National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for llw disposal nepa

  1. Integration of US Department of Energy contractor installations for the purpose of optimizing treatment, storage, and disposal of low-level radioactive waste (LLW)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lucas, M.; Gnoose, J.; Coony, M.; Martin, E.; Piscitella, R.

    1998-02-01

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) manages a multibillion dollar environmental management (EM) program. In June 1996, the Assistant Secretary of Energy for EM issued a memorandum with guidance and a vision for a ten year planning process for the EM Program. The purpose of this process, which became known as the Accelerated Cleanup: Focus on 2006, is to make step changes within the DOE complex regarding the approach for making meaningful environmental cleanup progress. To augment the process, Assistant Secretary requested the site contractors to engage in an effort to identify and evaluate integration alternatives for EM waste stream treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) that would parallel the 2006 Plan. In October 1996, ten DOE contractor installations began the task of identifying alternative opportunities for low level radioactive waste (LLW). Cost effective, efficient solutions were necessary to meet all requirements associated with storing, characterizing, treating, packaging, transporting, and disposing of LLW while protecting the workers` health and safety, and minimizing impacts to the environment. To develop these solutions, a systems engineering approach was used to establish the baseline requirements, to develop alternatives, and to evaluate the alternatives. Key assumptions were that unique disposal capabilities exist within the DOE that must be maintained; private sector disposal capability for some LLW may not continue to exist into the foreseeable future; and decisions made by the LLW Team must be made on a system or complex wide basis to fully realize the potential cost and schedule benefits. This integration effort promoted more accurate waste volume estimates and forecasts; enhanced recognition of existing treatment, storage, and disposal capabilities and capacities; and improved identification of cost savings across the complex.

  2. Disposal of LLW and ILW in Germany - Characterisation and Documentation of Waste Packages with Respect to the Change of Requirements

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bandt, G.; Spicher, G.; Steyer, St.; Brennecke, P.

    2008-07-01

    Since the 1998 termination of LLW and ILW emplacement in the Morsleben repository (ERAM), Germany, the treatment, conditioning and documentation of radioactive waste products and packages have been continued on the basis of the waste acceptance requirements as of 1995, prepared for the Konrad repository near Salzgitter in Lower Saxony, Germany. The resulting waste products and packages are stored in interim storage facilities. Due to the Konrad license issued in 2002 the waste acceptance requirements have to be completed by additional requirements imposed by the licensing authority, e. g. for the declaration of chemical waste package constituents. Therefore, documentation of waste products and packages which are checked by independent experts and are in parts approved by the responsible authority (Office for Radiation Protection, BfS) up to now will have to be checked again for fulfilling the final waste acceptance requirements prior to disposal. In order to simplify these additional checks, databases are used to ensure an easy access to all known facts about the waste packages. A short balance of the existing waste products and packages which are already checked and partly approved by BfS as well as an overview on the established databases ensuring a fast access to the known facts about the conditioning processes is presented. (authors)

  3. RH-LLW Disposal Facility Project CD-2/3 to Design/Build Proposal Reconciliation Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Annette L. Schafer

    2012-06-01

    A reconciliation plan was developed and implemented to address potential gaps and responses to gaps between the design/build vendor proposals and the Critical Decision-2/3 approval request package for the Remote-Handled Low Level Waste Disposal Facility Project. The plan and results of the plan implementation included development of a reconciliation team comprised of subject matter experts from Battelle Energy Alliance and the Department of Energy Idaho Operations Office, identification of reconciliation questions, reconciliation by the team, identification of unresolved/remaining issues, and identification of follow-up actions and subsequent approvals of responses. The plan addressed the potential for gaps to exist in the following areas: • Department of Energy Order 435.1, “Radioactive Waste Management,” requirements, including the performance assessment, composite analysis, monitoring plan, performance assessment/composite analysis maintenance plan, and closure plan • Environmental assessment supporting the National Environmental Policy Act • Nuclear safety • Safeguards and security • Emplacement operations • Requirements for commissioning • General project implementation. The reconciliation plan and results of the plan implementation are provided in a business-sensitive project file. This report provides the reconciliation plan and non-business sensitive summary responses to identified gaps.

  4. LLW Forum meeting report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-08-01

    This report summarizes the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Forum (LLW Forum) meeting on May 29 through May 31, 1996.The LLW Forum is an association of state and compact representatives, appointed by governors and compact commissions, established to facilitate state and compact implementation of the Low-Level Waste Policy Act of 1980 and the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 and to promote the objectives of low-level radioactive waste regional compacts. The LLW forum provides an opportunity for state and compact officials to share information with one another and to exchange views with officials of federal agencies and other interested parties.

  5. NEPA Contracting Reform Guidance

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

    NEPA process costs < NEPA contractor evaluation procedures < details on the DOE NEPA Web site U.S. Department of Energy, Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance, December 1996...

  6. NEPA Documentation

    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 -Department of EnergyNEW1 NEPA Determination: LM-12-11Note for:

  7. LLW Forum meeting report, May 7--9, 1997

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Norris, C.; Brown, H.; Lovinger, T.; Scheele, L.; Shaker, M.A.

    1997-12-31

    The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Forum met in Chicago, Illinois, on may 7--9, 1997. Twenty-three Forum Participants, Alternate Forum Participants, and meeting designees representing 20 compacts and states participated. A report on the meeting is given under the following subtitles: New developments in states and compacts; Upgrading an existing disposal facility; Revisions to DOE Order 5820 re DOE waste management; Conference of radiation control program directors: Recent and upcoming activities; National Conference of State Legislatures` (NCSL) low-level radioactive waste working group: Recent and upcoming activities; Executive session; LLW forum business session; Public involvement and risk communication: Success at West Valley, New York; DOE low-level waste management program; impact of the International Atomic Energy Agency`s convention on waste; Panel discussion: The environmental justice concept--Past, present and future; New technologies for processing and disposal of LLRW; High-level and low-level radioactive waste: A dialogue on parallels and intersections; Draft agreement re uniform application of manifesting procedures; Regulatory issues focus; LLW forum October 1997 agenda planning; Resolutions; LLW forum regulatory issues discussion group meets; and Attendance.

  8. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Categorically Excluded...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    NEPA National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Categorically Excluded Actions National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Categorically Excluded Actions Categorical Exclusions (CX)...

  9. NEPA Policy Statement

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The NEPA process is a valuable planning tool and provides an opportunity to improve the Department of Energy decisions and build public trust. Reviews of the Department's NEPA program have shown...

  10. NEPA Litigation Surveys

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    CEQ publishes surveys on NEPA litigation on an annual basis. These surveys identify the number of cases involving a NEPA based cause of action, Federal agencies that were identified as a lead...

  11. Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste (RHLLW) Disposal Project Code of Record

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S.L. Austad, P.E.; L.E. Guillen, P.E.; C. W. McKnight, P.E.; D. S. Ferguson, P.E.

    2010-10-01

    The Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project addresses an anticipated shortfall in remote-handled LLW disposal capability following cessation of operations at the existing facility, which will continue until it is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of fiscal year 2015). Development of a new onsite disposal facility, the highest ranked alternative, will provide necessary remote handled LLW disposal capability and will ensure continuity of operations that generate remote-handled LLW. This report documents the Code of Record for design of a new LLW disposal capability.

  12. Waste simulant development for evaluation of LLW melter system technology

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shade, J.W.

    1994-05-25

    This document describes the LLW simulant compositions, basis for the simulants, and recipes for preparing nonradioactive simulants for LLW melter tests.

  13. Preliminary low-level waste feed definition guidance - LLW pretreatment interface

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shade, J.W.; Connor, J.M.; Hendrickson, D.W.; Powell, W.J.; Watrous, R.A.

    1995-02-01

    The document describes limits for key constituents in the LLW feed, and the bases for these limits. The potential variability in the stream is then estimated and compared to the limits. Approaches for accomodating uncertainty in feed inventory, processing strategies, and process design (melter and disposal system) are discussed. Finally, regulatory constraints are briefly addressed.

  14. LLW Notes, Volume 12, Number 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Norris, C.; Brown, H. [eds.; Colsant, J.; Lovinger, T.; Scheele, L.; Shaker, M.A.

    1997-03-01

    Contents include articles entitled: California DHS sues US Interior Department to compel land transfer; LLW Forum holds winter meeting; LLW Forum waste information working group meets; LLW Forum regulatory issues discussion group meets; Envirocare investigation transferred to feds; Host state TCC meets in Laughlin, Nevada; BLM to require new permit for California site testing; Federal agencies and committees; Pena sworn in as Energy Secretary, Grumbly departs DOE; U.S. Supreme Court tackles property rights issues; GAO to study DOI`s actions; Congress scrutinizes FY `98 budget requests; and Senate committee passes high-level waste bill: Clinton threatens to veto.

  15. LLW notes, Vol. 11, No. 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-03-01

    `LLW Notes` is distributed by Afton Associates, Inc. to Low-Level Radioactive Waste Forum Participants and other state, and compact officials identified by those Participants to receive LLW Notes. The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Forum (LLW Forum) is an association of state and compact representatives, appointed by governors and compact commissions, established to facilitate state and compact implementation of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980 and the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy amendments Act of 1985 and to promote the objectives of low-level radioactive waste regional compacts. The LLW Forum provides an opportunity for state and compact officials to share information with one another and to exchange views with officials of federal agencies and other interested parties.

  16. LLW notes. Volume 11, No.8

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-12-01

    `LLW Notes` is distributed by Afton Associates, Inc. to Low-Level Radioactive Waste Forum Participants and other state, and compact officials identified by those Participants to receive `LLW Notes`. The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Forum (LLW Forum) is an association of state and compact representatives, appointed by governors and compact commissions, established to facilitate state and compact implementation of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980 and the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 and to promote the objectives of low-level radioactive waste regional compacts. The LLW Forum provides an opportunity for state and compact officials to share information with one another and to exchange views with officials of federal agencies and other interested parties.

  17. Greater-than-Class C low-level radioactive waste characterization. Appendix E-2: Mixed GTCC LLW assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kirner, N.P. [Ebasco Environmental, Idaho Falls, ID (United States)

    1994-09-01

    Mixed greater-than-Class C low-level radioactive waste (mixed GTCC LLW) is waste that combines two characteristics: it is radioactive, and it is hazardous. This report uses information compiled from Greater-Than-Class C Low-Level Radioactive Waste Characterization: Estimated Volumes, Radionuclide Activities, and Other Characteristics (DOE/LLW 1 14, Revision 1), and applies it to the question of how much and what types of mixed GTCC LLW are generated and are likely to require disposal in facilities jointly regulated by the DOE and the NRC. The report describes how to classify a RCRA hazardous waste, and then applies that classification process to the 41 GTCC LLW waste types identified in the DOE/LLW-114 (Revision 1). Of the 41 GTCC LLW categories identified, only six were identified in this study as potentially requiring regulation as hazardous waste under RCRA. These wastes can be combined into the following three groups: fuel-in decontamination resins, organic liquids, and process waste consisting of lead scrap/shielding from a sealed source manufacturer. For the base case, no mixed GTCC LLW is expected from nuclear utilities or sealed source licensees, whereas only 177 ml of mixed GTCC LLW are expected to be produced by other generators through the year 2035. This relatively small volume represents approximately 40% of the base case estimate for GTCC wastes from other generators. For these other generators, volume estimates for mixed GTCC LLW ranged from less than 1 m{sup 3} to 187 m{sup 3}, depending on assumptions and treatments applied to the wastes.

  18. Low-level radioactive waste disposal technologies used outside the United States

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Templeton, K.J.; Mitchell, S.J.; Molton, P.M.; Leigh, I.W.

    1994-01-01

    Low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal technologies are an integral part of the waste management process. In the United States, commercial LLW disposal is the responsibility of the State or groups of States (compact regions). The United States defines LLW as all radioactive waste that is not classified as spent nuclear fuel, high- level radioactive waste, transuranic waste, or by-product material as defined in Section II(e)(2) of the Atomic Energy Act. LLW may contain some long-lived components in very low concentrations. Countries outside the United States, however, may define LLW differently and may use different disposal technologies. This paper outlines the LLW disposal technologies that are planned or being used in Canada, China, Finland, France, Germany, Japan, Sweden, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom (UK).

  19. Comparison of low-level waste disposal programs of DOE and selected international countries

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Meagher, B.G. [Lockheed Idaho Technologies Co., Idaho Falls, ID (United States); Cole, L.T. [Cole and Associates (United States)

    1996-06-01

    The purpose of this report is to examine and compare the approaches and practices of selected countries for disposal of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) with those of the US Department of Energy (DOE). The report addresses the programs for disposing of wastes into engineered LLW disposal facilities and is not intended to address in-situ options and practices associated with environmental restoration activities or the management of mill tailings and mixed LLW. The countries chosen for comparison are France, Sweden, Canada, and the United Kingdom. The countries were selected as typical examples of the LLW programs which have evolved under differing technical constraints, regulatory requirements, and political/social systems. France was the first country to demonstrate use of engineered structure-type disposal facilities. The UK has been actively disposing of LLW since 1959. Sweden has been disposing of LLW since 1983 in an intermediate-depth disposal facility rather than a near-surface disposal facility. To date, Canada has been storing its LLW but will soon begin operation of Canada`s first demonstration LLW disposal facility.

  20. Commercial disposal options for Idaho National Engineering Laboratory low-level radioactive waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Porter, C.L.; Widmayer, D.A.

    1995-09-01

    The Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) is a Department of Energy (DOE)-owned, contractor-operated site. Significant quantities of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) have been generated and disposed of onsite at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC). The INEL expects to continue generating LLW while performing its mission and as aging facilities are decommissioned. An on-going Performance Assessment process for the RWMC underscores the potential for reduced or limited LLW disposal capacity at the existing onsite facility. In order to properly manage the anticipated amount of LLW, the INEL is investigating various disposal options. These options include building a new facility, disposing the LLW at other DOE sites, using commercial disposal facilities, or seeking a combination of options. This evaluation reports on the feasibility of using commercial disposal facilities.

  1. Disposal of low-level and mixed low-level radioactive waste during 1990

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-08-01

    Isotopic inventories and other data are presented for low-level radioactive waste (LLW) and mixed LLW disposed (and occasionally stored) during calendar year 1990 at commercial disposal facilities and Department of Energy (DOE) sites. Detailed isotopic information is presented for the three commercial disposal facilities located near Barnwell, SC, Richland, WA, and Beatty, NV. Less information is presented for the Envirocare disposal facility located near Clive, UT, and for LLW stored during 1990 at the West Valley site. DOE disposal information is included for the Savannah River Site (including the saltstone facility), Nevada Test Site, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Hanford Site, Y-12 Site, and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Summary information is presented about stored DOE LLW. Suggestions are made about improving LLW disposal data.

  2. Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project Code of Record

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S.L. Austad, P.E.; L.E. Guillen, P.E.; C. W. McKnight, P.E.; D. S. Ferguson, P.E.

    2012-06-01

    The Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste (LLW) Disposal Project addresses an anticipated shortfall in remote-handled LLW disposal capability following cessation of operations at the existing facility, which will continue until it is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). Development of a new onsite disposal facility will provide necessary remote-handled LLW disposal capability and will ensure continuity of operations that generate remote-handled LLW. This report documents the Code of Record for design of a new LLW disposal capability. The report is owned by the Design Authority, who can authorize revisions and exceptions. This report will be retained for the lifetime of the facility.

  3. Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project Code of Record

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S.L. Austad, P.E.; L.E. Guillen, P.E.; C. W. McKnight, P.E.; D. S. Ferguson, P.E.

    2011-01-01

    The Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste (LLW) Disposal Project addresses an anticipated shortfall in remote-handled LLW disposal capability following cessation of operations at the existing facility, which will continue until it is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). Development of a new onsite disposal facility, the highest ranked alternative, will provide necessary remote-handled LLW disposal capability and will ensure continuity of operations that generate remote-handled LLW. This report documents the Code of Record for design of a new LLW disposal capability. The report is owned by the Design Authority, who can authorize revisions and exceptions. This report will be retained for the lifetime of the facility.

  4. Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project Code of Record

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Austad, S. L.; Guillen, L. E.; McKnight, C. W.; Ferguson, D. S.

    2015-04-01

    The Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste (LLW) Disposal Project addresses an anticipated shortfall in remote-handled LLW disposal capability following cessation of operations at the existing facility, which will continue until it is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). Development of a new onsite disposal facility will provide necessary remote-handled LLW disposal capability and will ensure continuity of operations that generate remote-handled LLW. This report documents the Code of Record for design of a new LLW disposal capability. The report is owned by the Design Authority, who can authorize revisions and exceptions. This report will be retained for the lifetime of the facility.

  5. Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project Code of Record

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S.L. Austad, P.E.; L.E. Guillen, P.E.; C. W. McKnight, P.E.; D. S. Ferguson, P.E.

    2014-06-01

    The Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste (LLW) Disposal Project addresses an anticipated shortfall in remote-handled LLW disposal capability following cessation of operations at the existing facility, which will continue until it is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). Development of a new onsite disposal facility will provide necessary remote-handled LLW disposal capability and will ensure continuity of operations that generate remote-handled LLW. This report documents the Code of Record for design of a new LLW disposal capability. The report is owned by the Design Authority, who can authorize revisions and exceptions. This report will be retained for the lifetime of the facility.

  6. Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project Code of Record

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S.L. Austad, P.E.; L.E. Guillen, P.E.; C. W. McKnight, P.E.; D. S. Ferguson, P.E.

    2012-04-01

    The Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste (LLW) Disposal Project addresses an anticipated shortfall in remote-handled LLW disposal capability following cessation of operations at the existing facility, which will continue until it is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). Development of a new onsite disposal facility will provide necessary remote-handled LLW disposal capability and will ensure continuity of operations that generate remote-handled LLW. This report documents the Code of Record for design of a new LLW disposal capability. The report is owned by the Design Authority, who can authorize revisions and exceptions. This report will be retained for the lifetime of the facility.

  7. Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project Code of Record

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S.L. Austad, P.E.; L.E. Guillen, P.E.; C. W. McKnight, P.E.; D. S. Ferguson, P.E.

    2011-04-01

    The Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste (LLW) Disposal Project addresses an anticipated shortfall in remote-handled LLW disposal capability following cessation of operations at the existing facility, which will continue until it is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). Development of a new onsite disposal facility, the highest ranked alternative, will provide necessary remote-handled LLW disposal capability and will ensure continuity of operations that generate remote-handled LLW. This report documents the Code of Record for design of a new LLW disposal capability. The report is owned by the Design Authority, who can authorize revisions and exceptions. This report will be retained for the lifetime of the facility.

  8. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) | Department of Energy

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

    Environmental Management System National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Regulations and Links DOE NEPA Website NEPA Compliance Program...

  9. Council on Environmental Quality Collaboration in NEPA A Handbook...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Council on Environmental Quality Collaboration in NEPA A Handbook for NEPA Practitioners Council on Environmental Quality Collaboration in NEPA A Handbook for NEPA Practitioners...

  10. Tribal Energy NEPA Fundamentals Workshop

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Tribal Energy NEPA Fundamentals Workshop is a three-day workshop for tribes to understand how to manage the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process and implement the Council on...

  11. Tribal Energy NEPA Fundamentals Workshop

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Hosted by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), this two-day workshop is for tribes involved in energy and natural resource development to understand how to manage the NEPA process,...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

    2010-02-01

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

    2010-10-01

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; Mike Lehto

    2010-05-01

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

  15. Project Execution Plan for the Remote Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Danny Anderson

    2014-07-01

    As part of ongoing cleanup activities at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL), closure of the Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) is proceeding under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (42 USC 9601 et seq. 1980). INL-generated radioactive waste has been disposed of at RWMC since 1952. The Subsurface Disposal Area (SDA) at RWMC accepted the bulk of INL’s contact and remote-handled low-level waste (LLW) for disposal. Disposal of contact-handled LLW and remote-handled LLW ion-exchange resins from the Advanced Test Reactor in the open pit of the SDA ceased September 30, 2008. Disposal of remote-handled LLW in concrete disposal vaults at RWMC will continue until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the SDA (approximately at the end of fiscal year FY 2017). The continuing nuclear mission of INL, associated ongoing and planned operations, and Naval spent fuel activities at the Naval Reactors Facility (NRF) require continued capability to appropriately dispose of contact and remote handled LLW. A programmatic analysis of disposal alternatives for contact and remote-handled LLW generated at INL was conducted by the INL contractor in Fiscal Year 2006; subsequent evaluations were completed in Fiscal Year 2007. The result of these analyses was a recommendation to the Department of Energy (DOE) that all contact-handled LLW generated after September 30, 2008, be disposed offsite, and that DOE proceed with a capital project to establish replacement remote-handled LLW disposal capability. An analysis of the alternatives for providing replacement remote-handled LLW disposal capability has been performed to support Critical Decision-1. The highest ranked alternative to provide this required capability has been determined to be the development of a new onsite remote-handled LLW disposal facility to replace the existing remote-handled LLW disposal vaults at the SDA. Several offsite DOE and commercial disposal options exist for contact-handled LLW; however, offsite disposal options are either not currently available (i.e., commercial disposal facilities), practical, or cost-effective for all remote-handled LLW streams generated at INL. Offsite disposal of all INL and tenant-generated remote-handled waste is further complicated by issues associated with transporting highly radioactive waste in commerce; and infrastructure and processing changes at the generating facilities, specifically NRF, that would be required to support offsite disposal. The INL Remote-Handled LLW Disposal Project will develop a new remote handled LLW disposal facility to meet mission-critical, remote-handled LLW disposal needs. A formal DOE decision to proceed with the project has been made in accordance with the requirements of National Environmental Policy Act (42 USC§ 4321 et seq.). Remote-handled LLW is generated from nuclear programs conducted at INL, including spent nuclear fuel handling and operations at NRF and operations at the Advanced Test Reactor. Remote-handled LLW also will be generated by new INL programs and from segregation and treatment (as necessary) of remote handled scrap and waste currently stored in the Radioactive Scrap and Waste Facility at the Materials and Fuels Complex.

  16. Transmission/Nepa Database | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Nepa Database < Transmission Jump to: navigation, search NepaHeader.png Transmission Dashboard Permitting Atlas Compare States Arizona California Colorado Idaho Montana Nevada New...

  17. NEPA of 1969

    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 -Department of EnergyNEW1 NEPA Determination:NEPANational

  18. ADDITION FOR CHAPTER 10 OF THE EA/RIR/IRFA RE NEPA AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    ADDITION FOR CHAPTER 10 OF THE EA/RIR/IRFA RE NEPA AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. During the Council.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Environmental Protection Agency 1995). Further, the amount of waste disposed) and the impacts of those disposals are unrelated to the percentages of the walleye pollock and Pacific cod

  19. Evaluation of Groundwater Impacts to Support the National Environmental Policy Act Environmental Assessment for the INL Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Annette Schafer; Arthur S. Rood; A. Jeffrey Sondrup

    2010-08-01

    The groundwater impacts have been analyzed for the proposed RH-LLW disposal facility. A four-step analysis approach was documented and applied. This assessment compared the predicted groundwater ingestion dose to the more restrictive of either the 25 mrem/yr all pathway dose performance objective, or the maximum contaminant limit performance objective. The results of this analysis indicate that the groundwater impacts for either proposed facility location are expected to be less than the performance objectives. The analysis was prepared to support the NEPA-EA for the top two ranking of the proposed RH-LLW sites. As such, site-specific conditions were incorporated for each set of results generated. These site-specific conditions were included to account for the transport of radionuclides through the vadose zone and through the aquifer at each site. Site-specific parameters included the thickness of vadose zone sediments and basalts, moisture characteristics of the sediments, and aquifer velocity. Sorption parameters (Kd) were assumed to be very conservative values used in Track II analysis of CERCLA sites at INL. Infiltration was also conservatively assumed to represent higher rates corresponding to disturbed soil conditions. The results of this analysis indicate that the groundwater impacts for either proposed facility location are expected to be less than the performance objectives.

  20. Evaluation of Groundwater Impacts to Support the National Environmental Policy Act Environmental Assessment for the INL Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Annette Schafer; Arthur S. Rood; A. Jeffrey Sondrup

    2011-08-01

    The groundwater impacts have been analyzed for the proposed RH-LLW disposal facility. A four-step analysis approach was documented and applied. This assessment compared the predicted groundwater ingestion dose to the more restrictive of either the 25 mrem/yr all pathway dose performance objective, or the maximum contaminant limit performance objective. The results of this analysis indicate that the groundwater impacts for either proposed facility location are expected to be less than the performance objectives. The analysis was prepared to support the NEPA-EA for the top two ranking of the proposed RH-LLW sites. As such, site-specific conditions were incorporated for each set of results generated. These site-specific conditions were included to account for the transport of radionuclides through the vadose zone and through the aquifer at each site. Site-specific parameters included the thickness of vadose zone sediments and basalts, moisture characteristics of the sediments, and aquifer velocity. Sorption parameters (Kd) were assumed to be very conservative values used in Track II analysis of CERCLA sites at INL. Infiltration was also conservatively assumed to represent higher rates corresponding to disturbed soil conditions. The results of this analysis indicate that the groundwater impacts for either proposed facility location are expected to be less than the performance objectives.

  1. Evaluation of Groundwater Impacts to Support the National Environmental Policy Act Environmental Assessment for the INL Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Annette Schafer; Arthur S. Rood; A. Jeffrey Sondrup

    2011-12-01

    The groundwater impacts have been analyzed for the proposed RH-LLW disposal facility. A four-step analysis approach was documented and applied. This assessment compared the predicted groundwater ingestion dose to the more restrictive of either the 25 mrem/yr all pathway dose performance objective, or the maximum contaminant limit performance objective. The results of this analysis indicate that the groundwater impacts for either proposed facility location are expected to be less than the performance objectives. The analysis was prepared to support the NEPA-EA for the top two ranking of the proposed RH-LLW sites. As such, site-specific conditions were incorporated for each set of results generated. These site-specific conditions were included to account for the transport of radionuclides through the vadose zone and through the aquifer at each site. Site-specific parameters included the thickness of vadose zone sediments and basalts, moisture characteristics of the sediments, and aquifer velocity. Sorption parameters (Kd) were assumed to be very conservative values used in Track II analysis of CERCLA sites at INL. Infiltration was also conservatively assumed to represent higher rates corresponding to disturbed soil conditions. The results of this analysis indicate that the groundwater impacts for either proposed facility location are expected to be less than the performance objectives.

  2. DOE NEPA Guidance and Requirements - Search Index - Table of...

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

    Requirements and the NEPA Process DOE 2000 Clean Air Act - Section 309 Congress 1970 Collaboration in NEPA a Handbook for NEPA Practitioners CEQ 2007 Consideration of EJ in...

  3. DOE NEPA Compliance Officers

    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 pStateDOE FederalThe Department of Energy thisResearch Initiative |NEPA

  4. NEPA Lessons Learned Questionnaire

    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 -Department of EnergyNEW1 NEPA Determination: LM-12-11NoteLessons

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen

    2010-02-01

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen

    2010-05-01

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

  7. NEPA Documents | 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 Fuels Data CenterFinancialInvesting inServices » NEPA Documents NEPA Documents To see

  8. DOE-wide NEPA Contracting Update

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    A DOE team is evaluating the offers received in response to a Request for Quotations to provide NEPA support services. The scope of the solicitation is similar to that of the DOE-wide NEPA support...

  9. Assessment of Preferred Depleted Uranium Disposal Forms

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Croff, A.G.; Hightower, J.R.; Lee, D.W.; Michaels, G.E.; Ranek, N.L.; Trabalka, J.R.

    2000-06-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE) is in the process of converting about 700,000 metric tons (MT) of depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF6) containing 475,000 MT of depleted uranium (DU) to a stable form more suitable for long-term storage or disposal. Potential conversion forms include the tetrafluoride (DUF4), oxide (DUO2 or DU3O8), or metal. If worthwhile beneficial uses cannot be found for the DU product form, it will be sent to an appropriate site for disposal. The DU products are considered to be low-level waste (LLW) under both DOE orders and Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations. The objective of this study was to assess the acceptability of the potential DU conversion products at potential LLW disposal sites to provide a basis for DOE decisions on the preferred DU product form and a path forward that will ensure reliable and efficient disposal.

  10. INNOVATIVE DISPOSAL PRACTICES AT THE NEVADA TEST SITE TO MEET ITS LLW GENERATORS FUTURE DISPOSAL NEEDS

    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) AugustA. -71- Particulate: Columns 59 and R

  11. Development of low-level radioactive waste disposal capacity in the United States - progress or stalemate?

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Devgun, J.S. [Argonne National Lab., IL (United States); Larson, G.S. [Midwest Low-Level Radioactive Waste Commission, St. Paul, MN (United States)

    1995-12-31

    It has been fifteen years since responsibility for the disposal of commercially generated low-level radioactive waste (LLW) was shifted to the states by the United States Congress through the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980 (LLRWPA). In December 1985, Congress revisited the issue and enacted the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 (LLRWPAA). No new disposal sites have opened yet, however, and it is now evident that disposal facility development is more complex, time-consuming, and controversial than originally anticipated. For a nation with a large nuclear power industry, the lack of availability of LLW disposal capacity coupled with a similar lack of high-level radioactive waste disposal capacity could adversely affect the future viability of the nuclear energy option. The U.S. nuclear power industry, with 109 operating reactors, generates about half of the LLW shipped to commercial disposal sites and faces dwindling access to waste disposal sites and escalating waste management costs. The other producers of LLW - industries, government (except the defense related research and production waste), academic institutions, and medical institutions that account for the remaining half of the commercial LLW - face the same storage and cost uncertainties. This paper will summarize the current status of U.S. low-level radioactive waste generation and the status of new disposal facility development efforts by the states. The paper will also examine the factors that have contributed to delays, the most frequently suggested alternatives, and the likelihood of change.

  12. LLW Notes, vol. 9, no. 1. February/March 1994

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1994-03-01

    LLW Notes is published ten times each year and is distributed to Low- Level Radioactive Waste Forum Participants and other state and compact officials identified by those Participants to receive LLW Notes. The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Forum is an association of representatives of states and compacts established to facilitate state and compact commission implementation of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 and to promote the objectives of low-level radioactive waste regional compacts. The Forum provides an opportunity for states and compacts to share information with one another and to exchange views with officials of federal agencies.

  13. Review of private sector and Department of Energy treatment, storage, and disposal capabilities for low-level and mixed low-level waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Willson, R.A.; Ball, L.W.; Mousseau, J.D.; Piper, R.B.

    1996-03-01

    Private sector capacity for treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) of various categories of radioactive waste has been researched and reviewed for the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) by Lockheed Idaho Technologies Company, the primary contractor for the INEL. The purpose of this document is to provide assistance to the INEL and other US Department of Energy (DOE) sites in determining if private sector capabilities exist for those waste streams that currently cannot be handled either on site or within the DOE complex. The survey of private sector vendors was limited to vendors currently capable of, or expected within the next five years to be able to perform one or more of the following services: low-level waste (LLW) volume reduction, storage, or disposal; mixed LLW treatment, storage, or disposal; alpha-contaminated mixed LLW treatment; LLW decontamination for recycling, reclamation, or reuse; laundering of radioactively-contaminated laundry and/or respirators; mixed LLW treatability studies; mixed LLW treatment technology development. Section 2.0 of this report will identify the approach used to modify vendor information from previous revisions of this report. It will also illustrate the methodology used to identify any additional companies. Section 3.0 will identify, by service, specific vendor capabilities and capacities. Because this document will be used to identify private sector vendors that may be able to handle DOE LLW and mixed LLW streams, it was decided that current DOE capabilities should also be identified. This would encourage cooperation between DOE sites and the various states and, in some instances, may result in a more cost-effective alternative to privatization. The DOE complex has approximately 35 sites that generate the majority of both LLW and mixed LLW. Section 4.0 will identify these sites by Operations Office, and their associated LLW and mixed LLW TSD units.

  14. ASSESSING EXPOSURE TO THE PUBLIC FROM LOW LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE (LLW) TRANSPORTATION TO THE NEVADA TEST SITE.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Miller, J.J.; Campbell, S.; Church, B.W.; Shafer, D. S.; Gillespie, D.; Sedano, S.; Cebe, J.J.

    2003-02-27

    The United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) Nevada Test Site (NTS) is one of two regional sites where low-level radioactive waste (LLW) from approved DOE and U.S. DOD generators across the United States is disposed. In federal fiscal year (FY) 2002, over 57,000 cubic meters of waste was transported to and disposed at the NTS. DOE and U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations ensure that radiation exposure from truck shipments to members of the public is negligible. Nevertheless, particularly in rural communities along transportation routes in Utah and Nevada, there is perceived risk from members of the public about incremental exposure from LLW trucks, especially when ''Main Street'' and the LLW transportation route are the same. To better quantify the exposure to gamma radiation, a stationary monitoring array of four pressurized ion chambers (PICs) have been set up in a pullout just before LLW trucks reach the entrance to the NTS. The PICs are positioned at a distance of one meter from the sides of the truck trailer and at a height appropriate for the design of the trucks that will be used in FY2003 to haul LLW to the NTS. The use of four PICs (two on each side of the truck) is to minimize and to correct for non-uniformity where radiation levels from waste packages vary from side to side, and from front to back in the truck trailer. The PIC array is being calibrated by collecting readings from each PIC exposed to a known 137Cs source that was positioned at different locations on a flatbed stationed in the PIC array, along with taking secondary readings from other known sources. Continuous data collection using the PICs, with and without a truck in the array, is being used to develop background readings. In addition, acoustic sensors are positioned on each side of the PIC array to record when a large object (presumably a truck) enters the array. In FY2003, PIC surveys from as many incoming LLW trucks as possible will be made and survey data recorded automatically by dataloggers that will be periodically downloaded. Solar panels provide power for the batteries to run both the dataloggers and PICs. Truck drivers have been asked to park their truck within the PIC array for only the time it takes to complete an information log before moving on to one of two Radioactive Waste Management Sites (RWMS) on the NTS. On the log, the truck drivers record their shipment identification number, the time of day, where the waste originated, and information on the route they used to reach the NTS. This data will facilitate comparison of PIC readings with waste manifests and other waste disposal operations data collected at the RWMSs. Gamma radiation measurements collected from the PICs will be analyzed using standard health physics and statistical methods for comparison to DOT standards, but with the added benefit of obtaining an improved understanding of the variability of readings that can occur in the near vicinity of a LLW truck. The data collected will be combined with measurements of street width and other information about transportation routes through towns to develop realistic dose scenarios for citizens in Nevada and Utah towns.

  15. Proven concepts for LLW-treatment of large components for free release and recycling

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bergstroem, Lena; Lindstrom, Anders; Lindberg, Maria; Wirendal, Bo; Lorenzen, Joachim [Studsvik RadWaste AB, SE-611 82 Nykoeping (Sweden)

    2007-07-01

    This paper describes Studsvik's technical concept of LLW-treatment of large, retired components from nuclear installations in operation or in decommissioning. Many turbines, heat exchangers and other LLW components have been treated in Studsvik during the last 20 years. This also includes development of techniques and tools, especially our latest experience gained under the pilot project for treatment of one full size PWR steam generator from Ringhals NPP, Sweden. The ambition of this pilot project was to minimize the waste volumes for disposal and to maximize the material recycling. Another objective, respecting ALARA, was the successful minimization of the dose exposure to the personnel. The treatment concept for large, retired components comprises the whole sequence of preparations from road and sea transports and the management of the metallic LLW by segmentation, decontamination and sorting using specially devised tools and shielded treatment cell, to the decision criteria for recycling of the metals, radiological analyses and conditioning of the residual waste into the final packages suitable for customer-related disposal. For e.g. turbine rotors with their huge number of blades the crucial moments are segmentation techniques, thus cold segmentation is a preferred method to keep focus on minimization of volumes for secondary waste. Also a variety of decontamination techniques using blasting cabinet or blasting tumbling machines keeps secondary waste production to a minimum. The technical challenge of the treatment of more complicated components like steam generators also begins with the segmentation. A first step is the separation of the steam dome in order to dock the rest of the steam generator to a specially built treatment cell. Thereafter, the decontamination of the tube bundle is performed using a remotely controlled manipulator. After decontamination is concluded the cutting of the tubes as well as of the shell is performed in the same cell with remotely controlled tools. Some of the sections of steam dome shell or turbine shafts can be cleared directly for unconditional reuse without melting after decontamination and sampling program. Experience shows that the amount of material possible for clearance for unconditional use is between 95 - 97 % for conventional metallic scrap. For components like turbines, heat exchangers or steam generators the recycling ratio can vary to about 80 - 85% of the initial weight. (authors)

  16. LLW Notes, Volume 12, Number 7

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Norris, C.; Brown, H.; Gedden, R.; Lovinger, T.; Scheele, L.; Shaker, M.A.

    1997-09-01

    Contents include articles entitled: House votes 309 to 107 to approve Texas compact; Nebraska governor hosts LLRW meeting; Southeast Compact considers funding proposal; Chem-Nuclear explores options re SC revenue requirements; Legislation sets revenue requirements for Barnwell; TCC meets: Supports CA request for technical assistance; DOE approves part of California`s technical assistance request; State legislators discuss LLRW management for OH, IL, NC; Washington governor re Potential New Hanford Role; Federal court enjoins DOE from excluding WCS on new disposal; Appellate court in favor of DOE in surcharge rebates dispute; Hearing set for October in Ward Valley case; court rejects federal motion to dismiss Ward Valley suit; NE sues commission re veto over export authorizations; US Supreme Court dismisses line-item veto challenge; Department of Interior Inspector General investigation requested; USEC privatization plan approved; DOD finalizes LLRW disposal charter; Clinton nominates six DOE appointees; Congress moves FUSRAP to Army Corps of Engineers; Schaefer named interim director of USGS: Nichols leaves EPA: NRC Commissioner Rogers` term expires; NRC: CA ``Well-Quantified`` to license Ward Valley facility; EPA objects to state permit for Louisiana facility; Petitions submitted to EPA oppose Shintech permits; ECOS draft recommendations re Enviro programs; Legislation introduced to prohibit spent fuel shipments to the Goshutes; and HLW legislation ready for floor action.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Peggy Hinman

    2010-10-01

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

  18. Template for Expedited National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA...

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

    National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Review of Certain State Energy Program Projects Template for Expedited National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Review of Certain State...

  19. DRAFT NEPA Guidance on Consideration of the Effects of Climate...

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

    DRAFT NEPA Guidance on Consideration of the Effects of Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Emissions DRAFT NEPA Guidance on Consideration of the Effects of Climate Change and...

  20. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) All Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability (OE) projects are reviewed under the National...

  1. NEPA Implementation Procedures: Appendices I, II, and III

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These appendices are intended to improve public participation and facilitate agency compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Council on Environmental Quality's NEPA...

  2. Asking the Right Questions for a NEPA Review: An Environmental...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    for a NEPA Review: An Environmental Questionnaire for Funding Proposals Asking the Right Questions for a NEPA Review: An Environmental Questionnaire for Funding Proposals...

  3. Low-level radioactive waste management: transitioning to off-site disposal at Los Alamos National Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dorries, Alison M

    2010-11-09

    Facing the closure of nearly all on-site management and disposal capability for low-level radioactive waste (LLW), Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) is making ready to ship the majority of LLW off-site. In order to ship off-site, waste must meet the Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facility's (TSDF) Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC). In preparation, LANL's waste management organization must ensure LANL waste generators characterize and package waste compliantly and waste characterization documentation is complete and accurate. Key challenges that must be addressed to successfully make the shift to off-site disposal of LLW include improving the detail, accuracy, and quality of process knowledge (PK) and acceptable knowledge (AK) documentation, training waste generators and waste management staff on the higher standard of data quality and expectations, improved WAC compliance for off-site facilities, and enhanced quality assurance throughout the process. Certification of LANL generators will allow direct off-site shipping of LLW from their facilities.

  4. WRAP low level waste (LLW) glovebox acceptance test report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Leist, K.J.

    1998-02-17

    In June 28, 1997, the Low Level Waste (LLW) glovebox was tested using glovebox acceptance test procedure 13031A-85. The primary focus of the glovebox acceptance test was to examine control system interlocks, display menus, alarms, and operator messages. Limited mechanical testing involving the drum ports, hoists, drum lifter, compacted drum lifter, drum tipper, transfer car, conveyors, lidder/delidder device and the supercompactor were also conducted. As of November 24, 1997, 2 of the 131 test exceptions that affect the LLW glovebox remain open. These items will be tracked and closed via the WRAP Master Test Exception Database. As part of Test Exception resolution/closure the responsible individual closing the Test Exception performs a retest of the affected item(s) to ensure the identified deficiency is corrected, and, or to test items not previously available to support testing. Test Exceptions are provided as appendices to this report.

  5. Potential co-disposal of greater-than-class C low-level radioactive waste with Department of Energy special case waste - greater-than-class C low-level waste management program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Allred, W.E.

    1994-09-01

    This document evaluates the feasibility of co-disposing of greater-than-Class C low-level radioactive waste (GTCC LLW) with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) special case waste (SCW). This document: (1) Discusses and evaluates key issues concerning co-disposal of GTCC LLW with SCW. This includes examining these issues in terms of regulatory concerns, technical feasibility, and economics; (2) Examines advantages and disadvantages of such co-disposal; and (3) Makes recommendations. Research and analysis of the issues presented in this report indicate that it would be technically and economically feasible to co-dispose of GTCC LLW with DOE SCW. However, a dilemma will likely arise in the current division of regulatory responsibilities between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and DOE (i.e., current requirement for disposal of GTCC LLW in a facility licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission). DOE SCW is currently not subject to this licensing requirement.

  6. A Comprehensive Solution for Managing TRU and LLW From Generation to Final Disposition - 13205

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tozer, Justin C.; Sanchez, Edwina G.; Dorries, Alison M.

    2013-07-01

    A LANL multi-disciplinary team faced the challenge of building and delivering a waste information system capable of managing radioactive, hazardous, and industrial waste from cradle to grave. The result is the Waste Compliance and Tracking System (WCATS) a flexible, adaptive system that has allowed LANL to consolidate its legacy applications into one system, and leverage the advantages of managing all waste types within a single scalable enterprise application. Key functionality required for robust waste operations, include: waste characterization, waste identification, transportation, inventory management, waste processing, and disposal. In order to maintain data quality, field operations such as waste identification, surveillance checklists, wall-to-wall inventory assessments, waste transfers, shipment pickup and receipt, and simple consolidation operations are captured by the operator or technician using mobile computers. Work flow is managed via end-user defined work paths, to ensure that unit operations are performed in the correct order. Regulatory compliance reports and algorithms are provided to support typical U.S. EPA, DOT, NRC, and DOE requirements, including the EPA hazardous waste manifest, NRC LLW manifest, DOE nuclear material at risk, RCRA TSDF inventory rules, and so forth. The WCATS application has allowed LANL to migrate and consolidate its disparate legacy applications. The design and implementation is generalized so that facility owners can customize the user interface, setup facilities and unit operations (i.e., treatment, storage, disposal, characterization, and administrative), define inventory compliance rules, and establish custom work flow requirements. (authors)

  7. NEPA Policy | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergy AEnergy Managing SwimmingMicrosoft The basics of05/24/2011NEPA policy. September

  8. Taiwan industrial cooperation program technology transfer for low-level radioactive waste final disposal - phase I.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Knowlton, Robert G.; Cochran, John Russell; Arnold, Bill Walter; Jow, Hong-Nian; Mattie, Patrick D.; Schelling, Frank Joseph Jr.

    2007-01-01

    Sandia National Laboratories and the Institute of Nuclear Energy Research, Taiwan have collaborated in a technology transfer program related to low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal in Taiwan. Phase I of this program included regulatory analysis of LLW final disposal, development of LLW disposal performance assessment capabilities, and preliminary performance assessments of two potential disposal sites. Performance objectives were based on regulations in Taiwan and comparisons to those in the United States. Probabilistic performance assessment models were constructed based on limited site data using software including GoldSim, BLT-MS, FEHM, and HELP. These software codes provided the probabilistic framework, container degradation, waste-form leaching, groundwater flow, radionuclide transport, and cover infiltration simulation capabilities in the performance assessment. Preliminary performance assessment analyses were conducted for a near-surface disposal system and a mined cavern disposal system at two representative sites in Taiwan. Results of example calculations indicate peak simulated concentrations to a receptor within a few hundred years of LLW disposal, primarily from highly soluble, non-sorbing radionuclides.

  9. Siting Study for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; Joan Connolly; Lance Peterson; Brennon Orr; Bob Starr

    2010-10-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy has identified a mission need for continued disposal capacity for remote-handled low-level waste (LLW) generated at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). An alternatives analysis that was conducted to evaluate strategies to achieve this mission need identified two broad options for disposal of INL generated remote-handled LLW: (1) offsite disposal and (2) onsite disposal. The purpose of this study is to identify candidate sites or locations within INL boundaries for the alternative of an onsite remote handled LLW disposal facility and recommend the highest-ranked locations for consideration in the National Environmental Policy Act process. The study implements an evaluation based on consideration of five key elements: (1) regulations, (2) key assumptions, (3) conceptual design, (4) facility performance, and (5) previous INL siting study criteria, and uses a five-step process to identify, screen, evaluate, score, and rank 34 separate sites located across INL. The result of the evaluation is identification of two recommended alternative locations for siting an onsite remote-handled LLW disposal facility. The two alternative locations that best meet the evaluation criteria are (1) near the Advanced Test Reactor Complex and (2) west of the Idaho Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act Disposal Facility.

  10. Standardization of DOE Disposal Facilities Waste Acceptance Processes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shrader, T. A.; Macbeth, P. J.

    2002-02-26

    On February 25, 2000, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS) for low-level and mixed low-level wastes (LLW/ MLLW) treatment and disposal. The ROD designated the disposal sites at Hanford and the Nevada Test Site (NTS) to dispose of LLW/MLLW from sites without their own disposal facilities. DOE's Richland Operations Office (RL) and the National Nuclear Security Administration's Nevada Operations Office (NV) have been charged with effectively implementing the ROD. To accomplish this task NV and RL, assisted by their operating contractors Bechtel Nevada (BN), Fluor Hanford (FH), and Bechtel Hanford (BH) assembled a task team to systematically map out and evaluate the current waste acceptance processes and develop an integrated, standardized process for the acceptance of LLW/MLLW. A structured, systematic, analytical process using the Six Sigma system identified dispos al process improvements and quantified the associated efficiency gains to guide changes to be implemented. The review concluded that a unified and integrated Hanford/NTS Waste Acceptance Process would be a benefit to the DOE Complex, particularly the waste generators. The Six Sigma review developed quantitative metrics to address waste acceptance process efficiency improvements, and provides an initial look at development of comparable waste disposal cost models between the two disposal sites to allow quantification of the proposed improvements.

  11. DOE NEPA Guidance and Requirements- Search Index

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The DOE NEPA Guidance and Requirements - Search Index is a one-stop solution providing you with DOE's Guidance and Requirements documents combined into one file for easy download and use.

  12. Promoting NEPA Transparency and Public Engagement

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    “NEPA is, at its core, a transparency statute,” said Katie Scharf, Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Deputy General Counsel, in opening a panel discussion on using information technology to...

  13. Low-level waste inventory, characteristics, generation, and facility assessment for treatment, storage, and disposal alternatives considered in the US Department of Energy waste management programmatic environmental impact statement

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Goyette, M.L.; Dolak, D.A.

    1996-12-01

    This report provides technical support information for use in analyzing environmental impacts associated with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) low-level radioactive waste (LLW) management alternatives in the Waste-Management (WM) Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). Waste loads treated and disposed of for each of the LLW alternatives considered in the DOE WM PEIS are presented. Waste loads are presented for DOE Waste Management (WM) wastes, which are generated from routine operations. Radioactivity concentrations and waste quantities for treatment and disposal under the different LLW alternatives are described for WM waste. 76 refs., 14 figs., 42 tabs.

  14. Mixed waste characterization, treatment & disposal focus area

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-08-01

    The mission of the Mixed Waste Characterization, Treatment, and Disposal Focus Area (referred to as the Mixed Waste Focus Area or MWFA) is to provide treatment systems capable of treating DOE`s mixed waste in partnership with users, and with continual participation of stakeholders, tribal governments, and regulators. The MWFA deals with the problem of eliminating mixed waste from current and future storage in the DOE complex. Mixed waste is waste that contains both hazardous chemical components, subject to the requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and radioactive components, subject to the requirements of the Atomic Energy Act. The radioactive components include transuranic (TRU) and low-level waste (LLW). TRU waste primarily comes from the reprocessing of spent fuel and the use of plutonium in the fabrication of nuclear weapons. LLW includes radioactive waste other than uranium mill tailings, TRU, and high-level waste, including spent fuel.

  15. Application of Probabilistic Performance Assessment Modeling for Optimization of Maintenance Studies for Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Sites at the Nevada Test Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Crowe, B.; Yucel, V.; Rawlinson, S.; Black, P.; Carilli, J.; DiSanza, F.

    2002-02-25

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration of the Nevada Operations Office (NNSA/NV) operates and maintains two active facilities on the Nevada Test Site (NTS) that dispose defense-generated low-level radioactive waste (LLW), mixed radioactive waste, and ''classified waste'' in shallow trenches and pits. The operation and maintenance of the LLW disposal sites are self-regulated by the DOE under DOE Order 435.1. This Order requires formal review of a performance assessment (PA) and composite analysis (CA; assessment of all interacting radiological sources) for each LLW disposal system followed by an active maintenance program that extends through and beyond the site closure program. The Nevada disposal facilities continue to receive NTS-generated LLW and defense-generated LLW from across the DOE complex. The PA/CAs for the sites have been conditionally approved and the facilities are now under a formal maintenance program that requires testing of conceptual models, quantifying and attempting to reduce uncertainty, and implementing confirmatory and long-term background monitoring, all leading to eventual closure of the disposal sites. To streamline and reduce the cost of the maintenance program, the NNSA/NV is converting the deterministic PA/CAs to probabilistic models using GoldSim, a probabilistic simulation computer code. The output of probabilistic models will provide expanded information supporting long-term decision objectives of the NTS disposal sites.

  16. LLW Forum meeting report, October 20--22, 1997

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Norris, C.; Brown, H.; Lovinger, T.; Scheele, L.; Shaker, M.A.

    1997-12-31

    The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Forum met in Annapolis, Maryland, on October 20--22, 1997. Twenty-six Forum Participants, Alternate Forum Participants, and meeting designees representing 22 compacts and states participated. A report on the meeting is given under the following subtitles: New developments in states and compacts; Discussion with NRC Commissioner McGaffigan; Regulatory issues session; Executive session; LLW forum business session; DOE low-level waste management program; Transportation of radioactive waste; Environmental equity: Title VI; Congressional studies on Ward Valley Site; Implementation of DOE`s strategy for waste management; Relicensing Envirocare; Draft agreement for uniform application of manifesting procedures; CRCPD report; Panel: Future of low-level radioactive waste management; Agenda planning: February 1998; Resolutions; and Attendance.

  17. LLW Forum meeting report, April 18--19, 1991

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1991-12-31

    The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Forum is an association of representatives of states and compacts established to facilitate state and compact commission implementation of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980 and the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 and to promote the objectives of low-level radioactive waste regional compacts. The Forum provides an opportunity for states and compacts to share information with one another and to exchange views with officials of federal agencies. LLW Forum participants include representatives from regional compacts, designated host states, unaffiliated states, and states with currently- operating low-level radioactive waste facilities. This quarterly meeting was held on April 18-19, 1991.

  18. LLW Forum meeting report, April 25--27, 1994

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1994-12-31

    The Low-Level radioactive Waste Forum is an association of representatives of states and compacts established to facilitate state and compact commission implementation of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980 and the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 and to promote the objectives of low-level radioactive waste regional compacts. The Forum provides an opportunity for states and compacts to share information with one another and to exchange views with officials of federal agencies. LLW Forum participants include representatives from regional compacts, designated host states, unaffiliated states, and states with currently-operating low-level radioactive waste facilities. This quarterly meeting was held April 25-27, 1994 and activities during the first quarter of 1994 are detailed..

  19. Justification Of The Use Of Boreholes For Disposal Of Sealed Radiological Sources

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zarling, John [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Johnson, Peter [Los Alamos National Laboratory

    2008-01-01

    Soon there will be only 14 states in two compacts that are able to dispose of Low Level Waste (LLW): the Northwest and Rocky Mountain compact with disposal options in Richland, Washington, and the Atlantic compact with disposal options in Barnwell, South Carolina. How do states not in one of the two compacts dispose of their LLW? The Off-Site Source Recovery Project can take possession and dispose of some of the unwanted transuranic sources at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). However, there will be no path forward for states outside of the two compacts for disposal of their non-transuranic LLW. A solution that has been much discussed, debated and researched, but has not been put into wide scale practice, is the borehole disposal concept. It is the author's position that companies that drill and explore for oil have been disposing of sources in borehole-like structures for years. It should be noted that these companies are not purposely disposing of these sources, but the sources are irretrievable and must be abandoned. Additionally, there are Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations that must be followed to seal the well that contains the lost and abandoned source. According to the NRC Event Notification Reports database, there were a minimum of 29 reports of lost and abandoned sources in oil wells between December 1999 and October 2006. The sources were lost at depths between 2,018-18,887 feet, or 600-5,750 meters. The companies that are performing explorations with the aid of sealed radiological sources must follow regulation 10 CFR Part 39. Subsection 15 outlines the procedures that must be followed if sources are determined to be irretrievable and abandoned in place. If the NRC allows and has regulations in place for oil companies, why can't states and/or companies be allowed to dispose of LLW in a similar fashion?

  20. Design and operational considerations of United States commercial near-surface low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Birk, S.M.

    1997-10-01

    In accordance with the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985, states are responsible for providing for disposal of commercially generated low-level radioactive waste (LLW) within their borders. LLW in the US is defined as all radioactive waste that is not classified as spent nuclear fuel, high-level radioactive waste, transuranic waste, or by-product material resulting from the extraction of uranium from ore. Commercial waste includes LLW generated by hospitals, universities, industry, pharmaceutical companies, and power utilities. LLW generated by the country`s defense operations is the responsibility of the Federal government and its agency, the Department of Energy. The commercial LLRW disposal sites discussed in this report are located near: Sheffield, Illinois (closed); Maxey Flats, Kentucky (closed); Beatty, Nevada (closed); West Valley, New York (closed); Barnwell, South Carolina (operating); Richland, Washington (operating); Ward Valley, California, (proposed); Sierra Blanca, Texas (proposed); Wake County, North Carolina (proposed); and Boyd County, Nebraska (proposed). While some comparisons between the sites described in this report are appropriate, this must be done with caution. In addition to differences in climate and geology between sites, LLW facilities in the past were not designed and operated to today`s standards. This report summarizes each site`s design and operational considerations for near-surface disposal of low-level radioactive waste. The report includes: a description of waste characteristics; design and operational features; post closure measures and plans; cost and duration of site characterization, construction, and operation; recent related R and D activities for LLW treatment and disposal; and the status of the LLW system in the US.

  1. Gas generation from low-level radioactive waste: Concerns for disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Siskind, B.

    1992-01-01

    The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) has urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to reexamine the topic of hydrogen gas generation from low-level radioactive waste (LLW) in closed spaces to ensure that the slow buildup of hydrogen from water-bearing wastes in sealed containers does not become a problem for long-term safe disposal. Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) has prepared a report, summarized in this paper, for the NRC to respond to these concerns. The paper discusses the range of values for G(H{sub 2}) reported for materials of relevance to LLW disposal; most of these values are in the range of 0.1 to 0.6. Most studies of radiolytic hydrogen generation indicate a leveling off of pressurization, probably because of chemical kinetics involving, in many cases, the radiolysis of water within the waste. Even if no leveling off occurs, realistic gas leakage rates (indicating poor closure by gaskets on drums and liners) will result in adequate relief of pressure for radiolytic gas generation from the majority of commercial sector LLW packages. Biodegradative gas generation, however, could pose a pressurization hazard even at realistic gas leakage rates. Recommendations include passive vents on LLW containers (as already specified for high integrity containers) and upper limits to the G values and/or the specific activity of the LLW.

  2. Gas generation from low-level radioactive waste: Concerns for disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Siskind, B.

    1992-04-01

    The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) has urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to reexamine the topic of hydrogen gas generation from low-level radioactive waste (LLW) in closed spaces to ensure that the slow buildup of hydrogen from water-bearing wastes in sealed containers does not become a problem for long-term safe disposal. Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) has prepared a report, summarized in this paper, for the NRC to respond to these concerns. The paper discusses the range of values for G(H{sub 2}) reported for materials of relevance to LLW disposal; most of these values are in the range of 0.1 to 0.6. Most studies of radiolytic hydrogen generation indicate a leveling off of pressurization, probably because of chemical kinetics involving, in many cases, the radiolysis of water within the waste. Even if no leveling off occurs, realistic gas leakage rates (indicating poor closure by gaskets on drums and liners) will result in adequate relief of pressure for radiolytic gas generation from the majority of commercial sector LLW packages. Biodegradative gas generation, however, could pose a pressurization hazard even at realistic gas leakage rates. Recommendations include passive vents on LLW containers (as already specified for high integrity containers) and upper limits to the G values and/or the specific activity of the LLW.

  3. NEPA and NHPA: A Handbook for Integrating NEPA and Section 106 | Department

    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 -Department of EnergyNEW1 NEPA Determination:NEPA Successof

  4. LLW (Low-Level Waste) Notes, Volume 13, Number 1, February 1998

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1998-02-01

    LLW Notes is a newsletter distributed to Low-Level Radioactive Waste Forum Participants and other state and compact officials. The LLW Forum provides an opportunity for state and compact officials to share information with one another and to exchange views with officials of federal agencies and other interested parties. This issue focuses on the following topics: DOI approves Ward Valley permit application; Project evidentiary hearings begin in Texas; and Summary judgment motions in California breach of contract action.

  5. Overview of Nevada Test Site Radioactive and Mixed Waste Disposal Operations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J.T. Carilli; S.K. Krenzien; R.G. Geisinger; S.J. Gordon; B. Quinn

    2009-03-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office Environmental Management Program is responsible for carrying out the disposal of on-site and off-site generated low-level radioactive waste (LLW) and low-level radioactive mixed waste (MW) at the Nevada Test Site (NTS). Core elements of this mission are ensuring safe and cost-effective disposal while protecting workers, the public, and the environment. This paper focuses on the impacts of new policies, processes, and opportunities at the NTS related to LLW and MW. Covered topics include: the first year of direct funding for NTS waste disposal operations; zero tolerance policy for non-compliant packages; the suspension of mixed waste disposal; waste acceptance changes; DOE Consolidated Audit Program (DOECAP) auditing; the 92-Acre Area closure plan; new eligibility requirements for generators; and operational successes with unusual waste streams.

  6. Equity of commercial low-level radioactive waste disposal fees. Report to Congress

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1998-02-01

    In the Report accompanying the Fiscal Year 1997 Senate Energy and Water Development Appropriations Bill, the Senate Appropriations Committee directed the Department of Energy (DOE) to prepare a study of the costs of operating a low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal facility such as the one at Barnwell, South Carolina, and to determine whether LLW generators are paying equitable disposal fees. The disposal costs of four facilities are reviewed in this report, two operating facilities and two planned facilities. The operating facilities are located at Barnwell, South Carolina, and Richland, Washington. They are operated by Chem-Nuclear, LLC, (Chem-Nuclear), and US Ecology, Inc., (US Ecology), respectively. The planned facilities are expected to be built at Ward Valley, California, and Sierra Blanca, Texas. They will be operated by US Ecology and the State of Texas, respectively. This report found that disposal fees vary significantly among facilities for a variety of reasons. However, the information suggests that at each disposal facility, LLW generators pay equitable disposal fees.

  7. Composite analysis E-area vaults and saltstone disposal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cook, J.R.

    1997-09-01

    This report documents the Composite Analysis (CA) performed on the two active Savannah River Site (SRS) low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal facilities. The facilities are the Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility and the E-Area Vaults (EAV) Disposal Facility. The analysis calculated potential releases to the environment from all sources of residual radioactive material expected to remain in the General Separations Area (GSA). The GSA is the central part of SRS and contains all of the waste disposal facilities, chemical separations facilities and associated high-level waste storage facilities as well as numerous other sources of radioactive material. The analysis considered 114 potential sources of radioactive material containing 115 radionuclides. The results of the CA clearly indicate that continued disposal of low-level waste in the saltstone and EAV facilities, consistent with their respective radiological performance assessments, will have no adverse impact on future members of the public.

  8. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Compliance Guide, Sandia National Laboratories

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hansen, R.P. [Hansen Environmental Consultants, Englewood, CO (United States)

    1995-08-01

    This report contains a comprehensive National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Compliance Guide for the Sandia National Laboratories. It is based on the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA regulations in 40 CFR Parts 1500 through 1508; the US Department of Energy (DOE) N-EPA implementing procedures in 10 CFR Part 102 1; DOE Order 5440.1E; the DOE ``Secretarial Policy Statement on the National Environmental Policy Act`` of June 1994- Sandia NEPA compliance procedures-, and other CEQ and DOE guidance. The Guide includes step-by-step procedures for preparation of Environmental Checklists/Action Descriptions Memoranda (ECL/ADMs), Environmental Assessments (EAs), and Environmental Impact Statements (EISs). It also includes sections on ``Dealing With NEPA Documentation Problems`` and ``Special N-EPA Compliance Issues.``

  9. Statement of Work-National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Support...

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

    Statement of Work-National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Support Services Acquisition: Preparation and Review of Environmental Impact Statements, Environmental Assessments,...

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

    Energy Savers [EERE]

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

  11. Microsoft Word - NEPA Fact Sheet Oct 17 2011

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    National Environmental Policy Act The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 was enacted by Congress to ensure that federal agencies consider the potential environmental...

  12. NEPA and CEQA: Integrating State and Federal Environmental Reviews...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    California Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) have jointly prepared the handbook "NEPA and CEQA: Integrating Federal and State Environmental Reviews." The handbook...

  13. DOE Annual NEPA Planning Summary report templates 2011

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

    use","Estimated Cost","Estimated Schedule (NEPA Milestones)",,"Description" "Sand Hills Wind Project, Wyoming, DOEEA-1581",,"Applicant Funded","EA Determination...

  14. Notice of Change in National Environmental Policy (NEPA) Compliance...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Notice of Change in National Environmental Policy (NEPA) Compliance Approach Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride (DUF6) Conversion Facilities Project Notice of Change in National...

  15. 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...

  16. Chicago Office NEPA Tracking Number U. S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

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

    CH F 560-ACQ (1105) Previous editions are obsolete. Chicago Office NEPA Tracking Number U. S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY OFFICE OF SCIENCE -- CHICAGO OFFICE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL...

  17. DOE, NEPA, and YOU | 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:FinancingPetroleum Based| Department8, 2015 GATEWAY Takesto ResumeServicesof EnergyDOE, NEPA,

  18. NEPA Litigation Surveys | Department of Energy

    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 -Department of EnergyNEW1 NEPA Determination:

  19. An Update On Waste Control Specialists' 2004 License Application For Safe Disposal Of Class A, B, and C Low-Level Radioactive Waste In Texas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Baltzer, R.; Eriksson, L. [Waste Control Specialists LLC, Three Lincoln Centre, Dallas, Texas (United States)

    2008-07-01

    On December 10, 2007, Waste Control Specialists LLC (WCS) received notification that the Executive Director of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) had prepared an interim draft license and made a preliminary decision that it met all statutory and regulatory requirements for safe disposal of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) at the WCS' site in Texas. Pursuant to this interim draft license, WCS will be authorized to dispose Class A, B, and C LLW in two enhanced near-surface landfills at WCS' 5.4-square-kilometer (1,338-acre) treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) site in Andrews County, Texas (Fig. 1). One landfill will be dedicated to LLW generated within the member/party states of the Texas Compact (Texas and Vermont), while the other will be dedicated to LLW generated by the federal government. The calculated annual peak dose to the maximally exposed member of the general public, i.e., an adjacent resident, from any of the proposed LLW-disposal landfills occurs approximately 36,400 years after closure and is 0.034 milli-sievert (mSv) (3.4 milli-rem (mrem)), which is less than 14 percent of the applicable regulatory limit of 25 mSv (25 mrem). The draft license will be published in February 2008, which will be followed by 12 months of public hearings, and three months for preparation of the final license. Based on this schedule, the final license is due in May 2009. When opened, the WCS site will achieve a national milestone; it will be the first new Compact LLW-disposal site in the USA to open under the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980, as amended in 1985. (authors)

  20. NEPA Success Stories: Celebrating 40 Years of Transparency and Open Government

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    NEPA Success Stories: Celebrating 40 Years of Transparency and Open Government, Environmental Law Institute, 2010.

  1. Federal NEPA Contacts | Department of Energy

    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 IMSof 2005FAQS5 Summary of Rules FACRabel,AwardsNEPA Contacts Federal

  2. Form:NEPA Doc | 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 PagesSustainable Urban Transport JumpFlowood,PevafersaMapFile Jump to:NEPA Doc Jump to:

  3. NEPA Contracting Reform Guidance | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergy AEnergy Managing SwimmingMicrosoft The basics of05/24/2011 |guidance on NEPA

  4. NEPA and Other Laws | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergy AEnergy Managing SwimmingMicrosoft The basics of05/24/2011NEPA policy.guidance

  5. NEPA Database | OpenEI Community

    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 Inc Jump to: navigation,Mereg GmbHMontebalitoMtMxEnergyDatabaseNEO CorporationNEPA

  6. Property:NEPA FONSI | 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 EIS Report Url Jump to: navigation, search Property Name NEPA EAFONSI

  7. BLM NEPA Handbook | 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:EAandAmminex AAustria GeothermalInformationColor40 - ProtectingNEPA

  8. Category:NEPA Properties | 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 ECoopButte County,Camilla, Georgia:GeothermalNEPA Environmental Analysis Types Jump

  9. LM Annual NEPA Summary 2014.xls

    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 PublicLED ADOPTION REPORT LED8-14 LM 28-14 NEPA ID: LM

  10. Evaluating off-site disposal of low-level waste at LANL-9498

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hargis, Kenneth M [Los Alamos National Laboratory; French, Sean B [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Boyance, Julien A [NORTH WIND, INC.

    2009-01-01

    Los Alamos National Laboratory generates a wide range of waste types, including solid low-level radioactive waste (LL W), in conducting its national security mission and other science and technology activities. Although most ofLANL's LLW has been disposed on-site, limitations on expansion, stakeholder concerns, and the potential for significant volumes from environmental remediation and decontamination and demolition (D&D) have led LANL to evaluate the feasibility of increasing off-site disposal. It appears that most of the LL W generated at LANL would meet the Waste Acceptance Criteria at the Nevada Test Site or the available commercial LL W disposal site. Some waste is considered to be problematic to transport to off-site disposal even though it could meet the off-site Waste Acceptance Criteria. Cost estimates for off-site disposal are being evaluated for comparison to estimated costs under the current plans for continued on-site disposal.

  11. Operating Experience and Lessons Learned in the Use of Soft-Sided Packaging for Transportation and Disposal of Low Activity Radioactive Waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kapoor, A.; Gordon, S.; Goldston, W.

    2013-07-08

    This paper describes the operating experience and lessons learned at U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) sites as a result of an evaluation of potential trailer contamination and soft-sided packaging integrity issues related to the disposal of low-level and mixed low-level (LLW/MLLW) radioactive waste shipments. Nearly 4.3 million cubic meters of LLW/MLLW will have been generated and disposed of during fiscal year (FY) 2010 to FY 2015—either at commercial disposal sites or disposal sites owned by DOE. The LLW/MLLW is packaged in several different types of regulatory compliant packaging and transported via highway or rail to disposal sites safely and efficiently in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations and DOE orders. In 1999, DOE supported the development of LLW containers that are more volumetrically efficient, more cost effective, and easier to use as compared to metal or wooden containers that existed at that time. The DOE Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), working in conjunction with the plastic industry, tested several types of soft-sided waste packaging systems that meet U.S. Department of Transportation requirements for transport of low specific activity and surface contaminated objects. Since then, soft-sided packaging of various capacities have been used successfully by the decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) projects to package, transport, and dispose D&D wastes throughout the DOE complex. The joint team of experts assembled by the Energy Facility Contractors Group from DOE waste generating sites, DOE and commercial waste disposal facilities, and soft-sided packaging suppliers conducted the review of soft-sided packaging operations and transportation of these packages to the disposal sites. As a result of this evaluation, the team developed several recommendations and best practices to prevent or minimize the recurrences of equipment contamination issues and proper use of soft-sided packaging for transport and disposal of waste.

  12. Performance assessment for the disposal of low-level waste in the 200 West Area Burial Grounds

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wood, M.I.; Khaleel, R.; Rittmann, P.D.; Lu, A.H.; Finfrock, S.H.; DeLorenzo, T.H. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States); Serne, R.J.; Cantrell, K.J. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States)

    1995-06-01

    This document reports the findings of a performance assessment (PA) analysis for the disposal of solid low-level radioactive waste (LLW) in the 200 West Area Low-Level Waste Burial Grounds (LLBG) in the northwest corner of the 200 West Area of the Hanford Site. This PA analysis is required by US Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5820.2A (DOE 1988a) to demonstrate that a given disposal practice is in compliance with a set of performance objectives quantified in the order. These performance objectives are applicable to the disposal of DOE-generated LLW at any DOE-operated site after the finalization of the order in September 1988. At the Hanford Site, DOE, Richland Operations Office (RL) has issued a site-specific supplement to DOE Order 5820.2A, DOE-RL 5820.2A (DOE 1993), which provides additiona I ce objectives that must be satisfied.

  13. Low level tank waste disposal study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mullally, J.A.

    1994-09-29

    Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) contracted a team consisting of Los Alamos Technical Associates (LATA), British Nuclear Fuel Laboratories (BNFL), Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), and TRW through the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Technical Support Contract to conduct a study on several areas concerning vitrification and disposal of low-level-waste (LLW). The purpose of the study was to investigate how several parameters could be specified to achieve full compliance with regulations. The most restrictive regulation governing this disposal activity is the National Primary Drinking Water Act which sets the limits of exposure to 4 mrem per year for a person drinking two liters of ground water daily. To fully comply, this constraint would be met independently of the passage of time. In addition, another key factor in the investigation was the capability to retrieve the disposed waste during the first 50 years as specified in Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5820.2A. The objective of the project was to develop a strategy for effective long-term disposal of the low-level waste at the Hanford site.

  14. Memorandum for General Counsels, NEPA Liaisons and Participants in Scoping

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    As part of its continuing oversight of the implementation of the NEPA regulations, the Council on Environmental Quality has been investigating agency experience with scoping. This is the process by...

  15. Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, Staff Directory

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, Staff Directory including phone number and areas of responsibility for the  Energy and Waste Management Unit, Western Energy and Waste Management Unit, and the...

  16. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 & NEPA

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Section 1609(c) requires a report to Congress on the status and progress of NEPA reviews for Recovery Act funded projects and activities. The President has assigned reporting responsibility to CEQ

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1998-09-01

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

  18. Linking RESRAD-OFFSITE and HYDROGEOCHEM Model for Performance Assessment of Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility - 13429

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lin, Wen-Sheng [Hydrotech Research Institute, National Taiwan University, Taiwan (China)] [Hydrotech Research Institute, National Taiwan University, Taiwan (China); Yu, Charley; Cheng, Jing-Jy; Kamboj, Sunita; Gnanapragasam, Emmanuel [Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439 (United States)] [Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439 (United States); Liu, Chen-Wuing [Department of Bioenvironmental Systems Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taiwan (China)] [Department of Bioenvironmental Systems Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taiwan (China); Li, Ming-Hsu [Institute of Hydrological and Oceanic Sciences, National Central University, Taiwan (China)] [Institute of Hydrological and Oceanic Sciences, National Central University, Taiwan (China)

    2013-07-01

    Performance assessments are crucial steps for the long-term radiological safety requirements of low-level waste (LLW) disposal facility. How much concentration of radionuclides released from the near-field to biosphere and what radiation exposure levels of an individual can influence on the satisfactory performance of the LLW disposal facility and safety disposal environment. Performance assessment methodology for the radioactive waste disposal consists of the reactive transport modeling of safety-concerned radionuclides released from the near-field to the far-field, and the potential exposure pathways and the movements of radionuclides through the geosphere, biosphere and man of which the accompanying dose. Therefore, the integration of hydrogeochemical transport model and dose assessment code, HYDROGEOCHEM code and RESRAD family of codes is imperative. The RESRAD family of codes such as RESRAD-OFFSITE computer code can evaluate the radiological dose and excess cancer risk to an individual who is exposed while located within or outside the area of initial (primary) contamination. The HYDROGEOCHEM is a 3-D numerical model of fluid flow, thermal, hydrologic transport, and biogeochemical kinetic and equilibrium reactions in saturated and unsaturated media. The HYDROGEOCHEM model can also simulate the crucial geochemical mechanism, such as the effect of redox processes on the adsorption/desorption, hydrogeochemical influences on concrete degradation, adsorption/desorption of radionuclides (i.e., surface complexation model) between solid and liquid phase in geochemically dynamic environments. To investigate the safety assessment of LLW disposal facility, linking RESRAD-OFFSITE and HYDROGEOCHEM model can provide detailed tools of confidence in the protectiveness of the human health and environmental impact for safety assessment of LLW disposal facility. (authors)

  19. NEPA Success Stories and Benefits | Department of Energy

    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 -Department of EnergyNEW1 NEPA Determination:NEPA Success Stories

  20. NEPA and CEQA: Integrating State and Federal Environmental Reviews (Draft)

    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 -Department of EnergyNEW1 NEPA Determination:NEPA Success Stories|

  1. NEPA and CEQA: Integrating State and Federal Environmental Reviews (Final)

    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 -Department of EnergyNEW1 NEPA Determination:NEPA Success

  2. Geothermal NEPA Database on OpenEI (Poster)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Young, K. R.; Levine, A.

    2014-09-01

    The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) developed the Geothermal National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Database as a platform for government agencies and industry to access and maintain information related to geothermal NEPA documents. The data were collected to inform analyses of NEPA timelines, and the collected data were made publically available via this tool in case others might find the data useful. NREL staff and contractors collected documents from agency websites, during visits to the two busiest Bureau of Land Management (BLM) field offices for geothermal development, and through email and phone call requests from other BLM field offices. They then entered the information into the database, hosted by Open Energy Information (http://en.openei.org/wiki/RAPID/NEPA). The long-term success of the project will depend on the willingness of federal agencies, industry, and others to populate the database with NEPA and related documents, and to use the data for their own analyses. As the information and capabilities of the database expand, developers and agencies can save time on new NEPA reports by accessing a single location to research related activities, their potential impacts, and previously proposed and imposed mitigation measures. NREL used a wiki platform to allow industry and agencies to maintain the content in the future so that it continues to provide relevant and accurate information to users.

  3. Test Plan: Phase 1, Hanford LLW melter tests, GTS Duratek, Inc.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eaton, W.C.

    1995-06-14

    This document provides a test plan for the conduct of vitrification testing by a vendor in support of the Hanford Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Low-Level Waste (LLW) Vitrification Program. The vendor providing this test plan and conducting the work detailed within it [one of seven selected for glass melter testing under Purchase Order MMI-SVV-384215] is GTS Duratek, Inc., Columbia, Maryland. The GTS Duratek project manager for this work is J. Ruller. This test plan is for Phase I activities described in the above Purchase Order. Test conduct includes melting of glass with Hanford LLW Double-Shell Slurry Feed waste simulant in a DuraMelter{trademark} vitrification system.

  4. WRAP low level waste restricted waste management (LLW RWM) glovebox acceptance test report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Leist, K.J.

    1997-11-24

    On April 22, 1997, the Low Level Waste Restricted Waste Management (LLW RWM) glovebox was tested using acceptance test procedure 13027A-87. Mr. Robert L. Warmenhoven served as test director, Mr. Kendrick Leist acted as test operator and test witness, and Michael Lane provided miscellaneous software support. The primary focus of the glovebox acceptance test was to examine glovebox control system interlocks, operator Interface Unit (OIU) menus, alarms, and messages. Basic drum port and lift table control sequences were demonstrated. OIU menus, messages, and alarm sequences were examined, with few exceptions noted. Barcode testing was bypassed, due to the lack of installed equipment as well as the switch from basic reliance on fixed bar code readers to the enhanced use of portable bar code readers. Bar code testing was completed during performance of the LLW RWM OTP. Mechanical and control deficiencies were documented as Test Exceptions during performance of this Acceptance Test. These items are attached as Appendix A to this report.

  5. Standardization of DOE Disposal Facilities Waste Acceptance Process

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SHRADER, T.; MACBETH, P.

    2002-01-01

    On February 25, 2000, the US. Department of Energy (DOE) issued the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS) for low-level and mixed low-level wastes (LLW/ MLLW) treatment and disposal. The ROD designated the disposal sites at Hanford and the Nevada Test Site (NTS) to dispose of LLWMLLW from sites without their own disposal facilities. DOE's Richland Operations Office (RL) and the National Nuclear Security Administration's Nevada Operations Office (NV) have been charged with effectively implementing the ROD. To accomplish this task NV and RL, assisted by their operating contractors Bechtel Nevada (BN), Fluor Hanford (FH), and Bechtel Hanford (BH) assembled a task team to systematically map out and evaluate the current waste acceptance processes and develop an integrated, standardized process for the acceptance of LLWMLLW. A structured, systematic, analytical process using the Six Sigma system identified disposal process improvements and quantified the associated efficiency gains to guide changes to be implemented. The review concluded that a unified and integrated Hanford/NTS Waste Acceptance Process would be a benefit to the DOE Complex, particularly the waste generators. The Six Sigma review developed quantitative metrics to address waste acceptance process efficiency improvements, and provides an initial look at development of comparable waste disposal cost models between the two disposal sites to allow quantification of the proposed improvements.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2008-03-01

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

  7. Disposal concepts and characteristics of existing and potential low-waste repositories - 9076

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, Peter J [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Zarling, John C [Los Alamos National Laboratory

    2009-01-01

    The closure of the Barnwell low-level waste (LLW) disposal facility to non-Atlantic Compact users poses significant problems for organizations seeking to remove waste material from public circulation. Beta-gamma sources such as {sup 137}Cs and {sup 90}Sr in particular create problems because in 36 states no path forward exists for disposal. Furthermore, several other countries are considering disposition of sealed sources in a variety of facilities. Like much of the United States, many of these countries currently have no means of disposal. Consequently, there is a greater tendency for sources to be misplaced or stored in insufficient facilities, resulting in an increased likelihood of unwitting exposure of nearby people to radioactive materials. This paper provides an overview of the various disposal concepts that have been employed or attempted in the United States. From these concepts, a general overview of characteristics necessary for long-term disposal is synthesized.

  8. Performance assessment for a hypothetical low-level waste disposal facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, C.S.; Rohe, M.J.; Ritter, P.D.

    1997-01-01

    Disposing of low-level waste (LLW) is a concern for many states throughout the United States. A common disposal method is below-grade concrete vaults. Performance assessment analyses make predictions of contaminant release, transport, ingestion, inhalation, or other routes of exposure, and the resulting doses for various disposal methods such as the below-grade concrete vaults. Numerous assumptions are required to simplify the processes associated with the disposal facility to make predictions feasible. In general, these assumptions are made conservatively so as to underestimate the performance of the facility. The objective of this report is to describe the methodology used in conducting a performance assessment for a hypothetical waste facility located in the northeastern United States using real data as much as possible. This report consists of the following: (a) a description of the disposal facility and site, (b) methods used to analyze performance of the facility, (c) the results of the analysis, and (d) the conclusions of this study.

  9. CEQ Issues Revised Draft NEPA Guidance on GHG Emissions and Climate...

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

    Revised Draft NEPA Guidance on GHG Emissions and Climate Change CEQ Issues Revised Draft NEPA Guidance on GHG Emissions and Climate Change March 3, 2015 - 10:37am Addthis CEQ...

  10. Disposal rabbit

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Lewis, L.C.; Trammell, D.R.

    1983-10-12

    A disposable rabbit for transferring radioactive samples in a pneumatic transfer system comprises aerated plastic shaped in such a manner as to hold a radioactive sample and aerated such that dissolution of the rabbit in a solvent followed by evaporation of the solid yields solid waste material having a volume significantly smaller than the original volume of the rabbit.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    A. Jeff Sondrup; Annette L. Schafter

    2010-09-01

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

  12. Examples of Benefits from the NEPA process for ARRA funded activities

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Efforts to implement the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) include ensuring, and reporting on, timely NEPA reviews prepared in support of projects and activities funded under major provisions of ARRA. In addition to reporting on the status of the NEPA environmental reviews, agencies also report on the benefits of NEPA.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cushing, C.E.

    1992-12-01

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cushing, C.E.

    1992-12-01

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1997-08-01

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

  16. Lessons Learned from Raw Treatment in the Slovak Republic - Minimization for Final Disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanusik, V.; Hladky, E.; Krajc, T.; Pekar, A.; Stubna, M.; Urbanec, M. [Milan Zatkulak, VUJE, a.s., Trnava (Slovakia); Ehn, L.; Kover, M.; Remias, V.; Slezak, M. [JAVYS, a.s., Bohunice (Slovakia)

    2008-07-01

    This paper is referring about the utilization of technologies for the treatment and conditioning of low and intermediate level RAW from operation and decommissioning of nuclear facilities in Slovakia. This experience represents more than 116 reactor years of NPP operation, mainly of NPPs equipped with VVER 440 reactors, 30 years of decommissioning activities, 27 years of development and operation of technologies for the treatment and conditioning of RAW and 7 years of LLW and ILW final repository operation. These technologies are located in two localities: Jaslovske Bohunice and Mochovce. The complex treatment and conditioning center (cementation, bituminization, incineration, vitrification, fragmentation and compacting) for almost all types of radioactive waste is located in Jaslovske Bohunice NPP site. The treatment and conditioning center for liquid radioactive waste (cementation and bituminization) and the surface type repository for LLW and ILW final disposal are located in Mochovce area. The treated waste forms are disposed to repository in cubical Fiber Reinforced Concrete (FRC) containers. The experience from the phase of technology development and the phase of technology modifications for various types of RAW, the experience from long term operation of technologies and the experience from transportation of original and packed wastes are described in this paper. The method of optimally combined technology utilization in order to maximize the radionuclide inventory at the same time with respect of disposal safety limitations of repository is described, too. The significant RAW volume reduction for final disposal was achieved through mediation of the combination of treatment and conditioning technologies. The disposal of treated RAW in cubic FRC containers allowed the optimal utilization of volume and radiological capacity of LLW and ILW repository in Mochovce and the fulfillment of determined safety requirements at the same time. (authors)

  17. Evaluation of Low-Level Waste Disposal Receipt Data for Los Alamos National Laboratory Technical Area 54, Area G Disposal Facility - Fiscal Year 2011

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    French, Sean B. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Shuman, Robert [WPS: WASTE PROJECTS AND SERVICES

    2012-04-17

    The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL or the Laboratory) generates radioactive waste as a result of various activities. Operational or institutional waste is generated from a wide variety of research and development activities including nuclear weapons development, energy production, and medical research. Environmental restoration (ER), and decontamination and decommissioning (D and D) waste is generated as contaminated sites and facilities at LANL undergo cleanup or remediation. The majority of this waste is low-level radioactive waste (LLW) and is disposed of at the Technical Area 54 (TA-54), Area G disposal facility. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1 (DOE, 2001) requires that radioactive waste be managed in a manner that protects public health and safety, and the environment. To comply with this order, DOE field sites must prepare and maintain site-specific radiological performance assessments for LLW disposal facilities that accept waste after September 26, 1988. Furthermore, sites are required to conduct composite analyses that account for the cumulative impacts of all waste that has been (or will be) disposed of at the facilities and other sources of radioactive material that may interact with the facilities. Revision 4 of the Area G performance assessment and composite analysis was issued in 2008 (LANL, 2008). These analyses estimate rates of radionuclide release from the waste disposed of at the facility, simulate the movement of radionuclides through the environment, and project potential radiation doses to humans for several on-site and off-site exposure scenarios. The assessments are based on existing site and disposal facility data and on assumptions about future rates and methods of waste disposal. The accuracy of the performance assessment and composite analysis depends upon the validity of the data used and assumptions made in conducting the analyses. If changes in these data and assumptions are significant, they may invalidate or call into question certain aspects of the analyses. For example, if the volumes and activities of waste disposed of during the remainder of the disposal facility's lifetime differ significantly from those projected, the doses projected by the analyses may no longer apply. DOE field sites are required to implement a performance assessment and composite analysis maintenance program. The purpose of this program is to ensure the continued applicability of the analyses through incremental improvement of the level of understanding of the disposal site and facility. Site personnel are required to conduct field and experimental work to reduce the uncertainty in the data and models used in the assessments. Furthermore, they are required to conduct periodic reviews of waste receipts, comparing them to projected waste disposal rates. The radiological inventory for Area G was updated in conjunction with Revision 4 of the performance assessment and composite analysis (Shuman, 2008). That effort used disposal records and other sources of information to estimate the quantities of radioactive waste that have been disposed of at Area G from 1959, the year the facility started receiving waste on a routine basis, through 2007. It also estimated the quantities of LLW that will require disposal from 2008 through 2044, the year in which it is assumed that disposal operations at Area G will cease. This report documents the fourth review of Area G disposal receipts since the inventory was updated and examines information for waste placed in the ground during fiscal years (FY) 2008 through 2011. The primary objective of the disposal receipt review is to ensure that the future waste inventory projections developed for the performance assessment and composite analysis are consistent with the actual types and quantities of waste being disposed of at Area G. Toward this end, the disposal data that are the subject of this review are used to update the future waste inventory projections for the disposal facility. These projections are compared to the future inventory projections that were develope

  18. A Novel and Cost Effective Approach to the Decommissioning and Decontamination of Legacy Glove Boxes - Minimizing TRU Waste and Maximizing LLW Waste - 13634

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pancake, Daniel; Rock, Cynthia M.; Creed, Richard [Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 South Cass Avenue, Lemont, IL 60439 (United States)] [Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 South Cass Avenue, Lemont, IL 60439 (United States); Donohoue, Tom; Martin, E. Ray; Mason, John A. [ANTECH Corporation 9050 Marshall Court, Westminster, CO, 80031 (United States)] [ANTECH Corporation 9050 Marshall Court, Westminster, CO, 80031 (United States); Norton, Christopher J.; Crosby, Daniel [Environmental Alternatives, Inc., 149 Emerald Street, Suite R, Keene, NH 03431 (United States)] [Environmental Alternatives, Inc., 149 Emerald Street, Suite R, Keene, NH 03431 (United States); Nachtman, Thomas J. [InstaCote, Inc., 160 C. Lavoy Road, Erie, MI, 48133 (United States)] [InstaCote, Inc., 160 C. Lavoy Road, Erie, MI, 48133 (United States)

    2013-07-01

    This paper describes the process of decommissioning two gloveboxes at the Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) that were employed for work with plutonium and other radioactive materials. The decommissioning process involved an initial phase of clearing tools and materials from the glove boxes and disconnecting them from the laboratory infrastructure. The removed materials, assessed as Transuranic (TRU) waste, were packaged into 55 gallon (200 litre) drums and prepared for ultimate disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) at Carlsbad New Mexico. The boxes were then sampled to determine the radioactive contents by means of smears that were counted with alpha and beta detectors to determine the residual surface contamination, especially in terms of alpha particle emitters that are an indicator of TRU activity. Paint chip samples were also collected and sent for laboratory analysis in order to ascertain the radioactive contamination contributing to the TRU activity as a fixed contamination. The investigations predicted that it may be feasible to reduce the residual surface contamination and render the glovebox structure low level waste (LLW) for disposal. In order to reduce the TRU activity a comprehensive decontamination process was initiated using chemical compounds that are particularly effective for lifting and dissolving radionuclides that adhere to the inner surfaces of the gloveboxes. The result of the decontamination process was a reduction in the TRU surface activity on the inner surfaces of the gloveboxes by four orders of magnitude in terms of disintegrations per unit area (DPA). The next phase of the process involved a comprehensive assay of the gloveboxes using a combination of passive neutron and gamma ray scintillation detectors and a shielded and collimated high purity Germanium (HPGe) gamma ray detector. The HPGe detector was used to obtain gamma ray spectra for a variety of measurement positions within the glovebox. The spectra were used to determine the TRU content of the boxes by assessing the activity of Am-241 (59 keV) and Pu-241 (414 keV). Using the data generated it was possible for qualified subject matter experts (SME) to assess that the gloveboxes could be consigned for disposition as LLW and not as TRU. Once this determination was assessed and accepted the gloveboxes were prepared for final disposition to the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) - formerly the Nevada Test Site (NTS). This preparation involved fixing any remaining radioactive contamination within the gloveboxes by filling them with a foam compound, prior to transportation. Once the remaining contamination was fixed the gloveboxes were removed from the laboratory and prepared for transported by road to NNSS. This successful glovebox decontamination and decommissioning process illustrates the means by which TRU waste generation has been minimized, LLW generation has been maximized, and risk has been effectively managed. The process minimizes the volume of TRU waste and reduced the decommissioning time with significant cost savings as the result. (authors)

  19. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant disposal phase supplemental environmental impact statement. Implementation plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-05-01

    The Implementation Plan for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Disposal Phase Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS-II) has two primary purposes: (1) To report on the results of the scoping process (2) To provide guidance for preparing SEIS-II SEIS-II will be the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review for WIPP`s disposal phase. Chapter 1 of this plan provides background on WIPP and this NEPA review. Chapter 2 describes the purpose and need for action by the Department of Energy (hereafter DOE or the Department), as well as a description of the Proposed Action and alternatives being considered. Chapter 3 describes the work plan, including the schedule, responsibilities, and planned consultations with other agencies and organizations. Chapter 4 describes the scoping process, presents major issues identified during the scoping process, and briefly indicates how issues will be addressed in SEIS-II.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2003-09-01

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2004-09-22

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2002-09-01

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2001-09-01

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

  4. Integrated Disposal Facility FY2011 Glass Testing Summary Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pierce, Eric M.; Bacon, Diana H.; Kerisit, Sebastien N.; Windisch, Charles F.; Cantrell, Kirk J.; Valenta, Michelle M.; Burton, Sarah D.; Westsik, Joseph H.

    2011-09-29

    Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was contracted by Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC to provide the technical basis for estimating radionuclide release from the engineered portion of the disposal facility (e.g., source term). Vitrifying the low-activity waste at Hanford is expected to generate over 1.6 x 10{sup 5} m{sup 3} of glass (Certa and Wells 2010). The volume of immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW) at Hanford is the largest in the DOE complex and is one of the largest inventories (approximately 8.9 x 10{sup 14} Bq total activity) of long-lived radionuclides, principally {sup 99}Tc (t{sub 1/2} = 2.1 x 10{sup 5}), planned for disposal in a low-level waste (LLW) facility. Before the ILAW can be disposed, DOE must conduct a performance assessment (PA) for the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) that describes the long-term impacts of the disposal facility on public health and environmental resources. As part of the ILAW glass testing program PNNL is implementing a strategy, consisting of experimentation and modeling, in order to provide the technical basis for estimating radionuclide release from the glass waste form in support of future IDF PAs. The purpose of this report is to summarize the progress made in fiscal year (FY) 2011 toward implementing the strategy with the goal of developing an understanding of the long-term corrosion behavior of low-activity waste glasses.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen

    2012-05-01

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

  6. Operational Strategies for Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Site in Egypt - 13513

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mohamed, Yasser T. [Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center, Atomic Energy Authority, 3 Ahmed El-Zomor St., El-Zohour District, Naser City, 11787, Cairo (Egypt)] [Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center, Atomic Energy Authority, 3 Ahmed El-Zomor St., El-Zohour District, Naser City, 11787, Cairo (Egypt)

    2013-07-01

    The ultimate aims of treatment and conditioning is to prepare waste for disposal by ensuring that the waste will meet the waste acceptance criteria of a disposal facility. Hence the purpose of low-level waste disposal is to isolate the waste from both people and the environment. The radioactive particles in low-level waste emit the same types of radiation that everyone receives from nature. Most low-level waste fades away to natural background levels of radioactivity in months or years. Virtually all of it diminishes to natural levels in less than 300 years. In Egypt, The Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center has been established since 1983, as a waste management facility for LLW and ILW and the disposal site licensed for preoperational in 2005. The site accepts the low level waste generated on site and off site and unwanted radioactive sealed sources with half-life less than 30 years for disposal and all types of sources for interim storage prior to the final disposal. Operational requirements at the low-level (LLRW) disposal site are listed in the National Center for Nuclear Safety and Radiation Control NCNSRC guidelines. Additional procedures are listed in the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility Standards Manual. The following describes the current operations at the LLRW disposal site. (authors)

  7. Project report for the commercial disposal of mixed low-level waste debris

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Andrews, G.; Balls, V.; Shea, T.; Thiesen, T.

    1994-05-01

    This report summarizes the basis for the commercial disposal of Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) mixed low-level waste (MLLW) debris and the associated activities. Mixed waste is radioactive waste plus hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The critical factors for this project were DOE 5820.2A exemption, contracting mechanism, NEPA documentation, sampling and analysis, time limitation and transportation of waste. This report also will provide a guide or a starting place for future use of Envirocare of Utah or other private sector disposal/treatment facilities, and the lessons learned during this project.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1999-09-28

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

  9. Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 139: Waste Disposal Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2009-07-31

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 139 is identified in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) as 'Waste Disposal Sites' and consists of the following seven Corrective Action Sites (CASs), located in Areas 3, 4, 6, and 9 of the Nevada Test Site: CAS 03-35-01, Burn Pit; CAS 04-08-02, Waste Disposal Site; CAS 04-99-01, Contaminated Surface Debris; CAS 06-19-02, Waste Disposal Site/Burn Pit; CAS 06-19-03, Waste Disposal Trenches; CAS 09-23-01, Area 9 Gravel Gertie; and CAS 09-34-01, Underground Detection Station. Closure activities were conducted from December 2008 to April 2009 according to the FFACO (1996, as amended February 2008) and the Corrective Action Plan for CAU 139 (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, 2007b). The corrective action alternatives included No Further Action, Clean Closure, and Closure in Place with Administrative Controls. Closure activities are summarized. CAU 139, 'Waste Disposal Sites,' consists of seven CASs in Areas 3, 4, 6, and 9 of the NTS. The closure alternatives included No Further Action, Clean Closure, and Closure in Place with Administrative Controls. This CR provides a summary of completed closure activities, documentation of waste disposal, and confirmation that remediation goals were met. The following site closure activities were performed at CAU 139 as documented in this CR: (1) At CAS 03-35-01, Burn Pit, soil and debris were removed and disposed as LLW, and debris was removed and disposed as sanitary waste. (2) At CAS 04-08-02, Waste Disposal Site, an administrative UR was implemented. No postings or post-closure monitoring are required. (3) At CAS 04-99-01, Contaminated Surface Debris, soil and debris were removed and disposed as LLW, and debris was removed and disposed as sanitary waste. (4) At CAS 06-19-02, Waste Disposal Site/Burn Pit, no work was performed. (5) At CAS 06-19-03, Waste Disposal Trenches, a native soil cover was installed, and a UR was implemented. (6) At CAS 09-23-01, Area 9 Gravel Gertie, a UR was implemented. (7) At CAS 09-34-01, Underground Detection Station, no work was performed.

  10. Hydrologic evaluation methodology for estimating water movement through the unsaturated zone at commercial low-level radioactive waste disposal sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Meyer, P.D.; Rockhold, M.L.; Nichols, W.E.; Gee, G.W. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States)

    1996-01-01

    This report identifies key technical issues related to hydrologic assessment of water flow in the unsaturated zone at low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal facilities. In addition, a methodology for incorporating these issues in the performance assessment of proposed LLW disposal facilities is identified and evaluated. The issues discussed fall into four areas: estimating the water balance at a site (i.e., infiltration, runoff, water storage, evapotranspiration, and recharge); analyzing the hydrologic performance of engineered components of a facility; evaluating the application of models to the prediction of facility performance; and estimating the uncertainty in predicted facility performance. To illustrate the application of the methodology, two examples are presented. The first example is of a below ground vault located in a humid environment. The second example looks at a shallow land burial facility located in an arid environment. The examples utilize actual site-specific data and realistic facility designs. The two examples illustrate the issues unique to humid and arid sites as well as the issues common to all LLW sites. Strategies for addressing the analytical difficulties arising in any complex hydrologic evaluation of the unsaturated zone are demonstrated.

  11. Annotated bibliography National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents for Sandia National Laboratories

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Harris, J.M.

    1995-04-01

    The following annotated bibliography lists documents prepared by the Department of Energy (DOE), and predecessor agencies, to meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for activities and facilities at Sandia National Laboratories sites. For each NEPA document summary information and a brief discussion of content is provided. This information may be used to reduce the amount of time or cost associated with NEPA compliance for future Sandia National Laboratories projects. This summary may be used to identify model documents, documents to use as sources of information, or documents from which to tier additional NEPA documents.

  12. Use of comprehensive NEPA documents to reduce program risk

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wolff, T.A.; Hansen, R.P.

    1994-04-01

    Sandia National Laboratories operates DOE`s Kauai Test Facility (KTF) on the western coast of the Hawaiian island of Kauai. In July 1992, DOE approved a comprehensive Environmental Assessment (EA) covering ongoing and future rocket launches of experimental payloads. The KTF EA fulfilled two basic objectives: Consideration of environmental values early in the planning and decision making process; and public disclosure. These objectives can also be considered to be benefits of preparing comprehensive NEPA documents. However, proponents of an action are not as dedicated to these twin NEPA objectives as they are motivated by NEPA`s ability to reduce program risks. Once the KTF environmental assessment was underway, it was apparent that reducing risks to the program, budget, and schedule was the main incentive for successful completion of the EA. The comprehensive or ``omnibus`` environmental assessment prepared for the KTF is a de facto ``detailed statement,`` and it is also a good example of a ``mitigated FONSI,`` i.e., mitigation measures are essential to render some potential impacts not significant. Because the KTF EA is a broad scope, umbrella-like, site-wide assessment, it ``bounds`` the impacts of continuing and proposed future actions. The successful completion of this document eliminated the need to review, document, and gain approval individually for numerous related actions. Also, because it supported a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) after identifying appropriate mitigation, it also eliminated the need for an environmental impact statement (EIS). This paper discusses seven specific ways in which the KTF EA reduced program risks and supported budget and schedule objectives.

  13. NEPA Determination: LM-13-13 | Department of Energy

    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 -Department of EnergyNEW1 NEPA Determination: LM-12-11

  14. NEPA-Related Public Involvement | Department of Energy

    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 -Department of EnergyNEW1 NEPA

  15. Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE: Alternative Fuelsof EnergyApril 2014DepartmentCouncil Meeting notes, NovemberNEPA Policy and

  16. Golden Reading Room: NEPA Categorical Exclusions | 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 Fuels Data CenterFinancial Opportunities FinancialofInformationEnergyofNEPA

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1996-08-01

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-09-01

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-08-01

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

  20. Preliminary Project Execution Plan for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    David Duncan

    2011-05-01

    This preliminary project execution plan (PEP) defines U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) project objectives, roles and responsibilities of project participants, project organization, and controls to effectively manage acquisition of capital funds for construction of a proposed remote-handled low-level waste (LLW) disposal facility at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). The plan addresses the policies, requirements, and critical decision (CD) responsibilities identified in DOE Order 413.3B, 'Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets.' This plan is intended to be a 'living document' that will be periodically updated as the project progresses through the CD process to construction and turnover for operation.

  1. Greater-than-Class C Low-Level Radioactive Waste (GTCC LLW) ...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Pilot Plant in Carlsbad, N.M. On February 17, 2011, DOE issued the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Disposal of Greater-Than-Class C (GTCC) Low-Level Radioactive...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-03-01

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

  3. RAPID/Best Practices/NEPA Timelines | 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 HistoryPotentialRuralUtilityScalePVGeneration JumpPublic UtilityQuintasNEPA Timelines < RAPID‎ | Best

  4. NEPA Reports and Records of Decision | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergy AEnergy Managing SwimmingMicrosoft The basics of05/24/2011NEPA policy.

  5. LM Annual NEPA Planning Summary 2014 | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergy A plug-inPPLforLDRDEnergyTurbine blades beingLM Annual NEPA Planning Summary

  6. LM Annual NEPA Planning Summary 2015 | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergy A plug-inPPLforLDRDEnergyTurbine blades beingLM Annual NEPA Planning SummaryLM

  7. Property:NEPA EA EIS Report Url | 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 EIS Report Url Jump to: navigation, search Property Name NEPA EA EIS

  8. Property:NEPA Extraordinary Url | 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 EIS Report Url Jump to: navigation, search Property Name NEPA EA

  9. Property:NEPA FONSI Url | 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 EIS Report Url Jump to: navigation, search Property Name NEPA EAFONSI Url

  10. Property:NEPA FinalEA-EISDate | 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 EIS Report Url Jump to: navigation, search Property Name NEPA

  11. Category:NEPA Environmental Analysis Types | 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 ECoopButte County,Camilla, Georgia:GeothermalNEPA Environmental Analysis Types Jump to:

  12. Using the NEPA Requirements and Guidance - Search Index

    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 GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergyThe U.S.Laclede GasEfficiency|Feed|DepartmentTheEconomyHeatersUsingControlNEPA

  13. NEPA Determination: LM-12-11 | Department of Energy

    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 -Department of EnergyNEW1 NEPA Determination: LM-12-11 Routine and

  14. NEPA Determination: LM-12-12 | Department of Energy

    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 -Department of EnergyNEW1 NEPA Determination: LM-12-11 Routine

  15. NEPA Determination: LM-12a-12 | Department of Energy

    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 -Department of EnergyNEW1 NEPA Determination: LM-12-11 Routinea-12

  16. NEPA Implementation Procedures: Appendices I, II, and III | Department of

    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 -Department of EnergyNEW1 NEPA Determination: LM-12-11Note

  17. DOE-Wide NEPA Contracting | 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 Fuels DataEnergy Webinar:IAbout Us| Department of EnergyOctoberDOE-Wide NEPA

  18. DOE-NEPA-Document-CertificationandTransmittalFormAugust2012.pdf

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergy A plug-in electricLaboratory | version of the DOE021999 Guide to69,6 HazardNEPA

  19. NEPA Source Guide for the Hanford Site. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rued, W.J.

    1994-10-24

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cushing, C.E. [ed.

    1991-12-01

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cushing, C.E. (ed.)

    1991-12-01

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

  2. Caustic Recycling Pilot Unit to Separate Sodium from LLW at Hanford Site - 12279

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pendleton, Justin; Bhavaraju, Sai; Priday, George; Desai, Aditya; Duffey, Kean; Balagopal, Shekar [Ceramatec Inc., Salt Lake City, UT 84119 (United States)

    2012-07-01

    As part of the Department of Energy (DOE) sponsored Advanced Remediation Technologies initiative, a scheme was developed to combine Continuous Sludge Leaching (CSL), Near-Tank Cesium Removal (NTCR), and Caustic Recycling Unit (CRU) using Ceramatec technology, into a single system known as the Pilot Near-Tank Treatment System (PNTTS). The Cesium (Cs) decontaminated effluent from the NTCR process will be sent to the caustic recycle process for recovery of the caustic which will be reused in another cycle of caustic leaching in the CSL process. Such an integrated mobile technology demonstration will give DOE the option to insert this process for sodium management at various sites in Hanford, and will minimize the addition of further sodium into the waste tanks. This allows for recycling of the caustic used to remove aluminum during sludge washing as a pretreatment step in the vitrification of radioactive waste which will decrease the Low Level Waste (LLW) volume by as much as 39%. The CRU pilot process was designed to recycle sodium in the form of pure sodium hydroxide. The basis for the design of the 1/4 scale pilot caustic recycling unit was to demonstrate the efficient operation of a larger scale system to recycle caustic from the NTCR effluent stream from the Parsons process. The CRU was designed to process 0.28 liter/minute of NTCR effluent, and generate 10 M concentration of 'usable' sodium hydroxide. The proposed process operates at 40 deg. C to provide additional aluminum solubility and then recover the sodium hydroxide to the point where the aluminum is saturated at 40 deg. C. A system was developed to safely separate and vent the gases generated during operation of the CRU with the production of 10 M sodium hydroxide. Caustic was produced at a rate between 1.9 to 9.3 kg/hr. The CRU was located inside an ISO container to allow for moving of the unit close to tank locations to process the LLW stream. Actual tests were conducted with the NTCR effluent simulant from the Parsons process in the CRU. The modular CRU is easily scalable as a standalone system for caustic recycling, or for NTTS integration or for use as an In-Tank Treatment System to process sodium bearing waste to meet LLW processing needs at the Hanford site. The standalone pilot operation of the CRU to recycle sodium from NTCR effluent places the technology demonstration at TRL level 6. Multiple operations were performed with the CRU to process up to 500 gallons of the NTCR effluent and demonstrate an efficient separation of up to 70 % of the sodium without solids precipitation while producing 10 M caustic. Batch mode operation was conducted to study the effects of chemistry variation, establish the processing rate, and optimize the process operating conditions to recycle caustic from the NTCR effluent. The performance of the CRU was monitored by tracking the density parameter to control the concentration of caustic produced. Different levels of sodium were separated in tests from the effluent at a fixed operating current density and temperature. The voltage of the modules remained stable during the unit operation which demonstrated steady operation to separate sodium from the NTCR effluent. The sodium transfer current efficiency was measured in testing based on the concentration of caustic produced. Measurements showed a current efficiency of 99.8% for sodium transfer from the NTCR effluent to make sodium hydroxide. The sodium and hydroxide contents of the anolyte (NTCR feed) and catholyte (caustic product) were measured before and after each batch test. In two separate batch tests, samples were taken at different levels of sodium separation and analyzed to determine the stability of the NTCR effluent after sodium separation. The stability characteristics and changes in physical and chemical properties of the NTCR effluent chemistry after separation of sodium hydroxide as a function of storage time were evaluated. Parameters such as level of precipitated alumina, total alkalinity, analysis of Al, Na, K, Cs, Fe, OH, nitrate, nitrite, total dissolved and

  3. Chicago Office NEPA Tracking Number U. S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

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

    safety, and health? 2. Require the sitting, construction or major expansion of waste treatment, storage, or u disposal facilities? 3. Disturb hazardous substances,...

  4. Vitrification treatment options for disposal of greater-than-Class-C low-level waste in a deep geologic repository

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fullmer, K.S.; Fish, L.W.; Fischer, D.K.

    1994-11-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE), in keeping with their responsibility under Public Law 99-240, the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985, is investigating several disposal options for greater-than-Class C low-level waste (GTCC LLW), including emplacement in a deep geologic repository. At the present time vitrification, namely borosilicate glass, is the standard waste form assumed for high-level waste accepted into the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System. This report supports DOE`s investigation of the deep geologic disposal option by comparing the vitrification treatments that are able to convert those GTCC LLWs that are inherently migratory into stable waste forms acceptable for disposal in a deep geologic repository. Eight vitrification treatments that utilize glass, glass ceramic, or basalt waste form matrices are identified. Six of these are discussed in detail, stating the advantages and limitations of each relative to their ability to immobilize GTCC LLW. The report concludes that the waste form most likely to provide the best composite of performance characteristics for GTCC process waste is Iron Enriched Basalt 4 (IEB4).

  5. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and NEPA: CEQ Reports to Congress

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Section 1609(c) of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) requires a report to Congress on the status and progress of NEPA reviews for Recovery Act funded projects and activities...

  6. u.s. DEPARTlVIENT OF ENERGY EERE PROJECT MANAGEMENT CENTER NEPA...

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

    p."'O) u.s. DEPARTlVIENT OF ENERGY EERE PROJECT MANAGEMENT CENTER NEPA DETERMINATION RECIPIENT:City of Riverside PROJECT TITL.E: EECBGARRA - City of Riverside (S) Page 1 of2...

  7. Consideration of Cumulative Impacts in EPA Review of NEPA Documents, EPA Office of Federal Activities

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The purpose of this guidance is to assist EPA reviewers of NEPA documents in providing accurate, realistic, and consistent comments on the assessment of cumulative impacts. The guidance focuses on...

  8. Material Disposal Areas

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

    2 facility. The site includes four absorption beds that received treated radioactive liquid waste, 64 buried shafts used for the disposal of cement-treated radioactive mixtures,...

  9. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Table of Contents · Disposal options emergency mortality composting procedure · Use of composting during outbreaks #12;Disposal: Science and disinfection of farms and surveillance around affected flocks. " USDA APHIS VS EMD, 2007 #12;Disposal: Science

  10. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Poultry Farm Daily Disposal Methods 0;Disposal: Science and Theory First Composter in Delaware · Delmarva was of the first daily composting · 120 in USA over next 10 years #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Composting Procedure · Mixture ­ 1 ½ to 2

  11. NEPA source guide for the Hanford Site. Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tifft, S.R.

    1995-09-27

    This Source Guide will assist those working with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) to become more familiar with the Environmental Assessments (EA) and Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) that apply to specific activities and facilities at the Hanford Site. This document should help answer questions concerning NEPA coverage, history, processes, and the status of many of the buildings and units on and related to the Hanford Site. This document summarizes relevant EAs and EISs by briefly outlining the proposed action of each and the decision made by the US Department of Energy (DOE) or its predecessor agencies, the US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), and the US Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA), concerning the proposed action and current status of the buildings and units discussed in the proposed action. If a decision was officially stated by the DOE, as in a Finding Of No Significant Impact (FONSI) or a Record of Decision (ROD), and was located, a summary is provided in the text. Not all federal decisions, such as FONSIs and RODS, can be found in the Federal Register (FR). For example, although significant large-action FONSIs can be found in the FR, some low-interest FONSIs may have been published elsewhere (i.e., local newspapers). The EA and EIS summaries are arranged in numerical order. To assist in locating a particular EA or EIS, the upper right comer of each page lists the number of the summary or summaries discussed on that page. Any draft EA or EIS is followed by a ``D.`` The EAs with nonstandard numbering schemes are located in Chapter 3.

  12. Performance assessment for the class L-II disposal facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-03-01

    This draft radiological performance assessment (PA) for the proposed Class L-II Disposal Facility (CIIDF) on the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) has been prepared to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the US Department of Energy Order 5820.2A. This PA considers the disposal of low-level radioactive wastes (LLW) over the operating life of the facility and the long-term performance of the facility in providing protection to public health and the environment. The performance objectives contained in the order require that the facility be managed to accomplish the following: (1) Protect public health and safety in accordance with standards specified in environmental health orders and other DOE orders. (2) Ensure that external exposure to the waste and concentrations of radioactive material that may be released into surface water, groundwater, soil, plants, and animals results in an effective dose equivalent (EDE) that does not exceed 25 mrem/year to a member of the public. Releases to the atmosphere shall meet the requirements of 40 CFR Pt. 61. Reasonable effort should be made to maintain releases of radioactivity in effluents to the general environment as low as reasonably achievable. (1) Ensure that the committed EDEs received by individual who inadvertently may intrude into the facility after the loss of active institutional control (100 years) will not exceed 100 mrem/year for continuous exposure of 500 mrem for a single acute exposure. (4) Protect groundwater resources, consistent with federal, state, and local requirements.

  13. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · El compostaje se ha usado como Virginia (2007) ­ British Columbia (2009) Uso del compostaje #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Primera apilamiento Delmarva (2004) #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · El compostaje se usó para proteger una densa

  14. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Summary · Foam is currently a viable ­ Foam application directly to cage #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Legal Status of Foam · Procedure depopulation, culling, and euthanasia #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Acknowledgements · USDA AICAP2 · USDA

  15. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Mass Emergency Composting · Basic ­ Create carcass and litter windrow #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Mass Emergency Composting · Basic cover ­ Clean and disinfect house ­ Sample for virus again #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Mass

  16. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Composting · Composting is defined drop #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Composting · Optimal composting ­ Carbon to nitrogen ratio (C;Disposal: Science and Theory Compost Composition · A variety of supplemental carbon materials have been

  17. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory 2004 ­ Participación de Bud Malone y la espuma 2009 ­ Ninguna ventaja para el gas Breve historia de la espuma #12;Disposal: Science sistema de boquilla ¿Qué es la espuma? #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · La espuma puede incluir: ­ Una

  18. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Foam Generator Setup · Drop off foam generator cart at one end of house #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Foam Generator Setup · Trailer parked generator attached to hose #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Foam Generation Begins · Team of two to operate

  19. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Foaming Options · Compressed Air Foam Systems (CAFS) · Foam Blower · Foam Generator · Nozzle Systems #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Compressed ­ Industry owned response team #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Commercial CAFS for Poultry · Poultry

  20. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Opciones para la eliminación · ¿Qué compostaje durante brotes de enfermedades Lista de contenido #12;Disposal: Science and Theory "Ante un brote brotes de IIAP #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · En 2004, se despoblaron 100 millones de aves en todo el

  1. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Gassing is a preferred #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Carbon Dioxide Gassing · Carbon dioxide (CO2) one of the standard sensitivity time #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Argon-CO2 gas depopulation evaluated under laboratory

  2. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Opciones para la producción de espuma espuma · Sistemas de boquilla #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Requisitos estimados: · Tiempo: 2 a 3 compactas ­ Equipo de respuesta propio de la industria Espuma de aire comprimido #12;Disposal: Science

  3. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory 0 20 40 60 80 100 Compostaje #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Delmarva fue de las primeras granjas en realizar el compostaje de en EE.UU. en los próximos 10 años. Pionera en compostaje en Delaware #12;Disposal: Science and Theory

  4. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Use of Composting · Composting has ­ British Columbia 2009 #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Initial farm linked to NY LBM · Two additional and pile procedure Delmarva 2004 #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Delmarva 2004 · Composting used

  5. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Compostaje de aves de corralRouchey et al., 2005) Investigación previa #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Se ha evaluado y documentado el, bovino Investigación previa #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Experimento nro. 1 Impacto de la espuma en

  6. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Procedimiento básico ­ Desarrollar una pila de carcasas y lecho. Compostaje masivo de emergencia #12;Disposal: Science and Theory de emergencia #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Desarrollar planes antes de que ocurra una

  7. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Foam Used in Actual Outbreak · Water #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Water Based Foam Culling Demo · First large scale comparison · Two:46 (m:s) #12;Disposal: Science and Theory WV H5N2 AIV 2007 · AIV positive turkeys ­ 25,000 turkey farm

  8. Application for a Permit to Operate a Class III Solid Waste Disposal Site at the Nevada Test Site Area 5 Asbestiform Low-Level Solid Waste Disposal Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Programs

    2010-09-14

    The NTS solid waste disposal sites must be permitted by the state of Nevada Solid Waste Management Authority (SWMA). The SWMA for the NTS is the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Federal Facilities (NDEP/BFF). The U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) as land manager (owner), and National Security Technologies (NSTec), as operator, will store, collect, process, and dispose all solid waste by means that do not create a health hazard, a public nuisance, or cause impairment of the environment. NTS disposal sites will not be included in the Nye County Solid Waste Management Plan. The NTS is located approximately 105 kilometers (km) (65 miles [mi]) northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada (Figure 1). The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is the federal lands management authority for the NTS, and NSTec is the Management and Operations contractor. Access on and off the NTS is tightly controlled, restricted, and guarded on a 24-hour basis. The NTS has signs posted along its entire perimeter. NSTec is the operator of all solid waste disposal sites on the NTS. The Area 5 RWMS is the location of the permitted facility for the Solid Waste Disposal Site (SWDS). The Area 5 RWMS is located near the eastern edge of the NTS (Figure 2), approximately 26 km (16 mi) north of Mercury, Nevada. The Area 5 RWMS is used for the disposal of low-level waste (LLW) and mixed low-level waste. Many areas surrounding the RWMS have been used in conducting nuclear tests. A Notice of Intent to operate the disposal site as a Class III site was submitted to the state of Nevada on January 28, 1994, and was acknowledged as being received in a letter to the NNSA/NSO on August 30, 1994. Interim approval to operate a Class III SWDS for regulated asbestiform low-level waste (ALLW) was authorized on August 12, 1996 (in letter from Paul Liebendorfer to Runore Wycoff), with operations to be conducted in accordance with the ''Management Plan for the Disposal of Low-Level Waste with Regulated Asbestos Waste.'' A requirement of the authorization was that on or before October 9, 1999, a permit was required to be issued. Because of NDEP and NNSA/NSO review cycles, the final permit was issued on April 5, 2000, for the operation of the Area 5 Low-Level Waste Disposal Site, utilizing Pit 7 (P07) as the designated disposal cell. The original permit applied only to Pit 7, with a total design capacity of 5,831 cubic yards (yd{sup 3}) (157,437 cubic feet [ft{sup 3}]). NNSA/NSO is expanding the SWDS to include the adjacent Upper Cell of Pit 6 (P06), with an additional capacity of 28,037 yd{sup 3} (756,999 ft{sup 3}) (Figure 3). The proposed total capacity of ALLW in Pit 7 and P06 will be approximately 33,870 yd{sup 3} (0.9 million ft{sup 3}). The site will be used for the disposal of regulated ALLW, small quantities of low-level radioactive hydrocarbon-burdened (LLHB) media and debris, LLW, LLW that contains PCB Bulk Product Waste greater than 50 ppm that leaches at a rate of less than 10 micrograms of PCB per liter of water, and small quantities of LLHB demolition and construction waste (hereafter called permissible waste). Waste containing free liquids, or waste that is regulated as hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) or state-of-generation hazardous waste regulations, will not be accepted for disposal at the site. The only waste regulated under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) that will be accepted at the disposal site is regulated asbestos-containing materials (RACM). The term asbestiform is used throughout this document to describe this waste. Other TSCA waste (i.e., polychlorinated biphenyls [PCBs]) will not be accepted for disposal at the SWDS. The disposal site will be used as a depository of permissible waste generated both on site and off site. All generators designated by NNSA/NSO will be eligible to dispose regulated ALLW at the Asbestiform Low-Level Waste Disposal Site in accordance with the U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV) 325

  9. Taking interim actions: Integrating CERCLA and NEPA to move ahead with site cleanup

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MacDonell, M.M.; Peterson, J.M. (Argonne National Lab., IL (United States)); Valett, G.L. (Argonne National Lab., IL (United States) MK-Ferguson Co., St. Charles, MO (United States)); McCracken, S.H. (Argonne National Lab., IL (United States) USDOE, St. Charles, MO (United States))

    1991-01-01

    The cleanup of contaminated sites can be expedited by using interim response actions in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended, and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). In fact, a major portion of some Superfund sites can be cleaned up using interim actions. For CERCLA sites being remediated by the US Department of Energy (DOE), such actions must also comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) because the DOE has established a policy for integrating CERCLA and NEPA requirements. A strategy for the integrated documentation with implementation of interim actions has been applied successfully at the Weldon Spring site, and major cleanup projects are currently underway. This paper discusses some of the issues associated with integrating CERCLA and NEPA for interim actions and summarizes those actions that have been identified for the Weldon Spring site.

  10. Taking interim actions: Integrating CERCLA and NEPA to move ahead with site cleanup

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MacDonell, M.M.; Peterson, J.M. [Argonne National Lab., IL (United States); Valett, G.L. [Argonne National Lab., IL (United States)]|[MK-Ferguson Co., St. Charles, MO (United States); McCracken, S.H. [Argonne National Lab., IL (United States)]|[USDOE, St. Charles, MO (United States)

    1991-12-01

    The cleanup of contaminated sites can be expedited by using interim response actions in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended, and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). In fact, a major portion of some Superfund sites can be cleaned up using interim actions. For CERCLA sites being remediated by the US Department of Energy (DOE), such actions must also comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) because the DOE has established a policy for integrating CERCLA and NEPA requirements. A strategy for the integrated documentation with implementation of interim actions has been applied successfully at the Weldon Spring site, and major cleanup projects are currently underway. This paper discusses some of the issues associated with integrating CERCLA and NEPA for interim actions and summarizes those actions that have been identified for the Weldon Spring site.

  11. Special Analysis: Disposal Plan for Pit 38 at Technical Area 54, Area G

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    French, Sean B. [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Shuman, Rob [URS Coporation

    2012-06-26

    Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) generates radioactive waste as a result of various activities. Operational waste is generated from a wide variety of research and development activities including nuclear weapons development, energy production, and medical research; environmental restoration (ER), and decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) waste is generated as contaminated sites and facilities at LANL undergo cleanup or remediation. The majority of this waste is low-level radioactive waste (LLW) and is disposed of at the Technical Area 54 (TA-54), Area G disposal facility. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1 (DOE, 2001) requires that radioactive waste be managed in a manner that protects public health and safety, and the environment. To comply with this order, DOE field sites must prepare site-specific radiological performance assessments for LLW disposal facilities that accept waste after September 26, 1988. Furthermore, sites are required to conduct composite analyses that account for the cumulative impacts of all waste that has been (or will be) disposed of at the facilities and other sources of radioactive material that may interact with the facilities. Revision 4 of the Area G performance assessment and composite analysis was issued in 2008 (LANL, 2008). These analyses estimate rates of radionuclide release from the waste disposed of at the facility, simulate the movement of radionuclides through the environment, and project potential radiation doses to humans for several on- and off-site exposure scenarios. The assessments are based on existing site and disposal facility data, and on assumptions about future rates and methods of waste disposal. The Area G disposal facility consists of Material Disposal Area (MDA) G and the Zone 4 expansion area. To date, disposal operations have been confined to MDA G and are scheduled to continue in that region until MDA G undergoes final closure at the end of 2013. Given its impending closure, efforts have been made to utilize the remaining disposal capacity within MDA G to the greatest extent possible. One approach for doing this has been to dispose of low-activity waste from cleanup operations at LANL in the headspace of selected disposal pits. Waste acceptance criteria (WAC) for the material placed in the headspace of pits 15, 37, and 38 have been developed (LANL, 2010) and the impacts of placing waste in the headspace of these units has been evaluated (LANL, 2012a). The efforts to maximize disposal efficiency have taken on renewed importance because of the disposal demands placed on MDA G by the large volumes of waste that are being generated at LANL by cleanup efforts. For example, large quantities of waste were recently generated by the retrieval of waste formerly disposed of at TA-21, MDA B. A portion of this material has been disposed of in the headspace of pit 38 in compliance with the WAC developed for that disposal strategy; a large amount of waste has also been sent to off-site facilities for disposal. Nevertheless, large quantities of MDA B waste remain that require disposal. An extension of pit 38 was proposed to provide the disposal capacity that will be needed to dispose of institutional waste and MDA B waste through 2013. A special analysis was prepared to evaluate the impacts of the pit extension (LANL, 2012b). The analysis concluded that the disposal unit could be extended with modest increases in the exposures projected for the Area G performance assessment and composite analysis, as long as limits were placed on the radionuclide concentrations in the waste that is placed in the headspace of the pit. Based, in part, on the results of the special analysis, the extension of pit 38 was approved and excavation of the additional disposal capacity was started in May 2012. The special analysis presented here uses performance modeling to identify a disposal plan for the placement of waste in pit 38. The modeling uses a refined design of the disposal unit and updated radionuclide inventories to identify a disposal configuration that promotes efficie

  12. Integrated Disposal Facility FY2010 Glass Testing Summary Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pierce, Eric M.; Bacon, Diana H.; Kerisit, Sebastien N.; Windisch, Charles F.; Cantrell, Kirk J.; Valenta, Michelle M.; Burton, Sarah D.; Serne, R Jeffrey; Mattigod, Shas V.

    2010-09-30

    Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was contracted by Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC to provide the technical basis for estimating radionuclide release from the engineered portion of the disposal facility (e.g., source term). Vitrifying the low-activity waste at Hanford is expected to generate over 1.6 × 105 m3 of glass (Puigh 1999). The volume of immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW) at Hanford is the largest in the DOE complex and is one of the largest inventories (approximately 0.89 × 1018 Bq total activity) of long-lived radionuclides, principally 99Tc (t1/2 = 2.1 × 105), planned for disposal in a low-level waste (LLW) facility. Before the ILAW can be disposed, DOE must conduct a performance assessement (PA) for the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) that describes the long-term impacts of the disposal facility on public health and environmental resources. As part of the ILAW glass testing program PNNL is implementing a strategy, consisting of experimentation and modeling, in order to provide the technical basis for estimating radionuclide release from the glass waste form in support of future IDF PAs. The purpose of this report is to summarize the progress made in fiscal year (FY) 2010 toward implementing the strategy with the goal of developing an understanding of the long-term corrosion behavior of low-activity waste glasses. The emphasis in FY2010 was the completing an evaluation of the most sensitive kinetic rate law parameters used to predict glass weathering, documented in Bacon and Pierce (2010), and transitioning from the use of the Subsurface Transport Over Reactive Multi-phases to Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases computer code for near-field calculations. The FY2010 activities also consisted of developing a Monte Carlo and Geochemical Modeling framework that links glass composition to alteration phase formation by 1) determining the structure of unreacted and reacted glasses for use as input information into Monte Carlo calculations, 2) compiling the solution data and alteration phases identified from accelerated weathering tests conducted with ILAW glass by PNNL and Viteous State Laboratory/Catholic University of America as well as other literature sources for use in geochemical modeling calculations, and 3) conducting several initial calculations on glasses that contain the four major components of ILAW-Al2O3, B2O3, Na2O, and SiO2.

  13. Waste disposal package

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Smith, M.J.

    1985-06-19

    This is a claim for a waste disposal package including an inner or primary canister for containing hazardous and/or radioactive wastes. The primary canister is encapsulated by an outer or secondary barrier formed of a porous ceramic material to control ingress of water to the canister and the release rate of wastes upon breach on the canister. 4 figs.

  14. Radioactive waste disposal package

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Lampe, Robert F. (Bethel Park, PA)

    1986-01-01

    A radioactive waste disposal package comprising a canister for containing vitrified radioactive waste material and a sealed outer shell encapsulating the canister. A solid block of filler material is supported in said shell and convertible into a liquid state for flow into the space between the canister and outer shell and subsequently hardened to form a solid, impervious layer occupying such space.

  15. Oil field waste disposal costs at commercial disposal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Veil, J.A.

    1997-10-01

    The exploration and production segment of the U.S. oil and gas industry generates millions of barrels of nonhazardous oil field wastes annually. In most cases, operators can dispose of their oil fields wastes at a lower cost on-site than off site and, thus, will choose on-site disposal. However, a significant quantity of oil field wastes are still sent to off-site commercial facilities for disposal. This paper provides information on the availability of commercial disposal companies in different states, the treatment and disposal methods they employ, and how much they charge. There appear to be two major off-site disposal trends. Numerous commercial disposal companies that handle oil field wastes exclusively are located in nine oil-and gas-producing states. They use the same disposal methods as those used for on-site disposal. In addition, the Railroad Commission of Texas has issued permits to allow several salt caverns to be used for disposal of oil field wastes. Twenty-two other oil- and gas-producing states contain few or no disposal companies dedicated to oil and gas industry waste. The only off-site commercial disposal companies available handle general industrial wastes or are sanitary landfills. In those states, operators needing to dispose of oil field wastes off-site must send them to a local landfill or out of state. The cost of off-site commercial disposal varies substantially, depending on the disposal method used, the state in which the disposal company is located, and the degree of competition in the area.

  16. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Se ubica el carretón con el enfriamiento Ventiladores de túnel de viento #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Se estaciona el remolque en uno: Science and Theory · Se usa un equipo de dos personas para hacer funcionar el sistema: ­ Operario del

  17. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Table of Contents · Why Depopulate? · Depopulation Methods · Basics of Foam · Types of Foam Equipment · Science Behind Foam · Implementing Foam Depopulation · Use of Foam in the Field · Conclusions #12;Disposal: Science and Theory "When HPAI outbreaks

  18. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · El compostaje se define como la: Science and Theory · Compostaje óptimo ­ Relación carbono/nitrógeno (C:N): 20:1 a 35:1 ­ Contenido de Compostaje #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · Se ha utilizado satisfactoriamente una variedad de materiales

  19. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Disposal: Science and Theory #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Previous Research · Composting, et.al. 2005; Bendfeldt et al., 2006; DeRouchey et al., 2005) #12;Disposal: Science and Theory: Science and Theory Scientific Validation of Composting · Experiment 1 Impact of foam on composting

  20. ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING / NEPA SERVICES CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT OF MILITARY LANDS

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING / NEPA SERVICES CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT OF MILITARY LANDS CEMML@cemml.colostate.edu | http://www.cemml.colostate.edu Effective environmental planning and management of military and testing. The Center develops environmental planning documents for installations to incorporate

  1. Application for a Permit to Operate a Class III Solid Waste Disposal Site at the Nevada National Security Site Area 5 Asbestiform Low-Level Solid Waste Disposal Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Programs

    2010-10-04

    The Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) is located approximately 105 km (65 mi) northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. The U.S. Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) is the federal lands management authority for the NNSS and National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec) is the Management and Operations contractor. Access on and off the NNSS is tightly controlled, restricted, and guarded on a 24-hour basis. The NNSS is posted with signs along its entire perimeter. NSTec is the operator of all solid waste disposal sites on the NNSS. The Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) is the location of the permitted facility for the Solid Waste Disposal Site (SWDS). The Area 5 RWMS is located near the eastern edge of the NNSS (Figure 1), approximately 26 km (16 mi) north of Mercury, Nevada. The Area 5 RWMS is used for the disposal of low-level waste (LLW) and mixed low-level waste. Many areas surrounding the RWMS have been used in conducting nuclear tests. The site will be used for the disposal of regulated Asbestiform Low-Level Waste (ALLW), small quantities of low-level radioactive hydrocarbon-burdened (LLHB) media and debris, LLW, LLW that contains Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Bulk Product Waste greater than 50 ppm that leaches at a rate of less than 10 micrograms of PCB per liter of water, and small quantities of LLHB demolition and construction waste (hereafter called permissible waste). Waste containing free liquids, or waste that is regulated as hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) or state-of-generation hazardous waste regulations, will not be accepted for disposal at the site. Waste regulated under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) that will be accepted at the disposal site is regulated asbestos-containing materials (RACM) and PCB Bulk Product Waste greater than 50 ppm that leaches at a rate of less than 10 micrograms of PCB per liter of water. The term asbestiform is used throughout this document to describe RACM. The disposal site will be used as a depository of permissible waste generated both on site and off site. All generators designated by NNSA/NSO will be eligible to dispose regulated ALLW at the Asbestiform Low-Level Waste Disposal Site in accordance with the DOE/NV-325, Nevada National Security Site Waste Acceptance Criteria (NNSSWAC, current revision). Approval will be given by NNSA/NSO to generators that have successfully demonstrated through process knowledge (PK) and/or sampling and analysis that the waste is low-level, contains asbestiform material, or contains PCB Bulk Product Waste greater than 50 ppm that leaches at a rate of less than 10 micrograms of PCB per liter of water, or small quantities of LLHB demolition and construction waste and does not contain prohibited waste materials. Each waste stream will be approved through the Radioactive Waste Acceptance Program (RWAP), which ensures that the waste meets acceptance requirements outlined in the NNSSWAC.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2008-04-01

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

  3. Recommendation 223: Recommendations on Additional Waste Disposal...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    3: Recommendations on Additional Waste Disposal Capacity Recommendation 223: Recommendations on Additional Waste Disposal Capacity ORSSAB's recommendations encourage DOE to...

  4. NEPA at 19: A Primer on an "Old" Law with Solutions to New Problems |

    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 -Department of EnergyNEW1 NEPA Determination:NEPA

  5. Stakeholder Engagement on the Environmental Impact Statement for the Disposal of Greater-Than-Class C Low-Level Radioactive Waste -12565

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gelles, Christine; Joyce, James; Edelman, Arnold [Office of Environmental Management, Office of Disposal Operations-EM-43 (United States)

    2012-07-01

    The Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Disposal Operations is responsible for developing a permanent disposal capability for a small volume, but highly radioactive, class of commercial low-level radioactive waste, known as Greater-Than-Class C (GTCC) low-level radioactive waste. DOE has issued a draft environmental impact statement (EIS) and will be completing a final EIS under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) that evaluates a range of disposal alternatives. Like other classes of radioactive waste, proposing and evaluating disposal options for GTCC waste is highly controversial, presents local and national impacts, and generates passionate views from stakeholders. Recent national and international events, such as the cancellation of the Yucca Mountain project and the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident, have heighten stakeholder awareness of everything nuclear, including disposal of radioactive waste. With these challenges, the Office of Disposal Operations recognizes that informed decision-making that will result from stakeholder engagement and participation is critical to the success of the GTCC EIS project. This paper discusses the approach used by the Office of Disposal Operations to engage stakeholders on the GTCC EIS project, provides advice based on our experiences, and proffers some ideas for future engagements in today's open, always connected cyber environment. (authors)

  6. Radioactive waste material disposal

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Forsberg, C.W.; Beahm, E.C.; Parker, G.W.

    1995-10-24

    The invention is a process for direct conversion of solid radioactive waste, particularly spent nuclear fuel and its cladding, if any, into a solidified waste glass. A sacrificial metal oxide, dissolved in a glass bath, is used to oxidize elemental metal and any carbon values present in the waste as they are fed to the bath. Two different modes of operation are possible, depending on the sacrificial metal oxide employed. In the first mode, a regenerable sacrificial oxide, e.g., PbO, is employed, while the second mode features use of disposable oxides such as ferric oxide. 3 figs.

  7. Radioactive waste material disposal

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Forsberg, Charles W. (155 Newport Dr., Oak Ridge, TN 37830); Beahm, Edward C. (106 Cooper Cir., Oak Ridge, TN 37830); Parker, George W. (321 Dominion Cir., Knoxville, TN 37922)

    1995-01-01

    The invention is a process for direct conversion of solid radioactive waste, particularly spent nuclear fuel and its cladding, if any, into a solidified waste glass. A sacrificial metal oxide, dissolved in a glass bath, is used to oxidize elemental metal and any carbon values present in the waste as they are fed to the bath. Two different modes of operation are possible, depending on the sacrificial metal oxide employed. In the first mode, a regenerable sacrificial oxide, e.g., PbO, is employed, while the second mode features use of disposable oxides such as ferric oxide.

  8. Material Disposal Areas

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

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

  9. Hanford Landfill Reaches 15 Million Tons Disposed - Waste Disposal...

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

    as part of the River Corridor Closure Project - DOE's largest environmental cleanup closure project. The landfill is the largest disposal facility in the DOE cleanup complex....

  10. Enhancing RESRAD-OFFSITE for Low Level Waste Disposal Facility Performance Assessment

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Abstract: The RESRAD-OFFSITE code was developed to evaluate the radiological dose and excess cancer risk to an individual who is exposed while located within or outside the area of initial (primary) contamination. The primary contamination, which is the source of all releases modeled by the code, is assumed to be a layer of soil. The code considers the release of contamination from the source to the atmosphere, to surface runoff, and to groundwater. The radionuclide leaching was modeled as a first order (without transport) release using radionuclide distribution coefficient and infiltration rate calculated from water balance (precipitation, surface runoff, evapotranspiration, etc.). Recently, a new source term model was added the RESRAD-OFFSITE code so that it can be applied to the evaluation of Low Level Waste (LLW) disposal facility performance assessment. This new improved source term model include (1) first order with transport, (2) equilibrium desorption (rinse) release, and (3) uniform release (constant dissolution). With these new source release options, it is possible to simulate both uncontainerized (soil) contamination and containerized (waste drums) contamination. A delay time in the source release was also added to the code. This allows modeling the LLW container degradation as a function of time. The RESRAD-OFFSITE code also allows linking to other codes using improved flux and concentration input options. Additional source release model such as diffusion release may be added later. In addition, radionuclide database with 1252 radionuclides (ICRP 107) and the corresponding dose coefficients (DCFPAK 3.02) and the Department of Energy’s new gender- and age-averaged Reference Person dose coefficients (DOE-STD-1196-2011) which is based on the US census data will be added to the next version of RESRAD-OFFSITE code

  11. Near-Field Hydrology Data Package for the Integrated Disposal Facility 2005 Performance Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Meyer, Philip D.; Saripalli, Prasad; Freedman, Vicky L.

    2004-06-25

    CH2MHill Hanford Group, Inc. (CHG) is designing and assessing the performance of an Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) to receive immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW), Low-Level and Mixed Low-Level Wastes (LLW/MLLW), and the Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) melters used to vitrify the ILAW. The IDF Performance Assessment (PA) assesses the performance of the disposal facility to provide a reasonable expectation that the disposal of the waste is protective of the general public, groundwater resources, air resources, surface water resources, and inadvertent intruders. The PA requires prediction of contaminant migration from the facilities, which is expected to occur primarily via the movement of water through the facilities and the consequent transport of dissolved contaminants in the pore water of the vadose zone. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) assists CHG in its performance assessment activities. One of PNNL’s tasks is to provide estimates of the physical, hydraulic, and transport properties of the materials comprising the disposal facilities and the disturbed region around them. These materials are referred to as the near-field materials. Their properties are expressed as parameters of constitutive models used in simulations of subsurface flow and transport. In addition to the best-estimate parameter values, information on uncertainty in the parameter values and estimates of the changes in parameter values over time are required to complete the PA. These parameter estimates and information were previously presented in a report prepared for the 2001 ILAW PA. This report updates the parameter estimates for the 2005 IDF PA using additional information and data collected since publication of the earlier report.

  12. Savannah River Site waste vitrification projects initiated throughout the United States: Disposal and recycle options

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jantzen, C.M.

    2000-04-10

    A vitrification process was developed and successfully implemented by the US Department of Energy's (DOE) Savannah River Site (SRS) and at the West Valley Nuclear Services (WVNS) to convert high-level liquid nuclear wastes (HLLW) to a solid borosilicate glass for safe long term geologic disposal. Over the last decade, SRS has successfully completed two additional vitrification projects to safely dispose of mixed low level wastes (MLLW) (radioactive and hazardous) at the SRS and at the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR). The SRS, in conjunction with other laboratories, has also demonstrated that vitrification can be used to dispose of a wide variety of MLLW and low-level wastes (LLW) at the SRS, at ORR, at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), at Rocky Flats (RF), at the Fernald Environmental Management Project (FEMP), and at the Hanford Waste Vitrification Project (HWVP). The SRS, in conjunction with the Electric Power Research Institute and the National Atomic Energy Commission of Argentina (CNEA), have demonstrated that vitrification can also be used to safely dispose of ion-exchange (IEX) resins and sludges from commercial nuclear reactors. In addition, the SRS has successfully demonstrated that numerous wastes declared hazardous by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) can be vitrified, e.g. mining industry wastes, contaminated harbor sludges, asbestos containing material (ACM), Pb-paint on army tanks and bridges. Once these EPA hazardous wastes are vitrified, the waste glass is rendered non-hazardous allowing these materials to be recycled as glassphalt (glass impregnated asphalt for roads and runways), roofing shingles, glasscrete (glass used as aggregate in concrete), or other uses. Glass is also being used as a medium to transport SRS americium (Am) and curium (Cm) to the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) for recycle in the ORR medical source program and use in smoke detectors at an estimated value of $1.5 billion to the general public.

  13. Disposal options for burner ash from spent graphite fuel. Final study report November 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pinto, A.P.

    1994-08-01

    Three major disposal alternatives are being considered for Fort St. Vrain Reactor (FSVR) and Peach Bottom Reactor (PBR) spent fuels: direct disposal of packaged, intact spent fuel elements; (2) removal of compacts to separate fuel into high-level waste (HLW) and low-level waste (LLW); and (3) physical/chemical processing to reduce waste volumes and produce stable waste forms. For the third alternative, combustion of fuel matrix graphite and fuel particle carbon coatings is a preferred technique for head-end processing as well as for volume reduction and chemical pretreatment prior to final fixation, packaging, and disposal of radioactive residuals (fissile and fertile materials together with fission and activation products) in a final repository. This report presents the results of a scoping study of alternate means for processing and/or disposal of fissile-bearing particles and ash remaining after combustion of FSVR and PBR spent graphite fuels. Candidate spent fuel ash (SFA) waste forms in decreasing order of estimated technical feasibility include glass-ceramics (GCs), polycrystalline ceramic assemblages (PCAs), and homogeneous amorphous glass. Candidate SFA waste form production processes in increasing order of estimated effort and cost for implementation are: low-density GCs via fuel grinding and simultaneous combustion and waste form production in a slagging cyclone combustor (SCC); glass or low-density GCs via fluidized bed SFA production followed by conventional melting of SFA and frit; PCAs via fluidized bed SFA production followed by hot isostatic pressing (HIPing) of SFA/frit mixtures; and high-density GCs via fluidized bed SFA production followed by HIPing of Calcine/Frit/SFA mixtures.

  14. Waste Disposal Guide HOW TO PROPERLY DISPOSE OF WASTE MATERIALS

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Schaefer, Marcus

    of Containers p.8 o E. Disposal of Empty Containers p.8 o F. Storage of Waste Chemicals p.8,9 o G. Chemical Compatibility p.9 Radioactive Waste Disposal p.10 Bio Hazard Waste chemical and radioactive waste, and Biohazardous waste. This document contains university procedures

  15. Integrated Disposal Facility Risk Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MANN, F. M.

    2003-06-03

    An environmental risk assessment associated with the disposal of projected Immobilized Low-Activity Waste, solid wastes and failed or decommissioned melters in an Integrated Disposal Facility was performed. Based on the analyses all performance objectives associated with the groundwater, air, and intruder pathways were met.

  16. Laboratory Waste Disposal HAZARDOUS GLASS

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sheridan, Jennifer

    Laboratory Waste Disposal HAZARDOUS GLASS Items that could cut or puncture skin or trash- can without any treatment. Hazardous Glass and Plastic: Items that can puncture, cut or scratch if disposed a significant hazard. Bags of misc. plasticware that has been autoclaved to remove bio contamination. Syringe

  17. Melter Disposal Strategic Planning Document

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BURBANK, D.A.

    2000-09-25

    This document describes the proposed strategy for disposal of spent and failed melters from the tank waste treatment plant to be built by the Office of River Protection at the Hanford site in Washington. It describes program management activities, disposal and transportation systems, leachate management, permitting, and safety authorization basis approvals needed to execute the strategy.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2005-09-30

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

  19. Compilation and Presentation of Existing Data on Oil and Gas Leasing Development in a Manner Useful to the NEPA Process

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Amy Childers; Dave Cornue

    2008-11-30

    In recognition of our nation's increasing energy needs, the George W. Bush Administration's National Energy Policy Development Group report (May 2001) suggested that one way to increase domestic on-shore production of oil and gas is to increase access to undiscovered resources on federal lands. Also recognized is the need to protect and conserve natural resources, which often are located on and around federal lands. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was designed to create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony. NEPA requires that federal agencies prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) prior to the approval of any development activities. The NEPA scope is broad, with the process applicable to many situations from the building of highways, barge facilities and water outtake facilities, bridges, and watersheds to other less significant projects. The process often involves cooperation among multiple federal agencies, industry, scientists and consultants, and the surrounding community. The objective of the project, titled Compilation and Presentation of Existing Data on Oil and Gas Leasing and Development in a Manner Useful to the NEPA Process, is to facilitate faster and more comprehensive access to current oil and gas data by land management agencies and operators. This will enable key stakeholders in the NEPA process to make decisions that support access to federal resources while at the same time achieving a legitimate balance between environmental protection and appropriate levels of development.

  20. Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation: Waste Disposal In Engineered Trench #3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hamm, L. L.; Smith, F. G. III; Flach, G. P.; Hiergesell, R. A.; Butcher, B. T.

    2013-07-29

    Because Engineered Trench #3 (ET#3) will be placed in the location previously designated for Slit Trench #12 (ST#12), Solid Waste Management (SWM) requested that the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) determine if the ST#12 limits could be employed as surrogate disposal limits for ET#3 operations. SRNL documented in this Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation (UDQE) that the use of ST#12 limits as surrogates for the new ET#3 disposal unit will provide reasonable assurance that Department of Energy (DOE) 435.1 performance objectives and measures (USDOE, 1999) will be protected. Therefore new ET#3 inventory limits as determined by a Special Analysis (SA) are not required.

  1. Transportation, Aging and Disposal Canister System Performance...

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

    document provides specifications for selected system components of the Transportation, Aging and Disposal (TAD) canister-based system. Transportation, Aging and Disposal Canister...

  2. Optimization of Waste Disposal - 13338

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shephard, E.; Walter, N.; Downey, H.; Collopy, P.; Conant, J.

    2013-07-01

    From 2009 through 2011, remediation of areas of a former fuel cycle facility used for government contract work was conducted. Remediation efforts were focused on building demolition, underground pipeline removal, contaminated soil removal and removal of contaminated sediments from portions of an on-site stream. Prior to conducting the remediation field effort, planning and preparation for remediation (including strategic planning for waste characterization and disposal) was conducted during the design phase. During the remediation field effort, waste characterization and disposal practices were continuously reviewed and refined to optimize waste disposal practices. This paper discusses strategic planning for waste characterization and disposal that was employed in the design phase, and continuously reviewed and refined to optimize efficiency. (authors)

  3. Disposal: Science and Theory UNIVERSIDAD

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    zona de escarbado. · Se realiza un sellado o se cubren las aves con polietileno y se introduce CO2. Reproductoras de pollos de engorde selladas con polietileno Galpón parcial #12;Disposal: Science and Theory

  4. Title 40 CFR 1501 NEPA and Agency 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| Open Energy Information Serbia-EnhancingEt Al., 2013)Open EnergyTinox JumpInformation NPDES Jump to:31 NEPA and

  5. u.s. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY EERE PROJECT MANAGEMENT CENTER NEPA DETERMINATION

    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 DeliciousMathematics And Statistics » USAJobsMotion to Withdraw | DepartmentSuite 600, 1901THE6,test test1:NEPA

  6. Disposal phase experimental program plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-01-31

    The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) facility comprises surface and subsurface facilities, including a repository mined in a bedded salt formation at a depth of 2,150 feet. It has been developed to safely and permanently isolate transuranic (TRU) radioactive wastes in a deep geological disposal site. On April 12, 1996, the DOE submitted a revised Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Part B permit application to the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED). The DOE anticipates receiving an operating permit from the NMED; this permit is required prior to the start of disposal operations. On October 29, 1996, the DOE submitted a Compliance Certification Application (CCA) to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in accordance with the WIPP land Withdrawal Act (LWA) of 1992 (Public Law 102-579) as amended, and the requirements of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR) Parts 191 and 194. The DOE plans to begin disposal operations at the WIPP in November 1997 following receipt of certification by the EPA. The disposal phase is expected to last for 35 years, and will include recertification activities no less than once every five years. This Disposal Phase Experimental Program (DPEP) Plan outlines the experimental program to be conducted during the first 5-year recertification period. It also forms the basis for longer-term activities to be carried out throughout the 35-year disposal phase. Once the WIPP has been shown to be in compliance with regulatory requirements, the disposal phase gives an opportunity to affirm the compliance status of the WIPP, enhance the operations of the WIPP and the national TRU system, and contribute to the resolution of national and international nuclear waste management technical needs. The WIPP is the first facility of its kind in the world. As such, it provides a unique opportunity to advance the technical state of the art for permanent disposal of long-lived radioactive wastes.

  7. Generic Argillite/Shale Disposal Reference Case

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Zheng, Liange

    2014-01-01

    Shale Disposal Reference Case August 2014 Borehole activity: Oil and gas drilling targets for hydrocarbon resource

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    JANSKY, M.T.

    2000-09-01

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

  9. 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...

  10. Depleted uranium disposal options evaluation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hertzler, T.J.; Nishimoto, D.D.; Otis, M.D. [Science Applications International Corp., Idaho Falls, ID (United States). Waste Management Technology Div.

    1994-05-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, has chartered a study to evaluate alternative management strategies for depleted uranium (DU) currently stored throughout the DOE complex. Historically, DU has been maintained as a strategic resource because of uses for DU metal and potential uses for further enrichment or for uranium oxide as breeder reactor blanket fuel. This study has focused on evaluating the disposal options for DU if it were considered a waste. This report is in no way declaring these DU reserves a ``waste,`` but is intended to provide baseline data for comparison with other management options for use of DU. To PICS considered in this report include: Retrievable disposal; permanent disposal; health hazards; radiation toxicity and chemical toxicity.

  11. Disposable telemetry cable deployment system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Holcomb, David Joseph (Sandia Park, NM)

    2000-01-01

    A disposable telemetry cable deployment system for facilitating information retrieval while drilling a well includes a cable spool adapted for insertion into a drill string and an unarmored fiber optic cable spooled onto the spool cable and having a downhole end and a stinger end. Connected to the cable spool is a rigid stinger which extends through a kelly of the drilling apparatus. A data transmission device for transmitting data to a data acquisition system is disposed either within or on the upper end of the rigid stinger.

  12. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    Signals #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Foam versus Gas · CO2 gassing is an accepted procedure · Argon-CO2 encouraged for humaneness · In individual broilers, foam is as fast as CO2 · Argon-CO2 materially slower 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 SilenceofEEGActivity(s) Average Times to EEG Silence Ar-CO2 CO2 Foam

  13. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    on parameters. #12;Disposal: Science and Theory Foam vs. Foam with CO2 · Water based foam is conditionally not approved the use of water based foam · EU: indicated foam with CO2 gas preferred ­ Want the animal ­ Development of procedure ­ USDA APHIS and AVMA conditional approval 2007 - 2008 ­ No difference between CO2

  14. MARSHALL UNIVERSITY HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sanyal, Suman

    /16/2005 1 #12;Marshall University Hazardous Waste Program POLICY STATEMENT- Hazardous Materials Management of the Hazardous Waste Management Program is to ensure that proper handling and legal disposal of hazardous wastes Management Program will apply to the following: 1. Any liquid, semi-solid, solid or gaseous substance defined

  15. Disposal: Science and Theory UNIVERSIDAD

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    aviar #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · En EE.UU., se usó espuma a base de agua en 4 respuestas · 2.500 pollos de engorde / tratamiento · Generador de espuma ­ Agua: 3.463 litros ­ Espuma: 34 litros ­ Cesación: 11:06 (minutos:segundos) · Boquilla ­ Agua: 3.678 litros ­ Espuma: 37 litros ­ Cesación: 8

  16. Disposal Practices at the Nevada Test Site 2008 | Department...

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

    Disposal Practices at the Nevada Test Site 2008 Disposal Practices at the Nevada Test Site 2008 Full Document and Summary Versions are available for download Disposal Practices at...

  17. Generic Argillite/Shale Disposal Reference Case

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Zheng, Liange

    2014-01-01

    S. and K.S. Johnson, (1984). Shale and other argillaceousand R. T. Cygan, (2010). Shale Disposal of U.S. High-LevelDC. Generic Argillite/Shale Disposal Reference Case August

  18. Disposal: Science and Theory Disposal: Science and Theory

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Benson, Eric R.

    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 Observaciones Tiempo (seg.) Ar-CO2 CO2 Foam electroencefalográficas Envenenamiento con gas Ar-CO2 Envenenamiento con CO2 Espuma con aire ambiente Espuma con CO2 #12;Disposal: Science and Theory · El envenenamiento con CO2 es un procedimiento aceptado. · Se alienta el uso

  19. Disposable remote zero headspace extractor

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Hand, Julie J. (Idaho Falls, ID); Roberts, Mark P. (Arco, ID)

    2006-03-21

    The remote zero headspace extractor uses a sampling container inside a stainless steel vessel to perform toxicity characteristics leaching procedure to analyze volatile organic compounds. The system uses an in line filter for ease of replacement. This eliminates cleaning and disassembly of the extractor. All connections are made with quick connect fittings which can be easily replaced. After use, the bag can be removed and disposed of, and a new sampling container is inserted for the next extraction.

  20. Aerosol can waste disposal device

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    O'Brien, Michael D. (Las Vegas, NV); Klapperick, Robert L. (Las Vegas, NV); Bell, Chris (Las Vegas, NV)

    1993-01-01

    Disclosed is a device for removing gases and liquid from containers. The ice punctures the bottom of a container for purposes of exhausting gases and liquid from the container without their escaping into the atmosphere. The device includes an inner cup or cylinder having a top portion with an open end for receiving a container and a bottom portion which may be fastened to a disposal or waste container in a substantially leak-proof manner. A piercing device is mounted in the lower portion of the inner cylinder for puncturing the can bottom placed in the inner cylinder. An outer cylinder having an open end and a closed end fits over the top portion of the inner cylinder in telescoping engagement. A force exerted on the closed end of the outer cylinder urges the bottom of a can in the inner cylinder into engagement with the piercing device in the bottom of the inner cylinder to form an opening in the can bottom, thereby permitting the contents of the can to enter the disposal container.

  1. Aerosol can waste disposal device

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    O'Brien, M.D.; Klapperick, R.L.; Bell, C.

    1993-12-21

    Disclosed is a device for removing gases and liquid from containers. The device punctures the bottom of a container for purposes of exhausting gases and liquid from the container without their escaping into the atmosphere. The device includes an inner cup or cylinder having a top portion with an open end for receiving a container and a bottom portion which may be fastened to a disposal or waste container in a substantially leak-proof manner. A piercing device is mounted in the lower portion of the inner cylinder for puncturing the can bottom placed in the inner cylinder. An outer cylinder having an open end and a closed end fits over the top portion of the inner cylinder in telescoping engagement. A force exerted on the closed end of the outer cylinder urges the bottom of a can in the inner cylinder into engagement with the piercing device in the bottom of the inner cylinder to form an opening in the can bottom, thereby permitting the contents of the can to enter the disposal container. 7 figures.

  2. Electrochemical Apparatus with Disposable and Modifiable Parts

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

    each. Those used for bulk electrolysis (800), for flow (850), and for general electrochemistry (20-200) are also too expensive to be considered disposable. High cost means...

  3. UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA INFECTIOUS WASTE DISPOSAL

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Morgan, Stephen L.

    UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA INFECTIOUS WASTE DISPOSAL Introduction All biologically EHS: -South Carolina Infectious Waste Management Regulations R.61-105 #12;

  4. Plutonium Equivalent Inventory for Belowground Radioactive Waste at the Los Alamos National Laboratory Technical Area 54, Area G Disposal Facility - Fiscal Year 2011

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    French, Sean B.; Shuman, Rob

    2012-04-18

    The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) generates radioactive waste as a result of various activities. Many aspects of the management of this waste are conducted at Technical Area 54 (TA-54); Area G plays a key role in these management activities as the Laboratory's only disposal facility for low-level radioactive waste (LLW). Furthermore, Area G serves as a staging area for transuranic (TRU) waste that will be shipped to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant for disposal. A portion of this TRU waste is retrievably stored in pits, trenches, and shafts. The radioactive waste disposed of or stored at Area G poses potential short- and long-term risks to workers at the disposal facility and to members of the public. These risks are directly proportional to the radionuclide inventories in the waste. The Area G performance assessment and composite analysis (LANL, 2008a) project long-term risks to members of the public; short-term risks to workers and members of the public, such as those posed by accidents, are addressed by the Area G Documented Safety Analysis (LANL, 2011a). The Documented Safety Analysis uses an inventory expressed in terms of plutonium-equivalent curies, referred to as the PE-Ci inventory, to estimate these risks. The Technical Safety Requirements for Technical Area 54, Area G (LANL, 2011b) establishes a belowground radioactive material limit that ensures the cumulative projected inventory authorized for the Area G site is not exceeded. The total belowground radioactive waste inventory limit established for Area G is 110,000 PE-Ci. The PE-Ci inventory is updated annually; this report presents the inventory prepared for 2011. The approach used to estimate the inventory is described in Section 2. The results of the analysis are presented in Section 3.

  5. Integrating Volume Reduction and Packaging Alternatives to Achieve Cost Savings for Low Level Waste Disposal at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Church, A.; Gordon, J.; Montrose, J. K.

    2002-02-26

    In order to reduce costs and achieve schedules for Closure of the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (RFETS), the Waste Requirements Group has implemented a number of cost saving initiatives aimed at integrating waste volume reduction with the selection of compliant waste packaging methods for the disposal of RFETS low level radioactive waste (LLW). Waste Guidance Inventory and Shipping Forecasts indicate that over 200,000 m3 of low level waste will be shipped offsite between FY2002 and FY2006. Current projections indicate that the majority of this waste will be shipped offsite in an estimated 40,000 55-gallon drums, 10,000 metal and plywood boxes, and 5000 cargo containers. Currently, the projected cost for packaging, shipment, and disposal adds up to $80 million. With these waste volume and cost projections, the need for more efficient and cost effective packaging and transportation options were apparent in order to reduce costs and achieve future Site packaging a nd transportation needs. This paper presents some of the cost saving initiatives being implemented for waste packaging at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (the Site). There are many options for either volume reduction or alternative packaging. Each building and/or project may indicate different preferences and/or combinations of options.

  6. FACT SHEET: The Path Forward on Nuclear Waste Disposal | Department...

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

    FACT SHEET: The Path Forward on Nuclear Waste Disposal FACT SHEET: The Path Forward on Nuclear Waste Disposal FACT SHEET: The Path Forward on Nuclear Waste Disposal More Documents...

  7. Large Component Removal/Disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wheeler, D. M.

    2002-02-27

    This paper describes the removal and disposal of the large components from Maine Yankee Atomic Power Plant. The large components discussed include the three steam generators, pressurizer, and reactor pressure vessel. Two separate Exemption Requests, which included radiological characterizations, shielding evaluations, structural evaluations and transportation plans, were prepared and issued to the DOT for approval to ship these components; the first was for the three steam generators and one pressurizer, the second was for the reactor pressure vessel. Both Exemption Requests were submitted to the DOT in November 1999. The DOT approved the Exemption Requests in May and July of 2000, respectively. The steam generators and pressurizer have been removed from Maine Yankee and shipped to the processing facility. They were removed from Maine Yankee's Containment Building, loaded onto specially designed skid assemblies, transported onto two separate barges, tied down to the barges, th en shipped 2750 miles to Memphis, Tennessee for processing. The Reactor Pressure Vessel Removal Project is currently under way and scheduled to be completed by Fall of 2002. The planning, preparation and removal of these large components has required extensive efforts in planning and implementation on the part of all parties involved.

  8. Generic disposal concepts and thermal load management for larger...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Generic disposal concepts and thermal load management for larger waste packages. Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Generic disposal concepts and thermal load management...

  9. Deep Borehole Disposal Research: Geological Data Evaluation Alternativ...

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

    Deep Borehole Disposal Research: Geological Data Evaluation Alternative Waste Forms and Borehole Seals Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Deep Borehole Disposal Research:...

  10. NDAA Section 3116 Waste Determinations with Related Disposal...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    NDAA Section 3116 Waste Determinations with Related Disposal Performance Assessments NDAA Section 3116 Waste Determinations with Related Disposal Performance Assessments Section...

  11. Nevada Industrial Solid Waste Disposal Site Permit Application...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Nevada Industrial Solid Waste Disposal Site Permit Application Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Form: Nevada Industrial Solid Waste Disposal Site...

  12. Evaluation of Options for Permanent Geologic Disposal of Spent...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    disposal concepts are addressed: mined repositories in three geologic media-salt, clayshale rocks, and crystalline (e.g., granitic) rocks-and deep borehole disposal in...

  13. Deep Borehole Disposal of Spent Fuel. (Conference) | SciTech...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Deep Borehole Disposal of Spent Fuel. Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Deep Borehole Disposal of Spent Fuel. Abstract not provided. Authors: Brady, Patrick V. Publication...

  14. Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group Manual

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Low- LEVEL WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY FEDERAL REVIEW GROUP MANUAL REVISION 3 JUNE 2008 (This page intentionally left blank) Low-Level JVllsfe Disposal Fllcilil' Federal Review Group...

  15. Plans and Progress on Hanford MLLW Treatment and Disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MCKENNEY, D.E.

    2003-01-01

    Fluor Hanford's WMP has shown consistent success in treating and disposing of waste since the mixed waste disposal unit opened in 1999

  16. Deep Borehole Disposal of Nuclear Waste. (Conference) | SciTech...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Deep Borehole Disposal of Nuclear Waste. Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Deep Borehole Disposal of Nuclear Waste. Abstract not provided. Authors: Arnold, Bill Walter ;...

  17. Savannah River Site RCRA/CERCLA/NEPA integrated investigation case study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Clark, D.R.; Thomas, R.; Wilson, M.P.

    1992-01-01

    The Savannah River Site (SRS) is a US Department of Energy facility placed on the Superfund National Priority List in 1989. Numerous past disposal facilities and contaminated areas are undergoing the integrated regulatory remediation process detailed in the draft SRS Federal Facility Agreement. This paper will discuss the integration of these requirements by highlighting the investigation of the D-Area Burning/Rubble Pits, a typical waste unit at SRS.

  18. Savannah River Site RCRA/CERCLA/NEPA integrated investigation case study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Clark, D.R.; Thomas, R.; Wilson, M.P.

    1992-07-01

    The Savannah River Site (SRS) is a US Department of Energy facility placed on the Superfund National Priority List in 1989. Numerous past disposal facilities and contaminated areas are undergoing the integrated regulatory remediation process detailed in the draft SRS Federal Facility Agreement. This paper will discuss the integration of these requirements by highlighting the investigation of the D-Area Burning/Rubble Pits, a typical waste unit at SRS.

  19. Z-Bed Recovery Water Disposal

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Z-Bed Recovery Water Disposal Tritium Programs Engineering Louis Boone Josh Segura Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC M-TRT-H-00087 Rev 0 Date: 4102014 Tritium Facilities...

  20. Supplement Analysis for Disposal of Polychlorinated Biphenyl...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Disposal of Polychlorinated Biphenyl-Commingled Transuranic Waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (DOEEIS-0026-SA02) 1.0 Purpose and Need for Action Transuranic (TRU) waste is...

  1. Economic assessment of CO? capture and disposal

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Eckaus, Richard S.; Jacoby, Henry D.; Ellerman, A. Denny.; Leung, Wing-Chi.; Yang, Zili.

    A multi-sector multi-region general equilibrium model of economic growth and emissions is used to explore the conditions that will determine the market penetration of CO2 capture and disposal technology.

  2. Electrochemical apparatus comprising modified disposable rectangular...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    include more than one cuvette, which in practice is a disposable rectangular glass or plastic cuvette modified by drilling the hole(s) through. The apparatus include two plates...

  3. Disposal of Specific Articles Containing Radioactive Materials

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Jia, Songtao

    Am-241 3. NRC: United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4. Sodium Iodide (NaI) Detector: Uses. Disposal of these signs is governed by United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations, 10

  4. Asset Management Equipment Disposal Form -Refrigerant Recovery

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sin, Peter

    EPA's rule, equipment that is typically dismantled on site before disposal (e.g., retail food vacuum, and for small appliances the recover equipment performance requirements are 90 percent efficiency

  5. A disposable, self-administered electrolyte test

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Prince, Ryan, 1977-

    2003-01-01

    This thesis demonstrates the novel concept that it is possible to make a disposable, self-administered electrolyte test to be introduced to the general consumer market. Although ion specific electrodes have been used to ...

  6. Technical and philosophical aspects of ocean disposal 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Zapatka, Marchi Charisse

    1976-01-01

    and demolition debris Solid wastes 26 26 30 30 31 32 lii 1 i tary wastes. Radioactive wastes Disposal Methods. 32 32 34 Harges Containerized methods. Submarine outfalls CHASE. Indirect discharge . 40 44 Transport Mechanisms of iiaste... disposal of wastes is not a new idea, although it is only in recent years that this issue has received considerable attention. Man is concerned about the condition of the ocean because i+ is a valuable source of many resources from the marine environment...

  7. Electrochemical apparatus comprising modified disposable rectangular cuvette

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Dattelbaum, Andrew M; Gupta, Gautam; Morris, David E

    2013-09-10

    Electrochemical apparatus includes a disposable rectangular cuvette modified with at least one hole through a side and/or the bottom. Apparatus may include more than one cuvette, which in practice is a disposable rectangular glass or plastic cuvette modified by drilling the hole(s) through. The apparatus include two plates and some means of fastening one plate to the other. The apparatus may be interfaced with a fiber optic or microscope objective, and a spectrometer for spectroscopic studies. The apparatus are suitable for a variety of electrochemical experiments, including surface electrochemistry, bulk electrolysis, and flow cell experiments.

  8. Geochemical Data Package for the 2005 Hanford Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Krupka, Kenneth M.; Serne, R JEFFREY.; Kaplan, D I.

    2004-09-30

    CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc. (CH2M HILL) is designing and assessing the performance of an integrated disposal facility (IDF) to receive low-level waste (LLW), mixed low-level waste (MLLW), immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW), and failed or decommissioned melters. The CH2M HILL project to assess the performance of this disposal facility is the Hanford IDF Performance Assessment (PA) activity. The goal of the Hanford IDF PA activity is to provide a reasonable expectation that the disposal of the waste is protective of the general public, groundwater resources, air resources, surface-water resources, and inadvertent intruders. Achieving this goal will require prediction of contaminant migration from the facilities. This migration is expected to occur primarily via the movement of water through the facilities, and the consequent transport of dissolved contaminants in the vadose zone to groundwater where contaminants may be re-introduced to receptors via drinking water wells or mixing in the Columbia River. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) assists CH2M HILL in their performance assessment activities. One of the PNNL tasks is to provide estimates of the geochemical properties of the materials comprising the IDF, the disturbed region around the facility, and the physically undisturbed sediments below the facility (including the vadose zone sediments and the aquifer sediments in the upper unconfined aquifer). The geochemical properties are expressed as parameters that quantify the adsorption of contaminants and the solubility constraints that might apply for those contaminants that may exceed solubility constraints. The common parameters used to quantify adsorption and solubility are the distribution coefficient (Kd) and the thermodynamic solubility product (Ksp), respectively. In this data package, we approximate the solubility of contaminants using a more simplified construct, called the solution concentration limit, a constant value. The Kd values and solution concentration limits for each contaminant are direct inputs to subsurface flow and transport codes used to predict the performance of the IDF system. In addition to the best-estimate Kd values, a reasonable conservative value and a range are provided. The data package does not list estimates for the range in solubility limits or their uncertainty. However, the data package does provide different values for both the Kd values and solution concentration limits for different spatial zones in the IDF system and does supply time-varying Kd values for the cement solidified waste. The Kd values and solution concentration limits presented for each contaminant were previously presented in a report prepared by Kaplan and Serne (2000) for the 2001 ILAW PA, and have been updated to include applicable data from investigations completed since the issuance of that report and improvements in our understanding of the geochemistry specific to Hanford. A discussion is also included of the evolution of the Kd values recommended from the original 1999 ILAW PA through the 2001 ILAW and 2003 Supplement PAs to the current values to be used for the 2005 IDF PA for the key contaminants of concern: Cr(VI), nitrate, 129I, 79Se, 99Tc, and U(VI). This discussion provides the rationale for why certain Kd have changed with time.

  9. Ethidium Bromide: Disposal, Decontamination, and Destruction

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Jia, Songtao

    of the environment. 4. Hazardous Chemicals/Wastes: For the purposes of this policy, a hazardous waste or chemical requirements for the safe storage, use, handling, and disposal of particularly hazardous substances, including and the environment, and to comply with OSHA regulations. 2. Additional safety requirements may apply, depending

  10. Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) program overview

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-04-01

    The Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) enacted in 1984 required the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to evaluate all listed and characteristic hazardous wastes according to a strict schedule and to develop requirements by which disposal of these wastes would be protective of human health and the environment. The implementing regulations for accomplishing this statutory requirement are established within the Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) program. The LDR regulations (40 CFR Part 268) impose significant requirements on waste management operations and environmental restoration activities at DOE sites. For hazardous wastes restricted by statute from land disposal, EPA is required to set levels or methods of treatment that substantially reduce the waste`s toxicity or the likelihood that the waste`s hazardous constituents will migrate. Upon the specified LDR effective dates, restricted wastes that do not meet treatment standards are prohibited from land disposal unless they qualify for certain variances or exemptions. This document provides an overview of the LDR Program.

  11. Description Disposable Membrane Chromatography Units for Scale-

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Lebendiker, Mario

    traceable to raw components. Constructed of component materials that meet United States Pharmacopeia (USP for a free product sample! Materials of Construction Membrane Bed Volume Device volume of chromatography systems. Disposable 25 mm units. Available in Q and S chemistries. Manufactured in accordance

  12. Environmental waste disposal contracts April 3, 2012

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    and radioactive waste. The companies are · ARS Cavanagh Environmental Services, LLC · Portage, Inc. · Navarro of these materials may include trace or low levels of radioactive material. Waste materials also include transuranic the knowledge and experience to safely treat, package, and transport the waste for disposal in accordance

  13. Solving the problems of infectious waste disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hoffman, S.L.; Cabral, N.J. )

    1989-06-01

    Lawmakers are increasing pressures to ensure safe, appropriate disposal of infectious waste. This article discusses the problems, the regulatory climate, innovative approaches, and how to pay for them. The paper discusses the regulatory definition of infectious waste, federal and state regulations, and project finance.

  14. COMPILATION OF DISPOSABLE SOLID WASTE CASK EVALUATIONS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    THIELGES, J.R.; CHASTAIN, S.A.

    2007-06-21

    The Disposable Solid Waste Cask (DSWC) is a shielded cask capable of transporting, storing, and disposing of six non-fuel core components or approximately 27 cubic feet of radioactive solid waste. Five existing DSWCs are candidates for use in storing and disposing of non-fuel core components and radioactive solid waste from the Interim Examination and Maintenance Cell, ultimately shipping them to the 200 West Area disposal site for burial. A series of inspections, studies, analyses, and modifications were performed to ensure that these casks can be used to safely ship solid waste. These inspections, studies, analyses, and modifications are summarized and attached in this report. Visual inspection of the casks interiors provided information with respect to condition of the casks inner liners. Because water was allowed to enter the casks for varying lengths of time, condition of the cask liner pipe to bottom plate weld was of concern. Based on the visual inspection and a corrosion study, it was concluded that four of the five casks can be used from a corrosion standpoint. Only DSWC S/N-004 would need additional inspection and analysis to determine its usefulness. The five remaining DSWCs underwent some modification to prepare them for use. The existing cask lifting inserts were found to be corroded and deemed unusable. New lifting anchor bolts were installed to replace the existing anchors. Alternate lift lugs were fabricated for use with the new lifting anchor bolts. The cask tiedown frame was modified to facilitate adjustment of the cask tiedowns. As a result of the above mentioned inspections, studies, analysis, and modifications, four of the five existing casks can be used to store and transport waste from the Interim Examination and Maintenance Cell to the disposal site for burial. The fifth cask, DSWC S/N-004, would require further inspections before it could be used.

  15. Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level...

  16. Z-Bed Recovery Water Disposal | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Z-Bed Recovery Water Disposal Z-Bed Recovery Water Disposal Presentation from the 33rd Tritium Focus Group Meeting held in Aiken, South Carolina on April 22-24, 2014. Z-Bed...

  17. TITLE: DISPOSAL OF PROTECTED HEALTH INFORMATION POLICY & PURPOSE

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Salzman, Daniel

    TITLE: DISPOSAL OF PROTECTED HEALTH INFORMATION POLICY & PURPOSE: To assure confidential information including patient and research information is disposed of in an appropriate manner. PROCEDURE patient and research information. 1. All staff must assure that paper containing confidential patient

  18. Grout treatment facility land disposal restriction management plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hendrickson, D.W.

    1991-04-04

    This document establishes management plans directed to result in the land disposal of grouted wastes at the Hanford Grout Facilities in compliance with Federal, State of Washington, and Department of Energy land disposal restrictions. 9 refs., 1 fig.

  19. Acceptance of Classified Excess Components for Disposal at Area 5

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Poling, Jeanne [National Security Technologies, LLC (United States); Saad, Max [Sandia National Lab., NM (United States)

    2012-04-09

    This slide-show discusses weapons dismantlement and disposal, issues related to classified waste and their solutions.

  20. LANL completes excavation of 1940s waste disposal site

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    - 1 - LANL completes excavation of 1940s waste disposal site September 30, 2011 Waste safely removed from 65-year-old site LANL completed excavation of its oldest waste disposal site, Material from the six-acre site. MDA-B was used from 1944-48 as a waste disposal site for the Manhattan Project

  1. Used Fuel Disposal in Crystalline Rocks. FY15 Progress Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wang, Yifeng

    2015-08-20

    The objective of the Crystalline Disposal R&D Work Package is to advance our understanding of longterm disposal of used fuel in crystalline rocks and to develop necessary experimental and computational capabilities to evaluate various disposal concepts in such media.

  2. CITY OF PRINCE GEORGE: SNOW DISPOSAL AT THE LANSDOWNE ROAD

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    #12;CITY OF PRINCE GEORGE: SNOW DISPOSAL AT THE LANSDOWNE ROAD WASTEWATER TREATMENT CENTRE DOE FRAPH7 #12;Dayton & Knight Ltd. CITY OF PRINCE GEORGE SNOW DISPOSAL STUDY AT THE LANSDOWNE ROAD of Prince George. #12;CITY OF PRINCE GEORGE SNOW DISPOSAL STUDY AT THE LANSDOWNE ROAD WASTEWATER TREATMENT

  3. Pesticide fate in an aboveground disposal system 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Vanderglas, Brian Richard

    1988-01-01

    Major Subject: Soil Science PESTICIDE FATE IN AN ABOVEGROUND DISPOSAL SYSTEM A Thesis by BRIAN RICHARD VANDERGLAS Approved as to style and content by: K. W. Brown (Chair of Committee) John M. Sweeten (Member) Jack D. Price (Member) E. C. A.... Pesticides applied to digesters. . 3. Mass of active ingredient (A. l. ) per treatment. . . . 17 4. Mean efficiencies of pesticide extraction methods from the soil and water. 21 5. Optimal gas chromatograph conditions for analysis of pesticides extracted...

  4. High Level Waste Disposal System Optimization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dirk Gombert; M. Connolly; J. Roach; W. Holtzscheiter

    2005-02-01

    The high level waste (HLW) disposal system consists of the Yucca Mountain Facility (YMF) and waste product (e.g. glass) generation facilities. Responsibility for management is shared between the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) Offices of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (DOE-RW) and Environmental Management (DOE-EM). The DOE-RW license application and the Waste Acceptance System Requirements Document (WASRD), as well as the DOE-EM Waste Acceptance Product Specification for Vitrified High Level Waste Forms (WAPS) govern the overall performance of the system. This basis for HLW disposal should be reassessed to consider waste form and process technology research and development (R&D), which have been conducted by DOE-EM, international agencies (i.e. ANSTO, CEA), and the private sector; as well as the technical bases for including additional waste forms in the final license application. This will yield a more optimized HLW disposal system to accelerate HLW disposition, more efficient utilization of the YMF, and overall system cost reduction.

  5. Environmental planning and categorical exclusions: Making the categorical exclusion an integral part of your NEPA tool kit

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Holthoff, M.G.; Hanrahan, T.P.

    1994-06-01

    As contained in the Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, 40 CFR 1500--1508, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) directs federal agencies to adopt their own procedures for implementing the Act. The US Department of Energy (DOE) and the US Department of Agriculture Forest Service (USFS) are two examples of federal agencies with dissimilar but functionally equivalent CX processes. The DOE and USFS were selected as subjects for this study because of their distinctly different missions and as a results of the author`s familiarity with the policies of both agencies. The objectives of this study are to: (1) describe the CX policies and processes of the two agencies, (2) identify the similarities and differences between the two processes, and (3) suggest ways for improving these processes. In performing this evaluation, the authors will identify the components of each agency`s CX process that clearly contributes qualitative information for the purpose of making environmental planning decisions. Drawing from the best elements of each process, the authors will provide some general recommendations that should enable the agencies to fulfill their various obligations to the CX process while concurrently performing early, thorough, and expeditious environmental reviews under NEPA.

  6. Environmental assessment for the Radioactive and Mixed Waste Management Facility: Sandia National Laboratories/New Mexico

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-06-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) (DOE/EA-0466) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 for the proposed completion of construction and subsequent operation of a central Radioactive and Mixed Waste Management Facility (RMWMF), in the southeastern portion of Technical Area III at Sandia National Laboratory, Albuquerque (SNLA). The RMWMF is designed to receive, store, characterize, conduct limited bench-scale treatment of, repackage, and certify low-level waste (LLW) and mixed waste (MW) (as necessary) for shipment to an offsite disposal or treatment facility. The RMWMF was partially constructed in 1989. Due to changing regulatory requirements, planned facility upgrades would be undertaken as part of the proposed action. These upgrades would include paving of road surfaces and work areas, installation of pumping equipment and lines for surface impoundment, and design and construction of air locks and truck decontamination and water treatment systems. The proposed action also includes an adjacent corrosive and reactive metals storage area, and associated roads and paving. LLW and MW generated at SNLA would be transported from the technical areas to the RMWMF in containers approved by the Department of Transportation. The RMWMF would not handle nonradioactive hazardous waste. Based on the analysis in the EA, the proposed completion of construction and operation of the RMWMF does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment within the meaning of NEPA. Therefore, preparation of an environmental impact statement for the proposed action is not required.

  7. Disposal R&D in the Used Fuel Disposition Campaign: A Discussion of Opportunities for Active International Collaboration

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Birkholzer, J.T.

    2012-01-01

    of direct collaboration with international disposal programsdirect access to information, data, and expertise on various disposal

  8. EIS-0243: Nevada Test Site and Off-Site Locations in the State of Nevada

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EIS evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the management of low-level waste (LLW) at all sites and continue, to the extent practicable, disposal of on- site LLW at the Idaho...

  9. Review of Yucca Mountain Disposal Criticality Studies

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Scaglione, John M [ORNL] [ORNL; Wagner, John C [ORNL] [ORNL

    2011-01-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, submitted a license application for construction authorization of a deep geologic repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, in June of 2008. The license application is currently under review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. However,on March 3, 2010 the DOE filed a motion requesting withdrawal of the license application. With the withdrawal request and the development of the Blue Ribbon Commission to seek alternative strategies for disposing of spent fuel, the status of the proposed repository at Yucca Mountain is uncertain. What is certain is that spent nuclear fuel (SNF) will continue to be generated and some long-lived components of the SNF will eventually need a disposition path(s). Strategies for the back end of the fuel cycle will continue to be developed and need to include the insights from the experience gained during the development of the Yucca Mountain license application. Detailed studies were performed and considerable progress was made in many key areas in terms of increased understanding of relevant phenomena and issues regarding geologic disposal of SNF. This paper reviews selected technical studies performed in support of the disposal criticality analysis licensing basis and the use of burnup credit. Topics include assembly misload analysis, isotopic and criticality validation, commercial reactor critical analyses, loading curves, alternative waste package and criticality control studies, radial burnup data and effects, and implementation of a conservative application model in the criticality probabilistic evaluation as well as other information that is applicable to operations regarding spent fuel outside the reactor. This paper summarizes the work and significant accomplishments in these areas and provides a resource for future, related activities.

  10. Appendix K Disposal Cell Groundwater Monitoring Plan

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of NaturalDukeWakefield Municipal Gas &SCE-SessionsSouth DakotaRobbins and Myers Co -VANaval ,, *' ; . Final Disposal Cell

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Oliver, Douglas L.

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

  12. Defense High Level Waste Disposal Container System Description

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2000-10-12

    The Defense High Level Waste Disposal Container System supports the confinement and isolation of waste within the Engineered Barrier System of the Monitored Geologic Repository (MGR). Disposal containers are loaded and sealed in the surface waste handling facilities, transferred to the underground through the accesses using a rail mounted transporter, and emplaced in emplacement drifts. The defense high level waste (HLW) disposal container provides long-term confinement of the commercial HLW and defense HLW (including immobilized plutonium waste forms (IPWF)) placed within disposable canisters, and withstands the loading, transfer, emplacement, and retrieval loads and environments. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-owned spent nuclear fuel (SNF) in disposable canisters may also be placed in a defense HLW disposal container along with commercial HLW waste forms, which is known as 'co-disposal'. The Defense High Level Waste Disposal Container System provides containment of waste for a designated period of time, and limits radionuclide release. The disposal container/waste package maintains the waste in a designated configuration, withstands maximum handling and rockfall loads, limits the individual canister temperatures after emplacement, resists corrosion in the expected handling and repository environments, and provides containment of waste in the event of an accident. Defense HLW disposal containers for HLW disposal will hold up to five HLW canisters. Defense HLW disposal containers for co-disposal will hold up to five HLW canisters arranged in a ring and one DOE SNF canister in the ring. Defense HLW disposal containers also will hold two Multi-Canister Overpacks (MCOs) and two HLW canisters in one disposal container. The disposal container will include outer and inner cylinders, outer and inner cylinder lids, and may include a canister guide. An exterior label will provide a means by which to identify the disposal container and its contents. Different materials will be selected for the disposal container inner and outer cylinders. The two metal cylinders, in combination with the Emplacement Drift System, drip shield, and natural barrier, will support the design philosophy of defense-in-depth. The use of materials with different properties prevents a single mode failure from breaching the waste package. The inner cylinder and inner cylinder lids will be constructed of stainless steel and the outer cylinder and outer cylinder lids will be a barrier made of high-nickel alloy. The defense HLW disposal container interfaces with the emplacement drift environment and the internal waste by transferring heat from the canisters to the external environment and by protecting the canisters and their contents from damage/degradation by the external environment. The disposal container also interfaces with the canisters by limiting access of moderator and oxidizing agents to the waste. A loaded and sealed disposal container (waste package) interfaces with the Emplacement Drift System's emplacement drift waste package supports upon which the waste packages are placed. The disposal container interfaces with the Canister Transfer System, Waste Emplacement /Retrieval System, Disposal Container Handling System, and Waste Package Remediation System during loading, handling, transfer, emplacement, and retrieval for the disposal container/waste package.

  13. REGULATIONS ON PHOTOVOLTAIC MODULE DISPOSAL AND RECYCLING.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    FTHENAKIS,V.

    2001-01-29

    Environmental regulations can have a significant impact on product use, disposal, and recycling. This report summarizes the basic aspects of current federal, state and international regulations which apply to end-of-life photovoltaic (PV) modules and PV manufacturing scrap destined for disposal or recycling. It also discusses proposed regulations for electronics that may set the ground of what is to be expected in this area in the near future. In the US, several states have started programs to support the recycling of electronic equipment, and materials destined for recycling often are excepted from solid waste regulations during the collection, transfer, storage and processing stages. California regulations are described separately because they are different from those of most other states. International agreements on the movement of waste between different countries may pose barriers to cross-border shipments. Currently waste moves freely among country members of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and between the US and the four countries with which the US has bilateral agreements. However, it is expected, that the US will adopt the rules of the Basel Convention (an agreement which currently applies to 128 countries but not the US) and that the Convection's waste classification system will influence the current OECD waste-handling system. Some countries adopting the Basel Convention consider end-of-life electronics to be hazardous waste, whereas the OECD countries consider them to be non-hazardous. Also, waste management regulations potentially affecting electronics in Germany and Japan are mentioned in this report.

  14. Transuranic waste disposal in the United State

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thompson, J.D.

    1986-01-01

    The US is unique in having created a special class of radioactive waste disposal based on the concentration of transuranic (TRU) elements in the waste. Since 1970, the US has been placing newly generated TRU waste in retrievable storage. It is intended that these wastes will be placed in a permanent deep geologic repository, the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). The WIPP opening for a demonstration emplacement period is set for October 1988. Transuranic wastes derive from some of the manufacturing and research activities carried out by the US Department of Energy (DOE). The bulk of this waste is generated in plutonium parts fabrication activities. A variety of plutonium-contaminated materials ranging from glove boxes, high-efficiency particulate air filters, and machine tools, to chemical sludges derived from plutonium recovery streams are stored as TRU wastes. Other processes that generate TRU waste are plutonium production operations, preparation for and cleanup from fuel reprocessing, manufacturing of plutonium heat sources, and nuclear fuel cycle research activities. Extensive procedures will be used to examine and prepare waste before it is placed in the WIPP for disposal. After the WIPP opens, certified waste will be transported to it and emplaced in the repository.

  15. Final disposal of VOCs from industrial wastewaters

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ying, W.; Bonk, R.R.; Hannam, S.C. (Occidential Chemical Corp., Grand Island, NY (United States)); Qi-dong Li (Fudan Univ., Shanghai (China))

    1994-08-01

    Vapor phase carbon adsorption followed by spent carbon regeneration and catalytic oxidation were evaluated as methods for disposal of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) released from industrial wastewaters during treatment operations such as aeration, air-stripping and aerobic biodegradation. Adsorptive capacities and breakthrough characteristics for eight VOCs found in many hazardous landfill leachates and contaminated groundwater were compared for selection of the best adsorbent and optimum treatment conditions. Coconut shell-based activated carbons exhibited higher VOC loading capacities than coal-based carbons, fiber carbon, molecular sieve and zeolite. Steam and hot nitrogen were both effective for regeneration of the spent carbon. A small quantity of adsorbates left in the regenerated carbon did not result in immediate VOC breakthrough in the next cycle adsorption treatment. Catalytic oxidation was found to be an attractive alternative for VOC disposal. Using a new commercial catalyst developed for destruction of halogenated organic compounds, even stable VOCs such as trichloroethylene and tetrachloroethylene were completely destroyed at <350[degrees]C when oxidation was conducted at a space velocity of 17000/hr. 25 refs., 10 figs., 10 tabs.

  16. Iraq nuclear facility dismantlement and disposal project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cochran, J.R.; Danneels, J. [Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM (United States); Kenagy, W.D. [U.S. Department of State, Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, Office of Nuclear Energy, Safety and Security, Washington, DC (United States); Phillips, C.J.; Chesser, R.K. [Center for Environmental Radiation Studies, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX (United States)

    2007-07-01

    The Al Tuwaitha nuclear complex near Baghdad contains a significant number of nuclear facilities from Saddam Hussein's dictatorship. Because of past military operations, lack of upkeep and looting there is now an enormous radioactive waste problem at Al Tuwaitha. Al Tuwaitha contains uncharacterised radioactive wastes, yellow cake, sealed radioactive sources, and contaminated metals. The current security situation in Iraq hampers all aspects of radioactive waste management. Further, Iraq has never had a radioactive waste disposal facility, which means that ever increasing quantities of radioactive waste and material must be held in guarded storage. The Iraq Nuclear Facility Dismantlement and Disposal Program (the NDs Program) has been initiated by the U.S. Department of State (DOS) to assist the Government of Iraq (GOI) in eliminating the threats from poorly controlled radioactive materials, while building human capacities so that the GOI can manage other environmental cleanups in their country. The DOS has funded the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to provide technical assistance to the GOI via a Technical Cooperation Project. Program coordination will be provided by the DOS, consistent with U.S. and GOI policies, and Sandia National Laboratories will be responsible for coordination of participants and for providing waste management support. Texas Tech University will continue to provide in-country assistance, including radioactive waste characterization and the stand-up of the Iraq Nuclear Services Company. The GOI owns the problems in Iraq and will be responsible for the vast majority of the implementation of the NDs Program. (authors)

  17. FY 2006 ANNUAL REVIEW-SALTSTONE DISPOSAL FACILITY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Crapse, K; Benjamin Culbertson, B

    2007-03-15

    The Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF) consists of two disposal units, Vaults 1 and 4, described in the Performance Assessment (PA) (WSRC 1992). The FY06 PA Annual Review concludes that both vaults contain much lower levels of radionuclides (curies) than that allowed by the PA. The PA controls established to govern waste operations and monitor disposal facility performance are determined to be adequate.

  18. Will new disposal regulations undo decades of progress?

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ward, J. [John Ward Inc. (United States)

    2009-07-01

    In 1980, the Belville Amendments to RCRA instructed EPA to 'conduct a detailed and comprehensive study and submit a report' to Congress on the 'adverse effects on human health and the environment, if any, of the disposal and utilization' of coal ash. In both 1988 and 1999, EPA submitted reports to Congress and recommended coal ash should not be regulated as hazardous waste. After the failure of a Tennesse power plant's coal ash disposal facility, EPA will be proposing new disposal regulations.

  19. Deep Borehole Disposal Research: Geological Data Evaluation Alternativ...

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

    much of the enhanced geothermal focus on stimulating fracture development (e.g., fracking) at depth is not directly relevant to deep borehole disposal. For deep borehole...

  20. Depleted uranium storage and disposal trade study: Summary report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hightower, J.R.; Trabalka, J.R.

    2000-02-01

    The objectives of this study were to: identify the most desirable forms for conversion of depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF6) for extended storage, identify the most desirable forms for conversion of DUF6 for disposal, evaluate the comparative costs for extended storage or disposal of the various forms, review benefits of the proposed plasma conversion process, estimate simplified life-cycle costs (LCCs) for five scenarios that entail either disposal or beneficial reuse, and determine whether an overall optimal form for conversion of DUF6 can be selected given current uncertainty about the endpoints (specific disposal site/technology or reuse options).

  1. Low-Level Waste Disposal Alternatives Analysis Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Timothy Carlson; Kay Adler-Flitton; Roy Grant; Joan Connolly; Peggy Hinman; Charles Marcinkiewicz

    2006-09-01

    This report identifies and compares on-site and off-site disposal options for the disposal of contract-handled and remote-handled low-level waste generated by the Idaho National Laboratory and its tenants. Potential disposal options are screened for viability by waste type resulting in a short list of options for further consideration. The most crediable option are selected after systematic consideration of cost, schedule constraints, and risk. In order to holistically address the approach for low-level waste disposal, options are compiled into comprehensive disposal schemes, that is, alternative scenarios. Each alternative scenario addresses the disposal path for all low-level waste types over the period of interest. The alternative scenarios are compared and ranked using cost, risk and complexity to arrive at the recommended approach. Schedule alignment with disposal needs is addressed to ensure that all waste types are managed appropriately. The recommended alternative scenario for the disposal of low-level waste based on this analysis is to build a disposal facility at the Idaho National Laboratory Site.

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

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Apps Datasets Community Login | Sign Up Search Page Edit with form History ORS 466 - Storage, Treatment, and Disposal of Hazardous Waste and Materials Jump to: navigation, search...

  3. Used Fuel Disposition Campaign Disposal Research and Development...

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

    generated by existing and future nuclear fuel cycles. The disposal of SNF and HLW in a range of geologic media has been investigated internationally. Considerable progress has been...

  4. DISPOSAL CONTAINER HANDLING SYSTEM DESCRIPTION DOCUMENT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    E. F. Loros

    2000-06-30

    The Disposal Container Handling System receives and prepares new disposal containers (DCs) and transfers them to the Assembly Transfer System (ATS) or Canister Transfer System (CTS) for loading. The system receives the loaded DCs from ATS or CTS and welds the lids. When the welds are accepted the DCs are termed waste packages (WPs). The system may stage the WP for later transfer or transfer the WP directly to the Waste Emplacement/Retrieval System. The system can also transfer DCs/WPs to/from the Waste Package Remediation System. The Disposal Container Handling System begins with new DC preparation, which includes installing collars, tilting the DC upright, and outfitting the container for the specific fuel it is to receive. DCs and their lids are staged in the receipt area for transfer to the needed location. When called for, a DC is put on a cart and sent through an airlock into a hot cell. From this point on, all processes are done remotely. The DC transfer operation moves the DC to the ATS or CTS for loading and then receives the DC for welding. The DC welding operation receives loaded DCs directly from the waste handling lines or from interim lag storage for welding of the lids. The welding operation includes mounting the DC on a turntable, removing lid seals, and installing and welding the inner and outer lids. After the weld process and non-destructive examination are successfully completed, the WP is either staged or transferred to a tilting station. At the tilting station, the WP is tilted horizontally onto a cart and the collars removed. The cart is taken through an air lock where the WP is lifted, surveyed, decontaminated if required, and then moved into the Waste Emplacement/Retrieval System. DCs that do not meet the welding non-destructive examination criteria are transferred to the Waste Package Remediation System for weld preparation or removal of the lids. The Disposal Container Handling System is contained within the Waste Handling Building System. This includes the primary hot cell bounded by the receiving area and WP transport exit air locks; and isolation doors at ATS, CTS, and Waste Package Remediation. The hot cell includes areas for welding, various staging, tilting, and WP transporter loading. There are associated operating galleries and equipment maintenance areas outside the hot cell. These areas operate concurrently to accommodate the DC/WP throughput rates and support system maintenance. The new DC preparation area is located in an unshielded structure. The handling equipment includes DC/WP bridge cranes, tilting stations, and horizontal transfer carts. The welding area includes DC/WP welders and staging stations. Welding operations are supported by remotely operated equipment including a bridge crane and hoists, welder jib cranes, welding turntables, and manipulators. WP transfer includes a transfer/decontamination and transporter load area. The transfer operations are supported by a remotely operated horizontal lifting system, decontamination system, decontamination and inspection manipulator, and a WP horizontal transfer cart. All handling operations are supported by a suite of fixtures including collars, yokes, lift beams, and lid attachments. Remote equipment is designed to facilitate decontamination and maintenance. Interchangeable components are provided where appropriate. Set-aside areas are included, as required, for fixtures and tooling to support off-normal and recovery operations. Semi-automatic, manual, and backup control methods support normal, maintenance, and recovery operations. The system interfaces with the ATS and CTS to provide empty and receive loaded DCs. The Waste Emplacement/Retrieval System interfaces are for loading/unloading WPs on/from the transporter. The system also interfaces with the Waste Package Remediation System for DC/WP repair. The system is housed, shielded, supported, and has ventilation boundaries by the Waste Handling Building (WHB). The system is ventilated by the WHB Ventilation System, which in conjunction with ventilation boundaries ensure that ai

  5. Method for disposing of hazardous wastes

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

    1995-01-01

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

  6. Transuranic waste disposal in the United States

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hoffman, R.B.

    1986-01-01

    The United States is unique in having created a special class of radioactive waste disposal based on the concentration of transuranic elements in the waste. Since 1970, the US has been placing newly generated transuranic waste in retrievable storage. It is intended that these wastes will be placed in a permanent deep geologic repository, the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). WIPP opening for a demonstration emplacement period is set for October, 1988. Transuranic wastes derive from some of the manufacturing and research activities carried out by DOE. The bulk of this waste is generated in plutonium parts fabrication activities. A variety of plutonium contaminated materials ranging from glove boxes, HEPA filters, and machine tools, to chemical sludges derived from plutonium recovery streams are stored as TRU wastes. Other processes that generate TRU waste are plutonium production operations, preparation for and cleanup from fuel reprocessing, manufacturing of plutonium heat sources, and nuclear fuel cycle research activities.

  7. Disposable sludge dewatering container and method

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Cole, Clifford M. (1905 Cottonwood Dr., Aiken, SC 29803)

    1993-01-01

    A device and method for preparing sludge for disposal comprising a box with a thin layer of gravel on the bottom and a thin layer of sand on the gravel layer, an array of perforated piping deployed throughout the gravel layer, and a sump in the gravel layer below the perforated piping array. Standpipes connect the array and sump to an external ion exchanger/fine particulate filter and a pump. Sludge is deposited on the sand layer and dewatered using a pump connected to the piping array, topping up with more sludge as the aqueous component of the sludge is extracted. When the box is full and the free standing water content of the sludge is acceptable, the standpipes are cut and sealed and the lid secured to the box.

  8. Consolidation and disposal of PWR fuel inserts

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wakeman, B.H. (Virginia Electric and Power Co., Glen Allen, VA (United States))

    1992-08-01

    Design and licensing of the Surry Power Station Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation was initiated in 1982 by Virginia Power as part of a comprehensive strategy to increase spent fuel storage capacity at the Station. Designed to use large, metal dry storage casks, the Surry Installation will accommodate 84 such casks with a total storage capacity of 811 MTU of spent pressurized water reactor fuel assemblies. Virginia Power provided three storage casks for testing at the Idaho National Engineerinq Laboratory's Test Area North and the testing results have been published by the Electric Power Research Institute. Sixty-nine spent fuel assemblies were transported in truck casks from the Surry Power Station to Test Area North for testing in the three casks. Because of restrictions imposed by the cask testing equipment at Test Area North, the irradiated insert components stored in these fuel assemblies at Surry were removed prior to transport of the fuel assemblies. Retaining these insert components proved to be a problem because of a shortage of spent fuel assemblies in the spent fuel storage pool that did not already contain insert components. In 1987 Virginia Power contracted with Chem-Nuclear Systems, Inc. to process and dispose of 136 irradiated insert components consisting of 125 burnable poison rod assemblies, 10 thimble plugging devices and 1 part-length rod cluster control assembly. This work was completed in August and September 1987, culminating in the disposal at the Barnwell, SC low-level radioactive waste facility of two CNS 3-55 liners containing the consolidated insert components.

  9. 1 INSTRODUCTION In the concept of geological radioactive waste disposal,

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Boyer, Edmond

    1 INSTRODUCTION In the concept of geological radioactive waste disposal, argillite is being-hydro-mechanical characterization of Opalinus clay are presented. The material is one of the argillites being studied in several research projects in Europe in the context of geological radioactive waste disposal. 2 MATERIAL STUDIED

  10. Laboratory to demolish excavation enclosures at Material Disposal Area B

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    of a decades-old waste disposal site at the historic Technical Area 21. Pre-demolition activities are beginning, federal project manager with the National Nuclear Security Administration's Los Alamos Site Office. "We requirements and shipped offsite to an approved waste disposal facility. MDA B was used from 1944 to 1948

  11. Procedure for the Recycling Material and Disposal of Waste from

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Guillas, Serge

    that waste is produced, stored, transported and disposed of without harming the environment. This is your, transport and disposal of wastes produced by UCL as requested by Facilities Services waste managers Clinical Wastes Radioactive Wastes Laboratory Wastes of Unknown Hazard Non-Hazardous Laboratory Wastes

  12. Paint and Paint Thinner Waste: Collection, Storage and Disposal

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Jia, Songtao

    Paint and Paint Thinner Waste: Collection, Storage and Disposal Procedure: 8.01 Created: 09 paint and paint thinner waste, including solvent contaminated rags, is collected and stored in a manner&S) employees who handle, store or dispose of paint and paint thinner materials. Paint and paint thinner waste

  13. The role of organic complexants and microparticulates in the facilitated transport of radionuclides

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schilk, A.J.; Robertson, D.E.; Abel, K.H.; Thomas, C.W.

    1996-12-01

    This progress report describes the results of ongoing radiological and geochemical investigations of the mechanisms of radionuclide transport in groundwater at two low-level waste (LLW) disposal sites within the waste management area of the Chalk River Laboratories (CRL), Ontario, Canada. These sites, the Chemical Pit liquid disposal facility and the Waste Management Area C solid LLW disposal site, have provided valuable 30- to 40-year-old field locations for characterizing the migration of radionuclides and evaluating a number of recent site performance objectives for LLW disposal facilities. This information will aid the NRC and other federal, state, and local regulators, as well as LLW disposal site developers and waste generators, in maximizing the effectiveness of existing or projected LLW disposal facilities for isolating radionuclides from the general public and thereby improving the health and safety aspects of LLW disposal.

  14. RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL PROCEDURES 1. Radioactive waste is accepted for disposal by Radiation Safety on Monday, Wednesday and

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Hammack, Richard

    attire including lab coats when transporting radioactive waste. LABS OUTSIDE SANGER HALL 1RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL PROCEDURES 1. Radioactive waste is accepted for disposal by Radiation are required and may be scheduled by calling 8289131. 2. Segregate and package radioactive waste according

  15. The full fuel cycle of CO{sub 2} capture and disposal capture and disposal technology

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Saroff, L.

    1995-12-31

    The overall objective of this study was to develop a methodology for the evaluation of the energy usage and cost both private and societal (external cost)for full fuel cycles. It was envisioned that other organizations could employ the methodology with minor alterations for a consistent means of evaluating full fuel cycles. The methodology has been applied to three fossil fuel electric generation processes each producing 500 MWe (net). These are: a Natural Gas Combined Cycle (NGCC) power plant burning natural gas with direct CO{sub 2} capture and disposal; an Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) power plant burning coal with direct CO{sub 2} capture and disposal; and a Pulverized Fuel (PC) power plant burning coal with a managed forest indirectly sequestering CO{sub 2}. The primary aim is to provide decision makers with information from which to derive policy. Thus, the evaluation reports total energy used, private costs to build the facility, emissions and burdens, and the valuation (externalities) of the impacts of the burdens. The energy usage, private costs including capture and disposal, and emissions are reported in this paper. The valuations and analysis of the impact of the plant on the environment are reported in the companion paper. The loss in efficiency (LHV) considering the full fuel cycle as opposed to the thermal efficiency of the power plant is; 0.9, 2.4, and 4.6 for the NGCC, IGCC, and PC+controls, respectively. Electricity cost, c/kWh, including capital, operating and fuel, at a 10% discount rate. ranges from 5.6 to 7.08 for NGCC and 7.24 to 8.61 for IGCC. The range is dependent on the mode of disposal, primarily due to the long pipeline to reach a site for the pope disposal in the ocean. For the PC+ controls then is a considerable range from 7.66 to over 16 c/kWh dependent on the size and cost of the managed forest.

  16. Addendum to the composite analysis for the E-Area Vaults and Saltstone Disposal Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cook, J.R.

    2000-03-13

    This report documents the composite analysis performed on the two active SRS low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities. The facilities are the Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility and the E-Area Vaults Disposal Facility.

  17. A one-time excess inventory disposal decision under stochastic and price dependent demand 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Zhu, Xiaoyan

    2002-01-01

    This thesis studies a one-time excess inventory disposal problem where the demand during the disposal period (DDDP) is stochastic and its distribution depends on the disposal price. More specifically, this thesis considers a periodic...

  18. Generic Argillite/Shale Disposal Reference Case

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zheng, Liange; Colon, Carlos Jové; Bianchi, Marco; Birkholzer, Jens

    2014-08-08

    Radioactive waste disposal in a deep subsurface repository hosted in clay/shale/argillite is a subject of widespread interest given the desirable isolation properties, geochemically reduced conditions, and widespread geologic occurrence of this rock type (Hansen 2010; Bianchi et al. 2013). Bianchi et al. (2013) provides a description of diffusion in a clay-hosted repository based on single-phase flow and full saturation using parametric data from documented studies in Europe (e.g., ANDRA 2005). The predominance of diffusive transport and sorption phenomena in this clay media are key attributes to impede radionuclide mobility making clay rock formations target sites for disposal of high-level radioactive waste. The reports by Hansen et al. (2010) and those from numerous studies in clay-hosted underground research laboratories (URLs) in Belgium, France and Switzerland outline the extensive scientific knowledge obtained to assess long-term clay/shale/argillite repository isolation performance of nuclear waste. In the past several years under the UFDC, various kinds of models have been developed for argillite repository to demonstrate the model capability, understand the spatial and temporal alteration of the repository, and evaluate different scenarios. These models include the coupled Thermal-Hydrological-Mechanical (THM) and Thermal-Hydrological-Mechanical-Chemical (THMC) models (e.g. Liu et al. 2013; Rutqvist et al. 2014a, Zheng et al. 2014a) that focus on THMC processes in the Engineered Barrier System (EBS) bentonite and argillite host hock, the large scale hydrogeologic model (Bianchi et al. 2014) that investigates the hydraulic connection between an emplacement drift and surrounding hydrogeological units, and Disposal Systems Evaluation Framework (DSEF) models (Greenberg et al. 2013) that evaluate thermal evolution in the host rock approximated as a thermal conduction process to facilitate the analysis of design options. However, the assumptions and the properties (parameters) used in these models are different, which not only make inter-model comparisons difficult, but also compromise the applicability of the lessons learned from one model to another model. The establishment of a reference case would therefore be helpful to set up a baseline for model development. A generic salt repository reference case was developed in Freeze et al. (2013) and the generic argillite repository reference case is presented in this report. The definition of a reference case requires the characterization of the waste inventory, waste form, waste package, repository layout, EBS backfill, host rock, and biosphere. This report mainly documents the processes in EBS bentonite and host rock that are potentially important for performance assessment and properties that are needed to describe these processes, with brief description other components such as waste inventory, waste form, waste package, repository layout, aquifer, and biosphere. A thorough description of the generic argillite repository reference case will be given in Jové Colon et al. (2014).

  19. Disposal of Rocky Flats residues as waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dustin, D.F.; Sendelweck, V.S. . Rocky Flats Plant); Rivera, M.A. )

    1993-01-01

    Work is underway at the Rocky Flats Plant to evaluate alternatives for the removal of a large inventory of plutonium-contaminated residues from the plant. One alternative under consideration is to package the residues as transuranic wastes for ultimate shipment to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Current waste acceptance criteria and transportation regulations require that approximately 1000 cubic yards of residues be repackaged to produce over 20,000 cubic yards of WIPP certified waste. The major regulatory drivers leading to this increase in waste volume are the fissile gram equivalent, surface radiation dose rate, and thermal power limits. In the interest of waste minimization, analyses have been conducted to determine, for each residue type, the controlling criterion leading to the volume increase, the impact of relaxing that criterion on subsequent waste volume, and the means by which rules changes may be implemented. The results of this study have identified the most appropriate changes to be proposed in regulatory requirements in order to minimize the costs of disposing of Rocky Flats residues as transuranic wastes.

  20. Disposal of Rocky Flats residues as waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dustin, D.F.; Sendelweck, V.S.; Rivera, M.A.

    1993-03-01

    Work is underway at the Rocky Flats Plant to evaluate alternatives for the removal of a large inventory of plutonium-contaminated residues from the plant. One alternative under consideration is to package the residues as transuranic wastes for ultimate shipment to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Current waste acceptance criteria and transportation regulations require that approximately 1000 cubic yards of residues be repackaged to produce over 20,000 cubic yards of WIPP certified waste. The major regulatory drivers leading to this increase in waste volume are the fissile gram equivalent, surface radiation dose rate, and thermal power limits. In the interest of waste minimization, analyses have been conducted to determine, for each residue type, the controlling criterion leading to the volume increase, the impact of relaxing that criterion on subsequent waste volume, and the means by which rules changes may be implemented. The results of this study have identified the most appropriate changes to be proposed in regulatory requirements in order to minimize the costs of disposing of Rocky Flats residues as transuranic wastes.

  1. Hazardous-Substance Generator, Transporter and Disposer Liability under the Federal and California Superfunds

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Vernon, James; Dennis, Patrick W.

    1981-01-01

    Carpenter-Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act ofincluding spills and hazardous- waste disposal sites thatlabel for the disposal of hazardous wastes. Id. at 607. The

  2. Assessment of Disposal Options for DOE-Managed High-Level Radioactive...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    of Options for Permanent Geologic Disposal of Spent NuclearFuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste Repository Reference Disposal Concepts and Thermal Load Management Analysis...

  3. Analysis of alternatives for immobilized low activity waste disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Burbank, D.A.

    1997-10-28

    This report presents a study of alternative disposal system architectures and implementation strategies to provide onsite near-surface disposal capacity to receive the immobilized low-activity waste produced by the private vendors. The analysis shows that a flexible unit strategy that provides a suite of design solutions tailored to the characteristics of the immobilized low-activity waste will provide a disposal system that best meets the program goals of reducing the environmental, health, and safety impacts; meeting the schedule milestones; and minimizing the life-cycle cost of the program.

  4. Estimating heel retrieval costs for underground storage tank waste at Hanford. Draft

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DeMuth, S.

    1996-08-26

    Approximately 100 million gallons ({approx}400,000 m{sup 3}) of existing U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) owned radioactive waste stored in underground tanks can not be disposed of as low-level waste (LLW). The current plan for disposal of UST waste which can not be disposed of as LLW is immobilization as glass and permanent storage in an underground repository. Disposal of LLW generally can be done sub-surface at the point of origin. Consequently, LLW is significantly less expensive to dispose of than that requiring an underground repository. Due to the lower cost for LLW disposal, it is advantageous to separate the 100 million gallons of waste into a small volume of high-level waste (HLW) and a large volume of LLW.

  5. Disposal Facility Reaches 15-Million-Ton Milestone

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

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

  6. Supporting Calculations For Submerged Bed Scrubber Condensate Disposal Preconceptual Study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pajunen, A. J.; Tedeschi, A. R.

    2012-09-18

    This document provides supporting calculations for the preparation of the Submerged Bed Scrubber Condensate Disposal Preconceptual Study report The supporting calculations include equipment sizing, Hazard Category determination, and LAW Melter Decontamination Factor Adjustments.

  7. Canister design for deep borehole disposal of nuclear waste

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Hoag, Christopher Ian

    2006-01-01

    The objective of this thesis was to design a canister for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and other high-level waste in deep borehole repositories using currently available and proven oil, gas, and geothermal drilling ...

  8. Minor actinide waste disposal in deep geological boreholes

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sizer, Calvin Gregory

    2006-01-01

    The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate a waste canister design suitable for the disposal of vitrified minor actinide waste in deep geological boreholes using conventional oil/gas/geothermal drilling technology. ...

  9. Waste Disposal Site and Radioactive Waste Management (Iowa)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This section describes the considerations of the Commission in determining whether to approve the establishment and operation of a disposal site for nuclear waste. If a permit is issued, the...

  10. Laboratory to demolish excavation enclosures at Material Disposal...

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

    up the Lab's oldest waste disposal site near DP Road in Los Alamos. Contact Colleen Curran Communications Office (505) 664-0344 Email "We look forward to the day we officially...

  11. EIS-0026; Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Disposal Phase Final Supplementa...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    by calling 1 (800) 336-9477 COVER SHEET Lead Agency: U.S. Department of Energy Title: Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Disposal Phase Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement...

  12. Maintenance Guide for DOE Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    for use with DOE M 435.1-1 Maintenance Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses U.S. DEPARTMENT OF...

  13. Laboratory to demolish excavation enclosures at Material Disposal...

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

    Excavation Enclosures At MDA B Laboratory to demolish excavation enclosures at Material Disposal Area B near DP Road Pre-demolition activities are beginning this week and the work...

  14. Draft Geologic Disposal Requirements Basis for STAD Specification

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ilgen, Anastasia G.; Bryan, Charles R.; Hardin, Ernest

    2015-03-25

    This document provides the basis for requirements in the current version of Performance Specification for Standardized Transportation, Aging, and Disposal Canister Systems, (FCRD-NFST-2014-0000579) that are driven by storage and geologic disposal considerations. Performance requirements for the Standardized Transportation, Aging, and Disposal (STAD) canister are given in Section 3.1 of that report. Here, the requirements are reviewed and the rationale for each provided. Note that, while FCRD-NFST-2014-0000579 provides performance specifications for other components of the STAD storage system (e.g. storage overpack, transfer and transportation casks, and others), these have no impact on the canister performance during disposal, and are not discussed here.

  15. LLW Notes supplement, Volume 12, Number 6

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-07-01

    Contents include articles related to environmental justice concerns and Title VI, entitled as follows: Civil Rights Act of 1964; Exec order on environmental justice; Applicability to states; Philosophical differences -- Environmental justice and Title VI; Ambiguities in existing Title VI guidance; Clarification of existing Title VI guidance; Federal financial assistance; Administrative complaints vs. lawsuits; Effect and disparate impact; Termination, suspension or refusal to grant federal financial assistance; DOJ guidance defines environmental justice; NEJAC meets, adopts far-reaching resolution re siting; Indigenous Peoples Resolution No. 23; and States meet, support environmental justice concept and express concerns about federal approach and composition of NEJAC.

  16. LLW Notes, Volume 12, Number 8

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Norris, C.; Brown, H. [eds.; Gedden, R.; Lovinger, T.; Scheele, L.; Shaker, M.A.

    1997-12-31

    Contents include articles entitled: Chem-Nuclear documents new plan for Barnwell; Nebraska releases technical analysis of LLRW facility; Southeast Compact suspends funding for NC facility development; NC governor and Southeast Compact differ on proposed MOU; Midwest Compact to return export fees; State legislators` group revises radioactive waste policy; Internal documents discuss administration`s policy on Ward Valley; BLM issues EA for Ward Valley testing; California DHS, NRC criticize DOI`s testing protocols; Army removes training mines from Ward Valley site; The 1997 gubernatorial elections and a look ahead to 1998; Court throws out case challenging Pennsylvania`s siting law; DOE files notice of appeal in WCS suit; Central Compact moves to dismiss ``Veto`` authority suit; Congress exempts NAS from FACA; Judge sets schedule for Ward Valley case; Court won`t order DOE to accept spent fuel by deadline; NRC chairman expresses concern re CERCLA reauthorization; Senators question EPA`s guidance on remediation; EPA issues guidance, criticizes NRC decommissioning rule; Members of Congress clarify FUSRAP transfer; HLW legislation passes House by wide margin; Takings legislation passes House; Energy and water bill signed into law; and Senate confirms 5 of 6 DOE appointees.

  17. LLW Notes, Volume 12, Number 6

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Norris, C.; Brown, H.; Gedden, R.; Lovinger, T.; Scheele, L.; Shaker, M.A.

    1997-07-01

    Contents include articles entitled: GAO concludes most Ward Valley SEIS issues previously addressed; Midwest compact halts facility development; Texas publishes proposal to issue WCS radioactive materials license; Central Compact issues export authorizations over NE`s objection; Nebraska governor to host LLRW summit; California regulators reassured re US ecology facility in WA; Southeast Compact augments funding for North Carolina; State and compact calendar of events; IAEA Director General to UN: reexamine nuclear power; DOI convenes meetings on Ward Valley Title VI complaint; California BLM: Tribes fully represented and consulted; MW, NE, and SW file amici curiae briefs in Ward Valley suit; Court denies state`s motion for protective order; WCS files suit against Envirocare and others; States attack DOE`s claim re lack of authority to store spent fuel; House committee passes Texas legislation; Ward Valley land transfer bill introduced in Senate; Senate committee holds hearing on Ward Valley legislation and related GAO report; NRDC threatens to sue DOE re Envirocare; NRC chair criticizes Deputy Interior Secretary`s use of Ward Valley fact sheet; Utility consortium submits license application for storage on Goshute land to NRC; Envirocare cited for SNM violation; EPA begins audit; and EPA rejects Title VI claim re Texas site.

  18. LLW Notes, Volume 12, Number 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Norris, C.; Brown, H.; Gedden, R.; Lovinger, T.; Scheele, L.; Shaker, M.A.

    1997-04-01

    Contents include articles entitled: Texas Authority`s funding pending before conference committee: Auditor`s report favors authority; Revisions likely for Illinois siting law; Midwest Compact votes on Ohio fundings: Less approved than requested; Walter Sturgeon named executive director of North Carolina authority; New forum participant for Massachusetts; CRCPD holds fifth workshop for LLRW regulators; DOD generators hold annual meeting; State legislators` LLRW working group meets; NRC Chairman Jackson responds to proposal to amend the Policy Act; US Ecology uses to recover costs and lost profits and/or to compel Ward Valley land transfer; New suit against Envirocare and others alleges unlawful business practices; Federal court finds line-item veto unconstitutional; States/utilities seek to escrow nuclear waste payments; High-level waste bill passes Senate; NRC releases decommissioning rule; EPA Region VI re La Paz Agreement; EPA, NRC debate NRC`s decommissioning rule: No progress re approaches to risk harmonization; and Mousseau heads DOE`s national low-level waste management program.

  19. LLW Notes, Volume 12, Number 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Norris, C.; Brown, H.; Colsant, J.; Lovinger, T.; Scheele, L.; Shaker, M.A.

    1997-01-01

    Contents include articles entitled: Suit against Envirocare sparks investigations: Formal petition filed with NRC; Group alleges misconduct by USGS re Beatty study; EPA rescinds NESHAPs subpart 1; Northwest Compact executive director changes jobs; New forum participant for the state of New Jersey; and Director of North Carolina division of radiation control retires.

  20. LLW Notes, Volume 12, Number 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Norris, C.; Brown, H.; Colsant, J.; Lovinger, T.; Scheele, L.; Shaker, M.A.

    1997-02-01

    Contents include the following articles: National Environmental Justice Advisory Council considers Ward Valley resolution; NGA urges Congressional and Presidential support for low-level radioactive waste compacts and transfer of federal land in Ward Valley; RFP issued for SEIS on Ward Valley land transfer; Illinois siting criteria finalized; Consideration of tribal concerns during Ward Valley siting process; State legislators` LLRW working group meets in D.C.; Upcoming state and compact events; Court calendar; Texas compact legislation introduced in Congress; Superfund reform is a priority for 105th Congress; High-level waste bill gets off to an early start; Fort Mojave petition NEJAC for Ward Valley resolution; EPA withdraws cleanup rule from OMB; Board ruling raises doubts about proposed Louisiana enrichment facility; DOE recommends external regulation by NRC; and Supplement--Background on environmental justice.

  1. Naval Spent Nuclear Fuel disposal Container System Description Document

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    N. E. Pettit

    2001-07-13

    The Naval Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposal Container System supports the confinement and isolation of waste within the Engineered Barrier System of the Monitored Geologic Repository (MGR). Disposal containers/waste packages are loaded and sealed in the surface waste handling facilities, transferred underground through the access drifts using a rail mounted transporter, and emplaced in emplacement drifts. The Naval Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposal Container System provides long term confinement of the naval spent nuclear fuel (SNF) placed within the disposal containers, and withstands the loading, transfer, emplacement, and retrieval operations. The Naval Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposal Container System provides containment of waste for a designated period of time and limits radionuclide release thereafter. The waste package maintains the waste in a designated configuration, withstands maximum credible handling and rockfall loads, limits the waste form temperature after emplacement, resists corrosion in the expected handling and repository environments, and provides containment of waste in the event of an accident. Each naval SNF disposal container will hold a single naval SNF canister. There will be approximately 300 naval SNF canisters, composed of long and short canisters. The disposal container will include outer and inner cylinder walls and lids. An exterior label will provide a means by which to identify a disposal container and its contents. Different materials will be selected for the waste package inner and outer cylinders. The two metal cylinders, in combination with the Emplacement Drift System, drip shield, and the natural barrier will support the design philosophy of defense-in-depth. The use of materials with different properties prevents a single mode failure from breaching the waste package. The inner cylinder and inner cylinder lids will be constructed of stainless steel while the outer cylinder and outer cylinder lids will be made of high-nickel alloy.

  2. Salt disposal of heat-generating nuclear waste.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Leigh, Christi D.; Hansen, Francis D.

    2011-01-01

    This report summarizes the state of salt repository science, reviews many of the technical issues pertaining to disposal of heat-generating nuclear waste in salt, and proposes several avenues for future science-based activities to further the technical basis for disposal in salt. There are extensive salt formations in the forty-eight contiguous states, and many of them may be worthy of consideration for nuclear waste disposal. The United States has extensive experience in salt repository sciences, including an operating facility for disposal of transuranic wastes. The scientific background for salt disposal including laboratory and field tests at ambient and elevated temperature, principles of salt behavior, potential for fracture damage and its mitigation, seal systems, chemical conditions, advanced modeling capabilities and near-future developments, performance assessment processes, and international collaboration are all discussed. The discussion of salt disposal issues is brought current, including a summary of recent international workshops dedicated to high-level waste disposal in salt. Lessons learned from Sandia National Laboratories' experience on the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant and the Yucca Mountain Project as well as related salt experience with the Strategic Petroleum Reserve are applied in this assessment. Disposal of heat-generating nuclear waste in a suitable salt formation is attractive because the material is essentially impermeable, self-sealing, and thermally conductive. Conditions are chemically beneficial, and a significant experience base exists in understanding this environment. Within the period of institutional control, overburden pressure will seal fractures and provide a repository setting that limits radionuclide movement. A salt repository could potentially achieve total containment, with no releases to the environment in undisturbed scenarios for as long as the region is geologically stable. Much of the experience gained from United States repository development, such as seal system design, coupled process simulation, and application of performance assessment methodology, helps define a clear strategy for a heat-generating nuclear waste repository in salt.

  3. Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact: Waste Disposition Activities at the Paducah Site Paducah, Kentucky

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    N /A

    2002-11-05

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has completed an environmental assessment (DOE/EA-1339), which is incorporated herein by reference, for proposed disposition of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) wastes, low-level radioactive waste (LLW), mixed low-level radioactive waste (MLLW), and transuranic (TRU) waste from the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant Site (Paducah Site) in Paducah, Kentucky. All of the wastes would be transported for disposal at various locations in the United States. Based on the results of the impact analysis reported in the EA, DOE has determined that the proposed action is not a major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment with in the context of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). Therefore, preparation of an environmental impact statement is not necessary, and DOE is issuing this Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).

  4. DOE NEPA Compliance Officers

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

    918-595-6640 918-595-6656 Southwestern Power Administration One West 3rd St Tulsa, OK 74103-3519 SWPA Rogers, Jeremy kimbrough@wapa.gov Western Area Power...

  5. NEPA Determination Complete

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    DOE has determined that this proposed project is a major Federal action that may significantly affect the quality of the human environment. To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act ...

  6. RM Environmental Review (NEPA)

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

    Rebuild Project Granby Pumping Plant-Windy Gap Transmission Line Rebuild Project Hermosa West Wind Energy Project Maintenance and Vegetation Management along Existing Western...

  7. NEPA | 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 Inc Jump to: navigation,Mereg GmbHMontebalitoMtMxEnergyDatabaseNEO

  8. NEPA Contracting Reform Guidance

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergyTher i nAand DOEDepartment of Energy009 248.2 254.8 251.5 65.9Lighting

  9. OFFICE: NEPA REVIEWS:

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergyTher i nAand DOEDepartmentNew2008Group, Inc. Order(National4, 2014INFORMATION OFFICER

  10. Uncanistered Spent Nuclear fuel Disposal Container System Description Document

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    N. E. Pettit

    2001-07-13

    The Uncanistered Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Disposal Container System supports the confinement and isolation of waste within the Engineered Barrier System of the Monitored Geologic Repository (MGR). Disposal containers are loaded with intact uncanistered assemblies and/or individually canistered SNF assemblies and sealed in the surface waste handling facilities, transferred to the underground through the access drifts, and emplaced in emplacement drifts. The Uncanistered SNF Disposal Container provides long-term confinement of the commercial SNF placed inside, and withstands the loading, transfer, emplacement, and retrieval loads and environments. The Uncanistered SNF Disposal Container System provides containment of waste for a designated period of time, and limits radionuclide release. The disposal container maintains the waste in a designated configuration, withstands maximum handling and rockfall loads, limits the individual SNF assembly temperatures after emplacement, limits the introduction of moderator into the disposal container during the criticality control period, resists corrosion in the expected handling and repository environments, and provides containment of waste in the event of an accident.

  11. Location standards for RCRA Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs). RCRA Information Brief

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-10-01

    This bulletin describes RCRA location standards for hazardous waste storage and disposal facilities.

  12. Costs for off-site disposal of nonhazardous oil field wastes: Salt caverns versus other disposal methods

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Veil, J.A.

    1997-09-01

    According to an American Petroleum Institute production waste survey reported on by P.G. Wakim in 1987 and 1988, the exploration and production segment of the US oil and gas industry generated more than 360 million barrels (bbl) of drilling wastes, more than 20 billion bbl of produced water, and nearly 12 million bbl of associated wastes in 1985. Current exploration and production activities are believed to be generating comparable quantities of these oil field wastes. Wakim estimates that 28% of drilling wastes, less than 2% of produced water, and 52% of associated wastes are disposed of in off-site commercial facilities. In recent years, interest in disposing of oil field wastes in solution-mined salt caverns has been growing. This report provides information on the availability of commercial disposal companies in oil-and gas-producing states, the treatment and disposal methods they employ, and the amounts they charge. It also compares cavern disposal costs with the costs of other forms of waste disposal.

  13. Disposal of oil field wastes into salt caverns: Feasibility, legality, risk, and costs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Veil, J.A.

    1997-10-01

    Salt caverns can be formed through solution mining in the bedded or domal salt formations that are found in many states. Salt caverns have traditionally been used for hydrocarbon storage, but caverns have also been used to dispose of some types of wastes. This paper provides an overview of several years of research by Argonne National Laboratory on the feasibility and legality of using salt caverns for disposing of oil field wastes, the risks to human populations from this disposal method, and the cost of cavern disposal. Costs are compared between the four operating US disposal caverns and other commercial disposal options located in the same geographic area as the caverns. Argonne`s research indicates that disposal of oil field wastes into salt caverns is feasible and legal. The risk from cavern disposal of oil field wastes appears to be below accepted safe risk thresholds. Disposal caverns are economically competitive with other disposal options.

  14. Microsoft PowerPoint - Camper, ORNL-TN CAB-04-2010-final, via...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    to Clarifying Regulatory Approach * Commission Policy Decision 6 LLW Disposal Volume Projections 7 EPRI, 2006 8 "May you live in interesting times." Chi P b 9 Chinese Proverb...

  15. Uncanistered Spent Nuclear fuel Disposal Container System Description Document

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2000-10-12

    The Uncanistered Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Disposal Container System supports the confinement and isolation of waste within the Engineered Barrier System of the Monitored Geologic Repository (MGR). Disposal containers are loaded with intact uncanistered assemblies and/or individually canistered SNF assemblies and sealed in the surface waste handling facilities, transferred to the underground through the access drifts, and emplaced in the emplacement drifts. The Uncanistered SNF Disposal Container provides long-term confinement of the commercial SNF placed inside, and withstands the loading, transfer, emplacement, and retrieval loads and environments. The Uncanistered SNF Disposal Container System provides containment of waste for a designated period of time, and limits radionuclide release. The disposal container maintains the waste in a designated configuration, withstands maximum handling and rockfall loads, limits the individual SNF assembly temperatures after emplacement, limits the introduction of moderator into the disposal container during the criticality control period, resists corrosion in the expected handling and repository environments, and provides containment of waste in the event of an accident. Multiple boiling water reactor (BWR) and pressurized water reactor (PWR) disposal container designs are needed to accommodate the expected range of spent fuel assemblies and provide long-term confinement of the commercial SNF. The disposal container will include outer and inner cylinder walls, outer cylinder lids (two on the top, one on the bottom), inner cylinder lids (one on the top, one on the bottom), and an internal metallic basket structure. Exterior labels will provide a means by which to identify the disposal container and its contents. The two metal cylinders, in combination with the cladding, Emplacement Drift System, drip shield, and natural barrier, will support the design philosophy of defense-in-depth. The use of materials with different properties prevents a single mode failure from breaching the waste package. The inner cylinder and inner cylinder lids will be constructed of stainless steel and the outer cylinder and outer cylinder lid will be made of high-nickel alloy. The basket will assist criticality control, provide structural support, and improve heat transfer. The Uncanistered SNF Disposal Container System interfaces with the emplacement drift environment and internal waste by transferring heat from the SNF to the external environment and by protecting the SFN assemblies and their contents from damage/degradation by the external environment. The system also interfaces with the SFN by limiting access of moderator and oxidizing agents of the SFN. The waste package interfaces with the Emplacement Drift System's emplacement drift pallets upon which the wasted packages are placed. The disposal container interfaces with the Assembly Transfer System, Waste Emplacement/Retrieval System, Disposal Container Handling System, and Waste Package Remediation System during loading, handling, transfer, emplacement and retrieval of the disposal container/waste package.

  16. Geological aspects of the nuclear waste disposal problem

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laverov, N.P.; Omelianenko, B.L.; Velichkin, V.I.

    1994-06-01

    For the successful solution of the high-level waste (HLW) problem in Russia one must take into account such factors as the existence of the great volume of accumulated HLW, the large size and variety of geological conditions in the country, and the difficult economic conditions. The most efficient method of HLW disposal consists in the maximum use of protective capacities of the geological environment and in using inexpensive natural minerals for engineered barrier construction. In this paper, the principal trends of geological investigation directed toward the solution of HLW disposal are considered. One urgent practical aim is the selection of sites in deep wells in regions where the HLW is now held in temporary storage. The aim of long-term investigations into HLW disposal is to evaluate geological prerequisites for regional HLW repositories.

  17. Crystalline ceramics: Waste forms for the disposal of weapons plutonium

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ewing, R.C.; Lutze, W. [New Mexico Univ., Albuquerque, NM (United States); Weber, W.J. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States)

    1995-05-01

    At present, there are three seriously considered options for the disposition of excess weapons plutonium: (i) incorporation, partial burn-up and direct disposal of MOX-fuel; (ii) vitrification with defense waste and disposal as glass ``logs``; (iii) deep borehole disposal (National Academy of Sciences Report, 1994). The first two options provide a safeguard due to the high activity of fission products in the irradiated fuel and the defense waste. The latter option has only been examined in a preliminary manner, and the exact form of the plutonium has not been identified. In this paper, we review the potential for the immobilization of plutonium in highly durable crystalline ceramics apatite, pyrochlore, monazite and zircon. Based on available data, we propose zircon as the preferred crystalline ceramic for the permanent disposition of excess weapons plutonium.

  18. Earth melter and method of disposing of feed materials

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Chapman, C.C.

    1994-10-11

    An apparatus, and method of operating the apparatus is described, wherein a feed material is converted into a glassified condition for subsequent use or disposal. The apparatus is particularly useful for disposal of hazardous or noxious waste materials which are otherwise either difficult or expensive to dispose of. The apparatus is preferably constructed by excavating a melt zone in a quantity of soil or rock, and lining the melt zone with a back fill material if refractory properties are needed. The feed material is fed into the melt zone and, preferably, combusted to an ash, whereupon the heat of combustion is used to melt the ash to a molten condition. Electrodes may be used to maintain the molten feed material in a molten condition, and to maintain homogeneity of the molten materials. 3 figs.

  19. International Collaboration Activities in Different Geologic Disposal Environments

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Birkholzer, Jens

    2015-09-01

    This report describes the current status of international collaboration regarding geologic disposal research in the Used Fuel Disposition (UFD) Campaign. Since 2012, in an effort coordinated by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, UFD has advanced active collaboration with several international geologic disposal programs in Europe and Asia. Such collaboration allows the UFD Campaign to benefit from a deep knowledge base with regards to alternative repository environments developed over decades, and to utilize international investments in research facilities (such as underground research laboratories), saving millions of R&D dollars that have been and are being provided by other countries. To date, UFD’s International Disposal R&D Program has established formal collaboration agreements with five international initiatives and several international partners, and national lab scientists associated with UFD have conducted specific collaborative R&D activities that align well with its R&D priorities.

  20. Earth melter and method of disposing of feed materials

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Chapman, Christopher C. (Richland, WA)

    1994-01-01

    An apparatus, and method of operating the apparatus, wherein a feed material is converted into a glassified condition for subsequent use or disposal. The apparatus is particularly useful for disposal of hazardous or noxious waste materials which are otherwise either difficult or expensive to dispose of. The apparatus is preferably constructed by excavating a melt zone in a quantity of soil or rock, and lining the melt zone with a back fill material if refractory properties are needed. The feed material is fed into the melt zone and, preferably, combusted to an ash, whereupon the heat of combustion is used to melt the ash to a molten condition. Electrodes may be used to maintain the molten feed material in a molten condition, and to maintain homogeneity of the molten materials.

  1. Classified Component Disposal at the Nevada National Security Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Poling, J.; Arnold, P.; Saad, M.; DiSanza, F.; Cabble, K.

    2012-11-05

    The Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) has added the capability needed for the safe, secure disposal of non-nuclear classified components that have been declared excess to national security requirements. The NNSS has worked with U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration senior leadership to gain formal approval for permanent burial of classified matter at the NNSS in the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Complex owned by the U.S. Department of Energy. Additionally, by working with state regulators, the NNSS added the capability to dispose non-radioactive hazardous and non-hazardous classified components. The NNSS successfully piloted the new disposal pathway with the receipt of classified materials from the Kansas City Plant in March 2012.

  2. Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Waste Acceptance Criteria

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    W. Mahlon Heileson

    2006-10-01

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

  3. 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

  4. INERT-MATRIX FUEL: ACTINIDE ''BURINGIN'' AND DIRECT DISPOSAL

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rodney C. Ewing; Lumin Wang

    2002-10-30

    Excess actinides result from the dismantlement of nuclear weapons (Pu) and the reprocessing of commercial spent nuclear fuel (mainly 241 Am, 244 Cm and 237 Np). In Europe, Canada and Japan studies have determined much improved efficiencies for burnup of actinides using inert-matrix fuels. This innovative approach also considers the properties of the inert-matrix fuel as a nuclear waste form for direct disposal after one-cycle of burn-up. Direct disposal can considerably reduce cost, processing requirements, and radiation exposure to workers.

  5. Doctoral Defense "Biogeochemical evaluation of disposal options for arsenic-

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Kamat, Vineet R.

    generated during drinking water treatment" Tara Clancy Date: December 2, 2014 Time: 9:00 AM Location: GM Lutgarde Raskin Professor, Civil & Environmental Engineering Arsenic contamination of drinking water of arsenic removal technologies requires disposal options for produced wastes that limit the release

  6. Landfill Disposal of CCA-Treated Wood with Construction and

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Florida, University of

    those found in municipal solid waste (MSW) (e.g., food waste). However, research has shown that C liners (11). When CCA-treated wood is managed in the C&D debris waste stream and is disposed in unlined C&D debris can impact leachate quality which, in turn could affect leachate management practices or aquifers

  7. General Safety Guidelines for Bio-Hazardous Waste Disposal

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Holland, Jeffrey

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

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Wikswo, John

    Disposing of Hazardous Waste EPA Compliance Fact Sheet: Revision 1 Vanderbilt Environmental Health and Safety Telephone: 322-2057 Fax: 343-4957 After hours pager: 835-4965 www.safety.vanderbilt.edu HAZARDOUS WASTE COLLECTION PROGRAM VEHS has implemented a Hazardous Waste Collection Program to collect hazardous

  9. Preliminary Transportation, Aging and Disposal Canister System Performance Specification

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    C.A Kouts

    2006-11-22

    This document provides specifications for selected system components of the Transportation, Aging and Disposal (TAD) canister-based system. A list of system specified components and ancillary components are included in Section 1.2. The TAD canister, in conjunction with specialized overpacks will accomplish a number of functions in the management and disposal of spent nuclear fuel. Some of these functions will be accomplished at purchaser sites where commercial spent nuclear fuel (CSNF) is stored, and some will be performed within the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) transportation and disposal system. This document contains only those requirements unique to applications within Department of Energy's (DOE's) system. DOE recognizes that TAD canisters may have to perform similar functions at purchaser sites. Requirements to meet reactor functions, such as on-site dry storage, handling, and loading for transportation, are expected to be similar to commercially available canister-based systems. This document is intended to be referenced in the license application for the Monitored Geologic Repository (MGR). As such, the requirements cited herein are needed for TAD system use in OCRWM's disposal system. This document contains specifications for the TAD canister, transportation overpack and aging overpack. The remaining components and equipment that are unique to the OCRWM system or for similar purchaser applications will be supplied by others.

  10. Integrated Disposal Facility FY 2012 Glass Testing Summary Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pierce, Eric M.; Kerisit, Sebastien N.; Krogstad, Eirik J.; Burton, Sarah D.; Bjornstad, Bruce N.; Freedman, Vicky L.; Cantrell, Kirk J.; Snyder, Michelle MV; Crum, Jarrod V.; Westsik, Joseph H.

    2013-03-29

    PNNL is conducting work to provide the technical basis for estimating radionuclide release from the engineered portion of the disposal facility for Hanford immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW). Before the ILAW can be disposed, DOE must conduct a performance assessment (PA) for the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) that describes the long-term impacts of the disposal facility on public health and environmental resources. As part of the ILAW glass testing program, PNNL is implementing a strategy, consisting of experimentation and modeling, to provide the technical basis for estimating radionuclide release from the glass waste form in support of future IDF PAs. Key activities in FY12 include upgrading the STOMP/eSTOMP codes to do near-field modeling, geochemical modeling of PCT tests to determine the reaction network to be used in the STOMP codes, conducting PUF tests on selected glasses to simulate and accelerate glass weathering, developing a Monte Carlo simulation tool to predict the characteristics of the weathered glass reaction layer as a function of glass composition, and characterizing glasses and soil samples exhumed from an 8-year lysimeter test. The purpose of this report is to summarize the progress made in fiscal year (FY) 2012 and the first quarter of FY 2013 toward implementing the strategy with the goal of developing an understanding of the long-term corrosion behavior of LAW glasses.

  11. 8-Waste treatment and disposal A. Responsibility for waste management

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    8- Waste treatment and disposal A. Responsibility for waste management 1. Each worker is responsible for correctly bagging and labeling his/her own waste. 2. A BSL3 technician will be responsible for transporting and autoclaving the waste. Waste will be autoclaved once or twice per day, depending on use

  12. Support of the Iraq nuclear facility dismantlement and disposal program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Coates, Roger [International Atomic Energy Agency - IAEA, Wagramer Strasse 5, P.O. Box 100 - 1400 Vienna (Austria); Cochran, John; Danneels, Jeff [Sandia National Laboratories (United States); Chesser, Ronald; Phillips, Carlton; Rogers, Brenda [Center for Environmental Radiation Studies, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409 (United States)

    2007-07-01

    Available in abstract form only. Full text of publication follows: Iraq's former nuclear facilities contain large quantities of radioactive materials and radioactive waste. The Iraq Nuclear Facility Dismantlement and Disposal Program (the Iraq NDs Program) is a new program to decontaminate and permanently dispose of radioactive wastes in Iraq. The NDs Program is led by the Government of Iraq, under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) auspices, with guidance and assistance from a number of countries. The U.S. participants include Texas Tech University and Sandia National Laboratories. A number of activities are ongoing under the broad umbrella of the Iraq NDs Program: drafting a new nuclear law that will provide the legal basis for the cleanup and disposal activities; assembly and analysis of existing data; characterization of soil contamination; bringing Iraqi scientists to the world's largest symposium on radioactive waste management; touring U.S. government and private sector operating radwaste disposal facilities in the U.S., and hosting a planning workshop on the characterization and cleanup of the Al-Tuwaitha Nuclear Facility. (authors)

  13. Deep Borehole Disposal Remediation Costs for Off-Normal Outcomes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Finger, John T.; Cochran, John R.; Hardin, Ernest

    2015-08-17

    This memo describes rough-order-of-magnitude (ROM) cost estimates for a set of off-normal (accident) scenarios, as defined for two waste package emplacement method options for deep borehole disposal: drill-string and wireline. It summarizes the different scenarios and the assumptions made for each, with respect to fishing, decontamination, remediation, etc.

  14. Combination gas producing and waste-water disposal well

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Malinchak, Raymond M. (McKeesport, PA)

    1984-01-01

    The present invention is directed to a waste-water disposal system for use in a gas recovery well penetrating a subterranean water-containing and methane gas-bearing coal formation. A cased bore hole penetrates the coal formation and extends downwardly therefrom into a further earth formation which has sufficient permeability to absorb the waste water entering the borehole from the coal formation. Pump means are disposed in the casing below the coal formation for pumping the water through a main conduit towards the water-absorbing earth formation. A barrier or water plug is disposed about the main conduit to prevent water flow through the casing except for through the main conduit. Bypass conduits disposed above the barrier communicate with the main conduit to provide an unpumped flow of water to the water-absorbing earth formation. One-way valves are in the main conduit and in the bypass conduits to provide flow of water therethrough only in the direction towards the water-absorbing earth formation.

  15. Long-Term Performance of Uranium Tailings Disposal Cells - 13340

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bostick, Kent; Daniel, Anamary; Pill, Ken [Professional Project Services, Inc., 1100 Bethel Valley Road, Oak Ridge, TN, 37922 (United States)] [Professional Project Services, Inc., 1100 Bethel Valley Road, Oak Ridge, TN, 37922 (United States); Tachiev, Georgio; Noosai, Nantaporn; Villamizar, Viviana [Florida International University, 10555 W. Flagler St., EC 2100, Miami FL, 33174 (United States)] [Florida International University, 10555 W. Flagler St., EC 2100, Miami FL, 33174 (United States)

    2013-07-01

    Recently, there has been interest in the performance and evolution of Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project disposal cell covers because some sites are not compliant with groundwater standards. Field observations of UMTRA disposal cells indicate that rock covers tend to become vegetated and that saturated conductivities in the upper portion of radon barriers may increase due to freeze/thaw cycles and biointrusion. This paper describes the results of modeling that addresses whether these potential changes and transient drainage of moisture in the tailings affect overall performance of the disposal cells. A numerical unsaturated/saturated 3-dimensional flow model was used to simulate whether increases in saturated conductivities in radon barriers with rock covers affect the overall performance of the disposal cells using field data from the Shiprock, NM, UMTRA site. A unique modeling approach allowed simulation with daily climatic conditions to determine changes in moisture and moisture flux from the disposal cell. Modeling results indicated that increases in the saturated conductivity at the top of radon barrier do not influence flux from the tailings with time because the tailings behave similar hydraulically to the radon barrier. The presence of a thin layer of low conductivity material anywhere in the cover or tailings restricts flux in the worst case to the saturated conductivity of that material. Where materials are unsaturated at depth within the radon barrier of tailings slimes, conductivities are typically less than 10{sup -8} centimeters per second. If the low conductivity layer is deep within the disposal cell, its saturated properties are less likely to change with time. The significance of this modeling is that operation and maintenance of the disposal cells can be minimized if they are allowed to progress to a natural condition with some vegetation and soil genesis. Because the covers and underlying tailings have a very low saturated hydraulic conductivity after transient drainage, eventually the amount of moisture leaving the tailings has a negligible effect on groundwater quality. Although some of the UMTRA sites are not in compliance with the groundwater standards, the explanation may be legacy contamination from mining, or earlier higher fluxes from the tailings or unlined processing ponds. Investigation of other legacy sources at the UMTRA sites may help explain persistent groundwater contamination. (authors)

  16. Special Analysis: Revision of Saltstone Vault 4 Disposal Limits (U)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cook, J

    2005-05-26

    New disposal limits have been computed for Vault 4 of the Saltstone Disposal Facility based on several revisions to the models in the existing Performance Assessment and the Special Analysis issued in 2002. The most important changes are the use of a more rigorous groundwater flow and transport model, and consideration of radon emanation. Other revisions include refinement of the aquifer mesh to more accurately model the footprint of the vault, a new plutonium chemistry model accounting for the different transport properties of oxidation states III/IV and V/VI, use of variable infiltration rates to simulate degradation of the closure system, explicit calculation of gaseous releases and consideration of the effects of settlement and seismic activity on the vault structure. The disposal limits have been compared with the projected total inventory expected to be disposed in Vault 4. The resulting sum-of-fractions of the 1000-year disposal limits is 0.2, which indicates that the performance objectives and requirements of DOE 435.1 will not be exceeded. This SA has not altered the conceptual model (i.e., migration of radionuclides from the Saltstone waste form and Vault 4 to the environment via the processes of diffusion and advection) of the Saltstone PA (MMES 1992) nor has it altered the conclusions of the PA (i.e., disposal of the proposed waste in the SDF will meet DOE performance measures). Thus a PA revision is not required and this SA serves to update the disposal limits for Vault 4. In addition, projected doses have been calculated for comparison with the performance objectives laid out in 10 CFR 61. These doses are 0.05 mrem/year to a member of the public and 21.5 mrem/year to an inadvertent intruder in the resident scenario over a 10,000-year time-frame, which demonstrates that the 10 CFR 61 performance objectives will not be exceeded. This SA supplements the Saltstone PA and supersedes the two previous SAs (Cook et al. 2002; Cook and Kaplan 2003).

  17. Model Evaluation of the Thermo-Hydrological Response in Argillaceous Sedimentary Rock Repository for Direct Disposal of Dual-Purpose Canisters

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Zheng, Liange

    2014-01-01

    Alternative Concepts for Direct Disposal of Dual-PurposeRock Repository for Direct Disposal of Dual-PurposeRock Repository for Direct Disposal of Dual-Purpose

  18. The Very Deep Hole Concept: Evaluation of an Alternative for Nuclear Waste Disposal

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    1979-01-01

    OF AN ALTERNATIVE FOR NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL M.T. O'Brien,OF AN ALTERNATIVE FOR NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL M. T. O'Brien,from commercial nuclear wastes in geologic storage. Oak

  19. Interface control document between PUREX Plant Transition and Solid Waste Disposal Division

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Carlson, A.B.

    1995-09-01

    The interfacing responsibilities regarding solid waste management are described for the Solid Waste Disposal Division and the PUREX Transition Organization.

  20. Disposal Activities and the Unique Waste Streams at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Arnold, P.

    2012-10-31

    This slide show documents waste disposal at the Nevada National Security Site. Topics covered include: radionuclide requirements for waste disposal; approved performance assessment (PA) for depleted uranium disposal; requirements; program approval; the Waste Acceptance Review Panel (WARP); description of the Radioactive Waste Acceptance Program (RWAP); facility evaluation; recent program accomplishments, nuclear facility safety changes; higher-activity waste stream disposal; and, large volume bulk waste streams.

  1. Guide to Laboratory Sink/Sewer Disposal of Wastes EPA Compliance Fact Sheet: Revision 1

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Wikswo, John

    Guide to Laboratory Sink/Sewer Disposal of Wastes EPA Compliance Fact Sheet: Revision 1 Vanderbilt.safety.vanderbilt.edu Page 1 of 17 INTRODUCTION Vanderbilt University is required to comply with sewer disposal restrictions or limited from sink/sewer disposal. Wastes must NOT be intentionally diluted to comply with sink/sewer

  2. ACTIVATION, DECAY HEAT, AND WASTE DISPOSAL ANALYSES FOR THE ARIES-AT POWER PLANT

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    California at San Diego, University of

    throughout the device and to compute the Fetter and NRC 10CFR 61 waste disposal ratings (WDR) for variousACTIVATION, DECAY HEAT, AND WASTE DISPOSAL ANALYSES FOR THE ARIES-AT POWER PLANT D. Henderson, L, decay heat and waste disposal calculations of the ARIES-AT design are performed to evaluate the safety

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Calgary, University of

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

  4. The WIPP is the nation's first geologic facility designed for permanent disposal of transuranic

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    The WIPP is the nation's first geologic facility designed for permanent disposal of transuranic, New Mexico to dispose of this waste. The TRU waste being disposed at the WIPP is packaged into drums-level waste and spent nuclear fuel. The WIPP has a total capacity of 6.2 million cubic feet of TRU waste

  5. Impacts of Shale Gas Wastewater Disposal on Water Quality in Western Pennsylvania

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Jackson, Robert B.

    Impacts of Shale Gas Wastewater Disposal on Water Quality in Western Pennsylvania Nathaniel R bioaccumulation in localized areas of shale gas wastewater disposal. INTRODUCTION The safe disposal of large States, oil and gas wastewater is managed through recycling of the wastewater for shale gas operations

  6. General Guidelines for the Disposal of Refrigerators, Freezers, and other Refrigeration Abandon or dispose of refrigerators, freezers, or window air conditioning units in

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Cina, Jeff

    not Abandon or dispose of refrigerators, freezers, or window air conditioning units in dumpsters or in common working and nonworking household refrigeration units (refrigerators, freezers, window air conditioning

  7. Remote-Handled Low Level Waste Disposal Project Alternatives Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    David Duncan

    2010-10-01

    This report identifies, evaluates, and compares alternatives for meeting the U.S. Department of Energy’s mission need for management of remote-handled low-level waste generated by the Idaho National Laboratory and its tenants. Each alternative identified in the Mission Need Statement for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Treatment Project is described and evaluated for capability to fulfill the mission need. Alternatives that could meet the mission need are further evaluated and compared using criteria of cost, risk, complexity, stakeholder values, and regulatory compliance. The alternative for disposal of remote-handled low-level waste that has the highest confidence of meeting the mission need and represents best value to the government is to build a new disposal facility at the Idaho National Laboratory Site.

  8. 1994 Characterization report for the state approved land disposal site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Swanson, L.C.

    1994-09-19

    This report summarizes the results of characterization activities at the proposed state-approved land disposal site (SALDS); it updates the original characterization report with studies completed since the first characterization report. The initial characterization report discusses studies from two characterization boreholes, 699-48-77A and 699-48-77B. This revision includes data from implementation of the Groundwater Monitoring Plan and the Aquifer Test Plan. The primary sources of data are two down-gradient groundwater monitoring wells, 699-48-77C and 699-48-77D, and aquifer testing of three zones in well 699-48-77C. The SALDS is located on the Hanford Site, approximately 183 m north of the 200 West Area on the north side of the 200 Areas Plateau. The SALDS is an infiltration basin proposed for disposal of treated effluents from the 200 Areas of Hanford.

  9. Subseabed Disposal Program. Annual report, January-December 1978

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Talbert, D.M.

    1980-02-01

    This is the fifth annual report describing the progress and evaluating the status of the Subseabed Disposal Program (SDP), which was begun in June 1973. The program was initiated by Sandia Laboratories to explore the utility of stable, uniform, and relatively unproductive areas of the world as possible repositories for high-level nuclear wastes. The program, now international in scope, is currently focused on the stable submarine geologic formations under the deep oceans.

  10. Generator Certification Process for Envirocare's Containerized Class A Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rogers, B. C.

    2002-02-25

    On October 19, 2001, the Utah Division of Radiation Control issued Amendment 12 to Radioactive Material License UT2300249 (RML) for Envirocare of Utah, Inc. (Envirocare) disposal operations. The license amendment provides the mechanism for Envirocare to receive and dispose of containerized Class A Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) at the newly constructed Containerized Waste Facility (CWF). Due to the increased radioactivity and external dose rates of waste that will be shipped to the CWF, a Generator Certification Program has been implemented that eliminates the requirement to sample incoming shipments, thus keeping worker doses to as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA). This paper presents the key elements of the Generator Certification Program and describes the review and approval process for certifying generators to ship waste to the CWF. Each phase of the program will be discussed to assist generators in gaining a better understanding of the certification process. Additionally, the paper will present unique differences between the CWF Waste Acceptance Criteria and the requirements from other commercial disposal facilities.

  11. The NUMO Strategy for HLW and TRU Waste Disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kitayama, K.; Oda, Y. [Nuclear Waste Management Organization of Japan (NUMO), Tokyo (Japan)

    2008-07-01

    Shortly after the Nuclear Waste Management Organization of Japan (NUMO) was established, we initiated an open call to all municipalities, requesting volunteers to host a repository for vitrified HLW. The first volunteer applied for a preliminary literature survey phase last January but, unfortunately, it withdrew the application in April. This failure provided an invaluable lesson for both the relevant authorities and NUMO; subsequently the Atomic Energy Commission of Japan and associated organizations are examining a support plan to back up NUMO's open solicitation. On another front, a recent amendment of 'The Specified Radioactive Waste Final Disposal Act' also allocates specific 'TRU' waste for deep geological disposal, requiring a demonstration of safety to a similar level as that for HLW. To implement the radioactive waste disposal project, NUMO has developed a methodology appropriate to our specific boundary conditions - the NUMO Structured Approach. This takes into account, in particular, our need to balance competing goals, such as operational safety, post-closure safety and cost, during repository tailoring to specific sites. The most important challenge for NUMO is, however, to attract volunteers. We believe that our open and structured R and D program is critical to demonstrate technical competence which, in turn, enhances the credibility of our various public relations activities. (authors)

  12. Disposal of Draeger Tubes at Savannah River Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Malik, N.P.

    2000-10-13

    The Savannah River Site (SRS) is a Department of Energy (DOE) facility located in Aiken, South Carolina that is operated by the Westinghouse Savannah River Company (WSRC). At SRS Draeger tubes are used to identify the amount and type of a particular chemical constituent in the atmosphere. Draeger tubes rely on a chemical reaction to identify the nature and type of a particular chemical constituent in the atmosphere. Disposal practices for these tubes were identified by performing a hazardous waste evaluation per the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Additional investigations were conducted to provide guidance for their safe handling, storage and disposal. A list of Draeger tubes commonly used at SRS was first evaluated to determine if they contained any material that could render them as a RCRA hazardous waste. Disposal techniques for Draeger tubes that contained any of the toxic contaminants listed in South Carolina Hazardous Waste Management Regulations (SCHWMR) R.61-79. 261.24 (b) and/or contained an acid in the liquid form were addressed.

  13. Proceedings of the 1981 subseabed disposal program. Annual workshop

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1982-01-01

    The 1981 Annual Workshop was the twelfth meeting of the principal investigators and program management personnel participating in the Subseabed Disposal Program (SDP). The first workshop was held in June 1973, to address the development of a program (initially known as Ocean Basin Floors Program) to assess the deep sea disposal of nuclear wastes. Workshops were held semi-annually until late 1977. Since November 1977, the workshops have been conducted following the end of each fiscal year so that the program participants could review and critique the total scope of work. This volume contains a synopsis, as given by each Technical Program Coordinator, abstracts of each of the talks, and copies of the visual materials, as presented by each of the principal investigators, for each of the technical elements of the SDP for the fiscal year 1981. The talks were grouped under the following categories; general topics; site studies; thermal response studies; emplacement studies; systems analysis; chemical response studies; biological oceanography studies; physical oceanographic studies; instrumentation development; transportation studies; social environment; and international seabed disposal.

  14. Mined Geologic Disposal System Requirements Document. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-03-01

    This Mined Geologic Disposal System Requirements Document (MGDS-RD) describes the functions to be performed by, and the requirements for, a Mined Geologic Disposal System (MGDS) for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) (including SNF loaded in multi-purpose canisters (MPCs)) and commercial and defense high-level radioactive waste (HLW) in support of the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System (CRWMS). The purpose of the MGDS-RD is to define the program-level requirements for the design of the Repository, the Exploratory Studies Facility (ESF), and Surface Based Testing Facilities (SBTF). These requirements include design, operation, and decommissioning requirements to the extent they impact on the physical development of the MGDS. The document also presents an overall description of the MGDS, its functions (derived using the functional analysis documented by the Physical System Requirements (PSR) documents as a starting point), its segments as described in Section 3.1.3, and the requirements allocated to the segments. In addition, the program-level interfaces of the MGDS are identified. As such, the MGDS-RD provides the technical baseline for the design of the MGDS.

  15. Iraq nuclear facility dismantlement and disposal project (NDs Project).

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cochran, John Russell

    2010-06-01

    The Al Tuwaitha nuclear complex near Baghdad contains a number of facilities from Saddam Hussan's nuclear weapons program. Past military operations, lack of upkeep and looting have created an enormous radioactive waste problem at the Al Tuwaitha complex, which contains various, uncharacterized radioactive wastes, yellow cake, sealed radioactive sources, and contaminated metals that must be constantly guarded. Iraq has never had a radioactive waste disposal facility and the lack of a disposal facility means that ever increasing quantities of radioactive material must be held in guarded storage. The Iraq Nuclear Facility Dismantlement and Disposal Program (the NDs Program) has been initiated by the U.S. Department of State (DOS) to assist the Government of Iraq (GOI) in eliminating the threats from poorly controlled radioactive materials, while building human capacities so that the GOI can manage other environmental cleanups in their country. The DOS is funding the IAEA to provide technical assistance via Technical Cooperation projects. Program coordination will be provided by the DOS, consistent with GOI policies, and Sandia National Laboratories will be responsible for coordination of participants and waste management support. Texas Tech University will continue to provide in-country assistance, including radioactive waste characterization and the stand-up of the Iraq Nuclear Services Company. The GOI owns the problems in Iraq and will be responsible for implementation of the NDs Program.

  16. A critical comparison of ten disposable cup LCAs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Harst, Eugenie van der, E-mail: eugenie.vanderharst@wur.nl [Environmental Systems Analysis Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 47, NL-6700 AA Wageningen (Netherlands); Potting, José, E-mail: jose.potting@wur.nl [Environmental Systems Analysis Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 47, NL-6700 AA Wageningen (Netherlands) [Environmental Systems Analysis Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 47, NL-6700 AA Wageningen (Netherlands); Environmental Strategies Research (fms), KTH Royal Institute of Technology, SE-110 44 Stockholm (Sweden)

    2013-11-15

    Disposable cups can be made from conventional petro-plastics, bioplastics, or paperboard (coated with petro-plastics or bioplastics). This study compared ten life cycle assessment (LCA) studies of disposable cups with the aim to evaluate the robustness of their results. The selected studies have only one impact category in common, namely climate change with global warming potential (GWP) as its category indicator. Quantitative GWP results of the studies were closer examined. GWPs within and across each study show none of the cup materials to be consistently better than the others. Comparison of the absolute GWPs (after correction for the cup volume) also shows no consistent better or worse cup material. An evaluation of the methodological choices and the data sets used in the studies revealed their influence on the GWP. The differences in GWP can be attributed to a multitude of factors, i.e., cup material and weight, production processes, waste processes, allocation options, and data used. These factors basically represent different types of uncertainty. Sensitivity and scenario analyses provided only the influence of one factor at once. A systematic and simultaneous use of sensitivity and scenario analyses could, in a next research, result in more robust outcomes. -- Highlights: • Conflicting results from life cycle assessment (LCA) on disposable cups • GWP results of LCAs did not point to a best or worst cup material. • Differences in GWP results are due to methodological choices and data sets used. • Standardized LCA: transparency of LCA studies, but still different in approaches.

  17. Pyramiding tumuli waste disposal site and method of construction thereof

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Golden, Martin P. (Hamburg, NY)

    1989-01-01

    An improved waste disposal site for the above-ground disposal of low-level nuclear waste as disclosed herein. The disposal site is formed from at least three individual waste-containing tumuli, wherein each tumuli includes a central raised portion bordered by a sloping side portion. Two of the tumuli are constructed at ground level with adjoining side portions, and a third above-ground tumulus is constructed over the mutually adjoining side portions of the ground-level tumuli. Both the floor and the roof of each tumulus includes a layer of water-shedding material such as compacted clay, and the clay layer in the roofs of the two ground-level tumuli form the compacted clay layer of the floor of the third above-ground tumulus. Each tumulus further includes a shield wall, preferably formed from a solid array of low-level handleable nuclear wate packages. The provision of such a shield wall protects workers from potentially harmful radiation when higher-level, non-handleable packages of nuclear waste are stacked in the center of the tumulus.

  18. The Development of a Guideline on the Sampling/Testing of Innovative/Alternative Disposal Technologies for Sewage Treatment and Disposal

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Rhode Island, University of

    of degraded water quality in salt ponds, Wickford Harbor, Mount Hope Bay, Narrow River, as well as in manyThe Development of a Guideline on the Sampling/Testing of Innovative/Alternative Disposal Technologies for Sewage Treatment and Disposal Principle Investigators Calvin P. C. Poon #12;Problem

  19. Disposal of oil field wastes and NORM wastes into salt caverns.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Veil, J. A.

    1999-01-27

    Salt caverns can be formed through solution mining in the bedded or domal salt formations that are found in many states. Salt caverns have traditionally been used for hydrocarbon storage, but caverns have also been used to dispose of some types of wastes. This paper provides an overview of several years of research by Argonne National Laboratory on the feasibility and legality of using salt caverns for disposing of nonhazardous oil field wastes (NOW) and naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM), the risk to human populations from this disposal method, and the cost of cavern disposal. Costs are compared between the four operating US disposal caverns and other commercial disposal options located in the same geographic area as the caverns. Argonne's research indicates that disposal of NOW into salt caverns is feasible and, in most cases, would not be prohibited by state agencies (although those agencies may need to revise their wastes management regulations). A risk analysis of several cavern leakage scenarios suggests that the risk from cavern disposal of NOW and NORM wastes is below accepted safe risk thresholds. Disposal caverns are economically competitive with other disposal options.

  20. Disposal of NORM-Contaminated Oil Field Wastes in Salt Caverns

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Blunt, D.L.; Elcock, D.; Smith, K.P.; Tomasko, D.; Viel, J.A.; and Williams, G.P.

    1999-01-21

    In 1995, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Fossil Energy, asked Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne) to conduct a preliminary technical and legal evaluation of disposing of nonhazardous oil field waste (NOW) into salt caverns. That study concluded that disposal of NOW into salt caverns is feasible and legal. If caverns are sited and designed well, operated carefully, closed properly, and monitored routinely, they can be a suitable means of disposing of NOW (Veil et al. 1996). Considering these findings and the increased U.S. interest in using salt caverns for NOW disposal, the Office of Fossil Energy asked Argonne to conduct further research on the cost of cavern disposal compared with the cost of more traditional NOW disposal methods and on preliminary identification and investigation of the risks associated with such disposal. The cost study (Veil 1997) found that disposal costs at the four permitted disposal caverns in the United States were comparable to or lower than the costs of other disposal facilities in the same geographic area. The risk study (Tomasko et al. 1997) estimated that both cancer and noncancer human health risks from drinking water that had been contaminated by releases of cavern contents were significantly lower than the accepted risk thresholds. Since 1992, DOE has funded Argonne to conduct a series of studies evaluating issues related to management and disposal of oil field wastes contaminated with naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM). Included among these studies were radiological dose assessments of several different NORM disposal options (Smith et al. 1996). In 1997, DOE asked Argonne to conduct additional analyses on waste disposal in salt caverns, except that this time the wastes to be evaluated would be those types of oil field wastes that are contaminated by NORM. This report describes these analyses. Throughout the remainder of this report, the term ''NORM waste'' is used to mean ''oil field waste contaminated by NORM''.

  1. Modeling Coupled Processes in Clay Formations for Radioactive Waste Disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Liu, Hui-Hai; Rutqvist, Jonny; Zheng, Liange; Sonnenthal, Eric; Houseworth, Jim; Birkholzer, Jens

    2010-08-31

    As a result of the termination of the Yucca Mountain Project, the United States Department of Energy (DOE) has started to explore various alternative avenues for the disposition of used nuclear fuel and nuclear waste. The overall scope of the investigation includes temporary storage, transportation issues, permanent disposal, various nuclear fuel types, processing alternatives, and resulting waste streams. Although geologic disposal is not the only alternative, it is still the leading candidate for permanent disposal. The realm of geologic disposal also offers a range of geologic environments that may be considered, among those clay shale formations. Figure 1-1 presents the distribution of clay/shale formations within the USA. Clay rock/shale has been considered as potential host rock for geological disposal of high-level nuclear waste throughout the world, because of its low permeability, low diffusion coefficient, high retention capacity for radionuclides, and capability to self-seal fractures induced by tunnel excavation. For example, Callovo-Oxfordian argillites at the Bure site, France (Fouche et al., 2004), Toarcian argillites at the Tournemire site, France (Patriarche et al., 2004), Opalinus clay at the Mont Terri site, Switzerland (Meier et al., 2000), and Boom clay at Mol site, Belgium (Barnichon et al., 2005) have all been under intensive scientific investigations (at both field and laboratory scales) for understanding a variety of rock properties and their relations with flow and transport processes associated with geological disposal of nuclear waste. Clay/shale formations may be generally classified as indurated and plastic clays (Tsang et al., 2005). The latter (including Boom clay) is a softer material without high cohesion; its deformation is dominantly plastic. For both clay rocks, coupled thermal, hydrological, mechanical and chemical (THMC) processes are expected to have a significant impact on the long-term safety of a clay repository. For example, the excavation-damaged zone (EDZ) near repository tunnels can modify local permeability (resulting from induced fractures), potentially leading to less confinement capability (Tsang et al., 2005). Because of clay's swelling and shrinkage behavior (depending on whether the clay is in imbibition or drainage processes), fracture properties in the EDZ are quite dynamic and evolve over time as hydromechanical conditions change. To understand and model the coupled processes and their impact on repository performance is critical for the defensible performance assessment of a clay repository. Within the Natural Barrier System (NBS) group of the Used Fuel Disposition (UFD) Campaign at DOE's Office of Nuclear Energy, LBNL's research activities have focused on understanding and modeling such coupled processes. LBNL provided a report in this April on literature survey of studies on coupled processes in clay repositories and identification of technical issues and knowledge gaps (Tsang et al., 2010). This report will document other LBNL research activities within the natural system work package, including the development of constitutive relationships for elastic deformation of clay rock (Section 2), a THM modeling study (Section 3) and a THC modeling study (Section 4). The purpose of the THM and THC modeling studies is to demonstrate the current modeling capabilities in dealing with coupled processes in a potential clay repository. In Section 5, we discuss potential future R&D work based on the identified knowledge gaps. The linkage between these activities and related FEPs is presented in Section 6.

  2. Deep borehole disposal of high-level radioactive waste.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stein, Joshua S.; Freeze, Geoffrey A.; Brady, Patrick Vane; Swift, Peter N.; Rechard, Robert Paul; Arnold, Bill Walter; Kanney, Joseph F.; Bauer, Stephen J.

    2009-07-01

    Preliminary evaluation of deep borehole disposal of high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel indicates the potential for excellent long-term safety performance at costs competitive with mined repositories. Significant fluid flow through basement rock is prevented, in part, by low permeabilities, poorly connected transport pathways, and overburden self-sealing. Deep fluids also resist vertical movement because they are density stratified. Thermal hydrologic calculations estimate the thermal pulse from emplaced waste to be small (less than 20 C at 10 meters from the borehole, for less than a few hundred years), and to result in maximum total vertical fluid movement of {approx}100 m. Reducing conditions will sharply limit solubilities of most dose-critical radionuclides at depth, and high ionic strengths of deep fluids will prevent colloidal transport. For the bounding analysis of this report, waste is envisioned to be emplaced as fuel assemblies stacked inside drill casing that are lowered, and emplaced using off-the-shelf oilfield and geothermal drilling techniques, into the lower 1-2 km portion of a vertical borehole {approx}45 cm in diameter and 3-5 km deep, followed by borehole sealing. Deep borehole disposal of radioactive waste in the United States would require modifications to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and to applicable regulatory standards for long-term performance set by the US Environmental Protection Agency (40 CFR part 191) and US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (10 CFR part 60). The performance analysis described here is based on the assumption that long-term standards for deep borehole disposal would be identical in the key regards to those prescribed for existing repositories (40 CFR part 197 and 10 CFR part 63).

  3. Design and Installation of a Disposal Cell Cover Field Test

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Benson, C.H. [University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, Wisconsin; Waugh, W.J. [S.M. Stoller Corporation, Grand Junction, Colorado; Albright, W.H. [Desert Research Institute, Reno, Nevada; Smith, G.M. [Geo-Smith Engineering, Grand Junction, Colorado; Bush, R.P. [U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colorado

    2011-02-27

    The U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Legacy Management (LM) initiated a cover assessment project in September 2007 to evaluate an inexpensive approach to enhancing the hydrological performance of final covers for disposal cells. The objective is to accelerate and enhance natural processes that are transforming existing conventional covers, which rely on low-conductivity earthen barriers, into water balance covers, that store water in soil and release it as soil evaporation and plant transpiration. A low conductivity cover could be modified by deliberately blending the upper layers of the cover profile and planting native shrubs. A test facility was constructed at the Grand Junction, Colorado, Disposal Site to evaluate the proposed methodology. The test cover was constructed in two identical sections, each including a large drainage lysimeter. The test cover was constructed with the same design and using the same materials as the existing disposal cell in order to allow for a direct comparison of performance. One test section will be renovated using the proposed method; the other is a control. LM is using the lysimeters to evaluate the effectiveness of the renovation treatment by monitoring hydrologic conditions within the cover profile as well as all water entering and leaving the system. This paper describes the historical experience of final covers employing earthen barrier layers, the design and operation of the lysimeter test facility, testing conducted to characterize the as-built engineering and edaphic properties of the lysimeter soils, the calibration of instruments installed at the test facility, and monitoring data collected since the lysimeters were constructed.

  4. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS FOR SALTSTONE DISPOSAL UNIT COLUMN DEGRADATION ANALYSES

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Flach, G.

    2014-10-28

    PORFLOW related analyses supporting a Sensitivity Analysis for Saltstone Disposal Unit (SDU) column degradation were performed. Previous analyses, Flach and Taylor 2014, used a model in which the SDU columns degraded in a piecewise manner from the top and bottom simultaneously. The current analyses employs a model in which all pieces of the column degrade at the same time. Information was extracted from the analyses which may be useful in determining the distribution of Tc-99 in the various SDUs throughout time and in determining flow balances for the SDUs.

  5. Voluntary cleanup of the Ames chemical disposal site.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Taboas, A. L.; Freeman, R.; Peterson, J.; Environmental Assessment; USDOE

    2003-01-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy completed a voluntary removal action at the Ames chemical disposal site, a site associated with the early days of the Manhattan Project. It contained chemical and low-level radioactive wastes from development of the technology to extract uranium from uranium oxide. The process included the preparation of a Remedial Investigation, Feasibility Study, Baseline Risk Assessment, and, ultimately, issuance of a Record of Decision. Various stakeholder groups were involved, including members of the regulatory community, the general public, and the landowner, Iowa State University. The site was restored and returned to the landowner for unrestricted use.

  6. Microsoft Word - Appendix C_DisposalCellContents.doc

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of NaturalDukeWakefield Municipal Gas &SCE-SessionsSouth DakotaRobbins and MyersHr. Anthony V.How Disposal Cell Contents

  7. DOE - Office of Legacy Management -- Cheney Disposal Cell - 008

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of NaturalDukeWakefield Municipal Gas &SCE-SessionsSouth Dakota Edgemont, SouthLaboratory -Cheney Disposal Cell - 008

  8. DOE - Office of Legacy Management -- Clive Disposal Cell - 036

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of NaturalDukeWakefield Municipal Gas &SCE-SessionsSouth Dakota Edgemont, SouthLaboratory -Cheney Disposal- CO

  9. NNSA Reaches LEU Disposal Milestone | National Nuclear Security

    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 Medal of Honor recipientsAdministration LEU Disposal Milestone |

  10. Title I Disposal Sites Annual Report | 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 RankADVANCEDInstallers/ContractorsPhotovoltaicsState ofSavings for Specific2HeldTidalTimothyOilBradI Disposal

  11. The Texas Solution to the Nation's Disposal Needs for Irradiated Hardware - 13337

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Britten, Jay M. [Waste Control Specialists LLC, Andrews, TX 79714 (United States)] [Waste Control Specialists LLC, Andrews, TX 79714 (United States)

    2013-07-01

    The closure of the disposal facility in Barnwell, South Carolina, to out-of-compact states in 2008 left commercial nuclear power plants without a disposal option for Class B and C irradiated hardware. In 2012, Waste Control Specialists LLC (WCS) opened a highly engineered facility specifically designed and built for the disposal of Class B and C waste. The WCS facility is the first Interstate Compact low-level radioactive waste disposal facility to be licensed and operated under the Low-level Waste Policy Act of 1980, as amended in 1985. Due to design requirements of a modern Low Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) facility, traditional methods for disposal were not achievable at the WCS site. Earlier methods primarily utilized the As Low as Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) concept of distance to accomplish worker safety. The WCS method required the use of all three ALARA concepts of time, distance, and shielding to ensure the safe disposal of this highly hazardous waste stream. (authors)

  12. Overview of Low-Level Waste Disposal Operations at the Nevada Test Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DOE /Navarro

    2007-02-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office Environmental Management Program is charged with the responsibility to carry out the disposal of on-site and off-site generated low-level radioactive waste at the Nevada Test Site. Core elements of this mission are ensuring that disposal take place in a manner that is safe and cost-effective while protecting workers, the public, and the environment. This paper focuses on giving an overview of the Nevada Test Site facilities regarding currant design of disposal. In addition, technical attributes of the facilities established through the site characterization process will be further described. An update on current waste disposal volumes and capabilities will also be provided. This discussion leads to anticipated volume projections and disposal site requirements as the Nevada Test Site disposal operations look towards the future.

  13. Low-level radioactive waste disposal facility closure

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    White, G.J.; Ferns, T.W.; Otis, M.D.; Marts, S.T.; DeHaan, M.S.; Schwaller, R.G.; White, G.J. (EG and G Idaho, Inc., Idaho Falls, ID (USA))

    1990-11-01

    Part I of this report describes and evaluates potential impacts associated with changes in environmental conditions on a low-level radioactive waste disposal site over a long period of time. Ecological processes are discussed and baselines are established consistent with their potential for causing a significant impact to low-level radioactive waste facility. A variety of factors that might disrupt or act on long-term predictions are evaluated including biological, chemical, and physical phenomena of both natural and anthropogenic origin. These factors are then applied to six existing, yet very different, low-level radioactive waste sites. A summary and recommendations for future site characterization and monitoring activities is given for application to potential and existing sites. Part II of this report contains guidance on the design and implementation of a performance monitoring program for low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities. A monitoring programs is described that will assess whether engineered barriers surrounding the waste are effectively isolating the waste and will continue to isolate the waste by remaining structurally stable. Monitoring techniques and instruments are discussed relative to their ability to measure (a) parameters directly related to water movement though engineered barriers, (b) parameters directly related to the structural stability of engineered barriers, and (c) parameters that characterize external or internal conditions that may cause physical changes leading to enhanced water movement or compromises in stability. Data interpretation leading to decisions concerning facility closure is discussed. 120 refs., 12 figs., 17 tabs.

  14. Logistics modeling of future solid waste storage, treatment, and disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Holter, G.M.; Stiles, D.L.; Shaver, S.R.; Armacost, L.L.

    1993-11-01

    Logistics modeling is a powerful analytical technique for effective planning of waste storage, treatment, and disposal activities. Logistics modeling facilitates analyses of alternate scenarios for future waste flows, facility schedules, and processing or handling capacities. These analyses provide an increased understanding of the specific needs for waste storage, treatment, and disposal while adequate time remains to plan accordingly. They also help to determine the sensitivity of these needs to various system parameters. This paper discusses a logistics modeling system developed by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) to aid in solid waste planning for a large industrial complex managing many different types and classifications of waste. The basic needs for such a system are outlined, and the approach adopted in developing the system is described. A key component of this approach is the development of a conceptual model that provides a flexible framework for modeling the waste management system and addressing the range of logistics and economic issues involved. Developing an adequate description of the waste management system being analyzed is discussed. Examples are then provided of the types of analyses that have been conducted. The potential application of this modeling system to different settings is also examined.

  15. Oil field waste disposal in salt caverns: An information website

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tomasko, D.; Veil, J. A.

    1999-12-10

    Argonne National Laboratory has completed the construction of a Website for the US Department of Energy (DOE) that provides detailed information on salt caverns and their use for disposing of nonhazardous oil field wastes (NOW) and naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM). Specific topics in the Website include the following: descriptions of salt deposits and salt caverns within the US, salt cavern construction methods, potential types of wastes, waste emplacement, regulatory issues, costs, carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic human health risks associated with postulated cavern release scenarios, new information on cavern disposal (e.g., upcoming meetings, regulatory issues, etc.), other studies supported by the National Petroleum Technology Office (NPTO) (e.g., considerations of site location, cavern stability, development issues, and bedded salt characterization in the Midland Basin), and links to other associated Web sites. In addition, the Website allows downloadable access to reports prepared on the topic that were funded by DOE. Because of the large quantities of NOW and NORM wastes generated annually by the oil industry, information presented on this Website is particularly interesting and valuable to project managers, regulators, and concerned citizens.

  16. Tritiated wastewater treatment and disposal evaluation for 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Allen, W.L. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

    1995-08-01

    A second annual summary and analysis of potential processes for the mitigation of tritium contained in process effluent, ground water and stored waste is presented. It was prepared to satisfy the Hanford Federal Facility and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) Milestone M-26-05B. Technologies with directed potential for separation of tritium at present environmental levels are organized into two groups. The first group consists of four processes that have or are undergoing significant development. Of these four, the only active project is the development of membrane separation technology at the Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL). Although research is progressing, membrane separation does not present a near term option for the mitigation of tritium. A second grouping of five early stage projects gives an indication of the breadth of interest in low level tritium separation. If further developed, two of these technologies might prove to be candidates for a separation process. At the present, there continues to be no known commercially available process for the practical reduction of the tritium burden in process effluent. Material from last year`s report regarding the occurrence, regulation and management of tritium is updated and included in the appendices of this report. The use of the State Approved Land Disposal Site (SALDS) for disposal of tritiated effluent from the 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility (ETF) begins in the fall of 1995. This is the most significant event impacting tritium in the environment at the Hanford Site this coming year.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Isenhower, Daniel Bruce

    1982-01-01

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

  18. Degradation Of Cementitious Materials Associated With Saltstone Disposal Units

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Flach, G. P; Smith, F. G. III

    2013-03-19

    The Saltstone facilities at the DOE Savannah River Site (SRS) stabilize and dispose of low-level radioactive salt solution originating from liquid waste storage tanks at the site. The Saltstone Production Facility (SPF) receives treated salt solution and mixes the aqueous waste with dry cement, blast furnace slag, and fly ash to form a grout slurry which is mechanically pumped into concrete disposal cells that compose the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF). The solidified grout is termed “saltstone”. Cementitious materials play a prominent role in the design and long-term performance of the SDF. The saltstone grout exhibits low permeability and diffusivity, and thus represents a physical barrier to waste release. The waste form is also reducing, which creates a chemical barrier to waste release for certain key radionuclides, notably Tc-99. Similarly, the concrete shell of an SDF disposal unit (SDU) represents an additional physical and chemical barrier to radionuclide release to the environment. Together the waste form and the SDU compose a robust containment structure at the time of facility closure. However, the physical and chemical state of cementitious materials will evolve over time through a variety of phenomena, leading to degraded barrier performance over Performance Assessment (PA) timescales of thousands to tens of thousands of years. Previous studies of cementitious material degradation in the context of low-level waste disposal have identified sulfate attack, carbonation influenced steel corrosion, and decalcification (primary constituent leaching) as the primary chemical degradation phenomena of most relevance to SRS exposure conditions. In this study, degradation time scales for each of these three degradation phenomena are estimated for saltstone and concrete associated with each SDU type under conservative, nominal, and best estimate assumptions. The nominal value (NV) is an intermediate result that is more probable than the conservative estimate (CE) and more defensible than the best estimate (BE). The combined effects of multiple phenomena are then considered to determine the most limiting degradation time scale for each cementitious material. Degradation times are estimated using a combination of analytic solutions from literature and numerical simulation codes provided through the DOE Cementitious Barriers Partnership (CBP) Software Toolbox (http://cementbarriers.org). For the SDU 2 design, the roof, wall, and floor components are projected to become fully degraded under Nominal conditions at 3866, 923, and 1413 years, respectively. For SDU 4 the roof and floor are estimated to be fully degraded under Nominal conditions after 1137 and 1407 years, respectively; the wall is assumed to be fully degraded at time zero in the most recent PA simulations. Degradation of these concrete barriers generally occurs from combined sulfate attack and corrosion of embedded steel following carbonation. Saltstone is projected to degrade very slowly by decalcification, with complete degradation occurring in excess of 200,000 years for any SDU type. Complete results are provided.

  19. International low level waste disposal practices and facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nutt, W.M.

    2011-12-19

    The safe management of nuclear waste arising from nuclear activities is an issue of great importance for the protection of human health and the environment now and in the future. The primary goal of this report is to identify the current situation and practices being utilized across the globe to manage and store low and intermediate level radioactive waste. The countries included in this report were selected based on their nuclear power capabilities and involvement in the nuclear fuel cycle. This report highlights the nuclear waste management laws and regulations, current disposal practices, and future plans for facilities of the selected international nuclear countries. For each country presented, background information and the history of nuclear facilities are also summarized to frame the country's nuclear activities and set stage for the management practices employed. The production of nuclear energy, including all the steps in the nuclear fuel cycle, results in the generation of radioactive waste. However, radioactive waste may also be generated by other activities such as medical, laboratory, research institution, or industrial use of radioisotopes and sealed radiation sources, defense and weapons programs, and processing (mostly large scale) of mineral ores or other materials containing naturally occurring radionuclides. Radioactive waste also arises from intervention activities, which are necessary after accidents or to remediate areas affected by past practices. The radioactive waste generated arises in a wide range of physical, chemical, and radiological forms. It may be solid, liquid, or gaseous. Levels of activity concentration can vary from extremely high, such as levels associated with spent fuel and residues from fuel reprocessing, to very low, for instance those associated with radioisotope applications. Equally broad is the spectrum of half-lives of the radionuclides contained in the waste. These differences result in an equally wide variety of options for the management of radioactive waste. There is a variety of alternatives for processing waste and for short term or long term storage prior to disposal. Likewise, there are various alternatives currently in use across the globe for the safe disposal of waste, ranging from near surface to geological disposal, depending on the specific classification of the waste. At present, there appears to be a clear and unequivocal understanding that each country is ethically and legally responsible for its own wastes, in accordance with the provisions of the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management. Therefore the default position is that all nuclear wastes will be disposed of in each of the 40 or so countries concerned with nuclear power generation or part of the fuel cycle. To illustrate the global distribution of radioactive waste now and in the near future, Table 1 provides the regional breakdown, based on the UN classification of the world in regions illustrated in Figure 1, of nuclear power reactors in operation and under construction worldwide. In summary, 31 countries operate 433 plants, with a total capacity of more than 365 gigawatts of electrical energy (GW[e]). A further 65 units, totaling nearly 63 GW(e), are under construction across 15 of these nations. In addition, 65 countries are expressing new interest in, considering, or actively planning for nuclear power to help address growing energy demands to fuel economic growth and development, climate change concerns, and volatile fossil fuel prices. Of these 65 new countries, 21 are in Asia and the Pacific region, 21 are from the Africa region, 12 are in Europe (mostly Eastern Europe), and 11 in Central and South America. However, 31 of these 65 are not currently planning to build reactors, and 17 of those 31 have grids of less than 5 GW, which is said to be too small to accommodate most of the reactor designs available. For the remaining 34 countries actively planning reactors, as of September 2010: 14 indicate a strong intention to precede w

  20. System-Level Logistics for Dual Purpose Canister Disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kalinina, Elena A.

    2014-06-03

    The analysis presented in this report investigated how the direct disposal of dual purpose canisters (DPCs) may be affected by the use of standard transportation aging and disposal canisters (STADs), early or late start of the repository, and the repository emplacement thermal power limits. The impacts were evaluated with regard to the availability of the DPCs for emplacement, achievable repository acceptance rates, additional storage required at an interim storage facility (ISF) and additional emplacement time compared to the corresponding repackaging scenarios, and fuel age at emplacement. The result of this analysis demonstrated that the biggest difference in the availability of UNF for emplacement between the DPC-only loading scenario and the DPCs and STADs loading scenario is for a repository start date of 2036 with a 6 kW thermal power limit. The differences are also seen in the availability of UNF for emplacement between the DPC-only loading scenario and the DPCs and STADs loading scenario for the alternative with a 6 kW thermal limit and a 2048 start date, and for the alternatives with a 10 kW thermal limit and 2036 and 2048 start dates. The alternatives with disposal of UNF in both DPCs and STADs did not require additional storage, regardless of the repository acceptance rate, as compared to the reference repackaging case. In comparison to the reference repackaging case, alternatives with the 18 kW emplacement thermal limit required little to no additional emplacement time, regardless of the repository start time, the fuel loading scenario, or the repository acceptance rate. Alternatives with the 10 kW emplacement thermal limit and the DPCs and STADs fuel loading scenario required some additional emplacement time. The most significant decrease in additional emplacement time occurred in the alternative with the 6 kW thermal limit and the 2036 repository starting date. The average fuel age at emplacement ranges from 46 to 88 years. The maximum fuel age at emplacement ranges from 81 to 146 years. The difference in the average and maximum age of fuel at emplacement between the DPC-only and the DPCs and STADs fuel loading scenarios becomes less significant as the repository thermal limit increases and as the repository start date increases. In general, the role of STADs is to store young (30 year or younger) high burnup (45 GWD/MTU or higher) fuel. Recommendations for future study include detailed evaluation of the feasible alternatives with regard to the costs and factors not considered in this analysis, such as worker dose, dose to members of the public, and economic benefits to host entities. It is also recommended to conduct an additional analysis to evaluate the assumption regarding the transportability and disposability of DPCs for the next iteration of the direct disposal of DPCs study.

  1. Idaho Crews Overcome Challenges to Safely Dispose 1-Million-Pound Hot Cell

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    American Recovery and Reinvestment Act cleanup crews at the Idaho site recently disposed of a hot cell as heavy as nine fully loaded Boeing 737s.

  2. The Current Status of Radioactive Waste Management and Planning for Near Surface Disposal in Indonesia

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Purnomo, A. S.

    2003-02-24

    Near surface disposal has been practiced for some decades, with a wide variation in sites, types and amounts of wastes, and facility designs employed. Experience has shown that the effective and safe isolation of waste depends on the performance of the overall disposal system, which is formed by three major components or barriers: the site, the disposal facility and the waste form. Near surface disposal also rely on active institutional controls, such as monitoring and maintenance. The objective of radioactive waste disposal is to isolate waste so that it does not result in undue radiation exposure to humans and the environment. The required degree of isolation can be obtained by implementing various disposal methods, of which near surface disposal represents an option commonly used and demonstrated in several countries. In near surface disposal, the disposal facility is located on or below the ground surface, where the protective covering is generally a few meters thick. The se facilities are intended to contain low and intermediate level waste without appreciable quantities of long-lived radionuclides.

  3. [Composite analysis E-area vaults and saltstone disposal facilities]. PORFLOW and FACT input files

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cook, J.R.

    1997-09-01

    This diskette contains the PORFLOW and FACT input files described in Appendix B of the accompanying report `Composite Analysis E-Area Vaults and Saltstone Disposal Facilities`.

  4. New York State`s regulations for low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Youngberg, B.; Merges, P.; Owen, K.

    1994-12-31

    The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation`s (NYSDEC) regulations for low-level radioactive waste (LLRW) disposal facilities set primarily performance-based criteria for LLRW disposal facilities. The regulations (Part 383 of Title 6 of the New York State Codes of Rules and Regulations) set requirements for design, construction, operation, monitoring, site safety planning, financial assurance, closure, post closure monitoring and maintenance, and institutional control. The regulations are unique in their detail and in presenting specific requirements for below ground disposal units, above ground disposal units, and underground mined repositories.

  5. Long-term surveillance plan for the Burro Canyon disposal cell, Slick Rock, Colorado

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-11-01

    This long-term surveillance plant (LTSP) describes the US Department of energy`s (DOE) long-term care program for the Uranium Mill Tailings Remediation Action (UMTRA) Project`s burro Canyon disposal cell in San Miguel County, Colorado. This LTSP describes the long-term surveillance program the DOE will implement to ensure that the Burro Canyon disposal cell performs as designed. The program is based on site inspections to identify threats to disposal cell integrity. No ground water monitoring will be required at the Burro Canyon disposal cell because the ground water protection strategy is supplemental standards based on low-yield from the upper-most aquifer.

  6. Developing operating procedures for a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sutherland, A.A.; Miner, G.L.; Grahn, K.F.; Pollard, C.G. [Rogers and Associates Engineering Corp., Salt Lake City, UT (United States)

    1993-10-01

    This document is intended to assist persons who are developing operating and emergency procedures for a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility. It provides 25 procedures that are considered to be relatively independent of the characteristics of a disposal facility site, the facility design, and operations at the facility. These generic procedures should form a good starting point for final procedures on their subjects for the disposal facility. In addition, this document provides 55 annotated outlines of other procedures that are common to disposal facilities. The annotated outlines are meant as checklists to assist the developer of new procedures.

  7. Introduction to DOE Order 435.1 Low Level Radioactive Waste Disposal...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Disposal Requirements More Documents & Publications Status Updates on the Performance and Risk Assessment Community of Practice (P&RA CoP) LFRG Program Management Plan LFRG Charter...

  8. DOE Will Dispose of 34 Metric Tons of Plutonium by Turning it...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Will Dispose of 34 Metric Tons of Plutonium by Turning it into Fuel for Civilian Reactors | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People...

  9. Deep Geologic Nuclear Waste Disposal - No New Taxes - 12469

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Conca, James [RJLee Group, Inc., Pasco WA 509.205.7541 (United States); Wright, Judith [UFA Ventures, Inc., Richland, WA (United States)

    2012-07-01

    To some, the perceived inability of the United States to dispose of high-level nuclear waste justifies a moratorium on expansion of nuclear power in this country. Instead, it is more an example of how science yields to social pressure, even on a subject as technical as nuclear waste. Most of the problems, however, stem from confusion on the part of the public and their elected officials, not from a lack of scientific knowledge. We know where to put nuclear waste, how to put it there, how much it will cost, and how well it will work. And it's all about the geology. The President's Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future has drafted a number of recommendations addressing nuclear energy and waste issues (BRC 2011) and three recommendations, in particular, have set the stage for a new strategy to dispose of high-level nuclear waste and to manage spent nuclear fuel in the United States: 1) interim storage for spent nuclear fuel, 2) resumption of the site selection process for a second repository, and 3) a quasi-government entity to execute the program and take control of the Nuclear Waste Fund in order to do so. The first two recommendations allow removal and storage of spent fuel from reactor sites to be used in the future, and allows permanent disposal of actual waste, while the third controls cost and administration. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NPWA 1982) provides the second repository different waste criteria, retrievability, and schedule, so massive salt returns as the candidate formation of choice. The cost (in 2007 dollars) of disposing of 83,000 metric tons of heavy metal (MTHM) high-level waste (HLW) is about $ 83 billion (b) in volcanic tuff, $ 29 b in massive salt, and $ 77 b in crystalline rock. Only in salt is the annual revenue stream from the Nuclear Waste Fund more than sufficient to accomplish this program without additional taxes or rate hikes. The cost is determined primarily by the suitability of the geologic formation, i.e., how well it performs on its own for millions of years with little engineering assistance from humans. It is critical that the states most affected by this issue (WA, SC, ID, TN, NM and perhaps others) develop an independent multi-state agreement in order for a successful program to move forward. Federal approval would follow. Unknown to most, the United States has a successful operating deep permanent geologic nuclear repository for high and low activity waste, called the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, New Mexico. Its success results from several factors, including an optimal geologic and physio-graphic setting, a strong scientific basis, early regional community support, frequent interactions among stakeholders at all stages of the process, long-term commitment from the upper management of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) over several administrations, strong New Mexico State involvement and oversight, and constant environmental monitoring from before nuclear waste was first emplaced in the WIPP underground (in 1999) to the present. WIPP is located in the massive bedded salts of the Salado Formation, whose geological, physical, chemical, redox, thermal, and creep-closure properties make it an ideal formation for long-term disposal, long-term in this case being greater than 200 million years. These properties also mean minimal engineering requirements as the rock does most of the work of isolating the waste. WIPP has been operating for twelve years, and as of this writing, has disposed of over 80,000 m{sup 3} of nuclear weapons waste, called transuranic or TRU waste (>100 nCurie/g but <23 Curie/1000 cm{sup 3}) including some high activity waste from reprocessing of spent fuel from old weapons reactors. All nuclear waste of any type from any source can be disposed in this formation better, safer and cheaper than in any other geologic formation. At the same time, it is critical that we complete the Yucca Mountain license application review so as not to undermine the credibility of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the scientific commun

  10. EnergySolution's Clive Disposal Facility Operational Research Model - 13475

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nissley, Paul; Berry, Joanne

    2013-07-01

    EnergySolutions owns and operates a licensed, commercial low-level radioactive waste disposal facility located in Clive, Utah. The Clive site receives low-level radioactive waste from various locations within the United States via bulk truck, containerised truck, enclosed truck, bulk rail-cars, rail boxcars, and rail inter-modals. Waste packages are unloaded, characterized, processed, and disposed of at the Clive site. Examples of low-level radioactive waste arriving at Clive include, but are not limited to, contaminated soil/debris, spent nuclear power plant components, and medical waste. Generators of low-level radioactive waste typically include nuclear power plants, hospitals, national laboratories, and various United States government operated waste sites. Over the past few years, poor economic conditions have significantly reduced the number of shipments to Clive. With less revenue coming in from processing shipments, Clive needed to keep its expenses down if it was going to maintain past levels of profitability. The Operational Research group of EnergySolutions were asked to develop a simulation model to help identify any improvement opportunities that would increase overall operating efficiency and reduce costs at the Clive Facility. The Clive operations research model simulates the receipt, movement, and processing requirements of shipments arriving at the facility. The model includes shipment schedules, processing times of various waste types, labor requirements, shift schedules, and site equipment availability. The Clive operations research model has been developed using the WITNESS{sup TM} process simulation software, which is developed by the Lanner Group. The major goals of this project were to: - identify processing bottlenecks that could reduce the turnaround time from shipment arrival to disposal; - evaluate the use (or idle time) of labor and equipment; - project future operational requirements under different forecasted scenarios. By identifying processing bottlenecks and unused equipment and/or labor, improvements to operating efficiency could be determined and appropriate cost saving measures implemented. Model runs forecasting various scenarios helped illustrate potential impacts of certain conditions (e.g. 20% decrease in shipments arrived), variables (e.g. 20% decrease in labor), or other possible situations. (authors)

  11. Advanced Fuel Cycle Treatment, Recycling, and Disposal of Nuclear Waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Collins, Emory D [ORNL; Jubin, Robert Thomas [ORNL; DelCul, Guillermo D [ORNL; Spencer, Barry B [ORNL; Renier, John-Paul [ORNL

    2009-01-01

    Nuclear waste, in the form of used and spent nuclear fuel, is currently being stored in the U.S., mostly at reactor sites to await future direct disposal or treatment to permit recycle of re-usable components and minimization of wastes requiring geologic disposal. The used fuel is currently accumulating at a rate of over 2,000 tons per year and a total of over 60,000 tons is in storage. New dry storage capacity is estimated to cost {approx} $0.6 B per year. Technologies have been developed and deployed worldwide to treat only a portion of the nuclear waste that is generated. Recent research, development, and systems analysis studies have shown that nuclear waste treatment could be done at the rate of generation in a safe, environmentally friendly, and cost-effective manner. These studies continue to show that major benefits can be obtained by allowing the used fuel assemblies to remain in safe storage for 30 years or longer before treatment. During this time, the radioactivity and decay heat generation decrease substantially, such that the separations process can be simplified and made less costly, waste gases containing {sup 85}Kr can be released below regulatory limits, and the solid fission product wastes containing {sup 137}Cs and {sup 90}Sr require decay storage for a much shorter time-period before geologic disposal. In addition, the need for separating curium from americium and for extra purification cycles for the uranium and uranium-plutonium-neptunium products is greatly diminished. Moreover, during the 30+ years of storage prior to treatment, the quality of the recyclable fuel is only degraded by less than 5 percent. The 30+ year storage period also enables recycle of long-lived transuranic actinides to be accomplished in existing light water reactors without waiting on and incurring the cost of the development, licensing, and deployment of future Gen IV reactors. Overall, the safety, environmental, and cost benefits of treating the longer aged used nuclear wastes are substantial.

  12. Construction, Startup and Operation of a New LLRW Disposal Facility in Andrews County, Texas - 12151

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Van Vliet, James A. [Waste Control Specialists LLC, Andrews County, Texas (United States)

    2012-07-01

    During this last year, Waste Control Specialists LLC (WCS) completed construction and achieved start of operations of a new low level radioactive waste (LLRW) disposal facility in Andrews County Texas. Disposal operations are underway for commercial LLRW, and start up evolutions are in progress for disposal of Department of Energy (DOE) LLRW. The overall approach to construction and start up are presented as well as some of the more significant challenges and how they were addressed to achieve initial operations of the first new commercial low level radioactive waste disposal facility in more than 30 years. The WCS disposal facility consists of two LLRW disposal cells, one for Texas Compact waste, and a separate disposal cell for DOE waste. Both disposal cells have very robust and unique designs. The cells themselves are constructed entirely in very low permeability red bed clay. The cell liners include a 0.91 meter thick clay liner meeting unprecedented permeability limits, 0.3 meter thick reinforced concrete barriers, as well as the standard geo-synthetic liners. Actions taken to meet performance criteria and install these liners will be discussed. Consistent with this highly protective landfill design, WCS chose to install a zero discharge site water management system. The considerations behind the design and construction of this system will be presented. Other activities essential to successful start of LLRW disposal operations included process and procedure development and refinement, staffing and staff development, and training. Mock ups were built and used for important evolutions and functions. Consistent with the extensive regulation of LLRW operations, engagement with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) was continuous and highly interactive. This included daily activity conference calls, weekly coordination calls and numerous topical conference calls and meetings. TCEQ staff and consultants frequently observed specific construction evolutions, such as geological feature mapping of designated excavation faces, disposal cell clay liner installation, disposal cell concrete barrier construction, etc. (author)

  13. Disposal of chemical agents and munitions stored at Anniston Army Depot, Anniston, Alabama

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hunsaker, D.B. Jr.; Zimmerman, G.P.; Hillsman, E.L.; Miller, R.L.; Schoepfle, G.M.; Johnson, R.O.; Tolbert, V.R.; Kroodsma, R.L.; Rickert, L.W.; Rogers, G.O.; Staub, W.P.

    1990-09-01

    The purpose of this Phase I report is to examined the proposed implementation of on-site disposal at Anniston Army Depot (ANAD) in light of more detailed and more recent data than those included in the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (EPEIS). Two principal issues are addressed: (1) whether or not the new data would result in identification of on-site disposal at ANAD as the environmentally preferred alternative (using the same selection method and data analysis tools as in the FPEIS), and (2) whether or not the new data indicate the presence of significant environmental resources that could be affected by on-site disposal at ANAD. In addition, a status report is presented on the maturity of the disposal technology (and now it could affect on-site disposal at ANAD). Inclusion of these more recent data into the FPEIS decision method resulted in confirmation of on-site disposal for ANAD. No unique resources with the potential to prevent or delay implementation of on-site disposal at ANAD have been identified. A review of the technology status identified four principal technology developments that have occurred since publication of the FPEIS and should be of value in the implementation of on-site disposal at ANAD: the disposal of nonlethal agent at Pine Bluff Arsenal, located near Pine Bluff, Arkansas; construction and testing of facilities for disposal of stored lethal agent at Johnston Atoll, located about 1300 km (800 miles) southwest of Hawaii in the Pacific Ocean; lethal agent disposal tests at the chemical agent pilot plant operations at Tooele Army Depot, located near Salt Lake City, Utah; and equipment advances. 18 references, 13 figs., 10 tabs.

  14. Risk assessment of landfill disposal sites - State of the art

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Butt, Talib E. Lockley, Elaine; Oduyemi, Kehinde O.K.

    2008-07-01

    A risk assessment process can assist in drawing a cost-effective compromise between economic and environmental costs, thereby assuring that the philosophy of 'sustainable development' is adhered to. Nowadays risk analysis is in wide use to effectively manage environmental issues. Risk assessment is also applied to other subjects including health and safety, food, finance, ecology and epidemiology. The literature review of environmental risk assessments in general and risk assessment approaches particularly regarding landfill disposal sites undertaken by the authors, reveals that an integrated risk assessment methodology for landfill gas, leachate or degraded waste does not exist. A range of knowledge gaps is discovered in the literature reviewed to date. From the perspective of landfill leachate, this paper identifies the extent to which various risk analysis aspects are absent in the existing approaches.

  15. Optical ordance system for use in explosive ordnance disposal activities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Merson, J.A.; Salas, F.J.; Helsel, F.M.

    1994-01-01

    A portable hand-held solid state rod laser system and an optically-ignited detonator have been developed for use in explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) activities. Laser prototypes from Whittaker Ordnance and Universal Propulsion have been tested and evaluated. The optical detonator contains 2-(5 cyanotetrazolato) pentaamine cobalt III perchlorate (CP) as the DDT column and the explosive Octahydro 1, 3, 5, 7 -- tetranitro -- 1, 3, 5, 7 -- tetrazocine (HMX) as the output charge. The laser is designed to have an output of 150 mJ in a 500 microsecond pulse. This output allows firing through 2000 meters of optical fiber. The detonator can also be ignited with a portable laser diode source through a shorter length of fiber.

  16. Ridge station eases Florida's waste-disposal problems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Swanekamp, R.

    1994-10-01

    Two results of Florida's continuing population growth are (1) a critical need for electricity, and (2) a solid-waste disposal crisis. During a recent winter cold snap, electric demand in one service territory surged 25% over generating capacity and 10% over net system capability. Rolling blackouts ensued. At the same time, Florida's fragile wetlands environment is suffering from years of unfettered development. Groundwater sources are contaminated, landfill space is scarce, and illegal tire dumps blight the landscape. The recently constructed Ridge generating station in Polk County, Fla. is addressing both the state's electrical and environmental needs. Ridge, which entered commercial operation in May, burns a unique mix of urban woodwaste and scrap tires to provide 45 MW of critically needed electricity while keeping large quantities of solid waste out of landfills. When pipeline construction at an adjacent landfill is completed, the facility also will burn the methane gases produced when garbage decomposes.

  17. Probabilistic Modeling of Settlement Risk at Land Disposal Facilities - 12304

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Foye, Kevin C.; Soong, Te-Yang

    2012-07-01

    The long-term reliability of land disposal facility final cover systems - and therefore the overall waste containment - depends on the distortions imposed on these systems by differential settlement/subsidence. The evaluation of differential settlement is challenging because of the heterogeneity of the waste mass (caused by inconsistent compaction, void space distribution, debris-soil mix ratio, waste material stiffness, time-dependent primary compression of the fine-grained soil matrix, long-term creep settlement of the soil matrix and the debris, etc.) at most land disposal facilities. Deterministic approaches to long-term final cover settlement prediction are not able to capture the spatial variability in the waste mass and sub-grade properties which control differential settlement. An alternative, probabilistic solution is to use random fields to model the waste and sub-grade properties. The modeling effort informs the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of land disposal facilities. A probabilistic method to establish design criteria for waste placement and compaction is introduced using the model. Random fields are ideally suited to problems of differential settlement modeling of highly heterogeneous foundations, such as waste. Random fields model the seemingly random spatial distribution of a design parameter, such as compressibility. When used for design, the use of these models prompts the need for probabilistic design criteria. It also allows for a statistical approach to waste placement acceptance criteria. An example design evaluation was performed, illustrating the use of the probabilistic differential settlement simulation methodology to assemble a design guidance chart. The purpose of this design evaluation is to enable the designer to select optimal initial combinations of design slopes and quality control acceptance criteria that yield an acceptable proportion of post-settlement slopes meeting some design minimum. For this specific example, relative density, which can be determined through field measurements, was selected as the field quality control parameter for waste placement. This technique can be extended to include a rigorous performance-based methodology using other parameters (void space criteria, debris-soil mix ratio, pre-loading, etc.). As shown in this example, each parameter range, or sets of parameter ranges can be selected such that they can result in an acceptable, long-term differential settlement according to the probabilistic model. The methodology can also be used to re-evaluate the long-term differential settlement behavior at closed land disposal facilities to identify, if any, problematic facilities so that remedial action (e.g., reinforcement of upper and intermediate waste layers) can be implemented. Considering the inherent spatial variability in waste and earth materials and the need for engineers to apply sound quantitative practices to engineering analysis, it is important to apply the available probabilistic techniques to problems of differential settlement. One such method to implement probability-based differential settlement analyses for the design of landfill final covers has been presented. The design evaluation technique presented is one tool to bridge the gap from deterministic practice to probabilistic practice. (authors)

  18. NEPA Lessons Learned Cumulative Index December 2012 1 DOE NEPA...

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

    0916 Style Guide Sep 009; Dec 0717 Summary, EIS Mar 963 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statements see: Environmental Impact Statements Supplement Analyses Mar 9713; Dec 98...

  19. Memorandum for Federal NEPA Contacts: Emergency Actions and NEPA |

    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 - WAPAEnergy May 28 Webinar toMeeting'UnitedOn March 31, 2011,A

  20. Disposal techniques with energy recovery for scrapped vehicle tires

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sladek, T.A.; Demos, E.K.

    1987-06-01

    The scrap tire disposal problem is serious and widespread. However there are a number of promising management options, especially using the rubber as a supplemental fuel for existing combustors. The most cost-effective approach to dealing with Denver's tire stockpile appears to be shredding to a coarse size range, storing the shreds in a secure area, and marketing the rubber to nearby cement kilns, lime kilns, and boilers. This interim step would greatly reduce the volume of the pile, facilitate the Superfund evaluation, reduce fire and disease hazards, and simplify subsequent materials handling. Further processing to obtain rubber chips or crumbs may also be practical. However the industry and the markets would have to emerge over time. New power plants or pyrolysis facilities would be impeded by the low energy prices in Denver and the need for elaborate pollution controls. Landfilling could be considered as a last resort. Landfilling costs would be minimized if the tires are shredded. Chapter 2 discusses the tire disposal problem and the general options for tire management. Chapter 3 describes the methodology used to analyze Denver's situation and presents the results and conclusions obtained. This includes evaluation of strategies to implement the more promising resource recovery options in the Denver area. Chapter 4 summarizes the lessons learned and identifies impediments and uncertainties that need to be addressed in any future studies. The Appendix contains additional acknowledgments, a list of references, definitions for the acronyms and units used in the text, the agenda for the tire workshop, and a brief description of a stockpile fire near Denver in June 1987. 111 refs., 6 tabs.

  1. Field study of disposed solid wastes from advanced coal processes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-01-01

    Radian Corporation and the North Dakota Energy and Environmental Research Center (EERC) are funded to develop information to be used by private industry and government agencies for managing solid wastes produced by advanced coal combustion processes. This information will be developed by conducting several field studies on disposed wastes from these processes. Data will be collected to characterize these wastes and their interactions with the environments in which they are disposed. Three sites were selected for the field studies: Colorado Ute's fluidized bed combustion (FBC) unit in Nucla, Colorado; Ohio Edison's limestone injection multistage burner (LIMB) retrofit in Lorain, Ohio; and Freeman United's mine site in central Illinois with wastes supplied by the nearby Midwest Grain FBC unit. During the past year, field monitoring and sampling of the four landfill test cases constructed in 1989 and 1991 has continued. Option 1 of the contract was approved last year to add financing for the fifth test case at the Freeman United site. The construction of the Test Case 5 cells is scheduled to begin in November, 1992. Work during this past year has focused on obtaining data on the physical and chemical properties of the landfilled wastes, and on developing a conceptual framework for interpreting this information. Results to date indicate that hydration reactions within the landfilled wastes have had a major impact on the physical and chemical properties of the materials but these reactions largely ceased after the first year, and physical properties have changed little since then. Conditions in Colorado remained dry and no porewater samples were collected. In Ohio, hydration reactions and increases in the moisture content of the waste tied up much of the water initially infiltrating the test cells.

  2. Optimization of Deep Borehole Systems for HLW Disposal

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Driscoll, Michael; Baglietto, Emilio; Buongiorno, Jacopo; Lester, Richard; Brady, Patrick; Arnold, B. W.

    2015-09-09

    This is the final report on a project to update and improve the conceptual design of deep boreholes for high level nuclear waste disposal. The effort was concentrated on application to intact US legacy LWR fuel assemblies, but conducted in a way in which straightforward extension to other waste forms, host rock types and countries was preserved. The reference fuel design version consists of a vertical borehole drilled into granitic bedrock, with the uppermost kilometer serving as a caprock zone containing a diverse and redundant series of plugs. There follows a one to two kilometer waste canister emplacement zone having a hole diameter of approximately 40-50 cm. Individual holes are spaced 200-300 m apart to form a repository field. The choice of verticality and the use of a graphite based mud as filler between the waste canisters and the borehole wall liner was strongly influenced by the expectation that retrievability would continue to be emphasized in US and worldwide repository regulatory criteria. An advanced version was scoped out using zinc alloy cast in place to fill void space inside a disposal canister and its encapsulated fuel assembly. This excludes water and greatly improves both crush resistance and thermal conductivity. However the simpler option of using a sand fill was found adequate and is recommended for near-term use. Thermal-hydraulic modeling of the low permeability and porosity host rock and its small (? 1%) saline water content showed that vertical convection induced by the waste’s decay heat should not transport nuclides from the emplacement zone up to the biosphere atop the caprock. First order economic analysis indicated that borehole repositories should be cost-competitive with shallower mined repositories. It is concluded that proceeding with plans to drill a demonstration borehole to confirm expectations, and to carry out priority experiments, such as retention and replenishment of in-hole water is in order.

  3. LOCAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR WASTE DISPOSAL (BEGBROKE SITE) Landfill (England & Wales) Regulations 2002

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paxton, Anthony T.

    labelled or is inadequately packaged will NOT be accepted. WASTE OIL To dispose of waste oil, please contact Trevor Knibbs (83711) who will arrange for you to bring your oil to the waste oil store. Trevor1 LOCAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR WASTE DISPOSAL (BEGBROKE SITE) Landfill (England & Wales) Regulations 2002

  4. Graphene sheets fabricated from disposable paper cups as a catalyst support material for fuel cells

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Zhao, Tianshou

    Graphene sheets fabricated from disposable paper cups as a catalyst support material for fuel cells Hong Zhao and T. S. Zhao* Disposable paper-cups are used for the formation of graphene sheets with Fe2+ as a catalyst. The proposed synthesis strategy not only enables graphene sheets to be produced in high yield

  5. Sewage disposal in the Musi-River, India: water quality remediation through irrigation infrastructure

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Scott, Christopher

    Sewage disposal in the Musi-River, India: water quality remediation through irrigation + Business Media B.V. 2009 Abstract The disposal of untreated urban sewage in to open water bodies is common. This paper presents a 14 month (December 2003 ­ January 2005) water quality survey which aimed to quantify

  6. Environmental Impact of Wastewater Disposal in the Florida Keys, Monroe County Tom Higginbotham

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Ma, Lena

    University of Florida Soil and Water Science #12;Environmental Impact of Wastewater Disposal in the Florida affecting the normally oligotrophic marine waters. Typical methods of wastewater disposal include large wastewater systems are a cost-effective and long-term option for meeting public health and water quality

  7. Field study of an unconfined dredge spoil disposal area in Galveston Bay, Texas 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Bassi, David Edward

    1973-01-01

    or workboats. The bucket may be either s clamshell, orangepeel or dragline type. Spoil disposal is usually accomplished by dumping the spoil into a hopper barge along- side to be carried away or pumped out to some disposal area. These dredges...

  8. Environmental Health & Safety will help you properly dispose of and recycle your batteries & CFLs regardless

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nicholson, Bruce J.

    Environmental Health & Safety will help you properly dispose of and recycle your batteries & CFLs regardless of type. All batteries (rechargeable or single use) have a finite life span and will eventually need to be properly disposed of and recycled. Many batteries are considered "Hazardous Waste

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Timothy Solack; Carol Mason

    2012-03-01

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

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Fernandez, Eduardo

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

  11. Long-term surveillance plan for the Gunnison, Colorado, disposal site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-05-01

    This long-term surveillance plan (LTSP) describes the U.S. Department of Energy`s (DOE) long-term care program for the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project Gunnison disposal site in Gunnison County, Colorado. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has developed regulations for the issuance of a general license for the custody and long-term care of UMTRA Project disposal sites in 10 CFR Part 40. The purpose of this general license is to ensure that the UMTRA Project disposal sites will be cared for in a manner that protects the public health and safety and the environment. For each disposal site to be licensed, the NRC requires the DOE to submit a site-specific LTSP. The DOE prepared this LTSP to meet this requirement for the Gunnison disposal site. The general license becomes effective when the NRC concurs with the DOE`s determination of completion of remedial action for the Gunnison site and the NRC formally accepts this LTSP. This LTSP describes the long-term surveillance program the DOE will implement to ensure that the Gunnison disposal site performs as designed. The program is based on two distinct activities: (1) site inspections to identify threats to disposal cell integrity, and (2) ground water monitoring to demonstrate disposal cell performance. The LTSP is based on the UMTRA Project long-term surveillance program guidance and meets the requirements of 10 CFR {section}40.27(b) and 40 CFR {section}192.03.

  12. Long-term surveillance plan for the Gunnison, Colorado, disposal site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-02-01

    This long-term surveillance plan (LTSP) describes the U.S. Department of Energy`s (DOE) long-term care program for the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project Gunnison disposal site in Gunnison County, Colorado. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has developed regulations for the issuance of a general license for the custody and long-term care of UMTRA Project disposal sites in 10 CFR Part 40. The purpose of this general license is to ensure that the UMTRA Project disposal sites will be cared for in a manner that protects the public health and safety and the environment. For each disposal site to be licensed, the NRC requires the DOE to submit a site-specific LTSP. The DOE prepared this LTSP to meet this requirement for the Gunnison disposal site. The general license becomes effective when the NRC concurs with the DOE`s determination of completion of remedial action for the Gunnison site and the NRC formally accepts this LTSP. This LTSP describes the long-term surveillance program the DOE will implement to ensure that the Gunnison disposal site performs as designed. The program is based on two distinct activities: (1) site inspections to identify threats to disposal cell integrity, and (2) ground water monitoring to demonstrate disposal cell performance. The LTSP is based on the UMTRA Project long-term surveillance program guidance and meets the requirements of 10 CFR {section}40.27(b) and 40 CFR {section}192.03.

  13. Long-term surveillance plan for the Gunnison, Colorado disposal site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-04-01

    This long-term surveillance plan (LTSP) describes the U.S. Department of Energy`s (DOE) long-term care program for the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project Gunnison disposal site in Gunnison County, Colorado. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has developed regulations for the issuance of a general license for the custody and long-term care of UMTRA Project disposal sites in 10 CFR Part 40. The purpose of this general license is to ensure that the UMTRA Project disposal sites will be cared for in a manner that protects the public health and safety and the environment. For each disposal site to be licensed, the NRC requires the DOE to submit a site-specific LTSP. The DOE prepared this LTSP to meet this requirement for the Gunnison disposal site. The general license becomes effective when the NRC concurs with the DOE`s determination of completion of remedial action for the Gunnison site and the NRC formally accepts this LTSP. This LTSP describes the long-term surveillance program the DOE will implement to ensure that the Gunnison disposal site performs as designed. The program is based on two distinct activities: (1) site inspections to identify threats to disposal cell integrity, and (2) ground water monitoring to demonstrate disposal cell performance. The LTSP is based on the UMTRA Project long-term surveillance program guidance and meets the requirements of 10 CFR {section}40.27(b) and 40 CFR {section}192.03.

  14. Energy Disposal in the O3 P + HCl Reaction: Classical Dynamics and Comparison

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Ramachandran, Bala (Ramu)

    Energy Disposal in the O3 P + HCl Reaction: Classical Dynamics and Comparison to Experiment B The energy disposal in the O3 P + HClv = 2;j = 1;6;9 ! OHv0;j0 + Cl reaction is analyzed using the results distributions. A careful examination of several reactive trajectories suggests that a a direct abstraction mecha

  15. Correlated energy disposal and scattering dynamics of the Cl CD4(m3 2) reaction

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Zare, Richard N.

    Correlated energy disposal and scattering dynamics of the Cl þ CD4(m3 ¼ 2) reaction HANS A-of-flight spectrometer. After preparing the first overtone of the antisymmetric stretch (3 ¼ 2) with direct IR excitation to the stretch­bend combination (11 121 1) band. The product correlated energy disposal and the scattering

  16. ASSESSING GHG EMISSIONS FROM SLUDGE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL ROUTES THE METHOD BEHIND GESTABOUES TOOL

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Boyer, Edmond

    stakeholders to better understand the carbon footprint of sludge treatment and disposal options, we developed by a wastewater treatment plant of x per-captia-equivalents (PCE) during one year. The carbon footprint method we developed is adapted to sludge treatment and disposal processes and based on the "Bilan Carbone® " method

  17. Offsite commercial disposal of oil and gas exploration and production waste :availability, options, and cost.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Puder, M. G.; Veil, J. A.

    2006-09-05

    A survey conducted in 1995 by the American Petroleum Institute (API) found that the U.S. exploration and production (E&P) segment of the oil and gas industry generated more than 149 million bbl of drilling wastes, almost 18 billion bbl of produced water, and 21 million bbl of associated wastes. The results of that survey, published in 2000, suggested that 3% of drilling wastes, less than 0.5% of produced water, and 15% of associated wastes are sent to offsite commercial facilities for disposal. Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne) collected information on commercial E&P waste disposal companies in different states in 1997. While the information is nearly a decade old, the report has proved useful. In 2005, Argonne began collecting current information to update and expand the data. This report describes the new 2005-2006 database and focuses on the availability of offsite commercial disposal companies, the prevailing disposal methods, and estimated disposal costs. The data were collected in two phases. In the first phase, state oil and gas regulatory officials in 31 states were contacted to determine whether their agency maintained a list of permitted commercial disposal companies dedicated to oil. In the second stage, individual commercial disposal companies were interviewed to determine disposal methods and costs. The availability of offsite commercial disposal companies and facilities falls into three categories. The states with high oil and gas production typically have a dedicated network of offsite commercial disposal companies and facilities in place. In other states, such an infrastructure does not exist and very often, commercial disposal companies focus on produced water services. About half of the states do not have any industry-specific offsite commercial disposal infrastructure. In those states, operators take their wastes to local municipal landfills if permitted or haul the wastes to other states. This report provides state-by-state summaries of the types of offsite commercial disposal facilities that are found in each state. In later sections, data are presented by waste type and then by disposal method.

  18. DESIGN ANALYSIS FOR THE DEFENSE HIGH-LEVEL WASTE DISPOSAL CONTAINER

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    G. Radulesscu; J.S. Tang

    2000-06-07

    The purpose of ''Design Analysis for the Defense High-Level Waste Disposal Container'' analysis is to technically define the defense high-level waste (DHLW) disposal container/waste package using the Waste Package Department's (WPD) design methods, as documented in ''Waste Package Design Methodology Report'' (CRWMS M&O [Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System Management and Operating Contractor] 2000a). The DHLW disposal container is intended for disposal of commercial high-level waste (HLW) and DHLW (including immobilized plutonium waste forms), placed within disposable canisters. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-managed spent nuclear fuel (SNF) in disposable canisters may also be placed in a DHLW disposal container along with HLW forms. The objective of this analysis is to demonstrate that the DHLW disposal container/waste package satisfies the project requirements, as embodied in Defense High Level Waste Disposal Container System Description Document (SDD) (CRWMS M&O 1999a), and additional criteria, as identified in Waste Package Design Sensitivity Report (CRWMS M&Q 2000b, Table 4). The analysis briefly describes the analytical methods appropriate for the design of the DHLW disposal contained waste package, and summarizes the results of the calculations that illustrate the analytical methods. However, the analysis is limited to the calculations selected for the DHLW disposal container in support of the Site Recommendation (SR) (CRWMS M&O 2000b, Section 7). The scope of this analysis is restricted to the design of the codisposal waste package of the Savannah River Site (SRS) DHLW glass canisters and the Training, Research, Isotopes General Atomics (TRIGA) SNF loaded in a short 18-in.-outer diameter (OD) DOE standardized SNF canister. This waste package is representative of the waste packages that consist of the DHLW disposal container, the DHLW/HLW glass canisters, and the DOE-managed SNF in disposable canisters. The intended use of this analysis is to support Site Recommendation reports and to assist in the development of WPD drawings. Activities described in this analysis were conducted in accordance with the Development Plan ''Design Analysis for the Defense High-Level Waste Disposal Container'' (CRWMS M&O 2000c) with no deviations from the plan.

  19. Long-term surveillance plan for the Shiprock disposal site, Shiprock, New Mexico

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-12-01

    The long-term surveillance plan (LTSP) for the Shiprock, New Mexico, Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project disposal site describes the surveillance activities for the Shiprock disposal cell. The US Department of Energy (DOE) will carry out these activities to ensure that the disposal cell continues to function as designed. This final LTSP is being submitted to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) as a requirement for issuance of a general license for custody and long-term care for the disposal site. The general license requires that the disposal cell be cared for in accordance with the provisions of this LTSP. This Shiprock, New Mexico, LTSP documents whether the land and interests are owned by the US or an Indian tribe and describes in detail the long-term care program through the UMTRA Project Office.

  20. Long-term surveillance plan for the Collins Ranch Disposal Site, Lakeview, Oregon. Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-12-01

    This long-term surveillance plan (LTSP) for the Lakeview, Oregon, Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project disposal site describes the surveillance activities for the Lakeview (Collins Ranch) disposal cell, which will be referred to as the Collins Ranch disposal cell throughout this document. The US Department of Energy (DOE) will carry out these activities to ensure that the disposal cell continues to function as designed. This final LTSP was prepared as a requirement for acceptance under the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) general license for custody and long-term care of residual radioactive materials. This LTSP documents whether the land and interests are owned by the United States or an Indian tribe, and details how the long-term care of the disposal site will be carried out. It is based on the DOE`s Guidance for Implementing the UMTRA Project Long-term Surveillance Program (DOE, 1992a).

  1. Final long-term surveillance plan for the Spook, Wyoming, disposal site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1993-01-01

    A general license for the custody and long-term care of DOE Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project permanent disposal sites was issued by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and became effective on November 29, 1990. The general license will be in effect for a specific disposal site when the NRC accepts the disposal site`s long-term surveillance plan (LTSP) and concurs that remedial action is complete at that site. This document describes in detail the long-term surveillance activities for the Spook, Wyoming, disposal site, including monitoring, maintenance, and emergency measures necessary to fulfill the conditions of the general license, and to ensure that the disposal cell continues to comply with the UMTRA design standards.

  2. Conceptual Design Report for Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; David Duncan; Joan Connolly; Margaret Hinman; Charles Marcinkiewicz; Gary Mecham

    2010-10-01

    This conceptual design report addresses development of replacement remote-handled low-level waste disposal capability for the Idaho National Laboratory. Current disposal capability at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex is planned until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This conceptual design report includes key project assumptions; design options considered in development of the proposed onsite disposal facility (the highest ranked alternative for providing continued uninterrupted remote-handled low level waste disposal capability); process and facility descriptions; safety and environmental requirements that would apply to the proposed facility; and the proposed cost and schedule for funding, design, construction, and operation of the proposed onsite disposal facility.

  3. Conceptual Design Report for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego; David Duncan; Joan Connolly; Margaret Hinman; Charles Marcinkiewicz; Gary Mecham

    2011-03-01

    This conceptual design report addresses development of replacement remote-handled low-level waste disposal capability for the Idaho National Laboratory. Current disposal capability at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex is planned until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This conceptual design report includes key project assumptions; design options considered in development of the proposed onsite disposal facility (the highest ranked alternative for providing continued uninterrupted remote-handled low level waste disposal capability); process and facility descriptions; safety and environmental requirements that would apply to the proposed facility; and the proposed cost and schedule for funding, design, construction, and operation of the proposed onsite disposal facility.

  4. An Assessment of the Disposal of Petroleum Industry NORM in Nonhazardous Landfills

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Arnish, John J.; Blunt, Deborah, L.; Haffenden, Rebecca A.; Herbert, Jennifer; Pfingston, Manjula; Smith, Karen P.; Williams, Gustavious P.

    1999-10-12

    In this study, the disposal of radium-bearing NORM wastes in nonhazardous landfills in accordance with the MDEQ guidelines was modeled to evaluate potential radiological doses and resultant health risks to workers and the general public. In addition, the study included an evaluation of the potential doses and health risks associated with disposing of a separate NORM waste stream generated by the petroleum industry--wastes containing lead-210 (Pb-210) and its progeny. Both NORM waste streams are characterized in Section 3 of this report. The study also included reviews of (1) the regulatory constraints applicable to the disposal of NORM in nonhazardous landfills in several major oil and gas producing states (Section 2) and (2) the typical costs associated with disposing of NORM, covering disposal options currently permitted by most state regulations as well as the nonhazardous landfill option (Section 4).

  5. Conceptual Design Report for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    David Duncan

    2011-05-01

    This conceptual design report addresses development of replacement remote-handled low-level waste disposal capability for the Idaho National Laboratory. Current disposal capability at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex is planned until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This conceptual design report includes key project assumptions; design options considered in development of the proposed onsite disposal facility (the highest ranked alternative for providing continued uninterrupted remote-handled low level waste disposal capability); process and facility descriptions; safety and environmental requirements that would apply to the proposed facility; and the proposed cost and schedule for funding, design, construction, and operation of the proposed onsite disposal facility.

  6. NEPA Documentation | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergy AEnergy Managing SwimmingMicrosoft The basics of05/24/2011 |guidance on

  7. NEPA History | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergy AEnergy Managing SwimmingMicrosoft The basics of05/24/2011 |guidance

  8. NEPA Implementation | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity of Natural GasAdjustmentsShirleyEnergy AEnergy Managing SwimmingMicrosoft The basics of05/24/2011 |guidancethe

  9. NEPA | OpenEI Community

    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 Inc Jump to: navigation,Mereg GmbHMontebalitoMtMxEnergyDatabaseNEONEPA Home

  10. Considering Cumulative Effects under NEPA

    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) AugustA. Geographic Available for saleCHAPTER

  11. OpenEI Community - NEPA

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on QA:QA J-E-1 SECTION J APPENDIXsourceII Jump to:InformationInformationOorjaen TheGeothermalCostmaintenance

  12. NEPA - Categorical Exclusions - Hanford Site

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity ofkandz-cm11 Outreach Home Room NewsInformationJessework usesof Energy Moving Forward tocomponent NASANCAR/NCLDocuments

  13. NEPA - Environmental Assessments - Hanford Site

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Homesum_a_epg0_fpd_mmcf_m.xls" ,"Available from WebQuantity ofkandz-cm11 Outreach Home Room NewsInformationJessework usesof Energy Moving Forward tocomponent

  14. NEPA Updates | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE: Alternative Fuelsof EnergyApril 2014 |DepartmentMultimedia and PhotosMyBlog

  15. Numerical simulation of hydrothermal salt separation process and analysis and cost estimating of shipboard liquid waste disposal

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Hunt, Andrew Robert

    2007-01-01

    Due to environmental regulations, waste water disposal for US Navy ships has become a requirement which impacts both operations and the US Navy's budget. In 2006, the cost for waste water disposal Navy-wide was 54 million ...

  16. Revised 21/2/12 The University produces and disposes of significant quantities of waste each year, for example during the 2005/06 we disposed of 1284 tonnes

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Oakley, Jeremy

    on disposal Batteries The law bans the disposal of all batteries (both wet and dry cell) in landfill or by incineration. This means that batteries must not be disposed of in the general waste; instead they must battery recycling scheme. This guidance relates to dry cell batteries. ScHARR method. You can take your

  17. Methods for verifying compliance with low-level radioactive waste acceptance criteria

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1993-09-01

    This report summarizes the methods that are currently employed and those that can be used to verify compliance with low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal facility waste acceptance criteria (WAC). This report presents the applicable regulations representing the Federal, State, and site-specific criteria for accepting LLW. Typical LLW generators are summarized, along with descriptions of their waste streams and final waste forms. General procedures and methods used by the LLW generators to verify compliance with the disposal facility WAC are presented. The report was written to provide an understanding of how a regulator could verify compliance with a LLW disposal facility`s WAC. A comprehensive study of the methodology used to verify waste generator compliance with the disposal facility WAC is presented in this report. The study involved compiling the relevant regulations to define the WAC, reviewing regulatory agency inspection programs, and summarizing waste verification technology and equipment. The results of the study indicate that waste generators conduct verification programs that include packaging, classification, characterization, and stabilization elements. The current LLW disposal facilities perform waste verification steps on incoming shipments. A model inspection and verification program, which includes an emphasis on the generator`s waste application documentation of their waste verification program, is recommended. The disposal facility verification procedures primarily involve the use of portable radiological survey instrumentation. The actual verification of generator compliance to the LLW disposal facility WAC is performed through a combination of incoming shipment checks and generator site audits.

  18. Application for Permit to Operate a Class III Solid Waste Disposal Site at the Nevada Test Site - U10c Disposal Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Programs

    2010-08-05

    The NTS is located approximately 105 km (65 mi) northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. NNSA/NSO is the federal lands management authority for the NTS and NSTec is the Management & Operations contractor. Access on and off the NTS is tightly controlled, restricted, and guarded on a 24-hour basis. The NTS is posted with signs along its entire perimeter. NSTec is the operator of all solid waste disposal sites on the NTS. The U10C Disposal Site is located in the northwest corner of Area 9 at the NTS (Figure 1) and is located in a subsidence crater created by two underground nuclear events, one in October 1962 and another in April 1964. The disposal site opened in 1971 for the disposal of rubbish, refuse, pathological waste, asbestos-containing material, and industrial solid waste. A Notice of Intent form to operate the disposal site as a Class II site was submitted to the state of Nevada on January 26, 1994, and was acknowledged in a letter to the DOE on February 8, 1994. It operated as a state of Nevada Class II Solid Waste Disposal Site (SWDS) until it closed on October 5, 1995, for retrofit as a Class III SWDS. The retrofit consisted of the installation of a minimum four-foot compacted soil layer to segregate the different waste types and function as a liner to inhibit leachate and water flow into the lower waste zone. Five neutron monitoring tubes were installed in this layer to monitor possible leachate production and water activity. Upon acceptance of the installed barrier and approval of an Operating Plan by NDEP/BFF, the site reopened in January 1996 as a Class III SWDS for the disposal of industrial solid waste and other inert waste.

  19. GAO-15-305, DOE Real Property, Better Data and a More Proactive Approach Needed to Facilitate Property Disposal

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    GAO-15-305, DOE Real Property, Better Data and a More Proactive Approach Needed to Facilitate Property Disposal

  20. Long-term surveillance plan for the Cheney disposal site near Grand Junction, Colorado

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-04-01

    This long-term surveillance plan (LTSP) describes the U.S. Department of Energy`s (DOE) long-term care program for the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project Cheney disposal site. The site is in Mesa County near Grand Junction, Colorado. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has developed regulations for the issuance of a general license for the custody and long-term care of UMTRA Project disposal sites in 10 CFR Part 40. The purpose of this general license is to ensure that the UMTRA Project disposal sites are cared for in a manner that protects public health and safety and the environment. Before each disposal site may be licensed, the NRC requires the DOE to submit a site-specific LTSP. The DOE prepared this LTSP to meet this requirement for the Cheney disposal site. The general license becomes effective when the NRC concurs with the DOE`s determination that remedial action is complete and the NRC formally accepts this plan. This document describes the long-term surveillance program the DOE will implement to ensure that the Cheney disposal site performs as designed. The program is based on site inspections to identify potential threats to disposal cell integrity. The LTSP is based on the UMTRA Project long-term surveillance program guidance and meets the requirements of 10 CFR {section}40.27(b) and 40 CFR {section}192.03.