National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for facility siting act

  1. Recovery Act Supports Construction of Site's Largest Groundwater Treatment Facility

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Construction of the largest groundwater treatment facility at the Hanford Site – a major American Recovery and Reinvestment Act project – is on schedule and more than 70 percent...

  2. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act industrial site environmental restoration, site characterization plan: Area 6 Decontamination Pond Facility. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-08-01

    This plan presents the strategy for the characterization of the Area 6 Decontamination Pond Facility at the Nevada Test Site which will be conducted for the US Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office, Environmental Restoration Division. The objectives of the planned activities are to: obtain sufficient, sample analytical data from which further assessment, remediation, and/or closure strategies may be developed for the site; obtain sufficient, sample analytical data for management of investigation-derived waste. The scope of the characterization may include surface radiation survey(s), surface soil sampling, subsurface soil boring (i.e., drilling), and sampling of soil in and around the pond; in situ sampling of the soil within subsurface soil borings; and sample analysis for both site characterization and waste management purposes.

  3. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Industrial Site Environmental Restoration Site Characterization Plan, Area 6 Decontamination Pond Facility, Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-08-12

    This plan presents the strategy for the characterization of the Area 6 Decontamination Pond Facility (DPF) at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) which will be conducted for the U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations OffIce (DOE/NV), Environmental Restoration Division (ERD). The objectives of the planned activities are to: o Obtain sufficient, ample analytical data from which further assessment, remediation, and/or closure strategies maybe developed for the site. o Obtain sufficient, sample analytical data for management of investigation-derived waste. All references to regulations contained in this plan are to the versions of the regulations that are current at the time of publication of this plan. The scope of the characterization may include surface radiation survey(s), surface soil sampling, subsurface soil boring (i.e., drilling), and sampling of soil in and Mound the pond; in situ sampling of the soil within subsurface soil borings; and sample analysis for both site . . characterization and waste management purposes.

  4. Washington Energy Facility Site Evalutation Council - Siting...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Washington Energy Facility Site Evalutation Council - Siting and Review Process Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Washington Energy...

  5. Siting analyses for existing facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ford, K.; Mannan, M. [RMT/Jones and Neuse, Inc., Austin, TX (United States)

    1996-08-01

    The term {open_quotes}facility siting{close_quotes} refers to the spacial relationships between process units, process equipment within units, and the location of buildings relative to process equipment. Facility siting is an important consideration for the safe operation of manufacturing facilities. Paragraph (d) of the Process Safety Management (PSM) rule (29 CFR 1910.119) requires employers to document the codes and standards used for designing process equipment. This documentation includes facility siting. The regulation also requires employers to document that the design of the facility complies with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices. In addition, paragraph (e) of the PSM regulation requires that facility siting be evaluated during Process Hazard Analyses. Facility siting issues may also need to be considered in emergency planning and response which are required under paragraph (n) of the PSM rule. This paper will demonstrate, by utilizing an example, one technique for evaluating whether buildings could be affected by a catastrophic incident and for determining if these buildings should be included in the PSM programs developed at the facility such as Process Hazard Analysis and Mechanical Integrity. In addition, this example will illustrate a methodology for determining if the buildings are designed and located in accordance with good engineering practice and industry standards.

  6. Toxic Substances Control Act Uranium Enrichment Federal Facility...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Toxic Substances Control Act Uranium Enrichment Federal Facility Compliance Agreement Toxic Substances Control Act Uranium Enrichment Federal Facility Compliance Agreement Toxic...

  7. Site maps and facilities listings

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-11-01

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

  8. Hanford Site existing irradiated fuel storage facilities description

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Willis, W.L.

    1995-01-11

    This document describes facilities at the Hanford Site which are currently storing spent nuclear fuels. The descriptions provide a basis for the no-action alternatives of ongoing and planned National Environmental Protection Act reviews.

  9. Washington Energy Facility Site Evalutation Council - Generalized...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Washington Energy Facility Site Evalutation Council - Generalized Siting Process Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Chart: Washington Energy...

  10. DOE Site Facility Management Contracts Internet Posting | Department...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    DOE Site Facility Management Contracts Internet Posting DOE Site Facility Management Contracts Internet Posting PDF icon DOE NNSA Site Facility Management Contracts - November...

  11. RCRA Facility Investigation/Remedial Investigation Report for the Grace Road Site (631-22G)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Palmer, E.

    1998-10-02

    This report summarizes the activities and documents the results of a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Facility Investigation/Remedial Investigation conducted at Grace Road Site on the Savannah River Site near Aiken, South Carolina.

  12. Toxic Substances Control Act Uranium Enrichment Federal Facilities...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Toxic Substance Control Act Uranium Enrichment Federal Facilities Compliance Agreement (TSCA-UE- FFCA), February 20, 1992 State Kentucky Agreement Type Compliance Agreement Legal...

  13. Toxic Substances Control Act Uranium Enrichment Federal Facilities...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Toxic Substance Control Act Uranium Enrichment Federal Facilities Compliance Agreement (TSCA-UE- FFCA), February 20, 1992 State Ohio Agreement Type Compliance Agreement Legal...

  14. Uranium Processing Facility Site Readiness Subproject Completed...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    This Site Budget IG Web Policy Privacy No Fear Act Accessibility FOIA Sitemap Federal Government The White House DOE.gov USA.gov Jobs Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA...

  15. Independent Oversight Review, Savannah River Site Tritium Facilities...

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

    June 2012 Independent Oversight Review, Savannah River Site Tritium Facilities - June 2012 June 2012 Review of the Savannah River Site Tritium Facilities Implementation...

  16. Toxic Substances Control Act Uranium Enrichment Federal Facilities...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Thomas L. McCall, Jr. http:www.em.doe.govffaaortsca.html 4252001 Toxic Substances Control Act Uranium Enrichment Federal Facilities Compliance Agree.. Page 12 of 26 Deputy...

  17. Savannah River Site - Mixed Waste Management Facility Northwest...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    state determination for entire site. Addthis Related Articles Savannah River Site - Mixed Waste Management Facility Northeast Plume Savannah River Site - D-Area Oil Seepage Basin...

  18. Savannah River Site - Mixed Waste Management Facility Northeast...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    state determination for entire site. Addthis Related Articles Savannah River Site - Mixed Waste Management Facility Northwest Plume Savannah River Site - D-Area Oil Seepage Basin...

  19. Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Site K-West Annex Facility...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Review, Hanford Site K-West Annex Facility - April 2014 Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Site K-West Annex Facility - April 2014 April 2014 Review of the Hanford Site K-West...

  20. Savannah River Site Federal Facility Agreement, January 15, 1993...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    River Site Federal Facility Agreement Under Section 120 of CERCLA, January 15, 1993 State South Carolina Agreement Type Federal Facility Agreement Legal Driver(s) CERCLA Scope...

  1. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Knox, N.P.; Webb, J.R.; Ferguson, S.D.; Goins, L.F.; Owen, P.T.

    1990-09-01

    The 394 abstracted references on environmental restoration, nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions constitute the eleventh in a series of reports prepared annually for the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Programs. Citations to foreign and domestic literature of all types -- technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, symposia proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions -- have been included. The bibliography contains scientific, technical, economic, regulatory, and legal information pertinent to the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Programs. Major sections are (1) Surplus Facilities Management Program, (2) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning, (3) Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Programs, (4) Facilities Contaminated with Naturally Occurring Radionuclides, (5) Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program, (6) Grand Junction Remedial Action Program, (7) Uranium Mill Tailings Management, (8) Technical Measurements Center, (9) Remedial Action Program, and (10) Environmental Restoration Program. Within these categories, references are arranged alphabetically by first author. Those references having no individual author are listed by corporate affiliation or by publication title. Indexes are provided for author, corporate affiliation, title word, publication description, geographic location, subject category, and keywords. This report is a product of the Remedial Action Program Information Center (RAPIC), which selects and analyzes information on remedial actions and relevant radioactive waste management technologies.

  2. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Owen, P.T.; Knox, N.P.; Ferguson, S.D.; Fielden, J.M.; Schumann, P.L.

    1989-09-01

    The 576 abstracted references on nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions constitute the tenth in a series of reports prepared annually for the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Programs. Citations to foreign and domestic literature of all types--technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, symposia proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions--have been included. The bibliography contains scientific, technical, economic, regulatory, and legal information pertinent to the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Programs. Major sections are (1) Surplus Facilities Management Program, (2) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning, (3) Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, (4) Facilities Contaminated with Naturally Occurring Radionuclides, (5) Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program, (6) Uranium Mill Tailings Management, (7) Technical Measurements Center, and (8) General Remedial Action Program Studies. Within these categories, references are arranged alphabetically by first author. Those references having no individual author are listed by corporate affiliation or by publication description. Indexes are provided for author, corporate affiliation, title work, publication description, geographic location, subject category, and keywords.

  3. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) facility assessment guidance

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rastatter, C.; Fagan, D.; Foss, D.

    1986-10-01

    Facilities that manage hazardous wastes are required to obtain permits under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976. This guidance document informs RCRA permit writers and enforcement officials of procedures to be used in conducting RCRA Facility Assessments. The RCRA corrective-action program was established to investigate and require clean up of releases of hazardous wastes or constituents to the environment at facilities subject to RCRA permits. Releases to ground water, surface water, air, soil, and subsurface strata may be addressed.

  4. National Environmental Policy Act source guide for the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jansky, M.T.

    1998-09-30

    This Source Guide will assist those working with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 to become more familiar with the environmental assessments (EA) and environmental impact statements (EIS) that apply to specific activities and facilities on the Hanford Site. This document should help answer questions concerning NEPA coverage, history, processes, and the status of many of the buildings and units on and related to the Hanford Site. This document summarizes relevant EAs and EISs by briefly outlining the proposed action of each document and the decision made by the US Department of Energy (DOE) or its predecessor agencies, the US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and the US Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA). The summary includes the proposed action alternatives and current status of the proposed action. If a decision officially was stated by the DOE, as in a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) or a record of decision (ROD), and the decision was located, a summary is provided. Not all federal decisions, such as FONSIs and RODS, can be found in the Federal Register (FR). For example, although significant large-action FONSIs can be found in the FR, some low-interest FONSIs might have been published elsewhere (i.e., local newspapers).

  5. Site selection for the Salt Disposition Facility at the Savannah River Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bowers, J.A.

    2000-01-03

    The purpose of this report is to identify, assess, and rank potential sites for the proposed Salt Disposition Facility (SDF) at the Savannah River Site.

  6. O.A.R. 345-015 - Energy Facility Siting Council Site Certification...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Procedures (2014). Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titleO.A.R.345-015-EnergyFacilitySitingCouncilSiteCertificationProcedures&oldid789924" ...

  7. Site Selection for Surplus Plutonium Disposition Facilities at the Savannah River Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wike, L.D.

    2000-12-13

    The purpose of this study is to identify, assess, and rank potential sites for the proposed Surplus Plutonium Disposition Facilities complex at the Savannah River Site.

  8. Faces of the Recovery Act: Jobs at Savannah River Site

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    Skila Harris

    2010-09-01

    The Savannah River Site in Aiken, SC has been able to create/save thousands of jobs through the Recovery Act. These are the stories of just a few of the new hires.

  9. Progress Continues Post-Recovery Act Award at Hanford Site

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    American Recovery and Reinvestment Act work at the Hanford site continues with several projects intended to reduce the Cold War cleanup footprint, from decommissioning a plant once associated with...

  10. Faces of the Recovery Act: Jobs at Savannah River Site

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    The Savannah River Site in Aiken, SC has been able to create/save thousands of jobs through the Recovery Act. These are the stories of just a few of the new hires.

  11. Faces of the Recovery Act: Jobs at Savannah River Site

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    Clark, Doug; Picciano, Bill; Culpepper, Kelli; Cole, Nancy; Oliver, Rahmel;

    2013-05-29

    The Savannah River Site in Aiken, SC has been able to create/save thousands of jobs through the Recovery Act. These are the stories of just a few of the new hires.

  12. Method for siting detectors within a facility

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Gleason, Nathaniel Jeremy Meyer (Livermore, CA)

    2007-12-11

    A method, system and article of manufacture of siting one or more detectors in a facility represented with zones are provided. Signals S.sub.i,j representing an effect in zone j in response to a release of contaminant in zone i for one or more flow conditions are provided. A candidate architecture has one or more candidate zones. A limiting case signal is determined for each flow condition for multiple candidate architectures. The limiting case signal is a smallest system signal of multiple system signals associated with a release in a zone. Each system signal is a maximum one of the signals representing the effect in the candidate zones from the release in one zone for the flow condition. For each candidate architecture, a robust limiting case signal is determined based on a minimum of the limiting case signals. One candidate architecture is selected based on the robust limiting case signals.

  13. Making a Privacy Act Request - Hanford Site

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity ofkandz-cm11 Outreach Home Room NewsInformationJesse BergkampCentermillion toMSDS on theMaitrayeeEnergyMaking a Privacy Act

  14. Energy Facility Evaluation, Siting, Construction and Operation (New Hampshire)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The statute establishes a procedure for the review, approval, monitoring, and enforcement of compliance in the planning, siting, construction, and operation of energy facilities, including...

  15. Savannah River Site Salt Waste Processing Facility Technology...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Savannah River Site Salt Waste Processing Facility Technology Readiness Assessment Report Kurt D. Gerdes Harry D. Harmon Herbert G. Sutter Major C. Thompson John R. Shultz Sahid C....

  16. EIS-0364: Decommissioning of the Fast Flux Test Facility, Hanford Site, Richland, WA

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announces its intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), on proposed decommissioning of the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) at the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington.

  17. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) environmental checklist forms for 304 Concretion Facility Closure Plan. Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-11-01

    The 300 Area of the Hanford Site contains reactor fuel manufacturing facilities and several research and development laboratories. Recyclable scrap uranium with zircaloy-2 and copper silicon alloy, uranium-titanium alloy, beryllium/zircaloy-2 alloy, and zircaloy-2 chips and fines were secured in concrete billets (7.5-gallon containers) in the 304 Facility, located in the 300 Area. The beryllium/zircaloy-2 alloy and zircaloy-2 chips and fines are designated as mixed waste with the characteristic of ignitability. The concretion process reduced the ignitability of the fines and chips for safe storage and shipment. This process has been discontinued and the 304 Facility is now undergoing closure as defined in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Dangerous Waste Regulations, WAC 173-303-040. This closure plan presents a description of the 304 Facility, the history of materials and waste managed, and the procedures that will be followed to close the 304 Facility. The 304 Facility is located within the 300-FF-3 (source) and 300-FF-5 (groundwater) operable units, as designated in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) (Ecology et al. 1992). Contamination in the operable units 300-FF-3 and 300-FF-5 is scheduled to be addressed through the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 remedial action process. Therefore, all soil remedial action at the 304 Facility will be conducted as part of the CERCLA remedial action of operable units 300-FF-3 and 300-FF-5.

  18. Savannah River Site’s H Canyon Work Ensures Future Missions for Facility

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    EM and its primary contractor at the Savannah River Site (SRS) safely completed 16 facility modifications three months ahead of schedule in support of the continued operation and sustainability of the H Canyon facility.

  19. Site characterization plan: Yucca Mountain site, Nevada research and development area, Nevada: Consultation draft, Nuclear Waste Policy Act

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1988-01-01

    The Yucca Mountain site in Nevada is one of three candidate sites for the first geologic repository for radioactive waste. On May 28, 1986, it was recommended by the Secretary of Energy and approved by the President for detailed study in a program of site characterization. This site characterization plan (SCP) has been prepared by the US Department of Energy (DOE) in accordance with the requirements of the Nulcear Waste Policy Act to summarize the information collected to date about the geologic conditions at the site;to describe the conceptual designs for the repository and the waste package;and to present the plans for obtaining the geologic information necessary to demonstrate the suitability of the site for a repository, to design the repository and the waste package, to prepare an environmental impact statement, and to obtain from the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) an authorization to construct the repository. This introduction begins with a brief section on the process for siting and developing a repository, followed by a discussion of the pertinent legislation and regulations. A description of site characterization is presented next;it describes the facilities to be constructed for the site characterization program and explains the principal activities to be conducted during the program. Finally, the purpose, content, organizing principles, and organization of the site characterization plan are oulined, and compliance with applicable regulations is discussed.

  20. Site characterization plan: Yucca Mountain site, Nevada research and development area, Nevada: Consultation draft, Nuclear Waste Policy Act: Volume 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1988-01-01

    The Yucca Mountain site in Nevada is one of three candidate sites for the first geologic repository for radioactive waste. On May 28, 1986, it was recommended for detailed study in a program of site characterization. This site characterization plan (SCP) has been prepared in acordance with the requirements of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act to summarize the information collected to date about the geologic conditions at the site;to describe the conceptual designs for the repository and the waste package and to present the plans for obtaining the geologic information necessary to demonstrate the suitability of the site for a repository, to design the repository and the waste package, to prepare an environmental impact statement, and to obtain from the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) an authorization to construct the repository. This introduction begins with a brief section on the process for siting and eveloping a repository, followed by a discussion of the pertinent legislation and regulations. A description of site characterization is presented next;it describes the facilities to be constructed for the site characterization program and explains the principal activities to be conducted during the program. Finally, the purpose, content, organizing prinicples, and organization of this site characterization plan are outlined, and compliance with applicable regulations is discussed. 880 refs., 130 figs., 25 tabs.

  1. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Characterization, Revision 15

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Neitzel, Duane A.; Bunn, Amoret L.; Burk, Kenneth W.; Cannon, Sandra D.; Duncan, Joanne P.; Fowler, Richard A.; Fritz, Brad G.; Harvey, David W.; Hendrickson, Paul L.; Horton, Duane G.; Last, George V.; Poston, Ted M.; Prendergast-Kennedy, Ellen L.; Reidel, Steve P.; Scott, Michael J.; Thorne, Paul D.; Woody, Dave M.

    2003-09-01

    This document describes the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford Site environment. It is updated each year and is intended to provide a consistent description of the Hanford Site environment for the many National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents being prepared by DOE contractors. No statements of significance or environmental consequences are provided. This year's report is the thirteenth revision of the original document published in 1988 and is (until replaced by the fourteenth revision) the only version that is relevant for use in the preparation of Hanford NEPA, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) documents. The two chapters included in this document (Chapters 4 and 6) are numbered to correspond to the chapters where such information is typically presented in environmental impact statements (Weiss) and other Hanford Site NEPA or CERCLA documentation. Chapter 4.0 (Affected Environment) describes Hanford Site climate and meteorology, geology, hydrology, ecology, cultural, archaeological, and historical resources, socioeconomics, occupational safety, and noise. Chapter 6.0 (Statutory and Regulatory Requirements) describes federal and state laws and regulations, DOE directives and permits, and presidential executive orders that are applicable to the NEPA documents prepared for Hanford Site activities.

  2. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Characterization Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Neitzel, Duane A.; Bunn, Amoret L.; Cannon, Sandra D.; Duncan, Joanne P.; Fowler, Richard A.; Fritz, Brad G.; Harvey, David W.; Hendrickson, Paul L.; Hoitink, Dana J.; Horton, Duane G.; Last, George V.; Poston, Ted M.; Prendergast-Kennedy, Ellen L.; Reidel, Steve P.; Rohay, Alan C.; Scott, Michael J.; Thorne, Paul D.

    2004-09-22

    This document describes the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford Site environment. It is updated each year and is intended to provide a consistent description of the Hanford Site environment for the many National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents being prepared by DOE contractors. No statements of significance or environmental consequences are provided. This year's report is the sixteenth revision of the original document published in 1988 and is (until replaced by the seventeenth revision) the only version that is relevant for use in the preparation of Hanford NEPA, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) documents. The two chapters included in this document (Chapters 4 and 6) are numbered to correspond to the chapters where such information is typically presented in environmental impact statements (Weiss) and other Hanford Site NEPA or CERCLA documentation. Chapter 4.0 (Affected Environment) describes Hanford Site climate and meteorology, geology, hydrology, ecology, cultural, archaeological, and historical resources, socioeconomics, occupational safety and health, and noise. Chapter 6.0 (Statutory and Regulatory Requirements) describes federal and state laws and regulations, DOE directives and permits, and presidential executive orders that are applicable to the NEPA documents prepared for Hanford Site activities.

  3. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Characterization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Neitzel, Duane A.; Bunn, Amoret L.; Duncan, Joanne P.; Eschbach, Tara O.; Fowler, Richard A.; Fritz, Brad G.; Goodwin, Shannon M.; Harvey, David W.; Hendrickson, Paul L.; Hoitink, Dana J.; Horton, Duane G.; Last, George V.; Poston, Ted M.; Prendergast-Kennedy, Ellen L.; Rohay, Alan C.; Scott, Michael J.; Thorne, Paul D.

    2002-09-01

    This document describes the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford Site environment. It is updated each year and is intended to provide a consistent description of the Hanford Site environment for the many National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents being prepared by DOE contractors. No statements of significance or environmental consequences are provided. This year's report is the thirteenth revision of the original document published in 1988 and is (until replaced by the fourteenth revision) the only version that is relevant for use in the preparation of Hanford NEPA, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) documents. The two chapters included in this document (Chapters 4 and 6) are numbered to correspond to the chapters where such information is typically presented in environmental impact statements (Weiss) and other Hanford Site NEPA or CERCLA documentation. Chapter 4.0 (Affected Environment) describes Hanford Site climate and meteorology, geology, hydrology, ecology, cultural, archaeological, and historical resources, socioeconomics, occupational safety, and noise. Chapter 6.0 (Statutory and Regulatory Requirements) describes federal and state laws and regulations, DOE directives and permits, and presidential executive orders that are applicable to the NEPA documents prepared for Hanford Site activities.

  4. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Characterization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Neitzel, Duane A.; Antonio, Ernest J.; Eschbach, Tara O.; Fowler, Richard A.; Goodwin, Shannon M.; Harvey, David W.; Hendrickson, Paul L.; Hoitink, Dana J.; Horton, Duane G.; Last, George V.; Poston, Ted M.; Prendergast, Ellen L.; Rohay, Alan C.; Thorne, Paul D.

    2001-09-01

    This document describes the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford Site environment. It is updated each year and is intended to provide a consistent description of the Hanford Site environment for the many National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents being prepared by DOE contractors. No statements of significance or environmental consequences are provided. This year's report is the thirteenth revision of the original document published in 1988 and is (until replaced by the fourteenth revision) the only version that is relevant for use in the preparation of Hanford NEPA, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) documents. The two chapters included in this document (Chapters 4 and 6) are numbered to correspond to the chapters where such information is typically presented in environmental impact statements (Weiss) and other Hanford Site NEPA or CERCLA documentation. Chapter 4.0 (Affected Environment) describes Hanford Site climate and meteorology, geology, hydrology, ecology, cultural, archaeological, and historical resources, socioeconomics, occupational safety, and noise. Chapter 6.0 (Statutory and Regulatory Requirements) describes federal and state laws and regulations, DOE directives and permits, and presidential executive orders that are applicable to the NEPA documents prepared for Hanford Site activities.

  5. Site Selection for Surplus Plutonium Disposition Facilities at the Savannah River Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wike, L.D.

    2000-08-17

    A site selection study was conducted to evaluate locations for the proposed Surplus Plutonium Disposition Facilities. Facilities to be located include the Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility, the Pit Disassembly and Conversion Facility (PDCF), and the Plutonium Immobilization Project (PIP) facility. Objectives of the study include: (1) Confirm that the Department of Energy (DOE) selected locations for the MOX and PDCF were suitable based on selected siting criteria, (2) Recommend a site in the vicinity of F Area that is suitable for the PIP, and (3) Identify alternative suitable sites for one or more of these facilities in the event that further geotechnical characterization or other considerations result in disqualification of a currently proposed site.

  6. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) characterization. Revision 9

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Neitzel, D.A. [ed.] [ed.; Bjornstad, B.N.; Fosmire, C.J. [and others] [and others

    1997-08-01

    This ninth revision of the Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Characterization presents current environmental data regarding the hanford Site and its immediate environs. This information is intended for use in preparing Chapters 4 and 6 in Hanford Site-related NEPA documents. Chapter 4.0 (Affected Environment) includes information on climate and meteorology, geology, hydrology, ecology, cultural, archaeological and historical resources, socioeconomics, and noise. Chapter 6.0 (Statutory and Regulatory Requirements) provides the preparer with the federal and state regulations, DOE directives and permits, and environmental standards directly applicable to the NEPA documents on the Hanford Site. Not all of the sections have been updated for this revision. The following lists the updated sections: climate and meteorology; ecology (threatened and endangered species section only); culture, archaeological, and historical resources; socioeconomics; all of Chapter 6.

  7. REGULATION AND SYSTEM INTERDEPENDENCE: EFFECTS ON THE SITING OF CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL ENERGY FACILITIES

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Kooser, J.C.

    2013-01-01

    Strategies for Siting Coal Gasification Facilities in theStrategies for Siting Coal Gasification Facilities in thea 100 MW integrated coal gasification/ combined cycle

  8. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) characterization. Revision 8

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Neitzel, D.A. [ed.] [ed.; Bjornstad, B.N.; Fosmire, C.J.; Fowler, R.A. [and others] [and others

    1996-08-01

    This eighth revision of the Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Characterization presents current environmental data regarding the Hanford Site and its immediate environs. This information is intended for use in preparing Chapters 4 and 6 in Hanford Site-related NEPA documents. Chapter 4 (Affected Environment) includes information on climate and meteorology, geology, hydrology, ecology, historical, archaeological and cultural resources, socioeconomics, and noise. Chapter 6 (Statutory and Regulatory Requirements) provides the preparer with the federal and state regulations, DOE directives and permits, and environmental standards directly applicable to the NEPA documents on the Hanford Site. The following sections were updated in this revision: climate and meteorology; ecology (threatened and endangered species section only); historical; archaeological and cultural resources; and all of chapter 6. No conclusions or recommendations are given in this report. Rather, it is a compilation of information on the Hanford Site environment that can be used directly by Site contractors. This information can also be used by any interested individual seeking baseline data on the hanford Site and its past activities by which to evaluate projected activities and their impacts.

  9. Recovery Act funds advance cleanup efforts at Cold War site

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity ofkandz-cm11 Outreach Home RoomPreservation of Fe(II) by Carbon-RichProtonAbout Us Hanford SiteRecovery Act » Recovery

  10. Site characterization plan: Yucca Mountain site, Nevada research and development area, Nevada: Consultation draft, Nuclear Waste Policy Act

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1988-01-01

    Chapter six describes the basis for facility design, the completed facility conceptual design, the completed analytical work relating to the resolution of design issues, and future design-related work. The basis for design and the conceptual design information presented in this chapter meet the requirements of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, for a conceptual repository design that takes into account site-specific requirements. This information is presented to permit a critical evaluation of planned site characterization activities. Chapter seven describes waste package components, emplacement environment, design, and status of research and development that support the Nevada Nuclear Waste Storage Investigation (NNWSI) Project. The site characterization plan (SCP) discussion of waste package components is contained entirely within this chapter. The discussion of emplacement environment in this chapter is limited to considerations of the environment that influence, or which may influence, if perturbed, the waste packages and their performance (particularly hydrogeology, geochemistry, and borehole stability). The basis for conceptual waste package design as well as a description of the design is included in this chapter. The complete design will be reported in the advanced conceptual design (ACD) report and is not duplicated in the SCP. 367 refs., 173 figs., 68 tabs.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1993-09-01

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

  12. Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA) report. Fort Devens Facility, Fort Devens, Massachusetts. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gnewuch, S.

    1994-04-01

    This report presents the results of the Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA) investigation conducted by Arthur D. Little, Inc. at Fort Devens, a U.S. Government property selected for closure by the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission. The primary objective of this investigation as required under CERFA, is for federal agencies to expeditiously identify real property offering the greatest opportunity for immediate reuse and redevelopment. The property examined under this investigation is a 9,280-acre site located approximately 35 miles northwest of Boston, Massachusetts. Arthur D. Little reviewed existing investigation documents, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), state, and county regulatory records, environmental data bases, and title documents pertaining to Fort Devens during this investigation. This information was used to divide the installation into four categories of parcels: CERFA parcels, CERFA parcels with qualifiers, CERFA disqualified parcels, and CERFA excluded parcels. Arthur D. Little's investigation and subsequent parcelization of the installation determined that approximately 2,526 acres of the facility fall within the CERFA parcel category. Approximately 566 acres of the facility were identified as CERFA parcels with qualifiers, approximately 1,305 acres of installation property are identified as CERFA disqualified parcels, and approximately 4,883 areas of the facility were identified as CERFA excluded parcels, essentially the entire South Post.

  13. Idaho Site Launches Corrective Actions Before Restarting Waste Treatment Facility

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    IDAHO FALLS, Idaho – The Idaho site and its cleanup contractor have launched a series of corrective actions they will complete before safely resuming startup operations at the Integrated Waste Treatment Unit (IWTU) following an incident in June that caused the new waste treatment facility to shut down.

  14. Earthquake research for the safer siting of critical facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cluff, J.L. (ed.)

    1980-01-01

    The task of providing the necessities for living, such as adequate electrical power, water, and fuel, is becoming more complicated with time. Some of the facilities that provide these necessities would present potential hazards to the population if serious damage were to occur to them during earthquakes. Other facilities must remain operable immediately after an earthquake to provide life-support services to people who have been affected. The purpose of this report is to recommend research that will improve the information available to those who must decide where to site these critical facilities, and thereby mitigate the effects of the earthquake hazard. The term critical facility is used in this report to describe facilities that could seriously affect the public well-being through loss of life, large financial loss, or degradation of the environment if they were to fail. The term critical facility also is used to refer to facilities that, although they pose a limited hazard to the public, are considered critical because they must continue to function in the event of a disaster so that they can provide vital services.

  15. Savannah River Site Footprint Reduction Results under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - 13302

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Flora, Mary [Savannah River Nuclear Solutions Bldg. 730-4B, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States)] [Savannah River Nuclear Solutions Bldg. 730-4B, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States); Adams, Angelia [United States Department of Energy Bldg. 730-B, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States)] [United States Department of Energy Bldg. 730-B, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States); Pope, Robert [United States Environmental Protection Agency Region IV Atlanta, GA 30303 (United States)] [United States Environmental Protection Agency Region IV Atlanta, GA 30303 (United States)

    2013-07-01

    The Savannah River Site (SRS) is an 802 square-kilometer United States Department of Energy (US DOE) nuclear facility located along the Savannah River near Aiken, South Carolina, managed and operated by Savannah River Nuclear Solutions. Construction of SRS began in the early 1950's to enhance the nation's nuclear weapons capability. Nuclear weapons material production began in the early 1950's, eventually utilizing five production reactors constructed to support the national defense mission. Past operations have resulted in releases of hazardous constituents and substances to soil and groundwater, resulting in 515 waste sites with contamination exceeding regulatory thresholds. More than 1,000 facilities were constructed onsite with approximately 300 of them considered radiological, nuclear or industrial in nature. In 2003, SRS entered into a Memorandum of Agreement with its regulators to accelerate the cleanup using an Area Completion strategy. The strategy was designed to focus cleanup efforts on the 14 large industrial areas of the site to realize efficiencies of scale in the characterization, assessment, and remediation activities. This strategy focuses on addressing the contaminated surface units and the vadose zone and addressing groundwater plumes subsequently. This approach streamlines characterization and remediation efforts as well as the required regulatory documentation, while enhancing the ability to make large-scale cleanup decisions. In February 2009, Congress approved the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) to create jobs and promote economic recovery. At SRS, ARRA funding was established in part to accelerate the completion of environmental remediation and facility deactivation and decommissioning (D and D). By late 2012, SRS achieved 85 percent footprint reduction utilizing ARRA funding by accelerating and coupling waste unit remediation with D and D of remnant facilities. Facility D and D activities were sequenced and permitted with waste unit remediation activities to streamline regulatory approval and execution. Achieving footprint reduction fulfills the Government's responsibility to address legacy contamination; allows earlier completion of legally enforceable compliance agreement milestones; and enables future potential reuse of DOE resources, including land and infrastructure for other missions. Over the last 3.5 years significant achievements were met that contributed to footprint reduction, including the closure of 41 waste units (including 20 miles of radiologically contaminated stream) and decommissioning of 30 facilities (including the precedent setting in situ closure of two former production reactors, the first in the DOE Complex). Other notable achievements included the removal of over 39,750 cubic meters of debris and 68,810 cubic meters of contaminated soils, including 9175 cubic meters of lead-contaminated soil from a former site small arms testing range and treatment of 1,262 cubic meters of tritium-laden soils and concrete using a thermal treatment system. (authors)

  16. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Industrial Sites quality assurance project plan: Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-06-01

    This quality assurance project plan (QAPjP) describes the measures that shall be taken to ensure that the environmental data collected during characterization and closure activities of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Industrial Sites at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) are meaningful, valid, defensible, and can be used to achieve project objectives. These activities are conducted by the US Department of Energy Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV) under the Nevada Environmental Restoration (ER) Project. The Nevada ER Project consists of environmental restoration activities on the NTS, Tonopah Test Range, Nellis Air Force Range, and eight sites in five other states. The RCRA Industrial Sites subproject constitutes a component of the Nevada ER Project. Currently, this QAPjP is limited to the seven RCRA Industrial Sites identified within this document that are to be closed under an interim status and pertains to all field-investigation, analytical-laboratory, and data-review activities in support of these closures. The information presented here supplements the RCRA Industrial Sites Project Management Plan and is to be used in conjunction with the site-specific subproject sampling and analysis plans.

  17. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: a selected bibliography

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Owen, P.T.; Knox, N.P.; Fielden, J.M.; Johnson, C.A.

    1982-09-01

    This bibliography contains 693 references with abstracts on the subject of nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions. Foreign, as well as domestic, literature of all types - technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, conference papers, symposium proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions - has been included in this publication. The bibliography contains scientific (basic research as well as applied technology), economic, regulatory, and legal literature pertinent to the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Program. Major chapters are Surplus Facilities Management Program, Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning, Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program, Grand Junction Remedial Action Program, and Uranium Mill Tailings Management. Chapter sections for chapters 1 and 2 include: Design, Planning, and Regulations; Site Surveys; Decontamination Studies; Dismantlement and Demolition; Land Decontamination and Reclamation; Waste Disposal; and General Studies. The references within each chapter are arranged alphabetically by leading author. References having no individual author are arranged by corporate author or by title. Indexes are provided for (1) author; (2) corporate affiliation; (3) title; (4) publication description; (5) geographic location; and (6) keywords. An appendix of 202 bibliographic references without abstracts or indexes has been included in this bibliography. This appendix represents literature identified but not abstracted due to time constraints.

  18. Hanford Site Near-Facility Environmental Monitoring Data Report for Calendar Year 2002

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Perkins, Craig J.; Markes, Bruce M.; Mckinney, Stephen M.; Mitchell, R. M.; Roos, Richard C.

    2003-09-01

    This report contains the data gathered during near-facility monitoring during 2002 on the Hanford Site.

  19. The US Department of Energy`s facility reuse at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-08-01

    This audit was initiated to determine whether the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site was maximizing its reuse of excess facilities.

  20. SUMMARY OF REVISED TORNADO, HURRICANE AND EXTREME STRAIGHT WIND CHARACTERISTICS AT NUCLEAR FACILITY SITES

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Summary of Revised Tornado, Hurricane and Extreme Straight Wind Characteristics at Nuclear Facility Sites BY: John D. Stevenson Consulting Engineer

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Hazen, Terry

    2002-01-01

    On-Site Disposal Facility Leachate Treatment Final Report,for such a dilute leachate. Monitored Natural AttenuationOn-Site Disposal Facility Leachate Treatment Final Report,

  2. 240 Jobs Later: The Recovery Act's Impact at the Paducah Site...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Enrichment Corp. Recovery Act Creates Jobs, Accelerates Cleanup at DOE's Paducah Site UF6 piping deactivation The black inlet hose is attached to a negative air machine that...

  3. Sludge treatment facility preliminary siting study for the sludge treatment project (A-13B)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WESTRA, A.G.

    1999-06-24

    This study evaluates various sites in the 100 K area and 200 areas of Hanford for locating a treatment facility for sludge from the K Basins. Both existing facilities and a new standalone facility were evaluated. A standalone facility adjacent to the AW Tank Farm in the 200 East area of Hanford is recommended as the best location for a sludge treatment facility.

  4. Washington State Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council | Open Energy

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page| Open Energy Information Serbia-EnhancingEt Al.,Turin,VillageWarren Park,| OpenInformation Energy Facility Site

  5. Closure End States for Facilities, Waste Sites, and Subsurface Contamination

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gerdes, Kurt D.; Chamberlain, Grover S.; Wellman, Dawn M.; Deeb, Rula A.; Hawley, Elizabeth L.; Whitehurst, Latrincy; Marble, Justin

    2012-11-21

    The United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) manages the largest groundwater and soil cleanup effort in the world. DOE’s Office of Environmental Management (EM) has made significant progress in its restoration efforts at sites such as Fernald and Rocky Flats. However, remaining sites, such as Savannah River Site, Oak Ridge Site, Hanford Site, Los Alamos, Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, and West Valley Demonstration Project possess the most complex challenges ever encountered by the technical community and represent a challenge that will face DOE for the next decade. Closure of the remaining 18 sites in the DOE EM Program requires remediation of 75 million cubic yards of contaminated soil and 1.7 trillion gallons of contaminated groundwater, deactivation & decommissioning (D&D) of over 3000 contaminated facilities and thousands of miles of contaminated piping, removal and disposition of millions of cubic yards of legacy materials, treatment of millions of gallons of high level tank waste and disposition of hundreds of contaminated tanks. The financial obligation required to remediate this volume of contaminated environment is estimated to cost more than 7% of the to-go life-cycle cost. Critical in meeting this goal within the current life-cycle cost projections is defining technically achievable end states that formally acknowledge that remedial goals will not be achieved for a long time and that residual contamination will be managed in the interim in ways that are protective of human health and environment. Formally acknowledging the long timeframe needed for remediation can be a basis for establishing common expectations for remedy performance, thereby minimizing the risk of re-evaluating the selected remedy at a later time. Once the expectations for long-term management are in place, remedial efforts can be directed towards near-term objectives (e.g., reducing the risk of exposure to residual contamination) instead of focusing on long-term cleanup requirements. An acknowledgement of the long timeframe for complete restoration and the need for long-term management can also help a site transition from the process of pilot testing different remedial strategies to selecting a final remedy and establishing a long-term management and monitoring approach. This approach has led to cost savings and the more efficient use of resources across the Department of Defense complex and at numerous industrial sites across the U.S. Defensible end states provide numerous benefits for the DOE environmental remediation programs including cost-effective, sustainable long-term monitoring strategies, remediation and site transition decision support, and long-term management of closure sites.

  6. DECOMMISSIONING OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES IN GERMANY - STATUS AT BMBF SITES

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Papp, R.; Komorowski, K.

    2002-02-25

    In a period of approximately 40 years prior to 1994, the German Federal Government had spent about {approx} 15 billion to promote nuclear technology. These funds were earmarked for R&D projects as well as demonstration facilities which took up operation between 1960 and 1980. These BMBF (Federal Ministry for Research) facilities were mainly located at the sites of the federal research centers at Juelich and Karlsruhe (the research reactors AVR, FR2, FRJ-1, KNK, and MZFR, the pilot reprocessing plant WAK) but included also the pilot plants SNR-300 and THTR-300 for fast breeder and high-temperature gas-cooled reactor development, respectively, and finally the salt mine Asse which had been used for waste emplacement prior to conversion into an underground research laboratory. In the meantime, almost all of these facilities were shut down and are now in a state of decommissioning and dismantling. This is mainly due to the facts that R&D needs are satisfied or do not exist any more and that, secondly, the lack of political consensus led to the cancellation of advanced nuclear technology.

  7. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) characterization. Revision 10

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Neitzel, D.A.; Fosmire, C.J.; Fowler, R.A.

    1998-09-01

    This document describes the US Department of Energy`s (DOE) Hanford Site environment and is numbered to correspond to the chapters where such information is presented in Hanford Site NEPA related documents. The document is intended to provide a consistent description of the Hanford Site environment for the many NEPA documents that are being prepared by contractors. The two chapters in this document (Chapters 4 and 6) are numbered this way to correspond to the chapters where such information is presented in environmental impact statements (EISs) and other Site-related NEPA or CERCLA documentation. Chapter 4.0 (Affected Environment) describes the Hanford Site environment, and includes information on climate and meteorology, geology, hydrology, ecology, cultural, archaeological and historical resources, socioeconomics, and noise. Chapter 6.0 (Statutory and Regulatory Requirements) describes applicable federal and state laws and regulations, DOE directives and permits, and environmental standards directly applicable to the NEPA documents on the Hanford Site.

  8. Benefits of Site-wide NEPA National Environmental Policy Act...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    that process more useful to decision makers and thepublic, and to reduce the time and cost required to prepare NEPA documents. Benefits of Site-wide National Environmental...

  9. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Source Guide for the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    JANSKY, M.T.

    2000-09-01

    This Source Guide will assist those working with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 to become more familiar with the environmental assessments (EA) and environmental impact statements (EIS) that apply to specific activities and facilities on the Hanford Site. This document should help answer questions concerning NEPA coverage, history, processes, and the status of many of the buildings and units on and related to the Hanford Site. This document summarizes relevant EAs and EISs by briefly outlining the proposed action of each document and the decision made by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) or its predecessor agencies, the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and the U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA). The summary includes the proposed action alternatives and current status of the proposed action. If a decision officially was stated by the DOE, as in a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) or a record of decision (ROD), and the decision was located, a summary is provided. Not all federal decisions, such as FONSIs and RODs, can be found in the Federal Register (FR). For example, although significant large-action FONSIs can be found in the FR, some low-interest FONSIs might have been published elsewhere (i.e., local newspapers).

  10. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) characterization. Revision 7

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cushing, C.E. [ed.] ed.; Baker, D.A.; Chamness, M.A. [and others] and others

    1995-09-01

    This seventh revision of the Hanford Site National Environmental Policy (NEPA) Characterization presents current environmental data regarding the Hanford Site and its immediate environs. This information is intended for use in preparing Site-related NEPA documentation. Chapter 4.0 summarizes up-to-date information on climate and meteorology, geology, hydrology, environmental monitoring, ecology, history and archaeology, socioeconomics, land use, and noise levels prepared by Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) staff. More detailed data are available from reference sources cited or from the authors. Chapter 5.0 was not updated from the sixth revision (1994). It describes models, including their principal underlying assumptions, that are to be used in simulating realized or potential impacts from nuclear materials at the Hanford Site. Included are models of radionuclide transport in groundwater and atmospheric pathways, and of radiation dose to populations via all known pathways from known initial conditions. The updated Chapter 6.0 provides the preparer with the federal and state regulations, DOE Orders and permits, and environmental standards directly applicable to the NEPA documents on the Hanford Site, following the structure of Chapter 4.0. No conclusions or recommendations are given in this report. Rather, it is a compilation of information on the Hanford Site environment that can be used directly by Site contractors. This information can also be used by any interested individual seeking baseline data on the Hanford Site and its past activities by which to evaluate projected activities and their impacts.

  11. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) characterization. Revision 6

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cushing, C.E. [ed.; Baker, D.A.; Chamness, M.A. [and others

    1994-08-01

    This sixth revision of the Hanford Site National Environmental Policy (NEPA) Characterization presents current environmental data regarding the Hanford Site and its immediate environs. This information is intended for use in preparing Site-related NEPA documentation. Chapter 4.0 summarizes up-to-date information on climate and meteorology, geology and hydrology, ecology, history and archaeology, socioeconomics, land use, and noise levels prepared by Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) staff. More detailed data are available from reference sources cited or from the authors; Chapter 5.0 has been significantly updated from the fifth revision. It describes models, including their principal underlying assumptions, that are to be used in simulating realized or potential impacts from nuclear materials at the Hanford Site. Included are models of radionuclide transport in groundwater and atmospheric pathways, and of radiation dose to populations via all known pathways from known initial conditions; The updated Chapter 6.0 provides the preparer with the federal and state regulations, DOE orders and permits, and environmental standards directly applicable to the NEPA documents on the Hanford Site, following the structure of Chapter 4.0. No conclusions or recommendations are given in this report. Rather, it is a compilation of information on the Hanford Site environment that can be utilized directly by Site contractors. This information can also be used by any interested individual seeking baseline data on the Hanford Site and its past activities by which to evaluate projected activities and their impacts.

  12. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Characterization. Revision 5

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cushing, C.E.

    1992-12-01

    This fifth revision of the Hanford Site National Environmental Policy (NEPA) Characterization presents current environmental data regarding the Hanford Site and its immediate environs. This information is intended for use in preparing Site-related NEPA documentation. Information is presented on climate and meteorology, geology and hydrology, ecology, history and archaeology, socioeconomics, land use, and noise levels, prepared by Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) staff. Models are described that are to be used in simulating realized or potential impacts from nuclear materials at the Hanford Site. Included are models of radionuclide transport in groundwater and atmospheric pathways, and of radiation dose to populations via all known pathways from known initial conditions. Federal and state regulations, DOE orders and permits, and environmental standards directly applicable for the NEPA documents at the Hanford Site, are provided.

  13. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Characterization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cushing, C.E.

    1992-12-01

    This fifth revision of the Hanford Site National Environmental Policy (NEPA) Characterization presents current environmental data regarding the Hanford Site and its immediate environs. This information is intended for use in preparing Site-related NEPA documentation. Information is presented on climate and meteorology, geology and hydrology, ecology, history and archaeology, socioeconomics, land use, and noise levels, prepared by Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) staff. Models are described that are to be used in simulating realized or potential impacts from nuclear materials at the Hanford Site. Included are models of radionuclide transport in groundwater and atmospheric pathways, and of radiation dose to populations via all known pathways from known initial conditions. Federal and state regulations, DOE orders and permits, and environmental standards directly applicable for the NEPA documents at the Hanford Site, are provided.

  14. Monticello Mill site Federal Facility Agreement, December 22...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Millsite Federal Facility Agreement Pursuant to CERCLA Section 120, December 22, 1988 State Utah Agreement Type Federal Facility Agreement Legal Driver(s) CERCLA Scope...

  15. Savannah River Site - Salt Waste Processing Facility Independent...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    SALT WASTE PROCESSING FACILITY INDEPENDENT TECHNICAL REVIEW November 22, 2006 Conducted by: Harry Harmon, Team Lead CivilStructural Sub Team Facility Safety Sub Team Engineering...

  16. Idaho Site Advances Recovery Act Cleanup after Inventing Effective Treatment

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    For the first time in history, workers at the Idaho site achieved success in the initial cleanup of potentially dangerous sodium in a decommissioned nuclear reactor using an innovative treatment...

  17. 2013 Annual Wastewater Reuse Report for the Idaho National Laboratory Site’s Central Facilities Area Sewage Treatment Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mike Lewis

    2014-02-01

    This report describes conditions, as required by the state of Idaho Wastewater Reuse Permit (#LA-000141-03), for the wastewater land application site at the Idaho National Laboratory Site’s Central Facilities Area Sewage Treatment Plant from November 1, 2012, through October 31, 2013. The report contains, as applicable, the following information: • Site description • Facility and system description • Permit required monitoring data and loading rates • Status of compliance conditions and activities • Discussion of the facility’s environmental impacts. During the 2013 permit year, no wastewater was land-applied to the irrigation area of the Central Facilities Area Sewage Treatment Plant and therefore, no effluent flow volumes or samples were collected from wastewater sampling point WW-014102. However, soil samples were collected in October from soil monitoring unit SU-014101.

  18. DOE_site_facility_mgt_contracts_Internet_Posting_3-21-11.pdf...

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

    .pdf More Documents & Publications DOEMajorSiteFacilityContracts2-2011.pdf DOEsitefacilitymgtcontractsInternetPosting3-21-11(1)...

  19. Recovery Act Investment Accelerates Cleanup Work at DOE's Paducah Site |

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on DeliciousMathematicsEnergyInterested PartiesBuildingBudget ||DepartmentReadoutReviewRecordRecovery Act Helps

  20. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Characterization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rohay, A.C.; Fosmire, C.J.; Neitzel, D.A.; Hoitink, D.J.; Harvey, D.W.; Antonio, E.J.; Wright, M.K.; Thorne, P.D.; Hendrickson, P.L.; Fowler, R.A.; Goodwin, S.M.; Poston, T.M.

    1999-09-28

    This document describes the US Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford Site environment. It is updated each year and is intended to provide a consistent description of the Hanford Site environment for the many NEPA documents being prepared by DOE contractors. No conclusions or recommendations are provided. This year's report is the eleventh revision of the original document published in 1988 and is (until replaced by the 12th revision) the only version that is relevant for use in the preparation of Hanford NEPA; SEPA and CERCLA documents. The two chapters included in this document (Chapters 4 and 6) are numbered to correspond to the chapters where such information is presented in environmental impact statements (EISs) and other Site-related NEPA or CERCLA documentation. Chapter 4.0 (Affected Environment) describes Hanford Site climate and meteorology, geology, hydrology, ecology, cultural, archaeological and historical resources, socioeconomic; occupational safety, and noise. Sources for extensive tabular data related to these topics are provided in the chapter. Most subjects are divided into a general description of the characteristics of the Hanford Site, followed by site-specific information, where available, of the 100,200,300, and other Areas. This division allows the reader to go directly to those sections of particular interest. When specific information on each of these separate areas is not complete or available, the general Hanford Site description should be used. Chapter 6.0 (Statutory and Regulatory Requirements) is essentially a definitive NEPA Chapter 6.0, which describes applicable federal and state laws and regulations, DOE directives and permits, and environmental standards directly applicable to the NEPA documents on the Hanford Site. People preparing environmental assessments and EISs should also be cognizant of the document entitled ''Recommendations for the Preparation of Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements'' published by the DOE Office of NEPA Oversight. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) staff prepared individual sections of this document, with input from other Site contractors. More detailed data are available from reference sources cited or from the authors. The following sections of the document were reviewed by the authors and updated with the best available information through June 1999: Climate and Meteorology; Ecology; Cultural, Archaeological, and Historical Resources; Socioeconomics; and All of Chapter 6.

  1. Hanford Site National Evnironmental Policy Act (NEPA) characterization. Revision 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cushing, C.E. [ed.

    1991-12-01

    This fourth revision of the Hanford Site National Environmental Policy (NEPA) Characterization presents current environmental data regarding the Hanford Site and its immediate environs. This information is intended for use in preparing Site-related NEPA documentation. In Chapter 4.0 are presented summations of up-to-date information about climate and meteorology, geology and hydrology, ecology, history and archaeology, socioeconomics, land use, and noise levels. Chapter 5.0 describes models, including their principal assumptions, that are to be used in simulating realized or potential impacts from nuclear materials at the Hanford Site. Included are models of radionuclides transport in groundwater and atmospheric pathways, and of radiation dose to populations via all known pathways from known initial conditions. Chapter 6.0 provides the preparer with the federal and state regulations, DOE orders and permits, and environmental standards directly applicable for environmental impact statements for the Hanford Site, following the structure Chapter 4.0. NO conclusions or recommendations are given in this report.

  2. Hanford Site National Evnironmental Policy Act (NEPA) characterization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cushing, C.E. (ed.)

    1991-12-01

    This fourth revision of the Hanford Site National Environmental Policy (NEPA) Characterization presents current environmental data regarding the Hanford Site and its immediate environs. This information is intended for use in preparing Site-related NEPA documentation. In Chapter 4.0 are presented summations of up-to-date information about climate and meteorology, geology and hydrology, ecology, history and archaeology, socioeconomics, land use, and noise levels. Chapter 5.0 describes models, including their principal assumptions, that are to be used in simulating realized or potential impacts from nuclear materials at the Hanford Site. Included are models of radionuclides transport in groundwater and atmospheric pathways, and of radiation dose to populations via all known pathways from known initial conditions. Chapter 6.0 provides the preparer with the federal and state regulations, DOE orders and permits, and environmental standards directly applicable for environmental impact statements for the Hanford Site, following the structure Chapter 4.0. NO conclusions or recommendations are given in this report.

  3. Introduction The goal of the Emotion Research WEB-Site is to act as a

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Fellous, Jean-Marc

    1 Introduction The goal of the Emotion Research WEB-Site is to act as a repository of information, and practical information such as researcher web-pages, conference announcement and other relevant on

  4. Recovery Act Invests in Cleanup, Preservation of Hanford Site Locomotives, Railcars

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    With the help of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the Hanford Site is preserving the history of its locomotives and railcars as workers clean up the legacy of the Cold War.

  5. Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA) report, Woodbridge, Research Facility, Woodbridge, Virginia. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jones, K.

    1994-04-01

    This report presents the results of the Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA) investigation conducted by Arthur D. Little, Inc. at Woodbridge Research Facility (WRF), a U.S. Government property selected for closure by the Base Realignment and closure (BRAC) Commission. The primary objective of this investigation as required under CERFA is for Federal agencies to expeditiously identify real property offering the greatest opportunity for immediate reuse and redevelopment. Satisfying this objective requires the identification of real property where no Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)-regulated hazardous substance or petroleum or their derivatives were stored for one year or more, known to have been released, or disposed of.

  6. Assessment of the facilities on Jackass Flats and other Nevada Test Site facilities for the new nuclear rocket program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chandler, G.; Collins, D.; Dye, K.; Eberhart, C.; Hynes, M.; Kovach, R.; Ortiz, R.; Perea, J.; Sherman, D.

    1992-12-01

    Recent NASA/DOE studies for the Space Exploration Initiative have demonstrated a critical need for the ground-based testing of nuclear rocket engines. Experience in the ROVER/NERVA Program, experience in the Nuclear Weapons Testing Program, and involvement in the new nuclear rocket program has motivated our detailed assessment of the facilities used for the ROVER/NERVA Program and other facilities located at the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The ROVER/NERVA facilities are located in the Nevada Research L, Development Area (NRDA) on Jackass Flats at NTS, approximately 85 miles northwest of Las Vegas. To guide our assessment of facilities for an engine testing program we have defined a program goal, scope, and process. To execute this program scope and process will require ten facilities. We considered the use of all relevant facilities at NTS including existing and new tunnels as well as the facilities at NRDA. Aside from the facilities located at remote sites and the inter-site transportation system, all of the required facilities are available at NRDA. In particular we have studied the refurbishment of E-MAD, ETS-1, R-MAD, and the interconnecting railroad. The total cost for such a refurbishment we estimate to be about $253M which includes additional contractor fees related to indirect, construction management, profit, contingency, and management reserves. This figure also includes the cost of the required NEPA, safety, and security documentation.

  7. Freedom of Information and Privacy Act - Hanford Site

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity ofkandz-cm11 Outreach Home Room NewsInformation Current HABFES OctoberEvanServicesAmesFour LosAct Freedom of Information and

  8. Assessment of the facilities on Jackass Flats and other Nevada test site facilities for the new nuclear rocket program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chandler, G.; Collins, D.; Dye, K.; Eberhart, C.; Hynes, M.; Kovach, R.; Ortiz, R.; Perea, J.; Sherman, D. (Field Test Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545 (United States))

    1993-01-15

    Recent NASA/DOE studies for the Space Exploration Initiative have demonstrated a critical need for the ground-based testing of nuclear rocket engines. Experience in the ROVER/NERVA Program, experience in the Nuclear Weapons Testing Program, and involvement in the new nuclear rocket program has motivated our detailed assessment of the facilities used for the ROVER/NERVA Program and other facilities located at the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The ROVER/NERVA facilities are located in the Nevada Research Development Area (NRDA) on Jackass Flats at NTS, approximately 85 miles northwest of Las Vegas. To guide our assessment of facilities for an engine testing program we have defined a program goal, scope, and process. In particular we have assumed that the program goal will be to certify a full engine system design as flight test ready. All nuclear and non-nuclear components will be individually certified as ready for such a test at sites remote from the NRDA facilities, the components transported to NRDA, and the engine assembled. We also assume that engines of 25,000--100,000 lb thrust levels will be tested with burn times of 1 hour or longer. After a test, the engine will be disassembled, time critical inspections will be executed, and a selection of components will be transported to remote inspection sites. The majority of the components will be stored for future inspection at Jackass Flats. To execute this program scope and process will require ten facilities. We considered the use of all relevant facilities at NTS including existing and new tunnels as well as the facilities at NRDA. Aside from the facilities located at remote sites and the inter-site transportation system, all of the required facilities are available at NRDA. In particular we have studied the refurbishment of E-MAD, ETS-1, R-MAD, and the interconnecting railroad.

  9. Recovery Act Progress Update: Reactor Closure Feature

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cody, Tom

    2010-01-01

    A Recovery Act Progress Update. Decommissioning of two nuclear reactor sites at the Department of Energy's facilities has been approved and is underway.

  10. Recovery Act Progress Update: Reactor Closure Feature

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    Cody, Tom

    2012-06-14

    A Recovery Act Progress Update. Decommissioning of two nuclear reactor sites at the Department of Energy's facilities has been approved and is underway.

  11. Site characterization plan: Yucca Mountain site, Nevada research and development area, Nevada: Consultation draft, Nuclear Waste Policy Act: Volume 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1988-01-01

    The Yucca Mountain site in Nevada is one of three candidate sites for the first geologic repository for radioactive waste. On May 28, 1986, it was recommended for detailed study in a program of site characterization. This site characterization plan (SCP) has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act to summarize the information collected to date about the geologic conditions at the site; to describe the conceptual designs for the repository and the waste package and to present the plans for obtaining the geologic information necessary to demonstrate the suitability of the site for a repository, to design the repository and the waste package, to prepare an environmental impact statement, and to obtain from the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) an authorization to construct the repository. Chapter 3 summarizes present knowledge of the regional and site hydrologic systems. The purpose of the information presented is to (1) describe the hydrology based on available literature and preliminary site-exploration activities that have been or are being performed and (2) provide information to be used to develop the hydrologic aspects of the planned site characterization program. Chapter 4 contains geochemical information about the Yucca Mountain site. The chapter references plan for continued collection of geochemical data as a part of the site characterization program. Chapter 4 describes and evaluates data on the existing climate and site meterology, and outlines the suggested procedures to be used in developing and validating methods to predict future climatic variation. 534 refs., 100 figs., 72 tabs.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rosenberger, Kent H.

    2013-07-01

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

  13. 2013 Annual Site Inspection and Monitoring Report for Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act Title I Disposal Sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2014-03-01

    This report, in fulfillment of a license requirement, presents the results of long-term surveillance and maintenance activities conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Legacy Management (LM) in 2013 at 19 uranium mill tailings disposal sites established under Title I of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) of 1978.1 These activities verified that the UMTRCA Title I disposal sites remain in compliance with license requirements. DOE operates 18 UMTRCA Title I sites under a general license granted by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in accordance with Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 40.27 (10 CFR 40.27). As required under the general license, a long-term surveillance plan (LTSP) for each site was prepared by DOE and accepted by NRC. The Grand Junction, Colorado, Disposal Site, one of the 19 Title I sites, will not be included under the general license until the open, operating portion of the cell is closed. The open portion will be closed either when it is filled or in 2023. This site is inspected in accordance with an interim LTSP. Long-term surveillance and maintenance services for these disposal sites include inspecting and maintaining the sites; monitoring environmental media and institutional controls; conducting any necessary corrective actions; and performing administrative, records, stakeholder relations, and other regulatory stewardship functions. Annual site inspections and monitoring are conducted in accordance with site-specific LTSPs and procedures established by DOE to comply with license requirements. Each site inspection is performed to verify the integrity of visible features at the site; to identify changes or new conditions that may affect the long-term performance of the site; and to determine the need, if any, for maintenance, follow-up or contingency inspections, or corrective action in accordance with the LTSP. LTSPs and site compliance reports are available on the Internet at http://www.lm.doe.gov/.

  14. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Construction and Operation of a Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion Facility at the Portsmouth, Ohio, Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    N /A

    2003-11-28

    This document is a site-specific environmental impact statement (EIS) for construction and operation of a proposed depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF{sub 6}) conversion facility at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Portsmouth site in Ohio (Figure S-1). The proposed facility would convert the DUF{sub 6} stored at Portsmouth to a more stable chemical form suitable for use or disposal. The facility would also convert the DUF{sub 6} from the East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP) site near Oak Ridge, Tennessee. In a Notice of Intent (NOI) published in the Federal Register on September 18, 2001 (Federal Register, Volume 66, page 48123 [66 FR 48123]), DOE announced its intention to prepare a single EIS for a proposal to construct, operate, maintain, and decontaminate and decommission two DUF{sub 6} conversion facilities at Portsmouth, Ohio, and Paducah, Kentucky, in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (United States Code, Title 42, Section 4321 et seq. [42 USC 4321 et seq.]) and DOE's NEPA implementing procedures (Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 1021 [10 CFR Part 1021]). Subsequent to award of a contract to Uranium Disposition Services, LLC (hereafter referred to as UDS), Oak Ridge, Tennessee, on August 29, 2002, for design, construction, and operation of DUF{sub 6} conversion facilities at Portsmouth and Paducah, DOE reevaluated its approach to the NEPA process and decided to prepare separate site-specific EISs. This change was announced in a Federal Register Notice of Change in NEPA Compliance Approach published on April 28, 2003 (68 FR 22368); the Notice is included as Attachment B to Appendix C of this EIS. This EIS addresses the potential environmental impacts from the construction, operation, maintenance, and decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) of the proposed conversion facility at three alternative locations within the Portsmouth site; from the transportation of all ETTP cylinders (DUF{sub 6}, low-enriched UF6 [LEU-UF{sub 6}], and empty) to Portsmouth; from the transportation of depleted uranium conversion products to a disposal facility; and from the transportation, sale, use, or disposal of the fluoride-containing conversion products (hydrogen fluoride [HF] or calcium fluoride [CaF{sub 2}]). An option of shipping the ETTP cylinders to Paducah is also considered. In addition, this EIS evaluates a no action alternative, which assumes continued storage of DUF{sub 6} in cylinders at the Portsmouth and ETTP sites. A separate EIS (DOE/EIS-0359) evaluates potential environmental impacts for the proposed Paducah conversion facility.

  15. 2013 Annual Site Inspection and Monitoring Report for Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act Title II Disposal Sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2013-11-01

    This report, in fulfillment of a license requirement, presents the results of long-term surveillance and maintenance activities conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Legacy Management in 2013 at six uranium mill tailings disposal sites reclaimed under Title II of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) of 1978. These activities verified that the UMTRCA Title II disposal sites remain in compliance with license requirements. DOE manages six UMTRCA Title II disposal sites under a general license granted by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) established at Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 40.28. Reclamation and site transition activities continue at other sites, and DOE ultimately expects to manage approximately 27 Title II disposal sites. Long-term surveillance and maintenance activities and services for these disposal sites include inspecting and maintaining the sites; monitoring environmental media and institutional controls; conducting any necessary corrective action; and performing administrative, records, stakeholder services, and other regulatory functions. Annual site inspections and monitoring are conducted in accordance with site-specific long-term surveillance plans (LTSPs) and procedures established by DOE to comply with license requirements. Each site inspection is performed to verify the integrity of visible features at the site; to identify changes or new conditions that may affect the long-term performance of the site; and to determine the need, if any, for maintenance, follow-up inspections, or corrective action. LTSPs and site compliance reports are available online at http://www.lm.doe.gov

  16. Geological site characterization for the proposed Mixed Waste Disposal Facility, Los Alamos National Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Reneau, S.L.; Raymond, R. Jr. [eds.

    1995-12-01

    This report presents the results of geological site characterization studies conducted from 1992 to 1994 on Pajarito Mesa for a proposed Los Alamos National Laboratory Mixed Waste Disposal Facility (MWDF). The MWDF is being designed to receive mixed waste (waste containing both hazardous and radioactive components) generated during Environmental Restoration Project cleanup activities at Los Alamos. As of 1995, there is no Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permitted disposal site for mixed waste at the Laboratory, and construction of the MWDF would provide an alternative to transport of this material to an off-site location. A 2.5 km long part of Pajarito Mesa was originally considered for the MWDF, extending from an elevation of about 2150 to 2225 m (7060 to 7300 ft) in Technical Areas (TAs) 15, 36, and 67 in the central part of the Laboratory, and planning was later concentrated on the western area in TA-67. The mesa top lies about 60 to 75 m (200 to 250 ft) above the floor of Pajarito Canyon on the north, and about 30 m (100 ft) above the floor of Threemile Canyon on the south. The main aquifer used as a water supply for the Laboratory and for Los Alamos County lies at an estimated depth of about 335 m (1100 ft) below the mesa. The chapters of this report focus on surface and near-surface geological studies that provide a basic framework for siting of the MWDF and for conducting future performance assessments, including fulfillment of specific regulatory requirements. This work includes detailed studies of the stratigraphy, mineralogy, and chemistry of the bedrock at Pajarito Mesa by Broxton and others, studies of the geological structure and of mesa-top soils and surficial deposits by Reneau and others, geologic mapping and studies of fracture characteristics by Vaniman and Chipera, and studies of potential landsliding and rockfall along the mesa-edge by Reneau.

  17. Annual report for RCRA groundwater monitoring projects at Hanford Site facilities for 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-02-01

    This report presents the annual hydrogeologic evaluation of 20 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 groundwater monitoring projects and 1 nonhazardous waste facility at the US Department of Energy`s Hanford Site. Most of the projects no longer receive dangerous waste; a few projects continue to receive dangerous waste constituents for treatment, storage, or disposal. The 20 RCRA projects comprise 30 waste management units. Ten of the units are monitored under groundwater quality assessment status because of elevated levels of indicator parameters. The impact of those units on groundwater quality, if any, is being investigated. If dangerous waste or waste constituents have entered groundwater, their concentration, distribution, and rate of migration are evaluated. Groundwater is monitored at the other 20 units to detect contamination, should it occur. This report provides an interpretation of groundwater data collected at the waste management units between October 1992 and September 1993. Recent groundwater quality is also described for the 100, 200, 300, and 600 Areas and for the entire Hanford Site. Widespread contaminants include nitrate, chromium, carbon tetrachloride, tritium, and other radionuclides.

  18. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography, Volume 13: Part 2, Indexes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Goins, L.F.; Webb, J.R.; Cravens, C.D.; Mallory, P.K.

    1992-09-01

    This is part 2 of a bibliography on nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial action. This report contains indexes on the following: authors, corporate affiliation, title words, publication description, geographic location, subject category, and key word.

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) External Technical Review of the Proposed On-Site Waste Disposal Facility (OSWDF) at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant Why DOE-EM Did...

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    final design and closure of the facility. To view the full ETR reports, please visit this web site: http:www.em.doe.govPagesExternalTechReviews.aspx July 2009 The purpose of an...

  1. EIS-0385: Ancillary Facilities for the Richton Site of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, Mississippi

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    DOE announced the cancellation of a supplemental environmental impact statement for certain facilities associated with the 2007 selection of Richton, Mississippi, as the location of a new storage site for expanding the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

  2. Finishing Strong in 2011: The Recovery Act at Work at Savannah River Site

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    None

    2012-06-14

    American Recovery and Reinvestment Act's highlights and accomplishments for 2011 projects. Covers the latest technology and robotics used for waste management. This video is an overview of the success ARRA brought to the Savannah River Site, the environment, the econonmy, and the surrounding communities.

  3. Finishing Strong in 2011: The Recovery Act at Work at Savannah River Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None

    2011-01-01

    American Recovery and Reinvestment Act's highlights and accomplishments for 2011 projects. Covers the latest technology and robotics used for waste management. This video is an overview of the success ARRA brought to the Savannah River Site, the environment, the econonmy, and the surrounding communities.

  4. Recovery Act: Hydroelectric Facility Improvement Project - Replacement of Current Mechanical Seal System with Rope Packing System

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stephens, Jessica D.

    2013-05-29

    On January 27, 2010 the City of North Little Rock, Arkansas received notification of the awarding of a Department of Energy (DOE) grant totaling $450,000 in funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) under the Project Title: Recovery Act: Hydroelectric Facility Improvement Project – Automated Intake Clearing Equipment and Materials Management. The purpose of the grant was for improvements to be made at the City’s hydroelectric generating facility located on the Arkansas River. Improvements were to be made through the installation of an intake maintenance device (IMD) and the purchase of a large capacity wood grinder. The wood grinder was purchased in order to receive the tree limbs, tree trunks, and other organic debris that collects at the intake of the plant during high flow. The wood grinder eliminates the periodic burning of the waste material that is cleared from the intake and reduces any additional air pollution to the area. The resulting organic mulch has been made available to the public at no charge. Design discussion and planning began immediately and the wood grinder was purchased in July of 2010 and immediately put to work mulching debris that was gathered regularly from the intake of the facility. The mulch is currently available to the public for free. A large majority of the design process was spent in discussion with the Corps of Engineers to obtain approval for drawings, documents, and permits that were required in order to make changes to the structure of the powerhouse. In April of 2011, the City’s Project Engineer, who had overseen the application, resigned and left the City’s employ. A new Systems Mechanical Engineer was hired and tasked with overseeing the project. The transfer of responsibility led to a re-examination of the original assumptions and research upon which the grant proposal was based. At that point, the project went under review and a trip was booked for July 2011 to visit facilities that currently had an IMD installed. This further study of facilities revealed that the implementation of the project as originally described, while proving the benefits described in the original grant application, would likely intensify sand intake. Increased sand intake would lead to an increase in required shutdowns for maintenance and more rapid depreciation of key equipment which would result in a loss of generation capacity. A better solution to the problem, one that continued to meet the criteria for the original grant and ARRA standards, was developed. A supporting day trip was planned to visit other facilities located on the Arkansas River to determine how they were coping with the same strong amounts of sand, silt, and debris. Upon returning from the trip to other Arkansas River facilities it was extremely clear what direction to go in order to most efficiently address the issue of generator capacity and efficiency. Of the plants visited on the Arkansas River, every one of them was running what is called a rope packing shaft sealing system as opposed to mechanical shaft seals, which the facility was running. Rope packing is a time proven sealing method that has been around for centuries. It has proved to perform very well in dirty water situations just like that of the Arkansas River. In April of 2012 a scope change proposal was submitted to the DOE for approval. In August of 2012 the City received word that the change of scope had been approved. Plans were immediately set in motion to begin the conversion from mechanical seals to a packing box at the facility. Contractors arrived on October 1st, 2012 and the project team began unwatering the unit for disassembly. The seal conversion was completed on February 29th, 2013 with start-up of the unit. Further testing and adjusting was done throughout the first two weeks of March.

  5. EIS-0359: Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion Facility at the Paducah, Kentucky Site

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This site-specific EIS considers the construction, operation, maintenance, and decontamination and decommissioning of the proposed depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF6) conversion facility at three locations within the Paducah site; transportation of depleted uranium conversion products and waste materials to a disposal facility; transportation and sale of the hydrogen fluoride (HF) produced as a conversion co-product; and neutralization of HF to calcium fluoride and its sale or disposal in the event that the HF product is not sold.

  6. Lessons learned from the Siting Process of an Interim Storage Facility in Spain - 12024

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lamolla, Meritxell Martell [MERIENCE Strategic Thinking, 08734 Olerdola, Barcelona (Spain)

    2012-07-01

    On 29 December 2009, the Spanish government launched a site selection process to host a centralised interim storage facility for spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste. It was an unprecedented call for voluntarism among Spanish municipalities to site a controversial facility. Two nuclear municipalities, amongst a total of thirteen municipalities from five different regions, presented their candidatures to host the facility in their territories. For two years the government did not make a decision. Only in November 30, 2011, the new government elected on 20 November 2011 officially selected a non-nuclear municipality, Villar de Canas, for hosting this facility. This paper focuses on analysing the factors facilitating and hindering the siting of controversial facilities, in particular the interim storage facility in Spain. It demonstrates that involving all stakeholders in the decision-making process should not be underestimated. In the case of Spain, all regional governments where there were candidate municipalities willing to host the centralised interim storage facility, publicly opposed to the siting of the facility. (author)

  7. EIS-0082-S1: Defense Waste Processing Facility, Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The U.S. Department of Energy developed this Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement to assess the potential environmental impacts of completing construction and operating the Defense Waste Processing Facility, a group of associated facilities and structures, to pretreat, immobilize, and store high-level radioactive waste at the Savannah River Site.

  8. Facility Utilization and Risk Analysis for Remediation of Legacy Transuranic Waste at the Savannah River Site - 13572

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gilles, Michael L.; Gilmour, John C.

    2013-07-01

    Savannah River Nuclear Solutions (SRNS) completed the Accelerated TRU Project for remediating legacy waste at the Savannah River Site with significant cost and schedule efficiencies due to early identification of resources and utilization of risk matrices. Initial project planning included identification of existing facilities that could be modified to meet the technical requirements needed for repackaging and remediating the waste. The project schedule was then optimized by utilization of risk matrices that identified alternate strategies and parallel processing paths which drove the overall success of the project. Early completion of the Accelerated TRU Project allowed SRNS to pursue stretch goals associated with remediating very difficult TRU waste such as concrete casks from the hot cells in the Savannah River National Laboratory. Project planning for stretch goals also utilized existing facilities and the risk matrices. The Accelerated TRU project and stretch goals were funded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). (authors)

  9. Site Selection for Concrete Batch Plant to Support Plutonium Disposition Facilities at the Savannah River Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wike, L.D.

    2001-06-15

    WSRC conducted a site selection study to identify, assess, and rank candidate sites for an onsite concrete batch plant at the Savannah River Site in the vicinity of F-Area.

  10. EIS-0385-S1: Ancillary Facilities for the Richton Site of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, Mississippi

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Since selecting the Richton site, DOE has engaged in further consultations with Federal and Mississippi state agencies and is now considering different locations from those addressed in DOE/EIS–0385 for certain facilities associated with the Richton SPR expansion site.

  11. ARM Operations and Engineering Procedure Mobile Facility Site Startup

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Voyles, Jimmy W

    2015-05-01

    This procedure exists to define the key milestones, necessary steps, and process rules required to commission and operate an Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Mobile Facility (AMF), with a specific focus toward on-time product delivery to the ARM Data Archive. The overall objective is to have the physical infrastructure, networking and communications, and instrument calibration, grooming, and alignment (CG&A) completed with data products available from the ARM Data Archive by the Operational Start Date milestone.

  12. Independent Oversight Review, Savannah River Site Tritium Facilities -

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on DeliciousMathematicsEnergy HeadquartersFuelBConservation StandardsEnergy In2008 |of2013 |ofFacility -

  13. RCRA Subtitle C TSD facilities and solvent recovery facilities: Section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act. Toxic chemical release inventory; Industry guidance

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1999-01-01

    The purpose of this guidance document is to assist facilities in SIC code 4953 that are regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Subtitle C and facilities in SIC code 7389 that are primarily engaged in solvent recovery services on a contract or fee basis. This document explains the EPCRA Section 313 and PPA Section 6607 reporting requirements (collectively referred to as the EPCRA Section 313) reporting requirements, and discusses specific release and other waste management activities encountered at many facilities in these industries. The objectives of this manual are to: clarify EPCRA Section 313 requirements for industry; increase the accuracy and completeness of the data being reported by RCRA Subtitle C TSD and solvent recovery facilities; and reduce the level of effort expended by those facilities that prepare an EPCRA Section 313 report.

  14. Independent Oversight Review, Savannah River Site Tritium Facilities - June

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergyTher i nA Guide toIMPROVEMENT OF DESIGNEmergency2013 |2013 |ofFacility - August2012 |

  15. 2010 Annual Wastewater Reuse Report for the Idaho National Laboratory Site's Central Facilities Area Sewage Treatment Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mike lewis

    2011-02-01

    This report describes conditions, as required by the state of Idaho Wastewater Reuse Permit (#LA-000141-03), for the wastewater land application site at Idaho National Laboratory Site’s Central Facilities Area Sewage Treatment Plant from November 1, 2009, through October 31, 2010. The report contains the following information: • Site description • Facility and system description • Permit required monitoring data and loading rates • Status of special compliance conditions • Discussion of the facility’s environmental impacts. During the 2010 permit year, approximately 2.2 million gallons of treated wastewater was land-applied to the irrigation area at Central Facilities Area Sewage Treatment plant.

  16. 2012 Annual Wastewater Reuse Report for the Idaho National Laboratory Site's Central facilities Area Sewage Treatment Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mike Lewis

    2013-02-01

    This report describes conditions, as required by the state of Idaho Wastewater Reuse Permit (#LA-000141-03), for the wastewater land application site at Idaho National Laboratory Site’s Central Facilities Area Sewage Treatment Plant from November 1, 2011, through October 31, 2012. The report contains the following information: • Site description • Facility and system description • Permit required monitoring data and loading rates • Status of compliance conditions and activities • Discussion of the facility’s environmental impacts. During the 2012 permit year, no wastewater was land-applied to the irrigation area of the Central Facilities Area Sewage Treatment Plant.

  17. Lessons Learned from the 200 West Pump and Treatment Facility Construction Project at the US DOE Hanford Site - A Leadership for Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Gold-Certified Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dorr, Kent A.; Ostrom, Michael J.; Freeman-Pollard, Jhivaun R.

    2013-01-11

    CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company (CHPRC) designed, constructed, commissioned, and began operation of the largest groundwater pump and treatment facility in the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) nationwide complex. This one-of-a-kind groundwater pump and treatment facility, located at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation Site (Hanford Site) in Washington State, was built to an accelerated schedule with American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds. There were many contractual, technical, configuration management, quality, safety, and Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) challenges associated with the design, procurement, construction, and commissioning of this $95 million, 52,000 ft groundwater pump and treatment facility to meet DOE’s mission objective of treating contaminated groundwater at the Hanford Site with a new facility by June 28, 2012. The project team’s successful integration of the project’s core values and green energy technology throughout design, procurement, construction, and start-up of this complex, first-of-its-kind Bio Process facility resulted in successful achievement of DOE’s mission objective, as well as attainment of LEED GOLD certification, which makes this Bio Process facility the first non-administrative building in the DOE Office of Environmental Management complex to earn such an award.

  18. Comparison of Candidate Sites for installation of Landfill facility at Ignalina NPP Site Using Fuzzy Logic Approach

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Poskas, P.; Kilda, R.; Poskas, G.

    2008-07-01

    There is only one nuclear power plant in Lithuania - Ignalina NPP (Nuclear Power Plant). Two similar units with installed capacity of 1500 MW (each) were commissioned in 1983 and 1987 respectively. But the first Unit of Ignalina NPP was finally shutdown December 31, 2004, and second Unit is planned to be shutdown before 2010. Operational radioactive waste of different activities is generated at Ignalina NPP. After closure of INPP a waste from decommissioning should be managed also. According to Lithuanian regulatory requirements (1) the waste depending on the activity must be managed in different ways. In compliance with this Regulation very low-level radioactive waste (VLLW) could be disposed of in a Landfill facility. In such case very simple engineered barriers are required. A cap on the top of the repository is necessary from long-term safety point of view. Experience has shown that the effective and safe isolation of waste depends on the performance of the overall disposal system, which is formed by three major components: the site, the disposal facility and the waste form. The basic objective of the siting process is to select a suitable site for disposal and demonstrate that this site has characteristics which provide adequate isolation of radionuclides from the biosphere for desired periods of time. The methodology and results on evaluation and comparison of two candidate sites intended for construction of Landfill facility at Ignalina NPP site are presented in the paper. Criteria for comparison are based on the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) recommendations (2). Modeling of the radionuclide releases has been performed using ISAM (Improving of Safety Assessment Methodologies for Near Surface Disposal facilities) methodology (3). For generalization of the information and elaboration of the recommendations Fuzzy Logic approach was used (4). (authors)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    A. Jeff Sondrup; Annette L. Schafter

    2010-09-01

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

  20. Massive Cement Pour into Hanford Site Nuclear Facility Underway: Recovery

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergyTher i nAand DOE Safetyof Energy ThisSites |andofMassachusetts --As the state

  1. Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION J APPENDIXsourceII JumpQuarterly Smart Grid DataInformation Land Conservation andSiting Council

  2. DOE NNSA Site Facility Management Contracts - MASTER.xlsx

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergy A plug-in electric vehicle10nominate anDepartmentAss Fans isDepartment ofSite

  3. Addendum to the Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 113: Area 25 R-MAD Facility, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2011-02-24

    This addendum to the Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 113: Area 25, Reactor Maintenance, Assembly, and Disassembly Facility, Building 3110, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, DOE/NV--891-VOL I-Rev. 1, dated July 2003, provides details of demolition, waste disposal, and use restriction (UR) modification for Corrective Action Unit 113, Area 25 R-MAD Facility. Demolition was completed on July 15, 2010, when the last of the building debris was disposed. Final field activities were concluded on August 30, 2010, after all equipment was demobilized and UR signs were posted. This work was funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

  4. Guide to radiological accident considerations for siting and design of DOE nonreactor nuclear facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Elder, J.C.; Graf, J.M.; Dewart, J.M.; Buhl, T.E.; Wenzel, W.J.; Walker, L.J.; Stoker, A.K.

    1986-01-01

    This guide was prepared to provide the experienced safety analyst with accident analysis guidance in greater detail than is possible in Department of Energy (DOE) Orders. The guide addresses analysis of postulated serious accidents considered in the siting and selection of major design features of DOE nuclear facilities. Its scope has been limited to radiological accidents at nonreactor nuclear facilities. The analysis steps addressed in the guide lead to evaluation of radiological dose to exposed persons for comparison with siting guideline doses. Other possible consequences considered are environmental contamination, population dose, and public health effects. Choices of models and parameters leading to estimation of source terms, release fractions, reduction and removal factors, dispersion and dose factors are discussed. Although requirements for risk analysis have not been established, risk estimates are finding increased use in siting of major nuclear facilities, and are discussed in the guide. 3 figs., 9 tabs.

  5. Calendar Year 2004 annual site environmental report : Tonopah Test Range, Nevada & Kauai Test Facility, Hawaii.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Montoya, Amber L.; Wagner, Katrina; Goering, Teresa Lynn; Koss, Susan I.; Salinas, Stephanie A.

    2005-09-01

    Tonopah Test Range (TTR) in Nevada and Kauai Test Facility (KTF) in Hawaii are government-owned, contractor-operated facilities operated by Sandia Corporation, a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin Corporation. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), through the Sandia Site Office (SSO), in Albuquerque, NM, manages TTR and KTF's operations. Sandia Corporation conducts operations at TTR in support of DOE/NNSA's Weapons Ordnance Program and has operated the site since 1957. Westinghouse Government Services subcontracts to Sandia Corporation in administering most of the environmental programs at TTR. Sandia Corporation operates KTF as a rocket preparation launching and tracking facility. This Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) summarizes data and the compliance status of the environmental protection and monitoring program at TTR and KTF through Calendar Year (CY) 2004. The compliance status of environmental regulations applicable at these sites include state and federal regulations governing air emissions, wastewater effluent, waste management, terrestrial surveillance, and Environmental Restoration (ER) cleanup activities. Sandia Corporation is responsible only for those environmental program activities related to its operations. The DOE/NNSA, Nevada Site Office (NSO) retains responsibility for the cleanup and management of ER TTR sites. Currently, there are no ER Sites at KTF. Environmental monitoring and surveillance programs are required by DOE Order 450.1, Environmental Protection Program (DOE 2005) and DOE Order 231.1A, Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting (DOE 2004b).

  6. Case History of a Clean Water Act Compliance Agreement at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site near Golden, Colorado

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thompson, J.S.

    1995-08-01

    A major Clean Water Act (CWA) Federal Facilities Compliance Agreement was signed on March 25, 1991 by the US Department of Energy, Rocky Flats Field Office (DOE, RFFO) and the Water Enforcement Division of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region VIII. The agreement revised the Rocky Flats Plant`s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and arose from pemittee-requested changes in effluent monitoring points and permit violations, most notably the February 22, 1989 Chromic Acid Incident. The Rocky Flats Plant, now called the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (Site) near Golden Colorado was operated at that time by Rockwell International Corporation, who later plead guilty to six misdemeanor and felony counts of the CWA (the aforementioned NPDES permit violations) and paid a $4 million fine on March 26, 1992. The Compliance Agreement, hereafter referred to as the NPDES FFCA, called for three separate remedial action plans and contained a schedule for their submittal to the EPA. The compliance plans focussed on: (1) Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) performance upgrades, (2) source control and surface water protection, and (3) characterization of the impacts from past sludge disposal practices. Projects that implemented the compliance plans were initiated soon after submittal to the EPA and are forecast to complete in 1997 at a total cost of over $35 million. This paper presents a case history of NPDES FFCA compliance projects and highlights the successes, failures, and lessons learned.

  7. Decommissioning an Active Historical Reactor Facility at the Savannah River Site - 13453

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bergren, Christopher L.; Long, J. Tony; Blankenship, John K. [Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, Bldg. 730-4B, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States)] [Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, Bldg. 730-4B, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States); Adams, Karen M. [United States Department of Energy, Bldg. 730-B, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States)] [United States Department of Energy, Bldg. 730-B, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States)

    2013-07-01

    The Savannah River Site (SRS) is an 802 square-kilometer United States Department of Energy (US DOE) nuclear facility located along the Savannah River near Aiken, South Carolina, where Management and Operations are performed by Savannah River Nuclear Solutions (SRNS). In 2004, DOE recognized SRS as structure within the Cold War Historic District of national, state and local significance composed of the first generation of facilities constructed and operated from 1950 through 1989 to produce plutonium and tritium for our nation's defense. DOE agreed to manage the SRS 105-C Reactor Facility as a potentially historic property due to its significance in supporting the U.S. Cold War Mission and for potential for future interpretation. This reactor has five primary areas within it, including a Disassembly Basin (DB) that received irradiated materials from the reactor, cooled them and prepared the components for loading and transport to a Separation Canyon for processing. The 6,317 square meter area was divided into numerous work/storage areas. The walls between the individual basin compartments have narrow vertical openings called 'slots' that permit the transfer of material from one section to another. Data indicated there was over 830 curies of radioactivity associated with the basin sediments and approximately 9.1 M liters of contaminated water, not including a large quantity of activated reactor equipment, scrap metal, and debris on the basin floor. The need for an action was identified in 2010 to reduce risks to personnel in the facility and to eliminate the possible release of contaminants into the environment. The release of DB water could potentially migrate to the aquifer and contaminate groundwater. DOE, its regulators [U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)-Region 4 and the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC)] and the SC Historical Preservation Office (SHPO) agreed/concurred to perform a non-time critical removal action for the In Situ Decommissioning (ISD) of the 105-C Disassembly Basin. ISD consisted of stabilization/isolation of remaining contaminated water, sediment, activated reactor equipment, and scrap metal by filling the DB with underwater non-structural grout to the appropriate (-4.877 meter) grade-level, thence with dry area non-structural grout to the final -10 centimeter level. The roof over the DB was preserved due to its potential historical significance and to prevent the infiltration of precipitation. Forced evaporation was the form of treatment implemented to remove the approximately 9.1 M liters of contaminated basin water. Using specially formulated grouts, irradiated materials and sediment were treated by solidification/isolation thus reducing their mobility, reducing radiation exposure and creating an engineered barrier thereby preventing access to the contaminants. Grouting provided a low permeability barrier to minimize any potential transport of contaminants to the aquifer. Efforts were made to preserve the historical significance of the Reactor in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act. ISD provides a cost effective means to isolate and contain residual radioactivity from past nuclear operations allowing natural radioactive decay to reduce hazards to manageable levels. This method limits release of radiological contamination to the environment, minimizes radiation exposure to workers, prevents human/animal access to the hazardous substances, and allows for ongoing monitoring of the decommissioned facility. Field construction was initiated in August 2011; evaporator operations commenced January 2012 and ended July 2012 with over 9 M liters of water treated/removed. Over 8,525 cubic meters of grout were placed, completing in August 2012. The project completed with an excellent safety record, on schedule and under budget. (authors)

  8. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES AT SAVANNAH RIVER SITE'S H CANYON FACILITY

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sexton, L.; Fuller, Kenneth

    2013-07-09

    The Savannah River Site's (SRS) H Canyon Facility is the only large scale, heavily shielded, nuclear chemical separations plant still in operation in the U.S. The facility's operations historically recovered uranium-235 (U-235) and neptunium-237 (Np-237) from aluminum-clad, enriched-uranium fuel tubes from Site nuclear reactors and other domestic and foreign research reactors. Today the facility, in conjunction with HB Line, is working to provide the initial feed material to the Mixed Oxide Facility also located on SRS. Many additional campaigns are also in the planning process. Furthermore, the facility has started to integrate collaborative research and development (R&D) projects into its schedule. H Canyon can serve as the appropriate testing location for many technologies focused on monitoring the back end of the fuel cycle, due to the nature of the facility and continued operation. H Canyon, in collaboration with the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL), has been working with several groups in the DOE complex to conduct testing demonstrations of novel technologies at the facility. The purpose of conducting these demonstrations at H Canyon will be to demonstrate the capabilities of the emerging technologies in an operational environment. This paper will summarize R&D testing activities currently taking place in H Canyon and discuss the possibilities for future collaborations.

  9. Lessons Learned From The 200 West Pump And Treatment Facility Construction Project At The US DOE Hanford Site - A Leadership For Energy And Environmental Design (LEED) Gold-Certified Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dorr, Kent A. [CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, WA (United States); Ostrom, Michael J. [CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, WA (United States); Freeman-Pollard, Jhivaun R. [CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, WA (United States)

    2012-11-14

    CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company (CHPRC) designed, constructed, commissioned, and began operation of the largest groundwater pump and treatment facility in the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) nationwide complex. This one-of-a-kind groundwater pump and treatment facility, located at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation Site (Hanford Site) in Washington State, was built in an accelerated manner with American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds and has attained Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) GOLD certification, which makes it the first non-administrative building in the DOE Office of Environmental Management complex to earn such an award. There were many contractual, technical, configuration management, quality, safety, and LEED challenges associated with the design, procurement, construction, and commissioning of this $95 million, 52,000 ft groundwater pump and treatment facility. This paper will present the Project and LEED accomplishments, as well as Lessons Learned by CHPRC when additional ARRA funds were used to accelerate design, procurement, construction, and commissioning of the 200 West Groundwater Pump and Treatment (2W P&T) Facility to meet DOE's mission of treating contaminated groundwater at the Hanford Site with a new facility by June 28, 2012.

  10. Engineering Facilities Having the facilities to develop and test spacecraft on-site is a

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Mojzsis, Stephen J.

    concerning the level of allowable contamination for space-bound products. LASP's four on-site cleanrooms. Cleanroom standards are federally and internationally regulated and designated by class, which for Standardization (ISO) Class-5 cleanroom has at most 100,000 particles bigger than a half micron per cubic meter

  11. Recent progress in siting low-level waste disposal facilities in the Southwestern Compact and the Central Interstate Compact

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DeOld, J.H.; Shaffner, J.A.

    1995-11-01

    US Ecology is the private contractor selected to develop and operate low-level waste disposal facilities in the Southwestern and the Central Interstate Compacts. These initiatives have been proceeding for almost a decade in somewhat different regulatory and political climates. This paper chronicles recent events in both projects. In both cases there is reason for continued optimism that low-level waste facilities to serve the needs of waste generators in these two compacts will soon be a reality. When the California Department of Health Services issued a license for the proposed Ward Valley LLRW disposal facility on September 16, 1993, it represented a significant step in implementation of a new generation of regional LLRW disposal facilities. While limited scope land transfer hearings were on the horizon, project beneficiaries were confident that the disposal site would be operational by 1995. Since then, however, political initiatives championed by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) have clouded the federal land transfer process and left the commencement date of operations indeterminant. Since 1993, the biomedical community, waste generators most affected by delays, have been petitioning the current administration to emphasize the need for a timely solution. These efforts are aimed at Clinton administration officials responsible for current delays, who apparently have not recognized the importance of the Ward Valley facility to California`s economy, nor the national ramifications of their delaying actions. The current status of challenges to the Ward Valley license and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documentation is also provided. The presentation also discusses the recently completed National Academy of Science evaluation of reports critical of the Ward Valley development process.

  12. Implementation of the Clean Air Act, Title III, Section 112(r) Prevention of Accidental Release Rule requirements at U.S. DOE Oak Ridge Reservation facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Humphreys, M.P. [Dept. of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Office, TN (United States). Environmental Protection Div.; Fellers, H.L. [Lockheed-Martin Energy Systems K-25 Site, Oak Ridge, TN (United States)

    1997-12-31

    Title III, Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990 requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to promulgate regulations to prevent accidental releases of regulated substances and to reduce the severity of those releases that do occur. The final EPA rule for Risk Management Programs under Section 112(r)(7) of the CAA, promulgated June 20, 1996, applies to all stationary sources with processes that contain more than a threshold quantity of any of 139 regulated substances listed under 40 CFR 68.130. All affected sources will be required to prepare a risk management plan which must be submitted to EPA and be made available to state and local governments and to the public. This paper will provide details of initiatives underway at US Department of Energy (DOE) Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) Facilities for implementation of the Prevention of Accidental Release Rule. The ORR encompasses three DOE Facilities: the Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), and the K-25 Site. The Y-12 Plant manufactures component parts for the national nuclear weapons program; the ORNL is responsible for research and development activities including nuclear engineering, engineering technologies, and the environmental sciences; and the K-25 Site conducts a variety of research and development activities and is the home of a mixed waste incinerator. ORR activities underway and soon to be undertaken toward implementation of the Prevention of Accidental Release Rule include: compilation of inventories of regulated substances at all processes at each of the three ORR Facilities for determination of affected processes and facilities; plans for inventory reduction to levels below threshold quantities, where necessary and feasible; determination of the overlap of processes subject to the OSHA PSM Standard and determination of parallel requirements; preparation of Risk Management Plans and Programs for affected processes and facilities including detailed requirements for hazard assessment, prevention, and emergency response.

  13. Removal site evaluation report for the Isotope Facilities at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-07-01

    This removal site evaluation (RmSE) report of the Isotope Facilities at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) was prepared to provide the Environmental Restoration Program with information necessary to evaluate whether hazardous and/or radiological contaminants in and around the Isotopes Facility pose a substantial risk to human health or the environment and if remedial site evaluations (RSEs) or removal actions are required. The scope of the project included: (1) a review of historical evidence regarding operations and use of the facility; (2) interviews with facility personnel concerning current and past operating practices; (3) a site inspection; and (4) identification of hazard areas requiring maintenance, removal, or remedial actions. The results of RmSE indicate that no substantial risks exist from contaminants present in the Isotope Facilities because adequate controls and practices exist to protect human health and the environment. The recommended correction from the RmSE are being conducted as maintenance actions; accordingly, this RmSE is considered complete and terminated.

  14. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions. Volume 6. A selected bibliography

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Owen, P.T.; Michelson, D.C.; Knox, N.P.

    1985-09-01

    This bibliography of 683 references with abstracts on the subject of nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions is the sixth in a series of annual reports prepared for the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Programs. Foreign as well as domestic literature of all types - technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, conference papers, symposium proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions - has been included. The bibliography contains scientific (basic research as well as applied technology), economic, regulatory, and legal literature pertinent to the US Department of Energy's remedial action program. Major chapters are: (1) Surplus Facilities Management Program; (2) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning; (3) Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program; (4) Facilities Contaminated with Natural Radioactivity; (5) Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program; (6) Grand Junction Remedial Action Program; (7) Uranium Mill Tailings Management; (8) Technical Measurements Center; and (9) General Remedial Action Program Studies. Chapter sections for chapters 1, 2, 5, and 7 include Design, Planning, and Regulations; Environmental Studies and Site Surveys; Health, Safety, and Biomedical Studies; Decontamination Studies; Dismantlement and Demolition; Site Stabilization and Reclamation; Waste Disposal; Remedial Action Experience; and General Studies. The references within each chapter or section are arranged alphabetically by leading author. References having no individual author are arranged by corporate affiliation or by publication description.

  15. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography: Volume 8

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Owen, P.T.; Michelson, D.C.; Knox, N.P.

    1987-09-01

    The 553 abstracted references on nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions constitute the eighth in a series of reports. Foreign and domestic literature of all types - technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, symposia proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions - has been included. The bibliography contains scientific, technical, economic, regulatory, and legal information pertinent to the US Department of energy's remedial action program. Major chapters are Surplus Facilities Management Program, Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning, Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, Facilities Contaminated with Naturally Occurring Radionuclides, Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program, Uranium Mill Tailings Management, Technical Measurements Center, and General Remedial Action Program Studies. Chapter sections for chapters 1, 2, 5, and 6 include Design, Planning, and Regulations; Environmental Studies and Site Surveys; Health, Safety, and Biomedical Studies; Decontamination Studies; Dismantlement and Demolition; Site Stabilization and Reclamation; Waste Disposal; Remedial Action Experience; and General Studies. Within these categories, references are arranged alphabetically by first author. Those references having no individual author are listed by corporate affiliation or by publication description. Indexes are provided for author, corporate affiliation, title word, publication description, geographic location, and keywords. The appendix contains a list of frequently used acronyms and abbreviations.

  16. Optimal Siting of Regional Fecal Sludge Treatment Facilities: St. Elizabeth, Jamaica

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Vogel, Richard M.

    Optimal Siting of Regional Fecal Sludge Treatment Facilities: St. Elizabeth, Jamaica Ana Martha- ated with their mismanagement and deterioration. Historically, fecal sludge management has been-9496 2008 134:1 55 CE Database subject headings: Sludge; System analysis; Waste stabilization ponds

  17. EIS-0089: PUREX Plant and Uranium Oxide Plant Facilities, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The U.S. Department of Energy developed this statement to evaluate the environmental impacts of resumption of operations of the PUREX/Uranium Oxide facilities at the Hanford Site to produce plutonium and other special nuclear materials for national defense needs.

  18. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Characterization Report, Revision 17

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Neitzel, Duane A.; Bunn, Amoret L.; Cannon, Sandra D.; Duncan, Joanne P.; Fowler, Richard A.; Fritz, Brad G.; Harvey, David W.; Hendrickson, Paul L.; Hoitink, Dana J.; Horton, Duane G.; Last, George V.; Poston, Ted M.; Prendergast-Kennedy, Ellen L.; Reidel, Steve P.; Rohay, Alan C.; Sackschewsky, Michael R.; Scott, Michael J.; Thorne, Paul D.

    2005-09-30

    This document describes the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Hanford Site environment. It is updated each year and is intended to provide a consistent description of the Hanford Site environment for the many environmental documents being prepared by DOE contractors concerning the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). No statements about significance or environmental consequences are provided. This year’s report is the seventeenth revision of the original document published in 1988 and is (until replaced by the eighteenth revision) the only version that is relevant for use in the preparation of Hanford NEPA, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) documents. The two chapters included in this document (Chapters 4 and 6) are numbered to correspond to the chapters where such information is typically presented in environmental impact statements (EISs) and other Hanford Site NEPA or CERCLA documentation. Chapter 4.0 (Affected Environment) describes Hanford Site climate and meteorology; air quality; geology; hydrology; ecology; cultural, archaeological, and historical resources; socioeconomics; noise; and occupational health and safety. Sources for extensive tabular data related to these topics are provided in the chapter. Most subjects are divided into a general description of the characteristics of the Hanford Site, followed by site-specific information, where available, of the 100, 200, 300, and other areas. This division allows the reader to go directly to those sections of particular interest. When specific information on each of these separate areas is not complete or available, the general Hanford Site description should be used. Chapter 6.0 (Statutory and Regulatory Requirements) describes federal and state laws and regulations, DOE directives and permits, and presidential executive orders that are applicable to the NEPA documents prepared for Hanford Site activities. Information in Chapter 6 of this document can be adapted and supplemented with specific information for a chapter covering statutory and regulatory requirements in an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement. When preparing environmental assessments and EISs, authors should also be cognizant of the document titled Recommendations for the Preparation of Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements published by the DOE Office of NEPA Oversight (DOE 2004). Additional guidance on preparing DOE NEPA documents can be found at http://tis.eh.doe.gov/nepa/guidance.html. Any interested individual seeking baseline data on the Hanford Site and its past activities may also use the information contained in this document to evaluate projected activities and their impacts. For this 2005 revision, the following sections of the document were reviewed by the authors and updated with the best available information through May 2005: Climate and Meteorology Air Quality Geology – Seismicity section only Hydrology – Flow charts for the Columbia and Yakima rivers only Ecology – Threatened and Endangered Species subsection only Socioeconomics Occupational Safety All of Chapter 6.

  19. The effect of a state education reform act on environmental education and interpretive facilities in Texas 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Andereck, Kathleen Lucille

    1986-01-01

    of Texas HE/I facilities by school groups, 2) determine facility responses to H. B. 72, and 3) identify ecological variables associated with the occurrence and extent of management and progranaaing responses to H. B. 72. All Texas EE/I facilities were...- ming and management ~ have been made at Texas EE/I facilities in response to H. B. 72, and this adaptation is associated with ~ in school group attendance. Finally, envtrcnamntal, organi- zational, and technological characteristics of EE/I facilities...

  20. Facility Closure Report for T-Tunnel (U12t), Area 12, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2008-08-01

    This Facility Closure Report (FCR) has been prepared to document the actions taken to permanently close the remaining accessible areas of U12t-Tunnel (T-Tunnel) in Area 12 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The closure of T-Tunnel was a prerequisite to transfer facility ownership from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) to the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO). Closure of the facility was accomplished with the cooperation and concurrence of both NNSA/NSO and the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP). The purpose of this FCR is to document that the closure of T-Tunnel complied with the closure requirements specified in the Facility Closure Plan for N- and T-Tunnels Area 12, Nevada Test Site (Appendix D) and that the facility is ready for transfer to NNSA/NSO. The Facility Closure Plan (FCP) is provided in Appendix D. T-Tunnel is located approximately 42 miles north of Mercury in Area 12 of the NTS (Figure 1). Between 1970 and 1987, T-Tunnel was used for six Nuclear Weapons Effects Tests (NWETs). The tunnel was excavated horizontally into the volcanic tuffs of Rainier Mesa. The T-Tunnel complex consists of a main access drift with two NWET containment structures, a Gas Seal Plug (GSP), and a Gas Seal Door (GSD) (Figure 2). The T-Tunnel complex was mothballed in 1993 to preserve the tunnel for resumption of testing, should it happen in the future, to stop the discharge of tunnel effluent, and to prevent unauthorized access. This was accomplished by sealing the main drift GSD.

  1. Environmental monitoring plan for the Niagara Falls Storage Site and the Interim Waste Containment Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1986-04-01

    As part of the US Department of Energy's (DOE) Surplus Facility Management Program (SFMP), the Niagara Falls Storage Site (NFSS) is undergoing remedial action. Vicinity properties adjacent to and near the site are being cleaned up as part of DOE's Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). These programs are a DOE effort to clean up low-level radioactive waste resulting from the early days of the nation's atomic energy program. Radioactively contaminated waste from these remedial action activities are being stored at the NFSS in an interim waste containment facility (IWCF). When the remedial actions and IWCF are completed in 1986, activities at the site will be limited to waste management. The monitoring program was prepared in accordance with DOE Order 5484.1 and is designed to determine the contribution of radioactivity from the site to the environs and to demonstrate compliance with applicable criteria. Major elements of this program will also supplement other monitoring requirements including the performance monitoring system for the IWCF and the closure/post-closure plan. Emphasis will be directed toward the sampling and analysis of groundwater, surface water, air and sediment for parameters which are known to be present in the material stored at the site. The monitoring program will employ a phased approach whereby the first 5 years of data will be evaluated, and the program will be reviewed and modified as necessary. 17 refs., 10 figs., 3 tabs.

  2. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: a selected bibliography. Volume 5

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Owen, P.T.; Knox, N.P.; Chilton, B.D.; Baldauf, M.F.

    1984-09-01

    This bibliography of 756 references with abstracts on the subject of nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions is the fifth in a series of annual reports prepared for the US Department of Energy, Division of Remedial Action Projects. Foreign as well as domestic literature of all types - technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, conference papers, symposium proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions - has been included in this publication. The bibliography contains scientific (basic research as well as applied technology), economic, regulatory, and legal literature pertinent to the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Program. Major chapters are: (1) Surplus Facilities Management Program; (2) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning; (3) Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program; (4) Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program; (5) Grand Junction Remedial Action Program; (6) Uranium Mill Tailings Management; and (7) Technical Measurements Center. Chapter sections for chapters 1, 2, 4, and 6 include Design, Planning, and Regulations; Environmental Studies and Site Surveys; Decontamination Studies; Dismantlement and Demolition; Site Stabilization and Reclamation; Waste Disposal; Remedial Action Experience; and General Studies. The references within each chapter or section are arranged alphabetically by leading author. References having no individual author are arranged by corporate author or by title. Indexes are provided for the categories of author, corporate affiliation, title, publication description, geographic location, and keywords. The Appendix contains a list of frequently used acronyms.

  3. Hanford site near-facility environmental monitoring annual report, calendar year 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Perkins, C.J.

    1997-08-05

    This document summarizes the results of the near-facility environmental monitoring results for 1996 in the 100, 200/600, and 300/400 areas of the Hanford Site in south-central Washington State. Surveillance activities included sampling and analyses of ambient air, surface water, groundwater, soil, sediments, and biota. Also, external radiation measurements and radiological surveys were taken at waste disposal sites, radiologically controlled areas, and roads. These activities were conducted to assess and control the effects of nuclear facilities and waste sites on the local environment. The monitoring implements applicable portions of DOE Orders 5400.1 (DOE 1988a), 5400.5 (DOE 1990), and 5820.2A (DOE 1988b); Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 246-247; and Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 61, Subpart H (EPA 1989). In addition, diffuse sources were monitored to determine compliance with federal, state, and/or local regulations. In general, although effects from nuclear facilities can still be observed on the Hanford Site and radiation levels were slightly elevated when compared to offsite locations, the differences are less than in previous years.

  4. Decontamination and decommissioning assessment for the Waste Incineration Facility (Building 232-Z) Hanford Site, [Hanford], WA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dean, L.N. [Advanced Sciences, Inc., (United States)

    1994-02-01

    Building 232-Z is an element of the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) located in the 200 West Area of the Hanford Site. From 1961 until 1972, plutonium-bearing combustible materials were incinerated in the building. Between 1972 and 1983, following shutdown of the incinerator, the facility was used for waste segregation activities. The facility was placed in retired inactive status in 1984 and classified as a Limited Control Facility pursuant to DOE Order 5480.5, Safety of Nuclear Facilities, and 6430.1A, General Design Criteria. The current plutonium inventory within the building is estimated to be approximately 848 grams, the majority of which is retained within the process hood ventilation system. As a contaminated retired facility, Building 232-Z is included in the DOE Surplus Facility Management Program. The objective of this Decontamination and Decommissioning (D&D) assessment is to remove Building 232-Z, thereby elmininating the radiological and environmental hazards associated with the plutonium inventory within the structure. The steps to accomplish the plan objectives are: (1) identifying the locations of the most significant amounts of plutonium, (2) removing residual plutonium, (3) removing and decontaminating remaining building equipment, (4) dismantling the remaining structure, and (5) closing out the project.

  5. Savannah River Site RCRA Facility Investigation plan: Road A Chemical Basin

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1989-06-01

    The nature of wastes disposed of at the Road A Chemical Basin (RACB) is such that some degree of soil contamination is probable. Lead has also been detected in site monitoring wells at concentrations above SRS background levels. A RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI) is proposed for the RACB and will include a ground penetrating radar (GPR) survey, collection and chemical and radiological analyses of soil cores, installation of groundwater monitoring wells, collection and chemical and radiological analyses of groundwater samples, and collection of chemical and radiological analyses of surface water and sediment samples. Upon completion of the proposed RFI field work and chemical and radiological analyses, and RFI report should be prepared to present conclusions on the nature and extent of contamination at the site, and to make recommendations for site remediation. If contamination is detected at concentrations above SRS background levels, a receptor analysis should be done to evaluate potential impacts of site contamination on nearby populations.

  6. Analysis of 2011 Meteorological Data from the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory and Kesselring Site Operations Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Aluzzi, F J

    2012-02-27

    Both the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory (KAPL) in Schenectady, NY and the Kesselring Site Operations (KSO) facility near Ballston Spa, NY are required to estimate the effects of hypothetical emissions of radiological material from their respective facilities by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which regulates these facilities. An atmospheric dispersion model known as CAP88, which was developed and approved by the EPA for such purposes, is used by KAPL and KSO to meet this requirement. CAP88 calculations over a given time period are based on statistical data on the meteorological conditions for that period. Both KAPL and KSO have on-site meteorological towers which take atmospheric measurements at a frequency ideal for EPA regulatory model input. However, an independent analysis and processing of the meteorological data from each tower is required to derive a data set appropriate for use in the CAP88 model. The National Atmospheric Release Advisory Center (NARAC) was contracted by KAPL to process the on-site data for the calendar year 2011. The purpose of this document is to: (1) summarize the procedures used in the preparation/analysis of the 2011 meteorological data; and (2) document adherence of these procedures to the guidance set forth in 'Meteorological Monitoring Guidance for Regulatory Modeling Applications', EPA document - EPA-454/R-99-005 (EPA-454). This document outlines the steps in analyzing and processing meteorological data from the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory and Kesselring Site Operations facilities into a format that is compatible with the steady state dispersion model CAP88. This process is based on guidance from the EPA regarding the preparation of meteorological data for use in regulatory dispersion models. The analysis steps outlined in this document can be easily adapted to process data sets covering time period other than one year. The procedures will need to be modified should the guidance in EPA-454 be updated or revised.

  7. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography, volume 9

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Owen, P.T.; Knox, N.P.; Michelson, D.C.; Turmer, G.S.

    1988-09-01

    The 604 abstracted references on nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions constitute the ninth in a series of reports prepared annually for the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Programs. Foreign and domestic literature of all types--technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, symposia proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions--has been included. The bibliography contains scientific, technical, economic, regulatory, and legal information pertinent to the US Department of Energy's remedial action programs. Major sections are (1) Surplus Facilities Management Program, (2) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning, (3) Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, (4) Facilities Contaminated with Naturally Occurring Radionuclides, (5) Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program, (6) Uranium Mill Tailings Management, (7) Technical Measurements Center, and (8) General Remedial Action Program Studies. Subsections for sections 1, 2, 5, and 6 include: Design, Planning, and Regulations; Environmental Studies and Site Surveys; Health, Safety, and Biomedical Studies; Decontamination Studies; Dismantlement and Demolition; Site Stabilization and Reclamation; Waste Disposal; Remedial Action Experience; and General Studies. Within these categories, references are arranged alphabetically by first author. Those references having no individual author are listed by corporate affiliation or by publication description. Indexes are provided for author, corporate affiliation, title word, publication description, geographic location, and keywords. This report is a product of the Remedial Action Program Information Center (RAPIC), which selects and analyzes information on remedial actions and relevant radioactive waste management technologies. RAPIC staff and resources are available to meet a variety of information needs. Contact the center at (615) 576-0568 or FTS 626-0568.

  8. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions. Volume 1. A selected bibliography

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Faust, R.A.; Fore, C.S.; Knox, N.P.

    1980-09-01

    This bibliography of 633 references represents the first in a series to be produced by the Remedial Actions Program Information Center (RAPIC) containing scientific, technical, economic, and regulatory information concerning the decommissioning of nuclear facilities. Major chapters selected for this bibliography are Facility Decommissioning, Uranium Mill Tailings Cleanup, Contaminated Site Restoration, and Criteria and Standards. The references within each chapter are arranged alphabetically by leading author, corporate affiliation, or title of the document. When the author is not given, the corporate affiliation appears first. If these two levels of authorship are not given, the title of the document is used as the identifying level. Indexes are provided for (1) author(s), (2) keywords, (3) title, (4) technology development, and (5) publication description. An appendix of 123 entries lists recently acquired references relevant to decommissioning of nuclear facilities. These references are also arranged according to one of the four subject categories and followed by author, title, and publication description indexes. The bibliography was compiled from a specialized data base established and maintained by RAPIC to provide information support for the Department of Energy's Remedial Actions Program, under the cosponsorship of its three major components: Surplus Facilities Management Program, Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Actions Program, and Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Actions Program. RAPIC is part of the Ecological Sciences Information Center within the Information Center Complex at Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

  9. Site characterization report for the Old Hydrofracture Facility at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-01-01

    Several Old Hydrofracture Facility (OHF) structures (i.e., Building 7852, the bulk storage bins, the pump house, water tank T-5, and pump P-3) are surplus facilities at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) slated for decontamination and decommissioning (D and D). OHF was constructed in 1963 to allow experimentation and operations with an integrated solids storage, handling, mixing, and grout injection facility. It was shut down in 1980 and transferred to ORNL`s Surveillance and Maintenance Program. The hydrofracture process was a unique disposal method that involved injecting waste materials mixed with grout and additives under pumping pressures of 2,000 psi or greater into a deep, low-permeability shale formation. The injected slurry spread along fractures and bedding planes for hundreds of feet from the injection points, forming thin grout sheets (often less than 1/8 in. thick). The grout ostensibly immobilized and solidified the liquid wastes. Site characterization activities were conducted in the winter and spring of 1994 to collect information necessary to plan the D and D of OHF structures. This site characterization report documents the results of the investigation of OHF D and D structures, presenting data from the field investigation and laboratory analyses in the form of a site description, as-built drawings, summary tables of radiological and chemical contaminant concentrations, and a waste volume estimate. 25 refs., 54 figs., 17 tabs.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2008-03-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy, National Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) is planning to close the 92-Acre Area of the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) at the Nevada Test Site (NTS), which is about 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. Closure planning for this facility must take into account the regulatory requirements for a diversity of waste streams, disposal and storage configurations, disposal history, and site conditions. This paper provides a brief background of the Area 5 RWMS, identifies key closure issues, and presents the closure strategy. Disposals have been made in 25 shallow excavated pits and trenches and 13 Greater Confinement Disposal (GCD) boreholes at the 92-Acre Area since 1961. The pits and trenches have been used to dispose unclassified low-level waste (LLW), low-level mixed waste (LLMW), and asbestiform waste, and to store classified low-level and low-level mixed materials. The GCD boreholes are intermediate-depth disposal units about 10 feet (ft) in diameter and 120 ft deep. Classified and unclassified high-specific activity LLW, transuranic (TRU), and mixed TRU are disposed in the GCD boreholes. TRU waste was also disposed inadvertently in trench T-04C. Except for three disposal units that are active, all pits and trenches are operationally covered with 8-ft thick alluvium. The 92-Acre Area also includes a Mixed Waste Disposal Unit (MWDU) operating under Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Interim Status, and an asbestiform waste unit operating under a state of Nevada Solid Waste Disposal Site Permit. A single final closure cover is envisioned over the 92-Acre Area. The cover is the evapotranspirative-type cover that has been successfully employed at the NTS. Closure, post-closure care, and monitoring must meet the requirements of the following regulations: U.S. Department of Energy Order 435.1, Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 191, Title 40 CFR Part 265, Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) 444.743, RCRA requirements as incorporated into NAC 444.8632, and the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO). A grouping of waste disposal units according to waste type, location, and similarity in regulatory requirements identified six closure units: LLW Unit, Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 111 under FFACO, Asbestiform LLW Unit, Pit 3 MWDU, TRU GCD Borehole Unit, and TRU Trench Unit. The closure schedule of all units is tied to the closure schedule of the Pit 3 MWDU under RCRA.

  11. CLOSURE REPORT FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION UNIT 115: AREA 25 TEST CELL A FACILITY, NEVADA TEST SITE, NEVADA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NA

    2006-03-01

    This Closure Report (CR) describes the activities performed to close CAU 115, Area 25 Test Cell A Facility, as presented in the NDEP-approved SAFER Plan (NNSA/NSO, 2004). The SAFER Plan includes a summary of the site history, process knowledge, and closure standards. This CR provides a summary of the completed closure activities, documentation of waste disposal, and analytical and radiological data to confirm that the remediation goals were met and to document final site conditions. The approved closure alternative as presented in the SAFER Plan for CAU 115 (NNSA/NSO, 2004) was clean closure; however, closure in place was implemented under a Record of Technical Change (ROTC) to the SAFER Plan when radiological surveys indicated that the concrete reactor pad was radiologically activated and could not be decontaminated to meet free release levels. The ROTC is included as Appendix G of this report. The objectives of closure were to remove any trapped residual liquids and gases, dispose regulated and hazardous waste, decontaminate removable radiological contamination, demolish and dispose aboveground structures, remove the dewar as a best management practice (BMP), and characterize and restrict access to all remaining radiological contamination. Radiological contaminants of concern (COCs) included cobalt-60, cesium-137, strontium-90, uranium-234/235/236/238, and plutonium-239/240. Additional COCs included Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) metals, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and asbestos.

  12. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography, Volume 13: Part 1, Main text

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Goins, L.F.; Webb, J.R.; Cravens, C.D.; Mallory, P.K.

    1992-09-01

    This publication contains 1035 abstracted references on environmental restoration, nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions. These citations constitute the thirteenth in a series of reports prepared annually for the US Department of Energy (DOE) Environmental Restoration programs. Citations to foreign and domestic literature of all types. There are 13 major sections of the publication, including: (1) DOE Decontamination and Decommissioning Program; (2) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning; (3) DOE Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program; (4) DOE Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project; (5) Uranium Mill Tailings Management; (6) DOE Environmental Restoration Program; (7) DOE Site-Specific Remedial Actions; (8) Contaminated Site Restoration; (9) Remediation of Contaminated Soil and Groundwater; (10) Environmental Data Measurements, Management, and Evaluation; (11) Remedial Action Assessment and Decision-Making; (12) Technology Development and Evaluation; and (13) Environmental and Waste Management Issues. Bibliographic references are arranged in nine subject categories by geographic location and then alphabetically by first author, corporate affiliation, or publication title. Indexes are provided for author, corporate affiliation, title word, publication description, geographic location, subject category, and key word.

  13. Niagara Falls Storage Site, Annual site environmental report, Lewiston, New York, Calendar year 1986: Surplus Facilities Management Program (SFMP)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1987-06-01

    During 1986, the environmental monitoring program was continued at the Niagara Falls Storage Site (NFSS), a US Department of Energy (DOE) surplus facility located in Niagara County, New York, presently used for the interim storage of radioactive residues and contaminated soils and rubble. The monitoring program is being conducted by Bechtel National, Inc. The monitoring program at the NFSS measures radon gas concentrations in air; external gamma radiation levels; and uranium and radium concentrations in surface water, groundwater, and sediment. To verify that the site is in compliance with the DOE radiation protection standard and to assess its potential effect on public health, the radiation dose was calculated for the maximally exposed individual. Based on the conservative scenario described in the report, this individual would receive an annual external exposure approximately equivalent to 6% of the DOE radiation protection standard of 100 mrem/yr. By comparison, the incremental dose received from living in a brick house versus a wooden house is 10 mrem/yr above background. The cumulative dose to the population within an 80-km (50-mi) radius of the NFSS that would result from radioactive materials present at the site would be indistinguishable from the dose that the same population would receive from naturally occurring radioactive sources. Results of the 1986 monitoring show that the NFSS is in compliance with the DOE radiation protection standard. 14 refs., 11 figs., 14 tabs.

  14. Environmental assessment operation of the HB-Line facility and frame waste recovery process for production of Pu-238 oxide at the Savannah River Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-04-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA), DOE/EA-0948, addressing future operations of the HB-Line facility and the Frame Waste Recovery process at the Savannah River Site (SRS), near Aiken, South Carolina. Based on the analyses in the EA, DOE has determined that the proposed action is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. Therefore, DOE has concluded that, the preparation of an environmental impact statement is not required, and is issuing this Finding of No Significant Impact.

  15. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography, Volume 12. Environmental Restoration Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1991-09-01

    The 664 abstracted references on environmental restoration, nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions constitute the twelfth in a series of reports prepared annually for the US Department of Energy Remedial Action Programs. Citations to foreign and domestic literature of all types -- technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, symposia proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions -- have been included. The bibliography contains scientific, technical, economic, regulatory, and legal information pertinent to the US Department of Energy Remedial Action Programs. Major sections are (1) Decontamination and Decommissioning Program, (2) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning, (3) Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, (4) Facilities Contaminated with Naturally Occurring Radionuclides, (5) Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program, (6) Uranium Mill Tailings Management, (7) Technical Measurements Center, and (8) Environmental Restoration Program. Within these categories, references are arranged alphabetically by first author. Those references having no individual author are listed by corporate affiliation or by publication title. Indexes are provided for author, corporate affiliation, title word, publication description, geographic location, subject category, and key word. This report is a product of the Remedial Action Program Information Center (RAPIC), which selects, analyzes, and disseminates information on environmental restoration and remedial actions. RAPIC staff and resources are available to meet a variety of information needs. Contact the center at FTS 624-7764 or (615) 574-7764.

  16. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography, Volume 12

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Owen, P. T.; Webb, J. R.; Knox, N. P.; Goins, L. F.; Harrell, R. E.; Mallory, P. K.; Cravens, C. D.

    1991-09-01

    The 664 abstracted references on environmental restoration, nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions constitute the twelfth in a series of reports prepared annually for the US Department of Energy Remedial Action Programs. Citations to foreign and domestic literature of all types -- technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, symposia proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions -- have been included. The bibliography contains scientific, technical, economic, regulatory, and legal information pertinent to the US Department of Energy Remedial Action Programs. Major sections are (1) Decontamination and Decommissioning Program, (2) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning, (3) Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, (4) Facilities Contaminated with Naturally Occurring Radionuclides, (5) Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program, (6) Uranium Mill Tailings Management, (7) Technical Measurements Center, and (8) Environmental Restoration Program. Within these categories, references are arranged alphabetically by first author. Those references having no individual author are listed by corporate affiliation or by publication title. Indexes are provided for author, corporate affiliation, title word, publication description, geographic location, subject category, and key word. This report is a product of the Remedial Action Program Information Center (RAPIC), which selects, analyzes, and disseminates information on environmental restoration and remedial actions. RAPIC staff and resources are available to meet a variety of information needs. Contact the center at FTS 624-7764 or (615) 574-7764.

  17. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography, Volume 13: Part 2, Indexes. Environmental Restoration Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Goins, L.F.; Webb, J.R.; Cravens, C.D.; Mallory, P.K.

    1992-09-01

    This is part 2 of a bibliography on nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial action. This report contains indexes on the following: authors, corporate affiliation, title words, publication description, geographic location, subject category, and key word.

  18. EA-1605: Biomass Cogeneration and Heating Facilities at the Savannah River Site; Aiken, Allendale and Barnwell Counties, South Carolina

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) prepared this environmental assessment (EA) to analyze the potential environmental impacts of the proposed construction and operation of new biomass cogeneration and heating facilities at the Savannah River Site (SRS).

  19. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography, Vol. 18. Part 2. Indexes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-09-01

    This bibliography contains 3638 citations with abstracts of documents relevant to environmental restoration, nuclear facility decontamination and decommissioning (D&D), uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions. This report is the eighteenth in a series of bibliographies prepared annually for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Restoration. Citations to foreign and domestic literature of all types - technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, symposia proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions - have been included in Part 1 of the report. The bibliography contains scientific, technical, financial, and regulatory information that pertains to DOE environmental restoration programs. The citations are separated by topic into 16 sections, including (1) DOE Environmental Restoration Program; (2) DOE D&D Program; (3) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning; (4) DOE Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Programs; (5) NORM-Contaminated Site Restoration; (6) DOE Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project; (7) Uranium Mill Tailings Management; (8) DOE Site-Wide Remedial Actions; (9) DOE Onsite Remedial Action Projects; (10) Contaminated Site Remedial Actions; (11) DOE Underground Storage Tank Remediation; (12) DOE Technology Development, Demonstration, and Evaluations; (13) Soil Remediation; (14) Groundwater Remediation; (15) Environmental Measurements, Analysis, and Decision-Making; and (16) Environmental Management Issues. Within the 16 sections, the citations are sorted by geographic location. If a geographic location is not specified, the citations are sorted according to the document title. In Part 2 of the report, indexes are provided for author, author affiliation, selected title phrase, selected title word, publication description, geographic location, and keyword.

  20. Rocky Flats CAAS System Recalibrated, Retested, and Analyzed to Install in the Criticality Experiments Facility at the Nevada Test Site

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    2009-01-01

    the Nevada Test Site (NTS). Prior to the Rocky Flats Plant (Rocky Flats CAAS System Recalibrated, Retested, and Analyzed to Install in the Criticality Experiments Facility at the Nevada TestROCKY FLATS CAAS SYSTEM RECALIBRATED, RETESTED, AND ANALYZED TO INSTALL IN THE CRITICALITY EXPERIMENTS FACILITY AT THE NEVADA TEST

  1. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: a selected bibliography. Volume 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Owen, P.T.; Knox, N.P.; Fielden, J.M.; Faust, R.A.

    1983-09-01

    This bibliography of 657 references with abstracts on the subject of nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions is the fourth in a series of annual reports prepared for the US Department of Energy, Division of Remedial Action Projects. Foreign as well as domestic documents of all types - technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, conference papers, symposium proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions - have been references in this publication. The bibliography contains scientific (basic research as well as applied technology), economic, regulatory, and legal literature pertinent to the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Program. Major chapters are: (1) Surplus Facilities Management Program; (2) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning; (3) Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program; (4) Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program; (5) Grand Junction Remedial Action Program; and (6) Uranium Mill Tailings Management. Chapter sections for chapters 1 and 2 include: Design, Planning, and Regulations; Site Surveys; Decontamination Studies; Dismantlement and Demolition; Land Decontamination and Reclamation; Waste Disposal; and General studies. The references within each chapter or section are arranged alphabetically by leading author. References having no individual author are arranged by corporate author, or by title. Indexes are provided for the categories of author, corporate affiliation, title, publication description, geographic location, and keywords. Appendix A lists 264 bibliographic references to literature identified during this reporting period but not abstracted due to time constraints. Title and publication description indexes are given for this appendix. Appendix B defines frequently used acronyms, and Appendix C lists the recipients of this report according to their corporate affiliation.

  2. File:07HIBRenewableEnergyFacilitySitingProcessREFSP.pdf | Open Energy

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1ORDExplorationInjectionPermit (1).pdfInformation HIBRenewableEnergyFacilitySitingProcessREFSP.pdf Jump

  3. File:07MTAEnergyFacilitySiting (6).pdf | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1ORDExplorationInjectionPermit (1).pdfInformationInformation7MTAEnergyFacilitySiting (6).pdf Jump to:

  4. DOE site facility mgt contracts Internet Posting 5-2-11.xlsx | Department

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergy A plug-in electricLaboratory | DepartmentDOE Zeroof Energy DOE site facility mgt

  5. Recommendation by the Secretary of Energy Regarding the Suitability of the Yucca Mountain Site for a Repository Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Recommendation by the Secretary of Energy Regarding the Suitability of the Yucca Mountain Site for a Repository Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982

  6. SAVANNAH RIVER SITE'S H-CANYON FACILITY: IMPACTS OF FOREIGN OBLIGATIONS ON SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL DISPOSITION

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Magoulas, V.

    2013-06-03

    The US has a non-proliferation policy to receive foreign and domestic research reactor returns of spent fuel materials of US origin. These spent fuel materials are returned to the Department of Energy (DOE) and placed in storage in the L-area spent fuel basin at the Savannah River Site (SRS). The foreign research reactor returns fall subject to the 123 agreements for peaceful cooperation. These “123 agreements” are named after section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and govern the conditions of nuclear cooperation with foreign partners. The SRS management of these foreign obligations while planning material disposition paths can be a challenge.

  7. A brief history of the T Plant facility at the Hanford Site. Addendum 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gerber, M.S.

    1994-05-16

    T Plant (221-T) was the first and largest of the early chemical separations plants at the Hanford Engineer Works (HEW) (World War II name for the Hanford Site). Officially designated as a Cell Building by the Manhattan Engineer District (MED) of the Army Corps of Engineers (agency responsible for HEW), T Plant served as the headquarters of chemical processing operations at Hanford from its construction until the opening of the REDOX Plant in January 1952. Because it formed a crucial link in the first full-scale plutonium production operations in world history, it meets criteria established in the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 as a National Historic Structure.

  8. Facility Closure Report for Tunnel U16a, Area 16, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2009-07-01

    U16a is not listed in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. The closure of U16a was sponsored by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) and performed with the cooperation of the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office and the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection. This report documents closure of this site as identified in the DTRA Fiscal Year 2008 Statement of Work, Task 6.3. Closure activities included: · Removing and disposing of a shack and its contents · Disposing of debris from within the shack and in the vicinity of the tunnel entrance · Verifying that the tunnel is empty · Welding screened covers over tunnel vent holes to limit access and allow ventilation · Constructing a full-tunnel cross-section fibercrete bulkhead to prevent access to the tunnel Field activities were conducted from July to August 2008.

  9. The design of a Phase I non site-specific Centralized Interim Storage Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stringer, J.; Kane, D.

    1997-10-28

    The Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) recently completed a Topical Safety Analysis Report (TSAR) for a Phase 1 non site specific Centralized Interim Storage Facility (CISF). The TSAR will be used in licensing the CISF when and if a site is designated. The combined Phase 1 and Phase 2 CISF will provide federal storage capability for 40,000 metric tons of uranium (MTU) Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) under the oversight of the DOE. The Phase 1 TSAR was submitted to the NRC on May 1, 1997 and is currently under review having been docketed on June 10, 1997. This paper generally describes the Phase 1 CISF design and its operations as presented in the CISF TSAR.

  10. Groundwater Monitoring Plan for the Hanford Site 216-B-3 Pond RCRA Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnett, D BRENT.; Smith, Ronald M.; Chou, Charissa J.; McDonald, John P.

    2005-11-01

    The 216-B-3 Pond system was a series of ponds used for disposal of liquid effluent from past Hanford production facilities. In operation from 1945 to 1997, the B Pond System has been a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) facility since 1986, with RCRA interim-status groundwater monitoring in place since 1988. In 1994 the expansion ponds of the facility were clean closed, leaving only the main pond and a portion of the 216-B-3-3 ditch as the currently regulated facility. In 2001, the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) issued a letter providing guidance for a two-year, trial evaluation of an alternate, intrawell statistical approach to contaminant detection monitoring at the B Pond system. This temporary variance was allowed because the standard indicator-parameters evaluation (pH, specific conductance, total organic carbon, and total organic halides) and accompanying interim status statistical approach is ineffective for detecting potential B-Pond-derived contaminants in groundwater, primarily because this method fails to account for variability in the background data and because B Pond leachate is not expected to affect the indicator parameters. In July 2003, the final samples were collected for the two-year variance period. An evaluation of the results of the alternate statistical approach is currently in progress. While Ecology evaluates the efficacy of the alternate approach (and/or until B Pond is incorporated into the Hanford Facility RCRA Permit), the B Pond system will return to contamination-indicator detection monitoring. Total organic carbon and total organic halides were added to the constituent list beginning with the January 2004 samples. Under this plan, the following wells will be monitored for B Pond: 699-42-42B, 699-43-44, 699-43-45, and 699-44-39B. The wells will be sampled semi-annually for the contamination indicator parameters (pH, specific conductance, total organic carbon, and total organic halides) and annually for water quality parameters (chloride, iron, manganese, phenols, sodium, and sulfate). This plan will remain in effect until superseded by another plan or until B Pond is incorporated into the Hanford Facility RCRA Permit.

  11. Closure End States for Facilities, Waste Sites, and Subsurface Contamination - 12543

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gerdes, Kurt; Chamberlain, Grover; Whitehurst, Latrincy; Marble, Justin; Wellman, Dawn; Deeb, Rula; Hawley, Elisabeth

    2012-07-01

    The United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) manages the largest groundwater and soil cleanup effort in the world. DOE's Office of Environmental Management (EM) has made significant progress in its restoration efforts at sites such as Fernald and Rocky Flats. However, remaining sites, such as Savannah River Site, Oak Ridge Site, Hanford Site, Los Alamos, Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, and West Valley Demonstration Project possess the most complex challenges ever encountered by the technical community and represent a challenge that will face DOE for the next decade. Closure of the remaining 18 sites in the DOE EM Program requires remediation of 75 million cubic yards of contaminated soil and 1.7 trillion gallons of contaminated groundwater, deactivation and decommissioning (D and D) of over 3000 contaminated facilities and thousands of miles of contaminated piping, removal and disposition of millions of cubic yards of legacy materials, treatment of millions of gallons of high level tank waste and disposition of hundreds of contaminated tanks. The financial obligation required to remediate this volume of contaminated environment is estimated to cost more than 7% of the to-go life-cycle cost. Critical in meeting this goal within the current life-cycle cost projections is defining technically achievable end states that formally acknowledge that remedial goals will not be achieved for a long time and that residual contamination will be managed in the interim in ways that are protective of human health and environment. Formally acknowledging the long timeframe needed for remediation can be a basis for establishing common expectations for remedy performance, thereby minimizing the risk of re-evaluating the selected remedy at a later time. Once the expectations for long-term management are in place, remedial efforts can be directed towards near-term objectives (e.g., reducing the risk of exposure to residual contamination) instead of focusing on long-term cleanup requirements. An acknowledgement of the long timeframe for complete restoration and the need for long-term management can also help a site transition from the process of pilot testing different remedial strategies to selecting a final remedy and establishing a long-term management and monitoring approach. This approach has led to cost savings and the more efficient use of resources across the Department of Defense complex and at numerous industrial sites across the U.S. Defensible end states provide numerous benefits for the DOE environmental remediation programs including cost-effective, sustainable long-term monitoring strategies, remediation and site transition decision support, and long-term management of closure sites. (authors)

  12. Draft environmental assessment: Richton Dome site, Mississippi. Nuclear Waste Policy Act (Section 112). [Contains Glossary

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1984-12-01

    In February 1983, the US Department of Energy identified the Richton dome site as one of the nine potentially acceptable sites for a mined geo

  13. Pacific Northwest Laboratory FY 1993 Site Maintenance Plan for maintenance of DOE nonnuclear facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bright, J.D.

    1992-09-28

    This Site Maintenance Plan has been developed for Pacific Northwest Laboratory's (PNL) Nonnuclear Facilities. It is based on requirements specified by US Department of Energy (DOE) Order 4330.4A, Chapter I, Change No. 4. The objective of this maintenance plan is to provide baseline information for compliance to the DOE Order 4330.4A, to identify needed improvements, and to document the planned maintenance budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 1993 and to estimate maintenance budgets for FY 1994 and FY 1995 for all PNL facilities. Using the results of the self-assessment, PNL has selected 12 of the 36 elements of the Maintenance Program defined by DOE Order 4330.4A, Chapter I, for improvement. The elements selected for improvement are: Facility Condition Inspections; Work Request (Order) System; Formal Job Planning and Estimating; Work Performance (Time) Standards; Priority System; Maintenance Procedures and Other Work-Related Documents; Scheduling System; Post Maintenance Testing; Backlog Work Control; Equipment Repair History and Vendor Information; Work Sampling; and Identification and Control. Based upon a graded approach and current funding, those elements considered most important have been selected as goals for earliest compliance. Commitment dates for these elements have been established for compliance. The remaining elements of noncompliance will be targeted for implementation during later budget periods.

  14. Pacific Northwest Laboratory FY 1993 Site Maintenance Plan for maintenance of DOE nonnuclear facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bright, J.D.

    1992-09-28

    This Site Maintenance Plan has been developed for Pacific Northwest Laboratory`s (PNL) Nonnuclear Facilities. It is based on requirements specified by US Department of Energy (DOE) Order 4330.4A, Chapter I, Change No. 4. The objective of this maintenance plan is to provide baseline information for compliance to the DOE Order 4330.4A, to identify needed improvements, and to document the planned maintenance budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 1993 and to estimate maintenance budgets for FY 1994 and FY 1995 for all PNL facilities. Using the results of the self-assessment, PNL has selected 12 of the 36 elements of the Maintenance Program defined by DOE Order 4330.4A, Chapter I, for improvement. The elements selected for improvement are: Facility Condition Inspections; Work Request (Order) System; Formal Job Planning and Estimating; Work Performance (Time) Standards; Priority System; Maintenance Procedures and Other Work-Related Documents; Scheduling System; Post Maintenance Testing; Backlog Work Control; Equipment Repair History and Vendor Information; Work Sampling; and Identification and Control. Based upon a graded approach and current funding, those elements considered most important have been selected as goals for earliest compliance. Commitment dates for these elements have been established for compliance. The remaining elements of noncompliance will be targeted for implementation during later budget periods.

  15. Occupational radiation dose assessment for a non site specific spent fuel storage facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hadley, J. [Duke Engineering and Services, Inc., Charlotte, NC (United States); Eble, R.G. Jr. [Duke Engineering and Services, Inc., Vienna, VA (United States)

    1997-12-01

    To expedite the licensing process of the non site specific Centralized Interim Storage Facility (CISF) the Department of Energy has completed a phase I CISF Topical Safety Analysis Report (TSAR). The TSAR will be used in licensing the phase I CISF if a site is designated. An occupational radiation does assessment of the facility operations is performed as part of the phase I CISF design. The first phase of the CISF has the capability to receive, transfer, and store SNF in dual-purpose cask/canister systems (DPC`s). Currently there are five vendor technologies under consideration. The preliminary dose assessment is based on estimated occupational exposures using traditional power plant ISFSI and transport cask handling processes. The second step in the process is to recommend ALARA techniques to reduce potential exposures. A final dose assessment is completed implementing the ALARA techniques and a review is performed to ensure that the design is in compliance with regulatory criteria. The dose assessment and ALARA evaluation are determined using the following input information: Dose estimates from vendor SAR`s; ISFSI experience with similar systems; Traditional methods of operations; Expected CISF cask receipt rates; and feasible ALARA techniques. 5 refs., 1 tab.

  16. Recovery Act-Funded 90-m Blade Test Facility Commissioned May 18, 2011 |

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE:Financing Tool FitsProject Developsfor UCNIEnvironmental Impact StatementRecovery ActDepartment of

  17. Biological assessment of the effects of construction and operation of adepleted uranium hexafluoride conversion facility at the Portsmouth, Ohio,site.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Van Lonkhuyzen, R.

    2005-09-09

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride (DUF{sub 6}) Management Program evaluated alternatives for managing its inventory of DUF{sub 6} and issued the ''Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Alternative Strategies for the Long-Term Management and Use of Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride'' (DUF{sub 6} PEIS) in April 1999 (DOE 1999). The DUF{sub 6} inventory is stored in cylinders at three DOE sites: Paducah, Kentucky; Portsmouth, Ohio; and East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP), near Oak Ridge, Tennessee. In the Record of Decision for the DUF{sub 6} PEIS, DOE stated its decision to promptly convert the DUF{sub 6} inventory to a more stable chemical form. Subsequently, the U.S. Congress passed, and the President signed, the ''2002 Supplemental Appropriations Act for Further Recovery from and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the United States'' (Public Law No. 107-206). This law stipulated in part that, within 30 days of enactment, DOE must award a contract for the design, construction, and operation of a DUF{sub 6} conversion plant at the Department's Paducah, Kentucky, and Portsmouth, Ohio, sites, and for the shipment of DUF{sub 6} cylinders stored at ETTP to the Portsmouth site for conversion. This biological assessment (BA) has been prepared by DOE, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Endangered Species Act of 1974, to evaluate potential impacts to federally listed species from the construction and operation of a conversion facility at the DOE Portsmouth site. The Indiana bat is known to occur in the area of the Portsmouth site and may potentially occur on the site during spring or summer. Evaluations of the Portsmouth site indicated that most of the site was found to have poor summer habitat for the Indiana bat because of the small size, isolation, and insufficient maturity of the few woodlands on the site. Potential summer habitat for the Indiana bat was identified outside the developed area bounded by Perimeter Road, within the corridors along Little Beaver Creek, the Northwest Tributary stream, and a wooded area east of the X-100 facility. However, no Indiana bats were collected during surveys of these areas in 1994 and 1996. Locations A, B, and C do not support suitable habitat for the Indiana bat and would be unlikely to be used by Indiana bats. Indiana bat habitat also does not occur at Proposed Areas 1 and 2. Although Locations A and C contain small wooded areas, the small size and lack of suitable maturity of these areas indicate that they would provide poor habitat for Indiana bats. Trees that may be removed during construction would not be expected to be used for summer roosting by Indiana bats. Disturbance of Indiana bats potentially roosting or foraging in the vicinity of the facility during operations would be very unlikely, and any disturbance would be expected to be negligible. On the basis of these considerations, DOE concludes that the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect the Indiana bat. No critical habitat exists for this species in the action area. Although the timber rattlesnake occurs in the vicinity of the Portsmouth site, it has not been observed on the site. In addition, habitat for the timber rattlesnake is not present on the Portsmouth site. Therefore, DOE concludes that the proposed action would not affect the timber rattlesnake.

  18. Affect of Title III of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments on military facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Trembly, L.A. [Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center, Port Hueneme, CA (United States)

    1997-12-31

    EPA has promulgated a number of NESHAPs in accordance with Title III of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA90) that have affected military installations. This paper provides a survey of NESHAP applicability on military installations and where feasible outlines compliance efforts and quantifies the emission reductions achieved. This paper focuses on NESHAPs promulgated since CAAA90. Specific NESHAPs that will be discussed include Halogenated Solvent Cleaners, Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaners, Chromium Electroplating and Anodizing Tanks, Ship Building and Repair Operations and Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations. Other NESHAPs affecting military installations may be addressed if data are available.

  19. YUCCA MOUNTAIN PROJECT RECOMMENDATION BY THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY REGARDING THE SUITABILITY OF THE YUCCA MOUNTAIN SITE FOR A REPOSITORY UNDER THE NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY ACT OF 1982

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NA

    2002-03-26

    For more than half a century, since nuclear science helped us win World War II and ring in the Atomic Age, scientists have known that !he Nation would need a secure, permanent facility in which to dispose of radioactive wastes. Twenty years ago, when Congress adopted the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA or ''the Act''), it recognized the overwhelming consensus in the scientific community that the best option for such a facility would be a deep underground repository. Fifteen years ago, Congress directed the Secretary of Energy to investigate and recommend to the President whether such a repository could be located safely at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Since then, our country has spent billions of dollars and millions of hours of research endeavoring to answer this question. I have carefully reviewed the product of this study. In my judgment, it constitutes sound science and shows that a safe repository can be sited there. I also believe that compelling national interests counsel in favor of proceeding with this project. Accordingly, consistent with my responsibilities under the NWPA, today I am recommending that Yucca Mountain be developed as the site for an underground repository for spent fuel and other radioactive wastes. The first consideration in my decision was whether the Yucca Mountain site will safeguard the health and safety of the people, in Nevada and across the country, and will be effective in containing at minimum risk the material it is designed to hold. Substantial evidence shows that it will. Yucca Mountain is far and away the most thoroughly researched site of its kind in the world. It is a geologically stable site, in a closed groundwater basin, isolated on thousands of acres of Federal land, and farther from any metropolitan area than the great majority of less secure, temporary nuclear waste storage sites that exist in the country today. This point bears emphasis. We are not confronting a hypothetical problem. We have a staggering amount of radioactive waste in this country--nearly 100,000,000 gallons of high-level nuclear waste and more than 40,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel with more created every day. Our choice is not between, on the one hand, a disposal site with costs and risks held to a minimum, and, on the other, a magic disposal system with no costs or risks at all. Instead, the real choice is between a single secure site, deep under the ground at Yucca Mountain, or making do with what we have now or some variant of it--131 aging surface sites, scattered across 39 states. Every one of those sites was built on the assumption that it would be temporary. As time goes by. every one is closer to the limit of its safe life span. And every one is at least a potential security risk--safe for today, but a question mark in decades to come.

  20. Biological assessment of the effects of construction and operation of a depleted uranium hexafluoride conversion facility at the Paducah, Kentucky, site.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Van Lonkhuyzen, R.

    2005-09-09

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride (DUF{sub 6}) Management Program evaluated alternatives for managing its inventory of DUF{sub 6} and issued the ''Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Alternative Strategies for the Long-Term Management and Use of Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride'' (DUF{sub 6} PEIS) in April 1999 (DOE 1999). The DUF{sub 6} inventory is stored in cylinders at three DOE sites: Paducah, Kentucky; Portsmouth, Ohio; and East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP), near Oak Ridge, Tennessee. In the Record of Decision for the DUF{sub 6} PEIS, DOE stated its decision to promptly convert the DUF6 inventory to a more stable chemical form. Subsequently, the U.S. Congress passed, and the President signed, the ''2002 Supplemental Appropriations Act for Further Recovery from and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the United States'' (Public Law No. 107-206). This law stipulated in part that, within 30 days of enactment, DOE must award a contract for the design, construction, and operation of a DUF{sub 6} conversion plant at the Department's Paducah, Kentucky, and Portsmouth, Ohio, sites, and for the shipment of DUF{sub 6} cylinders stored at ETTP to the Portsmouth site for conversion. This biological assessment (BA) has been prepared by DOE, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act of 1974, to evaluate potential impacts to federally listed species from the construction and operation of a conversion facility at the DOE Paducah site.

  1. INSTALLATION OF BUBBLERS IN THE SAVANNAH RIVER SITED DEFENSE WASTE PROCESSING FACILITY MELTER

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, M.; Iverson, D.

    2010-12-08

    Savannah River Remediation (SRR) LLC assumed the liquid waste contract at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in the summer of 2009. The main contractual agreement was to close 22 High Level Waste (HLW) tanks in eight years. To achieve this aggressive commitment, faster waste processing throughout the SRS liquid waste facilities will be required. Part of the approach to achieve faster waste processing is to increase the canister production rate of the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) from approximately 200 canisters filled with radioactive waste glass per year to 400 canisters per year. To reach this rate for melter throughput, four bubblers were installed in the DWPF Melter in the late summer of 2010. This effort required collaboration between SRR, SRR critical subcontractor EnergySolutions, and Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, including the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL). The tasks included design and fabrication of the bubblers and related equipment, testing of the bubblers for various technical issues, the actual installation of the bubblers and related equipment, and the initial successful operation of the bubblers in the DWPF Melter.

  2. SAVANNAH RIVER SITE'S H-CANYON FACILITY: RECOVERY AND DOWN BLEND URANIUM FOR BENEFICIAL USE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Magoulas, V.

    2013-05-27

    For over fifty years, the H Canyon facility at the Savannah River Site (SRS) has performed remotely operated radiochemical separations of irradiated targets to produce materials for national defense. Although the materials production mission has ended, the facility continues to play an important role in the stabilization and safe disposition of proliferable nuclear materials. As part of the US HEU Disposition Program, SRS has been down blending off-specification (off-spec) HEU to produce LEU since 2003. Off-spec HEU contains fission products not amenable to meeting the American Society for Testing and Material (ASTM) commercial fuel standards prior to purification. This down blended HEU material produced 301 MT of ~5% enriched LEU which has been fabricated into light water reactor fuel being utilized in Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) reactors in Tennessee and Alabama producing economic power. There is still in excess of ~10 MT of off-spec HEU throughout the DOE complex or future foreign and domestic research reactor returns that could be recovered and down blended for beneficial use as either ~5% enriched LEU, or for use in subsequent LEU reactors requiring ~19.75% enriched LEU fuel.

  3. Energy infrastructure of the United States and projected siting needs: Scoping ideas, identifying issues and options. Draft report of the Department of Energy Working Group on Energy Facility Siting to the Secretary

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-12-01

    A Department of Energy (DOE) Working Group on Energy Facility Siting, chaired by the Policy Office with membership from the major program and staff offices of the Department, reviewed data regarding energy service needs, infrastructure requirements, and constraints to siting. The Working Group found that the expeditious siting of energy facilities has important economic, energy, and environmental implications for key Administration priorities.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, Frank G.; Phifer, Mark A.

    2014-01-22

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Flynn, N.C. Bechtel Jacobs

    2008-04-21

    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.

  6. Recovery Act-Funded Study Assesses Contamination at Former Test Site in California

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Workers in a study funded by $38 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to assess radiological contamination have collected more than 600 soil samples and surveyed 120 acres of...

  7. Calendar year 2003 : annual site enviromental report for Tonopah Test Range, Nevada and Kauai Test Facility, Hawaii.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wagner, Katrina; Sanchez, Rebecca V.; Mayeux, Lucie; Koss, Susan I.; Salinas, Stephanie A.

    2004-09-01

    Tonopah Test Range (TTR) in Nevada and Kauai Test Facility (KTF) in Hawaii are government-owned, contractor-operated facilities operated by Sandia Corporation, a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin Corporation. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), through the Sandia Site Office (SSO), in Albuquerque, NM, manages TTR and KTF's operations. Sandia Corporation conducts operations at TTR in support of DOE/NNSA's Weapons Ordnance Program and has operated the site since 1957. Westinghouse Government Services subcontracts to Sandia Corporation in administering most of the environmental programs at TTR. Sandia Corporation operates KTF as a rocket preparation launching and tracking facility. This Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) summarizes data and the compliance status of the environmental protection and monitoring program at TTR and KTF through Calendar Year (CY) 2003. The compliance status of environmental regulations applicable at these sites include state and federal regulations governing air emissions, wastewater effluent, waste management, terrestrial surveillance, and Environmental Restoration (ER) cleanup activities. Sandia Corporation is responsible only for those environmental program activities related to its operations. The DOE/NNSA, Nevada Site Office (NSO) retains responsibility for the cleanup and management of ER TTR sites. Currently, there are no ER Sites at KTF. Environmental monitoring and surveillance programs are required by DOE Order 450.1, Environmental Protection Program (DOE 2003) and DOE Order 231.1 Chg 2., Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting (DOE 1996).

  8. Calendar year 2002 annual site environmental report for Tonopah Test Range, Nevada and Kauai Test Facility, Hawaii.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wagner, Katrina; Sanchez, Rebecca V.; Mayeux, Lucie; Koss, Susan I.; Salinas, Stephanie A.

    2003-09-01

    Tonopah Test Range (TTR) in Nevada and Kauai Test Facility (KTF) in Hawaii are government-owned, contractor-operated facilities operated by Sandia Corporation, a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin Corporation. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), through the Sandia Site Office (SSO), in Albuquerque, NM, oversees TTR and KTF's operations. Sandia Corporation conducts operations at TTR in support of DOE/NNSA's Weapons Ordnance Program and has operated the site since 1957. Westinghouse Government Services subcontracts to Sandia Corporation in administering most of the environmental programs at TTR. Sandia Corporation operates KTF as a rocket preparation launching and tracking facility. This Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) summarizes data and the compliance status of the environmental protection and monitoring program at TTR and KTF through Calendar Year (CY) 2002. The compliance status of environmental regulations applicable at these sites include state and federal regulations governing air emissions, wastewater effluent, waste management, terrestrial surveillance, and Environmental Restoration (ER) cleanup activities. Sandia Corporation is responsible only for those environmental program activities related to its operations. The DOE/NNSA, Nevada Site Office (NSO) retains responsibility for the cleanup and management of ER TTR sites. Currently, there are no ER Sites at KTF. Environmental monitoring and surveillance programs are required by DOE Order 5400.1, General Environmental Protection Program (DOE 1990) and DOE Order 231.1, Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting (DOE 1996).

  9. Calendar year 2007 annual site environmental report for Tonopah Test Range, Nevada and Kauai Test Facility, Hawaii,

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Agogino, Karen; Sanchez, Rebecca

    2008-09-30

    Tonopah Test Range (TTR) in Nevada and Kauai Test Facility (KTF) in Hawaii are government-owned, contractor-operated facilities operated by Sandia Corporation (Sandia), a wholly owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin Corporation. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)/National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), through the Sandia Site Offi ce (SSO), in Albuquerque, NM, administers the contract and oversees contractor operations at TTR and KTF. Sandia manages and conducts operations at TTR in support of the DOE/NNSA’s Weapons Ordnance Program and has operated the site since 1957. Washington Group International subcontracts to Sandia in administering most of the environmental programs at TTR. Sandia operates KTF as a rocket preparation launching and tracking facility. This Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) summarizes data and the compliance status of the environmental protection and monitoring program at TTR and KTF through Calendar Year (CY) 2007. The compliance status of environmental regulations applicable at these sites include state and federal regulations governing air emissions, wastewater effluent, waste management, terrestrial surveillance, and Environmental Restoration (ER) cleanup activities. Sandia is responsible only for those environmental program activities related to its operations. The DOE/NNSA/Nevada Site Offi ce (NSO) retains responsibility for the cleanup and management of ER TTR sites. Currently, there are no ER Sites at KTF. Environmental monitoring and surveillance programs are required by DOE Order 450.1, Environmental Protection Program (DOE 2007a) and DOE Manual 231.1-1A, Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting Manual (DOE 2007).

  10. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act industrial site environmental restoration site characterization plan. Area 6 Steam Cleaning Effluent Ponds

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-02-01

    This plan presents the strategy for the characterization of the Area 6 South and North Steam Cleaning Effluent Ponds (SCEPs) at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) to be conducted for the US Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV), Environmental Restoration Division (ERD). The purposes of the planned activities are to: obtain sufficient, sample analytical data from which further assessment, remediation, and/or closure strategies may be developed for the site; obtain sufficient, sample analytical data for management of investigation-derived waste (IDW). The scope of the characterization may include excavation, drilling, and sampling of soil in and around both ponds; sampling of the excavated material; in situ sampling of the soil at the bottom and on the sides of the excavations as well as within subsurface borings; and conducting sample analysis for both characterization and waste management purposes. Contaminants of concern include RCRA-regulated VOCs and metals.

  11. Wetland assessment of the effects of construction and operation of a depleteduranium hexafluoride conversion facility at the Portsmouth, Ohio, site.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Van Lonkhuyzen, R.

    2005-09-09

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride (DUF{sub 6}) Management Program evaluated alternatives for managing its inventory of DUF{sub 6} and issued the ''Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Alternative Strategies for the Long-Term Management and Use of Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride'' (DUF{sub 6} PEIS) in April 1999 (DOE 1999). The DUF{sub 6} inventory is stored in cylinders at three DOE sites: Paducah, Kentucky; Portsmouth, Ohio; and East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP), near Oak Ridge, Tennessee. In the Record of Decision for the DUF{sub 6} PEIS, DOE stated its decision to promptly convert the DUF{sub 6} inventory to a more stable chemical form. Subsequently, the U.S. Congress passed, and the President signed, the ''2002 Supplemental Appropriations Act for Further Recovery from and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the United States'' (Public Law No. 107-206). This law stipulated in part that, within 30 days of enactment, DOE must award a contract for the design, construction, and operation of a DUF{sub 6} conversion plant at the Department's Paducah, Kentucky, and Portsmouth, Ohio, sites, and for the shipment of DUF{sub 6} cylinders stored at ETTP to the Portsmouth site for conversion. This wetland assessment has been prepared by DOE, pursuant to Executive Order 11990 (''Protection of Wetlands'') and DOE regulations for implementing this Executive Order as set forth in Title 10, Part 1022, of the ''Code of Federal Regulations'' (10 CFR Part 1022 [Compliance with Floodplain and Wetland Environmental Review Requirements]), to evaluate potential impacts to wetlands from the construction and operation of a conversion facility at the DOE Portsmouth site. Approximately 0.02 acre (0.009 ha) of a 0.08-acre (0.03-ha) palustrine emergent wetland would likely be eliminated by direct placement of fill material during facility construction at Location A. Portions of this wetland that are not filled may be indirectly affected by an altered hydrologic regime because of the proximity of construction, possibly resulting in a decreased frequency or duration of inundation or soil saturation, and potential loss of hydrology necessary to sustain wetland conditions. Construction at Locations B or C would not result in direct impacts to wetlands. However, the hydrologic characteristics of nearby wetlands could be indirectly affected by adjacent construction. Executive Order 11990, ''Protection of Wetlands'', requires federal agencies to minimize the destruction, loss, or degradation of wetlands, and to preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial uses of wetlands. DOE regulations for implementing Executive Order 11990 are set forth in 10 CFR Part 1022. The impacts at Location A may potentially be avoided by an alternative routing of the entrance road, or mitigation may be developed in coordination with the appropriate regulatory agencies. Unavoidable impacts to wetlands that are within the jurisdiction of the USACE may require a CWA Section 404 Permit, which would trigger the requirement for a CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the State of Ohio. Unavoidable impacts to isolated wetlands may require an Isolated Wetlands Permit from the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. A mitigation plan may be required prior to the initiation of construction. Cumulative impacts to wetlands are anticipated to be negligible to minor for the proposed action, in conjunction with the effects of existing conditions and other activities. Habitat disturbance would involve settings commonly found in this part of Ohio, which in many cases involve previously disturbed habitats.

  12. Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 116: Area 25 Test Cell C Facility, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2011-09-29

    This Closure Report (CR) presents information supporting closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 116, Area 25 Test Cell C Facility. This CR complies with the requirements of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) that was agreed to by the State of Nevada; the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Management; the U.S. Department of Defense; and DOE, Legacy Management (FFACO, 1996 [as amended March 2010]). CAU 116 consists of the following two Corrective Action Sites (CASs), located in Area 25 of the Nevada National Security Site: (1) CAS 25-23-20, Nuclear Furnace Piping and (2) CAS 25-41-05, Test Cell C Facility. CAS 25-41-05 consisted of Building 3210 and the attached concrete shield wall. CAS 25-23-20 consisted of the nuclear furnace piping and tanks. Closure activities began in January 2007 and were completed in August 2011. Activities were conducted according to Revision 1 of the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan for CAU 116 (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office [NNSA/NSO], 2008). This CR provides documentation supporting the completed corrective actions and provides data confirming that closure objectives for CAU 116 were met. Site characterization data and process knowledge indicated that surface areas were radiologically contaminated above release limits and that regulated and/or hazardous wastes were present in the facility.

  13. Siting algae cultivation facilities for biofuel production in the United States: trade-offs between growth rate, site constructability, water availability, and infrastructure

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Venteris, Erik R.; McBride, Robert; Coleman, Andre M.; Skaggs, Richard; Wigmosta, Mark S.

    2014-02-21

    Locating sites for new algae cultivation facilities is a complex task. The climate must support high growth rates, and cultivation ponds require appropriate land and water resources as well as key utility and transportation infrastructure. We employ our spatiotemporal Biomass Assessment Tool (BAT) to select promising locations based on the open-pond cultivation of Arthrospira sp. and a strain of the order Desmidiales. 64,000 potential sites across the southern United States were evaluated. We progressively apply a range of screening criteria and track their impact on the number of selected sites, geographic location, and biomass productivity. Both strains demonstrate maximum productivity along the Gulf of Mexico coast, with the highest values on the Florida peninsula. In contrast, sites meeting all selection criteria for Arthrospira were located along the southern coast of Texas and for Desmidiales were located in Louisiana and southern Arkansas. Site selection was driven mainly by the lack of oil pipeline access in Florida and elevated groundwater salinity in southern Texas. The requirement for low salinity freshwater (<400 mg L-1) constrained Desmidiales locations; siting flexibility is greater for salt-tolerant species such as Arthrospira. Combined siting factors can result in significant departures from regions of maximum productivity but are within the expected range of site-specific process improvements.

  14. Summary environmental site assessment report for the U.S. Department of Energy Oxnard Facility, Oxnard, California

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-02-01

    This report summarizes the investigations conducted by Rust Geotech at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Oxnard facility, 1235 East Wooley Road, Oxnard, California. These investigations were designed to locate, identify, and characterize any regulated contaminated media on the site. The effort included site visits; research of ownership, historical uses of the Oxnard facility and adjacent properties, incidences of and investigations for contaminants on adjacent properties, and the physical setting of the site; sampling and analysis; and reporting. These investigations identified two friable asbestos gaskets on the site, which were removed, and nonfriable asbestos, which will be managed through the implementation of an asbestos management plan. The California primary drinking water standards were exceeded for aluminum on two groundwater samples and for lead in one sample collected from the shallow aquifer underlying the site; remediation of the groundwater in this aquifer is not warranted because it is not used. Treated water is available from a municipal water system. Three sludge samples indicated elevated heavy metals concentrations; the sludge must be handled as a hazardous waste if disposed. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were detected at concentrations below remediation criteria in facility soils at two locations. In accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and State of California guidance, remediation of the PCBs is not required. No other hazardous substances were detected in concentrations exceeding regulatory limits.

  15. Hanford Site Near-Facility Environmental Monitoring Data Report for Calendar Year 2008

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Perkins, Craig J.; Dorsey, Michael C.; Mckinney, Stephen M.; Wilde, Justin W.; Poston, Ted M.

    2009-09-15

    Near-facility environmental monitoring is defined as monitoring near facilities that have the potential to discharge or have discharged, stored, or disposed of radioactive or hazardous materials. Monitoring locations are associated with nuclear facilities such as the Plutonium Finishing Plant, Canister Storage Building, and the K Basins; inactive nuclear facilities such as N Reactor and the Plutonium-Uranium Extraction (PUREX) Facility; and waste storage or disposal facilities such as burial grounds, cribs, ditches, ponds, tank farms, and trenches. Much of the monitoring consists of collecting and analyzing environmental samples and methodically surveying areas near facilities. The program is also designed to evaluate acquired analytical data, determine the effectiveness of facility effluent monitoring and controls, assess the adequacy of containment at waste disposal units, and detect and monitor unusual conditions.

  16. Hanford Site Near-Facility Environmental Monitoring Data Report for Calendar Year 2007- Appendix 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Perkins, Craig J.; Dorsey, Michael; Mckinney, Stephen M.; Wilde, Justin W.; Duncan, Joanne P.

    2008-10-13

    Near-facility environmental monitoring is defined as monitoring near facilities that have the potential to discharge or have discharged, stored, or disposed of radioactive or hazardous materials. Monitoring locations are associated with nuclear facilities such as the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP), Canister Storage Building (CSB), and the K Basins; inactive nuclear facilities such as N Reactor and the Plutonium-Uranium Extraction (PUREX) Facility; and waste storage or disposal facilities such as burial grounds, cribs, ditches, ponds, tank farms, and trenches. Much of the monitoring consists of collecting and analyzing environmental samples and methodically surveying areas near facilities. The program is also designed to evaluate acquired analytical data, determine the effectiveness of facility effluent monitoring and controls, assess the adequacy of containment at waste disposal units, and detect and monitor unusual conditions.

  17. Audit Report on "Waste Processing and Recovery Act Acceleration Efforts for Contact-Handled Transuranic Waste at the Hanford Site"

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None

    2010-05-01

    The Department of Energy's Office of Environmental Management's (EM), Richland Operations Office (Richland), is responsible for disposing of the Hanford Site's (Hanford) transuranic (TRU) waste, including nearly 12,000 cubic meters of radioactive contact-handled TRU wastes. Prior to disposing of this waste at the Department's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), Richland must certify that it meets WIPP's waste acceptance criteria. To be certified, the waste must be characterized, screened for prohibited items, treated (if necessary) and placed into a satisfactory disposal container. In a February 2008 amendment to an existing Record of Decision (Decision), the Department announced its plan to ship up to 8,764 cubic meters of contact-handled TRU waste from Hanford and other waste generator sites to the Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project (AMWTP) at Idaho's National Laboratory (INL) for processing and certification prior to disposal at WIPP. The Department decided to maximize the use of the AMWTP's automated waste processing capabilities to compact and, thereby, reduce the volume of contact-handled TRU waste. Compaction reduces the number of shipments and permits WIPP to more efficiently use its limited TRU waste disposal capacity. The Decision noted that the use of AMWTP would avoid the time and expense of establishing a processing capability at other sites. In May 2009, EM allocated $229 million of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) funds to support Hanford's Solid Waste Program, including Hanford's contact-handled TRU waste. Besides providing jobs, these funds were intended to accelerate cleanup in the short term. We initiated this audit to determine whether the Department was effectively using Recovery Act funds to accelerate processing of Hanford's contact-handled TRU waste. Relying on the availability of Recovery Act funds, the Department changed course and approved an alternative plan that could increase costs by about $25 million by processing Hanford TRU-waste on-site rather than at AMWTP. Further, under the newly adopted alternative approach, the Department would fail to achieve the previously anticipated reductions in volume associated with the use of existing AMWTP waste compaction capabilities.

  18. CHARACTERIZING DOE HANFORD SITE WASTE ENCAPSULATION STORAGE FACILITY CELLS USING RADBALL

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Farfan, E.; Coleman, R.

    2011-03-31

    RadBall{trademark} is a novel technology that can locate and quantify unknown radioactive hazards within contaminated areas, hot cells, and gloveboxes. The device consists of a colander-like outer tungsten collimator that houses a radiation-sensitive polymer semi-sphere. The collimator has a number of small holes with tungsten inserts; as a result, specific areas of the polymer are exposed to radiation becoming increasingly more opaque in proportion to the absorbed dose. The polymer semi-sphere is imaged in an optical computed tomography scanner that produces a high resolution 3D map of optical attenuation coefficients. A subsequent analysis of the optical attenuation data using a reverse ray tracing or backprojection technique provides information on the spatial distribution of gamma-ray sources in a given area forming a 3D characterization of the area of interest. RadBall{trademark} was originally designed for dry deployments and several tests, completed at Savannah River National Laboratory and Oak Ridge National Laboratory, substantiate its modeled capabilities. This study involves the investigation of the RadBall{trademark} technology during four submerged deployments in two water filled cells at the DOE Hanford Site's Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility.

  19. Surplus Facilities Management Program. Post-remedial-action survey report for SNAP-8 Experimental Reactor Facility, Building 010 site, Santa Susana Field Laboratories, Rockwell International, Ventura County, California

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wynveen, R.A.; Smith, W.H.; Sholeen, C.M.; Mayes, C.B.; Justus, A.L.; Flynn, K.F.

    1984-04-01

    Based on the results of the radiological assessment, the Argonne National Laboratory Radiological Survey Group arrived at the following conclusions: (1) soil contaminated with the radionuclides /sup 60/Co and /sup 152/Eu of undetermined origin was detected in the southwest quadrant of the Building 010 site. /sup 60/Co was also detected in one environmental sample taken from an area northwest of the site and in a borehole sample taken from the area that previously held the radioactive gas hold-up tanks. Uranium was detected in soil from a hole in the center of the building site and in a second hole southwest of the building site. In all cases, the radionuclide levels encountered in the soil were well below the criteria set by DOE for this site; and (2) the direct instrument readings at the surface of the site were probably the result of natural radiation (terrestrial and celestial), as well as shine from the material being stored at the nearby RMDF facility. There was no evidence that the contaminated soil under the asphalt pad contributed detectable levels to the total background readings.

  20. Post-Closure Report for Closed Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Corrective Action Units, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, for Fiscal Year 2014

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Silvas, Alissa J.

    2015-01-14

    This report serves as the combined annual report for post-closure activities for the following closed Corrective Action Units (CAUs): • CAU 90, Area 2 Bitcutter Containment • CAU 91, Area 3 U-3fi Injection Well • CAU 92, Area 6 Decon Pond Facility • CAU 110, Area 3 WMD U-3ax/bl Crater • CAU 111, Area 5 WMD Retired Mixed Waste Pits • CAU 112, Area 23 Hazardous Waste Trenches This report covers fiscal year 2014 (October 2013–September 2014). The post-closure requirements for these sites are described in Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Permit Number NEV HW0101 and summarized in each CAU-specific section in Section 1.0 of this report. The results of the inspections, a summary of maintenance activities, and an evaluation of monitoring data are presented in this report. Site inspections are conducted semiannually at CAUs 90 and 91 and quarterly at CAUs 92, 110, 111, and 112. Additional inspections are conducted at CAU 92 if precipitation occurs in excess of 0.50 inches (in.) in a 24-hour period and at CAU 111 if precipitation occurs in excess of 1.0 in. in a 24-hour period. Inspections include an evaluation of the condition of the units, including covers, fences, signs, gates, and locks. In addition to visual inspections, soil moisture monitoring, vegetation evaluations, and subsidence surveys are conducted at CAU 110. At CAU 111, soil moisture monitoring, vegetation evaluations, subsidence surveys, direct radiation monitoring, air monitoring, radon flux monitoring, and groundwater monitoring are conducted. The results of the vegetation surveys and an analysis of the soil moisture monitoring data at CAU 110 are presented in this report. Results of additional monitoring at CAU 111 are documented annually in the Nevada National Security Site Waste Management Monitoring Report Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites and in the Nevada National Security Site Data Report: Groundwater Monitoring Program Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, which will be prepared in approximately June 2015. All required inspections, maintenance, and monitoring were conducted in accordance with the post-closure requirements of the permit. It is recommended to continue inspections and monitoring as scheduled.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1997-10-01

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

  2. Recovery Act funding accelerates cleanup of Idaho Site, Creates jobs in

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantityBonneville Power Administration wouldMassR&D100 Winners * Impacts onReal-TimeRecord-SettingAct Workforce

  3. REGULATION AND SYSTEM INTERDEPENDENCE: EFFECTS ON THE SITING OF CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL ENERGY FACILITIES

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Kooser, J.C.

    2013-01-01

    Dilemma: California's 20 Year Power Plant Siting Plan, (siting process for power plants in California" Moreover, thedistribution of power plants in California was not likely to

  4. Removal site evaluation report on the bulk shielding facility at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-09-01

    This removal site evaluation report on the Bulk Shielding Facility (BSF) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory was prepared to provide the Environmental Restoration Program with information necessary to evaluate whether hazardous and/or radiological contaminants in and around BSF buildings pose a substantial risk to human health or the environment (i.e., a high probability of adverse effects) and whether remedial site evaluations or removal actions are, therefore, required. A removal site evaluation was conducted at nine areas associated with the BSF. The scope of each evaluation included (1) a search for, and review of, readily available historical records regarding operations and use of the facility (including hazardous substance usage and existing contamination); (2) interviews with facility personnel concerning current and past practices; and (3) a brief walk-through to visually inspect the facility and identify existing hazard areas requiring maintenance actions or remedial evaluation. The results of the removal site evaluation indicate that no substantial risks exist from contaminants present because adequate efforts are being made to contain and control existing contamination and hazardous substances and to protect human health and the environment. At Building 3004, deteriorated and peeling exterior paint has a direct pathway to the storm water drainage system and can potentially impact local surface water during periods of storm water runoff. The paint is assumed to be lead based, thus posing a potential problem. The paint should be sampled and analyzed to determine its lead content and to assess whether a hazard exists. If so, a maintenance action will be necessary to prevent further deterioration and dislodging of the paint. In addition, if the paint contains lead, then a remedial site evaluation should be conducted to determine whether lead from fallen chips has impacted soils in the immediate area of the building.

  5. Safety analysis--200 Area Savannah River Site: Separations Area operations Building 211-H Outside Facilities. Supplement 11, Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-01-01

    The H-Area Outside Facilities are located in the 200-H Separations Area and are comprised of a number of processes, utilities, and services that support the separations function. Included are enriched uranium loadout, bulk chemical storage, water handling, acid recovery, general purpose evaporation, and segregated solvent facilities. In addition, services for water, electricity, and steam are provided. This Safety Analysis Report (SAR) documents an analysis of the H-Area Outside Facilities and is one of a series of documents for the Separations Area as specified in the SR Implementation Plan for DOE order 5481.1A. The primary purpose of the analysis was to demonstrate that the facility can be operated without undue risk to onsite or offsite populations, to the environment, and to operating personnel. In this report, risks are defined as the expected frequencies of accidents, multiplied by the resulting radiological consequences in person-rem. Following the summary description of facility and operations is the site evaluation including the unique features of the H-Area Outside Facilities. The facility and process design are described in Chapter 3.0 and a description of operations and their impact is given in Chapter 4.0. The accident analysis in Chapter 5.0 is followed by a list of safety related structures and systems (Chapter 6.0) and a description of the Quality Assurance program (Chapter 7.0). The accident analysis in this report focuses on estimating the risk from accidents as a result of operation of the facilities. The operations were evaluated on the basis of three considerations: potential radiological hazards, potential chemical toxicity hazards, and potential conditions uniquely different from normal industrial practice.

  6. Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 254: Area 25, R-MAD Decontamination Facility, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    G. N. Doyle

    2002-02-01

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 254 is located in Area 25 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS), approximately 100 kilometers (km) (62 miles) northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. The site is located within the Reactor Maintenance, Assembly and Disassembly (R-MAD) compound and consists of Building 3126, two outdoor decontamination pads, and surrounding areas within an existing fenced area measuring approximately 50 x 37 meters (160 x 120 feet). The site was used from the early 1960s to the early 1970s as part of the Nuclear Rocket Development Station program to decontaminate test-car hardware and tooling. The site was reactivated in the early 1980s to decontaminate a radiologically contaminated military tank. This Closure Report (CR) describes the closure activities performed to allow un-restricted release of the R-MAD Decontamination Facility.

  7. REGULATION AND SYSTEM INTERDEPENDENCE: EFFECTS ON THE SITING OF CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL ENERGY FACILITIES

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Kooser, J.C.

    2013-01-01

    FACILITY LOCATION THEORY Electrical utilities, even ifTheory Public Versus Private Ownership of Electricallocation theory pertains to the electrical utility problem

  8. The 1993 baseline biological studies and proposed monitoring plan for the Device Assembly Facility at the Nevada Test Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Woodward, B.D.; Hunter, R.B.; Greger, P.D.; Saethre, M.B.

    1995-02-01

    This report contains baseline data and recommendations for future monitoring of plants and animals near the new Device Assembly Facility (DAF) on the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The facility is a large structure designed for safely assembling nuclear weapons. Baseline data was collected in 1993, prior to the scheduled beginning of DAF operations in early 1995. Studies were not performed prior to construction and part of the task of monitoring operational effects will be to distinguish those effects from the extensive disturbance effects resulting from construction. Baseline information on species abundances and distributions was collected on ephemeral and perennial plants, mammals, reptiles, and birds in the desert ecosystems within three kilometers (km) of the DAF. Particular attention was paid to effects of selected disturbances, such as the paved road, sewage pond, and the flood-control dike, associated with the facility. Radiological monitoring of areas surrounding the DAF is not included in this report.

  9. Environmental assessment for the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the Waste Segregation Facility at the Savannah River Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-01-01

    This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared by the Department of Energy (DOE) to assess the potential environmental impacts associated with the construction, operation and decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) of the Waste Segregation Facility (WSF) for the sorting, shredding, and compaction of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) at the Savannah River Site (SRS) located near Aiken, South Carolina. The LLW to be processed consists of two waste streams: legacy waste which is currently stored in E-Area Vaults of SRS and new waste generated from continuing operations. The proposed action is to construct, operate, and D&D a facility to process low-activity job-control and equipment waste for volume reduction. The LLW would be processed to make more efficient use of low-level waste disposal capacity (E-Area Vaults) or to meet the waste acceptance criteria for treatment at the Consolidated Incineration Facility (CIF) at SRS.

  10. Analysis of recently enacted national energy legislation and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 as related to Decontamination and Decommissioning at Federal, State, and private facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-09-01

    This report is a summary of an analysis of recently enacted national energy legislation and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 as related to Decontamination and Decommissioning (D&D) at Federal, State and private facilities. It is submitted pursuant to Appendix A of subcontract 9-X62-0785E-1, dated July 27, 1992, between the Regents of the University of California and Van Ness, Feldman & Curtis.

  11. Implementation of Treatment Systems for Low and Intermediate Radioactive Waste at Site Radwaste Treatment Facility (SRTF), PR China - 12556

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lohmann, Peter; Nasarek, Ralph; Aign, Joerg

    2012-07-01

    The AP1000 reactors being built in the People's Republic of China require a waste treatment facility to process the low and intermediate radioactive waste produced by these nuclear power stations. Westinghouse Electric Germany GmbH was successful in being awarded a contract as to the planning, delivery and commissioning of such a waste treatment facility. The Site Radwaste Treatment Facility (SRTF) is a waste treatment facility that can meet the AP1000 requirements and it will become operational in the near future. The SRTF is situated at the location of Sanmen, People's Republic of China, next to one of the AP1000 and is an adherent building to the AP1000 comprising different waste treatment processes for radioactive spent filter cartridges, ion-exchange resins and radioactive liquid and solid waste. The final product of the SRTF-treatment is a 200 l drum with cemented waste or grouted waste packages for storage in a local storage facility. The systems used in the SRTF are developed for these special requirements, based on experience from similar systems in the German nuclear industry. The main waste treatment systems in the SRTF are: - Filter Cartridge Processing System (FCS); - HVAC-Filter and Solid Waste Treatment Systems (HVS); - Chemical Liquid Treatment Systems (CTS); - Spent Resin Processing Systems (RES); - Mobile Treatment System (MBS). (authors)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Idaho Cleanup Project

    2006-06-01

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, F.; Phifer, M.

    2014-04-10

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

  14. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography, Volume 13: Part 1, Main text. Environmental Restoration Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Goins, L.F.; Webb, J.R.; Cravens, C.D.; Mallory, P.K.

    1992-09-01

    This publication contains 1035 abstracted references on environmental restoration, nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions. These citations constitute the thirteenth in a series of reports prepared annually for the US Department of Energy (DOE) Environmental Restoration programs. Citations to foreign and domestic literature of all types. There are 13 major sections of the publication, including: (1) DOE Decontamination and Decommissioning Program; (2) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning; (3) DOE Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program; (4) DOE Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project; (5) Uranium Mill Tailings Management; (6) DOE Environmental Restoration Program; (7) DOE Site-Specific Remedial Actions; (8) Contaminated Site Restoration; (9) Remediation of Contaminated Soil and Groundwater; (10) Environmental Data Measurements, Management, and Evaluation; (11) Remedial Action Assessment and Decision-Making; (12) Technology Development and Evaluation; and (13) Environmental and Waste Management Issues. Bibliographic references are arranged in nine subject categories by geographic location and then alphabetically by first author, corporate affiliation, or publication title. Indexes are provided for author, corporate affiliation, title word, publication description, geographic location, subject category, and key word.

  15. Evaluation of the effects of underground water usage and spillage in the Exploratory Studies Facility; Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dunn, E.; Sobolik, S.R.

    1993-12-01

    The Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project is studying Yucca Mountain in southwestern Nevada as a potential site for a high-level radioactive waste repository. Analyses reported herein were performed to support the design of site characterization activities so that these activities will have a minimal impact on the ability of the site to isolate waste and a minimal impact on underground tests performed as part of the characterization process. These analyses examine the effect of water to be used in the underground construction and testing activities for the Exploratory Studies Facility on in situ conditions. Underground activities and events where water will be used include construction, expected but unplanned spills, and fire protection. The models used predict that, if the current requirements in the Exploratory Studies Facility Design Requirements are observed, water that is imbibed into the tunnel wall rock in the Topopah Springs welded tuff can be removed over the preclosure time period by routine or corrective ventilation, and also that water imbibed into the Paintbrush Tuff nonwelded tuff will not reach the potential waste storage area.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-08-01

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

  17. Niagara falls storage site: Annual site environmental report, Lewiston, New York, Calendar Year 1988: Surplus Facilities Management Program (SFMP)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1989-04-01

    The monitoring program at the Niagara Falls Storage Site (NFSS) measures radon concentrations in air; external gamma radiation levels; and uranium and radium concentrations in surface water, groundwater, and sediment. To verify that the site is in compliance with the DOE radiation protection standard and to assess its potential effect on public health, the radiation dose was calculated for a hypothetical maximally exposed individual. Based on the conservative scenario described in this report, this hypothetical individual receives an annual external exposure approximately equivalent to 6 percent of the DOE radiation protection standard of 100 mrem/yr. This exposure is less than a person receives during two round-trip flights from New York to Los Angeles (because of the greater amounts of cosmic radiation at higher altitudes). The cumulative dose to the population within an 80-km (50-mi) radius of the NFSS that results from radioactive materials present at the site is indistinguishable from the dose that the same population receives from naturally occurring radioactive sources. Results of the 1988 monitoring show that the NFSS is in compliance with applicable DOE radiation protection standards. 17 refs., 31 figs., 20 tabs.

  18. Weldon Spring Site Remedial Action Project Federal Facilities Agreement: Quarterly environmental data summary for third quarter 1998

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1998-11-06

    In support of the Weldon Spring Site Remedial Action Project Federal Facilities Agreement, a copy of the Quarterly Environmental Data Summary (QEDS) for the third quarter of 1998 is enclosed. The data presented in this letter and attachment constitute the QEDS. The data, except for air monitoring data and site KPA generated data (uranium analyses), were received from the contract laboratories, verified by the Weldon Spring Site verification group, and merged into the database during the third quarter of 1998. Air monitoring data presented are the most recent complete sets of quarterly data. Significant data, defined as data values that have exceeded defined above normal Level 2 values, are discussed in this letter for Environmental Monitoring Plan (EMP) generated data only. Above normal Level 2 values are based, in ES and H procedures, on historical high values, DOE Derived Concentration Guides (DCGs), NPDES limits, and other guidelines. The procedures also establish actions to be taken in the event that above normal data occur.

  19. Closing the Gap: Using the Clean Air Act to Control Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Energy Facilities

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Hagan, Colin R.

    2012-01-01

    See generally, American Clean Energy and Security Act ofoptions related to enacting a "clean energy stan- dard." Theit should define "clean energy," but it is unclear whether

  20. Manhattan Project buildings and facilities at the Hanford Site: A construction history

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gerber, M.S.

    1993-09-01

    This document thoroughly examines the role that the Hanford Engineer Works played in the Manhattan project. The historical aspects of the buildings and facilities are characterized. An in depth look at the facilities, including their functions, methods of fabrication and appearance is given for the 100 AREAS, 200 AREAS, 300 AREAS, 500, 800 and 900 AREAS, 600 AREA, 700 AREA, 1100 AREA and temporary construction structures.

  1. Tritium monitoring in groundwater and evaluation of model predictions for the Hanford Site 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnett, D.B.; Bergeron, M.P.; Cole, C.R.; Freshley, M.D.; Wurstner, S.K.

    1997-08-01

    The Effluent Treatment Facility (ETF) disposal site, also known as the State-Approved Land Disposal Site (SALDS), receives treated effluent containing tritium, which is allowed to infiltrate through the soil column to the water table. Tritium was first detected in groundwater monitoring wells around the facility in July 1996. The SALDS groundwater monitoring plan requires revision of a predictive groundwater model and reevaluation of the monitoring well network one year from the first detection of tritium in groundwater. This document is written primarily to satisfy these requirements and to report on analytical results for tritium in the SALDS groundwater monitoring network through April 1997. The document also recommends an approach to continued groundwater monitoring for tritium at the SALDS. Comparison of numerical groundwater models applied over the last several years indicate that earlier predictions, which show tritium from the SALDS approaching the Columbia River, were too simplified or overly robust in source assumptions. The most recent modeling indicates that concentrations of tritium above 500 pCi/L will extend, at most, no further than {approximately}1.5 km from the facility, using the most reasonable projections of ETF operation. This extent encompasses only the wells in the current SALDS tritium-tracking network.

  2. Listing of Defense Nuclear Facilities

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

    Plant Mound Facility Fernald Environmental Management Project Site Pantex Plant Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site, including the Oxnard Facility Savannah River Site Los...

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    in the vadose zone). These alternatives to conventional ground water monitoring and assessment could persuade the regulatory agency to allow siting in a brownfield area. USACOE...

  4. Decommissioning and Dismantling of Liquid Waste Storage and Liquid Waste Treatment Facility from Paldiski Nuclear Site, Estonia

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Varvas, M. [AS ALARA, Leetse tee 21, Paldiski, 76806 (Estonia); Putnik, H. [Delegation of the European Commission to Russia, Kadashevskaja nab. 14/1 119017 Moscow (Russian Federation); Nirvin, B.; Pettersson, S. [SKB, Box 5864, Stockholm, SE-102 40 (Sweden); Johnsson, B. [Studsvik RadWaste, Nykoping, SE-611 82 (Sweden)

    2006-07-01

    The Paldiski Nuclear Facility in Estonia, with two nuclear reactors was owned by the Soviet Navy and was used for training the navy personnel to operate submarine nuclear reactors. After collapse of Soviet Union the Facility was shut down and handed over to the Estonian government in 1995. In co-operation with the Paldiski International Expert Reference Group (PIERG) decommission strategy was worked out and started to implement. Conditioning of solid and liquid operational waste and dismantling of contaminated installations and buildings were among the key issues of the Strategy. Most of the liquid waste volume, remained at the Facility, was processed in the frames of an Estonian-Finnish co-operation project using a mobile wastewater purification unit NURES (IVO International OY) and water was discharged prior to the site take-over. In 1999-2002 ca 120 m{sup 3} of semi-liquid tank sediments (a mixture of ion exchange resins, sand filters, evaporator and flocculation slurry), remained after treatment of liquid waste were solidified in steel containers and stored into interim storage. The project was carried out under the Swedish - Estonian co-operation program on radiation protection and nuclear safety. Contaminated installations in buildings, used for treatment and storage of liquid waste (Liquid Waste Treatment Facility and Liquid Waste Storage) were then dismantled and the buildings demolished in 2001-2004. (authors)

  5. Referenced-site environmental document for a Monitored Retrievable Storage facility: backup waste management option for handling 1800 MTU per year

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Silviera, D.J.; Aaberg, R.L.; Cushing, C.E.; Marshall, A.; Scott, M.J.; Sewart, G.H.; Strenge, D.L.

    1985-06-01

    This environmental document includes a discussion of the purpose of a monitored retrievable storage facility, a description of two facility design concepts (sealed storage cask and field drywell), a description of three reference sites (arid, warm-wet, and cold-wet), and a discussion and comparison of the impacts associated with each of the six site/concept combinations. This analysis is based on a 15,000-MTU storage capacity and a throughput rate of up to 1800 MTU per year.

  6. Hanford Site

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

    Subcontract for characterization work issued Subcontract for characterization work issued Recovery Act Projects Underway Recovery Act Projects Underway Hanford Site New Hires...

  7. Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 117: Area 26 Pluto Disassembly Facility, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mark Burmeister

    2009-06-01

    This Closure Report (CR) presents information supporting the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 117: Area 26 Pluto Disassembly Facility, Nevada Test Site, Nevada. This CR complies with the requirements of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order that was agreed to by the State of Nevada; U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Management; U.S. Department of Defense; and DOE, Legacy Management. Corrective Action Unit 117 comprises Corrective Action Site (CAS) 26-41-01, Pluto Disassembly Facility, located in Area 26 of the Nevada Test Site. The purpose of this CR is to provide documentation supporting the completed corrective actions and provide data confirming that the closure objectives for CAU 117 were met. To achieve this, the following actions were performed: • Review the current site conditions, including the concentration and extent of contamination. • Implement any corrective actions necessary to protect human health and the environment. • Properly dispose of corrective action and investigation wastes. • Document Notice of Completion and closure of CAU 117 issued by the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection. From May 2008 through February 2009, closure activities were performed as set forth in the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan for Corrective Action Unit 117, Area 26 Pluto Disassembly Facility, Nevada Test Site, Nevada. The purpose of the activities as defined during the data quality objectives process were: • Determine whether contaminants of concern (COCs) are present. • If COCs are present, determine their nature and extent, implement appropriate corrective actions, and properly dispose of wastes. Analytes detected during the closure activities were evaluated against final action levels to determine COCs for CAU 117. Assessment of the data generated from closure activities indicated that the final action levels were exceeded for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) reported as total Aroclor and radium-226. A corrective action was implemented to remove approximately 50 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated soil, approximately 1 cubic foot of radium-226 contaminated soil (and scabbled asphalt), and a high-efficiency particulate air filter that was determined to meet the criteria of a potential source material (PSM). Electrical and lighting components (i.e., PCB-containing ballasts and capacitors) and other materials (e.g., mercury-containing thermostats and switches, lead plugs and bricks) assumed to be PSM were also removed from Building 2201, as practical, without the need for sampling. Because the COC contamination and PSMs have been removed, clean closure of CAS 26-41-01 is recommended, and no use restrictions are required to be placed on this CAU. No further action is necessary because no other contaminants of potential concern were found above preliminary action levels. The physical end state for Building 2201 is expected to be eventual demolition to slab. The DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office provides the following recommendations: • Clean closure is the recommended corrective action for CAS 26-41-01 in CAU 117. • A Notice of Completion to the DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office is requested from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for closure of CAU 117. • Corrective Action Unit 117 should be moved from Appendix III to Appendix IV of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order.

  8. Page 1 D. Dilling, T. Brown FIRE FACILITIES AND SITE REQUIREMENTS

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    with regulations for nuclear facilities. They must also include systems to manage tritium and tritiated water, activated dust, and radioactive waste material. Maintenance activities on FIRE will require the use service connections will be required to feed power to the copper magnet system and deliver plasma

  9. Intensive archaeological survey of the proposed Central Sanitary Wastewater Treatment Facility, Savannah River Site, Aiken and Barnwell Counties, South Carolina

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stephenson, D.K.; Sassaman, K.E.

    1993-11-01

    The project area for the proposed Central Sanitary Wastewater Treatment Facility on the Savannah River Site includes a six-acre tract along Fourmile Branch and 18 mi of trunk line corridors. Archaeological investigations of the six-acre parcel resulted in the discovery of one small prehistoric site designated 38AK465. This cultural resource does not have the potential to add significantly to archaeological knowledge of human occupation in the region. The Savannah River Archaeological Research Program (SRARP) therefore recommends that 38AK465 is not eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and further recommends a determination of no effect. Archaeological survey along the trunk line corridors implicated previously recorded sites 38AK92, 38AK145, 38AK415, 38AK417, 38AK419, and 38AK436. Past disturbance from construction had severely disturbed 38AK92 and no archaeological evidence of 38AK145, 38AK419, and 38AK436 was recovered during survey. Lacking further evidence for the existence of these sites, the SRARP recommends that 38AK92, 38AK145, 38AK419, and 38AK436 are not eligible for nomination to the NRHP and thus warrant a determination of no effect. Two of these sites, 38Ak415 and 38AK417, required further investigation to evaluate their archaeological significance. Both of the sites have the potential to yield significant data on the prehistoric period occupation of the Aiken Plateau and the SRARP recommends that they are eligible for nomination to the NRHP. The Savannah River Archaeological Research Program recommends that adverse effects to sites 38AK415 and 38AK417 from proposed construction can be mitigated through avoidance.

  10. Geotechnical characterization of the North Ramp of the Exploratory Studies Facility: Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project. Volume 1, Data summary

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brechtel, C.E.; Lin, Ming; Martin, E.; Kessel, D.S.

    1995-05-01

    This report presents the results of geological and geotechnical characterization of the Miocene volcanic tuff rocks of the Timber Mountain and Paintbrush groups that the tunnel boring machine will encounter during excavation of the Exploratory Studies Facility (ESF) North Ramp. The is being constructed by the DOE as part of the Yucca Mountain Project site characterization activities. The purpose of these activities is to evaluate the feasibility of locating a potential high-level nuclear waste repository on lands adjacent to the Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada. This report was prepared as part of the Soil and Rock Properties Studies in accordance with the 8.3.1.14.2 Study Plan. This report is volume 1 of the data summary.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2013-06-21

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

  12. Federal Facilities Liaison Weighs in on EM Achievements, Challenges at Savannah River Site

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    AIKEN, S.C. – For more than two decades, Shelly Wilson has been working with the Savannah River Site (SRS) as an employee of South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC)....

  13. Hanford Site annual dangerous waste report: Volume 4, Waste Management Facility report, Radioactive mixed waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1994-12-31

    This report contains information on radioactive mixed wastes at the Hanford Site. Information consists of shipment date, physical state, chemical nature, waste description, handling method and containment vessel, waste number, waste designation and amount of waste.

  14. Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan for Corrective Action Unit 114: Area 25 EMAD Facility Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mark Krauss

    2010-06-01

    This Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan addresses the actions needed to achieve closure for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 114, Area 25 EMAD Facility, identified in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO). Corrective Action Unit 114 comprises the following corrective action site (CAS) located in Area 25 of the Nevada Test Site: • 25-41-03, EMAD Facility This plan provides the methodology for field activities needed to gather the necessary information for closing CAS 25-41-03. There is sufficient information and process knowledge from historical documentation and investigations of similar sites regarding the expected nature and extent of potential contaminants to recommend closure of CAU 114 using the SAFER process. Additional information will be obtained by conducting a field investigation before selecting the appropriate corrective action for CAS 25-41-03. It is anticipated that the results of the field investigation and implementation of corrective actions will support a defensible recommendation that no further corrective action is necessary. If it is determined that complete clean closure cannot be accomplished during the SAFER, then a hold point will have been reached and the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) will be consulted to determine whether the remaining contamination will be closed under the alternative corrective action of closure in place. This will be presented in a closure report that will be prepared and submitted to NDEP for review and approval. The CAS will be investigated based on the data quality objectives (DQOs) developed on April 30, 2009, by representatives of NDEP and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office. The DQO process was used to identify and define the type, amount, and quality of data needed to determine and implement appropriate corrective actions for CAS 25-41-03. The following text summarizes the SAFER activities that will support the closure of CAU 114: • Perform site preparation activities (e.g., utilities clearances, radiological surveys). • Collect samples of materials to determine whether potential source material (PSM) is present that may cause the future release of a contaminant of concern to environmental media. • If no PSMs are present at the CAS, establish no further action as the corrective action. • If a PSM is present at the CAS, either: - Establish clean closure as the corrective action. The material to be remediated will be removed and disposed of as waste, or - Establish closure in place as the corrective action and implement the appropriate use restrictions. • Confirm the selected closure option is sufficient to protect human health and the environment.

  15. Closing the Gap: Using the Clean Air Act to Control Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Energy Facilities

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Hagan, Colin R.

    2012-01-01

    associated with solar and wind energy occur prior to theemissions associated with wind energy as the lowest of anyenergy resource). 64. Wind energy emissions are also site

  16. Preclosure radiological safety analysis for the exploratory shaft facilities; Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ma, C.W.; Miller, D.D.; Jardine, L.J. [Bechtel National, Inc., San Francisco, CA (United States)

    1992-06-01

    This study assesses which structures, systems, and components of the exploratory shaft facility (ESF) are important to safety when the ESF is converted to become part of the operating waste repository. The assessment follows the methodology required by DOE Procedure AP-6.10Q. Failures of the converted ESF during the preclosure period have been evaluated, along with other underground accidents, to determine the potential offsite radiation doses and associated probabilities. The assessment indicates that failures of the ESF will not result in radiation doses greater than 0.5 rem at the nearest unrestricted area boundary. Furthermore, credible accidents in other underground facilities will not result in radiation doses larger than 0.5 rem, even if any structure, system, or component of the converted ESF fails at the same time. Therefore, no structure, system, or component of the converted ESF is important to safety.

  17. Recent ORNL experience in site performance prediction: the Gas Centrifuge Enrichment Plant and the Oak Ridge Central Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pin, F.G.

    1985-01-01

    The suitability of the Portsmouth Gas Centrifuge Enrichment Plant Landfill and the Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Central Waste Disposal Facility for disposal of low-level radioactive waste was evaluated using pathways analyses. For these evaluations, a conservative approach was selected; that is, conservatism was built into the analyses when assumptions concerning future events had to be made or when uncertainties concerning site or waste characteristics existed. Data from comprehensive laboratory and field investigations were used in developing the conceptual and numerical models that served as the basis for the numerical simulations of the long-term transport of contamination to man. However, the analyses relied on conservative scenarios to describe the generation and migration of contamination and the potential human exposure to the waste. Maximum potential doses to man were calculated and compared to the appropriate standards. Even under this conservative framework, the sites were found to provide adequate buffer to persons outside the DOE reservations and conclusions concerning site capacity and site acceptability were drawn. Our experience through these studies has shown that in reaching conclusions in such studies, some consideration must be given to the uncertainties and conservatisms involved in the analyses. Analytical methods to quantitatively assess the probability of future events to occur and to quantitatively determine the sensitivity of the results to data uncertainty may prove useful in relaxing some of the conservatism built into the analyses. The applicability of such methods to pathways analyses is briefly discussed.

  18. Siting of low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities in Texas 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Isenhower, Daniel Bruce

    1982-01-01

    receive from other states. Generators of low-level radioactive waste have resorted to the interim measure of storing their wastes. Ultimate disposal of this waste is the only real solution because generators faced with limited storage capacity... or limited access to storage facilities may be forced to curtail waste pro- ducing activities (Subcommittee on Nuclear Waste Disposal, Texas House of Representatives, 1980). Responsibility for safe disposal of low-level radioactive waste has been...

  19. DECOMMISSIONING OF THE 247-F FUEL MANUFACTURING FACILITY AT THE SAVANNAH RIVER SITE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Santos, J; Stephen Chostner, S

    2007-05-22

    Building 247-F at SRS was a roughly 110,000 ft{sup 2} two-story facility designed and constructed during the height of the cold war naval buildup to provide additional naval nuclear fuel manufacturing capacity in early 1980s. The building layout is shown in Fig. 1. A photograph of the facility is shown in Fig. 2. The manufacturing process employed a wide variety of acids, bases, and other hazardous materials. As the cold war wound down, the need for naval fuel declined. Consequently, the facility was shut down and underwent initial deactivation. All process systems were flushed with water and drained using the existing process drain valves. However, since these drains were not always installed at the lowest point in piping and equipment systems, a significant volume of liquid remained after initial deactivation was completed in 1990. At that time, a non-destructive assay of the process area identified approximately 17 (+/- 100%) kg of uranium held up in equipment and piping.

  20. Linde FUSRAP Site Remediation: Engineering Challenges and Solutions of Remedial Activities on an Active Industrial Facility - 13506

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Beres, Christopher M.; Fort, E. Joseph; Boyle, James D.

    2013-07-01

    The Linde FUSRAP Site (Linde) is located in Tonawanda, New York at a major research and development facility for Praxair, Inc. (Praxair). Successful remediation activities at Linde combines meeting cleanup objectives of radiological contamination while minimizing impacts to Praxair business operations. The unique use of Praxair's property coupled with an array of active and abandoned utilities poses many engineering and operational challenges; each of which has been overcome during the remedial action at Linde. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Buffalo District (USACE) and CABRERA SERVICES, INC. (CABRERA) have successfully faced engineering challenges such as relocation of an aboveground structure, structural protection of an active water line, and installation of active mechanical, electrical, and communication utilities to perform remediation. As remediation nears completion, continued success of engineering challenges is critical as remaining activities exist in the vicinity of infrastructure essential to business operations; an electrical substation and duct bank providing power throughout the Praxair facility. Emphasis on engineering and operations through final remediation and into site restoration will allow for the safe and successful completion of the project. (authors)

  1. Post-Closure Report for Closed Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Corrective Action Units, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada for Fiscal Year 2011 (October 2010-September 2011)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2012-01-18

    This report serves as the combined annual report for post-closure activities for the following closed Corrective Action Units (CAUs): (1) CAU 90, Area 2 Bitcutter Containment; (2) CAU 91, Area 3 U-3fi Injection Well; (3) CAU 92, Area 6 Decon Pond Facility; (4) CAU 110, Area 3 WMD U-3ax/bl Crater; and (5) CAU 112, Area 23 Hazardous Waste Trenches. This report covers fiscal year 2011 (October 2010-September 2011). The post-closure requirements for these sites are described in Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Permit Number NEV HW0101 and summarized in each CAU-specific section in Section 1.0 of this report. Site inspections are conducted semiannually at CAUs 90 and 91 and quarterly at CAUs 92, 110, and 112. Additional inspections are conducted at CAU 92 if precipitation occurs in excess of 0.50 inches in a 24-hour period. Inspections include an evaluation of the condition of the units and identification of any deficiencies that may compromise the integrity of the units. The condition of covers, fencing, signs, gates, and locks is documented. In addition, soil moisture monitoring and subsidence surveys are conducted at CAU 110. The results of the inspections, summary of maintenance activities, results of vegetations surveys, and analysis of monitoring data are presented in this report. Copies of the inspection checklists are included as Appendix A. Field notes completed during each inspection are included in Appendix B. Photographs taken during the inspections are included in Appendix C. It is recommended to continue semiannual inspections at CAUs 90 and 91; quarterly inspections at CAUs 92, 110, and 112; and additional inspections at CAU 92 if precipitation occurs in excess of 0.50 inches in a 24-hour period. At CAU 92, it is recommended to remove the wave barriers, as they have not proven to be necessary to protect the cover. At CAU 110, it is recommended to continue annual vegetation monitoring and soil moisture monitoring, and to reduce the frequency of subsidence surveys from twice per year to once every other year (biennially).

  2. Monticello NPL Sites Federal Facilities Agreement Meeting Minutes & Action Items

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of NaturalDukeWakefield Municipal Gas &SCE-SessionsSouthReport for the Weldon Spring, Missouri,MSEReportyGWSHP 1.83SiteS

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Peggy Hinman

    2010-10-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) needs to have disposal capability for remote-handled low level waste (LLW) generated at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) at the time the existing disposal facility is full or must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the INL Subsurface Disposal Area in approximately the year 2017.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1998-12-31

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

  5. Floodplain/wetland assessment of the effects of construction and operation ofa depleted uranium hexafluoride conversion facility at the Paducah, Kentucky,site.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Van Lonkhuyzen, R.

    2005-09-09

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride (DUF{sub 6}) Management Program evaluated alternatives for managing its inventory of DUF{sub 6} and issued the ''Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Alternative Strategies for the Long-Term Management and Use of Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride'' (DUF{sub 6} PEIS) in April 1999 (DOE 1999). The DUF{sub 6} inventory is stored in cylinders at three DOE sites: Paducah, Kentucky; Portsmouth, Ohio; and East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP), near Oak Ridge, Tennessee. In the Record of Decision for the DUF{sub 6} PEIS, DOE stated its decision to promptly convert the DUF{sub 6} inventory to a more stable chemical form. Subsequently, the U.S. Congress passed, and the President signed, the ''2002 Supplemental Appropriations Act for Further Recovery from and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the United States'' (Public Law No. 107-206). This law stipulated in part that, within 30 days of enactment, DOE must award a contract for the design, construction, and operation of a DUF{sub 6} conversion plant at the Department's Paducah, Kentucky, and Portsmouth, Ohio, sites, and for the shipment of DUF{sub 6} cylinders stored at ETTP to the Portsmouth site for conversion. This floodplain/wetland assessment has been prepared by DOE, pursuant to Executive Order 11988 (''Floodplain Management''), Executive Order 11990 (Protection of Wetlands), and DOE regulations for implementing these Executive Orders as set forth in Title 10, Part 1022, of the ''Code of Federal Regulations'' (10 CFR Part 1022 [''Compliance with Floodplain and Wetland Environmental Review Requirements'']), to evaluate potential impacts to floodplains and wetlands from the construction and operation of a conversion facility at the DOE Paducah site. Reconstruction of the bridge crossing Bayou Creek would occur within the Bayou Creek 100-year floodplain. Replacement of bridge components, including the bridge supports, however, would not be expected to result in measurable long-term changes to the floodplain. Approximately 0.16 acre (0.064 ha) of palustrine emergent wetlands would likely be eliminated by direct placement of fill material within Location A. Some wetlands that are not filled may be indirectly affected by an altered hydrologic regime, due to the proximity of construction, possibly resulting in a decreased frequency or duration of inundation or soil saturation and potential loss of hydrology necessary to sustain wetland conditions. Indirect impacts could be minimized by maintaining a buffer near adjacent wetlands. Wetlands would likely be impacted by construction at Location B; however, placement of a facility in the northern portion of this location would minimize wetland impacts. Construction at Location C could potentially result in impacts to wetlands, however placement of a facility in the southeastern portion of this location may best avoid direct impacts to wetlands. The hydrologic characteristics of nearby wetlands could be indirectly affected by adjacent construction. Executive Order 11990, ''Protection of Wetlands'', requires federal agencies to minimize the destruction, loss, or degradation of wetlands, and to preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial uses of wetlands. DOE regulations for implementing Executive Order 11990 as well as Executive Order 11988, ''Floodplain Management'', are set forth in 10 CFR Part 1022. Mitigation for unavoidable impacts may be developed in coordination with the appropriate regulatory agencies. Unavoidable impacts to wetlands that are within the jurisdiction of the USACE may require a CWA Section 404 Permit, which would trigger the requirement for a CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the Commonwealth of Kentucky. A mitigation plan may be required prior to the initiation of construction. Cumulative impacts to floodplains and wetlands are anticipated to be negligible to minor under the proposed action, in conjunction with the effects of existing conditions and other activities. Habitat disturbance would involve settings commonly found i

  6. Audit Report: Modular Office Facilities for Recovery Act Program Activities at the Hanford Site, OAS-RA-13-04

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE: Alternative FuelsofProgram:Y-12Power, Inc | DepartmentPeer ReviewEfficiencyOct04972 U.S.

  7. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography, Volume 18. Part 1B: Citations with abstracts, sections 10 through 16

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-09-01

    This bibliography contains 3,638 citations with abstracts of documents relevant to environmental restoration, nuclear facility decontamination and decommissioning (D and D), uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions. The bibliography contains scientific, technical, financial, and regulatory information that pertains to DOE environmental restoration programs. The citations are separated by topic into 16 sections, including (1) DOE Environmental Restoration Program; (2) DOE D and D Program; (3) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning; (4) DOE Formerly Utilized sites Remedial Action Program; (5) NORM-Contaminated Site Restoration; (6) DOE Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project; (7) Uranium Mill Tailings Management; (8) DOE Site-Wide Remedial Actions; (9) DOE Onsite Remedial Action Projects; (10) Contaminated Site Remedial Actions; (11) DOE Underground Storage Tank Remediation; (12) DOE Technology Development, Demonstration, and Evaluation; (13) Soil Remediation; (14) Groundwater Remediation; (15) Environmental Measurements, Analysis, and Decision-Making; and (16) Environmental Management Issues.

  8. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography, Volume 18. Part 1A: Citations with abstracts, sections 1 through 9

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-09-01

    This bibliography contains 3,638 citations with abstracts of documents relevant to environmental restoration, nuclear facility decontamination and decommissioning (D and D), uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions. The bibliography contains scientific, technical, financial, and regulatory information that pertains to DOE environmental restoration programs. The citations are separated by topic into 16 sections, including (1) DOE Environmental Restoration program; (2) DOE D and D Program; (3) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning; (4) DOE Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program; (5) NORM-Contaminated Site Restoration; (6) DOE Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project; (7) Uranium Mill Tailings Management; (8) DOE Site-Wide Remedial Actions; (9) DOE Onsite Remedial Action Projects; (10) Contaminated Site Remedial Actions; (11) DOE Underground Storage Tank Remediation; (12) DOE Technology Development, Demonstration, and Evaluation; (13) Soil Remediation; (14) Groundwater Remediation; (15) Environmental Measurements, Analysis, and Decision-Making; and (16) Environmental Management Issues.

  9. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act ( ARRA) FEMP Technical Assistance, U.S. General Services Administration - Project 194 U.S. Custom Cargo Inspection Facility, Detroit, MI

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Arends, J.; Sandusky, William F.

    2010-05-31

    This report documents the findings of an on-site audit of the U.S. Customs Cargo Inspection Facility (CIF) in Detroit, Michigan. The federal landlord for this building is the General Services Administration (GSA). The focus of the audit was to identify various no-cost or low-cost energy-efficiency opportunities that, once implemented, would reduce electrical and gas consumption and increase the operational efficiency of the building. This audit also provided an opportunity to identify potential capital cost projects that should be considered in the future to acquire additional energy (electric and gas) and water savings to further increase the operational efficiency of the building.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boehmer, Ann M.

    2009-05-31

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

  11. Rough order of magnitude cost estimate for immobilization of 18.2 MT of plutonium using existing facilities at the Savannah River site: alternatives 3A/5A/6A/6B/7A/9A

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DiSabatino, A., LLNL

    1998-06-01

    The purpose of this Cost Estimate Report is to identify preliminary capital and operating costs for a facility to immobilize 18.2 metric tons (nominal) of plutonium using ceramic in a new facility at Savannah River Site (SRS).

  12. Recovery Act Funds Expand Groundwater Treatment at Hanford Site: Contractor CH2M HILL drills record number of wells

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    RICHLAND, Wash. – Workers at the Hanford Site have surpassed goals for drilling wells to detect and remove contamination from groundwater.

  13. Environmentally based siting assessment for synthetic-liquid-fuels facilities. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1980-01-01

    A detailed assessment of the major environmental constraints to siting a synthetic fuels industry and the results of that assessment are used to determine on a regional basis the potential for development of such an industry with minimal environmental conflicts. Secondly, the ability to mitigate some of the constraining impacts through alternative institutional arrangements, especially in areas that are judged to have a low development potential is also assessed. Limitations of the study are delineated, but specifically, the study is limited geographically to well-defined boundaries that include the prime coal and oil shale resource areas. The critical factors used in developing the framework are air quality, water availability, socioeconomic capacity, ecological sensitivity, environmental health, and the management of Federally owned lands. (MCW)

  14. Better building: LEEDing new facilities

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

    Better building: LEEDing new facilities Better building: LEEDing new facilities We're taking big steps on-site to create energy efficient facilities and improve infrastructure....

  15. List of currently classified documents relative to Hanford Production Facilities Operations originated on the Hanford Site between 1961 and 1972

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-04-01

    The United States Department of Energy (DOE) has declared that all Hanford plutonium production- and operations-related information generated between 1944 and 1972 is declassified. Any documents found and deemed useful for meeting Hanford Environmental Dose Reconstruction (HEDR) objectives may be declassified with or without deletions in accordance with DOE guidance by Authorized Derivative Declassifiers. The September 1992, letter report, Declassifications Requested by the Technical Steering Panel of Hanford Documents Produced 1944--1960, (PNWD-2024 HEDR UC-707), provides an important milestone toward achieving a complete listing of documents that may be useful to the HEDR Project. The attached listing of approximately 7,000 currently classified Hanford-originated documents relative to Hanford Production Facilities Operations between 1961 and 1972 fulfills TSP Directive 89-3. This list does not include such titles as the Irradiation Processing Department, Chemical Processing Department, and Hanford Laboratory Operations monthly reports generated after 1960 which have been previously declassified with minor deletions and made publicly available. Also Kaiser Engineers Hanford (KEH) Document Control determined that no KEH documents generated between January 1, 1961 and December 31, 1972 are currently classified. Titles which address work for others have not been included because Hanford Site contractors currently having custodial responsibility for these documents do not have the authority to determine whether other than their own staff have on file an appropriate need-to-know. Furthermore, these documents do not normally contain information relative to Hanford Site operations.

  16. Status of Activities on Rehabilitation Of Radioactively Contaminated Facilities and the Site of Russian Research Center ''Kurchatov Institute''

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Volkov, V. G.; Ponomarev-Stepnoi, N. N.; Melkov, E. S; Ryazantsev, E. P.; Dikarev, V. S.; Gorodetsky, G. G.; Zverkov, Yu. A.; Kuznetsov, V. V.; Kuznetsova, T. I.

    2003-02-25

    This paper describes the program, the status, and the course of activities on rehabilitation of radioactively contaminated facilities and the territory of temporary radioactive waste (radwaste) disposal at the Russian Research Center ''Kurchatov Institute'' (RRC KI) in Moscow as performed in 2001-2002. The accumulation of significant amounts of radwaste at RRC KI territory is shown to be the inevitable result of Institute's activity performed in the days of former USSR nuclear weapons project and multiple initial nuclear power projects (performed from 1950's to early 1970's). A characterization of RRC KI temporary radwaste disposal site is given. Described is the system of radiation control and monitoring as implemented on this site. A potential hazard of adverse impacts on the environment and population of the nearby housing area is noted, which is due to possible spread of the radioactive plume by subsoil waters. A description of the concept and project of the RRC KI temporary radwaste disposal site is presented. Specific nature of the activities planned and performed stems from the nearness of housing area. This paper describes main stages of the planned activities for rehabilitation, their expected terms and sources of funding, as well as current status of the project advancement. Outlined are the problems faced in the performance and planning of works. The latter include: diagnostics of the concrete-grouted repositories, dust-suppression technologies, packaging of the fragmented ILW and HLW, soil clean-up, radioactive plume spread prevention, broad radiation monitoring of the work zone and environment in the performance of rehabilitation works. Noted is the intention of RRC KI to establish cooperation with foreign, first of all, the U.S. partners for the solution of problems mentioned above.

  17. Storage for the Fast Flux Test Facility unirradiated fuel in the Plutonium Finishing Plant Complex, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-01-01

    This Environmental Assessment evaluates the proposed action to relocate and store unirradiated Fast Flux Test Facility fuel in the Plutonium Finishing Plant Complex on the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington. The US Department of Energy has decided to cease fuel fabrication activities in the 308 Building in the 300 Area. This decision was based on a safety concern over the ability of the fuel fabrication portion of the 308 Building to withstand a seismic event. The proposed action to relocate and store the fuel is based on the savings that could be realized by consolidating security costs associated with storage of the fuel. While the 308 Building belowgrade fuel storage areas are not at jeopardy by a seismic event, the US Department of Energy is proposing to cease storage operations along with the related fabrication operations. The US Department of Energy proposes to remove the unirradiated fuel pins and fuel assemblies from the 308 Building and store them in Room 192A, within the 234-5Z Building, a part of the Plutonium Finishing Plant Complex, located in the 200 West Area. Minor modifications to Room 192A would be required to accommodate placement of the fuel. The US Department of Energy estimates that removing all of the fuel from the 308 Building would save $6.5 million annually in security expenditures for the Fast Flux Test Facility. Environmental impacts of construction, relocation, and operation of the proposed action and alternatives were evaluated. This evaluation concluded that the proposed action would have no significant impacts on the human environment.

  18. Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact: Interim Measures for the Mixed Waste Management Facility Groundwater at the Burial Ground Complex at the Savannah River Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    N /A

    1999-12-08

    The U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) prepared this environmental assessment (EA) to analyze the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed interim measures for the Mixed Waste Management Facility (MW) groundwater at the Burial Ground Complex (BGC) at the Savannah River Site (SRS), located near Aiken, South Carolina. DOE proposes to install a small metal sheet pile dam to impound water around and over the BGC groundwater seepline. In addition, a drip irrigation system would be installed. Interim measures will also address the reduction of volatile organic compounds (VOCS) from ''hot-spot'' regions associated with the Southwest Plume Area (SWPA). This action is taken as an interim measure for the MWMF in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) to reduce the amount of tritium seeping from the BGC southwest groundwater plume. The proposed action of this EA is being planned and would be implemented concurrent with a groundwater corrective action program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). On September 30, 1999, SCDHEC issued a modification to the SRS RCRA Part B permit that adds corrective action requirements for four plumes that are currently emanating from the BGC. One of those plumes is the southwest plume. The RCRA permit requires SRS to submit a corrective action plan (CAP) for the southwest plume by March 2000. The permit requires that the initial phase of the CAP prescribe a remedy that achieves a 70-percent reduction in the annual amount of tritium being released from the southwest plume area to Fourmile Branch, a nearby stream. Approval and actual implementation of the corrective measure in that CAP may take several years. As an interim measure, the actions described in this EA would manage the release of tritium from the southwest plume area until the final actions under the CAP can be implemented. This proposed action is expected to reduce the release of tritium from the southwest plume area to Fourmile Branch between 25 to 35 percent. If this proposed action is undertaken and its effectiveness is demonstrated, it may become a component of the final action in the CAP. This document was prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended; the requirements of the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing NEPA (40 CFR 1500-1508); and the DOE Regulations for Implementing NEPA (10 CFR 1021). NEPA requires the assessment of environmental consequences of Federal actions that may affect the quality of the human environment. Based on the potential for impacts described herein, DOE will either publish a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) or prepare an environmental impact statement (EM).

  19. State Environmental Policy Act environmental checklist forms for the 218-E-8 Borrow Pit Demolition Site Closure plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-11-01

    The 218-E-8 Demolition Site was the site of a single demolition event in November of 1984. This demolition event was a form of thermal treatment for spent or abandoned chemical waste. Because the 218-E-8 Demolition Site will no longer be used for this thermal activity, the site will be closed. Closure will be conducted pursuant to the requirements of the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) Dangerous Waste Regulations, Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-303-610 and 40 CFR 270.1. Closure also will satisfy closure requirements of WAC 173-303-680. This closure plan presents a description of the 218-E-8 Demolition Site, the history of the waste treated, and the approach that will be followed to close the 218-E-8 Demolition Site. Because dangerous waste does not include the source, special nuclear, and by-product material components of mixed waste, radionuclides are not within the scope of WAC 173-303 or of this closure plan. The information on radionuclides is provided only for general knowledge where appropriate. Only dangerous constituents derived from 218-E-8 Demolition Site operations will be addressed in this closure plan in accordance with WAC 173-303-610(2)(b)(i).

  20. Review of project definition studies of possible on-site uses of superconducting super collider assets and facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1994-12-01

    This document reports on the results of a peer review and evaluation of studies made of potential uses of assets from the terminated Superconducting Super Collider (SSC) project. These project definition studies focused on nine areas of use of major assets and facilities at the SSC site near Waxahachie, Texas. The studies were undertaken as part of the effort to maximize the value of the investment made in the SSC and were supported by two sets of grants, one to the Texas National Research Laboratory Commission (TNRLC) and the second to various universities and other institutions for studies of ideas raised by a public call for expressions of interest. The Settlement Agreement, recently signed by the Department of Energy (DOE) and TNRLC, provides for a division of SSC property. As part of the goal of maximizing the value of the SSC investment, the findings contained in this report are thus addressed to officials in both the Department and TNRLC. In addition, this review had several other goals: to provide constructive feedback to those doing the studies; to judge the benefits and feasibility (including funding prospects) of the projects studied; and to help worthy projects become reality by matching projects with possible funding sources.

  1. Review of project definition studies of possible on-site uses of superconducting super collider assets and facilities. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1994-12-01

    This document reports on the results of a peer review and evaluation of studies made of potential uses of assets from the terminated Superconducting Super Collider (SSC) project. These project definition studies focused on nine areas of use of major assets and facilities at the SSC site near Waxahachie, Texas. The studies were undertaken as part of the effort to maximize the value of the investment made in the SSC and were supported by two sets of grants, one to the Texas National Research Laboratory Commission (TNRLC) and the second to various universities and other institutions for studies of ideas raised by a public call for expressions of interest. The Settlement Agreement, recently signed by the Department of Energy (DOE) and TNRLC, provides for a division of SSC property. As part of the goal of maximizing the value of the SSC investment, the findings contained in this report are thus addressed to officials in both the Department and TNRLC. In addition, this review had several other goals: to provide constructive feedback to those doing the studies; to judge the benefits and feasibility (including funding prospects) of the projects studied; and to help worthy projects become reality by matching projects with possible funding sources.

  2. Geological and Geotechnical Site Investigation for the Design of a CO2 Rich Flue Gas Direct Injection and Storage Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Metz, Paul; Bolz, Patricia

    2013-03-25

    With international efforts to limit anthropogenic carbon in the atmosphere, various CO{sub 2} sequestration methods have been studied by various facilities worldwide. Basalt rock in general has been referred to as potential host material for mineral carbonation by various authors, without much regard for compositional variations due to depositional environment, subsequent metamorphism, or hydrothermal alteration. Since mineral carbonation relies on the presence of certain magnesium, calcium, or iron silicates, it is necessary to study the texture, mineralogy, petrology, and geochemistry of specific basalts before implying potential for mineral carbonation. The development of a methodology for the characterization of basalts with respect to their susceptibility for mineral carbonation is proposed to be developed as part of this research. The methodology will be developed based on whole rock data, petrography and microprobe analyses for samples from the Caledonia Mine in Michigan, which is the site for a proposed small-scale demonstration project on mineral carbonation in basalt. Samples from the Keweenaw Peninsula will be used to determine general compositional trends using whole rock data and petrography. Basalts in the Keweenaw Peninsula have been subjected to zeolite and prehnite-pumpellyite facies metamorphism with concurrent native copper deposition. Alteration was likely due to the circulation of CO{sub 2}-rich fluids at slightly elevated temperatures and pressures, which is the process that is attempted to be duplicated by mineral carbonation.

  3. Process for Transition of Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act Title II Disposal Sites to the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management for Long-Term Surveillance and Maintenance

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-03-01

    This document presents guidance for implementing the process that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Legacy Management (LM) will use for assuming perpetual responsibility for a closed uranium mill tailings site. The transition process specifically addresses sites regulated under Title II of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) but is applicable in principle to the transition of sites under other regulatory structures, such as the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-03-01

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

  5. A method for the assessment of site-specific economic impacts of commercial and industrial biomass energy facilities. A handbook and computer model

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-10-01

    A handbook on ``A Method for the Assessment of Site-specific Econoomic Impacts of Industrial and Commercial Biomass Energy Facilities`` has been prepared by Resource Systems Group Inc. under contract to the Southeastern Regional Biomass Energy Program (SERBEP). The handbook includes a user-friendly Lotus 123 spreadsheet which calculates the economic impacts of biomass energy facilities. The analysis uses a hybrid approach, combining direct site-specific data provided by the user, with indirect impact multipliers from the US Forest Service IMPLAN input/output model for each state. Direct economic impacts are determined primarily from site-specific data and indirect impacts are determined from the IMPLAN multipliers. The economic impacts are given in terms of income, employment, and state and federal taxes generated directly by the specific facility and by the indirect economic activity associated with each project. A worksheet is provided which guides the user in identifying and entering the appropriate financial data on the plant to be evaluated. The WLAN multipliers for each state are included in a database within the program. The multipliers are applied automatically after the user has entered the site-specific data and the state in which the facility is located. Output from the analysis includes a summary of direct and indirect income, employment and taxes. Case studies of large and small wood energy facilities and an ethanol plant are provided as examples to demonstrate the method. Although the handbook and program are intended for use by those with no previous experience in economic impact analysis, suggestions are given for the more experienced user who may wish to modify the analysis techniques.

  6. Canyon Facilities - Hanford Site

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity ofkandz-cm11 Outreach Home Room News PublicationsAudits &BradburyMay 1, 2013,Cafe ScientifiqueCanister Storage Building

  7. Hanford Site

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

    stops on her tour was the site's largest groundwater treatment facility. The 200 West Pump and Treat System removes multiple chemical and radiological contaminants from...

  8. Final Status Survey Report for Corrective Action Unit 117 - Pluto Disassembly Facility, Building 2201, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jeremy Gwin and Douglas Frenette

    2010-09-30

    This document contains the process knowledge, radiological data and subsequent statistical methodology and analysis to support approval for the radiological release of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 117 – Pluto Disassembly Facility, Building 2201 located in Area 26 of the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). Preparations for release of the building began in 2009 and followed the methodology described in the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM). MARSSIM is the DOE approved process for release of Real Property (buildings and landmasses) to a set of established criteria or authorized limits. The pre-approved authorized limits for surface contamination values and corresponding assumptions were established by DOE O 5400.5. The release criteria coincide with the acceptance criteria of the U10C landfill permit. The U10C landfill is the proposed location to dispose of the radiologically non-impacted, or “clean,” building rubble following demolition. However, other disposition options that include the building and/or waste remaining at the NNSS may be considered providing that the same release limits apply. The Final Status Survey was designed following MARSSIM guidance by reviewing historical documentation and radiological survey data. Following this review a formal radiological characterization survey was performed in two phases. The characterization revealed multiple areas of residual radioactivity above the release criteria. These locations were remediated (decontaminated) and then the surface activity was verified to be less than the release criteria. Once remediation efforts had been successfully completed, a Final Status Survey Plan (10-015, “Final Status Survey Plan for Corrective Action Unit 117 – Pluto Disassembly Facility, Building 2201”) was developed and implemented to complete the final step in the MARSSIM process, the Final Status Survey. The Final Status Survey Plan consisted of categorizing each individual room into one of three categories: Class 1, Class 2 or Class 3 (a fourth category is a “Non-Impacted Class” which in the case of Building 2201 only pertained to exterior surfaces of the building.) The majority of the rooms were determined to fall in the less restrictive Class 3 category, however, Rooms 102, 104, 106, and 107 were identified as containing Class 1 and 2 areas. Building 2201 was divided into “survey units” and surveyed following the requirements of the Final Status Survey Plan for each particular class. As each survey unit was completed and documented, the survey results were evaluated. Each sample (static measurement) with units of counts per minute (cpm) was corrected for the appropriate background and converted to a value with units of dpm/100 cm2. With a surface contamination value in the appropriate units, it was compared to the surface contamination limits, or in this case the derived concentration guideline level (DCGLw). The appropriate statistical test (sign test) was then performed. If the survey unit was statistically determined to be below the DCGLw, then the survey unit passed and the null hypothesis (that the survey unit is above limits) was rejected. If the survey unit was equal to or below the critical value in the sign test, the null hypothesis was not rejected. This process was performed for all survey units within Building 2201. A total of thirty-three “Class 1,” four “Class 2,” and one “Class 3” survey units were developed, surveyed, and evaluated. All survey units successfully passed the statistical test. Building 2201 meets the release criteria commensurate with the Waste Acceptance Criteria (for radiological purposes) of the U10C landfill permit residing within NNSS boundaries. Based on the thorough statistical sampling and scanning of the building’s interior, Building 2201 may be considered radiologically “clean,” or free of contamination.

  9. Rocky Flats CAAS System Recalibrated, Retested, and Analyzed to Install in the Criticality Experiments Facility at the Nevada Test Site

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    2009-01-01

    Nuclear Facilities, DOE- HDBK-3010-94, Vol. 1 (1994). 8. T.in the DOE Handbook, DOE-HDBK-3010-94 (Ref. 7). According to

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boehmer, Ann

    2010-11-01

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

  11. THE DEACTIVATION DECONTAMINATION & DECOMMISSIONING OF THE PLUTONIUM FINISHING PLANT (PFP) A FORMER PLUTONIUM PROCESSING FACILITY AT DOE HANFORD SITE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CHARBONEAU, S.L.

    2006-02-01

    The Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) was constructed as part of the Manhattan Project during World War II. The Manhattan Project was developed to usher in the use of nuclear weapons to end the war. The primary mission of the PFP was to provide plutonium used as special nuclear material (SNM) for fabrication of nuclear devices for the war effort. Subsequent to the end of World War II, the PFP's mission expanded to support the Cold War effort through plutonium production during the nuclear arms race and later the processing of fuel grade mixed plutonium-uranium oxide to support DOE's breeder reactor program. In October 1990, at the close of the production mission for PFP, a shutdown order was prepared by the Department of Energy (DOE) in Washington, DC and issued to the Richland DOE field office. Subsequent to the shutdown order, a team from the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) analyzed the hazards at PFP associated with the continued storage of certain forms of plutonium solutions and solids. The assessment identified many discrete actions that were required to stabilize the different plutonium forms into stable form and repackage the material in high integrity containers. These actions were technically complicated and completed as part of the PFP nuclear material stabilization project between 1995 and early 2005. The completion of the stabilization project was a necessary first step in deactivating PFP. During stabilization, DOE entered into negotiations with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the State of Washington and established milestones for the Deactivation and Decommissioning (D&D) of the PFP. The DOE and its contractor, Fluor Hanford (Fluor), have made great progress in deactivating, decontaminating and decommissioning the PFP at the Hanford Site as detailed in this paper. Background information covering the PFP D&D effort includes descriptions of negotiations with the State of Washington concerning consent-order milestones, milestones completed to date, and the vision of bringing PFP to slab-on-grade. Innovative approaches in planning and regulatory strategies, as well new technologies from within the United States and from other countries and field decontamination techniques developed by workforce personnel, such as the ''turkey roaster'' and the ''lazy Susan'' are covered in detail in the paper. Critical information on issues and opportunities during the performance of the work such as concerns regarding the handling and storage of special nuclear material, concerns regarding criticality safety and the impact of SNM de-inventory at PFP are also provided. The continued success of the PFP D&D effort is due to the detailed, yet flexible, approach to planning that applied innovative techniques and tools, involved a team of experienced independent reviewers, and incorporated previous lessons learned at the Hanford site, Rocky Flats, and commercial nuclear D&D projects. Multi-disciplined worker involvement in the planning and the execution of the work has produced a committed workforce that has developed innovative techniques, resulting in safer and more efficient work evolutions.

  12. EA-1106: Explosive Waste Treatment Facility at Site 300, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, San Joaquin County, California

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposal to build, permit, and operate the Explosive Waste Treatment Facility to treat explosive waste at the U.S. Department of Energy's Lawrence...

  13. Hanford Site

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

    piping and duct work. The 224-U, 224-UA, and 203-UX buildings are the last of five ancillary facilities at U Plant that will be demolished with Recovery Act funds. The other...

  14. Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan for Corrective Action Unit 118: Area 27 Super Kukla Facility, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Rev. No.: 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    David Strand

    2006-09-01

    This Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) plan addresses closure for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 118, Area 27 Super Kukla Facility, identified in the ''Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order''. Corrective Action Unit 118 consists of one Corrective Action Site (CAS), 27-41-01, located in Area 27 of the Nevada Test Site. Corrective Action Site 27-41-01 consists of the following four structures: (1) Building 5400A, Reactor High Bay; (2) Building 5400, Reactor Building and access tunnel; (3) Building 5410, Mechanical Building; and (4) Wooden Shed, a.k.a. ''Brock House''. This plan provides the methodology for field activities needed to gather the necessary information for closing the CAS. There is sufficient information and process knowledge from historical documentation and site confirmation data collected in 2005 and 2006 to recommend closure of CAU 118 using the SAFER process. The Data Quality Objective process developed for this CAU identified the following expected closure option: closure in place with use restrictions. This expected closure option was selected based on available information including contaminants of potential concern, future land use, and assumed risks. There are two decisions that need to be answered for closure. Decision I is to determine the nature of contaminants of concern in environmental media or potential source material that could impact human health or the environment. Decision II is to determine whether or not sufficient information has been obtained to confirm that closure objectives were met. This decision includes determining whether the extent of any contamination remaining on site has been defined, and whether actions have been taken to eliminate exposure pathways.

  15. Facility Effluent Monitoring Plan determinations for the 600 Area facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nickels, J.M.

    1991-08-01

    This document determines the need for Facility Effluent Monitoring Plans for Westinghouse Hanford Company's 600 Area facilities on the Hanford Site. The Facility Effluent Monitoring Plan determinations were prepared in accordance with A Guide For Preparing Hanford Site Facility Effluent Monitoring Plans (WHC 1991). Five major Westinghouse Hanford Company facilities in the 600 Area were evaluated: the Purge Water Storage Facility, 212-N, -P, and -R Facilities, the 616 Facility, and the 213-J K Storage Vaults. Of the five major facilities evaluated in the 600 Area, none will require preparation of a Facility Effluent Monitoring Plan.

  16. Geotechnical characterization of the North Ramp of the Exploratory Studies Facility: Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project. Volume 2, NRG corehole data appendices

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brechtel, C.E.; Lin, Ming; Martin, E.; Kessel, D.S.

    1995-05-01

    This report presents the results of the geological and geotechnical characterization of the Miocene volcanic tuff rocks of the Timber Mountain and Paintbrush groups that the tunnel boring machine will encounter during excavations of the Exploratory Studies Facility (ESF) North Ramp. The information in this report was developed to support the design of the ESF North Ramp. The ESF is being constructed by the DOE as part of the Yucca Mountain Project site characterization activities. The purpose of these activities is to evaluate the potential to locate the national high-level nuclear waste repository on land within and adjacent to the Nevada Test Site (NTS), Nye County, Nevada. This report was prepared as part of the Soil and Rock Properties Studies in accordance with the 8.3.1.14.2 Study Plan to Provide Soil and Rock Properties. This is volume 2 which contains NRG Corehole Data for each of the NRG Holes.

  17. Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 118: Area 27 Super Kukla Facility, Nevada Test Site, Nevada with ROTC 1, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mark Burmeister

    2007-09-01

    This CR provides documentation and justification for the closure of CAU 118 without further corrective action. This justification is based on process knowledge and the results of the investigative and closure activities conducted in accordance with the CAU 118 SAFER Plan: Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan for CAU 118: Area 27 Super Kukla Facility, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (NNSA/NSO, 2006). The SAFER Plan provides information relating to site history as well as the scope and planning of the investigation. This CR also provides the analytical and radiological survey data to confirm that the remediation goals were met as specified in the CAU 118 SAFER Plan (NNSA/NSO, 2006). The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) approved the CAU 118 SAFER Plan (Murphy, 2006), which recommends closure in place with use restrictions (URs).

  18. Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan for Corrective Action Unit 116: Area 25 Test Cell C Facility, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2008-12-01

    This Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan identifies the activities required for the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 116, Area 25 Test Cell C Facility. The Test Cell C (TCC) Facility is located in Area 25 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS) approximately 25 miles northwest of Mercury, Nevada (Figure 1). CAU 116 is currently listed in Appendix III of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) of 1996 (as amended February 2008) and consists of two Corrective Action Sites (CASs): (1) CAS 25-23-20, Nuclear Furnace Piping; and (2) CAS 25-41-05, Test Cell C Facility. CAS 25-41-05 is described in the FFACO as the TCC Facility but actually includes Building 3210 and attached concrete shield wall only. CAU 116 will be closed by demolishing Building 3210, the attached concrete shield wall, and the nuclear furnace piping. In addition, as a best management practice (BMP), Building 3211 (moveable shed) will be demolished due to its close proximity to Building 3210. This will aid in demolition and disposal operations. Radiological surveys will be performed on the demolition debris to determine the proper disposal pathway. As much of the demolition debris as space allows will be placed into the Building 3210 basement structure. After filling to capacity with demolition debris, the basement structure will be mounded or capped and closed with administrative controls. Prior to beginning demolition activities and according to an approved Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP), representative sampling of surface areas that are known, suspected, or have the potential to contain hazardous constituents such as lead or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) will be performed throughout all buildings and structures. Sections 2.3.2, 4.2.2.2, 4.2.2.3, 4.3, and 6.2.6.1 address the methodologies employed that assure the solid debris placed in the basement structure will not contain contaminants of concern (COCs) above hazardous waste levels. The anticipated post-closure-posting requirements for the mounded/capped basement structure, as well as for the entire CAU, are addressed in Section 4.2.10. The site contains radiologically impacted surfaces and hazardous materials. Based on review of the historical information for CAU 116 and recent site inspections, there is sufficient process knowledge to close CAU 116 using the SAFER process. CAUs that may be closed using the SAFER process have conceptual corrective actions that are clearly identified. Consequently, corrective action alternatives can be chosen prior to completing a corrective action investigation, given anticipated investigation results. The SAFER process combines elements of the data quality objective (DQO) process and the observational approach to plan and conduct closure activities. The DQOs are used to identify the problem and define the type and quality of data needed to complete the investigation phase of the SAFER process. The purpose of the investigation phase is to verify the adequacy of existing information used to determine the chosen corrective action. The observational approach provides a framework for managing uncertainty during the planning and decision-making phases of the project. The SAFER process allows for technical decisions to be made based on information gathered during site visits, interviews, meetings, research, and a consensus of opinion by the decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) team members. Any uncertainties are addressed by documented assumptions that are verified by sampling and analysis, data evaluation, onsite observations, and contingency plans, as necessary. Closure activities may proceed simultaneously with site characterization as sufficient data are gathered to confirm or disprove the assumptions made during selection of the corrective action. If, at any time during the closure process, new information is discovered that indicates that closure activities should be revised, closure activities will be reevaluated as appropriate. Based on a detailed review of historical documentation, there is sufficient process know

  19. Grout Isolation and Stabilization of Structures and Materials within Nuclear Facilities at the U.S. Department of Energy, Hanford Site, Summary - 12309

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Phillips, S.J.; Phillips, M.; Etheridge, D. [Applied Geotechnical Engineering and Construction, Incorporated, Richland, Washington (United States); Chojnacki, D.W.; Herzog, C.B.; Matosich, B.J.; Steffen, J.M.; Sterling, R.T. [CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, Washington (United States); Flaucher, R.H.; Lloyd, E.R. [Fluor Federal Services, Incorporated, Richland, Washington (United States)

    2012-07-01

    Per regulatory agreement and facility closure design, U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Site nuclear fuel cycle structures and materials require in situ isolation in perpetuity and/or interim physicochemical stabilization as a part of final disposal or interim waste removal, respectively. To this end, grout materials are being used to encase facilities structures or are being incorporated within structures containing hazardous and radioactive contaminants. Facilities where grout materials have been recently used for isolation and stabilization include: (1) spent fuel separations, (2) uranium trioxide calcining, (3) reactor fuel storage basin, (4) reactor fuel cooling basin transport rail tanker cars and casks, (5) cold vacuum drying and reactor fuel load-out, and (6) plutonium fuel metal finishing. Grout components primarily include: (1) portland cement, (2) fly ash, (3) aggregate, and (4) chemical admixtures. Mix designs for these typically include aggregate and non aggregate slurries and bulk powders. Placement equipment includes: (1) concrete piston line pump or boom pump truck for grout slurry, (2) progressive cavity and shearing vortex pump systems, and (3) extendable boom fork lift for bulk powder dry grout mix. Grout slurries placed within the interior of facilities were typically conveyed utilizing large diameter slick line and the equivalent diameter flexible high pressure concrete conveyance hose. Other facilities requirements dictated use of much smaller diameter flexible grout conveyance hose. Placement required direct operator location within facilities structures in most cases, whereas due to radiological dose concerns, placement has also been completed remotely with significant standoff distances. Grout performance during placement and subsequent to placement often required unique design. For example, grout placed in fuel basin structures to serve as interim stabilization materials required sufficient bearing i.e., unconfined compressive strength, to sustain heavy equipment yet, low breakout force to permit efficient removal by track hoe bucket or equivalent construction equipment. Further, flow of slurries through small orifice geometries of moderate head pressures was another typical design requirement. Phase separation of less than 1 percent was a typical design requirement for slurries. On the order of 30,000 cubic meters of cementitious grout have recently been placed in the above noted U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Site facilities or structures. Each has presented a unique challenge in mix design, equipment, grout injection or placement, and ultimate facility or structure performance. Unconfined compressive and shear strength, flow, density, mass attenuation coefficient, phase separation, air content, wash-out, parameters and others, unique to each facility or structure, dictate the grout mix design for each. Each mix design was tested under laboratory and scaled field conditions as a precursor to field deployment. Further, after injection or placement of each grout formulation, the material was field inspected either by standard laboratory testing protocols, direct physical evaluation, or both. (authors)

  20. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Federal Facility Compliance...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Federal Facility Compliance Act Order for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Compliance Order HWCA 9697-5002 State California Agreement Type Federal Facility Agreement Legal...

  1. Application of pathways analyses for site performance prediction for the Gas Centrifuge Enrichment Plant and Oak Ridge Central Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pin, F.G.; Oblow, E.M.

    1984-01-01

    The suitability of the Gas Centrifuge Enrichment Plant and the Oak Ridge Central Waste Disposal Facility for shallow-land burial of low-level radioactive waste is evaluated using pathways analyses. The analyses rely on conservative scenarios to describe the generation and migration of contamination and the potential human exposure to the waste. Conceptual and numerical models are developed using data from comprehensive laboratory and field investigations and are used to simulate the long-term transport of contamination to man. Conservatism is built into the analyses when assumptions concerning future events have to be made or when uncertainties concerning site or waste characteristics exist. Maximum potential doses to man are calculated and compared to the appropriate standards. The sites are found to provide adequate buffer to persons outside the DOE reservations. Conclusions concerning site capacity and site acceptability are drawn. In reaching these conclusions, some consideration is given to the uncertainties and conservatisms involved in the analyses. Analytical methods to quantitatively assess the probability of future events to occur and the sensitivity of the results to data uncertainty may prove useful in relaxing some of the conservatism built into the analyses. The applicability of such methods to pathways analyses is briefly discussed. 18 refs., 9 figs.

  2. Final closure plan for the high-explosives open burn treatment facility at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Experimental Test Site 300

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mathews, S.

    1997-04-01

    This document addresses the interim status closure of the HE Open Bum Treatment Facility, as detailed by Title 22, Division 4.5, Chapter 15, Article 7 of the Califonia Code of Regulations (CCR) and by Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 265, Subpart G, ``Closure and Post Closure.`` The Closure Plan (Chapter 1) and the Post- Closure Plan (Chapter 2) address the concept of long-term hazard elimination. The Closure Plan provides for capping and grading the HE Open Bum Treatment Facility and revegetating the immediate area in accordance with applicable requirements. The Closure Plan also reflects careful consideration of site location and topography, geologic and hydrologic factors, climate, cover characteristics, type and amount of wastes, and the potential for contaminant migration. The Post-Closure Plan is designed to allow LLNL to monitor the movement, if any, of pollutants from the treatment area. In addition, quarterly inspections will ensure that all surfaces of the closed facility, including the cover and diversion ditches, remain in good repair, thus precluding the potential for contaminant migration.

  3. Site Management Guide (Blue Book)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2014-03-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy (Department) Office of Legacy Management (LM), established in 2003, manages the Department’s postclosure responsibilities and ensures the future protection of human health and the environment. During World War II and the Cold War, the Federal government developed and operated a vast network of industrial facilities for the research, production, and testing of nuclear weapons, as well as other scientific and engineering research. These processes left a legacy of radioactive and chemical waste, environmental contamination, and hazardous facilities and materials at well over 100 sites. Since 1989, the Department has taken an aggressive accelerated cleanup approach to reduce risks and cut costs. At most Departmental sites undergoing cleanup, some residual hazards will remain at the time cleanup is completed due to financial and technical impracticality. However, the Department still has an obligation to protect human health and the environment after cleanup is completed. LM fulfills DOE’s postclosure obligation by providing long-term management of postcleanup sites which do not have continuing missions. LM is also responsible for sites under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). Currently, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is responsible for site surveys and remediation at FUSRAP sites. Once remediation is completed, LM becomes responsible for long-term management. LM also has responsibility for uranium processing sites addressed by Title II of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA). UMTRCA Title II sites are sites that were commercially owned and are regulated under a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) license. For license termination, the owner must conduct an NRC-approved cleanup of any on-site radioactive waste remaining from former uranium ore-processing operations. The site owner must also provide full funding for inspections and, if necessary, ongoing maintenance. Once site cleanup is complete, LM accepts title to these sites on behalf of the United States and assumes long-term management.

  4. Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan for Corrective Action Unit 114: Area 25 EMAD Facility Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mark Burmeister

    2009-08-01

    This Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan addresses the actions needed to achieve closure for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 114, Area 25 EMAD Facility, identified in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO). Corrective Action Unit 114 comprises the following corrective action sites (CASs) located in Area 25 of the Nevada Test Site: • 25-41-03, EMAD Facility • 25-99-20, EMAD Facility Exterior Releases This plan provides the methodology for field activities needed to gather the necessary information for closing each CAS. There is sufficient information and process knowledge from historical documentation and investigations of similar sites regarding the expected nature and extent of potential contaminants to recommend closure of CAU 114 using the SAFER process. Additional information will be obtained by conducting a field investigation before selecting the appropriate corrective action for each CAS. It is anticipated that the results of the field investigation and implementation of a corrective action of clean closure will support a defensible recommendation that no further corrective action is necessary. If it is determined that complete clean closure cannot be accomplished during the SAFER, then a hold point will have been reached and the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) will be consulted to determine whether the remaining contamination will be closed under the alternative corrective action of closure in place. This will be presented in a closure report that will be prepared and submitted to NDEP for review and approval. The sites will be investigated based on the data quality objectives (DQOs) developed on April 30, 2009, by representatives of NDEP; U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office; Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture; and National Security Technologies, LLC. The DQO process was used to identify and define the type, amount, and quality of data needed to determine and implement appropriate corrective actions for each CAS in CAU 114. The following text summarizes the SAFER activities that will support the closure of CAU 114: • Perform site preparation activities (e.g., utilities clearances, radiological surveys). • Collect environmental samples from designated target populations (e.g., stained soil) to confirm or disprove the presence of contaminants of concern (COCs) as necessary to supplement existing information. • Collect samples of materials to determine whether potential source material (PSM) is present that may cause the future release of a COC to environmental media. • If no COCs or PSMs are present at a CAS, establish no further action as the corrective action. • If COCs exist, collect environmental samples from designated target populations (e.g., clean soil adjacent to contaminated soil) and submit for laboratory analyses to define the extent of COC contamination. • If a COC or PSM is present at a CAS, either: - Establish clean closure as the corrective action. The material to be remediated will be removed, disposed of as waste, and verification samples will be collected from remaining soil, or - Establish closure in place as the corrective action and implement the appropriate use restrictions. • Confirm the selected closure option is sufficient to protect human health and the environment.

  5. Crash hit frequency analysis of aircraft overflights of the Nevada Test Site (NTS) and the Device Assembly Facility (DAF)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kimura, C Y; Sanzo, D L; Sharirli, M

    1998-07-09

    Aircraft crashes are an element of external events required to be analyzed and documented in Facility Safety Analysis Reports (SARs) and Nuclear Explosive Safety Studies (NESS). Aircraft crashes into DOE facilities are of concern due to effects related to impact and fire that can potentially lead to penetration of the facility, disruption of operations, and the potential of release of radioactive and/or hazardous materials subsequent to the aircraft impact. Recent changes in the control of the airspace were not considered in previous safety studies of aircraft flights over the NTS [Refs. 4,5,6]. The Airspace changes have warranted review of the effects of the issued MOU on the Device Assembly Facility (DAF) Authorization Basis Documents [Refs. 4,5], the underlying analysis assumptions, and results relevant to aircraft crash. This report documents the review and analysis of aircraft crash hit frequency on the DAF within NTS. It focuses on the impact of airspace changes based on the MOU. The frequency of an aircraft crashing and hitting the DAF is in the 1 E-7 to E-8 range. While this is considered to be acceptably small, it should not be considered an upper bound. This conclusion should not be interpreted to mean that no further work need be done. The results of the analysis are highly dependent on the assumptions made and the available data. There is considerable uncertainty in the number of overflights which are taking place over the NTS and restricted airspace R-4808N. To reduce this uncertainty, additional follow-on work should be done to activate the monitor in the CP at NTS which is to receive information from the Nellis Range control station, to monitor the level of air activity in R-4808N and to recalculate the aircraft crash hit frequency on the DAF when better overflight estimates are obtained. Finally, to reduce the human error component, the process by which the DOE notifies the USAF of ?no-fly? periods for R-4808N during which SNM is present in the DAF should be formalized either by modifying an existing operational procedure or instituting a new procedure. Additionally, the process for DOE notification by DAF personnel of the presence of SNM should be formalized.

  6. Crash hit frequency analysis of aircraft overflights of the Nevada Test Site (NTS) and the Device Assembly Facility (DAF)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kimura, C. Y.; Sanzo, D. L.; Sharirli, M.

    1998-12-16

    Aircraft crashes are an element of external events required to be analyzed and documented in Facility Safety Analysis Reports (SARs) and Nuclear Explosive Safety Studies (NESS). Aircraft crashes into DOE facilities are of concern due to effects related to impact and fire that can potentially lead to penetration of the facility, disruption of operations, and the potential of release of radioactive and/or hazardous materials subsequent to the aircraft impact. Recent changes in the control of the airspace were not considered in previous safety studies of aircraft flights over the NTS [Refs. 4,5,6]. The Airspace changes have warranted review of the effects of the issued MOU on the Device Assembly Facility (DAF) Authorization Basis Documents [Refs. 4,5], the underlying analysis assumptions, and results relevant to aircraft crash. This report documents the review and analysis of aircraft crash hit frequency on the DAF within NTS. It focuses on the impact of airspace changes based on the MOU. The frequency of an aircraft crashing and hitting the DAF is in the 1 E-7 to E-8 range. While this is considered to be acceptably small, it should not be considered an upper bound. This conclusion should not be interpreted to mean that no further work need be done. The results of the analysis are highly dependent on the assumptions made and the available data. There is considerable uncertainty in the number of overflights which are taking place over the NTS and restricted airspace R-4808N. To reduce this uncertainty, additional follow-on work should be done to activate the monitor in the CP at NTS which is to receive information from the Nellis Range control station, to monitor the level of air activity in R-4808N and to recalculate the aircraft crash hit frequency on the DAF when better overflight estimates are obtained. Finally, to reduce the human error component, the process by which the DOE notifies the USAF of ?no-fly? periods for R-4808N during which SNM is present in the DAF should be formalized either by modifying an existing operational procedure or instituting a new procedure. Additionally, the process for DOE notification by DAF personnel of the presence of SNM should be formalized.

  7. MOSE: a feasibility study for optical turbulence forecasts with the Meso-Nh mesoscale model to support AO facilities at ESO sites (Paranal and Armazones)

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Masciadri, E; 10.1117/12.925924

    2012-01-01

    We present very encouraging preliminary results obtained in the context of the MOSE project, an on-going study aiming at investigating the feasibility of the forecast of the optical turbulence and meteorological parameters (in the free atmosphere as well as in the boundary and surface layer) at Cerro Paranal (site of the Very Large Telescope - VLT) and Cerro Armazones (site of the European Extremely Large Telescope - E-ELT), both in Chile. The study employs the Meso-Nh atmospheric mesoscale model and aims at supplying a tool for optical turbulence forecasts to support the scheduling of the scientific programs and the use of AO facilities at the VLT and the E-ELT. In this study we take advantage of the huge amount of measurements performed so far at Paranal and Armazones by ESO and the TMT consortium in the context of the site selection for the E-ELT and the TMT to constraint/validate the model. A detailed analysis of the model performances in reproducing the atmospheric parameters (T, V, p, H, ...) near the g...

  8. RCRA facility investigation/corrective measures study work plan for the 200-UP-2 Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-06-01

    The 200-UP-2 Operable Unit is one of two source operable units at the U Plant Aggregate Area at the Hanford Site. Source operable units include waste management units and unplanned release sites that are potential sources of radioactive and/or hazardous substance contamination. This work plan, while maintaining the title RFI/CMS, presents the background and direction for conducting a limited field investigation in the 200-UP-2 Operable Unit, which is the first part of the process leading to final remedy selection. This report discusses the background, prior recommendations, goals, organization, and quality assurance for the 200-UP-2 Operable Unit Work Plan. The discussion begins with a summary of the regulatory framework and the role of the work plan. The specific recommendations leading into the work plan are then addressed. Next, the goals and organization of the report are discussed. Finally, the quality assurance and supporting documentation are presented.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2008-04-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) plans to close the waste and classified material storage cells in the southeast quadrant of the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS), informally known as the '92-Acre Area', by 2011. The 25 shallow trenches and pits and the 13 Greater Confinement Disposal (GCD) borings contain various waste streams including low-level waste (LLW), low-level mixed waste (LLMW), transuranic (TRU), mixed transuranic (MTRU), and high specific activity LLW. The cells are managed under several regulatory and permit programs by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP). Although the specific closure requirements for each cell vary, 37 closely spaced cells will be closed under a single integrated monolayer evapotranspirative (ET) final cover. One cell will be closed under a separate cover concurrently. The site setting and climate constrain transport pathways and are factors in the technical approach to closure and performance assessment. Successful implementation of the integrated closure plan requires excellent communication and coordination between NNSA/NSO and the regulators.

  10. Hanford Site

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

    Media Visit to Hazardous Burial Ground Members of the media out at one of the most hazardous burial grounds on site to take a look at work funded by Recovery Act funds. Search...

  11. MOX Lead Assembly Fabrication at the Savannah River Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Geddes, R.L.; Spiker, D.L.; Poon, A.P.

    1997-12-01

    The U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced its intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) on the disposition of the nations weapon-usable surplus plutonium.This EIS is tiered from the Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Material Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement issued in December 1996,and the associated Record of Decision issued on January, 1997. The EIS will examine reasonable alternatives and potential environmental impacts for the proposed siting, construction, and operation of three types of facilities for plutonium disposition. The three types of facilities are: a pit disassembly and conversion facility, a facility to immobilize surplus plutonium in a glass or ceramic form for disposition, and a facility to fabricate plutonium oxide into mixed oxide (MOX) fuel.As an integral part of the surplus plutonium program, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) was tasked by the DOE Office of Fissile Material Disposition(MD) as the technical lead to organize and evaluate existing facilities in the DOE complex which may meet MD`s need for a domestic MOX fuel fabrication demonstration facility. The Lead Assembly (LA) facility is to produce 1 MT of usable test fuel per year for three years. The Savannah River Site (SRS) as the only operating plutonium processing site in the DOE complex, proposes two options to carry out the fabrication of MOX fuel lead test assemblies: an all Category I facility option and a combined Category I and non-Category I facilities option.

  12. Electro-Mechanical Manipulator for Use in the Remote Equipment Decontamination Cell at the Defense Waste Processing Facility, Savannah River Site - 12454

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lambrecht, Bill; Dixon, Joe [Par Systems, Shoreview, Minnesota, 55126 (United States); Neuville, John R. [Savannah River Remediation, Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, 29808 (United States)

    2012-07-01

    One of the legacies of the cold war is millions of liters of radioactive waste. One of the locations where this waste is stored is at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina. A major effort to clean up this waste is on-going at the defense waste processing facility (DWPF) at SRS. A piece of this effort is decontamination of the equipment used in the DWPF to process the waste. The remote equipment decontamination cell (REDC) in the DWPF uses electro-mechanical manipulators (EMM) arms manufactured and supplied by PaR Systems to decontaminate DWPF process equipment. The decontamination fluid creates a highly corrosive environment. After 25 years of operational use the original EMM arms are aging and need replacement. To support continued operation of the DWPF, two direct replacement EMM arms were delivered to the REDC in the summer of 2011. (authors)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Guzowski, R.V.; Newman, G.

    1993-12-01

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

  14. Options To Cleanup Site-wide Vadose Zone Contamination At The Hanford Site, WA, State

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Goswami, D. [Ph.D, and John Price, Nuclear Waste Program, Washington State Department of Ecology, Richland, WA (United States)

    2008-07-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site in south central Washington State lies along the Columbia River and is one of DOE's largest legacy waste management sites. Enormous radionuclide and chemical inventories exist below-ground. These include Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) storage facilities where hazardous and radioactive contaminants were discharged and leaked to the soil surface and to the deep vadose zone and groundwater. The vadose zone is also contaminated from facilities regulated by the RCRA and Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) Act. Hanford now contains as much as 28,300 cubic meters of soil contaminated with radionuclides from liquid wastes released near processing facilities. The Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, Tri-Party Agreement (TPA) has set the completion of the cleanup of these sites by 2024. There are numerous technical and regulatory challenges to cleanup of the vadose zone at the Hanford site. This paper attempts to identify the categories of deep vadose zone problem and identifies a few possible regulatory options to clean up the site under the mix of state and federal regulatory authorities. There are four major categories of vadose contamination areas at the Hanford Site. The first is laterally extensive with intermediate depth (ground surface to about 45 meters depth) mostly related to high volume effluent discharge into cribs, ponds and ditches of designated CERCLA facilities. The second is dominated by laterally less extensive mostly related to leaks from RCRA tank farms. The later contamination is often commingled at depth with wastes from adjacent CERCLA facilities. The third category is from the high volume CERCLA facilities extending from the surface to more than 60 meters below ground. Contamination from the later category crosses the entire thickness of the vadose zone and reached groundwater. The fourth category is the lower volume waste sites. There are multiple management options to clean up the above four categories of vadose zones sites. The following are some of the options considered for detailed evaluation: - Maintain separate decision processes for each RCRA and CERCLA units/waste sites with a more accommodating schedule. - Create new vadose zone operable units with limited geographical boundaries regardless of site category/origin and make an integrated decision. - Expand the existing CERCLA groundwater operable units to include the deep vadose zone - Use a combination of the above. Each option has pros and cons and regulatory limitations. Detailed evaluation of these options is required to support a cost effective expedited cleanup. (authors)

  15. Image analysis for facility siting: a comparison of low- and high-altitude image interpretability for land use/land cover mapping

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Borella, H.M.; Estes, J.E.; Ezra, C.E.; Scepan, J.; Tinney, L.R.

    1982-01-01

    For two test sites in Pennsylvania the interpretability of commercially acquired low-altitude and existing high-altitude aerial photography are documented in terms of time, costs, and accuracy for Anderson Level II land use/land cover mapping. Information extracted from the imagery is to be used in the evaluation process for siting energy facilities. Land use/land cover maps were drawn at 1:24,000 scale using commercially flown color infrared photography obtained from the United States Geological Surveys' EROS Data Center. Detailed accuracy assessment of the maps generated by manual image analysis was accomplished employing a stratified unaligned adequate class representation. Both are-weighted and by-class accuracies were documented and field-verified. A discrepancy map was also drawn to illustrate differences in classifications between the two map scales. Results show that the 1:24,000 scale map set was accurate (99% to 94% area-weighted) than the 1:62,500 scale set, especially when sampled by class (96% to 66%). The 1:24,000 scale maps were also more time-consuming and costly to produce, due mainly to higher image acquisition costs.

  16. Site characterization summary report for Waste Area Grouping 10 Wells at the Old Hydrofracture Facility, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-03-01

    The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, is operated for the Department of Energy (DOE) by Martin Marietta Energy Systems (Energy Systems). As part of its DOE mission, ORNL has pioneered waste disposal technologies throughout the years of site operations since World War II. In the late 1950s, efforts were made to develop a permanent disposal alternative to the surface impoundments at ORNL at the request of the National Academy of Sciences. One such technology, the hydrofracture process, involved forming fractures in an underlying geologic host formation (a low-permeability shale) at depths of up to 1000 ft and subsequently injecting a grout slurry containing low-level liquid waste, cement, and other additives at an injection pressure of about 2000 psi. The objective of the effort was to develop a grout slurry that could be injected as a liquid but would solidify after injection, thereby immobilizing the radioisotopes contained in the low-level liquid waste. The scope of this site characterization was the access, sampling, logging, and evaluation of observation wells near the Old Hydrofracture Facility (OHF) in preparation for plugging, recompletion, or other final disposition of the wells.

  17. Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Site-Specific Plan for the Oak Ridge Reservation. [Appendix contains accromyms list and maps of waste management facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1991-09-01

    The United States Department of Energy (DOE) is committed to achieving and maintaining environmental regulatory compliance at its waste sites and facilities, while responding to public concerns and emphasizing waste minimization. DOE publishes the Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Five-Year Plan (FYP) annually to document its progress towards these goals. The purpose of this Site-Specific Plan (SSP) is to describe the activities, planned and completed, undertaken to implement these FYP goals at the DOE Field Office-Oak Ridge (DOE/OR) installations and programs; specifically, for the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR), Oak Ridge Associated Universities (ORAU), and Hazardous Waste Remedial Action Program (HAZWRAP). Activities described in this SSP address hazardous, radioactive, mixed, and sanitary wastes, along with treatment, storage, and disposal of current production waste and legacy waste from past operation. The SSP is presented in sections emphasizing Corrective Activities (A), Environmental Restoration (ER), Waste Management (WM), Technology Development (TD), and Transportation; and includes descriptions of activities, resources, and milestones by installation or program. 87 tabs.

  18. RECOVERY ACT: TAPOCO PROJECT: CHEOAH UPGRADE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tran, Paul

    2013-02-28

    Under Funding Opportunity Announcement Number: DE-FOA-0000120, Recovery Act: Hydroelectric Facility Modernization, Alcoa Power Generating Inc. (APGI), a fully owned subsidiary of Alcoa Inc., implemented major upgrades at its Cheoah hydroelectric facility near Robbinsville, North Carolina.

  19. Hanford Site environmental management specification

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Grygiel, M.L.

    1998-06-10

    The US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office (RL) uses this Hanford Site Environmental Management Specification (Specification) to document top-level mission requirements and planning assumptions for the prime contractors involved in Hanford Site cleanup and infrastructure activities under the responsibility of the US Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management. This Specification describes at a top level the activities, facilities, and infrastructure necessary to accomplish the cleanup of the Hanford Site and assigns this scope to Site contractors and their respective projects. This Specification also references the key National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), and safety documentation necessary to accurately describe the cleanup at a summary level. The information contained in this document reflects RL`s application of values, priorities, and critical success factors expressed by those involved with and affected by the Hanford Site project. The prime contractors and their projects develop complete baselines and work plans to implement this Specification. These lower-level documents and the data that support them, together with this Specification, represent the full set of requirements applicable to the contractors and their projects. Figure 1-1 shows the relationship of this Specification to the other basic Site documents. Similarly, the documents, orders, and laws referenced in this specification represent only the most salient sources of requirements. Current and contractual reference data contain a complete set of source documents.

  20. Hanford Site

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

    Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility...

  1. Managing Waste Inventory and License Limits at the Perma-Fix Northwest Facility to Meet CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company (CHPRC) American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Deliverables - 12335

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Moak, Don J.; Grondin, Richard L. [Perma-Fix Environmental Services, Inc. - PESI, Richland, WA 99354 (United States); Triner, Glen C.; West, Lori D. [East Tennessee Materials and Energy Corporation - M and EC, Richland, WA 99354 (United States)

    2012-07-01

    CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company (CHRPC) is a prime contractor to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) focused on the largest ongoing environmental remediation project in the world at the DOE Hanford Site Central Plateau, i.e. the DOE Hanford Plateau Remediation Contract. The East Tennessee Materials and Energy Corporation (M and EC); a wholly owned subsidiary of Perma-Fix Environmental Services, Inc. (PESI), is a small business team member to CHPRC. Our scope includes project management; operation and maintenance of on-site storage, repackaging, treatment, and disposal facilities; and on-site waste management including waste receipt from generators and delivery to on-site and off-site treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. As part of this scope, M and EC staffs the centralized Waste Support Services organization responsible for all waste characterization and acceptance required to support CHPRC and waste generators across the Hanford Site. At the time of the CHPRC contract award (August 2008) slightly more than 9,000 cubic meters (m{sup 3}) of legacy waste was defined as 'no-path-forward waste'. A significant portion of this waste (7,650 m{sup 3}) comprised wastes with up to 50 grams of special nuclear materials (SNM) in oversized packages recovered during retrieval operations and large glove boxes removed from the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP). Through a collaborative effort between the DOE, CHPRC, and Perma-Fix Environmental Services, Inc. (PESI), pathways for these problematic wastes were developed that took advantage of commercial treatment capabilities at a nearby vendor facility, Perma-Fix Northwest (PFNW). In the spring of 2009, CHPRC initiated a pilot program under which they began shipping large package, low gram suspect TRU (<15 g SNM per container), and large package contact and remote handled MLLW to the off-site PFNW facility for treatment. PFNW is restricted by the SNM limits set for the total quantity of SNM allowed at the facility in accordance with the facility's radioactive materials license(s) (RML). While both CHPRC and PFNW maintain waste databases to track all waste movements, it became evident early in the process that a tool was needed that married the two systems to better track SNM inventories and sequence waste from the point of generation, through the PFNW facility, and back to the Hanford site for final disposition. This tool, known as the Treatment Integration and Planning Tool (TIPT), has become a robust planning tool that provides real-time data to support compliant and efficient waste generation, transportation, treatment, and disposition. TIPT is developing into the next generation tool that will change the way in which legacy wastes, retrieval wastes and decontamination and decommissioning operations are conducted on the Plateau Remediation Contract (PRC). The real value of the TIPT is its predictive capability. It allows the W and FMP to map out optimal windows for processing waste through the PFNW facility, or through any process that is in some way resource limited. It allows project managers to identify and focus on problem areas before shipments are affected. It has been modified for use in broader applications to predict turnaround times and identify windows of opportunity for processing higher gram wastes through PFNW and to allow waste generators, site-wide, to accurately predict scope, cost, and schedule for waste generation to optimize processing and eliminate storage, double handling, and related costs and unnecessary safety risks. The TIPT addresses the years old problem of how to effectively predict not only what needs to be done, but when. 'When' is the key planning parameter that has been ignored by the generator and processor for many years, but has proven to be the most important parameter for both parties. While further refinement is a natural part of any development process, the current improvements on the TIPT have shown that prediction is a powerful consideration. Even in lean times expected for the foreseeable future, the improved TIPT continues to

  2. Hanford Site

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

    Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford...

  3. Hanford Site

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

    facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility...

  4. Hanford Site

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

    Aerial of Groundwater Treatment Facility Aerial of Groundwater Treatment Facility Groundwater Treatment Facility Groundwater Treatment Facility Groundwater Treatment Facility...

  5. Conceptual Site Treatment Plan Laboratory for Energy-Related Health Research Environmental Restoration Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chapman, T.E.

    1993-10-01

    The Federal Facilities Compliance Act (the Act) of 1992 waives sovereign immunity for federal facilities for fines and penalties under the provisions of the Resource Recovery and Conservation Act, state, interstate, and local hazardous and solid waste management requirements. However, for three years the Act delays the waiver for violations involving US Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. The Act, however, requires that the DOE prepare a Conceptual Site Treatment Plan (CSTP) for each of its sites that generate or store mixed wastes (MWs). The purpose of the CSTP is to present DOE`s preliminary evaluations of the development of treatment capacities and technologies for treating a site`s MW. This CSTP presents the preliminary capacity and technology evaluation for the Laboratory for Energy-Related Health Research (LEHR). The five identified MW streams at LEHR are evaluated to the extent possible given available information. Only one MW stream is sufficiently well defined to permit a technology evaluation to be performed. Two other MW streams are in the process of being characterized so that an evaluation can be performed. The other two MW streams will be generated by the decommissioning of inactive facilities onsite within the next five years.

  6. Proposed site treatment plan (PSTP) Volumes I & II & reference document, Revision 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Helmich, E.; Noller, D.K.; Wierzbicki, K.S. [and others

    1995-09-27

    The Federal Facility Compliance Act requires the Department of Energy to undertake a national effort to develop Site Treatment Plans for each of its sites generating or storing mixed waste. Mixed waste contains both a hazardous waste subject to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and radioactive material subject to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. The Site Treatment Plan for the Savannah River Site proposes how SRS will treat mixed waste that is now stored on the site and mixed waste that Will be generated in the future. Also, the Site Treatment Plan identifies Savannah River Site mixed wastes that other Department of Energy facilities could treat and mixed waste from other facilities that the Savannah River Site could treat. The Site Treatment Plan has been approved by the State of South Carolina. The Department of Energy Will enter into a consent order with the State of South Carolina by October 6, 1995. The consent order will contain enforceable commitments to treat mixed waste.

  7. Feasibility Study of Economics and Performance of Solar Photovoltaics at the Tronox Facility in Savannah, Georgia. A Study Prepared in Partnership with the Environmental Protection Agency for the RE-Powering America's Land Initiative: Siting Renewable Energy on Potentially Contaminated Land and Mine Sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kiatreungwattana, K.; Geiger, J.; Healey, V.; Mosey, G.

    2013-03-01

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in accordance with the RE-Powering America's Land initiative, selected the Tronox Facility site in Savannah, Georgia, for a feasibility study of renewable energy production. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) provided technical assistance for this project. The purpose of this report is to assess the site for a possible photovoltaic (PV) system installation and estimate the cost, performance, and site impacts of different PV options. In addition, the report recommends financing options that could assist in the implementation of a PV system at the site.

  8. Application of the SELECS methodology to evaluate socioeconomic and environmental impacts of commercial-scale coal liquefaction plants at six potential sites in Kentucky. Final report from the study on development of environmental guidelines for the selection of sites for fossil energy conversion facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Northrop, G. M.; D'Ambra, C. A.

    1980-11-01

    Environmental and socioeconomic impacts likely to occur during the operational phase of two coal liquefaction processes have been evaluated with SELECS (Site Evaluation for Energy Conversion Systems) for each of six potential sites in Kentucky for commercial scale facilities capable of processing about 26,000 tons of coal per stream day. The processes considered in this evaluation are SRC-I, a direct liquefaction route with solid boiler fuel as the principal product, and Coal-to-Methanol-to-Gasoline, an indirect liquefaction route with transportation fuel as the primary product. For comparative purposes, the impacts of a 2-gigawatt coal-fired steam-electric power plant (with coal requirements comparable to the liquefaction facilities) and an automobile parts manufacturing plant (with employment requirements of 849, comparable to the liquefaction facilities) have also been evaluated at each site. At each site, impacts have been evaluated for one or two nearby cities or towns and four to six counties where significant impacts might be expected. The SELECS methodology affords a well-organized and efficient approach to collecting and assessing a large volume of data needed to comprehensively determine the potential socioeconomic and environmental impacts resulting from the implementation of commercial scale synfuel and other energy conversion facilities. This study has also shown that SELECS is equally applicable to determine the impacts of other facilities, such as automobile parts manufacturing. In brief, the SELECS methodology serves the purpose of objectively screening sites in order to choose one at which adverse impacts will be least, and/or to determine what aspect of a proposed facility might be modified to lessen impacts at a specific site.

  9. Facility effluent monitoring plan determinations for the 300 Area facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nickels, J.M.

    1991-08-01

    Facility Effluent Monitoring Plan determinations were conducted for the Westinghouse Hanford Company 300 Area facilities on the Hanford Site. These determinations have been prepared in accordance with A Guide For Preparing Hanford Site Facility Effluent Monitoring Plans. Sixteen Westinghouse Hanford Company facilities in the 300 Area were evaluated: 303 (A, B, C, E, F, G, J and K), 303 M, 306 E, 308, 309, 313, 333, 334 A, and the 340 Waste Handling Facility. The 303, 306, 313, 333, and 334 facilities Facility Effluent Monitoring Plan determinations were prepared by Columbia Energy and Environmental Services of Richland, Washington. The 340 Central Waste Complex determination was prepared by Bovay Northwest, Incorporated. The 308 and 309 facility determinations were prepared by Westinghouse Handford Company. Of the 16 facilities evaluated, 3 will require preparation of a Facility effluent Monitoring Plan: the 313 N Fuels Fabrication Support Building, 333 N Fuels fabrication Building, and the 340 Waste Handling Facility. 26 refs., 5 figs., 10 tabs.

  10. Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Compliance Demonstration for DOE Order 435.1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. Simonds

    2006-09-01

    This compliance demonstration document provides an analysis of the Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) Complex compliance with DOE Order 435.1. The ICDF Complex includes the disposal facility (landfill), evaporation pond, admin facility, weigh scale, decon building, treatment systems, and various staging/storage areas. These facilities were designed and are being constructed to be compliant with DOE Order 435.1, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Subtitle C, and Toxic Substances Control Act polychlorinated biphenyl design and construction standards. The ICDF Complex is designated as the central Idaho National Laboratory (INL) facilityyy for the receipt, staging/storage, treatment, and disposal of INL Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) waste streams. This compliance demonstration document discusses the conceptual site model for the ICDF Complex area. Within this conceptual site model, the selection of the area for the ICDF Complex is discussed. Also, the subsurface stratigraphy in the ICDF Complex area is discussed along with the existing contamination beneath the ICDF Complex area. The designs for the various ICDF Complex facilities are also included in this compliance demonstration document. These design discussions are a summary of the design as presented in the Remedial Design/Construction Work Plans for the ICDF landfill and evaporation pond and the Staging, Storage, Sizing, and Treatment Facility. Each of the major facilities or systems is described including the design criteria.

  11. Hanford Site Development Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rinne, C.A.; Curry, R.H.; Hagan, J.W.; Seiler, S.W.; Sommer, D.J. ); Yancey, E.F. )

    1990-01-01

    The Hanford Site Development Plan (Site Development Plan) is intended to guide the short- and long-range development and use of the Hanford Site. All acquisition, development, and permanent facility use at the Hanford Site will conform to the approved plan. The Site Development Plan also serves as the base document for all subsequent studies that involve use of facilities at the Site. This revision is an update of a previous plan. The executive summary presents the highlights of the five major topics covered in the Site Development Plan: general site information, existing conditions, planning analysis, Master Plan, and Five-Year Plan. 56 refs., 67 figs., 31 tabs.

  12. Cold Test Facility - Hanford Site

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity ofkandz-cm11 Outreach Home Room News PublicationsAuditsCluster Compatibility Mode Cluster CompatibilityCoalCode

  13. Effluent Treatment Facility - Hanford Site

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity ofkandz-cm11 Outreach Home Room NewsInformation Current HABFES Science NetworkMediator Effects of ProtonationEfficient

  14. Integrated Disposal Facility - Hanford Site

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity ofkandz-cm11 Outreach Home Room NewsInformation CurrentHenryInhibiting Individual NotchInspiringAppendix forWeatherizeCodes

  15. Projects & Facilities - Hanford Site

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity ofkandz-cm11 Outreach Home RoomPreservation of Fe(II) by Carbon-Rich Matricesstudents working1999-2000UniversityIn

  16. Hanford Site

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

    Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold...

  17. Hanford Site

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

    contaminated Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility...

  18. Hanford Site

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

    100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX...

  19. Hanford Site

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

    -HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX...

  20. Hanford Site

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

    groundwater 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility...

  1. Recovery Act: Oxy-Combustion Technology Development for Industrial-Scale Boiler Applications. Task 4 - Testing in Alstom's 15 MWth Boiler Simulation Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Levasseur, Armand

    2014-04-30

    Alstom Power Inc. (Alstom), under U.S. DOE/NETL Cooperative Agreement No. DE-NT0005290, is conducting a development program to generate detailed technical information needed for application of oxy-combustion technology. The program is designed to provide the necessary information and understanding for the next step of large-scale commercial demonstration of oxy combustion in tangentially fired boilers and to accelerate the commercialization of this technology. The main project objectives include: Design and develop an innovative oxyfuel system for existing tangentially-fired boiler units that minimizes overall capital investment and operating costs; Evaluate performance of oxyfuel tangentially fired boiler systems in pilot scale tests at Alstom’s 15 MWth tangentially fired Boiler Simulation Facility (BSF); Address technical gaps for the design of oxyfuel commercial utility boilers by focused testing and improvement of engineering and simulation tools; Develop the design, performance and costs for a demonstration scale oxyfuel boiler and auxiliary systems; Develop the design and costs for both industrial and utility commercial scale reference oxyfuel boilers and auxiliary systems that are optimized for overall plant performance and cost; and, Define key design considerations and develop general guidelines for application of results to utility and different industrial applications. The project was initiated in October 2008 and the scope extended in 2010 under an ARRA award. The project is scheduled for completion by April 30, 2014. Central to the project is 15 MWth testing in the BSF, which provided in-depth understanding of oxy-combustion under boiler conditions, detailed data for improvement of design tools, and key information for application to commercial scale oxy-fired boiler design. Eight comprehensive 15 MWth oxy-fired test campaigns were performed with different coals, providing detailed data on combustion, emissions, and thermal behavior over a matrix of fuels, oxy-process variables and boiler design parameters. Significant improvement of CFD modeling tools and validation against 15 MWth experimental data has been completed. Oxy-boiler demonstration and large reference designs have been developed, supported with the information and knowledge gained from the 15 MWth testing. This report addresses the results from the 15 MWth testing in the BSF.

  2. Post-Closure Report for Closed Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Corrective Action Units, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada For Fiscal Year 2012 (October 2011–September 2012)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2013-01-17

    This report serves as the combined annual report for post-closure activities for the following closed Corrective Action Units (CAUs): · CAU 90, Area 2 Bitcutter Containment · CAU 91, Area 3 U-3fi Injection Well · CAU 92, Area 6 Decon Pond Facility · CAU 110, Area 3 WMD U-3ax/bl Crater · CAU 111, Area 5 WMD Retired Mixed Waste Pits · CAU 112, Area 23 Hazardous Waste Trenches This report covers fiscal year 2012 (October 2011–September 2012).

  3. Post-Closure Report for Closed Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Corrective Action Units, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada for fiscal year 2013 (October 2012 - September 2013)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None,

    2014-01-31

    This report serves as the combined annual report for post-closure activities for the following closed Corrective Action Units (CAUs): CAU 90, Area 2 Bitcutter Containment; CAU 91, Area 3 U-3fi Injection Well; CAU 92, Area 6 Decon Pond Facility; CAU 110, Area 3 WMD U-3ax/bl Crater; CAU 111, Area 5 WMD Retired Mixed Waste Pits; and, CAU 112, Area 23 Hazardous Waste Trenches.

  4. Feasibility Evaluation and Retrofit Plan for Cold Crucible Induction Melter Deployment in the Defense Waste Processing Facility at Savannah River Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnes, A.B. [Savannah River National Laboratory, Washington Savannah River Company, Aiken, SC (United States); Iverson, D.C.; Adkins, B.J. [Liquid Waste Operations, Washington Savannah River Company, Aiken, SC (United States); Tchemitcheff, E. [AREVA NC Inc., Richland Office, Richland, WA (United States)

    2008-07-01

    Cold crucible induction melters (CCIM) have been proposed as an alternative technology for waste glass melting at the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) at Savannah River Site (SRS) as well as for other waste vitrification facilities. Proponents of this technology cite high temperature operation, high tolerance for noble metals and aluminum, high waste loading, high throughput capacity, and low equipment cost as the advantages over existing Joule Heated Melter (JHM) technology. The CCIM uses induction heating to maintain molten glass at high temperature. A water-cooled helical induction coil is connected to an AC current supply, typically operating at frequencies from 100 kHz to 5 MHz. The oscillating magnetic field generated by the oscillating current flow through the coil induces eddy currents in conductive materials within the coil. Those oscillating eddy currents, in turn, generate heat in the material. In the CCIM, the induction coil surrounds a 'Cold Crucible' which is formed by metal tubes, typically copper or stainless steel. The tubes are constructed such that the magnetic field does not couple with the crucible. Therefore, the field generated by the induction coil couples primarily with the conductive medium (hot glass) within. The crucible tubes are water cooled to maintain their temperature between 100 deg. C to 200 deg. C so that a protective layer of molten glass and/or batch material, referred to as a 'skull', forms between them and the hot, corrosive melt. Because the protective skull is the only material directly in contact with the molten glass, the CCIM doesn't have the temperature limitations of traditional refractory lined JHM. It can be operated at melt temperatures in excess of 2000 deg. C, allowing processing of high waste loading batches and difficult-to-melt compounds. The CCIM is poured through a bottom drain, typically through a water-cooled slide valve that starts and stops the pour stream. To promote uniform temperature distribution and increase heat transfer to the slurry fed High Level Waste (HLW) sludge, the CCIM may be equipped with bubblers and/or water cooled mechanical agitators. The DWPF could benefit from use of CCIM technology, especially in light of our latest projections of waste volume to be vitrified. Increased waste loading and increased throughput could result in substantial life cycle cost reduction. In order to significantly surpass the waste throughput capability of the currently installed JHM, it may be necessary to install two 950 mm CCIMs in the DWPF Melt Cell. A cursory evaluation of system design requirements and modifications to the facility that may be required to support installation and operation of two 950 mm CCIMs was performed. Based on this evaluation, it appears technically feasible to position two CCIMs in the Melt Cell of the DWPF within the existing footprint of the current melter. Interfaces with support systems and controls including Melter Feed, Power, Melter Cooling Water, Melter Off-gas, and Canister Operations must be designed to support dual CCIM operations. This paper describes the CCIM technology and identifies technical challenges that must be addressed in order to implement CCIMs in the DWPF. (authors)

  5. FEASIBILITY EVALUATION AND RETROFIT PLAN FOR COLD CRUCIBLE INDUCTION MELTER DEPLOYMENT IN THE DEFENSE WASTE PROCESSING FACILITY AT SAVANNAH RIVER SITE 8118

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnes, A; Dan Iverson, D; Brannen Adkins, B

    2008-02-06

    Cold crucible induction melters (CCIM) have been proposed as an alternative technology for waste glass melting at the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) at Savannah River Site (SRS) as well as for other waste vitrification facilities. Proponents of this technology cite high temperature operation, high tolerance for noble metals and aluminum, high waste loading, high throughput capacity, and low equipment cost as the advantages over existing Joule Heated Melter (JHM) technology. The CCIM uses induction heating to maintain molten glass at high temperature. A water-cooled helical induction coil is connected to an AC current supply, typically operating at frequencies from 100 KHz to 5 MHz. The oscillating magnetic field generated by the oscillating current flow through the coil induces eddy currents in conductive materials within the coil. Those oscillating eddy currents, in turn, generate heat in the material. In the CCIM, the induction coil surrounds a 'Cold Crucible' which is formed by metal tubes, typically copper or stainless steel. The tubes are constructed such that the magnetic field does not couple with the crucible. Therefore, the field generated by the induction coil couples primarily with the conductive medium (hot glass) within. The crucible tubes are water cooled to maintain their temperature between 100 C to 200 C so that a protective layer of molten glass and/or batch material, referred to as a 'skull', forms between them and the hot, corrosive melt. Because the protective skull is the only material directly in contact with the molten glass, the CCIM doesn't have the temperature limitations of traditional refractory lined JHM. It can be operated at melt temperatures in excess of 2000 C, allowing processing of high waste loading batches and difficult-to-melt compounds. The CCIM is poured through a bottom drain, typically through a water-cooled slide valve that starts and stops the pour stream. To promote uniform temperature distribution and increase heat transfer to the slurry fed High Level Waste (HLW) sludge, the CCIM may be equipped with bubblers and/or water cooled mechanical agitators. The DWPF could benefit from use of CCIM technology, especially in light of our latest projections of waste volume to be vitrified. Increased waste loading and increased throughput could result in substantial life cycle cost reduction. In order to significantly surpass the waste throughput capability of the currently installed JHM, it may be necessary to install two 950 mm CCIMs in the DWPF Melt Cell. A cursory evaluation of system design requirements and modifications to the facility that may be required to support installation and operation of two 950 mm CCIMs was performed. Based on this evaluation, it appears technically feasible to position two CCIMs in the Melt Cell of the DWPF within the existing footprint of the current melter. Interfaces with support systems and controls including Melter Feed, Power, Melter Cooling Water, Melter Off-gas, and Canister Operations must be designed to support dual CCIM operations. This paper describes the CCIM technology and identifies technical challenges that must be addressed in order to implement CCIMs in the DWPF.

  6. TECHNICAL BASIS FOR DOE STANDARD 3013 EQUIVALENCY SUPPORTING REDUCED TEMPERATURE STABILIZATION OF OXALATE-DERIVED PLUTONIUM OXIDE PRODUCED BY THE HB-LINE FACILITY AT SAVANNAH RIVER SITE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Duffey, J.; Livingston, R.; Berg, J.; Veirs, D.

    2012-07-02

    The HB-Line (HBL) facility at the Savannah River Site (SRS) is designed to produce high-purity plutonium dioxide (PuO{sub 2}) which is suitable for future use in production of Mixed Oxide (MOX) fuel. The MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility (MFFF) requires PuO{sub 2} feed to be packaged per the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Standard 3013 (DOE-STD-3013) to comply with the facility's safety basis. The stabilization conditions imposed by DOE-STD-3013 for PuO{sub 2} (i.e., 950 C for 2 hours) preclude use of the HBL PuO{sub 2} in direct fuel fabrication and reduce the value of the HBL product as MFFF feedstock. Consequently, HBL initiated a technical evaluation to define acceptable operating conditions for production of high-purity PuO{sub 2} that fulfills the DOE-STD-3013 criteria for safe storage. The purpose of this document is to demonstrate that within the defined operating conditions, the HBL process will be equivalent for meeting the requirements of the DOE-STD-3013 stabilization process for plutonium-bearing materials from the DOE complex. The proposed 3013 equivalency reduces the prescribed stabilization temperature for high-purity PuO{sub 2} from oxalate precipitation processes from 950 C to 640 C and places a limit of 60% on the relative humidity (RH) at the lowest material temperature. The equivalency is limited to material produced using the HBL established flow sheet, for example, nitric acid anion exchange and Pu(IV) direct strike oxalate precipitation with stabilization at a minimum temperature of 640 C for four hours (h). The product purity must meet the MFFF acceptance criteria of 23,600 {micro}g/g Pu (i.e., 2.1 wt %) total impurities and chloride content less than 250 {micro}g/g of Pu. All other stabilization and packaging criteria identified by DOE-STD-3013-2012 or earlier revisions of the standard apply. Based on the evaluation of test data discussed in this document, the expert judgment of the authors supports packaging the HBL product under a 3013 equivalency. Under the defined process conditions and associated material specifications, the high-purity PuO{sub 2} produced in HBL presents no unique safety concerns for packaging or storage in the 3013 required configuration. The PuO{sub 2} produced using the HBL flow sheet conditions will have a higher specific surface area (SSA) than PuO{sub 2} stabilized at 950 C and, consequently, under identical conditions will adsorb more water from the atmosphere. The greatest challenge to HBL operators will be controlling moisture content below 0.5 wt %. However, even at the 0.5 wt % moisture limit, the maximum acceptable pressure of a stoichiometric mixture of hydrogen and oxygen in the 3013 container is greater than the maximum possible pressure for the HBL PuO{sub 2} product.

  7. Portsmouth Site Delivers First Radioactive Waste Shipment to...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Portsmouth Site Delivers First Radioactive Waste Shipment to Disposal Facility in Texas Portsmouth Site Delivers First Radioactive Waste Shipment to Disposal Facility in Texas...

  8. HWMA/RCRA Closure Plan for the TRA Fluorinel Dissolution Process Mockup and Gamma Facilities Waste System

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    K. Winterholler

    2007-01-31

    This Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act closure plan was developed for the Test Reactor Area Fluorinel Dissolution Process Mockup and Gamma Facilities Waste System, located in Building TRA-641 at the Reactor Technology Complex (RTC), Idaho National Laboratory Site, to meet a further milestone established under the Voluntary Consent Order SITE-TANK-005 Action Plan for Tank System TRA-009. The tank system to be closed is identified as VCO-SITE-TANK-005 Tank System TRA-009. This closure plan presents the closure performance standards and methods for achieving those standards.

  9. Study of the impacts of regulations affecting the acceptance of Integrated Community Energy Systems: public utility, energy facility siting and municipal franchising regulatory programs in the United States. Preliminary background report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Feurer, D.A.; Weaver, C.L.; Gallagher, K.C.; Hejna, D.; Rielley, K.J.

    1980-01-01

    This report is a summary of a series of preliminary reports describing the laws and regulatory programs of the United states and each of the 50 states affecting the siting and operation of energy generating facilities likely to be used in Integrated Community Energy Systems (ICES). A brief summary of public utility regulatory programs, energy facility siting programs, and municipal franchising authority is presented in this report to identify how such programs and authority may impact on the ability of an organization, whether or not it be a regulated utility, to construct and operate an ICES. Subsequent reports will (1) describe public utility rate regulatory procedures and practices as they might affect an ICES, (2) analyze each of the aforementioned regulatory programs to identify impediments to the development of ICES, and (3) recommend potential changes in legislation and regulatory practices and procedures to overcome such impediments.

  10. Anti-malarial prescription practices among outpatients with laboratory-confirmed malaria in the setting of a health facility-based sentinel site surveillance system in Uganda

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    2013-01-01

    the proportion prescribed quinine versus ACT differed basedfirst-line therapy. Oral quinine was recom- mended asmal- aria and parenteral quinine remained first-line therapy

  11. Mobile Facility

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of NaturalDukeWakefieldSulfateSciTechtail.Theory ofDid you notHeatMaRIEdioxide capture |GE PutsgovSitesMobile Facility AMF

  12. Site characterization progress report: Yucca Mountain, Nevada, October 1, 1994--March 31, 1995, Number 12. Nuclear Waste Policy Act (Section 113)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-08-01

    During the first half of fiscal year 1995, most activities at the Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project were directed at implementing the Program Plan developed by the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. The Plan is designed to enable the Office to make measurable and significant progress toward key objectives over the next five years within the financial resources that can be realistically expected. Activities this period focused on the immediate goal of determining by 1998 whether Yucca Mountain, Nevada, is technically suitable as a possible site for a geologic repository for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. Work on the Project advanced in several critical areas, including programmatic activities such as issuing the Program Plan, completing the first technical basis report to support the assessment of three 10 CFR 960 guidelines, developing the Notice of Intent for the Environmental Impact Statement, submitting the License Application Annotated Outline, and beginning a rebaselining effort to conform with the goals of the Program Plan. Scientific investigation and analysis of the site and design and construction activities to support the evaluation of the technical suitability of the site also advanced. Specific details relating to all Project activities and reports generated are presented in this report.

  13. Hanford Site

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

    Groundwater Treatment Facility Interior Groundwater Treatment Facility Interior Groundwater Treatment Facility Operations Groundwater Treatment Facility Operations Groundwater...

  14. Hanford Site

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

    savings Groundwater Treatment Facility Interior Groundwater Treatment Facility Interior Groundwater Treatment Facility Operations Groundwater Treatment Facility Operations...

  15. Hanford Site

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

    resin Groundwater Treatment Facility Interior Groundwater Treatment Facility Interior Groundwater Treatment Facility Operations Groundwater Treatment Facility Operations...

  16. Environmental assessment: South microwave communication facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1989-06-01

    Western Area Power Administration (Western) is proposing to construct, operate, and maintain eight microwave repeater stations in southwestern Colorado, southeastern Utah, and northern Arizona, in order to meet the minimum fade criteria established by the Western Systems Coordinating Council (WSCC) for the operation and protection of electric power systems. The proposed microwave facilities would increase the reliability of communication. This environmental assessment (EA) describes the existing environmental conditions and the impacts from construction of the eight microwave communication facilities. The EA was prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508), and the Department of Energy Guidelines (52 FR 47662, December 15, 1987). The proposed project would consist of constructing eight microwave facilities, each of which would include a self-supported lattice tower, an equipment building, a propane tank, distribution lines to provide electric power to the sites, and access roads to the sites. The facilities would be constructed in San Miguel and Montezuma Counties in Colorado, San Juan County, Utah, and Navajo, Apache, Coconino, and Yavapai Counties in Arizona. 20 refs., 2 figs., 2 tabs.

  17. Geophysical InversionFacility

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Oldenburg, Douglas W.

    UBC Geophysical InversionFacility Modelling and Inversion of EMI data collected over magnetic soils of EMI data acquired at sites with magnetic soils · Geophysical Proveouts · Geonics EM63 Data · First model parameters: · Location · Orientation · Polarizabilities 4 #12;UBC Geophysical Inversion Facility

  18. Land and Facility Use Planning

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

    1996-07-09

    The Land and Facility Use Planning process provides a way to guide future site development and reuse based on the shared long-term goals and objectives of the Department, site and its stakeholders. Does not cancel other directives.

  19. Annual Hanford Site Environmental Permitting Status Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HOMAN, N.A.

    2000-10-01

    The information contained in, and/or referenced in, this Annual Hanford Site Environmental Permitting Status Report addresses Permit Condition II.W (Other Permits and/or Approvals) of the Dangerous Waste Portion of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Permit for the Treatment, Storage, and Disposal of Dangerous Waste, issued by the Washington State Department of Ecology (WA7890008967). Condition II.W specifies that the Permittees are responsible for obtaining all other applicable federal, state, and local permits authorizing the development and operation of the Hanford Facility. This status report also addresses Permit Condition I.E.22, as interpreted in Section 12.1.25 of the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application, General Information Portion (DOE/RL-91-28, Rev. 4), that states this report will be prepared annually and a copy of this report will be placed in the Facility Operating Record, General Information file by October 1 of each year.

  20. Authorized Limits for the Release of a 25 Ton Locomotive, Serial Number 21547, at the Area 25 Engine Maintenance, Assembly, and Disassembly Facility, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jeremy Gwin and Douglas Frenette

    2010-04-08

    This document contains process knowledge and radiological data and analysis to support approval for release of the 25-ton locomotive, Serial Number 21547, at the Area 25 Engine Maintenance, Assembly, and Disassembly (EMAD) Facility, located on the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The 25-ton locomotive is a small, one-of-a-kind locomotive used to move railcars in support of the Nuclear Engine for Rocket Vehicle Application project. This locomotive was identified as having significant historical value by the Nevada State Railroad Museum in Boulder City, Nevada, where it will be used as a display piece. A substantial effort to characterize the radiological conditions of the locomotive was undertaken by the NTS Management and Operations Contractor, National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec). During this characterization process, seven small areas on the locomotive had contamination levels that exceeded the NTS release criteria (limits consistent with U.S. Department of Energy [DOE] Order DOE O 5400.5, “Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment”). The decision was made to perform radiological decontamination of these known accessible impacted areas to further the release process. On February 9, 2010, NSTec personnel completed decontamination of these seven areas to within the NTS release criteria. Although all accessible areas of the locomotive had been successfully decontaminated to within NTS release criteria, it was plausible that inaccessible areas of the locomotive (i.e., those areas on the locomotive where it was not possible to perform radiological surveys) could potentially have contamination above unrestricted release limits. To access the majority of these inaccessible areas, the locomotive would have to be disassembled. A complete disassembly for a full radiological survey could have permanently destroyed parts and would have ruined the historical value of the locomotive. Complete disassembly would also add an unreasonable financial burden for the contractor. A decision was reached between the NTS regulator and NSTec, opting for alternative authorized limits from DOE Headquarters. In doing so, NSTec personnel performed a dose model using the DOE-approved modeling code RESRAD-BUILD v3.5 to evaluate scenarios. The parameters used in the dose model were conservative. NSTec’s Radiological Engineering Calculation, REC-2010-001, “Public Dose Estimate from the EMAD 25 Ton Locomotive,” concluded that the four scenarios evaluated were below the 25-millirem per year limit, the “likely” dose scenarios met the “few millirem in a year” criteria, and that the EMAD 25-ton locomotive met the radiological requirements to be released with residual radioactivity to the public.

  1. Hanford Site

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

    100 DX Pump and Treat Facility 100 DX Pump and Treat Facility Groundwater Treatment Facility Interior Groundwater Treatment Facility Interior Groundwater Treatment Facility...

  2. 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

  3. Umatilla Satellite and Release Sites Project : Final Siting Report.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Montgomery, James M.

    1992-04-01

    This report presents the results of site analysis for the Umatilla Satellite and Release Sites Project. The purpose of this project is to provide engineering services for the siting and conceptual design of satellite and release facilities for the Umatilla Basin hatchery program. The Umatilla Basin hatchery program consists of artificial production facilities for salmon and steelhead to enhance production in the Umatilla River as defined in the Umatilla master plan approved in 1989 by the Northwest Power Planning Council. Facilities identified in the master plan include adult salmon broodstock holding and spawning facilities, facilities for recovery, acclimation, and/or extended rearing of salmon juveniles, and development of river sites for release of hatchery salmon and steelhead. The historic and current distribution of fall chinook, summer chinook, and coho salmon and steelhead trout was summarized for the Umatilla River basin. Current and future production and release objectives were reviewed. Twenty seven sites were evaluated for the potential and development of facilities. Engineering and environmental attributes of the sites were evaluated and compared to facility requirements for water and space. Site screening was conducted to identify the sites with the most potential for facility development. Alternative sites were selected for conceptual design of each facility type. A proposed program for adult holding facilities, final rearing/acclimation, and direct release facilities was developed.

  4. Proposed Site Treatment Plan (PSTP). STP reference document

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-02-22

    The Department of Energy (DOE) is required by Section 3021(b) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended by the Federal Facility Compliance Act (FFCAct), to prepare a plan describing the development of treatment capacities and technologies for treating mixed waste (hazardous/radioactive waste). DOE decided to prepare its site treatment plan in a three phased approach. The first phase, called the Conceptual Site Treatment Plan (CSTP), was issued in October 1993. At the Savannah River Site (SRS) the CSTP described mixed waste streams generated at SRS and listed treatment scenarios for each waste stream utilizing an onsite, offsite DOE, and offsite or onsite commercial or vendor treatment option. The CSTP is followed by the Draft Site Treatment Plan (DSTP), due to be issued in August 1994. The DSTP, the current activity., will narrow the options discussed in the CSTP to a preferred treatment option, if possible, and will include waste streams proposed to be shipped to SRS from other DOE facilities as well as waste streams SRS may send offsite for treatment. The SRS DSTP process has been designed to address treatment options for each of the site`s mixed waste streams. The SRS Proposed Site Treatment Plan (PSTP) is due to be issued in February 1995. The compliance order would be derived from the PSTP.

  5. DECOMMISSIONING CHALLENGES AT THE ROCKY FLATS ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY SITE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dorr, K. A.; Hoover, J.

    2002-02-25

    This paper presents a discussion of the demolition of the Building 788 cluster at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (RFETS) in Golden, Colorado. The Building 788 Cluster was a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permitted storage facilities and ancillary structures. Topics covered include the methods employed for Project Planning, Regulatory Compliance, Waste Management, Hazard Identification, Radiological Controls, Risk Management, Field Implementation, and Cost Schedule control, and Lessons Learned and Project Closeout.

  6. Recovery Act

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Recovery Act and Energy Department programs were designed to stimulate the economy while creating new power sources, conserving resources and aligning the nation to once again lead the global energy economy.

  7. Regional Radiological Security Partnership in Southeast Asia – Increasing the Sustainability of Security Systems at the Site-Level by Using a Model Facility Approach

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chamberlain, Travis L.; Dickerson, Sarah; Ravenhill, Scott D.; Murray, Allan; Morris, Frederic A.; Herdes, Gregory A.

    2009-10-07

    In 2004, Australia, through the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO), created the Regional Security of Radioactive Sources (RSRS) project and partnered with the U.S. Department of Energy’s Global Threat Reduction Initiative (GTRI) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to form the Southeast Asian Regional Radiological Security Partnership (RRSP). The intent of the RRSP is to cooperate with countries in Southeast Asia to improve the security of their radioactive sources. This Southeast Asian Partnership supports objectives to improve the security of high risk radioactive sources by raising awareness of the need and developing national programs to protect and control such materials, improve the security of such materials, and recover and condition the materials no longer in use. The RRSP has utilized many tools to meet those objectives including: provision of physical protection upgrades, awareness training, physical protection training, regulatory development, locating and recovering orphan sources, and most recently - development of model security procedures at a model facility. This paper discusses the benefits of establishing a model facility, the methods employed by the RRSP, and three of the expected outcomes of the Model Facility approach. The first expected outcome is to increase compliance with source security guidance materials and national regulations by adding context to those materials, and illustrating their impact on a facility. Second, the effectiveness of each of the tools above is increased by making them part of an integrated system. Third, the methods used to develop the model procedures establishes a sustainable process that can ultimately be transferred to all facilities beyond the model. Overall, the RRSP has utilized the Model Facility approach as an important tool to increase the security of radioactive sources, and to position facilities and countries for the long term secure management of those sources.

  8. Manhattan Project Signature Facilities | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Reactor, the T Plant Chemical Separations Building, the V-Site Assembly BuildingGun Site, and the Trinity Site. Two of the facilities--the Metallurgical Laboratory at the...

  9. ARM - Sites

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of NaturalDukeWakefieldSulfateSciTechtail.Theory of raregovAboutRecovery Act Recovery Act Logo SubscribegovSite Index Expand

  10. Annual Hanford Site environmental permitting status report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sonnichsen, J.C.

    1998-09-17

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

  11. West Valley Demonstration Project Site Environmental Report Calendar Year 2000

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2001-08-31

    The annual site environmental monitoring report for the West Valley Demonstration Project nuclear waste management facility.

  12. Independent Oversight Inspection, Savannah River Site- December 2009

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Inspection of Reinforced Concrete Construction at the Savannah River Site Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility

  13. Sandia Energy - Test Site Operations & Maintenance Safety

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

    Test Site Operations & Maintenance Safety Home Stationary Power Energy Conversion Efficiency Wind Energy SWiFT Facility & Testing Test Site Operations & Maintenance Safety Test...

  14. Y-12 Removes Nuclear Materials from Two Facilities to Reduce...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Removes Nuclear Materials from Two Facilities to Reduce Site's Nuclear Footprint (Alpha 5 and 9720-38 No Longer Designated as Nuclear Facilities) | National Nuclear Security...

  15. Hanford Site

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

    Fast Flux Test Facility PRC Fast Flux Test Facility PRC Fast Flux Test Facility PRC Fast Flux Test Facility PRC Fast Flux Test Facility PRC Fast Flux Test Facility PRC Fast Flux...

  16. Hanford Site

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

    FFTF PRC Fast Flux Test Facility PRC Fast Flux Test Facility PRC Fast Flux Test Facility PRC Fast Flux Test Facility PRC Fast Flux Test Facility PRC Fast Flux Test Facility PRC...

  17. Hanford Site

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

    Treatment Facility Aerial Photo of 200 West Groundwater Treatment Facility Drilling a Well Drilling a Well 200 West Facility Under Construction 200 West Facility Under...

  18. Hanford Site

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

    Pump and Treat Operator Pump and Treat Operator 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater...

  19. Hanford Site

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

    6.jpg Gallery: 200 West Groundwater Treatment LEED Facility Title: Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Name: Hanford LEED Gold Facility Document Date: 05082012...

  20. Hanford Site

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

    2.jpg Gallery: 200 West Groundwater Treatment LEED Facility Title: Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Name: Hanford LEED Gold Facility Document Date: 05082012...

  1. Hanford Site

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

    Gold Construction Material Reuse Construction Material Reuse Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford...

  2. Hanford Site

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

    68.jpg Gallery: 200 West Groundwater Treatment LEED Facility Title: Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Name: Hanford LEED Gold Facility Document Date: 05082012...

  3. Hanford Site

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

    46.jpg Gallery: 200 West Groundwater Treatment LEED Facility Title: Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Name: Hanford LEED Gold Facility Document Date: 05082012...

  4. Hanford Site

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

    LEED Construction Material Reuse Construction Material Reuse Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford...

  5. Hanford Site

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

    1.jpg Gallery: 200 West Groundwater Treatment LEED Facility Title: Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Name: Hanford LEED Gold Facility Document Date: 05082012...

  6. Hanford Site

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

    21.jpg Gallery: 200 West Groundwater Treatment LEED Facility Title: Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Name: Hanford LEED Gold Facility Document Date: 05082012...

  7. Hanford Site

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

    3s.jpg Gallery: 200 West Groundwater Treatment LEED Facility Title: Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Name: Hanford LEED Gold Facility Document Date: 05082012...

  8. Hanford Site

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

    Treatment Facility Construction Material Reuse Construction Material Reuse Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold...

  9. Hanford Site

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

    3.png Gallery: 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility Title: 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility Name: 100-HX Groundwater Facility Document Date: 01012011...

  10. Hanford Site

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

    groundwater treatment 100 DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 DX...

  11. Hanford Site

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

    8.JPG Gallery: 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility Title: 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility Name: 100-HX Groundwater Facility Document Date: 01012011...

  12. Hanford Site

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

    HX09.JPG Gallery: 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility Title: 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility Name: 100-HX Groundwater Facility Document Date: 01012011...

  13. Hanford Site

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

    1.JPG Gallery: 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility Title: 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility Name: 100-HX Groundwater Facility Document Date: 01012011...

  14. Hanford Site

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

    100 HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 HX Groundwater Treatment...

  15. Hanford Site

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

    411.jpg Gallery: 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility Title: 100DX Treatment Facility Under Construction 100DX Treatment Facility Under Construction Name: 100DX Treatment Facility...

  16. Hanford Site

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

    2.png Gallery: 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility Title: 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility Name: 100-HX Groundwater Facility Document Date: 01012011...

  17. Hanford Site

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

    Groundwater Treatment Resin Groundwater Treatment Resin 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX...

  18. Hanford Site

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

    7.JPG Gallery: 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility Title: 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility Name: 100-HX Groundwater Facility Document Date: 01012011...

  19. Hanford Site

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

    DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 DX Groundwater Treatment...

  20. Hanford Site

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

    Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 DX Groundwater Treatment...

  1. Hanford Site

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

    Area 100 HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100 HX Groundwater...

  2. Union job fight boiling at DOE cleanup sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Setzer, S.W.

    1993-11-15

    The US DOE is facing a growing jurisdictional dispute over which unions will perform the majority of clean-up work at its facilities. Unions affiliated with the AFL-CIO Metal Trades Council representing operations employees at the sites believe they have a fundamental right to work. Unions in the AFL-CIO's Building and Construction Trades Dept. insist that they have a clear mandate under federal labor law and the Davis-Bacon Act. The issue has heated up in recent weeks at the policy level and is boiling in a contentious dispute at DOE's Fernald site in Ohio.

  3. Safety Basis Requirements for Nonnuclear Facilities at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Site-Specific Work Smart Standard Revision 3 December 2006

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Beach, D; Brereton, S; Failor, R; Hildum, J; Ingram, C; Spagnolo, S; van Warmerdam, C

    2007-06-07

    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.

  4. ISIS Facility: Facility Design Challenges

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    McDonald, Kirk

    ISIS Facility: Facility Design Challenges Matt Fletcher Head, Design Division ISIS Department, FNAL #12;ISIS -- neutrons Diamond -- X-rays #12;#12;· Lifetime · Reliable Operation · Flexibility

  5. Low-level radioactive waste disposal facility closure

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    White, G.J.; Ferns, T.W.; Otis, M.D.; Marts, S.T.; DeHaan, M.S.; Schwaller, R.G.; White, G.J. (EG and G Idaho, Inc., Idaho Falls, ID (USA))

    1990-11-01

    Part I of this report describes and evaluates potential impacts associated with changes in environmental conditions on a low-level radioactive waste disposal site over a long period of time. Ecological processes are discussed and baselines are established consistent with their potential for causing a significant impact to low-level radioactive waste facility. A variety of factors that might disrupt or act on long-term predictions are evaluated including biological, chemical, and physical phenomena of both natural and anthropogenic origin. These factors are then applied to six existing, yet very different, low-level radioactive waste sites. A summary and recommendations for future site characterization and monitoring activities is given for application to potential and existing sites. Part II of this report contains guidance on the design and implementation of a performance monitoring program for low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities. A monitoring programs is described that will assess whether engineered barriers surrounding the waste are effectively isolating the waste and will continue to isolate the waste by remaining structurally stable. Monitoring techniques and instruments are discussed relative to their ability to measure (a) parameters directly related to water movement though engineered barriers, (b) parameters directly related to the structural stability of engineered barriers, and (c) parameters that characterize external or internal conditions that may cause physical changes leading to enhanced water movement or compromises in stability. Data interpretation leading to decisions concerning facility closure is discussed. 120 refs., 12 figs., 17 tabs.

  6. TRITIUM EXTRACTION FACILITY ALARA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Joye, BROTHERTON

    2005-04-19

    The primary mission of the Tritium Extraction Facility (TEF) is to extract tritium from tritium producing burnable absorber rods (TPBARs) that have been irradiated in a commercial light water reactor and to deliver tritium-containing gas to the Savannah River Site Facility 233-H. The tritium extraction segment provides the capability to deliver three (3) kilograms per year to the nation's nuclear weapons stockpile. The TEF includes processes, equipment and facilities capable of production-scale extraction of tritium while minimizing personnel radiation exposure, environmental releases, and waste generation.

  7. Plant Site Refrigeration Upgrade 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Zdrojewski, R.; Healy, M.; Ramsey, J.

    1999-01-01

    Bayer Corporation operates a multi-division manufacturing facility in Bushy Park, South Carolina. Low temperature refrigeration (-4°F) is required by many of the chemical manufacturing areas and is provided by a Plant Site Refrigeration System...

  8. The DOE ARM Aerial Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schmid, Beat; Tomlinson, Jason M.; Hubbe, John M.; Comstock, Jennifer M.; Mei, Fan; Chand, Duli; Pekour, Mikhail S.; Kluzek, Celine D.; Andrews, Elisabeth; Biraud, S.; McFarquhar, Greg

    2014-05-01

    The Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Program is a climate research user facility operating stationary ground sites that provide long-term measurements of climate relevant properties, mobile ground- and ship-based facilities to conduct shorter field campaigns (6-12 months), and the ARM Aerial Facility (AAF). The airborne observations acquired by the AAF enhance the surface-based ARM measurements by providing high-resolution in-situ measurements for process understanding, retrieval-algorithm development, and model evaluation that are not possible using ground- or satellite-based techniques. Several ARM aerial efforts were consolidated into the AAF in 2006. With the exception of a small aircraft used for routine measurements of aerosols and carbon cycle gases, AAF at the time had no dedicated aircraft and only a small number of instruments at its disposal. In this "virtual hangar" mode, AAF successfully carried out several missions contracting with organizations and investigators who provided their research aircraft and instrumentation. In 2009, AAF started managing operations of the Battelle-owned Gulfstream I (G-1) large twin-turboprop research aircraft. Furthermore, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 provided funding for the procurement of over twenty new instruments to be used aboard the G-1 and other AAF virtual-hangar aircraft. AAF now executes missions in the virtual- and real-hangar mode producing freely available datasets for studying aerosol, cloud, and radiative processes in the atmosphere. AAF is also engaged in the maturation and testing of newly developed airborne sensors to help foster the next generation of airborne instruments.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Arnold, P. M.

    2013-02-21

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

  10. Hanford Site

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

    DX Pump and Treat 100 DX Pump and Treat 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility 100-HX Groundwater Facility...

  11. Closure Plan for the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site at the Nevada Test Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Management

    2008-09-01

    The Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RMWS) at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) is managed and operated by National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO). This document is the first update of the preliminary closure plan for the Area 5 RWMS at the NTS that was presented in the Integrated Closure and Monitoring Plan (DOE, 2005a). The major updates to the plan include a new closure schedule, updated closure inventory, updated site and facility characterization data, the Title II engineering cover design, and the closure process for the 92-Acre Area of the RWMS. The format and content of this site-specific plan follows the Format and Content Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Closure Plans (DOE, 1999a). This interim closure plan meets closure and post-closure monitoring requirements of the order DOE O 435.1, manual DOE M 435.1-1, Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 191, 40 CFR 265, Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) 444.743, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) requirements as incorporated into NAC 444.8632. The Area 5 RWMS accepts primarily packaged low-level waste (LLW), low-level mixed waste (LLMW), and asbestiform low-level waste (ALLW) for disposal in excavated disposal cells.

  12. EM Recovery Act Lessons Learned (Sites)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Presentation slides from EM ARRA Best Practices and Lessons Learned WorkshopWaste Management SymposiumPhoenix, AZMarch 1, 2012.

  13. Facilities | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE: Alternative Fuelsof Energy Services » Program ManagementAct4 DOE/CF-0074Facilities Facilities

  14. Assessment of technologies for hazardous waste site remediation: Non-treatment technologies and pilot scale facility implementation -- excavation -- storage technology -- safety analysis and review statement. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, H.R.; Overbey, W.K. Jr.; Koperna, G.J. Jr.

    1994-02-01

    The purpose of this study is to assess the state-of-the-art of excavation technology as related to environmental remediation applications. A further purpose is to determine which of the excavation technologies reviewed could be used by the US Corp of Engineers in remediating contaminated soil to be excavated in the near future for construction of a new Lock and Dam at Winfield, WV. The study is designed to identify excavation methodologies and equipment which can be used at any environmental remediation site but more specifically at the Winfield site on the Kanawha River in Putnam County, West Virginia. A technical approach was determined whereby a functional analysis was prepared to determine the functions to be conducted during the excavation phase of the remediation operations. A number of excavation technologies were identified from the literature. A set of screening criteria was developed that would examine the utility and ranking of the technologies with respect to the operations that needed to be conducted at the Winfield site. These criteria were performance, reliability, implementability, environmental safety, public health, and legal and regulatory compliance. The Loose Bulk excavation technology was ranked as the best technology applicable to the Winfield site. The literature was also examined to determine the success of various methods of controlling fugitive dust. Depending upon any changes in the results of chemical analyses, or prior remediation of the VOCs from the vadose zone, consideration should be given to testing a new ``Pneumatic Excavator`` which removes the VOCs liberated during the excavation process as they outgas from the soil. This equipment however would not be needed on locations with low levels of VOC emissions.

  15. Ground-water monitoring compliance projects for Hanford site facilities: Progress report for January 1 to March 31, 1988: Volume 9: Appendix C

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1988-05-01

    The appendix is one of nine volumes, and presents data describing wells completed at the Hanford Site during the first quarter of calendar year 1988 (January through March). The data in this volume of Appendix C cover the following wells: 199-N-58; 199-N-59; 199-N-60; 199-N-61; 199-N-67. The data are presented in the following order: Well Completion Report/Title III Inspection List, As-Built Diagram, Logging Charts, and Drill Logs.

  16. 2009 Performance Assessment for the Saltstone Disposal Facility

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

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

  17. Comprehensive facilities plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-09-01

    The Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory`s Comprehensive Facilities Plan (CFP) document provides analysis and policy guidance for the effective use and orderly future development of land and capital assets at the Berkeley Lab site. The CFP directly supports Berkeley Lab`s role as a multiprogram national laboratory operated by the University of California (UC) for the Department of Energy (DOE). The CFP is revised annually on Berkeley Lab`s Facilities Planning Website. Major revisions are consistent with DOE policy and review guidance. Facilities planing is motivated by the need to develop facilities for DOE programmatic needs; to maintain, replace and rehabilitate existing obsolete facilities; to identify sites for anticipated programmatic growth; and to establish a planning framework in recognition of site amenities and the surrounding community. The CFP presents a concise expression of the policy for the future physical development of the Laboratory, based upon anticipated operational needs of research programs and the environmental setting. It is a product of the ongoing planning processes and is a dynamic information source.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2010-10-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy has identified a mission need for continued disposal capacity for remote-handled low-level waste (LLW) generated at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). An alternatives analysis that was conducted to evaluate strategies to achieve this mission need identified two broad options for disposal of INL generated remote-handled LLW: (1) offsite disposal and (2) onsite disposal. The purpose of this study is to identify candidate sites or locations within INL boundaries for the alternative of an onsite remote handled LLW disposal facility and recommend the highest-ranked locations for consideration in the National Environmental Policy Act process. The study implements an evaluation based on consideration of five key elements: (1) regulations, (2) key assumptions, (3) conceptual design, (4) facility performance, and (5) previous INL siting study criteria, and uses a five-step process to identify, screen, evaluate, score, and rank 34 separate sites located across INL. The result of the evaluation is identification of two recommended alternative locations for siting an onsite remote-handled LLW disposal facility. The two alternative locations that best meet the evaluation criteria are (1) near the Advanced Test Reactor Complex and (2) west of the Idaho Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act Disposal Facility.

  19. New Groundwater Treatment Facility Begins Operation: Boost in...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Efficiency, Reduces Costs in Hanford Site Groundwater Treatment Recovery Act Funds Expand Groundwater Treatment at Hanford Site: Contractor CH2M HILL drills record number of wells...

  20. Sitewide risk perspectives for the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Olinger, S.J.; Foppe, T.L.

    1998-05-01

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) has recently finalized a closure plan (originally called the Ten Year Plan) for closure and environmental cleanup of previous nuclear weapons facilities. The DOE Rocky Flats Field Office has established priorities for risk reduction work to Support closure activities, as well as addressing those hazards associated with storage and management of radioactive materials and hazardous chemicals. To provide information for future National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or other regulatory assessments of specific risk reduction projects identified in the Closure Plan, a risk assessment of normal operations and potential accidents was recently prepared to provide an updated baseline of the cumulative impacts to the worker, public and environment due to the Site`s operations, activities, and environmental conditions in light of the Site`s change in mission, and of future closure projects. This paper summarizes the risk assessment approach, results, and conclusions.

  1. Feasibility Study of Economics and Performance of Solar Photovoltaics at the TechCity East Campus Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Site in Kingston, New York. A Study Prepared in Partnership with the Environmental Protection Agency for the RE-Powering America's Land Initiative: Siting Renewable Energy on Potentially Contaminated Land and Mine Sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Salasovich, J.; Geiger, J. W.; Mosey, G.; Healey, V.

    2014-01-01

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in accordance with the RE-Powering America's Land initiative, selected the TechCity East Campus site in Kingston, New York, for a feasibility study of renewable energy production. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) provided technical assistance for this project. The purpose of this study is to assess the site for a possible photovoltaic (PV) system installation and estimate the cost, performance, and site impacts of different PV options. In addition, the report recommends financing options that could assist in the implementation of a PV system at the site.

  2. Evapotranspiration And Geochemical Controls On Groundwater Plumes At Arid Sites: Toward Innovative Alternate End-States For Uranium Processing And Tailings Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Looney, Brian B.; Denham, Miles E.; Eddy-Dilek, Carol A.; Millings, Margaret R.; Kautsky, Mark

    2014-01-08

    Management of legacy tailings/waste and groundwater contamination are ongoing at the former uranium milling site in Tuba City AZ. The tailings have been consolidated and effectively isolated using an engineered cover system. For the existing groundwater plume, a system of recovery wells extracts contaminated groundwater for treatment using an advanced distillation process. The ten years of pump and treat (P&T) operations have had minimal impact on the contaminant plume – primarily due to geochemical and hydrological limits. A flow net analysis demonstrates that groundwater contamination beneath the former processing site flows in the uppermost portion of the aquifer and exits the groundwater as the plume transits into and beneath a lower terrace in the landscape. The evaluation indicates that contaminated water will not reach Moenkopi Wash, a locally important stream. Instead, shallow groundwater in arid settings such as Tuba City is transferred into the vadose zone and atmosphere via evaporation, transpiration and diffuse seepage. The dissolved constituents are projected to precipitate and accumulate as minerals such as calcite and gypsum in the deep vadose zone (near the capillary fringe), around the roots of phreatophyte plants, and near seeps. The natural hydrologic and geochemical controls common in arid environments such as Tuba City work together to limit the size of the groundwater plume, to naturally attenuate and detoxify groundwater contaminants, and to reduce risks to humans, livestock and the environment. The technical evaluation supports an alternative beneficial reuse (“brownfield”) scenario for Tuba City. This alternative approach would have low risks, similar to the current P&T scenario, but would eliminate the energy and expense associated with the active treatment and convert the former uranium processing site into a resource for future employment of local citizens and ongoing benefit to the Native American Nations.

  3. Ground-water monitoring compliance projects for Hanford site facilities: Progress report for the period January 1 to March 31, 1988: Volume 7, Appendix B (contd)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1988-05-01

    This appendix is one of nine volumes, and presents data describing wwlls completed at the Hanford Site during the fourth quarter of calendar year 1987 (October through December). The data in this volume of Appendix B cover the following wells: 299-W10-14; 299-W15-15; 299-W15-16; 299-W15-17; 299-W15-18. The data are presented in the following order: Well Completion Report/Title III Inspection List, Inspection Plan, As-Built Diagram, Logging Charts, and Drill Logs.

  4. Ground-water monitoring compliance projects for Hanford site facilities: Progress report for the period January 1 to March 31, 1988: Volume 5, Appendix B

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1988-05-01

    This appendix is one of nine volumes, and presents data describing wells completed at the Hanford Site during the fourth quarter of calendar year 1987 (October through December). The data in this volume of Appendix B cover the following wells: 299-W6-2; 299-W7-1; 299-W7-2; 299-W7-3; 299-W7-4. The data are presented in the following order: Well Completion Report/Title III Inspection List, Inspection Plan, As-Built Diagram, Logging Charts, and Drill Logs.

  5. Ground-water monitoring compliance projects for Hanford site facilities: Progress report for the period, January 1-March 31, 1988: Volume 6, Appendix B (contd)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1988-05-01

    This appendix is one of nine volumes, and presents data describing wells completed at the Hanford Site during the fourth quarter of calendar year 1987 (October through December). The data in this volume of Appendix B cover the following wells: 299-W7-5; 299-W7-6; 299-W8-1; 299-W9-1; 299-W10-13. The data are presented in the following order: Well Completion Report/Title III Inspection List, Inspection Plan, As-Built Diagram, Logging Charts, and Drill Logs.

  6. Ground-water monitoring compliance projects for Hanford site facilities: Progress report for the period January 1 to March 31, 1988: Volume 8, Appendix B (contd)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1988-05-01

    This appendix is one of nine volumes, and presents data describing wells completed at the Hanford Site during the fourth quarter of calendar year 1987 (October through December). The data in this volume of Appendix B cover the following wells: 299-W18-21; 299-W18-22; 299-W18-23; 299-W18-24. The data are presented in the following order: Well Completion Report/Title III Inspection List, Inspection Plan, As-Built Diagram, Logging Charts, and Drill Logs.

  7. Ground-water monitoring compliance projects for Hanford site facilities: Progress report for the period January 1 to March 31, 1988: Volume 2, Appendix A

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1988-05-01

    This appendix is one of nine volumes, and presents data describing wells completed at the Hanford Site during the fourth quarter of calendar year 1987 (October through December). The data in this volume of Appendix A cover the following wells: 299-E27-8; 299-E27-9; 299-E27-10; 299-E28-26; 299-E28-27. The data are presented in the following order: Well Completion Report/Title III Inspection List, Inspection Plan, As-Built Diagram, Logging Charts, and Drill Logs.

  8. Ground-water monitoring compliance projects for Hanford site facilities: Progress report for the period January 1 to March 31, 1988: Volume 4, Appendix A (contd)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1988-05-01

    This appendix is one of nine volumes, and presents data describing wells completed at the Hanford Site during the fourth quarter of calendar year 1987 (October through December). The data in this volume of Appendix A cover the following wells: 299-E33-30; 299-E34-2; 299-E34-3; 299-E34-4; 299-E34-5; 299-E34-6. The data are presented in the following order: Well Completion Report/Title III Inspection List, Inspection Plan, As-Built Diagram, Logging Charts, and Drill Logs.

  9. Facility Safety

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

    1996-10-24

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

  10. Facility Safety

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

    1995-11-16

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

  11. Study of the impacts of regulations affecting the acceptance of Integrated Community Energy Systems: public utility, energy facility siting and municipal franchising regulatory programs in Washington. Preliminary background report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Feurer, D A; Weaver, C L; Gallagher, K C; Hejna, D; Rielley, K J

    1980-01-01

    The Washinton State Constitution grants authority to the legislature to regulate railroads and other common carriers as well as telegraph and telephone companies in the state. No section of the constitution expressly provides for the regulation of electric, gas, water, or heating utilities. The authority to regulate public utilities is vested generally in the Utilities and Transportation Commission, formerly designated at the Public Service Commission. The Commission is composed of three members appointed by the governor, with the consent of the senate. The term of office for commissioners is six years. Recently enacted legislation provides for the implementation of tax incentives to encourage the development of cogeneration facilities in the state. This plan is to be administered by the Department of Revenue in conjunction with the Energy Office. Public utility regulatory statutes, energy facility siting programs, and municipal franchising authority are examined to identify how they may impact on the ability of an organization, whether or not it be a regulated utility, to construct and operate an ICES.

  12. Hanford Site

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

    & Water Remediation Interior of Treatment Facility Interior of Treatment Facility Building an Extraction Well Building an Extraction Well 100DX Groundawter Treatment Facility 100DX...

  13. Hanford Site

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

    Soil & Water Remediation Interior of Treatment Facility Interior of Treatment Facility Building an Extraction Well Building an Extraction Well 100DX Groundawter Treatment Facility...

  14. Hanford Site

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

    facility 200 West Facility Under Construction 200 West Facility Under Construction Bio-Process Building under construction Bio-Process Building under construction Placing a tank in...

  15. Hanford Site

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

    and demolishing facilities, including the U Plant Canyon (a former chemical separations facility) and surrounding facilities. In this photo, radiological control technicians...

  16. Hanford Site

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

    U Ancillary Facilities Search Search Search Filter: U Ancillary Facilities All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX...

  17. Hanford Site

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

    00 West Groundwater Treatment LEED Facility All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility...

  18. Hanford Site

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

    PRC Fast Flux Test Facility PRC Fast Flux Test Facility Search Search Search Filter: PRC Fast Flux Test Facility All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor...

  19. Hanford Site

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

    Groundwater Treatment Facility Interior of Treatment Facility Interior of Treatment Facility Treatment Tanks Treatment Tanks Building an Extraction Well Building an Extraction Well...

  20. Hanford Site

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

    100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 200...

  1. Hanford Site

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

    exterior with tanks 12-10-10.jpg Gallery: Groundwater Treatment Resin Title: Groundwater Treatment Facility Groundwater Treatment Facility Name: Groundwater Treatment Facility...

  2. Hanford Site

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

    New Groundwater Treatment Facility Readies for Operation New Groundwater Treatment Facility Readies for Operation New Groundwater Treatment Facility Readies for Operation New...

  3. Hanford Site

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

    FaciltiyScreen shot06131216.jpg Gallery: Groundwater Treatment Resin Title: Groundwater Treatment Facility Groundwater Treatment Facility Name: Groundwater Treatment Facility...

  4. Hanford Site

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

    12102010Photo7DXExteriorwithTanks.jpg Gallery: 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility Title: 100DX Groundawter Treatment Facility 100DX Groundawter Treatment Facility Name:...

  5. Assessment of the Idaho National Laboratory Hot Fuel Examination Facility Stack Monitoring Site for Compliance with ANSI/HPS N13.1 1999

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Glissmeyer, John A.; Flaherty, Julia E.

    2010-08-27

    This document reports on a series of tests to determine whether the location of the air sampling probe in the Hot Fuels Examination Facility (HFEF) heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) exhaust duct meets the applicable regulatory criteria regarding the placement of an air sampling probe. Federal regulations require that a sampling probe be located in the exhaust stack according to the criteria of the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999, Sampling and Monitoring Releases of Airborne Radioactive Substances from the Stacks and Ducts of Nuclear Facilities. These criteria address the capability of the sampling probe to extract a sample that is representative of the effluent stream. The tests conducted by PNNL during July 2010 on the HFEF system are described in this report. The sampling probe location is approximately 20 feet from the base of the stack. The stack base is in the second floor of the HFEF, and has a building ventilation stream (limited potential radioactive effluent) as well as a process stream (potential radioactive effluent, but HEPA-filtered) that feeds into it. The tests conducted on the duct indicate that the process stream is insufficiently mixed with the building ventilation stream. As a result, the air sampling probe location does not meet the criteria of the N13.1-1999 standard. The series of tests consists of various measurements taken over a grid of points in the duct cross section at the proposed sampling-probe location. The results of the test series on the HFEF exhaust duct as it relates to the criteria from ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 are desribed in this report. Based on these tests, the location of the air sampling probe does not meet the requirements of the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard, and modifications must be made to either the HVAC system or the air sampling probe for compliance. The recommended approaches are discussed and vary from sampling probe modifications to modifying the junction of the two air exhaust streams.

  6. Naval Station Newport Wind Resource Assessment. A Study Prepared in Partnership with the Environmental Protection Agency for the RE-Powering America's Land Initiative: Siting Renewable Energy on Potentially Contaminated Land and Mine Sites, and The Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Robichaud, R.; Fields, J.; Roberts, J. O.

    2012-02-01

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) launched the RE-Powering America's Land initiative to encourage development of renewable energy (RE) on potentially contaminated land and mine sites. EPA is collaborating with the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate RE options at Naval Station (NAVSTA) Newport in Newport, Rhode Island where multiple contaminated areas pose a threat to human health and the environment. Designated a superfund site on the National Priorities List in 1989, the base is committed to working toward reducing the its dependency on fossil fuels, decreasing its carbon footprint, and implementing RE projects where feasible. The Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center (NFESC) partnered with NREL in February 2009 to investigate the potential for wind energy generation at a number of Naval and Marine bases on the East Coast. NAVSTA Newport was one of several bases chosen for a detailed, site-specific wind resource investigation. NAVSTA Newport, in conjunction with NREL and NFESC, has been actively engaged in assessing the wind resource through several ongoing efforts. This report focuses on the wind resource assessment, the estimated energy production of wind turbines, and a survey of potential wind turbine options based upon the site-specific wind resource.

  7. Radiation Protection Act (Pennsylvania)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This Act combines the radiation safety provisions of The Atomic Energy Development and Radiation Control Act and the Environmental Radiation Protection Act, and empowers the Department of...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-01-01

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

  9. Estimated airborne release of plutonium from Atomics International's Nuclear Materials Development Facility in the Santa Susana site, California, as a result of postulated damage from severe wind and earthquake hazard

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mishima, J.; Ayer, J.E.

    1981-09-01

    The potential mass of airborne releases of plutonium (source term) that could result from wind and seismic damage is estimated for the Atomics International Company's Nuclear Materials Development Facility (NMDF) at the Santa Susana site in California. The postulated source terms will be useful as the basis for estimating the potential dose to the maximum exposed individual by inhalation and to the total population living within a prescribed radius of the site. The respirable fraction of airborne particles is thus the principal concern. The estimated source terms are based on the damage ratio, and the potential airborne releases if all enclosures suffer particular levels of damage. In an attempt to provide a realistic range of potential source terms that include most of the normal processing conditions, a best estimate bounded by upper and lower limits is provided. The range of source terms is calculated by combining a high best estimate and a low damage ratio, based on a fraction of enclosures suffering crush or perforation, with the airborne release from enclosures based upon an upper limit, average, and lower limit inventory of dispersible materials at risk. Two throughput levels are considered. The factors used to evaluate the fractional airborne release of materials and the exchange rates between enclosed and exterior atmospheres are discussed. The postulated damage and source terms are discussed for wind and earthquake hazard scenarios in order of their increasing severity.

  10. Facility Energy Management Guidelines and Criteria for Energy...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    describe meeting requirements within Section 432 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007), including defining facilities covered by the provision,...

  11. Expanded North Carolina Lithium Facility Opens, Boosting U.S...

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

    is part of a comprehensive investment under the Recovery Act to support advanced battery and electric drive manufacturing facilities around the country. At full scale, these...

  12. Hanford Site Transuranic (TRU) Waste Certification Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    GREAGER, T.M.

    2000-12-06

    As a generator of transuranic (TRU) and TRU mixed waste destined for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), the Hanford Site must ensure that its TRU waste meets the requirements of US. Department of Energy (DOE) 0 435.1, ''Radioactive Waste Management,'' and the Contact-Handled (CH) Transuranic Waste Acceptance Criteria for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP-WAC). WIPP-WAC requirements are derived from the WIPP Technical Safety Requirements, WIPP Safety Analysis Report, TRUPACT-II SARP, WIPP Land Withdrawal Act, WIPP Hazardous Waste Facility Permit, and Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 191/194 Compliance Certification Decision. The WIPP-WAC establishes the specific physical, chemical, radiological, and packaging criteria for acceptance of defense TRU waste shipments at WIPP. The WPP-WAC also requires that participating DOE TRU waste generator/treatment/storage sites produce site-specific documents, including a certification plan, that describe their program for managing TRU waste and TRU waste shipments before transferring waste to WIPP. Waste characterization activities provide much of the data upon which certification decisions are based. Waste characterization requirements for TRU waste and TRU mixed waste that contains constituents regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) are established in the WIPP Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Waste Analysis Plan (WAP). The Hanford Site Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPjP) (HNF-2599) implements the applicable requirements in the WAP and includes the qualitative and quantitative criteria for making hazardous waste determinations. The Hanford Site must also ensure that its TRU waste destined for disposal at WPP meets requirements for transport in the Transuranic Package Transporter-11 (TRUPACT-11). The US. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) establishes the TRUPACT-11 requirements in the Safety Analysis Report for the TRUPACT-II Shipping Package (TRUPACT-11 SARP). In addition, a TRU waste is eligible for disposal at WIPP only if it has been generated in whole or in part by one or more of the activities listed in Section 10101(3) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. DOE sites must determine that each waste stream to be disposed of at WIPP is ''defense'' TRU waste. (See also the definition of ''defense'' TRU waste.). Only CH TRU wastes meeting the requirements of the QAPjP, WIPP-WAP, WPP-WAC, and other requirements documents described above will be accepted for transportation and disposal at WIPP.

  13. Hanford Site Transuranic (TRU) Waste Certification Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    GREAGER, T.M.

    2000-12-01

    As a generator of transuranic (TRU) and TRU mixed waste destined for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), the Hanford Site must ensure that its TRU waste meets the requirements of US. Department of Energy (DOE) 0 435.1, ''Radioactive Waste Management,'' and the Contact-Handled (CH) Transuranic Waste Acceptance Criteria for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP-WAC). WIPP-WAC requirements are derived from the WIPP Technical Safety Requirements, WIPP Safety Analysis Report, TRUPACT-II SARP, WIPP Land Withdrawal Act, WIPP Hazardous Waste Facility Permit, and Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 191/194 Compliance Certification Decision. The WIPP-WAC establishes the specific physical, chemical, radiological, and packaging criteria for acceptance of defense TRU waste shipments at WIPP. The WPP-WAC also requires that participating DOE TRU waste generator/treatment/storage sites produce site-specific documents, including a certification plan, that describe their program for managing TRU waste and TRU waste shipments before transferring waste to WIPP. Waste characterization activities provide much of the data upon which certification decisions are based. Waste characterization requirements for TRU waste and TRU mixed waste that contains constituents regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) are established in the WIPP Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Waste Analysis Plan (WAP). The Hanford Site Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPjP) (HNF-2599) implements the applicable requirements in the WAP and includes the qualitative and quantitative criteria for making hazardous waste determinations. The Hanford Site must also ensure that its TRU waste destined for disposal at WPP meets requirements for transport in the Transuranic Package Transporter-11 (TRUPACT-11). The US. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) establishes the TRUPACT-11 requirements in the Safety Analysis Report for the TRUPACT-II Shipping Package (TRUPACT-11 SARP). In addition, a TRU waste is eligible for disposal at WIPP only if it has been generated in whole or in part by one or more of the activities listed in Section 10101(3) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. DOE sites must determine that each waste stream to be disposed of at WIPP is ''defense'' TRU waste. (See also the definition of ''defense'' TRU waste.). Only CH TRU wastes meeting the requirements of the QAPjP, WIPP-WAP, WPP-WAC, and other requirements documents described above will be accepted for transportation and disposal at WIPP.

  14. Hanford Site

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

    Maintence Facility Container Maintence Facility "Green" Containers "Green" Containers Plutonium Finishing Plant Visit Plutonium Finishing Plant Visit Plutonium Finishing Plant...

  15. Hanford Site

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

    transport Container Maintence Facility Container Maintence Facility Plutonium Finishing Plant Transport Container Plutonium Finishing Plant Transport Container Last Dried MCO...

  16. Hanford Site

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

    New Groundwater Treatment Facility Readies for Operation New Groundwater Treatment Facility Readies for Operation Page: 1 2 3...

  17. Site Characterization for CO{sub 2} Storage from Coal-fired Power Facilities in the Black Warrior Basin of Alabama

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Clark, Peter; Pashin, Jack; Carlson, Eric; Goodliffe, Andrew; McIntyre-Redden, Marcella; Mann, Steven; Thompson, Mason

    2012-08-31

    Coal-fired power plants produce large quantities of carbon dioxide. In order to mitigate the greenhouse gas emissions from these power plants, it is necessary to separate and store the carbon dioxide. Saline formations provide a potential sink for carbon dioxide and delineating the capacity of the various known saline formations is a key part of building a storage inventory. As part of this effort, a project was undertaken to access the storage capacity of saline reservoirs in the Black Warrior Basin of Alabama. This basin has been a productive oil and gas reservoir that is well characterized to the west of the two major coal-fired power plants that are north of Birmingham. The saline zones were thought to extend as far east as the Sequatchie Anticline which is just east of the power plants. There is no oil or gas production in the area surrounding the power plants so little is known about the formations in that area. A geologic characterization well was drilled on the Gorgas Power Plant site, which is the farthest west of two power plants in the area. The well was planned to be drilled to approximately 8,000 feet, but drilling was halted at approximately 5,000 feet when a prolific freshwater zone was penetrated. During drilling, a complete set of cores through all of the potential injection zones and the seals above these zones were acquired. A complete set of openhole logs were run along with a vertical seismic profile (VSP). Before drilling started two approximately perpendicular seismic lines were run and later correlated with the VSP. While the zones that were expected were found at approximately the predicted depths, the zones that are typically saline through the reservoir were found to be saturated with a light crude oil. Unfortunately, both the porosity and permeability of these zones were small enough that no meaningful hydrocarbon production would be expected even with carbon dioxide flooding. iv While this part of the basin was found to be unsuitable for carbon dioxide injection, there is still a large storage capacity in the basin to the west of the power plants. It will, however, require pipeline construction to transport the carbon dioxide to the injection sites.

  18. US Department of Energy interim mixed waste inventory report: Waste streams, treatment capacities and technologies: Volume 4, Site specific---Ohio through South Carolina

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-04-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has prepared this report to provide an inventory of its mixed wastes and treatment capacities and technologies in response to Section 105(a) of the Federal Facility Compliance Act (FFCAct) of 1992 (Pub. L. No. 102-386). As required by the FFCAct-1992, this report provides site-specific information on DOE`s mixed waste streams and a general review of available and planned treatment facilities for mixed wastes at the following five Ohio facilities: Battelle Columbus Laboratories; Fernald Environmental Management Project; Mound Plant; Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant; and RMI, Titanium Company.

  19. ARM Aerial Facility

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of NaturalDukeWakefieldSulfateSciTechtail.Theory of raregovAboutRecovery Act Recovery Act LogogovDataValue-AddedgovSitesAerial

  20. Framework for DOE mixed low-level waste disposal: Site fact sheets

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gruebel, M.M.; Waters, R.D.; Hospelhorn, M.B.; Chu, M.S.Y.

    1994-11-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE) is required to prepare and submit Site Treatment Plans (STPS) pursuant to the Federal Facility Compliance Act (FFCAct). Although the FFCAct does not require that disposal be addressed in the STPS, the DOE and the States recognize that treatment of mixed low-level waste will result in residues that will require disposal in either low-level waste or mixed low-level waste disposal facilities. As a result, the DOE is working with the States to define and develop a process for evaluating disposal-site suitability in concert with the FFCAct and development of the STPS. Forty-nine potential disposal sites were screened; preliminary screening criteria reduced the number of sites for consideration to twenty-six. The DOE then prepared fact sheets for the remaining sites. These fact sheets provided additional site-specific information for understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the twenty-six sites as potential disposal sites. The information also provided the basis for discussion among affected States and the DOE in recommending sites for more detailed evaluation.

  1. Biological Information Document, Radioactive Liquid Waste Treatment Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Biggs, J.

    1995-12-31

    This document is intended to act as a baseline source material for risk assessments which can be used in Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements. The current Radioactive Liquid Waste Treatment Facility (RLWTF) does not meet current General Design Criteria for Non-reactor Nuclear Facilities and could be shut down affecting several DOE programs. This Biological Information Document summarizes various biological studies that have been conducted in the vicinity of new Proposed RLWTF site and an Alternative site. The Proposed site is located on Mesita del Buey, a mess top, and the Alternative site is located in Mortandad Canyon. The Proposed Site is devoid of overstory species due to previous disturbance and is dominated by a mixture of grasses, forbs, and scattered low-growing shrubs. Vegetation immediately adjacent to the site is a pinyon-juniper woodland. The Mortandad canyon bottom overstory is dominated by ponderosa pine, willow, and rush. The south-facing slope was dominated by ponderosa pine, mountain mahogany, oak, and muhly. The north-facing slope is dominated by Douglas fir, ponderosa pine, and oak. Studies on wildlife species are limited in the vicinity of the proposed project and further studies will be necessary to accurately identify wildlife populations and to what extent they utilize the project area. Some information is provided on invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles, and small mammals. Additional species information from other nearby locations is discussed in detail. Habitat requirements exist in the project area for one federally threatened wildlife species, the peregrine falcon, and one federal candidate species, the spotted bat. However, based on surveys outside of the project area but in similar habitats, these species are not expected to occur in either the Proposed or Alternative RLWTF sites. Habitat Evaluation Procedures were used to evaluate ecological functioning in the project area.

  2. Site Index - Hanford Site

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

    Flow Compensation Claim Process Presentations Related Information Vocational Rehabilitation Visitor Control Site Access Beryllium Program Beryllium Program Beryllium...

  3. Recovery Act Project Clears Portsmouth Switchyard, Benefits Community through Recycling

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    American Recovery and Reinvestment Act workers recently completed the demolition of structures in an electrical switchyard used to help power the Portsmouth Site's uranium enrichment processes for...

  4. Annotated bibliography National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents for Sandia National Laboratories

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Harris, J.M.

    1995-04-01

    The following annotated bibliography lists documents prepared by the Department of Energy (DOE), and predecessor agencies, to meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for activities and facilities at Sandia National Laboratories sites. For each NEPA document summary information and a brief discussion of content is provided. This information may be used to reduce the amount of time or cost associated with NEPA compliance for future Sandia National Laboratories projects. This summary may be used to identify model documents, documents to use as sources of information, or documents from which to tier additional NEPA documents.

  5. US nuclear warhead facility profiles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cochran, T.B.; Arkin, W.A.; Norris, R.S.; Hoenig, M.M.

    1987-01-01

    US Nuclear Warhead Facility Profiles is the third volume of the Nuclear Weapons Databook, a series published by the Natural Resources Defense Council. This volume reviews the different facilities in the US nuclear warhead complex. Because of the linkage between nuclear energy and nuclear weapons, the authors cover not only those facilities associated mainly with nuclear power research, but also those well known for weapons development. They are: the Argonne National Laboratory; the Hanford Reservation; the Oak Ridge National Laboratory; the Pantex plant; the Los Alamos Test Site; the Rocky Flats plant; the Sandia National Laboratories; and a host of others. Information on each facility is organized into a standard format that makes the book easy to use. The reader will find precise information ranging from a facility's address to its mission, management, establishment, budget, and staff. An additional, more in-depth presentation covers the activities and technical process of each facility. Maps, pictures, and figures complement the text.

  6. Facility Representatives

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

    2006-04-06

    REPLACED BY DOE-STD-1063 | SUPERSEDING DOE-STD-1063-2000 (MARCH 2000) The purpose of the DOE Facility Representative Program is to ensure that competent DOE staff personnel are assigned to oversee the day-to-day contractor operations at DOE’s hazardous nuclear and non-nuclear facilities.

  7. Facility Safety

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

    2005-12-22

    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.

  8. Report of the Task Force on Statewide Transmission Siting and...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    and disadvantages of a statewide transmission siting and permitting framwork for electric transmission facilities, and provides recommendations for improvement. Author...

  9. WEST VALLEY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT SITE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT CALENDARY YEAR 2001

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2002-09-30

    THE ANNUAL (CALENDAR YEAR 2001) SITE ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT FOR THE WEST VALLEY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT NUCLEAR WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tarlock, Dan A.

    1981-01-01

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

  11. Environmental Assessment for decommissioning the Strategic Petroleum Reserve Weeks Island Facility, Iberia Parish, Louisiana

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-12-01

    The Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) Weeks Island site is one of five underground salt dome crude oils storage facilities operated by the Department of Energy (DOE). It is located in Iberia Parish, Louisiana. The purpose of the proposed action is to decommission the Weeks Island crude oil storage after the oil inventory has been transferred to other SPR facilities. Water intrusion into the salt dome storage chambers and the development of two sinkholes located near the aboveground facilities has created uncertain geophysical conditions. This Environmental Assessment describes the proposed decommissioning operation, its alternatives, and potential environmental impacts. Based on this analyses, DOE has determined that the proposed action is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and has issued the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).

  12. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act Section 120(e)(5). Annual report to Congress for Fiscal year 1992

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-08-01

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) is committed to conducting its operations in a safe and environmentally sound manner. High priorities for the Department are identifying and correcting environmental problems at DOE facilities that resulted from past operations, and preventing environmental problems from occurring during present and future operations. In this regard, the Department is committed to clean up the 1989 inventory of sites in the Environmental Restoration Program by the year 2019. DOE has issued an Order and guidance establishing policy and procedures for activities conducted under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), and has developed a Five-Year Plan, updated annually, that integrates planning for corrective activities, environmental restoration and waste management operations at its facilities. DOE also continues to conduct assessments (e.g., Management Audits, Environmental Safety and Health (ES & H) Progress Assessments, Internal Self Assessments) at its operating facilities to provide the Secretary of Energy with information on current environmental compliance status and follow-up on findings.

  13. Study of the impacts of regulations affecting the acceptance of Integrated Community Energy Systems: public utility, energy facility siting and municipal franchising regulatory programs in South Carolina. Preliminary background report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Feurer, D A; Weaver, C L; Gallagher, K C; Hejna, D; Rielley, K J

    1980-01-01

    Pursuant to constitutional South Carolina mandate the General Assembly has created the Public Service Commission. The Commission is composed of seven members elected to four year terms by the General Assembly. One commissioner is elected from each of seven districts corresponding to the congressional districts as they existed as of January 1, 1930. The commissioners elect one of their members as chairman. The South Carolina statutes contain separate chapters dealing with the regulation of public utilities and electric utilities. Public utility includes the furnishing of gas or heat (other than by means of electricity) to the public. While the Commission is granted general supervisory and regulatory powers over public utilities and electric utilities, total governments retain some control over electrical utilities. All municipality's have the power to grant exclusive franchises to such utilities for the furnishing of light to the municipality and its inhabitants. Public utility regulatory statutes, energy facility siting programs, and municipal franchising authority are examined to identify how they may impact on the ability of an organization, whether or not it be a regulated utility, to construct and operate an ICES.

  14. Study of the impacts of regulations affecting the acceptance of Integrated Community Energy Systems: public utility, energy facility siting and municipal franchising regulatory programs in Iowa. Preliminary background report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Feurer, D A; Weaver, C L; Gallagher, K C; Hejna, D; Rielley, K J

    1980-01-01

    The authority to regulate public utilities is vested generally in the Iowa State Commerce Commission. The Commission is comprised of three members appointed by the governor with the approval of two-thirds of the senate. Commissioners are appointed for six-year terms. They must be free from employment or pecuniary interests in any public utility. Although the right to grant franchises is specifically reserved for municipalities, local governments exercise no regulatory authority over the provision of utility services by public utilities. Municipally-owned utilities, however, are specifically excepted from rate regulation by the Commission. The regulation of rates charged by municipally-owned utilities is the responsibility of local governments. The Commission is given no authority to review decisions of local governments with respect to rates. Public utility regulatory statutes, energy facility siting programs, and municipal franchising authority are examined to identify how they may impact on the ability of an organization, whether or not it be a regulated utility, to construct and operate an ICES.

  15. Study of the impacts of regulations affecting the acceptance of Integrated Community Energy Systems: public utility, energy facility siting and municipal franchising regulatory programs in New York. Preliminary background report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Feurer, D A; Weaver, C L; Gallagher, K C; Hejna, D; Rielley, K J

    1980-01-01

    The authority to regulate public utilities is vested generally in the New York Public Service Commission. The Commission is composed of five members appointed by the governor with the advice and consent of the senate. Commissioners are appointed for six-year terms. Commissioners may not have any pecuniary or financial interest in any public utility. Local governing bodies are authorized to exercise such power, jurisdiction and authority in enforcing the laws of the state and the orders, rules, and regulations of the commission as may be prescribed by statute or by the commission with respect to public utilities. A Commission spokesman confirmed that no statutes have been passed pursuant to this provision and the Commission has not ceded any of its regulatory powers to local governments. With the exception of the granting of franchises and permits to use public ways, local governments exercise no regulatory powers over public utilities. Public utility regulatory statutes, energy facility siting programs, and municipal franchising authority are examined to identify how they may impact on the ability of an organization, whether or not it be a regulated utility, to construct and operate an ICES.

  16. Study of the impacts of regulations affecting the acceptance of Integrated Community Energy Systems: public utility, energy facility siting and municipal franchising regulatory programs in Massachusetts. Preliminary background report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Feurer, D A; Weaver, C L; Gallagher, K C; Hejna, D; Rielley, K J

    1980-01-01

    The authority to regulate public utilities is vested generally in the Department of Public Utilities. The Department is under the supervision and control of a commission consisting of three members appointed by the governor for terms of four years. No more than two of the commissioners may be members of the same political party. Commissioners must be freee from any employment or financial interests which are incompatible with the duties of the Department. The Department is responsible for regulating public utilities. The Department is specifically granted general supervisory authority over all gas and electric companies. Specific provisions for the appeal of local decisions exist only in the case of a municipality's approval or disapproval of new operaions by an electric or gas company in a municipality already being served by another such utility. Public utility regulatory statutes, energy facility siting programs, and municipal franchising authority are examined to identify how they may impact on the ability of an organization, whether or not it be a regulated utility, to construct and operate an ICES.

  17. Info-Exch 2012- Sites Lessons Learned Presentation

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Sites around the DOE complex funded by the EM Recovery Act Program provided lessons learned during the 2012 Information Exchange.

  18. Site Environmental Report for 2008, Volume 1

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Lackner, Regina

    2009-01-01

    Power Authority (WAPA). Power purchases are arranged throughDOE’s Northern California Power Purchase Consortium. Thisincluding power to off-site facilities, through the purchase

  19. Site Recommendation Subsurface Layout

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    C.L. Linden

    2000-06-28

    The purpose of this analysis is to develop a Subsurface Facility layout that is capable of accommodating the statutory capacity of 70,000 metric tons of uranium (MTU), as well as an option to expand the inventory capacity, if authorized, to 97,000 MTU. The layout configuration also requires a degree of flexibility to accommodate potential changes in site conditions or program requirements. The objective of this analysis is to provide a conceptual design of the Subsurface Facility sufficient to support the development of the Subsurface Facility System Description Document (CRWMS M&O 2000e) and the ''Emplacement Drift System Description Document'' (CRWMS M&O 2000i). As well, this analysis provides input to the Site Recommendation Consideration Report. The scope of this analysis includes: (1) Evaluation of the existing facilities and their integration into the Subsurface Facility design. (2) Identification and incorporation of factors influencing Subsurface Facility design, such as geological constraints, thermal loading, constructibility, subsurface ventilation, drainage control, radiological considerations, and the Test and Evaluation Facilities. (3) Development of a layout showing an available area in the primary area sufficient to support both the waste inventories and individual layouts showing the emplacement area required for 70,000 MTU and, if authorized, 97,000 MTU.

  20. Hanford Site

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

    100DX pump and treat aerial.jpg Gallery: Groundwater Treatment Record Title: 100 DX Pump and Treat Facility 100 DX Pump and Treat Facility Name: 100 DX Pump and Treat Facility...

  1. Hanford Site

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

    W Pump & Treat March 24 216.jpg Gallery: 200 West Pump and Treat Title: 200 West Facility Under Construction 200 West Facility Under Construction Name: 200 West Facility Under...

  2. Hanford Site

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

    120106OutsideViewBioBldg200WP&T02.jpg Gallery: 200 West Groundwater Treatment LEED Facility Title: Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Name: Hanford LEED...

  3. Hanford Site

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

    Pump and Treat System Secretary Moniz at the 200 West Pump and Treat System Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold Facility Hanford LEED Gold...

  4. NGNP SITE 2 HAZARDS ASSESSMENT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wayne Moe

    2011-10-01

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

  5. Facility Environmental Vulnerability Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Van Hoesen, S.D.

    2001-07-09

    From mid-April through the end of June 2001, a Facility Environmental Vulnerability Assessment (FEVA) was performed at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The primary goal of this FEVA was to establish an environmental vulnerability baseline at ORNL that could be used to support the Laboratory planning process and place environmental vulnerabilities in perspective. The information developed during the FEVA was intended to provide the basis for management to initiate immediate, near-term, and long-term actions to respond to the identified vulnerabilities. It was expected that further evaluation of the vulnerabilities identified during the FEVA could be carried out to support a more quantitative characterization of the sources, evaluation of contaminant pathways, and definition of risks. The FEVA was modeled after the Battelle-supported response to the problems identified at the High Flux Beam Reactor at Brookhaven National Laboratory. This FEVA report satisfies Corrective Action 3A1 contained in the Corrective Action Plan in Response to Independent Review of the High Flux Isotope Reactor Tritium Leak at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, submitted to the Department of Energy (DOE) ORNL Site Office Manager on April 16, 2001. This assessment successfully achieved its primary goal as defined by Laboratory management. The assessment team was able to develop information about sources and pathway analyses although the following factors impacted the team's ability to provide additional quantitative information: the complexity and scope of the facilities, infrastructure, and programs; the significantly degraded physical condition of the facilities and infrastructure; the large number of known environmental vulnerabilities; the scope of legacy contamination issues [not currently addressed in the Environmental Management (EM) Program]; the lack of facility process and environmental pathway analysis performed by the accountable line management or facility owner; and poor facility and infrastructure drawings. The assessment team believes that the information, experience, and insight gained through FEVA will help in the planning and prioritization of ongoing efforts to resolve environmental vulnerabilities at UT-Battelle--managed ORNL facilities.

  6. Facility Status

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

    Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hefei, Anhui, P.R. China The Engineering Design of ARC: A Compact, High Field, Fusion Nuclear Science Facility and Demonstration Power Plant B. N....

  7. Facility Safety

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

    2002-05-20

    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.

  8. Facility Name Facility Name Facility FacilityType Owner Developer...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    FacilityStatus Coordinates D Metals D Metals D Metals Definition Small Scale Wind Valley City OH MW Northern Power Systems In Service AB Tehachapi Wind Farm AB Tehachapi...

  9. Consolidated Storage Facilities: Camel's Nose or Shared Burden? - 13112

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Williams, James M.

    2013-07-01

    The Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC) made a strong argument why the reformulated nuclear waste program should make prompt efforts to develop one or more consolidated storage facilities (CSFs), and recommended the amendment of NWPA Section 145(b) 2 (linking 'monitored retrievable storage' to repository development) as an essential means to that end. However, other than recommending that the siting of CSFs should be 'consent-based' and that spent nuclear fuel (SNF) at stranded sites should be first-in-line for removal, the Commission made few recommendations regarding how CSF development should proceed. Working with three other key Senators, Jeff Bingaman attempted in the 112. Congress to craft legislation (S. 3469) to put the BRC recommendations into legislative language. The key reason why the Nuclear Waste Administration Act of 2012 did not proceed was the inability of the four senators to agree on whether and how to amend NWPA Section 145(b). A brief review of efforts to site consolidated storage since the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1987 suggests a strong and consistent motivation to shift the burden to someone (anyone) else. This paper argues that modification of NWPA Section 145(b) should be accompanied by guidelines for regional development and operation of CSFs. After review of the BRC recommendations regarding CSFs, and the 'camel's nose' prospects if implementation is not accompanied by further guidelines, the paper outlines a proposal for implementation of CSFs on a regional basis, including priorities for removal from reactor sites and subsequently from CSFs to repositories. Rather than allowing repository siting to be prejudiced by the location of a single remote CSF, the regional approach limits transport for off-site acceptance and storage, increases the efficiency of removal operations, provides a useful basis for compensation to states and communities that accept CSFs, and gives states with shared circumstances a shared stake in storage and disposal in an integrated national program. (authors)

  10. Hanford Site

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

    2010 Fire Season All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 200 West Groundwater...

  11. Hanford Site

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

    to New Mission Support Contractor Transition to New Mission Support Contractor Cold Vacuum Drying Facility Operations Cold Vacuum Drying Facility Operations Cold Vacuum Drying...

  12. Hanford Site

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

    treatment 200 West Facility Under Construction 200 West Facility Under Construction Bio-Process Building under construction Bio-Process Building under construction Placing a tank...

  13. Hanford Site

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

    West 200 West Facility Under Construction 200 West Facility Under Construction Bio-Process Building under construction Bio-Process Building under construction Placing a tank in the...

  14. Hanford Site

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

    200 West Facility Under Construction 200 West Facility Under Construction Bio-Process Building under construction Bio-Process Building under construction Placing a tank in the...

  15. Hanford Site

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

    Well Drilling All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 200 West Groundwater...

  16. Hanford Site

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

    pump and treat 200 West Facility Under Construction 200 West Facility Under Construction Bio-Process Building under construction Bio-Process Building under construction Placing a...

  17. Hanford Site

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

    HX Pump and Treat.jpg Gallery: Groundwater Treatment Resin Title: Aerial of Groundwater Treatment Facility Aerial of Groundwater Treatment Facility Name: Aerial of Groundwater...

  18. Hanford Site

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

    W Pump and Treat Event All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 200 West Groundwater...

  19. Hanford Site

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

    West Pump and Treat All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 200 West Groundwater...

  20. Hanford Site

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

    Treatment Facility Construction 200 West Groundwater Treatment LEED Facility 200W Pump and Treat Event 2010 Fire Season 2013 Safety EXPO 209-E Critical Mass Laboratory...

  1. Hanford Site

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

    PRC 100 DX Groundwater Treatment Facility PRC Groundwater Work Search Search Search Filter: PRC 100 DX Groundwater Treatment Facility All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition...

  2. Hanford Site

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

    B Reactor All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 200 West Groundwater Treatment...

  3. Hanford Site

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

    Tribal Program All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 200 West Groundwater...

  4. Hanford Site

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

    PRC 100 HX Groundwater Treatment Facility PRC Groundwater Work Search Search Search Filter: PRC 100 HX Groundwater Treatment Facility All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition...

  5. Hanford Site

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

    August 2010 All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 200 West Groundwater...

  6. Hanford Site

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

    324 Building All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 200 West Groundwater...

  7. Hanford Site

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

    ERDF Expansion All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 200 West Groundwater...

  8. Hanford Site

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

    Public Outreach All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 200 West Groundwater...

  9. Hanford Site

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

    River Corridor All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 200 West Groundwater...

  10. Hanford Site

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

    Now Retired JoeGuietteInspector210-10-11.jpg Gallery: Groundwater Treatment Resin Title: Groundwater Treatment Facility Interior Groundwater Treatment Facility Interior Name:...

  11. Hanford Site

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

    VPP Program All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 200 West Groundwater Treatment...

  12. Hanford Site

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

    groundwater 200 West Facility Under Construction 200 West Facility Under Construction Bio-Process Building under construction Bio-Process Building under construction Placing a tank...

  13. Hanford Site

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

    Service All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 200 West Groundwater...

  14. Hanford Site

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

    Zone Initiative All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 200 West Groundwater...

  15. Hanford Site

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

    Retired Joe Guietteinspector10-10-10.jpg Gallery: Groundwater Treatment Resin Title: Groundwater Treatment Facility Interior Groundwater Treatment Facility Interior Name:...

  16. Hanford Site

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

    Removal All Galleries 284 East Explosive Demolition Settlers B Reactor 100DX Groundwater Treatment Facility 100HX Groundwater Treatment Facility 200 West Groundwater...

  17. Facility Safety

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

    2000-11-20

    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.

  18. Facility Safety

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

    2005-12-22

    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.

  19. Facility Safety

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

    2013-06-21

    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.

  20. Comprehensive Municipal Solid Waste Management, Resource Recovery, and Conservation Act (Texas)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This Act encourages the establishment of regional waste management facilities and the cooperation of local waste management entities in order to streamline the management of municipal solid waste...