Sample records for facilities disturb hazardous

  1. 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.

  2. PUREX facility hazards assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sutton, L.N.

    1994-09-23T23:59:59.000Z

    This report documents the hazards assessment for the Plutonium Uranium Extraction Plant (PUREX) located on the US Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site. Operation of PUREX is the responsibility of Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC). This hazards assessment was conducted to provide the emergency planning technical basis for PUREX. DOE Order 5500.3A requires an emergency planning hazards assessment for each facility that has the potential to reach or exceed the lowest level emergency classification. In October of 1990, WHC was directed to place PUREX in standby. In December of 1992 the DOE Assistant Secretary for Environmental Restoration and Waste Management authorized the termination of PUREX and directed DOE-RL to proceed with shutdown planning and terminal clean out activities. Prior to this action, its mission was to reprocess irradiated fuels for the recovery of uranium and plutonium. The present mission is to establish a passively safe and environmentally secure configuration at the PUREX facility and to preserve that condition for 10 years. The ten year time frame represents the typical duration expended to define, authorize and initiate follow-on decommissioning and decontamination activities.

  3. Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Program (Maryland)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Hazardous Waste Facilities Siting Board is responsible for overseeing the siting of hazardous waste facilities in Maryland, and will treat hazardous waste facilities separately from low-level...

  4. Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Act (Massachusetts)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This Act establishes the means by which developers of proposed hazardous waste facilities will work with the community in which they wish to construct a facility. When the intent to construct,...

  5. Hazard Baseline Downgrade Effluent Treatment Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Blanchard, A.

    1998-10-21T23:59:59.000Z

    This Hazard Baseline Downgrade reviews the Effluent Treatment Facility, in accordance with Department of Energy Order 5480.23, WSRC11Q Facility Safety Document Manual, DOE-STD-1027-92, and DOE-EM-STD-5502-94. It provides a baseline grouping based on the chemical and radiological hazards associated with the facility. The Determination of the baseline grouping for ETF will aid in establishing the appropriate set of standards for the facility.

  6. The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Hazardous Waste Facility Permit...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Hazardous Waste Facility Permit, Waste Analysis Plan The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Hazardous Waste Facility Permit, Waste Analysis Plan This...

  7. Cold Vacuum Drying Facility hazard analysis report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Krahn, D.E.

    1998-02-23T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the methodology used in conducting the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility (CVDF) hazard analysis to support the CVDF phase 2 safety analysis report (SAR), and documents the results. The hazard analysis was performed in accordance with DOE-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for US Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports, and implements the requirements of US Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports.

  8. Hazard Classification for Fuel Supply Shutdown Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BENECKE, M.W.

    2000-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

    Final hazard classification for the 300 Area N Reactor fuel storage facility resulted in the assignment of Nuclear Facility Hazard Category 3 for the uranium metal fuel and feed material storage buildings (303-A, 303-B, 303-G, 3712, and 3716). Radiological for the residual uranium and thorium oxide storage building and an empty former fuel storage building that may be used for limited radioactive material storage in the future (303-K/3707-G, and 303-E), and Industrial for the remainder of the Fuel Supply Shutdown buildings (303-F/311 Tank Farm, 303-M, 313-S, 333, 334 and Tank Farm, 334-A, and MO-052).

  9. Exploratory Studies Facility Subsurface Fire Hazards Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Richard C. Logan

    2002-03-28T23:59:59.000Z

    The primary objective of this Fire Hazard Analysis (FHA) is to confirm the requirements for a comprehensive fire and related hazards protection program for the Exploratory Studies Facility (ESF) are sufficient to minimize the potential for: The occurrence of a fire or related event; A fire that causes an unacceptable on-site or off-site release of hazardous or radiological material that will threaten the health and safety of employees, the public or the environment; Vital U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) programs suffering unacceptable interruptions as a result of fire and related hazards; Property losses from a fire and related events exceeding limits established by DOE; and Critical process controls and safety class systems being damaged as a result of a fire and related events.

  10. Exploratory Studies Facility Subsurface Fire Hazards Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. L. Kubicek

    2001-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

    The primary objective of this Fire Hazard Analysis (FHA) is to confirm the requirements for a comprehensive fire and related hazards protection program for the Exploratory Studies Facility (ESF) are sufficient to minimize the potential for: (1) The occurrence of a fire or related event. (2) A fire that causes an unacceptable on-site or off-site release of hazardous or radiological material that will threaten the health and safety of employees, the public or the environment. (3) Vital US. Department of Energy (DOE) programs suffering unacceptable interruptions as a result of fire and related hazards. (4) Property losses from a fire and related events exceeding limits established by DOE. (5) Critical process controls and safety class systems being damaged as a result of a fire and related events.

  11. 340 Waste handling Facility Hazard Categorization and Safety Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    T. J. Rodovsky

    2010-10-25T23:59:59.000Z

    The analysis presented in this document provides the basis for categorizing the facility as less than Hazard Category 3.

  12. Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility (WESF) Hazards Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    COVEY, L.I.

    2000-11-28T23:59:59.000Z

    This report documents the hazards assessment for the Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility (WESF) located on the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site. This hazards assessment was conducted to provide the emergency planning technical basis for WESF. DOE Orders require an emergency planning hazards assessment for each facility that has the potential to reach or exceed the lowest level emergency classification.

  13. Anywhere But Here: An Introduction to State Control of Hazardous Waste Facility Location

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tarlock, Dan A.

    1981-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    State Control Of Hazardous- Waste Facility Location A. Danautonomy over the location of hazardous-waste managementa hazardous-waste facility-siting process is the location of

  14. Preliminary hazards analysis for the National Ignition Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brereton, S.J.

    1993-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report documents the Preliminary Hazards Analysis (PHA) for the National Ignition Facility (NIF). In summary, it provides: a general description of the facility and its operation; identification of hazards at the facility; and details of the hazards analysis, including inventories, bounding releases, consequences, and conclusions. As part of the safety analysis procedure set forth by DOE, a PHA must be performed for the NIF. The PHA characterizes the level of intrinsic potential hazard associated with a facility, and provides the basis for hazard classification. The hazard classification determines the level of safety documentation required, and the DOE Order governing the safety analysis. The hazard classification also determines the level of review and approval required for the safety analysis report. The hazards of primary concern associated with NIF are radiological and toxicological in nature. The hazard classification is determined by comparing facility inventories of radionuclides and chemicals with threshold values for the various hazard classification levels and by examining postulated bounding accidents associated with the hazards of greatest significance. Such postulated bounding accidents cannot take into account active mitigative features; they must assume the unmitigated consequences of a release, taking into account only passive safety features. In this way, the intrinsic hazard level of the facility can be ascertained.

  15. Los Alamos National Laboratory Hazardous Waste Facility Permit...

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

    Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Draft Community Relations Plan CommentSuggestion Form Instructions for completing the form: Please reference the section in the plan that your...

  16. Quality Services: Solid Wastes, Part 361: Siting of Industrial Hazardous Waste Facilities (New York)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These regulations describe the siting of new industrial hazardous waste facilities located wholly or partially within the State. Industrial hazardous waste facilities are defined as facilities used...

  17. Liquid Effluent Retention Facility (LERF) Final Hazard Category Determination

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HUTH, L.L.

    2001-06-06T23:59:59.000Z

    The Liquid Effluent Retention Facility was designed to store 242-A Evaporator process condensate and other liquid waste streams for treatment at the 200 East Area Effluent Treatment Facility. The Liquid Effluent Retention Facility has been previously classified as a Category 3 Nonreactor Nuclear Facility. As defined in Hazard Categorization and Accident Analysis Techniques for Compliance with DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports (DOE 1992, DOE 1997), Category 3 Nuclear Facilities have the potential for significant localized (radiological) consequences. However, based on current facility design, operations, and radioactive constituent concentrations, the Liquid Effluent Retention Facility does not have the potential for significant localized (radiological) consequences and is categorized as a Radiological Facility. This report documents the final hazard categorization process performed in accordance with DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports. This report describes the current configuration and operations of the Liquid Effluent Retention Facility. Also included is a preliminary hazard categorization, which is based on current and proposed radioactive and hazardous material inventories, a preliminary hazards and accident analysis, and a final hazard category determination. The results of the hazards and accident analysis, based on the current configuration and operations of the Liquid Effluent Retention Facility and the current and proposed radioactive and hazardous material inventories, demonstrate that the Liquid Effluent Retention Facility does not have the potential for significant localized (radiological) consequences. Based on the final hazard category analysis, the Liquid Effluent Retention Facility is a Radiological Facility. The final hazard category determination is based on a comparative evaluation of the consequence basis for the Category 3 threshold quantities to the calculated consequences for credible releases The basis for the Category 3 threshold quantities is 10 rem-equivalent man at 30 meters (98 feet) (DOE 1992, DOE 1997). The calculated 12 hour consequences to an individual located at 30 meters (98 feet) for two credible scenarios, spray release and a pool release, are 3.50 rem and 1.32 rem, respectively, which based upon the original hazard categorization criteria (DOE 1992) classified the Liquid Effluent Retention Facility as a Radiological Facility. Comparison of the calculated 24 hour consequences to an individual located at 30 meters (98 feet) for two credible scenarios, spray release and a pool release, 7.00 rem and 2.64 rem respectively, confirmed the Liquid Effluent Retention Facility classification as a Radiological Facility under the current hazard categorization criteria (DOE 1997). Both result in dose consequence values less than the allowable, 10 rem, meeting the requirements for categorizing the Liquid Effluent Retention Facility as a Radiological Facility.

  18. Modern tornado design of nuclear and other potentially hazardous facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stevenson, J.D. [J.D. Stevenson Consulting Engineer, Cleveland, OH (United States); Zhao, Y. [Battele Energy Systems Group, Columbus, OH (United States)

    1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Tornado wind loads and other tornado phenomena, including tornado missiles and differential pressure effects, have not usually been considered in the design of conventional industrial, commercial, or residential facilities in the United States; however, tornado resistance has often become a design requirement for certain hazardous facilities, such as large nuclear power plants and nuclear materials and waste storage facilities, as well as large liquefied natural gas storage facilities. This article provides a review of current procedures for the design of hazardous industrial facilities to resist tornado effects. 23 refs., 19 figs., 13 tabs.

  19. Hazardous Liquid Pipelines and Storage Facilities (Iowa)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This statute regulates the permitting, construction, monitoring, and operation of pipelines transporting hazardous liquids, including petroleum products and coal slurries. The definition used in...

  20. EA-0688: Hazardous Waste Staging Facility, Pantex Plant, Amarillo, Texas

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of a proposal to construct the Hazardous Waste Staging Facility that would help to alleviate capacity problems as well as provide a single compliant...

  1. Pinellas Plant contingency plan for the hazardous waste management facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1988-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Subpart D of Part 264 (264.50 through .56) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations require that each facility maintain a contingency plan detailing procedures to {open_quotes}minimize hazards to human health or the environment from fires, explosions, or any unplanned sudden or non-sudden release of hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents to air, soil, or surface water.{close_quotes}

  2. Cold Vacuum Drying (CVD) Facility Hazards Analysis Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CROWE, R.D.

    2000-08-07T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the methodology used in conducting the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility (CVDF) Hazard Analysis to support the CVDF Final Safety Analysis Report and documents the results. The hazard analysis was performed in accordance with DOE-STD-3009-94, ''Preparation Guide for US. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports,'' and implements the requirements of DOE Order 5480.23, ''Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports.''

  3. ALTERNATE APPROACH TO HAZARD CATEGORIZATION FOR SALTSTONE FACILITY AT SRS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Roy, B.

    2009-04-28T23:59:59.000Z

    The Saltstone Facility at Savannah River Site (SRS) was originally segmented into two segments: the Saltstone Production Facility (SPF) and the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF). Based on the inventory of radionuclides available for release the SPF and SDF were categorized as Nonreactor Hazard Category (HC)-3. The hazard categorization recognized the SDF will contain contributions of radionuclides which would exceed the HC-2 Threshold Quantity (TQ) in the form of grout. However it was determined not to impact the facility hazard categorization based on the grout being in a solid, monolithic form which was not easily dispersible. But, the impact of a quantity of unset grout expected to be present at the vault following operation of the process was not addressed. A Potential Inadequacy in Safety Analysis (PISA) was later issued based on the hazard categorization determination for the facility not addressing unset grout. This initiated a re-evaluation of the accident scenarios within the hazards analysis. During this re-evaluation, the segmentation of the facility was challenged based on the potential interaction between facility segments; specifically, the leachate return line and the grout transfer line, which were considered separate segments, are located in close proximity at one point. such that for certain events (NPH as well as External Vehicle Impact) both could be damaged simultaneously and spill contents on the ground that could commingle. This would violate the guideline for segmentation. Therefore, the Hazard Categorization (HC) was reevaluated based on the facility being a single segment and including the additional unset grout as part of total inventory. This total inventory far exceeded the limit for HC-2 TQ and made the facility's initial categorization as HC-2. However, alternative analysis methodology based on credible release fractions allowed in DOE-STD-1027-92 (Ref.1) showed that the Saltstone facility could still be categorized as Hazard Category 3 Nuclear Facility with no segmentation. Since it was the first time any facility at SRS tried this alternate approach safety analyst had to face substantial resistance and reservations from both the facility and local DOE customers which were eventually overcome with approval and acceptance from DOE-HQ.

  4. 340 Facility emergency preparedness hazards assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CAMPBELL, L.R.

    1998-11-25T23:59:59.000Z

    This document establishes the technical basis in support of Emergency Planning activities for the 340 Facility on the Hanford Site. Through this document, the technical basis for the development of facility specific Emergency Action Levels and Emergency Planning Zone, is demonstrated.

  5. Hazard classification criteria for non-nuclear facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mahn, J.A.; Walker, S.A.

    1997-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Sandia National Laboratories` Integrated Risk Management Department has developed a process for establishing the appropriate hazard classification of a new facility or operation, and thus the level of rigor required for the associated authorization basis safety documentation. This process is referred to as the Preliminary Hazard Screen. DOE Order 5481.1B contains the following hazard classification for non-nuclear facilities: high--having the potential for onsite or offsite impacts to large numbers of persons or for major impacts to the environment; moderate--having the potential for considerable onsite impacts but only minor offsite impacts to people or the environment; low--having the potential for only minor onsite and negligible offsite impacts to people or the environment. It is apparent that the application of such generic criteria is more than likely to be fraught with subjective judgment. One way to remove the subjectivity is to define health and safety classification thresholds for specific hazards that are based on the magnitude of the hazard, rather than on a qualitative assessment of possible accident consequences. This paper presents the results of such an approach to establishing a readily usable set of non-nuclear facility hazard classifications.

  6. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOnItemResearch >Internship Program TheSiteEureka AnalyticsLarge fileHazardous Waste

  7. Overview of hazardous-waste regulation at federal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1982-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  8. Hazard categorization and classification for the sodium storage facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Van Keuren, J.C.

    1994-08-30T23:59:59.000Z

    The Sodium Storage Facility is planned to be constructed in the 400 area for long term storage of sodium from the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF). It will contain four large sodium storage tanks. Three of the tanks have a capacity of 80,000 gallons of sodium each, and the fourth will hold 52,500 gallons. The tanks will be connected by piping with each other and to the FFTF. Sodium from the FFTF primary and secondary Heat Transport Systems (HTS), Interim Decay Storage (IDS), and the Fuel Storage Facility (FSF) will be transferred to the facility, and stored there in a frozen state pending final disposition. A Hazard Classification has been performed in order to evaluate the potential toxic consequences of a sodium fire according to the provisions of DOE Order 5481.1B. The conclusion of these evaluations is that the Sodium Storage Facility meets the requirements of the lowest Hazard Category, i.e., radiological facility, and the Hazard Classification is recommended to be moderate.

  9. Fire Hazard Analysis for the Cold Vacuum Drying (CVD) Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    JOHNSON, B.H.

    1999-08-19T23:59:59.000Z

    This Fire Hazard Analysis assesses the risk from fire within individual fire areas in the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility at the Hanford Site in relation to existing or proposed fire protection features to ascertain whether the objectives of DOE Order 5480.7A Fire Protection are met.

  10. Design characteristics for facilities which process hazardous particulate

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Abeln, S.P.; Creek, K.; Salisbury, S.

    1998-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Los Alamos National Laboratory is establishing a research and processing capability for beryllium. The unique properties of beryllium, including light weight, rigidity, thermal conductivity, heat capacity, and nuclear properties make it critical to a number of US defense and aerospace programs. Concomitant with the unique engineering properties are the health hazards associated with processing beryllium in a particulate form and the potential for worker inhalation of aerosolized beryllium. Beryllium has the lowest airborne standard for worker protection compared to all other nonradioactive metals by more than an order of magnitude. This paper describes the design characteristics of the new beryllium facility at Los Alamos as they relate to protection of the workforce. Design characteristics to be reviewed include; facility layout, support systems to minimize aerosol exposure and spread, and detailed review of the ventilation system design for general room air cleanliness and extraction of particulate at the source.

  11. Rules and Regulations for Underground Storage Facilities Used for Petroleum Products and Hazardous Materials (Rhode Island)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These regulations apply to underground storage facilities for petroleum and hazardous waste, and seek to protect water resources from contamination. The regulations establish procedures for the...

  12. Torsion pendulum facility for direct force measurements of LISA GRS related disturbances

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    L. Carbone; A. Cavalleri; G. Ciani; R. Dolesi; M. Hueller; D. Tombolato; S. Vitale; W. J. Weber

    2006-11-06T23:59:59.000Z

    A four mass torsion pendulum facility for testing of the LISA GRS is under development in Trento. With a LISA-like test mass suspended off-axis with respect to the pendulum fiber, the facility allows for a direct measurement of surface force disturbances arising in the GRS. We present here results with a prototype pendulum integrated with very large-gap sensors, which allows an estimate of the intrinsic pendulum noise floor in the absence of sensor related force noise. The apparatus has shown a torque noise near to its mechanical thermal noise limit, and would allow to place upper limits on GRS related disturbances with a best sensitivity of 300 fN/Hz^(1/2) at 1mHz, a factor 50 from the LISA goal. Also, we discuss the characterization of the gravity gradient noise, one environmental noise source that could limit the apparatus performances, and report on the status of development of the facility.

  13. Superconducting Magnet Safety Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) facilities present unique hazards not found in most

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Maroncelli, Mark

    Superconducting Magnet Safety Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) facilities present unique hazards not found in most laboratory environments. The NMR facilities maintain superconducting magnets which have the units. Facility design and installation: Design and installation of a new NMR facility requires a number

  14. Fire Hazard Analysis for the Cold Vacuum Drying facility (CVD) Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SINGH, G.

    2000-09-06T23:59:59.000Z

    The CVDF is a nonreactor nuclear facility that will process the Spent Nuclear Fuels (SNF) presently stored in the 105-KE and 105-KW SNF storage basins. Multi-canister overpacks (MCOs) will be loaded (filled) with K Basin fuel transported to the CVDF. The MCOs will be processed at the CVDF to remove free water from the fuel cells (packages). Following processing at the CVDF, the MCOs will be transported to the CSB for interim storage until a long-term storage solution can be implemented. This operation is expected to start in November 2000. A Fire Hazard Analysis (FHA) is required for all new facilities and all nonreactor nuclear facilities, in accordance with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5480.7A, Fire Protection. This FHA has been prepared in accordance with DOE 5480.7A and HNF-PRO-350, Fire Hazard Analysis Requirements. Additionally, requirements or criteria contained in DOE, Richland Operations Office (RL) RL Implementing Directive (RLID) 5480.7, Fire Protection, or other DOE documentation are cited, as applicable. This FHA comprehensively assesses the risk of fire at the CVDF to ascertain whether the specific objectives of DOE 5480.7A are met. These specific fire protection objectives are: (1) Minimize the potential for the occurrence of a fire. (2) Ensure that fire does not cause an onsite or offsite release of radiological and other hazardous material that will threaten the public health and safety or the environment. (3) Establish requirements that will provide an acceptable degree of life safety to DOE and contractor personnel and ensure that there are no undue hazards to the public from fire and its effects in DOE facilities. (4) Ensure that vital DOE programs will not suffer unacceptable delays as a result of fire and related perils. (5) Ensure that property damage from fire and related perils does not exceed an acceptable level. (6) Ensure that process control and safety systems are not damaged by fire or related perils. This FHA is based on the facility as constructed and with planned operation at the time of document preparation. Changes in facility planned and actual operation require that the identified fire risks associated with the CVDF be re-evaluated. Consequently, formal documentation and future revision of this FHA may be required.

  15. Hazard categorization and baseline documentation for the Sodium Storage Facility. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bowman, B.R.

    1995-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

    Hazard Categorization evaluation has been performed in accordance with DOE-STD-1027 for the Sodium Storage Facility at FFTF and a determination of less than Category 3 or non-nuclear has been made. Hazard Baseline Documentation has been performed in accordance with DOE-EM-STD-5502 and a determination of ``Radiological Facility`` has been made.

  16. Fire Hazard Analysis for the Cold Vacuum Drying facility (CVD) Facility

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Singh, G

    2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The CVDF is a nonreactor nuclear facility that will process the Spent Nuclear Fuels (SNF) presently stored in the 105-KE and 105-KW SNF storage basins. Multi-canister overpacks (MCOs) will be loaded (filled) with K Basin fuel transported to the CVDF. The MCOs will be processed at the CVDF to remove free water from the fuel cells (packages). Following processing at the CVDF, the MCOs will be transported to the CSB for interim storage until a long-term storage solution can be implemented. This operation is expected to start in November 2000. A Fire Hazard Analysis (FHA) is required for all new facilities and all nonreactor nuclear facilities, in accordance with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5480.7A, Fire Protection. This FHA has been prepared in accordance with DOE 5480.7A and HNF-PRO-350, Fire Hazard Analysis Requirements. Additionally, requirements or criteria contained in DOE, Richland Operations Office (RL) RL Implementing Directive (RLID) 5480.7, Fire Protection, or other DOE documentation are cite...

  17. Guide for the Mitigation of Natural Phenomena Hazards for DOE Nuclear Facilities and NonNuclear Facilities

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

    2000-03-28T23:59:59.000Z

    This document provides guidance in implementing the Natural Phenomena Hazard (NPH) mitigation requirements of DOE O 420.1, Facility Safety, Section 4.4, "Natural Phenomena Hazards Mitigation." This Guide does not establish or invoke any new requirements. Any apparent conflicts arising from the NPH guidance would defer to the requirements in DOE O 420.1. No cancellation.

  18. Certification Plan, low-level waste Hazardous Waste Handling Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Albert, R.

    1992-06-30T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of this plan is to describe the organization and methodology for the certification of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) handled in the Hazardous Waste Handling Facility (HWHF) at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL). This plan also incorporates the applicable elements of waste reduction, which include both up-front minimization and end-product treatment to reduce the volume and toxicity of the waste; segregation of the waste as it applies to certification; an executive summary of the Waste Management Quality Assurance Implementing Management Plan (QAIMP) for the HWHF and a list of the current and planned implementing procedures used in waste certification. This plan provides guidance from the HWHF to waste generators, waste handlers, and the Waste Certification Specialist to enable them to conduct their activities and carry out their responsibilities in a manner that complies with the requirements of WHC-WAC. Waste generators have the primary responsibility for the proper characterization of LLW. The Waste Certification Specialist verifies and certifies that LBL LLW is characterized, handled, and shipped in accordance with the requirements of WHC-WAC. Certification is the governing process in which LBL personnel conduct their waste generating and waste handling activities in such a manner that the Waste Certification Specialist can verify that the requirements of WHC-WAC are met.

  19. Design and evaluation guidelines for Department of Energy facilities subjected to natural phenomena hazards

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kennedy, R.P. (Structural Mechanics Consulting, Inc., Yorba Linda, CA (USA)); Short, S.A. (ABB Impell Corp., Mission Viejo, CA (USA)); McDonald, J.R. (Texas Tech Univ., Lubbock, TX (USA)); McCann, M.W. Jr. (Benjamin (J.R.) and Associates, Inc., Mountain View, CA (USA)); Murray, R.C. (Lawrence Livermore National Lab., CA (USA)); Hill, J.R. (USDOE Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety, and He

    1990-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Department of Energy (DOE) and the DOE Natural Phenomena Hazards Panel have developed uniform design and evaluation guidelines for protection against natural phenomena hazards at DOE sites throughout the United States. The goal of the guidelines is to assure that DOE facilities can withstand the effects of natural phenomena such as earthquakes, extreme winds, tornadoes, and flooding. The guidelines apply to both new facilities (design) and existing facilities (evaluation, modification, and upgrading). The intended audience is primarily the civil/structural or mechanical engineers conducting the design or evaluation of DOE facilities. The likelihood of occurrence of natural phenomena hazards at each DOE site has been evaluated by the DOE Natural Phenomena Hazard Program. Probabilistic hazard models are available for earthquake, extreme wind/tornado, and flood. Alternatively, site organizations are encouraged to develop site-specific hazard models utilizing the most recent information and techniques available. In this document, performance goals and natural hazard levels are expressed in probabilistic terms, and design and evaluation procedures are presented in deterministic terms. Design/evaluation procedures conform closely to common standard practices so that the procedures will be easily understood by most engineers. Performance goals are expressed in terms of structure or equipment damage to the extent that: (1) the facility cannot function; (2) the facility would need to be replaced; or (3) personnel are endangered. 82 refs., 12 figs., 18 tabs.

  20. Fire hazards analysis of transuranic waste storage and assay facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Busching, K.R., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-07-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This document analyzes the fire hazards associated with operations at the Central Waste Complex. It provides the analysis and recommendations necessary to ensure compliance with applicable fire codes.

  1. F-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility Semiannual Correction Action Report, Vol. I and II

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chase, J.

    1999-11-18T23:59:59.000Z

    The groundwater in the uppermost aquifer beneath the F-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility (HWMF) at the Savannah River Site is routinely monitored for selected hazardous and radioactive constituents. This report presents the results of the required groundwater monitoring program.

  2. Technical basis document for the release from contaminated facility representative accident and associated represented hazardous conditions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    OBERG, B.D.

    2003-03-22T23:59:59.000Z

    This document supports the Tank Farms Documented Safety Analysis and describes the risk binning process and the technical basis for assigning risk bins for the release from contaminated facility representative accident and associated represented hazardous conditions. The representative accidents qualitatively considered are fires, deflagrations, and load drops in contaminated areas. The risks from a separate evaluation of compressed gas hazards are also summarized.

  3. ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - Building 400-EAA

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

    shears, hand tools) Eye hazard Pinch points Abrasive Rotating machinery 120 VAC Hydraulic pressure Guarding Anti-restart devices 1 NA 6, 7 NA NA NA A ASD108400 Water Flow...

  4. Facilities Condition and Hazards Assessment for Materials and Fuel Complex Facilities MFC-799, 799A, and 770C

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gary Mecham; Don Konoyer

    2009-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Materials & Fuel Complex (MFC) facilities 799 Sodium Processing Facility (a single building consisting of two areas: the Sodium Process Area (SPA) and the Carbonate Process Area (CPA), 799A Caustic Storage Area, and 770C Nuclear Calibration Laboratory have been declared excess to future Department of Energy mission requirements. Transfer of these facilities from Nuclear Energy to Environmental Management, and an associated schedule for doing so, have been agreed upon by the two offices. The prerequisites for this transfer to occur are the removal of nonexcess materials and chemical inventory, deinventory of the calibration source in MFC-770C, and the rerouting and/or isolation of utility and service systems. This report provides a description of the current physical condition and any hazards (material, chemical, nuclear or occupational) that may be associated with past operations of these facilities. This information will document conditions at time of transfer of the facilities from Nuclear Energy to Environmental Management and serve as the basis for disposition planning. The process used in obtaining this information included document searches, interviews and facility walk-downs. A copy of the facility walk-down checklist is included in this report as Appendix A. MFC-799/799A/770C are all structurally sound and associated hazardous or potentially hazardous conditions are well defined and well understood. All installed equipment items (tanks, filters, etc.) used to process hazardous materials remain in place and appear to have maintained their integrity. There is no evidence of leakage and all openings are properly sealed or closed off and connections are sound. The pits appear clean with no evidence of cracking or deterioration that could lead to migration of contamination. Based upon the available information/documentation reviewed and the overall conditions observed during the facilities walk-down, it is concluded that these facilities may be disposed of at minimal risk to human health, safety or the environment.

  5. Natural phenomena hazards design and evaluation criteria for Department of Energy Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This DOE standard gives design and evaluation criteria for natural phenomena hazards (NPH) effects as guidance for implementing the NPH mitigation requirements of DOE 5480.28. Goal of the criteria is to assure that DOE facilities can withstand the effects of earthquakes, extreme winds, tornadoes, flooding, etc. They apply to the design of new facilities and the evaluation of existing facilities; they may also be used for modification and upgrading of the latter.

  6. Evaluation of natural phenomena hazards as part of safety assessments for nuclear facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kot, C.A.; Hsieh, B.J.; Srinivasan, M.G.; Shin, Y.W.

    1995-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The continued operation of existing US Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities and laboratories requires a safety reassessment based on current criteria and guidelines. This also includes evaluations for the effects of Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH), for which these facilities may not have been designed. The NPH evaluations follow the requirements of DOE Order 5480.28, Natural Phenomena Hazards Mitigation (1993) which establishes NPH Performance Categories (PCs) for DOE facilities and associated target probabilistic performance goals. These goals are expressed as the mean annual probability of exceedance of acceptable behavior for structures, systems and components (SSCs) subjected to NPH effects. The assignment of an NPH Performance Category is based on the overall hazard categorization (low, moderate, high) of a facility and on the function of an SSC under evaluation (DOE-STD-1021, 1992). Detailed guidance for the NPH analysis and evaluation criteria are also provided (DOE-STD-1020, 1994). These analyses can be very resource intensive, and may not be necessary for the evaluation of all SSCs in existing facilities, in particular for low hazard category facilities. An approach relying heavily on screening inspections, engineering judgment and use of NPH experience data (S. J. Eder et al., 1993), can minimize the analytical effort, give reasonable estimates of the NPH susceptibilities, and yield adequate information for an overall safety evaluation of the facility. In the following sections this approach is described in more detail and is illustrated by an application to a nuclear laboratory complex.

  7. Former Hazardous Waste Management Facility -Perimeter Soils Update

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Homes, Christopher C.

    Division #12;2 Background Cesium -137 contamination found outside the Former Hazardous Waste Management of dispersed contamination in areas southeast of the FHWMF outside the scope of the targeted clean up (LISF). #12;#12;Path Forward Discrete areas of contamination within LISF footprint have been cleaned up

  8. Fire hazards analysis for the uranium oxide (UO{sub 3}) facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wyatt, D.M.

    1994-12-06T23:59:59.000Z

    The Fire Hazards Analysis (FHA) documents the deactivation end-point status of the UO{sub 3} complex fire hazards, fire protection and life safety systems. This FHA has been prepared for the Uranium Oxide Facility by Westinghouse Hanford Company in accordance with the criteria established in DOE 5480.7A, Fire Protection and RLID 5480.7, Fire Protection. The purpose of the Fire Hazards Analysis is to comprehensively and quantitatively assess the risk from a fire within individual fire areas in a Department of Energy facility so as to ascertain whether the objectives stated in DOE Order 5480.7, paragraph 4 are met. Particular attention has been paid to RLID 5480.7, Section 8.3, which specifies the criteria for deactivating fire protection in decommission and demolition facilities.

  9. Waste management facilities cost information for hazardous waste. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shropshire, D.; Sherick, M.; Biagi, C.

    1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report contains preconceptual designs and planning level life-cycle cost estimates for managing hazardous waste. The report`s information on treatment, storage, and disposal modules can be integrated to develop total life-cycle costs for various waste management options. A procedure to guide the US Department of Energy and its contractor personnel in the use of cost estimation data is also summarized in this report.

  10. Natural phenomena hazards design and evaluation criteria for Department of Energy Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has issued an Order 420.1 which establishes policy for its facilities in the event of natural phenomena hazards (NPH) along with associated NPH mitigation requirements. This DOE Standard gives design and evaluation criteria for NPH effects as guidance for implementing the NPH mitigation requirements of DOE Order 420.1 and the associated implementation Guides. These are intended to be consistent design and evaluation criteria for protection against natural phenomena hazards at DOE sites throughout the United States. The goal of these criteria is to assure that DOE facilities can withstand the effects of natural phenomena such as earthquakes, extreme winds, tornadoes, and flooding. These criteria apply to the design of new facilities and the evaluation of existing facilities. They may also be used for modification and upgrading of existing facilities as appropriate. The design and evaluation criteria presented herein control the level of conservatism introduced in the design/evaluation process such that earthquake, wind, and flood hazards are treated on a consistent basis. These criteria also employ a graded approach to ensure that the level of conservatism and rigor in design/evaluation is appropriate for facility characteristics such as importance, hazards to people on and off site, and threat to the environment. For each natural phenomena hazard covered, these criteria consist of the following: Performance Categories and target performance goals as specified in the DOE Order 420.1 NPH Implementation Guide, and DOE-STD-1 021; specified probability levels from which natural phenomena hazard loading on structures, equipment, and systems is developed; and design and evaluation procedures to evaluate response to NPH loads and criteria to assess whether or not computed response is permissible.

  11. Assessment of External Hazards at Radioactive Waste and Used Fuel Management Facilities - 13505

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gerchikov, Mark; Schneider, Glenn; Khan, Badi; Alderson, Elizabeth [AMEC NSS, 393 University Ave., Toronto, ON (Canada)] [AMEC NSS, 393 University Ave., Toronto, ON (Canada)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    One of the key lessons from the Fukushima accident is the importance of having a comprehensive identification and evaluation of risks posed by external events to nuclear facilities. While the primary focus has been on nuclear power plants, the Canadian nuclear industry has also been updating hazard assessments for radioactive waste and used fuel management facilities to ensure that lessons learnt from Fukushima are addressed. External events are events that originate either physically outside the nuclear site or outside its control. They include natural events, such as high winds, lightning, earthquakes or flood due to extreme rainfall. The approaches that have been applied to the identification and assessment of external hazards in Canada are presented and analyzed. Specific aspects and considerations concerning hazards posed to radioactive waste and used fuel management operations are identified. Relevant hazard identification techniques are described, which draw upon available regulatory guidance and standard assessment techniques such as Hazard and Operability Studies (HAZOPs) and 'What-if' analysis. Consideration is given to ensuring that hazard combinations (for example: high winds and flooding due to rainfall) are properly taken into account. Approaches that can be used to screen out external hazards, through a combination of frequency and impact assessments, are summarized. For those hazards that cannot be screened out, a brief overview of methods that can be used to conduct more detailed hazard assessments is also provided. The lessons learnt from the Fukushima accident have had a significant impact on specific aspects of the approaches used to hazard assessment for waste management. Practical examples of the effect of these impacts are provided. (authors)

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

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are8COaBulkTransmissionSitingProcess.pdfGetec AG|Information OpenEIHas BeenLegal Document- OtherOther: Hazardous|

  13. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOEThe Bonneville PowerCherries 82981-1cn SunnybankD.jpgHanford LEED&soilASTI-SORTI Comparison T.Hazardous Waste

  14. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOEThe Bonneville PowerCherries 82981-1cn SunnybankD.jpgHanford LEED&soilASTI-SORTI Comparison T.Hazardous Waste

  15. 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...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2011-01-21T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen

    2012-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  18. Closure of hazardous and mixed radioactive waste management units at DOE facilities. [Contains glossary

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This is document addresses the Federal regulations governing the closure of hazardous and mixed waste units subject to Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) requirements. It provides a brief overview of the RCRA permitting program and the extensive RCRA facility design and operating standards. It provides detailed guidance on the procedural requirements for closure and post-closure care of hazardous and mixed waste management units, including guidance on the preparation of closure and post-closure plans that must be submitted with facility permit applications. This document also provides guidance on technical activities that must be conducted both during and after closure of each of the following hazardous waste management units regulated under RCRA.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

    2010-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

    2010-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  2. Technological options for management of hazardous wastes from US Department of Energy facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chiu, S.; Newsom, D.; Barisas, S.; Humphrey, J.; Fradkin, L.; Surles, T.

    1982-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report provides comprehensive information on the technological options for management of hazardous wastes generated at facilities owned or operated by the US Department of Energy (DOE). These facilities annually generate a large quantity of wastes that could be deemed hazardous under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Included in these wastes are liquids or solids containing polychlorinated biphenyls, pesticides, heavy metals, waste oils, spent solvents, acids, bases, carcinogens, and numerous other pollutants. Some of these wastes consist of nonnuclear hazardous chemicals; others are mixed wastes containing radioactive materials and hazardous chemicals. Nearly 20 unit processes and disposal methods are presented in this report. They were selected on the basis of their proven utility in waste management and potential applicability at DOE sites. These technological options fall into five categories: physical processes, chemical processes, waste exchange, fixation, and ultimate disposal. The options can be employed for either resource recovery, waste detoxification, volume reduction, or perpetual storage. Detailed descriptions of each technological option are presented, including information on process performance, cost, energy and environmental considerations, waste management of applications, and potential applications at DOE sites. 131 references, 25 figures, 23 tables.

  3. Development of Probabilistic Design Basis Earthquake (DBE) Parameters for Moderate and High Hazard Facilities at INEEL

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S. M. Payne; V. W. Gorman; S. A. Jensen; M. E. Nitzel; M. J. Russell; R. P. Smith

    2000-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Design Basis Earthquake (DBE) horizontal and vertical response spectra are developed for moderate and high hazard facilities or Performance Categories (PC) 3 and 4, respectively, at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL). The probabilistic DBE response spectra will replace the deterministic DBE response spectra currently in the U.S. Department of Energy Idaho Operations Office (DOE-ID) Architectural Engineering Standards that govern seismic design criteria for several facility areas at the INEEL. Probabilistic DBE response spectra are recommended to DOE Naval Reactors for use at the Naval Reactor Facility at INEEL. The site-specific Uniform Hazard Spectra (UHS) developed by URS Greiner Woodward Clyde Federal Services are used as the basis for developing the DBE response spectra. In 1999, the UHS for all INEEL facility areas were recomputed using more appropriate attenuation relationships for the Basin and Range province. The revised UHS have lower ground motions than those produced in the 1996 INEEL site-wide probabilistic ground motion study. The DBE response spectra were developed by incorporating smoothed broadened regions of the peak accelerations, velocities, and displacements defined by the site-specific UHS. Portions of the DBE response spectra were adjusted to ensure conservatism for the structural design process.

  4. F-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility Correction Action Report, Third and Fourth Quarter 1998, Volumes I and II

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chase, J.

    1999-04-23T23:59:59.000Z

    The groundwater in the uppermost aquifer beneath the F-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility (HWMF), also known as the F-Area Seepage Basins, at the Savannah Site (SRS) is monitored periodically for selected hazardous and radioactive constituents. This report presents the results of the required groundwater monitoring program.

  5. H-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility Corrective Action Report, Third and Fourth Quarter 1998, Volumes I and II

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chase, J.

    1999-04-23T23:59:59.000Z

    The groundwater in the uppermost aquifer beneath the H-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility (HWMF), also known as the H-Area Seepage Basins, at the Savannah Site (SRS) is monitored periodically for selected hazardous and radioactive constituents. This report presents the results of the required groundwater monitoring program.

  6. Construction and operation of replacement hazardous waste handling facility at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. Environmental Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA), DOE/EA-0423, for the construction and operation of a replacement hazardous waste handling facility (HWHF) and decontamination of the existing HWHF at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL), Berkeley, California. The proposed facility would replace several older buildings and cargo containers currently being used for waste handling activities and consolidate the LBL`s existing waste handling activities in one location. The nature of the waste handling activities and the waste volume and characteristics would not change as a result of construction of the new facility. Based on the analysis in the EA, DOE has determined that the proposed action would not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, 42 USC. 4321 et seq. Therefore, an environmental impact statement is not required.

  7. Natural phenomena hazards evaluation of equipment and piping of Gaseous Diffusion Plant Uranium Enrichment Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Singhal, M.K.; Kincaid, J.H.; Hammond, C.R.; Stockdale, B.I.; Walls, J.C. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States). Technical Programs and Services; Brock, W.R.; Denton, D.R. [Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., Oak Ridge, TN (United States)

    1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    In support of the Gaseous Diffusion Plant Safety Analysis Report Upgrade program (GDP SARUP), a natural phenomena hazards evaluation was performed for the main process equipment and piping in the uranium enrichment buildings at Paducah and Portsmouth gaseous diffusion plants. In order to reduce the cost of rigorous analyses, the evaluation methodology utilized a graded approach based on an experience data base collected by SQUG/EPRI that contains information on the performance of industrial equipment and piping during past earthquakes. This method consisted of a screening walkthrough of the facility in combination with the use of engineering judgment and simple calculations. By using these screenings combined with evaluations that contain decreasing conservatism, reductions in the time and cost of the analyses were significant. A team of experienced seismic engineers who were trained in the use of the DOE SQUG/EPRI Walkdown Screening Material was essential to the success of this natural phenomena hazards evaluation.

  8. Hazardous medical waste generation rates of different categories of health-care facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Komilis, Dimitrios, E-mail: dkomilis@env.duth.gr [Laboratory of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Dept. of Environmental Engineering, Democritus University of Thrace, Xanthi 671 00 (Greece); Fouki, Anastassia [Hellenic Open University, Patras (Greece); Papadopoulos, Dimitrios [APOTEFROTIRAS S.A., Ano Liossia, 192 00 Elefsina (Greece)

    2012-07-15T23:59:59.000Z

    Highlights: Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer We calculated hazardous medical waste generation rates (HMWGR) from 132 hospitals. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer Based on a 22-month study period, HMWGR were highly skewed to the right. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer The HMWGR varied from 0.00124 to 0.718 kg bed{sup -1} d{sup -1}. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer A positive correlation existed between the HMWGR and the number of hospital beds. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer We used non-parametric statistics to compare rates among hospital categories. - Abstract: Goal of this work was to calculate the hazardous medical waste unit generation rates (HMWUGR), in kg bed{sup -1} d{sup -1}, using data from 132 health-care facilities in Greece. The calculations were based on the weights of the hazardous medical wastes that were regularly transferred to the sole medical waste incinerator in Athens over a 22-month period during years 2009 and 2010. The 132 health-care facilities were grouped into public and private ones, and, also, into seven sub-categories, namely: birth, cancer treatment, general, military, pediatric, psychiatric and university hospitals. Results showed that there is a large variability in the HMWUGR, even among hospitals of the same category. Average total HMWUGR varied from 0.012 kg bed{sup -1} d{sup -1}, for the public psychiatric hospitals, to up to 0.72 kg bed{sup -1} d{sup -1}, for the public university hospitals. Within the private hospitals, average HMWUGR ranged from 0.0012 kg bed{sup -1} d{sup -1}, for the psychiatric clinics, to up to 0.49 kg bed{sup -1} d{sup -1}, for the birth clinics. Based on non-parametric statistics, HMWUGR were statistically similar for the birth and general hospitals, in both the public and private sector. The private birth and general hospitals generated statistically more wastes compared to the corresponding public hospitals. The infectious/toxic and toxic medical wastes appear to be 10% and 50% of the total hazardous medical wastes generated by the public cancer treatment and university hospitals, respectively.

  9. Preliminary volcanic hazards evaluation for Los Alamos National Laboratory Facilities and Operations : current state of knowledge and proposed path forward

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Keating, Gordon N.; Schultz-Fellenz, Emily S.; Miller, Elizabeth D.

    2010-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The integration of available information on the volcanic history of the region surrounding Los Alamos National Laboratory indicates that the Laboratory is at risk from volcanic hazards. Volcanism in the vicinity of the Laboratory is unlikely within the lifetime of the facility (ca. 50–100 years) but cannot be ruled out. This evaluation provides a preliminary estimate of recurrence rates for volcanic activity. If further assessment of the hazard is deemed beneficial to reduce risk uncertainty, the next step would be to convene a formal probabilistic volcanic hazards assessment.

  10. Environmental Assessment for Hazardous Waste Staging Facility, Pantex Plant, Amarillo, Texas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared pursuant to the implementing regulations to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which require federal agencies to assess the environmental impacts of a proposed action to determine whether that action requires the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or if a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) can be issued. The Pantex Plant does not possess permanent containerized waste staging facilities with integral secondary containment or freeze protection. Additional deficiencies associated with some existing staging facilities include: no protection from precipitation running across the staging pads; lack of protection against weathering; and facility foundations not capable of containing leaks, spills or accumulated precipitation. These shortcomings have raised concerns with respect to requirements under Section 3001 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Deficiencies for these waste staging areas were also cited by a government audit team (Tiger Team) as Action Items. The provision for the staging of hazardous, mixed, and low level waste is part of the no-action altemative in the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the integrated ER/WM program. Construction of this proposed project will not prejudice whether or not this integration will occur, or how.

  11. Metallurgical Laboratory Hazardous Waste Management Facility groundwater monitoring report. First quarter 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    During first quarter 1995, samples from AMB groundwater monitoring wells at the Metallurgical Laboratory Hazardous Waste Management Facility (Met Lab HWMF) were analyzed for selected heavy metals, field measurements, radionuclides, volatile organic compounds, and other constituents. Six parameters exceeded standards during the quarter. As in previous quarters, tetrachloroethylene and trichloroethylene exceeded final Primary Drinking Water Standards (PDWS). Total organic halogens exceeded its Savannah River Site (SRS) Flag 2 criterion during first quarter 1995 as in fourth quarter 1994. Aluminum, iron, and manganese, which were not analyzed for during fourth quarter 1994, exceeded the Flag 2 criteria in at least two wells each during first quarter 1995. Groundwater flow direction and rate in the M-Area Aquifer Zone were similar to previous quarters. Conditions affecting the determination of groundwater flow directions and rates in the Upper Lost Lake Aquifer Zone, Lower Lost Lake Aquifer Zone, and the Middle Sand Aquifer Zone of the Crouch Branch Confining Unit were also similar to previous quarters.

  12. Chemical inventory control program for mixed and hazardous waste facilities at SRS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ades, M.J.; Vincent, A.M. III

    1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Mixed Waste (MW) and Hazardous Waste (HW) are being stored at the Savannah River Site (SRS) pending onsite and/or offsite treatment and disposal. The inventory control for these wastes has recently been brought under Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) in accordance with DOE Order 5480.22. With the TSRs was the question of the degree of rigor with which the inventory is to be tracked, considering that the variety of chemicals present, or that could be present, numbers in the hundreds. This paper describes the graded approach program to track Solid Waste (SW) inventories relative to TSRs. The approach uses a ratio of the maximum anticipated chemical inventory to the permissible inventory in accordance with Emergency Response Planning Guideline (ERPG) limits for on- and off-site receptors. A specific threshold ratio can then be determined. The chemicals above this threshold ratio are to be included in the chemical inventory control program. The chemicals that fall below the threshold ratio are managed in accordance with existing practice per State and RCRA hazardous materials requirements. Additionally, the facilities are managed in accordance with process safety management principles, specifically using process hazards analyses, which provides safety assurance for even the small quantities that may be excluded from the formal inventory control program. The method yields a practical approach to chemical inventory control, while maintaining appropriate chemical safety margins. The resulting number of specific chemicals that require inclusion in a rigorous inventory control program is greatly reduced by about 80%, thereby resulting in significant reduction in chemical data management while preserving appropriate safety margins.

  13. Identification of the source of methane at a hazardous waste treatment facility using isotopic analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hackley, K.C.; Liu, C.L. (Illinois State Geological Survey, Peabody, IL (United States)); Trainor, D.P. (Dames and Moore, Madison, WI (United States))

    1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Isotopic analyses have been used to determine the source of methane in subsurface sediments at a hazardous waste treatment facility in the Lake Calumet area of Chicago, Illinois. The study area is surrounded by landfills and other waste management operations and has a long history of waste disposal. The facility property consists of land constructed of approximately 15 feet of fill placed over lake sediments. The fill is underlain by successively older lacustrine and glacial till deposits to a maximum depth of approximately 80 feet. During a subsurface investigation of the site performed for a RCRA Facility Investigation of former solid waste management units (SWMUs) in the fill, significant quantities of methane were encountered in the natural deposits. Gas samples were collected from the headspace of 11 piezometers screened at depths of approximately 30, 40, and 50 feet beneath the surface. Methane concentrations up to 75% by volume were observed in some of the piezometers. Stable isotope analyses were completed on methane and associated CO[sub 2] separated from the gas samples. Radiocarbon (C-14) analyses were also completed on several of the samples. The delta C-13 results for the intermediate and deep zones are indicative of methane produced by microbial reduction of CO[sub 2]. The methane occurring in the shallow zone appears to be a mixture of methane from the intermediate zone and methane produced by microbial fermentation of naturally (nonanthropogenic) buried organic matter within the shallow lacustrine sediments. According to the isotopic and chemical results, the methane does not appear to be related to gas generation from nearby landfills or from organic wastes previously placed in the former facility SWMUs.

  14. M-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility groundwater monitoring and corrective-action report. Second quarter 1995, Volume 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the corrective-action program at the M-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility (HWMF) at the Savannah River Site during second quarter 1995. Topics include: changes in sampling, analysis, and reporting; water levels; remedial action of groundwater; and hydrology of the affected aquifer zones.

  15. Hazardous Materials Verification and Limited Characterization Report on Sodium and Caustic Residuals in Materials and Fuel Complex Facilities MFC-799/799A

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gary Mecham

    2010-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report is a companion to the Facilities Condition and Hazard Assessment for Materials and Fuel Complex Sodium Processing Facilities MFC-799/799A and Nuclear Calibration Laboratory MFC-770C (referred to as the Facilities Condition and Hazards Assessment). This report specifically responds to the requirement of Section 9.2, Item 6, of the Facilities Condition and Hazards Assessment to provide an updated assessment and verification of the residual hazardous materials remaining in the Sodium Processing Facilities processing system. The hazardous materials of concern are sodium and sodium hydroxide (caustic). The information supplied in this report supports the end-point objectives identified in the Transition Plan for Multiple Facilities at the Materials and Fuels Complex, Advanced Test Reactor, Central Facilities Area, and Power Burst Facility, as well as the deactivation and decommissioning critical decision milestone 1, as specified in U.S. Department of Energy Guide 413.3-8, “Environmental Management Cleanup Projects.” Using a tailored approach and based on information obtained through a combination of process knowledge, emergency management hazardous assessment documentation, and visual inspection, this report provides sufficient detail regarding the quantity of hazardous materials for the purposes of facility transfer; it also provides that further characterization/verification of these materials is unnecessary.

  16. H-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility groundwater monitoring report. Third and fourth quarters 1996, Volume 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The groundwater in the uppermost aquifer beneath the H-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility (HWMF), also known as the H-Area Seepage Basins, at the Savannah River Site (SRS) is monitored periodically for various hazardous and radioactive constituents as required by Module III, Section D, of the 1995 Resource Conservation and Recovery ACT (RCRA) Renewal Permit (South Carolina Hazardous and Mixed Waste Permit SC1-890-008-989), effective October 5, 1995. Currently, the H-Area HWMF monitoring network consists of 130 wells of the HSB series and 8 wells of the HSL series screened in the three hydrostratigraphic units that make up the uppermost aquifer beneath the H-Area HWMF. This report presents the results of the required groundwater monitoring program as identified in provision IIIDH.11.c

  17. M-Area and Metallurgical Laboratory Hazardous Waste Management Facilities groundwater monitoring and corrective-action report (U). Third and fourth quarters 1996, Vol. I

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the groundwater monitoring and corrective-action program at the M-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility (HWMF) and the Metallurgical Laboratory (Met Lab) HWMF at the Savannah River Site (SRS) during 1996.

  18. Hazard Baseline Documentation

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

    1995-12-04T23:59:59.000Z

    This standard establishes uniform Office of Environmental Management (EM) guidance on hazard baseline documents that identify and control radiological and non-radiological hazards for all EM facilities.

  19. Risk assessment and optimization (ALARA) analysis for the environmental remediation of Brookhaven National Laboratory`s hazardous waste management facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dionne, B.J.; Morris, S. III; Baum, J.W. [and others

    1998-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Department of Energy`s (DOE) Office of Environment, Safety, and Health (EH) sought examples of risk-based approaches to environmental restoration to include in their guidance for DOE nuclear facilities. Extensive measurements of radiological contamination in soil and ground water have been made at Brookhaven National Laboratory`s Hazardous Waste Management Facility (HWMF) as part of a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) remediation process. This provided an ideal opportunity for a case study. This report provides a risk assessment and an {open_quotes}As Low as Reasonably Achievable{close_quotes} (ALARA) analysis for use at other DOE nuclear facilities as an example of a risk-based decision technique.

  20. H-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility groundwater monitoring report, Third and fourth quarters 1995: Volume 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Groundwater at the H-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility (HWMF) is monitored in compliance with applicable regulations. Monitoring results are compared to the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental control (SCDHEC) Groundwater Protection Standard (GWPS). Historically as well as currently, nitrate-nitrite as nitrogen, nonvolatile beta, and tritium have been among the primary constituents to exceed standards. Other radionuclides and hazardous constituents also exceeded the GWPS in the second half of 1995. Elevated constituents were found primarily in the water table (Aquifer Zone IIB{sub 2}), however, constitutents exceeding standards also occurred in several different aquifer zones monitoring wells. Water-level maps indicate that the groundwater flow rates and directions at the H-Area HWMF have remained relatively constant since the basins ceased to be active in 1988.

  1. Natural phenomena risk analysis - an approach for the tritium facilities 5480.23 SAR natural phenomena hazards accident analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cappucci, A.J. Jr.; Joshi, J.R.; Long, T.A.; Taylor, R.P.

    1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A Tritium Facilities (TF) Safety Analysis Report (SAR) has been developed which is compliant with DOE Order 5480.23. The 5480.23 SAR upgrades and integrates the safety documentation for the TF into a single SAR for all of the tritium processing buildings. As part of the TF SAR effort, natural phenomena hazards (NPH) were analyzed. A cost effective strategy was developed using a team approach to take advantage of limited resources and budgets. During development of the Hazard and Accident Analysis for the 5480.23 SAR, a strategy was required to allow maximum use of existing analysis and to develop a cost effective graded approach for any new analysis in identifying and analyzing the bounding accidents for the TF. This approach was used to effectively identify and analyze NPH for the TF. The first part of the strategy consisted of evaluating the current SAR for the RTF to determine what NPH analysis could be used in the new combined 5480.23 SAR. The second part was to develop a method for identifying and analyzing NPH events for the older facilities which took advantage of engineering judgment, was cost effective, and followed a graded approach. The second part was especially challenging because of the lack of documented existing analysis considered adequate for the 5480.23 SAR and a limited budget for SAR development and preparation. This paper addresses the strategy for the older facilities.

  2. Low-level waste certification plan for the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Hazardous Waste Handling Facility. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-01-10T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of this plan is to describe the organization and methodology for the certification of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) handled in the Hazardous Waste Handling Facility (HWHF) at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL). This plan is composed to meet the requirements found in the Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) Solid Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) and follows the suggested outline provided by WHC in the letter of April 26, 1990, to Dr. R.H. Thomas, Occupational Health Division, LBL. LLW is to be transferred to the WHC Hanford Site Central Waste Complex and Burial Grounds in Hanford, Washington.

  3. Surveillance Guides - Hazards Control

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

    Facility Representative RL Facility Representative Program March 9, 1995 Surveillance Guide Revision 0 Hazard Controls Page 5 of Error Bookmark not defined....

  4. Facility Safety

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

    1996-10-24T23:59:59.000Z

    Establishes facility safety requirements related to: nuclear safety design, criticality safety, fire protection and natural phenomena hazards mitigation.

  5. Facility Safety

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

    1995-11-16T23:59:59.000Z

    Establishes facility safety requirements related to: nuclear safety design, criticality safety, fire protection and natural phenomena hazards mitigation.

  6. Waste management facilities cost information for transportation of radioactive and hazardous materials

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Feizollahi, F.; Shropshire, D.; Burton, D.

    1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report contains cost information on the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Complex waste streams that will be addressed by DOE in the programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS) project. It describes the results of the task commissioned by DOE to develop cost information for transportation of radioactive and hazardous waste. It contains transportation costs for most types of DOE waste streams: low-level waste (LLW), mixed low-level waste (MLLW), alpha LLW and alpha MLLW, Greater-Than-Class C (GTCC) LLW and DOE equivalent waste, transuranic (TRU) waste, spent nuclear fuel (SNF), and hazardous waste. Unit rates for transportation of contact-handled (<200 mrem/hr contact dose) and remote-handled (>200 mrem/hr contact dose) radioactive waste are estimated. Land transportation of radioactive and hazardous waste is subject to regulations promulgated by DOE, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and state and local agencies. The cost estimates in this report assume compliance with applicable regulations.

  7. Risk assessment of CST-7 proposed waste treatment and storage facilities Volume I: Limited-scope probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) of proposed CST-7 waste treatment & storage facilities. Volume II: Preliminary hazards analysis of proposed CST-7 waste storage & treatment facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sasser, K.

    1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In FY 1993, the Los Alamos National Laboratory Waste Management Group [CST-7 (formerly EM-7)] requested the Probabilistic Risk and Hazards Analysis Group [TSA-11 (formerly N-6)] to conduct a study of the hazards associated with several CST-7 facilities. Among these facilities are the Hazardous Waste Treatment Facility (HWTF), the HWTF Drum Storage Building (DSB), and the Mixed Waste Receiving and Storage Facility (MWRSF), which are proposed for construction beginning in 1996. These facilities are needed to upgrade the Laboratory`s storage capability for hazardous and mixed wastes and to provide treatment capabilities for wastes in cases where offsite treatment is not available or desirable. These facilities will assist Los Alamos in complying with federal and state requlations.

  8. M-Area and Metallurgical Laboratory Hazardous Waste Management Facilities Groundwate Monitoring and Corrective-Action Report, First and Second Quarters 1998, Volumes I, II, & III

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chase, J.

    1998-10-30T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the groundwater monitoring and corrective-action program at the M-Area Hazardous waste Management Facility (HWMF) and the Metallurgical Laboratory (Met Lab) HWMF at the Savannah river Site (SRS) during first and second quarters 1998. This program is required by South Carolina Hazardous Waste Permit SC1-890-008-989 and Section 264.100(g) of the South Carolina Hazardous Waste Management Regulations. Report requirements are described in the 1995 RCRA Renewal Permit, effective October 5, 1995, Section IIIB.H.11.b for the M-Area HWMF and Section IIIG.H.11.b for the Met Lab HWMF.

  9. Hazards Survey and Hazards Assessments

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

    1997-08-21T23:59:59.000Z

    This volume is to assist DOE Operations/Field Offices and operating contractors in complying with the DOE O 151.1 requirement that Hazards Surveys and facility-specific Hazards Assessments be prepared, maintained, and used for emergency planning purposes. Canceled by DOE G 151.1-2.

  10. M-area hazardous waste management facility groundwater monitoring and corrective-action report, First quarter 1995, Volume 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report, in three volumes, describes the ground water monitoring and c corrective-action program at the M-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility (HWMF) at the Savannah River Site (SRS) during the fourth quarter 1994 and first quarter 1995. Concise description of the program and considerable data documenting the monitoring and remedial activities are included in the document. This is Volume 1 covering the following topics: sampling and results; hydrogeologic assessment; water quality assessment; effectiveness of the corrective-action program; corrective-action system operation and performance; monitoring and corrective-action program assessment; proposed monitoring and corrective-action program modifications. Also included are the following appendicies: A-standards; B-flagging criteria; C-figures; D-monitoring results tables; E-data quality/usability assessment.

  11. Risk assessment for the Waste Technologies Industries (WTI) hazardous waste incinerator facility (east Liverpool, Ohio)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The report constitutes a comprehensive site-specific risk assessment for the WTI incineration facility located in East Liverpool, OH. Volume I is a description of the components and methodologies used in the risk assessment and provides a summary of the major results from the three components of the assessment.

  12. Reduction of COD in leachate from a hazardous waste landfill adjacent to a coke-making facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Banerjee, K.; O`Toole, T.J. [Chester Environmental, Moon Township, PA (United States)

    1995-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A hazardous waste landfill adjacent to a coke manufacturing facility was in operation between July 1990 and December 1991. A system was constructed to collect and treat the leachate from the landfill prior to discharge to the river. Occasionally, the discharge from the treatment facility exceeded the permit limitations for Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), and Total Organic Carbon (TOC). The objectives of this study were to determine treatment methods which would enable compliance with the applicable discharge limits; to establish the desired operating conditions of the process; and to investigate the effect of various parameters such as pH, catalyst dosage, and reaction time on the COD destruction efficiency. The characteristics of the landfill leachate in question were significantly variable in terms of chemical composition. A review of the influent quality data suggests that the COD concentration ranges between 80 and 390 mg/l. The oxidation processes using Fenton`s reagent or a combination of UV/hydrogen peroxide/catalyst are capable of reducing the COD concentration of the leachate below the discharge limitation of 35 mg/l. The estimated capital cost associated with the Fenton`s reagent process is approximately $525,000, and the annual operating and maintenance cost is $560,000. The estimated capital cost for the UV/hydrogen peroxide/catalyst treatment system is $565,000. The annual operating and maintenance cost of this process would be approximately $430,000.

  13. Montana Hazardous Waste Act (Montana)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This Act addresses the safe and proper management of hazardous wastes and used oil, the permitting of hazardous waste facilities, and the siting of facilities. The Department of Environmental...

  14. Surveillance Guides - Identification of Hazards

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

    Date: Facility Representative RL Facility Representative Program March 9, 1995 Surveillance Guide Revision 0 Identification of hazards Page 1 of 5...

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    George, Steven C.

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

  16. Hazardous Material Security (Maryland)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    All facilities processing, storing, managing, or transporting hazardous materials must be evaluated every five years for security issues. A report must be submitted to the Department of the...

  17. 3Q/4Q99 F-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility Corrective Action Report - Third and Fourth Quarter 1999, Volumes I and II

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chase, J.

    2000-05-12T23:59:59.000Z

    Savannah River Site (SRS) monitors groundwater quality at the F-Area Hazardous Waste management Facility (HWMF) and provides results of this monitoring to the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) semiannually as required by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permit. SRS also performs monthly sampling of the Wastewater Treatment Unit (WTU) effluent in accordance with Section C of the Underground Injection Control (UIC) application.

  18. 3Q/4Q99 Annual M-Area and Metallurgical Laboratory Hazardous Waste Management Facilities Groundwater Monitoring and Corrective-Action Report - Third and Fourth Quarters 1999 - Volumes I, II, and III

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chase, J.

    2000-04-19T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the groundwater monitoring and corrective-action program at the M-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility (HWMF) and the Metallurgical Laboratory (Met Lab) HWMF at the Savannah River Site (SRS) during 1999.

  19. 3Q/4Q00 Annual M-Area and Metallurgical Laboratory Hazardous Waste Management Facilities Groundwater Monitoring and Corrective-Action Report - Third and Fourth Quarters 2000 - Volumes I, II, and II

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cole, C.M. Sr.

    2001-04-17T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the groundwater monitoring and corrective-action program at the M-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility (HWMF) and the Metallurgical Laboratory (Met Lab) HWMF at the Savannah River Site (SRS) during 2000. This program is required by South Carolina Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Hazardous Waste Permit SC1890008989 and Section 264.100(g) of the South Carolina Hazardous Waste Management Regulations.

  20. Facility Microgrids

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2005-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  1. HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT REFERENCE

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Faraon, Andrei

    Principal Investigators 7 Laboratory Personnel 8 EH&S Personnel 8 HAZARDOUS WASTE ACCUMULATION AREAS 9 Satellite Accumulation Area 9 Waste Accumulation Facility 10 HAZARDOUS WASTE CONTAINER MANAGEMENT LabelingHAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT REFERENCE GUIDE Prepared by Environment, Health and Safety Office

  2. Hazard baseline documentation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This DOE limited technical standard establishes uniform Office of Environmental Management (EM) guidance on hazards baseline documents that identify and control radiological and nonradiological hazards for all EM facilities. It provides a road map to the safety and health hazard identification and control requirements contained in the Department`s orders and provides EM guidance on the applicability and integration of these requirements. This includes a definition of four classes of facilities (nuclear, non-nuclear, radiological, and other industrial); the thresholds for facility hazard classification; and applicable safety and health hazard identification, controls, and documentation. The standard applies to the classification, development, review, and approval of hazard identification and control documentation for EM facilities.

  3. Risk assessment for the Waste Technologies Industries (WTI) hazardous waste incineration facility (East Liverpool, Ohio). Volume 1. Executive summary

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Contents: Introduction and Summary of Results; Facility Background; Facility Emissions; Atmospheric Dispersion and Deposition Modeling of Emissions; Human Health Risk Assessment; Screening Ecological Risk Assessment; Accident Analysis; Additional Analysis in Response to Peer Review Recommendations; References.

  4. Risk assessment for the Waste Technologies Industries (WTI) hazardous waste incineration facility (East Liverpool, Ohio). Volume 2. Introduction

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Contents: Overview; Facility Background; Risk Assessment History at WTI; Peer Review Comments and Key Assumptions; and References.

  5. Enforcement Guidance Supplement 99-01: Enforcement of 10 CFR Part 830.120 (Quality Assurance Rule) for Facilities below Hazard Category III

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Section 1.3 of the Operational Procedures for Enforcement, published in June 1998, provides the opportunity for the Office of Enforcement and Investigation (EH Enforcement) periodically to issue clarifying guidance regarding the processes used in its enforcement activities. During the past 18 months, EH Enforcement has identified a number of examples in which both DOE and contractor organizations have incorrectly exempted activities from applicability of the DOE Quality Assurance Rule 10 CFR 830.120 (QA Rule). The contractors excluded these activities on the basis that the QA Rule did not apply if the activity was classified as less than a Hazard Category III under DOE Standard 1027-92 (Hazard Categorization and Accident Analysis Techniques for Compliance with DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports). Standard 1027 provides guidance for determining whether a facility, activity or area requires a Safety Analysis Report but it does not provide a basis for exclusion from the provisions of the QA Rule.

  6. Enforcement Guidance Supplement 99-01:Enforcement of 10 CFR Part 830.120 (Quality Assurance Rule)for Facilities Below Hazard Category III

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Section 1.3 of the Operational Procedures for Enforcement, published in June 1998, provides the opportunity for the Office of Enforcement and Investigation (EH Enforcement) periodically to issue clarifying guidance regarding the processes used in its enforcement activities. During the past 18 months, EH Enforcement has identified a number of examples in which both DOE and contractor organizations have incorrectly exempted activities fromapplicability of the DOE Quality Assurance Rule 10 CFR 830.120 (QA Rule). The contractors excluded these activities on the basis that the QA Rule did not apply if the activity was classified as less than a Hazard Category III under DOE Standard 1027-92 (Hazard Categorization and Accident Analysis Techniques for Compliance with DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports). Standard 1027 provides guidance for determining whether a facility, activity or area requires a Safety Analysis Report but it does not provide a basis for exclusion from the provisions of the QA Rule.

  7. Hazardous Materials and Controlled Hazardous Substances (Maryland)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    A permit is required to own, establish, operate, or maintain a facility in the state of Maryland that transfers quantities of a single hazardous material in excess of 100,000 pounds at any time...

  8. Hazardous Waste Management Standards and Regulations (Kansas)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This act states the standards and regulations for the management of hazardous waste. No person shall construct, modify or operate a hazardous waste facility or otherwise dispose of hazardous waste...

  9. Oklahoma Hazardous Waste Management Act (Oklahoma)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    A hazardous waste facility permit from the Department of Environmental Quality is required to store, treat or dispose of hazardous waste materials, or to construct, own or operate any facility...

  10. Rules and Regulations for Hazardous Waste Management (Rhode Island)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These regulations establish permitting and operational requirements for hazardous waste facilities. They are designed to minimize...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1988-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  12. Risk assessment for the Waste Technologies Industries (WTI) hazardous waste incinerator facility (east Liverpool, Ohio). Volume 2. Introduction. Draft report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This volume provides a description of the facility, and its location and setting in the three-state area of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia; an overview of previous risk assessments conducted by U.S. EPA for this site, including the preliminary assessment of inhalation exposure and the screening-level risk analyses of indirect exposure; and a summary of comments provided by the Peer Review Panel on the Project Plan.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Arnold, Patrick [NSTec] [NSTec

    2014-02-14T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  14. Facility Safety

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

    2005-12-22T23:59:59.000Z

    The order establishes facility and programmatic safety requirements for nuclear and explosives safety design criteria, fire protection, criticality safety, natural phenomena hazards (NPH) mitigation, and the System Engineer Program.Chg 1 incorporates the use of DOE-STD-1189-2008, Integration of Safety into the Design Process, mandatory for Hazard Category 1, 2 and 3 nuclear facilities. Cancels DOE O 420.1A.

  15. Hazard Analysis Database Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    GRAMS, W.H.

    2000-12-28T23:59:59.000Z

    The Hazard Analysis Database was developed in conjunction with the hazard analysis activities conducted in accordance with DOE-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for U S . Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports, for HNF-SD-WM-SAR-067, Tank Farms Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). The FSAR is part of the approved Authorization Basis (AB) for the River Protection Project (RPP). This document describes, identifies, and defines the contents and structure of the Tank Farms FSAR Hazard Analysis Database and documents the configuration control changes made to the database. The Hazard Analysis Database contains the collection of information generated during the initial hazard evaluations and the subsequent hazard and accident analysis activities. The Hazard Analysis Database supports the preparation of Chapters 3 ,4 , and 5 of the Tank Farms FSAR and the Unreviewed Safety Question (USQ) process and consists of two major, interrelated data sets: (1) Hazard Analysis Database: Data from the results of the hazard evaluations, and (2) Hazard Topography Database: Data from the system familiarization and hazard identification.

  16. October 2014 Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH) Meeting - Tuesday...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Seismic Hazard Analysis for Nuclear Facilities at the Hanford Site, Eastern Washington, USA Natural Phenomena Hazards DOE-STD 1020-2012 & DOE Handbook A Probabilistic Approach to...

  17. The Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Senior Seismic Hazard Analysis...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS FOR NUCLEAR FACILITIES AT THE HANFORD SITE, EASTERN WASHINGTON, USA A Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis Update Review for Two DOE Sites and NGA-East...

  18. 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)

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

    2012-08-31T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  19. Facility Safety

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

    2005-12-22T23:59:59.000Z

    This Order establishes facility and programmatic safety requirements for Department of Energy facilities, which includes nuclear and explosives safety design criteria, fire protection, criticality safety, natural phenomena hazards mitigation, and the System Engineer Program. Cancels DOE O 420.1A. DOE O 420.1B Chg 1 issued 4-19-10.

  20. LEARNERS GUIDE FOR RESPONSIBLE HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL WASTE

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Portman, Douglas

    1 LEARNERS GUIDE FOR RESPONSIBLE HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER the effects of improper hazardous waste management and disposal. Each person who works with hazardous is managed by the Hazardous Waste Management Unit (HWMU) of Facilities and Services. To contact HWMU dial x

  1. K Basin Hazard Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    PECH, S.H.

    2000-08-23T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the methodology used in conducting the K Basins Hazard Analysis, which provides the foundation for the K Basins Final Safety Analysis Report. This hazard analysis was performed in accordance with guidance provided by DOE-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for U. S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports and implements the requirements of DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Report.

  2. K Basins Hazard Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WEBB, R.H.

    1999-12-29T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the methodology used in conducting the K Basins Hazard Analysis, which provides the foundation for the K Basins Safety Analysis Report (HNF-SD-WM-SAR-062, Rev.4). This hazard analysis was performed in accordance with guidance provided by DOE-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for U. S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports and implements the requirements of DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Report.

  3. Preliminary hazards analysis -- vitrification process

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Coordes, D.; Ruggieri, M.; Russell, J.; TenBrook, W.; Yimbo, P. [Science Applications International Corp., Pleasanton, CA (United States)] [Science Applications International Corp., Pleasanton, CA (United States)

    1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper presents a Preliminary Hazards Analysis (PHA) for mixed waste vitrification by joule heating. The purpose of performing a PHA is to establish an initial hazard categorization for a DOE nuclear facility and to identify those processes and structures which may have an impact on or be important to safety. The PHA is typically performed during and provides input to project conceptual design. The PHA is then followed by a Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR) performed during Title 1 and 2 design. The PSAR then leads to performance of the Final Safety Analysis Report performed during the facility`s construction and testing. It should be completed before routine operation of the facility commences. This PHA addresses the first four chapters of the safety analysis process, in accordance with the requirements of DOE Safety Guidelines in SG 830.110. The hazards associated with vitrification processes are evaluated using standard safety analysis methods which include: identification of credible potential hazardous energy sources; identification of preventative features of the facility or system; identification of mitigative features; and analyses of credible hazards. Maximal facility inventories of radioactive and hazardous materials are postulated to evaluate worst case accident consequences. These inventories were based on DOE-STD-1027-92 guidance and the surrogate waste streams defined by Mayberry, et al. Radiological assessments indicate that a facility, depending on the radioactive material inventory, may be an exempt, Category 3, or Category 2 facility. The calculated impacts would result in no significant impact to offsite personnel or the environment. Hazardous materials assessment indicates that a Mixed Waste Vitrification facility will be a Low Hazard facility having minimal impacts to offsite personnel and the environment.

  4. Mr. John E. Kieling, Chief Hazardous Waste Bureau

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

    Pilot Plant (WIPP) facility. This notification fulfills the requirements of the W IPP Hazardous Waste Facility Perm it (Permit), (NM4890139088-TSDF), Permit Part 3, Section...

  5. Chemical process hazards analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Office of Worker Health and Safety (EH-5) under the Assistant Secretary for the Environment, Safety and Health of the US Department (DOE) has published two handbooks for use by DOE contractors managing facilities and processes covered by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Rule for Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals (29 CFR 1910.119), herein referred to as the PSM Rule. The PSM Rule contains an integrated set of chemical process safety management elements designed to prevent chemical releases that can lead to catastrophic fires, explosions, or toxic exposures. The purpose of the two handbooks, ``Process Safety Management for Highly Hazardous Chemicals`` and ``Chemical Process Hazards Analysis,`` is to facilitate implementation of the provisions of the PSM Rule within the DOE. The purpose of this handbook ``Chemical Process Hazards Analysis,`` is to facilitate, within the DOE, the performance of chemical process hazards analyses (PrHAs) as required under the PSM Rule. It provides basic information for the performance of PrHAs, and should not be considered a complete resource on PrHA methods. Likewise, to determine if a facility is covered by the PSM rule, the reader should refer to the handbook, ``Process Safety Management for Highly Hazardous Chemicals`` (DOE- HDBK-1101-96). Promulgation of the PSM Rule has heightened the awareness of chemical safety management issues within the DOE. This handbook is intended for use by DOE facilities and processes covered by the PSM rule to facilitate contractor implementation of the PrHA element of the PSM Rule. However, contractors whose facilities and processes not covered by the PSM Rule may also use this handbook as a basis for conducting process hazards analyses as part of their good management practices. This handbook explains the minimum requirements for PrHAs outlined in the PSM Rule. Nowhere have requirements been added beyond what is specifically required by the rule.

  6. Hazardous Waste Minimum Distance Requirements (Connecticut)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These regulations set minimum distance requirements between certain types of facilities that generate, process, store, and dispose of hazardous waste and other land uses. The regulations require an...

  7. Oil and Hazardous Substance Discharge Preparedness (Minnesota)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Anyone who owns or operates a vessel or facility that transports, stores, or otherwise handles hazardous wastes must take reasonable steps to prevent the discharge of those materials.

  8. The strategy of APO-Hazardous Waste Management Agency in forming the model of public acceptance of Croatian Waste Management Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Klika, M.C.; Kucar-Dragicevic, S.; Lokner, V. [APO, Zagreb (Croatia)] [and others

    1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    Some of basic elements related to public participation in hazardous and radioactive waste management in Croatia are underlined in the paper. Most of them are created or led by the APO-Hazardous Waste Management Agency. Present efforts in improvement of public participation in the field of hazardous and radioactive waste management are important in particular due to negligible role of public in environmentally related issues during former Yugoslav political system. For this reason it is possible to understand the public fearing to be deceived or neglected again. Special attention is paid to the current APO editions related to public information and education in the field of hazardous and radioactive waste management. It is important because only the well-informed public can present an active and respectful factor in hazardous and radioactive waste management process.

  9. Risk assessment for the Waste Technologies Industries (WTI) hazardous waste incinerator facility (east Liverpool, Ohio). Volume 5. Human health risk assessment (HHRA): Evaluation of potential risks from multipathway exposure to emissions. Draft report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) portion of the WTI Risk Assessment involves the integration of information about the facility with site-specific data for the surrounding region and population to characterize the potential human health risks due to emissions from the facility. The estimation of human health risks is comprised of the following general steps: (1) identification of substances of potential concern; (2) estimation of the nature and magnitude of chemical releases from the WTI facility; (3) prediction of the atmospheric transport of the emitted contaminants; (4) determination of the types of adverse effects associated with exposure to the substances of potential concern (referred to as hazard identification), and the relationship between the level of exposure and the severity of any health effect (referred to as dose-response assessment); (5) estimation of the magnitude of exposure (referred to as exposure assessment); and (6) characterization of the health risks associated with exposure (referred to as risk characterization).

  10. Hazardous and Industrial Waste (Minnesota)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This section describes standards that must be met by facilities generating and processing hazardous and industrial waste, as well as required permits for the construction and operation of such a...

  11. Hazardous Waste Management (North Carolina)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These rules identify and list hazardous waste and set standards for the generators and operators of such waste as well as owners or operators of waste facilities. They also stats standards for...

  12. Risk assessment for the Waste Technologies Industries (WTI) hazardous waste incinerator facility (east Liverpool, Ohio). Volume 3. Characterization of the nature and magnitude of emissions. Draft report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report constitutes a comprehensive site-specific risk assessment for the WTI incineration facility located in East Liverpool, OH. Volume III of the report describes the methods used to estimate both stack and fugitive emission rates from the facility.

  13. Facility Safety

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

    2000-11-20T23:59:59.000Z

    The objective of this Order is to establish facility safety requirements related to: nuclear safety design, criticality safety, fire protection and natural phenomena hazards mitigation. The Order has Change 1 dated 11-16-95, Change 2 dated 10-24-96, and the latest Change 3 dated 11-22-00 incorporated. The latest change satisfies a commitment made to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) in response to DNFSB recommendation 97-2, Criticality Safety.

  14. Facility Safety

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

    1995-10-13T23:59:59.000Z

    Establishes facility safety requirements related to: nuclear safety design, criticality safety, fire protection and natural phenomena hazards mitigation. Cancels DOE 5480.7A, DOE 5480.24, DOE 5480.28 and Division 13 of DOE 6430.1A. Canceled by DOE O 420.1A.

  15. Facility Safety

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

    2012-12-04T23:59:59.000Z

    The Order establishes facility and programmatic safety requirements for DOE and NNSA for nuclear safety design criteria, fire protection, criticality safety, natural phenomena hazards (NPH) mitigation, and System Engineer Program. Cancels DOE O 420.1B, DOE G 420.1-2 and DOE G 420.1-3.

  16. NSTP 2002-2 Methodology for Final Hazard Categorization for Nuclear...

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

    Methodology for Final Hazard Categorization for Nuclear Facilities from Category 3 to Radiological (111302). NSTP 2002-2 Methodology for Final Hazard Categorization for...

  17. Massachusetts Oil and Hazardous Material Release Prevention and Response Act, State Superfund Law (Massachusetts)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This Act contains information on prevention strategies for hazardous material release, permits for facilities managing hazardous waste, and response tactics and liability in the event such release...

  18. Quality Services: Solid Wastes, Parts 370-376: Hazardous Waste Management System (New York)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These regulations prescribe the management of hazardous waste facilities in New York State. They identify and list different types of hazardous wastes and describe standards for generators,...

  19. Resource Management Services: Water Regulation, Parts 595-599: Hazardous Substances (New York)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These regulations aim to prevent the release of hazardous substances into surface water and groundwater resources. They contain guidance for facilities which store and process hazardous substances,...

  20. Hazards assessment for the INEL Landfill Complex

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Knudsen, J.K.; Calley, M.B.

    1994-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report documents the hazards assessment for the INEL Landfill Complex (LC) located at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, which is operated by EG&G Idaho, Inc., for the US Department of Energy (DOE). The hazards assessment was performed to ensure that this facility complies with DOE and company requirements pertaining to emergency planning and preparedness for operational emergencies. DOE Order 5500.3A requires that a facility-specific hazards assessment be performed to provide the technical basis for facility emergency planning efforts. This hazards assessment was conducted in accordance with DOE Headquarters and the DOE Idaho Operations Office (DOE-ID) guidance to comply with DOE Order 5500.3A. The hazards assessment identifies and analyzes the hazards that are significant enough to warrant consideration in a facility`s operational emergency management program. The area surrounding the LC, the buildings and structures at the LC, and the processes that are used at the LC are described in this report. All hazardous materials, both radiological and nonradiological, at the LC were identified and screened against threshold quantities according to DOE Order 5500.3A guidance. Asbestos at the Asbestos Pit was the only hazardous material that exceeded its specified threshold quantity. However, the type of asbestos received and the packaging practices used are believed to limit the potential for an airborne release of asbestos fibers. Therefore, in accordance with DOE Order 5500.3A guidance, no further hazardous material characterization or analysis was required for this hazards assessment.

  1. Electrical hazards

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

    and certification by ANL prior to use. The Control of Hazardous Energy Sources - LockoutTagout (LOTO) Types of Energy Sources 1. Electricity 2. Gas, steam & pressurized...

  2. Hazardous Waste Management Compliance Guidelines INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Reisslein, Martin

    Hazardous Waste Management Compliance Guidelines INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE Arizona State University Management, generate a variety of hazardous chemical wastes. ASU is classified as a hazardous waste generator) and has been assigned an EPA identification number (AZD042017723). As a hazardous waste generator facility

  3. Hazardous Waste Program (Alabama)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This rule states criteria for identifying the characteristics of hazardous waste and for listing hazardous waste, lists of hazardous wastes, standards for the management of hazardous waste and...

  4. FIRE HAZARDS ANALYSIS - BUSTED BUTTE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    R. Longwell; J. Keifer; S. Goodin

    2001-01-22T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of this fire hazards analysis (FHA) is to assess the risk from fire within individual fire areas at the Busted Butte Test Facility and to ascertain whether the DOE fire safety objectives are met. The objective, identified in DOE Order 420.1, Section 4.2, is to establish requirements for a comprehensive fire and related hazards protection program for facilities sufficient to minimize the potential for: (1) The occurrence of a fire related event. (2) A fire that causes an unacceptable on-site or off-site release of hazardous or radiological material that will threaten the health and safety of employees. (3) Vital DOE programs suffering unacceptable interruptions as a result of fire and related hazards. (4) Property losses from a fire and related events exceeding limits established by DOE. Critical process controls and safety class systems being damaged as a result of a fire and related events.

  5. MERCURY RELEASE FROM DISTURBED ANOXIC SOILS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jaroslav Solc; Bethany A. Bolles

    2001-07-16T23:59:59.000Z

    The primary objectives of experiments conducted at the Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC) were to provide information on the secondary release of mercury from contaminated anoxic sediments to an aqueous environment after disturbance/change of in situ physical conditions and to evaluate its migration and partitioning under controlled conditions, including implications of these processes for treatment of contaminated soils. Experimental work included (1) characterization of the mercury-contaminated sediment; (2) field bench-scale dredging simulation; (3) laboratory column study to evaluate a longer-term response to sediment disturbance; (4) mercury volatilization from sediment during controlled drying; (5) resaturation experiments to evaluate the potential for secondary release of residual mercury after disturbance, transport, drying, and resaturation, which simulate a typical scenario during soil excavation and transport to waste disposal facilities; and (6) mercury speciation and potential for methylation during column incubation experiments.

  6. Risk assessment for the Waste Technologies Industries (WTI) hazardous waste incinerator facility (east Liverpool, Ohio). Volume 7. Accident analysis: Selection and assessment of potential release scenarios. Draft report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report constitutes a comprehensive site-specific risk assessment for the WTI incineration facility located in East Liverpool, OH. The Accident Analysis is an evaluation of the likelihood of occurrence and resulting consequences from several general classes of accidents that could potentially occur during operation of the facility. The Accident Analysis also evaluates the effectiveness of existing mitigation measures in reducing off-site impacts. Volume VII describes in detail the methods used to conduct the Accident Analysis and reports the results of evaluations of likelihood and consequence for the selected accident scenarios.

  7. Risk assessment for the Waste Technologies Industries (WTI) hazardous waste incinerator facility (east Liverpool, Ohio). Volume 6. Screening ecological risk assessment (SERA). Draft report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report constitutes a comprehensive site-specific risk assessment for the WTI incineration facility located in East Liverpool, OH. The Screening Ecological Risk Assessment (SERA) is an analysis of the potential significance of risks to ecological receptors (e.g., plants, fish, wildlife) from exposure to facility emissions. The SERA was performed using conservative assumptions and approaches to determine if a further, more refined analysis is warranted. Volume VI describes in detail the methods used in the SERA and reports the results of the SERA in terms of site-specific risks to ecological receptors.

  8. The application of a computerized storm surge model for hazard mapping within the Galveston Bay Area using an Automated Mapping and Facilities Management System

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Schornick, Lora Anne

    1987-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    University Chairman of Advisory Committee: Dr. Kenneth L. White Each year between June and November, hurricanes pose a threat to the communities along the Texas Coast. Disaster Planners become faced with the potential hazard of the storm surge... that accompanies the hurricane. The study site choosen for this thesis is Galveston Island and the Bay Area, It is often found within the range of landfall of a hurricane. Three local sites were examined in more detail. These sites are found at the east end...

  9. INTERNAL HAZARDS ANALYSIS FOR LICENSE APPLICATION

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    R.J. Garrett

    2005-02-17T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of this internal hazards analysis is to identify and document the internal hazards and potential initiating events associated with preclosure operations of the repository at Yucca Mountain. Internal hazards are those hazards presented by the operation of the facility and by its associated processes that can potentially lead to a radioactive release or cause a radiological hazard. In contrast to external hazards, internal hazards do not involve natural phenomena and external man-made hazards. This internal hazards analysis was performed in support of the preclosure safety analysis and the License Application for the Yucca Mountain Project. The methodology for this analysis provides a systematic means to identify internal hazards and potential initiating events that may result in a radiological hazard or radiological release during the repository preclosure period. These hazards are documented in tables of potential internal hazards and potential initiating events (Section 6.6) for input to the repository event sequence categorization process. The results of this analysis will undergo further screening and analysis based on the criteria that apply to the performance of event sequence analyses for the repository preclosure period. The evolving design of the repository will be re-evaluated periodically to ensure that internal hazards that have not been previously evaluated are identified.

  10. 1992 system disturbances

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    When a utility experiences an electric system emergency that requires reporting to the DOE, the utility sends a copy of the report to its Regional Council, which then sends a copy to NERC. Canadian utilities often voluntarily file emergency reports to DOE and NERC as well. NERC's annual review of system disturbances begins in November when the Disturbance Analysis Working Group meets to discuss each disturbance reported to NERC so far that year. The Group then contacts the Regional Council or utility(ies) involved and requests a detailed report of each incident. The Group then summarizes the report for this Review and analyzes it using the NERC Operating Guides and Planning Policies and Guides as the analysis categories. The Commentary section includes the conclusions and recommendations that were formulated from the analyses in this report plus the general experiences of the Working Group through the years. In 1992, utilities reported 22 incidents of system disturbances, load reductions, or unusual occurrences. This is eight fewer than reported in 1991. These incidents are listed chronologically and categorized as: fourteen system interruptions that resulted in loss of customer service, eight unusual occurrences that did not cause a service interruption. No public appeals to reduce demand or voltage reductions occurred in 1992. This document contains reports of 11 incidents plus a summary of the damage from Hurricane Andrew. Each utility or Region approved its analysis in this report. Included is a table of Disturbances by Analysis Category that offers a quick review of the categories applicable to each incident.

  11. Risk assessment for the Waste Technologies Industries (WTI) hazardous waste incinerator facility (east Liverpool, Ohio). Volume 4. Atmospheric dispersion and deposition modeling of emissions. Draft report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The report constitutes a comprehensive site-specific risk assessment for the WTI incineration facility located in East Liverpool, OH. Volume IV describes the air dispersion model used to estimate air concentrations and particle deposition, as well as the results of the modeling exercise.

  12. Risk assessment for the Waste Technologies Industries (WTI) hazardous waste incinerator facility (east Liverpool, Ohio). Volume 1. Executive summary. Draft report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report constitutes a comprehensive site-specific risk assessment for the WTI incineration facility located in East Liverpool, OH. Volume I is a description of the components and methodologies used in the risk assessment and provides a summary of the major results from the three components of the assessment.

  13. Surveillance Guide - OSS 19.5 Hazardous Waste Operations and...

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

    RL Facility Representative Program March 21, 1995 Surveillance Guide OSS 19.5 Revision 0 Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Page 6 of Error Bookmark...

  14. Mr. John E. Kieling, Chief Hazardous Waste Bureau Departmen

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

    to characterize and certify waste in accordance with the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Hazardous Waste Facility Permit. The report contains the results of the recertification audit...

  15. Packaging and Transfer of Hazardous Materials and Materials of...

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

    PACKAGING AND TRANSFER OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND MATERIALS OF NATIONAL SECURITY INTEREST Assessment Plan NNSANevada Site Office Facility Representative Division Performance...

  16. Hazard evaluation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vervalin, C.H.

    1986-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Recent major disasters in the hydrocarbon processing industry (HPI) have inspired renewed interest in the fine-tuning of hazard evaluation methods. In addition to traditional risk-study methods, the computer promises eventual expert systems to vastly improve the speed of assembling and using loss-prevention information. But currently, the computerization of hazard evaluation finds the HPI taking a back seat to aerospace/nuclear industries. The complexity of creating computer databases and expert systems has not-however-kept some HPI companies from plunging in. Arabian American Oil Co. (Aramco) has used computer-generated information in working with probabilistic risk analysis. Westinghouse has used its risk-analysis experience in the nuclear field to build a computer-based program for HPI clients. An Exxon plant has a huge data bank as the basis for its Hazard Loss Information System.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2012-02-16T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  18. 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)

    Arnold, P. M.

    2013-02-21T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  19. WHC fire hazards analysis policy

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Evans, C.B.

    1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of this document is to establish the fire protection policy for Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) relative to US Department of Energy (DOE) directives for Fire Hazards Analyses (FHAs) and their relationship to facility Safety Analysis Reports (SARs) as promulgated by the DOE Richland Operations Office.

  20. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENTS What are hazardous materials?

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Fernandez, Eduardo

    HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENTS What are hazardous materials? Hazardous materials are chemicals, accidentally spilled, or released. In addition to laboratory chemicals, hazardous materials may include common not involve highly toxic or noxious hazardous materials, a fire, or an injury requiring medical attention

  1. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENTS What are hazardous materials?

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Fernandez, Eduardo

    HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENTS What are hazardous materials? Hazardous materials are chemicals I do if there is a small spill in the area and personnel trained in Hazardous Material clean up, or there is a small spill where personnel trained in Hazardous Material clean up or an appropriate spill kit

  2. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENTS What are hazardous materials?

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Fernandez, Eduardo

    HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENTS What are hazardous materials? Hazardous materials are chemicals I do if there is a small spill in the area and personnel trained in Hazardous Material clean up spill where personnel trained in Hazardous Material clean up or an appropriate spill kit

  3. Reproductive Hazards in the Lab Reproductive Hazards

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    de Lijser, Peter

    Reproductive Hazards in the Lab Reproductive Hazards The term reproductive hazard refers to agents healthy children. Reproductive hazards may have harmful effects on libido, sexual behavior, or sperm the effects of reproductive hazards may be reversible for the parent, the effects on the fetus or offspring

  4. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENTS What are hazardous materials?

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Fernandez, Eduardo

    HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENTS What are hazardous materials? Hazardous materials are chemicals I do if there is a small spill in the area and personnel trained in Hazardous Material clean up personnel trained in Hazardous Material clean up or an appropriate spill kit is not available? Call 561

  5. PRTR/309 building nuclear facility preliminary

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cornwell, B.C.

    1994-12-08T23:59:59.000Z

    The hazard classification of the Plutonium Recycle Test Reactor (PRTR)/309 building as a ``Radiological Facility`` and the office portions as ``Other Industrial Facility`` are documented by this report. This report provides: a synopsis of the history and facility it`s uses; describes major area of the facility; and assesses the radiological conditions for the facility segments. The assessment is conducted using the hazard category threshold values, segmentation methodology, and graded approach guidance of DOE-STD-1027-92.

  6. Toxic hazards of underground excavation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, R.; Chitnis, V.; Damasian, M.; Lemm, M.; Popplesdorf, N.; Ryan, T.; Saban, C.; Cohen, J.; Smith, C.; Ciminesi, F.

    1982-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Inadvertent intrusion into natural or man-made toxic or hazardous material deposits as a consequence of activities such as mining, excavation or tunnelling has resulted in numerous deaths and injuries in this country. This study is a preliminary investigation to identify and document instances of such fatal or injurious intrusion. An objective is to provide useful insights and information related to potential hazards due to future intrusion into underground radioactive-waste-disposal facilities. The methodology used in this study includes literature review and correspondence with appropriate government agencies and organizations. Key categories of intrusion hazards are asphyxiation, methane, hydrogen sulfide, silica and asbestos, naturally occurring radionuclides, and various mine or waste dump related hazards.

  7. 300 Area Disturbance Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    LL Hale; MK Wright; NA Cadoret

    1999-01-07T23:59:59.000Z

    The objective of this study was to define areas of previous disturbance in the 300 Area of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site to eliminate these areas from the cultural resource review process, reduce cultural resource monitoring costs, and allow cultural resource specialists to focus on areas where subsurface disturbance is minimal or nonexistent. Research into available sources suggests that impacts from excavations have been significant wherever the following construction activities have occurred: building basements and pits, waste ponds, burial grounds, trenches, installation of subsurface pipelines, power poles, water hydrants, and well construction. Beyond the areas just mentioned, substrates in the' 300 Area consist of a complex, multidimen- sional mosaic composed of undisturbed stratigraphy, backfill, and disturbed sediments; Four Geographic Information System (GIS) maps were created to display known areas of disturbance in the 300 Area. These maps contain information gleaned from a variety of sources, but the primary sources include the Hanford GIS database system, engineer drawings, and historic maps. In addition to these maps, several assumptions can be made about areas of disturbance in the 300 Area as a result of this study: o o Buried pipelines are not always located where they are mapped. As a result, cultural resource monitors or specialists should not depend on maps depicting subsurface pipelines for accurate locations of previous disturbance. Temporary roads built in the early 1940s were placed on layers of sand and gravel 8 to 12 in. thick. Given this information, it is likely that substrates beneath these early roads are only minimally disturbed. Building foundations ranged from concrete slabs no more than 6 to 8 in. thick to deeply excavated pits and basements. Buildings constructed with slab foundations are more numerous than may be expected, and minimally disturbed substrates may be expected in these locations. Historic black and white photographs provide a partial record of some excavations, including trenches, building basements, and material lay-down yards. Estimates of excavation depth and width can be made, but these estimates are not accurate enough to pinpoint the exact location where the disturbedhmdisturbed interface is located (e.g., camera angles were such that depths and/or widths of excavations could not be accurately determined or estimated). In spite of these limitations, these photographs provide essential information. Aerial and historic low-level photographs have captured what appears to be backfill throughout much of the eastern portion of the 300 Area-near the Columbia River shoreline. This layer of fill has likely afforded some protection for the natural landscape buried beneath the fill. This assumption fits nicely with the intermittent and inadvertent discoveries of hearths and stone tools documented through the years in this part of the 300 Area. Conversely, leveling of sand dunes appears to be substantial in the northwestern portion of the 300 Area during the early stages of development. o Project files and engineer drawings do not contain information on any impromptu but necessary adjustments made on the ground during project implementation-after the design phase. Further, many projects are planned and mapped but never implemented-this information is also not often placed in project files. Specific recommendations for a 300 Area cultural resource monitoring strategy are contained in the final section of this document. In general, it is recommended that monitoring continue for all projects located within 400 m of the Columbia River. The 400-m zone is culturally sensitive and likely retains some of the most intact buried substrates in the 300 Area.

  8. Waveguide disturbance detection method

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Korneev, Valeri A. (Albany, CA); Nihei, Kurt T. (Oakland, CA); Myer, Larry R. (Benicia, CA)

    2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A method for detection of a disturbance in a waveguide comprising transmitting a wavefield having symmetric and antisymmetric components from a horizontally and/or vertically polarized source and/or pressure source disposed symmetrically with respect to the longitudinal central axis of the waveguide at one end of the waveguide, recording the horizontal and/or vertical component or a pressure of the wavefield with a vertical array of receivers disposed at the opposite end of the waveguide, separating the wavenumber transform of the wavefield into the symmetric and antisymmetric components, integrating the symmetric and antisymmetric components over a broad frequency range, and comparing the magnitude of the symmetric components and the antisymmetric components to an expected magnitude for the symmetric components and the antisymmetric components for a waveguide of uniform thickness and properties thereby determining whether or not a disturbance is present inside the waveguide.

  9. Risk assessment for the Waste Technologies Industries (WTI) hazardous waste incineration facility (East Liverpool, Ohio). Volume 6. Screening ecological risk assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Screening Ecological Risk Assessment (SERA) includes an evaluation of available biotic information from the site vicinity to provide a preliminary description of potential ecological receptors (e.g., rare, threatened and endangered species; migratory birds; and important game species), and important ecological habitats (e.g., wetland areas). A conceptual site model is developed that describe show stressors associated with the WTI facility might affect the ecological components in the surrounding environment through the development and evaluation of specific ecological endpoints. Finally, an estimate of the potential for current and/or future adverse impacts to the biotic component of the environment is provided, based on the integration of potential exposures of ecological receptors to WTI emissions and toxicological threshold values.

  10. HAZARDOUS WASTE [Written Program

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pawlowski, Wojtek

    HAZARDOUS WASTE MANUAL [Written Program] Cornell University [10/7/13 #12;Hazardous Waste Program................................................... 8 3.0 MINIMIZING HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATION.........................................................10 4.0 HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATOR REQUIREMENTS.....................................................10

  11. Canister storage building hazard analysis report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    POWERS, T.B.

    1999-05-11T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the methodology used in conducting the Canister Storage Building (CSB) hazard analysis to support the CSB final safety analysis report (FSAR) and documents the results. The hazard analysis was performed in accordance with the DOE-STD-3009-94, ''Preparation Guide for US. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports'', and meets the intent of HNF-PRO-704, ''Hazard and Accident Analysis Process''. This hazard analysis implements the requirements of DOE Order 5480.23, ''Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports''.

  12. Technical basis document for natural event hazards

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CARSON, D.M.

    2003-08-28T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical basis document was developed to support the documented safety analysis (DSA) and describes the risk binning process and the technical basis for assigning risk bins for natural event hazard (NEH)-initiated accidents. The purpose of the risk binning process is to determine the need for safety-significant structures, systems, and components (SSC) and technical safety requirement (TSR)-level controls for a given representative accident or represented hazardous conditions based on an evaluation of the frequency and consequence. Note that the risk binning process is not applied to facility workers, because all facility worker hazardous conditions are considered for safety-significant SSCs and/or TSR-level controls This report documents the technical basis for assigning risk bins for Natural Event Hazards Representative Accident and associated represented hazardous conditions.

  13. Hanford surplus facilities programs facilities listings and descriptions. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kiser, S.K.; Witt, T.L.

    1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    On the Hanford Site, many surplus facilities exist (including buildings, stacks, tanks, cribs, burial grounds, and septic systems) that are scheduled to be decommissioned. Many of these facilities contain large inventories of radionuclides, which present potential radiological hazards on and off the Hanford Site. Some structures with limited structural deterioration present potential radiological and industrial safety hazards to personnel. Because of the condition of these facilities, a systematic surveillance and maintenance program is performed to identify and correct potential hazards to personnel and the environment until eventual decommissioning operations are completed.

  14. Technical basis document for natural event hazards

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CARSON, D.M.

    2003-03-20T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical basis document was developed to support the Tank Farms Documented Safety Analysis (DSA), and describes the risk binning process and the technical basis for assigning risk bins for natural event hazards (NEH)-initiated representative accident and associated represented hazardous conditions. The purpose of the risk binning process is to determine the need for safety-significant structures, systems, and components (SSC) and technical safety requirement (TSR)-level controls for a given representative accident or represented hazardous conditions based on an evaluation of the frequency and consequence. Note that the risk binning process is not applied to facility workers, because all facility worker hazardous conditions are considered for safety-significant SSCs and/or TSR-level controls. Determination of the need for safety-class SSCs was performed in accordance with DOE-STD-3009-94, ''Preparation Guide for US Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analyses'', as described in this report.

  15. Canister Storage Building (CSB) Hazard Analysis Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    POWERS, T.B.

    2000-03-16T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the methodology used in conducting the Canister Storage Building (CSB) Hazard Analysis to support the final CSB Safety Analysis Report and documents the results. This report describes the methodology used in conducting the Canister Storage Building (CSB) hazard analysis to support the CSB final safety analysis report (FSAR) and documents the results. The hazard analysis process identified hazardous conditions and material-at-risk, determined causes for potential accidents, identified preventive and mitigative features, and qualitatively estimated the frequencies and consequences of specific occurrences. The hazard analysis was performed by a team of cognizant CSB operations and design personnel, safety analysts familiar with the CSB, and technical experts in specialty areas. The material included in this report documents the final state of a nearly two-year long process. Attachment A provides two lists of hazard analysis team members and describes the background and experience of each. The first list is a complete list of the hazard analysis team members that have been involved over the two-year long process. The second list is a subset of the first list and consists of those hazard analysis team members that reviewed and agreed to the final hazard analysis documentation. The material included in this report documents the final state of a nearly two-year long process involving formal facilitated group sessions and independent hazard and accident analysis work. The hazard analysis process led to the selection of candidate accidents for further quantitative analysis. New information relative to the hazards, discovered during the accident analysis, was incorporated into the hazard analysis data in order to compile a complete profile of facility hazards. Through this process, the results of the hazard and accident analyses led directly to the identification of safety structures, systems, and components, technical safety requirements, and other controls required to protect the public, workers, and environment.

  16. Fire hazard analysis for the fuel supply shutdown storage buildings

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    REMAIZE, J.A.

    2000-09-27T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of a fire hazards analysis (FHA) is to comprehensively assess the risk from fire and other perils within individual fire areas in a DOE facility in relation to proposed fire protection so as to ascertain whether the objectives of DOE 5480.7A, Fire Protection, are met. This Fire Hazards Analysis was prepared as required by HNF-PRO-350, Fire Hazards Analysis Requirements, (Reference 7) for a portion of the 300 Area N Reactor Fuel Fabrication and Storage Facility.

  17. Health-hazard evaluation report HETA 91-338-2187, IMC Corporation, Sterlington, Louisiana

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kiefer, M.; Tepper, A.; Miller, R.

    1992-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In response to a request from an authorized representative of the Construction and General Laborers Union, Local 762, an investigation was made of potential hazards for asbestos abatement contract workers at IMC Corporation, (SIC-2869), Sterlington, Louisiana. The IMC facility consisted of two ammonia facilities, a nitroparaffin (NP) facility, and a NP derivatives facility. An explosion occurred on May 1, 1991 in the NP facility, caused by a faulty compressor. During the post explosion renovation activities, an asbestos abatement firm was working on site due to the large amounts of asbestos (1332214) insulation which had been disturbed by the explosion. Records indicated that several workers complained of ill effects and odors on June 17 and 19. The incidents were investigated but no chemical exposure explanation was found. Routine and complaint based industrial hygiene monitoring was primarily area monitoring and not substance specific. Of the 25 workers interviewed, 22 had symptoms they felt were related to their work at IMC. The symptoms included those of the upper respiratory tract, central nervous system, and gastrointestinal system. The most common included diarrhea, nausea, headache, dizziness, and cough, each experienced by significantly more than half the subjects. The symptoms could not be linked conclusively to any specific chemical release, job task, work location, or food or drink source.

  18. What is Hazardous Hazardous waste is

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    de Lijser, Peter

    What is Hazardous Waste? Hazardous waste is any product charac- terized or labeled as toxic may be harmful to human health and/ or the environment. Hazardous Waste Disposal EH&S x7233 E.calrecycle.ca.gov www.earth911.com Campus Hazardous Waste Roundup Roundups conducted the last week of: January April

  19. Office of Nuclear Safety Basis and Facility Design

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Office of Nuclear Safety Basis & Facility Design establishes safety basis and facility design requirements and expectations related to analysis and design of nuclear facilities to ensure protection of workers and the public from the hazards associated with nuclear operations.

  20. HAZARD COMMUNICATION PROGRAM The______________________________ Department has developed a Hazard Communication

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Zhang, Yuanlin

    HAZARD COMMUNICATION PROGRAM The______________________________ Department has developed a Hazard about chemical hazards and other hazardous substances via our comprehensive Hazard Communication Program. The Hazard Communication Program will include: WORKPLACE CHEMICAL LIST MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEETS CONTAINER

  1. Facility worker technical basis document

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SHULTZ, M.V.

    2003-08-28T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical basis document was developed to support the Tank Farm Documented Safety Analysis (DSA). It describes the criteria and methodology for allocating controls to hazardous conditions with significant facility work consequence and presents the results of the allocation.

  2. Hazardous and Radioactive Mixed Waste

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

    1982-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    To establish hazardous waste management procedures for facilities operated under authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA). The procedures will follow. to the extent practicable, regulations issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pursuant to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA). Although Department of Energy (DOE) operations conducted under authority other than the AEA are subject to EPA or State regulations conforming with RCRA, facilities administered under the authority of the AEA are not bound by such requirements.

  3. Canister storage building hazard analysis report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Krahn, D.E.; Garvin, L.J.

    1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the methodology used in conducting the Canister Storage Building (CSB) hazard analysis to support the final CSB safety analysis report (SAR) and documents the results. The hazard analysis was performed in accordance with DOE-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for US Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Report, and implements the requirements of DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Report.

  4. ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - Building 420

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

    interlocked 1, 7, 8 3104010202-00027 3104-00032 1, 6, 7, 8 NA NA NA A Standard service contract with ABB. Mechanical work is done by the contractor. ASD108400 Matching...

  5. ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - Building 413

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

    1110-00125 Power Supplies Hot Work Permits 6, 7 NA NA NA A ASD108400 GESPAC Power Supply Control Units 120 VAC Fans Fan blades covered 1, 7 Power Supplies Hot Work...

  6. ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - Building 382

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

    1 NA 6 NA NA NA A ESH108382 Manual and Automatic Welders Heat Visible arc Signage Welding curtains NA NA NA NA NA NA A ESH108382 Cleaning Tanks Irritants High temp Noise 1 NA...

  7. ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - Building 412

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

    by locked cabinet and mechanically bolted 1 Weekly RF Group cross-training 2504-00003 (Lockout Tagout Procedure) 6 NA NA NA A, B ASD108400 Harmonic PAR Tube Amplifiers (located...

  8. ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - Building 411

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

    Doors closed Signage 1 NA NA NA NA NA A ASD108400 Best Uninterupptable Power Supply (UPS) (Controls Group) 24VDC 120VAC Lifting 120VAC covered Doors closed Signage 1 NA 6, 7 NA...

  9. ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - Building 400

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

    Additional Safety Tool References DC Power Supplies DC voltages < 72 Volts DC currents < 450 Amps Lifting < 75 lbs Supplies mounted in NEMA enclosures Rack doors locked Power...

  10. Transporting Hazardous Materials

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

    Transporting Hazardous Materials The procedures given below apply to all materials that are considered to be hazardous by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). Consult your...

  11. 283-E and 283-W hazards assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sutton, L.N.

    1994-09-26T23:59:59.000Z

    This report documents the hazards assessment for the 200 area water treatment plants 283-E and 283-W located on the US DOE Hanford Site. Operation of the water treatment plants is the responsibility of ICF Kaiser Hanford Company (ICF KH). This hazards assessment was conducted to provide emergency planning technical basis for the water treatment plants. This document represents an acceptable interpretation of the implementing guidance document for DOE ORDER 5500.3A which requires an emergency planning hazards assessment for each facility that has the potential to reach or exceed the lowest level emergency classification.

  12. Hazardous waste operational plan for site 300

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Roberts, R.S.

    1982-02-12T23:59:59.000Z

    This plan outlines the procedures and operations used at LLNL's Site 300 for the management of the hazardous waste generated. This waste consists primarily of depleted uranium (a by-product of U-235 enrichment), beryllium, small quantities of analytical chemicals, industrial type waste such as solvents, cleaning acids, photographic chemicals, etc., and explosives. This plan details the operations generating this waste, the proper handling of this material and the procedures used to treat or dispose of the hazardous waste. A considerable amount of information found in this plan was extracted from the Site 300 Safety and Operational Manual written by Site 300 Facility personnel and the Hazards Control Department.

  13. Preliminary Hazards Analysis Plasma Hearth Process

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Aycock, M.; Coordes, D.; Russell, J.; TenBrook, W.; Yimbo, P. [Science Applications International Corp., Pleasanton, CA (United States)] [Science Applications International Corp., Pleasanton, CA (United States)

    1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Preliminary Hazards Analysis (PHA) for the Plasma Hearth Process (PHP) follows the requirements of United States Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5480.23 (DOE, 1992a), DOE Order 5480.21 (DOE, 1991d), DOE Order 5480.22 (DOE, 1992c), DOE Order 5481.1B (DOE, 1986), and the guidance provided in DOE Standards DOE-STD-1027-92 (DOE, 1992b). Consideration is given to ft proposed regulations published as 10 CFR 830 (DOE, 1993) and DOE Safety Guide SG 830.110 (DOE, 1992b). The purpose of performing a PRA is to establish an initial hazard categorization for a DOE nuclear facility and to identify those processes and structures which may have an impact on or be important to safety. The PHA is typically performed during and provides input to project conceptual design. The PRA then is followed by a Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR) performed during Title I and II design. This PSAR then leads to performance of the Final Safety Analysis Report performed during construction, testing, and acceptance and completed before routine operation. Radiological assessments indicate that a PHP facility, depending on the radioactive material inventory, may be an exempt, Category 3, or Category 2 facility. The calculated impacts would result in no significant impact to offsite personnel or the environment. Hazardous material assessments indicate that a PHP facility will be a Low Hazard facility having no significant impacts either onsite or offsite to personnel and the environment.

  14. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EMERGENCY RESPONSE

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    ANNEX Q HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EMERGENCY RESPONSE #12;ANNEX Q - HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EMERGENCY RESPONSE 03/10/2014 v.2.0 Page Q-1 PROMULGATION STATEMENT Annex Q: Hazardous Materials Emergency Response, and contents within, is a guide to how the University conducts a response specific to a hazardous materials

  15. Track 3: Exposure Hazards

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    ISM Workshop Presentations Knoxville Convention Center, Knoxville, TN August 2009 Track 3: Exposure Hazards

  16. Facility worker technical basis document

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    EVANS, C.B.

    2003-03-21T23:59:59.000Z

    This report documents the technical basis for facility worker safety to support the Tank Farms Documented Safety Analysis and described the criteria and methodology for allocating controls to hazardous conditions with significant facility worker consequences and presents the results of the allocation.

  17. Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket (docket). Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Federal Facilities Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket (``docket``) identifies Federal facilities that may be contaminated with hazardous substances and that must be evaluated to determine if they pose a risk to public health or the environment The docket, required by Section 120(c) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), also provides a vehicle for making information about potentially contaminated facilities available to the public. Facilities listed on the docket must complete site assessments that provide the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with information needed to determine whether or not the facility should be included on he National Priorities List (NPL). This Information Brief, which revises the previous Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compiliance Docket Information Brief, provides updated information on the docket listing process, the implications of listing, and facility status after listing.

  18. New Seismic Model Will Refine Hazard Analysis at U.S. Nuclear...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    States reassess seismic hazards. The Central and Eastern United States Seismic Source Characterization for Nuclear Facilities model and report is the culmination of a four-year...

  19. Mr. James Bearzi, Bureau Chief Hazardous Waste Bureau

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

    the request is complete and adequate in accordance with Section B4-3d of the Hazardous Waste Facility Permit for the WIPP. CCP requested a Scenario 3 determination for...

  20. Mr. John Kieling, Acting Chief Hazardous Materials Bureau

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

    Laboratory to certify waste in accordance with the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Hazardous Waste Facility Permit. The audit was conducted on June 7-9, 2011. I certify under...

  1. Mr. John Kieling, Acting Chief Hazardous Waste Bureau

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

    exceeded the 50 percent action level listed in Part 4, Table 4.6.3.2 of the WIPP Hazardous Waste Facility Permit (Permit). The carbon tetrachloride values for the eight...

  2. Mr. James Bearzi, Bureau Chief Hazardous Waste Bureau Departmen

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

    the request is complete and adequate in accordance with Section B4-3d of the Hazardous Waste Facility Permit for the WIPP . CCP requested a Scenario 3 determination for...

  3. Trends and Opportunities in Industrial Hazardous Waste Minimization

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Atlas, M.

    This paper describes trends and opportunities in Resource Conservation and Recovery Act hazardous waste minimization. It uses U.S. Environmental Protection Agency data gathered since 1989 from over 20,000 facilities that account for almost all...

  4. Fire hazards analysis for solid waste burial grounds

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McDonald, K.M.

    1995-09-28T23:59:59.000Z

    This document comprises the fire hazards analysis for the solid waste burial grounds, including TRU trenches, low-level burial grounds, radioactive mixed waste trenches, etc. It analyzes fire potential, and fire damage potential for these facilities. Fire scenarios may be utilized in future safety analysis work, or for increasing the understanding of where hazards may exist in the present operation.

  5. An OSHA based approach to safety analysis for nonradiological hazardous materials

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Yurconic, M.

    1992-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The PNL method for chemical hazard classification defines major hazards by means of a list of hazardous substances (or chemical groups) with associated trigger quantities. In addition, the functional characteristics of the facility being classified is also be factored into the classification. In this way, installations defined as major hazard will only be those which have the potential for causing very serious incidents both on and off site. Because of the diversity of operations involving chemicals, it may not be possible to restrict major hazard facilities to certain types of operations. However, this hazard classification method recognizes that in the industrial sector major hazards are most commonly associated with activities involving very large quantities of chemicals and inherently energetic processes. These include operations like petrochemical plants, chemical production, LPG storage, explosives manufacturing, and facilities which use chlorine, ammonia, or other highly toxic gases in bulk quantities. The basis for this methodology is derived from concepts used by OSHA in its proposed chemical process safety standard, the Dow Fire and Explosion Index Hazard Classification Guide, and the International Labor Office`s program on chemical safety. For the purpose of identifying major hazard facilities, this method uses two sorting criteria, (1) facility function and processes and (2) quantity of substances to identify facilities requiringclassification. Then, a measure of chemical energy potential (material factor) is used to identify high hazard class facilities.

  6. An OSHA based approach to safety analysis for nonradiological hazardous materials

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Yurconic, M.

    1992-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The PNL method for chemical hazard classification defines major hazards by means of a list of hazardous substances (or chemical groups) with associated trigger quantities. In addition, the functional characteristics of the facility being classified is also be factored into the classification. In this way, installations defined as major hazard will only be those which have the potential for causing very serious incidents both on and off site. Because of the diversity of operations involving chemicals, it may not be possible to restrict major hazard facilities to certain types of operations. However, this hazard classification method recognizes that in the industrial sector major hazards are most commonly associated with activities involving very large quantities of chemicals and inherently energetic processes. These include operations like petrochemical plants, chemical production, LPG storage, explosives manufacturing, and facilities which use chlorine, ammonia, or other highly toxic gases in bulk quantities. The basis for this methodology is derived from concepts used by OSHA in its proposed chemical process safety standard, the Dow Fire and Explosion Index Hazard Classification Guide, and the International Labor Office's program on chemical safety. For the purpose of identifying major hazard facilities, this method uses two sorting criteria, (1) facility function and processes and (2) quantity of substances to identify facilities requiringclassification. Then, a measure of chemical energy potential (material factor) is used to identify high hazard class facilities.

  7. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 11, 26632675, 2011 www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/11/2663/2011/

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Boyer, Edmond

    is responsible for studying the safety and hazards of abandoned mines. One of the main scientific aims- gan on new extraction facilities and the mine operator kindly agreed to collaborate on the experiment

  8. Environmental Health and Safety September 14, 2012 Version 2.4 UC Irvine Construction Related Hazardous Waste

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    George, Steven C.

    Hazardous Waste Scope Some construction related wastes are hazardous and require special handling. Examples Tritium Exit Signs Incorrect documentation, transportation, tracking and disposal of hazardous wastes can (UCOP) approved hazardous waste disposal facilities. EH&S will provide a qualified person to inspect

  9. TECHNICAL BASIS DOCUMENT FOR NATURAL EVENT HAZARDS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    KRIPPS, L.J.

    2006-07-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical basis document was developed to support the documented safety analysis (DSA) and describes the risk binning process and the technical basis for assigning risk bins for natural event hazard (NEH)-initiated accidents. The purpose of the risk binning process is to determine the need for safety-significant structures, systems, and components (SSC) and technical safety requirement (TSR)-level controls for a given representative accident or represented hazardous conditions based on an evaluation of the frequency and consequence. Note that the risk binning process is not applied to facility workers, because all facility worker hazardous conditions are considered for safety-significant SSCs and/or TSR-level controls.

  10. Advanced Materials Laboratory hazards assessment document

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnett, B.; Banda, Z.

    1995-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Department of Energy Order 55OO.3A requires facility-specific hazards assessments be prepared, maintained, and used for emergency planning purposes. This hazards assessment document describes the chemical and radiological hazards associated with the AML. The entire inventory was screened according to the potential airborne impact to onsite and offsite individuals. The air dispersion model, ALOHA, estimated pollutant concentrations downwind from the source of a release, taking into consideration the toxicological and physical characteristics of the release site, the atmospheric conditions, and the circumstances of the release. The greatest distance at which a postulated facility event will produce consequences exceeding the Early Severe Health Effects threshold is 23 meters. The highest emergency classification is a General Emergency. The Emergency Planning Zone is a nominal area that conforms to DOE boundaries and physical/jurisdictional boundaries such as fence lines and streets.

  11. Addressing concerns related to geologic hazards at the site of the proposed Transuranic Waste Facility , TA-63, Los Alamos National Laboratory: focus on the current Los Alamos Seismic Network earthquake catalog, proximity of identified seismic events to the proposed facility , and evaluation of prev

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Roberts, Peter M. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Schultz-Fellenz, Emily S. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Kelley, Richard E. [Los Alamos National Laboratory

    2012-04-02T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical paper presents the most recent and updated catalog of earthquakes measured by the Los Alamos Seismic Network at and around Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), with specific focus on the site of the proposed transuranic waste facility (TWF) at Technical Area 63 (TA-63). Any questions about the data presented herein, or about the Los Alamos Seismic Network, should be directed to the authors of this technical paper. LANL and the Los Alamos townsite sit atop the Pajarito Plateau, which is bounded on its western edge by the Pajarito fault system, a 35-mile-long system locally comprised of the down-to-the-east Pajarito fault (the master fault) and subsidiary down-to-the-west Rendija Canyon, Guaje Mountain, and Sawyer Canyon faults (Figure 1). This fault system forms the local active western margin of the Rio Grande rift near Los Alamos, and is potentially seismogenic (e.g., Gardner et al., 2001; Reneau et al., 2002; Lewis et al., 2009). The proposed TWF area at TA-63 is situated on an unnamed mesa in the north-central part of LANL between Twomile Canyon to the south, Ten Site Canyon to the north, and the headwaters of Canada del Buey to the east (Figure 2). The local bedrock is the Quaternary Bandelier Tuff, formed in two eruptive pulses from nearby Valles caldera, the eastern edge of which is located approximately 6.5 miles west-northwest of the technical area. The older member (Otowi Member) of the Bandelier Tuff has been dated at 1.61 Ma (Izett and Obradovich 1994). The younger member (Tshirege Member) of the Bandelier Tuff has been dated at 1.256 Ma (age from Phillips et al. 2007) and is widely exposed as the mesa-forming unit around Los Alamos. Several discrete cooling units comprise the Tshirege Member. Commonly accepted stratigraphic nomenclature for the Tshirege Member is described in detail by Broxton and Reneau (1995), Gardner et al. (2001), and Lewis et al. (2009). The Tshirege Member cooling unit exposed at the surface at TA-63 is Qbt3. Understanding the subtle differences between Tshirege Member cooling units and the nature of the contacts between cooling units is critical to identifying the presence or absence of faults associated with the Pajarito fault system on the Pajarito Plateau. The Los Alamos Seismic Network (LASN) continuously monitors local earthquake activity in the Los Alamos area in support of LANL's Seismic Hazards program. Seismic monitoring of LANL facilities is a requirement of DOE Order 420.1B (Facility Safety). LASN currently consists of nine permanent seismic instrument field stations that telemeter real-time sensitive ground motion data to a central recording facility. Four of these stations are located on LANL property, with three of those within 2.5 miles of TA-63. The other five stations are in remote locations in the Jemez Mountains, Valles Caldera, St Peters Dome, and the Caja del Rio plateau across the Rio Grande from the Los Alamos area. Local earthquakes are defined as those with locations within roughly 100 miles of Los Alamos. Plate 1 shows the current LASN station locations and all local earthquakes recorded from 1973 through 2011. During this time period, LASN has detected and recorded over 850 local earthquakes in north-central New Mexico. Over 650 of these were located within about 50 miles of Los Alamos, and roughly 60 were within 10 miles. The apparent higher density of earthquakes close to Los Alamos, relative to the rest of north-central New Mexico, is due largely to the fact that LASN is a sensitive local seismic network, recording many very small nearby events (magnitude less than 1.0) that are undetectable at greater distances.

  12. Modified hazard ranking system for sites with mixed radioactive and hazardous wastes. User manual.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hawley, K.A.; Peloquin, R.A.; Stenner, R.D.

    1986-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document describes both the original Hazard Ranking System and the modified Hazard Ranking System as they are to be used in evaluating the relative potential for uncontrolled hazardous substance facilities to cause human health or safety problems or ecological or environmental damage. Detailed instructions for using the mHRS/HRS computer code are provided, along with instructions for performing the calculations by hand. Uniform application of the ranking system will permit the DOE to identify those releases of hazardous substances that pose the greatest hazard to humans or the environment. However, the mHRS/HRS by itself cannot establish priorities for the allocation of funds for remedial action. The mHRS/HRS is a means for applying uniform technical judgment regarding the potential hazards presented by a facility relative to other facilities. It does not address the feasibility, desirability, or degree of cleanup required. Neither does it deal with the readiness or ability of a state to carry out such remedial action, as may be indicated, or to meet other conditions prescribed in CERCLA. 13 refs., 13 figs., 27 tabs.

  13. Sustainable System for Residual Hazards Management

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kevin M. Kostelnik; James H. Clarke; Jerry L. Harbour

    2004-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Hazardous, radioactive and other toxic substances have routinely been generated and subsequently disposed of in the shallow subsurface throughout the world. Many of today’s waste management techniques do not eliminate the problem, but rather only concentrate or contain the hazardous contaminants. Residual hazards result from the presence of hazardous and/or contaminated material that remains on-site following active operations or the completion of remedial actions. Residual hazards pose continued risk to humans and the environment and represent a significant and chronic problem that require continuous longterm management (i.e. >1000 years). To protect human health and safeguard the natural environment, a sustainable system is required for the proper management of residual hazards. A sustainable system for the management of residual hazards will require the integration of engineered, institutional and land-use controls to isolate residual contaminants and thus minimize the associated hazards. Engineered controls are physical modifications to the natural setting and ecosystem, including the site, facility, and/or the residual materials themselves, in order to reduce or eliminate the potential for exposure to contaminants of concern (COCs). Institutional controls are processes, instruments, and mechanisms designed to influence human behavior and activity. System failure can involve hazardous material escaping from the confinement because of system degradation (i.e., chronic or acute degradation) or by externalintrusion of the biosphere into the contaminated material because of the loss of institutional control. An ongoing analysis of contemporary and historic sites suggests that the significance of the loss of institutional controls is a critical pathway because decisions made during the operations/remedial action phase, as well as decisions made throughout the residual hazards management period, are key to the longterm success of the prescribed system. In fact, given that society has become more reliant on and confident of engineered controls, there may be a growing tendency to be even less concerned with institutional controls.

  14. Georgia Hazardous Waste Management Act

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Georgia Hazardous Waste Management Act (HWMA) describes a comprehensive, Statewide program to manage hazardous wastes through regulating hazardous waste generation, transportation, storage,...

  15. Climate Change and Forest Disturbances

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Dale, Virginia H.; Joyce, Linda A.; McNulty, Steve; Neilson, Ronald P.; Ayres, Matthew P.; Flannigan, Michael D.; Hanson, Paul J.; Irland, Lloyd C.; Lugo, Ariel E.; Peterson, Chris J.; Simberloff, Daniel; Swanson, Frederick J.; Stocks, Brian J.; Wotton, B. Michael; Peterson, A. Townsend

    2001-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    of disturbances caused by climate change (e.g., Ojima et al. 1991).Yet modeling studies indicate the im- portance of climate effects on disturbance regimes (He et al. 1999). Local, regional, and global changes in temperature and precipitation can influence... circulation models (GCMs)—one de- veloped by the Hadley Center in the United Kingdom (HADCM2SUL) and one by the Canadian Climate Center (CGCM1)—have been selected for this national assessment (MacCracken et al. 2000). These transient GCMs simulate at...

  16. Hazardous Waste Management (Arkansas)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Hazardous Waste Program is carried out by the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality which administers its' program under the Hazardous Waste management Act (Arkansas Code Annotated 8-7...

  17. Hazardous Waste Management (Delaware)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The act authorizes the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environment Control (DNREC) to regulate hazardous waste and create a program to manage sources of hazardous waste. The act...

  18. Hazardous constituent source term. Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-11-17T23:59:59.000Z

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has several facilities that either generate and/or store transuranic (TRU)-waste from weapons program research and production. Much of this waste also contains hazardous waste constituents as regulated under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Toxicity characteristic metals in the waste principally include lead, occurring in leaded rubber gloves and shielding. Other RCRA metals may occur as contaminants in pyrochemical salt, soil, debris, and sludge and solidified liquids, as well as in equipment resulting from decontamination and decommissioning activities. Volatile organic compounds (VOCS) contaminate many waste forms as a residue adsorbed on surfaces or occur in sludge and solidified liquids. Due to the presence of these hazardous constituents, applicable disposal regulations include land disposal restrictions established by Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA). The DOE plans to dispose of TRU-mixed waste from the weapons program in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) by demonstrating no-migration of hazardous constituents. This paper documents the current technical basis for methodologies proposed to develop a post-closure RCRA hazardous constituent source term. For the purposes of demonstrating no-migration, the hazardous constituent source term is defined as the quantities of hazardous constituents that are available for transport after repository closure. Development of the source term is only one of several activities that will be involved in the no-migration demonstration. The demonstration will also include uncertainty and sensitivity analyses of contaminant transport.

  19. Hazard Analysis Database report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Niemi, B.J.

    1997-08-12T23:59:59.000Z

    This document describes and defines the Hazard Analysis Database for the Tank Waste Remediation System Final Safety Analysis Report.

  20. Hazard analysis results report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Niemi, B.J., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

    This document describes and defines the Hazard Analysis Results for the Tank Waste Remediation System Final Safety Analysis Report.

  1. WEATHER HAZARDS Basic Climatology

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Prediction Center (SPC) Watch Atmospheric conditions are right for hazardous weather ­ hazardous weather is likely to occur Issued by SPC Warning Hazardous weather is either imminent or occurring Issued by local NWS office #12;Outlooks--SPC Storm Prediction Center (SPC) Outlook=Convective Outlook Day 1 Day 2

  2. Hazardous Waste Management Training

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Dai, Pengcheng

    records. The initial training of Hazardous Waste Management and Waste Minimization is done in a classHazardous Waste Management Training Persons (including faculty, staff and students) working before handling hazardous waste. Departments are re- quired to keep records of training for as long

  3. Hazardous waste shipment data collection from DOE sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Page, L.A.; Kirkpatrick, T.D. (Idaho National Engineering Lab., Idaho Falls, ID (United States)); Stevens, L. (USDOE, Washington, DC (United States))

    1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Past practices at the US Department of Energy (DOE) sites for offsite release of hazardous waste are being reviewed to determine if radioactively contaminated hazardous wastes were released to commercial treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. Records indicating the presence of radioactivity in waste shipped to and treated at a commercial incineration facility led to a ban on offsite hazardous waste shipments and investigation of past practices for offsite release of hazardous waste from the DOE sites. A House of Representatives Interior and Insular Affairs Committee oversight hearing on potentially contaminated waste shipments to commercial facilities concluded that the main issue was the lack of a uniform national standard to govern disposal of mixed waste.

  4. Hazardous waste shipment data collection from DOE sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Page, L.A.; Kirkpatrick, T.D. [Idaho National Engineering Lab., Idaho Falls, ID (United States); Stevens, L. [USDOE, Washington, DC (United States)

    1992-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    Past practices at the US Department of Energy (DOE) sites for offsite release of hazardous waste are being reviewed to determine if radioactively contaminated hazardous wastes were released to commercial treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. Records indicating the presence of radioactivity in waste shipped to and treated at a commercial incineration facility led to a ban on offsite hazardous waste shipments and investigation of past practices for offsite release of hazardous waste from the DOE sites. A House of Representatives Interior and Insular Affairs Committee oversight hearing on potentially contaminated waste shipments to commercial facilities concluded that the main issue was the lack of a uniform national standard to govern disposal of mixed waste.

  5. Disturbance Rejection for Nonlinear Systems Zongxuan Sun

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tsao, Tsu-Chin

    Disturbance Rejection for Nonlinear Systems Zongxuan Sun Research and Development Center General result for a class of minimum phase nonlinear systems with linear disturbances. Sun and Tsao (1999, 2001

  6. Safety of magnetic fusion facilities: Requirements

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Standard identifies safety requirements for magnetic fusion facilities. Safety functions are used to define outcomes that must be achieved to ensure that exposures to radiation, hazardous materials, or other hazards are maintained within acceptable limits. Requirements applicable to magnetic fusion facilities have been derived from Federal law, policy, and other documents. In addition to specific safety requirements, broad direction is given in the form of safety principles that are to be implemented and within which safety can be achieved.

  7. WHC natural phenomena hazards mitigation implementation plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Conrads, T.J.

    1996-09-11T23:59:59.000Z

    Natural phenomena hazards (NPH) are unexpected acts of nature which pose a threat or danger to workers, the public or to the environment. Earthquakes, extreme winds (hurricane and tornado),snow, flooding, volcanic ashfall, and lightning strike are examples of NPH at Hanford. It is the policy of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to design, construct and operate DOE facilitiesso that workers, the public and the environment are protected from NPH and other hazards. During 1993 DOE, Richland Operations Office (RL) transmitted DOE Order 5480.28, ``Natural Phenomena Hazards Mitigation,`` to Westinghouse Hanford COmpany (WHC) for compliance. The Order includes rigorous new NPH criteria for the design of new DOE facilities as well as for the evaluation and upgrade of existing DOE facilities. In 1995 DOE issued Order 420.1, ``Facility Safety`` which contains the same NPH requirements and invokes the same applicable standards as Order 5480.28. It will supersede Order 5480.28 when an in-force date for Order 420.1 is established through contract revision. Activities will be planned and accomplished in four phases: Mobilization; Prioritization; Evaluation; and Upgrade. The basis for the graded approach is the designation of facilities/structures into one of five performance categories based upon safety function, mission and cost. This Implementation Plan develops the program for the Prioritization Phase, as well as an overall strategy for the implemention of DOE Order 5480.2B.

  8. Verification of Readiness to Start Up or Restart Nuclear Facilities

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

    2010-04-16T23:59:59.000Z

    The order establishes requirements for verifying readiness for startup of new Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities, activities, and operations, and for restart of existing Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities, activities, and operations that have been shut down. Cancels DOE O 425.1C. Adm Chg 1, dated 4-2-13.

  9. Facility effluent monitoring plan for the plutonium uranium extraction facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wiegand, D.L.

    1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A facility effluent monitoring plan is required by the US Department of Energy in DOE Order 5400.1 for any operations that involve hazardous materials and radioactive substances that could impact employee or public safety or the environment. This document is prepared using the specific guidelines identified in A Guide for Preparing Hanford Site Facility Effluent Monitoring Plans, WHC-EP-0438-01. This facility effluent monitoring plan assesses effluent monitoring systems and evaluates whether they are adequate to ensure the public health and safety as specified in applicable federal, state, and local requirements. This facility effluent monitoring plan shall ensure long-range integrity of the effluent monitoring systems by requiring an update whenever a new process or operation introduces new hazardous materials or significant radioactive materials. This document must be reviewed annually even if there are no operational changes, and it must be updated at a minimum of every three years.

  10. Facility effluent monitoring plan for the Plutonium Uranium Extraction Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Greager, E.M.

    1997-12-11T23:59:59.000Z

    A facility effluent monitoring plan is required by the US Department of Energy in DOE Order 5400.1 for any operations that involve hazardous materials and radioactive substances that could impact employee or public safety or the environment. This document is prepared using the specific guidelines identified in A Guide for Preparing Hanford Site Facility Effluent Monitoring Plans, WHC-EP-0438-01. This facility effluent monitoring plan assesses effluent monitoring systems and evaluates whether these systems are adequate to ensure the public health and safety as specified in applicable federal, state, and local requirements. This facility effluent monitoring plan will ensure long-range integrity of the effluent monitoring systems by requiring an update whenever a new process or operation introduces new hazardous materials or significant radioactive materials. This document must be reviewed annually even if there are no operational changes, and it must be updated, at a minimum, every 3 years.

  11. CONTROLLABILITY MEASURES FOR DISTURBANCE Sigurd Skogestad

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Skogestad, Sigurd

    of combined disturbances in the frequency domain using the singular value decomposition. Skogestad and MorariCONTROLLABILITY MEASURES FOR DISTURBANCE REJECTION Sigurd Skogestad and Erik A. Wol Chemical-in" disturbance rejection capabilities than others, that is, their dynamic resilience controllability with respect

  12. Adaptive Rejection of Narrow Band Disturbance in Hard Disk Drives

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Zheng, Qixing

    2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    of attenuating low frequency disturbances. There are several0 Hz to reject low frequency disturbances, but the resultingattenuation at the disturbance frequency. We can also notice

  13. Hazardous Wastes Management (Alabama)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This legislation gives regulatory authority to the Department of Environmental Management to monitor commercial sites for hazardous wastes; fees on waste received at such sites; hearings and...

  14. Safety Hazards of Batteries

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

    Safety Hazards of Batteries Battery technology is at the heart of much of our technological revolution. One of the most prevalent rechargeable batteries in use today is the...

  15. Radiation Hazards Program (Minnesota)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These regulations, promulgated by the Department of Health, set allowable radiation standards and mitigation practices, as well as procedures for the transportation of hazardous material.

  16. Modified Hazard Ranking System/Hazard Ranking System for sites with mixed radioactive and hazardous wastes: Software documentation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stenner, R.D.; Peloquin, R.A.; Hawley, K.A.

    1986-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The mHRS/HRS software package was developed by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) under contract with the Department of Energy (DOE) to provide a uniform method for DOE facilities to use in performing their Conservation Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) Phase I Modified Hazard Ranking System or Hazard Ranking System evaluations. The program is designed to remove the tedium and potential for error associated with the performing of hand calculations and the interpreting of information on tables and in reference books when performing an evaluation. The software package is designed to operate on a microcomputer (IBM PC, PC/XT, or PC/AT, or a compatible system) using either a dual floppy disk drive or a hard disk storage system. It is written in the dBASE III language and operates using the dBASE III system. Although the mHRS/HRS software package was developed for use at DOE facilities, it has direct applicability to the performing of CERCLA Phase I evaluations for any facility contaminated by hazardous waste. The software can perform evaluations using either the modified hazard ranking system methodology developed by DOE/PNL, the hazard ranking system methodology developed by EPA/MITRE Corp., or a combination of the two. This document is a companion manual to the mHRS/HRS user manual. It is intended for the programmer who must maintain the software package and for those interested in the computer implementation. This manual documents the system logic, computer programs, and data files that comprise the package. Hardware and software implementation requirements are discussed. In addition, hand calculations of three sample situations (problems) with associated computer runs used for the verification of program calculations are included.

  17. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Hazardous materials can be silent killers.

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Shinozuka, Masanobu

    HAZARDOUS MATERIALS #12;Hazardous materials can be silent killers. Almost every household they may be found, and what to do, or not do, about hazardous material spills. #12;Ways that hazardous or eyes · Ingestion; swallowing · Injection; penetrating skin #12;The key to dealing with hazardous

  18. Chapter 1 -Hazard Communication Hazard Communication and Training Act

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    and Training Act require employers to inform workers about hazardous chemicals in their work areas13 Chapter 1 - Hazard Communication Hazard Communication and Training Act The Hazard Communication and Safety (EH&S) to administer a program to comply with this law. Hazardous Chemicals Index EH&S maintains

  19. FACILITY WORKER TECHNICAL BASIS DOCUMENT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SHULTZ, M.V.

    2005-03-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical basis document was developed to support RPP-13033, ''Tank Farms Documented Safety Analysis (DSA). It describes the criteria and methodology for allocating controls to hazardous conditions with significant facility worker (FW) consequence and presents the results of the allocation. The criteria and methodology for identifying controls that address FW safety are in accordance with DOE-STD-3009-94, ''Preparation Guide for US Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analyses''.

  20. Repository Subsurface Preliminary Fire Hazard Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Richard C. Logan

    2001-07-30T23:59:59.000Z

    This fire hazard analysis identifies preliminary design and operations features, fire, and explosion hazards, and provides a reasonable basis to establish the design requirements of fire protection systems during development and emplacement phases of the subsurface repository. This document follows the Technical Work Plan (TWP) (CRWMS M&O 2001c) which was prepared in accordance with AP-2.21Q, ''Quality Determinations and Planning for Scientific, Engineering, and Regulatory Compliance Activities''; Attachment 4 of AP-ESH-008, ''Hazards Analysis System''; and AP-3.11Q, ''Technical Reports''. The objective of this report is to establish the requirements that provide for facility nuclear safety and a proper level of personnel safety and property protection from the effects of fire and the adverse effects of fire-extinguishing agents.

  1. Enterprise Assessments Operational Awareness Record for the Review of the Hanford Site Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Low-Activity Facility Wide Draft Hazard Analysis Report Â… June 2015

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

  2. Enterprise Assessments Operational Awareness Record for the Review of the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant High-Level Waste Facility Concentrate Receipt/Melter Feed/Glass Formers Reagent Hazards Analysis Event Tables Â… June 2015

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

  3. Hazard Communication at Purdue University

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Holland, Jeffrey

    Hazard Communication at Purdue University Radiological and Environmental Management Written APPENDICES A OSHA Health Hazard Definitions B OSHA Method Of Hazard Determination C Expanded List Completed Work Area Forms HCP-4, HCP-5, HCP-8 I Health Hazard Warning Information 1. Health Hazard Rating 2

  4. Effect of sample disturbance in opalinus clay shales

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pei, Jianyong, 1975-

    2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The sample disturbance problem for different geomaterials is reviewed in this thesis. A general discussion on the disturbance sources and complexities of the disturbance problem is followed by detailed reviews on disturbance ...

  5. Natural phenomena hazards site characterization criteria

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The criteria and recommendations in this standard shall apply to site characterization for the purpose of mitigating Natural Phenomena Hazards (wind, floods, landslide, earthquake, volcano, etc.) in all DOE facilities covered by DOE Order 5480.28. Criteria for site characterization not related to NPH are not included unless necessary for clarification. General and detailed site characterization requirements are provided in areas of meteorology, hydrology, geology, seismology, and geotechnical studies.

  6. Compressed Gas Safety for Experimental Fusion Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lee C. Cadwallader

    2004-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Experimental fusion facilities present a variety of hazards to the operators and staff. There are unique or specialized hazards, including magnetic fields, cryogens, radio frequency emissions, and vacuum reservoirs. There are also more general industrial hazards, such as a wide variety of electrical power, pressurized air, and cooling water systems in use, there are crane and hoist loads, working at height, and handling compressed gas cylinders. This paper outlines the projectile hazard assoicated with compressed gas cylinders and mthods of treatment to provide for compressed gas safety. This information should be of interest to personnel at both magnetic and inertial fusion experiments.

  7. Compressed Gas Safety for Experimental Fusion Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cadwallader, L.C. [Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (United States)

    2005-05-15T23:59:59.000Z

    Experimental fusion facilities present a variety of hazards to the operators and staff. There are unique or specialized hazards, including magnetic fields, cryogens, radio frequency emissions, and vacuum reservoirs. There are also more general industrial hazards, such as a wide variety of electrical power, pressurized air and cooling water systems in use, there are crane and hoist loads, working at height, and handling compressed gas cylinders. This paper outlines the projectile hazard associated with compressed gas cylinders and methods of treatment to provide for compressed gas safety. This information should be of interest to personnel at both magnetic and inertial fusion experiments.

  8. Pulse homodyne field disturbance sensor

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    McEwan, T.E.

    1997-10-28T23:59:59.000Z

    A field disturbance sensor operates with relatively low power, provides an adjustable operating range, is not hypersensitive at close range, allows co-location of multiple sensors, and is inexpensive to manufacture. The sensor includes a transmitter that transmits a sequence of transmitted bursts of electromagnetic energy. The transmitter frequency is modulated at an intermediate frequency. The sequence of bursts has a burst repetition rate, and each burst has a burst width and comprises a number of cycles at a transmitter frequency. The sensor includes a receiver which receives electromagnetic energy at the transmitter frequency, and includes a mixer which mixes a transmitted burst with reflections of the same transmitted burst to produce an intermediate frequency signal. Circuitry, responsive to the intermediate frequency signal indicates disturbances in the sensor field. Because the mixer mixes the transmitted burst with reflections of the transmitted burst, the burst width defines the sensor range. The burst repetition rate is randomly or pseudo-randomly modulated so that bursts in the sequence of bursts have a phase which varies. A second range-defining mode transmits two radio frequency bursts, where the time spacing between the bursts defines the maximum range divided by two. 12 figs.

  9. Pulse homodyne field disturbance sensor

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    McEwan, Thomas E. (Livermore, CA)

    1997-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A field disturbance sensor operates with relatively low power, provides an adjustable operating range, is not hypersensitive at close range, allows co-location of multiple sensors, and is inexpensive to manufacture. The sensor includes a transmitter that transmits a sequence of transmitted bursts of electromagnetic energy. The transmitter frequency is modulated at an intermediate frequency. The sequence of bursts has a burst repetition rate, and each burst has a burst width and comprises a number of cycles at a transmitter frequency. The sensor includes a receiver which receives electromagnetic energy at the transmitter frequency, and includes a mixer which mixes a transmitted burst with reflections of the same transmitted burst to produce an intermediate frequency signal. Circuitry, responsive to the intermediate frequency signal indicates disturbances in the sensor field. Because the mixer mixes the transmitted burst with reflections of the transmitted burst, the burst width defines the sensor range. The burst repetition rate is randomly or pseudo-randomly modulated so that bursts in the sequence of bursts have a phase which varies. A second range-defining mode transmits two radio frequency bursts, where the time spacing between the bursts defines the maximum range divided by two.

  10. NGNP SITE 2 HAZARDS ASSESSMENT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wayne Moe

    2011-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Project initiated at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) by the U.S. Department of Energy pursuant to the 2005 Energy Policy Act, is based on research and development activities supported by the Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems Initiative. The principal objective of the NGNP Project is to support commercialization of the high temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR) technology. The HTGR is a helium-cooled and graphite-moderated reactor that can operate at temperatures much higher than those of conventional light water reactor (LWR) technologies. Accordingly, it can be applied in many industrial applications as a substitute for burning fossil fuels, such as natural gas, to generate process heat in addition to producing electricity, which is the principal application of current LWRs. Nuclear energy in the form of LWRs has been used in the U.S. and internationally principally for the generation of electricity. However, because the HTGR operates at higher temperatures than LWRs, it can be used to displace the use of fossil fuels in many industrial applications. It also provides a carbon emission-free energy supply. For example, the energy needs for the recovery and refining of petroleum, for the petrochemical industry and for production of transportation fuels and feedstocks using coal conversion processes require process heat provided at temperatures approaching 800 C. This temperature range is readily achieved by the HTGR technology. This report summarizes a site assessment authorized by INL under the NGNP Project to determine hazards and potential challenges that site owners and HTGR designers need to be aware of when developing the HTGR design for co-location at industrial facilities, and to evaluate the site for suitability considering certain site characteristics. The objectives of the NGNP site hazard assessments are to do an initial screening of representative sites in order to identify potential challenges and restraints to be addressed in design and licensing processes; assure the HTGR technology can be deployed at variety of sites for a range of applications; evaluate potential sites for potential hazards and describe some of the actions necessary to mitigate impacts of hazards; and, provide key insights that can inform the plant design process. The report presents a summary of the process methodology and the results of an assessment of hazards typical of a class of candidate sites for the potential deployment of HTGR reactor technology. The assessment considered health and safety, and other important siting characteristics to determine the potential impact of identified hazards and potential challenges presented by the location for this technology. A four reactor module nuclear plant (2000 to 2400 MW thermal), that co-generates steam, electricity for general use in the plant, and hot gas for use in a nearby chemical processing facility, to provide the requisite performance and reliability was assumed for the assessment.

  11. Facility effluent monitoring plan for the tank farm facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Crummel, G.M.

    1998-05-18T23:59:59.000Z

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

  12. Risk assessment for the Waste Technologies Industries (WTI) hazardous waste incineration facility (East Liverpool, Ohio). Volume 5. Human health risk assessment; evaluation of potential risks from multipathway exposure to emissions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The report provide estimates of: (1) individual risks based on central tendency exposure; (2) individual risks based on maximum environmental concentrations; (3) risks to highly exposed or susceptible subgroups of the population (e.g., subsistence farmers and school children); (4) risks associated with specific activities that may result in elevated exposures (e.g., subsistence fishermen and deer hunters); and (5) population risk. This approach allows for the estimation of risks to specific segments of the population taking into consideration activity patterns, number of individuals, and actual locations of individuals in these subgroups with respect to the facility. The fate and transport modeling of emissions from the facility to estimate exposures to identified subgroups is described.

  13. LANSCE | Facilities

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

    LINAC Outreach Affiliations Visiting LANSCE Facilities Isotope Production Facility Lujan Neutron Scattering Center MaRIE Proton Radiography Ultracold Neutrons Weapons Neutron...

  14. Hazardous Waste Management (New Mexico)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The New Mexico Environment Department's Hazardous Waste Bureau is responsible for the management of hazardous waste in the state. The Bureau enforces the rules established by the Environmental...

  15. Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act (Pennsylvania)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This Act tasks the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection with regulating hazardous waste. The department is charged with siting, review, permitting and development of hazardous waste...

  16. INL Reactor Technology Complex Out-of-Service Buried Piping Hazards

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Douglas M. Gerstner

    2008-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Reactor Technology Complex (RTC) buried piping and components are being characterized to determine if they should be managed as hazardous waste and subject to the Hazardous Waste Management Act /Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). RTC buried piping and components involve both active piping and components from currently operating nuclear facilities, such as the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR), and inactive lines from facilities undergoing D&D activities. The issue exists as to the proper methods to analyze and control hazards associated with D&D activities on facilities collocated with existing operating nuclear facilities, or future collocated facilities being considered with the resurgent nuclear industry. During initial characterization activities, it was determined that residual radioactive material in several inactive RTC lines and components could potentially exceed hazard category (HC) 3 thresholds. In addition, concerns were raised as to how to properly isolate active nuclear facility piping and components from those inactive lines undergoing RCRA actions, and whether the operating facility safety basis could be impacted. Work was stopped, and a potential inadequacy in the safety analysis (PISA) was declared, even though no clear safety basis existed for the inactive, abandoned lines and equipment. An unreviewed safety question (USQ) and an occurrence report resulted. A HC 3 or greater Nuclear Facility/Activity for the buried piping and components was also declared in the occurrence report. A qualitative hazard assessment was developed to evaluate the potential hazards associated with characterization activities, and any potential effects on the safety basis of the collocated RTC operating nuclear facilities. The hazard assessment clearly demonstrated the low hazards associated with the activities based on form and dispersiblity of the radioactive material in the piping and components. The hazard assessment developed unique controls to isolate active RTC piping and components from inactive components, and demonstrated that existing safety management programs were adequate for protection of the worker.

  17. THE NOAA HAZARDOUS WEATHER TESTBED: COLLABORATIVE TESTING OF ENSEMBLE AND CONVECTION-ALLOWING WRF MODELS AND SUBSEQUENT

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Xue, Ming

    THE NOAA HAZARDOUS WEATHER TESTBED: COLLABORATIVE TESTING OF ENSEMBLE AND CONVECTION-ALLOWING WRF NOAA's Hazardous Weather Testbed (HWT) is a joint facility managed by the National Severe Storms and technologies into advances in forecasting and warning for hazardous mesoscale weather events throughout

  18. Fire Hazards Analysis for the 200 Area Interim Storage Area

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    JOHNSON, D.M.

    2000-01-06T23:59:59.000Z

    This documents the Fire Hazards Analysis (FHA) for the 200 Area Interim Storage Area. The Interim Storage Cask, Rad-Vault, and NAC-1 Cask are analyzed for fire hazards and the 200 Area Interim Storage Area is assessed according to HNF-PRO-350 and the objectives of DOE Order 5480 7A. This FHA addresses the potential fire hazards associated with the Interim Storage Area (ISA) facility in accordance with the requirements of DOE Order 5480 7A. It is intended to assess the risk from fire to ensure there are no undue fire hazards to site personnel and the public and to ensure property damage potential from fire is within acceptable limits. This FHA will be in the form of a graded approach commensurate with the complexity of the structure or area and the associated fire hazards.

  19. NORTH AMERICAN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL: Preliminary Disturbance...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Preliminary Disturbance Report The following information represents a partial sequence of events based upon Reliability Coordinator information available to NERC. It is not...

  20. Hazard Communication Site Specific Information Sheet Hazard Communication Program (HCP)

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Slatton, Clint

    Hazard Communication Site Specific Information Sheet Hazard Communication Program (HCP) Site Specific Information The responsible party for a unit/area should complete this section to make the Hazard Communication Program site specific. The responsible party will ensure that the Hazard Communication Program

  1. Hazardous Waste Management (Michigan)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    A person shall not generate, dispose, store, treat, or transport hazardous waste in this state without complying with the requirements of this article. The department, in the conduct of its duties...

  2. Hazardous Waste Management (Oklahoma)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This article states regulations for the disposal of hazardous waste. It also provides information about permit requirements for the transport, treatment and storage of such waste. It also mentions...

  3. 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,...

  4. Automated Job Hazards Analysis

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    AJHA Program - The Automated Job Hazard Analysis (AJHA) computer program is part of an enhanced work planning process employed at the Department of Energy's Hanford worksite. The AJHA system is routinely used to performed evaluations for medium and high risk work, and in the development of corrective maintenance work packages at the site. The tool is designed to ensure that workers are fully involved in identifying the hazards, requirements, and controls associated with tasks.

  5. HAZARD ANALYSIS SOFTWARE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sommer, S; Tinh Tran, T

    2008-04-08T23:59:59.000Z

    Washington Safety Management Solutions, LLC developed web-based software to improve the efficiency and consistency of hazard identification and analysis, control selection and classification, and to standardize analysis reporting at Savannah River Site. In the new nuclear age, information technology provides methods to improve the efficiency of the documented safety analysis development process which includes hazard analysis activities. This software provides a web interface that interacts with a relational database to support analysis, record data, and to ensure reporting consistency. A team of subject matter experts participated in a series of meetings to review the associated processes and procedures for requirements and standard practices. Through these meetings, a set of software requirements were developed and compiled into a requirements traceability matrix from which software could be developed. The software was tested to ensure compliance with the requirements. Training was provided to the hazard analysis leads. Hazard analysis teams using the software have verified its operability. The software has been classified as NQA-1, Level D, as it supports the analysis team but does not perform the analysis. The software can be transported to other sites with alternate risk schemes. The software is being used to support the development of 14 hazard analyses. User responses have been positive with a number of suggestions for improvement which are being incorporated as time permits. The software has enforced a uniform implementation of the site procedures. The software has significantly improved the efficiency and standardization of the hazard analysis process.

  6. Optimal Plant Shaping for High Bandwidth Disturbance Rejection in Discrete Disturbance Observers

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Mofrad, Mohammad R. K.

    Chen and Masayoshi Tomizuka Abstract-- The Q-filter cut-off frequency in a Disturbance Observer (DOB to a small value. From the disturbance rejection point of view, the higher the cut-off frequency c@me.berkeley.edu robust compensator to attenuate the low frequency disturbance and to provide the required robust perfor

  7. State of Colorado Wildfire Hazard

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    State of Colorado Wildfire Hazard Mitigation Plan Colorado Multi-Hazards Mitigation Plan July 2002 and importance of the August 1995 Wildfire Hazard Mitigation Plan and its predecessors as foundation documents on which to build and judge progress in wildfire hazard mitigation. The text version of the 1995 Plan

  8. Hazardous Working Policy November 2012

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Doran, Simon J.

    for: The management of University workers performing hazardous tasks or working in hazardous areas;2 Hazardous Areas: are areas where a University worker may be exposed to risks that are considered greater1 Hazardous Working Policy November 2012 Introduction The University of Surrey acknowledges

  9. HAZARDOUS WASTE LABEL DEPAUL UNIVERSITY

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Schaefer, Marcus

    - Hazardous Ignitable Reactive Toxic Oxidizer Other ( explain ) Generator Building Dept. HAZARDOUS WASTE LABEL: Generator Building Dept. Please fill out the hazardous waste label on line and download labels on to a plainHAZARDOUS WASTE LABEL DEPAUL UNIVERSITY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH & SAFETY 5-4170 Corrosive Non

  10. WORKPLACE HAZARD ASSESSMENT Location: Task

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Rubloff, Gary W.

    /Eyes Hands Foot Body 7. THERMAL HAZARD DOES NOT EXIST DOES EXIST SOURCE OF HAZARD Welding Brazing Furnace/NON-IONIZING RADIATION HAZARD DOES NOT EXIST DOES EXIST SOURCE OF HAZARD Heat Treating Brazing Welding Oxygen Cutting Laser High Intensity Lighting Body Part Affected Head Face/Eyes Hands Foot Body #12;

  11. 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.

  12. Facility effluent monitoring plan for 242-A evaporator facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A facility effluent monitoring plan is required by the U.S. Department of Energy in DOE Order 5400.1 for any operations that involve hazardous materials and radioactive substances that could affect employee or public safety or the environment. A facility effluent monitoring plan determination was performed during Calendar Year 1991 and the evaluation showed the need for a facility effluent monitoring plan. This document is prepared using the specific guidelines identified in A Guide for Preparing Hanford Site Facility Effluent Monitoring Plans, WHC-EP-0438-1. This facility effluent monitoring plan assesses effluent monitoring systems and evaluates whether they are adequate to ensure the public health and safety as specified in applicable federal, state, and local requirements. This facility effluent monitoring plan shall ensure long-range integrity of the effluent monitoring systems by requiring an update whenever a new process or operation introduces new hazardous materials or significant radioactive materials. This document must be reviewed annually even if there are no operational changes, and it must be updated, as a minimum, every three years.

  13. Site maps and facilities listings

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In September 1989, a Memorandum of Agreement among DOE offices regarding the environmental management of DOE facilities was signed by appropriate Assistant Secretaries and Directors. This Memorandum of Agreement established the criteria for EM line responsibility. It stated that EM would be responsible for all DOE facilities, operations, or sites (1) that have been assigned to DOE for environmental restoration and serve or will serve no future production need; (2) that are used for the storage, treatment, or disposal of hazardous, radioactive, and mixed hazardous waste materials that have been properly characterized, packaged, and labelled, but are not used for production; (3) that have been formally transferred to EM by another DOE office for the purpose of environmental restoration and the eventual return to service as a DOE production facility; or (4) that are used exclusively for long-term storage of DOE waste material and are not actively used for production, with the exception of facilities, operations, or sites under the direction of the DOE Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. As part of the implementation of the Memorandum of Agreement, Field Offices within DOE submitted their listings of facilities, systems, operation, and sites for which EM would have line responsibility. It is intended that EM facility listings will be revised on a yearly basis so that managers at all levels will have a valid reference for the planning, programming, budgeting and execution of EM activities.

  14. Identification of Aircraft Hazards

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    K. Ashley

    2006-12-08T23:59:59.000Z

    Aircraft hazards were determined to be potentially applicable to a repository at Yucca Mountain in ''Monitored Geological Repository External Events Hazards Screening Analysis'' (BSC 2005 [DIRS 174235], Section 6.4.1). That determination was conservatively based upon limited knowledge of flight data in the area of concern and upon crash data for aircraft of the type flying near Yucca Mountain. The purpose of this report is to identify specific aircraft hazards that may be applicable to a monitored geologic repository (MGR) at Yucca Mountain, using NUREG-0800, ''Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants'' (NRC 1987 [DIRS 103124], Section 3.5.1.6), as guidance for the inclusion or exclusion of identified aircraft hazards. The intended use of this report is to provide inputs for further screening and analysis of identified aircraft hazards based upon the criteria that apply to Category 1 and Category 2 event sequence analyses as defined in 10 CFR 63.2 [DIRS 176544] (Section 4). The scope of this report includes the evaluation of military, private, and commercial use of airspace in the 100-mile regional setting of the repository at Yucca Mountain with the potential for reducing the regional setting to a more manageable size after consideration of applicable screening criteria (Section 7).

  15. U.A.C. R315-3: Application and Permit Procedures for Hazardous...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    U.A.C. R315-3: Application and Permit Procedures for Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library...

  16. Utah. Code. Ann. § 19-6-108: New nonhazardous solid or hazardous...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    8: New nonhazardous solid or hazardous waste operation plans for facility or site Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- StatuteStatute:...

  17. Hazardous fluid leak detector

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Gray, Harold E. (Las Vegas, NV); McLaurin, Felder M. (Las Vegas, NV); Ortiz, Monico (Las Vegas, NV); Huth, William A. (Las Vegas, NV)

    1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A device or system for monitoring for the presence of leaks from a hazardous fluid is disclosed which uses two electrodes immersed in deionized water. A gas is passed through an enclosed space in which a hazardous fluid is contained. Any fumes, vapors, etc. escaping from the containment of the hazardous fluid in the enclosed space are entrained in the gas passing through the enclosed space and transported to a closed vessel containing deionized water and two electrodes partially immersed in the deionized water. The electrodes are connected in series with a power source and a signal, whereby when a sufficient number of ions enter the water from the gas being bubbled through it (indicative of a leak), the water will begin to conduct, thereby allowing current to flow through the water from one electrode to the other electrode to complete the circuit and activate the signal.

  18. Preliminary fire hazard analysis for the PUTDR and TRU trenches in the Solid Waste Burial Ground

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gaschott, L.J.

    1995-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

    This document represents the Preliminary Fire Hazards Analysis for the Pilot Unvented TRU Drum Retrieval effort and for the Transuranic drum trenches in the low level burial grounds. The FHA was developed in accordance with DOE Order 5480.7A to address major hazards inherent in the facility.

  19. Advanced Manufacturing Processes Laboratory Building 878 hazards assessment document

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wood, C.; Thornton, W.; Swihart, A.; Gilman, T.

    1994-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The introduction of the hazards assessment process is to document the impact of the release of hazards at the Advanced Manufacturing Processes Laboratory (AMPL) that are significant enough to warrant consideration in Sandia National Laboratories` operational emergency management program. This hazards assessment is prepared in accordance with the Department of Energy Order 5500.3A requirement that facility-specific hazards assessments be prepared, maintained, and used for emergency planning purposes. This hazards assessment provides an analysis of the potential airborne release of chemicals associated with the operations and processes at the AMPL. This research and development laboratory develops advanced manufacturing technologies, practices, and unique equipment and provides the fabrication of prototype hardware to meet the needs of Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico (SNL/NM). The focus of the hazards assessment is the airborne release of materials because this requires the most rapid, coordinated emergency response on the part of the AMPL, SNL/NM, collocated facilities, and surrounding jurisdiction to protect workers, the public, and the environment.

  20. Biosafety Facilities

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

    2007-07-11T23:59:59.000Z

    The Guide assists DOE/NNSA field elements and operating contractors in incorporating hazardous biological agents/toxins into emergency management programs, as required by DOE O 151.1C. No cancellation.

  1. A complete electrical hazard classification system and its application

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gordon, Lloyd B [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Cartelli, Laura [Los Alamos National Laboratory

    2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace, NFPA 70E, and relevant OSHA electrical safety standards evolved to address the hazards of 60-Hz power that are faced primarily by electricians, linemen, and others performing facility and utility work. This leaves a substantial gap in the management of electrical hazards in Research and Development (R&D) and specialized high voltage and high power equipment. Examples include lasers, accelerators, capacitor banks, electroplating systems, induction and dielectric heating systems, etc. Although all such systems are fed by 50/60 Hz alternating current (ac) power, we find substantial use of direct current (dc) electrical energy, and the use of capacitors, inductors, batteries, and radiofrequency (RF) power. The electrical hazards of these forms of electricity and their systems are different than for 50160 Hz power. Over the past 10 years there has been an effort to develop a method of classifying all of the electrical hazards found in all types of R&D and utilization equipment. Examples of the variation of these hazards from NFPA 70E include (a) high voltage can be harmless, if the available current is sufficiently low, (b) low voltage can be harmful if the available current/power is high, (c) high voltage capacitor hazards are unique and include severe reflex action, affects on the heart, and tissue damage, and (d) arc flash hazard analysis for dc and capacitor systems are not provided in existing standards. This work has led to a comprehensive electrical hazard classification system that is based on various research conducted over the past 100 years, on analysis of such systems in R&D, and on decades of experience. Initially, national electrical safety codes required the qualified worker only to know the source voltage to determine the shock hazard. Later, as arc flash hazards were understood, the fault current and clearing time were needed. These items are still insufficient to fully characterize all types of electrical hazards. The new comprehensive electrical hazard classification system uses a combination of voltage, shock current available, fault current available, power, energy, and waveform to classify all forms of electrical hazards. Based on this electrical hazard classification system, many new tools have been developed, including (a) work controls for these hazards, (b) better selection of PPE for R&D work, (c) improved training, and (d) a new Severity Ranking Tool that is used to rank electrical accidents and incidents with various forms of electrical energy.

  2. Glass Formulation and Fabrication Laboratory, Building 864, Hazards assessment document

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Banda, Z.; Wood, C.L.

    1995-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Department of Energy Order 5500.3A requires facility-specific hazards assessments be prepared, maintained, and used for emergency planning purposes. This hazards assessment document describes the chemical and radiological hazards associated with the Glass Formulation and Fabrication Laboratory, Building 864. The entire inventory was screened according to the potential airborne impact to onsite and offsite individuals. The air dispersion model, ALOHA, estimated pollutant concentrations downwind from the source of a release, taking into consideration the toxicological and physical characteristics of the release site, the atmospheric conditions, and the circumstances of the release. The greatest distances at which a postulated facility event will produce consequences exceeding the ERPG-2 threshold is 96 meters. The highest emergency classification is a Site Area Emergency. The Emergency Planning Zone is 100 meters.

  3. Simulation Technology Laboratory Building 970 hazards assessment document

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wood, C.L.; Starr, M.D.

    1994-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Department of Energy Order 5500.3A requires facility-specific hazards assessments be prepared, maintained, and used for emergency planning purposes. This hazards assessment document describes the chemical and radiological hazards associated with the Simulation Technology Laboratory, Building 970. The entire inventory was screened according to the potential airborne impact to onsite and offsite individuals. The air dispersion model, ALOHA, estimated pollutant concentrations downwind from the source of a release, taking into consideration the toxicological and physical characteristics of the release site, the atmospheric conditions, and the circumstances of the release. The greatest distances at which a postulated facility event will produce consequences exceeding the ERPG-2 and Early Severe Health Effects thresholds are 78 and 46 meters, respectively. The highest emergency classification is a Site Area Emergency. The Emergency Planning Zone is 100 meters.

  4. abiotic disturbance population: Topics by E-print Network

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

    disturbing, but that the disturbance is still non-zero. Asger C. Ipsen 2014-09-11 269 Timber supply on public land in response to catastrophic natural disturbance: a...

  5. ameliorating metabolic disturbances: Topics by E-print Network

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

    disturbing, but that the disturbance is still non-zero. Asger C. Ipsen 2014-09-11 218 Timber supply on public land in response to catastrophic natural disturbance: a...

  6. acutely disturbed patients: Topics by E-print Network

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

    disturbing, but that the disturbance is still non-zero. Asger C. Ipsen 2014-09-11 258 Timber supply on public land in response to catastrophic natural disturbance: a...

  7. Soil Disturbance from an Integrated Mechanical Forest Fuel Reduction

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Bolding, M. Chad

    Soil Disturbance from an Integrated Mechanical Forest Fuel Reduction Operation in Southwest Oregon1 literature has quantified harvesting system effectiveness or soil disturbance concerns from such operations. This paper reports results of soil disturbance generated from an integrated forest harvesting

  8. Adaptive Algorithms for the Rejection of Sinusoidal Disturbances

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Douglas, Scott C.

    Adaptive Algorithms for the Rejection of Sinusoidal Disturbances with Unknown Frequency Marc Bodson Abstract Two algorithms are presented for the rejection of sinusoidal disturbances with un­ known frequency presented in which frequency estimation and disturbance cancellation are performed simultaneously. Ap

  9. Documentation of Disturbance-Dependent Threatened and Endangered Species

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Documentation of Disturbance-Dependent Threatened and Endangered Species on U.S. Army-05 #12;#12;Disturbance Dependent T&E Species Documentation of Disturbance-Dependent Threatened

  10. Hazardous Waste Remedial Actions Program annual progress report, FY 1990

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Hazardous Waste Remedial Actions Programs (HAZWRAP), a unit of Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., supports the Department of Energy (DOE) Oak Ridge Operations Office in broadly environmental areas, especially those relating to waste management and environmental restoration. HAZWRAP comprises six program areas, which are supported by central administrative and technical organizations. Existing programs deal with airborne hazardous substances, pollution prevention, remedial actions planning, environmental restoration, technology development, and information and data systems. HAZWRAP's mission to develop, promote, and apply-cost-effective hazardous waste management and environmental technologies to help solve national problems and concerns. HAZWRAP seeks to serve as integrator for hazardous waste and materials management across the federal government. It applies the unique combination of research and development (R D) capabilities, technologies, management expertise, and facilities in the Energy Systems complex to address problems of national importance. 24 figs., 10 tabs.

  11. Environmental Hazards and

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Murphy, Bob

    . 2. Pollution -Mexico. 3. Transboundary pollution. 4. Conservation of natural resources - UnitedEnvironmental Hazards and Bioresource Management in the United States- Mexico Borderlands Edited. -(Special studies ;v. 3) Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-87903-503-X 1. Pollution -United States

  12. Hazardous waste sites and housing appreciation rates

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    McCluskey, Jill; Rausser, Gordon C.

    2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    WORKING PAPER NO. 906 HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES AND HOUSINGEconomics January 2000 Hazardous Waste Sites and Housingand RF. Anderson, Hazardous waste sites: the credibility

  13. Missouri Hazardous Waste Management Law (Missouri)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Hazardous Waste Program, administered by the Hazardous Waste Management Commission in the Department of Natural Resources, regulates the processing, transportation, and disposal of hazardous...

  14. Information-Disturbance theorem and Uncertainty Relation

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Takayuki Miyadera; Hideki Imai

    2007-07-31T23:59:59.000Z

    It has been shown that Information-Disturbance theorem can play an important role in security proof of quantum cryptography. The theorem is by itself interesting since it can be regarded as an information theoretic version of uncertainty principle. It, however, has been able to treat restricted situations. In this paper, the restriction on the source is abandoned, and a general information-disturbance theorem is obtained. The theorem relates information gain by Eve with information gain by Bob.

  15. Electric Disturbance Events (OE-417) | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Events (OE-417) Electric Disturbance Events (OE-417) The Electric Emergency Incident and Disturbance Report (Form OE-417) collects information on electric incidents and...

  16. Facility Safety (9-23-10)--Withdrawn

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

    2010-09-23T23:59:59.000Z

    Withdrawn, 5-19-2014--This approval includes revision of the three implementing Guides: DOE G 420.1-1, Nonreactor Nuclear Safety Design Criteria and Explosive Safety Criteria Guide for Use with DOE O 420.1, Facility Safety; DOE G 420.1-2, Guide for the Mitigation of Natural Phenomena Hazards for DOE Nuclear Facilities and NonNuclear Facilities; and DOE G 420.1-3, Implementation Guide for DOE Fire Protection and Emergency Services Programs for Use with DOE O 420.1B, Facility Safety

  17. Flooding of Industrial Facilities -Vulnerability Reduction in Practice

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paris-Sud XI, Université de

    any improvement. As human activities historically developed in river areas and floodplains, industrial-use planning in flood-prone areas and vulnerability reduction in flood-prone facilities. This paper focuses of hazardous material, soil or water pollutions by hazardous substances for the environment, fires, explosions

  18. Hazardous Waste Management (North Dakota)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Department of Health is the designated agency to administer and coordinate a hazardous waste management program to provide for the reduction of hazardous waste generation, reuse, recovery, and...

  19. Overview hazard analysis for the H2Fuel Bus Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hovis, G.L.

    1996-06-18T23:59:59.000Z

    The H2Fuel Bus project is a joint development effort to produce a safe, near-zero emission, 32 passenger bus that is propelled by electric power with continuous on-board hydrogen powered battery recharging. A key initiative in the hydrogen bus development effort is a rigorous evaluation of operational safety. Westinghouse Savannah River Co., the prime contractor at the Department of Energy`s Savannah River Site, has developed a hazard analysis methodology designed to provide a systematic, comprehensive identification and evaluation of hazards. Although originally developed to support nuclear/chemical facility safety basis documentation, the SRS Methodology has widespread applicability to operations and/or systems that utilize hazardous materials and energy. This methodology was used to perform an overview hazard analysis for the H2Fuel Bus project to focus attention on those hypothetical circumstances that pose the greatest threat to the populace and property. The hazard analysis yields a listing of all known H2Fuel Bus hazards, postulated accident scenarios describing possible hazardous releases or conditions, an assessment of the scenarios in terms of frequency of occurrence and consequence, and binning in frequency-consequence space to assess the relative severity of postulated scenarios.

  20. Verification of Readiness to Start Up or Restart Nuclear Facilities

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

    2010-04-16T23:59:59.000Z

    The order establishes requirements for verifying readiness for startup of new Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities, activities, and operations, and for restart of existing Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities, activities, and operations that have been shut down. Cancels DOE O 425.1C. Adm Chg 1, dated 4-2-13, cancels DOE O 425.1D.

  1. Geological Hazards Labs Spring 2010

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Chen, Po

    Geological Hazards Labs Spring 2010 TA: En-Jui Lee (http://www.gg.uwyo.edu/ggstudent/elee8/site - An Indispensible Tool in Hazard Planning 3 26/1; 27/1 Lab 2: Geologic Maps - Mapping the Hazards 4 2/2; 3/2 Lab 3: Population - People at Risk 5 9/2; 10/2 Lab 4: Plate Tectonics - Locating Geologic Hazards 6 16/2; 17/2 Lab 5

  2. D&D Toolbox Project- Technology Demonstration of Fixatives Applied to Hot Cell Facilities via Remote Sprayer Platforms

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Many facilities slated for D&D across the DOE complex pose hazards (radiological, chemical, and structural) which prevent the use of traditional manual techniques.

  3. Safety analysis report for the National Low-Temperature Neutron Irradiation Facility (NLTNIF) at the ORNL Bulk Shielding Reactor (BSR)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Coltman, R.R. Jr.; Kerchner, H.R.; Klabunde, C.E.; Richardson, S.A.

    1986-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report provides information concerning: the experiment facility; experiment assembly; instrumentation and controls; materials; radioactivity; shielding; thermodynamics; estimated or measured reactivity effects; procedures; hazards; and quality assurance. (JDB)

  4. Hazard Sampling Dialog General Layout

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Zhang, Tao

    1 Hazard Sampling Dialog General Layout The dialog's purpose is to display information about the hazardous material being sampled by the UGV so either the system or the UV specialist can identify the risk level of the hazard. The dialog is associated with the hazmat reading icons (Table 1). Components

  5. Appendix C: Hazardous Property Assessment

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Siddharthan, Advaith

    Appendix C: Hazardous Property Assessment The aim of this appendix is to: · give advice on the hazards properties H1 to H14 identified in Annex III of the HWD; · provide assessment methods and threshold concentrations for the hazards; and · advise on which test methods should be considered

  6. LOG HAZARD REGRESSION Huiying Sun

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Heckman, Nancy E.

    LOG HAZARD REGRESSION by Huiying Sun Ph.D, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, CHINA, 1991 regression splines to estimate the two log marginal hazard func­ tions of bivariate survival times, where, 1995) hazard regression for estimating a univariate survival time. We derive an approach to find

  7. Written Hazard Communication (HAZCOM) Program

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Jia, Songtao

    chemicals The potential hazards of chemicals in the work area How to protect yourself from these potential for their respective work areas MSDS's shall be maintained by each department for all hazardous chemicals&S office has developed several employee training modules for specific work areas and hazardous materials

  8. Methodologies for estimating one-time hazardous waste generation for capacity generation for capacity assurance planning

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tonn, B.; Hwang, Ho-Ling; Elliot, S. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States); Peretz, J.; Bohm, R.; Hendrucko, B. [Univ. of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN (United States)

    1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report contains descriptions of methodologies to be used to estimate the one-time generation of hazardous waste associated with five different types of remediation programs: Superfund sites, RCRA Corrective Actions, Federal Facilities, Underground Storage Tanks, and State and Private Programs. Estimates of the amount of hazardous wastes generated from these sources to be shipped off-site to commercial hazardous waste treatment and disposal facilities will be made on a state by state basis for the years 1993, 1999, and 2013. In most cases, estimates will be made for the intervening years, also.

  9. Potential health hazards of radiation. Fact Sheet

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2009-05-19T23:59:59.000Z

    During World War II and the Cold War, the federal government developed and operated industrial facilities for the research, production, and testing of nuclear weapons, as well as other scientific and engineering research. These processes left a legacy of radioactive and chemical waste, environmental contamination, and hazardous facilities and materials at well over 100 sites. Some of these sites processed uranium and vanadium, and upon closure, left behind millions of cubic yards of mill tailings on the sites and throughout the nearby communities. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) administers the cleanup of these areas to minimize the risks to the public and environment from exposure to the tailings and the radon gas they produce.

  10. WESF natural phenomena hazards survey

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wagenblast, G.R., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A team of engineers conducted a systematic natural hazards phenomena (NPH) survey for the 225-B Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility (WESF). The survey is an assessment of the existing design documentation to serve as the structural design basis for WESF, and the Interim Safety Basis (ISB). The lateral force resisting systems for the 225-B building structures, and the anchorages for the WESF safety related systems were evaluated. The original seismic and other design analyses were technically reviewed. Engineering judgment assessments were made of the probability of NPH survival, including seismic, for the 225-B structures and WESF safety systems. The method for the survey is based on the experience of the investigating engineers,and documented earthquake experience (expected response) data.The survey uses knowledge on NPH performance and engineering experience to determine the WESF strengths for NPH resistance, and uncover possible weak links. The survey, in general, concludes that the 225-B structures and WESF safety systems are designed and constructed commensurate with the current Hanford Site design criteria.

  11. Hazardous Waste Compliance Program Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Potter, G.L.; Holstein, K.A.

    1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Hazardous Waste Compliance Program Plan (HWCPP) describes how the Rocky Flats Plant institutes a more effective waste management program designed to achieve and maintain strict adherence to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) requirements. Emphasis is given to improve integration of line operations with programmatic and functional support activities necessary to achieve physical compliance to RCRA regulated equipment, facilities and operations at the floor level. This program focuses on specific activities occurring or which need to occur within buildings containing RCRA regulated units and activities. The plan describes a new approach to achieving and maintaining compliance. This approach concentrates authority and accountability for compliance with the line operating personnel, with support provided from the programmatic functions. This approach requires a higher degree of integration and coordination between operating and program support organizations. The principal changes in emphases are; (1) increased line operations involvement, knowledge and accountability in compliance activities, (2) improved management systems to identify, correct and/or avoid deficiencies and (3) enhanced management attention and employee awareness of compliance related matters.

  12. The Ecology of Risk in a Sunbelt City: A Multi-Hazard Analysis Amy Nelson, Bob Bolin, Ed Hackett, David Pijawka, Ed Sadalla, Diane Sicotte, Eric Matranga

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Hall, Sharon J.

    in the Phoenix, Arizona metropolitan area. The key focus is on the locations of hazardous industrial and toxic, and Disposal Facilities for hazardous substances, and Superfund sites are inequitably located in areas of potential risks produced by the colligation of point-source hazards in areas with disadvantaged populations

  13. Enhancing Railroad Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Enhancing Railroad Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety Rail Routing Enhancing Railroad Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety Rail Routing Presentation made by Kevin...

  14. TECHNICAL BASIS FOR THE NUCLEAR CRITICALITY REPRESENTATIVE ACCIDENT & ASSOCIATED REPRESENTED HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    GRIGSBY, J.M.

    2005-03-03T23:59:59.000Z

    Technical Basis Document for the Nuclear Criticality Representative Accident and Associate Represented Hazardous Conditions. Revision 2 of RPP-12371 provides accident consequence estimates for a hypothetical criticality event in an above grade facility (e.g. DBVS, CH-TRUM, and S-109 PWRS). This technical basis document was developed to support RPP-13033, ''Tank Farms Documented Safety Analysis (DSA)'', and describes the risk binning process and the technical basis for assigning risk bins for the nuclear criticality representative accident and associated hazardous conditions. The purpose of the risk binning process is to determine the need for safety-significant structures, systems, and components (SSC) and technical safety requirement (TSR)-level controls for a given representative accident or represented hazardous condition based on an evaluation of the frequency and consequence. Note that the risk binning process is not applied to facility workers, because all facility worker hazardous conditions are considered for safety-significant SSCs and/or TSR-level controls.

  15. Hazardous waste minimization report for CY 1986

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kendrick, C.M.

    1990-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is a multipurpose research and development facility. Its primary role is the support of energy technology through applied research and engineering development and scientific research in basic and physical sciences. ORNL also is a valuable resource in the solution of problems of national importance, such as nuclear and chemical waste management. In addition, useful radioactive and stable isotopes which are unavailable from the private sector are produced at ORNL. As a result of these activities, hazardous, radioactive, and mixed wastes are generated at ORNL. A formal hazardous waste minimization program for ORNL was launched in mid 1985 in response to the requirements of Section 3002 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). During 1986, a task plan was developed. The six major tasks include: planning and implementation of a laboratory-wide chemical inventory and the subsequent distribution, treatment, storage, and/or disposal (TSD) of unneeded chemicals; establishment and implementation of a distribution system for surplus chemicals to other (internal and external) organizations; training and communication functions necessary to inform and motivate laboratory personnel; evaluation of current procurement and tracking systems for hazardous materials and recommendation and implementation of improvements; systematic review of applicable current and proposed ORNL procedures and ongoing and proposed activities for waste volume and/or toxicity reduction potential; and establishment of criteria by which to measure progress and reporting of significant achievements. 8 refs., 1 fig., 5 tabs.

  16. Hazardous Waste Management Overview The Five L's

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Jia, Songtao

    Hazardous Waste Management Overview The Five L's CoLLect CoLLect all hazardous chemical waste are unsure if your chemical waste is a Hazardous Waste, consult EH&S at hazmat@columbia.edu. DO NOT - Dispose of Hazardous Waste inappropriately or prior to determining its hazards. Hazardous Waste must never

  17. Enhancing the safety of tailings management facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Meggyes, T.; Niederleithinger, E.; Witt, K.J.; Csovari, M.; Kreft-Burman, K.; Engels, J.; McDonald, C.; Roehl, K.E. [BAM, Berlin (Germany). Federal Institute for Material Research & Testing

    2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Unsafe tailings management facilities (TMFs) have caused serious accidents in Europe threatening human health/life and the environment. While advanced design, construction and management procedures are available, their implementation requires greater emphasis. An integrated research project funded by the European Union was carried out between 2002 and 2005 with the overall goal of improving the safety of TMFs (Sustainable Improvement in Safety of Tailings Facilities - TAILSAFE, http://www.tailsafe.com/). The objective of TAILSAFE was to develop and apply methods of parameter evaluation and measurement for the assessment and improvement of the safety state of tailings facilities, with particular attention to the stability of tailings dams and slurries, the special risks inherent when such materials include toxic or hazardous wastes, and authorization and management procedures for tailings facilities. Aspects of tailings facilities design, water management and slurry transport, non-destructive and minimally intrusive testing methods, monitoring and the application of sensors, intervention and remediation options were considered in TAILSAFE. A risk reduction framework (the TAILSAFE Parameter Framework) was established to contribute to the avoidance of catastrophic accidents and hazards from tailings facilities. Tailings from the mining and primary processing of metals, minerals and coal were included within the scope of TAILSAFE. The project focused on the avoidance of hazards by developing procedures and methods for investigating and improving the stability of tailings dams and tailings bodies.

  18. Facility effluent monitoring plan for WESF

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SIMMONS, F.M.

    1999-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The FEMP for the Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility (WESF) provides sufficient information on the WESF effluent characteristics and the effluent monitoring systems so that a compliance assessment against applicable requirements may be performed. Radioactive and hazardous material source terms are related to specific effluent streams that are in turn, related to discharge points and, finally are compared to the effluent monitoring system capability.

  19. ORISE: Hazard Assessments

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)Integrated CodesTransparencyDOE ProjectCrisis and RiskEnvironment AtGraduateH1N1Hazard

  20. B Plant hazards assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Broz, R.E.

    1994-09-23T23:59:59.000Z

    This document establishes the technical basis in support of Emergency Planning Activities for B Plant on the Hanford Site. The document represents an acceptable interpretation of the implementing guidance document for DOE Order 5500.3A. Through this document, the technical basis for the development of facility specific , Emergency Action Levels and the Emergency Planning Zone is demonstrated.

  1. adjacent fire disturbed: Topics by E-print Network

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

    B. 339 Brookhaven National Laboratory LIGHT SOURCES DIRECTORATE Subject: Building 725 Fire Hazard AnalysisFire Hazard Assessment Physics Websites Summary: Brookhaven National...

  2. Facility Safety

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

    2002-05-20T23:59:59.000Z

    To establish facility safety requirements for the Department of Energy, including National Nuclear Security Administration. Cancels DOE O 420.1. Canceled by DOE O 420.1B.

  3. ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - 400-EAA Mechanical Mezzanine

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

    System Water pressure Noise Rotating machinery 480 V Oil Remote location startup Guards Process control interlocks 1 NA 6, 7 ESH119 7-00511 5 ESH174 NA A ASD108400 Johnson...

  4. Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Public Comments to Community...

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

    PMRs, semi-annual meetings (e.g., CMRR and storm water permit meetings), Northern New Mexico Citizens' Advisory Board meetings, RACER, New Mexico Community Foundation FEED...

  5. Pantex Facility 10-Year Natural Phenomena Flood Hazard Analysis

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    and * Safeguards and Security Pantex (cont.) - Location Pantex (cont.) - Weather Patterns * Precipitation is typical for Southwest climate, mainly in the form of...

  6. Baseline Combined Fire Hazards Analysis and Fire Protection Facility...

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

    Floor plans are provided in Appendix A. Building 9116 is served by a roof mounted heat pump unit. An air handler is installed in the first floor mechanical (HVAC) room. This room...

  7. Baseline Combined Fire Hazards Analysis and Fire Protection Facility...

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

    units. One unit is positioned on the south wall and another on the west wall. A steam heat unit is provided in the ceiling area of the work shop. 2.2 Fire Boundaries Fire...

  8. 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 onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are8COaBulkTransmissionSitingProcess.pdfGetec AG|Information OpenEIHas Been HappeningHaysville,Haywood

  9. Pantex Facility 10-Year Natural Phenomena Flood Hazard Analysis

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2UraniumEnergy City ofiManage-85(1).pdf MoreNeil F.83 STAT. 140andNEPantex

  10. Protocol, High Hazard Nuclear Facility Project Oversight - November 2012 |

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn April 23, 2014, an OHASeptember 2010 |ofDepartment of Energy November 2012 Protocol

  11. Approaches for Developing Uniform Hazard Spectra at Critical Facilities |

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011AT&T, Inc.'s ReplyApplication of SyntheticPowerManagementOpportunity |Department of

  12. Approaches for Developing Uniform Hazard Spectra at Critical Facilities |

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011AT&T, Inc.'s ReplyApplication of SyntheticPowerManagementOpportunity |Department

  13. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2Uranium Transferon theTed Donat AboutThe QuadrennialDepartmentat the

  14. Pantex Facility 10-Year Natural Phenomena Flood Hazard Analysis |

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

  15. Natural Phenomena Hazards Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33Frequently Asked QuestionsDepartment of EnergyofPROTECTINGof NovemberSTATEMENT. Approved for

  16. Facility Safety

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

    2013-06-21T23:59:59.000Z

    DOE-STD-1104 contains the Department's method and criteria for reviewing and approving nuclear facility's documented safety analysis (DSA). This review and approval formally document the basis for DOE, concluding that a facility can be operated safely in a manner that adequately protects workers, the public, and the environment. Therefore, it is appropriate to formally require implementation of the review methodology and criteria contained in DOE-STD-1104.

  17. Hazardous Waste Act (New Mexico)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    "Hazardous waste" means any solid waste or combination of solid wastes that because of their quantity, concentration or physical, chemical or infectious characteristics may:  cause or significantly...

  18. Hazardous Substances Act (South Carolina)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Commissioner of the Department of Agriculture has the authority to promulgate regulations declaring specified substances to be hazardous and establishing labeling, transportation, storage, and...

  19. 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...

  20. Nebraska Hazardous Waste Regulations (Nebraska)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These regulations, promulgated by the Department of Environmental Quality, contain provisions pertaining to hazardous waste management, waste standards, permitting requirements, and land disposal...

  1. Development of an auditable safety analysis in support of a radiological facility classification

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kinney, M.D. [Roy F. Weston, Inc., Rockville, MD (United States); Young, B. [Dept. of Energy, Albuquerque, NM (United States)

    1995-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In recent years, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities commonly have been classified as reactor, non-reactor nuclear, or nuclear facilities. Safety analysis documentation was prepared for these facilities, with few exceptions, using the requirements in either DOE Order 5481.1B, Safety Analysis and Review System; or DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports. Traditionally, this has been accomplished by development of an extensive Safety Analysis Report (SAR), which identifies hazards, assesses risks of facility operation, describes and analyzes adequacy of measures taken to control hazards, and evaluates potential accidents and their associated risks. This process is complicated by analysis of secondary hazards and adequacy of backup (redundant) systems. The traditional SAR process is advantageous for DOE facilities with appreciable hazards or operational risks. SAR preparation for a low-risk facility or process can be cost-prohibitive and quite challenging because conventional safety analysis protocols may not readily be applied to a low-risk facility. The DOE Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management recognized this potential disadvantage and issued an EM limited technical standard, No. 5502-94, Hazard Baseline Documentation. This standard can be used for developing documentation for a facility classified as radiological, including preparation of an auditable (defensible) safety analysis. In support of the radiological facility classification process, the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project has developed an auditable safety analysis document based upon the postulation criteria and hazards analysis techniques defined in DOE Order 5480.23.

  2. Facility effluent monitoring plan for the plutonium-uranium extraction facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lohrasbi, J.; Johnson, D.L. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States); De Lorenzo, D.S. [Los Alamos Technical Associates, NM (United States)

    1993-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A facility effluent monitoring plan is required by the US Department of Energy in DOE Order 5400.1 for any operations that involve hazardous materials and radioactive substances that could impact employee or public safety or the environment. This document is prepared using the specific guidelines identified in A Guide for Preparing Hanford Site Facility Effluent Monitoring Plans, WHC-EP-0438-01. This facility effluent monitoring plan assesses effluent monitoring systems and evaluates whether they are adequate to ensure the public health and safety as specified in applicable federal, state, and local requirements. This facility effluent monitoring plan shall ensure long-range integrity of the effluent monitoring systems by requiring an update whenever a new process or operation introduces new hazardous materials or significant radioactive materials. This document must be reviewed annually even if there are no operational changes, and it must be updated at a minimum of every three years.

  3. NARROW AISLE MOBILE ROBOT NAVIGATION IN HAZARDOUS ENVIRONMENTS Thomas R. Collins, Andrew M. Henshaw Ronald C. Arkin

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    in the semi­structured environment found in a hazardous waste storage facility, a sensor system should useNARROW AISLE MOBILE ROBOT NAVIGATION IN HAZARDOUS ENVIRONMENTS Thomas R. Collins, Andrew M. Henshaw it to a system more suitable for actual deployment on a robot. Routine monitoring of stored radioactive materials

  4. NARROW AISLE MOBILE ROBOT NAVIGATION IN HAZARDOUS ENVIRONMENTS Thomas R. Collins, Andrew M. Henshaw Ronald C. Arkin

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    in the semi-structured environment found in a hazardous waste storage facility, a sensor system should useNARROW AISLE MOBILE ROBOT NAVIGATION IN HAZARDOUS ENVIRONMENTS Thomas R. Collins, Andrew M. Henshaw it to a system more suitable for actual deployment on a robot. Routine monitoring of stored radioactive materials

  5. PO*WW*ER mobile treatment unit process hazards analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Richardson, R.B.

    1996-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The objective of this report is to demonstrate that a thorough assessment of the risks associated with the operation of the Rust Geotech patented PO*WW*ER mobile treatment unit (MTU) has been performed and documented. The MTU was developed to treat aqueous mixed wastes at the US Department of Energy (DOE) Albuquerque Operations Office sites. The MTU uses evaporation to separate organics and water from radionuclides and solids, and catalytic oxidation to convert the hazardous into byproducts. This process hazards analysis evaluated a number of accident scenarios not directly related to the operation of the MTU, such as natural phenomena damage and mishandling of chemical containers. Worst case accident scenarios were further evaluated to determine the risk potential to the MTU and to workers, the public, and the environment. The overall risk to any group from operation of the MTU was determined to be very low; the MTU is classified as a Radiological Facility with low hazards.

  6. Hot Cell Facility (HCF) Safety Analysis Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MITCHELL,GERRY W.; LONGLEY,SUSAN W.; PHILBIN,JEFFREY S.; MAHN,JEFFREY A.; BERRY,DONALD T.; SCHWERS,NORMAN F.; VANDERBEEK,THOMAS E.; NAEGELI,ROBERT E.

    2000-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Safety Analysis Report (SAR) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports, and has been written to the format and content guide of DOE-STD-3009-94 Preparation Guide for U. S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports. The Hot Cell Facility is a Hazard Category 2 nonreactor nuclear facility, and is operated by Sandia National Laboratories for the Department of Energy. This SAR provides a description of the HCF and its operations, an assessment of the hazards and potential accidents which may occur in the facility. The potential consequences and likelihood of these accidents are analyzed and described. Using the process and criteria described in DOE-STD-3009-94, safety-related structures, systems and components are identified, and the important safety functions of each SSC are described. Additionally, information which describes the safety management programs at SNL are described in ancillary chapters of the SAR.

  7. HAZARD ALERT ENVIRONMENT HEALTH AND SAFETY

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Calgary, University of

    HAZARD ALERT ENVIRONMENT HEALTH AND SAFETY EH&S Hazard Alert - 2010.06.18 HAZARD ALERT ­ Reaction Manual. http://www.ucalgary.ca/safety/files/safety/LaboratoryFumeHoodUserStandard.pdf #12;HAZARD ALERT ENVIRONMENT HEALTH AND SAFETY EH&S Hazard Alert - 2010.06.18 In the recent incident the sash was closed while

  8. Laboratory Waste Disposal HAZARDOUS GLASS

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sheridan, Jennifer

    Laboratory Waste Disposal HAZARDOUS GLASS Items that could cut or puncture skin or trash- can without any treatment. Hazardous Glass and Plastic: Items that can puncture, cut or scratch if disposed of in normal trash containers. Pasteur pipettes Other pipettes and tips (glass or plastic) Slides and cover

  9. Hazardous and radioactive substances in

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    , and a number of other organic substances, as well as some biological effects of hazardous substances. Chapter 3 substances in the marine food web ...12 1.3 Effects of hazardous substances in the marine environment ..........................................40 2.5 Other organic substances............................................

  10. Fire hazards evaluation for light duty utility arm system

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HUCKFELDT, R.A.

    1999-02-24T23:59:59.000Z

    In accordance with DOE Order 5480.7A, Fire Protection, a Fire Hazards Analysis must be performed for all new facilities. LMHC Fire Protection has reviewed and approved the significant documentation leading up to the LDUA operation. This includes, but is not limited to, development criteria and drawings, Engineering Task Plan, Quality Assurance Program Plan, and Safety Program Plan. LMHC has provided an appropriate level of fire protection for this activity as documented.

  11. Disturbance, spatial turnover, and species coexistence in grassland plant communities

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Questad, Erin

    2008-08-18T23:59:59.000Z

    Humans have dramatically altered natural disturbance regimes. We thus need to understand how these alterations affect plant communities and whether natural disturbance regimes can be restored. I explored the effect of ...

  12. Laboratory Hazard Assessment Tool UC Laboratory Hazard Assessment v11 UC Regents Page 1 of 28

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Aluwihare, Lihini

    Laboratory Hazard Assessment Tool UC Laboratory Hazard Assessment v11 © UC Regents Page 1 of 28 This Laboratory Hazard Assessment Tool (LHAT) facilitates identification of hazards and identifies the Personal as hazards and personnel change, and at least once every 12 months, irrespective of changes to hazards

  13. Electric utility industry experience with geomagnetic disturbances

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnes, P.R.; Rizy, D.T.; McConnell, B.W. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States); Taylor, E.R. Jr. [ABB Power Systems, Inc., Pittsburgh, PA (United States); Tesche, F.M.

    1991-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A geomagnetic disturbance (GMD) by its nature occurs globally and almost simultaneously. Severe geomagnetic storms cause problems for electric power systems. The vulnerability of electric power systems to such events has apparently increased during the last 10 to 20 years because power system transmission lines have become more interconnected and have increased in length and because power systems are now operated closer to their limits than in the past. In this report, the experience of electric utilities during geomagnetic storms is examined and analyzed. Measured data, effects on power system components, and power system impacts are considered. It has been found that electric power systems are susceptible to geomagnetically induced earth-surface potential gradients as small as few (2 to 3) volts per kilometer, corresponding to a storm of K-6 intensity over an area of high earth resistivity. The causes and effects are reasonably well understood, but additional research is needed to develop a better understanding of solar-induced geomagnetic storms and the responses of power systems to these types of storms. A better understanding of geomagnetic storms and the power systems` responses to GMDs is needed so that mitigation measures can be implemented that will make power systems less susceptible to severe geomagnetic disturbances. A GMD caused by a large high-altitude nuclear detonation is similar in many ways to that of solar-induced geomagnetic storms except that a nuclear-caused disturbance would be much more intense with a far shorter duration. 49 refs.

  14. Electric utility industry experience with geomagnetic disturbances

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnes, P.R.; Rizy, D.T.; McConnell, B.W. (Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States)); Taylor, E.R. Jr. (ABB Power Systems, Inc., Pittsburgh, PA (United States)); Tesche, F.M.

    1991-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A geomagnetic disturbance (GMD) by its nature occurs globally and almost simultaneously. Severe geomagnetic storms cause problems for electric power systems. The vulnerability of electric power systems to such events has apparently increased during the last 10 to 20 years because power system transmission lines have become more interconnected and have increased in length and because power systems are now operated closer to their limits than in the past. In this report, the experience of electric utilities during geomagnetic storms is examined and analyzed. Measured data, effects on power system components, and power system impacts are considered. It has been found that electric power systems are susceptible to geomagnetically induced earth-surface potential gradients as small as few (2 to 3) volts per kilometer, corresponding to a storm of K-6 intensity over an area of high earth resistivity. The causes and effects are reasonably well understood, but additional research is needed to develop a better understanding of solar-induced geomagnetic storms and the responses of power systems to these types of storms. A better understanding of geomagnetic storms and the power systems' responses to GMDs is needed so that mitigation measures can be implemented that will make power systems less susceptible to severe geomagnetic disturbances. A GMD caused by a large high-altitude nuclear detonation is similar in many ways to that of solar-induced geomagnetic storms except that a nuclear-caused disturbance would be much more intense with a far shorter duration. 49 refs.

  15. DRAINING HAZARDOUS FLUIDS DURING BUILDING 221-1F DEACTIVATION AT THE SAVANNAH RIVER SITE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Musall, J.

    2010-05-11T23:59:59.000Z

    Several years ago, SRS completed a four year mission to decommission {approx}250 excess facilities. As part of that effort, SRS deactivated multiple facilities (e.g. Building 247-F, Naval Fuels Facility, and Building 211-F, Outside Facilities for F-Canyon) that contained extensive piping systems filled with hazardous material (e.g. nitric acid). Draining of hazardous materials from piping was successfully completed in all facilities without incident. In early 2009, the decommissioning program at SRS was restarted as a result of funding made available by the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Under ARRA, draining of piping containing hazardous material was initiated in multiple facilities including Building 221-1F (or A-Line). This paper describes and reviews the draining of piping containing hazardous materials at A-Line, with emphasis on an incident involving the draining of nitric acid. The paper is intended to be a resource for engineers, planners, and project managers, who face similar draining challenges.

  16. Columbia University Hazardous Waste Room Inspection Report

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Jia, Songtao

    Storage Area Hazardous Waste Room Inspection Report Location: Bldg. Room: Date: Inspected ByColumbia University Hazardous Waste Room Inspection Report Flammable Storage Area Lack Pack always closed while holding hazardous wastes? Comment: 12. Are containers labeled? Date

  17. COLORADO FRONT RANGE SEISMICITY AND SEISMIC HAZARD

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sheehan, Anne F.

    COLORADO FRONT RANGE SEISMICITY AND SEISMIC HAZARD Anne F. Sheehan University of Colorado, seismic, seismicity, crust, fault, hazard ABSTRACT Construction of seismic hazard and risk maps depends upon carefully constrained input parameters including background seismicity, seismic attenuation

  18. Analysis of Periodic GrowthDisturbance Models Timothy C. Reluga

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Reluga, Tim

    model for a fluctuating population. Changes in the disturbance frequency are shown to generate a period-bubbling bifurcation structure and population dynamics that are most variable at intermediate disturbance frequenciesAnalysis of Periodic Growth­Disturbance Models Timothy C. Reluga treluga

  19. Tracking and disturbance rejection for passive nonlinear systems Bayu Jayawardhana

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sontag, Eduardo

    signals of frequency . If the reference and disturbance signals are periodic, then the internal modelTracking and disturbance rejection for passive nonlinear systems Bayu Jayawardhana Abstract tracking of constant reference signal and disturbance rejection of a finite superposition of sine waves

  20. Disturbance and Landscape Dynamics The Rocky Mountains, Lander's Peak, 1863

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Hansen, Andrew J.

    environment. (Pickett and White 1985) Defining and Quantifying Disturbance #12;Frequency - number a specified time. Defining and Quantifying Disturbance #12;Frequency: none Frequency: 250-500 yrs SeverityBioe 515 Disturbance and Landscape Dynamics #12;The Rocky Mountains, Lander's Peak, 1863 Albert

  1. Frequency Analysis of Aircraft hazards for License Application

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    K. Ashley

    2006-10-24T23:59:59.000Z

    The preclosure safety analysis for the monitored geologic repository at Yucca Mountain must consider the hazard that aircraft may pose to surface structures. Relevant surface structures are located beneath the restricted airspace of the Nevada Test Site (NTS) on the eastern slope of Yucca Mountain, near the North Portal of the Exploratory Studies Facility Tunnel (Figure 1). The North Portal is located several miles from the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR), which is used extensively by the U.S. Air Force (USAF) for training and test flights (Figure 1). The NTS airspace, which is controlled by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for NTS activities, is not part of the NTTR. Agreements with the DOE allow USAF aircraft specific use of the airspace above the NTS (Reference 2.1.1 [DIRS 103472], Section 3.1.1 and Appendix A, Section 2.1; and Reference 2.1.2 [DIRS 157987], Sections 1.26 through 1.29). Commercial, military, and general aviation aircraft fly within several miles to the southwest of the repository site in the Beatty Corridor, which is a broad air corridor that runs approximately parallel to U.S. Highway 95 and the Nevada-California border (Figure 2). These aircraft and other aircraft operations are identified and described in ''Identification of Aircraft Hazards'' (Reference 2.1.3, Sections 6 and 8). The purpose of this analysis is to estimate crash frequencies for aircraft hazards identified for detailed analysis in ''Identification of Aircraft Hazards'' (Reference 2.1.3, Section 8). Reference 2.1.3, Section 8, also identifies a potential hazard associated with electronic jamming, which will be addressed in this analysis. This analysis will address only the repository and not the transportation routes to the site. The analysis is intended to provide the basis for: (1) Categorizing event sequences related to aircraft hazards; (2) Identifying design or operational requirements related to aircraft hazards.

  2. The mutagenic potential of soil and runoff water from land treatment of three hazardous industrial wastes

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Davol, Phebe

    1987-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    of agricultural chemicals and the performance of hazardous waste land treatment facilities. This study used a bioassay directed chemical analysis protocol to monitor the environmental fate of mutagenic constituents from a simulated land treatment demonstration...THE MUTAGENIC POTENTIAL OF SOIL AND RUNOFF WATER FROM LAND TREATMENT OF THREE HAZARDOUS INDUSTRIAL WASTES A Thesis by PHEBE DAYOL Submitted to the Graduate College of Te xa s ASM Un i ver s i ty in partial fulfillment of the requirement...

  3. Fire and Sudden Oak Death in Coast Redwood Forests: Effects of Two Distinct Disturbances

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Ramage, Benjamin Sean

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    2009. Effects of disturbance frequency, species traits andinclude disturbance type, frequency, scale/size, intensity,frequency, intensity), or they may result from entirely new disturbance

  4. Disturbance Cancellation by State Derivative Feedback with Application to Ramp-Connected Surface Effect Ships

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Basturk, Halil I.

    for only single frequency wave disturbance. This feature ofsinusoidal disturbances with unknown frequency,” Automatica,soidal disturbances with unknown frequency,” Automatica, 33,

  5. Realtime controller tuning for periodic disturbance rejection with application to active noise control

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Kinney, Charles E.

    2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    precisely model the disturbance frequency and therefore manyknowledge of the disturbance frequency. To overcome this,perturbations in the disturbance frequency. Steinbuch [2002

  6. North Portal Fuel Storage System Fire Hazard Analysis-ESF Surface Design Package ID

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    N.M. Ruonavaara

    1995-01-18T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of the fire hazard analysis is to comprehensively assess the risk from fire within the individual fire areas. This document will only assess the fire hazard analysis within the Exploratory Studies Facility (ESF) Design Package ID, which includes the fuel storage system area of the North Portal facility, and evaluate whether the following objectives are met: 1.1.1--This analysis, performed in accordance with the requirements of this document, will satisfy the requirements for a fire hazard analysis in accordance with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5480.7A. 1.1.2--Ensure that property damage from fire and related perils does not exceed an acceptable level. 1.1.3--Provide input to the ESF Basis For Design (BFD) Document. 1.1.4 Provide input to the facility Safety Analysis Report (SAR) (Paragraph 3.8).

  7. Technical basis for the nuclear criticality representative accident and associated represented hazardous conditions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CARSON, D.M.

    2003-03-20T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical basis document was developed to support the Tank Farms Documented Safety Analysis (DSA), and describes the risk binning process and the technical basis for assigning risk bins for the nuclear criticality representative accident and associated hazardous conditions. The purpose of the risk binning process is to determine the need for safety-significant structures, systems, and components (SSC) and technical safety requirement (TSR)-level controls for a given representative accident or represented hazardous condition based on an evaluation of the frequency and consequence. Note that the risk binning process is not applied to facility workers, because all facility worker hazardous conditions are considered for safety-significant SSCs and/or TSR-level controls. Determination of the need for safety-class SSCs was performed in accordance with DOE-STD-3009-94, ''Preparation Guide for US Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analyses'', as described in this report.

  8. Technical basis for the tank bump representative accident and associated hazardous conditions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WILLIAMS, J.C.

    2003-03-21T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical basis document was developed to support the Tank Farms Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) and describes the risk binning process and the technical basis for assigning risk bins for the tank bump representative accident and associated hazardous conditions. The purpose of the risk binning process is to determine the need for safety-significant structures, systems, and components (SSC) and/or technical safety requirement (TSR)-level controls for a given representative accident or represented hazardous conditions based on an evaluation of the frequency and consequence. Note that the risk binning process is not applied to facility workers, because all facility worker hazardous conditions are considered for safety-significant SSCs and/or TSR-level controls. Determination of the need for safety-class SSCs was performed in accordance with DOE-STD-3009-94, ''Preparation Guide for US Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports'', as described in this report.

  9. Hazard Lewis Farms Collection Binghamton University Libraries

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Suzuki, Masatsugu

    Hazard Lewis Farms Collection Binghamton University Libraries Special Collections Hazard Lewis Farms Collection Finding Aid created 2012 Jean Green, Head of Special Collections, Preservation

  10. Advanced Membrane Systems: Recovering Wasteful and Hazardous...

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

    Advanced Membrane Systems: Recovering Wasteful and Hazardous Fuel Vapors at the Gasoline Tank Advanced Membrane Systems: Recovering Wasteful and Hazardous Fuel Vapors at the...

  11. Research on the Use of Robotics in Hazardous Environments at Sandia National Laboratories

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kwok, Kwan S.

    1999-05-04T23:59:59.000Z

    Many hazardous material handling needs exist in remote unstructured environments. Currently these operations are accomplished using personnel in direct contact with the hazards. A safe and cost effective alternative to this approach is the use of intelligent robotic systems for safe handling, packaging, transport, and even excavation of hazardous materials. The Intelligent Systems and Robotics Center of Sandia National Laboratories has developed and deployed robotic technologies for use in hazardous environments, three of which have been deployed in DOE production facilities for handling of special nuclear materials. Other systems are currently under development for packaging special nuclear materials. This paper presents an overview of the research activities, including five delivered systems, at %ndia National Laboratories on the use of robotics in hazardous environments.

  12. Idaho National Laboratory Materials and Fuels Complex Natural Phenomena Hazards Flood Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gerald Sehlke; Paul Wichlacz

    2010-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report presents the results of flood hazards analyses performed for the Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) and the adjacent Transient Reactor Experiment and Test Facility (TREAT) located at Idaho National Laboratory. The requirements of these analyses are provided in the U.S. Department of Energy Order 420.1B and supporting Department of Energy (DOE) Natural Phenomenon Hazard standards. The flood hazards analyses were performed by Battelle Energy Alliance and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. The analyses addressed the following: • Determination of the design basis flood (DBFL) • Evaluation of the DBFL versus the Critical Flood Elevations (CFEs) for critical existing structures, systems, and components (SSCs).

  13. Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laycak, D

    2008-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

    This documented safety analysis (DSA) for the Waste Storage Facilities was developed in accordance with 10 CFR 830, Subpart B, 'Safety Basis Requirements', and utilizes the methodology outlined in DOE-STD-3009-94, Change Notice 3. The Waste Storage Facilities consist of Area 625 (A625) and the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) Storage Area portion of the DWTF complex. These two areas are combined into a single DSA, as their functions as storage for radioactive and hazardous waste are essentially identical. The B695 Segment of DWTF is addressed under a separate DSA. This DSA provides a description of the Waste Storage Facilities and the operations conducted therein; identification of hazards; analyses of the hazards, including inventories, bounding releases, consequences, and conclusions; and programmatic elements that describe the current capacity for safe operations. The mission of the Waste Storage Facilities is to safely handle, store, and treat hazardous waste, transuranic (TRU) waste, low-level waste (LLW), mixed waste, combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL (as well as small amounts from other DOE facilities).

  14. Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities March 2010

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laycak, D T

    2010-03-05T23:59:59.000Z

    This Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) for the Waste Storage Facilities was developed in accordance with 10 CFR 830, Subpart B, 'Safety Basis Requirements,' and utilizes the methodology outlined in DOE-STD-3009-94, Change Notice 3. The Waste Storage Facilities consist of Area 625 (A625) and the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) Storage Area portion of the DWTF complex. These two areas are combined into a single DSA, as their functions as storage for radioactive and hazardous waste are essentially identical. The B695 Segment of DWTF is addressed under a separate DSA. This DSA provides a description of the Waste Storage Facilities and the operations conducted therein; identification of hazards; analyses of the hazards, including inventories, bounding releases, consequences, and conclusions; and programmatic elements that describe the current capacity for safe operations. The mission of the Waste Storage Facilities is to safely handle, store, and treat hazardous waste, transuranic (TRU) waste, low-level waste (LLW), mixed waste, combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL (as well as small amounts from other DOE facilities).

  15. Method of recycling hazardous waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1999-11-11T23:59:59.000Z

    The production of primary metal from ores has long been a necessary, but environmentally devastating process. Over the past 20 years, in an effort to lessen environmental impacts, the metal processing industry has developed methods for recovering metal values from certain hazardous wastes. However, these processes leave residual molten slag that requires disposal in hazardous waste landfills. A new process recovers valuable metals, metal alloys, and metal oxides from hazardous wastes, such as electric arc furnace (EAF) dust from steel mills, mill scale, spent aluminum pot liners, and wastewater treatment sludge from electroplating. At the same time, the process does not create residual waste for disposal. This new method uses all wastes from metal production processes. These hazardous materials are converted to three valuable products - mineral wool, zinc oxide, and high-grade iron.

  16. Hazardous Waste Management Regulations (Mississippi)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Hazardous Waste Management Regulations follow the EPA's definitions and guidelines for the most part, which are listed in 40 CFR parts 260-282. In addition to these federal regulations the...

  17. Health Hazards in Indoor Air

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Logue, Jennifer M.

    2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Health Hazards in Indoor Air. In Proceedings of the 2010for VOCs from post-1990 indoor air concentration studies inUnion project on indoor air pollutants. Allergy, 2008. 63(

  18. Guidance Document Fume hoods are used when handling toxic or hazardous chemicals. Harmful gases, vapors and fumes

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Guidance Document FumeHoods Fume hoods are used when handling toxic or hazardous chemicals. Harmful the maximum safe mark (provided by Facilities Management during annual test) Use secondary containment (a hood without permission from EHS. Call EHS or Facilities Management if a hood is not functioning

  19. Risk management study for the retired Hanford Site facilities: Qualitative risk evaluation for the retired Hanford Site facilities. Volume 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Coles, G.A.; Shultz, M.V.; Taylor, W.E.

    1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document provides a risk evaluation of the 100 and 200 Area retired, surplus facilities on the Hanford Site. Also included are the related data that were compiled by the risk evaluation team during investigations performed on the facilities. Results are the product of a major effort performed in fiscal year 1993 to produce qualitative information that characterizes certain risks associated with these facilities. The retired facilities investigated for this evaluation are located in the 100 and 200 Areas of the 1,450-km{sup 2} (570-mi{sup 2}) Hanford Site. The Hanford Site is a semiarid tract of land in southeastern Washington State. The nearest population center is Richland, Washington, (population 32,000) 30-km (20 mi) southeast of the 200 Area. During walkdown investigations of these facilities, data on real and potential hazards that threatened human health or safety or created potential environmental release issues were identified by the risk evaluation team. Using these findings, the team categorized the identified hazards by facility and evaluated the risk associated with each hazard. The factors contributing to each risk, and the consequence and likelihood of harm associated with each hazard also are included in this evaluation.

  20. The Chemical Hazards Assessments Prior to D&D of the Plutonium Finishing Plant Hanford Nuclear Reservation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    FITCH, L.R.; HOPKINS, A.M.

    2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    All Hanford facilities, including the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) were evaluated for chemical hazards in 1997, 1998 and 2000. The hazard evaluation, known as the PFP Facility Vulnerability Assessment (FVA), was prompted when chemicals in Tank A-109 in the Plutonium Reclamation Facility (PRF) exploded in May 1997. Actions were undertaken to eliminate or reduce what were thought to be the worst hazards following that evaluation. In 2001, a new PFP team was organized to review the progress to date in reducing hazards and to reassess hazards that might still remain within the facility. This reassessment continued into 2002 and is referred to as the 2002 PFP Residual Chemical Hazards Reassessment (RCHR). This report explains the results of the 2001/2002 reassessment of the chemical hazards at PFP. This reassessment effort forms the basis of the RCHR. The RCHR relied on previous assessments as the starting point for the 2001/2002 evaluation and used ranking criteria very similar to previous efforts. The RCHR team was composed of professionals representing Industrial Hygiene, Chemical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Hazardous Materials Handling Specialists, Solid Waste Management Specialists and Environmental Specialists. All areas of concern that could be accessed were physically examined and photographed where possible. Information from processing records, facility drawings and documents, design engineers, process engineers and work packages were compiled. The PFP vessel inventory was examined and expanded where required. New items listed in the vessel inventory were investigated. All items investigated were ranked using the hazard ranking criteria developed. This information was put on data sheets and compiled in a database.

  1. Bulletin No. 233 Ergonomic Hazards of the

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Martin, Jeff

    July, 2004 Bulletin No. 233 Ergonomic Hazards of the Seated Posture Ergonomic Hazards of the Seated it is possible for these injuries to heal themselves when the ergonomic hazard is removed, cases do exist where;PAGE 2 ERGONOMIC HAZARDS of the SEATED POSTURE BULLETIN NO. 233 Ergonomic interventions to reduce

  2. Hazard % free free espresso Over Run

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Dill, David L.

    Total Products Hazard­ Hazard­ % free free espresso­ Over­ Run­ name in/out Method exact head time 5 0 1 dme­fast­opt 5/3 8 8 0 1 Table 2. Comparison of Hazard­Free Logic Minimization with espresso­level hazard­free minimization prob­ lem for several reasons: the general problem has not pre­ viously been

  3. CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS ENERGY 12.A GENERAL

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    US Army Corps of Engineers

    EM 385-1-1 XX Jun 13 12-1 SECTION 12 CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS ENERGY 12.A GENERAL 12.A.01 When working on or near any system that produces, uses, or stores hazardous energy, a hazardous energy control program (HECP) is required see 12.B. Hazardous energy is any energy, including but not limited to mechanical (e

  4. GUIDELINES FOR HANDLING HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL WASTE

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tennessee, University of

    GUIDELINES FOR HANDLING HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL WASTE The proper management of hazardous waste and regulatory compliance are achieved: 1. Make sure that no hazardous materials are placed into regular solid in the departmental chemical hygiene plan (CHP) before you begin to use hazardous substances. 3. Make sure you know

  5. Hazardous Materials Alert Departmental Contact(s)

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Hickman, Mark

    Hazardous Materials Alert Departmental Contact(s): Name ___________________________________________________________________________________ Hazardous Materials Alert If the release of a hazardous chemical or gas is affecting people in your area yourself at risk. 2. isOlATE the hazardous material by clearing the area, close the doors. If safe to do so

  6. CRAD, Hazardous Waste Management- December 4, 2007

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Hazardous Waste Management Implementation Inspection Criteria, Approach, and Lines of Inquiry (HSS CRAD 64-30)

  7. Nonreactor Nuclear Safety Design Guide for use with DOE O 420.1C, Facility Safety

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

    2012-12-04T23:59:59.000Z

    This Guide provides an acceptable approach for safety design of DOE hazard category 1, 2 and 3 nuclear facilities for satisfying the requirements of DOE O 420.1C. Cancels DOE G 420.1-1.

  8. Frequently Asked Questions Regarding DOE Order 420.1C, Facility...

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

    Natural Phenomena Hazards Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities, and DOE-STD-1066-2012, Fire Protection. Frequently Asked Questions Regarding DOE Order 420.1C,...

  9. EA-0820: Construction of Mixed Waste Storage RCRA Facilities, Buildings 7668 and 7669, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of a proposal to construct and operate two mixed (both radioactive and hazardous) waste storage facilities (Buildings 7668 and 7669) in accordance with...

  10. Process hazards analysis (PrHA) program, bridging accident analyses and operational safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Richardson, J. A. (Jeanne A.); McKernan, S. A. (Stuart A.); Vigil, M. J. (Michael J.)

    2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Recently the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) for the Plutonium Facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Technical Area 55 (TA-55) was revised and submitted to the US. Department of Energy (DOE). As a part of this effort, over seventy Process Hazards Analyses (PrHAs) were written and/or revised over the six years prior to the FSAR revision. TA-55 is a research, development, and production nuclear facility that primarily supports US. defense and space programs. Nuclear fuels and material research; material recovery, refining and analyses; and the casting, machining and fabrication of plutonium components are some of the activities conducted at TA-35. These operations involve a wide variety of industrial, chemical and nuclear hazards. Operational personnel along with safety analysts work as a team to prepare the PrHA. PrHAs describe the process; identi fy the hazards; and analyze hazards including determining hazard scenarios, their likelihood, and consequences. In addition, the interaction of the process to facility systems, structures and operational specific protective features are part of the PrHA. This information is rolled-up to determine bounding accidents and mitigating systems and structures. Further detailed accident analysis is performed for the bounding accidents and included in the FSAR. The FSAR is part of the Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) that defines the safety envelope for all facility operations in order to protect the worker, the public, and the environment. The DSA is in compliance with the US. Code of Federal Regulations, 10 CFR 830, Nuclear Safety Management and is approved by DOE. The DSA sets forth the bounding conditions necessary for the safe operation for the facility and is essentially a 'license to operate.' Safely of day-to-day operations is based on Hazard Control Plans (HCPs). Hazards are initially identified in the PrI-IA for the specific operation and act as input to the HCP. Specific protective features important to worker safety are incorporated so the worker can readily identify the safety parameters of the their work. System safety tools such as Preliminary Hazard Analysis, What-If Analysis, Hazard and Operability Analysis as well as other techniques as necessary provide the groundwork for both determining bounding conditions for facility safety, operational safety, and day-to-clay worker safety.

  11. Analysis of LNG peakshaving-facility release-prevention systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pelto, P.J.; Baker, E.G.; Powers, T.B.; Schreiber, A.M.; Hobbs, J.M.; Daling, P.M.

    1982-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of this study is to provide an analysis of release prevention systems for a reference LNG peakshaving facility. An overview assessment of the reference peakshaving facility, which preceeded this effort, identified 14 release scenarios which are typical of the potential hazards involved in the operation of LNG peakshaving facilities. These scenarios formed the basis for this more detailed study. Failure modes and effects analysis and fault tree analysis were used to estimate the expected frequency of each release scenario for the reference peakshaving facility. In addition, the effectiveness of release prevention, release detection, and release control systems were evaluated.

  12. Interim safety basis for fuel supply shutdown facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brehm, J.R.; Deobald, T.L.; Benecke, M.W.; Remaize, J.A.

    1995-05-23T23:59:59.000Z

    This ISB in conjunction with the new TSRs, will provide the required basis for interim operation or restrictions on interim operations and administrative controls for the Facility until a SAR is prepared in accordance with the new requirements. It is concluded that the risk associated with the current operational mode of the Facility, uranium closure, clean up, and transition activities required for permanent closure, are within Risk Acceptance Guidelines. The Facility is classified as a Moderate Hazard Facility because of the potential for an unmitigated fire associated with the uranium storage buildings.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Coenenberg, J.G.

    1997-08-15T23:59:59.000Z

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

  14. Increasing Resiliency to Natural Hazards: A Strategic Plan for the Multi-Hazards

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Fleskes, Joe

    Increasing Resiliency to Natural Hazards: A Strategic Plan for the Multi-Hazards Demonstration Survey #12;#12;Increasing Resiliency to Natural Hazards--A Strategic Plan for the Multi-Hazards on the USGS--the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards

  15. Activity Hazard Assessment 6.0 Page 1 of 6 Activity Hazard

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Aluwihare, Lihini

    Activity Hazard Assessment 6.0 Page 1 of 6 Activity Hazard Assessment Tool This form must Hazard Assessment specific to activities in their laboratories. The Activity Hazard Assessment identifies hazards to employees and specifies personal protective equipment (PPE) to protect employees during work

  16. Household Hazardous Waste Household hazardous waste is the discarded, unused, or leftover portion of household products

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    de Lijser, Peter

    over a larger area and releases them into the air. Pouring hazardous liquids on the ground can poisonHousehold Hazardous Waste Household hazardous waste is the discarded, unused, or leftover portion should be considered hazardous. You cannot treat hazardous wastes like other kinds of garbage

  17. Methodology for Determining Increases in Radionuclide Inventories for the Effluent Treatment Facility Process

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Blanchard, A.

    1998-10-16T23:59:59.000Z

    A study is currently underway to determine if the Effluent Treatment Facility can be downgraded from a Hazard Category 3 facility to a Radiological Facility per DOE STD-1027-92. This technical report provides a methodology to determine and monitor increases in the radionuclide inventories of the ETF process columns. It also provides guidelines to ensure that other potential increases to the ETF radionuclide inventory are evaluated as required to ensure that the ETF remains a Radiological Facility.

  18. Chemical Hazards and Safety Issues in Fusion Safety Design

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cadwallader, L.C. [Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (United States)

    2003-09-15T23:59:59.000Z

    Radiological inventory releases have dominated accident consequences for fusion; these consequences are important to analyze and are generally the most severe result of a fusion facility accident event. However, the advent of, or plan for, large-scale usage of some toxic materials poses the additional hazard of chemical exposure from an accident event. Examples of toxic chemicals are beryllium for magnetic fusion and fluorine for laser fusion. Therefore, chemical exposure consequences must also be addressed in fusion safety assessment. This paper provides guidance for fusion safety analysis. US Department of Energy (DOE) chemical safety assessment practices for workers and the public are reviewed. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has published some guidance on public exposure to releases of mixtures of chemicals, this guidance has been used to create an initial guideline for treating mixed radiological and toxicological releases in fusion; for example, tritiated hazardous dust from a tokamak vacuum vessel. There is no convenient means to judge the hazard severity of exposure to mixed materials. The chemical fate of mixed material constituents must be reviewed to determine if there is a separate or combined radiological and toxicological carcinogenesis, or if other health threats exist with radiological carcinogenesis. Recommendations are made for fusion facility chemical safety evaluation and safety guidance for protecting the public from chemical releases, since such levels are not specifically identified in the DOE fusion safety standard.

  19. Mobile Facility

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOnItemResearch > The EnergyCenterDioxide Capture inFacility AMF Information Science

  20. Facility Representatives

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

  1. Facility Representatives

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011AT&T,OfficeEnd ofEvaluations in Covered Facilities | Department of Energy063-2011

  2. Facility Status

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

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

  3. Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities

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

    2010-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

    The order defines the safety management program required by 10 CFR 830.204(b)(5) for maintenance and the reliable performance of structures, systems and components that are part of the safety basis required by 10 CFR 830.202 at hazard category 1, 2 and 3 DOE nuclear facilities. Admin Chg 1, dated 3-12-2013. Cancels DOE O 433.1A.

  4. Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities

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

    2010-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

    The order defines the safety management program required by 10 CFR 830.204(b)(5) for maintenance and the reliable performance of structures, systems and components that are part of the safety basis required by 10 CFR 830.202 at hazard category 1, 2 and 3 DOE nuclear facilities. Cancels DOE O 433.1A. Admin Chg 1, dated 3-12-2013, cancels DOE O 433.1B.

  5. Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities

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

    2007-02-13T23:59:59.000Z

    The Order defines the safety management program required by 10 CFR 830.204(b)(5) for maintenance and the reliable performance of Structures, Systems and Components (SSCs) that are part of the safety basis required by 10 CFR 830.202.1 at hazard category 1, 2 and 3 Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities. Cancels DOE O 433.1. Canceled by DOE O 433.1B.

  6. Volcano Hazards at Fuego and Acatenango, GuatemalaVolcano Hazards at Fuego and Acatenango, GuatemalaVolcano Hazards at Fuego and Acatenango, GuatemalaVolcano Hazards at Fuego and Acatenango, GuatemalaVolcano Hazards at Fuego and Acatenango, Guatemala 1111

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Rose, William I.

    Volcano Hazards at Fuego and Acatenango, GuatemalaVolcano Hazards at Fuego and Acatenango, GuatemalaVolcano Hazards at Fuego and Acatenango, GuatemalaVolcano Hazards at Fuego and Acatenango, GuatemalaVolcano Hazards at Fuego and Acatenango, Guatemala 11111 Open-File Report 01­431Open-File Report 01

  7. Secondary plant succession on disturbed sites at Yucca Mountain, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Angerer, J.P.; Ostler, W.K.; Gabbert, W.D.; Schultz, B.W.

    1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report presents the results of a study of secondary plant succession on disturbed sites created during initial site investigations in the late 1970s and early 1980s at Yucca Mountain, NV. Specific study objectives were to determine the rate and success of secondary plant succession, identify plant species found in disturbances that may be suitable for site-specific reclamation, and to identify environmental variables that influence succession on disturbed sites. During 1991 and 1992, fifty seven disturbed sites were located. Vegetation parameters, disturbance characteristics and environmental variables were measured at each site. Disturbed site vegetation parameters were compared to that of undisturbed sites to determine the status of disturbed site plant succession. Vegetation on disturbed sites, after an average of ten years, was different from undisturbed areas. Ambrosia dumosa, Chrysothamnus teretifolius, Hymenoclea salsola, Gutierrezia sarothrae, Atriplex confertifolia, Atriplex canescens, and Stephanomeria pauciflora were the most dominant species across all disturbed sites. With the exception of A. dumosa, these species were generally minor components of the undisturbed vegetation. Elevation, soil compaction, soil potassium, and amounts of sand and gravel in the soil were found to be significant environmental variables influencing the species composition and abundance of perennial plants on disturbed sites. The recovery rate for disturbed site secondary succession was estimated. Using a linear function (which would represent optimal conditions), the recovery rate for perennial plant cover, regardless of which species comprised the cover, was estimated to be 20 years. However, when a logarithmic function (which would represent probable conditions) was used, the recovery rate was estimated to be 845 years. Recommendations for future studies and site-specific reclamation of disturbances are presented.

  8. Flood Assessment at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site and the Proposed Hazardous Waste Storage Unit, DOE/Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schmeltzer, J. S., Millier, J. J., Gustafson, D. L.

    1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A flood assessment at the Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) and the proposed Hazardous Waste Storage Unit (HWSU) in Area 5 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS) was performed to determine the 100-year flood hazard at these facilities. The study was conducted to determine whether the RWMS and HWSU are located within a 100-year flood hazard as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and to provide discharges for the design of flood protection.

  9. National Environmental Policy Act Hazards Assessment for the TREAT Alternative

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen; Annette L. Schafer

    2014-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document provides an assessment of hazards as required by the National Environmental Policy Act for the alternative of restarting the reactor at the Transient Reactor Test (TREAT) facility by the Resumption of Transient Testing Program. Potential hazards have been identified and screening level calculations have been conducted to provide estimates of unmitigated dose consequences that could be incurred through this alternative. Consequences considered include those related to use of the TREAT Reactor, experiment assembly handling, and combined events involving both the reactor and experiments. In addition, potential safety structures, systems, and components for processes associated with operating TREAT and onsite handling of nuclear fuels and experiments are listed. If this alternative is selected, a safety basis will be prepared in accordance with 10 CFR 830, “Nuclear Safety Management,” Subpart B, “Safety Basis Requirements.”

  10. National Environmental Policy Act Hazards Assessment for the TREAT Alternative

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen; Annette L. Schafer

    2013-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document provides an assessment of hazards as required by the National Environmental Policy Act for the alternative of restarting the reactor at the Transient Reactor Test (TREAT) facility by the Resumption of Transient Testing Program. Potential hazards have been identified and screening level calculations have been conducted to provide estimates of unmitigated dose consequences that could be incurred through this alternative. Consequences considered include those related to use of the TREAT Reactor, experiment assembly handling, and combined events involving both the reactor and experiments. In addition, potential safety structures, systems, and components for processes associated with operating TREAT and onsite handling of nuclear fuels and experiments are listed. If this alternative is selected, a safety basis will be prepared in accordance with 10 CFR 830, “Nuclear Safety Management,” Subpart B, “Safety Basis Requirements.”

  11. Fire hazard analysis for Plutonium Finishing Plant complex

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MCKINNIS, D.L.

    1999-02-23T23:59:59.000Z

    A fire hazards analysis (FHA) was performed for the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) Complex at the Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford site. The scope of the FHA focuses on the nuclear facilities/structures in the Complex. The analysis was conducted in accordance with RLID 5480.7, [DOE Directive RLID 5480.7, 1/17/94] and DOE Order 5480.7A, ''Fire Protection'' [DOE Order 5480.7A, 2/17/93] and addresses each of the sixteen principle elements outlined in paragraph 9.a(3) of the Order. The elements are addressed in terms of the fire protection objectives stated in paragraph 4 of DOE 5480.7A. In addition, the FHA also complies with WHC-CM-4-41, Fire Protection Program Manual, Section 3.4 [1994] and WHC-SD-GN-FHA-30001, Rev. 0 [WHC, 1994]. Objectives of the FHA are to determine: (1) the fire hazards that expose the PFP facilities, or that are inherent in the building operations, (2) the adequacy of the fire safety features currently located in the PFP Complex, and (3) the degree of compliance of the facility with specific fire safety provisions in DOE orders, related engineering codes, and standards.

  12. Technical basis for the transportation related handling representative accidents and associated hazards condition

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    TOMASZEWSKI, T.A.

    2003-03-21T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical basis document was developed to support the Tank Farms Documented Safety Analysis (DSA), and describes the risk binning process and the technical basis for assigning risk bins for the handling and movement of tank farm waste sample containers, and mixed, low-level, and hazardous operational waste containers incidental to onsite vehicle transportation representative accident and associated hazardous conditions. The purpose of the risk binning process is to determine the need for safety-significant structures, systems, and components (SSC) and technical safety requirement (TSR)-level controls for a given representative accident or represented hazardous conditions based on an evaluation of the frequency and consequence. Note that the risk binning process is not applied to facility workers because all facility worker hazardous conditions are considered for safety-significant SSCs and/or TSR-level controls. See RPP-14286, Facility Worker Technical Basis Document, for these considerations. Determination of the need for safety-class SSCs was performed in accordance with DOE-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for US. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analyses, as described in this report.

  13. Mock Nuclear Processing Facility-Safeguards Training Requirements

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gibbs, Philip [Brookhaven National Lab. (BNL), Upton, NY (United States); Hasty, Tim [Savannah River Site (SRS), Aiken, SC (United States). Savannah River National Lab. (SRNL); Johns, Rissell [Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States); Baum, Gregory [Sandia National Lab. (SNL-NM), Albuquerque, NM (United States)

    2014-08-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This document outlines specific training requirements in the topical areas of Material Control and Accounting (MC&A) and Physical Protection(PP) which are to be used as technical input for designing a mock Integrated Security Facility (ISF) at Sandia National Laboratories (SNL). The overall project objective for these requirements is to enhance the ability to deliver training on Material Protection Control and Accounting (MC&A) concepts regarding hazardous material such as irradiated materials with respect to bulk processing facilities.

  14. Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Larson, H L

    2007-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

    This document contains Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, which include Area 612 (A612) and the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) Storage Area at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The TSRs constitute requirements regarding the safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. These TSRs are derived from the Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities (DSA) (LLNL 2006). The analysis presented therein determined that the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 2 non-reactor nuclear facilities. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits and controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard and accident analyses. Further, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls sections of the TSRs. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are used by RHWM to handle and store hazardous waste, TRANSURANIC (TRU) WASTE, LOW-LEVEL WASTE (LLW), mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL as well as small amounts from other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities, as described in the DSA. In addition, several minor treatments (e.g., drum crushing, size reduction, and decontamination) are carried out in these facilities. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are located in two portions of the LLNL main site. A612 is located in the southeast quadrant of LLNL. The A612 fenceline is approximately 220 m west of Greenville Road. The DWTF Storage Area, which includes Building 693 (B693), Building 696 Radioactive Waste Storage Area (B696R), and associated yard areas and storage areas within the yard, is located in the northeast quadrant of LLNL in the DWTF complex. The DWTF Storage Area fenceline is approximately 90 m west of Greenville Road. A612 and the DWTF Storage Area are subdivided into various facilities and storage areas, consisting of buildings, tents, other structures, and open areas as described in Chapter 2 of the DSA. Section 2.4 of the DSA provides an overview of the buildings, structures, and areas in the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, including construction details such as basic floor plans, equipment layout, construction materials, controlling dimensions, and dimensions significant to the hazard and accident analysis. Chapter 5 of the DSA documents the derivation of the TSRs and develops the operational limits that protect the safety envelope defined for the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. This TSR document is applicable to the handling, storage, and treatment of hazardous waste, TRU WASTE, LLW, mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste received or generated in the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. Section 5, Administrative Controls, contains those Administrative Controls necessary to ensure safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. Programmatic Administrative Controls are in Section 5.6. This Introduction to the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES TSRs is not part of the TSR limits or conditions and contains no requirements related to WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES operations or to the safety analyses of the DSA.

  15. A Green Laser Pointer Hazard

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Jemellie Galang; Allesandro Restelli; Edward W. Hagley; Charles W. Clark

    2010-08-09T23:59:59.000Z

    An inexpensive green laser pointer was found to emit 20 mW of infrared radiation during normal use. This is potentially a serious hazard that would not be noticed by most users of such pointers. We find that this infrared emission derives from the design of the pointer, and describe a simple method of testing for infrared emissions using common household items.

  16. Title III hazardous air pollutants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Todd, R.

    1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    The author presents an overview of the key provisions of Title III of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. The key provisions include the following: 112(b) -- 189 Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP); 112(a) -- Major Source: 10 TPY/25 TPY; 112(d) -- Application of MACT; 112(g) -- Modifications; 112(I) -- State Program; 112(j) -- The Hammer; and 112(r) -- Accidental Release Provisions.

  17. Abatement of Air Pollution: Hazardous Air Pollutants (Connecticut...

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

    allowable stack concentrations and hazard limiting values for the emission of hazardous air pollutants. The regulations also discuss sampling procedures for hazardous air...

  18. Chlorine Gas: An Evolving Hazardous Material Threat and Unconventional Weapon

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Jones, Robert; Wills, Brandon; Kang, Christopher

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Chlorine Gas: An Evolving Hazardous Material Threat andChlorine gas represents a hazardous material threat fromrepresents a persistent hazardous material (HAZMAT) threat.

  19. The Cost of Power Disturbances to Industrial & Digital Economy Companies

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Schrijver, Karel

    's Consortium for Electric Infrastructure for a Digital Society (CEIDS) By 1001 Fourier Drive, Suite 200 MadisonThe Cost of Power Disturbances to Industrial & Digital Economy Companies Submitted to: EPRI To Client #12;The Cost of Power Disturbances to Industrial & Digital Economy Companies Confidential

  20. UNPACKING COMPLEXITIES OF DISTURBANCE: INSIGHTS FROM CROSS-SYSTEM COMPARISONS

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Minnesota, University of

    Duniway, and Christine Laney are with the US Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service;Abstract Current use of definitions of disturbance limit quantitative comparisons of the effects: disturbance, drought, ecological theory, global change, hurricane, overgrazing, thresholds, wildfire 2 #12

  1. Universally Valid Error-Disturbance Relations in Continuous Measurements

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Atsushi Nishizawa; Yanbei Chen

    2015-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

    In quantum physics, measurement error and disturbance were first naively thought to be simply constrained by the Heisenberg uncertainty relation. Later, more rigorous analysis showed that the error and disturbance satisfy more subtle inequalities. Several versions of universally valid error-disturbance relations (EDR) have already been obtained and experimentally verified in the regimes where naive applications of the Heisenberg uncertainty relation failed. However, these EDRs were formulated for discrete measurements. In this paper, we consider continuous measurement processes and obtain new EDR inequalities in the Fourier space: in terms of the power spectra of the system and probe variables. By applying our EDRs to a linear optomechanical system, we confirm that a tradeoff relation between error and disturbance leads to the existence of an optimal strength of the disturbance in a joint measurement. Interestingly, even with this optimal case, the inequality of the new EDR is not saturated because of doublely existing standard quantum limits in the inequality.

  2. Owning Hazard, A Tragedy Barbara Young Welke*

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Barrett, Jeffrey A.

    693 Owning Hazard, A Tragedy Barbara Young Welke* In Memory of Frances Young Welke (March 21, 1992 in the ownership of hazard from the individuals who suffered injury, to the enterprises involved in manufacturing

  3. Georgia Hazardous Site Response Act (Georgia)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Georgia Hazardous Site Response Act is Georgia’s version of Superfund. The Act provides for graduated fees on the disposal of hazardous waste, a trust fund to enable the EPD to clean up or plan...

  4. Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Management Act (Massachusetts)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This Act contains regulations for safe disposal of hazardous waste, and establishes that a valid license is required to collect, transport, store, treat, use, or dispose of hazardous waste. Short...

  5. ASSESSING CHEMICAL HAZARDS AT THE PLUTONIUM FINISHING PLANT (PFP) FOR PLANNING FUTURE D&D

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HOPKINS, A.M.; KLOS, D.B.; MINETT, M.J.

    2007-01-25T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper documents the fiscal year (FY) 2006 assessment to evaluate potential chemical and radiological hazards associated with vessels and piping in the former plutonium process areas at Hanford's Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP). Evaluations by PFP engineers as design authorities for specific systems and other subject-matter experts were conducted to identify the chemical hazards associated with transitioning the process areas for the long-term layup of PFP before its eventual final decontamination and decommissioning (D and D). D and D activities in the main process facilities were suspended in September 2005 for a period of between 5 and 10 years. A previous assessment conducted in FY 2003 found that certain activities to mitigate chemical hazards could be deferred safely until the D and D of PFP, which had been scheduled to result in a slab-on-grade condition by 2009. As a result of necessary planning changes, however, D and D activities at PFP will be delayed until after the 2009 time frame. Given the extended project and plant life, it was determined that a review of the plant chemical hazards should be conducted. This review to determine the extended life impact of chemicals is called the ''Plutonium Finishing Plant Chemical Hazards Assessment, FY 2006''. This FY 2006 assessment addresses potential chemical and radiological hazard areas identified by facility personnel and subject-matter experts who reevaluated all the chemical systems (items) from the FY 2003 assessment. This paper provides the results of the FY 2006 chemical hazards assessment and describes the methodology used to assign a hazard ranking to the items reviewed.

  6. D-Area Preliminary Hazards Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Blanchard, A. [Westinghouse Savannah River Company, AIKEN, SC (United States); Paik, I.R. [Westinghouse Safety Management Solutions, , ()

    1998-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A comprehensive review of hazards associated with the D-Area was performed to identify postulated event scenarios.

  7. Chemical Hygiene Plan for the MRL TEMPO Facility

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Akhmedov, Azer

    1 Chemical Hygiene Plan for the MRL TEMPO Facility September 25, 2009 Update and Revision Table in a professional, safe, and environmentally responsible fashion . This Chemical Hygiene Plan (CHP) is intended a Chemical Hygiene Plan, its scope is not limited to chemical hazards. We have tried to include every topic

  8. Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    1991-09-18T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  9. CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS ENERGY Table Of Contents

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    US Army Corps of Engineers

    EM 385-1-1 XX Sep 13 i Section 12 CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS ENERGY Table Of Contents Section: Page 12.A General.................. .............................................. ... .12-1 12.B Hazardous Energy.......................................................12-6 #12;EM 385-1-1 XX Sep 13 12-1 SECTION 12 CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS ENERGY 12.A GENERAL 12.A.01 When

  10. Hazard & Disaster Management College of Science

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Hickman, Mark

    Hazard & Disaster Management College of Science 09 For further information about the University Postgraduate Programmes #12;PostgraduateProgrammes in Hazard & Disaster Management Postgraduate Diploma - BSc by risk management. These programmes aim to develop skills of hazard and disaster management through

  11. Hazard Communication Program 1.0 REFERENCE

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    de Lijser, Peter

    Hazard Communication Program 1.0 REFERENCE California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Sections 337 the properties and potential safety and health hazards of the materials which they use or to which they are exposed. Employees who use or may be exposed to potentially hazardous substances or harmful physical

  12. University of Florida Hazard Communication Program

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Slatton, Clint

    in the following areas with regard to the inventoried hazardous chemicals to which I am exposed: a. The chemical involving them in my work area. c. The proper and safe handling of the hazardous chemicals. d. The location chemicals. f. The physical and health hazards of the chemicals in my work area. g. Methods to protect myself

  13. Focus Sheet | Hazardous Waste Checklist How to be ready for state hazardous waste

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Wilcock, William

    storage cabinet. Avoid accumulating a lot of waste ­ keep areas clear. EPO ­ Hazardous Waste Checklist 07Focus Sheet | Hazardous Waste Checklist How to be ready for state hazardous waste inspectors. See a hazardous waste inspection. ons, rrosive. n hemicals? ical waste. Waste-like chemicals have als Are you

  14. HAZARDOUS DRUG SAFETY AND HEALTH PLAN FOR HANDLING ANTINEOPLASTIC OTHER HAZARDOUS DRUGS IN CLINICAL ENVIRONMENTS

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Kim, Duck O.

    containers, pickup hazardous drug waste and provide chemo spill kits to appropriate areas. The OfficeHAZARDOUS DRUG SAFETY AND HEALTH PLAN FOR HANDLING ANTINEOPLASTIC AND OTHER HAZARDOUS DRUGS, administration and disposal of drug residues. Drugs are classified as hazardous if studies in animals and

  15. 324 Building fire hazards analysis implementation plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eggen, C.D.

    1998-09-16T23:59:59.000Z

    In March 1998, the 324 Building Fire Hazards Analysis (FHA) (Reference 1) was approved by the US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL) for implementation by B and W Hanford Company (BWHC). The purpose of the FHA was to identify gaps in compliance with DOE Order 5480.7A (Reference 2) and Richland Operations Office Implementation Directive (RLID) 5480.7 (Reference 3), especially in regard to loss limitation. The FHA identified compliance gaps in six areas and provided 20 recommendations to bring the 324 Building into compliance with DOE Order 5480.7A. Additionally, one observation was provided. To date, four of the recommendations and the one observation have been completed. Actions identified for seven of the recommendations are currently in progress. Exemption requests will be transmitted to DOE-RL for three of the recommendations. Six of the recommendations are related to future shut down activities of the facility and the corrective actions are not being addressed as part of this plan. The actions for recommendations associated with the safety related part of the 324 Building and operation of the cells and support areas were evaluated using the Unreviewed Safety Question (USQ) process. Major Life Safety Code concerns have been corrected. The status of the recommendations and actions was confirmed during the July 1998 Fire Protection Assessment. BVMC will use this Implementation Plan to bring the 324 Building and its operation into compliance with DOE Order 5480.7A and RLID 5480.7.

  16. Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laycak, D T

    2008-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

    This document contains Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, which include Area 625 (A625) and the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) Storage Area at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The TSRs constitute requirements regarding the safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. These TSRs are derived from the 'Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities' (DSA) (LLNL 2008). The analysis presented therein determined that the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 2 non-reactor nuclear facilities. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits and controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard and accident analyses. Further, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls sections of the TSRs. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are used by RHWM to handle and store hazardous waste, TRANSURANIC (TRU) WASTE, LOW-LEVEL WASTE (LLW), mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL as well as small amounts from other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities, as described in the DSA. In addition, several minor treatments (e.g., size reduction and decontamination) are carried out in these facilities. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are located in two portions of the LLNL main site. A625 is located in the southeast quadrant of LLNL. The A625 fenceline is approximately 225 m west of Greenville Road. The DWTF Storage Area, which includes Building 693 (B693), Building 696 Radioactive Waste Storage Area (B696R), and associated yard areas and storage areas within the yard, is located in the northeast quadrant of LLNL in the DWTF complex. The DWTF Storage Area fenceline is approximately 90 m west of Greenville Road. A625 and the DWTF Storage Area are subdivided into various facilities and storage areas, consisting of buildings, tents, other structures, and open areas as described in Chapter 2 of the DSA. Section 2.4 of the DSA provides an overview of the buildings, structures, and areas in the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, including construction details such as basic floor plans, equipment layout, construction materials, controlling dimensions, and dimensions significant to the hazard and accident analysis. Chapter 5 of the DSA documents the derivation of the TSRs and develops the operational limits that protect the safety envelope defined for the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. This TSR document is applicable to the handling, storage, and treatment of hazardous waste, TRU WASTE, LLW, mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste received or generated in the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. Section 5, Administrative Controls, contains those Administrative Controls necessary to ensure safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. Programmatic Administrative Controls are in Section 5.6.

  17. Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laycak, D T

    2010-03-05T23:59:59.000Z

    This document contains Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, which include Area 625 (A625) and the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) Storage Area at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The TSRs constitute requirements regarding the safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. These TSRs are derived from the Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities (DSA) (LLNL 2009). The analysis presented therein determined that the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 2 non-reactor nuclear facilities. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits and controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard and accident analyses. Further, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls sections of the TSRs. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are used by RHWM to handle and store hazardous waste, TRANSURANIC (TRU) WASTE, LOW-LEVEL WASTE (LLW), mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL as well as small amounts from other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities, as described in the DSA. In addition, several minor treatments (e.g., size reduction and decontamination) are carried out in these facilities. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are located in two portions of the LLNL main site. A625 is located in the southeast quadrant of LLNL. The A625 fenceline is approximately 225 m west of Greenville Road. The DWTF Storage Area, which includes Building 693 (B693), Building 696 Radioactive Waste Storage Area (B696R), and associated yard areas and storage areas within the yard, is located in the northeast quadrant of LLNL in the DWTF complex. The DWTF Storage Area fenceline is approximately 90 m west of Greenville Road. A625 and the DWTF Storage Area are subdivided into various facilities and storage areas, consisting of buildings, tents, other structures, and open areas as described in Chapter 2 of the DSA. Section 2.4 of the DSA provides an overview of the buildings, structures, and areas in the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, including construction details such as basic floor plans, equipment layout, construction materials, controlling dimensions, and dimensions significant to the hazard and accident analysis. Chapter 5 of the DSA documents the derivation of the TSRs and develops the operational limits that protect the safety envelope defined for the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. This TSR document is applicable to the handling, storage, and treatment of hazardous waste, TRU WASTE, LLW, mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste received or generated in the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. Section 5, Administrative Controls, contains those Administrative Controls necessary to ensure safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. Programmatic Administrative Controls are in Section 5.4.

  18. Hazard Avoidance in Wireless Sensor and Actor Networks

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sivakumar, Raghupathy

    Hazard Avoidance in Wireless Sensor and Actor Networks Ramanuja Vedantham Zhenyun Zhuang Prof [Akyildiz'04] Network Low bandwidth (Hazards Hazards undesirable changes in the environment Reason for hazards Different latencies For different sensors and actors

  19. from Isotope Production Facility

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

    Cancer-fighting treatment gets boost from Isotope Production Facility April 13, 2012 Isotope Production Facility produces cancer-fighting actinium 2:32 Isotope cancer treatment...

  20. Fuel Fabrication Facility

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Construction of the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility Construction of the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility November 2005 May 2007 June 2008 May 2012...

  1. NEW - DOE O 420.1 Chg 1, Facility Safety

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

    The Order establishes facility and programmatic safety requirements for DOE and NNSA for nuclear safety design criteria, fire protection, criticality safety, natural phenomena hazards (NPH) mitigation, and System Engineer Program. This Page Change is limited in scope to changes necessary to invoke DOE-STD-1104, Review and Approval of Nuclear Facility Safety Basis and Safety Design Basis Document, and revised DOE-STD-3009-2014, Preparation of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis as required methods. DOE O 420.1C Chg 1, dated 2-27-15, cancels DOE O 420.1C, dated 12-4-12.

  2. Nuclear fuel cycle facility accident analysis handbook

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1998-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of this Handbook is to provide guidance on how to calculate the characteristics of releases of radioactive materials and/or hazardous chemicals from nonreactor nuclear facilities. In addition, the Handbook provides guidance on how to calculate the consequences of those releases. There are four major chapters: Hazard Evaluation and Scenario Development; Source Term Determination; Transport Within Containment/Confinement; and Atmospheric Dispersion and Consequences Modeling. These chapters are supported by Appendices, including: a summary of chemical and nuclear information that contains descriptions of various fuel cycle facilities; details on how to calculate the characteristics of source terms for releases of hazardous chemicals; a comparison of NRC, EPA, and OSHA programs that address chemical safety; a summary of the performance of HEPA and other filters; and a discussion of uncertainties. Several sample problems are presented: a free-fall spill of powder, an explosion with radioactive release; a fire with radioactive release; filter failure; hydrogen fluoride release from a tankcar; a uranium hexafluoride cylinder rupture; a liquid spill in a vitrification plant; and a criticality incident. Finally, this Handbook includes a computer model, LPF No.1B, that is intended for use in calculating Leak Path Factors. A list of contributors to the Handbook is presented in Chapter 6. 39 figs., 35 tabs.

  3. Detection device for hazardous materials

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Partin, Judy K.; Grey, Alan E.

    1994-04-05T23:59:59.000Z

    A detection device that is activated by the interaction of a hazardous chcal with a coating interactive with said chemical on an optical fiber thereby reducing the amount of light passing through the fiber to a light detector. A combination of optical filters separates the light into a signal beam and a reference beam which after detection, appropriate amplification, and comparison with preset internal signals, activates an alarm means if a predetermined level of contaminant is observed.

  4. Detection device for hazardous materials

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Partin, Judy K. (Idaho Falls, ID); Grey, Alan E. (Idaho Falls, ID)

    1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A detection device that is activated by the interaction of a hazardous chcal with a coating interactive with said chemical on an optical fiber thereby reducing the amount of light passing through the fiber to a light detector. A combination of optical filters separates the light into a signal beam and a reference beam which after detection, appropriate amplification, and comparison with preset internal signals, activates an alarm means if a predetermined level of contaminant is observed.

  5. Training for hazardous waste workers

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Favel, K.

    1990-10-26T23:59:59.000Z

    This implementation plan describes the system and provides the information and schedules that are necessary to comply with the Department of Energy (DOE) Albuquerque Operations Office (AL) Memorandum, Reference EPD dated September 11, 1990, Training for Hazardous Waste Workers. The memo establishes the need for identifying employees requiring environmental training, ensuring that the training is received, and meeting documentation and recordkeeping requirements for the training.

  6. Guide to research facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Guide provides information on facilities at US Department of Energy (DOE) and other government laboratories that focus on research and development of energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies. These laboratories have opened these facilities to outside users within the scientific community to encourage cooperation between the laboratories and the private sector. The Guide features two types of facilities: designated user facilities and other research facilities. Designated user facilities are one-of-a-kind DOE facilities that are staffed by personnel with unparalleled expertise and that contain sophisticated equipment. Other research facilities are facilities at DOE and other government laboratories that provide sophisticated equipment, testing areas, or processes that may not be available at private facilities. Each facility listing includes the name and phone number of someone you can call for more information.

  7. Hazardous materials in Fresh Kills landfill

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hirschhorn, J.S. [Hirschhorn and Associates, Wheaton, MD (United States)

    1997-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    No environmental monitoring and corrective action programs can pinpoint multiple locations of hazardous materials the total amount of them in a large landfill. Yet the consequences of hazardous materials in MSW landfills are considerable, in terms of public health concerns, environmental damage, and cleanup costs. In this paper a rough estimation is made of how much hazardous material may have been disposed in Fresh Kills landfill in Staten Island, New York. The logic and methods could be used for other MSW landfills. Fresh Kills has frequently been described as the world`s largest MSW landfill. While records of hazardous waste disposal at Fresh Kills over nearly 50 years of operation certainly do not exist, no reasonable person would argue with the conclusion that large quantities of hazardous waste surely have been disposed at Fresh Kills, both legally and illegally. This study found that at least 2 million tons of hazardous wastes and substances have been disposed at Fresh Kills since 1948. Major sources are: household hazardous waste, commercial RCRA hazardous waste, incinerator ash, and commercial non-RCRA hazardous waste, governmental RCRA hazardous waste. Illegal disposal of hazardous waste surely has contributed even more. This is a sufficient amount to cause serious environmental contamination and releases, especially from such a landfill without an engineered liner system, for example. This figure is roughly 1% of the total amount of waste disposed in Fresh Kills since 1948, probably at least 200 million tons.

  8. Exclusions and exemptions from RCRA hazardous waste regulation. RCRA Information Brief

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Powers, J.

    1993-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The provisions in 40 CFR 261 establish which solid waste and are regulated under Subtitle C of the Resource Considered hazardous waste and are regulated under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). These provisions also exclude or exempt certain wastes from regulation. Wastes are excluded or exempted from coverage for a variety of reasons. The original RCRA legislation excluded a number of wastes that did not present a significant threat to human health or the environment or that were managed under other environmental programs. Other wastes were excluded by EPA to encourage their recycling or reuse as feedstocks in manufacturing processes. Some exclusions or exemptions serve to establish when a waste material becomes subject to regulation or when waste quantities are too minimal to be fully covered by the Federal hazardous waste regulatory program. As new regulations have caused the universe of RCRA generators and facilities to increase, the number of exclusions and exemptions have increased as well. This information Brief provides an overview of the types of waste and hazardous waste management units/facilities that may be excluded or exempted from regulation under the Federal hazardous waste (RCRA) Subtitle C) regulatory program. These wastes and units/facilities may or may not be excluded or exempted from coverage under authorized State RCRA programs.

  9. A meta-analysis of soil microbial biomass responses to forest disturbances

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Holden, Sandra R; Treseder, Kathleen K

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    linked increases in disturbance frequency will affect soilthe frequency and severity of forest disturbances, withfrequency and severity of distur- bance events in forests. Our results imply that these disturbance

  10. Geographic patterns of diversity in streams are predicted by a multivariate model of disturbance and productivity

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Cardinale, Bradley J; Hillebrand, H; Charles, D F

    2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    of productivity and disturbance frequency, and an increasing= ?4.81, P disturbance frequency (b 4 = ?4.57 ±stream lati- tude and disturbance frequency (r = 0.03, P =

  11. University of Nevada, Reno Plant Community Invasibility in Riparian Landscapes: Role of Disturbance,

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Weisberg, Peter J.

    , diversions, and inter-basin water transfers alter disturbance regimes (flood frequency, magnitude, timingUniversity of Nevada, Reno Plant Community Invasibility in Riparian Landscapes: Role of Disturbance GRACE MORTENSON entitled Plant Community Invasibility in Riparian Landscapes: Role of Disturbance

  12. Classification of power quality disturbances using time-frequency ambiguity plane and

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Mamishev, Alexander

    Classification of power quality disturbances using time-frequency ambiguity plane and neural disturbances in power systems is an important task in power system monitoring and protection, This paper discussed. Keywords -- Power Quality Disturbances, Classification, Ambiguity Plane, Modified Fisher

  13. Occupational exposures to uranium: processes, hazards, and regulations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stoetzel, G.A.; Fisher, D.R.; McCormack, W.D.; Hoenes, G.R.; Marks, S.; Moore, R.H.; Quilici, D.G.; Breitenstein, B.D.

    1981-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The United States Uranium Registry (USUR) was formed in 1978 to investigate potential hazards from occupational exposure to uranium and to assess the need for special health-related studies of uranium workers. This report provides a summary of Registry work done to date. The history of the uranium industry is outlined first, and the current commercial uranium industry (mining, milling, conversion, enrichment, and fuel fabrication) is described. This description includes information on basic processes and areas of greatest potential radiological exposure. In addition, inactive commercial facilities and other uranium operations are discussed. Regulation of the commercial production industry for uranium fuel is reported, including the historic development of regulations and the current regulatory agencies and procedures for each phase of the industry. A review of radiological health practices in the industry - facility monitoring, exposure control, exposure evaluation, and record-keeping - is presented. A discussion of the nonradiological hazards of the industry is provided, and the final section describes the tissue program developed as part of the Registry.

  14. The steady-state mosaic of disturbance and succession across an old-growth Central Amazon forest landscape

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    on return frequencies for episodic disturbances, a balancereturn frequency of succession-inducing disturbances, variesEpisodic disturbance events with return frequencies greater

  15. Microsoft Word - CX_Memo_L0276.docx

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

    siting and construction or major expansion of waste storage, disposal, recovery, or treatment facilities, (iii) disturb hazardous substances, pollutants, contaminants, or...

  16. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION DETERMINATION

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

    but the proposal may include categorically excluded waste storage, disposal, recovery, or treatment actions or facilities; (3) Disturb hazardous substances, pollutants,...

  17. Microsoft Word - DRAFT Cowlitz Longview CX memo 080910.doc

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

    siting and construction or major expansion of waste storage, disposal, recovery, or treatment facilities, (iii) disturb hazardous substances, pollutants, contaminants, or...

  18. Microsoft Word - 2010_NESC_Power_Purchase_Contract_CX.doc

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

    siting and construction or major expansion of waste storage, disposal, recovery, or treatment facilities, (iii) disturb hazardous substances, pollutants, contaminants, or...

  19. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW for CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION DETERMINATION

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

    the proposal may include categorically excluded was te storage, disposal. recovery. or treatment actions o r facilities: (3) Disturb hazardous substances, pollutants,...

  20. Microsoft Word - CX_Memo_Santiam.docx

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

    siting and construction or major expansion of waste storage, disposal, recovery, or treatment facilities, (iii) disturb hazardous substances, pollutants, contaminants, or...

  1. Microsoft Word - CX_Memo_Naselle.docx

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

    siting and construction or major expansion of waste storage, disposal, recovery, or treatment facilities, (iii) disturb hazardous substances, pollutants, contaminants, or...

  2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW f"rCATECORICAL EXCLUSION DETERMINATION

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

    but the proposal may include categorically excluded waste storage, disposal. recovery. or treatment actions or facilities; (3) Disturb hazardous substances, pollutants,...

  3. EV I

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

    but the proposal may include categorically excluded waste storage. disposal. recovery. or treatment actions or facilities; (3) Disturb hazardous substances, pollutants....

  4. Hazard Labeling Elements 1. Product identifier: how the hazardous chemical is identified. This can be (but is not

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Chapman, Michael S.

    Hazard Labeling Elements 1. Product identifier: how the hazardous chemical is identified. This can of severity of hazard and alert the reader to a potential hazard on the label. There are only two signal words, "Danger" and "Warning." Within a specific hazard class, "Danger" is used for the more severe hazards

  5. Future Fixed Target Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Melnitchouk, Wolodymyr

    2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    We review plans for future fixed target lepton- and hadron-scattering facilities, including the 12 GeV upgraded CEBAF accelerator at Jefferson Lab, neutrino beam facilities at Fermilab, and the antiproton PANDA facility at FAIR. We also briefly review recent theoretical developments which will aid in the interpretation of the data expected from these facilities.

  6. Scanning probe microscopy with inherent disturbance suppression using micromechanical systems

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sparks, Andrew William, 1977-

    2005-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    All scanning probe microscopes (SPMs) are affected by disturbances, or mechanical noise, in their environments which can limit their imaging resolution. This thesis introduces a general approach for suppressing out-of-plane ...

  7. ORIGINAL PAPER Does off-trail backcountry skiing disturb moose?

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paris-Sud XI, Université de

    consequences on wildlife's energy budget if wildlife resists habituation, if an animal's risk perception and Gutzwiller 1995; Stankowich 2008). Human-induced disturbances may affect wildlife ecology because they may

  8. Disturbances, organisms and ecosystems: a global change perspective

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    -called "barbarians" are weakly efficient in a stable environment because they waste energy for foraging, growth, to anticipate disturbances will be examined in the light of evolutionary processes. At last, strategies by which

  9. Evolution of aquatic insect behaviours across a gradient of disturbance predictability

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Evolution of aquatic insect behaviours across a gradient of disturbance predictability David A `sufficient'. At one extreme, large infrequent disturbances such as hurricanes and tsunamis may devastate

  10. Closing the TSTA Facility, tritium removed from TSTA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tesch, Charles; Rogers, M. L. (Michael L.); Michelotti, R. A. (Roy A.)

    2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Tritium Systems Test Assembly (TSTA) project was begun in 1978 to develop, design, and demonstrate the technology and safe operation of selected tritium processing systems required for a fusion reactor. The TSTA is located at Los Alamos National Laboratory in Los Alamos, New Mexico, and was initially funded by the US DOE. Tritium processing at TSTA began in 1984. In 2001, DOE determined that the mission of TSTA had been successfully completed, and the facility should be stabilized. Stabilization comprised placing the facility in a safe and stable configuration with a goal of reducing the tritium inventory to below the DOE low-hazard nuclear facility threshold of 16000 Ci. The facility was then to be held in this safe and stable state until funding was available for the final decontamination and decommissioning. This paper will describe the process and results of the activities required to achieve the safe and stable condition. At the completion of the TSTA mission, the tritium inventory at TSTA was 170 grams. The facility was categorized as a DOE moderate-hazard nuclear facility. At the completion of the stabilization project in 2003, the tritium inventory had been reduced to less than 1 gram, well below the low-hazard nuclear facility threshold, and the facility was categorized as a radiological facility. The pre-stabilization tritium inventory at TSTA was grouped in the following categories: tritium gas mixed with hydrogen isotopes, tritiated water absorbed on molecular sieve, tritium held up as a hydride on various metals, and tritium held up in process components. For each category, the tritium content was characterized, a path for removal was determined, and the proper disposal package was developed. Half of the tritium removed from the facility was reusable and the other half was disposed as waste. Hydrogen exchange, calorimetry, direct sampling, pressure/composition/temperature, radiological smear surveys, and controlled regeneration were methods used to determine the tritium inventory. The removed tritium inventory was either sent to other facilities for processing or buried at the Los Alamos radioactive waste disposal site. No effort was made to recover tritiated water absorbed on molecular sieve. Some hardware was sent to other facilities for reuse. One complete experimental system, including a contaminated glovebox and many components, was packaged and transferred to another DOE site for future use. Special burial containers that could safely contain up to 10 grams of tritium per package were designed and fabricated. The entire project was conducted with low tritium emission to the environment and negligible personnel exposure. After completion of the tritium removal, all remaining hardware and piping were opened and vented, and facility emission was below 1 Ci per day.

  11. Occupational Safety Review of High Technology Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lee Cadwallader

    2005-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This report contains reviews of operating experiences, selected accident events, and industrial safety performance indicators that document the performance of the major US DOE magnetic fusion experiments and particle accelerators. These data are useful to form a basis for the occupational safety level at matured research facilities with known sets of safety rules and regulations. Some of the issues discussed are radiation safety, electromagnetic energy exposure events, and some of the more widespread issues of working at height, equipment fires, confined space work, electrical work, and other industrial hazards. Nuclear power plant industrial safety data are also included for comparison.

  12. Mission Support Alliance, LLC Volpentest Hazardous Materials...

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

    should use caution to preclude an overreliance on individual expertise and ensure hazard analysis procedures and policies are fully integrated into the systematic approach...

  13. Identification of Hazards, 3/9/95

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The objective of this surveillance is to evaluate the effectiveness of the contractor's hazards identification programs.  Surveillance activities encompass maintenance and implementation of safety...

  14. Mr. James Bearzi Hazardous Waste Bureau

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

    Bearzi Hazardous Waste Bureau Department of Energy Carlsbad Field Office P. O . Box 3090 Carlsbad. New Mexico 88221 May 26, 2009 New Mexico Environment Department 2905 E. Rodeo...

  15. Hazards Control, 3/9/35

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The objective of this surveillance is to evaluate the effectiveness of the contractor's programs and policy for establishing controls to mitigate hazards affecting the public, worker, and...

  16. Hazardous Material Packaging for Transport - Administrative Procedures

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

    1986-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

    To establ1sh administrative procedures for the certification and use of radioactive and other hazardous materials packaging by the Department of Energy (DOE).

  17. Hazardous Material Transportation Safety (South Dakota)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This legislation authorizes the Division of Highway Safety, in the Department of Public Safety, to promulgate regulations pertaining to the safe transportation of hazardous materials by a motor...

  18. Fire hazards analysis of central waste complex

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Irwin, R.M.

    1996-05-30T23:59:59.000Z

    This document analyzes the fire hazards associated with operational the Central Waste Complex. It provides the analysis and recommendations necessary to ensure compliance with applicable fire codes.

  19. BNL | CFN: Transport of Hazardous Materials

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

    Transportation of Hazardous Materials and Nanomaterials The following contains guidance for transporting materials to and from BNL and for on-site transfers. All staff and users...

  20. DC Hazardous Waste Management (District of Columbia)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This regulation regulates the generation, storage, transportation, treatment, and disposal of hazardous waste, and wherever feasible, reduces or eliminates waste at the source. It is the policy of...

  1. Hazardous Waste Management System-General (Ohio)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This chapter of the law establishes that the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency provides general regulations regarding hazardous waste, including landfills. Specific passages refer to the...

  2. 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...

  3. Louisiana Hazardous Waste Control Law (Louisiana)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality is responsible for administering the Louisiana Hazardous Waste Control Law and the regulations created under that law.

  4. Extremely Hazardous Substances Risk Management Act (Delaware)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This act lays out provisions for local governments to implement regulations and standards for the management of extremely hazardous substances, which are defined and categorized as follows:

  5. CRAD, Facility Safety- Nuclear Facility Safety Basis

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  6. Texas Facilities Commission's Facility Management Strategic Plan

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Ramirez, J. A.

    , Texas, November 17 - 19, 2009 Facility Strategic Plan ?High Performance Building Approach ? Envelope ? Load Reduction ? (Re)Design ? Advanced Tactics ?Building Automation ? Sub-metering ? Controls ?Commissioning ? Assessment ? Continuous ?Facility... International Conference for Enhanced Building Operations, Austin, Texas, November 17 - 19, 2009 Commissioning Assessment ?30 buildings ?CC Opportunities ?O&M Improvements ?Energy/Capital Improvement Opportunities ?Quick Payback Implementation ?Levering DM...

  7. Facility effluent monitoring plan for the 222-S Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nickels, J.M.; Warwick, G.J.

    1992-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A facility effluent monitoring plan is required by the US Department of Energy in DOE Order 5400.1 for any operations that involve hazardous materials and radioactive substances that could impact employee or public safety or the environment. A facility effluent monitoring plan determination was performed during Calendar Year 1991 and the evaluation requires the need for a facility effluent monitoring plan. This document is prepared using the specific guidelines identified in A Guide for Preparing Hanford Site Facility Effluent Monitoring Plans, WHC-EP-0438-1. This facility effluent monitoring plan assesses effluent monitoring systems and evaluates whether they are adequate to ensure the public health and safety as specified in applicable Federal, State, and local requirements. This facility effluent monitoring plan shall ensure long-range integrity of the effluent monitoring systems by requiring an update whenever a new process or operation introduces new hazardous materials or significant radioactive materials. This document must be reviewed annually even if there are no operational changes, and it must be updated, as a minimum, every three years.

  8. Hanford Site Near-Facility Environmental Monitoring Data Report for Calendar Year 2008

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Perkins, Craig J.; Dorsey, Michael C.; Mckinney, Stephen M.; Wilde, Justin W.; Poston, Ted M.

    2009-09-15T23:59:59.000Z

    Near-facility environmental monitoring is defined as monitoring near facilities that have the potential to discharge or have discharged, stored, or disposed of radioactive or hazardous materials. Monitoring locations are associated with nuclear facilities such as the Plutonium Finishing Plant, Canister Storage Building, and the K Basins; inactive nuclear facilities such as N Reactor and the Plutonium-Uranium Extraction (PUREX) Facility; and waste storage or disposal facilities such as burial grounds, cribs, ditches, ponds, tank farms, and trenches. Much of the monitoring consists of collecting and analyzing environmental samples and methodically surveying areas near facilities. The program is also designed to evaluate acquired analytical data, determine the effectiveness of facility effluent monitoring and controls, assess the adequacy of containment at waste disposal units, and detect and monitor unusual conditions.

  9. Hazardous Waste Management: The Role of Journalists in Decision Making Process

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eerskov-Klika, M.; Lokner, V.; Subasiae, D.; Schaller, A.

    2002-02-28T23:59:59.000Z

    The journalists are crucial for informing and education of general public about facts related to hazardous and radioactive waste management. Radio programs, TV and newspapers are daily reporting on relevant facts and news. In general, it is true that the majority of journalists are interested more in so called daily politics than in educating general public on certain technical or scientific topics. Therefore, hazardous and radioactive waste management was introduced to Croatian general public in last ten years mainly through various news on site selection of radioactive waste disposal facilities and some problems related to hazardous waste management. This paper presents APO's experience with journalists in last ten years includes program and activities referring informing and educating of journalists from all media.

  10. Establishing sitewide risk perspectives due to cumulative impacts from AB, EP, and NEPA hazard analyses

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Olinger, S.J. [Dept. of Energy, Golden, CO (United States). Rocky Flats Field Office; Foppe, T.L. [M.H. Chew and Associates, Inc., Golden, CO (United States)

    1998-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    With the end of the Cold War in 1992, the mission for the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (Site) was changed from production of nuclear weapon components to special nuclear materials (SNM) and waste management, accelerated cleanup, reuse and closure of the Site. This change in mission presents new hazards and risk management challenges. With today`s shrinking DOE budget, a balance needs to be achieved between controlling those hazards related to SNM and waste management and interim storage, and those hazards related to accelerated closure of the Site involving deactivation, decontamination, and decommissioning (DD and D) of surplus nuclear facilities. This paper discusses how risk assessments of normal operations and potential accidents have provided insights on the risks of current operations and planned closure activities.

  11. Hazardous Chemical Waste Management Reference Guide for Laboratories 9 1 Identification of Hazardous Chemical Waste

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Ford, James

    Hazardous Chemical Waste Management Reference Guide for Laboratories 9 1 · Identification of Hazardous Chemical Waste OBJECTIVES Do you know how to do the following? If you do, skip ahead to Minimization of Hazardous Waste section. If you do not, continue on in this section. · Determine whether

  12. OIKOS 92: 215224. Copenhagen 2001 Sequence effects of disturbance on community structure

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Fukami, Tadashi

    on the frequency or intensity of disturbance, probably reflecting the influence of the intermediate disturbance. This divergence occurred even under the same frequency and intensity of disturbance. These results suggestOIKOS 92: 215­224. Copenhagen 2001 Sequence effects of disturbance on community structure Tadashi

  13. Self-tuning for disturbance transmission decoupling in active vehicle suspensions

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Duffy, Ken

    sources of disturbance inputs to a vehicle suspension. One is a high frequency road disturbance due frequency load disturbance is typically due to load and inertial forces experienced by, or generatedSelf-tuning for disturbance transmission decoupling in active vehicle suspensions Mark C. Readman

  14. vol. 157, no. 5 the american naturalist may 2001 Disturbance Regimes and Life-History Evolution

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    -history the- ory. "Disturbance regime" is defined in terms of disturbance timing, frequency, predictability 1988; Turner et al. 1998) have suggested that the frequency of disturbances relative to an organismvol. 157, no. 5 the american naturalist may 2001 Disturbance Regimes and Life-History Evolution

  15. Treatment of gaseous effluents at nuclear facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Goossen, W.R.A. [Studiecentrum voor Kernenergie, Mol (Belgium). Dept. of Chemical Engineering] [ed.; Eichholz, G.G.; Tedder, D.W. [eds.] [Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA (United States)

    1991-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    Airborne effluents from nuclear facilities represent the major environmental impact from such plants both under routine conditions or after plant accidents. Effective control of such emissions, therefore, constitutes a major aspect of plant design for nuclear power plants and other facilities in the nuclear fuel cycle. This volume brings together a number of review articles by experts in the various areas of concern and describes some of the removal systems that have been designed for power plants and, particularly, for reprocessing plants. Besides controlling the release of radionuclides, other potentially hazardous effluents, such as nitrous oxides, must be minimized, and these are included in some of the systems described. The various chapters deal with historic developments and current technology in reducing emission of fission products, noble gases, iodine, and tritium, and consider design requirements for practical installations.

  16. The Great Plains Wind Power Test Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schroeder, John

    2014-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This multi-year, multi-faceted project was focused on the continued development of a nationally-recognized facility for the testing, characterization, and improvement of grid-connected wind turbines, integrated wind-water desalination systems, and related educational and outreach topics. The project involved numerous faculty and graduate students from various engineering departments, as well as others from the departments of Geosciences (in particular the Atmospheric Science Group) and Economics. It was organized through the National Wind Institute (NWI), which serves as an intellectual hub for interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research, commercialization and education related to wind science, wind energy, wind engineering and wind hazard mitigation at Texas Tech University (TTU). Largely executed by an academic based team, the project resulted in approximately 38 peer-reviewed publications, 99 conference presentations, the development/expansion of several experimental facilities, and two provisional patents.

  17. Technology Transitions Facilities Database

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The types of R&D facilities at the DOE Laboratories available to the public typically fall into three broad classes depending on the mode of access: Designated User Facilities, Shared R&D...

  18. Comparison of Hazard Analysisp y Requirements of I&C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    ) M di l D i A id tShip Accident (Ferry Sewol) Medical Device Accident (Therac-25) 3 NPP Accident­ Software Fault Tree Analysis ­ By AECL, Nancy Leveson Name of Software Hazards No % Remarks For construct hazard 4 7For construct hazard 4 7 Initialization hazard 4 7 IF-THEN-ELSE construct hazard 38 67 CASE

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

    2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  20. Modeling Aeolian Transport of Contaminated Sediments at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Technical Area 54, Area G: Sensitivities to Succession, Disturbance, and Future Climate

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Whicker, Jeffrey J. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Kirchner, Thomas B. [New Mexico State University; Breshears, David D. [University of Arizona; Field, Jason P. [University of Arizona

    2012-03-27T23:59:59.000Z

    The Technical Area 54 (TA-54) Area G disposal facility is used for the disposal of radioactive waste at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). 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. In compliance with that requirement, DOE field sites must prepare and maintain site-specific radiological performance assessments for facilities that receive waste after September 26, 1988. Sites are also required to conduct composite analyses for facilities that receive waste after this date; these analyses account for the cumulative impacts of all waste that has been (and will be) disposed of at the facilities and other sources of radioactive material that may interact with these facilities. LANL issued Revision 4 of the Area G performance assessment and composite analysis in 2008. In support of those analyses, vertical and horizontal sediment flux data were collected at two analog sites, each with different dominant vegetation characteristics, and used to estimate rates of vertical resuspension and wind erosion for Area G. The results of that investigation indicated that there was no net loss of soil at the disposal site due to wind erosion, and suggested minimal impacts of wind on the long-term performance of the facility. However, that study did not evaluate the potential for contaminant transport caused by the horizontal movement of soil particles over long time frames. Since that time, additional field data have been collected to estimate wind threshold velocities for initiating sediment transport due to saltation and rates of sediment transport once those thresholds are reached. Data such as these have been used in the development of the Vegetation Modified Transport (VMTran) model. This model is designed to estimate patterns and long-term rates of contaminant redistribution caused by winds at the site, taking into account the impacts of plant succession and environmental disturbance. Aeolian, or wind-driven, sediment transport drives soil erosion, affects biogeochemical cycles, and can lead to the transport of contaminants. Rates of aeolian sediment transport depend in large part on the type, amount, and spatial pattern of vegetation. In particular, the amount of cover from trees and shrubs, which act as roughness elements, alters rates of aeolian sediment transport. The degree to which the understory is disturbed and the associated spacing of bare soil gaps further influence sediment transport rates. Changes in vegetation structure and patterns over periods of years to centuries may have profound impacts on rates of wind-driven transport. For recently disturbed areas, succession is likely to occur through a series of vegetation communities. Area G currently exhibits a mosaic of vegetation cover, with patches of grass and forbs over closed disposal units, and bare ground in heavily used portions of the site. These areas are surrounded by less disturbed regions of shrubland and pinon-juniper woodland; some ponderosa pine forest is also visible in the canyon along the road. The successional trajectory for the disturbed portions of Area G is expected to proceed from grasses and forbs (which would be established during site closure), to shrubs such as chamisa, to a climax community of pinon-juniper woodland. Although unlikely under current conditions, a ponderosa pine forest could develop over the site if the future climate is wetter. In many ecosystems, substantial and often periodic disturbances such as fire or severe drought can rapidly alter vegetation patterns. Such disturbances are likely to increase in the southwestern US where projections call for a warmer and drier climate. With respect to Area G, the 3 most likely disturbance types are surface fire, crown fire, and drought-induced tree mortality. Each type of disturbance has a different frequency or likelihood of occurrence, but all 3 tend to reset the vegetation succession cycle to earlier stages. The Area G performance assessment and composite an