Powered by Deep Web Technologies
Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

Facility Disposition Safety Strategy RM | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Facility Disposition Safety Strategy RM Facility Disposition Safety Strategy RM The Facility Disposition Safety Strategy (FDSS) Review Module is a tool that assists DOE federal...

2

Facility Disposition Safety Strategy RM  

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

Facility Disposition Safety Strategy Review Module Facility Disposition Safety Strategy Review Module March 2010 CD-0 O 0 OFFICE OF Facilit C CD-1 F ENVIRO Standard R ty Dispos Rev Critical Decis CD-2 M ONMENTAL Review Plan sition Saf view Module sion (CD) Ap CD March 2010 L MANAGE n (SRP) fety Strat e pplicability D-3 EMENT tegy CD-4 Post Ope eration Standard Review Plan, 2 nd Edition, March 2010 i FOREWORD The Standard Review Plan (SRP) 1 provides a consistent, predictable corporate review framework to ensure that issues and risks that could challenge the success of Office of Environmental Management (EM) projects are identified early and addressed proactively. The internal EM project review process encompasses key milestones established by DOE O 413.3A, Change 1, Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets, DOE-STD-1189-2008,

3

DOE-STD-1120-2005; Integration of Environment Safety and Health into Facility Disposition Activities  

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

20-2005 20-2005 Volume 1 of 2 April 2005 DOE STANDARD INTEGRATION OF ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY, AND HEALTH INTO FACILITY DISPOSITION ACTIVITIES Volume 1 of 2: Documented Safety Analysis for Decommissioning and Environmental Restoration Projects U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE TS i 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) 605-6000.

4

Integrated Facilities Disposition Program  

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

Facilities Facilities Disposition Program Tank Waste Corporate Board Meeting at ORNL Sharon Robinson Dirk Van Hoesen Robert Jubin Brad Patton July 29, 2009 2 Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy The Integrated Facility Disposition Program (IFDP) addresses the remaining EM Scope at both ORNL and Y-12 Cost Range: $7 - $14B Schedule: 26 Years 3 Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy Scope of work * Treatment and disposition of legacy materials and waste * D&D 327 (1.5 M ft 2 ) excess facilities generating >2 M yd 3 debris * Soil and groundwater remedial actions generating >1 M yd 3 soils * Facilities surveillance and maintenance * Reconfiguration of waste management facilities * Ongoing waste management operations * Project management

5

Major Risk Factors Integrated Facility Disposition Project -...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Integrated Facility Disposition Project - Oak Ridge Major Risk Factors Integrated Facility Disposition Project - Oak Ridge Full Document and Summary Versions are available for...

6

Facility Safety  

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

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

1996-10-24T23:59:59.000Z

7

Facility Safety  

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

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

1995-11-16T23:59:59.000Z

8

Facility Safety  

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

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

2000-11-20T23:59:59.000Z

9

Summary - Major Risk Factors Integrated Facility Disposition...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

& ORNL, Oak Ridge, TN EM Project: Integrated Facility Disposition Project (IFDP) ETR Report Date: August 2008 ETR-15 United States Department of Energy Office of Environmental...

10

Facility Safety  

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

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

2005-12-22T23:59:59.000Z

11

Facility Safety  

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

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

2005-12-22T23:59:59.000Z

12

Facility Safety  

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

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

1995-10-13T23:59:59.000Z

13

Facility Safety  

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

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

2012-12-04T23:59:59.000Z

14

Facility Safety  

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

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

2002-05-20T23:59:59.000Z

15

Facility Safety  

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

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

2013-06-21T23:59:59.000Z

16

Assessment of the Integrated Facility Disposition Project at Oak Ridge  

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

Assessment of the Integrated Facility Disposition Project at Oak Assessment of the Integrated Facility Disposition Project at Oak Ridge National Laboratory & Y-12 for Transfer of Facilities & Materials to EM Assessment of the Integrated Facility Disposition Project at Oak Ridge National Laboratory & Y-12 for Transfer of Facilities & Materials to EM In December 2007, the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (EM-1) invited the DOE Program Secretarial Offices (PSOs) of Nuclear Energy (NE), Science (SC), and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to propose facilities and legacy waste for transfer to Environmental Management (EM) for final disposition or deactivation and decommissioning (D&D). Assessment of the Integrated Facility Disposition Project at Oak Ridge National Laboratory & Y-12 for Transfer of Facilities & Materials to EM

17

Assessment of the Integrated Facility Disposition Project at Oak Ridge  

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

the Integrated Facility Disposition Project at Oak the Integrated Facility Disposition Project at Oak Ridge National Laboratory & Y-12 for Transfer of Facilities & Materials to EM Assessment of the Integrated Facility Disposition Project at Oak Ridge National Laboratory & Y-12 for Transfer of Facilities & Materials to EM In December 2007, the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (EM-1) invited the DOE Program Secretarial Offices (PSOs) of Nuclear Energy (NE), Science (SC), and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to propose facilities and legacy waste for transfer to Environmental Management (EM) for final disposition or deactivation and decommissioning (D&D). Assessment of the Integrated Facility Disposition Project at Oak Ridge National Laboratory & Y-12 for Transfer of Facilities & Materials to EM

18

Major Risk Factors to the Integrated Facility Disposition Project  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The scope of the Integrated Facility Disposition Project (IFDP) needs to comprehensively address a wide range of environmental management risks atthe Oak Ridge Reservation (ORO).

19

Hight-Level Waste & Facilities Disposition  

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

High-Level Waste (HLW) and Facilities Disposition Final High-Level Waste (HLW) and Facilities Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement You are here: DOE-ID Home > Environmental Management > Idaho High-Level Waste (HLW) Table of Contents Documents are in the Adobe® PDF format and require the Adobe® Reader to access them. If you do not currently have the Acrobat Reader, you can download the Free Adobe Reader at http://get.adobe.com/reader/ Icon link to Free Adobe Acrobat Reader software * Large chapters broken down into sections Summary* Cover [ Adobe Acrobat File Size 1.48 MB] Section, 1.0 [ Adobe Acrobat File Size 612 KB] Section, 2.0 [ Adobe Acrobat File Size 251 KB] Sections, 3.0 - 3.2.1a [ Adobe Acrobat File Size 1.4 MB] Section, 3.2.1b [ Adobe Acrobat File Size 2.0 MB] Sections, 3.2.2 - 4.0 [ Adobe Acrobat File Size 1.4 MB]

20

EIS-0287: Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities Disposition Final...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

: Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement, EIS-0287 (September 2002) EIS-0287: Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities Disposition...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

DOE 2010 Safety and Security Reform Project - HSS Directives Disposition and Status (December 4, 2012)  

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

10 Safety and Security Reform Project - HSS Directives Disposition and Status (December 4, 2012) 10 Safety and Security Reform Project - HSS Directives Disposition and Status (December 4, 2012) Page 1 of 3 2010 HSS Directives Disposition Status Secretary of Energy Notice SEN-35-91, Nuclear Safety Policy Revise Complete - see Policy 420.1. Order 5400.5, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment Revise Complete - see Order 458.1. Order 5480.19, Conduct of Operations Requirements for DOE Facilities Revise Complete - see Order 422.1. Order 5480.20A, Personnel Selection, Training, Qualification, and Certification Requirements Revise Complete - see Order 426.2. Order 5480.30, Nuclear Reactor Design Criteria Re-certify Complete - re-certified. Manual 140.1-1B, Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Re-certify Complete - re-certified.

22

CRAD, Facility Safety- Nuclear Facility Safety Basis  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

23

Major Risk Factors to the Integrated Facility Disposition Project  

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

Oak Ridge Reservation Tennessee Major Risk Factors to the Integrated Facility Disposition Project (IFDP) Challenge The scope of the Integrated Facility Disposition Project (IFDP) needs to comprehensively address a wide range of environmental management risks at the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORO). These include: environmental remediation, regulatory compliance, deactivation and decommissioning (D&D) activities, and disposition of legacy materials and waste, along with the ongoing modernization, reindustrialization, and reconfiguration initiatives at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory and at the Y-12 National Security Complex. The balancing of the broad nature of these activities and issues at ORO are a key challenge for the IFDP especially since their interrelationship is not always obvious.

24

Review of the Facility Centered Assessment of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Waste Disposition Project, September 2011  

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

Facility Centered Assessment of the Facility Centered Assessment of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Waste Disposition Project September 2011 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1 2.0 Background ............................................................................................................................ 1 3.0 Results .................................................................................................................................... 2 4.0 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 7

25

Review of the Facility Centered Assessment of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Waste Disposition Project, September 2011  

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

Facility Centered Assessment of the Facility Centered Assessment of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Waste Disposition Project September 2011 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1 2.0 Background ............................................................................................................................ 1 3.0 Results .................................................................................................................................... 2 4.0 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 7

26

FACILITY SAFETY (FS)  

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

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

27

Nuclear Facility Safety Basis  

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

Safety Basis Safety Basis FUNCTIONAL AREA GOAL: A fully compliant Nuclear Facility Safety Basis. Program is implemented and maintained across the site. REQUIREMENTS:  10 CFR 830 Subpart B Guidance:  DOE STD 3009  DOE STD 1104  DOE STD  DOE G 421.1-2 Implementation Guide For Use in Developing Documented Safety Analyses To Meet Subpart B Of 10 CFR 830  DOE G 423.1-1 Implementation Guide For Use In Developing Technical Safety Requirements  DOE G 424.1-1 Implementation Guide For Use In Addressing Unreviewed Safety Question Requirements Performance Objective 1: Contractor Program Documentation The site contractor has developed an up-to-date, comprehensive, compliant, documented nuclear facility safety basis and associated implementing mechanisms and procedures for all required nuclear facilities and activities (10 CFR

28

CRAD, Facility Safety - Nuclear Facility Safety Basis | Department of  

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

CRAD, Facility Safety - Nuclear Facility Safety Basis CRAD, Facility Safety - Nuclear Facility Safety Basis CRAD, Facility Safety - Nuclear Facility Safety Basis A section of Appendix C to DOE G 226.1-2 "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities." Consists of Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) that can be used for assessment of a contractor's Nuclear Facility Safety Basis. CRADs provide a recommended approach and the types of information to gather to assess elements of a DOE contractor's programs. CRAD, Facility Safety - Nuclear Facility Safety Basis More Documents & Publications CRAD, Facility Safety - Unreviewed Safety Question Requirements Site Visit Report, Livermore Site Office - February 2011 FAQS Job Task Analyses - Nuclear Safety Specialist

29

DOE Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

DOE Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Facility Disposition Activities DOE Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Facility Disposition...

30

CRAD, Facility Safety - Unreviewed Safety Question Requirements...  

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

a recommended approach and the types of information to gather to assess elements of a DOE contractor's programs. CRAD, Facility Safety - Unreviewed Safety Question Requirements...

31

Preliminary siting characterization Salt Disposition Facility - Site B  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A siting and reconnaissance geotechnical program has been completed in S-Area at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. This program investigated the subsurface conditions for the area known as ``Salt Disposition Facility (SDF), Site B'' located northeast of H-Area and within the S-Area. Data acquired from the Site B investigation includes both field exploration and laboratory test data.

Wyatt, D.

2000-01-04T23:59:59.000Z

32

Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs establishes nuclear safety requirements related to safety management programs that are essential to the safety of DOE nuclear facilities.

33

Major Risk Factors Integrated Facility Disposition Project - Oak Ridge  

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

O O O f f f f i i c c e e o o f f E E n n v v i i r r o o n n m m e e n n t t a a l l M M a a n n a a g g e e m m e e n n t t ( ( E E M M ) ) E E n n g g i i n n e e e e r r i i n n g g a a n n d d T T e e c c h h n n o o l l o o g g y y External Technical Review (ETR) Report Major Risk Factors Integrated Facility Disposition Project (IFDP) Oak Ridge, TN AUGUST 1, 2008 Acknowledgement The External Technical Review of the Integrated Facility Disposition Project was conducted simultaneous to other assessments and visits. The ETR Team wishes to note the outstanding support received from all parties involved in the review, including the DOE Oak Ridge Office, the National Nuclear Security Administration Y-12 Site Office, UT-Battelle, B&W Y-12, and the Professional Project Services, Inc. (Pro2Serve). The ETR Team feels compelled to note, and

34

FACILITY SAFETY (FS)  

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

OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE OP.1 - (Core Requirements 4 and 6) Sufficient numbers of qualified personnel are available to conduct and support operations. Adequate facilities and equipment are available to ensure operational support services are adequate for operations. The level of knowledge of managers, operations personnel, and support personnel is adequate based on reviews of examinations and examination results and selected interviews of personnel. (Old Core Requirements 3, 8, 13, and 19) Criteria 1. Minimum staffing requirements for safe operations have been established for operations personnel, supervisors, and managers. These staffing levels are met and are consistent with the safety basis requirements and assumptions. (DOE O 5480.19; WPF DSA) 2. All ES&H matrix support functions are identified for system operations. Adequate

35

Implementation Guide for Surveillance and Maintenance during Facility Transition and Disposition  

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

As DOE facilities complete mission operations and are declared excess, they pass into a transition phase that ultimately prepares them for disposition. The disposition phase of a facility's life cycle usually includes deactivation, decommissioning, and surveillance and maintenance (S&M) activities.

1999-09-29T23:59:59.000Z

36

EIS-0287: Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities Disposition Final  

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

Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities Disposition Final Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement, EIS-0287 (September 2002) EIS-0287: Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement, EIS-0287 (September 2002) This EIS analyzes the potential environmental consequences of alternatives for managing high-level waste (HLW) calcine, mixed transuranic waste/sodium bearing waste (SBW) and newly generated liquid waste at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) in liquid and solid forms. This EIS also analyzes alternatives for the final disposition of HLW management facilities at the INEEL after their missions are completed. Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement, DOE/EIS-0287 (September 2002)

37

EIS-0287: Idaho High-Level Waste & Facilities Disposition | Department of  

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

7: Idaho High-Level Waste & Facilities Disposition 7: Idaho High-Level Waste & Facilities Disposition EIS-0287: Idaho High-Level Waste & Facilities Disposition SUMMARY This EIS analyzes the potential environmental consequences of alternatives for managing high-level waste (HLW) calcine, mixed transuranic waste/sodium bearing waste (SBW) and newly generated liquid waste at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) in liquid and solid forms. This EIS also analyzes alternatives for the final disposition of HLW management facilities at the INEEL after their missions are completed. PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITIES None available at this time. DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD January 12, 2010 EIS-0287: Amended Record of Decision Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities Disposition January 4, 2010

38

Master EM Project Definition Rating Index - Facility Disposition Definitions  

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

43 43 Master EM Project Definition Rating Index - Facility Disposition Definitions The following definitions describe the criteria required to achieve a maximum rating or maturity value of 5. It should be assumed that maturity values of 1-5 represent a subjective assessment of the quality of definition and/or the degree to which the end-state or maximum criteria have been met, or the product has been completed in accordance with the definition of maturity values. Rating Element Criteria for Maximum Rating COST A1 Cost Estimate A cost estimate has been developed and formally approved by DOE and is the basis for the cost baselines. The cost estimate is a reasonable approximation of Total Project Costs, and covers all phases of the project. The estimate is prepared in

39

DOE Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Facility  

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

Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Facility Disposition Activities DOE Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Facility Disposition Activities The original release of DOE-STD-1120-98 provided integrated safety management guidance for enhancing worker, public, and environmental protection during all facility disposition activities. Volume One of this Standard has been revised to provide a Department of Energy (DOE) approved methodology for preparing a Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) for decommissioning of nuclear facilities, as well as environmental restoration activities that involve work not done within a permanent structure. Methodologies provided in this Standard are intended to be compliant with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part

40

DOE Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Facility  

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

DOE Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into DOE Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Facility Disposition Activities DOE Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Facility Disposition Activities The original release of DOE-STD-1120-98 provided integrated safety management guidance for enhancing worker, public, and environmental protection during all facility disposition activities. Volume One of this Standard has been revised to provide a Department of Energy (DOE) approved methodology for preparing a Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) for decommissioning of nuclear facilities, as well as environmental restoration activities that involve work not done within a permanent structure. Methodologies provided in this Standard are intended to be compliant with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

Safety of Accelerator Facilities - DOE Directives, Delegations...  

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

Health, Environmental Protection, Facility Authorization, Safety The order defines accelerators and establishes accelerator specific safety requirements and approval authorities...

42

Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety...  

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

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting - October 2012 Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting - October 2012 October...

43

EA-1410: Proposed Disposition of the Omega West Facility at Los Alamos  

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

10: Proposed Disposition of the Omega West Facility at Los 10: Proposed Disposition of the Omega West Facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico EA-1410: Proposed Disposition of the Omega West Facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico SUMMARY This EA evaluates the environmental impacts for the proposal to remove the Omega West Facility and the remaining support structures from Los Alamos Canyon at the U.S. Department of Energy Los Alamos National Laboratory in Los Alamos, New Mexico. PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITIES None available at this time. DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD March 28, 2002 EA-1410: Finding of No Significant Impact Proposed Disposition of the Omega West Facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico March 28, 2002 EA-1410: Final Environmental Assessment

44

FACILITY SAFETY (FS)  

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

and effectively implemented, with line management responsibility for control of safety. (Old Core Requirement 11) Criteria 1. Operations and support personnel fully...

45

Safety of Accelerator Facilities  

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

To establish accelerator-specific safety requirements which, when supplemented by other applicable safety and health requirements, will serve to prevent injuries and illnesses associated with Department of Energy (DOE) or National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) accelerator operations. Cancels DOE O 420.2. Canceled by DOE O 420.2B.

2001-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

46

Safety of Accelerator Facilities  

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

To establish accelerator-specific safety requirements which, when supplemented by other applicable safety and health requirements, will serve to prevent injuries and illnesses associated with Department of Energy (DOE) or National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) accelerator operations. Cancels DOE O 420.2A. Certified 5-13-08. Canceled by DOE O 420.2C.

2004-07-23T23:59:59.000Z

47

Safety of Accelerator Facilities  

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

The order defines accelerators and establishes accelerator specific safety requirements and approval authorities which, when supplemented by other applicable safety and health requirements, promote safe operations to ensure protection of workers, the public, and the environment. Cancels DOE O 420.2B.

2011-07-21T23:59:59.000Z

48

CRAD, Facility Safety- Documented Safety Analysis  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

49

Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs: Nuclear Facility Training  

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

Safety (HS-30) Safety (HS-30) Office of Nuclear Safety Home » Directives » Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Rules » Nuclear Safety Workshops Technical Standards Program » Search » Approved Standards » Recently Approved » RevCom for TSP » Monthly Status Reports » Archive » Feedback DOE Nuclear Safety Research & Development Program Office of Nuclear Safety Basis & Facility Design (HS-31) Office of Nuclear Safety Basis & Facility Design - About Us » Nuclear Policy Technical Positions/Interpretations » Risk Assessment Working Group » Criticality Safety » DOE O 420.1C Facility Safety » Beyond Design Basis Events Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs (HS-32) Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs - About Us » Facility Representative Program

50

Assessment of the Integrated Facility Disposition Project at Oak Ridge National Laboratory & Y-12 for Transfer of Facilities & Materials to EM  

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

Integrated Facilities Disposition Project Integrated Facilities Disposition Project Technical Assistance Page 1 of 2 Oak Ridge National Laboratory Y-12 National Security Complex Tennessee Tennessee Assessment of the Integrated Facility Disposition Project at ORNL & Y-12 for Transfer of Facilities & Materials to EM Challenge In December 2007, the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (EM-1) invited the DOE Program Secretarial Offices (PSOs) of Nuclear Energy (NE), Science (SC), and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to propose facilities and legacy waste for transfer to Environmental Management (EM) for final disposition or deactivation and decommissioning (D&D). In parallel with the EM-1 initiative, the Oak Ridge Reservation was conducting a Critical

51

340 waste handling facility interim safety basis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document presents an interim safety basis for the 340 Waste Handling Facility classifying the 340 Facility as a Hazard Category 3 facility. The hazard analysis quantifies the operating safety envelop for this facility and demonstrates that the facility can be operated without a significant threat to onsite or offsite people.

VAIL, T.S.

1999-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

52

340 Waste handling facility interim safety basis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document presents an interim safety basis for the 340 Waste Handling Facility classifying the 340 Facility as a Hazard Category 3 facility. The hazard analysis quantifies the operating safety envelop for this facility and demonstrates that the facility can be operated without a significant threat to onsite or offsite people.

Stordeur, R.T.

1996-10-04T23:59:59.000Z

53

Evaluation of existing United States` facilities for use as a mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel fabrication facility for plutonium disposition  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A number of existing US facilities were evaluated for use as a mixed-oxide fuel fabrication facility for plutonium disposition. These facilities include the Fuels Material Examination Facility (FMEF) at Hanford, the Washington Power Supply Unit 1 (WNP-1) facility at Hanford, the Barnwell Nuclear Fuel Plant (BNFP) at Barnwell, SC, the Fuel Processing Facility (FPF) at Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL), the Device Assembly Facility (DAF) at the Nevada Test Site (NTS), and the P-reactor at the Savannah River Site (SRS). The study consisted of evaluating each facility in terms of available process space, available building support systems (i.e., HVAC, security systems, existing process equipment, etc.), available regional infrastructure (i.e., emergency response teams, protective force teams, available transportation routes, etc.), and ability to integrate the MOX fabrication process into the facility in an operationally-sound manner that requires a minimum amount of structural modifications.

Beard, C.A.; Buksa, J.J.; Chidester, K.; Eaton, S.L.; Motley, F.E.; Siebe, D.A.

1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

54

CRAD, New Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis and Technical...  

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

New Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis and Technical Safety Requirements - December 2, 2014 (EA CRAD 31-07, Rev. 0) CRAD, New Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis...

55

Radiological Safety Training for Accelerator Facilities  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

HANDBOOK RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY TRAINING FOR ACCELERATOR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public...

56

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

57

Impacts of criticality safety on hot fuel examination facility operations  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Hot Fuel Examination Facility (HFEF) complex comprises four large hot cells. These cells are used to support the nation's nuclear energy program, especially the liquid-metal fast breeder reactor, by providing nondestructive and destructive testing of irradiated reactor fuels and furnishing the hot cell services required for operation of Experimental Breeder Reactor II (EBR-II). Because it is a research rather than a production facility, HFEF assignments are varied and change from time to time to meet the requirements of our experimenters. Such a variety of operations presents many challenges, especially for nuclear criticality safety. The following operations are reviewed to assure that accidental criticality is not possible, and that all rules and regulations are met: transportation, temporary storage, examinations, and disposition.

Garcia, A.S.; Courtney, J.C.; Bacca, J.P.

1985-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

58

Facilities Management | Department of Energy  

Energy Savers [EERE]

and dispositions NE owned facilities and capabilities. The Idaho Site-Wide Safeguards and Security program ensures the safety, operability, and security of these...

59

Idaho Waste Treatment Facility Improves Worker Safety and Efficiency...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Idaho Waste Treatment Facility Improves Worker Safety and Efficiency, Saves Taxpayer Dollars Idaho Waste Treatment Facility Improves Worker Safety and Efficiency, Saves Taxpayer...

60

Nano Research Facility Lab Safety Manual Nano Research Facility  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

1 Nano Research Facility Lab Safety Manual Nano Research Facility: Weining Wang Office: Brauer rules and procedures (a) Accidents and spills for chemicals Not containing Nano-Materials Spills of non for chemicals Containing Nano-Materials In a fume hood small spills of nano-materials in a liquid may

Subramanian, Venkat

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

Process Guide for the Identification and Disposition of S/CI or Defective Items at Department of Energy Facilities  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Process Guide for the Identification and Disposition of S/CI or Defective Items was developed to help DOE facilities to collect, screen, communicate information, and dispose of S/CI or defective items that could potentially impact operations at DOE facilities.

62

Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Rules | Department of Energy  

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

Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Rules Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Rules DOE provides safety requirements and guidance in a number of forms. One form in which we publish...

63

Office of Nuclear Safety Basis and Facility Design  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

64

Safety of Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Full text of publication follows: ensuring safety during all stages of facility life cycle is a widely recognised responsibility of the operators, implemented under the supervision of the regulatory body and other competent authorities. As the majority of the facilities worldwide are still in operation or shutdown, there is no substantial experience in decommissioning and evaluation of safety during decommissioning in majority of Member States. The need for cooperation and exchange of experience and good practices on ensuring and evaluating safety of decommissioning was one of the outcomes of the Berlin conference in 2002. On this basis during the last three years IAEA initiated a number of international projects that can assist countries, in particular small countries with limited resources. The main IAEA international projects addressing safety during decommissioning are: (i) DeSa Project on Evaluation and Demonstration of Safety during Decommissioning; (ii) R{sup 2}D{sup 2}P project on Research Reactors Decommissioning Demonstration Project; and (iii) Project on Evaluation and Decommissioning of Former Facilities that used Radioactive Material in Iraq. This paper focuses on the DeSa Project activities on (i) development of a harmonised methodology for safety assessment for decommissioning; (ii) development of a procedure for review of safety assessments; (iii) development of recommendations on application of the graded approach to the performance and review of safety assessments; and (iv) application of the methodology and procedure to the selected real facilities with different complexities and hazard potentials (a nuclear power plant, a research reactor and a nuclear laboratory). The paper also outlines the DeSa Project outcomes and planned follow-up activities. It also summarises the main objectives and activities of the Iraq Project and introduces the R{sup 2}D{sup 2} Project, which is a subject of a complementary paper.

Batandjieva, B.; Warnecke, E.; Coates, R. [International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna (Austria)

2008-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

65

National Ignition Facility Project Site Safety Program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Safety Program for the National Ignition Facility (NIF) presents safety protocols and requirements that management and workers shall follow to assure a safe and healthful work environment during activities performed on the NIF Project site. The NIF Project Site Safety Program (NPSSP) requires that activities at the NIF Project site be performed in accordance with the ''LLNL ES&H Manual'' and the augmented set of controls and processes described in this NIF Project Site Safety Program. Specifically, this document: (1) Defines the fundamental NIF site safety philosophy. (2) Defines the areas covered by this safety program (see Appendix B). (3) Identifies management roles and responsibilities. (4) Defines core safety management processes. (5) Identifies NIF site-specific safety requirements. This NPSSP sets forth the responsibilities, requirements, rules, policies, and regulations for workers involved in work activities performed on the NIF Project site. Workers are required to implement measures to create a universal awareness that promotes safe practice at the work site and will achieve NIF management objectives in preventing accidents and illnesses. ES&H requirements are consistent with the ''LLNL ES&H Manual''. This NPSSP and implementing procedures (e.g., Management Walkabout, special work procedures, etc.,) are a comprehensive safety program that applies to NIF workers on the NIF Project site. The NIF Project site includes the B581/B681 site and support areas shown in Appendix B.

Dun, C

2003-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

66

CRAD, Safety Basis - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility | Department...  

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

CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility CRAD, Conduct of Operations - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility CRAD, Management - Idaho...

67

ACCELERATOR TEST FACILITY SAFETY ASSESSMENT DOCUMENT TABLE OF...  

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

Revised: March 1, 2010 i ACCELERATOR TEST FACILITY SAFETY ASSESSMENT DOCUMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE FACILITY ......

68

Interim Safety Basis for Fuel Supply Shutdown Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This ISB, in conjunction with the IOSR, provides 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 or the facility is shut down. It is concluded that the risks associated with tha current and anticipated mode of the facility, uranium disposition, clean up, and transition activities required for permanent closure, are within risk guidelines.

BENECKE, M.W.

2000-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

69

Nonreactor Nuclear Safety Design Criteria and Explosive Safety Criteria Guide for Use with DOE O 420.1, Facility Safety  

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

This Guide provides guidance on the application of requirements for nonreactor nuclear facilities and explosives facilities of Department of Energy (DOE) O 420.1, Facility Safety, Section 4.1, Nuclear and Explosives Safety Design Criteria. No cancellation.

2000-03-28T23:59:59.000Z

70

Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities  

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

145-2008 145-2008 April 2008 DOE HANDBOOK Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE This document has been reproduced directly 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. Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities DOE-HDBK-1145-2008 Program Management Guide

71

Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities  

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

NOT MEASUREMENT NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-HDBK-1145-2013 March 2013 DOE HANDBOOK Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities U.S. Department of Energy TRNG-0061 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 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. ii Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities DOE-HDBK-1145-2013 Program Management Foreword

72

CANISTER HANDLING FACILITY CRITICALITY SAFETY CALCULATIONS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This design calculation revises and updates the previous criticality evaluation for the canister handling, transfer and staging operations to be performed in the Canister Handling Facility (CHF) documented in BSC [Bechtel SAIC Company] 2004 [DIRS 167614]. The purpose of the calculation is to demonstrate that the handling operations of canisters performed in the CHF meet the nuclear criticality safety design criteria specified in the ''Project Design Criteria (PDC) Document'' (BSC 2004 [DIRS 171599], Section 4.9.2.2), the nuclear facility safety requirement in ''Project Requirements Document'' (Canori and Leitner 2003 [DIRS 166275], p. 4-206), the functional/operational nuclear safety requirement in the ''Project Functional and Operational Requirements'' document (Curry 2004 [DIRS 170557], p. 75), and the functional nuclear criticality safety requirements described in the ''Canister Handling Facility Description Document'' (BSC 2004 [DIRS 168992], Sections 3.1.1.3.4.13 and 3.2.3). Specific scope of work contained in this activity consists of updating the Category 1 and 2 event sequence evaluations as identified in the ''Categorization of Event Sequences for License Application'' (BSC 2004 [DIRS 167268], Section 7). The CHF is limited in throughput capacity to handling sealed U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW) canisters, defense high-level radioactive waste (DHLW), naval canisters, multicanister overpacks (MCOs), vertical dual-purpose canisters (DPCs), and multipurpose canisters (MPCs) (if and when they become available) (BSC 2004 [DIRS 168992], p. 1-1). It should be noted that the design and safety analyses of the naval canisters are the responsibility of the U.S. Department of the Navy (Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program) and will not be included in this document. In addition, this calculation is valid for the current design of the CHF and may not reflect the ongoing design evolution of the facility. However, it is anticipated that design changes to the facility layout will have little or no impact on the criticality results and/or conclusions presented in this document. This calculation is subject to the ''Quality Assurance Requirements and Description'' (DOE 2004 [DIRS 171539]) because the CHF is included in the Q-List (BSC 2005 [DIRS 171190], p. A-3) as an item important to safety. This calculation is prepared in accordance with AP-3.12Q, ''Design Calculations and Analyses'' [DIRS 168413].

C.E. Sanders

2005-04-07T23:59:59.000Z

73

Radiological Safety Training for Accelerator Facilities  

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

TS TS NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-HDBK-1108-2002 May 2002 Reaffirmation with Change Notice 2 July 2013 DOE HANDBOOK RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY TRAINING FOR ACCELERATOR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document is available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web Site at http://www.hss.energy.gov/nuclearsafety/techstds/ Change Notice No.2 Radiological Training for Accelerator Facilities Page/Section Change Throughout the document: Program Management Guide Instructor's Guide Student's Guide "Shall" and "Must" statements Revised to: Program Management Instructor's Material Student's Material Reworded to non-mandatory language unless associated with a requirement

74

Compressed Gas Safety for Experimental Fusion Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Lee C. Cadwallader

2004-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

75

Safety Plan for County and District Personnel and Facilities  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Safety Plan for County and District Personnel and Facilities Table of Contents Purpose and Scope of the Plan 2 Governance and Safety Committees Defined 2 Part I: Accident Reporting and Investigation 4 Processes 5 · Additional Training Resources 6 Part III: Safety Requirements for WSU Extension Facilities 7

Collins, Gary S.

76

Accelerator Facility Safety Implementation Guide for DOE O 420.2B, Safety of Accelerator Facilities  

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

This document is an aid to understanding and meeting the requirements of DOE O 420.2B, Safety of Accelerator Facilities, dated 7/23/04. It does not impose requirements beyond those stated in that Order or any other DOE Order. No cancellation.

2005-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

77

Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public  

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

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting - October 2012 Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting - October 2012 October 2012 Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting on the Status of Integration of Safety Into the Design of the Uranium Processing Facility [HIAR-Y-12-2012-10-02] The Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) observed the public hearing of the DNFSB review of the UPF project status for integrating safety into design. The meeting was broken into three parts: a panel discussion and questioning of National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) oversight and execution; a panel discussion and questioning of the B&W Y-12 Technical Services, LLC (B&W Y-12) design project team leadership; and an open public

78

Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public  

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

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting - October 2012 Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting - October 2012 October 2012 Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting on the Status of Integration of Safety Into the Design of the Uranium Processing Facility [HIAR-Y-12-2012-10-02] The Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) observed the public hearing of the DNFSB review of the UPF project status for integrating safety into design. The meeting was broken into three parts: a panel discussion and questioning of National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) oversight and execution; a panel discussion and questioning of the B&W Y-12 Technical Services, LLC (B&W Y-12) design project team leadership; and an open public

79

Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public  

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

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting - October 2012 Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting - October 2012 October 2012 Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting on the Status of Integration of Safety Into the Design of the Uranium Processing Facility [HIAR-Y-12-2012-10-02] The Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) observed the public hearing of the DNFSB review of the UPF project status for integrating safety into design. The meeting was broken into three parts: a panel discussion and questioning of National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) oversight and execution; a panel discussion and questioning of the B&W Y-12 Technical Services, LLC (B&W Y-12) design project team leadership; and an open public

80

Safety Culture And Best Practices At Japan's Fusion Research Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Safety Monitor Joint Working Group (JWG) is one of the magnetic fusion research collaborations between the US Department of Energy and the government of Japan. Visits by occupational safety personnel are made to participating institutions on a biennial basis. In the 2013 JWG visit of US representatives to Japan, the JWG members noted a number of good safety practices in the safety walkthroughs. These good practices and safety culture topics are discussed in this paper. The JWG hopes that these practices for worker safety can be adopted at other facilities. It is a well-known, but unquantified, safety principle that well run, safe facilities are more productive and efficient than other facilities (Rule, 2009). Worker safety, worker productivity, and high quality in facility operation all complement each other (Mottel, 1995).

Rule, K. [Princeton Plasma Physics Lab., Princeton, NJ (United States); King, M. [General Atomics, San Diego, CA (United States); Takase, Y. [Univ. of Tokyo (Japan); Oshima, Y. [Univ. of Tokyo (Japan); Nishimura, K. [National Institute for Fusion Science, Toki (Japan); Sukegawa, A. [Japan Atomic Energy Agency, Naka (Japan)

2014-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

Safety Culture and Best Practices at Japan's Fusion Research Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Safety Monitor Joint Working Group (JWG) is one of the magnetic fusion research collaborations between the US Department of Energy and the government of Japan. Visits by occupational safety personnel are made to participating institutions on a biennial basis. In the 2013 JWG visit of US representatives to Japan, the JWG members noted a number of good safety practices in the safety walkthroughs. These good practices and safety culture topics are discussed in this paper. The JWG hopes that these practices for worker safety can be adopted at other facilities. It is a well-known, but unquantified, safety principle that well run, safe facilities are more productive and efficient than other facilities (Rule, 2009). Worker safety, worker productivity, and high quality in facility operation all complement each other (Mottel, 1995).

Rule, Keith [PPPL

2014-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

82

CRAD, Nuclear Facility Safety System - September 25, 2009 | Department...  

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

Facility Safety System Functionality Inspection Criteria, Inspection Activities, and Lines of Inquiry (HSS CRAD 64-17, Rev 0 ) This document establishes the protocols used by...

83

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board's enabling legislation  

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

ENABLING STATUTE OF THE ENABLING STATUTE OF THE DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD 42 U.S.C. § 2286 et seq. NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT, FISCAL YEAR 1989 (Pub. L. No. 100-456, September 29, 1988), AS AMENDED BY NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT, FISCAL YEAR 1991 (Pub. L. No. 101-510, November 5, 1990), NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FISCAL YEARS 1992 AND 1993 (Pub. L. No. 102-190, December 5, 1991), ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 1992 (Pub. L. No. 102-486, October 24, 1992), NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FISCAL YEAR 1994 (Pub. L. No. 103-160, November 30, 1993), FEDERAL REPORTS ELIMINATION ACT OF 1998 (Pub. L. No. 105-362, November 10, 1998), NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FISCAL YEAR 2001 (Pub. L. No. 106-398, October 30, 2000), AND

84

Radiological Safety Training for Uranium Facilities  

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

DOE HDBK-1113-2008 DOE HDBK-1113-2008 April 2008 DOE HANDBOOK RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY TRAINING FOR URANIUM FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy FSC 6910 Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-HDBK-1113-2008 ii This document is available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web Site at http://www.hss.energy.gov/nuclearsafety/techstds/ DOE-HDBK-1113-2008 iii Foreword This Handbook describes a recommended implementation process for additional training as outlined in DOE-STD-1098-99, Radiological Control (RCS). Its purpose is to assist those individuals, Department of Energy (DOE) employees, Managing and Operating (M&O) contractors, and Managing and Integrating

85

Nuclear and Facility Safety Directives | Department of Energy  

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

Nuclear Safety » Nuclear and Facility Safety Nuclear Safety » Nuclear and Facility Safety Directives Nuclear and Facility Safety Directives DOE Order (O) 252.1A, Technical Standards Program DOE O 252.1A promotes DOE's use of Voluntary Consensus Standards (VCS) as the primary method for application of technical standards and establishes and manages the DOE Technical Standards Program (TSP) including technical standards development, information, activities, issues, and interactions. HS-30 Contact: Jeff Feit DOE Policy (P) 420.1, Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy DOE P 420.1, documents the Department's nuclear safety policy to design, construct, operate, and decommission its nuclear facilities in a manner that ensures adequate protection of workers, the public, and the environment. HS-30 Contact: James O'Brien

86

Electrical Safety Assessment Plan--NNSA/NSO IOD Facility Representative,  

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

Electrical Safety Assessment Plan--NNSA/NSO IOD Facility Electrical Safety Assessment Plan--NNSA/NSO IOD Facility Representative, 12/03 Electrical Safety Assessment Plan--NNSA/NSO IOD Facility Representative, 12/03 An assessment of the Electrical Safety (ES) program at XXXX was conducted during the week of December XX-XX, 2003. The assessment team evaluated the program using the programmatic areas and specific Lines of Inquiry (LOI) contained in the approved Assessment plan provided. The team consisted of the Facility Representative from National Nuclear Security Administration, as well as ES, Subject Matter Expert support. The assessment plan identified 5 areas of review for Electrical Safety. An integrated process has been established to ensure electrical safety hazards are identified and that adequate controls are defined and

87

OAK RIDGE CERCLA DISPOSAL FACILITY ACHIEVES SAFETY MILESTONE | Department  

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

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

88

The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board's first decade  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Concern over the safety of the United States' defense nuclear reactors in the late 1980s led to congressional creation of an independent oversight board. The Defense Nuclear Facility Safeties Board (DNFSB) is responsible for overseeing safety issues at the U.S. Department of Energy's nuclear facilities and issuing recommendations on operations and safety at these facilities, which include South Carolina's Savannah River Site, Texas' Pantex facility, Colorado's Rocky Flats Depot, and others. This article provides an historical overview of the DNFSB's first decade and discusses its relationship and interaction with the Department of Energy and congressional oversight committees as well as the recommendations it has issued on nuclear safety. An assessment of DNFSB's future prospects concludes the article.

Bert Chapman

2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

89

Criticality Safety Evaluation of Hanford Tank Farms Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Data and calculations from previous criticality safety evaluations and analyses were used to evaluate criticality safety for the entire Tank Farms facility to support the continued waste storage mission. This criticality safety evaluation concludes that a criticality accident at the Tank Farms facility is an incredible event due to the existing form (chemistry) and distribution (neutron absorbers) of tank waste. Limits and controls for receipt of waste from other facilities and maintenance of tank waste condition are set forth to maintain the margin subcriticality in tank waste.

WEISS, E.V.

2000-12-15T23:59:59.000Z

90

Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board  

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

This Manual presents the process the Department of Energy will use to interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) and its staff. Cancels DOE M 140.1-1A.

2001-03-30T23:59:59.000Z

91

Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board  

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

The manual defines the process DOE will use to interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board and its staff. Canceled by DOE M 140.1-1A. Does not cancel other directives.

1996-12-30T23:59:59.000Z

92

Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board  

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

This Manual presents the process the Department of Energy will use to interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) and its staff. Cancels DOE M 140.1-1.

1999-01-26T23:59:59.000Z

93

Review and Approval of Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Documents (Documented Safety Analyses and Technical Safety Requirements)  

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

February 1996 February 1996 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 2 Date November 2005 DOE STANDARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF NUCLEAR FACILITY SAFETY BASIS DOCUMENTS (DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSES AND TECHNICAL SAFETY REQUIREMENTS) U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, DC 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 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 Adminis tration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000.

94

The Safety and Tritium Applied Research Facility  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Device, Facility, and Operation / Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Tritium Science and Technology Tsukuba, Japan November 12-16, 2001

R. A. Anderl; D. A. Petti; K. A. McCarthy; G. R. Longhurst

95

CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health- Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A section of Appendix C to DOE G 226.1-2 "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities." Consists of Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) used for a February 2006 Commencement of Operations assessment of the Occupational Safety and Industrial Hygiene programs at the MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility at the Idaho National Laboratory Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project.

96

CFN Operations and Safety Awareness (COSA) Checklist Proximal Probes Facility  

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

Proximal Probes Facility Proximal Probes Facility Building 735 This COSA form must be completed for all experimenters working in the CFN and must be submitted to the CFN User Office for badge access. CFN Safety Awareness Policy: Each user must be instructed in the safe procedures in CFN related activities. CFN Facility Laboratory personnel shall keep readily available all relevant instructions and safety literature. Employee/Guest Name Life/Guest Number Department/Division ES&H Coordinator/Ext. Facility Manager COSA Trainer Guest User Staff USER ADMINISTRATION Checked in at User Administration and has valid BNL ID badge Safety Approval Form (SAF) approved. Training requirements completed (Indicate additional training specified in SAF or ESR in lines provided below): Select ESRs

97

CFN Operations and Safety Awareness (COSA) Checklist Electronic Nanomaterials Facility  

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

Electronic Nanomaterials Facility Electronic Nanomaterials Facility Building 735 This COSA form must be completed for all experimenters working in the CFN and must be submitted to the CFN User Office for badge access. CFN Safety Awareness Policy: Each user must be instructed in the safe procedures in CFN related activities. CFN Facility Laboratory personnel shall keep readily available all relevant instructions and safety literature. Employee/Guest Name Life/Guest Number Department/Division ES&H Coordinator/Ext. Facility Manager COSA Trainer Guest User Staff USER ADMINISTRATION Checked in at User Administration and has valid BNL ID badge Safety Approval Form (SAF) approved. Training requirements completed (Indicate additional training specified in SAF or ESR in lines provided below):

98

CFN Operations and Safety Awareness (COSA) Checklist Electron Microscopy Facility  

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

Electron Microscopy Facility Electron Microscopy Facility Building 735 This COSA form must be completed for all experimenters working in the CFN and must be submitted to the CFN User Office for badge access. CFN Safety Awareness Policy: Each user must be instructed in the safe procedures in CFN related activities. CFN Facility Laboratory personnel shall keep readily available all relevant instructions and safety literature. Employee/Guest Name Life/Guest Number Department/Division ES&H Coordinator/Ext. Facility Manager COSA Trainer Guest User Staff USER ADMINISTRATION Checked in at User Administration and has valid BNL ID badge Safety Approval Form (SAF) approved. Training requirements completed (Indicate additional training specified in SAF or ESR in lines provided below):

99

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1996-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

100

Technical safety requirements for the Auxiliary Hot Cell Facility (AHCF).  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

These Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) identify the operational conditions, boundaries, and administrative controls for the safe operation of the Auxiliary Hot Cell Facility (AHCF) at Sandia National Laboratories, in compliance with 10 CFR 830, 'Nuclear Safety Management.' The bases for the TSRs are established in the AHCF Documented Safety Analysis (DSA), which was issued in compliance with 10 CFR 830, Subpart B, 'Safety Basis Requirements.' The AHCF Limiting Conditions of Operation (LCOs) apply only to the ventilation system, the high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters, and the inventory. Surveillance Requirements (SRs) apply to the ventilation system, HEPA filters, and associated monitoring equipment; to certain passive design features; and to the inventory. No Safety Limits are necessary, because the AHCF is a Hazard Category 3 nuclear facility.

Seylar, Roland F.

2004-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

DOE-STD-1120-2005; Integration of Environment Safety and Health...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

20-2005 Volume 1 of 2 April 2005 DOE STANDARD INTEGRATION OF ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY, AND HEALTH INTO FACILITY DISPOSITION ACTIVITIES Volume 1 of 2: Documented Safety Analysis for...

102

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

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

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

2012-12-04T23:59:59.000Z

103

Idaho Waste Treatment Facility Improves Worker Safety and Efficiency, Saves  

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

Waste Treatment Facility Improves Worker Safety and Waste Treatment Facility Improves Worker Safety and Efficiency, Saves Taxpayer Dollars Idaho Waste Treatment Facility Improves Worker Safety and Efficiency, Saves Taxpayer Dollars August 27, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis The box retrieval forklift carriage is used to lift a degraded box as retrieval personnel monitor progress. The box retrieval forklift carriage is used to lift a degraded box as retrieval personnel monitor progress. The new soft-sided overpack is placed for shipment for treatment and repackaging. The new soft-sided overpack is placed for shipment for treatment and repackaging. The box retrieval forklift carriage is used to lift a degraded box as retrieval personnel monitor progress. The new soft-sided overpack is placed for shipment for treatment and repackaging.

104

Safety assessment for the rf Test Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Radio Frequency Test Facility (RFTF) is a part of the Magnetic Fusion Program's rf Heating Experiments. The goal of the Magnetic Fusion Program (MFP) is to develop and demonstrate the practical application of fusion. RFTF is an experimental device which will provide an essential link in the research effort aiming at the realization of fusion power. This report was compiled as a summary of the analysis done to ensure the safe operation of RFTF.

Nagy, A.; Beane, F. (eds.)

1984-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

105

Fuel Storage Facility Final Safety Analysis Report. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Fuel Storage Facility (FSF) is an integral part of the Fast Flux Test Facility. Its purpose is to provide long-term storage (20-year design life) for spent fuel core elements used to provide the fast flux environment in FFTF, and for test fuel pins, components and subassemblies that have been irradiated in the fast flux environment. This Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) and its supporting documentation provides a complete description and safety evaluation of the site, the plant design, operations, and potential accidents.

Linderoth, C.E.

1984-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

106

Amended Record of Decision: Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0287) (11/28/06)  

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

811 Federal Register 811 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 28, 2006 / Notices Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339. [FR Doc. E6-20124 Filed 11-27-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Amended Record of Decision: Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Amended Record of Decision. SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is amending its Record of Decision (ROD) published December 19, 2005 (70 Federal Register [FR] 75165), pursuant to the Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS) (DOE/EIS-0287, September 2002). The Final EIS analyzed two sets of alternatives for accomplishing DOE's

107

Facility Siting and Layout Optimization Based on Process Safety  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

) that identifies potential layouts by minimizing overall costs. This approach gives the coordinates of each facility in a continuous plane, and estimates for the total length of pipes, the land area, and the selection of safety devices. Finally, the 3D...

Jung, Seungho

2012-02-14T23:59:59.000Z

108

2012 Facility Representative/Safety System Oversight/Fire Safety Workshop - Registrants  

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

Facility Representative / Safety System Oversight Workshop Facility Representative / Safety System Oversight Workshop DOE Fire Safety Workshop Federal Technical Capability Panel (FTCP) Meeting May 14 - 18, 2012, at the Alexis park Resort Hotel, Las Vegas, NV Registrants As of 5/15/2012 Total Number: 218 First Name Last Name Government /Contractor Agency Secretarial Office Site Position Training Course FTCP FS 5/15 FS 5/16 FR/SSO Plenary FR Track SSO Track Fire Safety Training Tour Ron Alderson Government Employee DOE NNSA Nevada SSO SAF-271 No No No Yes No Yes No No Josh Allen Government Employee DOE EM Richland FR No No No No Yes Yes No No No Mark Alsdorf Government Employee DOE HSS Headquarters NTC Safety Training Manager SAF-271 Yes No No Yes No No No No Xavier Aponte Government Employee

109

Expectations on Documented Safety Analysis for Deactivated Inactive Nuclear Facilities in a State of Long Term Surveillance & Maintenance or Decommissioning  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

DOE promulgated 10 CFR 830 ''Nuclear Safety Management'' on October 10, 2000. Section 204 of the Rule requires that contractors at DOE hazard category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities develop a ''Documented Safety Analysis'' (DSA) that summarizes the work to be performed, the associated hazards, and hazard controls necessary to protect workers, the public, and the environment. Table 2 of Appendix A to the rule has been provided to ensure that DSAs are prepared in accordance with one of the available predetermined ''safe harbor'' approaches. The table presents various acceptable safe harbor DSAs for different nuclear facility operations ranging from nuclear reactors to decommissioning activities. The safe harbor permitted for decommissioning of a nuclear facility encompasses methods described in DOE-STD-1 120-98, ''Integration of Environment, Safety and Health into Facility Disposition Activities,'' and provisions in 29 CFR 1910.120 or 29 CFR 1926.65 (HAZWOPER). Additionally, an evaluation of public safety impacts and development of necessary controls is required when the facility being decommissioned contains radiological inventory or contamination exceeding the Rule's definition for low-level residual fixed radioactivity. This document discusses a cost-effective DSA approach that is based on the concepts of DOE-STD-I 120 and meets the 10 CFR 830 safe harbor requirements for both transition surveillance and maintenance as well as decommissioning. This DSA approach provides continuity for inactive Hanford nuclear facilities that will eventually transition into decommissioning. It also uses a graded approach that meets the expectations of DOE-STD-3011 and addresses HAZWOPER requirements to provide a sound basis for worker protection, particularly where intrusive work is being conducted.

JACKSON, M.W.

2002-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

110

DOE | Office of Health, Safety and Security | 2012 Facility Representative,  

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

Facility Representative Facility Representative Office of Nuclear Safety Home Facility Representative Home Annual Facility Rep Workshop › 2012 › 2011 › 2010 › 2009 › 2008 › 2007 › 2006 › 2005 › 2004 › 2003 › 2002 › 2001 › 2000 DOE Safety Links › ORPS Info › Operating Experience › DOE Lessons Learned › Accident Investigation Assessment Tools › FR CRADs › Surveillance Guides › Manager's Guide for Safety and Health Subject Matter Links General Program Information › Program Mission Statement › Program Directives and Guidance › FR of the Year Award Program › FR of the Year Award › FR Program Assessment Guide (Appendix B, DOE STD 1063-2011) FR Quarterly Performance Indicators Training & Qualification Information › Qualification Standards › Energy Online Courses

111

PF-4 actinide disposition strategy  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The dwindling amount of Security Category I processing and storage space across the DOE Complex has driven the need for more effective storage of nuclear materials at LANL's Plutonium Facility's (PF-4's) vault. An effort was begun in 2009 to create a strategy, a roadmap, to identify all accountable nuclear material and determine their disposition paths, the PF-4 Actinide Disposition Strategy (PADS). Approximately seventy bins of nuclear materials with similar characteristics - in terms of isotope, chemical form, impurities, disposition location, etc. - were established in a database. The ultimate disposition paths include the material to remain at LANL, disposition to other DOE sites, and disposition to waste. If all the actions described in the document were taken, over half of the containers currently in the PF-4 vault would been eliminated. The actual amount of projected vault space will depend on budget and competing mission requirements, however, clearly a significant portion of the current LANL inventory can be either dispositioned or consolidated.

Marcevicius, Robert W [Los Alamos National Laboratory

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

112

Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

113

Idaho High-Level Waste & Facilities Disposition, Final Environmental Impact Statement  

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

Appendix A Appendix A Site Evaluation Process A-iii DOE/EIS-0287 Idaho HLW & FD EIS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Appendix A Site Evaluation Process A-1 A.1 Introduction A-1 A.2 Methodology A-1 A.3 High-Level Waste Treatment and Interim Storage Site Selection A-3 A.3.1 Identification of "Must" Criteria A-3 A.3.2 Identification of "Want" Criteria A-3 A.3.3 Identification of Candidate Sites A-3 A.3.4 Evaluation Process A-4 A.3.5 Results of Evaluation Process A-6 A.4 Low-Activity Waste Disposal Site Selection A-6 A.4.1 Identification of "Must" Criteria A-7 A.4.2 Identification of "Want" Criteria A-8 A.4.3 Identification of Candidate Sites A-8 A.4.4 Evaluation Process A-8 A.4.5 Results of Evaluation Process A-9 A.4.6 Final Selection of a Low-Activity Waste Disposal Facility

114

Preparation of Safety Basis Documents for Transuranic (TRU) Waste Facilities  

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

5506-2007 5506-2007 April 2007 DOE STANDARD Preparation of Safety Basis Documents for Transuranic (TRU) Waste Facilities U.S. Department of Energy Washington, D.C. 20585 AREA-SAFT DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-STD-5506-2007 ii Available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web Site at Http://tis.eh.doe.gov/techstds/ DOE-STD-5506-2007 iii Foreword This Standard provides analytical assumptions and methods, as well as hazard controls to be used when developing Safety Basis (SB) documents for transuranic (TRU) waste facilities in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Complex. It also provides supplemental technical

115

Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Salt Waste Processing Facility Project  

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

Oversight Assessment of Oversight Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Salt Waste Processing Facility Project May 2011 January 2013 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Independent Oversight Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Salt Waste Processing Facility Project

116

Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Salt Waste Processing Facility Project  

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

Oversight Assessment of Oversight Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Salt Waste Processing Facility Project May 2011 January 2013 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Independent Oversight Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Salt Waste Processing Facility Project

117

2012 Facility Representative/Safety System Oversight/Fire Safety Workshop Agenda  

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

Facility Representative  Safety System Oversight  Fire Safety Facility Representative  Safety System Oversight  Fire Safety Overall Workshop Agenda May 14-18, 2012  Alexis Park Hotel  Las Vegas, Nevada Monday, May 14, 2012 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. SAF-271, SSO Assessments (Day 1) Zeus B Quality Assurance Overview for FR/SSO Personnel Zeus A 5:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m. Workshop Registration Zeus Foyer Tuesday, May 15, 2012 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Fire Safety Workshop Track Begins (see track agenda) Parthenon 4 SAF-271, SSO Assessments (Day 2) Zeus B . Safety Culture Workshop Zeus A Federal Technical Capability Panel Parthenon 2 5:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m. Workshop Registration Zeus Foyer Wednesday, May 16, 2012 6:30 a.m. - 7:45 a.m. Workshop Registration Zeus Foyer 8:00 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. FR/SSO Tracks Begin; Plenary session with Fire Safety Track Parthenon 2 & 4

118

TRANSPORTATION CASK RECEIPT/RETURN FACILITY CRITICALITY SAFETY EVALUATIONS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this design calculation is to demonstrate that the handling operations of transportation casks performed in the Transportation Cask Receipt and Return Facility (TCRRF) and Buffer Area meet the nuclear criticality safety design criteria specified in the ''Project Design Criteria (PDC) Document'' (BSC [Bechtel SAIC Company] 2004 [DIRS 171599], Section 4.9.2.2), and the functional nuclear criticality safety requirement described in the ''Transportation Cask Receipt/Return Facility Description Document'' (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170217], Section 3.2.3). Specific scope of work contained in this activity consists of the following items: (1) Evaluate criticality effects for both dry and fully flooded conditions pertaining to TCRRF and Buffer Area operations for defense in depth. (2) Evaluate Category 1 and 2 event sequences for the TCRRF as identified in the ''Categorization of Event Sequences for License Application'' (BSC 2004 [DIRS 167268], Section 7). This evaluation includes credible fuel reconfiguration conditions. In addition to the scope of work listed above, an evaluation was also performed of modeling assumptions for commercial spent nuclear fuel (CSNF) regarding inclusion of plenum and end regions of the active fuel. This calculation is limited to CSNF and US Department of Energy (DOE) SNF. it should be mentioned that the latter waste form is evaluated more in depth in the ''Canister Handling Facility Criticality Safety Calculations (BSC 2004 [DIRS 167614]). Further, the design and safety analyses of the naval SNF canisters are the responsibility of the US Department of the Navy (Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program) and will not be included in this document. In addition, this calculation is valid for the current design of the TCRRF and Buffer Area and may not reflect the ongoing design evolution of the facility. However, it is anticipated that design changes to the facility layout will have little or no impact on the criticality results and/or conclusions presented in this document. This calculation is subject to the ''Quality Assurance Requirements and Description'' (DOE 2004 [DIRS 171539]) because the TCRRF is included in the Q-List (BSC 2004 [DIRS 168361], p. A-3) as an item important to safety. This calculation is prepared in accordance with AP-3.12Q, ''Design Calculations and Analyses'' [DIRS 168413].

C.E. Sanders

2005-04-26T23:59:59.000Z

119

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

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

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

120

DOE/EIS-0287-SA-01: Supplement Analysis for the Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement (June 2005)  

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

7 7 -SA-Ol SUPPLEMENT ANALYSIS For The Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement June 2005 United States Department of Energy Idaho Operations Office 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 DOEÆIS-0287 -SA-O 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction......................................................................................................................... 4 Background......................................................................................................................... 4 Areas of Review.................................................................................................................. 6 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 Proposed Waste Treatment Technology.......... .......................................................

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

Facility Disposition Projects  

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

Score Maturity Value Target Score Maturity Value Target Score A1 Cost Estimate H 7.5 1 7.5 5 37.5 5 37.5 A2 Cost Risk/Contingency Analysis P 3.0 1 3.0 5 15.0 5 15.0 A3 Funding Requirements/Profile H 7.5 1 7.5 4 30.0 5 37.5 A4 Independent Cost Estimate/Schedule Review P 3.0 N/A 0.0 5 15.0 5 15.0 A5 Life Cycle Cost P 3.0 1 3.0 4 12.0 5 15.0 A6 Forecast of Cost at Completion P 3.0 N/A 0.0 3 9.0 5 15.0 A7 Cost Estimate for Next Phase Work Scope P 3.0 5 15.0 5 15.0 5 15.0 Subtotal Cost 36.0 133.5 150.0 B1 Project Schedule H 7.5 1 7.5 4 30.0 5 37.5 B2 Major Milestones P 3.0 1 3.0 5 15.0 5 15.0 B3 Resource Loading P 3.0 1 3.0 4 12.0 5 15.0 B4 Critical Path Management H 7.5 1 7.5 4 30.0 5 37.5 B5 Schedule Risk/Contingency Analysis P 3.0 1 3.0 5 15.0 5 15.0 B6 Forecast of Schedule Completion P 3.0 N/A 0.0 3 9.0 5 15.0 B7 Schedule for Next Phase Work Scope P 3.0 5 15.0 5 15.0 5 15.0 Subtotal Schedule

122

3S (Safeguards, Security, Safety) based pyroprocessing facility safety evaluation plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The big advantage of pyroprocessing for the management of spent fuels against the conventional reprocessing technologies lies in its proliferation resistance since the pure plutonium cannot be separated from the spent fuel. The extracted materials can be directly used as metal fuel in a fast reactor, and pyroprocessing reduces drastically the volume and heat load of the spent fuel. KAERI has implemented the SBD (Safeguards-By-Design) concept in nuclear fuel cycle facilities. The goal of SBD is to integrate international safeguards into the entire facility design process since the very beginning of the design phase. This paper presents a safety evaluation plan using a conceptual design of a reference pyroprocessing facility, in which 3S (Safeguards, Security, Safety)-By-Design (3SBD) concept is integrated from early conceptual design phase. The purpose of this paper is to establish an advanced pyroprocessing hot cell facility design concept based on 3SBD for the successful realization of pyroprocessing technology with enhanced safety and proliferation resistance.

Ku, J.H.; Choung, W.M.; You, G.S.; Moon, S.I.; Park, S.H.; Kim, H.D. [Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute - KAERI, 989-111 Daeduk-daero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 305-353 (Korea, Republic of)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

123

The Fast Flux Test Facility built on safety  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

No other high-tech industry has grown as fast as the nuclear industry. The information available to the general public has not kept pace with the rapid growth of nuclear data---its growth has outpaced its media image and the safety of nuclear facilities has become a highly debated issue. This book is an attempt to bridge the gap between the high-tech information of the nuclear industry and its understanding by the general public. It explains the three levels of defense at the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) and why these levels provide an acceptable margin to protect the general public and on-site personnel, while achieving FFTF's mission to provide research and development for the US Department of Energy (DOE).

Not Available

1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

124

Fast Flux Test Facility final safety analysis report. Amendment 73  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report provides Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) Amendment 73 for incorporation into the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTR) FSAR set. This page change incorporates Engineering Change Notices (ECNs) issued subsequent to Amendment 72 and approved for incorparoration before May 6, 1993. These changes include: Chapter 3, design criteria structures, equipment, and systems; chapter 5B, reactor coolant system; chapter 7, instrumentation and control systems; chapter 9, auxiliary systems; chapter 11, reactor refueling system; chapter 12, radiation protection and waste management; chapter 13, conduct of operations; chapter 17, technical specifications; chapter 20, FFTF criticality specifications; appendix C, local fuel failure events; and appendix Fl, operation at 680{degrees}F inlet temperature.

Gantt, D.A.

1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

125

Review and Approval of Nuclear Facility Safety Basis and Safety Design Basis Documents  

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

SENSITIVE DOE-STD-1104-2009 May 2009 Superseding DOE-STD-1104-96 DOE STANDARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF NUCLEAR FACILITY SAFETY BASIS AND SAFETY DESIGN BASIS DOCUMENTS U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, DC 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-STD-1104-2009 ii Available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards web page at http://www.hss.energy.gov/nuclearsafety/ns/techstds/ DOE-STD-1104-2009 iii CONTENTS FOREWORD .................................................................................................................................. v INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................

126

Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) Facility 10CFR830 Safety Basis Related to Facility Experiments  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) Advanced Test Reactor (ATR), a DOE Category A reactor, was designed to provide an irradiation test environment for conducting a variety of experiments. The ATR Safety Analysis Report, determined by DOE to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 830, Subpart B, provides versatility in types of experiments that may be conducted. This paper addresses two general types of experiments in the ATR facility and how safety analyses for experiments are related to the ATR safety basis. One type of experiment is more routine and generally represents greater risks; therefore this type of experiment is addressed with more detail in the safety basis. This allows individual safety analyses for these experiments to be more routine and repetitive. The second type of experiment is less defined and is permitted under more general controls. Therefore, individual safety analyses for the second type of experiment tend to be more unique from experiment to experiment. Experiments are also discussed relative to "major modifications" and DOE-STD-1027-92. Application of the USQ process to ATR experiments is also discussed.

Tomberlin, Terry Alan

2002-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

127

Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) Facility 10CFR830 Safety Basis Related to Facility Experiments  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) Advanced Test Reactor (ATR), a DOE Category A reactor, was designed to provide an irradiation test environment for conducting a variety of experiments. The ATR Safety Analysis Report, determined by DOE to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 830, Subpart B, provides versatility in types of experiments that may be conducted. This paper addresses two general types of experiments in the ATR facility and how safety analyses for experiments are related to the ATR safety basis. One type of experiment is more routine and generally represents greater risks; therefore this type of experiment is addressed with more detail in the safety basis. This allows individual safety analyses for these experiments to be more routine and repetitive. The second type of experiment is less defined and is permitted under more general controls. Therefore, individual safety analyses for the second type of experiment tend to be more unique from experiment to experiment. Experiments are also discussed relative to ''major modifications'' and DOE-STD-1027-92. Application of the USQ process to ATR experiments is also discussed.

Tomberlin, T.A.

2002-06-19T23:59:59.000Z

128

Independent Oversight Review of the Idaho National Laboratory Fuel Conditioning Facility Safety Basis  

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

INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT REVIEW OF THE IDAHO NATIONAL LABORATORY FUEL CONDITIONING FACILITY SAFETY BASIS April 2010 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Health, Safety and Security Office of Independent Oversight i INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT REVIEW OF THE IDAHO NATIONAL LABORATORY FUEL CONDITIONING FACILITY SAFETY BASIS Table of Contents Acronyms ............................................................................................................................ ii Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... iii 1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................1

129

Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide - November 2002  

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

Oak Ridge Operations Office Oak Ridge Operations Office Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide [Fulfills ORO Safety Basis Competency 1, 2 (Part 1), or 7 (Part 1)] November 2002 Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms and Abbreviations ......................................................................................... iii List of Figures ....................................................................................................................iv List of Tables......................................................................................................................iv INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................1

130

Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration Finding of No Significant Impact for the Proposed Disposition of the Omega West Facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico  

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

Finding of No Significant Impact for the Proposed Disposition of the Omega West Facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico U. S. Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration Office of Los Alamos Site Operations 528 35th Street Los Alamos, NM 87544 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECUIRTY ADMINISTRATION FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Proposed Disposition of the Omega West Facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Proposed Disposition of the Omega West Facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory [DOE/EA- 74 IO) (attached) provides sufficient evidence and analysis to determine that a Finding Of No Significant Impact is appropriate for the Proposed Action (Complete

131

Mixed Waste Management Facility Preliminary Safety Analysis Report. Chapters 1 to 20  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides information on waste management practices, occupational safety, and a site characterization of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. A facility description, safety engineering analysis, mixed waste processing techniques, and auxiliary support systems are included.

Not Available

1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

132

CRAD, New Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis and Technical Safety Requirements- December 2, 2014 (EA CRAD 31-07, Rev. 0)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

New Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis and Technical Safety Requirements Criteria Review and Approach Document (EA CRAD 31-07, Rev. 0)

133

National ignition facility environment, safety, and health management plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The ES&H Management Plan describes all of the environmental, safety, and health evaluations and reviews that must be carried out in support of the implementation of the National Ignition Facility (NIF) Project. It describes the policy, organizational responsibilities and interfaces, activities, and ES&H documents that will be prepared by the Laboratory Project Office for the DOE. The only activity not described is the preparation of the NIF Project Specific Assessment (PSA), which is to be incorporated into the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Stockpile Stewardship and Management (PEIS). This PSA is being prepared by Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) with input from the Laboratory participants. As the independent NEPA document preparers ANL is directly contracted by the DOE, and its deliverables and schedule are agreed to separately with DOE/OAK.

NONE

1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

134

Order Module--DOE O 420.2B, SAFETY OF ACCELERATOR FACILITIES | Department  

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

420.2B, SAFETY OF ACCELERATOR FACILITIES 420.2B, SAFETY OF ACCELERATOR FACILITIES Order Module--DOE O 420.2B, SAFETY OF ACCELERATOR FACILITIES This module will discuss the objectives and requirements associated with the Order and the contractor requirements document. We have provided an example to help familiarize you with the material. The example will also help prepare you for the practice at the end of this module and for the criterion test. Before continuing, you should obtain a copy of the Order at DOE Directives, Regulations, and Standards Portal Home Page or through the course manager. You may need to refer to these documents to complete the example, practice, and criterion test. DOE Order Self Study Modules - DOE O 420.1B Facility Safety More Documents & Publications Order Module--DOE O 420.1B, FACILITY SAFETY

135

DOE's Approach to Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis and Management  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Presenter: Dr. James O'Brien, Director, Office of Nuclear Safety, Office of Health, Safety and Security, US Department of Energy

136

Guidelines for preparing criticality safety evaluations at Department of Energy non-reactor nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document contains guidelines that should be followed when preparing Criticality Safety Evaluations that will be used to demonstrate the safety of operations performed at DOE non-reactor nuclear facilities. Adherence to these guidelines will provide consistency and uniformity in criticality safety evaluations (CSEs) across the complex and will document compliance with the requirements of DOE Order 5480.24.

Not Available

1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

137

MINIMIZING WASTE AND COST IN DISPOSITION OF LEGACY RESIDUES  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Research is being conducted at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) which is directed toward development of a quantitative basis for disposition of actinide-bearing process residues (both legacy residues and residues generated from ongoing programmatic operations). This research is focused in two directions: (1) identifying minimum negative consequence (waste, dose, cost) dispositions working within regulatory safeguards termination criteria, and (2) evaluating logistics/consequences of across-the-board residue discards such as authorized at Rocky Flats under a safeguards termination variance. The first approach emphasizes Laboratory commitments to environmental stewardship, worker safety, and fiscal responsibility. This approach has been described as the Plutonium Disposition Methodology (PDM) in deference to direction provided by DOE Albuquerque. The second approach is born of the need to expedite removal of residues from storage for programmatic and reasons and residue storage safety concerns. Any disposition path selected must preserve the legal distinction between residues as Special Nuclear Material (SNM) and discardable materials as waste in order to insure the continuing viability of Laboratory plutonium processing facilities for national security operations.

J. BALKEY; M. ROBINSON

2001-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

138

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting on the Status of Integration of Safety Into the Design of the Uranium Processing Facility, October 2012  

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

HSS Independent Activity Report - HSS Independent Activity Report - Rev. 0 Report Number: HIAR-Y-12-2012-10-02 Site: Y-12 UPF Subject: Office of Enforcement and Oversight's Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Activity Report for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Public Meeting on the Status of Integration of Safety into the Design of the Uranium Processing Facility (UPF) Dates of Activity: October 2, 2012 Report Preparer: Timothy Mengers Activity Description/Purpose: The Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) observed the public hearing of the DNFSB review of the UPF project status for integrating safety into design. The meeting was broken into three parts: a panel discussion and questioning of National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) oversight and execution; a panel discussion and questioning of the B&W Y-12

139

Plutonium Disposition Program | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Plutonium Disposition Program Plutonium Disposition Program Home > About Us > Our Programs > Nonproliferation > Fissile Materials Disposition > Plutonium Disposition Program Plutonium Disposition Program The U.S.-Russia Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement (PMDA), which entered into force on July 13, 2011, commits each country to dispose of at least 34 metric tons (MT) of weapon-grade plutonium withdrawn from their respective nuclear weapon programs. The U.S. remains firmly committed to its PMDA obligation to dispose of excess weapons plutonium. U.S. Plutonium Disposition The current U.S. plan to dispose of 34 MT of weapon-grade plutonium is to fabricate it into Mixed Oxide (MOX) fuel and irradiate it in existing light water reactors. This approach requires construction of new facilities

140

Records Disposition  

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

To assign responsibilities and authorities and to prescribe policies, procedures, standards, and guidelines for the orderly disposition of records of the Department of Energy (DOE) and its management and operating contractors. Cancels DOE O 1324.2 dated 5-28-80. Chg 1 dated 4-9-92. Canceled by DOE O 1324.2B dated 1-12-95.

1988-09-13T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

U.S. Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Nuclear Facility Safety  

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

U.S. Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Nuclear Facility U.S. Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals, Self-Study Guide U.S. Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals, Self-Study Guide This is an open-book evaluation. Complete the questions, and submit your answers (hand-written or electronically) to the Training Center. Someone will check and grade your answers. If you achieve a score of at least 80%, you will receive a completion certificate. Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide Review Questions More Documents & Publications Requirements in DOE O 5480.19, Conduct of Operations Requirements for DOE Facilities Cross-referenced to DOE O 422.1, Conduct of Operations. U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge Operations Office Nuclear Facility

142

Integrated Safety Analysis: Why It Is Appropriate for Fuel Recycling Facilities  

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

Integrated Safety Analysis: Why It Is Appropriate for Fuel Recycling Facilities Executive Summary This paper addresses why the use of an Integrated Safety Analysis ("ISA") is appropriate for fuel recycling facilities 1 which would be licensed under new regulations currently being considered by NRC. The use of the ISA for fuel facilities under Part 70 is described and compared to the use of a Probabilistic Risk Assessment ("PRA") for reactor facilities. A basis is provided for concluding that future recycling facilities - which will possess characteristics similar to today's fuel cycle facilities and distinct from reactors - can best be assessed using established qualitative or semi-quantitative ISA techniques to achieve and demonstrate safety in an effective and efficient manner.

143

September 10, 2010 HSS Briefing to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) on Union Activities  

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

Labor Union and Stakeholder Labor Union and Stakeholder Outreach and Collaboration Office of Health, Safety and Security Briefing to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Briefing to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Leadership Commitment Leadership Commitment " h "It is imperative that we communicate and establish relationships with those elements that train manage and elements that train, manage and represent our workforce to improve the safety culture at DOE sites." safety culture at DOE sites. Glenn S. Podonsky Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer 2 History History History History October 2006: Formation of HSS to provide an integrated DOE HQ-level function for health, safety, environment, and security into one unified office. February 2007: Established HSS Focus Group -

144

NASA Benchmarks Safety Functions Assessment plan - Developed By NNSA/Nevada Site Office Facility Representative Division  

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

SAFETY FUNCTIONS SAFETY FUNCTIONS Assessment Plan Developed By NNSA/Nevada Site Office Facility Representative Division Performance Objective: Management should be proactive in addressing safety-related issues. Management should have an established system to provide a ranking of safety considerations founded upon risk-based priorities. Criteria: A system is in place to provide a ranking of safety considerations founded upon risk-based priorities. (DOE/EH-0135) Procedures clearly define management's responsibility for safety- related decisions and provide for the escalation of matters in an appropriate time frame. (DOE/EH-0135) Management promotes safety programs and the organization's safety culture through sponsoring and attending safety meetings. (DOE/EH- 0135) Management encourages and supports effective programs for reporting

145

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Superconducting Magnet Safety Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) facilities present unique hazards or steel reinforced concrete, these ferromagnetic materials may have an effect on the magnetic field environmental temperature control is required (2) Structural support for heavy equipment and vibration control

Maroncelli, Mark

146

Records Disposition  

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

To assign responsibilities and authorities and to prescribe policies, procedures, standards, and guidelines for the orderly disposition of records of the Department of Energy (DOE) and its operating and onsite service contractors. Cancels DOE O 1324.1 dated 7-10-78. Chg 1 dated 7-2-81. Chg 2 dated 11-9-82. Canceled by DOE O 1324.2A dated 9-13-88.

1980-05-28T23:59:59.000Z

147

Construction safety program for the National Ignition Facility, Appendix A  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Topics covered in this appendix include: General Rules-Code of Safe Practices; 2. Personal Protective Equipment; Hazardous Material Control; Traffic Control; Fire Prevention; Sanitation and First Aid; Confined Space Safety Requirements; Ladders and Stairways; Scaffolding and Lift Safety; Machinery, Vehicles, and Heavy Equipment; Welding and Cutting-General; Arc Welding; Oxygen/Acetylene Welding and Cutting; Excavation, Trenching, and Shoring; Fall Protection; Steel Erection; Working With Asbestos; Radiation Safety; Hand Tools; Electrical Safety; Nonelectrical Work Performed Near Exposed High-Voltage Power-Distribution Equipment; Lockout/Tagout Requirements; Rigging; A-Cranes; Housekeeping; Material Handling and Storage; Lead; Concrete and Masonry Construction.

Cerruti, S.J.

1997-06-26T23:59:59.000Z

148

Facility Safety Policy, Guidance & Reports | Department of Energy  

Energy Savers [EERE]

criticality safety, natural phenomena hazards (NPH) mitigation, and System Engineer Program. DOE ORDER (O) 252.1A, TECHNICAL STANDARDS PROGRAM DOE O 252.1A promotes...

149

DOE Standard 3009-2014, Preparation of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis, Roll Out Training  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Office of Nuclear Safety is performing a series of site visits to provide roll-out training and assistance to Program and Site Offices and their contractors on effective implementation of the new revision to DOE Standard 3009-2014, Preparation of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis.

150

Construction safety program for the National Ignition Facility, Appendix B  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Appendix contains material from the LLNL Health and Safety Manual as listed below. For sections not included in this list, please refer to the Manual itself. The areas covered are: asbestos, lead, fire prevention, lockout, and tag program confined space traffic safety.

Cerruti, S.J.

1997-06-26T23:59:59.000Z

151

Guidelines for preparing criticality safety evaluations at Department of Energy non-reactor nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Department of Energy (DOE) is approved for use by all components of DOE. It contains guidelines that should be followed when preparing Criticality Safety Evaluations that will be used to demonstrate the safety of operations performed at DOE Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities. Adherence with these guidelines will provide consistency and uniformity in Criticality Safety Evaluations (CSEs) across the complex and will document compliance with DOE Order 5480.24 requirements as they pertain to CSEs.

NONE

1998-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

152

CRAD, Criticality Safety- Los Alamos National Laboratory TA 55 SST Facility  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A section of Appendix C to DOE G 226.1-2 "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities." Consists of Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) used for an assessment of the Criticality Safety program at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, TA 55 SST Facility.

153

CRAD, Criticality Safety- Y-12 Enriched Uranium Operations Oxide Conversion Facility  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A section of Appendix C to DOE G 226.1-2 "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities." Consists of Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) used for a January 2005 assessment of the Criticality Safety program at the Y-12 - Enriched Uranium Facility.

154

CFN Operations and Safety Awareness (COSA) Checklist Advanced Optical Methods Facility  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

(Indicate additional training specified in SAF or ESR in lines provided below): Select ESRs 20 User AdminCFN Operations and Safety Awareness (COSA) Checklist Advanced Optical Methods Facility Building 735 procedures in CFN related activities. CFN Facility Laboratory personnel shall keep readily available all

Ohta, Shigemi

155

CRAD, Safety Basis- Los Alamos National Laboratory Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A section of Appendix C to DOE G 226.1-2 "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities." Consists of Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) used for an assessment of the Safety Basis portion of an Operational Readiness Review at the Los Alamos National Laboratory Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility.

156

CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health- Los Alamos National Laboratory Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A section of Appendix C to DOE G 226.1-2 "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities." Consists of Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) used for an assessment of the Occupational and Industrial Safety and Hygiene Program portion of an Operational Readiness Review at the Los Alamos National Laboratory Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility.

157

CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health- Y-12 Enriched Uranium Operations Oxide Conversion Facility  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A section of Appendix C to DOE G 226.1-2 "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities." Consists of Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) used for a January 2005 assessment of Industrial Safety and Industrial Health programs at the Y-12 - Enriched Uranium Operations Oxide Conversion Facility.

158

Frequently Asked Questions Regarding DOE Order 420.1C, Facility Safety  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Frequently Asked Questions Regarding DOE Order 420.1C, Facility Safety, and its supporting directives, DOE?STD?1020?2012, Natural Phenomena Hazards Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities, and DOE?STD?1066?2012, Fire Protection

159

CRAD, Safety Basis- Y-12 Enriched Uranium Operations Oxide Conversion Facility  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A section of Appendix C to DOE G 226.1-2 "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities." Consists of Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) used for a January 2005 assessment of the Safety Basis at the Y-12 - Enriched Uranium Operations Oxide Conversion Facility.

160

Request For Records Disposition Autnority | Department of Energy  

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

Autnority Request For Records Disposition Autnority Published Posters. Posters depicting Department of Energy facilities, research projects, security awareness themes, and related...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

DOE Honors Idaho Facility with Safety Award | Department of Energy  

Energy Savers [EERE]

It relies on cooperation between managers, employees, and DOE to continuously improve health and safety programs. "I'm pleased to see this continuation of the VPP tradition at...

162

CFN Operations and Safety Awareness (COSA) Checklist Soft-Bio Nanomaterials Facility  

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

Soft-Bio Nanomaterials Facility Soft-Bio Nanomaterials Facility Building 735 This COSA form must be completed for all experimenters working in the CFN and must be submitted to the CFN User Office for badge access. CFN Safety Awareness Policy: Each user must be instructed in the safe procedures in CFN related activities. CFN Facility Laboratory personnel shall keep readily available all relevant instructions and safety literature. Employee/Guest Name Life/Guest Number Department/Division ES&H Coordinator/Ext. Facility Manager COSA Trainer Guest User Staff USER ADMINISTRATION Checked in at User Administration and has valid BNL ID badge Safety Approval Form (SAF) approved. Training requirements completed (Indicate additional training specified in SAF or ESR in lines provided below):

163

CFN Operations and Safety Awareness (COSA) Checklist Nanofabrication (Clean Room) Facility  

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

Nanofabrication (Clean Room) Facility Nanofabrication (Clean Room) Facility Building 735 This COSA form must be completed for all experimenters working in the CFN and must be submitted to the CFN User Office for badge access. CFN Safety Awareness Policy: Each user must be instructed in the safe procedures in CFN related activities. CFN Facility Laboratory personnel shall keep readily available all relevant instructions and safety literature. Employee/Guest Name Life/Guest Number Department/Division ES&H Coordinator/Ext. Facility Manager COSA Trainer Guest User Staff USER ADMINISTRATION Checked in at User Administration and has valid BNL ID badge Safety Approval Form (SAF) approved. Training requirements completed (Indicate additional training specified in SAF or ESR in lines provided below):

164

Review of Safety Basis Development for the Savannah River Site Salt Waste Processing Facility  

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

of5 of5 U.S. Department of Energy Subject: Review of Safety Basis Development for the Savannah River Site Salt Waste Processing Facility - Inspection Criteria, Approach, and Line:~ HS: Rev: Eff. Date: HSS CRAD 45-57 0 January 31,2013 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Acting Direc or, Office of Sifety and Emergency Management Evaluations Date: January 31, 2013 Criteria Review and Approach Document LL.v. ~·M Criteria Lead:ife\riew of Safety Basis Development for the Savannah River Site Salt Waste Processing Facility Page 1 of 5 Date: January 31, 2013 1.0 PURPOSE Within the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS), the Office of Enforcement and Oversight, Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations (HS-45) mission is to assess the effectiveness of the

165

Accelerator Facility Safety Implementation Guide for DOE Order (0) 420.2C, Safety of Accelerator Facilities  

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

The revision will address implementation of roles and responsibilities, improve operational efficiency using operating experience, and clarify the use of program requirements such as the Unreviewed Safety Issue and Accelerator Readiness Review.

2013-07-17T23:59:59.000Z

166

DOE/EIS-0287 Idaho High-Level Waste & Facilities Disposition Draft Environmental Impact Statement (December 1999)  

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

HLW & FD EIS HLW & FD EIS 3-13 DOE/EIS-0287D Calcine storag e i n b i n s ets Calcine storag e i n b i n s et s Cesium ion exchange & grouting Cesium ion exchange & grouting NWCF* NWCF* Calcine Mixed transuranic waste/SBW Mixed transuranic waste/NGLW Low-level waste disposa l*** disposa l*** Tank heels Transuranic waste (from tank heels) * * * * Mixed transuranic waste/ NGLW Mixed transuranic waste/ NGLW M i x e d t r a nsuran ic w a s t e / M i x e d t r a nsuran ic w a s t e / S B W s t o rage in Ta n k F a r m S B W s t o rage in Ta n k F a r m Low-leve l waste Low-leve l waste FIGURE 3-2. Continued Current Operations Alternative. LEGEND * Including high-temperature and maximum achievable control technology upgrades. Mixed transuranic waste/ newly generated liquid waste New Waste Calcining Facility ** Calcine would be transferred from bin set #1 to bin set #6 or #7.

167

Facilities  

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

168

Review of Safety Basis Development for the Los Alamos National Laboratory Transuranic Waste Facility  

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

of6 of6 Subject: Review of Safety Basis HS: HSS CRAD 45-59 U.S. Department of Development for the Los Alamos Rev: 0 National Laboratory Transuranic Eff. Date: May 6, 2013 Energy Waste Facility - Criteria and Review Approach Document Office of Safety and ~ Emergency Management Acting Djector, Of~e of Safety and Evaluations Emergency Management Evaluations Date: May 6, 2013 firo,~ Page 1of6 Criteria and Review e;dJatnes 0. Low Approach Document Date: May 6, 2013 1.0 PURPOSE Within the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS), the Office of Enforcement and Oversight, Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations (HS-45) mission is to assess the effectiveness of the environment, safety, health, and emergency management systems and practices used by line and

169

Conventional Facilities Chapter 11: Environment, Safety and Health 11-1 NSLS-II Preliminary Design Report  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Analysis 4. Fire Protection 5. Pressure Safety 6. Industrial Hygiene 7. Other ES&H Issues This document, the more stringent requirement will govern. 11.3.1 DOE O 420.1B ­ Facility Safety a) Fire protection system Program a) Fire protection b) Pressure safety c) Industrial hygiene d) Biological safety e) Electrical

Ohta, Shigemi

170

Receiving Basin for Offsite Fuels and the Resin Regeneration Facility Safety Analysis Report, Executive Summary  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Safety Analysis Report documents the safety authorization basis for the Receiving Basin for Offsite Fuels (RBOF) and the Resin Regeneration Facility (RRF) at the Savannah River Site (SRS). The present mission of the RBOF and RRF is to continue in providing a facility for the safe receipt, storage, handling, and shipping of spent nuclear fuel assemblies from power and research reactors in the United States, fuel from SRS and other Department of Energy (DOE) reactors, and foreign research reactors fuel, in support of the nonproliferation policy. The RBOF and RRF provide the capability to handle, separate, and transfer wastes generated from nuclear fuel element storage. The DOE and Westinghouse Savannah River Company, the prime operating contractor, are committed to managing these activities in such a manner that the health and safety of the offsite general public, the site worker, the facility worker, and the environment are protected.

Shedrow, C.B.

1999-11-29T23:59:59.000Z

171

Radiological safety at Argonne national laboratory's heavy ion research facility  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

This paper discusses the radiological safety system to be employed at the Argonne tandemlinac accelerator system (ATLAS). The design parameters of ATLAS that affect safety have remained unchanged since ATLAS construction began in 1982. The specialized radiological safety considerations of ATLAS were discussed in 1982 [1]. This paper will present the details of the hardware, the administrative controls, and the radiation monitoring that will be in effect when beam is produced in April 1985. The experimental hall utilizing the maximum energy beam ( ? 27 MeV per nucleon) from the completed ATLAS has been partitioned with shielding blocks into its final configuration. Because scientists want access to some of the partitioned-off areas while beam is present in other areas, an interlock and logic system allowing such occupancy has been designed. The rationale and hardware of the system will be discussed. Since one of the potential radiation hazards is high-energy forward-directed neutrons from any location where the beam impinges (such as collimators, bending and focussing systems, experimental targets, and beam stops), radiation surveys and hazard assessments are necessary for the administrative controls that allow occupancy of various areas. Because of the various uses of ATLAS, neutrons (the dominant beam hazard) will be non-existent in some experiments and will be of energies ? 10 MeV for a few experiments. These conditions may exist at specific locations during beam preparation but may change rapidly when beam is finally delivered to an experimental area. Monitoring and assessing such time varying and geographically changing hazards will be a challenge since little data will be available on source terms until various beams are produced of sufficient intensity and energy to make measurements. How the operating division for ATLAS and the Argonne safety division are addressing this aspect through administrative controls will also be discussed.

R.H. Cooke; R.A. Wynveen

1985-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

172

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Review at the Nevada National Security Site  

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

NNSS-2011-001 NNSS-2011-001 Site: Nevada National Security Site Subject: Office of Independent Oversight's Office of Environment, Safety and Health Evaluations Activity Report for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Review at the Nevada National Security Site Dates of Activity 02/14/2011 - 02/17/2011 Report Preparer William Macon Activity Description/Purpose: The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Independent Oversight, within the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS), visited the Nevada Site Office (NSO) and the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) from February 14-17, 2011. The purpose of the visit was to observe the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) review and maintain operational awareness of NNSS activities. Result:

173

Los Alamos National Laboratory corregated metal pipe saw facility preliminary safety analysis report. Volume I  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Preliminary Safety Analysis Report addresses site assessment, facility design and construction, and design operation of the processing systems in the Corrugated Metal Pipe Saw Facility with respect to normal and abnormal conditions. Potential hazards are identified, credible accidents relative to the operation of the facility and the process systems are analyzed, and the consequences of postulated accidents are presented. The risk associated with normal operations, abnormal operations, and natural phenomena are analyzed. The accident analysis presented shows that the impact of the facility will be acceptable for all foreseeable normal and abnormal conditions of operation. Specifically, under normal conditions the facility will have impacts within the limits posted by applicable DOE guidelines, and in accident conditions the facility will similarly meet or exceed the requirements of all applicable standards. 16 figs., 6 tabs.

NONE

1990-09-19T23:59:59.000Z

174

Closure of 324 Facility potential HEPA filter failure unreviewed safety questions  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document summarizes the activities which occurred to resolve an Unreviewed Safety Question (USQ) for the 324 Facility [Waste Technology Engineering Laboratory] involving Potential HEPA Filter Breach. The facility ventilation system had the capacity to fail the HEPA filters during accident conditions which would totally plug the filters. The ventilation system fans were modified which lowered fan operating parameters and prevented HEPA filter failures which might occur during accident conditions.

Enghusen, M.B.

1997-11-07T23:59:59.000Z

175

Disposition Schedules | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Disposition Schedules Disposition Schedules The DOE Records Disposition Schedules provide the authority for the transfer, or disposal of records created and maintained by the...

176

Spent nuclear fuel project cold vacuum drying facility safety equipment list  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides the safety equipment list (SEL) for the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility (CVDF). The SEL was prepared in accordance with the procedure for safety structures, systems, and components (SSCs) in HNF-PRO-516, ''Safety Structures, Systems, and Components,'' Revision 0 and HNF-PRO-097, Engineering Design and Evaluation, Revision 0. The SEL was developed in conjunction with HNF-SO-SNF-SAR-O02, Safety Analysis Report for the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility, Phase 2, Supporting Installation of Processing Systems (Garvin 1998). The SEL identifies the SSCs and their safety functions, the design basis accidents for which they are required to perform, the design criteria, codes and standards, and quality assurance requirements that are required for establishing the safety design basis of the SSCs. This SEL has been developed for the CVDF Phase 2 Safety Analysis Report (SAR) and shall be updated, expanded, and revised in accordance with future phases of the CVDF SAR until the CVDF final SAR is approved.

IRWIN, J.J.

1999-02-24T23:59:59.000Z

177

Appraisal of the Uranium Processing Facility Safety Basis Preliminary Safety Design Report Process at the Y-12 National Security Complex, May 2013  

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

Appraisal of the Appraisal of the Uranium Processing Facility Safety Basis Preliminary Safety Design Report Process at the Y-12 National Security Complex May 2011 May 2013 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U. S. Department of Energy Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Background........................................................................................................................................... 1 3.0 Scope..................................................................................................................................................... 2

178

Appraisal of the Uranium Processing Facility Safety Basis Preliminary Safety Design Report Process at the Y-12 National Security Complex, May 2013  

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

Appraisal of the Appraisal of the Uranium Processing Facility Safety Basis Preliminary Safety Design Report Process at the Y-12 National Security Complex May 2011 May 2013 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U. S. Department of Energy Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Background........................................................................................................................................... 1 3.0 Scope..................................................................................................................................................... 2

179

DOE Order Self Study Modules - DOE O 420.1B Facility Safety  

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

0.1B 0.1B FACILITY SAFETY NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION LEARNING AND CAREER DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CHANGE NO: 2 DOE O 420.1B Level: Familiar Date: 12/1/08 1 DOE ORDER O 420.1B FACILITY SAFETY FAMILIAR LEVEL _________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTIVES Given the familiar level of this module and the listed resources, you will be able to perform the following: 1. State the purpose of implementing DOE O 420.1B. 2. State who is responsible for complying with the requirements of this Order. 3. State the general and design requirements for nuclear safety. 4. State the general programmatic requirements for an acceptable fire protection program. 5. State the fire protection design requirements for a comprehensive fire protection

180

Lessons learnt from ITER safety & licensing for DEMO and future nuclear fusion facilities  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

One of the strong motivations for pursuing the development of fusion energy is its potentially low environmental impact and very good safety performance. But this safety and environmental potential can only be fully realized by careful design choices. For DEMO and other fusion facilities that will require nuclear licensing, S&E objectives and criteria should be set at an early stage and taken into account when choosing basic design options and throughout the design process. Studies in recent decades of the safety of fusion power plant concepts give a useful basis on which to build the S&E approach and to assess the impact of design choices. The experience of licensing ITER is of particular value, even though there are some important differences between ITER and DEMO. The ITER project has developed a safety case, produced a preliminary safety report and had it examined by the French nuclear safety authorities, leading to the licence to construct the facility. The key technical issues that arose during ...

Taylor, Neill

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

Office of UNF Disposition International Program - Strategic Plan |  

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

UNF Disposition International Program - Strategic Plan UNF Disposition International Program - Strategic Plan Office of UNF Disposition International Program - Strategic Plan The Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Energy, Used Nuclear Fuel Disposition Research and Development Office (UFD), performs the critical mission of addressing the need for an integrated strategy that combines safe storage of spent nuclear fuel with expeditious progress toward siting and licensing a disposal facility or facilities. The UFD International Program plays a key role in this effort. International collaboration provides a forum for exchanging strategies, expertise, and technologies with other nations that have also been investigating solutions to the problems of nuclear waste disposal-information that otherwise would have

182

Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Y-12 National Security Complex Urnaium Processing Facility Project, June 2012  

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

Y-12 National Security Complex Y-12 National Security Complex Uranium Processing Facility Project May 2011 June 2012 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy i Independent Oversight Assessment of Safety Culture at the Y-12 National Security Complex Uranium Processing Facility Project Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Scope and Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 2 3.0 Results and Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 3

183

Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Y-12 National Security Complex Urnaium Processing Facility Project, June 2012  

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

Y-12 National Security Complex Y-12 National Security Complex Uranium Processing Facility Project May 2011 June 2012 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy i Independent Oversight Assessment of Safety Culture at the Y-12 National Security Complex Uranium Processing Facility Project Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Scope and Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 2 3.0 Results and Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 3

184

Review of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Facility Fire Suppression Vital Safety System, January 2012  

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

the the Los Alamos National Laboratory Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Facility Fire Suppression Vital Safety System January 2012 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy i Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Background ............................................................................................................................................ 1 3.0 Scope ...................................................................................................................................................... 1

185

Review of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Facility Fire Suppression Vital Safety System, January 2012  

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

the the Los Alamos National Laboratory Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Facility Fire Suppression Vital Safety System January 2012 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy i Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Background ............................................................................................................................................ 1 3.0 Scope ...................................................................................................................................................... 1

186

Safety Analysis (SA) of the decontamination facility, Building 419, at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This safety analysis was performed for the Manager, Plant Services at LLNL and fulfills the requirements of DOE Order 5481.1. The analysis was based on field inspections, document review, computer calculations, and extensive input from Waste Management personnel. It was concluded that the maximum quantities of radioactive materials that safety procedures allow to be handled in this building do not pose undue risks on- or off-site even in postulated severe accidents. Risk from the various hazards at this facility vary from low to moderate as specified in DOE Order 5481.1. Recommendations are made for improvements that will reduce risks even further.

Odell, B.N.

1980-06-17T23:59:59.000Z

187

DOE-HDBK-1145-2001; Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities  

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

SENSITIVE SENSITIVE DOE-HDBK-1145-2001 August 2001 DOE STANDARD Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG 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 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. Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities DOE-HDBK-1145-2001 Program Management Guide Foreword This Handbook describes an implementation process for training as recommended in

188

Preparation Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analyses  

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

3009-94 3009-94 July 1994 CHANGE NOTICE NO.1 January 2000 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 2 April 2002 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 3 March 2006 DOE STANDARD PREPARATION GUIDE FOR U.S DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NONREACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITY DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSES U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, DC 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-STD-3009-94 Page ii This document has been reproduced directly 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. DOE-STD-3009-94 Page iii Preparation Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analyses Table of Changes

189

W-1 Sodium Loop Safety Facility experiment centerline fuel thermocouple performance. [LMFBR  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The W-1 Sodium Loop Safety Facility (SLSF) experiment is the fifth in a series of experiments sponsored by the Department of Energy (DOE) as part of the National Fast Breeder Reactor (FBR) Safety Assurance Program. The experiments are being conducted under the direction of Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) and Hanford Engineering Development Laboratory (HEDL). The irradiation phase of the W-1 SLSF experiment was conducted between May 27 and July 20, 1979, and terminated with incipient fuel pin cladding failure during the final boiling transient. Experimental hardware and facility performed as designed, allowing completion of all planned tests and test objectives. This paper focuses on high temperature in-fuel thermocouples and discusses their development, fabrication, and performance in the W-1 experiment.

Meyers, S.C.; Henderson, J.M.

1980-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

190

Request For Records Disposition | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Request For Records Disposition Request For Records Disposition Southeastern Power Administration (SEPA) Request For Records Disposition More Documents & Publications Audit...

191

Frequently Asked Questions Regarding DOE-STD-1195-2011, Design of Safety Significant Safety Instrumented Systems Used at DOE Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Frequently Asked Questions Regarding DOE-STD-1195-2011 which provides requirements and guidance for the design, procurement, installation, testing, maintenance, operation, and quality assurance of safety instrumented systems (SIS) that may be used at Department of Energy (DOE) nonreactor nuclear facilities for safety significant (SS) functions.

192

Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide Review Questions  

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

Oak Ridge Operations Oak Ridge Operations Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide Review Questions Name: Organization: Directions: This is an open-book evaluation. Complete the questions, and submit your answers (hand-written or electronically) to the Training Center. Someone will check and grade your answers. If you achieve a score of at least 80%, you will receive a completion certificate. Questions: 1. What is safety basis (SB)? 2. How does SB fit with integrated safety management (ISM)? 3. In what primary DOE documents can requirements and guidance for SB be found? 4. What are the "graded approach" factors that DOE takes into account in ensuring that the level of analysis and documentation and the actions used to comply with the requirements are

193

Electrical Safety Assessment Plan - Developed By NNSA/NSO IOD Facility Representative  

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

December 2003 December 2003 An assessment of the Electrical Safety (ES) program at XXXX was conducted during the week of December XX-XX, 2003. The assessment team evaluated the program using the programmatic areas and specific Lines of Inquiry (LOI) contained in the approved Assessment plan provided. The team consisted of the Facility Representative from National Nuclear Security Administration, as well as ES, Subject Matter Expert support. The assessment plan identified 5 areas of review for Electrical Safety. An integrated process has been established to ensure electrical safety hazards are identified and that adequate controls are defined and implemented. The M&O contractor and other NTS Users management actively participate in the ES program. An implemented Work Control process is in place that ensures

194

Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide Review Questions  

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

Oak Ridge Operations Oak Ridge Operations Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide Review Questions Name: Organization: Directions: This is an open-book evaluation. Complete the questions, and submit your answers (hand-written or electronically) to the Training Center. Someone will check and grade your answers. If you achieve a score of at least 80%, you will receive a completion certificate. Questions: 1. What is safety basis (SB)? 2. How does SB fit with integrated safety management (ISM)? 3. In what primary DOE documents can requirements and guidance for SB be found? 4. What are the "graded approach" factors that DOE takes into account in ensuring that the level of analysis and documentation and the actions used to comply with the requirements are

195

Facility Safety  

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

Changes include invoking DOE-STD-3009 and DOE-STD-1104 as requirements documents. NOTE: The two standards are not final documents but can be found in Technical Standards RevCom at https://www.standards.doe.gov/login.jsp. Login as an SME using your email address.

2014-06-25T23:59:59.000Z

196

Preliminary safety analysis report for the Auxiliary Hot Cell Facility, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Auxiliary Hot Cell Facility (AHCF) at Sandia National Laboratories, New Mexico (SNL/NM) will be a Hazard Category 3 nuclear facility used to characterize, treat, and repackage radioactive and mixed material and waste for reuse, recycling, or ultimate disposal. A significant upgrade to a previous facility, the Temporary Hot Cell, will be implemented to perform this mission. The following major features will be added: a permanent shield wall; eight floor silos; new roof portals in the hot-cell roof; an upgraded ventilation system; and upgraded hot-cell jib crane; and video cameras to record operations and facilitate remote-handled operations. No safety-class systems, structures, and components will be present in the AHCF. There will be five safety-significant SSCs: hot cell structure, permanent shield wall, shield plugs, ventilation system, and HEPA filters. The type and quantity of radionuclides that could be located in the AHCF are defined primarily by SNL/NM's legacy materials, which include radioactive, transuranic, and mixed waste. The risk to the public or the environment presented by the AHCF is minor due to the inventory limitations of the Hazard Category 3 classification. Potential doses at the exclusion boundary are well below the evaluation guidelines of 25 rem. Potential for worker exposure is limited by the passive design features incorporated in the AHCF and by SNL's radiation protection program. There is no potential for exposure of the public to chemical hazards above the Emergency Response Protection Guidelines Level 2.

OSCAR,DEBBY S.; WALKER,SHARON ANN; HUNTER,REGINA LEE; WALKER,CHERYL A.

1999-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

197

Review of the Savannah River Site Salt Waste Processing Facility Safety Basis and Design Development, August 2013  

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

Savannah River Site Savannah River Site Salt Waste Processing Facility Safety Basis and Design Development May 2011 August 2013 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose.................................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Background ............................................................................................................................................. 1 3.0 Scope and Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 2 4.0 Results .................................................................................................................................................... 3

198

Review of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Weapons Engineering Tritium Facility Tritium Gas Containment Vital Safety System, January 2013  

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

Independent Oversight Review of the Independent Oversight Review of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Weapons Engineering Tritium Facility Tritium Gas Containment Vital Safety System January 2013 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose............................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Background...................................................................................................................................... 1 3.0 Scope................................................................................................................................................ 1

199

"Defense-in-Depth" Laser Safety and the National Ignition Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The National Ignition Facility (NIF) is the largest and most energetic laser in the world contained in a complex the size of a football stadium. From the initial laser pulse, provided by telecommunication style infrared nanoJoule pulsed lasers, to the final 192 laser beams (1.8 Mega Joules total energy in the ultraviolet) converging on a target the size of a pencil eraser, laser safety is of paramount concern. In addition to this, there are numerous high-powered (Class 3B and 4) diagnostic lasers in use that can potentially send their laser radiation travelling throughout the facility. With individual beam paths of up to 1500 meters and a workforce of more than one thousand, the potential for exposure is significant. Simple laser safety practices utilized in typical laser labs just don't apply. To mitigate these hazards, NIF incorporates a multi layered approach to laser safety or 'Defense in Depth.' Most typical high-powered laser operations are contained and controlled within a single room using relatively simplistic controls to protect both the worker and the public. Laser workers are trained, use a standard operating procedure, and are required to wear Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) such as Laser Protective Eyewear (LPE) if the system is not fully enclosed. Non-workers are protected by means of posting the room with a warning sign and a flashing light. In the best of cases, a Safety Interlock System (SIS) will be employed which will 'safe' the laser in the case of unauthorized access. This type of laser operation is relatively easy to employ and manage. As the operation becomes more complex, higher levels of control are required to ensure personnel safety. Examples requiring enhanced controls are outdoor and multi-room laser operations. At the NIF there are 192 beam lines and numerous other Class 4 diagnostic lasers that can potentially deliver their hazardous energy to locations far from the laser source. This presents a serious and complex potential hazard to personnel. Because of this, a multilayered approach to safety is taken. This paper presents the philosophy and approach taken at the NIF in the multi-layered 'defense-in-depth' approach to laser safety.

King, J J

2010-12-02T23:59:59.000Z

200

Coordination Meeting with National Nuclear Security Administration Los Alamos Field Office Safety Basis Review Team Leader for Transuranic Waste Facility Preiminary Documented Safety Analysis Report  

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

HIAR-LANL-2013-04-08 HIAR-LANL-2013-04-08 Site: Los Alamos National Laboratory Subject: Office of Enforcement and Oversight's Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Activity Report for Coordination Meeting with National Nuclear Security Administration Los Alamos Field Office Safety Basis Review Team Leader for Transuranic Waste Facility Preliminary Documented Safety Analysis Report Dates of Activity : 04/08/13 Report Preparer: James O. Low Activity Description/Purpose: The Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) staff visited the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) to coordinate with the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Los Alamos Field Office (NA-00-LA) Safety Basis Review Team (SBRT) Leader for review of the revised preliminary documented safety analysis (PDSA) for the Transuranic Waste

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

Coordination Meeting with National Nuclear Security Administration Los Alamos Field Office Safety Basis Review Team Leader for Transuranic Waste Facility Preiminary Documented Safety Analysis Report  

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

HIAR-LANL-2013-04-08 HIAR-LANL-2013-04-08 Site: Los Alamos National Laboratory Subject: Office of Enforcement and Oversight's Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Activity Report for Coordination Meeting with National Nuclear Security Administration Los Alamos Field Office Safety Basis Review Team Leader for Transuranic Waste Facility Preliminary Documented Safety Analysis Report Dates of Activity : 04/08/13 Report Preparer: James O. Low Activity Description/Purpose: The Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) staff visited the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) to coordinate with the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Los Alamos Field Office (NA-00-LA) Safety Basis Review Team (SBRT) Leader for review of the revised preliminary documented safety analysis (PDSA) for the Transuranic Waste

202

DOE Records Disposition Schedule Changes | Department of Energy  

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

Records Disposition Schedule Changes DOE Records Disposition Schedule Changes Disposition Schedule Changes DOE Records Disposition Schedule Changes More Documents & Publications...

203

FAST FLUX TEST FACILITY (FFTF) A HISTORY OF SAFETY & OPERATIONAL EXCELLENCE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) is a 400-megawatt (thermal) sodium-cooled, high temperature, fast neutron flux, loop-type test reactor. The facility was constructed to support development and testing of fuels, materials and equipment for the Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor program. FFTF began operation in 1980 and over the next 10 years demonstrated its versatility to perform experiments and missions far beyond the original intent of its designers. The reactor had several distinctive features including its size, flux, core design, extensive instrumentation, and test features that enabled it to simultaneously carry out a significant array of missions while demonstrating its features that contributed to a high level of plant safety and availability. FFTF is currently being deactivated for final closure.

NIELSEN, D L

2004-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

204

Disposition of uranium-233  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US is developing a strategy for the disposition of surplus weapons-usable uranium-233 ({sup 233}U). The strategy (1) identifies the requirements for the disposition of surplus {sup 233}U; (2) identifies potential disposition options, including key issues to be resolved with each option; and (3) defines a road map that identifies future key decisions and actions. The disposition of weapons-usable fissile materials is part of a US international arms-control program for reduction of the number of nuclear weapons and the quantities of nuclear-weapons-usable materials worldwide. The disposition options ultimately lead to waste forms requiring some type of geological disposal. Major options are described herein.

Tousley, D.R. [Dept. of Energy, Washington, DC (United States). Office of Fissile Materials Disposition; Forsberg, C.W.; Krichinsky, A.M. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States)

1997-10-16T23:59:59.000Z

205

Environmental Management Waste Management Facility (EMWMF) Site-Specific Health and Safety Plan, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Bechtel Jacobs Company LLC (BJC) policy is to provide a safe and healthy workplace for all employees and subcontractors. The implementation of this policy requires that operations of the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility (EMWMF), located one-half mile west of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Y-12 National Security Complex, be guided by an overall plan and consistent proactive approach to environment, safety and health (ES&H) issues. The BJC governing document for worker safety and health, BJC/OR-1745, 'Worker Safety and Health Program', describes the key elements of the BJC Safety and Industrial Hygiene (IH) programs, which includes the requirement for development and implementation of a site-specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) where required by regulation (refer also to BJC-EH-1012, 'Development and Approval of Safety and Health Plans'). BJC/OR-1745, 'Worker Safety and Health Program', implements the requirements for worker protection contained in Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 851. The EMWMF site-specific HASP requirements identifies safe operating procedures, work controls, personal protective equipment, roles and responsibilities, potential site hazards and control measures, site access requirements, frequency and types of monitoring, site work areas, decontamination procedures, and outlines emergency response actions. This HASP will be available on site for use by all workers, management and supervisors, oversight personnel and visitors. All EMWMF assigned personnel will be briefed on the contents of this HASP and will be required to follow the procedures and protocols as specified. The policies and procedures referenced in this HASP apply to all EMWMF operations activities. In addition the HASP establishes ES&H criteria for the day-to-day activities to prevent or minimize any adverse effect on the environment and personnel safety and health and to meet standards that define acceptable waste management practices. The HASP is written to make use of past experience and best management practices to eliminate or minimize hazards to workers or the environment from events such as fires, falls, mechanical hazards, or any unplanned release to the environment.

Flynn, N.C. Bechtel Jacobs

2008-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

206

Safety Basis Requirements for Nonnuclear Facilities at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Site-Specific Work Smart Standards Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This standard establishes requirements that, when coupled with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's (LLNL's) Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) methods and other Work Smart Standards for assuring worker safety, assure that the impacts of nonnuclear operations authorized in LLNL facilities are well understood and controlled in a manner that protects the health of workers, the public, and the environment. All LLNL facilities shall be classified based on potential for adverse impact of operations to the health of co-located (i.e., nearby) workers and the public in accordance with this standard, Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 830, Subpart B, and Department of Energy Order (DOE O) 420.2A. This standard provides information on: Objectives; Applicability; Safety analysis requirements; Control selection and maintenance; Documentation requirements; Safety basis review, approval, and renewal; and Safety basis implementation.

Beach, R; Brereton, S; Failor, R; Hildum, S; Spagnolo, S; Van Warmerdam, C

2003-02-24T23:59:59.000Z

207

2009 VHA Facility Quality and Safety Report - Infrastructure | Data.gov  

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

Infrastructure Infrastructure Consumer Data Apps Challenges Resources About Blogs Let's Talk Feedback Consumer You are here Data.gov » Communities » Consumer » Data 2009 VHA Facility Quality and Safety Report - Infrastructure Dataset Summary Description The 2008 Hospital Report Card was mandated by the FY08 Appropriations Act, and focused on Congressionally-mandated metrics applicable to general patient populations. The 2009 VHA Facility Quality and Safety Repor report, not required by Congress, shifts to Veteran-centered metrics, and includes information related to infrastructure, care provided in outpatient and hospital settings, quality of care within given patient populations, accreditation status, patient satisfaction and patient outcomes for FY2008. The data in this report have been compiled from multiple sources throughout VHA. This dataset is a compilation of available services within each medical center, whether a medical center is accreditated by Joint commission and/or CARF and details the number of admissions by bed section, admissions per 1000 uniques, and average length of stay by bed sections. Total number of outpatient visits, number of unique patients and the medical center staffing.

208

B PLANT DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSIS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides the documented safety analysis (DSA) and Central Plateau Remediation Project (CP) requirements that apply to surveillance and maintenance (S&M) activities at the 221-B Canyon Building and ancillary support structures (B Plant). The document replaces BHI-010582, Documented Safety Analysis for the B-Plant Facility. The B Plant is non-operational, deactivated and undergoing long term S&M prior to decontamination and decommissioning (D&D). This DSA is compliant with 10 CFR 830, Nuclear Safety Management, Subpart B, ''Safety Basis Requirements.'' The DSA was developed in accordance with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) standard DOE-STD-1120-98, Integration of Environment, Safety, and Health into Facility Disposition Activities (DOE 1998) per Table 2 of 10 CFR 830 Appendix A, DOE Richland Operation Office (RL) direction (02-ABD-0053, Fluor Hanford Nuclear Safety Basis Strategy and Criteria) for facilities in long term S&M, and RL Direction (02-ABD-0091, ''FHI Nuclear Safety Expectations for Nuclear Facilities in Surveillance and Maintenance''). A crosswalk was prepared to identify potential inconsistencies between the previous B Plant safety analysis and DOE-STD-1120-98 guidance. In general, the safety analysis met the criteria of DOE-STD-1120-98. Some format and content changes have been made, including incorporating recent facility modifications and updating the evaluation guidelines and control selection criteria in accordance with RL direction (02-ABD-0053). The facility fire hazard analysis (FHA) and Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) are appended to this DSA as an aid to the users, to minimize editorial redundancy, and to provide an efficient basis for update.

DODD, E.N.; KERR, N.R.

2003-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

209

DISPOSITION PATHS FOR ROCKY FLATS GLOVEBOXES: EVALUATING OPTIONS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Kaiser-Hill Company, LLC has the responsibility for closure activities at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (RFETS). One of the challenges faced for closure is the disposition of radiologically contaminated gloveboxes. Evaluation of the disposition options for gloveboxes included a detailed analysis of available treatment capabilities, disposal facilities, and lifecycle costs. The Kaiser-Hill Company, LLC followed several processes in determining how the gloveboxes would be managed for disposition. Currently, multiple disposition paths have been chosen to accommodate the needs of the varying styles and conditions of the gloveboxes, meet the needs of the decommissioning team, and to best manage lifecycle costs. Several challenges associated with developing a disposition path that addresses both the radiological and RCRA concerns as well as offering the most cost-effective solution were encountered. These challenges included meeting the radiological waste acceptance criteria of available disposal facilities, making a RCRA determination, evaluating treatment options and costs, addressing void requirements associated with disposal, and identifying packaging and transportation options. The varying disposal facility requirements affected disposition choices. Facility conditions that impacted decisions included radiological and chemical waste acceptance criteria, physical requirements, and measurement for payment options. The facility requirements also impacted onsite activities including management strategies, decontamination activities, and life-cycle cost.

Lobdell, D.; Geimer, R.; Larsen, P.; Loveland, K.

2003-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

210

Toolbox Safety Talk Safety Data Sheets (SDS)  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Toolbox Safety Talk Safety Data Sheets (SDS) Environmental Health & Safety Facilities Safety-in sheet to Environmental Health & Safety for recordkeeping. Chemical manufacturers are required to produce Safety Data Sheets (SDS) for all chemicals produced. "Safety Data Sheets", previously referred

Pawlowski, Wojtek

211

Safety System Oversight Assessment of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Weapons Engineering Tritium Facility Tritium Gas Handling System  

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

Site Visit Report Site Visit Report Safety System Oversight Assessment of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Weapons Engineering Tritium Facility Tritium Gas Handling System INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW This report documents the results of the Office of Health, Safety and Security's (HSS) review of a safety system oversight (SSO) assessment of the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Weapons Engineering Tritium Facility (WETF) tritium gas handling system (TGHS). The assessment evaluated the TGHS's ability to perform as required by safety bases and other applicable requirements. The assessment was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Los Alamos Site Office (LASO) and was conducted October 25 - November 5, 2010. LASO was the overall lead organization for the evaluation, which included independent

212

disposition | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

disposition disposition Dataset Summary Description This dataset comes from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), and is part of the 2011 Annual Energy Outlook Report (AEO2011). This dataset is table 11, and contains only the reference case. The dataset uses million barrels per day. The data is broken down into crude oil, other petroleum supply, other non petroleum supply and liquid fuel consumption. Source EIA Date Released April 26th, 2011 (3 years ago) Date Updated Unknown Keywords 2011 AEO disposition EIA liquid fuels Supply Data application/vnd.ms-excel icon AEO2011: Liquid Fuels Supply and Disposition- Reference Case (xls, 117 KiB) Quality Metrics Level of Review Peer Reviewed Comment Temporal and Spatial Coverage Frequency Annually Time Period 2008-2035

213

Annual report to Congress: Department of Energy activities relating to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, calendar year 1998  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This is the ninth Annual Report to the Congress describing Department of Energy (Department) activities in response to formal recommendations and other interactions with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board). The Board, an independent executive-branch agency established in 1988, provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of energy regarding public health and safety issues at the Department`s defense nuclear facilities. The Board also reviews and evaluates the content and implementation of health and safety standards, as well as other requirements, relating to the design, construction, operation, and decommissioning of the Department`s defense nuclear facilities. The locations of the major Department facilities are provided. During 1998, Departmental activities resulted in the proposed closure of one Board recommendation. In addition, the Department has completed all implementation plan milestones associated with four other Board recommendations. Two new Board recommendations were received and accepted by the Department in 1998, and two new implementation plans are being developed to address these recommendations. The Department has also made significant progress with a number of broad-based initiatives to improve safety. These include expanded implementation of integrated safety management at field sites, a renewed effort to increase the technical capabilities of the federal workforce, and a revised plan for stabilizing excess nuclear materials to achieve significant risk reduction.

NONE

1999-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

214

Preparation Guide for U. S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis  

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

DOE-STD-3009-94 July 1994 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 12 January 2000 5 December 24 April 20021 DOE STANDARD PREPARATION GUIDE FOR U.S DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NONREACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITY DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSISANALYSES REPORTS U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, DC 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. TS This document has been reproduced directly 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;

215

DOE-HDBK-1113-98, CN 1, Reaffirm; Radiological Safety Training for Uranium Facilities  

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

REAFFIRMATION WITH REAFFIRMATION WITH ERRATA April 2005 DOE HANDBOOK RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY TRAINING FOR URANIUM FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy FSC 6910 Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-HDBK-1113-98 ii 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 U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. DOE-HDBK-1113-98 iii April 2005 Reaffirmation with Errata Changes to DOE-HDBK-1113-98, Radiological

216

DOE-HDBK-1113-98, CH 1; Radiological Safety Training for Uranium Facilities  

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

3-9 8 February 199 8 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 1 December 2002 DOE HANDBOOK RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY TRAINING FOR URANIUM FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy FSC 6910 Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. A pproved for public release; dist ribution is unlim ited. DOE-HDBK-1113-98 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 U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. DOE-HDBK-1113-98 iii Foreword This Handbook describes a recommended implementation process for additional training as outlined in

217

Preparation Guide for U. S. Department of Energy Nonreator Nuclear Facility Document Safety Analysis  

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

SENSITIVE DOE-STD-3009-94 July 1994 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 1 January 2000 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 2 April 2002 DOE STANDARD PREPARATION GUIDE FOR U.S DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NONREACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITY DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSES U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, DC 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. TS TS This document has been reproduced directly 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;

218

Sodium Loop Safety Facility W-2 experiment fuel pin rupture detection system. [LMFBR  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The objective of the Sodium Loop Safety Facility (SLSF) W-2 experiment is to characterize the combined effects of a preconditioned full-length fuel column and slow transient overpower (TOP) conditions on breeder reactor (BR) fuel pin cladding failures. The W-2 experiment will meet this objective by providing data in two technological areas: (1) time and location of cladding failure, and (2) early post-failure test fuel behavior. The test involves a seven pin, prototypic full-length fast test reactor (FTR) fuel pin bundle which will be subjected to a simulated unprotected 5 cents/s reactivity transient overpower event. The outer six pins will provide the necessary prototypic thermal-hydraulic environment for the center pin.

Hoffman, M.A.; Kirchner, T.L.; Meyers, S.C.

1980-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

219

Accident safety analysis for 300 Area N Reactor Fuel Fabrication and Storage Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of the accident safety analysis is to identify and analyze a range of credible events, their cause and consequences, and to provide technical justification for the conclusion that uranium billets, fuel assemblies, uranium scrap, and chips and fines drums can be safely stored in the 300 Area N Reactor Fuel Fabrication and Storage Facility, the contaminated equipment, High-Efficiency Air Particulate filters, ductwork, stacks, sewers and sumps can be cleaned (decontaminated) and/or removed, the new concretion process in the 304 Building will be able to operate, without undue risk to the public, employees, or the environment, and limited fuel handling and packaging associated with removal of stored uranium is acceptable.

Johnson, D.J.; Brehm, J.R.

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

220

Technical Safety Requirements for the B695 Segment of the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document contains Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) Division's B695 Segment of the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The TSRs constitute requirements regarding the safe operation of the B695 Segment of the DWTF. The TSRs are derived from the Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) for the B695 Segment of the DWTF (LLNL 2004). The analysis presented there determined that the B695 Segment of the DWTF is a low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 3, nonreactor nuclear facility. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits as well as controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard analyses. Furthermore, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls section of the TSRs. The B695 Segment of the DWTF (B695 and the west portion of B696) is a waste treatment and storage facility located in the northeast quadrant of the LLNL main site. The approximate area and boundary of the B695 Segment of the DWTF are shown in the B695 Segment of the DWTF DSA. Activities typically conducted in the B695 Segment of the DWTF include container storage, lab-packing, repacking, overpacking, bulking, sampling, waste transfer, and waste treatment. B695 is used to store and treat radioactive, mixed, and hazardous waste, and it also contains equipment used in conjunction with waste processing operations to treat various liquid and solid wastes. The portion of the building called Building 696 Solid Waste Processing Area (SWPA), also referred to as B696S in this report, is used primarily to manage solid radioactive waste. Operations specific to the SWPA include sorting and segregating low-level waste (LLW) and transuranic (TRU) waste, lab-packing, sampling, and crushing empty drums that previously contained LLW. A permit modification for B696S was submitted to DTSC in January 2004 to store and treat hazardous and mixed waste. Upon approval of the permit modification, B696S rooms 1007, 1008, and 1009 will be able to store hazardous and mixed waste for up to 1 year. Furthermore, an additional drum crusher and a Waste Packaging Unit will be permitted to treat hazardous and mixed waste. RHWM generally processes LLW with no, or extremely low, concentrations of transuranics (i.e., much less than 100 nCi/g). Wastes processed often contain only depleted uranium and beta- and gamma-emitting nuclides, e.g., {sup 90}Sr, {sup 137}Cs, {sup 3}H. Chapter 5 of the DSA documents the derivation of TSRs and develops the operational limits that protect the safety envelope defined for this facility. The DSA is applicable to the handling of radioactive waste stored and treated in the B695 Segment of the DWTF. Section 5 of the TSR, Administrative Controls, contains those Administrative Controls necessary to ensure safe operation of the B695 Segment of the DWTF. A basis explanation follows each of the requirements described in Section 5.5, Specific Administrative Controls. The basis explanation does not constitute an additional requirement, but is intended as an expansion of the logic and reasoning behind development of the requirement. Programmatic Administrative Controls are addressed in Section 5.6.

Larson, H L

2007-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

DOE-STD-6002-96; DOE Standard Safety of Magnetic Fusion Facilities: Requirements  

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

6002-96 6002-96 May 1996 DOE STANDARD SAFETY OF MAGNETIC FUSION FACILITIES: REQUIREMENTS U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT 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; (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. DE96009495 DOE-STD-6002-96 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page FOREWORD....................................................................................................................... v

222

Request For Records Disposition | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Request For Records Disposition Request For Records Disposition Spent Nuclear Fuels Request For Records Disposition More Documents & Publications The Report To The President And...

223

Characterizing Surplus US Plutonium for Disposition - 13199  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The United States (US) has identified 61.5 metric tons (MT) of plutonium that is permanently excess to use in nuclear weapons programs, including 47.2 MT of weapons-grade plutonium. Surplus inventories will be stored safely by the Department of Energy (DOE) and then transferred to facilities that will prepare the plutonium for permanent disposition. The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) operates a Feed Characterization program for the Office of Fissile Materials Disposition (OFMD) of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and the DOE Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM). SRNL manages a broad program of item tracking through process history, laboratory analysis, and non-destructive assay. A combination of analytical techniques allows SRNL to predict the isotopic and chemical properties that qualify materials for disposition through the Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility (MFFF). The research also defines properties that are important for other disposition paths, including disposal to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) as transuranic waste (TRUW) or to high-level waste (HLW) systems. (authors)

Allender, Jeffrey S. [Savannah River National Laboratory, Aiken SC 29808 (United States)] [Savannah River National Laboratory, Aiken SC 29808 (United States); Moore, Edwin N. [Moore Nuclear Energy, LLC, Savannah River Site, Aiken SC 29808 (United States)] [Moore Nuclear Energy, LLC, Savannah River Site, Aiken SC 29808 (United States)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

224

Characterizing surplus US plutonium for disposition  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The United States (US) has identified 61.5 metric tons (MT) of plutonium that is permanently excess to use in nuclear weapons programs, including 47.2 MT of weapons-grade plutonium. Surplus inventories will be stored safely by the Department of Energy (DOE) and then transferred to facilities that will prepare the plutonium for permanent disposition. The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) operates a Feed Characterization program for the Office of Fissile Materials Disposition (OFMD) of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and the DOE Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM). SRNL manages a broad program of item tracking through process history, laboratory analysis, and non-destructive assay. A combination of analytical techniques allows SRNL to predict the isotopic and chemical properties that qualify materials for disposition through the Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility (MFFF). The research also defines properties that are important for other disposition paths, including disposal to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) as transuranic waste (TRUW) or to high-level waste (HLW) systems.

Allender, Jeffrey S.; Moore, Edwin N.

2013-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

225

Annual report to Congress: Department of Energy activities relating to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, Calendar Year 1999  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This is the tenth Annual Report to the Congress describing Department of Energy activities in response to formal recommendations and other interactions with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board). The Board, an independent executive-branch agency established in 1988, provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Energy regarding public health and safety issues at the Department's defense nuclear facilities. The Board also reviews and evaluates the content and implementation of health and safety standards, as well as other requirements, relating to the design, construction, operation, and decommissioning of the Department's defense nuclear facilities. During 1999, Departmental activities resulted in the closure of nine Board recommendations. In addition, the Department has completed all implementation plan milestones associated with three Board recommendations. One new Board recommendation was received and accepted by the Department in 1999, and a new implementation plan is being developed to address this recommendation. The Department has also made significant progress with a number of broad-based initiatives to improve safety. These include expanded implementation of integrated safety management at field sites, opening of a repository for long-term storage of transuranic wastes, and continued progress on stabilizing excess nuclear materials to achieve significant risk reduction.

None

2000-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

226

SRS - Programs - Liquid Waste Disposition  

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

Liquid Waste Disposition Liquid Waste Disposition This includes both the solidification of highly radioactive liquid wastes stored in SRS's tank farms and disposal of liquid low-level waste generated as a by-product of the separations process and tank farm operations. This low-level waste is treated in the Effluent Treatment Facility. High-activity liquid waste is generated at SRS as by-products from the processing of nuclear materials for national defense, research and medical programs. The waste, totaling about 36 million gallons, is currently stored in 49 underground carbon-steel waste tanks grouped into two "tank farms" at SRS. While the waste is stored in the tanks, it separates into two parts: a sludge that settles on the bottom of the tank, and a liquid supernate that resides on top of the sludge. The waste is reduced to about 30 percent of its original volume by evaporation. The condensed evaporator "overheads" are transferred to the Effluent Treatment Project for final cleanup prior to release to the environment. As the concentrate cools a portion of it crystallizes forming solid saltcake. The concentrated supernate and saltcake are less mobile and therefore less likely to escape to the environment in the event of a tank crack or leak.

227

Letter from Nuclear Energy Institute regarding Integrated Safety Analysis: Why it is Appropropriate for Fuel Recycling Facilities  

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

082 l F: 202.533.0166 l rxm@nei.org l www.nei.org 082 l F: 202.533.0166 l rxm@nei.org l www.nei.org Rod McCullum DIRECTOR FUEL CYCLE PROJECTS NUCLEAR GENERATION DIVISION September 10, 2010 Ms. Catherine Haney Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Subject: Integrated Safety Analysis: Why It Is Appropriate for Fuel Recycling Facilities Project Number: 689 Dear Ms. Haney: Enclosed for your review is a Nuclear Energy Institute white paper on the use of Integrated Safety Analysis (ISA) at U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission-licensed recycling facilities. This paper is intended as an information source for the NRC and should serve as a foundation for discussion with industry representatives on the issue.

228

Disposition of fuel elements from the Aberdeen and Sandia pulse reactor (SPR-II) assemblies  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

We describe the disposition of fuel from the Aberdeen (APR) and the Sandia Pulse Reactors (SPR-II) which were used to provide intense neutron bursts for radiation effects testing. The enriched Uranium - 10% Molybdenum fuel from these reactors was shipped to the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) for size reduction prior to shipment to the Savannah River Site (SRS) for final disposition in the H Canyon facility. The Shipper/Receiver Agreements (SRA), intra-DOE interfaces, criticality safety evaluations, safety and quality requirements and key materials management issues required for the successful completion of this project will be presented. This work is in support of the DOE Consolidation and Disposition program. Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) has operated pulse nuclear reactor research facilities for the Department of Energy since 1961. The Sandia Pulse Reactor (SPR-II) was a bare metal Godiva-type reactor. The reactor facilities have been used for research and development of nuclear and non-nuclear weapon systems, advanced nuclear reactors, reactor safety, simulation sources and energy related programs. The SPR-II was a fast burst reactor, designed and constructed by SNL that became operational in 1967. The SPR-ll core was a solid-metal fuel enriched to 93% {sup 235}U. The uranium was alloyed with 10 weight percent molybdenum to ensure the phase stabilization of the fuel. The core consisted of six fuel plates divided into two assemblies of three plates each. Figure 1 shows a cutaway diagram of the SPR-II Reactor with its decoupling shroud. NNSA charged Sandia with removing its category 1 and 2 special nuclear material by the end of 2008. The main impetus for this activity was based on NNSA Administrator Tom D'Agostino's six focus areas to reenergize NNSA's nuclear material consolidation and disposition efforts. For example, the removal of SPR-II from SNL to DAF was part of this undertaking. This project was in support of NNSA's efforts to consolidate the locations of special nuclear material (SNM) to reduce the cost of securing many SNM facilities. The removal of SPR-II from SNL was a significant accomplishment in SNL's de-inventory efforts and played a key role in reducing the number of locations requiring the expensive security measures required for category 1 and 2 SNM facilities. A similar pulse reactor was fabricated at the Y-12 National Security Complex beginning in the late 1960's. This Aberdeen Pulse Reactor (APR) was operated at the Army Pulse Radiation Facility (APRF) located at the Aberdeen Test Center (ATC) in Maryland. When the APRF was shut down in 2003, a portion of the DOE-owned Special Nuclear Material (SNM) was shipped to an interim facility for storage. Subsequently, the DOE determined that the material from both the SPR-II and the APR would be processed in the H-Canyon at the Savannah River Site (SRS). Because of the SRS receipt requirements some of the material was sent to the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) for size-reduction prior to shipment to the SRS for final disposition.

Mckerley, Bill [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Bustamante, Jacqueline M [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Costa, David A [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Drypolcher, Anthony F [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Hickey, Joseph [Los Alamos National Laboratory

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

229

Annual report to Congress. Department of Energy activities relating to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, calendar year 2000  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Annual Report to the Congress describes the Department of Energy's activities in response to formal recommendations and other interactions with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. During 2000, the Department completed its implementation and proposed closure of one Board recommendation and completed all implementation plan milestones associated with two additional Board recommendations. Also in 2000, the Department formally accepted two new Board recommendations and developed implementation plans in response to those recommendations. The Department also made significant progress with a number of broad-based safety initiatives. These include initial implementation of integrated safety management at field sites and within headquarters program offices, issuance of a nuclear safety rule, and continued progress on stabilizing excess nuclear materials to achieve significant risk reduction.

None

2001-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

230

Revisions to the Facility Safety Order and DOE?STD?1066  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Presenter: Jim Bisker, Fire Protection Program Manager, Office of Health, Safety and Security (HS?32)

231

Savannah River Site Achieves Transuranic Waste Disposition Goal in 2013 |  

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

Savannah River Site Achieves Transuranic Waste Disposition Goal in Savannah River Site Achieves Transuranic Waste Disposition Goal in 2013 Savannah River Site Achieves Transuranic Waste Disposition Goal in 2013 December 24, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis Workers gather behind a “Safety and Security begins with Me” banner at the Savannah River Site. Workers gather behind a "Safety and Security begins with Me" banner at the Savannah River Site. Workers sort through transuranic waste at the Savannah River Site. Workers sort through transuranic waste at the Savannah River Site. SRR employees Glenn Kelly and Fred Merriweather pour the final amount of grout into Tank 6. SRR employees Glenn Kelly and Fred Merriweather pour the final amount of grout into Tank 6. Workers gather behind a "Safety and Security begins with Me" banner at the Savannah River Site.

232

Evaluation of replacement tritium facility (RTF) compliance with DOE safety goals using probabilistic consequence assessment methodology. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Savannah River Site (SRS), operated by the Westinghouse Savannah River Company (WSRC) for the US Department of Energy (DOE), is a major center for the processing of nuclear materials for national defense, deep-space exploration, and medical treatment applications in the United States. As an integral part of the DOE`s effort to modernize facilities, implement improved handling and processing technology, and reduce operational risk to the general public and onsite workers, transition of tritium processing at SRS from the Consolidated Tritium Facility to the Replacement Tritium Facility (RTF) began in 1993. To ensure that operation of new DOE facilities such as RTF present minimum involuntary and voluntary risks to the neighboring public and workers, indices of risk have been established to serve as target levels or safety goals of performance for assessing nuclear safety. These goals are discussed from a historical perspective in the initial part of this paper. Secondly, methodologies to quantify risk indices are briefly described. Lastly, accident, abnormal event, and normal operation source terms from RTF are evaluated for consequence assessment purposes relative to the safety targets.

O`Kula, K.R.; East, J.M.; Moore, M.L.

1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

233

Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework |  

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

Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework Completing the Office of River Protection (ORP) mission of stabilizing 56 million gallons of chemical and radioactive waste stored in Hanford's 177 tanks is one of the Energy Department's highest priorities. This Framework document outlines a phased approach for beginning tank waste treatment while continuing to resolve technical issues with the Pretreatment and High-Level Waste Facilities. Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework More Documents & Publications EIS-0391: Draft Environmental Impact Statement Waste Treatment Plant and Tank Farm Program EIS-0356: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

234

Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework |  

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

Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework Completing the Office of River Protection (ORP) mission of stabilizing 56 million gallons of chemical and radioactive waste stored in Hanford's 177 tanks is one of the Energy Department's highest priorities. This Framework document outlines a phased approach for beginning tank waste treatment while continuing to resolve technical issues with the Pretreatment and High-Level Waste Facilities. Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework More Documents & Publications EIS-0391: Draft Environmental Impact Statement Waste Treatment Plant and Tank Farm Program EIS-0356: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

235

The whole-body counting facility at the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority after relocation  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

......the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority new location...funded by the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...Measurements of gamma-radiation from the human body...ORTEC. MCA emulator software version 6.0. 2000......

L. del Risco Norrlid; I. stergren

2011-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

236

October 24, 2003, Criteria and Guidelines For the Assessment of Safety System Software and Firmware at Defense Nuclear Facilities  

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

3.1 3.1 Revision 3 October 24, 2003 U. S. Department of Energy Criteria and Guidelines For the Assessment of Safety System Software and Firmware at Defense Nuclear Facilities October 24, 2003 CRAD - 4.2.3.1 Revision 3 October 24, 2003 i TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS...................................................................................................................................ii GLOSSARY ...................................................................................................................................iii 1.0 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................1 2.0 BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................................2

237

Permitted Mercury Storage Facility Notifications | Department...  

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

Services Waste Management Waste Disposition Long-Term Management and Storage of Elemental Mercury is in the Planning Stages Permitted Mercury Storage Facility...

238

DOE-STD-101-92; Compilation of Nuclear Safety Criteria Potential Application to DOE Nonreactor Facilities  

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

-1O1-92 -1O1-92 DE92 011016 COMPILATION OF NUCLEAR SAFETY CRITERIA POTENTIAL APPLICATION TO DOE NONREACTOR FACILITIES Published: March 1992 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy Office of Nuclear Safety Policy and Standards Washington,DC 20585 This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Informa- tion, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; prices available from (423) 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. DE92011016 DOE-STD-101-92 CONTENTS FOREWORD 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose 1.2 Sources of Criteria and Format 1.3 Safety Analysis Report Criteria

239

U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge Operations Office Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide [Fulfills ORO Safety Basis Competency 1, 2 (Part 1), or 7 (Part 1)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

"This self-study guide provides an overview of safety basis terminology, requirements, and activities that are applicable to DOE and Oak Ridge Operations Office (ORO) nuclear facilities on the Oak...

240

Subject: Integrated Safety Analysis: Why It Is Appropriate for Fuel Recycling Facilities Project Number: 689Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Letter, 9/10/10  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Enclosed for your review is a Nuclear Energy Institute white paper on the use of Integrated Safety Analysis (ISA) at U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission-licensed recycling facilities. This paper is...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1996-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

242

Toolbox Safety Talk Ladder Safety  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Toolbox Safety Talk Ladder Safety Environmental Health & Safety Facilities Safety & Health Section Health & Safety for recordkeeping. Slips, trips, and falls constitute the majority of general industry elevated work tasks. Like any tool, ladders must be used properly to ensure employee safety. GENERAL

Pawlowski, Wojtek

243

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2011-01-21T23:59:59.000Z

244

Assistant Manager for Waste Disposition  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The incumbent of this position is responsible for providing overall leadership and direction for oversight of assigned contractor and Federal programs and activities associated with the disposition...

245

Major Risk Factors Integrated Facility Disposition Project -...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Regulations CH contact-handled CMTS Central Mercury Treatment System COG central off-gas CWA Clean Water Act of 1972 D&D deactivation, decontamination and decommissioning DARA...

246

Consent Order, Uranium Disposition Services, LLC - NCO-2010-01 | Department  

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

Uranium Disposition Services, LLC - NCO-2010-01 Uranium Disposition Services, LLC - NCO-2010-01 Consent Order, Uranium Disposition Services, LLC - NCO-2010-01 March 26, 2010 Consent Order issued to Uranium Disposition Services, LLC related to Construction Deficiencies at the DUF6 Conversion Buildings at the Portsmouth and Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plants The Office of Health, Safety and Security's Office of Enforcement has completed its investigation into the facts and circumstances associated with construction deficiencies at the DUF6 Conversion Buildings located at the Portsmouth and Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plants. The investigation reports, dated January 22, 2009, and April 23, 2009, were provided to Uranium Disposition Services, LLC (DDS), and addressed specific areas of potential noncompliance with DOE nuclear safety requirements established in

247

Criticality safety aspects of decontamination and decommissioning at defense nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Defense nuclear facilities have operated for forty years with a well-defined mission to produce weapons components for the nation. With the end of the cold war, the facilities` missions have changed to one of decontamination and decommissioning. Off-normal operations and use of new procedures, such as will exist during these activities, have often been among the causal factors in previous criticality accidents at process facilities. This paper explores the similarities in causal factors in previous criticality accidents to the conditions existing in current defense nuclear facilities undergoing the transition to decontamination and decommissioning. Practices to reduce the risk to workers, the public, and the environment are recommended.

Croucher, D.W.

1994-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

248

The safety climate of a Department of Energy nuclear facility: A sociotechnical analysis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Government- and public-sponsored groups are increasingly demanding greater accountability by the Department of Energy`s weapons complex. Many of these demands have focused on the development of a positive safety climate, one that not only protects workers onsite, but also the surrounding populace and environment as well. These demands are, in part, a response to findings which demonstrate a close linkage between actual organizational safety performance and the organization`s safety climate, i.e., the collective attitudes employees hold concerning the level of safety in their organization. This paper describes the approach taken in the systematic assessment of the safety climate at EG&G Rocky Flats Plant (RFP).

Johnson, A.E.; Harbour, J.L.

1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

249

SRS - Programs - H Area Nuclear Materials Disposition  

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

H Area Nuclear Materials Disposition H Area Nuclear Materials Disposition The primary mission of the H-Canyon Complex is to dissolve, purify and blend-down surplus highly enriched uranium (HEU) and aluminum-clad foreign and domestic research reactor fuel to produce a low enriched uranium (LEU) solution suitable for conversion to commercial reactor fuel. A secondary mission for H-Canyon is to dissolve excess plutonium (Pu) not suitable for MOX and transfer it for vitrification in the Defense Waste Processing Facility at SRS. H Canyon was constructed in the early 1950s and began operations in 1955. The building is called a canyon because of its long rectangular shape and two continuous trenches that contains the process vessels. It is approximately 1,000 feet long with several levels to accommodate the various stages of material stabilization, including control rooms to monitor overall equipment and operating processes, equipment and piping gallery for solution transport, storage, and disposition, and unique overhead bridge cranes to support overall process operations. All work is remotely controlled, and employees are further protected from radiation by thick concrete walls.

250

CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health- Los Alamos National Laboratory TA 55 SST Facility  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A section of Appendix C to DOE G 226.1-2 "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities." Consists of Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) used for an assessment of the Industrial Hygiene program at the Los Alamos National Laboratory TA 55 SST Facility.

251

EM Waste and Materials Disposition & Transportation | Department...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

EM Waste and Materials Disposition & Transportation EM Waste and Materials Disposition & Transportation DOE's Radioactive Waste Management Priorities: Continue to manage waste...

252

Preclosure radiological safety analysis for accident conditions of the potential Yucca Mountain Repository: Underground facilities; Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This preliminary preclosure radiological safety analysis assesses the scenarios, probabilities, and potential radiological consequences associated with postulated accidents in the underground facility of the potential Yucca Mountain repository. The analysis follows a probabilistic-risk-assessment approach. Twenty-one event trees resulting in 129 accident scenarios are developed. Most of the scenarios have estimated annual probabilities ranging from 10{sup {minus}11}/yr to 10{sup {minus}5}/yr. The study identifies 33 scenarios that could result in offsite doses over 50 mrem and that have annual probabilities greater than 10{sup {minus}9}/yr. The largest offsite dose is calculated to be 220 mrem, which is less than the 500 mrem value used to define items important to safety in 10 CFR 60. The study does not address an estimate of uncertainties, therefore conclusions or decisions made as a result of this report should be made with caution.

Ma, C.W.; Sit, R.C.; Zavoshy, S.J.; Jardine, L.J. [Bechtel National, Inc., San Francisco, CA (United States); Laub, T.W. [Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (United States)

1992-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

253

Site & Facility Restoration | Department of Energy  

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

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

254

Criticality Safety Evaluation Report for the Cold Vacuum Drying (CVD) Facilities Process Water Handling System  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report addresses the criticality concerns associated with process water handling in the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility. The controls and limitations on equipment design and operations to control potential criticality occurrences are identified.

KESSLER, S.F.

2000-08-10T23:59:59.000Z

255

Order Module--DOE O 420.1B, FACILITY SAFETY  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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...

256

Unallocated Off-Specification Highly Enriched Uranium: Recommendations for Disposition  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has made significant progress with regard to disposition planning for 174 metric tons (MTU) of surplus Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU). Approximately 55 MTU of this 174 MTU are ''offspec'' HEU. (''Off-spec'' signifies that the isotopic or chemical content of the material does not meet the American Society for Testing and Materials standards for commercial nuclear reactor fuel.) Approximately 33 of the 55 MTU have been allocated to off-spec commercial reactor fuel per an Interagency Agreement between DOE and the Tennessee Valley Authority (1). To determine disposition plans for the remaining {approx}22 MTU, the DOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Office of Fissile Materials Disposition (OFMD) and the DOE Office of Environmental Management (EM) co-sponsored this technical study. This paper represents a synopsis of the formal technical report (NNSA/NN-0014). The {approx} 22 MTU of off-spec HEU inventory in this study were divided into two main groupings: one grouping with plutonium (Pu) contamination and one grouping without plutonium. This study identified and evaluated 26 potential paths for the disposition of this HEU using proven decision analysis tools. This selection process resulted in recommended and alternative disposition paths for each group of HEU. The evaluation and selection of these paths considered criteria such as technical maturity, programmatic issues, cost, schedule, and environment, safety and health compliance. The primary recommendations from the analysis are comprised of 7 different disposition paths. The study recommendations will serve as a technical basis for subsequent programmatic decisions as disposition of this HEU moves into the implementation phase.

Bridges, D. N.; Boeke, S. G.; Tousley, D. R.; Bickford, W.; Goergen, C.; Williams, W.; Hassler, M.; Nelson, T.; Keck, R.; Arbital, J.

2002-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

257

Waste Receiving and Processing (WRAP) Facility Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR)  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Waste Receiving and Processing Facility (WRAP), 2336W Building, on the Hanford Site is designed to receive, confirm, repackage, certify, treat, store, and ship contact-handled transuranic and low-level radioactive waste from past and present U.S. Department of Energy activities. The WRAP facility is comprised of three buildings: 2336W, the main processing facility (also referred to generically as WRAP); 2740W, an administrative support building; and 2620W, a maintenance support building. The support buildings are subject to the normal hazards associated with industrial buildings (no radiological materials are handled) and are not part of this analysis except as they are impacted by operations in the processing building, 2336W. WRAP is designed to provide safer, more efficient methods of handling the waste than currently exist on the Hanford Site and contributes to the achievement of as low as reasonably achievable goals for Hanford Site waste management.

TOMASZEWSKI, T.A.

2000-04-25T23:59:59.000Z

258

Safety Software Quality Assurance Functions, Responsibilities, and Authorities for Nuclear Facilities and Activities  

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

To assign roles and responsibilities for improving the quality of safety software. DOE N 411.2 (archived) extends this Notice until 01/31/2005. DOE N 411.3 extends this Notice until 1/31/06. Canceled by DOE O 414.1C. does not cancel other directives.

2003-08-27T23:59:59.000Z

259

Review of Documented Safety Analysis Development for the Hanford Site Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (LBL Facilities), April 23, 2013 (HSS CRAD 45-58, Rev. 0)  

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

U.S. Department of U.S. Department of Energy Subject: Review of Documented Safety Analysis Development for the Hanford Site Waste Treatment and Immob ilization Plant (LBL Facilities) - C riteria and Review Approach D oc um~ HS: HSS CRAD 45-58 Rev: 0 Eff. Date: April 23, 2013 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Acting Di rec or, Office of Safety and Emergency Nltanagement Evaluations Date: Apri l 23 , 20 13 Criteria and Review Approach Document ~~ trd,James Low Date: April 23 , 20 13 1.0 PURPOSE Within the Office of H.ealth, Safety and Security (HSS), the Office of Enforcement and Overs ight, Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations (HS-45) miss io n is to assess the effectiveness of the environment, safety, health, and emergency management systems and practices used by line and

260

Alternative technical summary report for direct disposition in deep boreholes: Direct disposal of plutonium metal/plutonium dioxide in compound canisters, Version 4.0. Fissile Materials Disposition Program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report summarizes and compares the Immobilized and Direct Beep Borehole Disposition Alternatives. The important design concepts, facility features and operational procedures are briefly described, and a discussion of the issues that affect the evaluation of each alternative against the programmatic assessment criteria that have been established for selecting the preferred alternatives for plutonium disposition.

Wijesinghe, A.M.

1996-08-23T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

DOE Order Self Study Modules - DOE-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities Documented Safety Analyses  

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

3009-94 3009-94 PREPARATION GUIDE FOR U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NONREACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITY DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSES DOE-STD-3009-94 Familiar Level June 2011 1 DOE-STD-3009-94 PREPARATION GUIDE FOR U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NONREACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITY DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSES FAMILIAR LEVEL _______________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTIVES Given the familiar level of this module and the resources listed below, you will be able to answer the following questions: 1. What are five general requirements for contractors who are responsible for a hazard category 1, 2, or 3 nuclear facility, as related to establishing a safety basis? 2. What actions must a contractor take when it is made aware of a potential inadequacy of

262

disposition. prices | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

disposition. prices disposition. prices Dataset Summary Description This dataset comes from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), and is part of the 2011 Annual Energy Outlook Report (AEO2011). This dataset is Table 15, and contains only the reference case. The dataset uses gigawatts. The data is broken down into production, net imports, consumption by sector and price. Source EIA Date Released April 26th, 2011 (3 years ago) Date Updated Unknown Keywords 2011 AEO coal coal supply disposition. prices EIA Data application/vnd.ms-excel icon AEO2011: Coal Supply, Disposition, and Prices- Reference Case (xls, 91.7 KiB) Quality Metrics Level of Review Peer Reviewed Comment Temporal and Spatial Coverage Frequency Annually Time Period 2008-2035 License License Open Data Commons Public Domain Dedication and Licence (PDDL)

263

EIS-0229: Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials |  

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

29: Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile 29: Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials EIS-0229: Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials Summary The EIS will evaluate the reasonable alternatives and potential environmental impacts for the proposed siting, construction, and operation of three types of facilities for plutonium disposition. Public Comment Opportunities None available at this time. Documents Available For Download September 5, 2007 EIS-0229: Supplement Analysis (September 2007) Storage of Surplus Plutonium Materials at the Savannah River Site November 14, 2003 EIS-0229: Record of Decision (November 2003) Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials November 7, 2003 EIS-0229-SA-03: Supplement Analysis Fabrication of Mixed Oxide Fuel Lead Assemblies in Europe

264

REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY | Department of Energy  

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

RS-Weapons X-Rays REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY More Documents & Publications REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY...

265

REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

DISPOSITION AUTHORITY More Documents & Publications REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY Request For Records Disposition Autnority Records Dispostion-Coal Distribution Data...

266

REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY | Department of Energy  

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

Request for Records Disposition Authority REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY More Documents & Publications Request For Records Disposition Authority Request For Records...

267

Request For Records Disposition Authority | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Request For Records Disposition Authority Request For Records Disposition Authority National Archives Pacific Southwest Region Request For Records Disposition Authority More...

268

Report to the Secretary of Energy on Beyond Design Basis Event Pilot Evaluations, Results and Recommendations for Improvements to Enhance Nuclear Safety at DOE Nuclear Facilities  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

In the six months after the March 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident in Japan, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) took several actions to review the safety of its nuclear facilities and identify situations where near-term improvements could be made.

269

Application of Engineering and Technical Requirements for DOE Nuclear Facilities Standard Review Plan (SRP)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This Standard Review Plan (SRP), Application of Engineering and Technical Requirements for DOE Nuclear Facilities, was developed by the Chief of Nuclear Safety (CNS)1, Office of the Under Secretary for Nuclear Security, to help strengthen the technical rigor of line management oversight and federal monitoring of DOE nuclear facilities. This SRP (hereafter refers to as the Engineering SRP) provides consistent review guidance to assure that engineering and technical requirements are appropriately applied for the design, operations and disposition2 of DOE nuclear facilities. It is one of a series of three SRPs developed by the CNS. The other two SRPs address: 1) nuclear safety basis program review; and 2) application of requirements of DOE O 413.3B, Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets, and DOE-STD-1189, Integration of Safety into the Design Process, for DOE Critical Decision (CD) review and approval. These SRPs may be revised in the future to reflect changes in the DOE requirements, lessons learned, and experience/insights from nuclear facility design, operations, and disposition.

270

Toolbox Safety Talk Articulating Boom Work Platforms  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Toolbox Safety Talk Articulating Boom Work Platforms Environmental Health & Safety Facilities sign-in sheet to Environmental Health & Safety for recordkeeping. Articulating boom work platforms Articulating Boom Work Platforms Environmental Health & Safety Facilities Safety & Health Section 395 Pine Tree

Pawlowski, Wojtek

271

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1993-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

272

REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY  

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

LEAVE BLANK (NARA use only) LEAVE BLANK (NARA use only) JOB NUMBER To: NATIONAL ARCHIVES & RECORDS ADMINISTRATION 8601 ADELPHI ROAD, COLLEGE PARK, MD 20740-6001 Date Received 1. FROM (Agency or establishment) NOTIFICATION TO AGENCY In accordance with the provisions of 44 U.S.C 3303a, the disposition request, including amendments is approved except for items that may be marked "disposition not approved" or "withdrawn" in column 10. 2. MAJOR SUB DIVISION 3. MINOR SUBDIVISION 4. NAME OF PERSON WITH WHOM TO CONFER 5. TELEPHONE DATE ARCHIVIST OF THE UNITED STATES 6. AGENCY CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that I am authorized to act for this agency in matters pertaining to the disposition of its records and that the records proposed for disposal on the attached______page(s) are not needed now for the business of this agency or will not be

273

Depleted uranium disposition study -- Supplement, Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Department of Energy Office of Weapons and Materials Planning has requested a supplemental study to update the recent Depleted Uranium Disposition report. This supplemental study addresses new disposition alternatives and changes in status.

Becker, G.W.

1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

274

West Valley Demonstration Project Phase I Decommissioning - Facility  

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

Project Phase I Decommissioning - Project Phase I Decommissioning - Facility Disposition Partnering Performance Agreement West Valley Demonstration Project Phase I Decommissioning - Facility Disposition Partnering Performance Agreement The Department of Energy, West Valley Demonstration Project (DOE-WVDP) and CH2M Hill B&W West Valley (CHBWV) are committed to continuous improvement and will utilize principles of the DOE Environmental Management (DOE-EM) Partnering Policy to create and foster a team environment to successfully complete the West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) Phase I Decommissioning - Faciltiy Disposition. West Valley Demonstration Project Phase I Decommissioning - Facility Disposition Partnering Performance Agreement More Documents & Publications CX-009527: Categorical Exclusion Determination

275

Office of Nuclear Safety  

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

Office of Nuclear Safety (HS-30) Office of Nuclear Safety (HS-30) Office of Nuclear Safety Home » Directives » Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Rules » Nuclear Safety Workshops Technical Standards Program » Search » Approved Standards » Recently Approved » RevCom for TSP » Monthly Status Reports » Archive » Feedback DOE Nuclear Safety Research & Development Program Office of Nuclear Safety Basis & Facility Design (HS-31) Office of Nuclear Safety Basis & Facility Design - About Us » Nuclear Policy Technical Positions/Interpretations » Risk Assessment Working Group » Criticality Safety » DOE O 420.1C Facility Safety » Beyond Design Basis Events Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs (HS-32) Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs - About Us

276

Toolbox Safety Talk Machine Shop Safety  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Toolbox Safety Talk Machine Shop Safety Environmental Health & Safety Facilities Safety & Health to Environmental Health & Safety for recordkeeping. Machine shops are an integral part of the Cornell University be taken seriously. Many of the most frequently cited OSHA safety standards pertain to machine safeguarding

Pawlowski, Wojtek

277

Criticality safety management during the new mission at Rocky Flats  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Under the cleanup and waste management missions at the former United States Department of Energy (DOE) production sites, a redirection of nuclear criticality safety programs has to take place to accommodate new objectives and reduced resources. The Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (RFETS) provides innovative approaches to respond to the needs of its new mission. The paper provides some background on the changes in the DOE complex and expands on the steps undertaken at RFETS with the hope that some of the novel approaches could be of use at other facilities. With the demise of the Cold War, the United States Department of Energy weapons complex has transitioned from the production of nuclear material to the disposition of weapons and cleanup of former production sites. Fissionable material in stored waste, contaminated facilities and equipment, and left over inventories presents nuclear criticality safety challenges that requires careful management.

Toffer, H.; Wilson, R.E. [Safe Sites of Colorado, Golden, CO (United States)

1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

278

Integrated Safety Management  

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

Safety Management BEHAVIOR (SAFETY CULTURE) - principles of behavior (values) - align motivations PLAN WORK define project scope define facility functional requirements define and...

279

Fissile Materials Disposition | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Fissile Materials Disposition | National Nuclear Security Administration Fissile Materials Disposition | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Fissile Materials Disposition Home > About Us > Our Programs > Nonproliferation > Fissile Materials Disposition Fissile Materials Disposition Since the end of the Cold War, significant quantities of plutonium and

280

Post-test analysis of dryout test 7B' of the W-1 Sodium Loop Safety Facility Experiment with the SABRE-2P code. [LMFBR  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

An understanding of conditions that may cause sodium boiling and boiling propagation that may lead to dryout and fuel failure is crucial in liquid-metal fast-breeder reactor safety. In this study, the SABRE-2P subchannel analysis code has been used to analyze the ultimate transient of the in-core W-1 Sodium Loop Safety Facility experiment. This code has a 3-D simple nondynamic boiling model which is able to predict the flow instability which caused dryout. In other analyses dryout has been predicted for out-of-core test bundles and so this study provides additional confirmation of the model.

Rose, S.D.; Dearing, J.F.

1981-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

October 24, 2003, Assessment Criteria and Guidelines for Determining the Adequacy of Software Used in the Safety Analysis and Design of Defense Nuclear Facilities  

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

4.1 4.1 Revision 3 October 24, 2003 U. S. Department of Energy Assessment Criteria and Guidelines for Determining the Adequacy of Software Used in the Safety Analysis and Design of Defense Nuclear Facilities October 24, 2003 CRAD - 4.2.4.1 Revision 3 October 24, 2003 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS ..................................................................................................................................iii GLOSSARY ...................................................................................................................................iv 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1 2.0 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................2

282

Report to the Secretary of Energy on Beyond Design Basis Event Pilot Evaluations, Results and Recommendations for Improvements to Enhance Nuclear Safety at DOE Nuclear Facilities, January 2013  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

In the six months after the March 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident in Japan, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) took several actions to review the safety of its nuclear facilities and identify situations where near-term improvements could be made. These actions and recommendations were addressed in an August 2011 report to the Secretary of Energy, Review of Requirements and Capabilities for Analyzing and Responding to Beyond Design Basis Events.

283

The Process, Methods and Tool Used To Integrate Safety During Design of a Category 2 Nuclear Facility  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Presenter: Lynn J. Harkey, SDIT Project Engineer, Uranium Processing Facility Project, B&W Y-12 Track 5-2

284

FACILITY SAFETY (FS)  

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

actions, demonstrate a highpriority commitment to comply with these requirements. (Old Core Requirements 14 and 8) Criteria 1. A QA program has been approved by DOE and...

285

FACILITY SAFETY (FS)  

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

competence commensurate with responsibility for the range of duties assigned. (DOE P 450.4; 10 CFR 830, Subpart A, Criterion 2) 4. Operation managers fully understand...

286

FACILITY SAFETY (FS)  

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

Criteria 1. A radiological protection program has been established and implemented. (10 CFR 830.204(b)(5); 10 CFR 835; DOE O 5400.5; DOE N 441.3) 2. The radiological protection...

287

Review of Nevada Site Office Criticality Safety Assessments at the Criticality Experiments Facility and Training Assembly for Criticality Safety and Appraisal of the Criticality Experiments Facility Startup Plan, October 2011  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This report provides the results of an independent oversight review of criticality safety assessment activities conducted by the Department of Energy's (DOE) Nevada Site Office

288

Savannah River Site Waste Disposition Project  

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

Terrel J. Spears Terrel J. Spears Assistant Manager Waste Disposition Project DOE Savannah River Operations Office Savannah River Site Savannah River Site Waste Disposition Project Waste Disposition Project 2 Waste Disposition Project - Mission Radioactive Liquid Waste - Tank Waste Stabilization and Disposition - Disposition 36 million gallons of radioactive liquid waste - Close 49 underground storage tanks in which the waste now resides 3 36.7 Million 33.7 Mgal (92%) 3.0 Mgal (8%) Saltcake Sludge Salt Supernate Volume Curies 397 Million Curies (MCi) 212 MCi (54%) 185 MCi (46%) Gallons (Mgal) 36.5 Million 33.5 Mgal (92%) 3.0 Mgal (8%) Liquid Waste Background Liquid Waste Background * 2 tanks closed * 49 tanks remaining to close - aging, carbon steel - 27 compliant, 22 non-compliant - 12 have known leak sites

289

Chemical Safety Vulnerability Working Group report. Volume 2  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Chemical Safety Vulnerability (CSV) Working Group was established to identify adverse conditions involving hazardous chemicals at DOE facilities that might result in fires or explosions, release of hazardous chemicals to the environment, or exposure of workers or the public to chemicals. A CSV Review was conducted in 148 facilities at 29 sites. Eight generic vulnerabilities were documented related to: abandoned chemicals and chemical residuals; past chemical spills and ground releases; characterization of legacy chemicals and wastes; disposition of legacy chemicals; storage facilities and conditions; condition of facilities and support systems; unanalyzed and unaddressed hazards; and inventory control and tracking. Weaknesses in five programmatic areas were also identified related to: management commitment and planning; chemical safety management programs; aging facilities that continue to operate; nonoperating facilities awaiting deactivation; and resource allocations. Volume 2 consists of seven appendices containing the following: Tasking memorandums; Project plan for the CSV Review; Field verification guide for the CSV Review; Field verification report, Lawrence Livermore National Lab.; Field verification report, Oak Ridge Reservation; Field verification report, Savannah River Site; and the Field verification report, Hanford Site.

Not Available

1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

290

Uranium Downblending and Disposition Project Technology Readiness...  

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

Assessment EA-1488: Environmental Assessment for the U-233 Disposition, Medical Isotope Production, and Building 3019 Complex Shutdown at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory,...

291

Plutonium Disposition Program | National Nuclear Security Administrati...  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

accumulating newly separated weapon-grade plutonium. RUSSIAN PLUTONIUM DISPOSITION Russia plans to dispose of its 34 metric tons of weapon-grade plutonium by fabricating it...

292

Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Preliminary Quality Assurance...  

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

Preliminary Quality Assurance Implementation Plan Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Preliminary Quality Assurance Implementation Plan The primary objective of this report is to...

293

Weapons Dismantlement and Disposition NNSS Capabilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has tasked the WDD working group to disposition the large inventory of legacy classified weapon components scattered across the complex.

Pat Arnold

2011-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

294

DISPOSITION AUTHORITIES FROZEN UNDER THE EPIDEMIOLOGICAL MORATORIUM...  

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

authorities which are under the moratorium on the destruction of health related records as of March 2008. DISPOSITION AUTHORITIES FROZEN UNDER THE EPIDEMIOLOGICAL MORATORIUM...

295

Alternative technical summary report for immobilized disposition in deep boreholes: Immobilized disposal of plutonium in coated ceramic pellets in grout without canisters, Version 4.0. Fissile materials disposition program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper summarizes and compares the immobilized and direct borehole disposition alternatives previously presented in the alternative technical summary. The important design concepts, facility features and operational procedures are first briefly described. This is followed by a discussion of the issues that affect the evaluation of each alternative against the programmatic assessment criteria that have been established for selecting the preferred alternatives for plutonium disposition.

Wijesinghe, A.M.

1996-08-23T23:59:59.000Z

296

Status and Effectiveness of DOE Efforts to Learn from Internal and External Operating Experience in Accordance with Commitment #20 of the DOE Implementation Plan for Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 2004-1  

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

Safety and Security Safety and Security Report to the Secretary on the Status and Effectiveness of DOE Efforts to Learn from Internal and External Operating Experience in Accordance with Commitment #20 of the DOE Implementation Plan for Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 2004-1 February 2011 Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Office of Health, Safety and Security HSS Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Department-wide Action Plan for the Columbia Accident and Davis-Besse Event ........... 3 3.0 Comprehensive Operating Experience Program ................................................................. 5

297

Status and Effectiveness of DOE Efforts to Learn from Internal and External Operating Experience in Accordance with Commitment #20 of the DOE Implementation Plan for Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 2004-1  

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

Safety and Security Safety and Security Report to the Secretary on the Status and Effectiveness of DOE Efforts to Learn from Internal and External Operating Experience in Accordance with Commitment #20 of the DOE Implementation Plan for Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 2004-1 February 2011 Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Office of Health, Safety and Security HSS Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Department-wide Action Plan for the Columbia Accident and Davis-Besse Event ........... 3 3.0 Comprehensive Operating Experience Program ................................................................. 5

298

Feasibility study for a transportation operations system cask maintenance facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) is responsible for the development of a waste management program for the disposition of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level waste (HLW). The program will include a transportation system for moving the nuclear waste from the sources to a geologic repository for permanent disposal. Specially designed casks will be used to safely transport the waste. The cask systems must be operated within limits imposed by DOE, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and the Department of Transportation (DOT). A dedicated facility for inspecting, testing, and maintaining the cask systems was recommended by the General Accounting Office (in 1979) as the best means of assuring their operational effectiveness and safety, as well as regulatory compliance. In November of 1987, OCRWM requested a feasibility study be made of a Cask Maintenance Facility (CMF) that would perform the required functions. 46 refs., 16 figs., 13 tabs.

Rennich, M.J.; Medley, L.G.; Attaway, C.R.

1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

299

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1986-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

300

Mixed and low-level waste treatment project: Appendix C, Health and safety criteria for the mixed and low-level waste treatment facility at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. Part 1, Waste streams and treatment technologies  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report describes health and safety concerns associated with the Mixed and Low-level Waste Treatment Facility at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. Various hazards are described such as fire, electrical, explosions, reactivity, temperature, and radiation hazards, as well as the potential for accidental spills, exposure to toxic materials, and other general safety concerns.

Neupauer, R.M.; Thurmond, S.M.

1992-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

Mixed and low-level waste treatment project: Appendix C, Health and safety criteria for the mixed and low-level waste treatment facility at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report describes health and safety concerns associated with the Mixed and Low-level Waste Treatment Facility at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. Various hazards are described such as fire, electrical, explosions, reactivity, temperature, and radiation hazards, as well as the potential for accidental spills, exposure to toxic materials, and other general safety concerns.

Neupauer, R.M.; Thurmond, S.M.

1992-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

302

Processing and Disposition of Special Actinide Target Materials - 13138  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Department of Energy (DOE) manages an inventory of materials that contains a range of long-lived radioactive isotopes that were produced from the 1960's through the 1980's by irradiating targets in high-flux reactors at the Savannah River Site (SRS) to produce special heavy isotopes for DOE programmatic use, scientific research, and industrial and medical applications. Among the products were californium-252, heavy curium (including Cm-246 through Cm-248), and plutonium-242 and -244. Many of the isotopes are still in demand today, and they can be recovered from the remaining targets previously irradiated at SRS or produced from the recovered isotopes. Should the existing target materials be discarded, the plutonium (Pu) and curium (Cm) isotopes cannot be replaced readily with existing production sources. Some of these targets are stored at SRS, while other target material is stored at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) at several stages of processing. The materials cannot be stored in their present form indefinitely. Their long-term management involves processing items for beneficial use and/or for disposition, using storage and process facilities at SRS and ORNL. Evaluations are under way for disposition options for these materials, and demonstrations of improved flow sheets to process the materials are being conducted at ORNL and the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL). The disposition options and a management evaluation process have been developed. Processing demonstrations and evaluations for these unique materials are under way. (authors)

Robinson, Sharon M.; Patton, Brad D. [Oak Ridge National Laboratory, P.O. Box 2008, Oak Ridge, TN 37831 (United States)] [Oak Ridge National Laboratory, P.O. Box 2008, Oak Ridge, TN 37831 (United States); Allender, Jeffrey S. [Savannah River National Laboratory (United States)] [Savannah River National Laboratory (United States)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

303

Request For Records Disposition Authority | Department of Energy  

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

Records Schedule Contractor Checks Request For Records Disposition Authority More Documents & Publications DOE-STD-4001-2000 DOE Records Disposition Schedule Changes Audit Letter...

304

Request For Records Disposition Authority | Department of Energy  

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

Fossil Energy Equity Re-determination Records Request For Records Disposition Authority More Documents & Publications REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY Inspection Report:...

305

REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Pacific Northwest Lab: Richland Operations Office REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY More Documents & Publications REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY Request For...

306

PROCEDURE FOR PREPARING RECORDS INVENTORY AND DISPOSITION SCHEDULES...  

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

PROCEDURE FOR PREPARING RECORDS INVENTORY AND DISPOSITION SCHEDULES (RIDS) PROCEDURE FOR PREPARING RECORDS INVENTORY AND DISPOSITION SCHEDULES (RIDS) This document lists the...

307

Facility Representative Program: 2010 Facility Representative Workshop  

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

308

Nuclear Materials Disposition | Department of Energy  

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

Nuclear Materials Disposition Nuclear Materials Disposition Nuclear Materials Disposition Nuclear Materials Disposition In fulfilling its mission, EM frequently manages and completes disposition of surplus nuclear materials and spent nuclear fuel. These are not waste. They are nuclear materials no longer needed for national security or other purposes, including spent nuclear fuel, special nuclear materials (as defined by the Atomic Energy Act) and other Nuclear Materials. Spent Nuclear Fuel Spent nuclear fuel (SNF) is fuel that has been withdrawn from a nuclear reactor following irradiation, the constituent elements of which have not been separated by reprocessing. SNF may include: (1) intact, non-defective fuel assemblies or fuel rods; (2) failed fuel assemblies or fuel rods; (3) segments of fuel rods or pieces of fuel derived from spent fuel rods; and

309

I REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY  

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

REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY LEAVE BL ...A (NARA use only1 JOB NUMBER TO: NATIONAL ARCHIVES & RECORDS ADMINISTRATION In accordance with the provisions of 44 U.S.C. 3303a, the Office of the Chief Information Officer disposition request, including amendments, is approved except for items that may be marked "disposition not approved" or "withdrawn" in column 10. Records Management Division N1-434-02-2 Date received 860 1 ADELPHI ROAD COLLEGE PARK, MD 20740-600 1 1. FROM (Agency or establishment) Department of Energy , ( / I 4 30 -A&&& NOTIFICATION TO AGENCY 6. AGENCY CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that I am authorized to act for this agency in matters pertaining to the disposition of its records and that the

310

Management response plan for the Chemical Safety Vulnerability Working Group report. Volume 2  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Chemical Safety Vulnerability (CSV) Working Group was established to identify adverse conditions involving hazardous chemicals at DOE facilities that might result in fires or explosions, release of hazardous chemicals to the environment, or exposure of workers or the public to chemicals. A CSV Review was conducted in 146 facilities at 29 sites. Eight generic vulnerabilities were documented related to: abandoned chemicals and chemical residuals; past chemical spills and ground releases; characterization of legacy chemicals and wastes; disposition of legacy chemicals; storage facilities and conditions; condition of facilities and support systems; unanalyzed and unaddressed hazards; and inventory control and tracking. Weaknesses in five programmatic areas were also identified related to: management commitment and planning; chemical safety management programs; aging facilities that continue to operate; nonoperating facilities awaiting deactivation; and resource allocations. To address the facility-specific and site-specific vulnerabilities, responsible DOE and site-contractor line organizations have developed initial site response plans. These plans, presented as Volume 2 of this Management Response Plan, describe the actions needed to mitigate or eliminate the facility- and site-specific vulnerabilities identified by the CSV Working Group field verification teams. Initial site response plans are described for: Brookhaven National Lab., Hanford Site, Idaho National Engineering Lab., Lawrence Livermore National Lab., Los Alamos National Lab., Oak Ridge Reservation, Rocky Flats Plant, Sandia National Laboratories, and Savannah River Site.

Not Available

1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

311

REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY  

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

1nstrlrcrlons on reverts) 1nstrlrcrlons on reverts) ' 0 NATIONAL ARCMVES and RECORDS AD~~INISTRAT~ON (NIR) WASHINGTON, DC 20408 1. FROM (Agency or estabi~shment) Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 . '2. MAJOR SUBDIVISION fn lccordance w i l h the provirions o f 4 4 DOE~NEVADA OPERATIONS OFFICE U.S.C. 3 3 0 3 r the disposition r e q u c ~ t , including rmtndments, i s approvtd n c t p l 3. MINOR SUBOlVlStON lor ilemr that mky be mrrkcd 'dir wition not approved' o r withdmwn' in c&mn lo. '4. NAME O F PERSON WITH WHOM TO CONFER 5. TELEPHONE Mary Ann Wallace -301 903 4353 6. AGENCY CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that I am authorized to a d for this to th#disposit-ion of its records and that the records roposed for disposal on the P now needed for the business of this agency or wil not be needed after the concurrence f

312

REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY  

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

m m - REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY (See Instructions on reverse) GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION N A T I O N A L ARCHIVES AND RECORDS SERVICE, WASHINGTON, DC 20408 1. F R O M ( A g e n c y o r e s t a b l i s h m e n t ) jepartment of Energy 2. MAJOR S U B D I V I S I O N Oak Ridse Operations Office 3. M I N O R S U B D I V I S I O N 4 . N A M E O F PERSON W I T H W H O M T O C O N F E R ( 5 . T E L E P H O N E E X T . L E A V E B L A N K - JOB N O . d/-d33P PO- ZJ - - - - p p D A T E R E C E I V E D p - NOTIFICATION TO AGENCY In accordance with the provisions of 44 U.S.C. 3303a the disposal request, including amendments, is approved except for items that may be marked "disposition not approved" or "withdrawn" in column 10. If no records are proposed for disposal, the signature of the Archivist is not required. - DATE ARCHIVIST

313

SI Safety Information  

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

Information Information Policies and Procedures Radiation Safety Device List (full version)(compressed version) APS QA APS Safety Page DOE Orders DOE Order 420.2 (11/08/95) DOE Order 420.2A (01/08/01) Accelerator Safety Implementation Guide for DOE Order 420.2 DOE Order 420.2B (07/23/04) Expires (07/23/08) (html) (pdf) Accelerator Facility Safety Implementation Guide for DOE O 420.2B (html) (pdf) Safety of Accelerator Facilities (02/18/05) Accelerator Facility Safety Implementation Guide for DOE O 420.2B (pdf) Safety of Accelerator Facilities (7/1/05) ESH Manual Guidance 5480.25 Guidance for an Accelerator Facility Safety Program 5480.25 Guidance (09/01/93) Bases & Rationale for Guidance for an Accelerator Facitlity Safety Program (October 1994) NCRP Report No. 88 "Radiation Alarms and Access Control Systems" (1987) ISBN

314

Comparison of Integrated Safety Analysis (ISA) and Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) for Fuel Cycle Facilities, 2/17/11  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

During the 580th meeting of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS), February10-12, 2011, we reviewed the staffs white paper, A Comparison of Integrated Safety Analysisand...

315

EIS-0283: Surplus Plutonium Disposition Environmental Impact Statement  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This EIS analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with alternatives for the disposition of surplus plutonium.

316

Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Disposal  

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

Campaign Disposal Research and Development Roadmap Prepared for U.S. Department of Energy Used Fuel Disposition Campaign September 2012 FCR&D-USED-2011-000065 REV 1 DISCLAIMER This information was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the U.S. Government. Neither the U.S. Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness, of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. References herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trade mark, manufacturer, or

317

Chapter 10 Health and Safety  

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

Transmission facilities can also become a target for vandalism, sabotage, and terrorism. BPA designs its facilities to meet safety requirements to prevent or reduce these risks....

318

Innovative Resin Transfer and Disposition at Indian Point Unit 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A number of sites have both operating and shuttered nuclear facilities. Reducing dose to the caretakers can have beneficial effects for other site personnel who may work or pass near the shuttered facility. Furthermore, disposition of waste can have a positive effect on NRC required regular reporting of, and plans for the disposition of on-site wastes. Entergy's Indian Point Energy Center recently reduced the on-site curie load by working with RWE NUKEM and WMG, Inc. to innovatively free and ship nearly 1,000 cubic feet and nearly 600 curies of 30 year old resin and sludge from Unit 1. Old drawings, operations logs, were consulted and transfer lines were remotely checked. The tank selection sequence was primarily based on dose rates. System modifications to facilitate resin transfer were made on the lowest dose tanks first to gain current operating experience. Resin transfers were performed in accordance with the procedures developed, into waiting cask with appropriate waste containers. Decomposed resin of varying consistency could clog discharge lines and operational changes were made to mitigate against flow interruptions. Hydrogen buildup in the tanks was carefully addressed while solidified resin remains a challenge to be overcome. (authors)

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

2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

319

EIS-0283-S1: Supplement to the Surplus Plutonium Disposition Environmental  

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

3-S1: Supplement to the Surplus Plutonium Disposition 3-S1: Supplement to the Surplus Plutonium Disposition Environmental Impact Statement EIS-0283-S1: Supplement to the Surplus Plutonium Disposition Environmental Impact Statement SUMMARY The Supplement evaluates the potential environmental impacts of using MOX fuel in these six specific reactors named in the DCS proposal as well as other program changes made since the SPD Draft EIS was published. PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITIES None available at this time. DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD November 5, 1999 EIS-0236-S1: DOE Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement National Ignition Facility Draft Environmental Impact Statement to the Stockpile Stewardship and Management November 5, 1999 EIS-0236-S1: Notice of Availability for the Draft Supplemental Programmatic

320

Waste Disposition Update by Christine Gelles  

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

Waste Disposition Update Waste Disposition Update Christine Gelles Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Waste Management (EM-30) EM SSAB Chairs Meeting Washington, DC 2 October 2012 www.em.doe.gov 2 o Waste Stream Highlights o DOE Transportation Update o Greater Than Class C (GTCC) Low Level Waste Environmental Impact Statement o Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future o Nuclear Regulatory Commission's LLW Regulatory Initiatives Discussion Topics www.em.doe.gov 3 Waste Stream Highlights www.em.doe.gov 4 o Within current budget outlook, it is especially critical that EM ensures safe, reliable and cost effective disposition paths exist. o The program's refocused organization and the detailed

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

Barriers and Issues Related to Achieving Final Disposition of Depleted Uranium  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Approximately 750,000 metric tons (MT) of surplus depleted uranium (DU) in various chemical forms are stored at several Department of Energy (DOE) sites throughout the United States. Most of the DU is in the form of DU hexafluoride (DUF6) that resulted from uranium enrichment operations over the last several decades. DOE plans to convert the DUF6 to ''a more stable form'' that could be any one or combination of DU tetrafluoride (DUF4 or green salt), DU oxide (DUO3, DUO2, or DU3O8), or metal depending on the final disposition chosen for any given quantity. Barriers to final disposition of this material have existed historically and some continue today. Currently, the barriers are more related to finding uses for this material versus disposing as waste. Even though actions are beginning to convert the DUF6, ''final'' disposition of the converted material has yet to be decided. Unless beneficial uses can be implemented, DOE plans to dispose of this material as waste. This expresses the main barrier to DU disposition; DOE's strategy is to dispose unless uses can be found while the strategy should be only dispose as a last resort and make every effort to find uses. To date, only minimal research programs are underway to attempt to develop non-fuel uses for this material. Other issues requiring resolution before these inventories can reach final disposition (uses or disposal) include characterization, disposal of large quantities, storage (current and future), and treatment options. Until final disposition is accomplished, these inventories must be managed in a safe and environmentally sound manner; however, this is becoming more difficult as materials and facilities age. The most noteworthy final disposition technical issues include the development of reuse and treatment options.

Gillas, D. L.; Chambers, B. K.

2002-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

322

Facility Representative Program: 2007 Facility Representative Workshop  

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

323

CRAD, Criteria and Guidelines For the Assessment of Safety System Software and Firmware at Defense Nuclear Facilities  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The purpose and scope of this CRAD is to provide a set of consistent assessment criteria and guidelines for the assessment of safety system software and firmware that performs an SC or SS function, as described in the Background section. The scope of the assessment, henceforth, is called "I&C software."

324

Safety Communications  

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

Communications Communications New Staff & Guests Safety Topics ISM Plan Safety Communications Questions about safety and environmental compliance should first be directed to your supervisor or work lead. The Life Sciences Division Safety Coordinator Scott Taylor at setaylor@lbl.gov , 486-6133 (office), or (925) 899-4355 (cell); and Facilities Manager Peter Marietta at PMarietta@lbl.gov, 486-6031 (office), or 967-6596 (cell), are also sources of information. Your work group has a representative to the Division Environment, Health, & Safety Committee. This representative can provide safety guidance and offer a conduit for you to pass on your concerns or ideas. A list of current representatives is provided below. Additional safety information can be obtained on-line from the Berkeley Lab

325

Excess plutonium disposition using ALWR technology  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Office of Nuclear Energy of the Department of Energy chartered the Plutonium Disposition Task Force in August 1992. The Task Force was created to assess the range of practicable means of disposition of excess weapons-grade plutonium. Within the Task Force, working groups were formed to consider: (1) storage, (2) disposal,and(3) fission options for this disposition,and a separate group to evaluate nonproliferation concerns of each of the alternatives. As a member of the Fission Working Group, the Savannah River Technology Center acted as a sponsor for light water reactor (LWR) technology. The information contained in this report details the submittal that was made to the Fission Working Group of the technical assessment of LWR technology for plutonium disposition. The following aspects were considered: (1) proliferation issues, (2) technical feasibility, (3) technical availability, (4) economics, (5) regulatory issues, and (6) political acceptance.

Phillips, A. (ed.); Buckner, M.R.; Radder, J.A.; Angelos, J.G.; Inhaber, H.

1993-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

326

Toolbox Safety Talk Lock/Tag/Verify  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Energy Environmental Health & Safety Facilities Safety & Health Section 395 Pine Tree Rd. Suite 210 Energy Environmental Health & Safety Facilities Safety & Health Section 395 Pine Tree Rd. Suite 210Toolbox Safety Talk Lock/Tag/Verify The Control of Hazardous Energy Environmental Health & Safety

Pawlowski, Wojtek

327

REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY  

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

Instructions on reverse) Instructions on reverse) LEAVE BLANK - GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS SERVICE, WASHINGTON, DC 20408 I . F R O M (Agency or ertabluhmentJ D A T E RECEIVED NOTIF~CATION TO AGENCY Department of Energy 2. MAJ0.R S U B D I V I S I O N I 4 . N A M E O F PERSON W I T H W H O M T O CONFER 15. TELEPHONE E X T . \OATS l A R C H l V l S T O F T H E U N I T E D STATES In accordance with the provisions of 44 U.S.C. 3303 the dispoal request. including amendmentr, is approved . 3. M I N O R S U B D I V I S I O N except for items that may be marked "disposition not approved" or "withdrawn" in column 10. If no records are proposed for disposal, the signature of the Archivist is not required. I hereby certify that I am authorized to act for this agency in matters pertaining to the disposal of the agency's records;

328

DOE-STD-3007-93 CN-1; DOE Standard Guidelines For Preparing Criticality Safety Evaluations at Department of Energy Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities  

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

7-93 7-93 November 1993 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 1 September 1998 DOE STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR PREPARING CRITICALITY SAFETY EVALUATIONS AT DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NON-REACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT 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; (423) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. Order No. DE98003918 Change Notice No. 1 DOE-STD-3007-93 September 1998

329

Facility stabilization project, fiscal year 1998 -- Multi-year workplan (MYWP) for WBS 1.4  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The primary Facility Stabilization mission is to provide minimum safe surveillance and maintenance of facilities and deactivate facilities on the Hanford Site, to reduce risks to workers, the public and environment, transition the facilities to a low cost, long term surveillance and maintenance state, and to provide safe and secure storage of special nuclear materials, nuclear materials, and nuclear fuel. Facility Stabilization will protect the health and safety of the public and workers, protect the environment and provide beneficial use of the facilities and other resources. Work will be in accordance with the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement), local, national, international and other agreements, and in compliance with all applicable Federal, state, and local laws. The stakeholders will be active participants in the decision processes including establishing priorities, and in developing a consistent set of rules, regulations, and laws. The work will be leveraged with a view of providing positive, lasting economic impact in the region. Effectiveness, efficiency, and discipline in all mission activities will enable Hanford Site to achieve its mission in a continuous and substantive manner. As the mission for Facility Stabilization has shifted from production to support of environmental restoration, each facility is making a transition to support the Site mission. The mission goals include the following: (1) Achieve deactivation of facilities for transfer to EM-40, using Plutonium Uranium Extraction (PUREX) plant deactivation as a model for future facility deactivation; (2) Manage nuclear materials in a safe and secure condition and where appropriate, in accordance with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards rules; (3) Treat nuclear materials as necessary, and store onsite in long-term interim safe storage awaiting a final disposition decision by US Department of Energy; (4) Implement nuclear materials disposition directives. In the near term these are anticipated to mostly involve transferring uranium to other locations for beneficial use. Work will be in accordance with the Tri-Party Agreement, and other agreements and in compliance with all applicable Federal, state and local laws. The transition to deactivation will be accomplished through a phased approach, while maintaining the facilities in a safe and compliant configuration. In addition, Facility Stabilization will continue to maintain safe long-term storage facilities for Special Nuclear Material (SNM), Nuclear Material (NM), and Nuclear Fuel (NF). The FSP deactivation strategy aligns with the deactivate facilities mission outlined in Hanford Site SE documentation. Inherent to the FSP strategies are specific Hanford Strategic Plan success indicators such as: reduction of risks to workers, the public and environment; increasing the amount of resources recovered for other uses; reduction/elimination of inventory and materials; and reduction/elimination of costly mortgages.

Floberg, W.C.

1997-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

330

Nuclear Engineer (Criticality Safety)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This position is located in the Nuclear Safety Division (NSD) which has specific responsibility for managing the development, analysis, review, and approval of non-reactor nuclear facility safety...

331

324 Facility special-case waste assessment in support of 324 closure (TPA milestone M-89-05)  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, also known as the Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-89-05, requires US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office to complete a 324 Facility Special-Case Waste Assessment in Support of 324 Closure. This document, HNF-1270, has been prepared with the intent of meeting this regulatory commitment. Alternatives for the special-case wastes located in the 324 Building were defined and analyzed. Based on the criteria of safety, environmental, complexity of interfaces, risk, cost, schedule, and long-term operability and maintainability, the best alternative was chosen. Waste packaging and transportation options are also included in the recommendations. The waste disposition recommendations for the B-Cell dispersibles/tank heels and High-Level Vault packaged residuals are to direct them to the Plutonium Uranium Extraction Facility (PUREX) Number 2 storage tunnel.

Hobart, R.L.

1998-06-25T23:59:59.000Z

332

2015 DOE Safety and Security Enforcement Workshop - Badging and...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

2015 DOE Safety and Security Enforcement Workshop - Badging and Facility Information 2015 DOE Safety and Security Enforcement Workshop - Badging and Facility Information January...

333

Safety & Quality Assurance  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Together, our Facility Operations Division and Engineering, Safety and Quality Division work to ensure EM conducts its operations and cleanup safely through sound practices. These divisions ensure...

334

Idaho High-Level Waste & Facilities Disposition, Final Environmental...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

from INTEC closure activities stored in the Tank Farm, solids in the bottom of the tanks, and trace contamination from first cycle reprocessing extraction waste. SBW contains...

335

CRAD, Radiological Controls - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility...  

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

Safety & Health - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility CRAD, Engineering - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility CRAD, Conduct of Operations - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility...

336

CRAD, Management - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility | Department...  

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

- Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility CRAD, Conduct of Operations - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility...

337

ANL-W MOX fuel lead assemblies data report for the surplus plutonium disposition environmental impact statement  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this document is to support the US Department of Energy (DOE) Fissile Materials Disposition Program`s preparation of the draft surplus plutonium disposition environmental impact statement (EIS). This is one of several responses to data call requests for background information on activities associated with the operation of the lead assembly (LA) mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel fabrication facility. The DOE Office of fissile Materials Disposition (DOE-MD) has developed a dual-path strategy for disposition of surplus weapons-grade plutonium. One of the paths is to disposition surplus plutonium through irradiation of MOX fuel in commercial nuclear reactors. MOX fuel consists of plutonium and uranium oxides (PuO{sub 2} and UO{sub 2}), typically containing 95% or more UO{sub 2}. DOE-MD requested that the DOE Site Operations Offices nominate DOE sites that meet established minimum requirements that could produce MOX LAs. The paper describes the following: Site map and the LA facility; process descriptions; resource needs; employment requirements; wastes, emissions, and exposures; accident analysis; transportation; qualitative decontamination and decommissioning; post-irradiation examination; LA fuel bundle fabrication; LA EIS data report assumptions; and LA EIS data report supplement.

O`Connor, D.G.; Fisher, S.E.; Holdaway, R. [and others

1997-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

338

ARM - ARM Safety Policy  

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

Safety Policy Safety Policy About Become a User Recovery Act Mission FAQ Outreach Displays History Organization Participants Facility Statistics Forms Contacts Facility Documents ARM Management Plan (PDF, 335KB) Field Campaign Guidelines (PDF, 1.1MB) ARM Climate Research Facility Expansion Workshop (PDF, 1.46MB) Facility Activities ARM and the Recovery Act Contributions to International Polar Year Comments? We would love to hear from you! Send us a note below or call us at 1-888-ARM-DATA. Send ARM Safety Policy The ARM Climate Research Facility safety policy states that all activities for which the ARM Climate Research Facility has primary responsibility will be conducted in such a manner that all reasonable precautions are taken to protect the health and safety of employees and the general public. All

339

Plutonium Disposition Program | National Nuclear Security Administration  

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

Home > Media Room > Fact Sheets > Plutonium Disposition Program Home > Media Room > Fact Sheets > Plutonium Disposition Program Fact Sheet Plutonium Disposition Program Jun 26, 2013 SUPPORTING NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION Weapon-grade plutonium and highly enriched uranium (HEU) are the critical ingredients for making a nuclear weapon. With the end of the Cold War, hundreds of tons of these materials were determined to be surplus to U.S. and Russian defense needs. Denying access to plutonium and HEU is the best way to prevent nuclear proliferation to rogue states and terrorist organizations. The most certain method to prevent these materials from falling into the wrong hands is to dispose of them. During the April 2010 Nuclear Security Summit, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov signed a protocol

340

U.S. and Russia Sign Plutonium Disposition Agreement | National...  

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

Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home About Us Our History NNSA Timeline U.S. and Russia Sign Plutonium Disposition Agreement U.S. and Russia Sign Plutonium Disposition...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

U. S. Atomic Energy Commision REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY More Documents & Publications REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY DOE-HDBK-1109-97 DOE-HDBK-1109-97...

342

Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework  

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

Department of Energy Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework DOE's Nuclear Safety Enabling Legislation Regulatory Enforcement & Oversight Regulatory Governance Atomic Energy Act 1946 Atomic Energy Act 1954 Energy Reorganization Act 1974 DOE Act 1977 Authority and responsibility to regulate nuclear safety at DOE facilities 10 CFR 830 10 CFR 835 10 CFR 820 Regulatory Implementation Nuclear Safety Radiological Safety Procedural Rules ISMS-QA; Operating Experience; Metrics and Analysis Cross Cutting DOE Directives & Manuals DOE Standards Central Technical Authorities (CTA) Office of Health, Safety, and Security (HSS) Line Management SSO/ FAC Reps 48 CFR 970 48 CFR 952 Federal Acquisition Regulations External Oversight *Defense Nuclear Facility

343

Independent Oversight Assessment, Salt Waste Processing Facility...  

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

Salt Waste Processing Facility Project - January 2013 January 2013 Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Salt Waste Processing Facility Project The U.S. Department of Energy...

344

Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials  

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

86 86 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 156 / Thursday, August 13, 1998 / Notices 1 SRS has been identified by DOE as the preferred site for the immobilization disposition facility. responsibilities are to (1) evaluate the standards of accreditation applied to applicant foreign medical schools; and (2) determine the comparability of those standards to standards for accreditation applied to United States medical schools. For Further Information Contact: Bonnie LeBold, Executive Director, National Committee on Foreign Medical Education and Accreditation, 7th and D Streets, S.W., Room 3082, ROB #3, Washington, D.C. 20202-7563. Telephone: (202) 260-3636. Beginning September 28, 1998, you may call to obtain the identity of the countries whose standards are to be evaluated during this

345

Life cycle costs for the domestic reactor-based plutonium disposition option  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Projected constant dollar life cycle cost (LCC) estimates are presented for the domestic reactor-based plutonium disposition program being managed by the US Department of Energy Office of Fissile Materials Disposition (DOE/MD). The scope of the LCC estimate includes: design, construction, licensing, operation, and deactivation of a mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel fabrication facility (FFF) that will be used to purify and convert weapons-derived plutonium oxides to MOX fuel pellets and fabricate MOX fuel bundles for use in commercial pressurized-water reactors (PWRs); fuel qualification activities and modification of facilities required for manufacture of lead assemblies that will be used to qualify and license this MOX fuel; and modification, licensing, and operation of commercial PWRs to allow irradiation of a partial core of MOX fuel in combination with low-enriched uranium fuel. The baseline cost elements used for this document are the same as those used for examination of the preferred sites described in the site-specific final environmental impact statement and in the DOE Record of Decision that will follow in late 1999. Cost data are separated by facilities, government accounting categories, contract phases, and expenditures anticipated by the various organizations who will participate in the program over a 20-year period. Total LCCs to DOE/MD are projected at approximately $1.4 billion for a 33-MT plutonium disposition mission.

Williams, K.A.

1999-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

346

Surplus Highly Enriched Uranium Disposition Program plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this document is to provide upper level guidance for the program that will downblend surplus highly enriched uranium for use as commercial nuclear reactor fuel or low-level radioactive waste. The intent of this document is to outline the overall mission and program objectives. The document is also intended to provide a general basis for integration of disposition efforts among all applicable sites. This plan provides background information, establishes the scope of disposition activities, provides an approach to the mission and objectives, identifies programmatic assumptions, defines major roles, provides summary level schedules and milestones, and addresses budget requirements.

NONE

1996-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

347

SEAS Safety Program SEAS SAFETY PROGRAM 2013-2014  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

SEAS Safety Program SEAS SAFETY PROGRAM 2013-2014 Program Structure and Responsibilities Dr. Anas Chalah #12;SEAS Safety Program SEAS Safety Program Structure We have developed a great model of collaboration among · EHSEM · SEAS Safety Program · SEAS Facilities which accounts for the regulatory component

348

SEAS Safety Program SEAS SAFETY PROGRAM 2012-2103  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

SEAS Safety Program SEAS SAFETY PROGRAM 2012-2103 Program Structure and Responsibilities Dr. Anas Chalah #12;SEAS Safety Program SEAS Safety Program Structure We have developed a great model of collaboration among · EHSEM · SEAS Safety Program · SEAS Facilities which accounts for the regulatory component

349

Independent Oversight Inspection, Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility- August 2008  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Inspection of Environment, Safety and Health Programs at the Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility

350

Technical Safety Requirements  

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

Safety Requirements Safety Requirements FUNCTIONAL AREA GOAL: Contractor has developed, maintained, and received DOE Field Office Approval for the necessary operating conditions of a facility. The facility has also maintained an inventory of safety class and safety significant systems and components. REQUIREMENTS:  10 CFR 830.205, Nuclear Safety Rule.  DOE-STD-3009-2002, Preparation Guide for U. S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analyses.  DOE-STD-1186-2004, Specific Administrative Controls. Guidance:  DOE G 423.1-1, Implementation Guide for Use in Developing Technical Safety Requirements.  NSTP 2003-1, Use of Administrative Controls for Specific Safety Functions. Performance Objective 1: Contractor Program Documentation

351

Documented Safety Analysis  

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

Documented Safety Analysis Documented Safety Analysis FUNCTIONAL AREA GOAL: A document that provides an adequate description of the hazards of a facility during its design, construction, operation, and eventual cleanup and the basis to prescribe operating and engineering controls through Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) or Administrative Controls (AC). REQUIREMENTS:  10 CFR 830.204, Nuclear Safety Rule  DOE-STD-1027-92, Hazard Categorization, 1992.  DOE-STD-1104-96, Change Notice 1, Review and Approval of Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Documents (documented Safety Analyses and Technical Safety Requirements), dated May 2002.  DOE-STD-3009-2002, Preparation Guide for U. S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analyses, Change Notice No. 2, April 2002.

352

Development of a Techno-Economic Model to Optimize DOE Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposition  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The National Spent Nuclear Fuel (NSNF) Program is evaluating final disposition of spent nuclear fuel (SNE) in the Department of Energy (DOE) complex. Final disposition of SNF may require that the fuel be treated to minimize material concerns. The treatments may range from electrometallurgical treatment (EMT) and chemical dissolution to engineering controls. Treatment options and treatment locations will depend on fuel type and location of the fuel. One of the first steps associated with selecting one or more sites for treating SNF in the DOE complex is to determine the cost of each option. An economic analysis will assist in determining which fuel treatment alternative attains the optimum disposition of SNF at the lowest possible cost to the government and the public. For this study, a set of questions was developed for the EMT process for fuels at several locations. The set of questions addresses all issues associated with design, construction, and operation of a production facility. A matrix table was developed to determine questions applicable to various fuel treatment options. A work breakdown structure (WBS) was developed to identify a treatment process and costs from initial design to shipment of treatment products to final disposition. Costs can be applied to determine the life cycle cost of each option. This technique can also be applied to other treatment techniques for treating SNF.

Ramer, R. J.; Plum, M. M.; Adams, J. P.; Dahl, C. A.

1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

353

Safety Basis Criteria & Review Approach Documents | Department of Energy  

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

Safety Basis Criteria & Review Approach Documents Safety Basis Criteria & Review Approach Documents Safety Basis Criteria & Review Approach Documents Documents Available for Download CRAD, Safety Basis - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility CRAD, Safety Basis - Idaho Accelerated Retrieval Project Phase II CRAD, Safety Basis - Los Alamos National Laboratory TA 55 SST Facility CRAD, Safety Basis - Los Alamos National Laboratory Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility CRAD, Safety Basis - Oak Ridge National Laboratory High Flux Isotope Reactor CRAD, Safety Basis - Oak Ridge National Laboratory High Flux Isotope Reactor Contractor ORR CRAD, Safety Basis - Oak Ridge National Laboratory TRU ALPHA LLWT Project CRAD, Safety Basis - Y-12 Enriched Uranium Operations Oxide Conversion Facility

354

CRITICALITY SAFETY (CS)  

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

Objective CS.1 - A criticality safety program is established, sufficient numbers of qualified personnel are provided, and adequate facilities and equipment are available to ensure criticality safety support services are adequate for safe operations. (Core Requirements 1, 2, and 6) Criteria * Functions, assignments, responsibilities, and reporting relationships are clearly defined, understood, and effectively implemented. * Operations support personnel for the criticality safety area are adequately staffed and trained. Approach Record Review: Review the documentation that establishes the Criticality Safety Requirements (CSRs) for appropriateness and completeness. Review for adequacy and completion the criticality safety personnel training records that indicate training on facility procedures and systems under

355

LLNL MOX fuel lead assemblies data report for the surplus plutonium disposition environmental impact statement  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this document is to support the US Department of Energy (DOE) Fissile Materials Disposition Program`s preparation of the draft surplus plutonium disposition environmental impact statement. This is one of several responses to data call requests for background information on activities associated with the operation of the lead assembly (LA) mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel fabrication facility. The DOE Office of Fissile Materials Disposition (DOE-MD) has developed a dual-path strategy for disposition of surplus weapons-grade plutonium. One of the paths is to disposition surplus plutonium through irradiation of MOX fuel in commercial nuclear reactors. MOX fuel consists of plutonium and uranium oxides (PuO{sub 2} and UO{sub 2}), typically containing 95% or more UO{sub 2}. DOE-MD requested that the DOE Site Operations Offices nominate DOE sites that meet established minimum requirements that could produce MOX LAs. LLNL has proposed an LA MOX fuel fabrication approach that would be done entirely inside an S and S Category 1 area. This includes receipt and storage of PuO{sub 2} powder, fabrication of MOX fuel pellets, assembly of fuel rods and bundles, and shipping of the packaged fuel to a commercial reactor site. Support activities will take place within a Category 1 area. Building 332 will be used to receive and store the bulk PuO{sub 2} powder, fabricate MOX fuel pellets, and assemble fuel rods. Building 334 will be used to assemble, store, and ship fuel bundles. Only minor modifications would be required of Building 332. Uncontaminated glove boxes would need to be removed, petition walls would need to be removed, and minor modifications to the ventilation system would be required.

O`Connor, D.G.; Fisher, S.E.; Holdaway, R. [and others

1998-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

356

DOE/EIS-0283; Surplus Plutonium Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement (11/1999)  

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

5 of 5 5 of 5 Final Environmental Impact Statement November 1999 Comment Response Document Volume III - Part B Cover Sheet Responsible Agency: United States Department of Energy (DOE) Title: Surplus Plutonium Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement (SPD EIS) (DOE/EIS-0283) Locations of Candidate Sites: California, Idaho, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Washington Contacts: For further information on the SPD Final EIS contact: For information on the DOE National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process contact: Mr. G. Bert Stevenson, NEPA Compliance Officer Ms. Carol Borgstrom, Director Office of Fissile Materials Disposition Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance U.S. Department of Energy Office of Environment, Safety and Health

357

EIS-0283DS Supplement to the Surplus Plutonium Disposition Draft Environmental Impact Statement, April 1999  

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

Sheet Sheet Responsible Agency: United States Department of Energy (DOE) Title: Supplement to the Surplus Plutonium Disposition Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Supplement) (DOE/EIS-0283-DS) Locations of Candidate Sites: Idaho, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and Washington Contacts: For further information on the Supplement contact: For further information on the DOE National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process contact: Mr. G. Bert Stevenson, NEPA Compliance Officer Office of Fissile Materials Disposition U.S. Department of Energy P.O. Box 23786 Washington, DC 20026-3786 Voice: (202) 586-5368 Ms. Carol Borgstrom, Director Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance Office of Environment, Safety and Health U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Ave., SW

358

DOE/EIS-0283; Surplus Plutonium Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement (11/1999)  

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

4 of 5 4 of 5 Final Environmental Impact Statement November 1999 Comment Response Document Volume III - Part A Cover Sheet Responsible Agency: United States Department of Energy (DOE) Title: Surplus Plutonium Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement (SPD EIS) (DOE/EIS-0283) Locations of Candidate Sites: California, Idaho, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Washington Contacts: For further information on the SPD Final EIS contact: For information on the DOE National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process contact: Mr. G. Bert Stevenson, NEPA Compliance Officer Ms. Carol Borgstrom, Director Office of Fissile Materials Disposition Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance U.S. Department of Energy Office of Environment, Safety and Health

359

Used fuel disposition research and development roadmap - FY10 status.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Since 1987 the U.S. has focused research and development activities relevant to the disposal of commercial used nuclear fuel and U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) owned spent nuclear fuel and high level waste on the proposed repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. At the same time, the U.S. successfully deployed a deep geologic disposal facility for defense-related transuranic waste in bedded salt at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. In 2009 the DOE established the Used Fuel Disposition Campaign (UFDC) within the Office of Nuclear Energy. The Mission of the UFDC is to identify alternatives and conduct scientific research and technology development to enable storage, transportation and disposal of used nuclear fuel and wastes generated by existing and future nuclear fuel cycles. The U.S. national laboratories have participated on these programs and has conducted research and development related to these issues to a limited extent. However, a comprehensive research and development (R&D) program investigating a variety of geologic media has not been a part of the U.S. waste management program since the mid 1980s. Such a comprehensive R&D program is being developed in the UFDC with a goal of meeting the UFDC Grand Challenge to provide a sound technical basis for absolute confidence in the safety and security of long-term storage, transportation, and disposal of used nuclear fuel and wastes from the nuclear energy enterprise. The DOE has decided to no longer pursue the development of a repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Since a repository site will ultimately have to be selected, sited, characterized, designed, and licensed, other disposal options must now be considered. In addition to the unsaturated volcanic tuff evaluated at Yucca Mountain, several different geologic media are under investigation internationally and preliminary assessments indicate that disposal of used nuclear fuel and high level waste in these media is feasible. Considerable progress has been made in the U.S. and other nations in understanding disposal concepts in different geologic media, but gaps in knowledge still exist. A principal aspect of concern to the UFDC as it considers the broad issues of siting a repository in different geologic media are the marked differences in the regulatory bases for assessing suitability and safety of a repository between the U.S. and other nations. Because the probability based - risked informed nature of the current U.S. regulations for high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel is sufficiently different from other regulations, information gained in previous studies, while useful, likely need to be supplemented to enable more convincing communication with the public, better defense of the numerical models, and stronger safety cases. Thus, it was recognized when the UFDC was established that there were readily identified disposal-related R&D opportunities to address knowledge gaps. An effort to document these research opportunities was a key component of Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 engineered system, natural system, and system-level modeling activities for a range of disposal environments. A principal contribution to identifying these gaps was a workshop held to gather perspectives from experts both within and external to the UFDC regarding R&D opportunities. In the planning for FY2010 it was expected that these activities would culminate with a UFDC research and development roadmap that would identify the knowledge gaps, discuss the R&D needed to fill these gaps, and prioritize the proposed R&D over both the near- and long-term. A number of knowledge gaps and needed R&D were identified and are discussed in this report. However, these preliminary R&D topics have not been evaluated in detail nor have they been prioritized to support future planning efforts. This will be completed in FY11 and the final UFDC Research and Development Roadmap will be completed. This report discusses proposed R&D topics in three areas related to repository siting, design, and performance: natural systems

Nutt, W. M. (Nuclear Engineering Division)

2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

360

Portugal Egypt Figure 2. Natural gas supply and disposition in the United States, 2012  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Portugal Egypt Figure 2. Natural gas supply and disposition in the United States, 2012 (trillion cubic feet) Natural Gas Plant Liquids Production Gross Withdrawals From Gas and Oil Wells Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed Vented/Flared Reservoir Repressuring Production Dry Gas Imports Canada Trinidad/Tobago Natural Gas Storage Facilities Exports Japan Canada Mexico Additions Withdrawals Gas Industry Use Residential Commercial Industrial Vehicle Fuel Electric Power 29.5 0.8 0.2 3.3 2.963 0.112 0.620 0.971 0.014 24.1 1.3 2.9 2.8 2.5 2.9 7.2 0.03 9.1 0.003 Sources: Energy Information Administration (EIA), Form EIA-176, "Annual Report of Natural and Supplemental Gas Supply and Disposition"; Form EIA-895, "Annual Quantity and

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

Disposition of Surplus Highly Enriched Uranium  

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

EIS-0240-S EIS-0240-S For Further Information Contact: U.S. Departmel>t of Energy Office of Fissile Materials Disposition, 1000 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 . This report 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; telephone (423) 576-8401 for prices, Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161. Copies of this document are available (while supplies last) upon written request to: Office of Fissile Materials Disposition, MD-4 Forrestal Building United States Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20585 @ Printed with soy ink on recycled paper. .__- -. @ .: Depafimmt of Energy . i i~t " Wastin@on, DC 20585 June 1996 Dear hterested

362

Disposition of Surplus Highly Enriched Uranium  

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

@ @ Printed with soy ink on recycled paper. ,, ,, This report has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors horn the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; telephone (423) 576-8401 for prices, Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161. Copies of this document are available (while supplies last) upon written request to: Office of Fissile Materials Disposition, MD-4 ' Forrestal Building United States Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20585 Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 June 1996 Dear hterested Party: The Disposition of Surplus Highly Enriched Uranium Final Environmental Impact Statemnt is enclosed for your information. This document has been prepared in accordance

363

Disposition of Surplus Highly Enriched Uranium  

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

. . ------- .--- --. ---- DOE/EIS-0240 I United States Department of Energy I For Further Information Contact: U.S. Department of Energy Otice of Fissile Materials Disposition, 1000 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 1 I ---- I I . I I I I This report 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; telephone (423) 576-8401 for prices. Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161. Copies of this document are available (while supplies last) upon written request to: I Office of Fissile Materials Disposition, MD-4 Forrestal Building United States Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20585 , @ Printed with soy ink on recycled paper. -_. - COVERS~ET

364

Capturing Process Knowledge for Facility Deactivation and Decommissioning  

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

Tech Assistance Tech Assistance Savannah River National Laboratory- Assess Adequacy of Process Knowledge for D&D Guidance for Determining Adequacy of Process Knowledge Page 1 of 2 Savannah River National Laboratory South Carolina Capturing Process Knowledge for Facility Deactivation and Decommissioning Challenge The Office of Environmental Management (EM) is responsible for the disposition of a vast number of facilities at numerous sites around the country which have been declared excess to current mission needs. When such excess facilities are scheduled for deactivation and decommissioning (D&D), among the tasks the responsible project team is faced with include the evaluation and planning for the removal, characterization, and disposition of all legacy

365

The ultimate disposition of depleted uranium  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Depleted uranium (DU) is produced as a by-product of the uranium enrichment process. Over 340,000 MTU of DU in the form of UF{sub 6} have been accumulated at the US government gaseous diffusion plants and the stockpile continues to grow. An overview of issues and objectives associated with the inventory management and the ultimate disposition of this material is presented.

Lemons, T.R. [Uranium Enrichment Organization, Oak Ridge, TN (United States)

1991-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

366

Office of Independent Oversight's Office of Environment, Safety and Health Evaluations Activity Report for the Visit at the LANL CMRR Project Facility Construction Site, November 1-5, 2010  

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

Office of Independent Oversight's Office of Environment, Safety and Health Office of Independent Oversight's Office of Environment, Safety and Health Evaluations Activity Report for the Visit at the LANL CMRR Project Facility Construction Site, November 1-5, 2010 The U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Independent Oversight, within the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS), conducted an orientation visit on November 1-5, 2010, at the Chemical and Metallurgy Research Replacement (CMRR) project site at the Department of Energy Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The purpose of the visit was to determine ways in which HSS would be able to carry out its independent oversight responsibilities with respect to this project in a method that encourages integration with DOE-LANL. The orientation visit was conducted by the HSS LANL Site Lead and an HSS contractor.

367

Electrical safety guidelines  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Electrical Safety Guidelines prescribes the DOE safety standards for DOE field offices or facilities involved in the use of electrical energy. It has been prepared to provide a uniform set of electrical safety standards and guidance for DOE installations in order to affect a reduction or elimination of risks associated with the use of electrical energy. The objectives of these guidelines are to enhance electrical safety awareness and mitigate electrical hazards to employees, the public, and the environment.

Not Available

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

368

Facility Representative Program: 2003 Facility Representative Workshop  

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

369

Facility Safety | Department of Energy  

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

two requirements documents to express identical sets of requirements for two distinct organizational groups. The first, Order 414.1C, applies to practically all DOE...

370

Nuclear and Facility Safety Directives  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

DOE O 252.1A promotes DOE's use of Voluntary Consensus Standards (VCS) as the primary method for application of technical standards and establishes and manages the DOE Technical Standards Program ...

371

Update of the Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Implementation Plan |  

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

Update of the Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Implementation Plan Update of the Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Implementation Plan Update of the Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Implementation Plan The Used Fuel Disposition Campaign will identify alternatives and conduct scientific research and technology development to enable storage, transportation, and disposal of used nuclear fuel and wastes generated by existing and future nuclear fuel cycles. This Campaign Implementation Plan provides summary level detail describing how the Used Fuel Disposition Campaign supports achievement of the overarching Fuel Cycle Research and Development Program mission and objectives. Activities will be sufficiently flexible to accommodate any of the potential fuel cycle options for used fuel management. Update of the Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Implementation Plan

372

Waste and Materials Disposition Information | Department of Energy  

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

Waste and Materials Disposition Waste and Materials Disposition Information Waste and Materials Disposition Information Waste and Materials Disposition Information As the Office of Environmental Management (EM) fulfills its mission, waste and materials disposition plays a vital role in the cleanup of radioactive waste and the environmental legacy of nuclear weapons production and nuclear energy research. Disposal of waste frequently falls on the critical path of cleanup projects. Significant planning resources are spent to identify alternatives and find a path that is cost-effective and in the best interest of the Federal government. In many instances, waste disposition, (processing, treatment and disposal) is part of cleanup agreements and is of interest to stakeholders and requires the oversight of regulators.

373

Toolbox Safety Talk Woodworking Machines  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Toolbox Safety Talk Woodworking Machines Environmental Health & Safety Facilities Safety & Health to Environmental Health & Safety for recordkeeping. Machine shops are an integral part of the Cornell University for many student courses and elective activities. Woodworking machines can pose a myriad of hazards

Pawlowski, Wojtek

374

Request For Records Disposition Authority: Strategic Petroleum Reserve  

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

Request For Records Disposition Authority: Strategic Petroleum Request For Records Disposition Authority: Strategic Petroleum Reserve Project Management Office Request For Records Disposition Authority: Strategic Petroleum Reserve Project Management Office Paper case files pertaining to environmental permit applications, permits and related correspondence as well as NEPA correspondence within of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve Project Management Office (SPRPMO) Request For Records Disposition Authority: Strategic Petroleum Reserve Project Management Office More Documents & Publications 2012 Annual Planning Summary for Fossil Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, RMOTC, and Strategic Petroleum Reserve Field Office CX-002673: Categorical Exclusion Determination CX-009794: Categorical Exclusion Determination

375

Request For Records Disposition Authority-Nuclear Weapons | Department...  

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

For Records Disposition Authority-Nuclear Weapons This document identifies the nuclear weapon records generated by the Department of Energy's (DOE) Nuclear Weapons Complex Request...

376

REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY | Department of Energy  

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

Nuclear Power Plant Docket Records REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY More Documents & Publications PIA - Savannah River Remediation Accreditation Boundary (SRR AB) REQUEST...

377

EA-1488: Environmental Assessment for the U-233 Disposition,...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Environmental Assessment for the U-233 Disposition, Medical Isotope Production, and Building 3019 Complex Shutdown at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee...

378

Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Phase I Ring Compression Testing...  

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

Phase I Ring Compression Testing of High Burnup Cladding Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Phase I Ring Compression Testing of High Burnup Cladding The purpose of ring compression...

379

Consent Order, Uranium Disposition Services, LLC- NCO-2010-01  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Issued to Uranium Disposition Services, LLC related to Construction Deficiencies at the DUF6 Conversion Buildings at the Portsmouth and Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plants

380

EM Opens New Waste Repackaging Facility at Laboratory | Department of  

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

Opens New Waste Repackaging Facility at Laboratory Opens New Waste Repackaging Facility at Laboratory EM Opens New Waste Repackaging Facility at Laboratory March 7, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis A view of the new facility where transuranic waste will be repackaged at Los Alamos National Laboratory. A view of the new facility where transuranic waste will be repackaged at Los Alamos National Laboratory. EM Deputy Assistant Secretary for Waste Management Frank Marcinowski, left, talks with LANL’s Oversized Container Disposition Project Manager Mike Romero while on a tour of the 375 box line facility in late February. EM Deputy Assistant Secretary for Waste Management Frank Marcinowski, left, talks with LANL's Oversized Container Disposition Project Manager Mike Romero while on a tour of the 375 box line facility in late February.

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

Criticality Safety | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

at Department of Energy Non Reactor Nuclear Facilities DOE-STD-1135-99, Guidance for Nuclear Criticality Safety Engineer Training and Qualification Contact Garrett Smith...

382

Plutonium-Uranium Extraction (PUREX) facility preclosure work plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Bhatia, R.K., Westinghouse Hanford

1996-07-09T23:59:59.000Z

383

Seismic Safety Guide  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This guide provides managers with practical guidelines for administering a comprehensive earthquake safety program. The Guide is comprehensive with respect to earthquakes in that it covers the most important aspects of natural hazards, site planning, evaluation and rehabilitation of existing buildings, design of new facilities, operational safety, emergency planning, special considerations related to shielding blocks, non-structural elements, lifelines, fire protection and emergency facilities. Management of risk and liabilities is also covered. Nuclear facilities per se are not dealt with specifically. The principles covered also apply generally to nuclear facilities but the design and construction of such structures are subject to special regulations and legal controls.

Eagling, D.G. (ed.)

1983-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

384

Bases, Assumptions, and Results of the Flowsheet Calculations for the Decision Phase Salt Disposition Alternatives  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The High Level Waste (HLW) Salt Disposition Systems Engineering Team was formed on March 13, 1998, and chartered to identify options, evaluate alternatives, and recommend a selected alternative(s) for processing HLW salt to a permitted wasteform. This requirement arises because the existing In-Tank Precipitation process at the Savannah River Site, as currently configured, cannot simultaneously meet the HLW production and Authorization Basis safety requirements. This engineering study was performed in four phases. This document provides the technical bases, assumptions, and results of this engineering study.

Dimenna, R.A.; Jacobs, R.A.; Taylor, G.A.; Durate, O.E.; Paul, P.K.; Elder, H.H.; Pike, J.A.; Fowler, J.R.; Rutland, P.L.; Gregory, M.V.; Smith III, F.G.; Hang, T.; Subosits, S.G.; Campbell, S.G.

2001-03-26T23:59:59.000Z

385

Microsoft PowerPoint - FY09_11 Disposition Plan_090804  

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

to 2011 FIMS Disposition to 2011 FIMS Disposition Plan Phil Dalby, P.E., LEED AP Facilities Engineer Office of Engineering and Construction Management U. S. Department of Energy August 4, 2009 2 FY 2009 to FY 2011 Disposition Plan RPV # Of Assets GSF RPV # Of Assets Gross Sq Feet FY 02 N/A N/A N/A $322,545,118 379 1,533,715 - $2,914,059 $322,545,118 FY 03 N/A N/A N/A $313,800,817 420 1,140,524 - $2,166,996 $636,345,935 FY 04 N/A N/A N/A $678,724,838 536 2,878,328 - $5,468,823 $1,315,070,773 FY 05 $1,029,311,442 473 4,111,764 $1,047,538,247 488 4,101,396 102% $7,792,652 $2,362,609,020 FY 06 $788,456,532 270 1,773,232 $1,352,580,138 625 2,800,679 172% $5,321,290 $3,715,189,158 FY 07 $550,347,778 208 1,414,961 $595,332,143 243 1,568,969 108% $2,981,041 $4,310,521,301 FY 08 $312,272,791 114 782,388 $1,029,579,616 219 1,418,007 330%

386

Development of a techno-economic model to optimization DOE spent nuclear fuel disposition  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of the National Spent Nuclear Fuel (NSNF) Program conducted by Lockheed Martin Idaho Technology Co. (LMITCO) at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) is to evaluate what to do with the spent nuclear fuel (SNF) in the Department of Energy (DOE) complex. Final disposition of the SNF may require that the fuel be treated to minimize material concerns. The treatments may range from electrometallurgical treatment and chemical dissolution to engineering controls. Treatment options and treatment locations will depend on the fuel type and the current locations of the fuel. One of the first steps associated with selecting one or more sites for treating the SNF in the DOE complex is to determine the cost of each option. An economic analysis will assist in determining which fuel treatment alternative attains the optimum disposition of SNF at the lowest possible cost to the government and the public. For this study, a set of questions was developed for the electrometallurgical treatment process for fuels at several locations. The set of questions addresses all issues associated with the design, construction, and operation of a production facility. A matrix table was developed to determine questions applicable to various fuel treatment options. A work breakdown structure (WBS) was developed to identify a treatment process and costs from initial design to shipment of treatment products to final disposition. Costs will be applied to determine the life-cycle cost of each option. This technique can also be applied to other treatment techniques for treating spent nuclear fuel.

Ramer, R.J.; Plum, M.M.; Adams, J.P.; Dahl, C.A.

1997-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

387

Safety System Oversight: 2010 Safety System Oversight Workshop  

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

Safety System Oversight Workshop Safety System Oversight Workshop May 12 - 13, 2010 Las Vegas, NV 2010 Facility Representative and Safety System Oversight Workshops Summary: PDF SSO Steering Committee Meeting Minutes: PDF 2009 Safety System Oversight Annual Award Workshop Agenda: PDF Workshop Presentations: Panel Discussion on the Integration of Facility Representatives and Safety System Oversight Personnel at Site Programs Presentation Panel Highlights Introduction, Goals, and Objectives for SSO Workshop Community Update Demographic Survey Results Introduction of the Safety System Oversight Steering Committee Earl Hughes Presentation Oak Ridge Fire Protection SSO Program Pat Smith, Oak Ridge Office Presentation Commercial Grade Dedication Fran Lemieux, NSTec, Nevada Test Site Presentation

388

EM Waste and Materials Disposition & Transportation  

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

On Closure Success On Closure Success 1 EM Waste and Materials Disposition & Transportation National Transportation Stakeholders Forum Chicago, Illinois May 26, 2010 Frank Marcinowski Acting Chief Technical Officer and Deputy Assistant Secretary for Technical and Regulatory Support Office of Environmental Management DOE's Radioactive Waste Management Priorities * Continue to manage waste inventories in a safe and compliant manner * Address high risk waste in a cost- ff ti effective manner * Maintain and optimize current disposal capability for future generations * Develop future disposal capacity in a complex environment * Promote the development of treatment and disposal alternatives in the 2 and disposal alternatives in the

389

Facility Representative Program: 2001 Facility Representative Workshop  

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

390

Readiness Assessment for MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility - Advanced...  

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

NS.1 Facility safety documentation that describes the "safety envelope" for the AR Project II activities is in place and has been implemented to meet the following criteria:...

391

H. UNREVIEWED SAFETY QUESTIONS  

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

Department of Energy Pt. 835 H. UNREVIEWED SAFETY QUESTIONS 1. The USQ process is an important tool to evaluate whether changes affect the safety basis. A contractor must use the USQ proc- ess to ensure that the safety basis for a DOE nuclear facility is not undermined by changes in the facility, the work performed, the associated hazards, or other factors that support the adequacy of the safety basis. 2. The USQ process permits a contractor to make physical and procedural changes to a nuclear facility and to conduct tests and ex- periments without prior approval, provided these changes do not cause a USQ. The USQ process provides a contractor with the flexi- bility needed to conduct day-to-day oper- ations by requiring only those changes and tests with a potential to impact the safety

392

H. UNREVIEWED SAFETY QUESTIONS  

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

3 3 Department of Energy Pt. 835 H. UNREVIEWED SAFETY QUESTIONS 1. The USQ process is an important tool to evaluate whether changes affect the safety basis. A contractor must use the USQ proc- ess to ensure that the safety basis for a DOE nuclear facility is not undermined by changes in the facility, the work performed, the associated hazards, or other factors that support the adequacy of the safety basis. 2. The USQ process permits a contractor to make physical and procedural changes to a nuclear facility and to conduct tests and ex- periments without prior approval, provided these changes do not cause a USQ. The USQ process provides a contractor with the flexi- bility needed to conduct day-to-day oper- ations by requiring only those changes and tests with a potential to impact the safety

393

EIS-0327: Disposition of Scrap Metals Programmatic EIS | Department of  

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

27: Disposition of Scrap Metals Programmatic EIS 27: Disposition of Scrap Metals Programmatic EIS EIS-0327: Disposition of Scrap Metals Programmatic EIS Summary This EIS will evaluate the environmental impacts of policy alternatives for the disposition of scrap metals (primarily carbon steel and stainless steel) that may have residual surface radioactivity. DOE is cancelling this EIS. Public Comment Opportunities No public comment opportunities available at this time. Documents Available for Download December 19, 2011 EA-1919: Notice of Revision to Clearance Policy Recycle of Scrap Metals Originating from Radiological Areas (December 2011) July 12, 2001 EIS-0327: Notice of Intent to Prepare a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and Announcement of Public Scoping Meetings Disposition of Scrap Metals

394

Properties and Dispositions: Some Metaphysical Remarks on Quantum Ontology  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

After some suggestions about how to clarify the confused metaphysical distinctions between dispositional and non?dispositional or categorical properties I review some of the main interpretations of QM in order to show that with the relevant exception of Bohms minimalist interpretation quantum ontology is irreducibly dispositional. Such an irreducible character of dispositions must be explained differently in different interpretations but the reducibility of the contextual properties in the case of Bohmian mechanics is guaranteed by the fact that the positions of particles play the role of the categorical basis a role that in other interpretations cannot be filled by anything else. In Bohrs and Everett?type interpretations dispositionalism is instrumentalism in disguise.

Mauro Dorato

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

395

Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Preliminary Quality Assurance Implementation  

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

Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Preliminary Quality Assurance Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Preliminary Quality Assurance Implementation Plan Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Preliminary Quality Assurance Implementation Plan The primary objective of this report is to determine whether the existing Fuel Cycle Technologies (FCT) Quality Assurance Program Document (QAPD) is sufficient for work to be performed in the Used Fuel Disposition Campaign (UFDC), and where the existing QAPD is not sufficient, supply recommendations for changes to the QAPD to accommodate the UFDC. The FCT QAPD provides a sound and useable foundation for the implementation of QA for UFDC R&D activities, including the application of QA in a graded approach. Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Preliminary Quality Assurance Implementation Plan More Documents & Publications

396

EIS-0283-S2: Surplus Plutonium Disposition Supplemental Environmental  

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

3-S2: Surplus Plutonium Disposition Supplemental 3-S2: Surplus Plutonium Disposition Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement EIS-0283-S2: Surplus Plutonium Disposition Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Summary This EIS analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with changes to the surplus plutonium disposition program, including changes to the inventory of surplus plutonium and proposed new alternatives. The original EIS is available here. For more information, see: www.nnsa.energy.gov/nepa/spdsupplementaleis Public Comment Opportunities None available at this time. Documents Available for Download April 25, 2013 EIS-0283-S2: Interim Action Determination Surplus Plutonium Disposition Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (K-Area Materials Storage (KAMS) Area Expansion at the Savannah River Site)

397

Facility Centered Assessment of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Science and Technology Operations - Facility Operations Director Managed Facilities, August 2011  

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

Review Report Review Report Facility Centered Assessment of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Science and Technology Operations - Facility Operations Director Managed Facilities May 2011 August 2011 Office of Health, Safety and Security Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Table of Contents Background ................................................................................................................................................... 1 Results ........................................................................................................................................................... 2 Conduct of the FCA ......................................................................................................................... 2

398

Facility Centered Assessment of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Science and Technology Operations - Facility Operations Director Managed Facilities, August 2011  

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

Review Report Review Report Facility Centered Assessment of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Science and Technology Operations - Facility Operations Director Managed Facilities May 2011 August 2011 Office of Health, Safety and Security Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Table of Contents Background ................................................................................................................................................... 1 Results ........................................................................................................................................................... 2 Conduct of the FCA ......................................................................................................................... 2

399

Stanford University Committee on Health and Safety  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

to ensuring safety is a consideration in what is done in all activities at Stanford (Safety Culture) #12Stanford University Committee on Health and Safety 2011 Public Meeting June 27, 2010 5:00-6:30 Stanford Environmental Safety Facility #12;University Committee on Health & Safety June 27, 2011 Public

400

Independent Oversight Review, Savannah River Site Salt Waste Processing Facility- August 2013  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Review of the Savannah River Site Salt Waste Processing Facility Safety Basis and Design Development.

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

ACTION: Technical Position on the Use of National Consensus and Building Codes to Meet DOE Order 420.18, Facility Safety, Albright, 9/13/07  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The attached technical position was developed in response to line organization requests for clarification and it will be posted on the Office ofNuclear Safety and Environmental Policy web page for...

402

Nuclear Reactor Safety Design Criteria  

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

The order establishes nuclear safety criteria applicable to the design, fabrication, construction, testing, and performance requirements of nuclear reactor facilities and safety class structures, systems, and components (SSCs) within these facilities. Cancels paragraphs 8a and 8b of DOE 5480.6. Cancels DOE O 5480.6 in part. Certified 11-18-10.

1993-01-19T23:59:59.000Z

403

TA-55: LANL Plutonium-Processing Facilities  

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

TA-55: LANL Plutonium-Processing Facilities TA-55: LANL Plutonium-Processing Facilities TA-55: LANL Plutonium-Processing Facilities TA-55 supports a wide range of national security programs that involve stockpile stewardship, plutonium processing, nuclear materials stabilization, materials disposition, nuclear forensics, nuclear counter-terrorism, and nuclear energy. ...the only fully operational, full capability plutonium facility in the nation. National Security At the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), virtually all plutonium operations occur within the Plutonium Facility at Technical Area 55 (TA-55). TA-55 is the nation's most modern plutonium science and manufacturing facility, and it is the only fully operational, full capability plutonium facility in the nation. Thus, TA-55 supports a wide

404

Dismantlement and Disposition | National Nuclear Security Administrati...  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Maintaining the safety, security and effectiveness of the nuclear deterrent without nuclear testing - especially at lower numbers - requires increased investments across the...

405

Facility Representative Program: Facility Representative Program Sponsors  

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

406

Assessment of Facilities, Materials, and Wastes Proposed for Transfer to EM  

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

Non-Integrated Facilities Disposition Non-Integrated Facilities Disposition Project Technical Assistance Page 1 of 2 Complex-Wide Multi-State Assessment of Facilities, Materials, and Wastes Proposed for Transfer to EM Challenge In December 2007 the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (EM-1) invited the DOE Program Secretarial Offices (PSOs) of Nuclear Energy (NE), Science (SC), and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to propose facilities and legacy waste for transfer to Environmental Management (EM) for final disposition or deactivation and decommissioning (D&D). Transfers of facilities, materials, and waste to EM will generate liabilities that are currently unfunded. For purposes of overall planning, it is important to understand the impacts of proposed transfers with regard to technical

407

INDUSTRIAL SAFETY & HEALTH (ISH)  

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

BASIS (SB) BASIS (SB) OBJECTIVE SB.1 Facility safety documentation 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 (systems, procedures, administrative controls, etc.) that protect workers and the public form those hazards/risks. Safety structures, systems and components (SSCs) are defined and a system to maintain control over their designs and modification is established. (Core Requirement 7) Criteria 1. The TA-55 SST Facility safety basis and related documentation address the full spectrum of hazards/risks associated with operations. 2. Controls designed to mitigate the consequence of analyzed TA-55 SST Facility

408

Interim Storage of Plutonium in Existing Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

'In this era of nuclear weapons disarmament and nonproliferation treaties, among many problems being faced by the Department of Energy is the safe disposal of plutonium. There is a large stockpile of plutonium at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Center and it remains politically and environmentally strategic to relocate the inventory closer to a processing facility. Savannah River Site has been chosen as the final storage location, and the Actinide Packaging and Storage Facility (APSF) is currently under construction for this purpose. With the ability of APSF to receive Rocky Flats material an estimated ten years away, DOE has decided to use the existing reactor building in K-Area of SRS as temporary storage to accelerate the removal of plutonium from Rocky Flats. There are enormous cost savings to the government that serve as incentive to start this removal as soon as possible, and the KAMS project is scheduled to receive the first shipment of plutonium in January 2000. The reactor building in K-Area was chosen for its hardened structure and upgraded seismic qualification, both resulting from an effort to restart the reactor in 1991. The KAMS project has faced unique challenges from Authorization Basis and Safety Analysis perspectives. Although modifying a reactor building from a production facility to a storage shelter is not technically difficult, the nature of plutonium has caused design and safety analysis engineers to make certain that the design of systems, structures and components included will protect the public, SRS workers, and the environment. A basic overview of the KAMS project follows. Plutonium will be measured and loaded into DOT Type-B shipping packages at Rocky Flats. The packages are 35-gallon stainless steel drums with multiple internal containment boundaries. DOE transportation vehicles will be used to ship the drums to the KAMS facility at SRS. They will then be unloaded, stacked and stored in specific locations throughout the reactor building. The storage life is projected to be ten years to allow the preparation of APSF. DOE has stipulated that there be no credible release during storage, since there are no design features in place to mitigate a release of plutonium (i.e. HEPA filters, facility containment boundaries, etc.). This mandate has presented most of the significant challenges to the safety analysis team. The shipping packages are designed to withstand certain accidents and conditions, but in order to take credit for these the storage environment must be strictly controlled. Damages to the packages from exposure to fire, dropping, crushing and other impact accidents have been analyzed, and appropriate preventative design features have been incorporated. Other efforts include the extension of the shipping life (roughly two years) to a suitable storage life of ten years. These issues include the effects of internal pressure increases, seal degradation and the presence of impurities. A process known as the Container Qualification Program has been conducted to address these issues. The KAMS project will be ready to receive the first shipment from Rocky Flats in January 2000. No credible design basis scenarios resulting in the release of plutonium exist. This work has been useful in the effort to provide a safer disposition of plutonium, but also the lessons learned and techniques established by the team will help with the analysis of future facility modifications.'

Woodsmall, T.D.

1999-05-10T23:59:59.000Z

409

Enforcement handbook: Enforcement of DOE nuclear safety requirements  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Handbook provides detailed guidance and procedures to implement the General Statement of DOE Enforcement Policy (Enforcement Policy or Policy). A copy of this Enforcement Policy is included for ready reference in Appendix D. The guidance provided in this Handbook is qualified, however, by the admonishment to exercise discretion in determining the proper disposition of each potential enforcement action. As discussed in subsequent chapters, the Enforcement and Investigation Staff will apply a number of factors in assessing each potential enforcement situation. Enforcement sanctions are imposed in accordance with the Enforcement Policy for the purpose of promoting public and worker health and safety in the performance of activities at DOE facilities by DOE contractors (and their subcontractors and suppliers) who are indemnified under the Price-Anderson Amendments Act. These indemnified contractors, and their suppliers and subcontractors, will be referred to in this Handbook collectively as DOE contractors. It should be remembered that the purpose of the Department`s enforcement policy is to improve nuclear safety for the workers and the public, and this goal should be the prime consideration in exercising enforcement discretion.

NONE

1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

410

HEQUEST FOR Rt43RDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY  

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

- - HEQUEST FOR Rt43RDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY (See ~nstructions on reverse) / GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS SERVICE, WASHINGTON, D C 20408 1 . F R O M (Agency orestablishment) U.S. Department of Energy 2 . MAJOR SUBDIVISION Oak Ridge Operations Office 3. M I N O R SUBDIVISION I hereby certify that I am authorized to act for this agency in matters pertaining to the disposal of the agency's records; that the records proposed for disposal in this Request of 4 page(s) are not now needed for the business of this agency or will not be needed after the retention periods specified; and that written concurrence from the General Accounting Office, if required under the provisions of Title 8 of the GAO Manual for Guidance of Federal Agencies, is

411

REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION AUTHORITY S  

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

S S e e Instructions o n reverse) NATIONAL ARCHIVES and RECORDS ADMINISTRATION (NIR) WASHINGTON. DC 20408 , - - 1. FROM (Agency or establishment) Department of Energy 2. MAJOR SUBDIVISION Assistant Secretary For Fossil Energy (FE-1) I 3. MINOR SUBDIVISION Office of Naval Petroleum and Shale Oil 4 . NAME OF PERSON WITH WHOM TO CON I 1 Jerry Hinkle (FE 47) 1(202)586-43 80 I I / 6. AGENCY CERTIFICATION I NOTIFICATION TO AGENCY i I In accordance with the provisions of 44 U.S.C. 3303a the disposition request, including amendments, is ap roved except for items that may be marke! "dis osition not approved" or "withdrawn" in c o L n 10. I hereby certify that I am authorized to act for this agency in yatters pertaining to of its records and that the records roposed for disposal on the attached

412

Disposition options for {sup 233}U  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The United States is implementing a program to dispose of excess nuclear-weapons-usable materials--including {sup 233}U. A series of studies have identified multiple {sup 233}U disposition options, and these options are described herein. Most of the options involve adding depleted uranium containing {sup 238}U to the {sup 233}U. Converting the {sup 233}U into a mixture of <12 wt % {sup 233}U in {sup 238}U converts the weapons-usable {sup 233}U into nonweapons-usable {sup 233}U. For {sup 233}U that is considered waste, further isotopic dilution to <0.66 wt % {sup 233}U in {sup 238}U minimizes potential long-term repository criticality concerns and in many cases minimizes final waste volumes.

Forsberg, C.W.; Icenhour, A.S.; Krichinsky, A.M.

1998-04-27T23:59:59.000Z

413

Neutron Assay System for Confinement Vessel Disposition  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Los Alamos National Laboratory has a number of spherical confinement vessels (CVs) remaining from tests involving nuclear materials. These vessels have an inner diameter of 6 feet with 1-inch thick steel walls. The goal of the Confinement Vessel Disposition (CVD) project is to remove debris and reduce contamination inside the CVs. The Confinement Vessel Assay System (CVAS) was developed to measure the amount of special nuclear material (SNM) in CVs before and after cleanout. Prior to cleanout, the system will be used to perform a verification measurement of each vessel. After cleanout, the system will be used to perform safeguards-quality assays of {le}100-g {sup 239}Pu equivalent in a vessel for safeguards termination. The CVAS has been tested and calibrated in preparation for verification and safeguards measurements.

Frame, Katherine C. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Bourne, Mark M. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Crooks, William J. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Evans, Louise [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Mayo, Douglas R. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Miko, David K. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Salazar, William R. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Stange, Sy [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Valdez, Jose I. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Vigil, Georgiana M. [Los Alamos National Laboratory

2012-07-13T23:59:59.000Z

414

The ultimate disposition of depleted uranium  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Significant amounts of the depleted uranium (DU) created by past uranium enrichment activities have been sold, disposed of commercially, or utilized by defense programs. In recent years, however, the demand for DU has become quite small compared to quantities available, and within the US Department of Energy (DOE) there is concern for any risks and/or cost liabilities that might be associated with the ever-growing inventory of this material. As a result, Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. (Energy Systems), was asked to review options and to develop a comprehensive plan for inventory management and the ultimate disposition of DU accumulated at the gaseous diffusion plants (GDPs). An Energy Systems task team, under the chairmanship of T. R. Lemons, was formed in late 1989 to provide advice and guidance for this task. This report reviews options and recommends actions and objectives in the management of working inventories of partially depleted feed (PDF) materials and for the ultimate disposition of fully depleted uranium (FDU). Actions that should be considered are as follows. (1) Inspect UF{sub 6} cylinders on a semiannual basis. (2) Upgrade cylinder maintenance and storage yards. (3) Convert FDU to U{sub 3}O{sub 8} for long-term storage or disposal. This will include provisions for partial recovery of costs to offset those associated with DU inventory management and the ultimate disposal of FDU. Another recommendation is to drop the term tails'' in favor of depleted uranium'' or DU'' because the tails'' label implies that it is waste.'' 13 refs.

Not Available

1990-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

415

Analysis and section of processes for the disposition of excess fissile material from nuclear weapon dismantlement in the United States  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The end of the cold war and the acceleration of nuclear disarmament efforts by the United States (US) and Russia are generating large quantities of surplus fissile nuclear materials that are no longer needed for military purposes. The safe and secure disposition of this surplus material to prevent theft or reuse in weapons has become a high priority for the US Department of Energy (USDOE). Many options exist for storage and disposition (use or disposal) of these surplus materials. The criteria, which have been developed from the basis for a preliminary ``screening`` of options, to eliminate from further consideration those options that do not meet minimal requirements. Factors, or attributes, contained in the screening and selection criteria include: (1) resistance to theft and diversion by unauthorized parties, (2) resistance to retrieval, extraction, and reuse by the host nation, (3) technical viability, (4) environmental, safety, and health impacts, (5) cost effectiveness, (6) timeliness, (7) fostering of progress and cooperation with Russia and others, (8) public and institutional acceptance, and (9) additional benefits. The evaluation of environmental impacts, in accordance with the US National Environmental Policy Ac (NEPA) process, is an integral part of the overall evaluation process. Because of the variety of physical and chemical forms of the nuclear material inventory, and because of the large number of possible disposition technologies and final forms, several hundred possible pathways to disposition have been defined and have undergone a systematic selection process. Also, because nuclear material disposition will have far ranging impacts, extensive public, in the form of public and stakeholder, input was integral to the selection process.

Myers, B.R.; Armantrout, G.A. [Lawrence Livermore National Lab., CA (United States); Erickson, R. [Los Alamos National Lab., NM (United States)

1995-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

416

Relationship of Surplus Plutonium Disposition Alternatives and...  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Building Note: Appendices C and D provide details about the analyses of human health effects at DOE facilities under normal and accident conditions, respectively, while...

417

Hanford Surplus Facilities Program plan, Fiscal year 1991  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Hanford Surplus Facilities Program is responsible for the safe and cost-effective surveillance, maintenance, and decommissioning of surplus facilities at the Hanford Site. The management of these facilities requires a surveillance and maintenance program to keep them in a safe condition and development of a plan for ultimate disposition. Criteria used to evaluate each factor relative to decommissioning are based on the guidelines presented by the US Department of Energy-Richland Operations Office, Environmental Restoration Division, and are consistent with the Westinghouse Hanford Company commitment to decommission the Hanford Site retired facilities in the safest and most cost-effective way achievable. This document outlines the plan for managing these facilities to the end of disposition. 12 refs., 2 figs., 4 tabs.

Hughes, M.C.; Wahlen, R.K.; Winship, R.A.

1990-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

418

Health and Safety Training Reciprocity  

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

Establishes a policy for reciprocity of employee health and safety training among DOE entities responsible for employee health and safety at DOE sites and facilities to increase efficiency and effectiveness of Departmental operations while meeting established health and safety requirements. Does not cancel other directives.

2014-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

419

Microsoft PowerPoint - S08-05_Leishear_Salt Disposition Initiative.ppt  

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

Blending in Nuclear Waste Tanks Blending in Nuclear Waste Tanks Bob Leishear Savannah River Remediation Salt Disposition Engineering November 17, 2010 Print Close 2 Blending in Nuclear Waste Tanks Volume 37.1 Million Gallons (Mgal) Curies 183 MCi (52%) 169 MCi (48%) 352 Million Curies (MCi) 171 MCi (49%) Sludge 34.2 Mgal (92%) 2.9 Mgal (8%) 18.4 Mgal (49%) Salt Supernate 12 MCi (3%) Saltcake 15.8 Mgal (43%) Print Close 3 Blending in Nuclear Waste Tanks Sample of Vitrified Radioactive Glass Print Close 4 Blending in Nuclear Waste Tanks SDU 3 SDU 3 SDU 2 SDU 2 SDU (Vault) 4 SDU (Vault) 4 SDU (Vault) 1 SDU (Vault) 1 Cell A Cell B Saltstone Production Facility Saltstone Production Facility Print Close 5 Blending in Nuclear Waste Tanks Print Close 6 Blending in Nuclear Waste Tanks Sludge Salt Feed Solutions Print Close 7 Experimental Strategy Scale-

420

Occupational Safety & Health Criteria & Review Approach Documents |  

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

Occupational Safety & Health Criteria & Review Approach Documents Occupational Safety & Health Criteria & Review Approach Documents Occupational Safety & Health Criteria & Review Approach Documents Documents Available for Download CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health - Idaho Accelerated Retrieval Project Phase II CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health - Los Alamos National Laboratory TA 55 SST Facility CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health - Los Alamos National Laboratory Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health - Oak Ridge National Laboratory High Flux Isotope Reactor CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health - Oak Ridge National Laboratory High Flux Isotope Reactor Contractor ORR

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

DRAFT Bear Safety Plan  

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

Bear Safety Plan June 2010 Bear Safety Plan June 2010 NSA_bsp_Rev9.doc 1 Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Climate Research Facility/ North Slope of Alaska/Adjacent Arctic Ocean (ACRF/NSA/AAO) Bear Safety Plan Background As a major part of DOE's participation in the US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), the North Slope of Alaska (NSA) and Adjacent Arctic Ocean (AAO) Climate Research Facility (ACRF) exists on the North Slope of Alaska with its Central Facility near the town of Barrow. A secondary facility exists at Atqasuk, a town 100km inland from Barrow. Other instrumentation locations in more remote areas on the North Slope may be established in later stages of the project. Polar bears, and to a lesser extent, brown bears (barren ground grizzly) are significant hazards within the ACRF/NSA/AAO

422

BNL | Accelerator Test Facility  

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

Accelerator Test Facility Accelerator Test Facility Home Core Capabilities Photoinjector S-Band Linac Laser Systems CO2 Laser Nd:Yag Laser Beamlines Beamline Simulation Data Beamline Parameters Beam Diagnostics Detectors Beam Schedule Operations Resources Fact Sheet (.pdf) Image Library Upgrade Proposal (.pdf) Publications ES&H Experiment Start-up ATF Handbook Laser Safety Collider-Accelerator Dept. C-AD ES&H Resources Staff Users' Place Apply for Access ATF photo ATF photo ATF photo ATF photo ATF photo A user facility for advanced accelerator research The Brookhaven Accelerator Test Facility (ATF) is a proposal driven, steering committee reviewed facility that provides users with high-brightness electron- and laser-beams. The ATF pioneered the concept of a user facility for studying complex properties of modern accelerators and

423

General Engineer / Physical Scientist (Facility Representative)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Facility Representatives (FRs) are line management's on-site technical representative with responsibility for identifying and evaluating environmental, safety and health issues and concerns,...

424

Supervisory General Engineer (Facility Engineering Division Director)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A successful candidate in this position will lead the Facility Engineering Division by providing internal and independent safety system oversight of Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) operations in...

425

Safety Management System Policy  

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

POLICY POLICY Washington, D.C. Approved: 4-25-11 SUBJECT: INTEGRATED SAFETY MANAGEMENT POLICY PURPOSE AND SCOPE To establish the Department of Energy's (DOE) expectation for safety, 1 including integrated safety management that will enable the Department's mission goals to be accomplished efficiently while ensuring safe operations at all departmental facilities and activities. This Policy cancels and supersedes DOE Policy (P) 411.1, Safety Management Functions, Responsibilities, and Authorities Policy, dated 1-28-97; DOE P 441.1, DOE Radiological Health and Safety Policy, dated 4-26-96; DOE P 450.2A, Identifying, Implementing and Complying with Environment, Safety and Health Requirements, dated 5-15-96; DOE P 450.4, Safety Management

426

Safety System Oversight  

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

Safety System Oversight Safety System Oversight Office of Nuclear Safety Home Safety System Oversight Home Annual SSO/FR Workshop DOE Safety Links › ORPS Info › Operating Experience Summary › DOE Lessons Learned › Accident Investigation Program Assessment Tools › SSO CRADS Subject Matter Links General Program Information › Program Mission Statement › SSO Program Description › SSO Annual Award Program › SSO Annual Award › SSO Steering Committee › SSO Program Assessment CRAD SSO Logo Items Site Leads and Steering Committee Archive Facility Representative Contact Us HSS Logo SSO SSO Program News Congratulations to Ronnie L. Alderson of Nevada Field Office, the Winner of the 2012 Safety System Oversight Annual Award! 2012 Safety System Oversight Annual Award Nominees SSO Staffing Analysis

427

DOE Seeks Industry Input on Nickel Disposition Strategy | Department of  

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

DOE Seeks Industry Input on Nickel Disposition Strategy DOE Seeks Industry Input on Nickel Disposition Strategy DOE Seeks Industry Input on Nickel Disposition Strategy March 23, 2012 - 12:00pm Addthis WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Energy Department's prime contractor, Fluor-B&W Portsmouth (FBP), managing the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant (GDP), issued a request for Expressions of Interest (EOI) seeking industry input to support the development of an acquisition strategy for potential disposition of DOE nickel. The EOI requests technical, financial, and product market information to review the feasibility of technologies capable of decontaminating the nickel to a level indistinguishable from what is commercially available, such that it could be safely recycled and reused. The EOI scope is for 6,400 tons of nickel to be recovered from the uranium enrichment process

428

WASTE DISPOSITION PROJECT MAKES GREAT STRIDES AT THE IDAHO SITE |  

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

WASTE DISPOSITION PROJECT MAKES GREAT STRIDES AT THE IDAHO SITE WASTE DISPOSITION PROJECT MAKES GREAT STRIDES AT THE IDAHO SITE WASTE DISPOSITION PROJECT MAKES GREAT STRIDES AT THE IDAHO SITE April 1, 2010 - 12:00pm Addthis An operator uses robotic manipulators to process RH TRU. An operator uses robotic manipulators to process RH TRU. Idaho - The Waste Disposition Project Team at the Department of Energy's Idaho Site has continued to keep its commitment to remove remote handled (RH) transuranic (TRU) waste out of Idaho, protecting the Snake River Plain Aquifer and keeping the Office of Environmental Management's commitment to environmental clean up. In 2007, the first shipment of RH TRU waste left the gates of the Idaho Site, headed to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) for disposal. In the three years since, devoted individuals on the CH2M-WG, Idaho's (CWI)

429

Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Preliminary Quality Assurance Implementation  

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

Preliminary Quality Assurance Preliminary Quality Assurance Implementation Plan Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Preliminary Quality Assurance Implementation Plan The primary objective of this report is to determine whether the existing Fuel Cycle Technologies (FCT) Quality Assurance Program Document (QAPD) is sufficient for work to be performed in the Used Fuel Disposition Campaign (UFDC), and where the existing QAPD is not sufficient, supply recommendations for changes to the QAPD to accommodate the UFDC. The FCT QAPD provides a sound and useable foundation for the implementation of QA for UFDC R&D activities, including the application of QA in a graded approach. Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Preliminary Quality Assurance Implementation Plan More Documents & Publications Used Fuel Disposition Campaign International Activities Implementation Plan

430

AEO2011: Liquid Fuels Supply and Disposition | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Liquid Fuels Supply and Disposition Liquid Fuels Supply and Disposition Dataset Summary Description This dataset comes from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), and is part of the 2011 Annual Energy Outlook Report (AEO2011). This dataset is table 11, and contains only the reference case. The dataset uses million barrels per day. The data is broken down into crude oil, other petroleum supply, other non petroleum supply and liquid fuel consumption. Source EIA Date Released April 26th, 2011 (3 years ago) Date Updated Unknown Keywords 2011 AEO disposition EIA liquid fuels Supply Data application/vnd.ms-excel icon AEO2011: Liquid Fuels Supply and Disposition- Reference Case (xls, 117 KiB) Quality Metrics Level of Review Peer Reviewed Comment Temporal and Spatial Coverage Frequency Annually

431

WASTE DISPOSITION PROJECT MAKES GREAT STRIDES AT THE IDAHO SITE |  

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

WASTE DISPOSITION PROJECT MAKES GREAT STRIDES AT THE IDAHO SITE WASTE DISPOSITION PROJECT MAKES GREAT STRIDES AT THE IDAHO SITE WASTE DISPOSITION PROJECT MAKES GREAT STRIDES AT THE IDAHO SITE April 1, 2010 - 12:00pm Addthis An operator uses robotic manipulators to process RH TRU. An operator uses robotic manipulators to process RH TRU. Idaho - The Waste Disposition Project Team at the Department of Energy's Idaho Site has continued to keep its commitment to remove remote handled (RH) transuranic (TRU) waste out of Idaho, protecting the Snake River Plain Aquifer and keeping the Office of Environmental Management's commitment to environmental clean up. In 2007, the first shipment of RH TRU waste left the gates of the Idaho Site, headed to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) for disposal. In the three years since, devoted individuals on the CH2M-WG, Idaho's (CWI)

432

Low Level Waste Disposition - Quantity and Inventory | Department of  

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

Low Level Waste Disposition - Quantity and Inventory Low Level Waste Disposition - Quantity and Inventory Low Level Waste Disposition - Quantity and Inventory This study has been prepared by the Used Fuel Disposition (UFD) campaign of the Fuel Cycle Research and Development (FCR&D) program. The purpose of this study is to provide an estimate of the volume of low level waste resulting from a variety of commercial fuel cycle alternatives in order to support subsequent system-level evaluations of disposal system performance. This study provides an estimate of Class A/B/C low level waste (LLW), greater than Class C (GTCC) waste, mixed LLW and mixed GTCC waste generated from the following initial set of fuel cycles and recycling processes: 1. Operations at a geologic repository based upon a once through light

433

Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Disposal Research and Development Roadmap |  

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

Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Disposal Research and Development Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Disposal Research and Development Roadmap Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Disposal Research and Development Roadmap The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE), Office of Fuel Cycle Technology (OFCT) has established the Used Fuel Disposition Campaign (UFDC) to conduct the research and development (R&D) activities related to storage, transportation and disposal of used nuclear fuel (UNF) and high level nuclear waste (HLW). The Mission of the UFDC is To identify alternatives and conduct scientific research and technology development to enable storage, transportation and disposal of used nuclear fuel and wastes generated by existing and future nuclear fuel cycles. The U.S. has, for the past twenty-plus years, focused efforts on disposing

434

Low Level Waste Disposition - Quantity and Inventory | Department of  

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

Low Level Waste Disposition - Quantity and Inventory Low Level Waste Disposition - Quantity and Inventory Low Level Waste Disposition - Quantity and Inventory This study has been prepared by the Used Fuel Disposition (UFD) campaign of the Fuel Cycle Research and Development (FCR&D) program. The purpose of this study is to provide an estimate of the volume of low level waste resulting from a variety of commercial fuel cycle alternatives in order to support subsequent system-level evaluations of disposal system performance. This study provides an estimate of Class A/B/C low level waste (LLW), greater than Class C (GTCC) waste, mixed LLW and mixed GTCC waste generated from the following initial set of fuel cycles and recycling processes: 1. Operations at a geologic repository based upon a once through light

435

Integrated Tool Development for Used Fuel Disposition Natural System  

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

Integrated Tool Development for Used Fuel Disposition Natural Integrated Tool Development for Used Fuel Disposition Natural System Evaluation Phase I Report Integrated Tool Development for Used Fuel Disposition Natural System Evaluation Phase I Report The natural barrier system (NBS) is an integral part of a geologic nuclear waste repository. The report describes progress in development of an integrated modeling framework that can be used for systematically analyzing the performance of a natural barrier system and identifying key factors that control the performance. This framework is designed as an integrated tool for prioritization and programmatic decisions. Integrated Tool Development for Used Fuel Disposition Natural System Evaluation Phase I Report More Documents & Publications Natural System Evaluation and Tool Development FY11 Progress Report

436

DOE Seeks Industry Input on Nickel Disposition Strategy | Department of  

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

Industry Input on Nickel Disposition Strategy Industry Input on Nickel Disposition Strategy DOE Seeks Industry Input on Nickel Disposition Strategy March 23, 2012 - 12:00pm Addthis WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Energy Department's prime contractor, Fluor-B&W Portsmouth (FBP), managing the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant (GDP), issued a request for Expressions of Interest (EOI) seeking industry input to support the development of an acquisition strategy for potential disposition of DOE nickel. The EOI requests technical, financial, and product market information to review the feasibility of technologies capable of decontaminating the nickel to a level indistinguishable from what is commercially available, such that it could be safely recycled and reused. The EOI scope is for 6,400 tons of nickel to be recovered from the uranium enrichment process

437

Integrated Tool Development for Used Fuel Disposition Natural System  

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

Integrated Tool Development for Used Fuel Disposition Natural Integrated Tool Development for Used Fuel Disposition Natural System Evaluation Phase I Report Integrated Tool Development for Used Fuel Disposition Natural System Evaluation Phase I Report The natural barrier system (NBS) is an integral part of a geologic nuclear waste repository. The report describes progress in development of an integrated modeling framework that can be used for systematically analyzing the performance of a natural barrier system and identifying key factors that control the performance. This framework is designed as an integrated tool for prioritization and programmatic decisions. Integrated Tool Development for Used Fuel Disposition Natural System Evaluation Phase I Report More Documents & Publications Natural System Evaluation and Tool Development FY11 Progress Report

438

AEO2011: Coal Supply, Disposition, and Prices | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Supply, Disposition, and Prices Supply, Disposition, and Prices Dataset Summary Description This dataset comes from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), and is part of the 2011 Annual Energy Outlook Report (AEO2011). This dataset is Table 15, and contains only the reference case. The dataset uses gigawatts. The data is broken down into production, net imports, consumption by sector and price. Source EIA Date Released April 26th, 2011 (3 years ago) Date Updated Unknown Keywords 2011 AEO coal coal supply disposition. prices EIA Data application/vnd.ms-excel icon AEO2011: Coal Supply, Disposition, and Prices- Reference Case (xls, 91.7 KiB) Quality Metrics Level of Review Peer Reviewed Comment Temporal and Spatial Coverage Frequency Annually Time Period 2008-2035 License License Open Data Commons Public Domain Dedication and Licence (PDDL)

439

EA-1977: Acceptance and Disposition of Used Nuclear Fuel Containing...  

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

Fuel Containing U.S.-Origin Highly Enriched Uranium from the Federal Republic of Germany EA-1977: Acceptance and Disposition of Used Nuclear Fuel Containing U.S.-Origin...

440

Americium/Curium Disposition Life Cycle Planning Study  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

At the request of the Department of Energy Savannah River Office (DOE- SR), Westinghouse Savannah River Company (WSRC) evaluated concepts to complete disposition of Americium and Curium (Am/Cm) bearing materials currently located at the Savannah River Site (SRS).

Jackson, W.N. [Westinghouse Savannah River Company, AIKEN, SC (United States); Krupa, J.; Stutts, P.; Nester, S.; Raimesch, R.

1998-04-30T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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

EIS-0327: Disposition of Scrap Metals Programmatic EIS  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This EIS will evaluate the environmental impacts of policy alternatives for the disposition of scrap metals (primarily carbon steel and stainless steel) that may have residual surface radioactivity. DOE is cancelling this EIS.

442

A Study of Cattle Disposition: Exploring QTL Associated with Temperament  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

In any production setting, cattle disposition (temperament) has a great impact on handling and performance. Thus, behavior can be economically important, yielding the rationale for study. Wegenhoft (2005) previously identified several quantitative...

Boldt, Clayton Ryan

2008-05-16T23:59:59.000Z

443

Safety First Safety Last Safety Always Safety Shoes  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Safety First Safety Last Safety Always Safety Shoes and Boots Safety Tip #21 Don't let your day guards) can be used in conjunction with standard safety shoes. Safety boots Safety boots come in many varieties, and which you will use will depend on the specific hazards you face. Boots offer more protection

Minnesota, University of

444

CRAD, Engineering Design and Safety Basis - December 22, 2009 | Department  

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

Engineering Design and Safety Basis - December 22, 2009 Engineering Design and Safety Basis - December 22, 2009 CRAD, Engineering Design and Safety Basis - December 22, 2009 December 22, 2009 Engineering Design and Safety Basis Inspection Criteria, Inspection Activities, and Lines of Inquiry (HSS CRAD 64-19, Rev. 0) The engineering design and safety basis inspection will evaluate the effectiveness of programs and processes for the design and safety basis of selected safety structures, systems, and components (SSCs) of a nuclear facility. The nuclear facility may be an existing facility, a major modification to an existing facility, or a new facility under construction. Accordingly, the safety basis for the facility, for example, a documented safety analysis (DSA) or a preliminary documented safety analysis (PDSA),

445

CRAD, Engineering Design and Safety Basis - December 22, 2009 | Department  

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

Engineering Design and Safety Basis - December 22, 2009 Engineering Design and Safety Basis - December 22, 2009 CRAD, Engineering Design and Safety Basis - December 22, 2009 December 22, 2009 Engineering Design and Safety Basis Inspection Criteria, Inspection Activities, and Lines of Inquiry (HSS CRAD 64-19, Rev. 0) The engineering design and safety basis inspection will evaluate the effectiveness of programs and processes for the design and safety basis of selected safety structures, systems, and components (SSCs) of a nuclear facility. The nuclear facility may be an existing facility, a major modification to an existing facility, or a new facility under construction. Accordingly, the safety basis for the facility, for example, a documented safety analysis (DSA) or a preliminary documented safety analysis (PDSA),

446

RESEARCH SAFETY RADIATION SAFETY  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

and Communications Manager (951) 827-6303 janette.ducut@ucr.edu Beiwei Tu, MS, CIH, CSP Safety and Industrial Hygiene, CSP Laboratory Safety Compliance Specialist (951) 827-2528 sarah.meyer@ucr.edu (vacant) Integrated

447

Safety System Oversight Assessment, Los Alamos National Laboratory- May 2011  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Safety System Oversight Assessment of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Weapons Engineering Tritium Facility Tritium Gas Handling System

448

Office of Environment, Safety and Health Evaluations Appraisal...  

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

transportation, radioactive waste management, quality assurance, procurement, conduct of operations, design and system facility engineering, safety system maintenance,...

449

Facility Representative Program: 2006 Facility Representative Workshop  

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

450

TRACKING SURPLUS PLUTONIUM FROM WEAPONS TO DISPOSITION  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Supporting nuclear nonproliferation and global security principles, beginning in 1994 the United States has withdrawn more than 50 metric tons (MT) of government-controlled plutonium from potential use in nuclear weapons. The Department of Energy (DOE), including the National Nuclear Security Administration, established protocols for the tracking of this "excess" and "surplus" plutonium, and for reconciling the current storage and utilization of the plutonium to show that its management is consistent with the withdrawal policies. Programs are underway to ensure the safe and secure disposition of the materials that formed a major part of the weapons stockpile during the Cold War, and growing quantities have been disposed as waste, after which they are not included in traditional nuclear material control and accountability (NMC&A) data systems. A combination of resources is used to perform the reconciliations that form the basis for annual reporting to DOE, to U.S. Department of State, and to international partners including the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Allender, J.; Beams, J.; Sanders, K.; Myers, L.

2013-07-16T23:59:59.000Z

451

Pipeline Safety (Pennsylvania) | Department of Energy  

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

Pipeline Safety (Pennsylvania) Pipeline Safety (Pennsylvania) Pipeline Safety (Pennsylvania) < Back Eligibility Utility Investor-Owned Utility Industrial Municipal/Public Utility Rural Electric Cooperative Program Info State Pennsylvania Program Type Safety and Operational Guidelines Provider Pennsylvania Public Utilities Commission The Pennsylvania legislature has empowered the Public Utility Commission to direct and enforce safety standards for pipeline facilities and to regulate safety practices of certificated utilities engaged in the transportation of natural gas and other gas by pipeline. The Commission is authorized to enforce federal safety standards as an agent for the U.S. Department of Transportation's Office of Pipeline Safety. The safety standards apply to the design, installation, operation,

452

Toolbox Safety Talk Waste Anesthetic Gas (WAG)  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Toolbox Safety Talk Waste Anesthetic Gas (WAG) Environmental Health & Safety Facilities Safety-in sheet to Environmental Health & Safety for recordkeeping. Anesthetic gas and vapors that leak into the surrounding room during medical or research procedures are considered waste anesthetic gas (WAG). These gases

Pawlowski, Wojtek

453

Radiation Safety Guide For Ancillary Personnel  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

, facilities, and public safety staff) who occasionally work in areas posted with the radiation symbol rules, you can ensure your safety while working in areas posted with the radiation symbol. 1. Follow allRadiation Safety Guide For Ancillary Personnel University of Washington Radiation Safety Office 203

Wilcock, William

454

DOE/EA-1651: FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Uranium-233 Material Downblending and Disposition Project at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee (01/13/10)  

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

URANIUM-233 MATERIAL DOWNBLENDING AND DISPOSITION PROJECT URANIUM-233 MATERIAL DOWNBLENDING AND DISPOSITION PROJECT AT THE OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY, OAK RIDGE, TENNESSEE AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) ACTION: Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) SUMMARY: DOE has completed the Final Environmental Assessment for U-233 Material Downblending and Disposition Project at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory [DOE/EA-1651]. This environmental assessment (EA) evaluates the impacts of planned activities to modify selected Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) facilities; process the ORNL inventory of uranium-233 (U-233); and transport the processed material to a long-term disposal facility. Small quantities of similar material currently stored at other DOE sites may also be included in this initiative. The

455

MAGNET CELL SAFETY PROCEDURE SP-16 Revision 02  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

MAGNET CELL SAFETY PROCEDURE SP-16 Page i Revision 02 July 19, 2006 NATIONAL HIGH MAGNETIC: MAGNET CELL SAFETY PROCEDURE ______________________________________________________ HEAD of MAGNET ______________________________________________________ HEAD of FACILITIES John Kynoch #12;MAGNET CELL SAFETY PROCEDURE SP-16 Pageii Revision 02 July 19

Weston, Ken

456

Old Dominion University Annual Security and Fire Safety Report  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Protection Features in Residence Halls____________________ 21 Residential Facilities Fire Safety AmenitiesOld Dominion University 2012 Annual Security and Fire Safety Report All statements and policies _________________________________________ 17 Fire Safety ______________________________________________________________ 19 Residence Halls

457

LANL MOX fuel lead assemblies data report for the surplus plutonium disposition environmental impact statement  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this document is to support the US Department of Energy (DOE) Fissile Materials Disposition Program`s preparation of the draft surplus plutonium disposition environmental impact statement. This is one of several responses to data call requests for background information on activities associated with the operation of the lead assembly (LA) mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel fabrication facility. LANL has proposed an LA MOX fuel fabrication approach that would be done entirely inside an S and S Category 1 area. This includes receipt and storage of PuO{sub 2} powder, fabrication of MOX fuel pellets, assembly of fuel rods and bundles, and shipping of the packaged fuel to a commercial reactor site. Support activities will take place within both Category 1 and 2 areas. Technical Area (TA) 55/Plutonium Facility 4 will be used to store the bulk PuO{sub 2} powder, fabricate MOX fuel pellets, assemble rods, and store fuel bundles. Bundles will be assembled at a separate facility, several of which have been identified as suitable for that activity. The Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Building (at TA-3) will be used for analytical chemistry support. Waste operations will be conducted in TA-50 and TA-54. Only very minor modifications will be needed to accommodate the LA program. These modifications consist mostly of minor equipment upgrades. A commercial reactor operator has not been identified for the LA irradiation. Postirradiation examination (PIE) of the irradiated fuel will take place at either Oak Ridge National Laboratory or ANL-W. The only modifications required at either PIE site would be to accommodate full-length irradiated fuel rods. Results from this program are critical to the overall plutonium distribution schedule.

Fisher, S.E.; Holdaway, R.; Ludwig, S.B. [and others

1998-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

458

Hanford MOX fuel lead assemblies data report for the surplus plutonium disposition environmental impact statement  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this document is to support the US Department of Energy (DOE) Fissile Materials Disposition Program`s preparation of the draft surplus plutonium disposition environmental impact statement. This is one of several responses to data call requests for background information on activities associated with the operation of the lead assembly (LA) mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel fabrication facility. DOE-MD requested that the DOE Site Operations Offices nominate DOE sites that meet established minimum requirements that could produce MOX LAs. Six initial site combinations were proposed: (1) Argonne National Laboratory-West (ANL-W) with support from Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), (2) Hanford, (3) Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) with support from Pantex, (4) Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), (5) Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR), and (6) Savannah River Site (SRS). After further analysis by the sites and DOE-MD, five site combinations were established as possible candidates for producing MOX LAs: (1) ANL-W with support from INEEL, (2) Hanford, (3) LANL, (4) LLNL, and (5) SRS. Hanford has proposed an LA MOX fuel fabrication approach that would be done entirely inside an S and S Category 1 area. An alternate approach would allow fabrication of fuel pellets and assembly of fuel rods in an S and S Category 1 facility. In all, a total of three LA MOX fuel fabrication options were identified by Hanford that could accommodate the program. In every case, only minor modification would be required to ready any of the facilities to accept the equipment necessary to accomplish the LA program.

O`Connor, D.G.; Fisher, S.E.; Holdaway, R. [and others

1998-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

459

Worker Safety and Health Enforcement Letter issued to Los Alamos National Security, LLC, related to Worker Beryllium Exposure during Machining at the Los Alamos National Laboratorys Beryllium Technology Facility, May 29, 2013 (WEL-2013-01)  

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

29, 2013 29, 2013 Dr. Charles F. McMillan, President Los Alamos National Security, LLC Los Alamos National Laboratory Mailstop A 100, Drop Point 03140071S Bikini Atoll Road, TA-3 Los Alamos, New Mexico 87454 WEL-2013-01 Dear Dr. McMillan: The Office of Health, Safety and Security's Office of Enforcement and Oversight evaluated the circumstances surrounding a work evolution performed at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Technical Area 3, Building 141, Beryllium Technology Facility (BTF), on July 11, 2012. The work evolution resulted in a worker exposure to beryllium in excess of the Department of Energy (DOE) action level of 0.2 micrograms per cubic meter for an 8-hour, time-weighted average. Los Alamos National Security, LLC (LANS), which manages and

460

Safety First Safety Last Safety Always General site safety  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Safety First Safety Last Safety Always General site safety During the course of construction barrier at least 5 feet (1.5m) high having a fire-resistance rating of at least one half hour. Site Safety and Clean-up Safety Tip #20 Safety has no quitting time. All contractors should clean up their debris, trash

Minnesota, University of

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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.


461

Safety First Safety Last Safety Always Safety Tip #22  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Safety First Safety Last Safety Always Safety Tip #22 Mowing Operations Mowing unsafely just doesn for out-of-control vehicles. Wear hearing protection and a safety vest. Wear a hard hat and safety goggles of this safety tip sheet. Please refrain from reading the information verbatim--paraphrase it instead

Minnesota, University of

462

Safety for Users  

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

Safety for Users Safety for Users Safety for Users Print Safety at the ALS The mission of the ALS is "Support users in doing outstanding science in a safe environment." All users and staff participate in creating a culture and environment where performing research using the proper safeguards and fulfilling all safety requirements result in the success of the facility and its scientific program. The documents and guidance below will assist users and staff to achieve these goals. How Do I...? A series of fact sheets that explain what users need to know and do when preparing to conduct experiments at the ALS. Complete Experiment Safety Documentation? Work with Biological Materials? Work with Chemicals? Work with Regulated Soil? Bring and Use Electrical Equipment at the ALS?

463

Assessment of Facilities, Materials, and Wastes Proposed for Transfer to EM  

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

Facilities, Materials, and Wastes Proposed for Facilities, Materials, and Wastes Proposed for Transfer to EM Assessment of Facilities, Materials, and Wastes Proposed for Transfer to EM In December 2007 the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (EM-1) invited the DOE Program Secretarial Offices (PSOs) of Nuclear Energy (NE), Science (SC), and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to propose facilities and legacy waste for transfer to Environmental Management (EM) for final disposition or deactivation and decommissioning (D&D). Assessment of Facilities, Materials, and Wastes Proposed for Transfer to EM More Documents & Publications Assessment of the Integrated Facility Disposition Project at Oak Ridge National Laboratory & Y-12 for Transfer of Facilities & Materials to EM

464

Optimization and implementation study of plutonium disposition using existing CANDU Reactors. Final report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Since early 1994, the Department of Energy has been sponsoring studies aimed at evaluating the merits of disposing of surplus US weapons plutonium as Mixed Oxide (MOX) fuel in existing commercial Canadian Pressurized Heavy Water reactors, known as CANDU`s. The first report, submitted to DOE in July, 1994 (the 1994 Executive Summary is attached), identified practical and safe options for the consumption of 50 to 100 tons of plutonium in 25 years in some of the existing CANDU reactors operating the Bruce A generating station, on Lake Huron, about 300 km north east of Detroit. By designing the fuel and nuclear performance to operate within existing experience and operating/performance envelope, and by utilizing existing fuel fabrication and transportation facilities and methods, a low cost, low risk method for long term plutonium disposition was developed. In December, 1995, in response to evolving Mission Requirements, the DOE requested a further study of the CANDU option with emphasis on more rapid disposition of the plutonium, and retaining the early start and low risk features of the earlier work. This report is the result of that additional work.

NONE

1996-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

465

INDUSTRIAL SAFETY & HEALTH (ISH)  

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

HEALTH (ISH) HEALTH (ISH) OBJECTIVE ISH.1 A comprehensive industrial safety & health program has been implemented to address applicable safety requirements at the TA 55 SST Facility. (Core Requirements 1, 3, and 4) Criteria * Procedures are implemented to address applicable industrial & health safety issues. * An adequate number of trained personnel are available to support SST facility regarding industrial safety & health concerns. * Portable fire extinguishers are appropriate for the class of fire they are expected to fight and are located within the proper distance. * Cranes, hooks, slings, and other rigging are plainly marked as to their capacity and inspected prior to use. * Forklifts and other powered lifting devices are adequately inspected.

466

Los Alamos National Laboratory summary plan to fabricate mixed oxide lead assemblies for the fissile material disposition program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report summarizes an approach for using existing Los Alamos National Laboratory (Laboratory) mixed oxide (MOX) fuel-fabrication and plutonium processing capabilities to expedite and assure progress in the MOX/Reactor Plutonium Disposition Program. Lead Assembly MOX fabrication is required to provide prototypic fuel for testing in support of fuel qualification and licensing requirements. It is also required to provide a bridge for the full utilization of the European fabrication experience. In part, this bridge helps establish, for the first time since the early 1980s, a US experience base for meeting the safety, licensing, safeguards, security, and materials control and accountability requirements of the Department of Energy and Nuclear Regulatory Commission. In addition, a link is needed between the current research and development program and the production of disposition mission fuel. This link would also help provide a knowledge base for US regulators. Early MOX fabrication and irradiation testing in commercial nuclear reactors would provide a positive demonstration to Russia (and to potential vendors, designers, fabricators, and utilities) that the US has serious intent to proceed with plutonium disposition. This report summarizes an approach to fabricating lead assembly MOX fuel using the existing MOX fuel-fabrication infrastructure at the Laboratory.

Buksa, J.J.; Eaton, S.L.; Trellue, H.R.; Chidester, K.; Bowidowicz, M.; Morley, R.A.; Barr, M.

1997-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

467

FUEL CYCLE POTENTIAL WASTE FOR DISPOSITION  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The United States (U.S.) currently utilizes a once-through fuel cycle where used nuclear fuel (UNF) is stored on-site in either wet pools or in dry storage systems with ultimate disposal in a deep mined geologic repository envisioned. Within the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE), the Fuel Cycle Research and Development Program (FCR&D) develops options to the current commercial fuel cycle management strategy to enable the safe, secure, economic, and sustainable expansion of nuclear energy while minimizing proliferation risks by conducting research and development of advanced fuel cycles, including modified open and closed cycles. The safe management and disposition of used nuclear fuel and/or nuclear waste is a fundamental aspect of any nuclear fuel cycle. Yet, the routine disposal of used nuclear fuel and radioactive waste remains problematic. Advanced fuel cycles will generate different quantities and forms of waste than the current LWR fleet. This study analyzes the quantities and characteristics of potential waste forms including differing waste matrices, as a function of a variety of potential fuel cycle alternatives including: (1) Commercial UNF generated by uranium fuel light water reactors (LWR). Four once through fuel cycles analyzed in this study differ by varying the assumed expansion/contraction of nuclear power in the U.S. (2) Four alternative LWR used fuel recycling processes analyzed differ in the reprocessing method (aqueous vs. electro-chemical), complexity (Pu only or full transuranic (TRU) recovery) and waste forms generated. (3) Used Mixed Oxide (MOX) fuel derived from the recovered Pu utilizing a single reactor pass. (4) Potential waste forms generated by the reprocessing of fuels derived from recovered TRU utilizing multiple reactor passes.

Carter, J.

2011-01-03T23:59:59.000Z

468

FUEL CYCLE POTENTIAL WASTE FOR DISPOSITION  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The United States (U.S.) currently utilizes a once-through fuel cycle where used nuclear fuel (UNF) is stored on-site in either wet pools or in dry storage systems with ultimate disposal in a deep mined geologic repository envisioned. Within the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE), the Fuel Cycle Research and Development Program (FCR&D) develops options to the current commercial fuel cycle management strategy to enable the safe, secure, economic, and sustainable expansion of nuclear energy while minimizing proliferation risks by conducting research and development of advanced fuel cycles, including modified open and closed cycles. The safe management and disposition of used nuclear fuel and/or nuclear waste is a fundamental aspect of any nuclear fuel cycle. Yet, the routine disposal of used nuclear fuel and radioactive waste remains problematic. Advanced fuel cycles will generate different quantities and forms of waste than the current LWR fleet. This study analyzes the quantities and characteristics of potential waste forms including differing waste matrices, as a function of a variety of potential fuel cycle alternatives including: (1) Commercial UNF generated by uranium fuel light water reactors (LWR). Four once through fuel cycles analyzed in this study differ by varying the assumed expansion/contraction of nuclear power in the U.S; (2) Four alternative LWR used fuel recycling processes analyzed differ in the reprocessing method (aqueous vs. electro-chemical), complexity (Pu only or full transuranic (TRU) recovery) and waste forms generated; (3) Used Mixed Oxide (MOX) fuel derived from the recovered Pu utilizing a single reactor pass; and (4) Potential waste forms generated by the reprocessing of fuels derived from recovered TRU utilizing multiple reactor passes.

Jones, R.; Carter, J.

2010-10-13T23:59:59.000Z

469

Facility effluent monitoring plan for the tank farm facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Crummel, G.M.

1998-05-18T23:59:59.000Z

470

EA-1488: Environmental Assessment for the U-233 Disposition, Medical  

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

488: Environmental Assessment for the U-233 Disposition, 488: Environmental Assessment for the U-233 Disposition, Medical Isotope Production, and Building 3019 Complex Shutdown at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee EA-1488: Environmental Assessment for the U-233 Disposition, Medical Isotope Production, and Building 3019 Complex Shutdown at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee The purpose of the proposed action evaluated in this environmental assessment (EA) is the processing of uranium-233 (233U) stored at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and other small quantities of similar material currently stored at other U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) sites in order to render it suitable for safe, long-term, economical storage. The 233U is stored within Bldg. 3019A, which is part of the Bldg. 3019

471

EM Makes Significant Progress on Dispositioning Transuranic Waste at Idaho  

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

EM Makes Significant Progress on Dispositioning Transuranic Waste EM Makes Significant Progress on Dispositioning Transuranic Waste at Idaho Site EM Makes Significant Progress on Dispositioning Transuranic Waste at Idaho Site December 24, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis Workers treat sludge-bearing, transuranic waste from the Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project. Workers treat sludge-bearing, transuranic waste from the Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project. A tank at the Materials and Fuels Complex containing residual sodium is moved prior to waste treatment. A tank at the Materials and Fuels Complex containing residual sodium is moved prior to waste treatment. Distillation equipment is shown prior to transport to the Idaho site. Distillation equipment is shown prior to transport to the Idaho site. In these 2010 photographs, unexploded ordnance were collected and then detonated onsite at the Mass Detonation Area.

472

EA-1290: Disposition of Russian Federation Titled Natural Uranium |  

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

290: Disposition of Russian Federation Titled Natural Uranium 290: Disposition of Russian Federation Titled Natural Uranium EA-1290: Disposition of Russian Federation Titled Natural Uranium SUMMARY This EA evaluates the potential environmental impacts of a proposal to transport up to an average of 9,000 metric tons per year of natural uranium as uranium hexafluoride (UF6) from the United States to the Russian Federation. This amount of uranium is equivalent to 13,3000 metric tons of UF6. The EA also examines the impacts of this action on the global commons. Transfer of natural UF6 to the Russian Federation is part of a joint U.S./Russian program to dispose of highly enriched uranium (HEU) from dismantled Russian nuclear weapons. PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITIES None available at this time. DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD

473

EA-1599: Disposition of Radioactively Contaminated Nickel Located at the  

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

99: Disposition of Radioactively Contaminated Nickel Located 99: Disposition of Radioactively Contaminated Nickel Located at the East Tennessee Technology Park, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Paducah, Kentucky, for Controlled Radiological Applications EA-1599: Disposition of Radioactively Contaminated Nickel Located at the East Tennessee Technology Park, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Paducah, Kentucky, for Controlled Radiological Applications Summary This EA was being prepared to evaluate potential environmental impacts of a proposal to dispose of nickel scrap that is volumetrically contaminated with radioactive materials and that DOE recovered from equipment it had used in uranium enrichment. This EA is on hold. Public Comment Opportunities No public comment opportunities at this time.

474

EM Makes Significant Progress on Dispositioning Transuranic Waste at Idaho  

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

EM Makes Significant Progress on Dispositioning Transuranic Waste EM Makes Significant Progress on Dispositioning Transuranic Waste at Idaho Site EM Makes Significant Progress on Dispositioning Transuranic Waste at Idaho Site December 24, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis Workers treat sludge-bearing, transuranic waste from the Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project. Workers treat sludge-bearing, transuranic waste from the Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project. A tank at the Materials and Fuels Complex containing residual sodium is moved prior to waste treatment. A tank at the Materials and Fuels Complex containing residual sodium is moved prior to waste treatment. Distillation equipment is shown prior to transport to the Idaho site. Distillation equipment is shown prior to transport to the Idaho site. In these 2010 photographs, unexploded ordnance were collected and then detonated onsite at the Mass Detonation Area.

475

Used Fuel Disposition Research & Development | Department of Energy  

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

Used Fuel Disposition Used Fuel Disposition Research & Development Used Fuel Disposition Research & Development A typical spent nuclear fuel cask sitting on a railcar. Since the early 1960s, the United States has safely conducted more than 3,000 shipments of used nuclear fuel without any harmful release of radioactive material. A typical spent nuclear fuel cask sitting on a railcar. Since the early 1960s, the United States has safely conducted more than 3,000 shipments of used nuclear fuel without any harmful release of radioactive material. In order to assure the development of a sustainable nuclear fuel cycle for the nation's energy future, to provide a sound technical basis for implementation of a new national policy for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, and to better understand, assess, and communicate the

476

Disposition of DOE Excess Depleted Uranium, Natural Uranium, and  

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

Disposition of DOE Excess Depleted Uranium, Natural Uranium, and Disposition of DOE Excess Depleted Uranium, Natural Uranium, and Low-Enriched Uranium Disposition of DOE Excess Depleted Uranium, Natural Uranium, and Low-Enriched Uranium The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) owns and manages an inventory of depleted uranium (DU), natural uranium (NU), and low-enriched uranium (LEU) that is currently stored in large cylinders as depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF6), natural uranium hexafluoride (NUF6), and low-enriched uranium hexafluoride (LEUF6) at the DOE Paducah site in western Kentucky (DOE Paducah) and the DOE Portsmouth site near Piketon in south-central Ohio (DOE Portsmouth)1. This inventory exceeds DOE's current and projected energy and defense program needs. On March 11, 2008, the Secretary of Energy issued a policy statement (the

477

Paducah Demolition Debris Shipped for Disposition | Department of Energy  

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

Demolition Debris Shipped for Disposition Demolition Debris Shipped for Disposition Paducah Demolition Debris Shipped for Disposition August 27, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis The first five-car section of demolition debris from the C-340 Metals Plant leaves July 15 from the Paducah site. The first five-car section of demolition debris from the C-340 Metals Plant leaves July 15 from the Paducah site. A P&L locomotive travels near Woodville Road, south of the Paducah site, with the waste shipment in tow. A P&L locomotive travels near Woodville Road, south of the Paducah site, with the waste shipment in tow. The first five-car section of demolition debris from the C-340 Metals Plant leaves July 15 from the Paducah site. A P&L locomotive travels near Woodville Road, south of the Paducah site, with the waste shipment in tow.

478

DOE/EA-1607 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DISPOSITION OF DOE EXCESS  

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

µCi/cc microcuries per cubic centimeter µCi/cc microcuries per cubic centimeter MAP mitigation action plan MEI maximally exposed individual mg/kg milligrams per kilogram mrem millirem mSv millisievert MT metric ton MTCA Model Toxics Control Act MTU metric tons of uranium N/A not applicable Final Environmental Assessment: Disposition of DOE Excess Depleted Uranium, Natural Uranium, and Low-Enriched Uranium vi NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NEF National Enrichment Facility NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NU natural uranium NUF 6 natural uranium hexafluoride pCi/g picocuries per gram PEIS programmatic environmental impact statement PM 2.5 particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less PM 10 particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less

479

LANSCE | Facilities  

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

Isotope Production Facility (IPF) Lujan Neutron Scattering Center Materials Test Station (MTS) Proton Radiography (pRad) Ultracold Neutrons (UCN) Weapons Neutron Research Facility...

480

Office of Nuclear Safety - Directives  

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

Nuclear and Facility Safety Directives Nuclear and Facility Safety Directives The HSS Office of Nuclear Safety is the responsible office for the development, interpretation, and revision of the following Department of Energy (DOE) directives. Go to DOE's Directives Web Page to view these directives. DOE Order (O) 252.1A, Technical Standards Program DOE O 252.1A promotes DOE's use of Voluntary Consensus Standards (VCS) as the primary method for application of technical standards and establishes and manages the DOE Technical Standards Program (TSP) including technical standards development, information, activities, issues, and interactions. HS-30 Contact: Jeff Feit DOE Policy (P) 420.1, Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy DOE P 420.1, documents the Department's nuclear safety policy to design, construct, operate, and decommission its nuclear facilities in a manner that ensures adequate protection of workers, the public, and the environment.

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "facility disposition safety" 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.