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

The Remote Handled Immobilization Low Activity Waste Disposal Facility Environmental Permits & Approval Plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this document is to revise Document HNF-SD-ENV-EE-003, ''Permitting Plan for the Immobilized Low-Activity Waste Project, which was submitted on September 4, 1997. That plan accounted for the interim storage and disposal of Immobilized-Low Activity Waste at the existing Grout Treatment Facility Vaults (Project W-465) and within a newly constructed facility (Project W-520). Project W-520 was to have contained a combination of concrete vaults and trenches. This document supersedes that plan because of two subsequent items: (1) A disposal authorization that was received on October 25, 1999, in a U. S. Department of Energy-Headquarters, memorandum, ''Disposal Authorization Statement for the Department of Energy Hanford site Low-Level Waste Disposal facilities'' and (2) ''Breakthrough Initiative Immobilized Low-Activity Waste (ILAW) Disposal Alternative,'' August 1999, from Lucas Incorporated, Richland, Washington. The direction within the U. S. Department of Energy-Headquarters memorandum was given as follows: ''The DOE Radioactive Waste Management Order requires that a Disposal authorization statement be obtained prior to construction of new low-level waste disposal facility. Field elements with the existing low-level waste disposal facilities shall obtain a disposal authorization statement in accordance with the schedule in the complex-wide Low-Level Waste Management Program Plan. The disposal authorization statement shall be issued based on a review of the facility's performance assessment and composite analysis or appropriate CERCLA documentation. The disposal authorization shall specify the limits and conditions on construction, design, operations, and closure of the low-level waste facility based on these reviews. A disposal authorization statement is a part of the required radioactive waste management basis for a disposal facility. Failure to obtain a disposal authorization statement or record of decision shall result in shutdown of an operational disposal facility or disapproval to initiate construction of a new facility.''

DEFFENBAUGH, M.L.

2000-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

2

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

3

WPCF Underground Injection Control Disposal Permit Evaluation...  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

and Fact Sheet Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Report: WPCF Underground Injection Control Disposal Permit Evaluation and Fact Sheet Abstract...

4

Hanford Facility RCRA permit handbook  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Purpose of this Hanford Facility (HF) RCRA Permit Handbook is to provide, in one document, information to be used for clarification of permit conditions and guidance for implementing the HF RCRA Permit.

NONE

1996-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

5

Oil field waste disposal costs at commercial disposal facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The exploration and production segment of the U.S. oil and gas industry generates millions of barrels of nonhazardous oil field wastes annually. In most cases, operators can dispose of their oil fields wastes at a lower cost on-site than off site and, thus, will choose on-site disposal. However, a significant quantity of oil field wastes are still sent to off-site commercial facilities for disposal. This paper provides information on the availability of commercial disposal companies in different states, the treatment and disposal methods they employ, and how much they charge. There appear to be two major off-site disposal trends. Numerous commercial disposal companies that handle oil field wastes exclusively are located in nine oil-and gas-producing states. They use the same disposal methods as those used for on-site disposal. In addition, the Railroad Commission of Texas has issued permits to allow several salt caverns to be used for disposal of oil field wastes. Twenty-two other oil- and gas-producing states contain few or no disposal companies dedicated to oil and gas industry waste. The only off-site commercial disposal companies available handle general industrial wastes or are sanitary landfills. In those states, operators needing to dispose of oil field wastes off-site must send them to a local landfill or out of state. The cost of off-site commercial disposal varies substantially, depending on the disposal method used, the state in which the disposal company is located, and the degree of competition in the area.

Veil, J.A.

1997-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

6

Solid Waste Disposal Facilities (Massachusetts)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

7

The Hazardous Waste/Mixed Waste Disposal Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Hazardous Waste/Mixed Waste Disposal Facility (HW/MWDF) will provide permanent Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permitted storage, treatment, and disposal for hazardous and mixed waste generated at the Department of Energy's (DOE) Savannah River Site (SRS) that cannot be disposed of in existing or planned SRS facilities. Final design is complete for Phase I of the project, the Disposal Vaults. The Vaults will provide RCRA permitted, above-grade disposal capacity for treated hazardous and mixed waste generated at the SRS. The RCRA Part B Permit application was submitted upon approval of the Permit application, the first Disposal Vault is scheduled to be operational in mid 1994. The technical baseline has been established for Phase II, the Treatment Building, and preliminary design work has been performed. The Treatment Building will provide RCRA permitted treatment processes to handle a variety of hazardous and mixed waste generated at SRS in preparation for disposal. The processes will treat wastes for disposal in accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR). A RCRA Part B Permit application has not yet been submitted to SCDHEC for this phase of the project. The Treatment Building is currently scheduled to be operational in late 1996.

Bailey, L.L.

1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

8

The Hazardous Waste/Mixed Waste Disposal Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Hazardous Waste/Mixed Waste Disposal Facility (HW/MWDF) will provide permanent Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permitted storage, treatment, and disposal for hazardous and mixed waste generated at the Department of Energy`s (DOE) Savannah River Site (SRS) that cannot be disposed of in existing or planned SRS facilities. Final design is complete for Phase I of the project, the Disposal Vaults. The Vaults will provide RCRA permitted, above-grade disposal capacity for treated hazardous and mixed waste generated at the SRS. The RCRA Part B Permit application was submitted upon approval of the Permit application, the first Disposal Vault is scheduled to be operational in mid 1994. The technical baseline has been established for Phase II, the Treatment Building, and preliminary design work has been performed. The Treatment Building will provide RCRA permitted treatment processes to handle a variety of hazardous and mixed waste generated at SRS in preparation for disposal. The processes will treat wastes for disposal in accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency`s (EPA`s) Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR). A RCRA Part B Permit application has not yet been submitted to SCDHEC for this phase of the project. The Treatment Building is currently scheduled to be operational in late 1996.

Bailey, L.L.

1991-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

9

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

10

WIPP Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Update  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Hazardous Waste Facility Permit (HWFP) was issued on October 27, 1999 [1]. Since that time, the WIPP has sought modifications to clarify the permit language, provide alternative methods for meeting permit requirements and to update permit conditions. Significant advancements have been made in transuranic (TRU) waste management as the result of modifications to the HWFP. Among these advancements is a modification to obtain a drum age criteria (DAC) value to perform headspace gas sampling on drums to be super-compacted and placed in a 100-gallon overpack drum. In addition, the Section 311 permit modification request that would allow for more efficient waste characterization, and the modification to authorize the shipment and disposal of Remote-Handled (RH) TRU waste were merged together and submitted to the regulator as the Consolidated Permit Modification Request (PMR). The submittal of the Consolidated PMR came at the request of the regulator as part of responses to Notices of Deficiency (NODs) for the separate PMRs which had been submitted in previous years. Section 311 of the fiscal year 2004 Energy and Water Developments Appropriations Act (Public Law 108-137) [2] directs the Department of Energy to submit a permit modification that limits waste confirmation to radiography or visual examination of a statistical subpopulation of containers. Section 311 also specifically directs that disposal room performance standards be to be met by monitoring for volatile organic compounds in the underground disposal rooms. This statute translates into the elimination of other waste confirmation methods such as headspace gas sampling and analysis and solids sampling and analysis. These methods, as appropriate, will continue to be used by the generator sites during hazardous waste determinations or characterization activities. This modification is expected to reduce the overall cost of waste analysis by hundreds of millions of dollars [3]. Combining both the chap. 311 and RH TRU waste permit modification requests allows for both the regulator and DOE to expedite action on the modification requests. The Combined PMR reduces costs by having only one administrative process for both modification requests. (authors)

Kehrman, B.; Most, W. [Washington Regulatory and Environmental Services, 4021 National Parks Highway, Carlsbad, NM 88220 (United States)

2006-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

11

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

SciTech Connect (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

12

Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application, general information portion  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The `Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application` is considered to be a single application organized into a General Information Portion (this document, DOE/RL-91-28) and a Unit- Specific Portion. The scope of the General Information Portion includes information that could be used to discuss operating units, units undergoing closure, or units being dispositioned through other options. Documentation included in the General Information Portion is broader in nature and could be used by multiple treatment, storage, and/or disposal units. A checklist indicating where information is contained in the General Information Portion, in relation to the Washington State Department of Ecology guidance documentation, is located in the Contents Section. The intent of the General Information Portion is: (1) to provide an overview of the Hanford Facility; and (2) to assist in streamlining efforts associated with treatment, storage, and/or disposal unit-specific Part B permit application, preclosure work plan, closure work plan, closure plan, closure/postclosure plan, or postclosure permit application documentation development, and the `Hanford Facility Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Permit` modification process. Revision 2 of the General Information Portion of the `Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application` contains information current as of May 1, 1996. This document is a complete submittal and supersedes Revision 1.

Price, S.M., Westinghouse Hanford

1996-07-29T23:59:59.000Z

13

The WIPP Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Improvements--2007 Update  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The most significant changes to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Hazardous Waste Facility Permit to date were completed during the past year with the implementation of significant revisions to the Waste Analysis Plan and the authorization to dispose of remote-handled transuranic waste. The modified Permit removes the requirement for reporting headspace gas sampling and analysis results for every container of transuranic mixed waste and provides for the use of radiography and visual examination to confirm a statistically representative subpopulation of the waste stream in each waste shipment as well as other changes that streamline the analytical data management process. Implementation began on November 17, 2006. (authors)

Kehrman, R.; Most, W. [Washington Regulatory and Environmental Services, Carlsbad, NM (United States)

2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

14

Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application, general information portion  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

15

Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application, PUREX storage tunnels  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

16

Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document, Set 2, the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Part B Permit Application, consists of 15 chapters that address the content of the Part B checklists prepared by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology 1987) and the US Environmental Protection Agency (40 CFR 270), with additional information requirements mandated by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 and revisions of WAC 173-303. For ease of reference, the Washington State Department of Ecology checklist section numbers, in brackets, follow the chapter headings and subheadings. This permit application contains umbrella- type'' documentation with overall application to the Hanford Facility. This documentation is broad in nature and applies to all TSD units that have final status under the Hanford Facility Permit.

none,

1991-09-18T23:59:59.000Z

17

Permitting of Wind Energy Facilities: A Handbook  

SciTech Connect (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

18

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1993-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

19

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NSTec Environmental Management

2009-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

20

Z-Area saltstone disposal facility groundwater monitoring report. First and second quarters 1997  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents the results of groundwater sampling during the first and second quarters of 1997 in the Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility. This report presents only the data for sampling during the first half of 1997 as required by industrial Solid Waste Permit No. 025500-1603. For a detailed discussion of groundwater monitoring in the Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility, consult the 1996 Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Annual Report. Appendix A presents the proposed South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control Proposed Groundwater Monitoring Standards. Flagging criteria are described in Appendix B. In May 1997 SCDHEC granted approval for seven hydrocone sampling.

NONE

1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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.


21

Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application, low-level burial grounds  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Hanford Facility Dangerous Plaste 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 Low-Level Burial Grounds (this document, DOE/RL-88-20).

Engelmann, R.H.

1997-08-12T23:59:59.000Z

22

Composite analysis E-area vaults and saltstone disposal facilities  

SciTech Connect (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

NMDOT Application for Permit to Install Utility Facilities Within...  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- OtherOther: NMDOT Application for Permit to Install Utility Facilities Within Public ROWLegal Published NA Year Signed or Took...

24

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Sonnichsen, J.C.

1997-08-21T23:59:59.000Z

25

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

SciTech Connect (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

26

FY 2006 ANNUAL REVIEW-SALTSTONE DISPOSAL FACILITY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Crapse, K; Benjamin Culbertson, B

2007-03-15T23:59:59.000Z

27

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report summarizes the 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.

Arnold, Patrick [NSTec] [NSTec

2014-02-14T23:59:59.000Z

28

Mixed waste disposal facilities at the Savannah River Site  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Savannah River Site (SRS) is a key installation of the US Department of Energy (DOE). The site is managed by DOE's Savannah River Field Office and operated under contract by the Westinghouse Savannah River Company (WSRC). The Site's waste management policies reflect a continuing commitment to the environment. Waste minimization, recycling, use of effective pre-disposal treatments, and repository monitoring are high priorities at the site. One primary objective is to safely treat and dispose of process wastes from operations at the site. To meet this objective, several new projects are currently being developed, including the M-Area Waste Disposal Project (Y-Area) which will treat and dispose of mixed liquid wastes, and the Hazardous Waste/Mixed Waste Disposal Facility (HW/MWDF), which will store, treat, and dispose of solid mixed and hazardous wastes. This document provides a description of this facility and its mission.

Wells, M.N.; Bailey, L.L.

1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

29

Mixed waste disposal facilities at the Savannah River Site  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Savannah River Site (SRS) is a key installation of the US Department of Energy (DOE). The site is managed by DOE`s Savannah River Field Office and operated under contract by the Westinghouse Savannah River Company (WSRC). The Site`s waste management policies reflect a continuing commitment to the environment. Waste minimization, recycling, use of effective pre-disposal treatments, and repository monitoring are high priorities at the site. One primary objective is to safely treat and dispose of process wastes from operations at the site. To meet this objective, several new projects are currently being developed, including the M-Area Waste Disposal Project (Y-Area) which will treat and dispose of mixed liquid wastes, and the Hazardous Waste/Mixed Waste Disposal Facility (HW/MWDF), which will store, treat, and dispose of solid mixed and hazardous wastes. This document provides a description of this facility and its mission.

Wells, M.N.; Bailey, L.L.

1991-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

30

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

31

A New Concept: Use of Negotiations in the Hazardous Waste Facility Permitting Process in New Mexico  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper describes a unique negotiation process leading to authorization of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to manage and dispose remote-handled (RH) transuranic (TRU) mixed wastes at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). The negotiation process involved multiple entities and individuals brought together under authority of the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) to discuss and resolve technical and facility operational issues flowing from an NMED-issued hazardous waste facility Draft Permit. The novel negotiation process resulted in numerous substantive changes to the Draft Permit, which were ultimately memorialised in a 'Draft Permit as Changed'. This paper discusses various aspects of the negotiation process, including events leading to the negotiations, regulatory basis for the negotiations, negotiation participants, and benefits of the process. (authors)

Johnson, G.J. [Washington TRU Solutions, LLC, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, New Mexico (United States); Rose, W.M. [U.S. Department of Energy, Carlsbad Field Office, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, New Mexico (United States); Domenici, P.V.; Hollingsworth, L. [Domenici Law Firm PC, Albuquerque, New Mexico (United States)

2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

32

Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application, 616 Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Storage Facility. Revision 2A  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This permit application for the 616 Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Storage Facility consists for 15 chapters. Topics of discussion include the following: facility description and general provisions; waste characteristics; process information; personnel training; reporting and record keeping; and certification.

Bowman, R.C.

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

33

Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility Groundwater Monitoring Report. 1997 Annual Report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Samples from the ZBG wells at the Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility are analyzed for constituents required by South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) Industrial Solid Waste Permit {number_sign}025500-1603 (formerly IWP-217). No constituents were reported above SCDHEC-proposed groundwater monitoring standards or final Primary Drinking Water Standards during first or third quareters 1997. No constituents were detected above SRS flagging criteria during first or third quarters 1997.

Roach, J.L. Jr. [Westinghouse Savannah River Company, AIKEN, SC (United States)

1997-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

34

Statistical evaluation of effluent monitoring data for the 200 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The 200 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility (TEDF) consists of a pair of infiltration basins that receive wastewater originating from the 200 West and 200 East Areas of the Hanford Site. TEDF has been in operation since 1995 and is regulated by State Waste Discharge Permit ST 4502 (Ecology 1995) under the authority of Chapter 90.48 Revised Code of Washington (RCW) and Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 173-216. The permit stipulates monitoring requirements for effluent (or end-of-pipe) discharges and groundwater monitoring for TEDF. Groundwater monitoring began in 1992 prior to TEDF construction. Routine effluent monitoring in accordance with the permit requirements began in late April 1995 when the facility began operations. The State Waste Discharge Permit ST 4502 included a special permit condition (S.6). This condition specified a statistical study of the variability of permitted constituents in the effluent from TEDF during its first year of operation. The study was designed to (1) demonstrate compliance with the waste discharge permit; (2) determine the variability of all constituents in the effluent that have enforcement limits, early warning values, and monitoring requirements (WHC 1995); and (3) determine if concentrations of permitted constituents vary with season. Additional and more frequent sampling was conducted for the effluent variability study. Statistical evaluation results were provided in Chou and Johnson (1996). Parts of the original first year sampling and analysis plan (WHC 1995) were continued with routine monitoring required up to the present time.

CJ Chou; VG Johnson

2000-04-04T23:59:59.000Z

35

Subproject L-045H 300 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The study focuses on the project schedule for Project L-045H, 300 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility. The 300 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility is a Department of Energy subproject of the Hanford Environmental Compliance Project. The study scope is limited to validation of the project schedule only. The primary purpose of the study is to find ways and means to accelerate the completion of the project, thereby hastening environmental compliance of the 300 Area of the Hanford site. The 300 Area'' has been utilized extensively as a laboratory area, with a diverse array of laboratory facilities installed and operational. The 300 Area Process Sewer, located in the 300 Area on the Hanford Site, collects waste water from approximately 62 sources. This waste water is discharged into two 1500 feet long percolation trenches. Current environmental statutes and policies dictate that this practice be discontinued at the earliest possible date in favor of treatment and disposal practices that satisfy applicable regulations.

Not Available

1991-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

36

Integrated Disposal Facility FY2011 Glass Testing Summary Report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

37

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

38

Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility groundwater monitoring report. 1996 annual report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility is located in the Separations Area, north of H and S Areas, at the Savannah River Site (SRS). The facility permanently disposes of low-level radioactive waste. The facility blends low-level radioactive salt solution with cement, slag, and flyash to form a nonhazardous cementitious waste that is pumped to aboveground disposal vaults. Z Area began these operations in June 1990. Samples from the ZBG wells at the Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility are analyzed for constituents required by South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) Industrial Solid Waste Permit {number_sign}025500-1603 (formerly IWP-217). During second quarter 1996, lead was reported above the SCDHEC-proposed groundwater monitoring standard in one well. No other constituents were reported above SCDHEC-proposed groundwater monitoring standards for final Primary Drinking Water Standards during first, second, or third quarters 1996. Antimony was detected above SRS flagging criteria during third quarter 1996. In the past, tritium has been detected sporadically in the ZBG wells at levels similar to those detected before Z Area began radioactive operations.

NONE

1996-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

39

Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Public Comments to Community...  

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

1 SECTION COMMENT POST? 2.0 & 4.0 1. Fix broken links on pages 3 and 4 for the HWA permit. Yes 2.0 2. Revise a sentence on page 4 to: "Limits on LANL waste facilities may be...

40

Guidance for writing permits for the use or disposal of sewage sludge. Draft report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Section 405(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) directs the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop regulations containing guidelines for the use and disposal of sewage sludge. On February 19th, 1993, EPA published final regulations at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 503 as the culmination of a major effort to develop technical standards in response to Section 405(d). These regulations govern three sewage sludge use and disposal practices: land application, surface disposal, and incineration. A key element in EPA's implementation of the Part 503 regulations is educating Agency and State personnel about these new requirements. Although the regulations are generally directly enforceable against all persons involved in the use and disposal of sewage sludge, they will also be implemented through permits issued to treatment works treating domestic sewage as defined in 40 CFR 122.22. Thus, the primary focus of the manual is to assist permit writers in incorporating the Part 503 requirements into permits; it serves as an update to the Guidance for Writing Case-by-Case Permit Conditions for Municipal Sewage Sludge (PB91-145508/HDM).

Not Available

1993-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

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.


41

Support of the Iraq nuclear facility dismantlement and disposal program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

42

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

43

Geosynthetic Clay Liner applications in waste disposal facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

44

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1993-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

45

Integrated Disposal Facility FY 2012 Glass Testing Summary Report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2013-03-29T23:59:59.000Z

46

Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Waste Acceptance Criteria  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

47

Performance assessment for the class L-II disposal facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1997-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

48

Application for Permit to Construct Access Driveway Facilities...  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

ROW Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Permit ApplicationPermit Application: Application for Permit to Construct Access Driveway...

49

Integrated Disposal Facility FY2010 Glass Testing Summary Report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

50

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1993-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

51

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 (OSTI)

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

52

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

53

Low-level radioactive waste disposal facility closure  

SciTech Connect (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

54

Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group Manual  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of Energy Power.pdf11-161-LNG | DepartmentEnergy InvitationLegaltoLizLow- LEVEL WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY

55

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

SciTech Connect (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

56

300 area TEDF permit compliance monitoring plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document presents the permit compliance monitoring plan for the 300 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility (TEDF). It addresses the compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and Department of Natural Resources Aquatic Lands Sewer Outfall Lease.

BERNESKI, L.D.

1998-11-20T23:59:59.000Z

57

Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Compliance Demonstration for DOE Order 435.1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

58

Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Public Comments to Community...  

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

covered by the permit. Please use another word for "promulgated," such as "created." This section should state that it is a ten-year permit, set to expire in November 2020. It...

59

International low level waste disposal practices and facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

60

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

SciTech Connect (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

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

Corrective action management unit application for the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility  

SciTech Connect (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

62

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

SciTech Connect (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

2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

63

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

64

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

65

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

SciTech Connect (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

66

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

SciTech Connect (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

67

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

SciTech Connect (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

68

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

SciTech Connect (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

2010-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

69

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

SciTech Connect (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

70

Environmental Permitting of a Low-BTU Coal Gasification Facility  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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...

Murawczyk, C.; Stewart, J. T.

1983-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

71

CHARACTERIZATION OF CORE SAMPLE COLLECTED FROM THE SALTSTONE DISPOSAL FACILITY  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Cozzi, A.; Duncan, A.

2010-01-28T23:59:59.000Z

72

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

73

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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...

74

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

75

Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Fact Sheet | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia, Virginia: Energy Resources Jump to: navigation,Ohio:Greer CountyCorridor |InformationNevada:1227118¬į,HaysvillePermit

76

Recycled Water Reuse Permit Renewal Application for the Central Facilities Area Sewage Treatment Plant  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This renewal application for a Recycled Water Reuse Permit is being submitted in accordance with the Idaho Administrative Procedures Act 58.01.17 ďRecycled Water RulesĒ and the Municipal Wastewater Reuse Permit LA-000141-03 for continuing the operation of the Central Facilities Area Sewage Treatment Plant located at the Idaho National Laboratory. The permit expires March 16, 2015. The permit requires a renewal application to be submitted six months prior to the expiration date of the existing permit. For the Central Facilities Area Sewage Treatment Plant, the renewal application must be submitted by September 16, 2014. The information in this application is consistent with the Idaho Department of Environmental Qualityís Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater and discussions with Idaho Department of Environmental Quality personnel.

Mike Lewis

2014-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

77

Application for Permit to Construct Access Driveway Facilities on Highway  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home5b9fcbce19 NoPublic Utilities Address: 160 East 300AlgoilEnergy Information the Army Permit: Engineering Form 4345 JumpROW |

78

Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities (TSDF) Guidance  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia, Virginia: Energy Resources Jump to: navigation,Ohio:Greer CountyCorridorPart A Permit Application Jump to: navigation,|

79

Radiological performance assessment for the E-Area Vaults Disposal Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The E-Area Vaults (EAVs) located on a 200 acre site immediately north of the current LLW burial site at Savannah River Site will provide a new disposal and storage site for solid, low-level, non-hazardous radioactive waste. The EAV Disposal Facility will contain several large concrete vaults divided into cells. Three types of structures will house four designated waste types. The Intermediate Level Non-Tritium Vaults will receive waste radiating greater than 200 mR/h at 5 cm from the outer disposal container. The Intermediate Level Tritium Vaults will receive waste with at least 10 Ci of tritium per package. These two vaults share a similar design, are adjacent, share waste handling equipment, and will be closed as one facility. The second type of structure is the Low Activity Waste Vaults which will receive waste radiating less than 200 mR/h at 5 cm from the outer disposal container and containing less than 10 Ci of tritium per package. The third facility, the Long Lived Waste Storage Building, provides covered, long term storage for waste containing long lived isotopes. Two additional types of disposal are proposed: (1) trench disposal of suspect soil, (2) naval reactor component disposal. To evaluate the long-term performance of the EAVs, site-specific conceptual models were developed to consider: (1) exposure pathways and scenarios of potential importance; (2) potential releases from the facility to the environment; (3) effects of degradation of engineered features; (4) transport in the environment; (5) potential doses received from radionuclides of interest in each vault type.

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

1994-04-15T23:59:59.000Z

80

Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Compliance Demonstration for DOE Order 435.1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

82

Natural hazards phenomena mitigation with respect to seismic hazards at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report provides information on the seismic hazard for design of the proposed Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF), a facility designed for the disposal of wastes generated during the cleanup of Hanford Site aggregate areas. The preferred ERDF site is located south and east of 200 East and 200 West Areas. The Washington State Groundwater Protection Program (WAC 173-303-806 (4)(a)(xxi)) requires that the characteristics of local and regional hydrogeology be defined. A plan for that work has been developed (Weekes and Borghese 1993). In addition, WAC 173-303-282 provides regulatory guidance on siting a dangerous waste facility, and US Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5480.28 requires consideration of natural phenomena hazards mitigation for DOE sites and facilities. This report provides information to evaluate the ERDF site with respect to seismic hazard. The ERDF will be a Corrective Action Management Unit (CAMU) as defined by 40 CFR 260.10.

Reidel, S.P.

1994-01-06T23:59:59.000Z

83

Disposal of radioactive waste from nuclear research facilities  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Maxeiner, H; Kolbe, E

2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

84

Permits  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security Administration the1 - September 2006 TheSteven AshbyDepartment ofGE'sOptimizationUSING CRonOther Permits

85

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

SciTech Connect (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

86

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

SciTech Connect (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

87

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

88

Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application, 325 hazardous waste treatment units. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report contains the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application for the 325 Hazardous Waste Treatment Units (325 HWTUs) which consist of the Shielded Analytical Laboratory, the 325 Building, and the 325 Collection/Loadout Station Tank. The 325 HWTUs receive, store, and treat dangerous waste generated by Hanford Facility programs. Routine dangerous and/or mixed waste treatment that will be conducted in the 325 HWTUs will include pH adjustment, ion exchange, carbon absorption, oxidation, reduction, waste concentration by evaporation, precipitation, filtration, solvent extraction, solids washing, phase separation, catalytic destruction, and solidification/stabilization.

NONE

1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

89

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2004-06-25T23:59:59.000Z

90

Radiological performance assessment for the Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

91

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

92

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

SciTech Connect (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

93

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

SciTech Connect (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

94

First Commercial US Mixed Waste Vitrification Facility: Permits, Readiness Reviews, and Delisting of Final Wasteform  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Westinghouse Savannah River Co. (WSRC) contracted GTS Duratek (Duratek) to construct and operate the first commercial vitrification facility to treat an F-006 mixed (radioactive/hazardous) waste in the United States. The permits were prepared and submitted to the South Carolina state regulators by WSRC - based on a detailed design by Duratek. Readiness Assessments were conducted by WSRC and Duratek at each major phase of the operation (sludge transfer, construction, cold and radioactive operations, and a major restart) and approved by the Savannah River Department of Energy prior to proceeding. WSRC prepared the first `Upfront Delisting` petition for a vitrified mixed waste. Lessons learned with respect to the permit strategy, operational assessments, and delisting from this `privatization` project will be discussed.

Pickett, J.B. [Westinghouse Savannah River Company, AIKEN, SC (United States); Norford, S.W.; Diener, G.A.

1998-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

95

Second performance assessment iteration of the Greater Confinement Disposal facility at the Nevada Test Site  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Greater Confinement Disposal (GCD) facility was established in Area 5 at the Nevada Test Site for containment of waste inappropriate for shallow land burial. Some transuranic (TRU) waste has been disposed of at the GCD facility, and compliance of this disposal system with EPA regulation 40 CFR 191 must be evaluated. We have adopted an iterative approach in which performance assessment results guide site data collection, which in turn influences the parameters and models used in performance assessment. The first iteration was based upon readily available data, and indicated that the GCD facility would likely comply with 40 CFR 191 and that the downward flux of water through the vadose zone (recharge) had a major influence on the results. Very large recharge rates, such as might occur under a cooler, wetter climate, could result in noncompliance. A project was initiated to study recharge in Area 5 by use of three environmental tracers. The recharge rate is so small that the nearest groundwater aquifer will not be contaminated in less than 10,000 years. Thus upward liquid diffusion of radionuclides remained as the sole release pathway. This second assessment iteration refined the upward pathway models and updated the parameter distributions based upon new site information. A new plant uptake model was introduced to the upward diffusion pathway; adsorption and erosion were also incorporated into the model. Several modifications were also made to the gas phase radon transport model. Plutonium solubility and sorption coefficient distributions were changed based upon new information, and on-site measurements were used to update the moisture content distributions. The results of the assessment using these models indicate that the GCD facility is likely to comply with all sections of 40 CFR 191 under undisturbed conditions.

Baer, T.A.; Emery, J.N. [GRAM, Inc., Albuquerque, NM (United States); Price, L.L. [Science Applications International Corp., Albuquerque, NM (United States); Olague, N.E. [Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (United States)

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

96

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

NONE

1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

97

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

98

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

PHIFER, MARK

2004-03-19T23:59:59.000Z

99

Annual Hanford Site Environmental Permitting Status Report  

SciTech Connect (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. This status report also addresses Permit Condition I.E.22, as interpreted in Section 12.1.25 of the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application, General Information Portion (DOE/RL-91-28, Rev. 4), that states this report will be prepared annually and a copy of this report will be placed in the Facility Operating Record, General Information file by October 1 of each year.

HOMAN, N.A.

2000-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

100

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

102

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Smith, Frank G.; Phifer, Mark A.

2014-01-22T23:59:59.000Z

103

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

104

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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 1,000ís 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

105

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

SciTech Connect (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

106

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 ďProtocol for Development of Authorized Release Limits for Concrete at U.S. Department of Energy Sites,Ē (1) from ...

American Society for Testing and Materials. Philadelphia

2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

107

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

NONE

1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

108

Comparative approaches to siting low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Newberry, W.F.

1994-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

109

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1996-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

110

Waste Disposal (Illinois)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

111

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 (OSTI)

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

112

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

113

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

114

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

SciTech Connect (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

115

Stormwater Permits (Vermont)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [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...

116

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

, 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." Disposal of TRU mixed waste at the WIPP requires EPA and state approval. (EPA regulates the radioactive

117

Interaction of Sr-90 with site candidate soil for demonstration disposal facility at Serpong  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Interaction of radiostrontium (Sr-90) with site candidate soil for demonstration disposal facility to be constructed in the near future at Serpong has been done. This activity is to anticipate the interim storage facility at Serpong nuclear area becomes full off condition, and show to the public how radioactive waste can be well managed with the existing technology. To ensure that the location is save, a reliability study of site candidate soil becomes very importance to be conducted through some experiments consisted some affected parameters such as contact time, effect of ionic strength, and effect of Sr{sup +} ion in solution. Radiostrontium was used as a tracer on the experiments and has role as radionuclide reference in low-level radioactive waste due to its long half-live and it's easy to associate with organism in nature. So, interaction of radiostrontium and soil samples from site becomes important to be studied. Experiment was performed in batch method, and soil sample-solution containing radionuclide was mixed in a 20 ml of PE vial. Ratio of solid: liquid was 10{sup ?2} g/ml. Objective of the experiment is to collect the specific characteristics data of radionuclide sorption onto soil from site candidate. Distribution coefficient value was used as indicator where the amount of initial and final activities of radiostrontium in solution was compared. Result showed that equilibrium condition was reached after contact time 10 days with Kd values ranged from 1600-2350 ml/g. Increased in ionic strength in solution made decreased of Kd value into soil sample due to competition of background salt and radiostrontium into soil samples, and increased in Sr ion in solution caused decreased of Kd value in soil sample due to limitation of sorption capacity in soil samples. Fast condition in saturated of metal ion into soil samples was reached due to a simple reaction was occurred.

Setiawan, Budi, E-mail: bravo@batan.go.id [Radwaste Technology Center-National Nuclear Energy Agency, PUSPIPTEK, Serpong-Tangerang 15310 (Indonesia); Mila, Oktri; Safni [Dept. of Chemistry, Fac. of Math. and Nat. Sci., Andalas University, Kampus Limau Manis, Padang-West Sumatra 25163 (Indonesia)

2014-03-24T23:59:59.000Z

118

Disposal Of Irradiated Cadmium Control Rods From The Plumbrook Reactor Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

119

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

120

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Hladek, K.L.

1997-10-07T23:59:59.000Z

122

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2006-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

123

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

124

Annual Hanford Site Environmental Permitting status report  

SciTech Connect (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

125

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1988-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

126

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

127

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Hiergesell, R

2005-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

128

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

129

P\\procedure\\EU#13 Page 1 of 3 TITLE ANNUAL FACILITY PERMIT  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

such as water management districts, state agencies, or federal agencies. ATTACHMENT "A" Department of an individual permit for each alteration of an existing electrical, gas, mechanical, plumbing or interior non

Fernandez, Eduardo

130

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2013-04-15T23:59:59.000Z

131

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Ballantyne, N.A.

1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

132

Safety aspects related to the operation of the Cabril L/ILW disposal facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In October 1992 the Spanish Ministry of Industry granted the operating permit to the Centro de Almacenamiento de El Cabril (C.A. El Cabril). The Annex 1 to this permit contains the limits and conditions related to safety and to radiological health protection, set by nuclear regulatory authority, the Consejo de Seguridad Nuclear (CSN). The main aspects of the operation regulated in the permit as well as their technical basis and practical meaning are discussed in this paper.

Ruiz, M.C. [Consejo de Seguridad Nuclear, Madrid (Spain); Alonso, J.A. [ENRESA, Madrid (Spain). Safety and Licensing Dept.

1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

133

Ground-water flow and transport modeling of the NRC-licensed waste disposal facility, West Valley, New York  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report describes a simulation study of groundwater flow and radionuclide transport from disposal at the NRC licensed waste disposal facility in West Valley, New York. A transient, precipitation driven, flow model of the near-surface fractured till layer and underlying unweathered till was developed and calibrated against observed inflow data into a recently constructed interceptor trench for the period March--May 1990. The results suggest that lateral flow through the upper, fractured till layer may be more significant than indicated by previous, steady state flow modeling studies. A conclusive assessment of the actual magnitude of lateral flow through the fractured till could however not be made. A primary factor contributing to this uncertainty is the unknown contribution of vertical infiltration through the interceptor trench cap to the total trench inflow. The second part of the investigation involved simulation of the migration of Sr-90, Cs-137 and Pu-239 from the one of the fuel hull disposal pits. A first-order radionuclide leach rate with rate coefficient of 10{sup {minus}6}/day was assumed to describe radionuclide release into the disposal pit. The simulations indicated that for wastes buried below the fractured till zone, no significant migration would occur. However, under the assumed conditions, significant lateral migration could occur for radionuclides present in the upper, fractured till zone. 23 refs., 68 figs., 12 tabs.

Kool, J.B.; Wu, Y.S. (HydroGeoLogic, Inc., Herndon, VA (United States))

1991-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

134

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Almond, P.; Kaplan, D.

2011-04-25T23:59:59.000Z

135

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Phifer, M.A.

2004-03-19T23:59:59.000Z

136

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Smith, F.; Phifer, M.

2014-04-10T23:59:59.000Z

137

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

138

Implementation of the Clean Air Act, Title V operating permit program requirements for the U.S. DOE Oak Ridge Reservation facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Title V of the Clean Air Act (CAA) establishes a new permit program requiring major sources and sources subject to Title III (Hazardous Air Pollutants) to obtain a state operating permit. Historically, most states have issued operating permits for individual emission units. Under the Title V permit program, a single permit will be issued for all of the emission units at the facility much like the current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program. The permit will specify all reporting, monitoring, and record-keeping requirements for the facility. Sources required to obtain permits include (a) major sources that emit 100 tons per year or more of any criteria air contaminant, (b) any source subject to the HAP provisions of Title III, (c) any source subject to the acid rain provisions of Title IV, (d) any source subject to New Source Performance Standards, and (e) any source subject to new source review under the nonattainment or Prevention of Significant Deterioration provisions. The State of Tennessee Title V Operating Permit Program was approved by EPA on August 28, 1996. This paper will provide details of initiatives underway at US Department of Energy (DOE) Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) Facilities for implementation of requirements under the Title V Operating Permit Program. The ORR encompasses three DOE Facilities: the Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), and the East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP). The Y-12 Plant manufactures component parts for the national nuclear weapons program; the ORNL is responsible for research and development activities including nuclear engineering, engineering technologies, and the environmental sciences; and the ETTP conducts a variety of research and development activities and is the home of a mixed waste incinerator. Each of the three DOE Facilities is considered a major source under Title V of the CAA.

Humphreys, M.P. [Dept. of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Office, TN (United States). Environmental Protection Div.

1998-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

139

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

140

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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.


141

ORNL results for Test Case 1 of the International Atomic Energy Agency`s research program on the safety assessment of Near-Surface Radioactive Waste Disposal Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) started the Coordinated Research Program entitled ```The Safety Assessment of Near-Surface Radioactive Waste Disposal Facilities.`` The program is aimed at improving the confidence in the modeling results for safety assessments of waste disposal facilities. The program has been given the acronym NSARS (Near-Surface Radioactive Waste Disposal Safety Assessment Reliability Study) for ease of reference. The purpose of this report is to present the ORNL modeling results for the first test case (i.e., Test Case 1) of the IAEA NSARS program. Test Case 1 is based on near-surface disposal of radionuclides that are subsequently leached to a saturated-sand aquifer. Exposure to radionuclides results from use of a well screened in the aquifer and from intrusion into the repository. Two repository concepts were defined in Test Case 1: a simple earth trench and an engineered vault.

Thorne, D.J.; McDowell-Boyer, L.M.; Kocher, D.C.; Little, C.A. [Oak Ridge National Lab., Grand Junction, CO (United States); Roemer, E.K. [Oak Ridge Inst. for Science and Education, TN (United States)

1993-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

142

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

SciTech Connect (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

143

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Hall, Steven Douglas

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

144

Siting of low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities in Texas  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Isenhower, Daniel Bruce

1982-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

145

Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility Groundwater Monitoring Report (1998 Annual Report)  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In accordance with SRS Z-Area Saltstone Industrial Solid Waste Permit, wells ZBG-1, ZBG-1A and ZBG-2 are monitored for the parameters listed in this document. Sampling was done during the first and third quarters of 1998. Additional Analyses were also run. The analytical results appear in Appendix 1.

Wells, D.

1999-04-27T23:59:59.000Z

146

RCRA, superfund and EPCRA hotline training module. Introduction to: Permits and interim status (40 cfr part 270) updated July 1996  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Owners/operators of facilities that treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste must obtain an operating permit, as required by Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The module presents an overview of the RCRA permitting process and the requirements that apply to TSDFs operating under interim status until a permit is issued. The regulations governing the permit process are found in 40 CFR Parts 124 through 270.

NONE

1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

147

Annual Hanford Site environmental permitting status report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The information contained and/or referenced in this Annual Hanford Site Environmental Permitting Status Report (Status Report) addresses the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) of 1971 and Condition II.W. of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 Permit, Dangerous Waste Portion (DW Portion). Condition II.W. of the RCRA Permit specifies the Permittees are responsible for all other applicable federal, state, and local permits for the development and operation of the Hanford Facility. Condition II.W. of the RCRA Permit specifies that the Permittees are to use their best efforts to obtain such permits. For the purposes of permit condition, `best efforts` means 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. This Status Report includes information on all existing and anticipated environmental permitting. Environmental permitting required by RCRA, the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984, and non-RCRA permitting (solid waste handling, Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Clean Water Act Amendments of 1987, Washington State waste discharge, and onsite sewage system) is addressed. Information on RCRA and non-RCRA is current as of July 31, 1998. For the purposes of RCRA and the State of Washington Hazardous Waste Management Act of 1976 [as administered through the Dangerous Waste Regulations, Washington Active Code (WAC) 173-303], the Hanford Facility is considered a single facility. As such, the Hanford Facility has been issued one US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/State Identification Number (WA7890008967). This EPA/State identification number encompasses over 60 treatment, storage, and/or disposal (TSD) units. The Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) has been delegated authority by the EPA to administer the RCRA, including mixed waste authority. The RCRA permitting approach for the Hanford Facility is addressed in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement). Pursuant to the Tri-Party Agreement, a single RCRA permit was issued by Ecology and the EPA to cover the Hanford Facility. The RCRA Permit, through the permit modification process, eventually will incorporate all TSD units.

Sonnichsen, J.C.

1998-09-17T23:59:59.000Z

148

Operating Permits (New Jersey)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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...

149

Wind Energy Permitting Standards  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

All wind facilities larger than 0.5 megawatts (MW) that begin construction after July 1, 2010, must obtain a permit from any county in which the facility is located. Facilities must also obtain...

150

TPDES General Permit No. TXR150000  

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

individual permit. This permit does not authorize the discharge or land disposal of any wastewater from concrete batch plants at regulated construction sites. Authorization for...

151

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

SciTech Connect (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

152

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Reigel, M.; Cozzi, A.

2010-08-17T23:59:59.000Z

153

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2013-06-21T23:59:59.000Z

154

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Phifer, MA

2004-03-19T23:59:59.000Z

155

Performance Confirmation Strategies for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant - A Historical Perspective from an Operating Disposal Facility - 12248  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Performance confirmation is an important element of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) program. Performance confirmation was first used during the early WIPP site characterization phase to focus experimental activities that address the development of probabilistic repository performance models and to address stakeholder assurance needs. The program is currently used to analyze the conditions of the repository and its surroundings to ensure that the basis for the repository's long-term radioactive waste containment predictions is valid. This basis is related to the parameters, assumptions, conceptual and numerical models that are used to predict or validate the potential radioactive waste containment performance of the system. The concept of performance confirmation for the WIPP is one that has evolved since the first repository work was initiated decades ago and plays an important role in assuring adequate repository performance both now and in the long-term. The WIPP mission has progressed from a pilot project to an operational disposal facility and will progress to eventual site closure when disposal operations are completed. Performance confirmation is an important part of each of these progressions. The concept of disposing radioactive waste in a geologic repository today involves a complete understanding of many technical, political, regulatory, societal and economic elements. Many of these elements overlap and solving all relevant issues necessary to site, operate and decommission a disposal facility should be done with knowledge of each element's requirements and impacts. Performance confirmation is one tool that can help to coordinate many of these elements into a program that actively investigates what is thought to be adequately understood about the system and what information is lacking. A performance confirmation program is used to determine ways to challenge and verify those areas that are thought to be understood and to find ways to understand those areas that are not well understood. Performance confirmation programs have been used twice at WIPP, first during site characterization and PA development and later in a Compliance Monitoring program. At first, only certain technical aspects of the system were deemed important because it was a scientifically-based, government project. Early site characterization work was design to gather information about the geology and hydrology of the area and the mechanical properties of the natural barrier. The information would be used in a PA to determine the long-term containment performance of the disposal system. A performance confirmation element was used to identify the sensitive elements of the system that were certain, well understood or justified and those that were not. It identified experimental and analytical programs that could be used to reduce uncertainty, confirm sensitive assumptions and provide useful data. This performance confirmation program provided data to justify the adequacy of the information used in PA to demonstrate compliance with EPA's containment requirements. Performance confirmation will continue to be used in the post-closure period for at least 30 years and likely up to the end of the 100-year institutional controls period. As the technical basis for the repository matures throughout the operational period, the currently planned post-closure monitoring program will need to be reassessed prior to implementation. However, the intent of the program will be the same as it was for the previous programs, to ensure the ultimate goal of the repository. This goal is to safely isolate waste from the accessible environment and ensure public and environmental safety. (authors)

Wagner, Steve [John Hart and Associate for Sandia National Laboratories, Carlsbad, New Mexico 88220 (United States)

2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

156

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 (OSTI)

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

157

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

158

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1996-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

159

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

SciTech Connect (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

2007-01-12T23:59:59.000Z

160

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

SciTech Connect (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

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

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  

SciTech Connect (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

162

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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: ē Department of Energy Order 435.1, ďRadioactive Waste Management,Ē requirements, including the performance assessment, composite analysis, monitoring plan, performance assessment/composite analysis maintenance plan, and closure plan ē Environmental assessment supporting the National Environmental Policy Act ē Nuclear safety ē Safeguards and security ē Emplacement operations ē Requirements for commissioning ē 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

163

RCRA/UST, superfund, and EPCRA hotline training module. Introduction to: Permits and interim status (40 CFR part 270) updated as of July 1995  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The module presents an overview of the RCRA permitting process and the requirements that apply to treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) operating under interim status until a permit is issued. It lists the types of activities that do and do not require a permit. It provides CFR cites for definitions of existing hazardous waste facility and new hazardous waste facility and identifies CFR sections relevant to Part A and Part B permit information requirements and describes the difference between them. It outlines steps in the process from interim status to receipt of permit. It identifies the differences among permit modification classes, and lists the special forms of permits. It lists the permit-by-rule applications, status and eligibility requirements for interim status and the conditions for termination of interim status and lists the conditions for changes during interim status.

NONE

1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

164

Louisiana Title V General Permits  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Title V of the Federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 requires federal operating permits for all major sources of air pollution. In 1992, Title 40, Part 70 of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR Part 70) codified the law s requirements. These federal regulations, entitled Operating Permit Program, define the minimum requirements for state administered operating permit programs. The intent of Title V is to put into one document all requirements of an operating permit. General Permits for oil and gas facilities may be preferred if the facility can comply with all permit requirements. If greater flexibility than allowed by the General Permit is required, then the facility should apply for an individual Title V permit. General Permits are designed to streamline the permitting process, shorten the time it takes to obtain approval for initial and modified permits. The advantages of the General Permit include reduced paperwork and greater consistency because the permits are standardized. There should be less uncertainty because permit requirements will be known at the time of application. Approval times for Initial and modified General Permits should be reduced. Lengthy public notice procedures (and possible hearings) will be required for only the initial approval of the General Permit and not for each applicant to the permit. A disadvantage of General Permits is reduced flexibility since the facility must comply with the requirements of a standardized permit.

Boyer, B.E.; Neal, T.L.

1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

165

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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 Energyís 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

166

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

167

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1988-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

168

Industrial Permit  

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

Protection Obeying Environmental Laws Industrial Permit Industrial Permit The Industrial Permit authorizes the Laboratory to discharge point-source effluents under the...

169

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

170

Chapter 38 Hazardous Waste Permitting Process (Kentucky)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This administrative regulation establishes the general provisions for storage, treatment, recycling, or disposal of hazardous waste. It provides information about permits and specific requirements...

171

Identification of permit and waste acceptance criteria provisions requiring modification for acceptance of commercial mixed waste. National Low-Level Waste Management Program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In October 1990, representatives of States and compact regions requested that the US Department of Energy (DOE) explore an agreement with host States and compact regions under which DOE would accept commercial mixed low-level radioactive waste (LLW) at DOE`s own treatment and disposal facilities. A program for DOE management of commercial mixed waste is made potentially more attractive in light of the low commercial mixed waste volumes, high regulatory burdens, public opposition to new disposal sites, and relatively high cost of constructing commercial disposal facilities. Several studies were identified as essential in determining the feasibility of DOE accepting commercial mixed waste for disposal. The purpose of this report is to identify any current or proposed waste acceptance criteria (WAC) or Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) provisions that would have to be modified for commercial mixed waste acceptance at specified DOE facilities. Following the introduction, Section 2 of this report (a) provides a background summary of existing and proposed mixed waste disposal facilities at each DOE site, and (b) summarizes the status of any RCRA Part B permit and WAC provisions relating to the disposal of mixed waste, including provisions relating to acceptance of offsite waste. Section 3 provides overall conclusions regarding the current status and permit modifications that must be implemented in order to grant DOE sites authority under their permits to accept commercial mixed waste for disposal. Section 4 contains a list of references.

Not Available

1994-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

172

General Air Permits (Louisiana)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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...

173

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

174

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

175

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

176

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  

SciTech Connect (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

177

Dredged and Fill Material Disposal (North Dakota)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This chapter provides regulations for the disposal of dredged and fill material. Any entity desiring to dispose of such material must first obtain a permit, and the State Engineer has the...

178

Storm Water Discharge Permits (Wisconsin)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Wisconsin's storm water runoff regulations include permitting requirements for construction sites and industrial facilities, including those processing or extracting coal or gas. The purpose of the...

179

Solar and Wind Permitting Laws  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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...

180

Preliminary identification of potentially disruptive scenarios at the Greater Confinement Disposal Facility, Area 5 of the Nevada Test Site  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Greater Confinement Disposal location is being evaluated to determine whether defense-generated transuranic waste buried at this location complies with the Containment Requirements established by the US Environmental Protection Agency. One step in determining compliance is to identify those combinations of events and processes (scenarios) that define possible future states of the disposal system for which performance assessments must be performed. An established scenario-development procedure was used to identify a comprehensive set of mutually exclusive scenarios. To assure completeness, 761 features, events, processes, and other listings (FEPS) were compiled from 11 references. This number was reduced to 205 primarily through the elimination of duplications. The 205 FEPs were screened based on site-specific, goal-specific, and regulatory criteria. Four events survived screening and were used in preliminary scenario development: (1) exploratory drilling penetrates a GCD borehole, (2) drilling of a withdrawal/injection well penetrates a GCD borehole, (3) subsidence occurs at the RWMS, and (4) irrigation occurs at the RWMS. A logic diagram was used to develop 16 scenarios from the four events. No screening of these scenarios was attempted at this time. Additional screening of the currently retained events and processes will be based on additional data and information from site-characterization activities. When screening of the events and processes is completed, a final set of scenarios will be developed and screened based on consequence and probability of occurrence.

Guzowski, R.V. [Science Applications International Corp., Albuquerque, NM (United States); Newman, G. [GRAM, Inc., Albuquerque, NM (United States)

1993-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

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.


181

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

SciTech Connect (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

182

Use of a scenario-development procedure to identify potentially disruptive scenarios, Greater Confinement Disposal facility, Area 5, Nevada Test Site  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Greater Confinement Disposal (GCD) facility includes four boreholes that contain transuranic (TRLT) waste. Presence of the TRU waste means that this facility must comply with the US Environmental Protection Agency`s Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Waste-Final Rule 40 CFR Part 191. To comply with the Containment Requirements of this rule, all potentially disruptive events and processes, and by implication all potentially disruptive combinations of events and processes (scenarios), must be identified for possible inclusion in performance assessments. Screening of the FEPs identified four events for scenario development: exploratory drilling for natural resources, drilling withdrawal wells, irrigation, and subsidence. Recent environmental-isotope analyses of the vadose zone suggest that radionuclide transport from the boreholes to the water table by infiltration is not a feasible transport mechanism within the time frame of regulatory concern. For this reason, the event of drilling withdrawal wells was merged with exploratory drilling for resources. The descriptions of the remaining three events were modified slightly to aid in estimation of event probabilities and consequence analyses. The three events are: exploratory drilling for resources penetrates a TRU borehole, irrigation occurs at the Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS), and subsidence occurs at the RWMS. Use of a logic diagram with these three events resulted in the construction of eight scenarios, including base-case (undisturbed) conditions. Screening these scenarios at this stage of scenario development was beyond the scope of this task. Based on the implementation assumptions, this scenario-development procedure produced a comprehensive set of mutually exclusive scenarios that are reproducible and auditable for use in GCD performance assessments.

Guzowski, R.V. [Science Applications International Corp., San Diego, CA (United States)]|[Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (United States). Safety and Risk Assessment Dept.

1994-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

183

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

SciTech Connect (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

184

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

185

General Conditions Applicable to Water Discharge Permits and Procedures and Criteria for Issuing Water Discharge Permits (Connecticut)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

These regulations describe permit and facility requirements for facilities which discharge wastewater. Facility construction, expansion, alteration, production increases, or process modifications...

186

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

187

Submission of Notice of Termination of Coverage Under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit No. CAS000002 for WDID No. 201C349114, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Ignition Facility Construction Project  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This is the completed Notice of Termination of Coverage under the General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity. Construction activities at the National Ignition Facility Construction Project at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory are now complete. The Notice of Termination includes photographs of the completed construction project and a vicinity map.

Brunckhorst, K

2009-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

188

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Hazen, Terry

2002-08-26T23:59:59.000Z

189

Unique method of ash disposal can benefit marine life  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

As more communities turn to waste-to-energy facilities to help solve their solid waste disposal problems, the amount of ash created by these facilities increases. Incineration of solid waste produces particulate residues which are often rich in lead, cadmium, copper, and zinc because of the concentration which occurs as a result of reduction. It has been shown that such metals can sometimes be leached from ash residues, giving rise to special concerns that incineration ashes be disposed of in an environmentally acceptable manner. In urban coastal areas where landfills are few and increasingly distant, ocean disposal of stabilized incineration residues (SIR) may provide an acceptable alternative to current landfill practices. In May 1985, a research program was initiated at the Marine Sciences Research Center to examine the feasibility of utilizing SIR for artificial reef construction in the ocean. Results of these studies showed that particulate incineration residues could be combined with cement to form a solid block possessing physical properties necessary for ocean disposal. The stabilized residues were subjected to regulatory extraction protocols, and in no instance did the metal concentrations in the leachates exceed the regulatory limits for toxicity. Bioassays revealed no adverse effects on the phytoplankton communities exposed to elutriate concentrations higher than could be encountered under normal disposal conditions. The success of the laboratory studies resulted in securing the necessary permits for the placement of an artificial habitat constructed using SIR in coastal wasters. Results from this program are described.

Roethel, F.J.; Breslin, V.T. (State Univ. of New York, Stony Brook (USA))

1988-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

190

Disposal of NORM-Contaminated Oil Field Wastes in Salt Caverns  

SciTech Connect (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

191

The long-term and the short-term at a cropping municipal sewage sludge disposal facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The City of Raleigh, NC, chose land application of municipal sewage sludge as a means of reducing pollution to the Neuse River. The Neuse River Waste Water Treatment Plant (NRWWTP) is located in the Piedmont Province of North Carolina. The soils at the facility are derived largely from the Rolesville Granite. Sewage sludge is applied to over 640 acres of cropland, owned in fee or leased. In making the policy decision for use of the sludge land application method 20 or so years ago, the City had to evaluate the potential for heavy metal accumulation in the soils and plants as well as the potential for ground-water contamination from the nitrate-nitrogen. The city also had to make a policy decision about limiting the discharge of heavy metals to the sewer system. Study of data from monitoring wells demonstrate that well position is a key in determining whether or not nitrate-nitrogen contamination is detected. Data from a three-year study suggest that nitrate-nitrogen moves fairly rapidly t the water table, although significant buildup in nitrogen-nitrogen may take a number of years. Evidence exists suggesting that the time between application of sewage sludge and an increase of nitrate-nitrogen at the water table may be on the order of nine months to a year. It is apparent that in the case of municipal sewage sludge application one can anticipate some nitrate-nitrogen buildup and that the public policy on drinking water standards must recognize this fact.

Welby, C.W. (North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, NC (United States). Dept. of Marine, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences)

1994-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

192

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1997-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

193

Experiment Hazard Class 15.2 - USDA Soil Permit  

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

shipment, and disposal of regulated soil samples. A copy of the current APS USDA Soil Permit must accompany all samples. A copy of the home institution's soil permit is required...

194

Permitting plan for the immobilized low-activity waste project  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document addresses the environmental permitting requirements for the transportation and interim storage of the Immobilized Low-Activity Waste (ILAW) produced during Phase 1 of the Hanford Site privatization effort. 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 and disposal of Tank Waste Remediation Systems (TWRS) immobilized low-activity tank waste (ILAW) and (2) interim storage of TWRS immobilized HLW (IHLW) and other canistered high-level waste forms. Low-activity waste (LAW), low-level waste (LLW), and high-level waste (HLW) are defined by the TWRS, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington, Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) DOE/EIS-0189, August 1996 (TWRS, Final EIS). By definition, HLW requires permanent isolation in a deep geologic repository. Also by definition, LAW is ``the waste that remains after separating from high-level waste as much of the radioactivity as is practicable that when solidified may be disposed of as LLW in a near-surface facility according to the NRC regulations.`` It is planned to store/dispose of (ILAW) inside four empty vaults of the five that were originally constructed for the Group Program. Additional disposal facilities will be constructed to accommodate immobilized LLW packages produced after the Grout Vaults are filled. The specifications for performance of the low-activity vitrified waste form have been established with strong consideration of risk to the public. The specifications for glass waste form performance are being closely coordinated with analysis of risk. RL has pursued discussions with the NRC for a determination of the classification of the Hanford Site`s low-activity tank waste fraction. There is no known RL action to change law with respect to onsite disposal of waste.

Deffenbaugh, M.L.

1997-09-04T23:59:59.000Z

195

Construction Permits and Fees (New Mexico)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [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...

196

Update on onshore disposal of offshore drilling wastes  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is developing effluent limitations guidelines to govern discharges of cuttings from wells drilled using synthetic-based muds. To support this rulemaking, Argonne National Laboratory was asked by EPA and the US Department of Energy (DOE) to collect current information about those onshore commercial disposal facilities that are permitted to receive offshore drilling wastes. Argonne contacted state officials in Louisiana, Texas, California and Alaska to obtain this information. The findings, collected during October and November 1999, are presented by state.

Veil, J. A.

1999-11-29T23:59:59.000Z

197

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Roscha, V.

1994-11-29T23:59:59.000Z

198

Wastewater Construction and Operation Permits (Iowa)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

199

Integrated Disposal Facility - Hanford Site  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsruc DocumentationP-SeriesFlickrinformation for and NovelFEG-SEM with EDAXfor NewIntegrated Codes

200

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Bergeron, Marcel P.; Freeman, Eugene J.

2005-06-09T23:59:59.000Z

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.


201

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

202

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

203

Hazardous Waste Facilities Siting (Connecticut)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

These regulations describe the siting and permitting process for hazardous waste facilities and reference rules for construction, operation, closure, and post-closure of these facilities.

204

Biomass Anaerobic Digestion Facilities and Biomass Gasification Facilities (Indiana)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

205

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

206

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

207

Water Permits (Louisiana)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [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...

208

Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-399 MATL LLP  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Application to rescind Presidential Permit held by†Montana Alberta Tie Ltd.†and issue a permit to MATL covering the same international transmission facilities.

209

Application for Presidential Permit OE Doc. No. PP-399 MATL LLP...  

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

Application to rescind Presidential Permit held by Montana Alberta Tie Ltd. and issue a permit to MATL covering the same international transmission facilities. Federal Register...

210

Optimization of Waste Disposal - 13338  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

From 2009 through 2011, remediation of areas of a former fuel cycle facility used for government contract work was conducted. Remediation efforts were focused on building demolition, underground pipeline removal, contaminated soil removal and removal of contaminated sediments from portions of an on-site stream. Prior to conducting the remediation field effort, planning and preparation for remediation (including strategic planning for waste characterization and disposal) was conducted during the design phase. During the remediation field effort, waste characterization and disposal practices were continuously reviewed and refined to optimize waste disposal practices. This paper discusses strategic planning for waste characterization and disposal that was employed in the design phase, and continuously reviewed and refined to optimize efficiency. (authors)

Shephard, E.; Walter, N.; Downey, H. [AMEC E and I, Inc., 511 Congress Street, Suite 200, Portland, ME 04101 (United States)] [AMEC E and I, Inc., 511 Congress Street, Suite 200, Portland, ME 04101 (United States); Collopy, P. [AMEC E and I, Inc., 9210 Sky Park Court, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92123 (United States)] [AMEC E and I, Inc., 9210 Sky Park Court, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92123 (United States); Conant, J. [ABB Inc., 5 Waterside Crossing, Windsor, CT 06095 (United States)] [ABB Inc., 5 Waterside Crossing, Windsor, CT 06095 (United States)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

211

Regulatory Guidance Letter 96-01 SUBJECT: Use of Nationwide Permit Number 23 for  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

and conditions of nationwide permit 23, will require evaluation under standard permit procedures administration, operation, and maintenance. 3. Maintenance dredging and debris disposal where no new depths modification, suspension, or revocation procedures. Development of local procedures to streamline coordination

US Army Corps of Engineers

212

RRC - Supplemental Application Information for Permit to Maintain...  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Supplemental Application Information for Permit to Maintain and Use a Commercial Oil and Gas Waste Disposal Pit Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library...

213

SCFA lead lab technical assistance at Oak Ridge Y-12 nationalsecurity complex: Evaluation of treatment and characterizationalternatives of mixed waste soil and debris at disposal area remedialaction DARA solids storage facility (SSF)  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

On July 17-18, 2002, a technical assistance team from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Subsurface Contaminants Focus Area (SCFA) met with the Bechtel Jacobs Company Disposal Area Remedial Action (DARA) environmental project leader to review treatment and characterization options for the baseline for the DARA Solids Storage Facility (SSF). The technical assistance request sought suggestions from SCFA's team of technical experts with experience and expertise in soil treatment and characterization to identify and evaluate (1) alternative treatment technologies for DARA soils and debris, and (2) options for analysis of organic constituents in soil with matrix interference. Based on the recommendations, the site may also require assistance in identifying and evaluating appropriate commercial vendors.

Hazen, Terry

2002-08-26T23:59:59.000Z

214

State Surface Water Discharge Permits (New Hampshire)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Rules apply to the discharge of all pollutants from a point source to surface waters of the state. The rule does not apply to facilities that require both a state discharge permit and a federal...

215

Wind Energy Permitting Standards (North Carolina)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [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...

216

Annual Hanford Site environmental permitting status report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Annual Hanford Site Environmental Permitting Status Report (Status Report) was prepared in response to requirements prescribed in U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5400.2A, `Environmental Compliance Issue Coordination`. This Order, canceled in April 1996, required that information on existing and anticipated environmental permitting for DOE facilities be submitted (or updated) annually by October 1 of each calendar year. Although the Order was canceled, the need for this Status Report still remains. For example, the Washington State Department of Ecology`s (Ecology) Dangerous Waste Permit Application Requirements (Publication Number 95-402, June 1996), Checklist Section J, calls for current information on existing and anticipated environmental permitting. As specified in the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application, General Information Portion (DOE/RL-91-28), this Status Report serves as the vehicle for meeting this requirement for the Hanford Facility. This Status Report includes information on all existing and anticipated environmental permitting. Environmental permitting required by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976, the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984, and non-RCRA permitting (solid waste handling, Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Clean Water Act Amendments of 1987, Washington State waste discharge, and onsite sewage system) are addressed. Information on RCRA and non-RCRA permitting is included and is current as of July 31, 1996.

Thompson, S.A.

1996-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

217

Disposability Assessment: Aluminum-Based Spent Nuclear Fuel Forms  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

218

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

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

electric transmission facilities at the U.S. - Canada Border. FINAL TDI Presidential Permit Application. January 25, 2010 More Documents & Publications EIS-0447: Draft...

219

Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-044 Northern...  

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

transmission facilities at the U.S. - Canada Border. Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-44 Northern Electric Cooperative Association More Documents &...

220

Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-235 Sempra...  

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

transmission facilities at the U.S. - Mexico Border. Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. 235 Sempra Energy Resources. More Documents & Publications PP-235 Sempra...

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

Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-300 Maine...  

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

transmission facilities at the U.S-Canada border. Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-300 Maine Public Service Company More Documents & Publications PP-300...

222

Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-366 Twin...  

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

transmission facilities at the U.S. - Canada Border. Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-366 Twin Rivers Paper Company, Inc. More Documents & Publications...

223

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

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

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...

224

Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-059 Central...  

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

transmission facilities at the U.S. - Mexico Border Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-59 Central Power and Light Company (CPL) More Documents &...

225

Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-334 Energia...  

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

226

Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-304 Generadora...  

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

transmission facilities at the U.S-Mexico border. Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-304 Generadora Del Desierto SA DE CV More Documents & Publications...

227

Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-257 Emera...  

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

transmission facilities at the U.S. - Canada Border. Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-257 Emera Energy Services, Inc. More Documents & Publications...

228

Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-334 Baja...  

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

transmission facilities at the U.S. - Mexico Border. Application for Presidental Permit OE Docket No. PP-334 Baja Wind Transmission, LLC More Documents & Publications...

229

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

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

hereby applies to the United States Department of Energy (DOE) for a Presidential Permit authorizing the construction, connection, operation, and maintenance of facilities for...

230

Negotiating Title V and non-Title V permits  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Title V Operating Permits program has been extended over many more years than originally anticipated when the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments were first legislated. In fact, the regulatory program is still being refined even as facilities complete and submit their Title V permit applications. Likewise, it is clear that the agency review of the Title V permit applications will probably take considerably longer than originally anticipated. Finally, when the agency does complete the review, it is equally clear that there will need to be a significant amount of negotiating on the part of the facility to arrive at a simplified permit that is operationally feasible. This paper presents a number of suggestions for what the facility should be doing between the time the permit application is first submitted and the agency responds with a draft permit. The suggestions are designed to help simplify the permit and enhance flexibility. In addition, the paper presents permit negotiating techniques and points out the pitfalls that will be encountered if the facility does not take action prior to receiving the draft Title V permit. This paper suggests that the facility should internally evaluate how the permit application impacts facility operations prior to the agency doing so. It also suggests that the facility should contact the agency early and amend the permit application to take advantage of increasing regulatory flexibility. By taking these steps, and properly negotiating the permit terms and conditions; the facility will achieve a much better permit, and will hopefully be able to avoid the regulatory burdens and delays associated with re-opening the permit during the next 5 to 8 years (from the time of permit application submittal).

Erbes, R.E. [Kleinfelder, Inc., Parker, CO (United States); MacDougall, C.R. [Kleinfelder, Inc., Pleasanton, CA (United States)

1998-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

231

Plutonium-Uranium Extraction (PUREX) facility preclosure work plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The dangerous waste permit identification number (WA7890008967)was issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Washington State Department of Ecology. This identification number encompasses a number of treatment, storage, and/or disposal units within the Hanford Facility. One of these treatment, storage, and/or disposal units is the PUREX Facility,currently undergoing a phased closure. The PUREX Facility Preclosure Work Plan submittal differs from closure plans previously submitted by the U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office to the Washington State Department of Ecology,in that the closure process occurs in three distinct phases as part of the decommissioning process (i.e., transition,surveillance and maintenance, and disposition). Final closure will occur during the disposition phase. This phased decommissioning process is implemented because development of a complete closure plan during the transition phase is impractical and future land use determinations have not been identified. The objective of the transition phase is to place the PUREX Facility in a safe configuration with respect to human health and the environment. Following the transition phase activities, the PUREX Facility will begin the surveillance and maintenance phase of 10 or more years until disposition phase activities commence. The closure plan for the PUREX facility will be prepared during the disposition phase. For purposes of this documentation, the PUREX Facility does not include the PUREX Storage Tunnels. The PUREX Storage Tunnels are an operating storage unit(DOE/RL-94-24).

Bhatia, R.K., Westinghouse Hanford

1996-07-09T23:59:59.000Z

232

Waste Disposal Site and Radioactive Waste Management (Iowa)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [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...

233

Chapter 47 Solid Waste Facilities (Kentucky)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [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...

234

Microsoft Word - Environmental Permits  

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

Permits July 16, 2012 Department of Energy PermitsAgreements Issuing Agency Kentucky Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Kentucky Division of Water Solid Waste -...

235

Risk analyses for disposing nonhazardous oil field wastes in salt caverns  

SciTech Connect (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

236

Optimizing High Level Waste Disposal  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

If society is ever to reap the potential benefits of nuclear energy, technologists must close the fuel-cycle completely. A closed cycle equates to a continued supply of fuel and safe reactors, but also reliable and comprehensive closure of waste issues. High level waste (HLW) disposal in borosilicate glass (BSG) is based on 1970s era evaluations. This host matrix is very adaptable to sequestering a wide variety of radionuclides found in raffinates from spent fuel reprocessing. However, it is now known that the current system is far from optimal for disposal of the diverse HLW streams, and proven alternatives are available to reduce costs by billions of dollars. The basis for HLW disposal should be reassessed to consider extensive waste form and process technology research and development efforts, which have been conducted by the United States Department of Energy (USDOE), international agencies and the private sector. Matching the waste form to the waste chemistry and using currently available technology could increase the waste content in waste forms to 50% or more and double processing rates. Optimization of the HLW disposal system would accelerate HLW disposition and increase repository capacity. This does not necessarily require developing new waste forms, the emphasis should be on qualifying existing matrices to demonstrate protection equal to or better than the baseline glass performance. Also, this proposed effort does not necessarily require developing new technology concepts. The emphasis is on demonstrating existing technology that is clearly better (reliability, productivity, cost) than current technology, and justifying its use in future facilities or retrofitted facilities. Higher waste processing and disposal efficiency can be realized by performing the engineering analyses and trade-studies necessary to select the most efficient methods for processing the full spectrum of wastes across the nuclear complex. This paper will describe technologies being evaluated at Idaho National Laboratory and the facilities weíve designed to evaluate options and support optimization.

Dirk Gombert

2005-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

237

Presidential Permits | Department of Energy  

Energy Savers [EERE]

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...

238

Alcohol Services Category #1 # Permit Application Category #2  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Alcohol Services Category #1 # Permit Application Category #2 Category #3 Facility to be Used If an outdoor event, attach UNL Police approved licensed area plan to Permit Request. This individual may TO OBTAIN THE REQUIRED ALCOHOL SERVICES PERMIT FOR EACH EVENT. THE APPROVED CATERER IS RESPONSIBLE

Powers, Robert

239

WIPP Documents - Hazardous Waste Facility Permit (RCRA)  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary)morphinanInformation Desert SouthwestTechnologies | Blandine Jerome VelenciaNewsNewsFederal Regulations 40

240

Has operating permitting really changed with Title V? Reflecting on the Title V operating permit program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Now that some state regulatory agencies are reviewing Title V permit applications and issuing permits, evaluation of the process can be made in comparison with the original goals of the Title V permitting program. In addition, assessment of the terms and conditions that are being incorporated into permits, the nature of draft permits that are issued to facilities for comment, and the extent and type of negotiation that have been conducted with agencies to develop successful Title V permits, will be helpful for facilities that are currently undergoing application review. In working with a Fortune 500 surface coating company, fourteen Title V permit applications were developed and submitted for plants located in Maryland, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New Jersey, Illinois, Georgia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Indiana and southern California. Draft permits have been issued for several of the plants, and differences in the terms and conditions, testing requirements, and permit format and structure have been noted between states. One of the issued permits required modification, and the process was one of the first for this state agency.

Goldstein, D.R.; Cressman, A.W.

1999-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

Medical surveillance and programs on industrial hygiene at RCRA facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Some special areas where much progress in industrial hygiene and safety has been made in the past few years are; training, personal protective equipment, uniforms, personal monitoring, area monitoring, and medical surveillance. Before one can begin to construct programs for worker protection, some knowledge of potential exposures must be gained. The best place to start is the Waste Analysis Plan, and the list of wastes that a particular site is authorized to receive. Waste Codes are listed within a facility`s Part A and Part B permits. Actual facility receipt of wastes are well documented within Load Records and other documentation. A facility`s training program forms the heart of a health and safety program. Every TSD facility should have developed a matrix of job titles and required training. Every facility must also make a commitment to providing a wide range of personal protective equipment, including a wide array of disposables. Some facilities will benefit from the occasional use of the newer respirator quantitative fit-testing devices. All facilities are urged to rent or borrow this type of equipment periodically. Quantitative respirator fit-testers are capable of revealing important deficiencies in a respirator program. Providing uniforms is a newer means of protecting workers. The use of uniforms is an effective means for addressing the idea of carry-home-waste. The use of disposables including boots, must be integrated into a Uniform Program if the program is to be effective. In addition, employees must strictly understand that uniforms must not leave the facility at any time, including lunch time.

Murphy, T.E. [Ash Grove Cement Co., Overland Park, KS (United States)

1994-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

242

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

SciTech Connect (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

243

Salt caverns for oil field waste disposal.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Salt caverns used for oil field waste disposal are created in salt formations by solution mining. When created, caverns are filled with brine. Wastes are introduced into the cavern by pumping them under low pressure. Each barrel of waste injected to the cavern displaces a barrel of brine to the surface. The brine is either used for drilling mud or is disposed of in an injection well. Figure 8 shows an injection pump used at disposal cavern facilities in west Texas. Several types of oil field waste may be pumped into caverns for disposal. These include drilling muds, drill cuttings, produced sands, tank bottoms, contaminated soil, and completion and stimulation wastes. Waste blending facilities are constructed at the site of cavern disposal to mix the waste into a brine solution prior to injection. Overall advantages of salt cavern disposal include a medium price range for disposal cost, large capacity and availability of salt caverns, limited surface land requirement, increased safety, and ease of establishment of individual state regulations.

Veil, J.; Ford, J.; Rawn-Schatzinger, V.; Environmental Assessment; RMC, Consultants, Inc.

2000-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

244

Solar Permitting Law (Oregon)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

With the passage of HB 3516 in June 2011, solar permit application approval is a "ministerial function", provided a system meets certain guidelines. To qualify for this simplified permitting...

245

Solar Construction Permitting Standards  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Owners of solar photovoltaic (PV) systems and solar water heating systems in Arizona are required to obtain a building permit before their systems may be installed. Permits are handled at the...

246

DISCOUNTED EVENT PERMIT REQUEST  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

DISCOUNTED EVENT PERMIT REQUEST Discounted daily parking rates are available for CSM events where or the daily scratch off permits: COMMUTER LOTS: $3.00 / day GENERAL LOTS: $4.00 / day Please e-mail or drop

247

Solar Construction Permitting Standards  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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...

248

WPCF Underground Injection Control Disposal Permit Evaluation and Fact  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia, Virginia:FAQ < RAPID Jump to:Seadov PtyInformationSEDS data Jump to: navigation, searchVyconWELtec BioPowerSheet |

249

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Arnold, P.

2012-10-31T23:59:59.000Z

250

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

SciTech Connect (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

251

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

SciTech Connect (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

252

Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility Lessons Learned  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of lessons learned is to identify insight gained during a project Ė successes or failures Ė 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 ERDFís ARRA-funded expansion project.

Caulfield, R.

2012-07-12T23:59:59.000Z

253

On-Site Disposal Facility Inspection Report  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

982011 September 2011 point- specific IC inspection na 1304 East Cell 2, 6:1 No Johnson grass 9132011 September 2011 OSDF Inspection BL1 Herbicide applied June-13 1305...

254

On-Site Disposal Facility Inspection Report  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "ofEarlyEnergyDepartment ofDepartment ofofOxford SiteToledo SiteTonawandaUniversity21 theB29.1y8947.1 09/13

255

On-Site Disposal Facility Inspection Report  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "ofEarlyEnergyDepartment ofDepartment ofofOxford SiteToledo SiteTonawandaUniversity21 theB29.1y8947.1

256

Treated Effluent Disposal Facility - Hanford Site  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsrucLas ConchasPassiveSubmittedStatusButlerTransportation From modeling andTransuranicTravelTreated

257

Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility - Hanford Site  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsruc DocumentationP-Series toESnet4: NetworkingEnvironment EnvironmentFIB/SEM PublicEnvironmental

258

Hazardous Waste Transporter Permits (Connecticut)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Transportation of hazardous wastes into or through the State of Connecticut requires a permit. Some exceptions apply. The regulations provide information about obtaining permits and other permit...

259

CENSUS AND STATISTICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF SOIL AND WATER QUALITY AT ABANDONED AND OTHER CENTRALIZED AND COMMERCIAL DRILLING-FLUID DISPOSAL SITES IN LOUISIANA, NEW MEXICO, OKLAHOMA, AND TEXAS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Commercial and centralized drilling-fluid disposal (CCDD) sites receive a portion of spent drilling fluids for disposal from oil and gas exploration and production (E&P) operations. Many older and some abandoned sites may have operated under less stringent regulations than are currently enforced. This study provides a census, compilation, and summary of information on active, inactive, and abandoned CCDD sites in Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas, intended as a basis for supporting State-funded assessment and remediation of abandoned sites. Closure of abandoned CCDD sites is within the jurisdiction of State regulatory agencies. Sources of data used in this study on abandoned CCDD sites mainly are permit files at State regulatory agencies. Active and inactive sites were included because data on abandoned sites are sparse. Onsite reserve pits at individual wells for disposal of spent drilling fluid are not part of this study. Of 287 CCDD sites in the four States for which we compiled data, 34 had been abandoned whereas 54 were active and 199 were inactive as of January 2002. Most were disposal-pit facilities; five percent were land treatment facilities. A typical disposal-pit facility has fewer than 3 disposal pits or cells, which have a median size of approximately 2 acres each. Data from well-documented sites may be used to predict some conditions at abandoned sites; older abandoned sites might have outlier concentrations for some metal and organic constituents. Groundwater at a significant number of sites had an average chloride concentration that exceeded nonactionable secondary drinking water standard of 250 mg/L, or a total dissolved solids content of >10,000 mg/L, the limiting definition for underground sources of drinking water source, or both. Background data were lacking, however, so we did not determine whether these concentrations in groundwater reflected site operations. Site remediation has not been found necessary to date for most abandoned CCDD sites; site assessments and remedial feasibility studies are ongoing in each State. Remediation alternatives addressed physical hazards and potential for groundwater transport of dissolved salt and petroleum hydrocarbons that might be leached from wastes. Remediation options included excavation of wastes and contaminated adjacent soils followed by removal to permitted disposal facilities or land farming if sufficient on-site area were available.

Alan R. Dutton; H. Seay Nance

2003-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

260

Operating limit evaluation for disposal of uranium enrichment plant wastes  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A proposed solid waste landfill at Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant (PGDP) will accept wastes generated during normal plant operations that are considered to be non-radioactive. However, nearly all solid waste from any source or facility contains small amounts of radioactive material, due to the presence in most materials of trace quantities of such naturally occurring radionuclides as uranium and thorium. This paper describes an evaluation of operating limits, which are protective of public health and the environment, that would allow waste materials containing small amounts of radioactive material to be sent to a new solid waste landfill at PGDP. The operating limits are expressed as limits on concentrations of radionuclides in waste materials that could be sent to the landfill based on a site-specific analysis of the performance of the facility. These limits are advantageous to PGDP and DOE for several reasons. Most importantly, substantial cost savings in the management of waste is achieved. In addition, certain liabilities that could result from shipment of wastes to a commercial off-site solid waste landfill are avoided. Finally, assurance that disposal operations at the PGDP landfill are protective of public health and the environment is provided by establishing verifiable operating limits for small amounts of radioactive material; rather than relying solely on administrative controls. The operating limit determined in this study has been presented to the Commonwealth of Kentucky and accepted as a condition to be attached to the operating permit for the solid waste landfill.

Lee, D.W.; Kocher, D.C.; Wang, J.C.

1996-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

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.


261

Remedial Action and Waste Disposal Conduct of OperationsMatrix  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

M. A. Casbon.

1999-05-24T23:59:59.000Z

262

E-Print Network 3.0 - additional llrw disposal Sample Search...  

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

of Biological and Ecological Engineering, Oregon State University Collection: Environmental Sciences and Ecology 3 CO-DISPOSAL FACILITY FOR HAZARDOUS AND LOW-LEVEL...

263

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Act (Pennsylvania)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

264

Radionuclide limits for vault disposal at the Savannah River Site  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Cook, J.R.

1992-02-04T23:59:59.000Z

265

CCS Project Permit Acquisition Protocols  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Geologic carbon storage projects require a vast range of permits prior to deployment. These include land-access permits, drilling permits, seismic survey permits, underground injection control permits, and any number of local and state permits, depending on the location of the project. For the ďCharacterization of Most Promising Sequestration Formations in the Rocky Mountain RegionĒ (RMCCS) project in particular, critical permits included site access permits, seismic survey permits, and drilling permits for the characterization well. Permits for these and other activities were acquired either prior to or during the project.

Lee, Si-Yong; Zaluski, Wade; Matthews, Vince; McPherson, Brian

2013-06-30T23:59:59.000Z

266

Section 6 -Facilities Usage and Maintenance A. Facilities Usage and Maintenance  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Section 6 - Facilities Usage and Maintenance A. Facilities Usage and Maintenance 1 be held financially responsible. Financial responsibility extends to abandoned belongings, excessive is not permitted under any circumstances. Storage facilities are provided in most student housing units for storing

Pantaleone, Jim

267

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

268

Commercial disposal options for Idaho National Engineering Laboratory low-level radioactive waste  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) is a Department of Energy (DOE)-owned, contractor-operated site. Significant quantities of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) have been generated and disposed of onsite at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC). The INEL expects to continue generating LLW while performing its mission and as aging facilities are decommissioned. An on-going Performance Assessment process for the RWMC underscores the potential for reduced or limited LLW disposal capacity at the existing onsite facility. In order to properly manage the anticipated amount of LLW, the INEL is investigating various disposal options. These options include building a new facility, disposing the LLW at other DOE sites, using commercial disposal facilities, or seeking a combination of options. This evaluation reports on the feasibility of using commercial disposal facilities.

Porter, C.L.; Widmayer, D.A.

1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

269

Results of Tritium Tracking and Groundwater Monitoring at the Hanford Site 200 Area State-Approved Land Disposal Site-FY1999  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Hanford Site 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility (ETF) processes contaminated liquids derived from Hanford Site facilities. The clean water generated by these processes is occasionally enriched in tritium and is discharged to the 200 Area State Approved Land Disposal Site (SALDS). Groundwater monitoring for tritium and other constituents is required by the state-issued permit at 21 wells surrounding the facility. During FY 1999, average tritium activities in most wells declined from average activities in 1998. The exception was deep well 69948-77C, where tritium results were at an all-time high (77,000 pCi/L) as a result of the delayed penetration of effluent deeper into the aquifer. Of the 12 constituents with permit enforcement limits, which are monitored in SALDS proximal wells, all were within limits during FY 1999. Water level measurements in nearby wells indicate that a small hydraulic mound exists around the SALDS facility as a result of discharges. This feature is directing groundwater flow radially outward a short distance before the regional northeasterly flow predominates. Evaluation of this condition indicates that the network is currently adequate for tracking potential effects of the SALDS on the groundwater. Recommendations include the discontinuation of ammonia, benzene, tetrahydrofuran, and acetone from the regular groundwater constituent list; designating background well 299-W8-1 as a tritium-tracking well only, and the use of quadruplicate averages of field pH, instead of a single laboratory measurement, as a permit compliance parameter.

Barnett, D.B.

1999-10-20T23:59:59.000Z

270

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

SciTech Connect (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

271

Immobilized low-level waste disposal options configuration study  

SciTech Connect (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

272

Impacts of Shale Gas Wastewater Disposal on Water Quality in Western Pennsylvania  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Impacts of Shale Gas Wastewater Disposal on Water Quality in Western Pennsylvania Nathaniel R. In Pennsylvania, oil and gas wastewater is sometimes treated at brine treatment facilities and discharged to local bioaccumulation in localized areas of shale gas wastewater disposal. INTRODUCTION The safe disposal of large

Jackson, Robert B.

273

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.

274

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 ¬Ĺ to 2

Benson, Eric R.

275

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

276

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

277

1999 Annual Mixed Waste Management Facility Groundwater Correction - Action Report (Volumes I, II, and III)  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Corrective Action Report (CAR) for the Mixed Waste Management Facility (MWMF) is being prepared to comply with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Permit Number SC1 890 008 989, dated October 31, 1999. This CAR compiles and presents all groundwater sampling and monitoring activities that are conducted at the MWMF. As set forth in previous agreements with South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC), all groundwater associated with the Burial Ground Complex (BGC) (comprised of the MWMF, Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility, and Old Radioactive Waste Burial Ground) will be addressed under this RCRA Permit. This CAR is the first to be written for the MWMF and presents monitoring activities and results as an outcome of Interim Status and limited Permitted Status activities. All 1999 groundwater monitoring activities were conducted while the MWMF was operated during Interim Status. Changes to the groundwater monitoring program were made upon receipt of the RCRA Permit, where feasible. During 1999, 152 single-screened and six multi-screened groundwater monitoring wells at the BGC monitored groundwater quality in the uppermost aquifer as required by the South Carolina Hazardous Waste Management Regulations (SCHWMR), settlement agreements 87-52-SW and 91-51-SW, and RCRA Permit SC1 890 008 989. However, overall compliance with the recently issued RCRA Permit could not be implemented until the year 2000 due to the effective date of the RCRA Permit and scheduling of groundwater monitoring activities. Changes have been made to the groundwater monitoring network to meet Permit requirements for all 2000 sampling events.

Chase, J.

2000-06-14T23:59:59.000Z

278

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

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

transmission facilities at the U.S-Canada border. Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. 230-4 International Transmission Company More Documents & Publications...

279

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

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

transmission facilities at the U.S-Canada border. Application for persidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 International Transmission Company More Documents &...

280

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

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

Application for Presidential Permit authorizing International Transmission Company to construct, operate, and maintain electric transmission facilities at teh U.S. - Canada Border....

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

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

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

transmission facilities at the U.S-Canada border. Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-4 International Transmission Company: Response of PJM...

282

Systems engineering programs for geologic nuclear waste disposal  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The design sequence and system programs presented begin with general approximate solutions that permit inexpensive analysis of a multitude of possible wastes, disposal media, and disposal process properties and configurations. It then continues through progressively more precise solutions as parts of the design become fixed, and ends with repository and waste form optimization studies. The programs cover both solid and gaseous waste forms. The analytical development, a program listing, a users guide, and examples are presented for each program. Sensitivity studies showing the effects of disposal media and waste form thermophysical properties and repository layouts are presented as examples.

Klett, R. D.; Hertel, Jr., E. S.; Ellis, M. A.

1980-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

283

Storm Water Individual Permit.  

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

information meeting to discuss the biannual update on the NPDES Storm Water Individual Permit. Wednesday, January 22, 2014 5:30 p.m. Cities of Gold Conference Center 10 Cities of...

284

Water Use Permitting (Wisconsin)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Withdrawers in the Great Lakes Basin who withdraw water in quantities that average 100,000 gallons per day or more in any 30-day period are required to get a water use permit. Two types of water...

285

Direct Discharge Permit (Vermont)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A direct discharge permit is required if a project involves the discharge of pollutants to state waters. For generation purposes, this involves the withdrawal of surface water for cooling purposes...

286

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1996-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

287

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

288

Disposal of drilling fluids  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Bryson, W.R.

1983-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

289

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

290

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

SciTech Connect (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.

David Duncan

2011-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

291

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

SciTech Connect (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

292

RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL IN GRANITE  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Witherspoon, P.A.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

293

Optimizing operational flexibility and enforcement liability in Title V permits  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Now that most states have interim or full approval of the portions of their state implementation plans (SIPs) implementing Title V (40 CFR Part 70) of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA), most sources which require a Title V permit have submitted or are well on the way to submitting a Title V operating permit application. Numerous hours have been spent preparing applications to ensure the administrative completeness of the application and operational flexibility for the facility. Although much time and effort has been spent on Title V permit applications, the operating permit itself is the final goal. This paper outlines the major Federal requirements for Title V permits as given in the CAAA at 40 CFR 70.6, Permit Content. These Federal requirements and how they will effect final Title V permits and facilities will be discussed. This paper will provide information concerning the Federal requirements for Title V permits and suggestions on how to negotiate a Title V permit to maximize operational flexibility and minimize enforcement liability.

McCann, G.T. [Rust Environment and Infrastructure Inc., Greenville, SC (United States)

1997-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

294

Uranium-Loaded Water Treatment Resins: 'Equivalent Feed' at NRC and Agreement State-Licensed Uranium Recovery Facilities - 12094  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Community Water Systems (CWSs) are required to remove uranium from drinking water to meet EPA standards. Similarly, mining operations are required to remove uranium from their dewatering discharges to meet permitted surface water discharge limits. Ion exchange (IX) is the primary treatment strategy used by these operations, which loads uranium onto resin beads. Presently, uranium-loaded resin from CWSs and mining operations can be disposed as a waste product or processed by NRC- or Agreement State-licensed uranium recovery facilities if that licensed facility has applied for and received permission to process 'alternate feed'. The disposal of uranium-loaded resin is costly and the cost to amend a uranium recovery license to accept alternate feed can be a strong disincentive to commercial uranium recovery facilities. In response to this issue, the NRC issued a Regulatory Issue Summary (RIS) to clarify the agency's policy that uranium-loaded resin from CWSs and mining operations can be processed by NRC- or Agreement State-licensed uranium recovery facilities without the need for an alternate feed license amendment when these resins are essentially the same, chemically and physically, to resins that licensed uranium recovery facilities currently use (i.e., equivalent feed). NRC staff is clarifying its current alternate feed policy to declare IX resins as equivalent feed. This clarification is necessary to alleviate a regulatory and financial burden on facilities that filter uranium using IX resin, such as CWSs and mine dewatering operations. Disposing of those resins in a licensed facility could be 40 to 50 percent of the total operations and maintenance (O and M) cost for a CWS. Allowing uranium recovery facilities to treat these resins without requiring a license amendment lowers O and M costs and captures a valuable natural resource. (authors)

Camper, Larry W.; Michalak, Paul; Cohen, Stephen; Carter, Ted [Nuclear Regulatory Commission (United States)

2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

295

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.

296

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory ¬∑ Opciones para la eliminaci√≥n ¬∑ ¬ŅQu√© 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.

297

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.

298

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 ¬∑ M√ļltiples especies de aves pueden despoblarse con espuma cesaci√≥n #12;Disposal: Science and Theory ¬∑ Dentro de una especie, pueden existir variaciones ¬≠ Los √°nades

Benson, Eric R.

299

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 pr√≥ximos 10 a√Īos. Pionera en compostaje en Delaware #12;Disposal: Science and Theory

Benson, Eric R.

300

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.

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 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.

302

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.

303

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.

304

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.

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 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.

306

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.

307

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.

308

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.

309

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.

310

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory 2004 ¬≠ Participaci√≥n de Bud Malone y la espuma 2009 ¬≠ Ninguna ventaja para el gas Breve historia de la espuma #12;Disposal: Science sistema de boquilla ¬ŅQu√© es la espuma? #12;Disposal: Science and Theory ¬∑ La espuma puede incluir: ¬≠ Una

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

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 (OSTI)

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

313

Montana Water Quality Permit Application, Nondegradation Authorization...  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

LibraryAdd to library PermittingRegulatory Guidance - Supplemental Material: Montana Water Quality Permit Application, Nondegradation Authorization, and Permit FeesPermitting...

314

Permit application modifications  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document contains the Permit Application Modifications for the Y-12 Industrial Landfill V site on the Oak Ridge Reservation. These modifications include the assessment of stability of the proposed Landfill V under static and loading conditions. Analyses performed include the general slope stability, veneer stability of the bottom liner and cover system, and a liquefaction potential assessment of the foundation soils.

NONE

1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

315

"Mobile money" services permit  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

"Mobile money" services permit cell phone users to send small amounts of money via text message to their friends and relatives. There are over 90 mobile money services in the world today, mainly in emergingTure oF Money october 2012 - April 2013 Muriel Ansley reynolds exhibit GAllery For the full exhibit checklist

Loudon, Catherine

316

Conducting Private R&D at PNNL Tapping valuable government resources with a unique Use Permit  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Conducting Private R&D at PNNL Tapping valuable government resources with a unique Use Permit What. Unique to PNNL is a powerful technology development and transfer mechanism known as the Use Permit. The Use Permit allows Battelle staff working at PNNL to use federal government facilities and equipment

317

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

SciTech Connect (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.

2014-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

318

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

SciTech Connect (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

319

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

SciTech Connect (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

320

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

SciTech Connect (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.


321

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

SciTech Connect (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

322

Low-Level Waste Disposal Alternatives Analysis Report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

323

PUREX facility preclosure work plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This preclosure work plan presents a description of the PUREX Facility, the history of the waste managed, and addresses transition phase activities that position the PUREX Facility into a safe and environmentally secure configuration. For purposes of this documentation, the PUREX Facility does not include the PUREX Storage Tunnels (DOE/RL-90/24). Information concerning solid waste management units is discussed in the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application, General Information Portion (DOE/RL-91-28, Appendix 2D).

Engelmann, R.H.

1997-04-24T23:59:59.000Z

324

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

325

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

SciTech Connect (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

326

Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites (Iowa)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

327

Performance Assessment Program for the Savannah River Site Liquid Waste Facilities - 13610  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Liquid Waste facilities at the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Savannah River Site (SRS) are operated by Liquid Waste Operations contractor Savannah River Remediation LLC (SRR). A separate Performance Assessment (PA) is prepared to support disposal operations at the Saltstone Disposal Facility and closure evaluations for the two liquid waste tank farm facilities at SRS, F-Tank Farm and H-Tank Farm. A PA provides the technical basis and results to be used in subsequent documents to demonstrate compliance with the pertinent requirements identified in operations and closure regulatory guidance. The Saltstone Disposal Facility is subject to a State of South Carolina industrial solid waste landfill permit and the tank farms are subject to a state industrial waste water permit. The three Liquid Waste facilities are also subject to a Federal Facility Agreement approved by the State, DOE and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Due to the regulatory structure, a PA is a key technical document reviewed by the DOE, the State of South Carolina and the EPA. As the waste material disposed of in the Saltstone Disposal Facility and the residual material in the closed tank farms is also subject to reclassification prior to closure via a waste determination pursuant to Section 3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2005, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is also a reviewing agency for the PAs. Pursuant to the Act, the NRC also has a continuing role to monitor disposal actions to assess compliance with stated performance objectives. The Liquid Waste PA program at SRS represents a continual process over the life of the disposal and closure operations. When the need for a PA or PA revision is identified, the first step is to develop a conceptual model to best represent the facility conditions. The conceptual model will include physical dimensions of the closed system, both the engineered and natural system, and modeling input parameters associated with the modeled features, both initial values (at the time of facility closure) and degradation rates/values. During the development of the PA, evaluations are conducted to reflect not only the results associated with the best available information at the time but also to evaluate potential uncertainties and sensitivities associated with the modeled system. While the PA will reflect the modeled system results from the best available information, it will also identify areas for future work to reduce overall PA uncertainties moving forward. DOE requires a PA Maintenance Program such that work continues to reduce model uncertainties, thus bolstering confidence in PA results that support regulatory decisions. This maintenance work may include new Research and Development activities or modeling as informed by previous PA results and other new information that becomes available. As new information becomes available, it is evaluated against previous PAs and appropriate actions are taken to ensure continued confidence in the regulatory decisions. Therefore, the PA program is a continual process that is not just the development of a PA but seeks to incorporate new information to reduce overall model uncertainty and provide continuing confidence in regulatory decisions. (author)

Rosenberger, Kent H. [Savannah River Remediation LLC, Building 705-1C, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States)] [Savannah River Remediation LLC, Building 705-1C, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

328

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

CCA-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, others have not, and the product continues to enter the waste stream from construction, demolition

Florida, University of

329

Coastal Permit Program Rules (New Jersey)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Coastal Permit Program Rules provide the processes for permit reviews. They include details on what activities need permits; the qualifications for general permits or permits-by-rule; the...

330

Hanford Site air operating permit application  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

331

Portland's Residential Solar Permitting Guide  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This program guide outlines the application and review procedures for obtaining the necessary permit(s) to install a solar energy system for a new or existing residential building. The guide also...

332

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

SciTech Connect (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

333

Model operating permits for natural gas processing plants  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Major sources as defined in Title V of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 that are required to submit an operating permit application will need to: Evaluate their compliance status; Determine a strategic method of presenting the general and specific conditions of their Model Operating Permit (MOP); Maintain compliance with air quality regulations. A MOP is prepared to assist permitting agencies and affected facilities in the development of operating permits for a specific source category. This paper includes a brief discussion of example permit conditions that may be applicable to various types of Title V sources. A MOP for a generic natural gas processing plant is provided as an example. The MOP should include a general description of the production process and identify emission sources. The two primary elements that comprise a MOP are: Provisions of all existing state and/or local air permits; Identification of general and specific conditions for the Title V permit. The general provisions will include overall compliance with all Clean Air Act Titles. The specific provisions include monitoring, record keeping, and reporting. Although Title V MOPs are prepared on a case-by-case basis, this paper will provide a general guideline of the requirements for preparation of a MOP. Regulatory agencies have indicated that a MOP included in the Title V application will assist in preparation of the final permit provisions, minimize delays in securing a permit, and provide support during the public notification process.

Arend, C. [Hydro-Search, Inc., Houston, TX (United States)

1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

334

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

335

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

336

Proposed modifications to the RCRA post-closure permit for the Chestnut Ridge Hydrogeologic Regime at the U.S. Department of Energy Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents proposed modifications to several conditions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Post-Closure Permit (PCP) for the Chestnut Ridge Hydrogeologic Regime (CRHR) (permit number TNHW-088, EPA ID No. TN3 89 009 0001). These permit conditions define the requirements for RCRA post-closure detection groundwater monitoring at the Chestnut Ridge Sediment Disposal Basin (CRSDB) and Kerr Hollow Quarry (KHQ), and RCRA post-closure corrective action groundwater monitoring at the Chestnut Ridge Security Pits (CRSPs). Modification of these PCP conditions is requested to: (1) clarify the planned integration of RCRA post-closure corrective action groundwater monitoring at the CRSPs with the monitoring program to be established in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) record of decision (ROD), (2) revise several of the current technical requirements for groundwater monitoring based on implementation of the RCRA monitoring programs during 1996, (3) replace several of the technical procedures included in the PCP with updated versions recently issued by the Y-12 Plant Groundwater Protection Program (GWPP), and (4) correct inaccurate regulatory citations and references to permit conditions and permit attachments. With these modifications, the Y- 12 Plant will continue to meet the full intent of all regulatory obligations for post-closure care of these facilities. Section 2 provides the technical justification for each proposed permit modification. Section 3.0 contains proposed changes to Section II of the PCP. Modifications to site-specific permit conditions are presented in Section 4.0 (CRSDB), Section 5.0 (CRSPs), and Section 6.0 (KHQ). Sections 7.0 and 8.0 reference updated and revised procedures for groundwater sampling, and monitoring well plugging and abandonment, respectively. Appendix A includes all proposed revisions to the permit attachments.

NONE

1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

337

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.

338

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.

339

Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory ¬∑ Se ubica el carret√≥n con el enfriamiento Ventiladores de t√ļnel 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.

340

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.

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

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.

342

Regulatory and Permitting Issues  

SciTech Connect (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

343

Overview of Low-Level Waste Disposal Operations at the Nevada Test Site  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office Environmental Management Program is charged with the responsibility to carry out the disposal of on-site and off-site generated low-level radioactive waste at the Nevada Test Site. Core elements of this mission are ensuring that disposal take place in a manner that is safe and cost-effective while protecting workers, the public, and the environment. This paper focuses on giving an overview of the Nevada Test Site facilities regarding currant design of disposal. In addition, technical attributes of the facilities established through the site characterization process will be further described. An update on current waste disposal volumes and capabilities will also be provided. This discussion leads to anticipated volume projections and disposal site requirements as the Nevada Test Site disposal operations look towards the future.

DOE /Navarro

2007-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

344

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

345

The collision of Title III and Title V: A potential permitting and enforcement nightmare  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Clean Air Act of 1990 (CAA) mandated that all facilities classified as major were to obtain a Federal Title V operating permit. In addition, any facility, either major or minor, which emits certain chemicals or compounds above a specific single quantity limit or a total aggregate limit are subject to Title III requirements and are required to obtain a Title V permit as well. The problem with obtaining a Title V permit for Title III substances is there is limited data, at least for the utilities sources, on emission factors and emission rates for many of the Title III listed chemical compounds. In addition, the emission data that exists is very conservative, and if used, would show the facilities to be significant emitters of hazardous air emissions, while actual emissions are significantly less. This could lead a facility to applying for a Title V permit unnecessarily, a time consuming process at best. In Iowa, facilities submitted the first Title V permit applications in 1994. The Iowa Department of Natural Resources is currently in the process of reviewing the submittals prior to issuing operating permits. Title III has not been addressed at all in the submittals and therefore will not be included in this round of finished permits that are to be issued. The outcome of this is that the Title V permits will have to be opened and amended to include the applicable Title III operating conditions and constraints. This paper will examine the areas where Title III and Title V collide and the potential permitting and enforcement issues that will have to be faced by the facilities that operate under these permits. This paper is based on the opinions of two of the three responsible parties (facilities and consultants) that are dealing with the potential permitting and enforcement wreckage before the collision occurs.

Facca, G.; Faler, M.

1998-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

346

Develop an effective Title V operating permit  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Under Title V of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA), thousands of industrial and government facilities are required to apply for a comprehensive operating permit that addresses all the emission sources at a site and the CAA regulations that apply to them. The new permitting requirements apply to major sources only--although there are several definitions of a major source under the Amended Act. Because Title V applicability is based on potential to emit (PTE) rather than actual emissions, even small and medium sources may initially be subject to this program. Unlike other regulations, Title V puts the burden of demonstrating continuous compliance on source owners and operators. Careful attention to detail is necessary during the application process because the Title V permit is inherently an enforcement fool for the EPA and the general public. Noncompliance can lead to citizen suits and fines up to $25,000 per day. Therefore, it is critical to negotiate an operating permit that does not adversely impact current operations yet provides flexibility for future modifications. Each state and local agency has its own application forms and regulatory interpretations. Areas of complexity include the classification of emission units, the approach for the PTE calculation, the separation of federal and state-enforceable requirements, and the relationship between Title V and other CAAA titles. This article summarizes some lessons learned based upon experiences in various states. (It does not attempt to resolve program uncertainties among jurisdictions.) The practical strategies presented can be used for developing (or modifying) Title V applications as well as during permit negotiations.

Chadha, N.

1997-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

347

Presidential Permits - Procedures | Department of Energy  

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

Permits - Procedures Presidential Permits - Procedures Executive Order 12038 states that, before a Presidential permit may be issued, the action must be found to be consistent with...

348

Broward County Online Solar Permitting (Florida)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Broward County now offers Go SOLAR Online Permitting*, for rooftop solar photovoltaic system permitting. This online permitting system may be used for residential or low commercial properties that...

349

Manor Farm Permit Fees from 1 March 2014 Staff permits  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

-Site: low * £18.42 per month Car Share Permit * £82.00 per annum 2 or more University motorists sharing: Permit Type £ Notes Essential Use £201.00 per annum Car Share £80.00 per annum 2 or more University motorists sharing SOUPS Permits £8.75 for an allocation of 5 Maximum of 120 in an academic year University

Doran, Simon J.

350

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The ultimate aims of treatment and conditioning is to prepare waste for disposal by ensuring that the waste will meet the waste acceptance criteria of a disposal facility. Hence the purpose of low-level waste disposal is to isolate the waste from both people and the environment. The radioactive particles in low-level waste emit the same types of radiation that everyone receives from nature. Most low-level waste fades away to natural background levels of radioactivity in months or years. Virtually all of it diminishes to natural levels in less than 300 years. In Egypt, The Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center has been established since 1983, as a waste management facility for LLW and ILW and the disposal site licensed for preoperational in 2005. The site accepts the low level waste generated on site and off site and unwanted radioactive sealed sources with half-life less than 30 years for disposal and all types of sources for interim storage prior to the final disposal. Operational requirements at the low-level (LLRW) disposal site are listed in the National Center for Nuclear Safety and Radiation Control NCNSRC guidelines. Additional procedures are listed in the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility Standards Manual. The following describes the current operations at the LLRW disposal site. (authors)

Mohamed, Yasser T. [Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center, Atomic Energy Authority, 3 Ahmed El-Zomor St., El-Zohour District, Naser City, 11787, Cairo (Egypt)] [Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center, Atomic Energy Authority, 3 Ahmed El-Zomor St., El-Zohour District, Naser City, 11787, Cairo (Egypt)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

351

Annual report of 1991 groundwater monitoring data for the Kerr Hollow Quarry and Chestnut Ridge Sediment Disposal Basin at the Y-12 Plant: Reporting and statistical evaluation of the subsequent year (sixth) data  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This annual report has historically been prepared to meet the annual reporting requirements of the Tennessee Department of and Environment and Conservation (TDEC), Hazardous Waste Management Regulation 1200-1-11-.05 (6)(e), for detection monitoring data collected on Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) wells in place around facilities which are accorded interim status. The regulatory authority for these units at the Y-12 Plant is currently in transition. A Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) with an effective date of January 1, 1992, has been negotiated with the Department of Energy (DOE) for the Oak Ridge Reservation. This agreement provides a framework for remediation of the Oak Ridge Reservation so that both RCRA and CERCLA requirements are integrated into the remediation process and provides for State, EPA, and DOE to proceed with CERCLA as the lead regulatory requirement and RCRA as an applicable or relevant and appropriate requirement. This report is presented for the RCRA certified wells for two interim status units at the Y-12 Plant. These units are Kerr Hollow Quarry and Chestnut Ridge Sediment Disposal Basin. Kerr Hollow is currently undergoing clean closure under RCRA. The Chestnut Ridge Sediment Disposal Basin (CRSDB) was closed in 1989 under a TDEC approved RCRA closure plan. The relevance of a RCRA Post-Closure Permit to either of these units is a matter of contention between DOE and TDEC since the FFA does not contemplate post-closure permits.

McMahon, L.W. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States); Mercier, T.M. [H and R Technical Associates, Inc., Oak Ridge, TN (United States)] [comps.

1992-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

352

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

SciTech Connect (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

353

Large Component Removal/Disposal  

SciTech Connect (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

354

State of Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities...  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities - ApplicationRenewal for Encroachment Permit Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Form:...

355

Low-level radioactive waste disposal operations at Los Alamos National Laboratory  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) generates Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLW) from various activities: research and development, sampling and storage of TRU wastes, decommissioning and decontamination of facilities, and from LANL`s major role in stockpile stewardship. The Laboratory has its own active LLW disposal facility located at Technical Area 54, Area G. This paper will identify the current operations of the facility and the issues pertaining to operating a disposal facility in today`s compliance and cost-effective environment.

Stanford, A.R.

1997-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

356

Portland's Commercial Solar Permitting Guide  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This program guide outlines the application and review procedures for obtaining the necessary permits to install a solar energy system on a new or existing commercial building.

357

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

As part of the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order negotiations, the US Department and 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-E Powerhouse Ash Pit. The 200-E Powerhouse Ash Waste Water discharges to the 200-E Powerhouse Ash Pit via dedicated pipelines. The 200-E Ash Waste Water is the only discharge to the 200-E Powerhouse Ash Pit. The 200-E 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

358

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

SciTech Connect (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

359

Overview of the Storm Water Individual Permit.pdf  

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

the LANL Storm Water Individual Permit? Poster, Individual Permit for Storm Water, NPDES Permit No...

360

State Water Permit Regulation (Arkansas)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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...

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

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

362

The incandescent disposal system  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The electrotechnology device being introduced to the low-level waste market is an Incandescent Disposal System (IDS) for volume reduction and vitrification. The process changes the composition of the waste material, usually long molecular chains, into simple molecules and elements. It renders the volume of low-level wastes to a manageable solid vitrified residue, carbon black, and a water discharge. The solid material, which has been vitrified if silica is introduced into the waste stream, is an ideal inert filler. The carbon black is non-leaching and is readily available for vitrification as it comes out of the IDS.

Smith, R.G.

1996-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

363

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

364

State Waste Discharge Permit application: 400 Area Septic System  

SciTech Connect (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

365

Sludge utilization and disposal in Virginia  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This state-of-the-art study was initiated to determine the problem issues, present knowledge about the issues, and additional research needs in the area of land disposal of municipal sewage sludge. Three questionnaires were developed to survey technically oriented professional, county extension agents, and Virginia NPDES permit holders to obtain these groups' views on problems and deficiencies needing further investigation. Another phase of the study was to conduct an extensive review of the literature on the subject of land application of sewage sludge. Listings of pertinent literature relating to land application with specific interest toward potentially toxic metals, pathogens, nitrogen, and phosphorus were obtained and reviewed. Additional research is needed in the following areas: a method that accurately estimates metal availability within the soil; a method to determine the potential for a disease outbreak from controlled application of treated municipal sewage sludge; a more precise method of N-balancing; the impact of P loading on water quality.

Martens, D.C.; McCart, G.D.; Reneau, R.B. Jr; Simpson, T.W.; Ban-Kiat, T.

1982-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

366

Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-2 and...  

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

transmission facilities at the U.S-Canada border. Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-230-2 and PP-230-3 ITC Holdings Corporation Limited Partnership,...

367

Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-235-1 Sempra...  

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

transmission facilities at the U.S-Mexico border. Application for presidential permit OE Docket No. PP-235-1 Sempra Energy Resources and Termoelectrica U.S LLC More...

368

Information related to low-level mixed waste inventory, characteristics, generation, and facility assessment for treatment, storage, and disposal alternatives considered in the U.S. Department of Energy Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report was prepared to support the analysis of risks and costs associated with the proposed treatment of low-level mixed waste (LLMW) under management of the US Department of Energy (DOE). The various waste management alternatives for treatment of LLMW have been defined in the DOE`s Office of Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement. This technical memorandum estimates the waste material throughput expected at each proposed LLMW treatment facility and analyzes potential radiological and chemical releases at each DOE site resulting from treatment of these wastes. Models have been developed to generate site-dependent radiological profiles and waste-stream-dependent chemical profiles for these wastes. Current site-dependent inventories and estimates for future generation of LLMW have been obtained from DOE`s 1994 Mixed Waste Inventory Report (MWIR-2). Using treatment procedures developed by the Mixed Waste Treatment Project, the MWIR-2 database was analyzed to provide waste throughput and emission estimates for each of the different waste types assessed in this report. Uncertainties in the estimates at each site are discussed for waste material throughputs and radiological and chemical releases.

Wilkins, B.D.; Dolak, D.A.; Wang, Y.Y.; Meshkov, N.K.

1996-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

369

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

SciTech Connect (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

370

E-Print Network 3.0 - alternate product facility Sample Search...  

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

typically represents about 30 percent... (NPV) 1 Status Quo with transportation and disposal End 2010 4* of excess ash at alternative facility 2... residue from these two...

371

Project Execution Plan for the Remote Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

As part of ongoing cleanup activities at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL), closure of the Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) is proceeding under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (42 USC 9601 et seq. 1980). INL-generated radioactive waste has been disposed of at RWMC since 1952. The Subsurface Disposal Area (SDA) at RWMC accepted the bulk of INLís contact and remote-handled low-level waste (LLW) for disposal. Disposal of contact-handled LLW and remote-handled LLW ion-exchange resins from the Advanced Test Reactor in the open pit of the SDA ceased September 30, 2008. Disposal of remote-handled LLW in concrete disposal vaults at RWMC will continue until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the SDA (approximately at the end of fiscal year FY 2017). The continuing nuclear mission of INL, associated ongoing and planned operations, and Naval spent fuel activities at the Naval Reactors Facility (NRF) require continued capability to appropriately dispose of contact and remote handled LLW. A programmatic analysis of disposal alternatives for contact and remote-handled LLW generated at INL was conducted by the INL contractor in Fiscal Year 2006; subsequent evaluations were completed in Fiscal Year 2007. The result of these analyses was a recommendation to the Department of Energy (DOE) that all contact-handled LLW generated after September 30, 2008, be disposed offsite, and that DOE proceed with a capital project to establish replacement remote-handled LLW disposal capability. An analysis of the alternatives for providing replacement remote-handled LLW disposal capability has been performed to support Critical Decision-1. The highest ranked alternative to provide this required capability has been determined to be the development of a new onsite remote-handled LLW disposal facility to replace the existing remote-handled LLW disposal vaults at the SDA. Several offsite DOE and commercial disposal options exist for contact-handled LLW; however, offsite disposal options are either not currently available (i.e., commercial disposal facilities), practical, or cost-effective for all remote-handled LLW streams generated at INL. Offsite disposal of all INL and tenant-generated remote-handled waste is further complicated by issues associated with transporting highly radioactive waste in commerce; and infrastructure and processing changes at the generating facilities, specifically NRF, that would be required to support offsite disposal. The INL Remote-Handled LLW Disposal Project will develop a new remote handled LLW disposal facility to meet mission-critical, remote-handled LLW disposal needs. A formal DOE decision to proceed with the project has been made in accordance with the requirements of National Environmental Policy Act (42 USCß 4321 et seq.). Remote-handled LLW is generated from nuclear programs conducted at INL, including spent nuclear fuel handling and operations at NRF and operations at the Advanced Test Reactor. Remote-handled LLW also will be generated by new INL programs and from segregation and treatment (as necessary) of remote handled scrap and waste currently stored in the Radioactive Scrap and Waste Facility at the Materials and Fuels Complex.

Danny Anderson

2014-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

372

Evaluation of nuclear facility decommissioning projects. Three Mile Island Unit 2. Radioactive waste and laundry shipments. Volume 9. Summary status report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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 to May 5, 1985. 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.; Miller, R. L.; Scotti, K. S.

1986-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

373

Hanford facility contingency plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Hanford Facility Contingency Plan, together with each TSD unit- specific contingency plan, meets the WAC 173-303 requirements for a contingency plan. Applicability of this plan to Hanford Facility activities is described in the Hanford Facility RCRA Permit, Dangerous Waste Portion, General Condition II.A. General Condition II.A applies to Part III TSD units, Part V TSD units, and to releases of hazardous substances which threaten human health or the environment. Additional information about the applicability of this document may also be found in the Hanford Facility RCRA Permit Handbook (DOE/RL-96-10). This plan includes descriptions of responses to a nonradiological hazardous substance spill or release at Hanford Facility locations not covered by TSD unit-specific contingency plans or building emergency plans. The term hazardous substances is defined in WAC 173-303-040 as: ``any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance, product, commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits any of the physical, chemical or biological properties described in WAC 173-303-090 or 173-303-100.`` Whenever the term hazardous substances is used in this document, it will be used in the context of this definition. This plan includes descriptions of responses for spills or releases of hazardous substances occurring at areas between TSD units that may, or may not, threaten human health or the environment.

Sutton, L.N.

1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

374

Geological Disposal Concept Selection Aligned with a Voluntarism Process - 13538  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The UK's Radioactive Waste Management Directorate (RWMD) is currently at a generic stage in its implementation programme. The UK site selection process is a voluntarist process and, as yet, no communities have decided to participate. RWMD has set out a process to describe how a geological disposal concept would be selected for the range of higher activity wastes in the UK inventory, including major steps and decision making points, aligned with the stages of the UK site selection process. A platform of information is being developed on geological disposal concepts at various stages of implementation internationally and, in order to build on international experience, RWMD is developing its approach to technology transfer. The UK has a range of different types of higher activity wastes with different characteristics; therefore a range of geological disposal concepts may be needed. In addition to identifying key aspects for considering the compatibility of different engineered barrier systems for different types of waste, RWMD is developing a methodology to determine minimum separation distances between disposal modules in a co-located geological disposal facility. RWMD's approach to geological disposal concept selection is intended to be flexible, recognising the long term nature of the project. RWMD is also committed to keeping alternative radioactive waste management options under review; an approach has been developed and periodic reviews of alternative options will be published. (authors)

Crockett, Glenda; King, Samantha [Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, Building 587, Curie Avenue, Harwell Oxford, Didcot, Oxfordshire, OX11 0RH (United Kingdom)] [Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, Building 587, Curie Avenue, Harwell Oxford, Didcot, Oxfordshire, OX11 0RH (United Kingdom)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

375

Radioactive mixed waste disposal  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Various types of waste have been generated during the 50-year history of the Hanford Site. Regulatory changes in the last 20 years have provided the emphasis for better management of these wastes. Interpretations of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) have led to the definition of radioactive mixed wastes (RMW). The radioactive and hazardous properties of these wastes have resulted in the initiation of special projects for the management of these wastes. Other solid wastes at the Hanford Site include low-level wastes, transuranic (TRU), and nonradioactive hazardous wastes. This paper describes a system for the treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) of solid radioactive waste.

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

1993-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

376

Request for modification of 200 Area effluent treatment facility final delisting  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A Delisting Petition submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in August 1993 addressed effluent to be generated at the 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility from treating Hanford Facility waste streams. This Delisting Petition requested that 71.9 million liters per year of treated effluent, bearing the designation 'F001' through 'F005', and/or 'F039' that is derived from 'F001' through 'F005' waste, be delisted. On June 13, 1995, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency published the final rule (Final Delisting), which formally excluded 71.9 million liters per year of 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility effluent from ''being listed as hazardous wastes'' (60 FR 31115 now promulgated in 40 CFR 261). Given the limited scope, it is necessary to request a modification of the Final Delisting to address the management of a more diverse multi-source leachate (F039) at the 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility. From past operations and current cleanup activities on the Hanford Facility, a considerable amount of both liquid and solid Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 regulated mixed waste has been and continues to be generated. Ultimately this waste will be treated as necessary to meet the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Land Disposal Restrictions. The disposal of this waste will be in Resource Conservation and Recovery Act--compliant permitted lined trenches equipped with leachate collection systems. These operations will result in the generation of what is referred to as multi-source leachate. This newly generated waste will receive the listed waste designation of F039. This waste also must be managed in compliance with the provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.

BOWMAN, R.C.

1998-11-19T23:59:59.000Z

377

Costs for off-site disposal of nonhazardous oil field wastes: Salt caverns versus other disposal methods  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

According to an American Petroleum Institute production waste survey reported on by P.G. Wakim in 1987 and 1988, the exploration and production segment of the US oil and gas industry generated more than 360 million barrels (bbl) of drilling wastes, more than 20 billion bbl of produced water, and nearly 12 million bbl of associated wastes in 1985. Current exploration and production activities are believed to be generating comparable quantities of these oil field wastes. Wakim estimates that 28% of drilling wastes, less than 2% of produced water, and 52% of associated wastes are disposed of in off-site commercial facilities. In recent years, interest in disposing of oil field wastes in solution-mined salt caverns has been growing. This report provides information on the availability of commercial disposal companies in oil-and gas-producing states, the treatment and disposal methods they employ, and the amounts they charge. It also compares cavern disposal costs with the costs of other forms of waste disposal.

Veil, J.A.

1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

378

WASTE DISPOSAL SECTION CORNELL UNIVERSITY  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

radioactive products as regular trash. All packages must be free of contamination, radiation symbols2/07 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

Pawlowski, Wojtek

379

Los Alamos National Laboratory Hazardous Waste Facility Permit...  

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

community-environmentenvironmental-stewardshipprotectioncommunity-relations-plan.php . First name Click here to enter text. Last name Click here to enter text. Email...

380

NPDES Individual Permit for Industrial Facilities - Mail Merge...  

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

WATER DISCHARGES ASSOCIATED WITH INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITY FROM FABRICATED METAL PRODUCTS INDUSTRY......44 I. CONTENTS OF PLAN. ......

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

Hawaii Permit Application for Solid Waste Management Facility | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia, Virginia: Energy Resources Jump to: navigation,Ohio:Greer CountyCorridor | OpenOpen EnergyOpenOceanic

382

Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Public Comments to Community Relations Plan  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth7-1D: Vegetation ProposedUsingFun with Bigfront.jpgcommunity200cell 9Harvey Brooks, 1960OptionsHazardous Waste

383

Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Public Comments to Community Relations Plan  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth7-1D: Vegetation ProposedUsingFun with Bigfront.jpgcommunity200cell 9Harvey Brooks, 1960OptionsHazardous Waste

384

Permitted Mercury Storage Facility Notifications | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProvedDecemberInitiativesNationalNuclearRockyServices ¬Ľ Waste Management ¬Ľ Waste

385

NMDOT Application for Permit to Install Utility Facilities Within Public  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia, Virginia: Energy Resources Jump to:46 -Energieprojekte3 ClimateSpurrInformation NAMA-ProgrammeNF| OpenROW | Open

386

The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Hazardous Waste Facility Permit, Waste  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of EnergyEnergyENERGYWomen Owned SmallOf The 2012 Greenbuy Program. | DepartmentManagementLasSavings

387

Salt disposal of heat-generating nuclear waste.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report summarizes the state of salt repository science, reviews many of the technical issues pertaining to disposal of heat-generating nuclear waste in salt, and proposes several avenues for future science-based activities to further the technical basis for disposal in salt. There are extensive salt formations in the forty-eight contiguous states, and many of them may be worthy of consideration for nuclear waste disposal. The United States has extensive experience in salt repository sciences, including an operating facility for disposal of transuranic wastes. The scientific background for salt disposal including laboratory and field tests at ambient and elevated temperature, principles of salt behavior, potential for fracture damage and its mitigation, seal systems, chemical conditions, advanced modeling capabilities and near-future developments, performance assessment processes, and international collaboration are all discussed. The discussion of salt disposal issues is brought current, including a summary of recent international workshops dedicated to high-level waste disposal in salt. Lessons learned from Sandia National Laboratories' experience on the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant and the Yucca Mountain Project as well as related salt experience with the Strategic Petroleum Reserve are applied in this assessment. Disposal of heat-generating nuclear waste in a suitable salt formation is attractive because the material is essentially impermeable, self-sealing, and thermally conductive. Conditions are chemically beneficial, and a significant experience base exists in understanding this environment. Within the period of institutional control, overburden pressure will seal fractures and provide a repository setting that limits radionuclide movement. A salt repository could potentially achieve total containment, with no releases to the environment in undisturbed scenarios for as long as the region is geologically stable. Much of the experience gained from United States repository development, such as seal system design, coupled process simulation, and application of performance assessment methodology, helps define a clear strategy for a heat-generating nuclear waste repository in salt.

Leigh, Christi D. (Sandia National Laboratories, Carlsbad, NM); Hansen, Francis D.

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

388

Solar Construction Permitting Standards (California)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Two bills signed in 2012 place limits on the fees that cities, counties, cities and counties, and charter cities can charge for a solar permit. AB 1801 specifies that a local government cannot base...

389

Solar Permitting & Inspection Webinar Series  

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability U.S.A. and the Interstate Renewable Energy Council, Inc. (IREC) present a series of three webinars on Solar Permitting & Inspection. As part of the U...

390

Class 1 Permit Modification Notification  

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

Waste Bureau New Mexico Environment Department 2905 Rodeo Park Drive East, Bu il ding 1 Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505-6303 JUL 0 5 2011 Subject: Notification of a Class 1 Permit...

391

Well Permits (District of Columbia)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [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...

392

Developed by: Solar Permitting Work Group  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

of Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. California Solar Permitting Guidebook Improving Permit Review and Approval for Small Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Systems June 2012 First Edition #12;California Solar Permitting Guidebook2 California Solar Permitting Guidebook Improving Permit Review and Approval for Small Solar Photovoltaic (PV

393

1999 Report on Hanford Site land disposal restriction for mixed waste  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

BLACK, D.G.

1999-03-25T23:59:59.000Z

394

Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation: Waste Disposal In Engineered Trench #3  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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. L.; Smith, F. G. III; Flach, G. P.; Hiergesell, R. A.; Butcher, B. T.

2013-07-29T23:59:59.000Z

395

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Part B Permit Application [for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)]. Chapter D, Appendix D1 (conclusion): Volume 3, Revision 1.0  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report, Part B (Vol. 3) of the permit application for the WIPP facility, contains information related to the site characterization of the facility, including geology, design, rock salt evaluations, maps, drawings, and shaft excavations. (CBS)

Not Available

1992-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

396

Title I Disposal Site  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

The Office of Legacy Management and the Navajo Nation have been discussing an item specified in the Long Term Surveillance Plan (LTSP) for the Mexican Hat site for some time now, and we have come to a resolution on the matter. The LTSP specifies seep sampling at the site to confirm that the disposal cell is operating as designed. Typically, this is to be done for a specific time and then reevaluated, but, in this LTSP there is no time frame given. After 8 years of experience in sampling and observing these six seeps, it has been found that most are not flowing at all, and those that have any water running are so limited in flow that it is difficult to obtain a sample. In addition, several risk assessments have been performed over the years to evaluate the possible ecological risks associated with exposure to this seep water. The analysis indicates there would be no eco-risk based on the historic data to any wildlife or livestock. This information and a full analysis of the situation was submitted to the Navajo Nation for their consideration, and, in further discussions, they have agreed to limit the sampling to only making observations during the annual cell inspection, and if water is observed to be increased compared to historic observations, then sampling will resume. Their agreement to this change is noted in the enclosed copy of their letter to DOE dated July 25, 2006. I have enclosed a copy of this report,

Mr. Bill; Von Till

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

397

Transportation, Aging and Disposal Canister System Performance...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

specifications for selected system components of the Transportation, Aging and Disposal (TAD) canister-based system. Transportation, Aging and Disposal Canister System Performance...

398

Chapter 37 Land Disposal Restrictions (Kentucky)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This administrative regulation establishes requirements for land disposal of hazardous waste. These include- surface impound exemptions, prohibitions on disposal and storage and treatment standards...

399

ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SCHEDULE 4: PROPERTY DISPOSAL RECORDS...  

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

4: PROPERTY DISPOSAL RECORDS (Revision 2) ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SCHEDULE 4: PROPERTY DISPOSAL RECORDS (Revision 2) These records pertain to the sales by agencies of real and...

400

Canastota Renewable Energy Facility Project  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The project was implemented at the Madison County Landfill located in the Town of Lincoln, Madison County, New York. Madison County has owned and operated the solid waste and recycling facilities at the Buyea Road site since 1974. At the onset of the project, the County owned and operated facilities there to include three separate landfills, a residential solid waste disposal and recycled material drop-off facility, a recycling facility and associated administrative, support and environmental control facilities. This putrescible waste undergoes anaerobic decomposition within the waste mass and generates landfill gas, which is approximately 50% methane. In order to recover this gas, the landfill was equipped with gas collection systems on both the east and west sides of Buyea Road which bring the gas to a central point for destruction. In order to derive a beneficial use from the collected landfill gases, the County decided to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the future use of the generated gas.

Blake, Jillian; Hunt, Allen

2013-12-13T23:59:59.000Z

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.


401

Water Pollution Control Permit Regulations (Vermont)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

402

Presidential Permit Holders - Annual Reports | Department of...  

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

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...

403

Permitting of Consumptive Uses of Water (Florida)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Local water management districts are required to establish programs and regulations to provide for the permitting of consumptive uses of water. Such permitting programs are subject to the...

404

Operating Permits and Emission Fees (New Mexico)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The New Mexico Environment Department's Air Quality Bureau processes permit applications for industries that emit pollutants to the air. The Permitting Section consists of three units, the Minor...

405

Petroleum Pipeline Eminent Domain Permit Procedures (Georgia)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Petroleum Pipeline Eminent Domain Permit Procedures serve to protect Georgia's natural and environmental resources by requiring permits be issued by the Director of the Environmental Protection...

406

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act corrective measures study: Area 6 decontamination pond facility, corrective action unit no. 92  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Corrective Action Unit (CAU) No. 92, the Area 6 Decontamination Pond Facility (DPF), is an historic disposal unit located at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) in Nye County, Nevada (Figures 1 - 1, 1-2, and 1-3). The NTS is operated by the U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV), which has been required by the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) to characterize the DPF under the requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Part A Permit (NDEP, 1995) for the NTS and Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 265 (1996c). The DPF is prioritized in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO, 1996) but is governed by the permit. The DPF was characterized through sampling events in 1994, 1996, and 1997. The results of these sampling events are contained in the Final Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Industrial Site Environmental Restoration Site Characterization Report, Area 6 Decontamination Pond Facility, Revision I (DOE/NV, 1997). This Corrective Measures Study (CMS) for the Area 6 DPF has been prepared for the DOE/NV`s Environmental Restoration Project. The CMS has been developed to support the preparation of a Closure Plan for the DPF. Because of the complexities of the contamination and regulatory issues associated with the DPF, DOE/NV determined a CMS would be beneficial to the evaluation and selection of a closure alternative.

NONE

1997-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

407

Ultimate disposal of low and medium radioactive waste in France  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The National Radioactive Waste Management Agency (ANDRA) has been entrusted with the long-term management of radioactive waste. This paper presents the methodology of safety assessment used by ANDRA for a land disposal facility of radioactive waste with short or medium half-life and with low or medium specific activity. This methodology was used in the design of ``the Centre de stockage de l`Aube``.

Ringeard, C. [National Radioactive Waste Management Agency, Fontenay aux Roses (France). Environmental, Safety, Quality Dept.

1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

408

Remediation of a Former USAF Radioactive Material Disposal Site  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper describes the remediation of a low-level radiological waste burial site located at the former James Connally Air Force Base in Waco, Texas. Burial activities at the site occurred during the 1950's when the property was under the ownership of the United States Air Force. Included is a discussion of methods and strategies that were used to successfully exhume and characterize the wastes for proper disposal at offsite disposal facilities. Worker and environmental protection measures are also described. Information gained from this project may be used at other similar project sites. A total of nine burial tubes had been identified for excavation, characterization, and removal from the site. The disposal tubes were constructed of 4-ft lengths of concrete pipe buried upright with the upper ends flush with ground surface. Initial ground level observations of the burial tubes indicated that some weathering had occurred; however, the condition of the subsurface portions of the tubes was unknown. Soil excavation occurred in 1-foot lifts in order that the tubes could be inspected and to allow for characterization of the soils at each stage of the excavation. Due to the weight of the concrete pipe and the condition of the piping joints it was determined that special measures would be required to maintain the tubes intact during their removal. Special tube anchoring and handling methods were required to relocate the tubes from their initial positions to a staging area where they could be further characterized. Characterization of the disposal tubes was accomplished using a combination of gamma spectroscopy and activity mapping methods. Important aspects of the project included the use of specialized excavation and disposal tube reinforcement measures to maintain the disposal tubes intact during excavation, removal and subsequent characterization. The non-intrusive gamma spectroscopy and data logging methods allowed for effective characterization of the wastes while minimizing disposal costs. In addition, worker exposures were maintained ALARA as a result of the removal and characterization methods employed.

Hoffman, D. E.; Cushman, M; Tupyi, B.; Lambert, J.

2003-02-25T23:59:59.000Z

409

Solid Waste Disposal Act (Texas)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality is responsible for the regulation and management of municipal solid waste and hazardous waste. A fee is applied to all solid waste disposed in the...

410

Calcined solids storage facility closure study  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The disposal of radioactive wastes now stored at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory is currently mandated under a {open_quotes}Settlement Agreement{close_quotes} (or {open_quotes}Batt Agreement{close_quotes}) between the Department of Energy and the State of Idaho. Under this agreement, all high-level waste must be treated as necessary to meet the disposal criteria and disposed of or made road ready to ship from the INEEL by 2035. In order to comply with this agreement, all calcined waste produced in the New Waste Calcining Facility and stored in the Calcined Solids Facility must be treated and disposed of by 2035. Several treatment options for the calcined waste have been studied in support of the High-Level Waste Environmental Impact Statement. Two treatment methods studied, referred to as the TRU Waste Separations Options, involve the separation of the high-level waste (calcine) into TRU waste and low-level waste (Class A or Class C). Following treatment, the TRU waste would be sent to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) for final storage. It has been proposed that the low-level waste be disposed of in the Tank Farm Facility and/or the Calcined Solids Storage Facility following Resource Conservation and Recovery Act closure. In order to use the seven Bin Sets making up the Calcined Solids Storage Facility as a low-level waste landfill, the facility must first be closed to Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) standards. This study identifies and discusses two basic methods available to close the Calcined Solids Storage Facility under the RCRA - Risk-Based Clean Closure and Closure to Landfill Standards. In addition to the closure methods, the regulatory requirements and issues associated with turning the Calcined Solids Storage Facility into an NRC low-level waste landfill or filling the bin voids with clean grout are discussed.

Dahlmeir, M.M.; Tuott, L.C.; Spaulding, B.C. [and others] [and others

1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

411

Abandoned Property Abandoned and unclaimed property left in residential facilities, on breezeways, in stairwells, laundry  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Abandoned Property Abandoned and unclaimed property left in residential facilities, on breezeways in the residence halls. Non-grounded extension cords are not permitted in any residential facility. Up to six (6, dryers, toaster ovens, and dishwashers are NOT permitted in any residential facility. Coffee pots

Boyce, Richard L.

412

Los Alamos National Laboratory opens new waste repackaging facility  

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

to increase its capability to process nuclear waste for permanent disposal. March 7, 2013 A view of the new box line facility where transuranic waste will be repackaged at Los...

413

Facility Microgrids  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Microgrids are receiving a considerable interest from the power industry, partly because their business and technical structure shows promise as a means of taking full advantage of distributed generation. This report investigates three issues associated with facility microgrids: (1) Multiple-distributed generation facility microgrids' unintentional islanding protection, (2) Facility microgrids' response to bulk grid disturbances, and (3) Facility microgrids' intentional islanding.

Ye, Z.; Walling, R.; Miller, N.; Du, P.; Nelson, K.

2005-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

414

Disposal Facility Reaches 15-Million-Ton Milestone | Department...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

and hundreds of support structures. McCormick and Washington Closure President Carol Johnson praised a large group of Hanford workers. "We have an exceptional workforce committed...

415

Solid Waste Disposal Resource Recovery Facilities Act (South Carolina)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This legislation authorizes local governing bodies to form joint agencies to advance the collection, transfer, processing of solid waste, recovery of resources, and sales of recovered resources in...

416

Property and Facilities Division VEHICLE PURCHASING & DISPOSAL REQUISITION PF330  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

: Garaging Information: Vehicle Details Vehicle Make: Model: Vehicle Body Type: Sedan, Wagon, Utility Drive Account Project ID Free Form Tag Place operational account i.e. fuel , servicing, registration costs below: Operational Unit Site Fund Code Function Expense Account Project ID Free Form Tag Completed and authorised PF

Blows, Mark

417

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

space criterion is met. Evaluate and utilize density methods that are more reliable than nuclear density testing for compaction testing (e.g. ASTM D 4914). Re-evaluate the testing...

418

Enhancing RESRAD-OFFSITE for Low Level Waste Disposal Facility...  

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

The RESRAD-OFFSITE code was developed to evaluate the radiological dose and excess cancer risk to an individual who is exposed while located within or outside the area of...

419

Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility at Idaho National Laboratory | Department of  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "ofEarly Career Scientists'Montana.ProgramJulietip sheetK-4InFindingIR-2003-TransmissionDepartmentIan

420

New Facility Will Test Disposal Cell Cover Renovation | Department of  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of EnergyEnergyENERGY TAXBalanced Scorecard Federal2Energy SecondWells |Energy Services ¬Ľ New

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

OAK RIDGE CERCLA DISPOSAL FACILITY ACHIEVES SAFETY MILESTONE | Department  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of EnergyEnergyENERGY TAXBalanced ScorecardReactor Technology SubcommitteeWilliamsOn(National Renewableof

422

Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility at Idaho National Laboratory  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of Energy Power.pdf11-161-LNG | Department ofHTS CableDepartment of Energy ReportingIan Kalin About

423

Operational Issues at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility at  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProvedDecemberInitiativesNationalNuclear Safety Officethe ChiefServices ¬Ľ

424

DOE Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility | Department of Energy  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "ofEarly Career Scientists'Montana. DOCUMENTS AVAILABLEReportEnergyDeveloping a TribalResourcesClean CitiesThe

425

D11 WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES FOR TRANSURANIC WASTE  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "ofEarly Career Scientists'Montana. DOCUMENTS AVAILABLEReport 2009Site |Documents D.O.E. RACE TO ZERO

426

Operational Issues at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility at Hanford  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of Energy Power.pdf11-161-LNG |September 15, 2010Energy Series | Department ofOperating andHanford

427

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of Energy Power.pdf11-161-LNGInternational EnergyCommittee onGASRainey STAR Center | ETR-19 United

428

Maintenance Guide for DOE Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of Energy Power.pdf11-161-LNG | DepartmentEnergyMagna: Product Capabilities Brochure Magna:Department4 G

429

2009 Performance Assessment for the Saltstone Disposal Facility |  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of Energy Power Systems Engineering ResearchServices4/08VirginiaOsuna- FLIGHT - -July05 Ways

430

Water pollution Control Permit Fee Schedules (West Virginia)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This rule establishes schedules of permit application fees and annual permit fees for state water pollution control permits and national pollutant discharge elimination system permits issued by the...

431

Parking Options 2011/12 Reserved Permits  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Parking Options 2011/12 Reserved Permits A Reserved permit is $275 this fiscal year and is only available to faculty and staff through payroll deduction. Individuals issued a Reserved permit may park is completely full someone is parked illegally and Parking Services should be notified. Reserved permit holders

432

Permits  

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

under Title V of the Clean Air Act, streamlines the way authorities regulate air pollution by consolidating all air pollution control requirements into a single, comprehensive...

433

Energy Generation Project Permitting (Vermont)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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...

434

Uncle Sam goes to market: Federal agency disposal of emission reduction credits under the Federal property management regulations. Master's thesis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

With the realignment and closure of Federal facilities, especially Department of Defense installations, Federal agencies have been presented with a unique opportunity: the chance to create and dispose of air emission reduction credits (ERCs). This situation and current commitments by the Congress and EPA to expand the use of market based pollution control programs have generated interest in certain circles as to whether and how Federal agencies can dispose of ERCs and similar pollution rights and allowances. This paper will discuss ERCs, why the disposal of ERCs by Federal agencies is a pressing issue, and how Federal agencies can dispose of ERCs under existing Federal property laws and regulations.

Rafferty, V.J.

1994-01-30T23:59:59.000Z

435

Tank Waste Disposal Program redefinition  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The record of decision (ROD) (DOE 1988) on the Final Environmental Impact Statement, Hanford Defense High-Level, Transuranic and Tank Wastes, Hanford Site, Richland Washington identifies the method for disposal of double-shell tank waste and cesium and strontium capsules at the Hanford Site. The ROD also identifies the need for additional evaluations before a final decision is made on the disposal of single-shell tank waste. This document presents the results of systematic evaluation of the present technical circumstances, alternatives, and regulatory requirements in light of the values of the leaders and constitutents of the program. It recommends a three-phased approach for disposing of tank wastes. This approach allows mature technologies to be applied to the treatment of well-understood waste forms in the near term, while providing time for the development and deployment of successively more advanced pretreatment technologies. The advanced technologies will accelerate disposal by reducing the volume of waste to be vitrified. This document also recommends integration of the double-and single-shell tank waste disposal programs, provides a target schedule for implementation of the selected approach, and describes the essential elements of a program to be baselined in 1992.

Grygiel, M.L.; Augustine, C.A.; Cahill, M.A.; Garfield, J.S.; Johnson, M.E.; Kupfer, M.J.; Meyer, G.A.; Roecker, J.H. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States); Holton, L.K.; Hunter, V.L.; Triplett, M.B. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States)

1991-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

436

Use of engineered soils and other site modifications for low-level radioactive waste disposal  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission requires that low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal facilities be designed to minimize contact between waste and infiltrating water through the use of site design features. The purpose of this investigation is to identify engineered barriers and evaluate their ability to enhance the long-term performance of an LLW disposal facility. Previously used barriers such as concrete overpacks, vaults, backfill, and engineered soil covers, are evaluated as well as state-of-the-art barriers, including an engineered sorptive soil layer underlying a facility and an advanced design soil cover incorporating a double-capillary layer. The purpose of this investigation is also to provide information in incorporating or excluding specific engineered barriers as part of new disposal facility designs. Evaluations are performed using performance assessment modeling techniques. A generic reference disposal facility design is used as a baseline for comparing the improvements in long-term performance offered by designs incorporating engineered barriers in generic and humid environments. These evaluations simulate water infiltration through the facility, waste leaching, radionuclide transport through the facility, and decay and ingrowth. They also calculate a maximum (peak annual) dose for each disposal system design. A relative dose reduction factor is calculated for each design evaluated. The results of this investigation are presented for concrete overpacks, concrete vaults, sorptive backfill, sorptive engineered soil underlying the facility, and sloped engineered soil covers using a single-capillary barrier and a double-capillary barrier. Designs using combinations of barriers are also evaluated. These designs include a vault plus overpacks, sorptive backfill plus overpacks, and overpack with vault plus sorptive backfill, underlying sorptive soil, and engineered soil cover.

Not Available

1994-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

437

Depleted uranium disposal options evaluation  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, has chartered a study to evaluate alternative management strategies for depleted uranium (DU) currently stored throughout the DOE complex. Historically, DU has been maintained as a strategic resource because of uses for DU metal and potential uses for further enrichment or for uranium oxide as breeder reactor blanket fuel. This study has focused on evaluating the disposal options for DU if it were considered a waste. This report is in no way declaring these DU reserves a ``waste,`` but is intended to provide baseline data for comparison with other management options for use of DU. To PICS considered in this report include: Retrievable disposal; permanent disposal; health hazards; radiation toxicity and chemical toxicity.

Hertzler, T.J.; Nishimoto, D.D.; Otis, M.D. [Science Applications International Corp., Idaho Falls, ID (United States). Waste Management Technology Div.

1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

438

Quality Services: Solid Wastes, Part 360: Solid Waste Management Facilities (New York)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

These regulations apply to all solid wastes with the exception of hazardous or radioactive waste. Proposed solid waste processing facilities are required to obtain permits prior to construction,...

439

Solid Waste Regulation No. 8- Solid Waste Composting Facilities (Rhode Island)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Facilities which compost putrescible waste and/or leaf and yard waste are subject to these regulations. The regulations establish permitting, registration, and operational requirements for...

440

RSSC RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL 08/2011 7-1 RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

RSSC RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL 08/2011 7-1 CHAPTER 7 RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL PAGE I. Radioactive Waste Disposal ............................................................................................ 7-2 II. Radiation Control Technique #2 Instructions for Preparation of Radioactive Waste

Slatton, Clint

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.