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


1

Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Act (Massachusetts) |  

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

Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Act (Massachusetts) Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Act (Massachusetts) Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Act (Massachusetts) < Back Eligibility Commercial Fed. Government Fuel Distributor Industrial Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Municipal/Public Utility Rural Electric Cooperative Tribal Government Utility Program Info State Massachusetts Program Type Siting and Permitting Provider Department of Environmental Protection 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, maintain, and/or operate a hazardous waste facility in a city or town is demonstrated, a local assessment committee will be established by that community. The

2

Hazards assessment for the Hazardous Waste Storage Facility  

SciTech Connect

This report documents the hazards assessment for the Hazardous Waste Storage Facility (HWSF) located at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. 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. The hazards assessment identifies and analyzes hazards that are significant enough to warrant consideration in a facility`s operational emergency management program. The area surrounding HWSF, the buildings and structures at HWSF, and the processes used at HWSF are described in this report. All nonradiological hazardous materials at the HWSF were identified (radiological hazardous materials are not stored at HWSF) and screened against threshold quantities according to DOE Order 5500.3A guidance. Two of the identified hazardous materials exceeded their specified threshold quantity. This report discusses the potential release scenarios and consequences associated with an accidental release for each of the two identified hazardous materials, lead and mercury. Emergency considerations, such as emergency planning zones, emergency classes, protective actions, and emergency action levels, are also discussed based on the analysis of potential consequences. Evaluation of the potential consequences indicated that the highest emergency class for operational emergencies at the HWSF would be a Site Area Emergency.

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

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

3

Cold Vacuum Drying Facility hazard analysis report  

SciTech Connect

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.

Krahn, D.E.

1998-02-23T23:59:59.000Z

4

Exploratory Studies Facility Subsurface Fire Hazards Analysis  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Richard C. Logan

2002-03-28T23:59:59.000Z

5

340 Waste handling Facility Hazard Categorization and Safety Analysis  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

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

T. J. Rodovsky

2010-10-25T23:59:59.000Z

6

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE STAGING FACILITY  

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

HAZARDOUS WASTE STAGING FACILITY HAZARDOUS WASTE STAGING FACILITY Project 39GF71024-GPDI21000000 . PANTEX PLANT AMARILLO, TEXAS DOE/EA-0688 JUNE 1993 MASTER DiSTRiBUTiON OF THIS DOCUMENT IS UNLIMITEI) ffrl TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 Need for Action 1 2.0 Description of Proposed Facility Action 3.0 Location of the Action 8 4.0 Alternatives to Proposed Action 9 4.1 No Action 9 4.2 Redesign and Modify Existing staging Facilities 9 4.3 Use Other Existing Space at Pantex Plant 9 4.4 Use Temporary Structures 9 4.5 Stage Waste at Other Sites 10 4.6 Stage Wastes Separately 10 5.0 Environmental Impacts of Proposed Action 10 5.1 Archeology 10 5.2 FloodplainlW etlands 10 5.3 Threatened and Endangered Species 10 5.4 Surrounding La,nd Use 11 5.5 Construction 11 5.6 Air Emissions 11

7

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

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

688: Hazardous Waste Staging Facility, Pantex Plant, Amarillo, 688: Hazardous Waste Staging Facility, Pantex Plant, Amarillo, Texas EA-0688: Hazardous Waste Staging Facility, Pantex Plant, Amarillo, Texas SUMMARY 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 facility to stage wastes at the U.S. Department of Energy's Pantex Plant in Amarillo, Texas. PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITIES None available at this time. DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD January 29, 1993 EA-0688: Finding of No Significant Impact Hazardous Waste Staging Facility, Pantex Plant, Amarillo, Texas January 29, 1993 EA-0688: Final Environmental Assessment Hazardous Waste Staging Facility, Pantex Plant, Amarillo, Texas

8

Hazards assessment for the Waste Experimental Reduction Facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report documents the hazards assessment for the Waste Experimental Reduction Facility (WERF) 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 DOE Idaho Operations Office (DOE-ID) guidance to comply with DOE Order 5500.3A. The hazards assessment identifies and analyzes hazards that are significant enough to warrant consideration in a facility`s operational emergency management program. This hazards assessment describes the WERF, the area surrounding WERF, associated buildings and structures at WERF, and the processes performed at WERF. All radiological and nonradiological hazardous materials stored, used, or produced at WERF were identified and screened. Even though the screening process indicated that the hazardous materials could be screened from further analysis because the inventory of radiological and nonradiological hazardous materials were below the screening thresholds specified by DOE and DOE-ID guidance for DOE Order 5500.3A, the nonradiological hazardous materials were analyzed further because it was felt that the nonradiological hazardous material screening thresholds were too high.

Calley, M.B.; Jones, J.L. Jr.

1994-09-19T23:59:59.000Z

9

Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Program (Maryland) | Department of Energy  

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

Facility Siting Program (Maryland) Facility Siting Program (Maryland) Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Program (Maryland) < Back Eligibility Commercial Construction Industrial Investor-Owned Utility Municipal/Public Utility Retail Supplier Rural Electric Cooperative Transportation Utility Program Info State Maryland Program Type Siting and Permitting Provider Maryland Department of the Environment 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 nuclear waste facilities. This legislation describes the factors considered by the Board in making siting decisions. The Board is authorized to enact rules and regulations pertaining to the siting of hazardous and low-level nuclear

10

WIPP Hazardous Waste Facility Permit - 2008 Update  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

11

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

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

High Hazard Nuclear Facility Project Oversight - November High Hazard Nuclear Facility Project Oversight - November 2012 Protocol, High Hazard Nuclear Facility Project Oversight - November 2012 November 2012 Protocol for High Hazard Nuclear Facility Project Oversight The purpose of this protocol is to establish the requirements and responsibilities for managing and conducting Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) independent oversight of high-hazard nuclear facility projects. As part of the Department of Energy's (DOE) self regulatory framework for safety and security, DOE Order 227.1, Independent Oversight Program, assigns HSS the responsibility for implementing an independent oversight program. It also requires the HSS Office of Enforcement and Oversight to conduct independent evaluations of safety and security. This

12

Hazardous Liquid Pipelines and Storage Facilities (Iowa)  

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

13

Hazardous Waste Facilities Siting (Connecticut) | Department of Energy  

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

Facilities Siting (Connecticut) Facilities Siting (Connecticut) Hazardous Waste Facilities Siting (Connecticut) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Fed. Government Fuel Distributor General Public/Consumer Industrial Installer/Contractor Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Low-Income Residential Multi-Family Residential Municipal/Public Utility Nonprofit Residential Retail Supplier Rural Electric Cooperative Schools State/Provincial Govt Systems Integrator Transportation Tribal Government Utility Program Info State Connecticut Program Type Siting and Permitting Provider Department of Energy and Environmental Protection These regulations describe the siting and permitting process for hazardous waste facilities and reference rules for construction, operation, closure,

14

340 Facility emergency preparedness hazards assessment  

SciTech Connect

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.

CAMPBELL, L.R.

1998-11-25T23:59:59.000Z

15

ALTERNATE APPROACH TO HAZARD CATEGORIZATION FOR SALTSTONE FACILITY AT SRS  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Roy, B.

2009-04-28T23:59:59.000Z

16

ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - Building 413  

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

13 13 Equipment Hazards Engineered Controls Electrical Safety Training References Electrical Safety Procedures Mechanical Safety Training References Mechanical Safety Procedures Radiological, Environmental & Chemical Training References Radiological, Environmental & Chemical Procedures Additional Safety Tool References DC Power Supplies DC voltages < 200 Volts DC currents < 200 Amps AC voltages < 600 Volts Lifting < 350 lbs Supplies mounted in relay racks Rack doors locked or bolted closed Power source signage 120/208/480 VAC covered Lifting fixture Emergency stop buttons Flashing strobes LOTO 1, 7 1110-00124 31020101-00025 1110-00125 Power Supplies Hot Work Permits 6, 7 NA NA NA A ASD108/400 GESPAC Power Supply Control Units 120 VAC Fans Fan blades covered 1, 7 Power Supplies Hot Work Permit

17

ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - Building 412  

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

2 2 Equipment Hazards Engineered Controls Electrical Safety Training References Electrical Safety Procedures Mechanical Safety Training References Mechanical Safety Procedures Radiological, Environmental & Chemical Training References Radiological, Environmental & Chemical Procedures Additional Safety Tool References DC Power Supplies DC voltages < 300 Volts DC currents < 500 Amps AC voltages < 600 Volts Lifting < 350 lbs Supplies mounted in relay racks Rack doors locked or bolted closed Power source signage 120/208/480 VAC covered Lifting fixture Emergency stop buttons Flashing strobes LOTO 1, 7 2502-00005 2502-00006 2502-00007 2502-00008 2502-00010 250201-00028 250202-00001 2502-00006 2502-00007 250206-00007 2202-00006 2202-00009 250203-00006 250204-00002 250205-00004

18

ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - Building 400  

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

Equipment Hazards Engineered Controls Electrical Safety Training References Electrical Safety Procedures Mechanical Safety Training References Mechanical Safety Procedures Radiological, Environmental & Chemical Training References Radiological, Environmental & Chemical Procedures 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 source signage 120/208 VAC covered Emergency stop buttons Flashing strobes LOTO 1,7 31020101-00025 3108-00006 310202-00089 3102-00064 2202-00006 Power Supplies Hot Work Permits 6, 7 NA NA NA A ASD108/400 Hi Power DC Power Supply DC voltages < 72 Volts DC currents < 2600 Amps AC voltages < 600 Volts Supplies built in NEMA enclosures

19

ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - Building 420  

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

20 20 Equipment Hazards Engineered Controls Electrical Safety Training References Electrical Safety Procedures Mechanical Safety Training References Mechanical Safety Procedures Radiological, Environmental & Chemical Training References Radiological, Environmental & Chemical Procedures Additional Safety Tool References DC Power Supplies DC voltages < 300 Volts DC currents < 500 Amps AC voltages < 600 Volts Lifting < 350 lbs Supplies mounted in relay racks Rack doors locked or bolted closed Power source signage 120/208/480 VAC covered Lifting fixture Emergency stop buttons Flashing strobes LOTO 1, 7 2202-00006 2402-00002 240201-00002 240202-00003 240204-00003 31020101-00025 2202-00004 2202-00006 2202-00009 220209-00057 31020101-00025 Power Supplies Hot Work Permits

20

Natural Phenomena Hazards Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities  

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

STATEMENT. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. STATEMENT. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-STD-1020-2012 December 2012 _________________ Supersedes DOE-STD-1020-2002 DOE STANDARD Natural Phenomena Hazards Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities U.S. Department of Energy AREA NPHZ Washington, D.C. 20585 NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-STD-1020-2012 This document is available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web page at http://www.hss.doe.gov/nuclearsafety/ns/techstds/ DOE-STD-1020-2012 i Foreword Department of Energy (DOE) Standard (STD)-1020-2012, Natural Phenomena Hazards

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


21

Natural Phenomena Hazards Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities  

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

STATEMENT. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. STATEMENT. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-STD-1020-2012 December 2012 _________________ Supersedes DOE-STD-1020-2002 DOE STANDARD Natural Phenomena Hazards Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities U.S. Department of Energy AREA NPHZ Washington, D.C. 20585 NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-STD-1020-2012 This document is available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web page at http://www.hss.doe.gov/nuclearsafety/ns/techstds/ DOE-STD-1020-2012 i Foreword Department of Energy (DOE) Standard (STD)-1020-2012, Natural Phenomena Hazards

22

Pantex Facility 10-Year Natural Phenomena Flood Hazard Analysis  

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

Pantex Facility 10-Year Natural Pantex Facility 10-Year Natural Phenomena Flood Hazard Analysis Presented by and October, 2011 Presentation Outline I. Introductions II. Pantex III. 10 Year Update IV. Final Results V. July 2010 Event VI. Emergency Planning VII.What's Next Pantex The Pantex Plant, located 17 miles northeast of Amarillo, Texas, in Carson County, is charged with maintaining the safety, security and reliability of the nation's nuclear weapons stockpile. Worked performed at Pantex supports three core missions. * Stockpile Stewardship * Nonproliferation and * Safeguards and Security Pantex (cont.) - Location Pantex (cont.) - Weather Patterns * Precipitation is typical for Southwest climate, mainly in the form of Spring and

23

Certification plan transuranic waste: Hazardous Waste Handling Facility  

SciTech Connect

The purpose of this plan is to describe the organization and methodology for the certification of transuranic (TRU) waste handled in the Hazardous Waste Handling Facility at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL). The plan 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 Quality Assurance Implementing Management Plan (QAIMP) for the HWBF; and a list of the current and planned implementing procedures used in waste certification.

1992-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

24

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

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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

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

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

25

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

Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

26

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

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

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.

SINGH, G.

2000-09-06T23:59:59.000Z

27

Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis for Southern California Coastal Facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The overall objective of this study was to develop probabilistic seismic hazard estimates for the coastal and offshore area of Ventura, Los Angeles and Orange counties for use as a basis for the University of Southern California (USC) to develop physical models of tsunami for the coastal regions and by the California State Lands Commission (SLC) to develop regulatory standards for seismic loading and liquefaction evaluation of marine oil terminals. The probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) was carried out by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), in several phases over a time period of two years, following the method developed by LLNL for the estimation of seismic hazards at Department Of Energy (DOE) facilities, and for 69 locations of nuclear plants in the Eastern United States, for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). This method consists in making maximum use of all physical data (qualitative, and quantitative) and to characterize the uncertainties by using a set of alternate spatiotemporal models of occurrence of future earthquakes, as described in the SSHAC, PSHA Guidance Document (Budnitz et al., 1997), and implemented for the NRC (Savy et al., 2002). In general, estimation of seismic hazard is based not only on our understanding of the regional tectonics and detailed characterization of the faults in the area but also on the analysis methods employed and the types of physical and empirical models that are deemed appropriate for the analysis. To develop this understanding, the body of knowledge in the scientific community is sampled in a series of workshops with a group of experts representative of the entire scientific community, including geologists and seismologists from the United States Geological Survey (USGS), members of the South California Earthquake Center (SCEC), and members of academic institutions (University of California Santa-Cruz, Stanford, UC Santa Barbara, and University of Southern California), and members of consulting firms. The purpose of the workshops was to analyze and evaluate existing data and formulate tectonic models that represent all the possible and physically valid models envisioned by the group. The basic input for the PSHA was a set of alternate earthquake source characterizations and a multi-model representation of ground motion attenuation, for adequate representation of the uncertainties. In the first phase, the physical modeling enabled rigorous analysis of uncertainty that arises from a lack of full knowledge in the characterization of both earthquake sources and ground motion. The set of ground motion prediction models included models that were updated to benefit from near field data from the most recent earthquakes (Taiwan and Turkey). The calculation were performed with LLNL computer software that is based on the Cornell, 1968 analytical model, and that propagates the knowledge uncertainties using a Monte-Carlo simulation approach (see, Bernreuter et al., 1989). Although the calculation were performed for rock-site conditions and generic soil sites, only the results for rock are given here. It is assumed that development of design parameters will include a correction of the spectral shape to reflect the site specificity. The results are for the average of the two horizontal components of the ground motion. The PSHA was calculated for thirteen sites, including two sites offshore. These sites are: Catalina Island site 1, Catalina Island site 2, Goleta, Offshore Santa-Monica, Offshore San-Clemente, Port Dume, Palos Verde site 1, Palos Verde site 2, Port of Long Beach, Port of Los Angeles, Port Hueneme, San Pedro Escarpment, and Redondo Canyon. For these thirteen sites, the hazard curves in terms of probability of exceedence of the peak ground acceleration (PGA), was calculated. In addition for Port of Long Beach, Port of Los Angeles, Santa Monica, and a site Offshore, east of San Clemente the (5% damping) uniform hazard response spectra were calculated for five Return Periods (100, 500, 1000, 2000, 10,000 year Return Periods). The detailed results are

Savy, J; Foxall, B

2004-04-16T23:59:59.000Z

28

Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis for Southern California Coastal Facilities  

SciTech Connect

The overall objective of this study was to develop probabilistic seismic hazard estimates for the coastal and offshore area of Ventura, Los Angeles and Orange counties for use as a basis for the University of Southern California (USC) to develop physical models of tsunami for the coastal regions and by the California State Lands Commission (SLC) to develop regulatory standards for seismic loading and liquefaction evaluation of marine oil terminals. The probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) was carried out by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), in several phases over a time period of two years, following the method developed by LLNL for the estimation of seismic hazards at Department Of Energy (DOE) facilities, and for 69 locations of nuclear plants in the Eastern United States, for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). This method consists in making maximum use of all physical data (qualitative, and quantitative) and to characterize the uncertainties by using a set of alternate spatiotemporal models of occurrence of future earthquakes, as described in the SSHAC, PSHA Guidance Document (Budnitz et al., 1997), and implemented for the NRC (Savy et al., 2002). In general, estimation of seismic hazard is based not only on our understanding of the regional tectonics and detailed characterization of the faults in the area but also on the analysis methods employed and the types of physical and empirical models that are deemed appropriate for the analysis. To develop this understanding, the body of knowledge in the scientific community is sampled in a series of workshops with a group of experts representative of the entire scientific community, including geologists and seismologists from the United States Geological Survey (USGS), members of the South California Earthquake Center (SCEC), and members of academic institutions (University of California Santa-Cruz, Stanford, UC Santa Barbara, and University of Southern California), and members of consulting firms. The purpose of the workshops was to analyze and evaluate existing data and formulate tectonic models that represent all the possible and physically valid models envisioned by the group. The basic input for the PSHA was a set of alternate earthquake source characterizations and a multi-model representation of ground motion attenuation, for adequate representation of the uncertainties. In the first phase, the physical modeling enabled rigorous analysis of uncertainty that arises from a lack of full knowledge in the characterization of both earthquake sources and ground motion. The set of ground motion prediction models included models that were updated to benefit from near field data from the most recent earthquakes (Taiwan and Turkey). The calculation were performed with LLNL computer software that is based on the Cornell, 1968 analytical model, and that propagates the knowledge uncertainties using a Monte-Carlo simulation approach (see, Bernreuter et al., 1989). Although the calculation were performed for rock-site conditions and generic soil sites, only the results for rock are given here. It is assumed that development of design parameters will include a correction of the spectral shape to reflect the site specificity. The results are for the average of the two horizontal components of the ground motion. The PSHA was calculated for thirteen sites, including two sites offshore. These sites are: Catalina Island site 1, Catalina Island site 2, Goleta, Offshore Santa-Monica, Offshore San-Clemente, Port Dume, Palos Verde site 1, Palos Verde site 2, Port of Long Beach, Port of Los Angeles, Port Hueneme, San Pedro Escarpment, and Redondo Canyon. For these thirteen sites, the hazard curves in terms of probability of exceedence of the peak ground acceleration (PGA), was calculated. In addition for Port of Long Beach, Port of Los Angeles, Santa Monica, and a site Offshore, east of San Clemente the (5% damping) uniform hazard response spectra were calculated for five Return Periods (100, 500, 1000, 2000, 10,000 year Return Periods). The detailed results are

Savy, J; Foxall, B

2004-04-16T23:59:59.000Z

29

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

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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...

Singh, G

2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

30

Pantex Facility 10-Year Natural Phenomena Flood Hazard Analysis  

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

Planning (cont.) What's Next FDC-1 Facilities (500 yr Storm) * Critical Mission SSCs * Essential Safety Facilities * Essential Security Facilities Conceptual Study * Mitigation...

31

Methodology for Final Hazard Categorization for Nuclear Facilities from Category 3 to Radiological  

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

Office of Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Office of Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Nuclear Safety Technical Position NSTP 2002-2 Methodology for Final Hazard Categorization for Nuclear Facilities from Category 3 to Radiological Issue: DOE-STD-1027-92 defines a lower threshold criterion for preliminary hazard categorization as a nuclear Hazard Category 3 (HC-3) facility or activity. But it does not provide a method other than inventory reduction or segmentation on how an HC-3 facility or activity can be demonstrated to be below HC-3 (i.e., radiological) in final hazard categorization. Background: 10 CFR 830 Subpart B requires that all DOE nuclear facilities categorized as HC-3 or above have a DOE approved safety basis compliant with the requirements of Subpart B. The rule requires the use of DOE-

32

Certification Plan, low-level waste Hazardous Waste Handling Facility  

SciTech Connect

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.

Albert, R.

1992-06-30T23:59:59.000Z

33

Certification Plan, Radioactive Mixed Waste Hazardous Waste Handling Facility  

SciTech Connect

The purpose of this plan is to describe the organization and methodology for the certification of radioactive mixed waste (RMW) handled in the Hazardous Waste Handling Facility at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL). RMW is low-level radioactive waste (LLW) or transuranic (TRU) waste that is co-contaminated with dangerous waste as defined in the Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) Solid Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) and the Washington State Dangerous Waste Regulations, 173-303-040 (18). This waste is to be transferred to the Hanford Site Central Waste Complex and Burial Grounds in Hanford, Washington. This plan 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 (Section 4); and a list of the current and planned implementing procedures used in waste certification.

Albert, R.

1992-06-30T23:59:59.000Z

34

Fire hazards analysis of transuranic waste storage and assay facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Busching, K.R., Westinghouse Hanford

1996-07-31T23:59:59.000Z

35

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

36

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

Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

37

M-Area hazardous waste management facility groundwater monitoring report -- first quarter 1994. Volume 1  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report describes the groundwater monitoring and corrective action program at the M-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility (HWMF) at the Savannah River Site (SRS) during first quarter 1994 as required by South Carolina Hazardous Waste Permit SC1-890-008-989 and section 264.100(g) of the South Carolina Hazardous Waste Management Regulations. During first quarter 1994, 42 point-of-compliance (POC) wells at the M-Area HWMF were sampled for drinking water parameters.

Evans, C.S.; Washburn, F.; Jordan, J.; Van Pelt, R.

1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

38

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Chase, J.

1999-11-18T23:59:59.000Z

39

Category 3 threshold quantities for hazard categorization of nonreactor facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This document provides the information necessary to determine Hazard Category 3 threshold quantities for those isotopes of interest not listed in WHC-CM-4-46, Section 4, Table 1.''Threshold Quantities.''

Mandigo, R.L.

1996-02-13T23:59:59.000Z

40

ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - Building 400-EAA  

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

-EAA -EAA Equipment Hazards Engineered Controls Electrical Safety Training References Electrical Safety Procedures Mechanical Safety Training References Mechanical Safety Procedures Radiological, Environmental & Chemical Training References Radiological, Environmental & Chemical Procedures Additional Safety Tool References Blue Oven Temperature to 600° F voltage 208 VAC Signage 1 NA 6, 7 Physical Agents Training NA NA NA A ASD108/400 Compressed Air Line 65-130 PSI Regulator Pressure relief NA NA 6, 7 ESH119 NA NA A ASD108/400 Various Shop Tools (lathe, drill press, grinder, belt sander, 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 ASD108/400 Water Flow Test Stand Pressure Slip hazard NA

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


41

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Gary Mecham; Don Konoyer

2009-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

42

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

SciTech Connect

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

Romano, Stephen; Welling, Steven; Bell, Simon

2003-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

43

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Not Available

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

44

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

1995-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

45

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

Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

46

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

NONE

1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

47

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

2011-01-21T23:59:59.000Z

48

SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES TOXIC/HAZARDOUS MATERIAL TRANSFER FACILITY DESIGN  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

facilities transferring toxic/hazardous materials with the following exceptions: A) gasoline station or similar installation solely incident to the retail sale or personal consumption of motor fuels for motor, phone number, signature and seal: C) Suffolk County tax map number (District-Section-Block-Lot); D

Homes, Christopher C.

49

Special Purpose Power Plant Critical Facility Summary Hazards Report (Addendum 2)  

SciTech Connect

The SNAP Experimental Reactor (SER) is a small power reactor that is to be built and operated in the original SNAP-II critical facility. The reactor is described, and the hazards previously evaluated for the SNAP II critical faciity are reviewed.

Thiele, A.W.

1959-03-11T23:59:59.000Z

50

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Boyd D. Christensen

2012-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

51

Hazards and accident analyses, an integrated approach, for the Plutonium Facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This paper describes an integrated approach to perform hazards and accident analyses for the Plutonium Facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory. A comprehensive hazards analysis methodology was developed that extends the scope of the preliminary/process hazard analysis methods described in the AIChE Guidelines for Hazard Evaluations. Results fro the semi-quantitative approach constitute a full spectrum of hazards. For each accident scenario identified, there is a binning assigned for the event likelihood and consequence severity. In addition, each accident scenario is analyzed for four possible sectors (workers, on-site personnel, public, and environment). A screening process was developed to link the hazard analysis to the accident analysis. Specifically the 840 accident scenarios were screened down to about 15 accident scenarios for a more through deterministic analysis to define the operational safety envelope. The mechanics of the screening process in the selection of final scenarios for each representative accident category, i.e., fire, explosion, criticality, and spill, is described.

Pan, P.Y.; Goen, L.K.; Letellier, B.C.; Sasser, M.K.

1995-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

52

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Barilo, N.F.

1995-05-11T23:59:59.000Z

53

Eye hazard and glint evaluation for the 5-MW/sub t/ Solar Thermal Test Facility  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Potential eye hazards associated with concentrated reflected light are evaluated for the ERDA 5-MW/sub t/ Solar Thermal Test Facility to be constructed at Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Light intensities and hazardous ranges of single and multiple coincident heliostat beams are evaluated at ground level and in the air space above the facility. Possible long-range and short-range effects of distractive effects of reflected beams are discussed. Also described are certain beam control modifications which were incorporated to minimize the altitudes at which overflying aircraft could encounter unsafe levels. Recommendations are made for further evaluation of intensity excursions during fail-safe shutdown situations, and for experiments to verify analytical models and to assess distractive glint effects.

Brumleve, T.D.

1977-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

54

Radioactive and mixed waste management plan for the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Hazardous Waste Handling Facility  

SciTech Connect

This Radioactive and Mixed Waste Management Plan for the Hazardous Waste Handling Facility at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory is written to meet the requirements for an annual report of radioactive and mixed waste management activities outlined in DOE Order 5820.2A. Radioactive and mixed waste management activities during FY 1994 listed here include principal regulatory and environmental issues and the degree to which planned activities were accomplished.

NONE

1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

55

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

2010-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

56

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

2010-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

57

Walkthrough screening evaluation field guide. Natural phenomena hazards at Department of Energy facilities: Revision 2  

SciTech Connect

The US Department of Energy (DOE) has a large inventory of existing facilities. Many of these facilities were not designed and constructed to current natural phenomena hazard (NPH) criteria. The NPH events include earthquakes, extreme winds and tornadoes, and floods. DOE Order 5480.28 establishes policy and requirements for NPH mitigation for DOE facilities. DOE is conducting a multiyear project to develop evaluation guidelines for assessing the condition and determining the need for upgrades at DOE facilities. One element of the NPH evaluation guidelines` development involves the existing systems and components at DOE facilities. This effort is described in detail in a cited reference. In the interim period prior to availability of the final guidelines, DOE facilities are encouraged to implement an NPH walk through screening evaluation process by which systems and components that need attention can be rapidly identified. Guidelines for conducting the walk through screening evaluations are contained herein. The result of the NPH walk through screening evaluation should be a prioritized list of systems and components that need further action. Simple and inexpensive fixes for items identified in the walk through as marginal or inadequate should be implemented without further study. By implementing an NPH walk through screening evaluation, DOE facilities may realize significant reduction in risk from NPH in the short term.

Eder, S.J. [EQE Engineering Consultants, San Francisco, CA (United States); Eli, M.W. [Lawrence Livermore National Lab., CA (United States); Salmon, M.W. [EQE Engineering Consultants, Irvine, CA (United States)

1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

58

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

SciTech Connect

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.

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

2000-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

59

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Chase, J.

1999-04-23T23:59:59.000Z

60

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Not Available

1992-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


61

A DOE-STD-3009 hazard and accident analysis methodology for non-reactor nuclear facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This paper demonstrates the use of appropriate consequence evaluation criteria in conjunction with generic likelihood of occurrence data to produce consistent hazard analysis results for nonreactor nuclear facility Safety Analysis Reports (SAR). An additional objective is to demonstrate the use of generic likelihood of occurrence data as a means for deriving defendable accident sequence frequencies, thereby enabling the screening of potentially incredible events (<10{sup {minus}6} per year) from the design basis accident envelope. Generic likelihood of occurrence data has been used successfully in performing SAR hazard and accident analyses for two nonreactor nuclear facilities at Sandia National Laboratories. DOE-STD-3009-94 addresses and even encourages use of a qualitative binning technique for deriving and ranking nonreactor nuclear facility risks. However, qualitative techniques invariably lead to reviewer requests for more details associated with consequence or likelihood of occurrence bin assignments in the test of the SAR. Hazard analysis data displayed in simple worksheet format generally elicits questions about not only the assumptions behind the data, but also the quantitative bases for the assumptions themselves (engineering judgment may not be considered sufficient by some reviewers). This is especially true where the criteria for qualitative binning of likelihood of occurrence involves numerical ranges. Oftentimes reviewers want to see calculations or at least a discussion of event frequencies or failure probabilities to support likelihood of occurrence bin assignments. This may become a significant point of contention for events that have been binned as incredible. This paper will show how the use of readily available generic data can avoid many of the reviewer questions that will inevitably arise from strictly qualitative analyses, while not significantly increasing the overall burden on the analyst.

MAHN,JEFFREY A.; WALKER,SHARON ANN

2000-03-23T23:59:59.000Z

62

Mixed waste certification plan for the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Hazardous Waste Handling Facility. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect

The purpose of this plan is to describe the organization and methodology for the certification of mixed waste 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. Mixed waste is to be transferred to the WHC Hanford Site Central Waste Complex and Burial Grounds in Hanford, Washington.

1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

63

Hazardous waste cleanup at federal facilities: Need for an integrated policy  

SciTech Connect

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has generated and disposed of large volumes of hazardous and radioactive waste as a result of 50 years of nuclear weapons production. DOE is now faced with the problem of remediating its more than 13,000 hazardous waste sites. To be effective for the good of the environment and public health, our nation`s hazardous waste policy must first address several questions: What is the level of risk at federal facilities? (Is remediation really necessary?) Can and should institutional controls be incorporated into the cleanup process? How effective are cleanup technologies? What cleanup standards should be used? What will be done with waste generated during remediation? How do we obtain appropriate stakeholder involvement? Once these questions are answered and a more reliable, predictable policy has been developed, the waste management and environmental restoration program may not be an unwanted drain on America`s pocketbook, and we may have a cleaner country as well.

Travis, C.C. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States); Ladd, B. [Univ. of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN (United States)

1993-09-22T23:59:59.000Z

64

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

65

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

SciTech Connect

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. 50100 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.

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

2010-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

66

Natural Phenomena Hazards Design and Evaluation Criteria for Department of Energy Facilities  

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

0-2002 0-2002 January 2002 Superseding DOE-STD-1020-94 April 1994 DOE STANDARD NATURAL PHENOMENA HAZARDS DESIGN AND EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA NPHZ Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. TS This document has been reproduced from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. DOE-STD-1020-2002 iii Foreword This revision provides information to help meet the requirements of 10 CFR Part 830, "Nuclear

67

DOE-STD-3014-96; DOE Standard Accident Analysis For Aircraft Crash Into Hazardous Facilities  

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

DOE STANDARD DOE STANDARD October 1 996 Reaffirmation May 2006 ACCIDENT CRASH INTO ANALYSIS HAZARDOUS FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 AREA SAFT DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. FOR AIRCRAFT This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (423) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 487-4650. Order No. DE97000162 DOE-STD-3014-96 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS PARAGRAPH PAGE FOREWORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

68

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

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.

NONE

1997-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

69

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

1998-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

70

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

SciTech Connect

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.

1995-01-10T23:59:59.000Z

71

Packaging and Transfer of Hazardous Materials and Materials of National Security Interest Assessment plan - Developed By NNSA/Nevada Site Office Facility Representative Division  

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

PACKAGING AND TRANSFER PACKAGING AND TRANSFER OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND MATERIALS OF NATIONAL SECURITY INTEREST Assessment Plan NNSA/Nevada Site Office Facility Representative Division Performance Objective: Verify that packaging and transportation safety requirements of hazardous materials and materials of national security interest have been established and are in compliance with DOE Orders 461.1 and 460.1B Criteria: Verify that safety requirements for the proper packaging and transportation of DOE/NNSA offsite shipments and onsite transfers of hazardous materials and for modal transport have been established [DOE O 460.1B, 1, "Objectives"]. Verify that the contractor transporting a package of hazardous materials is in compliance with the requirements of the Hazardous Materials Regulations

72

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

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.

Chase, J.

1998-10-30T23:59:59.000Z

73

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  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Sasser, K.

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

74

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

NONE

1995-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

75

Energy spectra of the pneumatically positioned neutron sources at LLNL's Hazards control standards and calibration facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Hazards Control Department of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory maintains a Standards and Calibration Laboratory that includes three neutron sources (two /sup 252/Cf and one /sup 238/PuBe that can be positioned pneumatically for irradiations. Ten moderators exist to modify the neutron energy spectra produced by these sources. The thicknesses and materials of these moderators are: 25-cm water; 5-, 10-, 15-, and 25-cm heavy water; 20-cm aluminum; and 2-, 5-, 10-, and 15-cm polyethylene. We used a multisphere spectrometer to measure the neutron spectra at 2 m from both the PuBe source and the smaller Cf source, with the sources bare, and in all of the moderators. These data were reduced in 25 energy groups ranging from 0.25 eV to 16 MeV. Except for the 15-m polyethylene moderator, we also made measurements using a liquid-scintillator fast-neutron spectrometer. These data were reduced in 0.1-MeV increments from 0.5 to 12.5 MeV. Spectra from the measurements and from independent calculations are presented in tabular and graphic form. Dosimetric values, calculated from both the measured and calculated spectra, are also presented.

Thorngate, J.H.

1987-06-15T23:59:59.000Z

76

User`s guide for the KBERT 1.0 code: For the knowledge-based estimation of hazards of radioactive material releases from DOE nuclear facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The possibility of worker exposure to radioactive materials during accidents at nuclear facilities is a principal concern of the DOE. The KBERT software has been developed at Sandia National Laboratories under DOE support to address this issue by assisting in the estimation of risks posed by accidents at chemical and nuclear facilities. KBERT is an acronym for Knowledge-Based system for Estimating hazards of Radioactive material release Transients. The current prototype version of KBERT focuses on calculation of doses and consequences to in-facility workers due to accidental releases of radioactivity. This report gives detailed instructions on how a user who is familiar with the design, layout and potential hazards of a facility can use KBERT to assess the risks to workers in that facility. KBERT is a tool that allows a user to simulate possible accidents and observe the predicted consequences. Potential applications of KBERT include the evaluation of the efficacy of evacuation practices, worker shielding, personal protection equipment and the containment of hazardous materials.

Browitt, D.S.; Washington, K.E.; Powers, D.A. [and others

1995-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

77

Facilities  

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

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

78

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Chase, J.

2000-05-12T23:59:59.000Z

79

Hazardous Material Security (Maryland)  

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

80

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  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Cole, C.M. Sr.

2001-04-17T23:59:59.000Z

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


81

Facility Microgrids  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

2005-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

82

Facilities  

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

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

83

Hazardous Waste Management Standards and Regulations (Kansas)  

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

84

Rules and Regulations for Hazardous Waste Management (Rhode Island)  

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

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

85

DOE-STD-1024-92; DOE Standard Guidelines For Use of Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Curves at Department of Energy Sites for Department of Energy Facilities  

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

STD-1024-92 STD-1024-92 December 1992 Change Notice #1 January 1996 DOE STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR USE OF PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD CURVES AT DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY SITES FOR DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA FACR Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; prices available from (615) 576-8401. Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161. Order No. DE93005386 DOE-STD-1024-92 (CH - 1) Subject: CHANGE NOTICE #1

86

1Q/2Q00 M-Area and Metallurgical Laboratory Hazardous Waste Management Facilities Groundwater Monitoring and Corrective-Action Report - First and Second Quarters 2000 - Volumes I, II, and II  

SciTech Connect

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 of 2000.

Chase, J.

2000-10-24T23:59:59.000Z

87

Hazard Analysis Database Report  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

GRAMS, W.H.

2000-12-28T23:59:59.000Z

88

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2012-08-31T23:59:59.000Z

89

ARM - SGP Rural Driving Hazards  

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

Rural Driving Hazards Rural Driving Hazards SGP Related Links Facilities and Instruments Central Facility Boundary Facility Extended Facility Intermediate Facility Radiometric Calibration Facility Geographic Information ES&H Guidance Statement Operations Science Field Campaigns Visiting the Site Fact Sheet Images Information for Guest Scientists Contacts SGP Rural Driving Hazards The rural location of the Southern Great Plains (SGP) site facilities requires that visitors travel on unpaved, dirt and gravel, roads. Visitors should be aware of the driving hazards this presents by taking the following precautions: Proceed cautiously: Many rural roads have unmarked and blind intersections. Slow down: Sanded and gravel raods can cause a vehicle to swerve. Maintain a safe following distance: During the dry season, vehicles

90

Preliminary Feasibility, Design, and Hazard Analysis of a Boiling Water Test Loop Within the Idaho National Laboratory Advanced Test Reactor National Scientific User Facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) is a pressurized light-water reactor with a design thermal power of 250 MW. The principal function of the ATR is to provide a high neutron flux for testing reactor fuels and other materials. The ATR and its support facilities are located at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). A Boiling Water Test Loop (BWTL) is being designed for one of the irradiation test positions within the. The objective of the new loop will be to simulate boiling water reactor (BWR) conditions to support clad corrosion and related reactor material testing. Further it will accommodate power ramping tests of candidate high burn-up fuels and fuel pins/rods for the commercial BWR utilities. The BWTL will be much like the pressurized water loops already in service in 5 of the 9 flux traps (region of enhanced neutron flux) in the ATR. The loop coolant will be isolated from the primary coolant system so that the loops temperature, pressure, flow rate, and water chemistry can be independently controlled. This paper presents the proposed general design of the in-core and auxiliary BWTL systems; the preliminary results of the neutronics and thermal hydraulics analyses; and the preliminary hazard analysis for safe normal and transient BWTL and ATR operation.

Douglas M. Gerstner

2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

91

Hazard Analysis Database Report  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

GAULT, G.W.

1999-10-13T23:59:59.000Z

92

K Basin Hazard Analysis  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

PECH, S.H.

2000-08-23T23:59:59.000Z

93

Electricity - Annual Disturbance Events Archive  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Annual Disturbance Events Annual Disturbance Events Archive Last Updated - May 2010 Major Disturbances and Unusual Occurrences 2009 pdf excel 2008 pdf excel 2007 pdf excel 2006 pdf...

94

Preliminary hazards analysis -- vitrification process  

SciTech Connect

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.

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

95

Microsoft Word - Appendix C - Soil Disturbance Evaluation Procedure.docx  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

Rocky Flats Site Soil Disturbance Evaluation Procedure Rocky Flats Site Soil Disturbance Evaluation Procedure This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy Rocky Flats Site Operations Guide July 2013 Doc. No. S03037-6.0 Page C-1 Soil Disturbance Evaluation Process Purpose: The purpose of this Soil Disturbance Evaluation Process is to identify hazards and regulatory requirements so that appropriate work control steps, including regulatory agency and/or engineering approvals, are implemented to address and mitigate the hazard and/or meet regulatory requirements. The soil disturbance evaluation process is a part of the Rocky Flats Site Operations Guide (RFSOG) work planning process (Section 12.1), including consideration of the Health and Safety Manual, LMS/POL/S04321 standard for penetration permits. This

96

Chemical process hazards analysis  

SciTech Connect

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.

NONE

1996-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

97

Hazardous Waste Management (Oklahoma) | Department of Energy  

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

treatment and storage of such waste. It also mentions the availability of tax credits for waste facilities. Energy recovery from the destruction of a hazardous waste may be...

98

Hazardous Waste  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Table 6   General refractory disposal options...D landfill (b) Characterized hazardous waste by TCLP

99

Hazardous Wastes Management (Alabama) | Department of Energy  

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

Hazardous Wastes Management (Alabama) Hazardous Wastes Management (Alabama) Hazardous Wastes Management (Alabama) < Back Eligibility Commercial Construction Developer Industrial Transportation Savings Category Alternative Fuel Vehicles Hydrogen & Fuel Cells Buying & Making Electricity Water Home Weatherization Solar Wind Program Info State Alabama Program Type Environmental Regulations Safety and Operational Guidelines 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 investigations. The legislation also states responsibilities of generators and transporters of hazardous waste as well as responsibilities of hazardous waste storage and treatment facility and hazardous waste disposal site operators. There

100

RCRA facility assessments  

SciTech Connect

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

NONE

1994-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


101

Surveillance Guides - Hazards Control  

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

Hazards Control Hazards Control 1.0 Objective 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 environment. 2.0 References 2.1 DOE 4330.4B Maintenance Management Program 2.2 48 CFR 1970.5204-2 Department of Energy Acquisition Regulations 3.0 Requirements Implemented This surveillance is conducted to verify implementation of DOE 450.4-1A Volume 2 Appendix E core expectation #3 (CE II-3). CE II-3: An integrated process has been established and is utilized to develop controls which mitigate the identified hazards present within a facility or activity. The set of controls ensure adequate protection of the public, worker, and the environment and are established as agreed upon by DOE.

102

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

103

Quality Services: Solid Wastes, Part 361: Siting of Industrial Hazardous  

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

1: Siting of Industrial 1: Siting of Industrial Hazardous Waste Facilities (New York) Quality Services: Solid Wastes, Part 361: Siting of Industrial Hazardous Waste Facilities (New York) < Back Eligibility Commercial Fed. Government Industrial Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Municipal/Public Utility State/Provincial Govt Tribal Government Utility Program Info State New York Program Type Siting and Permitting Provider NY Department of Environmental Conservation 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 for the purpose of treating, storing, compacting, recycling, exchanging or disposing of industrial hazardous waste materials, including treatment, compacting,

104

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

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

105

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

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

106

Hazardous Waste Program (Alabama)  

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

107

FIRE HAZARDS ANALYSIS - BUSTED BUTTE  

SciTech Connect

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.

R. Longwell; J. Keifer; S. Goodin

2001-01-22T23:59:59.000Z

108

Electrical hazards  

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

associated with your work or the equipment you are using, stop the work and ask your CAT representative for guidance in developing safe work practices that minimize the hazards...

109

B Plant facility description  

SciTech Connect

Buildings 225B, 272B, 282B, 282BA, and 294B were removed from the B Plant facility description. Minor corrections were made for tank sizes and hazardous and toxic inventories.

Chalk, S.E.

1996-10-04T23:59:59.000Z

110

Montana Hazardous Waste Act (Montana) | Department of Energy  

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

Montana Hazardous Waste Act (Montana) Montana Hazardous Waste Act (Montana) Montana Hazardous Waste Act (Montana) < Back Eligibility Utility Fed. Government Commercial Agricultural Investor-Owned Utility State/Provincial Govt Industrial Construction Municipal/Public Utility Local Government Rural Electric Cooperative Tribal Government Institutional Program Info State Montana Program Type Siting and Permitting Provider Montana Department of Environmental Quality 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 Quality is authorized to enact regulations pertaining to all aspects of hazardous waste storage and disposal, and the Act addresses permitting requirements for disposal

111

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

SciTech Connect

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

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2012-02-16T23:59:59.000Z

112

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

SciTech Connect

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

,

2013-02-21T23:59:59.000Z

113

Cold Weather Hazards  

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

0 0 Cold Weather Hazards June 2010 NSA_cwh_Rev10.doc 1 Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Climate Research Facility/ North Slope of Alaska/Adjacent Arctic Ocean (ACRF/NSA/AAO) Cold Weather Hazards Winter Conditions at the North Slope of Alaska The North Slope of Alaska is north of the Arctic Circle at latitudes ranging from 69 to 72 degrees. Barrow, the largest town on the North Slope (pop. 4500), is the site of a National Weather Service Station, which has been active for several decades, so the climatology of the Alaska arctic coastal region as represented by Barrow is relatively well known. The North Slope is covered with ice and snow typically eight months of the year (October-May). During part of November, all of December, and most of January, the sun does not come above the horizon; this

114

Rules and Regulations for Underground Storage Facilities Used...  

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

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

115

RADIATION HAZARDS ENCOUNTERED IN ARC MELTING THORIUM  

SciTech Connect

A project to provide information on the hazards associated wlth arc melting of Th is described. A general airsampling analysis was made to determine the separation, concentration, and distribution of Th daughter (decay) products throughout arc melting, machining, and forging processes found in a handling facility. The value of well coordinated health physics program is stressed in connection with potential health hazards and personnel protection. Building, equipment, and exhaust ventilation requirements for such a facility are discussed, along wlth special handling methods. (auth)

Lowery, R.R.

1960-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

116

Implementation of the hazardous debris rule  

SciTech Connect

Hazardous debris includes objects contaminated with hazardous waste. Examples of debris include tree stumps, timbers, boulders, tanks, piping, crushed drums, personal protective clothing, etc. Most of the hazardous debris encountered comes from Superfund sites and other facility remediation, although generators and treaters of hazardous waste also generate hazardous debris. Major problems associated with disposal of debris includes: Inappropriateness of many waste treatments to debris; Difficulties in obtaining representative samples; Costs associated with applying waste specific treatments to debris; Subtitle C landfill space was being used for many low hazard debris types. These factors brought about the need for debris treatment technologies and regulations that addressed these issues. The goal of such regulation was to provide treatment to destroy or remove the contamination if possible and, if this is achieved, to dispose of the cleaned debris as a nonhazardous waste. EPA has accomplished this goal through promulgation of the Hazardous Debris Rule, August 18, 1992.

Sailer, J.E.

1993-01-05T23:59:59.000Z

117

About Chemical Hazards  

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

Chemical Hazards What Is a Chemical Hazard? chemical hazards.jpg A chemical hazard is any substance that can cause harm, primarily to people. Chemicals of all kinds are stored in...

118

Hazardous Waste Management (Indiana) | Department of Energy  

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

Hazardous Waste Management (Indiana) Hazardous Waste Management (Indiana) Hazardous Waste Management (Indiana) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Fuel Distributor Industrial Investor-Owned Utility Municipal/Public Utility Rural Electric Cooperative Transportation Utility Program Info State Indiana Program Type Environmental Regulations Provider Indiana Department of Environmental Management The state supports the implementation of source reduction, recycling, and other alternative solid waste management practices over incineration and land disposal. The Department of Environmental Management is tasked regulating hazardous waste management facilities and practices. Provisions pertaining to permitting, site approval, construction, reporting, transportation, and remediation practices and fees are discussed in these

119

Natural Phenomena Hazards Modeling Project: Seismic Hazard Models for Department of Energy Sites  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) has developed seismic and wind hazard models for the Office of Nuclear Safety (ONS), Department of Energy (DOE). The work is part of a three-phase effort aimed at establishing uniform building design criteria for seismic and wind hazards at DOE sites throughout the US. In Phase 1, LLNL gathered information on the sites and their critical facilities, including nuclear reactors, fuel-reprocessing plants, high-level waste storage and treatment facilities, and special nuclear material facilities. In Phase 2, development of seismic and wind hazard models, was initiated. These hazard models express the annual probability that the site will experience an earthquake or wind speed greater than some specified magnitude. This report summarizes the final seismic hazard models and response spectra recommended for each site and the methodology used to develop these models. 15 references, 2 figures, 1 table.

Coats, D.W.; Murray, R.C.

1984-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

120

Hazard Evaluation for 244-CR Vault  

SciTech Connect

This document presents the results of a hazards identification and evaluation performed on the 244-CR Vault to close a USQ (USQ No.TF-98-0785, Potential Inadequacy in Authorization Basis (PIAB): To Evaluate Miscellaneous Facilities Listed In HNF-2503 And Not Addressed In The TWRS Authorization Basis) that was generated as part of an evaluation of inactive TWRS facilities.

GRAMS, W.H.

1999-08-19T23:59:59.000Z

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


121

DOE Standard 1020 - Natural Phenomena Hazard analysis and Design Criteria  

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

DOE Standard 1020 - Natural Phenomena Hazard analysis and Design DOE Standard 1020 - Natural Phenomena Hazard analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities DOE Standard 1020 - Natural Phenomena Hazard analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities Department of Energy (DOE) Standard (STD)-1020-2012, Natural Phenomena Hazards Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities, provides criteria and guidance for the analysis and design of facility structures, systems, and components (SSCs) that are necessary to implement the requirements of DOE Order (O) 420.1C, Facility Safety, and to ensure that the SSCs will be able to effectively perform their intended safety functions under the effects of natural phenomena hazards (NPHs). This Standard also provides criteria and guidance for the use of industry building codes and voluntary

122

FACILITY SAFETY (FS)  

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

FACILITY SAFETY (FS) FACILITY SAFETY (FS) OBJECTIVE FS.1 - (Core Requirement 7) Facility safety documentation in support of SN process operations,is in place and has been implemented that describes the safety envelope of the facility. The, safety documentation should characterize the hazards/risks associated with the facility and should, identify preventive and mitigating measures (e.g., systems, procedures, and administrative, controls) that protect workers and the public from those hazards/risks. (Old Core Requirement 4) Criteria 1. A DSA has been prepared by FWENC, approved by DOE, and implemented to reflect the SN process operations in the WPF. (10 CFR 830.200, DOE-STD-3009-94) 2. A configuration control program is in place and functioning such that the DSA is

123

WIPP Documents - Hazardous Waste Facility Permit (RCRA)  

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

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

124

ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - Building 382  

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

reviews 1 NA ESH145 ESH119 ESH195 NA NA NA A ESH108382 Surface Analysis Chamber High voltage Compressed gas Cryogenic vacuum Cage Limited access Clean hood TLD Safety...

125

ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - Building 411  

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

1 NA 6, 7 NA NA NA A ASD108400 LINAC Klystrons Total 6 (RF Group) (ME Group) (Vac Group) High voltage Ionizing radiation Non-ionizing radiation Lead SF6 (waveguide) High pressure...

126

What is Hazardous Hazardous waste is  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

What is Hazardous Waste? Hazardous waste is any product charac- terized or labeled as toxic, reactive, cor- rosive, flammable, combustible that is unwanted, dis- carded or no longer useful. This waste may be harmful to human health and/ or the environment. Hazardous Waste Disposal EH&S x7233 E-Waste

de Lijser, Peter

127

Communication in hazardous environments  

SciTech Connect

Radios were investigated for use in hazardous environments where protective breathing equipment such as plastic suits and respirators interfere with communication. A radio system, manufactured by Communications-Applied technology (C-AT), was identified that was designed specifically for hazardous environment communications. This equipment had been used successfully by the US Army and NASA for several years. C-AT equipment was evaluated in plantwide applications at the Savannah River Plant (SRP) using temporary frequencies obtained by the Department of Energy-Savannah River (DOE-SR). Radios performed well in all applications, which included a tritium facility, high-level caves, a nuclear reactor building, tank farm, and a canyon building interior. Permanent frequencies were obtained by DOE-SR for two complete six-man C-AT systems at SRP. Because of the relatively short range of these systems, replicates will cover all applications of this type of equipment plantwide. Twelve radio systems are currently being used successfully in plantwide applications.

Rankin, W N; Herold, T R

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

128

Oklahoma Hazardous Waste Management Act (Oklahoma) | Department of Energy  

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

Oklahoma Hazardous Waste Management Act (Oklahoma) Oklahoma Hazardous Waste Management Act (Oklahoma) Oklahoma Hazardous Waste Management Act (Oklahoma) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Construction Industrial Investor-Owned Utility Municipal/Public Utility Rural Electric Cooperative Utility Program Info State Oklahoma Program Type Environmental Regulations Provider Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality 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 engaged in the operation of storing, treating or disposing of hazardous waste or storing recyclable materials. The Department shall not issue a permit for the treatment, disposal or temporary storage of any liquid hazardous waste in a

129

Hazardous and Industrial Waste (Minnesota) | Department of Energy  

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

Hazardous and Industrial Waste (Minnesota) Hazardous and Industrial Waste (Minnesota) Hazardous and Industrial Waste (Minnesota) < Back Eligibility Utility Fed. Government Commercial Agricultural Investor-Owned Utility State/Provincial Govt Industrial Construction Municipal/Public Utility Local Government Residential Installer/Contractor Rural Electric Cooperative Tribal Government Low-Income Residential Schools Retail Supplier Institutional Multi-Family Residential Systems Integrator Fuel Distributor Nonprofit General Public/Consumer Transportation Program Info State Minnesota Program Type Siting and Permitting 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 facility. The statute also

130

Transportation of RCRA hazardous wastes. RCRA Information Brief  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (HMTA) regulate the transport of hazardous wastes. Under these statutes, specific pretransport regulatory requirements must be met by DOE before the shipment of hazardous wastes, including radioactive mixed wastes. The pretransport requirements are designed to help reduce the risk of loss, leakage, or exposure during shipment of hazardous materials and to communicate information on potential hazards posed by the hazardous material in transport. These goals are accomplished through the tracking of shipments, correctly packaging and labeling containers, and communicating potential hazards. Specific requirements include manifesting, packaging, marking and labeling waste packages; placarding transport vehicles; choosing appropriate waste transporters and shipment destinations; and record keeping and reporting. This information Brief focuses primarily on the transporter requirements both for transportation within a DOE facility and using a commercial transporter to transport RCRA hazardous wastes off-site.

Not Available

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

131

Hazardous Waste Management (North Carolina) | Department of Energy  

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

(North Carolina) (North Carolina) Hazardous Waste Management (North Carolina) < Back Eligibility Commercial Industrial Construction Fuel Distributor Transportation Savings Category Alternative Fuel Vehicles Hydrogen & Fuel Cells Buying & Making Electricity Water Home Weatherization Solar Wind Program Info State North Carolina Program Type Environmental Regulations Safety and Operational Guidelines Siting and Permitting Provider Department of Environment and Natural Resources 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 surface impoundments and location standards for facilities. An applicant applying for a permit for a hazardous waste facility shall

132

Hazardous Materials Incident Response Procedure | Department of Energy  

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

Hazardous Materials Incident Response Procedure Hazardous Materials Incident Response Procedure Hazardous Materials Incident Response Procedure The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidance for developing an emergency response plan, as outlined in OSHA's 29 CFR 1910.120(q), for facility response. This model has been adopted and applied to work for response to transportation accidents involving radioactive material or other hazardous materials incidents Hazardous Materials Incident Response Procedure.docx More Documents & Publications Handling and Packaging a Potentially Radiologically Contaminated Patient Decontamination Dressdown at a Transportation Accident Involving Radioactive Material Medical Examiner/Coroner on the Handling of a Body/Human Remains that are Potentially Radiologically Contaminated

133

Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act (Pennsylvania) | Department of Energy  

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

Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act (Pennsylvania) Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act (Pennsylvania) Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act (Pennsylvania) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Construction Fuel Distributor Industrial Investor-Owned Utility Municipal/Public Utility Rural Electric Cooperative Utility Program Info State Pennsylvania Program Type Environmental Regulations Grant Program Provider Department of Environmental Protection 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 treatment and disposal facilities in order to protect public health and safety, foster economic growth and protect the environment. Pennsylvania law establishes a fund to provide to the Department the

134

Preliminary Hazards Analysis Plasma Hearth Process  

SciTech Connect

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.

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

135

Facility worker technical basis document  

SciTech Connect

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.

EVANS, C.B.

2003-03-21T23:59:59.000Z

136

Portsmouth Site Feeds Bacteria to Render Hazardous Groundwater Waste  

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

Portsmouth Site Feeds Bacteria to Render Hazardous Groundwater Portsmouth Site Feeds Bacteria to Render Hazardous Groundwater Waste Harmless Portsmouth Site Feeds Bacteria to Render Hazardous Groundwater Waste Harmless April 2, 2012 - 12:00pm Addthis Neil Smith puts a trained eye on the pressure and flow of a food-grade com¬pound being injected into an under¬ground plume of hazardous waste near the X-720 Maintenance Facility at the DOE Piketon Site. The sodium lactate compound promotes bacterial growth in the groundwater that turns hazardous waste into harmless end-products. Neil Smith puts a trained eye on the pressure and flow of a food-grade com¬pound being injected into an under¬ground plume of hazardous waste near the X-720 Maintenance Facility at the DOE Piketon Site. The sodium lactate compound promotes bacterial growth in the groundwater that turns

137

HAZARD CATEGORIZATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION SITES AT HANFORD WASHINGTON  

SciTech Connect

Environmental restoration activities, defined here as work to identify and characterize contaminated sites and then contain, treat, remove or dispose of the contamination, now comprises a significant fraction of work in the DOE complex. As with any other DOE activity, a safety analysis must be in place prior to commencing restoration. The rigor and depth of this safety analysis is in part determined by the site's hazard category. This category in turn is determined by the facility's hazardous material inventory and the consequences of its release. Progressively more complicated safety analyses are needed as a facility's hazard category increases from radiological to hazard category three (significant local releases) to hazard category two (significant on-site releases). Thus, a facility's hazard category plays a crucial early role in helping to determine the level of effort devoted to analysis of the facility's individual hazards. Improper determination of the category can result in either an inadequate safety analysis in the case of underestimation of the hazard category, or an unnecessarily cumbersome analysis in the case of overestimation. Contaminated sites have been successfully categorized and safely restored or remediated at the former DOE production site at Hanford, Washington. This paper discusses various means used to categorize former plutonium production or support sites at Hanford. Both preliminary and final hazard categorization is discussed. The importance of the preliminary (initial) hazard categorization in guiding further DOE involvement and approval of the safety analyses is discussed. Compliance to DOE direction provided in ''Hazard Categorization and Accident Analysis Techniques for Compliance with DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports'', DOE-STD-1027-92, is discussed. DOE recently issued 10 CFR 830, Subpart B which codifies previous DOE safety analysis guidance and orders. The impact of 10 CFR 830, Subpart B on hazard categorization is also discussed.

BISHOP, G.E.

2001-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

138

Facility effluent monitoring plan for the 325 Facility  

SciTech Connect

The Applied Chemistry Laboratory (325 Facility) houses radiochemistry research, radioanalytical service, radiochemical process development, and hazardous and mixed hazardous waste treatment activities. The laboratories and specialized facilities enable work ranging from that with nonradioactive materials to work with picogram to kilogram quantities of fissionable materials and up to megacurie quantities of other radionuclides. The special facilities include two shielded hot-cell areas that provide for process development or analytical chemistry work with highly radioactive materials, and a waste treatment facility for processing hazardous, mixed, low-level, and transuranic wastes generated by Pacific Northwest Laboratory. Radioactive material storage and usage occur throughout the facility and include a large number of isotopes. This material is in several forms, including solid, liquid, particulate, and gas. Some of these materials are also heated during testing which can produce vapors. The research activities have been assigned to the following activity designations: High-Level Hot Cell, Hazardous Waste Treatment Unit, Waste Form Development, Special Testing Projects, Chemical Process Development, Analytical Hot Cell, and Analytical Chemistry. The following summarizes the airborne and liquid effluents and the results of the Facility Effluent Monitoring Plan (FEMP) determination for the facility. The complete monitoring plan includes characterization of effluent streams, monitoring/sampling design criteria, a description of the monitoring systems and sample analysis, and quality assurance requirements.

NONE

1998-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

139

Hazard Analysis Database report  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Niemi, B.J.

1997-08-12T23:59:59.000Z

140

Hazard Analysis for In Tank Spray Leaks  

SciTech Connect

The River Protection Project (RPP) Authorization Basis (AB) contains controls that address spray leaks in tanks. However, there are no hazardous conditions in the Hazards Database that specifically identify in-tank spray leak scenarios. The purpose of this Hazards Evaluation is to develop hazardous conditions related to in-tank spray leaks for the Hazards Database and to provide more complete coverage of Tank Farm facilities. Currently, the in-tank spray leak is part of the ''Spray Leak in Structures or From Waste Transfer Lines'' accidents in Section 3.4.2.9 of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) (CHG, 2000a). The accident analysis for the ''Spray Leak in Structure or From Waste Transfer Lines'' states the following regarding the location of a possible spray leak: Inside ventilated waste storage tanks (DSTs, DCRTs, and some SSTs). Aerosols could be generated inside a storage tank during a transfer because of a leak from the portion of the transfer pipe inside the tank. The tank ventilation system could help disperse the aerosols to the atmosphere should the vent system HEPA filters fail. This Hazards Evaluation also evaluates the controls currently assigned to the spray leak in structure accident and determines the applicability of the controls to the new hazardous conditions. This comparison reviews both the analysis in the FSAR and the controls found in the Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) (CHG, 2000h). If the new hazardous conditions do not match the analyzed accident conditions and controls, then additional analysis may be required. This document is not intended to authorize the activity or determine the adequacy of controls; it is only intended to provide information about the hazardous conditions associated with this activity. The Control decision process as defined in the AB will be used to determine the adequacy of controls and whether the proposed activity is within the AB. This hazard evaluation does not constitute an accident analysis.

GRAMS, W.H.

2000-06-13T23:59:59.000Z

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


141

ARM - Facility News Article  

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

January 15, 2006 [Facility News] January 15, 2006 [Facility News] Location, Location, Location... Field Campaign Focuses on Latitude Effects Bookmark and Share A scintillometer was used to detect atmospheric optical disturbances-called scintillations-caused by temperature, pressure and humidity. The instrument emits light from two transmitters, shown at left. The light traverses the local atmosphere, perturbed by density fluctuations. Some of the light enters the receiver, shown at right. (Image from Scintec at www.scintec.com.) A scintillometer was used to detect atmospheric optical disturbances-called scintillations-caused by temperature, pressure and humidity. The instrument emits light from two transmitters, shown at left. The light traverses the local atmosphere, perturbed by density fluctuations. Some of the light

142

An OSHA based approach to safety analysis for nonradiological hazardous materials  

SciTech Connect

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.

Yurconic, M.

1992-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

143

An OSHA based approach to safety analysis for nonradiological hazardous materials  

SciTech Connect

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.

Yurconic, M.

1992-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

144

Facility effluent monitoring plan for the 324 Facility  

SciTech Connect

The 324 Facility [Waste Technology Engineering Laboratory] in the 300 Area primarily supports the research and development of radioactive and nonradioactive waste vitrification technologies, biological waste remediation technologies, spent nuclear fuel studies, waste mixing and transport studies, and tritium development programs. All of the above-mentioned programs deal with, and have the potential to, release hazardous and/or radioactive material. The potential for discharge would primarily result from (1) conducting research activities using the hazardous materials, (2) storing radionuclides and hazardous chemicals, and (3) waste accumulation and storage. This report summarizes the airborne and liquid effluents, and the results of the Facility Effluent Monitoring Plan (FEMP) determination for the facility. The complete monitoring plan includes characterizing effluent streams, monitoring/sampling design criteria, a description of the monitoring systems and sample analysis, and quality assurance requirements.

NONE

1994-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

145

About Chemical Hazards  

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

Chemical Hazards Chemical Hazards What Is a Chemical Hazard? chemical hazards.jpg A chemical hazard is any substance that can cause harm, primarily to people. Chemicals of all kinds are stored in our homes and can result in serious injuries if not properly handled. Household items such as bleach can result in harmful chlorine gas or hydrochloric acid if carelessly used. Gasoline fumes from containers for lawnmowers or boats can result in major health hazards if inhaled. DOE Oak Ridge uses thousands of chemicals in its varied research and other operations. New chemicals are or can be created as a result of the research or other activities. DOE follows national safety requirements in storing and handling these chemicals to minimize the risk of injuries from its chemical usage. However, accidents can occur despite careful attention to proper handling and storage procedures.

146

Facility effluent monitoring plan for the 327 Facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The 327 Facility [Post-Irradiation Testing Laboratory] provides office and laboratory space for Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) scientific and engineering staff conducting multidisciplinary research in the areas of post-irradiated fuels and structural materials. The facility is designed to accommodate the use of radioactive and hazardous materials in the conduct of these activities. This report summarizes the airborne emissions and liquid effluents and the results of the Facility Effluent Monitoring Plan (FEMP) determination for the facility. The complete monitoring plan includes characterization of effluent streams, monitoring/sampling design criteria, a description of the monitoring systems and sample analysis, and quality assurance requirements.

NONE

1994-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

147

Nuclear Facility Design  

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

Design Design FUNCTIONAL AREA GOAL: Headquarters and Field organizations and their contractors ensure that nuclear facilities are designed to assure adequate protection for the public, workers, and the environment from nuclear hazards. REQUIREMENTS:  10 CFR 830.120  10 CFR 830 subpart B  DOE O 413.3  DOE O 420.1B  DOE O 414.1C  DOE O 226.1  DOE M 426.1  DEAR 970-5404-2 Guidance:  DOE G 420.1-1  Project Management Practices, Integrated Quality ( Rev E, June 2003)  DOE Implementation Plan for DNSB Recommendation 2004-2 Performance Objective 1: Contractor Program Documentation Contracts between and the contractors who operate nuclear facilities contain adequate requirements concerning the conduct of nuclear facility safety design for nuclear facility capital projects and major modifications and the

148

Radiation Hazards Program (Minnesota)  

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

149

Nuclear Facilities Production Facilities  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

150

Seismic Hazard Characterization at the DOE Savannah River Site (SRS): Status report  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The purpose of the Seismic Hazard Characterization project for the Savannah River Site (SRS-SHC) is to develop estimates of the seismic hazard for several locations within the SRS. Given the differences in the geology and geotechnical characteristics at each location, the estimates of the seismic hazard are to allow for the specific local conditions at each site. Characterization of seismic hazard is a critical factor for the design of new facilities as well as for the review and potential retrofit of existing facilities at SRS. The scope of the SRS seismic hazard characterization reported in this document is limited to the Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA). The goal of the project is to provide seismic hazard estimates based on a state-of-the-art method which is consistent with developments and findings of several ongoing studies which are deemed to bring improvements in the state of the seismic hazard analyses.

Savy, J.B.

1994-06-24T23:59:59.000Z

151

WHC natural phenomena hazards mitigation implementation plan  

SciTech Connect

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.

Conrads, T.J.

1996-09-11T23:59:59.000Z

152

Safety of magnetic fusion facilities: Requirements  

SciTech Connect

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.

1996-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

153

Effect of sample disturbance in opalinus clay shales  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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 ...

Pei, Jianyong, 1975-

2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

154

Hazardous Waste Management Training  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Hazardous Waste Management Training Persons (including faculty, staff and students) working be thoroughly familiar with waste handling and emergency procedures ap- plicable to their job responsibilities before handling hazardous waste. Departments are re- quired to keep records of training for as long

Dai, Pengcheng

155

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

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

Monitoring, Reporting, and Analysis Electric Disturbance Events (OE-417) Electric Disturbance Events (OE-417) Electricity Advisory Committee Technology Development Electricity...

156

Seismic hazard analysis overview and executive summary  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Site Specific Spectra Project (SSSP) described in this report was a multi-year study funded by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) as part of NRC's Systematic Evaluation Program (SEP). The main objective of this project was to provide assistance to the NRC by developing estimates of the seismic hazard at the nine oldest nuclear power plant sites east of the Rocky Mountains which were included in the SEP. This volume gives brief overview of the SEP and the SSSP including a discussion of the formal elicitation of expert opinion used to obtain a subjective representation of parameters that affect seismic hazard and the development of the seismic hazard at the nine SEP facilities.

Bernreuter, D.L.; Minichino, C.

1982-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

157

Repository Subsurface Preliminary Fire Hazard Analysis  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Richard C. Logan

2001-07-30T23:59:59.000Z

158

FACILITY WORKER TECHNICAL BASIS DOCUMENT  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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''.

SHULTZ, M.V.

2005-03-31T23:59:59.000Z

159

Appendix B Major Disturbances and Unusual Occurrences  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

144 U.S. Energy Information Administration/Electric Power Monthly June 2012 Table B.2 Major Disturbances and Unusual Occurrences, Year-to-Date through ...

160

Scientists Classify Forest Disturbances to Grow Understanding...  

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

Scientists Classify Forest Disturbances to Grow Understanding of Climate Change Daniel Hayes, shown here outside of Nome, Alaska, traveled to the Arctic in June to study climate...

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


161

Biological treatment of hazardous aqueous wastes  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Studies were conducted with a rotating biological conractor (RBC) to evaluate the treatability of leachates from the Stringfellow and New Lyme hazardous-waste sites. The leachates were transported from the waste sites to Cincinnati at the United States Environmental Protection Agency's Testing and Evaluation Facility. A series of batches were run with primary effluent from Cincinnati's Mill Creek Sewage Treatment Facility. The paper reports on the results from these experiments and the effectiveness of an RBC to adequately treat leachates from Superfund sites.

Opatken, E.J.; Howard, H.K.; Bond, J.J.

1987-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

162

NGNP SITE 2 HAZARDS ASSESSMENT  

SciTech Connect

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.

Wayne Moe

2011-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

163

Experiment Hazard Class 9 - Magnets  

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

hazard classification applies to all experiments involving magnets, magnetic fields, and electric fields. Other hazard classifications such as electrical safety and their...

164

Hazardous Waste Management (New Mexico)  

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

165

Research Facilities  

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

FLEX lab image, windows testing lab, scientist inside a lab, Research Facilities EETD maintains advanced research and test facilities for buildings, energy technologies, air...

166

CHSP: HAZARD CONTROLS  

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

HYGIENE HYGIENE AND SAFETY PLAN CHSP SITE MAP HAZARD CONTROLS CONTROLS FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS arrow image WORK PRACTICE CONTROLS arrow image CHEMICAL STORAGE GUIDELINES DECOMISSIONING LAB AND SHOP SPACES SPECIFIC CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES arrow image EMERGENCY PROCEDURES AND EQUIPMENT arrow image APPENDICES arrow image FAQs QUESTIONS Search the CHSP: > Go spacer image EH&S Home PUB 3000 LBNL Home LBNL A-Z Index LBNL Search LBNL Phone Book Privacy & Security Notice spacer spacer image spacer image spacer image HAZARD CONTROLS This section discusses control procedures for limiting employee exposure to chemical hazards. Technical Areas Technical areas include laboratories, shops, workrooms, and similar areas where non-administrative activities are performed. For the purpose of the

167

Job Hazard Analysis  

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

Step by Step Instructions - Page 1 of 2 Helpful Information STEP 1. Log in to the EH&S Job Hazards Analysis (JHA) system at https:ehswprod.lbl.govehstrainingjhalogin.aspx...

168

Definition: Disturbance Monitoring Equipment | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Disturbance Monitoring Equipment Disturbance Monitoring Equipment Jump to: navigation, search Dictionary.png Disturbance Monitoring Equipment Devices capable of monitoring and recording system data pertaining to a Disturbance. Such devices include the following categories of recorders: Sequence of event recorders which record equipment response to the event., Fault recorders, which record actual waveform data replicating the system primary voltages and currents. This may include protective relays., Dynamic Disturbance Recorders (DDRs), which record incidents that portray power system behavior during dynamic events such as low-frequency (0.1 Hz - 3 Hz) oscillations and abnormal frequency or voltage excursions. Phasor Measurement Units and any other equipment that meets the functional requirements of DMEs may qualify as DMEs.[1]

169

Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH) Workshop | Department of Energy  

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

Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH) Workshop Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH) Workshop Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH) Workshop The Energy Department Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH) Workshop, sponsored by the Chief of Nuclear Safety and the Chief of Defense Nuclear Safety, was held October 25-26, 2011, in Germantown, Maryland. The workshop brought together approximately 80 experts involved in the characterization of, and mitigation against, natural hazards that can impact nuclear facilities. The workshop featured twenty presentations as well as a breakout session devoted to discussing the status of the commonly used structural analysis code SASSI, a System for Analysis of Soil-Structure Interaction. A Method for Evaluating Fire after Earthquake Scenarios for Single Buildings_1.pdf Addressing Uncertainties in Design Inputs - A Case Study of Probabilistic

170

Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH) Workshop | Department of Energy  

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

Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH) Workshop Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH) Workshop Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH) Workshop The Energy Department Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH) Workshop, sponsored by the Chief of Nuclear Safety and the Chief of Defense Nuclear Safety, was held October 25-26, 2011, in Germantown, Maryland. The workshop brought together approximately 80 experts involved in the characterization of, and mitigation against, natural hazards that can impact nuclear facilities. The workshop featured twenty presentations as well as a breakout session devoted to discussing the status of the commonly used structural analysis code SASSI, a System for Analysis of Soil-Structure Interaction. A Method for Evaluating Fire after Earthquake Scenarios for Single Buildings_1.pdf Addressing Uncertainties in Design Inputs - A Case Study of Probabilistic

171

NEHRP - Advisory Committee on Earthquake Hazards ...  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

NEHRP logo National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program. ... Advisory Committee on Earthquake Hazards Reduction. Highlights. ...

172

Hazardous Waste/Mixed Waste Treatment Building Safety Information Document (SID)  

SciTech Connect

This Safety Information Document (SID) provides a description and analysis of operations for the Hazardous Waste/Mixed Waste Disposal Facility Treatment Building (the Treatment Building). The Treatment Building has been classified as a moderate hazard facility, and the level of analysis performed and the methodology used are based on that classification. Preliminary design of the Treatment Building has identified the need for two separate buildings for waste treatment processes. The term Treatment Building applies to all these facilities. The evaluation of safety for the Treatment Building is accomplished in part by the identification of hazards associated with the facility and the analysis of the facility`s response to postulated events involving those hazards. The events are analyzed in terms of the facility features that minimize the causes of such events, the quantitative determination of the consequences, and the ability of the facility to cope with each event should it occur. The SID presents the methodology, assumptions, and results of the systematic evaluation of hazards associated with operation of the Treatment Building. The SID also addresses the spectrum of postulated credible events, involving those hazards, that could occur. Facility features important to safety are identified and discussed in the SID. The SID identifies hazards and reports the analysis of the spectrum of credible postulated events that can result in the following consequences: Personnel exposure to radiation; Radioactive material release to the environment; Personnel exposure to hazardous chemicals; Hazardous chemical release to the environment; Events leading to an onsite/offsite fatality; and Significant damage to government property. The SID addresses the consequences to the onsite and offsite populations resulting from postulated credible events and the safety features in place to control and mitigate the consequences.

Fatell, L.B.; Woolsey, G.B.

1993-04-15T23:59:59.000Z

173

Identification of Aircraft Hazards  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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).

K. Ashley

2006-12-08T23:59:59.000Z

174

Decision analysis for INEL hazardous waste storage  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

In mid-November 1993, the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) Waste Reduction Operations Complex (WROC) Manager requested that the INEL Hazardous Waste Type Manager perform a decision analysis to determine whether or not a new Hazardous Waste Storage Facility (HWSF) was needed to store INEL hazardous waste (HW). In response to this request, a team was formed to perform a decision analysis for recommending the best configuration for storage of INEL HW. Personnel who participated in the decision analysis are listed in Appendix B. The results of the analysis indicate that the existing HWSF is not the best configuration for storage of INEL HW. The analysis detailed in Appendix C concludes that the best HW storage configuration would be to modify and use a portion of the Waste Experimental Reduction Facility (WERF) Waste Storage Building (WWSB), PBF-623 (Alternative 3). This facility was constructed in 1991 to serve as a waste staging facility for WERF incineration. The modifications include an extension of the current Room 105 across the south end of the WWSB and installing heating, ventilation, and bay curbing, which would provide approximately 1,600 ft{sup 2} of isolated HW storage area. Negotiations with the State to discuss aisle space requirements along with modifications to WWSB operating procedures are also necessary. The process to begin utilizing the WWSB for HW storage includes planned closure of the HWSF, modification to the WWSB, and relocation of the HW inventory. The cost to modify the WWSB can be funded by a reallocation of funding currently identified to correct HWSF deficiencies.

Page, L.A.; Roach, J.A.

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

175

Disturbances along the Arizona Monsoon Boundary  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The possibility of disturbances along the boundary between two air masses in the southwestern United States and northwestern Mexico during the summer is examined. This boundary is an approximately north-south confluent zone resulting from the ...

Thomas J. Moore; Robert L. Gall; Thomas C. Adang

1989-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

176

Relay Performance During Major System Disturbances  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

AbstractPower systems in the United States and abroad experienced several wide-area disturbances in the last 15 years including the largest blackout on August 14, 2003, in the Midwest

Demetrios Tziouvaras; Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories

1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

177

Information-Disturbance theorem and Uncertainty Relation  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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.

Takayuki Miyadera; Hideki Imai

2007-07-31T23:59:59.000Z

178

Facility effluent monitoring plan for 242-A evaporator facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

1995-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

179

Minimizing Spacecraft Attitude Disturbances in Space Manipulator Systems  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

This paper presents a technique called the Enhanced Disturbance Map to plan space manipulator motions that will result in relatively low spacecraft disturbances. This subject is of significant concern because future robotic systems used in space may encounter problems due to the dynamic disturbances imposed on their spacecraft by their manipulator motions. Although a spacecraft's attitude control reaction jets can compensate for these dynamic disturbances, jet fuel is a limited resource and excessive disturbances would limit the life of a system. The Enhanced Disturbance Map can aid in understanding this complex problem and in the development of algorithms to reduce disturbances, including ones that use manipulator redundancy to eliminate the disturbances.

Miguel Torres; Steven Dubowsky

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

180

Application: Facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

... Option.. Papavergos, PG; 1991. Halon 1301 Use in Oil and Gas Production Facilities: Alaska's North Slope.. Ulmer, PE; 1991. ...

2011-12-22T23:59:59.000Z

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


181

Site maps and facilities listings  

SciTech Connect

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.

Not Available

1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

182

A complete electrical hazard classification system and its application  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

183

Missouri Hazardous Waste Management Law (Missouri)  

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

184

Natural phenomena hazards assessment criteria for DOE sites: DOE Standard DOE-STD-1023-95  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This paper summarizes hazard assessment criteria (DOE-STD-1023-95) for Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH) at DOE sites. The DOE has established policy and requirements for NPH mitigation for DOE sites and facilities using a graded approach by DOE Order 5480.28. The graded approach is implemented by five performance categories established for structures, systems, and components (SSCs) at DOE facilities based on criteria provided by DOE-STD-1021-93. In applying the design/evaluation criteria of DOE-STD-1020-94 for DOE facilities subjected to one of the natural phenomena hazards, the establishment of design basis load levels consistent with the corresponding performance category is required. This standard provides general criteria as well as specific criteria for natural phenomena hazard assessments to ensure that adequate design basis load levels are established for design and/or evaluation of DOE facilities.

Chen, J.C.; Lu, S.C.; Boissonnade, A.C. [and others

1995-03-24T23:59:59.000Z

185

Report Wildland Fire Area Hazard  

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

Report Wildland Fire Area Hazard Report Wildland Fire Area Hazard Report Wildland Fire Area Hazard Report wildland fire area hazards or incidents that are non-life threatening only. Call 911 for all emergencies that require immediate assistance. How to report wildland fire hazard Use the following form to report any wildland fire area hazards or incidents that are non-life threatening only. Call 911 for all emergencies that require immediate assistance. Fill out this form as completely as possible so we can better assess the hazard. All submissions will be assessed as promptly as possible. For assistance with a non-emergency situation, contact the Operations Support Center at 667-6211. Name (optional): Hazard Type (check one): Wildlife Sighting (check box if animal poses serious threat) Trails (access/egress)

186

Order Module--DOE O 420.1B, FACILITY SAFETY | Department of Energy  

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

DOE O 420.1B, FACILITY SAFETY DOE O 420.1B, FACILITY SAFETY Order Module--DOE O 420.1B, FACILITY SAFETY To ensure that new DOE hazard category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities are designed and constructed in a manner that ensures adequate protection to the public, workers, and the environment from nuclear hazards. To ensure that major modifications to hazard category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities comply with the design and construction requirements for new hazard category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities. To ensure that new DOE nuclear reactors comply with the requirements of DOE O 420.1B and the design requirements of DOE O 5480.30, Nuclear Reactor Safety Design Criteria. DOE Order Self Study Modules - DOE O 420.1B Facility Safety More Documents & Publications Order Module--DOE O 420.2B, SAFETY OF ACCELERATOR FACILITIES

187

Simulation Technology Laboratory Building 970 hazards assessment document  

SciTech Connect

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.

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

1994-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

188

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Banda, Z.; Wood, C.L.

1995-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

189

HAZARDS SUMMARY REPORT ON NUCLEAR PHYSICS LABORATORY AT CANEL  

SciTech Connect

ON NUCLEAR PHYSICS LABORATORY AT CANEL. The critical experiment facility at CANEL is described. Information of the mature of experimental assemblies and operations is included. Safety features of the building, equipment, and operations are pointed out. Possible accidents and the resulting hazards to surrounding areas are analyzed. The make-up of the surrounding area is described. (M.C.G.)

1955-10-13T23:59:59.000Z

190

DOE natural phenomenal hazards design and evaluation criteria  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

It is the policy of the Department of Energy (DOE) to design, construct, and operate DOE facilities so that workers, the general public, and the environment are protected from the impacts of natural phenomena hazards (NPH). Furthermore, DOE has established explicit goals of acceptable risk for NPH performance. As a result, natural phenomena hazard (earthquake, extreme wind, and flood) design and evaluation criteria for DOE facilities have been developed based on target probabilistic performance goals. These criteria include selection of design/evaluation NPH input from probabilistic hazard curves combined with commonly practiced deterministic response evaluation methods and acceptance criteria with controlled levels of conservatism. For earthquake considerations, conservatism is intentionally introduced in specification of material strengths and capacities, in the allowance of limited inelastic behavior, and by a seismic scale factor. Criteria have been developed following a graded approach for several performance goals ranging from that appropriate for normal-use facilities to that appropriate for facilities involving hazardous or critical operations. Performance goals are comprised of qualitative expressions of acceptable behavior and of target quantitative probabilities that acceptable limits of behavior are maintained. The criteria are simple procedures but have a rigorous basis. This paper addresses DOE seismic design and evaluation criteria.

Murray, R.C.; Nelson, T.A. [Lawrence Livermore National Lab., CA (United States); Short, S.A. [EQE International, Inc., Irvine, CA (United States); Kennedy, R.P.; Chander, H. [RPK Structural Mechanics Consulting, Inc., Yorba Linda, CA (United States); Hill, J.R.; Kimball, J.K. [USDOE, Washington, DC (United States)

1994-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

191

Hazardous Waste Management Keith Williams  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Hazardous Waste Management Keith Williams DES ­ Environmental Affairs Extension 53163 #12,100 Locally · 1998 Univ of Va $33,990 · 1998 Univ. of MD $0 !!!!! #12;Hazardous Waste Disposal Procedures Hazardous (Chemical) Waste Management in University of Maryland Laboratories o All laboratories and work

Appelbaum, Ian

192

Integrating Total Quality Management (TQM) and hazardous waste management  

SciTech Connect

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and its subsequent amendments have had a dramatic impact on hazardous waste management for business and industry. The complexity of this law and the penalties for noncompliance have made it one of the most challenging regulatory programs undertaken by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The fundamentals of RCRA include ``cradle to grave`` management of hazardous waste, covering generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. The regulations also address extensive definitions and listing/identification mechanisms for hazardous waste along with a tracking system. Treatment is favored over disposal and emphasis is on ``front-end`` treatment such as waste minimization and pollution prevention. A study of large corporations such as Xerox, 3M, and Dow Chemical, as well as the public sector, has shown that well known and successful hazardous waste management programs emphasize pollution prevention and employment of techniques such as proactive environmental management, environmentally conscious manufacturing, and source reduction. Nearly all successful hazardous waste programs include some aspects of Total Quality Management, which begins with a strong commitment from top management. Hazardous waste management at the Rocky Flats Plant is further complicated by the dominance of ``mixed waste`` at the facility. The mixed waste stems from the original mission of the facility, which was production of nuclear weapons components for the Department of Energy (DOE). A Quality Assurance Program based on the criterion in DOE Order 5700.6C has been implemented at Rocky Flats. All of the elements of the Quality Assurance Program play a role in hazardous waste management. Perhaps one of the biggest waste management problems facing the Rocky Flats Plant is cleaning up contamination from a forty year mission which focused on production of nuclear weapon components.

Kirk, N. [Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO (United States)

1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

193

Overview hazard analysis for the H2Fuel Bus Program  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

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.

Hovis, G.L.

1996-06-18T23:59:59.000Z

194

Safety Hazards of Batteries  

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

Safety Hazards of Batteries 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 Lithium-ion battery. Cell phones, laptop computers, GPS systems, iPods, and even cars are now using lithium- ion rechargeable battery technology. In fact, you probably have a lithium-ion battery in your pocket or purse right now! Although lithium-ion batteries are very common there are some inherent dangers when using ANY battery. Lithium cells are like any other technology - if they are abused and not used for their intended purpose catastrophic results may occur, such as: first-, second-, and third-degree burns, respiratory problems, fires, explosions, and even death. Please handle the lithium-ion batteries with care and respect.

195

Disposal Facility Reaches 15-Million-Ton Milestone  

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

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

196

Oil and Hazardous Substance Discharge Preparedness (Minnesota...  

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

Hazardous Substance Discharge Preparedness (Minnesota) Oil and Hazardous Substance Discharge Preparedness (Minnesota) Eligibility Utility Fed. Government Commercial Agricultural...

197

National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Staff ...  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Staff. National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (731.05). Dr. John (Jack) R. Hayes, Jr. ...

2013-08-12T23:59:59.000Z

198

Underground Facilities Information (Iowa) | Department of Energy  

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

Facilities Information (Iowa) Facilities Information (Iowa) Underground Facilities Information (Iowa) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Fuel Distributor Industrial Installer/Contractor Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Low-Income Residential Multi-Family Residential Municipal/Public Utility Residential Transportation Utility Savings Category Alternative Fuel Vehicles Hydrogen & Fuel Cells Buying & Making Electricity Solar Wind Program Info State Iowa Program Type Environmental Regulations Provider Iowa Utilities Board This section applies to any excavation which may impact underground facilities, including those used for the conveyance of electricity or the transportation of hazardous liquids or natural gas. Excavation is prohibited unless notification takes place, as described in this chapter

199

User Facilities  

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

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory's National User Facilities are available for cooperative research with institutions and the private sector worldwide. The Environmental...

200

NSTP 2002-2 Methodology for Final Hazard Categorization for Nuclear  

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

NSTP 2002-2 Methodology for Final Hazard Categorization for Nuclear NSTP 2002-2 Methodology for Final Hazard Categorization for Nuclear Facilities from Category 3 to Radiological (11/13/02). NSTP 2002-2 Methodology for Final Hazard Categorization for Nuclear Facilities from Category 3 to Radiological (11/13/02). 0 CFR 830 Subpart B requires that all DOE nuclear facilities categorized as HC-3 or above have a DOE approved safety basis compliant with the requirements of Subpart B. The rule requires the use of DOESTD- 1027-92 (STD- 1027) as the methodology for categorizing DOE nuclear facilities. STD- 1027 requires a preliminary categorization be established on the basis of the inventory of radionuclides in a facility or involved in an activity. It also permits a safety analyses (see STD-1027 section 3.1.2) to establish a final

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


201

State of Tennessee Hazardous Waste Management Permit, TNHW-127  

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

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

202

State of Tennessee Hazardous Waste Management Permit, TNHW-122  

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

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

203

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

204

Mobile Facility  

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

Facility Facility AMF Information Science Architecture Baseline Instruments AMF1 AMF2 AMF3 Data Operations AMF Fact Sheet Images Contacts AMF Deployments Hyytiälä, Finland, 2014 Manacapuru, Brazil, 2014 Oliktok Point, Alaska, 2013 Los Angeles, California, to Honolulu, Hawaii, 2012 Cape Cod, Massachusetts, 2012 Gan Island, Maldives, 2011 Ganges Valley, India, 2011 Steamboat Springs, Colorado, 2010 Graciosa Island, Azores, 2009-2010 Shouxian, China, 2008 Black Forest, Germany, 2007 Niamey, Niger, 2006 Point Reyes, California, 2005 Mobile Facilities Pictured here in Gan, the second mobile facility is configured in a standard layout. Pictured here in Gan, the second mobile facility is configured in a standard layout. To explore science questions beyond those addressed by ARM's fixed sites at

205

AN ENHANCED HAZARD ANALYSIS PROCESS FOR THE HANFORD TANK FARMS  

SciTech Connect

CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc., has expanded the scope and increased the formality of process hazards analyses performed on new or modified Tank Farm facilities, designs, and processes. The CH2M HILL process hazard analysis emphasis has been altered to reflect its use as a fundamental part of the engineering and change control process instead of simply being a nuclear safety analysis tool. The scope has been expanded to include identification of accidents/events that impact the environment, or require emergency response, in addition to those with significant impact to the facility worker, the offsite, and the 100-meter receptor. Also, there is now an expectation that controls will be identified to address all types of consequences. To ensure that the process has an appropriate level of rigor and formality, a new engineering standard for process hazards analysis was created. This paper discusses the role of process hazards analysis as an information source for not only nuclear safety, but also for the worker-safety management programs, emergency management, environmental programs. This paper also discusses the role of process hazards analysis in the change control process, including identifying when and how it should be applied to changes in design or process.

SHULTZ MV

2008-05-15T23:59:59.000Z

206

Risk analysis of an LPG facility  

SciTech Connect

This paper describes methods used to conduct a safety review of an existing LPG loading, processing, and storage facility. An engineering team conducted a Hazard and Operability study of the plant to identify potential problems. A Probabilistic Risk Assessment was also made on the facility where the probability and consequences of worst case accidents were estimated. Stone and Webster recently completed an analysis of an LPG terminal to determine if there were any engineering, design, or operating deficiencies which could jeopardize the operability of the facility or make operation hazardous. The facility includes a dock for off-loading refrigerated propane and butane, transfer piping from the dock to storage, a heating system, pressurized storage, dehydration, product transfer and loading.

Daley, H.F.; Chapman, P.D.L.

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

207

DOE O 425.1D Admin Chg 1, Verification of Readiness to Start Up or Restart Nuclear Facilities  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

The order establishes requirements for verifying readiness for startup of new Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities, activities, and operations, and ...

2010-04-16T23:59:59.000Z

208

Quality Services: Solid Wastes, Parts 370-376: Hazardous Waste Management  

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

Parts 370-376: Hazardous Waste Parts 370-376: Hazardous Waste Management System (New York) Quality Services: Solid Wastes, Parts 370-376: Hazardous Waste Management System (New York) < Back Eligibility Commercial Fed. Government Industrial Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Municipal/Public Utility Rural Electric Cooperative Schools State/Provincial Govt Tribal Government Utility Program Info State New York Program Type Safety and Operational Guidelines Provider NY Department of Environmental Conservation 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, transporters, as well as treatment, storage and disposal facilities. The regulations also define specific types

209

Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Public Comments to Community Relations Plan  

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

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

210

Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Public Comments to Community...  

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

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

211

SITING HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES * KARL F. BIRNS  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

cap and are now under RCRA post-closure care and monitoring. Capping of the old ponds has lessened contaminated soils excavated during the RCRA closure of the OLF as well as soils excavated from the banks of NT. complete the RCRA closure of the K-1417-B Drum Storage Yard and will perform surveillance and maintenance

Columbia University

212

ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - 400-EAA Top of Storage...  

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

Piping Pressure Cabinets Signage NA NA 6 ESH119 NA NA A ASD108400 Diagnostics Racks Electrical Low voltage 120 VAC Breaker in rack Extinguisher 20 feet away 1 310504-00008 6 NA 2...

213

ASD Facility Hazard Analysis Document - 400-EAA Mechanical Mezzanine  

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

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

214

DOE Permitting Hydrogen Facilities: Hazard and Risk Analysis  

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

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

215

Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Public Comments to Community...  

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

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

216

SITING HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES KARL F. BIRNS  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

management or even other public projects such as nuclear powerplant difficulties can impact siting a new of the siting process. Those wishing such infollIla tion will also find that a number of states have extensive

Columbia University

217

Experiment Hazard Class 11 - Hydrogen  

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

1 - Hydrogen 1 - Hydrogen Applicability This hazard classification applies to all experiments and processes involving the use of gaseous hydrogen. This class includes work performed in the Experiment Hall Beamline Stations and any preparatory/setup/testing work performed in the LOM laboratories. Other hazard controls such as fire protection and life safety regulations may apply to experiments of this hazard class. A summary of controls for hydrogen use is available in the hydrogen summary document. Experiment Category Experiments involving previously reviewed hazard controls qualify for categorized as medium risk. Experiments involving new equipment or modified hazard control schemes are categorized as high risk. Experiment Hazard Control Verification Statements Engineered Controls - Applicable controls for storage and use of

218

Hazardous Waste Minimum Distance Requirements (Connecticut) | Department of  

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

Minimum Distance Requirements (Connecticut) Minimum Distance Requirements (Connecticut) Hazardous Waste Minimum Distance Requirements (Connecticut) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Fed. Government Fuel Distributor General Public/Consumer Industrial Installer/Contractor Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Low-Income Residential Multi-Family Residential Municipal/Public Utility Nonprofit Residential Retail Supplier Rural Electric Cooperative Schools State/Provincial Govt Systems Integrator Transportation Tribal Government Utility Program Info State Connecticut Program Type Siting and Permitting Provider Department of Energy and Environmental Protection These regulations set minimum distance requirements between certain types of facilities that generate, process, store, and dispose of hazardous waste

219

HAZARDS SUMMARY REPORT ON CRITICAL EXPERIMENT PROGRAM NO. 1 AT CANEL  

SciTech Connect

The construction of a critical assembly is proposed for determining the characteristics of the PWAC Na-cooled, heterogeneous aircraft reactor design. The experimental facility would be located at the CANEL site. The site meteorology, hydrology, geology, and topography are considered; the facility and critical assembly design is shown, and the extent of hazards from accidents and sabotage is evaluated. (D.E.B.)

1957-05-24T23:59:59.000Z

220

Hazardous Waste Act (New Mexico)  

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

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


221

OSS 19.5 Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response 3/21/95 |  

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

5 Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response 3/21/95 5 Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response 3/21/95 OSS 19.5 Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response 3/21/95 The objective of this surveillance is to ensure that workers who are performing activities associated with characterizing, handling, processing, storing or transporting hazardous wastes are adequately protected. The surveillance also evaluates the effectiveness of programs implemented to protect the health and safety of emergency response personnel who may be called upon to mitigate upset conditions at a facility where hazardous waste operations are conducted. Finally, the surveillance includes evaluations of the contractor's compliance with specific requirements regarding hazardous waste operations and emergency response. OSS19-05.doc

222

Electric utility industry experience with geomagnetic disturbances  

SciTech Connect

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.

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

223

Electric utility industry experience with geomagnetic disturbances  

SciTech Connect

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.

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

224

Electric Utility Industry Experience with Geomagnetic Disturbances  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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 a 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.

Barnes, P.R.

1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

225

PO*WW*ER mobile treatment unit process hazards analysis  

SciTech Connect

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.

Richardson, R.B.

1996-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

226

A hazard separation system for dismantlement of nuclear weapon components  

SciTech Connect

Over the next decade, the US Department of Energy (DOE) must retire and dismantle many nuclear weapon systems. In support of this effort, Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) has developed the Hazard Separation System (HSS). The HSS combines abrasive waterjet cutting technology and real-time radiography. Using the HSS, operators determine the exact location of interior, hazardous sub-components and remove them through precision cutting. The system minimizes waste and maximizes the recovery of recyclable materials. During 1994, the HSS was completed and demonstrated. Weapon components processed during the demonstration period included arming, fusing, and firing units; preflight control units; neutron generator subassemblies; and x-units. Hazards removed included radioactive krytron tubes and gap tubes, thermal batteries, neutron generator tubes, and oil-filled capacitors. Currently, the HSS is being operated at SNL in a research and development mode to facilitate the transfer of the technology to other DOE facilities for support of their dismantlement operations.

Lutz, J.D.; Purvis, S.T.; Hospelhorn, R.L.; Thompson, K.R.

1995-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

227

Potential Health Hazards of Radiation | Department of Energy  

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

Potential Health Hazards of Radiation Potential Health Hazards of Radiation Potential Health Hazards of Radiation Potential Health Hazards of Radiation More Documents &...

228

Hot Cell Facility (HCF) Safety Analysis Report  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

229

Site & Facility Restoration | Department of Energy  

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

Restoration Restoration Site & Facility Restoration Deactivation & Decommissioning (D&D) Deactivation and Decommissioning (D&D) is the process of taking an active/excess/abandoned facility to a final disposition end state. Because of residual radioactivity, other hazardous constituents, and the physical condition of EM's facilities, D&D presents unique hazards that must be addressed from a safety, programmatic, environmental, and technological standpoint. Read more Soil & Groundwater Remediation The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) manages the largest groundwater and soil remediation effort in the world. The inventory at the DOE sites includes 6.5 trillion liters of contaminated groundwater, an amount equal to about four times the daily U.S. water consumption, and 40 million cubic

230

Hydrogen Trailer Storage Facility (Building 878). Consequence analysis  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The Department of Energy Order 5500.3A requires facility-specific hazards assessments be prepared, maintained, and used for emergency planning purposes. This consequence analysis documents the impact that a hydrogen accident could have to employees, the general public, and nearby facilities. The computer model ARCHIE was utilized to determine discharge rates, toxic vapor dispersion analyses, flammable vapor cloud hazards, explosion hazards, and flame jets for the Hydrogen Trailer Storage Facility located at Building 878. To determine over pressurization effects, hand calculations derived from the Department of the Air Force Manual, ``Structures to Resist the Effects of Accidental Explosions,`` were utilized. The greatest distances at which a postulated facility event will produce the Lower Flammability and the Lower Detonation Levels are 1,721 feet and 882 feet, respectively. The greatest distance at which 10.0 psi overpressure (i.e., total building destruction) is reached is 153 feet.

Banda, Z.; Wood, C.L.

1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

231

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

SciTech Connect

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.

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

232

Fire hazards evaluation for light duty utility arm system  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

HUCKFELDT, R.A.

1999-02-24T23:59:59.000Z

233

REGARDING RADIATION HAZARDS  

SciTech Connect

Within 24 to 36 hr after detonation on July 6 and 24 in the Nevada testing area of 2 thermonuclear bombs of the order of 10 kiloton magnitude, the I/ sup 131/ levels of milk from several Utah milk sheds repeatedly exceeded hazardous levels. These findings, reflected in daily I/sup 131/ counts, led the Director of Public Health in Utah to have milk diverted from fluid distribution to milk-products manufacture, thereby permitting time for these dairy foods to become safe for consumer use. In other cities sudden peak levels have also occurred. Thus, Troy, New York, in April, 1953, was exposed by a flash rainstorm, which occurred 18 hr after a Nevada test explosion, to radioactive fallout sufficient to produce levels in milk estimated at more than a 1000 times the safe limit by British or American standards, more than 4 times the British annual allowance in 1 quart of milk. It is suggested that public-health authorities, working in coliaboration with the nation's medical centers, should institute routine, daily I/sup 131/ thyroid-uptake counts on the infants in various parts of the country. (H.H.D.)

Boardman, D.W.

1962-09-13T23:59:59.000Z

234

Transporting & Shipping Hazardous Materials at LBNL: Waste -...  

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

Waste: Hazardous, Biohazardous, Medical or Radioactive Do not transport or ship hazardous material wastes off-site. Only Waste Management, Radiation Protection or approved...

235

Mr. James Bearzi, Chief Hazardous Waste Bureau  

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

Carlsbad Carlsbad , New Mexico 88221 October 12, 2010 New Mexico Environment Department 2905 Rodeo Park Drive East, Building 1 Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505-6303 Subject: Notification of Results of Evaluation of Sampling Line Loss, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Number NM4890139088 - TSDF Dear Mr. Bearzi: As required under Permit Condition IV.F.5.e, the Permittees are hereby notifying the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) of the results of the evaluation of the loss of two hydrogen and methane monitoring sampling lines. The sampling lines involved were in Panel 3 Rooms 7 and 6. These lines are identified as 7E (exhaust side) and 61 (inlet side). These line losses were previously reported to the NMED on September 2, 2010 and September 28, 2010, respectively.

236

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

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

New Seismic Model Will Refine Hazard Analysis at U.S. Nuclear New Seismic Model Will Refine Hazard Analysis at U.S. Nuclear Plants New Seismic Model Will Refine Hazard Analysis at U.S. Nuclear Plants January 31, 2012 - 2:09pm Addthis The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) released a new seismic study today that will help U.S. nuclear facilities in the central and eastern United 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 effort among the participating organizations and replaces previous seismic source models used by industry and government since the late 1980s. The NRC is requesting U.S. nuclear power plants to reevaluate seismic

237

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

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

New Seismic Model Will Refine Hazard Analysis at U.S. Nuclear New Seismic Model Will Refine Hazard Analysis at U.S. Nuclear Plants New Seismic Model Will Refine Hazard Analysis at U.S. Nuclear Plants January 31, 2012 - 2:09pm Addthis The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) released a new seismic study today that will help U.S. nuclear facilities in the central and eastern United 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 effort among the participating organizations and replaces previous seismic source models used by industry and government since the late 1980s. The NRC is requesting U.S. nuclear power plants to reevaluate seismic

238

Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility, January 2011  

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

February 11, 2011 February 11, 2011 Site Visit Report Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility, January 2011 INTRODUCTION This report documents the results of a review conducted by the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) of the Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility (WESF) documented safety analysis (DSA) at the Hanford Site. During discussions with the U.S. Department of Energy Richland Operations Office (DOE- RL), the review of WESF was jointly selected by HSS and DOE-RL based on the high hazards of the facility and the need to periodically evaluate the facility and DSA by independent reviewers. SCOPE The scope of the review was to evaluate the WESF safety and support systems in detecting, preventing and mitigating analyzed events as described in the facility's DSA, PRC-EDC-10-45190, 2010, Executive

239

Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility, January 2011  

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

February 11, 2011 February 11, 2011 Site Visit Report Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility, January 2011 INTRODUCTION This report documents the results of a review conducted by the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) of the Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility (WESF) documented safety analysis (DSA) at the Hanford Site. During discussions with the U.S. Department of Energy Richland Operations Office (DOE- RL), the review of WESF was jointly selected by HSS and DOE-RL based on the high hazards of the facility and the need to periodically evaluate the facility and DSA by independent reviewers. SCOPE The scope of the review was to evaluate the WESF safety and support systems in detecting, preventing and mitigating analyzed events as described in the facility's DSA, PRC-EDC-10-45190, 2010, Executive

240

DOE G 420.1-1A, Nonreactor Nuclear Safety Design Guide for use with DOE O 420.1C, Facility Safety  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

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 ...

2012-12-04T23:59:59.000Z

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


241

Surveillance Guides - Identification of Hazards  

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

Identification of Hazards Identification of Hazards 1.0 Objective 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 basis documentation (SARs, ISBs, BIOs, JCOs, HASPs etc) as well as activity level hazards identification via JHAs, AJHAs, JSAs etc.) 2.0 References 2.1 DOE 4330.4B Maintenance Management Program 2.2 48 CFR 1970 Department of Energy Acquisition Regulations 2.3 DOE O 5480.21, Unreviewed Safety Questions 2.4 DOE O 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports 3.0 Requirements Implemented This surveillance verifies implementation of guiding principle #5 and core value #2 as specified in 48 CFR 1970.5204-2 (b) (5) and (c) (2) respectively. Additionally, it verifies implementation of

242

Method of recycling hazardous waste  

SciTech Connect

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.

NONE

1999-11-11T23:59:59.000Z

243

Hazard-free connection release.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

??Fault-tolerant communication in a distributed system requires reliable connection management and message delivery. Reliable connection management includes the guarantee of hazard-free release, in which no (more)

Walter, Jennifer E.

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

244

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

SciTech Connect

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.

Musall, J.

2010-05-11T23:59:59.000Z

245

CHANGE OF KEWB REACTOR CORES-EVALUATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITH REGARD TO ASSOCIATED HAZARDS  

SciTech Connect

The KEWB Facility is described, and an over-all technical evaluation is made of the hazards associated with changing from a spherical to a cylindrical core. The characteristics of the two systems, the operation and emergency procedures, a brief history of the program, a summary of the data obtained, and maximum accident analyses are given. The conclusion is that the core change does not represent an adverse change with respect to associated hazards. (T.R.H.)

1960-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

246

HAZARDS SUMMARY FOR THE L-77 LABORATORY REACTOR FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA, RENO  

SciTech Connect

A hazards summary report for the planned installation and operation of an L-77 Laboratory Reactor of the University of Nevada is presented. Site data, including information on the geography, geology, seismology, climatology, and hydrology of the area in which the reactor will be installed are included. The reactor site and administiation of the reactor facility are described along with the reactor, its uses, and its performance characteristics. Analyses of the nuclear, radiation, and operational hazards are also included. (auth)

1962-09-14T23:59:59.000Z

247

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

SciTech Connect

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).

N.M. Ruonavaara

1995-01-18T23:59:59.000Z

248

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

Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

249

Project plan, Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response Training Center: Project 95L-EWT-100  

SciTech Connect

The Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response (HAMMER) Training Center will provide for classroom lectures and hands-on practical training in realistic situations for workers and emergency responders who are tasked with handling and cleanup of toxic substances. The primary objective of the HAMMER project is to provide hands-on training and classroom facilities for hazardous material workers and emergency responders. This project will also contribute towards complying with the planning and training provisions of recent legislation. In March 1989 Title 29 Code of Federal Regulations Occupational Safety and Health Administration 1910 Rules and National Fire Protection Association Standard 472 defined professional requirements for responders to hazardous materials incidents. Two general types of training are addressed for hazardous materials: training for hazardous waste site workers and managers, and training for emergency response organizations.

Borgeson, M.E.

1994-11-09T23:59:59.000Z

250

Surveillance Guide - OSS 19.5 Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response  

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

HAZARDOUS WASTE OPERATIONS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE HAZARDOUS WASTE OPERATIONS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE 1.0 Objective The objective of this surveillance is to ensure that workers who are performing activities associated with characterizing, handling, processing, storing or transporting hazardous wastes are adequately protected. The surveillance also evaluates the effectiveness of programs implemented to protect the health and safety of emergency response personnel who may be called upon to mitigate upset conditions at a facility where hazardous waste operations are conducted. Finally, the surveillance includes evaluations of the contractor's compliance with specific requirements regarding hazardous waste operations and emergency response. 2.0 References 2.1 DOE 5483.1A, Occupational Safety and Health Program

251

Payment Of the New Mexico Environment Department- Hazardous Waste Bureau Annual Business and Generation Fees Calendar Year 2011  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The purpose of this letter is to transmit to the New Mexico Environment Department-Hazardous Waste Bureau (NMED-HWB), the Los alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Annual Business and Generation Fees for calendar year 2011. These fees are required pursuant to the provisions of New Mexico Hazardous Waste Act, Chapter 74, Article 4, NMSA (as amended). The Laboratory's Fenton Hill Facility did not generate any hazardous waste during the entire year, and is not required to pay a fee for calendar year 2011. The enclosed fee represents the amount for a single facility owned by the Department of Energy and co-operated by the Los Alamos National Security, LLC (LANS).

Juarez, Catherine L. [Los Alamos National Laboratory

2012-08-31T23:59:59.000Z

252

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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).

Gerald Sehlke; Paul Wichlacz

2010-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

253

NEHRP - National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program ...  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

... Failures I by John Egan National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program. A research and implementation partnership. ...

2013-08-28T23:59:59.000Z

254

Secondary plant succession on disturbed sites at Yucca Mountain, Nevada  

SciTech Connect

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.

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

1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

255

Independent Oversight Review, DOE/NNSA Nuclear Facilities - April 2013 |  

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

DOE/NNSA Nuclear Facilities - April DOE/NNSA Nuclear Facilities - April 2013 Independent Oversight Review, DOE/NNSA Nuclear Facilities - April 2013 April 2013 Lessons Learned from the 2012 Targeted Reviews of Emergency Preparedness for Severe Natural Phenomena Events at Select DOE/NNSA Nuclear Facilities This report provides lessons learned from the 2012 reviews performed by Independent Oversight. The reviews performed during the fall of 2011 and throughout 2012 were at DOE/NNSA sites with hazard category 1 and 2 nuclear facilities, some of which also have significant quantities of hazardous chemicals on site. The purpose of the Independent Oversight review was to determine the state of emergency preparedness of selected sites by examining the sites' processes for evaluating plausible severe NPEs;

256

PROJECTIZING AN OPERATING NUCLEAR FACILITY  

SciTech Connect

This paper will discuss the evolution of an operations-based organization to a project-based organization to facilitate successful deactivation of a major nuclear facility. It will describe the plan used for scope definition, staff reorganization, method estimation, baseline schedule development, project management training, and results of this transformation. It is a story of leadership and teamwork, pride and success. Workers at the Savannah River Site's (SRS) F Canyon Complex (FCC) started with a challenge--take all the hazardous byproducts from nearly 50 years of operations in a major, first-of-its-kind nuclear complex and safely get rid of them, leaving the facility cold, dark, dry and ready for whatever end state is ultimately determined by the United States Department of Energy (DOE). And do it in four years, with a constantly changing workforce and steadily declining funding. The goal was to reduce the overall operating staff by 93% and budget by 94%. The facilities, F Canyon and its adjoined sister, FB Line, are located at SRS, a 310-square-mile nuclear reservation near Aiken, S.C., owned by DOE and managed by Washington Group International subsidiary Washington Savannah River Company (WSRC). These facilities were supported by more than 50 surrounding buildings, whose purpose was to provide support services during operations. The radiological, chemical and industrial hazards inventory in the old buildings was significant. The historical mission at F Canyon was to extract plutonium-239 and uranium-238 from irradiated spent nuclear fuel through chemical processing. FB Line's mission included conversion of plutonium solutions into metal, characterization, stabilization and packaging, and storage of both metal and oxide forms. The plutonium metal was sent to another DOE site for use in weapons. Deactivation in F Canyon began when chemical separations activities were completed in 2002, and a cross-functional project team concept was implemented to successfully accomplish deactivation. This concept had to allow for continued operations in FB Line until 2005, while providing distinct task-oriented teams for deactivation of the FCC. Facility workers, always the most knowledgeable about any facility, were integral parts of the project team. The team defined the scope, developed a bottoms-up estimate, reorganized personnel to designated project teams, and developed a baseline schedule with about 12,000 activities. Training was implemented to prepare the facility workers to use project management tools and concepts, which were to execute the project, coordinate activities and track progress. The project budget was estimated at $579 million. The team completed F Canyon and FB Line deactivation in August 2006, four months ahead of schedule and under budget.

Adams, N

2007-07-08T23:59:59.000Z

257

Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities March 2010  

SciTech Connect

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).

Laycak, D T

2010-03-05T23:59:59.000Z

258

Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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).

Laycak, D

2008-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

259

SGP Central Facility  

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

Central Facility Central Facility SGP Related Links Facilities and Instruments Central Facility Boundary Facility Extended Facility Intermediate Facility Radiometric Calibration Facility Geographic Information ES&H Guidance Statement Operations Science Field Campaigns Visiting the Site Fact Sheet Images Information for Guest Scientists Contacts SGP Central Facility The ARM Climate Research Facility deploys specialized remote sensing instruments in a fixed location at the site to gather atmospheric data of unprecedented quality, consistency, and completeness. More than 30 instrument clusters have been placed around the site; the central facility; and the boundary, intermediate, and extended facilities. The locations for the instruments were chosen so that the measurements reflect conditions

260

ARM - Facility News Article  

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

31, 2004 Facility News ARM Climate Research Facility Achieves User Milestone Three Months Ahead of Schedule Bookmark and Share Summary of the ARM Climate Research Facility User...

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


261

ARM - Facility News Article  

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

January 15, 2008 Facility News Future of User Facility Discussed at Fall Workshop As a national user facility, ARM is accessible to scientists around the globe for...

262

ARM - SGP Central Facility  

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

Central Facility Central Facility SGP Related Links Facilities and Instruments Central Facility Boundary Facility Extended Facility Intermediate Facility Radiometric Calibration Facility Geographic Information ES&H Guidance Statement Operations Science Field Campaigns Visiting the Site Fact Sheet Images Information for Guest Scientists Contacts SGP Central Facility The ARM Climate Research Facility deploys specialized remote sensing instruments in a fixed location at the site to gather atmospheric data of unprecedented quality, consistency, and completeness. More than 30 instrument clusters have been placed around the site; the central facility; and the boundary, intermediate, and extended facilities. The locations for the instruments were chosen so that the measurements reflect conditions

263

Independent Oversight Review, DOE Headquarters Facilities - March 2002 |  

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

DOE Headquarters Facilities - March DOE Headquarters Facilities - March 2002 Independent Oversight Review, DOE Headquarters Facilities - March 2002 March 2002 Review of the Headquarters Facilities Emergency Response Plans The Secretary of Energy's Office of Independent Oversight and Performance Assurance conducted a review of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Headquarters facilities emergency response plans in February 2002. The purpose of this review was to assess the Department's readiness to respond to emergency events, such as fires and hazardous material releases (inside and outside the building), that occur at any of the following facilities: the two primary DOE Headquarters facilities, namely, the James V. Forrestal building, which is located in Washington, D.C., and the main Germantown, Maryland, facility; and the 270 Corporate Center and Cloverleaf

264

LISA Science Results in the Presence of Data Disturbances  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Each spacecraft in the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna houses a proof mass which follows a geodesic through spacetime. Disturbances which change the proof mass position, momentum, and/or acceleration will appear in the LISA data stream as additive quadratic functions. These data disturbances inhibit signal extraction and must be removed. In this paper we discuss the identification and fitting of monochromatic signals in the data set in the presence of data disturbances. We also present a preliminary analysis of the extent of science result limitations with respect to the frequency of data disturbances.

Scott E Pollack

2004-03-04T23:59:59.000Z

265

Guidelines for generators of hazardous chemical waste at LBL and guidelines for generators of radioactive and mixed waste at LBL. Revision 2  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The purpose of this document is to provide the acceptance criteria for the transfer of hazardous chemical waste to LBL`s Hazardous Waste Handling Facility (HWHF). Hazardous chemical waste is a necessary byproduct of LBL`s research and technical support activities. This waste must be handled properly if LBL is to operate safely and provide adequate protection to staff and the environment. These guidelines describe how you, as a generator of hazardous chemical waste, can meet LBL`s acceptance criteria for hazardous chemical waste.

Not Available

1993-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

266

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

267

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

SciTech Connect

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.

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

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

268

The Role of Disturbance in Dry Tropical Forest Landscapes  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Disturbance can be defined as 'any relatively discrete event in time that disrupts ecosystem, community, or population structure and changes resources, substrate availability, or the physical environment'. This definition requires that the spatial and temporal scales of the system and disturbance be determined. Disturbances are typically characterized by their size, spatial distribution, frequency or return time, predictability, and magnitude (which includes both intensity and severity). These disturbance attributes set the parameters for the suite of species, both plant and animal, that can persist within a given system. As such, an understanding of seasonally dry tropical forests in Asia requires an understanding of disturbance within the region. However, disturbances are relatively poorly understood in dry tropical forests, partly because of the weak seasonality in temperature and high tree species diversity of these forests relative to most forest systems of the world. There are about 1,048,700 km{sup 2} of dry tropical forests worldwide and that only 3% of this land is in conservation status. In other words, 97% of the world's seasonally dry tropical forest is at risk of human disturbance. About half of this forest occurs in South America, where most of the conservation lands are located. Satellite imagery based on MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) data shows that only about 3.8% of the world's dry tropical forests are in Australia and South east Asia. The susceptibility of these forests to human disturbances is of great concern and is largely unstudied. Because natural disturbance regimes shape the ecosystem structure and are in many ways integral to these forest systems, it is critical to know how natural disturbance affects dry forest in order to understand the effects of human activities on these forests. Even basic information about disturbances in dry tropical forests is only recently available. Therefore this chapter brings together much of the available information from dry tropical forest throughout the world with the goal of developing an understanding of the role of disturbance in Asian dry forests. Most ecologists now recognize that disturbances, rather than being catastrophic agents of destruction, are a normal, perhaps even an integral, part of long-term system dynamics. The composition, structure, organization, and development and trophic dynamics of most forest systems are the products of disturbances. As an example, the forest composition for two disturbances in the Anaikatty Hills of Western Ghats were compared, where the low disturbance was from past logging followed by cutting and illicit felling and grazing and the high disturbance was due to human presence, past logging, and fuelwood collection. They found higher species richness and Shannon-Wiener diversity index for the low-disturbance forest (98 and 3.9, respectively) compared to the high-disturbance stand (45 and 2.71, respectively) as well as significant differences in mean basal area of trees, density of seedlings, number of species, density and diversity of shrubs, and number of species and diversity of herbs. Some ecological systems contain species that have evolved in response to disturbances. Adaptations typical of dry tropical forest plants are drought tolerance, seed dispersal mechanisms, and the ability to sprout subsequent to disturbance. In contrast, evidence was found that human disturbance in Kakamega Forest of western Kenya has significantly reduced allelic richness and heterozygosity, increased inbreeding, and slightly reduced gene flow in Prunus africana in the past century.

Dale, Virginia H [ORNL

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

269

Thoughts on Hazard Assessment (Oct)  

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

Hazard Assessment of Chemical Air Hazard Assessment of Chemical Air Contaminants Measured in Residences J.M. Logue, T.E. McKone, M. H. Sherman, B.C. Singer Environmental Energy Technologies Division June 2010 Funding was provided by the U.S. Dept. of Energy Building Technologies Program, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy under DOE Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231; by the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control through Interagency Agreement I-PHI-01070, and by the California Energy Commission through Contract 500-08-06. LBNL Report Number 3650-E 1 Disclaimer This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. While this document is believed to contain correct information, neither the United States

270

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

SciTech Connect

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.

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

2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

271

Research Facilities and Programs  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

WEB RESOURCES: Magnesium Research Facilities and Programs ... to universities, corporations, and other facilities involved in magnesium research, 0, 1025...

272

Californium Neutron Irradiation Facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Californium Neutron Irradiation Facility. Summary: ... Cf irradiation facility (Photograph by: Neutron Physics Group). Lead Organizational Unit: pml. Staff: ...

2013-07-23T23:59:59.000Z

273

Mobile Solar Tracker Facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Mobile Solar Tracker Facility. ... NIST's mobile solar tracking facility is used to characterize the electrical performance of photovoltaic panels. ...

2011-11-15T23:59:59.000Z

274

Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) seismic hazard analysis  

SciTech Connect

New design and evaluation guidelines for department of energy facilities subjected to natural phenomena hazard, are being finalized. Although still in draft form at this time, the document describing those guidelines should be considered to be an update of previously available guidelines. The recommendations in the guidelines document mentioned above, and simply referred to as the guidelines'' thereafter, are based on the best information at the time of its development. In particular, the seismic hazard model for the Princeton site was based on a study performed in 1981 for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), which relied heavily on the results of the NRC's Systematic Evaluation Program and was based on a methodology and data sets developed in 1977 and 1978. Considerable advances have been made in the last ten years in the domain of seismic hazard modeling. Thus, it is recommended to update the estimate of the seismic hazard at the DOE sites whenever possible. The major differences between previous estimates and the ones proposed in this study for the PPPL are in the modeling of the strong ground motion at the site, and the treatment of the total uncertainty in the estimates to include knowledge uncertainty, random uncertainty, and expert opinion diversity as well. 28 refs.

Savy, J.

1989-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

275

Electrical Sitchgear Building No. 5010-ESF Fire Hazards Technical Report  

SciTech Connect

The purpose of this Fire Hazards Analysis Technical Report (hereinafter referred to as Technical Report) is to assess the risk from fire within individual fire areas to ascertain whether the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) fire safety objectives are met. The objectives, identified in DOE Order 420.1, Change 2, Fire Safety, Section 4.2, 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 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 the employees, the public, and the environment; (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 defined limits established by DOE; and (5) Critical process controls and safety class systems being damaged as a result of a fire and related event.

N.M. Ruonavaara

2001-05-08T23:59:59.000Z

276

Facility Representatives  

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

DOE-STD-1063-2006 April 2006 Superseding DOE-STD-1063-2000 March 2000 DOE STANDARD FACILITY REPRESENTATIVES U.S. Department of Energy AREA MGMT Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-STD-1063-2006 ii Available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program web site at http://www.eh.doe.gov/techstds/ DOE-STD-1063-2006 iii FOREWORD 1. This Department of Energy standard is approved for use by all DOE Components. 2. The revision to this DOE standard was developed by a working group consisting of headquarters and field participants. Beneficial comments (recommendations, additions, deletions) and any pertinent data that may improve this document should

277

Facility Type!  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

ITY: ITY: --&L~ ----------- srct-r~ -----------~------~------- if yee, date contacted ------------- cl Facility Type! i I 0 Theoretical Studies Cl Sample 84 Analysis ] Production 1 Diepasal/Storage 'YPE OF CONTRACT .--------------- 1 Prime J Subcontract&- 1 Purchase Order rl i '1 ! Other information (i.e., ---------~---~--~-------- :ontrait/Pirchaee Order # , I C -qXlJ- --~-------~~-------~~~~~~ I I ~~~---~~~~~~~T~~~ FONTRACTING PERIODi IWNERSHIP: ,I 1 AECIMED AECMED GOVT GOUT &NTtiAC+OR GUN-I OWNED ----- LEEE!? M!s LE!Ps2 -LdJG?- ---L .ANDS ILJILDINGS X2UIPilENT IRE OR RAW HA-I-L :INAL PRODUCT IASTE Z. RESIDUE I I kility l pt I ,-- 7- ,+- &!d,, ' IN&"E~:EW AT SITE -' ---------------- , . Control 0 AEC/tlED managed operations

278

Facility Representatives  

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

063-2011 063-2011 February 2011 Superseding DOE-STD-1063-2006 April 2006 DOE STANDARD FACILITY REPRESENTATIVES U.S. Department of Energy AREA MGMT Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-STD-1063-2011 ii Available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web site at http://www.hss.doe.gov/nuclearsafety/ns/techstds/ DOE-STD-1063-2011 iii FOREWORD 1. This Department of Energy (DOE) standard is approved for use by all DOE/National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Components. 2. The revision to this DOE standard was developed by a working group consisting of headquarters and field participants. Beneficial comments (recommendations,

279

Research Facility,  

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

Collecting and Delivering the Data Collecting and Delivering the Data As a general condition for use of the ARM Climate Research Facility, users are required to include their data in the ARM Data Archive. All data acquired must be of sufficient quality to be useful and must be documented such that users will be able to clearly understand the meaning and organization of the data. Final, quality-assured data sets are stored in the Data Archive and are freely accessible to the general scientific community. Preliminary data may be shared among field campaign participants during and shortly following the campaign. To facilitate sharing of preliminary data, the ARM Data Archive establishes restricted access capability, limited to participants and data managers.

280

Facility automation for retail facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This article will focus on retail chain stores with areas of 22,000 to 75,000 sq ft, but much of the article will apply to all retail stores independent of size. Typically, a store is serviced by 5 to 15 rooftop HVAC units with a total cooling capacity of 50 to 150 tons, depending on the floor area and geographic location. The interior lighting represents a load of 80 to 300 KW with three lighting levels--retail, stocking, and security or night. Most stores are located in strip centers, and therefore, the parking lot lighting is provided by the landlord, but each store does control and service its own sign lighting. Generally, the total load controlled by an FAS represents 130 to 450 KW with corresponding annual energy costs ranging from $65,000 to $200,000 (natural gas and electricity), depending on the size of the store and the local unit costs of energy. Historical utility data, electrical and mechanical drawings, site surveys, significant analyses of data, and most importantly, discussions with corporate facilities management personnel and store operations personnel provide the source for the development theory and sequence of operation of the design of the facility automation systems for retail stores. The three main goals of an FAS are: reduce utility operating costs, maintain comfort levels during occupied hours, reduce HVAC maintenance costs.

Ameduri, G. (Roth Bros., Inc., Youngstown, OH (United States). Facilities Automation Division)

1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


281

Recent History of Large-Scale Ecosystem Disturbances in North  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Satellite Record Christopher Potter,1 * Pang-Ning Tan,2 Vipin Kumar,2 Chris Kucharik,3 Steven Klooster,4 Ecosystem structure and function are strongly im- pacted by major disturbance events (Pickett and White 1985 (Pickett and White 1985; Tilman 1985). Ecosystem disturbances can contribute to the current rise of carbon

Wisconsin at Madison, University of

282

FAQS Qualification Card - Facility Representative | Department of Energy  

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

Representative Representative FAQS Qualification Card - Facility Representative A key element for the Department's Technical Qualification Programs is a set of common Functional Area Qualification Standards (FAQS) and associated Job Task Analyses (JTA). These standards are developed for various functional areas of responsibility in the Department, including oversight of safety management programs identified as hazard controls in Documented Safety Analyses (DSA). For each functional area, the FAQS identify the minimum technical competencies and supporting knowledge and skills for a typical qualified individual working in the area. FAQC-FacilityRepresentative.docx Description Facility Representative Qualification Card More Documents & Publications FAQS Gap Analysis Qualification Card - Facility Representative

283

Interim safety basis for fuel supply shutdown facility  

SciTech Connect

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.

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

1995-05-23T23:59:59.000Z

284

Analysis of LNG peakshaving-facility release-prevention systems  

SciTech Connect

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.

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

1982-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

285

Laboratory Waste Disposal HAZARDOUS GLASS  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Laboratory Waste Disposal HAZARDOUS GLASS Items that could cut or puncture skin or trash- can liners. This waste stream must be boxed to protect custodial staff. It goes directly to the landfill lined cardboard box. Tape seams with heavy duty tape to contain waste. Limit weight to 20 lbs. Or

Sheridan, Jennifer

286

Weather and the Transport of Hazardous Materials | Department...  

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

Weather and the Transport of Hazardous Materials Weather and the Transport of Hazardous Materials Weather and the Transport of Hazardous Materials More Documents & Publications...

287

Experiment Hazard Class 4.4 -Class 4 Lasers  

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

Use of Class 4 Lasers Applicability This hazard classification applies to all experiments involving class 4 lasers. Other hazard classifications and their associated hazard...

288

Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Management Act (Massachusetts)  

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

289

Modeling and Hazard Analysis Using Stpa  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

A joint research project between MIT and JAXA/JAMSS is investigating the application of a new hazard analysis to the system and software in the HTV. Traditional hazard analysis focuses on component failures but software ...

Ishimatsu, Takuto

290

Harrisburg Facility Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Harrisburg Facility Biomass Facility Harrisburg Facility Biomass Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Harrisburg Facility Biomass Facility Facility Harrisburg Facility Sector Biomass Facility Type Landfill Gas Location Dauphin County, Pennsylvania Coordinates 40.2734277°, -76.7336521° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":40.2734277,"lon":-76.7336521,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

291

Brookhaven Facility Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Brookhaven Facility Biomass Facility Brookhaven Facility Biomass Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Brookhaven Facility Biomass Facility Facility Brookhaven Facility Sector Biomass Facility Type Landfill Gas Location Suffolk County, New York Coordinates 40.9848784°, -72.6151169° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":40.9848784,"lon":-72.6151169,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

292

Rules and Regulations for Underground Storage Facilities Used for Petroleum  

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

Rules and Regulations for Underground Storage Facilities Used for Rules and Regulations for Underground Storage Facilities Used for Petroleum Products and Hazardous Materials (Rhode Island) Rules and Regulations for Underground Storage Facilities Used for Petroleum Products and Hazardous Materials (Rhode Island) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Fed. Government Fuel Distributor General Public/Consumer Industrial Installer/Contractor Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Multi-Family Residential Municipal/Public Utility Nonprofit Retail Supplier Rural Electric Cooperative Schools State/Provincial Govt Systems Integrator Transportation Tribal Government Utility Program Info State Rhode Island Program Type Environmental Regulations Provider Department of Environmental Management These regulations apply to underground storage facilities for petroleum and

293

Program: Structural Performance Under Multi-Hazards  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

... derive lessons learned from disasters and failures ... hazard failure analysis, and disaster and failure ... heat transfer, and nonlinear structural response. ...

2013-01-03T23:59:59.000Z

294

Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials...  

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

Administration Other Agencies You are here Home Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Activities Department of Transportation...

295

NEHRP - Hazard Vulnerability and Disaster Resiliency ...  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

... Hazard Vulnerability and Disaster Resiliency. 2013. ... gaps for achieving resilience in the ... protection, emergency response, business continuity, and ...

296

NEHRP - Earthquake Risk and Hazard Research ...  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Grants&Contracts. Earthquake Risk and Hazard Research, Implementation, and Outreach Roadmap. Award. Contract SB134106Z0011 ...

297

Earthquake Hazards Reduction Information at NIST  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

... 2013). Earthquakes (08/15/2011). Fifteen Named to Earthquake Hazards Reduction Advisory Committee (10/05/2010). Final ...

2010-09-23T23:59:59.000Z

298

Coiled tubing flowline cuts wetlands disturbance  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Operators in environmentally sensitive wetland areas of South Louisiana have used jointed, or stickpipe flowlines to transmit oil and gas to and from wellsites and production facilities. Recently, a new method featuring coiled tubing was introduced, using it as a recyclable gas flowline. The coiled tubing method eliminates potential environmental damage that could occur when stickpipe is used and it allows the tubing to be easily recovered and reused when the well is taken out of service. This article describes economic advantages of using coiled tubing and how its use simplified environmental constraints encountered in swamps. It is an expanded version of the authors` presentation to World Oil`s Coiled Tubing Conference, Houston, March, 1993.

Coats, E.A. [Halliburton Services, New Orleans, LA (United States); Marinello, S.A. [Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO (United States)

1993-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

299

Engineered Nanomaterials, Sexy New Technology and Potential Hazards  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Engineered nanomaterials enhance exciting new applications that can greatly benefit society in areas of cancer treatments, solar energy, energy storage, and water purification. While nanotechnology shows incredible promise in these and other areas by exploiting nanomaterials unique properties, these same properties can potentially cause adverse health effects to workers who may be exposed during work. Dispersed nanoparticles in air can cause adverse health effects to animals not merely due to their chemical properties but due to their size, structure, shape, surface chemistry, solubility, carcinogenicity, reproductive toxicity, mutagenicity, dermal toxicity, and parent material toxicity. Nanoparticles have a greater likelihood of lung deposition and blood absorption than larger particles due to their size. Nanomaterials can also pose physical hazards due to their unusually high reactivity, which makes them useful as catalysts, but has the potential to cause fires and explosions. Characterization of the hazards (and potential for exposures) associated with nanomaterial development and incorporation in other products is an essential step in the development of nanotechnologies. Developing controls for these hazards are equally important. Engineered controls should be integrated into nanomaterial manufacturing process design according to 10CFR851, DOE Policy 456.1, and DOE Notice 456.1 as safety-related hardware or administrative controls for worker safety. Nanomaterial hazards in a nuclear facility must also meet control requirements per DOE standards 3009, 1189, and 1186. Integration of safe designs into manufacturing processes for new applications concurrent with the developing technology is essential for worker safety. This paper presents a discussion of nanotechnology, nanomaterial properties/hazards and controls.

Beaulieu, R A

2009-05-04T23:59:59.000Z

300

PTS 13.1 Radioactive And Hazardous Material Transportation 4/13/00 |  

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

PTS 13.1 Radioactive And Hazardous Material Transportation 4/13/00 PTS 13.1 Radioactive And Hazardous Material Transportation 4/13/00 PTS 13.1 Radioactive And Hazardous Material Transportation 4/13/00 The objective of this surveillance is to evaluate the effectiveness of the contractor's programs, policies, and procedures to transport radioactive and hazardous materials off-site or to receive such materials for routine operations, treatment, storage, or disposal. The Facility Representative observes preparation of materials for shipment and receipt of materials and reviews specific documents to determine compliance with requirements imposed by DOE and by applicable regulations from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Department of Transportation. PTS13-01.doc More Documents & Publications Order Module--DOE O 460.1C, PACKAGING AND TRANSPORTATION SAFETY, DOE O

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


301

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

Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

302

NORTH AMERICAN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL: Preliminary Disturbance Report  

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

NORTH AMERICAN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL: Preliminary NORTH AMERICAN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL: Preliminary Disturbance Report NORTH AMERICAN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL: Preliminary Disturbance Report The following information represents a partial sequence of events based upon Reliability Coordinator information available to NERC. It is not clear if these events caused the event or were a consequence of other events. NERC is establishing teams to study the event and will coordinate with FERC, DOE, the industry and others. NORTH AMERICAN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL: Preliminary Disturbance Report More Documents & Publications North American Electric Reliability Council Power Outage Update North American Electric Reliability Council Outage Announcement U.S. - Canada Power System Outage Task Force: Final Report on the

303

NORTH AMERICAN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL: Preliminary Disturbance Report  

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

NORTH AMERICAN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL: Preliminary NORTH AMERICAN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL: Preliminary Disturbance Report NORTH AMERICAN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL: Preliminary Disturbance Report The following information represents a partial sequence of events based upon Reliability Coordinator information available to NERC. It is not clear if these events caused the event or were a consequence of other events. NERC is establishing teams to study the event and will coordinate with FERC, DOE, the industry and others. NORTH AMERICAN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL: Preliminary Disturbance Report More Documents & Publications North American Electric Reliability Council Power Outage Update Blackout 2003: Final Report on the August 14, 2003 Blackout in the United States and Canada: Causes and Recommendations

304

Regulations for Land Disturbing Activities (North Carolina) | Department of  

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

Regulations for Land Disturbing Activities (North Carolina) Regulations for Land Disturbing Activities (North Carolina) Regulations for Land Disturbing Activities (North Carolina) < Back Eligibility Utility Fed. Government Commercial Agricultural Investor-Owned Utility State/Provincial Govt Industrial Construction Municipal/Public Utility Local Government Residential Installer/Contractor Rural Electric Cooperative Tribal Government Low-Income Residential Schools Retail Supplier Institutional Multi-Family Residential Systems Integrator Fuel Distributor Nonprofit General Public/Consumer Transportation Savings Category Alternative Fuel Vehicles Hydrogen & Fuel Cells Buying & Making Electricity Water Home Weatherization Solar Wind Program Info State North Carolina Program Type Siting and Permitting The law requires installation and maintenance of sufficient erosion control

305

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

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Household Hazardous Waste Household hazardous waste is the discarded, unused, or leftover portion of household products containing toxic chemicals. These wastes CANNOT be disposed of in regular garbage. Any should be considered hazardous. You cannot treat hazardous wastes like other kinds of garbage

de Lijser, Peter

306

Readiness Assessment for MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility - Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project … 5-07  

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

CRITICALITY SAFETY CRITICALITY SAFETY OBJECTIVE CS.1 Facility safety documentation that describes the "safety envelope" for the AR Project II activities is in place and has been implemented and administrative and engineering controls to prevent and mitigate hazards associated with commencing the AR Project II activities are tailored to the work being performed and the associated hazards to meet the following criteria: CRITERIA: CS. 1.1 Criticality safety requirements are current, approved, and properly controlled. CS. 1.2 Facility safety and criticality requirements have been incorporated into applicable procedures and documents. REVIEW APPROACH: Document Reviews: * Review applicable CSEs for identification of facility hazards and development

307

Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities  

SciTech Connect

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.

Larson, H L

2007-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

308

OSHA List of Hazardous Chemicals  

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

OSHA List of Hazardous Chemicals OSHA List of Hazardous Chemicals ACETALDEHYDE ACETAMIDE ACETIC ACID ACETIC ANHYDRIDE ACETONE ACETONItr ILE ACETYLAMINOFLUORENE, 2- ACETYLENE ACETYLENE DICHLORIDE ACETYLENE TETRABROMIDE ACETYLSALICYLIC ACID (ASPIRIN) ACROLEIN ACRYLAMIDE ACRYLIC ACID ACRYLONITRILE ACTINOMYCIN D ADRIAMYCIN AFLATOXINS ALDRIN ALLYL ALCOHOL ALLYL CHLORIDE ALLYL GLYCIDYL ETHER (AGE) ALLYL PROPYL DISULFIDE ALUMINA ALUMINUM, METAL DUST, AS AL ALUMINUM, PYRO POWDERS, AS AL ALUMINUM, SOLUBLE SALTS, AS AL ALUMINUM, WELDING FUMES, AS AL ALUMINUM, ALKYLS, NOT OTHERWISE CLASSIFIED, AS AL ALUMINUM OXIDE, AS AL AMINOANTHRAQUINONE (AAQ), AMINOAZOTOLUENE, O- AMINOBIPHENYL, 4- AMINOETHANOL, 2- AMINO-2-METHYLANTHRAQUINONE, 1- AMINO-5-(5-NITRO-2-FURYL)- -1, 3,4-THIADIADIAZOLE, 2- AMINOPYRIDINE, 2- AMINO-1,2,4-TRIAZOLE, 3-

309

Models of volcanic eruption hazards  

SciTech Connect

Volcanic eruptions pose an ever present but poorly constrained hazard to life and property for geothermal installations in volcanic areas. Because eruptions occur sporadically and may limit field access, quantitative and systematic field studies of eruptions are difficult to complete. Circumventing this difficulty, laboratory models and numerical simulations are pivotal in building our understanding of eruptions. For example, the results of fuel-coolant interaction experiments show that magma-water interaction controls many eruption styles. Applying these results, increasing numbers of field studies now document and interpret the role of external water eruptions. Similarly, numerical simulations solve the fundamental physics of high-speed fluid flow and give quantitative predictions that elucidate the complexities of pyroclastic flows and surges. A primary goal of these models is to guide geologists in searching for critical field relationships and making their interpretations. Coupled with field work, modeling is beginning to allow more quantitative and predictive volcanic hazard assessments.

Wohletz, K.H.

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

310

Models of volcanic eruption hazards  

SciTech Connect

Volcanic eruptions pose an ever present but poorly constrained hazard to life and property for geothermal installations in volcanic areas. Because eruptions occur sporadically and may limit field access, quantitative and systematic field studies of eruptions are difficult to complete. Circumventing this difficulty, laboratory models and numerical simulations are pivotal in building our understanding of eruptions. For example, the results of fuel-coolant interaction experiments show that magma-water interaction controls many eruption styles. Applying these results, increasing numbers of field studies now document and interpret the role of external water eruptions. Similarly, numerical simulations solve the fundamental physics of high-speed fluid flow and give quantitative predictions that elucidate the complexities of pyroclastic flows and surges. A primary goal of these models is to guide geologists in searching for critical field relationships and making their interpretations. Coupled with field work, modeling is beginning to allow more quantitative and predictive volcanic hazard assessments.

Wohletz, K.H.

1992-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

311

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

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

2007-01-25T23:59:59.000Z

312

International Facility Management Association Strategic Facility  

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

Facility Management Association Facility Management Association Strategic Facility Planning: A WhIte PAPer Strategic Facility Planning: A White Paper on Strategic Facility Planning © 2009 | International Facility Management Association For additional information, contact: 1 e. Greenway Plaza, Suite 1100 houston, tX 77046-0104 USA P: + 1-713-623-4362 F: + 1-713-623-6124 www.ifma.org taBle OF cOntentS PreFace ......................................................... 2 executive Summary .................................... 3 Overview ....................................................... 4 DeFinitiOn OF Strategic Facility Planning within the Overall cOntext OF Facility Planning ................. 5 SPecializeD analySeS ................................ 9 OrganizatiOnal aPPrOacheS tO SFP ... 10 the SFP PrOceSS .......................................

313

Office of Nuclear Facility Basis & Facility Design  

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

Office of Nuclear Safety Basis & Facility Design(HS-31) Reports to the Office of Nuclear Safety About Us The Office of Nuclear Safety Basis & Facility Design establishes safety...

314

Detection device for hazardous material  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

This invention is comprised of a detection device that is activated by the interaction of a hazardous chemical 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.

Partin, J.K.; Grey, A.E.

1990-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

315

Criteria and Processes for the Certification of Non-Radioactive Hazardous and Non-Hazardous Wastes  

SciTech Connect

This document details Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's (LLNL) criteria and processes for determining if potentially volumetrically contaminated or potentially surface contaminated wastes are to be managed as material containing residual radioactivity or as non-radioactive. This document updates and replaces UCRL-AR-109662, Criteria and Procedures for the Certification of Nonradioactive Hazardous Waste (Reference 1), also known as 'The Moratorium', and follows the guidance found in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) document, Performance Objective for Certification of Non-Radioactive Hazardous Waste (Reference 2). The 1992 Moratorium document (UCRL-AR-109662) is three volumes and 703 pages. The first volume provides an overview of the certification process and lists the key radioanalytical methods and their associated Limits of Sensitivities. Volumes Two and Three contain supporting documents and include over 30 operating procedures, QA plans, training documents and organizational charts that describe the hazardous and radioactive waste management system in place in 1992. This current document is intended to update the previous Moratorium documents and to serve as the top-tier LLNL institutional Moratorium document. The 1992 Moratorium document was restricted to certification of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), State and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) hazardous waste from Radioactive Material Management Areas (RMMA). This still remains the primary focus of the Moratorium; however, this document increases the scope to allow use of this methodology to certify other LLNL wastes and materials destined for off-site disposal, transfer, and re-use including non-hazardous wastes and wastes generated outside of RMMAs with the potential for DOE added radioactivity. The LLNL organization that authorizes off-site transfer/disposal of a material or waste stream is responsible for implementing the requirements of this document. The LLNL Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) organization is responsible for the review and maintenance of this document. It should be noted that the DOE metal recycling moratorium is still in effect and is implemented as outlined in reference 17 when metals are being dispositioned for disposal/re-use/recycling off-site. This document follows the same methodology as described in the previously approved 1992 Moratorium document. Generator knowledge and certification are the primary means of characterization. Sampling and analysis are used when there is insufficient knowledge of a waste to determine if it contains added radioactivity. Table 1 (page 12) presents a list of LLNL's analytical methods for evaluating volumetrically contaminated waste and updates the reasonably achievable analytical-method-specific Minimum Detectable Concentrations (MDCs) for various matrices. Results from sampling and analysis are compared against the maximum MDCs for the given analytical method and the sample specific MDC to determine if the sample contains DOE added volumetric radioactivity. The evaluation of an item that has a physical form, and history of use, such that accessible surfaces may be potentially contaminated, is based on DOE Order 5400.5 (Reference 3), and its associated implementation guidance document DOE G 441.1-XX, Control and Release of Property with Residual Radioactive Material (Reference 4). The guidance document was made available for use via DOE Memorandum (Reference 5). Waste and materials containing residual radioactivity transferred off-site must meet the receiving facilities Waste Acceptance Criteria (if applicable) and be in compliance with other applicable federal or state requirements.

Dominick, J

2008-12-18T23:59:59.000Z

316

Ionosphere disturbances during rocket launches at Baikonur (Kazakhstan)  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

A review of the ionosphere disturbances created by burning rockets is given. Published materials obtained by different authors are used in the review. Contemporary ionospheric data (f0 E, f0 F1, f0 ... Keywords: ionosonde measurement, ionosphere, rocket

V. I. Drobzhev; G. I. Gordienko; S. N. Mukasheva

2004-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

317

Information-Disturbance Theorem for Mutually Unbiased Observables  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

We derive a novel version of information-disturbance theorems for mutually unbiased observables. We show that the information gain by Eve inevitably makes the outcomes by Bob in the conjugate basis not only erroneous but random.

Takayuki Miyadera; Hideki Imai

2006-02-05T23:59:59.000Z

318

Life Cycle of a Linear Coastal-Trapped Disturbance  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

A recent climatology of observed coastal-trapped disturbances in the marine atmospheric boundary layer along the United States west coast motivates the detailed examination, for a specific form of imposed forcing, of a linear shallow-water ...

R. M. Samelson; A. M. Rogerson

1996-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

319

A Diagnostic Study of Baroclinic Disturbances in Polar Air Streams  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Quasi-Lagmngian budgets of mass, vorticity and heat are calculated following disturbances that form within polar air streams. Observed cases are extracted from the European Centre for Medium-range Weather Forecasts analyses during the First GARP ...

Mark R. Sinclair; Russell L. Elsberry

1986-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

320

Case Studies of African Wave Disturbances in Gridded Analyses  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

African wave disturbances (AWDs), an important trigger of Sahel summer rainfall, are studied using ECMWF gridded datasets for July and August 1987 and 1988. Power spectra of time series of 700-mb meridional winds near Niamey taken from analyses ...

Leonard M. Druyan; Patrick Lonergan; Judah Cohen

1997-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


321

ARM - Facility News Article  

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

than any other quarter on record-961 The U.S. Department of Energy requires national user facilities to report facility use by total visitor days and facility to track actual...

322

Geomagnetic Disturbance (GMD) News and Observer, Edition 3  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Geomagnetic Disturbance (GMD) News and Observer is a new Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) newsletter that provides information on geomagnetic disturbance projects in development, as well as a summary of new technology developments. This is the third issue of our newsletter, which will be published approximately quarterly, and provides progress reports and insights for the industry on this important topic.EPRI is working with the industry to assess system vulnerability and ...

2012-09-27T23:59:59.000Z

323

Geomagnetic Disturbance (GMD) News and Observer, Issue 2  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Geomagnetic Disturbance (GMD) News and Observer is a new Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) newsletter that provides information on geomagnetic disturbance projects in development, as well as a summary of new technology developments. This is the second issue of our newsletter, which will be published approximately quarterly, and provides progress reports and insights for the industry on this important topic.EPRI is working with the industry to assess system vulnerability and ...

2012-09-12T23:59:59.000Z

324

Geomagnetic Disturbance (GMD) News and Observer, First Edition  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Geomagnetic Disturbance (GMD) News and Observer is a new Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) newsletter that will be published quarterly and will provide information on geomagnetic disturbance projects in development, as well as a summary of new technology developments. This premier issue summarizes the current knowledge about GMDs and how transformers and the power system as a whole can be affected by GMDs. The following articles are featured in this issue: EPRI Executive Update, GMD Primer: Ho...

2012-08-10T23:59:59.000Z

325

Criticality safety training at the Hot Fuel Examination Facility  

SciTech Connect

HFEF comprises four hot cells and out-of-cell support facilities for the US breeder program. The HFEF criticality safety program includes training in the basic theory of criticality and in specific criticality hazard control rules that apply to HFEF. A professional staff-member oversees the implementation of the criticality prevention program. (DLC)

Garcia, A.S.; Courtney, J.C.; Thelen, V.N.

1983-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

326

ARM - Facility News Article  

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

Facility News Data Collection from Mobile Facility on Gan Island Suspended Local weather balloon launch volunteers pose with the AMF team on Gan Island after completing their...

327

from Isotope Production Facility  

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

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

328

ARM - Facility News Article  

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

approximately 22,500 square kilometers, or the approximate area of a modern climate model grid cell. Centered around the SGP Central Facility, these extended facilities are...

329

Chemistry Dept. Research Facilities  

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

Research Facilities As a research organization within a National Laboratory, the Chemistry Department operates research facilities that are available to other researchers as...

330

Facility Safeguardability Assessment Report  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

of the Facility Safeguardability Analysis (FSA) Process RA Bari SJ Johnson J Hockert R Wigeland EF Wonder MD Zentner August 2012 PNNL- 21698 Overview of the Facility...

331

Facility Safeguardability Assessment Report  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

facilities or research facilities that involve previously unused processes or technologies, comparison with previously required safeguard design features may not be...

332

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...

333

User Facility Agreement Form  

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

5. Which Argonne user facility will be hosting you? * Advanced Leadership Computing Facility (ALCF) Advanced Photon Source (APS) Argonne Tandem Linear...

334

NREL: Biomass Research - Facilities  

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

Facilities At NREL's state-of-the-art biomass research facilities, researchers design and optimize processes to convert renewable biomass feedstocks into transportation fuels and...

335

ARM - Facility News Article  

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

May 15, 2008 Facility News National User Facility Organization Meets to Discuss Progress and Ideas In late April, the ARM Technical Director attended an annual meeting of the...

336

Oak Ridge Reservation Facilities  

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

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

337

ARM - Facility News Article  

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

January 15, 2008 Facility News ARM Mobile Facility Completes Field Campaign in Germany Researchers will study severe precipitation events that occurred in August and October...

338

Public Meeting on Oversight of Complex, High Hazard Nuclear Operations - EM Statement - November 24, 2009  

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

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting on Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting on Oversight of Complex High Hazard Nuclear Operations Statement of Dr. Ines Triay Assistant Secretary, DOE Office of Environmental Management November 24, 2009 Good morning Mr. Vice Chairman and Members of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. I appreciate the opportunity to be here today to represent the Department of Energy's Office of Environmental Management (EM) and address the actions our office has taken regarding oversight of complex high hazard nuclear operations. My remarks cover the six topics you provided to the Secretary in your letter dated August 25, 2009. Expectations of the senior Department of Energy (DOE) leadership with respect to safety philosophy and safety management approach.

339

Facility Representative Program: 2003 Facility Representative Workshop  

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

3 Facility Representative Workshop 3 Facility Representative Workshop May 13 - 15, 2003 Las Vegas, NV Facility Rep of the Year Award | Attendees list | Summary Report [PDF] WORKSHOP AGENDA Day 1: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 Theme: Program Successes and Challenges 8:00 a.m. John Evans, Facility Representative Program Manager 8:15 a.m. Welcome Kathleen Carlson Manager, Nevada Site Office 8:30 a.m. Keynote Address Savannah River Site and Facility Reps - A Shared History and Common Future Jeffrey M. Allison Manager, Savannah River Operations Office 9:00 a.m. Videotaped Remarks from the Deputy Secretary Kyle E. McSlarrow, Deputy Secretary of Energy 9:10 a.m. Facility Representative of the Year Presentation Mark B. Whitaker, Jr., Departmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

340

NREL: Research Facilities - Test and User Facilities  

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

Test and User Facilities Test and User Facilities NREL has test and user facilities available to industry and other organizations for researching, developing, and evaluating renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies. Here you'll find an alphabetical listing and brief descriptions of NREL's test and user facilities. A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z A Advanced Research Turbines At our wind testing facilities, we have turbines available to test new control schemes and equipment for reducing loads on wind turbine components. Learn more about the Advanced Research Turbines on our Wind Research website. Back to Top D Distributed Energy Resources Test Facility This facility was designed to assist the distributed power industry in the

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


341

Facility Representative Program: 2000 Facility Representative Workshop  

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

0 Facility Representative Workshop 0 Facility Representative Workshop May 16-18, 2000 Las Vegas, NV Facility Rep of the Year Award | Attendees list | Summary Report [PDF] WORKSHOP AGENDA Tuesday, May 16, 2000 Theme for Day 1: Sustaining the Success of the Facility Representative Program 8:00 a.m. - Opening Remarks - Joe Arango, Facility Representative Program Manager 8:05 a.m. - Welcome - Kenneth Powers, Deputy Manager Nevada Operations Office 8:15 a.m. - Deputy Secretary Remarks - T. J. Glauthier, Deputy Secretary of Energy 8:30 a.m. - Keynote Address - Jerry Lyle, Assistant Manager for Environmental Management, Idaho Operations Office 9:00 a.m. - Facility Representative of the Year Presentation - Mark B. Whitaker, Departmental Representative 9:30 a.m. - Break 9:50 a.m. - Program Results and Goals - Joe Arango, Facility Representative Program Manager

342

Nuclear fuel cycle facility accident analysis handbook  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

NONE

1998-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

343

Guide to research facilities  

SciTech Connect

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.

Not Available

1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

344

Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities  

SciTech Connect

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.

Laycak, D T

2010-03-05T23:59:59.000Z

345

Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities  

SciTech Connect

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.

Laycak, D T

2008-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

346

and environments and natural hazards  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

The purpose of the curriculum is to provide basic knowledge and understanding of marine debris and its hazardous impact on the marine and coastal ecosystems as well as human health and safety. The primary goal of the curriculum is to provide activities which help students understand the impact of their actions on the marine environment and themselves. The curriculum will provide several hands-on activities and graphing opportunities using Microsoft Excel. The activities and graphing exercises may be modified for other grade levels.

Created Matthew Brim

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

347

Quality Services: Solid Wastes, Part 360: Solid Waste Management Facilities  

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

0: Solid Waste Management 0: Solid Waste Management Facilities (New York) Quality Services: Solid Wastes, Part 360: Solid Waste Management Facilities (New York) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Fuel Distributor Industrial Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Multi-Family Residential Municipal/Public Utility Rural Electric Cooperative Transportation Utility Program Info State New York Program Type Environmental Regulations Provider NY Department of Environmental Conservation 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, and the regulations provide details about permitting, construction, registration, and operation requirements. The regulations contain specific guidance for land

348

EA-1957: Cabin Creek Biomass Facility, Place County, CA  

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

DOE is proposing to provide funding to Placer County, California to construct and operate a two-megawatt wood-to-energy biomass facility at the Eastern Regional Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) and Landfill in unincorporated Placer County. The wood?to?energy biomass facility would use a gasification technology. The fuel supply for the proposed project would be solely woody biomass, derived from a variety of sources including hazardous fuels residuals, forest thinning and harvest residuals, and Wildland Urban Interface sourced waste materials from residential and commercial property defensible space clearing and property management activities.

349

Facilities/Staff Hydrogen  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Thermophysical Properties of Hydrogen. FACILITIES and STAFF. The Thermophysical Properties Division is the Nation's ...

350

Hazardous Waste Management (Arkansas) | Department of Energy  

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

Hazardous Waste Management (Arkansas) Hazardous Waste Management (Arkansas) Hazardous Waste Management (Arkansas) < Back Eligibility Commercial Construction Fuel Distributor Industrial Investor-Owned Utility Municipal/Public Utility Retail Supplier Rural Electric Cooperative State/Provincial Govt Transportation Utility Program Info State Arkansas Program Type Environmental Regulations Sales Tax Incentive Provider Department of Environmental Quality 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 8-7-202.) The Hazardous Waste Program is based off of the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act set forth in 40 CFR parts 260-279. Due to the great similarity to the

351

BNL | CFN: Transport of Hazardous Materials  

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

Transportation of Hazardous Materials and Nanomaterials 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 must adhere to Laboratory guidelines when making plans to move materials either by commercial carrier or in rented or personal vehicles. BNL hazardous material transport guidelines apply for products that meet the definition of hazardous materials according to 49 CFR 171.8 and any nanomaterial that has known hazardous properties (toxic, flammable, reactive). BNL guidelines are also provided for all other nanomaterials even if they have not been identified as hazardous materials. Some materials may be transported in personal vehicles as per "Materials of Trade" (MOT) guidance. The regulations for transporting MOT are much

352

Hazardous waste management in the Pacific basin  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Hazardous waste control activities in Asia and the Pacific have been reviewed. The review includes China (mainland, Hong Kong, and Taiwan), Indonesia, Korea, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand. It covers the sources of hazardous waste, the government structure for dealing with hazardous waste, and current hazardous waste control activities in each country. In addition, the hazardous waste program activities of US government agencies, US private-sector organizations, and international organizations are reviewed. The objective of these reviews is to provide a comprehensive picture of the current hazardous waste problems and the waste management approaches being used to address them so that new program activities can be designed more efficiently.

Cirillo, R.R.; Chiu, S.; Chun, K.C.; Conzelmann, G. [Argonne National Lab., IL (United States); Carpenter, R.A.; Indriyanto, S.H. [East-West Center, Honolulu, HI (United States)

1994-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

353

Facility Representative Program: 2001 Facility Representative Workshop  

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

1 Facility Representative Workshop 1 Facility Representative Workshop May 15 - 17, 2001 Las Vegas, NV Facility Rep of the Year Award | Attendees list | Summary Report [PDF] WORKSHOP AGENDA Day 1: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 Theme: Program Successes and Challenges 8:00 a.m. - Logistics Announcements & Opening Remarks - Joe Arango, Facility Representative Program Manager 8:15 a.m. - Welcome - Debbie Monette, Assistant Manager for National Security, Nevada Operations Office 8:30 a.m. - Keynote Address - Ralph Erickson, National Nuclear Security Administration 9:00 a.m.- DOE Facility Representative of the Year Presentation - Mark B. Whitaker, Jr., Departmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 9:30 a.m. - Break 9:50 a.m. - Program Summary - Joe Arango 10:10 a.m. - Management Panel/Questions and Answers

354

Facility Representative Program: 2010 Facility Representative Workshop  

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

10 Facility Representative Workshop 10 Facility Representative Workshop May 12 - 13, 2010 Las Vegas, NV Facility Rep of the Year Award | Attendees | Summary Report Workshop Agenda and Presentations Day 1: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 8:00 a.m. Opening Remarks James Heffner, Facility Representative Program Manager Earl Hughes, Safety System Oversight Program Manager Office of Nuclear Safety Policy and Assistance Office of Health, Safety and Security 8:15 a.m. Welcome from the Nevada Site Office John Mallin, Deputy Assistant Manager for Site Operations Nevada Site Office 8:30 a.m. Workshop Keynote Address Todd Lapointe Chief of Nuclear Safety Central Technical Authority Staff 9:15 a.m. Facility Representative and Safety System Oversight Award Ceremony James Heffner, Facility Representative Program Manager

355

Facility Representative Program: 2007 Facility Representative Workshop  

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

7 Facility Representative Workshop 7 Facility Representative Workshop May 15 - 17, 2007 Las Vegas, NV Facility Rep of the Year Award | Attendees list | Summary Report [PDF] WORKSHOP AGENDA Final Day 1: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 8:00 a.m. Opening Remarks Joanne Lorence, Facility Representative Program Manager 8:15 a.m. Welcome from the Nevada Site Office Gerald Talbot, Manager, Nevada Site Office 8:30 a.m. Videotaped Remarks from the Deputy Secretary The Honorable Clay Sell, Deputy Secretary of Energy 8:45 a.m. Keynote Address - Safety Oversight Perspective and Expectations Glenn Podonsky, Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer, Office of Health, Safety and Security 9:10 a.m. Facility Representative of the Year Presentation Mark B. Whitaker, Jr., Departmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board,

356

Computer Viruses and Other Hazards  

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

Computer Viruses and Other Hazards Computer Viruses and Other Hazards Name: Paul Status: other Grade: 12+ Location: IL Country: USA Date: May 2, 2011 Question: What is a Computer Virus? What do viruses do? How do viruses Spread? How do I prevent a virus? What are Trojan Horse programs? Malware? Phishing? Replies: Paul From National Institute of Science and Technology Which is the US government office in charge of this problem and should be your reference for this subject At this URL: http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-61-rev1/SP800-61rev1.pdf Please find the following definitions from paragraph 5: 5.1.1 Virus: A virus is designed to self-replicate-make copies of itself-and distribute the copies to other files, programs, or computers. Viruses insert themselves into host programs and propagate when the infected program is executed, generally by user interaction (e.g., opening a file, running a program, clicking on a file attachment). Viruses have many purposes-some are designed to play annoying tricks, whereas others have destructive intent. Some viruses present themselves as jokes while performing secret destructive functions. There two major types of viruses are compiled viruses, which are executed by the operating system, and interpreted viruses, which are executed by an application.

357

Proceedings: Hazardous Waste Material Remediation Technology Workshop  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report presents the proceedings of an EPRI workshop on hazardous waste materials remediation. The workshop was the fourth in a series initiated by EPRI to aid utility personnel in assessing technologies for decommissioning nuclear power plants. This workshop focused on specific aspects of hazardous waste management as they relate to nuclear plant decommissioning. The information will help utilities understand hazardous waste issues, select technologies for their individual projects, and reduce decom...

1999-11-23T23:59:59.000Z

358

MRAP MONTICELLO PROJECTS FEDERAL FACILITY AGREEMENT REPORT  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

MRAP MRAP MONTICELLO PROJECTS FEDERAL FACILITY AGREEMENT REPORT May/June 2005 Report Period: May 1 -June 30, 2005 DOE Project Coordinator: Art Kleinrath HIGHLIGHTS DOE constmction, as identified in the Millsite Restoration Plan, was substantially completed on June 3. Seeding of disturbed areas was completed on June 15. MSG DOE completed constmction of the permeable reactive treatment cell and initiated operations in June. The cell is an enhancement to the existing pe1meable reactive ban·ier and was designed to alleviate ground water mounding. MVP Approximately one cubic yard of contaminated material was identified in a City of Monticello excavation near the golf course. This material was transferred to the Temporary Storage Facility located at the DOE Monticello Office.

359

Facility Representative Program: 2008 Facility Representative...  

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

Sherman Chao, LSO Conduct of Operations Improvements at K Basins Dennis Humphreys, RL Molten Salt Reactor Experiment (MSRE) facility lessons learned Charlie Wright, ORO...

360

Facility Representative Program: 2005 Facility Representative...  

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

Sharing of Good Practices and Lessons Learned (4) Inadvertent Startup of Electric Centrifuge at the Weapon Evaluation Test Lab Joyce Arviso-Benally, SSO Facility Rep...

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


361

Facility Representative Program: 2012 Facility Representative...  

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

18, 2012 Las Vegas, NV Agenda | Presentations | SSO Annual Award | Pictures | Summary Report 2011 Facility Representative of the Year Award 2011 WINNER: Congratulations to Bradley...

362

Transporting & Shipping Hazardous Materials at LBNL: Lithium...  

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

Lithium Batteries Lithium batteries are considered hazardous materials when shipped by air. Notify Shipping for any shipments that include lithium batteries. Note: If you need to...

363

Experiment Hazard Class 3 - High Temperatures  

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

* RF and Microwave * UV Light Hydrogen * Hydrogen Electronics * Electrical Equipment * High Voltage Other * Other Class 3 - High Temperatures Applicability The hazard controls...

364

Hazardous waste management and pollution prevention  

SciTech Connect

The management of hazardous wastes is one of the most critical environmental issues that faces many developing countries. It is one of the areas where institutional control and treatment and disposal technology has not kept pace with economic development. This paper reviews the development of hazardous waste management methods over the past decades, and provides the information on the status and trends of hazardous waste management strategy in selected western nations. Several issues pertinent to hazardous waste management will be reviewed, including: (1) definition of hazard; (2) why are we concerned with hazardous wastes; (3) aspects of hazardous waste management system; and (4) prioritization of hazardous waste management options. Due to regulatory and economic pressure on hazardous waste management, pollution prevention has become a very important environmental strategy in many developed countries. In many developed countries, industry is increasingly considering such alternative approaches, and finding many opportunities for their cost effective implementation. This paper provides a review of the status and trends of pollution prevention in selected western nations.

Chiu, Shen-yann.

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

365

Hazardous waste management and pollution prevention  

SciTech Connect

The management of hazardous wastes is one of the most critical environmental issues that faces many developing countries. It is one of the areas where institutional control and treatment and disposal technology has not kept pace with economic development. This paper reviews the development of hazardous waste management methods over the past decades, and provides the information on the status and trends of hazardous waste management strategy in selected western nations. Several issues pertinent to hazardous waste management will be reviewed, including: (1) definition of hazard; (2) why are we concerned with hazardous wastes; (3) aspects of hazardous waste management system; and (4) prioritization of hazardous waste management options. Due to regulatory and economic pressure on hazardous waste management, pollution prevention has become a very important environmental strategy in many developed countries. In many developed countries, industry is increasingly considering such alternative approaches, and finding many opportunities for their cost effective implementation. This paper provides a review of the status and trends of pollution prevention in selected western nations.

Chiu, Shen-yann

1992-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

366

DC Hazardous Waste Management (District of Columbia)  

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

367

Enhancing Railroad Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety...  

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

Safety Rail Routing Enhancing Railroad Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety Rail Routing Presentation made by Kevin Blackwell for the NTSF annual meeting held from May 14-16,...

368

Hazardous Material Transportation Safety (South Dakota)  

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

369

Hazardous Waste Management (Michigan) | Department of Energy  

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

(Michigan) Hazardous Waste Management (Michigan) Eligibility Utility Fed. Government Commercial Agricultural Investor-Owned Utility StateProvincial Govt Industrial Construction...

370

Hazardous Waste Management (Delaware) | Department of Energy  

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

Management (Delaware) Hazardous Waste Management (Delaware) Eligibility Utility Fed. Government Commercial Agricultural Investor-Owned Utility StateProvincial Govt Industrial...

371

Advisory Committee on Earthquake Hazards Reduction ...  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

... N ational Research Council road map entitled, National ... A recent upswing in oil and gas activity ... in US national seismic hazard maps 2) Determine ...

2013-03-18T23:59:59.000Z

372

Louisiana Hazardous Waste Control Law (Louisiana)  

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

The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality is responsible for administering the Louisiana Hazardous Waste Control Law and the regulations created under that law.

373

Date: ____________ MATERIAL FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Feb 2003 Date: ____________ MATERIAL FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL 1) Source: Bldg: ________________________________________ Disinfection? cc YES, Autoclaved (each container tagged with `Treated Biomedical Waste') cc YES, Chemical

Sinnamon, Gordon J.

374

Hazardous Waste Management Implementation Inspection Criteria...  

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

to the Director of the Office of ES&H Evaluations on (301) 903-5392. Subject: Hazardous Waste Management Inplementation Inspection Criteria, Approach, Evaluations Management Date:...

375

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT AND EMERGENCYRESPONSE TRAINING...  

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

Authorization Act authorized the establishment of Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response (HAMMER) Training and Education Centers at Department of Energy sites...

376

Extremely Hazardous Substances Risk Management Act (Delaware)  

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

377

AGREEMENT BETWEEN NEW MEXICO ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT HAZARDOUS...  

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

BETWEEN NEW MEXICO ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT HAZARDOUS WASTE BUREAU AND WASTE ISOLATION PILOT PLANT PERMITTEES REGARDING A TIME EXTENSION FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION RELATED TO FINAL AUDIT...

378

Testing the disturbed zone around a rigid inclusion in salt  

SciTech Connect

Deformational processes within a zone of rock surrounding excavations in salt result in alteration of the geophysical and hydrologic properties as compared to the undisturbed condition. The disturbed rock zone offers little resistance to fluid flow. It is hypothesized that rigid inclusions such as concrete seals will arrest and subsequently reverse the disturbance process and induce healing in the disturbed This experiment gathered in situ data that substantiates this hypothesis. A series of tests was conducted in a volume of rock surrounding concrete seals that were placed in a 1-m borehole approximately eight years ago. Fluid flow measurements, measurements of geophysical parameters of the surrounding rock and petrographic analyses on core samples were performed to characterize the rock. This paper presents the testing methodology and summarizes the data gathered from the field test program.

Knowles, M.K.; Borns, D.; Fredrich, J.; Holcomb, D.; Price, R.; Zeuch, D. [Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (United States); Dale, T.; Van Pelt, R.S. [INTERA, Inc., Austin, TX (United States)

1996-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

379

Hazardous materials (HAZMAT) Spill Center strategic plan  

SciTech Connect

This strategic Plan was developed in keeping with the Department of Energy`s mission for partnership with its customers to contribute to our Nation`s welfare by providing the technical information and the scientific and educational foundation for the technology, policy and institutional leadership necessary to achieve efficiency in energy use, diversity in energy sources, a more productive and competitive economy, improved environmental quality, and a secure national defense. The Plan provides the concepts for realigning the Departments`s Hazardous Materials Spill Center (HSC) in achieving its vision of becoming the global leader in meeting the diverse HAZMAT needs in the areas of testing, training, and technology. Each of these areas encompass many facets and a multitude of functional and operational requirements at the Federal, state, tribal, and local government levels, as well as those of foreign governments and the private sector. The evolution of the limited dimensional Liquefied Gaseous Fuels Spill Test Facility into a multifaceted HAZMAT Spill Center will require us to totally redefine our way of thinking as related to our business approach, both within and outside of the Department. We need to establish and maintain a viable and vibrant outreach program through all aspects of the public (via government agencies) and private sectors, to include foreign partnerships. The HAZMAT Spill Center goals and objectives provide the direction for meeting our vision. This direction takes into consideration the trends and happenings identified in the {open_quotes}Strategic Outlook{close_quotes}, which includes valuable input from our stakeholders and our present and future customers. It is our worldwide customers that provide the essence of the strategic outlook for the HAZMAT Spill Center.

1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

380

NREL: Photovoltaics Research - Facilities  

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

Facilities Facilities NREL's world-class research facilities provide the venue for innovative advances in photovoltaic technologies and applications. These facilities within the National Center for Photovoltaics (NCPV) serve both multi-use and dedicated-use functions. We encourage our research colleagues in industry, universities, and other laboratories to pursue opportunities in working with our staff in these facilities. Dedicated-Use Facilities Photo of a red-hot coil glowing inside a round machine. Research within these facilities focuses on targeted areas of interest that require specific tools, techniques, or unique capabilities. Our two main dedicated-use facilities are the following: Outdoor Test Facility (OTF) OTF researchers study and evaluate advanced or emerging PV technologies

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


381

Hazardous Chemical Waste Management Reference Guide for Laboratories 9 1 Identification of Hazardous Chemical Waste  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

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 a material must be considered a hazardous chemical waste by using the Radiological-Chemical

Ford, James

382

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

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Focus 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. Are your waste containers properly labeled? us Waste label as soon t Do you accumulate waste in a safe

Wilcock, William

383

Site characterization and hazard assessment criteria for natural phenomena hazards at DOE sites  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This paper briefly summarizes requirements for site characterization and hazard assessment of Natural Phenomena Hazards for compliance with DOE Order 5480.28. The site characterization criteria for NPH evaluation are provided in a draft DOE-STD-1022-XX and the assessment criteria of natural phenomena hazards are provided in draft DOE-STD-1023-XX.

Chen, J.C.; Lu, S.C.; Ueng, T.S.; Boissonnade, A.C.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

384

MAINTENANCE Assessment Plan, NNSA/Nevada Site Office Facility  

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

MAINTENANCE Assessment Plan, NNSA/Nevada Site Office Facility MAINTENANCE Assessment Plan, NNSA/Nevada Site Office Facility Representative Division MAINTENANCE Assessment Plan, NNSA/Nevada Site Office Facility Representative Division An effective facilities maintenance program should optimize the material condition of components and equipment to support safe and effective operations and ensure the peak performance and reliability of those systems and equipment important to operations. The program, facility or operation has a Maintenance Implementation Plan (MIP), or equivalent document, which defines and documents the approach to conduct of maintenance .Employees shall be encouraged to become involved in the identification and control of hazards in the workplace. (DOE O 440.1A CRD) Workers shall have the right, without reprisal, to accompany DOE worker

385

Idaho waste treatment facility startup testing suspended to evaluate system  

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

waste treatment facility startup testing suspended to waste treatment facility startup testing suspended to evaluate system response Idaho waste treatment facility startup testing suspended to evaluate system response June 20, 2012 - 12:00pm Addthis Media Contacts Brad Bugger 208-526-0833 Danielle Miller 208-526-5709 IDAHO FALLS, ID- On Saturday, June 16, startup testing was suspended at the Integrated Waste Treatment Unit (IWTU) located at the U.S. Department of Energy's Idaho Site. Testing and plant heat-up was suspended to allow detailed evaluation of a system pressure event observed during testing on Saturday. Facility startup testing has been ongoing for the past month, evaluating system and component operation and response during operating conditions. No radioactive or hazardous waste has been introduced into the facility,

386

Independent Oversight Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities - May 2013 |  

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

Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities - May 2013 Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities - May 2013 Independent Oversight Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities - May 2013 May 2013 Lessons Learned from Targeted Reviews of Implementation Verification Review Processes at Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities This report summarizes and analyzes the results of independent reviews of IVR and associated processes at eight DOE sites conducted by Independent Oversight from August 2011 to September 2012. The purpose of the Independent Oversight review was to evaluate the processes and methods used for verifying the implementation of safety basis hazard controls and periodically re-verifying that the controls remain in place. Independent Oversight Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities - May 2013 More Documents & Publications Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Site CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation

387

Lawn and Garden Tool Hazards  

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

Root Out Lawn and Garden Tool Hazards For many Americans, working outdoors on the lawn and in the garden is a great way to exercise and relax. However, safety experts warn that, if caution is not employed with lawn and garden tools, you could wind up spending more time indoors, starting with a trip to a hospital emergency room. "The most frequent injuries are from lawn mowers, which are unforgiving machines," cautions John Drengenberg, manager of Consumer Affairs for Underwriters Laboratories Inc., Northbrook, Ill., a not-for-profit product safety testing organization. "Statistics tell us that each year lawn mower accidents send close to 85,000 people to emergency rooms. But that's not all. Nearly 15,000 others need medical treatment for injuries from trimmers and other power garden

388

Facility Representative Program: Facility Representative Program Sponsors  

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

Facility Representative Program Sponsors Facility Representative Program Sponsors There are 29 Facility Representative Program Sponsors Office Name Title E-Mail Phone ASO Larry Pendexter ES&H Div Dir (Argonne) larry.pendexter@ch.doe.gov 630-252-1485 BHSO Bob Desmarais Operations Management Division Director desmarai@bnl.gov 631-344-5434 CBFO Glenn Gamlin Facility Representative Supervisor glenn.gamlin@wipp.ws 575-234-8136 CBFO Casey Gadbury Operations Manager casey.gadbury@wipp.ws 575-234-7372 FSO Mark Bollinger Deputy Manager Mark.Bollinger@ch.doe.gov 630-840-8130 FSO John Scott FR Team Lead john.scott@ch.doe.gov 630-840-2250 HS-30 James O'Brien Director, Office of Nuclear Safety James.O'Brien@hq.doe.gov 301-903-1408 HS-32 Earl Hughes Facility Representative Program Manager Earl.Hughes@hq.doe.gov 202-586-0065

389

Occupational Safety Review of High Technology Facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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.

Lee Cadwallader

2005-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

390

User Facilities | ORNL  

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

USER PORTAL USER PORTAL BTRICBuilding Technologies Research Integration Center CNMSCenter for Nanophase Materials Sciences CSMBCenter for Structural Molecular Biology CFTFCarbon Fiber Technology Facility HFIRHigh Flux Isotope Reactor MDF Manufacturing Demonstration Facility NTRCNational Transportation Research Center OLCFOak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility SNSSpallation Neutron Source Keeping it fresh at the Spallation Neutron Source Nanophase material sciences' nanotech toolbox Home | User Facilities SHARE ORNL User Facilities ORNL is home to a number of highly sophisticated experimental user facilities that provide unmatched capabilities to the broader scientific community, including a growing user community from universities, industry, and other laboratories research institutions, as well as to ORNL

391

Mediated electrochemical hazardous waste destruction  

SciTech Connect

There are few permitted processes for mixed waste (radioactive plus chemically hazardous) treatment. We are developing electrochemical processes that convert the toxic organic components of mixed waste to water, carbon dioxide, an innocuous anions such as chloride. Aggressive oxidizer ions such as Ag{sup 2+} or Ce{sup +4} are produced at an anode. These can attack the organic molecules directly. They can also attack water which yields hydroxyl free radicals that in turn attack the organic molecules. The condensed (i.e., solid and/or liquid) effluent streams contain the inorganic radionuclide forms. These may be treated with existing technology and prepared for final disposal. Kinetics and the extent of destruction of some toxic organics have been measured. Depending on how the process is operated, coulombic efficiency can be nearly 100%. In addition, hazardous organic materials are becoming very expensive to dispose of and when they are combined with transuranic radioactive elements no processes are presently permitted. Mediated electrochemical oxidation is an ambient-temperature aqueous-phase process that can be used to oxidize organic components of mixed wastes. Problems associated with incineration, such as high-temperature volatilization of radionuclides, are avoided. Historically, Ag (2) has been used as a mediator in this process. Fe(6) and Co(3) are attractive alternatives to Ag(2) since they form soluble chlorides during the destruction of chlorinated solvents. Furthermore, silver itself is a toxic heavy metal. Quantitative data has been obtained for the complete oxidation of ethylene glycol by Fe(6) and Co(3). Though ethylene glycol is a nonhalogenated organic, this data has enabled us to make direct comparisons of activities of Fe(6) and Co(3) with Ag(2). Very good quantitative data for the oxidation of ethylene glycol by Ag(2) had already been collected. 4 refs., 6 figs.

Hickman, R.G.; Farmer, J.C.; Wang, F.T.

1991-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

392

Hazardous Waste Technician Vandenberg AFB, California  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Hazardous Waste Technician Vandenberg AFB, California POSITION A Hazardous Waste Technician, California. ORGANIZATION CEMML is a research, education and service unit within the Warner College of Natural of California. The base, with its 45 miles of scenic coastline, is home to 53 species of mammals, 315 species

393

Heavy metals hazardous components of Eaf dust  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Electric arc furnace (EAF) dust is a waste generated in the EAF during the steel production process. Among different wastes, EAF dust represents one of the most hazardous, since it contains heavy metals such as Zn, Fe, Cr, Cd and Pb. The goal of the ... Keywords: electric arc furnace (EAF), furnace additives, hazard components, heavy metals, scrap composition, x-ray fluorescence spectroscopy

Cristiana-Zizi Rizescu; Zorica Bacinschi; Elena Valentina Stoian; Aurora Poinescu; Dan Nicolae Ungureanu

2011-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

394

Fire and explosion hazards of oil shale  

SciTech Connect

The US Bureau of Mines publication presents the results of investigations into the fire and explosion hazards of oil shale rocks and dust. Three areas have been examined: the explosibility and ignitability of oil shale dust clouds, the fire hazards of oil shale dust layers on hot surfaces, and the ignitability and extinguishment of oil shale rubble piles. 10 refs., 54 figs., 29 tabs.

1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

395

CHEMICAL HYGIENE PLAN HAZARD COMMUNICATION PLAN  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

CHEMICAL HYGIENE PLAN AND HAZARD COMMUNICATION PLAN Occupational Exposures to Hazardous Chemicals and Safety Numbers Research Safety 2723 Environmental Health/Safety Chemical Hygiene Officer Radiation Safety Human Resources (Accident Reports) 4589 Clinical Engineering 2964 #12;TABLE OF CONTENTS CHEMICAL HYGIENE

Oliver, Douglas L.

396

CHEMICAL HYGIENE PLAN HAZARD COMMUNICATION PLAN  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

CHEMICAL HYGIENE PLAN AND HAZARD COMMUNICATION PLAN Occupational Exposures to Hazardous Chemicals Safety 2723 Environmental Health/Safety Chemical Hygiene Officer Radiation Safety Officer Biological (Accident Reports) 2204 Bioengineering 2965 #12;TABLE OF CONTENTS CHEMICAL HYGIENE PLAN (CHP) (4/2007) 1

Oliver, Douglas L.

397

CHEMICAL HYGIENE PLAN HAZARD COMMUNICATION PLAN  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

CHEMICAL HYGIENE PLAN AND HAZARD COMMUNICATION PLAN Occupational Exposures to Hazardous Chemicals and Safety Numbers Research Safety 2723 Environmental Health/Safety Chemical Hygiene Officer Radiation Safety Human Resources (Accident Reports) 4589 Bioengineering 2965 #12;TABLE OF CONTENTS CHEMICAL HYGIENE PLAN

Kim, Duck O.

398

Energy and solid/hazardous waste  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report addresses the past and potential future solid and hazardous waste impacts from energy development, and summarizes the major environmental, legislation applicable to solid and hazardous waste generation and disposal. A glossary of terms and acronyms used to describe and measure solid waste impacts of energy development is included. (PSB)

None

1981-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

399

Transporting & Shipping Hazardous Materials at LBNL  

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

EHSS EHSS Industrial Hygiene Group HazMat Transport/Shipping Home Biological & Infectious Substances Chemicals Compressed Gas Cryogens Dry Ice Engineered Nanomaterials Gasoline Lithium Betteries Radioactive Materials Waste: Hazardous, Biohazardous, Medical or Radioactive Mixed Hazardous Materials Personal/Rental Vehicles HazMat Transport/Shipping Transporting and shipping hazardous materials can be dangerous, but both activities can be done safely - much of it by the researchers themselves. Each of the items below is subject to some transportation or shipping restrictions. Click on the applicable hazardous material icon below to learn how you can safely (and legally) transport that hazardous material and to learn what laboratory resources are available to you for your shipping needs.

400

Surveillance Guides - PTS 13.1 Radioactive And Hazardous Material Transportation  

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

RADIOACTIVE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION RADIOACTIVE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION 1.0 Objective The objective of this surveillance is to evaluate the effectiveness of the contractor's programs, policies, and procedures to transport radioactive and hazardous materials off-site or to receive such materials for routine operations, treatment, storage, or disposal. The Facility Representative observes preparation of materials for shipment and receipt of materials and reviews specific documents to determine compliance with requirements imposed by DOE and by applicable regulations from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Department of Transportation. 2.0 References DOE O 460.1A, Packaging and Transportation Safety DOE O 460.2, Chg1, Departmental Materials Transportation and Packaging

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


401

DOE Order Self Study Modules - 29 CFR 1910.120 Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response  

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

29 CFR 1910.120 29 CFR 1910.120 HAZARDOUS WASTE OPERATIONS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION SERVICE CENTER Change No: 0 29 CFR 1910.120 Level: Familiar Date: 3/14/05 1 29 CFR 1910.120 HAZARDOUS WASTE OPERATIONS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE FAMILIAR LEVEL _________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTIVES Given the familiar level of this module and the resources, you will be able to perform the following: 1. Discuss clean-up operations required by the regulation. 2. Discuss corrective actions during clean-up operations covered by the resource conservation and recovery act (RCRA). 3. Discuss operations involving hazardous wastes that are conducted at treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) facilities.

402

Health Hazard Evaluation Report HETA 84-340-1606, Denver Laundry and Dry Cleaning, Denver, Colorado  

SciTech Connect

Environmental and breathing zone samples were analyzed for tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene) (PCE) at Denver Laundry and Dry Cleaning, Denver, Colorado in July, 1984. The evaluation was requested by a company representative to determine if a health hazard from exposure to PCE existed during the commercial laundry and dry cleaning processes. A noise evaluation was also requested. The author concludes that a health hazard exists due to overexposure to PCE and noise at the facility. Recommendations include replacing the present transfer system by a dry/to/dry closed system if possible, improving work practices, removing clothing from each machine at the same time replacing or cleaning and oiling the bearings in the dryers, and establishing an educational program to instruct new employees on the hazards of chemical and noise exposure.

Pryor, P.

1985-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

403

Establishing sitewide risk perspectives due to cumulative impacts from AB, EP, and NEPA hazard analyses  

SciTech Connect

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.

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

404

Geomagnetic Disturbance (GMD) News and Observer: Issue 4  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This is thefourth issue of GMD News and Observer. This newsletter provides progress reports and insights for the industry on the geomagnetic disturbance (GMD) area. This issue covers efforts accomplished in 2012 and summarizes plans for 2013. Previous issues can be downloaded from epri.com (1025857, 1025858, and1025859).

2013-04-17T23:59:59.000Z

405

Quantifying disturbance rejection of SLIP-like running systems  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The speed and maneuverability at which legged animals can travel across rough and cluttered landscapes has provided inspiration for the development of legged robots with similar capabilities. Researchers have developed a number of robots that can run ... Keywords: Legged robot, biologically-inspired robot, disturbance rejection, stability

Bruce Miller; John Schmitt; Jonathan E Clark

2012-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

406

The Nonlinear Evolution of Disturbances to a Parabolic Jet  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

It has been shown that the linearized equations for disturbances to a parabolic jet on a ? plane, with curvature Un0(y) such that the basic-state absolute vorticity gradient ? ? Un0(y) is zero, ultimately become inconsistent in the neighborhood ...

G. Brunet; P. H. Haynes

1995-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

407

ARM - Facility News Article  

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

October 15, 2005 [Facility News] October 15, 2005 [Facility News] Room to Share-New Guest Facility Ready for Users at North Slope of Alaska Bookmark and Share In September, installation was completed on the new Guest Instrument Facility in Barrow to provide additional space and ease crowded conditions. In September, installation was completed on the new Guest Instrument Facility in Barrow to provide additional space and ease crowded conditions. To alleviate crowded conditions at its research facilities on the North Slope of Alaska (NSA) site in Barrow, ARM operations staff recently completed the installation of a new Guest Instrument Facility. Similar to the platform at the Atqasuk site, the facility consists of two insulated shipping containers mounted on pilings, with a mezzanine to accommodate

408

NREL: Wind Research - Facilities  

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

Facilities Facilities Our facilities are designed to meet the wind industry's critical research needs with state-of-the-art design and testing facilities. NREL's unique and highly versatile facilities at the National Wind Technology Center offer research and analysis of wind turbine components and prototypes rated from 400 watts to 3 megawatts. Satellite facilities support the growth of wind energy development across the United States. National Wind Technology Center Facilities Our facilities are contained within a 305-acre area that comprises field test sites, test laboratories, industrial high-bay work areas, machine shops, electronics and instrumentation laboratories, and office areas. In addition, there are hundreds of test articles and supporting components such as turbines, meteorological towers, custom test apparatus, test sheds,

409

FACET User Facility  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites

AD SLACPortal > Accelerator Research Division > FACET User Facility AD SLACPortal > Accelerator Research Division > FACET User Facility Sign In Launch the Developer Dashboard SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory DOE | Stanford | SLAC | SSRL | LCLS | AD | PPA | Photon Science | PULSE | SIMES FACET User Facility : FACET An Office of Science User Facility Search this site... Search Help (new window) Top Link Bar FACET User Facility FACET Home About FACET FACET Experimental Facilities FACET Users Research at FACET SAREC Expand SAREC FACET FAQs FACET User Facility Quick Launch FACET Users Home FACET Division ARD Home About FACET FACET News FACET Users FACET Experimental Facilities FACET Research Expand FACET Research FACET Images Expand FACET Images SAREC Expand SAREC FACET Project Site (restricted) FACET FAQs FACET Site TOC All Site Content

410

Government Facilities Segment Analysis  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Federal, state, and local governments own or lease an estimated 1.2 million buildings and facilities in the United States. These facilities are an important -- and often overlooked -- customer segment for all energy and energy service providers.

1998-12-19T23:59:59.000Z

411

Geothermal component test facility  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

A description is given of the East Mesa geothermal facility and the services provided. The facility provides for testing various types of geothermal energy-conversion equipment and materials under field conditions using geothermal fluids from three existing wells. (LBS)

Not Available

1976-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

412

Technology transfer in hazardous waste management  

SciTech Connect

Hazardous waste is a growing problem in all parts of the world. Industrialized countries have had to deal with the treatment and disposal of hazardous wastes for many years. The newly industrializing countries of the world are now faced with immediate problems of waste handling. The developing nations of the world are looking at increasing quantities of hazardous waste generation as they move toward higher levels of industrialization. Available data are included on hazardous waste generation in Asia and the Pacific as a function of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Although there are many inconsistencies in the data (inconsistent hazardous waste definitions, inconsistent reporting of wastes, etc.) there is definite indication that a growing economy tends to lead toward larger quantities of hazardous waste generation. In developing countries the industrial sector is growing at a faster rate than in the industrialized countries. In 1965 industry accounted for 29% of GDP in the developing countries of the world. In 1987 this had grown to 37% of GDP. In contrast, industry accounted for 40% of GDP in 1965 in industrialized countries and dropped to 35% in 1987. This growth in industrial activity in the developing countries brings an increase in the need to handle hazardous wastes. Although hazardous wastes are ubiquitous, the control of hazardous wastes varies. The number of regulatory options used by various countries in Asia and the Pacific to control wastes are included. It is evident that the industrialized countries, with a longer history of having to deal with hazardous wastes, have found the need to use more mechanisms to control them. 2 refs., 2 figs.

Drucker, H.

1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

413

Seismic Hazards & Infrastructure: A Historic Perspective  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

... systems and facilities include communication, electric power, liquid fuel ... Substation Equipment Database Development ... Design of Substations ...

2009-01-05T23:59:59.000Z

414

Supercomputing | Facilities | ORNL  

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

Primary Systems Infrastructure High Performance Storage Supercomputing and Computation Home | Science & Discovery | Supercomputing and Computation | Facilities and Capabilities...

415

Idaho Site Nuclear Facilities  

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

Site Nuclear Facilities Idaho Idaho National Laboratorys (INL) Idaho Closure Project (ICP) This page was last updated on May 16...

416

MML Microscopy Facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The MML Electron Microscopy Facility consists of three transmission electron microscopes (TEM), three scanning electron microscopes (SEM), a ...

2013-06-11T23:59:59.000Z

417

Photon Sciences | Navigation | Facilities  

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

Facilities NSLS About NSLS Accelerator Activity Report Experimental Systems Machine Status & History Operations & Engineering Operating Schedules Ring Parameters NSLS Ops:...

418

Facilities and Instruments  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

... The EL Facilities listed here are available for cooperative or independent research, typically on a cost reimbursable basis. ...

2013-03-12T23:59:59.000Z

419

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

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

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

420

Facility Representative Program: 2004 Facility Representative Workshop  

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

4 Facility Representative Workshop 4 Facility Representative Workshop May 18 - 20, 2004 Las Vegas, NV Facility Rep of the Year Award | Attendees list | Summary Report [PDF] WORKSHOP AGENDA Final Day 1: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 Theme: Program Successes and Challenges 8:00 a.m. Opening Remarks John Evans, Facility Representative Program Manager 8:15 a.m. Welcome Kathy Carlson, Nevada Site Office Manager 8:30 a.m. Videotaped Remarks from the Deputy Secretary Kyle E. McSlarrow, Deputy Secretary of Energy Deputy Secretary's Remarks 8:40 a.m. Keynote Address - NNSA Evaluation of Columbia Accident Investigation Board Report Brigadier General Ronald J. Haeckel, Principal Assistant Deputy Administrator for Military Applications, NNSA Other Information: NASA’S Columbia Accident Investigation Board Report

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


421

Facility Representative Program: 2006 Facility Representative Workshop  

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

6 Facility Representative Workshop 6 Facility Representative Workshop May 16 - 19, 2006 Knoxville, Tennessee Facility Rep of the Year Award | Attendees list | Summary Report [PDF] WORKSHOP AGENDA Final To view Pictures, scroll the mouse over the Picture icon To view Presentations, Picture Slideshows and Video, click on the icon Day 1: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 8:00 a.m. Opening Remarks John Evans, Facility Representative Program Manager 8:15 a.m. Welcome from Oak Ridge Office Gerald Boyd, Manager, Oak Ridge Office 8:25 a.m. Welcome from Y-12 Site Office Theodore Sherry, Manager, Y-12 Site Office 8:35 a.m. Videotaped Remarks from the Deputy Secretary The Honorable Clay Sell, Deputy Secretary of Energy 8:40 a.m. Keynote Address - Safety Oversight at Environmental Management Activities Dr. Inés Triay, Chief Operating Officer, Office of Environmental Management

422

Facility Representative Program: 2000 Facility Representative...  

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

- Break 10:00 a.m. - Making Your Observations CountLeading Indicators - Mike Weis, Rocky Flats Field Office 10:45 a.m. - Facility Representative PanelQuestions and Answers (Ben...

423

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Wilhite, E.L.

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

424

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Wilhite, E.L.

1992-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

425

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air PollutantsCalendar Year 2010 INL Report for Radionuclides (2011)  

SciTech Connect

This report documents the calendar Year 2010 radionuclide air emissions and resulting effective dose equivalent to the maximally exposed individual member of the public from operations at the Department of Energy's Idaho National Laboratory Site. This report was prepared in accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, 'Protection of the Environment,' Part 61, 'National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants,' Subpart H, 'National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities.'

Mark Verdoorn; Tom Haney

2011-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

426

NREL: Buildings Research - Facilities  

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

Facilities Facilities NREL provides industry, government, and university researchers with access to state-of-the-art and unique equipment for analyzing a wide spectrum of building energy efficiency technologies and innovations. NREL engineers and researchers work closely with industry partners to research and develop advanced technologies. NREL's existing facilities have been used to test and develop many award-winning building technologies and innovations that deliver significant energy savings in buildings, and the new facilities further extend those capabilities. In addition, the NREL campus includes living laboratories, buildings that researchers and other NREL staff use every day. Researchers monitor real-time building performance data in these facilities to study energy use

427

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

428

Project Plan: Central and Eastern United States Seismic Source Characterization for Nuclear Facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This project plan outlines the Central and Eastern United States Seismic Source Characterization for Nuclear Facilities (CEUS SSC) Project, which will replace the Seismic Hazard Methodology for the Central and Eastern United States, EPRI report NP-4726, July 1986. The objective of the CEUS SSC project is to develop an up-to-date assessment of probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) SSC for CEUS. Input to a PSHA consists of both seismic source and ground motion characterization. These two components ...

2008-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

429

Final safety analysis report for the irradiated fuels storage facility  

SciTech Connect

A fuel storage facility has been constructed at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant to provide safe storage for spent fuel from two commercial HTGR's, Fort St. Vrain and Peach Bottom, and from the Rover nuclear rocket program. The new facility was built as an addition to the existing fuel storage basin building to make maximum use of existing facilities and equipment. The completed facility provides dry storage for one core of Peach Bottom fuel (804 elements), 1$sup 1$/$sub 2$ cores of Fort St. Vrain fuel (2200 elements), and the irradiated fuel from the 20 reactors in the Rover program. The facility is designed to permit future expansion at a minimum cost should additional storage space for graphite-type fuels be required. A thorough study of the potential hazards associated with the Irradiated Fuels Storage Facility has been completed, indicating that the facility is capable of withstanding all credible combinations of internal accidents and pertinent natural forces, including design basis natural phenomena of a 10,000 year flood, a 175-mph tornado, or an earthquake having a bedrock acceleration of 0.33 g and an amplification factor of 1.3, without a loss of integrity or a significant release of radioactive materials. The design basis accident (DBA) postulated for the facility is a complete loss of cooling air, even though the occurrence of this situation is extremely remote, considering the availability of backup and spare fans and emergency power. The occurrence of the DBA presents neither a radiation nor an activity release hazard. A loss of coolant has no effect upon the fuel or the facility other than resulting in a gradual and constant temperature increase of the stored fuel. The temperature increase is gradual enough that ample time (28 hours minimum) is available for corrective action before an arbitrarily imposed maximum fuel centerline temperature of 1100$sup 0$F is reached. (LK)

Bingham, G.E.; Evans, T.K.

1976-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

430

Apparatus for transporting hazardous materials  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

An apparatus and method are provided for selectively receiving, transporting, and releasing one or more radioactive or other hazardous samples for analysis on a differential thermal analysis (DTA) apparatus. The apparatus includes a portable sample transporting apparatus for storing and transporting the samples and includes a support assembly for supporting the transporting apparatus when a sample is transferred to the DTA apparatus. The transporting apparatus includes a storage member which includes a plurality of storage chambers arrayed circumferentially with respect to a central axis. An adjustable top door is located on the top side of the storage member, and the top door includes a channel capable of being selectively placed in registration with the respective storage chambers thereby permitting the samples to selectively enter the respective storage chambers. The top door, when closed, isolates the respective samples within the storage chambers. A plurality of spring-biased bottom doors are located on the bottom sides of the respective storage chambers. The bottom doors isolate the samples in the respective storage chambers when the bottom doors are in the closed position. The bottom doors permit the samples to leave the respective storage chambers from the bottom side when the respective bottom doors are in respective open positions. The bottom doors permit the samples to be loaded into the respective storage chambers after the analysis for storage and transport to a permanent storage location.

Osterman, Robert A. (Canonsburg, PA); Cox, Robert (West Mifflin, PA)

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

431

Apparatus for incinerating hazardous waste  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

An apparatus is described for incinerating wastes, including an incinerator having a combustion chamber, a fluid-tight shell enclosing the combustion chamber, an afterburner, an off-gas particulate removal system and an emergency off-gas cooling system. The region between the inner surface of the shell and the outer surface of the combustion chamber forms a cavity. Air is supplied to the cavity and heated as it passes over the outer surface of the combustion chamber. Heated air is drawn from the cavity and mixed with fuel for input into the combustion chamber. The pressure in the cavity is maintained at least approximately 2.5 cm WC higher than the pressure in the combustion chamber. Gases cannot leak from the combustion chamber since the pressure outside the chamber (inside the cavity) is higher than the pressure inside the chamber. The apparatus can be used to treat any combustible wastes, including biological wastes, toxic materials, low level radioactive wastes, and mixed hazardous and low level transuranic wastes. 1 figure.

Chang, R.C.W.

1994-12-20T23:59:59.000Z

432

Apparatus for incinerating hazardous waste  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

An apparatus for incinerating wastes, including an incinerator having a combustion chamber, a fluidtight shell enclosing the combustion chamber, an afterburner, an off-gas particulate removal system and an emergency off-gas cooling system. The region between the inner surface of the shell and the outer surface of the combustion chamber forms a cavity. Air is supplied to the cavity and heated as it passes over the outer surface of the combustion chamber. Heated air is drawn from the cavity and mixed with fuel for input into the combustion chamber. The pressure in the cavity is maintained at least approximately 2.5 cm WC (about 1" WC) higher than the pressure in the combustion chamber. Gases cannot leak from the combustion chamber since the pressure outside the chamber (inside the cavity) is higher than the pressure inside the chamber. The apparatus can be used to treat any combustible wastes, including biological wastes, toxic materials, low level radioactive wastes, and mixed hazardous and low level transuranic wastes.

Chang, Robert C. W. (Martinez, GA)

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

433

Biomass Anaerobic Digestion Facilities and Biomass Gasification...  

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

Biomass Anaerobic Digestion Facilities and Biomass Gasification Facilities (Indiana) Biomass Anaerobic Digestion Facilities and Biomass Gasification Facilities (Indiana)...

434

HAZWOPER project documents for demolition of the Waste Evaporator Facility, Building 3506, at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

SciTech Connect

This document, in support of the Waste Evaporator Facility (WEF) demolition project and contains the Project Work Plan and the Project Health and Safety Plan for demolition and partial remediation actions by ATG at the Waste Evaporator Facility, Building 3506. Various activities will be conducted during the course of demolition, and this plan provides details on the work steps involved, the identification of hazards, and the health and safety practices necessary to mitigate these hazards. The objective of this document is to develop an approach for implementing demolition activities at the WEF. This approach is based on prior site characterization information and takes into account all of the known hazards at this facility. The Project Work Plan provides instructions and requirements for identified work steps that will be utilized during the performance of demolition, while the Health and Safety Plan addresses the radiological, hazardous material exposure, and industrial safety concerns that will be encountered.

NONE

1996-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

435

Lessons learned from the EG&G consolidated hazardous waste subcontract and ESH&Q liability assessment process  

SciTech Connect

Hazardous waste transportation, treatment, recycling, and disposal contracts were first consolidated at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory in 1992 by EG&G Idaho, Inc. At that time, disposition of Resource, Conservation and Recovery Act hazardous waste, Toxic Substance Control Act waste, Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act hazardous substances and contaminated media, and recyclable hazardous materials was consolidated under five subcontracts. The wastes were generated by five different INEL M&O contractors, under the direction of three different Department of Energy field offices. The consolidated contract reduced the number of facilities handling INEL waste from 27 to 8 qualified treatment, storage, and disposal facilities, with brokers specifically prohibited. This reduced associated transportation costs, amount and cost of contractual paperwork, and environmental liability exposure. EG&G reviewed this approach and proposed a consolidated hazardous waste subcontract be formed for the major EG&G managed DOE sites: INEL, Mound, Rocky Flats, Nevada Test Site, and 10 satellite facilities. After obtaining concurrence from DOE Headquarters, this effort began in March 1992 and was completed with the award of two master task subcontracts in October and November 1993. In addition, the effort included a team to evaluate the apparent awardee`s facilities for environment, safety, health, and quality (ESH&Q) and financial liability status. This report documents the evaluation of the process used to prepare, bid, and award the EG&G consolidated hazardous waste transportation, treatment, recycling, and/or disposal subcontracts and associated ESH&Q and financial liability assessments; document the strengths and weaknesses of the process; and propose improvements that would expedite and enhance the process for other DOE installations that used the process and for the re-bid of the consolidated subcontract, scheduled for 1997.

Fix, N.J.

1995-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

436

Facility Name Facility Name Facility FacilityType Owner Developer EnergyPurchaser  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Name Facility Name Facility FacilityType Owner Developer EnergyPurchaser Name Facility Name Facility FacilityType Owner Developer EnergyPurchaser Place GeneratingCapacity NumberOfUnits CommercialOnlineDate WindTurbineManufacturer FacilityStatus Coordinates D Metals D Metals D Metals Definition Small Scale Wind Valley City OH MW Northern Power Systems In Service AB Tehachapi Wind Farm AB Tehachapi Wind Farm AB Tehachapi Definition Commercial Scale Wind Coram Energy AB Energy Southern California Edison Co Tehachapi CA MW Vestas In Service AFCEE MMR Turbines AFCEE MMR Turbines AFCEE MMR Turbines Definition Commercial Scale Wind AFCEE Air Force Center for Engineering and the Environment Distributed generation net metered Camp Edwards Sandwich MA MW GE Energy In Service AG Land AG Land AG Land Definition Community Wind AG Land Energy LLC

437

ARM - Facility News Article  

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

March 22, 2007 [Facility News] March 22, 2007 [Facility News] GEWEX News Features Dust Data from ARM Mobile Facility Deployment Bookmark and Share Data from the recent deployment of the ARM Mobile Facility are featured in the February issue of GEWEX News. Data from the recent deployment of the ARM Mobile Facility are featured in the February issue of GEWEX News. The February 2007 issue (Vol. 17, No. 1) of GEWEX News features early results from special observing periods of the African Monsoon Mutidisciplinary Analysis, including data obtained by the ARM Mobile Facility (AMF). The AMF was stationed in the central Sahel from January through December 2006, with the primary facility at the Niamey airport, and an ancillary site in Banizoumbou. The AMF recorded a major dust storm that passed through the area in March, and combined with simultaneous satellite

438

ARM - Facility News Article  

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

February 16, 2005 [Facility News] February 16, 2005 [Facility News] Mobile Facility Arrives Safe and Sound in Point Reyes Bookmark and Share Image - The ARM Mobile Facility in Point Reyes, California Image - The ARM Mobile Facility in Point Reyes, California Safe and sound at Point Reyes, the ARM Mobile Facility instrumentation is set up on the roof of a shelter until a fence is installed to keep out the curious local cattle. On February 9, the ARM Mobile Facility (AMF) withstood an accident on the way to its deployment location at Point Reyes, California. About an hour from its destination, the truck carrying the two AMF shelters packed with instrumentation and associated equipment swerved to avoid another vehicle and slid off the road and down a steep embankment. Emergency personnel soon

439

ARM - Facility News Article  

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

22, 2011 [Facility News] 22, 2011 [Facility News] Request for Proposals Now Open Bookmark and Share The ARM Climate Research Facility is now accepting applications for use of an ARM mobile facility (AMF), the ARM aerial facility (AAF), and fixed sites. Proposals are welcome from all members of the scientific community for conducting field campaigns and scientific research using the ARM Facility, with availability as follows: AMF2 available December 2013 AMF1 available March 2015 AAF available between June and October 2013 Fixed sites available FY2013 Priority will be given to proposals that make comprehensive use of the ARM facilities and focus on long-term goals of the DOE Office of Biological and Environmental Research. Successful proposals will be supplied all operational and logistical resources (provided at no cost to the principal

440

Prioritized research for reducing the seismic hazards of ...  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

... to improve performance under other hazards (eg, wind hazards or ... versus re-use a building (ie, evaluation based on equivalent carbon footprint) ...

2008-03-13T23:59:59.000Z

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


441

Vegetation Cover Analysis of Hazardous Waste Sites in Utah and...  

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

Vegetation Cover Analysis of Hazardous Waste Sites in Utah and Arizona Using Hyperspectral Remote Sensing Vegetation Cover Analysis of Hazardous Waste Sites in Utah and Arizona...

442

FAQ 12-What are the hazards associated with uranium hexafluoride...  

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

hazards associated with uranium hexafluoride? What are the hazards associated with uranium hexafluoride? The characteristics of UF6 pose potential health risks, and the material is...

443

Abatement of Air Pollution: Hazardous Air Pollutants (Connecticut)  

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

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

444

Massachusetts Oil and Hazardous Material Release Prevention and...  

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

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

445

Hazards Control, 3/9/35 | Department of Energy  

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

Hazards Control, 3935 Hazards Control, 3935 The objective of this surveillance is to evaluate the effectiveness of the contractor's programs and policy for establishing...

446

Solid Waste Disposal, Hazardous Waste Management Act, Underground...  

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

Disposal, Hazardous Waste Management Act, Underground Storage Act (Tennessee) Solid Waste Disposal, Hazardous Waste Management Act, Underground Storage Act (Tennessee) Eligibility...

447

Integrating waste management with Job Hazard analysis  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The web-based Automated Job Hazard Analysis (AJHA) system is a tool designed to help capture and communicate the results of the hazard review and mitigation process for specific work activities. In Fluor Hanford's day-to-day work planning and execution process, AJHA has become the focal point for integrating Integrated Safety Management (ISM) through industrial health and safety principles; environmental safety measures; and involvement by workers, subject-matter experts and management. This paper illustrates how AJHA has become a key element in involving waste-management and environmental-control professionals in planning and executing work. To support implementing requirements for waste management and environmental compliance within the core function and guiding principles of an integrated safety management system (ISMS), Fluor Hanford has developed the a computer-based application called the 'Automated Job Hazard Analysis' (AJHA), into the work management process. This web-based software tool helps integrate the knowledge of site workers, subject-matter experts, and safety principles and requirements established in standards, and regulations. AJHA facilitates a process of work site review, hazard identification, analysis, and the determination of specific work controls. The AJHA application provides a well-organized job hazard analysis report including training and staffing requirements, prerequisite actions, notifications, and specific work controls listed for each sub-task determined for the job. AJHA lists common hazards addressed in the U.S. Occupational, Safety, and Health Administration (OSHA) federal codes; and State regulations such as the Washington Industrial Safety and Health Administration (WISHA). AJHA also lists extraordinary hazards that are unique to a particular industry sector, such as radiological hazards and waste management. The work-planning team evaluates the scope of work and reviews the work site to identify potential hazards. Hazards relevant to the work activity being analyzed are selected from the listing provided in AJHA. The work team can also enter one-time hazards unique to the work activity. Because AJHA is web based, it can be taken into the field during site walk-downs using wireless or cell- phone technologies. Once hazards are selected, AJHA automatically lists mandatory and optional controls, based on the referenced codes and good work practices. The hazards selected may also require that additional specific analysis be performed, focusing on the unique characteristics of the job being analyzed. For example, the physical characteristics, packaging, handling, and disposal requirements for a specific waste type. The work team then evaluates the identified hazards and related controls and adds details as needed for the specific work activity being analyzed. The selection of relevant hazards also triggers required reviews by subject-matter experts (SMEs) and the on-line completion of necessary forms and permits. The details of the hazard analysis are reviewed on line or in a work- team group setting. SME approvals are entered on-line and are published in the job hazard analysis report. (authors)

NONE

2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

448

Hazard Categorization Reduction via Nature of the Process Argument  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This paper documents the Hazard Categorization (HC) and Critical Safety Evaluation (CSE) for activities performed using an Inspection Object (IO) in excess of the single parameter subcritical limit of 700 g of U-235. By virtue of exceeding the single parameter subcritical limit and the subsequent potential for criticality, the IO HC is initially categorized as HC2. However, a novel application of the nature of the process argument was employed to reduce the IO HC from HC2 to less than HC3 (LTHC3). The IO is composed of five separate uranium metal plates that total no greater than 3.82 kg of U-235 (U(20)). The IO is planned to be arranged in various configurations. As the IO serves as a standard for experimentation aimed at establishing techniques for detection of fissionable materials, it may be placed in close proximity to various reflectors, moderators, or both. The most reactive configurations of the IO were systematically evaluated and shown that despite the mass of U-235 and potential positioning near various reflectors and moderators, the IO cannot be assembled into a critical configuration. Therefore, the potential for criticality does not exist. With Department of Energy approval, a Hazards Assessment Document with high-level (facility-level) controls on the plates negates the potential for criticality and satisfies the nature of the process argument to reduce the HC from HC2 to LTHC3.

Chelise A. Van De Graaff; Dr. Chad Pope; J. Todd Taylor

2012-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

449

HYTEST Phase I Facility Commissioning and Modeling  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The purpose of this document is to report the first year accomplishments of two coordinated Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) projects that utilize a hybrid energy testing laboratory that couples various reactors to investigate system reactance behavior. This work is the first phase of a series of hybrid energy research and testing stations - referred to hereafter as HYTEST facilities that are planned for construction and operation at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). A HYTEST Phase I facility was set up and commissioned in Bay 9 of the Bonneville County Technology Center (BCTC). The purpose of this facility is to utilize the hydrogen and oxygen that is produced by the High Temperature Steam Electrolysis test reactors operating in Bay 9 to support the investigation of kinetic phenomena and transient response of integrated reactor components. This facility provides a convenient scale for conducting scoping tests of new reaction concepts, materials performance, new instruments, and real-time data collection and manipulation for advance process controls. An enclosed reactor module was assembled and connected to a new ventilation system equipped with a variable-speed exhaust blower to mitigate hazardous gas exposures, as well as contract with hot surfaces. The module was equipped with a hydrogen gas pump and receiver tank to supply high quality hydrogen to chemical reactors located in the hood.

Lee P. Shunn; Richard D. Boardman; Shane J. Cherry; Craig G. Rieger

2009-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

450

Safety analysis of the 700-horsepower combustion test facility  

SciTech Connect

The objective of the program reported herein was to provide a Safety Analysis of the 700 h.p. Combustion Test Facility located in Building 93 at the Pittsburgh Energy Technology Center. Extensive safety related measures have been incorporated into the design, construction, and operation of the Combustion Test Facility. These include: nitrogen addition to the coal storage bin, slurry hopper, roller mill and pulverizer baghouse, use of low oxygen content combustion gas for coal conveying, an oxygen analyzer for the combustion gas, insulation on hot surfaces, proper classification of electrical equipment, process monitoring instrumentation and a planned remote television monitoring system. Analysis of the system considering these factors has resulted in the determination of overall probabilities of occurrence of hazards as shown in Table I. Implementation of the recommendations in this report will reduce these probabilities as indicated. The identified hazards include coal dust ignition by hot ductwork and equipment, loss of inerting within the coal conveying system leading to a coal dust fire, and ignition of hydrocarbon vapors or spilled oil, or slurry. The possibility of self-heating of coal was investigated. Implementation of the recommendations in this report will reduce the ignition probability to no more than 1 x 10/sup -6/ per event. In addition to fire and explosion hazards, there are potential exposures to materials which have been identified as hazardous to personal health, such as carbon monoxide, coal dust, hydrocarbon vapors, and oxygen deficient atmosphere, but past monitoring experience has not revealed any problem areas. The major environmental hazard is an oil spill. The facility has a comprehensive spill control plan.

Berkey, B.D.

1981-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

451

{open_quotes}Secure Bus{close_quotes} disturbance-free power at the utility substation level  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Over the last 18 months Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM), El Camino Real Engineering, Inc. (CRE), Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) and Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) have worked on the development of disturbance-free power at the medium voltage substation level. The work resulted in the Secure Bus concept, a system in which a medium voltage bus in a substation is immune to power outages and voltage sags on the utility source. The Secure Bus voltage is also immune to voltage sags resulting from faults on any distribution feeder connected to the bus. The Secure Bus concept originated from work conducted to improve power quality for large high-tech manufacturing facilities, in particular for large semiconductor manufacturing plants. For the demands on quality power of a modern facility conventional equipment is not adequate for protecting the end user. For example, the operation of conventional vacuum breakers during short circuit conditions on a feeder circuit, requiring 3 to 5 cycles for breaker opening, does not allow for fast enough current interruption to avoid a voltage dip on the main bus. A sever voltage sag could result in a shut down of sensitive equipment being supplied by the other feeder circuits, which are connected to the main bus. The circumvent the problem, a fast breaker was introduced which interrupts the short circuit before the current causes a significant voltage disturbance. To make the bus immune also to power disturbances caused by power outages, energy storage is introduced to provide the necessary energy back-up in case the primary source is not available.

Boenig, H.J. [Los Alamos National Lab., NM (United States); Jones, W.H. [El Camino Real Engineering, Inc., Corrales, NM (United States)

1996-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

452

Low Energy Cosmic Rays and the Disturbed Magnetosphere  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Low energy galactic cosmic rays as well as particles accelerated to high energies either at the solar surface or in the interplanetary medium have access to the atmosphere above a given position on the Earth depending upon the state of the magnetosphere. The interpretation of the cosmic ray anisotropy, deduced from the neutron monitor (NM) network, must assume the variability of the magnetospheric configuration. Along with a short review of changes of the geomagnetic cutoffs in the disturbed magnetosphere reported in the earlier papers, we present the results of computations of transmissivity function and asymptotic directions for selected points on the ground and for a low altitude polar orbiting satellite as well. The computations, based on different available models of geomagnetic field of external sources are performed for quiet time periods and for strong geomagnetic disturbances occurred in 2003 and 2004.

Kudela, K

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

453

The Uranium Processing Facility Finite Element Meshing Discussion  

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

Uranium Processing Facility (UPF) Uranium Processing Facility (UPF) Finite Element Meshing Discussion ...Need picture of Building... October 25, 2011 Department of Energy - Natural Phenomenon Hazard Workshop 1 Loring Wyllie Arne Halterman Degenkolb Engineers, San Francisco Purpose of Presentation * Design vs. Analysis * Discuss the mesh criteria * Discuss the evolution of the mesh of the UPF main building model * Discuss how the mesh affects the analysis process October 25, 2011 2 Department of Energy - Natural Phenomenon Hazard Workshop FEM Modeling * GTStrudl typically used for DOE projects. * Mesh size is important * What is to be captured? * How complex is the system? * Current criteria set to capture in-plane and out-of-plane response. October 25, 2011 3

454

D11 WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES FOR TRANSURANIC WASTE  

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

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

455

How the EPRI Geomagnetic Disturbance (GMD) Research Fits Together  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

In collaboration with the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), the utility industry, and other stakeholders, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) is building on two decades of research in the geomagnetic disturbances (GMD) area to develop the knowledge and tools to understand, predict, and mitigate the impact of GMDs on power systems. The three-year, comprehensive, multi-deliverable project that EPRI has recently launched will help the electric utility industry understand, ...

2012-09-18T23:59:59.000Z

456

Geo-magnetic Disturbances (GMD): Monitoring, Mitigation, and Next Steps  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The North American power grid may be increasingly susceptible to the effects of geo-magnetic disturbances (GMDs) caused by solar storms. Without adequate steps to mitigate these effects, severe GMDs may pose a risk to power system reliability. This report summarizes information that industry experts and North American utilities presented at a recent NERC workshop on GMD mitigation and related GMD topics. It supplements this information with a review of the latest GMD literature to provide an up-to-date s...

2011-12-30T23:59:59.000Z

457

Geomagnetic Disturbance (GMD) News and Observer, Issue 5  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Welcome to the fifth issue of our newsletter, GMD News and Observer. Published approximately quarterly, this newsletter provides progress reports and insights for the industry on the geomagnetic disturbance (GMD) area. This issue includes an update from NERC on its GMD Task Force work, a summary of a soon-to-be-published EPRI report on the impact of GICs on the North American Eastern and Western Interconnects, and noteworthy news, including the recent FERC final rulemaking on ...

2013-08-19T23:59:59.000Z

458

All Hazard Awareness Employee Pocket Guide  

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

Hazard Hazard Awareness Employee Pocket Guide produced by Emergency Services Program For emergencies dial x7911 911 from cell phones berkeley lab Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 2 Emergency Preparedness Response FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE x7911 911 from cell phones Employee Pocket Guide 3 FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE x7911 911 from cell phones Employee Emergency Response Expectations Before an emergency: * Accept personal responsibility for your own safety. * Prepare your personal/family emergency plan. * Review your Building Emergency Plan (BEP) or Emergency Response Guide. * Know the location of all your building's exits and Assembly Areas. * Know the specific hazards in your area and the response procedures for each hazard. * Understand how to report an emergency.

459

Enhancing Railroad Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety  

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

Railroad Hazardous g Railroad Hazardous g Materials Transportation Safety Kevin R. Blackwell Kevin R. Blackwell Kevin R. Blackwell Kevin R. Blackwell Radioactive Materials Program Manager Radioactive Materials Program Manager H d M t i l Di i i H d M t i l Di i i Hazmat Hazardous Materials Division Hazardous Materials Division Federal Railroad Administration Federal Railroad Administration Presentation for the Presentation for the DOE NTSF Meeting DOE NTSF Meeting May 10 May 10- -12, 2011 12, 2011 Our Regulated Community * More than 550 l d railroads * 170,000 miles of track * 220,000 employees * 1.3 million railcars * 20,000 locomotives Hazmat * 3,500 chemical shippers * Roughly 2 Million Roughly 2 Million annual HM shipments HM-232E Introduction * Notice of Proposed Rulemaking d b * Issued December 21, 2006 * Int