National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for national level revisions

  1. High Level Waste System Plan Revision 9

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Davis, N.R.; Wells, M.N.; Choi, A.S.; Paul, P.; Wise, F.E.

    1998-04-01

    Revision 9 of the High Level Waste System Plan documents the current operating strategy of the HLW System at SRS to receive, store, treat, and dispose of high-level waste.

  2. Level: National Data;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    .5 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2006; Level: National Data; Row: Energy Sources and Shipments, including Further Classification of 'Other' Energy Sources; Column: First Use per Energy Sources and Shipments; Unit: Trillion Btu. Total Energy Source First Use Total United States Coal 1,433 Natural Gas 5,911 Net Electricity 2,851 Purchases 2,894 Transfers In 20 Onsite Generation from Noncombustible Renewable Energy 4 Sales and Transfers Offsite 67 Coke and Breeze 272

  3. Revised Propane Stock Levels for 6/7/13

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Revised Propane Stock Levels for 6713 Release Date: June 19, 2013 Following the release of the Weekly Petroleum Status Report (WPSR) for the week ended June 7, 2013, EIA...

  4. 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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cushing, C.E.; Baker, D.A.; Chamness, M.A.

    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.

  7. IAEA Information Circular 225 Revision 5: Fact Sheet | National Nuclear

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Security Administration IAEA Information Circular 225 Revision 5: Fact Sheet | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Library Bios Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases

  8. Reflecting the Revised PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard...

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

    Reflecting the Revised PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard in NEPA Evaluations Reflecting the Revised PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard in NEPA Evaluations This...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cushing, C.E.

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Neitzel, D.A.; Bjornstad, B.N.; Fosmire, C.J.

    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.

  11. Reflecting the Revised PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard in NEPA

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Evaluations | Department of Energy Reflecting the Revised PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard in NEPA Evaluations Reflecting the Revised PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard in NEPA Evaluations This letter, from the Director of the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Federal Activities, outlines EPA's position as to how the revised National Air Quality Standard should be reflected in NEPA evaluations of proposed actions. PDF icon G-EPA-particulate_matter_standard.pdf

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Neitzel, D.A.; Bjornstad, B.N.; Fosmire, C.J.; Fowler, R.A.

    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.

  13. 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.

  14. Revisions

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    U.S. proved reserves of crude oil and lease condensate, crude oil, and lease condensate, 2004-14 million barrels Revisions a Net of Sales b New Reservoir Proved d Change Net and and New Field Discoveries Total c Estimated Reserves from Adjustments Revisions Adjustments Acquisitions Extensions Discoveries in Old Fields Discoveries Production 12/31 Prior Year Year (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) 2004 80 444 524 37 731 36 159 926 2,001 22,592 -514 2005 237 558 795 327 946 209 57 1,212

  15. Revisions

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    proved reserves of natural gas, wet after lease separation, 2001-14 billion cubic feet Revisions a Net of Sales b New Reservoir Proved d Change Net and and New Field Discoveries Total c Estimated Reserves from Adjustments Revisions Adjustments Acquisitions Extensions Discoveries in Old Fields Discoveries Production 12/31 Prior Year Year (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) Total natural gas (billion cubic feet) 2001 1,849 -2,438 -589 2,715 17,183 3,668 2,898 23,749 20,642 191,743 5,233

  16. Nevada National Security Site Integrated Groundwater Sampling Plan, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Marutzky, Sam; Farnham, Irene

    2014-10-01

    The purpose of the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) Integrated Sampling Plan (referred to herein as the Plan) is to provide a comprehensive, integrated approach for collecting and analyzing groundwater samples to meet the needs and objectives of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) Underground Test Area (UGTA) Activity. Implementation of this Plan will provide high-quality data required by the UGTA Activity for ensuring public protection in an efficient and cost-effective manner. The Plan is designed to ensure compliance with the UGTA Quality Assurance Plan (QAP). The Plan’s scope comprises sample collection and analysis requirements relevant to assessing the extent of groundwater contamination from underground nuclear testing. This Plan identifies locations to be sampled by corrective action unit (CAU) and location type, sampling frequencies, sample collection methodologies, and the constituents to be analyzed. In addition, the Plan defines data collection criteria such as well-purging requirements, detection levels, and accuracy requirements; identifies reporting and data management requirements; and provides a process to ensure coordination between NNSS groundwater sampling programs for sampling of interest to UGTA. This Plan does not address compliance with requirements for wells that supply the NNSS public water system or wells involved in a permitted activity.

  17. Idaho National Engineering Laboratory installation roadmap document. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-05-30

    The roadmapping process was initiated by the US Department of Energy`s office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management (EM) to improve its Five-Year Plan and budget allocation process. Roadmap documents will provide the technical baseline for this planning process and help EM develop more effective strategies and program plans for achieving its long-term goals. This document is a composite of roadmap assumptions and issues developed for the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) by US Department of Energy Idaho Field Office and subcontractor personnel. The installation roadmap discusses activities, issues, and installation commitments that affect waste management and environmental restoration activities at the INEL. The High-Level Waste, Land Disposal Restriction, and Environmental Restoration Roadmaps are also included.

  18. National Ignition Facility project acquisition plan revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Clobes, A.R.

    1996-10-01

    The purpose of this National Ignition Facility Acquisition Plan is to describe the overall procurement strategy planned for the National Ignition Facility M Project. It was prepared for the NIP Prood Office by the NIF Procurement Manager.

  19. Future scientists advance to national level

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

    Future scientists advance to national level Future scientists advance to DOE national competition A team from Los Alamos bested 39 other teams from around New Mexico in the 10-hour New Mexico Regional Science Bowl. April 3, 2012 Members of the Los Alamos High School Science Bowl Team Members of the Los Alamos High School Science Bowl Team were in Washington DC after their regional win, representing New Mexico in the 22nd Annual Department of Energy (DOE) National Science Bowl. Contact Kathy

  20. Operating Experience Level 3, OSHA's Revised Hazard Communication...

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

    Publications Hazard Communication Training - Upcoming Implementation Date for New Hazard Communication Standard Operating Experience Level 3, Safe Management of Mercury...

  1. Oak Ridge National Laboratory Waste Management Plan. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Forgy, Jr., J. R.

    1991-12-01

    The goal of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Waste Management Program is the protection of workers, the public, and the environment. A vital aspect of this goal is to comply with all applicable state, federal, and DOE requirements. Waste management requirements for DOE radioactive wastes are detailed in DOE Order 5820.2A, and the ORNL Waste Management Program encompasses all elements of this order. The requirements of this DOE order and other appropriate DOE orders, along with applicable Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) and US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules and regulations, provide the principal source of regulatory guidance for waste management operations at ORNL. The objective of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Waste Management Plan is to compile and to consolidate information annually on how the ORNL Waste Management is to compile and to consolidate information annually on how the ORNL Waste Management Program is conducted, which waste management facilities are being used to manage wastes, what forces are acting to change current waste management systems, what activities are planned for the forthcoming fiscal year (FY), and how all of the activities are documented.

  2. EA-1442: Final Environmental Assessment, Revised | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Assessment, Revised EA-1442: Final Environmental Assessment, Revised Proposed Construction and Operation of a Biosafety Level 3 Facility at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California Revision The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) of the Department of Energy (DOE) has responsibility for national programs to reduce and counter threats from weapons of mass destruction including nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons (bioweapons). NNSA's bioscience work at

  3. Reflecting the Revised PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard in NEPA Evaluations (EPA, 2007)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This letter, from the Director of the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Federal Activities, outlines EPA's position as to how the revised National Air Quality Standard should be reflected in NEPA evaluations of proposed actions.

  4. Underground Test Area Quality Assurance Project Plan Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Irene Farnham

    2011-05-01

    This Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) provides the overall quality assurance (QA) program requirements and general quality practices to be applied to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) Underground Test Area (UGTA) Sub-Project (hereafter the Sub-Project) activities. The requirements in this QAPP are consistent with DOE Order 414.1C, Quality Assurance (DOE, 2005); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans for Modeling (EPA, 2002); and EPA Guidance on the Development, Evaluation, and Application of Environmental Models (EPA, 2009). The QAPP Revision 0 supersedes DOE--341, Underground Test Area Quality Assurance Project Plan, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision 4.

  5. 2010 Idaho National Laboratory Water Use Report and Comprehensive Well Inventory (Revision 19)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mike Lewis

    2011-06-01

    This 2010 Idaho National Laboratory Water Use Report and Comprehensive Well Inventory (Revision 19) provides water use information (monthly annual average and total annual volume) for production and potable water wells at the Idaho National Laboratory for Calendar Year 2010. It also provides detailed information for new, modified, and abandoned (decommissioned) wells and holes. Five new wells were drilled and completed in the latter part of Calendar Years 2009 and 2010. Two wells were modified in Calendar Year 2010 and 66 wells and boreholes reported as abandoned (decommissioned). Detailed construction information for the new and modified wells, along with abandonment information for older wells, is provided. Location maps are provided if survey information was available. This report is being submitted in accordance with the Water Rights Agreement between the State of Idaho and the United States, for the United States Department of Energy (dated 1990) and the subsequent Partial Decree for Water Right 34-10901 issued June 20, 2003.

  6. 2014 Idaho National Laboratory Water Use Report and Comprehensive Well Inventory (Revision 23)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lewis, Mike

    2015-06-01

    This 2014 Idaho National Laboratory Water Use Report and Comprehensive Well Inventory (Revision 23) provides water use information for production and potable water wells at the Idaho National Laboratory for Calendar Year 2014. It also provides detailed information for new, modified, and decommissioned wells and holes. One new well was drilled and completed in Calendar Year 2014. No modifications were performed on any wells. No wells were decommissioned in Calendar Year 2014. Detailed construction information and a location map for the new well is provided. This report is being submitted in accordance with the Water Rights Agreement between the State of Idaho and the United States, for the United States Department of Energy (dated 1990), the subsequent Partial Decree for Water Right 34-10901 issued June 20, 2003, and the Final Unified Decree issued August 26, 2014.

  7. 2013 Idaho National Laboratory Water Use Report and Comprehensive Well Inventory (Revision 22)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mike Lewis

    2014-06-01

    This 2013 Idaho National Laboratory Water Use Report and Comprehensive Well Inventory (Revision 22) provides water use information for production and potable water wells at the Idaho National Laboratory for Calendar Year 2013. It also provides detailed information for new, modified, and decommissioned wells and holes. Two new wells were drilled and completed in Calendar Year 2013. No modifications were performed on any wells. Seven wells were decommissioned in Calendar Year 2013. Detailed construction information for the new and decommissioned wells is provided. Location maps are included, provided survey information was available. This report is being submitted in accordance with the Water Rights Agreement between the State of Idaho and the United States, for the United States Department of Energy (dated 1990) and the subsequent Partial Decree for Water Right 34-10901 issued June 20, 2003.

  8. Coal Data Publication Revision Policy

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Publication Revision Policy IF this occurs: THEN Survey Manager determines impact: WHAT happens next to the database and in our coal reports: Respondent provides data that are clearly incorrect or revised data for any period in the current reporting year. If National level percentage is > 1%, or If Regional level percentage is > 5%, or If State level percentage is > 10%. Quarterly Coal Report (QCR) and Quarterly Coal Distribution Report (QCDR) will be reposted no further back than the

  9. Underground Test Area Activity Quality Assurance Plan Nevada National Security Site, Nevada. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Farnham, Irene; Krenzien, Susan

    2012-10-01

    This Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) provides the overall quality assurance (QA) requirements and general quality practices to be applied to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) Underground Test Area (UGTA) activities. The requirements in this QAP are consistent with DOE Order 414.1C, Quality Assurance (DOE, 2005); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans for Modeling (EPA, 2002); and EPA Guidance on the Development, Evaluation, and Application of Environmental Models (EPA, 2009). NNSA/NSO, or designee, must review this QAP every two years. Changes that do not affect the overall scope or requirements will not require an immediate QAP revision but will be incorporated into the next revision cycle after identification. Section 1.0 describes UGTA objectives, participant responsibilities, and administrative and management quality requirements (i.e., training, records, procurement). Section 1.0 also details data management and computer software requirements. Section 2.0 establishes the requirements to ensure newly collected data are valid, existing data uses are appropriate, and environmental-modeling methods are reliable. Section 3.0 provides feedback loops through assessments and reports to management. Section 4.0 provides the framework for corrective actions. Section 5.0 provides references for this document.

  10. Underground Test Area Activity Quality Assurance Plan Nevada National Security Site, Nevada. Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Krenzien, Susan; Farnham, Irene

    2015-06-01

    This Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) provides the overall quality assurance (QA) requirements and general quality practices to be applied to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) Underground Test Area (UGTA) activities. The requirements in this QAP are consistent with DOE Order 414.1D, Change 1, Quality Assurance (DOE, 2013a); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans for Modeling (EPA, 2002); and EPA Guidance on the Development, Evaluation, and Application of Environmental Models (EPA, 2009). If a participant’s requirement document differs from this QAP, the stricter requirement will take precedence. NNSA/NFO, or designee, must review this QAP every two years. Changes that do not affect the overall scope or requirements will not require an immediate QAP revision but will be incorporated into the next revision cycle after identification. Section 1.0 describes UGTA objectives, participant responsibilities, and administrative and management quality requirements (i.e., training, records, procurement). Section 1.0 also details data management and computer software requirements. Section 2.0 establishes the requirements to ensure newly collected data are valid, existing data uses are appropriate, and environmental-modeling methods are reliable. Section 3.0 provides feedback loops through assessments and reports to management. Section 4.0 provides the framework for corrective actions. Section 5.0 provides references for this document.

  11. Future scientists advance to national level

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

    for modeling lung cancer. In other news December, 1 2015 - Novel therapy for stomach cancer; grand opening of Manhattan Project National Historical Park; 2015 Northern New...

  12. IEEE 1547 Revision--Will You Be Ready?; NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Preus, Robert

    2015-06-15

    Summary of some of the main new developments being developed for the revised IEEE 1547 distributed generation grid interconnection standard.

  13. Lessons Learned by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Activity-level

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Work Planning & Control | Department of Energy Lessons Learned by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Activity-level Work Planning & Control Lessons Learned by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Activity-level Work Planning & Control May 16, 2013 Presenter: Donna J. Governor, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Topics Covered: Work Control Review Board (WCRB) Functional Area Manager identified at the Institution level reporting directly to the Deputy Laboratory Director

  14. Distribution-Transformer Level Flynn, Eric B. [Los Alamos National

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Taming the Grid: Dynamic Load Composition Quantification at the Distribution-Transformer Level Flynn, Eric B. Los Alamos National Laboratory; Holby, Edward F. Los Alamos...

  15. How to Integrate Climate Change Adaptation into National-Level...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Integrate Climate Change Adaptation into National-Level Policy and Planning in the Water Sector Jump to: navigation, search Tool Summary LAUNCH TOOL Name: How to Integrate Climate...

  16. 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.

  17. The Usefulness of Bi-Level Switching; Original Technical Note: November 1998. Revised August, 1999

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Building Technologies Department

    1998-11-01

    California's Title 24 Energy Efficiency Building Standard requires multiple lighting level control in all individual offices. Usually, this requirement is fulfilled using bi-level switching. With bi-level switching, each office occupant is provided with two wall switches near the doorway to control their lights. In a typical installation, one switch would control 1/3 of the fluorescent lamps in the ceiling lighting system, while the other switch would control the remaining 2/3 of the lamps. This allows four possible light levels: OFF, 1/3, 2/3 and FULL lighting. Because it has been required by building code since 1983, bi-level switching is common in California office buildings. However, there is no published evidence showing that occupants sometimes use just one switch rather than just switching on both switches when entering the room. Consequently, some have questioned whether bi-level switching is a necessary or desirable requirement for typical office buildings. In fact, the draft national standard, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1989K apparently does not require bi-level switching at all.

  18. Underground Test Area Fiscal Year 2012 Annual Quality Assurance Report Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Farnham, Irene; Marutzky, Sam

    2013-01-01

    This report is mandated by the Underground Test Area (UGTA) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) and identifies the UGTA quality assurance (QA) activities for fiscal year (FY) 2012. All UGTA organizations—U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO); Desert Research Institute (DRI); Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL); Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL); Navarro-Intera, LLC (N-I); National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec); and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)—conducted QA activities in FY 2012. The activities included conducting assessments, identifying findings and completing corrective actions, evaluating laboratory performance, revising the QAPP, and publishing documents. In addition, processes and procedures were developed to address deficiencies identified in the FY 2011 QAPP gap analysis.

  19. Groundwater Level Status Report for 2005 Los Alamos National Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S.P. Allen; R.J. Koch

    2006-05-15

    The status of groundwater level monitoring at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in 2005 is provided in this report. The Groundwater Level Monitoring Project was instituted in 2005 to provide a framework for the collection and processing of quality controlled groundwater level data. This report summarizes groundwater level data for 137 monitoring wells, including 41 regional aquifer wells, 22 intermediate wells, and 74 alluvial wells. Pressure transducers were installed in 118 monitoring wells for continuous monitoring of groundwater levels. Time-series hydrographs of groundwater level data are presented along with pertinent construction and location information for each well.

  20. How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (NPS, 1990, revised 1997)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The National Register of Historic Places is the official list of properties recognized to have national, state, or local significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture. To guide the selection of properties included in the National Register, the National Park Service (NPS) has developed the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. This bulletin explains how the NPS applies these criteria in evaluating the wide range of properties that may be significant in local, state, and national history. It should be used by anyone who must decide if a particular property qualifies for the National Register.

  1. Radionuclide concentrations in elk that winter on Los Alamos National Laboratory lands. Revision

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fresquez, P.R.; Armstrong, D.A.; Salazar, J.G.

    1994-07-01

    Elk spend the winter in areas at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) that may contain radioactivity above natural and/or worldwide fallout levels. This study was initiated to determine the levels of {sup 90}Sr, {sup 137}Cs, {sup 238}Pu, {sup 239}Pu, and total uranium in various tissues (brain, hair, heart, jawbone, kidneys, leg bone, liver, and muscle) of adult cow elk that use LANL lands during the fall/winter months. No significant differences in radionuclide contents were detected in any of the tissue samples collected from elk on LANL lands as compared with elk collected from off-site locations. The total effective (radiation) dose equivalent a person would receive from consuming 3.2 lb of heart, 5.6 lb of liver, and 226 lb of muscle from elk that winter on LANL lands, after natural background has been subtracted, was 0.00008, 0.0001, and 0.008 mrem/yr, respectively. The highest dose was less than 0.01% of the International Commission on Radiological Protection permissible dose limit for protecting the public.

  2. LANL Biosafety Level 3 Facility Environmental Impact Statement | National

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Nuclear Security Administration Biosafety Level 3 Facility Environmental Impact Statement | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Library Bios Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters

  3. Revision of species inventory checklists for Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, New Mexico

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fischer, N.T. )

    1990-10-01

    This report revises and updates the 1974 report by W. C. Martin and W. L. Wagner, Biological Survey of Kirtland Air Force Base (East). The biological communities of Kirtland Air Force Base (KAFB) are described with respect to the Biome classification system of Brown (1982), and a standardized system of habitat types is proposed based on biome and soil type. The potential occurrence of state or federally endangered species is discussed. No species listed as endangered or threatened is known to occur on KAFB, although five are identified as potentially occurring. Updated lists of amphibians, reptiles, breeding birds, mammals, and plants are presented. 18 refs., 3 figs., 8 tabs.

  4. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Levels of Price Difference;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Percent of Establishments by Levels of Price Difference that Would Cause Fuel Switching from Coal to a Less Expensive Substitute, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Levels of Price Difference; Unit: Establishment Counts. Would Switch Would Not Estimate to More NAICS Establishments Switch Due 1 to 10 11 to 25 26 to 50 Over 50 Cannot Expensive Code(a) Subsector and Industry Able to Switch(b) to Price Percent Percent Percent Percent Be Provided Substitute Total United States

  5. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0.5 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Residual Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Establishment Counts. Residual Fuel Oil(b) Alternative Energy Sources(c) Coal Coke NAICS Total Establishments Not Electricity Natural Distillate and Code(a) Selected Subsectors and Industry Consuming Residual Fuel Oil(d Switchable Switchable Receipts(e) Gas Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(f) Total United States 311 Food

  6. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Floorspace and Buildings;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    9.1 Enclosed Floorspace and Number of Establishment Buildings, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Floorspace and Buildings; Unit: Floorspace Square Footage and Building Counts. Approximate Approximate Average Enclosed Floorspace Average Number Number of All Buildings Enclosed Floorspace of All Buildings of Buildings Onsite NAICS Onsite Establishments(b) per Establishment Onsite per Establishment Code(a) Subsector and Industry (million sq ft) (counts) (sq ft) (counts) (counts)

  7. " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"

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

    0 Capability to Switch Coal to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002; " " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Thousand Short Tons." ,,"Coal",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,,"RSE" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  8. " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"

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

    2 Capability to Switch LPG to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002; " " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Thousand Barrels." ,,"LPG",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  9. " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"

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

    2 Capability to Switch Natural Gas to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002;" " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Billion Cubic Feet." ,,"Natural Gas",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  10. " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"

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

    4 Capability to Switch Residual Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002;" " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Thousand Barrels." ,,"Residual Fuel Oil",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  11. " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"

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

    6 Capability to Switch Electricity to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002; " " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Million Kilowatthours." ,,"Electricity Receipts",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  12. " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"

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

    8 Capability to Switch Distillate Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002; " " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Thousand Barrels." ,,"Distillate Fuel Oil",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  13. " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"

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

    0 Capability to Switch Coal to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; " " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Thousand Short Tons." ,,"Coal",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  14. " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"

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

    2 Capability to Switch LPG to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; " " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Thousand Barrels." ,,"LPG",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  15. " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"

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

    2 Capability to Switch Natural Gas to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006;" " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Billion Cubic Feet." ,,"Natural Gas",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  16. " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"

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

    4 Capability to Switch Residual Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006;" " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Thousand Barrels." ,,"Residual Fuel Oil",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  17. " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"

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

    6 Capability to Switch Electricity to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; " " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Million Kilowatthours." ,,"Electricity Receipts",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  18. " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"

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

    8 Capability to Switch Distillate Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; " " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Thousand Barrels." ,,"Distillate Fuel Oil",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(b)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  19. " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"

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

    3. Quantity of Purchased Electricity, Natural Gas, and Steam, 1998;" " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Supplier Sources of Purchased Electricity, Natural Gas, and Steam;" " Unit: Physical Units or Btu." ,,,"Electricity","Components",,"Natural Gas","Components",,"Steam","Components" " "," ",,,"Electricity",,,"Natural

  20. Entry-Level Positions | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Entry-Level Positions | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Library Bios Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Photo Gallery Jobs Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at

  1. Working with the National Center of Photovoltaics (NCPV) (Revised) (Fact Sheet)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    2011-06-01

    Capabilities fact sheet for the National Center for Photovoltaics: Working with the National Center for Photovoltaics. One-sided sheet that includes projects in various areas: Technology Pathway Partnerships, CRADAs, Incubator Program, Pre-Incubator Program, Universities, Next-Generation Program, and NREL T&E.

  2. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy Order 461.1B, Packaging and Transportation for Offsite Shipment of Materials of National Security Interest

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

    2015-01-15

    The purpose of this memorandum is to provide justification for the proposed revision of DOE O 461.1B, Packaging and Transportation for Offsite Shipment of Materials of National Security Interest, dated 12-16-2010, as part of the the quadrennial review and recertification as required by DOE O 251.1C, Departmental Directives Program.

  3. Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) Environmental Restoration Program (ERP), Baseline Safety Analysis File (BSAF). Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-06-20

    This document was prepared to take the place of a Safety Evaluation Report since the Baseline Safety Analysis File (BSAF)and associated Baseline Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) File do not meet the requirements of a complete safety analysis documentation. Its purpose is to present in summary form the background of how the BSAF and Baseline TSR originated and a description of the process by which it was produced and approved for use in the Environmental Restoration Program.The BSAF is a facility safety reference document for INEL environmental restoration activities including environmental remediation of inactive waste sites and decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) of surplus facilities. The BSAF contains safety bases common to environmental restoration activities and guidelines for performing and documenting safety analysis. The common safety bases can be incorporated by reference into the safety analysis documentation prepared for individual environmental restoration activities with justification and any necessary revisions. The safety analysis guidelines in BSAF provide an accepted method for hazard analysis; analysis of normal, abnormal, and accident conditions; human factors analysis; and derivation of TSRS. The BSAF safety bases and guidelines are graded for environmental restoration activities.

  4. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Levels of Price Difference;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Next MECS will be fielded in 2015 Table 10.17 Percent of Establishments by Levels of Price Difference that Would Cause Fuel Switching from LPG to a Less Expensive Substitute, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Levels of Price Difference; Unit: Establishment Counts. Would Switch Would Not Estimate to More NAICS Establishments Switch Due 1 to 10 11 to 25 26 to 50 Over 50 Cannot Expensive Code(a) Subsector and Industry Able to Switch(b) to Price Percent Percent Percent Percent

  5. Level: National Data; Row: Employment Sizes within NAICS Codes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: Employment Sizes within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios; Unit: Varies. Consumption Consumption per Dollar Consumption per Dollar of Value NAICS per Employee of Value Added of Shipments Code(a) Economic Characteristic(b) (million Btu) (thousand Btu) (thousand Btu) Total United States 311 - 339 ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES Employment Size Under 50 562.6 4.7 2.4 50-99 673.1 5.1 2.4 100-249 1,072.8 6.5 3.0 250-499 1,564.3

  6. Level: National Data; Row: Employment Sizes within NAICS Codes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: Employment Sizes within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios; Unit: Varies. Consumption Consumption per Dollar Consumption per Dollar of Value NAICS per Employee of Value Added of Shipments Code(a) Economic Characteristic(b) (million Btu) (thousand Btu) (thousand Btu) Total United States 311 - 339 ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES Employment Size Under 50 625.5 3.3 1.7 50-99 882.3 5.8 2.5 100-249 1,114.9 5.8 2.5 250-499 2,250.4

  7. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2.4 Number of Establishments by Nonfuel (Feedstock) Use of Combustible Energy, 2006 Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources Unit: Establishment Counts. Any Combustible NAICS Energy Residual Distillate LPG and Coke Code(a) Subsector and Industry Source(b) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(c) Natural Gas(d) NGL(e) Coal and Breeze Other(f) Total United States 311 Food 183 0 105 38 Q 0 W 8 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 36 0 Q 13 W 0 0 6 311221 Wet Corn Milling W 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 31131 Sugar

  8. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3.4 Number of Establishments by Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources Unit: Establishment Counts. Any NAICS Energy Net Residual Distillate LPG and Coke Code(a) Subsector and Industry Source(b) Electricity(c) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(d) Natural Gas(e) NGL(f) Coal and Breeze Other(g) Total United States 311 Food 14,128 14,113 326 1,462 11,395 2,920 67 13 1,240 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 580 580 15 174 445 269 35 0 148 311221 Wet Corn Milling 47 47 W 17

  9. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2.4 Number of Establishments by Nonfuel (Feedstock) Use of Combustible Energy, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Establishment Counts. Any Combustible NAICS Energy Residual Distillate LPG and Coke Code(a) Subsector and Industry Source(b) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(c) Natural Gas(d) NGL(e) Coal and Breeze Other(f) Total United States 311 Food 592 W Q Q Q 0 0 345 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 85 0 W 15 Q 0 0 57 311221 Wet Corn Milling 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 31131 Sugar

  10. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4.4 Number of Establishments by Offsite-Produced Fuel Consumption, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Establishment Counts. Any NAICS Energy Residual Distillate LPG and Coke Code(a) Subsector and Industry Source(b) Electricity(c) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(d) Natural Gas(e) NGL(f) Coal and Breeze Other(g) Total United States 311 Food 13,269 13,265 144 2,413 10,373 4,039 64 W 1,496 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 602 602 9 201 489 268 30 0 137 311221 Wet Corn

  11. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    1 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Coal to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Establishment Counts. NAICS Total Not Electricity Natural Distillate Residual Code(a) Subsector and Industry Consumed(d) Switchable Switchable Receipts(e) Gas Fuel Oil Fuel Oil LPG Other(f) Total United States 311 Food 67 21 49 W 19 10 W W W 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 35 7 29 W 7 3 0 W W 311221 Wet Corn Milling 18 4 17 0 4 W 0 W

  12. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch LPG to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Establishment Counts. Coal Coke NAICS Total Not Electricity Natural Distillate Residual and Code(a) Subsector and Industry Consumed(d) Switchable Switchable Receipts(e) Gas Fuel Oil Fuel Oil Coal Breeze Other(f) Total United States 311 Food 2,920 325 1,945 171 174 25 W 0 0 15 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 269 36 152 Q Q W W 0 0 W

  13. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Natural Gas to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Establishment Counts. Natural Gas(b) Alternative Energy Sources(c) Coal Coke NAICS Total Not Electricity Distillate Residual and Code(a) Subsector and Industry Consumed(d) Switchable Switchable Receipts(e) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(f) Total United States 311 Food 11,395 1,830 6,388 484 499 245 Q 555 0 203 3112

  14. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Residual Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Establishment Counts. Residual Fuel Oil(b) Alternative Energy Sources(c) Coal Coke NAICS Total Not Electricity Natural Distillate and Code(a) Subsector and Industry Consumed(d) Switchable Switchable Receipts(e) Gas Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(f) Total United States 311 Food 326 178 23 0 150 Q 0 Q 0 W 3112 Grain and

  15. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Electricity to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Establishment Counts. Coal Coke NAICS Total Not Natural Distillate Residual and Code(a) Subsector and Industry Receipts(d) Switchable Switchable Gas Fuel Oil Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(e) Total United States 311 Food 14,109 708 8,259 384 162 0 Q 105 0 84 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 580 27 472 3 Q 0 W W 0 W 311221 Wet

  16. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    9 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Distillate Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Establishment Counts. Coal Coke NAICS Total Not Electricity Natural Residual and Code(a) Subsector and Industry Consumed(d) Switchable Switchable Receipts(e) Gas Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(f) Total United States 311 Food 1,462 276 900 Q 217 8 0 25 0 16 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 174 10 131 W 4 W 0 W 0 W 311221

  17. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    1 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Coal to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Establishment Counts. NAICS Total Establishments Not Electricity Natural Distillate Residual Code(a) Selected Subsectors and Industry Consuming Coal(d) Switchable Switchable Receipts(e) Gas Fuel Oil Fuel Oil LPG Other(f) Total United States 311 Food 64 19 54 0 17 6 W W W 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 30 13 24 0 12 W 0 W W 311221 Wet

  18. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch LPG to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Establishment Counts. Coal Coke NAICS Total Establishments Not Electricity Natural Distillate Residual and Code(a) Selected Subsectors and Industry Consuming LPG(d) Switchable Switchable Receipts(e) Gas Fuel Oil Fuel Oil Coal Breeze Other(f) Total United States 311 Food 4,039 600 2,860 356 221 Q W 0 0 16 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling

  19. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Natural Gas to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Establishment Counts. Natural Gas(b) Alternative Energy Sources(c) Coal Coke NAICS Total Establishments Not Electricity Distillate Residual and Code(a) Selected Subsectors and Industry Consuming Natural Gas(d Switchable Switchable Receipts(e) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(f) Total United States 311 Food 10,373 1,667

  20. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Electricity to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Establishment Counts. Coal Coke NAICS Total Establishments Not Natural Distillate Residual and Code(a) Selected Subsectors and Industry with Electricity Receipts(d Switchable Switchable Gas Fuel Oil Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(e) Total United States 311 Food 13,265 765 11,829 482 292 Q Q 51 Q Q 3112 Grain and Oilseed

  1. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    9 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Distillate Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Establishment Counts. Coal Coke NAICS Total Establishments Not Electricity Natural Residual and Code(a) Selected Subsectors and Industry Consuming Distillate Fuel Oil(d Switchable Switchable Receipts(e) Gas Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(f) Total United States 311 Food 2,416 221 2,115 82 160 Q 0 Q 0 30 3112 Grain and

  2. Level: National Data; Row: Values of Shipments within NAICS Codes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: Values of Shipments within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios; Unit: Varies. Consumption Consumption per Dollar Consumption per Dollar of Value NAICS per Employee of Value Added of Shipments Code(a) Economic Characteristic(b) (million Btu) (thousand Btu) (thousand Btu) Total United States 311 - 339 ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 330.6 3.6 2.0 20-49 550.0 4.5 2.2

  3. Level: National Data; Row: Values of Shipments within NAICS Codes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: Values of Shipments within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios; Unit: Varies. Consumption Consumption per Dollar Consumption per Dollar of Value NAICS per Employee of Value Added of Shipments Code(a) Economic Characteristic(b) (million Btu) (thousand Btu) (thousand Btu) Total United States 311 - 339 ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 405.4 4.0 2.1 20-49 631.3 4.7 2.2

  4. " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;"

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

    1. Quantity of Purchased Energy Sources, 1998;" " Level: National Data and Regional Totals;" " Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Physical Units or Btu." " "," "," ",," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ",," " " "," ",,,,,,,,"Coke" " "," ","

  5. Sandia National Laboratories/New Mexico Environmental Baseline update--Revision 1.0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-07-01

    This report provides a baseline update to provide the background information necessary for personnel to prepare clear and consise NEPA documentation. The environment of the Sandia National Laboratories is described in this document, including the ecology, meteorology, climatology, seismology, emissions, cultural resources and land use, visual resources, noise pollution, transportation, and socioeconomics.

  6. Waste Management Facilities cost information for mixed low-level waste. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-06-01

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

  7. Electric Vehicle and Infrastructure Codes and Standards Chart (Revised) (Fact Sheet), NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory)

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)]

    Dispensing Infrastructure NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. CONTROLLING AUTHORITIES: State and Federal Energy Regulatory Commissions CONTROLLING AUTHORITIES: Local Building and Fire Departments CONTROLLING AUTHORITIES: DOT/NHTS Many standards development organizations (SDOs) are working to develop codes and standards needed for the utilization of alternative fuel

  8. Overview of groundwater and surface water standards pertinent to the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. Revision 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lundahl, A.L.; Williams, S.; Grizzle, B.J.

    1995-09-01

    This document presents an overview of groundwater- and surface water-related laws, regulations, agreements, guidance documents, Executive Orders, and DOE orders pertinent to the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. This document is a summary and is intended to help readers understand which regulatory requirements may apply to their particular circumstances. However, the document is not intended to be used in lieu of applicable regulations. Unless otherwise noted, the information in this report reflects a summary and evaluation completed July 1, 1995. This document is considered a Living Document, and updates on changing laws and regulations will be provided.

  9. Background Information for the Nevada National Security Site Integrated Sampling Plan, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Farnham, Irene; Marutzky, Sam

    2014-12-01

    This document describes the process followed to develop the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) Integrated Sampling Plan (referred to herein as the Plan). It provides the Plan’s purpose and objectives, and briefly describes the Underground Test Area (UGTA) Activity, including the conceptual model and regulatory requirements as they pertain to groundwater sampling. Background information on other NNSS groundwater monitoring programs—the Routine Radiological Environmental Monitoring Plan (RREMP) and Community Environmental Monitoring Program (CEMP)—and their integration with the Plan are presented. Descriptions of the evaluations, comments, and responses of two Sampling Plan topical committees are also included.

  10. Los Alamos National Laboratory transuranic waste quality assurance project plan. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-04-14

    This Transuranic (TRU) Waste Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPjP) serves as the quality management plan for the characterization of transuranic waste in preparation for certification and transportation. The Transuranic Waste Characterization/Certification Program (TWCP) consists of personnel who sample and analyze waste, validate and report data; and provide project management, quality assurance, audit and assessment, and records management support, all in accordance with established requirements for disposal of TRU waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) facility. This QAPjP addresses how the TWCP meets the quality requirements of the Carlsbad Area Office (CAO) Quality Assurance Program Description (QAPD) and the technical requirements of the Transuranic Waste Characterization Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP). The TWCP characterizes and certifies retrievably stored and newly generated TRU waste using the waste selection, testing, sampling, and analytical techniques and data quality objectives (DQOs) described in the QAPP, the Los Alamos National Laboratory Transuranic Waste Certification Plan (Certification Plan), and the CST Waste Management Facilities Waste Acceptance Criteria and Certification [Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC)]. At the present, the TWCP does not address remote-handled (RH) waste.

  11. Lesson Learned by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Activity-level Work Planning and Control

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Slide Presentation by Donna J. Governor, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Lessons Learned by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Activity-Level Work Planning & Control.

  12. Likely social impacts of proposed national-level policy initiatives

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Piernot, C.A.; Rothweiler, M.A.; Levine, A.; Crews, R.

    1981-03-01

    The results are described of an investigation of likely social effects of enacting nine proposed national-level policy initiatives to accelerate development and use of solar energy. This study is part of the Technology Assessment of Solar Energy Systems (TASE) project supported by the US Department of Energy. The report presents general social impact information about the variety of ways in which the American people could be affected by enactment of these initiatives. It identifies the effects of each initiative on individuals, groups, organizations, communities, and society as a whole. In addition, it provides a framework for organizing a myriad of impact information into a set of conceptually exclusive impact categories. It illustrates that social impacts means effects on people as individuals, groups, organizations, and communities as well as on the infrastructure of society. Finally, it demonstrates the importance of specifying an audience of impact with a case example from the residential rental market.

  13. Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 465: Hydronuclear Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mark Burmeister and Patrick Matthews

    2012-11-01

    The corrective action sites (CASs) within CAU 465 are located within Areas 6 and 27 of the NNSS. CAU 465 comprises the following CASs: • 00-23-01, Hydronuclear Experiment, located in Area 27 of the NNSS and known as the Charlie site. • 00-23-02, Hydronuclear Experiment, located in Area 27 of the NNSS and known as the Dog site. • 00-23-03, Hydronuclear Experiment, located in Area 27 of the NNSS and known as the Charlie Prime and Anja sites. • 06-99-01, Hydronuclear, located in Area 6 of the NNSS and known as the Trailer 13 site. The purpose of this CR is to provide documentation supporting the completed corrective actions and provide data confirming that the closure objectives for CASs within CAU 465 were met. From September 2011 through July 2012, closure activities were performed as set forth in the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan for CAU 465: Hydronuclear, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada.

  14. Chemical reactivity testing for the National Spent Nuclear Fuel Program. Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Koester, L.W.

    2000-02-08

    This quality assurance project plan (QAPjP) summarizes requirements used by Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Incorporated (LMES) Development Division at Y-12 for conducting chemical reactivity testing of Department of Energy (DOE) owned spent nuclear fuel, sponsored by the National Spent Nuclear Fuel Program (NSNFP). The requirements are based on the NSNFP Statement of work PRO-007 (Statement of Work for Laboratory Determination of Uranium Hydride Oxidation Reaction Kinetics.) This QAPjP will utilize the quality assurance program at Y-12, Y60-101PD, Quality Program Description, and existing implementing procedures for the most part in meeting the NSNFP Statement of Work PRO-007 requirements, exceptions will be noted. The project consists of conducting three separate series of related experiments, ''Passivation of Uranium Hydride Powder With Oxygen and Water'', '''Passivation of Uranium Hydride Powder with Surface Characterization'', and ''Electrochemical Measure of Uranium Hydride Corrosion Rate''.

  15. Site safety plan for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory CERCLA investigations at site 300. Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kilmer, J.

    1997-08-01

    Various Department of Energy Orders incorporate by reference, health and safety regulations promulgated by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). One of the OSHA regulations, 29 CFR 1910.120, Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response, requires that site safety plans are written for activities such as those covered by work plans for Site 300 environmental investigations. Based upon available data, this Site Safety Plan (Plan) for environmental restoration has been prepared specifically for the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Site 300, located approximately 15 miles east of Livermore, California. As additional facts, monitoring data, or analytical data on hazards are provided, this Plan may need to be modified. It is the responsibility of the Environmental Restoration Program and Division (ERD) Site Safety Officer (SSO), with the assistance of Hazards Control, to evaluate data which may impact health and safety during these activities and to modify the Plan as appropriate. This Plan is not `cast-in-concrete.` The SSO shall have the authority, with the concurrence of Hazards Control, to institute any change to maintain health and safety protection for workers at Site 300.

  16. Oak Ridge National Laboratory Waste Management Plan, fiscal year 1994. Revision 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Turner, J.W.

    1993-12-01

    US Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5820.2A was promulgated in final form on September 26, 1988. The order requires heads of field organizations to prepare and to submit updates on the waste management plans for all operations under their purview according to the format in Chap. 6, {open_quotes}Waste Management Plan Outline.{close_quotes} These plans are to be submitted by the DOE Oak Ridge Operations Office (DOE-ORO) in December of each year and distributed to the DP-12, ES&H-1, and other appropriate DOE Headquarters (DOE-HQ) organizations for review and comment. This document was prepared in response to this requirement for fiscal year (FY) 1994. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) waste management mission is reduction, collection, storage, treatment, and disposal of DOE wastes, generated primarily in pursuit of ORNL missions, in order to protect human health and safety and the environment. In carrying out this mission, waste management staff in the Waste Management and Remedial Action Division (WMRAD) will (1) guide ORNL in optimizing waste reduction and waste management capabilities and (2) conduct waste management operations in a compliant, publicly acceptable, technically sound, and cost-efficient manner. Waste management requirements for DOE radioactive wastes are detailed in DOE Order 5820.2A, and the ORNL Waste Management Program encompasses all elements of this order. The requirements of this DOE order and other appropriate DOE orders, along with applicable Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation and US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules and regulations, provide the principal source of regulatory guidance for waste management operations at ORNL. The objective of this document is compilation and consolidation of information on how the ORNL Waste Management Program is conducted, which waste management facilities are being used to manage wastes, what activities are planned for FY 1994, and how all of the activities are documented.

  17. Entry-Level Positions | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Blog NNSA & Nuclear Security Enterprise support nation's preparedness NNSA Blog NNSA's work aids in fight against cancer NNSA Blog NSC leader recognized as community role model...

  18. Disposal of Low-Level Waste at the Nevada National Security Site |

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

    Department of Energy of Low-Level Waste at the Nevada National Security Site Disposal of Low-Level Waste at the Nevada National Security Site PDF icon Disposal of Low-Level Waste at the Nevada National Security Site More Documents & Publications Keynote Address: Update on Environmental Management Communication Is Key to Packaging and Transportation Safety and Compliance Status Updates on the Performance and Risk Assessment Community of Practice

  19. Outcomes of Patients With Revised Stage I Clear Cell Sarcoma of Kidney Treated in National Wilms Tumor Studies 1-5

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kalapurakal, John A., E-mail: j-kalapurakal@northwestern.edu [Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois (United States); Perlman, Elizabeth J. [Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois (United States)] [Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois (United States); Seibel, Nita L. [Cancer Therapy and Evaluation Program, Bethesda, Maryland (United States)] [Cancer Therapy and Evaluation Program, Bethesda, Maryland (United States); Ritchey, Michael [Phoenix Children's Hospital, Phoenix, Arizona (United States)] [Phoenix Children's Hospital, Phoenix, Arizona (United States); Dome, Jeffrey S. [Children's National Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia (United States)] [Children's National Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia (United States); Grundy, Paul E. [University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB (Canada)] [University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB (Canada)

    2013-02-01

    Purpose: To report the clinical outcomes of children with revised stage I clear cell sarcoma of the kidney (CCSK) using the National Wilms Tumor Study Group (NWTS)-5 staging criteria after multimodality treatment on NWTS 1-5 protocols. Methods and Materials: All CCSK patients enrolled in the National Wilms Tumor Study Group protocols had their pathology slides reviewed, and only those determined to have revised stage I tumors according to the NWTS-5 staging criteria were included in the present analysis. All patients were treated with multimodality therapy according to the NWTS 1-5 protocols. Results: A total of 53 children were identified as having stage I CCSK. All patients underwent primary surgery with radical nephrectomy. The chemotherapy regimens used were as follows: regimen A, C, F, or EE in 4 children (8%); regimen DD or DD4A in 33 children (62%); regimen J in 4 children (8%); and regimen I in 12 children (22%). Forty-six patients (87%) received flank radiation therapy (RT). Seven children (13%) did not receive flank RT. The median delay between surgery and the initiation of RT was 9 days (range, 3-61). The median RT dose was 10.8 Gy (range, 10-36). The flank RT doses were as follows: 10.5 or 10.8 Gy in 25 patients (47%), 11-19.9 Gy in 2 patients (4%), 20-29.9 Gy in 9 patients (17%), and 30-40 Gy in 10 patients (19%). The median follow-up for the entire group was 17 years (range, 2-36). The relapse-free and cancer-specific survival rate was 100% at the last follow-up examination. Conclusions: The present results have demonstrated that children with revised stage I CCSK using the NWTS-5 staging criteria have excellent survival rates despite the use of varying RT doses and chemotherapy regimens in the NWTS 1-5 protocols.

  20. Implementation plan for liquid low-level radioactive waste systems under the FFA for fiscal years 1996 and 1997 at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-06-01

    This document is the fourth annual revision of the plans and schedules for implementing the Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) compliance program, originally submitted in 1992 as ES/ER-17&D1, Federal Facility Agreement Plans and Schedules for Liquid Low-Level Radioactive Waste Tank Systems at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. This document summarizes the progress that has been made to date implementing the plans and schedules for meeting the FFA commitments for the Liquid Low-Level Waste (LLLW) System at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). In addition, this document lists FFA activities planned for FY 1997. Information presented in this document provides a comprehensive summary to facilitate understanding of the FFA compliance program for LLLW tank systems and to present plans and schedules associated with remediation, through the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) process, of LLLW tank systems that have been removed from service.

  1. LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE & MIXED WASTE SHIPMENTS TO THE NEVADA NATIONAL SECURITY SITE

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

    NV NY NY NV OH TN TN TN, WA, CA TN TN TN TX y ct 2 Plant Perma-Fix LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE & MIXED WASTE SHIPMENTS TO THE NEVADA NATIONAL SECURITY SITE FIRST QUARTER REPORT, FY 2011 (OCTOBER, NOVEMBER, DECEMBER 2010) Livermore National Laboratory ergy Alliance onal Laboratory Mixed Waste Treatment Project gonne National Laboratory ational Laboratory Gaseous Diffusion Plant Proving Ground terra, LLC en National Laboratory y Environmental Services ecurity Technologies, Inc. h Gaseous Diffusion

  2. Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 566: EMAD Compound, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada with ROTC-1, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mark Krauss

    2011-06-01

    This Closure Report (CR) presents information supporting the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 566: EMAD Compound, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada. Corrective Action Unit 566 comprises Corrective Action Site (CAS) 25-99-20, EMAD Compound, located within Area 25 of the Nevada National Security Site. The purpose of this CR is to provide documentation supporting the completed corrective actions and provide data confirming that the closure objectives for CAU 566 were met. To achieve this, the following actions were performed: • Review the current site conditions, including the concentration and extent of contamination. • Implement any corrective actions necessary to protect human health and the environment. • Properly dispose of corrective action and investigation wastes. • Document Notice of Completion and closure of CAU 566 issued by the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection. From October 2010 through May 2011, closure activities were performed as set forth in the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan for CAU 566: EMAD Compound, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada. The purposes of the activities as defined during the data quality objectives process were as follows: • Determine whether contaminants of concern (COCs) are present. • If COCs are present, determine their nature and extent, implement appropriate corrective actions, and properly dispose of wastes. Analytes detected during the closure activities were evaluated against final action levels (FALs) to determine COCs for CAU 566. Assessment of the data from collected soil samples, and from radiological and visual surveys of the site, indicates the FALs were exceeded for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and radioactivity. Corrective actions were implemented to remove the following: • Radiologically contaminated soil assumed greater than FAL at two locations • Radiologically contaminated soil assumed greater than FAL with lead shot • PCB-contaminated soil • Radiologically contaminated filters and equipment • Fuels, lubricants, engine coolants, and oils • Lead debris • Electrical and lighting components assumed to be potential source materials, including - fluorescent light bulbs - mercury switches (thermostats) - circuit boards - PCB-containing ballasts Closure of CAU 566 was achieved through a combination of removal activities and closure in place. Corrective actions to remove COCs, and known and assumed potential source materials, were implemented as was practical. The PCBs remaining at the site are bounded laterally, but not vertically, within CAS 25-99-20 based upon step-out sampling; the sources (e.g., PCB transformer oils, diesel fuel from locomotive reservoirs) have been removed; the practice of the application of PCB-containing oils for soil stabilization has ceased; and the COCs are not readily mobile in the environment. Closure in place is necessary, and future land use of the site will be restricted from intrusive activities. This will effectively eliminate inadvertent contact by humans with the contaminated media. The DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, provides the following recommendations: • No further corrective action is required at CAS 25-99-20. • Closure in place of CAS 25-99-20. • A use restriction is required at CAU 566. • A Notice of Completion to the DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, is requested from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for closure of CAU 566. • Corrective Action Unit 566 should be moved from Appendix III to Appendix IV of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order.

  3. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 550: Smoky Contamination Area Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Grant Evenson

    2012-05-01

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 550 is located in Areas 7, 8, and 10 of the Nevada National Security Site, which is approximately 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. CAU 550, Smoky Contamination Area, comprises 19 corrective action sites (CASs). Based on process knowledge of the releases associated with the nuclear tests and radiological survey information about the location and shape of the resulting contamination plumes, it was determined that some of the CAS releases are co-located and will be investigated as study groups. This document describes the planned investigation of the following CASs (by study group): (1) Study Group 1, Atmospheric Test - CAS 08-23-04, Atmospheric Test Site T-2C; (2) Study Group 2, Safety Experiments - CAS 08-23-03, Atmospheric Test Site T-8B - CAS 08-23-06, Atmospheric Test Site T-8A - CAS 08-23-07, Atmospheric Test Site T-8C; (3) Study Group 3, Washes - Potential stormwater migration of contaminants from CASs; (4) Study Group 4, Debris - CAS 08-01-01, Storage Tank - CAS 08-22-05, Drum - CAS 08-22-07, Drum - CAS 08-22-08, Drums (3) - CAS 08-22-09, Drum - CAS 08-24-03, Battery - CAS 08-24-04, Battery - CAS 08-24-07, Batteries (3) - CAS 08-24-08, Batteries (3) - CAS 08-26-01, Lead Bricks (200) - CAS 10-22-17, Buckets (3) - CAS 10-22-18, Gas Block/Drum - CAS 10-22-19, Drum; Stains - CAS 10-22-20, Drum - CAS 10-24-10, Battery. These sites are being investigated because existing information on the nature and extent of potential contamination is insufficient to evaluate and recommend corrective action alternatives (CAAs). Additional information will be obtained by conducting a corrective action investigation before evaluating CAAs and selecting the appropriate corrective action for each study group. The results of the field investigation will support a defensible evaluation of viable CAAs that will be presented in the Corrective Action Decision Document. The sites will be investigated based on the data quality objectives (DQOs) developed on January 31, 2012, by representatives of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office. The DQO process was used to identify and define the type, amount, and quality of data needed to develop and evaluate appropriate corrective actions for CAU 550. The potential contamination sources associated with the study groups are from nuclear testing activities conducted at CAU 550. The DQO process resulted in an assumption that the total effective dose (TED) within the default contamination boundary of CAU 550 exceeds the final action level and requires corrective action. The presence and nature of contamination outside the default contamination boundary at CAU 550 will be evaluated based on information collected from a field investigation. Radiological contamination will be evaluated based on a comparison of the TED at sample locations to the dose-based final action level. The TED will be calculated as the total of separate estimates of internal and external dose. Results from the analysis of soil samples will be used to calculate internal radiological dose. Thermoluminescent dosimeters placed at the center of each sample location will be used to measure external radiological dose. Appendix A provides a detailed discussion of the DQO methodology and the DQOs specific to each group of CASs.

  4. EA-0843: Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Low-Level and Mixed Waste Processing, Idaho Falls, Idaho

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of a proposal to (1) reduce the volume of the U.S. Department of Energy's Idaho National Engineering Laboratory's (INEL) generated low-level waste (LLW)...

  5. Underground Test Area Fiscal Year 2013 Annual Quality Assurance Report Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Krenzien, Susan; Marutzky, Sam

    2014-01-01

    This report is required by the Underground Test Area (UGTA) Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) and identifies the UGTA quality assurance (QA) activities for fiscal year (FY) 2013. All UGTA organizations—U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO); Desert Research Institute (DRI); Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL); Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL); Navarro-Intera, LLC (N-I); National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec); and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)—conducted QA activities in FY 2013. The activities included conducting assessments, identifying findings and completing corrective actions, evaluating laboratory performance, and publishing documents. In addition, integrated UGTA required reading and corrective action tracking was instituted.

  6. Groundwater Level Status Report for Fiscal Year 2007 - Los Alamos National Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shannon P. Allen, Richard J. Koch

    2008-03-17

    The status of groundwater level monitoring at Los Alamos National Laboratory in Fiscal Year 2007 is provided in this report. The Groundwater Level Monitoring Project was instituted in 2005 to provide a framework for the collection and processing of quality controlled groundwater level data. This report summarizes groundwater level data for 166 monitoring wells, including 45 regional aquifer wells, 25 intermediate wells, and 96 alluvial wells, and 11 water supply wells. Pressure transducers were installed in 133 monitoring wells for continuous monitoring of groundwater levels. Time-series hydrographs of groundwater level data are presented along with pertinent construction and location information for each well.

  7. National low-level waste management program radionuclide report series, Volume 15: Uranium-238

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Adams, J.P.

    1995-09-01

    This report, Volume 15 of the National Low-Level Waste Management Program Radionuclide Report Series, discusses the radiological and chemical characteristics of uranium-238 ({sup 238}U). The purpose of the National Low-Level Waste Management Program Radionuclide Report Series is to provide information to state representatives and developers of low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities about the radiological, chemical, and physical characteristics of selected radionuclides and their behavior in the waste disposal facility environment. This report also includes discussions about waste types and forms in which {sup 238}U can be found, and {sup 238}U behavior in the environment and in the human body.

  8. One size fits all? An assessment tool for solid waste management at local and national levels

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Broitman, Dani; Ayalon, Ofira; Kan, Iddo

    2012-10-15

    Highlights: Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer Waste management schemes are generally implemented at national or regional level. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer Local conditions characteristics and constraints are often neglected. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer We developed an economic model able to compare multi-level waste management options. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer A detailed test case with real economic data and a best-fit scenario is described. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer Most efficient schemes combine clear National directives with local level flexibility. - Abstract: As environmental awareness rises, integrated solid waste management (WM) schemes are increasingly being implemented all over the world. The different WM schemes usually address issues such as landfilling restrictions (mainly due to methane emissions and competing land use), packaging directives and compulsory recycling goals. These schemes are, in general, designed at a national or regional level, whereas local conditions and constraints are sometimes neglected. When national WM top-down policies, in addition to setting goals, also dictate the methods by which they are to be achieved, local authorities lose their freedom to optimize their operational WM schemes according to their specific characteristics. There are a myriad of implementation options at the local level, and by carrying out a bottom-up approach the overall national WM system will be optimal on economic and environmental scales. This paper presents a model for optimizing waste strategies at a local level and evaluates this effect at a national level. This is achieved by using a waste assessment model which enables us to compare both the economic viability of several WM options at the local (single municipal authority) level, and aggregated results for regional or national levels. A test case based on various WM approaches in Israel (several implementations of mixed and separated waste) shows that local characteristics significantly influence WM costs, and therefore the optimal scheme is one under which each local authority is able to implement its best-fitting mechanism, given that national guidelines are kept. The main result is that strict national/regional WM policies may be less efficient, unless some type of local flexibility is implemented. Our model is designed both for top-down and bottom-up assessment, and can be easily adapted for a wide range of WM option comparisons at different levels.

  9. Underground Test Area Fiscal Year 2014 Annual Quality Assurance Report Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Krenzien, Susan

    2015-01-01

    This report is required by the Underground Test Area (UGTA) Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) and identifies the UGTA quality assurance (QA) activities from October 1, 2013, through September 30, 2014 (fiscal year [FY] 2014). All UGTA organizations—U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO); Desert Research Institute (DRI); Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL); Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL); National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec); Navarro-Intera, LLC (N-I); and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)—conducted QA activities in FY 2014. The activities included conducting oversight assessments for QAP compliance, identifying findings and completing corrective actions, evaluating laboratory performance, and publishing documents. UGTA Activity participants conducted 25 assessments on topics including safe operations, QAP compliance, activity planning, and sampling. These assessments are summarized in Section 2.0. Corrective actions tracked in FY 2014 are presented in Appendix A. Laboratory performance was evaluated based on three approaches: (1) established performance evaluation programs (PEPs), (2) interlaboratory comparisons, or (3) data review. The results of the laboratory performance evaluations, and interlaboratory comparison results are summarized in Section 4.0. The UGTA Activity published three public documents and a variety of other publications in FY 2014. The titles, dates, and main authors are identified in Section 5.0. The Contract Managers, Corrective Action Unit (CAU) Leads, Preemptive Review (PER) Committee members, and Topical Committee members are listed by name and organization in Section 6.0. Other activities that affected UGTA quality are discussed in Section 7.0. Section 8.0 provides the FY 2014 UGTA QA program conclusions, and Section 9.0 lists the references not identified in Section 5.0.

  10. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 573: Alpha Contaminated Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Matthews, Patrick

    2014-05-01

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 573 is located in Area 5 of the Nevada National Security Site, which is approximately 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. CAU 573 is a grouping of sites where there has been a suspected release of contamination associated with non-nuclear experiments and nuclear testing. This document describes the planned investigation of CAU 573, which comprises the following corrective action sites (CASs): • 05-23-02, GMX Alpha Contaminated Area • 05-45-01, Atmospheric Test Site - Hamilton These sites are being investigated because existing information on the nature and extent of potential contamination is insufficient to evaluate and recommend corrective action alternatives.

  11. Oak Ridge National Laboratory Corrective Action Plan in response to Tiger Team assessment. Volume 1, Revision 5

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kuliasha, Michael A.

    1991-08-23

    This report presents a complete response to the Tiger Team assessment that was conducted at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and at the US Department of Energy (DOE) Oak Ridge Operations Office (ORO) from October 22, 1990, through November 30, 1990. The action plans have undergone both a discipline review and a cross-cutting review with respect to root cause. In addition, the action plans have been integrated with initiatives being pursued across Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., in response to Tiger Team findings at other DOE facilities operated by Energy Systems. The root cause section is complete and describes how ORNL intends to address the root causes of the findings identified during the assessment. The action plan has benefited from a complete review by various offices at DOE Headquarters as well as review by the Tiger Team that conducted the assessment to ensure that the described actions are responsive to the observed problems.

  12. Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 544: Cellars, Mud Pits, and Oil Spills, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mark Krauss and Catherine Birney

    2011-05-01

    This Closure Report (CR) presents information supporting the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 544: Cellars, Mud Pits, and Oil Spills, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada. This CR complies with the requirements of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order that was agreed to by the State of Nevada; U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Management; U.S. Department of Defense; and DOE, Legacy Management. The corrective action sites (CASs) within CAU 544 are located within Areas 2, 7, 9, 10, 12, 19, and 20 of the Nevada National Security Site. Corrective Action Unit 544 comprises the following CASs: • 02-37-08, Cellar & Mud Pit • 02-37-09, Cellar & Mud Pit • 07-09-01, Mud Pit • 09-09-46, U-9itsx20 PS #1A Mud Pit • 10-09-01, Mud Pit • 12-09-03, Mud Pit • 19-09-01, Mud Pits (2) • 19-09-03, Mud Pit • 19-09-04, Mud Pit • 19-25-01, Oil Spill • 19-99-06, Waste Spill • 20-09-01, Mud Pits (2) • 20-09-02, Mud Pit • 20-09-03, Mud Pit • 20-09-04, Mud Pits (2) • 20-09-06, Mud Pit • 20-09-07, Mud Pit • 20-09-10, Mud Pit • 20-25-04, Oil Spills • 20-25-05, Oil Spills The purpose of this CR is to provide documentation supporting the completed corrective actions and data confirming that the closure objectives for CASs within CAU 544 were met. To achieve this, the following actions were performed: • Review the current site conditions, including the concentration and extent of contamination. • Implement any corrective actions necessary to protect human health and the environment. • Properly dispose of corrective action and investigation wastes. • Document Notice of Completion and closure of CAU 544 issued by the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection.

  13. Revised Manuscript May

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

    Revised Manuscript May 20, 2014 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A 3 J.E. Purcell a,b , J.H. Kelley a,c , E. Kwan a,d , C.G. Sheu a,d and H.R. Weller a,d a Triangle Universities ...

  14. Revised Manuscript May

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

    Revised Manuscript May 29, 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A 3 D.R. Tilley a,b , H.R. Weller a,c and H.H. Hasan a,c a Triangle Universities Nuclear Laboratory, Durham, NC ...

  15. Mixed Waste Management Options: 1995 Update. National Low-Level Waste Management Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kirner, N.; Kelly, J.; Faison, G.; Johnson, D.

    1995-05-01

    In the original mixed Waste Management Options (DOE/LLW-134) issued in December 1991, the question was posed, ``Can mixed waste be managed out of existence?`` That study found that most, but not all, of the Nation`s mixed waste can theoretically be managed out of existence. Four years later, the Nation is still faced with a lack of disposal options for commercially generated mixed waste. However, since publication of the original Mixed Waste Management Options report in 1991, limited disposal capacity and new technologies to treat mixed waste have become available. A more detailed estimate of the Nation`s mixed waste also became available when the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) published their comprehensive assessment, titled National Profile on Commercially Generated Low-Level Radioactive Mixed Waste (National Profile). These advancements in our knowledge about mixed waste inventories and generation, coupled with greater treatment and disposal options, lead to a more applied question posed for this updated report: ``Which mixed waste has no treatment option?`` Beyond estimating the volume of mixed waste requiring jointly regulated disposal, this report also provides a general background on the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). It also presents a methodical approach for generators to use when deciding how to manage their mixed waste. The volume of mixed waste that may require land disposal in a jointly regulated facility each year was estimated through the application of this methodology.

  16. Revised Manuscript

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

    4 June 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 10 D.R. Tilley a,b , J.H. Kelley a,b , J.L. Godwin a,c , D.J. Millener d J. Purcell a,e , C.G. Sheu a,c and H.R. Weller a,c a Triangle Universities Nuclear Laboratory, Durham, NC 27708-0308 b Department of Physics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-8202 c Department of Physics, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708-0305 d Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973 e Department of Physics and Astronomy, Georgia State University,

  17. Oak Ridge National Laboratory Corrective Action Plan in response to Tiger Team assessment. Volume 2, Revision 5

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kuliasha, Michael A.

    1991-08-23

    This report presents a complete response to the Tiger Team assessment that was conducted to Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and at the US Department of Energy (DOE) Oak Ridge Operations Office (ORO) from October 2, 1990, through November 30, 1990. The action plans have undergone both a discipline review and a cross-cutting review with respect to root cause. In addition, the action plans have been integrated with initiatives being pursued across Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., in response to Tiger Team findings at other DOE facilities operated by Energy Systems. The root cause section is complete and describes how ORNL intends to address the root cause of the findings identified during the assessment. This report is concerned with reactors safety and health findings, responses, and planned actions. Specific areas include: organization and administration; quality verification; operations; maintenance; training and certification; auxiliary systems; emergency preparedness; technical support; nuclear criticality safety; security/safety interface; experimental activities; site/facility safety review; radiological protection; personnel protection; fire protection; management findings, responses, and planned actions; self-assessment findings, responses, and planned actions; and summary of planned actions, schedules, and costs.

  18. Environmental Assessment Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, low-level and mixed waste processing

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-06-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA), DOE/EA-0843, for the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) low-level and mixed waste processing. The original proposed action, as reviewed in this EA, was (1) to incinerate INEL`s mixed low-level waste (MLLW) at the Waste Experimental Reduction Facility (WERF); (2) reduce the volume of INEL generated low-level waste (LLW) through sizing, compaction, and stabilization at the WERF; and (3) to ship INEL LLW to a commercial incinerator for supplemental LLW volume reduction.

  19. Greater-than-Class C low-level radioactive waste characterization: Estimated volumes, radionuclide activities, and other characteristics. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-09-01

    The Department of Energy`s (DOE`s) planning for the disposal of greater-than-Class C low-level radioactive waste (GTCC LLW) requires characterization of the waste. This report estimates volumes, radionuclide activities, and waste forms of GTCC LLW to the year 2035. It groups the waste into four categories, representative of the type of generator or holder of the waste: Nuclear Utilities, Sealed Sources, DOE-Held, and Other Generator. GTCC LLW includes activated metals (activation hardware from reactor operation and decommissioning), process wastes (i.e., resins, filters, etc.), sealed sources, and other wastes routinely generated by users of radioactive material. Estimates reflect the possible effect that packaging and concentration averaging may have on the total volume of GTCC LLW. Possible GTCC mixed LLW is also addressed. Nuclear utilities will probably generate the largest future volume of GTCC LLW with 65--83% of the total volume. The other generators will generate 17--23% of the waste volume, while GTCC sealed sources are expected to contribute 1--12%. A legal review of DOE`s obligations indicates that the current DOE-Held wastes described in this report will not require management as GTCC LLW because of the contractual circumstances under which they were accepted for storage. This report concludes that the volume of GTCC LLW should not pose a significant management problem from a scientific or technical standpoint. The projected volume is small enough to indicate that a dedicated GTCC LLW disposal facility may not be justified. Instead, co-disposal with other waste types is being considered as an option.

  20. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Reasons that Made Quantity Unswitchable;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Reasons that Made Electricity Unswitchable, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Reasons that Made Quantity Unswitchable; Unit: Million kWh. Total Amount of Total Amount of Equipment is Not Switching Unavailable Long-Term Unavailable Combinations of NAICS Electricity Consumed Unswitchable Capable of Using Adversely Affects Alternative Environmenta Contract Storage for Another Columns F, G, Code(a) Subsector and Industry as a Fuel Electricity Fuel Use Another Fuel the Products

  1. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Reasons that Made Quantity Unswitchable;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    1 Reasons that Made Natural Gas Unswitchable, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Reasons that Made Quantity Unswitchable; Unit: Billion cubic feet. Total Amount of Total Amount of Equipment is Not Switching Unavailable Long-Term Unavailable Combinations of NAICS Natural Gas Unswitchable Capable of Using Adversely Affects Alternative Environmenta Contract Storage for Another Columns F, G, Code(a) Subsector and Industry Consumed as a FueNatural Gas Fuel Use Another Fuel the

  2. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Reasons that Made Quantity Unswitchable;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Reasons that Made Coal Unswitchable, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Reasons that Made Quantity Unswitchable; Unit: Million short tons. Total Amount of Total Amount of Equipment is Not Switching Unavailable Long-Term Unavailable Combinations of NAICS Coal Consumed Unswitchable Capable of Using Adversely Affects Alternative Environmenta Contract Storage for Another Columns F, G, Code(a) Subsector and Industry as a Fuel Coal Fuel Use Another Fuel the Products Fuel

  3. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Reasons that Made Quantity Unswitchable;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 Reasons that Made LPG Unswitchable, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Reasons that Made Quantity Unswitchable; Unit: Million barrels. Total Amount of Total Amount of Equipment is Not Switching Unavailable Long-Term Unavailable Combinations of NAICS LPG Consumed Unswitchable Capable of Using Adversely Affects Alternative Environmenta Contract Storage for Another Columns F, G, Code(a) Subsector and Industry as a Fuel LPG Fuel Use Another Fuel the Products Fuel

  4. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Energy Sources; Column: Consumption Potential;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Nonswitchable Minimum and Maximum Consumption, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Energy Sources; Column: Consumption Potential; Unit: Physical Units. Actual Minimum Maximum Energy Sources Consumption Consumption(a) Consumption(b) Total United States Electricity Receipts(c) (million kilowatthour 745,247 727,194 770,790 Natural Gas (billion cubic feet) 5,064 4,331 5,298 Distillate Fuel Oil (thousand barrels) 22 20 82 Residual Fuel Oil (thousand barrels) 13 9 46 Coal (thousand short

  5. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Capability to Switch LPG to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Million Barrels. Coal Coke NAICS Total Not Electricity Natural Distillate Residual and Code(a) Selected Subsectors and Industry Consumed(c) Switchable Switchable Receipts(d) Gas Fuel Oil Fuel Oil Coal Breeze Other(e) Total United States 311 Food 1 * 1 * * * * 0 0 * 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling * * * * * * * 0

  6. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Capability to Switch Distillate Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Million Barrels. Coal Coke NAICS Total Not Electricity Natural Residual and Code(a) Selected Subsectors and Industry Consumed(c) Switchable Switchable Receipts(d) Gas Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(e) Total United States 311 Food 4 * 3 * * * 0 * 0 * 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling * * * * * * 0 *

  7. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: All Energy Sources Collected;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Table 7.1 Average Prices of Purchased Energy Sources, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: All Energy Sources Collected; Unit: U.S. Dollars per Physical Units. Selected Wood and Other Biomass Components Coal Components Coke Electricity Components Natural Gas Components Steam Components Total Wood Residues Bituminous Electricity Diesel Fuel Motor Natural Gas Steam and Wood-Related and Electricity from Sources and Gasoline Pulping Liquor Natural Gas from Sources

  8. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: All Energy Sources Collected;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Next MECS will be conducted in 2010 Table 7.2 Average Prices of Purchased Energy Sources, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: All Energy Sources Collected; Unit: U.S. Dollars per Million Btu. Selected Wood and Other Biomass Components Coal Components Coke Electricity Components Natural Gas Components Steam Components Total Wood Residues Bituminous Electricity Diesel Fuel Motor Natural Gas Steam and Wood-Related and Electricity from Sources and Gasoline Pulping

  9. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    2 Reasons that Made Coal Unswitchable, 2006;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Reasons that Made Quantity Unswitchable;" " Unit: Million short tons." ,,,,"Reasons that Made Coal Unswitchable" " "," ",,,,,,,,,,,,," " ,,"Total Amount of ","Total Amount of","Equipment is Not","Switching","Unavailable

  10. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    3 Reasons that Made LPG Unswitchable, 2006;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Reasons that Made Quantity Unswitchable;" " Unit: Million barrels." ,,,,"Reasons that Made LPG Unswitchable" " "," ",,,,,,,,,,,,," " ,,"Total Amount of ","Total Amount of","Equipment is Not","Switching","Unavailable

  11. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    4 Reasons that Made Distillate Fuel Oil Unswitchable, 2006;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Reasons that Made Quantity Unswitchable;" " Unit: Million barrels." ,,,,"Reasons that Made Distillate Fuel Oil Unswitchable" " "," ",,,,,,,,,,,,," " ,,"Total Amount of ","Total Amount of","Equipment is Not","Switching","Unavailable

  12. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    1 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Coal to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,"Coal(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,,"RSE" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  13. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    3 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch LPG to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,"LPG(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  14. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    3 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Natural Gas to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,"Natural Gas(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  15. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    5 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Residual Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,"Residual Fuel Oil(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  16. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    7 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Electricity to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002; " " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,"Electricity Receipts(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  17. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    9 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Distillate Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2002;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,"Distillate Fuel Oil(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke",,"RSE" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  18. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    11 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Coal to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,"Coal(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" "NAICS"," ","Total"," ","Not","Electricity","Natural","Distillate","Residual"

  19. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    3 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch LPG to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,"LPG(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  20. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    3 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Natural Gas to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,,"Natural Gas(b)",,,," Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  1. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    5 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Residual Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,,"Residual Fuel Oil(b)",,,," Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  2. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    7 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Electricity to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; " " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,"Electricity Receipts(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  3. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    9 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Distillate Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,"Distillate Fuel Oil(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total","

  4. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    1 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Coal to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,"Coal(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" "NAICS"," ","Total Establishments"," ","Not","Electricity","Natural","Distillate","Residual"

  5. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    3 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch LPG to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,"LPG(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total Establishments","

  6. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    3 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Natural Gas to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,,"Natural Gas(b)",,,," Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total Establishments","

  7. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    0.5 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Residual Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,,"Residual Fuel Oil(b)",,,," Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total Establishments","

  8. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    7 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Electricity to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010; " " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,"Electricity Receipts(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total Establishments ","

  9. " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;"

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

    9 Number of Establishments with Capability to Switch Distillate Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010;" " Level: National Data;" " Row: NAICS Codes;" " Column: Energy Sources;" " Unit: Establishment Counts." ,,"Distillate Fuel Oil(b)",,,"Alternative Energy Sources(c)" ,,,,,,,,,,"Coal Coke" "NAICS"," ","Total Establishments","

  10. Green Building: How the Navajo Nation Can Address Renewable Energy Development at the Local Level

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    gov Tribal Energy Program Review Denver, CO Red Rock, New Mexico Green Building Gepetta S. Billie Graduate Intern, Tribal Energy Program Master's Candidate, Community & Regional Planning University of New Mexico How the Navajo Nation can Address Renewable Energy Development at the Local Level Work Plan & Public Involvement Implementation Assessment & Evaluation Overview Introduction Statement of Need Community Profile Conclusion 2 | Tribal Energy Program eere.energy.gov 3 | Tribal

  11. Revised Manuscript

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

    5 October 2014 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 5 D.R. Tilley a,b , C.M. Cheves a,c , J.L. Godwin a,c , G.M. Hale d , H.M. Hofmann e , J.H. Kelley a,b , C.G. Sheu a,c and H.R. Weller a,c a Triangle Universities Nuclear Laboratory, Durham, NC 27708-0308 b Department of Physics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-8202 c Department of Physics, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708-0305 d Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545 e Universit¨ at Erlangen-N¨ urnberg,

  12. National profile on commercially generated low-level radioactive mixed waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Klein, J.A.; Mrochek, J.E.; Jolley, R.L.; Osborne-Lee, I.W.; Francis, A.A.; Wright, T.

    1992-12-01

    This report details the findings and conclusions drawn from a survey undertaken as part of a joint US Nuclear Regulatory Commission and US Environmental Protection Agency-sponsored project entitled ``National Profile on Commercially Generated Low-Level Radioactive Mixed Waste.`` The overall objective of the work was to compile a national profile on the volumes, characteristics, and treatability of commercially generated low-level mixed waste for 1990 by five major facility categories-academic, industrial, medical, and NRC-/Agreement State-licensed goverment facilities and nuclear utilities. Included in this report are descriptions of the methodology used to collect and collate the data, the procedures used to estimate the mixed waste generation rate for commercial facilities in the United States in 1990, and the identification of available treatment technologies to meet applicable EPA treatment standards (40 CFR Part 268) and, if possible, to render the hazardous component of specific mixed waste streams nonhazardous. The report also contains information on existing and potential commercial waste treatment facilities that may provide treatment for specific waste streams identified in the national survey. The report does not include any aspect of the Department of Energy`s (DOES) management of mixed waste and generally does not address wastes from remedial action activities.

  13. Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Capability to Switch Coal to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Thousand Short Tons. NAICS Total Not Electricity Natural Distillate Residual Code(a) Subsector and Industry Consumed(c) Switchable Switchable Receipts(d) Gas Fuel Oil Fuel Oil LPG Other(e) Total United States 311 Food 6,603 1,013 5,373 27 981 303 93 271 86 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 5,099 658 4,323

  14. Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Capability to Switch LPG to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Thousand Barrels. Coal Coke NAICS Total Not Electricity Natural Distillate Residual and Code(a) Subsector and Industry Consumed(c) Switchable Switchable Receipts(d) Gas Fuel Oil Fuel Oil Coal Breeze Other(e) Total United States 311 Food 850 159 549 Q 86 8 * 0 0 Q 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling Q 2 Q 1 Q

  15. Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Capability to Switch Natural Gas to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Billion Cubic Feet. Coal Coke NAICS Total Not Electricity Distillate Residual and Code(a) Subsector and Industry Consumed(c) Switchable Switchable Receipts(d) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(e) Total United States 311 Food 618 165 379 8 109 12 1 38 0 10 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 115

  16. Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Capability to Switch Residual Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Thousand Barrels. Coal Coke NAICS Total Not Electricity Natural Distillate and Code(a) Subsector and Industry Consumed(c) Switchable Switchable Receipts(d) Gas Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(e) Total United States 311 Food 4,124 2,134 454 0 1,896 284 0 Q 0 Q 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling

  17. Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Capability to Switch Electricity to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Million Kilowatthours. Coal Coke NAICS Total Not Natural Distillate Residual and Code(a) Subsector and Industry Receipts(c) Switchable Switchable Gas Fuel Oil Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(d) Total United States 311 Food 73,551 1,887 55,824 711 823 0 111 45 0 205 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling

  18. Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Capability to Switch Distillate Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2006; Level: National Data and Regional Totals; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Thousand Barrels. Coal Coke NAICS Total Not Electricity Natural Residual and Code(a) Subsector and Industry Consumed(c) Switchable Switchable Receipts(d) Gas Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(e) Total United States 311 Food 2,723 127 2,141 4 111 * 0 5 0 7 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 153 6

  19. Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    1 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity; Unit: Physical Units or Btu. Distillate Coal Fuel Oil (excluding Coal Net Residual and Natural Gas(d) LPG and Coke and Breeze) NAICS Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(c) (billion NGL(e) (million Other(f) Code(a) End Use (trillion Btu) (million kWh) (million bbl) (million bbl) cu ft) (million bbl) short tons) (trillion Btu) Total United States

  20. Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity; Unit: Trillion Btu. Distillate Fuel Oil Coal NAICS Net Residual and LPG and (excluding Coal Code(a) End Use Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(c) Natural Gas(d) NGL(e) Coke and Breeze) Other(f) Total United States 311 - 339 ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 15,658 2,850 251 129 5,512 79 1,016 5,820 Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel --

  1. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes (3-Digit Only); Column: Energy Sources

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4.4 Number of Establishments by Offsite-Produced Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes (3-Digit Only); Column: Energy Sources Unit: Establishment Counts. Any NAICS Energy Residual Distillate LPG and Coke Code(a) Subsector and Industry Source(b) Electricity(c) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(d) Natural Gas(e) NGL(f) Coal and Breeze Other(g) Total United States 311 Food 14,128 14,109 326 1,462 11,395 2,920 67 13 1,149 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 580 580 15 174 445 269 35 0 144 311221

  2. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    1.4 Number of Establishments by First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2006; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments Unit: Establishment Counts. Any Shipments NAICS Energy Net Residual Distillate LPG and Coke and of Energy Sources Code(a) Subsector and Industry Source(b) Electricity(c) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(d) Natural Gas(e) NGL(f) Coal Breeze Other(g) Produced Onsite(h) Total United States 311 Food 14,128 14,113 326 1,475 11,399 2,947 67 15

  3. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    .4 Number of Establishments by First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2010; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments; Unit: Establishment Counts. Any Shipments NAICS Energy Net Residual Distillate LPG and Coke and of Energy Sources Code(a) Subsector and Industry Source(b) Electricity(c) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(d) Natural Gas(e) NGL(f) Coal Breeze Other(g) Produced Onsite(h) Total United States 311 Food 13,269 13,265 151 2,494 10,376 4,061 64 7

  4. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Usage within Cogeneration Technologies;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 Number of Establishments by Usage of Cogeneration Technologies, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Usage within Cogeneration Technologies; Unit: Establishment Counts. Establishments with Any Cogeneration NAICS Technology Code(a) Subsector and Industry Establishments(b) in Use(c) In Use(d) Not in Use Don't Know In Use(d) Not in Use Don't Know In Use(d) Not in Use Don't Know In Use(d) Not in Use Don't Know In Use(d) Not in Use Don't Know Total United States 311 Food 14,128 297

  5. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Usage within Cogeneration Technologies;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 Number of Establishments by Usage of Cogeneration Technologies, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Usage within Cogeneration Technologies; Unit: Establishment Counts. Establishments with Any Cogeneration NAICS Technology Code(a) Selected Subsectors and Industry Establishments(b) in Use(c) In Use(d) Not in Use(e) Don't Know In Use(d) Not in Use(e) Don't Know In Use(d) Not in Use(e) Don't Know In Use(d) Not in Use(e) Don't Know In Use(d) Not in Use(e) Don't Know Total United

  6. Level: National Data; Row: Specific Energy-Management Activities within NAICS Codes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Next MECS will be conducted in 2010 Table 8.4 Number of Establishments by Participation in Specific Energy-Management Activities, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: Specific Energy-Management Activities within NAICS Codes; Column: Participation; Unit: Establishment Counts. NAICS Code(a) Energy-Management Activity No Participation Participation(b) Don't Know Not Applicable Total United States 311 - 339 ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES Full-Time Energy Manager (c) 159,258 9,922 25,553 -- Set Goals for

  7. Level: National Data; Row: Specific Energy-Management Activities within NAICS Codes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Next MECS will be fielded in 2015 Table 8.4 Number of Establishments by Participation in Specific Energy-Management Activities, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: Specific Energy-Management Activities within NAICS Codes; Column: Participation; Unit: Establishment Counts. NAICS Code(a) Energy-Management Activity No Participation Participation(b) Don't Know No Steam Used Total United States 311 - 339 ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES Full-Time Energy Manager (c) 142,267 12,536 15,365 -- Set Goals for

  8. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity; Unit: Physical Units or Btu. Distillate Coal Fuel Oil (excluding Coal Net Demand Residual and Natural Gas(c) LPG and Coke and Breeze) for Electricity(a) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(b) (billion NGL(d) (million End Use (million kWh) (million bbl) (million bbl) cu ft) (million bbl) short tons) Total United States TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 977,338 40 22 5,357 21

  9. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Next MECS will be conducted in 2010 Table 5.8 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity; Unit: Trillion Btu. Distillate Fuel Oil Coal Net Demand Residual and LPG and (excluding Coal End Use for Electricity(a) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(b) Natural Gas(c) NGL(d) Coke and Breeze) Total United States TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 3,335 251 129 5,512 79 1,016 Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel 84 133 23 2,119 8 547

  10. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity; Unit: Physical Units or Btu. Distillate Coal Fuel Oil (excluding Coal Net Residual and Natural Gas(c) LPG and Coke and Breeze) Total Electricity(a) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(b) (billion NGL(d) (million Other(e) End Use (trillion Btu) (million kWh) (million bbl) (million bbl) cu ft) (million bbl) short tons) (trillion Btu) Total United States TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION

  11. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: End Uses; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Electricity; Unit: Trillion Btu. Distillate Fuel Oil Coal Net Residual and LPG and (excluding Coal End Use Total Electricity(a) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(b) Natural Gas(c) NGL(d) Coke and Breeze) Other(e) Total United States TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 15,658 2,850 251 129 5,512 79 1,016 5,820 Indirect Uses-Boiler Fue -- 41 133 23 2,119 8 547 -- Conventional Boiler Use 41 71 17

  12. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Energy Sources; Column: Consumption Potential;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Table 10.1 Nonswitchable Minimum and Maximum Consumption, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Energy Sources; Column: Consumption Potential; Unit: Physical Units. Actual Minimum Maximum Energy Sources Consumption Consumption(a) Consumption(b) Total United States Electricity Receipts(c) (million kilowatthour 854,102 826,077 889,281 Natural Gas (billion cubic feet) 5,357 4,442 5,649 Distillate Fuel Oil (thousand barrels) 22,139 19,251 101,340 Residual Fuel Oil (thousand barrels) 39,925

  13. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Capability to Switch Coal to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Million Short Tons. NAICS Total Not Electricity Natural Distillate Residual Code(a) Selected Subsectors and Industry Consumed(c) Switchable Switchable Receipts(d) Gas Fuel Oil Fuel Oil LPG Other(e) Total United States 311 Food 8 2 7 * 1 * * * * 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 6 1 4 0 1 * 0 * * 311221 Wet Corn

  14. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Capability to Switch Natural Gas to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Billion Cubic Feet. Coal Coke NAICS Total Not Electricity Distillate Residual and Code(a) Selected Subsectors and Industry Consumed(c) Switchable Switchable Receipts(d) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(e) Total United States 311 Food 563 139 416 12 72 26 4 35 * 13 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling

  15. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Capability to Switch Residual Fuel Oil to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Million Barrels. Coal Coke NAICS Total Not Electricity Natural Distillate and Code(a) Selected Subsectors and Industry Consumed(c) Switchable Switchable Receipts(d) Gas Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(e) Total United States 311 Food 2 1 1 * 1 * 0 0 0 * 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling * * * 0 * * 0 0

  16. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Capability to Switch Electricity to Alternative Energy Sources, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes, Value of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Million Kilowatthours. Coal Coke NAICS Total Not Natural Distillate Residual and Code(a) Selected Subsectors and Industry Receipts(c) Switchable Switchable Gas Fuel Oil Fuel Oil Coal LPG Breeze Other(d) Total United States 311 Food 75,673 2,403 70,987 666 1,658 Q 406 Q Q 141 3112 Grain and Oilseed

  17. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Electricity Components;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    1.1 Electricity: Components of Net Demand, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Electricity Components; Unit: Million Kilowatthours. Total Sales and Net Demand NAICS Transfers Onsite Transfers for Code(a) Subsector and Industry Purchases In(b) Generation(c) Offsite Electricity(d) Total United States 311 Food 73,242 309 4,563 111 78,003 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 15,283 253 2,845 72 18,310 311221 Wet Corn Milling 6,753 48 2,396 55 9,142 31131 Sugar Manufacturing

  18. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Next MECS will be conducted in 2010 Table 6.1 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2006 Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios Unit: Varies. Consumption Consumption per Dollar Consumption per Dollar of Value NAICS per Employee of Value Added of Shipments Code(a) Subsector and Industry (million Btu) (thousand Btu) (thousand Btu) Total United States 311 Food 879.8 5.0 2.2 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 6,416.6 17.5 5.7 311221 Wet Corn Milling 21,552.1 43.6

  19. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Next MECS will be fielded in 2015 Table 6.1 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios; Unit: Varies. Consumption Consumption per Dollar Consumption per Dollar of Value NAICS per Employee of Value Added of Shipments Code(a) Subsector and Industry (million Btu) (thousand Btu) (thousand Btu) Total United States 311 Food 871.7 4.3 1.8 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 6,239.5 10.5 3.6 311221 Wet Corn Milling 28,965.0 27.1

  20. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Onsite-Generation Components;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 Electricity: Components of Onsite Generation, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Onsite-Generation Components; Unit: Million Kilowatthours. Renewable Energy (excluding Wood NAICS Total Onsite and Code(a) Subsector and Industry Generation Cogeneration(b) Other Biomass)(c) Other(d) Total United States 311 Food 4,563 4,249 * 313 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 2,845 2,819 0 27 311221 Wet Corn Milling 2,396 2,370 0 27 31131 Sugar Manufacturing 951 951 0 * 3114 Fruit

  1. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Utility and Nonutility Purchasers;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Next MECS will be conducted in 2010 Table 11.5 Electricity: Sales to Utility and Nonutility Purchasers, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Utility and Nonutility Purchasers; Unit: Million Kilowatthours. Total of NAICS Sales and Utility Nonutility Code(a) Subsector and Industry Transfers Offsite Purchaser(b) Purchaser(c) Total United States 311 Food 111 86 25 3112 Grain and Oilseed Milling 72 51 21 311221 Wet Corn Milling 55 42 13 31131 Sugar Manufacturing 7 3 4

  2. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Selected NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    August 2009 Next MECS will be conducted in 2010 Table 3.6 Selected Wood and Wood-Related Products in Fuel Consumption, 2006 Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Selected NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources Unit: Trillion Btu. Wood Residues and Wood-Related Pulping Liquor Wood Byproducts and NAICS or Biomass Agricultural Harvested Directly from Mill Paper-Related Code(a) Subsector and Industry Black Liquor Total(b) Waste(c) from Trees(d) Processing(e) Refuse(f) Total United States 311 Food 0

  3. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    1.3 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes Column: Energy Sources and Shipments; Unit: Trillion Btu. Shipments Economic Net Residual Distillate LPG and Coke and of Energy Sources Characteristic(a) Total(b) Electricity(c) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(d) Natural Gas(e) NGL(f) Coal Breeze Other(g) Produced Onsite(h) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 1,166 367 23

  4. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2.3 Nonfuel (Feedstock) Use of Combustible Energy, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes Column: Energy Sources Unit: Trillion Btu Economic Residual Distillate LPG and Coke and Characteristic(a) Total Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(b) Natural Gas(c) NGL(d) Coal Breeze Other(e) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 47 0 3 5 Q 20 1 17 20-49 112 7 Q 20 1 12 1 64 50-99 247 29 Q 26 88 33 * 68 100-249 313 28 1 97 12 48 43 85

  5. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Electricity: Components of Net Demand, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Electricity Components; Unit: Million Kilowatthours. Sales and Net Demand Economic Total Onsite Transfers for Characteristic(a) Purchases Transfers In(b) Generation(c) Offsite Electricity(d) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 107,618 56 1,447 28 109,094 20-49 97,570 181 5,220 307 102,664 50-99 104,082 Q 3,784 2,218

  6. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Electricity: Components of Onsite Generation, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Onsite-Generation Components; Unit: Million Kilowatthours. Renewable Energy (excluding Wood Economic Total Onsite and Characteristic(a) Generation Cogeneration(b) Other Biomass)(c) Other(d) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 1,447 450 Q Q 20-49 5,220 5,106 29 Q 50-99 3,784 3,579 29 Q 100-249 17,821 17,115 484

  7. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Electricity: Sales to Utility and Nonutility Purchasers, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Utility and Nonutility Purchasers; Unit: Million Kilowatthours. Total of Economic Sales and Utility Nonutility Characteristic(a) Transfers Offsite Purchaser(b) Purchaser(c) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 28 28 0 20-49 307 227 80 50-99 2,218 1,673 545 100-249 2,647 1,437 1,210 250-499 3,736 2,271

  8. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3.3 Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Trillion Btu. Economic Net Residual Distillate LPG and Coke and Characteristic(a) Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(c) Natural Gas(d) NGL(e) Coal Breeze Other(f) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 1,139 367 23 45 535 14 21 3 131 20-49 1,122 333 13 19 530 8 93 5 122 50-99 1,309 349 22 17 549 10 157 8 197

  9. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4.3 Offsite-Produced Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy Sources; Unit: Trillion Btu. Economic Residual Distillate Natural LPG and Coke and Characteristic(a) Total Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Fuel Oil(c) Gas(d) NGL(e) Coal Breeze Other(f) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 1,066 367 23 45 535 13 21 3 59 20-49 1,063 334 13 18 530 8 93 5 63 50-99 1,233 357 22 16 549 10 157 8

  10. Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Consumption Ratios of Fuel, 2010; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: Values of Shipments and Employment Sizes; Column: Energy-Consumption Ratios; Unit: Varies. Consumption Consumption per Dollar Consumption per Dollar of Value Economic per Employee of Value Added of Shipments Characteristic(a) (million Btu) (thousand Btu) (thousand Btu) Total United States Value of Shipments and Receipts (million dollars) Under 20 405.4 4.0 2.1 20-49 631.3 4.7 2.2 50-99 832.0 4.9 2.3 100-249 1,313.4 6.2

  11. Solar Position Algorithm for Solar Radiation Applications (Revised...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Revised January 2008 * NRELTP-560-34302 Solar Position Algorithm for Solar Radiation Applications Ibrahim Reda and Afshin Andreas National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole...

  12. Microsoft Word - Transmittal Revised B6 Checlist and Additional...

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

    the Idaho National LaboratoryCentral Characterization Project Remote-Handled Waste Visual Examination Process, Audit A-10-03 Dear Mr. Zappe: This letter transmits the revised...

  13. Microsoft Word - CCP-PO-012-Revision 15

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    PO-012 Revision 15 CCP/Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Interface Document EFFECTIVE DATE: 01/23/2014 Mike Ramirez PRINTED NAME APPROVED FOR USE INFORMATION ONLY CCP-PO-012, Rev. 15 Effective Date: 01/23/2014 CCP/Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Interface Document Page 2 of 54 RECORD OF REVISION Revision Number Date Approved Description of Revision 0 10/21/2003 Initial Issue. 1 12/16/2003 Revised the Scope of the document. Updated Section 2.1 References. Updated Section 3.0, steps 3.7

  14. Energy Department Revises NEPA Regulations to Improve Efficiency |

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Department of Energy Revises NEPA Regulations to Improve Efficiency Energy Department Revises NEPA Regulations to Improve Efficiency October 3, 2011 - 12:39pm Addthis Washington, D.C. -- The U.S. Department of Energy will save time and money in its environmental reviews of many proposed energy projects under revised regulations approved September 27, 2011, to implement the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The revisions focus on the Department's categorical exclusion provisions, and

  15. DOE Revises its NEPA Regulations, Including Categorical Exclusions |

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Department of Energy Revises its NEPA Regulations, Including Categorical Exclusions DOE Revises its NEPA Regulations, Including Categorical Exclusions September 30, 2011 - 2:30pm Addthis On September 27, 2011, the Department of Energy (DOE) approved revisions to its National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations, and on September 28th, submitted the revisions to the Federal Register. The final regulations, which become effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, are

  16. Performance Assessment for the Idaho National Laboratory Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2012-05-01

    This performance assessment for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility at the Idaho National Laboratory documents the projected radiological dose impacts associated with the disposal of low-level radioactive waste at the facility. This assessment evaluates compliance with the applicable radiological criteria of the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for protection of the public and the environment. The calculations involve modeling transport of radionuclides from buried waste to surface soil and subsurface media, and eventually to members of the public via air, groundwater, and food chain pathways. Projections of doses are calculated for both offsite receptors and individuals who inadvertently intrude into the waste after site closure. The results of the calculations are used to evaluate the future performance of the low-level radioactive waste disposal facility and to provide input for establishment of waste acceptance criteria. In addition, one-factor-at-a-time, Monte Carlo, and rank correlation analyses are included for sensitivity and uncertainty analysis. The comparison of the performance assessment results to the applicable performance objectives provides reasonable expectation that the performance objectives will be met

  17. 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.

  18. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Usage within General Energy-Saving Technologies;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Number of Establishments by Usage of General Energy-Saving Technologies, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Usage within General Energy-Saving Technologies; Unit: Establishment Counts. NAICS Code(a) Subsector and Industry Establishments(b) In Use(e) Not in Use Don't Know In Use(e) Not in Use Don't Know In Use(e) Not in Use Don't Know In Use(e) Not in Use Don't Know In Use(e) Not in Use Don't Know Total United States 311 Food 14,128 1,632 9,940 2,556 3,509 8,048 2,571 1,590

  19. Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Usage within General Energy-Saving Technologies;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Number of Establishments by Usage of General Energy-Saving Technologies, 2010; Level: National Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Usage within General Energy-Saving Technologies; Unit: Establishment Counts. NAICS Code(a) Selected Subsectors and Industry Establishments(b) In Use(e) Not in Use(f) Don't Know In Use(e) Not in Use(f) Don't Know In Use(e) Not in Use(f) Don't Know In Use(e) Not in Use(f) Don't Know In Use(e) Not in Use(f) Don't Know Total United States 311 Food 13,271 1,849 10,454 968

  20. Level 3 Baseline Risk Assessment for Building 3515 at Oak Ridge National Lab., Oak Ridge, TN

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wollert, D.A.; Cretella, F.M.; Golden, K.M.

    1995-08-01

    The baseline risk assessment for the Fission Product Pilot Plant (Building 3515) at the Oak Ridge National laboratory (ORNL) provides the Decontamination and Decommissioning (D&D) Program at ORNL and Building 3515 project managers with information concerning the results of the Level 3 baseline risk assessment performed for this building. The document was prepared under Work Breakdown Structure 1.4.12.6.2.01 (Activity Data Sheet 3701, Facilities D&D) and includes information on the potential long-term impacts to human health and the environment if no action is taken to remediate Building 3515. Information provided in this document forms the basis for the development of remedial alternatives and the no-action risk portion of the Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis report.

  1. Landfill impacts on aquatic plant communities and tissue metal levels at Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stewart, P.M. [National Biological Service, Porter, IN (United States). Lake Michigan Ecological Station; Scribailo, R.W. [Purdue Univ.North Central, Westville, IN (United States). Section of Biology and Chemistry

    1995-12-31

    One important environmental issue facing Northwest Indiana and park management at Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore (INOU) is the contamination of water, sediment and biota by persistent toxic substances. Aquatic plant communities were used to evaluate the water/organismal quality of the Grand Calumet Lagoons and two dunal ponds (pannes) at Gary, Indiana, which are partially located in the Miller Woods Unit of INDU. The lagoon is divided into several areas, the USX Lagoon is located between sections of a large industrial landfill (steel slag and other material). The Marquette Lagoon is located further away from the landfill and tends to be upgradient from the landfill. The West Panne (WP) is located next to the landfill, while the East Panne (EP) is separated from the landfill and the WP by a high dune ridge. Plant populations shift toward fewer submergent aquatics, with a higher abundance of tolerant taxa in the western section of the USX Lagoon. These differences are supported by cluster analysis. Heavy metals in root tissue of Scirpus americanus and other plant species from the pannes were significantly higher than those found in shoots. Shoot tissue metal levels in plants collected from the lagoons were higher than root tissue metal levels. The WP site has the most elevated tissue metal levels for most metals assayed, while the EP site shows similar contaminant levels. The plant distributions observed and tissue metal concentrations measured suggest that INDU`s aquatic plant community has been affected by the industrial landfill and that there exists a hydrological connection between the ponds.

  2. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Facilities Division- Optimizing Activity-level Work Planning and Control Lessons Learned

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Presenter: Ken Fletcher, Deputy Division Director for Facilities, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

  3. LOW-LEVEL WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY FEDERAL REVIEW GROUP EXECUTION PLAN

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    LOW-LEVEL WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY FEDERAL REVIEW GROUP EXECUTION PLAN Los Alamos National Laboratory Paducah Idaho National Laboratory Hanford Site Savannah River Site Nevada National Security Site Oak Ridge Portsmouth Revision 0 September 2015 3 Contents Acronyms ........................................................................................................................................ 5 1.0 Introduction

  4. Revised Manuscript

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

    Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A 19 D.R. Tilley a,b , H.R. Weller a,c and C.M. Cheves a,c ... calcs. of 17,19 N, 19,21 O levels 1989SA1H Second class currents & neutrino mass in ...

  5. Ecosystem level assessment of the Grand Calumet Lagoons, Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stewart, P.M. [National Biological Service, Porter, IN (United States)

    1995-12-31

    The Grand Calumet Lagoons make up the eastern section of the Grand Calumet River (GCR), Indiana Harbor and Ship Canal and nearshore Lake Michigan Area of Concern (AOC). The GCR AOC is the only one of the 42 Great Lakes Areas of Concern identified by the International Joint Commission with all 14 designated uses classified as impaired. Included within the boundaries of the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore (INDU), is the central section of the Grand Calumet Lagoons. A number of biotic and abiotic factors were tested to determine the effects of an industrial landfill that borders the lagoons to assess the potential impact on park resources. Analysis included water quality testing, assessments of macroinvertebrate, fish, algae and aquatic plant communities and contaminant concentrations in water, sediment and plant and fish tissue. Surface water testing found very few contaminants, but significantly higher nutrient levels were found in the water column closest to the landfill. Macroinvertebrate, aquatic plant and fish communities all showed significant impairment in relationship to their proximity to the landfill. Aquatic plant growth habit became limited next to the landfill with certain growth habits disappearing entirely. Aquatic plants collected close to the landfill had high concentrations of several heavy metals in their stems and shoots. Using the index of biotic integrity (IBI), fish community assessment indicated impairment in the areas adjacent to the landfill. Sediments tested at one site had over 12% polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and carp (Cyprinus carpio) collected from this site had whole fish tissue concentrations over 1 mg/kg PAH.

  6. Revised Manuscript

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

    4 January 2016 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A 5 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A 5-10 was...

  7. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 567: Miscellaneous Soil Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, with ROTC 1 Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Matthews, Patrick K.

    2013-07-01

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 567 is located in Areas 1, 3, 5, 20, and 25 of the Nevada National Security Site, which is approximately 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. CAU 567 is a grouping of sites where there has been a suspected release of contamination associated with nuclear testing. This document describes the planned investigation of CAU 567, which comprises the following corrective action sites (CASs): • 01-23-03, Atmospheric Test Site T-1 • 03-23-25, Seaweed E Contamination Area • 05-23-07, A5b RMA • 20-23-08, Colby Mud Spill • 25-23-23, J-11 Soil RMA These sites are being investigated because existing information on the nature and extent of potential contamination is insufficient to evaluate and recommend corrective action alternatives (CAAs). Additional information will be obtained by conducting a corrective action investigation before evaluating CAAs and selecting the appropriate corrective action for each CAS. The results of the field investigation will support a defensible evaluation of viable CAAs that will be presented in the investigation report. The sites will be investigated based on the data quality objectives (DQOs) developed on May 6, 2013, by representatives of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office. The DQO process was used to identify and define the type, amount, and quality of data needed to develop and evaluate appropriate corrective actions for CAU 567. The site investigation process will also be conducted in accordance with the Soils Activity Quality Assurance Plan, which establishes requirements, technical planning, and general quality practices to be applied to this activity. The potential contamination sources associated with CAU 567 releases are nuclear test operations and other NNSS operations. The DQO process resulted in an assumption that total effective dose (TED) within a default contamination boundary at Atmospheric Test Site T-1 exceeds the final action level (FAL) and requires corrective action. The presence and nature of contamination outside the default contamination boundary at Atmospheric Test Site T-1 and all other CAU 567 CASs will be evaluated based on information collected from a field investigation. Radiological contamination will be evaluated based on a comparison of the TED at sample locations to the dose-based FAL. The TED will be calculated as the total of separate estimates of internal and external dose. Results from the analysis of soil samples will be used to calculate internal radiological dose. Thermoluminescent dosimeters placed at the center of each sample location will be used to measure external radiological dose. Appendix A provides a detailed discussion of the DQO methodology and the DQOs specific to each CAS.

  8. Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 372: Area 20 Cabriolet/Palanquin Unit Craters, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Matthews, Patrick and Sloop, Christy

    2011-04-01

    This Corrective Action Decision Document (CADD)/Closure Report (CR) has been prepared for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 372, Area 20 Cabriolet/Palanquin Unit Craters, located within Areas 18 and 20 at the Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, in accordance with the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO). Corrective Action Unit 372 comprises four corrective action sites (CASs): • 18-45-02, Little Feller I Surface Crater • 18-45-03, Little Feller II Surface Crater • 20-23-01, U-20k Contamination Area • 20-45-01, U-20L Crater (Cabriolet) The purpose of this CADD/CR is to provide justification and documentation supporting the recommendation that no further corrective action is needed for CAU 372 based on the implementation of the corrective action of closure in place with administrative controls at all CASs. Corrective action investigation (CAI) activities were performed from November 9, 2009, through December 10, 2010, as set forth in the Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 372: Area 20 Cabriolet/Palanquin Unit Craters. The approach for the CAI was divided into two facets: investigation of the primary release of radionuclides and investigation of other releases (migration in washes and chemical releases). The purpose of the CAI was to fulfill data needs as defined during the data quality objective (DQO) process. The CAU 372 dataset of investigation results was evaluated based on a data quality assessment. This assessment demonstrated the dataset is acceptable for use in fulfilling the DQO data needs. Investigation results were evaluated against final action levels (FALs) established in this document. A radiological dose FAL was established of 25 millirem per year based on the Remote Work Area exposure scenario (336 hours of annual exposure). Radiological doses exceeding the FAL were found to be present at all four CASs. It is assumed that radionuclide levels present within the Little Feller I and Cabriolet high contamination areas and within the craters at Palanquin and Cabriolet exceed the FAL. It is also assumed that potential source material in the form of lead bricks at Little Feller I and lead-acid batteries at Palanquin and Cabriolet exceed the FAL. Therefore, corrective actions were undertaken that consist of removing potential source material, where present, and implementing a use restriction and posting warning signs at each CAS. These use restrictions were recorded in the FFACO database; the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) Facility Information Management System; and the NNSA/NSO CAU/CAS files. Therefore, NNSA/NSO provides the following recommendations: • No further corrective actions are necessary for CAU 372. • A Notice of Completion to NNSA/NSO is requested from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for closure of CAU 372. • Corrective Action Unit 372 should be moved from Appendix III to Appendix IV of the FFACO.

  9. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 569: Area 3 Yucca Flat Atmospheric Test Sites Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Patrick Matthews; Christy Sloop

    2012-02-01

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 569 is located in Area 3 of the Nevada National Security Site, which is approximately 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. Corrective Action Unit 569 comprises the nine numbered corrective action sites (CASs) and one newly identified site listed below: (1) 03-23-09, T-3 Contamination Area (hereafter referred to as Annie, Franklin, George, and Moth); (2) 03-23-10, T-3A Contamination Area (hereafter referred to as Harry and Hornet); (3) 03-23-11, T-3B Contamination Area (hereafter referred to as Fizeau); (4) 03-23-12, T-3S Contamination Area (hereafter referred to as Rio Arriba); (5) 03-23-13, T-3T Contamination Area (hereafter referred to as Catron); (6) 03-23-14, T-3V Contamination Area (hereafter referred to as Humboldt); (7) 03-23-15, S-3G Contamination Area (hereafter referred to as Coulomb-B); (8) 03-23-16, S-3H Contamination Area (hereafter referred to as Coulomb-A); (9) 03-23-21, Pike Contamination Area (hereafter referred to as Pike); and (10) Waste Consolidation Site 3A. Because CAU 569 is a complicated site containing many types of releases, it was agreed during the data quality objectives (DQO) process that these sites will be grouped. These sites are being investigated because existing information on the nature and extent of potential contamination is insufficient to evaluate and recommend corrective action alternatives (CAAs). Additional information will be obtained by conducting a corrective action investigation before evaluating CAAs and selecting the appropriate corrective action for each study group. The results of the field investigation will support a defensible evaluation of viable CAAs that will be presented in the Corrective Action Decision Document. The sites will be investigated based on the DQOs developed on September 26, 2011, by representatives of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office. The DQO process was used to identify and define the type, amount, and quality of data needed to develop and evaluate appropriate corrective actions for CAU 569. The presence and nature of contamination at CAU 569 will be evaluated based on information collected from a field investigation. Radiological contamination will be evaluated based on a comparison of the total effective dose (TED) at sample locations to the dose-based final action level (FAL). The TED will be calculated as the total of separate estimates of internal and external dose. Results from the analysis of soil samples will be used to calculate internal radiological dose. Thermoluminescent dosimeters placed at the center of each sample location will be used to measure external radiological dose. A field investigation will be performed to define any areas where TED exceeds the FAL and to determine whether contaminants of concern are present at the site from other potential releases. The presence and nature of contamination from other types of releases (e.g., excavation, migration, and any potential releases discovered during the investigation) will be evaluated using soil samples collected from biased locations indicating the highest levels of contamination. Appendix A provides a detailed discussion of the DQO methodology and the objectives specific to each study group.

  10. Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 365: Baneberry Contamination Area, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Patrick Matthews

    2011-09-01

    Corrective Action Unit 365 comprises one corrective action site (CAS), CAS 08-23-02, U-8d Contamination Area. The purpose of this CADD/CR is to provide justification and documentation supporting the recommendation that no further corrective action is needed for CAU 365 based on the implementation of the corrective action of closure in place with a use restriction (UR). Corrective action investigation (CAI) activities were performed from January 18, 2011, through August 2, 2011, as set forth in the Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 365: Baneberry Contamination Area. The purpose of the CAI was to fulfill data needs as defined during the data quality objective (DQO) process. The CAU 365 dataset of investigation results was evaluated based on a data quality assessment. This assessment demonstrated the dataset is complete and acceptable for use in supporting the DQO decisions. Investigation results were evaluated against final action levels (FALs) established in this document. A radiological dose FAL of 25 millirem per year was established based on the Remote Work Area exposure scenario (336 hours of annual exposure). Radiological doses exceeding the FAL were found to be present to the southwest of the Baneberry crater. It was also assumed that radionuclide levels present within the crater and fissure exceed the FAL. Corrective actions were undertaken that consisted of establishing a UR and posting warning signs for the crater, fissure, and the area located to the southwest of the crater where soil concentrations exceeded the FAL. These URs were recorded in the FFACO database; the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) Facility Information Management System; and the NNSA/NSO CAU/CAS files. Therefore, NNSA/NSO provides the following recommendations: (1) No further corrective actions beyond what are described in this document are necessary for CAU 365. (2) A Notice of Completion to NNSA/NSO is requested from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for closure of CAU 365. (3) Corrective Action Unit 365 should be moved from Appendix III to Appendix IV of the FFACO.

  11. Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 539: Areas 25 and 26 Railroad Tracks Nevada National Security Site, Nevada with ROTC-1, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mark Kauss

    2011-06-01

    This Closure Report (CR) presents information supporting the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 539: Areas 25 and 26 Railroad Tracks, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada. This CR complies with the requirements of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) that was agreed to by the State of Nevada; U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Management; U.S. Department of Defense; and DOE, Legacy Management. The corrective action sites (CASs) within CAU 539 are located within Areas 25 and 26 of the Nevada National Security Site. Corrective Action Unit 539 comprises the following CASs: • 25-99-21, Area 25 Railroad Tracks • 26-99-05, Area 26 Railroad Tracks The purpose of this CR is to provide documentation supporting the completed corrective actions and provide data confirming that the closure objectives for CASs within CAU 539 were met. To achieve this, the following actions were performed: • Reviewed documentation on historical and current site conditions, including the concentration and extent of contamination. • Conducted radiological walkover surveys of railroad tracks in both Areas 25 and 26. • Collected ballast and soil samples and calculated internal dose estimates for radiological releases. • Collected in situ thermoluminescent dosimeter measurements and calculated external dose estimates for radiological releases. • Removed lead bricks as potential source material (PSM) and collected verification samples. • Implemented corrective actions as necessary to protect human health and the environment. • Properly disposed of corrective action and investigation wastes. • Implemented an FFACO use restriction (UR) for radiological contamination at CAS 25-99-21. The approved UR form and map are provided in Appendix F and will be filed in the DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO), Facility Information Management System; the FFACO database; and the NNSA/NSO CAU/CAS files. From November 29, 2010, through May 2, 2011, closure activities were performed as set forth in the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan for Corrective Action Unit 539: Areas 25 and 26 Railroad Tracks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada. The purposes of the activities as defined during the data quality objectives process were as follows: • Determine whether contaminants of concern (COCs) are present. • If COCs are present, determine their nature and extent, implement appropriate corrective actions, and properly dispose of wastes. Analytes detected during the closure activities were evaluated against final action levels (FALs) to determine COCs for CAU 539. Assessment of the data generated from closure activities revealed the following: • At CAS 26-99-05, the total effective dose for radiological releases did not exceed the FAL of 25 millirem per Industrial Area year. Potential source material in the form of lead bricks was found at three locations. A corrective action of clean closure was implemented at these locations, and verification samples indicated that no further action is necessary. • At CAS 25-99-21, the total effective dose for radiological releases exceeds the FAL of 25 millirem per Industrial Area year. Potential source material in the form of lead bricks was found at eight locations. A corrective action was implemented by removing the lead bricks and soil above FALs at these locations, and verification samples indicated that no further action is necessary. Pieces of debris with high radioactivity were identified as PSM and remain within the CAS boundary. A corrective action of closure in place with a UR was implemented at this CAS because closure activities showed evidence of remaining soil contamination and radioactive PSM. Future land use will be restricted from surface and intrusive activities. Closure activities generated waste streams consisting of industrial solid waste, recyclable materials, low-level radioactive waste, and mixed low-level radioactive waste. Wastes were disposed of in the appropriate onsite landfills. The NNSA/NSO provides the following recommendations: • Clean closure is required at CAS 26-99-05. • Closure in place is required at CAS 25-99-21. • A UR is required at CAS 25-99-21. • A Notice of Completion to the NNSA/NSO is requested from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for closure of CAU 539. • Corrective Action Unit 539 should be moved from Appendix III to Appendix IV of the FFACO.

  12. Revised Manuscript

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

    Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A 4 D.R. Tilley 1,2 and H.R. Weller 1,3 1 Traingle ... Information relating to unbound states in 4 H, 4 He, and 4 Li is presented and discussed. ...

  13. Revised Manuscript

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

    Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A 18 D.R. Tilley a,b , H.R. Weller a,c and C.M. Cheves a,c ... of nuclei far from stability 1994BO1H Summary of recent research employing ...

  14. Revised Manuscript

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

    Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A 20 D.R. Tilley a,b , C.M. Cheves a,c , J.H. Kelley a,c , S. Raman d and H.R. Weller a,c a Triangle Universities Nuclear Laboratory, Durham, NC ...

  15. Revised Manuscript

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

    Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A 9 D.R. Tilley a,b , J.H. Kelley a,b , J.L. Godwin a,c , D.J. Millener d J. Purcell a,e , C.G. Sheu a,c and H.R. Weller a,c a Triangle Universities ...

  16. Revised Manuscript

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

    Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A 7 D.R. Tilley a,b , C.M. Cheves a,c , J.L. Godwin a,c , G.M. Hale d , H.M. Hofmann e , J.H. Kelley a,b , C.G. Sheu a,c and H.R. Weller a,c a ...

  17. Revised Manuscript

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

    Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A 6 D.R. Tilley a,b , C.M. Cheves a,c , J.L. Godwin a,c , G.M. Hale d , H.M. Hofmann e , J.H. Kelley a,b , C.G. Sheu a,c and H.R. Weller a,c a ...

  18. Revised Manuscript

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

    Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A 17 D.R. Tilley a,b , H.R. Weller a,c and C.M. Cheves a,c ... The low- energy spectra were investigated by (1990LI1Q), who included 2h-1p multiple ...

  19. Revised Manuscript

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

    Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A 8 D.R. Tilley a,b , J.H. Kelley a,b , J.L. Godwin a,c , D.J. Millener d J. Purcell a,e , C.G. Sheu a,c and H.R. Weller a,c a Triangle Universities ...

  20. Revised Manuscript

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

    1 May, 2012 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A 11 J.H. Kelley a,b , E. Kwan a,c , J.E. Purcell a,d , C.G. Sheu a,c , and H.R. Weller a,c a Triangle Universities Nuclear Laboratory, ...

  1. Determination of low-level radioactivity in environmental samples by gamma spectroscopy at Argonne National Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Streets, W.E.; Heinrich, R.R.; Lamoureux, L.L.

    1988-01-01

    We currently have six Ge/Ge(Li) detectors that are being used for gamma counting of environmental samples (three with horizontal geometry, three with vertical geometry). The detectors were calibrated for close-geometry efficiency by counting standards in a set configuration (a height of 6.4 cm in a 4-oz. wide-mouthed Naglene bottle) immediately adjacent to the cryostat face. This configuration was chosen so that the standards would be symmetrical to the centers of both the horizontal and vertical detectors. Two solid standards were prepared by adding a known amount of Standard Reference Material NBL No. 6-A (Pitchblende) and NBL No. 7-A (Monazite Sand) to a blanked soil and mixing. Homogeneity of the standards was checked by counting each standard at each quadrant (on a horizontal detector). The final mixtures showed less than 1% deviation between the high and low quadrant counts. Two liquid secondary standards were prepared from stock solutions of /sup 137/Cs, /sup 131/I, and /sup 110m/Ag, which has been characterized as point sources using several detector efficiency curves. These efficiencies were determined using point source standards from the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). All standards had activity levels that allowed less than 1% counting statistics to be obtained on the major peaks (i.e., those with stronger branching ratio) within two hours. Analysis of the resulting data yield smooth efficiency curves for each of the six detectors. Although the standard compositions varied, solid and liquid, the densities were all approx. =1.0 g/cm/sup 3/. 3 refs.

  2. Revised Manuscript

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

    30 October 2012 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 13 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 13-15 was published in Nuclear Physics A523 (1991), p. 1. This version of A = 13 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. The introduction and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the

  3. Revised Manuscript

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

    5 November 2012 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 14 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 13-15 was published in Nuclear Physics A523 (1991), p. 1. This version of A = 14 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. The introduction and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the

  4. Revised Manuscript

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

    8 November 2010 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 6 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A490 (1988), p. 1. This version of A = 6 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. The introduction and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the

  5. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 105: Area 2 Yucca Flat Atmospheric Test Sites Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Patrick Matthews

    2012-09-01

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 105 is located in Area 2 of the Nevada National Security Site, which is approximately 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. CAU 105 is a geographical grouping of sites where there has been a suspected release of contamination associated with atmospheric nuclear testing. This document describes the planned investigation of CAU 105, which comprises the following corrective action sites (CASs): • 02-23-04, Atmospheric Test Site - Whitney • 02-23-05, Atmospheric Test Site T-2A • 02-23-06, Atmospheric Test Site T-2B • 02-23-08, Atmospheric Test Site T-2 • 02-23-09, Atmospheric Test Site - Turk These sites are being investigated because existing information on the nature and extent of potential contamination is insufficient to evaluate and recommend corrective action alternatives (CAAs). Additional information will be obtained by conducting a corrective action investigation before evaluating CAAs and selecting the appropriate corrective action for each CAS. The results of the field investigation will support a defensible evaluation of viable CAAs that will be presented in the Corrective Action Decision Document. The sites will be investigated based on the data quality objectives (DQOs) developed on April 30, 2012, by representatives of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office. The DQO process was used to identify and define the type, amount, and quality of data needed to develop and evaluate appropriate corrective actions for CAU 105. The site investigation process will also be conducted in accordance with the Soils Activity Quality Assurance Plan, which establishes requirements, technical planning, and general quality practices to be applied to this activity. The potential contamination sources associated with all CAU 105 CASs are from atmospheric nuclear testing activities. The presence and nature of contamination at CAU 105 will be evaluated based on information collected from a field investigation. Radiological contamination will be evaluated based on a comparison of the total effective dose at sample locations to the dose-based final action level. The total effective dose will be calculated as the total of separate estimates of internal and external dose. Results from the analysis of soil samples will be used to calculate internal radiological dose. Thermoluminescent dosimeters placed at the center of each sample location will be used to measure external radiological dose. Appendix A provides a detailed discussion of the DQO methodology and the DQOs specific to each CAS. This Corrective Action Investigation Plan has been developed in accordance with the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order that was agreed to by the State of Nevada; DOE, Environmental Management; U.S. Department of Defense; and DOE, Legacy Management. Under the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, this Corrective Action Investigation Plan will be submitted to the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for approval. Fieldwork will be conducted after the plan is approved.

  6. Revised Manuscript

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

    5 September 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 7 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A413 (1984), p. 1. This version of A = 7 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and Introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Also, Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  7. Revised Manuscript

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

    4 April 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 7 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A490 (1988), p. 1. This version of A = 7 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. The introduction and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  8. Revised Manuscript

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

    9 September 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 8 F. Ajzenberg-Selove a and T. Lauritsen b a University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 b California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-24 was published in Nuclear Physics 11 (1959), p. 1. This version of A = 8 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discov- ered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted

  9. Revised Manuscript

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

    7 August 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 8 T. Lauritsen a and F. Ajzenberg-Selove b a California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California b University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics 78 (1966), p. 1. This version of A = 8 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors dis- covered after the article went to press. Figures and ntroductory tables have been omitted from

  10. Revised Manuscript

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

    2 September 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 9 T. Lauritsen a and F. Ajzenberg-Selove b a California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California b University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics 78 (1966), p. 1. This version of A = 9 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discov- ered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted

  11. Revised Manuscript

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

    7 March 2016 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 10 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A227 (1974), p. 1. This version of A = 10 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the TUNL/NNDC format.

  12. Revised Manuscript

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

    5 May 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 11 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 11-12 was published in Nuclear Physics A433 (1985), p. 1. This version of A = 11 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL format.

  13. Revised Manuscript

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

    5 June 2012 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 11 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 11-12 was published in Nuclear Physics A506 (1990), p. 1. This version of A = 11 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers are in the NNDC/TUNL format. (References

  14. Revised Manuscript

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

    3 July 2015 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 12 F. Ajzenberg-Selove a and T. Lauritsen b a University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 b California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California Abstract: An evaluation of A = 11-12 was published in Nuclear Physics A114 (1968), p. 1. This version of A = 12 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from

  15. Revised Manuscript

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

    24 February 2016 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 12 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 11-12 was published in Nuclear Physics A248 (1975), p. 1. This version of A = 12 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  16. Revised Manuscript

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

    3 February 2009 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 13 F. Ajzenberg-Selove a and T. Lauritsen b a University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 b California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-24 was published in Nuclear Physics 11 (1959), p. 1. This version of A = 13 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors dis- covered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted

  17. Revised Manuscript

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

    02 April 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 13 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 13-15 was published in Nuclear Physics A152 (1970), p. 1. This version of A = 13 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  18. Revised Manuscript

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

    2 July 2015 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 13 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 13-15 was published in Nuclear Physics A268 (1976), p. 1. This version of A = 13 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL format.

  19. Revised Manuscript

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

    15 July 2015 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 13 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 13-15 was published in Nuclear Physics A360 (1981), p. 1. This version of A = 13 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Also, Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  20. Revised Manuscript

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

    1 March 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 13 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 13-15 was published in Nuclear Physics A449 (1986), p. 1. This version of A = 13 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  1. Revised Manuscript

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

    14 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 14 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 13-15 was published in Nuclear Physics A360 (1981), p. 1. This version of A = 14 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Also, Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL format.

  2. Revised Manuscript

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

    10 April 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 14 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 13-15 was published in Nuclear Physics A449 (1986), p. 1. This version of A = 14 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  3. Revised Manuscript

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

    3 February 2009 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 15 F. Ajzenberg-Selove a and T. Lauritsen b a University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 b California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-24 was published in Nuclear Physics 11 (1959), p. 1. This version of A = 15 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors dis- covered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted

  4. Revised Manuscript

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

    6 June 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 15 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 13-15 was published in Nuclear Physics A152 (1970), p. 1. This version of A = 15 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL format.

  5. Revised Manuscript

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

    2 April 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 15 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 13-15 was published in Nuclear Physics A449 (1986), p. 1. This version of A = 15 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  6. Revised Manuscript

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

    May 2015 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 16 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 16-17 was published in Nuclear Physics A281 (1977), p. 1. This version of A = 16 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL format.

  7. Revised Manuscript

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

    1 July 2014 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 17 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 16-17 was published in Nuclear Physics A375 (1982), p. 1. This version of A = 17 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Also, Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  8. Revised Manuscript

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

    0 January 2013 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 17 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 16-17 was published in Nuclear Physics A460 (1986), p. 1. This version of A = 17 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  9. Revised Manuscript

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

    20 November 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 18 F. Ajzenberg-Selove a and T. Lauritsen b a University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 b California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-24 was published in Nuclear Physics 11 (1959), p. 1. This version of A = 18 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors dis- covered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted

  10. Revised Manuscript

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

    7 March 2015 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 18 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 18-20 was published in Nuclear Physics A300 (1978), p. 1. This version of A = 18 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  11. Revised Manuscript

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

    0 December 2012 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 19 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 18-20 was published in Nuclear Physics A475 (1987), p. 1. This version of A = 19 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  12. Revised Manuscript

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

    3 February 2009 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 20 F. Ajzenberg-Selove a and T. Lauritsen b a University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 b California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-24 was published in Nuclear Physics 11 (1959), p. 1. This version of A = 20 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors dis- covered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted

  13. Revised Manuscript

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

    4 February 2015 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 20 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 18-20 was published in Nuclear Physics A300 (1978), p. 1. This version of A = 20 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  14. Revised Manuscript

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

    3 March 2014 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 20 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 18-20 was published in Nuclear Physics A392 (1983), p. 1. This version of A = 20 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  15. Revised Manuscript

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

    7 November 2012 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 20 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 18-20 was published in Nuclear Physics A475 (1987), p. 1. This version of A = 20 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  16. Revised Manuscript

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

    March 2010 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 5 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A490 (1988), p. 1. This version of A = 5 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. The introduction and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the NNDC/TUNL

  17. Revised Manuscript

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

    5 August 2008 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 6 T. Lauritsen a and F. Ajzenberg-Selove b a California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California b University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics 78 (1966), p. 1. This version of A = 6 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discov- ered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from

  18. Revised Manuscript

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

    7 January 2016 Energy Levels of Light Nuclei A = 6 F. Ajzenberg-Selove University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6396 Abstract: An evaluation of A = 5-10 was published in Nuclear Physics A227 (1974), p. 1. This version of A = 6 differs from the published version in that we have corrected some errors discovered after the article went to press. Figures and introductory tables have been omitted from this manuscript. Reference key numbers have been changed to the TUNL/NNDC format.

  19. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 571: Area 9 Yucca Flat Plutonium Dispersion Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bailey, Bernadine; Matthews, Patrick

    2013-07-01

    CAU 571 is a grouping of sites where there has been a suspected release of contamination associated with nuclear testing. This document describes the planned investigation of CAU 571, which comprises the following corrective action sites (CASs): • 09-23-03, Atmospheric Test Site S-9F • 09-23-04, Atmospheric Test Site T9-C • 09-23-12, Atmospheric Test Site S-9E • 09-23-13, Atmospheric Test Site T-9D • 09-45-01, Windrows Crater These sites are being investigated because existing information on the nature and extent of potential contamination is insufficient to evaluate and recommend corrective action alternatives (CAAs). Additional information will be obtained by conducting a corrective action investigation before evaluating CAAs and selecting the appropriate corrective action for each CAS. The results of the field investigation will support a defensible evaluation of viable CAAs that will be presented in the investigation report. The sites will be investigated based on the data quality objectives (DQOs) developed on March 6, 2013, by representatives of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (now the Nevada Field Office). The DQO process was used to identify and define the type, amount, and quality of data needed to develop and evaluate appropriate corrective actions for CAU 571. The site investigation process will also be conducted in accordance with the Soils Activity Quality Assurance Plan, which establishes requirements, technical planning, and general quality practices to be applied to this activity. The potential contamination sources associated with CAU 571 CASs are from nuclear testing activities. The DQO process resulted in an assumption that total effective dose (TED) within a default contamination boundary exceeds the final action level (FAL) and requires corrective action. The presence and nature of contamination outside the default contamination boundaries at CAU 571 will be evaluated based on information collected from a field investigation. Radiological contamination will be evaluated based on a comparison of the TED at sample locations to the dose-based FAL. The TED will be calculated as the total of separate estimates of internal and external dose. Results from the analysis of soil samples will be used to calculate internal radiological dose. Thermoluminescent dosimeters placed at the center of each sample location will be used to measure external radiological dose. Chemical contamination will be evaluated by comparing soil sample results to the FAL. Appendix A provides a detailed discussion of the DQO methodology and the DQOs specific to each CAS.

  20. Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 106: Area 5, 11 Frenchman Flat Atmospheric Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Patrick Matthews and Dawn Peterson

    2011-09-01

    Corrective Action Unit 106 comprises four corrective action sites (CASs): (1) 05-20-02, Evaporation Pond; (2) 05-23-05, Atmospheric Test Site - Able; (3) 05-45-04, 306 GZ Rad Contaminated Area; (4) 05-45-05, 307 GZ Rad Contaminated Area. The purpose of this CADD/CR is to provide justification and documentation supporting the recommendation that no further corrective action is needed for CAU 106 based on the implementation of corrective actions. The corrective action of clean closure was implemented at CASs 05-45-04 and 05-45-05, while no corrective action was necessary at CASs 05-20-02 and 05-23-05. Corrective action investigation (CAI) activities were performed from October 20, 2010, through June 1, 2011, as set forth in the Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 106: Areas 5, 11 Frenchman Flat Atmospheric Sites. The approach for the CAI was divided into two facets: investigation of the primary release of radionuclides, and investigation of other releases (mechanical displacement and chemical releases). The purpose of the CAI was to fulfill data needs as defined during the data quality objective (DQO) process. The CAU 106 dataset of investigation results was evaluated based on a data quality assessment. This assessment demonstrated the dataset is complete and acceptable for use in fulfilling the DQO data needs. Investigation results were evaluated against final action levels (FALs) established in this document. A radiological dose FAL of 25 millirem per year was established based on the Industrial Area exposure scenario (2,250 hours of annual exposure). The only radiological dose exceeding the FAL was at CAS 05-45-05 and was associated with potential source material (PSM). It is also assumed that additional PSM in the form of depleted uranium (DU) and DU-contaminated debris at CASs 05-45-04 and 05-45-05 exceed the FAL. Therefore, corrective actions were undertaken at these CASs that consisted of removing PSM and collecting verification samples. Results of verification samples show that remaining soil does not contain contamination exceeding the FALs. Therefore, the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) provides the following recommendations: (1) No further corrective actions are necessary for CAU 106. (2) A Notice of Completion to NNSA/NSO is requested from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for closure of CAU 106. (3) Corrective Action Unit 106 should be moved from Appendix III to Appendix IV of the FFACO.

  1. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 570: Area 9 Yucca Flat Atmospheric Test Sites Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Patrick Matthews

    2012-08-01

    CAU 570 comprises the following six corrective action sites (CASs): • 02-23-07, Atmospheric Test Site - Tesla • 09-23-10, Atmospheric Test Site T-9 • 09-23-11, Atmospheric Test Site S-9G • 09-23-14, Atmospheric Test Site - Rushmore • 09-23-15, Eagle Contamination Area • 09-99-01, Atmospheric Test Site B-9A These sites are being investigated because existing information on the nature and extent of potential contamination is insufficient to evaluate and recommend corrective action alternatives (CAAs). Additional information will be obtained by conducting a corrective action investigation before evaluating CAAs and selecting the appropriate corrective action for each CAS. The results of the field investigation will support a defensible evaluation of viable CAAs that will be presented in the Corrective Action Decision Document. The sites will be investigated based on the data quality objectives (DQOs) developed on April 30, 2012, by representatives of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office. The DQO process was used to identify and define the type, amount, and quality of data needed to develop and evaluate appropriate corrective actions for CAU 570. The site investigation process will also be conducted in accordance with the Soils Activity Quality Assurance Plan, which establishes requirements, technical planning, and general quality practices to be applied to this activity. The presence and nature of contamination at CAU 570 will be evaluated based on information collected from a field investigation. Radiological contamination will be evaluated based on a comparison of the total effective dose at sample locations to the dose-based final action level. The total effective dose will be calculated as the total of separate estimates of internal and external dose. Results from the analysis of soil samples will be used to calculate internal radiological dose. Thermoluminescent dosimeters placed near the center of each sample location will be used to measure external radiological dose. Appendix A provides a detailed discussion of the DQO methodology and the DQOs specific to each CAS.

  2. EIS-0388: Operation of a Biosafety Level 3 Facility at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EIS evaluates the operation of a Biosafety Level 3 Facility (BSL–3 Facility) at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). A BSL-2 Alternative, an existing BSL-2 permitted facility, and a No Action Alternative will be analyzed. The EIS is currently on hold.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Peggy Hinman

    2010-10-01

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

  4. Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 374: Area 20 Schooner Unit Crater, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada with ROTC 1, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Patrick Matthews

    2011-07-01

    Corrective Action Unit 374 comprises five corrective action sites (CASs): • 18-22-05, Drum • 18-22-06, Drums (20) • 18-22-08, Drum • 18-23-01, Danny Boy Contamination Area • 20-45-03, U-20u Crater (Schooner) The purpose of this Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report is to provide justification and documentation supporting the recommendation that no further corrective action is needed for CAU 374 based on the implementation of corrective actions. The corrective action of closure in place with administrative controls was implemented at CASs 18-23-01 and 20-45-03, and a corrective action of removing potential source material (PSM) was conducted at CAS 20-45-03. The other CASs require no further action; however, best management practices of removing PSM and drums at CAS 18-22-06, and removing drums at CAS 18-22-08 were performed. Corrective action investigation (CAI) activities were performed from May 4 through October 6, 2010, as set forth in the Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 374: Area 20 Schooner Unit Crater, Nevada Test Site, Nevada. The approach for the CAI was divided into two facets: investigating the primary release of radionuclides and investigating other releases (migration in washes and chemical releases). The purpose of the CAI was to fulfill data needs as defined during the data quality objective (DQO) process. The CAU 374 dataset of investigation results was evaluated based on the data quality indicator parameters. This evaluation demonstrated the dataset is acceptable for use in fulfilling the DQO data needs. Analytes detected during the CAI were evaluated against final action levels (FALs) established in this document. Radiological doses exceeding the FAL of 25 millirem per year were found to be present in the surface soil that was sampled. It is assumed that radionuclide levels present in subsurface media within the craters and ejecta fields (default contamination boundaries) at the Danny Boy and Schooner sites exceed the FAL. It is also assumed that PSM in the form of lead-acid batteries at Schooner exceeds the FAL. Therefore, corrective actions were undertaken that consist of removing PSM, where present, and implementing a use restriction and posting warning signs at the Danny Boy and Schooner sites. These use restrictions were recorded in the FFACO database; the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) Facility Information Management System; and the NNSA/NSO CAU/CAS files. Therefore, NNSA/NSO provides the following recommendations: • No further corrective actions are necessary for CAU 374. • A Notice of Completion to NNSA/NSO is requested from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for closure of CAU 374. • Corrective Action Unit 374 should be moved from Appendix III to Appendix IV of the FFACO.

  5. Mission Need Statement for the Idaho National Laboratory Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lisa Harvego

    2009-06-01

    The Idaho National Laboratory proposes to establish replacement remote-handled low-level waste disposal capability to meet Nuclear Energy and Naval Reactors mission-critical, remote-handled low-level waste disposal needs beyond planned cessation of existing disposal capability at the end of Fiscal Year 2015. Remote-handled low-level waste is generated from nuclear programs conducted at the Idaho National Laboratory, including spent nuclear fuel handling and operations at the Naval Reactors Facility and operations at the Advanced Test Reactor. Remote-handled low-level waste also will be generated by new 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. Replacement disposal capability must be in place by Fiscal Year 2016 to support uninterrupted Idaho operations. This mission need statement provides the basis for the laboratory’s recommendation to the Department of Energy to proceed with establishing the replacement remote-handled low-level waste disposal capability, project assumptions and constraints, and preliminary cost and schedule information for developing the proposed capability. Without continued remote-handled low-level waste disposal capability, Department of Energy missions at the Idaho National Laboratory would be jeopardized, including operations at the Naval Reactors Facility that are critical to effective execution of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program and national security. Remote-handled low-level waste disposal capability is also critical to the Department of Energy’s ability to meet obligations with the State of Idaho.

  6. DOE Requests Information on Potential New or Revised Categorical Exclusions

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    | Department of Energy on Potential New or Revised Categorical Exclusions DOE Requests Information on Potential New or Revised Categorical Exclusions December 22, 2009 - 10:33am Addthis The U.S. Department of Energy intends to update its National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) categorical exclusions, and has posted a request for information on the NEPA website to seek input from interested individuals and organizations regarding new or revised categorical exclusions. Addthis Related

  7. Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 367: Area 10 Sedan, Ess and Uncle Unit Craters Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Patrick Matthews

    2011-06-01

    Corrective Action Unit 367 comprises four corrective action sites (CASs): • 10-09-03, Mud Pit • 10-45-01, U-10h Crater (Sedan) • 10-45-02, Ess Crater Site • 10-45-03, Uncle Crater Site The purpose of this Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report is to provide justification and documentation of the corrective actions and site closure activities implemented at CAU 367. A corrective action of closure in place with use restrictions was completed at each of the three crater CASs (10-45-01, 10-45-02, and 10-45-03); corrective actions were not required at CAS 10-09-03. In addition, a limited soil removal corrective action was conducted at the location of a potential source material release. Based on completion of these correction actions, no additional corrective action is required at CAU 367, and site closure is considered complete. Corrective action investigation (CAI) activities were performed from February 2010 through March 2011, as set forth in the Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 367: Area 10 Sedan, Ess and Uncle Unit Craters, Nevada Test Site, Nevada. The approach for the CAI was divided into two facets: investigation of the primary release of radionuclides, and investigation of non-test or other releases (e.g., migration in washes and potential source material). Based on the proximity of the Uncle, Ess, and Sedan craters, the impact of the Sedan test on the fallout deposited from the two earlier tests, and aerial radiological surveys, the CAU 367 investigation was designed to study the releases from the three crater CASs as one combined release (primary release). Corrective Action Site 10-09-03, Mud Pit, consists of two mud pits identified at CAU 367. The mud pits are considered non-test releases or other releases and were investigated independent of the three crater CASs. The purpose of the CAI was to fulfill data needs as defined during the data quality objective (DQO) process. The CAU 367 dataset of investigation results was evaluated based on a data quality assessment. This assessment demonstrated the dataset is complete and acceptable for use in fulfilling the DQO data needs. Analytes detected during the CAI were evaluated against final action levels (FALs) established in this document. For the primary release, radiological doses exceeding the FAL of 25 millirem per year were not found to be present in the surface or shallow subsurface soil outside the default contamination boundary. However, it was assumed that radionuclides are present in subsurface media within each of the three craters (Sedan, Ess, and Uncle) due to prompt injection of radionuclides from the tests. Based on the assumption of radiological dose exceeding the FAL, corrective actions were undertaken that consisted of implementing a use restriction and posting warning signs at each crater CAS. These use restrictions were recorded in the FFACO database; the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) Facility Information Management System; and the NNSA/NSO CAU/CAS files. With regard to other releases, no contaminants of concern were identified at the mud pits or any of the other release locations, with one exception. Potential source material in the form of lead was found at one location. A corrective action of clean closure was implemented at this location, and verification samples indicated that no further action is necessary. Therefore, NNSA/NSO provides the following recommendations: • A Notice of Completion to NNSA/NSO is requested from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for closure of CAU 367. • Corrective Action Unit 367 should be promoted from Appendix III to Appendix IV of the FFACO.

  8. Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 375: Area 30 Buggy Unit Craters, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Patrick Matthews

    2011-08-01

    Corrective Action Unit 375 comprises three corrective action sites (CASs): (1) 25-23-22, Contaminated Soils Site; (2) 25-34-06, Test Cell A Bunker; and (3) 30-45-01, U-30a, b, c, d, e Craters. The purpose of this CADD/CR is to provide justification and documentation supporting the recommendation that no further corrective action is needed for CAU 375 based on the implementation of corrective action of closure in place with administrative controls at CAS 25-23-22, no further action at CAS 25-34-06, and closure in place with administrative controls and removal of potential source material (PSM) at CAS 30-45-01. Corrective action investigation (CAI) activities were performed from July 28, 2010, through April 4, 2011, as set forth in the Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 375: Area 30 Buggy Unit Craters. The approach for the CAI was divided into two facets: investigation of the primary release of radionuclides, and investigation of other releases (migration in washes and chemical releases). The purpose of the CAI was to fulfill data needs as defined during the data quality objective (DQO) process. The CAU 375 dataset of investigation results was evaluated based on the data quality assessment. This assessment demonstrated the dataset is acceptable for use in fulfilling the DQO data needs. Investigation results were evaluated against final action levels (FALs) established in this document. A radiological dose FAL of 25 millirem per year was established based on the Remote Work Area exposure scenario (336 hours of annual exposure). Radiological doses exceeding the FAL were assumed to be present within the default contamination boundaries at CASs 25-23-22 and 30-45-01. No contaminants were identified at CAS 25-34-06, and no corrective action is necessary. Potential source material in the form of lead plate, lead-acid batteries, and oil within an abandoned transformer were identified at CAS 30-45-01, and corrective actions were undertaken that consisted of removing the PSM. Use restrictions and warning signs were implemented for the remaining radiological contamination at CASs 25-23-22 and 30-45-01. These use restrictions were recorded in the FFACO database; the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) Facility Information Management System; and the NNSA/NSO CAU/CAS files. Therefore, NNSA/NSO provides the following recommendations: (1) No further corrective actions are necessary for CAU 375; (2) A Notice of Completion to NNSA/NSO is requested from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for closure of CAU 375; and (3) Move CAU 375 from Appendix III to Appendix IV of the FFACO.

  9. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 104: Area 7 Yucca Flat Atmospheric Test Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Patrick Matthews

    2011-08-01

    CAU 104 comprises the 15 CASs listed below: (1) 07-23-03, Atmospheric Test Site T-7C; (2) 07-23-04, Atmospheric Test Site T7-1; (3) 07-23-05, Atmospheric Test Site; (4) 07-23-06, Atmospheric Test Site T7-5a; (5) 07-23-07, Atmospheric Test Site - Dog (T-S); (6) 07-23-08, Atmospheric Test Site - Baker (T-S); (7) 07-23-09, Atmospheric Test Site - Charlie (T-S); (8) 07-23-10, Atmospheric Test Site - Dixie; (9) 07-23-11, Atmospheric Test Site - Dixie; (10) 07-23-12, Atmospheric Test Site - Charlie (Bus); (11) 07-23-13, Atmospheric Test Site - Baker (Buster); (12) 07-23-14, Atmospheric Test Site - Ruth; (13) 07-23-15, Atmospheric Test Site T7-4; (14) 07-23-16, Atmospheric Test Site B7-b; (15) 07-23-17, Atmospheric Test Site - Climax These sites are being investigated because existing information on the nature and extent of potential contamination is insufficient to evaluate and recommend corrective action alternatives (CAAs). Additional information will be obtained by conducting a corrective action investigation before evaluating CAAs and selecting the appropriate corrective action for each CAS. The results of the field investigation will support a defensible evaluation of viable CAAs that will be presented in the Corrective Action Decision Document. The sites will be investigated based on the data quality objectives (DQOs) developed on April 28, 2011, by representatives of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office. The DQO process was used to identify and define the type, amount, and quality of data needed to develop and evaluate appropriate corrective actions for CAU 104. The releases at CAU 104 consist of surface-deposited radionuclides from 30 atmospheric nuclear tests. The presence and nature of contamination at CAU 104 will be evaluated based on information collected from a field investigation. Radiological contamination will be evaluated based on a comparison of the total effective dose (TED) to the dose-based final action level (FAL). The presence of TED exceeding the FAL is considered a radiological contaminant of concern (COC). Anything identified as a COC will require corrective action. The TED will be calculated as the total of separate estimates of internal and external dose. Results from the analysis of soil samples will be used to calculate internal radiological dose. Thermoluminescent dosimeters will be used to measure external radiological dose. Based on process knowledge of the releases associated with the nuclear tests and radiological survey information about the location and shape of the resulting contamination plume, it was determined that the releases from the nuclear tests are co-located and will be investigated concurrently. A field investigation will be performed to define areas where TED exceeds the FAL and to determine whether other COCs are present at the site. The investigation will also collect information to determine the presence and nature of contamination associated with migration and excavation, as well as any potential releases discovered during the investigation. Appendix A provides a detailed discussion of the DQO methodology and the DQOs specific to each CAS.

  10. Status Update on Action 2b: Revision of DOE G 226.1-2 with new Guidance for Activity-level Work Planning and Control

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Slide Presentation by Roger Claycomb, Work Control Program Manager, DOE Idaho Operations Office. Strengthen guidance and formality associated with contractor implementation and Federal monitoring of activity-level WP&C. Develop a DOE Guide on Federal oversight and evaluation of the effectiveness of Activity-Level WP&C.

  11. Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 567: Miscellaneous Soil Sites Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Matthews, Patrick

    2014-12-01

    This Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report presents information supporting the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 567: Miscellaneous Soil Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada. The purpose of this Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report is to provide justification and documentation supporting the recommendation that no further corrective action is needed for CAU 567 based on the implementation of the corrective actions. The corrective actions implemented at CAU 567 were developed based on an evaluation of analytical data from the CAI, the assumed presence of COCs at specific locations, and the detailed and comparative analysis of the CAAs. The CAAs were selected on technical merit focusing on performance, reliability, feasibility, safety, and cost. The implemented corrective actions meet all requirements for the technical components evaluated. The CAAs meet all applicable federal and state regulations for closure of the site. Based on the implementation of these corrective actions, the DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office provides the following recommendations: • No further corrective actions are necessary for CAU 567. • The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection issue a Notice of Completion to the DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office for closure of CAU 567. • CAU 567 be moved from Appendix III to Appendix IV of the FFACO.

  12. System Plan Revision 5 + 6

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

    Plan Revision 7 General Overview DaBrisha Smith (DOE/ORP) April 10, 2013 System Plan 101 * What is System Planning - A process used by organizations to design, analyze and define future operations possible outcomes. * What is the RRP System Plan - A summary-level document that describes how the technical, cost, and schedule operating scenario (Baseline Case) is integrated to meet the mission demands. - Describes how the RPP mission could be achieved based on a set of assumptions for each

  13. Standards Development and Revision | Department of Energy

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

    Standards Development and Revision Standards Development and Revision Beginning in the 1970s, Congress enacted a series of laws that established or directed the Department of Energy (DOE) to establish energy efficiency standards for certain appliances and commercial equipment. In addition, DOE is required to review existing standards for covered products at least once every six years and to set standards at levels that achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency that is

  14. 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

  15. Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 570: Area 9 Yucca Flat Atmospheric Test Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Matthews, Patrick

    2013-11-01

    This Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report presents information supporting the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 570: Area 9 Yucca Flat Atmospheric Test Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada. This complies with the requirements of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) that was agreed to by the State of Nevada; U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Management; U.S. Department of Defense; and DOE, Legacy Management. The purpose of the CADD/CR is to provide justification and documentation supporting the recommendation that no further corrective action is needed.

  16. Microsoft Word - CCP-AK-LANL-006-Revision 13

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    P2010-3583 CCP-AK-LANL-006 Central Characterization Program Acceptable Knowledge Summary Report For LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY TA-55 MIXED TRANSURANIC WASTE WASTE STREAMS: LA-MHD01.001 LA-CIN01.001 LA-MIN02-V.001 LA-MIN04-S.001 Revision 13 February 10, 2014 Mike Ramirez Printed Name APPROVED FOR USE INFORMATION ONLY CCP-AK-LANL-006, Rev. 13 Effective Date: 02/10/2014 CCP Acceptable Knowledge Summary Report Page 2 of 229 RECORD OF REVISION Revision Number Date Approved Description of Revision

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2007-06-07

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

  18. Hanford High-Level Waste Vitrification Program at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory: technology development - annotated bibliography

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Larson, D.E.

    1996-09-01

    This report provides a collection of annotated bibliographies for documents prepared under the Hanford High-Level Waste Vitrification (Plant) Program. The bibliographies are for documents from Fiscal Year 1983 through Fiscal Year 1995, and include work conducted at or under the direction of the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. The bibliographies included focus on the technology developed over the specified time period for vitrifying Hanford pretreated high-level waste. The following subject areas are included: General Documentation; Program Documentation; High-Level Waste Characterization; Glass Formulation and Characterization; Feed Preparation; Radioactive Feed Preparation and Glass Properties Testing; Full-Scale Feed Preparation Testing; Equipment Materials Testing; Melter Performance Assessment and Evaluations; Liquid-Fed Ceramic Melter; Cold Crucible Melter; Stirred Melter; High-Temperature Melter; Melter Off-Gas Treatment; Vitrification Waste Treatment; Process, Product Control and Modeling; Analytical; and Canister Closure, Decontamination, and Handling

  19. Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 105: Area 2 Yucca Flat Atmospheric Test Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Matthews, Patrick

    2013-09-01

    This Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report presents information supporting the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 105: Area 2 Yucca Flat Atmospheric Test Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada. CAU 105 comprises the following five corrective action sites (CASs): -02-23-04 Atmospheric Test Site - Whitney Closure In Place -02-23-05 Atmospheric Test Site T-2A Closure In Place -02-23-06 Atmospheric Test Site T-2B Clean Closure -02-23-08 Atmospheric Test Site T-2 Closure In Place -02-23-09 Atmospheric Test Site - Turk Closure In Place The purpose of this Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report is to provide justification and documentation supporting the recommendation that no further corrective action is needed for CAU 105 based on the implementation of the corrective actions. Corrective action investigation (CAI) activities were performed from October 22, 2012, through May 23, 2013, as set forth in the Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 105: Area 2 Yucca Flat Atmospheric Test Sites; and in accordance with the Soils Activity Quality Assurance Plan, which establishes requirements, technical planning, and general quality practices.

  20. ?Framework for a Risk-Informed Groundwater Compliance Strategy for Corrective Action Unit 98: Frenchman Flat, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada, Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Marutzky, Sam

    2010-09-01

    Note: This document was prepared before the NTS was renamed the Nevada National Security Site (August 23, 2010); thus, all references to the site herein remain NTS. Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 98, Frenchman Flat, at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) was the location of ten underground nuclear tests between 1965 and 1971. As a result, radionuclides were released in the subsurface in the vicinity of the test cavities. Corrective Action Unit 98 and other CAUs at the NTS and offsite locations are being investigated. The Frenchman Flat CAU is one of five Underground Test Area (UGTA) CAUs at the NTS that are being evaluated as potential sources of local or regional impact to groundwater resources. For UGTA sites, including Frenchman Flat, contamination in and around the test cavities will not be remediated because it is technologically infeasible due to the depth of the test cavities (150 to 2,000 feet [ft] below ground surface) and the volume of contaminated groundwater at widely dispersed locations on the NTS. Instead, the compliance strategy for these sites is to model contaminant flow and transport, estimate the maximum spatial extent and volume of contaminated groundwater (over a period of 1,000 years), maintain institutional controls, and restrict access to potentially contaminated groundwater at areas where contaminants could migrate beyond the NTS boundaries.

  1. Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan for Corrective Action Unit 575: Area 15 Miscellaneous Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Matthews, Patrick

    2014-12-01

    This Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan addresses the actions needed to achieve closure for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 575, Area 15 Miscellaneous Sites, identified in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO). CAU 575 comprises the following four corrective action sites (CASs) located in Area 15 of the Nevada National Security Site: • 15-19-02, Waste Burial Pit • 15-30-01, Surface Features at Borehole Sites • 15-64-01, Decontamination Area • 15-99-03, Aggregate Plant This plan provides the methodology for field activities needed to gather the necessary information for closing each CAS. There is sufficient information and process knowledge from historical documentation and investigations of similar sites regarding the expected nature and extent of potential contaminants to recommend closure of CAU 575 using the SAFER process. Additional information will be obtained by conducting a field investigation to document and verify the adequacy of existing information, to affirm the predicted corrective action decisions, and to provide sufficient data to implement the corrective actions. This will be presented in a closure report that will be prepared and submitted to the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) for review and approval.

  2. Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 550: Smoky Contamination Area Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Matthews, Patrick K.

    2015-02-01

    This Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report presents information supporting the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 550: Smoky Contamination Area, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada. CAU 550 includes 19 corrective action sites (CASs), which consist of one weapons-related atmospheric test (Smoky), three safety experiments (Ceres, Oberon, Titania), and 15 debris sites (Table ES-1). The CASs were sorted into the following study groups based on release potential and technical similarities: • Study Group 1, Atmospheric Test • Study Group 2, Safety Experiments • Study Group 3, Washes • Study Group 4, Debris The purpose of this document is to provide justification and documentation supporting the conclusion that no further corrective action is needed for CAU 550 based on implementation of the corrective actions listed in Table ES-1. Corrective action investigation (CAI) activities were performed between August 2012 and October 2013 as set forth in the Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 550: Smoky Contamination Area; and in accordance with the Soils Activity Quality Assurance Plan. The approach for the CAI was to investigate and make data quality objective (DQO) decisions based on the types of releases present. The purpose of the CAI was to fulfill data needs as defined during the DQO process. The CAU 550 dataset of investigation results was evaluated based on a data quality assessment. This assessment demonstrated the dataset is complete and acceptable for use in fulfilling the DQO data needs.

  3. Standard Review Plan for the review of a license application for a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility. Revision 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-04-01

    The Standard Review Plan (SRP) (NUREG-1200) provides guidance to staff reviewers in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards who perform safety reviews of applications to construct and operate low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities. The SRP ensures the quality and uniformity of the staff reviews and presents a well-defined base from which to evaluate proposed changes in the scope and requirements of the staff reviews. The SRP makes information about the regulatory licensing process widely available and serves to improve the understanding of the staff`s review process by interested members of the public and the industry. Each individual SRP addresses the responsibilities of persons performing the review, the matters that are reviewed, the Commission`s regulations and acceptance criteria necessary for the review, how the review is accomplished, the conclusions that are appropriate, and the implementation requirements.

  4. Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan for Corrective Action Unit 465: Hydronuclear Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, with ROTC 1, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Patrick Matthews

    2011-11-01

    This Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan addresses the actions needed to achieve closure for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 465, Hydronuclear, identified in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO). Corrective Action Unit 465 comprises the following four corrective action sites (CASs) located in Areas 6 and 27 of the Nevada National Security Site: (1) 00-23-01, Hydronuclear Experiment; (2) 00-23-02, Hydronuclear Experiment; (3) 00-23-03, Hydronuclear Experiment; (4) 06-99-01, Hydronuclear. The sites will be investigated based on the data quality objectives (DQOs) developed on July 6, 2011, by representatives of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office. The DQO process was used to identify and define the type, amount, and quality of data needed to determine and implement appropriate corrective actions for each CAS in CAU 465. For CAU 465, two potential release components have been identified. The subsurface release component includes potential releases of radiological and nonradiological contaminants from the subsurface hydronuclear experiments and disposal boreholes. The surface release component consists of other potential releases of radiological and nonradiological contaminants to surface soils that may have occurred during the pre- and post-test activities. This plan provides the methodology for collection of the necessary information for closing each CAS component. There is sufficient information and process knowledge from historical documentation, contaminant characteristics, existing regional and site groundwater models, and investigations of similar sites regarding the expected nature and extent of potential contaminants to recommend closure of CAU 465 using the SAFER process. For potential subsurface releases, flow and transport models will be developed to integrate existing data into a conservative description of contaminant migration in the unsaturated zone from the hydronuclear experiments and disposal boreholes. For the potential surface releases, additional information will be obtained by conducting a field investigation before selecting the appropriate corrective action for each CAS component. It is anticipated that results of the flow and transport models, the field investigation, and implementation of the corrective action of closure in place will support a defensible recommendation that no further corrective action is necessary. This will be presented in a closure report that will be prepared and submitted to NDEP for review and approval. The following text summarizes the SAFER activities that will support the closure of CAU 465: (1) Perform site preparation activities (e.g., utilities clearances, and radiological and visual surveys). (2) Move or remove and dispose of debris at various CASs, as required. (3) Collect environmental samples from designated target populations (e.g., stained soil) to confirm or disprove the presence of contaminants of concern as necessary to supplement existing information. (4) Evaluate and analyze existing data to develop conservative flow and transport models to simulate the potential for contaminant migration from the hydronuclear experiments and disposal boreholes to the water table within 1,000 years. (5) Confirm the preferred closure option (closure in place with use restrictions) is sufficient to protect human health and the environment.

  5. Corrective Action Decision Document/Corrective Action Plan for Corrective Action Unit 547: Miscellaneous Contaminated Waste Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mark Krauss

    2011-09-01

    The purpose of this CADD/CAP is to present the corrective action alternatives (CAAs) evaluated for CAU 547, provide justification for selection of the recommended alternative, and describe the plan for implementing the selected alternative. Corrective Action Unit 547 consists of the following three corrective action sites (CASs): (1) CAS 02-37-02, Gas Sampling Assembly; (2) CAS 03-99-19, Gas Sampling Assembly; and(3) CAS 09-99-06, Gas Sampling Assembly. The gas sampling assemblies consist of inactive process piping, equipment, and instrumentation that were left in place after completion of underground safety experiments. The purpose of these safety experiments was to confirm that a nuclear explosion would not occur in the case of an accidental detonation of the high-explosive component of the device. The gas sampling assemblies allowed for the direct sampling of the gases and particulates produced by the safety experiments. Corrective Action Site 02-37-02 is located in Area 2 of the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) and is associated with the Mullet safety experiment conducted in emplacement borehole U2ag on October 17, 1963. Corrective Action Site 03-99-19 is located in Area 3 of the NNSS and is associated with the Tejon safety experiment conducted in emplacement borehole U3cg on May 17, 1963. Corrective Action Site 09-99-06 is located in Area 9 of the NNSS and is associated with the Player safety experiment conducted in emplacement borehole U9cc on August 27, 1964. The CAU 547 CASs were investigated in accordance with the data quality objectives (DQOs) developed by representatives of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office. The DQO process was used to identify and define the type, amount, and quality of data needed to determine and implement appropriate corrective actions for CAU 547. Existing radiological survey data and historical knowledge of the CASs were sufficient to meet the DQOs and evaluate CAAs without additional investigation. As a result, further investigation of the CAU 547 CASs was not required. The following CAAs were identified for the gas sampling assemblies: (1) clean closure, (2) closure in place, (3) modified closure in place, (4) no further action (with administrative controls), and (5) no further action. Based on the CAAs evaluation, the recommended corrective action for the three CASs in CAU 547 is closure in place. This corrective action will involve construction of a soil cover on top of the gas sampling assembly components and establishment of use restrictions at each site. The closure in place alternative was selected as the best and most appropriate corrective action for the CASs at CAU 547 based on the following factors: (1) Provides long-term protection of human health and the environment; (2) Minimizes short-term risk to site workers in implementing corrective action; (3) Is easily implemented using existing technology; (4) Complies with regulatory requirements; (5) Fulfills FFACO requirements for site closure; (6) Does not generate transuranic waste requiring offsite disposal; (7) Is consistent with anticipated future land use of the areas (i.e., testing and support activities); and (8) Is consistent with other NNSS site closures where contamination was left in place.

  6. External Peer Review Team Report for Corrective Action Unit 97: Yucca Flat/Climax Mine, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Marutzky, Sam J.; Andrews, Robert

    2015-01-01

    The peer review team commends the Navarro-Intera, LLC (N-I), team for its efforts in using limited data to model the fate of radionuclides in groundwater at Yucca Flat. Recognizing the key uncertainties and related recommendations discussed in Section 6.0 of this report, the peer review team has concluded that U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is ready for a transition to model evaluation studies in the corrective action decision document (CADD)/corrective action plan (CAP) stage. The DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) clarified the charge to the peer review team in a letter dated October 9, 2014, from Bill R. Wilborn, NNSA/NFO Underground Test Area (UGTA) Activity Lead, to Sam J. Marutzky, N-I UGTA Project Manager: “The model and supporting information should be sufficiently complete that the key uncertainties can be adequately identified such that they can be addressed by appropriate model evaluation studies. The model evaluation studies may include data collection and model refinements conducted during the CADD/CAP stage. One major input to identifying ‘key uncertainties’ is the detailed peer review provided by independent qualified peers.” The key uncertainties that the peer review team recognized and potential concerns associated with each are outlined in Section 6.0, along with recommendations corresponding to each uncertainty. The uncertainties, concerns, and recommendations are summarized in Table ES-1. The number associated with each concern refers to the section in this report where the concern is discussed in detail.

  7. Corrective Action Decision Document for Corrective Action Unit 568. Area 3 Plutonium Dispersion Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Matthews, Patrick

    2015-08-01

    The purpose of this Corrective Action Decision Document is to identify and provide the rationale for the recommendation of corrective action alternatives (CAAs) for the 14 CASs within CAU 568. Corrective action investigation (CAI) activities were performed from April 2014 through May 2015, as set forth in the Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 568: Area 3 Plutonium Dispersion Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada; and in accordance with the Soils Activity Quality Assurance Plan, which establishes requirements, technical planning, and general quality practices. The purpose of the CAI was to fulfill data needs as defined during the DQO process. The CAU 568 dataset of investigation results was evaluated based on a data quality assessment. This assessment demonstrated that the dataset is complete and acceptable for use in fulfilling the DQO data needs. Based on the evaluation of analytical data from the CAI, review of future and current operations at the 14 CASs, and the detailed and comparative analysis of the potential CAAs, the following corrective actions are recommended for CAU 568: • No further action is the preferred corrective action for CASs 03-23-17, 03-23-22, 03-23-26. • Closure in place is the preferred corrective action for CAS 03-23-19; 03-45-01; the SE DCBs at CASs 03-23-20, 03-23-23, 03-23-31, 03-23-32, 03-23-33, and 03-23-34; and the Pascal-BHCA at CAS 03-23-31. • Clean closure is the preferred corrective action for CASs 03-08-04, 03-23-30, and 03-26-04; and the four well head covers at CASs 03-23-20, 03-23-23, 03-23-31, and 03-23-33.

  8. Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Next MECS will be conducted in 2010 Table 5.3 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity; Unit: Physical Units or Btu. Distillate Coal Fuel Oil (excluding Coal Net Demand Residual and Natural Gas(d) LPG and Coke and Breeze) NAICS for Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(c) (billion NGL(e) (million Code(a) End Use (million kWh) (million bbl) (million bbl) cu ft) (million bbl) short tons)

  9. Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity;

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 End Uses of Fuel Consumption, 2006; Level: National Data; Row: End Uses within NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources, including Net Demand for Electricity; Unit: Trillion Btu. Distillate Fuel Oil Coal NAICS Net Demand Residual and LPG and (excluding Coal Code(a) End Use for Electricity(b) Fuel Oil Diesel Fuel(c) Natural Gas(d) NGL(e) Coke and Breeze) Total United States 311 - 339 ALL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 3,335 251 129 5,512 79 1,016 Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel 84 133 23

  10. DWPF waste form compliance plan (Draft Revision)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Plodinec, M.J.; Marra, S.L.

    1991-01-01

    The Department of Energy currently has over 100 million liters of high-level radioactive waste in storage at the Savannah River Site (SRS). In the late 1970's, the Department of Energy recognized that there were significant safety and cost advantages associated with immobilizing the high-level waste in a stable solid form. Several alternative waste forms were evaluated in terms of product quality and reliability of fabrication. This evaluation led to a decision to build the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) at SRS to convert the easily dispersed liquid waste to borosilicate glass. In accordance with the NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) process, an Environmental Impact Statement was prepared for the facility, as well as an Environmental Assessment of the alternative waste forms, and issuance of a Record of Decision (in December, 1982) on the waste form. The Department of Energy, recognizing that start-up of the DWPF would considerably precede licensing of a repository, instituted a Waste Acceptance Process to ensure that these canistered waste forms would be acceptable for eventual disposal at a federal repository. This report is a revision of the DWPF compliance plan.

  11. DWPF waste form compliance plan (Draft Revision)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Plodinec, M.J.; Marra, S.L.

    1991-12-31

    The Department of Energy currently has over 100 million liters of high-level radioactive waste in storage at the Savannah River Site (SRS). In the late 1970`s, the Department of Energy recognized that there were significant safety and cost advantages associated with immobilizing the high-level waste in a stable solid form. Several alternative waste forms were evaluated in terms of product quality and reliability of fabrication. This evaluation led to a decision to build the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) at SRS to convert the easily dispersed liquid waste to borosilicate glass. In accordance with the NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) process, an Environmental Impact Statement was prepared for the facility, as well as an Environmental Assessment of the alternative waste forms, and issuance of a Record of Decision (in December, 1982) on the waste form. The Department of Energy, recognizing that start-up of the DWPF would considerably precede licensing of a repository, instituted a Waste Acceptance Process to ensure that these canistered waste forms would be acceptable for eventual disposal at a federal repository. This report is a revision of the DWPF compliance plan.

  12. National Low-Level Waste Management Program Radionuclide Report Series. Volume 10, Nickel-63

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Carboneau, M.L.; Adams, J.P.

    1995-02-01

    This report outlines the basic radiological, chemical, and physical characteristics of nickel-63 ({sup 63}Ni) and examines how these characteristics affect the behavior of {sup 63}Ni in various environmental media, such as soils, groundwater, plants, animals, the atmosphere, and the human body. Discussions also include methods of {sup 63}Ni production, waste types, and waste forms that contain {sup 63}Ni. The primary source of {sup 63}Ni in the environment has been low-level radioactive waste material generated as a result of neutron activation of stable {sup 62}Ni that is present in the structural components of nuclear reactor vessels. {sup 63}Ni enters the environment from the dismantling activities associated with nuclear reactor decommissioning. However, small amounts of {sup 63}Ni have been detected in the environment following the testing of thermonuclear weapons in the South Pacific. Concentrations as high as 2.7 Bq{sup a} per gram of sample (or equivalently 0.0022 parts per billion) were observed on Bikini Atoll (May 1954). {sup 63}Ni was not created as a fission product species (e.g., from {sup 235}U or {sup 239}Pu fissions), but instead was produced as a result of neutron capture in {sup 63}Ni, a common nickel isotope present in the stainless steel components of nuclear weapons (e.g., stainless-304 contains {approximately}9% total Ni or {approximately}0.3% {sup 63}Ni).

  13. Corrective Action Decision Document/Corrective Action Plan for Corrective Action Unit 104: Area 7 Yucca Flat Atmospheric Test Sites Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Patrick Matthews

    2012-10-01

    CAU 104 comprises the following corrective action sites (CASs): • 07-23-03, Atmospheric Test Site T-7C • 07-23-04, Atmospheric Test Site T7-1 • 07-23-05, Atmospheric Test Site • 07-23-06, Atmospheric Test Site T7-5a • 07-23-07, Atmospheric Test Site - Dog (T-S) • 07-23-08, Atmospheric Test Site - Baker (T-S) • 07-23-09, Atmospheric Test Site - Charlie (T-S) • 07-23-10, Atmospheric Test Site - Dixie • 07-23-11, Atmospheric Test Site - Dixie • 07-23-12, Atmospheric Test Site - Charlie (Bus) • 07-23-13, Atmospheric Test Site - Baker (Buster) • 07-23-14, Atmospheric Test Site - Ruth • 07-23-15, Atmospheric Test Site T7-4 • 07-23-16, Atmospheric Test Site B7-b • 07-23-17, Atmospheric Test Site - Climax These 15 CASs include releases from 30 atmospheric tests conducted in the approximately 1 square mile of CAU 104. Because releases associated with the CASs included in this CAU overlap and are not separate and distinguishable, these CASs are addressed jointly at the CAU level. The purpose of this CADD/CAP is to evaluate potential corrective action alternatives (CAAs), provide the rationale for the selection of recommended CAAs, and provide the plan for implementation of the recommended CAA for CAU 104. Corrective action investigation (CAI) activities were performed from October 4, 2011, through May 3, 2012, as set forth in the CAU 104 Corrective Action Investigation Plan.

  14. Level III baseline risk evaluation for Building 3505 at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mostella, W.B. Jr.

    1994-12-01

    The Level III Baseline Risk Evaluation (BRE) for Building 3505, the ORNL Metal Recovery Facility, provides an analysis of the potential for adverse health effects, current or future, associated with the presence of hazardous substances in the building. The Metal Recovery Facility was used from 1952 through 1960 to process large quantities of radioactive material using the PUREX process for the recovery of uranium-238, plutonium-239, neptunium-237, and americium-241. The facility consists of seven process cells (A through G), a canal, a dissolver room, a dissolver pit, an office, locker room, storage area, control room, electrical gallery, shop, and makeup area. The cells were used to house the nuclear fuel reprocessing equipment, and the canal was constructed to be used as a water-shielded transfer canal. Currently, there are no known releases of radioactive contaminants from Building 3505. To perform the BRE, historical radiological survey data were used to estimate the concentration of alpha- and beta/gamma emitting radionuclides in the various cells, rooms, and other areas in Building 3505. Data from smear surveys were used to estimate the amount of transferable contamination (to which receptors can be exposed via inhalation and ingestion), and data from probe surveys were used to estimate the amount of both fixed and transferable contamination (from which receptors can receive external exposure). Two land use scenarios, current and future, and their subsequent exposure scenarios were explored in the BRE. Under the current land use scenario, two exposure scenarios were evaluated. The first was a worst-case industrial exposure scenario in which the receptor is a maintenance worker who works 8 hours/day, 350 days/year in the building for 25 years. In the second, more realistic exposure scenario, the receptor is a surveillance and maintenance (S&M) worker who spends two 8-hour days/year in the building for 25 years.

  15. Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 561: Waste Disposal Areas, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mark Krauss

    2011-08-01

    CAU 561 comprises 10 CASs: (1) 01-19-01, Waste Dump; (2) 02-08-02, Waste Dump and Burn Area; (3) 03-19-02, Debris Pile; (4) 05-62-01, Radioactive Gravel Pile; (5) 12-23-09, Radioactive Waste Dump; (6) 22-19-06, Buried Waste Disposal Site; (7) 23-21-04, Waste Disposal Trenches ; (8) 25-08-02, Waste Dump; (9) 25-23-21, Radioactive Waste Dump; and (10) 25-25-19, Hydrocarbon Stains and Trench. The purpose of this CADD/CR is to provide justification and documentation supporting the recommendation for closure of CAU 561 with no further corrective action. The purpose of the CAI was to fulfill the following data needs as defined during the DQO process: (1) Determine whether COCs are present; (2) If COCs are present, determine their nature and extent; and (3) Provide sufficient information and data to complete appropriate corrective actions. The following contaminants were determined to be present at concentrations exceeding their corresponding FALs: (1) No contamination exceeding FALs was identified at CASs 01-19-01, 03-19-02, 05-62-01, 12-23-09, and 22-19-06. (2) The surface and subsurface soil within the burn area at CAS 02-08-02 contains arsenic and lead above the FALs of 23 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) and 800 mg/kg, respectively. The surface and subsurface soil within the burn area also contains melted lead slag (potential source material [PSM]). The soil within the waste piles contains polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) above the FALs. The contamination within the burn area is spread throughout the area, as it was not feasible to remove all the PSM (melted lead), while at the waste piles, the contamination is confined to the piles. (3) The surface and subsurface soils within Trenches 3 and 5 at CAS 23-21-04 contain arsenic and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) above the FALs of 23 mg/kg and 0.74 mg/kg, respectively. The soil was removed from both trenches, and the soil that remains at this CAS does not contain contamination exceeding the FALs. Lead bricks and counterweights were also removed, and the soil below these items does not contain contamination that exceeds the FAL for lead. (4) The concrete-like material at CAS 25-08-02 contains arsenic above the FAL of 23 mg/kg. This concrete-like material was removed, and the soil that remains at this CAS does not contain contamination exceeding the FALs. Lead-acid batteries were also removed, and the soil below the batteries does not contain contamination that exceeds the FAL for lead. (5) The surface soils within the main waste dump at the posted southern radioactive material area (RMA) at CAS 25-23-21 contain cesium (Cs)-137 and PCBs above the FALs of 72.9 picocuries per gram (pCi/g) and 0.74 mg/kg, respectively. The soil was removed from the RMA, and the soil that remains at this CAS does not contain contamination exceeding the FALs. (6) The surface and subsurface soils at CAS 25-25-19 do not contain contamination exceeding the FALs. In addition, lead bricks were removed, and the soil below these items does not contain contamination that exceeds the FAL for lead. The following best management practices were implemented: (1) Housekeeping debris at CASs 02-08-02, 23-21-04, 25-08-02, 25-23-21, and 25-25-19 was removed and disposed of; (2) The open trenches at CAS 23-21-04 were backfilled; (3) The waste piles at CAS 25-08-02 were removed and the area leveled to ground surface; and (4) The remaining waste piles at the main waste dump at CAS 25-23-21 were leveled to ground surface. Therefore, NNSA/NSO provides the following recommendations: (1) No further action for CASs 01-19-01, 03-19-02, 05-62-01, 12-23-09, and 22-19-06; (2) Closure in place with an FFACO use restriction (UR) at CAS 02-08-02 for the remaining PAH-, arsenic-, and lead-contaminated soil, and the melted lead PSM. The UR form and map have been filed in the NNSA/NSO Facility Information Management System, the FFACO database, and the NNSA/NSO CAU/CAS files; (3) No further corrective action at CAS 23-21-04, as the lead bricks and counterweights (PSM) have been removed, and the COCs of arsenic and PCBs in soil have be

  16. Addendum to the Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 372: Area 20 Cabriolet/Palanquin Unit Craters Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Patrick Matthews and Christy Sloop

    2012-01-01

    This document constitutes an addendum to the Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 372: Area 20 Cabriolet/Palanquin Unit Craters, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (Revision 0), April 2011.

  17. National survey of crystalline rocks and recommendations of regions to be explored for high-level radioactive waste repository sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smedes, H.W.

    1983-04-01

    A reconnaissance of the geological literature on large regions of exposed crystalline rocks in the United States provides the basis for evaluating if any of those regions warrant further exploration toward identifying potential sites for development of a high-level radioactive waste repository. The reconnaissance does not serve as a detailed evaluation of regions or of any smaller subunits within the regions. Site performance criteria were selected and applied insofar as a national data base exists, and guidelines were adopted that relate the data to those criteria. The criteria include consideration of size, vertical movements, faulting, earthquakes, seismically induced ground motion, Quaternary volcanic rocks, mineral deposits, high-temperature convective ground-water systems, hydraulic gradients, and erosion. Brief summaries of each major region of exposed crystalline rock, and national maps of relevant data provided the means for applying the guidelines and for recommending regions for further study. It is concluded that there is a reasonable likelihood that geologically suitable repository sites exist in each of the major regions of crystalline rocks. The recommendation is made that further studies first be conducted of the Lake Superior, Northern Appalachian and Adirondack, and the Southern Appalachian Regions. It is believed that those regions could be explored more effectively and suitable sites probably could be found, characterized, verified, and licensed more readily there than in the other regions.

  18. Cultural Resource Protection Plan for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility at the Idaho National Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pace, Brenda Ringe; Gilbert, Hollie Kae

    2015-05-01

    This plan addresses cultural resource protection procedures to be implemented during construction of the Remote Handled Low Level Waste project at the Idaho National Laboratory. The plan proposes pre-construction review of proposed ground disturbing activities to confirm avoidance of cultural resources. Depending on the final project footprint, cultural resource protection strategies might also include additional survey, protective fencing, cultural resource mapping and relocation of surface artifacts, collection of surface artifacts for permanent curation, confirmation of undisturbed historic canal segments outside the area of potential effects for construction, and/or archaeological test excavations to assess potential subsurface cultural deposits at known cultural resource locations. Additionally, all initial ground disturbing activities will be monitored for subsurface cultural resource finds, cultural resource sensitivity training will be conducted for all construction field personnel, and a stop work procedure will be implemented to guide assessment and protection of any unanticipated discoveries after initial monitoring of ground disturbance.

  19. 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.

  20. " Level: National Data;" " ...

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

    Fuel","the Products","Fuel Supply","Restrictions(b)","in Place(c)","Alternative Fuels(d)","Reason","H, I, J, and K","Don't Know" ,,,"Total United States" ...

  1. ENERGY STAR CERTIFIED HOMES, VERSION 3 (REV. 08) NATIONAL PROGRAM...

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

    CERTIFIED HOMES, VERSION 3 (REV. 08) NATIONAL PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS ENERGY STAR CERTIFIED HOMES, VERSION 3 (REV. 08) NATIONAL PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS Revision 08 is the most ...

  2. Parallel programming with PCN. Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Foster, I.; Tuecke, S.

    1993-01-01

    PCN is a system for developing and executing parallel programs. It comprises a high-level programming language, tools for developing and debugging programs in this language, and interfaces to Fortran and Cthat allow the reuse of existing code in multilingual parallel programs. Programs developed using PCN are portable across many different workstations, networks, and parallel computers. This document provides all the information required to develop parallel programs with the PCN programming system. It includes both tutorial and reference material. It also presents the basic concepts that underlie PCN, particularly where these are likely to be unfamiliar to the reader, and provides pointers to other documentation on the PCN language, programming techniques, and tools. PCN is in the public domain. The latest version of both the software and this manual can be obtained by anonymous ftp from Argonne National Laboratory in the directory pub/pcn at info.mcs. ani.gov (cf. Appendix A). This version of this document describes PCN version 2.0, a major revision of the PCN programming system. It supersedes earlier versions of this report.

  3. Shallow ground-water flow, water levels, and quality of water, 1980-84, Cowles Unit, Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cohen, D.A.; Shedlock, R.J.

    1986-01-01

    The Cowles Unit of Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore in Porter County, northwest Indiana, contains a broad dune-beach complex along the southern shoreline of Lake Michigan and a large wetland, called the Great Marsh, that occupies the lowland between the shoreline dunes and an older dune-beach complex farther inland. Water levels and water quality in the surficial aquifer were monitored from 1977 to 1984 near settling ponds on adjacent industrial property at the western end of the Cowles Unit. Since 1980, when the settling pond bottoms were sealed, these intradunal lowlands contained standing water only during periods of high snowmelt or rainfall. Water level declines following the cessation of seepage ranged from 6 feet at the eastern-most settling pond to nearly 14 feet at the western-most pond. No general pattern of water table decline was observed in the Great Marsh or in the shoreline dune complex at distances > 3,000 ft east or north of the settling ponds. Since the settling ponds were sealed, the concentration of boron has decreased while concentrations of cadmium, arsenic, zinc, and molybdenum in shallow ground-water downgradient of the ponds show no definite trends in time. Arsenic, boron and molybdenum have remained at concentrations above those of shallow groundwater in areas unaffected by settling pond seepage. 11 refs., 10 figs., 1 tab.

  4. HNF-37489-FP Revision

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    37489-FP Revision 0 Project Hanford Management Contractor foc the US. Deparbnsnt of Energy under Contract DE-ACO6-96RL13200 FLUOR, P.O. Box 1000 Richland, Washington Implementation of the Seismic Design Criteria for DOE-STD-I 189-2008, Appendix A HNF-37489-FP Revision 0 Implementation of the Seismic Design Criteria for DOE-STD-1189- 2008, Appendix A S. K. Omberg Fluor Government Group Date Published April 2008 To Be Presented at The Nuclear Renaissanm. Safety Analysls for the New Nuclear Age

  5. Radiological control manual. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kloepping, R.

    1996-05-01

    This Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Radiological Control Manual (LBNL RCM) has been prepared to provide guidance for site-specific additions, supplements and interpretation of the DOE Radiological Control Manual. The guidance provided in this manual is one methodology to implement the requirements given in Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 835 (10 CFR 835) and the DOE Radiological Control Manual. Information given in this manual is also intended to provide demonstration of compliance to specific requirements in 10 CFR 835. The LBNL RCM (Publication 3113) and LBNL Health and Safety Manual Publication-3000 form the technical basis for the LBNL RPP and will be revised as necessary to ensure that current requirements from Rules and Orders are represented. The LBNL RCM will form the standard for excellence in the implementation of the LBNL RPP.

  6. Revised Draft Guidance on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Climate Change in NEPA Reviews | Department of Energy Draft Guidance on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change in NEPA Reviews Revised Draft Guidance on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change in NEPA Reviews On December 18, 2014, CEQ released revised draft guidance for public comment that describes how Federal departments and agencies should consider the effects of greenhouse gas emissions and climate change in their National Environmental Policy

  7. Conceptual Evaluation for the Installation of Treatment Capability for Mixed Low Level Waste at the Nevada National Security Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Management

    2010-11-24

    National Security Technologies, LLC, initiated an evaluation of treatment technologies that they would manage and operate as part of the mixed low-level waste (MLLW) disposal facilities at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). The NNSS Disposal Facility has been receiving radioactive waste from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) complex since the 1960s, and since 2005 the NNSS Disposal Facility has been receiving radioactive and MLLW for disposal only. In accordance with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), all mixed waste must meet land disposal restrictions (LDRs) prior to disposal. Compliance with LDRs is attained through treatment of the waste to mitigate the characteristics of the listed waste hazard. Presently, most generators utilize commercial capacity for waste treatment prior to shipment to the NNSS Disposal Facility. The objectives of this evaluation are to provide a conceptual study of waste treatment needs (i.e., demand), identify potential waste treatment technologies to meet demand, and analyze implementation considerations for initiating MLLW treatment capacity at the NNSS Disposal Facility. A review of DOE complex waste generation forecast data indicates that current and future Departmental demand for mixed waste treatment capacity will remain steady and strong. Analysis and screening of over 30 treatment technologies narrowed the field of treatment technologies to four: • Macroencapsulation • Stabilization/microencapsulation • Sort and segregation • Bench-scale mercury amalgamation The analysis of treatment technologies also considered existing permits, current the NNSS Disposal Facility infrastructure such as utilities and procedures, and past experiences such as green-light and red-light lessons learned. A schedule duration estimate has been developed for permitting, design, and construction of onsite treatment capability at the NNSS Disposal Facility. Treatment capability can be ready in 20 months.

  8. Lessons Learned at the Nevada National Security Site Implementing the EFCOG Activity-level Work Planning and Control Guide

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Slide Presentation by Steele Coddington, Work Planning Manager, National Security Technologies, Nevada National Security Site. Lessons Learned Implementing Work Planning & Control. 6 Step Process for improving WP&C.

  9. Revision of Army regulation (AR) 200-2, environmental effects of Army actions, and the application of total quality mangement (TQM) principles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Merkel, H,K.; Robitaille, P.

    1995-12-01

    AR 200-2 is the Army`s implementing regulation to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and DoD`s NEPA Directive DoDD 6050.1. AR 200-2 was last revised in the late 1980s and since then the scope of Army NEPA compliance activities have significantly increased, and NEPA practice and case law are continually changing. The purpose of revising AR 200-2 is to provide Army personel with clear and Concise guidance on how to meet their NEPA compliance requirements. The revision process included reviewing the current AR 200-2 to identify areas and topics needing clarification or modification; conferring with Army NEPA personnel to obtain views on NEPA compliance practices and procedures; conducting a review and analysis of significant, recent developments in NEPA case law; reviewing other federal NEPA implementing regulations to identify useful, transferrable concepts; preparing a {open_quotes}strawman{close_quotes} version of AR 200-2 to use as a starting point in the revision process; coordinating and consolidating input from the AR 200-2 Revisions Steering Committee; and responding to review comments. A draft version of AR 200-2 has been completed and informal Army-wide comments have been addressed. Some of the issues that the AR 200-2 Revisions Steering Committee considered during the revision effort included expanding the list of categorical exclusions, determining the appropriate length for the public comment period for environmental assessments prior to approval of the finding of no significant impact, determining the appropriate level of analysis for Army actions abroad, and determining whether Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation Liability Act (CERCLA) or Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) actions should be addressed under NEPA. Total Quality Management (TQM) principles were applied during the revision process. GroupSystems{trademark} software was used as a vehicle to enhance total group participation from managers to practitioners.

  10. Battery Test Manual For Electric Vehicles, Revision 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Christophersen, Jon P.

    2015-06-01

    This battery test procedure manual was prepared for the United States Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Vehicle Technologies Office. It is based on technical targets for commercial viability established for energy storage development projects aimed at meeting system level DOE goals for Electric Vehicles (EV). The specific procedures defined in this manual support the performance and life characterization of advanced battery devices under development for EVs. However, it does share some methods described in the previously published battery test manual for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Due to the complexity of some of the procedures and supporting analysis, future revisions including some modifications and clarifications of these procedures are expected. As in previous battery and capacitor test manuals, this version of the manual defines testing methods for full-size battery systems, along with provisions for scaling these tests for modules, cells or other subscale level devices. The DOE-United States Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC), Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) supported the development of the manual. Technical Team points of contact responsible for its development and revision are Chul Bae of Ford Motor Company and Jon P. Christophersen of the Idaho National Laboratory. The development of this manual was funded by the Unites States Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Vehicle Technologies Office. Technical direction from DOE was provided by David Howell, Energy Storage R&D Manager and Hybrid Electric Systems Team Leader. Comments and questions regarding the manual should be directed to Jon P. Christophersen at the Idaho National Laboratory (jon.christophersen@inl.gov).

  11. EIS-0074: Long-Term Management of Defense High-Level Radioactive Wastes Idaho Chemical Processing Plant, Idaho National Engineering Lab, Idaho

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The U.S. Department of Energy prepared this statement to analyze the environmental implications of the proposed selection of a strategy for long-term management of the high-level radioactive wastes generated as part of the national defense effort at the Department's Idaho Chemical Processing Plant at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. The project was cancelled after the Draft Environmental Impact Statement was produced.

  12. 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.

  13. 2008 MERRTT Revision Letter

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    November 2, 2007 The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Transportation Emergency Preparedness Program (TEPP) is pleased to announce the release of the 2008 Modular Emergency Response Radiological Transportation Training (MERRTT). This revision replaces the 2005 MERRTT CD-ROM set. As required by the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act, the 2008 MERRTT has been sent to the Occupational, Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) for review. The 2008 version of MERRTT includes several enhancements, but the primary

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1992-09-01

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1992-09-01

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

  16. Revised (05/06)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY OMB No. 1901-0260 (Revised 03/12) Germantown, MD 20874-1290 Expires: General Information 1. Purpose Standard Remittance Advice (RA) form is a mandatory form designed to serve as the source document for entries into the Department's accounting records under Public Law 97-425 data from Purchasers concerning payment of their contribution to the Nuclear Waste Fund. 2. Who Shall Submit The RA must be submitted by Purchasers who signed the Standard Contract for Disposal of

  17. Revised OMB Circular A-76 (Revised November 14, 2002) | Department of

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Energy Revised OMB Circular A-76 (Revised November 14, 2002) Revised OMB Circular A-76 (Revised November 14, 2002) PDF icon Revised OMB Circular A-76 (Revised November 14, 2002) More Documents & Publications Operating Guidelines Appendix A B.DOC� DOE HR Guidebook 12_15_05.DOC� Operating Guidelines Appendix C D

  18. Greater-than-Class C low-level radioactive waste shipping package/container identification and requirements study. National Low-Level Waste Management Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tyacke, M.

    1993-08-01

    This report identifies a variety of shipping packages (also referred to as casks) and waste containers currently available or being developed that could be used for greater-than-Class C (GTCC) low-level waste (LLW). Since GTCC LLW varies greatly in size, shape, and activity levels, the casks and waste containers that could be used range in size from small, to accommodate a single sealed radiation source, to very large-capacity casks/canisters used to transport or dry-store highly radioactive spent fuel. In some cases, the waste containers may serve directly as shipping packages, while in other cases, the containers would need to be placed in a transport cask. For the purpose of this report, it is assumed that the generator is responsible for transporting the waste to a Department of Energy (DOE) storage, treatment, or disposal facility. Unless DOE establishes specific acceptance criteria, the receiving facility would need the capability to accept any of the casks and waste containers identified in this report. In identifying potential casks and waste containers, no consideration was given to their adequacy relative to handling, storage, treatment, and disposal. Those considerations must be addressed separately as the capabilities of the receiving facility and the handling requirements and operations are better understood.

  19. Nevada Revised Statutes | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Not provided DOI Not Provided Check for DOI availability: http:crossref.org Online Internet link for Nevada Revised Statutes Citation Nevada Revised Statutes (2014). Retrieved...

  20. Oregon Revised Statutes | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Not provided DOI Not Provided Check for DOI availability: http:crossref.org Online Internet link for Oregon Revised Statutes Citation Oregon Revised Statutes (2014). Retrieved...

  1. Microsoft Word - Revision 2 06-16-2014.doc

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

    0 Nevada National Security Site Profile Sheet Nevada National Security Site Profile Sheet - Revision 2 - June 2014 A. Waste Generator or Classified Matter Originator Information 1. Company name: 2. Address: 3. Generator/Originator Facility: 4. Primary Technical Contact: Email: Phone: Fax: 5. DOE Point of Contact: Email: Phone: Fax: 6. Certification Official: Email: Phone: Fax: 7. Generator's EPA Identification Number (If profile involves hazardous waste): 8. If the waste or classified matter is

  2. EIS-0305: Treating Transuranic (TRU)/Alpha Low-Level at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EIS evaluates DOE's proposal to construct, operate, and decontaminate/decommission a Transuranic (TRU) Waste Treatment Facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The four waste types that would be treated at the proposed facility would be remote-handled TRU mixed waste sludge, liquid low-level waste associated with the sludge, contact-handled TRU/alpha low-level waste solids, and remote-handled TRU/alpha low-level waste solids. The mixed waste sludge and some of the solid waste contain metals regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and may be classified as mixed waste.

  3. Determination of Structural Carbohydrates and Lignin in Biomass: Laboratory Analytical Procedure (LAP) (Revised July 2011)

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

    Determination of Structural Carbohydrates and Lignin in Biomass Laboratory Analytical Procedure (LAP) Issue Date: April 2008 Revision Date: August 2012 (Version 08-03-2012) A. Sluiter, B. Hames, R. Ruiz, C. Scarlata, J. Sluiter, D. Templeton, and D. Crocker Technical Report NREL/TP-510-42618 Revised August 2012 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. National

  4. Determination of Total Carbohydrates in Algal Biomass: Laboratory Analytical Procedure (LAP) (Revised)

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

    Carbohydrates in Algal Biomass Laboratory Analytical Procedure (LAP) Issue Date: December 2, 2013 Revision Date: December 29, 2015 Stefanie Van Wychen and Lieve M.L. Laurens Technical Report NREL/TP-5100-60957 Revised December 2015 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at

  5. Determination of Total Solids and Ash in Algal Biomass: Laboratory Analytical Procedure (LAP) (Revised)

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

    Solids and Ash in Algal Biomass Laboratory Analytical Procedure (LAP) Issue Date: December 2, 2013 Revision Date: December 29, 2015 Stefanie Van Wychen and Lieve M.L. Laurens Technical Report NREL/TP-5100-60956 Revised December 2015 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at

  6. Office of Enterprise Assessments Review of the Y-12 National Security Complex 2014 Site-Level Exercise - January 2015

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

    2014 Site-Level Exercise January 2015 Office of Emergency Management Assessments Office of Environment, Safety and Health Assessments Office of Enterprise Assessments U.S. Department of Energy Table of Contents Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................................... ii Executive Summary

  7. Advanced Inverter Functions to Support High Levels of Distributed Solar: Policy and Regulatory Considerations (Brochure), NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory)

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

    ADVANCED INVERTER FUNCTIONS TO SUPPORT HIGH LEVELS OF DISTRIBUTED SOLAR POLICY AND REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS The use of advanced inverters in the design of solar photovoltaic (PV) systems can address some of the challenges to the integration of high levels of distributed solar generation on the electricity system. Although the term "advanced inverters" seems to imply a special type of inverter, some of the inverters currently deployed with PV systems can already provide advanced

  8. Cancelled- DOE Secretarial Notice: National Environmental Policy Act (1990)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This Secretarial Notice announced revisions of DOE compliance procedures under the National Environmental Policy Act. This notice has been cancelled and is for historical use only.

  9. Yakima Fisheries Project : Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration.

    1995-05-01

    BPA proposes to fund several fishery-related activities in the Yakima River Basin. The Yakima Fisheries Project (YFP), included in the Northwest Power Planning Council`s fish and wildlife program, would be jointly managed by the State of Washington and the Yakima Indian Nation. Fisheries resources in the Yakima River are severely reduced from historical levels and there is a significant potential for enhancement of these resources. BPA`s proposed action is to fund (1) information gathering on the implementation of supplementation techniques and on feasibility of reintroducing coho salmon in an environment where native populations have become extinct; (2) research activities based on continuous assessment, feedback and improvement of research design and activities ({open_quotes}adaptive management{close_quotes}); and (3) the construction, operation, and maintenance of facilities for supplementing populations of upper Yakima spring chinook salmon. The project has been considerably revised from the original proposal described in the first draft EIS. Examined in addition to No Action (which would leave present anadromous fisheries resources unchanged in the, Basin) are two alternatives for action: (1) supplementation of depressed natural populations of upper Yakima spring chinook and (2) that same supplementation plus a study to determine the feasibility of re-establishing (via stock imported from another basin) naturally spawning population and a significant fall fishery for coho in the Yakima Basin. Alternative 2 has been identified as the preferred action. Major issues examined in the Revised Draft EIS include potential impacts of the project on genetic and ecological resources of existing fish populations, on water quality and quantity, on threatened and endangered species listed under the Endangered Species Act, and on the recreational fishery.

  10. Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total natural gas proved reserves, reserves changes, and production, wet after lease separation, 2014 billion cubic feet Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries Estimated Proved Reserves Adjustments Increases Decreases Sales Acquisitions Extensions Discoveries in Old Fields Production Reserves State and subdivision 12/31/13 (+,-) (+) (-) (-) (+) (+) (+) (+) (-) 12/31/14 Alaska 7,383 -25 268 690 167 195 146 0 0 305 6,805 Lower 48 States 346,611 4,930 55,060 53,654

  11. Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Nonassociated natural gas proved reserves, reserves changes, and production, wet after lease separation, 2014 billion cubic feet Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries Estimated Proved Reserves Adjustments Increases Decreases Sales Acquisitions Extensions Discoveries in Old Fields Production Reserves State and Subdivision 12/31/13 (+,-) (+) (-) (-) (+) (+) (+) (+) (-) 12/31/14 Alaska 955 -24 89 137 0 34 138 0 0 101 954 Lower 48 States 294,549 3,533 41,975 44,047

  12. Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Associated-dissolved natural gas proved reserves, reserves changes, and production, wet after lease separation, 2014 billion cubic feet Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries Estimated Proved Reserves Adjustments Increases Decreases Sales Acquisitions Extensions Discoveries in Old Fields Production Reserves State and Subdivision 12/31/13 (+,-) (+) (-) (-) (+) (+) (+) (+) (-) 12/31/14 Alaska 6,428 -1 179 553 167 161 8 0 0 204 5,851 Lower 48 States 52,062 1,397

  13. Solid waste integrated forecast technical (SWIFT) report: FY1997 to FY 2070, Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Valero, O.J.; Templeton, K.J.; Morgan, J.

    1997-01-07

    This web site provides an up-to-date report on the radioactive solid waste expected to be managed by Hanford's Waste Management (WM) Project from onsite and offsite generators. It includes: an overview of Hanford-wide solid waste to be managed by the WM Project; program-level and waste class-specific estimates; background information on waste sources; and comparisons with previous forecasts and with other national data sources. This web site does not include: liquid waste (current or future generation); waste to be managed by the Environmental Restoration (EM-40) contractor (i.e., waste that will be disposed of at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF)); or waste that has been received by the WM Project to date (i.e., inventory waste). The focus of this web site is on low-level mixed waste (LLMW), and transuranic waste (both non-mixed and mixed) (TRU(M)). Some details on low-level waste and hazardous waste are also provided. Currently, this web site is reporting data th at was requested on 10/14/96 and submitted on 10/25/96. The data represent a life cycle forecast covering all reported activities from FY97 through the end of each program's life cycle. Therefore, these data represent revisions from the previous FY97.0 Data Version, due primarily to revised estimates from PNNL. There is some useful information about the structure of this report in the SWIFT Report Web Site Overview.

  14. GETEM Manuals and Revision Notes

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Please refer to these manuals and revision notes prior to downloading and running the Geothermal Electricity Technology Evaluation Model (GETEM). Because this is a beta version, you are urged to...

  15. Final Environmental Impact Statement for Treating Transuranic (TRU)/Alpha Low-level Waste at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Oak Ridge, Tennessee

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    N /A

    2000-06-30

    The DOE proposes to construct, operate, and decontaminate/decommission a TRU Waste Treatment Facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The four waste types that would be treated at the proposed facility would be remote-handled TRU mixed waste sludge, liquid low-level waste associated with the sludge, contact-handled TRU/alpha low-level waste solids, and remote-handled TRU/alpha low-level waste solids. The mixed waste sludge and some of the solid waste contain metals regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and may be classified as mixed waste. This document analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with five alternatives--No Action, the Low-Temperature Drying Alternative (Preferred Alternative), the Vitrification Alternative, the Cementation Alternative, and the Treatment and Waste Storage at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Alternative.

  16. RPP-RPT-42583 Revision

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    42583 Revision 0 Synthetic Sling Failure - Evaluations and Recommendations Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management Contractor for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of River Protection under Contract DE-AC27-08RV14800 Approved for Public Release; Further Dissemination Unlimited RPP-RPT-42583 Revision 0 Synthetic Sling Failure - Evaluations and Recommendations C. S. Henderson T. C. Mackey Washington River Protection Solutions Date Published

  17. Modeling Photovoltaic Module-Level Power Electronics in the System Advisor Model; NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2015-07-01

    Module-level power electronics, such as DC power optimizers, microinverters, and those found in AC modules, are increasing in popularity in smaller-scale photovoltaic (PV) systems as their prices continue to decline. Therefore, it is important to provide PV modelers with guidelines about how to model these distributed power electronics appropriately in PV modeling software. This paper extends the work completed at NREL that provided recommendations to model the performance of distributed power electronics in NREL’s popular PVWatts calculator [1], to provide similar guidelines for modeling these technologies in NREL's more complex System Advisor Model (SAM). Module-level power electronics - such as DC power optimizers, microinverters, and those found in AC modules-- are increasing in popularity in smaller-scale photovoltaic (PV) systems as their prices continue to decline. Therefore, it is important to provide PV modelers with guidelines about how to model these distributed power electronics appropriately in PV modeling software.

  18. Analysis of Precipitation (Rain and Snow) Levels and Straight-line Wind Speeds in Support of the 10-year Natural Phenomena Hazards Review for Los Alamos National Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kelly, Elizabeth J.; Dewart, Jean Marie; Deola, Regina

    2015-12-10

    This report provides site-specific return level analyses for rain, snow, and straight-line wind extreme events. These analyses are in support of the 10-year review plan for the assessment of meteorological natural phenomena hazards at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). These analyses follow guidance from Department of Energy, DOE Standard, Natural Phenomena Hazards Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities (DOE-STD-1020-2012), Nuclear Regulatory Commission Standard Review Plan (NUREG-0800, 2007) and ANSI/ ANS-2.3-2011, Estimating Tornado, Hurricane, and Extreme Straight-Line Wind Characteristics at Nuclear Facility Sites. LANL precipitation and snow level data have been collected since 1910, although not all years are complete. In this report the results from the more recent data (1990–2014) are compared to those of past analyses and a 2004 National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration report. Given the many differences in the data sets used in these different analyses, the lack of statistically significant differences in return level estimates increases confidence in the data and in the modeling and analysis approach.

  19. Drivers for the Value of Demand Response under Increased Levels of Wind and Solar Power; NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hale, Elaine

    2015-07-30

    Demand response may be a valuable flexible resource for low-carbon electric power grids. However, there are as many types of possible demand response as there are ways to use electricity, making demand response difficult to study at scale in realistic settings. This talk reviews our state of knowledge regarding the potential value of demand response in several example systems as a function of increasing levels of wind and solar power, sometimes drawing on the analogy between demand response and storage. Overall, we find demand response to be promising, but its potential value is very system dependent. Furthermore, demand response, like storage, can easily saturate ancillary service markets.

  20. In situ grouting of low-level burial trenches with a cement-based grout at Oak Ridge National Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Francis, C.W.; Spence, R.D.; Tamura, T.; Spalding, B.P.

    1993-01-01

    A technology being evaluated for use in the closure of one of the low-level radwaste burial grounds at ORNL is trench stabilization using a cement-based grout. To demonstrate the applicability and effectiveness of this technology, two interconnecting trenches in SWSA 6 were selected as candidates for in situ grouting with a particulate grout. The primary objective was to demonstrate the increased trench stability (characterized by trench penetration tests) and the decreased potential for leachate migration (characterized by hydraulic conductivity tests) following in situ injection of a particulate grout into the waste trenches. Stability against trench subsidence is a critical issue. For example, construction of impermeable covers to seal the trenches will be ineffectual unless subsequent trench subsidence is permanently suspended. A grout composed of 39% Type 1 Portland cement, 55.5% Class F fly ash, and 5.5% bentonite mixed at 12.5 lb/gal of water was selected. Before the trenches were grouted, the primary characteristics relating to physical stability, hydraulic conductivity, and void volume of the trenches were determined. Their physical stability was evaluated using soil-penetration tests.

  1. National Level Co-Control Study of the Targets for Energy Intensity and Sulfur Dioxide in China

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zhou, Nan; Price, Lynn; Zheng, Nina; Ke, Jing; Hasanbeigi, Ali

    2011-10-15

    Since 2006, China has set goals of reducing energy intensity, emissions, and pollutants in multiple guidelines and in the Five Year Plans. Various strategies and measures have then been taken to improve the energy efficiency in all sectors and to reduce pollutants. Since controlling energy, CO{sub 2} emissions, and pollutants falls under the jurisdiction of different government agencies in China, many strategies are being implemented to fulfill only one of these objectives. Co-controls or integrated measures could simultaneously reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and criteria air pollutant emissions. The targets could be met in a more cost effective manner if the integrated measures can be identified and prioritized. This report provides analysis and insights regarding how these targets could be met via co-control measures focusing on both CO{sub 2} and SO{sub 2} emissions in the cement, iron &steel, and power sectors to 2030 in China. An integrated national energy and emission model was developed in order to establish a baseline scenario that was used to assess the impact of actions already taken by the Chinese government as well as planned and expected actions. In addition, CO{sub 2} mitigation scenarios and SO{sub 2} control scenarios were also established to evaluate the impact of each of the measures and the combined effects. In the power sector, although the end of pipe SO{sub 2} control technology such as flue gas desulfurization (FGD) has the largest reduction potential for SO{sub 2} emissions, other CO{sub 2} control options have important co-benefits in reducing SO{sub 2} emissions of 52.6 Mt of SO{sub 2} accumulatively. Coal efficiency improvements along with hydropower, renewable and nuclear capacity expansion will result in more than half of the SO{sub 2} emission reductions as the SO{sub 2} control technology through 2016. In comparison, the reduction from carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is much less and has negative SO{sub 2} reductions potential. The expanded biomass generation scenario does not have significant potential for reducing SO{sub 2} emissions, because of its limited availability. For the cement sector, the optimal co-control strategy includes accelerated adoption of energy efficiency measures, decreased use of clinker in cement production, increased use of alternative fuels, and fuel-switching to biomass. If desired, additional SO{sub 2} mitigation could be realized by more fully adopting SO{sub 2} abatement mitigation technology measures. The optimal co-control scenario results in annual SO{sub 2} emissions reductions in 2030 of 0.16 Mt SO{sub 2} and annual CO{sub 2} emissions reductions of 76 Mt CO{sub 2}. For the iron and steel sector, the optimal co-control strategy includes accelerated adoption of energy efficiency measures, increased share of electric arc furnace steel production, and reduced use of coal and increased use of natural gas in steel production. The strategy also assumes full implementation of sinter waste gas recycling and wet desulfurization. This strategy results in annual SO{sub 2} emissions reductions in 2030 of 1.3 Mt SO{sub 2} and annual CO{sub 2} emissions reductions of 173 Mt CO{sub 2}.

  2. Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Coalbed methane proved reserves, reserves changes, and production, 2014 billion cubic feet Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries Estimated Proved Reserves Adjustments Increases Decreases Sales Acquisitions Extensions Discoveries in Old Fields Production Reserves State and Subdivision 12/31/13 (+,-) (+) (-) (-) (+) (+) (+) (+) (-) 12/31/14 Alaska 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lower 48 States 12,392 1,796 3,299 1,020 442 680 395 0 0 1,404 15,696 Alabama 413 641 42 40 0 0 0

  3. Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Crude oil and lease condensate proved reserves, reserves changes, and production, 2014 million barrels Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries Estimated Proved Reserves Adjustments Increases Decreases Sales Acquisitions Extensions Discoveries in Old Fields Production Reserves State and Subdivision 12/31/13 (+,-) (+) (-) (-) (+) (+) (+) (+) (-) 12/31/14 Alaska 2,898 1 239 196 125 187 35 0 0 182 2,857 Lower 48 States 33,622 439 5,789 5,416 2,350 2,641 4,986 164 219

  4. Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Crude oil proved reserves, reserves changes, and production, 2014 million barrels Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries Estimated Proved Reserves Adjustments Increases Decreases Sales Acquisitions Extensions Discoveries in Old Fields Production Reserves State and Subdivision 12/31/13 (+,-) (+) (-) (-) (+) (+) (+) (+) (-) 12/31/14 Alaska 2,898 1 238 196 125 186 35 0 0 182 2,855 Lower 48 States 30,473 515 5,077 4,798 2,032 2,234 4,395 151 207 2,692 33,530 Alabama

  5. Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Lease condensate proved reserves, reserves changes, and production, 2014 million barrels Published New Reservoir Proved Revision Revision New Field Discoveries Estimated Proved Reserves Adjustments Increases Decreases Sales Acquisitions Extensions Discoveries in Old Fields Production Reserves State and Subdivision 12/31/13 (+,-) (+) (-) (-) (+) (+) (+) (+) (-) 12/31/14 Alaska 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 Lower 48 States 3,149 -76 712 618 318 407 591 13 12 326 3,546 Alabama 14 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 13

  6. System Plan Revision 4

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

    characterization allowing WTP feed waste acceptance and consistent HLW batch delivery 3 Fluid Level Settled Solids 1,000,000 gallon double shell feed staging tank 145,000 gallon...

  7. High Level Waste Tank Farm Replacement Project for the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. Environmental Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-06-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA), DOE/EA-0831, for the construction and operation of the High-Level Waste Tank Farm Replacement (HLWTFR) Project for the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant located at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL). The HLWTFR Project as originally proposed by the DOE and as analyzed in this EA included: (1) replacement of five high-level liquid waste storage tanks with four new tanks and (2) the upgrading of existing tank relief piping and high-level liquid waste transfer systems. As a result of the April 1992 decision to discontinue the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel at INEL, DOE believes that it is unlikely that the tank replacement aspect of the project will be needed in the near term. Therefore, DOE is not proposing to proceed with the replacement of the tanks as described in this-EA. The DOE`s instant decision involves only the proposed upgrades aspect of the project described in this EA. The upgrades are needed to comply with Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Idaho Hazardous Waste Management Act requirements, and the Department`s obligations pursuant to the Federal Facilities Compliance Agreement and Consent Order among the Environmental Protection Agency, DOE, and the State of Idaho. The environmental impacts of the proposed upgrades are adequately covered and are bounded by the analysis in this EA. If DOE later proposes to proceed with the tank replacement aspect of the project as described in the EA or as modified, it will undertake appropriate further review pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act.

  8. Nevada National Security Site Radiological Control Manual

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Radiological Control Managers’ Council

    2012-03-26

    This document supersedes DOE/NV/25946--801, 'Nevada Test Site Radiological Control Manual,' Revision 1 issued in February 2010. Brief Description of Revision: A complete revision to reflect a recent change in name for the NTS; changes in name for some tenant organizations; and to update references to current DOE policies, orders, and guidance documents. Article 237.2 was deleted. Appendix 3B was updated. Article 411.2 was modified. Article 422 was re-written to reflect the wording of DOE O 458.1. Article 431.6.d was modified. The glossary was updated. This manual contains the radiological control requirements to be used for all radiological activities conducted by programs under the purview of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO). Compliance with these requirements will ensure compliance with Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 835, 'Occupational Radiation Protection.' Programs covered by this manual are located at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS); Nellis Air Force Base and North Las Vegas, Nevada; Santa Barbara and Livermore, California; and Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland. In addition, fieldwork by NNSA/NSO at other locations is covered by this manual. Current activities at NNSS include operating low-level radioactive and mixed waste disposal facilities for United States defense-generated waste, assembly and execution of subcritical experiments, assembly/disassembly of special experiments, the storage and use of special nuclear materials, performing criticality experiments, emergency responder training, surface cleanup and site characterization of contaminated land areas, environmental activity by the University system, and nonnuclear test operations, such as controlled spills of hazardous materials at the Hazardous Materials Spill Center. Currently, the major potential for occupational radiation exposure is associated with the burial of low-level radioactive waste and the handling of radioactive sources. Remediation of contaminated land areas may also result in radiological exposures.

  9. TRUPACT-III Content Codes (TRUCON-III), Revision 2, July 2012

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    WIPP 11-3458 Rev. 2 TRUPACT-III CONTENT CODES (TRUCON-III) Revision 2 July 2012 This document supersedes DOE/WIPP 10-3458, Revision 1 DOE/WIPP 11-3458 Rev. 2 TRUPACT-III CONTENT CODES (TRUCON-III) Revision 2 July 2012 Approved by: [Signature on File] Date:_ 12 July 2012 _ J. R. Stroble, Director, Office of the National TRU Program DOE/WIPP 11-3458 Rev. 2, July 2012 3 This document has been submitted as required to: U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information PO Box

  10. Acquisition Career Management Program Handbook, Partial Revision...

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

    Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Acquisition Career Management Program Handbook, Partial Revision of Chapter 11, Contracting Officer's Representative SUMMARY: The...

  11. Initial performance assessment of the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste stored at Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. Volume 1, Methodology and results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rechard, R.P.

    1993-12-01

    This performance assessment characterized plausible treatment options conceived by the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) for its spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste and then modeled the performance of the resulting waste forms in two hypothetical, deep, geologic repositories: one in bedded salt and the other in granite. The results of the performance assessment are intended to help guide INEL in its study of how to prepare wastes and spent fuel for eventual permanent disposal. This assessment was part of the Waste Management Technology Development Program designed to help the US Department of Energy develop and demonstrate the capability to dispose of its nuclear waste. Although numerous caveats must be placed on the results, the general findings were as follows: Though the waste form behavior depended upon the repository type, all current and proposed waste forms provided acceptable behavior in the salt and granite repositories.

  12. 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

    2011-12-23

    Groundwater impacts have been analyzed for the proposed remote-handled low-level waste disposal facility. The analysis was prepared to support the National Environmental Policy Act environmental assessment for the top two ranked sites for the proposed disposal facility. A four-phase screening and analysis approach was documented and applied. Phase I screening was site independent and applied a radionuclide half-life cut-off of 1 year. Phase II screening applied the National Council on Radiation Protection analysis approach and was site independent. Phase III screening used a simplified transport model and site-specific geologic and hydrologic parameters. Phase III neglected the infiltration-reducing engineered cover, the sorption influence of the vault system, dispersion in the vadose zone, vertical dispersion in the aquifer, and the release of radionuclides from specific waste forms. These conservatisms were relaxed in the Phase IV analysis which used a different model with more realistic parameters and assumptions. Phase I screening eliminated 143 of the 246 radionuclides in the inventory from further consideration because each had a half-life less than 1 year. An additional 13 were removed because there was no ingestion dose coefficient available. Of the 90 radionuclides carried forward from Phase I, 57 radionuclides had simulated Phase II screening doses exceeding 0.4 mrem/year. Phase III and IV screening compared the maximum predicted radionuclide concentration in the aquifer to maximum contaminant levels. Of the 57 radionuclides carried forward from Phase II, six radionuclides were identified in Phase III as having simulated future aquifer concentrations exceeding maximum contaminant limits. An additional seven radionuclides had simulated Phase III groundwater concentrations exceeding 1/100th of their respective maximum contaminant levels and were also retained for Phase IV analysis. The Phase IV analysis predicted that none of the thirteen remaining radionuclides would exceed the maximum contaminant levels for either site location. The predicted cumulative effective dose equivalent from all 13 radionuclides also was less than the dose criteria set forth in Department of Energy Order 435.1 for each site location. An evaluation of composite impacts showed one site is preferable over the other based on the potential for commingling of groundwater contamination with other facilities.

  13. Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 569: Area 3 Yucca Flat Atmospheric Test Sites Nevada National Security Site, Nevada with ROTC 1, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sloop, Christy

    2013-04-01

    This Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report presents information supporting the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 569: Area 3 Yucca Flat Atmospheric Test Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada. CAU 569 comprises the following nine corrective action sites (CASs): • 03-23-09, T-3 Contamination Area • 03-23-10, T-3A Contamination Area • 03-23-11, T-3B Contamination Area • 03-23-12, T-3S Contamination Area • 03-23-13, T-3T Contamination Area • 03-23-14, T-3V Contamination Area • 03-23-15, S-3G Contamination Area • 03-23-16, S-3H Contamination Area • 03-23-21, Pike Contamination Area The purpose of this Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report is to provide justification and documentation supporting the recommendation that no further corrective action is needed for CAU 569 based on the implementation of the corrective actions listed in Table ES-2.

  14. Initial performance assessment of the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste stored at Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. Volume 2: Appendices

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rechard, R.P.

    1993-12-01

    This performance assessment characterized plausible treatment options conceived by the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) for its spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste and then modeled the performance of the resulting waste forms in two hypothetical, deep, geologic repositories: one in bedded salt and the other in granite. The results of the performance assessment are intended to help guide INEL in its study of how to prepare wastes and spent fuel for eventual permanent disposal. This assessment was part of the Waste Management Technology Development Program designed to help the US Department of Energy develop and demonstrate the capability to dispose of its nuclear waste, as mandated by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. The waste forms comprised about 700 metric tons of initial heavy metal (or equivalent units) stored at the INEL: graphite spent fuel, experimental low enriched and highly enriched spent fuel, and high-level waste generated during reprocessing of some spent fuel. Five different waste treatment options were studied; in the analysis, the options and resulting waste forms were analyzed separately and in combination as five waste disposal groups. When the waste forms were studied in combination, the repository was assumed to also contain vitrified high-level waste from three DOE sites for a common basis of comparison and to simulate the impact of the INEL waste forms on a moderate-sized repository, The performance of the waste form was assessed within the context of a whole disposal system, using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency`s Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes, 40 CFR 191, promulgated in 1985. Though the waste form behavior depended upon the repository type, all current and proposed waste forms provided acceptable behavior in the salt and granite repositories.

  15. Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Construction and Operations of a Biosafety Level 3 Facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    N /A

    2002-02-26

    The ''National Environmental Policy Act of 1969'' (NEPA) requires Federal agency officials to consider the environmental consequences of their proposed actions before decisions are made. In complying with NEPA, the United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) follows the Council on Environmental Quality regulations (40 ''Code of Federal Regulations'' [CFR] 1500-1508) and DOE's own NEPA implementing procedures (10 CFR 1021). The purpose of an environmental assessment (EA) is to provide Federal decision-makers with sufficient evidence and analysis to determine whether to prepare an Environmental impact statement (EIS) or issue a Finding of No Significant Impact. This EA has been prepared to assess environmental consequences resulting from the construction and operation of a Biosafety Level 3 (BSL-3) laboratory facility within the boundaries of the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). LANL is one of the national security laboratories under the authority of the Under Secretary for Nuclear Security of the NNSA who serves as the Administrator for Nuclear Security and Head of the NNSA (50 USC Chapter 41, Section 2402(b)). The objectives of this EA are to (1) describe the underlying purpose and need for NNSA action; (2) describe the Proposed Action and identify and describe any reasonable alternatives that satisfy the purpose and need for NNSA action; (3) describe baseline environmental conditions at LANL; (4) analyze the potential indirect, direct, and cumulative effects to the existing environment from implementation of the Proposed Action and other reasonable alternatives; and (5) compare the effects of the Proposed Action with the No Action Alternative and other reasonable alternatives. For the purposes of compliance with NEPA, reasonable alternatives are identified as being those that meet NNSA's purpose and need for action by virtue of timeliness, appropriate technology, and applicability to LANL. The EA process also provides NNSA with environmental information that can be used in developing mitigative actions, if necessary, to minimize or avoid adverse effects to the quality of the human environment and natural ecosystems should NNSA decide to proceed with implementing the construction and operation of a BSL-3 facility at LANL. Ultimately, the goal of NEPA and this EA is to aid NNSA officials in making decisions based on an understanding of environmental consequences and taking actions that protect, restore, and enhance the environment.

  16. A report documenting the completion of the Los Alamos National Laboratory portion of the ASC level II milestone ""Visualization on the supercomputing platform

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ahrens, James P; Patchett, John M; Lo, Li - Ta; Mitchell, Christopher; Mr Marle, David; Brownlee, Carson

    2011-01-24

    This report provides documentation for the completion of the Los Alamos portion of the ASC Level II 'Visualization on the Supercomputing Platform' milestone. This ASC Level II milestone is a joint milestone between Sandia National Laboratory and Los Alamos National Laboratory. The milestone text is shown in Figure 1 with the Los Alamos portions highlighted in boldfaced text. Visualization and analysis of petascale data is limited by several factors which must be addressed as ACES delivers the Cielo platform. Two primary difficulties are: (1) Performance of interactive rendering, which is the most computationally intensive portion of the visualization process. For terascale platforms, commodity clusters with graphics processors (GPUs) have been used for interactive rendering. For petascale platforms, visualization and rendering may be able to run efficiently on the supercomputer platform itself. (2) I/O bandwidth, which limits how much information can be written to disk. If we simply analyze the sparse information that is saved to disk we miss the opportunity to analyze the rich information produced every timestep by the simulation. For the first issue, we are pursuing in-situ analysis, in which simulations are coupled directly with analysis libraries at runtime. This milestone will evaluate the visualization and rendering performance of current and next generation supercomputers in contrast to GPU-based visualization clusters, and evaluate the perfromance of common analysis libraries coupled with the simulation that analyze and write data to disk during a running simulation. This milestone will explore, evaluate and advance the maturity level of these technologies and their applicability to problems of interest to the ASC program. In conclusion, we improved CPU-based rendering performance by a a factor of 2-10 times on our tests. In addition, we evaluated CPU and CPU-based rendering performance. We encourage production visualization experts to consider using CPU-based rendering solutions when it is appropriate. For example, on remote supercomputers CPU-based rendering can offer a means of viewing data without having to offload the data or geometry onto a CPU-based visualization system. In terms of comparative performance of the CPU and CPU we believe that further optimizations of the performance of both CPU or CPU-based rendering are possible. The simulation community is currently confronting this reality as they work to port their simulations to different hardware architectures. What is interesting about CPU rendering of massive datasets is that for part two decades CPU performance has significantly outperformed CPU-based systems. Based on our advancements, evaluations and explorations we believe that CPU-based rendering has returned as one viable option for the visualization of massive datasets.

  17. Phase I Flow and Transport Model Document for Corrective Action Unit 97: Yucca Flat/Climax Mine, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada, Revision 1 with ROTCs 1 and 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Andrews, Robert

    2013-09-01

    The Underground Test Area (UGTA) Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 97, Yucca Flat/Climax Mine, in the northeast part of the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) requires environmental corrective action activities to assess contamination resulting from underground nuclear testing. These activities are necessary to comply with the UGTA corrective action strategy (referred to as the UGTA strategy). The corrective action investigation phase of the UGTA strategy requires the development of groundwater flow and contaminant transport models whose purpose is to identify the lateral and vertical extent of contaminant migration over the next 1,000 years. In particular, the goal is to calculate the contaminant boundary, which is defined as a probabilistic model-forecast perimeter and a lower hydrostratigraphic unit (HSU) boundary that delineate the possible extent of radionuclide-contaminated groundwater from underground nuclear testing. Because of structural uncertainty in the contaminant boundary, a range of potential contaminant boundaries was forecast, resulting in an ensemble of contaminant boundaries. The contaminant boundary extent is determined by the volume of groundwater that has at least a 5 percent chance of exceeding the radiological standards of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) (CFR, 2012).

  18. Clean Air Act. Revision 5

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-02-15

    This Reference Book contains a current copy of the Clean Air Act, as amended, and those regulations that implement the statute and appear to be most relevant to DOE activities. The document is provided to DOE and contractor staff for informational purposes only and should not be interpreted as legal guidance. This Reference Book has been completely revised and is current through February 15, 1994.

  19. Final deactivation project report on the High Radiation Level Analytical Facility, Building 3019B at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-09-01

    The purpose of this report is to document the condition of the High Radiation Level Analytical Facility (Building 3019B) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) after completion of deactivation activities. This report identifies the activities conducted to place the facility in a safe and environmentally sound condition prior to transfer to the Environmental Restoration EM-40 Program. This document provides a history and description of the facility prior to the commencement of deactivation activities and documents the condition of the building after completion of all deactivation activities. Turnover items, such as the Post-Deactivation Surveillance and Maintenance (S&M) Plan, remaining hazardous materials inventory, radiological controls, safeguards and security, quality assurance, facility operations, and supporting documentation provided in the Nuclear Material and Facility Stabilization (EM-60) Turnover package are discussed. Building 3019B will require access to perform required S&M activities to maintain the building safety envelope. Building 3019B was stabilized during deactivation so that when transferred to the EM-40 Program, only a minimal S&M effort would be required to maintain the building safety envelope. Other than the minimal S&M activities the building will be unoccupied and the exterior doors locked to prevent unauthorized access. The building will be entered only to perform the required S&M until decommissioning activities begin.

  20. REVISED MD-110 REFERENCE GUIDE SEPTERMBER 2015

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    REVISED MD-110 REFERENCE GUIDE SEPTEMBER 2015 BACKGROUND On August 5, 2015, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) approved the first revision to its Management Directive 110 (MD-110) since 1999. The revised MD-110 provides federal agencies with updated Commission policies, procedures, and guidance relating to the federal sector complaint process as set forth in 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 and reflects new developments in case law, as the federal workplace and EEO practices have evolved. The

  1. ADR Revised Policy | Department of Energy

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

    Revised Policy ADR Revised Policy SUMMARY: On October 24, 1995, the Department of Energy (DOE) published an interim Statement of Policy on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) (60 FR 54482) to further its commitment to the use of ADR for resolving issues in controversy in a fair, timely, and cost efficient manner, and to comply with the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act (ADRA), 5 U.S.C. §571 et seq. Today, DOE publishes a revised Statement of Policy on Alternative Dispute Resolution to

  2. ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SCHEDULE 21:AUDIOVISUAL RECORDS (Revision...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SCHEDULE 21:AUDIOVISUAL RECORDS (Revision 1) More Documents & Publications ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SCHEDULE 21: AUDIOVISUAL RECORDS Audiovisual Records ADM 21...

  3. NMED Presentation on Revised Consent Order

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    At the November 12, 2015 Special NNMCAB Meeting NMED Secretary Ryan Flynn provided a presentation on the Revisions to the 2005 Order on Consent.

  4. National Security Facility (NSF) | Argonne National Laboratory

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

    National Security Facility (NSF) National Security Facility (NSF) Argonne National Laboratory's National Security Facility (NSF) is a flexible, state-of-the-art secure user facility that contains multiple national security networks, video teleconference capability, high-resolution graphics support, a fully powered and cooled data center, multi-level training facilities, and conferencing facilities. The NSF provides tools and resources to enable and strengthen connections between government

  5. National Postdoctoral Association | Argonne National Laboratory

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

    National Postdoctoral Association The National Postdoctoral Association (NPA) is a member-driven organization that provides a unique, national voice for postdoctoral scholars. Since 2003, we have taken on the ambitious agenda to enhance the quality of the postdoctoral experience in the U.S. We have assumed a leadership role in addressing the many issues confronting the postdoctoral community that are national in scope and requiring action beyond the local level. Read more. Argonne National Lab

  6. National Energy Software Center: benchmark problem book. Revision

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    1985-12-01

    Computational benchmarks are given for the following problems: (1) Finite-difference, diffusion theory calculation of a highly nonseparable reactor, (2) Iterative solutions for multigroup two-dimensional neutron diffusion HTGR problem, (3) Reference solution to the two-group diffusion equation, (4) One-dimensional neutron transport transient solutions, (5) To provide a test of the capabilities of multi-group multidimensional kinetics codes in a heavy water reactor, (6) Test of capabilities of multigroup neutron diffusion in LMFBR, and (7) Two-dimensional PWR models.

  7. National Fuel Cell Technology Evaluation Center (NFCTEC) (Revised...

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

    information. Since 2004 NREL has produced around 200 CDPs for these hydrogen and fuel cell technology validation projects: * Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicle and Infrastructure...

  8. 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.

  9. EIS-0286: Notice of Revised Scope | Department of Energy

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

    Notice of Revised Scope EIS-0286: Notice of Revised Scope Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has decided to revise the...

  10. NRC comprehensive records disposition schedule. Revision 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-02-01

    Title 44 US Code, ``Public Printing and Documents,`` regulations issued by the General Service Administration (GSA) in 41 CFR Chapter 101, Subchapter B, ``Management and Use of Information and Records,`` and regulations issued by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) in 36 CFR Chapter 12, Subchapter B, ``Records Management,`` require each agency to prepare and issue a comprehensive records disposition schedule that contains the NARA approved records disposition schedules for records unique to the agency and contains the NARA`s General Records Schedules for records common to several or all agencies. The approved records disposition schedules specify the appropriate duration of retention and the final disposition for records created or maintained by the NRC. NUREG-0910, Rev. 3, contains ``NRC`s Comprehensive Records Disposition Schedule,`` and the original authorized approved citation numbers issued by NARA. Rev. 3 incorporates NARA approved changes and additions to the NRC schedules that have been implemented since the last revision dated March, 1992, reflects recent organizational changes implemented at the NRC, and includes the latest version of NARA`s General Records Schedule (dated August 1995).

  11. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 331.1C, Chg 3, Employee Performance Management and Recognition Program

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

    The revision incorporates recommendations from the FY12 National Council on Federal Labor-Management Relation's "Goals-Engagement-Accountability-Results (GEAR)" report and program requirements currently contained in the DOE Supervisory/Non-Supervisory Employee Performance Management and Recognition Desk Reference (Desk Reference) such as the DOE Monetary Awards Scale, as well as program requirements that have been established via memoranda since the Order was revised in October 2010.

  12. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 331.1C Chg 3, Employee Performance Management and Recognition Program

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

    2015-03-20

    The revision incorporates recommendations from the FY12 National Council on Federal Labor-Management Relation's "Goals-Engagement-Accountability-Results (GEAR)" report and program requirements currently contained in the DOE Supervisory/Non-Supervisory Employee Performance Management and Recognition Desk Reference (Desk Reference) such as the DOE Monetary Awards Scale, as well as program requirements that have been established via memoranda since the Order was revised in October 2010.

  13. Determination of Total Lipids as Fatty Acid Methyl Esters (FAME) by in situ Transesterification: Laboratory Analytical Procedure (LAP) (Revised)

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

    Lipids as Fatty Acid Methyl Esters (FAME) by in situ Transesterification Laboratory Analytical Procedure (LAP) Issue Date: December 2, 2013 Revision Date: December 29, 2015 Stefanie Van Wychen, Kelsey Ramirez, and Lieve M.L. Laurens Technical Report NREL/TP-5100-60958 Revised December 2015 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC This report is available at no cost from

  14. DOE Requests Information on Potential New or Revised Categorical...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    DOE Requests Information on Potential New or Revised Categorical Exclusions DOE Requests Information on Potential New or Revised Categorical Exclusions December 22, 2009 - 10:33am...

  15. Attachment 2: Solicitation for Offers with New and Revised Green...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Attachment 2: Solicitation for Offers with New and Revised Green Lease Text Attachment 2: Solicitation for Offers with New and Revised Green Lease Text PDF icon Solicitation for...

  16. Attachment 2: Solicitation for Offers with New and Revised Green...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    2: Solicitation for Offers with New and Revised Green Lease Text Attachment 2: Solicitation for Offers with New and Revised Green Lease Text PDF icon Solicitation for Offers ...

  17. Commercial Grade Dedication Record (ANL-746 Revised) | Department...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Record (ANL-746 Revised) Commercial Grade Dedication Record (ANL-746 Revised) A sample of a process to recorddocument CGD activities. Forms are included. Commercial Grade...

  18. Generalized Test Plan for the Vitrification of Simulated High-Level -Waste Calcine in the Idaho National Laboratory‘s Bench -Scale Cold Crucible Induction Melter

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vince Maio

    2011-08-01

    This Preliminary Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Test Plan outlines the chronological steps required to initially evaluate the validity of vitrifying INL surrogate (cold) High-Level-Waste (HLW) solid particulate calcine in INL's Cold Crucible Induction Melter (CCIM). Its documentation and publication satisfies interim milestone WP-413-INL-01 of the DOE-EM (via the Office of River Protection) sponsored work package, WP 4.1.3, entitled 'Improved Vitrification' The primary goal of the proposed CCIM testing is to initiate efforts to identify an efficient and effective back-up and risk adverse technology for treating the actual HLW calcine stored at the INL. The calcine's treatment must be completed by 2035 as dictated by a State of Idaho Consent Order. A final report on this surrogate/calcine test in the CCIM will be issued in May 2012-pending next fiscal year funding In particular the plan provides; (1) distinct test objectives, (2) a description of the purpose and scope of planned university contracted pre-screening tests required to optimize the CCIM glass/surrogate calcine formulation, (3) a listing of necessary CCIM equipment modifications and corresponding work control document changes necessary to feed a solid particulate to the CCIM, (4) a description of the class of calcine that will be represented by the surrogate, and (5) a tentative tabulation of the anticipated CCIM testing conditions, testing parameters, sampling requirements and analytical tests. Key FY -11 milestones associated with this CCIM testing effort are also provided. The CCIM test run is scheduled to be conducted in February of 2012 and will involve testing with a surrogate HLW calcine representative of only 13% of the 4,000 m3 of 'hot' calcine residing in 6 INL Bin Sets. The remaining classes of calcine will have to be eventually tested in the CCIM if an operational scale CCIM is to be a feasible option for the actual INL HLW calcine. This remaining calcine's make-up is HLW containing relatively high concentrations of zirconium and aluminum, representative of the cladding material of the reprocessed fuel that generated the calcine. A separate study to define the CCIM testing needs of these other calcine classifications in currently being prepared under a separate work package (WP-0) and will be provided as a milestone report at the end of this fiscal year.

  19. Summative Mass Analysis of Algal Biomass Â… Integration of Analytical Procedures; Laboratory Analytical Procedure (LAP) (Revised)

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

    Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 Summative Mass Analysis of Algal Biomass - Integration of Analytical Procedures Laboratory Analytical Procedure (LAP) Issue Date: December 2, 2013 Revision Date: December 29, 2015 Lieve M.L. Laurens Technical Report NREL/TP-5100-60943 Revised December 2015 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC This report is available at no cost from the

  20. The Manhattan Project National Security History Series

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

    The Manhattan Project National Security History Series 5 Visit our Manhattan Project web site: http://www.cfo.doe.gov/me70/manhattan/index.htm 5 DOE/MA-0002 Revised F. G. Gosling Offce of History and Heritage Resources Executive Secretariat Offce of Management Department of Energy January 2010 The Manhattan Project National Security History Series 5 National Security History Series Volume I: The Manhattan Project: Making the Atomic Bomb Volume II: Building the Nuclear Arsenal: Cold War Nuclear

  1. Pancreaticoportal Fistula and Disseminated Fat Necrosis After Revision of a Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Klein, Seth J. Saad, Nael; Korenblat, Kevin; Darcy, Michael D.

    2013-04-15

    A 59-year old man with alcohol related cirrhosis and portal hypertension was referred for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) to treat his refractory ascites. Ten years later, two sequential TIPS revisions were performed for shunt stenosis and recurrent ascites. After these revisions, he returned with increased serum pancreatic enzyme levels and disseminated superficial fat necrosis; an iatrogenic pancreaticoportal vein fistula caused by disruption of the pancreatic duct was suspected. The bare area of the TIPS was subsequently lined with a covered stent-graft, and serum enzyme levels returned to baseline. In the interval follow-up period, the patient has clinically improved.

  2. Environmental Programs Procedure Preparation, Revision, Review, Approval,

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    and Use | Department of Energy Environmental Programs Procedure Preparation, Revision, Review, Approval, and Use Environmental Programs Procedure Preparation, Revision, Review, Approval, and Use The documents included in this listing are additional references not included in the Phase 2 Radiological Release at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Attachment F: Bibliography and References report. The documents were examined and used to develop the final report. PDF icon Environmental Programs

  3. 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 Fllcili~l' Federal Review Group il1allUlli Revision 3, June 200S Concurrence The Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group Manual, Revision 3, is approved for use as of the most recent date below. Date Chair, Low-Level Waste Disposal Federal Review Group Andrew WalJo, 1II Deputy Director, Otlice of Nuclear Safety, Quality Assurance, and

  4. Revision of the DELFIC Particle Activity Module

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hooper, David A; Jodoin, Vincent J

    2010-09-01

    The Defense Land Fallout Interpretive Code (DELFIC) was originally released in 1968 as a tool for modeling fallout patterns and for predicting exposure rates. Despite the continual advancement of knowledge of fission yields, decay behavior of fission products, and biological dosimetry, the decay data and logic of DELFIC have remained mostly unchanged since inception. Additionally, previous code revisions caused a loss of conservation of radioactive nuclides. In this report, a new revision of the decay database and the Particle Activity Module is introduced and explained. The database upgrades discussed are replacement of the fission yields with ENDF/B-VII data as formatted in the Oak Ridge Isotope Generation (ORIGEN) code, revised decay constants, revised exposure rate multipliers, revised decay modes and branching ratios, and revised boiling point data. Included decay logic upgrades represent a correction of a flaw in the treatment of the fission yields, extension of the logic to include more complex decay modes, conservation of nuclides (including stable nuclides) at all times, and conversion of key variables to double precision for nuclide conservation. Finally, recommended future work is discussed with an emphasis on completion of the overall radiation physics upgrade, particularly for dosimetry, induced activity, decay of the actinides, and fractionation.

  5. EM Quality Assurance Policy, Revision 0 | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Policy, Revision 0 EM Quality Assurance Policy, Revision 0 Previous EM policy on the use of the corporate Quality Assurance Program (EM-QA-001 Rev. 0). This document has been superseded by Revision 1 of the policy, but is still in use at some EM sites. PDF icon EM Quality Assurance Policy, Revision 0 More Documents & Publications Line Management Understanding of QA and Oversight EM Quality Assurance Program (EM-QA-001 Revision 0) QA Corporate Board Meeting - February 2010 (Teleconference)

  6. CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Summary Tables (12 pages, 59 kb) CONTENTS PAGES 1. Summary Table: Totals and Means of Floorspace, Number of Workers, and Hours of Operation, 1995 2. Summary Table: Totals and Medians of Floorspace, Number of Workers, Hours of Operation, and Age of Building, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of

  7. CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Structure Tables (16 pages, 93 kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 8. Building Size, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 9. Building Size, Floorspace, 1995 Table 10. Year Constructed, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 11. Year Constructed, Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial

  8. Bourg_Sposito revised manuscript

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Ion Exchange Phenomena Ian C. Bourg Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Garrison Sposito University of California at Berkeley 6.1 Introduction Ion exchange phenomena involve the population of readily exchangeable ions, the subset of adsorbed solutes that balance the intrinsic surface charge and can be readily replaced by major background electrolyte ions (Sposito, 2008). These phenomena have occupied a central place in soil chemistry research since Way (1850) first showed that potassium uptake

  9. Microsoft Word - CCP-PO-003-Revision 13

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Effective Date: CCP-PO-003 REVISION 13 CCP TRANSURANIC AUTHORIZED METHODS FOR PAYLOAD CONTROL (CCP CH-TRAMPAC) INFORMATION ONLY CCP-PO-003, Rev. 13 Effective Date: 07/31/2013 CCP Transuranic Authorized Methods for Payload Control (CCP CH-TRAMPAC) Page 2 of 284 RECORD OF REVISION Revision Number Date Approved Description of Revision 3 05/31/2002 Revised to reflect Rev 19 to the TRAMPAC and the new CH-WAC. 4 02/11/2003 Revised steps 2.4.1, 6.2.1, 6.2.2 and 7.0 and added CCP-TP-046, CCP-TP-047 and

  10. Hanford Site technical baseline database. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Porter, P.E.

    1995-01-27

    This report lists the Hanford specific files (Table 1) that make up the Hanford Site Technical Baseline Database. Table 2 includes the delta files that delineate the differences between this revision and revision 0 of the Hanford Site Technical Baseline Database. This information is being managed and maintained on the Hanford RDD-100 System, which uses the capabilities of RDD-100, a systems engineering software system of Ascent Logic Corporation (ALC). This revision of the Hanford Site Technical Baseline Database uses RDD-100 version 3.0.2.2 (see Table 3). Directories reflect those controlled by the Hanford RDD-100 System Administrator. Table 4 provides information regarding the platform. A cassette tape containing the Hanford Site Technical Baseline Database is available.

  11. Recent Title V operating permit program revisions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nicewander, M.

    1995-12-31

    The purpose of this paper is to discuss recent EPA proposed regulations regarding required procedures to be incorporated into the state operating permit programs to accommodate permit revisions. The development and implementation of an operating permits program must balance air pollution control requirements with the ability of a source to meet changing market demands. This has been the major item of concern during the operating permits program development. Before discussing the specific procedures for revising operating permits, it is necessary to include some generic background information for familiarization with the operating permits program.

  12. Revisions to US EPA Superfund Risk and Dose Assessment Models and Guidance - 13403

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Walker, Stuart A.

    2013-07-01

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund program's six Preliminary Remediation Goal (PRG) and Dose Compliance Concentration (DCC) internet based calculators for risk and dose assessment at Superfund sites are being revised to reflect better science, revisions to existing exposure scenarios and new scenarios, and changes to match up more closely with the EPA chemical regional screening level calculator. A revised version of the 1999 guidance document that provides an overview for the Superfund risk assessment process at radioactively contaminated sites, 'Radiation Risk Assessment At CERCLA Sites: Q and A', is being completed that will reflect Superfund recommended guidance and other technical documents issued over the past 13 years. EPA is also issuing a series of fact sheets in the document 'Superfund Radiation Risk Assessment: A Community Tool-kit'. This presentation would go over those changes that are expected to be finished by this spring. (authors)

  13. Hawaii Revised Statute 182-6 Exploration | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Hawaii Revised Statute 182-6 Exploration Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- StatuteStatute: Hawaii Revised Statute 182-6...

  14. Property:NEPA RevisedApplicationDate | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    RevisedApplicationDate Jump to: navigation, search Property Name NEPA RevisedApplicationDate Property Type Date This is a property of type Date. Pages using the property "NEPA...

  15. Department of Energy Extends Comment Period on Proposed Revisions...

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

    Extends Comment Period on Proposed Revisions to its NEPA Rules Department of Energy Extends Comment Period on Proposed Revisions to its NEPA Rules February 17, 2011 - 5:29pm ...

  16. POLICY FLASH 2013-58 Revised Guide for Financial Assistance ...

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

    POLICY FLASH 2013-58 Revised Guide for Financial Assistance POLICY FLASH 2013-58 Revised Guide for Financial Assistance Questions concerning this policy flash should be directed to...

  17. Public Comment Received on Proposed Revisions to DOE's NEPA Rule...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Public Comment Received on Proposed Revisions to DOE's NEPA Rule: 10 CFR Part 1021 Public Comment Received on Proposed Revisions to DOE's NEPA Rule: 10 CFR Part 1021 Public Comment...

  18. EM Quality Assurance Program (EM-QA-001 Revision 0)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Previous revision of the Environmental Management Quality Assurance Program. The program is the EM management system to ensure we"do work correctly." This document has been superseded by Revision 1...

  19. Microsoft Word - Transmittal Revised B6 Checlist and Additional Objective Evidence for INL-CCP.doc

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

    94:UFC 2300.00 Department of Energy Carlsbad Field Office P. O. Box 3090 Carlsbad, New Mexico 88221 November 24, 2009 Mr. Steve Zappe, Project Leader Hazardous Materials Bureau New Mexico Environment Department 2905 E. Rodeo Park Drive, Building 1 Santa Fe, NM 87505-6110 Subject: Transmittal of the Revised B6 Checklist and Additional Objective Evidence for the Idaho National Laboratory/Central Characterization Project Remote-Handled Waste Visual Examination Process, Audit A-10-03 Dear Mr. Zappe:

  20. Notice, Revised Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement- July 2013

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Notice to all cleared individuals, the "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement, Standard Form 312" (SF 312) was revised in July 2013.

  1. Revision Policy for EIA Weekly Underground Natural Gas Storage Estimates

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

    Revision Policy for EIA Weekly Underground Natural Gas Storage Estimates Latest Update: November 16, 2015 This report consists of the following sections: General EIA Weekly Natural Gas Storage Report Revisions Policy - a description of how revisions to the Weekly Natural Gas Storage Report estimates may occur EIA Weekly Natural Gas Storage Report Policy to Allow Unscheduled Release of Revisions - a description of the policy that will be implemented in the event of an out-of-cycle release

  2. FTCP Corrective Action Plan - Revision 2 | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Corrective Action Plan - Revision 2 FTCP Corrective Action Plan - Revision 2 FTCP Corrective Action Plan, Revision 2, which is Deliverable B for Commitment 13 in the Department of Energy (DOE) Implementation Plan to Improve Oversight of Nuclear Operations, issued in response to Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 2004-1, Oversight of Complex, High-Hazard Nuclear Operations PDF icon FTCP Corrective Action Plan Revision 2 More Documents & Publications FTCP Corrective Action

  3. FTCP Corrective Action Plan- Revision 1

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    January 2007 FTCP Corrective Action Plan, Revision 1, which is Deliverable B for Commitment 13 in the Department of Energy (DOE) Implementation Plan to Improve Oversight of Nuclear Operations, issued in response to Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 2004- 1, Oversight of Complex, High-Hazard Nuclear Operations

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This Revision 3 of the Low-Level Waste Disposal  Facility Federal Review Group (LFRG) Manual was prepared primarily to include review criteria for the review of transuranic (TRU) waste disposal...

  5. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE G 226.1-2, Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities

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

    2013-04-04

    This revision will incorporate new content devoted to Federal oversight and evaluation of effectiveness of activity-level work planning and control (WP&C) at Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities.

  6. Best Practices Guide for Energy-Efficient Data Center Design: Revised March 2011, Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) (Brochure)

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

    Best Practices Guide for Energy-Efficient Data Center Design Revised March 2011 Prepared by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy; NREL is operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Acknowledgements | Contacts Acknowledgements This report was prepared by John Bruschi, Peter Rumsey, Robin Anliker, Larry Chu, and Stuart Gregson of Rumsey

  7. 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.

  8. Microsoft Word - CCP-PO-001-Revision 21

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Effective Date: Nuclear Waste Partnership Carlsbad, NM CCP-PO-001 Revision 21 CCP Transuranic Waste Characterization Quality Assurance Project Plan INFORMATION ONLY CCP-PO-001, Rev. 21 Effective Date: 05/31/2013 CCP TRU Waste Characterization Quality Assurance Project Plan Page 2 of 99 Nuclear Waste Partnership Carlsbad, NM RECORD OF REVISION Revision Number Date Approved Description of Revision 3 01/14/2002 Added Tables B-9, B-10, and B-11; Revised the CCP Organization Chart, Figure A-1; and

  9. Microsoft Word - CCP-PO-002-Revision 27

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Effective Date: CCP-PO-002 Revision 27 CCP Transuranic Waste Certification Plan INFORMATION ONLY CCP-PO-002, Rev. 27 Effective Date: 05/31/2013 CCP Transuranic Waste Certification Plan Page 2 of 168 RECORD OF REVISION Revision Number Date Approved Description of Revision 4 05/17/2002 Revised to reflect requirements of new Department of Energy (DOE)/WIPP 02-3122, Contact-Handled Transuranic Waste Acceptance Criteria for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (CH-WAC) (WIPP). 5 02/12/2003 Added

  10. Microsoft Word - CCP-TP-002-Revision 26

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    CCP-TP-002 Revision 26 CCP Reconciliation of DQOs and Reporting Characterization Data EFFECTIVE DATE: 06/19/2013 Mike Ramirez PRINTED NAME APPROVED FOR USE INFORMATION ONLY CCP-TP-002, Rev. 26 Effective Date: 06/19/2013 CCP Reconciliation of DQOs and Reporting Characterization Data Page 2 of 36 RECORD OF REVISION Revision Number Date Approved Description of Revision 18 11/16/2006 Revised to implement the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Hazardous Waste Facility Permit requirements resulting from the

  11. Microsoft Word - CCP-TP-005-Revision 26

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    TP-005 Revision 26 CCP Acceptable Knowledge Documentation EFFECTIVE DATE: 08/12/2013 Mike Ramirez PRINTED NAME APPROVED FOR USE INFORMATION ONLY CCP-TP-005, Rev. 26 Effective Date: 08/12/2013 CCP Acceptable Knowledge Documentation Page 2 of 81 RECORD OF REVISION Revision Number Date Approved Description of Revision 4 01/17/2002 Revised to delete the requirement for signing the AK Summary and other minor changes. Added cis & trans- 1,2-Dichloroethylene, Attachment 5. 5 01/24/2002 Minor change

  12. Microsoft Word - CCP-TP-030-Revision 33 (Obsolete)

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    CCP-TP-030 Revision 33 CCP CH TRU Waste Certification and WWIS/WDS Data Entry EFFECTIVE DATE: 11/19/2013 Mike Ramirez PRINTED NAME APPROVED FOR USE INFORMATION ONLY CCP-TP-030, Rev. 33 Effective Date: 11/19/2013 CCP CH TRU Waste Certification and WWIS/WDS Data Entry Page 2 of 34 RECORD OF REVISION Revision Number Date Approved Description of Revision 24 08/20/2008 Revised in response to Central Characterization Project Corrective Active Report CAR 08-025, deleted Characterization Data System

  13. Technical support document for proposed 1994 revision of the MEC thermal envelope requirements

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Conner, C.C.; Lucas, R.G.

    1994-03-01

    This report documents the development of the proposed revision of the Council of American Building Officials` (CABO) 1994 supplement to the 1993 Model Energy Code (MEC) building thermal envelope requirements for maximum component U{sub 0}-value. The 1994 amendments to the 1993 MEC were established in last year`s code change cycle and did not change the envelope requirements. The research underlying the proposed MEC revision was conducted by Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) for the US Department of Energy (DOE) Building Energy Standards program. The goal of this research was to develop revised guidelines based on an objective methodology that determines the most cost-effective (least total cost) combination of energy conservation measures (ECMs) (insulation levels and window types) for residential buildings. This least-cost set of ECMs was used as a basis for proposing revised MEC maximum U{sub 0}-values (thermal transmittances). ECMs include window types (for example, double-pane vinyl) and insulation levels (for example, R-19) for ceilings, walls, and floors.

  14. Guidance document for revision of DOE Order 5820.2A, Radioactive Waste Technical Support Program. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kudera, D.E.; McMurtrey, C.D.; Meagher, B.G.

    1993-04-01

    This document provides guidance for the revision of DOE Order 5820.2A, ``Radioactive Waste Management.`` Technical Working Groups have been established and are responsible for writing the revised order. The Technical Working Groups will use this document as a reference for polices and procedures that have been established for the revision process. The overall intent of this guidance is to outline how the order will be revised and how the revision process will be managed. In addition, this document outlines technical issues considered for inclusion by a Department of Energy Steering Committee.

  15. Environmental Monitoring Plan, Revision 6

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gallegos, G M; Bertoldo, N A; Blake, R G; Campbell, C G; Grayson, A R; Nelson, J C; Revelli, M A; Rosene, C A; Wegrecki, T; Williams, R A; Wilson, K R; Jones, H E

    2012-03-02

    The purpose of environmental monitoring is to promote the early identification of, and response to, potential adverse environmental impacts associated with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) operations. Environmental monitoring supports the Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS), International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14001 Environmental Management Systems standard, and U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment. Specifically, environmental monitoring enables LLNL to detect, characterize, and respond to releases from LLNL activities; assess impacts; estimate dispersal patterns in the environment; characterize the pathways of exposure to members of the public; characterize the exposures and doses to individuals and to the population; and to evaluate the potential impacts to the biota in the vicinity of LLNL. Environmental monitoring is also a major component of compliance demonstration for permits and other regulatory requirements. The Environmental Monitoring Plan (EMP) addresses the sample collection and analytical work supporting environmental monitoring to ensure the following: (1) A consistent system for collecting, assessing, and documenting environmental data of known and documented quality; (2) A validated and consistent approach for sampling and analysis of samples to ensure laboratory data meets program-specific needs and requirements within the framework of a performance-based approach for analytical laboratory work; and (3) An integrated sampling approach to avoid duplicative data collection. LLNL prepares the EMP because it provides an organizational framework for ensuring that environmental monitoring work, which is integral to the implementation of LLNL's Environmental Management System, is conducted appropriately. Furthermore, the Environmental Monitoring Plan helps LLNL ensure compliance with DOE Order 231.1 Change 2, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting, which require the publication of an annual report that characterizes the site's environmental management performance. To summarize, the general regulatory drivers for this environmental monitoring plan are ISO 14001, DOE Order 458.1, and DOE Order 231.1. The environmental monitoring addressed by this plan includes preoperational characterization and assessment, effluent and surveillance monitoring, and permit and regulatory compliance monitoring. Additional environmental monitoring is conducted at LLNL as part of compliance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, also known as Superfund). LLNL coordinates its ground water surveillance monitoring program with the CERCLA monitoring program to gain sampling efficiencies.

  16. Parallel programming with PCN. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Foster, I.; Tuecke, S.

    1991-12-01

    PCN is a system for developing and executing parallel programs. It comprises a high-level programming language, tools for developing and debugging programs in this language, and interfaces to Fortran and C that allow the reuse of existing code in multilingual parallel programs. Programs developed using PCN are portable across many different workstations, networks, and parallel computers. This document provides all the information required to develop parallel programs with the PCN programming system. In includes both tutorial and reference material. It also presents the basic concepts that underly PCN, particularly where these are likely to be unfamiliar to the reader, and provides pointers to other documentation on the PCN language, programming techniques, and tools. PCN is in the public domain. The latest version of both the software and this manual can be obtained by anonymous FTP from Argonne National Laboratory in the directory pub/pcn at info.mcs.anl.gov (c.f. Appendix A).

  17. Coal within a revised energy perspective

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Darmstadter, J.

    2006-07-15

    The author considers the use of coal within a revised energy perspective, focusing on the factors that will drive which fuels are used to generate electricity going forward. He looks at the world markets for fossil fuels and the difficulties of predicting oil and natural gas supply and prices, as demonstrated by the variability in projections from one year to another in the EIA's Annual Energy Outlook. 4 refs., 1 tab.

  18. Supplier Information Form Date: New Revision

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

    Supplier Information Form Date: New Revision Interested suppliers may complete and submit a Supplier Information Form to be included into LANS' vendor database. Suppliers are advised that there is no guarantee any solicitations or awards will be sent to Supplier by submitting a Supplier Information Form; however, in the event a solicitation is sent to the Supplier from an LANS Procurement Official, then a more formal quotation/offer may be required. Legal Business Name: D/B/A: (if applicable)

  19. Environmental Monitoring Plan, Revision 5

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gallegos, G M; Blake, R G; Bertoldo, N A; Campbell, C G; Coty, J; Folks, K; Grayson, A R; Jones, H E; Nelson, J C; Revelli, M A; Wegrecki, T; Williams, R A; Wilson, K

    2010-01-27

    The purpose of environmental monitoring is to promote the early identification of, and response to, potential adverse environmental impacts associated with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) operations. Environmental monitoring supports the Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS), International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14001 Environmental Management Systems standard, and U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 450.1A, Environmental Protection Program. Specifically, in conformance with DOE Order 450.1A, Attachment 1, paragraph 1(b)(5), environmental monitoring enables LLNL to detect, characterize, and respond to releases from LLNL activities; assess impacts; estimate dispersal patterns in the environment; characterize the pathways of exposure to members of the public; characterize the exposures and doses to individuals and to the population; and to evaluate the potential impacts to the biota in the vicinity of LLNL. Environmental monitoring also serves to demonstrate compliance with permits and other regulatory requirements. The Environmental Monitoring Plan (EMP) addresses the sample collection and analytical work supporting environmental monitoring to ensure the following: (1) A consistent system for collecting, assessing, and documenting environmental data of known and documented quality. (2) A validated and consistent approach for sampling and analysis of samples to ensure laboratory data meets program-specific needs and requirements within the framework of a performance-based approach for analytical laboratory work. (3) An integrated sampling approach to avoid duplicative data collection. Until its cancellation in January 2003, DOE Order 5400.1 required the preparation of an environmental monitoring plan. Neither DOE Order 450.1A nor the ISO 14001 standard are as prescriptive as DOE Order 5400.1, in that neither expressly requires an EMP. However, LLNL continues to prepare the EMP because it provides an organizational framework for ensuring that this work, which is integral to the implementation of LLNL's Environmental Management System, is conducted appropriately. Furthermore, the Environmental Monitoring Plan helps LLNL ensure compliance with DOE Order 5400.5, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment, and DOE Order 231.1 Change 2, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting, which require the publication of an annual report that characterizes the site's environmental management performance. To summarize, the general regulatory drivers for this environmental monitoring plan are ISO 14001, DOE Order 450.1A, DOE Order 5400.5, and DOE Order 231.1. The environmental monitoring addressed by this plan includes preoperational characterization and assessment, effluent and surveillance monitoring, and permit and regulatory compliance monitoring. Additional environmental monitoring is conducted at LLNL as part of compliance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, also known as Superfund). LLNL coordinates its ground water surveillance monitoring program with the CERCLA monitoring program to gain sampling efficiencies. (See LLNL [1992] and LLNL [2008] for information about LLNL's CERCLA activities).

  20. Independent Oversight Targeted Review, Sandia National Laboratories...

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

    Review, Sandia National Laboratories - November 2013 December 2013 Targeted Review of Activity-Level Implementation of Radiological Controls at Sandia National Laboratories This...

  1. " Level: National Data and Regional Totals...

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

    ... 1, 2, and 4 fuel oils and Nos. 1, 2, and 4" "diesel fuels." " (c) 'Natural Gas' ... gas brokers, marketers," "and any marketing subsidiaries of utilities." " (d) ...

  2. National Transportation Stakeholders Forum (NTSF)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Transportation Stakeholders Forum (NTSF) is the mechanism through which DOE communicates at a national level with states and tribes about the Department...

  3. The mixed waste management facility. Project baseline revision 1.2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Streit, R.D.; Throop, A.L.

    1995-04-01

    Revision 1.2 to the Project Baseline (PB) for the Mixed Waste Management Facility (MWMF) is in response to DOE directives and verbal guidance to (1) Collocate the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) and MWMF into a single complex, integrate certain and overlapping functions as a cost-saving measure; (2) Meet certain fiscal year (FY) new-BA funding objectives ($15.3M in FY95) with lower and roughly balanced funding for out years; (3) Reduce Total Project Cost (TPC) for the MWMF Project; (4) Include costs for all appropriate permitting activities in the project TPC. This baseline revision also incorporates revisions in the technical baseline design for Molten Salt Oxidation (MSO) and Mediated Electrochemical Oxidation (MEO). Changes in the WBS dictionary that are necessary as a result of this rebaseline, as well as minor title changes, at WBS Level 3 or above (DOE control level) are approved as a separate document. For completeness, the WBS dictionary that reflects these changes is contained in Appendix B. The PB, with revisions as described in this document, were also the basis for the FY97 Validation Process, presented to DOE and their reviewers on March 21-22, 1995. Appendix C lists information related to prior revisions to the PB. Several key changes relate to the integration of functions and sharing of facilities between the portion of the DWTF that will house the MWMF and those portions that are used by the Hazardous Waste Management (HWM) Division at LLNL. This collocation has been directed by DOE as a cost-saving measure and has been implemented in a manner that maintains separate operational elements from a safety and permitting viewpoint. Appendix D provides background information on the decision and implications of collocating the two facilities.

  4. National/International Standards

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    CNS and staff are recognized experts within their areas of technical responsibilities. An important aspect of this recognition is the contribution made by CNS staff to advance collaboration and the nuclear safety experience at the national and international level.

  5. Southeast Regional Clean Energy Policy Analysis (Revised)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McLaren, J.

    2011-04-01

    More than half of the electricity produced in the southeastern states is fuelled by coal. Although the region produces some coal, most of the states depend heavily on coal imports. Many of the region's aging coal power facilities are planned for retirement within the next 20 years. However, estimates indicate that a 20% increase in capacity is needed over that time to meet the rapidly growing demand. The most common incentives for energy efficiency in the Southeast are loans and rebates; however, total public spending on energy efficiency is limited. The most common state-level policies to support renewable energy development are personal and corporate tax incentives and loans. The region produced 1.8% of the electricity from renewable resources other than conventional hydroelectricity in 2009, half of the national average. There is significant potential for development of a biomass market in the region, as well as use of local wind, solar, methane-to-energy, small hydro, and combined heat and power resources. Options are offered for expanding and strengthening state-level policies such as decoupling, integrated resource planning, building codes, net metering, and interconnection standards to support further clean energy development. Benefits would include energy security, job creation, insurance against price fluctuations, increased value of marginal lands, and local and global environmental paybacks.

  6. DOE Secretarial Notice: National Environmental Policy Act (February 5,

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

    1990, status: cancelled) | Department of Energy Notice: National Environmental Policy Act (February 5, 1990, status: cancelled) DOE Secretarial Notice: National Environmental Policy Act (February 5, 1990, status: cancelled) This Secretarial Notice announced revisions of DOE compliance procedures under the National Environmental Policy Act. PDF icon G-DOE-sen-15-90.pdf More Documents & Publications Notice regarding DOE NEPA implementation Acquisition Guide for Federal Agencies EA-0300:

  7. National Strategic Unconventional Resource Model | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    National Strategic Unconventional Resource Model National Strategic Unconventional Resource Model This is the second revision to the National Strategic Unconventional Resources Model that was developed in 2005-2006 to support the Task Force mandated by Congress in subsection 369(h) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The primary function of the first Model was to evaluate varying economic scenarios for four technologies: Surface Mining, Underground Mining, Modified In-Situ, and True In-Situ. In

  8. EA-1707: Revised Draft Environmental Assessment | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    07: Revised Draft Environmental Assessment EA-1707: Revised Draft Environmental Assessment Closure of Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of a proposal of DOE activities associated with the closure of Hanford's Site Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill. PDF icon EA-1707_FactSheet_1.pdf PDF icon EA-1707_Revised_Predecisional_Draft_EA.pdf PDF icon EA-1707_Appendix_1.pdf More Documents

  9. HNF-53665 Revision 0 Steelhead Redd Monitoring Report for

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

    665 Revision 0 Steelhead Redd Monitoring Report for Calendar Year 2012 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management Contractor for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC06-09RL14728 P.O. Box 650 Richland, Washington 99352 Approved for Public Release; Further Dissemination Unlimited HNF-53665 Revision 0 This page intentionally left blank. HNF-53665 Revision 0 Steelhead Redd Monitoring Report for Calendar Year 2012 Document Type: RPT

  10. EIS-0218: Revised Record of Decision | Department of Energy

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

    Revised Record of Decision EIS-0218: Revised Record of Decision Revision of the Record of Decision for a Nuclear Weapons Nonproliferation Policy Concerning Foreign Research Reactor Spent Nuclear Fuel DOE has decided to extend the FRR SNF Acceptance Policy for an additional 10 years beyond its current expiration until May 12, 2016, for irradiation of eligible fuel, and until May 12, 2019, for fuel acceptance. DOE has also decided to include the Australian RRR as a reactor eligible to participate

  11. Audit/Investigative Records Schedule (Revision 2) | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Audit/Investigative Records Schedule (Revision 2) Audit/Investigative Records Schedule (Revision 2) This schedule covers both records associated with investigations other than those performed by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) as well as records created by the Department's OIG investigations. PDF icon Audit/Investigative Records Schedule (Revision 2) More Documents & Publications Audit/Investigation Records ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SCHEDULE 18: SECURITY, EMERGENCY PLANNING, AND

  12. ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SCHEDULE 4: PROPERTY DISPOSAL RECORDS (Revision 2) |

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

    Department of Energy 4: PROPERTY DISPOSAL RECORDS (Revision 2) ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SCHEDULE 4: PROPERTY DISPOSAL RECORDS (Revision 2) These records pertain to the sales by agencies of real and personal property surplus to the needs of the Government. PDF icon ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SCHEDULE 4: PROPERTY DISPOSAL RECORDS (Revision 2) More Documents & Publications PROPERTY DISPOSAL RECORDS ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS: PROCUREMENT, SUPPLY, AND GRANT RECORDS ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SCHEDULE 3:

  13. NE-20 ACTION: SSDP Project Charter Revision CONCURRENCES RTG SYMBOL

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    0 ACTION: SSDP Project Charter Revision CONCURRENCES RTG SYMBOL James W. Vaughan, Jr. N-923 Acting Assistant Secretary . for Nuclear Energy Murphi Attached for your signature is a revised Project Charter for the 1/ 86 Shippingport Station Decommissioning Project (SSDP). Since our original M determination in July that there was a need to revise the SSDP Charter, we N K23 have been in discussion with the Richland Operations Field Office (RL). INe Significant differences in management philosophy

  14. National Green Building Standard Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2012-07-01

    DOE's Building America Program is a research and development program to improve the energy performance of new and existing homes. The ultimate goal of the Building America Program is to achieve examples of cost-effective, energy efficient solutions for all U.S. climate zones. Periodic maintenance of an ANSI standard by review of the entire document and action to revise or reaffirm it on a schedule not to exceed five years is required by ANSI. In compliance, a consensus group has once again been formed and the National Green Building Standard is currently being reviewed to comply with the periodic maintenance requirement of an ANSI standard.

  15. CEQ Extends Comment Period on Revised Draft Guidance on Consideration...

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

    in NEPA Reviews CEQ Extends Comment Period on Revised Draft Guidance on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change in NEPA Reviews February 20, ...

  16. CEQ Issues Revised Draft Guidance on Consideration of Greenhouse...

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

    Change in NEPA Reviews CEQ Issues Revised Draft Guidance on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change in NEPA Reviews December 22, 2014 - ...

  17. Revised Draft Guidance on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions...

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

    and Climate Change in NEPA Reviews Revised Draft Guidance on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change in NEPA Reviews On December 18, 2014, CEQ released ...

  18. EIS-0183: Revised Record of Decision | Department of Energy

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

    (FCRTS) of, the 846-megawatt (MW) Shepherds. PDF icon DOEEIS-0183, Revised Record of Decision for Offer of Conditional Commitment for a Loan Guarantee for, and Electrical...

  19. Microsoft Word - CCP-QP-002-Revision 39

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    CCP-QP-002 Revision 39 CCP Training and Qualification Plan EFFECTIVE DATE: 04/14/2015 Mike Ramirez PRINTED NAME APPROVED FOR USE INFORMATION ONLY CCP-QP-002, Rev. 39 Effective Date: 04/14/2015 CCP Training and Qualification Plan Page 2 of 42 RECORD OF REVISION Revision Number Date Approved Description of Revision 9 02/20/2002 Major rewrite to streamline and create a more concise procedure. Document reduced from 57 pages to 16 pages. 10 06/05/2002 Added References. Changes to CCP Technical

  20. Microsoft Word - CCP-QP-008-Revision 24

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    QP-008 Revision 24 CCP Records Management EFFECTIVE DATE: 02/10/2015 Mike Ramirez PRINTED NAME APPROVED FOR USE INFORMATION ONLY CCP-QP-008, Rev. 24 Effective Date: 02/10/2015 CCP Records Management Page 2 of 35 RECORD OF REVISION Revision Number Date Approved Description of Revision 6 03/11/2002 Additions for use of e-QA system 7 06/07/2002 Incorporation of instructions for pagination and removal of text in Attachments. 8 09/04/2002 Added the definition of magnetic tape and incorporated text to

  1. Section 20320 of the Revised Continuing Appropriations Resolution...

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

    20320 of the Revised Continuing Appropriations Resolution More Documents & Publications ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005 Energy Policy Act of 2005 Section 129 of the Consolidated...

  2. Recently Added or Revised "Slice" Information (contracts/slice...

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

    Product Recently Added or Revised Information (updated November 2, 2011) Applicable Interest Rates for Slice Product (updated November 2, 2011) Slice Product Review Meeting...

  3. Revisions to FAR Part 17 Special Contracting Methods and Part...

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

    and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Revisions to FAR Part 17 Special Contracting Methods and Part 35 Research and Development Contracting SUMMARY: The Federal Register (77 FR...

  4. Major Process Revision of WP&C - Lessons Learned | Department...

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

    Hazard AnalysisControl Subject Matter Expert Involvement Expectations for Workers Lessons Learned Major Process Revision of WP&C - Lessons Learned More Documents &...

  5. Hawaii Revised Statute 523A-2, Definition of Mineral Resources...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Not provided DOI Not Provided Check for DOI availability: http:crossref.org Online Internet link for Hawaii Revised Statute 523A-2, Definition of Mineral Resources Citation...

  6. NMED Revised LANL Consent Order Draft March 2016

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    At the March 30, 2016 Board Meeting: The New Mexico Environment Department gave an Overview of the Revised LANL Consent Order.

  7. EIS-0200: Revision to the Record of Decision | Department of...

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

    (DOE) is revising the Record of Decision (ROD) for its Waste Management Program: Treatment and Storage of Transuranic Waste prepared pursuant to the Waste Management...

  8. ,"New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion...

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2013...

  9. ,"New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion...

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

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","New Mexico Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2013...

  10. WPN 98-3- Revised Weatherization Assistance Program Application Package

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    To issue the revised application package and reporting requirements for the low-income Weatherization Assistance Program for use by the states.

  11. ,"Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion...

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2013...

  12. ,"Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion...

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

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)",1,"Annual",2013...

  13. Draft Revised Guidelines for Implementing Executive Order 11988, "Floodplain Management"

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency published the draft “Revised Guidelines for Implementing Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management” for public review and comment on January 30, 2015.

  14. Revised Acquisition Guide Chapter 42.5, Contract Management Planning

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

    policyguidancepolicyflashes.htm. Questions concerning the revised Acquisition Guide chapter may be addressed to Mike Larson at (202) 287-1426 or Michael.Larson@hq.doe.gov....

  15. Lessons Learned by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Activity...

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

    Lessons Learned by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Activity-level Work Planning & Control Lessons Learned by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Activity-level Work...

  16. Fig 9-revised Flowchart.xls

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Figure 9 Soil Nature and Extent AOI Identification Process d The PRG value for lead is not a calculated PRG, but rather is taken from the EPA guidance document Revised Interim Soil Lead Guidance for CERCLA Sites and RCRA Correction Action Facilities (1994). e For surface soil (0 to 0.5 ft), WRW surface soil (0 to 0.5 ft) PRGs are used. For subsurface soil (0.5 ft to a maximum depth of 209 ft), WRW subsurface soil (0.5 to 8 ft) PRGs are used. a Soil "superset" for soil samples collected

  17. Badri Narayanan | Argonne National Laboratory

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

    National Institute of Technology Surathkal, India (2006) Research Interests Large-scale molecular dynamics simulations to investigate materials phenomena at atomic level for...

  18. National Institute for Global Environmental Change

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Werth, G.C.

    1992-04-01

    This document is the Semi-Annual Report of the National Institute for Global Environmental Change for the reporting period July 1 to December 31, 1991. The report is in two parts. Part I presents the mission of the Institute, examples of progress toward that mission, a brief description of the revised management plan, and the financial report. Part II presents the statements of the Regional Center Directors along with progress reports of the projects written by the researchers themselves.

  19. Policy Flash 2013-38 Revised Merit Review Guide For Financial...

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

    8 Revised Merit Review Guide For Financial Assistance Policy Flash 2013-38 Revised Merit Review Guide For Financial Assistance Attached is Policy Flash 2013-38 Revised Merit Review ...

  20. Instructions for the Supporting Statement - Revision | Department of Energy

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

    the Supporting Statement - Revision Instructions for the Supporting Statement - Revision PDF icon Instructions for the Supporting Statementrev-includes BH table.pdf More Documents & Publications Paperwork Reduction Act Submission (OMB 83-I) Supporting Statement: OE Recovery Act Financial Assistance Grants OMB Control Number 1910-5149

  1. Special Analysis for the Disposal of the Idaho National Laboratory Unirradiated Light Water Breeder Reactor Rods and Pellets Waste Stream at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shott, Gregory

    2014-08-31

    The purpose of this special analysis (SA) is to determine if the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Unirradiated Light Water Breeder Reactor (LWBR) Rods and Pellets waste stream (INEL103597TR2, Revision 2) is suitable for disposal by shallow land burial (SLB) at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS). The INL Unirradiated LWBR Rods and Pellets waste stream consists of 24 containers with unirradiated fabricated rods and pellets composed of uranium oxide (UO2) and thorium oxide (ThO2) fuel in zirconium cladding. The INL Unirradiated LWBR Rods and Pellets waste stream requires an SA because the 229Th, 230Th, 232U, 233U, and 234U activity concentrations exceed the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) Action Levels.

  2. NV/YMP radiological control manual, Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gile, A.L.

    1996-11-01

    The Nevada Test Site (NTS) and the adjacent Yucca Mountain Project (YMP) are located in Nye County, Nevada. The NTS has been the primary location for testing nuclear explosives in the continental US since 1951. Current activities include operating low-level radioactive and mixed waste disposal facilities for US defense-generated waste, assembly/disassembly of special experiments, surface cleanup and site characterization of contaminated land areas, and non-nuclear test operations such as controlled spills of hazardous materials at the hazardous Materials (HAZMAT) Spill Center (HSC). Currently, the major potential for occupational radiation exposure is associated with the burial of low-level nuclear waste and the handling of radioactive sources. Planned future remediation of contaminated land areas may also result in radiological exposures. The NV/YMP Radiological Control Manual, Revision 2, represents DOE-accepted guidelines and best practices for implementing Nevada Test Site and Yucca Mountain Project Radiation Protection Programs in accordance with the requirements of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection. These programs provide protection for approximately 3,000 employees and visitors annually and include coverage for the on-site activities for both personnel and the environment. The personnel protection effort includes a DOE Laboratory Accreditation Program accredited dosimetry and personnel bioassay programs including in-vivo counting, routine workplace air sampling, personnel monitoring, and programmatic and job-specific As Low as Reasonably Achievable considerations.

  3. Microsoft PowerPoint - 13 DOE PM Workshop UPF Presentation revised...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    3 DOE PM Workshop UPF Presentation revised - Harry Peters Compatibility Mode Microsoft PowerPoint - 13 DOE PM Workshop UPF Presentation revised - Harry Peters Compatibility...

  4. Microsoft Word - DOE-EA-1707D_Revised_Predecisional_EA Closure...

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

    Energy Richland Operations Office Richland, Washington 99352 DOEEA-1707D REVISED PREDECISIONAL DRAFT AUGUST 2011 DOEEA-1707D REVISED PREDECISIONAL DRAFT iii AUGUST 2011 Contents ...

  5. POLICY FLASH 2014-25 Revision to the Procurement Strategy Panel...

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

    POLICY FLASH 2014-25 Revision to the Procurement Strategy Panel (PSP) Briefing Process POLICY FLASH 2014-25 Revision to the Procurement Strategy Panel (PSP) Briefing Process ...

  6. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 457.1, Nuclear Counterterrorism

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

    2013-02-07

    Intent is to revise DOE O 457.1 and include the content of DOE M 457.1-1 as appendices to the revised order.

  7. EIS-0288-S1: Revision to EPA Notice of Availability Draft Supplemental...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    288-S1: Revision to EPA Notice of Availability Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement EIS-0288-S1: Revision to EPA Notice of Availability Draft Supplemental...

  8. A Review of Criticality Accidents 2000 Revision

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thomas P. McLaughlin; Shean P. Monahan; Norman L. Pruvost; Vladimir V. Frolov; Boris G. Ryazanov; Victor I. Sviridov

    2000-05-01

    Criticality accidents and the characteristics of prompt power excursions are discussed. Sixty accidental power excursions are reviewed. Sufficient detail is provided to enable the reader to understand the physical situation, the chemistry and material flow, and when available the administrative setting leading up to the time of the accident. Information on the power history, energy release, consequences, and causes are also included when available. For those accidents that occurred in process plants, two new sections have been included in this revision. The first is an analysis and summary of the physical and neutronic features of the chain reacting systems. The second is a compilation of observations and lessons learned. Excursions associated with large power reactors are not included in this report.

  9. Independent Oversight Targeted Review, Sandia National Laboratories – November 2013

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Targeted Review of Activity-Level Implementation of Radiological Controls at Sandia National Laboratories

  10. Independent Oversight Review, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory- August 2014

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Review of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Radiological Controls Activity-Level Implementation.

  11. Notice of Intent to Revise Department of Energy Integrated Safety Management Policy 450.4A, Order 450.2, and Guide 450.4-1C

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

    2015-11-05

    The proposed revisions will seamlessly integrate with the recently provided content in DOE G 226.1-2A, 2014, Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities, and HDBK 1211-2014,Activity-Level Work Planning and Control Implementation, addressing the activity-level work planning and control and safety culture features of ISM.

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  13. Notice of Intent to Revise DOE O 475.2A, Identifying Classified Information

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

    2014-03-06

    The revision will incorporate changes that were identified during the 1-year review after initial issuance

  14. Microsoft Word - ADR Revised Policy82508Reformatted.doc | Department of

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Energy ADR Revised Policy82508Reformatted.doc Microsoft Word - ADR Revised Policy82508Reformatted.doc PDF icon Microsoft Word - ADR Revised Policy82508Reformatted.doc More Documents & Publications ADR Revised Policy ADR Policy Federal Register Document

  15. Special Analysis for the Disposal of the Neutron Products Incorporated Sealed Source Waste Stream at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shott, Gregory

    2014-08-31

    The purpose of this special analysis (SA) is to determine if the Neutron Products Incorporated (NPI) Sealed Sources waste stream (DRTK000000056, Revision 0) is suitable for disposal by shallow land burial (SLB) at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS). The NPI Sealed Sources waste stream consists of 850 60Co sealed sources (Duratek [DRTK] 2013). The NPI Sealed Sources waste stream requires a special analysis (SA) because the waste stream 60Co activity concentration exceeds the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) Action Levels.

  16. New Mexico - West Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision...

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

    Decreases (Million Barrels) New Mexico - West Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Decreases (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6...

  17. New Mexico - East Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision...

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

    Increases (Million Barrels) New Mexico - East Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Increases (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6...

  18. New Mexico - East Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision...

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

    Decreases (Million Barrels) New Mexico - East Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Decreases (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6...

  19. New Mexico - West Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision...

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

    Increases (Million Barrels) New Mexico - West Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Increases (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6...

  20. New Mexico Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Increases...

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

    Increases (Million Barrels) New Mexico Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Increases (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7...

  1. New Mexico Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Decreases...

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

    Decreases (Million Barrels) New Mexico Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Decreases (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7...

  2. Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update Data Revision Notice

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    for some stations in the West Coast less California region. EIA has corrected this error and provides a revision to the affected areas for December 28, 2015 in this...

  3. Workplace Charging Challenge Partner: ReVision Energy

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    ReVision Energy’s mission is to reduce fossil fuel consumption and carbon emissions. Since 50% of all carbon emissions in their region come from transportation, the company is embracing workplace...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-05-01

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

  5. Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Texas Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  6. New York Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) New York Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Increases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  7. New York Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) New York Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  8. Memorandum: Revised Guidance for the Office of Environmental Management

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Site Specific Advisory Boards | Department of Energy Revised Guidance for the Office of Environmental Management Site Specific Advisory Boards Memorandum: Revised Guidance for the Office of Environmental Management Site Specific Advisory Boards From: Assistant Secretary, Jessie H. Roberson (EM-1) To: SSAB Members (J. Bierer, T. Martin, M. Wilson, P. Claire, J. Brannon, D. Mosby, B. Tanner, V. Holm, W. Waters) The purpose of this memorandum is to provide guidance and direction for

  9. Microsoft Word - Envera Final Report - 121010 VCR Revised 031511.doc

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    ENVERA VARIABLE COMPRESSION RATIO ENGINE FINAL REPORT US Department of Energy Cooperative Agreement Instrument Number DE-FC26-05NT42484 December 10, 2010 Revised March 15, 2011 ENVERA, LLC 7 Millside Lane Mill Valley, California 94941 Principal Investigator: Charles Mendler Tel. 415 381-0560 CMendler@VCREngine.com This report does not include confidential information. ENVERA LLC December 10, 2010, Revised March 15, 2011 2 Acknowledgment This material is based upon work supported by the

  10. NREL Job Task Analysis: Retrofit Installer Technician (Revised) |

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Department of Energy Retrofit Installer Technician (Revised) NREL Job Task Analysis: Retrofit Installer Technician (Revised) A summary of job task analyses for the position of retrofit installer technician when conducting weatherization work on a residence. PDF icon retrofit_installer_jta_04112012.pdf More Documents & Publications NREL Job Task Analysis: Retrofit Installer Technician NREL Job Task Analysis: Energy Auditor Training Self-Assessment

  11. ETA-HTP11 - Vehicle Verification - Revision 1

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

    1 Revision 1 Effective October 1, 2005 Vehicle Verification Prepared by Electric Transportation Applications Prepared by: _______________________________ Date:__________ Garrett Beauregard Approved by: _________________________________________________ Date: _______________ Donald B. Karner ©2004 Electric Transportation Applications All Rights Reserved Procedure ETA-HTP11 Revision 0 Page 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Objectives 3 2.0 Purpose 3 3.0 Documentation 3 4.0 Initial Conditions and

  12. ETA-NTP011 Vehicle Verification - Revision 4

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

    ETA-NTP011 Revision 4 Effective February 1, 2008 Vehicle Verification Prepared by Electric Transportation Applications Prepared by: _______________________________ Nick Fengler Date:__________ Approved by: _________________________________________________ Donald B. Karner Date: _______________ 2 Procedure ETA-NTP011 Revision 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Objectives 3 2.0 Purpose 3 3.0 Documentation 3 4.0 Initial Conditions and Prerequisites 4 5.0 Verification Requirements 5.1 Minimum Requirements 5

  13. Test Procedure Development and Revision | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Test Procedure Development and Revision Test Procedure Development and Revision Most energy conservation standards rulemakings are accompanied by a concurrent test procedure rulemaking. Test procedures detail the protocols that manufacturers must follow when testing their products for compliance with Department of Energy (DOE) standards. DOE also uses the test procedures to determine compliance with the applicable standards in any verification or enforcement testing. The procedures specify how

  14. CEQ Issues Revised Draft Guidance on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change in NEPA Reviews | Department of Energy Guidance on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change in NEPA Reviews CEQ Issues Revised Draft Guidance on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change in NEPA Reviews December 22, 2014 - 12:59pm Addthis The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) issued revised draft guidance on consideration of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the effects of

  15. EIS-0226: Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement | Department of

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Energy Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement EIS-0226: Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at the West Valley Demonstration Project and Western New York Nuclear Service Center This EIS has been prepared in accordance with NEPA and SEQR to examine the potential environmental impacts of the range of reasonable alternatives to decommission and/or maintain long-term stewardship at WNYNSC. The alternatives analyzed in this Draft EIS

  16. Eastern Wind Integration and Transmission Study (EWITS) (Revised) |

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Department of Energy Eastern Wind Integration and Transmission Study (EWITS) (Revised) Eastern Wind Integration and Transmission Study (EWITS) (Revised) EWITS was designed to answer questions about technical issues related to a 20% wind energy scenario for electric demand in the Eastern Interconnection. PDF icon 47078.pdf More Documents & Publications Eastern Wind Integration and Transmission Study: Executive Summary and Project Overview Proceedings of the March 25-26, 2009 Conference

  17. Sandia National Laboratories:

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

    05, 2016 Articles Nondestructive Testing Nondestructive Testing: Sandia looks inside composites Sandia takes home three national tech transfer awards Decon, bombs, and above and beyond Sandians win Black Engineer of the Year awards Sandians win Black Engineer of the Year awards Ice sheet modeling of Greenland, Antarctica helps predict sea-level rise Ice sheet modeling of Greenland, Antarctica helps predict sea-level rise Making waves Making waves Grid modernization Grid modernization New Mexico

  18. National Laboratory

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

    draws more than 200 students to Los Alamos National Laboratory April 16, 2015 NOTE TO EDITORS: Media are welcome to attend the awards ceremony from 9 a.m. to noon a.m., April 21 at...

  19. Supporting documentation for the 1997 revision to the DOE Insulation Fact Sheet

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stovall, T.K.

    1997-08-22

    The Department of Energy (DOE) Insulation Fact Sheet has been revised to reflect developments in energy conservation technology and the insulation market. A nationwide insulation cost survey was made by polling insulation contractors and builders, and the results are reported here. These costs, along with regional weather data, regional fuel costs, and fuel-specific system efficiencies were used to produce recommended insulation levels for new and existing houses. This report contains all of the methodology, algorithms, assumptions, references, and data resources that were used to produce the 1997 DOE Insulation Fact Sheet.

  20. The Energy Information Administration is proposing the following revisions to their electricity survey forms in 2011:

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Energy Information Administration proposed the following revisions to their electricity survey forms in 2011: F or m E I A -411, " C oor dinated B ulk Power Supply Pr ogr am R epor t." * Change form name to "Coordinated Bulk Power Supply & Demand Program Report;" return to collecting projected reliability data on a 10-year basis as opposed to 5 years. Change "Council" to "Regional Entity" and add submission of Sub-regional level breakout of data. *