National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for helium-48 cfr subpart

  1. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Summary #12;Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2014 DOE/WIPP-14....................................................................................................................................... 7 #12;Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2014 DOE/WIPP 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2014 DOE/WIPP-14-3503 EXECSUM-v Executive

  2. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    at the WIPP (40 CFR § 194.8) United States Department of Energy Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Carlsbad Field for Disposal at the WIPP (40 CFR § 194.8) #12;Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2009 DOE/WIPP-09-3424 Section 88-iii Table of Contents 8.0 Approval Process for Waste Shipment

  3. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    at the WIPP (40 CFR § 194.8) United States Department of Energy Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Carlsbad Field Shipment From Waste Generator Sites for Disposal at the WIPP (40 CFR § 194.8) #12;Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2014 DOE/WIPP-14-3503 8-i Section 8-2014 Table

  4. 50 CFR 216: Subpart I - General Regulations Governing Small Takes...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    50 CFR 216: Subpart I - General Regulations Governing Small Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to...

  5. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    2014 DOE/WIPP-14-3503 STRUCT-iii Structure-2014 Table of Contents Structure of the CRA-2014........................................................................5 #12;Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2014 DOE/WIPP Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2014 DOE/WIPP-14-3503 STRUCT-v Structure-2014

  6. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Application 2014 DOE/WIPP-14-3503 Section 46-201446-iii Table of Contents 46.0 Removal of Waste (40 CFR § 194 ...............................................................................................................46-3 #12;Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2014 DOE/WIPP and C Compliance Recertification Application 2014 DOE/WIPP-14-3503 Section 46-201446-v Acronyms

  7. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Application 2014 DOE/WIPP-14-3503 Section 21-201421-iii Table of Contents 21.0 Inspections (40 CFR § 194­2012)...................... 21-6 #12;Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2014 DOE/WIPP and C Compliance Recertification Application 2014 DOE/WIPP-14-3503 Section 21-201421-v Acronyms

  8. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Recertification Application DOE U.S. Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency NEA Nuclear Energy Agency PIC passive institutional control RWMC Radioactive Waste Management Committee RK&M Records, Knowledge and Memory WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot Plant #12;Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance

  9. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    .....................................................43-4 DOE/WIPP-09-3424 Section 43-200943-iii #12;Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2009 This page intentionally left blank. DOE/WIPP-09-3424 Section 43-200943-iv #12.S. Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency PIC passive institutional control WIPP Waste

  10. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    ­2007).......................................................................................................... 21-5 DOE/WIPP-09-3424 Section 21-200921-iii #12;Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2009 This page intentionally left blank. DOE/WIPP-09-3424 Section 21-200921-iv #12 QA quality assurance RH-TRU remote-handled transuranic TRU transuranic WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot

  11. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    ......................................................................................STRUCT-3 DOE/WIPP-09-3424 STRUCT-i Structure #12;Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2009 This page intentionally left blank. DOE/WIPP-09-3424 STRUCT-ii Structure #12 Compliance Recertification Application EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot

  12. U.S. EPA Regulations Review Update: Subpart W NESHAPS (40 CFR 61)

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Subpart W National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for radon emissionsU.S. EPA Regulations Review Update: Subpart W NESHAPS (40 CFR 61) Uranium and Thorium Mill Tailings agreement reached November 2009 #12;Pg 3 Existing Subpart W Summary Applies to radon emissions from

  13. Title 18 CFR Subpart E Application for License for Major Unconstructed...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Title 18 CFR Subpart E Application for License for Major Unconstructed Project and Major Modified Project Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal...

  14. Title 18 CFR Subpart F Application for License for Major Project...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    8 CFR Subpart F Application for License for Major Project -- Existing Dam Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation:...

  15. Title 18 CFR Subpart G Application for License for Minor Water...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Title 18 CFR Subpart G Application for License for Minor Water Power Projects and Major Water Power Projects 5 Megawatts or Less Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference...

  16. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2004 GLOSSARY OF TERMS1

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Part 191. Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear protection standards for management (Subpart A) and disposal (Subparts B and C) of spent nuclear fuel standards which define the acceptable management of hazardous waste. 40 CFR Part 264, Subpart G

  17. U.S. EPA Regulations Review Update: Subpart W NESHAPS (40 CFR 61)

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for radon emissions for operating mill tailings Review began after receivingU.S. EPA Regulations Review Update: Subpart W NESHAPS (40 CFR 61) Reid J. Rosnick Radiation Summary Applies to radon emissions from operating uranium mill tailings Radon emissions flux standard

  18. Implementation Guide for Use in Developing Documented Safety Analyses to Meet Subpart B of 10 CFR 830

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

    2001-10-24

    This Guide elaborates on the documented safety analysis (DSA) development process and the safe harbor provisions of the Appendix to10 CFR 830 Subpart B. Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 830, Subpart B, 'Safety Basis Requirements,' requires the contractor responsible for a Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facility to analyze the facility, the work to be performed, and the associated hazards and to identify the conditions, safe boundaries, and hazard controls necessary to protect workers, the public, and the environment from adverse consequences. Canceled by DOE G 421.1-2A

  19. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    ............................................................................................................... 32-1 32.3 1998 Certification Decision CARD Compliance Application Review Document CCA Compliance Certification Application CFR Code Waste Iso

  20. U.S. EPA NESHAP Subpart W Revisions Update

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    U.S. EPA NESHAP Subpart W Revisions Update Reid J. Rosnick Radiation Protection Division NRC update on 40 CFR 61, Subpart W (National Emission Standard for Radon Emissions from Operating Mill Tailings under Clean Air Act) #12;Pg 3 40 CFR 61 Subpart W Summary Applies to radon emissions from

  1. Implementation Guide for Use in Developing Documented Safety Analyses to Meet Subpart B of 10 CFR 830

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

    2011-12-19

    Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 830, Subpart B, Safety Basis Requirements, requires the contractor responsible for a Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facility to analyze the facility, the work to be performed, and the associated hazards and to identify the conditions, safe boundaries, and hazard controls necessary to protect workers, the public, and the environment from adverse consequences. Supersedes DOE G 421.1-2.

  2. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    at the time of disposal. 3 31.2 Background4 The radioactive waste disposal regulations at 40 CFR Part 191 (U.................................................................................................................31-7 List of Tables Table 31-1. Total Radioactivity Associated with CH-TRU and RH-TRU Wastes Waste Inventory Report CARD Compliance Application Review Document CCA Compliance Certification

  3. Compliance program for 40 CFR 61, Subpart H at Los Alamos National Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McNamara, E.A.

    1997-01-01

    Effective on March 15, 1990, the Environmental Protection Agency established regulations controlling the emission of radionuclides to the air from Department of Energy facilities to limit the dose to the public to 10 mrem/yr. These regulations are detailed in 40 CFR 61, Subpart H, {open_quotes}National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities{close_quotes}. Part of these regulations require the operation of sampling systems on stacks meeting certain requirements. Although Los Alamos National Laboratory has a long history of stack sampling, the systems in place at the time the regulation became effective did not meet the specific design requirements of the new regulation. In addition, certain specific program elements did not exist or were not adequately documented. The Los Alamos National Laboratory has undertaken a major effort to upgrade its compliance program to meet the requirements of USEPA. This effort involved: developing new and technically superior sampling methods and obtaining approval from the Environmental Protection Agency for their use; negotiating specific methodologies with the Environmental Protection Agency to implement certain requirements of the regulation: implementing a complete, quality assured, compliance program; and upgrading sampling systems. After several years of effort, Los Alamos National Laboratory now meets all requirements of the USEPA.

  4. Final Report History and Basis of NESHAPs and Subpart W

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    a Rulemaking to Modify the NESHAP Subpart W Standard for Radon Emissions from Operating Uranium Mills (40 CFR a National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutant (NESHAP) for radon emissions from operating uraniumFinal Report History and Basis of NESHAPs and Subpart W Prepared by S. Cohen & Associates 1608

  5. Preliminary performance assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1992. Volume 1, Third comparison with 40 CFR 191, Subpart B

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-12-01

    Before disposing of transuranic radioactive wastes in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), the United States Department of Energy (DOE) must evaluate compliance with applicable long-term regulations of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Sandia National Laboratories is conducting iterative performance assessments of the WIPP for the DOE to provide interim guidance while preparing for final compliance evaluations. This volume contains an overview of WIPP performance assessment and a preliminary comparison with the long-term requirements of the Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes (40 CFR 191, Subpart B).

  6. A reevaluation of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP - 40 CFR 61, Subpart H) program at Sandia National Laboratories, New Mexico

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Culp, T.A.; Hylko, J.M.

    1997-10-01

    The initial National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP - 40 CFR 61, Subpart H) Program at Sandia National Laboratories, New Mexico (SNL/NM) required: (1) continuous air monitoring of sources if the calculated effective dose equivalent (EDE) to the maximum exposed individual (MEI) was > 0.1 mrem/yr; (2) the determination of emissions based on measurements or measured parameters if the EDE to the MEI was < 0.1 mrem/yr; and (3) the calculation of worst case releases when the expected air concentrations were below detection limits using standard monitoring equipment. This conservative interpretation of the regulation guided SNL/NM to model, track, and trend virtually all emission sources with the potential to include any radionuclides. The level of effort required to implement these activities was independent of the EDE contributing from individual sources. A recent programmatic review found the NESHAP program to be in excess of the legal requirements. A further review found that, in summation, 13 of 16 radionuclide sources had a negligible impact on the final calculated EDE to the MEI used to demonstrate compliance at 20 separate on-site receptor locations. A reevaluation was performed to meet the legal requirements of 40 CFR 61, Subpart H, and still be reasonable and appropriate under the existing circumstances.

  7. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2004 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY1

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    SUMMARY1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), located near Carlsbad, New Mexico defense activities. The WIPP Land Withdrawal Act (LWA) requires the Department of Energy (DOE) to submit to EPA documentation of WIPP's continuing compliance with the Agency's disposal regulations, 40 CFR Part

  8. Tank exhaust comparison with 40 CFR 61.93, Subpart H, and other referenced guidelines for Tank Farms National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant (NESHAP) designated stacks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bachand, D.D.; Crummel, G.M.

    1994-07-01

    The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated National Emission Standards other than Radon from US Department of Energy (DOE) Facilities (40 CFR 61, Subpart H) on December 15, 1989. The regulations specify procedures, equipment, and test methods that.are to be used to measure radionuclide emissions from exhaust stacks that are designated as National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant (NESHAP) stacks. Designated NESHAP stacks are those that have the potential to cause any member of the public to receive an effective dose equivalent (EDE) greater than or equal to 0.1 mrem/year, assuming all emission controls were removed. Tank Farms currently has 33 exhaust stacks, 15 of which are designated NESHAP stacks. This document assesses the compliance status of the monitoring and sampling systems for the designated NESHAP stacks.

  9. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE G 414.1-1B, Management and Independent Assessments Guide for Use with 10 CFR, Part 830, Subpart A, and DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance; DOE M 450.4-1, Integrated Safety Management System Manual; and DOE O 226.1A

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

    2013-04-18

    This memorandum provides justification for revising DOE G 414.1-1B, Management and Independent Assessments Guide for Use With 10 CFR, Part 830, Subpart A, and DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance; DOE M 450.4-1, Integrated Safety Management System Manual; and DOE O 226.1A, Implementation of Department of Energy Oversight Policy.

  10. INTERPRETATION REGARDING EXEMPTION RELIEF UNDER 10 C.F.R. PART...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    RELIEF, AND NON-COMPLIANT 'DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSES' SUBJECT TO 10 C.F.R. PART 830, NUCLEAR SAFETY MANAGEMENT, SUBPART B, SAFETY BASIS REQUIREMENTS INTERPRETATION REGARDING...

  11. DOE G 414.1-4, Safety Software Guide for Use with 10 CFR 830 Subpart A, Quality Assurance Requirements, and DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    "This Department of Energy (DOE or Department) Guide provides information plus acceptable methods for implementing the safety software quality assurance (SQA) requirements of DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance, dated 6-17-05. DOE O 414.1C requirements supplement the quality assurance program (QAP) requirements of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 830, Subpart A, Quality Assurance, for DOE nuclear facilities and activities. The safety SQA requirements for DOE, including the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), and its contractors are necessary to implement effective quality assurance (QA) processes and achieve safe nuclear facility operations. DOE promulgated the safety software requirements and this guidance to control or eliminate the hazards and associated postulated accidents posed by nuclear operations, including radiological operations. Safety software failures or unintended output can lead to unexpected system or equipment failures and undue risks to the DOE/NNSA mission, the environment, the public, and the workers. Thus DOE G 414.1-4 has been developed to provide guidance on establishing and implementing effective QA processes tied specifically to nuclear facility safety software applications. DOE also has guidance1 for the overarching QA program, which includes safety software within its scope. This Guide includes software application practices covered by appropriate national and international consensus standards and various processes currently in use at DOE facilities.2 This guidance is also considered to be of sufficient rigor and depth to ensure acceptable reliability of safety software at DOE nuclear facilities. This guidance should be used by organizations to help determine and support the steps necessary to address possible design or functional implementation deficiencies that might exist and to reduce operational hazards-related risks to an acceptable level. Attributes such as the facility life-cycle stage and the hazardous nature of each facility’s operations should be considered when using this Guide. Alternative methods to those described in this Guide may be used provided they result in compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 830 Subpart A and DOE O 414.1C. Another objective of this guidance is to encourage robust software quality methods to enable the development of high quality safety applications."

  12. 40 CFR Ch. I (7101 Edition)Pt. 61, Subpt. V, Table 2 TABLE 2 TO PART 61, SUBPART V.--SURGE

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (c) All mill owners or operators shall comply with the provisions of 40 CFR 192.32(a) as determined by the Nuclear Regulatory Commis- sion. The owner or operator shall have

  13. Quality Assurance Management System Guide for Use with 10 CFR 830 Subpart A, Quality Assurance Requirements, and DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance

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

    2005-06-17

    This Guide provides information on principles and practices used to establish and implement an effective quality assurance program or quality management system in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 830. Cancels DOE G 414.1-2. Canceled by DOE G 414.1-2B.

  14. Suspect/Counterfeit Items Guide for Use with 10 CFR 830 Subpart A, Quality Assurance Requirements, and DOE O 414.1B, Quality Assurance

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

    2004-11-03

    This Guide provides guidance to assist DOE/NNSA and its contractors in mitigating the safety threat of suspect/counterfeit items (S/CIs). Cancels DOE G 440.1-6, Implementation Guide for use with Suspect/Counterfeit Items Requirements of DOE O 440.1, Worker Protection Management; 10 CFR 830.120; and DOE O 5700.6C, Quality Assurance, dated 6-30-97. Canceled by DOE G 414.1-2B.

  15. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Quality Assurance Project Plan for National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs), Subpart H

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hall, L.; Biermann, A

    2000-06-27

    As a Department of Energy (DOE) Facility whose operations involve the use of radionuclides, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) is subject to the requirements of 40 CFR 61, the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs). Subpart H of this Regulation establishes standards for exposure of the public to radionuclides (other than radon) released from DOE Facilities (Federal Register, 1989). These regulations limit the emission of radionuclides to ambient air from DOE facilities (see Section 2.0). Under the NESHAPs Subpart H Regulation (hereafter referred to as NESHAPs), DOE facilities are also required to establish a quality assurance program for radionuclide emission measurements; specific requirements for preparation of a Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) are given in Appendix B, Method 114 of 40 CFR 61. Throughout this QAPP, the specific Quality Assurance Method elements of 40 CFR 61 Subpart H addressed by a given section are identified. In addition, the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) (US EPA, 1994a) published draft requirements for QAPP's prepared in support of programs that develop environmental data. We have incorporated many of the technical elements specified in that document into this QAPP, specifically those identified as relating to measurement and data acquisition; assessment and oversight; and data validation and usability. This QAPP will be evaluated on an annual basis, and updated as appropriate.

  16. NESHAP Subpart W Activities Reid J. Rosnick

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    EPA'S NESHAP Subpart W Activities Reid J. Rosnick Environmental Protection Agency Office (Clean Air Act) Subpart W Requirements (continued) · Radon emission standard of 20 pCi/m2/sec -- annual reporting requirements, notification in advance of testing · The radon emission standard is for existing

  17. NESHAP Subpart W Activities Reid J. Rosnick

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    EPA'S NESHAP Subpart W Activities Reid J. Rosnick Environmental Protection Agency Radiation and impoundment design requirements similar to hazardous waste facilities · Permanent radon barrier at closure #12 for Uranium Operations (Clean Air Act) Subpart W Requirements (continued) · Radon emission standard of 20 p

  18. Order Module--SAFETY SOFTWARE GUIDE FOR USE WITH 10 CFR 830,...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    SAFETY SOFTWARE GUIDE FOR USE WITH 10 CFR 830, SUBPART A, QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, AND DOE O 414.1C, QUALITY ASSURANCE Order Module--SAFETY SOFTWARE GUIDE FOR USE WITH 10...

  19. DOE G 414.1-4, Safety Software Guide for Use with 10 CFR 830...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    G 414.1-4, Safety Software Guide for Use with 10 CFR 830 Subpart A, Quality Assurance Requirements, and DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance DOE G 414.1-4, Safety Software Guide for Use...

  20. Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Site Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Monitoring Plan - 40 CFR 98

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Deborah L. Layton; Kimberly Frerichs

    2011-12-01

    The purpose of this Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Monitoring Plan is to meet the monitoring plan requirements of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 98.3(g)(5). This GHG Monitoring Plan identifies procedures and methodologies used at the Idaho National Laboratory Site (INL Site) to collect data used for GHG emissions calculations and reporting requirements from stationary combustion and other regulated sources in accordance with 40 CFR 98, Subparts A and other applicable subparts. INL Site Contractors determined subpart applicability through the use of a checklist (Appendix A). Each facility/contractor reviews operations to determine which subparts are applicable and the results are compiled to determine which subparts are applicable to the INL Site. This plan is applicable to the 40 CFR 98-regulated activities managed by the INL Site contractors: Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Idaho Cleanup Project (ICP), Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project (AMWTP), and Naval Reactors Facilities (NRF).

  1. Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Site Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Monitoring Plan - 40 CFR 98

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Deborah L. Layton; Kimberly Frerichs

    2010-07-01

    The purpose of this Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Monitoring Plan is to meet the monitoring plan requirements of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 98.3(g)(5). This GHG Monitoring Plan identifies procedures and methodologies used at the Idaho National Laboratory Site (INL Site) to collect data used for GHG emissions calculations and reporting requirements from stationary combustion and other regulated sources in accordance with 40 CFR 98, Subparts A and other applicable subparts. INL Site Contractors determined subpart applicability through the use of a checklist (Appendix A). Each facility/contractor reviews operations to determine which subparts are applicable and the results are compiled to determine which subparts are applicable to the INL Site. This plan is applicable to the 40 CFR 98-regulated activities managed by the INL Site contractors: Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Idaho Cleanup Project (ICP), Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project (AMWTP), and Naval Reactors Facilities (NRF).

  2. EPA Update: NESHAP Subpart W Activities

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    EPA Update: NESHAP Subpart W Activities Reid J. Rosnick Environmental Protection Agency Radiation also requested that ISL facilities provide radon flux data from their evaporation ponds #12;5 Status be employed for monitoring and analysis of radon flux · We are planning to work with all stakeholders

  3. NESHAP Subpart W Activities Reid J. Rosnick

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    EPA'S NESHAP Subpart W Activities Reid J. Rosnick Environmental Protection Agency Radiation and impoundment design requirements similar to hazardous waste facilities · Permanent radon barrier at closure #12) · Radon emission standard of 20 pCi/m2/sec -- annual reporting requirements, notification in advance

  4. NESHAP Subpart W Activities An Internet Webinar

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    sources regulated under Rad-NESHAP, including radon emissions from operation uranium mill tailings (NESHAPEPA'S NESHAP Subpart W Activities An Internet Webinar Reid J. Rosnick Environmental Protection the presentation, we'll try to answer as many questions as possible, time permitting #12;3 Overview What is NESHAP

  5. Draft Minutes -Subpart W Stakeholder Conference Call October 4, 2012

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    is basically unchanged since our last call. The package is still in EPA's Office of Policy, currently projected on the Subpart W website, where they can now be found. Travis Stills: The Office of General Council should review mining process. Will the EPA include this process in the proposed Subpart W rule? Oscar Paulson

  6. Subpart W Stakeholder Conference Call July 5, 2012

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    there was a presentation with data on radon flux from fluids. It should also be placed on the website. Reid: I know are: Subpart W is a regulation authorized by the Clean Air Act. It specifically regulates radon

  7. Risk Assessment Revision for 40 CPR Part 61 Subpart W

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Risk Assessment Revision for 40 CPR Part 61 Subpart W ­ Radon Emissions from Operating Mill-II............................................................................................................13 2.9 GENII-NESHAPS and Indoor Air (ORIA) promulgated National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs

  8. EA-1463: 10 CFR 433: Energy Efficiency Standards for New Federal Commercial and High-Rise Multi-Family Residential Buildings and 10 CFR 435: Energy Efficiency Standards for New Federal Residential Low-Rise Residential Buildings

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The EA examines the potential environmental impacts of the Final Rule on building habitability and the outdoor environment. To identify the potential environmental impacts that may result from implementing the Final Rule for new Federal commercial and residential buildings, DOE compared the Final Rule with the “no-action alternative” of using the current Federal standards – 10 CFR Part 434 and 10 CFR Part 435 Subpart C (referred to as the “no-action alternative”).

  9. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    River Site TRU transuranic WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot Plant WTS Washington TRU Solutions DOE/WIPP-09

  10. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    -3503 Section 27-201427-vi Elements and Chemical Compounds CO2 carbon dioxide MgO magnesium oxide #12;Title 40 RHPIP Remote-Handled TRU Waste Characterization Program Implementation Plan RH remote-handled RSI

  11. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Compliance Recertification Application 2009 Elements and Chemical Compounds Am americium CO2 carbon dioxide-4 27.6.2 LANL Remote-Handled TRU Waste Visual Examination Data Verification Peer Review Assurance Program Document RH-TRU remote-handled transuranic RSI Institute for Regulatory Science SNL Sandia

  12. Risk Assessment Revision for 40 CFR Part 61 Subpart W

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    .......................................................... 3 2.1.2 Radon Generated from Sediment Deposits................................................. 3 2 Table 2: Specific Radon Fluxes from Six State Milling Regions for Three Components of a Uranium Tailings .................................................................................... 15 Table 5: Uranium Sites ­ Wind Speed Data Percentage in Each Wind Bin

  13. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    -2009............................................................................EXECSUM-4 DOE/WIPP-09 Application 2009 This page intentionally left blank. DOE/WIPP-09-3424 EXECSUM-iv Executive Summary-2009 #12 Baseline Calculation T fields transmissivity fields TRU transuranic RH Remote-Handled WIPP Waste Isolation

  14. Enforcement Guidance Supplement 03-01 Supplemental Guidance Concerning the Factual Bases for Issuing Consent Orders Pursuant to 10 CFR 820.23

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    In October 2000, the Office of Price-Anderson Enforcement (OE) issued Enforcement Guidance Supplement (EGS) 00-04, “Factual Bases for Issuing Consent Orders Pursuant to 10 CFR 820.23 and Compliance Orders Pursuant to 10 CFR subpart C.” That EGS, in part, delineated a set of criteria that OE would use to determine whether to apply its enforcement discretion, in this case through the use of Consent Orders. Those criteria provided both guidance to DOE contractors regarding situations for which the use of Consent Orders are appropriate, and a tool to assure consistency in the OE evaluation of requests for resolution of potential violations by Consent Order.

  15. Title 18 CFR Subpart E Application for License for Major Unconstructed

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page| Open Energy Information Serbia-EnhancingEt Al., 2013)Open EnergyTinox Jump to:, ChapterEnergyEnergy86.1

  16. Title 18 CFR Subpart F Application for License for Major Project --

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page| Open Energy Information Serbia-EnhancingEt Al., 2013)Open EnergyTinox Jump to:, ChapterEnergyEnergy86.1Existing Dam |

  17. Title 18 CFR Subpart G Application for License for Minor Water Power

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page| Open Energy Information Serbia-EnhancingEt Al., 2013)Open EnergyTinox Jump to:, ChapterEnergyEnergy86.1Existing Dam

  18. 10 C.F.R. PART 835-OCCUPATIONAL RADIATION PROTECTION, Subpart...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    to a standard (e.g., primary, secondary, or tertiary) or conventionally true value. Contamination area means any area where contamination levels are greater than the values...

  19. 40 CFR Part 192, Subpart D standards for Management of Uranium

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Branch Economist Chief, NESHAPs Section Attorney Advisor Reviewer Writer/Reviewer Reviewer Reviewer · · · · · · · REGULATION OF URANIUM MILL TAILINGS · · · · · · THE 1989 CAA NESHAP STANDARDS AND THE CLEAN AIR ACT-3 RADON-222 SOURCES, ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORT, and RISK COEFFICIENTS · · · · · · · · · · · 4-1 MILL

  20. 50 CFR 216: Subpart I - General Regulations Governing Small Takes of Marine

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EAand Dalton JumpProgram | Open Energy Information 55 et64ft WaveMammals

  1. 10 C.F.R. PART 835-OCCUPATIONAL RADIATION PROTECTION, Subpart A - General Provisions

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergyTher i n c i p a l De p u t y A s s i s t a n t S eOF 11 DOCUMENT5-OCCUPATIONAL

  2. Order Module--SAFETY SOFTWARE GUIDE FOR USE WITH 10 CFR 830, SUBPART A,

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on DeliciousMathematicsEnergyInterested Parties -DepartmentAvailableHighOffice|Order Module--DOE

  3. INTERPRETATION REGARDING EXEMPTION RELIEF UNDER 10 C.F.R. PART 820, SUBPART

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on DeliciousMathematicsEnergy HeadquartersFuelB IMSofNewsletterGuidingUpdateofMarchOffshore WindINLINSPECTIONE,

  4. LLNL NESHAPs 2004 Annual Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Harrach, R; Gallegos, G; Peterson, R; Wilson, K; Harrach, R J; Gallegos, G M; Peterson, S R; Wilson, K R

    2005-06-27

    This annual report is prepared pursuant to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs; Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 61, Subpart H). Subpart H governs radionuclide emissions to air from Department of Energy (DOE) facilities.

  5. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2004 Table of Contents1

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    .........................................................................................................................1-27 List of Figures Figure 1-1. Final WIPP CCDF................................................................................................. 1-7 Figure 1-2. WIPP Location in Southeastern New Mexico..................................................... 1-12 Figure 1-3. Methodology for Performance Assessment of the WIPP

  6. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2004 Table of Contents1

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    ......................................................................................................................3-40 List of Figures Figure 3-1. WIPP Property Sector Designators .................................................................3-2 Figure 3-2. Plan View of WIPP Underground Facility and Panel Closure Systems .........3-4 Figure..........................................................................3-6 Figure 3-33-5. Spatial View of the WIPP Facility

  7. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2004 Table of Contents1

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    .........................................................................................................4-42 4.3.1 Load Management

  8. US Department of Energy radionuclide air emissions annual report (under Subpart H of 40 CFR Part 61) calendar year 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-12-31

    This report contains information collected by the Rocky Flats Plant concerning the emission of radionuclides into the air. Topics discussed include: Facility information, source description, air emissions data, dose assessments, point and non-point sources, and supplemental information on decontamination of concrete docks.

  9. Title 40 CFR Part 191 Subparts B and C Compliance Recertification Application 2004 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS1

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    /hydrogen DA Data Administrator DAC Drum Age Criteria DAM Design Analysis Model DAS data acquisition software ACNFS Advisory Committee on Nuclear Facility Safety AEC Atomic Energy Commission AECL Atomic Energy for Testing Materials B&W-NES Babcock & Wilcox-Nuclear Engineering Services BAB butyric acid bacteria BAPL

  10. File:CFR-2011-title36-vol2-part251-subpartB.pdf | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QAsource History View New Pages Recent Changes AllApschem.pdf Jump to: navigation,Boiler permit

  11. Two Approaches to Reactor Decommissioning: 10 CFR Part 50 License Termination and License Amendment, Lessons Learned from the Regulatory Perspective

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Watson, B.A.; Buckley, J.T.; Craig, C.M.

    2006-07-01

    Trojan Nuclear Plant (Trojan) and Maine Yankee Nuclear Plant (Maine Yankee) were the first two power reactors to complete decommissioning under the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) License Termination Rule (LTR), 10 CFR Part 20, Subpart E. The respective owners' decisions to decommission the sites resulted in different approaches to both the physical aspects of the decommissioning, and the approach for obtaining approval for completing the decommissioning in accordance with regulations. Being in different States, the two single-unit pressurized water reactor sites had different State requirements and levels of public interest that impacted the decommissioning approaches. This resulted in significant differences in decommissioning planning, conduct of decommissioning operations, volumes of low- level radioactive waste disposed, and the final status survey (FSS) program. While both licensees have Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations (ISFSIs), Trojan obtained a separate license for the ISFSI in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 72 and terminated their 10 CFR Part 50 license. Maine Yankee elected to obtain a general license under 10 CFR Part 50 for the ISFSI and reduce the physical site footprint to the ISFSI through a series of license amendments. While the NRC regulations are flexible and allow different approaches to ISFSI licensing there are separate licensing requirements that must be addressed. In 10 CFR 50.82, the NRC mandates public participation in the decommissioning process. For Maine Yankee, public input resulted in the licensee entering into an agreement with a concerned citizen group and resulted in State legislation that significantly lowered the dose limit below the NRC radiological criteria of 25 mrem (0.25 mSv) per year (yr) in 10 CFR 20.1402 for unrestricted use. The lowering of the radiological criteria resulted in a significant dose modeling effort using site-specific Derived Concentrations Guideline Levels (DCGLs) that were well below the NRC DCGL screening values. This contributed to a longer than anticipated period to obtain NRC approval of the Maine Yankee License Termination Plan (LTP). By employing the lessons learned from its first LTP submittal, which was not accepted by the NRC staff, Trojan was able to obtain approval of its revised LTP promptly. While both licensees provided final status survey reports (FSSRs) for NRC approval, the Trojan approach to decommissioning and data management allowed NRC to efficiently review FSS records and supporting documentation. Therefore, NRC was able to review Trojan's FSSR more efficiently than Maine Yankee's FSSR. This paper describes the regulatory impacts of the two different approaches to the decommissioning, the development of licensee required plans, decommissioning operations and records, the differences in licensing processes, and the lessons learned for improving the processes. (authors)

  12. SANDIA REPORT

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

    DOE, and Sandia (NMED April 2004) , 40 CFR 265 Subpart G and the Chem ical Waste Landfill Closure Plan (SNL, December 1992, as amended). This page intentionally left...

  13. Marine Sciences Laboratory Radionuclide Air Emissions Report...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Regulations (CFR), Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), Subpart H, "National Emission Standards...

  14. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Campus Radionuclide Air...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Regulations (CFR), Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), Subpart H, National Emission Standards...

  15. Conceptual design report for Project W-420, stack monitoring upgrade

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lott, D.T., Fluor Daniel Hanford

    1997-03-10

    This document provides the Conceptual Design for the upgrade of seven designated Tank Farm stacks to meet NESHAP Title 40, CFR, Part 61, Sub-part H requirements.

  16. Process Guide for the Identification and Disposition of S/CI...

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

    Oversight Special Study, Department of Energy - August 2003 Order Module--SAFETY SOFTWARE GUIDE FOR USE WITH 10 CFR 830, SUBPART A, QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, AND DOE...

  17. Sequim Site Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Regulations (CFR), Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), Subpart H, National Emission Standards...

  18. Box 352100 Seattle WA 98195-2100 206-685-1928 VOICE 206-616-6101 FAX www.cfr.washington.edu December 24, 2009

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Brown, Sally

    Professionals, Coastal Bio-Energy Forum, CFR Alumni Association, CFR Graduate Student Symposium, Denman Forestry

  19. Uranium Watch REGULATORY CONFUSION: FEDERALAND STATE

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    with the administration and enforcement of 40 C.F.R. Part 61 Subpart W, National Emission Standards for Radon Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS) in the State of Utah. The DAQ also implements the general NESHAPS from the EPA in 1995.2 APPLICABILITY OF SUBPART W 3. According to 40 C.F.R. § 61

  20. 10 CFR 1021 -- Department of Energy: National Environmental Policy...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    10 CFR 1021 -- Department of Energy: National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures 10 CFR 1021 -- Department of Energy: National Environmental Policy Act Implementing...

  1. 10 CFR 851 Worker Safety and Health Program Frequently Asked...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    10 CFR 851 Worker Safety and Health Program Frequently Asked Questions - Updated October 19, 2010 10 CFR 851 Worker Safety and Health Program Frequently Asked Questions - Updated...

  2. 29 CFR Part 1960; Basic Program Elements for Federal Employee Occupational Safety and Health Programs and Related Matters; Subpart 1 for Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements

    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: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirley Ann Jackson About Us ShirleyU.S. DRIVE11 CostProposed Rulemaking |5Template |6Conditions8793

  3. Safety Software Guide for Use with 10 CFR 830, Subpart A, Quality Assurance Requirements, and DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance

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

    2005-06-17

    This Guide provides acceptable methods for implementing the safety software quality assurance requirements of draft DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance. Certified 11-3-10. No cancellation.

  4. Safety Software Guide for Use with 10 CFR 830, Subpart A, Quality Assurance Requirements, and DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance

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

    2013-07-17

    The revision to DOE G 414.1-4 will conform to the revised DOE O 414.1D and incorporate new information and lessons learned since 2005, including information gained as a result of the February 2011, Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, GAO-11-143.

  5. Program management assessment of Federal Facility Compliance Agreement regarding CAA-40 C.F.R. Part 61, Subpart H at the Los Alamos National Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-01-01

    An assessment of Los Alamos National Laboratory`s management system related to facility compliance with an element of the Clean Air Act was performed under contract by a team from Northern Arizona University. More specifically, a Federal Facilities Compliance Agreement (FFCA) was established in 1996 to bring the Laboratory into compliance with emissions standards of radionuclides, commonly referred to as Rad/NESHAP. In the fall of 1996, the four-person team of experienced environmental managers evaluated the adequacy of relevant management systems to implement the FFCA provisions. The assessment process utilized multiple procedures including document review, personnel interviews and re-interviews, and facility observations. The management system assessment was completed with a meeting among team members, Laboratory officials and others on November 1, 1996 and preparation of an assessment report.

  6. Occupational Radiation Protection Program (10 CFR 835)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The occupational radiation protection program is governed by the Rule, specified as 10 CFR 835. The requirements given in 10 CFR 835 are matters of law, punishable by civil and criminal penalties.

  7. 40 cfr 190 text JANUARY 13, 1977

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    40 cfr 190 text THURSDAY, JANUARY 13, 1977 PART VII ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 'AGENCY RADIATION to propose Page 1 #12;40 cfr 190 text standards, and 82 comment letters fol- lowing the publication

  8. FOIA 10CFR, Code of Federal Regulations for the Freedom of Information Act

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    FOIA 10CFR, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) for the Freedom of Information Act is 10 CFR 1004, as posted on the U.S. Department of Energy website.

  9. SF 6432-CR Standard Terms and Conditions for Cost Reimbursement...

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

    of 48 CFR Subpart 9903.201-1(b)(2). III. COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS--ELIGIBILITY FOR MODIFIED CONTRACT COVERAGE If the offerorquoter is eligible to use the modified...

  10. SF 6432-TM Standard Terms and Conditions for Time and Materials...

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

    of 48 CFR Subpart 9903.201-1(b)(2). III. COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS--ELIGIBILITY FOR MODIFIED CONTRACT COVERAGE If the offerorquoter is eligible to use the modified...

  11. SF 6432-FP Standard Terms and Conditions for Firm Fixed-price...

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

    of 48 CFR Subpart 9903.201-1(b)(2). III. COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS--ELIGIBILITY FOR MODIFIED CONTRACT COVERAGE If the offerorquoter is eligible to use the modified...

  12. 2008 Annual Site Environmental Report Summary Pamphlet

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

    health and the ecosystem. Chemical Waste Landfill (CWL) The CWL is an interim status landfill undergoing closure in accordance with 40 CFR Part 265 Subpart G and the CWL Final...

  13. Independent Oversight Activity Report for Catholic University...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Office of River Protection. BNI is focused on developing the Low Activity Waste (LAW) Facility documented safety analysis (DSA) per 10 CFR 830, Subpart B. This Office of Health,...

  14. U.S. Department of Energy Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    of the Categorical Exclusions Applied: PORTS CX: Utility and Electrical System Optimization 10 CFR 1021, Appendix B to Subpart D: B1.3: Routine maintenance B1.27:...

  15. SQA Directives and Guidance | Department of Energy

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

    DOE O 414.1D, Quality Assurance DOE G 414.1-4, Software Guide for use with 10 CFR 830 Subpart A, Quality Assurance Requirements, and DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance DOE Order O...

  16. Air Charter Services

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

    U.S.C. 40118 (Fly America Act) * Airline Open Skies Agreements (http:www.gsa.govportalcontent103191) * FAR Subpart 47.4 * FAR 52.247-63 * 41 CFR 301-10.131 through...

  17. Independent Oversight Special Review, Bechtel Jacobs Company...

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

    of SCI or Defective Items at Department of Energy Facilities Order Module--SAFETY SOFTWARE GUIDE FOR USE WITH 10 CFR 830, SUBPART A, QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, AND DOE...

  18. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL INTERPRETATION...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Title 10 C.F.R Part 820, Subpart E, Exemption Relief, provides the only procedural mechanism through which DOE may exempt a contractor from the application of DOE Nuclear Safety...

  19. EPA's Radiation Protection Standards Protecting the Environment from

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS) (40 CFR 61) set limits for airborne radiological emissions from specific. Subpart W limits radon emissions from tailings at operating uranium mills. For more information, visit

  20. SNS Experience with Steven M. Trotter

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    McDonald, Kirk

    . DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Clean Air Act · National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs), 40 CFR 61 · Subpart H · National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon from

  1. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information - Docket Number: HS-RM-10...

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

    Commenter: Marc Kolanz 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2222011 10 CFR 850, Request for Information - Docket Number:...

  2. RESEARCH INVOLVING PRISONERS DEFINITIONS AND EXAMPLES

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    1 RESEARCH INVOLVING PRISONERS 05/30/2008 DEFINITIONS AND EXAMPLES The DUHS IRB reviews and approves research involving prisoners in compliance with 45 CFR 46 Subpart C and other applicable regulations and laws. The provisions of Subpart C apply whenever the research targets prisoners as subjects

  3. Revising 10 CFR Part 1022 “Compliance with Floodplain and Wetland Environmental Review Requirements”

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Revising 10 CFR Part 1022 “Compliance with Floodplain and Wetland Environmental Review Requirements”

  4. RCRA ground-water monitoring: Draft technical guidance

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-11-01

    The manual was prepared to provide guidance for implementing the ground-water monitoring regulations for regulated units contained in 40 CFR Part 264 Subpart F and the permitting standards of 40 CFR Part 270. The manual also provides guidance to owners and operators of treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) that are required to comply with the requirements of 40 CFR Part 264 Subparts J (Tank Systems), K (Surface Impoundments), L (Waste Piles), N (Landfills), and X (Miscellaneous Units). This document updates technical information contained in other sources of U.S. EPA guidance, such as chapter eleven of SW-846 (Revision O, September 1986) and the Technical Enforcement Guidance Document (TEGD).

  5. Radiation Safety Training Guide for Use with Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection

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

    1999-03-17

    This Guide provides an acceptable methodology for establishing and operating a radiation safety training program that will comply with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) requirements specified in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection (DOE 1998a), hereinafter referred to as 10 CFR 835. In particular, this Guide provides guidance for achieving compliance with subpart J of 10 CFR 835. Canceled by DOE G 441.1-1B.

  6. EPA Review of Standards for Uranium and Thorium Milling Facilities @ 40 CFR Parts 61 and 192.

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    radon** (US Nuclear Regulatory Commission: 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 40 Appendix A; US regulatory limits. The basic regulatory limits that operating uranium mills and ISRs must comply

  7. Worker Safety and Health Program (10 CFR 851/DOE 0440.1B) | Department...

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

    Safety and Health Program (10 CFR 851DOE 0440.1B) Worker Safety and Health Program (10 CFR 851DOE 0440.1B) The DOE Safety and Health Program supports line management and...

  8. MARSAME References 10 CFR 20.1003. Standards for Protection Against Radiation, Definitions. Code of Federal

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    MARSAME References REFERENCES 10 CFR 20.1003. Standards for Protection Against Radiation://www.hss.energy.gov/enforce/rands/10CFR820.pdf (accessed October 24, 2008). 10 CFR 835. Occupational Radiation Protection. Code (ANSI) 1997. Radiation Protection Instrumentation Test and Calibration, Portable Survey Instruments

  9. Site-Specific Analyses for Demonstrating Compliance with 10 CFR 61 Performance Objectives - 12179

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Grossman, C.J.; Esh, D.W.; Yadav, P.; Carrera, A.G.

    2012-07-01

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend its regulations at 10 CFR Part 61 to require low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities to conduct site-specific analyses to demonstrate compliance with the performance objectives in Subpart C. The amendments would require licensees to conduct site-specific analyses for protection of the public and inadvertent intruders as well as analyses for long-lived waste. The amendments would ensure protection of public health and safety, while providing flexibility to demonstrate compliance with the performance objectives, for current and potential future waste streams. NRC staff intends to submit proposed rule language and associated regulatory basis to the Commission for its approval in early 2012. The NRC staff also intends to develop associated guidance to accompany any proposed amendments. The guidance is intended to supplement existing low-level radioactive waste guidance on issues pertinent to conducting site-specific analyses to demonstrate compliance with the performance objectives. The guidance will facilitate implementation of the proposed amendments by licensees and assist competent regulatory authorities in reviewing the site-specific analyses. Specifically, the guidance provides staff recommendations on general considerations for the site-specific analyses, modeling issues for assessments to demonstrate compliance with the performance objectives including the performance assessment, intruder assessment, stability assessment, and analyses for long-lived waste. This paper describes the technical basis for changes to the rule language and the proposed guidance associated with implementation of the rule language. The NRC staff, per Commission direction, intends to propose amendments to 10 CFR Part 61 to require licensees to conduct site-specific analyses to demonstrate compliance with performance objectives for the protection of public health and the environment. The amendments would require a performance assessment to demonstrate protection of the general population from releases of radioactivity, an assessment to demonstrate protection of a potential inadvertent intruder, and a long-term analysis to assess how the design of the facility considers the potential radiological impacts associated with disposal of long-lived waste streams. Concurrently, the NRC staff intends to propose associated guidance to facilitate the implementation of the requirements to conduct site-specific analyses. In proposing these amendments to the regulation and associated guidance, the NRC staff has conducted extensive public outreach since 2009 including three public meetings and four briefings of the NRC's Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards. The NRC staff plans to submit the proposed amendments to the regulations to the Commission in early 2012. Subsequently, the proposed amendments and associated guidance would be published in the Federal Register for public comment pending approval of the proposed amendments to the regulations by the Commission. Following the public comment period, NRC staff plans to address public comments and revise, as necessary, the regulations and associated guidance before publishing a final rule, which is anticipated in 2013. (authors)

  10. Evaluation of PM10 and Total Suspended Particulate Sampler Performance Through Wind Tunnel Testing 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Thelen, Mary Katherine

    2011-10-21

    of PM10 followed by collection of the PM10 on a filter over a 24-hr period. For a sampler to qualify as a FEM sampler, it must meet the performance specifications set forth in 40 CFR, Part 53, Subpart D and demonstrate comparability to a reference... by gravimetric sampling near a source using Federal Reference Method (FRM) samplers. A sampler is designated as FRM under the provisions of 40 CFR, Part 53 (CFR, 2006b). EPA designates those PM10 samplers which meet the requirements specified in 40 CFR, Part...

  11. Large Particle Penetration During PM10 Sampling 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Faulkner, William; Haglund, John; Smith, Raleigh

    2014-01-01

    are required to meet specific criteria outlined in 40 CFR Part 53, Subpart D (henceforth “Subpart D”). The wind tunnel used for the present tests was originally fabricated in the early 1980s for the development and evaluation of PM10 inlets (McFarland and Ortiz... 1982, 1984). The wind tunnel has been reassembled in order to resume Subpart D testing and evalua- tion. The 0.61 £ 0.61 meter (2 £ 2 foot) square wind tunnel is comprised of three sections, each 1.22 meters (4 feet) in length, a HEPA filter doubling...

  12. Title 36 CFR 214 Postdecisional Administrative Review Process...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Title 36 CFR 214 Postdecisional Administrative Review Process for Occupancy or Use of National Forest System Lands and Resources Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference...

  13. Title 40 CFR 1502.3 Statutory Requirements for Environmental...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    .3 Statutory Requirements for Environmental Impact Statements Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: Title 40 CFR...

  14. Title 10 CFR 900 Coordination of Federal Authorizations for Electric...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Title 10 CFR 900 Coordination of Federal Authorizations for Electric Transmission Facilities Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document-...

  15. Title 50 CFR 402 Interagency Cooperation - Endangered Species...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Federal RegulationFederal Regulation: Title 50 CFR 402 Interagency Cooperation - Endangered Species Act of 1973, as...

  16. Title 40 CFR 300 National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Title 40 CFR 300 National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Federal...

  17. Title 33 CFR 115 Bridge Locations and Clearances: Administrative...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Title 33 CFR 115 Bridge Locations and Clearances: Administrative Procedures Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Federal...

  18. Title 18 CFR 4 Licenses, Permits, Exemptions, and Determination...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Title 18 CFR 4 Licenses, Permits, Exemptions, and Determination of Project Costs Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document-...

  19. Title 10 CFR 1021 National Environmental Policy Act Implementing...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Title 10 CFR 1021 National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Federal...

  20. Title 32 CFR 775 Procedures for Implementing the National Environmenta...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Title 32 CFR 775 Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Federal...

  1. Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA Regulations: 40 CFR...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA Regulations: 40 CFR 1500 - 1518 Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Secondary Legal...

  2. 50 CFR 216 - Regulations Governing the Taking and Importing of...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    50 CFR 216 - Regulations Governing the Taking and Importing of Marine Mammals Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document-...

  3. 10 CFR 851 Worker Safety and Health Program Frequently Asked...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Worker Safety and Health Program Frequently Asked Questions - Updated October 19, 2010 10 CFR 851 Worker Safety and Health Program Frequently Asked Questions - Updated October 19,...

  4. 1995 Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs): Radionuclides. Annual report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-06-01

    Under Section 61.94 of 40 CFR 61, Subpart H (National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities), each DOE facility must submit an annual report documenting compliance. This report addresses the Section 61.94 reporting requirements for operations at INEL for CY 1995. For that year, airborne radionuclide emissions from INEL operations were calculated to result in a maximum individual dose to a member of the public of 1.80E-02 mrem (1.80E-07 Sievert), well below the 40 CFR 61, Subpart H, regulatory standard of 10 mrem per year (1.0E-04 Sievert per year).

  5. Letter to Mr. Podonsky from DOE and Contractor Attorneys' Association concerning 10 CFR 851 implementation issues, May 21, 2007

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Memorandum to Mr. Podonsky from DOE and Contractor Attorneys' Association concerning 10 CFR 851 implementation issues, May 21, 2007

  6. SUBPART H INSPECTION MANUAL Radionuclide NESHAPS

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    , and dispose of radioactive wastes. These facilities contain significant amounts of radioactive material.1.2 Compliance with the Standard 5 1.1.3 Estimated Releases and Reporting 13 1.1.4 Quality Assurance Practices 16 ­ Additional Questions and Answers 65 Appendix D: Example Inspection Report Format and Example Inspection

  7. SUBPART B - Exception Regulations | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE:Financing Tool FitsProjectData Dashboard RutlandSTEAB's Priorities throughAND POWER FACILITIE

  8. Subpart C-Standards for Internal

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of NaturalDukeWakefield Municipal GasAdministration Medal01 Sandia4)9 Federal RegisterStorm WaterSeptember 2010gallons1

  9. Material Safety Data Sheet according to ANSI Z400.1-2004 and 29 CFR 1910.1200

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Wikswo, John

    Material Safety Data Sheet according to ANSI Z400.1- 2004 and 29 CFR 1910.1200 WINDEX® ORIGINAL;Material Safety Data Sheet according to ANSI Z400.1- 2004 and 29 CFR 1910.1200 WINDEX® ORIGINAL GLASS AND PETS. #12;Material Safety Data Sheet according to ANSI Z400.1- 2004 and 29 CFR 1910.1200 WINDEX

  10. 5 CFR 731, Suitability - Drug Testing for DOE Positions

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

    Sfmt 8010 Y:SGML214009.XXX 214009 yshivers on PROD1PC62 with CFR 30 5 CFR Ch. I (1-1-08 Edition) 731.102 has a natural tendency to affect, an of- ficial decision. 731.102...

  11. (Created 3/06; Revised 6/06, 8/09, 6/10, 8/10, 10/11, 8/12) UNL Environmental Health and Safety (402) 472-4925 http://ehs.unl.edu

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tsymbal, Evgeny Y.

    dispenses gasoline into the fuel tank of a motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine, non-road vehicle, or non and underground storage tanks at Gasoline Dispensing Facilities (GDF) pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA) (40 CFR Part 63 Subpart CCCCCC). Gasoline dispensing facility (GDF) means any stationary facility which

  12. Preparation of RCRA contingency plans

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-07-01

    The purpose of this guidance is to assist Department of Energy (DOE) field personnel in the preparation of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) contingency plans as set forth in 40 CFR 264/265 Subpart D and 270.42. The guidance will assist personnel in evaluating and ensuring facility compliance with the contingency plan requirements.

  13. CX-011607: Categorical Exclusion Determination

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Mission Support Alliance Annual Categorical Exclusion for Air Conditioning Systems for Existing Equipment under 10 CFR 1021, Subpart D, Appendix B, B1.4 for Calendar Year 2014 CX(s) Applied: B1.4 Date: 12/02/2013 Location(s): Washington Offices(s): River Protection-Richland Operations Office

  14. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Major Sources. Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers; Guidance for Calculating Emission Credits Resulting from Implementation of Energy Conservation Measures

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Papar, Riyaz; Wright, Anthony; Cox, Daryl

    2012-07-01

    The purpose of this document is to provide guidance for developing a consistent approach to documenting efficiency credits generated from energy conservation measures in the Implementation Plan for boilers covered by the Boiler MACT rule (i.e., Subpart DDDDD of CFR Part 63).

  15. CX-011605: Categorical Exclusion Determination

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Mission Support Alliance Annual Categorical Exclusion for Asbestos Removal under 10 CFR 1021, Subpart D, Appendix B, B1.16 for Calendar Year 2014 CX(s) Applied: B1.16 Date: 12/02/2013 Location(s): Washington Offices(s): River Protection-Richland Operations Office

  16. CX-009667: Categorical Exclusion Determination

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Mission Support Alliance Annual Categorical Exclusion for Asbestos Removal under 10 CFR 1021, Subpart D, Appendix B CX(s) Applied: B1.16 Date: 12/05/2012 Location(s): Washington Offices(s): River Protection-Richland Operations Office

  17. Human Subjects: The human subject approval for this project will not have occurred at the time of application

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Finley Jr., Russell L.

    of such research activities. The types of IRB reviews are based on the type of protocol that is submitted. The HIC Research Protection Program (HRPP)" for research involving human participants and is briefly summarized participant research. These include the regulations from DHHS [45 CFR 46] and its subparts, the FDA

  18. CX-011593: Categorical Exclusion Determination

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Mission Support Alliance Annual Categorical Exclusion for Oil Spill Cleanup under 10 CFR 1021, Subpart D, Appendix B, B5.6 for Calendar Year 2014 CX(s) Applied: B5.6 Date: 12/02/2013 Location(s): Washington Offices(s): River Protection-Richland Operations Office

  19. CX-009653: Categorical Exclusion Determination

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Mission Support Alliance Annual Categorical Exclusion for Oil Spill Cleanup under 10 CFR 1021, Subpart D, Appendix B CX(s) Applied: B5.6 Date: 12/15/2012 Location(s): Washington Offices(s): River Protection-Richland Operations Office

  20. CX-011604: Categorical Exclusion Determination

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Mission Support Alliance Annual Categorical Exclusion for Polychlorinated Biphenyl Removal under 10 CFR 1021, Subpart D, Appendix B, B1.17 for Calendar Year 2014 CX(s) Applied: B1.17 Date: 12/02/2013 Location(s): Washington Offices(s): River Protection-Richland Operations Office

  1. Performance of a High Volume PM2.5 Sampler 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Li, Huan

    2013-12-12

    .5) concentrations can be measured by a Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) sampler. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) designates PM_(2.5) samplers which meet the requirements specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulation (CFR), Part 53, Subpart F as FEM samplers...

  2. The Rulemaking Process: From Laws to Environmental Standards

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    's "National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS)" (40 CFR Part 61) set limits Emission Standards for Operating Uranium Mill Tailings," limits radon emissions from tailings at operating for Uranium Mill Tailings The Subpart W standards limit the radon releases and doses to the public from

  3. PNNL-20436-3 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pollutants (NESHAP), Subpart H, "National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon of radionuclides. WAC 246-247 further requires the reporting of radionuclide emissions, including radon, from all PNNL Site sources. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1989 revised the NESHAP regulations (i.e., 40 CFR 61

  4. Technical and Regulatory Support to Develop a Rulemaking to Potentially Modify the NESHAP

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Technical and Regulatory Support to Develop a Rulemaking to Potentially Modify the NESHAP Subpart W Standard for Radon Emissions from Operating Uranium Mills (40 CFR 61.250) U.S. Environmental Protection.................................................................2 1.3 Current Understanding of Radon Risk

  5. EPA Update: NESHAP Uranium Activities

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    EPA Update: NESHAP Uranium Activities Reid J. Rosnick Environmental Protection Agency Radiation Mining (Clean Air Act) · 40 CFR 61.20, Subpart B regulations limiting radon emissions from underground air radon standard not to exceed 10 mrem/yr to any member of the public-compliance determined

  6. PNNL-20436-2 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pollutants (NESHAP), Subpart H, "National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon of radionuclides. WAC 246-247 further requires the reporting of radionuclide emissions, including radon, from all PNNL Site sources. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1989 revised the NESHAP regulations (i.e., 40 CFR 61

  7. February 2011 1906: Pure Food & Drugs Act regulated

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Arslan, Hüseyin

    February 2011 #12; 1906: Pure Food & Drugs Act ­ regulated adultered/misbranded food & drugs 1938: Food, Drugs, & Cosmetics Acts ­ required premarket review for safety 1962: FDCA Amendments ­ the birth for investigations of new drugs, including a requirement for informed consent #12; 21 CFR 312 Subpart A ­ general

  8. CX-009654: Categorical Exclusion Determination

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Mission Support Alliance Annual Categorical Exclusion for Drop-Off, Collection, and Transfer Facilities for Recyclable Materials under 10 CFR 1021, Subpart D, Appendix B CX(s) Applied: B1.35 Date: 12/05/2012 Location(s): Washington Offices(s): River Protection-Richland Operations Office

  9. CX-011599: Categorical Exclusion Determination

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Mission Support Alliance Annual Categorical Exclusion for Drop-Off, Collection, and Transfer Facilities for Recyclable Materials under 10 CFR 1021, Subpart D, Appendix B, B1.35 for Calendar Year 2014 CX(s) Applied: B1.35 Date: 12/02/2013 Location(s): Washington Offices(s): River Protection-Richland Operations Office

  10. Sealed Radioactive Source Accountability and Control Guide

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

    1999-04-15

    For use with Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection. This Guide provides an acceptable methodology for establishing and operating a sealed radioactive source accountability and control program that will comply with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) requirements specified in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection (DOE 1998a), hereinafter referred to as 10 CFR 835. In particular, this Guide provides guidance for achieving compliance with subpart M of 10 CFR 835. Canceled by DOE G 441.1-1B.

  11. Radiation-Generating Devices Guide for Use with Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection

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

    1999-04-15

    For use with Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection. This Guide provides an acceptable methodology for establishing and operating a sealed radioactive source accountability and control program that will comply with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) requirements specified in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection (DOE 1998a), hereinafter referred to as 10 CFR 835. In particular, this Guide provides guidance for achieving compliance with subpart M of 10 CFR 835. Canceled by DOE G 441.1-1B.

  12. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Cameron Anderson

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Cameron Anderson 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  13. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Cheryl Floreen

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Cheryl Floreen 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  14. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Reginald Gaylord

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Reginald Gaylord 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  15. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Jim Withers

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Jim Withers 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  16. Economic feasibility study: CFR advanced direct coal liquefaction process. Volume 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-09-01

    Preliminary technical and economic data are presented on the CFR Advanced Coal Liquefaction Process. Operating cost estimates and material balances are given.

  17. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Thomas Peterson

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Thomas Peterson 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  18. Title 43 CFR 429 Use of Bureau of Reclamation Land, Facilities...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Federal RegulationFederal Regulation: Title 43 CFR 429 Use of Bureau of Reclamation Land, Facilities, and...

  19. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Steven Jahn

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Steven Jahn 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  20. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Susan Leckband

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Susan Leckband 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  1. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Mario Moreno

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Mario Moreno 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  2. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Kenneth Meyer

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Kenneth Meyer 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  3. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- William R. Kleem

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: William R. Kleem 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  4. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Timothy Bolden

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Timothy Bolden 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  5. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Scott Yundt

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Scott Yundt 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  6. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Ed Kvartek

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Ed Kvartek 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  7. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Michael Brisson

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Michael Brisson 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  8. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Thomas W. Morris

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Thomas W. Morris 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  9. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Paul A. Schulte

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Paul A. Schulte 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  10. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- John Walter

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: John Walter 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  11. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Jamie Stalker

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Jamie Stalker 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  12. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Bret Moscon

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Bret Moscon 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  13. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Faye Vleger

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Faye Vleger 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  14. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Troy Bodily

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Troy Bodily 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  15. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Pete Stafford

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Pete Stafford 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  16. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Anoop Agrawal

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Anoop Agrawal 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  17. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Roby Enge

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Roby Enge 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  18. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Joseph Herndon

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Joseph Herndon 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  19. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Terry Vaughn

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Terry Vaughn 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  20. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Curtis Valle

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Curtis Valle 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  1. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Mark Fisher

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Mark Fisher 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  2. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Mark Strauch

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Mark Strauch 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  3. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Scott Stafford

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    Commenter: Scott Stafford 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  4. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- J. Chris Cantwell

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: J. Chris Cantwell 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  5. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Richard L. Dickson

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Richard L. Dickson 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  6. 36 CFR 63: Determinations of Eligibility for Inclusion in the...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    36 CFR 63: Determinations of Eligibility for Inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal...

  7. Title 25 CFR 224 Tribal Energy Resource Agreements Under The...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Federal RegulationFederal Regulation: Title 25 CFR 224 Tribal Energy Resource Agreements Under The Indian Tribal Energy...

  8. Applicability of 10 CFR 851 to Savannah River Ecology Laboratory

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Letter from Bruce Diamond, Assistant General Counsel for Environment, DOE, dated November 24, 2007 to Mr. Bertsch, Director and Professor, Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, regarding Savannah Riber Ecology Laboratory's Request for Interpretive Ruling under 10 CFR 851.

  9. Title 43 CFR 46 Implementation of the National Environmental...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Title 43 CFR 46 Implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Federal...

  10. Title 43 CFR 3264 Reports - Drilling Operations | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Title 43 CFR 3264 Reports - Drilling Operations Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Federal RegulationFederal Regulation: Title 43...

  11. UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON COLLEGE OF FOREST RESOURCES (CFR) STRATEGIC PLANNING RETREAT

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Brown, Sally

    1 UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON COLLEGE OF FOREST RESOURCES (CFR) STRATEGIC PLANNING RETREAT September BEEN ACCOMPLISHED IN THE COLLEGE OF FOREST RESOURCES SINCE THE LAST STRATEGIC PLANNING RETREAT AND WHAT professorships (Ridgeway and Scott) · Availability of student scholarships from CFR · Updated Master Plan

  12. Implementation Guide for use with 10 CFR Part 850, Chronic Beryllium Disease Prevention Program

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

    2001-01-04

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has established regulatory requirements for the Chronic Beryllium Disease Prevention Program (CBDPP) in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 850 (10 CFR 850) [64 Federal Register (FR) 68854]. Supersedes DOE G 440.1-7. Certified 9-23-10.

  13. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Alliance for Water Efficiency (AWE)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Alliance for Water Efficiency (AWE) 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  14. 10 CFR 850, Request for Information- Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP- Christopher R. McKean

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Commenter: Christopher R. McKean 10 CFR 850 - Request for Information Docket Number: HS-RM-10-CBDPP Comment Close Date: 2/22/2011

  15. Recommended values for the distribution coefficient (Kd) to be used in dose assessments for decommissioning the Zion Nuclear Power Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sullivan, T.

    2014-09-24

    ZionSolutions is in the process of decommissioning the Zion Nuclear Power Plant. The site contains two reactor Containment Buildings, a Fuel Building, an Auxiliary Building, and a Turbine Building that may be contaminated. The current decommissioning plan involves removing all above grade structures to a depth of 3 feet below grade. The remaining underground structures will be backfilled. The remaining underground structures will contain low amounts of residual licensed radioactive material. An important component of the decommissioning process is the demonstration that any remaining activity will not cause a hypothetical individual to receive a dose in excess of 25 mrem/y as specified in 10CFR20 SubpartE.

  16. Recommended values for the distribution coefficient (Kd) to be used in dose assessments for decommissioning the Zion Nuclear Power Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sullivan T.

    2014-06-09

    ZionSolutions is in the process of decommissioning the Zion Nuclear Power Plant. The site contains two reactor Containment Buildings, a Fuel Building, an Auxiliary Building, and a Turbine Building that may be contaminated. The current decommissioning plan involves removing all above grade structures to a depth of 3 feet below grade. The remaining underground structures will be backfilled. The remaining underground structures will contain low amounts of residual licensed radioactive material. An important component of the decommissioning process is the demonstration that any remaining activity will not cause a hypothetical individual to receive a dose in excess of 25 mrem/y as specified in 10CFR20 SubpartE.

  17. LLNL NESHAPs 1995 annual report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gallegos, G.M.; Harrach, R.J.; Biermann, A.H.; Tate, P.J.

    1996-06-01

    This annual report is prepared pursuant to the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart H; Subpart H governs radionuclide emissions to air from Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. NESHAPs limits the emission of radionuclides to the ambient air from DOE facilities to levels resulting in an effective dose equivalent (EDE) of 10 mrem to any member of the public. This document contains the EDEs for the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) site-wide maximally exposed members of the public from 1995 operations.

  18. 40 CFR Ch. I (7101 Edition) 61.71 61.71 Recordkeeping.

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    - national Commission on Radiological Protection's Publication No. 26. (b) Facility means all buildings Department of Energy Facilities SOURCE: 54 FR 51695, Dec. 15, 1989, unless otherwise noted. § 61.90 Designation of facilities. The provisions of this subpart apply to operations at any facility owned

  19. Questions and answers based on revised 10 CFR Part 20

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Borges, T.; Stafford, R.S.; Lu, P.Y.; Carter, D.

    1994-05-01

    NUREG/CR-6204 is a collection of questions and answers that were originally issued in seven sets and which pertain to revised 10 CFR Part 20. The questions came from both outside and within the NRC. The answers were compiled and provided by NRC staff within the offices of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Nuclear Regulatory Research, the Office of State Programs, and the five regional offices. Although all of the questions and answers have been reviewed by attorneys in the NRC Office of the General Counsel, they do not constitute official legal interpretations relevant to revised 10 CFR Part 20. The questions and answers do, however, reflect NRC staff decisions and technical options on aspects of the revised 10 CFR Part 20 regulatory requirements. This NUREG is being made available to encourage communication among the public, industry, and NRC staff concerning the major revisions of the NRC`s standards for protection against radiation.

  20. Radiological worker training

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-10-01

    This Handbook describes an implementation process for core training as recommended in Implementation Guide G441.12, Radiation Safety Training, and as outlined in the DOE Radiological Control Standard (RCS). The Handbook is meant to assist those individuals within the Department of Energy, Managing and Operating contractors, and Managing and Integrating contractors identified as having responsibility for implementing core training recommended by the RCS. This training is intended for radiological workers to assist in meeting their job-specific training requirements of 10 CFR 835. While this Handbook addresses many requirements of 10 CFR 835 Subpart J, it must be supplemented with facility-specific information to achieve full compliance.

  1. 2009 Performance Assessment for the Saltstone Disposal Facility

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    This Performance Assessment (PA) for the Savannah River Site (SRS) was prepared to support the operation and eventual closure of the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF). This PA was prepared to demonstrate compliance with the pertinent requirements of the United States Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1, Change 1, Radioactive Waste Management, Chapter IV, and Title 10, of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 61, Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste, Subpart C as required by the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2005, Section 3116. [DOE O 435.1-1, 10 CFR 61, NDAA_3116

  2. U.S. Department of Energy NESHAP Annual Report for CY 2014 Sandia National Laboratories Tonopah Test Range

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Evelo, Stacie; Miller, Mark L.

    2015-05-01

    This National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) Annual Report has been prepared in a format to comply with the reporting requirements of 40 CFR 61.94 and the April 5, 1995 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). According to the EPA approved NESHAP Monitoring Plan for the Tonopah Test Range (TTR), 40 CFR 61, subpart H, and the MOA, no additional monitoring or measurements are required at TTR in order to demonstrate compliance with the NESHAP regulation.

  3. Title 40 CFR 1508 Terminology and Index | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump to:226CFR 1508

  4. Title 40 CFR 1508: Terminology and Index | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump to:226CFR 1508:

  5. Title 43 CFR 1610 Resource Management Planning | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump to:226CFR10

  6. Title 43 CFR 3000 General | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump to:226CFR10Act

  7. Hanford safety analysis and risk assessment handbook (SARAH)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    GARVIN, L.J.

    2003-01-20

    The purpose of the Hanford Safety Analysis and Risk Assessment Handbook (SARAH) is to support the development of safety basis documentation for Hazard Category 1,2, and 3 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities. SARAH describes currently acceptable methodology for development of a Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) and derivation of technical safety requirements (TSR) based on 10 CFR 830, ''Nuclear Safety Management,'' Subpart B, ''Safety Basis Requirements,'' and provides data to ensure consistency in approach.

  8. Certification for DOE G 414.1-4

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

    2010-11-03

    Department of Energy (DOE) Guide (G) 414.1-4, Safety Software Guide for Use with 10 CFR 830, Subpart A, Quality Assurance Requirements, and DOE Order (O) 414.1C, Quality Assurance, dated 06-17-05, has been reviewed by my organization and is deemed to be in compliance with related Departmental Directives, Secretarial Delegations, organizational structure, budget guidelines, regulations, standards, OMB guidance, relevant memoranda of understanding and public laws.

  9. Degree of mixing downstream of rectangular bends and design of an inlet for ambient aerosol 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Seo, Youngjin

    2006-04-12

    velocity of 24 m/s. The nuclear industry is confronted with a problem similar to that for bioaerosol sampling from ductwork. Under the requirements of 40 CFR 61, Subparts H and I, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA, 2003d and 2003e... Figure 40. Penetration for the MIT and the AWI-90 without the Fractionator as a Function of Wind Speed for Different Intake Gaps. Particle Size: 10.4 ?m AD???????????????.. 61 Figure 41. Penetration...

  10. Tritium emissions from 200 East Area Double-Shell Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bachand, D.D.

    1994-11-28

    This document evaluates the need for tritium sampling of the emissions from the 200 East Area Double Shell Tanks based on the requirements of {open_quotes}National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants{close_quotes} (NESHAP). The NESHAP requirements are specified in 40 Code of Federal Regulation (CFR), Part 61, Subpart H; {open_quotes}National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities{close_quotes}.

  11. CONFIRMATORY SURVEY RESULTS FOR PORTIONS OF THE ABB COMBUSTION ENGINEERING SITE IN WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT DURING THE FALL OF 2011

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wade C. Adams

    2011-12-09

    From the mid-1950s until mid-2000, the Combustion Engineering, Inc. (CE) site in Windsor, Connecticut (Figure A-1) was involved in the research, development, engineering, production, and servicing of nuclear fuels, systems, and services. The site is currently undergoing decommissioning that will lead to license termination and unrestricted release in accordance with the requirements of the License Termination Rule in 10 CFR Part 20, Subpart E. Asea Brown Boveri Incorporated (ABB) has been decommissioning the CE site since 2001.

  12. Certification for DOE G 414.1-1B

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

    2010-11-18

    This certification was reviewed by the Executive Steering Committee for the Quality Assurance (QA) Directives reform and the Guide was found to be relevant, appropriate and necessary. The Guide provides the Department with non-mandatory approaches for implementing Criteria 9, Management Assessment, and Criteria 10, Independent Assessment, for DOE O 414.1C, as well as found in Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 830, Subpart A.

  13. Title 36 CFR 215 Notice, Comment, and Appeal Procedures for National...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Title 36 CFR 215 Notice, Comment, and Appeal Procedures for National Forest System Projects and Activities Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal...

  14. 33 CFR 322: Permits for Structures or Work in or Affecting Navigable...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    33 CFR 322: Permits for Structures or Work in or Affecting Navigable Waters of the United States Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document-...

  15. Title 43 CFR 3204.10 What Payment Must I Submit With My Noncompetitive...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Federal RegulationFederal Regulation: Title 43 CFR 3204.10 What Payment Must I Submit With My Noncompetitive Lease...

  16. Title 43 CFR 1610.7-2 Designation of Areas of Critical Environmental...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Federal RegulationFederal Regulation: Title 43 CFR 1610.7-2 Designation of Areas of Critical Environmental ConcernLegal...

  17. Title 43 CFR 3201.11 What Lands are Not Available for Geothermal...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Federal RegulationFederal Regulation: Title 43 CFR 3201.11 What Lands are Not Available for Geothermal Leasing?Legal...

  18. EA-1086: Amendments to 10 CFR Part 835 (Revised Version- 6/98)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of a proposal to issue as a final rulemaking an amended version of 10 CFR Part 835, "Occupational Radiation Protection."  The amended version provides...

  19. 6450-01-P, DOE 10 CFR Parts 430 and 431, Docket No. EERE-2010...

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

    6450-01-P, DOE 10 CFR Parts 430 and 431, Docket No. EERE-2010-BT-CE-0014 RIN 1904-AC23, Draft Submission to Federal Register, Notice of Revisions to Energy Efficiency Enforcement...

  20. Title 14 CFR 77 Safe, Efficient Use, and Preservation of the...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    CFR 77 Safe, Efficient Use, and Preservation of the Navigable Airspace Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Federal RegulationFederal...

  1. Title 43 CFR Part 45 Conditions and Prescriptions in FERC Hydropower...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    to mandatory conditions and prescriptions developed for inclusion in a hydropower license. Published NA Year Signed or Took Effect 2005 Legal Citation 43 CFR 45.1 et seq....

  2. Title 43 CFR 2800 Rights-of-way Under the Federal Land Policy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Title 43 CFR 2800 Rights-of-way Under the Federal Land Policy Management Act Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- Federal...

  3. Title 43 CFR 2800: Rights-of-Way Under the Federal Land Policy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Title 43 CFR 2800: Rights-of-Way Under the Federal Land Policy Management Act Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document-...

  4. 50 CFR 18.27 - Regulations Governing Small Takes of Marine Mammals...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    50 CFR 18.27 - Regulations Governing Small Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental To Specified Activities Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal...

  5. Subpart W Quarterly Conference Call April 5, 2012

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    " at conventional mill tailings? Reid: In our review we looked at whether or not there are technologies available for conventional impoundments. The Proposed Rule is making it clear that evaporation ponds at any facility for 2 impoundments of 40 acres or less. Sarah: When exactly does a uranium tailings impoundment become

  6. Page 1 of 4 Subpart W Public Quarterly Conference Call

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    and on to approval Radon Flux at ISL Evaporation Ponds o Data not up, and hope to have it up in the next few weeks o Draft documentation and data show that there is radon flux from evaporation ponds from ISL facilities. Reid needs to get back to the contractor. Oscar: Kennecott has extensive data on Ra-226 in tailings

  7. Subpart W Stakeholders Conference Call April 2, 2015

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    , (ORIA), Susan Stahle, (OGC) Industry: Jim Cain, Cotter; Kim Morrison, Energy Fuels UPDATE Reid began asked about whether EPA had receive a supplemental document from Energy Fuels. Reid stated that we did

  8. Subpart W Stakeholders Conference Call October 17, 2013

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Morrison, Energy Fuels: Steve Cohen, Darryl Liles, Randy Weider, SENES UPDATE Reid began the call progress. Reid will update the expected date of proposal on the website. DISCUSSION Sarah Fields: Have you

  9. Department of Energy Acquisition Regulation (DEAR) Subpart 903...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    under the Disputes clause of the contract regarding the disallowance of cost or the termination of the contract. 903.971 Contract clause. The contracting officer shall insert the...

  10. ATTENDANCE/MINUTES QUARTERLY CONFERENCE CALL ON SUBPART W

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    documents, contact information, and more. Website is located at: www.epa.gov/radiation/neshaps, Enforcement and Useful Links. Additionally, there is a legacy docket from the NESHAP rulemakings in the 1980s they are extensive. Further, EPA requested radon flux data from evaporation ponds at ISL facilities. The data

  11. ATTENDANCE/DRAFT MINUTES QUARTERLY CONFERENCE CALL ON SUBPART W

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sweeney ­ National Mining Assoc. Tom Peake ­ EPA Richard Blubaugh ­ National Mining Assoc. Susan Stahle ­ CCAT Mike Thomas - Uranerz Lynn Holtz ­ CCAT Mike Griffin ­ Uranium One Travis Stills ­ Energy Minerals Law Ctr. Sarah Fields ­ Uranium Watch Scott Bakken - Cameco John Hamrick ­ Cotter Corp. Jim Cain

  12. Subpart W Stakeholders Conference Call January 2, 2014

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Groups: Sharyn Cunningham, CCAT; Anita Minton, CCAT; Sarah Fields, Uranium Watch; Jennifer Thurston, INFORM Uranium Industry/Other: Jim Cain, John Hamrick, Cotter; Travis Stills, Energy Minerals Law Center between members of the National Mining Association and OMB, EPA, the Council on Environmental Quality

  13. Subpart W Stakeholders Conference Call July 11, 2013

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    , Angelique Diaz Environmental Groups: Sharyn Cunningham, CCAT; Sarah Fields, Uranium Watch; Jennifer Thurston, INFORM Uranium Industry/Other: Oscar Paulson, Kennecott; Mike Griffin, Strata; Dawn Coleman, Uranerz; Josh Leftwich, Cameco; Katie Sweeney, National Mining Association; Darryl Liles, SENES UPDATE Reid

  14. Subpart W Stakeholders Conference Call October 2, 2014

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    . (Note: Since the phone call EPA has posted information on www.epa.gov/radiation/laws/192.html.) Jennifer, cell 3 is not closing. Neither Shootaring Canyon nor Sweetwater have a double liner. #12;Aaron Mintzes

  15. Appendix B to Subpart D to Part 1021

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

    geothermal pipeline segments B5.6 Oil spill cleanup operations B5.7 Importexport natural gas, no new construction B5.8 Importexport natural gas, new cogeneration powerplant...

  16. Appendix B to Subpart D to Part 1021

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE:FinancingPetroleum Based Fuels Research at 1 Table ofDepartmentEnergylimits68Price-Andersonto

  17. DOE Subpart H Report. Annual NESHAPS Meeting on Radiological Emissions |

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE:FinancingPetroleum Based| Department8, 2015 GATEWAY Takes onandField | Department of

  18. Department of Energy Acquisition Regulation (DEAR) Subpart 903.9:

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE:FinancingPetroleum Based| Department8, 20153Danielthrough the InteragencyDepartment'sEnergy

  19. MENTAL POLICY ACT IMPLE- MENTING PROCEDURES Subpart A-General

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE: Alternative Fuelsof EnergyApril 2014 |Department of Energy MA3T Model Application at59

  20. Management and Independent Assessments Guide for Use with 10 CFR Part 830, Subpart A, and DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance; DOE M 450.4 -1, Integrated Safety Management System Manual; and DOE O 226.1A, Implementation of DOE Oversight Policy

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

    2007-09-27

    This Guide provides information on establishing processes for performing effective assessments. The revision to Guide reflects updated assessment practices, international standards, and changes in DOE expectations. Cancels DOE G 414.1-1A. Certified 11-18-10. Canceled by DOE G 414.1-1C.

  1. 10 CFR 850 Implementation of Requirements

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lee, S

    2012-01-05

    10 CFR 850 defines a contractor as any entity, including affiliated entities, such as a parent corporation, under contract with DOE, including a subcontractor at any tier, with responsibility for performing work at a DOE site in furtherance of a DOE mission. The Chronic Beryllium Disease Prevention Program (CBDPP) applies to beryllium-related activities that are performed at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The CBDPP or Beryllium Safety Program is integrated into the LLNL Worker Safety and Health Program and, thus, implementation documents and responsibilities are integrated in various documents and organizational structures. Program development and management of the CBDPP is delegated to the Environment, Safety and Health (ES&H) Directorate, Worker Safety and Health Functional Area. As per 10 CFR 850, Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS) periodically submits a CBDPP to the National Nuclear Security Administration/Livermore Site Office (NNSA/LSO). The requirements of this plan are communicated to LLNS workers through ES&H Manual Document 14.4, 'Working Safely with Beryllium.' 10 CFR 850 is implemented by the LLNL CBDPP, which integrates the safety and health standards required by the regulation, components of the LLNL Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS), and incorporates other components of the LLNL ES&H Program. As described in the regulation, and to fully comply with the regulation, specific portions of existing programs and additional requirements are identified in the CBDPP. The CBDPP is implemented by documents that interface with the workers, principally through ES&H Manual Document 14.4. This document contains information on how the management practices prescribed by the LLNL ISMS are implemented, how beryllium hazards that are associated with LLNL work activities are controlled, and who is responsible for implementing the controls. Adherence to the requirements and processes described in the ES&H Manual ensures that ES&H practices across LLNL are developed in a consistent manner. Other implementing documents, such as the ES&H Manual, are integral in effectively implementing 10 CFR 850.

  2. 43 CFR 2801 | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EAand Dalton Jump to:Wylie,InformationSpeciesRegister2008§6901 -3 CFR

  3. 10 CFR § 1021 | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION J APPENDIX ECoop IncIowa (UtilityMichigan)data bookresult formatswindMarketSize Home n/a n/aCFR §

  4. 40 CFR Ch. I (7105 Edition) 190.10 period in which he is engaged in car-

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    or emissions therefrom and car- rying out inspection and enforcement activities to assure compliance6 40 CFR Ch. I (7­1­05 Edition)§ 190.10 period in which he is engaged in car- rying out any

  5. Statistical Analysis of Transient Cycle Test Results in a 40 CFR Part 1065 Engine Dynamometer Test Cell

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Effects of "new" engine testing procedures (40 CFR Part 1065) with respect to repeatability of transient engine dynamometer tests were examined as well as the effects of calibration and measurement methods

  6. General Term and Condition Grantees are hereby given notice that the 48 CFR section 3.908, implementing

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Baker, Chris I.

    General Term and Condition Grantees are hereby given notice that the 48 CFR section 3," "grantee," "subgrant," or "subgrantee"): 3.908 Pilot program for enhancement of contractor employee

  7. EA-1778: Proposed Rule, 10 CFR 433 and 435, Energy Conservation and Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of DOE's Proposed Rule, 10 CFR Part 433, “Energy Conservation and Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction Standards for the Design and Construction of New Federal Commercial and Multi-Family High-Rise Residential Buildings” and 10 CFR Part 435, “Energy Conservation and Fossil Fuel-Generated Energy Consumption Reduction Standards for the Design and Construction of New Federal Low-Rise Residential Buildings”.

  8. Uninterruptible Power Supplies Designed to meet or exceed the safety standards established by UL, CSA, CE and VDE. The Alpha CFR UPS is one of the safest, most reliable and versatile Uninterruptible Power Systems

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Berns, Hans-Gerd

    Uninterruptible Power Supplies Designed to meet or exceed the safety standards established by ULKVA available. Uninterruptible Power Supply > The CFR's microprocessor design provides efficiency, CSA, CE and VDE. The Alpha CFR UPS is one of the safest, most reliable and versatile Uninterruptible

  9. Review of the technical bases of 40 CFR Part 190.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kelly, John E.; McMahon, Kevin A.; Siegel, Malcolm Dean; Weiner, Ruth F.; Bixler, Nathan E.; Klein, Keith A. (Longenecker and Associates)

    2010-07-01

    The dose limits for emissions from the nuclear fuel cycle were established by the Environmental Protection Agency in 40 CFR Part 190 in 1977. These limits were based on assumptions regarding the growth of nuclear power and the technical capabilities of decontamination systems as well as the then-current knowledge of atmospheric dispersion and the biological effects of ionizing radiation. In the more than thirty years since the adoption of the limits, much has changed with respect to the scale of nuclear energy deployment in the United States and the scientific knowledge associated with modeling health effects from radioactivity release. Sandia National Laboratories conducted a study to examine and understand the methodologies and technical bases of 40 CFR 190 and also to determine if the conclusions of the earlier work would be different today given the current projected growth of nuclear power and the advances in scientific understanding. This report documents the results of that work.

  10. Technical description of Stack 296-B-5

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ridge, T.M.

    1994-11-15

    Of particular concern to facilities on the Hanford site is Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter 40, Part 61, Subpart H, ``National emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities.`` Assessments of facility stacks and potential radionuclide emissions determined whether these stacks would be subject to the sampling and monitoring requirements of 40 CFR 61, Subpart H. Stack 296-B-5 exhausts 221-BB building which houses tanks containing B Plant steam condensate and B Plant process condensate from the operation of the low-level waste concentrator. The assessment of potential radionuclide emissions from the 296-B-5 stack resulted in an effective dose equivalent to the maximally exposed individual of less than 0.1 millirem per year. Therefore, the stack is not subject to the sampling and monitoring requirements of 40 CFR 61, Subpart H. However, the sampling and monitoring system must be in compliance with the Environmental Compliance Manual, WHC-CM-7-5. Currently, 296-B-5 is sampled continuously with a record sampler and continuous air monitor (CAM).

  11. Occupational ALARA Program Guide for Use with Title 10, CFR, Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection

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

    1999-03-17

    This Guide provides an acceptable methodology for establishing and operating an occupational "as low as is reasonably achievable" (ALARA) program that will comply with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) requirements specified in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection (DOE 1998a), hereinafter referred to as 10 CFR 835. For completeness, this Guide also references detailed guidance provided in the DOE-STD-1098-99, RADIOLOGICAL CONTROL (DOE 1999a), hereinafter referred to as the RCS.

  12. Title 43 CFR 1600-1610 Planning, Programming, Budgeting | Open Energy

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump to:226CFR

  13. Title 43 CFR 2800 Rights-of-way Under the Federal Land Policy Management

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump to:226CFR10Act |

  14. Title 7 CFR 658 Farmland Protection Policy Act | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 GeneralInformationCFR 658

  15. 1990 INEL national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants. Annual report, June 1991

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-05-01

    The Environmental Protection Agency issued on December 15, 1989 final rules governing air emissions of radionuclides. Requirements concerning radionuclide emissions from Department of Energy Facilities are addressed under Title 40, Code Federal Regulations (CFR) 61, Subpart H, ``National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides other Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities.`` Section 61.94 of the regulations require that each DOE facility submit on an annual basis a report documenting compliance with the Subpart H requirements. This report addresses the section 61.94 reporting requirements for operations at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) for calendar year 1990. The Idaho Operations Office of the Department of Energy is the primary contact concerning NESHAPs compliance at the INEL.

  16. 1990 INEL national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-05-01

    The Environmental Protection Agency issued on December 15, 1989 final rules governing air emissions of radionuclides. Requirements concerning radionuclide emissions from Department of Energy Facilities are addressed under Title 40, Code Federal Regulations (CFR) 61, Subpart H, National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides other Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities.'' Section 61.94 of the regulations require that each DOE facility submit on an annual basis a report documenting compliance with the Subpart H requirements. This report addresses the section 61.94 reporting requirements for operations at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) for calendar year 1990. The Idaho Operations Office of the Department of Energy is the primary contact concerning NESHAPs compliance at the INEL.

  17. Chemical Hygiene Plan In Accordance with 29 CFR 1910.1450 and R325.70106

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Berdichevsky, Victor

    Chemical Hygiene Plan In Accordance with 29 CFR 1910.1450 and R325.70106 Occupational Exposure industrial operations in the use and handling of hazardous chemicals. The Laboratory Standard applies to all covered by the standard must carry out the provisions of a Chemical Hygiene Plan (CHP). A CHP is a written

  18. 45 CFR 46.101(b) Categories of Exempt Human Subjects Research

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Oviedo, Néstor J.

    45 CFR 46.101(b) Categories of Exempt Human Subjects Research: (b) Unless otherwise required by department or agency heads, research activities in which the only involvement of human subjects that human subjects can be identified, directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects; and (ii) any

  19. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Major Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers; Guidance for Calculating Efficiency Credits Resulting from Implementation of Energy Conservation Measures

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cox, Daryl; Papar, Riyaz; Wright, Dr. Anthony

    2013-02-01

    The purpose of this document is to provide guidance for developing a consistent approach to documenting efficiency credits generated from energy conservation measures in the Implementation Plan for boilers covered by the Boiler MACT rule (i.e., subpart DDDDD of CFR part 63). This document divides Boiler System conservation opportunities into four functional areas: 1) the boiler itself, 2) the condensate recovery system, 3) the distribution system, and 4) the end uses of the steam. This document provides technical information for documenting emissions credits proposed in the Implementation Plan for functional areas 2) though 4). This document does not include efficiency improvements related to the Boiler tune-ups.

  20. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Major Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers; Guidance for Calculating Emission Credits Resulting from Implementation of Energy Conservation Measures

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cox, Daryl; Papar, Riyaz; Wright, Dr. Anthony

    2012-07-01

    The purpose of this document is to provide guidance for developing a consistent approach to documenting efficiency credits generated from energy conservation measures in the Implementation Plan for boilers covered by the Boiler MACT rule (i.e., subpart DDDDD of CFR part 63). This document divides Boiler System conservation opportunities into four functional areas: 1) the boiler itself, 2) the condensate recovery system, 3) the distribution system, and 4) the end uses of the steam. This document provides technical information for documenting emissions credits proposed in the Implementation Plan for functional areas 2) though 4). This document does not include efficiency improvements related to the Boiler tune-ups.

  1. 2009 LANL radionuclide air emissions report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fuehne, David P.

    2010-06-01

    The emissions of radionuclides from Department of Energy Facilities such as Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) are regulated by the Amendments to the Clean Air Act of 1990, National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR 61 Subpart H). These regulations established an annual dose limit of 10 mrem to the maximally exposed member of the public attributable to emissions of radionuclides. This document describes the emissions of radionuclides from LANL and the dose calculations resulting from these emissions for calendar year 2009. This report meets the reporting requirements established in the regulations.

  2. 2010 LANL radionuclide air emissions report /

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fuehne, David P.

    2011-06-01

    The emissions of radionuclides from Department of Energy Facilities such as Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) are regulated by the Amendments to the Clean Air Act of 1990, National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR 61 Subpart H). These regulations established an annual dose limit of 10 mrem to the maximally exposed member of the public attributable to emissions of radionuclides. This document describes the emissions of radionuclides from LANL and the dose calculations resulting from these emissions for calendar year 2010. This report meets the reporting requirements established in the regulations.

  3. 2008 LANL radionuclide air emissions report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fuehne, David P.

    2009-06-01

    The emissions of radionuclides from Department of Energy Facilities such as Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) are regulated by the Amendments to the Clean Air Act of 1990, National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR 61 Subpart H). These regulations established an annual dose limit of 10 mrem to the maximally exposed member of the public attributable to emissions of radionuclides. This document describes the emissions of radionuclides from LANL and the dose calculations resulting from these emissions for calendar year 2008. This report meets the reporting requirements established in the regulations.

  4. U.S. Department of Energy Report, 2005 LANL Radionuclide Air Emissions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Keith W. Jacobson, David P. Fuehne

    2006-09-01

    Amendments to the Clean Air Act, which added radionuclides to the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), went into effect in 1990. Specifically, a subpart (H) of 40 CFR 61 established an annual limit on the impact to the public attributable to emissions of radionuclides from U.S. Department of Energy facilities, such as the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). As part of the new NESHAP regulations, LANL must submit an annual report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency headquarters and the regional office in Dallas by June 30. This report includes results of monitoring at LANL and the dose calculations for the calendar year 2006.

  5. No-migration variance petition. Appendices A--B: Volume 2, Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-03-01

    Volume II contains Appendix A, emergency plan and Appendix B, waste analysis plan. The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Emergency plan and Procedures (WP 12-9, Rev. 5, 1989) provides an organized plan of action for dealing with emergencies at the WIPP. A contingency plan is included which is in compliance with 40 CFR Part 265, Subpart D. The waste analysis plan provides a description of the chemical and physical characteristics of the wastes to be emplaced in the WIPP underground facility. A detailed discussion of the WIPP Waste Acceptance Criteria and the rationale for its established units are also included.

  6. U.S. DOE 2004 LANL Radionuclide Air Emissions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    K.W. Jacobson

    2005-08-12

    Amendments to the Clean Air Act, which added radionuclides to the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), went into effect in 1990. Specifically, a subpart (H) of 40 CFR 61 established an annual limit on the impact to the public attributable to emissions of radionuclides from U.S. Department of Energy facilities, such as the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). As part of the new NESHAP regulations, LANL must submit an annual report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency headquarters and the regional office in Dallas by June 30. This report includes results of monitoring at LANL and the dose calculations for the calendar year 2004.

  7. United States Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration Sandia Field Office NESHAP Annual Report CY2014 for Sandia National Laboratories New Mexico

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    evelo, stacie; Miller, Mark L.

    2015-05-01

    This report provides a summary of the radionuclide releases from the United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration facilities at Sandia National Laboratories, New Mexico (SNL/NM) during Calendar Year (CY) 2014, including the data, calculations, and supporting documentation for demonstrating compliance with 40 Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) 61, Subpart H--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR EMISSIONS OF RADIONUCLIDES OTHER THAN RADON FROM DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY FACILITIES. A description is given of the sources and their contributions to the overall dose assessment. In addition, the maximally exposed individual (MEI) radiological dose calculation and the population dose to local and regional residents are discussed.

  8. Basis to demonstrate compliance with the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the Stand-off Experiments Range

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Michael Sandvig

    2011-01-01

    The purpose of this report is to provide the basis and the documentation to demonstrate general compliance with the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS) 40 CFR 61 Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities,” (the Standard) for outdoor linear accelerator operations at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Stand-off Experiments Range (SOX). The intent of this report is to inform and gain acceptance of this methodology from the governmental bodies regulating the INL.

  9. July 17, 2008; HSS/Union Working Group Meeting, Safety Standards, 10 CFR 851 Â… Meeting Summary

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on DeliciousMathematicsEnergyInterested Parties - WAPA Public CommentInverted Attic9: HSS Focus Group10 CFR 85110 CFR

  10. Clean Slate Environmental Remediation DSA for 10 CFR 830 Compliance

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    James L. Traynor, Stephen L. Nicolosi, Michael L. Space, Louis F. Restrepo

    2006-08-01

    Clean Slate Sites II and III are scheduled for environmental remediation (ER) to remove elevated levels of radionuclides in soil. These sites are contaminated with legacy remains of non-nuclear yield nuclear weapons experiments at the Nevada Test Site, that involved high explosive, fissile, and related materials. The sites may also hold unexploded ordnance (UXO) from military training activities in the area over the intervening years. Regulation 10 CFR 830 (Ref. 1) identifies DOE-STD-1120-98 (Ref. 2) and 29 CFR 1910.120 (Ref. 3) as the safe harbor methodologies for performing these remediation operations. Of these methodologies, DOE-STD-1120-98 has been superseded by DOE-STD-1120-2005 (Ref. 4). The project adopted DOE-STD-1120-2005, which includes an approach for ER projects, in combination with 29 CFR 1910.120, as the basis documents for preparing the documented safety analysis (DSA). To securely implement the safe harbor methodologies, we applied DOE-STD-1027-92 (Ref. 5) and DOE-STD-3009-94 (Ref. 6), as needed, to develop a robust hazard classification and hazards analysis that addresses non-standard hazards such as radionuclides and UXO. The hazard analyses provided the basis for identifying Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) level controls. The DOE-STD-1186-2004 (Ref. 7) methodology showed that some controls warranted elevation to Specific Administrative Control (SAC) status. In addition to the Evaluation Guideline (EG) of DOE-STD-3009-94, we also applied the DOE G 420.1 (Ref. 8) annual, radiological dose, siting criterion to define a controlled area around the operation to protect the maximally exposed offsite individual (MOI).

  11. Title 25 CFR 162: Leases and Permits | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page| Open Energy Information Serbia-EnhancingEt Al., 2013)Open EnergyTinox Jump to:,11 Protection of2CFR 162: Leases and

  12. Title 25 CFR 2 Appeals from Administrative Actions | Open Energy

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page| Open Energy Information Serbia-EnhancingEt Al., 2013)Open EnergyTinox Jump to:,11 Protection of2CFR 162: Leases

  13. Title 33 CFR 327 Public Hearings | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page| Open Energy Information Serbia-EnhancingEt Al., 2013)Open EnergyTinox Jump to:,11Information 989OpenTitle 33 CFR

  14. File:40 CFR 141.pdf | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QAsource History View New Pages Recent Changes All SpecialIDAStateEnvironmentalProcess.pdf40 CFR 141.pdf Jump to:

  15. File:40 CFR 142.pdf | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QAsource History View New Pages Recent Changes All SpecialIDAStateEnvironmentalProcess.pdf40 CFR 141.pdf Jump to:40

  16. File:40 CFR 143.pdf | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QAsource History View New Pages Recent Changes All SpecialIDAStateEnvironmentalProcess.pdf40 CFR 141.pdf Jump

  17. Title 30 CFR 1201 General | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump to: navigation,

  18. Title 36 CFR 219 Planning | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump to:226 Lease of19

  19. Title 40 CFR 112 Oil Pollution Prevention | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump to:226 Lease12 Oil

  20. Title 40 CFR 124 Procedures for Decisionmaking | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump to:226 Lease124

  1. Title 43 CFR 3201 Available Lands | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump

  2. Title 43 CFR 3202 Lessee Qualifications | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump Lessee

  3. Title 43 CFR 3203 Competitive Leasing | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump Lessee Competitive

  4. Title 48 CFR 1 Federal Acquisition Regulations System | Open Energy

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General

  5. Title 50 CFR 226 Designated Critical Habitat | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 GeneralInformation 1726

  6. Title 50 CFR § 10 | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 GeneralInformation

  7. 33 CFR 330: Nationwide Permit Program | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EAand Dalton Jump to:Wylie,InformationSpecies |114: NavigationAct33 CFR

  8. 10 CFR 851 Implementation Work Group | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE: Alternative FuelsofProgram:Y-12 Beta-3 Racetracks Y-12 Beta-3of/ The Office of10 CFR 851

  9. 10 CFR Part 1017 - Identification and Protection of Unclassified Controlled

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE: Alternative FuelsofProgram:Y-12 Beta-3 Racetracks Y-12 Beta-3of/ The Office of10 CFR 851Nuclear

  10. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Potential Impact Categories for Radiological Air Emission Monitoring

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ballinger, Marcel Y.; Gervais, Todd L.; Barnett, J. M.

    2012-06-05

    In 2002, the EPA amended 40 CFR 61 Subpart H and 40 CFR 61 Appendix B Method 114 to include requirements from ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 Sampling and Monitoring Releases of Airborne Radioactive Substances from the Stack and Ducts of Nuclear Facilities for major emission points. Additionally, the WDOH amended the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 246-247 Radiation protection-air emissions to include ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 requirements for major and minor emission points when new permitting actions are approved. A result of the amended regulations is the requirement to prepare a written technical basis for the radiological air emission sampling and monitoring program. A key component of the technical basis is the Potential Impact Category (PIC) assigned to an emission point. This paper discusses the PIC assignments for the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) Integrated Laboratory emission units; this revision includes five PIC categories.

  11. EA-1871: Environmental Assessment for Final Rule, 10 CFR 433, “EE Standards for New Federal Commercial and High-Rise Multi-Family Residential Buildings” and 10 CFR 435, “EE Standards for New Federal Residential Low-Rise Residential Buildings"

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) for DOE‘s Final Rule, 10 CFR 433, ?Energy Efficiency Standards for New Federal Commercial and High-Rise Multi-Family Residential Buildings? and 10 CFR 435, ?Energy Efficiency Standards for New Federal Residential Low-Rise Residential Buildings? Baseline Standards Update. The final rule updates the baseline standards in 10 CFR 433 and 10 CFR 435 to the latest private sector standards based on the cost-effectiveness of the latest private sector standards and DOE‘s determination that energy efficiency has been improved in these codes as required by 42 U.S.C 6831 et seq. DOE is issuing its final determinations on American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE)/Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) Standard 90.1-2007 (ASHRAE 2007) and the International Code Council‘s 2009 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) in the same edition of the Federal Register as this final rule.

  12. 10430 Federal Register / Vol. 57. No. 59 / Thursday, March 26. 1992 / Rules and Regulations 50 CFR Parts672 and 675

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    .S. fisheries appear at 50 CFR part 620. During its August 13-15, 1991, meeting, the Council approved Amendments. Certain technical changes to existing regulations are implemented. Two technical amendments to directed flexibility analysis (EA/RIR/FRFA) may be obtained from the North Pacific Fishery Management Council, P 0. Box

  13. 679.24 Gear Limitations 50 CFR 679b24.docx 679.24 Gear Limitations Page 1 of 5

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    § 679.24 Gear Limitations 50 CFR 679b24.docx § 679.24 Gear Limitations Page 1 of 5 Updated May 5, 2014 § 679.24 Gear limitations. Regulations pertaining to vessel and gear markings are set forth to § 300.62 of chapter III of this title. (a) Marking of hook-and-line, longline pot, and pot-and-line gear

  14. Critical comments on the US Environmental Protection Agency Standards 40 CFR 191

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pflum, C.G.; Van Konynenburg, R.A.; Krishna, P.

    1993-01-14

    This paper is about the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ``Environmental Standards for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Wastes,`` 40 CFR 191. These standards regulate the disposal of radioactive wastes in geologic repositories. Currently, two repository sites are under investigation: The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) site, located near Carlsbad, New Mexico, may become the repository for defense-generated transuranic waste (TRU); and the Yucca Mountain site, located near Las Vegas, Nevada, may become the repository for spent reactor fuel and a small amount of reprocessing waste (hereinafter called high-level radioactive waste or HLW). The paper was written for readers who have an interest in 40 CFR 191 but do not have the time or inclination to ponder the technical details.

  15. July 17, 2008; HSS/Union Working Group Meeting, Safety Standards, 10 CFR 851 - Information Package

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on DeliciousMathematicsEnergyInterested Parties - WAPA Public CommentInverted Attic9: HSS Focus Group10 CFR 851 /

  16. July 17, 2008; HSS/Union Working Group Meeting, Safety Standards, 10 CFR 851 - Agenda

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on DeliciousMathematicsEnergyInterested Parties - WAPA Public CommentInverted Attic9: HSS Focus Group10 CFR 851

  17. Summary of radionuclide air emissions from Department of Energy facilities for CY 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-04-01

    Facilities owned or operated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) handle and process radioactive materials in conjunction with their research, nuclear materials production, remediation, and waste disposal activities. During normal operations, some of these facilities have the potential to release small quantities of radionuclides to the environment. Radionuclide emissions to the atmosphere from DOE facilities are regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the authority of Section 112 of the Clean Air Act. Subpart H of 40 CFR Part 61 of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) sets standards for public exposure to airborne radioactive materials (other than radon) released by DOE facilities, DOE radon emissions are regulated by NESHAPs in Subparts Q and T. Subparts Q and T apply specifically to DOE storage and disposal facilities for radium-containing material. Airborne radionuclide emissions are also regulated by the Department of Energy under the authority provided by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Department of Energy Organization Act of 1977, as amended. This report summarizes air emissions subject to the EPA requirements and demonstrates that DOE facilities are in compliance with the required dose limits.

  18. Remedial action plan and site design for stabilization of the inactive Uranium Mill Tailings Site at Lowman, Idaho

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1991-09-01

    The DOE proposes to achieve compliance with the proposed EPA groundwater protection standards (Subparts A and B of 40 CFR 192) by meeting the EPA maximum concentration limits (MCLs) or background concentrations for designated hazardous constituents in groundwater in the uppermost aquifer (alluvium/weathered granodiorite) at the point of compliance (POC) at the Lowman disposal site near Lowman, Idaho. The proposed remedial action in conjunction with existing hydrogeological conditions at the Lowman site will ensure sufficient protection of human health and the environment. The DOE has concluded that the EPA groundwater protection standards will be met at the POC because, with the exception of antimony, none of the hazardous constituents that exceed laboratory method detection limits within the radioactive sand pore fluids were above the proposed concentration limits. The DOE has demonstrated that antimony will meet the proposed concentration limits at the POC through attenuation in subsoils beneath the disposal cell and by dilution in groundwater underflow. The Lowman processing site is in compliance with Subpart B of 40 CFR 192 because statistical analyses of groundwater samples indicate no groundwater contamination.

  19. Remedial action plan and site design for stabilization of the inactive Uranium Mill Tailings Site at Lowman, Idaho. Attachment 4, Water resources protection strategy: Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1991-09-01

    The DOE proposes to achieve compliance with the proposed EPA groundwater protection standards (Subparts A and B of 40 CFR 192) by meeting the EPA maximum concentration limits (MCLs) or background concentrations for designated hazardous constituents in groundwater in the uppermost aquifer (alluvium/weathered granodiorite) at the point of compliance (POC) at the Lowman disposal site near Lowman, Idaho. The proposed remedial action in conjunction with existing hydrogeological conditions at the Lowman site will ensure sufficient protection of human health and the environment. The DOE has concluded that the EPA groundwater protection standards will be met at the POC because, with the exception of antimony, none of the hazardous constituents that exceed laboratory method detection limits within the radioactive sand pore fluids were above the proposed concentration limits. The DOE has demonstrated that antimony will meet the proposed concentration limits at the POC through attenuation in subsoils beneath the disposal cell and by dilution in groundwater underflow. The Lowman processing site is in compliance with Subpart B of 40 CFR 192 because statistical analyses of groundwater samples indicate no groundwater contamination.

  20. Design/installation and structural integrity assessment of Bethel Valley low-level waste collection and transfer system upgrade for Building 3092 (Central Off-Gas Scrubber Facility) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-01-01

    This document describes and assesses planned modifications to be made to the Building 3092 Central Off-Gas Scrubber Facility of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The modifications are made in responsible to the requirements of 40CFR264 Subpart J, relating to environmental protection requirements for buried tank systems. The modifications include the provision of a new scrubber recirculation tank in a new, below ground, lines concrete vault, replacing and existing recirculation sump that does not provide double containment. A new buried, double contained pipeline is provided to permit discharge of spent scrubber recirculation fluid to the Central Waste Collection Header. The new vault, tank, and discharge line are provided with leak detection and provisions to remove accumulated liquid. New scrubber recirculation pumps, piping, and accessories are also provided. This assessment concludes that the planned modifications comply with applicable requirements of 40CFR264 Subpart J, as set forth in Appendix F to the Federal Facility Agreement, Docket No. 89-04-FF, covering the Oak Ridge Reservation.

  1. 1999 INEEL National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants - Radionuclides

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. W. Tkachyk

    2000-06-01

    Under Section 61.94 of Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 61, Subpart H, ''National Emission Standards for Emission of Radionuclides Other Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities,'' each Department of Energy (DOE) facility must submit an annual report documenting compliance. This report addresses the Section 61.94 reporting requirements for operations at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) for calendar year (CY) 1999. The Idaho Operations Office of the DOE is the primary contract concerning compliance with the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) at the INEEL. For CY 1999, airborne radionuclide emissions from the INEEL operations were calculated to result in a maximum individual dose to a member of the public of 7.92E-03 mrem (7.92E-08 Sievert). This effective dose equivalent (EDE) is well below the 40 CFR 61, Subpart H, regulatory standard of 10 mrem per year (1.0E-04 Sievert per year).

  2. 1996 Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) -- Radionuclides. Annual report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-06-01

    Under Section 61.94 of Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 61, Subpart H, ``National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities,`` each Department of Energy (DOE) facility must submit an annual report documenting compliance. This report addresses the Section 61.94 reporting requirements for operations at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) for calendar year (CY) 1996. The Idaho Operations Office of the DOE is the primary contact concerning compliance with the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) at the INEEL. For calendar year 1996, airborne radionuclide emissions from the INEEL operations were calculated to result in a maximum individual dose to a member of the public of 3.14E-02 mrem (3.14E-07 Sievert). This effective dose equivalent (EDE) is well below the 40 CFR 61, Subpart H, regulatory standard of 10 mrem per year (1.0E-04 Sievert per year).

  3. 1998 INEEL National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants - Radionuclides

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. W. Tkachyk

    1999-06-01

    Under Section 61.94 of Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 61, Subpart H, ''National Emission Standards for Emission of Radionuclides Other Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities,'' each Department of Energy (DOE) facility must submit an annual report documenting compliance. This report addresses the Section 61.94 reporting requirements for operations at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) for calendar year (CY) 1998. The Idaho Operations Office of the DOE is the primary contract concerning compliance with the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) at the INEEL. For CY 1998, airborne radionuclide emissions from the INEEL operations were calculated to result in a maximum individual dose to a member of the public of 7.92E-03 mrem (7.92E-08 Sievert). This effective dose equivalent (EDE) is well below the 40 CFR 61, Subpart H, regulatory standard of 10 mrem per year (1.0E-04 Sievert per year).

  4. Radionuclide air emissions report for the Hanford Site -- calendar year 1997

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gleckler, B.P.; Rhoads, K.

    1998-06-17

    This report documents radionuclide air emission from the Hanford Site in 1997, and the resulting effective dose equivalent to the maximally exposed member of the public, referred to as the MEI. The report has been prepared in accordance with reporting requirements in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart H, National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities. This report has also been prepared in accordance with the reporting requirements of the Washington Administrative Code Chapter 246-247, Radiation Protection-Air Emissions. The effective dose equivalent to the MEI from the Hanford Site`s 1997 point source emissions was 1.2 E-03 mrem (1.2 E-05 mSv), which is well below the 40 CFR 61 Subpart H regulatory limit of 10 mrem/yr. Radon and thoron emissions, exempted from 40 CFR 61 Subpart H, resulted in an effective dose equivalent to the MEI of 2.5 E-03 mrem (2.5 E-05 mSv). The effective dose equivalent to the MEI attributable to diffuse and fugitive emissions was 2.2 E-02 mrem (2.2 E-04 mSv). The total effective dose equivalent from all of the Hanford Site`s air emissions was 2.6 E-02 mrem (2.6 E-04 mSv). The effective dose equivalent from all of the Hanford Site`s air emissions is well below the Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 246-247, regulatory limit of 10 mrem/yr.

  5. Subpart W Quarterly Conference Call July 7, 2011, 11:00 am 12:00 pm

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paulson (Kennecott), Wayne Heili, John Cash (UR Energy), Mike Newton (Neutron Energy), Miriam Wetly Uranium) Other: Travis Stills (Energy Minerals Law Center), Andrew Maylor, Jennifer Hanston (Sheep Mountain Alliance) Status Update on Action Items from Last Call R. Rosnick: I don't have a great deal

  6. Subpart W Quarterly Conference Call October 6, 2011, 11:00 am 12:00 pm

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    (Kennecott), Scott Charmin (Uranium One), Jeff Kelsey (UR Energy ) Other: Travis Stills (Energy Minerals Law Center), Katie Sweeney (National Mining Association) R. Rosnick: This is our regularly scheduled

  7. SECTION 12-HAZARD COMMUNICATION PROGRAM (HCP) 29 CFR Section 1920-"Hazardous Communications" states that, "the purpose of this section is to ensure

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Selmic, Sandra

    144 SECTION 12- HAZARD COMMUNICATION PROGRAM (HCP) 29 CFR Section 1920- "Hazardous Communications" states that, "the purpose of this section is to ensure that the hazards of all chemicals produced or imported are evaluated, and that information concerning their hazards is transmitted to employers

  8. Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for the Hanford Site Calendar Year 1999

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    ROKKAN, D.J.

    2000-06-01

    This report documents radionuclide air emissions from the US. Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site in 1999 and the resulting effective dose equivalent to the maximally exposed individual (MEI) member of the public. The report has been prepared in accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart H, ''National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities'', and with the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 246-247. Radiation Protection-Air Emissions. The federal regulations in Subpart H of 40 CFR 61 require the measurement and reporting of radionuclides emitted from US. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities and the resulting offsite dose from those emissions. A standard of 10 mrem/yr effective dose equivalent (EDE) is imposed on them. The EDE to the MEI due to routine emissions in 1999 from Hanford Site point sources was 0.029 mrem (2.9 E-04 mSv), which is less than 0.3 percent of the federal standard. WAC 246-247 requires the reporting of radionuclide emissions from all Hanford Site sources, during routine as well as nonroutine operations. The state has adopted the 40 CFR 61 standard of 10 mrem/yr EDE into their regulations. The state further requires that the EDE to the MEI be calculated not only from point source emissions but also from diffuse and fugitive sources of emissions. The EDE from diffuse and fugitive emissions at the Hanford Site in 1999 was 0.039 mrem (3.9 E-04 mSv) EDE. The total dose from point sources and from diffuse and fugitive sources of radionuclide emissions during all operating conditions in 1999 was 0.068 mrem (6.8 E-04 mSv) EDE, which is less than 0.7 percent of the state standard.

  9. Enforcement Guidance Supplement 98-01:Duration of Investigations Conducted Pursuant to 10 CFR 820.21; Purpose of Transcript Requirements Set Forth in 10 CFR 820.10 (d)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The DOE Enforcement Handbook (1087-95) provides the Office of Enforcement and Investigation with the opportunity to issue interim clarifying guidance occasionally with respect to the processes to be used in this office (see Section 1.3- Interim Enforcement Guidance). In particular, it is important to assist contractors and others on the relationships between the requirements of Part 820 and the Enforcement Policy, 10 CFR 820, Appendix A.

  10. Title 25 CFR 211 Leasing of Tribal Lands for Mineral Development | Open

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page| Open Energy Information Serbia-EnhancingEt Al., 2013)Open EnergyTinox Jump to:,11 Protection of2CFR 162: LeasesEnergy

  11. Title 50 CFR 600 Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page| Open Energy Information Serbia-EnhancingEt Al., 2013)Open EnergyTinoxOpenStatutes Jump to: navigation,Habitat50 CFR

  12. Title 36 CFR 220 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Compliance | Open

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump to:226 Lease

  13. Title 40 CFR 122 EPA Administered Permit Programs: The National Pollutant

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump to:226 Lease12

  14. Title 40 CFR 1500 Purpose, Policy, and Mandate | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump to:226 Lease124

  15. Title 40 CFR 1500-1508 Council on Environmental Quality | Open Energy

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump to:226

  16. Title 43 CFR 3204 Noncompetitive Leasing Other Than Direct Use Leases |

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump Lessee

  17. Title 43 CFR 3279 Utilization Relief and Appeals | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump Lessee9

  18. Title 43 CFR 4 Department Hearings and Appeals Procedures | Open Energy

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General Jump

  19. Title 43 CFR 429 Use of Bureau of Reclamation Land, Facilities, and

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 General JumpWaterbodies | Open

  20. Title 50 CFR 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants | Open Energy

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION JEnvironmental Jump to:EA EISTJThin Film Solar TechnologiesCFR 1201 GeneralInformation 17

  1. DOE National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures (10 CFR Part 1021) [DOE][2012]

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE: Alternative Fuels DataEnergy Webinar:IAbout Us »Buildings DOEDOE FCalculationDOE CFR PART

  2. 10 CFR Part 830 Nuclear Safety Technical Positions | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE: Alternative FuelsofProgram:Y-12 Beta-3 Racetracks Y-12 Beta-3of/ The Office of10 CFR 851Nuclear10

  3. Final safety evaluation report related to the certification of the advanced boiling water reactor design. Volume 1: Main report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-07-01

    This safety evaluation report (SER) documents the technical review of the US Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) standard design by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff. The application for the ABWR design was initially submitted by the General Electric Company, now GE Nuclear Energy (GE), in accordance with the procedures of Appendix O of Part 50 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 50). Later GE requested that its application be considered as an application for design approval and subsequent design certification pursuant to 10 CFR {section} 52.45. The ABWR is a single-cycle, forced-circulation, boiling water reactor (BWR) with a rated power of 3,926 megawatts thermal (MWt) and a design power of 4,005 MWt. To the extent feasible and appropriate, the staff relied on earlier reviews for those ABWR design features that are substantially the same as those previously considered. Unique features of the ABWR design include internal recirculation pumps, fine-motion control rod drives, microprocessor-based digital logic and control systems, and digital safety systems. On the basis of its evaluation and independent analyses, the NRC staff concludes that, subject to satisfactory resolution of the confirmatory items identified in Section 1.8 of this SER, GE`s application for design certification meets the requirements of Subpart B of 10 CFR Part 52 that are applicable and technically relevant to the US ABWR standard design.

  4. Final safety evaluation report related to the certification of the advanced boiling water reactor design. Volume 2: Appendices

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-07-01

    This safety evaluation report (SER) documents the technical review of the US Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) standard design by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff. The application for the ABWR design was initially submitted by the General Electric Company, now GE Nuclear Energy (GE), in accordance with the procedures of Appendix O of Part 50 of Title 10 of the code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 50). Later GE requested that its application be considered as an application for design approval and subsequent design certification pursuant to 10 CFR {section} 52.45. The ABWR is a single-cycle, forced-circulation, boiling water reactor (BWR) with a rated power of 3,926 megawatts thermal (MWt) and a design power of 4,005 MWt. To the extent feasible and appropriate, the staff relied on earlier reviews for those ABWR design features that are substantially the same as those previously considered. Unique features of the ABWR design include internal recirculation pumps, fine-motion control rod drives, microprocessor-based digital logic and control systems, and digital safety systems. On the basis of its evaluation and independent analyses, the NRC staff concludes that, subject to satisfactory resolution of the confirmatory items identified in Section 1.8 of this SER, GE`s application for design certification meets the requirements of Subpart B of 10 CFR Part 52 that are applicable and technically relevant to the US ABWR standard design.

  5. Implementation of 10 CFR 20.1406 Through Life Cycle Planning for Decommissioning

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    O'Donnell, E.; Ott, W.R.

    2008-07-01

    This paper summarizes a regulatory guide that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, is currently developing for use in implementing Title 10, Section 20.1406, of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 20.1406), 'Minimization of Contamination'. The intent of the regulation is to diminish the occurrence and severity of 'legacy sites' by taking measures to reduce and control contamination and facilitate eventual decommissioning. The thrust of the regulatory guide is to encourage applicants to use technically sound engineering judgment and a practical risk-informed approach to achieve the objectives of 10 CFR 20.1406. In particular, such an approach should consider the materials and processes involved (e.g., solids, liquids, gases), and focus on (1) the relative significance of potential contamination, (2) areas that are most susceptible to leaks, and (3) the appropriate level of consideration that should be incorporated in facility design and operational procedures to prevent and control contamination. (authors)

  6. Implementation of the Resource Disincentive in 40 CFR part 191.14 (e) at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-06-01

    In 1986, the US Department of Energy (DOE) Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Project Office (WPO) (DOE-WPO) prepared a strategy for complying with the Environmental Protection Agency`s (EPA`s) Standards for the management of transuranic (TRU) waste. Section 3.2.2.2 of the DOE`s report addressed compliance with the Assurance Requirements found in 40 CFR {section} 191.14. One of the Assurance Requirements addresses the selection of repository sites that contain recoverable natural resources. This report documents that the site selection process for the WIPP facility did indeed comply with the natural resource disincentive requirement in 40 CFR {section} 191,14(e) at the time selected and therefore complies with the standard at this time. Thus, it shall be shown that it is reasonably certain that the WIPP site provides better overall protection than practical alternatives that were available when the site was selected. It is important to point out here, and it will be discussed later in the report, that the resource disincentive requirement is a preliminary siting criterion that requires further evaluation of sites that have resources (i.e, hydrocarbons, minerals and groundwater) in the vicinity or on the site. This further evaluation requires that for sites that do have resources, a qualitative determination must be made that the site will provide better overall protection than practical alternatives. The purpose of this report is not to provide a quantitative evaluation for selection of the WIPP site. A further discussion on the difference between the qualitative analysis required under 40 CFR {section} 191.14(e) and the quantitative analysis under other sections of 40 CFR 191 is provided in {section}2.1 of this report.

  7. Marine Sciences Laboratory Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2014

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Snyder, Sandra F.; Barnett, J. M.

    2015-05-04

    The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC) Pacific Northwest Site Office (PNSO) has oversight and stewardship duties associated with the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) Marine Sciences Laboratory (MSL) located on Battelle Land – Sequim.This report is prepared to document compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), Subpart H, ''National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities” and Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 246-247, “Radiation Protection–Air Emissions.'' The EDE to the MSL MEI due to routine operations in 2014 was 9E-05 mrem (9E-07 mSv). No non-routine emissions occurred in 2014. The MSL is in compliance with the federal and state 10 mrem/yr standard.

  8. Marine Sciences Laboratory Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2013

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Snyder, Sandra F.; Barnett, J. M.; Ballinger, Marcel Y.

    2014-05-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC) Pacific Northwest Site Office (PNSO) has oversight and stewardship duties associated with the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) Marine Sciences Laboratory (MSL) located on Battelle Land – Sequim (Sequim). This report is prepared to document compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities” and Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 246-247, “Radiation Protection–Air Emissions.” The EDE to the Sequim MEI due to routine operations in 2013 was 5E-05 mrem (5E-07 mSv). No non-routine emissions occurred in 2013. The MSL is in compliance with the federal and state 10 mrem/yr standard.

  9. US Department of Energy Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action ground water Project. Revision 1, Version 1: Final project plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-12-21

    The scope of the Project is to develop and implement a ground water compliance strategy for all 24 UMTRA processing sites. The compliance strategy for the processing sites must satisfy requirements of the proposed EPA ground water cleanup standards in 40 CFR Part 192, Subparts B and C (1988). This scope of work will entail the following activities, on a site-specific basis: Development of a compliance strategy based upon modification of the UMTRA Surface Project remedial action plans (RAP) or development of Ground Water Project RAPs with NRC and state or tribal concurrence on the RAP; implementation of the RAP to include establishment of institutional controls, where appropriate; institution of long-term verification monitoring for transfer to a separate DOE program on or before the Project end date; and preparation of completion reports and final licensing on those sites that will be completed prior to the Project end date.

  10. Basement Fill Model Evaluation of Maximum Radionuclide Concentrations for Initial Suite of Radionuclides. Zion Station Restoration Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sullivan, Terry

    2014-12-10

    ZionSolutions is in the process of decommissioning the Zion Nuclear Power Plant in order to establish a new water treatment plant. There is some residual radioactive particles from the plant which need to be brought down to levels so an individual who receives water from the new treatment plant does not receive a radioactive dose in excess of 25 mrem/y?¹ as specified in 10 CFR 20 Subpart E. The objectives of this report are: (a) To present a simplified conceptual model for release from the buildings with residual subsurface structures that can be used to provide an upper bound on radionuclide concentrations in the fill material and the water in the interstitial spaces of the fill. (b) Provide maximum water concentrations and the corresponding amount of mass sorbed to the solid fill material that could occur in each building for use by ZSRP in selecting ROCs for detailed dose assessment calculations.

  11. Interim Status Closure Plan Open Burning Treatment Unit Technical Area 16-399 Burn Tray

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vigil-Holterman, Luciana R.

    2012-05-07

    This closure plan describes the activities necessary to close one of the interim status hazardous waste open burning treatment units at Technical Area (TA) 16 at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL or the Facility), hereinafter referred to as the 'TA-16-399 Burn Tray' or 'the unit'. The information provided in this closure plan addresses the closure requirements specified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 40, Part 265, Subparts G and P for the thermal treatment units operated at the Facility under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the New Mexico Hazardous Waste Act. Closure of the open burning treatment unit will be completed in accordance with Section 4.1 of this closure plan.

  12. Integration of Environment, Safety, and Health into Facility Disposition Activities

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

    1998-05-01

    Volume One of this Standard has been revised to provide a Department of Energy (DOE) approved methodology for preparing a Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) for decommissioning of nuclear facilities, as well as environmental restoration activities that involve work not done within a permanent structure. Methodologies provided in this Standard are intended to be compliant with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 830, Nuclear Safety Management, Subpart B, Safety Basis Requirements. Volume Two contains the appendices that provide additional environment, safety and health (ES&H) information to complement Volume 1 of this Standard. Volume 2 of the Standard is much broader in scope than Volume 1 and satisfies several purposes. Integrated safety management expectations are provided in accordance with facility disposition requirements contained in DOE O 430.1B, Real Property Asset Management.

  13. 2014 LANL Radionuclide Air Emissions Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fuehne, David Patrick

    2015-07-21

    This report describes the emissions of airborne radionuclides from operations at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) for calendar year 2014, and the resulting off-site dose from these emissions. This document fulfills the requirements established by the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants in 40 CFR 61, Subpart H – Emissions of Radionuclides other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities, commonly referred to as the Radionuclide NESHAP or Rad-NESHAP. Compliance with this regulation and preparation of this document is the responsibility of LANL’s RadNESHAP compliance program, which is part of the Environmental Protection Division. The information in this report is required under the Clean Air Act and is being submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 6.

  14. Follow that mercury!

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Linero, A.A.

    2008-07-01

    The article discusses one technology option for avoiding release of mercury captured by power plant pollution control equipment in order to render it usable in concrete. This is the use of selective catalytic reduction for NOx control and lime spray dryer absorbers (SDA) for SO{sub 2} control prior to particulate collection by fabric filters. In this scenario all mercury removed is trapped in the fabric filter baghouse. The US EPA did not establish mercury emission limits for existing cement plants in the latest regulation 40 CFR 63, Subpart LLL (December 2006) and was sued by the Portland Cement Association because of the Hg limits established for new kilns and by several states and environmental groups for the lack of limits on existing ones. A full version of this article is available on www.acaa-usa.org/AshatWork.htm. 2 figs.

  15. Safety Basis Requirements for Nonnuclear Facilities at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Site-Specific Work Smart Standard Revision 3 December 2006

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Beach, D; Brereton, S; Failor, R; Hildum, J; Ingram, C; Spagnolo, S; van Warmerdam, C

    2007-06-07

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

  16. Clothes Dryer Automatic Termination Evaluation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    TeGrotenhuis, Ward E.

    2014-10-01

    Volume 2: Improved Sensor and Control Designs Many residential clothes dryers on the market today provide automatic cycles that are intended to stop when the clothes are dry, as determined by the final remaining moisture content (RMC). However, testing of automatic termination cycles has shown that many dryers are susceptible to over-drying of loads, leading to excess energy consumption. In particular, tests performed using the DOE Test Procedure in Appendix D2 of 10 CFR 430 subpart B have shown that as much as 62% of the energy used in a cycle may be from over-drying. Volume 1 of this report shows an average of 20% excess energy from over-drying when running automatic cycles with various load compositions and dryer settings. Consequently, improving automatic termination sensors and algorithms has the potential for substantial energy savings in the U.S.

  17. 1997 Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) -- Radionuclides annual report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-06-01

    Under Section 61.94 of Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 61, Subpart H, National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities, each Department of Energy (DOE) facility must submit an annual report documenting compliance. This report addresses the Section 61.94 reporting requirements for operations at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) for calendar year (CY) 1997. Section 1 of this report provides an overview of the INEEL facilities and a brief description of the radioactive materials and processes at the facilities. Section 2 identifies radioactive air effluent release points and diffuse sources at the INEEL and actual releases during 1997. Section 2 also describes the effluent control systems for each potential release point. Section 3 provides the methodology and EDE calculations for 1997 INEEL radioactive emissions.

  18. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Facility Radionuclide Emission Points and Sampling Systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barfuss, Brad C.; Barnett, J. M.; Ballinger, Marcel Y.

    2009-04-08

    Battelle—Pacific Northwest Division operates numerous research and development laboratories in Richland, Washington, including those associated with the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) on the Department of Energy’s Hanford Site that have the potential for radionuclide air emissions. The National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP 40 CFR 61, Subparts H and I) requires an assessment of all effluent release points that have the potential for radionuclide emissions. Potential emissions are assessed annually. Sampling, monitoring, and other regulatory compliance requirements are designated based upon the potential-to-emit dose criteria found in the regulations. The purpose of this document is to describe the facility radionuclide air emission sampling program and provide current and historical facility emission point system performance, operation, and design information. A description of the buildings, exhaust points, control technologies, and sample extraction details is provided for each registered or deregistered facility emission point. Additionally, applicable stack sampler configuration drawings, figures, and photographs are provided.

  19. Pacific Northwest Laboratory facilities radionuclide inventory assessment CY 1992-1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sula, M.J.; Jette, S.J.

    1994-09-01

    Assessments for evaluating compliance with airborne radionuclide emission monitoring requirements in the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs - U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40 Part 61, Subparts H and I) were performed for 33 buildings at the U.S. Department of Energy`s (DOE) Pacific Northwest Laboratory on the Hanford Site, and for five buildings owned and operated by Battelle, Pacific Northwest Laboratories in Richland, Washington. The assessments were performed using building radionuclide inventory data obtained in 1992 and 1993. Results of the assessments are summarized in Table S.1 for DOE-PNL buildings and in Table S.2 for Battelle-owned buildings. Based on the radionuclide inventory assessments, four DOE-PNL buildings (one with two emission points) require continuous sampling for radionuclides per 40 CFR 61. None of the Battelle-owned buildings require continuous emission sampling.

  20. LLNL NESHAPs Project 1994 Annual Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Surano, K.A.; Biermann, A.H.; Harrach, R.J.

    1995-06-01

    The NESHAPs standared in 40 CFR part 61, Subpart H limites the emission of radionuclides to the ambient air from DOE facilities to levels resulting in an annual effective dose equivalent (EDE) of 10 mrem to any member of the public. The EDEs to the LLNL site-wide maximally exposed member of the public from 1994 operations were: Livermore 0.065 mrem; site 300 - 0.081 mrem. A complete LLNL-wide radionuclide-inventory update was conducted for 1994. Inventory and site-specific meteorological data, together with results from continuous-monitoring systems, were used as inputs to the EPA-approved CAP88-PC air-dispersion/dose-assessment model to calculate the reported EDEs.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen; Annette L. Schafer

    2014-02-01

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen; Annette L. Schafer

    2013-11-01

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

  3. Delaware Basin Monitoring Annual Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Washington Regulatory and Environmental Services; Washington TRU Solutions LLC

    2005-09-30

    The Delaware Basin Drilling Surveillance Program (DBDSP) is designed to monitor drilling activities in the vicinity of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). This program is based on Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requirements. The EPA environmental standards for the management and disposal of transuranic (TRU) radioactive waste are codified in 40 CFR Part 191 (EPA 1993). Subparts B and C of the standard address the disposal of radioactive waste. The standard requires the Department of Energy (DOE) to demonstrate the expected performance of the disposal system using a probabilistic risk assessment or performance assessment (PA). This PA must show that the expected repository performance will not release radioactive material above limits set by the EPA's standard. This assessment must include the consideration of inadvertent drilling into the repository at some future time.

  4. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Safety Analysis Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-11-01

    The following provides a summary of the specific issues addressed in this FY-95 Annual Update as they relate to the CH TRU safety bases: Executive Summary; Site Characteristics; Principal Design and Safety Criteria; Facility Design and Operation; Hazards and Accident Analysis; Derivation of Technical Safety Requirements; Radiological and Hazardous Material Protection; Institutional Programs; Quality Assurance; and Decontamination and Decommissioning. The System Design Descriptions`` (SDDS) for the WIPP were reviewed and incorporated into Chapter 3, Principal Design and Safety Criteria and Chapter 4, Facility Design and Operation. This provides the most currently available final engineering design information on waste emplacement operations throughout the disposal phase up to the point of permanent closure. Also, the criteria which define the TRU waste to be accepted for disposal at the WIPP facility were summarized in Chapter 3 based on the WAC for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.`` This Safety Analysis Report (SAR) documents the safety analyses that develop and evaluate the adequacy of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Contact-Handled Transuranic Wastes (WIPP CH TRU) safety bases necessary to ensure the safety of workers, the public and the environment from the hazards posed by WIPP waste handling and emplacement operations during the disposal phase and hazards associated with the decommissioning and decontamination phase. The analyses of the hazards associated with the long-term (10,000 year) disposal of TRU and TRU mixed waste, and demonstration of compliance with the requirements of 40 CFR 191, Subpart B and 40 CFR 268.6 will be addressed in detail in the WIPP Final Certification Application scheduled for submittal in October 1996 (40 CFR 191) and the No-Migration Variance Petition (40 CFR 268.6) scheduled for submittal in June 1996. Section 5.4, Long-Term Waste Isolation Assessment summarizes the current status of the assessment.

  5. A comparison of spent fuel shipping cask response to 10 CFR 71 normal conditions and realistic hot day extremes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Manson, S.J.; Gianoulakis, S.E.

    1994-04-01

    An examination of the effect of a realistic (though conservative) hot day environment on the thermal transient behavior of spent fuel shipping casks is made. These results are compared to those that develop under the prescribed normal thermal condition of 10 CFR 71. Of specific concern are the characteristics of propagating thermal waves, which are set up by diurnal variations of temperature and insolation in the outdoor environment. In order to arrive at a realistic approximation of these variations on a conservative hot day, actual temperature and insolation measurements have been obtained from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) for representatively hot and high heat flux days. Thus, the use of authentic meteorological data ensures the realistic approach sought. Further supporting the desired realism of the modeling effort is the use of realistic cask configurations in which multiple laminations of structural, shielding, and other materials are expected to attenuate the propagating thermal waves. The completed analysis revealed that the majority of wall temperatures, for a wide variety of spent fuel shipping cask configurations, fall well below those predicted by enforcement of the regulatory environmental conditions of 10 CFR 71. It was found that maximum temperatures at the cask surface occasionally lie above temperatures predicted under the prescribed regulatory conditions. However, the temperature differences are small enough that the normal conservative assumptions that are made in the course of typical cask evaluations should correct for any potential violations. The analysis demonstrates that diurnal temperature variations that penetrate the cask wall all have maxima substantially less than the corresponding regulatory solutions. Therefore it is certain that vital cask components and the spent fuel itself will not exceed the temperatures calculated by use of the conditions of 10 CFR 71.

  6. LLNL NESHAPs 1996 Annual Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gallegos, G.M.

    1997-01-06

    This annual report is prepared pursuant to the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart H; Subpart H governs radionuclide emissions to air from Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. NESHAPs limits the emission of radionuclides to the ambient air from DOE facilities to levels resulting in an annual effective dose equivalent (EDE) of 10 mrem (10 microsieverts) to any member of the public. The EDEs for the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) site-wide maximally exposed members of the public from 1996 operations were (1) Livermore site: 0. 093 mrem (0.93 microsievert) (52% from point-source emissions, 48% from diffuse-source emissions); (2) Site 300: 0.033 mrem (0.33 microsievert) (99% from point-source, 1% from diffuse-source emissions). The EDEs were generally calculated using the EPA-approved CAP88-PC air-dispersion/dose-assessment model. Site-specific meteorological data, stack flow data, and emissions estimates based on radionuclide inventory data or continuous-monitoring systems data were the specific input to CAP88-PC for each modeled source. 5 figs., 8 tabs.

  7. Applicability issues and compliance strategies for the proposed oil and gas industry hazardous air pollutant standards

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tandon, N.; Winborn, K.A.; Grygar, W.W. II

    1999-07-01

    The US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) has targeted oil and natural gas transmission and storage facilities located across the United States for regulation under the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) program (proposed in Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 63 [40 CFR 63], Subparts HH and HHH). The proposed NESHAP were published in the February 6, 1998 Federal Register and are expected to be promulgated in May 1999. These rules are intended to reduce Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP) emitted from oil and gas facilities. It is expected that these rules will require more than 400 major sources and more than 500 non-major sources (also referred to as area sources) to meet maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards defined in the NESHAP. The rules would regulate HAP emission from glycol dehydration units, storage vessels and various fugitive leak sources. This technical paper addresses the applicability issues and compliance strategies related to the proposed NESHAP. The applicability criteria for both rules differ from those promulgated for other source categories under 40 CFR 63. For example, individual unit throughput and/or HAP emission thresholds may exempt specific units from the MACT standards in the NESHAP. The proposed Subpart HH would apply not only to major sources, but also to triethylene glycol (TEC) dehydration units at area sources located in urban areas. For both proposed NESHAP all 199 HAP must be considered for the major source determinations, but only 15 specific HAP are targeted for control under the proposed standards. An overview of the HAP control requirements, exemption criteria, as well as initial and continued compliance determination strategies are presented. Several industry examples are included to assist industry develop compliance strategies.

  8. Preliminary performance assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1992. Volume 5, Uncertainty and sensitivity analyses of gas and brine migration for undisturbed performance

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-08-01

    Before disposing of transuranic radioactive waste in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), the United States Department of Energy (DOE) must evaluate compliance with applicable long-term regulations of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Sandia National Laboratories is conducting iterative performance assessments (PAs) of the WIPP for the DOE to provide interim guidance while preparing for a final compliance evaluation. This volume of the 1992 PA contains results of uncertainty and sensitivity analyses with respect to migration of gas and brine from the undisturbed repository. Additional information about the 1992 PA is provided in other volumes. Volume 1 contains an overview of WIPP PA and results of a preliminary comparison with 40 CFR 191, Subpart B. Volume 2 describes the technical basis for the performance assessment, including descriptions of the linked computational models used in the Monte Carlo analyses. Volume 3 contains the reference data base and values for input parameters used in consequence and probability modeling. Volume 4 contains uncertainty and sensitivity analyses with respect to the EPA`s Environmental Standards for the Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes (40 CFR 191, Subpart B). Finally, guidance derived from the entire 1992 PA is presented in Volume 6. Results of the 1992 uncertainty and sensitivity analyses indicate that, conditional on the modeling assumptions and the assigned parameter-value distributions, the most important parameters for which uncertainty has the potential to affect gas and brine migration from the undisturbed repository are: initial liquid saturation in the waste, anhydrite permeability, biodegradation-reaction stoichiometry, gas-generation rates for both corrosion and biodegradation under inundated conditions, and the permeability of the long-term shaft seal.

  9. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Initial Report for PCB Disposal Authorization (40 CFR {section} 761.75[c])

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Westinghouse TRU Solutions

    2002-03-19

    This initial report is being submitted pursuant to Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) {section} 761.75(c) to request authorization to allow the disposal of transuranic (TRU) wastes containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) which are duly regulated under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Approval of this initial report will not affect the disposal of TRU or TRU mixed wastes that do not contain PCBs. This initial report also demonstrates how the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) meets or exceeds the technical standards for a Chemical Waste Landfill. Approval of this request will allow the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to dispose of approximately 88,000 cubic feet (ft3) (2,500 cubic meters [m3]) of TRU wastes containing PCBs subject to regulation under the TSCA. This approval will include only those PCB/TRU wastes, which the TSCA regulations allow for disposal of the PCB component in municipal solid waste facilities or chemical waste landfills (e.g., PCB remediation waste, PC B articles, and bulk PCB product waste). Disposal of TRU waste by the DOE is congressionally mandated in Public Law 102-579 (as amended by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997, Pub. L. 104-201, referred to as the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act [LWA]). Portions of the TRU waste inventory contain hazardous waste constituents regulated under 40 CFR Parts 260 through 279, and/or PCBs and PCB Items regulated under 40 CFR Part 761. Therefore, the DOE TRU waste program must address the disposal requirements for these hazardous waste constituents and PCBs. To facilitate the disposal of TRU wastes containing hazardous waste constituents, the owner/operators received a Hazardous Waste Facility Permit (HWFP) from the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) on October 27, 1999. The permit allows the disposal of TRU wastes subject to hazardous waste disposal requirements (TRU mixed waste). Informational copies of this permit and other referenced documents are available from the WIPP website. To facilitate the disposal of TRU wastes containing PCBs, the owner/operators are hereby submitting this initial report containing information required pursuant to the Chemical Waste Landfill Approval requirements in 40 CFR {section} 761.75(c). Although WIPP is defined as a miscellaneous unit and not a landfill by the New Mexico Hazardous Waste Act, WIPP meets or exceeds all applicable technical standards for chemical waste landfills by virtue of its design and programs as indicated in the Engineering Report (Attachment B). The layout of this initial report is consistent with requirements (i.e., Sections 2.0 through 12.0 following the sequence of 40 CFR {section} 761.75[c][i] -[ix] with sections added to discuss the Contingency and Training Plans; and Attachment B of this initial report addresses the requirements of 40 CFR {section} 761.75[b][1] through [9] in this order). This initial report includes a description of three proposed changes that will be subject to ''conditional approval.'' The first will allow the disposal of remote-handled (RH) PCB/TRU waste at WIPP. The second will allow the establishment of a central confirmation facility at WIPP. The third will allow for an increase in contact-handled Working Copy Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Initial Report for PCB Disposal Authorization DOE/WIPP 02-3196 (CH) waste storage capacities. These proposed changes are discussed further in Section 3.3 of this initial report. ''Conditional approval'' of these requests would allow these activities at WIPP contingent upon: - Approval of the HWFP modification (NMED) and Compliance Certification Application (CCA) change request (Environmental Protection Agency [EPA]) - Inspection of facility prior to implementing the change (if deemed necessary by the EPA) - Written approval from the EPA This initial report also includes the following three requests for waivers to the technical requirements for Chemical Waste Landfills pursuant to 40 CFR {section} 761.75(c)(4): - Hydrologic Conditions (40 CFR {section} 761.75[b][3]) - Monitoring Systems (40 CFR {sect

  10. Subpart W Quarterly Call January 3, 2013 EPA: Reid Rosnick (ORIA), Angelique Diaz (Region 8), Susan Stahle (OGC)

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Minerals Law Center) Industry Oscar Paulson (Kennecott), Katie Sweeney (National Mining Association), John Cash (Ur- Energy), Mike Thomas (?), John McCarthy (?), Bill Carney (Uranium One), Mike Griffin (Strata

  11. A comparison of spent fuel shipping cask response to 10 CFR 71 normal conditions and realistic hot day extremes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Manson, S.J.; Gianoulakis, S.E.

    1994-02-01

    The structural properties of spent nuclear fuel shipping containers vary as a function of the cask wall temperature. An analysis is performed to determine the effect of a realistic, though bounding, hot day environment on the thermal behavior of spent fuel shipping casks. These results are compared to those which develop under a steady-state application of the prescribed normal thermal conditions of 10CFR71. The completed analysis revealed that the majority of wall temperatures, for a wide variety of spent fuel shipping cask configurations, fall well below those predicted by using the steady-state application of the regulatory boundary conditions. It was found that maximum temperatures at the cask surface occasionally lie above temperatures predicted under the regulatory condition. This is due to the conservative assumptions present in the ambient conditions used. The analysis demonstrates that diurnal temperature variations which penetrate the cask wall have maxima substantially less than the corresponding temperatures obtained when applying the steady-state regulatory boundary conditions. Therefore, it is certain that vital cask components and the spent fuel itself will not exceed the temperatures calculated by use of the steady-state interpretation of the 10CFR71 normal conditions.

  12. Final safety evaluation report related to the certification of the System 80{sup +} design (Docket No. 52-002). Volume 1, Chapters 1--14

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-08-01

    This final safety evaluation report (FSER) documents the technical review of the System 80+ standard design by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff. The application for the System 80+ design was submitted by Combustion Engineering, Inc., now Asea Brown Boveri-Combustion Engineering (ABB-CE) as an application for design approval and subsequent design certification pursuant to 10 CFR {section} 52.45. System 80+ is a pressurized water reactor with a rated power of 3914 megawatts thermal (MWt) and a design power of 3992 MWt at which accidents are analyzed. Many features of the System 80+ are similar to those of Abb-CE`s System 80 design from which it evolved. Unique features of the System 80+ design included: a large spherical, steel containment; an in-containment refueling water storage tank; a reactor cavity flooding system, hydrogen ignitors, and a safety depressurization system for severe accident mitigation; a combustion gas turbine for an alternate ac source; and an advanced digitally based control room. On the basis of its evaluation and independent analyses, the NRC staff concludes that ABB-CE`s application for design certification meets the requirements of Subpart B of 10 CFR Part 52 that are applicable and technically relevant to the System 80+ standard design. This document, Volume 1, contains Chapters 1 through 14 of this report.

  13. RCRA Assessment Plan for Single-Shell Tank Waste Management Area TX-TY

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Horton, Duane G.

    2007-03-26

    WMA TX-TY contains underground, single-shell tanks that were used to store liquid waste that contained chemicals and radionuclides. Most of the liquid has been removed, and the remaining waste is regulated under the RCRA as modi¬fied in 40 CFR Part 265, Subpart F and Washington State’s Hazardous Waste Management Act . WMA TX-TY was placed in assessment monitoring in 1993 because of elevated specific conductance. A groundwater quality assessment plan was written in 1993 describing the monitoring activities to be used in deciding whether WMA TX-TY had affected groundwater. That plan was updated in 2001 for continued RCRA groundwater quality assessment as required by 40 CFR 265.93 (d)(7). This document further updates the assessment plan for WMA TX-TY by including (1) information obtained from ten new wells installed at the WMA after 1999 and (2) information from routine quarterly groundwater monitoring during the last five years. Also, this plan describes activities for continuing the groundwater assessment at WMA TX TY.

  14. Compliance status report for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-03-31

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for the disposition of transuranic (TRU) waste generated through national defense-related activities. Approximately 53,700 m{sup 2} of these wastes have been generated and are currently stored at government defense installations across the country. The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), located in southeastern New Mexico, has been sited and constructed to meet the criteria established by the scientific and regulatory community for the safe, long-term disposal of TRU and TRU-mixed wastes. This Compliance Status Report (CSR) provides an assessment of the progress of the WIPP Program toward compliance with long-term disposal regulations, set forth in Title 40 CFR 191 (EPA, 1993a), Subparts B and C, and Title 40 CFR {section}268.6 (EPA, 1993b), in order to focus on-going and future experimental and engineering activities. The CSR attempts to identify issues associated with the performance of the WIPP as a long-term repository and to focus on the resolution of these issues. This report will serve as a tool to focus project resources on the areas necessary to ensure complete, accurate, and timely submittal of the compliance application. This document is not intended to constitute a statement of compliance or a demonstration of compliance.

  15. Final safety evaluation report related to the certification of the System 80{sup +} design (Docket No. 52-002). Volume 2, Chapters 15--22 and appendices

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-08-01

    This final safety evaluation report (FSER) documents the technical review of the System 80+ standard design by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff. The application for the system 80+ design was submitted by Combustion Engineering, Inc., now Asea Brown Boveri-Combustion Engineering (ABB-CE) as an application for design approval and subsequent design certification pursuant to 10 CFR {section} 52.45. System 80+ is a pressurized water reactor with a rated power of 3914 megawatts thermal (MWt) and a design power of 3992 MWt at which accidents are analyzed. Many features of the System 80+ are similar to those of ABB-CE`s System 80 design from which it evolved. Unique features of the System 80+ design include: a large spherical, steel containment; an in-containment refueling water storage tank; a reactor cavity flooding system, hydrogen ignitors and a safety depressurization system for severe accident mitigation; a combustion gas turbine for an alternate ac source; and an advanced digitally based control room. On the basis of its evaluation and independent analyses, the NRC staff concludes that ABB-CE`s application for design certification meets the requirements of Subpart B of 10 CFR Part 52 that are applicable and technically relevant to the System 80+ standard design. This document, Volume 2, contains Chapters 15 through 22 and Appendices A through E.

  16. Uncertainty and sensitivity analyses for gas and brine migration at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, May 1992

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Helton, J.C. [Arizona State Univ., Tempe, AZ (United States); Bean, J.E. [New Mexico Engineering Research Inst., Albuquerque, NM (United States); Butcher, B.M. [Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (United States); Garner, J.W.; Vaughn, P. [Applied Physics, Inc., Albuquerque, NM (United States); Schreiber, J.D. [Science Applications International Corp., Albuquerque, NM (United States); Swift, P.N. [Tech Reps, Inc., Albuquerque, NM (United States)

    1993-08-01

    Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques based on Latin hypercube sampling, partial correlation analysis, stepwise regression analysis and examination of scatterplots are used in conjunction with the BRAGFLO model to examine two phase flow (i.e., gas and brine) at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), which is being developed by the US Department of Energy as a disposal facility for transuranic waste. The analyses consider either a single waste panel or the entire repository in conjunction with the following cases: (1) fully consolidated shaft, (2) system of shaft seals with panel seals, and (3) single shaft seal without panel seals. The purpose of this analysis is to develop insights on factors that are potentially important in showing compliance with applicable regulations of the US Environmental Protection Agency (i.e., 40 CFR 191, Subpart B; 40 CFR 268). The primary topics investigated are (1) gas production due to corrosion of steel, (2) gas production due to microbial degradation of cellulosics, (3) gas migration into anhydrite marker beds in the Salado Formation, (4) gas migration through a system of shaft seals to overlying strata, and (5) gas migration through a single shaft seal to overlying strata. Important variables identified in the analyses include initial brine saturation of the waste, stoichiometric terms for corrosion of steel and microbial degradation of cellulosics, gas barrier pressure in the anhydrite marker beds, shaft seal permeability, and panel seal permeability.

  17. Programmer`s manual for CAMCON: Compliance Assessment Methodology CONtroller

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rechard, R.P. [Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (United States); Gilkey, A.P.; Rudeen, D.K.; Byle, K.A. [New Mexico Engineering Research Inst., Albuquerque, NM (United States); Iuzzolino, H.J. [Geo-Centers, Inc., Albuquerque, NM (United States)

    1993-05-01

    CAMCON, the Compliance Assessment Methodology CONtroller, is an analysis system that assists in assessing the compliance of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) with applicable long-term regulations of the US Environmental Protection Agency, including Subpart B of the Environmental Standards for the Management and Disposal of spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes, 40 CFR 191 and 40CFR268.6, which is the portion of the Land Disposal Restrictions implementing the Resource, Conservative, and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended that states the conditions for disposal of hazardous chemical wastes. This manual provides an architectural overview of the CAMCON system. Furthermore this manual presents guidelines and presents suggestions for programmers developing the many different types of software necessary to investigate various events and physical processes of the WIPP. These guidelines include user interface requirements, minimum quality assurance requirements, coding style suggestions, and the use of numerous software libraries developed specifically for or adapted for the CAMCON system.

  18. LLNL NESHAPs, 1993 annual report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Harrach, R.J.; Surano, K.A.; Biermann, A.H.; Gouveia, F.J.; Fields, B.C.; Tate, P.J.

    1994-06-01

    The standard defined in NESHAPSs CFR Part 61.92 limits the emission of radionuclides to the ambient air from DOE facilities to those that would cause any member of the public to receive in any year an effective dose equivalent of 10 mrem. In August 1993 DOE and EPA signed a Federal Facility Compliance Agreement which established a schedule of work for LLNL to perform to demonstrate compliance with NESHAPs, 40 CFR part 61, Subpart H. The progress in LLNL`s NESHAPs program - evaluations of all emission points for the Livermore site and Site 300, of collective EDEs for populations within 80 km of each site, status in reguard to continuous monitoring requirements and periodic confirmatory measurements, improvements in the sampling and monitoring systems and progress on a NESHAPs quality assurance program - is described in this annual report. In April 1994 the EPA notified DOE and LLNL that all requirements of the FFCA had been met, and that LLNL was in compliance with the NESHAPs regulations.

  19. Hanford Site radionuclide national emission standards for hazardous ari pollutants registered and and unregistered stack (powered exhaust) source assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Davis, W.E.

    1995-12-01

    On February 3, 1993, US DOE Richland Operations Office received a Compliance Order and Information Request from the Director of the Air and Toxics Div. of US EPA, Region X. The compliance order requires the Richland Operations Office to evaluate all radionuclide emission points at the Hanford site to determine which are subject to the continuous emission measurement requirements in Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 61, Subpart H, and to continuously measure radionuclide emissions in accordance with 40 CFR 61.93. The Information Request required The provision of a written compliance plan to meet the requirements of the compliance order. A compliance plan was submitted to EPA, Region X, on April 30, 1993. It set as one of the milestones, the complete assessment of the Hanford Site 84 stacks registered with the Washington State Department of Health, by December 17, 1993. This milestone was accomplished. The compliance plan also called for reaching a Federal Facility Compliance Agreement; this was reached on February 7, 1994, between DOE Richland Operations and EPA, Region X. The milestone to assess the unregistered stacks (powered exhaust) by August 31, 1994, was met. This update presents assessments for 72 registered and 22 unregistered stacks with potential emissions > 0.1 mrem/yr.

  20. Preliminary performance assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1992. Volume 2, Technical basis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-12-01

    Before disposing of transuranic radioactive waste in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), the United States Department of Energy (DOE) must evaluate compliance with applicable long-term regulations of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Sandia National Laboratories is conducting iterative performance assessments (PAs) of the WIPP for the DOE to provide interim guidance while preparing for a final compliance evaluation. This volume, Volume 2, contains the technical basis for the 1992 PA. Specifically, it describes the conceptual basis for consequence modeling and the PA methodology, including the selection of scenarios for analysis, the determination of scenario probabilities, and the estimation of scenario consequences using a Monte Carlo technique and a linked system of computational models. Additional information about the 1992 PA is provided in other volumes. Volume I contains an overview of WIPP PA and results of a preliminary comparison with the long-term requirements of the EPA`s Environmental Protection Standards for Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes (40 CFR 191, Subpart B). Volume 3 contains the reference data base and values for input parameters used in consequence and probability modeling. Volume 4 contains uncertainty and sensitivity analyses related to the preliminary comparison with 40 CFR 191B. Volume 5 contains uncertainty and sensitivity analyses of gas and brine migration for undisturbed performance. Finally, guidance derived from the entire 1992 PA is presented in Volume 6.

  1. RCRA Assessment Plan for Single-Shell Tank Waste Management Area B-BX-BY at the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Narbutovskih, Susan M.

    2006-09-29

    This document was prepared as a groundwater quality assessment plan revision for the single-shell tank systems in Waste Management Area B-BX-BY at the Hanford Site. Groundwater monitoring is conducted at this facility in accordance with 40 CFR Part 265, Subpart F. In FY 1996, the groundwater monitoring program was changed from detection-level indicator evaluation to a groundwater quality assessment program when elevated specific conductance in downgradient monitoring well 299 E33-32 was confirmed by verification sampling. During the course of the ensuing investigation, elevated technetium-99 and nitrate were observed above the drinking water standard at well 299-E33-41, a well located between 241-B and 241-BX Tank Farms. Earlier observations of the groundwater contamination and tank farm leak occurrences combined with a qualitative analysis of possible solutions, led to the conclusion that waste from the waste management area had entered the groundwater and were observed in this well. Based on 40 CFR 265.93 [d] paragraph (7), the owner-operator must continue to make the minimum required determinations of contaminant level and rate/extent of migrations on a quarterly basis until final facility closure. These continued determinations are required because the groundwater quality assessment was implemented prior to final closure of the facility.

  2. Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for the Hanford Site Calendar year 1998

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DIEDIKER, L.P.

    1999-06-15

    This report documents radionuclide air emissions from the Hanford Site in I998 and the resulting effective dose equivalent to the maximally exposed individual (MEI) member of the public. The report has been prepared in accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR SI), Subpart H, ''National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities,'' and with the Washington Administrative Code Chapter 246-247, Radiation Protection--Air Emissions. The federal regulations in 40 CFR 61, Subpart H; require the measurement and reporting of radionuclides emitted from Department of Energy facilities and the resulting offsite dose from those emissions. A standard of 10 mrem/yr effective dose equivalent (EDE) is imposed on them. The EDE to the MEI due to routine emissions in 1998 from Hanford Site point sources was 1.3 E-02 mrem (1.3 E-04 mSv), which is 0.13 percent of the federal standard. Chapter 246-247 of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) requires the reporting of radionuclide emissions from all Department of Energy Hanford Site sources. The state has adopted into these regulations the 40 CFR 61 standard of 10 mrem/yr EDE. The EDE to the MEI attributable to diffuse and fugitive radionuclide air emissions from the Hanford Site in 1998 was 2.5 E-02 mrem (2.5 E-04 mSv). This dose added to the dose from point sources gives a total for all sources of 3.8 E-02 mrem/yr (3.8 E-04 mSv) EDE, which is 0.38 percent of the 10 mrem/yr standard. An unplanned release on August 26, 1998, in the 300 Area of the Hanford Site resulted in a potential dose of 4.1 E-02 mrem to a hypothetical individual at the nearest point of public access to that area. This hypothetical individual was not the MEI since the wind direction on the day of the release was away from the MEI residence. The potential dose from the unplanned event was similar in magnitude to that from routine releases during 1998. Were the release from this unplanned event combined with routine releases, the total dose would be less than 1 percent ofthe 10 mrem/yr standard.

  3. Hanford Site Air Operating Permit Application Supplemental Information [Sec 1 Thru 5] Vol 1 Thru 3 Appendices A Thru C

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CURN, B.L.

    2000-05-01

    This report documents radionuclide air emissions from the Hanford Site in 1998 and the resulting effective dose equivalent to the maximally exposed individual (MEI) member of the public. The report has been prepared in accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR 61), Subpart H: ''National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities,'' and with the Washington Administrative Code Chapter 246247, Radiation Protection - Air Emissions. The federal regulations in 40 CFR 61, Subpart H, require the measurement and reporting of radionuclides emitted from Department of Energy facilities and the resulting offsite dose from those emissions. A standard of 10 mrem/yr effective dose equivalent (EDE) is imposed on them. The EDE to the MEI due to routine emissions in 1998 from Hanford Site point sources was 1.3 E-02 mrem (1.3 E-04 mSv). which is 0.13 percent of the federal standard. Chapter 246-247 of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) requires the reporting of radionuclide emissions from all Department of Energy Hanford Site sources. The state has adopted into these regulations the 40 CFR 61 standard of 10 mrem/yr EDE. The EDE to the MEI attributable to diffuse and fugitive radionuclide air emissions from the Hanford Site in 1998 was 2.5 E-02 mrem (2.S E-04 mSv). This dose added to the dose from point sources gives a total for all sources of 3.8 E-02 mrem/yr (3.8 E-04 mSv) EDE. which is 0.38 percent of the 10 mrem/yr standard. An unplanned release on August 26, 1998, in the 300 Area of the Hanford Site resulted in a potential dose of 4.1 E-02 mrem to a hypothetical individual at the nearest point of public access to that area. This hypothetical individual was not the MEI since the wind direction on the day of the release was away from the MEI residence. The potential dose from the unplanned event was similar in magnitude to that from routine releases during 1998. Were the release from this unplanned event combined with routine releases, the total dose would be less than 1 percent of the 10 mrem/yr standard.

  4. Tony Nesky To Subject UPLOAD C:\\Users\\ANesky\\Desktop\\June14search\\INQUIRY

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    to uranium mills: 1. Radon Emission Standards for Operating Uranium Mill Tailings (NESHAP Subpart W.) 2

  5. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Groundwater Protection Management Program Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Washington Regulatory and Environmental Services

    2005-07-01

    The DOE established the Groundwater Monitoring Program (GMP) (WP 02-1) to monitor groundwater resources at WIPP. In the past, the GMP was conducted to establish background data of existing conditions of groundwater quality and quantity in the WIPP vicinity, and to develop and maintain a water quality database as required by regulation. Today the GMP is conducted consistent with 204.1.500 NMAC (New MexicoAdministrative Code), "Adoption of 40 CFR [Code of Federal Regulations] Part 264,"specifically 40 CFR §264.90 through §264.101. These sections of 20.4.1 NMAC provide guidance for detection monitoring of groundwater that is, or could be, affected by waste management activities at WIPP. Detection monitoring at WIPP is designed to detect contaminants in the groundwater long before the general population is exposed. Early detection will allow cleanup efforts to be accomplished before any exposure to the general population can occur. Title 40 CFR Part 264, Subpart F, stipulates minimum requirements of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (42 United States Code [U.S.C.] §6901 et seq.) (RCRA) groundwater monitoring programs including the number and location of monitoring wells; sampling and reporting schedules; analytical methods and accuracy requirements; monitoring parameters; and statistical treatment of monitoring data. This document outlines how WIPP intends to protect and preserve groundwater within the WIPP Land Withdrawal Area (WLWA). Groundwater protection is just one aspect of the WIPP environmental protection effort. An overview of the entire environmental protection effort can be found in DOE/WIPP 99-2194, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Environmental Monitoring Plan. The WIPP GMP is designed to statistically determine if any changes are occurring in groundwater characteristics within and surrounding the WIPP facility. If a change is noted, the cause will then be determined and the appropriate corrective action(s) initiated.

  6. Pressure Safety Program Implementation at ORNL

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lower, Mark; Etheridge, Tom; Oland, C. Barry

    2013-01-01

    The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is a US Department of Energy (DOE) facility that is managed by UT-Battelle, LLC. In February 2006, DOE promulgated worker safety and health regulations to govern contractor activities at DOE sites. These regulations, which are provided in 10 CFR 851, Worker Safety and Health Program, establish requirements for worker safety and health program that reduce or prevent occupational injuries, illnesses, and accidental losses by providing DOE contractors and their workers with safe and healthful workplaces at DOE sites. The regulations state that contractors must achieve compliance no later than May 25, 2007. According to 10 CFR 851, Subpart C, Specific Program Requirements, contractors must have a structured approach to their worker safety and health programs that at a minimum includes provisions for pressure safety. In implementing the structured approach for pressure safety, contractors must establish safety policies and procedures to ensure that pressure systems are designed, fabricated, tested, inspected, maintained, repaired, and operated by trained, qualified personnel in accordance with applicable sound engineering principles. In addition, contractors must ensure that all pressure vessels, boilers, air receivers, and supporting piping systems conform to (1) applicable American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (2004) Sections I through XII, including applicable code cases; (2) applicable ASME B31 piping codes; and (3) the strictest applicable state and local codes. When national consensus codes are not applicable because of pressure range, vessel geometry, use of special materials, etc., contractors must implement measures to provide equivalent protection and ensure a level of safety greater than or equal to the level of protection afforded by the ASME or applicable state or local codes. This report documents the work performed to address legacy pressure vessel deficiencies and comply with pressure safety requirements in 10 CFR 851. It also describes actions taken to develop and implement ORNL’s Pressure Safety Program.

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

    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: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustments (BillionProvedTravel TravelChallengesOhio2014: FederalofMakeCybersecurity for EnergyEnforcement10 CFR

  8. A Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 191 Evaluation of Buried Transuranic Waste at the Nevada Test Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    G. J. Shott, V. Yucel, L. Desotell

    2008-04-01

    In 1986, 21 m{sup 3} of transuranic (TRU) waste was inadvertently buried in a shallow land burial trench at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site on the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office is considered five options for management of the buried TRU waste. One option is to leave the waste in-place if the disposal can meet the requirements of Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 191, 'Environmental Radiation Protection Standard for Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level, and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes'. This paper describes analyses that assess the likelihood that TRU waste in shallow land burial can meet the 40 CFR 191 standards for a geologic repository. The simulated probability of the cumulative release exceeding 1 and 10 times the 40 CFR 191.13 containment requirements is estimated to be 0.009 and less than 0.0001, respectively. The cumulative release is most sensitive to the number of groundwater withdrawal wells drilled through the disposal trench. The mean total effective dose equivalent for a member of the public is estimated to reach a maximum of 0.014 milliSievert (mSv) at 10,000 years, or approximately 10 percent of the 0.15 mSv 40 CFR 191.15 individual protection requirement. The dose is predominantly from inhalation of short-lived Rn-222 progeny in air produced by low-level waste disposed in the same trench. The transuranic radionuclide released in greatest amounts, Pu-239, contributes only 0.4 percent of the dose. The member of public dose is most sensitive to the U-234 inventory and the radon emanation coefficient. Reasonable assurance of compliance with the Subpart C groundwater protection standard is provided by site characterization data and hydrologic processes modeling which support a conclusion of no groundwater pathway within 10,000 years. Limited quantities of transuranic waste in a shallow land burial trench at the NTS can meet the requirements of 40 CFR 191.

  9. A Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 191 Evaluation of Buried Transuranic Waste at the Nevada Test Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shott, G.J.; Yucel, V.; Desotell, L. [National Security Technologies, LLC, Las Vegas, NV (United States); Pyles, G.; Carilli, J. [U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, Las Vegas, NV (United States)

    2008-07-01

    In 1986, 21 m{sup 3} of transuranic (TRU) waste was inadvertently buried in a shallow land burial trench at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site on the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office is considered five options for management of the buried TRU waste. One option is to leave the waste in-place if the disposal can meet the requirements of Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 191, 'Environmental Radiation Protection Standard for Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level, and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes'. This paper describes analyses that assess the likelihood that TRU waste in shallow land burial can meet the 40 CFR 191 standards for a geologic repository. The simulated probability of the cumulative release exceeding 1 and 10 times the 40 CFR 191.13 containment requirements is estimated to be 0.009 and less than 0.0001, respectively. The cumulative release is most sensitive to the number of groundwater withdrawal wells drilled through the disposal trench. The mean total effective dose equivalent for a member of the public is estimated to reach a maximum of 0.014 milli-Sievert (mSv) at 10,000 years, or approximately 10 percent of the 0.15 mSv 40 CFR 191.15 individual protection requirement. The dose is predominantly from inhalation of short-lived Rn-222 progeny in air produced by low-level waste disposed in the same trench. The transuranic radionuclide released in greatest amounts, Pu-239, contributes only 0.4 percent of the dose. The member of public dose is most sensitive to the U-234 inventory and the radon emanation coefficient. Reasonable assurance of compliance with the Subpart C groundwater protection standard is provided by site characterization data and hydrologic processes modeling which support a conclusion of no groundwater pathway within 10,000 years. Limited quantities of transuranic waste in a shallow land burial trench at the NTS can meet the requirements of 40 CFR 191. (authors)

  10. Combustion characteristics of indolene-methanol blends in a CFR spark ignition engine

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Patel, K.S.

    1984-01-01

    A study of the combustion characteristics of indolene, methanol and indolene-methanol blends has been completed. The investigation included theoretical and experimental parts. In the theoretical part, turbulent burning velocity, laminar burning velocity, and mass burning velocity are computed. The experimental part was completed on a CFR spark ignition engine using indolene, methanol, and indolene-methanol blends. Methanol concentration was varied from 0 to 100 vol.%. For each blend, compression ratio was varied from 5.0 to KLCR (Knock Limited Compression Ratio). The results of theoretical analysis showed that the laminar burning velocity increased as the vol.% of methanol increased. The experimental results indicated that adding methanol to indolene, MBT (Minimum advanced for Best Torque) spark advance, volumetric efficiency, brake mean effective pressure are decreased while break specific fuel consumption, brake thermal efficiency an KLCR are increased. The theoretical and experimental results showed that adding methanol to indolene, apparent flame speed, turbulent burning velocity and the ratio of turbulent to laminar burning velocity increased. Pure methanol produced the highest turbulent burning velocity. It is concluded that methanol has considerable effect on the combustion characteristics of spark ignition engine.

  11. Draft Title 40 CFR 191 compliance certification application for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Volume 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-03-31

    The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) is a research and development facility for the demonstration of the permanent isolation of transuranic radioactive wastes in a geologic formation. The facility was constructed in southeastern New Mexico in a manner intended to meet criteria established by the scientific and regulatory community for the safe, long-term disposal of transuranic wastes. The US Department of Energy (DOE) is preparing an application to demonstrate compliance with the requirements outlined in Title 40, Part 191 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) for the permanent disposal of transuranic wastes. As mandated by the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Land Withdrawal Act of 1992, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must evaluate this compliance application and provide a determination regarding compliance with the requirements within one year of receiving a complete application. Because the WIPP is a very complex program, the DOE has planned to submit the application as a draft in two parts. This strategy will allow for the DOE and the EPA to begin technical discussions on critical WIPP issues before the one-year compliance determination period begins. This report is the first of these two draft submittals.

  12. CY08 TTR_ASER.indb

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

    Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) 40 CFR 110 Discharge of Oil 40 CFR 112 Oil Pollution Prevention 40 CFR 122 EPA Administered Permit Programs: Th e National...

  13. CY10 ASER TTR_cover final.indd

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

    Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) 40 CFR 110 Discharge of Oil 40 CFR 112 Oil Pollution Prevention 40 CFR 122 EPA Administered Permit Programs: e National Pollutant...

  14. CY09 ASER TTR Cover.indd

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

    Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) 40 CFR 110 Discharge of Oil 40 CFR 112 Oil Pollution Prevention 40 CFR 122 EPA Administered Permit Programs: e National Pollutant...

  15. Part VII: Section J - List of Documents, Exhibits, and Other...

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

    Right -To-Know 40 CFR 401 - General Provisions - Effluent Guideline and Standards 40 CFR 403 - General Pretreatment Regulations for Existing and New Sources of Pollution 40 CFR...

  16. Environmental Protection Department LLNL NESHAPs 2007 Annual Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bertoldo, N A; Larson, J M; Wilson, K R

    2008-06-25

    This annual report is prepared pursuant to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs; Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 61, Subpart H). Subpart H governs radionuclide emissions to air from U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. NESHAPs limits the emission of radionuclides to the ambient air from DOE facilities to levels resulting in an annual effective dose equivalent (EDE) of 10 mrem (100 {micro}Sv) to any member of the public. The EDEs for the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) site-wide maximally exposed members of the public from operations in 2007 are summarized here. Livermore site: 0.0031 mrem (0.031 {micro}Sv) (42% from point source emissions, 58% from diffuse source emissions). The point source emissions include gaseous tritium modeled as tritiated water vapor as directed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region IX; the resulting dose is used for compliance purposes. Site 300: 0.0035 mrem (0.035 {micro}Sv) (90% from point source emissions, 10% from diffuse source emissions). The EDEs were calculated using the U.S. EPA-approved CAP88-PC air dispersion/dose-assessment model, except for doses for two diffuse sources that were estimated using measured radionuclide concentrations and dose calculations. Specific inputs to CAP88-PC for the modeled sources included site-specific meteorological data and source emissions data, the latter variously based on continuous stack effluent monitoring data, stack flow or other release-rate information, ambient air monitoring data, and facility knowledge.

  17. Potential Offsite Radiological Doses Estimated for the Proposed Divine Strake Experiment, Nevada Test Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ron Warren

    2006-12-01

    An assessment of the potential radiation dose that residents offsite of the Nevada Test Site (NTS) might receive from the proposed Divine Strake experiment was made to determine compliance with Subpart H of Part 61 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities. The Divine Strake experiment, proposed by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, consists of a detonation of 700 tons of heavy ammonium nitrate fuel oil-emulsion above the U16b Tunnel complex in Area 16 of the NTS. Both natural radionuclides suspended, and historic fallout radionuclides resuspended from the detonation, have potential to be transported outside the NTS boundary by wind. They may, therefore, contribute radiological dose to the public. Subpart H states ''Emissions of radionuclides to the ambient air from Department of Energy facilities shall not exceed those amounts that would cause any member of the public to receive in any year an effective dose equivalent of 10 mrem/yr'' (Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 61.92) where mrem/yr is millirem per year. Furthermore, application for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approval of construction of a new source or modification of an existing source is required if the effective dose equivalent, caused by all emissions from the new construction or modification, is greater than or equal to 0.1 mrem/yr (40 CFR 61.96). In accordance with Section 61.93, a dose assessment was conducted with the computer model CAP88-PC, Version 3.0. In addition to this model, a dose assessment was also conducted by the National Atmospheric Release Advisory Center (NARAC) at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. This modeling was conducted to obtain dose estimates from a model designed for acute releases and which addresses terrain effects and uses meteorology from multiple locations. Potential radiation dose to a hypothetical maximally exposed individual at the closest NTS boundary to the proposed Divine Strake experiment, as estimated by the CAP88-PC model, was 0.005 mrem with wind blowing directly towards that location. Boundary dose, as modeled by NARAC, ranged from about 0.006 to 0.007 mrem. Potential doses to actual offsite populated locations were generally two to five times lower still, or about 40 to 100 times lower then the 0.1 mrem level at which EPA approval is required pursuant to Section 61.96.

  18. Benchmarking of RESRAD-OFFSITE : transition from RESRAD (onsite) toRESRAD-OFFSITE and comparison of the RESRAD-OFFSITE predictions with peercodes.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Yu, C.; Gnanapragasam, E.; Cheng, J.-J.; Biwer, B.

    2006-05-22

    The main purpose of this report is to document the benchmarking results and verification of the RESRAD-OFFSITE code as part of the quality assurance requirements of the RESRAD development program. This documentation will enable the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its contractors, and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and its licensees and other stakeholders to use the quality-assured version of the code to perform dose analysis in a risk-informed and technically defensible manner to demonstrate compliance with the NRC's License Termination Rule, Title 10, Part 20, Subpart E, of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 20, Subpart E); DOE's 10 CFR Part 834, Order 5400.5, ''Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment''; and other Federal and State regulatory requirements as appropriate. The other purpose of this report is to document the differences and similarities between the RESRAD (onsite) and RESRAD-OFFSITE codes so that users (dose analysts and risk assessors) can make a smooth transition from use of the RESRAD (onsite) code to use of the RESRAD-OFFSITE code for performing both onsite and offsite dose analyses. The evolution of the RESRAD-OFFSITE code from the RESRAD (onsite) code is described in Chapter 1 to help the dose analyst and risk assessor make a smooth conceptual transition from the use of one code to that of the other. Chapter 2 provides a comparison of the predictions of RESRAD (onsite) and RESRAD-OFFSITE for an onsite exposure scenario. Chapter 3 documents the results of benchmarking RESRAD-OFFSITE's atmospheric transport and dispersion submodel against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) CAP88-PC (Clean Air Act Assessment Package-1988) and ISCLT3 (Industrial Source Complex-Long Term) models. Chapter 4 documents the comparison results of the predictions of the RESRAD-OFFSITE code and its submodels with the predictions of peer models. This report was prepared by Argonne National Laboratory's (Argonne's) Environmental Science Division. This work is jointly sponsored by the NRC's Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research and DOE's Office of Environment, Safety and Health and Office of Environmental Management. The approaches and or methods described in this report are provided for information only. Use of product or trade names is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement either by DOE, the NRC, or Argonne.

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  1. Results of Phase I groundwater quality assessment for single-shell tank waste management Area S-SX at the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, V.G.; Chou, C.J.

    1998-01-01

    Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) conducted a Phase I, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) groundwater quality assessment for the Richland Field Office of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE-RL), in accordance with the Federal Facility Compliance Agreement. The purpose of the investigation was to determine if the Single-Shell Tank Waste Management Area (WMA) S-SX has impacted groundwater quality. The WMA is located in the southern portion of the 200 West Area of the Hanford Site and consists of the 241-S and 241-SX tank farms and ancillary waste systems. The unit is regulated under RCRA interim-status regulations (40 CFR 265, Subpart F) and was placed in assessment groundwater monitoring (40 CFR 265.93 [d]) in August 1996 because of elevated specific conductance and technetium-99, a non-RCRA co-contaminant, in downgradient monitoring wells. Major findings of the assessment are summarized below: (1) Distribution patterns for radionuclides and RCRA/dangerous waste constituents indicate WMA S-SX has contributed to groundwater contamination observed in downgradient monitoring wells. (2) Drinking water standards for nitrate and technetium-99 are currently exceeded in one RCRA-compliant well (299-W22-46) located at the southeastern comer of the SX tank farm. (3) Technetium-99, nitrate, and chromium concentrations in downgradient well 299-W22-46 (the well with the highest current concentrations) appear to be declining after reaching maximum concentrations in May 1997. (4) Cesium-137 and strontium-90, major constituents of concern in single-shell tank waste, were not detected in any of the RCRA-compliant wells in the WMA network, including the well with the highest current technetium-99 concentrations (299-W22-46). (5) Low but detectable strontium-90 and cesium-137 were found in one old well (2-W23-7), located inside and between the S and SX tank farms.

  2. Compilation of RCRA closure plan conditions applicable to boilers and industrial furnaces at cement plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Raymond, A.N.

    1998-12-31

    A prudent approach to closure plan development will assist preparers of closure plans to ensure that a cement kiln BIF unit and associated Resources conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) units are effectively closed in a manner that minimizes potential threats to human health and the environment, as well as facilitating closure in an economical and timely manner. Cement kilns burning hazardous waste-derived-fuel (HWDF) must comply with the general facility standards of Subpart G Closure and Post-Closure requirements of 40 CFR parts 264 or 265 in addition to the RCRA Part b permitting requirements of 40 CFR parts 270.13 and 270.22 (e) and (f). As a result, approved closure plans for BIF facilities (or individual BIF units) will contain general and site-specific permit conditions that will mandate numerous closure activities be conducted to successfully implement the partial or final closure of a permitted or interim status BIF unit or facility. Currently, a scarce amount of published information is available to the cement industry in the form of agency guidance documents that would assist facilities with BIF unit closures. A review of seven approved or implemented closure plans revealed significant differences between plans approved recently versus a few years ago as well as observed differences in acceptable closure criteria between EPA regions and various states agencies. The intent of this paper is to first familiarize readers with general closure plan requirements, followed by a detailed discussion of closure requirements that are pertinent to BIF unit facilities. Comparisons are presented to provide an overview of typical components of BIF unit closure plans.

  3. Dose assessment from potential radionuclide emissions from stacks on the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Davis, W.E.; Barnett, J.M.

    1995-04-01

    On February 3, 1993, the US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office (RL), received a Compliance Order and Information Request from the Director of the Air and Toxics Division of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 10. The Compliance Order required RL to (1) evaluate all radionuclide emission points at the Hanford Site to determine which points are subject to the continuous emission sampling requirements of Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 61 (40 CFR 61), Subpart H, and (2) continuously sample radionuclide emissions in accordance with requirements in 40 CFR 61.93. The Information Request required RL to provide a written Compliance Plan to meet the requirements of the Compliance Order. A Compliance Plan was submitted to EPA, Region 10, on April 30, 1993. The Compliance Plan specified that a dose assessment would be performed for 84 Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) stacks registered with the Washington State Department of Health on the Hanford Site. Any stack identified in the assessment as having potential emissions to cause an effective dose equivalent (EDE) to a maximum exposed individual (MEI) greater than 0.1 mrem y{sup {minus}1} must have a compliant sampling system. In addition, a Federal Facility Compliance Agreement (FFCA) was signed on. February 7, 1994. The FFCA required that all unregistered stacks on the Hanford Site be assessed. This requirement increased the number of stacks to be assessed to 123 stacks. Six methods for performing the assessments are described. An initial assessment using only the HEPA filtration factor for back calculations identified 32 stacks that would have emissions which would cause an EDE to the MEI greater than 0.1 mrem y{sup {minus}1}. When the other methods were applied the number was reduced to 20 stacks. The paper discusses reasons for these overestimates.

  4. No-migration determination. Annual report, September 1, 1993--August 31, 1994

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-11-01

    This report fulfills the annual reporting requirement as specified in the Conditional No-Migration Determination (NMD) for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), published in the Federal Register on November 14, 1990 (EPA, 1990a). This report covers the project activities, programs, and data obtained during the period September 1, 1993, through August 31, 1994, to support compliance with the NMD`. In the NMD, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concluded that the DOE had demonstrated, to a reasonable degree of certainty, that hazardous constituents will not migrate from the WIPP disposal unit during the test phase of the project, and that the DOE had otherwise met the requirements of 40 CFR Part 268.6, Petitions to Allow Land Disposal of a Waste Prohibited Under Subpart C of Part 268 (EPA, 1986a), for the WIPP facility. By granting the NMD, the EPA has allowed the DOE to temporarily manage defense-generated transuranic (TRU) mixed wastes, some of which are prohibited from land disposal by Title 40 CFR Part 268, Land Disposal Restrictions (EPA, 1986a), at the WIPP facility for the purposes of testing and experimentation for a period not to exceed 10 years. In granting the NMD, the EPA imposed several conditions on the management of the experimental waste used during the WIPP test phase. One of these conditions is that the DOE submit annual reports to the EPA to demonstrate the WIPP`s compliance with the requirements of the NMD. In the proposed No-Migration Variance (EPA, 1990b) and the final NMD, the EPA defined the content and parameters that must be reported on an annual basis. These reporting requirements are summarized and are cross-referenced with the sections of the report that satisfy the respective requirement.

  5. Technical Letter Report Development of Flaw Size Distribution Tables Including Effects of Flaw Depth Sizing Errors for Draft 10CFR 50.61a (Alternate PTS Rule) JCN-N6398, Task 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Simonen, Fredric A.; Gosselin, Stephen R.; Doctor, Steven R.

    2013-04-22

    This document describes a new method to determine whether the flaws in a particular reactor pressure vessel are consistent with the assumptions regarding the number and sizes of flaws used in the analyses that formed the technical justification basis for the new voluntary alternative Pressurized Thermal Shock (PTS) rule (Draft 10 CFR 50.61a). The new methodology addresses concerns regarding prior methodology because ASME Code Section XI examinations do not detect all fabrication flaws, they have higher detection performance for some flaw types, and there are flaw sizing errors always present (e.g., significant oversizing of small flaws and systematic under sizing of larger flaws). The new methodology allows direct comparison of ASME Code Section XI examination results with values in the PTS draft rule Tables 2 and 3 in order to determine if the number and sizes of flaws detected by an ASME Code Section XI examination are consistent with those assumed in the probabilistic fracture mechanics calculations performed in support of the development of 10 CFR 50.61a.

  6. G

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Incrementally Funding Fixed-Price Actions References: FAR Subpart 15.4-Contract Pricing FAR Subpart 32.7-Contract Funding When is this Acquisition Letter (AL) effective? This AL is...

  7. Ethical Issues in Research with "Vulnerable" and "HardtoReach"

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Illinois at Chicago, University of

    are interdependentinterdependent · One can be vulnerable w/o being harmed or d ( d i )wronged (and vice versa) #12;2 Ways women (Subpart B) ADDITIONAL SAFEGUARDS? · handicapped persons · Prisoners (Subpart C) · Children

  8. Nevada Test Site National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Calendar Year 2008

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ronald Warren and Robert F. Grossman

    2009-06-30

    The Nevada Test Site (NTS) is operated by the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office. From 1951 through 1992, the NTS was the continental testing location for U.S. nuclear weapons. The release of radionuclides from NTS activities has been monitored since the initiation of atmospheric testing. Limitation to under-ground detonations after 1962 greatly reduced radiation exposure to the public surrounding the NTS. After nuclear testing ended in 1992, NTS radiation monitoring focused on detecting airborne radionuclides from historically contaminated soils. These radionuclides are derived from re-suspension of soil (primarily by winds) and emission of tritium-contaminated soil moisture through evapotranspiration. Low amounts of tritium were also emitted to air at the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF), an NTS support complex in the city of North Las Vegas. To protect the public from harmful levels of man-made radiation, the Clean Air Act, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) (Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 61 Subpart H) (CFR, 2008a) limits the release of radioactivity from a U.S. Department of Energy facility (e.g., the NTS) to 10 millirem per year (mrem/yr) effective dose equivalent to any member of the public. This limit does not include radiation not related to NTS activities. Unrelated doses could come from naturally occurring radioactive elements or from other man-made sources such as medical treatments. The NTS demonstrates compliance with the NESHAP limit by using environmental measurements of radionuclide air concentrations at critical receptor locations. This method was approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for use on the NTS in 2001 and has been the sole method used since 2005. Six locations on the NTS have been established to act as critical receptor locations to demonstrate compliance with the NESHAP limit. These locations are actually pseudo-critical receptor stations, because no member of the public actually resides at these onsite locations. Compliance is demonstrated if the measured annual average concentration of each detected radionuclide at each of these locations is less than the NESHAP Concentration Levels (CLs) for Environmental Compliance listed in 40 CFR 61, Appendix E, Table 2 (CFR, 2008a). At any one location, if multiple radionuclides are detected then compliance with NESHAP is demonstrated when the sum of the fractions (determined by dividing each radionuclide's concentration by its CL and then adding the fractions together) is less than 1.0. In 2008, the potential dose from radiological emissions to air, from both current and past NTS activities, at onsite compliance monitoring stations was a maximum of 1.9 mrem/yr; well below the 10 mrem/yr dose limit. Air sampling data collected at all six pseudo-critical receptor stations had average concentrations of radioactivity that were a fraction of the CL values listed in Table 2 in Appendix E of 40 CFR 61 (CFR, 2008a). Concentrations ranged from less than 1 percent to a maximum of 19 percent of the allowed NESHAP limit. Because the nearest member of the public resides approximately 20 kilometers (12 miles) from the NTS boundary, concentrations at this location would be only a small fraction of that measured on the NTS. Potential dose to the public from NLVF was also very low at 0.00006 mrem/yr; more than 160,000 times lower than the 10 mrem/yr limit.

  9. Microsoft Word - al94-19.doc

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    from the Secretary and under the authority of the Department of Energy Acquisition Regulation (DEAR) Subpart 901.301-70. ***...

  10. 1993 Annual PCB Document for Los Alamos National Laboratory EPA Region VI, January 1, 1993 through December 31, 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wechsler, R.J.; Sandoval, T.M.; Bryant, D.E.; Hupke, L.; Esquibel, L.

    1995-12-31

    This document, the {open_quotes}1993 Annual PCB Document for Los Alamos National Laboratory{close_quotes} was prepared to fulffill the requirements of the federal PCB (Polychlorinated Biphenyl) regulation: 40 CFR 761 Subpart J General Records and Reports. The PCB Management Program at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Environmental Protection Group, compiled this 1993 Annual PCB Document. The overall format generally follows the sequence of the applicable regulations. Subsection 1.2 cross references those regulatory requirements with the applicable Document Section. The scope of this document also includes status summaries of various aspects of LANL`s PCB Management Program. The intent of this approach to the Annual Document is to provide an overview of LANL`s PCB Management Program and to increase the usefulness of this document as a management tool. Section 2.0, {open_quotes}Status of the PCB Management Program{close_quotes}, discusses the use, generation of waste, and storage of PCBs at LANL. Section 3.0 is the 1993 Annual Document Log required by 761.180(a). This Section also discusses the PCB Management Program`s policies for reporting under those regulatory requirements. Sections 4.0 and 5.0 contain the 1993 Annual Records for off-site and on-site disposal as required by 761.180(b). There is a tab for each manifest and its associated continuation sheets, receipt letters, and certificates of disposal.

  11. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Campus Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2013

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Snyder, Sandra F.; Barnett, J. M.; Bisping, Lynn E.

    2014-06-01

    This report documents radionuclide air emissions that result in the highest effective dose equivalent (EDE) to a member of the public, referred to as the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The report has been prepared in compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), Subpart H, National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities and Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 246-247, Radiation Protection Air Emissions. The dose to the PNNL Site MEI due to routine major and minor point source emissions in 2013 from PNNL Site sources is 2E-05 mrem (2E-07 mSv) EDE. The dose from fugitive emissions (i.e., unmonitored sources) is 2E-6 mrem (2E-8 mSv) EDE. The dose from radon emissions is 1E-11 mrem (1E-13 mSv) EDE. No nonroutine emissions occurred in 2013. The total radiological dose for 2013 to the MEI from all PNNL Site radionuclide emissions, including fugitive emissions and radon, is 2E-5 mrem (2E-7 mSv) EDE, or 100,000 times smaller than the federal and state standard of 10 mrem/yr, to which the PNNL Site is in compliance

  12. Sequim Site Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2012

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Snyder, Sandra F.; Barnett, J. M.; Gervais, Todd L.

    2013-04-01

    This report is prepared to document compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), Subpart H, National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities and ashington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 246-247, Radiation Protection Air Emissions. This report meets the calendar year 2012 Sequim Site annual reporting requirement for its operations as a privately-owned facility as well as its federally-contracted status that began in October 2012. Compliance is indicated by comparing the estimated dose to the maximally exposed individual (MEI) with the 10 mrem/yr Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standard. The MSL contains only sources classified as fugitive emissions. Despite the fact that the regulations are intended for application to point source emissions, fugitive emissions are included with regard to complying with the EPA standard. The dose to the Sequim Site MEI due to routine operations in 2012 was 9E-06 mrem (9E-08 mSv). No non-routine emissions occurred in 2012. The MSL is in compliance with the federal and state 10 mrem/yr standard.

  13. Groundwater contaminant plume ranking. [UMTRA Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1988-08-01

    Containment plumes at Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project sites were ranked to assist in Subpart B (i.e., restoration requirements of 40 CFR Part 192) compliance strategies for each site, to prioritize aquifer restoration, and to budget future requests and allocations. The rankings roughly estimate hazards to the environment and human health, and thus assist in determining for which sites cleanup, if appropriate, will provide the greatest benefits for funds available. The rankings are based on the scores that were obtained using the US Department of Energy's (DOE) Modified Hazard Ranking System (MHRS). The MHRS and HRS consider and score three hazard modes for a site: migration, fire and explosion, and direct contact. The migration hazard mode score reflects the potential for harm to humans or the environment from migration of a hazardous substance off a site by groundwater, surface water, and air; it is a composite of separate scores for each of these routes. For ranking the containment plumes at UMTRA Project sites, it was assumed that each site had been remediated in compliance with the EPA standards and that relict contaminant plumes were present. Therefore, only the groundwater route was scored, and the surface water and air routes were not considered. Section 2.0 of this document describes the assumptions and procedures used to score the groundwater route, and Section 3.0 provides the resulting scores for each site. 40 tabs.

  14. U.S. Department of Energy Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Ground Water Project: Project plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-09-01

    The scope of the Project is to develop and implement a ground water compliance strategy for all 24 UMTRA Project processing sites. The compliance strategy for the processing sites must satisfy the proposed EPA ground water cleanup standards in 40 CFR Part 192, Subparts B and C (1987). This scope of work will entail the following activities on a site-specific basis: Develop a compliance strategy based on modification of the UMTRA Surface Project RAPs or develop Ground Water Project RAPs with NRC concurrence on the RAP and full participation of the affected states and tribes. Implement the RAP to include institutional controls, where appropriate, as an interim measure until compliance with the standards is achieved. Institute long-term verification monitoring for transfer to a separate long-term surveillance program on or before the Project end date. Prepare certification or confirmation reports and modify the long-term surveillance plan (LTSP), where needed, on those sites completed prior to the Project end date.

  15. RCRA corrective action determination of no further action

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-06-01

    On July 27, 1990, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a regulatory framework (55 FR 30798) for responding to releases of hazardous waste and hazardous constituents from solid waste management units (SWMUs) at facilities seeking permits or permitted under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The proposed rule, `Corrective Action for Solid Waste Management Units at Hazardous Waste Facilities`, would create a new Subpart S under the 40 CFR 264 regulations, and outlines requirements for conducting RCRA Facility Investigations, evaluating potential remedies, and selecting and implementing remedies (i.e., corrective measures) at RCRA facilities. EPA anticipates instances where releases or suspected releases of hazardous wastes or constituents from SWMUs identified in a RCRA Facility Assessment, and subsequently addressed as part of required RCRA Facility Investigations, will be found to be non-existent or non-threatening to human health or the environment. Such releases may require no further action. For such situations, EPA proposed a mechanism for making a determination that no further corrective action is needed. This mechanism is known as a Determination of No Further Action (DNFA) (55 FR 30875). This information Brief describes what a DNFA is and discusses the mechanism for making a DNFA. This is one of a series of Information Briefs on RCRA corrective action.

  16. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Site Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2012

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Snyder, Sandra F.; Barnett, J. M.; Bisping, Lynn E.

    2013-06-06

    This report documents radionuclide air emissions that result in the highest effective dose equivalent (EDE) to a member of the public, referred to as the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The report has been prepared in compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), Subpart H, National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities and Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 246-247, Radiation Protection Air Emissions. The dose to the PNNL Site MEI due to routine major and minor point source emissions in 2012 from PNNL Site sources is 9E-06 mrem (9E-08 mSv) EDE. The dose from fugitive emissions (i.e., unmonitored sources) is 1E-7 mrem (1E-9 mSv) EDE. The dose from radon emissions is 2E-6 mrem (2E-08 mSv) EDE. No nonroutine emissions occurred in 2012. The total radiological dose for 2012 to the MEI from all PNNL Site radionuclide emissions, including fugitive emissions and radon, is 1E-5 mrem (1E-7 mSv) EDE, or 100,000 times smaller than the federal and state standard of 10 mrem/yr, to which the PNNL Site is in compliance.

  17. Alternative methods for dispoal of low-level radioactive wastes. Task 1. Description of methods and assessment of criteria. [Alternative methods are belowground vaults, aboveground vaults; earth mounded concrete bunkers, mined cavities, augered holes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bennett, R.D.; Miller, W.O.; Warriner, J.B.; Malone, P.G.; McAneny, C.C.

    1984-04-01

    The study reported herein contains the results of Task 1 of a four-task study entitled Criteria for Evaluating Engineered Facilities. The overall objective of this study is to ensure that the criteria needed to evaluate five alternative low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal methods are available to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Agreement States. The alternative methods considered are belowground vaults, aboveground vaults, earth mounded concrete bunkers, mined cavities, and augered holes. Each of these alternatives is either being used by other countries for low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal or is being considered by other countries or US agencies. In this report the performance requirements are listed, each alternative is described, the experience gained with its use is discussed, and the performance capabilities of each method are addressed. Next, the existing 10 CFR Part 61 Subpart D criteria with respect to paragraphs 61.50 through 61.53, pertaining to site suitability, design, operations and closure, and monitoring are assessed for applicability to evaluation of each alternative. Preliminary conclusions and recommendations are offered on each method's suitability as an LLW disposal alternative, the applicability of the criteria, and the need for supplemental or modified criteria.

  18. TS LOOP NON-POTABLE PUMP EVALUATION

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S. Goodin

    1999-05-14

    This analysis evaluates the existing subsurface non-potable water system from the portal pump to the end of the water line in the South Ramp and determines if the pump size and spacing meets the system pressure and flow requirements for construction operations and incipient fire fighting capability as established in the Subsurface Fire Hazards Analysis (CRWMS M&O 1998b). This analysis does not address the non potable water system in the Cross Drift which is covered under a previous design analysis (CRWMS-M&O 1998a). The Subsurface Fire Hazards Analysis references sections of OSHA 29 CFR 1910 Subpart L for requirements applicable to the incipient fire fighting hose stations used underground. This analysis does not address mechanical system valves, fittings, risers and other components of the system piping. This system is not designed or intended to meet all National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) codes for a fire fighting system but is only considered a backup system to fire extinguishers that are installed throughout the Topopah Springs (TS) Loop and may be used to fight small incipient stage fires.

  19. Comparison of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s CAP88 PC versions 3.0 and 4.0

    DOE Public Access Gateway for Energy & Science Beta (PAGES Beta)

    Jannik, Tim; Farfan, Eduardo B.; Dixon, Ken; Newton, Joseph; Sailors, Christopher; Johnson, Levi; Moore, Kelsey; Stahman, Richard

    2015-08-01

    The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) with the assistance of Georgia Regents University, completed a comparison of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) environmental dosimetry code CAP88 PC V3.0 with the recently developed V4.0. CAP88 is a set of computer programs and databases used for estimation of dose and risk from radionuclide emissions to air. At the U.S. Department of Energy's Savannah River Site, CAP88 is used by SRNL for determining compliance with EPA's National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR 61, Subpart H) regulations. Using standardized input parameters, individual runs were conducted for each radionuclide within itsmore »corresponding database. Some radioactive decay constants, human usage parameters, and dose coefficients changed between the two versions, directly causing a proportional change in the total effective 137Cs, 3H, 129I, 239Pu, and 90Sr) is provided. In general, the total effective doses will decrease for alpha/beta emitters because of reduced inhalation and ingestion rates in V4.0. However, for gamma emitters, such as 60Co and 137Cs, the total effective doses will increase because of changes EPA made in the external ground shine calculations.« less

  20. Users guide for ENVSTD program Version 2. 0 and LTGSTD program Version 2. 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Crawley, D.B.; Riesen, P.K.; Briggs, R.S.

    1989-02-01

    On January 30, 1989, the US Department of Energy (DOE) promulgated 10 CFR Part 435, Subpart A, an Interim Rule entitled ''Energy Conservation Voluntary Performance Standards for New Commercial and Multi-Family High Rise Residential Buildings; Mandatory for New Federal Buildings.'' As a consequence, federal agencies must design all future federal commercial and multifamily high rise residential buildings in accordance with the Standards, or show that their current standards already meet or exceed the energy-efficiency requirements of the Standards. Although these newly enacted Standards do not regulate the design of nonfederal buildings, DOE recommends that all design professionals use the Standards as guidelines for designing energy-conserving buildings. To encourage private sector use, the Standards were presented in the January 30, 1989, Federal Register in the format typical of commercial standards rather than a federal regulation. As a further help, DOE supported the development of various microcomputer programs to ease the use of the Standards. Two of these programs/emdash/ENVSTD (Version 2.0) and LTGSTD (Version 2.0)/emdash/are detailed in this users guide and provided on the accompanying diskette. This package, developed by Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL), is intended to facilitate the designer's use of the Standards dealing specifically with a building's envelope and lighting system designs. Using these programs will greatly simplify the designer's task of performing the sometimes complex calculations needed to determine a design's compliance with the Standards. 3 refs., 6 figs.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mathews, S.

    1997-04-01

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

  2. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Biennial Environmental Compliance Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Washington Regulatory and Environmental Services

    2006-10-12

    This Biennial Environmental Compliance Report (BECR) documents compliance with environmental regulations at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), a facility designed and authorized for the safe disposal of transuranic (TRU) radioactive waste. This BECR covers the reporting period from April 1, 2004, to March 31, 2006. As required by the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act (LWA) (Public Law [Pub. L.] 102-579, as amended by Pub. L. 104-201), the BECR documents United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) compliance with regulations and permits issued pursuant to the following: (1) Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 191, Subpart A, "Environmental Standards for Management and Storage"; (2) Clean Air Act (CAA) (42 United States Code [U.S.C.] §7401, et seq.); (3) Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA) (42 U.S.C. §§6901-6992, et seq.); (4) Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) (42 U.S.C. §§300f, et seq.); (5) Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (15 U.S.C. §§2601, et seq.); (6) Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (42 U.S.C. §§9601, et seq.); and all other federal and state of New Mexico laws pertaining to public health and safety or the environment.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laycak, D T

    2010-03-05

    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).

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Perkins, C.J.

    1997-08-05

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

  5. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Facility Radionuclide Emissions Units and Sampling Systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnett, J. M.; Brown, Jason H.; Walker, Brian A.

    2012-04-01

    Battelle-Pacific Northwest Division operates numerous research and development (R and D) laboratories in Richland, WA, including those associated with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) on the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)'s Hanford Site and PNNL Site that have the potential for radionuclide air emissions. The National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP 40 CFR 61, Subparts H and I) requires an assessment of all emission units that have the potential for radionuclide air emissions. Potential emissions are assessed annually by PNNL staff members. Sampling, monitoring, and other regulatory compliance requirements are designated based upon the potential-to-emit dose criteria found in the regulations. The purpose of this document is to describe the facility radionuclide air emission sampling program and provide current and historical facility emission unit system performance, operation, and design information. For sampled systems, a description of the buildings, exhaust units, control technologies, and sample extraction details is provided for each registered emission unit. Additionally, applicable stack sampler configuration drawings, figures, and photographs are provided. Deregistered emission unit details are provided as necessary for up to 5 years post closure.

  6. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Site Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2011

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Snyder, Sandra F.; Barnett, J. M.; Bisping, Lynn E.

    2012-06-12

    This report documents radionuclide air emissions that result in the highest effective dose equivalent (EDE) to a member of the public, referred to as the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The report has been prepared in compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), Subpart H, National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities and Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 246-247, Radiation Protection Air Emissions. The EDE to the PNNL Site MEI due to routine emissions in 2011 from PNNL Site sources was 1.7E 05 mrem (1.7E-7 mSv) EDE. No nonroutine emissions occurred in 2011. The total radiological dose for 2011 to the MEI from all PNNL Site radionuclide emissions was more than 10,000 times smaller than the federal and state standard of 10 mrem/yr, to which the PNNL Site is in compliance.

  7. LLNL NESHAPs 2008 Annual Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bertoldo, N; Gallegos, G; MacQueen, D; Wegrecki, A; Wilson, K

    2009-06-25

    Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC operates facilities at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) where radionuclides are handled and stored. These facilities are subject to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) in Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 40, Part 61, Subpart H, which regulates radionuclide emissions to air from Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. Specifically, NESHAPs limits the emission of radionuclides to the ambient air to levels resulting in an annual effective dose equivalent of 10 mrem (100 {mu}Sv) to any member of the public. Using measured and calculated emissions, and building-specific and common parameters, LLNL personnel applied the EPA-approved computer code, CAP88-PC, Version 1.0, to calculate the dose to the maximally exposed individual for the Livermore site and Site 300. The dose for the LLNL site-wide maximally exposed members of the public from operations in 2008 are summarized here: {sm_bullet} Livermore site: 0.0013 mrem (0.013 {mu}Sv) (26% from point source emissions, 74% from diffuse source emissions). The point source emissions include gaseous tritium modeled as tritiated water vapor as directed by EPA Region IX; the resulting dose is used for compliance purposes. {sm_bullet} Site 300: 0.000000044 mrem (0.00000044 {mu}Sv) (100% from point source emissions).

  8. Comparison of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s CAP88 PC versions 3.0 and 4.0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jannik, Tim; Farfan, Eduardo B.; Dixon, Ken; Newton, Joseph; Sailors, Christopher; Johnson, Levi; Moore, Kelsey; Stahman, Richard

    2015-08-01

    The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) with the assistance of Georgia Regents University, completed a comparison of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) environmental dosimetry code CAP88 PC V3.0 with the recently developed V4.0. CAP88 is a set of computer programs and databases used for estimation of dose and risk from radionuclide emissions to air. At the U.S. Department of Energy's Savannah River Site, CAP88 is used by SRNL for determining compliance with EPA's National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR 61, Subpart H) regulations. Using standardized input parameters, individual runs were conducted for each radionuclide within its corresponding database. Some radioactive decay constants, human usage parameters, and dose coefficients changed between the two versions, directly causing a proportional change in the total effective 137Cs, 3H, 129I, 239Pu, and 90Sr) is provided. In general, the total effective doses will decrease for alpha/beta emitters because of reduced inhalation and ingestion rates in V4.0. However, for gamma emitters, such as 60Co and 137Cs, the total effective doses will increase because of changes EPA made in the external ground shine calculations.

  9. User's guide for ENVSTD24 program, Version 2. 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, R.L.; Connell, L.M.

    1993-05-01

    On January 30, 1989, the US Department of Energy (DOE) promulgated an interim rule entitled [open quotes]Energy Conservation Voluntary Performance Standards for New Commercial and Multi-Family High Rise Residential Buildings; Mandatory for New Federal Buildings[close quotes] (10 CFR Part 435, Subpart A). These standards require federal agencies to design all future federal commercial and multifamily high-rise residential buildings in accordance with the standards, or demonstrate that their current requirements already meet or exceed the energy-efficiency requirements of the standards. Although these newly enacted standards do not regulate the design of nonfederal buildings, the DOE recommends that all design professionals use the standards as guidelines for designing energy-conserving buildings. To encourage private sector use, the DOE published the standards in the January 30, 1989, Federal Register in the format typical of commercial standards. The Pacific Northwest Laboratory developed several computer programs for the DOE to make it easier for designers to comply with the standards. One of the programs, ENVSTD24 (Version 2.4), is detailed in this user's guide and is provided on the accompanying diskettes. The program will facilitate the designer's use of the standards dealing specifically with building envelope design. Using this program will greatly simplify the designer's task of performing the calculations needed to determine if a design complies with the standards.

  10. User's guide for LTGSTD24 program, Version 2. 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, R.L.; Connell, L.M.

    1993-05-01

    On January 30, 1989, the US Department of Energy (DOE) promulgated an interim rule entitled [open quotes]Energy Conservation Voluntary Performance Standards for New Commercial and Multi-Family High Rise Residential Buildings; Mandatory for New Federal Buildings[close quotes] (10 CFR Part 435, Subpart A). These standards require federal agencies to design all future federal commercial and multifamily high-rise residential buildings in accordance with the standards, or demonstrate that their current requirements already meet or exceed the energy-efficiency requirements of the standards. Although these newly enacted standards do not regulate the design of non-federal buildings, the DOE recommends that all design professionals use the standards as guidelines for designing energy-conserving buildings. To encourage private sector use, the DOE published the standards in the January 30, 1989, Federal Register in the format typical of commercial standards. The Pacific Northwest Laboratory developed several computer programs for the DOE to make it easier for designers to comply with the standards. One of the programs, LTGSTD24 (Version 2.4), is detailed in this user's guide and is provided on the accompanying diskettes. The program will facilitate the designer's use of the standards dealing specifically with building lighting design. Using this program will greatly simplify the designer's task of performing the calculations needed to determine if a design complies with the standards.

  11. The Columbia River Protection Supplemental Technologies Quality Assurance Project Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fix, N. J.

    2007-01-10

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has conducted interim groundwater remedial activities on the Hanford Site since the mid-1990s for several groundwater contamination plumes. DOE established the Columbia River Protection Supplemental Technologies Project (Technologies Project) in 2006 to evaluate alternative treatment technologies. The objectives for the technology project are as follows: develop a 300 Area polyphosphate treatability test to immobilize uranium, design and test infiltration of a phosphate/apatite technology for Sr-90 at 100-N, perform carbon tetrachloride and chloroform attenuation parameter studies, perform vadose zone chromium characterization and geochemistry studies, perform in situ biostimulation of chromium studies for a reducing barrier at 100-D, and perform a treatability test for phytoremediation for Sr-90 at 100-N. This document provides the quality assurance guidelines that will be followed by the Technologies Project. This Quality Assurance Project Plan is based on the quality assurance requirements of DOE Order 414.1C, Quality Assurance, and 10 CFR 830, Subpart A--Quality Assurance Requirements as delineated in Pacific Northwest National Laboratory’s Standards-Based Management System. In addition, the technology project is subject to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans (EPA/240/B-01/003, QA/R-5). The Hanford Analytical Services Quality Assurance Requirements Documents (HASQARD, DOE/RL-96-68) apply to portions of this project and to the subcontractors. HASQARD requirements are discussed within applicable sections of this plan.

  12. STATUS OF THE NRC'S DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAM

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Orlando, D. A.; Camper, L. W.; Buckley, J.

    2002-02-25

    On July 21, 1997, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission published the final rule on Radiological Criteria for License Termination (the License Termination Rule) as Subpart E to 10 CFR Part 20. NRC regulations require that materials licensees submit Decommissioning Plans to support the decommissioning of its facility if it is required by license condition, or if the procedures and activities necessary to carry out the decommissioning have not been approved by NRC and these procedures could increase the potential health and safety impacts to the workers or the public. NRC regulations also require that reactor licensees submit Post-shutdown Decommissioning Activities Reports and License Termination Plans to support the decommissioning of nuclear power facilities. This paper provides an update on the status of the NRC's decommissioning program. It discusses the status of permanently shut-down commercial power reactors, complex decommissioning sites, and sites listed in the Site Decommissioning Management Plan. The paper provides the status of various tools and guidance the NRC is developing to assist licensees during decommissioning, including a Standard Review Plan for evaluating plans and information submitted by licensees to support the decommissioning of nuclear facilities and the D and D Screen software for determining the potential doses from residual radioactivity. Finally, it discusses the status of the staff's current efforts to streamline the decommissioning process.

  13. Status of the NRC Decommissioning Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Orlando, D. A.; Camper, L.; Buckley, J.; Pogue, E.; Banovac, K.

    2003-02-24

    On July 21, 1997, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) published the final rule on Radiological Criteria for License Termination (the License Termination Rule or LTR) as Subpart E to 10 CFR Part 20. NRC regulations require that materials licensees submit Decommissioning Plans to support the decommissioning of its facility if it is required by license condition, or if the procedures and activities necessary to carry out the decommissioning have not been approved by NRC and these procedures could increase the potential health and safety impacts to the workers or the public. NRC regulations also require that reactor licensees submit Post-shutdown Decommissioning Activities Reports and License Termination Plans to support the decommissioning of nuclear power facilities. This paper provides an update on the status of the NRC's decommissioning program that was presented during WM'02. It discusses the staff's current efforts to streamline the decommissioning process, current issues being faced in the decommissioning program, such as partial site release and restricted release of sites, as well as the status of the decommissioning of complex sites and those listed in the Site Decommissioning Management Plan. The paper discusses the status of permanently shut-down commercial power reactors and the transfer of complex decommissioning sites and sites listed on the SDMP to Agreement States. Finally the paper provides an update of the status of various tools and guidance the NRC is developing to assist licensees during decommissioning, including an effort to consolidate and risk-inform decommissioning guidance.

  14. Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laycak, D

    2008-06-16

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

  15. DATA MONITORING AND ANALYSIS PROGRAM MANUAL

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gravois, Melanie

    2007-07-06

    This procedure provides guidelines and techniques for analyzing and trending data using statistical methods for Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL). This procedure outlines the steps used in data analysis and trending. It includes guidelines for performing data analysis and for monitoring (or controlling) processes using performance indicators. This procedure is used when trending and analyzing item characteristics and reliability, process implementation, and other quality-related information to identify items, services, activities, and processes needing improvement, in accordance with 10 CFR Part 830, Subpart A, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 414.1C, and University of California (UC) Assurance Plan for LBNL. Trend codes, outlined in Attachment 4, are assigned to issues at the time of initiation and entry into the Corrective Action Tracking System (CATS) database in accordance with LBNL/PUB-5519 (1), Issues Management Program Manual. Throughout this procedure, the term performance is used to encompass all aspects of performance including quality, timeliness, efficiency, effectiveness, and reliability. Data analysis tools are appropriate whenever quantitative information describing the performance of an item, service, or process can be obtained.

  16. Partial List of Laws, Regulations and Guidelines Bearing on the Operation of Biological Research Labs

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Agricultural Bioterrorism 10 CFR Parts 19 and 20; Radioactive Materials and Radiation Safety. 15 CFR Chemicals in the Laboratory 40 CFR 260 - 262; RCRA ­ Hazardous Waste Management, Lists and Generator Rule Select Agent Regulations, 49 CFR 171-180-Transportation Additional CFR's not indicated above 21

  17. FROM PROPERTY LEASE TO PROPERTY TRANSFER - TAKING THE STEPS TO FACILITATE SITE CLOSURE USING THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY'S 10 CFR 770 PROCESS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cusick, Lesley T.; Hart, Patricia W.

    2003-02-27

    While implementing a successful leasing program for land and facilities at the Department of Energy's Oak Ridge Operations Office in Oak Ridge, TN, the Department is now transitioning from a leasing program to one of title transfer. The program, called ''Reindustrialization'', is the result of a visionary idea to enable the use of excess resources to meet a community's needs in the wake of continued DOE downsizing. An established process included within the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act, tailored to meet DOE-ORO's objectives, was used to lease. Title transfer, using DOE's new 10 CFR 770 process, is being undertaken to meet a DOE-HQs directive to close the ORO facility where Reindustrialization is taking place. Title transfer is a key component of the closure effort. However, the process for title transfer is new, it is a DOE process, and it has not yet been completed for any facilities in the DOE complex. Making the transition from a known to an unknown has created opportunities in program design, as well as implementation, coordination and acceptance challenges in a variety of areas, and a host of lessons learned and learning.

  18. Vol 2, Integrated Safety Management System Guide

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

    1997-12-26

    This Guide provides guidance for addressing the requirements of DOE P 450.4 and DEAR integrated SMS clauses promulgated in 48 CFR 970.5204-2, 48 CFR 970.5204-78, and 48 CFR 970.1001.

  19. Vol 1, Integrated Safety Management System Guide,

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

    1997-11-26

    This Guide provides guidance for addressing the requirements of DOE P 450.4 and DEAR integrated SMS clauses promulgated in 48 CFR 970.5204-2, 48 CFR 970.5204-78, and 48 CFR 970.1001.

  20. Enforcement Guidance Supplement 00-03: Specific Issues on Applicabilit...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    00-03: Specific Issues on Applicability of 10 CFR 830 Enforcement Guidance Supplements Enforcement Guidance Supplement 99-03: Limitation of 10 CFR Part 830 to Equipment...

  1. IPAGE OF PAGES AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    10 CFR 71 Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material 10 CFR 433 Energy Efficiency Standards for the Design and Construction of New Federal Commercial and Multi-Family...

  2. Microsoft Word - App E Update Oct 2010

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    10 CFR 71 Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material 10 CFR 433 Energy Efficiency Standards for the Design and Construction of New Federal Commercial and Multi-Family...

  3. Presentation Title Presentation Location

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Framework 5 * Dry Storage * 10 CFR Part 72 * Term certificates and licenses * Aging management plans for renewal * Multiple renewals allowed * Transportation * 10 CFR...

  4. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants - Radionuclide Emissions Calendar Year 2013

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Warren, R.

    2014-06-04

    The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) operates the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) and North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF). From 1951 through 1992, the NNSS was the continental testing location for U.S. nuclear weapons. The release of radionuclides from NNSS activities has been monitored since the initiation of atmospheric testing. Limitations to underground detonations after 1962 greatly reduced radiation exposure to the public surrounding the NNSS. After nuclear testing ended in 1992, NNSS radiation monitoring focused on detecting airborne radionuclides from historically contaminated soils. These radionuclides are derived from re-suspension of soil (primarily by wind) and emission of tritium-contaminated soil moisture through evapotranspiration. Low amounts of legacy-related tritium are also emitted to air at the NLVF, an NNSS support complex in North Las Vegas. To protect the public from harmful levels of man-made radiation, the Clean Air Act, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) (Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 61 Subpart H) (CFR 2010a) limits the release of radioactivity from a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facility to that which would cause 10 millirem per year (mrem/yr) effective dose equivalent to any member of the public. This limit does not include radiation unrelated to NNSS activities. Unrelated doses could come from naturally occurring radioactive elements, from sources such as medically or commercially used radionuclides, or from sources outside of the United States, such as the damaged Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan in 2011. NNSA/NFO demonstrates compliance with the NESHAP limit by using environmental measurements of radionuclide air concentrations at critical receptor locations on the NNSS (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] and DOE 1995). This method was approved by the EPA for use on the NNSS in 2001 (EPA 2001a) and has been the sole method used since 2005. Six locations on the NNSS have been established to act as critical receptor locations to demonstrate compliance with the NESHAP limit. These locations are actually pseudo-critical receptor stations, because no member of the public actually resides at these onsite locations. Compliance is demonstrated if the measured annual average concentration is less than the NESHAP Concentration Levels (CLs) for Environmental Compliance listed in 40 CFR 61, Appendix E, Table 2 (CFR 2010a). For multiple radionuclides, compliance is demonstrated when the sum of the fractions (determined by dividing each radionuclide’s concentration by its CL and then adding the fractions together) is less than 1.0. In 2013, the potential dose from radiological emissions to air, resulting from both current and past NNSS activities, was well below the 10 mrem/yr dose limit. Air sampling data collected at all air monitoring stations had average concentrations of radioactivity that were a fraction of the CL values. Concentrations ranged from 0.2% to a maximum of 10.1% of the allowed NESHAP limit. Because the nearest member of the public resides about 9 kilometers from potential release points on the NNSS, dose to the public would be only a small fraction of the value measured on the NNSS. The potential dose to the public from NLVF emissions was also very low at 0.000011 mrem/yr, more than 900,000 times lower than the 10 mrem/yr limit.

  5. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants - Radionuclide Emissions Calendar Year 2012

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Warren, R.

    2013-06-10

    The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) operates the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) and North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF). From 1951 through 1992, the NNSS was the continental testing location for U.S. nuclear weapons. The release of radionuclides from NNSS activities has been monitored since the initiation of atmospheric testing. Limitation to underground detonations after 1962 greatly reduced radiation exposure to the public surrounding the NNSS. After nuclear testing ended in 1992, NNSS radiation monitoring focused on detecting airborne radionuclides from historically contaminated soils. These radionuclides are derived from re-suspension of soil (primarily by wind) and emission of tritium-contaminated soil moisture through evapotranspiration. Low amounts of legacy-related tritium are also emitted to air at the NLVF, an NNSS support complex in North Las Vegas. To protect the public from harmful levels of man-made radiation, the Clean Air Act, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) (Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 61 Subpart H) (CFR 2010a) limits the release of radioactivity from a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facility to that which would cause 10 millirem per year (mrem/yr) effective dose equivalent to any member of the public. This limit does not include radiation unrelated to NNSS activities. Unrelated doses could come from naturally occurring radioactive elements, from sources such as medically or commercially used radionuclides, or from sources outside of the United States, such as the damaged Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan in 2011. NNSA/NFO demonstrates compliance with the NESHAP limit by using environmental measurements of radionuclide air concentrations at critical receptor locations on the NNSS (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] and DOE 1995). This method was approved by the EPA for use on the NNSS in 2001 (EPA 2001a) and has been the sole method used since 2005. Six locations on the NNSS have been established to act as critical receptor locations to demonstrate compliance with the NESHAP limit. These locations are actually pseudo-critical receptor stations, because no member of the public actually resides at these onsite locations. Compliance is demonstrated if the measured annual average concentration is less than the NESHAP Concentration Levels (CLs) for Environmental Compliance listed in 40 CFR 61, Appendix E, Table 2 (CFR 2010a). For multiple radionuclides, compliance is demonstrated when the sum of the fractions (determined by dividing each radionuclide’s concentration by its CL and then adding the fractions together) is less than 1.0. In 2012, the potential dose from radiological emissions to air, resulting from both current and past NNSS activities, was well below the 10 mrem/yr dose limit. Air sampling data collected at all air monitoring stations had average concentrations of radioactivity that were a fraction of the CL values. Concentrations ranged from less than 0.5% to a maximum of 11.1% of the allowed NESHAP limit. Because the nearest member of the public resides about 9 kilometers from potential release points on the NNSS, dose to the public would be only a small fraction of the value measured on the NNSS. The potential dose to the public from NLVF emissions was also very low at 0.000024 mrem/yr, more than 400,000 times lower than the 10 mrem/yr limit.

  6. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants - Radionuclide Emissions, Calendar Year 2010

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Ecological and Environmental Monitoring

    2011-06-30

    The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office operates the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS, formerly the Nevada Test Site) and North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF). From 1951 through 1992, the NNSS was the continental testing location for U.S. nuclear weapons. The release of radionuclides from NNSS activities has been monitored since the initiation of atmospheric testing. Limitation to underground detonations after 1962 greatly reduced radiation exposure to the public surrounding the NNSS. After nuclear testing ended in 1992, NNSS radiation monitoring focused on detecting airborne radionuclides from historically contaminated soils. These radionuclides are derived from re-suspension of soil (primarily by wind) and emission of tritium-contaminated soil moisture through evapotranspiration. Low amounts of tritium are also emitted to air at the NLVF, an NNSS support complex in North Las Vegas. To protect the public from harmful levels of man-made radiation, the Clean Air Act, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) (Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 61 Subpart H) (CFR, 2010a) limits the release of radioactivity from a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facility to that which would cause 10 millirem per year (mrem/yr) effective dose equivalent to any member of the public. This limit does not include radiation unrelated to NNSS activities. Unrelated doses could come from naturally occurring radioactive elements, from sources such as medically or commercially used radionuclides, or from sources outside of the United States, such as those from the damaged Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan. Because this report is intended to discuss radioactive air emissions during calendar year 2010, data on radionuclides in air from the 2011 Fukushima nuclear power plant releases are not presented but will be included in the report for calendar year 2011. The NNSS demonstrates compliance with the NESHAP limit by using environmental measurements of radionuclide air concentrations at critical receptor locations (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] and DOE, 1995). This method was approved by the EPA for use on the NNSS in 2001(EPA, 2001a) and has been the sole method used since 2005. Six locations on the NNSS have been established to act as critical receptor locations to demonstrate compliance with the NESHAP limit. These locations are actually pseudo-critical receptor stations, because no member of the public actually resides at these onsite locations. Compliance is demonstrated if the measured annual average concentration is less than the NESHAP Concentration Levels (CLs) for Environmental Compliance listed in 40 CFR 61, Appendix E, Table 2 (CFR, 2010a). For multiple radionuclides, compliance is demonstrated when the sum of the fractions (determined by dividing each radionuclide's concentration by its CL and then adding the fractions together) is less than 1.0. In 2010, the potential dose from radiological emissions to air, resulting from both current and past NNSS activities, at onsite compliance monitoring stations was well below the 10 mrem/yr dose limit. Air sampling data collected at all air monitoring stations had average concentrations of radioactivity that were a fraction of the CL values. Concentrations ranged from less than 1 percent to a maximum of 17 percent of the allowed NESHAP limit. Because the nearest member of the public resides about 20 kilometers from potential release points on the NNSS, dose to the public would be only a small fraction of that measured on the NNSS. The potential dose to the public from NLVF emissions was also very low at 0.000032 mrem/yr, more than 300,000 times lower than the 10 mrem/yr limit.

  7. 2011 Radioactive Materials Usage Survey for Unmonitored Point Sources

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sturgeon, Richard W.

    2012-06-27

    This report provides the results of the 2011 Radioactive Materials Usage Survey for Unmonitored Point Sources (RMUS), which was updated by the Environmental Protection (ENV) Division's Environmental Stewardship (ES) at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). ES classifies LANL emission sources into one of four Tiers, based on the potential effective dose equivalent (PEDE) calculated for each point source. Detailed descriptions of these tiers are provided in Section 3. The usage survey is conducted annually; in odd-numbered years the survey addresses all monitored and unmonitored point sources and in even-numbered years it addresses all Tier III and various selected other sources. This graded approach was designed to ensure that the appropriate emphasis is placed on point sources that have higher potential emissions to the environment. For calendar year (CY) 2011, ES has divided the usage survey into two distinct reports, one covering the monitored point sources (to be completed later this year) and this report covering all unmonitored point sources. This usage survey includes the following release points: (1) all unmonitored sources identified in the 2010 usage survey, (2) any new release points identified through the new project review (NPR) process, and (3) other release points as designated by the Rad-NESHAP Team Leader. Data for all unmonitored point sources at LANL is stored in the survey files at ES. LANL uses this survey data to help demonstrate compliance with Clean Air Act radioactive air emissions regulations (40 CFR 61, Subpart H). The remainder of this introduction provides a brief description of the information contained in each section. Section 2 of this report describes the methods that were employed for gathering usage survey data and for calculating usage, emissions, and dose for these point sources. It also references the appropriate ES procedures for further information. Section 3 describes the RMUS and explains how the survey results are organized. The RMUS Interview Form with the attached RMUS Process Form(s) provides the radioactive materials survey data by technical area (TA) and building number. The survey data for each release point includes information such as: exhaust stack identification number, room number, radioactive material source type (i.e., potential source or future potential source of air emissions), radionuclide, usage (in curies) and usage basis, physical state (gas, liquid, particulate, solid, or custom), release fraction (from Appendix D to 40 CFR 61, Subpart H), and process descriptions. In addition, the interview form also calculates emissions (in curies), lists mrem/Ci factors, calculates PEDEs, and states the location of the critical receptor for that release point. [The critical receptor is the maximum exposed off-site member of the public, specific to each individual facility.] Each of these data fields is described in this section. The Tier classification of release points, which was first introduced with the 1999 usage survey, is also described in detail in this section. Section 4 includes a brief discussion of the dose estimate methodology, and includes a discussion of several release points of particular interest in the CY 2011 usage survey report. It also includes a table of the calculated PEDEs for each release point at its critical receptor. Section 5 describes ES's approach to Quality Assurance (QA) for the usage survey. Satisfactory completion of the survey requires that team members responsible for Rad-NESHAP (National Emissions Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants) compliance accurately collect and process several types of information, including radioactive materials usage data, process information, and supporting information. They must also perform and document the QA reviews outlined in Section 5.2.6 (Process Verification and Peer Review) of ES-RN, 'Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Rad-NESHAP Compliance Project' to verify that all information is complete and correct.

  8. HANFORD SAFETY ANALYSIS & RISK ASSESSMENT HANDBOOK (SARAH)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    EVANS, C B

    2004-12-21

    The purpose of the Hanford Safety Analysis and Risk Assessment Handbook (SARAH) is to support the development of safety basis documentation for Hazard Category 2 and 3 (HC-2 and 3) U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 830, ''Nuclear Safety Management''. Subpart B, ''Safety Basis Requirements.'' Consistent with DOE-STD-3009-94, Change Notice 2, ''Preparation Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analyses'' (STD-3009), and DOE-STD-3011-2002, ''Guidance for Preparation of Basis for Interim Operation (BIO) Documents'' (STD-3011), the Hanford SARAH describes methodology for performing a safety analysis leading to development of a Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) and derivation of Technical Safety Requirements (TSR), and provides the information necessary to ensure a consistently rigorous approach that meets DOE expectations. The DSA and TSR documents, together with the DOE-issued Safety Evaluation Report (SER), are the basic components of facility safety basis documentation. For HC-2 or 3 nuclear facilities in long-term surveillance and maintenance (S&M), for decommissioning activities, where source term has been eliminated to the point that only low-level, residual fixed contamination is present, or for environmental remediation activities outside of a facility structure, DOE-STD-1120-98, ''Integration of Environment, Safety, and Health into Facility Disposition Activities'' (STD-1120), may serve as the basis for the DSA. HC-2 and 3 environmental remediation sites also are subject to the hazard analysis methodologies of this standard.

  9. 1995 revisions to the DOT/NRC transport regulations and their impact on nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Grella, A.W.

    1996-10-01

    On September 28, 1995, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) published major amendments to the nuclear transportation regulations of the US. The amendments culminated an approximate 8-year effort of the two agencies to conform US regulations (to the extent practicable) to the international transport standards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Safety Series N. 6, {open_quotes}Regulations For The Safe Transport of Radioactive Material{close_quotes}, 1985 Edition (Revised 1990). This paper identifies the major revisions to the regulations which have taken place and discusses not only their probable future impacts but also identifies certain issues and early impacts which have been emerging since publication of the final rules late in 1995. The discussion is summarized with respect to these impacts and issues on transportation of radioactive material by the nuclear power industry. Many of the revisions which are more minor in nature are also identified. The generic effective date for mandatory compliance with the revised regulations was April 1, 1996, however two of the major revisions of interest to the utilities have later effective dates for mandatory compliance. The use of the so-called {open_quotes}NRC-Certified Type A LSA Packages{close_quotes} are authorized until April 1, 1999 and mandatory compliance with the new radiation protection program requirements of 49 CFR 172 Subpart I is not until October 1, 1997. This paper is based to a large extent on the EPRI report bearing the same title as this paper, which is currently in draft.

  10. Evaluation of the WIPP Project`s compliance with the EPA radiation protection standards for disposal of transuranic waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Neill, R.H.; Chaturvedi, L.; Rucker, D.F.; Silva, M.K.; Walker, B.A.; Channell, J.K.; Clemo, T.M.

    1998-03-01

    The US Environmental Protection Agency`s (EPA) proposed rule to certify that the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) meets compliance with the long-term radiation protection standards for geologic repositories (40CFR191 Subparts B and C), is one of the most significant milestones to date for the WIPP project in particular, and for the nuclear waste issue in general. The Environmental Evaluation Group (EEG) has provided an independent technical oversight for the WIPP project since 1978, and is responsible for many improvements in the location, design, and testing of various aspects of the project, including participation in the development of the EPA standards since the early 1980s. The EEG reviewed the development of documentation for assessing the WIPP`s compliance by the Sandia National Laboratories following the 1985 promulgation by EPA, and provided many written and verbal comments on various aspects of this effort, culminating in the overall review of the 1992 performance assessment. For the US Department of Energy`s (DOE) compliance certification application (CCA), the EEG provided detailed comments on the draft CCA in March, 1996, and additional comments through unpublished letters in 1997 (included as Appendices 8.1 and 8.2 in this report). Since the October 30, 1997, publication of the EPA`s proposed rule to certify WIPP, the EEG gave presentations on important issues to the EPA on December 10, 1997, and sent a December 31, 1997 letter with attachments to clarify those issues (Appendix 8.3). The EEG has raised a number of questions that may have an impact on compliance. In spite of the best efforts by the EEG, the EPA reaction to reviews and suggestions has been slow and apparently driven by legal considerations. This report discusses in detail the questions that have been raised about containment requirements. Also discussed are assurance requirements, groundwater protection, individual protection, and an evaluation of EPA`s responses to EEG`s comments.

  11. Radionuclide Air Emission Report for 2008

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wahl, Linnea

    2009-05-21

    Berkeley Lab operates facilities where radionuclides are handled and stored. These facilities are subject to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) radioactive air emission regulations in Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 40, Part 61, Subpart H (EPA 1989). Radionuclides may be emitted from stacks or vents on buildings where radionuclide production or use is authorized or they may be emitted as diffuse sources. In 2008, all Berkeley Lab sources were minor sources of radionuclides (sources resulting in a potential dose of less than 0.1 mrem/yr [0.001 mSv/yr]). These minor sources include more than 100 stack sources and one source of diffuse emissions. There were no unplanned emissions from the Berkeley Lab site. Emissions from minor sources (stacks and diffuse emissions) either were measured by sampling or monitoring or were calculated based on quantities used, received for use, or produced during the year. Using measured and calculated emissions, and building-specific and common parameters, Laboratory personnel applied the EPA-approved computer code, CAP88-PC, to calculate the effective dose equivalent to the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The effective dose equivalent from all sources at Berkeley Lab in 2008 is 5.2 x 10{sup -3} mrem/yr (5.2 x 10{sup -5} mSv/yr) to the MEI, well below the 10 mrem/yr (0.1 mSv/yr) dose standard. The location of the MEI is at the University of California (UC) Lawrence Hall of Science, a public science museum about 1500 ft (460 m) east of Berkeley Lab's Building 56. The estimated collective effective dose equivalent to persons living within 50 mi (80 km) of Berkeley Lab is 1.1 x 10{sup -1} person-rem (1.1 x 10{sup -3} person-Sv) attributable to the Lab's airborne emissions in 2008.

  12. Radionuclide Air Emission Report for 2009

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wahl, Linnea

    2010-06-01

    Berkeley Lab operates facilities where radionuclides are handled and stored. These facilities are subject to the EPA radioactive air emission regulations in 40CFR61, Subpart H (EPA 1989). Radionuclides may be emitted from stacks or vents on buildings where radionuclide production or use is authorized or they may be emitted as diffuse sources. In 2009, all Berkeley Lab sources were minor sources of radionuclides (sources resulting in a potential dose of less than 0.1 mrem/yr [0.001 mSv/yr]). These minor sources included more than 100 stack sources and one source of diffuse emissions. There were no unplanned emissions from the Berkeley Lab site. Emissions from minor sources (stacks and diffuse emissions) either were measured by sampling or monitoring or were calculated based on quantities used, received for use, or produced during the year. Using measured and calculated emissions, and building-specific and common parameters, Laboratory personnel applied the EPA-approved computer code, CAP88-PC, to calculate the effective dose equivalent to the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The effective dose equivalent from all sources at Berkeley Lab in 2009 is 7.0 x 10{sup -3} mrem/yr (7.0 x 10{sup -5} mSv/yr) to the MEI, well below the 10 mrem/yr (0.1 mSv/yr) dose standard. The location of the MEI is at the University of California (UC) Lawrence Hall of Science, a public science museum about 1500 ft (460 m) east of Berkeley Lab's Building 56. The estimated collective effective dose equivalent to persons living within 50 mi (80 km) of Berkeley Lab is 1.5 x 10{sup -1} person-rem (1.5 x 10{sup -3} person-Sv) attributable to the Lab's airborne emissions in 2009.

  13. Radionuclide Air Emission Report for 2007

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wahl, Linnea; Wahl, Linnea

    2008-06-13

    Berkeley Lab operates facilities where radionuclides are handled and stored. These facilities are subject to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) radioactive air emission regulations in Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 40, Part 61, Subpart H (EPA 1989). The EPA regulates radionuclide emissions that may be released from stacks or vents on buildings where radionuclide production or use is authorized or that may be emitted as diffuse sources. In 2007, all Berkeley Lab sources were minor stack or building emissions sources of radionuclides (sources resulting in a potential dose of less than 0.1 mrem/yr [0.001 mSv/yr]), there were no diffuse emissions, and there were no unplanned emissions. Emissions from minor sources either were measured by sampling or monitoring or were calculated based on quantities received for use or produced during the year. Using measured and calculated emissions, and building-specific and common parameters, Laboratory personnel applied the EPA-approved computer code, CAP88-PC, Version 3.0, to calculate the effective dose equivalent to the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The effective dose equivalent from all sources at Berkeley Lab in 2007 is 1.2 x 10{sup -2} mrem/yr (1.2 x 10{sup -4} mSv/yr) to the MEI, well below the 10 mrem/yr (0.1 mSv/yr) EPA dose standard. The location of the MEI is at the University of California (UC) Lawrence Hall of Science, a public science museum about 1500 ft (460 m) east of Berkeley Lab's Building 56. The estimated collective effective dose equivalent to persons living within 50 mi (80 km) of Berkeley Lab is 3.1 x 10{sup -1} person-rem (3.1 x 10{sup -3} person-Sv) attributable to the Lab's airborne emissions in 2007.

  14. Transition from Consultation to Monitoring-NRC's Increasingly Focused Review of Factors Important to F-Area Tank Farm Facility Performance - 13153

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barr, Cynthia; Grossman, Christopher; Alexander, George; Parks, Leah; Fuhrmann, Mark; Shaffner, James; McKenney, Christepher [U.S. NRC, Rockville, MD (United States)] [U.S. NRC, Rockville, MD (United States); Pabalan, Roberto; Pickett, David [Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses, Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, TX (United States)] [Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses, Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, TX (United States); Dinwiddie, Cynthia [Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, TX (United States)] [Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, TX (United States)

    2013-07-01

    In consultation with the NRC, DOE issued a waste determination for the F-Area Tank Farm (FTF) facility in March 2012. The FTF consists of 22 underground tanks, each 2.8 to 4.9 million liters in capacity, used to store liquid high-level waste generated as a result of spent fuel reprocessing. The waste determination concluded stabilized waste residuals and associated tanks and auxiliary components at the time of closure are not high-level and can be disposed of as LLW. Prior to issuance of the final waste determination, during the consultation phase, NRC staff reviewed and provided comments on DOE's revision 0 and revision 1 FTF PAs that supported the waste determination and produced a technical evaluation report documenting the results of its multi-year review in October 2011. Following issuance of the waste determination, NRC began to monitor DOE disposal actions to assess compliance with the performance objectives in 10 CFR Part 61, Subpart C. To facilitate its monitoring responsibilities, NRC developed a plan to monitor DOE disposal actions. NRC staff was challenged in developing a focused monitoring plan to ensure limited resources are spent in the most cost-effective manner practical. To address this challenge, NRC prioritized monitoring areas and factors in terms of risk significance and timing. This prioritization was informed by NRC staff's review of DOE's PA documentation, independent probabilistic modeling conducted by NRC staff, and NRC-sponsored research conducted by the Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses in San Antonio, TX. (authors)

  15. Remedial Action Plan and Site design for stabilization of the inactive Uranium Mill Tailings sites at Slick Rock, Colorado: Revision 1. Remedial action selection report, Attachment 2, geology report, Attachment 3, ground water hydrology report, Attachment 4, water resources protection strategy. Final

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-09-01

    The Slick Rock uranium mill tailings sites are located near the small community of Slick Rock, in San Miguel County, Colorado. There are two designated Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project sites at Slick Rock: the Union Carbide site and the North Continent site. Both sites are adjacent to the Dolores River. The sites contain former mill building concrete foundations, tailings piles, demolition debris, and areas contaminated by windblown and waterborne radioactive materials. The total estimated volume of contaminated materials is approximately 621,000 cubic yards (475,000 cubic meters). In addition to the contamination at the two processing site areas, 13 vicinity properties were contaminated. Contamination associated with the UC and NC sites has leached into ground water. Pursuant to the requirements of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) (42 USC {section}7901 et seq.), the proposed remedial action plan (RAP) will satisfy the final US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards in 40 CFR Part 192 (60 FR 2854) for cleanup, stabilization, and control of the residual radioactive material (RRM) (tailings and other contaminated materials) at the disposal site at Burro Canyon. The requirements for control of the RRM (Subpart A) will be satisfied by the construction of an engineered disposal cell. The proposed remedial action will consist of relocating the uranium mill tailings, contaminated vicinity property materials, demolition debris, and windblown/weaterborne materials to a permanent repository at the Burro Canyon disposal site. The site is approximately 5 road mi (8 km) northeast of the mill sites on land recently transferred to the DOE by the Bureau of Land Management.

  16. Reid Rosnick/DC/USEPA/US 01/05/2011 07:14 AM

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    for information; at least a letter that is addressed to them is on the Subpart W Review website: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/docs/neshaps the risk assessment draft document within the last 2 months, contacted Cotter for real-time radon flux data is on the Subpart W Review website: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/docs/neshaps/subpart-w/uranium%20cotter%20test

  17. Proposed Rule To Implement the 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard: Revision on Subpart 1 Area Reclassification and Anti-Backsliding Provisions Under Former 1-Hour Ozone Standard; Proposed Deletion of Obsolete 1-Hour Ozone Standard Provision

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of NaturalDukeWakefield Municipal GasAdministration Medal01 Sandia4)9 Federal Register / Vol. 76,EXAMPLE 4 ***4

  18. Microsoft Word - AL2005-03.doc

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Program for Contractors' Purchasing Systems References: FAR 44.3, Contractors' Purchasing Systems Reviews DEAR Subpart 970.44 - Management and Operating Contractor Purchasing DOE...

  19. H. UNREVIEWED SAFETY QUESTIONS

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

    design and modifications. 835.1003 Workplace controls. Subpart L-Radioactive Contamination Control 835.1101 Control of material and equipment. 835.1102 Control of areas....

  20. AcqGuideChapter39pt2.doc

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    This subpart prescribes the technical standards for: Software applications and operating systems; Web-based intranet and internet information and applications; ...

  1. DOE Issues Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Electric Motors...

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

    regarding energy conservation standards for certain commercial and industrial electric motors, under subpart B of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 431, including a...

  2. PNNL-22342-2 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    , Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), Subpart H, "National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department

  3. PNNL-22342-3 Department of Energy Office of Science

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    , Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), Subpart H, "National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department

  4. EA-1664: Final Environmental Assessment

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    10 CFR Part 430 Energy Conservation Standards: Energy Conservation Standards for Fluorescent and Incandescent Lamps

  5. Summary of Decisions- July 30 – August 3, 2012

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Decisions were issued on: - Freedom of Information Act Appeal - Personnel Security (10 CFR Part 710)

  6. Nevada Test Site National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Calendar Year 2007

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Robert Grossman; Ronald Warren

    2008-06-01

    The Nevada Test Site (NTS) is operated by the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office. From 1951 through 1992, the NTS was operated as the nation's site for nuclear weapons testing. The release of man-made radionuclides from the NTS as a result of testing activities has been monitored since the first decade of atmospheric testing. After 1962, when nuclear tests were conducted only underground, the radiation exposure to the public surrounding the NTS was greatly reduced. After the 1992 moratorium on nuclear testing, radiation monitoring on the NTS focused on detecting airborne radionuclides which come from historically contaminated soils resuspended into the air (e.g., by winds) and tritium-contaminated soil moisture emitted to the air from soils through evapotranspiration. To protect the public from harmful levels of man-made radiation, the Clean Air Act, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) (Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 61 Subpart H) limits the release of radioactivity from a U.S. Department of Energy facility (e.g., the NTS) to 10 millirem per year (mrem/yr) effective dose equivalent to any member of the public. This is the dose limit established for someone living off of the NTS from radionuclides emitted to air from the NTS. This limit does not include the radiation doses that members of the public may receive through the intake of radioactive particles unrelated to NTS activities, such as those that come from naturally occurring elements in the environment (e.g., naturally occurring radionuclides in soil or radon gas from the earth or natural building materials), or from other man-made sources (e.g., medical treatments). The NTS demonstrates compliance using environmental measurements of radionuclide air concentrations at critical receptor locations. This method was approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for use on the NTS in 2001 and has been the sole method used since 2005. There are six critical receptor locations on the NTS that are actually pseudocritical receptor locations because they are hypothetical receptor locations; no person actually resides at these onsite locations. Annual average concentrations of detected radionuclides are compared with Concentration Levels (CL) for Environmental Compliance values listed in 40 CFR 61, Appendix E, Table 2. Compliance is demonstrated if the sum of fractions (CL/measured concentrations) of all detected radionuclides at each pseudo-critical receptor location is less than one. In 2007, as in all previous years for which this report has been produced, the NTS has demonstrated that the potential dose to the public from radiological emissions to air from current and past NTS activities is well below the 10 mrem/yr dose limit. Air sampling data collected onsite at each of the six pseudo-critical receptor stations on the NTS had average concentrations of nuclear test-related radioactivity that were a fraction of the limits listed in Table 2 in Appendix E of 40 CFR 61. They ranged from less than 1 percent to a maximum of 20 percent of the allowed NESHAP limit. Because the nearest member of the public resides approximately 20 kilometers (12 miles) from the NTS boundary, concentrations at this location would be only a small fraction of that measured on the NTS.

  7. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants - Radionuclide Emissions Calendar Year 2009

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ciucci, John

    2010-06-11

    The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office operates the Nevada Test Site (NTS) and North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF). From 1951 through 1992, the NTS was the continental testing location for U.S. nuclear weapons. The release of radionuclides from NTS activities has been monitored since the initiation of atmospheric testing. Limitation to underground detonations after 1962 greatly reduced radiation exposure to the public surrounding the NTS. After nuclear testing ended in 1992, NTS radiation monitoring focused on detecting airborne radionuclides from historically contaminated soils. These radionuclides are derived from re-suspension of soil (primarily by wind) and emission of tritium-contaminated soil moisture through evapotranspiration. Low amounts of tritium were also emitted to air at the NLVF, an NTS support complex in North Las Vegas. To protect the public from harmful levels of man-made radiation, the Clean Air Act, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) (Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 61 Subpart H) limits the release of radioactivity from a U.S. Department of Energy facility to 10 millirem per year (mrem/yr) effective dose equivalent to any member of the public. This limit does not include radiation not related to NTS activities. Unrelated doses could come from naturally occurring radioactive elements or from sources such as medically or commercially used radionuclides. The NTS demonstrates compliance with the NESHAP limit by using environmental measurements of radionuclide air concentrations at critical receptor locations. This method was approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for use on the NTS in 2001 and has been the sole method used since 2005. Six locations on the NTS have been established to act as critical receptor locations to demonstrate compliance with the NESHAP limit. These locations are actually pseudo-critical receptor stations, because no member of the public actually resides at these onsite locations. Compliance is demonstrated if the measured annual average concentration of each detected radionuclide at each of these locations is less than the NESHAP Concentration Levels (CLs) for Environmental Compliance listed in 40 CFR 61, Appendix E, Table 2. At any one location, if multiple radionuclides are detected, then compliance with NESHAP is demonstrated when the sum of the fractions (determined by dividing each radionuclide’s concentration by its CL and then adding the fractions together) is less than 1.0. In 2009, the potential dose from radiological emissions to air, resulting from both current and past NTS activities, at onsite compliance monitoring stations was a maximum of 1.69 mrem/yr, well below the 10 mrem/yr dose limit. Air sampling data collected at all six critical receptor stations had average concentrations of radioactivity that were a fraction of the CL values listed in Table 2 in Appendix E of 40 CFR 61. Concentrations ranged from less than 1 percent to a maximum of 17 percent of the allowed NESHAP limit. Because the nearest member of the public resides approximately 20 kilometers from potential release points on the NTS, concentrations at this location would be only a small fraction of that measured on the NTS. The potential dose to the public from NLVF emissions was also very low at 0.000044 mrem/yr, 230,000 times lower than the 10 mrem/yr limit.

  8. Reid Rosnick/DC/USEPA/US 05/21/2010 06:59 AM

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    : NESHAP Subpart W: Standards for Radon Emissions from Operating Uranium Mill Tailings - New ORD Lead Hi/CI/USEPA/US@EPA, David Carson/CI/USEPA/US@EPA, Souhail Al-Abed/CI/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 05/20/2010 03:39 PM Subject: NESHAP Subpart W: Standards for Radon Emissions from Operating Uranium Mill Tailings - New ORD Lead Hi Reid, I

  9. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    regarding regulation of radon emissions from uranium mills under the CAA's NESHAP provisions pursuant to 40, Subpart W, National Emission Standards for Radon Emissions From Operating Mill Tailings ("NESHAP Subpart W and update regulations to adequately limit radon emissions from operating uranium mills in a manner which

  10. Thornton, Marisa From: Thornton, Marisa on behalf of Collections.SubW

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    . NESHAP Subpart W is a radon emission standard for operating uranium mill tailings. In accordance rule for radon emissions from uranium mills - tomorrow 11 am EDT From: Peake, Tom Sent: Tuesday call on Subpart W draft rule for radon emissions from uranium mills tomorrow 11 am EDT 5th of 5

  11. October 24, 2003, Criteria and Guidelines For the Assessment...

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

    of the requirements established in CFR, part 10, section 830. 10 CFR 830 Safety Analysis and Design Software - Software that is not a part of a structure, system, or...

  12. Microsoft Word - Fossil Fuel EA Final EA

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

    DOE compared the Proposed Rule with the "no-action alternative" of using the current Federal building energy efficiency standards found at 10 CFR Part 433 and 10 CFR Part 435...

  13. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 11. CONTRACT...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    determined in accordance with the cost principles of 48 CFR part 31, appropriate for the type of organization to which the subcontract is to be awarded, as supplemented by 48 CFR...

  14. Statistical Analysis of Transient Cycle Test Results in a 40...

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

    Analysis of Transient Cycle Test Results in a 40 CFR Part 1065 Engine Dynamometer Test Cell Statistical Analysis of Transient Cycle Test Results in a 40 CFR Part 1065 Engine...

  15. DOE Directives and NNSA Policy Letters Enforceable under 10 C...

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

    DOE Directives and NNSA Policy Letters Enforceable under 10 C.F.R. Part 824 DOE Directives and NNSA Policy Letters Enforceable under 10 C.F.R. Part 824 June 26, 2015 - 2:24pm...

  16. Microsoft Word - MP 5 2 Final Rev 3

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 194.8, Approval process for waste shipment from waste generator sites for disposal at the WIPP 3.1.2 40 CFR Part 194.22, Quality Assurance 3.1.3 40...

  17. Implementation Guide for Use in Developing Technical Safety Requirements

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

    2014-09-08

    The guide was developed in support of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 830, Nuclear Safety Management. It provides guidance for the requirements defined in 10 CFR §830.205, Technical Safety Requirements.

  18. Regulatory Framework for Salt Waste Disposal and Tank Closure at the Savannah River Site - 13663

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thomas, Steve; Dickert, Ginger

    2013-07-01

    The end of the Cold War has left a legacy of approximately 37 million gallons of radioactive waste in the aging waste tanks at the Department of Energy's Savannah River Site (SRS). A robust program is in place to remove waste from these tanks, treat the waste to separate into a relatively small volume of high-level waste and a large volume of low-level waste, and to actively dispose of the low-level waste on-site and close the waste tanks and associated ancillary structures. To support performance-based, risk-informed decision making and to ensure compliance with all regulatory requirements, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its current and past contractors have worked closely with the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to develop and implement a framework for on-site low-level waste disposal and closure of the SRS waste tanks. The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, provides DOE the authority to manage defense-related radioactive waste. DOE Order 435.1 and its associated manual and guidance documents detail this radioactive waste management process. The DOE also has a requirement to consult with the NRC in determining that waste that formerly was classified as high-level waste can be safely managed as either low-level waste or transuranic waste. Once DOE makes a determination, NRC then has a responsibility to monitor DOE's actions in coordination with SCDHEC to ensure compliance with the Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 61 (10CFR61), Subpart C performance objectives. The management of hazardous waste substances or components at SRS is regulated by SCDHEC and the EPA. The foundation for the interactions between DOE, SCDHEC and EPA is the SRS Federal Facility Agreement (FFA). Managing this array of requirements and successfully interacting with regulators, consultants and stakeholders is a challenging task but ensures thorough and thoughtful processes for disposing of the SRS low-level waste and the closure of the tank farm facilities. (authors)

  19. Distribution Integrity Management Plant (DIMP)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gonzales, Jerome F.

    2012-05-07

    This document is the distribution integrity management plan (Plan) for the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Natural Gas Distribution System. This Plan meets the requirements of 49 CFR Part 192, Subpart P Distribution Integrity Management Programs (DIMP) for the LANL Natural Gas Distribution System. This Plan was developed by reviewing records and interviewing LANL personnel. The records consist of the design, construction, operation and maintenance for the LANL Natural Gas Distribution System. The records system for the LANL Natural Gas Distribution System is limited, so the majority of information is based on the judgment of LANL employees; the maintenance crew, the Corrosion Specialist and the Utilities and Infrastructure (UI) Civil Team Leader. The records used in this report are: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) 7100.1-1, Report of Main and Service Line Inspection, Natural Gas Leak Survey, Gas Leak Response Report, Gas Leak and Repair Report, and Pipe-to-Soil Recordings. The specific elements of knowledge of the infrastructure used to evaluate each threat and prioritize risks are listed in Sections 6 and 7, Threat Evaluation and Risk Prioritization respectively. This Plan addresses additional information needed and a method for gaining that data over time through normal activities. The processes used for the initial assessment of Threat Evaluation and Risk Prioritization are the methods found in the Simple, Handy Risk-based Integrity Management Plan (SHRIMP{trademark}) software package developed by the American Pipeline and Gas Agency (APGA) Security and Integrity Foundation (SIF). SHRIMP{trademark} uses an index model developed by the consultants and advisors of the SIF. Threat assessment is performed using questions developed by the Gas Piping Technology Company (GPTC) as modified and added to by the SHRIMP{trademark} advisors. This Plan is required to be reviewed every 5 years to be continually refined and improved. Records for all piping system installed after the effective date of this Plan will be captured and retained in the UI records documentation system. Primary Utility Asbuilts are maintained by Utilities Mapping (UMAP) and additional records are maintained on the N drive. Engineering Change Notices (ECNs) are stored on the N drive under configuration management and kept up by Utilities and Infrastructure Division Office (UI-DO). Records include, at a minimum, the location where new piping and appurtenances are installed and the material of which they are constructed.

  20. EA-1774: Final Environmental Assessment

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    10 CFR Part 431 Energy Conservation Standards: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Water Heaters, Direct Heating Equipment, and Pool Heaters

  1. Enforcement Guidance Supplement 01-01: Nuclear Weapon Program...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    This enforcement guidance focuses on the applicability of 10 CFR Part 830 to nuclear weapon programs and...

  2. D-1 2013 SITE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Federal, State, and Local Laws and

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    : Radioactive Waste Management 07/09/1999 DOE P 450.5 Policy: Line Environment, Safety, and Health Oversight 06 for State, Local and Regional Oil Removal Contingency Plans 40 CFR 110 Discharge of Oil 40 CFR 112 Oil Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program: Criteria and Standards 40 CFR 148 Hazardous Waste Injection

  3. D-1 2012 SITE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Federal, State, and Local Laws and

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    : Radioactive Waste Management 07/09/1999 DOE P 450.5 Policy: Line Environment, Safety, and Health Oversight 06 for State, Local and Regional Oil Removal Contingency Plans 40 CFR 110 Discharge of Oil 40 CFR 112 Oil Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program: Criteria and Standards 40 CFR 148 Hazardous Waste Injection

  4. D-1 2011 SITE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Federal, State, and Local Laws and

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    : Radioactive Waste Management 07/09/1999 DOE P 450.5 Policy: Line Environment, Safety, and Health Oversight 06 for State, Local and Regional Oil Removal Contingency Plans 40 CFR 110 Discharge of Oil 40 CFR 112 Oil Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program: Criteria and Standards 40 CFR 148 Hazardous Waste Injection

  5. RESPONSIBILITIES OF AN INVESTIGATOR WHO IS ALSO A SPONSOR

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    (Investigational Device Exemptions) 21 CFR 814 (Premarket Approval of Medical Devices) 21 CFR 820 (Quality System medical devices that involve electrical power and are not FDA approved or licensed for human use must b UNIVERSITY HEALTH SYSTEM Human Research Protection Program #12;2 21 CFR 320 (Bioavailability

  6. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants - Radionuclide Emissions, Calendar Year 2011

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Ecological and Environmental Monitoring

    2012-06-19

    The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office operates the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) and North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF). From 1951 through 1992, the NNSS was the continental testing location for U.S. nuclear weapons. The release of radionuclides from NNSS activities has been monitored since the initiation of atmospheric testing. Limitation to underground detonations after 1962 greatly reduced radiation exposure to the public surrounding the NNSS. After nuclear testing ended in 1992, NNSS radiation monitoring focused on detecting airborne radionuclides from historically contaminated soils. These radionuclides are derived from re-suspension of soil (primarily by wind) and emission of tritium-contaminated soil moisture through evapotranspiration. Low amounts of legacy-related tritium are also emitted to air at the NLVF, an NNSS support complex in North Las Vegas. To protect the public from harmful levels of man-made radiation, the Clean Air Act, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) (Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 61 Subpart H) limits the release of radioactivity from a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facility to that which would cause 10 millirem per year (mrem/yr) effective dose equivalent to any member of the public. This limit does not include radiation unrelated to NNSS activities. Unrelated doses could come from naturally occurring radioactive elements, from sources such as medically or commercially used radionuclides, or from sources outside of the United States, such as the damaged Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan. Radionuclides from the Fukushima nuclear power plant were detected at the NNSS in March 2011 and are discussed further in Section III. The NNSS demonstrates compliance with the NESHAP limit by using environmental measurements of radionuclide air concentrations at critical receptor locations. This method was approved by the EPA for use on the NNSS in 2001 and has been the sole method used since 2005. Six locations on the NNSS have been established to act as critical receptor locations to demonstrate compliance with the NESHAP limit. These locations are actually pseudo-critical receptor stations, because no member of the public actually resides at these onsite locations. Compliance is demonstrated if the measured annual average concentration is less than the NESHAP Concentration Levels (CLs) for Environmental Compliance listed in 40 CFR 61, Appendix E, Table 2. For multiple radionuclides, compliance is demonstrated when the sum of the fractions (determined by dividing each radionuclide's concentration by its CL and then adding the fractions together) is less than 1.0. In 2011, the potential dose from radiological emissions to air, resulting from both current and past NNSS activities, at onsite compliance monitoring stations was well below the 10 mrem/yr dose limit. Air sampling data collected at all air monitoring stations had average concentrations of radioactivity that were a fraction of the CL values. Concentrations ranged from less than 1% to a maximum of 12.2% of the allowed NESHAP limit. Because the nearest member of the public resides about 20 kilometers from potential release points on the NNSS, dose to the public would be only a small fraction of the value measured on the NNSS. The potential dose to the public from NLVF emissions was also very low at 0.000024 mrem/yr, more than 400,000 times lower than the 10 mrem/yr limit.

  7. TO: Procurement Directors FROM: Director Contract and Financial...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Guide Chapter 42.101 in a series of tables arranged by contract type. The order of the tables follows the order used in the Subparts of FAR Part 16- TYPES OF CONTRACTS, which...

  8. The accelerated approval process in oncology : an examination of the conversion rate of approved therapies to full approval

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Kim, Jean Jinsun

    2006-01-01

    In 1992, Accelerated Approval, or Subpart H approval, was added to the NDA regulations so promising products that provide a meaningful therapeutic benefit for serious or life-threatening diseases could be introduced to the ...

  9. G

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Exceeding 5 Years References: FAR Subpart 17.204(e) DEAR 970.1706 Acquisition Letter 2013-3 Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 When Is this Acquisition Letter (AL) Effective?...

  10. DOE National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures...

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

    PART 1021 - NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT IMPLEMENTING PROCEDURES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 2401 et seq. Subpart...

  11. Page 1 of 3 DRAFT Minutes

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    (Cotter) and under Rad NESHAPs there is no standard for Rn released from surface mining operation, thinks that in Subpart W should take into consideration the radon from uranium mines in the vicinity of the uranium mill

  12. Reid Rosnick/DC/USEPA/US 07/06/2010 09:15 AM

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    the Economic Impact Analysis that assists in EPA's defense of a proposed rulemaking decision for NESHAP Subpart are (determining radon flux from the evaporation ponds) in case they have to refute what we have done

  13. Subpage migration and replication in CC-NUMA multiprocessors 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nadaanayakinahalu, Sudhindra

    1999-01-01

    the benefits of dynamic memory management schemes for large memory page sizes. This thesis proposes two new schemes, subpart migration/replication and partial page invalidation for better dynamic memory management. New hardware designs are suggested...

  14. Audit Services Requirements Discussed In Guide Chapter 42.101...

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

    in the order used in the Subparts of FAR Part 16-TYPES OF CONTRACS, which is: Fixed-Price, Cost-Reimbursement, Incentive, Indefinite-Delivery, Time-and-Materials, and...

  15. Comparison and coherence with the chromium electroplating NESHAP at Hill Air Force Base

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Palmer, G. [OO-ALC/EME, Hill AFB, UT (United States); Hallenburg, E. [JBR Environmental Consultants, Inc., Sandy, UT (United States)

    1998-12-31

    One of the major functions at the landing gear facility located at Hill AFB are the chromium electroplating operations. This facility is classified as a major, large-hard-chromium electroplating operation, and was likely the first source in United States to comply with Subpart N of the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP). A required initial performance test under Subpart N was required, besides establishing site-specific operating parameter values. These requirements were established after final promulgation of NESHAPS`s Subpart N on January 25, 1995. Because this compliance effort was the first test of Subpart N in EPA Region VIII, many precedents were established. Classifying the state-of-the-art MAPCO scrubber system to a specific type of scrubber listed in Subpart N posed some challenges and interpretation. The biggest challenge was compliance with the prescribed work practice standard, monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping requirements. The chromium electroplating environment is a corrosive and caustic domicile for equipment and components. With the promulgation of Subpart N, the electroplating facility received additional attention. Following the initial performance test, various modifications were deemed necessary to the control systems, ventilation ducts, exhaust configuration, mesh pads, mesh pad housing and other electroplating assemblages. Decommissioning of the chromium anodizing tanks at the facility was also a result of trying to achieve compliance. Because of system upgrades, a new initial performance test was warranted. The improved system operated under new flow characteristics, site-specific parameter values, and improved collection and scrubbing efficiencies.

  16. Seismic Design Expectations Report

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    flood, and lightning. This report only focuses on the seismic design expectations. NPH safety requirements are described in 10 CFR Part 830, Nuclear Safety Management, DOE O...

  17. EA-1637: Final Environmental Assessment

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    10 CFR 431 Energy Conservation Program for Commerical and Industrial Equipment: Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner and Packaged Terminal Heat Pump Energy Conservation Standards; Final Rule

  18. Enforcement Policy Statement Regarding Walk-in Cooler/Walk-in...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    the four energy conservation standards applicable to dedicated condensing refrigeration systems operating at medium temperatures that are promulgated at 10 C.F.R. 431.306(e),...

  19. Enforcement Policy Statement Regarding Walk-in Cooler/Walk-in...

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

    the four energy conservation standards applicable to dedicated condensing refrigeration systems operating at medium temperatures that are promulgated at 10 C.F.R. 431.306(e)....

  20. Development of a Transportable, 1065-Compliant Emissions Measurement...

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

    Transportable, 1065-Compliant Emissions Measurement System CFR 1065 test procedures for heavy-heavy duty engines for the 2010 model year and later require laboratory upgrades to...

  1. A Mountain-Scale Monitoring Network for Yucca Mountain Performance Confirmation

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Freifeld, Barry; Tsang, Yvonne

    2006-01-01

    A Mountain-Scale MonitoringNetwork for Yucca Mountain Performance Confirmation Barrythe performance of Yucca Mountain is required by 10 CFR Part

  2. RL-721 REV? I. Project Title: NEPA REVIEW SCREENING FORM Document...

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

    of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities" and 40 CFR part 280, "Technical Standards and Corrective Action Requirements for Owners and Operators of...

  3. Independent Oversight Review of the Los Alamos National Laboratory...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Programs ALARA As Low As Reasonably Achievable ARA Airborne Radiation Area CA Contamination Area CAM Continuous Air Monitor CFR Code of Federal Regulations CHP Certified...

  4. Microsoft PowerPoint - 1_Cruz_Import Export_NMMSS 2013 Presentation...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    reactor components to specified countries Authorize imports (10 CFR 110.27) of major reactor components, source, special nuclear andor byproduct materials to authorized...

  5. EA-1673: Final Environmental Assessment

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    10 CFR 431 Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment: Energy Conservation Standards and Test Procedures for Commercial Heating, Air-Conditioning, and Water-Heating Equipment

  6. Selection Process and Notification for Small Business Innovation...

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

    Designated Responsible Employee for complying with national policies prohibiting discrimination (see 10 CFR 1040.5) Representation of limited rights data and restricted software,...

  7. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal Register, 72 FR 33696...

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

    Actions and Mandates Final Rule, Federal Register, 74 FR 10830, 10 CFR Part 436, March 13, 2009 Federal Government Energy Management Conservation Programs Reports to Congress...

  8. combined_supplemental_hud_multifamily_weatherization_list_3-2...

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

    lihtc.xls More Documents & Publications list2eligiblemultifamilybuildings10-cfr-440-22b4ii.xls rdmfhlowandverylow.xls hudlist-1...

  9. Beryllium - HPMC Occupational Health Services

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

    Hanford in accordance with 10 CFR 850. This program is designed to provide professional services in support of Hanford workers. HPMC OMS is committed to the health, preventive...

  10. A Basic Overview of Occupational Radiation Exposure Monitoring...

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

    and DOE Radiation Exposure Monitoring System programs that aid in the oversight of radiation protection activities at DOE. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.),...

  11. Document

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

    48 CFR Chapter 1 Federal Acquisition Regulations; Purchases from Federal Prison Industries- Requirement for Market Research and Small Entity Compliance Guide; Interim...

  12. May 20, 2015 Webinar - Guidance for Conducting Technical Analyses...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    - Guidance for Conducting Technical Analyses for 10 CFR Part 61 Performance & RIsk Assessment (P&RA) Community of Practice (CoP) Webinar - May 20, 2015 - Guidance for...

  13. LANL Sustainable Design Guide - Appendices

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

    government, thereby saving taxpayer dollars and reducing emissions that contribute to air pollution and global climate change. 10CFR434 - Energy Conservation Voluntary...

  14. Granular Dynamics in Pebble Bed Reactor Cores

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Laufer, Michael Robert

    2013-01-01

    Plants,” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 10 CFR 50,Information,” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 10 CFRTHTR Operation,” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Adams

  15. General Counsel Legal Interpretation Regarding Medical Removal...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Regarding Medical Removal Protection Benefits Pursuant to 10 CFR Part 850, Chronic Beryllium Disease Prevention Program General Counsel Legal Interpretation Regarding Medical...

  16. Document | Department of Energy

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

    Counsel Legal Interpretation Regarding Medical Removal Protection Benefits Pursuant to 10 CFR Part 850, Chronic Beryllium Disease Prevention Program Inspection Report: IG-0769...

  17. Internal Revenue Service

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

    4l -123456789012345 m If this is an individual account plan, was there a blackout period? (See instructions and 29 CFR 2520.101-3.) ......

  18. IMPLEMENTATION OF DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ACQUISITION REGULATION...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Requirements 1. The results of a test that demonstrates the absence of any illegal drugs (existing requirements: 10 CFR 707; DEAR 970.5223-4 Workplace Substance Abuse...

  19. EA-1662: Final Environmental Assessment

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    10 CFR Part 430 Energy Conservation Program: EnergyConservation Standards for Certain Consumer Products (Dishwashers, Dehumidifiers, Microwave Ovens, and Electric and Gas Kitchen Ranges and Ovens)

  20. Design of Complex Systems to Achieve Passive Safety: Natural Circulation Cooling of Liquid Salt Pebble Bed Reactors

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Scarlat, Raluca Olga

    2012-01-01

    1986, 10 CFR Part 50. ). Defence in Depth in Nuclear Safety.Report by the International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group. (Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Safety. The Accident at