Sample records for hazardous waste facilities

  1. Hazardous Waste Facilities Siting (Connecticut)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

  3. Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Program (Maryland)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  4. Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Act (Massachusetts)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tarlock, Dan A.

    1981-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

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

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Albert, R.

    1992-06-30T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    COVEY, L.I.

    2000-11-28T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1988-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  12. WIPP Documents - Hazardous Waste Facility Permit (RCRA)

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

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

  13. Overview of hazardous-waste regulation at federal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1982-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  15. 340 Waste handling Facility Hazard Categorization and Safety Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    T. J. Rodovsky

    2010-10-25T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Busching, K.R., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-07-31T23:59:59.000Z

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

  18. HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT REFERENCE

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Faraon, Andrei

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

  19. Former Hazardous Waste Management Facility -Perimeter Soils Update

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Homes, Christopher C.

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

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

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

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chase, J.

    1999-11-18T23:59:59.000Z

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

  2. Hazardous Waste Program (Alabama)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  3. Montana Hazardous Waste Act (Montana)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOEThe Bonneville PowerCherries 82981-1cn SunnybankD.jpgHanford LEED&soilASTI-SORTI Comparison T.Hazardous Waste

  5. Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Public Comments to Community Relations Plan

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOEThe Bonneville PowerCherries 82981-1cn SunnybankD.jpgHanford LEED&soilASTI-SORTI Comparison T.Hazardous Waste

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2011-01-21T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1982-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  11. HAZARDOUS WASTE [Written Program

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pawlowski, Wojtek

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

  12. Hazardous Waste Management Standards and Regulations (Kansas)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-01-10T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

    2010-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

    2010-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  16. Hazardous Waste Management (North Carolina)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen

    2012-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

  19. Oklahoma Hazardous Waste Management Act (Oklahoma)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chase, J.

    1999-04-23T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chase, J.

    1999-04-23T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2012-07-15T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  7. LEARNERS GUIDE FOR RESPONSIBLE HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL WASTE

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Portman, Douglas

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

  8. Hazardous and Industrial Waste (Minnesota)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  10. Hazardous Waste Management Training

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Dai, Pengcheng

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

  11. Georgia Hazardous Waste Management Act

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  13. Hazardous Wastes Management (Alabama)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  14. Hazardous Waste Management (Arkansas)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  15. Hazardous Waste Management (Delaware)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  16. PUREX facility hazards assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sutton, L.N.

    1994-09-23T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  18. Hazardous Waste Minimum Distance Requirements (Connecticut)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

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

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

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    George, Steven C.

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  2. What is Hazardous Hazardous waste is

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    de Lijser, Peter

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sasser, K.

    1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Arnold, Patrick [NSTec] [NSTec

    2014-02-14T23:59:59.000Z

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

  8. Hazardous Waste Management (Oklahoma)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  9. Hazardous Waste Management (New Mexico)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  10. Hazardous Waste Management Compliance Guidelines INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Reisslein, Martin

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1998-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chase, J.

    1998-10-30T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

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

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

  15. Hazardous Waste Management (Michigan)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  16. Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites (Iowa)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  17. Hazardous Waste Act (New Mexico)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  18. Hazardous waste operational plan for site 300

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Roberts, R.S.

    1982-02-12T23:59:59.000Z

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

  19. HAZARDOUS WASTE LABEL DEPAUL UNIVERSITY

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Schaefer, Marcus

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

  20. Hazardous waste sites and housing appreciation rates

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    McCluskey, Jill; Rausser, Gordon C.

    2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  2. Nebraska Hazardous Waste Regulations (Nebraska)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  3. Hazardous Waste Management (North Dakota)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  4. Hazardous and Radioactive Mixed Waste

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

    1982-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  6. Hazardous Waste Management Overview The Five L's

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Jia, Songtao

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

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

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

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

  10. 3Q/4Q00 Annual M-Area and Metallurgical Laboratory Hazardous Waste Management Facilities Groundwater Monitoring and Corrective-Action Report - Third and Fourth Quarters 2000 - Volumes I, II, and II

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cole, C.M. Sr.

    2001-04-17T23:59:59.000Z

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

  11. Missouri Hazardous Waste Management Law (Missouri)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  14. 3Q/4Q99 F-Area Hazardous Waste Management Facility Corrective Action Report - Third and Fourth Quarter 1999, Volumes I and II

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chase, J.

    2000-05-12T23:59:59.000Z

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

  15. Hazardous Waste Transporter Permits (Connecticut)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  16. 3Q/4Q99 Annual M-Area and Metallurgical Laboratory Hazardous Waste Management Facilities Groundwater Monitoring and Corrective-Action Report - Third and Fourth Quarters 1999 - Volumes I, II, and III

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chase, J.

    2000-04-19T23:59:59.000Z

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

  17. Columbia University Hazardous Waste Room Inspection Report

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Jia, Songtao

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

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

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

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2012-02-16T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Arnold, P. M.

    2013-02-21T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  2. Method of recycling hazardous waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1999-11-11T23:59:59.000Z

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

  3. Hazardous waste shipment data collection from DOE sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  4. Hazardous waste shipment data collection from DOE sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1992-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Wilcock, William

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

  6. Hazardous Waste Management Regulations (Mississippi)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  8. Laboratory Waste Disposal HAZARDOUS GLASS

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sheridan, Jennifer

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

  9. Fire hazards analysis for solid waste burial grounds

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McDonald, K.M.

    1995-09-28T23:59:59.000Z

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

  10. Hazardous Waste Compliance Program Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  11. Transfer Lines to Connect Liquid Waste Facilities and Salt Waste...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Transfer Lines to Connect Liquid Waste Facilities and Salt Waste Processing Facility Transfer Lines to Connect Liquid Waste Facilities and Salt Waste Processing Facility October...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1988-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  16. Trends and Opportunities in Industrial Hazardous Waste Minimization

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Atlas, M.

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

  17. Hazardous Waste Management (Indiana)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The state supports the implementation of source reduction, recycling, and other alternative solid waste management practices over incineration and land disposal. The Department of Environmental...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  19. DC Hazardous Waste Management (District of Columbia)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This regulation regulates the generation, storage, transportation, treatment, and disposal of hazardous waste, and wherever feasible, reduces or eliminates waste at the source. It is the policy of...

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  1. Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Management Act (Massachusetts)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    de Lijser, Peter

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2012-08-31T23:59:59.000Z

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

  4. Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility ...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility (WCRRF) Waste Characterization Glovebox Operations Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility (WCRRF)...

  5. GUIDELINES FOR HANDLING HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL WASTE

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tennessee, University of

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HUTH, L.L.

    2001-06-06T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    George, Steven C.

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

  8. Hazardous waste minimization report for CY 1986

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kendrick, C.M.

    1990-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  10. Training for hazardous waste workers

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Favel, K.

    1990-10-26T23:59:59.000Z

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

  11. Ventura County hazardous waste minimization program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, D.A.; Koepp, D.W.

    1987-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In 1985, Ventura County Environmental Health Department began a technical assistance program to encourage hazardous waste generators to reduce their dependence on land disposal. In order to accomplish this, information from the California State Hazardous Waste Manifest Information System was analyzed to identify the types, quantities and disposition of hazardous waste produced by companies in Ventura County. All generators that rely on land disposal were also surveyed to determine future waste management plans. Waste audits were conducted at each site to determine if alternative waste handling methods were feasible and to ensure that reuse, recycling and waste reduction methods are used when possible. This article summarizes these findings and projects future hazardous waste generation and disposal patterns for industries in Ventura County. It also identifies barriers to volume reduction and provides a framework for future local hazardous waste alternative technology/volume reduction program activities.

  12. Hazard Baseline Downgrade Effluent Treatment Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Blanchard, A.

    1998-10-21T23:59:59.000Z

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

  13. Energy and solid/hazardous waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None

    1981-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  14. Apparatus for incinerating hazardous waste

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Chang, R.C.W.

    1994-12-20T23:59:59.000Z

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

  15. Apparatus for incinerating hazardous waste

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

    1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  16. Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laycak, D

    2008-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laycak, D T

    2010-03-05T23:59:59.000Z

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

  18. Mr. James Bearzi Hazardous Waste Bureau

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

    Bearzi Hazardous Waste Bureau Department of Energy Carlsbad Field Office P. O . Box 3090 Carlsbad. New Mexico 88221 May 26, 2009 New Mexico Environment Department 2905 E. Rodeo...

  19. Fire hazards analysis of central waste complex

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Irwin, R.M.

    1996-05-30T23:59:59.000Z

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

  20. Hazardous Waste Management System-General (Ohio)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This chapter of the law establishes that the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency provides general regulations regarding hazardous waste, including landfills. Specific passages refer to the...

  1. Chapter 38 Hazardous Waste Permitting Process (Kentucky)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  2. Louisiana Hazardous Waste Control Law (Louisiana)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  4. Improving Tamper Detection for Hazardous Waste Security

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnston, R. G.; Garcia, A. R. E.; Pacheco, N.; Martinez, R. K.; Martinez, D. D.; Trujillo, S. J.; Lopez, L. N.

    2003-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

    Since September 11, waste managers are increasingly expected to provide effective security for their hazardous wastes. Tamper-indicating seals can help. This paper discusses seals, and offers recommendations for how to choose and use them.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Ford, James

    Hazardous Chemical Waste Management Reference Guide for Laboratories 9 1 · Identification of Hazardous Chemical Waste OBJECTIVES Do you know how to do the following? If you do, skip ahead to Minimization of Hazardous Waste section. If you do not, continue on in this section. · Determine whether

  6. Waste Stream Disposal Pharmacy Quick Sheet (6/16/14) Also pharmacy employees must complete SABA "Medication Waste Stream Disposal" Non-hazardous Hazardous Additional Waste

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Oliver, Douglas L.

    Additional Waste Disposal Location Green Bins for Non-hazardous waste Black Bins must complete SABA "Medication Waste Stream Disposal" Non-hazardous Hazardous for Hazardous Waste Yellow Trace Chemo Disposal Bin Red Sharps Bins Red

  7. Idaho Waste Vitrification Facilities Project Vitrified Waste Interim Storage Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bonnema, Bruce Edward

    2001-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This feasibility study report presents a draft design of the Vitrified Waste Interim Storage Facility (VWISF), which is one of three subprojects of the Idaho Waste Vitrification Facilities (IWVF) project. The primary goal of the IWVF project is to design and construct a treatment process system that will vitrify the sodium-bearing waste (SBW) to a final waste form. The project will consist of three subprojects that include the Waste Collection Tanks Facility, the Waste Vitrification Facility (WVF), and the VWISF. The Waste Collection Tanks Facility will provide for waste collection, feed mixing, and surge storage for SBW and newly generated liquid waste from ongoing operations at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center. The WVF will contain the vitrification process that will mix the waste with glass-forming chemicals or frit and turn the waste into glass. The VWISF will provide a shielded storage facility for the glass until the waste can be disposed at either the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant as mixed transuranic waste or at the future national geological repository as high-level waste glass, pending the outcome of a Waste Incidental to Reprocessing determination, which is currently in progress. A secondary goal is to provide a facility that can be easily modified later to accommodate storage of the vitrified high-level waste calcine. The objective of this study was to determine the feasibility of the VWISF, which would be constructed in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws. This project supports the Department of Energy’s Environmental Management missions of safely storing and treating radioactive wastes as well as meeting Federal Facility Compliance commitments made to the State of Idaho.

  8. HAZARDOUS WASTE SATELLITE ACCUMULATION AREA REQUIREMENTS 1. Mark all waste containers conspicuously with the words "Hazardous Waste."

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Slatton, Clint

    HAZARDOUS WASTE SATELLITE ACCUMULATION AREA REQUIREMENTS 1. Mark all waste containers conspicuously. Decontaminate 5. Dispose of cleanup debris as Hazardous Waste Chemical Spill ­ major 1. Evacuate area, isolate with the words "Hazardous Waste." 2. Label all containers accurately, indicating the constituents and approximate

  9. Cold Vacuum Drying Facility hazard analysis report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Krahn, D.E.

    1998-02-23T23:59:59.000Z

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

  10. Hazardous and Nonhazardous Solid Waste Applicant Disclosure Regulations (Mississippi)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The purpose of the Hazardous and Nonhazardous Solid Waste Applicant Disclosure Regulations is to help maintain accountability and track data on the hazardous and nonhazardous waste sites in...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  12. University of Twente hazardous wast regulations 1 Introduction

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Twente, Universiteit

    1 University of Twente hazardous wast regulations 1 Introduction Effective from June 2011 the collection of hazardous waste has been outsourced to van Gansewinkel. The hazardous waste is collected that the hazardous waste is to be offered directly to the collector by the parties offering waste at a designated

  13. Solid Waste Facilities Regulations (Massachusetts)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This chapter of the Massachusetts General Laws governs the operation of solid waste facilities. It seeks to encourage sustainable waste management practices and to mitigate adverse effects, such as...

  14. Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Larson, H L

    2007-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

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

  15. Hazardous waste Interpretation of the definition and classification of hazardous waste

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Siddharthan, Advaith

    Hazardous waste Interpretation of the definition and classification of hazardous waste www Scottish Environment Protection Agency Environment and Heritage Service Rio House Corporate Office Waste.environment-agency.gov.uk www.sepa.org.uk www.ehsni.gov.uk © Environment Agency 2005 ISBN: 1 84432 454 0 An electronic pdf

  16. Hazardous Waste Management Act (South Dakota)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    It is the public policy of the state of South Dakota to regulate the control and generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous wastes. The state operates a comprehensive...

  17. Audit of Selected Hazardous Waste Remedial Actions Program Costs...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    of Selected Hazardous Waste Remedial Actions Program Costs, ER-B-97-04 Audit of Selected Hazardous Waste Remedial Actions Program Costs, ER-B-97-04 Audit of Selected Hazardous...

  18. New Waste Calcining Facility (NWCF) Waste Streams

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    K. E. Archibald

    1999-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report addresses the issues of conducting debris treatment in the New Waste Calcine Facility (NWCF) decontamination area and the methods currently being used to decontaminate material at the NWCF.

  19. Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laycak, D T

    2008-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

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

  20. Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laycak, D T

    2010-03-05T23:59:59.000Z

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

  1. Hazard Classification for Fuel Supply Shutdown Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BENECKE, M.W.

    2000-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  6. Independent Oversight Assessment, Salt Waste Processing Facility...

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

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

  7. Chapter 47 Solid Waste Facilities (Kentucky)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This chapter establishes the permitting standards for solid waste sites or facilities, the standards applicable to all solid waste sites or facilities, and the standards for certification of...

  8. Risk assessment for the Waste Technologies Industries (WTI) hazardous waste incineration facility (East Liverpool, Ohio). Volume 7. Accident analysis; selection and assessment of potential release scenarios

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In this part of the assessment, several accident scenarios are identified that could result in significant releases of chemicals into the environment. These scenarios include ruptures of storage tanks, large magnitude on-site spills, mixing of incompatible wastes, and off-site releases caused by tranpsortation accidents. In evaluating these scenarios, both probability and consequence are assessed, so that likelihood of occurrence is coupled with magnitude of effect in characterizing short term risks.

  9. Appendix B: Wastes and Potential Hazards for

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Siddharthan, Advaith

    of minerals including gypsum, salt, potash, asbestos, graphite, fluorite, calcite, clay, sand and gravel or their compounds and should be considered under the following hazards: H5 to H7, H10, H11, or H14. 01 05 drilling muds and other drilling wastes 01 05 05* oil-containing drilling muds and wastes M Oil-containing muds

  10. Remote vacuum compaction of compressible hazardous waste

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Coyne, M.J.; Fiscus, G.M.; Sammel, A.G.

    1998-10-06T23:59:59.000Z

    A system is described for remote vacuum compaction and containment of low-level radioactive or hazardous waste comprising a vacuum source, a sealable first flexible container, and a sealable outer flexible container for receiving one or more first flexible containers. A method for compacting low level radioactive or hazardous waste materials at the point of generation comprising the steps of sealing the waste in a first flexible container, sealing one or more first containers within an outer flexible container, breaching the integrity of the first containers, evacuating the air from the inner and outer containers, and sealing the outer container shut. 8 figs.

  11. Remote vacuum compaction of compressible hazardous waste

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Coyne, Martin J. (Pittsburgh, PA); Fiscus, Gregory M. (McMurray, PA); Sammel, Alfred G. (Pittsburgh, PA)

    1998-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A system for remote vacuum compaction and containment of low-level radioactive or hazardous waste comprising a vacuum source, a sealable first flexible container, and a sealable outer flexible container for receiving one or more first flexible containers. A method for compacting low level radioactive or hazardous waste materials at the point of generation comprising the steps of sealing the waste in a first flexible container, sealing one or more first containers within an outer flexible container, breaching the integrity of the first containers, evacuating the air from the inner and outer containers, and sealing the outer container shut.

  12. Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    1991-09-18T23:59:59.000Z

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

  13. Exploratory Studies Facility Subsurface Fire Hazards Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Richard C. Logan

    2002-03-28T23:59:59.000Z

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

  14. Exploratory Studies Facility Subsurface Fire Hazards Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. L. Kubicek

    2001-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  16. Solid Waste Disposal Facilities (Massachusetts)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  17. Disposing of Hazardous Waste EPA Compliance Fact Sheet: Revision 1

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Wikswo, John

    will be utilized. Please visit the VEHS website to submit an electronic Chemical Waste Collection Request FormDisposing of Hazardous Waste EPA Compliance Fact Sheet: Revision 1 Vanderbilt Environmental Health WASTE COLLECTION PROGRAM VEHS has implemented a Hazardous Waste Collection Program to collect hazardous

  18. Four: Evaluating Reforms in the Implementation of Hazardous Waste Policies in California

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Cutter, W. Bowman; DeShazo, J.R.

    2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    THE IMPLEMENTATION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE POLICIES IN CALIFORNIAfrom the release of hazardous waste and toxic substances.The mishandling of hazardous waste by industry has created

  19. Hazardous Waste Contamination: Implications for Commercial/Industrial Land Transactions in Silicon Valley

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Scholz, Diane

    1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Magazine (October). Hazardous Waste Contamination, ScholzPatton. 1 988. State Hazardous Waste and Property TransferForbes. 1 985. "Hazardous Waste Problems: Implications for

  20. Four: Evaluating Reforms in the Implementation of Hazardous Waste Policies in California

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Cutter, W. Bowman; DeShazo, J.R.

    2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    in four areas: storage tanks, hazardous waste generatingprograms in hazardous waste and other areas. This resultof hazardous waste laws, requiring that every area be under

  1. The Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Waste in the Mediterranean Regional Context

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Scovazzi, Tullio

    2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    HAZARDOUS WASTE IN MEDITERRANEAN Moreover, the Mediterranean Protocol,Protocol Area by transboundary movements of hazardous wastes (wastes subject to this Protocol; Annex II: List of hazardous

  2. Improving tamper detection for hazardous waste security

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnston, R. G. (Roger G.); Garcia, A. R. E. (Anthony R. E.); Pacheco, A. N. (Adam N.); Trujillo, S. J. (Sonia J.); Martinez, R. K. (Ronald K.); Martinez, D. D. (Debbie D.); Lopez, L. N. (Leon N.)

    2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    After September 11, waste managers are increasingly expected to provide improved levels of security for the hazardous materials in their charge. Many low-level wastes that previously had minimal or no security must now be well protected, while high-level wastes require even greater levels of security than previously employed. This demand for improved security comes, in many cases, without waste managers being provided the necessary additional funding, personnel, or security expertise. Contributing to the problem is the fact that--at least in our experience--waste managers often fail to appreciate certain types of security vulnerabilities. They frequently overlook or underestimate the security risks associated with disgruntled or compromised insiders, or the potential legal and political liabilities associated with nonexistent or ineffective security. Also frequently overlooked are potential threats from waste management critics who could resort to sabotage, vandalism, or civil disobedience for purposes of discrediting a waste management program.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  4. Steps for Chemical "Hazardous Waste" Removal 1. Complete a Green Hazardous Waste tag and attach to waste container. This is required for each individual item to

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pawlowski, Wojtek

    Steps for Chemical "Hazardous Waste" Removal 1. Complete a Green Hazardous Waste tag and attach by calling 5-8200 or by e-mailing waste_tech@cornell.edu ) 2. Place all Hazardous Waste containers into a UN. Leave top copy of Hazardous Waste tag in the box with the items to be removed 4. Submit a request

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Powers, J.

    1993-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  6. EIS-0286: Hanford Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program Environmental Impact Statement (HSW EIS) analyzes the proposed waste management practices at the Hanford Site.

  7. Hazardous waste management in the Texas construction industry 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sprinkle, Donald Lee

    1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This pilot study reports the statewide, regulatory compliance of general construction contractors in Texas who generated regulated amounts of hazardous waste during 1990, defined by existing state and federal hazardous-waste-management regulations...

  8. Hazardous waste management in the Texas construction industry

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sprinkle, Donald Lee

    1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This pilot study reports the statewide, regulatory compliance of general construction contractors in Texas who generated regulated amounts of hazardous waste during 1990, defined by existing state and federal hazardous-waste-management regulations...

  9. Freeze Concentration Applied to Hazardous Waste Management

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Ruemekorf, R.

    Ages. Potable water from seawater was recorded in the 17th century. Today this technology is emerging as a new unit operation for the recovery ofwater from RCRA hazardous waste streams. Typical streams are high in water content and contain soluble...

  10. Hazardous and Radioactive Mixed Waste Program

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

    1989-02-22T23:59:59.000Z

    To establish Department of Energy (DOE) hazardous and radioactive mixed waste policies and requirements and to implement the requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) within the framework of the environmental programs established under DOE O 5400.1. This directive does not cancel any directives.

  11. Permit Fees for Hazardous Waste Material Management (Connecticut)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These regulations describe applicable fees for permit application, modification, and transfer for permits related to hazardous waste management.

  12. General Safety Guidelines for Bio-Hazardous Waste Disposal

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Holland, Jeffrey

    General Safety Guidelines for Bio-Hazardous Waste Disposal · Determine if you have a Bio-Hazardous, cell cultures, Petri dishes, and etc. NOT fitting the category 1 description. · ALL BIO-HAZARDOUS WASTE OF CATEGORY 1 NEEDS TO BE TREATED BY AUTOCLAVE OR WITH HIV/HBV KILLING AGENT BEFORE PICK-UP · Bio-hazardous

  13. Management of hazardous medical waste in Croatia

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Marinkovic, Natalija [Medical School University of Zagreb, Department for Chemistry and Biochemistry, Salata 3b, 10 000 Zagreb (Croatia)], E-mail: nmarinko@snz.hr; Vitale, Ksenija; Holcer, Natasa Janev; Dzakula, Aleksandar ['Andrija Stampar' School of Public Health, Medical School University of Zagreb, Rockefellerova 4, 10 000 Zagreb (Croatia); Pavic, Tomo [Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, Ksaver 200, 10 000 Zagreb (Croatia)

    2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This article provides a review of hazardous medical waste production and its management in Croatia. Even though Croatian regulations define all steps in the waste management chain, implementation of those steps is one of the country's greatest issues. Improper practice is evident from the point of waste production to final disposal. The biggest producers of hazardous medical waste are hospitals that do not implement existing legislation, due to the lack of education and funds. Information on quantities, type and flow of medical waste are inadequate, as is sanitary control. We propose an integrated approach to medical waste management based on a hierarchical structure from the point of generation to its disposal. Priority is given to the reduction of the amounts and potential for harm. Where this is not possible, management includes reduction by sorting and separating, pretreatment on site, safe transportation, final treatment and sanitary disposal. Preferred methods should be the least harmful for human health and the environment. Integrated medical waste management could greatly reduce quantities and consequently financial strains. Landfilling is the predominant route of disposal in Croatia, although the authors believe that incineration is the most appropriate method. In a country such as Croatia, a number of small incinerators would be the most economical solution.

  14. The Law of Hazardous Waste: CERCLA, RCRA, & Common Law Claims

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Kammen, Daniel M.

    Law 273.4 The Law of Hazardous Waste: CERCLA, RCRA, & Common Law Claims (Fall 2006) Units: 3 CCN (2 of Hazardous Waste Disposal and Remediation (2d ed. 2005) Syllabus Class 1 ­ August 22 Claims Based on Common: 1. Miller & Johnston The Law of Hazardous Waste Disposal and Remediation 2. Ch. III, Intro to RCRA

  15. The Law of Hazardous Waste: CERCLA, RCRA, & Common Law Claims

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Kammen, Daniel M.

    Law 273.4 The Law of Hazardous Waste: CERCLA, RCRA, & Common Law Claims (Fall 2008) Units: 3 CCN (2, The Law of Hazardous Waste Disposal and Remediation (2d ed. 2005) Syllabus Class 1 ­ August 19 Claims on Federal Law: 1. Miller & Johnston The Law of Hazardous Waste Disposal and Remediation 2. Ch. III, Intro

  16. Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility ...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Operations, EP-WCRR-WO-DOP-0233 Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility (WCRRF) Waste Characterization Glovebox Operations, EP-WCRR-WO-DOP-0233 The documents...

  17. Method and apparatus for incinerating hazardous waste

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Korenberg, Jacob (York, PA)

    1990-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    An incineration apparatus and method for disposal of infectious hazardous waste including a fluidized bed reactor containing a bed of granular material. The reactor includes a first chamber, a second chamber, and a vertical partition separating the first and second chambers. A pressurized stream of air is supplied to the reactor at a sufficient velocity to fluidize the granular material in both the first and second chambers. Waste materials to be incinerated are fed into the first chamber of the fluidized bed, the fine waste materials being initially incinerated in the first chamber and subsequently circulated over the partition to the second chamber wherein further incineration occurs. Coarse waste materials are removed from the first chamber, comminuted, and recirculated to the second chamber for further incineration. Any partially incinerated waste materials and ash from the bottom of the second chamber are removed and recirculated to the second chamber for further incineration. This process is repeated until all infectious hazardous waste has been completely incinerated.

  18. Pharmaceutical waste may be a hazardous chemical waste, controlled substance or biomedical waste. Proper classification is necessary to be in compliance with the laws regulating each waste type.

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    George, Steven C.

    Pharmaceutical waste may be a hazardous chemical waste, controlled substance or biomedical waste. Hazardous Chemical Pharmaceutical Waste: A number of common pharmaceuticals are regulated as hazardous or more of the EPA characteristics of a hazardous chemical waste are also regulated as a hazardous

  19. Sorting and disposal of hazardous laboratory Radioactive waste

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Maoz, Shahar

    Sorting and disposal of hazardous laboratory waste Radioactive waste Solid radioactive waste in a tray to avoid spill Final disposal of both solid and radioactive waste into the yellow barrel into the solid biological waste. Formalin should be disposed off as Chemical Waste. Carcasses of experimental

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Davol, Phebe

    1987-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  1. Staged mold for encapsulating hazardous wastes

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Unger, Samuel L. (Los Angeles, CA); Telles, Rodney W. (Alhambra, CA); Lubowitz, Hyman R. (Rolling Hills Estates, CA)

    1990-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A staged mold for stabilizing hazardous wastes for final disposal by molding an agglomerate of the hazardous wastes and encapsulating the agglomerate. Three stages are employed in the process. In the first stage, a first mold body is positioned on a first mold base, a mixture of the hazardous wastes and a thermosetting plastic is loaded into the mold, the mixture is mechanically compressed, heat is applied to cure the mixture to form a rigid agglomerate, and the first mold body is removed leaving the agglomerate sitting on the first mold base. In the second stage, a clamshell second mold body is positioned around the agglomerate and the first mold base, a powdered thermoplastic resin is poured on top of the agglomerate and in the gap between the sides of the agglomerate and the second mold body, the thermoplastic is compressed, heat is applied to melt the thermoplastic, and the plastic is cooled jacketing the agglomerate on the top and sides. In the third stage, the mold with the jacketed agglomerate is inverted, the first mold base is removed exposing the former bottom of the agglomerate, powdered thermoplastic is poured over the former bottom, the first mold base is replaced to compress the thermoplastic, heat is applied to melt the new thermoplastic and the top part of the jacket on the sides, the plastic is cooled jacketing the bottom and fusing with the jacketing on the sides to complete the seamless encapsulation of the agglomerate.

  2. Staged mold for encapsulating hazardous wastes

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Unger, Samuel L. (Los Angeles, CA); Telles, Rodney W. (Alhambra, CA); Lubowitz, Hyman R. (Rolling Hills Estates, CA)

    1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A staged mold for stabilizing hazardous wastes for final disposal by molding an agglomerate of the hazardous wastes and encapsulating the agglomerate. Three stages are employed in the process. In the first stage, a first mold body is positioned on a first mold base, a mixture of the hazardous wastes and a thermosetting plastic is loaded into the mold, the mixture is mechanically compressed, heat is applied to cure the mixture to form a rigid agglomerate, and the first mold body is removed leaving the agglomerate sitting on the first mold base. In the second stage, a clamshell second mold body is positioned around the agglomerate and the first mold base, a powdered thermoplastic resin is poured on top of the agglomerate and in the gap between the sides of the agglomerate and the second mold body, the thermoplastic is compressed, heat is applied to melt the thermoplastic, and the plastic is cooled jacketing the agglomerate on the top and sides. In the third stage, the mold with the jacketed agglomerate is inverted, the first mold base is removed exposing the former bottom of the agglomerate, powdered thermoplastic is poured over the former bottom, the first mold base is replaced to compress the thermoplastic, heat is applied to melt the new thermoplastic and the top part of the jacket on the sides, the plastic is cooled jacketing the bottom and fusing with the jacketing on the sides to complete the seamless encapsulation of the agglomerate.

  3. Preliminary hazards analysis for the National Ignition Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brereton, S.J.

    1993-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  5. Hazardous Waste Collection in Safety Cans HOW DOES THIS WORK?

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pawlowski, Wojtek

    Hazardous Waste Collection in Safety Cans HOW DOES THIS WORK? o Labs that generate large volumes of solvent hazardous waste can contact EHS @ 255-8200 for approval of the use of safety cans. Once EHS approves the use we will provide the can. o A hang pocket will be placed on the can that states "Hazardous

  6. Compliance of Hazardous Waste Satellite Accumulation Areas (SAAs)

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Compliance of Hazardous Waste Satellite Accumulation Areas (SAAs) All Hazardous waste generated to be chemically hazardous and shall be kept in a Satellite Accumulation Area (SAA). The safety coordinator will keep a list of all SAA's in the division and must be notified before an accumulation area

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1986-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  9. UNBC Hazardous Waste Guide Proper waste management practices are essential for the safety of all students, staff, and

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Northern British Columbia, University of

    chemical waste, hazardous solid chemical waste (i.e. items that have been contaminated with hazardous are preferred for all hazardous liquid chemical waste. - Plastic bags are preferred for all hazardous solidUNBC Hazardous Waste Guide Proper waste management practices are essential for the safety of all

  10. Hurricane Andrew: Impact on hazardous waste management

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kastury, S.N. (Dept. of Environmental Regulation, Tallahassee, FL (United States))

    1993-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    On August 24, 1992, Hurricane Andrew struck the eastern coast of South Florida with winds of 140 mph approximately and a storm surge of 15 ft. The Florida Department of Environmental Regulation finds that the Hurricane Andrew caused a widespread damage throughout Dade and Collier County as well as in Broward and Monroe County and has also greatly harmed the environment. The Department has issued an emergency final order No. 92-1476 on August 26, 1992 to address the environmental cleanup and prevent any further spills of contaminants within the emergency area. The order authorizes the local government officials to designate certain locations in areas remote from habitation for the open burning in air certain incinerators of hurricane generated yard trash and construction and demolition debris. The Department staff has assisted the county and FEMA staff in establishing procedures for Hazardous Waste Management, Waste Segregation and disposal and emergency responses. Local governments have issued these burn permits to public agencies including FDOT and Corps of Engineering (COE). Several case studies will be discussed on the Hazardous Waste Management at this presentation.

  11. Mixed waste removal from a hazardous waste storage tank

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Geber, K.R.

    1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The spent fuel transfer canal at the Oak Ridge Graphite Reactor was found to be leaking 400 gallons of water per day into the surrounding soil. Sampling of the sediment layer on the floor of the canal to determine the environmental impact of the leak identified significant radiological contamination and elevated levels of cadmium and lead which are hazardous under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Under RCRA regulations and Rules of Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, the canal was considered a hazardous waste storage tank. This paper describes elements of the radiological control program established in support of a fast-track RCRA closure plan that involved underwater mapping of the radiation fields, vacuuming, and ultra-filtration techniques that were successfully used to remove the mixed waste sediments and close the canal in a method compliant with state and federal regulations.

  12. Shedding a new light on hazardous waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Reece, N.

    1991-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The sun's ability to detoxify waterborne chemicals has long been known; polluted streams, for example, become cleaner as they flow through sunlit areas. Solar detoxification harnesses this natural degradation process for beneficial ends, producing simple, nonhazardous substances from hazardous organic chemicals. Solar detoxification systems now being developed break down these chemicals without using the fossil fuels required by conventional technologies. Sunlight destroys hazardous waste because of the distinctive properties of photons, the packets of energy that make up sunlight. Low-energy photons add thermal energy that will heat toxic chemicals; high-energy photons add the energy needed to break the chemical bonds of these chemicals. The detoxification process discussed here takes advantage of this latter group of photons found in the ultraviolet portion of the solar spectrum. 4 figs.

  13. The Hybrid Treatment Process for mixed radioactive and hazardous waste treatment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ross, W.A.; Kindle, C.H.

    1992-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper describes a new process for treating mixed hazardous and radioactive waste, commonly called mixed waste. The process is called the Hybrid Treatment Process (HTP), so named because it is built on the 20 years of experience with vitrification of wastes in melters, and the 12 years of experience with treatment of wastes by the in situ vitrification (ISV) process. It also uses techniques from several additional technologies. Mixed wastes are being generated by both the US Department of Energy (DOE) and by commercial sources. The wastes are those that contain both a hazardous waste regulated under the US Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Resource, Conservation, and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations and a radioactive waste with source, special nuclear, or byproduct materials. The dual regulation of the wastes increases the complexity of the treatment, handling, and storage of the waste. The DOE is the largest holder and generator of mixed waste. Its mixed wastes are classified as either high-level, transuranic (TRU), or low-level waste (LLW). High-level mixed wastes will be treated in vitrification plants. Transuranic wastes may be disposed of without treatment by obtaining a no-migration variance from the EPA. Lowlevel wastes, however, will require treatment, but treatment systems with sufficient capacity are not yet available to DOE. Various facilities are being proposed for the treatment of low-level waste. The concept described in this paper represents one option for establishing that treatment capacity.

  14. The Hybrid Treatment Process for mixed radioactive and hazardous waste treatment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ross, W.A.; Kindle, C.H.

    1992-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper describes a new process for treating mixed hazardous and radioactive waste, commonly called mixed waste. The process is called the Hybrid Treatment Process (HTP), so named because it is built on the 20 years of experience with vitrification of wastes in melters, and the 12 years of experience with treatment of wastes by the in situ vitrification (ISV) process. It also uses techniques from several additional technologies. Mixed wastes are being generated by both the US Department of Energy (DOE) and by commercial sources. The wastes are those that contain both a hazardous waste regulated under the US Environmental Protection Agency`s (EPA) Resource, Conservation, and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations and a radioactive waste with source, special nuclear, or byproduct materials. The dual regulation of the wastes increases the complexity of the treatment, handling, and storage of the waste. The DOE is the largest holder and generator of mixed waste. Its mixed wastes are classified as either high-level, transuranic (TRU), or low-level waste (LLW). High-level mixed wastes will be treated in vitrification plants. Transuranic wastes may be disposed of without treatment by obtaining a no-migration variance from the EPA. Lowlevel wastes, however, will require treatment, but treatment systems with sufficient capacity are not yet available to DOE. Various facilities are being proposed for the treatment of low-level waste. The concept described in this paper represents one option for establishing that treatment capacity.

  15. Wastes Hazardous or Solid | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are beingZealand Jump to:Ezfeedflag JumpID-fTri GlobalJump to: navigation, search Contents 1Wastes Hazardous or Solid

  16. Oregon Procedure and Criteria for Hazardous Waste Treatment,...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Oregon Procedure and Criteria for Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage or Disposal Permits Fact Sheet Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Permitting...

  17. NEW MEXICO ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT Hazardous Waste Burealt SUSANA...

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

    MEXICO ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT Hazardous Waste Burealt SUSANA MARTINEZ Governor 2905 Rodeo Park Drive East, Building 1 Santa Fe, New Mexico 875056303 Phone (50S) 476-6000 Fax...

  18. Order Module--self-study program: HAZARDOUS WASTE OPERATIONS...

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

    the criterion test. Before continuing, you should obtain a copy of the regulation at Hazardous waste operations and emergency response or through the course manager. You may need...

  19. Fees For Disposal Of Hazardous Waste Or Substances (Alabama)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The article lists annual payments to be made to counties, restrictions on disposal of hazardous waste, additional fees collected by counties and penalties.

  20. Chapter 31 Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste (Kentucky)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This administrative regulation establishes the general provisions necessary for identification and listing of a hazardous waste. The regulation also establishes the criteria for identifying the...

  1. South Carolina Hazardous Waste Management Act (South Carolina)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Department of Health and Environmental Control is authorized to promulgate rules and regulations to prevent exposure of persons, animals, or the environment to hazardous waste. The construction...

  2. Chapter 32 Standards Applicable to Generators of Hazardous Waste (Kentucky)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This administrative regulation establishes procedures to establish the applicable general provisions for generators of hazardous waste. It also establishes recordkeeping and reporting standards....

  3. Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Office 2 3 TITLE: 4 Revised Draft Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program Environmental Impact 5 Statement, Richland, Benton County, Washington (DOE...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

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

    4050 Santa Fe, NM 87502-5469 Subject: Written Notice Regarding Application of EPA Hazardous Waste Number D001 to Some Nitrate Salt Bearing Waste Containers Dear Mr. Kieling and...

  6. Chemotherapy waste may be a hazardous chemical waste or biomedical waste. Proper classification is necessary to be in compliance with the laws regulating each waste type.

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    George, Steven C.

    Chemotherapy waste may be a hazardous chemical waste or biomedical waste. Proper classification is necessary to be in compliance with the laws regulating each waste type. Hazardous Chemical Chemotherapy Waste: A number of chemotherapy drugs are regulated as a hazardous chemical waste. These include

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  8. Revised Draft Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program Environmental Impact Statement, Richland, Washington

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    N /A

    2003-04-11T23:59:59.000Z

    This ''Revised Draft Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program Environmental Impact Statement'' (HSW EIS) covers three primary aspects of waste management at Hanford--waste treatment, storage, and disposal. It also addresses four kinds of solid waste--low-level waste (LLW), mixed (radioactive and chemically hazardous) low-level waste (MLLW), transuranic (TRU) waste, and immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW). It fundamentally asks the question: how should we manage the waste we have now and will have in the future? This EIS analyzes the impacts of the LLW, MLLW, TRU waste, and ILAW we currently have in storage, will generate, or expect to receive at Hanford. The HSW EIS is intended to help us determine what specific facilities we will continue to use, modify, or construct to treat, store, and dispose of these wastes (Figure S.1). Because radioactive and chemically hazardous waste management is a complex, technical, and difficult subject, we have made every effort to minimize the use of acronyms (making an exception for our four waste types listed above), use more commonly understood words, and provide the ''big picture'' in this summary. An acronym list, glossary of terms, and conversions for units of measure are provided in a readers guide in Volume 1 of this EIS.

  9. Steps for Chemical "Hazardous Waste" Removal 1. Complete a green Hazardous Waste tag. Peel and stick the bottom copy to the waste container. This is required

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pawlowski, Wojtek

    Steps for Chemical "Hazardous Waste" Removal 1. Complete a green Hazardous Waste tag. Peel Hazardous Waste containers into a UN rated DOT box with proper styrofoam or cardboard inserts. DOT boxes for your use are located at: -Bard / Kimball / Thurston: B60a Bard Hall -Biotech / Weill / Corson Mudd

  10. Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Waste Acceptance Criteria

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    W. Mahlon Heileson

    2006-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Idaho Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Disposal Facility (ICDF) has been designed to accept CERCLA waste generated within the Idaho National Laboratory. Hazardous, mixed, low-level, and Toxic Substance Control Act waste will be accepted for disposal at the ICDF. The purpose of this document is to provide criteria for the quantities of radioactive and/or hazardous constituents allowable in waste streams designated for disposal at ICDF. This ICDF Complex Waste Acceptance Criteria is divided into four section: (1) ICDF Complex; (2) Landfill; (3) Evaporation Pond: and (4) Staging, Storage, Sizing, and Treatment Facility (SSSTF). The ICDF Complex section contains the compliance details, which are the same for all areas of the ICDF. Corresponding sections contain details specific to the landfill, evaporation pond, and the SSSTF. This document specifies chemical and radiological constituent acceptance criteria for waste that will be disposed of at ICDF. Compliance with the requirements of this document ensures protection of human health and the environment, including the Snake River Plain Aquifer. Waste placed in the ICDF landfill and evaporation pond must not cause groundwater in the Snake River Plain Aquifer to exceed maximum contaminant levels, a hazard index of 1, or 10-4 cumulative risk levels. The defined waste acceptance criteria concentrations are compared to the design inventory concentrations. The purpose of this comparison is to show that there is an acceptable uncertainty margin based on the actual constituent concentrations anticipated for disposal at the ICDF. Implementation of this Waste Acceptance Criteria document will ensure compliance with the Final Report of Decision for the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center, Operable Unit 3-13. For waste to be received, it must meet the waste acceptance criteria for the specific disposal/treatment unit (on-Site or off-Site) for which it is destined.

  11. Environmental Management Waste Management Facility (EMWMF) at...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Technical Review Report: Oak Ridge Reservation Review of the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility (EMWMF) at Oak Ridge By Craig H. Benson, PhD, PE; William H....

  12. Analysis and Design of Evapotranspirative Cover for Hazardous Waste Landfill

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Zornberg, Jorge G.

    Analysis and Design of Evapotranspirative Cover for Hazardous Waste Landfill Jorge G. Zornberg, M, Inc. OII Superfund landfill in southern California. This cover system constitutes the first ET cover:6 427 CE Database subject headings: Evapotranspiration; Coating; Landfills; Hazardous waste; Design

  13. Social impacts of hazardous and nuclear facilities and events: Implications for Nevada and the Yucca Mountain high-level nuclear waste repository; [Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Freudenburg, W.R. [Wisconsin Univ., Madison, WI (United States); Carter, L.F.; Willard, W. [Washington State Univ., Pullman, WA (United States); Lodwick, D.G. [Miami Univ., Oxford, OH (United States); Hardert, R.A. [Arizona State Univ., Tempe, AZ (United States); Levine, A.G. [State Univ. of New York, Buffalo, NY (United States). Dept. of Sociology; Kroll-Smith, S. [New Orleans Univ., LA (United States); Couch, S.R. [Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, PA (United States); Edelstein, M.R. [Ramapo College, Mahwah, NJ (United States)

    1992-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Social impacts of a nuclear waste repository are described. Various case studies are cited such as Rocky Flats Plant, the Feed Materials Production Center, and Love Canal. The social impacts of toxic contamination, mitigating environmental stigma and loss of trust are also discussed.

  14. The Advantages of Fixed Facilities in Characterizing TRU Wastes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    FRENCH, M.S.

    2000-02-08T23:59:59.000Z

    In May 1998 the Hanford Site started developing a program for characterization of transuranic (TRU) waste for shipment to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico. After less than two years, Hanford will have a program certified by the Carlsbad Area Office (CAO). By picking a simple waste stream, taking advantage of lessons learned at the other sites, as well as communicating effectively with the CAO, Hanford was able to achieve certification in record time. This effort was further simplified by having a centralized program centered on the Waste Receiving and Processing (WRAP) Facility that contains most of the equipment required to characterize TRU waste. The use of fixed facilities for the characterization of TRU waste at sites with a long-term clean-up mission can be cost effective for several reasons. These include the ability to control the environment in which sensitive instrumentation is required to operate and ensuring that calibrations and maintenance activities are scheduled and performed as an operating routine. Other factors contributing to cost effectiveness include providing approved procedures and facilities for handling hazardous materials and anticipated contingencies and performing essential evolutions, and regulating and smoothing the work load and environmental conditions to provide maximal efficiency and productivity. Another advantage is the ability to efficiently provide characterization services to other sites in the Department of Energy (DOE) Complex that do not have the same capabilities. The Waste Receiving and Processing (WRAP) Facility is a state-of-the-art facility designed to consolidate the operations necessary to inspect, process and ship waste to facilitate verification of contents for certification to established waste acceptance criteria. The WRAP facility inspects, characterizes, treats, and certifies transuranic (TRU), low-level and mixed waste at the Hanford Site in Washington state. Fluor Hanford operates the $89 million facility under the Project Hanford Management Contract. This paper describes the operating experiences and results obtained during the first year of full operations at WRAP. Interested audiences include personnel involved in TRU waste characterization activities, TRU waste treatment and disposal facilities and TRU waste certification. The conclusions of this paper are that WRAP has proven itself to be a valuable asset for low-level and TRU waste management.

  15. Method for disposing of hazardous wastes

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Burton, Frederick G. (West Richland, WA); Cataldo, Dominic A. (Kennewick, WA); Cline, John F. (Prosser, WA); Skiens, W. Eugene (Richland, WA)

    1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A method and system for long-term control of root growth without killing the plants bearing those roots involves incorporating a 2,6-dinitroaniline in a polymer and disposing the polymer in an area in which root control is desired. This results in controlled release of the substituted aniline herbicide over a period of many years. Herbicides of this class have the property of preventing root elongation without translocating into other parts of the plant. The herbicide may be encapsulated in the polymer or mixed with it. The polymer-herbicide mixture may be formed into pellets, sheets, pipe gaskets, pipes for carrying water, or various other forms. The invention may be applied to other protection of buried hazardous wastes, protection of underground pipes, prevention of root intrusion beneath slabs, the dwarfing of trees or shrubs and other applications. The preferred herbicide is 4-difluoromethyl-N,N-dipropyl- 2,6-dinitro-aniline, commonly known as trifluralin.

  16. Waste Management Facilities Cost Information Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Feizollahi, F.; Shropshire, D.

    1992-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Waste Management Facility Cost Information (WMFCI) Report, commissioned by the US Department of Energy (DOE), develops planning life-cycle cost (PLCC) estimates for treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. This report contains PLCC estimates versus capacity for 26 different facility cost modules. A procedure to guide DOE and its contractor personnel in the use of estimating data is also provided. Estimates in the report apply to five distinctive waste streams: low-level waste, low-level mixed waste, alpha contaminated low-level waste, alpha contaminated low-level mixed waste, and transuranic waste. The report addresses five different treatment types: incineration, metal/melting and recovery, shredder/compaction, solidification, and vitrification. Data in this report allows the user to develop PLCC estimates for various waste management options.

  17. Hazardous Liquid Pipelines and Storage Facilities (Iowa)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Timothy Solack; Carol Mason

    2012-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A new onsite, remote-handled low-level waste disposal facility has been identified as the highest ranked alternative for providing continued, uninterrupted remote-handled low-level waste disposal for remote-handled low-level waste from the Idaho National Laboratory and for nuclear fuel processing activities at the Naval Reactors Facility. Historically, this type of waste has been disposed of at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex. Disposal of remote-handled low-level waste in concrete disposal vaults at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex will continue until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This preliminary safety design report supports the design of a proposed onsite remote-handled low-level waste disposal facility by providing an initial nuclear facility hazard categorization, by discussing site characteristics that impact accident analysis, by providing the facility and process information necessary to support the hazard analysis, by identifying and evaluating potential hazards for processes associated with onsite handling and disposal of remote-handled low-level waste, and by discussing the need for safety features that will become part of the facility design.

  19. Hazardous Waste Management: The Role of Journalists in Decision Making Process

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eerskov-Klika, M.; Lokner, V.; Subasiae, D.; Schaller, A.

    2002-02-28T23:59:59.000Z

    The journalists are crucial for informing and education of general public about facts related to hazardous and radioactive waste management. Radio programs, TV and newspapers are daily reporting on relevant facts and news. In general, it is true that the majority of journalists are interested more in so called daily politics than in educating general public on certain technical or scientific topics. Therefore, hazardous and radioactive waste management was introduced to Croatian general public in last ten years mainly through various news on site selection of radioactive waste disposal facilities and some problems related to hazardous waste management. This paper presents APO's experience with journalists in last ten years includes program and activities referring informing and educating of journalists from all media.

  20. Storing Hazardous Waste In Your Laboratory EPA Compliance Fact Sheet: Revision 1

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Wikswo, John

    Storing Hazardous Waste In Your Laboratory EPA Compliance Fact Sheet: Revision 1 Vanderbilt.safety.vanderbilt.edu HAZARDOUS WASTE CONTAINERS Hazardous waste must be stored in containers (including lids) made of materials that are compatible with the waste. Hazardous waste containers must be in good condition and free of leaks or any

  1. Identifying Hazardous Waste In Your Laboratory EPA Compliance Fact Sheet: Revision 1

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Wikswo, John

    Identifying Hazardous Waste In Your Laboratory EPA Compliance Fact Sheet: Revision 1 Vanderbilt.safety.vanderbilt.edu IDENTIFYING HAZARDOUS WASTES IN YOUR LAB Laboratory personnel should treat all waste chemical solids, liquids, or containerized gases as hazardous wastes unless a specific chemical waste has been confirmed to be a non-hazardous

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CROWE, R.D.

    2000-08-07T23:59:59.000Z

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

  3. TEX-A-SYST: Reducing the Risk of Ground Water Contamination by Improving Hazardous Waste Management

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Harris, Bill L.; Hoffman, D.; Mazac Jr., F. J.; Kantor, A. S.

    1997-08-29T23:59:59.000Z

    dangerous chemical reac- tions that could release the products. H Have emergency equipment, such as adsorbents and shovels, ready to contain spills. Farm and Household Waste This category of potentially hazardous sub- stances includes the following items: H... that can be composted (such as household garbage, leaves and straw). H Recyclable materials should be taken to a recycling facility and uncontaminated trash to a licensed landfill or a municipal incinerator. Farm and household waste is excluded from...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Coenenberg, J.G.

    1997-08-15T23:59:59.000Z

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

  5. Site Visit Report, Hanford Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Site Visit Report, Hanford Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility - January 2011 Site Visit Report, Hanford Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility - January 2011 January 2011 Hanford...

  6. Final Hanford Offsite Waste Shipment Leaves Idaho Treatment Facility...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Final Hanford Offsite Waste Shipment Leaves Idaho Treatment Facility Final Hanford Offsite Waste Shipment Leaves Idaho Treatment Facility August 18, 2011 - 12:00pm Addthis Idaho...

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

  8. Organic and inorganic hazardous waste stabilization using combusted oil shale

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sorini, S.S.; Lane, D.C.

    1991-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A laboratory study was conducted at the Western Research Institute to evaluate the ability of combusted oil shale to stabilize organic and inorganic constituents of hazardous wastes. The oil shale used in the research was a western oil shale retorted in an inclined fluidized-bed reactor. Two combustion temperatures were used, 1550{degrees}F and 1620{degrees}F (843{degrees}C and 882{degrees}C). The five wastes selected for experimentation were an API separator sludge, creosote-contaminated soil, mixed metal oxide/hydroxide waste, metal-plating sludge, and smelter dust. The API separator sludge and creosote-contaminated soil are US EPA-listed hazardous wastes and contain organic contaminants. The mixed metal oxide/hydroxide waste, metal-plating sludge (also an EPA-listed waste), and smelter dust contain high concentrations of heavy metals. The smelter dust and mixed metal oxide/hydroxide waste fail the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) for cadmium, and the metalplating sludge fails the TCLP for chromium. To evaluate the ability of the combusted oil shales to stabilize the hazardous wastes, mixtures involving varying amounts of each of the shales with each of the hazardous wastes were prepared, allowed to equilibrate, and then leached with deionized, distilled water. The leachates were analyzed for the hazardous constituent(s) of interest.

  9. Hazardous Waste Management Policy H&S Committee approved Dec 20121 The University produces `hazardous waste' from all areas, not just

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Burton, Geoffrey R.

    produces `hazardous waste' from all areas, not just laboratories and workshops, which meansHazardous Waste Management Policy H&S Committee approved Dec 20121 BACKGROUND The University that this policy potentially applies to everyone. Hazardous waste includes infectious biological/clinical waste

  10. Applicability of slags as waste forms for hazardous waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bates, J.K.; Buck, E.C.; Dietz, N.L.; Wronkiewicz, D.J.; Feng, X. [Argonne National Lab., IL (United States); Whitworth, C.; Filius, K.; Battleson, D. [MSE, Inc., Butte, MT (United States)

    1994-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Slags, which are a combination of glassy and ceramic phases, were produced by the Component Development and Integration Facility, using a combination of soil and metal feeds. The slags were tested for durability using accelerated test methods in both water vapor and liquid water for time periods up to 179 days. The results indicated that under both conditions there was little reaction of the slag, in terms of material released to solution, or the reaction of the slag to form secondary mineral phases. The durability of the slags tested exceeded that of current high-level nuclear glass formulations and are viable materials, for waste disposal.

  11. Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application, general information portion

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hays, C.B.

    1998-05-19T23:59:59.000Z

    The Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application is considered to be a single application organized into a General Information Portion (document number DOE/RL-91-28) and a Unit-Specific Portion. Both the General Information and Unit-Specific portions of the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application address the content of the Part B permit application guidance prepared by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology 1996) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (40 Code of Federal Regulations 270), with additional information needed by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments and revisions of Washington Administrative Code 173-303. Documentation contained in the General Information Portion is broader in nature and could be used by multiple treatment, storage, and/or disposal units (e.g., the glossary provided in this report).

  12. A mathematical model to predict leaching of hazardous inorganic wastes from solidified/stabilized waste forms

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sabharwal, Krishan

    1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    and Reauthorization Act (SARA). The other important law dealing with hazardous wastes is the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), enacted in 1976 and significantly amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, RCRA provides "cradle... in 1980 to provide funding and enforcement authority to the EPA for cleaning up the numerous hazardous waste sites existing in the United States. In 1986, the act was made more comprehensive with the addition of the Superfund Amendments...

  13. Organic and inorganic hazardous waste stabilization utilizing fossil fuel combustion waste materials

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Netzel, D.A.; Lane, D.C.; Brown, M.A.; Raska, K.A.; Clark, J.A.; Rovani, J.F.

    1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A laboratory study was conducted at the Western Research Institute to evaluate the ability of innovative clean coal technology (ICCT) waste to stabilize organic and inorganic constituents of hazardous wastes. The four ICCT wastes used in this study were: (1) the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) atmospheric fluidized bed combustor (AFBC) waste, (2) the TVA spray dryer waste, (3) the Laramie River Station spray dryer waste, and (4) the Colorado-Ute AFBC waste. Four types of hazardous waste stream materials were obtained and chemically characterized for use in evaluating the ability of the ICCT wastes to stabilize hazardous organic and inorganic wastes. The wastes included an API separator sludge, mixed metal oxide-hydroxide waste, metal-plating sludge, and creosote-contaminated soil. The API separator sludge and creosote-contaminated soil are US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-listed hazardous wastes and contain organic contaminants. The mixed metal oxide-hydroxide waste and metal-plating sludge (also an EPA-listed waste) contain high concentrations of heavy metals. The mixed metal oxide-hydroxide waste fails the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) for cadmium, and the metal-plating sludge fails the TCLP for chromium. To evaluate the ability of the ICCT wastes to stabilize the hazardous wastes, mixtures involving varying amounts of each of the ICCT wastes with each of the hazardous wastes were prepared, allowed to equilibrate, and then leached with deionized, distilled water. The leachates were analyzed for the hazardous constituent(s) of interest using the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure.

  14. Iron phosphate compositions for containment of hazardous metal waste

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Day, D.E.

    1998-05-12T23:59:59.000Z

    An improved iron phosphate waste form for the vitrification, containment and long-term disposition of hazardous metal waste such as radioactive nuclear waste is provided. The waste form comprises a rigid iron phosphate matrix resulting from the cooling of a melt formed by heating a batch mixture comprising the metal waste and a matrix-forming component. The waste form comprises from about 30 to about 70 weight percent P{sub 2}O{sub 5} and from about 25 to about 50 weight percent iron oxide and has metals present in the metal waste chemically dissolved therein. The concentration of iron oxide in the waste form along with a high proportion of the iron in the waste form being present as Fe{sup 3+} provide a waste form exhibiting improved chemical resistance to corrosive attack. A method for preparing the improved iron phosphate waste forms is also provided. 21 figs.

  15. Iron phosphate compositions for containment of hazardous metal waste

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Day, Delbert E. (Rolla, MO)

    1998-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    An improved iron phosphate waste form for the vitrification, containment and long-term disposition of hazardous metal waste such as radioactive nuclear waste is provided. The waste form comprises a rigid iron phosphate matrix resulting from the cooling of a melt formed by heating a batch mixture comprising the metal waste and a matrix-forming component. The waste form comprises from about 30 to about 70 weight percent P.sub.2 O.sub.5 and from about 25 to about 50 weight percent iron oxide and has metals present in the metal waste chemically dissolved therein. The concentration of iron oxide in the waste form along with a high proportion of the iron in the waste form being present as Fe.sup.3+ provide a waste form exhibiting improved chemical resistance to corrosive attack. A method for preparing the improved iron phosphate waste forms is also provided.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Roy, B.

    2009-04-28T23:59:59.000Z

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

  17. RCRA Hazardous Waste Part A Permit Application: Instructions...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Part A Permit Application: Instructions and Form (EPA Form 8700-23) Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Form: RCRA Hazardous Waste Part A Permit...

  18. ORS 466 - Storage, Treatment, and Disposal of Hazardous Waste...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    ORS 466 - Storage, Treatment, and Disposal of Hazardous Waste and Materials Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- StatuteStatute: ORS...

  19. Putting It Down: Hazardous-Waste Management in the Throwaway Culture

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Stockton, Wendy

    1981-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    protocols existed for these indicators. 68 Even granting that EPA's testing criteria for hazardous waste

  20. 340 Facility emergency preparedness hazards assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CAMPBELL, L.R.

    1998-11-25T23:59:59.000Z

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

  1. EIS-0133: Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility for the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Livermore, California

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The U.S. Department of Energy’s San Francisco Operations Office developed this statement to analyze the potential environmental and socioeconomic impacts of alternatives for constructing and operating a Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility for nonradioactive (hazardous and nonhazardous) mixed and radioactive wastes at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

  2. Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    (TSR), ABD-WFM-006, Revision 2.1 Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility (WCRRF)Technical Safety Requirements (TSR), ABD-WFM-006, Revision 2.1 The...

  3. Monthly Theme Hazardous Waste Disposal July 2009 Monthly Theme for discussion at Department Meetings -July 2009

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Calgary, University of

    Monthly Theme ­ Hazardous Waste Disposal ­ July 2009 Monthly Theme for discussion at Department Meetings - July 2009 Hazardous Waste Disposal Often a waste pick-up is initiated but the waste isn't picked that it would be beneficial to have a stand and deliver course on Hazardous Waste Disposal offered

  4. The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Hazardous Waste Facility Permit, Waste

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2Uranium Transferon theTed Donat AboutThe QuadrennialDepartmentat the

  5. Statistical comparison of leachate from hazardous, codisposal, and municipal solid waste landfills

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gibbons, R.D.; Dolan, D.G.; May, H.; O'Leary, K.; O'Hara, R.

    1999-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

    There has been considerable debate regarding the chemical characterization of landfill leachate in general and the comparison of various types of landfill leachate (e.g., hazardous, codisposal, and municipal) in particular. For example, the preamble to the US EPA Subtitle D regulation (40 CFR Parts 257 and 258) suggests that there are no significant differences between the number and concentration of toxic constituents in hazardous versus municipal solid waste landfill leachate. The purpose of this paper is to statistically test this hypothesis in a large leachate database comprising 1490 leachate samples from 283 sample points (i.e., monitoring location such as a leachate sump) in 93 landfill waste cells (i.e., a section of a facility that took a specific waste stream or collection of similar waste streams) from 48 sites with municipal, codisposal, or hazardous waste site histories. Results of the analysis reveal clear differention between landfill leachate types, both in terms of constituents detected and their concentrations. The result of the analysis is a classification function that can estimate the probability that new leachate or ground water sample was produced by the disposal of municipal, codisposal, or hazardous waste. This type of computation is illustrated, and applications of the model to Superfund cost-allocation problems are discussed.

  6. Hazard classification criteria for non-nuclear facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1997-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  7. Screening Level Risk Assessment for the New Waste Calcining Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    M. L. Abbott; K. N. Keck; R. E. Schindler; R. L. VanHorn; N. L. Hampton; M. B. Heiser

    1999-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This screening level risk assessment evaluates potential adverse human health and ecological impacts resulting from continued operations of the calciner at the New Waste Calcining Facility (NWCF) at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC), Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL). The assessment was conducted in accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report, Guidance for Performing Screening Level Risk Analyses at Combustion Facilities Burning Hazardous Waste. This screening guidance is intended to give a conservative estimate of the potential risks to determine whether a more refined assessment is warranted. The NWCF uses a fluidized-bed combustor to solidify (calcine) liquid radioactive mixed waste from the INTEC Tank Farm facility. Calciner off volatilized metal species, trace organic compounds, and low-levels of radionuclides. Conservative stack emission rates were calculated based on maximum waste solution feed samples, conservative assumptions for off gas partitioning of metals and organics, stack gas sampling for mercury, and conservative measurements of contaminant removal (decontamination factors) in the off gas treatment system. Stack emissions were modeled using the ISC3 air dispersion model to predict maximum particulate and vapor air concentrations and ground deposition rates. Results demonstrate that NWCF emissions calculated from best-available process knowledge would result in maximum onsite and offsite health and ecological impacts that are less then EPA-established criteria for operation of a combustion facility.

  8. Waste Toolkit A-Z Electrical (non-hazardous)

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Melham, Tom

    -hazardous electrical items are often referred to as `non-haz WEEE'. WEEE stands for Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment, after the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive, which came into force in 2007. Non-haz WEEE can include keyboards, mice, kettles, telephones, desk fans and toasters. The WEEE

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

    2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  10. A Strategy for Quantifying Radioactive Material in a Low-Level Waste Incineration Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hochel, R.C. [Westinghouse Savannah River Company, AIKEN, SC (United States)

    1997-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    One of the methods proposed by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for the volume reduction and stabilization of a variety of low-level radioactive wastes (LLW) is incineration. Many commercial incinerators are in operation treating both non-hazardous and hazardous wastes. These can obtain volume reductions factors of 50 or more for certain wastes, and produce a waste (ash) that can be easily stabilized if necessary by vitrification or cementation. However, there are few incinerators designed to accommodate radioactive wastes. One has been recently built at the Savannah River Site (SRS) near Aiken, SC and is burning non-radioactive hazardous waste and radioactive wastes in successive campaigns. The SRS Consolidated Incineration Facility (CIF) is RCRA permitted as a Low Chemical Hazard, Radiological facility as defined by DOE criteria (Ref. 1). Accordingly, the CIF must operate within specified chemical, radionuclide, and fissile material inventory limits (Ref. 2). The radionuclide and fissile material limits are unique to radiological or nuclear facilities, and require special measurement and removal strategies to assure compliance, and the CIF may be required to shut down periodically in order to clean out the radionuclide inventory which builds up in various parts of the facility.

  11. Biological treatment of concentrated hazardous, toxic, andradionuclide mixed wastes without dilution

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stringfellow, William T.; Komada, Tatsuyuki; Chang, Li-Yang

    2004-06-15T23:59:59.000Z

    Approximately 10 percent of all radioactive wastes produced in the U. S. are mixed with hazardous or toxic chemicals and therefore can not be placed in secure land disposal facilities. Mixed wastes containing hazardous organic chemicals are often incinerated, but volatile radioactive elements are released directly into the biosphere. Some mixed wastes do not currently have any identified disposal option and are stored locally awaiting new developments. Biological treatment has been proposed as a potentially safer alternative to incineration for the treatment of hazardous organic mixed wastes, since biological treatment would not release volatile radioisotopes and the residual low-level radioactive waste would no longer be restricted from land disposal. Prior studies have shown that toxicity associated with acetonitrile is a significant limiting factor for the application of biotreatment to mixed wastes and excessive dilution was required to avoid inhibition of biological treatment. In this study, we demonstrate that a novel reactor configuration, where the concentrated toxic waste is drip-fed into a complete-mix bioreactor containing a pre-concentrated active microbial population, can be used to treat a surrogate acetonitrile mixed waste stream without excessive dilution. Using a drip-feed bioreactor, we were able to treat a 90,000 mg/L acetonitrile solution to less than 0.1 mg/L final concentration using a dilution factor of only 3.4. It was determined that the acetonitrile degradation reaction was inhibited at a pH above 7.2 and that the reactor could be modeled using conventional kinetic and mass balance approaches. Using a drip-feed reactor configuration addresses a major limiting factor (toxic inhibition) for the biological treatment of toxic, hazardous, or radioactive mixed wastes and suggests that drip-feed bioreactors could be used to treat other concentrated toxic waste streams, such as chemical warfare materiel.

  12. Removal of radioactive and other hazardous material from fluid waste

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Tranter, Troy J. (Idaho Falls, ID); Knecht, Dieter A. (Idaho Falls, ID); Todd, Terry A. (Aberdeen, ID); Burchfield, Larry A. (W. Richland, WA); Anshits, Alexander G. (Krasnoyarsk, RU); Vereshchagina, Tatiana (Krasnoyarsk, RU); Tretyakov, Alexander A. (Zheleznogorsk, RU); Aloy, Albert S. (St. Petersburg, RU); Sapozhnikova, Natalia V. (St. Petersburg, RU)

    2006-10-03T23:59:59.000Z

    Hollow glass microspheres obtained from fly ash (cenospheres) are impregnated with extractants/ion-exchangers and used to remove hazardous material from fluid waste. In a preferred embodiment the microsphere material is loaded with ammonium molybdophosphonate (AMP) and used to remove radioactive ions, such as cesium-137, from acidic liquid wastes. In another preferred embodiment, the microsphere material is loaded with octyl(phenyl)-N-N-diisobutyl-carbamoylmethylphosphine oxide (CMPO) and used to remove americium and plutonium from acidic liquid wastes.

  13. Hazard categorization and classification for the sodium storage facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Van Keuren, J.C.

    1994-08-30T23:59:59.000Z

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

  14. Encapsulation of mixed radioactive and hazardous waste contaminated incinerator ash in modified sulfur cement

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kalb, P.D.; Heiser, J.H. III; Colombo, P.

    1990-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Some of the process waste streams incinerated at various Department of Energy (DOE) facilities contain traces of both low-level radioactive (LLW) and hazardous constituents, thus yielding ash residues that are classified as mixed waste. Work is currently being performed at Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) to develop new and innovative materials for encapsulation of DOE mixed wastes including incinerator ash. One such material under investigation is modified sulfur cement, a thermoplastic developed by the US Bureau of Mines. Monolithic waste forms containing as much as 55 wt % incinerator fly ash from Idaho national Engineering Laboratory (INEL) have been formulated with modified sulfur cement, whereas maximum waste loading for this waste in hydraulic cement is 16 wt %. Compressive strength of these waste forms exceeded 27.6 MPa. Wet chemical and solid phase waste characterization analyses performed on this fly ash revealed high concentrations of soluble metal salts including Pb and Cd, identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as toxic metals. Leach testing of the ash according to the EPA Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) resulted in concentrations of Pb and Cd above allowable limits. Encapsulation of INEL fly ash in modified sulfur cement with a small quantity of sodium sulfide added to enhance retention of soluble metal salts reduced TCLP leachate concentrations of Pb and Cd well below EPA concentration criteria for delisting as a toxic hazardous waste. 12 refs., 4 figs., 2 tabs.

  15. Hazardous Chemical Waste Management Reference Guide for Laboratories 11 Empty Container Decision Tree

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Ford, James

    Hazardous Chemical Waste Management Reference Guide for Laboratories 11 Empty Container Decision Tree Chemical waste materials must be handled as hazardous unless they are on the Non-Hazardous Waste List. Used hazardous materials containers are an exception, however. They have their own resource

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    JOHNSON, B.H.

    1999-08-19T23:59:59.000Z

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

  17. Method for immobilizing mixed waste chloride salts containing radionuclides and other hazardous wastes

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Lewis, Michele A.; Johnson, Terry R.

    1993-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

    The invention is a method for the encapsulation of soluble radioactive waste chloride salts containing radionuclides such as strontium, cesium and hazardous wastes such as barium so that they may be permanently stored without future threat to the environment. The process consists of contacting the salts containing the radionuclides and hazardous wastes with certain zeolites which have been found to ion exchange with the radionuclides and to occlude the chloride salts so that the resulting product is leach resistant.

  18. Method for immobilizing mixed waste chloride salts containing radionuclides and other hazardous wastes

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Lewis, Michele A. (Naperville, IL); Johnson, Terry R. (Wheaton, IL)

    1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The invention is a method for the encapsulation of soluble radioactive waste chloride salts containing radionuclides such as strontium, cesium and hazardous wastes such as barium so that they may be permanently stored without future threat to the environment. The process consists of contacting the salts containing the radionuclides and hazardous wastes with certain zeolites which have been found to ion exchange with the radionuclides and to occlude the chloride salts so that the resulting product is leach resistant.

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

  20. 10/2/2006 SLAC-I-760-2A08Z-001-R002 HAZARDOUS WASTE DETERMINATION FORM

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Wechsler, Risa H.

    /2/2006 SLAC-I-760-2A08Z-001-R002 HAZARDOUS WASTE DETERMINATION FORM For RP Use Only Hazardous Waste;________________________________________________________________________________________________ 10/2/2006 SLAC-I-760-2A08Z-001-R002 HAZARDOUS WASTE DETERMINATION FORM For RP Use Only Hazardous Waste Codes:Hazardous Classification: [ ] Non-Hazardous [ ] RCRA Waste [ ] Non-RCRA Waste (CA Haz Waste

  1. RCRA, superfund and EPCRA hotline training module. Introduction to: Hazardous waste identification (40 cfr part 261) updated July 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The module introduces a specific hazardous waste identification process, which involves asking and analyzing a series of questions about any waste being evaluated. It analyzes in detail the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) definition of `hazardous waste.` It explains concepts that are essential to identifying a RCRA hazardous waste: hazardous waste listing, hazardous waste characteristics, the `mixture` and `derived-from` rules, the `contained-in` policy, and the hazardous waste identification rules (HWIR).

  2. Savannah River Site offsite hazardous waste shipment data validation report. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Casey, C.; Kudera, D.E.; Page, L.A.; Rohe, M.J.

    1995-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The objective of this data validation is to verify that waste shipments reported in response to the US Department of Energy Headquarters data request are properly categorized according to DOE-HQ definitions. This report documents all findings and actions resulting from the independent review of the Savannah River Site data submittal, and provides a summary of the SRS data submittal and data validation strategy. The overall hazardous waste management and offsite release process from 1987--1991 is documented, along with an identification and description of the hazardous waste generation facilities. SRS did not ship any hazardous waste offsite before 1987. Sampling and analysis and surface surveying procedures and techniques used in determining offsite releasability of the shipments are also described in this report. SRS reported 150 manifested waste shipments from 1984 to 1991 that included 4,755 drums or lab packs and 13 tankers. Of these waste items, this report categorizes 4,251 as clean (including 12 tankers), 326 as likely clean, 138 as likely radioactive, and 55 as radioactive (including one tanker). Although outside the original scope of this report, 14 manifests from 1992 and 1993 are included, covering 393 drums or lab packs and seven tankers. From the 1992--1993 shipments, 58 drums or lab packs are categorized as radioactive and 16 drums are categorized as likely radioactive. The remainder are categorized as clean.

  3. Method of recovering hazardous waste from phenolic resin filters

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Meikrantz, David H. (Idaho Falls, ID); Bourne, Gary L. (Idaho Falls, ID); McFee, John N. (Albuquerque, NM); Burdge, Bradley G. (Idaho Falls, ID); McConnell, Jr., John W. (Idaho Falls, ID)

    1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The invention is a process for the recovery of hazardous wastes such as heavy metals and radioactive elements from phenolic resin filter by a circulating a solution of 8 to 16 molar nitric acid at a temperature of 110 to 190 degrees F. through the filter. The hot solution dissolves the filter material and releases the hazardous material so that it can be recovered or treated for long term storage in an environmentally safe manner.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fix, N.J.

    1995-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  5. Waste Examination Assay Facility operations: TRU waste certification

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schultz, F.J.; Caylor, B.A.; Coffey, D.E.; Phoenix, L.B.

    1987-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The ORNL Waste Examination Assay Facility (WEAF) was established to nondestructively assay (NDA) transuranic (TRU) waste generated at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The present facility charter encompasses the NDA and nondestructive examination (NDE) of both TRU and low-level wastes (LLW). Presently, equipment includes a Neutron Assay System (NAS), a Segmented Gamma Scanner (SGS), a drum-sized Real-Time Radiography (RTR) system, and a Neutron Slab Detector (NSD). The first three instruments are computer interfaced. Approximately 2300 TRU waste drums have been assayed with the NAS and the SGS. Another 3000 TRU and LLW drums have been examined with the RTR unit. Computer data bases have been developed to collate the large amount of data generated during the assays and examinations. 6 refs., 1 tab.

  6. Health and Safety Procedures Manual for hazardous waste sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thate, J.E.

    1992-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Oak Ridge National Laboratory Chemical Assessments Team (ORNL/CAT) has developed this Health and Safety Procedures Manual for the guidance, instruction, and protection of ORNL/CAT personnel expected to be involved in hazardous waste site assessments and remedial actions. This manual addresses general and site-specific concerns for protecting personnel, the general public, and the environment from any possible hazardous exposures. The components of this manual include: medical surveillance, guidance for determination and monitoring of hazards, personnel and training requirements, protective clothing and equipment requirements, procedures for controlling work functions, procedures for handling emergency response situations, decontamination procedures for personnel and equipment, associated legal requirements, and safe drilling practices.

  7. The East Tennessee Technology Park Progress Report for the Tennessee Hazardous Waste Reduction Act for Calendar Year 1999

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bechtel Jacobs Company LLC

    2000-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report is prepared for the East Tennessee Technology Park (formerly the Oak Ridge K-25 Site) (ETTP) in compliance with the ''Tennessee Hazardous Waste Reduction Act of 1990'' (THWRA) (TDEC 1990), Tennessee Code Annotated 68-212-306. Annually, THWRA requires a review of the site waste reduction plan, completion of summary waste reduction information as part of the site's annual hazardous waste reporting, and completion of an annual progress report analyzing and quantifying progress toward THWRA-required waste stream-specific reduction goals. This THWRA-required progress report provides information about ETTP's hazardous waste streams regulated under THWRA and waste reduction progress made in calendar year (CY) 1999. This progress report also documents the annual review of the site plan, ''Oak Ridge Operations Environmental Management and Enrichment Facilities (EMEF) Pollution Prevention Program Plan'', BJC/OR-306/R1 (Bechtel Jacobs Company 199a). In 1996, ETTP established new goal year ratios that extended the goal year to CY 1999 and targeted 50 percent waste stream-specific reduction goals. In CY 1999, these CY 1999 goals were extended to CY 2000 for all waste streams that generated waste in 1999. Of the 70 ETTP RCRA waste streams tracked in this report from base years as early as CY 1991, 51 waste streams met or exceeded their reduction goal based on the CY 1999 data.

  8. The East Tennessee Technology Park Progress Report for the Tennessee Hazardous Waste Reduction Act for Calendar Year 2000

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bechtel Jacobs Company LLC

    2001-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report is prepared for the East Tennessee Technology Park (formerly the Oak Ridge K-25 Site) (ETTP) in compliance with the ''Tennessee Hazardous Waste Reduction Act of 1990'' (THWRA) (TDEC 1990), Tennessee Code Annotated 68-212-306. Annually, THWRA requires a review of the site waste reduction plan, completion of summary waste reduction information as part of the site's annual hazardous waste reporting, and completion of an annual progress report analyzing and quantifying progress toward THWRA-required waste stream-specific reduction goals. This THWRA-required progress report provides information about ETTP's hazardous waste streams regulated under THWRA and waste reduction progress made in calendar year (CY) 2000. This progress report also documents the annual review of the site plan, ''Oak Ridge Operations Environmental Management and Enrichment Facilities (EMEF) Pollution Prevention Program Plan'', BJC/OR-306/R1 (Bechtel Jacobs Company 2000). In 1996, ETTP established new goal year ratios that extended the goal year to CY 1999 and targeted 50 percent waste stream-specific reduction goals. In CY 2000, these goals were extended to CY 2001 for all waste streams that generated waste in 2000. Of the 70 ETTP RCRA waste streams tracked in this report from base years as early as CY 1991, 50 waste streams met or exceeded their reduction goal based on the CY 2000 data.

  9. Evaluation of prospective hazardous waste treatment technologies for use in processing low-level mixed wastes at Rocky Flats

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McGlochlin, S.C.; Harder, R.V.; Jensen, R.T.; Pettis, S.A.; Roggenthen, D.K.

    1990-09-18T23:59:59.000Z

    Several technologies for destroying or decontaminating hazardous wastes were evaluated (during early 1988) as potential processes for treating low-level mixed wastes destined for destruction in the Fluidized Bed Incinerator. The processes that showed promise were retained for further consideration and placed into one (or more) of three categories based on projected availability: short, intermediate, and long-term. Three potential short-term options were identified for managing low-level mixed wastes generated or stored at the Rocky Flats Plant (operated by Rockwell International in 1988). These options are: (1) Continue storing at Rocky Flats, (2) Ship to Nevada Test Site for landfill disposal, or (3) Ship to the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory for incineration in the Waste Experimental Reduction Facility. The third option is preferable because the wastes will be destroyed. Idaho National Engineering Laboratory has received interim status for processing solid and liquid low-level mixed wastes. However, low-level mixed wastes will continue to be stored at Rocky Flats until the Department of Energy approval is received to ship to the Nevada Test Site or Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. Potential intermediate and long-term processes were identified; however, these processes should be combined into complete waste treatment systems'' that may serve as alternatives to the Fluidized Bed Incinerator. Waste treatment systems will be the subject of later work. 59 refs., 2 figs.

  10. Stabilization solutions to hazardous metals laden waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kramer, M. [Ashland Chemical Co., Boonton, NJ (United States)

    1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper is limited to treatment of bottom and fly ash waste resulting from WTE and RTE Cogeneration plants, commonly known as trash burners. The body of the paper defines waste generation and conventional treatment schemes. This paper does not identify a best treatment, however, it does offer a general perspective of the treatments to lead the reader to further investigation. Advantages and disadvantages of the ash treatments is discussed in each treatment section. 29 refs., 1 fig.

  11. Waste characterization for the F/H Effluent Treatment Facility in support of waste certification

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brown, D.F.

    1994-10-17T23:59:59.000Z

    The Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) procedures define the rules concerning packages of solid Low Level Waste (LLW) that are sent to the E-area vaults (EAV). The WACs tabulate the quantities of 22 radionuclides that require manifesting in waste packages destined for each type of vault. These quantities are called the Package Administrative Criteria (PAC). If a waste package exceeds the PAC for any radionuclide in a given vault, then specific permission is needed to send to that vault. To avoid reporting insignificant quantities of the 22 listed radionuclides, the WAC defines the Minimum Reportable Quantity (MRQ) of each radionuclide as 1/1000th of the PAC. If a waste package contains less than the MRQ of a particular radionuclide, then the package`s manifest will list that radionuclide as zero. At least one radionuclide has to be reported, even if all are below the MRQ. The WAC requires that the waste no be ``hazardous`` as defined by SCDHEC/EPA regulations and also lists several miscellaneous physical/chemical requirements for the packages. This report evaluates the solid wastes generated within the F/H Effluent Treatment Facility (ETF) for potential impacts on waste certification.

  12. Guidelines for generators to meet HWHF acceptance requirements for hazardous, radioactive, and mixed wastes at Berkeley Lab. Revision 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Albert, R.

    1996-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document provides performance standards that one, as a generator of hazardous chemical, radioactive, or mixed wastes at the Berkeley Lab, must meet to manage their waste to protect Berkeley Lab staff and the environment, comply with waste regulations and ensure the continued safe operation of the workplace, have the waste transferred to the correct Waste Handling Facility, and enable the Environment, Health and Safety (EH and S) Division to properly pick up, manage, and ultimately send the waste off site for recycling, treatment, or disposal. If one uses and generates any of these wastes, one must establish a Satellite Accumulation Area and follow the guidelines in the appropriate section of this document. Topics include minimization of wastes, characterization of the wastes, containers, segregation, labeling, empty containers, and spill cleanup and reporting.

  13. The effects of hazardous waste taxes on generation and disposal of chlorinated solvent waste

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sigman, Hilary

    1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In 1989, 30 states levied taxes on e generation or management of hazardous waste. These taxes constitute one of the broadest applications of an emissions tax in U.S. environmental policy and provide a natural experiment ...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1986-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  16. Standard Guide for Preparing Waste Management Plans for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    American Society for Testing and Materials. Philadelphia

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    1.1 This guide addresses the development of waste management plans for potential waste streams resulting from decommissioning activities at nuclear facilities, including identifying, categorizing, and handling the waste from generation to final disposal. 1.2 This guide is applicable to potential waste streams anticipated from decommissioning activities of nuclear facilities whose operations were governed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) or Agreement State license, under Department of Energy (DOE) Orders, or Department of Defense (DoD) regulations. 1.3 This guide provides a description of the key elements of waste management plans that if followed will successfully allow for the characterization, packaging, transportation, and off-site treatment or disposal, or both, of conventional, hazardous, and radioactive waste streams. 1.4 This guide does not address the on-site treatment, long term storage, or on-site disposal of these potential waste streams. 1.5 This standard does not purport to address ...

  17. Chemical Applications of Electrohydraulic Cavitation for Hazardous Waste Control

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Hoffmann, M. R.

    CHEMICAL APPLICATIONS OF ELECTROHVDRAULIC CAVITATION FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE CONTROL MICHAEL R. HOFFMANN, PROFESSOR, CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, PASADENA, CA 91125 Abstract We have been investigating the fundamental chemistry..., production of hydroxyl radicals, hydrogen atoms, hydrogen peroxide and aquated electrons. The chemical changes of compounds in water pulsed with these different sources of power are induced in part by the violent collapse of cavitation bubbles...

  18. Los Alamos National Laboratory opens new waste repackaging facility

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

    brought a third waste repackaging facility online to increase its capability to process nuclear waste for permanent disposal. March 7, 2013 A view of the new box line facility...

  19. The necessity for permanence : making a nuclear waste storage facility

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Stupay, Robert Irving

    1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The United States Department of Energy is proposing to build a nuclear waste storage facility in southern Nevada. This facility will be designed to last 10,000 years. It must prevent the waste from contaminating the ...

  20. Meeting Department of Defense non-hazardous solid waste goals

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eakes, W.S.; Comstock, J.

    1999-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper will discuss the previous and present Department of Defense (DOD) non-hazardous solid waste goals and how Navy and Marine Corps installation collect solid waste data and measure the goals. The installation and central data collection systems used, data collection problems and solutions, data quality, and the yearly measure. The paper will also discuss the original solid waste reduction and diversion goal and how the Navy and Marine Corps performed. The new DOD landfill and incineration diversion goal will be discussed and some techniques the Navy will use to meet the new goals.

  1. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH STORAGE, TREATMENT, AND DISPOSAL OF SOLID RADIOACTIVE AND CHEMICALLY HAZARDOUS WASTE AT THE HANFORD SITE, RICHLAND, WASHINGTON

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, Wayne L.; Nelson, Iral C.; Payson, David R.; Rhoads, Kathleen

    2004-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program Environmental Impact Statement (HSW EIS) provides environmental and technical information concerning U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) proposed waste management practices for certain solid radioactive wastes at the Hanford Site through the year 2046. The HSW EIS covers four primary aspects of waste management at Hanford – storage, treatment, transportation, and disposal. It also addresses four types of solid waste – low-level waste, mixed low-level waste that contains both radioactive and chemically hazardous constituents, immobilized low-activity waste from processing Hanford tank waste, and transuranic waste. The HSW EIS was prepared to assist DOE in determining which specific Hanford Site facilities will continue to be used, will be modified, or need to be constructed, to safely treat, store, and dispose of these wastes.

  2. Environmental assessment for the construction and operation of waste storage facilities at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Paducah, Kentucky

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    DOE is proposing to construct and operate 3 waste storage facilities (one 42,000 ft{sup 2} waste storage facility for RCRA waste, one 42,000 ft{sup 2} waste storage facility for toxic waste (TSCA), and one 200,000 ft{sup 2} mixed (hazardous/radioactive) waste storage facility) at Paducah. This environmental assessment compares impacts of this proposed action with those of continuing present practices aof of using alternative locations. It is found that the construction, operation, and ultimate closure of the proposed waste storage facilities would not significantly affect the quality of the human environment within the meaning of NEPA; therefore an environmental impact statement is not required.

  3. Mixed and Low-Level Treatment Facility Project. Appendix B, Waste stream engineering files, Part 1, Mixed waste streams

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This appendix contains the mixed and low-level waste engineering design files (EDFS) documenting each low-level and mixed waste stream investigated during preengineering studies for Mixed and Low-Level Waste Treatment Facility Project. The EDFs provide background information on mixed and low-level waste generated at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. They identify, characterize, and provide treatment strategies for the waste streams. Mixed waste is waste containing both radioactive and hazardous components as defined by the Atomic Energy Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, respectively. Low-level waste is waste that contains radioactivity and is not classified as high-level waste, transuranic waste, spent nuclear fuel, or 11e(2) byproduct material as defined by DOE 5820.2A. Test specimens of fissionable material irradiated for research and development only, and not for the production of power or plutonium, may be classified as low-level waste, provided the concentration of transuranic is less than 100 nCi/g. This appendix is a tool that clarifies presentation format for the EDFS. The EDFs contain waste stream characterization data and potential treatment strategies that will facilitate system tradeoff studies and conceptual design development. A total of 43 mixed waste and 55 low-level waste EDFs are provided.

  4. Navy aquatic hazardous waste sites: the problem and possible solutions. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnston, R.K.; Wild, W.J.; Richter, K.E.; Lapota, D.; Stang, P.M.

    1989-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Data on 367 hazardous waste disposal sites at 58 Navy Marine Corps activities, located in the coastal zone, were reviewed to characterize the contaminants, disposal methods, and potentially impacted environments present at navy aquatic hazardous waste sites. This report identifies Navy aquatic hazardous waste site problems, assesses technology requirements, and describes remedial pilot projects being initiated at impacted aquatic sites.

  5. The evaluation of an analytical protocol for the determination of substances in waste for hazard classification

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Boyer, Edmond

    1 The evaluation of an analytical protocol for the determination of substances in waste for hazard The classification of waste as hazardous could soon be assessed in Europe using largely the hazard properties of its knowledge of the component constituents of a given waste will therefore be necessary. An analytical protocol

  6. Project management plan, Waste Receiving and Processing Facility, Module 1, Project W-026

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Starkey, J.G.

    1993-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Hanford Waste Receiving and Processing Facility Module 1 Project (WRAP 1) has been established to support the retrieval and final disposal of approximately 400K grams of plutonium and quantities of hazardous components currently stored in drums at the Hanford Site.

  7. Vitrification of M-Area Mixed (Hazardous and Radioactive) F006 Wastes: I. Sludge and Supernate Characterization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jantzen, C.M.

    2001-10-05T23:59:59.000Z

    Technologies are being developed by the US Department of Energy's (DOE) Nuclear Facility sites to convert low-level and mixed (hazardous and radioactive) wastes to a solid stabilized waste form for permanent disposal. One of the alternative technologies is vitrification into a borosilicate glass waste form. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has declared vitrification the Best Demonstrated Available Technology (BDAT) for high-level radioactive mixed waste and produced a Handbook of Vitrification Technologies for Treatment of Hazardous and Radioactive Waste. The DOE Office of Technology Development (OTD) has taken the position that mixed waste needs to be stabilized to the highest level reasonably possible to ensure that the resulting waste forms will meet both current and future regulatory specifications. Stabilization of low level and hazardous wastes in glass are in accord with the 1988 Savannah River Technology Center (SRTC), then the Savannah River Laboratory (SRL), Professional Planning Committee (PPC) recommendation that high nitrate containing (low-level) wastes be incorporated into a low temperature glass (via a sol-gel technology). The investigation into this new technology was considered timely because of the potential for large waste volume reduction compared to solidification into cement.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Management

    2009-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

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

  9. Impacts of hazardous waste regulation on low-level waste management

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sharples, F.E.; Eyman, L.D.

    1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 have greatly expanded the universe of what, and who, is regulated under Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Handling requirements for hazardous waste are becoming increasingly more stringent, particularly where land disposal is concerned. DOE needs to begin actively pursuing strategies directed at keeping the management of LLW clearly separated from wastes that are legitimately regulated under RCRA. Such strategies would include instituting systemwide changes in internal management practices, establishing improved location standards for LLW disposal, and negotiating interagency compromise agreements to obtain variances from RCRA requirements where necessary and appropriate.

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  11. Method for solidification of radioactive and other hazardous waste

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Anshits, Alexander G. (Krasnoyarsk, RU); Vereshchagina, Tatiana A. (Krasnoyarsk, RU); Voskresenskaya, Elena N. (Krasnoyarsk, RU); Kostin, Eduard M. (Zheleznogorsk, RU); Pavlov, Vyacheslav F. (Krasnoyarsk, RU); Revenko, Yurii A. (Zheleznogorsk, RU); Tretyakov, Alexander A. (Zheleznogorsk, RU); Sharonova, Olga M. (Krasnoyarsk, RU); Aloy, Albert S. (Saint-Petersburg, RU); Sapozhnikova, Natalia V. (Saint-Petersburg, RU); Knecht, Dieter A. (Idaho Falls, ID); Tranter, Troy J. (Idaho Falls, ID); Macheret, Yevgeny (Idaho Falls, ID)

    2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Solidification of liquid radioactive waste, and other hazardous wastes, is accomplished by the method of the invention by incorporating the waste into a porous glass crystalline molded block. The porous block is first loaded with the liquid waste and then dehydrated and exposed to thermal treatment at 50-1,000.degree. C. The porous glass crystalline molded block consists of glass crystalline hollow microspheres separated from fly ash (cenospheres), resulting from incineration of fossil plant coals. In a preferred embodiment, the porous glass crystalline blocks are formed from perforated cenospheres of grain size -400+50, wherein the selected cenospheres are consolidated into the porous molded block with a binder, such as liquid silicate glass. The porous blocks are then subjected to repeated cycles of saturating with liquid waste, and drying, and after the last cycle the blocks are subjected to calcination to transform the dried salts to more stable oxides. Radioactive liquid waste can be further stabilized in the porous blocks by coating the internal surface of the block with metal oxides prior to adding the liquid waste, and by coating the outside of the block with a low-melting glass or a ceramic after the waste is loaded into the block.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1992-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  13. Design characteristics for facilities which process hazardous particulate

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1998-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  14. Listed below are specific requirements to review for those areas that generate and/or store hazardous waste as applicable

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Movileanu, Liviu

    hazardous waste as applicable: 1) The work area generating hazardous waste must be under the control) The hazardous waste Satellite Accumulation Area (SAA) is: A) located at or near the point of generation (where accumulation area is clearly marked as "Hazardous Waste Satellite Accumulation Area". 4) The accumulation area

  15. Method for encapsulating hazardous wastes using a staged mold

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Unger, Samuel L. (Los Angeles, CA); Telles, Rodney W. (Alhambra, CA); Lubowitz, Hyman R. (Rolling Hills Estates, CA)

    1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A staged mold and method for stabilizing hazardous wastes for final disposal by molding an agglomerate of the hazardous wastes and encapsulating the agglomerate. Three stages are employed in the process. In the first stage, a first mold body is positioned on a first mold base, a mixture of the hazardous wastes and a thermosetting plastic is loaded into the mold, the mixture is mechanically compressed, heat is applied to cure the mixture to form a rigid agglomerate, and the first mold body is removed leaving the agglomerate sitting on the first mold base. In the second stage, a clamshell second mold body is positioned around the agglomerate and the first mold base, a powdered thermoplastic resin is poured on top of the agglomerate and in the gap between the sides of the agglomerate and the second mold body, the thermoplastic is compressed, heat is applied to melt the thermoplastic, and the plastic is cooled jacketing the agglomerate on the top and sides. In the third stage, the mold with the jacketed agglomerate is inverted, the first mold base is removed exposing the former bottom of the agglomerate, powdered thermoplastic is poured over the former bottom, the first mold base is replaced to compress the thermoplastic, heat is applied to melt the new thermoplastic and the top part of the jacket on the sides, the plastic is cooled jacketing the bottom and fusing with the jacketing on the sides to complete the seamless encapsulation of the agglomerate.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    TOMASZEWSKI, T.A.

    2000-04-25T23:59:59.000Z

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

  17. Final Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program Environmental Impact Statement Richland, Washington

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    M.S. Collins C.M. Borgstrom

    2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program Environmental Impact Statement (HSW EIS) provides environmental and technical information concerning U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) proposed waste management practices at the Hanford Site. The HSW EIS updates analyses of environmental consequences from previous documents and provides evaluations for activities that may be implemented consistent with the Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS) Records of Decision (RODs). Waste types considered in the HSW EIS include operational low-level radioactive waste (LLW), mixed low-level waste (MLLW), immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW), and transuranic (TRU) waste (including TRU mixed waste). MLLW contains chemically hazardous components in addition to radionuclides. Alternatives for management of these wastes at the Hanford Site, including the alternative of No Action, are analyzed in detail. The LLW, MLLW, and TRU waste alternatives are evaluated for a range of waste volumes, representing quantities of waste that could be managed at the Hanford Site. A single maximum forecast volume is evaluated for ILAW. The No Action Alternative considers continuation of ongoing waste management practices at the Hanford Site and ceasing some operations when the limits of existing capabilities are reached. The No Action Alternative provides for continued storage of some waste types. The other alternatives evaluate expanded waste management practices including treatment and disposal of most wastes. The potential environmental consequences of the alternatives are generally similar. The major differences occur with respect to the consequences of disposal versus continued storage and with respect to the range of waste volumes managed under the alternatives. DOE's preferred alternative is to dispose of LLW, MLLW, and ILAW in a single, modular, lined facility near PUREX on Hanford's Central Plateau; to treat MLLW using a combination of onsite and offsite facilities; and to certify TRU waste onsite using a combination of existing, upgraded, and mobile facilities. DOE issued the Notice of Intent to prepare the HSW EIS on October 27, 1997, and held public meetings during the scoping period that extended through January 30, 1998. In April 2002, DOE issued the initial draft of the EIS. During the public comment period that extended from May through August 2002, DOE received numerous comments from regulators, tribal nations, and other stakeholders. In March 2003, DOE issued a revised draft of the HSW EIS to address those comments, and to incorporate disposal of ILAW and other alternatives that had been under consideration since the first draft was published. Comments on the revised draft were received from April 11 through June 11, 2003. This final EIS responds to comments on the revised draft and includes updated analyses to incorporate information developed since the revised draft was published. DOE will publish the ROD(s) in the ''Federal Register'' no sooner than 30 days after publication of the Environmental Protection Agency's Notice of Availability of the final HSW EIS.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Larson, H L

    2007-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

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

  19. P\\procedure\\EH&S#15 Page 1 of 2 TITLE: HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL WASTE DISPOSAL POLICY

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Fernandez, Eduardo

    P\\procedure\\EH&S#15 Page 1 of 2 TITLE: HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL WASTE DISPOSAL POLICY OBJECTIVE AND PURPOSE: Ensure the proper disposal of hazardous chemical waste generated on FAU Campuses RESPONSIBILITY EH&S or local Fire Department. Assist EH&S and or Fire Department in securing the area. HAZARDOUS

  20. Disposal of Hazardous Medical Waste Policy and Procedures Commencement Date: 27 November, 1996

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Disposal of Hazardous Medical Waste Policy and Procedures Commencement Date: 27 November, 1996 containing or used in work involving cytotoxic substances. Hazardous Medical Waste Means any substance, edges, points or protuberances capable of cutting or penetrating the skin. 5. POLICY STATEMENT Hazardous

  1. Final Hazard Categorization for the Remediation of the 116-C-3 Chemical Waste Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    T. M. Blakley; W. D. Schofield

    2007-09-10T23:59:59.000Z

    This final hazard categorization (FHC) document examines the hazards, identifies appropriate controls to manage the hazards, and documents the commitments for the 116-C-3 Chemical Waste Tanks Remediation Project. The remediation activities analyzed in this FHC are based on recommended treatment and disposal alternatives described in the Engineering Evaluation for the Remediation to the 116-C-3 Chemical Waste Tanks (BHI 2005e).

  2. Waste Acceptance Decisions and Uncertainty Analysis at the Oak Ridge Environmental Management Waste Management Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Redus, K. S.; Patterson, J. E.; Hampshire, G. L.; Perkins, A. B.

    2003-02-25T23:59:59.000Z

    The Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) Attainment Team (AT) routinely provides the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Oak Ridge Operations with Go/No-Go decisions associated with the disposition of over 1.8 million yd3 of low-level radioactive, TSCA, and RCRA hazardous waste. This supply of waste comes from 60+ environmental restoration projects over the next 15 years planned to be dispositioned at the Oak Ridge Environmental Management Waste Management Facility (EMWMF). The EMWMF WAC AT decision making process is accomplished in four ways: (1) ensure a clearly defined mission and timeframe for accomplishment is established, (2) provide an effective organization structure with trained personnel, (3) have in place a set of waste acceptance decisions and Data Quality Objectives (DQO) for which quantitative measures are required, and (4) use validated risk-based forecasting, decision support, and modeling/simulation tools. We provide a summary of WAC AT structure and performance. We offer suggestions based on lessons learned for effective transfer to other DOE.

  3. University of California, Irvine Environmental Health and Safety www.ehs.uci.edu Questions Call: (949) 824-6200 Version 3.0 Hazardous Chemical Waste Training

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    George, Steven C.

    : (949) 824-6200 Version 3.0 Hazardous Chemical Waste Training: · All hazardous chemical waste generators must complete the Hazardous Waste Training class available online at http://www.uclc.uci.edu/. Hazardous Waste Labeling: · A hazardous waste label must be placed on a waste container upon the start

  4. Thirty-year solid waste generation forecast for facilities at SRS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The information supplied by this 30-year solid waste forecast has been compiled as a source document to the Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement (WMEIS). The WMEIS will help to select a sitewide strategic approach to managing present and future Savannah River Site (SRS) waste generated from ongoing operations, environmental restoration (ER) activities, transition from nuclear production to other missions, and decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) programs. The EIS will support project-level decisions on the operation of specific treatment, storage, and disposal facilities within the near term (10 years or less). In addition, the EIS will provide a baseline for analysis of future waste management activities and a basis for the evaluation of the specific waste management alternatives. This 30-year solid waste forecast will be used as the initial basis for the EIS decision-making process. The Site generates and manages many types and categories of waste. With a few exceptions, waste types are divided into two broad groups-high-level waste and solid waste. High-level waste consists primarily of liquid radioactive waste, which is addressed in a separate forecast and is not discussed further in this document. The waste types discussed in this solid waste forecast are sanitary waste, hazardous waste, low-level mixed waste, low-level radioactive waste, and transuranic waste. As activities at SRS change from primarily production to primarily decontamination and decommissioning and environmental restoration, the volume of each waste s being managed will change significantly. This report acknowledges the changes in Site Missions when developing the 30-year solid waste forecast.

  5. Simple Waste Solutions for Complex Facilities - 12433

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    King, Terry I. [Washington Closure Hanford, Richland, Washington 99352 (United States); Stephan, Clifford J. [Lucas Engineering and Management Services, Richland Washington 99352 (United States)

    2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The buildings in the 300 Area, including several Category 3 nuclear facilities are undergoing deactivation, decommissioning, decontamination and demolition (D4) by Washington Closure Hanford (WCH) as part of the River Corridor Closure Contract (RCCC). The D4 process has generated a wide variety of low-level radioactive and low-level radioactive mixed waste as well as TRU. The Hanford Site-wide Transportation Safety Document (TSD) has been successfully utilized to transport waste streams that otherwise would not be able to be shipped. The TSD accomplished this by establishing a comprehensive set of onsite transportation and packaging performance standards and risk-based standards. The requirements and standards presented are equivalent to DOT and NRC standards (10 CFR 71). (authors)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2012-04-02T23:59:59.000Z

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

  7. A model for determining the fate of hazardous constituents in waste during in-vessel composting 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Bollineni, Prasanthi

    1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Composting is one of the techniques that has evolved as a safe disposal and predisposal alternative to the stringent regulations on hazardous waste disposal. The implementation of this technique needs careful evaluation of the processes a hazardous...

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  9. The Mixed Waste Management Facility. Preliminary design review

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This document presents information about the Mixed Waste Management Facility. Topics discussed include: cost and schedule baseline for the completion of the project; evaluation of alternative options; transportation of radioactive wastes to the facility; capital risk associated with incineration; radioactive waste processing; scaling of the pilot-scale system; waste streams to be processed; molten salt oxidation; feed preparation; initial operation to demonstrate selected technologies; floorplans; baseline revisions; preliminary design baseline; cost reduction; and project mission and milestones.

  10. Processing of solid mixed waste containing radioactive and hazardous materials

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Gotovchikov, V.T.; Ivanov, A.V.; Filippov, E.A.

    1998-05-12T23:59:59.000Z

    Apparatus for the continuous heating and melting of a solid mixed waste bearing radioactive and hazardous materials to form separate metallic, slag and gaseous phases for producing compact forms of the waste material to facilitate disposal includes a copper split water-cooled (cold) crucible as a reaction vessel for receiving the waste material. The waste material is heated by means of the combination of a plasma torch directed into the open upper portion of the cold crucible and an electromagnetic flux produced by induction coils disposed about the crucible which is transparent to electromagnetic fields. A metallic phase of the waste material is formed in a lower portion of the crucible and is removed in the form of a compact ingot suitable for recycling and further processing. A glass-like, non-metallic slag phase containing radioactive elements is also formed in the crucible and flows out of the open upper portion of the crucible into a slag ingot mold for disposal. The decomposition products of the organic and toxic materials are incinerated and converted to environmentally safe gases in the melter. 6 figs.

  11. Processing of solid mixed waste containing radioactive and hazardous materials

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Gotovchikov, Vitaly T. (Moscow, RU); Ivanov, Alexander V. (Moscow, RU); Filippov, Eugene A. (Moscow, RU)

    1998-05-12T23:59:59.000Z

    Apparatus for the continuous heating and melting of a solid mixed waste bearing radioactive and hazardous materials to form separate metallic, slag and gaseous phases for producing compact forms of the waste material to facilitate disposal includes a copper split water-cooled (cold) crucible as a reaction vessel for receiving the waste material. The waste material is heated by means of the combination of a plasma torch directed into the open upper portion of the cold crucible and an electromagnetic flux produced by induction coils disposed about the crucible which is transparent to electromagnetic fields. A metallic phase of the waste material is formed in a lower portion of the crucible and is removed in the form of a compact ingot suitable for recycling and further processing. A glass-like, non-metallic slag phase containing radioactive elements is also formed in the crucible and flows out of the open upper portion of the crucible into a slag ingot mold for disposal. The decomposition products of the organic and toxic materials are incinerated and converted to environmentally safe gases in the melter.

  12. Waste receiving and processing facility module 1 auditable safetyanalysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bottenus, R.J.

    1997-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Waste Receiving and Processing Facility Module 1 Auditable Safety Analysis analyzes postulated accidents and determines controls to prevent the accidents or mitigate the consequences.

  13. Dismantlement and Radioactive Waste Management of DPRK Nuclear Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jooho, W.; Baldwin, G. T.

    2005-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    One critical aspect of any denuclearization of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) involves dismantlement of its nuclear facilities and management of their associated radioactive wastes. The decommissioning problem for its two principal operational plutonium facilities at Yongbyun, the 5MWe nuclear reactor and the Radiochemical Laboratory reprocessing facility, alone present a formidable challenge. Dismantling those facilities will create radioactive waste in addition to existing inventories of spent fuel and reprocessing wastes. Negotiations with the DPRK, such as the Six Party Talks, need to appreciate the enormous scale of the radioactive waste management problem resulting from dismantlement. The two operating plutonium facilities, along with their legacy wastes, will result in anywhere from 50 to 100 metric tons of uranium spent fuel, as much as 500,000 liters of liquid high-level waste, as well as miscellaneous high-level waste sources from the Radiochemical Laboratory. A substantial quantity of intermediate-level waste will result from disposing 600 metric tons of graphite from the reactor, an undetermined quantity of chemical decladding liquid waste from reprocessing, and hundreds of tons of contaminated concrete and metal from facility dismantlement. Various facilities for dismantlement, decontamination, waste treatment and packaging, and storage will be needed. The shipment of spent fuel and liquid high level waste out of the DPRK is also likely to be required. Nuclear facility dismantlement and radioactive waste management in the DPRK are all the more difficult because of nuclear nonproliferation constraints, including the call by the United States for “complete, verifiable and irreversible dismantlement,” or “CVID.” It is desirable to accomplish dismantlement quickly, but many aspects of the radioactive waste management cannot be achieved without careful assessment, planning and preparation, sustained commitment, and long completion times. The radioactive waste management problem in fact offers a prospect for international participation to engage the DPRK constructively. DPRK nuclear dismantlement, when accompanied with a concerted effort for effective radioactive waste management, can be a mutually beneficial goal.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen

    2010-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen

    2010-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1993-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

     The objective of this surveillance is to ensure that workers who are performing activities associated with characterizing, handling, processing, storing or transporting hazardous wastes are...

  18. Method and apparatus for the management of hazardous waste material

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Murray, Jr., Holt (Hopewell, NJ)

    1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A container for storing hazardous waste material, particularly radioactive waste material, consists of a cylindrical body and lid of precipitation hardened C17510 beryllium-copper alloy, and a channel formed between the mated lid and body for receiving weld filler material of C17200 copper-beryllium alloy. The weld filler material has a precipitation hardening temperature lower than the aging kinetic temperature of the material of the body and lid, whereby the weld filler material is post weld heat treated for obtaining a weld having substantially the same physical, thermal, and electrical characteristics as the material of the body and lid. A mechanical seal assembly is located between an interior shoulder of the body and the bottom of the lid for providing a vacuum seal.

  19. Method and apparatus for the management of hazardous waste material

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Murray, H. Jr.

    1995-02-21T23:59:59.000Z

    A container for storing hazardous waste material, particularly radioactive waste material, consists of a cylindrical body and lid of precipitation hardened C17510 beryllium-copper alloy, and a channel formed between the mated lid and body for receiving weld filler material of C17200 copper-beryllium alloy. The weld filler material has a precipitation hardening temperature lower than the aging kinetic temperature of the material of the body and lid, whereby the weld filler material is post weld heat treated for obtaining a weld having substantially the same physical, thermal, and electrical characteristics as the material of the body and lid. A mechanical seal assembly is located between an interior shoulder of the body and the bottom of the lid for providing a vacuum seal. 40 figs.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Maroncelli, Mark

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SINGH, G.

    2000-09-06T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bowman, B.R.

    1995-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

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

  3. Independent Oversight Activity Report, Hanford Waste Treatment...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Observation of the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Low Activity Waste Facility Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Systems Hazards Analysis Activities...

  4. High level waste facilities -- Continuing operation or orderly shutdown

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Decker, L.A.

    1998-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Two options for Environmental Impact Statement No action alternatives describe operation of the radioactive liquid waste facilities at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. The first alternative describes continued operation of all facilities as planned and budgeted through 2020. Institutional control for 100 years would follow shutdown of operational facilities. Alternatively, the facilities would be shut down in an orderly fashion without completing planned activities. The facilities and associated operations are described. Remaining sodium bearing liquid waste will be converted to solid calcine in the New Waste Calcining Facility (NWCF) or will be left in the waste tanks. The calcine solids will be stored in the existing Calcine Solids Storage Facilities (CSSF). Regulatory and cost impacts are discussed.

  5. Copenhagen Waste Management and Incineration

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    ownership of treatment facilities · Incineration plants · Land fill · Disposal of hazardous waste · Source waste prevention · Focus areas · Changes in behaviour among consumers and producers · City schemes almost fully developed · Collection of hazardous substances, paper, cardboard, gardening and bulky

  6. RCRA/UST, superfund and EPCRA hotline training module. Introduction to: Hazardous waste identification (40 CFR part 261) updated as of July 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This module introduces a specific hazardous waste identification process, which involves asking and analyzing a series of questions about any waste being evaluated. Analyzes in detail the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) definition of hazardous waste. It explains the following concepts that are essential to identifying a RCRA hazardous waste: hazardous waste listing, hazardous waste characteristics, the mixture and derived-from rules, the contained-in policy, and the Hazardous Waste Identification Rule (HWIR).

  7. Oil and Hazardous Substance Discharge Preparedness (Minnesota)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  8. Fire hazard analysis of the radioactive mixed waste trenchs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McDonald, K.M. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

    1995-04-27T23:59:59.000Z

    This Fire Hazards Analysis (FHA) is intended to assess comprehensively the risk from fire associated with the disposal of low level radioactive mixed waste in trenches within the lined landfills, provided by Project W-025, designated Trench 31 and 34 of the Burial Ground 218-W-5. Elements within the FHA make recommendations for minimizing risk to workers, the public, and the environment from fire during the course of the operation`s activity. Transient flammables and combustibles present that support the operation`s activity are considered and included in the analysis. The graded FHA contains the following elements: description of construction, protection of essential safety class equipment, fire protection features, description of fire hazards, life safety considerations, critical process equipment, high value property, damage potential--maximum credible fire loss (MCFL) and maximum possible fire loss (MPFL), fire department/brigade response, recovery potential, potential for a toxic, biological and/or radiation incident due to a fire, emergency planning, security considerations related to fire protection, natural hazards (earthquake, flood, wind) impact on fire safety, and exposure fire potential, including the potential for fire spread between fire areas. Recommendations for limiting risk are made in the text of this report and printed in bold type. All recommendations are repeated in a list in Section 18.0.

  9. Central Facilities Area Facilities Radioactive Waste Management Basis and DOE Manual 435.1-1 Compliance Tables

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; Brion Bennett

    2011-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Department of Energy Order 435.1, 'Radioactive Waste Management,' along with its associated manual and guidance, requires development and maintenance of a radioactive waste management basis for each radioactive waste management facility, operation, and activity. This document presents a radioactive waste management basis for Idaho National Laboratory's Central Facilities Area facilities that manage radioactive waste. The radioactive waste management basis for a facility comprises existing laboratory-wide and facilityspecific documents. Department of Energy Manual 435.1-1, 'Radioactive Waste Management Manual,' facility compliance tables also are presented for the facilities. The tables serve as a tool for developing the radioactive waste management basis.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Singh, G

    2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  11. Method for acid oxidation of radioactive, hazardous, and mixed organic waste materials

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Pierce, Robert A. (Aiken, SC); Smith, James R. (Corrales, NM); Ramsey, William G. (Aiken, SC); Cicero-Herman, Connie A. (Aiken, SC); Bickford, Dennis F. (Folly Beach, SC)

    1999-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The present invention is directed to a process for reducing the volume of low level radioactive and mixed waste to enable the waste to be more economically stored in a suitable repository, and for placing the waste into a form suitable for permanent disposal. The invention involves a process for preparing radioactive, hazardous, or mixed waste for storage by contacting the waste starting material containing at least one organic carbon-containing compound and at least one radioactive or hazardous waste component with nitric acid and phosphoric acid simultaneously at a contacting temperature in the range of about 140.degree. C. to about 210 .degree. C. for a period of time sufficient to oxidize at least a portion of the organic carbon-containing compound to gaseous products, thereby producing a residual concentrated waste product containing substantially all of said radioactive or inorganic hazardous waste component; and immobilizing the residual concentrated waste product in a solid phosphate-based ceramic or glass form.

  12. EIS-0082: Defense Waste Processing Facility, Savannah River Plant

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Office of Defense Waste and Byproducts Management developed this EIS to provide environmental input into both the selection of an appropriate strategy for the permanent disposal of the high-level radioactive waste currently stored at the Savannah River Plant (SRP) and the subsequent decision to construct and operate a Defense Waste Processing Facility at the SRP site.

  13. Safety analysis report for the Waste Storage Facility. Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bengston, S.J.

    1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This safety analysis report outlines the safety concerns associated with the Waste Storage Facility located in the Radioactive Waste Management Complex at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. The three main objectives of the report are: define and document a safety basis for the Waste Storage Facility activities; demonstrate how the activities will be carried out to adequately protect the workers, public, and environment; and provide a basis for review and acceptance of the identified risk that the managers, operators, and owners will assume.

  14. 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.

    2009-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

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

    2000-03-28T23:59:59.000Z

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

  16. Preparation of waste oil for analysis to determine hazardous metals

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Essling, A.M.; Huff, D.R.; Huff, E.A.; Fox, I.M.; Graczyk, D.G.

    1995-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Two methods for preparing waste-oil samples to permit measurement of their metals content were evaluated. For this evaluation, metals-in-oil standard reference materials were prepared by each method and the resulting solutions were analyzed for 20 metals, including those (As, Ba, Cd, Cr, Pb, Hg, Se, and Ag) regulated as hazardous under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. One preparation method involved combustion of the waste oil under oxygen at 25 atm pressure, as described in the American Society for Testing and Materials test method E926-88. As we applied it, this method gave recoveries well under 90% for most of the metals that we examined and, hence, proved unsatisfactory for routine application to waste-oil analysis. With the other method, nitric acid decomposition in a sealed vessel heated with microwave energy (analogous to US Environmental Protection Agency Method 3051), recoveries of all 20 metal contaminants were within 90 to 110% of the certified values. This microwave digestion procedure was also more efficient since it allowed six samples to be prepared together, whereas the oxygen combustion approach allowed processing of only one sample at a time.

  17. Grand Junction projects office mixed-waste treatment program, VAC*TRAX mobile treatment unit process hazards analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bloom, R.R.

    1996-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The objective of this report is to demonstrate that a thorough assessment of the risks associated with the operation of the Rust Geotech patented VAC*TRAX mobile treatment unit (MTU) has been performed and documented. The MTU was developed to treat mixed wastes at the US Department of Energy (DOE) Albuquerque Operations Office sites. The MTU uses an indirectly heated, batch vacuum dryer to thermally desorb organic compounds from mixed wastes. This process hazards analysis evaluated 102 potential hazards. The three significant hazards identified involved the inclusion of oxygen in a process that also included an ignition source and fuel. Changes to the design of the MTU were made concurrent with the hazard identification and analysis; all hazards with initial risk rankings of 1 or 2 were reduced to acceptable risk rankings of 3 or 4. The overall risk to any population group from operation of the MTU was determined to be very low; the MTU is classified as a Radiological Facility with low hazards.

  18. Waste sampling and characterization facility complex safety analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Meloy, R.T., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-06-04T23:59:59.000Z

    The Waste Sampling and Characterization Facility is a `Non-Nuclear, Radiological Facility. This document demonstrates, by analysis, that WSCF can meet the chemical and radiological inventory limits for a radiological facility. It establishes control that ensures those inventories are maintained below threshold values to preserve the `Non- Nuclear, Radiological` classification.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1992-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  20. Material selection for Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Larrick, A.P.; Blackburn, L.D.; Brehm, W.F.; Carlos, W.C.; Hauptmann, J.P. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States); Danielson, M.J.; Westerman, R.E. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States); Divine, J.R. [ChemMet Ltd., West Richland, WA (United States); Foster, G.M. [ICF Kaiser Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

    1995-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper briefly summarizes the history of the materials selection for the US Department of Energy`s high-level waste carbon steel storage tanks. It also provides an evaluation of the materials for the construction of new tanks at the evaluation of the materials for the construction of new tanks at the Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility. The evaluation included a materials matrix that summarized the critical design, fabrication, construction, and corrosion resistance requirements: assessed. each requirement: and cataloged the advantages and disadvantages of each material. This evaluation is based on the mission of the Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility. On the basis of the compositions of the wastes stored in Hanford waste tanks, it is recommended that tanks for the Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility be constructed of ASME SA 515, Grade 70, carbon steel.

  1. Final Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program Environmental Impact Statement Richland, Washington

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    N /A

    2004-02-13T23:59:59.000Z

    This Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program Environmental Impact Statement (HSW EIS) provides environmental and technical information concerning U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) ongoing and proposed waste management practices at the Hanford Site in Washington State. The HSW EIS updates some analyses of environmental consequences from previous documents and provides evaluations for activities that may be implemented consistent with the Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS; DOE 1997c) Records of Decision (RODs). The draft HSW EIS was initially issued in April 2002 for public comment (DOE 2002b). A revised draft HSW EIS was issued in March 2003 to address new waste management alternatives that had been proposed since the initial draft HSW EIS was prepared, and to address comments received during the public review period for the first draft (DOE 2003d). The revised draft HSW EIS also incorporated alternatives for disposal of immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW) from treatment of Hanford Site tank waste in the waste treatment plant (WTP) currently under construction, an activity that was not included in the first draft (68 FR 7110). This final HSW EIS describes the DOE preferred alternative, and in response to public comments received on the March 2003 revised draft, provides additional analyses for some environmental consequences associated with the preferred alternative, with other alternatives, and with cumulative impacts. Public comments on the revised draft HSW EIS are addressed in the comment response document (Volume III of this final EIS). This HSW EIS describes the environmental consequences of alternatives for constructing, modifying, and operating facilities to store, treat, and/or dispose of low-level (radioactive) waste (LLW), transuranic (TRU) waste, ILAW, and mixed low-level waste (MLLW) including WTP melters at Hanford. In addition, the potential long-term consequences of LLW, MLLW, and ILAW disposal on groundwater and surface water are evaluated for a 10,000-year period, although the DOE performance standards only require assessment for the first 1000 years after disposal (DOE 2001f). This document does not address non-radioactive waste that contains ''hazardous'' or ''dangerous'' waste, as defined under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 (42 USC 6901) and Washington State Dangerous Waste regulations (WAC 173-303). Following a previous National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42 USC 4321) review (DOE 1997d), DOE decided to dispose of TRU waste in New Mexico at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), a repository that meets the requirements of 40 CFR 191 (63 FR 3623). This HSW EIS has been prepared in accordance with NEPA, the DOE implementing procedures for NEPA 10 CFR 1021, and the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR 1500-1508).

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1990-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  3. UC DAVIS CUPA SELF AUDIT CHECKLIST 1. Are chemical hazardous waste containers disposed of through Yes No NA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Kolner, Brian H.

    UC DAVIS CUPA SELF AUDIT CHECKLIST 1. Are chemical hazardous waste containers disposed of through days if 1 pound or 1 quart of acutely hazardous waste is accumulated? (Prudent practice is to dispose of within 90 days). 2. Does each chemical hazardous waste container have a UC Davis Yes Ë No Ë NA Ë

  4. 24.01.01.Q0.04 Hazardous Waste Management Page 1 of 2 STANDARD ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    24.01.01.Q0.04 Hazardous Waste Management Page 1 of 2 STANDARD ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE 24.01.01.Q0.04 Hazardous Waste Management Program Approved July 18, 2012 Next scheduled review: July 18, 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________ A hazardous waste management program shall be implemented at Texas A&M University at Qatar (TAMUQ), located

  5. Transuranic (Tru) waste volume reduction operations at a plutonium facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cournoyer, Michael E [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Nixon, Archie E [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Dodge, Robert L [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Fife, Keith W [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Sandoval, Arnold M [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Garcia, Vincent E [Los Alamos National Laboratory

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Programmatic operations at the Los Alamos National Laboratory Plutonium Facility (TA 55) involve working with various amounts of plutonium and other highly toxic, alpha-emitting materials. The spread of radiological contamination on surfaces, airborne contamination, and excursions of contaminants into the operator's breathing zone are prevented through use of a variety of gloveboxes (the glovebox, coupled with an adequate negative pressure gradient, provides primary confinement). Size-reduction operations on glovebox equipment are a common activity when a process has been discontinued and the room is being modified to support a new customer. The Actin ide Processing Group at TA-55 uses one-meter-long glass columns to process plutonium. Disposal of used columns is a challenge, since they must be size-reduced to get them out of the glovebox. The task is a high-risk operation because the glass shards that are generated can puncture the bag-out bags, leather protectors, glovebox gloves, and the worker's skin when completing the task. One of the Lessons Learned from these operations is that Laboratory management should critically evaluate each hazard and provide more effective measures to prevent personnel injury. A bag made of puncture-resistant material was one of these enhanced controls. We have investigated the effectiveness of these bags and have found that they safely and effectively permit glass objects to be reduced to small pieces with a plastic or rubber mallet; the waste can then be easily poured into a container for removal from the glove box as non-compactable transuranic (TRU) waste. This size-reduction operation reduces solid TRU waste generation by almost 2% times. Replacing one-time-use bag-out bags with multiple-use glass crushing bags also contributes to reducing generated waste. In addition, significant costs from contamination, cleanup, and preparation of incident documentation are avoided. This effort contributes to the Los Alamos National Laboratory Continuous Improvement Program by improving the efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and formality of glovebox operations. In this report, the technical issues, associated with implementing this process improvement are addressed, the results discussed, effectiveness of Lessons Learned evaluated, and waste savings presented.

  6. Decontamination and dismantlement of the building 594 waste ion exchange facility at Argonne National Laboratory-East project final report.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wiese, E. C.

    1998-11-23T23:59:59.000Z

    The Building 594 D&D Project was directed toward the following goals: Removal of any radioactive and hazardous materials associated with the Waste Ion Exchange Facility; Decontamination of the Waste Ion Exchange Facility to unrestricted use levels; Demolition of Building 594; and Documentation of all project activities affecting quality (i.e., waste packaging, instrument calibration, audit results, and personnel exposure) These goals had been set in order to eliminate the radiological and hazardous safety concerns inherent in the Waste Ion Exchange Facility and to allow, upon completion of the project, unescorted and unmonitored access to the area. The ion exchange system and the resin contained in the system were the primary areas of concern, while the condition of the building which housed the system was of secondary concern. ANL-E health physics technicians characterized the Building 594 Waste Ion Exchange Facility in September 1996. The characterization identified a total of three radionuclides present in the Waste Ion Exchange Facility with a total activity of less than 5 {micro}Ci (175 kBq). The radionuclides of concern were Co{sup 60}, Cs{sup 137}, and Am{sup 241}. The highest dose rates observed during the project were associated with the resin in the exchange vessels. DOE Order 5480.2A establishes the maximum whole body exposure for occupational workers at 5 rem (50 mSv)/yr; the administrative limit at ANL-E is 1 rem/yr (10 mSv/yr).

  7. Solid Waste Management Plan. Revision 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-04-26T23:59:59.000Z

    The waste types discussed in this Solid Waste Management Plan are Municipal Solid Waste, Hazardous Waste, Low-Level Mixed Waste, Low-Level Radioactive Waste, and Transuranic Waste. The plan describes for each type of solid waste, the existing waste management facilities, the issues, and the assumptions used to develop the current management plan.

  8. SRS: Site ranking system for hazardous chemical and radioactive waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rechard, R.P.; Chu, M.S.Y.; Brown, S.L.

    1988-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the rationale and presents instructions for a site ranking system (SRS). SRS ranks hazardous chemical and radioactive waste sites by scoring important and readily available factors that influence risk to human health. Using SRS, sites can be ranked for purposes of detailed site investigations. SRS evaluates the relative risk as a combination of potentially exposed population, chemical toxicity, and potential exposure of release from a waste site; hence, SRS uses the same concepts found in a detailed assessment of health risk. Basing SRS on the concepts of risk assessment tends to reduce the distortion of results found in other ranking schemes. More importantly, a clear logic helps ensure the successful application of the ranking procedure and increases its versatility when modifications are necessary for unique situations. Although one can rank sites using a detailed risk assessment, it is potentially costly because of data and resources required. SRS is an efficient approach to provide an order-of-magnitude ranking, requiring only readily available data (often only descriptive) and hand calculations. Worksheets are included to make the system easier to understand and use. 88 refs., 19 figs., 58 tabs.

  9. Composition and process for the encapsulation and stabilization of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Kalb, P.D.; Colombo, P.

    1999-07-20T23:59:59.000Z

    The present invention provides a composition and process for disposal of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes. The present invention preferably includes a process for multibarrier encapsulation of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes by combining substantially simultaneously dry waste powder, a non-biodegradable thermoplastic polymer and an anhydrous additive in an extruder to form a homogeneous molten matrix. The molten matrix may be directed in a clean'' polyethylene liner, allowed to cool, thus forming a monolithic waste form which provides a multibarrier to the dispersion of wastes into the environment. 2 figs.

  10. Composition and process for the encapsulation and stabilization of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Kalb, P.D.; Colombo, P.

    1998-03-24T23:59:59.000Z

    The present invention provides a composition and process for disposal of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes. The present invention preferably includes a process for multibarrier encapsulation of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes by combining substantially simultaneously dry waste powder, a non-biodegradable thermoplastic polymer and an anhydrous additive in an extruder to form a homogeneous molten matrix. The molten matrix may be directed in a ``clean`` polyethylene liner, allowed to cool, thus forming a monolithic waste form which provides a multibarrier to the dispersion of wastes into the environment. 2 figs.

  11. Composition and process for the encapsulation and stabilization of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Kalb, Paul D. (Wading River, NY); Colombo, Peter (Patchogue, NY)

    1998-03-24T23:59:59.000Z

    The present invention provides a composition and process for disposal of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes. The present invention preferably includes a process for multibarrier encapsulation of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes by combining substantially simultaneously dry waste powder, a non-biodegradable thermoplastic polymer and an anhydrous additive in an extruder to form a homogenous molten matrix. The molten matrix may be directed in a "clean" polyethylene liner, allowed to cool, thus forming a monolithic waste form which provides a multibarrier to the dispersion of wastes into the environment.

  12. Composition and process for the encapsulation and stabilization of radioactive hazardous and mixed wastes

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Kalb, P.D.; Colombo, P.

    1997-07-15T23:59:59.000Z

    The present invention provides a composition and process for disposal of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes. The present invention preferably includes a process for multibarrier encapsulation of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes by combining substantially simultaneously dry waste powder, a non-biodegradable thermoplastic polymer and an anhydrous additive in an extruder to form a homogeneous molten matrix. The molten matrix may be directed in a ``clean`` polyethylene liner, allowed to cool, thus forming a monolithic waste form which provides a multibarrier to the dispersion of wastes into the environment. 2 figs.

  13. Composition and process for the encapsulation and stabilization of radioactive hazardous and mixed wastes

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Kalb, Paul D. (21 Barnes Road, Wading River, NY 11792); Colombo, Peter (44 N. Pinelake Dr., Patchogue, NY 11772)

    1997-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The present invention provides a composition and process for disposal of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes. The present invention preferably includes a process for multibarrier encapsulation of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes by combining substantially simultaneously dry waste powder, a non-biodegradable thermoplastic polymer and an anhydrous additive in an extruder to form a homogenous molten matrix. The molten matrix may be directed in a "clean" polyethylene liner, allowed to cool, thus forming a monolithic waste form which provides a multibarrier to the dispersion of wastes into the environment.

  14. Composition and process for the encapsulation and stabilization of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Kalb, Paul D. (Wading River, NY); Colombo, Peter (Patchogue, NY)

    1999-07-20T23:59:59.000Z

    The present invention provides a composition and process for disposal of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes. The present invention preferably includes a process for multibarrier encapsulation of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes by combining substantially simultaneously dry waste powder, a non-biodegradable thermoplastic polymer and an anhydrous additive in an extruder to form a homogenous molten matrix. The molten matrix may be directed in a "clean" polyethylene liner, allowed to cool, thus forming a monolithic waste form which provides a multibarrier to the dispersion of wastes into the environment.

  15. Evaluation program effectiveness of household hazardous waste collection: The Seattle-King County experience

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1991-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Seattle-King County Hazardous Waste Management Plan provides the framework for an intensive effort to keep Household Hazardous and Small Quantity Generator (SQG) wastes from entering the ``normal`` municipal waste streams. The Plan sets ambitious goals for diverting thousands of tons of hazardous wastes from being thrown, poured or dumped in the municipal waste stream. During the first five years, over $30 millon will be spent for a variety of HHW and SQG programs. The Plan incorporates a wide range of elements, including education, collection, and compliance components. Many of the hazardous waste education and collection programs have been developed in response to the Plan, so their effectiveness is still undetermined. A key component of the Plan is program evaluation. This report provides descriptions of two evaluation methods used to establish baselines for assessing the effectiveness of the Hazardous Waste Management Plan`s programs. Focusing on the Plan`s household hazardous waste programs, the findings of the baseline evaluations are discussed and conclusions are made. A general population survey, conducted through telephone interviews, was designed to assess changes in knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of area residents. Characterization of the solid waste stream was used to identify the hazardous constituents contributed to municipal solid waste by households. Monitoring changes in the amount of hazardous materials present in the waste stream was used to indicate whether or not Program strategies are influencing disposal behaviors. Comparing the data gathered by these two evaluation methods provided a unique opportunity to cross-check the findings and validate that change, if any, has occurred. From the comparisons, the report draws a number of conclusions.

  16. Evaluation program effectiveness of household hazardous waste collection: The Seattle-King County experience

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1991-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Seattle-King County Hazardous Waste Management Plan provides the framework for an intensive effort to keep Household Hazardous and Small Quantity Generator (SQG) wastes from entering the normal'' municipal waste streams. The Plan sets ambitious goals for diverting thousands of tons of hazardous wastes from being thrown, poured or dumped in the municipal waste stream. During the first five years, over $30 millon will be spent for a variety of HHW and SQG programs. The Plan incorporates a wide range of elements, including education, collection, and compliance components. Many of the hazardous waste education and collection programs have been developed in response to the Plan, so their effectiveness is still undetermined. A key component of the Plan is program evaluation. This report provides descriptions of two evaluation methods used to establish baselines for assessing the effectiveness of the Hazardous Waste Management Plan's programs. Focusing on the Plan's household hazardous waste programs, the findings of the baseline evaluations are discussed and conclusions are made. A general population survey, conducted through telephone interviews, was designed to assess changes in knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of area residents. Characterization of the solid waste stream was used to identify the hazardous constituents contributed to municipal solid waste by households. Monitoring changes in the amount of hazardous materials present in the waste stream was used to indicate whether or not Program strategies are influencing disposal behaviors. Comparing the data gathered by these two evaluation methods provided a unique opportunity to cross-check the findings and validate that change, if any, has occurred. From the comparisons, the report draws a number of conclusions.

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

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

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

  18. New Mexico Environmental Department (NMED) Waste Isolation Pilot...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Mexico Environmental Department (NMED) Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Hazardous Waste Facility Permit The documents included in this listing are additional references not...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    OBERG, B.D.

    2003-03-22T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  1. Pretreatment options for waste-to-energy facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Diaz, L.F.; Savage, G.M. [CalRecovery, Inc., Hercules, CA (United States)

    1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper describes various options available for processing MSW before the material is introduced to waste-to-energy facilities. Specifically, the paper reviews the type of equipment currently available for the recovery of resources from the waste stream. In addition, the paper discusses other matters which in many cases are ignored but are extremely important for the design of the processes. Some of these matters include the use of reliable waste characterization data during conceptual design and definition of the properties and specifications of the recovered materials and/or energy forms (e.g., RDF). Finally, the paper discusses other factors that have a critical impact on the facility such as potential environmental consequences of pretreatment of the waste prior to its combustion in waste-to-energy facilities.

  2. Progress of the High Level Waste Program at the Defense Waste Processing Facility - 13178

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bricker, Jonathan M.; Fellinger, Terri L.; Staub, Aaron V.; Ray, Jeff W.; Iaukea, John F. [Savannah River Remediation, Aiken, South Carolina, 29808 (United States)] [Savannah River Remediation, Aiken, South Carolina, 29808 (United States)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Defense Waste Processing Facility at the Savannah River Site treats and immobilizes High Level Waste into a durable borosilicate glass for safe, permanent storage. The High Level Waste program significantly reduces environmental risks associated with the storage of radioactive waste from legacy efforts to separate fissionable nuclear material from irradiated targets and fuels. In an effort to support the disposition of radioactive waste and accelerate tank closure at the Savannah River Site, the Defense Waste Processing Facility recently implemented facility and flowsheet modifications to improve production by 25%. These improvements, while low in cost, translated to record facility production in fiscal years 2011 and 2012. In addition, significant progress has been accomplished on longer term projects aimed at simplifying and expanding the flexibility of the existing flowsheet in order to accommodate future processing needs and goals. (authors)

  3. 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.

  4. A Regulatory Analysis and Reassessment of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Listed Hazardous Waste Numbers for Applicability to the INTEC Liquid Waste System

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gilbert, K.L.; Venneman, T.E.

    1998-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report concludes that there are four listed hazardous waste numbers (F001, F002, F005, and U134) applicable to the waste in the Process Equipment Waste Evaporator (PEWE) liquid waste system at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. The chemical constituents associated with these listed hazardous waste numbers, including those listed only for ignitability are identified. The RCRA Part A permit application hazardous waste numbers identify chemical constituents that may be treated or stored by the PEWE liquid waste system either as a result of a particular characteristic (40 CFR, Subpart C) or as a result of a specific process (40 CFR 261, Subpart D). The RCRA Part A permit application for the PEWE liquid waste system identifies the universe of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hazardous waste numbers [23 characteristic (hazardous waste codes) numbers and 105 listed numbers (four F-listed hazardous waste numbers, 20 P-listed hazardous waste numbers, and 81 U-listed hazardous waste numbers)] deemed acceptable for storage and treatment. This evaluation, however, identifies only listed wastes (and their chemical constituents) that have actually entered the PEWE liquid waste system and would, therefore, be assigned to the PEWE liquids and treatment residuals.

  5. Westinghouse Cementation Facility of Solid Waste Treatment System - 13503

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jacobs, Torsten; Aign, Joerg [Westinghouse Electric Germany GmbH, Global Waste Management, Tarpenring 6, D- 22419 Hamburg (Germany)] [Westinghouse Electric Germany GmbH, Global Waste Management, Tarpenring 6, D- 22419 Hamburg (Germany)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    During NPP operation, several waste streams are generated, caused by different technical and physical processes. Besides others, liquid waste represents one of the major types of waste. Depending on national regulation for storage and disposal of radioactive waste, solidification can be one specific requirement. To accommodate the global request for waste treatment systems Westinghouse developed several specific treatment processes for the different types of waste. In the period of 2006 to 2008 Westinghouse awarded several contracts for the design and delivery of waste treatment systems related to the latest CPR-1000 nuclear power plants. One of these contracts contains the delivery of four Cementation Facilities for waste treatment, s.c. 'Follow on Cementations' dedicated to three locations, HongYanHe, NingDe and YangJiang, of new CPR-1000 nuclear power stations in the People's Republic of China. Previously, Westinghouse delivered a similar cementation facility to the CPR-1000 plant LingAo II, in Daya Bay, PR China. This plant already passed the hot functioning tests successfully in June 2012 and is now ready and released for regular operation. The 'Follow on plants' are designed to package three 'typical' kind of radioactive waste: evaporator concentrates, spent resins and filter cartridges. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview on the Westinghouse experience to design and execution of cementation facilities. (authors)

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

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

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

  7. Waste Heat Recovery from Refrigeration in a Meat Processing Facility

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Murphy, W. T.; Woods, B. E.; Gerdes, J. E.

    1980-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A case study is reviewed on a heat recovery system installed in a meat processing facility to preheat water for the plant hot water supply. The system utilizes waste superheat from the facility's 1,350-ton ammonia refrigeration system. The heat...

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Davol, Phebe

    1987-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    (EPA, 1983). Land tr eatment may be a viable disposal alternative for many petroleum based hazardous wastes. This technology involves the controlled incorporation of wastes into the surface layer of soil resulting in degradation, immobilization... increased as the waste degraded, but began to decrease by the end of the study. Although the mechanism to explain this phenomena is unknown, it is possible that non-mutagenic compounds in the waste may have degraded into mutagenic compounds...

  9. Liquid waste certification plan 340 waste handling facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HALGREN, D.L.

    1999-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

    This document addresses the discharges from the 340 Facility to the 300 Area Process Sewer and Retention Process Sewer.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gary Mecham; Don Konoyer

    2009-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  11. 24.01.01.M3 Hazardous Waste Management Program Page 1 of 2 UNIVERSITY RULE

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) Resource Conservation personnel safety and environmental preservation associated with hazardous waste management activities Environmental Health and Safety Department (EHS) and through the EHS home page (https

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application documentation consists of both Part A and a Part B permit application documentation. An explanation of the Part A revisions associated with this treatment and storage unit, including the current revision, is provided at the beginning of the Part A section. Once the initial Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit is issued, the following process will be used. As final, certified treatment, storage, and/or disposal unit-specific documents are developed, and completeness notifications are made by the US Environmental Protection Agency and the Washington State Department of Ecology, additional unit-specific permit conditions will be incorporated into the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit through the permit modification process. All treatment, storage, and/or disposal units that are included in the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application will operate under interim status until final status conditions for these units are incorporated into the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit. The Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application, 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility contains information current as of May 1, 1993.

  13. Summary - Environmental Management Waste Management Facility...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    remedial actions at Oak Ridge. As noted in the recommendations, compaction assessment, waste settlement and impact on the cover should have a focused review to ensure long term...

  14. Industrial Solid Waste Landfill Facilities (Ohio)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This chapter of the law establishes that the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency provides rules and guidelines for landfills, including those that treat waste to generate electricity. The law...

  15. Determining the effective diffusivity of ions in hazardous wastes solidified by portland cement

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Taffinder, Glen Gregory

    1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    DETERMINING THE EFFECTIVE DIFFUSIVITY OF TONS IN HAZARDOUS WASTES SOLIDIFIED BY PORTLAND CEMENT A Thesis by GLEN GREGORY TAFFINDER Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements... for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE May 1991 Major Subject: Civil Engineering DETERMINING THE EFFECTIVE DIFFUSIVITY OF TONS IN HAZARDOUS WASTES SOLIDIFIED BY PORTLAND CEMENT A Thesis by GLEN GREGORY TAFFINDER Approved as to scyle and content by: Bill...

  16. Results of Hazardous and Mixed Waste Excavation from the Chemical Waste Landfill

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Young, S. G.; Schofield, D. P.; Kwiecinski, D.; Edgmon, C. L.; Methvin, R.

    2002-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper describes the results of the excavation of a 1.9-acre hazardous and mixed waste landfill operated for 23 years at Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Excavation of the landfill was completed in 2 1/2 years without a single serious accident or injury. Approximately 50,000 cubic yards of soil contaminated with volatile and semi-volatile organics, metals, polychlorinated biphenyl compounds, and radioactive constituents was removed. In addition, over 400 cubic yards of buried debris was removed, including bulk debris, unknown chemicals, compressed gas cylinders, thermal and chemical batteries, explosive and ordnance debris, pyrophoric materials and biohazardous waste. Removal of these wastes included negotiation of multiple regulations and guidances encompassed in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), and risk assessment methodology. RCRA concepts that were addressed include the area of contamination, permit modification, emergency treatment provision, and listed waste designation. These regulatory decisions enabled the project to overcome logistical and programmatic needs such as increased operational area, the ability to implement process improvements while maintaining a record of decisions and approvals.

  17. Radioactive Waste Storage Facility at the Armenian NPP - 12462

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Grigoryan, G.; Amirjanyan, A.; Gondakyan, Y. [Nuclear and Radiation Safety Center (NRSC), 4 Tigran Mets, 375010 Yerevan (Armenia); Stepanyan, A. [Armenian Nuclear Regulatory Authority(ANRA), 4 Tigran Mets, 375010 Yerevan (Armenia)

    2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    We present a detailed contaminant transfer dynamics model for radionuclide in geosphere and biosphere medium. The model describes the transport of radionuclides using full equation for the processes of advection, diffusion, decay and sorption. The overall objective is to establish, from a post-closure radiological safety point of view, whether it is practical to convert an existing radioactive waste storage facility at Armenian NPP, to a waste disposal facility. The calculation includes: - Data sources for: the operational waste-source term; options for refurbishment and completion of the waste storage facility as a waste disposal facility; the site and its environs; - Development of an assessment context for the safety assessment, and identification of waste treatment options; - A description of the conceptual and mathematical models, and results calculated for the base case scenario relating to the release of contaminants via the groundwater pathway and also precipitation especially important for this site. The results of the calculations showed that the peak individual dose is < 7 E-8 Sv/y arising principally from I-129 after 700 years post closure. Other significant radionuclides, in terms of their contribution to the total dose are I-129, Tc-99 and in little C-14 (U- 234 and Po-210 are not relevant). The study does not explore all issues that might be expected to be presented in a safety case for a near surface disposal facility it mainly focuses on post- closure dose impacts. Most emphasis has been placed on the development of scenarios and conceptual models rather than the presentation and analyses of results and confidence building (only deterministic results are presented). The calculations suggest that, from a perspective the conversion of the waste-storage facility is feasible such that all the predicted doses are well below internationally recognized targets, as well as provisional Armenian regulatory objectives. This conclusion applies to the disposal of the ANPP present and future arising of L/ILW operating wastes. (authors)

  18. Technical evaluation of proposed Ukrainian Central Radioactive Waste Processing Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gates, R.; Glukhov, A.; Markowski, F.

    1996-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical report is a comprehensive evaluation of the proposal by the Ukrainian State Committee on Nuclear Power Utilization to create a central facility for radioactive waste (not spent fuel) processing. The central facility is intended to process liquid and solid radioactive wastes generated from all of the Ukrainian nuclear power plants and the waste generated as a result of Chernobyl 1, 2 and 3 decommissioning efforts. In addition, this report provides general information on the quantity and total activity of radioactive waste in the 30-km Zone and the Sarcophagus from the Chernobyl accident. Processing options are described that may ultimately be used in the long-term disposal of selected 30-km Zone and Sarcophagus wastes. A detailed report on the issues concerning the construction of a Ukrainian Central Radioactive Waste Processing Facility (CRWPF) from the Ukrainian Scientific Research and Design institute for Industrial Technology was obtained and incorporated into this report. This report outlines various processing options, their associated costs and construction schedules, which can be applied to solving the operating and decommissioning radioactive waste management problems in Ukraine. The costs and schedules are best estimates based upon the most current US industry practice and vendor information. This report focuses primarily on the handling and processing of what is defined in the US as low-level radioactive wastes.

  19. Hazard evaluation for transfer of waste from tank 241-SY-101 to tank 241-SY-102

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SHULTZ, M.V.

    1999-04-05T23:59:59.000Z

    Tank 241-SY-101 waste level growth is an emergent, high priority issue. The purpose of this document is to record the hazards evaluation process and document potential hazardous conditions that could lead to the release of radiological and toxicological material from the proposed transfer of a limited quantity (approximately 100,000 gallons) of waste from Tank 241-SY-101 to Tank 241-SY-102. The results of the hazards evaluation were compared to the current Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Basis for Interim Operation (HNF-SD-WM-BIO-001, 1998, Revision 1) to identify any hazardous conditions where Authorization Basis (AB) controls may not be sufficient or may not exist. Comparison to LA-UR-92-3196, A Safety Assessment for Proposed Pump Mixing Operations to Mitigate Episodic Gas Releases in Tank 241-SY-101, was also made in the case of transfer pump removal activities. Revision 1 of this document deletes hazardous conditions no longer applicable to the current waste transfer design and incorporates hazardous conditions related to the use of an above ground pump pit and overground transfer line. This document is not part of the AB and is not a vehicle for requesting authorization of the activity; it is only intended to provide information about the hazardous conditions associated with this activity. The AB Control Decision process will be used to determine the adequacy of controls and whether the proposed activity is within the AB. This hazard evaluation does not constitute an accident analysis.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  2. Waste Analysis Plan for the Waste Receiving and Processing (WRAP) Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    TRINER, G.C.

    1999-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of this waste analysis plan (WAP) is to document the waste acceptance process, sampling methodologies, analytical techniques, and overall processes that are undertaken for dangerous, mixed, and radioactive waste accepted for confirmation, nondestructive examination (NDE) and nondestructive assay (NDA), repackaging, certification, and/or storage at the Waste Receiving and Processing Facility (WRAP). Mixed and/or radioactive waste is treated at WRAP. WRAP is located in the 200 West Area of the Hanford Facility, Richland, Washington. Because dangerous waste does not include source, special nuclear, and by-product material components of mixed waste, radionuclides are not within the scope of this documentation. The information on radionuclides is provided only for general knowledge.

  3. If you have established that your waste is hazardous or may be hazardous the next step is to identify the "Risk Phrases" that apply to each component in the waste.

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Siddharthan, Advaith

    If you have established that your waste is hazardous or may be hazardous the next step. Use the Approved Supply List (available from HSE books). This shows hazard information are aiming to clarify the following: · the categories of danger exhibited by the substance (Hazard Groups

  4. Characterization of the Old Hydrofracture Facility (OHF) waste tanks located at ORNL

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Keller, J.M.; Giaquinto, J.M.; Meeks, A.M.

    1997-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Old Hydrofracture Facility (OHF) is located in Melton Valley within Waste Area Grouping (WAG) 5 and includes five underground storage tanks (T1, T2, T3, T4, and T9) ranging from 13,000 to 25,000 gal. capacity. During the period of 1996--97 there was a major effort to re-sample and characterize the contents of these inactive waste tanks. The characterization data summarized in this report was needed to address waste processing options, examine concerns dealing with the performance assessment (PA) data for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), evaluate the waste characteristics with respect to the waste acceptance criteria (WAC) for WIPP and Nevada Test Site (NTS), address criticality concerns, and to provide the data needed to meet DOT requirements for transporting the waste. This report discusses the analytical characterization data collected on both the supernatant and sludge samples taken from three different locations in each of the OHF tanks. The isotopic data presented in this report supports the position that fissile isotopes of uranium ({sup 233}U and {sup 235}U) do not satisfy the denature ratios required by the administrative controls stated in the ORNL LLLW waste acceptance criteria (WAC). The fissile isotope of plutonium ({sup 239}Pu and {sup 241}Pu) are diluted with thorium far above the WAC requirements. In general, the OHF sludge was found to be hazardous (RCRA) based on total metal content and the transuranic alpha activity was well above the 100 nCi/g limit for TRU waste. The characteristics of the OHF sludge relative to the WIPP WAC limits for fissile gram equivalent, plutonium equivalent activity, and thermal power from decay heat were estimated from the data in this report and found to be far below the upper boundary for any of the remote-handled transuranic waste (RH-TRU) requirements for disposal of the waste in WIPP.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    George, Steven C.

    as a hazardous waste by local, state, and federal laws. A waste is considered a hazardous waste if it contains on how to determine if your waste is hazardous visit http://www.ehs.uci.edu/programs/enviro/hwasteguidelines.html Hazardous Chemical Waste Training: · All hazardous chemical waste generators must complete the Hazardous

  6. 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))

    1990-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gaschott, L.J.

    1995-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

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

  8. Permeability of consolidated incinerator facility wastes stabilized with portland cement

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Walker, B.W.

    2000-04-19T23:59:59.000Z

    The Consolidated Incinerator Facility (CIF) at the Savannah River Site (SRS) burns low-level radioactive wastes and mixed wastes as a method of treatment and volume reduction. The CIF generates secondary waste, which consists of ash and offgas scrubber solution. Currently the ash is stabilized/solidified in the Ashcrete process. The scrubber solution (blowdown) is sent to the SRS Effluent Treatment Facility (ETF) for treatment as wastewater. In the past, the scrubber solution was also stabilized/solidified in the Ashcrete process as blowcrete, and will continue to be treated this way for listed waste burns and scrubber solutions that do not meet the ETF Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC). The disposal plan for Ashcrete and special case blowcrete is to bury these containerized waste forms in shallow unlined trenches in E-Area. The WAC for intimately mixed, cement-based wasteforms intended for direct disposal specifies limits on compressive strength and permeability. Simulated waste and actual CIF ash and scrubber solution were mixed in the laboratory and cast into wasteforms for testing. Test results and related waste disposal consequences are given in this report.

  9. Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application, 616 Nonradioactive dangerous waste storage facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Price, S.M.

    1997-04-30T23:59:59.000Z

    This chapter provides information on the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the waste stored at the 616 NRDWSF. A waste analysis plan is included that describes the methodology used for determining waste types.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wyatt, D.M.

    1994-12-06T23:59:59.000Z

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

  11. Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility (WESF) Interim Status Closure Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SIMMONS, F.M.

    2000-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document describes the planned activities and performance standards for closing the Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility (WESF). WESF is located within the 225B Facility in the 200 East Area on the Hanford Facility. Although this document is prepared based on Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 265, Subpart G requirements, closure of the storage unit will comply with Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-303-610 regulations pursuant to Section 5.3 of the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) Action Plan (Ecology et al. 1996). Because the intention is to clean close WESF, postclosure activities are not applicable to this interim status closure plan. To clean close the storage unit, it will be demonstrated that dangerous waste has not been left onsite at levels above the closure performance standard for removal and decontamination. If it is determined that clean closure is not possible or environmentally is impracticable, the interim status closure plan will be modified to address required postclosure activities. WESF stores cesium and strontium encapsulated salts. The encapsulated salts are stored in the pool cells or process cells located within 225B Facility. The dangerous waste is contained within a double containment system to preclude spills to the environment. In the unlikely event that a waste spill does occur outside the capsules, operating methods and administrative controls require that waste spills be cleaned up promptly and completely, and a notation made in the operating record. Because dangerous waste does not include source, special nuclear, and by-product material components of mixed waste, radionuclides are not within the scope of this documentation. The information on radionuclides is provided only for general knowledge.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  13. Waste Description Pounds Reduced,

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    -labeled oligonucleotides Waste minimization 3,144 Radiological waste (396 ft3 ); Mixed waste (35 gallons); Hazardous Waste of radioactivity, thus avoiding radiological waste generation. This process won a 2008 DOE P2 Star Award environmentally friendly manor. BNL pays shipping fees to the recycling facility. Building demolition recycling

  14. Globalization and Hazardous Waste Management: From Brown to Green?

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    O'Neill, Kate

    2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    by the international scrap metal industry and its national/73 The waste and scrap metal industries have been heavily

  15. Chemical hazards associated with treatment of waste electrical and electronic equipment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tsydenova, Oyuna [Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, 2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Kanagawa 240-0115 (Japan); Bengtsson, Magnus, E-mail: bengtsson@iges.or.jp [Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, 2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Kanagawa 240-0115 (Japan)

    2011-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

    This review paper summarizes the existing knowledge on the chemical hazards associated with recycling and other end-of-life treatment options of waste electrical and electronic equipment (e-waste). The hazards arise from the presence of heavy metals (e.g., mercury, cadmium, lead, etc.), flame retardants (e.g., pentabromophenol, polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), tetrabromobisphenol-A (TBBPA), etc.) and other potentially harmful substances in e-waste. If improperly managed, the substances may pose significant human and environmental health risks. The review describes the potentially hazardous content of e-waste, examines the existing e-waste management practices and presents scientific data on human exposure to chemicals, workplace and environmental pollution associated with the three major e-waste management options, i.e., recycling, incineration and landfilling. The existing e-waste management practices and associated hazards are reviewed separately for developed and developing countries. Finally, based on this review, the paper identifies gaps in the existing knowledge and makes some recommendations for future research.

  16. Hazardous Waste Code Determinations for the First/Second Stage Sludge Waste Stream (IDCs 001, 002, 800)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Arbon, Rodney Edward

    2001-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document, Hazardous Waste Code Determination for the First/Second-Stage Sludge Waste Stream, summarizes the efforts performed at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) to make a hazardous waste code determination on Item Description Codes (IDCs) 001, 002, and 800 drums. This characterization effort included a thorough review of acceptable knowledge (AK), physical characterization, waste form sampling, chemical analyses, and headspace gas data. This effort included an assessment of pre-Waste Analysis Plan (WAP) solidified sampling and analysis data (referred to as preliminary data). Seventy-five First/Second-Stage Sludge Drums, provided in Table 1-1, have been subjected to core sampling and analysis using the requirements defined in the Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP). Based on WAP defined statistical reduction, of preliminary data, a sample size of five was calculated. That is, five additional drums should be core sampled and analyzed. A total of seven drums were sampled, analyzed, and validated in compliance with the WAP criteria. The pre-WAP data (taken under the QAPP) correlated very well with the WAP compliant drum data. As a result, no additional sampling is required. Based upon the information summarized in this document, an accurate hazardous waste determination has been made for the First/Second-Stage Sludge Waste Stream.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1994-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  18. Geosynthetic Clay Liner applications in waste disposal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

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

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

  20. Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Fact Sheet | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

  1. EA-1848: Fulcrum Sierra Waste-to-Ethanol Facility in McCarran...

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

    8: Fulcrum Sierra Waste-to-Ethanol Facility in McCarran, Storey County, NV EA-1848: Fulcrum Sierra Waste-to-Ethanol Facility in McCarran, Storey County, NV June 1, 2011 EA-1848:...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1998-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  3. 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)

    1994-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  4. Hight-Level Waste & Facilities Disposition

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

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

  5. Process and material that encapsulates solid hazardous waste

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    O'Brien, Michael H. (Idaho Falls, ID); Erickson, Arnold W. (Idaho Falls, ID)

    1999-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A method of encapsulating mixed waste in which a thermoplastic polymer having a melting temperature less than about 150.degree. C. and sulfur and mixed waste are mixed at an elevated temperature not greater than about 200.degree. C. and mixed for a time sufficient to intimately mix the constituents, and then cooled to a solid. The resulting solid is also disclosed.

  6. Hazard evaluation for transfer of waste from tank 241-SY-101 to tank 241-SY-102

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SHULTZ, M.V.

    1999-02-12T23:59:59.000Z

    Tank 241-SY-101 (SY-101) waste level growth is an emergent, high priority issue. The purpose of this document is to record the hazards evaluation process and document potential hazardous conditions that could lead to the release of radiological and toxicological material from the proposed transfer of a limited quantity (approximately 100,000 gallons) of waste from SY-101 to 241-SY-102 (SY-102). The results of the hazards evaluation will be compared to the current Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Basis for Interim Operation (HNF-SD-WM-BIO-001, 1998, Revision 1) to identify any hazardous conditions where Authorization Basis (AB) controls may not be sufficient or may not exist. Comparison to LA-UR-92-3196, A Safety Assessment for Proposed Pump Mixing Operations to Mitigate Episodic Gas Releases in Tank 241-SY-101, was also made in the case of transfer pump removal activities. This document is not intended to authorize the activity or determine the adequacy of controls; it is only intended to provide information about the hazardous conditions associated with this activity. The Unreviewed Safety Question (USQ) process will be used to determine the adequacy of controls and whether the proposed activity is within the AB. This hazard evaluation does not constitute an accident analysis.

  7. Enterprise Assessments Operational Awareness Record, Waste Treatment...

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

    Waste (HLW) Facility Hazard Analysis (HA) Process for the HLW Preliminary Documented Safety Analysis upgrade during October 20 - November 6, 2014. The review covered a limited...

  8. Materials evaluation programs at the Defense Waste Processing Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gee, J.T.; Iverson, D.C.; Bickford, D.F.

    1992-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    The Savannah River Site (SRS) has been operating a nuclear fuel cycle since the 1950s to produce nuclear materials in support of the national defense effort. About 83 million gallons of high-level waste produced since operations began has been consolidated by evaporation into 33 million gallons at the waste tank farm. The Department of Energy authorized the construction of the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF), the function of which is to immobilize the waste as a durable borosilicate glass contained in stainless steel canisters prior to the placement of the canisters in a federal repository. The DWPF is now mechanically complete and is undergoing commissioning and run-in activities. A brief description of the DWPF process is provided.

  9. Materials evaluation programs at the Defense Waste Processing Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gee, J.T.; Iverson, D.C.; Bickford, D.F.

    1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Savannah River Site (SRS) has been operating a nuclear fuel cycle since the 1950s to produce nuclear materials in support of the national defense effort. About 83 million gallons of high-level waste produced since operations began has been consolidated by evaporation into 33 million gallons at the waste tank farm. The Department of Energy authorized the construction of the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF), the function of which is to immobilize the waste as a durable borosilicate glass contained in stainless steel canisters prior to the placement of the canisters in a federal repository. The DWPF is now mechanically complete and is undergoing commissioning and run-in activities. A brief description of the DWPF process is provided.

  10. Grout formulation for disposal of low-level and hazardous waste streams containing fluoride

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    McDaniel, E.W.; Sams, T.L.; Tallent, O.K.

    1987-06-02T23:59:59.000Z

    A composition and related process for disposal of hazardous waste streams containing fluoride in cement-based materials is disclosed. the presence of fluoride in cement-based materials is disclosed. The presence of fluoride in waste materials acts as a set retarder and as a result, prevents cement-based grouts from setting. This problem is overcome by the present invention wherein calcium hydroxide is incorporated into the dry-solid portion of the grout mix. The calcium hydroxide renders the fluoride insoluble, allowing the grout to set up and immobilize all hazardous constituents of concern. 4 tabs.

  11. Measurements and models for hazardous chemical and mixed wastes. 1998 annual progress report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Holcomb, C.; Watts, L.; Outcalt, S.L.; Louie, B. [National Inst. of Standards and Technology, Boulder, CO (US); Mullins, M.E.; Rogers, T.N. [Michigan Technological Univ., Houghton, MI (US)

    1998-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    'Aqueous waste of various chemical compositions constitutes a significant fraction of the total waste produced by industry in the US. A large quantity of the waste generated by the US chemical process industry is waste water. In addition, the majority of the waste inventory at DoE sites previously used for nuclear weapons production is aqueous waste. Large quantities of additional aqueous waste are expected to be generated during the clean-up of those sites. In order to effectively treat, safely handle, and properly dispose of these wastes, accurate and comprehensive knowledge of basic thermophysical property information is paramount. This knowledge will lead to huge savings by aiding in the design and optimization of treatment and disposal processes. The main objectives of this project are: Develop and validate models that accurately predict the phase equilibria and thermodynamic properties of hazardous aqueous systems necessary for the safe handling and successful design of separation and treatment processes for hazardous chemical and mixed wastes. Accurately measure the phase equilibria and thermodynamic properties of a representative system (water + acetone + isopropyl alcohol + sodium nitrate) over the applicable ranges of temperature, pressure, and composition to provide the pure component, binary, ternary, and quaternary experimental data required for model development. As of May, 1998, nine months into the first year of a three year project, the authors have made significant progress in the database development, have begun testing the models, and have been performance testing the apparatus on the pure components.'

  12. CHARACTERIZATION OF DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE USING HAZARDOUS WASTE GUIDANCE. APPLICATIONS TO HANFORD SITE ACCELERATED HIGH-LEVEL WASTE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL MISSION0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hamel, William; Huffman, Lori; Lerchen, Megan; Wiemers, Karyn

    2003-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

    Federal hazardous waste regulations were developed for management of industrial waste. These same regulations are also applicable for much of the nation's defense nuclear wastes. At the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford Site in southeast Washington State, one of the nation's largest inventories of nuclear waste remains in storage in large underground tanks. The waste's regulatory designation and its composition and form constrain acceptable treatment and disposal options. Obtaining detailed knowledge of the tank waste composition presents a significant portion of the many challenges in meeting the regulatory-driven treatment and disposal requirements for this waste. Key in applying the hazardous waste regulations to defense nuclear wastes is defining the appropriate and achievable quality for waste feed characterization data and the supporting evidence demonstrating that applicable requirements have been met at the time of disposal. Application of a performance-based approach to demonstrating achievable quality standards will be discussed in the context of the accelerated high-level waste treatment and disposal mission at the Hanford Site.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    K. Winterholler

    2007-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

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

    to as the Permittees, intend to augment the facility system known as the underground ventilation system (UVS) with the Interim Ventilation System (IVS). The UVS is broadly...

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

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

    air bag, K-12 Rescue Saw, 5,000- watt generator, self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA), and much more equipment Surface (Safety and Emergency Services Facility) Fire...

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

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

    that time underground exhaust air has continued to be routed through HEPA filtration. The radiological release contaminated portions of the underground facility. In addition, the...

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

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

    by the Permit, and surface storage areas were not adversely impacted by the fire and radiological incidents at the WIPP facility. The storage limits in the Permit were...

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

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

    revision of the Isolation Plan include an updated description of the WIPP Facility Recovery Plan (Recovery Plan); additional detail regarding the schedule for final closure of...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sonnichsen, J.C.

    1997-08-21T23:59:59.000Z

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

  20. TREATMENT OF METAL-LADEN HAZARDOUS WASTES WITH ADVANCED CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY BY-PRODUCTS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    James T. Cobb, Jr.

    2003-09-12T23:59:59.000Z

    Metal-laden wastes can be stabilized and solidified using advanced clean coal technology by-products (CCTBs)--fluid bed combustor ash and spray drier solids. These utility-generated treatment chemicals are available for purchase through brokers, and commercial applications of this process are being practiced by treaters of metal-laden hazardous waste. A complex of regulations governs this industry, and sensitivities to this complex has discouraged public documentation of treatment of metal-laden hazardous wastes with CCTBs. This report provides a comprehensive public documentation of laboratory studies that show the efficacy of the stabilization and solidification of metal-laden hazardous wastes--such as lead-contaminated soils and sandblast residues--through treatment with CCTBs. It then describes the extensive efforts that were made to obtain the permits allowing a commercial hazardous waste treater to utilize CCTBs as treatment chemicals and to install the equipment required to do so. It concludes with the effect of this lengthy process on the ability of the treatment company to realize the practical, physical outcome of this effort, leading to premature termination of the project.

  1. Measurements and Models for Hazardous chemical and Mixed Wastes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laurel A. Watts; Cynthia D. Holcomb; Stephanie L. Outcalt; Beverly Louie; Michael E. Mullins; Tony N. Rogers

    2002-08-21T23:59:59.000Z

    Mixed solvent aqueous waste of various chemical compositions constitutes a significant fraction of the total waste produced by industry in the United States. Not only does the chemical process industry create large quantities of aqueous waste, but the majority of the waste inventory at the DOE sites previously used for nuclear weapons production is mixed solvent aqueous waste. In addition, large quantities of waste are expected to be generated in the clean-up of those sites. In order to effectively treat, safely handle, and properly dispose of these wastes, accurate and comprehensive knowledge of basic thermophysical properties is essential. The goal of this work is to develop a phase equilibrium model for mixed solvent aqueous solutions containing salts. An equation of state was sought for these mixtures that (a) would require a minimum of adjustable parameters and (b) could be obtained from a available data or data that were easily measured. A model was developed to predict vapor composition and pressure given the liquid composition and temperature. It is based on the Peng-Robinson equation of state, adapted to include non-volatile and salt components. The model itself is capable of predicting the vapor-liquid equilibria of a wide variety of systems composed of water, organic solvents, salts, nonvolatile solutes, and acids or bases. The representative system o water + acetone + 2-propanol + NaNo3 was selected to test and verify the model. Vapor-liquid equilibrium and phase density measurements were performed for this system and its constituent binaries.

  2. WIPP Remote Handled Waste Facility: Performance Dry Run Operations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Burrington, T. P.; Britain, R. M.; Cassingham, S. T.

    2003-02-24T23:59:59.000Z

    The Remote Handled (RH) TRU Waste Handling Facility at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) was recently upgraded and modified in preparation for handling and disposal of RH Transuranic (TRU) waste. This modification will allow processing of RH-TRU waste arriving at the WIPP site in two different types of shielded road casks, the RH-TRU 72B and the CNS 10-160B. Washington TRU Solutions (WTS), the WIPP Management and Operation Contractor (MOC), conducted a performance dry run (PDR), beginning August 19, 2002 and successfully completed it on August 24, 2002. The PDR demonstrated that the RHTRU waste handling system works as designed and demonstrated the handling process for each cask, including underground disposal. The purpose of the PDR was to develop and implement a plan that would define in general terms how the WIPP RH-TRU waste handling process would be conducted and evaluated. The PDR demonstrated WIPP operations and support activities required to dispose of RH-TRU waste in the WIPP underground.

  3. Waste Receiving and Processing (WRAP) Module 1 Hazards Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CAMPBELL, L.R.

    1999-09-29T23:59:59.000Z

    This document establishes the technical basis in support of Emergency Planning activities for the WRAP Module 1 Facility on the Hanford Site. Through this document, the technical basis for the development of facility specific Emergency Action Levels and Emergency Planning Zone is demonstrated.

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

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

    to enhance waste stream collection. The cost ofthe bins was 2,717. 70. * Light-emitting diode (LED) task lights were purchased to replace fluorescent units with the purpose...

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

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

    A UG 1 7 2012 New Mexico Environment Department 2905 Rodeo Park Drive East, Building 1 Santa Fe , New Mexico 87505-6303 Subject: Notification of Sampling Line Loss, Waste Isolation...

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

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

    Derived Waste (Part 4, Section 4.5.3.1) The flow of traffic in the underground during recovery will be managed to prevent the spread of radioactive contamination. Traffic routes...

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

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

    CBFO:OESH:GTB:ANC:12-0808:UFC 5487.00 Sincerely, . arok Sharif. PrPect Manager Nbdlear Waste Partnership. LLC C. Walker. Trinity Engineering CBFO M&RC *ED denotes electronic...

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

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

    if deemed necessary by WHE. Attachments are required to be completed as the applicable step is completed. 1.0 UNDERGROUND SITE-DERIVED WASTE CONTAINER PREPARATION NOTE Adequate...

  9. agency hazardous waste: Topics by E-print Network

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

    and 9,117 tpa scrap metals (2 Columbia University 87 United States Office of Office of Solid EPA540S-96500 Environmental Protection Research and Waste and December 1995...

  10. Lab Safety/Hazardous Waste Training Persons (including faculty, staff and students) working in a lab and work-

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tennessee, University of

    Lab Safety/Hazardous Waste Training Persons (including faculty, staff and students) working in a lab and work- ing with hazardous materials should receive annual training that address- es lab safety, personal protective equipment, storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials, emergency procedures

  11. Hanford Site Hazardous waste determination report for transuranic debris waste streams NPFPDL1A, NPFPDL1B, NPFPDL1C and NPFPDL1D

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WINTERHALDER, J.A.

    1999-09-29T23:59:59.000Z

    This Hazardous Waste Determination Report is intended to satisfy the terms of a Memorandum of Agreement (Agreement signed on June 16, 1999) between the U.S. Department of Energy and the New Mexico Environment Department. The Agreement pertains to the exchange of information before a final decision is made on the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant application for a permit under the ''New Mexico Hazardous Waste Act''. The Agreement will terminate upon the effective date of a final ''New Mexico Hazardous Waste Act'' permit for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. In keeping with the principles and terms of the Agreement, this report describes the waste stream data and information compilation process, and the physical and chemical analyses that the U.S. Department of Energy has performed on selected containers of transuranic debris waste to confirm that the waste is nonhazardous (non-mixed). This also summarizes the testing and analytical results that support the conclusion that the selected transuranic debris waste is not hazardous and thus, not subject to regulation under the ''Resource Conservation and Recovery Act'' or the ''New Mexico Hazardous Waste Act''. This report will be submitted to the New Mexico Environment Department no later than 45 days before the first shipment of waste from the Hanford Site to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, unless the parties mutually agree in writing to a shorter time. The 52 containers of transuranic debris waste addressed in this report were generated, packaged, and placed into storage between 1995 and 1997. Based on reviews of administrative documents, operating procedures, waste records, generator certifications, and personnel interviews, this transuranic debris waste was determined to be nonhazardous. This determination is supported by the data derived from nondestructive examination, confirmatory visual examination, and the results of container headspace gas sampling and analysis. Therefore, it is concluded that this transuranic debris waste, which consists of 52 containers from waste streams NPFPDLIA, NPFPDLIB, NPFPDLIC, and NPFPDLID, is not hazardous waste, and no hazardous waste numbers specified in Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 261, have been assigned. Accordingly, the 52 containers of transuranic debris waste addressed in this report meet the requirements for transuranic waste as defined by the Department of Energy Waste Acceptance Criteria for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. The 52 containers are acceptable for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant as nonhazardous transuranic waste.

  12. Measurement and Model for Hazardous Chemical and Mixed Waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Michael E. Mullins; Tony N. Rogers; Stephanie L. Outcalt; Beverly Louie; Laurel A. Watts; Cynthia D. Holcomb

    2002-07-30T23:59:59.000Z

    Mixed solvent aqueous waste of various chemical compositions constitutes a significant fraction of the total waste produced by industry in the United States. Not only does the chemical process industry create large quantities of aqueous waste, but the majority of the waste inventory at the Department of Energy (DOE) sites previously used for nuclear weapons production is mixed solvent aqueous waste. In addition, large quantities of waste are expected to be generated in the clean-up of those sites. In order to effectively treat, safely handle, and properly dispose of these wastes, accurate and comprehensive knowledge of basic thermophysical properties is essential. The goal of this work is to develop a phase equilibrium model for mixed solvent aqueous solutions containing salts. An equation of state was sought for these mixtures that (a) would require a minimum of adjustable parameters and (b) could be obtained from a available data or data that were easily measured. A model was developed to predict vapor composition and pressure given the liquid composition and temperature. It is based on the Peng-Robinson equation of state, adapted to include non-volatile and salt components. The model itself is capable of predicting the vapor-liquid equilibria of a wide variety of systems composed of water, organic solvents, salts, nonvolatile solutes, and acids or bases. The representative system of water + acetone + 2-propanol + NaNO3 was selected to test and verify the model. Vapor-liquid equilibrium and phase density measurements were performed for this system and its constituent binaries.

  13. Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility (WESF) Basis for Interim Operation (BIO)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    COVEY, L.I.

    2000-11-28T23:59:59.000Z

    The Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility (WESF) is located in the 200 East Area adjacent to B Plant on the Hanford Site north of Richland, Washington. The current WESF mission is to receive and store the cesium and strontium capsules that were manufactured at WESF in a safe manner and in compliance with all applicable rules and regulations. The scope of WESF operations is currently limited to receipt, inspection, decontamination, storage, and surveillance of capsules in addition to facility maintenance activities. The capsules are expected to be stored at WESF until the year 2017, at which time they will have been transferred for ultimate disposition. The WESF facility was designed and constructed to process, encapsulate, and store the extracted long-lived radionuclides, {sup 90}Sr and {sup 137}Cs, from wastes generated during the chemical processing of defense fuel on the Hanford Site thus ensuring isolation of hazardous radioisotopes from the environment. The construction of WESF started in 1971 and was completed in 1973. Some of the {sup 137}Cs capsules were leased by private irradiators or transferred to other programs. All leased capsules have been returned to WESF. Capsules transferred to other programs will not be returned except for the seven powder and pellet Type W overpacks already stored at WESF.

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

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

    2015. Implementation of the Plan was in anticipation of investigation of the source of a radiological release from the facility that occurred on February 14, 2014. The purpose of...

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

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

    of the RCRA Contingency Plan was in anticipation of investigation into the source of a radiological release from the facility that occurred on February 14, 2014 . The purpose of...

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

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

    The implementation of the Plan was in anticipation of investigation of the source of a radiological release from the facility that occurred on February 14, 2014. The purpose of...

  17. Statement of work for services provided by the waste sampling and characterization facility for the effluent and environmental monitoring program - Calendar year 1999

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DIEDIKER, L.P.

    1999-06-03T23:59:59.000Z

    This document defines the services that the Waste Sampling and Characterization Facility (WSCF) shall provide the Environmental Compliance Program (ECP) throughout the calendar year for effluent and environmental monitoring (EEM) analysis. One of the purposes of EEM is to monitor liquid and gaseous effluents and the environment immediately around facilities that might contain radioactive and hazardous materials. Monitoring data are collected, evaluated, and reported to determine the degree of compliance with applicable federal and state regulations and permits.

  18. Statement of Work (SOW) for services provided by the Waste Sampling and Characterization Facility for the Effluent and Environmental Monitoring Program during calendar year 1998

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    GLECKLER, B.P.

    1998-10-22T23:59:59.000Z

    This document defines the services the Waste Sampling and Characterization Facility (WSCF) shall provide the Effluent and Environmental Monitoring Program (EEM) throughout the calendar year for analysis. The purpose of the EEM Program is to monitor liquid and gaseous effluents, and the environment immediately around the facilities which may contain radioactive and hazardous materials. Monitoring data are collected, evaluated, and reported to determine their degree of compliance with applicable federal and state regulations and permits.

  19. The mixed waste management facility. Project baseline revision 1.2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Streit, R.D.; Throop, A.L.

    1995-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Revision 1.2 to the Project Baseline (PB) for the Mixed Waste Management Facility (MWMF) is in response to DOE directives and verbal guidance to (1) Collocate the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) and MWMF into a single complex, integrate certain and overlapping functions as a cost-saving measure; (2) Meet certain fiscal year (FY) new-BA funding objectives ($15.3M in FY95) with lower and roughly balanced funding for out years; (3) Reduce Total Project Cost (TPC) for the MWMF Project; (4) Include costs for all appropriate permitting activities in the project TPC. This baseline revision also incorporates revisions in the technical baseline design for Molten Salt Oxidation (MSO) and Mediated Electrochemical Oxidation (MEO). Changes in the WBS dictionary that are necessary as a result of this rebaseline, as well as minor title changes, at WBS Level 3 or above (DOE control level) are approved as a separate document. For completeness, the WBS dictionary that reflects these changes is contained in Appendix B. The PB, with revisions as described in this document, were also the basis for the FY97 Validation Process, presented to DOE and their reviewers on March 21-22, 1995. Appendix C lists information related to prior revisions to the PB. Several key changes relate to the integration of functions and sharing of facilities between the portion of the DWTF that will house the MWMF and those portions that are used by the Hazardous Waste Management (HWM) Division at LLNL. This collocation has been directed by DOE as a cost-saving measure and has been implemented in a manner that maintains separate operational elements from a safety and permitting viewpoint. Appendix D provides background information on the decision and implications of collocating the two facilities.

  20. Hanford facility dangerous waste permit application, PUREX storage tunnels

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Haas, C. R.

    1997-09-08T23:59:59.000Z

    The Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Permit Application is considered to be a single application organized into a General Information Portion (document number DOE/RL-91-28) and a Unit-Specific Portion. The scope of the Unit-Specific Portion is limited to Part B permit application documentation submitted for individual, `operating` treatment, storage, and/or disposal units, such as the PUREX Storage Tunnels (this document, DOE/RL-90-24).

  1. Hazardous waste dislodging and conveyance: The confined sluicing method

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Summers, D.A.; Fossey, R.D.; Mann, M.D.; Blaine, J.G. [Univ. of Missouri, Rolla, MO (United States). High Pressure Waterjet Lab.; Rinker, M.W. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States)

    1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes an investigation of a means for dislodging and conveying waste currently stored in underground storage tanks. A series of experiments have been carried out to evaluate the potential of a medium pressure, medium flow rate cutting system as a means of dislodging the waste. It has been found that waterjets at a pressure of 10,000 psi can effectively cut the material which has been chosen to simulate the hardened saltcake within the storage tanks. Based on a parameterization test it has thus been calculated that an inlet flow volume of approximately 30 gallons per minute will be sufficient to excavate 30 gallons per minute of waste from a tank. In order to transport the resulting slurry from the tank, a modified jet pump has been developed and has demonstrated its capability of conveying fluid and waste particles, up to one inch in diameter, to a height of more than 60 feet. Experiments were conducted to examine different configurations to achieve the production levels required for waste removal and to clean the walls of residual material. It was found more effective to clean the walls using an inclined angle of impact rather than a perpendicular angle of impact in order to provide a safeguard against driving the water through any cracks in the containment. It was demonstrated that excavation can take place with almost total immediate extraction of the water and debris from the cutting process. The results have qualitatively shown the potential of a medium pressure waterjet system for achieving the required results for underground storage tank waste retrieval.

  2. International low level waste disposal practices and facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nutt, W.M. (Nuclear Engineering Division)

    2011-12-19T23:59:59.000Z

    The safe management of nuclear waste arising from nuclear activities is an issue of great importance for the protection of human health and the environment now and in the future. The primary goal of this report is to identify the current situation and practices being utilized across the globe to manage and store low and intermediate level radioactive waste. The countries included in this report were selected based on their nuclear power capabilities and involvement in the nuclear fuel cycle. This report highlights the nuclear waste management laws and regulations, current disposal practices, and future plans for facilities of the selected international nuclear countries. For each country presented, background information and the history of nuclear facilities are also summarized to frame the country's nuclear activities and set stage for the management practices employed. The production of nuclear energy, including all the steps in the nuclear fuel cycle, results in the generation of radioactive waste. However, radioactive waste may also be generated by other activities such as medical, laboratory, research institution, or industrial use of radioisotopes and sealed radiation sources, defense and weapons programs, and processing (mostly large scale) of mineral ores or other materials containing naturally occurring radionuclides. Radioactive waste also arises from intervention activities, which are necessary after accidents or to remediate areas affected by past practices. The radioactive waste generated arises in a wide range of physical, chemical, and radiological forms. It may be solid, liquid, or gaseous. Levels of activity concentration can vary from extremely high, such as levels associated with spent fuel and residues from fuel reprocessing, to very low, for instance those associated with radioisotope applications. Equally broad is the spectrum of half-lives of the radionuclides contained in the waste. These differences result in an equally wide variety of options for the management of radioactive waste. There is a variety of alternatives for processing waste and for short term or long term storage prior to disposal. Likewise, there are various alternatives currently in use across the globe for the safe disposal of waste, ranging from near surface to geological disposal, depending on the specific classification of the waste. At present, there appears to be a clear and unequivocal understanding that each country is ethically and legally responsible for its own wastes, in accordance with the provisions of the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management. Therefore the default position is that all nuclear wastes will be disposed of in each of the 40 or so countries concerned with nuclear power generation or part of the fuel cycle. To illustrate the global distribution of radioactive waste now and in the near future, Table 1 provides the regional breakdown, based on the UN classification of the world in regions illustrated in Figure 1, of nuclear power reactors in operation and under construction worldwide. In summary, 31 countries operate 433 plants, with a total capacity of more than 365 gigawatts of electrical energy (GW[e]). A further 65 units, totaling nearly 63 GW(e), are under construction across 15 of these nations. In addition, 65 countries are expressing new interest in, considering, or actively planning for nuclear power to help address growing energy demands to fuel economic growth and development, climate change concerns, and volatile fossil fuel prices. Of these 65 new countries, 21 are in Asia and the Pacific region, 21 are from the Africa region, 12 are in Europe (mostly Eastern Europe), and 11 in Central and South America. However, 31 of these 65 are not currently planning to build reactors, and 17 of those 31 have grids of less than 5 GW, which is said to be too small to accommodate most of the reactor designs available. For the remaining 34 countries actively planning reactors, as of September 2010: 14 indicate a strong intention to precede w

  3. Mixed and low-level waste treatment facility project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The technology information provided in this report is only the first step toward the identification and selection of process systems that may be recommended for a proposed mixed and low-level waste treatment facility. More specific information on each technology will be required to conduct the system and equipment tradeoff studies that will follow these preengineering studies. For example, capacity, maintainability, reliability, cost, applicability to specific waste streams, and technology availability must be further defined. This report does not currently contain all needed information; however, all major technologies considered to be potentially applicable to the treatment of mixed and low-level waste are identified and described herein. Future reports will seek to improve the depth of information on technologies.

  4. Can chemicals go down the drain? The management of hazardous waste is regulated at the federal level by the United States Environmental

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Maroncelli, Mark

    Can chemicals go down the drain? The management of hazardous waste is regulated at the federal Resources (PADEP) also regulates the disposal of hazardous waste. These regulations are contained in 25 PA system may create a variety of hazards including the following: · Fire and/or explosion hazards within

  5. University of California, Irvine Environmental Health and Safety www.ehs.uci.edu Questions Call: (949) 824-6200 Version 1.0 Dental clinics generate a variety of wastes that are regulated as a hazardous waste by local, state, and federal laws. A

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    George, Steven C.

    as a hazardous waste by local, state, and federal laws. A waste is considered a hazardous waste if it contains. Common Types Of Dental Clinic Hazardous Waste Include: · Filters From Mercury Containing Amalgam is hazardous visit http://www.ehs.uci.edu/programs/enviro/hwasteguidelines.html. Hazardous Chemical Waste

  6. Hazardous Waste Part A Permit Application | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

  7. A systematic assessment of the state of hazardous waste clean-up technologies. Quarterly technical progress report, April 1--June 30, 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Berg, M.T.; Reed, B.E.; Gabr, M.

    1993-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    West Virginia University (WVU) and the US DOE Morgantown Energy Technology Center (METC) entered into a Cooperative Agreement on August 29, 1992 entitled ``Decontamination Systems Information and Research Programs.`` Stipulated within the Agreement is the requirement that WVU submit to METC a series of Technical Progress Report for Year 1 of the Agreement. This report reflects the progress and/or efforts performed on the following nine technical projects encompassed by the Year 1 Agreement for the period of April 1 through June 30, 1993: Systematic assessment of the state of hazardous waste clean-up technologies; site remediation technologies -- drain-enhanced soil flushing (DESF) for organic contaminants removal; site remediation technologies -- in situ bioremediation of organic contaminants; excavation systems for hazardous waste sites; chemical destruction of polychlorinated biphenyls; development of organic sensors -- monolayer and multilayer self-assembled films for chemical sensors; Winfield lock and dam remediation; Assessments of Technologies for hazardous waste site remediation -- non-treatment technologies and pilot scale test facility implementation; and remediation of hazardous sites with stream reforming.

  8. Materials and Security Consolidation Complex Facilities Radioactive Waste Management Basis and DOE Manual 435.1-1 Compliance Tables

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Listed

    2011-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Department of Energy Order 435.1, 'Radioactive Waste Management,' along with its associated manual and guidance, requires development and maintenance of a radioactive waste management basis for each radioactive waste management facility, operation, and activity. This document presents a radioactive waste management basis for Idaho National Laboratory's Materials and Security Consolidation Center facilities that manage radioactive waste. The radioactive waste management basis for a facility comprises existing laboratory-wide and facility-specific documents. Department of Energy Manual 435.1-1, 'Radioactive Waste Management Manual,' facility compliance tables also are presented for the facilities. The tables serve as a tool for developing the radioactive waste management basis.

  9. Materials and Fuels Complex Facilities Radioactive Waste Management Basis and DOE Manual 435.1-1 Compliance Tables

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; Brion Bennett

    2011-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Department of Energy Order 435.1, 'Radioactive Waste Management,' along with its associated manual and guidance, requires development and maintenance of a radioactive waste management basis for each radioactive waste management facility, operation, and activity. This document presents a radioactive waste management basis for Idaho National Laboratory's Materials and Fuels Complex facilities that manage radioactive waste. The radioactive waste management basis for a facility comprises existing laboratory-wide and facility-specific documents. Department of Energy Manual 435.1-1, 'Radioactive Waste Management Manual,' facility compliance tables also are presented for the facilities. The tables serve as a tool for developing the radioactive waste management basis.

  10. Research and Education Campus Facilities Radioactive Waste Management Basis and DOE Manual 435.1-1 Compliance Tables

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    L. Harvego; Brion Bennett

    2011-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    U.S. Department of Energy Order 435.1, 'Radioactive Waste Management,' along with its associated manual and guidance, requires development and maintenance of a radioactive waste management basis for each radioactive waste management facility, operation, and activity. This document presents a radioactive waste management basis for Idaho National Laboratory Research and Education Campus facilities that manage radioactive waste. The radioactive waste management basis for a facility comprises existing laboratory-wide and facility-specific documents. Department of Energy Manual 435.1-1, 'Radioactive Waste Management Manual,' facility compliance tables also are presented for the facilities. The tables serve as a tool to develop the radioactive waste management basis.

  11. Remote infrared imaging system for scanning hazardous waste tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Morris, K.L.H.

    1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper provides a description of the deployment of an infrared imaging system in an underground radioactive waste storage tank. The system was made for surface scanning to detect regions of high heat if present. The deployment described was for testing the system`s capabilities as well as the logistics of deployment and the system`s functionality in the field. The system was deployed and removed successfully providing a surface scan of the tank. Some improvements are recommended.

  12. Phosphate glasses for radioactive, hazardous and mixed waste immobilization

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Cao, Hui (Middle Island, NY); Adams, Jay W. (Stony Brook, NY); Kalb, Paul D. (Wading River, NY)

    1999-03-09T23:59:59.000Z

    Lead-free phosphate glass compositions are provided which can be used to immobilize low level and/or high level radioactive wastes in monolithic waste forms. The glass composition may also be used without waste contained therein. Lead-free phosphate glass compositions prepared at about 900.degree. C. include mixtures from about 1 mole % to about 6 mole %.iron (III) oxide, from about 1 mole % to about 6 mole % aluminum oxide, from about 15 mole % to about 20 mole % sodium oxide or potassium oxide, and from about 30 mole % to about 60 mole % phosphate. The invention also provides phosphate, lead-free glass ceramic glass compositions which are prepared from about 400.degree. C. to about 450.degree. C. and which includes from about 3 mole % to about 6 mole % sodium oxide, from about 20 mole % to about 50 mole % tin oxide, from about 30 mole % to about 70 mole % phosphate, from about 3 mole % to about 6 mole % aluminum oxide, from about 3 mole % to about 8 mole % silicon oxide, from about 0.5 mole % to about 2 mole % iron (III) oxide and from about 3 mole % to about 6 mole % potassium oxide. Method of making lead-free phosphate glasses are also provided.

  13. Phosphate glasses for radioactive, hazardous and mixed waste immobilization

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Cao, Hui (Middle Island, NY); Adams, Jay W. (Stony Brook, NY); Kalb, Paul D. (Wading River, NY)

    1998-11-24T23:59:59.000Z

    Lead-free phosphate glass compositions are provided which can be used to immobilize low level and/or high level radioactive wastes in monolithic waste forms. The glass composition may also be used without waste contained therein. Lead-free phosphate glass compositions prepared at about 900.degree. C. include mixtures from about 1 mole % to about 6 mole % iron (III) oxide, from about 1 mole % to about 6 mole % aluminum oxide, from about 15 mole % to about 20 mole % sodium oxide or potassium oxide, and from about 30 mole % to about 60 mole % phosphate. The invention also provides phosphate, lead-free glass ceramic glass compositions which are prepared from about 400.degree. C. to about 450.degree. C. and which includes from about 3 mole % to about 6 mole % sodium oxide, from about 20 mole % to about 50 mole % tin oxide, from about 30 mole % to about 70 mole % phosphate, from about 3 mole % to about 6 mole % aluminum oxide, from about 3 mole % to about 8 mole % silicon oxide, from about 0.5 mole % to about 2 mole % iron (III) oxide and from about 3 mole % to about 6 mole % potassium oxide. Method of making lead-free phosphate glasses are also provided.

  14. Phosphate glasses for radioactive, hazardous and mixed waste immobilization

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Cao, H.; Adams, J.W.; Kalb, P.D.

    1999-03-09T23:59:59.000Z

    Lead-free phosphate glass compositions are provided which can be used to immobilize low level and/or high level radioactive wastes in monolithic waste forms. The glass composition may also be used without waste contained therein. Lead-free phosphate glass compositions prepared at about 900 C include mixtures from about 1 mole % to about 6 mole % iron (III) oxide, from about 1 mole % to about 6 mole % aluminum oxide, from about 15 mole % to about 20 mole % sodium oxide or potassium oxide, and from about 30 mole % to about 60 mole % phosphate. The invention also provides phosphate, lead-free glass ceramic glass compositions which are prepared from about 400 C to about 450 C and which includes from about 3 mole % to about 6 mole % sodium oxide, from about 20 mole % to about 50 mole % tin oxide, from about 30 mole % to about 70 mole % phosphate, from about 3 mole % to about 6 mole % aluminum oxide, from about 3 mole % to about 8 mole % silicon oxide, from about 0.5 mole % to about 2 mole % iron (III) oxide and from about 3 mole % to about 6 mole % potassium oxide. Method of making lead-free phosphate glasses are also provided. 8 figs.

  15. Phosphate glasses for radioactive, hazardous and mixed waste immobilization

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Cao, H.; Adams, J.W.; Kalb, P.D.

    1998-11-24T23:59:59.000Z

    Lead-free phosphate glass compositions are provided which can be used to immobilize low level and/or high level radioactive wastes in monolithic waste forms. The glass composition may also be used without waste contained therein. Lead-free phosphate glass compositions prepared at about 900 C include mixtures from about 1--6 mole % iron (III) oxide, from about 1--6 mole % aluminum oxide, from about 15--20 mole % sodium oxide or potassium oxide, and from about 30--60 mole % phosphate. The invention also provides phosphate, lead-free glass ceramic glass compositions which are prepared from about 400 C to about 450 C and which includes from about 3--6 mole % sodium oxide, from about 20--50 mole % tin oxide, from about 30--70 mole % phosphate, from about 3--6 mole % aluminum oxide, from about 3--8 mole % silicon oxide, from about 0.5--2 mole % iron (III) oxide and from about 3--6 mole % potassium oxide. Method of making lead-free phosphate glasses are also provided. 8 figs.

  16. PLUTONIUM FINISHING PLANT (PFP) 241-Z LIQUID WASTE TREATMENT FACILITY DEACTIVATION AND DEMOLITION

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    JOHNSTON GA

    2008-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

    Fluor Hanford, Inc. (FH) is proud to submit the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) 241-Z liquid Waste Treatment Facility Deactivation and Demolition (D&D) Project for consideration by the Project Management Institute as Project of the Year for 2008. The decommissioning of the 241-Z Facility presented numerous challenges, many of which were unique with in the Department of Energy (DOE) Complex. The majority of the project budget and schedule was allocated for cleaning out five below-grade tank vaults. These highly contaminated, confined spaces also presented significant industrial safety hazards that presented some of the most hazardous work environments on the Hanford Site. The 241-Z D&D Project encompassed diverse tasks: cleaning out and stabilizing five below-grade tank vaults (also called cells), manually size-reducing and removing over three tons of process piping from the vaults, permanently isolating service utilities, removing a large contaminated chemical supply tank, stabilizing and removing plutonium-contaminated ventilation ducts, demolishing three structures to grade, and installing an environmental barrier on the demolition site . All of this work was performed safely, on schedule, and under budget. During the deactivation phase of the project between November 2005 and February 2007, workers entered the highly contaminated confined-space tank vaults 428 times. Each entry (or 'dive') involved an average of three workers, thus equaling approximately 1,300 individual confined -space entries. Over the course of the entire deactivation and demolition period, there were no recordable injuries and only one minor reportable skin contamination. The 241-Z D&D Project was decommissioned under the provisions of the 'Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order' (the Tri-Party Agreement or TPA), the 'Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976' (RCRA), and the 'Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980' (CERCLA). The project completed TPA Milestone M-083-032 to 'Complete those activities required by the 241-Z Treatment and Storage Unit's RCRA Closure Plan' four years and seven months ahead of this legally enforceable milestone. In addition, the project completed TPA Milestone M-083-042 to 'Complete transition and dismantlement of the 241-2 Waste Treatment Facility' four years and four months ahead of schedule. The project used an innovative approach in developing the project-specific RCRA closure plan to assure clear integration between the 241-Z RCRA closure activities and ongoing and future CERCLA actions at PFP. This approach provided a regulatory mechanism within the RCRA closure plan to place segments of the closure that were not practical to address at this time into future actions under CERCLA. Lessons learned from th is approach can be applied to other closure projects within the DOE Complex to control scope creep and mitigate risk. A paper on this topic, entitled 'Integration of the 241-Z Building D and D Under CERCLA with RCRA Closure at the PFP', was presented at the 2007 Waste Management Conference in Tucson, Arizona. In addition, techniques developed by the 241-Z D&D Project to control airborne contamination, clean the interior of the waste tanks, don and doff protective equipment, size-reduce plutonium-contaminated process piping, and mitigate thermal stress for the workers can be applied to other cleanup activities. The project-management team developed a strategy utilizing early characterization, targeted cleanup, and close coordination with PFP Criticality Engineering to significantly streamline the waste- handling costs associated with the project . The project schedule was structured to support an early transition to a criticality 'incredible' status for the 241-Z Facility. The cleanup work was sequenced and coordinated with project-specific criticality analysis to allow the fissile material waste being generated to be managed in a bulk fashion, instead of individual waste packages. This approach negated the need for real-time assay of individ

  17. Health physics and public health activities at hazardous wastes sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Charp, P.A. [Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, GA (United States)

    1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) has worked with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at several sites contaminated with radioactive materials. The Navajo Brown Vandever (B-V) uranium mine site near Bluewater, New Mexico, and the Austin Avenue Radiation Site (AAR) in Lansdowne, Pennsylvania were the subject of ATSDR health advisories. The sites were contamined with uranium or uranium byproducts but the identification of potential health effects and actions taken to prevent or reduce exposures were approached from different perspectives. At B-V contaminants included uranium and mine tailings, radium, and radon. Contaminants at the site and physical hazards were removed. At AAR, radium and radon were located in residential settings. Residents who might have had annual exposures greater than accepted standards or recommendations were relocated and contaminated building demolished.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2000-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  19. 1999 Annual Mixed Waste Management Facility Groundwater Correction - Action Report (Volumes I, II, and III)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chase, J.

    2000-06-14T23:59:59.000Z

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

  20. Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...

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

    factor, unitless Per the Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment Protocol for Hazardous Waste Combustion Facilities (EPA 1999), BAF-S values for organic chemical COPCs were...

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Solid Waste Disposal Laws and Regulations are found in Tenn. Code 68-211. These rules are enforced and subject to change by the Public Waste Board (PWB), which is established by the Division...

  2. EPA Citizens Guide to Hazardous Waste Permitting Process | 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 onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are beingZealand JumpConceptual Model,DOE FacilityDimondale,South, NewDyer County,ECO2LtdLegal

  3. EPA Hazardous Waste Generators Website | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are beingZealand JumpConceptual Model,DOE FacilityDimondale,South, NewDyer County,ECO2LtdLegalClass VHandbook on

  4. EPA Hazardous Waste TSDF Guide | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are beingZealand JumpConceptual Model,DOE FacilityDimondale,South, NewDyer County,ECO2LtdLegalClass VHandbook onTSDF

  5. Treatment technologies for hazardous ashes generated from possible incineration of navy waste. Technical note

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Torres, T.

    1990-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Navy recognizes that thermal treatment of Navy hazardous wastes (HW) should, under the terms of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, be avoided. Combustion waste disposal may nonetheless become unavoidable in certain cases, even after all possible process enhancements that avoid HW production are implemented. Even then, some toxic constituents that may be present in the waste will not be destroyed by incineration and will persist in the ash residue produced by incineration. Such incinerator ashes will have to be disposed of in HW landfills. The Navy is thus evaluating methods of treatment of such ash to remove or immobilize the toxic constituents that persist following incineration in order to render the waste treatment residue nonhazardous. Appropriate technology identified in this work can be applied to ash produced by HW combuster operated by the Navy, if any, or be required for ash produced by commercial generators handling Navy HWs.

  6. Overview of Fiscal Year 2002 Research and Development for Savannah River Site's Salt Waste Processing Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    H. D. Harmon, R. Leugemors, PNNL; S. Fink, M. Thompson, D. Walker, WSRC; P. Suggs, W. D. Clark, Jr

    2003-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

    The Department of Energy's (DOE) Savannah River Site (SRS) high-level waste program is responsible for storage, treatment, and immobilization of high-level waste for disposal. The Salt Processing Program (SPP) is the salt (soluble) waste treatment portion of the SRS high-level waste effort. The overall SPP encompasses the selection, design, construction and operation of treatment technologies to prepare the salt waste feed material for the site's grout facility (Saltstone) and vitrification facility (Defense Waste Processing Facility). Major constituents that must be removed from the salt waste and sent as feed to Defense Waste Processing Facility include actinides, strontium, cesium, and entrained sludge. In fiscal year 2002 (FY02), research and development (R&D) on the actinide and strontium removal and Caustic-Side Solvent Extraction (CSSX) processes transitioned from technology development for baseline process selection to providing input for conceptual design of the Salt Waste Processing Facility. The SPP R&D focused on advancing the technical maturity, risk reduction, engineering development, and design support for DOE's engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors for the Salt Waste Processing Facility. Thus, R&D in FY02 addressed the areas of actual waste performance, process chemistry, engineering tests of equipment, and chemical and physical properties relevant to safety. All of the testing, studies, and reports were summarized and provided to the DOE to support the Salt Waste Processing Facility, which began conceptual design in September 2002.

  7. Preliminary hazards analysis -- vitrification process

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  8. Waste Management facilities fault tree databank 1995 status report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Minnick, W.V.; Wellmaker, K.A.

    1995-08-16T23:59:59.000Z

    The Safety Information Management and Analysis Group (SIMA) of the Safety Engineering Department (SED) maintains compilations of incidents that have occurred in the Separations and Process Control, Waste Management, Fuel Fabrication, Tritium and SRTC facilities. This report records the status of the Waste Management (WM) Databank at the end of CY-1994. The WM Databank contains more than 35,000 entries ranging from minor equipment malfunctions to incidents with significant potential for injury or contamination of personnel. This report documents the status of the WM Databank including the availability, training, sources of data, search options, Quality Assurance, and usage to which these data have been applied. Periodic updates to this memorandum are planned as additional data or applications are acquired.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hladek, K.L.

    1997-10-07T23:59:59.000Z

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

  10. Design and construction of the defense waste processing facility project at the Savannah River Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Baxter, R G

    1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Du Pont Company is building for the Department of Energy a facility to vitrify high-level radioactive waste at the Savannah River Plant (SRP) near Aiken, South Carolina. The Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) will solidify existing and future radioactive wastes by immobilizing the waste in Processing Facility (DWPF) will solidify existing and future radioactives wastes by immobilizing the waste in borosilicate glass contained in stainless steel canisters. The canisters will be sealed, decontaminated and stored, prior to emplacement in a federal repository. At the present time, engineering and design is 90% complete, construction is 25% complete, and radioactive processing in the $870 million facility is expected to begin by late 1989. This paper describes the SRP waste characteristics, the DWPF processing, building and equipment features, and construction progress of the facility.

  11. Economic incentives for hazardous-waste management: Deposit-refunded systems and used lubricating oil

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Belzer, R.B.

    1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Economic incentives have been widely advocated for controlling environmental externalities. There has been increasing interest in devising such incentives to reduce the generation of hazardous waste. It is demonstrated that since firms comply with existing disposal rules, there is no efficiency basis for additional incentives. In contrast, incentives may be appropriate for firms that do not comply with existing rules. A range of regulatory instruments is compared, including taxes on inputs and waste generation, and subsidies for safe disposal and waste minimization. Each instrument has undesirable properties. Waste-end taxes encourage illegal disposal; safe-disposal subsides stimulate waste generation; and waste-minimization subsidies cannot be effectively targeted. The economic incentive instrument proposed is a combination of input taxes and safe-disposal subsidies, sometime manifest in the deposit-refund system. This instrument is efficiency-enhancing under plausible real-world conditions. The theoretical results are applied to the case of used lubricating oil, a large-volume waste stream that has vexed regulators for many years. An empirical model is developed that enables the simulation of prices, quantities, and net social benefits resulting from the establishment of a tax-subsidy or deposit-refund system. This model accounts for variations in: price-responsiveness; residual external damage from disposal; ex ante rates of regulatory compliance; and the level of transactions costs implied by the program. The instrument offers positive net social benefits, but only under a narrow range of conditions. The model is modified to apply to a generic hazardous waste problem that emphasizes illegal dumping. The existence of positive net social benefits depends on differences in risk across disposal options, the ex ante level of regulatory compliance, and the magnitude of unit transactions costs.

  12. Function-based Biosensor for Hazardous Waste Toxin Detection

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    James J Hickman

    2008-07-09T23:59:59.000Z

    There is a need for new types of toxicity sensors in the DOE and other agencies that are based on biological function as the toxins encountered during decontamination or waste remediation may be previously unknown or their effects subtle. Many times the contents of the environmental waste, especially the minor components, have not been fully identified and characterized. New sensors of this type could target unknown toxins that cause death as well as intermediate levels of toxicity that impair function or cause long term impairment that may eventually lead to death. The primary question posed in this grant was to create an electronically coupled neuronal cellular circuit to be used as sensor elements for a hybrid non-biological/biological toxin sensor system. A sensor based on the electrical signals transmitted between two mammalian neurons would allow the marriage of advances in solid state electronics with a functioning biological system to develop a new type of biosensor. Sensors of this type would be a unique addition to the field of sensor technology but would also be complementary to existing sensor technology that depends on knowledge of what is to be detected beforehand. We integrated physics, electronics, surface chemistry, biotechnology, and fundamental neuroscience in the development of this biosensor. Methods were developed to create artificial surfaces that enabled the patterning of discrete cells, and networks of cells, in culture; the networks were then aligned with transducers. The transducers were designed to measure electromagnetic fields (EMF) at low field strength. We have achieved all of the primary goals of the project. We can now pattern neurons routinely in our labs as well as align them with transducers. We have also shown the signals between neurons can be modulated by different biochemicals. In addition, we have made another significant advance where we have repeated the patterning results with adult hippocampal cells. Finally, we demonstrated that patterned cardiac cells on microelectrode arrays could act as sensors as well.

  13. Waste Sampling and Characterization Facility (WSCF). Maintenance Implementation Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bozich, J.L.

    1993-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Maintenance Implementation Plan has been developed for maintenance functions associated with the Waste Sampling and Characterization Facility (WSCF). This plan is developed from the guidelines presented by Department of Energy (DOE) Order 4330.4A, Maintenance Management Program (DOE 1990), Chapter II. The objective of this plan is to provide baseline information for establishing and identifying WHC conformance programs and policies applicable to implementation of DOE order 4330.4A guidelines. In addition, this maintenance plan identifies the actions necessary to develop a cost-effective and efficient maintenance program at WSCF.

  14. Process for the encapsulation and stabilization of radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Colombo, Peter (Patchogue, NY); Kalb, Paul D. (Wading River, NY); Heiser, III, John H. (Bayport, NY)

    1997-11-14T23:59:59.000Z

    The present invention provides a method for encapsulating and stabilizing radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes in a modified sulfur cement composition. The waste may be incinerator fly ash or bottom ash including radioactive contaminants, toxic metal salts and other wastes commonly found in refuse. The process may use glass fibers mixed into the composition to improve the tensile strength and a low concentration of anhydrous sodium sulfide to reduce toxic metal solubility. The present invention preferably includes a method for encapsulating radioactive, hazardous and mixed wastes by combining substantially anhydrous wastes, molten modified sulfur cement, preferably glass fibers, as well as anhydrous sodium sulfide or calcium hydroxide or sodium hydroxide in a heated double-planetary orbital mixer. The modified sulfur cement is preheated to about 135.degree..+-.5.degree. C., then the remaining substantially dry components are added and mixed to homogeneity. The homogeneous molten mixture is poured or extruded into a suitable mold. The mold is allowed to cool, while the mixture hardens, thereby immobilizing and encapsulating the contaminants present in the ash.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  16. System for enhanced destruction of hazardous wastes by in situ vitrification of soil

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Timmerman, Craig L. (Richland, WA)

    1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The present invention comprises a system for promoting the destruction of volatile and/or hazardous contaminants present in waste materials during in situ vitrification processes. In accordance with the present invention, a cold cap (46) comprising a cohesive layer of resolidified material is formed over the mass of liquefied soil and waste (40) present between and adjacent to the electrodes (10, 12, 14, 16) during the vitrification process. This layer acts as a barrier to the upward migration of any volatile type materials thereby increasing their residence time in proximity to the heated material. The degree of destruction of volatile and/or hazardous contaminants by pyrolysis is thereby improved during the course of the vitrification procedure.

  17. Deposit-refund systems for managing hazardous wastes produced by small businesses

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cuckovich, W.P.; Schwartz, S.I. (Univ. of California, Davis (USA))

    1989-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This article examines the potential of an economic incentive device virtually unused in the United States for managing hazardous wastes-- deposit-refund systems. The emphasis is on reducing the high rate of illegal disposal of hazardous wastes by small firms. We give evidence that illegal disposal is a problem and identify its underlying causes, principally lack of enforcement. Theory and operation of deposit-refund systems are described, with illustrative situations showing the crucial role of the size of the refund relative to the cost of legal disposal. Economic effects, advantages, and problems of design and implementation are examined. We conclude that deposit-refund systems are potentially effective for reducing illegal disposal, and that they promote economic efficiency and equity. Pilot programs are recommended.

  18. Scoping evaluation of the technical capabilities of DOE sites for disposal of hazardous metals in mixed low-level waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gruebel, M.M.; Waters, R.D.; Langkopf, B.S.

    1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A team of analysts designed and conducted a scoping evaluation to estimate the technical capabilities of fifteen Department of Energy sites for disposal of the hazardous metals in mixed low-level waste (i.e., waste that contains both low-level radioactive materials and hazardous constituents). Eight hazardous metals were evaluated: arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, selenium, and silver. The analysis considered transport only through the groundwater pathway. The results are reported as site-specific estimates of maximum concentrations of each hazardous metal in treated mixed low-level waste that do not exceed the performance measures established for the analysis. Also reported are site-specific estimates of travel times of each hazardous metal to the point of compliance.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

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

  20. Inter-relation between technical and jurisdictional aspects of hazardous waste management in Houston

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Vasavada, Nishith Maheshbhai

    1987-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    in Houston. (May 1987) Nishith Maheshbhai Vasavada, B. E. , M. S. University M. E. & M. S. University Chair of Advisory Committee: Dr. Roy Harm Problems created by hazardous waste have occurred very fast and have led to promulgation of many regulations... 3. 4, 2 Texas Water Commission 3. 4. 3 Department of Health, City of Houston 3. 4. 4 Community Awareness and Emergency Response (CARR) 3. 4. 5 Houston Chamber of Commerce Recommendations 48 48 48 49 50 51 51 CHAPTER IV ? MUNICIPAL...