 1979. Data were collected from radioactive shipment records, summarized, and placed in a computerized data information retrieval/manipulation system which permits extraction of specific information. This report covers the period of April 9, 1979 through April 19, 1987. Included in this report are: waste disposal site locations, dose rates, curie content, waste description, container type and number, volumes and weights. This information is presented in two major categories: protective clothing (laundry) and radioactive waste. Each of the waste shipment reports is in chronological order.

Doerge, D. H.; Haffner, D. R.

1988-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

383

Siting & Permitting | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Siting & Permitting Siting & Permitting Jump to: navigation, search Siting and permitting policies can facilitate the installation of clean energy systems by specifying the conditions and fees involved in project development. Some local governments have adopted simplified or expedited permitting standards for wind and/or solar projects. “Top-of-the-stack” or fast-track permitting saves system owners and project developers time and money. Some states have established maximum fees that local governments may charge for a permit for a solar or wind energy system. In addition, some states have developed (or have supported the development of) model wind ordinances for use by local governments. [1] References ↑ DSIRE Glossary Retrieved from "http://en.openei.org/w/index.php?title=Siting_%26_Permitting&oldid=538321"

384

Large Component Removal/Disposal  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Wheeler, D. M.

2002-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

385

BIOLOGICAL IRRADIATION FACILITY  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

A facility for irradiating biological specimens with neutrons is described. It includes a reactor wherein the core is off center in a reflector. A high-exposure room is located outside the reactor on the side nearest the core while a low-exposure room is located on the opposite side. Means for converting thermal neutrons to fast neutrons are movably disposed between the reactor core and the high and low-exposure rooms. (AEC)

McCorkle, W.H.; Cern, H.S.

1962-04-24T23:59:59.000Z

386

EM Plan Accelerates Uranium-233 Disposal, Saves Taxpayers Half Billion  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

EM Plan Accelerates Uranium-233 Disposal, Saves Taxpayers Half EM Plan Accelerates Uranium-233 Disposal, Saves Taxpayers Half Billion Dollars EM Plan Accelerates Uranium-233 Disposal, Saves Taxpayers Half Billion Dollars August 1, 2012 - 12:00pm Addthis For more than 50 years, the uranium-233 (U-233) supply has been stored at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s (ORNL) Building 3019. The facility, located near the center of the ORNL campus, is owned by EM and one of the nation’s few repositories for U-233 and other special nuclear materials dating back to the Manhattan Project. For more than 50 years, the uranium-233 (U-233) supply has been stored at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory's (ORNL) Building 3019. The facility, located near the center of the ORNL campus, is owned by EM and one of the nation's few repositories for U-233 and other special nuclear materials

387

EM Plan Accelerates Uranium-233 Disposal, Saves Taxpayers Half Billion  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

EM Plan Accelerates Uranium-233 Disposal, Saves Taxpayers Half EM Plan Accelerates Uranium-233 Disposal, Saves Taxpayers Half Billion Dollars EM Plan Accelerates Uranium-233 Disposal, Saves Taxpayers Half Billion Dollars August 1, 2012 - 12:00pm Addthis For more than 50 years, the uranium-233 (U-233) supply has been stored at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s (ORNL) Building 3019. The facility, located near the center of the ORNL campus, is owned by EM and one of the nation’s few repositories for U-233 and other special nuclear materials dating back to the Manhattan Project. For more than 50 years, the uranium-233 (U-233) supply has been stored at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory's (ORNL) Building 3019. The facility, located near the center of the ORNL campus, is owned by EM and one of the nation's few repositories for U-233 and other special nuclear materials

388

Radioactive waste material disposal  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

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.

Forsberg, C.W.; Beahm, E.C.; Parker, G.W.

1995-10-24T23:59:59.000Z

389

Radioactive waste material disposal  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

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.

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

390

Management Strategies for Treatment and Disposal of Utility-Generated Low-Level Radioactive Waste  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Some states or regional compacts may be unable to establish LLRW disposal facilities by the January 1, 1993, deadline. The possible strategies described in this report should help nuclear utilities prepare for this possibility by identifying safe and cost-effective waste disposal options.

1989-04-11T23:59:59.000Z

391

GRR/Section 15-ID-a - Air Quality Permit - Permit to Construct | Open  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

15-ID-a - Air Quality Permit - Permit to Construct 15-ID-a - Air Quality Permit - Permit to Construct < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 15-ID-a - Air Quality Permit - Permit to Construct 15IDAAirQualityPermitPermitToConstruct (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Idaho Department of Environmental Quality Regulations & Policies IDAPA 58.01.01 Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 15IDAAirQualityPermitPermitToConstruct (1).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative The Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) requires an air quality

392

Transmittal of Immobilized Low Activity Waste (ILAW) Disposal Preliminary RAM Analysis Report (formerly PLG-1412)  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report presents the results of the preliminary reliability, availability, and maintainability analysis of operations at the ILAW Disposal Facility, Project W-520, to be performed during Phase I activities in support of the WTP

CALMUS, R.B.

2002-12-04T23:59:59.000Z

393

Options and costs for offsite disposal of oil and gas exploration and production wastes.  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

In the United States, most of the exploration and production (E&P) wastes generated at onshore oil and gas wells are disposed of or otherwise managed at the well site. Certain types of wastes are not suitable for onsite management, and some well locations in sensitive environments cannot be used for onsite management. In these situations, operators must transport the wastes offsite for disposal. In 1997, Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne) prepared a report that identified offsite commercial disposal facilities in the United States. This information has since become outdated. Over the past year, Argonne has updated the study through contacts with state oil and gas agencies and commercial disposal companies. The new report, including an extensive database for more than 200 disposal facilities, provides an excellent reference for information about commercial disposal operations. This paper describes Argonne's report. The national study provides summaries of the types of offsite commercial disposal facilities found in each state. Data are presented by waste type and by disposal method. The categories of E&P wastes in the database include: contaminated soils, naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM), oil-based muds and cuttings, produced water, tank bottoms, and water-based muds and cuttings. The different waste management or disposal methods in the database involve: bioremediation, burial, salt cavern, discharge, evaporation, injection, land application, recycling, thermal treatment, and treatment. The database includes disposal costs for each facility. In the United States, most of the 18 billion barrels (bbl) of produced water, 149 million bbl of drilling wastes, and 21 million bbl of associated wastes generated at onshore oil and gas wells are disposed of or otherwise managed at the well site. However, under certain conditions, operators will seek offsite management options for these E&P wastes. Commercial disposal facilities are offsite businesses that accept and manage E&P wastes for a fee. Their services include waste management and disposal, transportation, cleaning of vehicles and tanks, disposal of wash water, and, in some cases, laboratory analysis. Commercial disposal facilities offer a suite of waste management methods and technologies.

Puder, M. G.; Veil, J. A.; Environmental Science Division

2007-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

394

Study examining a DOE proposal to dispose of mixed low level waste at the Nevada test site using an alternative landfill design.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

??The Department of Energy has set forth a proposal to use an Alternative Landfill Design (ALD) for the Mixed Low Level Waste disposal facility, in… (more)

Hart, Deborah

2005-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

395

DOE to Hold Public Information Meetings On Proposed Permit Modification  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Meeting Meeting On Proposed Permit Modification CARLSBAD, N.M., January 31, 2001 - The public is invited to comment on a proposed modification to the Hazardous Waste Facility Permit for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). Submittal of the proposed modification to the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) begins a formal review process that includes a 60-day public comment period and a public information meeting. In its request, DOE proposes alternative methods of quality control for radiography, which is currently done through visual examination. The proposed alternative is Digital Radiography/Computed Tomography. The modification would allow DOE to take advantage of new technology that enables analysis of the contents of

396

PRESIDENTIAL PERMIT NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY ORDER NO. PP-231  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY ORDER NO. PP-231 I. BACKGROUND The Office of Fossil Energy (FE) of the Department of Energy (DOE) has the responsibility for implementing Executive Order (EO) 10485, as amended by EO 12038, which requires the issuance of Presidential permits for the construction, operation, maintenance, and connection of electric transmission facilities at the United States international border. On November 2, 2000, Northern States Power Company (NSP) filed an application with the Office of Fossil Energy (FE) of the Department of Energy (DOE) for a Presidential permit to construct, operate, maintain, and connect an electric transmission line that would cross the U.S. border with Canada. NSP, doing business as Excel Energy Incorporated (Xcel), proposes to

397

WEB RESOURCE: Nuclear Waste Disposal  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

May 10, 2007 ... The complete "Yucca Mountain Resource Book" is also available for download at this site. Citation: Nuclear Waste Disposal. 2007. Nuclear ...

398

Waste disposal and renewable resources.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

?? Purpose/aim: The purpose of this dissertation is to find out the effect of waste disposal on environment and to explore the effect of renewable… (more)

Hai, Qu; PiaoYi, Sun

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

399

Continuing disposal of coal ash  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The large volume of power-plant coal ash produced and stricter Federal water pollution controls are making ash disposal increasingly difficult for utilities. The protection of surface and ground water quality required in the Resource conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act's Clean Water Act (CWA) amendments of 1977 have raised the cost of disposal to a level where an acceptable method must be found. The Electric Power Research Institute's Coal Ash Disposal Manual (EPRI-FM--1257) describes-ash chemistry, disposal site selection, site monitoring and reclamation, and other information of interest to utilities that are making cost estimates and procedure evaluations. (DCK)

Lihach, N.; Golden, D.

1980-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

400

Washington Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA...  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Washington Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- OtherOther: Washington Joint...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


401

Aquatic Habitat Protection Permit (Saskatchewan, Canada) | Open...  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

aID5044&FilenameAquatic+Habitat+Protection+Permit+Application.pdf&lEnglish Summary The Environmental Management and Protection Act, 2002 (EMPA) provides for the protection of...

402

Disclosure of Permitted Communication Concerning Fossil Fuel...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Disclosure of Permitted Communication Concerning Fossil Fuel Energy Consumption Reduction for New Construction and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings -- Docket No....

403

Industrial Discharge Permits (District of Columbia)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

All businesses and government agencies discharging process wastewater to the public sewer system must report their activities to DC Water's Pretreatment Center. Wastewater discharge permits are...

404

Solar Permitting Law (Oregon) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Residential Residential Savings Category Solar Buying & Making Electricity Heating & Cooling Water Heating Program Info State Oregon Program Type SolarWind Permitting...

405

GRR/Section 15-TX-a - Air Permit - Permit to Construct | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 15-TX-a - Air Permit - Permit to Construct GRR/Section 15-TX-a - Air Permit - Permit to Construct < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 15-TX-a - Air Permit - Permit to Construct 15TXAAirPermitPermitToConstruct (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Regulations & Policies Title 30 of the Texas Administrative Code 30 TAC 116.114 30 TAC 39.418 30 TAC 39.604 30 TAC 39.605 30 TAC 39.409 30 TAC 116.136 30 TAC 55.254 30 TAC 116.136 30 TAC 116.137 Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 15TXAAirPermitPermitToConstruct (1).pdf 15TXAAirPermitPermitToConstruct (1).pdf 15TXAAirPermitPermitToConstruct (1).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range.

406

B Plant complex treatment, storage, and disposal units inspection plan  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Beam, T.G.

1994-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

407

Nuclear Facilities Production Facilities  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000. Sand 2011-4582P. ENERGY U.S. DEPARTMENT OF Gamma Irradiation Facility (GIF) The GIF provides test cells for...

408

The mixed waste management facility: Cost-benefit for the Mixed Waste Management Facility at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory  

SciTech Connect

The Mixed Waste Management Facility, or MWMF, has been proposed as a national testbed facility for the demonstration and evaluation of technologies that are alternatives to incineration for the treatment of mixed low-level waste. The facility design will enable evaluation of technologies at pilot scale, including all aspects of the processes, from receiving and feed preparation to the preparation of final forms for disposal. The MWMF will reduce the risk of deploying such technologies by addressing the following: (1) Engineering development and scale-up. (2) Process integration and activation of the treatment systems. (3) Permitting and stakeholder issues. In light of the severe financial constraints imposed on the DOE and federal programs, DOE/HQ requested a study to assess the cost benefit for the MWMF given other potential alternatives to meet waste treatment needs. The MVVMF Project was asked to consider alternatives specifically associated with commercialization and privatization of the DOE site waste treatment operations and the acceptability (or lack of acceptability) of incineration as a waste treatment process. The result of this study will be one of the key elements for a DOE decision on proceeding with the MWMF into Final Design (KD-2) vs. proceeding with other options.

Brinker, S.D.; Streit, R.D.

1996-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

409

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WIPP PERMIT MODIFICATION AT THE HANFORD TRANSURANIC (TRU) PROGRAM  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Hanford is one of the Department of Energy's sites that ships transuranic (TRU) waste to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). WIPP's revised Hazardous Waste Facility Permit, granted by the State of New Mexico, required Hanford's TRU Program to make substantial changes to its process for certifying and shipping waste. This paper presents the extent of the changes to WIPP's permit and describes the way Hanford addressed the new requirements.

MCDONALD KM

2007-11-21T23:59:59.000Z

410

CoalFleet Integrated-Gasification-Combined-Cycle (IGCC) Permitting Guidelines  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

EPRIs CoalFleet for Tomorrow Program was formed to accelerate the deployment and commercialization of clean, efficient, advanced coal-fired power systems. During the planning and construction of these power systems, facility owners must obtain permits for plant construction and operation, discharge of pollutants to air and water, land and water use, and other areas of regulatory control. Such permits must be negotiated with regulators who are often not familiar with advanced coal technologies. These Coal...

2007-12-20T23:59:59.000Z

411

DOE/WIPP 02-3196 - Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Initial Report for PCB Disposal Authorization, March 19, 2002  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

2-3196 2-3196 Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Initial Report for PCB Disposal Authorization (40 CFR § 761.75[c]) March 19, 2002 Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Initial Report for PCB Disposal Authorization DOE/WIPP 02-3196 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2.0 LOCATION OF THE DISPOSAL FACILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.0 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DISPOSAL FACILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.0 ENGINEERING REPORT ON TECHNICAL STANDARDS FOR CHEMICAL WASTE LANDFILLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.0 SAMPLING AND MONITORING EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES AVAILABLE 6 6.0 EXPECTED WASTE VOLUMES OF PCB/TRU WASTE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7.0 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WASTE MATERIALS OTHER THAN PCBS . . . . 8 8.0 DISPOSAL FACILITY OPERATIONS PLAN

412

Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-334 Energia Juarez U.S. Transmission, LLC,: Record of Decision  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

DOE announces its decision to issue a Presidential Permit to Energia Sierra Juarez U.S, Transmission, LLC (ESJ) to construct, operate and maintain electric transmission facilities at the U.S. -...

413

Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application, 616 Nonradioactive dangerous waste storage facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This chapter provides information on the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the waste stored at the 616 NRDWSF. A waste analysis plan is included that describes the methodology used for determining waste types.

Price, S.M.

1997-04-30T23:59:59.000Z

414

Major developments in section 404-permitting  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Mountain coal mining in the Central Appalachians faces increased challenge under the Clean Water Act (CWA). These challenges have included the US Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) increased involvement in permitting under Section 404 of the CWA; active opposition by environmental groups to Section 404 permits; and proposed federal legislation to reduce the availability of these permits. These recent challenges culminated in a June 11, 2009, Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the PEA, the Department of Interior (DoI) and the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) that will limit the use of general permits for mountaintop coal mining and increase the scrutiny applied to individual permits, while also providing a coordinated approach for reviewing the backlog of pending permit application. By entering into the MoU, the federal agencies aim to reduce the environmental impacts of mountaintop coal mining while increasing certainty and transparency for permit applications. Challenges to Section 404 permitting for mountaintop coal mining are dynamic and new developments occur almost daily. This article provides a snapshot of the current climate.

Ahrens, M.; Orr, S. [Lathan & Watkins LLP (United States)

2009-06-15T23:59:59.000Z

415

WASTE DISPOSAL SECTION CORNELL UNIVERSITY  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

2/07 WASTE DISPOSAL SECTION CORNELL UNIVERSITY PROCEDURE for DISPOSAL of RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS This procedure has been developed to ensure the safety of those individuals who handle radioactive waste identified hazardous waste, or other unusual issues require special consideration. Contact the Department

Manning, Sturt

416

Household waste disposal in Mekelle city, Northern Ethiopia  

SciTech Connect

In many cities of developing countries, such as Mekelle (Ethiopia), waste management is poor and solid wastes are dumped along roadsides and into open areas, endangering health and attracting vermin. The effects of demographic factors, economic and social status, waste and environmental attributes on household solid waste disposal are investigated using data from household survey. Household level data are then analyzed using multinomial logit estimation to determine the factors that affect household waste disposal decision making. Results show that demographic features such as age, education and household size have an insignificant impact over the choice of alternative waste disposal means, whereas the supply of waste facilities significantly affects waste disposal choice. Inadequate supply of waste containers and longer distance to these containers increase the probability of waste dumping in open areas and roadsides relative to the use of communal containers. Higher household income decreases the probability of using open areas and roadsides as waste destinations relative to communal containers. Measures to make the process of waste disposal less costly and ensuring well functioning institutional waste management would improve proper waste disposal.

Tadesse, Tewodros [Agricultural Economics and Rural Policy Group, Wageningen University, Hollandseweg 1 6706 KN Wageningen (Netherlands)], E-mail: tewodroslog@yahoo.com; Ruijs, Arjan [Environmental Economics and Natural Resources Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 8130, 6700 EW Wageningen (Netherlands); Hagos, Fitsum [International Water Management Institute (IWMI), Subregional Office for the Nile Basin and East Africa, P.O. Box 5689, Addis Ababa (Ethiopia)

2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

417

Application to Amend Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 British  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Amend Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 Amend Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 British Columbia Transmission Corporation: Federal Register Notice Volume 72, No. 78 - Apr. 24, 2007 Application to Amend Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 British Columbia Transmission Corporation: Federal Register Notice Volume 72, No. 78 - Apr. 24, 2007 Application from British Columbia Transmission Corporation to amend Presidential Permit to construct, operate and maintain electric transmission facilities at the U.S. - Canada Border: Federal Register Notice Application to Amend Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 British Columbia Transmission Corporation: Federal Register Notice, Volume 72, No. 78 More Documents & Publications EXC-13-0004 - In the Matter of Liebherr Canada Ltd. PP-369 British Columbia Transmission Corporation and British Columbia Hydro

418

Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-305 Montana Alberta  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Federal Register Notice Volume 70, No. 210 - Nov. 1, 2005 Federal Register Notice Volume 70, No. 210 - Nov. 1, 2005 Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-305 Montana Alberta Tie Ltd: Federal Register Notice Volume 70, No. 210 - Nov. 1, 2005 Application from Montana Alberta Tie Ltd to construct, operate, and maintain electric transmission facilities at the U.S-Canada border. Federal Register Notice Vol 70 No 210. Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. 305 Montana Alberta Tie Ltd More Documents & Publications Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-305 Montana Alberta Tie Ltd: Update Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-305 Montana Alberta Tie Ltd: Scope Change #1 Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-305 Montana Alberta Tie Ltd: Notice to Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and

419

Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-371 Northern Pass  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

LLC: Federal Register Notice Volume 75, No. 220 - Nov. LLC: Federal Register Notice Volume 75, No. 220 - Nov. 16, 2010 Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-371 Northern Pass Transmission LLC: Federal Register Notice Volume 75, No. 220 - Nov. 16, 2010 Application from Northern Pass Transmission LLC to construct, operate, and maintain electric transmission facilities at the U.S-Canada border.. Federal Register Notice Vol 75 No 220. Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-371 Northern Pass Transmission LLC More Documents & Publications Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-362 Champlain Hudson: Federal Register Notice Volume 75, No. 43 - Mar. 5, 2010 Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-371 Northern Pass Transmission LLC: Addendum to Application Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-371 Northern Pass

420

Public invited to comment on additional proposed modications to WIPP hazardous waste permit  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Public Invited to Comment on Additional Proposed Modifications Public Invited to Comment on Additional Proposed Modifications To WIPP Hazardous Waste Permit CARLSBAD, N.M., April 26, 2000 - The public is invited to comment on additional proposed modifications to the hazardous waste facility permit for the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). Earlier this month, DOE and the Westinghouse Waste Isolation Division requested -- through three Class 2 permit modification submittals -- that the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) change certain provisions of the state permit. On April 20, DOE and Westinghouse submitted to NMED three additional Class 2 permit modifications. The Class 2 submittals begin a formal review process that includes a 60-day public comment period and two separate public meetings. Written comments will be accepted by

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "disposal facility permit" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


421

Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-362 Champlain Hudson:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-362 Champlain Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-362 Champlain Hudson: Federal Register Notice Volume 75, No. 43 - Mar. 5, 2010 Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-362 Champlain Hudson: Federal Register Notice Volume 75, No. 43 - Mar. 5, 2010 Application from Champlain Hudson to construct, operate, and maintain electric transmission facilities at the U.S-Canada border. Federal Register Notice Volume 75, No. 43 PP-362 Champlain Hudson Power Express Inc, Federal Register Notice Volume 75, No. 43 More Documents & Publications Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-362 Champlain Hudson Power Express, Inc. Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-362 Champlain Hudson Power Express Inc 2012 Annual Planning Summary for Electricity Delivery and Energy

422

Solar Construction Permitting Standards | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Standards Standards Solar Construction Permitting Standards < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial General Public/Consumer Industrial Local Government Nonprofit Residential Savings Category Solar Buying & Making Electricity Heating & Cooling Water Heating Program Info State Colorado Program Type Solar/Wind Permitting Standards Provider Colorado Energy Office Owners of solar photovoltaic (PV) systems and solar water heating systems in Colorado are required to obtain a building permit before their systems may be installed. Permits are handled at the local level and awarded by counties and municipalities. Traditionally, counties and municipalities have been free to assign their own fees for a permit. These fees can vary broadly in size across jurisdictions and in some cases, can be large enough

423

Coordinating Permit Office | OpenEI Community  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Coordinating Permit Office Coordinating Permit Office Home Kyoung's picture Submitted by Kyoung(155) Contributor 9 July, 2013 - 20:57 GRR 3rd Quarter - Stakeholder Update Meeting Alaska analysis appropriations Categorical Exclusions Coordinating Permit Office Cost Mechanisms Cost Recovery geothermal Hawaii NEPA permitting quarterly meeting White Papers On June 26th, we held the 3rd Quarter GRR Stakeholder Update at the Grand Sierra Resort in Reno, NV. The meeting was well-attended with over 40 attendees, including in-person and webinar attendance. Thanks to all who attended! Files: application/pdf icon Presentation: 3rd Quarterly Stakeholder Update Meeting application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.presentationml.presentation icon Mock-up: GRR Permitting Wizard Interface Kyoung's picture Submitted by Kyoung(155)

424

Sandia Laboratories radiation facilities  

SciTech Connect

This brochure is designed as a basic source of information for prospective users of Sandia Laboratories Radiation Facilities. It contains a brief description of the various major radiation sources, a summary of their output characteristics, and additional information useful to experimenters. Radiation source development and source upgrading is an ongoing program, with new source configurations and modes of operation continually being devised to satisfy the ever-changing radiation requirements of the users. For most cases, the information here should allow a potential user to assess the applicability of a particular radiation facility to a proposed experiment and to permit some preirradiation calculations and planning.

Choate, L.M.; Schmidt, T.R.; Schuch, R.L.

1977-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

425

DOE - Office of Legacy Management -- Shallow Land Disposal Area - PA 45  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

Shallow Land Disposal Area - PA 45 Shallow Land Disposal Area - PA 45 FUSRAP Considered Sites Shallow Land Disposal Area, PA Alternate Name(s): Parks Township Shallow Land Disposal Area Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation (NUMEC) Babcox and Wilcox Parks Facilities PA.45-1 PA.45-5 PA.45-6 Location: PA Route 66 and Kissimere Road, Parks Township, Apollo, Pennsylvania PA.45-1 Historical Operations: Fabricated nulcear fuel under an NRC license as an extension of NUMEC Apollo production facilities. PA.45-1 PA.45-5 Eligibility Determination: Eligible PA.45-6 Radiological Survey(s): None Site Status: Cleanup in progress by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. PA.45-6 USACE Website Long-term Care Requirements: To be determined upon completion. Also see Documents Related to Shallow Land Disposal Area, PA

426

12/2000 Low-Level Waste Disposal Capacity Report Version 2 | Department of  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Services » Waste Management » Waste Disposition » 12/2000 Services » Waste Management » Waste Disposition » 12/2000 Low-Level Waste Disposal Capacity Report Version 2 12/2000 Low-Level Waste Disposal Capacity Report Version 2 The purpose of this Report is to assess whether U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) disposal facilities have sufficient volumetric and radiological capacity to accommodate the low-level waste (LLW) and mixed low-level waste (MLLW) that the Department expects to dispose at these facilities. 12/2000 Low-Level Waste Disposal Capacity Report Version 2 More Documents & Publications EIS-0243: Record of Decision EIS-0200: Record of Decision EIS-0286: Record of Decision Waste Management Nuclear Materials & Waste Tank Waste and Waste Processing Waste Disposition Packaging and Transportation

427

EIS-0375: Disposal of Greater-than-Class-C Low-Level Radioactive Waste and  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

5: Disposal of Greater-than-Class-C Low-Level Radioactive 5: Disposal of Greater-than-Class-C Low-Level Radioactive Waste and Department of Energy GTCC-like Waste EIS-0375: Disposal of Greater-than-Class-C Low-Level Radioactive Waste and Department of Energy GTCC-like Waste EIS-0375: Disposal of Greater-than-Class-C Low-Level Radioactive Waste and Department of Energy GTCC-like Waste Summary This EIS evaluates the reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts associated with the proposed development, operation, and long-term management of a disposal facility or facilities for Greater-Than-Class C (GTCC) low-level radioactive waste and GTCC-like waste. The Environmental Protection Agency is a cooperating agency in the preparation of this EIS. The EIS evaluates potential impacts from the construction and operation of

428

Siting Study for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Lisa Harvego; Joan Connolly; Lance Peterson; Brennon Orr; Bob Starr

2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

429

Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-369 British Columbia  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

69 British 69 British Columbia Transmission Corporation and British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-369 British Columbia Transmission Corporation and British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority Application from British Columbia Transmission Corporation and British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority to construct, operate, and maintain electric transmission facilities at the U.S. - Canada Border. Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-369 British Columbia Transmission Corporation and British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority More Documents & Publications PP-369 British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-022-4 British Columbia Transmission Corporation

430

GRR/Section 7-NV-a - Permit to Construct and Permit to Operate | Open  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

7-NV-a - Permit to Construct and Permit to Operate 7-NV-a - Permit to Construct and Permit to Operate < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 7-NV-a - Permit to Construct and Permit to Operate 07NVAPermitToConstructAndPermitToOperate (3).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Nevada Division of Environmental Protection Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 07NVAPermitToConstructAndPermitToOperate (3).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative _ 7-NV-a.1 and 6-NV-a.2 - Has an Environmental Review been Completed for Construction? The developer must make sure to undergo an environmental process before

431

UNREVIEWED DISPOSAL QUESTION EVALUATION: WASTE DISPOSAL IN ENGINEERED TRENCH #3  

SciTech Connect

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.

Hamm, L.; Smith, F.; Flach, G.; Hiergesell, R.; Butcher, T.

2013-07-29T23:59:59.000Z

432

Naval Spent Nuclear Fuel disposal Container System Description Document  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Naval Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposal Container System supports the confinement and isolation of waste within the Engineered Barrier System of the Monitored Geologic Repository (MGR). Disposal containers/waste packages are loaded and sealed in the surface waste handling facilities, transferred underground through the access drifts using a rail mounted transporter, and emplaced in emplacement drifts. The Naval Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposal Container System provides long term confinement of the naval spent nuclear fuel (SNF) placed within the disposal containers, and withstands the loading, transfer, emplacement, and retrieval operations. The Naval Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposal Container System provides containment of waste for a designated period of time and limits radionuclide release thereafter. The wast